From The KMIL  News Room

Bell-Milam Land & Water Rights Association

This designation is based on the amount of fecal coliform bacteria colonies in the water.  The level is above the maximum level designated for contact recreation.  The current measure of suitability is the amount of e-coli bacteria in the water.  The level of e-coli is also above the maximum for contact recreation.  (See TNRCC Clean Rivers Water Quality reports for details.)  Contact recreation is swimming, boating, and similar activities.

If the dam is moved from the vicinity of Sugar Loaf Mountain to the confluence of the Little River and the Brazos River, it will involve many more acres that this,  The exact location of the dam is not known at this time.  The engineering personnel have not visited the site at last contact.  Also, the data for the appraisal and cost of full reservoir lists ~55,000 acres to be appraised and surveyed.

The area that is mentioned in the Region G plan, as can best be determined, is in the area of Gillis Street and will include the current water treatment plant and sewage treatment plants for the City of Cameron.  It will include water levels up to, or at least very close to, the Cameron Country Club.  County Road 227 will be closed between the Country Club and for some distance beyond the current Little River Bridge of County Road 227.  This road is heavily traveled and will increase the travel to Cameron by several miles.  This is also true for several other areas.  In Table 5A.14-18 of Region G Initially Prepared Plan this is referred to as:  "Cultural Resources:  Probable high impact; Suburban parts of the City of Cameron may be inundated."  The Final Plan does not change this view.  

Very little significance seems to be placed on the demolition of many historical sites, family cemeteries, family farms, Indian burial grounds, etc...  Some of this land has been in the families for years.  One tract in particular has been in one family since 1836.  This land includes at least Indian burial grounds on both sides of the Little River.  

This is an estimate based on information obtained form the Region G Plan, the Milam County Appraisal District and discussion with farmers and ranchers in the area.  This value assumes the lower acreage of 35,000 acres and not the probable loss of 55,000 acres.  It does not include the loss of tax base from homes, buildings, wells, equipment, and labor on and from these lands.  If a value-added factor 5 is applied to this value, it will result in an economic impact of the City, County, and CISD of over $25,000,000 per year.  Some have suggested the value added factor for agriculture may be as high as 7.

This land represents some of the richest farmland in central Texas.  This is "bottomland" and can not be replaced.  We are not making more bottomland these days.

Is the CISD going to reduce its budget?  Probably not, they will just increase the tax rate to meet the spending needs of the schools.  The result will be higher taxes to support the necessary functions of government.  These increases will be felt all across the county.

There is much speculation about the increase in economic development as a result of the reservoir.  Even if there is some unknown economic benefit, there will be a twenty-year delay in achieving it.  Once the initial confiscation of the land form the farmers and ranchers, the taxable value will drop significantly and eventually to zero.  It will remain zero for many years.  Some have estimated that even if there is significant economic development, the city and county taxes will not reflect that growth for about twenty years.  What happens in the meantime?

One only needs to look at Granger and Sommerville to see how much economic growth and development Cameron can expect.  What makes us so unique that we would not wind up with some lack of development?  After all a river flowing with water not suited for contact5 recreation will only store water not suited for contact recreation.  Where are the economic studies to confirm the assumption of economic development?  The Region G and Region H engineers had plenty of time to study the economic impact of not getting cheap water for the Georgetown and Houston areas. 

There is an argument being put forward that just 100 new homes in Cameron will offset the loss of the agricultural and livestock income and tax base.  This may be true in a singular sense.  Cameron has not seen this sort of growth in the past.  Also, this will only offset the $4,000,000 loss once.  What about the value added factor?  What about the other years?  Where are these 100 new homes going to come from?  Where are the jobs going to be created to sustain these new and expensive homes?  Not at a bait shop!

Is this all based on the unfounded assumption that with the Little River Reservoir will come economic gains and growth?  There are no studies to show that we can expect and economic growth or development of added value from the Little River Reservoir.  The only studies referenced in the Regional Water Planning documents are the adverse effect on Houston and surrounding cities if they do not get water for development of economic base and population.  Is bigger always better?  Especially is growth in the Houston area necessarily better for Texas and Milam County?

There seems to be little regard being given to the environmental balance in the area.  There are rumors of nesting bald eagles.  There are surely wetlands to be considered.  There are thousands of native pecan and oak trees, referred to as bottomland hardwoods.  There are native grasses throughout the area that will be destroyed.  We understand that there is concern for an amphibian species.  It is also understood that there are some problems with the lack of flow into the estuaries and other portions of the Brazos River.

