DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Texas Coastal Waters Nutrient Reduction Strategies Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Texas Coastal Waters Nutrient Reduction Strategies Report FINAL TEXAS COASTAL WATERS: NUTRIENT REDUCTION STRATEGIES REPORT Photo: Courtesy of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 2014 Prepared for: TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Prepared by: AUGUST 2019 This page intentionally left blank FINAL TEXAS COASTAL WATERS: NUTRIENT REDUCTION STRATEGIES REPORT Prepared for: TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Prepared by: Austin, TX 78758 AUGUST 2019 Printed on Recycled Paper This page intentionally left blank Nutrient Reduction Restoration Strategies Report Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... ES-1 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background Information ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 SECTION 2 DEVELOPMENT OF INITIAL CRITERIA FOR TARGET WATERSHED IDENTIFICATION ........ 2-1 2.1 Data Collection .................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Atmospheric Deposition ....................................................................................................... 2-3 2.1.2 Fish Kills ................................................................................................................................ 2-3 2.2 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.1 Evaluating Water Quality Conditions ................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.2 Point Source Influences ..................................................................................................... 2-13 2.2.3 Dissolved Oxygen ................................................................................................................ 2-13 2.3 Consideration of Additional Characteristics for Prioritizing Watersheds ....................................... 2-21 SECTION 3 EVALUATION OF RECOMMENDED TARGET WATERSHEDS .............................................. 3-1 3.1 Watershed Descriptions ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Lower Guadalupe River Watershed ................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2.1 Land Use and Land Cover .................................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.2 Beneficial Uses and Impairments, Other Ongoing Studies and Projects .......................... 3-4 3.3 San Fernando Creek Watershed ........................................................................................................ 3-7 3.3.1 Land Use and Land Cover .................................................................................................... 3-8 3.3.2 Beneficial Uses and Impairments, Other Ongoing Studies and Projects .......................... 3-8 3.4 Petronila Creek Watershed .............................................................................................................. 3-14 3.4.1 Land Use and Land Cover .................................................................................................. 3-14 3.4.2 Beneficial Uses and Impairments ...................................................................................... 3-14 3.5 Data Inputs for Nutrient Load Modeling .......................................................................................... 3-17 3.6 Other Factors Influencing Instream Nutrient Concentrations ........................................................ 3-19 3.7 Lower Guadalupe River Watershed - Nutrient Sources and Load Estimates ................................ 3-24 3.8 San Fernando Creek Watershed - Nutrient Sources and Load Estimates..................................... 3-28 3.9 Petronila Creek Watershed - Nutrient Sources and Load Estimates ............................................. 3-32 3.10 Watersheds Targeted for Nutrient Reduction Strategies ............................................................... 3-32 SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF RESTORATION APPROACHES ................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Petronila Creek Agriculture ................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Cropland Management Strategies ..................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.1 Group 1: Cropland BMPs Modeled in STEPL....................................................................... 4-3 4.2.2 Group 2: Other Cropland BMPs for Consideration ............................................................ 4-10 4.2.3 Group 3: Cropland BMPs Not Typically Used in Petronila Creek Watershed................... 4-11 i August 2019 Nutrient Reduction Restoration Strategies Report Table of Contents 4.3 Other Agricultural Management Strategies ..................................................................................... 4-12 4.4 Reducing Nutrient Loading Using Off-Field Management Strategies ............................................ 4-15 4.4.1 Targeting Privately-held Off-field Areas ............................................................................. 