While this is a serious and somewhat dire issue in Texas, we are excited to have some solutions to offer and the opportunity to brainstorm with you to come up with things we can do individually and in groups to help Texas decision-makers consider some things they seem to be leaving out of the plan. We will take a look at issues the Texas Legislature will make decisions on this session, as well as learn what Holistic Management has in the toolbox for maximizing abundance through great land stewardship. Holistic Resource Managers are winning stewardship awards all over Texas. We’ll see why.

It is a great lineup of speakers and activities – DO NOT MISS IT!

Cost of the conference:
The Annual Meeting – includes the Grazing Class, the Friday Social, the Trade Show, The Silent Auction – the whole shebang is $140 ($250 couple) for members and $165 ($305 couple) non-member (and that includes 2007 dues so you are a non-member no longer).

If you want to just attend part of the event, you can go to the Friday Grazing Class for $80 ($145 couple) members or $95 ($175 couple) or the Catching Raindrops Conference for $70 ($130 couple) members or $80 ($145 couple) non-members. The Friday Social is free with any other part of the conference, but if you want to go to just that networking opportunity, the fee is $10.

Friday Grazing Class
Terry Gompert is especially good at teaching this valuable tool. You will learn how and why to do the planning, how to use the planning charts, how to estimate forage, how to know when it is time to move the livestock off the forage and when you can safely return. This is the in-depth training in this aspect of Holistic Management you have been looking for.

Want to be a part of the HRM Annual Meeting?
You can think of something of interest to donate to HRM for our silent auction. Can be an object, a service, a hunting trip – anything someone else might like to have. Contact Sharon Lane (slane@hrm-texas.org) include a description and photos (if you can) of the auction item for our publicity and the auction bid sheets. Your donation is tax-deductible!

See some of the items donated so far at http://www.hrm-texas.org/silent_auction07.htm

Or you can become a sponsor…HRM is seeking folks to sponsor some of the expenses involved with the annual meeting. This is a great way to help and be a part of this important program. Just let us know which part you’d like to sponsor and how you’d like to be seen in our publicity. Here are the parts of the whole:
Conference snacks - $50
Friday night drinks (soft drinks, beer, wine) - $50
Friday night snacks - $180 – Pioneer Water Tanks, sponsor
Saturday lunch - $900
Facilities - $300
Decorations for Friday social- $50
Programs/handouts for conference - $50
Printed conference name tags - $20 – Susan Prugel, sponsor

Contact Peggy Cole at pcole@hrm-texas.org (512-847-3822) to let us know what you would like to sponsor.

Robert Puente, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, told listeners municipal utility districts, or MUDs, are on the top of his agenda. A MUD is essentially a separate political subdivision authorized either by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or the legislature for the purpose of providing water, sewage, drainage and other services where such municipal services were not previously available. Funding for the creation of a MUD is through the sale of tax-exempt municipal bonds.

“In the last legislative session there were numerous MUD bills filed all over the state,” Puente noted, “the majority of them coming out of the Houston area.”

MUD bills, he said, tend to be filed late in the session, partly because they are local bills and local bills do not have to meet specific deadlines required of other bills. These MUD bills, Puente added, get included in with other bills, and time often becomes an issue.

MUDs, Puente said, can be a great development tool, but he said developers use them not just that way but as a “tool to make the developer richer.”

“There was one bill filed last session that specifically said in the statute that the district MUD rules would prevail over city ordinances and city rules, making it a kingdom in and of itself,” Puente told listeners.

It was bills such as this, he said, that prompted legislators to request further study of MUDs in the interim. Specifically, the interim charge to Puente‚s committee was to “explore the benefits and concerns associated with Municipal Utility Districts, including assessment of the appropriateness of granting districts the additional powers of other special districts; evaluate the impact of MUDs on economic growth and development, as well as overall tax implications; review public disclosure notification requirements—as well as bonding authority of some districts.”

The interim committee held hearings in Houston on this matter.

“One of the things we learned is that in certain parts of the state, MUDS are very well liked and very well used,” Puente told listeners. “In other parts of the state they are not. Houston, for example, loves MUDs.”

