Appendices - h-gac.com€¦ · 177 DRAFT – Appendices Appendices APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY APPENDIX B:...

177 DRAFT – Appendices

Appendices

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

APPENDIX B: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MATERIALS

APPENDIX C: WORKSHOP FINDINGS REPORTS

APPENDIX D: PUBLIC COMMENT LOG

APPENDIX E: TECHNICAL CROSSWALK

APPENDIX F: BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX G: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

DRAFT – Appendix A: Glossary

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

abundance The number of individuals of a given species found in an area over a given time period.

algal bloom Population explosion of phytoplankton in response to optimal growth conditions, including nutrient over-enrichment from wastewater and nonpoint sources.

ambient Prevailing environmental conditions, as opposed to those measured in a laboratory or waste stream.

assemblage A subset of a taxonomic group located in a given area. Used in community ecology.

bacteria implementation group (BIG)

Thirty-member committee preparing an implementation plan to remedy high levels of bacteria in waterways identified in four TMDL projects in the Houston Region.

benthic Of, relating to, or occurring at the bottom of a body of water.

best management practice Pollution-control techniques applied to waste disposal, spill control, site runoff, and other activities. Implemented to prevent or reduce the amount of pollutants entering a water body.

biodiversity Degree of variability in the living world. The term can describe the number of species, the amount of genetic variation, or the number of community types present in a given area.

biomagnification The concentration of toxins in an organism resulting from ingestion of other plants or animals in which the toxins are more widely disbursed.

brackish The mixture of saltwater and fresh water in estuaries. Salinity can range from 0.5 to 35 parts per thousand.

coastal prairie A native habitat consisting of a mixture of upland and wetland geomorphology, hydrology, and vegetation located along the Gulf Coastal Plain.

colonial nesting The propensity for some bird species, e.g., most egrets and herons, to nest in dense colonies.

community An assemblage of various plant and animal species that share a given habitat at the same time.

competition Rivalry by multiple individuals or populations in pursuit of a limited resource (e.g., food or space).

conservation easement An agreement between a landowner and a government authority or qualified land trust for conserving habitat. The agreement restricts the way in which a land parcel can be used in the future.

conservation Management that preserves, protects, and restores natural resources (e.g., habitat) in the presence of social and economic needs.

contact recreation Activities that are presumed to involve a significant risk of ingestion of water (e.g., wading by children, swimming, water skiing, diving, tubing, surfing, handfishing as defined by Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, §66.115).

cordgrass Any member of the genus Spartina; a partially submerged wetland plant common to brackish and salt marshes of the Gulf Coast.

delta An exposed or submerged deposit of stream-borne sediments found at the mouths of rivers.

dermo A disease of oysters caused by the parasitic protozoan Perkinsus marinus.


dioxins

A class of chemical contaminants formed during combustion processes such as waste incineration, forest fires, and backyard trash burning, as well as during some industrial processes, such as paper-pulp bleaching and herbicide manufacturing.

dissolved oxygen (DO) Oxygen dissolved in water that is necessary for the survival of most aquatic life.

diversity A measure of the variety of living things in a community, based upon one of several mathematical formulae which account for both numbers of species and numbers of individuals within species.

dredge and fill The movement of sediments from one location to another, typically for navigation channel maintenance, shoreline development, or habitat-restoration activities. Dredge-and-fill activities typically require a Section 10/404 permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

E. coli Escherichia coli is a subgroup of fecal coliform bacteria that is present in the intestinal tracts and feces of warm-blooded animals. It is used as an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens. E. coli is currently an accepted indicator of contamination in freshwater.

ecological services (ecosystem services)

Human benefits arising from the ecological functions of ecosystems (e.g., fisheries harvests, nature tourism, and provision of clean water).

ecosystem approach Management of ecological systems that integrates ecological, social, and economic goals and recognizes humans as key components of the ecosystem.

ecosystem A natural system that includes the totality of living things, their physical environment, and the interrelationships among them.

ecotourism Tourism involving travel to areas of natural or ecological interest for observing wildlife and learning about the environment, e.g., birdwatching.

education

Refers to efforts to increase the knowledge of specific audiences through intentional, structured communications or trainings. Specific audiences might include K-12 students, college students, teachers and instructors at all academic levels, or adult members of the public.

effluent Wastewater discharged from any point source prior to entering a water body.

emergent wetlands Marshes in which vegetation is rooted underwater and the tops exposed (as contrasted with submerged vegetation or upland habitats).

Enterococcus

A subgroup of fecal streptococci bacteria (mainly Streptococcus faecalis and Streptococcus faecium) that is present in the intestinal tracts and feces of warm-blooded animals. It is used as an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens. Enterococcus is currently an accepted indicator of contamination in saltwater.

estuary A coastal, semi-enclosed body of water within which saltwater from the sea mixes with freshwater from land drainage.

eutrophication Nutrient over-enrichment of a water body resulting in overgrowth of algae, frequently followed by algae die offs and oxygen depletion.


fecal coliform

A portion of the coliform bacteria group that is present in the intestinal tracts and feces of warm-blooded animals; heat tolerant bacteria from other sources can sometimes be included. It is used as an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens

finfish Fish, as opposed to shellfish.

food chain A series of interconnected feeding relationships; the process of energy capture (by green plants) and successive transfer to grazers (primary consumers) and predators (secondary consumers and above).

food web The network of trophic relationships in an ecosystem; a complex network of food chain interactions.

fragmentation The breaking up of large expanses of habitat into smaller tracts,

freshwater inflow Freshwater that flows into an estuary from rivers, streams, and creeks, including the contribution of wastewater effluent discharges, return flows, and stormwater runoff into the bay and its tributaries.

habitat The place in the environment where an organism lives or can be found.

impairments Water quality that fails to meet surface water quality standards for rivers, lakes, and estuaries, as defined by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

impervious surface Land surface with a low capacity for soil infiltration, e.g., parking lots or roadways. Degrades water quality by increasing surface runoff and the quantity of nonpoint source pollution.

impingement The accumulation of organisms on a water-intake screen, e.g., at a power-plant cooling-water intake.

indicator bacteria Types of bacteria used to detect and estimate the level of fecal contamination of water.

inflow The water feeding an estuary, generally referring to river sources.

inlet A channel of water between adjacent barrier islands that connects a bay with the open ocean.

intertidal The portion of shoreline exposed at low tide and inundated by high tide.

invasive species Nonnative species that establish, reproduce, and spread in the region to which they were introduced.

jetty An artificial structure that projects into a body of water and is used to direct water currents or accommodate maritime vessels.

landings The part of fishing vessel’s fisheries catch that is brought ashore. Landings are the total catch minus the discards.

loading

The rate of introduction of a constituent (e.g., contaminant) to a receiving water, for example in pounds per day. Loading is significant in relation to the volume and circulation of the receiving water; problems occur when high loadings occur into receiving waters with limited assimilative capacity.

microbiological Pertaining to biology that deals with microorganisms.

microplastics Small plastic particles in the environment, defined by NOAA as less than 5 mm in diameter.

microscopic Too small to be seen by the unaided eye but large enough to be studied under a microscope.

most probable number (MPN) A method of measuring the concentration of fecal coliform bacteria in a water sample.


National Estuary Program (NEP) A nonregulatory program of the U.S. EPA that encompasses 28 estuaries of national importance. It requires that each estuary develop a comprehensive conservation and management plan. Its goal is to improve the quality of the nation’s estuaries.

nonpoint source (NPS) Any source other than a point source; any of a number of diffuse, land-based sources of constituents (including pollutants) in water, which are generally transported in runoff from precipitation. Contrasts with point source pollutants, or end-of-the-pipe constituents generally transported in wastewater from a discrete source.

nursery areas Portions of the estuary where marine species spend their early life stages, fulfilling requirements for adequate food and protection from predators. Examples include emergent marshes and seagrass beds.

outfall A site where there is a point loading of domestic, industrial, or heat wastes to an aquatic system; a discharge point for a wastewater stream, e.g., a sewage treatment plant or refinery.

outreach Any attempt to engage the public, stakeholders, or partners in activities or discussions that enhance connection to Galveston Bay. Typically, outreach activities apply to a broad audience with a less specific structure.

partner Any person, group, or entity actively working in the Galveston Bay Watershed to implement The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition.

pathogen A disease-causing microbe.

phytoplankton Green plants (for example algae) inhabiting waters, unattached and drifting with the currents.

point source End-of-the-pipe constituents (including pollutants) generally transported in wastewater from a discrete source.

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) A family of organic compounds; mixtures of up to 209 individual chlorinated compounds. They have been used as coolants and lubricants in transformers, capacitors, and other electrical equipment because they do not burn easily and are good insulators.

population An aggregation of organisms of a given species, capable of interbreeding.

predation Capture and consumption of one organism by another.

preservation The management of a natural resource which strives to maintain the natural state of the ecosystem so that it is not artificially interrupted or destroyed and natural resources are not depleted.

primary producer An organism capable of producing biomass from inorganic compounds; the base of the food web.

restoration Returning a degraded system to a natural, healthy, and undegraded state.

return flow Water that returns to surface or ground water after human use.

riparian Associated with the bank of a watercourse, for example, the riparian woodlands bordering a river.

saline water (saltwater) Water that contains a significant concentration of dissolved salts. The salinity of water in the ocean averages about 35 parts per thousand.

salinity A measure of salt concentration in water, ranging from zero to about 33 parts per thousand in estuaries.

salinity gradient A spatial salinity transition, e.g., from a fresh river mouth to saline ocean inlet.

salinity wedge A layer of dense saltwater that lies below less dense, lower-salinity waters. The salinity wedge in Galveston Bay moves northward (particularly through the Houston Ship Channel) with high tides and low freshwater inflows.


salt marsh

Coastal wetlands that occur on the intertidal shorelines of estuaries where salinities vary due to mixing of freshwater and seawater. The dominant salt-marsh plant species in Galveston Bay is salt-marsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora).

seafood advisory Warning issued by a public-health authority recommending avoidance or reduced intake of certain species of seafood that may pose increased health risks to consumers.

stakeholder

An individual or organization with an interest in a natural resource or other issue by virtue of livelihood or simple personal concern. A “stakeholder” could be an elected official, government employee, nonprofit employee, local business owner, land owner, volunteer, recreational bay user, or industry representative.

storm surge

The increase in water depth caused by a hurricane, due to a combination of low atmospheric pressure (which creates a bulge in surface waters) and wind-piling of water against the shore. Serious damage can result when a storm surge moves onshore and as waters flow back to their source.

stormwater runoff Water from rain or snowmelt that does not soak into the ground but runs off the land and flows, untreated, into waterways.

submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) Rooted, submerged vegetation, including seagrasses and freshwater rooted macrophytes; contrasts with emergent species such as smooth cordgrass.

subsidence The loss of land elevation due to groundwater or petroleum withdrawal and natural settling and compaction.

substrate The material or substance on which an organism lives, grows, or obtains its nourishment.

terrestrial Refers to land, as opposed to the aquatic or marine environment.

Texas Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List

The list of impaired surface waters in Texas, updated annually by the TCEQ under section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act.

tidal flats Non-vegetated areas of sand or mud that are alternately submerged or exposed to air, depending on the tides.

total maximum daily load (TMDL) As defined in the federal Clean Water Act, the maximum amount of a pollutant a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards.

treatment wetlands Constructed wetlands that are designed and created to filter and treat storm water runoff or wastewater effluent using natural physical, biological, and chemical treatment processes.

trophic level The position in the food chain relative to eating and being eaten; includes primary producers, primary consumers, and higher consumers.

turbidity The relative lack of clarity (cloudiness) of water, caused by suspended material (e.g., sediments), colored materials in solution, and plankton. Turbidity correlates inversely with available light for photosynthesis.

water quality standards The criteria used to establish explicit goals for the quality of streams, rivers, lakes, and bays.

watershed The land area drained by a river or stream. The natural hydrologic unit associated with numerous ecological and physical processes involving water.

watershed-based plan A comprehensive land-use and water management plan targeted at improving water quality.


wetland An area where saturation with water is the dominant influence on characteristics of the soil and on composition of the plant community.

zooplankton Animals that are suspended in, and move within, the water column.

DRAFT – Appendix B: Public Engagement Materials

APPENDIX B: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MATERIALS

This page intentionally left blank.

1

Galveston Bay Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan Revision

Public Engagement Plan

FINAL

October 14, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVERVIEW 2

II. PURPOSE 2 III. APPROACH 2

IV. WORKSHOP OVERVIEW 3 V. PUBLICITY EFFORTS 3 VI. STAKEHOLDERS & CRITICAL CONTACTS 4 VII. CRITICAL MILESTONES / PRODUCTION SCHEDULE 4

2

I. OVERVIEW The Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) has been tasked with supporting the Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) in revising the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP)– or The Galveston Bay Plan. H-GAC will engage GBEP, the Galveston Bay Council (GBC), GBC subcommittees, partner organizations, regional stakeholders, and the public on utilizing existing plans, GBEP documents and an implementation review to:

identify remaining relevant CCMP and strategic action plan (SAP) actions

recognize new and emerging issues facing the estuary and watershed that are not found or adequately addressed by the CCMP or the SAP; and

collaborate through a series of planning work sessions to prioritize and condense activities into a strategic revised plan.

Additionally, H-GAC will lead public engagement efforts to gather, organize and assess implementation goals and priorities. H-GAC will then compile the information collected from stakeholders into the revised plan.

II. PURPOSE & GOALS This Public Engagement Plan will outline the outreach process used to inform and engage stakeholders and the community-at large in the project area, as specified by Task 2 of the contract. Specific goals of this plan are to:

1. Create a clear foundation for the public engagement methodology. 2. Identify stakeholders that will actively participate on the project. 3. Establish the schedule for task completion and critical milestones.

III. APPROACH

H-GAC proposes an approach focused primarily on digital outreach, the use of partner resources, and H-GAC staff acting as project ambassadors. 1. Digital Outreach / Shareable Content

a. Utilize digital communications as primary outreach vessel(s) for various stakeholder groups.

i. Social Media Posts ii. Eblasts / Newsletter Updates

iii. Online Questionnaires

2. Partner Piggy-Backing a. Utilize partner stakeholders’ existing communications networks / mechanisms to push

out project information and request project feedback.