4-16 4.4.2 Road Rights-of-Way............................................................................................................. 4-18 4.5 Relative Load Reduction Potential ................................................................................................... 4-19 4.6 Planning Level Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................ 4-20 SECTION 5 IDENTIFICATION OF NUTRIENT REDUCTION STAKEHOLDERS ......................................... 5-1 5.1 Federal Partners ................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 State Partners ..................................................................................................................................... 5-3 5.3 Regional Partners ............................................................................................................................... 5-5 5.4 Local Government Partners ................................................................................................................ 5-6 5.5 Local Partners ..................................................................................................................................... 5-6 5.6 Non-Governmental Organizations ...................................................................................................... 5-7 SECTION 6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .................................................................................................... 6-1 SECTION 7 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 7-1 APPENDICES Appendix A Coastal Segments with Nutrient Concerns Appendix B Dissolved Oxygen Status History for Nutrient Impacted Coastal Waters Appendix C TPDES Permitted Outfalls Discharging to 15 Candidate Segments Appendix D STEPL Results: Estimated Nutrient Loads for 12-Digit HUCs Appendix E Scenario Descriptions of Relevant BMPs from the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide Appendix F Estimated Nutrient Load Reductions for Select Strategies in Petronila Creek ii August 2019 Nutrient Reduction Restoration Strategies Report Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Texas Coastal Zone Boundary ..................................................................................................... 1-3 Figure 2-1 Frequency Distribution of Average Percent Exceedance of Nutrient Screening Levels ........................................................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-2 Texas Upper Coast Segments with Significant Nutrient Concerns (n=58) ............................. 2-11 Figure 2-3 Texas Lower Coast Segments with Significant Nutrient Concerns (n=58) ............................. 2-12 Figure 2-4 2014 Dissolved Oxygen ILOS for Nutrient-Impacted Coastal Waters (n=58) ........................ 2-14 Figure 2-5 Summary of the Watershed Prioritization Process .................................................................. 2-17 Figure 2-6 Non-urban, Nutrient-impacted Watersheds within the Coastal Zone Boundary (Northern Coast) ........................................................................................................................ 2-19 Figure 2-7 Non-urban, Nutrient-impacted Watersheds within the Coastal Zone Boundary (Central Coast) ..........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sandies, Hybrids Hot Bites
    Hunting Texas Special section inside * August 8, 2008 Texas’ Premier Outdoor Newspaper Volume 4, Issue 24 * Hunting Annual 2008 www.lonestaroutdoornews.com INSIDE HUNTING Sandies, hybrids hot bites Schools keep anglers in class The Texas Animal Health Commission approved new BY CRAIG NYHUS rules permitting the transport of male hogs to Summer means hot white bass and hybrid striped authorized game ranches bass action at many Texas lakes, and North Texas without requiring blood lakes like Lake Ray Hubbard, Ray Roberts, Lewisville tests for swine disease. and Richland Chambers lead the way for many. Page 6 Gary Goldsmith, a retired principal, fished Lewisville Lake with Art Kenney and Michael The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Anderson. “We caught and released more than 100 Service approved liberal sand bass reaching the 2-pound mark,” Goldsmith waterfowl limits for the said. “With 30 minutes of daylight left we went to an 2008-2009 season. area called Queen’s Point for hybrids. As soon as we Page 7 started the bite was on — we caught 20 more fish at that spot.” FISHING The group was fishing Lead Babies Slabs in 18 feet of water. “It’s best to keep them as close to the bottom as possible when fishing for hybrids,” Goldsmith said. East Texas lakes find crappie fishermen switching gears to chase sandies when the crappie bite slows. West Texas reservoirs see the whites hitting on top. And in the Hill Country, the Highland Lakes often get hot. “All of the fish are on the main lakes,” said Joe Bray, who guides on several Hill Country lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Bookletchart™ Houston Ship Channel – Alexander Island to Carpenters Bayou NOAA Chart 11329