The committee’s interim report offers some of the testimony provided by Joe B. Allen, of Allen Boone Humphries Robinson LLP. Allen testified that there were 511 active MUDs in the Houston area. He testified that the city of Houston was “unable and unwilling to extend services that were needed to address growth in certain areas. At the same time the city of Houston did not want other cities created around it.” Thus MUDs have worked well in this situation.

On the other hand, Puente said, the committee also heard from some business people from Austin who testified that MUDs were not as well liked or often used in that area. The interim report documents some of the testimony from Laura Huffman, assistant city manager of the City of Austin, who testified that “Austin’s tax base has tripled, the population has almost doubled, and there have been nearly 150,000 new jobs, all without significant reliance on MUDs.” Huffman also testified that the City of Austin has not adopted the use of MUDs because “they are unconvinced of the cost savings and the affordability that is passed on to home buyers.”

“Essentially what the committee learned is that MUDs are unique to the situation,” Puente commented.

In the end, he said, the interim committee came up with some recommendations for standardizing the creation of MUDs through the legislative process.

“That way, when a developer comes to the natural resources committee asking for help to pass a particular MUD bill, that developer is required to make his case based on this model language,” Puente explained.

Another big issue that is expected to be front and center in the 80th legislative session, the chairman said, is waste-water reuse. This topic was also part of the House Natural Resource Committee‚s interim charge. Specifically, the committee was to “examine state wastewater re-use policies, including an assessment of potential changes or clarifications to the Texas Water Code.”

“In the 2002 water plan there was an 18 percent reduction in the use of reuse,” Puente told listeners. “Five years later, this new plan has a 200 percent increase in waste water reuse. It’s very obvious that this is a great tool for meeting future water needs.”

The opinions relating to indirect and direct waste-water reuse vary, Puente noted, depending on whether one is an upstream or downstream user. Some downstream users are particularly concerned with how such practices impact environmental flows. In the 79th legislative session the issue was addressed in much detail in SB 3. That bill failed, however.

“SB 3 will be the starting point for this session,” Puente commented, “but hopefully we will keep our hands off this issue until we have good recommendations.”

Puente has long been an avid promoter of water conservation initiatives, and he intends to push his agenda on this matter in the 80th legislative session.

“Just like reuse, it seems like water conservation was discovered in the last four or five years,” Puente commented. “It is the cheapest way to get additional water resources.”

The City of San Antonio, Puente said, has made conservation work best through partnerships and partnership incentives.

“I’m proud that San Antonio Water Systems has taken the lead on water conservation. El Paso Water Utilities has also made great strides in water conservation. San Antonio and El Paso are often neck and neck in terms of who has the lowest per capita use, but I will concede that El Paso probably should be ahead because they get less rainfall.”

The Water Conservation Implementation Task Force created during the 78th legislative session had some good recommendations, Puente said, of which the majority were included in SB 3. The chairman told listeners that SB 3 will also be the starting point for the new water conservation bills in the 80th legislative session.

“I intend to re-file them as House bills,” Puente said.

Puente also commented that one of the reasons he believes water conservation measures have not been well accepted is partly out of fear that they will be mandated.

“Hardly any of the water conservation tools implemented in San Antonio have been done through mandates,” he insisted, “and if you look at the history of bills filed in the past, I never mentioned the word mandate, that we need to mandate these kinds of issues. Someone in the lobbying arena is spreading the word that there are going to be mandates, but they’re not mandates. It works without mandates,” he stressed.

Finally, Puente told listeners that issues relating to groundwater districts once again will be debated on the House floor. One particular issue likely to be discussed, he said, is the formation of districts along political boundaries versus aquifer boundaries.

Kip Averitt, chairman of the Senate Water and Natural Resources Committee, followed Puente with his thoughts on the legislative session. Funding of the state water plan, Averitt told listeners, will likely be his top water issue in this legislative session.

“We have an incredible opportunity to make some significant progress in our state. We recently adopted the state water plan, and now it’s time to take the next step in enhancing the implementation process,” Averitt said. “This is our moment, our chance to push that forward into the next decade, and we do that by financing the water plan.”

The Water Development Board, he said, has put a price tag of $78 million for the initial financing phase, though all told, the price tag to fund the proposed water infrastructure through 2060 is some $30 billion.

