 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Nine Texas mussels may be listed as endangered On December 15 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began a review that will consider adding nine species of freshwater mussels to the endangered species list. Like the TAP lawsuit to protect the whooping crane (story below), the listing of these species has the potential to drastically impact regional water management. When a 1990s lawsuit over endangered species was concluded, limitations were placed on Edwards Aquifer pumping. "This is bigger", said Texas Parks and Wildlife biologist Marsha May. "We are talking about East Texas, Central Texas, and West Texas." Freshwater mussels are considered one of the most imperiled groups of animals in the nation, and Texas has over 50 species. Threats include excess sediments, lack of water, and lack of specific fish species which the mussels depend on to survive. Group notifies state it intends to sue over river management In December a group called The Aransas Project (TAP) notified Texas that it intends to file a federal lawsuit over management of the Guadalupe and San Antonio Rivers. The group asserts that reduced freshwater inflows to the coastal bays and estuaries have harmed the endangered whooping crane by reducing their winter food supply. If successful, such a lawsuit could drastically change water management and water rights permitting in the entire basin. A similar lawsuit in the early 1990s over Edwards Aquifer pumping resulted in the creation of the Edwards Aquifer Authority and limitations on groundwater pumping in order to ensure endangered species survival. The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority owns more than half the water rights in the basin and questions TAP's assertions. "They are totally unfounded", said GBRA General Manager Bill West. When they make their winter migration to the Texas coast, whooping cranes prefer blue crabs and wolfberries. A recent study found that when they are unavailable, the cranes will switch to other food sources like clams, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife questions their food value. USFWS spokesman Tom Buckley said that clams "just aren't very nutritious", and the whooping crane flock is experiencing "tough times" in the winter. Some have suggested that one of the impacts of a successful lawsuit could be limitations on San Antonio's use of its recycled water distribution system. The San Antonio Water System operates the nation's largest direct reuse system, in which highly treated wastewater is piped to customers for industrial, commercial, and landscaping uses. However, the system's maximum capacity represents only a small fraction of the total recycled water budget. Use of recycled water by CPS-Energy is a much larger component. During the critical summertime months, more than two-thirds of all the recycled water produced by SAWS is used by CPS-Energy for cooling electrical power plants. |
||
|
Science panel envisions 97% cutback in pumping The first study to look at the relationship between Aquifer pumping and the biological demands of endangered species has concluded that in a worst-case drought scenario, pumping would have to be cut by 97% to ensure species survival. The findings were presented in December to steering committee members of the Recovery Implementation Program (RIP), a group created by legislation in 2007 and charged with formulating a scientific basis for aquifer management that protects the species. Such a drastic reduction in pumpage is widely seen as an unworkable solution, even by some of the most conservation-minded members of the RIP. Instead, the number is seen as a starting point for negotiations amongst stakeholders about various Aquifer management schemes. The group contains members representing cities, farmers, commercial interests, environmental groups, and state and federal agencies. Other potential management methods include enhanced recharge, recirculation of water back to spring openings, and additional storage of excess Edwards water during wet times. San Antonio cancels drought restrictions Generous rains in October along with rising springflow and J-17 levels led the city of San Antonio to cancel Stage I drought restrictions on November 9. Before the October rains, it had been the driest two-year period on record. Drought restrictions were in place for seven months. |
||
|
GBRA Tree Ring study followed up with new video In 2006 the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (GBRA) sponsored a tree-ring study to reconstruct historical climates for the south Central Texas and Edwards Plateau regions, pushing back knowledge to 1648. While most regional water planners use the "drought of record" of the 1950s as the basis for development of adequate new supplies, the GBRA study suggested that more severe droughts have occurred. Head researcher Malcolm Cleaveland said "It would appear unwise for civil authorities to assume that the 1950s drought represents the worst-case scenario to be used for planning purposes." In 2009 the GBRA released a new video documentary of the tree-ring study, and you can view it on the Climate Page. S.A. Council caves in to developer threats, approves Recharge Zone project On October 15 the San