Skip to content
Sections
  • Obituaries
  • eEdition
  • Popular Content
  • Submit a Tip
May 22nd, 2022
  • QUICK LINKS
  • Obituaries
  • eEdition
  • Popular Content
  • Submit a Tip
  • News
  • Columbus & Lowndes County
  • Starkville & Oktibbeha County
  • West Point & Clay County
  • Area
  • State
  • National
  • Business
  • Sports
  • High School Sports
  • College Sports
  • Local Columns
  • Opinions
  • Local Columns
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Roses & Thorns
  • Dispatch Editorials
  • Obituaries
  • Lifestyles
  • Columns
  • Entertainment
  • Food
  • Transitions & Announcements
  • Community
  • Religion
  • Classifieds
  • Photo Galleries
  • Public Records
  • Building Permits
  • Marriages & Divorces
May 22nd, 2022

Open eyes, open minds.

  • News
  • State

The world of water law is watching Mississippi’s aquifer fight

By Alex Rozier/Mississippi Today • October 12, 2021

A map showing the border of the aquifer at issue in a water dispute between Mississippi and Tennessee. Courtesy graphic/U.S. Geological Survey

Mississippi laid out an argument before the U.S. Supreme Court last week that could impact water law principles around the globe.

The state is seeking over $600 million in damages from neighboring Tennessee over what it sees as stolen groundwater. Since 1985, Mississippi claims, a Memphis public utility has pumped enough water from an interstate aquifer to force water from Mississippi’s side of the border into Tennessee.

The nation’s highest court has ruled on a number of disputes dealing with surface water in the past, such as two states fighting over use of the same river, but this is the first case to focus entirely on groundwater.

Law and water resource experts explained to Mississippi Today why the Supreme Court’s ruling could have wide-reaching effects.

First, the supply of groundwater in the world dwarfs that of surface water, which is already becoming less reliable due to climate change; about three-quarters of Mississippi’s water comes from groundwater.

Second, very few places around the world that share aquifers have any agreement over how to divide the resource.

“People, communities, countries are going to have to go to groundwater to meet their water needs, and they’ll eventually be pumping from the same aquifers on different sides of the border,” said Gabriel Eckstein, a professor and director of the Energy, Environmental, and Natural Resource Systems Law Program at Texas A&M University.

This case, he explained, will help inform places across the world on how to share groundwater.

“Well do I sue my neighbor, do I enter into a treaty with them, or do I ignore them?” Eckstein said.

For the most part, bordering states and countries have chosen the latter option. With this case, Mississippi is hoping to set a new precedent by staking ownership in the water under its land.
Physically, the evidence backs Mississippi’s claim, explained Robert Mace, a professor at Texas State University with a Ph.D. in hydrogeology.

“Tennessee’s pumping creates what we call a cone of depression, and that cone of depression reaches out across the state line,” Mace said. “The data clearly shows that the human intervention of (Tennessee’s) well field has impacted the groundwater flow in the aquifer and is pulling water from Mississippi into Tennessee.”

Conceptually, however, it’s unclear what the legal grounds are for Mississippi’s claims, as the justices expressed during last week’s oral arguments.

In past interstate water disputes, the Supreme Court has leaned on “equitable apportionment,” a set of principles that determine a fair allotment of water based on factors such as how many people need the water, what it’s needed for, conservation, climate, among others.

Tennessee, the special master — an outside expert the court appoints for highly technical cases — and the assistant to the solicitor general all argued that equitable apportionment should apply to this case as well.

But Mississippi chose to forgo that route for the time being, instead claiming ownership over the water that has flowed underneath Tennessee, an argument that the justices and other legal experts struggle with.

The justices, expressing confusion, made several analogies during the oral arguments to wrap their heads around the issue: If a pack of wild horses ran from one state to another, which state owns the horses? If a plane in the sky forced fog across a state boundary, could one state claim damages from the loss of its fog?

“The bottom line is that water flows,” said Buzz Thompson, a professor at Stanford University who served as Special Master for Montana v. Wyoming, a Supreme Court interstate water case from 2018. “It’s hard to say that you have a right to keep a molecule of water that’s underneath your state from flowing over under another state, unless you tell that state that they can’t pump.
“It’s hard to find very many legal experts outside of Mississippi that would say this is a reasonable and responsible way of resolving these types of disputes.”

Several states, led by Colorado, the International Law Committee in New York City, and various law professors from around the country all filed briefs against Mississippi, citing equitable apportionment as a reasonable solution.

A ruling in Mississippi’s favor would make it difficult to equitably divide groundwater in the future, Eckstein said.

“States will say, ‘This is how much we have, this is how much you have, I’m sorry you have just a small section of the aquifer, too bad. If you want, we’ll sell you some,’” he said. “It’s not an equity issue anymore, it becomes an ownership and market issue.”

Popular

Bulldogs on the brink: Mississippi State softball loses to South Florida, falls into Tallahassee Regional losers’ bracket

By Theo DeRosa

Mississippi State softball pitcher Annie Willis selected in Women’s Pro Fastpitch draft

By Theo DeRosa

Mississippi State softball runs over Howard, stays alive in Tallahassee Regional

By Theo DeRosa

Tallahassee nights: Mississippi State softball goes past midnight to beat USF, advance to regional final

By Theo DeRosa


Public Information Links

  • City of Columbus
  • Lowndes County
  • City of Starkville
  • Oktibbeha County
  • City of West Point
  • Clay County
  • Building Permits
  • Marriages & Divorces
  • MS Dept of Health Restaurant Inspections


On This Day 2021

No. 10 Mississippi State comes back to beat Alabama, sweep series

By Theo DeRosa

Featured Podcast

The C Dispatch Podcast

Sections

  • News
  • Sports
  • Opinions
  • Lifestyles
  • Obituaries

Info

  • About
  • Contact
  • Submit a Tip
  • Terms & Service
  • Popular Content

Dispatch

Contact Us

Main Switchboard:

(662) 328-2424

Physical Address:

516 Main Street
Columbus, MS 39701

Mailing Address:

PO Box 511
Columbus, MS 39701

cdispatch.com © 2022 – The Commerical Dispatch

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT