Tag Archive for: subsidence

Truth is the First Casualty In Water Wars, Too

Aeschylus, the ancient Greek playwright coined the phrase, “The first casualty in war is truth.” The same is true of water wars. In an attempt to justify unlimited groundwater pumping from the Jasper aquifer, a headline in a Montgomery County online newspaper trumpeted, “University Of Houston Study Shows No Linkage Between Deep Groundwater Production And Subsidence In Montgomery County.” But wait! Is that what the study really said? The article did not provide a link to the actual study. So how could you tell if the review was accurate? It’s not. Below are just a few of the reasons why.

Contradictions Between Study and Newspaper’s Summary

The UH study didn’t study Montgomery County. It looked only at Harris-Galveston Subsidence District Regulatory Areas 1 and 2. They cover only SOUTHERN Harris and Galveston counties! Researchers found no subsidence associated with the Jasper there. That’s because virtually no one pumps the Jasper there (See Jasper well location map below).  The article’s anonymous author forgot to mention that though.

“Don’t Extrapolate Results,” But They Did

The UH study also carefully cautions readers not to extrapolate the results from the study area to other areas. But the newspaper did it and forgot to mention the caution also.

Newspaper Falsely Claims Study Suggests “No Subsidence”

The newspaper author claimed that the study “suggests that Montgomery County utilities, municipalities, homeowner’s associations, and other large-scale groundwater users could draw water production from the Jasper aquifer without causing any subsidence at the surface of Montgomery County.” The UH study makes no such suggestion. 

Claimed “No Need for Regulation,” Contrary to UH Findings

The newspaper author goes on to claim that the study “also suggests that, as long as groundwater production comes from the Jasper or lower formations (such as the Upper Catahoula Formation), there is little need, if any, for any groundwater regulation whatsoever.” Again, the UH study makes no such suggestion. 

Quite the contrary, the UH study says that regulation was effective in slowing the subsidence found in other aquifers along the gulf coast that were being depleted, such as the Evangeline and Chicot. 

Newspaper Claim of 100% Annual Recharge Not Substantiated by Study

The newspaper author also says that, “Since the quantity of groundwater in Montgomery County is essentially unlimited, and since Montgomery County aquifers enjoy almost 100% recharge annually after production drawdowns have occurred, there would seem to be no reason whatsoever to regulate groundwater production from the Jasper aquifer and the Catahoula aquifer.” The study makes no mention of recharge rates in either of those aquifers.

Newspaper Implies “No Need for Regulation” but Study Says It Helped

Finally, the anonymous newspaper author concludes by saying, “The University of Houston study suggests that it’s time for the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District to bring the entire over-regulation of groundwater to a crashing halt.” The study made no such recommendation.

Inferring that the UH scientists even implied that would require turning the the study’s findings on their head. Quite the contrary. The study explicitly states that regulations implemented in 1975 with the formation of the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District slowed out-of-control subsidence.

Newspaper Article Not Signed

Jumpin’ Jasper! What’s going on here? Who wrote this unsigned article? Was it someone who stands to profit financially from pumping the Jasper dry? 

Why Water Not Pumped From Southern Part of Jasper

For the record, the Jasper dips toward the coast along a roughly north-to-south axis. The Jasper aquifer contains fresh water in Montgomery County and northern Harris County. But south of that, it becomes brackish. The water is too salty to use. That’s a big reason why virtually no one pumps it in the southern part of the region.

This map shows the freshwater limits of the Jasper aquifer in 2010. For the most part, the freshwater portion of the Jasper aquifer does not extend to the area of interest studied by the UH scholars.

The down-dip part of the Jasper toward the coast also goes very deep. At the southern limit of freshwater, depth ranges to thousands of feet in places (see bottom of colored area below). Why would you drill that deep if you could get fresher water from aquifers like the Chicot and Evangeline much closer to the surface?

From Page 30 of Hydrogeology and Simulation of Ground-Water Flow and Land-Surface Subsidence in the Northern Part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5102, USGS

Subsidence Already Noted in Northern Part of Jasper

Those are the reasons why the UH scholars do not associate subsidence with the Jasper in southern Harris and Montgomery Counties. That does NOT mean subsidence won’t happen in other areas where utilities DO pump the Jasper. It already has.

Map showing contours of the average subsidence rate (mm/year) during the time span from 2006 to 2012. From “Is There Deep-Seated Subsidence in the Houston-Galveston Area?”, Page 2.

