bays in peril bays in peril

WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT GLOSSARY OF KEY CONCEPTS A Water is the lifeblood of our Texas landscape. Texas Naturalized Conditions: rivers provide water and habitat for fi sh and wildlife A computer model scenario showing freshwater infl ow throughout the state and provide the freshwater that amounts that would have occurred during about a 50- forecast for freshwater keeps coastal estuaries functioning and healthy. Unfor- year period if there had not been water withdrawals, dams, or other human alterations of infl ow patterns. tunately, we haven’t done a very good job of protecting Used as a baseline for comparison. fl ows to our rivers. Most water use permits were issued without Future Use: any consideration of how much fl ow should be left in A computer model scenario showing freshwater the river to protect water quality, fi sh and wildlife, and infl ow amounts during the same period as for natu- Texas estuaries human recreational activities. ralized conditions if all existing water withdrawal permits were fully used and levels of wastewater reuse Even today, the state hasn’t come to grips with how to were increased to about 50%. protect river fl ows and freshwater infl ows to the coast. Periods Below Drought The state and 16 regional water planning groups are Tolerance Levels: Sabine Lake developing plans to meet water demands for the next 50 A determination of the number of periods of six con- years, but so far that process does not include freshwater secutive months of very low freshwater infl ows, with- report summary infl ows as a water demand to be met. in a March-October window. During such periods, galveston bay infl ows would not be adequate to keep salinity levels Water planning and management involve choices. within state-determined salinity bounds for key spe- cies, resulting in stressful conditions and in reduced For example, planners and managers can choose to im- reproduction and survival. prove water-use effi ciency to support more people with Good Years With Low the same amount of water and reduce the need for new Freshwater Pulses: reservoirs. Lawmakers can choose to formally set aside A determination of the number of years dur- Caution river fl ows that haven’t yet been allocated to make sure ing which the important spring or early sum- those fl ows will remain available for fi sh and wildlife. We mer pulses of high freshwater infl ows are can develop voluntary methods to convert some existing below target levels. These pulses are needed Danger to support strong reproduction and growth of key unused permits from their original purpose to a new use estuarine species. for protecting river fl ows and freshwater infl ows. WHERE THE RIVER MEETS THE SEA In short, we can avoid the severe damage to our es- Texas coastal estuaries, where fresh river water mixes tuaries that this analysis predicts. Texas can have water For More Information Matagorda bay with the salty waters of the Gulf of Mexico, support an You can get the full Bays in Peril report and learn development policies that meet our increasing human amazing abundance of wildlife. Young fi sh and shrimp feed more about the Texas Living Waters Project at demands for water while also protecting our natural and hide in brackish estuary waters until they are mature heritage. The vast majority of Texans want strong www.texaswatermatters.org or www.nwf.org. To get san antonio bay enough to survive in the Gulf of Mexico. Resident and protections for Texas rivers and estuaries. If we get that involved in protecting our rivers and bays, contact the National Wildlife Federation at 1-800-919-9151 or migratory birds by the thousands rest and feed in estuarine message to state and local leaders, we can pass on to [email protected]. marshes. Oysters are found only in estuaries. In fact, 95 future Texans the same beauty and bounty from Texas copano/aransas bays percent of the Gulf’s recreationally and commercially bays that we inherited. important fi sh and other marine species rely on estuaries during some part of their life cycle. Acknowledgements The National Wildlife Federation thanks the Houston What keeps these unique coastal waters healthy and Endowment Inc., the Meadows Foundation, the Brown corpus christi bay productive is the freshwater fl owing into them from Texas Foundation, the Jacob and Terese Hershey Foundation, rivers. Without adequate freshwater infl ows, water quality and the Magnolia Charitable Trust for their fi nancial sup- would suffer, many species would be unable to reproduce port in the preparation of this report. Printed on recycled paper with soy and vegetable based inks. or grow, and the estuaries themselves, as nurseries and habitat for a vast array of marine life, would decline. (continued on page 2)

upper laguna madre National Wildlife Federation bays in peril national wildlife federation

