DOCSLIB.ORG

TRINITY-SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: an Analysis of Bay Segment Boundaries, Physical Characteristics, and Nutrient Processes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TRINITY-SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: an Analysis of Bay Segment Boundaries, Physical Characteristics, and Nutrient Processes TRINITY-SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: An Analysis of Bay Segment Boundaries, Physical Characteristics, and Nutrient Processes ^'tyMffi-'*-'',!\ ••*'•: ^'-:''"''' '.'.'.' "I~t~" .. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES LP-86 March 1982 TRINITY - SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: AN ANALYSIS OF BAY SEGMENT BOUNDARIES, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, AND NUTRIENT PROCESSES Prepared by the Engineering and Environmental Systems Section ofthe Planning and Development Division The preparation of this report was financed through a planning grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency under provisions of Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control ActAmendmentsof1972,as amended. Texas Department ofWater Resources LP-86 Printed in March 1982 Report reflects work completed in June 1979. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES Harvey Davis, Executive Director TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD Louis A. Beecherl Jr., Chairman George W. McCleskey, Vice Chairman Glen E. Roney Lonnie A. "Bo" Pilgrim W. O. Bankston Louie Welch TEXAS, WATER COMMISSION Lee B. M. Biggart, Chairman Felix McDonald, Commissioner John D. Stover, Commissioner Authorization for use or reproduction of any original material contained in this publication, i.e., not obtained from other sources, is freely granted. The Department would appreciate acknowledgement. Published and distributed .. by the Texas Department of Water Resources Post Office Box 13087 Austin, Texas 78711 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE 1 SUMMARY 3 ANALYSIS OF BAY SEGMENT BOUNDARIES 4 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 7 Introduction 7 Sedimentation and Erosion 7 Mineral and Energy Resources 12 Groundwater Resources 14 Data Collection Program 14 Circulation and Salinity 21 Summary 21 Description of Estuarine Mathematical Models 21 Introduction 21 Description of the Modeling Process 21 Mathematical Model Development 22 (1) Hydrodynamic Model 22 (2) Conservative Mass Transport Model 25 (3) Data Sets Required 25 Application of Mathematical Models, Trinity-San Jacinto 25 Estuary Simulated Flow Patterns 27 (1) Simulated March, August, and October 27 Circulation Patterns Under Average Inflow Conditions (2) Simulated January, February, July, 30 September, November and December Circulation Patterns Under Average Inflow Conditions (3) Simulated April, May and June Circu- 30 lation Patterns Under Average Inflow Conditions Simulated Salinity Patterns 30 (1) Simulated Spring and Early Summer Salinity 55 Patterns Under Average Historical Freshwater Inflow Conditions in TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued Page (2) Simulated Fall, Winter and Late Summer 55 Salinity Patterns Under Average Historical Freshwater Inflow Conditions NUTRIENT PROCESSES 55 Summary 55 Nutrient Loading 56 Marsh Vegetative Production 64 Marsh Nutrient Cycling 66 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 69 BIBLIOGRAPHY 70 FIGURES 1. Location of Estuaries 5 2-3. Existing Bay Segment Boundaries, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 6 4-5. Proposed Bay Segment Boundaries, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 8 6. Geologic Map 9 7-8. Shoreline Physical Processes, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 11 9-10. Oil and Gas Fields, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 13 11-12. Land-Surface Subsidence in the Houston Area (1964-1973) 15 13. Data Collection Sites in Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 16 14. Location of Gaging Stations, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 17 15. Relationships Between Tidal Hydrodynamic and Salinity Models 23 16. Conceptual Illustration of Discretization of a Bay 24 17. Computational Grid, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 26 18. Total Mean Monthly Inflow Distribution, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary, Gaged, Ungaged, and Return Flows Excluding San Jacinto River 29 19. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under January Average Inflow (1941-1976) 31 20. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under February Average Inflow (1941-1976) 32 21. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under March Average Inflow (1941-1976) 33 IV TABLE OF CONTENTS—Continued Page 22. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under April Average Inflow (1941-1976) 34 23. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under May Average Inflow (1941-1976) 35 24. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under June Average Inflow (1941-1976) 36 25. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under July Average Inflow (1941-1976) 37 26. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under August Average Inflow (1941-1976) 38 27. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under September Average Inflow (1941-1976) 39 28. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under October Average Inflow (1941-1976) 40 29. