More Austinites drilling private wells to water lawns (San Antonio, Spring: utilities, price)

[TexasHorseLady]

Actually, Biscuits, it's not the people who, yes, have their 1-D-1 whose wells are the problem, for the most part (and quite a few of them have been supporting themselves and their families with agriculture for a few generations now, to put your mind at rest).

But think about this. In order to be fair, suppose everyone who lives in Central Austin drills a well. (After all, why shouldn't they?) What do you suppose the impact would be?

[FueledByBlueBell]

From the article I don't get the impression that many of these are transplants.

[Biscuits]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Actually, Biscuits, it's not the people who, yes, have their 1-D-1 whose wells are the problem, for the most part (and quite a few of them have been supporting themselves and their families with agriculture for a few generations now, to put your mind at rest).

But think about this. In order to be fair, suppose everyone who lives in Central Austin drills a well. (After all, why shouldn't they?) What do you suppose the impact would be?

It is not a matter of why everyone who lives in Central Austin should not drill a well, rather than an mater of why they can not. Half of Central Austin is ineligible due to being in the more sensitive southern section of the aquifer. The vast majority of the remaining half do not have drilling-truck accessibility to a spot on their lot that is 50' from all sewer lines and 5' from all property lines; as required by state law. Finally there is that pesky $20,000 price tag. Because of these limitations, there simply is no chance for the number of urban residential wells in Austin to become a legitimate issue.

But all of that aside, what if everyone in Central Austin had a well? I suspect they would water their landscaping with enough frequency to keep it green and -- unlike now -- use zero treated drinking water in the process. Some would be responsible with their watering and landscape design and some would not; just like now. Unfortunately, if your hypothetical ever did occur, Austin Water would probably have to raise their water rates astronomically to make up for the lost revenue, pricing many more families out of the city.

THL, I really would like to know if the Zilker Great Lawn is deserving of watering, in your opinion.

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by Biscuits

I wish you the best of luck with with your policy changes. Zilker Park will look very interesting xeriscaped.

Actually, much of it is already. As to the big lawn at Zilker that ACL paid for, it seems to me it's a shared resource enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of people, so a case might be made for maintaining it for the common good. Might. Maybe. On the other hand there are other parks in the city that do not water and they still get used and enjoyed.

Originally Posted by Biscuits

What of those "wealthy" people's trees? You know, the ones that you likely feel are a community asset but pay nothing to maintain.

If they are native species, they should do fine without artificial watering.

Originally Posted by Biscuits

Do you also agree that there should be laws against the number of times we should flush a toilet in a day or the number of children we should have.

Since toilet flushing represents the second third of the average household's water bill, I support measures to reduce this use by reasonable means. One is by public awareness campaigns. Another is to offer incentives for the use of low usage toilets, such as dual-flush systems. The third is to encourage the use of greywater-flush systems. The fourth is to encourage the use of household urinals, which can have minimal water use, and composting toilets, which have zero water use. The fifth, interesting suggestion, free birth control from the water district in packaging that promotes water conservation.

Originally Posted by Biscuits

Can you be honest with yourself and admit that class envy/hatred might be affecting your stance against the "privileged few" in this matter? Didn't you already repel at the thought of the people living in Pemberton Heights or Tarrytown to begin with?

Well, let me just take a look at that possibility... hmmmmmm... nope. That's not me at all. Must be your imagination at work.

[owlman]

Some of those properties with new wells look real close. I wonder if it's legal to split the cost of drilling with an adjacent property, or sell water to neighbors?

[Adamson865]

Originally Posted by owlman

Some of those properties with new wells look real close. I wonder if it's legal to split the cost of drilling with an adjacent property, or sell water to neighbors?

That sounds like a great idea, and I'd do it in a heartbeat if I lived out there.

[IC_deLight]

First of all, wells tapping into the Edwards Aquifer come under the purview of the Edwards Aquifer Authority. One would not "need" another groundwater management entity. The jurisdiction of the EAA is the Edwards Aquifer regardless of what geographic territory one is talking about.

Groundwater districts have "vertical" jurisdiction for groundwater within their geographic boundaries with the exception that none of them has any jurisdiction whatsoever over the Edwards Aquifer. Thus the differing groundwater management entities have mutually exclusive management authority.

Groundwater is not a "mineral". Groundwater belongs to the surface estate holder and conveys with the property unless expressly reserved. The Texas Supreme Court recently held that ownership will be treated similar to that of oil and gas - the property owner owns the groundwater in place beneath his/her property. Regulation can be imposed but regulation can go so far as to constitute a governmental taking which would require compensation to the property owner. Outright denial of access to the groundwater requires compensation.

[orngkat]

unnatural state is not a good criteria to determine whether something makes sense.

I think you twisted my words a bit. Though I hate the word sustainable, nothing about a green lawn is.
Unnecessary might be a better word when one is talking about a dwindling resource like water.

[TheCardinal]

One of the funny-ironic things about this debate is that the do-gooders at the Statesman have contributed to the Central Austin rich-person water well phenomenon by annually making a big deal out of the "Top 10 Water Users" list, in which they publicly shame the likes of Lance Armstrong and Mike McCaul for using too much city water to keep their landscaping green. You can bet your bottom dollar that one of the motivating factors behind the decision of Mr. Wealthy Local Celebrity to drill a private well is to keep his name off that list. That way he doesn't have to make up an implausible story about a "broken irrigation pipe" or some similar nonsense.

Oh, and our Attorney General has one of those wells too. I watched them drill it several months ago so I suppose it's no big secret.

[owlman]

Originally Posted by TheCardinal

Oh, and our Attorney General has one of those wells too. I watched them drill it several months ago so I suppose it's no big secret.

That and the fact that they mentioned it in the article...