DOCSLIB.ORG

Wildlife & Watershed Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wildlife & Watershed Planning Wildlife & Watershed Planning Kevin Wagner, PhD WPPs & TMDLs Addressing Non-Domesticated Species (Wildlife) Wildlife Measures in 10 of 11 EPA Accepted WPPs Attoyac Bayou Buck Creek Cypress Creek Geronimo & Alligator Creeks Lake Granbury Lampasas River Leon River Plum Creek Upper Cibolo Creek Upper San Antonio River Wildlife Measures Included in TMDL Implementation Plans Copano Bay Dickinson Bayou Gilleland Creek Guadalupe River above Canyon Texas BST Studies To Date 5-Way Split (averages based on findings in 10 watersheds) Non-Avian Avian Wildlife Wildlife 32% 18% Pets Unidentified 5% 11% All Livestock Human 24% 10% Mean Background Levels in Runoff Fecal Coliform E. coli Site (#/100 mL) (cfu/100 mL) Reference Ungrazed pasture 10,000 Robbins et al. 1972 Ungrazed pasture 6,600 Doran et al. 1981 Control plots 6,800 Guzman et al. 2010 Pasture destocked >2 mos. 1,000-10,000 Collins et al. 2005 Ungrazed pasture 6,200-11,000 Wagner et al. 2012 Pasture destocked >2 wks. 2,200-6,000 Wagner et al. 2012 Impacts of Migratory Wildlife E. coli concentrations at ungrazed site BB1 (2009-2010) Date BB1 BB2 BB3 300,000 3/13/09 140 3/25/09 1,200 250,000 3/26/09 1,000 7,200 /100 mL) 3/27/09 2,000 200,000 cfu 4/17/09 1,155 980 450 4/18/09 4,400 2,225 2,100 150,000 4/28/09 7,600 12,200 24,000 100,000 10/4/09 57,000 5,114 3,065 Concentration ( 10/9/09 36,000 24,043 15,000 coli 50,000 10/13/09 42,851 23,826 5,591 E. 10/22/09 172,500 - 10/26/09 261,000 181,000 45,000 Jul-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Feb-10 Jun-09 Mar-10 Oct-09 Apr-09 Sep-09 Dec-09 May-10 Aug-09 Mar-09 Nov-09 May-09 >80% of E. coli loading from wildlife at 3 sites in 2009 E. coli in edge-of-field runoff (Harmel) Species in Texas >680 Wildlife Species ◉ >140 mammals ◉ >540 bird species > 15 domesticated species Dog Sheep Pig Goat Cattle Cat Chicken Donkey Duck Horse Llama Alpaca Ferret Turkey Rabbit 1 Human species Challenges Obtaining population data ◉ Impacts Source Survey & Modeling ◉ Impacts Load Allocations & BMPs Selected/Implemented Identifying & implementing appropriate management measures Communicating with & keeping stakeholders engaged Sources of animal density data Livestock Texas Agricultural Statistics USDA Census of Agriculture Deer Density Sources TPWD County Biologists http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/landwater/land/habitats/county/ TPWD Publications Lockwood, M. (2005). White-tailed Deer Population Trends. Pineywoods Deer Herd Status Report ◉ http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_bk_w7000_0088a.pdf The Post Oak Savannah Deer Herd Past, Present, Future ◉ http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_w7000_0237b.pdf Frio County White-tailed Deer Population Data ◉ http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/landwater/land/habitats/southtx_plain/regulatory/pop_trends/frio_pop.phtml White-tailed Deer Management In The Texas Hill Country ◉ http://www.texasconservation.org/resources/pwd_rp_w7000_0828.pdf Guidelines for White-tailed Deer Management in the Crosstimbers & Prairies Region of North TX ◉ http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_w7000_1133.pdf Deer Densities Reported In WPPs Upper Llano – 10.1 ac/deer Copano Bay – 13.5 ac/deer Leon River – 27.5 ac/deer ◉ RMU23 – 56.6/1000 ac ◉ RMU24 – 8.4/1000 ac Buck Creek – 36 ac/deer Plum Creek – 127 ac/deer Feral Hog Density Data Sources TPWD County Biologists http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/landwater/land/habitats/county/ Stakeholder group Published studies in Texas Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources. 2012. Feral Hog Population Growth, Density & Harvest in Texas. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Publication SP-472, August 2012. Adkins & Haveson. 2007. Demographic and spatial characteristics of feral hogs in the Chihuahuan Desert, Texas. Human–Wildlife Conflicts 1(2):152–160, Fall 2007 Harveson, L. A., M. E. Tewes, N. J. Silvy, J. D. Hillje, and J. Rutledge. 2000. Prey use by mountain lions in southern Texas. Southwestern Naturalist 45:472–476. Ilse, L. M., and E. C. Hellgren. 1995. Resource partitioning in sympatric populations of collared peccaries and feral hogs in southern Texas. Journal of Mammalogy 76:784– 789. Other Published Studies on Feral Hogs Mapston, M. E. 2004, May. Feral hogs in Texas. Publication B-6149. College Station: Texas Cooperative Extension, Wildlife Services. Reidy, M. M. 2007. Efficacy of electric fencing to inhibit feral pig movements and evaluation of population estimation techniques. Thesis. Kingsville, Texas: Texas A&M University-Kingsville. Rollo, S., L. D. Highfield, and M. P. Ward. 2007. A novel estimation method for predicting spatial density of feral swine using ecological data. GISVET ’07 – Pre Conference Draft. College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University, Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences. Taylor, R. 1991. The feral hog in Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Federal Aid Report Series No. 28. Project W-125-R. 20 pp. University of Georgia. 