December 2017 Newsletter
This is Texas. But even in America, you start telling people what they can and can't do with their property and you'll become very unpopular - very quickly.
Of course, there is the unacknowledged guarantee that some people will believe anything if they stand to gain an advantage, whether in money or power. And of course, there is the acknowledged guarantee that there are some emotionally-damaged or mentally-deranged people who believe that more government is the answer.
There are always those who are easily convinced that it’s "for the public good." For some reason, they always seem to think they have a monopoly on intelligence, and know what’s best for the rest of us!
The problem isn't that they are a vast majority, but that they are a minority that’s growing. Especially, when it comes to government control of privately-owned groundwater.
Especially, when you throw-in something about a 'dangerous shortage of clean water’, and a dire prediction that your kids may go thirsty. Mom and Pop, the green apple eaters, and the mentally-bent all stop thinking and start praying to the More-Government Gang in the legislature to save them.
Among that crowd, groundwater takes precedence over climate-change theology.
Especially, in Texas.
Another sneaky effort is underway to undermine private ownership of groundwater.
So, this month’s newsletter must sadly report on how we see a great university, swallowing the rancid theories of socialism, becoming an advocate for government control over private resources:
Texas A & M and Mexico water planners are searching for ways to develop a trans-boundary water initiative. This effort is to look at and examine shared aquifers between Mexico and Texas, and develop “governance” (read controls) to “protect and conserve” groundwater in such aquifers. http://twri.tamu.edu/publications/conservation-matters/2017/october/transboundary-water-expert-speaks-on-water-security/
But any concept of government efficiency is just wrong! It’s illogical. As we know too well, despite what some tell us, governance means inefficient, sneaky, cumbersome, under-handed, and dangerous.
Pushing the initiative, a Texas A & M spokesman said that, “The danger is that when water is governed in a really decentralized way, made up of hundreds of individual decisions, it ends up depriving someone of water that they need...”
Which pretty much tells everything you need to know about where this study group is coming from –
So far, since 1967, the only Texas citizens being deprived “of water that they need” are the rightful owners of the water, the landowners.
The sneaky danger of this study is that any ‘international agreement’ reached with Mexico on ‘governance’ of the aquifer, must be approved by the Texas Legislature. Then, just as night follows day, the rules concerning control (governance) in that agreement will apply to all aquifers located in our state.
But is Mexico really the example of government that Texas wants to follow?
For years, Aggie jokes were based on envy and respect: You don’t pick at those you hate, you ignore them. You tweak your friends and those you admire.
But proud Aggies, at least those with a brain, should be up in arms: Over 100-years of principles and values are disappearing, creating “Teasipper2” –
It seems the first President Bush’s “bully pulpit” snowed the Texas A & M Regents into letting his buddy, Robert Gates, on campus. Previously, Gates was an unelected 35-year-plus employee of the federal government, primarily in the State Department.
Even before Gates was in charge, A & M had started a slow swing to a more liberal outlook, juxtaposed with a tradition of Constitutional values. This once-proud university started losing its way, taking up the empty slogans of the nation’s progressives – forgetting the students and graduates who gave their blood and lives protecting the American Dream of individual freedom and economic choice from the evils of the socialism it now seems to endorse.
But during and after Gates' A & M time, the Swamp-dwellers Lullaby has become the new Aggie fight song.
Before you think we have lost our mind (which we may have, as unthinking Aggies may want to shoot the messenger) consider that:
The Texas Water Resource Institute and the Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute (same societal mind; same institution) claim they "are working together to foster and communicate research and educational outreach programs focused on water and natural resources science and management issues in Texas and beyond."
Regardless of what they claim, these water “resource experts”are helping lay a foundation for a state management (control) scheme of land and groundwater in all the draining basins of every river or stream in Texas, including seasonal creeks, drainage ditches and low spots.
A & M is on point for the effort.
Consider the US. Environmental Protection Agency’s recent acceptance of the Navasota River Below Lake Limestone Watershed Protection Plan, co-developed by the above organizations, along with something called the Navasota River Watershed Partnership, which is the desired model as recommended in the supposedly-failed national Clean Water Act.
This prototype will be a desired model for other forthcoming “watershed partnerships” in “water drainage basins” all over Texas. Eventually, landowners will be responsible for any run-off or standing water from rain that falls on their land . . .
But the Navasota River plan explains that, “...watershed stakeholders were organized to recommend management strategies for five sources that can be feasibly managed. These include feral hogs, humans, livestock, pets, and stormwater.“
Note the "feasibly managed” … includes “humans…" (You have to wonder if this means independent humans? )
There’s no report on the number of watershed landowners participating –
Texas landowners help pay for it, so you should read the plan. Not so much for what it says, but for what it intends for the future. The plan was developed by a state non-point source* grant to TWRI from the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board, and the watershed plan is available for download at http://twri.tamu.edu/publications/reports/2017/tr-497/
And here they go again, turning Texas into a California moonbeam: http://twri.tamu.edu/publications/conservation-matters/2017/november/texas-am-collaborates-with-university-of-california-on-grant-to-fund-food-energy-water-research/
The last thing we should do is wallow in the mistakes of California. Could it be that is what happens when Texas schools hire California PhDs?
But explain this thing to me, Sally: How come so many people have a PhD in Stupidity?
Feel free to call us alarmists but, when the fines come, landowners will consider their taxes really cheap.
Remember that over a decade ago, Rural/Urban Resources was the first organization to start warning about the state taking control of the landowner’s groundwater.
The next step, now, is control of the landowner’s land . . . and most excuses will do.
*According to the EPA, non-point source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters and ground waters. These pollutants include:
- Excess fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides
- Oil, grease and toxic chemicals
- Sediment from improperly managed construction sites, crop and forest lands, and erosion.
- Salt from irrigation practices and acid drainage.
- Bacteria and nutrients from livestock, pet wastes and faulty septic systems.
- Your comments are always welcomed -