Great Salt Lake legislative update: Feb. 15, 2024

Feb 16, 2024 | GSL Project

By Beth Parker and Brig Daniels and Great Salt Lake Policy Accelerator students

Great Salt Lake with evening sky (purple clouds)The Great Salt Lake Project: Great Salt Lake Policy Accelerator
University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

Sign up now to receive our updates in your email inbox, or scroll to the bottom of this update.

I. Weekly overview in a nutshell

In each week’s report, we will identify the most impactful bills (favorable or unfavorable) that could significantly affect Great Salt Lake. See below for a more in-depth discussion on each of these bills (and many others).

  • H.B. 453: This bill creates a comprehensive regulatory scheme for mining companies that mine using evaporation ponds near Great Salt Lake and is currently the top bill on our watch list. The bill passed the House this week and was sent to the Senate.
  • S.B. 18: This bill makes a number of changes that will make it easier for the state to get conserved water to Great Salt Lake. It is a major step in the right direction. This bill passed through the legislature this week and now awaits the governor’s signature.
  • S.B. 211: Among Great Salt Lake-related bills, during the past week this bill has served as a lightning rod as it has moved rapidly through the legislature. The bill consolidates some water-planning authorities in a water district water-development council and in a Utah water agent. Most controversially, this bill would exempt these water-planning roles from Utah public transparency laws—the Open Meetings Act and the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA).
  • H.J.R 27: While a resolution does not change law, this resolution provides a comprehensive list of the 77 municipalities within Great Salt Lake’s watershed that (as of yet) have not addressed water conservation in their municipal plans. It calls on these municipalities to act. While in many ways a water conservation “naughty list,” the list also provides targets for low-hanging fruit for municipal water conservation efforts.
  • H.B. 280: This bill proposes taking the power to prioritize water projects away from local jurisdictions and giving it to the state water board to create a state water plan and fund. There was an undefined, highly controversial proposed water use fee included in the bill that has recently been amended out in exchange for a water-development coordinating council to research future funding sources.

Legislative process: For an overview of Utah’s legislative process, please see our description in a previous legislative update. Utah’s process includes multiple readings of bills and an unusual voting process.

Road map: In the following sections, we highlight other major changes or important updates, including:

  • A more extensive discussion of new bills (part II)
  • Tracking of the rest of the bills on our Great Salt Lake watch list (part III)
  • Updates on critical requests for appropriations (part IV)
  • News and community updates surrounding the lake (part V)

II. New bills we are watching

Here we introduce and begin to track additional bills that we believe will either positively or negatively impact Great Salt Lake. We also track other water-related bills that might be of interest. In part IV, we discuss bills we have already addressed in previous reports.

Bills with positive impacts on Great Salt Lake

  • H.J.R. 27: Joint Resolution Encouraging Water-Efficient Landscaping Ordinances for New Construction (sponsored by Rep. Doug Owens): This joint resolution is a strong recommendation from the Utah legislature to counties and municipalities in Utah. While a resolution is not law, it is an expression of the legislature, particularly a joint resolution like H.J.R. 27. In this resolution, the legislature calls on municipalities and counties to include in their general plans a “substantive and actionable water use and preservation element,” and to do so as soon as possible. The well-crafted resolution is justified by the high salinity levels in GSL, the need to share the burden of addressing the problem, and the highly variable state of regulations regarding landscaping for new construction and incentives for replacing existing nonfunctional turf. The resolution will be sent to 77 local governments in the Great Salt Lake basin urging them to expeditiously address these gaps in encouraging water-efficient landscaping.
    • Update: This resolution is being considered by the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee.
  • H.B. 535: Water Conservation Modifications (sponsored by Rep. Michael L. Kohler): This bill addresses a broad range of issues. First, it reiterates the Great Salt Lake commissioner’s role as strategic planner and coordinator for Great Salt Lake. Furthermore, the bill mandates that the commissioner conduct a study on the implementation of water-conservation strategies in the Great Salt Lake Basin aimed at increasing municipal water flowing to Great Salt Lake. The bill also requires the commissioner to determine how conserved municipal water can be quantified, either by measurement or by the adoption of a good-faith approximation.
    • Update: This bill has just had its first reading in the House.

