1894 - Hawley "hangs out his shingle" in Fort Worth, becoming the first independent consulting engineer in Texas in water and sewer work.

1935 - Texas Governor James Allred appoints Marvin Nichols chairman of the Texas Planning Board, tasked with obtaining federal emergency relief funds for the State and making recommendations for the development of the natural and economic resources of Texas.

1957 - The Texas Water Development Board is created, with Marvin Nichols as its first chairman.

Marvin Nichols dies on April 10, 1969. Within hours of Nichols' death, the Texas Legislature passed a resolution to name a proposed dam and reservoir in Northeast Texas the "Marvin C. Nichols Dam and Reservoir." The reservoir was a key part of the original Texas Water Plan that Nichols was instrumental in developing.

Marvin C. Nichols

1978 - Bob Nichols becomes President of the National Society of Professional Engineers.

1983 - Jim Nichols named "Engineer of the Year" for 1983 by the Texas Society of Professional Engineers for his "outstanding achievement in technical and professional work and community involvement."

1994 - Freese and Nichols celebrates 100 years of service and looks forward to the next 100 years.

1998 - Freese and Nichols is selected to eight of the 16 regions to provide water planning services under Senate Bill I, confirming the firm's role as a major contributor to Texas water planning. [Note that Region D in extreme Northeast Texas was NOT one of these 8 regions. Roberto]

The 16 Texas Water Development Regions

The 19 Counties in Region D

2001 - Freese and Nichols wins the Marvin Nichols Dam project with MTG Engineers.

Question

Are there any new dam projects under consideration that would affect Wood County?

Answer

Senate Bill 1 requires regional areas of the state to develop regional water plans "to identify those policies and actions that may be needed to meet Texas' near- and long-term water needs based on a reasonable projected use of water, affordable water supply availability, and conservation of the state's natural resources."

Wood County is included in Region (D) North East Texas. A State-wide summary of the plans may be found at: Summary of the Regional Water Plans. There is also a direct link to the Region D Summary on this page. We provide links to the entire Region D Report, as well as other information, on our Regional Planning page.

The North East Texas RWPG recommends that the Marvin Nichols I site be developed (Red River County) to provide a source of future water supply for water users both within the North East Texas Region and the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex (Region C). The Region C RWPG has indicated that the Marvin Nichols 1 site is their preferred option for reservoir development within the Sulphur River Basin. Should this site prove not feasible, the Region C RWPG has indicated that its secondary preference would be to develop an equivalent amount of water supply through the construction of the George Parkhouse I and II sites and the Marvin Nichols II site. None of the proposed reservoirs in Wood County such as Big Sandy and Waters Bluff were recommended by the North East Texas RWPG.

An independent appraisal firm from Redmond, Washington, recently estimated that Texas' least-cost alternative water supply project - Marvin Nichols Reservoir, a controversial 72,000-acre project proposed in the 2002 Texas Water Plan - would require $5.1 billion to construct. That figure, according to Barnett, represents a conservative starting point that Oklahoma negotiators were prepared to request from their counterparts south of the state line. Although no specific contract terms have been contemplated, one draft revenue scenario envisioned an up-front payment from Texas of $35 million with annual payments escalating between $9 and $124 million throughout the 100-year life of the deal. Revenue would be paid directly to a public trust established through the pending State/Tribal Water Compact.

Marvin Nichols opponents attempt protest

By John Henderson
The Paris News

Published January 31, 2002

MOUNT VERNON - While meetings of the Sulphur River Basin Authority
haven't been noticed much by local citizens in the past, Tuesday's regular
meeting in Mount Vernon suggested a coming change.

The office, established in 1985 and based in Texarkana, may eventually
manage much more than just the water quality and quantity in the basin,
which includes Wright Patman Lake and 3,558 square miles of drainage
area.

If the Sulphur is dammed to create the Marvin Nichols I Reservoir, as the
current Texas Water Plan provides, the authority would be in charge of
managing a 72,000-acre lake which would flood out 10 percent of
southeastern Red River County's land mass. That includes hardwood
bottomland, and some family farms and ranchland held for generations.

The lake could produce an estimated 600 million gallons of water a day,
80 percent of which would be meant for the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex,
expected to double in population and water usage by 2050.

The board members seemed surprised to see all 10 available seats in the
community room of the First National Bank of Mount Vernon filled with
concerned citizens. The agenda for Tuesday afternoon's meeting of the
Sulphur River Basin Authority was routine - mostly bill payments - and
didn't mention Marvin Nichols at all.

It also didn't specifically list an open public hearing, so Charles Lowry,
authority vice president who had been presiding over the meeting in the
absence of authority president Mike Huddleston, called for adjournment.

