Rio Grande Current

Rio Grande Facts

2010-06-21T08:36:00.001-05:00

The Rio Grande is 1,896-mile long, the fifth longest river in the United States

The Rio Grande's watershed encompasses 335,000 square miles. It drains more than 40,000 square miles in Texas alone.

A 1,250 mile segment of the river forms the international boundary between Mexico and the United States.

The Rio Grande begins in the Colorado mountains, courses through New Mexico, forms the border between Texas and Mexico, and flows into the Gulf of Mexico.

Historically, the river flowed continuously from Colorado to the Gulf of Mexico until the early 1900s when construction of dams, channelization, human consumption, and landuse practices altered the flow of the river.

At present, the Upper Rio Grande virtually stops in El Paso/Ciudad Juarez and resumes significant flows at the confluence with the Rio Conchos 250 miles downstream.

Its principal tributaries are the Pecos, Devils, Chama, and Puerco rivers in the United States, and the Conchos, Salado, and San Juan in Mexico.

The principal cities along the river are Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Socorro, Truth or Consequences, Mesilla, and Las Cruces in New Mexico; and El Paso, Presidio, Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Laredo, Rio Grande City, McAllen, and Brownsville in Texas.

In Mexico the principal cities are Ciudad Juárez, Ojinaga, Ciudad Acuña, Piedras Negras, Nuevo Laredo, Camargo, Reynosa, and Matamoros.

The Rio Grande was listed among the nation's Most Endangered Rivers in 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, and 2003.

Read From Source.

Fort Stockton Water Hearing Delayed

2010-06-08T08:45:00.000-05:00

It could be January before Oilman Clayton Williams will have a hearing on his plan to pump water out of Pecos County.

The City of Fort Stockton filed a motion requesting that the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District postpone the dates.

That's because a hydrology study won't be complete in time.

Fort Stockton Holdings' and Williams agreed with the request to put off the hearing until January.

A company executive says he respects that the city wants to completely analyze the study.

IBWC: Bacteria Levels in Rio Grande at Brownsville Remain a Concern

2010-06-01T14:48:00.000-05:00

By Steve Taylor
[Elizabeth
Elizabeth Verdecchia runs the Texas Clean Rivers Program for the Rio Grande.

MERCEDES, May 31 - High levels of bacteria in the section of the Rio Grande that runs through Brownsville and Matamoros remains a concern for the International Boundary and Water Commission.

The issue will be discussed at the next meeting of the IBWC’s Lower Rio Grande Citizens Forum, which takes place Tuesday, June 8, at the Commission’s office in Mercedes.

At the meeting, the IBWC’s Environmental Protection Specialist, Elizabeth Verdecchia, will provide an overview of water quality in the Lower Rio Grande as well as discuss current and future water quality monitoring and outreach activities through the Texas Clean Rivers Program for the Rio Grande Basin. Verdecchia runs the Texas Clean Rivers Program for the Rio Grande.

In a media advisory about the citizen’s forum, the IBWC acknowledged that “bacteria levels remain a concern in the Brownsville area.” The advisory points out that the IBWC and the University of Texas at Brownsville have completed the first phase of an intensive bacteria study of the Rio Grande in the Brownsville area. UTB’s Dr. Elizabeth Heise will provide preliminary results of the study at Tuesday’s meeting.

“We hope the study will help us get a better understanding of what's causing the high bacteria levels,” Verdecchia said. “We hope people will come to the June 8 meeting to learn more about water quality and to let us know of any concerns they have.”

The section of the Rio Grande that runs through Brownsville/Matamoros has been listed by the state of Texas as impaired for contact recreation since monitoring began in 1996.

E.coli bacteria is used to indicate whether a river is meeting its designated use for contact recreation, and the Texas Surface Water Quality Standard for contact recreation is 126 colonies per 100 milliliters. At one of the stations in this study, (Rio Grande at Brownsville, TCEQ ID# 13177), e.coli values collected from 2001 to 2009 have an average of 750 colonies per 100 milliliters.

In an e-mail to the Guardian, IBWC spokeswoman Sally Spener said that while high bacteria levels may be a concern for recreational users of the river, water taken from the river for drinking purposes is treated for bacteria. Therefore, Spener said, tap water is not affected. The cause of the high bacteria is unknown, and IBWC’s intensive monitoring study is designed to understand the bacteria contamination and its potential sources, she said.

Brian R Smith, regional medical director for the Texas Department of State Health Services, told the Guardian that he has not heard anything about the Brownsville section of the Rio Grande having higher bacteria counts than sections further north.

“I doubt that they do, but bacterial counts in the warm water with overflow from Mexican sources is always the concern,” Smith said, pointing out that TCEQ tracks river coliforms, not the Department of State Health Services.

The IBWC’s Rio Grande Valley headquarters is located at 325 Golf Course Road in Mercedes. The June 8 meeting takes place between 4 and 6 p.m. at that office.

Spener said Clean Rivers Program staff will be available at the June 8 meeting to discuss any issues and questions the public has related to Rio Grande water quality. Copies of the CRPs 2010 Rio Grande Basin Highlights Report, with detailed water quality information, will also be available for distribution, she said.

The Rio Grande water quality studies are being carried out with funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Recovery Act funds are also being used for levee construction. IBWC Civil Engineer Rod Dunlap will be at the June 8 forum to give an update on levee construction projects in Hidalgo and Cameron counties.

The projects are designed to enhance flood protection in the Valley in accordance with standards established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Dunlap’s presentation will include current project construction updates on several levee construction contracts along the Rio Grande and off-river floodways affecting the communities of McAllen, Granjeno, Hidalgo, Pharr, San Juan, Alamo, Donna, Weslaco, Mercedes, La Villa, and La Feria, Spener said.

In a related presentation, Field Environmental Monitor Wacey Hough, a contractor with H2 Environment Services, will discuss environmental issues associated with levee construction.

The presentation will discuss nesting surveys, rare and endangered plant identification and relocation, wildlife identification and relocation, coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wetlands preservation, and storm water pollution prevention.

Lower Rio Grande Citizens Forum was established by the U.S. Section of the IBWC to “facilitate the exchange of information between the USIBWC and members of the public about Commission activities in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.”

Consultant: Border Region Need Not Fear Pecos Water Extraction

2010-05-27T10:28:00.001-05:00

ROUND ROCK, May 24 – During a press conference in Mission recently, Gov. Rick Perry referred to the issue of ground water extraction from the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer by Clayton Williams’ company, Fort Stockton Holdings.

A proposed plan to transport water via aqua ducts to the Midland-Odessa and San Angelo metropolitan areas is an issue requiring “the wisdom of Solomon,” Perry said, in a humorous reference to a prayer meeting he had just attended.

South Texas political leaders along the Rio Grande have joined their counterparts in the Fort Stockton area in requesting a moratorium on the water extraction plans of some 41,000,000 gallons per day for the next 30 years until an independent hydro-geological study can be completed. They want assurances that the extractions would not compromise the flow of the Pecos River into the Rio Grande, an estimated flow at the confluence of some 80,000,000 gallons per day.

The border leaders have nothing to worry about, hydro geologist, Mike Thornhill told the Guardian. Based in Round Rock, Texas, Thornhill has been contracted by Fort Stockton Holdings, a Clayton Williams Company, to conduct a two-year comprehensive study to determine if the amounts requested in a Fort Stockton Holdings permit would be “in compliance” with the rules and management plan of the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District.

“I will look any political leader in the eye (from Mexico or South Texas) and assure them that the requested amount of water extraction would not compromise the flow of water from the Pecos River into the Rio Grande, nor the amount of water in Amistad Reservoir,” Thornhill told the Guardian, in a telephone interview.

“Based on our studies for the area, and our research and experience over the last 22 years, I have found that there is no possible way that neighboring communities or counties could be adversely affected by the amount of pumping that Mr. Williams is requesting.”

Certainly, the Rio Grande flows cannot be affected by the permitted pumping, Thornhill said.

“The point is – if the pumping cannot be detected in the Pecos River, there is no way the pumping can be detected in the Rio Grande which is more than 100 miles away. It is impossible,” Thornhill said.

There are several scientific reasons why this is true, Thornhill explained, many of which were presented at the most recent meeting of Groundwater Management Area 7 (GMA 7).

“The simplest explanation is that Fort Stockton Holdings is asking to use the same amount of water that they are currently permitted to use, which is even less water than was pumped from FSH’s properties in the past,” Thornhill said.

“All they are requesting is a change in use – they are not requesting any new or additional water. That is, instead of watering alfalfa, they would like to transfer their water to surrounding communities who have projected shortage of water.”

Thornhill said the water will either be pumped for farming, or for the beneficial use of tens of thousands of Texans.

“Again, the amount of water will not change. So, if the amount of water pumped does not change, the impact will not change. The permits will actually ensure that pumping will not be as much in the future as it was in the past,” Thornhill said.

Many political and community based entities have expressed skepticism with Thornhill’s assessment.

Jay Johnson-Castro, of the Rio Grande International Studies Center, based in Laredo on the banks of the Rio Grande, originally brought the issue of Pecos groundwater to the Guardian. He says communities on the Rio Grande are right to be concerned about the permit.

The sister cities of Laredo, Texas and Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, the County of Hidalgo, and the Texas Border Coalition have all publicly expressed very public concern over the issue of extraction of water from the Edwards-Trinity aquifer, as well as its sale and transport to other West Texas metro areas. They are calling for a moratorium on the permit for water extraction until an independent hydro-geological study can be accomplished.

Fort Stockton City Manager Rafael Castillo, in a previous interview with the Guardian, expressed concerns that the precedent for large-scale extraction from the aquifer could indeed compromise the flow of water into Amistad Reservoir and the southward flow to the millions of residents on both sides of the Rio Grande down-river from the permit area.

Thornhill doesn’t share these concerns. “This is a false alarm,” says the hydro-geologist. “There is no measurable flow into the Pecos River (that could be affected by the extraction). Moreover, the Pecos River only provides 11 percent of the water delivered to the Amistad Reservoir.”

Thornhill, a registered professional geologist, is president of the Thornhill Group based in Round Rock.

Protesta San Agustin

2010-05-20T16:38:00.002-05:00

Resolution

2010-05-19T14:37:00.002-05:00

Click here to view resolution between the county of Hidalgo and RGISC.

History of the International Boundary and Water Commission

2010-05-14T10:48:00.002-05:00

The IBWC traces its roots to the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden Treaty of 1853, which established temporary joint commissions to survey, map, and demarcate with ground landmarks the new United States (U.S.) – Mexico boundary. The Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty of February 2, 1848 established the international boundary between the United States and Mexico. The Treaty of December 30, 1853 reestablished the southern boundary of New Mexico and Arizona to enable the United States to construct a railroad to the west coast along a southern route and to resolve a question arising from the 1848 Treaty as to the location of the southern boundary of New Mexico. The Convention of 1882 established another temporary joint commission to resurvey the western land boundary between the Rio Grande and the Pacific Ocean, rebuild the old monuments, and install additional monuments where necessary. U.S. Commissioner John Whitney Barlow and Mexican Commissioner Jacobo Blanco resurveyed the borderline and increased the number of boundary monuments from 52 to 258. This survey started at the El Paso, Texas – Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua border in 1891, and concluded at the San Diego, California – Tijuana, Baja California border in 1894. Later as border populations increased during the 1900’s, the Commission installed 18 additional boundary monuments for a total of 276.

As the settlements grew along the boundary rivers (Rio Grande and Colorado River), settlers began developing adjoining lands for agriculture. In the late Nineteenth Century, questions arose as to the location of the boundary and the jurisdiction of lands when the boundary rivers changed their course and transferred land from one side of the river to the other. As a result, the two Governments adopted certain rules to deal with such questions in the Convention of November 12, 1884.

The U.S. and Mexico established the International Boundary Commission (IBC) on March 1, 1889 as another temporary body to apply the rules that were adopted by the Convention of 1884. The IBC was extended indefinitely in 1900 and is considered the direct predecessor to the modern day International Boundary and Water Commission. The 1884 Convention was modified by the Banco Convention of March 20, 1905 to retain the Rio Grande and the Colorado River as the boundary.

As border populations increased during the early to mid 1900's, the Commission was faced with many new challenges. The U.S. and Mexico used studies developed by the IBC as the basis for the first water distribution treaty between the two countries, the Convention of March 1, 1906, which allocated the waters of the Rio Grande from El Paso to Fort Quitman, an 89-mile (143 km) international boundary reach of the Rio Grande through the El Paso-Juárez Valley. This Convention allotted to Mexico 60,000 acre-feet annually of the waters of the Rio Grande to be delivered in accordance with a monthly schedule at the headgate to Mexico's Acequia Madre just above Juárez, Chihuahua. To facilitate such deliveries, the U.S. constructed, at its expense, the Elephant Butte Dam in its territory. The Convention includes the provison that in case of extraordinary drought or serious accident to the irrigation system in the U.S., the amount of water delivered to the Mexican Canal shall be diminished in the same proportion as the water delivered to lands under the irrigation system in the U.S. downstream of Elephant Butte Dam.

In the Convention of February 1, 1933, the two Governments agreed to jointly construct, operate and maintain, through the IBC, the Rio Grande Rectification Project, which straightened and stabilized the 155-mile (249 km) river boundary through the highly developed El Paso-Juárez Valley. The project further provided for the control of the river's floods through this Valley.

The IBC was also instrumental in developing the second water distribution treaty between the United States and Mexico in 1944, which addressed utilization of the waters of the Colorado River and Rio Grande from Fort Quitman, Texas to the Gulf of Mexico. The Water Treaty of February 3, 1944 expanded the duties and responsibilities of the IBC and renamed it the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC). The 1944 Treaty charged the IBWC with the application of the treaty and the exercise of the rights and obligations which the U.S. and Mexican Governments assumed thereunder and with the settlement of all disputes that were to arise under the treaty.

The 1944 Treaty provides that the jurisdiction of the IBWC extends to the limitrophe parts of the Rio Grande and the Colorado River, the land boundary between the U.S. and Mexico and to works located upon the border. Neither Section is to assume jurisdiction or control over works within the limits of the country of the other without the express consent of the Government of the latter. The works constructed, acquired or used in fulfillment of the provisions of the Treaty and located wholly within the territorial limits of either country, although these works may be international in character, they are to remain under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the Section of the Commission in whose country the works may be situated.

Pursuant to the 1944 Treaty the IBWC has the status of an international body and consists of a United States Section and a Mexican Section. Each Section is headed by an Engineer Commissioner. Wherever there are provisions for joint action or joint agreement of the two Governments or for the furnishing of reports, studies or plans to the two Governments, it is understood that those matters will be handled by or through the Department of State of the United States and the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Mexico. Each Government affords diplomatic status to the Commissioner, designated by the other Government. The Commission, two principal engineers, a legal adviser, and a secretary, designed by each Government as members of its Section of the Commission are entitled in the territory of the other country to the privileges and immunities appertaining to diplomatic officers. The IBWC and its personnel may freely carry out their observations, studies and field work in the territory of the other country. Each Government bears the expenses of its respective Section; joint expenses which may be incurred as agreed by the IBWC are to be born equally by the two Governments.

Of the waters of the Rio Grande, the Treaty allocates to Mexico: (1) all of the waters reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande from the San Juan and Alamo Rivers, including the return flows from the lands irrigated from those two rivers; (2) two-thirds of the flow in the main channel of the Rio Grande from the measured Conchos, San Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido and Salado Rivers, and the Las Vacas Arroyo, subject to certain provisions; and (3) one-half of all other flows occurring in the main channel of the Rio Grande downstream from Fort Quitman. The Treaty allots to the United States: (1) all of the waters reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande from the Pecos and Devils Rivers, Goodenough Spring and Alamito, Terlingua, San Felipe and Pinto Creeks; (2) one-third of the flow reaching the main channel of the river from the six named measured tributaries from Mexico and provides that this third shall not be less, as an average amount in cycles of five consecutive years, than 350,000 acre-feet annually; and (3) one-half of all other flows occurring in the main channel of the Rio Grande downstream from Fort Quitman.

The 1944 Treaty further provided for the two Governments to jointly construct, operate and maintain on the main channel of the Rio Grande the dams required for the conservation, storage and regulation of the greatest quantity of the annual flow of the river to enable each country to make optimum use of its allotted waters.

The 1944 Treaty provides that of the waters of the Colorado River there are allotted to Mexico: (1) a guaranteed annual quantity of 1.5 million acre-feet to be delivered in accordance with schedules formulated in advance by Mexico within specified limitations; and (2) any other waters arriving at the Mexican points of diversion under certain understandings. To enable diversion of Mexico's allotted waters, the Treaty provided for the construction by Mexico of a main diversion structure in the Colorado River, below the point where the California-Baja California land boundary line intersects the river. It also provided for the construction at Mexico's expense of such works as may be needed in the U.S. to protect its lands from such floods and seepage as might result from the construction and operation of the diversion structure.

In the 1944 Treaty the two Governments agreed to give preferential attention to the solution of all border sanitation problems.

The Treaty also provides that the IBWC study, investigate and report to the Governments on such hydroelectric facilities as the IBWC finds should be built at the international storage dams and on such flood control works, other than those specified in the Treaty, that the IBWC finds should be built on the boundary rivers, the estimated cost thereof, the part to be built by each Government, and to be operated and maintained by each through its Section of the IBWC.

The IBWC was instrumental in the development of the Chamizal Convention of August 29, 1963, which resolved the nearly 100-year-old boundary problem at El Paso, Texas and Juárez, Chihuahua, known as the Chamizal dispute, involving some 600 acres (243 hectares) of territory which were transferred from the south to the north bank of the Rio Grande by movement of the river during the mid-Nineteenth Century. By this Convention, the two Governments gave effect to a 1911 arbitration award under 1963 conditions. The IBWC relocated and concrete-lined 4.4 miles of the Rio Grande channel and transferred a net amount of 437.18 acres (176.92 hectares) from the north (U.S.) to the south side (Mexico) of the river.

The Treaty of November 23, 1970 resolved all pending boundary differences and provided for maintaining the Rio Grande and the Colorado River as the international boundary. The Rio Grande was reestablished as the boundary throughout its 1,255-mile limitrophe section. The Treaty includes provisions for restoring and preserving the character of the Rio Grande as the international boundary where that character has been lost, to minimize changes in the channel, and to resolve problems of sovereignty that might arise due to future changes in the channel of the Rio Grande. It provides for procedures designed to avoid the loss of territory by either country incident to future changes in the river's course due causes other than lateral movement, incident to eroding one of its banks and depositing alluvium on the opposite bank. This Treaty also charged the IBWC with carrying out its provisions.

The two Governments reached agreement for the solution of another long-standing problem regarding the quality of the Colorado River water allocated to Mexico under the 1944 Treaty, which was incorporated in Minute No. 242 of the IBWC dated August 30, 1973; and the IBWC submitted and the two Governments approved “Recommendations for the Solution of the Border Sanitation Problems,” in Minute No. 261, dated September 24, 1979, which provided that for each border sanitation problem, the IBWC would prepare a Minute that would identify the problem and the course of action for resolution. Pursuant to Minute No. 261, the IBWC subsequently concluded Minutes to address border sanitation problems at Naco, Arizona/Naco Sonora (Minute No. 273), Nogales, Arizona/ Nogales, Sonora (Minute No. 276), Laredo, Texas/Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas (Minute No. 279) and San Diego, California/Tijuana, Baja California (Minutes Nos. 283, 296 and 311), and to address the water quality of the New River at Calexico, California and Mexicali, Baja California (Minute No. 274).

“Our Crowd” and the Rule of Capture

2010-05-13T10:05:00.000-05:00

[West Texas Weekly continues to bring you insight into local politics. Mark Glover, Contributing Editor Alpine, explains the legal logic behind riparian rights.]

Alpine – While the West Texas water export plans of Clayton Williams hang in a Federal Court in Midland, Dr Megan Benson presented an historical overview of the evolution of Texas groundwater law at the Sul Ross campus last Friday night, hosted by the Center for Big Bend Studies.

“In Texas, because of the Rule of Capture, one landowner or corporation can mine and market a disproportionate amount of water for immediate gain seriously impacting or depleting resources without liability to his neighbors,” said Benson, a recipient of the 2009 Fellowship for Excellence in West Texas History.

Texas, the only western state that practices the Rule of Capture, aka the Law of the Biggest Pump, gained its head of steam in a 1904 court case known as W.A. East vs. Houston & Texas Central Railroad Inc.

“It was not a water case but a railroad case. It fits perfectly with railroad litigation of the time, but it inadvertently became a water case,” Belton explained. “No law has impacted Texas environmental politics more.”
The Right of Capture is an ancient English Common Law concept that originated in conflicts between landowners and hunters. Specifically it asked at what moment the animal becomes the private property of the hunter,” Benson said.

Later in an 1843 English courtroom, this concept was applied by the court to settle a case involving a drained well. By implementing the Rule of Capture, courts ruled against neighbors trying to collect damages from those who out-pumped them.

Standing at the podium with black framed glasses and a leather jacket, Benson, whose SRSU funded research fellowship allowed her to study the subject for one year, unveiled the back story that led to the landmark decision of 1904.

Edward House, son of a wealthy Texas banker, pursued a course of multiplying his father’s substantial holdings by engaging in transportation. Eminent in the dredging of the Houston ship channel in the 1890’s, House was also engaged in the railroad business at a time when common carrier law was being crafted by the Texas legislature.

“Weak in appearance, with no discernable public speaking skills, House was a behind the scenes man,” Benson said.
House befriended William Hogg who went on to become Texas governor in 1891, as well as a series of governors through 1907 including Charles Allen Culberson, Joseph Draper Sayers and Samuel Willis Tucker Lanham part of “our crowd” a term used by House to define his political posse.

This series of governors oversaw the sale of Texas public lands that financed Texas schools. They also crafted early common carrier laws that, according to Benson, “chipped away the liability by common carriers for negligence.”

