WaterWired

Trump Twofer! 1) CRS Insight Report: 'The Trump Administration Directives on Western Water' and 2) 'Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West'

1) This two-pager CRS Insight report by Pervaze A. Sheikh and Charles V. Stern was updated on 9 November 2018: The Trump Administration Directives on Western Water. 

I added the graphics - they are not from these reports.

Here is the entire text. This versiondoes not contain all the hot links so you might want to read the online version - click here.

On October 19, 2018, the Trump Administration released a Presidential Memorandum directing federal agencies to address regulations that burden federal water projects in California and complete biological opinions under theEndangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §§1531 et seq.) for specific federal water projects in the western United States. Affected projects include the California Central Valley Project (CVP), the Klamath Irrigation Project in Oregon, and the Columbia River Basin water system in the Pacific Northwest. The White House memorandum does not carry the force of law nor is it a federal regulation. Rather, it serves as a directive to federal agencies for these projects. Congressional interest in the directive arises from both specific interest in these projects and broader interest in managing water conveyance systems in the West and addressing their regulatory policies. This insight covers specific projects or water systems addressed by the memorandum.

California Water and the CVP

The CVP is a large water supply project in northern and central California operated by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), an agency in the Department of the Interior (DOI). The CVP's service area extends over a distance of approximately 400 miles in central California. The project delivers more than 7 million acre-feet of water per year, on average, to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and species, and is operated jointly with the State Water Project (SWP; owned and operated by the State of California). Water deliveries from the CVP and SWP are regulated through a series of laws and regulations. Biological Opinions (BiOps) issued under ESA and state water quality standards issued under the Clean Water Act are two primary factors affecting how much water can be delivered to users. BiOps addressing the CVP and SWP were issued in 2008 for Delta smelt by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, in DOI) and, in 2009, by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, in the Department of Commerce) for salmon.

The White House memorandum directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce (Secretaries) to identify water infrastructure projects in California for which both Secretaries have responsibility for under ESA and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq.). For each project, the Secretaries are to jointly 

designate one official who, within 30 days, is to identify regulations or procedures that burden the project. The agencies are also to develop a plan to "appropriately suspend, revise, or rescind regulations or procedures that burden the project beyond the degree needed to protect the public interest or comply with the law." Public interest is not defined or discussed in the memorandum, but burden is defined as "to unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, impede, or otherwise impose significant costs on the permitting, utilization, transmission, delivery, or supply of water resources and infrastructure."

The memorandum further directs the Secretaries to develop a timeline for completing the environmental compliance requirements for the identified projects within 40 days.

In addition, the memorandum also directs the Secretaries to ensure that the review of the long-term coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and California State Water Project (OCAP) is completed with an updated operations plan and issued Record of Decision. The memorandum directs the biological assessment of OCAP to be completed before January 31, 2019, and a final BiOp to be issued within 135 days of January 31, 2019.

These directives follow a memo, issued by Secretary Zinke on August 17, 2018, soliciting ideas from federal agency staff on how to address California water issues. The Secretary directed staff to develop a plan of action to maximize water supply deliveries, incorporate best science into real-time decision making, streamline ESA and NEPA processes, construct new storage for water, resolve issues with OCAP and other joint state and federal projects, and improve coordination between FWS and NMFS, among other actions.

Other Western Projects Addressed

The White House memorandum also directs the Secretaries to complete a joint consultation on the Klamath Irrigation Project by March 2019 and develop a schedule to complete the Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement and associated BiOps by 2020.

The Klamath Project is a federal irrigation project in Oregon owned and operated by Reclamation; it provides irrigation water for an estimated 1,400 farms in the Klamath River Basin. The current BiOps regulate water flows to the Klamath Project to provide more water to endangered fish.