There are additional concerns relative to the effects of the leaching of the soil in the bottomland.  For many years arsenic was used as a poison and defoliant for the huge cotton acreages.  This arsenic is still present.  Arsenic does not go away.  What is the effect of this contamination of the water quality in any proposed reservoir?  The real question is, has it even been looked at?  The BRA says no studies have been done.  

The alliance of farmers, ranchers, environmentalists, conservationists, and historians is probably unusual.  Farmers and ranchers are not usually thought of as being environmentalists and conservationists.  In fact they probably cringe at the thought of being called such for the most part.  They are however very much so, only in their own way.  They want to preserve and protect their land for its value to their way of life, their heritage and their livelihoods.

Region H uses the terms "conservation pool" and "conservation level."  However, the purpose in the Little River Reservoir has nothing to do with conservation, it is all about getting water to Houston so they can continue to grow and expand.  While the water is designated to go to places other than Houston, it frees up other sources for Houston.

In the Executive Summary for the Region H plan (Page3) it is stated that; "Region H water demands are projected to increase from approximately 2.25 million acre feet per year in year 2000 to over 3.18 million acre feet per year by year 2050."  None of this projected increase is for agriculture or livestock use.  Later in the report (Page 4) they state; "The total amount of water supply currently available to Region H from existing water supply will be 3,687,500 acre feet per year (ac-ft/yr) ... by the years 2030 and 2050 the available supply will be 3,460,000 ac-ft/yr."  Unless something is missing from the equation, that is about 260,000-acre feet per year above their needs.  This amount represents a 10% excess of water supply to demand and about 200% of what they will get from the Little River Reservoir.

Further there are estimates that the City of Houston alone loses over 1,000,000 gallons of water per day to leakage in their water system.  If this is true, that comes is 365,000,000 gallons per year or 1,120 acre-feet per year.

Region G can meet all of its water shortage needs in the central Texas area by the use of existing water supplies and by using ground water from the Carizzo-Wilcox aquifer.

During the public meetings on the Region G Plan, the question of control was brought up.  In both the Region G and Region H Plans they mention of the vastness of the Little River watershed.  It is 7,500 square miles.  Both plans make mention of the fact that it is "uncontrolled."  When asked about that statement they said that referred to the fact that the Little River flows without dams or other obstructions and is a natural flow and not a controlled flow.  I would point out that it also means that the Brazos River Authority has no control over the water flow in the Little River until it gets into the Brazos River further downstream.  This reservoir is about power and control!

The Brazos G Regional Water Planning Group has continually disregarded questions from citizens about the plan.  Questions submitted to the Group at the public meetings were not discussed in any open meeting of record.  Appeals to have questions answered have fallen on deaf ears.  In December 2000 at the regular meeting of the Brazos G Regional Water Planning Group, the Bell-Milam Land and Water Rights Association presented nine specific questions to the Group in writing.  Some of these answers have become obvious with the passing of time, others were not answered.  At the February 2001 meeting inquiry was made as to whether the Group intended to answer the questions.  As of May 1, 2001, the remaining questions had still not been answered.  These specific questions have now been addressed in a letter dated, May 17, 2001.

Questions about the Initially Prepared Plan were submitted to the Region G, and never answered.  There is no record of the questions even being forwarded to the members for consideration  There was no discussion of the resolution to the questions and suggestions made at any public meeting of record, or by private communication.

The water is for use in Region G (Williamson County) and Region H (Houston area) through the Brazos River Authority and Gulf Coast Water Authority.  There will be 40,000 acre-feet going to Williamson County and the remainder to the Houston area.  The water is needed for watering yards, washing cares, filling swimming pools, and operating decorative fountains as per an article in the Houston Chronicle.  The people of the Houston area are tired of being "inconvenienced" by the current shortages of water.  The facts are that there is plenty of water in the Region H area, it is not where they want it, and it is more economical for them to seize our land and our economy than it is to redistribute their water.

Personnel representing Region G and Region H have publicly stated that Houston does not get any of this water.  The fact s are that the water goes to Rosenberg, Alice, and other cities, and Houston gets water they are now using.  Houston is the benefactor! 