Bills with negative impacts on Great Salt Lake

  • S.B. 211: Generational Water Infrastructure Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Stuart Adams and Rep. Mike Schultz): This bill has generated significant attention in a brief period. It creates two entities, a water district water-development council and a Utah water agent, funded with $4 million from the general fund, to advise Utah’s largest water districts on long-term projects addressing future water demands. These groups have the power to plan “generational water infrastructure” projects that will get more water to Utah, likely through pipelines and perhaps negotiations with surrounding states. These entities cannot own property or water rights, set policy, or appropriate money. Much of the public attention to the bill has focused on the decision to make communications among these entities exempted from the Open Meetings Act and the Government Record Access and Management Act (GRAMA). These acts allow for public input and transparency in government projects and communication. Given that water infrastructure can yield both positive and negative impacts on the lake, this bill has elicited questions regarding its proper characterization.
    • Update: This bill is moving very quickly since being introduced on Feb. 9. It is being widely discussed in hearings and passed all three Senate readings this past week. A bill substitute was passed on Feb. 14 that made some minor clarifications to the bill. The updated bill was then introduced in the House on Feb. 14.
    • In the news: This bill is attracting significant media coverage. Deseret News described it as expecting “the caregivers of today’s water resources to manage new infrastructure projects in a generational way to protect the finite resource for decades to come.” KSL summarized the bill as a way to look for water outside of Utah, while pointing out concerns over transparency and special-interest group involvement. In another article, KSL points out that Nevada has an exemplary deal with California to help them develop desalination plants in exchange for Colorado River water and that Adams justified the GRAMA exemption as a means to increase collaboration. Leia Larsen, on Utah’s Public Radio with Tom Williams, summarized the bill and Williams described the hunt for new water as “quixotic” since other western states also need their water and will not want to give their water to Utah. Larsen also reported that the lack of transparency would lead to decisions on the Bear River development and Lake Powell Pipeline without public input.  KUER and Ben Winslow at Fox 13 gave thorough summaries, and The Salt Lake Tribune highlighted how making these important water decisions without public input is harmful and reported that the Utah Transparency Project deemed this bill a “closed door” for taxpayers. Environmental groups are also speaking out in opposition of this bill because it prioritizes imported water over conservation and lacks transparency.

Other bills of interest

  • H.B. 5: Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Base Budget (sponsored by Rep. Stewart Barlow and Sen. Scott Sandall): This bill supplements and provides the following appropriations for the use of state agencies in the upcoming fiscal year.
    • Of the appropriations provided for the Utah Geological Survey, $350,000 will go to Great Salt Lake groundwater studies
    • Of the appropriations provided for the Division of Water Resources, $3.9 million will go to Great Salt Lake amendments
    • Of the appropriations provided for the Division of Wildlife Resources, $600,000 will go to Great Salt Lake and Utah Lake waterbird expenses
    • Up to $750,000 of the appropriations provided for the office of the Great Salt Lake commissioner will go toward the creation and implementation of the commissioner’s Great Salt Lake strategic plan. The bill also provides that these funds shall not lapse at the close of fiscal year 2024.
      • Update: Governor Cox signed this bill into law on Jan. 31, 2024.

III. Significant updates to ongoing bills we are tracking

Here, we continue to track the progress of bills first introduced in previous weekly legislative updates (search through our previous updates). We discuss bills that we believe will either positively or negatively impact Great Salt Lake. We also track water-related bills that might be of interest.