The Columbia River Basin produces hydropower and regulates water flows through 31 federal dams owned and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Reclamation. The basin supports 13 listed fish species or distinct populations (salmon and trout species). Basin dams have blocked fish passage in much of the basin, and hydropower generation leads to fish mortality due to fish passing through turbines. The current BiOp for the Columbia River dates to 2014. Court rulings have altered the system BiOps over time, and efforts are underway to create a new BiOp (a judge allowed NMFS until 2021 to finish the new document).

Potential Congressional Interest

Some in Congress are interested in the White House memorandum because it shows the intent and direction of the Administration for implementing laws associated with western water. The policies in the directive could result in expediting (and in some cases altering) the implementation of key laws governing the management of water supplies in the West. Some who support this approach contend that the direction to federal agencies will result in improved access to and certainty for water supplies, along with streamlining regulatory processes. Some critical of the memorandum contend that it could lower environmental standards for these projects and affect listed species. They contend that it might set a precedent for species affected by other projects. The effect of the memorandum's directive will depend on its implementation. For example, how the Administration applies the definition of burden to regulations or procedures when addressing the CVP, to what extent new BiOps for these projects alter existing requirements for environmental protection, and how regulatory processes will be streamlined, will largely determine how transformative the regulations will be.

2) And here is the Presidential Memorandum on Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West:

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERC
THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY
THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
THE CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Subject:        Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following:

Section 1.  Policy.  During the 20th Century, the Federal Government invested enormous resources in water infrastructure throughout the western United States to reduce flood risks to communities; to provide reliable water supplies for farms, families, businesses, and fish and wildlife; and to generate dependable hydropower.  Decades of uncoordinated, piecemeal regulatory actions have diminished the ability of our Federal infrastructure, however, to deliver water and power in an efficient, cost‑effective way.

Unless addressed, fragmented regulation of water infrastructure will continue to produce inefficiencies, unnecessary burdens, and conflict among the Federal Government, States, tribes, and local public agencies that deliver water to their citizenry.  To meet these challenges, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce should, to the extent permitted by law, work together to minimize unnecessary regulatory burdens and foster more efficient decision-making so that water projects are better able to meet the demands of their authorized purposes.

Sec. 2.  Streamlining Western Water Infrastructure Regulatory Processes and Removing Unnecessary Burdens.  To address water infrastructure challenges in the western United States, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall undertake the following actions:

(a)  Within 30 days of the date of this memorandum, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall:

(i)   identify major water infrastructure projects in California for which the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce have joint responsibility under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (Public Law 93-205) or individual responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (Public Law 91-190); and

(ii)  for each such project, work together to facilitate the designation of one official to coordinate the agencies’ ESA and NEPA compliance responsibilities.  Within the 30-day time period provided by this subsection, the designated official shall also identify regulations and procedures that potentially burden the project and develop a proposed plan, for consideration by the Secretaries, to appropriately suspend, revise, or rescind any regulations or procedures that unduly burden the project beyond the degree necessary to protect the public interest or otherwise comply with the law.  For purposes of this memorandum, “burden” means to unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, impede, or otherwise impose significant costs on the permitting, utilization, transmission, delivery, or supply of water resources and infrastructure.

(b)  Within 40 days of the date of this memorandum, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall develop a timeline for completing applicable environmental compliance requirements for projects identified under section 2(a)(i) of this memorandum.  Environmental compliance requirements shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, and in accordance with applicable law.

(c)  To the maximum extent practicable and consistent with applicable law, including the authorities granted to the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce under the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (Public Law 114-322):

(i)    The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall ensure that the ongoing review of the long-term coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project is completed and an updated Plan of Operations and Record of Decision is issued.

(ii)   The Secretary of the Interior shall issue final biological assessments for the long-term coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project not later than January 31, 2019.

(iii)  The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall ensure the issuance of their respective final biological opinions for the long-term coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project within 135 days of the deadline provided in section 2(c)(ii) of this memorandum.  To the extent practicable and consistent with law, these shall be joint opinions.

(iv)   The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall complete the joint consultation presently underway for the Klamath Irrigation Project by August 2019.

