Top-Main Comal Spring
April 22, 2014 image by Cheryl Gilpin; bottom- typical flows before HCP
approved, image from video on Edwards Aquifer
HCP website .
Notice that Main Comal Spring was documented not
flowing on April 22 when USGS gage level was 141 cfs cubic feet per second and stopped flowing for days
the week before., Prior to that it would only flow intermittently during 24
hour periods earlier in April. Strangely on April 24 the spring was flowing
slightly and flowing pretty well at the sidewalk corner spring on the same
spring run, with a USFWS plankton net and lots of fountain darters around two
days before no fountain darters were any where near these spring openings. On April 29, once again the Main Comal Spring
was not flowing at all for 24 hour periods and the area in front of the main
spring was mostly dry. It is apparent
that parts of these flows can be adjusted at will, but at whose will? On May 1 the USGS streamflow gage way downstream was at 135 cfs.
At average flows for previous extreme drought periods in April water level would be up above their waste lines. New Braunfels Citizens are serious about keeping our taxes low and making our city minimize risks and expenses to NB citizens. However, our town can't accomplish that if we set a priority on minimizing regulation and monitoring of regional pumping of the Edwards Aquifer and on our springruns.
The Edwards Aquifer Habitat Conservation Plan is actually a
misleading name. It should have been
called a Plan to put more money into the pockets of over-allocated pumping
permitees and extend periods of critically low aquifer levels at the expense of citizens of New Braunfels
in order to make the regions pumping permits worth more money for longer
periods and not have any conservation
limitations on those users who will pay their highest rate. Why don't we figure out why this is not
working and go back to the drawing board instead of going along with plans that
are based upon false assumptions that the EAA directors actually reduce pumping
permits during times of critical period
when actually they do not and they offer the groundwater profiteers incentive
and mechanisms to keep us in critical period levels instead of actually having effective rules that work by
minimizing critical period. Those EAA
critical period rules have been on the book since 2008 they never did reduce
pumping as the legislature mandated and with the HCP assuming that they work as
legislated, the HCP strategies and extra
legal agreements actually work to give further incentive and profit to the
pumpers to keep our aquifer at critical period levels.
Why is that
the case? It is because the pumping permitees were the first in Texas to be
established as private groundwater marketers when the Edwards Aquifer act first
started the Edwards Aquifer Authority in 1994.
But the groundwater marketing was intended in that legislation to be a
privilege and an incentive for cooperation of large pumpers to go along with
and support the EAA Act. The EAA Act
included language to keep that privilege tightly regulated but that has not
come to be the case. The EAA Act has
language that states that the Edwards Aquifer pumping permits would not be
considered as property rights owing buy down but the EAA directors have been
doing there best to make that not the case either. Some of their permitting and critical period
rules actually violate state legislature mandates to avoid regulating the
groundwater marketing as much as possible and to maximize their profits and
treat their permits in way that will turn them permanently and irreversibly
into property rights owing buy down with public money, the HCP strategy to pay
back volunteers to reduce pumping is going to help make that the case and Steve
Ramsey the New Braunfels representative on the HCP steering committee is now
begging to start the Voluntary irrigation suspension because he is misled to
think that there are not other options and does not realize it will
irreversibly impact all future plans to reduce any of the aquifer permits
because buy back will always then be required to honor all the EAA permits as
owed pay back once pay back for reduction actually starts for the few
volunteers pumpers now in its program once the program is triggered to start
the reductions and puts pay back money in their pockets to reduce their pumping
permit then it set a legal precedent that will irreversible change on how we
treat all the EAA permits from then all pumping permit reduction will legally require
pay back with our public dollars no matter how over allocated or poorly
regulated or how poorly suited they are regarding wise water use. That will mean pumpers will have even more
incentive to keep our aquifer and springlfows dangerously low and managing to
avoid that will become less likely to accomplish.
Is the strategy with a title that includes "voluntary irrigation suspension" also a misleading name ?
Actually the
Voluntary irrigation suspension program is not really done as these pumpers
were volunteering to give up something because we will be paying them back and
forever turning all the overallocated
pumping permits into property rights that will require pay back with our
public money whenever reduced whether voluntarily or required and whenever they
can not not market their permit amounts or withdraw their permitted
amounts due to draining of their wells
under their land.
Really there
are things we can do to keep our aquifer levels from being so low that they
trigger this voluntary program. However, once it is first triggered, there will
be no turning back and that will be less likely because we will give much more
profit and incentive to the pumpers to keep our springflows and aquifer very
very low without considering the risks and harms that causes, they are only considering
how to maximize their profits. They can tweek our springflows to make us beg
for whatever they want us to do because of the lack of proper regulation on
their pumping and groundwater marketing and because of HCP strategies
agreements with our city of New Braunfels leaders that are now helping them accomplish this.
Our city leaders are going along with the HCP without considering how to reduce
expense and risk to our Comal Springflows and to citizens and it is not the
pumpers best intrest to figure that out because they profit by imposing crisis
and extending critical periods. City
leaders only listening to NBU should realize that risks and expenses to our
citizens are not their best intrest to consider our leaders need to protect us
citizens and do the home work themselves to minimize harms to our Comal Springs
and our citizens.
When HCP
strategies and modeling ignore how our EAA director made rules are actually
working to make the regions pumping permits worth more money for longer periods
and not have any conservation limitations on those users who will pay
their highest rate they present great harms and risks for our spring flows and
expense for citizens of New Braunfels. However, the Edwards Aquifer HCP
stakeholders are not trying very hard to honestly present the harms and risks
to us and actually knowingly avoid modeling and reporting harms to our
springruns and citizens here in New Braunfnels. Since it is obvious now that
the HCP stakeholders were giving our town information based upon their modeling
with false assumtions, why don't we
figure out why this is not working and insist the regions HCP steering
committee right now hold emergency meeting to better prepare and minimize up
coming critical periods for this summer.
They should go back to the drawing board instead of going along with
plans that are based upon false assumptions that the EAA directors actually
reduce pumping permits during times of critical period when actually they
do not and they offer the groundwater profiteers incentive and mechanisms to
keep us in critical period levels instead of actually having effective
rules that work by minimizing critical period. Those EAA critical period
rules have been on the book since 2008 they never did reduce pumping as the
legislature mandated and with the HCP assuming that they work as
legislated, the HCP strategies and extra legal agreements actually work
to give further incentive and profit to the pumpers to keep our aquifer at
critical period levels.
A false map is put into the HCP 2013 report after the pubic comment period:
The HCP 2013 report even
included false information about the HCP impacts
on the Comal river which were not part of the report seen for public
comment but added in just before the steering committee voted to approve
that and finalize the report and while refusing to hear public comment
about the addition before they voted at the meeting held here in New
Braunfels last March 2014. Our own New Braunfels steering committee
member did not even request the committee hear the comments about that
my husband the assistant director of the Edwards Aquifer Research and
Data Center and I former EAA director from New braunfels brought to give
before the vote was made. We had observed the mapped section of the
comparison in late summer 2013 when the map was dated and also the
morning of the meeting and the river there had much mor impact than the
map indicated there back in July and still the day of the meeting. but
that incorrect mpa showing less than 10% reduction in habitat is still
in the HCP report and was never seen for public comment.
HCP Drought Contigency Planning is it happening through HCP adaptive management to minimize drought impacts this summer? How is that working?
At the Edwards Aquifer Habitat Conservation Plan
HCP implementation steering committee meeting in March 2014 held in New
Braunfels the steering committee approved a recommendation to set up the HCP
drought contingency planning team with no hydrology or water resource experts
only educators and communications experts and to set up the drought contingency
scope to be to conduct outreach and public relations to keep the public
positive about the HCP. Andrew Samson
from Texas State on the HCP implementation committee suggested and it was approved
for the planning team not to be called a drought contingency planning team
since in reality that would not be its scope.
However, there has been no planning for drought as is required of this HCP. Preparing to minimize impact of drought does
not seem to be on their radar. I agree
with Andrew Sansom about not misleading people with a title that is not what
they are doing.
Can we change the direction of the Edwards Aquifer Authority and the HCP now? YES!!!
But that won't happen unless New BRaufnels quickly backs out of the agreement they made based upon HCP false assumtions and quickly makes the HCP stakeholders develop a strategy that actually is serious about enough water conservation and pumping restriction to minimize the length and severity of aquifer critical periods.
Perhaps if groundwater marketing were considered only a
priveledge and reward for not being at critically low aquifer levels and not
allowed during critically low aquifer levels and if those marketing groundwater
were not allowed to serve on the EAA board or the EA HCP steering committee,
then our public dollars and decisions would be more about properly managing
water supply to minimize risks to people and the ecosystems. The EAA Act was established first and
foremost for protection of endangered species and for protection of the aquifer water quality and quantity it was
not set up to establish the Edwards Aquifer Authority as a groundwater
marketing agency which is now what most of the EAA directors consider as their
primary role. Citizens need to insist
their leaders do our their homework for our town about our water resources and
insist our leaders urge and aggressively insist that regional , stakeholder and
state and federal laws and rule making and strategies minimize harm to our
springflows and our economy and wildlife and human health and insist the EAA
directors and the EAA stakeholder process follow legal mandates protective of
springflows and springrun water quality and
get back on the right track to make us more resilient for upcoming
drought conditions.
Preserving the Comal Springflows and minimizing damage to Landa Park as Native American Sacred Site preservation:
These springflows
are important for endangered species and for the cultural preservation of the
Comal River as a sacred paleo and native American site. I went to a Catholic
high school but I take great great pride and do not hesitate to embrace my
native American cultural background and wish more of my neighbors would do the
same because that is where we can learn from thousands of years of wisdom about
how to live and manage our work and homes while conserving and sustaining our
water resources and springflows for our future and for our children and
children’s children, For the past few generations many of our elderly have
started dying young we have lost their wisdom we need to learn the lessons to
be found in the artifacts of the Landa Lake area now under going much
destruction, where are our artifacts what can we learn from them? Maybe if we figure that out we will see how
unwise current leadership has been and support setting better priorities.
Sincerely, Cheryl Gilpin, former Edwards Aquifer Authority
director elected from New Braunfels