    BookletChart™ Houston Ship Channel – Alexander Island to Carpenters Bayou NOAA Chart 11329 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Included Area Published by the leads to Goose Creek. Private poles and markers may at times mark the preferred route. Goose Creek contains numerous oil wells, pipelines, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration pilings, and other hazards; local knowledge is advised. The creek is used National Ocean Service by oil well supply and commercial fishing vessels. Office of Coast Survey The highway bridge 2.8 miles above the entrance has a 48-foot fixed span with a clearance of 9 feet. Two highway and two railroad bridges www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov between the entrance and this bridge have fixed spans with a minimum 888-990-NOAA width of 32 feet and minimum clearance of 14 feet. Overhead power cables crossing the creek between the mouth and the highway bridge What are Nautical Charts? 2.8 miles above the entrance have a least clearance of 36 feet. Baytown, 4 miles above Morgans Point on the NE side of the channel, is Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show the site of the Exxon Company, U.S.A., refining facilities. water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much About 1.5 miles above the Baytown facilities, a privately maintained more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and channel leads in a SW direction from the main ship channel along the efficient navigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Hydrologic Data for the Lower San Antonio River Sub-Basin
    Technical Study Summaries: Lower San Antonio River Hydrologic Data Median flows in Lower San Antonio River have increased over 60 years The amount of water flowing in the Lower San Antonio River during median flow conditions has increased over the past 60 years, according to data collected from a gage maintained by the US Geological Survey. As shown in the figure below, the median flow of the river at Goliad, TX has increased for each day of the year when comparing values from the time periods 1940-1969 and 1970- 2007. The hydrologic character of the basin can be analyzed using similar techniques and data from a network of USGS gages within the Lower San Antonio River system. The relative location of gages currently maintained by the USGS is shown in the map below. A list of current and historical gages of interest to this is study is also provided. 800 1970 to 2007 700 1940 to 1969 600 500 400 [cfs] Discharge 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oc t Nov Dec Figure 1. Median of daily discharge values for USGS gage #08188500, San Antonio River at Goliad. Figure 2. Relative location of current USGS stream gages in the San Antonio River Basin. Table 1. Historical and Current USGS Gages of Interest in the Lower San Antonio River Sub-basin. Earliest Latest Median Drainage Gage # Gage Name Record Record Flow (cfs) Area (mi2) 08181800 San Antonio Rv nr Elmendorf , TX 1962 Present 326 1,743 08182500 Calaveras Ck nr Elmendorf, TX 1954 1971 77.2 08183200 San Antonio Rv nr Floresville, TX 2006 Present 1,964 08183000 San Antonio Rv at
    [Show full text]
  • Guadalupe, San Antonio, Mission, and Aransas Rivers and Mission, Copano, Aransas, and San Antonio Bays Basin and Bay Area Stakeholders Committee
    Guadalupe, San Antonio, Mission, and Aransas Rivers and Mission, Copano, Aransas, and San Antonio Bays Basin and Bay Area Stakeholders Committee May 25, 2012 Guadalupe, San Antonio, Mission, & Aransas Rivers and Mission, Copano, Aransas, & San Antonio Bays Basin & Bay Area Stakeholders Committee (GSA BBASC) Work Plan for Adaptive Management Preliminary Scopes of Work May 25, 2012 May 10, 2012 The Honorable Troy Fraser, Co-Presiding Officer The Honorable Allan Ritter, Co-Presiding Officer Environmental Flows Advisory Group (EFAG) Mr. Zak Covar, Executive Director Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Dear Chairman Fraser, Chairman Ritter and Mr. Covar: Please accept this submittal of the Work Plan for Adaptive Management (Work Plan) from the Guadalupe, San Antonio, Mission, and Aransas Rivers and Mission, Copano, Aransas and San Antonio Bays Basin and Bay Area Stakeholders Committee (BBASC). The BBASC has offered a comprehensive list of study efforts and activities that will provide additional information for future environmental flow rulemaking as well as expand knowledge on the ecosystems of the rivers and bays within our basin. The BBASC Work Plan is prioritized in three tiers, with the Tier 1 recommendations listed in specific priority order. Study efforts and activities listed in Tier 2 are presented as a higher priority than those items listed in Tier 3; however, within the two tiers the efforts are not prioritized. The BBASC preferred to present prioritization in this manner to highlight the studies and activities it identified as most important in the immediate term without discouraging potential sponsoring or funding entities interested in advancing efforts within the other tiers.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Alliance Houston Port Region
