DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 76, No. 153/Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48777 (2) Evaluation factors for each competitive position of the contractor (iii) Issues a final termination for assessment shall include, at a minimum, being evaluated as well as impede the cause or default notice; or the following: efficiency of Government operations. (iv) Makes a subsequent withdrawal (i) Technical or Quality. Evaluations used in determining award or a conversion of a termination for (ii) Cost Control (as applicable). or incentive fee payments may also be default to a termination for (iii) Schedule/Timeliness. used to satisfy the requirements of this convenience. (iv) Management or Business subpart. A copy of the annual or final (2) Agencies shall establish CPARS Relations. past performance evaluation shall be focal points who will register users to (v) Small Business Subcontracting (as provided to the contractor as soon as it report data into the FAPIIS module of applicable). is finalized. CPARS (available at http:// (3) These evaluation factors, including (e) Agencies shall require— www.cpars.gov/, then select FAPIIS). subfactors, may be tailored, however, (1) Performance issues be documented (3) The primary duties of the CPARS each factor and subfactor shall be promptly during contract performance focal point is to administer CPARS and evaluated and supporting narrative to ensure critical details are included in FAPIIS access. Agencies must also provided. the evaluation; establish PPIRS group managers. The (4) Each evaluation factor, as listed in (2) The award fee determination, if primary duties of the PPIRS group paragraph (b)(2) of this section, shall be required, align with the contractor’s managers are to grant or deny access to rated in accordance with a five scale performance and be reflected in the PPIRS. The CPARS Reference Material, rating system (e.g., exceptional, very evaluation; on the Web site, includes reporting good, satisfactory, marginal, and (3) Timely assessments and quality instructions. unsatisfactory). Rating definitions shall data (see the quality standards in the Dated: August 3, 2011. reflect those contained in the CPARS CPARS Policy Guide at http:// Policy Guide available at http:// www.cpars.gov/) in the contractors past Rodney P. Lantier, www.cpars.gov/. performance evaluation; and Deputy Director for Acquisition Policy. (c)(1) When the contract provides for (4) Frequent assessment (e.g., monthly [FR Doc. 2011–20089 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] incentive fees, the incentive-fee contract or quarterly) of agency compliance with BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P performance evaluation shall be entered the reporting requirements in 42.1502, into CPARS. (See 16.401(f).) so agencies can readily identify (2) When the contract provides for delinquent past performance reports DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR award fee, the award fee-contract and monitor their reports for quality performance adjectival rating as control. Fish and Wildlife Service described in 16.401(e)(3) shall be (f) Agencies shall prepare and submit entered into CPARS. all past performance reports 50 CFR Part 17 (d) Agency evaluations of contractor electronically into the CPARS at performance, including both negative [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2011–0057; MO http://www.cpars.gov/. These reports are 92210–0–0008 B2] and positive evaluations, prepared transmitted to the Past Performance under this subpart shall be provided to Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) at Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the contractor as soon as practicable http://www.ppirs.gov. Past performance and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a after completion of the evaluation. reports for classified contracts and Petition To List the Nueces River and Contractors shall be given a minimum of special access programs shall not be Plateau Shiners as Threatened or 30 days to submit comments, rebutting reported in CPARS, but will be reported Endangered statements, or additional information. as stated in this subpart and in AGENCY: Agencies shall provide for review at a accordance with agency procedures. Fish and Wildlife Service, level above the contracting officer to Agencies shall ensure that appropriate Interior. consider disagreements between the management and technical controls are ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition parties regarding the evaluation. The in place to ensure that only authorized finding. ultimate conclusion on the performance personnel have access to the data and SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and evaluation is a decision of the the information safeguarded in contracting agency. Copies of the Wildlife Service (Service), announce a accordance with 42.1503(b). 12-month finding on a petition to list evaluation, contractor response, and (g) Agencies shall use the past the Nueces River shiner (Cyprinella sp.) review comments, if any, shall be performance information in PPIRS that and plateau shiner (Cyprinella lepida) retained as part of the evaluation. These is within the last three years (six for as threatened or endangered and to evaluations may be used to support construction and architect-engineer designate critical habitat under the future award decisions, and should contracts) and information contained in Endangered Species Act of 1973, as therefore be marked ‘‘Source Selection the Federal Awardee Performance and amended (Act). After review of all Information’’. Evaluation of Federal Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), available scientific and commercial Prison Industries (FPI) performance may e.g., termination for default or cause. be used to support a waiver request (see (h) Other contractor performance information, we find that listing the 8.604) when FPI is a mandatory source information. (1) Agencies shall ensure Nueces River and plateau shiners is not in accordance with subpart 8.6. The information is reported in the FAPIIS warranted at this time. However, we ask completed evaluation shall not be module of CPARS within 3 working the public to submit to us any new released to other than Government days after a contracting officer— information that becomes available personnel and the contractor whose (i) Issues a final determination that a concerning the threats to the Nueces performance is being evaluated during contractor has submitted defective cost River and plateau shiners or their the period the information may be used or pricing data; habitats at any time. to provide source selection information. (ii) Makes a subsequent change to the DATES: The finding announced in this Disclosure of such information could final determination concerning document was made on August 9, 2011. cause harm both to the commercial defective cost or pricing data pursuant ADDRESSES: This finding is available on interest of the Government and to the to 15.407–1(d); the Internet at http:// VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:11 Aug 08, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM 09AUP1 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 48778 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules www.regulations.gov at Docket Number Previous Federal Actions Cyprinella, of which both species of [FWS–R2–ES–2011–0057]. Supporting On June 25, 2007, we received a shiners are members (Nelson et al. 2004, documentation we used in preparing petition dated June 18, 2007, from p. 69; Schonhuth and Mayden 2010, p. this finding is available for public Forest Guardians (now WildEarth 77). The taxonomy within this genus inspection, by appointment, during Guardians), requesting that 475 species has been associated with extensive normal business hours at the U.S. Fish in the southwestern United States, confusion because similarities in body and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological including the Nueces River and plateau characteristics have made it difficult to Services Field Office, 10711 Burnet shiners, be listed under the Act and differentiate between species Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758. critical habitat be designated. We (Schonhuth and Mayden 2010, p. 77). Please submit any new information, acknowledged the receipt of the petition Fortunately, much of this confusion is materials, comments, or questions in a letter to the petitioner, dated July being resolved with advances in genetic concerning this finding to the above 11, 2007. In that letter we also stated analysis (Schonhuth and Mayden 2010, address. that the petition was under review by pp. 77–98). However, there are still staff in our Southwest Regional Office. outstanding taxonomic issues that need FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On March 19, 2008, WildEarth to be resolved to clarify any potential Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, Guardians filed a complaint alleging confusion between the Nueces River Austin Ecological Services Field Office that the Service failed to comply with and plateau shiners. (see ADDRESSES); by telephone at 512– its mandatory duty to make a When first described, the Nueces 490–0057, extension 248; or by preliminary 90-day finding on the June River and plateau shiners were not facsimile at 512–490–0974. If you use a 18, 2007, petition to list 475 southwest considered separate species. They were telecommunications device for the deaf species. We subsequently published an both originally described as the plateau (TDD), please call the Federal initial 90-day finding for 270 of the 475 shiner, Cyprinella lepida, by Girard in Information Relay Service (FIRS) at petitioned species on January 6, 2009 1856 (Richardson and Gold 1995, p. 29). 800–877–8339. (74 FR 419), concluding that the petition Nearly 100 years later, both species did not present substantial information were still thought to be one species. For SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that listing of those 270 species may be example, Hubbs (1954, pp. 277–291) Background warranted. This initial 90-day finding recognized only one species as distinct, did not include the Nueces River and the plateau shiner, Notropis Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered plateau shiners. Subsequently, on (=Cyprinella) lepidus, occurring in the Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) March 13, 2009, the Service and Nueces, Frio, and upper Guadalupe (16 U.S.C.
Recommended publications
  • Notropis Girardi) and Peppered Chub (Macrhybopsis Tetranema)