3. Project Ambassadors a. H-GAC staff will act as Plan ambassador at various meetings and workshops over the

course of the project lifecycle, including: i. Clean Waters Initiative

ii. Flood Awareness Success in Texas

3

iii. Natural Resources Advisory Committee iv. Parks and Natural Areas Subcommittee v. Regional Flood Management Council

vi. Various TMDL/I-Plan and WPP Stakeholder Group Meetings vii. CRP Steering Committee

H-GAC will also conduct three (3) public workshops targeting the two primary groups in and around the Galveston Bay watershed: the critical audience and secondary audience. The critical audience is Galveston Bay Council members and sub-committee members. The bulk of schedule coordination and outreach will be focused on this group.

The secondary audience invited to participate will be comprised of members of various “interested parties,” including:

Local / regional governmental entities o City Representatives o County Representatives o Texas Commission on Environmental Quality o Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Adjacent professional services partners / non-profits o Bayou Preservation Association o Galveston Bay Foundation o Houston Advanced Research Center o Texas A&M AgriLife Extension o Texas Parks & Wildlife o Texas Forest Service o Houston Audubon o Houston Wilderness

A detailed stakeholder list is currently under development. The execution of this Approach, and its corresponding schedule, are outlined within this Public Engagement Plan.

IV. WORKSHOP OVERVIEW Three (3) workshops are planned to obtain feedback on existing Galveston Bay Plan priorities, identify additional needs not included in previous Plan iterations, present Draft content and allow for public comment. Workshop #1 – October 2016 Establish prioritization of goals to be utilized as framework for plan revision. Workshop #2 – February 2017 (tentative) Present “crosswalk” of DRAFT Plan goals and priorities using feedback from Workshop #1 and follow up questionnaire(s).

4

Workshop #3 – June 2017 (tentative) Present DRAFT Plan and provide opportunity for public review and comment. An Execution Plan detailing the purpose, approach, agenda and schedule will be created for each Workshop as the date approaches, but will not be included in this document.

V. PUBLICITY EFFORTS Publicity efforts for the Galveston Bay Plan Update will be multi-faceted, and will include the following outreach categories:

Digital Outreach / Sharable Content o E-blasts (Constant Contact) o Social Media Posts o Questionnaires o Website

Traditional Outreach o Press Release(s) o *Newspaper, Television, and Radio Stations Outreach

Online Community Calendars Media Kits

In order to generate interest in the project and Plan, H-GAC will e-mail local newspapers, television stations, and radio stations a Press Release announcing the details of each workshop. A list of the specific print, television, and radio outlets to be targeted is under development. *It should be noted that Television and Radio interest, particularly on-air interest and support, is likely to be very limited; however, online interest through “Community Calendar” pages is often higher.

VI. STAKEHOLDER LIST & CRITICAL CONTACTS GBEP will provide H-GAC access to the existing listserv / current stakeholder contact data for the Galveston Bay Plan by September 2016. H-GAC will also pull contact data for stakeholders involved in ongoing watershed planning efforts. Additionally, GBEP will establish and coordinate with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of GBEP leadership and key GBC members, to provide project leadership and review for outreach and Plan materials over the course of the project lifecycle.

VII. CRITIAL MILESTONES / PRODUCTION SCHEDULE H-GAC will provide a schedule of critical path items, including project milestones, required review deadlines, and Workshop-specific and project deliverables. Production schedules will be updated throughout the project lifecycle, with particular emphasis on activities surrounding the three (3) public workshops.

Galveston Bay Plan Revision Workshop # 1

August 24, 2016

Purpose (desired outcome) of Workshop 1: Establish prioritization of goals to be utilized as framework for plan revision. Audience for Workshop 1: Workshop #1 will be open to the public; however, the critical audience is Galveston Bay Council members and sub-committee members The secondary audience invited to participate will be comprised of members of various “interested parties,” including:

• Local / regional governmental entities o City Representatives o County Representatives o Texas Commission on Environmental Quality o Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

• Adjacent professional services partners / non-profits o Artist Boat o Bayou Preservation Association o Galveston Bay Foundation o Houston Advanced Research Center o Texas A&M AgriLife Extension o Texas Parks & Wildlife o Texas Forest Service o Houston Audubon o Houston Wilderness

• Various H-GAC Program Committees o Clean Waters Initiative o Flood Awareness Success in Texas o Natural Resources Advisory Committee o Parks and Natural Areas Subcommittee o Regional Flood Management Council o Various TMDL/I-Plan and WPP Stakeholder Group Meetings o CRP Steering Committee

Format for Workshop 1:

DRAFT Agenda

2:05 – 2-:15 PM Workshop Welcome & Overview ▪ Welcome – Jeff Taebel ▪ GBC Overview/History – Sarah Bernhardt ▪ Overview of Small Group Exercise – Meredith Dang

2:15 – 3:30 PM Workshop Small Group Exercise Five priority categories (based on GBC subcommittees, plus an administrative category).

▪ Natural Resource Uses ▪ Water and Sediment Quality ▪ Public Participation and Education ▪ Monitoring and Research ▪ Implementation and Vision

Participants will discuss previous priorities and identify holes in the small group, then rank priorities individually.

3:30 – 4:00 PM Workshop Closeout ▪ Present on Next Steps – Meredith Dang

4:00 – 6:00 PM Open House Less official, won’t include structured exercises. Instead, attendees will be able to watch a repeating PowerPoint with project details and look at priorities ranked earlier in the afternoon. Sheets for individual priority ranking will also be provided.

Prior to the workshop, crucial and secondary audiences will receive:

• Primer email providing o Project background & overview o Priorities o Website Link o RSVP Link

Deliverables needed for Workshop 1:

• Project Website

• Shareable Digital Content / Posts o Facebook

▪ Page Banners ▪ Posts w/links & graphics

o Twitter ▪ Posts w/links & graphics

o Newsletter articles / text w/links

• Master eblast list / critical contacts database

• “Online” Workshop questionnaire

• Press Release

• Media kit

• Workshop Sign-in sheets, way-finding signage, graphic displays/activity boards for each priority station, PowerPoint presentation, handouts

• Post-workshop results Timeline for Workshop 1: October 2016 – need to select:

• Date o October 26

• Location

• Staff for manning priority stations / facilitation o Steven, Meredith, Kathy, Justin, Jean, Todd, Josh o GBEP staff

1

Galveston Bay Plan Revision Workshop # 2

January 12, 2017

Purpose (desired outcome) of Workshop 2: Vet the prioritized framework and action plans with a focus on implementation feasibility. Audience for Workshop 2: Workshop #2 will be advertised to the Primary Audience (Galveston Bay Council members and subcommittee members). There will not be a separate, public facing meeting at this juncture; however, Secondary Audience members previously identified or that attended Open House #1 (see corresponding Stakeholder List) will receive information on the status of the project and any discussion outcomes. The Secondary Audience includes:

• Local / regional governmental entities o City Representatives o County Representatives o Texas Commission on Environmental Quality o Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

• Adjacent professional services partners / non-profits o Artist Boat o Bayou Preservation Association o Galveston Bay Foundation o Houston Advanced Research Center o Texas A&M AgriLife Extension o Texas Parks & Wildlife o Texas Forest Service o Houston Audubon o Houston Wilderness

• Various H-GAC Program Committees o Clean Waters Initiative o Flood Awareness Success in Texas o Natural Resources Advisory Committee o Parks and Natural Areas Subcommittee o Regional Flood Management Council o Various TMDL/I-Plan and WPP Stakeholder Group Meetings o CRP Steering Committee

2

Format for Workshop 2:

DRAFT Agenda

2:00 – 2-:10 PM Workshop Welcome ▪ Welcome – Jeff Taebel ▪ Plan Revision Update – Sarah Bernhardt, GBEP

2:10 – 2:15 PM Workshop Goals & Activities Overview – Meredith Dang, H-GAC There are three primary area of focus for Workshop #2, each of which will be accomplished through individual and / or group exercises.

1. Group Feedback 2. Targeted Outputs 3. Implementation Feasibility

2:15 – 2:40 PM Group Feedback (Exercise 1) This exercise will take place in the structured group setting. Participants will vote on and rank pre-screened / approved outputs with Electronic Voting Clickers. Participants will see how the group votes in real time. After completion of this exercise, participants will be released to the Open House portion of the meeting. There are different possibilities for what can be covered during this exercise:

• Roles/responsibilities of council and subcommittees (and how to increase collaboration among subcommittees and between council and subcommittees)

• What would like Galv Bay to be like in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years (achievements)

• Other?

2:40 – 3:00 PM Update on Subcommittee Meetings (5 min. Highlights) (Chairs/Vice Chairs or Subcommittee Staff Leads)

▪ M&R – George Guillen ▪ NRU – Cherie O’Brien ▪ PPE – Amanda Brown ▪ WSQ – Brian Koch

3:00 – 4:00 PM At-Your-Own-Pace Format – Exercises 2 & 3 Targeted Outputs (Exercise 2) and Implementation Feasibility (Exercise 3), which will be completed by individual attendees in an Open House-style format.

3

Participants can spend as much or as little time at each of the four Focus Area stations to participate in the exercises. Specific details on the activities will follow separately.

• Targeted Outputs exercise will focus on if the outputs identified meet the SMART criteria

• Implementation Feasibility will focus on level of resources (range) as well as challenges and opportunities

No formal close-out will be conducted. Participants will leave after completing Exercises 2 & 3.

4

Prior to the workshop, Primary Audiences will receive:

• Primer email providing o Copies of Final Frameworks (M&R, NRU, PPE & WSQ)

▪ Incorporating Subcommittee Feedback / Discussion ▪ Reference Only, All Content Requiring Discussion or Alteration Will Be Covered

in Workshop #2 o Workshop #1 Summary o Workshop #2 Date / Time o Workshop #2 Agenda o Pertinent Project Links

Secondary Audiences will receive:

• Informational email providing o Project Status Update

▪ Workshop #1 Summary ▪ Current Activities ▪ Plan Release Date (est.) & Next Steps

o Pertinent Project Links An opportunity for providing feedback digitally will be provided to Secondary Audiences after Workshop #2. Deliverables needed for Workshop 2:

• Updated master e-blast list / critical contacts database

• Digital Workshop Questionnaire

• Press Release

• Media kit

• Workshop Sign-in sheets, way-finding signage, graphic displays/activity boards for each exercise, PowerPoint presentation, handouts

• Post-workshop results

1

The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition DRAFT Full Execution Plan - Workshop # 3

Revised on January 18, 2018

PURPOSE OF WORKSHOP #3 Present the draft The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition to stakeholders, incorporating digital and in-workshop feedback into the final The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition. Workshop #3 marks the beginning of the required 30-day public comment period for the CCMP. AUDIENCE FOR WORKSHOP #3 The primary audience for Workshop #3 remains the Galveston Bay Council, its subcommittees, and existing stakeholders that participated in the Open House and Workshops #1 and #2. However, Workshop #3 will be advertised more widely to reach more members of the public. ENGAGEMENT TOOLS H-GAC will use a variety of tools to promote Workshop #3 and the release of the draft The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition. Media Outreach H-GAC will distribute the GBEP-approved Press Releases promoting the workshop two weeks prior to the workshop date. Should media outlets be interested in learning more about the project for publication, H-GAC staff will coordinate with the GBEP to determine how interviews, quotes, and correspondence are to proceed on a case-by-case basis.

Online A significant portion of H-GAC’s promotional activities will occur online, using three primary vehicles.

1. Project Website

H-GAC will update the existing project website, www.GalvestonBayPlan.org, with current project status information, upcoming / past meetings and events, and pertinent project documents.

2. Social Media H-GAC will post project updates, links, and meeting details to the agency’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. Additionally, H-GAC will ask partner entities to cross-promote posts and workshop details.

http://www.galvestonbayplan.org/

2

3. Eblasts H-GAC will send an eblasts to the entire stakeholder list 30-days prior to the workshop, with one reminder eblast sent two weeks prior to the workshop date. More frequent eblast reminders will be sent to the Galveston Bay Council, its subcommittees, and existing stakeholders that participated in the Open House and Workshops #1 and #2. In addition, eblasts promoting the online component of the public comment period will be sent over the course of the 30-day public comment period.

Newsletters H-GAC will promote the workshop it its monthly Community & Environmental Newsletter in February and March. This newsletter has a distribution list of 1,222 and a reach far beyond the “typical” channels for water quality. Additionally, H-GAC will ask partner entities to cross-promote the workshop in their February and March newsletters. FORMAT FOR WORKSHOP #3 Unlike the facilitated approach taken for Workshops #1 and #2, Workshop #3 will be set up as an Open House with five manned stations.

1. Plan Priority One: Ensure Safe Human and Aquatic Life Use Technical content from this section of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition will be presented through posters and exhibits, designed to provide attendees with a broad understanding of the three Action Plans under this Plan Priority and 12 associated Actions.

2. Plan Priority Two: Protect and Sustain the Living Resources

Technical content from this section of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition will be presented through posters and exhibits, designed to provide attendees with a broad understanding of the three Action Plans under this Plan Priority and eight associated Actions.

3. Plan Priority Three: Engage Communities Technical content from this section of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition will be presented through posters and exhibits, designed to provide attendees with a broad understanding of the two Action Plans under this Plan Priority and seven associated Actions.

4. Plan Priority Four: Science-based Decision Making Technical content from this section of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition will be presented through posters and exhibits, designed to provide attendees with a broad understanding of the two Action Plans under this Plan Priority and 11 associated Actions.

5. General Plan Information This station will include posters and exhibits for content from sections of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition not included under a Plan Priority, such as the Regional Monitoring Plan and Finance Plan.

3

To provide for more in-depth discussion, H-GAC requests that the Plan Priority stations be manned primarily by the GBEP staff and subcommittee chairs / vice chairs, as appropriate. Each station will include a mechanism for providing content feedback, likely through a designed comment form. H-GAC does not anticipate including a formal presentation or discussion during Workshop #3. Rather, attendees are welcome to spend as much or as little time at each station as they deem appropriate. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD In addition to the in-person workshop, the CCMP website will make accommodations for providing digital comments on the draft of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition. A mock-up of this feature will be drafted and shared with the GBEP prior to its launch. This feature will become live the day of Workshop #3 and remain available for 30-days after. Post-workshop eblast, as well as social media, notifying recipients of the availability of the online Public Comment feature. ADDITIONAL OUTREACH Pending the availability of funds and the GBEP’s preference, H-GAC will also complete one of the following scenarios. Scenario 1 H-GAC may use the presentation given to the Galveston Bay Council meeting on January 17, 2018 as the basis for a “guided tour” of the draft of The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition online. The presentation, which walks participants through the history, structure, and technical highlights of the document, would be an image of the PowerPoint and corresponding audio of staff giving the presentation. The guided tour would be available on YouTube and promoted through social media and on the project website. A mock-up of this feature would be drafted and shared with the GBEP prior to its launch. Scenario 2 H-GAC may post the presentation given to the Galveston Bay Council meeting on January 17, 2018 online for reader reference. The presentation, which walks participants through the history, structure, and technical highlights of the document, would be available via PDF on the project website.