(d)  The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall provide monthly updates to the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality and other components of the Executive Office of the President, as appropriate, regarding progress in meeting the established timelines.

Sec. 3.  Improve Forecasts of Water Availability.  To facilitate greater use of forecast-based management and use of authorities and capabilities provided by the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-25) and other applicable laws, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall convene water experts and resource managers to develop an action plan to improve the information and modeling capabilities related to water availability and water infrastructure projects.  The action plan shall be completed by January 2019 and submitted to the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality.

Sec. 4.  Improving Use of Technology to Increase Water Reliability.  To the maximum extent practicable, and pursuant to the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, title XVI), the Water Desalination Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-298), and other applicable laws, the Secretary of the Interior shall direct appropriate bureaus to promote the expanded use of technology for improving the accuracy and reliability of water and power deliveries.  This promotion of expanded use should include:

(a)  investment in technology and reduction of regulatory burdens to enable broader scale deployment of desalination technology;

(b)  investment in technology and reduction of regulatory burdens to enable broader scale use of recycled water; and

(c)  investment in programs that promote and encourage innovation, research, and development of technology that improve water management, using best available science through real-time monitoring of wildlife and water deliveries.

Sec. 5.  Consideration of Locally Developed Plans in Hydroelectric Projects Licensing.  To the extent the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce participate in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing activities for hydroelectric projects, and to the extent permitted by law, the Secretaries shall give appropriate consideration to any relevant information available to them in locally developed plans, where consistent with the best available information.

Sec. 6.  Streamlining Regulatory Processes and Removing Unnecessary Burdens on the Columbia River Basin Water Infrastructure.  In order to address water and hydropower operations challenges in the Columbia River Basin, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Energy, and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works under the direction of the Secretary of the Army, shall develop a schedule to complete the Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement and the associated Biological Opinion due by 2020.  The schedule shall be submitted to the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality within 60 days of the date of this memorandum.

Sec. 7.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

DONALD J. TRUMP    19 October 2018

Enjoy!

“In the West, when you touch water, you touch everything.” – Wayne N. Aspinall

AWRA Publication: 'State Water Plans - Monographs from 17 States'

I have to a give a big shout-out to AWRA President Dr. Brenda O. Bateman (Technical Services Division Administrator for the Oregon Water Resources Department) and BoD member Scott Kudlas (Director of the Office of Water Supply at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality) for being the driving forces behind this landmark publication. Kudos to all those who contributed their time to this effort. And, lest I forget, the AWRA Policy Technical Committee

The states represented are: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.  

Delayed shill alert: I am the AWRA Technical Director.

Download the report (PDF): click here 

From the report:

Introduction

The American Water Resources Association (AWRA) is pleased to present this publication resulting from its third National Leadership Institute (NLI) Workshop for State Officials. State leaders gathered during a three-day period in 2017 (November 8-10), in a workshop designed specifically for state officials who have responsibility for developing their state water plans. Their professions were diverse and included engineers, planners, scientists, economists, and other disciplines. 

The workshop covered a wide variety of topics, including the latest updates on groundwater policy, water governance models, open source data tools, the fundamentals of integrated water resources planning, and how to build support for water planning. Discussions quickly turned to the desire to develop original materials and analysis for the American Water Resources Association, drawing upon the expertise of current and previous workshop participants. 

We asked the authors to follow a common format, providing an “elevator speech” that succinctly describes the purpose of each water plan. From there, we asked them to point the reader to the statutory underpinnings, to help set the formal context. Authors then described the planning horizons, scheduled deadlines, and current status of their plans. They have provided a summary of the process used and the resulting components contained in each plan. Authors took the time to make some observations about the challenges overcome and the challenges that yet remain with these efforts. Finally, they provided a sense of scope and scale, both geographically and financially. 

In the concluding chapter, we highlight some of the common themes and threads we observed along the way. 

Enjoy!

