DOCSLIB.ORG

Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan A guidance document developed by the stakeholders of the Lavaca River watershed to address water quality in the Lavaca River Tidal (Assessment Units 1601_01, 1601_02, 1601_03), Lavaca River Above Tidal (1602_02, 1602_03), Big Brushy Creek (1602A_01), Rocky Creek (1602B_01, 1602B_02), and Lavaca River Above Campbell Branch (1602C_01, 1602C_02) April 2018 TWRI TR-507 Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan A guidance document developed by the stakeholders of the Lavaca River watershed to address water quality in the Lavaca River Tidal (Assessment Units 1601_01, 1601_02, 1601_03), Lavaca River Above Tidal (1602_02, 1602_03), Big Brushy Creek (1602A_01), Rocky Creek (1602B_01, 1602B_02), and Lavaca River Above Campbell Branch (1602C_01, 1602C_02) Authored and prepared by: Michael Schramm, Allen Berthold, Clare Entwistle and Kirby Peddicord Texas Water Resources Institute Texas Water Resources Institute Technical Report – 507 April 2018 College Station, Texas Funding support for this project provided by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Cover photo: Lavaca River in Hallettsville, TX, by Michael Schramm, TWRI Acknowledgments The Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan (WPP) presents the strategy developed by stakeholders of the Lavaca River watershed to restore water quality. Stakeholders dedicated considerable time and effort in discussing the watershed, influences on water quality and potential methods to address water quality concerns, and selecting appropriate strate- gies to improve water quality. The ultimate success of the Lavaca River WPP achieving its goals depends heavily on the current and continued support from these individuals and agencies. Special appreciation is extended to the many watershed landowners and residents who attended the numerous meetings and events to provide direct input to the plan. The direct involvement of landowners and residents was critical to ensuring the plan included feasible management measures that address sources of water quality impairments in the watershed. The time and effort of landowners and residents are greatly appreciated and are reflected in the contents of this plan. Local and regional government agencies and organizations also played key roles in plan development. Representatives provided insight regarding their specific focus areas and ensured the inclusion of content in the plan that is appro- priate for the watershed. Local and regional agencies that contributed to the development of this WPP include: • City of Yoakum Public Works • City of Edna Public Works • Jackson and Lavaca counties • Jackson and Lavaca Soil and Water Conservation Districts • Lavaca-Navidad River Authority Agency support and input was an integral part of the WPP development process. In particular, the following agencies provided technical guidance and willingness to provide spe- cialized knowledge on a number of topics: • Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service • Texas A&M AgriLife Research • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality • Texas Parks and Wildlife Department • Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board • USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service i Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan Table of Contents Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ii List of Figures ..............................................................................................................................................v List of Tables ...............................................................................................................................................vi List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................vii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Action Taken ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Watershed Protection Plan Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Pollutant Reductions .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Recommended Actions ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Education and Outreach ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 Tracking Progress and Measuring Success........................................................................................................................ 4 Goals of the Plan ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 1: Introduction to Watershed Management............................................................................. 5 Watersheds and Water Quality .............................................................................................................................................. 5 The Watershed Approach ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Watershed Protection Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 Adaptive Management ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 Education and Outreach ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 2: Watershed Description ........................................................................................................... 