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under November Average Inflow (1941-1976) 41 30. Simulated Net Steady-State Flows in the Trinity-San , Jacinto Estuary under December Average Inflow (1941-1976) 42 31. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under January Average Inflows 43 32. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under February Average Inflows 44 33. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under March Average Inflows 45 34. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under April Average Inflows 46 35. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under May Average Inflows 47 36. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under June Average Inflows 48 37. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under July Average Inflows 49 38. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under August Average Inflows 50 39. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under September Average Inflows 51 40. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under October Average Inflows 52 41. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under November Average Inflows 53 42. Simulated Salinities in the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary under December Average Inflows 54 TABLE OF CONTENTS-Continued Page 43. Mean Monthly Organic Nitrogen Concentrations of Streams Contributing to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 57 44. Mean Monthly Inorganic Nitrogen Concentrations of Streams Contributing to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 58 45. Mean Monthly Total Phosphorus Concentrations of Streams Contributing to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 59 46. Mean Monthly Total Organic Carbon Concentrations of Streams Contributing to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 60 TABLES 1. USGS or Corps of Engineers Gages, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary 18 2. Mean Monthly Freshwater Inflows, Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary, 1941-1976 28 3. Range of Expected Inorganic Nitrogen Loading to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary Based on Mean Monthly Gaged Discharge 61 4. Range of Expected Organic Nitrogen to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary Based on Mean Monthly Gaged Discharge 61 5. Range of Expected Total Phosphorus Loading to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary Based on Mean Monthly Gaged Discharge 62 6. Range of Expected Total Organic Carbon Loading to the Trinity-San Jacinto Estuary Based on Mean Monthly Gaged Discharge 62 7. Scientific and Common Names of Important Plant Species Occurring in the Trinity River Delta 65 8. Summary of Nutrient Exchange Rates 67 9. Summary of Nutrient Exchange Rates for Plant Types from the Lower Trinity River Delta Marshes Corrected for Wall Effects 68 10. Exchange Rates of Carbon, Nitrogen, and Phosphorus in the Linear Marsh from the Trinity River Delta 68 vi TRINITY-SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: AN ANALYSIS OF BAY SEGMENT BOUNDARIES, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, AND NUTRIENT PROCESSES PREFACE In 1976, the Section 208 Planning Program for 2. Analysis of the physical characteristics of the nondesignated planning areas of Texas was selected estuarine systems including mixing, initiated. Additional planning funds were subse transport, current patterns, and salinity pat quently made available by EPA to expand the scope terns; and of this planning effort and to consider other issues 3. Definition of nutrient processes in Texasestua not previously addressed. These planning monies rine systems, especially theeffects ofinflowson were available in early 1978 as a supplement to the nutrient cycling and contributions from deltaic EPA grant for Section 208 planning in nondesig nated planning areas. A part of the funds were ear marsh areas. marked for development of analyses which could be The above tasks are basic to any considerationof used in future planning efforts for evaluation of the the adequacy of water quality standards for Texas appropriateness of existing water quality standards estuarine systems. Future tasks, which are necessary in major Texas estuarine systems. Due to the short to complete a comprehensive assessment of coastal time frame of the supplemental grant funds, only water quality standards, include definition of the three tasks were selected. Later these can be waterquality requirements to meet various wateruse expanded upon throughout the continuing planning criteria for estuarine/river systems, and an assess process. The three selected tasks are the subject of ment of the costs and benefits of various uses. this report on the Trinity-San Jacinto estuary: 1. Analysis of the appropriateness of existingbay segment boundaries; TRINITY-SAN JACINTO ESTUARY: AN ANALYSIS OF BAY SEGMENT BOUNDARIES, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, AND NUTRIENT PROCESSES SUMMARY The Trinity-San Jacinto estuary can be
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Oyster Restoration Project in Galveston Bay and Sabine Lake 2014