4

DELIVERABLES FOR WORKSHOP #3

• Shareable Digital Content / Posts o Facebook

▪ Page Banners ▪ Posts w/links & graphics

o Twitter ▪ Posts w/links & graphics

• Public Comment Feature on Project Website o Newsletter articles / text w/links

• Master eblast list / critical contacts database

• Press Release

• Workshop Sign-in sheets, way-finding signage, graphic displays/activity boards for each priority station, PowerPoint presentation, handouts

• Post-workshop results

DRAFT – Appendix C: Workshop Findings Report

APPENDIX C: WORKSHOP FINDINGS REPORT


1

THE GALVESTON BAY PLAN REVISION Workshop #1 Meeting Summary

November 29, 2016

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Workshop Overview 3 Approach & Agenda Dot Exercises Inclusion of Digital Workshop Questionnaire General Information on Calculations Water & Sediment Quality Section 5 Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots Exercise) Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots Exercise) Natural Resource Uses Section 6 Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots Exercise) Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots Exercise) Public Participation & Education Section 7 Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots Exercise) Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots Exercise) Monitoring & Research Section 8 Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots Exercise) Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots Exercise) Vision & Implementation Section 9 Individual Results (Activity Sheet & Digital Questionnaires) Note on Percentage Calculations Appendix – Unabridged Participant Comments 12 Water & Sediment Quality – Individual Sheet Emerging Priorities Natural Resource Uses – Individual Sheet Emerging Priorities Public Participation & Education – Individual Sheet Emerging Priorities Monitoring & Research – Individual Sheet Emerging Priorities

3

WORKSHOP OVERVIEW The purpose of Workshop #1 was to establish prioritization of goals to be utilized as the framework for The Galveston Bay Plan Revision. This prioritization included both existing priorities (as identified by The Galveston Bay Plan and Strategic Action Plan) and emerging priorities, which participants identified during the workshop. Approach & Agenda Galveston Bay Council and Subcommittee members were invited to the workshop via Constant Contact invitation(s). Respondents were asked to register in advance of the event to allow for thorough pre-planning.

2:05 – 2-:15 PM Workshop Welcome & Overview Welcome – Jeff Taebel GBC Overview/History – Sarah Bernhardt Overview of Small Group Exercise – Meredith Dang

2:15 – 3:30 PM Workshop Small Group Exercise Five priority focus areas (based on GBC subcommittees, plus a vision and implementation focus area).

Natural Resource Uses Water and Sediment Quality Public Participation and Education Monitoring and Research Vision & Implementation

Participants discussed existing priorities and identified emerging priorities in small groups, then ranked the existing priorities individually. Each participant visited each category table.

3:30 – 4:00 PM Workshop Closeout Emerging Priorities Exercise Next Steps – Meredith Dang

Dot Exercises Unless otherwise specified, the following applies to all dot exercises discussed in this report. Prioritization of Existing Priorities: The participants were instructed to place the dots on those existing priorities that they believe should be the focus of The Galveston Bay Plan Revision. Agree / Disagree (Emerging Priorities): Emerging priorities listed on individual participant sheets during the exercise were summarized and written out on a blank sheet. Participants were given

4

the opportunity to note whether they agreed or disagreed with each summarized emerging priority (indicating whether it should be included in The Galveston Bay Plan Revision). Each participant was provided one green dot (for ‘agree’) and one red dot (for ‘disagree’) for each focus area. As the emerging priorities listed during the exercise are only a summary of the full list of emerging priorities listed by participants, a complete listing of all the emerging priorities and comments provided during Workshop #1 can be found in the appendix of this document (see page 12). Inclusion of Digital Workshop Questionnaire Those Galveston Bay Council and Subcommittee members unable to attend Workshop #1 were provided with a Digital Workshop #1 Questionnaire, in which the activities and exercises from the workshop were made available digitally from November 3, 2016 – November 10, 2016. The results from the Digital Workshop #1 Questionnaire have been included in this report, and are marked accordingly. General Information on Calculations Workshop #1 activities for Natural Resource Uses; Water and Sediment Quality; Public Participation & Education; and Monitoring and Research all contain feedback from 50 in-person participants, though some abstained from voting in some / all focus areas for various reasons. Percentages for these focus areas were calculated as the percentage of received feedback, not total number of participants. The Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire received 12 completed responses. Incomplete submissions were not included. Percentages were calculated as a percentage of received total number of participants.

5

WATER & SEDIMENT QUALITY RESULTS Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots) Each participant was given three dots (votes), which could be placed in any combination desired by the participant. Abstaining from voting for any of the priorities was also allowed.

EXISTING PRIORITIES WKSHP DIGITAL WKSHP

TOTAL % OF VOTES

Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollutant Loads 39 8 47 28%

Maintain the Capacity and Integrity of Municipal Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems to Eliminate Sewage Bypasses and Unauthorized Overflows 26 7

33 19%

Eliminate Pollution Problems from Poorly Operated Sewage Treatment Plants and Promote Regionalization of Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities, Including Publicly Owned Treatment Works 24.5 12

36.5 21%

Minimize Risk of Waterborne Illness Resulting from Contact Recreation 11.5 2

13.5 8%

Reduce the Concentrations of Toxins in Key Species of Concern 21.5 3

24.5 14%

Reduce Human Health Risk Resulting from Consumption of Contaminated Seafood 11.5 4

15.5 9%

Totals 134 36 170 100%

Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots) The agree / disagree ranking for emerging priorities below only reflects the activities from Workshop #1, not the Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire. Any emerging priorities submitted by participants via the Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire will be discussed with the Subcommittees in December 2016 / January 2017.

EMERGING PRIORITES AGREE DISAGREE # SHEETS*

Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in water (microplastics) 7 0 10

Spills/leaks from other than WWTP (transportation, etc.) 3 0 1

Failing infrastructure at older plants and limited funding to fix. Public/private partnerships

3 0 2

Environmental justice for communities experiencing negative effects 7 2 2

Include trash as a pollutant 5 1 9

Expand the geographic scope of the watershed 6 6 2

Coastal erosion/bayou erosion/sediment control 4 0 5

DIGITAL WORKSHOP – EMERGING PRIORITIES

Sediment load reduction

* This column counts the total number of times the Emerging Priority in question appears on

individual comment sheets.

6

NATURAL RESOURCE USES RESULTS Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots) Each participant was given three dots (votes), which could be placed in any combination desired by the participant. Abstaining from voting for any of the priorities was also allowed.


TOTAL % OF VOTES

Protect Existing Coastal Habitats 42.25 12 12 33%

Restore and Enhance Coastal Habitats 42.25 9 9 25%

Ensure Freshwater Inflows Necessary to Maintain Productive Estuary 21.25 8

8 22%

Sustain and Restore Native Species Populations 16.5 5 5 14%

Eradicate or Reduce Populations of Exotic Invasive Species and Prevent New Invasions 12.75 2 2 6%

Totals 135 36 36 100%

Emerging Priorities Ranking Exercise (Red & Green Dots) The agree / disagree ranking for emerging priorities below only reflects the activities from Workshop #1, not the Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire. Any emerging priorities submitted by participants via the Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire will be discussed with the Subcommittees in December 2016 / January 2017. Each Workshop #1 participant was given one red for disagree, one green dot for agree, for this focus area.


Use green infrastructure for flood/storm surge protection 6 0 3

Combine waste/storm water treatment systems with stormwater wetland habitat creation

3 0 1

Sea level rise/climate change risk/coastal resilience and adaptation

9 0 2

Blue carbon/renewable energy 2 4 4

Invasive species control/protect native species biodiversity 1 0 4

Understand risks of hardening and flow altering infrastructure to bay habitats

3 0 1

Consider increasing number of small acreage protection areas 3 0 1

Ecosystem services/economic valuation 4 0 3

Increase beneficial use of dredge material coordination 1 0 2


Resilience to climate change



7

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & EDUCATION RESULTS Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots) Each participant was given three dots (votes), which could be placed in any combination desired by the participant. Abstaining from voting for any of the priorities was also allowed.


TOTAL % OF VOTES

Create a Sense of Personal Ownership and Shared Responsibility Among All Cultural Components of the Community, Including the Public, Industry, and Government 52 11

63 36%

Obtain Information to Develop and Evaluate Estuary Program Communication Efforts 6 3

9 5%

Facilitate Broad Public Involvement in Estuary Program Policy, Management, and Implementation 19 6

25 14%

Ensure Stakeholders Receive the Knowledge Necessary to Act on the Estuary Program's Priorities in Ways that Benefit the Bay and the Entire Community 30 7

37 21%

Increase Participation of Local Governments in Estuary Program Initiatives 18 7

25 14%

Increase the Number of Partners Actively Involved in Estuary Program Initiatives 12 2

14 8%

Totals 137 36 173 100%



Add K-12 programming in outreach and education 11 1 5

Create a two-way process for communication 4 0 3

Involve public and private industry in needs assessments 4 8 4

Get local government buy in 12 0 1

No emerging priorities identified through the Digital Workshop Questionnaire. * This column counts the total number of times the Emerging Priority in question appears on


8

MONITORING & RESEARCH RESULTS Existing Priorities Ranking Exercise (Blue Dots) Each participant was given one dot (vote), given the small number of existing priorities for the focus area. Abstaining from voting for any of the priorities was also allowed.


TOTAL % OF VOTES

Increase Understanding of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem 32.5 8

40.5 78%

Make Research and Bay Information Readily Available to the Public, Galveston Bay Council Members, and Galveston Bay Estuary Program Subcommittee Members 7.5 4

11.5 22%

Totals 40 12 52 100%



Need applied research to facilitate and track plan implementation 10 0 6

Monitoring for emerging pollutants (e.g. pharmaceuticals, trash) 4 0 1

More research on ecological services of coastal prairies 2 0 2

Use of citizen science to aid in monitoring 0 5 3

Economic valuation of resources 7 0 2

Bacterial source tracking (BST) 0 0 1

Create rapid research funding source 0 2 2

Increase monitoring of species diversity and habitat loss 1 0 2

Translate research and results for public understanding and agency action

6 0 8


Increase Understanding of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem through a synthesis of current studies and discussion of future priorities



9

VISION & IMPLEMENTATION RESULTS Separate and apart from the priority ranking activities in the previous sections, Vision & Implementation focused on providing an opportunity to discuss the current boundaries of The Galveston Bay Plan service area, as well as the implementability of The Galveston Bay Plan and its Revision. Note on Percentage Calculations Forty-one individual sheets were received from Workshop #1 for consideration. Twelve responses were received from Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire. In both instances, percentages were calculated as the percentage of received total number of participants providing feedback (41 and 12, respectively). Question 1 (Part 1) Is the watershed that was established for The Galveston Bay Plan (1995) comprehensive enough to be able to identify and solve the issues facing Galveston Bay? *

ANSWERS WKSHP % DIGITAL WKSHP %

Yes 20% 83%

No 59% 17%

Maybe / Cautious 7%

No Answer 15%

Totals 100% 100%

Question 1 (Part 2) What, if any, changes would you recommend? What are the pros and cons of such a change? **


No Answer 29% 58%

Cautious of Expansion / Not Supportive of Expansion 7% 8%

Expand to Include Local Lakes (Livingston, Conroe) 5% 0%

Suggest a Tiered Approach to Watershed Expansion 15% 8%

Expand to Include Northwest Corridor / Houston-Area Counties 17% 8%

Expand All the Way to Dallas 12% 8%

Expand All the Way to Dallas for Some Issues, Not All 17% 8%

Question 2 (Part 1) Do you feel that The Galveston Bay Plan is a document that is and will continue to be able to identify and solve issues facing Galveston Bay?


Yes 32% 42%

No 2% 0%

No Direct Answer / No Answer 66% 58%

Totals 100% 100%

10

Question 2 (Part 2) If not, how could it be improved? **


Need to Identify Metrics 12% 0%

More Communication & Status Updates 10% 8%

Plan Updates / More Flexible Plan Type (Ability to Add & Remove Elements)

24% 25%

More Planning Sessions 2% 0%

More Collaboration 7% 8%

Need Easy-To-Read Executive Summary / Definition for Broader Audience

15% 8%

Other (Specific Topics for Consideration) 41% 17%

Question 3 How could The Galveston Bay Plan improve the ability of partners and agencies in identifying and solving issues facing Galveston Bay? ***


No Answer 49% 8%

Increase Public Awareness 10% 25%

Enhanced Communication / More Meetings 15% 25%

More Collaboration 17% 17%

More Money / Greater Funding Flexibility 12% 17%

Smaller Meetings 2% 0%

More Pilot Projects 5% 0%

Focus on Solving Local Problems 7% 8%

More Comprehensive Planning 2% 8%

Change Subcommittee Structure 2% 0%

Better Subcommittee Communication 5% 8%

Better Quality Data / More Frequent Data Sharing / More Frequent Data Updates

0% 33%

Stronger Regulatory Environment 0% 0%

Identify critical path items 5% 25%

More mapping of issues 0% 8%

*This question was a mandatory component of the Workshop #1 Digital Questionnaire, with only “Yes” or “No” as options. **Percentages calculated as the percentage of received feedback, not total number of participants. Totals will not amount to 100% since some respondent made multiple suggestions. ***Percentages calculated as the percentage of total number of participants responding. Totals will not amount to 100% since some respondent made multiple suggestions.

11

APPENDIX Unabridged Participant Comments

Water & Sediment Quality – Individual Sheet Comments A clear link is missing between the critical issue of the quality of our watersheds to the public participation and education (PPE).

This is an environmental justice issue for many of our communities and we should ongoing provide/identify a method for community feedback.

Move (reduce nonpoint source pollutant loads) to implementation and engagement. Plans and communication not working.