8 Lavaca River and Watershed Description .......................................................................................................................... 8 Soils and Topography .............................................................................................................................................................10 Land Use and Land Management .......................................................................................................................................12 Climate ..........................................................................................................................................................................................12 Demographics ............................................................................................................................................................................13 Chapter 3: Water Quality ......................................................................................................................... 15 Bacteria ..........................................................................................................................................................................................17 RUAA ..........................................................................................................................................................................................19 Dissolved Oxygen......................................................................................................................................................................19 UAA .............................................................................................................................................................................................19 Nutrients .......................................................................................................................................................................................19 Flow ................................................................................................................................................................................................20 Potential Sources of Water Quality Issues .......................................................................................................................23 Domestic Livestock ...............................................................................................................................................................23 Wildlife and Feral Hogs .......................................................................................................................................................23 Domestic Pets .........................................................................................................................................................................23
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Lavaca Basin Highlights Clean Rivers Program Report
    2018 Lavaca Basin Highlights Clean Rivers Program Report Bald Eagle at LNRA Volkmer Barn Prepared by the Lavaca-Navidad River Authority (LNRA) PO Box 429, Edna, TX 77957 PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The preparation of this report was financed in part through funding from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711 1 LAVACA BASIN HIGHLIGHTS REPORT 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acronyms 3 2017 Highlights 4 Water Quality Monitoring 14 Water Quality Conditions 19 Stakeholder Participation and Public Outreach 22 LNRA Web Site 25 Figures: Figure 1 – Doppler image of Hurricane Harvey at Landfall 5 Figure 2 – Navidad River Below Spillway 6 Figure 3 – Water Released from Palmetto Bend Dam 6 Figure 4 – Sample Location on Rocky Creek 8 Figure 5 – Texana Cove Before Weevil Release 10 Figure 6 – Texana Cove 2 Years After Weevil Release 11 Figure 7 – Adult Salvinia Weevil 11 Figure 8 - Map of Impaired Streams in the Lavaca River 13 Figure 9 - FY 2017 Lavaca Basin Monitoring Sites 16 Figure 10 - Nature Camp 22 Tables: Table 1 – Monitoring Sites for FY 2017 17 2 Acronyms AU Assessment Unit BMP Best Management Practice(s) CFS Cubic feet per second CFU Colony Forming Unit CRP Clean Rivers Program DO Dissolved Oxygen (in water) EPA Environmental Protection Agency IR Integrated Report LNRA Lavaca Navidad River Authority mg/L Milligrams per Liter PPT Parts Per Thousand RUAA Recreational Use Attainability Analysis SH State Highway SWQM Surface Water Quality Monitoring TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TDS Total Dissolved Solids TIAER The Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research TPWD Texas Parks & Wildlife TWRI Texas Water Resources Institute UAA Use Attainability Analysis USDA United States Agriculture Department USGS United States Geological Survey WQS Water Quality Standards WPP Watershed Protection Plan 3 2017 Basin Highlights • The Lavaca-Navidad River Basin receives an average annual rainfall of approximately 42 inches per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting December 7, 2018 10 A.M
    Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting December 7, 2018 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. CRP Coordinated Monitoring Meeting Texas Logperch (Percina carbonaria) https://cms.lcra.org/sch edule.aspx?basin=19& FY=2019 2 Segment 1911 – Upper San Antonio River 12908 SAR at Woodlawn 12909 SAR at Mulberry 12899 SAR at Padre16731 Road SAR Upstream 12908 SAR at Woodlawn 21547 SAR at VFW of the Medina River Confluence 12879 SAR at SH 97 Pterygoplichthys sp. 3 Segment 1901 – Lower San Antonio River 16992 Cabeza Creek FM 2043 16580 SAR Conquista12792 SAR Pacific RR SE Crossing Goliad 12790 SAR at FM 2506 Pterygoplichthys sp. 4 Segment 1905 – Upper Medina River 21631 UMR Mayan 12830 UMR Old English Ranch Crossing 21631 UMR Mayan Ranch 12832 UMR FM 470 5 Segment 1904 Medina Lake & 1909 Medina Diversion Lake Medina Diversion Lake Medina Lake 6 Segment 1903 Lower Medina River 12824 MR CR 2615 14200 MR CR 484 12811 MR FH 1937 Near Losoya 7 Segment 1908 Upper Cibolo Creek 1285720821 UCC NorthrupIH10 Park 15126 UCC Downstream Menger CK 8 Segment 1913 Mid Cibolo Creek 12924 Mid 14212 Mid Cibolo Cibolo Creek Upstream WWTP Schaeffer Road 9 Segment 1902 Lower Cibolo Creek 12802 Lower Cibolo Creek FM 541 12741 Martinez Creek21755 Gable Upstream FM Road 537 14197 Scull Crossing 10 Segment 1910 Salado Creek 12861 Salado Creek Southton 12870 Gembler 14929 Comanche Park 11 Segment 1912 Medio Creek 12916 Hidden Valley Campground 12735 Medio Creek US 90W 12 Segment 1907 Upper Leon Creek & 1906 Lower Leon Creek 12851 Upper Leon Creek Raymond Russel Park 14198 Upstream Leon Creek
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. 2014 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (updated September 23, 2014) EPA has not approved the definition of “surface water in the state” in the TX WQS, which includes an area out 10.36 miles into the Gulf of Mexico by reference to §26.001 of the Texas Water Code. Under the CWA, Texas does not have jurisdiction to establish water quality standards more than three nautical miles from the coast, but does not extend past that point. Beyond three miles, EPA retains authority for CWA purposes. EPA’s approval also does not include the application the TX WQS for the portions of the Red River and Lake Texoma that are located within the state of Oklahoma. Finally, EPA is not approving the TX WQS for those waters or portions of waters located in Indian Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. The following sections in the 2014 Texas WQS have been approved by EPA and are therefore effective for CWA purposes: • §307.1. General Policy Statement • §307.2. Description of Standards • §307.5. Antidegradation • §307.6. Toxic Materials (see “No Action” section) • §307.8. Application of Standards (see “No Action” section) • Appendix B – Sole-source Surface Drinking Water Supplies • Appendix E – Site-specific Toxic Criteria • Appendix F – Site-specific Nutrient Criteria for Selected Reservoirs (see “No Action” section) The following sections in the 2014 Texas WQS have been approved by EPA, except for specific items as noted: • §307.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Potential Adverse Health Effects Associated with Consuming Fish from The
    Characterization of Potential Adverse Health Effects Associated with Consuming Fish from the Lavaca-Matagorda Bay Estuary 2013 Department of State Health Services Division for Regulatory Services Policy, Standards, and Quality Assurance Unit Seafood and Aquatic Life Group Austin, Texas 1 INTRODUCTION This document summarizes the results of a survey of the Lavaca-Matagorda Bay Estuary conducted in the summer of 2012 by the Texas Department of State Health Service (DSHS) Seafood and Aquatic Life Group (SALG). The Texas Environmental Health Institute1 (TEHI) provided project financial support. Over 1.1 million people participate in saltwater fishing activities in Texas annually.2 Recreational saltwater fishing in Texas represents a $1.8 billion per year industry. In 1988, the Texas Department of Health (TDH), now the DSHS, issued Aquatic Life Order Number 1 (AL-1).3 AL-1 prohibited the taking of finfish and crabs from a delineated area of Lavaca and Cox Bays due to mercury contamination. Mercury contamination in Lavaca Bay is attributed to wastewater discharge from a chloralkali plant that the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) Point Comfort Operation in Calhoun County, Texas, operated from 1965 to 1979. During 1999, additional fish and blue crab tissue monitoring in Cox Bay indicated that mercury concentrations decreased to acceptable levels. In 2000, TDH issued Aquatic Life Order Number 13 (AL-13; Figure 1).4 AL-13 modified the prohibited area defined in AL-1 to exclude Cox Bay. Since the follow-up monitoring of Cox Bay in 1999, the DSHS has not conducted any seafood contaminant monitoring in the Lavaca-Matagorda Bay Estuary.