    RESOLUTION NO. 001-2014 A RESOLUTION OF THE ECONOMIC ALLIANCE HOUSTON PORT REGION, SUPPORTING THE “COASTAL BARRIER” CONCEPT BEING PROPOSED BY TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY AT GALVESTON, AS THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EQUITABLE MEANS OF PROTECTING THE ENTIRE HOUSTON-GALVESTON REGION FROM STORM SURGE AND SUB-TROPICAL RAIN EVENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE DELIVERY OF SUCH RESOLUTION TO TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY AT GALVESTON, THE GULF COAST COMMUNITY PROTECTION AND RECOVERY DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THOSE STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATORS THAT REPRESENT THE HOUSTON PORT REGION. WHEREAS, the Houston Port Region includes 16 coastal communities with a significant population of residents and businesses that can be affected by a storm surge and sub-tropical rain events; and WHEREAS, the Houston Port Region is home to the 25-mile Houston Ship Channel - home to one of the world’s most influential energy corridor and trade ports; and WHEREAS, storm surge entering Galveston Bay as a result of a hurricane or other significant storm event tends to increase in height as it moves further up into the Bay and endangers human life, destroys property, and damages sensitive ecosystems; and WHEREAS, a comprehensive flood gate and barrier system along the Gulf Coast, including San Luis Pass, Bolivar Peninsula and the mouth of the Houston, Galveston and Texas City ship channels would provide the necessary protection for the Houston-Galveston region and in particular, areas surrounding Galveston Bay; and WHEREAS, the “Coastal Barrier” concept looks to existing technology created and effectively
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • SAN ANTONIO #Tealtour #NOCCEA1 MARKET
    #TealTour SAN ANTONIO #NOCCEA1 MARKET Frederick Wilderness Park 21395 Milsa Dr, San Antonio, TX 78256 Friedrich Wilderness Park lies at the southern end of the Texas Hill Country. The park is hilly due to its location on the Balcones escarpment that separates the Texas Hill Country from the flat South Texas The Alamo 300 Alamo Plaza, San Antonio, TX 75205 The 1836 Battlefield has been lost in the nearly two centuries since that dramatic battle. The Mexican army tore down the compound’s outer walls in May of 1836. This left just two structures, the Alamo Church and Long Barrack. San Antonio grew up with the Alamo at its heart, with streets and buildings now occupying the site of the most sacred battle in Texas history. Headwaters Sanctuary Trails 4503 Broadway Street, San Antonio TX 78209 Our 53-acre nature sanctuary is home to the Blue Hole, the source spring of the San Antonio River. McAllister Park Trailhead 13102 Jones Maltsberger Road, San Antonio, TX 78247 Hiking and biking along the Greenway trails are great ways to get fit and enjoy the outdoors. There are over 50 major trailheads and neighborhood connections to access the trail system around the city. The four major segments of the Greenway are the Leon Creek Greenway, the Salado Creek Greenway, the Westside Creeks and the Medina River Greenway each offering several miles of uninterrupted trails. The San Antonio Riverwalk 849 E Commerce St, San Antonio, TX 78205 The San Antonio Riverwalk is a city park and network of walkways along the banks of the San Antonio River.
    [Show full text]
  • Houston-Galveston, Texas Managing Coastal Subsidence
    HOUSTON-GALVESTON, TEXAS Managing coastal subsidence TEXAS he greater Houston area, possibly more than any other Lake Livingston A N D S metropolitan area in the United States, has been adversely U P L L affected by land subsidence. Extensive subsidence, caused T A S T A mainly by ground-water pumping but also by oil and gas extraction, O C T r has increased the frequency of flooding, caused extensive damage to Subsidence study area i n i t y industrial and transportation infrastructure, motivated major in- R i v vestments in levees, reservoirs, and surface-water distribution facili- e S r D N ties, and caused substantial loss of wetland habitat. Lake Houston A L W O Although regional land subsidence is often subtle and difficult to L detect, there are localities in and near Houston where the effects are Houston quite evident. In this low-lying coastal environment, as much as 10 L Galveston feet of subsidence has shifted the position of the coastline and A Bay T changed the distribution of wetlands and aquatic vegetation. In fact, S A Texas City the San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park, site of the battle O Galveston that won Texas independence, is now partly submerged. This park, C Gulf of Mexico about 20 miles east of downtown Houston on the shores of Galveston Bay, commemorates the April 21, 1836, victory of Texans 0 20 Miles led by Sam Houston over Mexican forces led by Santa Ana. About 0 20 Kilometers 100 acres of the park are now under water due to subsidence, and A road (below right) that provided access to the San Jacinto Monument was closed due to flood- ing caused by subsidence.