Very important (reduce the concentrations of toxins in key species of concern).

More regulation and fines for municipal polluters.

Need more than outreach and campaigns to reduce nonpoint source pollution.

Trash - inland sources.

Environmental justice issues and communities that experience those negative effects.

Trash should be included as a pollutant.

Add pharmaceuticals in the list of pollutants to be addressed in water treatment.

Implement NPS pollution controls.

Toxins: bacteria, pharmaceuticals, heavy metals, bio accumulators.

Combine #4 (minimize risk of waterborne illness resulting from contact recreation) and #6 (reduce human health risk resulting from consumption of contaminated seafood).

Work with upper watershed and include action items / overall plan to benefit entirety of watershed and bay.

Trash in water and associated with water nearshore and offshore.

Need to move from planning into implementation.

Move degraded streams off the list and prevent others from joining.

Low relative to others except for trash (reduce nonpoint source pollutant loads).

Trash needs to be a priority.

Reducing turbidity.

I support expanding the geographic scope of the watershed expanding to include up to Dallas when it comes to freshwater inflow and nonpoint source pollution issues.

Funding $$$ / take much resources to do all testing, water samples, fish samples.

These overlap too much to stick three stickers on a poster.

Did not "vote."

Agree with adding pharmaceuticals in water as an important emerging concern.

Storm / flooding damage caused contamination.

Perhaps include stormwater run-off and associated sedimentation/deposition.

Create a coalition between the public and private sector to inspect and repair facilities that are below regulation standards.

Fine operators as needed to get in line.

EDC's in water.

Huge issues with failing infrastructure at older plants and limited funding to fix.

Need a preamble to this section about the condition of the water e.g. sufficient oxygen/clarity or else?

Prioritization of objectives may be different for different usage designations of the waterbody / segment.

Erosion, pharmaceuticals.

12

Living shorelines to connect cutback coastal erosion due to substance causing increased sediment load.

Reduce sources of sediment that provide habitat for bacteria.

Reduce pharmaceuticals in the wastewater stream.

Erosion.

Floatables and trash.

Toxics in sediment (in addition to key species).

Emerging contaminants (pharmaceutical etc.).

Plastic pollution and erosion - priorities for this section.

Lots of water quality data/monitoring but how is the data being used by all partners?

Also any thoughts to using wildlife as indicators of contamination?

Enhance communication of water quality and bacterial levels.

Assess cumulative levels and inputs of point source pollution.

Understand level and impacts of environmental estrogens in bay habitat and organisms.

Reduce use of septic systems.

Integrate research involving human health and monitoring of water and {indecipherable} Purity.

Address coastal erosion.

Address trash and plastics.

Understand use of green infrastructure for improving water sediment quality.

Stabilize eroding shorelines.

Monofilament line and other marine debris.

Pills/leaks from other than WWTPs, NPS (ships, trains, pipelines) - aerial deposition.

Trash, floatables.

Nutrient reduction.

Maintain dissolved oxygen concentrations.

Riparian habitat protection.

Microplastics, nutrients.

Pharmaceuticals and personal care products in our waters and how they affect wildlife populations.

Why stop at public utilities. What about industrial inputs?

Promote integration of beneficial wetland habitats with design and implementation of new storm water retention infrastructure and new waste water treatment facilities. E.g. Richland creek WMA in Tarrant County Regional River/Water Authority.

13

Natural Resource Uses – Individual Sheet Comments #1 - freshwater inflows.

#2 - Eradicate invasive species / giant salvina / Chinese tallow, etc.

#3 - Restore (enhance habitats)

Marine debris - higher incidents lately of wildlife entrapment/ingestion of debris.

No current address of issue of microplastics (and escape of manufactured {indecipherable} for use in many new products).

Increase access to quality habitat areas.

Catalogue local success stories.

Be sure to include recreational use.

N/A

If you do 1, 2 and 3, 4 will be achieved with minimal extra effort.

Difficult to do 5 without 1, 2, and 3.

Emerging - people to manage projects.

Put a focus on the ecosystem services provided and not just economic value of the fishery (i.e. oyster reef habitat).

Add education and outreach too.

All of the above are high priorities!

None of these should be dropped from the plan.

Habitat (restoration/preservation) emphasis has been historically on "bigger" acres, yet there are other factors that classify usable space such as increase number or species in a particular area.

I wonder how those small acres that have higher wildlife concentrations might compete with the "big" acre impact projects.

I hope erosion protection is included in one of these priorities.

Promote design and implementation of waste/storm water treatment/storage systems that provide benefit wetland habitats and water quality.

Monitor and measure native species, invasive, fwl, habitat, etc… needs to be incorporated somewhere here in M&R.

Impacts of climate change on natural resources should be included in context of coastal resilience and adaptation.

It is very difficult to determine which of these 5 are most critical. They are all so important.

To focus on three and delay any other two would be like leaks in a dike.

Perhaps combine #1 and #2 but I would fear weakening the efforts.

Working collaboratively to? To finding opportunities for protecting the bay.

Use the income of the bay for fisheries and industry to determine our ecosystem services value.

Possible increased coordination with groups/companies/organizations known for dredging activities to coordinate beneficial use opportunities for them.

Try and give them more options to use that material if it is high quality.

Consensus on protect, restore, enhance, and what they mean and how that translates to action on the ground.

Would think that if we restore and enhance would also include protecting (at the same time).

Effects of sea level rise?

Climate change?

Use dredged material beneficially to "build" costal habitat.

Sea level rise.

14

Be sure "coastal" includes a minimum of the coastal zone, and also does not exclude areas that impact the coastal zone.

Eradication of invasives may not be at all realistic. Control/manage may be more appropriate.

Green infrastructure needs to be emphasized.

Be proactive in understanding the use of habitat as infrastructure for flood protection and erosion.

Also in understanding the risks of hardened or flow-altering infrastructure to bay habitats and ecosystems.

The use of green infrastructure for water quality, quality of life, etc.

Invasive species management is an essential part of protecting and restoring habitats.

All very important issues to the bay.

More engagement.

More funding to protect and restore.

Resource/people experts - best practices - how to "restore" X remove X etc.

We (NGOs) re-invented a lot of wheels.

Experimental learning for K-Grad leads to protection of investments.

A really adequate analysis of corps sec. 404 program and how well working and mitigation works.

Sustain high biodiversity of native species.

Identify all emerging threats with each priority and how to implement into action items for success.

Renewable energy.

Energy conservation.

Emerging issues, e.g. pharmaceuticals.

Erosion issues for water quality.

Floatables and trash.

Quantitative/dollar valuation of resources, economic valuation of resources so we can better advocate for their protection.

Decarbonization of economy? Decarbonization, blue carbon, etc.

The use of green infrastructure in storm surge protection planning.

Do a better job of communicating the suite of services that these resources provide to public - quantify and money.

15

Public Participation & Education – Individual Sheet Comments Been on council since 1999!

Public is difficult to involve!

For events to disseminate information you have to bribe them with gifts, lottery, tickets, t-shirts, etc., and food!

Increase education rather than only emphasizing outreach and marketing.

Specific education activity suite that includes science classes, art projects, creative writing.

Consider education beyond science to include arts - resonates with a bigger audience that can foster cultured attachment to the bay.

N/A

Do #1 and everything else will happen.

Did not care for the "format" of the workshop.

Basically made to choose the status quo - how it is now.

I think the current format needs an entire rework. Including the re-writing/re-organizing the priorities.

Put a focus on educating public, governments, and the fishing community on the benefits of ecosystem services vs. just monetary gain (i.e. oysters). Not only important for business.

This (obtain information to develop and evaluate estuary program communication efforts) should be done as part of #1.

It isn't a separate objective to me.

Include local government and program partners in facilitating board public involvement in estuary program policy, management, and implementation.

Create avenue(s) for more comparisons between estuary programs and environmental justice areas of Galveston Bay.

Increase public access to the bay.

I'm interested to see how the broad public communication is working.

Also my experience tells me personal change (behavior) will happen faster with ownership and responsibility which may increase local governments as cities/counties address issues raised by their "voting" citizens.

Emphasis on education K-12.

Experiential like BWET or EPA EE grants not just outreach.

Industry partners’ participation should be promoted.

Target industry partners in a strategic fashion especially those that can assist with goals and objectives.

Does this (obtain information to develop and evaluate estuary program communication efforts) mean to develop metrics to gauge success and or track when time to change message as losing traction?

There is a need to determine the audience that GBEP (as a state agency program) can directly target (e.g. local governments) and audiences that can be more effectively targeted by partners (e.g. the general public).

Re: priority #1

What is the vehicle available to community members to provide regular feedback or seek out information?

Should GBEPs focus really be on the general public or should efforts be focused at a higher level with the expectation others will communicate with the public?

Conduct communications and outcome research.

More beyond just transmitting knowledge. Action.

Integrate tested principles and community based participatory research.

Ensure the bi-directional communication among stakeholders, committees, etc. (GBEP).

16

Prioritize public access to all bay resources and habitats.

Need to address better ethnic, racial, religious minorities (reach out for more diversity).

These areas overlap quite a bit but government buy-in of these initiatives is my priority.

Communicate strategically in both a broad scale as well as a targeted environment and adding specific problem areas within the community.

Increase public access.

Include targeted outreach over broad outreach.

Incorporate public participation as part of PPE not just provide knowledge - more to action.

K-12 education support and resources needed.

Survey the community to determine the issues and their ideas for public participation and education.

Knowledge is not action…need more than information transfer.

Understand people's attitudes and beliefs about Galveston Bay (really more of an M&R thing but I forgot to write on that sheet).

Additional outreach to local industry in particular the refineries people and money.

What are public's needs?

Define education and how it relates.

Without access goals will always be limited.

17

Monitoring & Research – Individual Sheet Comments

#1 increase understanding of ecosystem esi, status and trends.

This activity needs to clearly link to the other areas of emphasis (public outreach, WQ, etc.)

Seems to be constrained and possibly irrelevant.

More of a support function to other programs.

Data gap = turbidity and trash loading.

I have alternate language but not with me. Combined the two statement.

Did not "vote."

Identify gaps in monitoring and publish a list of needs.

This (increase understanding of the Galveston bay ecosystem) is almost way too broad.

Consideration and research on value and enhance meat of ecosystem services.

Provide more GIS based maps of various aspects of Galveston Bay ecosystem.

Bacterial source tracking.

Monitoring for emerging pollutants (e.g. pharmaceuticals).

Increased monitoring of species diversity and habitat loss.

There is so much research that we do not know how to apply practically to our disciplines. Understanding this is key!

Also I'd like to see an increase support in the use of citizen science to aid in monitoring so we have community buy in as well as increased public understanding of this science.

We need to be able to gather research and studies to make better decisions and choices for plan interpretation.

Things have and do change so quickly. How to adapt and research fast enough?

Categories that feed to the other priority issues.

Also gather research so we do a better job at implementation.

Public distribution of GBEP funded research and monitoring should be a requirement of the entity receiving the funds and directed through funding agreements.

Increase funding for research and monitoring.

Identify data gaps to prioritize monitoring and research projects to provide that info to increase understanding.

Status and trends efforts also very important.

Facilitate collection and aggregation of environmental, social and economic data collected by fed, state, and local agencies, universities, non-profit and private/industry partners.

Need applied research to facilitate and track implementation of the plan.

Track plan implementation in form of performance measures or equivalent that can be communicated to partners and the public.

An idea: GBEP asks organizations throughout the watershed to host an informational and ed monitoring and research session with a citizen science component inviting local constituents. GBEP would lead / local agency would host and invite and assist GBEP.

Ability to monitor change.

Insist that projects in other areas (NRU, etc.) use the best existing data.

Emphasize research and monitoring that can contribute to best practices or tools for use in other areas (NRU, etc.).

Emphasize outcome based research.

Emphasize translation of existing data/information for use by practitioners and policy makers.

18

Increase understanding of connections between upland habitats and water.

Link all groups to this (water quality (break into components of areas) etc.) (allows for prioritization, data gap ID, emerging threat ID).

How resilient is the bay?

Host meeting with citizen science component and use fishing size and fish type info to better understand the bay.

Conducting and ecosystem service valuation of the bay to understand and determine the value of the bay's ecology.

Real time or revisited monitoring of the bay "Heal the Bay" water quality tool.

M&R needs to focus on research and monitoring needs for implementation.

These priorities are equally essential now so I am not ranking them.

Present research findings in non-technical format so it can relate to the average person. How does the information we are collecting relate to people… i.e. XX acres of healthy oyster reefs filter XX gallons of water.

Provide information and data that has an impact on an individual (why should I care) how does it affect my family?

Clearly explain in layman’s terms what the GB ecosystem is.

Make sure to identify existing issues or projects being implemented or have been identified as a priority, and determine what needs to be monitored or researched.

Make sure the data collected becomes more than just bathroom reading material.

Make sure the research can be used practically to improve our bay.

Seek funding opportunities, partnerships with universities to allay funding issues (i.e. grad student projects) seeking to reach untargeted publications.

Additional/new/better research.

These are not mutually exclusive. Both should be part of the plan. You can't provide information if some don't have it.

Figure out a way to get more funding for research.

Increase research for emerging and future issues.

More monitoring to see how/if we are being successful with our current efforts. We need this information to determine how to keep moving forward.

Perform economic evaluation of various Galveston Bay resources - e.g. wetland services and functions, fishery.

Identify data gaps, e.g. economic valuation of resources.

Efficacy and efficiency of outreach efforts.

Better understanding of appropriate goals for fisheries abundance, habitat goals, etc. In other words, what makes a healthy ecological system?

Making information available vs. helping stakeholders understand the information and use the information…should we focus on that too?

More research of ecological sources that the coastal prairies provide to overall quality of water in Galveston Bay.

This effort is too parochial. Need to engage with outside researches about coastal issues and science.

Perceived as too closed door - locked up.

Should be science based all objectives.

Should have categories based on other GBEP limitations.

As structured M&R is obscure and irrelevant. We need to elevate its importance by making it relevant.

