KUER0%

More than 3,700 protests lodged over water rights for the Box Elder data center 17%

By Macy Lipkin0%

5/6/2026, 1:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 3 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 4.1% saturation with 24 hits. Analysis detected 60 faulty-reasoning hits from 589 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 32.7% and a BS Rank of 17% (18,191 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.10% of the article peer group.

Even after approval from the Box Elder County Commission, a massive data center project in northwest Utah has to clear more obstacles before construction can begin. 
A big one is obtaining water rights. 
The proposed mega data center needs to change a water right from agricultural to industrial use. 
Opponents want to prevent that from happening. 
More than 3,700 people have filed protests against the change with the Utah Division of Water Rights. 
Developers say the data center will use far less than the water rights they plan to buy, but Deeda Seed of the Center for Biological Diversity doubts their project can be that efficient. 
“We all suffer if Great Salt Lake continues to decline, and this contributes to that decline,” she said. 
And just because there’s a water right doesn’t mean there’s water. 
After this winter’s record-low snowpack, for instance, some farmers expect to be allocated so little water that they’re choosing not to plant at all. 
Applications to change who owns a water right or how it’s used generally go through without any protests. 
Audra Sorensen, spokesperson for the Utah Division of Water Rights, said she hasn’t seen more than a handful filed on any application until now. 
The division has its work cut out for it. 
“It is the process of the state engineer's office to look at every single protest, read every single document, be very thorough, and then make a decision based on that,” she said. 
The next step may be a hearing, which some protesters requested, Sorensen said. 
She doesn’t know when that would happen, but she noted that the thousands of people who paid the $15 fee to file official protests are now part of the process and will receive updates. 
“People would be allowed to provide evidence, as it's just a regular old legal process and say, ‘Hey, I think it's going to impair my water right here,’ ‘It might impair this or that or the other,’” she said. 
But the process is not subjective. 
“It's absolutely just based on the law, what is allowed, what is not allowed, and if that evidence presented during a hearing or a protest determines that it shouldn't, the change application shouldn't be approved, then that's the direction it would go,” Sorensen said. 
The $15 fee goes toward the division’s work processing the complaints, creating reports and doing what it’s required to do by law. 
The process won’t end with the state engineer’s decision. 
Parties can appeal if they disagree with the outcome. 
The water right that’s received so many protests dates back to 1904 and includes 1,900 acre-feet of water. 
Data center developers say they will buy about 2,800 and have another 10,000 on contract, so it’s unclear if or how the project could continue without this particular water right. 
Every sale of rights like this must go through the Division of Water Rights, Sorensen said. 
The Military Installation Development Authority, which is championing the project, also has other things on its to-do list. 
“The Stratos Project Area was just created yesterday,” a spokesperson said Tuesday in a statement, referring to the Box Elder site. 
“We will now work with the development team to lay out next steps, required studies, state regulatory processes, etc.” 
Community engagement is important, the spokesperson said, and a MIDA Design Review Committee will form and hold public meetings. 
Macy Lipkin is a Report for America corps member who reports for KUER in northern Utah. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.4%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.0%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 4.3%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 5.8%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 5.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Macy Lipkin: 2.1%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias3.1%This article: 4.1%Macy Lipkin: 5.6%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 3.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 3.1%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion3.1%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.2%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 3.9%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.7%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.5%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.7%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

589 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers29%attributed speech416writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageDeeda Seed • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageAudra Sorensen • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAudra Sorensen • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageAudra Sorensen • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageAudra Sorensen • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageAudra Sorensen • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Deeda Seed

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words10% of attributed speech5.8% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.