Bills with positive impacts on Great Salt Lake

  • H.B. 453: Great Salt Lake Revisions (sponsored by Rep. Casey Snider and Sen. Sandall): This bill creates a comprehensive regulatory scheme for mining companies that mine using evaporation ponds near Great Salt Lake. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill received a unanimous favorable recommendation from the House Business and Labor Committee on Feb. 8 and passed its third reading in the House on Feb. 13. The bill was modestly revised this week, though the revision left much of the bill’s original heft in place. During the committee meeting, Speaker Schultz emphasized the need for fairness in the treatment of all water-right holders in the state, pointing out several times that mineral companies on the lake are currently the only water users in Utah not subject to any restrictions. The bill was sent to the Senate on Feb. 14, where it had its first reading.
    • In the news: There has been substantial reporting on this bill. Coverage included Adam Small at KSL, Ben Winslow at Fox 13, and Leia Larsen at The Salt Lake Tribune. Ben Winslow at Fox 13 reported on Compass Minerals’ announcement that it would stop its lithium-mining project in Great Salt Lake. The company cited increased regulatory risks, likely a reference to this bill. Utah’s Public Radio with Tom Williams interviewed Leia Larsen about this bill. Ben Winslow at Fox 13 also provided a legislative update that included this bill.
  • S.B. 18: Water Modifications (sponsored by Sen. Scott D. Sandall and Rep. Casey Snider): This is an important bill that changes the law of water rights in Utah to favor delivering water to Great Salt Lake, first by granting reprieves on forfeiture of water rights for nonuse. The bill also defines the measurement of “saved water” from irrigation-efficiency improvements and restricts protests to cases where changes demonstrably impact another appropriator’s water rights. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill passed through the legislature on Feb. 14 and now awaits the governor’s signature.
  • S.B. 118: Water-Efficiency Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Michael K. McKell): This bill attempts to incentivize water-wise landscaping for new residential construction by reimbursing property owners for the difference in price compared to traditional sod. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: Sen. McKell introduced a second substitute for this bill prior to its second reading in the Senate. The only change to the substitute is to appropriate one-time funding of $1 million from the general fund to the program. The bill passed its third reading in the Senate on Feb. 13 and has been introduced in the House.
  • H.B. 275: Water Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Casey Snider): This bill addresses outdoor water use by prohibiting homeowners associations from prohibiting water-wise landscaping and expanding who can receive water-conservation grants. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: On Feb. 8, the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee recommended a substitute version of this bill and placed it on the Senate’s second-reading calendar on Feb. 9. The new version adds that the state engineer can specify how cities and water districts must submit data to the state if located within the Great Salt Lake watershed.
  • H.B. 448: State Water Program Reporting Requirements (sponsored by Rep. Raymond Ward): This bill requires the Division of Water Resources to collaborate with state agencies to quantify and monitor state legislative water-optimization efforts, including water banking, and annually report their findings. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: The House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee amended this bill and gave this bill a favorable recommendation on Feb. 14. The House Committee amendments were likewise incorporated into the text of the bill on Feb. 14. It is currently awaiting its third reading in the House.
  • H.B. 401: Water Usage Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Doug Owens): This shoulder-season irrigation bill narrows the municipal irrigation season from May 1 to Sept. 30, restricting municipal irrigation of lawn and turf for the rest of the year to save water. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill has not progressed or changed since last week’s update in which the bill was referred to the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee on Feb. 7, 2024.
    • In the news: Friends of Great Salt Lake explained that H.B. 401 prohibits the watering of lawn or turf from Oct. 1 to April 1 in counties in the Great Salt Lake watershed, and it expressed support for the bill. Friends of Great Salt Lake also reported that the Great Salt Lake commissioner’s strategic plan outlined that up to 60% of Utah’s residential water use goes toward outdoor irrigation.
  • H.B. 11: Water-Efficient Landscaping Requirements (sponsored by Rep. Doug Owens): This bill focuses on limiting nonfunctional turf (turf used for aesthetic or landscaping purposes) of public property and buildings—at both the state and local levels—particularly those that are newly acquired or re-landscaped. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: No change since last week; this bill is still circled. Circling a bill means temporarily postponing action on it without removing it from its place on the calendar.
    • In the news: The bill was discussed in The Daily Universe. The discussion covered how a similar bill was shot down in 2022 and the Utah Farm Bureau’s opposition to the bill.
  • H.B. 61: Water Measuring and Accounting Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Carl R. Albrecht): This bill gives the state engineer powers to create rules about water accounting and the use of technologies—mainly telemetry—to measure water use and water as it is transported downstream. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: After passing through both the House and Senate, a draft of the enrolled bill was prepared on Feb. 9.
  • S.B. 77: Water Rights Restricted Account Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Scott D. Sandall and Rep. Casey Snider): This bill frees up money allocated to the state engineer toward investments needed to make water shepherding more possible. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: After passing through both the Senate and House, a draft of the enrolled bill was prepared on Feb. 9.
  • H.B. 295: Produced Water Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Steven Lund): This bill encourages extraction companies to reuse their produced water, the salty water left over from the oil and gas extraction process, for further extraction to free up an additional 800,000 acre feet of water. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: The Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee gave this bill a favorable recommendation, and it is awaiting its second reading in the Senate.
  • S.B. 196: Great Salt Lake Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Nate Blouin): This bill directs the Great Salt Lake commissioner to create a plan and pilot program to maximize the amount of water getting to the lake in wet water years like the 2022-2023 winter. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill received a favorable recommendation from the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee on Feb 13 (6-0). It is awaiting its second reading in the Senate.
    • In the news: Carter Williams at KSL reported on the bill. Ben Winslow at Fox 13 covered the bill’s hearing in the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee: “The bill does not create any new authorities for the commissioner; it doesn’t spend any money. We’re just trying to ensure that when we have a really good water year like we did last year…we have a coordinated plan with broad stakeholder buy-in on how we’re going to maximize the current conditions for the benefit of the Great Salt Lake. We’ve got to be more proactive in the future.” Several committee members had questions about the definition of “wet water year,” as well as whether the plan would be mandatory. Sen. Blouin expressed willingness to work on the definition of “wet water year” in the bill and confirmed that the plan would not be mandatory. Rather, the goal of the plan is to involve stakeholders in creating a cooperative agreement for wet water years and provide the state with a plan for directing water to the lake. Tim Davis, Great Salt Lake deputy commissioner, clarified that the plan would not interfere with any water rights and would only direct abundant water produced in wet years to the lake. Davis also noted that the commissioner intends to proceed with this plan regardless of the bill’s status, as it is a task outlined in the commissioner’s strategic plan, released earlier this year.
  • H.B. 472: Water Revisions (sponsored by Rep. Brian King): This bill directs the Division of Water Resources and Water Rights to study the creation of a collaborative, centralized water database and center for all Utah water data. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill has been amended on Feb. 13, 2024, to require the division to collaborate and consult with other state agencies (rather than a permit). During the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee hearing, Rep. King discussed the legislature’s concern for Great Salt Lake and described his collaboration with scientists across the state in drafting this bill. Comments were generally supportive of this bill, and a Clearfield city council member recommended adding the Division of Water Quality to the list of consultations to strengthen the bill. On Feb. 12, 2024, H.B. 472 passed the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee with a vote of 10-1-3. It was placed on the House’s second-reading calendar on Feb. 13, 2024.
  • H.B. 243: Riparian Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Gay Lynn Bennion): This bill would encourage municipalities to identify riparian areas and create zoning laws to protect them.To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: The bill has been amended so as to not require municipalities to identify riparian areas and to create zoning laws to protect them. In place of a requirement, the bill would require the Division of Water Resources to recognize local government efforts related to riparian areas. The amended bill faced considerable opposition from legislators during the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee on Feb. 9. The legislators’ concerns centered on the potential effects on private land owners. On Feb. 9, the committee voted to hold the bill.