    [Show full text]
  • Lavaca Basin 2021 Water Quality Update
    Lavaca Basin 2021 Water Quality Update Prepared by the Lavaca-Navidad River Authority (LNRA) PO Box 429, Edna, TX 77957 Prepared in cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality The preparation of this report was financed in part through funding from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) LAVACA BASIN 2021 Water Quality Update Table of Contents Preface: ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1: Lavaca Basin Within The State Of Texas ................................................................ 3 2020 Basin Highlights: ................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: FY 2021 LNRA Water Quality Monitoring Schedule (Includes USGS Sampling) 5 Major Basin Activity Changes And Events: ................................................................................... 6 Lavaca River Watershed Protection Plan: ...................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Site #12524 E. coli Values ....................................................................................... 8 Figure 4: Site #12525 E. coli Values ....................................................................................... 8 Figure 5: Site #12527 E. coli Values ....................................................................................... 9 Figure 6: Site #18190 E. coli Values ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Peak Streamflows and Flood Inundation of Selected
    Prepared in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency Characterization of Peak Streamflows and Flood Inundation of Selected Areas in Southeastern Texas and Southwestern Louisiana from the August and September 2017 Flood Resulting from Hurricane Harvey Scientific Investigations Report 2018–5070 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover, Photograph showing the area where Townsen Boulevard intersects U.S. Highway 59, about 0.65 mile southwest of USGS streamflow-gaging station 08069500, West Fork San Jacinto River near Humble, Texas, August 30, 2017. Perspective of the photo is looking downstream, and the right flood plain of the West Fork San Jacinto River is shown. Photograph courtesy of Steve Fitzgerald, Harris County Flood Control District, used with permission. Back cover: Upper left, Photograph showing Addicks Reservoir looking upstream from top of dam with outlet works and lake station (USGS 08073000, Addicks Reservoir near Addicks, TX), August 29, 2017. Addicks Reservoir is a flood-control reservoir for the City of Houston, and its spillway is located about 12 miles north of Sugar Land, Texas. Photograph by Robert Ellis, Hydrologic Technician with the U.S. Geological Survey Gulf Coast Texas Program Office in Houston, Texas. Upper right, Photograph showing Addicks Reservoir looking upstream from top of dam with outlet works and lake station (USGS 08073000, Addicks Reservoir near Addicks, TX), April 6, 2018. Addicks Reservoir is a flood-control reservoir for the City of Houston, and its spillway is located about 12 miles north of Sugar Land, Texas. Photograph by Tom Pistillo, Hydrologic Technician with the U.S. Geological Survey Gulf Coast Texas Program Office in Houston, Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Distributional Surveys of Freshwater Bivalves in Texas: Progress Report for 2001
    DISTRIBUTIONAL SURVEYS OF FRESHWATER BIVALVES IN TEXAS: PROGRESS REPORT FOR 2001 by Robert G. Howells MANAGEMENT DATA SERIES No. 200 2002 Texas Parks and Wildlife Inland Fisheries Division 4200 Smith School Road Austin, Texas 78744 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many biologists and technicians with Texas Parks and Wildlife's (TPW) Inland Fisheries Heart of the Hills Research Station obtained freshwater mussels during other department field work and provided editorial review of this report. Volunteers supplying specimens or data during 2001 included Dr. Don Shepherd, Stephan Tower, Jesse Todd, Nathan Allan, Marvin Eisthen, Sue Calbert, Roe Davenport, Alex Brence, and Joe Bergmann. Additionally, Dr. Art Bogan loaned previously collected unionids currently in the North Carolina State Natural History Museum collection to HOH for examination and Jack Ralph (TPW) provided data from a collection made in the Colorado River prior to the initiation of HOH freshwater mussel surveys. ABSTRACT During 2001, less than 150 unionid specimens were documented among 90 locations examined statewide in Texas where specimens were either directly surveyed by the Heart of the Hills Research Station (HOH) staff or were sent to HOH by volunteers. Living specimens and recently-dead shells were found in 13.3% of the collections and 70.0% produced no unionids or their remains. In general, too few specimens were obtained from too few sites to draw extensive conclusions about the status of freshwater mussels in Texas in 2001. Drought conditions that began in mid-1995 in many areas of Texas continued, more or less continually, until mid-2000 when many locations experienced an increase in precipitation and elevation in water levels.