However, USGS well-water height readings north of Highway 99 show severe drawdown near the population centers in southern Montgomery and northern Harris Counties. And surprise, surprise! That also happens to be the area where most subsidence has occurred in Montgomery County.

Unsustainable Pumping Rates

While the advocates of unlimited groundwater pumping want you to believe that the aquifer recharge rates in Montgomery County equal the drawdown rate, they don’t. The Jasper aquifer is being drawn down in populated places at more than 10 FEET per year (see graph below). But USGS estimates that the recharge rate for the Jasper is as little as ONE-TENTH of an INCH per year. That means some utilities have been using up Jasper water 1200 times faster than nature replaces it.

This well drilled in the Jasper aquifer near the Woodlands showed an average decline of approximately 10 feet per year (about 180 feet in 18 years).
USGS map showing 2000-2018 Water-Level Decreases/Increases (left) vs. Well Locations (right) for the Jasper Aquifer. This USGS viewer lets you see different aquifers over different time periods and check water level changes for any well near you. Most of Montgomery County’s major declines happened near major population centers.

Truth or Consequences

Ground level declines produce fault movement and subsidence. They translate to infrastructure damage and flooding. 

As water levels decline, water wells begin to have problems producing. They lose “yield,” which means they can’t produce as much water in a given time period. This requires the wells to run longer to meet demand. It costs more to lift water. Longer run times increase maintenance costs.  Pumps have to be lowered. The motors have to be upsized, which requires electrical rewiring. 

Some well pumps can’t be lowered any farther, which may mean abandoning and replacing the well. Some water level decline is expected. But those who argue that Montgomery County has an unlimited supply of water are just ludicrous. The harder you pump, the more decline you get, and with that comes all the consequences of declines. 

Why People Want to Believe the Unbelievable

Montgomery County residents have found the change from well to surface water financially difficult. People WANT to believe that unlimited groundwater pumping is safe. I just hope they don’t wind up putting all their water lillies in one pond, so to speak. 

The only thing worse than expensive water is no water. Or no water plus infrastructure damaged by subsidence.

Selective Perception Amplified by Selective Deception

Selective perception is a well known cognitive bias. It describes the process by which people perceive what they want to in media messages while ignoring opposing viewpoints. However, in this case, it seems that selective deception is amplifying the bias.

Don’t take my word. Read the newspaper article and then read the actual study on which the article is based. I provide links so you can make up your own mind; the newspaper article did not.

Other Useful References

Below are some other useful publications from the U.S. Geological Survey which is part of the Department of the Interior.

USGS Subsidence home page. Contains dozens of useful publications on Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence, plus raw data in numerous formats.

Hydrogeology and Simulation of Ground-Water Flow and Land-Surface Subsidence in the Northern Part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System, Texas By Mark C. Kasmarek and James L. Robinson, 2004

Groundwater Withdrawals 1976, 1990, and 2000–10 and Land-Surface-Elevation Changes 2000–10 in Harris, Galveston, Fort Bend, Montgomery, and Brazoria Counties, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5034, By Mark C. Kasmarek and Michaela R. Johnson

Land Surface Subsidence in Harris County between 1915 and 2001.

Water-Level Altitudes 2016 and Water-Level Changes in the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper Aquifers and Compaction 1973–2015 in the Chicot and Evangeline Aquifers, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5034, U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey

Evaluation of Ground-Water Flow and Land-Surface Subsidence Caused by Hypothetical
Withdrawals in the Northern Part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5024, U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey by Mark C. Kasmarek, Brian D. Reece, and Natalie A. Houston

Also, don’t forget to check out the subsidence tab under the Reports page of this web site.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/27/2019

697 Days after Hurricane Harvey

“Is There Deep-Seated Subsidence in the Houston-Galveston Area?” by Jiangbo Yu, Guoquan Wang, Timothy J. Kearns, and Linqiang Yang, Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, National Center for Airborne LiDAR Mapping, 312 Science & Research Building 1, Room 312, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204-5007, USA. Copyright © 2014 Jiangbo Yu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, International Journal of Geophysics, Volume 2014, Article ID 942834, 11 pages.

Note: All thoughts in this post represent my opinions on matters of public interest and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.