Antonio City Council approved plans for a multiuse development on the Steubing Ranch, a 389-acre tract over the Recharge Zone. Before the vote, Mayor Castro repeatedly asked Daniel Ortiz, a lobbyist representing the developer, about the impact the project would have on the Recharge Zone. Ortiz's primary response was that things could be worse. He argued that a single develoment plan for the whole project is better than the alternative - developing it piecemeal over a period of years. Mayor Castro seemed unconvinced and told Ortiz he would welcome a study of similar zoning cases, “so we, as policymakers, can understand the legitimacy of the (piecemeal) threat.” San Antonio drops back to Stage 1 On October 12, after several weeks of generous rains that raised the J-17 index well level by over 10 feet, San Antonio officials announced an end to Stage 2 restrictions. Under the city's Aquifer Management Plan, Stage 2 can be cancelled when the J-17 stays above 650' for 30 days. The level rose to 650.1 on September 11 and has remained above 650' since then. SAWS Vice-President Chuck Ahrens said "We've been in Stage 2 restrictions for almost four months now, but experts are predicting wet weather to continue through the winter. We're very appreciative of the efforts of San Antonians to manage our water resources during the driest two years in recorded history. Thank you, San Antonio!" |
||
|
3,000 acres added to Government Canyon On September 10, the San Antonio city council transferred ownership of 3,000 acres of Recharge Zone lands adjacent to Government Canyon State Natural Area to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. The move was praised as serving to protect endangered species habitats, the Edwards Aquifer, and Camp Bullis all at once. Since the 3,000 acres contain endangered golden-cheeked warbler habitat, permanently preserving them by transferring ownership to Parks and Wildlife allowed the city to gain mitigation credits it could assign to another area. The city assigned the credits to Camp Bullis, thereby affording the military training facility greater freedom and flexibility to continue its mission without being quite so constrained by the growing presence of endangered species that have been displaced from nearby development projects. |
||
|
Proposed Regional Habitat Conservation Plan will help protect Edwards, Camp Bullis On August 12, Bexar county officials hosted a meeting to begin discussing a new approach to regional development and environmental protection that will be known as the Southern Edwards Plateau Habitat Conservation Plan. The new approach is seen as a way to provide endangered species habitat protection while also providing developers with a streamlined approval process for their projects. The idea of a Habitat Conservation Plan was first offered by officials in the summer of 2008, in response to concerns about rampant development around Camp Bullis. The plan would involve preparing detailed maps of potential habitats for 31 endangered plants and animals in eight counties. By extension, protecting these habitats would also help protect the Edwards Aquifer and Camp Bullis. Using regional habitat assessment maps, developers could easily determine the likelihood that a proposed project would destroy habitat, and they could contribute funds or purchase mitigation lands from a bank established for that purpose. The process could take as little as several weeks, instead of the several years it takes to receive permits when developers pursue them on their own. Such a plan would mitigate reductions in endangered species habitats while providing developers with a clear roadmap to legally advance their projects. Currently, almost no land is set aside as required by the Endangered Species Act when developers encounter endangered species habitats. When habitats are encountered, developers have several choices:
Under Option 4, one or several counties and other jurisdictions that want to participate develop a Conservation Plan that outlines exactly what developers are allowed to do and what sort of mitigation is required. Essentially, developers use a pre-approved Section 10A permit, and they pay into a mitigation bank which provides funds for purchase of good quality, occupied habitat. If this process is available, developers often prefer it because they can obtain permission to legally take habitat much quicker than when dealing directly with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. When a similar Habitat Conservation Plan was developed in Travis county near Austin, it took almost a decade. In Bexar county, officials are hoping it can be achieved in two years. For a plan to be effective, participation by many jurisdictions will be needed, and cities and counties must make a commitment to be a partner in the plan before it is submitted for approval. For example, in the city of Helotes, which sits on an important recharge stream, the current political climate is antithetic to regional environmental protection and conservation goals. Most of the progress made by previous "green" city councils under Mayor Jon Allan has been systematically reversed in favor of environmentally insensitive development schemes. Residents and citizens that worked toward Aquifer protection by establishment