THE GALVESTON BAY PLAN REVISION Workshop #2 Meeting Summary FINAL

April 21, 2017

2 Workshop #2 Findings Report FINAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Workshop Overview Workshop #2 Purpose 3 Approach & Agenda 3 Workshop Activities Exercise #1 Instructions 4 Exercise #2 Instructions 4 Exercise #3 Instructions 4 Inclusion of Digital Workshop Questionnaire 4 Additional Information Requests 4 Water & Sediment Quality Section Exercise # 1 7 Exercise # 2 19 Exercise # 3 26 Natural Resource Uses Section Exercise # 1 29 Exercise # 2 37 Exercise # 3 40 Public Participation & Education Section Exercise # 1 43 Exercise # 2 49 Exercise # 3 54 Monitoring & Research Section Exercise # 1 56 Exercise # 2 67 Exercise # 3 70


WORKSHOP OVERVIEW The Galveston Bay Plan is the comprehensive conservation and management plan for the Galveston Bay estuary. The Plan has led the Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) and its partners through 22 years of significant conservation, restoration, and education work in the Galveston Bay watershed. Workshop #2 was held on March 1, 2017 from 2 – 4pm in La Marque, Texas. Fifty-four people, including GBEP and Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) staff, attended. Attendees were provided with an informational packet upon arriving, which included an agenda, project reference information and acronym list, as well as Exercise #2 materials and Framework reference sheets for Monitoring & Research, Public Participation & Education, Natural Resource Uses and Water & Sediment Quality. Workshop #2 Purpose The purpose of Workshop #2 was to vet the frameworks and action plans with a focus on implementation feasibility. Approach & Agenda Galveston Bay Council and Subcommittee members (164 in total) were invited to the workshop via Constant Contact invitation(s). Respondents were asked to register in advance of the event to allow for thorough pre-planning. Registrants were sent Workshop #2 primer materials on Friday, February 24, which included a project status update, PDFs of the four subcommittee-specific Frameworks, and prompts for workshop Exercises. The day of the workshop, attendees were given an informational packet, which contained an agenda,

acronym list, Exercise #2 materials, and the four subcommittee-specific Frameworks.

The agenda for Workshop #2 can be found below. 2:00 PM Workshop Welcome Jeff Taebel, Houston-Galveston Area Council 2:05 PM The Plan: Where We’ve Been & Where We’re Going Sarah Bernhardt, Galveston Bay Estuary Program 2:20 PM Update on Subcommittee Meetings Monitoring & Research - George Guillen Natural Resource Uses - Cherie O’Brien Public Participation & Education - Cynthia Clevenger Water & Sediment Quality - Brian Koch 2:40 PM Workshop Goals & Activities Overview Meredith Dang, Houston-Galveston Area Council 2:45 PM Exercises At-Your-Own-Pace Exercise #1 – Past, Current and Future Accomplishments Exercise #2 – Costs and Feasibility of Targeted Outputs

Exercise #3 – Implementation Feasibility


There was not a separate, public-facing meeting following Workshop #2; however, Secondary Audience members previously identified or that attended Open House #1 will receive information on the status of the project and any discussion outcomes, scheduled for mid-May 2017. WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES Prior to Workshop #2, the four subcommittees met to discuss the Frameworks for each programmatic Focus Area, providing input and updates to Specific Objectives, Actions, Measures, and Targeted Outputs. Exercise #1 Instructions For Exercise #1, revised Frameworks for each Focus Area were mounted on 60” x 40” foam core boards. Participants were asked to review the revised Frameworks and provide additional Projects & Accomplishments, as well as Lead Implementers. The feedback in this report has been presented with limited editing, except in circumstances requiring additional clarity. Exercise #2 Instructions It is important that the activities identified in The Galveston Bay Plan are achievable, measurable, and ultimately support stakeholder identified Specific Objectives (goals). Exercise #2 focused on Targeted Outputs, ensuring that they be achievable, measurable, and ultimately support identified Specific Objectives (goals). Respondents checked “yes” or “no” for each Targeted Output. Those respondents that selected “no” for a Targeted Output(s) were asked to provide further feedback, though none from Workshop #2 or the Digital Questionnaire did. Respondents were also asked to provide cost estimates for each Targeted Output, but only if they felt comfortable doing so. Note on Exercise #2: Participation in Exercise #2 saw the fewest respondents across the board. It is likely that the in-depth, technical nature of the exercise contributed to fewer respondents. Additionally, respondent numbers, both at Workshop #2 and through the Digital Questionnaire, varied for each Specific Objective and for Targeted Outputs. Exercise #3 Instructions Exercise #3 focused on implementation feasibility. Participants were asked to use a pin to place Specific Objectives to a grid, per their answers to two questions:

1. To what extent would accomplishing this Specific Objective advance the mission of The Galveston Bay Plan? (y axis)

2. How easy or difficult would accomplishing this Specific Objective be? (x axis)


One grid was provided for each of the Subcommittees. For each exercise grid, there were four primary quadrants (A, B, C and D). Each quadrant was sub-divided into four units, or sub quadrants (A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and so on). Each sub quadrant represented an intersection between the how well the mission would be advanced by a specific objective (y axis) and how easy it would be to accomplish that specific objective (x-axis). Note on Exercise #3 Calculations: H-GAC counted the total of each Specific Objective in each sub quadrant, and calculated the percentage represented in each. Those percentages were assigned a value based on ease of implementation and support of the mission, then plotted on a scatter graph to display aggregated information. Inclusion of Digital Workshop Questionnaire Those Galveston Bay Council and Subcommittee members unable to attend Workshop #2 were provided with Digital Workshop #2 Questionnaires (12 questionnaires in total), in which the activities and exercises from the workshop were made available digitally from March 23, 2017 – April 5, 2017. The results from Digital Workshop #2 Questionnaires have been included in this report. Additional Information Requests Requests for Workshop #2 photos, calculation spreadsheets, and other materials can be requested by e-mail [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]?subject=Workshop%20%232%20Findings%20Report%20-%20Detailed%20Information%20Request

6 Workshop #2 Findings Report FINAL Water & Sediment Quality Results

WATER & SEDIMENT QUALITY RESULTS Water & Sediment Quality (WSQ) Focus Area covers Specific Objectives pertaining to water and sediment quality issues and activities. Report Key There are 12 Specific Objectives for the WSQ Focus Area. Specific Objectives are grouped by Issue Area, and numbered correspondingly. For WSQ, there are three Issue Areas:

NPS – Nonpoint Source

PS – Point Source

PHA – Public Health Awareness

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

NPS-1 Support Watershed Based Plan Development and Implementation.

NPS-2 Support a Back the Bay NPS Education Campaign.

NPS-3 Implement NPS best management practice demonstration projects.

NPS-4 Host NPS Workshops to Enhance Technical Understanding and Expand Use of Best Practices.

PS-1 Implement a Back the Bay PS Campaign with Phase I and Phase II Stormwater Programs.

PS-2 Maintain Capacity and Integrity of Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSS).

PS-3 Improve WWTF Compliance.

PHA-1 Improve Seafood Advisory Awareness.

PHA-2 Improve Regional Contact Recreation Risk Awareness.

PHA-3 Improve Regional Contact Recreation Safety by Implementing WBPs (i.e. TMDL I-Plans and WPPs).

PHA-4 Improve Safety of Human Shellfish Consumption from Bay Waters by Implementing WBPs.

PHA-5 Improve Safety of Human Consumption of Recreational Finfish by Implementing WBPs.


Exercise #1 - Past, Current and Future Accomplishments

1. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Support Watershed Based Plan Development and Implementation. Description Develop and implement local watershed based plans, i.e. watershed protection plans (WPPs) and total maximum daily load (TMDL) implementation plans (I-Plans) with local partners and stakeholders. Identify target area(s) to schedule implementation by developing prioritization measures such as: relationship of water body to water quality standard; local source of funding or match available; ongoing watershed planning effort; size of waterbody; access to monitoring data. Projects & Accomplishments (1) There are 6 WPPs being developed or completed. (2) There are 3 TMDL I-Plans developed or completed. (3) Cease the Grease, low impact development (LID) projects, boater waste education, stormwater wetlands, and Construction Permit Education are being implemented. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Texas State Soil & Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service (AgriLife) Galveston Bay Foundation (GBF) Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) Future Watershed Partners

Workshop #2 Responses

Lead Implementers Projects & Accomplishments

TPWD

Armand Bayou

Workshop #2 Digital Questionnaire Responses


Lead Implementer: HARC

No response.


2. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Support a Back the Bay Nonpoint Source (NPS) Education Campaign. Description Apply a NPS outreach campaign to the target area(s) using completed Galveston Bay Estuary Program Back the Bay message and brand to foster public awareness, education and encourage action to improve water quality. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Back the Bay messages and materials have been completed. (2) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a NPS Outreach Tool Box. (3) Cease the Grease, storm drain stenciling, Trash Bash, and pet waste public outreach messaging. (4) Galveston Bay Foundation's (GBF) Pump Don't Dump campaign aimed at educating boaters about hazards of sewage discharge and pump out alternatives. (5) Clear Lake has been declared a no discharge zone. (6) GBF looking at no discharge zone for Galveston Bay. Lead Implementers WSQ & Public Participation & Education (PPE) Subcommittees TCEQ Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) TSSWCB AgriLife GBF H-GAC



Texans for Clean Water TPWD

No response.



No response. No response.


3. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Implement NPS best management practice demonstration projects. Description Identify specific structural and non-structural measures to implement. Apply structural and nonstructural NPS best management practices to target area(s). Projects & Accomplishments Demonstration Projects include: (a) Brays Bayou Wetland (b) Ghirardi Family Watersmart Park (c) Harris County Flood Control District Detention with Water Quality Improvement Features (d) Birnamwood Dr. (e) Almeda Rd. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ TSSWCB AgriLife GBF H-GAC Local Governments Development Community



Houston Wilderness (Gulf-Houston RCP) TPWD

Gulf-Houston Regional Conservation Plan (RCP): Headwaters to Baywaters Initiative; Galveston Bay Acg. And Easement Initiative; Migratory Bird & Oyster Reefs Initiative





4. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Host NPS Workshops to Enhance Technical Understanding and Expand Use of Best Practices. Description Provide NPS technical workshops in target area(s) to enhance the reach of structural and non-structural BMPs that address failing OSSFs, feral hogs, illicit discharges, illegal dumping, boater wastes and agricultural sources. Tie-in with Back the Bay messaging. Projects & Accomplishments Ongoing efforts by H-GAC, Harris County, Texas Coastal Watershed Program, Texas A&M University: (a) H-GAC on-site sewage facility (OSSF) website management (b) Harris County Annual OSSF Seminar (c) Harris County and East Aldine Management District OSSF abandonment (d) H-GAC Real Estate Course (e) AgriLife Extension OSSF Management Workshop (f) Texas Water Resources Institute Lone Star Healthy Streams program targets agriculture producers with information on best practices. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ TSSWCB AgriLife H-GAC



GLO TPWD

Coastal NPS Management Program - Management Measure Implementation Kills & Spills Database



Lead implementer: TWRI

No response.


5. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Point Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Implement a Back the Bay Point Source (PS) Campaign with Phase I and Phase II Stormwater Programs. Description Collaborate Back the Bay PS campaign with owners and operators of Phase I and II municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) on development and implementation of stormwater management programs to address sediment, litter, pet wastes, and illicit discharges from the MS4s. Projects & Accomplishments (1) MS4s address impaired waters through measures described in their Stormwater Management Plans. (2) H-GAC's Clean Water Initiative workshops that cover topics related to the MS4 permit requirements. (3) A number of programs/projects target MS4 management measures. (4) Top 5/Least 5 project and Bayou Preservation Association/City of Houston investigations are example IDDE programs Lead Implementers WSQ & PPE Subcommittees TCEQ H-GAC Local MS4s



Houston Wilderness (Gulf-Houston RCP) Texans for Clean Water

No response.





6. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Point Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Maintain Capacity and Integrity of Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSS). Description Promote TCEQ programs and efforts to encourage repairs, improvements and replacement of chronically failing SSS. Promote TCEQ's Sanitary Sewer Overflow Initiative (SSOI) that develops compliance agreements with municipalities with sanitary sewer overflows (SSO). Use Back the Bay Outreach to support initiatives that address fats, oils, grease and sanitary wipes, common causes of SSOs. Projects & Accomplishments (1) The BIG identified SSOs as a leading contributor of untreated effluent to area waters. (2) The City of Houston placed resources to address failing systems. (3) TCEQ Region 12's list of local governments participating in TCEQ's SSOI. (4) GBF's Oyster I-Plan is addressing SSOs. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ TMDL I-Plan(s) H-GAC GBF



Owners of the San. Sewer System No response.



lead implementer: local governments No response.


7. Issue Area Improve Water Quality Through Point Source Pollution Abatement Specific Objective Improve Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) Compliance. Description Coordinate with TCEQ's Region 12 and Small Business Administration on opportunities to improve WWTF compliance. Develop and promote through Back the Bay a compliance tool box that could include measures like technical workshops, increased regulatory compliance inspections and no-notice inspections, development of a non-regulatory inspection program, identify funding sources and potential for regionalization of chronically noncompliant WWTFs. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Harris County conducts compliance inspections and shares data with the BIG and H-GAC. (2) Compliance data is available via EPA's ECHO website. (3) WWTF operators are required to report to the TCEQ via Discharge Monitoring Reports. (4) TCEQ and EPA maintain list of chronically noncompliant WWTFs, Harris County identifies chronically failing WWTFs, works with the facilities to find solutions that sometimes includes regionalization. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ Local Governments



TPWD-Kills & Spills Database Industry Galveston County Health District

No response.




Additional feedback included the addition of “OSSF” in the Issue Area Description, and OSSF compliance under Specific Objective “Improve WWTF Compliance.”


8. Issue Area Promote Public Health Awareness Specific Objective Improve Seafood Advisory Awareness. Description Support effective seafood advisory outreach. Work with PPE and stakeholders on outreach, education, and awareness efforts to assist the public in better evaluating their risk from consuming Galveston Bay fish and/or shellfish. Projects & Accomplishments (1) GBF with funding from the EPA, has placed warning signs in places with seafood advisories as part of their Galveston Bay Seafood Advisory Education Campaign. (2) H-GAC has created a seafood advisory pamphlet. (3) Major legacy source identified as a Superfund Site on the San Jacinto River, currently identifying and approving remedial step. EPA is lead agency. Lead Implementers WSQ & PPE Subcommittees Texas Department of State Health Services (TDSHS) TCEQ TPWD General Land Office (GLO)



GBF No response.