Those Who Deny History Are Doomed To Repeat It: Subsidence in 1974 and 2019

My post about Conroe escalating the Montgomery County water wars and putting millions of people in the crossfire from subsidence drew a response from Simon Sequeira, president of Quadvest. Sequiera is one of the litigants arguing for unlimited pumping of groundwater. On Facebook, he dismissively said, “Rehak has an elementary understanding of the issues.”

Who are Simon Sequiera and Quadvest?

Quadvest claims to be the “fastest growing, privately-owned utility company in Southeast Texas.” It has aggressive growth goals. Unlimited pumping of cheap groundwater would help them attain those goals. I consider Mr. Sequeira’s criticism with that in mind. He has some self-interest in this fight. If he wins, he gets even richer. Unfortunately, for millions of people in the Gulf Coast region, money has a short memory.

Denying History Means Learning the Hard Way

The history of Quadvest goes back only 40 years, so this 1974 Texas Monthly article about subsidence may not be part of Mr. Sequeira’s or the company’s institutional memory. William Broyles wrote it. Broyles helped found Texas Monthly and won numerous national magazine awards, one of the highest honors in journalism. Broyles later went on to a distinguished film career as a screenwriter.

The article, titled Disaster, Part Two: Houston, discusses subsidence. It begins with the story of a home – built less than 10 feet above sea level – that had subsided 10 feet in the previous 30 years, three of those feet in just the previous 10 years. The home was separated from the shore and surrounded by sand bags when Broyles wrote the article.

It was one of 448 homes in Brownwood, an exclusive subdivision in Baytown, that actually sank into Galveston Bay.

Cause of Subsidence

In the next paragraph Broyles discusses the cause: “Across the Houston Ship Channel, … the booming plants and industries of the world’s largest petro-chemical complex and the nation’s third largest port had set in motion an inexorable geologic process which destined their quiet neighborhood for the bottom of Galveston Bay. This great agricultural, industrial, and refining economy—and its population—have been fueled by 190 billion gallons of water a year, available easily and cheaply from industrial and municipal wells. These wells have steadily drained the Evangeline and Chicot aquifers (underground water storage systems) faster than they are refilled by annual rainfall. Each year the wells must go deeper to find water. Because of the region’s geology, water is a vital structural component of the clay and sand underlying the land surface; when it is removed, the land sinks.”

One aquifer in Montgomery County is being depleted 500 times faster than its recharge rate. This is clearly not sustainable.

Alternate Doomsday Scenario

Because of its proximity to sea level, Brownwood felt the effects of subsidence first. But the article goes on to discuss the effects of subsidence in the Sixties and Seventies on Pasadena, League City, Clear Lake, the San Jacinto Battle Ground, Galveston, Texas City, and the Johnson Space Center.

The doomsday scenario most feared then and now is a giant hurricane pushing storm surge up the Bay.

The specter of subsidence was so feared by the people of the time that it led to the creation of the Houston-Galveston Subsidence District by the Texas Legislature in 1975, just months after Broyles wrote the article.

Of course, most of Montgomery County is higher than the area bordering Galveston Bay. So why should Montgomery County residents worry?

Red contours show subsidence in last century. Blue contours show subsidence in first 16 years of this century. Note how the small red circle near Jersey Village (A) quickly expanded to the large blue circle around it. Also note (B) the widening gap between red and blue at the top of the frame. This shows that areas that depend on groundwater, i.e., Montgomery County, are subsiding faster than those on surface water, i.e., most of Harris County. Source: Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

Water level declines start at the well locations where the aquifer is being overpumped.  They call the drawdown curves “cones of depression.” Any local district allowing unlimited groundwater pumping would be impacted first and most. Then the effects would spread to neighboring counties such as Harris and Liberty. This could reduce the gradient of the San Jacinto, causing floodwaters to move slower or accumulate in certain places. Jersey Village is already experiencing this type of flooding due to excessive pumping that put it in the center of a giant bowl.

Fault Activation and Property Damage

Broyles’ article goes on to describe another fear: the activation of faults. “Subsidence caused by massive water withdrawal from regions of high compressibility has also nudged into activity more than 1000 miles of faults. These faults, which generally run parallel to the coast, range in displacement from several inches to eight feet. Such a fault has caused the variation in subsidence at the San Jacinto Monument, where one end of the reflecting pool has sunk three feet and the other end six feet.” 

“This faulting,” continues Broyles, “… exacerbates the problems caused by relatively even subsidence; sewers, pipelines, foundations, sensitive catalytic units, and other highly sophisticated structures cannot survive faulting.”