"Aren't you going to call for public comment?" asked Max Shumake, whose
family owns land in the proposed path of Marvin Nichols.

Michael Burke, administrator of the Sulphur River Basin Authority, said
Wednesday that he was in a hurry to get back to Texarkana. While a few
board members stayed, Burke gathered up his materials and headed out.

While he left, Shumake passed out copies of a letter Burke had sent him,
asking for a membership list and by-laws for the "Sulphur Oversight
Society." The ad-hoc group which communicates by e-mail has sometimes
been associated with Shumake and a few other people, none of which
Shumake said were any of the basin authority's business.

"That's like going to church and asking for their rolls," remarked Oran
Caudle, a supporter of the anti-Marvin Nichols cause.

Shumake had a bigger word for the memo - "harassment."

"I just want to tell you that as a board and as individuals, you are liable
for what you say or do," he said.

Burke said Wednesday that he didn't understand Shumake's strong
reaction to his memo. The same people have been coming to protest
Marvin Nichols for several months, he said, but only recently had it been
implied that they were organized.

"We don't know who they are," Burke said. "He could have just pitched it
in the trash."

Lowry, the only board member local to Mount Vernon, stayed to listen a
while longer, though he said after leaving that he was concerned if a
quorum of the board stayed, it might be considered an illegal meeting.

"I was appointed to represent my county and Northeast Texas, whether
the lake's built or not," Lowry said.

Lowry pointed out that Dallas money would pay for the project, originally
estimated by the state to cost $1.7 billion (SOS supporters tout a different
figure, somewhere around $5 billion.)

"What would you rather have? Do you want Northeast Texas people in
charge of this, or a group from the Metroplex in charge? That's where I'm
coming from," he said.

© 2000 The Paris News. All rights reserved.

$1.7 BILLION MARVIN NICHOLS DAM TOPS NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION REPORT OF TEXAS' UNNECESSARY WATER PROJECTS

National Wildlife Federation

Austin, TX- The proposed Marvin Nichols Dam in Northeast Texas received top billing in a National Wildlife Federation (NWF) report highlighting expensive and inappropriate state water projects. The NWF announced the list today in a report entitled "Down the Drain."

The NWF says the six highlighted projects, recommended in a draft State Water Plan the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) released recently for public comment, would damage the environment, harm fish and wildlife resources and rural economies, and waste billions of dollars. The featured projects and their estimated costs are: Marvin Nichols Dam/Reservoir= $1.7 billion, Lower Colorado River Pipeline= $800 million-$1 billion, Little River Dam/Reservoir= $361 million, Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Withdrawal=$332 million, Brownsville Weir= $81 million, Gulf Coast Aquifer Withdrawals= $38 million, Total Taxpayer Dollars Down the Drain= $3.5 billion

"The State's population is expected to double in the next 50 years which means Texans clearly do face a water challenge," said Susan Kaderka, Director of the National Federation's Gulf States Office in Austin. "But we've got to find a way to supply water for human needs without drying up our streams and rivers and without wasting billions of dollars. That means looking at how we can use water more efficiently, and not just assuming we can pump or divert or capture all the water we might want," she said. "Unfortunately, these projects illustrate that water planners are relying largely on outdated concrete-and-steel approaches to supplying water that threatens to send our hard-earned money and the natural heritage of Texas down the drain," continued Kaderka.

NWF Water Resources Scientist, Dr. Norman Johns, said rivers, streams, and aquifers in Texas are already stressed. "We've got to get serious about conserving water," said Johns. "For example, if the major cities in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area would bring their water usage down to the level of other major Texas cities, the so called "need" for the Marvin Nichols dam would evaporate. State water planners are proposing to trade healthy rivers and coastal bays, along with the rural communities they help support, for the privilege of maintaining big green lawns even during a severe drought."

The "Down the Drain" report provides a brief analysis of six projects. NWF's concerns with the featured projects include loss of freshwater inflows to coastal bays, which are critical to survival of coastal fish and wildlife and their associated fishing and tourism industries (Lower Colorado River Pipeline and Brownsville Weir); loss of family farms and ranches as well as important wildlife habitat (Little River and Marvin Nichols Dams/Reservoirs); and depletion of groundwater resulting from over-pumping of aquifers (Carrizo-Wilcox and Gulf Coast Aquifers projects).

The complete NWF report is available online at http://www.nwf.org/texaswaterforwildlife/

"NWF is encouraging Texans to get more involved in the water planning process," said Kaderka. "This State Plan will affect both the bank accounts and the legacy of Texans, so we've all got a stake in it," Kaderka noted that state officials are talking of new statewide taxes and fees to help pay for new water projects. "But regardless of who pays, no decisions are more critical to future generations of Texans than those about water. The Water Development Board needs to hear that Texans won't support new water projects until we have a Water Plan that supports the efficient use of water and protects our natural heritage."

