Note: Curtis Chubb, Central Texas Aquifer Coalition coordinator, penned this commentary in a recent edition of the Austin American-Statesman. Many of his views hit the nail squarely on the head and apply directly to our situation here in western Hays County vis a vis the Hays Trinity Groundwater Conservation District and all the warring "property rights" factions who would just as soon suck our aquifer dry than abide by any kind of management oversight whatsoever. Remember, out here, virtually all of us depend on well water. Keep your eyes peeled. Several seats on the HTGCD board are up for election in May. Who you chose may verily decide the future course of our water supply.
More insights on recent developments in a nearby groundwater district to the east: http://www.rockdalereporter.com/news/2010-02-04/Front_Page/CarrizoWilcox_aquifer_study_will_compare_plans_pum.html
Send your comments to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net, to the HTGCD, manager@haysgroundwater.com, or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
Asher Price's (Statesman) recent article about local groundwater resources (Feb. 28, "State seeks to unify local handling of groundwater") was written by someone outside looking into the world of groundwater. I am writing this article as someone inside looking out.
We are experiencing a modern-day "water rush" in Central Texas, where the greed for oil has been replaced by the greed for groundwater.
I own about 90 acres in Milam County, where, as Price describes it, the "fiefdom" of the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District reigns. And as a freelance journalist, I have reported about Post Oak for local newspapers since 2004. So I understand both landowners' rights and the workings of Post Oak.
When I read in Price's article that a groundwater attorney said a cap on pumping could rob landowners of their water-pumping rights, I thought to myself that the attorney must want Texas to return to the rule of capture, by which anyone could pump as much groundwater as they wanted. In essence, the rule of capture is the absence of groundwater management — the only time landowners' rights would not be infringed upon by government. Texas uses groundwater districts to modify the rule of capture and manage groundwater resources.
The Post Oak general manager's quote in Price's article starts with,"My board is in favor of landowners' property rights ... "That is the usual reason given for approving all permit applications and for planning not to use the Texas Water Development Board's determination of available groundwater as a cap for permitting. Although his recognition of landowners' rights is admirable, nowhere in the state law controlling groundwater districts is it stated that they are charged with protecting property rights. Their only duties are related to protecting aquifers.
I agree that the state is attempting to regain some control of groundwater management. I believe that this is a good thing for the reasons highlighted in Price's article.
The state's effort was predicted by Ronald Kaiser of the Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources in 2001, when he said: "The issue is not whether Texas will continue to defer to local groundwater districts to solve regional or state problems, because it is a foregone conclusion that the state has started down that slippery slope and will not change. The issue is whether the state will provide aquifer-sustainable use standards for local groundwater management districts to follow. Over-drafting and mining of groundwater are aquifer-wide issues that must be addressed accordingly."
And that is exactly what the state is trying to do with the aquifer pumping caps.
When you witness what is going on at the groundwater district level, it would be hard not to conclude that there are major problems. For example, some groundwater districts are managed by people with no background in hydrogeology and groundwater management. The state, however, has left it to these districts to negotiate with the water marketers and their inexhaustible bank accounts, legions of attorneys and hired groundwater experts.
Post Oak's response to this challenge is to approve all permit applications and to wait until the aquifers are drained to alarming levels called "trigger points" before trying to reign in the pumping. In other words, they have opted to kick the problem on down the road.
Probably the most convincing argument for more state involvement in groundwater management was made by a major Central Texas water marketer: He thought more state control would be a bad thing.
We need help.
Chubb is coordinator of the Central Texas Aquifers Coalition.
3 comments:
Well the HTGCD board could certainly learn some from this other groundwater district.
When your desire to control extends to eliminating property owners' right to access their own water to serve their own property then it's time for you to be tarred and feathered and run out of town.
When other governmental entities (e.g., county) are forcing virtually all new homes to be in HOAs, and homeowners are threatened with fines and foreclosures lest they keep unrealistically green lawns or landscaping (the developer controlled board tends to also own the private water utility mandated by the county), you shouldn't be surprised that water is consumed. Don't be foolish enough to call these imposed regimes a "choice" by homeowners.
You would remove much of the incentive for the accelerated waste by giving homeowners the choice instead of claiming that their choice was living under the rule of an involuntary membership corporation.
HTGCD has only sought to continue this bad practice for the benefit of the HTGCD board. You see, the central water systems have to pay production fees to HTGCD and at least some board members are seeking to turn HTGCD into a civil servant retirement plan with health insurance, pensions, etc. To this end they have sought to force virtually all residents of the district to be on central water systems when the source is groundwater. Yeah, they want to "save" groundwater by "saving" it from you without compensation to you and then giving it to selected corporations to sell back to you with the added insult of production fees tacked on to boot.
Perhaps it's time to terminate the HTGCD due to its inability to stay within the bounds of control that the residents limited it to. Year after year, the district's board seeks to create a fiefdom. When the people say "no", you see tantrums fit for a 3rd world dictatorship.