A recent study by SMU, funded by NASA, confirms that fault activation is still a very real threat from subsidence in Montgomery County.

One economic geologist quoted by Broyles in 1975 characterized faults as “slow motion earthquakes.” There’s no shortage of pipelines, wells, and oilfield instructure. We should not forget that Humble Oil Company turned into one of the world’s largest brands, Exxon, and started right here. Also, there’s other infrastructure like roads, sewers and water distribution networks to be concerned about in northern Harris and southern Montgomery Counties.

Private Vs. Public Interest

If Mr. Sequeira is smart, he will pay close attention to the end of Broyles’ article. Broyles concludes with a discussion of a massive and messy class-action lawsuit between those fighting for unlimited pumping and those whose property was damaged.

Broyles said, “…People … endangered by subsidence are not accepting the extinction of their property … stoically.”

That should give everyone on both sides of the current water war lots to think about.

Many wells and pipelines run through the Lake Houston watershed. Hmmmm. Subsidence, faulting, ruptures, drinking water for 2 million people. It’s easy to see how this could get even uglier. Before there is any resolution, history may repeat itself.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/22/2019

692 Days since Hurricane Harvey

All thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public safety and interest. They are protected by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the Great State of Texas.

Life Out of Balance

In addition to monitoring sand mining legislation, I have spent the last several days drafting and redrafting my own letter to the Army Corps and TCEQ about the proposed new high-rise development for Kingwood.

I’m not done with my letter yet. I keep discovering alarming facts. They raise questions about the wisdom of such a development in a fragile, wetlands environment.

Surprising Discoveries

A marina to hold 640 yachts could fill the the entire West Fork. Lined up bow to stern, they would stretch at least 16,000 feet – the entire distance from the marina to the mouth bar. Talk about traffic jams and impacts on navigation! (Hint: Navigation is one of the things that the Corps considers.)

Then I started to think about the population increase and the water supply. Five thousand condos at 2.71 people per household (Kingwood average) PLUS a 50 story hotel, would add about 15,000 people to Kingwood’s population – about a 20 percent increase.

Kingwood is on well water drawn from the Evangeline Aquifer. USGS shows that the water level in the aquifer is decreasing at the rate of 1.7 feet per year, but only recharging at one-tenth of one inch per year, We’re using up the aquifer 200 times faster than the recharge rate! A twenty percent increase would kick that rate up to 240X. (Hint: the Corps also considers impacts on the water supply.)

Depletion rate of the Evangeline aquifer near the site of the proposed high-rise development in Kingwood is unsustainable.

Think maybe this could have to do with increasing rates of subsidence and your foundation problems? Check out this AP article that shows what subsidence is doing in Tehran. (Hint: the Corps considers environmental impacts, safety, economics, and the welfare of the public, too.)

Wrong Number and a Hang Up

With that pleasant thought, I decided to call the developer to see if we could talk about some of my concerns. Surprise! The developer does not answer the phone number listed in the Public Notice. The people who answer the phone tell me I have the “Wrong number” and hang up. So I sent a certified letter requesting a public meeting to discuss these issues. We shall see if he responds. Many of the phone numbers for the developers’ other companies are not live. It kind of makes you wonder who you’re dealing with.

Putting it All into Perspective

The deeper I dig, the more concerned I become about connections between the high-rise development, sand mining and legislation. Are we encouraging unsustainable practices? Stay with me for a second.

It all reminds me of a classic 1952 science fiction book called The Space Merchants by Pohl and Kornbluth.  I read it decades ago.

In a vastly overpopulated near-future world, businesses have taken the place of governments and now hold all political power. The public is constantly deluded into thinking that all the products on the market improve quality of life.

The book illustrates how production/consumption cycles thrive. On a small scale, think about movie theaters putting more salt on popcorn, so you’ll buy a $5 soft drink that costs a penny to make.

On a grander scale think about sand mining in the flood plain to get cheap sand. So that these developers can build high rises in the flood plain. And sell them thanks to below-cost government flood insurance. That you and I pay for with our taxes. When all we really wanted to do was take a walk by the river and enjoy the serenity … that’s being destroyed.

Nesting pair of great egrets seconds after their first egg hatched. I call this shot, “Proud Parents.” By Bob Rehak.

It also reminded me of a movie called Koyaanisqatsi released in 1982. Francis Ford Coppola executive-produced it. It’s 90 minutes of world-class cinematography. The visual tempo increases from languid when we see nature photography in the beginning – to frenetic at the end when we see nature being overpowered by man and technology. Imagine time-lapse photography applied to evolution that accelerates at a dizzying pace.