“If a train killed a horse at a railroad crossing – no negligence. If a man was unloading a boxcar and hurt himself – no negligence. If a bridge failed – no liability,” Benson said.

Trains needed water for their locomotive steam plants and what W.A. East didn’t realize when the Houston and TC Railroad built a well across the street from his, in what is now downtown Denison, was that a 50,000 gallon a day well was going to suck his well dry.

He took them to court in Denison and lost. He appealed at the “Old Red” court house in Dallas where Judge John Bookhout of the Fifth Circuit Court of Civil Appeals overturned the case.

“It shocks our sense of justice… that the appellee claims immunity from liability,” said the former New Yorker turned Texan said.

The judge ordered the railroad to pay $ 210 to Mr. East.

But the railroad appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.

Frank Alvan Williams, presided over the case. A friend of Edward House, and a member of “our crowd,” Williams was appointed to the 1st District Court of Appeals in Houston by Governor Hogg in 1892 and went on to the Texas Supreme Court in 1899.

The court’s decision of 1904 includes the now sacred if not infamous wording, “Because the existence, origin, movement and course of such waters, and the causes which govern and direct their movements, are so secret, occult and concealed that an attempt to administer any set of legal rules in respect to them would be involved in hopeless uncertainty, and would therefore be practically impossible.”

The court’s finding not only used ephemeral wording to explain the “occult” like nature of water to establish the non-liability of the railroad for sucking their neighbor’s well dry, but also exercised selective precedence mining these words from an Ohio court’s decision rendered fifty years earlier.

The Oil Industry in Texas also works under the Rule of Capture and the law was summarily explained by Irish actor Daniel Day Lewis in the Marfa filmed movie “There Will Be Blood” –

“If you have a milkshake and I have a milkshake and I have a straw and my straw reaches across the room and starts to drink your milkshake: I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!”

Thirty miles east of that movie set, Benson, who earned her PHD in American History from the University of Oklahoma, delivered the final touches of her lecture.

“The Texas Supreme Court found no validity in Judge Bookhouts opinion,” Benson said. “It simply served the intent of the railroad.”

Benson reported House was later quoted as saying in reference to “our crowd” – “we got just about everything we wanted, including the East Decision.”

Benson went on to point out some exceptions to the Rule of Capture:
1917, Article 16 – known as the conservation amendment, legislated against wasting water.

1949, Texas legislature authorized the creation of Underground Water Conservation Districts, most of them starting in the panhandle to protect the Ogallala Aquifer.

1993, State Bill 1477 created the Edwards Aquifer Authority which replaced the Edwards Underground Water Conservation District, an entity that Benson suggested was “more powerful” than a regular district and that “challenged the Rule of Capture.”

1997, SB 1 and 2001, SB2 extended the regulating authority of water districts.

Today the 50/50 Rule is making its way into many regional Texas jurisdictions, a rule that limits depletions of aquifers to no more than 50 per cent in a fifty year period. Some districts are limiting pumping to the size of the land owned and still others permit pumping based on historical usage. Challenges to these new water distribution limits consistently find their way to the courtroom where ultimately the Rule of Capture prevails.

Brewster County Judge Val Beard has stated in the past that she believes the law and the conservation districts should be abolished, clearing the way for TORT law to adjudicate liability issues. Hawaii eliminates the problem altogether by claiming all underground water as property of the state, as do most countries in the world.

Likely most rural west Texans will not be sitting back and enjoying their underground water being pumped to urban centers like Midland-Odessa as Clayton Williams plans. Fort Stockton Holdings Inc., a Williams’ family owned operation with farming roots in Belton, seeks damages in a federal suit against the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District for denying their water export permit. FSH is not challenging the Rule of Capture, but rather claims their constitutional rights under Articles 5, 13, and 14 in the US Constitution were breached in the water district’s decision.

In the meantime the hairy hunted animal of the Rule of Capture continues un-caught and legally safe in the occult wanderings of the Texas legal system.

“The Rule of Capture, established in the 1904 East case, and based on 1843 English precedent, allows for enormous private wealth to be gained yet depletes our most valuable resource. By selectively using precedent and undisputable sacred text, the question is, ‘Is the Rule of Capture a good resource management plan?” Belton asked. “’And was it ever?’”

We Get to the Tragedy of the Commons, by Bruce Darling

2010-05-13T09:18:00.000-05:00

or - "When everybody owns everything, nobody will take care of anything." Aristotle

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS

The above photo is of the old pool at Comanche Spring (Fort Stockton, Texas), probably taken during the late 1940s or early 1950s. Comanche Spring was the third largest spring in Texas. It was also a source of irrigation water for at least 90 years, and a rare oasis in the semi-arid region of Trans-Pecos Texas. Average daily discharge was estimated to be 21 million gallons. Comanche Spring ceased to flow more 50 years ago, after Clayton Williams, Sr. developed a well field to supply water to his crops. Williams' well field dried up the spring and captured the groundwater that had been used for decades to irrigate more than 6,000 acres of farmland near Fort Stockton. Comanche Spring stands out as a prime example of the destruction of a commons, as well as a basis for reasonable regulation of groundwater pumpage AND the assignment of well-defined and enforceable rights to groundwater in Texas.

________________________________________________

A principal problem underlying the 1949 and 1985 GCD amendments was the failure to recognize that the flow of groundwater is not controlled by political, but by hydrogeologic, boundaries. Furthermore, there was no requirement that GCDs overlying a common aquifer develop a cooperative set of management plans. In most cases, there was no evidence that GCDs intended to develop plans that would have led to co-operation or to minimal departures from the Rule of Capture (ROC). Most GCDs, in fact, seem to have been committed to preserving the doctrine under the guise of “local control.”

GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS – A STEP BEYOND GROUNDWATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS

As noted above, many GCDs were delineated on the basis of political — not hydrogeological — boundaries. Although the districts have been encouraged to work with each other to produce coherent management plans, prior to 2005, it was often the case that there was little interaction among the districts and that many GCDs pursued objectives which were not in sync with those of neighboring districts. To rectify shortcomings of the GCD system, the Legislature, in 2005, adopted House Bill 1763, which required joint planning among the districts within designated Groundwater Management Areas (GMAs) that cover all of the State’s major and minor aquifers.

The Legislature specified that TWDB was to use aquifer boundaries or subdivisions of aquifer boundaries in its delineation of each GMA. TWDB proposed 16 management areas, with boundaries which reflect those of the major hydrogeologic areas. (Mace, R.E., R. Petrossian, R. Bradley, and W.F. Mullican, III, A Streetcar Named Desired Future Conditions: The New Groundwater Availability for Texas; presented at the 7th Annual The Changing Face of Water Right in Texas, State Bar of Texas, May 18-19, San Antonio, TX.

Under the provisions of the 2005 law, representatives of GCDs are required to meet at least once every year to conduct joint planning and to review groundwater management plans and accomplishments in their respective GMAs. The intended long-term effect is to get GCDs to work together under rules which will lead to a better understanding of hydrogeological conditions and the availability of groundwater throughout the State. From this, it is expected that coherent sets of regional management plans will be developed to ensure that groundwater resources will be available to residents of Texas through the year 2060.

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE RULE OF CAPTURE – AN INTRODUCTION TO THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS

Was anything ever to be gained by embracing the ROC as the principal groundwater doctrine of Texas?

Two factors which might be cited in favor of the ROC are:

1. The ROC encourages economic development through maximum utilization of a source or sources of groundwater; and

2. The ROC entails minimal government involvement in the operations of water wells.

It should be noted that “maximum utilization” is not synonymous with “optimal utilization.” Microeconomic theory emphasizes optimal over maximum utilization, as optimal utilization embodies the concept of economic efficiency, as measured by marginal cost/profit. Maximum utilization embodies neither. This is the equivalent of saying that one can produce a natural resource over a given period of time in a manner that would maximize total revenue (assuming that the marginal profit of the last unit produced is zero) instead of producing the resource over a shorter period of time, such that the production schedule fails to yield a marginal profit of the last produced unit of zero. With respect to the exploitation of nonrenewable natural resources (e.g. gold, oil, uranium), this is best explained by Harold E. Hotelling’s theory of the mine (The Economics of Exhaustible Resources, in The Journal of Political Economy, v. 39, pp. 137–175 (1931)), in which Hotelling postulates that optimal resource exploitation is achieved when the marginal profit of the last extracted unit is zero. Although Hotelling’s theory is most often applied to mining operations, it is reasonable to extend the theory to an exhaustible or potentially exhaustible resource, such as groundwater.

With regard to the second point above, there is nothing in economics to suggest that unfettered exploitation of a natural resource such as groundwater is economically efficient or amounts to sensible resource management. With respect to groundwater, “minimal government involvement” might be required to prevent over-exploitation, depletion, contamination, and, insofar as groundwater can be considered to be a “public good,” promotion of the health, safety, and welfare of the public.
Factors which might be cited as reasons to amend or replace the ROC with a different groundwater rights doctrine are:

1. The potential for overproduction and depletion;

2. Inefficient use and devaluation of the resource;

3. The potential for a Tragedy of the Commons; and

4. The ROC ignores the needs of future generations.

Points 1 and 2 are well-established consequences associated with the aggressive exploitation not only of water but of other natural resources that can be considered to form a commons (e.g., petroleum reservoirs, “forests, rangeland, parks). As such, both are factors that underlie the devaluation and/or destruction of a commons, cited as point #3 above. A prima facie example of points #1 and #2 is found in the petroleum industry of Texas, particularly in the overexploitation of early giant fields such as Spindletop (near Beaumont, Texas).

Discovered in January 1901, Spindletop attracted thousands of speculators and producers to Beaumont, Texas. Each producer sought to extract as much oil as possible from his small lease, under the assumption that other producers would drain “his” oil if he did not produce it first. The result was a proliferation of closely spaced drilling rigs, each producing from the same reservoir. The effect of the production frenzy was rapid depletion of reservoir pressure and rapidly decreasing output. Initial production was as much as 100,000 barrels of oil per day, and total production in 1902 was 17,500,000 barrels (47,945 barrels per day). By 1904, total production was 3,650,000 barrels (10,000 barrels per day).

The Big Oilfields website notes the following with regard to the production of oil at Spindletop:

Mineral rights to the oil under the leases worked according to the old English "rule of capture." Under this principle, anybody who had property or a lease anywhere over the pool of crude had the right to suck it out of the ground as fast as he could.

With little understanding of the underground pressures of natural gas and water, the producers extracted too much oil too quickly. Water seeped into the reservoir. The flow of oil forced to the surface by pumps slowed to a trickle.

The original production area at Spindletop was reduced to a minor oil field by 1909.

Point #4 is a much-discussed and debated matter involving commitments of one generation to its successors. Given the opportunity to exploit aquifers, petroleum reservoirs, forests, and rangelands, it is reasonable to inquire whether the current generation has an obligation to generations yet to come to ensure that adequate resources will be available or that public lands will not be degraded from overuse.

DEFINITION OF A COMMONS AND THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS

A "commons" is any resource which is used as though it belongs to all. An aquifer would easily qualify as a commons. If anyone can use a shared resource simply because one wants or needs to use it, then one is exploiting a commons. A commons can be destroyed by uncontrolled use.

Garrett Hardin described factors that underlie the destruction or degradation of a commons in his essay The Tragedy of the Commons. (Refer to Science, Vol. 162, No. 3859, Dec. 13, 1968.

Hardin’s essay is developed around a parable about the grazing of animals on open pastureland. The owners of the animals are motivated to increase their personal wealth by adding one head of stock at a time to their respective flocks. However, each animal added to the total stretches the carrying capacity of the land. The degradation attributable to each additional animal is small, yet if all owners pursue this strategy, the carrying capacity will be exceeded and the property severely damaged or destroyed. It is not necessary for all users of a commons to behave as described by Hardin. The destruction of the resource can occur if only one user attempts to dominate the commons.

COMANCHE SPRING

One such example of damage to a commons involving the production of water is the matter of Comanche Spring, located at Fort Stockton, Texas (refer to the photo at the beginning of this post). Comanche Spring was a source of water for animals and humans, and the substantial discharge (estimated to be as much as 21 million gallons per day Mgd) made the spring a prime hunting ground for Indians and an ideal location for an army post and a stagecoach stop. The spring also provided water for irrigation, and, in later years, it was the site of a large pool in a municipal park. The spring, however, ceased to flow as a result of pumping to support irrigation, principally by one farmer.

In A Primer for Understanding Texas Water Law, Timothy L. Brown describes the facts and legal issues at the core of the matter. The Comanche Spring case (Pecos County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 v. Williams, 271 SW2d 503 (Tex.Civ.App–El Paso 1954, writ ref’d n.r.e.) is prominent in Texas water law. Brown’s account of the matter is reproduced below:

At Fort Stockton, Texas, there were large, prolific springs, named Comanche Springs. The springs provided a water supply for numerous irrigators in the Pecos County Water Control and Improvement District, which upon development, supplied water to irrigate over 6,000 acres.

Up gradient from the springs was land owned by Clayton Williams (Sr.) …. At the time the case arose, Texas was in the early stages of the Great Drought of the 1950s and Williams needed water for his crops. He developed a well field and began to pump water from the formation. The pumping resulted in drying up the springs, which cut off the water supply for the irrigators in the district. Litigation followed. The irrigators asserted that they and their predecessors had owned the location and flow of the spring and that they had used the water beneficially for ninety years. By virtue of this, they alleged, they acquired the right to be protected in the subsurface source of the water. They also plead in the alternative that if they did not own the source of the water supply, they were nevertheless entitled to a fair share of the source of supply. The gist of this argument was that they had a correlative right to the water. They also alleged that the spring was not fed by percolating groundwater, but rather by a well-defined underground stream in which they acquired rights by virtue of claims filed with the Board of Water Engineers. The remedy they sought was an injunction against Williams’ pumping.

Williams countered by filing exceptions to the plaintiffs’ petition. He asserted that the water was percolating groundwater and since no waste had been alleged, he was entitled to a judgment on the basis of the East case. He also asserted that the plaintiffs’ allegation about a well-defined underground stream was insufficient because the source, location, beds and banks and course of the so-called well-defined channel were not provided. The trial court sustained Williams’ exceptions. The irrigators appealed.

The El Paso Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court judgment. The court held that Williams absolutely owned the water beneath his land and the plaintiffs had no correlative rights in it. As to the general allegation about the well-defined stream, Williams’ exceptions were well taken because there was no evidence to support the proposition. As to the failure of the spring when Williams pumped, that did not prove the existence of a well-defined underground channel.

On appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, the plaintiffs attempted to avoid the effect of the East case with an interesting argument. The argument was that the percolating groundwater referred to in the East case did not include water moving in well-defined underground strata. Percolating groundwater, according to modern hydrology, is divided into two classes: first, “diffused percolating water,” defined as slowly moving water which cannot be traced directly as the source of a natural stream, and, second, “percolating water feeding a natural water course,” defined as water which supplies a surface water stream. The former definition was what was used to define percolating groundwater at common law, so East did not apply.

The significance of this argument was, if the Supreme Court adopted the definitions, East would have been stripped of its significance. This is because the facts about most groundwater are known or subject to being known. Thus, once groundwater reached a known water sand, it would no longer be percolating water subject to private ownership as provided by East. This comports with the Attorney General’s earlier opinion.

The Supreme Court declined to take the case and did not write an opinion. By declining to take the case, we can only infer that the Supreme Court apparently rejected the proposition.

The Comanche Spring case stands out as an example of the destruction of a commons for several reasons:

1. By 1954, hydrogeology had advanced enough since the formulation of Darcy’s law in 1856 that the fundamental principles of hydrostratigraphy and the flow of groundwater on local to subregional scales were well understood.

2. By 1954, the effects of pumping on water levels were not mysterious, many thanks to the work of hydrogeologists and civil engineers with the Water Resources Division of the United States Geological Survey.

3. Arguments that Comanche Spring was fed by “percolating water” (as understood in the East case) instead of “water moving in well-defined underground strata” (as made on appeal) were clearly absurd. All that was required to counter the claims of Williams’ attorneys was an investigation of the hydrostratigraphy of the area, measurements of water levels in wells between Williams’ property and properties downstream of the spring, and evaluation of drawdown and recovery from pumping tests.

4. Williams’ pumping caused water levels to fall below the discharge point of the spring, and the lower water levels led to the cessation of discharge. This amounted to as much as 21 Mgd of captured flow to support Williams’ farm and to the loss of water to support irrigation on 6,000 acres that had been sustained by spring flow for many years. This effectively gave Williams a monopoly over a commons that had served a great many people for at least 90 years.

5. The cessation of flow also destroyed a rare water resource in west Texas and denied residents of Fort Stockton and the surrounding area the recreational and aesthetic equivalent of the springs of Balmorhea (Reeves County) or Barton Springs (Travis County).

Williams' suits dropped vs. mayor, water district in 'water war'

2010-05-12T11:07:00.000-05:00

by Bob Campbell
Midland Reporter-Telegram

Published: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 8:15 PM CDT

Two lawsuits associated with Midland oilman Clayton Williams' Pecos County water pipeline project have been dropped.

Williams in December and January had filed state and federal suits against Fort Stockton Mayor Ruben Falcon and the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District, alleging Falcon had impugned his reputation for honesty and the water district improperly refused to process his application.

(READ THE STATEMENTS: Mayor Ruben Falcon and Clayton Williams)

Midland attorney Robert Rendall said Tuesday that the first rhubarb was settled when Falcon apologized and the second ended as the district agreed to give due process to Williams' application to pump 42.3 million gallons a day through a $250-$300 million pipeline 100 miles northeast to west of Midland International Airport.

"Mayor Falcon issued a statement of apology and Mr. Williams agreed the two sides will do a better job of communicating with each other going down the road," Rendall said. "Mayor Falcon acknowledged that some of the characterizations he had made could be interpreted negatively.

"The federal suit was dropped when the water district accepted the application because that was the whole reason for filing it."

Rendall said the district will probably start the hearing process in about two months.

Williams said after the suits were dropped that his reputation "is important to me.

"It's hard to do business with people if they cannot trust my word or rely on my handshake," he said. "A reputation for honesty can be as hard to earn as a fortune, and it is more valuable because fortunes can be lost and won again. But once a reputation for honesty is gone, it is gone forever."

Austin attorney Bruce Scrafford said in January that Williams and his Fort Stockton Holdings had spent more than $1 million researching the plan to continue using no more water than Williams is already allocated for irrigation.

Scrafford said four studies in 20 years, including a recent analysis by Thornhill Group hydrologists from Round Rock, proved the Edwards Trinity Aquifer under Williams' 13,000 acre alfalfa farm southwest of Fort Stockton would constantly replenish itself.

Seeking to change the farm's permit from agricultural to out of county transfers for municipalities and businesses, Scrafford said the farm may now pump 47,418 acre-feet of water annually while the city of Fort Stockton will need fewer than 3,500 acre-feet per year for the next 50 years.

Using 42.3 million gallons a day for 365 days would total 15.4 billion gallons, or 47,418 acre-feet, according to references. An acre-foot (water a foot deep more than an acre of land) is 325,851 gallons.

2010-05-11T15:07:00.003-05:00

Dear RGISC Members:

The 2010 annual meeting of the Rio Grande International Study Center (RGISC) will be on Thursday, May 20th at the Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center at the Laredo Community College Campus. The members meeting, scheduled for 6:00 p.m. will include refreshments. There will be an update of the on-going projects by the RGISC Board. There will be plenty of time for questions and answers.

This present s an opportunity for participants to also visit the Center’s many live exhibits. Outdoor exhibits include alligators, gray foxes , racoons, bobcats, coatamundi, porcupines, fish, turtles, lizards, snakes, catus gardens, and other native plant and animal species. The living laboratory provides many interesting indoor exhibits of animals that live in the Rio Grande Watershed.

Your membership attests to your belief in the RGISC mission of improving and protecting water quality and quantity in the Rio Grande through reseach, education and binational cooperation. Please invite your friends to the annual meeting and encourage them to become members. We hope you will attend and please feel free to bring friends and neighbors to the annual meeting, enjoy the expanding richness of the Center, and join to help us provide environmental education to the community in the coming year.
Please contact our Administrative Assistant, Hilda Martinez at 721-5392 or rgisc@laredo.edu to let us know how many folks you will be bringing. This will help us make preparations for the refreshments and increase your enjoyment of the Center.

Sincerely,

Jay J. Johnson-Castro, Sr. Executive Director

Water deal saves $17M

2010-05-11T14:59:00.001-05:00

By Chris Roberts \ El Paso Times

EL PASO -- The city will save more than $17 million during the next decade thanks to a new agreement with the district that provides about half of El Paso's drinking water.

"Financially, it is significant," said Nick Costanzo, Public Service Board vice president of business and finance. "Based on the contract that was in place, the price would have more than doubled in 10 years. ... It certainly takes some of the pressure off for future rate increases."

The El Paso County Water Improvement District agreed to freeze the price of some water it provides for two years and then tie annual increases to the consumer price index with a cap of 4 percent. The previous agreement, part of a 40-year contract that is renegotiated every 10 years, called for 8 percent annual increases.

Water obtained under the "2001 contract" now costs $260 per acre foot. An acre-foot can supply the household needs of two four-person families for one year. Under the new agreement, the city will pay about $65.8 million to the district during the next 10 years.

The contract covers about 18,000 acre feet of the total 61,000 acre feet supplied by the district. Water in that contract is the most expensive. Other contracts going back to the 1940s set lower prices.

people are paying in California."

The higher price is part of doing business in arid locations, Costanzo said, where water is harder to find. He said the city's price is among the lowest in the Southwest.

It took nearly 30 years of haggling among the Elephant Butte Irrigation District in New Mexico, the federal Bureau of Reclamation and the county water district to reach agreement on how Rio Grande water would be allocated. The city is a district member because it has water rights for about 3,200 acres it owns.