Bills with negative impacts on Great Salt Lake

  • H.B. 280: Water-Related Changes (sponsored by Rep. Casey Snider): Still controversial, this large bill takes the power to prioritize water projects away from local jurisdictions and gives it to the state water board. It also proposes an undefined fee on water users to fund water projects like Bear River development. While undefined, the current bill requires implementing a fee by the end of 2026. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill was amended to require a study for financing water infrastructure projects and seemingly removes the controversial proposed fee in exchange for a water-development coordinating council to discuss future funding. The House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee gave the amended version a favorable recommendation (12-1) and it had its second reading in the House on Feb. 12.
    • In the news: Leia Larsen, on Utah’s Public Radio with Tom Williams, described this bill as treating water infrastructure projects the same way we look at transportation projects and requiring similar long-term planning. Larsen indicated that smaller communities have raised concerns about having the resources and staff to do this level of planning and suggested the bill might see some tweaks going forward as a result. Deseret News summarized this bill and explained how removing the fee in exchange for a fee study made it much less controversial.
  • S.B. 195: Golf Course Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Daniel McCay): This bill proposes formal tracking of water usage by golf courses and seeks to encourage golf courses to improve their usage, but it also shields golf course water usage data from public view and access. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: The bill received a favorable recommendation from the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee on Feb. 8. Public comments in the meeting generally expressed support, with some notable points made by a few commenters. Frank Pignanelli, representing the Utah Media Coalition, commended the research the bill calls for; however, joking that sprinkler shaming is “a fundamental Utah activity,” he emphasized that taxpayers have a right to information about how golf courses are using water and requested that the sponsor remove that provision of the bill. Ryan Peterson, a lobbyist for Golf Alliance Utah, expressed support but had concerns with the logistics of the bill and said that asking private golf courses to measure and report their water usage would be an extraordinary measure not asked of any other private water users, such as farmers. In response, Warren Peterson of the Utah Farm Bureau pointed out that farmers in Utah are statutorily required to measure and report their water usage, and all have systems in place for doing so. The bill passed its second reading in the Senate but was circled on Feb. 13. Circling a bill means temporarily postponing action on it without removing it from its place on the calendar.