The title, a Navajo phrase meaning “life out of balance”, is revealed at the end. The movie makes its point without speaking a word. It created an impression that’s still vivid after 35 years. I highly recommend it if you want to feel what’s happening to the San Jacinto in your bones.

You can buy or rent the movie through the iTunes Store or Amazon Prime Video. It’s a classic in the documentary genre.

Connecting the Dots

The book, the movie, the high-rise development and the sand mines make you want to scream “Enough already.” We need to restore balance. Live life in harmony with nature. Isn’t that what we wanted for our children when we decided to buy homes in Kingwood?

I’m sure that someone will say, “But we need the tax revenues.” To which I will say, “If we weren’t destroying our own environment maybe we wouldn’t need such high taxes.

A couple hundred million tax dollars to dredge!? Maybe that sand isn’t so cheap after all. I know emotion won’t sway the Corps and TCEQ, but dammit, “Enough already!”

Posted by Bob Rehak on January 25, 2019

514 Days since Hurricane Harvey

As always, these represent my opinions on matters of public police. They are protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the Great State of Texas.

Subsidence, Flooding and the Lone Star Ground Water Conservation District Election

Note: If you are from Harris County, you cannot vote in this election, but it still affects you. Please forward this link to friends in Montgomery County. This is an update of a previous post and recommends some candidates at the end.

Next Tuesday, Montgomery County voters will elect board members to the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) for the first time ever. Some candidates advocate using more groundwater, a move that could give residents cheaper water in the short run, but which could also cause subsidence and contribute to flooding in the long run. It could even create shortages, raise water costs and limit growth. Here’s how.

How Subsidence Can Increase Flood Risk

When ground subsides, it sinks. In this region, the primary cause is groundwater removal.

“Using surface water instead of groundwater reduces subsidence. Where groundwater use has been reduced, subsidence has generally ceased,” said Michael Turco, General Manager of the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District. 

Southern Montgomery County, and northern and northwestern Harris County have some of the highest subsidence rates in the region today.

Yet some Montgomery County voters advocate removing more ground water because, at this moment, it’s cheaper than surface water. They are betting their future and their neighbors’ futures on it.

One part of Baytown, the Brownwood subdivision, is a classic, visually striking, and cautionary example of subsidence.  Brownwood subsided so much that it became uninhabitable. Excessive groundwater pumping by industry around Galveston Bay caused the area to sink ten feet.

In 1944, the area that would become Brownwood in Baytown was starting to show signs of development.

By 1978, Brownwood was well developed…and sinking fast. Then, in 1983, a 12-foot storm surge from Alicia destroyed the entire community.

Today, Brownwood floods so much that all homes are gone. Baytown converted what was left into a park.

Coastal vs. Differential Subsidence

Inland areas also face flood threats from subsidence, but not the kind associated with storm surge. In Montgomery County and surrounding areas, the flood threat comes from sinking at different rates in different places.

Example: subsidence around Jersey Village created a “bowl” within the landscape that has been linked to increased flooding there. See the contour map below.

Other examples: The Woodlands and Kingwood sank two feet in the last century. Most of Buffalo Bayou sank eight.

Red contours show subsidence in last century. Blue contours show subsidence in first 16 years of this century. Note how the small red circle near Jersey Village (A) quickly expanded to the large blue circle around it. Also note (B) the widening gap between red and blue at the top of the frame. This shows that areas that depend on groundwater, i.e., Montgomery County, are subsiding faster than those on surface water, i.e., most of Harris County. Source: Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

Three Ways Unequal Subsidence Increases Flood Risk

Unequal sinking contributes to flooding by changing the slope of rivers and streams.

  • If the slope increases, water flows faster and contributes to flooding downstream.
  • If slope decreases, water moves more slowly or even pools, contributing to flooding upstream.
  • Sinking between two drainage basins can even divert floodwater from one basin to another.

The “Pump-Now, Let-Somebody-Else-Pay-Later” Mentality

Subsidence happens so slowly that some people claim it’s not a problem – especially those on higher ground. They want to continue pumping water from wells because they perceive it to be cheaper than surface water.

It can be – at least in the short run– until wells run low or dry. Then pumping costs increase – often along with salinity – and the people who depend on the well are out of water and out of luck.

