DOCSLIB.ORG

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in Texas (GIWW-T)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in Texas (GIWW-T) TEXAS GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY MASTER PLAN: TECHNICAL REPORT by C. James Kruse Director, Center for Ports & Waterways Texas A&M Transportation Institute David Ellis Research Scientist Texas A&M Transportation Institute Annie Protopapas Associate Research Engineer Texas A&M Transportation Institute Nicolas Norboge Assistant Research Scientist Texas A&M Transportation Institute and Brianne Glover Assistant Research Scientist Texas A&M Transportation Institute Report 0-6807-1 Project 0-6807 Project Title: Texas Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Master Plan Performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration Resubmitted: August 2014 TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER This research was performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the FHWA or TxDOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. We acknowledge the guidance and support that the following members of the TxDOT Project Monitoring Committee (PMC) provided: • Sarah Bagwell, planning and strategy director, Maritime Division (project coordinator). • Caroline Mays, freight planning branch manager, Transportation Planning & Programming Division. • Peggy Thurin, systems planning director, Transportation Planning & Programming Division. • Andrea Lofye, Federal Legislative Affairs. • Jay Bond, State Legislative Affairs. • Jennifer Moczygemba, systems section director, Rail Division. • Matthew Mahoney, waterways coordinator, Maritime Division (not a member of the PMC, but provided valuable assistance). iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ ix Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 Background and Purpose ............................................................................................................ 1 Economic Importance of the GIWW-T ...................................................................................... 2 Dredging Issues ........................................................................................................................... 3 Physical Infrastructure and Safety Issues ................................................................................... 5 Intersections with Ship Channels ............................................................................................ 5 Floodgates and Locks ............................................................................................................. 5 Fleeting Areas ......................................................................................................................... 6 Mooring Areas ........................................................................................................................ 7 Encroachment ......................................................................................................................... 8 Economics and Funding Issues ................................................................................................... 8 Elevate the Priority of Economically Important GIWW-T Projects to the Corps and to Congress .............................................................................................................................. 9 Apply for Marine Highway Designation .............................................................................. 10 Apply for Federal Discretionary Grant Programs ................................................................. 11 Explore Feasibility of Florida Inland Navigation District Model for Texas......................... 11 Consider Utilizing Coastal Erosion Planning and Response Funds ..................................... 11 Explore Ending State Diesel Tax Exemptions for Certain GIWW-T Users ......................... 12 Explore Public-Private Partnership (P3) Opportunities and Monitor Possible Inland Waterway P3 Pilot Projects That Might Be Pursued in the Future ....................................... 12 Explore Utilizing Texas Rainy Day Fund for Waterway Projects ........................................ 12 Consider the Panama Canal Approach for Texas ................................................................. 13 TxDOT Legislative Obstacles .................................................................................................. 13 Performance Metrics ................................................................................................................. 14 Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 15 Chapter 1: Introduction and Background ................................................................................ 17 Project Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 17 GIWW-T Public Stakeholders .................................................................................................. 18 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ............................................................................................. 20 Texas Department of Transportation .................................................................................... 20 U.S. Coast Guard .................................................................................................................. 21 Texas Railroad Commission ................................................................................................. 21 Texas General Land Office ................................................................................................... 22 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ..................................................................... 22 GIWW-T Stakeholder Working Group .................................................................................... 22 Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 23 Project Background/Importance of the GIWW-T .................................................................... 