SMRF's
motion for summary judgement in the water right case was decided
in favor of SMRF on February 7, 2006, and also in favor of
combined motions by all the other Texas groups working to
preserve river flows and bay and estuary freshwater inflows.
The Judge ruled that instream water rights applications are
indeed provided for in the state laws, and SMRF's application
for water should now be sent to an administrative hearing,
not denied as it was in 2003. See press release below, from
the day of the hearing in January before the decision was
announced, for details about the motion for summary judgement
and the cases by the groups involved. For articles on the
SMRF win, see archives of Houston Chronicle, Austin American
Statesman, Victoria Advocate or San Marcos Daily Record for
the week of February 7. For background information on the
SMRF Water Right Project, read on, below the press release.
Press Release:
For Immediate Release
By: San Marcos River Foundation on Jan. 30, 2006
Re: District Court hearing for Texas "instream flow"
water right applications
A district court judge heard arguments today in several combined
cases that may help determine whether future generations of
Texans have flowing rivers and healthy coastal bays to enjoy.
The San Marcos River Foundation (SMRF), Galveston Bay Foundation,
Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association, Matagorda
Bay Foundation, and Caddo Lake Institute all filed applications
for water rights for the explicit purpose of protecting flows
in Texas rivers. Historically, most water rights have been
requested for the purpose of taking publicly-owned surface
water out of the state's streams and rivers.
"The only reason we see water flowing today in some of
our rivers is that the permit holders are not yet pumping
out all of the water rights that have been granted,"
said Dianne Wassenich. Wassenich is executive director of
SMRF, a 21 year old nonprofit formed to protect the San Marcos
River, its watershed and estuaries. "We filed our application
because we were concerned that virtually all of the water
would be spoken for without making sure that sufficient flow
was maintained to support wildlife, coastal fishing activities,
recreation and water quality. As explained in our application,
any water right we get will be donated to the Texas Water
Trust," continued Wassenich. The Texas Legislature created
the Texas Water Trust in 1997 for the express purpose of holding
water rights to protect environmental flows, but it has been
little utilized.
In 2003, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ),
which is the state agency that oversees water rights permitting,
summarily denied all of those applications without even allowing
a hearing. The TCEQ commssioners overruled the recommendations
of its staff and asserted that it did not have authority to
grant permits for instream flow protection purposes. The TCEQ
Order also disavowed the agency's own rules authorizing permits
for those purposes. Each of the applicants appealed the dismissal
of the applications in Travis County District Court.
In today's hearing, Judge Suzanne Covington heard arguments
on motions for summary judgment filed in each of the cases.
The basic question before the Judge today was whether TCEQ
had authority to grant applications of the type requested
in these applications. If the Judge rules in favor of the
plaintiff organizations, the applications would be sent back
to TCEQ for further consideration and a hearing.
SMRF's attorneys, Stuart Henry and Phillip Poplin of Austin,
assert in the SMRF motion for summary judgment that "TCEQ
does have the authority to grant SMRF a permit for the beneficial,
instream use it has applied for. The State Water Code, TCEQ's
own rules, and the history of water rights permitting by the
Commission explicitly and implicitly recognize this authority."
"Texas law authorizes these types of permits and we owe
it to future generations of Texans to make sure we pass along
healthy rivers and estuaries. We just want a fair chance to
make the case for how much water needs to be set aside to
accomplish that," adds Dr. Jack Fairchild, Board President
of SMRF.
Judge Covington said today at the end of the 3 hour hearing
that her decision will not take long.
Contact: Dianne Wassenich, Executive Director
Phone: 353-4628 office
[back
to top]
|