"The Elephant Butte Irrigation District is happy, we're happy and the Bureau of Reclamation is happy," said Jesus "Chuy" Reyes, who manages the water district.

It was not always so.

"We were fighting New Mexico. We were fighting the irrigation district. We were fighting the colonia development," Archuleta said. "We tore down those adobe walls, if you will."

Reyes was less poetic. Archuleta "and I worked it out at lunch," he said.

The agreement became final at the end of March.

River water, flowing mostly from snowmelt in the mountains of New Mexico and Colorado, is vital to El Paso's long-term survival. It is considered a renewable resource.

The city wants to use as much river water as it can to conserve what is available in the Hueco Bolson, a vast aquifer that runs parallel to the Franklin Mountains on the city's East Side. A small portion of it is relatively easy to treat. The larger portion is brackish and will require relatively costly treatment at the city's desalination plant.

"A child born today is probably going to live 100 years," Costanzo said. "We want to have 75 percent of the Hueco potable water available 100 years from now."

As El Paso grows during the next 10 years, the city will increase output from the desalination plant, Costanzo said. "It's also an insurance policy for when there is a river drought," he added.

During a river drought, all members take an equal hit, Reyes said. In the drought of 2003 and 2004, members received half of their allotments, he said.

Those members have about 32,000 water accounts that include small tracts and large farms. The district's 100 employees are responsible for operating and maintaining about 350 miles of irrigation canals that stretch from the New Mexico state line to Hudspeth County, Reyes said.

"Mostly it's going to pecan orchards," he said. "There is a lot of cotton still in the valley. We don't have as many vegetables."

It was agriculture that prompted the federal government, looking for ways to speed development of the West, to begin water projects in the late 1800s. Flood control and farming were the goals, which is why the district controls the water.

"Recreation and municipal use were not part of the equation," Archuleta said.

The Elephant Butte and Caballo dams were built in the early 1900s, he said. It wasn't until the early 1940s that the city began staking its claims. For decades, El Paso relied mostly on groundwater, Archuleta said.

Now the city waits for stream flow predictions based on snowpack. There is good news this year.

The region will receive its full allotment, Reyes said.

Water wars

2010-05-11T08:30:00.001-05:00

Commissioners eye legal action to stop Fort Stockton plan

By Zach Lindsey LAREDO MORNING TIMES

When the Webb County Commissioners Court voted Monday to oppose a plan to draw water from the Pecos River watershed upstream of the Rio Grande, they became one more voice in the border region speaking out against the proposal.

But the court wants to go two steps further: Commissioners are suggesting legal action, as well as taking the issue to Austin.

The Fort Stockton Holdings plan to export 41 million gallons of water a day from Pecos County has drawn negative reactions from many border governments, including the City of Laredo and Nuevo Laredo.

Water rights in Fort Stockton have attracted the attention of border communities after a plan was announced by Clayton Williams to export water from the Fort Stockton area.

Although the Williams family, owners of Fort Stockton Holdings, has been pumping water from the watershed for irrigation since the 1950s, this is the first time they will export that water for sale to regions outside of the watershed.

Geoscientist Mike Thornhill, who has done more than 20 years of research on the groundwater beneath the Fort Stockton Holdings property, says there is “no possible way that neighboring

counties or communities could be adversely affected by the amount of pumping that Mr. Williams is requesting.”

They will not be pumping any more water than they currently pump, and Thornhill stressed that “the amount of water… will not change.

If the amount of water does not change, the impact will not change.”

But Rio Grande International Study Center Director Jay Johnson Castro described to the court a pumping process that “dried up about 43 of 46 springs which, prior to this happening, flowed into the Rio Grande.”

At the time, the Williams family referred to a Texas law called the Rule of Capture, which states that the groundwater on their land belongs to them, as opposed to surface water, which belongs to the state.

Johnson Castro called the law “archaic.”

As for the impact, Johnson Castro disagreed with Thornhill.

“We don’t know the impact, but we think we ought to know the impact before we allow it to occur,” Johnson Castro said. He called for a “moratorium for inadequate science.”

Commissioner Sergio “Keko” Martinez recommended helping the Rio Grande International Study Center in any way the court could, including possibly providing financial support.

“Certainly, this thing is going to affect Webb County,” Martinez said.

The Rio Grande “is certainly our main water source, and any effect… upstream would certainly carry effects down here.”

After discussing the Rule of Capture, paired with a reminder that, based on U.S. Census figures, the border region could grow by nearly 300 percent by 2050, County Judge Danny Valdez wondered if the court shouldn’t bring the situation to Austin and place it on the county’s legislative agenda.

Valdez suggested formulating legislation to do away with the entire Rule of Capture.

That would address concerns over future plans to draw water from the watershed. Johnson Castro called the Fort Stockton Holdings situation a “precedent,” and the court worried that, if Williams is successful, other private entities will do the same.

During the state’s last big drought in the late 1990s, the Rio Grande didn’t make it to the Gulf of Mexico, Johnson Castro said.

“This was before any such export out of our watershed,” Johnson Castro said

Venta Rio News Video

2010-05-05T10:58:00.002-05:00

El millonario empresario texano Clayton Williams ha solicitado la autorizacion del distrito de conservacion de agua del condado de pecos para extraer 45-trillones de galones, de agua del Rio Pecos durante un periodo de 30 años. Williams se dice pagaria por el agua, para luego venderla. Esto a puesto en alerta a autoridades de ambas fronteras, por el impacto que podria tener al rio bravo, porque el rio pecos de donde sacaria el agua se conecta con lo que es la principal fuente de agua de las comunidades fronterizas. Wendolyne Rivera nos amplia la informacion en exclusiva.

Environmentalists up-in-arms over plan to sell river water

2010-05-05T09:40:00.000-05:00

Many environmentalists, along with state, city and county leaders, are up in arms over a plan to take millions of gallons of water a day from the Rio Grande.

It's a plan by billionaire Clayton Willams to pump 40,000,000 gallons of groundwater from a watershed that feeds the river in Fort Stockton area to the city of Midland, Texas.

House Bill 4805 sets up the Texas Water Supply District near Midland International Airport.

It's good news for that city which has been looking for a new water source for decades but could be devastating for cities and towns along the Rio Grande.

The proposal would not only allow for the pumping of water out of the river, but also a $300,000 state loan to help pay for a pipeline from Fort Stockton to Midland.

Many border leaders plan a lawsuit if the plan moves forward.

Council sets the stage to battle water plan

2010-05-04T09:13:00.002-05:00

As concern mounts on both sides of the border about a plan to export water from sources in
South Texas, the City of Laredo is doing its best to fight the plan. On Monday, the City Council unanimously approved a resolution against it. The plan, the brainchild of Clayton Williams’ Fort Stockton Holding Company, would extract about 41 million gallons a day from reservoirs in Pecos County. The aquifers act as feeders into the Pecos River, a tributary of the Rio Grande — the only water source for many border cities, including Laredo. Although Williams already extracts 41 million gallons per day to irrigate farmland in Pecos County area, Rio Grande International Study Center Director Jay Johnson Castro said that the exportation of water from the region will have bigger consequences for the watershed. Mayor Raul Salinas complained about the fact that Williams did not come to Laredo or send a messenger to address his concernsWilliams, however, sent a letter, which mentioned economic development.
Johnson Castro argued the point, saying that Williams’ economic development could happen at the loss of other communities down the river. Councilman Gene Belmares worried that estimated growth in Laredo will mean that the city may one day be forced to import water from an outside source — the same type of source that, by signing the resolution, the city is opposing.
“We may be faced with the same economic question that (Midland, the planned purchasers of
Williams’ water) is asking, which is how do we get more water,” Belmares said.“We don’t have the answers for that,” Johnson Castro replied, but added that the real solution involves cooperation between the United States and Mexico.With Williams’ current pumping of 41 million gallons a day during irrigation times, only about two or three of 46 Pecos County springs flow in the summertime. In the winter, all of them flow, according to Johnson Castro.“So there’s a direct correlation?” Belmares asked. “Yes,” Johnson Castro said. “Motion to approve,” Belmares said.

Valley Leaders Oppose Pecos Water Extraction Plans

2010-05-03T14:57:00.002-05:00

McALLEN, May 3 – Two more elected officials down-river of the Amistad Reservoir have weighed in on oil tycoon and developer Clayton Williams’ application to extract groundwater from the Pecos River watershed.

Hidalgo County Judge Rene Ramirez and McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez have followed the lead set by Laredo Mayor Raul Salinas, who made clear his forceful opposition to the plans two weeks ago.

In an interview with the Guardian on Saturday, Ramirez characterized William’s intention to draw 41 million gallons per day from the Edward’s Aquifer as “devastating.”

“Water is not a luxury, it is a necessity. When you have that kind of impact on the kind of growing population that we have here, it causes serious concern. I’m sure there is going to be a strong argument that he doesn’t have the right. You can’t live without it. Development can’t occur without it,” Ramirez said.

The Guardian also interviewed Cortez on Sunday.

“I am aware of the Pecos groundwater issue and like most of the mayors of the border am strongly opposed to that (William’s) action. Whether or not he is supported by any state law, when the common good is threatened for the benefit of a few, the law in question loses its validity,” said Cortez.

Laredo Mayor Salinas said he and other border officials “will stand tall in staunch opposition” to efforts to extract billions of gallons of groundwater from the Pecos River watershed.

“I am in the process of contacting every political leader down-river from the Pecos. I am contacting the Texas Border Coalition, both of our U.S. Senators, John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, all of our elected federal and state legislators and senators and will be meeting personally with the mayor of Nuevo Laredo tomorrow,” Salinas told the Guardian, in a phone interview two weeks ago.

“As mayor of a city that depends almost exclusively on the Rio Grande for our water, I will not sit by and let it be taken away by someone in West Texas.”

Last week Salinas and Nuevo Laredo Municipal President Roman Garza Barrios issued a joint proclamation opposing Williams’ intent to extract the large quantities of aquifer water destined for the Rio Grande, describing the application as “a significant thereat for residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural sustainability and growth in Laredo, Texas and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.”

The Pecos River feeds approximately 80 million gallons of water per day into the Rio Grande.

In a telephone interview with the Guardian, Fort Stockton City Manager Rafael Castillo referred this reporter to the documents listed on this Web site:

http://www.cityfs.net/ (Click on to read documents relevant to the water losses projected by Fort Stockton)

The hydro geologic study conducted by the Texas Water Development Board indicates that if the permit were executed as requested by William’s Fort Stockton Holdings Company, the net loss to the aquifer that ultimately feeds the Rio Grande would be 68,000 acre feet per year. An acre foot is an acre of water at a depth of one foot. One acre foot equals 325 851.429 U.S. gallons

Williams’ own study claims that no more water would be pumped from the aquifer than is already going on. The ancient Texas rule known as the “Right of Capture” based on old British Common Law grants ownership of ground water to the owner of the land above it. Subsequent state laws have come into conflict with the “Right of Capture.”

“Obviously there are differences in what Mr. Williams claims and what the Texas Water Development Board states through its study,” said Castillo acknowledging that it is yet to be determined what the net effect on water flow down river will be after such a huge net loss to the Edwards Aquifer, because it is not yet known how much of that water ultimately flows into the Rio Grande.

“If Clayton Williams is ultimately successful in sending billions of gallons of water to the Midland-Odessa metropolitan area with approximately 300,000 population, what will the effect be on the 10 million people that live down-river on either side of the U.S.-Mexican Border,” Castillo said.

U.S. Congressman Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, had already vowed to contact the office of Gov. Rick Perry and the International Boundary and Water Commission prior to the April 20th hearing held in Ft Stockton.

“We have some new and innovative ideas that we have about the recapture of water but we have to live in today’s times. Taking that much water away will have a devastating effect on our communities,” added Ramirez, summing up the projected role of such water loss to the Rio Grande Valley and cities on both sides of the river.

Public hearing set for regional water plan

2010-04-27T11:05:00.002-05:00

Despite recent heavy rains and the Amistad and Falcon reservoirs being nearly full, the time to plan for future water needs along the Rio Grande — especially during times of drought — is now.
The Rio Grande Regional Water Planning Group (Rio Grande RWPG), one of 16 regional water planning groups around the state, will hold a public hearing at 11 a.m. Wednesday, at the Laredo Public Library, 1120 E. Calton Road, in order to receive public comments on a revised regional water plan. The planning group represents a wide range of stakeholders, such as irrigationdistricts, water utilities, cities, counties, environmental groups, small businesses and large industries. It has been working for the past year to update the 2005-06 regional water plan with new information. The revised and updated plan is known as the Initially Prepared Plan (IPP). Physical copies of the IPP were distributed last month to county clerks’ offices and certain libraries in the eight-county region in order to give the general public an opportunity to read the plan. The regional water plan is also available online at www.riograndewaterplan.org. Chapter 4 is a key chapter because it outlines the recommended strategies to meet water demands for the next 50 years. Those strategies include municipal and agricultural water conservation, acquisition of additional water rights from the Rio Grande, increased water recycling for non-potable use, and desalination of seawater and brackish groundwater. The deadline to comment is Monday, June 28, 2010. Comments received by the deadline will be incorporated into a new plan that will be submitted to the Texas Water Development Board on Sept. 1,
2010. All meetings of the Rio Grande RWPG are open to the public and include opportunities
for public comment. For more information, visit www.riograndewaterplan. org.

A border runs through it (the Rio Grande)

2010-04-27T09:21:00.000-05:00

(maybe in the end, more volatile and important to border region Texans than the current drug war – the legal division of the Rio’s waters is sometimes like Solomon’s decision! Read on……

Mexico unable to provide promised water to Texas
It’s caused international incidents with border flair. A Mexican governor has villified Texas leaders for playing politics with it and U.S. lawyers have threatened to sue for violation of international treaties related to it. Steeped in the annals of America’s symbiotic relationship with Mexico is the two countries’ long-standing and sometimes tense agreement over an issue more far-reaching than border security and immigration: water.

The Treaty of Feb. 3, 1944 — also called the “Treaty of the Utilization of Waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande” — directs Mexico to deliver water to the U.S. from six tributaries that feed into the Rio Grande, in exchange for water from the Colorado River. But the Mexican government’s inability to meet its current water obligation has some Texas businesses, agricultural leaders and state lawmakers keeping a close eye on their southern neighbor.

The treaty, which runs in five-year cycles, mandates that Mexico deliver an average of 350,000 acre-feet of water to the U.S. annually from the waters that flow into Mexico’s Rio Grande, known there as the Rio Bravo. In exchange, Mexico is entitled to 1.5 million acre-feet of water annually from the Colorado River, which drains into Mexico at the Arizona-California border. (An acre-foot of water is 325,821 gallons.) But in the first year of the treaty’s current cycle, which ended Feb. 28, Mexico delivered just 189,371 acre-feet of water to the U.S. — well short of the expected annual average.

Sally Spener, public affairs officer with the El Paso-based International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), said this doesn’t present a crisis yet; the treaty was authored in a fashion that allows Mexico to make up the difference. Mexico could make up last year’s deficit by releasing about 510,600 acre-feet by the end of February 2011. “The reason the treaty did this is, that particular region is affected by highly variable conditions, so that you can have low flow one year and you can have a hurricane the next,” Spener said. “That’s why it is a five-year average that is required rather than an annual delivery amount.”

Some critics have less confidence. They point to Mexico’s past delivery troubles, including a feud the country settled with U.S. farmers in 2005, after Mexico fell behind in its delivery by more than 700,000 acre-feet. At the time, Mexican authorities said their own water needs were preventing the release. After Mexico agreed to expedite delivery the dispute ended — but the aftereffects still linger.

The treaty directs water use in Texas from Fort Quitman to the Gulf of Mexico, and has a huge impact on Texas agricultural producers and municipal water suppliers who rely on the river or their water. The majority of water delivered to the U.S. comes from two main tributaries that feed into the Rio Grande: the Conchos, which enters the river in Presidio and in Ojinaga, Mexico; and the Salado, which enters the Rio Grande at the Falcon Dam reservoir, which sits on the Starr/Zapata county line south of Laredo.

At a recent interim committee hearing of the Texas Senate’s International Relations and Trade Committee at the Capitol, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality officials explained that Mexico is not in violation of the treaty — yet. “It is something that we have brought to the attention of the IBWC and have scheduled a meeting with the State Department,” testified Carlos Rubinstein, a TCEQ commissioner. “Anything that impacts the delivery of water to the Rio Grande ultimately impacts the delivery of water to all of the residents and could also impact the colonias.”

Ken Jones, the director of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council, explained that Mexico holds the cards in the situation, at least geographically. “Seventy-eight percent of the watershed that feeds into Falcon and Amistad that supplies the water for the U.S. side is actually physically in Mexico,” he said. “That’s why the compliance thing is so important to us because it’s limited access to the U.S. side in terms of inflow to the reservoir system.”

What do the Mexicans say when asked about their shortfall? “They say they need if for their side, too,” said Jones.

Most of the Mexican water is used for irrigation in Texas. Rio Grande Valley Water Master Erasmo Yarrito, who calculated water use percentages for this story, said since at least 2007, the majority of the area’s water was used for irrigation — about 72 percent that year, rising to about 80 percent in 2008 and 2009.

Jones said reservoir levels are monitored on a regular basis to check the inflow of water from Mexico. The situation with Mexico was dire last time, not only because of the backlog, but because of the simultaneous drought experienced by the region. But the reservoirs are currently at greater than 80 percent capacity this time around — a good sign. Jones said it isn’t until reservoir levels reach the 50 to 55 percent capacity range that municipalities initiate local water restrictions.

Rubenstein said the impact of the Mexican water shortfall is “primarily to agricultural users, but that then translates into an economic impact to the Valley as well.” Because 100 percent of water-supply corporations and municipalities in the Rio Grande Valley get their water from the Rio Grande, Rubinstein added, “if the river is short-changed, it will affect just about every sector of the Valley.”

“We are continuing to work with them,” Rubenstein said. Mexico “fully caught up [in the past] and were actually able to close two cycles.”

Read from source here.

Town, tycoon wage war for water Fort Stockton fights plans to sell aquifer resources

2010-04-27T08:39:00.001-05:00

The West Texas town of Fort Stockton is challenging a billionaire oil tycoon over his plans to sell water from its local aquifer to a town more than 100 miles north, threatening to deplete the local water supply.

Clayton Williams Jr. — the 1990 Republican gubernatorial nominee — has a permit from Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District for his Fort Stockton Holdings to pump large amounts of water from the Pecos County portion of the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer. But the permit limits him to using the water for irrigation purposes, thwarting his plans to transfer and sell the water outside Pecos County to Midland and other municipalities for profit.

The citizens of Fort Stockton, said Mayor Ruben Falcon, “feel that the future water supply is threatened by having a large amount of water transferred out of the aquifer.” Others believe allowing Williams’ transfer would set a dangerous precedent for all communities in the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo Watershed, which supplies Laredo and the entire Rio Grande Valley.

“There is going to be a whole set of dominoes where people are going to be extracting or attempting to extract water from the watershed ... at the risk of the Rio Grande community,” said Jay J. Johnson Castro, the executive director of the Rio Grande International Study Center in Laredo.

The center and the city of Fort Stockton entered into a joint resolution seeking a moratorium to prevent the transfer of the water.

The 11-member conservation district could decide the issue as soon as May, though contested hearings may push the decision into the fall. The clash underscores the increasing scarcity of water in Texas — and the resulting standoffs between profit seekers looking to mine and sell the water and the municipalities trying cling to their rights to local supplies.

In the balance hangs the health of the Rio Grande, which is included on the World Wildlife’s list of most endangered rivers in North America, Castro said. Williams’ attempted removal of the water could harm the rivers that eventually drain into the Rio Grande, which in prior years has failed to make it the Gulf of Mexico because of low water levels.

Williams wants to draw more than 47,000 acre-feet of water annually from the watershed. An acrefoot is about 325,820 gallons, potentially bringing Fort Stockton Holding’s haul to exceed more than 15,449,780 gallons annually and total more than 463 trillion gallons over the life of the 30-year permit.

“Laredo and Nuevo Laredo suck out about 100 million gallons a day. Now Clayton Williams wants to suck out 41 million gallons a day,” Castro said. “That’s 40 percent of what the two Laredos use, and one guy wants to extract it to make the money.”

Neither Williams nor his attorney responded to repeated requests seeking comment. Williams, however, has slapped Falcon with a civil suit alleging libel and slander after Falcon publicly raised concerns over what he alleges was Williams’ intent with the water and his determination to obtain it.

Falcon “indicated that individuals associated with Fort Stockton Holdings L.P. wanted to ‘roll right over several landowners by their abuse of condemnation power to condemn easements,’” Williams alleges in court documents.

The conservation district denied an application after the district determined it didn’t clearly explain how he planned to use the water, said Russell Johnson, the city of Fort Stockton’s Austin-based attorney with McGinnis, Lochridge and Kilgore. The conservation district is considering an amended application.

Williams has a permit in place that allows him to drill the same amount he is requesting — but solely for irrigation purposes. He asserts in his libel lawsuit that the “rule of capture” makes the water under his property his to pump, use or sell. The rule asserts that the landowner holds the right to capture the water beneath his property without considering the effects to neighboring properties.

In court documents, Williams cites previous case law — including a 1954 case involving his father, Clayton Williams Sr. That case, Pecos County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 v. Williams, reaffirms the rule of capture in his favor, Williams claims in court documents.

In that case, an appellate court decided the elder Williams owned the water beneath his land, which fed into Comanche Springs. Williams also cites Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code, which reads, “ownership and rights of the owners of the land and their lessees and assigns in groundwater are herby recognized.”

Williams’ opponents, meanwhile, are counting on the fact that he wants to change the use of the water from what’s in his existing permit. They argue that current law supersedes Texas’ rule of capture. Johnson and Falcon are banking on the Texas Supreme Court decision rendered in Guitar Holding Co. LP v. Hudspeth County Underground Water Conservation District to bolster that argument.