24 History ................................................................................................................................... 24 Importance ............................................................................................................................ 25 Upper Reach .......................................................................................................................... 33 v Middle Reach ........................................................................................................................ 35 Lower Reach ......................................................................................................................... 38 Future of the GIWW-T ............................................................................................................. 40 Organization of Report ............................................................................................................. 43 Chapter 2: GIWW-T Dredging ................................................................................................. 45 Background ............................................................................................................................... 45 Importance of Annual Maintenance Dredging ......................................................................... 46 Documentation of Placement Areas ......................................................................................... 47 Beneficial Uses ......................................................................................................................... 60 TxDOT’s Role in Beneficial Use Projects ............................................................................ 63 Beneficial Use Projects in the Galveston District ................................................................. 64 West Galveston Bay Interagency Recommendations ........................................................... 67 State-Managed Programs that Include Beneficial Use Projects ........................................... 70 Related Beneficial Use Initiatives ......................................................................................... 73 Chapter 3: GIWW-T-Related Infrastructure and Safety Issues ............................................ 75 Background ............................................................................................................................... 75 Intersection with Ship Channels ............................................................................................... 75 Floodgates and Locks ............................................................................................................... 79 Brazos River Floodgates ......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GEOTEXTILE TUBE and GABION ARMOURED SEAWALL for COASTAL PROTECTION an ALTERNATIVE by S Sherlin Prem Nishold1, Ranganathan Sundaravadivelu 2*, Nilanjan Saha3
    PIANC-World Congress Panama City, Panama 2018 GEOTEXTILE TUBE AND GABION ARMOURED SEAWALL FOR COASTAL PROTECTION AN ALTERNATIVE by S Sherlin Prem Nishold1, Ranganathan Sundaravadivelu 2*, Nilanjan Saha3 ABSTRACT The present study deals with a site-specific innovative solution executed in the northeast coastline of Odisha in India. The retarded embankment which had been maintained yearly by traditional means of ‘bullah piling’ and sandbags, proved ineffective and got washed away for a stretch of 350 meters in 2011. About the site condition, it is required to design an efficient coastal protection system prevailing to a low soil bearing capacity and continuously exposed to tides and waves. The erosion of existing embankment at Pentha ( Odisha ) has necessitated the construction of a retarded embankment. Conventional hard engineered materials for coastal protection are more expensive since they are not readily available near to the site. Moreover, they have not been found suitable for prevailing in in-situ marine environment and soil condition. Geosynthetics are innovative solutions for coastal erosion and protection are cheap, quickly installable when compared to other materials and methods. Therefore, a geotextile tube seawall was designed and built for a length of 505 m as soft coastal protection structure. A scaled model (1:10) study of geotextile tube configurations with and without gabion box structure is examined for the better understanding of hydrodynamic characteristics for such configurations. The scaled model in the mentioned configuration was constructed using woven geotextile fabric as geo tubes. The gabion box was made up of eco-friendly polypropylene tar-coated rope and consists of small rubble stones which increase the porosity when compared to the conventional monolithic rubble mound.
    [Show full text]
  • Shore Protection by Offshore Breakwaters
    l§lHydraulics Research Wallingford SHORE PROTECTION BY OFFSHORE BREAKWATERS A H Brampton Ph .D J V Smallman Ph.D Report No SR 8 July 1985 Registered Office: Hydraulics Research Limited, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX 10 8BA. Telephone: 0491 35381. Telex: 848552 Thi s report describes work carri ed out wi thin the research programme Commission B for the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheri es and Food . The study was carri ed ou t in the Coas tal Processes Sect ion of the Mari time Engineering Department of Hydraulics Research . The departmental nominated officer is Mr A Alli son . The Company's nominated project officer is Dr S W Huntington. The report is publi s hed on behalf of MAFF but any op inions expressed are not necessarily those of the Ministry . C Crown copyri ght 19 85 ABSTRACT This report reviews the information available for the design and use of offshore breakwaters in shore protection. As an introduction to the subject the physical processes occurring in the lee of an offshore breakwater are described with reference