    Notropis Girardi) and Peppered Chub (Macrhybopsis Tetranema)

    Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 Species Status Assessment Report for the Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) and Peppered Chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema) Arkansas River shiner (bottom left) and peppered chub (top right - two fish) (Photo credit U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 Version 1.0a October 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 Albuquerque, NM This document was prepared by Angela Anders, Jennifer Smith-Castro, Peter Burck (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – Southwest Regional Office) Robert Allen, Debra Bills, Omar Bocanegra, Sean Edwards, Valerie Morgan (USFWS –Arlington, Texas Field Office), Ken Collins, Patricia Echo-Hawk, Daniel Fenner, Jonathan Fisher, Laurence Levesque, Jonna Polk (USFWS – Oklahoma Field Office), Stephen Davenport (USFWS – New Mexico Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office), Mark Horner, Susan Millsap (USFWS – New Mexico Field Office), Jonathan JaKa (USFWS – Headquarters), Jason Luginbill, and Vernon Tabor (Kansas Field Office). Suggested reference: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2018. Species status assessment report for the Arkansas River shiner (Notropis girardi) and peppered chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema), version 1.0, with appendices. October 2018. Albuquerque, NM. 172 pp. Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 INTRODUCTION (CHAPTER 1) The Arkansas River shiner (Notropis girardi) and peppered chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema) are restricted primarily to the contiguous river segments of the South Canadian River basin spanning eastern New Mexico downstream to eastern Oklahoma (although the peppered chub is less widespread). Both species have experienced substantial declines in distribution and abundance due to habitat destruction and modification from stream dewatering or depletion from diversion of surface water and groundwater pumping, construction of impoundments, and water quality degradation.
  • 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

    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.
  • Endangered Species

    Endangered Species

    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
  • Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A

    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).
  • Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 2 from U

    Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 2 from U

    FINAL - Submitted for Approval Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River From U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas © Konrad Schmidt Canadian River Municipal Water Authority June 2005 Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 2 from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas This management plan is a cooperative effort between various local, state, and federal entities. Funding for this plan was provided by the Canadian River Municipal Water Authority. Suggested citation: Canadian River Municipal Water Authority – 2005 – Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas Preparation of this Plan was accomplished by John C. Williams, acting as Special Advisor under contract to CRMWA. Technical review was provided by Rod Goodwin, Wildlife Biologist and Head of the Water Quality Division of CRMWA. Editorial review was performed by Jolinda Brumley. Cover photograph: Arkansas River Shiner by Ken Collins, USFWS Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 3 from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith Table of Contents Introduction and Background …………………………………………………………7 Species Biology ...................................................................................................................9
  • 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

    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.
  • Matching the Hatch for the TX Hill Country[2]

    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.
  • Factors Influencing Community Structure of Riverine

    Factors Influencing Community Structure of Riverine

    FACTORS INFLUENCING COMMUNITY STRUCTURE OF RIVERINE ORGANISMS: IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPERILED SPECIES MANAGEMENT by David S. Ruppel, M.S. A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy with a Major in Aquatic Resources and Integrative Biology May 2019 Committee Members: Timothy H. Bonner, Chair Noland H. Martin Joseph A. Veech Kenneth G. Ostrand James A. Stoeckel COPYRIGHT by David S. Ruppel 2019 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, David S. Ruppel, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I thank my major advisor, Timothy H. Bonner, who has been a great mentor throughout my time at Texas State University. He has passed along his vast knowledge and has provided exceptional professional guidance and support with will benefit me immensely as I continue to pursue an academic career. I also thank my committee members Dr. Noland H. Martin, Dr. Joseph A. Veech, Dr. Kenneth G. Ostrand, and Dr. James A. Stoeckel who provided great comments on my dissertation and have helped in shaping manuscripts that will be produced in the future from each one of my chapters.
  • 10 Most Significant Weather Events of the 1900S for Austin, Del Rio and San Antonio and Vicinity

    10 Most Significant Weather Events of the 1900S for Austin, Del Rio and San Antonio and Vicinity

    10 MOST SIGNIFICANT WEATHER EVENTS OF THE 1900S FOR AUSTIN, DEL RIO AND SAN ANTONIO AND VICINITY PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AUSTIN/SAN ANTONIO TX 239 PM CST TUE DEC 28 1999 ...10 MOST SIGNIFICANT WEATHER EVENTS OF THE 1900S FOR AUSTIN...DEL RIO AND SAN ANTONIO AND VICINITY... SINCE ONE OF THE MAIN FOCUSES OF WEATHER IN CENTRAL AND SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS INVOLVES PERIODS OF VERY HEAVY RAIN AND FLASH FLOODING...NOT ALL HEAVY RAIN AND FLASH FLOOD EVENTS ARE LISTED HERE. MANY OTHER WEATHER EVENTS OF SEASONAL SIGNIFICANCE ARE ALSO NOT LISTED HERE. FOR MORE DETAILS ON SIGNIFICANT WEATHER EVENTS ACROSS CENTRAL AND SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS IN THE PAST 100 YEARS...SEE THE DOCUMENT POSTED ON THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AUSTIN/SAN ANTONIO WEBSITE AT http://www.srh.noaa.gov/images/ewx/wxevent/100.pdf EVENTS LISTED BELOW ARE SHOWN IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER... FIRST STARTING WITH AUSTIN AND VICINITY...FOLLOWED BY DEL RIO AND VICINITY...AND ENDING WITH SAN ANTONIO AND VICINITY. AUSTIN AND VICINITY... 1. SEPTEMBER 8 - 10... 1921 - THE REMNANTS OF A HURRICANE MOVED NORTHWARD FROM BEXAR COUNTY TO WILLIAMSON COUNTY ON THE 9TH AND 10TH. THE CENTER OF THE STORM BECAME STATIONARY OVER THRALL...TEXAS THAT NIGHT DROPPING 38.2 INCHES OF RAIN IN 24 HOURS ENDING AT 7 AM SEPTEMBER 10TH. IN 6 HOURS...23.4 INCHES OF RAIN FELL AND 31.8 INCHES OF RAIN FELL IN 12 HOURS. STORM TOTAL RAIN AT THRALL WAS 39.7 INCHES IN 36 HOURS. THIS STORM CAUSED THE MOST DEADLY FLOODS IN TEXAS WITH A TOTAL OF 215 FATALITIES.
  • Beach and Bay Access Guide

    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.
  • Canadian River Basin Bioassessment

    Canadian River Basin Bioassessment

    Canadian River Basin Bioassessment Sarah Robertson, Melissa Parker, Gordon Linam, Clinton Robertson, Archis Grubh Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Inland Fisheries Division AND Melissa Casarez University of Texas at Austin, Biodiversity Collections River Studies Report No. 26 Inland Fisheries Division Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas October 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2 Study Area ................................................................................................................. 2 Survey and Management History .............................................................................. 2 Study Sites .............................................................................................................................. 4 Canadian River .......................................................................................................... 6 Oxbow Lakes ............................................................................................................. 6 Supplemental Fish Collection Sites ........................................................................... 7 Water Quality and Quantity .................................................................................................... 8 Fish Assemblage ....................................................................................................................