Johnson litigated the 2007 case on behalf of the Guitar family, who owned a large swath of land over the Bone Springs-Victorio Peak Aquifer in Hudspeth County. In that case, the court overturned a lower court’s decision that, under the district rules, “production from a grandfathered well, historically used to irrigate crops, can in the future be sold for transport out of the district as a preserved historic or existing use.”

Instead, the higher court determined that the “amount of groundwater used and its beneficial purpose are components of ‘historic or existing use.’” So the district exceeded its rule-making authority by ignoring changes in the amount and purpose of water use in decisions to grandfathering existing wells, the higher court ruled.

Read from source here.

HELP WANTED

2010-04-26T16:43:00.000-05:00

Rio Grande International Study Center
Dia del Rio Campaign Coordinator
Part-Time, Temporary (May—October 2010)

Coordinator will organize and implement Dia del Rio Awareness Campaign
Throughout the Rio Grande Watershed area.
Excellent written and oral communications skills required.
Must be proficient in Microsoft, Word, PowerPoint and Publisher.

Call 956/721-5392 for application.
EOE

Another Volley in Texas' Water Wars

2010-04-26T10:00:00.000-05:00

by Melissa del Bosque
Published on: Friday, April 23, 2010

The City of Laredo has joined the battle against wealthy oil and gas man Clayton “Claytie” Williams Jr’s bid to extract 41 million gallons of water a day which the city believes could ultimately affect the Rio Grande.

Williams plan is to sell the water to Midland, according to the City of Laredo, potentially threatening water supplies downstream and further complicating the 1944 U.S.-Mexico water treaty.

You may remember Williams. He ran a good ol’ boy campaign as the Republican candidate for governor against Democrat Ann Richards in 1990. The Williams family have been longtime farmers in the Fort Stockton area. Williams Sr. is infamous for drying up the Comanche Springs because of the copious amounts of water needed for his farming operation. He won a landmark case in the ‘50s reaffirming his right to pump water under Texas’ archaic “Rule of Capture” law.

Laredo is, understandingly, serious about its protection of the Rio Grande its sole source of drinking water. “Water is life. No one is going to cut our lifeline or take away our natural resources, not from us, or anyone else along the border,” Mayor Raul Salinas said in a press release.

Under the “Rule of Capture” anyone who has a well can pump as much water as permitted regardless of the affect on his neighbors. Williams has applied for the permit from the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District in Ft. Stockton. Currently, local groundwater districts are the only entities that can prevent someone from depleting an aquifer.

Jay Johnson-Castro, director of the nonprofit Rio Grande International Study Center, worries that extracting water from the Edwards/Trinity aquifer zone will ultimately deplete water supplies in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo watershed. He’d like to see a moratorium on the permit until science can prove otherwise.

“This is a major issue. The border region is one of the fastest growing regions in the United States and it deserves every drop of water that comes its way,” he says.

Johnson-Castro, and cities along the border including Laredo, are appealing to officials at the state and federal level to put a moratorium on William’s bid to export water. The city of Fort Stockton has also passed a resolution supporting the moratorium.

Last year, Williams filed a civil suit alleging liable and slander against Fort Stockton’s Mayor Ruben Falcon. Among other things, Williams took issue with Falcon stating during a Dec. 14, 2009, commissioners meeting that Williams wanted “to roll right over several landowners by their abuse of condemnation power to condemn easements.”

According to Texas law, though, Williams has every right to pump under the rule of the capture. The devil in the details is whether he can export the water and sell it rather than use it for irrigation on his 13,000 acre alfalfa farm. This is not a minor amount of water. The amount of water that Laredo and Nuevo Laredo use equals 100 million gallons a day, while Williams wants to pump 41 million gallons a day, according to the Texas Tribune.

The privatization and marketing of water is a recurring issue that the State Legislature keeps punting to local groundwater districts. Back in 2005, some private water marketing interests had the idea of pumping water out of Kinney County, which lies on the Rio Grande, sending it downstream toward Brownsville and then piping it up to San Antonio.

The ensuing battle between water marketers and county residents was nasty and prolonged and spilled out into the Texas Legislature. As a legislative staffer in the committee where the bill was heard in 2005, I can tell you I will never forget it. It was like the Hatfield and McCoys -- at times heated and ugly and it went on for days and days. Jay Johnson-Castro and his brother Tommy Castro penned a tune about the rule of capture based on that 2005 battle – it’s appropriately enough, a blues number.

That bill finally died, thank God, but the issue never will.

If Williams is allowed to export and sell his water it will open the floodgates (pun intended) for other water marketers in the state. This is a huge issue for Texas and something that is deserving of statewide policy instead of being hashed out piecemeal by groundwater districts which don’t have the legal firepower or scientific background to grapple with such a contentious issue.

The state Legislature is going to have to muster the intestinal fortitude and a number of special sessions to tackle the “Rule of Capture.” But we all know that intestinal fortitude is something the Legislature is short on these days.

Read from source Here.

City of Laredo to Announce Opposition to Pecos River Water Project

2010-04-26T08:39:00.000-05:00

Laredo, Texas - Developing news in the debate over extracting water from the Pecos River.

The City of Laredo will announce its opposition to a water project supported by Midland businessman Clayton Williams.

According to the Laredo Sun newspaper, Mayor Raul Salinas says the resolution will be presented at the next city council meeting.

He is quoted as saying that the project is harmful and negative for those who depend on the Rio Grande.

The Pecos River feeds about 80-million gallons of water per day into the Rio Grande.

Williams says he has the right to extract underground water from his property near Fort Stockton and he plans to sell it for industrial use in Midland.

Texas Two-Step: Claytie Channels Boone; Groundwater Issues in Austin

2010-04-23T08:58:00.000-05:00

Now, on to Claytie Williams. This item appeared on 21 April 2010 in the Texas Tribune. Williams hasGMA rights to pump 47,000 acre-feet annually from beneath his Pecos County land under a permit from the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District (MPGCD) which lies mostly within GMA 7 with its northern part in GMA 3.

So what's the problem? Well, Williams' water is to be used for irrigation, and he wants to sell it to cities such as Midland more than 100 miles away from his land holdings. So he needs a waiver from the MPGCD. His request may come before the board as early as May 2010.

Not everyone is enthused about Williams' desire to sell the groundwater. From reporter Julian Aguilar's story:

The citizens of Fort Stockton, says Mayor Ruben Falcon, “feel that the future water supply is threatened by having a large amount of water transferred out of the aquifer.” Others believe allowing Williams’ transfer would set a dangerous precedent for all communities in the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo Watershed, which supplies Laredo and the entire Rio Grande Valley.

“There is going to be a whole set of dominoes where people are going to be extracting or attempting to extract water from the watershed … at the risk of the Rio Grande Community,” said Jay J. Johnson Castro, the executive director of the Rio Grande International Study Center in Laredo. The center and the City of Fort Stockton entered into a joint resolution seeking a moratorium to prevent the transfer of the water.

The 11-member conservation district could decide the issue as soon as May, though contested hearings may push the decision into the fall. The clash underscores the increasing scarcity of water in Texas — and the resulting standoffs between profit seekers looking to mine and sell the water and the municipalities trying cling to their rights to local supplies. In the balance hangs the health of the Rio Grande, which is already included on the World Wildlife’s list of most endangered rivers in North America, Castro said. Williams’ attempted removal of the water could harm the rivers that eventually drain into the Rio Grande, which in prior years has failed to make it the Gulf of Mexico due to low water levels.

Williams wants to draw more than 47,000 acre-feet of water annually from the watershed. An acre–foot is about 325,820 gallons, potentially bringing Fort Stockton Holding’s haul to exceed more than 15,449,780 gallons annually and total more than 463 trillion gallons over the life of the 30-year permit.

Here is more:

Williams already has a permit in place that allows him to drill the same amount he is requesting — but solely for irrigation purposes. He asserts in his current libel lawsuit that the “rule of capture” makes the water under his property his to pump, use or sell. The rule asserts that the landowner holds the right to capture the water beneath his property without considering the effects to neighboring properties.

In court documents, Williams cites previous case law — including a 1954 case involving his father, Clayton Williams Sr. That case, Pecos County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 v. Williams, reaffirms the rule of capture in his favor, Williams Jr. claims in court documents. In that case, an appellate court decided the elder Williams owned the water beneath his land, which fed into Comanche Springs. Williams Jr. also cites Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code, which reads, “ownership and rights of the owners of the land and their lessees and assigns in groundwater are herby recognized.”

So yes, the 'rule of capture' still rules in Texas.

Williams’ opponents, meanwhile, are counting on the fact that he wants to change the use of the water from what's in his existing permit. They argue that current law supersedes Texas’ rule of capture. Johnson and Falcon are banking on the Texas Supreme Court decision rendered in Guitar Holding Co. LP v. Hudspeth County Underground Water Conservation District to bolster that argument.

Johnson litigated the 2007 case on behalf of the Guitar family, who owned a large swath of land over the Bone Springs-Victorio Peak Aquifer in Hudspeth County. In that case, the court overturned a lower court’s decision that, under the district rules, “production from a grandfathered well, historically used to irrigate crops, can in the future be sold for transport out of the district as a preserved historic or existing use.” Instead, the higher court determined that the “amount of groundwater used and its beneficial purpose are components of ‘historic or existing use.’” So the district exceeded its rule-making authority by ignoring changes in the amount and purpose of water use in decisions to grandfathering existing wells, the higher court ruled.

“The Guitar case stands for the proposition that, just because Mr. Williams has the right to produce 46,000 acre-feet for irrigation purposes, that does not mean he has the right to convert that amount to some new use,” Johnson said.

But some people are persistent, even invoking international issues:

It is ultimately up to the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District to approve or reject the permit. But Castro argues that because the surface waters of the Rio Grande are governed by the Treaty of Feb. 3, 1944, which is overseen by the International Boundary and Water Commission in El Paso, the federal government should consider intervening in the dispute.

“We think there are higher laws that should be in consideration here. The Environmental Protection Agency should look into this because this is the future,” he said. “Our thought is, the growth should be where the water is. The water shouldn’t be moved where you want the growth. That’s where Texas is going to get into trouble.”

Castro has written the international water commission and four border congressmen: U.S. Reps. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso, and Ciro Rodriguez, D-San Antonio. The IBWC acknowledged receipt of the letter, but commission spokeswoman Sally Spener declined to comment in detail, saying the agency has yet to respond its claims.

I will be very interested in seeing how this case and the Pickens case are resolved. The one similarity is that like Pickens, Williams does not have a buyer for his water. Midland apparently does not want it, and there is talk of using it for a 'clean coal' power plant that is supposed to be built in the Midland-Odessa area. And Williams' water would need to be blended or purified to be used for drinking water.

So why is Williams is trying to do this if there are no buyers? A friend of mine suggested that 'personalities' are involved here. I'll say.

Ah, Texas groundwater! I was under the impression that after passing the GMA legislation, Texas had its act together with groundwater. Let me make a real stretch here and say that Boone and Claytie may soon be laughing all the way to bank (which they will probably do anyway, win or lose).

And you can thank Wayne Bossert of the NW Kansas Groundwater Management District 4, for 'encouraging' me (unbeknownst to him) for posting this.

“Nobody has stepped up to the plate. Nobody has foreseen this. Nobody is dealing with this directly. There are millions of people downriver from him. Once they know, (they) are going to have more power than he ever imagined.” -- J.J.J. Castro, quoted in the article.

Read from source Here.

Buscan vender el agua del río Bravo; peligra subistencia de millones

2010-04-23T08:56:00.000-05:00

Acuña, Coah.- Ante la grave amenaza que se cierne sobre la cuenca del río Bravo por la pretensión de la empresa Fort Stockton Holdings, el Distrito del Agua Subterránea celebró en esa pequeña comunidad este martes su primera junta pública integrando un bloque de defensa por la intención de lograr se les autorice extraer 15 mil millones de galones anualmente durante 30 años, para comercializar el agua en varias ciudades de Texas.

Fort Stockton Holdings, es propiedad del magnate texano Clayton Williams Jr., político, ganadero, empresario banquero y quien fue candidato a Gobernador de Texas.

Ante la Corte del Distrito Oeste de Texas, con su grupo de abogados, Williams ha interpuesto una demanda afirmando que tiene la autorización para extraer 41 millones diarios de la cuenca compartida del río Bravo y el Pecos, que inicialmente destinaría a uso agrícola pero que ahora busca vender a ciudades como Dallas, Midland, Odessa, Austin y San Antonio.

El activista ambiental delriense Jay Johnson Castro, director ejecutivo del Centro de Estudios Internacional del Río Grande, afirma que se han unido organismos y autoridades en la lucha por evitar que se dé esta aprobación para extraer masivamente agua de la cuenca, lo que afectaría a unos diez millones de habitantes de ciudades fronterizas de cinco estados como son Texas, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León y Tamaulipas.

Estas comunidades, tienen en el Bravo su principal fuente de supervivencia por ser su mayor fuente de abasto del vital líquido.

Este miércoles habría otra junta en Laredo para tratar el caso, afirmando Johnson que este sería un acto discriminatorio en perjuicio de los fronterizos, quizá legal pero no justo, además de que su autorización violaría el Tratado Internacional de Aguas de 1944 entre México y Estados Unidos que prohibe extraer agua con fines privados o de lucro.

Dijo que el potentado Williams busca que se aplique la antigua ley británica que tiene el estado de Texas de “derecho de captura”, donde quien tenga el mayor equipo de bombeo es quien obtiene toda el agua que pueda extraer, siendo 47 mil pies acres por año los que éste está demandando, incluso ya en la Corte, afirmando que su empresa está actuando legalmente, que ha invertido ya más de un millón de dólares y pidiendo, inclusive, que se sancione a las autoridades de Fort Stockton por no darle la autorización.

Fort Stockton es una pequeña comunidad de apenas 7 mil 500 habitantes y de aprobarse esta petición se afectaría a ciudades desde Acuña hasta Matamoros, desde Del Rio hasta Brownsville, afirmándose inclusive que equivaldría a un ecocidio por los graves e irreversibles daños que se causaría además a la flora y a la fauna.

“El agua es ahora el petróleo azul”, dijo Jay Johnson, ejemplificando que hace cinco años el pie de acre de agua se pagaba en apenas 125 dólares pero actualmente este mismo volumen vale cinco mil dólares, de ahí la ambición de esta empresa por buscar este multimillonario negocio, pero a costa de afectar a millones de residentes fronterizos.

Se viene exhortando a legisladores, agencias ambientales de Coahuila y Texas como la EPA, SEMARNAT, CONAGUA, Departamento del Interior y la CILA, en cuya jurisdicción geográfica entran las cuencas compartidas del Pecos y Bravo, a unirse para evitar esta aprobación.

En México organismos señalan que el país “no se puede quedar cruzado de brazos” y se disponen a participar ante esta amenaza.

Johnson citó también que hace unos ocho años a consecuencia de una intensa sequía el Bravo sin extracción alguna no llegó a desembocar al Golfo, por lo que sería catastrófico que esto ocurriera cuando se aprobara la extracción de una cantidad enorme como son 14 billones de galones de agua, con una concesión criminal por treinta años, que es lo que se busca impedir.

Read from source Here.

Nine admitted as parties in Fort Stockton Holdings hearing

2010-04-22T10:52:00.000-05:00

Pioneer Staff Writer

The word for the day is “justiciable.”According to Merriam-Webster, the word means “capable of being decided by legal principles or by a court of justice.”According to the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District Board of Directors, it means you get to be a part of the process of determining whether the production permit for Fort Stockton Holdings is approved.A total of nine parties were found to have a justiciable interest by the MPGCD Board of Directors during a nearly six-hour meeting and hearing Tuesday at the Large Community Hall.“These are people with a real interest,” MPGCD special legal counsel Bill Dugat said, “or could be potentially adversely affected.”Eleven parties were not qualified. They included a number of groundwater districts south and east of Pecos County, as well as the City of Del Rio, the City of Menard, the Brewster County Groundwater Conservation District and Brewster County.
The Rio Grande International Study Center, which recently formed an alliance with the City of Fort Stockton to fight Fort Stockton Holdings' plan to export about 47,000 acre-feet of water per year from 18,000 acres Clayton Williams controls in the Leon-Belding area west of Fort Stockton, was also found to not have a justiciable interest and was not qualified.Dugat, who was retained by the MPGCD board earlier in the meeting, said the parties who were admitted during the hearing had easily-identifiable links to the district. He said the board's focus must be on the MPGCD and the sustainability of desired future conditions for the district, not on issues outside the district's jurisdiction.Those who were granted party status at the meeting will advance to the hearing on the merits, Dugat said. That hearing - which is yet to be determined, according to MPGCD board president Glenn Honaker - will include sworn testimony before the board.

The nine qualified at the hearing were:

>> Fort Stockton Holdings, which has its amended application for a production permit and transport authorization before the board. According to the application, Fort Stockton Holdings plans to withdraw water from 46 existing wells currently permitted for irrigation purposes to market to potential municipal or industrial users in as many as 22 counties.

>> The general manager of the MPGCD, Paul Weatherby.

>> The City of Fort Stockton, which has four wells in the Leon-Belding area.

>> Pecos County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1, which has wells in the Leon-Belding area it uses to supply potable water to about 900 families in Pecos County, according to Harvey Gray, chairman of the PCWCID No. 1 board.

>> Mark Bradley Davis, a Pecos County landowner who has about 3,400 acres about 20 miles away from Leon-Belding, according to his attorney Charles Myers of Midland.

>> Gregg McKenzie, a former Pecos County Commissioner who ranches and owns land in Pecos County. McKenzie also briefly served as an MPGCD director before resigning due to a conflict of interest. McKenzie also said he has a well-lease with Williams that only allows for agricultural withdrawls.

>> Dan Piercy, a Pecos County landowner who owns land adjacent to land controlled by Williams in the Leon-Belding area

>> Tom Beard, a Brewster County rancher, who owns land in a small part of southern Pecos County

>> L.B. Ryan, a Pecos County landowner with property in the area of Leon-Belding. Ryan said he has a lease with Williams similar to McKenzie's.

MPGCD officials stressed early and repeatedly the meeting was not a forum to debate the merits of the application. The nearly-full Large Community Hall at the start of the meeting was only half-full a little more than an hour in, and was nearly empty as the session moved into the afternoon.The meeting and hearing was for process and procedure - the process and procedure of who may formally protest or support Fort Stockton Holdings' application. Some speakers, who comprised potential parties and public commenters, did make their views known, however, and most either came out against or signified they were against the application.Several speakers admitted confusion about the process, specifically regarding the qualifications required to be admitted as a party.

During the regular meeting of the board, it approved the accounts payable, the treasurer's report for March 31 and the line item transfers.The board also discussed possible agenda items for the board's next regularly-scheduled meeting at 1 p.m. May 18, including the restructuring of board offices, the status of a director for Precinct 1, and applications from SandRidge Energy and the City of Iraan.

Read from source Here.

Del Pecos a Nuevo Laredo

2010-04-22T09:32:00.000-05:00

El agua del río Pecos llega hasta el Bravo y es derecho de los fronterizos, de acuerdo al Tratado de 1944 entre EU y México.

NUEVO LAREDO.- El agua del río Pecos, y sus afluentes subterráneos alimentan al río Bravo.

Una empresa privada adquirió derechos sobre extensos territorios y ha solicitado la extracción del agua de esos lugares para transportarla y venderla a entidades públicas y privadas en condados cercanos.

El agua del Bravo ha sido considerada patrimonio de la comunidad fronteriza de EU y México, a raíz del tratado binacional de 1944.

El Estado de Texas ha regulado sus aguas sobre la arcaica “regla de captura”, o “derecho de captura”. Esencialmente, el propietario del mayor bombeo obtiene el agua que se puede extraer.

La petición de una moratoria se solicita para proteger el agua, y realizar estudios de impacto ambiental, si se aprueba la extracción del agua solicitada por la empresa privada.

Read from source Here.

Espera CILA llegue solicitud de apoyo

2010-04-22T09:20:00.000-05:00

Se proyecta extraer agua del río Pecos, uno de los afluentes más importantes de Estados Unidos que llegan al Bravo
NUEVO LAREDO.- La Comisión Internacional de Límites y Aguas (CILA) en Nuevo Laredo están a la espera de que llegue la solicitud de apoyo por parte de las autoridades ambientales, para intervenir en el caso de Fort Stockton en el que se proyecta extraer agua del río Pecos, uno de los afluentes más importantes de Estados Unidos que llegan al río Bravo.

"Vamos a analizar el caso, es muy importante porque es agua dentro de la cuenca del río Bravo. Se tienen que hacer los estudios porque al parecer se está hablando de extraer aguas subterráneas.

Tenemos que ver hasta dónde podemos intervenir porque es en territorio de Estados Unidos y no tenemos un tratado de aguas subterráneas", destacó David Negrete Arroyos, representante de la Cila en Nuevo Laredo.

El último tratado binacional fue acordado en el año de 1944, en que el agua del Bravo fue considerada patrimonio de la humanidad, tratado entre México y Estados Unidos que surgió a raíz de un problema.

Negrete Arroyos, dijo que la situación que se está presentando en el vecino país podría ser punta de lanza para llegar a un tratado binacional de aguas subterráneas y entonces sí poder actuar de forma inmediata.

Sin embargo están a la espera de que llegue el oficio de petición de ayuda por parte de las autoridades ambientales.

Read from source Here.

Río Bravo, en riesgo de desaparecer

2010-04-22T09:13:00.000-05:00

El cauce fronterizo se ubica entre los 10 afluentes con poca vida; buscan frenar extracción de su agua

NUEVO LAREDO.- El río Bravo se ubica entre los 10 afluentes en peligro de desaparecer, debido al agua que se extrae de ellos, según un estudio realizado en el 2007 por el Fondo Mundial de la Vida Silvestre.