to natural examples. This is followed by a survey of case histories, and mathematical and physical modelling techniques for offshore breakwaters. Some of the methods which are available for the design of a breakwater system are reviewed. Possible future developments in the design process are described, and the areas in which further research on the effects of offshore breakwaters is required are highlighted. CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 OFFSHORE BREAKWATERS - THE PHYSICAL PROCESSES 2 2.1 Natural Examples 2 2.2 Physical processes 4 3 LITERATURE STUDY 6 3.1 Review of case histories 6 3.2 Physical model studies 10 3 .3 Ma thematical model studies 16 4 DESIGN METHODS FOR AN OFFSHORE BREAKWATER SYSTEM 19 4.1 Developing the initial design 19 4.2 Methods for improving the breakwa ter design 22 5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 26 6 CONCLUS IONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 28 7 ACKNOWLEDGE MENTS 29 8 REFERENCES 30 FIGURES PLATES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–11 Edition) § 80.840
    § 80.840 33 CFR Ch. I (7–1–11 Edition) Point Au Fer Reef Light 33; thence to Freeport Entrance Light 6; thence Atchafalaya Bay Pipeline Light D lati- Freeport Entrance Light 7; thence the tude 29°25.0′ N. longitude 91°31.7′ W.; seaward extremity of Freeport South thence to Atchafalaya Bay Light 1 lati- Jetty. tude 29°25.3′ N. longitude 91°35.8′ W.; [CGD 77–118a, 42 FR 35784, July 11, 1977. Re- thence to South Point. designated by CGD 81–017, 46 FR 28154, May (b) Lines following the general trend 26, 1981, as amended by CGD 84–091, 51 FR of the highwater shoreline drawn 7787, Mar. 6, 1986] across the bayou and canal inlets from the Gulf of Mexico between South § 80.850 Brazos River, TX to the Rio Point and Calcasieu Pass except as oth- Grande, TX. erwise described in this section. (a) Except as otherwise described in (c) A line drawn on an axis of 140° this section lines drawn continuing the true through Southwest Pass general trend of the seaward, Vermillion Bay Light 4 across South- highwater shorelines across the inlets west Pass. to Brazos River Diversion Channel, San (d) A line drawn across the seaward Bernard River, Cedar Lakes, Brown extremity of the Freshwater Bayou Cedar Cut, Colorado River, Matagorda Canal Entrance Jetties. Bay, Cedar Bayou, Corpus Christi Bay, (e) A line drawn from Mermentau and Laguna Madre. Channel East Jetty Light 6 to (b) A line drawn across the seaward Mermentau Channel West Jetty Light extremity of Matagorda Ship Channel 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Guard, DHS § 80.525
    Coast Guard, DHS Pt. 80 Madagascar Singapore 80.715 Savannah River. Maldives Surinam 80.717 Tybee Island, GA to St. Simons Is- Morocco Tonga land, GA. Oman Trinidad 80.720 St. Simons Island, GA to Amelia Is- land, FL. Pakistan Tobago Paraguay 80.723 Amelia Island, FL to Cape Canaveral, Tunisia Peru FL. Philippines Turkey 80.727 Cape Canaveral, FL to Miami Beach, Portugal United Republic of FL. Republic of Korea Cameroon 80.730 Miami Harbor, FL. 80.735 Miami, FL to Long Key, FL. [CGD 77–075, 42 FR 26976, May 26, 1977. Redes- ignated by CGD 81–017, 46 FR 28153, May 26, PUERTO RICO AND VIRGIN ISLANDS 1981; CGD 95–053, 61 FR 9, Jan. 2, 1996] SEVENTH DISTRICT PART 80—COLREGS 80.738 Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands. DEMARCATION LINES GULF COAST GENERAL SEVENTH DISTRICT Sec. 80.740 Long Key, FL to Cape Sable, FL. 80.01 General basis and purpose of demarca- 80.745 Cape Sable, FL to Cape Romano, FL. tion lines. 80.748 Cape Romano, FL to Sanibel Island, FL. ATLANTIC COAST 80.750 Sanibel Island, FL to St. Petersburg, FL. FIRST DISTRICT 80.753 St. Petersburg, FL to Anclote, FL. 80.105 Calais, ME to Cape Small, ME. 80.755 Anclote, FL to the Suncoast Keys, 80.110 Casco Bay, ME. FL. 80.115 Portland Head, ME to Cape Ann, MA. 80.757 Suncoast Keys, FL to Horseshoe 80.120 Cape Ann, MA to Marblehead Neck, Point, FL. MA. 80.760 Horseshoe Point, FL to Rock Island, 80.125 Marblehead Neck, MA to Nahant, FL.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Submerged Breakwaters on Sediment Distribution Along Marsh Boundaries
    water Article The Impact of Submerged Breakwaters on Sediment Distribution along Marsh Boundaries Iacopo Vona *, Matthew W. Gray and William Nardin Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Cambridge, MD 21613, USA; [email protected] (M.W.G.); [email protected] (W.N.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 7 February 2020; Accepted: 31 March 2020; Published: 2 April 2020 Abstract: Human encroachment and development on coastlines have led to greater amounts of armoring of shorelines. Breakwaters are a common feature along coastlines, which are used to dampen wave energy and protect shorelines from flash floods or overwash events. Although common, their effects on sediment transport and marsh geomorphology are poorly understood. To address this gap, our study quantifies the effects of breakwaters on sediment transport and marsh evolution under different wave regimes using Delft3D-SWAN, a dynamic geomorphodynamic numerical model. Model configurations used the same numerical domain, but scenarios had different sediments, waves, tides, basin slopes and breakwater distances from the shoreline to explore how waves and tidal currents shape coastal margins. Model results suggested breakwaters were responsible for an average wave damping between 10–50%, proportional to the significant wave height across all modeled scenarios. Shear stress at the beginning of the marsh and the volume of sediment deposited at the end of the simulation (into the marsh behind the breakwater) increased on average between 20–40%, proportional to the slope and distance of the breakwater from the shoreline. Sediment trapping, defined as the ratio between the volume of sediment housed into the salt marsh behind and away from the breakwater, was found to be less than 1 from most model runs.