1993. Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study. Feral Hog Densities Reported In WPPs Feral hog densities range from 12-26 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Plum Creek – 12 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Leon River – 18.9 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Copano Bay watershed – 19.2 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Upper Llano – 21.3 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Geronimo Creek – 25 hogs/sq. mi. ◉ Buck Creek – 25.6 hogs/sq. mi. Other animal species Density data difficult to find or nonexistent E. coli conc. in feces of many species unknown BST currently best approach Non-avian wildlife contributions (Parker et al. 2013) Implications/questions of wildlife being identified as significant source of E. coli Implications: Background/wildlife loadings need to be considered when: ◉ Developing TMDLs and watershed based plans ◉ And possibly when applying water quality standards Ignoring background/wildlife contributions may lead to: ◉ Inaccurate load allocations and reductions ◉ Nonattainment of water quality standards Questions remain including: How do we better integrate background/wildlife loadings into water quality management? What can/should we do to address wildlife loads? Goals for today are to discuss: Wildlife Populations in Texas Better Integrating Wildlife Into Planning & Implementation Current Approaches for Addressing Wildlife Sources Watershed Coordinator Experience in Addressing Wildlife Funding for Implementing Wildlife Management Measures Other Approaches for Addressing Wildlife Contributions .
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]
  • Lampasas River Watershed Final Report
    Texas Water Resources Institute TR-442 April 2013 Bacterial Source Tracking to Support the Development and Implementation of Watershed Protection Plans for the Lampasas and Leon Rivers Lampasas River Watershed Final Report L. Gregory, E. Casarez, J. Truesdale, G. Di Giovanni, R. Owen, J. Wolfe Bacterial Source Tracking to Support the Development and Implementation of Watershed Protection Plans for the Lampasas and Leon Rivers Lampasas River Watershed Final Report Funding provided through a Texas State General Revenue Grant from the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board TSSWCB Project 10-51 Authored By: Lucas Gregory1, Elizabeth Casarez2, Joy Truesdale2, George Di Giovanni2, Tony Owen3, and June Wolfe3 1Texas A&M AgriLife Research– Texas Water Resource Institute 2University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health El Paso Regional Campus 3Texas A&M AgriLife Research - Blackland Research and Extension Center Texas Water Resources Institute Technical Report 442 April 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................... iv Tables ........................................................................................................................................................... v Figures ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Projects in Texas (2000 - 2012)
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation - Projects in Texas (2000 - 2012) Award NFWF NFWF Non- Grantee NFWF Total Project Fiscal EZG# Project Title Grantee Project Description Federal Federal Matching Location Award Funds Year Funds Funds Funds Short Grass Prairie Protect, restore and enhance shortgrass prairie, LPC Conservation in The Nature habitat, and playas in the southeastern New Mexico and 2013 34736 $60,000 $60,000 $50,000 $110,000 New Mexico; Texas New Mexico and Conservancy Texas focal area and implement public education and Texas outreach activities. Aerial Survey Western The Lesser Prairie Chicken Interstate Working Group will Assessment of Association of Fish use the newly developed range-wide aerial survey to Colorado; Kansas; New 2013 35249 $125,000 $125,000 $250,000 $375,000 Lesser Prairie and Wildlife assess Farm Bill Programs for each of the 15X15 km Mexico; Oklahoma; Texas Chicken (LPC) Agencies survey blocks. Assess the abundance of Guadalupe Bass in the San Antonio River basin and re-introduce the species on the San Antonio River Upper San Antonio River in Texas. Project, which Basin Guadalupe San Antonio River supports the goals of the Southeast Aquatic Resources 2012 31188 Bass Assessment $44,201 $44,201 $300,000 $344,201 Texas Authority Partnership as part of the National Fish Habitat Action and Re- Plan, will restore aquatic and riparian habitats, expand of introduction (TX) the range and distribution of Guadalupe Bass, and improve the biotic integrity of the San Antonio River. Continue to reduce the gaps in knowledge of American Texas American Gulf Coast Bird Oystercatcher population status and breeding 2012 30267 Oystercatcher $134,975 $67,487 $67,487 $134,989 $269,964 Texas Observatory parameters, and begin implementation of conservation Conservation strategies on the Texas Gulf Coast.