HARC & GBF

Galveston Bay Report Card


9. Issue Area Promote Public Health Awareness Specific Objective Improve Regional Contact Recreation Risk Awareness. Description Work with the Public Participation and Education subcommittee to develop a public risk advisory program based on risks from contact recreation due to waterborne pathogens. Projects & Accomplishments (1) GLO Texas Beach Watch - Harris, Galveston and Brazoria Counties implement the program at selected recreational beaches along the Texas Coast. (2) When Enterococcus levels exceed standards established by the EPA, GLO and local governments issue advisories warning public not to swim in affected waters. Lead Implementers WSQ & PPE Subcommittees TCEQ GLO Local Governments



GBF GBF Citizen Science Bacteria (enterococci) monitoring program (www.galvbay.org/citizenscience) includes map of current data, ~20 sites in Bay, GBF public outreach & presentations about recreation safety Human recreation risk grade on Galv. Bay Report Card



HARC & GBF



10. Issue Area Promote Public Health Awareness Specific Objective Improve Regional Contact Recreation Safety by Implementing WBPs (i.e. TMDL I-Plans and WPPs). Description Support and facilitate development and implementation of WBPs, including TMDL Programs or WPPs, to address bacteria impaired contact recreation waters. Support could be in the form of continuing the stakeholder process or funding specific measures of the I-Plan or WPP. Projects & Accomplishments (1) WSQ coordinates with the region WBPs. (2) Bacteria Implementation Group Implementation Plan and Dickinson Bayou Implementation Plan are two TMDL I-Plans developed to address bacteria impairments. (3) Several completed WPPs also address bacteria. Jarbo Bayou TMDL is in development. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ TSSWCB AgriLife GBF H-GAC Future Watershed Partners






Lead Implementer: HARC

No response.


11. Issue Area Promote Public Health Awareness Specific Objective Improve Safety of Human Shellfish Consumption from Bay Waters by Implementing WBPs. Description Support implementation of the Upper Texas Coast Oyster Waters TMDL I-Plan to address bacteria impaired oyster waters. Support could be in the form of continuing the stakeholder process or funding specific measures of the I-Plan. Projects & Accomplishments The Upper Texas Oyster Waters TMDL and I-Plan was completed in 2015. TCEQ, Galveston Bay Foundation and stakeholders are implementing the plan to reduce sources of bacteria. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ GBF TDSHS



AgriLife No response.



lead implementer: TPWD

No response.


12. Issue Area Promote Public Health Awareness Specific Objective Improve Safety of Human Consumption of Recreational Finfish by Implementing WBPs. Description Support and facilitate development and implementation of legacy and toxin TMDL Programs as they arise. Provide support as needed, for the PCB/Dioxin TMDL study. Projects & Accomplishments Many TMDLs have been developed for local waterways impacted by high concentrations of toxins, including: (a) PCB/Dioxin TMDL (b) Patrick Bayou TMDL (c) Clear Creek TMDL (TDS-Complete) (d) Clear Creek Fish Advisory - Chlorinated Pesticides, rescinded. Lead Implementers WSQ Subcommittee TCEQ TSSWCB AgriLife GBF H-GAC Future Watershed Partners






Lead implementer: TDSHS No response.


WSQ Exercise #2 - Costs and Feasibility of Targeted Outputs NPS-1 Support Watershed Based Plan (WBP) Development and Implementation. Develop and implement local watershed based plans, i.e. watershed protection plans (WPPs) and total maximum daily load (TMDL) implementation plans (I-Plans) with local partners and stakeholders. Identify target area(s) to schedule implementation by developing prioritization measures such as: relationship of water body to water quality standard; local source of funding or match available; ongoing watershed planning effort; size of waterbody; access to monitoring data; etc.

TARGETED OUTPUTS IMPLEMENTATION COST SUPPORTS SPECIFIC

OBJECTIVE? EDITS TO SUPPORT

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support the development of two Watershed Based Plans (20% completion of goal).

$0 - $200,000 4/4 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Support the development of three additional (five total) Watershed Based Plans (50% completion of goal).

$200,000 - $1 Million 4/4 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Support the development of five additional (ten total) Watershed Based Plans (100% completion of goal).

$1 Million - $500 Million 4/4 Respondents Agreed None

NPS-2 Support a Back the Bay NPS Education Campaign. Apply a NPS outreach campaign to the target area(s) using completed Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) Back the Bay message and brand to foster public awareness, education and encourage action to improve water quality.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Conduct initial survey of target population. $0 - $200,000 3/4 Respondents Agreed None

Short Initiate target area campaign. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/4 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Track number of individuals involved, target populations or groups engaged


Long-Term Track changes in public perception through follow-up evaluation/questionnaire.



NPS-3 Implement NPS best management practice demonstration projects. Identify specific structural and non-structural measures to implement. Apply structural and nonstructural NPS best management practices (BMPs) to target area(s).



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Initiate two Best Management Practice demonstration projects.


Medium Initiate first three additional Best Management Practice demonstration projects (five in total).


Long-Term Complete five Best Management Practice demonstration projects.


Long-Term Evaluate demonstration project results and develop white paper on findings.


NPS-4 Host NPS Workshops to Enhance Technical Understanding and Expand Use of Best Practices. Provide NPS technical workshops in target area(s) to enhance the reach of structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs) that address failing on-site sewage facilities (OSSFs), feral hogs, illicit discharges, illegal dumping, boater wastes and agricultural sources.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Conduct Best Management Practice awareness level surveys, prior to hosting workshops


Short Conduct one Best Management Practice education workshop per year.


Medium Conduct one Best Management Practice education workshop per year.


Long-Term Conduct one Best Management Practice education workshop per year.


Long-Term Conduct Best Management Practice awareness level surveys, after hosting workshops



PS-1 Implement a Back the Bay PS Campaign with Phase I and Phase II Stormwater Programs. Collaborate Back the Bay PS campaign with owners and operators of Phase I and II municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) on development and implementation of stormwater management programs to address sediment, litter, pet wastes, and illicit discharges from the MS4s. Best management practices (e.g. low impact development/green infrastructure, Construction BMPs, Illicit Discharge Detection Programs) and other water quality improvement techniques can be promoted.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop database to track existing MS4 programs and identify opportunities for collaboration.


Short Develop Outreach Plan to promote or host workshops and regional messaging campaigns to support Point Source education efforts (number TBD).


Medium Significant progress on executing Outreach Plan goals (50% complete).


Long-term Significant progress on executing Outreach Plan goals (100% complete).


Long-term Track success of workshops by identifying the number of MS4s implementing Best Management Practice measures.



PS-2 Maintain Capacity and Integrity of Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSS). Promote Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) programs and efforts to encourage repairs, improvements and replacement of chronically failing SSS. Promote TCEQ's Sanitary Sewer Overflow Initiative (SSOI) that develops compliance agreements with municipalities with sanitary sewer overflows. Use Back the Bay Outreach to support initiatives that address Fats, Oils, Grease and Sanitary Wipes, common causes of SSOs.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify and prioritize list of geographies with chronically failing Sanitary Sewer Systems in need of repair, improvement, or replacement.


Medium Support or host technical workshops (number to be determined) geared toward targeted communities.


Medium Track number of workshops supported or hosted and number of attendees.


Long-term Track number of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Implementation Plans initiated or completed in targeted geography.


Long-Term Pull Sanitary Sewer Overflow data for targeted geographies to determine whether a reduction has occurred.



PS-3 Improve Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) Compliance. Coordinate with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) Region Twelve and Small Business Administration on opportunities to improve WWTF compliance. Develop and promote through Back the Bay a compliance tool box that could include measures like technical workshops, increased regulatory compliance inspections and no-notice inspections, development of a non-regulatory inspection program, identify funding sources and potential for regionalization of chronically noncompliant WWTFs.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify chronically failing wastewater treatment facilities and create Compliance Toolbox.


Medium Use Compliance Toolbox to work with chronically failing facilities, communicating through technical workshops and non-regulatory visits (number TBD).


Long-Term Pull failure data for identified wastewater treatment facilities to determine Compliance Toolbox success.


PHA-1 Improve Seafood Advisory Awareness. Support effective seafood advisory outreach. Work with the Public Participation & Education subcommittee (PPE) and stakeholders on outreach, education, and awareness efforts to assist the public in better evaluating their risk from consuming Galveston Bay fish and/or shellfish.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop Seafood Advisory Awareness Outreach Plan. Identify specific goals for increasing awareness (goals TBD).


Medium Significant progress on Outreach Plan goals (50% of goals completed).


Long-term Significant progress on Outreach Plan goals (100% of goals completed).


Long-Term Assess effectiveness of Outreach Plan by tracking number of groups and individuals reached.



PHA-2 Improve Regional Contact Recreation Risk Awareness. Work with the Public Participation & Education subcommittee (PPE) to develop a public risk advisory program based on risks from contact recreation due to waterborne pathogens.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop Contact Recreation Outreach Plan. Identify specific goals for increasing awareness (goals TBD).


Medium Significant progress on Outreach Plan goals (50% of goals completed).


Long-term Significant progress on Outreach Plan goals (100% of goals completed).


Long-Term Assess effectiveness of Outreach Plan by tracking number of groups and individuals reached.


PHA-3 Improve Regional Contact Recreation Safety by Implementing WBPs. Support and facilitate development and implementation of watershed based plans (WBPs), including total maximum daily load (TMDL) Programs or watershed protection plans (WPPs), to address bacteria impaired contact recreation waters. Support could be in the form of continuing the stakeholder process or funding specific measures of the TMDL Program or WPP.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support and facilitate the development of one – two Watershed Based Plans.


Medium Support and facilitate the development an additional two Watershed Based Plans (three – four total).


Long-Term Assess impact of supported Watershed Based Plans by tracking the number of Best Management Practices implemented and number of improved condition Assessment Units.



PHA-4 Improve Safety of Human Shellfish Consumption from Bay Waters by Implementing Watershed Based Plans (WBPs). Support implementation of the Upper Texas Coast Oyster Waters total maximum daily load implementation plan (TMDL I-Plan) to address bacteria impaired oyster waters. Support could be in the form of continuing the stakeholder process or funding specific measures of the I-Plan.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support implementation of the Upper Texas Coast Oyster Waters TMDL I-Plan and report on status.


Medium Continue to support implementation of the Upper Texas Coast Oyster Waters TMDL I-Plan and report on status.


Long-term Review water quality data to determine whether a decrease in bacteria concentrations has occurred.


PHA-5 Improve Safety of Human Consumption of Recreational Finfish by Implementing Watershed Based Plans (WBPs). Support and facilitate development and implementation of legacy and toxin total maximum daily load (TMDL) Programs as they arise. Provide support as needed, for the PCB/Dioxin TMDL study.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support and facilitate the development of one – two Watershed Based Plans.


Medium Support and facilitate the development an additional two Watershed Based Plans.


Long-Term Assess impact of supported Watershed Based Plans by tracking the number of Best Management Plans implemented and number of improved condition Assessment Units.



WSQ Exercise #3 - Implementation Feasibility

For WSQ, Specific Objectives contained the most variability between “Ease” and “Mission”.

67% (8/12) were considered easy to very easy to implement.

75% (9/12) strongly support mission implementation.

Water and Sediment Quality Plan Area Action Specific Objective Ease of Implementation Support of GBEP Mission

NPS-1

Support Watershed Based Plan Development and Implementation. 0.59 1.68

NPS-2

Support a Back the Bay NPS Education Campaign. 1.21 1.32

NPS-3

Implement NPS best management practice demonstration projects. 1.30 1.65

NPS-4

Host NPS Workshops to Enhance Technical Understanding and Expand Use of Best Practices.

1.76 1.48

PS-1

Implement a Back the Bay PS Campaign with Phase I and Phase II Stormwater Programs. 0.57 1.24

PS-2

Maintain Capacity and Integrity of Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSS). -0.81 1.71

PS-3 Improve WWTF Compliance. -1.45 1.60

PHA-1

Improve Seafood Advisory Awareness. 0.65 0.55

PHA-2

Improve Regional Contact Recreation Risk Awareness. 1.00 1.00

PHA-3

Improve Regional Contact Recreation Safety by Implementing WBPs (i.e. TMDL I-Plans and WPPs).

0.17 1.11

PHA-4

Improve Safety of Human Shellfish Consumption from Bay Waters by Implementing WBPs. -0.25 0.90

PHA-5

Improve Safety of Human Consumption of Recreational Finfish by Implementing WBPs. -0.65 0.70

28 Workshop #2 Findings Report FINAL Natural Resource Uses Results

NATURAL RESOURCE USES RESULTS The Natural Resource Uses (NRU) Focus Area covers Specific Objectives pertaining to habitat/living resource conservation and balanced human uses issues and activities. Report Key There are eight Specific Objectives for the NRU Focus Area. Specific Objectives are grouped by Issue Area, and numbered correspondingly. For NRU, there are three Issue Areas:

HC – Habitat Conservation

SC – Species Conservation

FWI – Freshwater Inflows


HC-1 Land Acquisition

HC-2 Habitat Restoration

HC-3 Habitat Enhancement

SC-1 Native Species Management

SC-2 Invasive Species Control

FWI-1

Encourage public and GBEP stakeholder participation in regional water planning groups and the development of priorities policies that ensure adequate quantities of freshwater reach Galveston Bay.

FWI-2

Support further research to understand the annual and seasonal freshwater inflow needs for Galveston Bay, as well as information needed to develop management strategies.

FWI-3

Develop or support outreach initiatives that promote water conservation and educate the public on the value and importance of freshwater inflows.



1. Issue Area Habitat Conservation Specific Objective Land Acquisition Description Fund and develop Conservation Assistance Programs. Fund acquisition projects that leverages GBEP money for additional funds. Projects & Accomplishments Since 2000, GBEP and partners have conserved 8,812 acres of important coastal habitats through fee-simple acquisition and conservation easements, leveraging approximately $30 million. Lead Implementers The Artist Boat The Conservation Fund Ducks Unlimited Galveston Bay Foundation Houston Audubon Texas General Land Office Texas Parks and Wildlife Department US Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



Trust for Public Land Houston Wilderness

No response.





2. Issue Area Habitat Conservation Specific Objective Habitat Restoration Description Fund projects that restore habitat(s) that leverages GBEP money for additional funds. Projects & Accomplishments Since 2000, GBEP and partners have conserved 14,548 acres of important coastal habitats and 39,663 linear feet of shoreline through restoration and erosion control projects, leveraging approximately $29 million. Lead Implementers Ducks Unlimited Galveston Bay Foundation The Nature Conservancy NOAA Restoration NRG Energy Texas Coastal Watershed Program Texas General Land Office Texas Parks and Wildlife Department US Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



Port of Houston Authority HW

No response.