    [Show full text]
  • 28.6-ACRE WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY 28.6 ACRES of Leisure on the La Buena Vida Texas Coastline
    La Buena Rockport/AransasVida Pass, Texas 78336 La Buena Vida 28.6-ACRE WATERFRONT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY 28.6 ACRES Of leisure on the La Buena Vida Texas coastline. ROCKPORT/ARANSAS PASS EXCLUSIVE WATERFRONT COMMUNITY ACCESSIBILITY Adjacent to Estes Flats, Redfish Bay & Aransas Bay, popular salt water fishing spots for Red & Black drum Speckled Trout, and more. A 95-acre residential enclave with direct channel access to the Intracoastal IDEAL LOCATION Waterway, Redfish Bay, and others Nestled between the two recreational’ sporting towns of Rockport & Aransas Pass. LIVE OAK COUNTRY CLUB TX-35 35 TEXAS PALM HARBOR N BAHIA BAY ISLANDS OF ROCKORT LA BUENA VIDA 35 TEXAS CITY BY THE SEA TX-35 35 TEXAS ARANSAS BAY GREGORY PORT ARANSAS ARANSAS McCAMPBELL PASS PORTER AIRPORT 361 SAN JOSE ISLAND 361 361 INGLESIDE INGLESIDE ON THE BAY REDFISH BAY PORT ARANSAS MUSTANG BEACH AIRPORT SPREAD 01 At Home in Rockport & Aransas Pass Intimate & Friendly Coastal Community RECREATIONAL THRIVING DESTINATION ARTS & CULTURE Opportunity for fishing, A strong artistic and waterfowl hunting, cultural identity boating, water sports, • Local art center camping, hiking, golf, etc. • Variety of galleries • Downtown museums • Cultural institutions NATURAL MILD WINTERS & PARADISE WARM SUMMERS Featuring some of the best Destination for “Winter birdwatching in the U.S. Texans,” those seeking Home to Aransas National reprieve from colder Wildlife Refuge, a protected climates. haven for the endangered Whooping Crane and many other bird and marine species. SPREAD 02 N At Home in Rockport & Aransas Pass ARANSAS COUNTY AREA ATTRACTIONS & AIRPORT AMENITIES FULTON FULTON BEACH HARBOUR LIGHT PARK SALT LAKE POPEYES COTTAGES PIZZA HUT HAMPTON INN IBC BANK THE INN AT ACE HARDWARE FULTON ELEMENTARY FULTON HARBOUR SCHOOL ENROLLMENT: 509 THE LIGHTHOUSE INN - ROCKPORT FM 3036 BROADWAY ST.
