Vote focuses on protecting East Texas water resources

By LYNN MONTGOMERY | East Texas Edition

May 26, 2005 - The North East Texas Regional Water Planning Group (NETRWPG) has concluded Marvin Nichols I Reservoir should not be included in any of the state's regional water plans, and voted at their May 18 meeting to issue this recommendation to the state's water board.

The group decided their recommendation should read:

"Due to the significant negative impacts upon environmental factors, agricultural resources/rural areas, other natural resources, and third parties, Marvin Nichols I Reservoir should not be included as a water management strategy in any 2006 regional water plan or the 2007 State Water Plan. Accordingly, inclusion of the Marvin Nichols I Reservoir in any regional water plan would be inconsistent with the region's efforts to ensure the long-term protection of the region's water resources, agricultural resources and natural resources."

The 16-6 vote carried the measure, and now the recommendation will be sent to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) by June 1.

The board discussed the recommendation's language for over an hour at the meeting in Mount Pleasant, and a portion of the discussion was about an amendment proposed by Hopkins County board member Beth Wisenbaker

Wisenbaker wanted to add an amendment that would specify George Parkhouse 1 as an alternative for the metroplex if they exhausted all other conservation measures or water resource strategies.

George Parkhouse would be built in northern Hopkins/southern Delta counties.

"We should be considerate of our neighbors to the west," Wisenbaker said about the Dallas metroplex population.

"I've been on this board going on seven years and have yet seen our neighbors consider us," responded C.W. Forsyth of Morris County, which drew applause from the audience.

"They have to prove a reservoir is needed," said Camp County's Vernon Rowe.

"We are making the statement (with the recommmendation) we firmly believe this," began Marion County's John Bradley. "I don't think we need an amendment."

Wisenbaker's proposed amendment failed.

The board continued the language deliberation, and Harrison County's Richard Letourneau said, "In December 2002, we went through a lot of semantics on words that meant nothing. This reservoir is keeping thousands of people upset and disrupting their lives. With our thoughts, we demoted the reservoir but we really didn't."

Letourneau stated he recently talked to two of the "high ups at TWDB" and was told the only way to completely eliminate the reservoir was to cause a conflict.

"How do we create a conflict? 'Take it out of our plan,' was the response. We do have a conflict with Region C (metroplex) on this issue. We have shown Region C many options. The water is available. It (the reservoir) can be put in the plan just like it can be taken out. As long as it's there, Region C can build the reservoir," Letourneau concluded.

The question was then proposed to TWDB representative Virginia Towles: "How do you take it out of the plan?"

"I don't hear the phrase 'out of the plan' tossed around. If there is a conflict, that will have to be evaluated by the TWDB. It is not a cut-and-dry issue," Towles said.

With this information, the board took another vote, with the above-quoted language, and the recommmendation passed

The preliminary plan also does not recommend any of the previous 15 potential lake sites to be built.

"The is the best birthday present I could have asked for," said George Frost who will be celebrating his 62nd birthday at the end of the month.

"We made a big statement here today," stated Letourneau.

"I appreciate the votes from all of you who have heard our cries and pleas," said Max Shumake, a strong advocate against Marvin Nichols.

The next step for the plan will be a public comment hearing. It has been set to begin at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Aug. 2, at the civic center in Gilmer.

The next NETRWPG meeting will be at 1 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 17, at the Mount Pleasant Extension office.