    [Show full text]
  • Application and Utility of a Low-Cost Unmanned Aerial System to Manage and Conserve Aquatic Resources in Four Texas Rivers
    Application and Utility of a Low-cost Unmanned Aerial System to Manage and Conserve Aquatic Resources in Four Texas Rivers Timothy W. Birdsong, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, TX 78744 Megan Bean, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 5103 Junction Highway, Mountain Home, TX 78058 Timothy B. Grabowski, U.S. Geological Survey, Texas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Texas Tech University, Agricultural Sciences Building Room 218, MS 2120, Lubbock, TX 79409 Thomas B. Hardy, Texas State University – San Marcos, 951 Aquarena Springs Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666 Thomas Heard, Texas State University – San Marcos, 951 Aquarena Springs Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666 Derrick Holdstock, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 3036 FM 3256, Paducah, TX 79248 Kristy Kollaus, Texas State University – San Marcos, 951 Aquarena Springs Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666 Stephan Magnelia, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, P.O. Box 1685, San Marcos, TX 78745 Kristina Tolman, Texas State University – San Marcos, 951 Aquarena Springs Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666 Abstract: Low-cost unmanned aerial systems (UAS) have recently gained increasing attention in natural resources management due to their versatility and demonstrated utility in collection of high-resolution, temporally-specific geospatial data. This study applied low-cost UAS to support the geospatial data needs of aquatic resources management projects in four Texas rivers. Specifically, a UAS was used to (1) map invasive salt cedar (multiple species in the genus Tamarix) that have degraded instream habitat conditions in the Pease River, (2) map instream meso-habitats and structural habitat features (e.g., boulders, woody debris) in the South Llano River as a baseline prior to watershed-scale habitat improvements, (3) map enduring pools in the Blanco River during drought conditions to guide smallmouth bass removal efforts, and (4) quantify river use by anglers in the Guadalupe River.
    [Show full text]
  • National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010
    You may use the information and images contained in this document for non-commercial, personal, or educational purposes only, provided that you (1) do not modify such information and (2) include proper citation. If material is used for other purposes, you must obtain written permission from the author(s) to use the copyrighted material prior to its use. Reviewed: 7/27/2021 Jenny Wrast Environmental Institute of Houston FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Lakes Field Lab, Data Report Research Design Field Lab, Data Rivers Design Field Lab, Data Report Research Design Field Streams Research Design Field Lab, Data Report Research Design Coastal Report Research Design Field Lab, Data Report Research Wetlands Research Research Research Design Field Lab, Data Report 11 sites in: • Sabine Lake • Galveston Bay • Trinity Bay • West Bay • East Bay • Christmas Bay 26 sites in: • East Matagorda Bay • Tres Palacios Bay • Lavaca Bay • Matagorda Bay • Carancahua Bay • Espiritu Santu Bay • San Antonio Bay • Ayres Bay • Mesquite Bay • Copano Bay • Aransas Bay 16 sites in: • Corpus Christi Bay • Nueces Bay • Upper Laguna Madre • Baffin Bay • East Bay • Alazan Bay •Lower Laguna Madre Finding Boat Launches Tracking Forms Locating the “X” Site Pathogen Indicator Enterococcus Habitat Assessment Water Field Measurements Light Attenuation Basic Water Chemistry Chlorophyll Nutrients Sediment Chemistry and Composition •Grain Size • TOC • Metals Sediment boat and equipment cleaned • PCBs after every site. • Organics Benthic Macroinvertebrates Sediment Toxicity Minimum of 3-Liters of sediment required at each site. Croaker Spot Catfish Whole Fish Sand Trout Contaminants Pinfish •Metals •PCBs •Organics Upper Laguna Madre Hurricanes Hermine & Igor Wind & Rain Upper Laguna Madre Copano Bay San Antonio Bay—August Trinity Bay—July Copano Bay—September Jenny Kristen UHCL-EIH Lynne TCEQ Misty Art Crowe Robin Cypher Anne Rogers Other UHCL-EIH Michele Blair Staff Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Fishing Guide |