3. Issue Area Habitat Conservation Specific Objective Habitat Enhancement Description Fund projects that enhance habitat(s) that leverages GBEP money for additional funds. Projects & Accomplishments Since 2000, GBEP and partners have conserved 5,472 acres of important coastal habitats through enhancement and invasive species control projects, leveraging approximately $330,000. Lead Implementers Armand Bayou Nature Center Galveston Bay Foundation Houston Audubon The Nature Conservancy NOAA Restoration NRG Energy Scenic Galveston Texas Parks and Wildlife Department US Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



Port of Houston Authority HW

No response.





4. Issue Area Species Conservation Specific Objective Native Species Management Description Fund Projects that Sustain and Restore Native Species Populations. Projects & Accomplishments Several habitat restoration projects focusing on target species underway (colonial waterbirds, migratory gamebirds, oysters, etc.). Lead Implementers Ducks Unlimited Galveston Bay Foundation The Nature Conservancy NOAA Restoration NRG Energy Texas Coastal Watershed Program Texas General Land Office Texas Parks and Wildlife Department US Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



Houston Audubon American Birds Cons. GCBO Audubon-TX Houston Wilderness Bayou Preservation Association





5. Issue Area Species Conservation Specific Objective Invasive Species Control Description Fund Projects that Reduce Invasive Species. Projects & Accomplishments Texas Department of Agriculture and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department regulate terrestrial and aquatic invasive species respectively. Many educational resources to inform public, example: texasinvasives.org. Programs to reduce abundance of invasive species occur in many locations. Lead Implementers Ducks Unlimited Galveston Bay Foundation Houston Advanced Research Center The Nature Conservancy NOAA Restoration NRG Energy Texas Coastal Watershed Program Texas General Land Office Texas Parks and Wildlife Department US Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



AgriLife, Houston Wilderness (Gulf-Houston RCP Projects)

Bayou Preservation Association - association w/invasive vegetation removal along bayous





6. Issue Area Freshwater Inflows Specific Objective Encourage public and GBEP stakeholder participation in regional water planning groups and the development of priorities policies that ensure adequate quantities of freshwater reach Galveston Bay. Description Inform the public about opportunities to comment on Regional Water Plans. Projects & Accomplishments The Galveston Bay Freshwater Inflows Group (GBFIG) has been disbanded due to the passage of SB3. The SB3 process established the Basin and Bay Expert Science Team (BBEST) and Basin and Bay Stakeholder (BBAS) groups to discuss inflow needs. The BBEST and BBAS groups incorporated many members of the GBFIG. Lead Implementers Galveston Bay Foundation San Jacinto River Authority Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service



Texas Living Waters Project (GBF, Lone Star Chapter of Sierra Club, and National Wildlife Federation) Trinity River Water Authority City of Houston Dallas City City of Fort Worth Gulf Coast Water Authority NFBWA WHWA Other water authorities TWBD National Wildlife Federation

TCEQ formally adopted the standards for e-flows protection for SJ/T in 2011. These standards will be revised in 2021 - time which there will be a public opportunity for revision. Continue research in this area to inform further revision of these standards.





7. Issue Area Freshwater Inflows Specific Objective Support further research to understand the annual and seasonal freshwater inflow needs for Galveston Bay, as well as information needed to develop management strategies. Description Inform the public about opportunities to comment on Regional Water Plans. Projects & Accomplishments Multiple Galveston Bay Council members sit on the Trinity/San Jacinto Basin and Bay Area Stakeholder Committee and Basin and Bay Area Expert Science Team. Lead Implementers Texas A&M Galveston University of Houston Clear Lake US Geological Survey US Fish and Wildlife Service



Texas Living Waters Project (see above) Texas Water Development Board Houston Wilderness

Texas Environmental Flows Project (TxState, NWF, Harte, etc.) TWDB environmental flows studies Gulf-Houston Regional Conservation Plan (RVP) - Headwaters to Baywaters Initiative





8. Issue Area Freshwater Inflows Specific Objective Develop or support outreach initiatives that promote water conservation and educate the public on the value and importance of freshwater inflows. Description Inform the public about opportunities to comment on Regional Water Plans. Projects & Accomplishments Freshwater Inflow Education Program Lead Implementers Galveston Bay Foundation



Texas Living Waters Project GBEP?

Water Conservation Program





NRU Exercise #2 - Costs and Feasibility of Targeted Outputs HC-1 Land Acquisition Fund and develop Conservation Assistance Programs. Fund acquisition projects that leverage Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) money for additional funds.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Maintain list of acquisition projects to submit for funding. $0 - $200,000 6/6 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Develop Conservation Initiative white papers for targeted sub-bay watersheds.


Medium Continue GBEP programmatic support for conservation assistance programs in the watershed.


Medium Develop grant proposals and funding strategies for acquisition projects.


Long-Term Place 5,000 acres of important coastal habitat under long-term conservation through fee-simple acquisition, conservation easements, and other mechanisms.

$1 Million - $500 Million 6/6 Respondents Agreed None

HC-2 Habitat Restoration Fund projects that restore habitat(s) that leverages Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) money for additional funds.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify important coastal areas to target for restoration of lost or degraded coastal habitats, using 1950's aerial imagery as a benchmark.


Medium Develop funding strategies for restoration projects that can be adapted to multiple funding sources.


Long-Term Restore 2,500 acres of lost or degraded coastal habitats. $200,000 - $1 Million 6/6 Respondents Agreed None


HC-3 Habitat Enhancement Fund projects that enhance habitat(s) that leverages Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) money for additional funds.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify important coastal areas to target for enhancement of degraded coastal habitats.


Medium Develop funding strategies for enhancement projects that can be adapted to multiple funding sources.


Long-Term Enhance 5,000 acres of lost or degraded coastal habitats. $1 Million - $500 Million 6/6 Respondents Agreed None

SC-1 Native Species Management Fund projects that sustain and restore native species populations.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop habitat conservation projects based on species needs.


Medium Continue to develop habitat conservation projects based on species needs.


Long-Term Continue to develop habitat conservation projects based on species needs.


SC-2 Invasive Species Control Fund projects that reduce invasive species.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify important coastal areas to target for enhancement of degraded coastal habitats.


Medium Develop funding strategies for enhancement projects that can be adapted to multiple funding sources.


Long-Term Enhance 5,000 acres of lost or degraded coastal habitats. $1 Million - $500 Million 6/6 Respondents Agreed None


FWI-1* Encourage public and Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) stakeholder participation in regional water planning groups and the development of priorities policies that ensure adequate quantities of freshwater reach Galveston Bay. FWI-2* Support further research to understand the annual and seasonal freshwater inflow needs for Galveston Bay, as well as information needed to develop management strategies. FWI-3* Develop or support outreach initiatives that promote water conservation and educate the public on the value and importance of freshwater inflows.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Identify opportunities to participate in the regional water planning processes to ensure that the rules that govern the regional Water Plans better protect water for wildlife.


Medium Continue to identify opportunities to participate in the regional water planning processes to ensure that the rules that govern the regional Water Plans better protect water for wildlife.


Long-Term Continue to identify opportunities to participate in the regional water planning processes to ensure that the rules that govern the regional Water Plans better protect water for wildlife.


*The Targeted Outputs for all three Freshwater Inflows Specific Objectives are the same and were grouped during Exercise #2.


NRU Exercise #3 - Implementation Feasibility

75% (6/8) of NRU Specific Objectives were considered to advance the mission extremely well.

63% (5/8) of NRU Specific Objectives were considered easy to implement, with 25% (2/8) considered very difficult to implement.

Natural Resource Uses Action Specific Objective Ease of Implementation Support of GBEP Mission

HC-1 Land Acquisition -1.1 1.9

HC-2 Habitat Restoration -0.3 1.9

HC-3 Habitat Enhancement 0.5 1.5

SC-1 Native Species Management 0.5 1.4

SC-2 Invasive Species Control -1.38 1.33

FWI-1

Encourage public and GBEP stakeholder participation in regional water planning groups and the development of priorities policies that ensure adequate quantities of freshwater reach Galveston Bay. 0.79 0.47

FWI-2

Support further research to understand the annual and seasonal freshwater inflow needs for Galveston Bay, as well as information needed to develop management strategies. 0.32 1.26

FWI-3

Develop or support outreach initiatives that promote water conservation and educate the public on the value and importance of freshwater inflows. 0.75 0.8


Very Difficult Very Easy

Advances the Mission Extremely Well

Does Not Advance the Mission At All

42 Workshop #2 Findings Report FINAL Public Participation & Education Results

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & EDUCATION RESULTS Public Participation & Education (PPE) Focus Area covers Specific Objectives pertaining to education and outreach issues and activities. Report Key There are six Specific Objectives for the PPE Focus Area. Specific Objectives are grouped by Issue Area, and numbered correspondingly. For PPE, there are two Issue Areas:

SPO – Stakeholder & Partner Outreach

PEA – Public Education & Awareness


SPO-1 Develop New and Support Existing Stewardship Programs & Volunteer Opportunities for Stakeholders.

SPO-2 Support and Promote Workshops and Events that Facilitate Stakeholder & Partner Involvement.

SPO-3 Ensure that local governments are knowledgeable about key estuary issues, common interests, and new information as it becomes available.

SPO-4 Continue to Expand and Support the Back the Bay Campaign and Other Regional Initiatives.

PEA-1 Develop New and Support Existing Programs in Galveston Bay to Engage the Public in a Dialogue About Key Issues.

PEA-2 Develop New and Support Existing K-12 Galveston Bay Estuary-Related Curricular Materials for Regional Use. Find Opportunities to "Train the Trainers."


Exercise #1 - Past, Current and Future Accomplishments 1. Issue Area

Stakeholder & Partner Outreach Specific Objective Develop New and Support Existing Stewardship Programs & Volunteer Opportunities for Stakeholders. Description Continue to develop, support and promote stewardship programs and volunteer opportunities for Stakeholders, industry and government. Opportunities could include GBEP Subcommittee participation or any other projects that allow participants to become ambassadors of and for the health of Galveston Bay, as well as events, special projects, and other volunteer programs. Projects & Accomplishments Galveston Bay Brigade Girl Scouts of San Jacinto Council - Various Projects Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) Invasive Species Program - Current River, Lakes, Bays 'N Bayous Trash Bash - Annual Sam Houston Council - Boy Scouts of America - Various Projects Texas Estuarine Resource Network Program (various) - Current Texas Parks & Wildlife Department Learn to Fish - Current Texas Stream Team - Current White Oak Bayou Project (RE: invasive species) - Current Lead Implementers Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) Various Partners HARC Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) Texas Audubon Texas Conservation Fund



Houston Sierra Club Student Conservation Association Texans for Clean Water GBF Bayou Preservation Association Industry Texas City - La Marque Community Advisory Council

Adopt-a-beach Setty / Bolivar Texas master naturalists - Galveston Bay Area Chapter SCA Houston Community Program (Env. / Cons. Service projects & Enc. Ed and workforce readiness) GBF Land Stewardship workdays, habitat restoration workdays (marsh, oysters) - current Bayou Preservation Association - Bayou Clean Ups





2. Issue Area Stakeholder & Partner Outreach Specific Objective Support and Promote Workshops and Events that Facilitate Stakeholder & Partner Involvement. Description Continue to host and expand the State of the Bay Symposia on a three-year schedule. Support existing workshops and events hosted by Stakeholders & Partners in off years. Explore opportunities for new workshops or events. Projects & Accomplishments Environmental Educators Workshop - Future GBEP Speaker's Bureau - Future H-GAC Workshop Series (Various) - Current State of the Bay Symposium - 2016 Texas AgriLife Programs (Various) - Current Trash Free Waters- Current Trash Summit- Current Lead Implementers GBEP Galveston Bay Council Subcommittee Members






HARC No response.


3. Issue Area Stakeholder & Partner Outreach Specific Objective Ensure that local governments are knowledgeable about key estuary issues, common interests, and new information as it becomes available. Description Develop resource materials for local government use and reference, and proactively distribute and promote those materials. Use resource materials as a vehicle to build new and support existing relationships with local governments. Provide specific support to MS4 permit holders to assist in meeting permit requirements. Provide materials to small communities without MS4 permits to supplement public engagement activities. Projects & Accomplishments Galveston Bay Action Network - Current H-GAC's Clean Water Is Essential - Future H-GAC's Designing For Impact - Current H-GAC's Water Resources Information Map - Current Texas A&M - Galveston's Texas Coastal Atlas - Current Texas AgriLife CHARM Mapping Application - Current Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) / I-Plan Projects - Various Watershed Protection Plans - Various Lead Implementers GBEP Galveston Bay Council Subcommittee Members



Houston Sierra Club Texans for Clean Water Texas Living Waters Project GBF GLO NWF Houston Wilderness (Gulf-Houston RCP)

Bays in Peril Report (upcoming from NFW) HW Workshops & Government meeting(s) opportunities Sierra Club - Review & comment on section 10/404 permits Texans for Clean Water - Comment and communicate with elected officials and agencies Coastal NPS Management Program (management measure implementation) GBF's work w/water utilities and municipalities on water consideration for the Bay - informed by the recently released Texas Water Conservation Scorecard (texaswaterconservationboard.org) and the Water By the Yard Report.



HARC Maybe have programs that provide CEUs to licensed city staff to encourage more participation.


