AGUAblog

Hamilton Pool is a collapsed grotto in Travis County and probably the best swimming hole in Texas. The Austin American-Statesman is reporting that an upstream housing development has polluted Hamilton Pool with silt.

Hamilton Pool and the silt-covered four-mile stretch of creek feeding it will cost about $2.3 million to clean, a consultant hired by Travis County said today. The creek and iconic southwestern Travis County swimming hole were polluted by a development along the Hays/Travis county line, according to the consultant, echoing what county officials were already saying.

The development company, Coldwater Development, has said it may not be fully responsible for the silt. The developers have also said they obtained and followed the proper permits from the state and Hays County, and that the heavy, flood-causing rains in May 2007 were more than any development could be expected to handle.

The silt now covers almost all of the four-mile stretch of creek and sits at the bottom of Hamilton Pool. The creek’s swimming holes have been filled in; one near the development was 25 to 30 feet deep before the May rains, and is now only about 5 feet deep, according to Espey Consultants.

Property rights extremists, which Texas seems filled with, argue that developers should be able to do whatever they want on their property, unencumbered by regulations. They ignore the rights of others, especially the unlucky downstream folks whose property suffers from their beliefs.

When development occurs in a creek’s watershed, and impervious cover increases, the frequent result is destruction of the creek. Erosion undermines and topples riparian trees. Aquatic life dies because of thermal, sedimentary, and chemical pollution. Water becomes unsafe for contact recreation. The natural baseflow that previously sustained the creek year-round is converted to torrential flows during storms alternating with periods of no flow at all. In the worst cases, the stream must be converted to a concrete-lined channel to speed the storm runoff downstream to the next unlucky souls.

Austin has good watershed protection ordinances that extend beyond the aquifer recharge zone. Even though they didn’t protect Hamilton Pool, it’s time San Antonio adopted some of its own, only better.

A standing room only crowd showed up for the San Antonio premier of Laura Dunn’s film “The Unforeseen” last week. The movie recounts the epic battle to protect Austin’s wonderous Barton Springs from the onslaught of Developers and Property Rights fanatics. Dunn’s style has grown more elegiac than her earlier work perhaps revealing the influence of the film’s executive producer, Academy award nominated director Terrence Malik.

Before the movie some of us Aquifer huggers got together at the home of Helen Ballew and David Ribble for a little food and libations.

Later we embarked to the Fiesta Room on the Trinity University campus.  Among the luminaries were two former candidates for the Edwards Aquifer Authority Annalisa Peace and Stephen Colley.  Here we see Annalisa making points with Carol Fisher, she of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s San Antonio regional office, while Stephen looks on.

Folks were patient with the sign in process despite their eagerness to get a good seat!

A developer who bought property next to Toyota is threatening to sue the City for “taking” the value of his land.

Attorney Rob Pazouki, representing Sayani, said the mayor’s plan — if carried out — would sharply reduce the land’s value and could prompt the owner to sue. “Obviously, we don’t agree with it and consider it to be a legal taking,” Pazouki said.

The plan is to reverse a recent rezoning of the land for high density residential development. According to reports in the Express-News, the rezoning was sneaked through Council as a result of subterfuge involving Councilman Phil Cortez and backroom deals with lobbyist David Earl. The chickens, which were plentiful on this land pre-Toyota, have come home to roost.

Pazouki ignores the fact that, sans the Toyota factory, his client’s property isn’t worth a nickel more than farmland in Yoakum. Since taxpayers shelled out $133 million in incentives to bring Toyota to our city, then I figure he owes us for “giving” his land its value. Therefore, it’s a wash.

It seems to me that taxpayers should have rights equivalent to those that property owners enjoy. However, developers don’t agree, and are asking the legislature to trump our rights (again) this next session with more “takings” bills.

Developers believe that cities should compensate them for the costs of complying with rules that prevent them from contaminating the aquifer or polluting the air. After the SOS ordinance in Austin and the Aquifer Protection Ordinance in San Antonio were adopted, they got the legislature to pass the Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act (PRPRPA). However, the act was not retroactive, therefore the Austin and San Antonio ordinances were, for the most part, still able to work.