    [Show full text]
  • River Basins, Major Bays and Streams
    Texas River Basins, Brazos River Basin Wolf Creek Brazos-Colorado Coastal Basin Rita Blanca Creek Major Bays and Canadian River Basin Canadian River Colorado River Basin North Fork of the Red River Streams XAmarillo Colorado-Lavaca Coastal Basin Salt Fork of the Red River Cypress Creek Basin Prairie Dog Town Fork of the Red River ® Guadalupe River Basin North Pease River Lavaca River Basin Pease River White River Tongue River Lavaca-Guadalupe Coastal Basin Wichita River Wichita River North Wichita River Little Wichita River South Wichita River Lubbock Trinity River X North Sulphur River Neches River Basin Brazos River West Fork of the Trinity River Brazos River Sulphur River Neches-Trinity Coastal Basin South Sulphur River Clear Fork Tr n Plano X Cypress Creek Garland FortWorth Irving X Sabine River Nueces River Basin i ity Rive X Clear Fork of the Brazos River XTr n X iityX RiverMesqu i te r XX Dallas Nueces-Rio Grande Coastal Basin Arl ington Grand Prairie Sabine River XAbilene Paluxy River Leon River Chambers Creek Brazos River Attoyac Bayou El Paso Richland Creek X Colorado River Pecan Bayou Navasota River Neches River Waco Angelina River Concho River X Colorado River Lampasas River Tr n iity River Colorado River Pecos River Brazos River Neches River San Saba River Llano River North Llano River San Jacinto River XAustin Beaumont South Llano River Pedernales River Devils River X Trinity River Brazos River Guadalupe River Clo orado River San Bernard River Houston Sabine Medina River X Sabinal River Frio River X West NuecesWest River
    [Show full text]
  • Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(3) Appendix C
    Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(3) Appendix C - Segment Descriptions The following descriptions define the geographic extent of the state's classified segments. Boundaries of bay and estuary segments have not been precisely defined. Segment boundaries are illustrated in the document entitled The Atlas of Texas Surface Waters (GI-316) as amended and published by the commission. SEGMENT DESCRIPTION 0101 Canadian River Below Lake Meredith - from the Oklahoma State Line in Hemphill County to Sanford Dam in Hutchinson County 0102 Lake Meredith - from Sanford Dam in Hutchinson County to a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Camp Creek in Potter County, up to the normal pool elevation of 2936.5 feet (impounds Canadian River) 0103 Canadian River Above Lake Meredith - from a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Camp Creek in Potter County to the New Mexico State Line in Oldham County 0104 Wolf Creek - from the Oklahoma State Line in Lipscomb County to a point 2.0 km (1.2 mi) upstream of FM 3045 in Ochiltree County 0105 Rita Blanca Lake - from Rita Blanca Dam in Hartley County up to the normal pool elevation of 3860 feet (impounds Rita Blanca Creek) 0201 Lower Red River - from the Arkansas State Line in Bowie County to the Arkansas- Oklahoma State Line in Bowie County 0202 Red River Below Lake Texoma - from the Arkansas-Oklahoma State Line in Bowie County to Denison Dam in Grayson County 0203 Lake Texoma - from Denison Dam in Grayson County to a point immediately upstream of the confluence of Sycamore Creek in Cooke County, up to
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Floods of 1940
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERKT J. A. Krug, Secretary GEOl-OGICAL SURVEY , W. & Wrather, Director Water-Supply Paper 1046 TEXAS FLOODS OF 1940 BY . ' *" SETH D. BREEDING »ntt UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1948 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS Page Abstract ____ -___ -. 1 Introduction _____ ___. 2 Administration and personnel________ __________ 3 Acknowledgments __ __ 4 Measurement of flood discharges... ____ _____________ 4 June-July floods in south-central Texas ____ _ __ 5 Rainfall.-______.. _____ __ 8 Flood stages and discharges 15 Summary of flood stages and discharges 18 Stages and discharges at stream-gaging stations__ ________ 18 Brazos River Basin,______ __ ________ 27 Brazos River at Waco_ , ___ _ ___ 27 Brazos River near Marlin_ ________________________ . 29 Brazos River near Bryan______ __ ______ 30 Brazos River near Hempstead ____ __ 32 Brazos River near San Felipe__ ____ ________ 33 Brazos River at Richmond- ____ _-________ 35 Brazos River at East Columbia,_______ ________ 36 Little River at Cameron_ ___ 37 Yegua Creek near Somerville, _-___ ___________ 39 Navasota River near Easterly _ __________ _______ 40 Colorado River Basin._____ __ ____ 41 Colorado River at Austin ____ 41 Colorado River at Smithville __ _ ________ 43 Colorado River at La Grange.. ______ 44 Colorado River at Columbus_ _t ,.» ________ 46 Colorado River at Wha$to^_ __, .._ I i- '-- -.,- .» T 48 Colorado River nea>^y'Cityl___i?i__«^.-ii-l'_._s_^ 49 Dry Creek^at Btle§chei[I^ak® niftr ^mijfchySBjiifeJi-.______ 50 _ 51 Edna_ _ _ 53 Navidad River near Ganado___ 54 Guadalupe River Basin__________ .
