Great Salt Lake legislative recap
Despite House Speaker Mike Schultz’s comments about putting a “pause” on Great Salt Lake legislation this session, a handful of bills relating to the lake were introduced. “Most bills that would encourage water conservation failed. Some money — a sliver of what was asked — was given to monitor dust coming off Great Salt Lake, to lease water for the lake and to protect wetlands,” the Salt Lake Tribune reported of the last session.
Underfunding dust control puts public health at risk, as airborne toxins from the drying lakebed contribute to lung disease and asthma. Meanwhile, programs intended to help farmers conserve and redirect water to the lake remain unused, as developers offer significantly higher payouts for water rights.
Investing in Antelope Island’s visitor center and facilities seems futile if lawmakers continue neglecting the health of Great Salt Lake itself. Without sufficient water conservation efforts, the lake will keep shrinking, exposing more toxic dust and threatening the island’s ecosystem. A beautiful visitor center won’t matter if Antelope Island becomes inaccessible due to receding water or if worsening air quality makes outdoor recreation unsafe. Protecting the lake should be the priority
The fight to save the Great Salt Lake must remain a top priority. Without real conservation measures, Utahns will continue to face worsening air quality, water shortages, and ecosystem collapse.
Bills that FAILED:
SB 305 Water Wise Landscaping: Would have limited grass at state owned buildings in certain locations like parking strips and places that aren’t actively used. Opponents didn’t want to have a “war on turf.SB
131 Water Commitment Amendments: Would have allowed cities to count water saved for the Great Salt Lake in their state-required conservation plans. It didn’t create new flows or diversions. Opponents raised concerns it could be used to stop water development projects.
HB 328 Water Usage Amendments: Lauded as going a long way to halt the decline of the lake, it would have limited the use of overhead spray irrigation at new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects in northern Utah in areas that aren’t used for playing, exercise or recreation. That would encourage conservation by limiting water-thirsty grass to areas that would be actively used for recreation. Grass farmers opposed it.
SB 92 Golf Course Amendments: Would have allowed an analysis of water use on publicly owned golf courses to recommend water-saving strategies and eventually create a master plan for state-owned golf courses. Privately-owned courses would have been exempt.
HJR009 Joint Resolution Regarding Utah’s Share of Colorado River Water: Could have had an impact on negotiations between states, tribes and Mexico over the future of the Colorado River, according to FOX 13 News. It called for Utah to be able to use its river allocation anywhere in the state.
HB 318 Residential Turf Amendments: Would have limited residential lawns at newly constructed single-family detached dwellings located in the Great Salt Lake Basin. This bill was not debated.HB 330: Water Sprinkler Efficiency Requirements: Would have required all sprinkler heads purchased after July 1, 2026 be waterwise. This bill was not debated.
HB 536 Water Usage Notification Amendments: Would have required water suppliers to measure and record water usage for users and notify them if their water use spiked significantly. This bill was not debated.
More 2024 legislation, courtesy of the Salt Lake Tribune, here.