“That $78 million,” Averitt insisted, “should be the easiest appropriation that we make this legislative session.

“The stars are aligned. We’re going to have a nice surplus. We don’t have to put a tax on bottled water or tap fees like we were talking about last session when we didn’t have any money. I believe we can make this work with our existing revenue sources now.

“That‚s one senator‚s opinion,” he added. “Ultimately, if it gets done it will be because stakeholders tell us to vote to fund the state water plan.”

“Conjunctive management,” the chairman said, is also high on his priority list for the 80th legislative session.

“We have inconsistency in our policies, which probably promotes not a very well thought-out process of developing water throughout our state. We want our policy to be more consistent.”

The chairman noted that two sessions ago he filed a bill to repeal the junior rights provision.

“I had my head handed to me,” Averitt commented. “It was a pretty emotional issue, I discovered. I think we will see a much accelerated interest in this issue this legislative session. I think some are finding that it is an impediment to the state water plan.

“I don’t expect we’ll repeal it this session,” he added, “but I do expect that we will address the issue and maybe figure out other ways to deal with it.”

Like his House counterpart, the chairman noted that water conservation is a fundamental component of the water planning process.

“If we aren’t willing to demonstrate a willingness to employ conservation efforts, then I think we’re going to have major kinks in our armor when we go through the legislative process, when we ask people to make sacrifices in one region or the next. There are going to be people asking why they should give up their land for a reservoir if others are not committed to conservation efforts.”

Awareness and education of conservation is critical, Averitt said, and such efforts like the proposed Water IQ program must be funded.

With regard to groundwater districts, the chairman also mentioned the idea of such districts being formed along aquifer boundaries rather than political boundaries.

“I recently wrote a letter to all the county judges in Texas asking for their input and asking them to be at the table regardless of whether they’re in a district or not.”

Environmental flows, he told listeners, is another appropriation issue.

“A lot of blood, sweat and tears has gone into developing a consensus plan, and we’re closer to getting the deal signed, but there again, if we don’t appropriate the funds to make the system work, then it‚s all for naught.”

He noted that last session there was a $10 million fiscal note associated with environmental flows, and he said he expects the price tag will be fairly similar this session.

One other major bloodbath that Averitt said he anticipates this session is the designation of reservoir sites.

“So much of our water plan is dependent on finding future surface water sources, and reservoir sites are an integral part of some of the regions‚ water plans,” he told listeners.

In the 2007 state water plan, the Texas Water Development Board has recommended that the legislature consider 17 major reservoir sites.

“When someone files a bill to designate reservoir sites, you can expect to see fire and brimstone in the capitol,” Averitt concluded.

The final speaker on the legislative panel was attorney Charles “Chuck” Bailey. Bailey offered a private practitioner’s perspective in dealing with legislators as well as some thoughts on what might be expected in this session.

It was noted that there will be many new faces at the Capitol this session.

“The issues may be the same, but the way the players look at these issues,” Bailey stressed, “is different.”

Bailey’s experience with water related matters dates back to the days of Lieutenant Governor Bob Bullock. In fact, Bailey was asked by Bullock to mediate SB 1477, the Edwards Aquifer bill.

“We were looking at this fundamental change in how we were to deal with the Edwards Aquifer and all the users of it. At that time the chairman for the Senate Natural Resources Committee was from Paint Rock and the chairman in the House was from Knox City. You have to take into account that the chairmen were from rural communities. They were interested in local control, they were interested in the rule of capture, so you see all those compromises in the bill,” Bailey commented.

In the next session Bailey dealt with junior rights.

“Talk about fire and brimstone. I remember one night in the House when the chairman of House Appropriations from San Angelo decided inter-basin transfers was not going to pass. We heard a big crash down there and chairs were being broken on the podium. Take into account who the players were. Inter-basin transfers, at least the version that was passed, was not going to let you move water out of East Texas or anywhere else.

“Really, what you had up until the last two or three sessions, we had the rural folks, the ag folks, controlling things. You had a speaker from West Texas. We had people in the positions that made the policy decisions looking at it from their perspective,” Bailey continued.

“Now we have a chairman from Waco and a chairman from San Antonio. They’re going to be looking at it from a different perspective—what’s best for the state based on what the people they represent want. So it’s something you have to take into account,” he reiterated.

