Colorado relaxes water rights law to allow rain barrels
July 1st, 2009 by cdunaganThe state of Colorado, where water is scarce, has begun to allow certain homeowners to collect rainwater that falls onto their roofs. A new law, which goes into effect today, removes the legal stigma from people who collect water in rain barrels — provided they meet some strict criteria.
In Washington state, where water is more plentiful (at least in Western Washington), rainwater collection remains stuck in a legal quagmire.
Folks here are growing more aware of the problems that can be created by excess stormwater, which may cause erosion and can transport pollution into the nearest waterway. We are seeing a big push for “low impact development,” which focuses on getting rainwater to soak into the ground as quickly as possible.
But putting rainwater to actual use is another issue. If you intend to use the runoff for watering plants or really any purpose, you are supposed to obtain a water right from the Washington Department of Ecology. In practice, Ecology officials say they allow de minimis use of runoff, such as filling a rain barrel for your garden. But if your goal is to fill a large tank, you could run into problems.
At first, it seems rather ridiculous that a person could be prevented from using the water that falls on his or her property. But when you consider the legal implications, you are forced to confront the extremes. If lots of people were allowed to store all the rainwater they wanted, some streams might dry up in the summer.
For years, Washington legislators have tried to define how much water can be taken without the need for a water right, but the legislation has never gone anywhere. A bill in the 2009 Legislature would have directed Ecology to establish how many gallons can be collected and to describe areas where such collection would and would not be allowed.
A year ago, Department of Ecology officials decided they needed to develop some general rules in the absence of a state law. They offered this rationale:
An acceptable level of rainwater harvesting without requiring a water right has never been defined in law or rule. This lack of clarity has’ created a public perception that even tiny amounts of rainwater harvesting and use is subject to the water code and/or permit process.
Starting in 2003 and every year thereafter the legislature has attempted to c1arify this legal ambiguity. All such efforts have failed. Stormwater management is a major problem, particularly in urban settings. The legal ambiguity concerning rainwater harvesting is hindering efforts to utilize rainwater harvesting as a stormwater management tool. If Ecology does not move forward with the rule, the crippling uncertainty will remain.
The rule was never formally proposed and probably won’t go anywhere for the foreseeable future, according to Judy Beitel of Ecology’s Water Resources Program. Her program has undergone such severe staff cutbacks that special projects like this will be greatly diminished. For further discussion, see Ecology’s page on Rainwater Collection.
Colorado legislators understand that the collection of rainwater could potentially impair uses by people downstream who hold legal rights to the available water. The new law imposes some strict criteria, as outlined in a discussion paper (PDF 44 kb).
Specifically, one’s home must have a legal well or be entitled to have a well designated for domestic uses. Water must not be available from a city or water district. Rainwater can be collected only from the roof, and the use must be consistent with permitted uses of the private well. One must file an application with the state.
A second law will allow limited pilot projects involving large-scale rainwater collection for developments.
These measures seem like a good start to break through the legal quagmire, but Colorado’s law does not begin to address the stormwater problems in urban areas that we see in Western Washington.
New York Times reporter Kirk Johnson explores the implications with some Colorado residents who want to collect rainwater, but his story does not touch on the finer points of the new law.
For Washington state, reporter Jennifer Langston wrote a fairly comprehensive piece for the Seattle P-I about a year ago. In it, she pointed out that Seattle officials had taken steps to solve the water rights problem for many city residents by obtaining a permit for roof collection is areas where streamflow was not a concern.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://pugetsoundblogs.com/waterways/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
Tags: Colorado water, rainwater, Washington Department of Ecology, water rights
July 1st, 2009 at 3:21 pm
DOE perplexes me. They are unable to clear the massive backlog of water rights applications citing a lack of staff time to accomplish the task – yet they are able to devote considerable resources to a variety of other projects. One of their efforts up in Jefferson County is getting a decidedly hostile reception http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20090628/news/306289980 and one can see why. A represenative from DOE spoke at the last KCAA meeting and it was clear to me that despite their “friendly” public face, their policies seek to limit access to all water as much as possible. Why don’t they come clean with the citizens of WA and admit that they are dragging their feet on processing water rights applications and coming up with a workable water harvest policy because it serves their purposes to limit citizen access to water.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:00 pm
The idea that “downstream” people have “rights” to the rain that falls on my property is insulting to my sense of logic and fairness. I say to them, “the hell with you”. I will take what I want and use it as I see fit. Stop me if you can.
July 1st, 2009 at 11:21 pm
This makes me want to run right out and buy a few large rainbarrels just to see if I end up on the rain police radar.
Have we gotten so mired up in needing a regulation for everything that the average suburbanite has to worry about putting a barrel in their yard or (heaven forbid!) in line with their roof drainspout?
Regards,
Kathryn Simpson
July 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
“Harvesting” rain water. What a concept. If the State Department of Ecology claims it is their rain water and can control us harvesting what falls on our property, it seems more than reasonable that we can sue them when their rain water damages our property.
Their next step will be to tax us for the air we breathe in and charge us for the CO2 we breathe out into the “State’s” atmosphere.
Soon our prayers of thanksgiving won’t be to the Lord, they will be to the Department of Ecology which has taken over what is given and what gets ‘taketh’ away. The Dept. of Ecology doesn’t just act like it’s God. It now believes it is God.
July 2nd, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Collect rain water from your roof and reduce the storm water that creates damage to our roads and streams. Maybe you would even empty your collected rain water a few days before a big rain storm, if you were told about it by the weatherman.
Use the collect rain water for your garden during the summer to reduce your high water load on the public water system. Maybe, you would release most or all of your water before November when our rain ready starts to come down and some of this water will soak into the ground and feed the creek in the summer and early fall when it needs little extra water.
This all seems to be common sense to me. The only real problem is the up front cost for each house to collect rain water.
If the government could see rain collection the way I do, maybe they could lower the impact fee for a new house or a group of houses, which cost more due to the rain collect and use system but are more friendly to the environment.
July 4th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Marrowstone Island folks – the old timers, anyway – were water conservatives from necessity. Most were innovative using rain water, gray water and one homeowner turned the basement into a cistern – they did well with very little water.
Some folks I know in Jefferson County live on a mountain not served by a water supply. In addition to collecting rainwater, they did and do still haul water home to store in tanks…and watered livestock and pets.
How expensive can it be to have an efficient rain collection watering system? The couple I mentioned had very little money and none to spare.
Sharon O’Hara
Not allowing homeowners to collect rainwater off their own roof for their own use is government control to the extreme..so it seems to me.
July 5th, 2009 at 9:55 am
As I understand it, Washington’s law already makes it illegal to collect rainwater without a water right. Everyone understands that the law is a problem. As far as I know, it has never been enforced.
Fixing the law is a goal of Ecology officials, but it’s not likely to happen until the economy gets growing again.
A letter published in The News Tribute in Tacoma and a response by Ecology’s Ken Slattery (both on Ecology’s Web site) may clarify Ecology’s position (PDF 16 kb).
July 5th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Based on Ken Slattery’s comments:
If a property owner sold a home and well generating 60 g but retained the adjoining property and the right to tap into the well for that adjoining property use – will it not be allowed?
Sharon O’Hara