Environmental Flows Under Texas Senate Bill 3:
Download
1 / 35

Environmental Flows Under Texas Senate Bill 3: Did We Leave Enough Water for the Fishes? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 142 Views
  • Uploaded on

Environmental Flows Under Texas Senate Bill 3: Did We Leave Enough Water for the Fishes? . Kirk Winemiller, Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University. • Texas Senate Bill 1 (1997) established regional water planning groups.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Environmental Flows Under Texas Senate Bill 3: Did We Leave Enough Water for the Fishes? ' - duc


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Environmental Flows Under Texas Senate Bill 3:

Did We Leave Enough Water for the Fishes?

Kirk Winemiller, Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University



• Senate Bill 2 (2001) mandated environmental flows research by natural resource agencies (TWDB, TPWD, TCEQ)

– established the Texas Instream Flow Program


• Senate Bill 3 of the 80 research by natural resource th Texas Legislature (2007) mandated formation of basin stakeholder groups and expert science teams to make environmental flow recommendations using best available information.


The research by natural resource focus is future water rights permitting.

Most rights were issued prior to 1985 and have no environmental protection.

Of the estimated 7500 rights, fewer than 15% include environmental restrictions.

So ….. the burden falls to post-1985 rights to protect environmental flows.


For the past 40 years, the state has relied upon simple desktop approaches for evaluating flow needs of rivers, streams and bays (Lyons Method, 7Q2, etc.).


The goal is to conserve the desktop timing, magnitude & durationof flow components that are essential features of the natural flow regime.


Texas SB 3 Process desktop for Establishing Environmental Flows

Lt. Governor- 3

E-flow

Standards

Speaker- 3

Governor- 3

TCEQ

Environmental Flows Advisory Group

9 members

Appoint

Environmental Flows Science Advisory Committee

9 members

Advise

Basin and Bay Area Stakeholders Committee

17+ Members

Appoint

Basin and Bay Expert Science Team


Texas SB 3 Process desktop for Establishing Environmental Flows

Speaker- 3

Governor- 3

Lt. Governor- 3

TCEQ

Environmental Flows Advisory Group

9 members

Appoint

Environmental Flows Science Advisory Committee

9 members

E-flow

Standards

Basin and Bay Area Stakeholders Committee

17+ Members

Advise

Appoint

Basin and Bay Expert Science Team


  • Basin and Bay Expert Science desktop Teams

    • shall develop environmental flow analyses and a recommended environmental flow regime for the river basin and bay system through a collaborative process designed to achieve a consensus


  • Basin and Bay Expert Science desktop Teams

    • shall develop environmental flow analyses and a recommended environmental flow regime for the river basin and bay system through a collaborative process designed to achieve a consensus

    • the science team must consider all reasonably available science, without regard to the need for the water for other uses


Science Team Biology Subcommittee desktop

Environmental Flows Recommendation

Village Creek near Kountze, USGS gage 08041500

  • Subsistence flows: 83 cfs Winter

  • 61 cfs Spring, Summer, Fall

  • Base flows:

  • Dry year: Winter 240 cfs, Spring 106 cfs, Summer 70 cfs, Fall 89 cfs

  • Average year: Winter 424 cfs, Spring 189 cfs, Summer 91 cfs, Fall 138 cfs

  • Wet year: Winter 672 cfs, Spring 335 cfs, Summer 135 cfs, Fall 236 cfs

  • High flow pulses*:

  • 2-per-season: Winter 2,010 cfs, Spring 1,380 cfs, Summer 341 cfs, Fall 712 cfs

  • 1-per-season: Winter 2,070 cfs, Spring 2,070 cfs, Summer 814 cfs, Fall 2,070 cfs

  • 1-per-2 years: 12,400 cfs

  • * high flow pulses have estimated volumes & durations; frequencies may not be attained every year.