Bailey expects the Edwards Aquifer again to be among the issues debated in this legislative session.

“A decade has passed and we’re still working on Edwards Aquifer issues.”

Groundwater districts will also be another hot topic, he said, and most likely the rule of capture.

“In-stream flows, waste water reuse, inter-basin transfers—all of these issues will be on the table again. Nothing new, just how they’re looked at.”

He offered another personal experience of how different players view the same topic differently.

“When we did SB 1477, one of the things we put in the bill was a prohibition on a pipeline that would have taken water from Uvalde to San Antonio. The irrigators didn’t want that,” Bailey explained.

“Then about five or six years later I get a call asking that prohibition be taken out. I was told that things have changed, that some of the rural folks have saved water and so they want to be able to sell that extra water, but they couldn’t get it anywhere because there was this prohibition on a pipeline.

“I worked on it for about three years and I couldn’t get it out of there, and the reason I couldn’t was because of the players. The representative and the Senator didn’t want it moved. Now the players have changed,” he concluded.

For the second year TreeFolks is distributing home orchard kits as a part of our annual regional tree planting. These kits are an excellent way to get started growing your own delicious fruit. Last year we distributed 100 kits and had people yelling for more so this year we're offering 150 kits.

The Home Orchard Kit is a great deal. It includes four excellent fruit trees (recommended for planting in this area), four grape vines, a copy of our Fruit and Nut Tree Growing Guide for Central Texas. The cost is $52.00 payable in advance. There is a limit of two kits per family. Orchard kits will be distributed on February 3, 2007 from 9:00 until Noon at the Red Rock Community Center (no exceptions please). Any unclaimed kits will be sold at noon and the money refunded to the original purchaser.

This year's kit will include:

• 1 ea., 4-5' Pawnee Pecan Tree
• 1 ea., 2-3' Texas Everbearing Fig Tree
• 1 ea., 4-5' Floridaking Peach Tree
• 1 ea., 4-5' Dorsett Gold Apple
• 4 ea., Champanel Grape Vines
• 1 Copy of the Fruit and Nut Tree Growing Guide for Central Texas

Descriptions of all of those varieties can be found at this link.

WE ABSOLUTELY WILL SELL OUT SO ORDER EARLY!!!

From birdwatchers to mountain bikers, the active set accounts for almost $300 billion in annual retail sales and contributes more than twice that to the U.S. economy, according to a Boulder, Colo.-based trade group.

Outdoor recreationists shell out $46 billion a year on the gear they need to hit the woods, the rivers and the slopes, according to a recent report by the Outdoor Industry Foundation.

But they spend five times that much ($243 billion) on all the extras - food, lodging, entertainment and transportation.

"We've always known we have a larger economic impact - now we have the data to support it," said Kim Coupounas, board chairman of the Outdoor Industry Association and co-founder and CEO of GoLite, a Boulder-based apparel and gear maker.

The study does more than measure retail sales. It also tracks the "ripple effects" of the spending. In all, it estimates active outdoor recreation pumps $730 billion annually into the U.S. economy.

Among other findings:
The industry supports about 6.5 million jobs.
Annual tax revenues add up to $88 billion a year.

The trade group hopes the fresh statistics, the most comprehensive report it has commissioned, will help it make a stronger case for protecting the wilds from development, oil drilling and the like.

"The purpose is really to show the economic importance of outdoor recreation - we're a force," said Clint Wall, research director for the outdoor industry group.

"That might change the dynamic in Washington."

Wall said the group wanted to take a "conservative" approach to defining the sector's economic impact.

It left out sales of some vehicles, boats and other big-ticket items such as second homes and cabins.

The study showed three-quarters of Americans take part in outdoor recreation.

Topping the list of avid outdoors' types: wildlife viewing participants. Birding fanatics have been a boon to the segment, which attracted 66 million people last year.

Biking ranked second, with 60 million people taking part. Those taking to the trails for running, hiking, rock climbing or backpacking total 56 million a year. By the number, dollar impact in the U.S.

$46 billion: Annual sales of clothing, gear and accessories.

$243 billion: Outdoor recreation trips involving food, lodging, entertainment and transportation.

$730 billion: The total amount the sector winds up contributing to the economy.

