The Little Fish that Roared: The Endangered Species Act, State Groundwater Law, and Private Property Rights Collide over the Texas Edwards Aquifer

Communicating future water needs to an at-risk population: lessons learned following defeat of the Applewhite Dam and Reservoir Project in San Antonio, Texas

“…Current directions in water provision: the aftermath of the Applewhite defeat Currently, SAWS relies on a series of initiatives which attempt to meet present demands and future needs (Votteler 1998(Votteler , 2002. Following the drought of 1996, San Antonio initiated the Citizens Committee on Water Policy which facilitated public input and involvement in developing a long-range water plan of policies and options including pipeline construction to import water, recycling and conservation, increased water rates, aquifer storage and recovery, and construction of new reservoirs.…”

“…Following the drought of 1996, San Antonio initiated the Citizens Committee on Water Policy which facilitated public input and involvement in developing a long-range water plan of policies and options including pipeline construction to import water, recycling and conservation, increased water rates, aquifer storage and recovery, and construction of new reservoirs. Since 1996, the legislative and regulatory arena has also evolved and intensified (Votteler 1998(Votteler , 2002. In 1997, the Texas legislature passed a comprehensive water planning law that created 16 regional water planning groups.…”

Groundwater Supply in Texas: Private Land Considerations in a Rule-of-Capture State

“…In response to a lawsuit brought by the Sierra Club and the consequent federal ruling that the Texas Water Commission develop a plan to maintain threatened or endangered species habitat by ensuring adequate spring flow, the Texas legislature passed Senate Bill 1477 in May 1993. This resulted in the creation of the Edwards Aquifer Authority (EAA) (Voteller 1998) and in pumping limits of 450,000 acre-feet per year from the aquifer (Kaiser and Phillips 1998). Unlike other water conservation districts, the EAA was ordered to use its powers to regulate groundwater withdrawal in the seven counties overlying the aquifer's recharge and storage areas.…”

Simulated effects of reduced spring flow from the Edwards Aquifer on population size of the fountain darter (Etheostoma fonticola)

“…To assess how all endangered species within the Edwards Aquifer might fair into the future is important; however, because of its limited distribution, the fountain darter is one of the species identified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as having a low potential for full recovery and delisting (USFWS, 1995). The fountain darter requires steady spring flow, minimal water temperature variability, and appropriate vegetation composition to survive, and is generally the first species affected by low spring flows (Votteler, 1998). Pumping restrictions within the aquifer zone have been mandated legally (Votteler, 1998) to maintain adequate spring flows for fountain darters (>2.8 m 3 /s) in the San Marcos River (USFWS, 1995), where the primary remaining population exists.…”

“…The fountain darter requires steady spring flow, minimal water temperature variability, and appropriate vegetation composition to survive, and is generally the first species affected by low spring flows (Votteler, 1998). Pumping restrictions within the aquifer zone have been mandated legally (Votteler, 1998) to maintain adequate spring flows for fountain darters (>2.8 m 3 /s) in the San Marcos River (USFWS, 1995), where the primary remaining population exists. The fountain darter has been referred to as "the little fish that roared" (Votteler, 1998) in that it has been a focal point for controversies involving the endangered species act, state of Texas groundwater law, and private property rights.…”