"We know accurately only when we know little; with knowledge doubt increases. "
- Goethe

CRS Report: 'Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act - Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions'

An updated (9 November 2018) CRS report by Charles V. Stern, Pervaze A. Sheikh, and Nicole T. Carter: Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act: Bureau of Reclamation and California Water Provisions 

Download CRS_Water_WIIN_9Nov2018

Summary
Most of the provisions in the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322), enacted on December 16, 2016, relate to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, the WIIN Act also includes a subtitle (Title II, Subtitle J, §§4001-4013) with the potential to affect western water infrastructure owned by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation; part of the Department of the Interior). Three sections in Subtitle J (§4007, §4009, and §4011) made alterations that would apply throughout Reclamation’s service area, the 17 states to the west of the Mississippi River. Most of the remaining sections of this subtitle include provisions specific to the Central Valley Project (CVP), a multipurpose water-conveyance system in California operated by Reclamation. Most of Subtitle J’s provisions were derived from bills that received consideration in the 112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses. 

Although most parts of the WIIN Act had broad stakeholder support when enacted, some of Subtitle J’s provisions were (and continue to be) debated. Particularly controversial provisions include those related to implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544) as it relates to endangered salmon and threatened Delta smelt and to California water infrastructure, as well as authorities that alter Reclamation’s approach to water resources project development. The controversy of these provisions was evidenced by President Obama’s signing statement accompanying the bill, which focused on the Obama Administration’s interpretation of Subtitle J, particularly the act’s environmental provisions. 

 The WIIN Act was debated and enacted at a time when California was enduring severe drought. However, by most metrics, the drought in California ended with the wet winter of 2016-2017, which occurred after enactment of the WIIN Act. Regardless of hydrologic status, most of the WIIN Act’s drought provisions are to remain in effect until five years after its enactment, or December 2021. 

Due to the scarcity of water in the West and the importance of federal water infrastructure to the region, western water issues are regularly of interest to lawmakers. In addition to overseeing the implementation of CVP operational provisions in the WIIN Act, Congress also may consider their amendment, extension, or repeal. According to Reclamation, the relatively wet hydrology that followed enactment of the WIIN Act has largely limited opportunities to implement some of the act’s operational authorities, and some federal operational changes pursuant to the WIIN Act reportedly were proposed but deemed incompatible with state requirements. However, some of the operational changes authorized under the act have been implemented. Congress also has appropriated funding authorized for Reclamation (both for the CVP and for other projects) under the bill. CRS estimates that from FY2017 to FY2019, Congress appropriated a total of approximately $575 million for Reclamation projects and programs authorized under the WIIN Act. Some of the bill’s authorities have met their appropriations ceilings; thus, they may be proposed for extension or amendment. 

This report discusses selected provisions enacted under Subtitle J of the WIIN Act. It provides background and context related to selected drought- and water-related provisions, summarizes the changes authorized in the WIIN Act, and discusses issues and questions that Congress may consider. For additional background on the CVP, see CRS Report R45342, Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation, by Charles V. Stern and Pervaze A. Sheikh. 

 Excellent!

Enjoy!

"There is science, logic, reason; there is thought verified by experience. And then there is California." - Edward Abbey     

The Water Report IMAR Article: 'Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge' - Basin Scale Implementation of MAR

This article by David R. Tuthill, Jr. and Ronald D. Carlson of the Recharge Development Corporation appeared in Issue #176 (15 October 2018) of The Water Report. Editor David Light granted me permission to post it here.

David Tuthill is a former director of the Idaho Department of Water Resources. I met him for the first time at a meeting of the Western States Water Council in Newport last August and we talked about the IMAR approach. It's intriguing although I have not yet delved into it in great detail. I need to think about its 'patentable' aspect.

Download Incentivized_MAR_TWR

Here is the introductory material.

Introduction

A process of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge, utilizing ownership of marketable Aquifer Recharge Units is being implemented within Idaho’s Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer. A powerful tool in establishing balanced and sustainable aquifer management, the Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge program could have beneficial application in suitable water basins throughout the West.

Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) may be defined as processes designed to move water from land surface to aquifer storage. MAR has been conducted in various locations throughout the world since ancient times. Modern MAR efforts in the western United States have been frequently documented in The Water Report (see Recharge References below). Virtually all of these efforts, however, have been undertaken by or through a governmental entity (state or municipal), or by a private entity at a local scale involving one or just a few wells. The State of Arizona created a basin-wide opportunity for crediting recharge water but this system applies only in Arizona. While localized efforts in other basins have been implemented, to date they do not provide cost-effective incentivized solutions at a basin scale.

The Recharge Development Corporation (RDC) is an Idaho corporation created for the purpose of developing infrastructure, processes, and strategies that will facilitate water retention projects to benefit residents and water users in the State of Idaho.

RDC is helping incentivize Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer entities to be involved in MAR through the application of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge (patent-pending).

Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge (IMAR) includes the following seven concepts:

1) Ownership of Aquifer Recharge Units (ARUs) that are fungible, have value, can be bought and sold and are directly analogous to the space acquired in a surface reservoir

2) MAR volumes are measured and the measured volumes are allocated to ARUs which each represent one acre-foot of virtual space in an aquifer, and are fully tracked

3) Real-time measurements of MAR volumes are based on surface water flow measurements. The evacuation of ARU storage generally relates to a pumped volume attributed to the ARU holder

4) Water allocated to owned ARUs becomes available to enable pumping. When the ability to pump under other established water rights would otherwise not be available, allocated ARU storage can be withdrawn and used as a supplemental water supply — in the same manner in which surface storage credited to the space of a reservoir space holder is used to supplement a surface water right (entitlement) to divert natural stream flow

5) Canal companies are commonly non-profit corporations created to distribute allocated water supplies to the stockholders of the company. Similarly, a local non-profit organization that is owned and operated by ARU owners is established under state law to accomplish long-term management of the ARUs and associated MAR within a basin

6) The ARUs are associated on a one-to-one basis with the shares of stock in the local non-profit corporation

7) Specific MAR allocation protocols that are similar to an allocation priority are applied to certain ARUs based on the date of acquisition of the shares

An eighth concept that is being investigated and discussed but has not yet been achieved is to treat a local aquifer as an additional reservoir that is fully integrated with the surface reservoirs in a basin. Implementation of this concept is a work in progress.

This article provides an overview of the unique IMAR process. From its genesis, a group of Idaho water users, lawyers, engineers and technical experts developed the operational concepts and legal approach for a defensible and robust IMAR program. The article discusses: ARUs; municipal applications; ground water district applications; tribal opportunities; and costs. The existing implementation in the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer in Idaho is described. Criteria for other eligible basins are listed. The result is a case for application of these concepts in other basins throughout the western United States and internationally. 

Cutting to the chase.....

Conclusion

The principals of RDC have spent eight years developing the concepts and techniques described in this paper, to provide for implementation of Incentivized Managed Aquifer Recharge. The system is now operational in one basin, with movements toward starting the process in many others. These processes provide opportunities for implementation of conjunctive management and for additional beneficial use of water in the spirit of western water law. The principals look forward to assisting others with implementation of these concepts.

For additional information:

Dave tuthill, Recharge Development Corporation, 208/ 870-0345 or dave@idahowaterengineering.com

Good stuff!

Enjoy!

"When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves." - Viktor Frankl (quoted in @Forbes via @TheWeek)

 

Bless Their Hearts! NWF's Texas Living Waters Project Produces 'Best Bets for Texas Water' - A Guidebook for Texas' Water Future

Sarah Bates of the National Wildlife Federtation - one of the  brightest lights when it comes to the Western  water-land nexus - just sent me this missive about the Texas Living Waters Project. 

Funny I would receive this today. I just finished sending Texas Water Wonk (H2OWonk) extraordinaire Todd Votteler a message. He is editing a fiuture (July 2019) issue of Water Resources IMPACT on - you guessed it - Texas Water! Stay tuned!