Not appeased by the PRPRPA, developers came back in 2005 with more “takings” legislation. However, it was defeated by opposition from SOS Alliance, AGUA, GEAA, and several municipalities. In May, the next battle will occur at the House of Representatives Land & Resource Management committee meeting

Land & Resource Management committee meeting

TIME & DATE: 9:00 AM, Tuesday, May 06, 2008

PLACE: E2.014

CHAIR: Rep. Rob Orr

The Committee will meet to take testimony on the following Interim Charges: Charge #5 (regarding treating wind as a property right); Charge #4 (regarding the effectiveness of the Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act); and…

 The Maverick Ranch-Fromme Farm homestead

When you enter the gate of the historic Maverick Ranch-Fromme Farm in far northwest Bexar County, you step back in time.  Gone are the freshly cleared pathways for new roads.  The dense, treeless, subdivisions are out of sight.  Here is the Texas Hill Country–950 minimally developed acres–complete with old limestone homesteads and hand-built stone walls.  In addition to being listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the Ranch is home to the Golden-Cheeked Warbler and the Black-Capped Vireo, two endangered bird species.  It contains prehistoric remnants, a historic cemetary, and it was the site of the final Comanche raid in Bexar County.  And for those of us Aquifer fans, the Ranch is located in the Contributing Zone of the Edwards Aquifer, and Leon Creek, a contributing stream to the Aquifer, cuts through the middle of it.

The Maverick Ranch-Fromme Farm has been family owned and carefully tended for 150 years.  Now it’s in danger of being wiped out by man-made floodwaters.

The Bexar Regional Water Managment (BRWM) alliance of Bexar County, the San Antonio River Authority, and the City of San Antonio, has recently proposed taking the property by eminent domain in order to build a flood control dam to help mitigate flooding from other dense area developments.  If the dam is built, the farm and ranch will be flooded out, and there ain’t no ark big enough to protect what will be lost. 

1. Request a public hearing with recorded comments by writing:

Bexar Regional Watershed Management Committee

Suzanne Scott

General Manager

San Antonio River Authority

PO BOX 839980

San Antonio, TX

78283-9980

Email: sbscott@sara-tx.org

2. Tell the BRWM governing Committee of Seven what you think.  Contact info at: http://www.bexarfloodfacts.org/committees.php

For more information on the Maverick Ranch-Fromme Farm property, send email to: mavericktex@gmail.com

And thanks! -EAE

    Last Thursday, January 10, 2008, San Antonio City Council unanimously approved the purchase of development rights on 2,251 acres in Uvalde County as part of the Edwards Aquifer Land Acquisition program.  Known as “Gulley Ranch”, the $1.5 million needed to enter into the agreement was funded by Proposition One money, revenue from an additional sales tax approved by voters back in May 2005.

     The conservation easement will limit further development of the land as well as certain land uses in an effort to prevent contamination of the Edwards Aquifer.  Under the agreement, building will be allowed in certain designated zones, and impervious cover allowed up to 1% of the total land area.  The property currently has about 4 acres of impervious cover, or 0.2%.  Although the property is not home to any endangered species, it lies entirely within the Edwards Recharge Zone and contains many sensitive recharge features.

According to Terry Dudley, of the Edwards Aquifer Authority:

“Approximately 70% of Edwards [Aquifer] recharge originates in Medina and Uvalde Counties.”

Since water in the aquifer generally flows west to east, most of the water we drink is likely to have traveled from those more western counties.  Nevertheless, protection of sensitive recharge land in Bexar County is also important, and approximately 10,000 acres have been dedicated to conservation easements, including Government Canyon.  The price of land in Bexar County has escalated in the last few years, making it difficult to further add to this total.

Please contact City Council at www.sanantonio.gov/council to thank them for voting to protect sensitive land within the Edwards Aquifer watershed.

Photo at: www.ruf.rice.edu/~leeman/edwards_map

Yesterday, City Council postponed acting on a request by VIA Metro that would clear the way for a “transit park” to be built on sensitive recharge zone land. VIA’s request should be denied.

Site of proposed VIA Metro transit park

Why Council would even consider approving a dirty, high impervious cover facility like this over the aquifer is puzzling. Hmm…according to the Express-News:

The council’s decision also freezes a proposal to extend Marshall Road, which is key to a developer’s plans to create a high-end retail, residential and business area on an adjacent 58 acres….The site is owned by Dan Parman’s 281/150 Stone Oak Developers Ltd. and is under contract by Darren Casey Interests, said Bill Kaufman, Casey’s attorney….Kaufman has said his client proposed the deal to help spark the extension of Marshall Road.

Puzzle solved.

Equally disturbing, the land is currently limited to 15% impervious cover, and the rezoning would bump that to a dangerous 65%. Along with that 65% will come the inevitable tree destruction.

To sum up:

• Industrial-strength vehicles bearing large quantities of gasoline, oil, brake dust, and miscellaneous dirt, plus
• Sensitive, highly-permeable recharge zone land, plus
• Replacement of heavily-forested natural areas with asphalt paving, plus
• Highway expansion over aquifer along with associated truck, car, and bus traffic paving the way for additional intense commercial development

equals…a bad deal.

An interesting thing happened to me recently.  My arch-enemy from Middle School friended me on Facebook.  We’ll call her Sally.  When the graduating classes from South and Bancroft Elementary Schools combined in Doherty Middle, my inseparable group of childhood friends (all of us had gone to South) welcomed Sally (from Bancroft) into our midst.  That was sixth grade.  A year later, in seventh grade, Sally turned my friends against me carefully and calculating, well, as much as any 13 year old can be.  It was a regular witch-hunt with all sorts of stories coming out of the woodwork to support Sally’s claim against me.  What followed amounted to a text message breakup.  Once part of the nightly telephone gabfest, my phone fell silent.  No one passed me notes in class anymore.  Lunchtime was unbearable.  When I took my usual spot at the table, conversation became hushed.  Even my offers to trade a pack of Shark Bites for some Ho-Hos fell on deaf ears.

What does this have to do with Aquifer protection?  Well, the dilemma I’m faced with—whether to give an enemy a chance (friend Sally) or let the division remain (reject her)—comes up often in environmental matters.  The us vs. them mentality is nowhere more apparent than at City Council hearings where environmentalists and development reps awkwardly share the same space, passing each other with a sideways glance and clenched-teeth hello.  It is tempting to view the situation as a showdown: them—the soulless profit-driven prosecutors, and us—the heroic defenders of a frail, embattled Aquifer.  But where does this division lead us?  Is our cause furthered or hampered by an unwillingness to embrace our enemies?  Now, I’m not advocating you invite x development rep over for tea, but might it be worth giving him/her the benefit of a doubt?  The Golden Rule works for me.  Show a little respect and most often you get respect in return.   In an age when environmentalists are painted as tree-hugging Chicken Littles, could respect be the foot in the door to change?

Looking back, the split that occurred between my friends and me was probably inevitable given our changing interests.  I bumped around for a little while, but eventually settled into a new set of friends, some of whom I maintain contact with to this day.  So perhaps I should be thankful that Sally expedited matters.  Furthermore, the experience was humbling for me, which was a good thing.  In the end I decided to accept Sally’s request to be my friend.  Maybe she’s still the 13 year old I remember, but I would never know if I simply turned my back on her.  Besides, we’re no longer sharing the same lunchroom table, so how hard could it be?

I guess my final word of advice to those bravely fighting for environmental preservation and justice would be to extend an olive leaf as often as possible to those across the aisle from you.  You might make a friend and change a mind while you’re at it. -EAE

      WELCOME to the new AGUA blog!  What does AGUA do?  We protect San Antonio’s drinking water source, the Edwards “Eddie the Karst” Aquifer.  Why?  Because we like drinking clean, untreated water right out of the tap.  Frankly, we think it’s a basic human right.  Unfortunately, current levels of development over the Recharge Zone threaten this right.  So what are we doing about it?  Standing up and fighting for our right!  Keep an eye on this blog and you’ll see our efforts in action.  And the best part?  You are invited to join us at any step along the way.

     This blog offers new features for our long-time members and new ones, alike.  For our steadfast core, we offer an unobtrusive way to stay informed on water issues in San Antonio.  (Bookmark us!).  We want to give you all a forum to speak out in a medium that would show you there are many of you out there.  For any new members we pick up along the way, we hope this blog will provide you with what you need to know about your drinking water.  We want you to be involved.  Adopt our cause!

       For all, check out the Ask a Hydro(logist) feature.  For all those questions you had on Eddie and were afraid to ask, let our expert hydrologist, George Rice, answer them.  Also, check out WHIMBY (What’s Happening In My Back Yard?) for an updated log of all rezoning changes/water issues that may affect your neighborhood and our drinking water.

     This is a DIY effort (you should see our office).  We’re still working on ways to better achieve our goal: protecting our drinking water.  We encourage you to submit comments and suggestions.  Which brings me to the real reason for setting up this blog: We can’t do it without you!  We can’t protect Eddie without your help.  We need your eyes, your ideas, and your man (and woman) power.

     So, get workin’!  There’s lots to be done.  Enjoy the blog while you’re at it.

     Sincerely,

     Elyzabeth “Aquifer Warrior” Earnley aka AGUA Technical Research Director

Q: Dr. Hydrologist, I’ve heard the media talking about an “acre foot” of water when referring to the aquifer. I don’t know what that means. Can you help me?

A: Concerned Citizen,An acre-foot is a measure of volume used when referring to very large amounts of water, as is the case with the Edwards Aquifer. It is defined as the amount of water needed to cover exactly one acre of land to a depth of one foot. This amounts to exactly 43, 560 cubic feet of water, or about 325,853 gallons. Thanks for your question!