Fall 2002 - Lone Star Chapter, Sierra Club

4 Lone Star Sierran Fall 2002
Feature
Continued from previous page.
not see that future water supply or jobs associated
with construction of the reservoir as providing any
benefit to them, at least no benefit that outweighs
the negative impacts on their communities and way
of life. Among their primary concerns, of course, is
the loss of their homes, their farms, their ranches,
their forests, their traditional livelihood, and their
cultural heritage as the reservoir drowns their land.
Flooding of this land could cost the region in excess of
$140 million annually due to loss of timber and
agricultural production. Local opponents of the
reservoir concerned about the economic and social
impacts of the proposed project are organized as the
Sulphur Oversight Society (SOS).
These local landowners and other Northeast Texas
citizens have joined forces with environmental
groups such as the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra
Club and regional Sierra Club groups in North Texas,
the National Wildlife Federation, and the Texas
Committee on Natural Resources. Environmentalists
oppose the Marvin Nichols Reservoir for a variety
of reasons. One of the major reasons is the potential
loss of bottomland hardwood forests. Over 36,000
acres of such forests would be flooded and thus lost as
a result of building the reservoir. The U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service considers bottomland hardwood
forests as one of the most endangered ecosystems in
the Southeastern United States.
Waste of Water in the Dallas/Fort Worth
Region
Another reason for the opposition to the Marvin
Nichols Reservoir from both environmentalists and
Northeast Texas landowners is that the Dallas/Fort
Worth region does not truly need the water from the
proposed impoundment. Dallas and other cities in
the region have been shown to use an incredible
amount of water per capita, far more than most other
large cities in Texas.
Although estimates vary, Dallas, for example, uses
in the vicinity of 250 gallons of water per person per
day. That compares to approximately 146 gallons of
water per person per day in San Antonio, a city that
has made great strides over the past decade in
trimming water consumption by its residents
through a variety of measures. The Region C water
plan predicted that the per capita water use in Dallas
would actually increase over the next 50 years to a
level of 264 gallons per capita per day – one of the few
areas in the state where per capita use for expected
to go up.
By one analysis done by the National Wildlife
Federation, if Dallas Water Utilities (the city’s water
department) were to decrease its per capita water
consumption by 2050 to just 200 gallons per day, that
alone would provide the city with almost twice as
A broad coalition of people attended the Region C water
planning group meeting in July to promote water conservation
as an alternative to the Marvin Nichols Reservoir.
much water as it would gain from its share of the
Marvin Nichols Reservoir project. Yet, despite the
cost effectiveness of saving water rather than paying
for an expensive new impoundment and pipeline, the
City of Dallas and its North Central Texas neighbors
have done little thus far to conserve water.
Opponents of the reservoir see no reason for the
building of a vast new impoundment of water in
Northeast Texas to feed the unquenchable thirst of a
neighboring region unwilling to curb its profligate
use of water. There is no justification, they say, for
a project that would have such a devastating impact
on the environment and way of life of Northeast
Texas just to water St. Augustine grass lawns in
Dallas, Fort Worth, and their suburbs.
Moving Forward
The united opposition to the reservoir is beginning
to make a difference. Local elected officials who
have been sitting on the fence or speaking positively
about the project are starting to express their opposition.
Media coverage is building. Members of the
Region C Water Planning Group have shown a willingness
to take a closer look at their plan’s reliance
on the proposed reservoir. Opposition to the reservoir
on the Region D Water Planning Group has
grown. The effort to defeat the reservoir is far from
over, but the grassroots opposition is making its
power felt.
Photo courtesy of Justin Murrill