    Project aims to restore Galveston Bay oyster reefs by CHRISTOPHER SMITH GONZALEZ see http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20140527-project-aims-to-restore-galveston-bay-oyster- reefs.ece The Galveston County Daily News Published: 27 May 2014 06:00 PM GALVESTON — Floating just a couple of meters above an oyster reef in Galveston Bay, two scientists working to improve the reef sifted through rock and shell pulled up from the bottom. “I don’t see any spat,” said Bryan Legare, a natural resource specialist with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, as he looked for the small, immature oysters. “It might be a little early for spat since it’s been such a cold winter,” said colleague Bill Rodney, an oyster restoration biologist, as they looked over the pile of cultch — the hard material including rock, crushed limestone and shell that oysters attach to. The young oysters, or spat, will develop as the weather warms, but the pressing question is whether the right conditions will exist for them to grow to mature oysters, which then become part of a multimillion business and which fill an important ecological niche. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is in the midst of the largest oyster reef restoration project it’s ever undertaken. It’s an effort to provide oysters with a hard surface they can grow on. The silt deposited in the bay by Hurricane Ike in 2008 and the ongoing drought have damaged oyster reefs in Galveston Bay. Not much can be done about the lack of rain, but the department is trying to do something to deal with the silt by depositing almost 80,000 tons of river rock, ranging from the size of a marble to a small brick, over Middle Reef, Pepper Grove Reef and Hannah’s Reef in East Bay and the large Sabine Reef in Sabine Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Status and Historical Trends of Seagrass in the CCBNEP Study
    Current Status and Historical Trends of Seagrass in the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Study Area Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program CCBNEP-20 • October 1997 This project has been funded in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement #CE-9963-01-2 to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. The contents of this document do not necessarily represent the views of the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, nor do the contents of this document necessarily constitute the views or policy of the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Management Conference or its members. The information presented is intended to provide background information, including the professional opinion of the authors, for the Management Conference deliberations while drafting official policy in the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP). The mention of trade names or commercial products does not in any way constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use. Current Status and Historical Trends of Seagrasses in the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Study Area Warren Pulich, Jr., Ph.D. Catherine Blair Coastal Studies Program Texas Parks & Wildlife Department 3000 IH 35 South Austin, Texas 78704 and William A. White The University of Texas at Austin Bureau of Economic Geology University Station Box X Austin, Texas 78713 Publication CCBNEP - 20 October 1997 Policy Committee Commissioner John Baker Mr. Jerry Clifford Policy Committee Chair Policy Committee Vice-Chair Texas Natural Resource Conservation Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6 Commission The Honorable Vilma Luna Commissioner Ray Clymer State Representative Texas Parks and Wildlife Department The Honorable Carlos Truan Commissioner Garry Mauro Texas Senator Texas General Land Office The Honorable Josephine Miller Commissioner Noe Fernandez County Judge, San Patricio County Texas Water Development Board The Honorable Loyd Neal Mr.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Oyster Restoration in the Gulf of Mexico Proposals from the Nature Conservancy 2018 COVER PHOTO © RICHARD BICKEL / the NATURE CONSERVANCY
    Oyster Restoration in the Gulf of Mexico Proposals from The Nature Conservancy 2018 COVER PHOTO © RICHARD BICKEL / THE NATURE CONSERVANCY Oyster Restoration in the Gulf of Mexico Proposals from The Nature Conservancy 2018 Oyster Restoration in the Gulf of Mexico Proposals from The Nature Conservancy 2018 Robert Bendick Director, Gulf of Mexico Program Bryan DeAngelis Program Coordinator and Marine Scientist, North America Region Seth Blitch Director of Coastal and Marine Conservation, Louisiana Chapter Introduction and Purpose The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has long been engaged in oyster restoration, as oysters and oyster reefs bring multiple benefits to coastal ecosystems and to the people and communities in coastal areas. Oysters constitute an important food source and provide significant direct and indirect sources of income to Gulf of Mexico coastal communities. According to the Strategic Framework for Oyster Restoration Activities drafted by the Region-wide Trustee Implementation Group for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (June 2017), oyster reefs not only supply oysters for market but also (1) serve as habitat for a diversity of marine organisms, from small invertebrates to large, recreationally and commercially important species; (2) provide structural integrity that reduces shoreline erosion, and (3) improve water quality and help recycle nutrients by filtering large quantities of water. The vast numbers of oysters historically present in the Gulf played a key role in the health of the overall ecosystem. The dramatic decline of oysters, estimated at 50–85% from historic levels throughout the Gulf (Beck et al., 2010), has damaged the stability and productivity of the Gulf’s estuaries and harmed coastal economies.