    [Show full text]
  • TPWD Strategic Planning Regions
    River Basins TPWD Brazos River Basin Brazos-Colorado Coastal Basin W o lf Cr eek Canadian River Basin R ita B l anca C r e e k e e ancar Cl ita B R Strategic Planning Colorado River Basin Colorado-Lavaca Coastal Basin Canadian River Cypress Creek Basin Regions Guadalupe River Basin Nor t h F o r k of the R e d R i ver XAmarillo Lavaca River Basin 10 Salt Fork of the Red River Lavaca-Guadalupe Coastal Basin Neches River Basin P r air i e Dog To w n F o r k of the R e d R i ver Neches-Trinity Coastal Basin ® Nueces River Basin Nor t h P e as e R i ve r Nueces-Rio Grande Coastal Basin Pease River Red River Basin White River Tongue River 6a Wi chita R iver W i chita R i ver Rio Grande River Basin Nor t h Wi chita R iver Little Wichita River South Wichita Ri ver Lubbock Trinity River Sabine River Basin X Nor t h Sulphur R i v e r Brazos River West Fork of the Trinity River San Antonio River Basin Brazos River Sulphur R i v e r South Sulphur River San Antonio-Nueces Coastal Basin 9 Clear Fork Tr Plano San Jacinto River Basin X Cypre ss Creek Garland FortWorth Irving X Sabine River in San Jacinto-Brazos Coastal Basin ity Rive X Clea r F o r k of the B r az os R i v e r XTr n X iityX RiverMesqu ite Sulphur River Basin r XX Dallas Arlington Grand Prai rie Sabine River Trinity River Basin XAbilene Paluxy River Leon River Trinity-San Jacinto Coastal Basin Chambers Creek Brazos River Attoyac Bayou XEl Paso R i c h land Cr ee k Colorado River 8 Pecan Bayou 5a Navasota River Neches River Waco Angelina River Concho River X Colorado River 7 Lampasas
    [Show full text]
  • Distributional Surveys of Freshwater Bivalves in Texas: Progress Report for 1999
    DISTRIBUTIONAL SURVEYS OF FRESHWATER BIVALVES IN TEXAS: PROGRESS REPORT FOR 1999 by Robert G. Howells MANAGEMENT DATA SERIES No. 170 2000 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 (TPWD) Inland Fisheries Research and Management offices assisted with surveys and collections of freshwater mussels. Pam Baker (Kerrville, Texas) assisted the HOH staff with collections on the Pecos River and the Rio Grande. Baldo Loya (Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, Mission, Texas) assisted with survey efforts in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Volunteers also collected mussel survey data; these included: Marv Eisthen (Dallas, Texas) examined Lake Lewisville, Mike Hernandez and other Brazos River Authority staff members (Waco, Texas) examined a number of sites in the Central Brazos River drainage; A. Tucker Davis (Dallas, Texas) used SCUBA to survey sites near Dallas; Dan Warren and Charles Keith (Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission, Abilene, Texas) examined a site on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River; Roe Davenport (San Antonio, Texas) examined sites the central and lower Brazos River and lower Rio Grande; Melba Sexton (Luling, Texas) reported on specimens found in the San Marcos River; Steve Ansley and other U.S. Geological Survey (Austin, Texas) personnel provided information on sites on the Rio Grande and also joined with TPWD to examine other areas in Big Bend; Sally Strong, Bernice Speer and Betsin Maxim
    [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]
  • Gazetteer of Streams of Texas
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 448 GAZETTEER OF STREAMS OF TEXAS PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF GLENN A. GRAY WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT FEINTING OFFICE 1919 GAZETTEER OF STREAMS OF TEXAS. Prepared under the direction of GLENN A. GRAY. INTRODUCTION. The following pages contain a gazetteer of streams, lakes, and ponds as shown by the topographic maps of Texas which were pre­ pared by the United States Geological Survey and, in areas not covered by the topographic maps, by State of Texas county maps and the post-route map of Texas. For many streams a contour map of Texas, prepared in 1899 by Robert T. Hill, was consulted, as well as maps compiled by private surveys, engineering corporations, the State Board of Water Engineers, and the International Boundary Commission. An effort has been made to eliminate errors where practicable by personal reconnaissance. All the descriptions are based on the best available maps, and their accuracy therefore depends on that of the maps. Descriptions of streams in the central part of the State, adjacent to the Bio Grande above Brewster County, and in parts of Brewster, Terrell, Bowie, Casg, Btirleson, Brazos, Grimes, Washington, Harris, Bexar, Wichita, Wilbarger, Montague, Coke, and Graysoh counties were compiled by means of topographic maps and are of a good degree of accuracy. It should be understood, however, that all statements of elevation, length, and fall are roughly approximate. The Geological Survey topographic maps used are cited in the de­ scriptions of the streams and are listed below.