of parks and open spaces were openly vilified by Mayor Tom Stoolcraft and the City Council and summarily dismissed from city committees. Grants intended for parks and open spaces were declined. Comments provided by expert scientists and hydrogeologists, including an EAA Board member, were publicly ridiculed and systematically ignored. In 2007, Councilman Dick Whitehead publicly argued in favor of 100% impervious cover over the Edwards recharge zone. Development tax breaks are handed out like candy. Committees that used to provide public input regarding development have been dissolved. Remaining committees rarely meet. Important development decisions are relegated to the consent agenda and rubber-stamped in lightning-fast meetings without public discussion. When public discussion is allowed, Mayor Stoolcraft hand-picks who may speak. Rezoning of sensitive lands to allow intensive development is the norm. While San Antonio and its leaders and citizens have demonstrated a strong commitment to protection of the Edwards Aquifer and endangered species, it is clear that cities like Helotes present a major difficulty in developing a successful Regional Plan. EAA board decides to explore water quality rules On August 11 the board of the EAA voted to explore a new regulatory program that would protect the Edwards Aquifer by establishing a 20 percent impervious cover limit for all classes of development on the recharge zone and portions of the contributing zone up to five miles of the recharge zone within the Authorithy's jurisdiction. A wide body of scientific literature indicates that allowing impervious cover to exceed a threshold of 10 to 20 percent can degrade water quality. The EAA has several times delayed development of water quality rules because it was concerned such action would result in a private property rights backlash and legislative retaliation. Although the enabling legislation of the EAA seems to authorize that agency to implement water quality rules, the legislation's author has said it does not. At present, there is no institutional or regulatory framework that can effectively protect Edwards water quality. For a complete discussion of the water quality protection issue, see the Aquifer Protection section on the Hydrogeology page. |
||
|
Large developments around Camp Bullis move forward despite opposition In July, two new large residential subdivisions near Camp Bullis received city okays, despite widespread and vocal opposition from those concerned about the impact on Bullis and the Edwards Aquifer. In one case, the city Planning Commission approved a developer's request to build 420 homes on 335 acres along Scenic Loop south of Boerne Stage Road, less than three miles west of Camp Bullis. In another case, on the eastern side of Camp Bullis, the city Zoning Commission approved a developer's request to transform the last large tract of unimproved land in north Bexar county into a commercial and residential area. Meanwhile, new San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro unveiled a list of actions the city will consider when the council's summer break is over. They include a measure that would require developers to sign an affidavit indicating they have complied with the Endangered Species Act, voluntary real estate disclosures to warn buyers of noise and hazards created by Camp Bullis, and expansion of the Military Influence Overlay District from three miles to five miles to control light pollution. |
||
|
Supreme Court sides with EAA on late filers On June 26 the Texas Supreme Court ruled that late filers for pumping permits are not entitled to any water rights from the Edwards. The case involved the Chemical Lime Corporation, which had been using Edwards water at its New Braunfels plant since 1907. The plant combined water, limestone, and heat to produce a grade of lime used for purifying water and controlling sulfur emissions from power plants. Like all other users, the company was required to file a permit application for an Edwards water right by December 30, 1996. An original filing deadline of March 1, 1994 was delayed because of court challenges to the Act that created the EAA. As a result, filers had an extra 22 months to collect data they knew would be required in their applications. Application were to include historical use going back to 1972, but workers at Chemical Lime had trouble finding the older data. Several calls were made to the EAA and Chemical Lime's workers were under the impression they had received a verbal okay to file late. Their application was submitted 18 days after the deadline. At first, the EAA did not notice that Chemical Lime's application was late and continued to process it, and even notified the company that a permit would be issued for 618 acre-feet. But in November of 2000 the EAA notified Chemical Lime that its application would be denied because it was filed after the deadline, and the company sued. Lower courts had agreed with Chemical Lime's contention that it had substantially complied with statutory requirements on filing a permit application, but the Supreme Court said "A deadline is not something one can substantially comply with. A miss is as good as a mile." There were over 1,000 permit applicants in 1996, and only 22 were late. If