Water as a Commodity

Statewide Study: Should Water Be a Commodity?

Members  met in October to discuss the questions raised by the state study committee on water resources and the trend to make them a commodity. LWV-TSC sponsored a public meeting last February on this topic, calling on experts in the field to help us better understand the issues involved. A Facts & Issues background paper is available to all members at lwvtexas.org

Members were called upon to answer four key questions:

  1. Should water be regulated differently from oil and gas?
  2. Our opinions on the “rule of capture” and groundwater conservation districts.
  3. Should water be transferred to dry areas of the state from areas with more water resources? How should it be done?
  4. Should groundwater be regulated the same as surface water, or should different rules apply?

In January 2012 a new League position on this issue will be approved and published on this site.

QUESTIONS for DISCUSSION and

CONSENSUS on Water as a Commodity

1. Texas has a mandate to preserve and conserve the water of the state. Both groundwater and oil and gas are  considered the property of the landowner. Should water continue to be regulated differently from oil and gas?

Choose one.

a) Like oil and gas, groundwater in place is private property. There is no reason to regulate the two differently.

b) While there are some similarities between water and oil and gas, water serves a much different function, and it should  be managed for the benefit of the people and the protection of the resource.

Comment:

2. The “Rule of Capture” has been modified by the creation of groundwater conservation districts (GCD’s). How do you feel about the following issues? Yes or no.

a) If a water district prevents the owners of underground water from selling as much water as they want, thereby depriving them of income, the landowners should be compensated for loss of potential income.

b) Locally controlled groundwater conservation districts should have the power to regulate groundwater use in a way that protects landowner water rights from neighboring water withdrawal and to conserve the aquifer.

c) The state should enact laws strengthening the rights and responsibilities of GCD’s in order to improve their ability to defend against lawsuits questioning those rights.

d) Groundwater should be owned and permitted by the state, as is surface water.

Comment:

3. Transfers of water from areas of surplus to areas of scarcity have been discussed. Which of the following options would best serve Texans? Choose one or more.

a) A state agency with strong enforcement powers should regulate all water transfers to make sure that water resources are not depleted.

b) The state should allow water transfers through an exchange agency that lets price float with the market. Buyers would determine the successful bidder, not the state.

c) There is no need for the state to regulate water transfers. Because of the expense and distances involved, localities will solve this problem without interference from the state.

d) The state should only intervene when transfers are in dispute.

Comment:

4. What steps should be taken to ensure that future growth makes the best use of limited water resources? Choose one or more.

a) Developers should not be allowed to build unless they are able to find enough water for the project.

b) Requiring permits would limit growth. Market forces plus the price of water should determine what gets built.

c) There should be mandatory public interest review of water transfers that considers potential third-party impacts and protects the environment.

d) Water moved to urban areas should not endanger the future economies of rural Texas.

Comment:

5. Should groundwater be regulated differently from surface water or should the same rules apply?

Choose one.

a) Groundwater and surface water are so interrelated that the same rules should apply.

b) Because groundwater is less quantifiable, it should be governed by a different set of regulations and different agencies.

Comment:

Should Water Be a Commodity?

Background Paper with Facts & Issues on the management of Texas Water Resources

 

 

 

LWV Study on Water as Commodity

Focus: An update of the LWV-Texas Water position to consider the competition for water in Texas, including governmental policy, public interest rights, and water resource protection concerns.

Scope:

  • Analyze current state regulations that govern the sale or transfer of water rights
  • Consider ramifications if Texas were to classify water as a commodity rather than a natural resource
  • Explore options such as a state-run water marketing administration
  • Assess laws that would be needed for interstate or international water transfers
  • Assess the best use of our water (i.e., public interest concerns, environmental factors, effect on third parties, future water requirements)