    [Show full text]
  • Beach and Bay Access Guide
    Texas Beach & Bay Access Guide Second Edition Texas General Land Office Jerry Patterson, Commissioner The Texas Gulf Coast The Texas Gulf Coast consists of cordgrass marshes, which support a rich array of marine life and provide wintering grounds for birds, and scattered coastal tallgrass and mid-grass prairies. The annual rainfall for the Texas Coast ranges from 25 to 55 inches and supports morning glories, sea ox-eyes, and beach evening primroses. Click on a region of the Texas coast The Texas General Land Office makes no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information depicted on these maps, or the data from which it was produced. These maps are NOT suitable for navigational purposes and do not purport to depict or establish boundaries between private and public land. Contents I. Introduction 1 II. How to Use This Guide 3 III. Beach and Bay Public Access Sites A. Southeast Texas 7 (Jefferson and Orange Counties) 1. Map 2. Area information 3. Activities/Facilities B. Houston-Galveston (Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, Harris, and Matagorda Counties) 21 1. Map 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities C. Golden Crescent (Calhoun, Jackson and Victoria Counties) 1. Map 79 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities D. Coastal Bend (Aransas, Kenedy, Kleberg, Nueces, Refugio and San Patricio Counties) 1. Map 96 2. Area Information 3. Activities/Facilities E. Lower Rio Grande Valley (Cameron and Willacy Counties) 1. Map 2. Area Information 128 3. Activities/Facilities IV. National Wildlife Refuges V. Wildlife Management Areas VI. Chambers of Commerce and Visitor Centers 139 143 147 Introduction It’s no wonder that coastal communities are the most densely populated and fastest growing areas in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • U N S U U S E U R a C S
    WALLER MONTGOMERY Prairie S 6 2 1 t DISTRICT 8 H 3 MONTGOMERY 4 View w 6 y Tomball y Waller DISTRICT East Fork San w H Jacinto River t StLp 494 Dayton LEE Spring 8 S S China tH Pine Island w Liberty Ames y Nome 7 DISTRICT y S Devers 1 7 w t 3 H H 2 59 w S 1 y y 10 w t LIBERTY H H 9 2 Smithville t 5 4 w 1 S y Hempstead 9 Eastex y w Fwy 3 H 6 Hwy Atascocita DISTRICT S S S t H wy 159 DISTRICT t tH 9 Industry S 5 Lake Houston H 2 w 1 y 110th Congress of the United States w t y S Hw y w 7 tH y w Humble H y 1 w 15 t H 18 1 y 159 9 t on 4 4 S m u 6 JEFFERSON 0 a 3 e 1 y 71 Bellville B 6 w StHwy N y o w tH DISTRICT rt h H S we S t s t S Cedar Creek Reservoir t F Jersey L w p 10 y Village 8 Old River- 6 ( Crosby N Winfree y Aldine La Grange o w Fayetteville r H t t h S y B Hw e nt 4 StHwy 36 o r l eaum 2 WALLER t B e ) 1 v Sheldon i y Lake Charlotte Hw Lost R t Barrett S Lake y t C i e n 5 DISTRICT HARRIS d Mont a ri 9 r B Belvieu T y San Jacinto yu w 7 StHwy 73 H River t Beaumont S Hwy Cloverleaf 1 Winnie Pattison Hilshire 6 Highlands Lake Katy Village y Spring Cove Cotton Lake Anahuac w H StHwy 65 S Channelview t t Valley H S w San Hwy Jacinto Stowell BASTROP y Brookshire 7 1 Felipe Katy Blvd City Hedwig Village Hunters Old Alligator Sealy Fwy Creek River Bayou Anahuac Village Baytown CALDWELL Houston Piney Beach Bunker Hill e Scott Bay Point d Galena i 6 City Village Village West University s 4 Cinco y Park DISTRICT 1 a Dr Bessies Cr ) Place y AUSTIN Ranch y W w w H FAYETTE k 29 t P S Ma Columbus FM n adena Fwy CHAMBERS in o as S P Weimar FM