Es por ello que las autoridades civiles buscarán detener, o por lo menos pausar el proyecto de extraer agua de los mantos acuíferos del Bravo para uso privado, en una región de Fort Stockton, Texas.

"Son 41 mil galones de agua al día lo que está solicitando por parte de la empresa estadounidense. Imagínate si se saca tanta agua por día, dónde vamos a estar dentro de 10 ó 20 años", destacó Sandra Luz Tejada Vallarta, presidenta del Centro Internacional de Estudios del Río Bravo CIER, AC en Nuevo Laredo.

El CIER AC buscará el apoyo de las autoridades competentes de los tres niveles de gobierno mexicano, como CILA, Conagua, Semarnat, entre otras dependencias, para trabajar en conjunto con el Centro de Estudios Internacionales de Río Grande, hasta obtener los estudios hidrológicos sobre el impacto que generaría al extraer agua del río.

"Todos unidos podemos alzar la voz y poner un poquito de presión. De lo que se dio cuenta el RGISC, es de que se estaba haciendo de forma muy discreta el trámite por parte de la empresa, aunque conforme a la ley; pero somos una asociación pendiente de lo que está sucediendo y que la ciudadanía esté informada de los peligros que está registrando el río Bravo y por ello mismo tenemos que cuidarlo", puntualizó.

El martes habrá una reunión en el Condado de Fort Stockton entre las autoridades y los representantes de la empresa, para considerar la preliminar del proyecto.

Una empresa privada de Fort Stockton tramita la autorización para poder extraer del Bravo, millones de metros cúbicos de agua para uso privado, situación que ha alarmado a las autoridades de dicho condado.

Read fro source Here.

REPORTAJE VENTA DEL RIO PECOS

2010-04-22T09:07:00.000-05:00

Iniciamos el noticiero con el rio bravo el cual ambientalisatas locales dicen esta en peligro. Asi es angel. El millonario empresario texano Clayton Williams ha solicitado la autorizacion del distrito de conservacion de agua del condado de pecos para extraer 45-trillones de galones, de agua del Rio Pecos durante un periodo de 30 años. Williams se dice pagaria por el agua, para luego venderla. Esto a puesto en alerta a autoridades de ambas fronteras, por el impacto que podria tener al rio bravo, porque el rio pecos de donde sacaria el agua se conecta con lo que es la principal fuente de agua de las comunidades fronterizas. Wendolyne Rivera nos amplia la informacion en exclusiva.

Watch Video Here.

Millonario tras agua del Bravo

2010-04-22T08:42:00.000-05:00

Upriver water plan could affect border towns

2010-04-19T09:40:00.000-05:00

By Zach Lindsey
LAREDO MORNING TIMES
Published: Monday, April 19, 2010 1:25 AM CDT

A company’s plan to pump 14 billion gallons a year from the Rio Grande watershed in Pecos County could affect drinking water for dozens of border communities, according to Jay Johnson Castro of the Rio Grande International Study Center.

Rancher Clayton Williams wants to export the water, which runs through property he owns, to an industrial customer in Midland.

But environmental groups fear the impact on the watershed, and Texas State Sen. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio is afraid of the legal precedent that the water exportation would create.

Now, an April 20 hearing with the Pecos County Water District could decide the fate of Williams’ plan.

To many in Ft. Stockton in Pecos County, Clayton “Claytie” Williams, who made a failed run for the governor’s seat in 1990, is a hometown kind of guy.

But his plan has many people worried, and Uresti hasn’t softened on the issue.

“Sen. Uresti fought this plan when it first came up during the legislative session last year, and he will continue to do so,” said Mark Langford, media spokesman for Uresti.

Williams filed an application to export the water, which all sits on land he owns, in April 2008. Initially, the district called his application administratively incomplete.

They since have ruled the application complete.

Currently, Williams uses about that much water irrigating his alfalfa crops, but much of that water may return to the aquifer, meaning the use does not place a burden on the river downstream.

Johnson-Castro said there has been no scientific assessment of the impact that taking that water away from the Rio Grande watershed will have on downstream drinking water.

“Nobody downriver has a clue,” Johnson-Castro said.

The amount of water Williams plans to pump out equals about 41 million gallons a day, which is more than half the amount that Laredo’s 65 million gallon plant typically produces.

Although the impact will be spread out along the Pecos River and the Rio Grande, Johnson-Castro worried about the combined impact of a serious drought and the increased drain on the river’s sources.

In 2001, a drought drained so much river water that the river didn’t make it all the way to the ocean, but, instead, dried up around 20 to 30 miles from its confluence with the ocean.

With no long-term scientific research on the effects of pumping so much water from the river, Johnson-Castro worries the combination of pumping and a drought could cause even more profound problems, especially for Brownsville.

“We want to go all the way to the top,” Johnson-Castro said. He plans to talk to representatives of the International Boundaries and Water Commission, as well as Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency.

He was not too concerned with local agencies at this point.

Until a thorough scientific study is mandated by federal agencies, Johnson-Castro is uncomfortable with Williams’ plan.

Johnson-Castro also worried about the possible “domino” effect that success for Williams would create.

“If he succeeds, it’s going to be the first domino (of) robbing from the natural flow of the Rio Grande,” Johnson-Castro said.

The Williams family actually has a history with water-related legalese.

In the 1950s, Clayton Williams’ father was involved in a lawsuit because over-pumping on his part caused the springs that lead to the Pecos River to dry up.

That court case, which Williams won, defined the rule of capture, a law that Williams Jr. is evoking in this instance.

A hearing examiner out of Austin will preside at the April 20 meeting at the Large Community Hall in Ft. Stockton.

The hearing examiner will hear public comment and determine the next step for Williams.

(Zach Lindsey may be reached at 728-2538 or zach@lmtonline.com)

Council finds another ally in water fight

2010-04-19T09:19:00.000-05:00

The Fort Stockton City Council is looking for allies in its battle against Fort Stockton Holdings.

They found another one recently when the board of the Rio Grande International Study Center in Laredo voted unanimously to support efforts to protect Pecos County groundwater as part of a larger campaign to protect the Pecos River watershed.
Tuesday night, the Council reciprocated, passing Resolution 10-111R, which commits the City of Fort Stockton to joining forces with RGISC in its campaign for a moratorium on the transport of water from the Pecos and Rio Grande watersheds.

The resolution also asks, in concert with RGISC, for a hydrological study of the groundwater flows of the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer to determine impacts.

“It's being said that water is being wasted and going down into the Pecos River,” Fort Stockton Mayor Ruben Falcon said. “Well, south-southeast of us, there are millions of people that rely on that water from the Pecos River and the Rio Grande. There is a beneficial use for this water.”

The Council's action follows a presentation by Jay Johnson-Castro Sr. of RGISC at Council two weeks prior. Johnson-Castro proposed the city join RGISC in the building of an alliance to protect the entire Rio Grande watershed, which extends into several Mexican states and as far north as Colorado.

RGISC, which is a nonprofit organization headquartered at Laredo Community College, and the city plan to jointly write the International Boundary and Water Commission, the Texas Water Development Board, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Comision Internacional de los Limites y Agua.

The city and RGISC also plan to contact several congressmen whose districts lie on the U.S.-Mexico border, including U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D-Texas), who represents the 23rd District.

The alliance also hopes to gather input from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Division, the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife, among other agencies and organizations.

Among other business, the Council:

>> approved the consent agenda, including the accounts payable of $384,046.44

>> approved Ordinance 10-102, which allows for the inclusion of a portion of Beverly Square Addition to the city

>> approved Ordinance 10-103, which closes, vacates and abandons a portion of East 13th Street between Gatlin and Schlegal streets

>> tabled Ordinance 10-104, which would amend Chapter 2 of the city's Code or Ordinances to change the time of Council meetings; Councilwoman Brenda Tipton, who was absent from the meeting, is seeking to move Council meetings to an earlier time, according to Falcon; several councilmembers said such a time change may be problematic and Councilman Billy Espino said he would like additional time to reflect on moving Council meetings to an earlier time

>> received a presentation from Charlie Spence, a recruiting specialist out of Midland for the U.S. Census Bureau; Spence said the Census Bureau is looking to hire about 150 people in Pecos County for the decennial census; Spence said the jobs are expected to begin in April and will pay $13.25 per hour and offer 50 cents per mile for mileage reimbursement; employees must be 18 years old and must be U.S. citizens

View from Source Here.

Peligra el río Bravo por explotación de mantos acuíferos

2010-04-19T09:15:00.000-05:00

Millones de metros cúbicos de aguas que alimentan al río Bravo provenientes del Pecos serán extraídas, transportadas y puesta a la venta, si es aprobada la solicitud de una empresa privada, en el condado texano de Pecos
NUEVO LAREDO.- En un oficio, del que El Mañana tiene copia, el Centro de Estudios Internacionales del Río Grande solicita al Congreso de EU que intervenga y se declare una moratoria urgentemente, para evitar que proceda esta autorización.

Aunque autoridades de la ciudad de Fort Stockton se oponen, poco puede hacer pues es una ley estatal la que permite que una empresa explote mantos acuíferos y no hay restricción para que el agua sacada sea puesta a la venta en otros condados.

El próximo martes 20 de abril se realizará una audiencia pública en esa ciudad.

Los organismos ambientales temen que si se autoriza la extracción y traslado de los mantos acuíferos sentaría un precedente y permitiría que cualquier entidad pueda extraer, transportar y comercializar el agua del Bravo sin importar el impacto que pueda causar a la población fronteriza que depende del agua de este afluente.

“Desde hace más de un siglo, el Estado de Texas ha regulado sus aguas sobre la arcaica “regla de captura”, o “derecho de captura”.

Esencialmente, el propietario del mayor bombeo obtiene el agua que se puede extraer. A partir de esta “regla”, una solicitud ha sido hecha por un particular para extraer 47 mil pies de acre por año de la cuenca del Río Grande- Río Bravo, explica Jay Johnson, director ejecutivo del Centro de Estudios Internacionales del Río Grande (RGISC por sus siglas en inglés).

Si se autoriza la extracción, significa que podrán sacar el equivalente a 57 millones 973 mil metros cúbicos de agua. Esto es el equivalente a vaciar 20 veces el agua del Laguito de Nuevo Laredo en un año aproximadamente.

En la misiva enviada al congresista estadounidense Henry Cuéllar, le exponen el riesgo potencial que representa y solicitan interceda para que se apruebe una moratoria que proteja el agua, hasta que se realicen estudios sobre el impacto que tendría aprobar a la empresa privada a extraer el agua.

“Le escribimos como nuestro representantes del Congreso, con un llamado urgente para su ayuda en la obtención de una moratoria (contra) la explotación propuesta por una (compañía) privada de las aguas de la cuenca del río Grande”, escribe Johnson.

“Nunca antes una cantidad masiva de agua se ha extraído y transferido fuera de la cuenca y los límites de la CILA. Este es un caso que sienta un precedente.

¿Cómo impacta el espíritu y el propósito del Tratado de 1944?”, enfatiza.

Los representantes de la ciudad de Fort Stockton, una pequeña comunidad con 7 mil habitantes, han sido presionados para que aprueben la solicitud, revela Johnson, debido a que la ley lo permite.

Sin embargo, han unido esfuerzos con el Centro de Estudios Internacionales del Río Grande para pedir ante autoridades federales se proteja el agua, hasta que se realicen estudios ambientales sobre el impacto que tendría esta extracción.

“Juntos, el Consejo Municipal de la Ciudad de Fort Stockton y el RGISC pedimos intervenir y prevenir, este peligroso precedente hidrológico.

Si este permiso es autorizado, otros lo seguirán. El desvío de aguas del Río Grande-Río Bravo –que da vida a 10 millones de habitantes dentro de los límites CILA- sería para desviar el agua lejos de la región de mayor crecimiento en nuestros dos países que depende de este río.

Esta acción se realiza con fines de lucro para una entidad.… Tal acción pondría en peligro el crecimiento a lo largo de la frontera”, expresa Johnson.

Read from source Here.

Cuellar Expresses Concern over Pecos Water Extraction Bid

2010-04-19T09:07:00.000-05:00

McALLEN, April 17 - U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar says the proposed extraction of 41 million gallons per day of groundwater from the Pecos River watershed is a matter of “the utmost concern.”

The Laredo Democrat made his views on the issue known in a letter his office sent to the Laredo-based Rio Grande International Study Center (RGISC), elaborating further that his staff has contacted Gov. Rick Perry and the International Boundary and Water Commission.

Cuellar’s response followed a call by RGISC Executive Director Jay Johnson Castro for a moratorium on the removal of water from the aquifer until geological studies and environmental impact studies have been conducted.

At stake is the extraction for private sale of 41 million gallons of water per day from the underground springs that feed the Pecos River, a tributary that provides the Rio Grande River with approximately 80 million gallons of water per day.

According to Johnson-Castro, former Republican gubernatorial candidate, developer and rancher Clayton Williams wants to pipe the water to the Midland-Odessa region. Williams, Johnson-Castro said, has applied for a permit to extract 41 million gallons of water a day, or about 15 billion gallons of water per year, for 30 plus years, out of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed.

If approved, the permit would allow 45 trillion gallons of water to be taken out to the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed as a result of this one application alone, Johnson-Castro said. The application is from Williams' Fort Stockton Holdings to the Middle Pecos County Groundwater Conservation District,” Johnson-Castro explained.

Extracted water would then be sold to developers in the Midland-Odessa area and transported by aqueducts to that area. Johnson Castro is fearful that this extraction would be one of several more to come that would threaten the ecology of the Rio Grande and the very existence of the cities and communities down river from the confluence of the Pecos and Rio Grande/Bravo rivers, a growing area with over ten million inhabitants on either side of the U.S.-Mexico border.

Major metropolitan areas that could be affected by the loss of water from the aquifer would be Laredo-Nuevo Laredo, Roma-Miguel Aleman, Rio Grande-Camargo, and both sides of the Border in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.

“For over a century, the State of Texas has regulated its waters based on the archaic ‘rule of capture,’ or ‘right of capture.’ Essentially, the biggest pump and pumper owns the water that can be extracted,” Johnson Castro wrote, in his letter to Cuellar.

“As an advocate for the protection of the Rio Grande, Congressman Cuellar takes these matters seriously. Staff also contacted the International Boundary and Water Commission regarding this specific proposal and today Congressman Cuellar’s staff called the office of Governor Perry to learn more about this issue,” reads a communiqué from the Congressman’s office to the Guardian.

The preliminary hearing for the permit application will be held this coming Tuesday, April 20, in Fort Stockton. The final decision will be rendered on May 18. Attempts to reach Clayton Williams or his company for comment were unsuccessful at press time.

Read from source Here.

Controlling Giant River Cane to Economic Advantage

2010-04-15T15:11:00.000-05:00

Jim Earhart, Ph.D.

Director of the Rio Grande International Study Center Cane Control Project

Unfortunately for the vegetation and wildlife of the riparian habitat along the Rio Grande this American heritage river was made part of the border between the United States and Mexico. The historic economic disparity between the two countries, coupled with the recent “war on terrorism,” has created a “war” on water quality and habitat for native plants and animals along the river.

The United States Department of Homeland Security is spending large quantities of tax dollars to stop the flow of illegal traffic across the border. This expenditure includes a proposal to eradicate giant river cane (Arundo donax, A. donax) by mechanical removal with heavy equipment and by aerial application of a broad spectrum herbicide by helicopter.

We agree that this invasive plant provides concealment for illegal activity, replaces indigenous plants that provide habitat for native species, and uses large quantities of water that could be used by farms and cities, but we believe the means suggested by the federal government will be highly detrimental to the ecology of the Rio Grande.

River cane has replaced willow and other riparian trees that serve as sources of food and nesting for important bird species. Small U. S. populations of Groove-billed Ani, Altamira Oriole, Elf Owl, Ferruginous Pygmy Owl, Brown Jay, Gray Hawk, Chachalaca, Ringed Kingfisher, Hook-billed Kite, and White-tipped Dove are confined to a relatively small area in South Texas, mostly along the river. Increasing acreage of A. donax will be detrimental to these species. Cane should be controlled, but aerial spraying, the method of choice by Homeland Security, will kill native vegetation that serves as habitat for native species.

Giant river cane was introduced into the Americas by the early Spanish settlers who used it to construct crude housing, weave baskets and mats, make musical instruments, and, very likely, to feed livestock. Because of its prolific growth in warm, moist environments that lack natural enemies, A. donax has been far more successful in America than in its native Mediterranean region. Dense stands of the cane extend for hundreds of miles along the Rio Grande.

The Rio Grande International Study Center, in conjunction with Laredo Community College (LCC), is investigating the potential use of this invasive species of giant grass as food for livestock. Most local ranchers along the U. S. river bank do not graze livestock on the cane for fear of theft or for fever tick infestation or because they believe animals will not eat the cane.

Our work was stimulated by reports that goats have been used with some success in controlling cane growth in California. Furthermore, we have seen horses, goats, cattle, and donkeys drinking from the river in Mexico across from the LCC Campus and concomitantly we have observed very little cane growing on the Mexican river bank. Rather than cane the Mexican bank is lined with large trees that shade the flowing water.

These observations prompted two of our members, Tom Miller, Director of the Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center and Dr. Tom Vaughan, Texas A&M International University Biology Professor to compare U. S. and Mexican cane growth by canoeing a 90 mile stretch of the river between Laredo and Eagle Pass.

They estimated cane cover on the U. S. river bank to be between 95 and 98 percent compared to three to five percent cane cover on the Mexican side of the river. During their three nights on the river they could find no place to camp on the U. S. side because of the dense cane and were forced to camp either in Mexico or on islands in the river. They reported no mammals on the U. S. river bank, either domestic or wild.

From our trials during the past two years we know that ram sheep, Spanish goats, Boer goats, and donkeys feed enthusiastically on A. donax. Poncho, one of our two donkeys, is thriving after almost two years of browsing and grazing primarily on river cane.

In our goat herd we now have one Billy, four nannies and three kids. Most of these goats have been feeding on the cane for about five months and appear healthy. Two of the nannies kidded while feeding on the cane and have produced vigorous kids.

Feral dog problems have prevented us from having more long term data on sheep and goats. We have taken steps to prevent predator problems by building more secure fencing, setting dog traps, and increasing surveillance by our volunteers and by U. S. Border Patrol Agents who have been very accommodating in helping us with the experiment.

We are working to answer other questions. For example what is the live stock carrying capacity of an acre of cane during different seasons of the year? In recent winter months the cane growth rate was low and two donkeys and five goats decimated one acre of cane in a few weeks. The animals had to be fed supplemental hay until they could be transferred to a new stand of cane. Now, April 6, 2010 seven goats and two donkeys are having difficulty in keeping up with the cane growth on the same acre.

There are numerous other questions to be answered. At what stage of development is the cane more attractive and palatable to the animals? What, if any, supplemental nutrients will be required for long term feeding with cane? How will the cane be replaced with native species?

Our work suggests one way in which cane may be controlled to economic advantage rather than spending large sums of taxpayer money and employing environmentally damaging techniques to control this invasive species.

We wish to honor Susan Porter Smith, environmental visionary, science research editor, and artist who founded Save the Laja, Inc., and to thank the organization she established for its financial support of the Rio Grande International Study Center’s river cane project to safely and effectively improve habitat along the Rio Grande by less environmentally threatening means.

Also, special thanks to Laredo Community College Intern Nelly Hays who enthusiastically expended much hard work to help make this project a reality.

Furthermore, thanks to Penny Warren, RGISC Board Member and expert birder, for her input on the writing of this paper.

An Urgent Call for Help

2010-04-14T09:09:00.000-05:00

On the Mexico side of the international boundary, the Rio Grande has historically been called the Rio Bravo. In this appeal, we refer to this 1885-mile long international river as the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo.

The watershed of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo covers eight states in our two countries. In the United States, that would include Colorado, New Mexico,and Texas. In Mexico the watershed includes Durango, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas.

For their agricultural, industrial, commercial,and residential existence, millions of US citizens and millions of Mexican citizens have historically relied on the natural hydrological flows of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo and its tributaries, from its headwaters in the Colorado Rockies all the way to its mouth as it flows into the Gulf of Mexico.

Due to drought, just a few years ago, the waters of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo dried up before it could reach the Gulf.

In this era of global climate change, the likelihood of more drought seems imminent. In this past year Texas just came out of a period of the worst drought on record. Yet, new threats are looming on the horizon for the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo, especially on the Texas-Mexico portion of the river.

The Mexico side of the border is the fastest growing region in Mexico. Similarly, the Texas side of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo is the fastest growing region in the United States. Such growth will continue to put a lot of added pressure on the waters of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo, both in the terms of consumption as well as contamination.

As it is, according to American Rivers, the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo is one of the most endangered rivers in North America. According the World Wildlife Fund, the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo is the seventh most endangered river in the world.

The newest endangerment to the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo is upon us. This threat is somewhat stealth, as it is under the radar of most state, federal and international agencies and organizations. For over a century, the State of Texas has regulated its waters based on the archaic “rule of capture,” or “right of capture.” Essentially, the biggest pump and pumper owns the water that can be extracted.

Based on this “rule”, an application has been made by a private party to extract 47,000 acre feet per year out of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed. An acre foot is equal to roughly 326,000 gallons of water.

The application is from Clayton Williams, Jr.’s Fort Stockton Holdings to the Middle Pecos County Groundwater Conservation District (MPGCD). The application proposes to extract 41,000,000 gallons of water a day, or about 15,000,000,000 gallons of water per year--for 30 plus years--out of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed.

If approved, the permit would allow 45,000,000,000,000 gallons of water to be taken out to the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed as a result of this one application alone. Others will follow. The preliminary hearing will be held this coming Tuesday, April 20, 2010, in Fort Stockton. The final decision will be rendered on May 18, 2010.