Once again it is all about power and growth of the cities at the expense of the rural communities because we do have neither the political power nor finances to combat their tactics.  Studies seem to have been conducted on the impact on the cities if they do not have enough water to meet their projected needs.  Has a corresponding study been conducted to evaluate the effect of destroying the economy and way of life for the people of rural Milam County?  Most of us live here because we choose to and do not want to see our rural lifestyle destroyed by metropolitan growth and its incumbent pollution, crime, and waste of natural resources.

To date that have been no engineering studies performed on the suitability of a Little River Reservoir.  The engineers proposing this reservoir for the Region G Planning Group admitted that they had never visited the proposed site.  Their only familiarity with area, terrain, hydrology, geology, and history are limited to what they could obtain from maps available to them.  Again they emphasized that no engineering studies have been conducted.  There is strong belief among some that it is doubtful if the reservoir will even hold water.  The silting of the reservoir has never been mentioned.  This seems to be significant problem with Granger Lake.  Why should this be any different?

How can a reasonable cost estimates be made when by their own admission, personnel of the engineering-consulting firms developing the reports have never visited Milam County.  No consideration has been given to replacement of roads, homes, retraining, relocation, and other requirements of the persons displaced.  They have also stated that the site of the dam is not known exactly.  Then how do you estimated the cost without knowing anything about the area?  Can we assume that the cost estimate will be low?  When was the last time a project like this came in under cost estimates?

The Region G Plan makes no new provisions for the City of Cameron to get water.  If the flow of the Little River is going to be stored for release to Region H and the Brazos River Authority (Supposedly to Williamson and Coryell Counties), where does Cameron get water.  From Region G Plan:  "5B.25.1 City of Cameron -- No shortage is projected for the City of Cameron and no changes in water supply are recommended."  I believe the current pumping stations and treatment plant will be under water.  That seems like at least a slight change may be requirred.

At a recent meeting with representatives of the Texas Water Development Board in Austin .  The following erroneous and/or contradictory information was supplied.  In a handout from Ernest C. Rebuck, Ph.D., P.E., Assistant Division Director for Water Resource planning Division.  His hand out made the following points

1) Little River reservoir is the planning/discussion Stage. This statement is probably accurate although it is difficult to understand how they can be doing any planning, including cost estimates, without having conducted a single engineering study or site visit.

2) Water needed in williamson county and downstream: If one examines the Initially Prepared Plan for Region G (which encompasses Milam County) the needs for Williamson County through the year 2050 are met without relying  on the Little River Reservoir.  The requirements are in Region H (Houston area) and they have the Little River Reservoir high on their priority list.  The firm yield for the reservoir is 169,800-acre feet per year.  In the Region H Plan, the water is distributed by sending 40,000 acre feet to Brazos River Authority for Region G (Williamson County is short about 36,769 acre feet and Coryell County is short about 5,474 acre feet), 85,000 acre feet was scheduled for the Brazos River Authority, and 44,800 acre feet to the Gulf Coast Water Authority.  No mention is made in the Region G about shopping water from the Little River Reservoir to Region H.  (The firm yield has been reduced from 169,800 to 129,000 acre feet per year due to a data entry error?) 

3) Any of three possible reservoirs. This is a misleading statement.  The Region G plan only mentions the other two possible sites.  They are a 300 mean sea level reservoir of 14,000 acres and an off channel reservoir of 4,000 acres.  Neither of these reservoirs are really considered, since throughout the Region H Plan they continually allocate 129,800 acre feet to entities in Region H.  So the mention of the other possible configuration is a "smoke screen"

4) earliest construction would occur would be 2030. This can not be the case.  Region H is planning on water being delivered at the rate of 129,800 acre feet per year beginning in the year 2030 and the starting decade is 2000.

This organization was founded in 1967 to oppose the construction of a reservoir on the Little River.  It has successfully worked for the preservation of the land and water rights for residents of Bell and Milam counties.  The opposition will take effort and money.  You can not take on Alvin, Katy, Pulshear, Brazoria County, Houston, Brazos River Authority, and the like without some substantial effort and funds.  It is felt that this is what Region G, Region H, and the BRA personnel are thinking and planning on.  During discussion with personnel from the Texas Water Development Board one of them made the comment that "the people of Houston don't give a squat where their water comes from."  I believe this, and taking some cheap land form some "country hicks" from Milam County is sure a lot easier than getting it from the "big-time land developers" in and around Houston.