Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Supreme Court delivers major ruling on water regulation
Austin Legal blog AAS 2/24/12
Supreme Court delivers major ruling on water regulation
In a ruling likely to have a wide impact on the regulation of water use in Texas, the state Supreme Court today ruled that landowners have an ownership interest in water beneath their land and may be compensated if regulations limit their access to it.
The legal dispute involves a ranch owner who sued when the Edwards Aquifer Authority issued a permit that limited the amount of underground water that could be used.
The authority had argued that if landowners can be compensated for limiting access to their water, the result would be a disaster, creating an unknown number of legal disputes and a financial burden that could make regulating water impossible.
(snip)
Ken Kramer, director of the Sierra Club’s Lone Star Chapter, said the decision could have disastrous impact on the state economy and environment.
“The court has done a huge disservice to everyone who has been working for proper management of the groundwater resources needed for our state’s people and our environment,” Kramer said.
Supreme Court delivers major ruling on water regulation
In a ruling likely to have a wide impact on the regulation of water use in Texas, the state Supreme Court today ruled that landowners have an ownership interest in water beneath their land and may be compensated if regulations limit their access to it.
The legal dispute involves a ranch owner who sued when the Edwards Aquifer Authority issued a permit that limited the amount of underground water that could be used.
The authority had argued that if landowners can be compensated for limiting access to their water, the result would be a disaster, creating an unknown number of legal disputes and a financial burden that could make regulating water impossible.
(snip)
Ken Kramer, director of the Sierra Club’s Lone Star Chapter, said the decision could have disastrous impact on the state economy and environment.
“The court has done a huge disservice to everyone who has been working for proper management of the groundwater resources needed for our state’s people and our environment,” Kramer said.
Well it's each person for themselves once again. I'm sure the water corporations that buy/rent the Texas Supreme Court judges are happy. They will just suck all the water from underneath faster than anyone else can. And then continue to sell it to everyone else at exorbitant prices. Water is the new black gold in Texas.
What a mess.
14 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
It's really concerning in view of the most recent droughts. We should have some management/regulation of a very scarce resource. Instead the Texas Supremes have sentenced Texas to a slow death by a thousand cuts.
The entire Texas Supreme Court is 100% republican and it shows.
Every land owner is going to be their own "dam". And the only way other land owners can manage their resources is to act as crazy as their neighbors. The FEDs will need to step in periodically just like in this story.
Nuts, plain nuts. 
I mean you still have to prove it as a landowner. Lots of suits going on now from landowners who claim their wells have gone dry or been contaminated. None of them have won as of yet. Plus they're out for the legal fees to keep the cases going.
You know there will probably be some landowner who already is leasing their property to the fracking gas industry and that's all it takes. With that one person's permission to take the underground water the industry won't be fazed They have deep pockets of money.
Texas Tribune 2/24/12
Texas Supreme Court Rules For Landowners in Water Case
In a case with potentially vast implications for groundwater rules in Texas, the state supreme court has unanimously ruled in favor of two farmers in the San Antonio area who challenged the local aquifer authority's sharp restrictions on their use of a water well on their land.
The much-anticipated ruling is "going to make life much more complicated for groundwater districts," said Gregory Ellis, an attorney and the former general manager of the Edwards Aquifer Authority (EAA).
Texans wanting to put a well on their land generally must go to their local groundwater conservation district for permission to withdraw a certain amount of water, as part of an effort to keep aquifers healthy.
(snip)
But environmental groups are concerned. The ruling "injects huge uncertainty" into a recovery program in the Edwards Aquifer Area, aimed at maintaining certain levels of spring flows and helping endangered species, said Myron Hess of the National Wildlife Federation.
Tom Mason, of the Austin law firm Graves, Dougherty, Hearon & Moody, said the ruling was likely to lead to more litigation.
"Landowners with wells may be encouraged by this and want to challenge groundwater district regulations, particularly in the Edwards Aquifer Authority," he said. Meanwhile, as the courts consider the implications of the ruling, groundwater districts "may be a little less inclined to regulate as vigorously as before," Mason said.
Texas Supreme Court Rules For Landowners in Water Case
In a case with potentially vast implications for groundwater rules in Texas, the state supreme court has unanimously ruled in favor of two farmers in the San Antonio area who challenged the local aquifer authority's sharp restrictions on their use of a water well on their land.
The much-anticipated ruling is "going to make life much more complicated for groundwater districts," said Gregory Ellis, an attorney and the former general manager of the Edwards Aquifer Authority (EAA).
Texans wanting to put a well on their land generally must go to their local groundwater conservation district for permission to withdraw a certain amount of water, as part of an effort to keep aquifers healthy.
(snip)
But environmental groups are concerned. The ruling "injects huge uncertainty" into a recovery program in the Edwards Aquifer Area, aimed at maintaining certain levels of spring flows and helping endangered species, said Myron Hess of the National Wildlife Federation.
Tom Mason, of the Austin law firm Graves, Dougherty, Hearon & Moody, said the ruling was likely to lead to more litigation.
"Landowners with wells may be encouraged by this and want to challenge groundwater district regulations, particularly in the Edwards Aquifer Authority," he said. Meanwhile, as the courts consider the implications of the ruling, groundwater districts "may be a little less inclined to regulate as vigorously as before," Mason said.
AAS Editorial 2/27/12
Groundwater ruling potentially unleashes geyser of future cases
(snip)
How much of the water underneath their land do landowners own? When landowners pump water from an aquifer, they are drawing water from the entire aquifer, not just from the part that lies immediately beneath their land.
A couple of million Central Texans rely on the Edwards Aquifer. Where do an individual's property rights end and those 2 million others' rights begin?
If the right applies to individuals, then we assume it also applies to industry. Power plants, refineries and any other large industrial user of water struggling to access surface water supplies — Texas law treats surface water differently from groundwater, regulating it more tightly — could potentially access without limits any groundwater that lies under land it owns.
Groundwater ruling potentially unleashes geyser of future cases
(snip)
How much of the water underneath their land do landowners own? When landowners pump water from an aquifer, they are drawing water from the entire aquifer, not just from the part that lies immediately beneath their land.
A couple of million Central Texans rely on the Edwards Aquifer. Where do an individual's property rights end and those 2 million others' rights begin?
If the right applies to individuals, then we assume it also applies to industry. Power plants, refineries and any other large industrial user of water struggling to access surface water supplies — Texas law treats surface water differently from groundwater, regulating it more tightly — could potentially access without limits any groundwater that lies under land it owns.
Corporations are people remember. Especially in Texas where "bidness" is king. How big a hose can they use to suck up all the water they need?
