David K. Israel
Rain: Who owns it? – How 4 states see it
by David K. Israel - March 11, 2009 - 5:30 AM

conservation2_e.jpgAs water becomes harder and harder to find, especially in places like Arizona, New Mexico and California, new communities going up these days are being planned with rain water collectors for each home. Though the water won’t be used for drinking, this ‘grey water’ as it’s called, can be used for toilets or irrigations systems, where the quality of the water isn’t so important.

It’s only a matter of time before we have the technology to capture our own roof run-off and store it for drinking water. But is that legal? Who owns the rain? If you’re using rain barrels or cisterns right now to capture roof run-off for your gardens, are you breaking the law? Sounds silly, right?

Turns out, though, it depends where you live. Here’s how some states see it:

The bad:

1. Utah

Capturing the rain and you can find yourself in the slammer here. Rainwater is state property. However, things might be changing. Keep an eye on Senator Scott Jenkins who’s trying to get a bill passed that will allow you to harvest the rain.

2. Colorado

Live in Denver? Forget about harvesting your rainwater until state legislators get to work on a new bill allowing it, but only for irrigation. Until then, you’ll have to go rogue if you want to collect the rain because Colorado says your roof is merely a tributary to a stream. Where? Well, somewhere, of course.

The good:

1. New Mexico

In many parts of New Mexico, commercial buildings and all new houses larger than 2,500 square feet must have cisterns in place to capture rainwater. Smaller dwellings must have rain barrels or other such capture systems.

2. Arizona

Live in Scottsdale? Did you know the state offers income-tax credit to cover ¼ of the cost of your rainwater-capture system? Up to $1,000! For more info, check this out here.

Click here to get a Risk-Free issue of mental_floss magazine
Comments (5)
  1. Regarding Denver: How funny. The city of Denver has a tax to cover the costs of water drainage. The basis of the tax is that developed property no longer absorbs rainwater and it costs the city money to provide a drainage system for the water that’s coming off parking lots, building roofs, etc.

  2. If rainwater is the property of the state, I bet they don’t take ownership of it when it causes problems such as flooding.

    When it snows in Denver, can you ask the city to please remove their property from you driveway?

  3. Colorado is so poor (because of a stupid thing called TABOR that we won’t go into) that they don’t even remove snow from any city streets. This is still the wild west. You are on your own out here.

  4. We may be “poor” because of TABOR, but on the other hand we aren’t $50 billion in debt like California–because of TABOR.

  5. The stance of Colorado law, and the bills noted in this article, are in direct opposition to the facts and reality. A recent study commissioned by Douglas County and the Colorado Water Conservation Board has confirmed that very little precipitation that falls on an undeveloped site ever returns to the stream system. The study focused on an area in northwest Douglas County, where the average annual precipitation is 17.5 inches. In dry years, 100 percent of the annual precipitation is lost to evaporation and transpiration by vegetation. In wet years, a maximum of 15 percent of the precipitation returns to the stream system. On average, just 3 percent of annual precipitation ever returns to the stream.

    Harvesting rainwater is a time-tested technique for saving and utilizing the free water that falls from the shy. To learn more about the process, uses, designs, installation, videos and health considerations, visit RainTankDepot.com .

Comment

commenting policy