    Texas Commercial Fishing regulations summary 2021 2022 SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 – AUGUST 31, 2022 Subject to updates by Texas Legislature or Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission TEXAS COMMERCIAL FISHING REGULATIONS SUMMARY This publication is a summary of current regulations that govern commercial fishing, meaning any activity involving taking or handling fresh or saltwater aquatic products for pay or for barter, sale or exchange. Recreational fishing regulations can be found at OutdoorAnnual.com or on the mobile app (download available at OutdoorAnnual.com). LIMITED-ENTRY AND BUYBACK PROGRAMS .......................................................................... 3 COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN LICENSE TYPES ........................................................................... 3 COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT LICENSE TYPES ........................................................................ 6 BAIT DEALER LICENSE TYPES LICENCIAS PARA VENDER CARNADA .................................................................................... 7 WHOLESALE, RETAIL AND OTHER BUSINESS LICENSES AND PERMITS LICENCIAS Y PERMISOS COMERCIALES PARA NEGOCIOS MAYORISTAS Y MINORISTAS .......... 8 NONGAME FRESHWATER FISH (PERMIT) PERMISO PARA PESCADOS NO DEPORTIVOS EN AGUA DULCE ................................................ 12 BUYING AND SELLING AQUATIC PRODUCTS TAKEN FROM PUBLIC WATERS ............................. 13 FRESHWATER FISH ................................................................................................... 13 SALTWATER FISH .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Matching the Hatch for the TX Hill Country[2]
    MATCHING THE HATCH FOR THE TX HILL COUNTRY Tying and choosing proper fly patterns to increase your success on the water. Matt Bennett Fly Geek Custom Flies [email protected] Why should you listen to me? • Fishing the Austin area since 2008 • LWFF – 2012 through 2015 • Fly Geek Custom Flies – 2015 – now • Past Austin Fly Fishers President • Current TX Council Vice President Overview of the TX Hill Country Llano River near Kingsland Guadalupe River at Lazy L&L Brushy Creek near Round Rock Characteristics of Hill Country Rivers ¨ There’s a bunch! Guadalupe, Comal, San Marcos, Colorado, Llano, Blanco, Nueces, Frio, Sabinal, Concho, Lampasas and associated feeder creeks ¨ Majority are shallow and wadeable in stretches ¨ Extremely Clear Water (some clearer than others) ¨ Sandy, limestone and granite bottoms with lots of granite boulders/outcroppings ¨ Extreme flooding events YEARLY on average. Sept 11, 1952 – Lake Travis rises 57 feet in 14 hours. 23-26” of rain Guadalupe River, July 17,1987 Llano River / Lake LBJ – Nov. 4 2000 Why does flooding matter to fishing? ¨ Because of the almost-annual flooding / drought cycle of our rivers, they are constantly changing ¨ Holes get filled in and dug out, gravel gets moved around, banks get undercut ¨ We have to constantly relearn our fisheries to stay successful on the water ¨ Choosing the right flies with the proper triggers is an important part of your success on the water Overview of our forage Baitfish, crawfish, insects, and other terrestrials Why is forage important? ¨ #1 rule of all fishing – know your forage! ¨ Knowing the common forage where you fish increases your chances of success as it clues you in on what flies you should be fishing ¨ Forage base will vary between water bodies, time of year, species targeted, and more, as well as year-to-year.
    [Show full text]