By KEVIN WALKER
Michigan Correspondent

LANSING, Mich. — The Michigan Farm Bureau has come out against proposed water use legislation that would create more rules and restrictions on the rights of landowners.
The Farm Bureau would like to keep the current law, which simply states that a landowner with a natural body of water on their property – a riparian – is entitled to a reasonable use of that water; and it’s currently up to the courts, not the state, to determine if the use is reasonable.
“This legislation would shift that determination to the state, with input from the public,” said Matt Smego, assistant legislative counsel at the Farm Bureau. “It would allow the public to pick and choose uses that it believes are reasonable, potentially limiting the type of use an individual may choose for their property.”
According to Smego, the proposed legislation would require more water users to obtain permits because it would lower the withdrawal threshold from two million gallons per day to one million. The legislation would also require permits in areas that are not yet known, referred to as zone C areas, if a certain percentage of water is withdrawn.
“We believe this sets a precedent for requiring water users to pay for permits that do not provide any additional environmental protections,” Smego said.
Paul Seelbach, research director for fisheries at the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR), believes much of what’s going on right now is political posturing on the part of the Farm Bureau and others.
“There’s some things the Farm Bureau is saying that isn’t quite right,” he said. “Everybody’s doing their regular potshots sort of thing. We didn’t forget about farming when we developed this thing.”
Seelbach is neutral on the proposed legislation, but he does believe in the Groundwater Advisory Council, a group started years ago to develop better policies for groundwater use. The Farm Bureau was part of this group.
“We worked in a collaborative model, not a ‘tell everybody what to do’ kind of model,” he said. “What’s going on now is the final negotiations on the fine points. The farmers have not been a part of this discussion for five years. It’s hard to communicate a good public policy to thousands of people. Farm interests, however, were well represented on the council.”
The Michigan United Conservation Clubs (MUCC) takes a position similar to Seelbach’s. According to a statement posted on its official website, “the MUCC believes in the collaborative policy process represented by the work of the (Groundwater Advisory) Council and numerous (state) Senate work groups, and supports the recommendations that have emerged from these informed and earnest processes ...
“MUCC believes that Michigan needs water-use regulation to ensure the health and quantity of our state’s fishery and other water-dependent natural resources. We believe that both the Senate and the House package of bills are significant improvements over the current protections provided by state and common law.”
Another part of the proposed legislation is an Internet-based water withdrawal assessment tool. Although it supports development of the tool, the Farm Bureau wants to implement a trial period to see how it will work in the real world.
Versions of the proposed legislation would enact the tool right away without a trial period.
Seelbach said he can understand both positions. Some people support enactment of the tool right away, arguing that any problems can be worked out as they come up, while others prefer a slower start-up time, allowing for evaluation and feedback for any potential problems before the tool becomes integrated into the system.
Seelbach also said while he believes that some form of the water-use legislation will become law soon, it’s not a foregone conclusion.
“The whole thing could just implode,” he said.