366
13.3.3 Brazos River Basin
In contrast to the Colorado River, there was no basin-wide management of water
allocation for the Brazos River. Arguably, as a result of the 2011 drought, the Brazos
River basin in Texas became the center of a legal battle regarding the water allocation and the right of the State of Texas, via the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, to have some discretion in interpreting state surface water law (Malewitz 2015).
In 2011, a senior water rights holder asked the TCEQ to call water rights on the
Brazos River.
As the TCEQ went down the prioritized list of water rights for the basin, it eventually came to water rights for some cities and thermoelectric power plants, putting
them in a difficult position. Cutting water access to power plants could alienate
elected officials and their power-consuming constituents, thus reducing the capacity
for electricity supply and in turn causing increased electricity prices during the hottest summer on record.
Consequently, the TCEQ chose not to cut off legal water access to power plants
or cities in 2011, citing public health, safety, and welfare concerns; however, they
did call water rights for farmers, continuing curtailment of water for senior irrigation rights into 2012, but not for power generation (Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, 2013).
As a result, the Texas Farm Bureau sued TCEQ, claiming the TCEQ’s decision
criteria in this instance cannot replace the prior appropriation doctrine for long-term
governance. Over the ensuing few years, the Farm Bureau won initial legal rulings,
along with two appeals.
Eventually, the TCEQ appealed to the Texas Supreme Court. In February 2016,
the Court resolved the legal issue by choosing not to consider the appeal, thus leaving in place lower court rulings that sided with the farmers and against the
TCEQ (Malewitz 2016).
Effectively, the justices left in place a lower court’s ruling that said Texas cannot give
special treatment to cities or power generators over more “senior” water rights holders on
parched rivers—even if the state declares it necessary to protect the ‘public health, safety,
and welfare.’
13.3.4 Use of Metrics to Improve Drought Management
Plans are often created in preparation for their execution in time-sensitive situations
in which decision-making is needed, like emergencies. In the Texas case study previously discussed, the surface water rights priority doctrine serves as such a plan
during a case of drought; however, the plan is only valuable if it can practically be
enacted during such a time of constraint.
The TCEQ used words such as “public health” and “safety” to discuss why they
could not cut off the water supply to thermal power generators. However, how much
M. Carbajales-Dale and C. W. King
13.3.3 Brazos River Basin
In contrast to the Colorado River, there was no basin-wide management of water
allocation for the Brazos River. Arguably, as a result of the 2011 drought, the Brazos
River basin in Texas became the center of a legal battle regarding the water allocation and the right of the State of Texas, via the Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, to have some discretion in interpreting state surface water law (Malewitz 2015).
In 2011, a senior water rights holder asked the TCEQ to call water rights on the
Brazos River.
As the TCEQ went down the prioritized list of water rights for the basin, it eventually came to water rights for some cities and thermoelectric power plants, putting
them in a difficult position. Cutting water access to power plants could alienate
elected officials and their power-consuming constituents, thus reducing the capacity
for electricity supply and in turn causing increased electricity prices during the hottest summer on record.
Consequently, the TCEQ chose not to cut off legal water access to power plants
or cities in 2011, citing public health, safety, and welfare concerns; however, they
did call water rights for farmers, continuing curtailment of water for senior irrigation rights into 2012, but not for power generation (Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, 2013).
As a result, the Texas Farm Bureau sued TCEQ, claiming the TCEQ’s decision
criteria in this instance cannot replace the prior appropriation doctrine for long-term
governance. Over the ensuing few years, the Farm Bureau won initial legal rulings,
along with two appeals.
Eventually, the TCEQ appealed to the Texas Supreme Court. In February 2016,
the Court resolved the legal issue by choosing not to consider the appeal, thus leaving in place lower court rulings that sided with the farmers and against the
TCEQ (Malewitz 2016).
Effectively, the justices left in place a lower court’s ruling that said Texas cannot give
special treatment to cities or power generators over more “senior” water rights holders on
parched rivers—even if the state declares it necessary to protect the ‘public health, safety,
and welfare.’
13.3.4 Use of Metrics to Improve Drought Management
Plans are often created in preparation for their execution in time-sensitive situations
in which decision-making is needed, like emergencies. In the Texas case study previously discussed, the surface water rights priority doctrine serves as such a plan
during a case of drought; however, the plan is only valuable if it can practically be
enacted during such a time of constraint.
The TCEQ used words such as “public health” and “safety” to discuss why they
could not cut off the water supply to thermal power generators. However, how much
M. Carbajales-Dale and C. W. King