Estuary System Periods Below Drought Tolerance Levels Years With Low Freshwater Pulses Overall THREATS FROM UPSTREAM duced alterations in the river’s fl ow pattern, and if there Ranking were a repeat of past rainfall patterns. We also used the Despite their importance, Texas estuaries face an un- Naturalized Future Use Increase Naturalized Future Use Increase models to predict what freshwater infl ows to each estuary certain future because they are last in line, both physical- Conditions Conditions would be with the same rainfall but with the ‘future use’ ly and legally, to get a share of our publicly owned rivers. (full permit use/50 percent reuse) scenario. Sabine Lake 2 10 400% 23 34 48% Danger More and more water is being withdrawn from our rivers upstream to meet inland water demands. Since estuaries Having determined the freshwater infl ows each bay Galveston Bay 0 5 >500% 10 16 60% Danger have no legal claim on the rivers’ fl ows, larger upstream would receive under ‘naturalized conditions’ and under Matagorda Bay 3 20 567% 16 31 94% Danger withdrawals mean less water for the coast. In some river our ‘future use’ scenario, we then looked at how the basins, the state has issued permits to take out more wa- future-use infl ows stack up against what each estuary San Antonio Bay 2 7 250% 19 24 26% Danger ter than will actually be in the river during drier years, system needs to stay healthy. Copano/Aransas Bays 6 6 0% 21 21 0% Good meaning freshwater infl ows to the coast could essentially cease at times. Fortunately, much of the water now au- FRESHWATER: HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH? Corpus Christi Bay 2 6 NA 13 35 169% Danger thorized for withdrawal is not actually being withdrawn Upper Laguna Madre 3 3 0% 15 15 0% Good each year. But that will change as Texas’ population To determine how much freshwater a given estuary grows and current permit holders increasingly sell what- needs, we used two infl ow criteria we developed from state ever water they’re not using. With increased demand for studies. The fi rst addresses what each estuary needs dur- a limited resource, full use of these existing water permits ing low-rainfall periods. These ‘drought tolerance levels’ See glossary on back is coming closer and closer. are the infl ows needed to keep salinity conditions within reasonable tolerance ranges for key species. The second To compound matters, cities, businesses and other criterion addresses the important ‘freshwater pulses’ of permit holders are fi nding new ways to re-use wastewa- high infl ows that naturally occur in the spring and early ter—for landscape irrigation, for example, or industrial summer of most years. These ‘freshwater pulses’ support cooling systems—rather than discharge it back into the strong levels of reproduction and growth. OUR RANKING SYSTEM WHAT WE FOUND river. While reuse can be an effi cient water use, it also Even if humans were not using any water, the estuar- An estuary can’t stay healthy and productive if it The results of our analysis are troubling, with fi ve estu- reduces the ‘return fl ows’ that are all that keep some riv- experiences too many years without strong freshwater aries receiving a ‘danger’ ranking. During dry times, four ers fl owing during drier times. The challenge is to fi nd ies would not always receive enough freshwater infl ows to satisfy these two criteria. Rainfall varies from year to pulses or if it endures too many prolonged periods of of Texas’ seven major estuaries would face serious prob- the right balance in meeting human water needs and infl ows below drought tolerance levels. Because a large lems under the ‘future use’ scenario, with sustained pe- protecting our rivers and bays. year and the fi sh and wildlife that depend on estuaries are adapted to these naturally varying conditions. The chal- increase in the frequency of either of these conditions riods of very low fl ows happening much more frequently lenge is to avoid patterns of water use (and reuse) that signals real problems, we used the higher of the two than under ‘naturalized conditions.’ During these low- WHAT’S AHEAD FOR FRESHWATER INFLOWS? push infl ows below one or both criteria so often that fi sh percentage-increase calculations to assign an overall fl ow periods, many species are on life-support and are In this report, the National Wildlife Federation takes and wildlife can no longer cope. ranking for the estuary. We assumed, however, that the just able to survive. If they are on life-support too often a fi rst-ever look at what would happen to the infl ows to estuaries can tolerate some increase in how often infl ows or for too long, they may be unable to recover quickly, or Texas’ seven major estuaries if existing water permits As a starting point for our comparisons, we looked would fall below the criteria. We considered an estuary’s at all, when infl ows increase with wetter times. The key were fully used and wastewater reuse increased. We pro- at how often the infl ows predicted under ‘naturalized prospects ‘good’ if our assessment showed no more than spring and early summer infl ow pulses needed to support jected what freshwater infl ows would be for each estuary conditions’ fell below each of the two infl ow criteria a 33 percent (or 1/3) increase in periods with infl ows strong productivity would over roughly a 50-year period. The frequency of periods of if holders of all