Revises provisions relating to water. (BDR 48-586)
Summary
Assembly Bill 132 revises Nevada’s water law exemption for certain wildlife water catchment structures known as guzzlers. Under current law, small-scale precipitation collection in a guzzler can be exempt from the state’s water appropriation requirements if it meets specified size and design limits. This bill expands that exemption by increasing the maximum allowed guzzler capacity from 20,000 gallons to 40,000 gallons and increasing the maximum pipe length from one-quarter mile to one-half mile, while leaving the one-acre capture-area limit and other approval requirements in place.
The bill still requires that the guzzler not conflict with existing water rights as determined by the State Engineer, be developed by or in consultation with wildlife agencies, and be approved by the Department of Wildlife. It also continues to preserve the separate exemption for rooftop precipitation collection for nonpotable domestic use. In practical terms, the measure broadens the range of wildlife water projects that can qualify for the exemption without triggering the full water appropriation process.
Impact
AB 132 amends NRS 533.027, the statute governing exemptions from Nevada’s water appropriation requirements, by enlarging the parameters for wildlife guzzlers that may collect precipitation without being treated as appropriations of water. The change affects state water administration, wildlife habitat projects, and any public or private entities working with the Department of Wildlife or state/federal wildlife managers to develop guzzlers. It does not eliminate oversight; projects must still avoid conflicts with existing water rights and receive wildlife agency approval.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong bipartisan support and no recorded opposition: the Assembly passed the bill 42-0 and the Senate passed it 21-0. With no committee transcript provided, there is no evidence of significant controversy in the available record. The unanimous votes suggest the bill was viewed favorably as a targeted, technical adjustment to support wildlife water infrastructure.
Contention
No notable points of contention appear in the provided materials. The only substantive policy choice reflected in the bill is whether to expand the size and pipe-length limits for exempt guzzlers, and the unanimous votes indicate broad agreement on that change. Any potential concerns would likely center on water-rights protection or administrative oversight, but the bill preserves those safeguards by retaining the State Engineer conflict review and Department of Wildlife approval requirements.