    [Show full text]
  • Harbor Protection Through Construction of Artificial Submerged Reefs
    Harbor Protection through Construction of Artificial Submerged Reefs Amarjit Singh, Vallam Sundar, Enrique Alvarez, Roberto Porro, Michael Foley (www.hawaii.gov) 2 Outline • Background of Artificial Reefs • Multi-Purpose Artificial Submerged Reefs (MPASRs) ▫ Coastline Protection ▫ Harbor Protection • MPASR Concept for Kahului Harbor, Maui ▫ Situation ▫ Proposed Solution • Summary 3 Background First documented First specifically Artificial reefs in First artificial reef Artificial reefs in artificial reefs in designed artificial Hawaii– concrete/tire in Hawaii Hawaii – concrete Z- U.S. reefs in U.S. modules modules 1830’s 1961 1970’s 1985-1991 1991- Present • Uses • Materials ▫ Create Marine Habitat ▫ Rocks; Shells ▫ Enhance Fishing ▫ Trees ▫ Recreational Diving Sites ▫ Concrete Debris ▫ Surfing Enhancement ▫ Ships; Car bodies ▫ Coastal Protection ▫ Designed concrete modules ▫ Geosynthetic Materials 4 Multi-Purpose Artificial Submerged Reefs (MPASRs) Specifically designed artificial reef which can provide: • Coastline Protection or Harbor Protection ▫ Can help restore natural beach dynamics by preventing erosion ▫ Can reduce wave energy transmitted to harbor entrances • Marine Habitat Enhancement ▫ Can provide environment for coral growth and habitat fish and other marine species. ▫ Coral can be transplanted to initiate/accelerate coral growth • Recreational Uses ▫ Surfing enhancement: can provide surfable breaking waves where none exist ▫ Diving/Snorkeling: can provide site for recreational diving and snorkeling 5 MPASRs as Coastal Protection Wave Transmission: MPASRs can reduce wave energy transmitted to shoreline. Kt = Ht/Hi K = H /H t t i Breakwater K = wave transmission t Seabed coefficient, (Pilarczyk 2003) Ht= transmitted wave height shoreward of structure Hi = incident wave height seaward of structure. 6 MPASRs as Coastal Protection • Wave Refraction: MPASR causes wave refraction around the reef, focusing wave energy in a different direction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Georgia Coast Saltwater Paddle Trail
    2010 The Georgia Coast Saltwater Paddle Trail This project was funded in part by the Coastal Management Program of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, and the U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grant award #NA09NOS4190171, as well as the National Park Service Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Program. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of OCRM or NOAA. September 30, 2010 0 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Coastal Georgia Regional Development Center Project Team .......................................................... 3 Planning and Government Services Staff ................................................................................................... 3 Geographic Information Systems Staff ....................................................................................................... 3 Economic Development Staff .......................................................................................................................... 3 Administrative Services Staff .......................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2021 Operating Budget
    Annual Budget 2020-2021 Presented to City Council September 14, 2020 City of Aransas Pass, Texas Pass, Aransas of City CITY OF ARANSAS PASS, TEXAS FY 2020-2021 ANNUAL BUDGET CITY OF ARANSAS PASS ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 This budget will raise more total property taxes than last year’s budget by an amount of $473,814 (General Fund $289,0217 and Debt Service Fund $184,787), which is a 10.81% increase from last year’s budget. The property tax revenues to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year is $278,536. City Council Recorded Vote The recoded vote for each member of the governing body voted by name voting on the adoption of the Fiscal Year 2020 (FY 2020) budget as follows: September 14, 2020 Ram Gomez, Mayor Jan Moore, Mayor Pro Tem Billy Ellis, Councilman Carrie Scruggs, Councilwoman Vick Abrego, Councilwoman Tax Rate Adopted FY 19-20 Adopted FY 20-21 Property Tax Rate $0.799194 $0.799194 No-New-Revenue Tax Rate $0.715601 $0.764378 NNR M&O Tax Rate $0.451317 $0.466606 Voter Approval Tax Rate $0.799194 $0.818847 Debt Rate $0.311772 $0.314914 At the end of FY 2020, the total debt obligation (outstanding principal) for the City of Aransas Pass secured by property taxes is $11,870,000. More information regarding the City’s debt obligation, including payment requirements for current and future years, can be found in the Debt Service Funds section of the budget document. i CITY OF ARANSAS PASS, TEXAS FY 2020-2021 ANNUAL BUDGET ii CITY OF ARANSAS PASS, TEXAS FY 2020-2021 ANNUAL BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS
    [Show full text]
  • Page 574 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION and NAVIGABLE WATERS § 1804
    § 1804 TITLE 33—NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS Page 574 SHORT TITLE (11) Gulf Intracoastal Waterway: From St. For short title of title II of Pub. L. 95–502 as the ‘‘In- Mark’s River, Florida, to Brownsville, Texas, land Waterways Revenue Act of 1978’’, see section 201 of 1,134.5 miles. Pub. L. 95–502, set out as a Short Title of 1978 Amend- (12) Illinois Waterway (Calumet-Sag Chan- ment note under section 1 of Title 26, Internal Revenue nel): From the junction of the Illinois River Code. with the Mississippi River RM 0 to Chicago § 1804. Inland and intracoastal waterways of the Harbor at Lake Michigan, approximately RM United States 350. (13) Kanawha River: From junction with For purposes of section 4042 of title 26 (relat- Ohio River at RM 0 to RM 90.6 at Deepwater, ing to tax on fuel used in commercial transpor- West Virginia. tation on inland waterways) and for purposes of (14) Kaskaskia River: From junction with 1 section 1802 of this title, the following inland the Mississippi River at RM 0 to RM 36.2 at and intracoastal waterways of the United States Fayetteville, Illinois. are described in this section: (15) Kentucky River: From junction with (1) Alabama-Coosa Rivers: From junction Ohio River at RM 0 to confluence of Middle with the Tombigbee River at river mile (here- and North Forks at RM 258.6. inafter referred to as RM) 0 to junction with (16) Lower Mississippi River: From Baton Coosa River at RM 314. (2) Allegheny River: From confluence with Rouge, Louisiana, RM 233.9 to Cairo, Illinois, the Monongahela River to form the Ohio River RM 953.8.