existing permits withdrew their full au- below either criterion. We assigned a ‘caution’ ranking not be impacted as heav- Overall Increase in ‘below-criteria’ infl ows under ‘naturalized conditions’ be- if the increase fell between 33 percent and 67 percent. ily. Two of the seven major Ranking Problem thorized amount of water and if the amount of wastewater Conditions that was reused rather than discharged back into the came a baseline for each estuary, because it refl ects natural A ‘danger’ ranking resulted only if the analysis predicted estuaries would face very river increased to roughly 50 percent. variations in infl ows. a 67 percent (or 2/3) or greater increase in periods with large increases in the number infl ows below at least one of the criteria. More study of years with reduced spring 0% to 33% We then looked at how often the infl ows predicted un- While this ‘future use’ scenario may seem somewhat is needed to determine if estuaries would be seriously and early summer infl ow der the ‘future use’ scenario (full permit use/50 percent re- Good hypothetical, we believe these conditions are likely to harmed by smaller changes than those used as the basis pulses. use) for the same time period would fall below the infl ow be seen in the not-too-distant future if Texas does not of assessment here. Because each estuary has developed above 33% criteria. Finally, we compared the results by calculating, change how it manages water. In addition, our analysis in response to unique patterns of infl ow pulses and of but below as a percentage, how much more often infl ows predicted considers only impacts from current water permits and low infl ows, our analysis does not attempt to make com- 67% under the ‘future use’ scenario fell below one or both cri- Caution does not attempt to account for new water-use permits parisons between different estuaries. that are likely to be issued. teria when compared to the baseline. For example, if our results showed that the number of times the freshwater 67% or greater To quantify expected infl ows, we used computer models pulse target was not met increased from two years under Danger developed for the Texas Commission on Environmental ‘naturalized conditions’ to four years under the ‘future use’ Quality. These models predict what infl ows to each estu- scenario, we indicated a 100 percent increase in ‘years ary would have been under ‘naturalized conditions,’ i.e., with low freshwater pulses.’ We calculated percentage if there were no dams or pipelines or other human-in- changes for each criterion for each estuary. bays in peril national wildlife federation

Estuary System Periods Below Drought Tolerance Levels Years With Low Freshwater Pulses Overall THREATS FROM UPSTREAM duced alterations in the river’s fl ow pattern, and if there Ranking were a repeat of past rainfall patterns. We also used the Despite their importance, Texas estuaries face an un- Naturalized Future Use Increase Naturalized Future Use Increase models to predict what freshwater infl ows to each estuary certain future because they are last in line, both physical- Conditions Conditions would be with the same rainfall but with the ‘future use’ ly and legally, to get a share of our publicly owned rivers. (full permit use/50 percent reuse) scenario. Sabine Lake 2 10 400% 23 34 48% Danger More and more water is being withdrawn from our rivers upstream to meet inland water demands. Since estuaries Having determined the freshwater infl ows each bay Galveston Bay 0 5 >500% 10 16 60% Danger have no legal claim on the rivers’ fl ows, larger upstream would receive under ‘naturalized conditions’ and under Matagorda Bay 3 20 567% 16 31 94% Danger withdrawals mean less water for the coast. In some river our ‘future use’ scenario, we then looked at how the basins, the state has issued permits to take out more wa- future-use infl ows stack up against what each estuary San Antonio Bay 2 7 250% 19 24 26% Danger ter than will actually be in the river during drier years, system needs to stay healthy. Copano/Aransas Bays 6 6 0% 21 21 0% Good meaning freshwater infl ows to the coast could essentially cease at times. Fortunately, much of the water now au- FRESHWATER: HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH? Corpus Christi Bay 2 6 NA 13 35 169% Danger thorized for withdrawal is not actually being withdrawn Upper Laguna Madre 3 3 0% 15 15 0% Good each year. But that will change as Texas’ population To determine how much freshwater a given estuary grows and current permit holders increasingly sell what- needs, we used two infl ow criteria we developed from state ever water they’re not using. With increased demand for studies. The fi rst addresses what each estuary needs dur- a limited resource, full use of these existing water permits ing low-rainfall periods. These ‘drought tolerance levels’ See glossary on back is coming closer and closer. are the infl ows needed to keep salinity conditions within reasonable tolerance ranges for key species. The second To compound matters, cities, businesses and other criterion addresses the important ‘freshwater pulses’ of permit holders are fi nding new ways to