 Here's Sarah's email:

NWF’s Texas Living Waters Project team has released an educational guidebook that establishes our positions on and explores the pros and cons of different water supply options in Texas. You can view the interactive guidebook here: https://texaslivingwaters.org/bestbets

This project came together thanks to many contributions and rounds of revisions from the Texas Living Waters policy, science and conservation team. Please send congratulations to: Tom Spencer, Annie Schmitt, Norman Johns, Jennifer Walker, Myron Hess, Susan Kaderka, Ruthie Redmond (Sierra Club) and Paula Paciorek (Galveston Bay Foundation).

In addition to this online release, our team will be leading outreach efforts through webinars for both reporters and the general public, and will leverage our print booklet to build relationships through a state legislative briefing, the Texas Tribune’s Rural Texas Symposium, and one-on-one meetings with local representatives in key counties.

Here’s the release we sent out earlier this week:

Free educational resource helps Texans play an informed role in preparing for Texas’ water future

The Texas Living Waters Project, a coalition of National Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter and Galveston Bay Foundation, will release Best Bets for Texas Water this Thursday, Oct. 25. This guidebook explores strategies in Texas’ water security toolbox so that communities can prepare for both flood and drought without sacrificing wildlife and the environment.

The heavy rainfall that parts of Texas have experienced in recent weeks is consistent with climate change studies that predict more intense periods of both flood and drought across the state, causing hardship as communities struggle to prepare for both water extremes. Even as flooding events become more intense, Texas’ inevitable droughts will continue to threaten the long-term viability of the state’s water supplies.

While the most recent (2017) State Water Plan predicts a steadily rising population and growing municipal needs during the next 50 years, it also predicts the state will increasingly have fewer existing water supplies and higher potential for water shortages. As Texans grapple with the challenge of providing enough water for a growing state and a changing climate, the Best Bets for Texas Water guidebook breaks down the pros and cons of different water supply strategies so that community leaders, water suppliers and residents alike can understand the potential impacts of different water supply decisions.

This resource evaluates nine different water supply and management strategies against the following criteria:

• Environment: How does this strategy impact rivers, springs, bays and wildlife?
• True costs: This criteria looks beyond dollar signs to the big picture. How does this strategy affect the Texas economy (and water customers whose wallets foot the bill for water supply projects)?
• Long-term viability: Decades from now, will this strategy have been worth the investment? Looking forward, are there any opportunities and concerns that we already know to expect?

“The good news is that many strategies exist for Texas communities to prepare for a future with more people and less water,” said Tom Spencer, director of the Texas Living Waters Project. “But when it comes to implementing these strategies, the stakes are high. If water supply projects aren’t examined closely and done carefully, water could be wasted, rivers could be depleted, and wildlife could be harmed – all while Texans foot the costly bill.”

Texans can utilize this resource to better understand some of the strategies that will likely be considered during upcoming planning and decision-making processes, such as the 2019 Texas legislative session and the utility-led development of five-year Water Conservation Plans, due May 2019. As the individuals who typically bear the cost burden of water supply strategies through the water rates they pay, residents can use the information in this guide to hold decision-makers accountable for state and local water management approaches.

In addition to the digital version of this resource, the educational tool is also available upon request as a physical booklet. Texans hoping to take a deeper dive into these materials may do so by registering for a webinar that the Texas Living Waters Project team will host on Wednesday, Nov. 7 at 11 a.m. Central Time.

Press contact:

Tom Spencer
Director, Texas Living Waters Project
spencert@nwf.org, 512-610-7763

The Texas Living Waters Project is a collaboration of conservation groups working to ensure that there will always be enough fresh water. We do this by using science-based advocacy to encourage balanced approaches to Texas water management. It’s important for our wildlife, our economy and our kids.

I would have loved to have seen 'Best Bets for Nevada' but that's just me.

Enjoy!

"If that ain’t a fact, God’s a possum." - Texas saying