With all this in mind, the Rio Grande International Study Center (RGISC), a non-profit organization based at the Laredo Community College on the banks of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo, along with our sister organization in Mexico, el Centro Internacional del los Estudios del Rio Bravo (CIER), has allied with the City of Fort Stockton.

We are also allying with not only the citizens of Pecos County but also the millions of citizens of the international community who reside within and depend upon the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo for their existence. On their behalf, we are appealing to US Congressmen to help us prevent such an unprecedented action that would be taken without adequate science.

We request that Congressmen please utilize your office and position of authority to call for a moratorium on any extraction of waters from the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed. Approval of such extraction of billions of gallons of water a year should NOT be granted.

There is a need for time, time for an adequate hydrological study to be performed that would reveal what impact such a diversion away from the international watershed would have. Our concern is that there is insufficient science that would show the impact on the natural hydrological cycle of the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed, on which millions of bi-national citizens downriver depend.

Under the 1944 Treaty with Mexico, the waters of Fort Stockton and Pecos County, Texas, are within the geographical boundaries of the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC). Never before has a massive amount of water been extracted and transferred out of the watershed and IBWC boundaries. This is a precedent-setting case. How would this impact the spirit and intent of the 1944 treaty?

The City of Fort Stockton is a small community of some 7,500 population. The total population of Pecos County is about 20,000. Alone, they are hard-pressed to handle the magnitude of this challenge. The residents there already have a historic natural spring, Comanche Springs, that is dried up most of the year due to high impact pumping of the aquifer for irrigation by the same businessman who now wishes to export water out of the watershed to Midland, Texas, for profit.

Find below a resolution drafted by the City Council of the City of Fort Stockton. Together , the City Council and RGISC appeal to you to intervene and prevent, this dangerous hydrological precedent. If this permit is allowed, others will follow. Diverting Rio Grande-Rio Bravo waters away from almost ten million inhabitants within the IBWC boundaries would be to divert water away from the fastest growing region in our two countries that already depends on this river.

This action is being done for one entity’s profit. It is also being done so that other areas outside the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed region could experience economic growth. That such an action would jeopardize the growth along the border seems discriminatory against those who live on the US-Mexico border.

We are also writing the IBWC, the Council on Environmental Quality-Office of the Whitehouse, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, US Fish and Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Texas Water Development Board, and Texas Parks and Wildlife.

We are writing all the members of Congress who have border districts. We are writing the Governor of theState of Texas as well as all the members of our Texas Legislature that represent the border.

In Mexico, we are writing the Comision Internacional de los Limites y Agua, Comision Nacional del Agua, Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturals, and the governors of the five states within the Rio Grande-Rio Bravo watershed.

Editor's Note: Article adapted from letter to Congressman Cuellar from Jay J. Johnson-Castro, Sr., Executive Director of the Rio Grande International Study Center--gm

RESOLUTION NO. 1O-111R

A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT STOCKTON JOINING FORCES WITH THE RIO GRANDE INTERNATIONAL STUDY CENTER IN ITS PLEA FOR A MORATORIUM & INTERVENTION TO PREVENT WATER FROM BEING TRANSPORTED, EXPORTED OR PUMPED FROM THE PECOS RIVER AND RIO GRANDE RIVER WATERSHEDS & REQUESTING THAT A HYDROLOGICAL STUDY BE PERFORMED OF THE SUBTERRANEAN WATER FLOWS OF THE EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER TO DETERMINE WHAT UNFORESEEN ADVERSE IMPACTS COULD OCCUR ON THE FLOW OF WATER INTO THE INTERNATIONAL BODY WATER OF WHICH MILLIONS OF INHABITANTS IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY DEPEND ON FOR EXISTENCE.

WHEREAS, The Pecos River is an integral part of the Rio Grande watershed, which is an international body of water under the 1944 treaty between the United States and Mexico; and

WHEREAS, Downriver from the mouth of the Pecos River in confluence with the Rio Grande is an international community of some 6-10 million inhabitants that solely rely on the Rio Grande as a source of existence; residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural usage; and

WHEREAS, Pecos County is confronted with an enterprise that is attempting to extract approximately 15 billion gallons of water per year from the Pecos watershed under the Texas "rule of capture"; and

WHEREAS, If successful, that would become a precedent for other water marketing enterprises; and

WHEREAS, The Rio Grande International Study Center is a non-profit organization with the stewardship of protecting the Rio Grande watershed; and

WHEREAS, The board of directors of the RGISC has voted unanimously to support Fort Stockton in attempting to protect the Pecos River watershed; and

WHEREAS, RGISC and the City of Fort Stockton will jointly submit correspondence to the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), Environmental Protection Agency, Comision Internacional de los Lirnites y Agua (CILA), CONAGUA (Comision Nacional del Agua), SEMARNAT (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturals), Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), along with the four Congressional representatives from Texas bordering Mexico; Congressman Silvestre Reyes (Dist. 16), Congressman Ciro Rodriguez (Dist. 23), Congressman Henry Cuellar (Dist. 28) and Congressman Solomon Ortiz (Dist. 27); and

WHEREAS, A request will be sought for a moratorium and an intervention regarding plans to transfer, export or pump water out of, along with the protection of, the Pecos River and Rio Grande River watersheds until additional hydrological studies of the subterranean water flows of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer can be made to determine what unforeseen adverse impacts could occur on the flow of water into the international body water of which millions of inhabitants in the international community depend on for existence; and

WHEREAS, Input will also be solicited from the Texas Parks and Wildlife, National Parks Service, US Fish and Wildlife, as well as other local, state, national and international organizations and agencies; and

WHEREAS, A joint press conference will be held to inform the media about our request for intervention; and

- - NOW THEREFFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE FORT STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL, THAT IT HEREBY ENDORSES: JOINING FORCES WITH THE RIO GRANDE INTERNATIONAL STUDY CENTER IN ITS PLEA FOR A MORATORIUM & INTERVENTION TO PREVENT WATER FROM BEING TRANSPORTED, EXPORTED OR PUMPED FROM THE PECOS RIVER AND RIO GRANDE RIVER WATERSHEDS & REQUESTING THAT A HYDROLOGICAL STUDY BE PERFORMED OF THE SUBTERRANEAN WATER FLOWS OF THE EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER TO DETERMINE WHAT UNFORESEEN ADVERSE IMPACTS COULD OCCUR ON THE FLOW OF WATER INTO THE INTKRNATIONAL BODY WATER OF WIllCR MILLIONS OF INHAB1.TA.""I!TS IN THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY DEPEND ON FOR EXISTENCE.

PASSED AND APPRGYED by the Fort Stockton City Council on this 23rd day of February, 2010.

Controlling Giant River Cane to Economic Advantage

2010-04-08T08:49:00.000-05:00

By
Jim Earhart, Ph.D.
Director of the Rio Grande International Study Center Cane Control Project

Unfortunately for the vegetation and wildlife of the riparian habitat along the Rio Grande this American heritage river was made part of the border between the United States and Mexico. The historic economic disparity between the two countries, coupled with the recent “war on terrorism,” has created a “war” on water quality and habitat for native plants and animals along the river.

The United States Department of Homeland Security is spending large quantities of tax dollars to stop the flow of illegal traffic across the border. This expenditure includes a proposal to eradicate giant river cane (Arundo donax, A. donax) by mechanical removal with heavy equipment and by aerial application of a broad spectrum herbicide by helicopter.
We agree that this invasive plant provides concealment for illegal activity, replaces indigenous plants that provide habitat for native species, and uses large quantities of water that could be used by farms and cities, but we believe the means suggested by the federal government will be highly detrimental to the ecology of the Rio Grande.

River cane has replaced willow and other riparian trees that serve as sources of food and nesting for important bird species. Small U. S. populations of Groove-billed Ani, Altamira Oriole, Elf Owl, Ferruginous Pygmy Owl, Brown Jay, Gray Hawk, Chachalaca, Ringed Kingfisher, Hook-billed Kite, and White-tipped Dove are confined to a relatively small area in South Texas, mostly along the river. Increasing acreage of A. donax will be detrimental to these species. Cane should be controlled, but aerial spraying, the method of choice by Homeland Security, will kill native vegetation that serves as habitat for native species.

Giant river cane was introduced into the Americas by the early Spanish settlers who used it to construct crude housing, weave baskets and mats, make musical instruments, and, very likely, to feed livestock. Because of its prolific growth in warm, moist environments that lack natural enemies, A. donax has been far more successful in America than in its native Mediterranean region. Dense stands of the cane extend for hundreds of miles along the Rio Grande.

The Rio Grande International Study Center, in conjunction with Laredo Community College (LCC), is investigating the potential use of this invasive species of giant grass as food for livestock. Most local ranchers along the U. S. river bank do not graze livestock on the cane for fear of theft or for fever tick infestation or because they believe animals will not eat the cane.

Our work was stimulated by reports that goats have been used with some success in controlling cane growth in California. Furthermore, we have seen horses, goats, cattle, and donkeys drinking from the river in Mexico across from the LCC Campus and concomitantly we have observed very little cane growing on the Mexican river bank. Rather than cane the Mexican bank is lined with large trees that shade the flowing water.

These observations prompted two of our members, Tom Miller, Director of the Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center and Dr. Tom Vaughan, Texas A&M .

Building a Rio Grande~Rio Bravo portal...

2010-02-18T15:39:00.000-06:00

Greetings to all…

Whether you are located in the Rio Grande~Rio Bravo watershed… or are dedicated to some part of it.

The Rio Grande International Study Center…and our counterpart in Mexico…el Centro Internacional de los Estudios del Rio Bravo…are going to be making contact with your organization within the next month.

In early 2009, RGISC-CIER undertook the project of building a web portal of everything Rio Grande~Rio Bravo. As a bi-national environmental non-profit organization, it is our mission: To preserve, protect and foster respect for the Rio Grande~Rio Bravo, its watershed, environment and cultures, through research, education and bi-national stewardship and alliances with individuals agencies and organizations.

So, the goal of this communiqué is to continue to build our awareness of, ally with, and build an eight state bi-national stewardship with any and all individuals, entities, organizations, institutions and agencies that care about the Rio Grande~Rio Bravo, from the headwaters in San Juan Valley of the Colorado Rockies, along with the many tributaries on both sides of the Rio…all the way to the mouth at the Gulf…at Boca Chica and Baghdad. This of course includes all the tributaries and their respective watersheds, such as Rio Conchos with headwaters in the Mexican states of Durango and Chihuahua and the Pecos River with its headwaters in New Mexico.

So far, we have identified some 500 entities such as yours. Some 350 on the US side and 150 on the Mexican side. We contacted you once last year and we already have you on our Rio Grande~Rio Bravo watershed Google Map at www.rgisc.org.

Beginning this next week, someone from our staff will be calling you to verify your contact information. We would just like to make sure it is correct and current. We are also aspiring to build additional watershed-wide data bases of information and share regional research, news, photographs, maps, concerns and challenges. We are also open to suggestions on how to build a better network and web presence that serves the needs of each region of the watershed.

Also, for 15 years, RGISC and CIER have maintained a bi-national celebration of the Rio Grande~Rio Bravo during the third week of October, culminating in Dia del Rio on the third Saturday. At one time, Dia del Rio was celebrated up and down the watershed. We hope that you will join us for the 16th anniversary celebration…this year in 2010 in reviving this watershed wide celebration.

Please feel free to contact us at any time…and help us build and galvanize an alliance to protect our watershed and the waters that allow us to exist here.

Together we can give voice to the waters of the Rio Grande~Rio Bravo…

Jay J. Johnson-Castro Sr.

Water Symposium Schedule

2010-02-09T13:53:00.000-06:00

ANTHROPOLOGY & WATER: Spa Cultures, Dreaming & Healing Waters – Dr. Jonathan DeVierville, St. Philips College.
Our ancient ancestors knew Dreams as mirrors and windows of their Souls. Sumerians, Egyptians, Chinese, Greeks, Persians, Celts, Romans as well as indigenous Peoples around the Planet frequented thermal-mineral springs, wells and pools for re-creation, dreaming and healing. Designed for rest, sleep and relaxation, these naturally watered sacred sites helped encourage, facilitate and integrate creative wellness and regenerative deep dreaming. Participants will be introduced to this ancient healing legacy.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 9:00 am)

ARCHITECTURE & WATER: Architecture & Water: A Critical Balance into the Future! – Gabriel Durand-Hollis, FAIA, Principal with DHR Architects and Adrianna Swindle owner of ASA, Accessibility Specialist.
The two presenters offer different perspectives on how water has impacted the formation of cities, both in a historical sense and in the context of modern architecture. Important attention is given to new developments in water conservation, storage and recycling in current architectural practice and exciting research forecast what is in our future. Obviously architecture deals with water in its various states. When we are building spaces there must strike a balance between too much water and too little water.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 1:00 pm)

ART & WATER II: An Exhibit & Experiment – Liz Ward, Trinity University along with students.
(Ongoing throughout the Symposium.)

ART & WATER III: Ebru - A Turkish Form of Painting on Water
Ebru is a process of dripping dyes upon water, shaping the colors in every which way with various tools and finally, transferring the final composition to paper that is laid over the water. Upon contact the dyes cleave to the paper, leaving the water blank as in the beginning, thus, each print is one-of-a-kind. This on-going expression of art will continue throughout the WATER Symposium and is available for participation by all those in attendance. (Ongoing throughout the Symposium.)

ART & WATER IV: Water as an Inspiration in Contemporary Art – David S. Rubin, The Brown Foundation Curator of Contemporary Art, San Antonio Museum of Art.
A visual exploration of the ways in which contemporary artists have used water as an image, often for symbolic or metaphoric purposes, in a variety of mediums including painting, drawing, sculpture, photography, video, and digital media. The presentation will include works by San Antonio artists recently featured in the San Antonio Museum of Art exhibition, Waterflow. (Monday, February 15 at 1:00 PM.)

CIVICS & WATER: Who Controls Your Water – Sally Bolster, League of Women Voters, along with Mr. Robert R. Puente (President/CEO, SAWS); Suzanne B. Scott (San Antonio River Authority General Manager); Velma Reyes Danielson (Edwards Aquifer Authority General Manager); Brad Groves (Trinity-Glen Rose Water Conservation District President of the Board); Kerry McCollough (District Planner for BexarMet). Panel discussion.
(Monday, 15 February at 7:00 pm)

CIVIL ENGINEERING & WATER: From Rain to Drain – Lynne Christopher & Greg Wukasch, San Antonio Water System.
Ever wondered where your water comes from when you turn on the tap or where it goes when you’re finished with it? Find out about the workings of a water system. Learn how your water gets to you and where it goes after the flush. How is wastewater “recycled” and what happens to the bi-products of the process? Experience first hand some of the challenges that SAWS faces daily from main breaks to the GREASE MONSTER!
(Monday, February 15 at 9:00 a.m.)

COSMOLOGY & WATER: The Deep History of Water - Sr. Linda Gibler, OP, PhD
The story of water from the Beginning, 13.7 billion years ago to now, including how hydrogen was formed in the first milliseconds of creation, to how long it took for oxygen to form in stars, to their combination as water in space and water’s subsequent role in star birth, including our Sun. (When we look at Orion, we are looking at millions of oceans of water.) I could say something about how water drenches our Solar System and how we come to have so much of it on Earth. I could end with the role water played in the first life on Earth and all life ever since. Linda Gibler, OP, is the Associate Academic Dean at the Oblate School of Theology in San Antonio and the science editor of the Collins Foundation Press. Overwhelmed by the first Hubble deep field picture, Linda, a Dominican Sister of Houston, became enchanted with the magnificence of the universe and intrigued by the images’ significance for a Catholic understanding of God. In 1999, she began formal study of cosmology at the California Institute of Integral Studies, where she completed a MA and then a PhD in Philosophy and Religion with an emphasis in Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness
(Monday, February 15 at 9:00 a.m.).

CREATIVITY & WATER: Flowing from Expression to Empowered Action - Dianne Monroe
This highly experiential workshop combines two fields new to San Antonio. Expressive Art is a way of opening our creativity to explore our inner worlds. The Work that Reconnects (developed by internationally acclaimed systems theorist and environmental scholar Joanna Macy – www.JoannaMacy.net) is a form of group work that reconnects people with our planet and one another in a way that strengthens their ability to act on behalf of meaningful change. This workshop combines elements of both to offer participants the opportunity to explore their personal connections with water in a way that enlivens and enriches their sense of passion and purpose. Dianne Monroe is a writer, photographer and Expressive Arts Facilitator who offers a range of experiential and transformational-learning based workshops. Her workshops flow from the power of creativity and are rooted in our connection with the natural world and its wisdom. Dianne has studied with Joanna Macy and now brings her internationally recognized approach to South Texas.
(Monday, February 15 at 1:00 PM.)

ECOLOGY & WATER: Conservation From Rain Catchment to Gray Water – Elise Garcia & Carol Coston, Santuario SisterFarm.
Santuario Sisterfarm is a nonprofit organization founded in 2002 by Latina women and Dominican Sisters and co-directed by Adrian Dominican Sisters Carol Coston, OP and Elise D. García, OP. Located in the Hill Country of south-central Texas and rooted in the rich multicultural legacy of the Borderlands, Santuario Sisterfarm is dedicated to inspiriting the work of transforming human relationships with Earth and among ourselves, from dominance to co-creative partnerships.
(Monday, February 15 at 11:00 a.m.)

ECONOMICS & WATER: A Local Perspective – Carol Patterson, Director of the Edwards Aquifer Authority (District 1), and Kirk Patterson, attorney & EARIP Steering Committee member.
The San Antonio/Edwards Aquifer Region is facing critical choices on how to meet future water supply and springflow needs. Achieving an efficient, affordable, and fair balance of these goals requires looking at alternative solutions. We will cover the major plans and proposals of the region, including SAWS, the EARIP, and the Region L part of the Texas Water Plan.
(Monday, February 15 at 5:00 p.m.)

ELECTRICITY & WATER: Playing for Keeps – Dr. Lauren Ross, Director of the Glenrose Project.
Every person on the planet is part of a global bet on water and electrical infrastructure and the stakes are high. Yet, in the midst of growing awareness around climate change and water shortages, as a culture we are largely ignorant of the intersection of these challenges. Workshop participants will compete for cupcakes in a fast-paced, educational, and winner-take-all game to meet global energy and water needs without bankrupting natural resources.
(Monday, February 15 at 7:00 pm)

ENERGY & WATER: New Ways of Deriving Energy from Water- Panel Discussion: Dr. Kyle Murray, UTSA, along with Janet Abbott Spa Waters of the Americas 501c3. Alyssa Burgin moderating.
Texas has a long history as an energy provider through agriculture and oil. During the oil exploration era, hot mineralized waters were found and many of these resources became health destinations and famous for thier healing waters. With current interest in geothermal - heat from the earth- as considered the best renewable energy resource, we will discuss how geothermal mineral waters are becoming a geothermal direct use consideration for wellness facilities, greenhouses, aqua culture to name a few. We will also discuss the geology of Texas heated earth, aquifers and water chemistry.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 1:00 p.m.)

FASHION DESIGN & WATER:WATER FALLS FASHION SHOW
CoCo and ReyBey Productions present The Water Falls Fashion Show. In this exhibit you will see high school designers from all over San Antonio showcase their talent - inspired by water.
(Sunday, February 14 at 5:30 pm.)

GEOPOLITICS & WATER: Trickle Down from Source to Ocean - Headwaters Coalition
Every river has a source, and all rivers flow through many natural and human communities, to the ocean that connects us all. Using the San Antonio River as an example, session leaders will explain the "anatomy" and "biology" of rivers, especially how a river begins at its headwaters, how tributaries flow into a mainstem, and how that mainstem river progresses to its end. Through dialogue, participants will explore what this may mean to all of us in terms of social justice, natural resource management, and to or moral obligation to earth care.

GLOBALIZATION & WATER: The Story of the Thirsty – Paul Darilek, Living Water International.
883 million people lack access to clean drinking water. A child dies of diarrhea every fifteen seconds. But the hope of the matter is that you can do something about it--and have a blast doing it. The Story of the Thirsty is a multi-media presentation--part education, part film, part poetry, part advocacy opportunity, all fun--featuring the work of Living Water International, a non-profit that provides clean drinking water to the world's poorest people in 25 countries. It's a chance to learn, to be moved and, if you like, to get involved.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 5:00 pm.)

HISTORY & WATER: Chronology of Efforts to Manage the Edwards Aquifer – Dr. John Donahue, Trinity University.
The presenter draws upon his involvement as a stakeholder in water management issues over the Edwards Aquifer in Central Texas in which local actors participate with state and federal agencies to manage groundwater withdrawals.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 3:00 pm.)

HYDROLOGY & WATER I: The Hydro-illogical Cycle in Texas - Raymond Slade, Jr.
Raymond Slade, Jr. retired from the U.S. Geological Survey with 33 years of experience as a hydrologist, serving the last 6 years as the Surface-Water Specialist for Texas. During his career with the USGS, he authored about 75 reports on Texas water resources, with subjects including floods and droughts, hydrology of rural and urban watersheds, and water quality of surface and ground water. In cooperation with the City of Austin, he developed and supervised a long-term investigation of Barton Springs and associated Edwards aquifer and authored about 25 reports on the hydrology and water-quality of the springs and aquifer.

HYDROLOGY & WATER II: Intro to South-Central Texas – George Ozuna, Deputy Director, USGS Texas Water Science Center.
Learn the basics from a hydrologist who has worked in this area his entire career. This educational offering includes an overview of the water cycle, a discussion of flood and drought in Central Texas, and basic hydrology of the Edwards Aquifer.
(Monday, February 15 at 11:00 AM.)