Chemical Lime had prevailed, all other existing permits would have had to be reduced to meet the statutory pumping cap. In court filings, Chemical Lime said that without a reliable water source, it would have to close the plant and lay off all employees. Governor signs three bills aimed at Camp Bullis protection Last fall, San Antonio lawmakers said they would push for laws in the 2009 legislative session that would provide new tools in protecting Camp Bullis against encroaching development. Most of the threats that unbridled development poses to the military installation are also threats to the Edwards Aquifer. A total of seven bills were filed, and several died in the face of opposition from landowners and developers. Others failed through inattention caused by the legislature's sole focus on the voter ID bill in the last days of the session. An eighth measure, House Joint Resolution 132, is a proposed constitutional amendment that would give cities and counties the ability to issue bonds to finance land acquisitions around military bases. It will be on the ballot in November. A bill intended to complement HJR 132 by providing guidelines on what kinds of bonds could be purchased and how they could be repaid failed, but some lawmakers think local governments will be able to proceed without it if the constitutional amendment passes. Other bills that failed to pass were HB 4130, HB 143, and SB 2222, and SB 2223. HB 4130 would have allowed the creation Tax Incremental Reinvestment Zones to finance buffer zone acquisitions, and HB 143 would have required developers to tell buyers of the dust and noise generated by training activities. SB 2222 would have created Regional Military Sustainability Commissions to create and adopt development standards around bases, and SB 2223 was an almost identical version that restricted applicability to areas with a municipality of more than 1.1 million people. On June 19 Governor Rick Perry signed the remaining three bills, HB 1013, SB 2534, and HB 2919. HB 1013 gives counties within five miles of an installation to require "dark sky" lighting, and SB 2534 creates a task force led by the State Comptroller that will review state and local efforts to address endangered species issues and prepare a report containing recommendations on how to make those efforts more cost effective. HB 2919 was originally aimed at protecting Dyess AFB in Abilene, but lawmakers successfully attached almost all the language from SB 2223, and its passage was considered by Camp Bullis protection proponents to be the session's biggest "win". Once established, the Commission will recommend compatible development standards and review the compatibility of new projects within five miles of Cap Bullis. San Antonio approves land use study for Camp Bullis On June 18 the San Antonio city council approved a Joint Land Use Study for Camp Bullis, which makes 65 recommendations for protecting the viability of current and future missions at the base. These include strategies for land acquisitions, encouraging communication between stakeholders, developing habitat plans, and zoning and building codes. The study also placed a strong focus on sustaining economic growth and favoring private interests, so observers were left with serious doubts about whether the study will eventually result in any meaningful protections of the Edwards Aquifer in the Camp Bullis area. Each of the study's 65 recommendations has to be implemented by ordinance, and some of them are similar to provisions that failed in the 2009 legislative session because of opposition by landowners and developers, such as a provision to advise potential buyers of noise and dust created by training activities. Express-News columnist Carlos Guerra noted that efforts are already underway to delay implementation and/or grandfather existing plans. In the 1990s, similar tactics were used effectively to skirt new Aquifer protection rules. When San Antonio enacted its first rules and guidelines for development over the Recharge Zone in 1995, developers had plenty of heads-up time and were grandfathered to develop in the old fashion as long as they filed a plat before the rules went into effect. The result was that large sensitive areas in northwest Bexar county were developed without meaningful protections. On June 15 the San Antonio Water System declared Stage 2 drought restrictions. The declaration applies to SAWS customers within the San Antonio city limits. The Edwards Aquifer Authorithy has not declared a Stage 2 drought for the San Antonio pool of the Edwards. Here's why there's a difference in the way the entities declare a Stage: SAWS usually implements restrictions when the J-17 level falls below the trigger level for a single day, and the EAA uses a 10-day average of either the J-17 level or Comal or San Marcos Springs. Residents living outside San Antonio should check with their local authorities to see what restrictions apply to them. See the Restrictions Page for more about how Stages are declared and what San Antonio's rule are. |
||
|