    [Show full text]
  • Beach and Bay Access Guide
    Texas Beach & Bay Access Guide Second Edition Texas General Land Office Jerry Patterson, Commissioner The Texas Gulf Coast The Texas Gulf Coast consists of cordgrass marshes, which support a rich array of marine life and provide wintering grounds for birds, and scattered coastal tallgrass and mid-grass prairies. The annual rainfall for the Texas Coast ranges from 25 to 55 inches and supports morning glories, sea ox-eyes, and beach evening primroses. Click on a region of the Texas coast The Texas General Land Office makes no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information depicted on these maps, or the data from which it was produced. These maps are NOT suitable for navigational purposes and do not purport to depict or establish boundaries between private and public land. Contents I. Introduction 1 II. How to Use This Guide 3 III. Beach and Bay Public Access Sites A. Southeast Texas 7 (Jefferson and Orange Counties) 1. Map 2. Area information 3. Activities/Facilities B. Houston-Galveston (Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, Harris, and Matagorda Counties) 21 1. Map 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities C. Golden Crescent (Calhoun, Jackson and Victoria Counties) 1. Map 79 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities D. Coastal Bend (Aransas, Kenedy, Kleberg, Nueces, Refugio and San Patricio Counties) 1. Map 96 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities E. Lower Rio Grande Valley (Cameron and Willacy Counties) 1. Map 2. Area Information 128 3. Activities/Facilities IV. National Wildlife Refuges V. Wildlife Management Areas VI. Chambers of Commerce and Visitor Centers 139 143 147 Introduction It’s no wonder that coastal communities are the most densely populated and fastest growing areas in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH CAROLINA 2020 DRAFT 303(D) LIST Upper Broad Broad River Basin
    NORTH CAROLINA 2020 DRAFT 303(D) LIST Upper Broad Broad River Basin AU Name AU Number Classification AU_LengthArea AU_Units AU ID Description Broad River Basin 03050105 Upper Broad BROAD RIVER 9-(22)a C 1.8 FW Miles 12499 From Carolina Mountain Power Company to US 64/74 Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2008 BROAD RIVER 9-(22)b1 C 6.3 FW Miles 13396 From US 64/74 to Cove Creek Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2008 Cleghorn Creek 9-26-(0.75) C 1.5 FW Miles 13295 From 90 meters south of Baber Road to the Broad River Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2008 Catheys Creek 9-41-13-(6)b C 1.9 FW Miles 12701 From confluence with Hollands Creek to S. Broad R. Fish Community (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 1998 Mill Creek 9-41-13-3 WS-V 4.5 FW Miles 12705 From source to Catheys Creek Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2008 Hollands Creek 9-41-13-7-(3) C 2.2 FW Miles 12709 From Case Branch to Catheys Creek Fish Community (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 1998 Sandy Run Creek 9-46-(1) WS-IV 10.4 FW Miles 13221 From source to a point approximately 0.7 mile upstream of SR 1168 Fish Community (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2018 Hinton Creek 9-50-15 C 13.2 FW Miles 12777 From source to First Broad River Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria
    [Show full text]