|
Views on proposed Marvin Nichols reservoir expressed at water meeting |
|||
|
By LYNN MONTGOMERY | East Texas Edition |
|||
August 8, 2002 -- What comes to mind when someone says the word "hot?" Could it be the weather or maybe a pepper? For many people in East Texas, water comes to mind because of the controversy over the proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir. Due to this "hot" water controversy, there will likely be people who get burned. From timber industry representatives to environmentalists, from farmers and ranchers to state representatives, from conservationists to concerned citizens, people are coming together to express their views about water. The combined forces convened at the July 22 Region C water planning meeting at the Trinity River Authority Central Wastewater Treatment Plant in Grand Prairie. Region C will receive the majority of the water from the proposed reservoir. Before the meeting, a crowd of over 150 people, sweltering under a blazing sun, stood for a short press conference to voice adamant opposition to the proposed reservoir. "Meet the faces of a new coalition," said Rita Beving, conservation co-chairman of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club of Dallas. "From Dalby Springs to Dallas, from Denton to Texarkana ... in all of my years as an activist, I have never seen such dedication from a group united for a single cause." Waving fans that read "No Nickels for Nichols," opponents listened and cheered as each spokesman stated their heartfelt sentiments. "We would like to plead with the people of Dallas to conserve a little water, and this (the building of the reservoir) would be totally unnecessary," said Shirley Shumake of DeKalb. "We want to pass along what we have to our children and grandchildren." Shumake, along with brother Max, are founding members of the Sulphur River Oversight Society (SOS). SOS is leading strong opposition to the reservoir and organized around 50 people from the East Texas area to make the chartered bus ride to the July 23 meeting. "I've been fighting these kinds of battles against wasteful 'water hustling' projects for over 30 years, " said state Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth. " We don't want to pay for these mistakes." During the meeting's public comment time, Burnam went on to say he knew that serving on the water planning group was a voluntary job for most and he appreciated the commitment they made. "I think you could take it (Marvin Nichols) out of your plan if you wanted too and I think you would be well advised if you did. I don't think this reservoir is necessary," Burnam stated. "I think it is being pushed for private agenda versus public agenda. I don't think we have put enough interest in conservation." Aggressive conservation measures echoed many times during the public comment session. "I am here today to talk about toilets," said Ann Drum who proposed a rebate or alternative incentive program to encourage people to replace high water-volume toilets with 1.6 gallon toilets. "There are two approaches, one is give a rebate to people for a portion of what they had to spend to buy the new toilet; another approach is just to provide free toilets." Drum explained that the toilet program has been done in other parts of the United States and at least one Texas city. "New York City achieved a 7 percent reduction in total water consumption using the toilet replacement program. In Austin, they reduced water usage by 20 percent through the toilet replacement program. San Antonio estimates savings of 8,000 to 20,000 gallons per year per toilet replaced." Other suggestions were rainwater harvesting, education, and using native plants. "If we could educate the public on how to properly water their San Augustine and Bermuda grass lawns, then the grass would have a deeper root system. It would take less water and you would still have a beautiful lawn," said David Neighbors from Paris. "One thing everybody is not looking at here. (The metroplex) are trying to get water for the population you think is coming. Somebody has to feed these people and somebody has to entertainment. We have the wildlife for very little cost." Others appealed to the board "not to run their families out of their homes," as the proposed reservoir would take over 72,000 acres, not counting mitigated land. "I've been told wise men change their minds, fools never do; so I hope I am speaking to wise men today," Billie Scroggins Lindsey, from Hagansport, said. "I live on a farm that has been in my family since the early 1900s. My dad and granddad dug the farm out of the Sulphur River bottom with a pick hoe and grubbin axe. I am the fourth generation there. I am real upset that the 250 acres we have has deer, geese, black bear, fox, and one black panther and I hate to see you go in and cover that with water," Lindsey said. "I'm just telling you my heart today. I'm not the only family loosing my land to this lake," Lindsey continued with tears in her eyes. Dickie Dalby, from DeKalb, asked for a show of hands from the crowd and the board who are native Texans. "I am a fifth generation Texan," Dalby said. "I live in an old farmhouse that my great-great-granddaddy built in the 1830s. This is not worthless bottomland. This is a priceless heritage." The proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir, with a $1.6 billion price tag, will flood approximately 72,000 acres. In addition, at this point, no one knows how much land is needed for mitigation or where that land will come from. Opponents believe that if the metroplex uses water wisely and taps from the already 'abundant' water supply, for example, Texoma and Toledo Bend, there will not be a need for this reservoir. Information obtained from the Texas Water Development Board states there is concern for areas with high per capita water use. Per capita water use is defined as the average amount of water used by each person, which is based on calculation of total water used divided by population. For example, Richardson uses 275 gallons per person per day. Houston uses 180 gallons; Austin 213; Tyler 181; San Antonio 173; and Killeen 120. But Austin, Houston and San Antonio all have active conservation programs that promote water use efficiency, according to the Texas water plan. Terrace Stewart, Region C chairman of the North Texas Water Planning Group, thanked everyone for their comments and promised to take those comments into consideration. He added that the water planning group would "make a concerted effort" to listen to the public and "perhaps there is still some work that we can do on the issue." Region C board members were told by Tom Gooch, with Freese and Nichols, that in the scope of work, they (Region C) had a limited budget of $160,000 for optimal conservation task. The name Freese and Nichols is synonymous with water engineering across the state. They are the engineering firm hired by Region C as a water consultant. Freese and Nichols is also one of the partners studying the proposed lake site for the Sulphur River Basin Authority. The name of the proposed lake is Marvin Nichols. |
