The Texas Water Development Board develops the state water plan from the approved regional water plans.
beled as a “guide,” in truth it isn’t. TWDB requires that any wa- ter project it fi nances be consistent with or mentioned spe- cifi cally in the state water plan, and the TCEQ does the same for the issuance of a water right permit.
Sedimentation, fl ows and impediments Three major is-
sues affect the cur- rent and future health of Texas’ riv- ers, management of water resources, water regulation and water rights — sedi- mentation, environ- mental flows, and regulatory impedi-
ments to inter-basin surface water transfers. Sedimentation has reduced and continues to reduce
the water storage capacity of Texas’ major rivers and feeder rivers and streams. Environmental fl ows refer to the amount of water
needed to keep a river healthy for the biology that depends on it — particularly endangered species and economic species such as shrimp that spawn in the estuaries at the mouth of rivers. Senate Bill (SB) 1, which became law in 1997, cre-
ated disincentives for voluntary transfers of surface water from one river basin to another. This affected the ability of holders of water right permits to manage surface water. The TWDB called for a legislative fi x to this prob-
lem in both the 2007 State Water Plan and the 2012 State Water Plan (a state water plan is created every 5 years). House Bill (HB) 3233 passed by the 83rd Leg- islature in 2013 was designed to address these regula- tory impediments.
Sedimentation According to Merry Klonower, TWDB director of communications and web administration, sediment,
76 The Cattleman May 2014
which is carried into rivers and reservoirs by erosion of river channels and the surrounding landscape, re- duces their water storage capacity by 0.3 percent a year. That equates to a loss of 90,000 acre feet of water
every year due to sediment loading. While the sedi- ment could be removed by dredging, a TWDB study conducted in 2005 found the cost of dredging was twice the cost of new reservoir development, so TWDB does not consider it an economical solution at this time. She says, “Sediment reduction can be accomplished
by best management practices in surrounding wa- tersheds to reduce sediment runoff into rivers and reservoirs.”
Environmental fl ows Before 1975, the Texas Water Commission, the
predecessor to TCEQ, did not consider environmental fl ows when issuing permits for water rights. In 1975, the legislature passed a law that required the Texas Water Commission to consider environmental fl ows to Texas’ bays and estuaries before issuing a water right permit. Between 1975 and 1985, the commission handled water rights permits on a case-by-case basis, and in a limited number of cases put special conditions on water right permits based on environmental fl ows. Water right holders felt that the process had become too arbitrary, which made planning for stakeholders diffi cult. In 1985, the legislature enacted law that authorized
TCEQ to put conditions on water right permits to main- tain environmental fl ows to the bays and estuaries of Texas, and required it to maintain stream fl ow for other users as well, maintain water quality and maintain enough fl ow to support wildlife habitat. After the 1985 legislation, the TCEQ performed an
environmental fl ow analysis for each water right per- mit application and frequently put fl ow restrictions on them that included a cut-off point at which no water diversions could be made — effectively canceling a water right. In 1997, SB 1 passed and put in place the current
state water planning process. During that process, the TWDB would make recommendations to the legislature concerning water rights issues and how they impacted the environment, inter-basin water transfers and cancel- lation of water rights. Fixes to these problems required legislative action. SB 2 became law in 2001. This legislation created the
Texas Instream Flow Program. It charged the TWDB, TPWD and the TCEQ with conducting studies of Texas’
thecattlemanmagazine.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100