Other bills of interest

  • S.B. 125: Secondary Water Amendments (sponsored by Sen. David P. Hinkins): This bill increases the number of suppliers who would be exempt from having to meter. Currently, only secondary water suppliers with less than 1,000 users are exempt from requirements, but this bill would expand that to suppliers with less than 2,500 users outside the Great Salt Lake Basin. The metering requirements would still apply to suppliers within the Great Salt Lake Basin. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: On Feb. 13, the bill passed through the Senate and was forwarded to the House for a first reading. It was subsequently sent to the House Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee.
  • H.B. 42: Water Rights Publication Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Joel K. Briscoe): This bill modernizes water rights and change applications, allowing for electronic confirmation and reporting. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill passed through both chambers of the legislature and is now awaiting the governor’s signature.
    • In the news: Rep. Joel Briscoe summarized the bill on Utah’s Public Radio with Tom Williams.
  • H.B. 249: Utah Legal Personhood Amendments (sponsored by Rep. Walt Brooks): This bill prohibits certain categories of nonhumans, including bodies of water, from being granted or receiving legal personhood status. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: On Feb. 14, 2024, this bill passed the Senate’s second reading with a vote of 18-5-6. On February 15, 2024, HB 249 was circled on the Senate’s 3rd reading calendar by a voice vote. Circling a bill means temporarily postponing action on it without removing it from its place on the calendar.
  • S.B. 39 Water Shareholder Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Scott D. Sandall and Rep. Casey Snider): This bill changes Utah water law to allow for additional time for change applications by a shareholder in a water company. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: Governor Cox signed this bill into law on Feb. 13, 2024.
  • S.B. 55: Bear Lake Preservation Amendments (sponsored by Sen. Chris Wilson): This bill develops guiding principles for the management of Bear Lake, which would recognize and seek to preserve its ecological, recreation, cultural, and aesthetic values while supporting the lake for irrigation purposes. To read more about this bill, see our previous legislative update.
    • Update: This bill has not progressed or changed since it was on the agenda for the Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee’s meeting on Jan. 17, 2024, but was not considered by the committee.

IV. Requests for appropriation

Requests for appropriation (RFAs) are mechanisms by which legislators can request funding from the state government for specific programs. RFAs can include one-time requests or ongoing funding. Money can also be requested within specific bills, but RFAs request money for projects outside of bills. Get more information on RFAs.

RFAs for this session were due on Jan. 27, 2024. See our past reports from Jan. 31 and Feb. 8 for summaries of the appropriations requests relevant to Great Salt Lake. Last week, on Feb. 7, the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Appropriations Subcommittee met for its last scheduled meeting of the session to vote on whether to recommend many of these requests (see the voting package).

On Feb. 13, the subcommittee presented its recommendations to the Executive Appropriations Committee (EAC), which will combine these requests with all other recommendations for funding requests into a single package that moves forward for legislators to vote on. We summarized those recommendations in a previous legislative update.

This summary was quite extensive, and we do not repeat it here but underline the fact that these are some of the most important decisions that will be made relative to Great Salt Lake this session. There are two notable updates:

  • First, Sen. David Hinkins’ request for $700,000 in one-time funds to research methods for restoring aspen stands to high-elevation forests was recommended by the subcommittee. However, the subcommittee recommended that the research only be funded pending an audit of past project funds, and with the condition that any funds disbursed be in the form of a reimbursement for expenses already made. This research was profiled last summer in the The Salt Lake Tribune.
  • Second, Rep. Doug Owens’ Great Salt Lake phragmites eradication RFA, which we discussed last week, was missing from the subcommittee’s recommendation list to the EAC. This funding would empower forestry, fire, and state lands to bolster initiatives in vegetation management and invasive species control, particularly around the Great Salt Lake area, including removal of invasive phragmites. Invasive phragmites are responsible for the extraction of an estimated 71,000 acre-feet of water from the Great Salt Lake Basin in a typical year. While the Great Salt Lake phragmites eradication RFA was not included in the subcommittee’s recommended list, a new item appeared entitled “Invasive Species Management and Support Staff.” This recommended request includes one-time funding of $2 million (the same one-time amount) and ongoing funding of $500,000 (not included in Rep. Owens’ RFA). We suspect this money is for phragmite removal.