The Texas Water Development Board is holding hearings on the draft State Plan around the state and is accepting written comments through November 12.

The nation's largest member-supported conservation education and advocacy group, the National Wildlife Federation unites people from all walks of life to protect nature, wildlife, and the world we all share. The federation has educated and inspired families to uphold America's conservation tradition since 1936.

Mount Pleasant Daily Tribune, 20 January 2002

Marvin Nichols Project Takes Gigantic Step Forward In 2001

With the planning of Senate Bill 1 now finished, the proposed $1.7 billion Marvin Nichols Reservoir project is one step closer to happening.

According to Mike Huddleston, president of the Sulphur River Basin Authority, approval of the 2002 State Water Plan has given the Authority the green light to begin the permitting process for the dam.

"The permitting process for the reservoir project is estimated to take from 5 to 10 years," said Huddleston, "with the land acquisition process taking about five years."

A lot of controversy has surrounded the proposed project, with more than one local organization, along with several ecologists coming out in rejection of the project, which will require 75,000 acres of land in the Sulphur River bottom to complete the dam.

Local land owner Max Shumake of DeKalb, has been one vocal opponent in the fight against the dam.

"This project is going to take away our birthrights, and displace wildlife and people for miles and miles," said Shumake, president of Save Our Sulphur River (S0S).

Throughout talks concerning the project, Huddleston has maintained that small, local groups like Huddleston's [This is obviously a misprint and was supposed to have been Shumake's. R.] do not speak for the majority of residents along the Sulphur River.

"A hundred or so people do not represent all of that region," said Huddleston. "Many people I have spoken with are thrilled with the project."

If the project does come to fruition, 80 percent of the water from the dam will go to the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, which will be funding the project, the other 20 percent of the water will remain for local residents.

"The proposed reservoir is to be constructed on the somewhere up stream of the confluence on the Sulphur River and State Highway 259," said Huddleston. "The reservoir was proposed in both the Region D and Region C plans and consequently has been adopted and included in the new 2002 Water Plan."

Huddleston is very pleased to announce the Sulphur River Basin Authority has been given the right to construct the dam from the State of Texas.

"If the dam is going to be built, people in this area should be glad that we're building it, and not the Corps of Engineers," said Huddleston.

Huddleston pointed to the economic impact to Northeast Texas and the fact that all displaced wildlife will be placed on reserves as positive aspects of the dam.

"Since the Marvin Nichols Reservoir will not be a Corps of Engineers project, all adjacent property can be developed," said Huddleston. "As the land around the reservoir develops and the population increases, county tax sales generated by this increase will offset the loss of real estate tax revenue from the agricultural land that will be covered by the reservoir."

[Agenda Item] 27 Resolution No. 1-24-02-046 -- Approving An Advanced Funding Agreement Between The City Of Irving And The Sulphur River Basin Authority In The Amount Of $23,000.00 For The Development Of Marvin Nichols Reservoir.

L O C A L N E W S

Cities reach further in search of water
Monica Wolfson, Times Record News

The Marvin Nichols Lake, which would be located near Mount Pleasant, Texas, about 150 miles northeast of Fort Worth, will provide 552 million gallons of water per day to more than 30 cities including the communities in the lake's area.

The cost of the project would be shared among all the benefactors including Plano, Richardson, Denton and Mesquite.

"It is truly a cooperative effort," Williams said [Mike Williams, manager of community relations for the Tarrant Regional Water District]. "It will have to be for a number of reasons, not to mention the staggering cost associated with it."

It will take 25 years to build Nichols, and the lake should be able to supply the growing metropolitan area with water for another 25 years.

Following discussion, Tony Williams reviewed events of discussions between Region C and D of the Sulphur River Task Group to propose the development of a project in the Sulphur Basin that would serve both regions. He introduced the designation of the Marvin Nichols I site as a unique reservoir site.  After discussion by several members, it was agreed that designation should be considered later after the reservoir development relationship between Regions C and D becomes clearer.

John Bradley questioned the mitigation for bottomland that would be lost if Nichols I was selected.  Texas Parks and Wildlife Department representative Dan Jones, reported that 648,000 acres could be the maximum area required for mitigation.

Dan Jones distributed materials on 15 candidate sites for designation as ecologically unique stream segments. Mr. Jones stated that some of the sites could be set aside for conservation without interfering with water supplies.  Others would have the ability to conflict with reservoir sites.  Following discussion, Vernon Rowe made the motion, second by Sue Ann Harting, there will be no designation of ecologically unique stream segments because of lack of definition regarding the implications of designations. Sites recommended by TWPD will be included in the plan as potentially ecologically important. Motion carried, with Ruth Culver voting against and the remaining members voting in favor.