    [Show full text]
  • LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513
    LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 IMPROVED RANCH | FOR SALE LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER OFFERING SUMMARY Sales Price $998,000 Price/AC $8,790/AC Subject Property Highlights • Less than 3 miles from Interstate 35 just south of Belton Leon River • 4,000’ of frontage on the spectacular Leon River • Diverse mixture of woods and cropland • Several single family residences with lots of potential FM 436 3 Forks Rd LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER PROPERTY INFORMATION Size 113.53 AC North side of FM 436, approximately 3 miles Location east of Interstate 35 just south of Belton 2,490 SF main residence built in 1974, 1,166 SF Improvements home constructed in 2003, numerous older barns 30’ of frontage along FM 436 with long Frontage/Access driveway leading to the property Topography/ Heavily wooded along the south side and the Water Features Leon River with about a 40 acre dry crop field Wildlife Deer, turkey, hogs, ducks and dove Approximately 45% is in the flood Flood Plain plain along the Leon River Owner believes to own 100% of the Minerals mineral estate, minerals are negotiable LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER Subject Virginia Wallace Texas, 120.18 AC +/- Virginia Wallace Texas, 120.18 AC +/- LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER Flood Plain Map 100 Year 500 Year Unmapped/ Stream, House Cabin Boundary Floodway Special River/Creek Subject Floodplain Floodplain Not Intermittent Water Body The information contained herein was obtained from sources Aaron Morris deemed to be reliable.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Geological Survey
    DEFARTM KUT OF THE 1STEK1OK BULLETIN OK THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY No. 19O S F, GEOGRAPHY, 28 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1902 UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR GAZETTEEK OF TEXAS BY HENRY G-A-NNETT WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1902 CONTENTS Page. Area .................................................................... 11 Topography and drainage..... ............................................ 12 Climate.................................................................. 12 Forests ...............................................................'... 13 Exploration and settlement............................................... 13 Population..............'................................................. 14 Industries ............................................................... 16 Lands and surveys........................................................ 17 Railroads................................................................. 17 The gazetteer............................................................. 18 ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. PF,ATE I. Map of Texas ................................................ At end. ry (A, Mean annual temperature.......:............................ 12 \B, Mean annual rainfall ........................................ 12 -ryj (A, Magnetic declination ........................................ 12 I B, Wooded areas............................................... 12 Density of population in 1850 ................................ 14 B, Density of population in 1860
    [Show full text]
  • FALL 1969 Bulletin 17 RAYMOND L