Much of the groundwater in Montgomery County used for human consumption is pumped from the Jasper aquifer which also affects Harris and Galveston Counties. Source Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

And that high ground they enjoyed? If it subsides faster than surrounding areas, they can alter the slope of rivers and creeks, increasing their own flood risk, like Jersey Village. This is currently happening in southern Montgomery County and northern Harris County.

Depleting at More Than 500X the Recharge Rate

Still, some people say, “I’ll worry about that when it becomes a problem.”

Problem is:

The rate of depletion will exceed the rate of recharge by more than 500X – an environmental catastrophe.

More Expensive in Long Run

Now consider this. Experience and science show that pressure in an aquifer will decrease when pumping exceeds the recharge rate. And as pressure in an aquifer decreases, the cost of bringing water to the surface increases dramatically. Then recovery is no longer economical, i.e., competitive with surface water. It’s like the oil industry. As a rule of thumb, half the oil in reservoirs is left underground. It’s simply too expensive to recover because of low pressure.

For all these reasons, most counties in the region are trying to switch people to surface water. Groundwater withdrawals in Waller, Liberty, Grimes, Walker and San Jacinto Counties have either declined or stayed the same since 2000.

Counties surrounding Montgomery have either decreased groundwater pumping or kept it steady.

Meanwhile, Montgomery County’s groundwater withdrawals have soared. A report by LBG Guyton Associates to the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District showed that the largest pumping increase since 2000 occurred in Montgomery County.

Montgomery County groundwater pumping virtually tripled in the last three decades.

Montgomery County Growth

The surge in Montgomery County groundwater usage is largely because of growth. On a percentage basis, Montgomery County is growing faster than any county in the region except Fort Bend.

Montgomery County growth trails only Fort Bend.

So Why Worry NOW?

Water resources take so long to develop that they need to be planned 50 years ahead. If Montgomery County hopes to keep growing rapidly, where will water come from to support that growth? Especially if voters undermine financial viability of the half-billion-dollar, surface-water treatment plant – that they just built – by shifting back to groundwater!

The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) finished the plant in 2015 to comply with the LSGCD requirement to reduce groundwater use. Many people don’t realize that the SJRA pumps groundwater from 38 wells to supply The Woodlands. The SJRA must comply with LSGCD regulations like everyone else.

To comply, the SJRA and 90 other water utilities who partnered with them, drew up plans for a surface water treatment plant and signed contracts to purchase water from it. The SJRA then borrowed money from the State and built the plant. Inevitably, the cost of water increased to cover construction.

After it was built, several providers changed their minds and began pushing the LSGCD board to produce more groundwater to take costs back down. When the board refused, the breakaway faction succeeded in getting a measure on November’s ballot to elect an LSGCD board more favorable to groundwater pumping.

Since 2001, the LSGCD has had a nine-member board appointed by a combination of local entities. They include Montgomery County, cities, and MUDs. The SJRA even has one seat.  The appointees are experts who fully understand the future consequences of subsidence and unlimited groundwater pumping; an elected board may not.

If an elected board ignores the science and allows unlimited groundwater pumping, it would affect the financial projections on which the surface water plant was built.

Betting the Future

If people vote for candidates who advocate using “cheaper” groundwater in the short term, they will also be voting for subsidence and policies that limit long-term growth. Without question, they will be betting their future, their children’s futures and their neighbors’ futures on a rapidly depleting water source.

If that’s the will of the people, so be it. I just hope they don’t set a precedent that residents in neighboring counties follow. If so, we could all be sunk.

Candidates Who Believe in Science-Based, Groundwater Management

Fortunately, there are people running for LSGWCD board positions who believe in science-based, groundwater management. Knowledgeable acquaintances in Montgomery County recommend the following candidates who, they say, have professional experience related to water management and/or water supply, and would work to preserve Montgomery County’s future, reduce subsidence and prevent flooding:

  • Place 1, County Precinct 1 – Stuart Taylor
  • Place 2, County Precinct 2 – Garry Oakley
  • Place 3, County Precinct 3 – Rick Moffatt
  • Place 4, County Precinct 4 – Gail Carney
  • Place 5, County At Large – Gregg Hope
  • Place 6, Conroe – Jackie Chance, Sr.
  • Place 7, The Woodlands – Kent Maggert

Please spread the word to every voter you know in Montgomery County.

Posted by Bob Rehak, November 3, 2018

431 Days since Hurricane Harvey