Comments on: Texas’ Groundwater Rights in Supreme Court

By: Dawnielle Castledine

Dawnielle Castledine — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:46:39 +0000

The difference between water and food, in the commodity argument, is that food is something that humans are able to create more of and control where it is created. This is dependent on some very important factors (including water supply) but for the most part this stands to be true when compared to water. Water is not something that humans can create on their land. It either is there or it isn’t, whether that be in the form or surface water or groundwater. Once a groundwater supply is “exhausted”, it is usually (though not always) gone for good. Sometimes this is due to infiltration of brackish water from the lowering of water tables, others due to subsidence of land and the loss of underground storage capacity.

Groundwater conservation districts were created by the Texas Legislature primarily to be able to prolong these areas with this groundwater resource for future use, by providing research on the supply, looking into the future of the district in terms of population growth, irrigation needs, city needs and industrial needs, as well as help to plan to meet these needs with the supply by resource management planning, permitting and supplying information on conservation strategies.

I really don’t think it is a Capitalist or Socialist issue but is more of an issue of who is the better manager of a community resource that everyone has a right to. Texas is the only state in the arid and drought prone southwest that doesn’t have a strong regulating authority when it comes to our groundwater. This is due completely to the supply of water being a finite resource, and the desire to make it last as long as possible for all of the members of these state’s populations.

Full disclosure: I am an Environmental Science and Policy major in Austin, TX. I don’t own land. I don’t farm or have irrigation needs. I am curious though, why are GCDs such a threat to landowners, who may or may not have irrigation needs, that they feel wronged by GCDs constitutional right (Texas Water Code) to permit and apply limits? Are the CGDs really setting that much of a cap on pumping amounts?

By: The Baines Report » Featured Spring '10 Showcase: Energy & Environment » Thirsty Texas

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:35:02 +0000

[...] boy, do we fight over water. Water makes frequent appearances in Texas Supreme Court trials about rights to pump groundwater and flooding due to construction and the operation of water reservoirs. Fighting over water reached [...]

By: Craig Jones

Craig Jones — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:56:17 +0000

Water IS a commodity. Whether one wants to consider it as such is simply a matter of personal belief. Just like food, water is a precious commodity that all people need for survival. We don’t seem to have a significant problem in accepting food as a tradable commodity in which some derive profits; why should water be different?

There is a basic question that we all must ask ourselves: Who do we believe can/will do the best job of allocating scarce (?) resources, the government or the market?

Capitalist believe that the market provides the best means for allocating resources. Given that one of our country’s primary problems is obesity amongst the poor, I would say that our capitalist experiment has done a fantastic job at allocating food.

Socialist believe that governments and committees are the most efficient allocators of scarce resources. Can we think of any example to prove this theory.

Thanks for the website
craig jones

By: Bill Butler

Bill Butler — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 05:30:39 +0000

This is what I studied in college, pleased to see the conversation pop up on twitter. I’m glad the supreme court is forced to face the question, but ultimately the truth won’t be universal here. I will be looking for the final decision on this one.

In my opinion water is a commodity because it takes time & energy to obtain the resource for use & time is money. This principle is at the core of our free market society & globally too. Also at our core is a sense of right & wrong, it needs to be applied to each case as it comes down the pipe. Broad sweeping legislation can cause more trouble than good when a ruling attempts to define & control relatively natural cycles. We are nature & I think people know what to do.