    BAYLOR FALL 1969 Bulletin 17 The Evolution of the Leon River System RAYMOND L JR. thinking is more important than elaborate FRANK PH.D. PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY BAYLOR UNIVERSITY 1929-1934 Objectives of Geological Training at Baylor The training of a geologist in a university covers but a few years; his education continues throughout his active The purposes of training geologists at Baylor University are to provide a sound basis of understanding and to foster a truly geological point of view, both of which are essential for continued pro­ fessional growth. The staff considers geology to be unique among sciences since it is primarily a field science. All geologic research in­ cluding that done in laboratories must be firmly supported by field observations. The student is encouraged to develop an inquiring objective attitude and to examine critically all geological concepts and principles. The development of a mature and professional attitude toward geology and geological research is a principal concern of the department. THE BAYLOR UNIVERSITY PRESS TEXAS BAYLOR GEOLOGICAL STUDIES BULLETIN NO. 17 The Geomorphic Evolution of the Leon River System RAYMOND L JR. BAYLOR UNIVERSITY Department of Geology Waco, Texas Fall, 1969 Baylor Geological Studies EDITORIAL STAFF Jean M. Spencer, M.S., Editor environmental and medical geology O. T. Hayward, Ph.D., Advisor, Cartographic Editor stratigraphy-sedimentation, structure, geophysics-petroleum, groundwater R. L. M.A., Business Manager archeology, geomorphology, vertebrate paleontology James W. Dixon, Jr., Ph.D. stratigraphy, paleontology, structure Walter T. Huang, Ph.D. mineralogy, petrology, metallic minerals Gustavo A. Morales, Ph.D. micropaleontology, stratigraphy STUDENT EDITORIAL STAFF Lawrence W.
    [Show full text]
  • Watershed Protection Plan for the Leon River Below Proctor Lake and Above Belton Lake
    Watershed Protection Plan for the Leon River Below Proctor Lake and Above Belton Lake Prepared for the Stakeholders of the Leon River Watershed by Parsons Water & Infrastructure Inc. and the Brazos River Authority PARSONS Funding for the development of this Watershed Protection Plan was provided by the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through a federal Clean Water Act §319(h) nonpoint source grant to the Brazos River Authority. This WPP is available on the Brazos River Authority website at: http://www.brazos.org/LeonRiverWPP.asp January 2015 Watershed Protection Plan for the Leon River Below Proctor Lake Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 : Introduction .............................................................................................................................1 1.1 Watershed Characteristics .........................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 5 1.1.2 Demographics and Economy ........................................................................................... 6 1.1.3 History .............................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Project Background ...................................................................................................................8 1.3 Elements of
    [Show full text]
  • Time of Travel of Translatory Waves on the Brazos, Leon, and Little
    TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPORT 115 TIME OF TRAVEL OF TRANSLATORY WAVES ON THE BRAZOS, LEON, AND LITTLE RIVERS, TEXAS By Willard B. Mills U.S. Geological Survey Prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperalion with rhe Te"as Water Development Board and lhe Brazos River Authority April 1970 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION 2 BRAZOS RIVER REACH 2 Description 2 Travel Time. 4 LEON, LITTLE, AND BRAZOS RIVERS REACH 5 Description 5 Travel Time. 5 Leon River Near Belton to Little River at Cameron 6 Little River at Cameron to Brazos River Near BrY<ln 7 REFERENCES CITED 14 TABLES 1. Stream-Gaging Stations in Operation on the Brazos River Reach During Period of Report 4 2, Travel Time of Peaks on the Brazos River .. 5 3. Stream-Gaging Stations in Operation on the Leon, Little, and Brazos Rivers Reach During Period of Report B 4. Travel Times in the Subreaches From Leon River Near Belton to Little River at Cameron 9 FIGURES 1. Map Showing Study Reaches and Locations of Gaging Stations in the Lower Brazos River Basin 3 2. Definition Sketches of Points for Which Travel Times Were Obtained From Gage-Height Charts 4 3. Graph Showing Relationship of Travel Time to Peak Discharge on the Brazos River From the Whitney Gaging Station to the Richmond Gaging Station 6 4. Graph Showing Travel Time of Peak Discharge on the Brazos River From the Whitney Gaging Station to the Waco Gaging Station 7 5. Graph Showing Travel Time of Peak Discharge on the Brazos River From the Waco Gaging Station to the Bryan Gaging Station 7 '" TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) Page 6.
    [Show full text]