EAA proposes extension of Chapter 713 rules to include fire control measures In December of 2006, a giant debris fire erupted in Helotes and subsequent firefighting efforts contaminated several small domestic wells on the recharge zone (see stories from January, February, and March 2007). The fiasco gave the EAA impetus toward adoption of rules that require hazardous substance registration, storage, and planning (see story from March 2008). In May of 2009, the EAA proposed the addition of a new section entitled Control of Fires on the Recharge Zone. In addition to meeting all the requirements of the existing rules, facilities that store more than 10,000 pounds or 1,000 gallons of regulated substances will have to meet additional requirements designed to aid in protection of the Edwards during firefighting events. These include storage of spill containment supplies and site maps that indicate the location of wells, site drainage patterns, storm sewer inlets, firefighting connections, and regulated substance traps. Since the Henry Zumwalt debris fire was extinguished, the city of Helotes has become a laughing stock regarding Aquifer protection measures. At the time, the entire City Council was composed of environmentally-minded members including former Mayor Jon Allan. They all went up against powerful landowners and county commissioners to insist the fire be brought under control. For weeks, no action was taken, but the county and the TCEQ eventually had to act when dozens of residents and their Council representatives took to the streets with homemade signs and masks demanding the fire be put out. It was, but all the Council members who dared to suggest that protection of air and water should be a priority were subsequently defeated for re-election in a private property rights backlash financed by area developers. The current Council, including Mayor Tom Schoolcraft, have demonstrated an unwillingness to engage in any measure of Aquifer protection. On May 14, they voted to repeal the city's limitations on development in the Recharge Zone. In the past, Councilman Dick Whitehead has argued in favor of 100% impervious cover on the Recharge Zone. Councilman Jeff Ellis was recently arrested and charged with child molestation. The names of the other anti-Edwards council members are Cindy Massey, David Legendre, and Ed Villanueva. |
||
|
Stage 1 imposed as new drought triggers used for first time On April 10 declining J-17 levels caused San Antonio officials to declare Stage 1 drought restrictions. It marked the first time that newly revised trigger levels were exercised (see story below). The limits will stay in place for a minimum of 30 days even if J-17 levels rise above the trigger level. See details on San Antonio's drought restrictions. |
||
|
Aquifer Guardians may block stimulus funds for 281/1604 interchange In 2008 the Aquifer Guardians in Urban Areas filed a lawsuit to challenge the results of a study that concluded building a toll road over the Edwards north of Loop 1604 would not have a significant impact on the Aquifer. In October of 2008 federal officials revoked the clearance to proceed, and transportation officials had little choice but to agree to conduct a more comprehensive study, which they said would delay the project by several years (see previous News item). When $80 million in federal stimulus funds became available in March of 2009, along with $60 million in state bonds, transportation officials said they hoped to use the money to start construction on a multi-level interchange at 281 and 1604 within a year. In response, lawyers for AGUA said they were prepared to challenge federal environmental clearance for the interchange, and they said it should be part of the study. That would result in a 3-5 year delay, and the federal stimulus funds allocated to the project would likely go unspent. Currently, the interchange has been assigned a "categorical exclusion", which is normally used for minor changes to interchanges that will clearly have no impact. AGUA says it's ridiculous to think a multi-level interchange would not have an impact, and they sent a letter to federal regulators questioning the exemption for the interchange. Regional Mobility Chairman Bill Thornton appeared to come unglued on tv news appearances and lashed out at toll road opponents. For decades, environmental groups have regarded Mr. Thornton as a strong proponent of policies that favor development over Edwards water quality and protection of endangered species. When he was Mayor of San Antonio in 1996, in response to an order by federal judge Lucius Bunton that San Antonio limit its Edwards pumping, Thornton vowed to fight the order and boldly pronounced "I think it's time we drew a line in the sand for consideration of humans and human rights." (see Bunton orders pumping limits, San Antonio Express-News, Aug. 24, 1996). EAA finds flaws in technical report on "western" water On March 10, the board of the EAA was advised by chief technical officer Geary Schindel that a consultant's report on bringing western Edwards water to San Antonio contained factual errors and technical shortcomings that “bring into question the validity of the analyses”. A proposal by Southwest Texas Water Resources LP is one of several that have been offered to bring western Edwards water to San Antonio. The idea is that water from the Uvalde Pool of the Edwards could be utilized without having a major impact on springflows and endangered species habitats in San Marcos and New Braunfels (see the FAQ on western water for the complete story). The firm commissioned Pape-Dawson Engineers to evaluate the technical merits of the proposal and the potential effects on the Edwards. The EAA staff found, among other problems, that the engineering report failed to consider the impact of a recurrence of a drought as severe as the 1950s drought of record. The report itself has not been made public. Mother of Aquifer Protection Fay Sinkin passes away For over three decades, Fay Sinkin was a leading environmental activist and a passionate proponent of Edwards Aquifer protection. She passed away on March 4 at the age of 90. After moving to San Antonio in 1942 to marry Bill Sinkin, she was involved in numerous civil and minority rights causes in the 1950s and 60s. In the 1970s, she organized and led the Aquifer Protection Alliance. At that time, there were several controversial projects proposed over the recharge zone in northwest Bexar county, including the University of Texas, a large shopping mall, and a 9,300 acre housing development. The land that was to be the housing development eventually became Government Canyon State Natural Area. Also in the 70s, she was instrumental in having the Edwards declared the nation's first 'Sole Source Aquifer', which prevents federal funding of projects over aquifers that supply more than 50% of a city's needs. In the 1980s, she was the first woman to serve on the Edwards Underground Water District board of directors. In the 1990s, she opposed the Applewhite Reservoir project, which would have been San Antonio's first surface water reservoir. The project was voted down twice. In 2002, she worked with the grass roots Smart Growth Coalition to oppose construction of a PGA Village over the Edwards in north central Bexar county. Many admired her style, which was largely persuasive, not demonstrative or rude. Her husband Bill Sinkin said "She was a wonderful woman. To the end, she was a fighter in a classic way. I was very proud."
|
||
|
SAWS revised Water Plan focuses more on Edwards In 1998 the San Antonio Water System unveiled a 50-year water supply plan that included a wide range of policies and options including use of recycled water, an aquifer storage and recovery system (ASR), and pursuing large projects with regional partners. Some of these, such as using recycled water and the ASR project, were implemented with resounding success, while most of the regional components of the original program were eventually dropped or scaled back. A project to develop water from the Simsboro Aquifer in conjunction with Alcoa Aluminum and CPS-Energy was dropped in 2005, along with another project to develop lower Guadalupe River water in partnership with the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority. In February of 2009 SAWS proposed a revised approach that would involve planning for SAWS' service area only. The plan includes a buying program for Edwards water rights and an expansion of the ASR project. It also includes recharge enhancement and evaluating recirculation, and a scaled-back brackish water desalination facility. A project to bring water from the Colorado River was left in the revised plan as a potential supply, although in January of 2009 the cost estimate for this project rose dramatically while water availability was cut to half the initial expectation. The new plan acknowledges the extremely difficult regulatory environment surrounding groundwater supply efforts in Texas. In the last several years, there has been an explosion of Groundwater Conservation Districts that have the power to regulate and limit transfers of water to San Antonio. In pursuing projects like a regional Carrizo Aquifer supply and a multi-county desalination wellfield, SAWS has met stiff opposition from local landowners and districts who simply do not want any water to be transferred to San Antonio. On the other side of the coin, SAWS has a very serious responsibility to provide adequate water for a growing city of over one million people, and failure in this task is not an option. SAWS President and former state legislator Robert Puente said he has "full confidence in the findings and recommendations for managing our current and future resources. We've had exhaustive discussions, sometimes lively and even contentious. But because of it, we bring the best Water Management Plan there is to offer our community." Study on Recharge and Recirculation suggests it is feasible but expensive On February 11 consultants presented the results of a long-awaited study on Recharge and Recirculation to regional water planners. The study identified 29 strategies that could be combined in various ways to enhance recharge and recirculate Edwards water to maintain sprinflows. Costs for the various scenarios range from $1.8 billion to $4 billion, but they all ensure at least 40 cubic feet per second of flow at Comal Springs, even during repeat of the drought of record in the 1950s. For more, see the FAQ on Recharge and Recirculation. San Antonio adopts new drought restriction triggers On February 5, the San Antonio City Council approved changes sought by SAWS to the city's drought trigger levels (see story below). Effective immediately, each Stage will now begin when the J-17 level is 10 feet higher than previously. San Antonio's Stage I now begins at 660'. |