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS & WATER: Texas-Mexico Water Issues – Jay Johnson-Castro, Director, Rio Grande International Study Center.
Along the banks of the Rio Grande, from the Colorado Rockies to the Gulf of Mexico, millions of inhabitants, and within the Rio Grande watershed, there are literally hundreds of governmental agencies from the local to the international levels, as well as institutions and non-governmental organizations that have some focus on the Rio Grande as a source or resource. Equally, there are hundreds of entities that endeavor to exploit and threaten the quantity and quality of the very waters that millions of people depend on for survival. Yet, in 2010, there is only one initiative to form an alliance that would to protect the waters of the Rio Grande, its watershed, environment and cultures from such threats and exploitation. We will discuss some of the treats to the Rio Grande, including major threats that originate from prominent and wealthy sources within the State of Texas and the Texas laws that, if left unchallenged, would ultimately prevent the Rio Grande from reaching the estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 9:00 am)

LAND USE & WATER: Human Impact on the Edwards Aquifer – Annalisa Peace, Executive Director, Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance and David K. Langford, Vice President Emeritus, Texas Wildlife Association.
The Edwards Aquifer presents a special challenge in that it is a “karst” aquifer. Learn all about why our regional groundwater supplies are particularly fragile, how they are being compromised, how this wonderful natural system works to provide us with one of the world’s cleanest and most reliable water supplies and what we need to do to ensure that we have good quality water for years to come. Plenty of opportunity for Q&A to discuss aquifer related to current events.
(Monday, February 15 at 1:00 pm)

LANDSCAPE DESIGN & WATER: Xeriscape - Water Saving Plants in Texas – Melissa Miller, Chair of the Native Landscape Certification Program of the San Antonio Native Plant Society.
If you want to conserve water in your landscape, first consider what part of Texas you are in, as the state has eleven major ecoregions. Then consider the micro-climates you have. Plants native to your ecoregion have evolved there for eons and know best how to survive the extremes on their own. Learn about the native plants that have already been in cultivation, some for hundreds of years, or are easy to grow, that will work on your property.

(Monday, February 15 at 5:00 pm)

LAW & WATER II: Hot Issues in Recent Cases – Mary Q. Kelly, Greg Ellis (TX Alliance of Groundwater Districts), and Steve Kosub (SAWS Legal).
According to Mark Twain, "whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over." This is especially true here in Texas . Learn why from a panel of three of the top legal experts in the field of water law in a discussion of legal issues that determine how water is allocated in Texas and within our region. Mary Q. Kelly (Gardner Law Firm) will present a Basic Overview of Texas Water Law; Greg Ellis (Director of the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts) will discuss Hot Issues in recent cases; Steve Kosub (Legal Counsel for SAWS) will guide us through Legal Applications of Future Water Planning. The presentations will be followed by a spirited Q & A session moderated by Mary Q. Kelly .

(Tuesday, February 16 at 11:00 am)

LAW & WATER I: Water is a Birthright– Larry Joe Doherty, environmental attorney.
Larry Joe Doherty, an attorney and civic activist well-versed in matters related to ethics, takes on the ethics of water consumption, and, specifically, water commodification. Is water a human right, as believed by water activists, or is water a commodity, like oil, which some can profit from at the expense of others. A very timely presentation as companies jockey to privatize your water rights.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 9:00 am)

MUSIC & WATER: Music IN Water – Brother Mike Sullivan, S.M., DMA, St. Mary’s University.
A survey of music compositions inspired by water, in all its forms, beginning with Medieval chants, symphonic literature, folks songs, works songs, popular music, and all points in between. The presentation will include numerous recordings and video.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 3:00 pm)

OCEANIC STUDIES & WATER: Environmental Freshwater Inflows and Salinity in Coastal Bays – John S. Adams, Conrad Blucher Institute for Surveying and Science & Coastal Bend Bays
The demand for freshwater is an issue that has been part of the public discussion for at least 150 years. A famous quote, attributed to Mark Twain, asserts the “Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting over.” As human populations expand, the various enterprises and activities that come with that expansion, including agriculture and ranching operations, steam based power generation, municipal and industrial demand, and recreational uses, all depend on a limited and finite water supply. The environmental flows of freshwater that are left over may reach the bays and estuaries along the coast, assuming that they are not captured by dams and reservoirs. The importance of freshwater reaching the estuaries has traditionally taken a back seat to the importance of freshwater reaching coastal communities for their industrial, municipal, and agricultural needs.
(Monday, February 15 at 3:00 pm)

OUTER SPACE & WATER: From Earth & Beyond! Jacqueline Havelka, NASA’s Life Sciences Data Archive
This presentation will observe water from the unique perspective of outer space. Participants will learn about NASA’s discoveries about water on Earth and other planets. Over the last decade, new observations of our Milky Way galaxy show that water is more abundant than expected. Other learnings will be about the crucial importance of water as a life support system in spacecrafts, and unique ways astronauts will ensure that they have water to live and work. A visual presentation with some of the spectacular pictures that have been taken in outer space and on other planets will be shown.
(Monday, February 15 at 9:00 a.m.)

PEACE & WATER: Flowing Toward Nonviolent and Sustainable Communities –
Dr. Randall Amster, Prescott College; Executive Director, Peace & Justice Studies Association
Against the seemingly intractable trends of militarization and resource conflict stand examples of people and communities managing scarce resources peacefully and sustainably. In the desert southwest, in fact, one of the last great “common pool resource” systems in North America provides irrigation water and open grazing land to farmers and pastoralists alike. Derived from the imported culture of Spanish settlers and combined with the best practices of the native peoples of the region, this acequia system serves as a powerful example of how we might envision people working together not only with each other but with the land itself, thus demonstrating the potential of effective techniques for conflict transformation at levels of engagement ranging from the interpersonal to the environmental. This interactive workshop will present an alternative acequia-inspired vision for managing resource conflict, with an eye toward generating concrete plans of action for use in local communities everywhere. The lesson is that if relatively “poor” people confronted with extreme scarcity in arid regions can create a stable, cooperative, and nonviolent system for managing water, then certainly we can likewise find ways to do so with all of the tools at our disposal.

(Monday, February 15 at 5:00 pm)

POETRY & WATER: Water as Refuge & Reunion – Cyra Dumitru, poet & instructor at St. Mary’s University.
This interactive session combines the reading of original poems by Dumitru with writing exercises. We will explore water as a source of inspiration for our own flow of words. We will tap into our memories and imagination as sources of content. The emphasis will be upon the process of playful, quick writing followed by shaping, and opportunities to share. Designed for anyone who loves water and words.
(Tuesday, February 16 at 1:00 pm)

POLITICAL SCIENCE & WATER I: Whose Water Is It? Urban vs. Agricultural Water Use – Mike Mecke.
Mike Mecke recently retired as the AgriLife Extension water programs specialist at Fort Stockton, Texas. (Tuesday, February 16 at 11:00 am)

POLITICAL SCIENCE & WATER II: Water & Conflict – Dr. Celine Jacquemin, Amir Samandi & Leona Pallansch, St. Mary's University
Challenges of water and conflict in the Middle East and on the African continent.

(Tuesday, February 16 at 3:00 am)

PSYCHOLOGY & WATER: The Living Waters of the Psyche – Alan Drymala, LPC, LMFT, Jungian psychotherapist.
Water is the pre-eminent symbol for the unconscious. We will reflect together on our watery relation to this psychic wellspring, examining our language and our dreams, as well as fairy tale and alchemical images. C.G. Jung believed that the fate of humanity rested on how many individuals would establish a conscious and living relationship to this source.

PUBLIC HEALTH & WATER: Biologic, Organic and Inorganic Contaminants – Geary Schnidel, P.G..
The US EPA has recognized karst aquifer as one of the most vulnerable aquifer types. The Edwards Aquifer is a highly developed karst aquifer containing caves, sinkholes, sinking streams, rapid groundwater velocities and a wide diversity of aquifer fauna. In 1984, an outbreak of Cryptosporidiosis, caused by a water borne pathogen, occurred in the community of Braun Station near San Antonio affecting approximately 200 people. Learn about water quality from a public health prospective including a discussion on water quality sampling, water quality parameters, maximum contaminant limits, why and how we treat water, the importance of access to clean drinking water, and common threats and case histories.
(Monday, February 15 at 11:00 AM.)

SPIRITUALITY & WATER: Barbie Gorelick, Sylvia Maddox, and Narjis Pierre of the Tri-Faith Dialogue of San Antonio.
The Abrahamic Faiths of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all view WATER in a most sacred way. Come hear members of the Core Team of the Tri-Faith Dialogue of San Antonio share information and thoughts on the role of WATER in their faith traditions. There will be plenty of time for questions, and of course, dialogue! (Monday, February 15 at 3:00 p.m.)

THEOLOGY & WATER: What’s in the sacred texts? – Dr. Norm Beck, Texas Lutheran University, moderator.
Panel Discussion
(Monday, 15 February at 7:00 pm)

URBAN STUDIES & WATER: San Antonio Running Dry! – Char Miller, W.M. Keck Professor of Environmental Analysis, Pomona College, California.
As the WATER Symposium’s featured speaker, Char will set contemporary San Antonio and Water in a wider context along with select readings from his just-released 2 companion volume books, Water in the 21st-Century West and River Basins of the American West published by Oregon State U Press. Book-signing to follow. (Sunday, February 14 at 6:30 p.m.)

A Toxic Century: Mining Giant Must Clean Up Mess

2010-02-08T11:53:00.000-06:00

In December, the Justice Department announced a settlement in one of the largest environmental bankruptcies in U.S. history.

The American Smelting and Refining Company, known as Asarco, will pay a record $1.79 billion to settle claims for hazardous waste pollution at 80 sites in as many as 20 states.

Cleanup will begin this year on one of Asarco's most notorious properties — the copper smelter in El Paso, Texas.

Icon Of A Bygone Era

Driving through El Paso on Interstate 10, you can't miss it: There on a bluff, a stone's throw from the Rio Grande, the old iron and copper smelter sits like a moldering Soviet factory.

Time was, the 120-year-old smelter — where metals are extracted from ore — was a pillar of El Paso's economy and one of the best jobs in town.

"You can't get [a] job here in El Paso compared to Asarco," says Miguel Beltran, 82, a former maintenance worker. "Asarco is the best place to work. We were just like a family."

Asarco was part of the mining empire of the storied Guggenheim family, which made the steel that helped the U.S. military win two world wars. But the world changed.

Smokestacks that once represented power and progress became symbols of industrial pollution. Today, many people remember the smelter as an environmental outlaw for contaminating central El Paso with dangerous metals, and for secretly and illegally burning hazardous waste.

Jim and Debbie Kelly stand on the smelter's slag field looking up at an 800-foot smokestack emblazoned with "ASARCO." They belong to an anti-smelter group called Get the Lead Out.

"It was the largest smokestack in the country, and there were people in town who proudly proclaimed we live in a place with the largest smokestack," Jim Kelly says.

"They marketed it very well," says Debbie Kelly. "And the people of El Paso were brainwashed to believe that this was the most wonderful thing El Paso could possibly have ... this tall, polluting, contaminating smokestack."

'A Bookmark In History'

Although the smelter shut down in 1999, as recently as last year, Asarco sought to renew its air emissions permit to restart the blast furnaces. Widespread opposition in El Paso and across the river in Juarez, Mexico, became a case study of a community's fight for environmental justice.

"Maybe stick them out in the middle of nowhere, but to be right in the heart of a city is not a good thing," says El Paso Mayor John Cook, who opposed the permit.

The Environmental Protection Agency finally told Asarco "no." The company, then a bankrupt subsidiary of the mining giant Grupo Mexico, abandoned its efforts to reopen the El Paso copper smelter. In December, the state appointed a trustee to clean up the site, which is contaminated with a periodic table of heavy metals: lead, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, selenium and zinc.

Asarco paid $52 million to a custodial trust as part of its bankruptcy settlement. The plan now is to sell off the plant for scrap, isolate the contaminated soil, treat the poisoned groundwater so it doesn't flow into the Rio Grande, and finally, cap the whole 400-acre site with asphalt. A big question is what to do with the iconic brick smokestack?

"I would love to leave the smokestack there as a reminder, sort of a bookmark in history," Cook says.

But whose history: El Paso's or Mexico's?

Mexico Suffers Asarco's Waste

Cook and other longtime El Pasoans remember when the wind would shift to the south, the smelter would crank up production, and the smokestack would gush dirty yellow smoke directly into Juarez.

"They could basically pollute as much as they wanted, because it was going into another country that had no ability to stop us," Cook says.

It was the largest smokestack in the country, and there were people in town who proudly proclaimed we live in a place with the largest smokestack.
- Jim Kelly
As a result, sulfur dioxide and heavy metals fell on the colonias and schools and playgrounds of El Paso's sister city, where federal and state regulators had no jurisdiction.

"It is very clear that a majority of what came out of that flue and was deposited over 100 years landed in Mexico," says Texas state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, one of those who led the fight to close down Asarco.

Colonia Ladrillera, in Juarez, is located less than a half-mile from the smelter. People here complained of skin rashes, allergies and asthma when Asarco was operating.

When longtime resident Consuelo Renteria is asked what she thinks when she sees the great chimney to the north, she answers with fire in her voice: "I think it's a symbol of our rage, because it hurt many people here," she says. "The people of the United States, they will fix everything over there. And here, what will happen? Nothing."

Company Loyalty

The corporate office of Asarco in Tucson, Ariz., did not respond to an interview request. With the bankruptcy settlement, the company has a new CEO and has turned its attention to its remaining three copper mines in Arizona and a copper refinery in Amarillo, Texas. A statement on its Web site says at Asarco, environmental considerations are "a way of life within the company."

To this day, some former workers remain angry at the public thrashing the company endured.

"Everybody was healthy," says Pat Escandon. "My uncles were there; they passed away in their late 80s. My dad was 87. I've never had a headache." He and all the men in his family worked at Asarco most of their adult lives.

Despite Escandon's enduring company loyalty, Asarco's impact on public health in El Paso is irrefutable.

Lasting Effects

A landmark study by the Centers for Disease Control in the early 1970s found that more than half of the children living within a mile of the smelter had levels of lead in their blood four times today's acceptable limit.

The lead study was so influential that it contributed to the EPA's decision in 1973 to phase lead components out of gasoline.

A similar study in Juarez found a mirror image of elevated blood-lead levels in Mexican children.

A follow-up U.S. study was even more troubling.

"We found in these children who seemed to be healthy that they had reduced IQ, slowing of their reflexes, impairment of their motor coordination," says Dr. Philip Landrigan, the epidemiologist who led the research nearly 40 years ago. "This was one of the very first demonstrations that lead could cause toxicity on the human brain in children who appeared to have no symptoms."

Landrigan is now chair of the Department of Preventive Medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City, and an acclaimed children's health advocate.

After these findings, Asarco discontinued its lead smelting operation in El Paso.

To date, more than 1,000 properties surrounding the plant have been "remediated," or cleaned up. One of them was the home of Yvette Ramirez Ammerman, whose daughter, Alisa, was found to have lead in her blood.

"She's 9 now," says Ammerman. "She had some issues. She's had some trouble with math. She has some behavioral issues. It's hard to know whether or not that's as a result of the lead."

Ammerman, who now lives with her family in Albuquerque, N.M., is asked how she feels about Asarco today.

"There's a part of me that would like to say, 'In your greed, you allowed this to happen,' " she says.

After more than a century of ore smelting and decades of conflict with regulators and the community, Asarco is about to become history. El Paso must decide what to do with the prime real estate after the remediation is completed.

In Tacoma, Wash., and Omaha, Neb., toxic industrial sites belonging to Asarco were cleaned up and reused for condos, office buildings and a convention center. In El Paso, once the poison has been buried, they can begin to look to the future.

Groups OK Paso plan

2010-02-04T08:41:00.000-06:00

After a week’s worth of contentious debate, LCC, Border Patrol and the environmental community have reached a consensus on the expansion of the river road that runs through the pristine Paso Del Indio. However, it’s an unusual agreement because it’s based on trust, something not commonly seen nowadays, especially among governmental entities. “This is our roll of the dice,” said Jay Johnson-Castro, executive director of the Rio Grande International Study Center (RGISC). “RGISC is wanting to weigh on the side of trust.” Austin Skero, assistant Laredo Sector Border Patrol chief, said he discussed a written agreement with RGISC members earlier this week. But “that’s not possible because (RGISC members) aren’t engineers,” he said.“However, we have provided them with a set of plans and they marked the most sensitive areas,” he added. “We will be careful.” Skero joined Johnson-Castro at the podium Wednesday for a special called Laredo Community College board meeting. As part of a verbal agreement, RGISC members will take the onsite manager of the road project on a walkthrough of the trail, pointing out and prioritizing the most sensitive areas. “If at any time during the course of construction, (the manager) needs to make a decision, he can make an educated decision, which improves transparency,” Skero said. At issue is a temporary work area easement that will give Border Patrol an additional 20 feet around the river road. The additional 20 feet would allow the agency to move in large construction equipment to complete the 36-foot-wide road. Currently, the dirt road, which will be surfaced with caliche, is about 10 to 12 feet wide. A consultant for Border Patrol estimated that fewer than 227 trees and an unknown amount of vegetation will have to be removed during construction. However, the agency has a legal responsibility to replace the trees and vegetation. Wednesday marked the second time LCC trustees have discussed the temporary easement. After a lengthy discussion Jan. 28, LCC trustees voted to grant the temporary easement to Border Patrol on the condition that the agency’s officials visit with RGISC members. The members said they had a legal right to be involved in the process because RGISC has a resolution with LCC that gives them joint use of the Paso Del Indio. But Skero said Border Patrol was unaware of the resolution. “Now we know,” he told the board Wednesday. “This has been an education. “This was nothing more, in my opinion, than a communications problem. And it has been resolved.” Johnson-Castro agreed. “It has not been the easiest thing to do because we came at this from two different angles,” he said. “But we need to be united on things if we want the best results.” RGISC members met with Border Patrol officials for almost 2½ hours Monday. But they didn’t reach a consensus, Johnson- Castro said shortly after the meeting. By Wednesday, though, an agreement had been reached. And to ensure everything was OK between the two groups, the board held a special called meeting to again discuss the temporary work area easement. LCC President Juan L. Maldonado prefaced the meeting by saying the entities had had a healthy discussion during the past several days, noting that in remediation, neither side gets 100 percent of what it wants. At the end of the meeting, trustees unanimously approved a one-year temporary work area easement with a possible extension of another year. The extension is at the discretion of the LCC president. The construction, which has already begun, is expected to take 30 to 45 days to complete. Maldonado said the one-year-plus-long temporary easement is needed for mitigating the environmental issues, such as replacing the trees and vegetation destroyed in the construction process.

No agreement on river road expansion

2010-02-02T09:24:00.000-06:00

Federal law enforcement officials and environmentalists did not reach a consensus Monday on the widening of the Border Patrol road that runs through the Paseo Del Indio trail. “What we hear from Border Patrol’s side is that they are going to be incredibly sensitive to the habitat areas and not take out any habitat that they don’t have to. We’re working on that idea,” said Jay Johnson-Castro of the Rio Grande International Study Center. Johnson-Castro was among several RGISC members who met with Border Patrol officials for about two and a half hours Monday afternoon. Juan L. Maldonado, Laredo Community College president, also attended the meeting. Because an agreement was not reached, RGISC members said they will meet with Border Patrol officials again to identify essential areas that they don’t want disturbed. “We’re trying to operate on the basis that we’re all on the same side here and we all want to do what’s right and trust one another,” Johnson-Castro said shortly after Monday’s

meeting. “And if that approach works, then we’ll arrive at something more favorable.” An LCC special called board meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday to iron out any differences remaining between the two groups. Last week, LCC trustees asked Border Patrol to sit down with the environmentalists because of their fervent opposition to the expansion of the road, which has been a subject of debate for several years. Trustees made the decision after discussing at length the renewal of a temporary work area easement requested by Border Patrol. The temporary easement would allow the agency to expand the road from 12 to 36 feet wide. The dirt road would also be surfaced with caliche, an all-weather gravel. Border Patrol already has a 50-year easement from LCC for 36 feet by the river. But they need an additional 20 feet for construction equipment, so they’re asking LCC trustees to approve a temporary work area easement. In 2005, trustees granted them a three-year temporary work area easement, but U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials said they were unable to finish

the project because of a lack of funding. The requested temporary work area easement would renew the expired document. The road expansion would allow two cars to pass each other and provide better response time to security issues in an area known as a crossing point for illegal immigrants, Border Patrol officials said. They estimate that fewer than 277 trees would have

to be removed to finish the project. Under a city ordinance, the trees and vegetation would have to be replaced.

http://www.lmtonline.com/edition/edition/?haspdf=1 must have subscription.

Trustees’ road OK has string attached.

2010-01-29T09:28:00.000-06:00

We are grateful that(trustees) included us in the process,” said JayJohnson-Castro of the Rio

Grande International Study Center. “We have a legal right to be in the process because we have a resolution of understanding with LCC.” The resolution provides them with joint use of the Paso Del Indio Trail, which trustees, administrators and community members alike described as a gem that attracts ecotourists and is frequented by researchers, teachers and students. Administration recommended that the board approve the renewal of the temporary work area easement to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the completion of the Riverbend

Project. CBP initiated the project in 2005 after LCC trustees granted a three year temporary work area easement that expired in April 2008. But CBP was unable to finish the project because of a lack of funding, Border Patrol officials said. The requested temporary work area easement would renew the expired document and allow CBP to complete part of the Riverbend Project. The dirt road that’s on LCC’s property is about 0.8 miles long and runs about 10 to

12 feet wide. Border Patrol, under the original easement approved by the board, wants to finish the project -by expanding the road to 24 feet, allowing two cars to pass each other, and surfacing it with caliche, an all-weather gravel. With shoulders factored in, it would be a 36-footwide

road. Fewer than 227 trees would have to be removed, along with an unknown amount of vegetation, said Eric Webb, a consultant hired by CBP, adding that the agency would have to

replace the trees and vegetation. The proposed speed limit would be 25 miles per hour, said Jesus Chan, assistant Border Patrol agent. But because the trail is frequented by school children, administration and trustees would like to see that speed limit reduced. “If we want to reduce it

to 15 or 20 miles per hour, all it takes is the stroke of a pen,” Chan replied. Johnson-Castro said after the meeting that he and others would try and meet with CBP officials sometime next week to work out their differences. He said he wants to see Border Patrol stop using the ATVs and instead use mounted patrol. Meeting a resolution for them would mean Border Patrol protecting

the environment and protecting the trees, he added. Among those who addressed trustees during public forum Thursday were Laredo biologist Jim Earhart; Tom Miller, executive director of the LCC Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center; Ricardo Villarreal, museum director for the Webb County Heritage Foundation; Ricardo Perez, LCC student; Alejandro

Medina, former LCC student; and pastors Bill Davis and Mike Barrera. (Nick Georgiou may be

reached at 728-2582 or nickg@lmtonline.com) LCC.