    [Show full text]
  • Bayous and Galveston Bay Report Card - with Additional Details
    Bayous and Galveston Bay Report Card - With Additional Details Water Recreation Safety (fecal bacteria): Bayous: C Galveston Bay: A Action Items: Report sewage spills, collect pet waste, proper maintenance of septic and aerobic on-site sewage treatment, and pump out boat sewage in designated facilities Dissolved Oxygen (aquatic life health): Bayous: A Galveston Bay: A Action Items: preserve and restore habitats by planting native plants and removing invasive, exotic species; slow runoff by reducing paved areas, use rain gardens and rainfall harvesting Phosphorus (eutrophication/ algae blooms): Bayous: C Galveston Bay: B Action Items: Proper use of fertilizers, use of slow release and organic plant fertilizers; avoid or reduce phosphates in cleaning products Nitrogen (eutrophication/ algae blooms): Bayous: A Galveston Bay: B Action Items: Proper use of fertilizers, use of slow release and organic plant fertilizers Litter and Trash (wildlife entanglement/ingestion, aesthetics): Bayous: I Galveston Bay: I Action Items: Participate in clean-ups, clean your surroundings, report littering and illegal dumping, dispose of trash properly and encourage others to do the same Grades: A = Excellent B = Good C = Adequate for now D = Requires Action F = Critical I = Insufficient Data (since Texas does not measure floatable debris as a water quality standard in the manner it does other pollutants) For additional details on this report card, see the Details below. Additional details on the Galveston Bay conditions and grading methodology are at: www.galvbaygrade.org
    [Show full text]
  • St. Andrew Bay
    St. Andrew Bay By Michael S. Brim1 and Lawrence R. Handley2 Background St. Andrew Bay is unique because of its wealth of biological diversity. Keppner (2002) documented the diversity St. Andrew Bay has a watershed of approximately associated with the bay and compared it with surveys of 297,576 ha (735,300 acres, or 1,149 mi2) (Beck and others, Indian River Lagoon, Fla., which has been touted as the most 2000) (fig. 1). The bay is almost entirely within Bay County, biologically diverse estuary in North America. His report an area of over 2,590 km2 (1,000 mi2), which has a resident documents 2,913 species of plants and animals associated with population of more than 148,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). St. Andrew Bay, nearly 400 more species than found in Panama City is the largest of seven municipalities surrounding the lagoon. the bay. Much of the county, however, is unincorporated land The bay is, however, a fragile ecosystem. Because traditionally supporting silviculture. of its high-salinity waters, the depths of the bay, the lack The primary industries in Bay County are tourism and the of significant freshwater inflow from land drainage, and military, with Tyndall Air Force Base playing a dominant role the minimal tidal regime, the bay is highly susceptible to in the community. The U.S. Navy’s Coastal Systems Station becoming polluted or contaminated. Chemicals and nutrients and the U.S. Coast Guard also share the bay’s shoreline. are not readily flushed from this bay, and the nature of the Most tourist activity occurs on Panama City Beach or upon deep sediments (rich in fine clays, silt, and organic carbon) bay waters.