||
|
Bill filed to prohibit discharge of recycled water to Edwards On January 26 Rep. David Leibowitz of San Antonio filed a bill that would prohibit the TCEQ from issuing a new permit authorizing the discharge of sewage effluent directly into any water in the Contributing or Recharge Zone of the San Antonio or Barton Springs segments of the Edwards Aquifer. Proponents insisted it is a necessary step to protect the Edwards. Others said it is an unfortunate and misguided effort that exploits public misunderstandings to impose a back-door impediment to development. In Texas, where private property rights are highly valued, it has proven difficult to impose up-front limits on development, even when common natural resources like air and water are harmed. The debate promises to be contentious, but at least several things are clear: in most places, recycled water is increasingly recognized as a valuable and useful resource, not a threat at all. In San Antonio, the city's effluents are used to maintain flows in the San Antonio River and Salado Creek, and lasting and measureable environmental benefits have been documented. Several cities use wastewaters as a supply source for direct consumption, and the practice is destined to become increasingly widespread as membrane-based treatment technologies become cheaper. Modern membranes can produce water much purer than anything found in nature. Advocates of the proposed bill have characterized recycled water as "sewage" and "pollution", but most who are familiar with the science and processes involved say that is a ridiculous mischaracterization. Most treatment plant effluents are close to drinking water quality and are far superior to the stormwater runoff that ends up as Aquifer recharge. They suggest that instead of outlawing discharges, we should be heading in the exact opposite direction by requiring that recycled water be treated to fully potable standards and recharged to the groundwater source from where it came. Critics of the proposed legislation point out the underlying issue and the real threat is development and the degraded quality of runoff that results, not recycled water. If the bill passes, developers may simply build "no discharge" facilities and spray irrigate the effluent. In that case, critics say, valuable recycled water will go to waste and we'll have done nothing to limit the real threat. Additional habitat sought for endangered cave creatures On January 14, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit alleging the area designated as critical habitat for endangered cave creatures in the Edwards region is far less than sufficient. After the creatures were listed as endangered in 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service initially proposed designating 9,516 acres in Bexar county as critical habitat. When the final designation came out in 2003, only 1,063 acres were included. The Center for Biological Diversity contends the reduction was due to political influence by the Bush administration. It is hoped the Obama administration will settle the suit by ordering the Fish and Wildlife Service to reconsider its designation. San Antonio Water System to seek earlier drought restrictions On January 6, San Antonio Water System trustees voted to ask City Council to change the city's drought restriction trigger levels so that landscape watering cutbacks will begin when the J-17 well reaches 660'. Currently, the city's trigger is at 650'. A little background: in December of 2007, the Edwards Aquifer Authority revised its drought triggers to comply with changes mandated by the Texas Legislature. Whereas previously Stage I restrictions began at 650', the new trigger became 660'. The changes were the flip-side of a compromise that raised the overall pumping cap (see previous News story). At that time, San Antonio did not change its own trigger levels, saying it could meet required cutbacks by drawing water its Aquifer Storage and Recovery facility. The EAA does not require cities to maintain trigger levels that match its own; cities are free to meet required cutbacks by whatever means they desire. However, in June of 2008 the EAA declared a Stage I Critical Period and San Antonio did not. The situation was very confusing for the public, which didn't know who to believe or whether restrictions were actually in effect. In most cases, the proposed changes will make drought declarations more uniform and the San Antonio public will have a much clearer indication that restrictions are in force based on J-17 levels. The proposed ordinance will not, however, recognize declining springflows as a trigger, so it will still be possible for the EAA to declare a drought stage without San Antonio following suit. In addition to J-17 levels, flows at San Marcos Springs can be used to trigger drought restrictions, although hydrogeologists have known for decades there is little relationship between pumpage in San Antonio and flows at San Marcos. In February of 2008 the EAA completed a study that evaluated whether or not the San Marcos Springs should be considered as flowing from a separate aquifer pool. The study concluded there is not sufficient technical justification for creation of a San Marcos Pool.
|