Road Construction Woes

2010-01-26T10:03:00.000-06:00

A planned road expansion along the U.S. Border Patrol’s riverside road will disrupt research being conducted by Laredo Community College’s Environmental Science Center, and once again pit the federal agency against local environmentalists.

Border Patrol hopes to repair and expand the road, which is currently dirt and runs about 10 to 12 feet in width.

At Thursday’s meeting of the Laredo Community College Board of Trustees, the board will discuss granting a temporary work easement to Border Patrol so they can move in large equipment to finish the 36-foot-wide road.

Although the Border Patrol already has an easement for the 36 feet, they need another, temporary easement, to bring in heavy equipment 20 feet around the road.

Border Patrol Spokesman Jason Darling said that the road is part of a “comprehensive strategy” that is needed for the agents in the area to “work safely and efficiently.”

But local environmentalists are calling it a hassle.

Jim Earhart of the Rio Grande International Studies Center, who is studying natural ways of eliminating the invasive carrizo that grows along the riverbanks, will find his studies without a home once construction on the road begins.

He pointed out a big, muddy pothole on the dirt road that runs by his study center.

“We don’t have any problem with getting this fixed,” Earhart said.

In fact, Earhart said that he would like to see caliche used to pave the road to create a more permanent, reliable fixture.

But he questions the Border Patrol’s methods.

He worried that the road may create erosion.

It will also force him to move the study into the feasibility of using animals such as goats to eat carrizo, an invasive species that Border Patrol also wants to do away with.

Besides Earhart’s studies, the area, known as Paseo del Indio, is an LCC walking trail used by students and naturalists to watch birds and other natural phenomenon.

“It’s inconsistent to have a 55-mph Border Patrol road blazing through a walking trail,” said Jay Johnson-Castro, executive director of LCC’s Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center.

“This is not the right message.”

Johnson-Castro called it “militarized nature.”

There are about 1,000 species that inhabit the area.

Darling had few specifics about the project. He did not specify whether the speed limit on the road was, in fact, going to be 55 miles an hour.

He did say that “the United States Border Patrol takes into account respect for the public who may be in that area.

Part of that respect is paying the utmost attention to the safety of ... persons who may be walking in that area.”

Whatever the speed limits are, Darling said that the agents driving on the road will abide by them, not only for the safety of the public but for their own safety.

The project will be discounted for Border Patrol, thanks for the cooperative effort of a military detachment that will be helping out.

The military unit will use the construction as a training exercise. In total, it will cost about $750,000.

Fort Stockton Holding's Permit Application "Incomplete"

2010-01-21T08:35:00.000-06:00

Another battle in the war over water in Pecos County was fought on Tuesday afternoon.

While the outcome may look like a blow to Clayton Williams' attempt to transport water out of the area, but it just may be a small defeat in the long run.

"Incomplete," that's the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District's decision concerning Fort Stockton Holdings' permit application to transport and sell water out of the county.

"There are statutory laws in the Texas Water Code," General Manager Paul Weatherby of the Middle Pecos Groundwater Conservation District, said. "There are elements that have to be met to support these types of applications and we review all applications the same way and either they are complete or not complete."

The board claims Clayton Williams' company, one, didn't show a real need for the water and two, provided too broad of a location of use.

"We're very disappointed in the decision and we believe our application is complete," Paul Latham, Executive Vice President of Fort Stockton Holdings, said. "But we have strong ties to the City of Fort Stockton and Pecos County, and we continue to support them."

But they would not say if they planned to resubmit their application.

It wasn't a surprise that the opposition liked the verdict.

"They did not submit a complete application and the City's very happy," Fort Stockton Mayor Ruben Falcon, said.

Right now, this battle looks like a loss for Williams, but he's still trying to push a bill through Austin to help him accomplish his goal.

His adversaries are growing in number, one man came all the way from Laredo ready to fight.

"This is a form of violation," Jay Johnson-Castro of the Rio Grande International Study Center, said. "This is a form of exploitation abuse. And we want to encourage the folks of Pecos County and Fort Stockton not to relax and enjoy it. Put up a fight."

For now, this battle's at a standstill, but there may be more fearsome fights in the future.

President Calderón officially opens Anzalduas International Bridge

2010-01-13T09:18:00.000-06:00

REYNOSA, Mexico, Jan. 12 - Under heavy security measures, Mexican President Felipe Calderón provided the keynote address at the opening ceremonies of the Anzalduas Bridge connecting Mission, Texas with the northwestern industrial sector of Reynosa, Tamaulipas.

“This project is of great importance not just to Mission and Reynosa, not just to Texas and Tamaulipas, but to the people of the nations on both sides of the Border,” Calderón said, in Spanish.

For much of his speech, Calderón emphasized the importance of economic opportunities between the U.S. and Mexico.

“We realize that the best way to create jobs in Texas and Tamaulipas is to create the connections that enhance commerce between our two countries,” he said. “Our economies are designed to complement one another. The largest economy in the world and a smaller but growing economy in Mexico, a capital intensive economy and a labor intensive economy each with a great geographic opportunity to reinforce each other and to grow and flourish.”

Eugenio Hernández Flores, Governor of Tamaulipas, was a key figure in the completion of the Anzalduas Bridge. He accompanied Calderón during the inauguration of the bridge.

“The mere appearance of President Calderón at this inauguration ceremony clearly shows the relevance of opening another port of entry between the States of Tamaulipas and Texas, between Mexico and the United States,” Hernández said.

“Having seen this project through to its completion is of great significance. It shows the strength and cooperation of two great nations and the great cooperation of all the Mexican municipal governments involved in this project, as well as the property owners who were willing to negotiate with the different levels of government in order for this bridge to be built.”

Hernández said the improved facility to import and export goods between the two countries will have a “profound effect” on the local and national economies of both countries.

U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, represents the Mission/Granjeno area where the bridge stands. Cuellar held an impromptu press conference with reporters from both the U.S. and Mexico just before the ceremony began.

“We as a nation need to focus more on facilitating trade through building bridges, like this one. We also need to make sure that with a facility like this you have the right personnel. While security is an issue that must be addressed we need to be looking with just as much emphasis on promoting trade between our countries,” Cuellar said.

“Ninety-nine percent of Mexican nationals coming across the Border through the ports of entry are coming here for legitimate purposes. We must assure that these people are able to move across as quickly as possible. Mexicans are spending money in the retail sectors of our economy, in the hotels and restaurants. Texas trade with Mexico is over one billion dollars a day.”

Reynosa Mayor Oscar Luebbert also spoke during the ceremony. He said the process of building Anzalduas Bridge took 18 years from start to finish.

“President Calderón and Governor Hernández Flores are to be congratulated for staying on task during the all the years of their individual terms as well as the functionaries of the cities of the Rio Grande Valley bordering Reynosa. This is a historic day for Reynosa,” Luebbert said.

The Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations, Patricia Espinosa Cantellano was the only speaker at the event to mention the much derided border wall.

“It is much more rewarding to see bridges built between our countries than walls. Bridges integrate our economies, our people and our culture,” Espinosa said. “Yes we do need to address security issues and other issues such as protectionism on both sides of the border. A bridge is a powerful instrument in the quest to achieve those goals.”

Calderón concluded his remarks by referencing the historic significance of 2010.

“It gives me great pleasure to inaugurate the Anzalduas Bridge at the beginning of 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexican Independence and the one-hundredth anniversary of the Mexican Revolution,” Calderón said.

“Twenty-first Century globalization has shown the importance of integration and bridges promote just that. The new Anzalduas Bridge along with the Pharr Bridge will go a long way to resolving congestion in the city of Reynosa by offering two alternative routes for commercial traffic.”

Calderón said it is appropriate that the Mexican federal government has increased from three percent to five percent the portion of Gross Domestic Product allocated to the development toward the building of bridges, highways, airports and ports of entry, even in these times of financial crisis.

“This bridge represents a huge step in the direction of bringing our two economies together. I send my greetings and thanks through Mr. Ron Kirk to President Obama and our assurance that your priorities of a secure and competitive border are also ours,” declared Calderón in conclusion.

Kirk, the Trade Representative in Obama’s Cabinet, was the highest ranking U.S. official at the ceremony.

Cortez: Now let's get trucks rolling across Anzalduas bridge

2010-01-13T09:12:00.000-06:00

REYNOSA, Jan. 12 - In a speech at the official opening of Anzalduas Bridge on Monday, McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez stressed the importance of allowing commercial trucks to use America’s newest international bridge.

Under a presidential permit, cargo traffic is not permitted to use Anzalduas until the Pharr-Reynosa International Bridge averages 15,000 northbound commercial vehicles per week, or until 2015. Currently, the bridge averages about 9,000. The City of Pharr depends heavily on bridge fees.

Cortez said it makes no sense to under-utilize the Anzalduas Bridge. He hinted at a unified bridge system that could see revenues collected from trucks crossing the international bridges of the Rio Grande Valley or at least Hidalgo County pooled together and distributed equitably.

“Now we have this valuable asset, let us not waste it by under-utilizing it. For us to be able to compete in this global economy our region needs not just one bridge but a system of bridges so that we can become the most efficient region for companies to relocate. An efficient system of legal ports of entries is essential to us to continue to attract new companies to our region,” Cortez said.

“Let us not waste our investment by not allowing commercial truck traffic to cross on this bridge. Commercial truck congestion has long been a key obstacle in developing efficient trade.”

Anzalduas International Bridge has only been open since mid-December. In his speech, Cortez said that companies and customs agents are already “begging” that the Anzalduas bridge board at least allow an empty truck trailer to cross the bridge.

McAllen banker Carlos Garza chairs the McAllen International Toll Bridge Board. Speaking immediately after the opening ceremony, Garza said it is not a forgone conclusion that allowing trucks to use Anzalduas will inevitably hurt Pharr.

“If Pharr did lose out it would only be short lived and temporary. We need to think not about how we cut the pie but how we grow the pie. If we made this a bridge system and make it easier to cross, we all benefit.” Garza said.

Garza said it is likely that Pharr will always be the bridge for hazardous cargo and agricultural products. He also urged the Mexican government to use its political muscle to allow commercial truck traffic on Anzalduas.

After the official ceremony concluded the City of McAllen hosted a luncheon for U.S. and Mexican dignitaries at the McAllen Convention Center. At that event, former McAllen Economic Development Corporation President and CEO Mike Allen reminded the Guardian that the original idea for a bridge at Anzalduas came about because of the need to get trucks moving more quickly and cheaply to and from the maquiladoras in Reynosa.

“We are competing with China right now so we have to reduce costs. The key thing for our community is to have multiple crossing points, in Donna, in Pharr, in McAllen, everywhere. That is what helps business,” Allen said.

Pat Townsend, president and CEO of Mission Economic Development Authority, told the Guardianthat he had sympathy for Pharr elected officials because their first responsibility is to their voters and taxpayers. “There is only so far you can go in being Valley-minded or Metro-minded when you have a responsibility to the taxpayers and the voters who elected you,” Townsend said. “We have to make sure there is no negative impact on the taxpayers and the general treasury of Pharr. Tell me how you do that?”

Townsend said an improvement in the general economy would help because that would mean more trade with Mexico.

Allen first proposed a bridge in the Mission area when he went down to Mexico City with commercial real estate developer Mike Blum in 1993.

“My thought was economic development but we also knew it would open up a retail gateway into the interior of Mexico. At that time, Reynosa was not as big as it is now,” Allen said.

“I think you are going to be very surprised. I think you are going to have thousands more people crossing that bridge than you planned for. Mexicans will come because it is easy, because they do not face any danger going through Reynosa and they can shop and go. From where I live I can be in Monterrey in an hour and 45 minutes.”

Allen also predicted that a much larger number of Mexican nationals from Monterrey would buy second homes in the Valley because Anzalduas International Bridge makes it easier to get to the region. “Just like we go to New Mexico or Colorado, the Mexicans will have second homes here and from here they can go anywhere in the country,” he said. He also predicted even more export opportunities for retail stores in the Valley. “Downtown, retail stores like Sears and Penny’s are big exporters. People do not think about that,” he said.

Garza agreed with Allen’s analysis about more Mexican nationals visiting the Valley because of the new bridge. “We hope it will not just change the Monterrey traffic. The real key is how do we change the travel patterns of people in Central Mexico who maybe before used other bridges and maybe went on to San Antonio to make this region their choice and their place to come and shop and vacation and stay. To me, that is the real goal and that is where the real benefit will be realized,” Garza said.

Cortez said the new bridge could be viewed as a symbol of the “very strong” relationship that exists between the United States and Mexico. “It is an invitation that communicates ‘come to our home, you are welcome.’ It is an invitation to share and exchange, art, music, food, culture. It is an invitation that says let us do business today,” Cortez said.

Obama, Calderón, may officially open Anzalduas Bridge

2010-01-04T10:02:00.000-06:00

MISSION, Dec. 31 - Border leaders are working hard to get President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderón to officially open Anzalduas International Bridge next month.

“I would say there is a 50-50 chance of getting the two presidents here for the official opening,” said U.S. Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, D-Mercedes. “I am working hard to make it happen. We are looking at either January 12 or January 16. I have made phone calls and I am waiting for a return.”

Hinojosa said city leaders in McAllen, Mission, Hidalgo and Granjeno deserve praise for the efforts they are making to get the two presidents to the border. “You have to understand that both of presidents are working with some extremely difficult issues. We will have to wait and see,” Hinojosa said.

Anzalduas International Bridge is situated three miles west of the Hidalgo/Reynosa International Bridge, off of Military Highway and Anzalduas Highway (FM 396) in Mission. It connects Mission, Texas, with the west side of Reynosa, Tamaulipas. It was opened to traffic on Dec. 15.

Carlos I. Garza, chairman of the Anzalduas International Bridge Board, said the new crossing point is important because it will cut down the commute time for thousands of U.S. workers employed at maquiladoras immediately across the border in Mexico.

The span connects McAllen’s Foreign Trade Zone and the massive Sharyland Plantation development directly to Reynosa’s fast-growing west side and its modern industrial parks. “An increase in cross border activity will improve the economies on both sides of the border,” Garza said.

McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez said the new crossing is the result of intense collaboration on the international, federal, state and local levels and an investment worth more than $100 million. It is a collaborative project between the cities of McAllen, Mission, Hidalgo and Granjeno and a decade in the making.

“The opening of the Anzalduas International Bridge will get us closer to being the destination of choice for international business development and it will make it easier for Mexican tourists to cross more efficiently,” said Cortez, on the first day travelers were allowed to use the bridge. “It is a complement to the many assets we are developing to make our region the choice to many who are seeking quality of life.”

Hidalgo Mayor John David Franz agreed.

“The opening of the Anzalduas International Bridge brings us closer to being the best option for international business development and it facilitates travel for Mexican tourists, allowing faster crossings,” Franz said.

State Sen. Eddie Lucio said a visit by Obama to the border was important for a number of reasons. The Brownsville Democrat has twice written to the White House offering his assistance on border and health issues.

“A visit by President Obama would be wonderful. We need the President to come to our area of the state and country. I don’t know if he took it all in when he was campaigning… the issues that are important to us, the international issues that we live with each day, immigration, the criminal element that we have to put up with each day, health care issues,” Lucio said.

“We have a perspective that he needs to look at first hand to better understand how life really is on the border and South Texas. We are as American as anyone living in Boston or New York. We need our own place at the table to be able to offer the type of information that they need to make critical decisions. His visit would be huge. I personally would like to attend and listen to his plans for the future.”

Lucio joked that his best chance of getting to see Obama could be through his son, state Rep. Eddie Lucio III, D-San Benito. Senator Lucio first backed Hillary Clinton for president in 2008, switching to Obama after the Democratic Party primary was over. Rep. Lucio backed Obama from the beginning.

“I will have to turn to my son to see if he can communicate with the White House. I want to get close to Obama. I have written him a couple of times and I have not really had an answer from him officially,” Lucio said.

“I have talked to one of his aides. I told him that I am at the President’s disposal. I have 22 years in state government. I know the issues here. I know the international issues as well. I have worked with the people in Mexico, so the President can use me in any way that he needs to be able to further his cause and his presidency.”

Here is an Anzalduas International Bridge Project Fact Sheet produced by the Anzalduas International Bridge Board:

• Bridge is located in Mission, Texas south of Military Highway and Bryan Road. Crossing is 3 miles west of the Hidalgo-Reynosa International Bridge, off of Military Highway and Anzalduas Highway (FM 396).

• Anzalduas is the closest international crossing to Mexico City and Monterrey. Route will reduce travel time to Monterrey by 30-45 minutes.

• Anzalduas International Bridge has four entrance lanes, including a SENTRI Lane in the United States. Bridge span is 3.2 miles (5.1 KM) from port to port and features 4 lanes, two safety bump-out spaces, and a pedestrian walkway. Lanes elevated to preserve nearby U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge.

• Anzalduas is a joint public project between the cities of McAllen, Mission, Hidalgo and Granjeno, TX DOT, the federal government (GSA) and the Republic of Mexico worth over $100 million dollars.

• In Texas, the Anzalduas International Bridge connects to the McAllen Foreign Trade Zone, where more than 410 companies are based; and the Sharyland Plantation, a 6,000 acre residential, industrial and retail development.

• Dozens of multi-national corporations are located in state of the art industrial areas near Anzalduas’ entry in west Reynosa, MX. The companies include: Nokia, Matsushita, Black and Decker, Fujitsu, Seimens, Corning, TRW and Symbol Technologies

• Anzalduas International Bridge hours of operation: 6 am to 10 pm, daily

• Official bridge inauguration is planned for January of 2010

Time Line

1992-1998 Preliminary design and site location studies by Halff and Associates
1994 Wilbur Smith Associates complete traffic study
1994-1998 Review of preliminary application for U.S. Permit by U.S. federal agencies
1995 Four party agreement with federal agencies for land use at site
July 1999 U.S. Presidential Permit issued by President Clinton
Feb 2001 Initial exchange of diplomatic notes with Mexico
Fall 2003 Approval by federal agencies of construction plans
Fall 2007 June 2007, bridge groundbreaking ceremony
Fall of 2009 Anzalduas International Bridge Completed

Anzalduas Bridge Board Summary of Costs from 2007 to 2009

Bridge Contract to Williams Bros $28,713, 014
Toll Plaza Building & Landscaping $3,078,014
Roadways, Drainage & Site Improvements $3,961,122
Water, Sanitary Sewer Lines $2,296,078
Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment $909,011
Electrical Utilities & Lighting $1,543,206
All other owner’s expense $2,796,171
Grand Total $43,296,616

Written by Steve Taylor

2009-03-26T15:21:00.000-05:00

Rio Grande Current

Rio Grande Facts

Fort Stockton Water Hearing Delayed

IBWC: Bacteria Levels in Rio Grande at Brownsville Remain a Concern

Consultant: Border Region Need Not Fear Pecos Water Extraction

Protesta San Agustin

Resolution

History of the International Boundary and Water Commission

“Our Crowd” and the Rule of Capture

We Get to the Tragedy of the Commons, by Bruce Darling

Williams' suits dropped vs. mayor, water district in 'water war'

by Bob CampbellMidland Reporter-Telegram

Water deal saves $17M

Water wars

Commissioners eye legal action to stop Fort Stockton plan

By Zach Lindsey LAREDO MORNING TIMES

Venta Rio News Video

Environmentalists up-in-arms over plan to sell river water

Council sets the stage to battle water plan

Valley Leaders Oppose Pecos Water Extraction Plans

Public hearing set for regional water plan

A border runs through it (the Rio Grande)

Town, tycoon wage war for water Fort Stockton fights plans to sell aquifer resources

HELP WANTED

Another Volley in Texas' Water Wars

City of Laredo to Announce Opposition to Pecos River Water Project

Texas Two-Step: Claytie Channels Boone; Groundwater Issues in Austin

Buscan vender el agua del río Bravo; peligra subistencia de millones

Nine admitted as parties in Fort Stockton Holdings hearing

Del Pecos a Nuevo Laredo

Espera CILA llegue solicitud de apoyo

Río Bravo, en riesgo de desaparecer

REPORTAJE VENTA DEL RIO PECOS

Millonario tras agua del Bravo

Upriver water plan could affect border towns

Council finds another ally in water fight

Peligra el río Bravo por explotación de mantos acuíferos

Cuellar Expresses Concern over Pecos Water Extraction Bid

Controlling Giant River Cane to Economic Advantage

An Urgent Call for Help

Controlling Giant River Cane to Economic Advantage

Building a Rio Grande~Rio Bravo portal...

Water Symposium Schedule

A Toxic Century: Mining Giant Must Clean Up Mess

Groups OK Paso plan

No agreement on river road expansion

Trustees’ road OK has string attached.

Road Construction Woes

Fort Stockton Holding's Permit Application "Incomplete"

President Calderón officially opens Anzalduas International Bridge

Cortez: Now let's get trucks rolling across Anzalduas bridge

Obama, Calderón, may officially open Anzalduas Bridge

by Bob Campbell
Midland Reporter-Telegram