So, as the Highland Lakes watershed and our aquifers dry down, one has to wonder how all these new Hill Country LCRA water customers will be served in the coming future
"These two years are so much worse than any two years of the drought of record," said Karen Bondy, manager of river services.
Editor's Note: Here's a good combination of reports from Rob Baxter of the Friendship Alliance of north Hays County, and Asher Price, excellent regional reporter for the Austin American-Statesman. Mr. Baxter's lead-in commentary reflects on recent history in water-dealing and how the water pipelines from LCRA were invited into northern Hays County. Mr. Price reports on a Sept. 23 LCRA board meeting that included some tough news on the effects of the drought.
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net, or to Mr. Baxter at rbaxman@aol.com or friendshipalliance@yahoogroups.com. Mr. Price's email is at the bottom of the story.
By Rob Baxter
Friendship Alliance
The short-sighted and greed-based, rather than need-based, policy hens of former LCRA chief Joe Beal are coming home to roost.
Back in 2000, when Joe Beal and the LCRA sucker punched the SW Austin Hill Country by caving into developer and financial interests, they chose to run unneeded pipelines up 290W and Hamilton Pool Road, against the will of many residents who spoke up against these unplanned "plans" at the time.
These pipelines were shoved down the region's throat without any comprehensive planning involving schools, highways or sewage disposal whatsoever, under the guise of an "emergency," an emergency that was fabricated when one well in Sunset Canyon allegedly went dry...that being a well belonging to a friend of then County Judge Jim Powers and a member of the DS (Dripping Springs) Planning Commission.
The "outrage" created at that time over this one well was then used to create the "emergency" water resolution the county commissioners, led by Russ Molenarr of Precinct 4, needed to spur local growth and development based on the 290W LCRA pipeline. This was also orchestrated in tandem with then illegal development agreements for the now abandoned Cypress-Rutherford tract plan and the subsequently developed Belterra subdivision. (We say "then illegal" because following the FA's discovery of their illegality, with the help of congressional testimony from then DS City Attorney Rex Baker, legislation was passed making the illegal DS agreements retroactively legal.)
These agreements were also done concurrently with Development District legislation proposed by then Hays State Rep. Rick Green, defeated legislation that arguably helped cost Green his seat. Hays County's own little "Chinatown." This would have made a great novel were it not all fact.
This is all brought up again now only in the interest of learning from one's mistakes. So, as the Highland Lakes watershed and our aquifers dry down, one has to wonder how all these new Hill Country LCRA water customers will be served in the coming future.
Read on below to see how the present LCRA management struggles to come to terms with the prior LCRA mismanagement. And meanwhile, pray for more and more rain.
ENVIRONMENT
Tougher water rules on way? LCRA reviewing drought plan.
Intensity of drought may push LCRA to act on management plan sooner.
By Asher Price
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, September 25, 2009
Despite rains that have raked Central Texas since the start of September, the Lower Colorado River Authority said this week that the intensity of the drought over the past two years could compel it to require its municipal and industrial customers to curtail water use earlier than called for in a state-approved drought plan.
At its board meeting Wednesday, LCRA staffers said that recent rains have helped replenish water supplies only slightly and that the river authority may ask for "special emergency relief" from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for flexibility in managing its water supplies.
A staff analysis, presented to LCRA's board of directors, shows that, in severity if not length, the current drought is more intense than the drought of the 1950s. This record drought is the basis of LCRA's state-approved water management plan, which determines steps the LCRA takes at various milestones over the course of a drought to stretch water supplies. Under the management plan, the LCRA must wait until the combined storage of the Highland Lakes falls below 600,000 acre-feet before it can make pro rata water supply cuts — which could require reductions of 35 percent of average use — to all its customers, which include cities and industrial facilities.
Currently, the lakes contain 788,000 acre-feet and are 39 percent full. LCRA staff said that if it determines the drought is worse than the one in the 1950s, it could be forced to ask for more restrictions. Though the LCRA can declare the drought worse than the drought of record, it still needs to consult with the environmental commission to make changes to its water management plan.
"These two years are so much worse than any two years of the drought of record," said Karen Bondy, manager of river services.
Some areas, like northern Hays and southern Travis counties, already face stiff cutbacks. The Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District, which oversees pumping of underground water by companies and cities that provide water to at least 50,000 people, has been in a critical stage drought, which requires a 30 percent cut in use, since December.
In August, the LCRA asked its customers to implement mandatory outdoor water restrictions, which were aimed at cutting water use by 25 percent. Should the LCRA call for a 35 percent cut across the basin, it would effectively be asking customers to slice away an additional 10 percent of their average use. Strategies in that case could include further limiting the length of time residents could water their lawns.
Under current conditions, record low volumes of water are flowing from tributaries into the Highland Lakes, which supply water to at least a million Central Texans. In addition, the region has received below-normal rainfall for the past two years, the third-driest such period on record, with only 35.25 inches of rain in Austin, compared with 67 inches on average. Record high temperatures in 2008 and 2009 have also contributed to the intensity of the drought.
Hard rains a week ago provided only 1 percent of what was needed to fill the lakes, and the LCRA urged people to continue conserving water.
"The drought is not over," said Tim Timmerman, a board member from Travis County.
The staff will come back to the board in October with recommendations.
"We're trying to deal with an unpredictable future while managing an incredibly important resource in our basin," general manager Tom Mason told the board.
asherprice@statesman.com; 445-3643
1 comment:
"These pipelines were shoved down the region's throat without any comprehensive planning involving schools, highways or sewage disposal whatsoever..."
Rob, just what kind of planning would have been done? The kind of planning that the County faux-Court does now that has absolutely no teeth? As for what passes for legal or illegal - where in State law does it say a County can adopt a Comprehensive Plan? (Hint: nowhere) Why is this relevant? Because by the same token, you say that the City entered into an illegal contract with a private entity (Belterra). Development Agreements weren't illegal, just in your mind they were illegal. Friendship Alliance didn't win anything, they just convinced enough people that perhaps it was questionable, but never proved it was illegal, and the Legislature provided clarity on the matter.
The water would have eventually come this way; like it or not. The leftist environmental wackos insist that too many subdivisions on wells is draining the aquifer, and then when an alternative water source is found and brought in to relieve the wells, what happens? You bemoan the fact that now there is a water line. The water line fed development. BS - the development was already happening, it was just going to be on wells, and not on surface water. Did it speed it up or make it more dense? Yes, but more dense is what you get with surface water, not less. You get less density when you have subdivisions that are reliant on wells. Those are simply the facts. Would we have had less people if we were operating subdivisions entirely on wells? Yes, less density, but more pressure on the aquifer. Any dunderhead would realize that. Your fiends (and yes I mean fiends) at the Hays-Trinity would have to agree to concede that point - that the surface water was a good respite from the onslaught of subdivisions that could have come in and been created using groundwater - by creating a MUD or some other type of utility district which bypasses the Groundwater District and goes straight to the state for a permit.
Post a Comment