    [Show full text]
  • The Texas Shrimp Fishery
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Texas Shrimp Fishery A report to the Governor and the 77th Legislature of Texas SEPTEMBER 2002 September 1, 2002 commissioners The Honorable Rick Perry Katharine Armstrong Idsal Chairman, San Antonio Governor of Texas Ernest Angelo, Jr. Vice-Chairman, Midland P. O. Box 12428 John Avila, Jr. Austin, Texas 78711 Fort Worth Joseph B.C. Fitzsimons San Antonio The Honorable Members of the Alvin L. Henry 77th Legislature Houston State Capitol Building Philip Montgomery Dallas Austin, Texas 78711 Donato D. Ramos Laredo Kelly W. Rising, M.D. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: Beaumont Mark E. Watson, Jr. San Antonio I respectfully submit a report titled “The Texas Shrimp Fishery.” Lee M. Bass This report is submitted pursuant to the provisions of Chairman-Emeritus Fort Worth Section 77.005 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. Robert L. Cook Executive Director Your continued support of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department programs is very much appreciated. Sincerely, Robert L. Cook Executive Director To manage and conserve the natural and cultural RLC:RKR:klp resources of Texas and to provide hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation cc: Parks and Wildlife Commissioners opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. 4200 SMITH SCHOOL ROAD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744-3291 512-389-4800 www.tpwd.state.tx.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Texas Shrimp Fishery INTRODUCTION . .1 SHRIMP LIFE HISTORY . .2 Brown Shrimp . .2 White Shrimp . .3 Pink Shrimp . .3 HISTORY OF MANAGEMENT . .4 Fishery Management Plan . .4 Limited Entry and Buyback . .4 SHRIMP HABITAT . .6 Description of Texas Coastal and Marine Habitat . .6 Status and Trends of Texas Coastal Wetlands .
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
    United States Region VI EPA/906/R-98/002 Environmental Protection Ecosystems Protection Branch June 1998 Agency 6WQ-E Galveston Bay 1993 Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (This page is intentionally blank) EPA/906/R-98/002 Regional Environmental Monitoring And Assessment Program Galveston Bay 1993 June 1998 By Cynthia Gorham-Test U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 Ecosystems Protection Branch 6WQ-E 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202 (This page is intentionally blank) The R-EMAP Galveston Bay Study is a follow-up study of the EMAP-Estuaries: Louisiana Province Studies. Several comparisons are made between data collected and analyzed in this report and that of the following citation: Macauley J.M., J.K. Summers, V.D. Engle, P.T. Heitmuller, and A.M. Adams. 1995. Annual Statistical Summary: EMAP-Estuaries Louisianian Province - 1993. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Offices of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL. EPA/620/R-96/003. R-EMAP and EMAP data are available at http://www.epa.gov/emap iv Acknowledgments EPA Region 6, Water Quality Division U.S. EPA, ORD, Gulf Breeze Lab Jeff Catanzarita Virginia Engle Phil Crocker Tom Heitmuller Norm Dyer John Macauley Evan Hornig Kevin Summers Angel Kosfizer James Stiebing U.S. EPA, ORD, EMAP Kenneth Teague Rick Linthurst Gulf Coast Research Group at USM IMS University of Mississippi Richard Heard Carol Cleveland Tom Lytle Gary Gaston Ervin Otvos Chet Rakocinski William Walker Texas A&M University, Geochemical and Environmental Research Group Bob Pressley Terry Wade Texas Research and Analysis Corporation Barbara Albrecht Jerri Brecken-Folse Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission George Guillen Steve Twidwell v Table of Contents Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]