    [Show full text]
  • Recharge Enhancement Study Guadalupe- San Antonio River
    Recharge Enhancement Study Guadalupe­ San Antonio River Basin / / Volume II­ / I Technical / I Report / / I / / I I I I Edwards Underground I Water District AAR ZO ~IILCCJ• I I UAUAlUf'f ESTUARY In r r r GUADALUPE - SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASIN r RECHARGE ENHANCEMENT STUDY r r r VOLUME II · TECHNICAL REPORT r r Prepared for r Edwards Underground Water District r r r by HDR Engineering, Inc. r and r Espey, Huston & Associates, Inc. r r September, 1993 r r Advisocy Committee Participants for r Guadalupe - San Antonio River Basin r Recharge Enhancement Study Edwards Underground Water District• r Russell Masters San Antonio Water System r Joe Aceves Guadalupe • Blanco River Authority r Thomas Hill Bexar Metropolitan Water District r Tom Moreno San Antonio River Authority r Fred Pfeiffer City of San Marcos r Larry Gilley Canyon Regional Water Authority r David Davenport Springhills Water Management District r Ray Buck Nueces River Authority r Con Mims r City of Corpus Christi James Dodson r Industrial Water Users Association Bob Wright r Texas Water Development Board r Gordon Thorn r • Study Sponsor r r r VOLUME II • TECHNICAL REPORT r TABLE OF CONTENTS r SECI'ION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1-1 r 1.1 Study Objectives •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1-3 2.0 WA'J'E,R RIGHTS AN'D USE ••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2-1 r 2.1 Water Rights • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • 2-1 2.2 Historical Surface Water Use • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
    [Show full text]
  • Riparian Training Proj QPR 3 31 14
    Texas Riparian and Stream Ecosystem Education Project CWA 319(h) NPS Grant Program TSSWCB Contract No. 12-07 Quarter no. 6 From 01/01/14 Through 3/31/14 I. Abstract In this quarter the project work primarily focused on advertising, coordinating, conducting and preparations for the following workshops: Lavaca River Basin in February, San Bernard River in March, Arroyo in April and Cedar Bayou in May of 2014. This included coordinating the workshops with agency partners and the Planning Team, to put together instructors, updating the course, website and advertising materials. Work also continued on contacting watershed coordinators to plan future workshops across the state for 2014. Tasks also included updating webpages, gathering educational materials/presentations/evaluations, and visiting with some of the watershed coordinators about this program. Texas A&M Forest Service has assisted with finding field sites, instructing at workshops, and is creating a forestry presentation for Urban areas. Nueces River Authority has continued working on digita l tools and updating the Remarkable Riparian Website, and providing the Remarkable Riparian publications for workshop attendees. II. Overall Progress and Results by Objective and Task OBJECTIVE 1: PROJECT ADMINISTRATION Administer, coordinate and monitor all work performed under this project including technical and financial supervision and preparation of status and final reports. Task 1.1: Project Administration –TWRI/IRNR will prepare electronic quarterly progress reports (QPRs) for submission to TSSWCB. QPRs shall document all activities performed within a quarter and shall be submitted by the 15th of January, April, July and October. QPRs shall be distributed to all project partners.
    [Show full text]