SB3 Accomplishments for the Sabine & Neches Basins desktop

Flow Pulses for the Neches River at Evadale

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

1

X

0

Science team

TCEQ draft standard

TCEQ final standard

Stakeholder committee declined to propose

Stakeholder committee late submission


SB3 Accomplishments for the Trinity & San Jacinto Basins desktop

Flow Pulses for the Trinity River near Romayor

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

1

X

X

0

Science team-

regime group

Science team-

conditional group

TCEQ final standard

TCEQ draft standard

Stakeholder committee (regime)

Stakeholder committee (conditional)


SB3 Accomplishments for the Colorado & Lavaca Basins desktop

Flow Pulses for the Colorado River at Wharton

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

1

0

Science team

TCEQ draft standard

TCEQ final standard

Stakeholder committee


SB3 Accomplishments for the Guadalupe & San Antonio Basins desktop

Flow Pulses for the Guadalupe River at Victoria

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

1

0

Science team

&

Stakeholder committee

TCEQ draft standard

TCEQ final standard


SB3 Accomplishments for the Brazos Basin desktop

Flow Pulses for the Brazos River at Richmond

1,019,000

617,000

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

1

?

0

Stakeholder Committee

TCEQ standard

Science team


SB3 Accomplishments for the Brazos Basin desktop

Flow Pulses for the Brazos River at Richmond

1,019,000

617,000

5

4

3

Pulse/yr (acre feet x 105)

2

pulse required to connect a young oxbow in the region

1

?

0

Stakeholder Committee

TCEQ standard

Science team


Arguments for setting environmental flow standards lower than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:


Arguments for setting environmental flow standards lower than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• Water project X has been planned for my region, so the standards need to be low enough to allow that to go forward.


Arguments for setting environmental flow standards lower than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• Water project X has been planned for my region, so the standards need to be low enough to allow that to go forward.

• We can’t be sure these are the exact values that will satisfy environmental needs, but we know for sure we will need more water for municipal and industrial growth.


Arguments for setting environmental flow standards lower than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• Water project X has been planned for my region, so the standards need to be low enough to allow that to go forward.

• We can’t be sure these are the exact values that will satisfy environmental needs, but we know for sure we will need more water for municipal and industrial growth.

• It doesn’t matter if we set them too low, because, except during prolonged drought, it is impossible to divert all of the water from a river.


Arguments for setting environmental flow standards lower than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• Water project X has been planned for my region, so the standards need to be low enough to allow that to go forward.

• We can’t be sure these are the exact values that will satisfy environmental needs, but we know for sure we will need more water for municipal and industrial growth.

• It doesn’t matter if we set them too low because, except during prolonged drought, it is impossible to divert all of the water from a river.

• We don’t have to worry if we set standards too low right now, because we can adjust them later under the adaptive management plan.


SB3 definition of environmental flow regime: than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

“A schedule of flow quantities that reflects seasonal and yearly fluctuations that typically would vary geographically, by specific location in a watershed, and that are shown to be adequate to support a sound ecological environment and to maintain the productivity, extent, and persistence of key aquatic habitats in and along the affected water bodies.”


Saltwater barrier than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

on Lower Neches

River

Big Thicket Preserve

Lower Cypress Tract

MeadeWestvaco

paper mill effluent

receiving pond

City of Beaumont


Conclusion: than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• SB3 seemed like a reasonable attempt at a stakeholder-driven, science-based process to produce improved standards for environmental protection during water rights permitting.


Conclusion: than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• But the process broke down at nearly every step as powerful economic/political interests leveraged their positions to ensure that environmental flow protections were set as low as possible, thus having more water available for future appropriations.


Conclusion: than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• Certain stakeholders invoked adaptive management as an insurance policy –– mistakes can be corrected as new information comes forth.


Conclusion: than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:

• However, the promise of adaptive management also can be used to justify bad decisions that can result in severe and long-lasting impacts.


Rio Grande at Big Bend National Park than those advised by science teams and stakeholder committees:


ad