V. Other updates

  • Siphoning Great Salt Lake for lithium extraction: Two articles—from The Wall Street Journal and Business Insider—reported on the idea of “[removing] billions of gallons of water from the Great Salt Lake, [extracting] the lithium, and then [returning] the water.” Lilac Solutions, the California-based startup proposing this plan, stated that “its method of harvesting lithium from the lake would avoid environmental damage and not cause any water loss.”
  • “Like Utah, California has had pipeline dreams to save its drying Salton Sea”: Saige Miller reported on the fate of California’s Salton Sea and how it compares to Great Salt Lake. Replenishing lake levels with piped ocean water has been proposed for both of these lakes, despite their differences. Patrick O’Dowd, the executive director of the Salton Sea Authority, says “[t]he technologies that might make a seawater importation project feasible haven’t been invented yet…we’re having to deal with tomorrow’s problems with today’s dollars and today’s technology.”
  • “The health of the Great Salt Lake and changing how we value water”: Amy Joi O-Donoghue reported on Great Salt Lake Commissioner Steed’s media briefing last Wednesday, highlighting the existence of “new money under consideration to put in for the turf buyback program, for growing ‘smarter,’ and millions on the table to quantify that what water is saved is actually making it to the lake.”
  • “Controlled releases planned at Utah Lake”: KSL’s Carter Williams reported that State Engineer Teresa Wilhelmsen planned to release water from Utah Lake beginning last Thursday, Feb. 8, 2024, as it approaches 100% capacity for the first time since 2011. The water will make its way towards Great Salt Lake from Saratoga Springs to the Jordan River. Great Salt Lake Commissioner Brian Steed has asked other water managers in the Great Salt Lake Basin for similar releases to send water to Great Salt Lake as the snowpack reaches 110% of the average for this point in the year, and reservoirs already sit close to full after last year’s record winter. Newsweek also reported on the releases, pointing to the dangers to Utah if Great Salt Lake continues to decline.
  • “Dust from Great Salt Lake helps algal blooms thrive, study finds”: Mike Anderson for KSLTV reported on the relationship between blowing dust and algal blooms. Janice Brahney, an associate professor of environmental biogeochemistry at Utah State University, says “[U]nequivocally. We saw that dust additions can lead to eutrophication.” This is true of “all kinds of dust, from construction and agricultural work to mining and even the bed of the shrinking Great Salt Lake.”
  • “Democrats pushing initiative that will create a Great Salt Lake license plate”: The Utah Senate Democrats are championing an initiative that would create a GSL license plate, purchases of which would support GSL conservation.
  • Great Salt Lake story map released: The Utah Department of Natural Resources (DNR) released an interactive story map as an educational resource sharing “how climate, hydrology and water management affect the rise and fall of the lake…some of the critical preservation work underway, as well as what we can do moving forward to restore and maintain a healthy lake.” The DNR indicated that this resource was created in response to a request from the Great Salt Lake Strike Team.
  • “How Salt Lake City is looking to improve future water consumption:” KSL’s Carter Williams reported that Salt Lake City Public Utilities is “finishing up a draft of a revised watershed management plan expected to improve water quality and supply” across its service area following an audit of water consumption within Salt Lake facilities earlier this month in an effort to conserve water for the Great Salt Lake. Unsurprisingly, the audit revealed that city-owned properties and facilities are the biggest water users, and Williams reported on Mayor Erin Mendenhall’s recent statement that the city is “identifying and prioritizing” landscape conversions to reduce outdoor water use to conserve water going forward.
  • GSL Lobby Days: Join a coalition of lake advocates every week throughout the 2024 legislative session for GSL Lobby Days. Each week, they will provide a rundown of the bills being watched and a short lobbying training before heading out to communicate with our lawmakers together. No experience necessary. Sign up today!

Get Involved

VOLUNTEER. DONATE. STAY INFORMED.

Donate today to help us create practical, actionable, and legally-sound advice for policymakers who are working with us to save the Great Salt Lake.

To stay informed about the work of the Great Salt Lake Project, join our email list.

If you are a legal professional with the desire to help with the Great Salt Lake Project, we need your help. Please fill out the form below.

GSL Volunteer Form
Name
Name
First
Last
How would you like to be involved?


OTHER NEWS