The HTGCD has sought to impose metering, eliminate residential wells, force homeowners to pay HTGCD "production fees", force homeowners to purchase water from private utilities, subject homeowners to unauthorized searches and fines, etc., etc. Such conduct is fundamentally in conflict with representations about HTGCD at the time support was solicited for its creation.
Time for change in the composition of the HTGCD board. No more "musical chairs" with the same despots simply rotating which of them wears the crown and trying to give landowners' water to HTGCD favored vendors.
Anon 1, any time the subject of our groundwater district comes up, you come up with the same insane rant about HOAs, county rules, and the jack-booted aims of the district. If you're stuck living in a subdivision HOA, please move or do some sort of exorcism to relieve the pain.
Your tired rants against the HTGCD, are full of malarky and fabrication.
The HTGCD and county do NOT force community water systems on anyone, developers do. Production fees paid by water utilities to the HTGCD was set up under the special legislation produced by (your champion) former State Rep Rick Green and is maintained by his look-a-like Patrick Rose.
The HTGCD is NOT trying to confiscate homeowner wells, is NOT attempting to meter homeowner wells, is NOT scheming to force homeowners to purchase water from water utilities. NO ONE producing less than 25,000 gallons of groundwater daily is charged a red cent.
The board of the HTGCD is FOLLOWING THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND STATE WATER CODE as they currently apply to groundwater districts and groundwater management, no more, no less.
A board of directors with your mindset would only hasten the day we are overrun with water profiteers and we all run dry. That seems to be your agenda. Right now, the only thing standing in the way is our groundwater district with its currently sitting directors.
I can tell you are not a native West Texan, and certainly not one who who has experienced his family well drying up due to drought or some neighbor with a bigger, deeper well filling their vanity ponds and swimming pools, watering the vineyards and St. Augustine grass on their estate like there's no tomorrow.
Dude, wake up and scrub the cob webs from your brain. There's only so much water in the our aquifer to go around and these days there's a lot less of it.
Thank God for the replenishing rains. They'll last a couple of months thru a hard drought. But the aguifer's levels are still much lower than they were 10 or 20 years ago.
Texas patriot:
Your focus on west Texas reveals your lack of knowledge about Hays county. In fact, your county commissioners just imposed new subdivision platting rules that REQUIRE central water systems if the source of water for the subdivision is groundwater.
The mandate for HOAs is certainly developers in part, but the county does its number on ya by requiring these "open areas" and private maintenance of the open areas - hence HOAs are imposed indirectly.
You are also apparently unaware of the legislation that HTGCD has attempted to impose on homeowners. Apparently you never attended a meeting conducted by this group. HTGCD most certainly did attempt to impose transfer fees, prevent anyone that did not have a well in the ground by June 1, 2009 from ever having a residential well, turn all residential wells into permitted wells for current owners when they sold their property, and so on, and so on. Once a well is permitted, you have to have metering and pay production fees. As far as the unlawful search, Backus himself vigorously sought such authority and it was certainly in the bill that HTGCD hired Texas Stakeholders to promote at the expense of residents.
The HTGCD isn't "following the law". The HTGCD is attempting to change the law to suit the personal agendas of a few of the board members- and to the great detriment of all the other property owners in the county.
Before you run off in such an uneducated fashion, perhaps you should either attend HTGCD meetings or obtain copies of the legislation they tried to pursue last year. I'd post it here but there is no way to add an attachment.
Despite your insinuations, I have not suggested nor promoted the proposition that owners should engage in waste of water resources. To the contrary, I have been adamantly opposed to the HTGCD's attempts to create a system that ensures waste and that also denies homeowners compensation for taking of their water for the sole benefit of the HTGCD and the private water utilities. I haven't even addressed anything other than residential wells for one's own use.
As far as the remarks about waste, keep in mind that the water utilities love the St. Augustine and all the other uses. You want to ignore the fact that homeowners are being mandated to keep unrealistically "green" lawns (or even implement a lawn) by HOAs threatening with fine and foreclosure otherwise. There is no defense. You can say "move", but that simply means that the next owner would be in the same boat - doesn't change the situation. Vineyards would be agricultural use and although I don't care much for them, that is a different topic. I would certainly support giving the HTGCD the authority to hear disputes between HOAs and homeowners regarding HOAs forcing homeowners to engage in water wasting activities.
When you force homeowners to purchase water from entities like Aqua Tex or force homeowners to live in regimes where developers own the water utility, you shouldn't be surprised that the utility will be operated to maximize profits - not conservation! The HTGCD likewise prospers from production of groundwater - thus its financial interests are directly opposite to its stated objective of conservation.
Perhaps you enjoy maligning the messenger when you don't like the message. "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" you know. Do a little research on the county's subdivision rules, obtain copies of the legislation that Backus, et al. hired Texas Stakeholders to promote, and come back after the education.
Post a Comment