Participants
66 million: Wildlife viewing
60 million: Bicycling
56 million: Hiking, other trail activities
45 million: Camping
33 million: Fishing
24 million: Paddling
16 million: Snow sports
13 million: Hunting

Source: Outdoor Industry Foundation, Fall 2006 Report

Joanne Kelley writes for the Rocky Mountain News.

The cost of raw land in Texas continues to spiral upward, and once expansive ranches are being hacked into tiny fragments. Those trends could have detrimental long-term impacts on wildlife.

Shannon Tompkins called me to his desk Friday to check out the online notice regarding a place for sale about halfway between Dallas and Oklahoma. The property is 324 low-fenced acres and includes a nice-looking house with garage, stocked lakes, grain storage and (presumably, once you see the price tag) lots more.

When asked to guess the asking figure, I missed almost by an entire zero. It can be yours, anyone's, for a mere $3.25 million. Apparently, while none of us rational people were looking, the value of dirt in the middle of nowhere - at least it's in Texas - rose to nearly $10,000 per acre.

The only thing wackier than that tag is that it almost surely will be met, but probably not by anyone who realizes that country dirt, even in Texas, isn't worth that much unless it comes with mineral rights, which this place almost certainly does not.

There is an understandable enthusiasm among urbanites over owning bits and pieces of the countryside, and who could blame them? Much psychological good can come from getting a jump on Friday-afternoon traffic, hitting the city limits and then driving a few hours farther to your ranchette or farmette at the intersection of Peace and Quiet. I've been tempted but hesitate to become part of what I see as a potentially damaging situation for wildlife.

Big, working ranches are being passed by their individual owners to multiple heirs, increasingly fewer of whom have interest in keeping (or can afford to keep) those places whole. One parcel becomes two, two become four, and in a couple more generations, what once was a mighty, Texas-cattle ranch is reduced to 10- and 20-acre crumbs.

Ignorance is bliss
Twenty acres is huge if you're trying to mow it, but that is not enough land on which to really hunt anything bigger than squirrels or cottontails. A good marksman could pin paper targets to fence posts at each corner and hit all four bull's-eyes from a tripod set in the middle. You're not "hunting" on 20 or even 50 acres so much as you are just hoping a deer hops to your side of the fence before it's spotted on the other.

Folks who don't understand the relationship between land and wildlife, especially that big animals need healthy chunks of habitat to sustain each of them, are less inclined to care what happens on their places much past the sight line from the back porch. So long as the half-acre around the house is kept free of snakes (by mooching feral cats that show up within hours of a title change), the owners of these small parcels seldom do much with them.

Nor should they. Unless neighbors across every fence sign up for a common management program, there's little incentive to make costly habitat improvements or resist pulling the trigger on game.

Texas is going the way of Colorado, where a local county sheriff a few years ago got so many calls from new, sedan-driving property owners that he actually published a neophyte's country-life guide.

Among the FAQs addressed on those pages, all drawn from actual calls to his office, were such inquiries as "What's that smell?" and "When is someone going to pave the road to my place?"

To which the answers were "Livestock" and "Probably never, unless you pay for it yourself," respectively.

Recently, I've looked at photos of people proudly hand-feeding whitetails in weekend-home backyards. Deer are as opportunistic as any wild animal and, with a handful of corn, can be tamed to a degree.

The more they come to rely on handouts, however, the less capable those animals are of fending for themselves. When property owners get distracted and don't return for a few months and their "pets" can't find enough to eat because other deer rushed into that habitat, each of those deer winds up a little hungry - and more susceptible to disease.

It's great that city people are interested in rural Texas and want to experience it. It's unfortunate; however, that land doesn't come with an owner's manual.

Stronger Rural Communities?
Dr. Paul Martin sent us the link to the center for Rural Affairs, a private nonprofit working to strengthen small businesses, family farms and ranches, and rural communities. They are collecting signatures on a well thought out petition to congress for items like “investing in programs such as the Conservation Security Program, which preserve land and water by rewarding farmers and ranchers for good stewardship on working lands rather than by what and how much they produce, is also good for family farmers, ranchers, and rural communities”. If you agree, go sign your name at http://www.strengthenruralamerica.com/