re-use wastewa- high infl ows that naturally occur in the spring and early ter—for landscape irrigation, for example, or industrial summer of most years. These ‘freshwater pulses’ support cooling systems—rather than discharge it back into the strong levels of reproduction and growth. OUR RANKING SYSTEM WHAT WE FOUND river. While reuse can be an effi cient water use, it also Even if humans were not using any water, the estuar- An estuary can’t stay healthy and productive if it The results of our analysis are troubling, with fi ve estu- reduces the ‘return fl ows’ that are all that keep some riv- experiences too many years without strong freshwater aries receiving a ‘danger’ ranking. During dry times, four ers fl owing during drier times. The challenge is to fi nd ies would not always receive enough freshwater infl ows to satisfy these two criteria. Rainfall varies from year to pulses or if it endures too many prolonged periods of of Texas’ seven major estuaries would face serious prob- the right balance in meeting human water needs and infl ows below drought tolerance levels. Because a large lems under the ‘future use’ scenario, with sustained pe- protecting our rivers and bays. year and the fi sh and wildlife that depend on estuaries are adapted to these naturally varying conditions. The chal- increase in the frequency of either of these conditions riods of very low fl ows happening much more frequently lenge is to avoid patterns of water use (and reuse) that signals real problems, we used the higher of the two than under ‘naturalized conditions.’ During these low- WHAT’S AHEAD FOR FRESHWATER INFLOWS? push infl ows below one or both criteria so often that fi sh percentage-increase calculations to assign an overall fl ow periods, many species are on life-support and are In this report, the National Wildlife Federation takes and wildlife can no longer cope. ranking for the estuary. We assumed, however, that the just able to survive. If they are on life-support too often a fi rst-ever look at what would happen to the infl ows to estuaries can tolerate some increase in how often infl ows or for too long, they may be unable to recover quickly, or Texas’ seven major estuaries if existing water permits As a starting point for our comparisons, we looked would fall below the criteria. We considered an estuary’s at all, when infl ows increase with wetter times. The key were fully used and wastewater reuse increased. We pro- at how often the infl ows predicted under ‘naturalized prospects ‘good’ if our assessment showed no more than spring and early summer infl ow pulses needed to support jected what freshwater infl ows would be for each estuary conditions’ fell below each of the two infl ow criteria a 33 percent (or 1/3) increase in periods with infl ows strong productivity would over roughly a 50-year period. The frequency of periods of if holders of all existing permits withdrew their full au- below either criterion. We assigned a ‘caution’ ranking not be impacted as heav- Overall Increase in ‘below-criteria’ infl ows under ‘naturalized conditions’ be- if the increase fell between 33 percent and 67 percent. ily. Two of the seven major Ranking Problem thorized amount of water and if the amount of wastewater Conditions that was reused rather than discharged back into the came a baseline for each estuary, because it refl ects natural A ‘danger’ ranking resulted only if the analysis predicted estuaries would face very river increased to roughly 50 percent. variations in infl ows. a 67 percent (or 2/3) or greater increase in periods with large increases in the number infl ows below at least one of the criteria. More study of years with reduced spring 0% to 33% We then looked at how often the infl ows predicted un- While this ‘future use’ scenario may seem somewhat is needed to determine if estuaries would be seriously and early summer infl ow der the ‘future use’ scenario (full permit use/50 percent re- Good hypothetical, we believe these conditions are likely to harmed by smaller changes than those used as the basis pulses. use) for the same time period would fall below the infl ow be seen in the not-too-distant future if Texas does not of assessment here. Because each estuary has developed above 33% criteria. Finally, we compared the results by calculating, change how it manages water. In addition, our analysis in response to unique patterns of infl ow pulses and of but below as a percentage, how much more often infl ows predicted considers only impacts from current water permits and low infl ows, our analysis does not attempt to make com- 67% under the ‘future use’ scenario fell below one or both cri- Caution does not attempt to account for new water-use permits parisons between different estuaries. that are likely to be issued. teria when compared to the baseline. For example, if our results showed that the number of times the freshwater 67% or greater To quantify expected infl ows, we used computer models pulse target was not met increased from two years under Danger developed for the Texas Commission on Environmental ‘naturalized conditions’ to four years under the ‘future use’ Quality. These models predict what infl ows to each estu- scenario, we indicated a 100 percent increase in ‘years ary would have been under ‘naturalized conditions,’ i.e., with low freshwater pulses.’ We calculated percentage if there were no dams or pipelines or other human-in- changes for each criterion for each estuary. bays in peril bays in peril

WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT GLOSSARY OF KEY CONCEPTS A Water is the lifeblood of our Texas landscape. Texas Naturalized Conditions: rivers provide water and habitat for fi sh and wildlife A computer model scenario showing freshwater infl ow throughout the state and provide the freshwater that amounts that would have occurred during about a 50- forecast for freshwater keeps coastal estuaries functioning and healthy. Unfor- year period if there had not been water withdrawals, dams, or other human alterations of infl ow patterns. tunately, we haven’t done a very good job of protecting Used as a baseline for comparison. fl ows to our rivers. Most water use permits were issued without Future Use: any consideration of how much fl ow should be left in A computer model scenario showing freshwater the river to protect water quality, fi sh and wildlife, and infl ow amounts during the same period as for natu- Texas estuaries human recreational activities. ralized conditions if all existing water withdrawal permits were fully used and levels of wastewater reuse Even today, the state hasn’t come to grips with how to were increased to about 50%. protect river fl ows and freshwater infl ows to the coast. Periods Below Drought The state and 16 regional water planning groups are Tolerance Levels: Sabine Lake developing plans to meet water demands for the next 50 A determination of the number of periods of six con- years, but so far that process does not include freshwater secutive months of very low freshwater infl ows, with- report summary infl ows as a water demand to be met. in a March-October window. During such periods, galveston bay infl ows would not be adequate to keep salinity levels Water planning and management involve choices. within state-determined salinity bounds for key spe- cies, resulting in stressful conditions and in reduced For example, planners and managers can choose to im- reproduction and survival. prove water-use effi ciency to support more people with Good Years With Low the same amount of water and reduce the need for new Freshwater Pulses: reservoirs. Lawmakers can choose to formally set aside A determination of the number of years dur- Caution river fl ows that haven’t yet been allocated to make sure ing which the important spring or early sum- those fl ows will remain available for fi sh and wildlife. We mer pulses of high freshwater infl ows are can develop voluntary methods to convert some existing below target levels. These pulses are needed Danger to support strong reproduction and growth of key unused permits from their original purpose to a new use estuarine species. for protecting river fl ows and freshwater infl ows. WHERE THE RIVER MEETS THE SEA In short, we can avoid the severe damage to our es- Texas coastal estuaries, where fresh river water mixes tuaries that this analysis predicts. Texas can have water For More Information Matagorda bay with the salty waters of the Gulf of Mexico, support an You can get the full Bays in Peril report and learn development policies that meet our increasing human amazing abundance of wildlife. Young fi sh and shrimp feed more about the Texas Living Waters Project at demands for water while also protecting our natural and hide in brackish estuary waters until they are mature heritage. The vast majority of Texans want strong www.texaswatermatters.org or www.nwf.org. To get san antonio bay enough to survive in the Gulf of Mexico. Resident and protections for Texas rivers and estuaries. If we get that involved in protecting our rivers and bays, contact the National Wildlife Federation at 1-800-919-9151 or migratory birds by the thousands rest and feed in estuarine message to state and local leaders, we can pass on to [email protected]. marshes. Oysters are found only in estuaries. In fact, 95 future Texans the same beauty and bounty from Texas copano/aransas bays percent of the Gulf’s recreationally and commercially bays that we inherited. important fi sh and other marine species rely on estuaries during some part of their life cycle. Acknowledgements The National Wildlife Federation thanks the Houston What keeps these unique coastal waters healthy and Endowment Inc., the Meadows Foundation, the Brown corpus christi bay productive is the freshwater fl owing into them from Texas Foundation, the Jacob and Terese Hershey Foundation, rivers. Without adequate freshwater infl ows, water quality and the Magnolia Charitable Trust for their fi nancial sup- would suffer, many species would be unable to reproduce port in the preparation of this report. Printed on recycled paper with soy and vegetable based inks. or grow, and the estuaries themselves, as nurseries and habitat for a vast array of marine life, would decline. (continued on page 2)

upper laguna madre National Wildlife Federation