4. Issue Area Stakeholder & Partner Outreach Specific Objective Continue to Expand and Support the Back the Bay Campaign and Other Regional Initiatives. Description Build on previous Back the Bay campaign success and explore new opportunities to refine and expand it through Stakeholder & Partner feedback / participation. Support other regional initiatives, such as Cease the Grease and the Galveston Bay Action Network. Projects & Accomplishments Back the Bay - Current Cease the Grease - Current Galveston Bay Action Network - Current Lead Implementers GBEP Galveston Bay Council Subcommittee Members



GBF Texas Living Waters Project Bayou Preservation Association

Galveston Bay Water Brigade - water wise Bay cities challenge (gbwb.org - campaign)





5. Issue Area Public Education & Awareness Specific Objective Develop New and Support Existing Programs in Galveston Bay to Engage the Public in a Dialogue About Key Issues. Description Continue to develop, support and promote public awareness and start a dialogue about key issues impacting Galveston Bay and what can be done to mitigate those issues. Continue to develop, support and promote public education initiatives, with a focus on Adult Education, that change behaviors and attitudes in Galveston Bay. Conduct and/or support public awareness and public perception surveys to measure awareness levels and message impact. Projects & Accomplishments Back the Bay - Current Galveston Bay Report Card - Annual Kinder Institute Houston Area Survey - Annual Lead Implementers GBEP Various Partners



Student Conservation Association Texans for Clean Water Sierra Club GBF Texas Living Waters Project (GBF, NWF, Lonestar Chapter of Sierra Club) Houston Sierra Club AgriLife USPOS (sp?) Urban Initiative

SCA / WPARD Milby Park / Sims Bayou NPS Project (2 Yrs) Texas master Naturalist (Training & Outreach Program) Ongoing Outreach & social Media (TFCW) Monthly Programs (Sierra Club) Galveston Bay Water Brigade (GBWB) Water-wise bay Cities Challenge (competition for 20 cities in the Bay area to conserve water for the Bay) GBF rain barrel workshops Outings Program (Houston Sierra Club) Galveston Bay Report Card - Annual (->and in Spanish) GBF rain barrel workshops



HARC GBF



6. Issue Area Public Education & Awareness Specific Objective Develop New and Support Existing K-12 Galveston Bay Estuary-Related Curricular Materials for Regional Use. Find Opportunities to "Train the Trainers." Description Continue to develop, support and promote programs that seek to educate K-12 audiences on how changes in behavior and attitude can positively influence the protection and preservation of Galveston Bay. Continue to develop, support and promote programs that seek to work collaboratively with educators on how educational materials and programs are introduced to students. Projects & Accomplishments Artist Boat Youth Eco-Art Series - Current Audubon Texas Youth Program - Current Environmental Educators Exchange - Current Galveston Bay Foundation Youth Programs - Current HERE Project - Future Project Water Education for Teachers (WET) - Current Texas AgriLife Education Workshops (Various) - Current Lead Implementers GBEP Various Partners



Galveston Bay Foundation Artist Boat Bayou Preservation Association Bayou Land Conservancy

University of Houston - Clear Lake Environmental Institute: Junior Master Naturalist Bayou Preservation Association - Watershed Explorers BLC No Child Left Inside





PPE Exercise #2 - Costs and Feasibility of Targeted Outputs SPO-1 Develop New and Support Existing Stewardship Programs & Volunteer Opportunities for Stakeholders. Continue to develop, support and promote stewardship programs and volunteer opportunities for stakeholders, industry and government. Opportunities could include Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) Subcommittee participation or any other projects that allow participants to become ambassadors of and for the health of Galveston Bay, as well as events, special projects, and other volunteer programs.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop database of existing programs. $0 - $200,000 10/10 Respondents Agreed None

Short Identify new geographies and communities. $0 - $200,000 10/10 Respondents Agreed None

Short Create action plan to support existing (or create) ten programs.


Medium Measurable increase in existing program participation (specific to programs already supported, such as Texas Stream Team, Trash Bash, etc.).


Medium Support five additional programs (or 50% goal met). $200,000 - $1 Million 9/10 Respondents Agreed None

Long-term Support five additional programs (or 100% goal met). $200,000 - $1 Million 9/10 Respondents Agreed None


SPO-2 Support and Promote Workshops and Events that Facilitate Stakeholder & Partner Involvement. Continue to host and expand the State of the Bay Symposia on a three-year schedule. Support existing workshops and events hosted by Stakeholders & Partners in off years. Explore opportunities for new workshops or events.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Host 2019 and 2022 Symposia. Complete events database. $200,000 - $1 Million 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Host 2025 Symposium. Measurable increase (5%) in attendance from 2022.


Long-Term Host 2028 Symposium. Measurable increase (10%) in attendance from 2025.


Short Identify underserved geographies and culturally diverse communities.


Short Create action plan (specific number of events to be determined).


Short Development and promotion of a Speaker's Bureau, spanning all subject areas.


Medium Significant progress on action plan items (50% of goals met). $200,000 - $1 Million 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Completion of all action plan items (100% of goals met). $200,000 - $1 Million 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Short Sponsor or assist in planning of three Stakeholder activities or events (2018, 2020, 2021).


Medium Sponsor or assist in planning of two Stakeholder activities or events (2023, 2024).


Long-Term Sponsor or assist in planning of two Stakeholder activities or events (2026, 2027).



SPO-3 Ensure that local governments are knowledgeable about key estuary issues, common interests, and new information as it becomes available. Develop resource materials for local government use and reference, and proactively distribute and promote those materials. Use resource materials as a vehicle to build new and support existing relationships with local governments. Provide specific support to municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit holders to assist in meeting permit requirements. Provide materials to small communities without MS4 permits to supplement public engagement activities.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Develop database of existing resources. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Update database with new or updated resources. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Update database with new or updated resources. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Short Create action plan (specific resources to be determined based on gap analysis).


Short Work with Partners to create new materials identified in action plan.




SPO-4 Continue to Expand and Support the Back the Bay Campaign and Other Regional Initiatives. Build on previous Back the Bay campaign success and explore new opportunities to refine and expand it through Stakeholder & Partner feedback / participation. Support other regional initiatives, such as Cease the Grease and the Galveston Bay Action Network.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Create action plan for goals (specific goals to be determined, could include increasing the number of partners each year).





PEA-1 Develop New and Support Existing Programs in Galveston Bay to Engage the Public in a Dialogue About Key Issues. Continue to develop, support and promote public awareness and start a dialogue about key issues impacting Galveston Bay and what can be done to mitigate those issues. Continue to develop, support and promote public education initiatives, with a focus on Adult Education, that change behaviors and attitudes in Galveston Bay. Conduct and/or support public awareness and public perception surveys to measure awareness levels and message impact.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?


Short Conduct awareness level surveys, prior to program expansion. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Short Identify new geographies and communities from survey. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Short Create action plan (specific goals to be determined based on gap analysis). Coordinate with other groups conducting similar research / surveys.




Long-Term Conduct awareness level surveys, after program expansion. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Create new materials identified in action plan. $0 - $200,000 11/11 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Create any new materials, as needed. $200,000 - $1 Million 11/11 Respondents Agreed None


PEA-2 Develop New and Support Existing K-12 Galveston Bay Estuary-Related Curricular Materials for Regional Use. Find Opportunities to "Train the Trainers." Continue to develop, support and promote programs that seek to educate K-12 audiences on how changes in behavior and attitude can positively influence the protection and preservation of Galveston Bay. Continue to develop, support and promote programs that seek to work collaboratively with educators on how educational materials and programs are introduced to students.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?


Short Conduct Educators Summit to identify education gaps and needs.


Short Create action plan (specific goals to be determined in Educators Summit).





PPE Exercise #3 - Implementation Feasibility PPE clustered the most of the four Focus Areas.

50% (3/6) of Specific Objectives were considered easy to implement and three considered difficult, though only slightly.

67% (4/6) were considered as strongly implementing the mission.

Public Participation and Education Plan Action Specific Objective Ease of Implementation Support of GBEP Mission

SPO-1

Develop New and Support Existing Stewardship Programs & Volunteer Opportunities for Stakeholders. 0.8 1.36

SPO-2

Support and Promote Workshops and Events that Facilitate Stakeholder & Partner Involvement. 1.15 1.12

SPO-3

Ensure that local governments are knowledgeable about key estuary issues, common interests, and new information as it becomes available. -0.27 0.88

SPO-4

Continue to Expand and Support the Back the Bay Campaign and Other Regional Initiatives. 0.85 1.23

PEA-1

Develop New and Support Existing Programs in Galveston Bay to Engage the Public in a Dialogue About Key Issues.

-0.2 1.12

PEA-2

Develop New and Support Existing K-12 Galveston Bay Estuary-Related Curricular Materials for Regional Use. Find Opportunities to "Train the Trainers."

-0.23 0.96


Very Difficult Very Easy



56 Workshop #2 Findings Report FINAL Monitoring & Research Results

MONITORING & RESEARCH RESULTS Monitoring & Research (M&R) Focus Area covers Specific Objectives pertaining to monitoring, research, and access. Report Key There are ten Specific Objectives for the M&R Focus Area. Specific Objectives are grouped by Issue Area, and numbered correspondingly. For M&R, there are two Issue Areas:

RES – Research

ACS – Access


RES-1 Conduct Biological Stressor Monitoring and Research

RES-2 Conduct Geochemical Stressor Monitoring and Research

RES-3 Conduct Physical Stressor Monitoring and Research

RES-4 Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Contact Recreation

RES-5 Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Seafood Consumption

RES-6 Evaluate Best Management Practice (BMP) Demonstration Projects

RES-7 Conduct Research on Ecosystem Service and Economic Valuation of Bay Resources

RES-8 Complete Coastal Resiliency and Acclimation Studies

ACS-1 Support Tracking the Status and Trends of Environmental and Stressor Indicators of Galveston Bay Ecosystem Health

ACS-2 Expand the Dissemination of Easy to Access Galveston Bay Monitoring and Research



1. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Biological Stressor Monitoring and Research Description Evaluate the influence of biological stressors (e.g. harmful algal blooms, Toxoplasma gondii, Perkinsus marinus (Dermo), invasive species and commercial and recreational harvest) on aquatic, semi- aquatic, and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Texas A&M University (TAMU) has taken the lead in studying harmful algal blooms and Dermo in the past. (2) Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) investigates fish kills. (3) TPWD, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Natural Resource Uses (NRU) subcommittee, and others have led efforts to study effective ways to limit or locally eradicate invasive species populations. (4) Other institutions have studied individual populations (e.g. University of Houston - Clear Lake and Houston Zoo's Diamondback Terrapin work). Lead Implementers Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)



No response. TPWD /TAMUG completed collaborative study of Dermo and comparison w/PER methodologies - in connection with TLWS work on freshwater inflows - salinity affecting species survival and incidence of invasive species and position such as dermo? Not sure if to add here.





2. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Geochemical Stressor Monitoring and Research Description Investigate the affect of geochemical stressors (e.g. eutrophication, biomagnification of legacy toxins and endocrine disrupters) on aquatic, semi-aquatic and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. Evaluate fate and transport through the environment and develop baselines for future comparison. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Watershed based plans identify current water quality baselines to determine load reductions needed to meet water quality standards. (2) The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has begun to develop nutrient numerical standards beginning with Lakes and Rivers. Sediment and Litter might be emerging areas where baselines could be developed. (3) Baylor University, Texas A&M University-Galveston (TAMUG), United States Geological Survey (USGS) and others have identified endocrine disrupters and personal care products in this region. (4) TAMUG and UHCL-Environmental Institute of Houston have studied Dolphin populations and conducted tissue bioassays. There has been some interest in biomagnification studies in avian populations. Lead Implementers GBEP Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs








3. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Physical Stressor Monitoring and Research Description Study the influence of physical changes to the estuary (e.g. litter and illegal dumping, modified freshwater inflows, bay circulation, coastal erosion, shoreline hardening, land use changes and loss or fragmentation of habitats) on aquatic, semi-aquatic, and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Bay circulation and infrastructure studies were completed in 1999 by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for GBEP. (2) Research covering sea level rise, wetland habitat loss and freshwater inflows have been completed during the first twenty years. (3) Estuarine wetland habitat restoration projects have resulted in seagrass bed returns to West Bay. (4) UHCL and Houston Zoo have conducted studies on Diamond backed Terrapin. Lead Implementers GBEP Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs



Texas Living Waters Project (National Wildlife Federation) Houston Wilderness

TAMUG studies on Rangia (sp?) and Vallisneria as biological indicators of freshwater inflows. Texas Living Waters Project (NWF) on rangia and vallisneria as other biological indicators of freshwater inflows. USGS coastal inflow (Trinity @Wallisville) TWDB hydrodynamic model development for the Trinity River Delta TWDB TxBlend model for T-SJ Estuary. Gulf - Houston RCP - Headwaters to Baywaters Initiative





4. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Contact Recreation Description Initiate and complete studies that characterize the public's contact recreation risks from waterborne pathogens in bay and bay tributaries; conduct bacteria source tracking to characterize sources of pathogens and evaluate the emergence of new pathogen indicators. Projects & Accomplishments (1) City of Houston, Harris County, TAMUG and others have been looking at alternative bacteria indicators, analysis methods, resuspension and other research. (2) Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 planned funding by GBEP for watersheds within the GBEP region. Lead Implementers GBEP Local Governments Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs








5. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Seafood Consumption Description Identify sources and evaluate remedial actions to address legacy pollutants, surface run-off, illegal dumping and air deposition that can affect the size of recreational shellfish harvest areas or number of seafood advisories. Known pollutants of concern include PCB, Dioxin, and mercury. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Advisory (ADV) 55 was issued in December 2015 and rescinded ADV 49 and the pesticide advisory (HSC) due to lower concentrations but maintains consumption advisory for Dioxin and PCBs in fish and shellfish (all fish and blue crabs) for HSC above Fred Hartman Bridge and an advisory for catfish, spotted seatrout and blue crab between Fred Hartman Bridge south to a line from Red Bluff Point to Five-Mile Cut Marker to Houston Point. (2) ADV 50 issued in June 2013 advisory for all species of catfish for Galveston Bay and all contiguous waters, including Chocolate, East, Trinity, and West Bays. Galveston Bay Symposium highlighted air deposition studies and GBEP funded a project with the University of Houston. Lead Implementers GBEP Texas Department of State Health Services (TDSHS) TCEQ TPWD General Land Office (GLO) Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs



Houston Wilderness Rice University City of Houston

Test & analysis of Asian Carp Fish





6. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Evaluate Best Management Practice (BMP) Demonstration Projects Description Evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs to address non-point source (NPS) and point source (PS) pollutants and improve water quality. Evaluation of data from either built BMPs with available data or from future planned demonstration BMPs would be studied. New projects would be instrumented or monitored to collect stormwater run-off in watersheds containing impaired waters. Projects & Accomplishments Demonstration Projects Include: (a) Brays Bayou Wetland (b) Ghirardi Family Watersmart Park (c) Harris County Flood Control (HCFCD) Detention with Water Quality Improvement Features (d) Birnamwood Dr. (e) Almeda Rd. Lead Implementers GBEP Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs Local Governments



Houston Wilderness CCISD Education Village Stormwater Wetland (Texas Coastal Watershed Program) Gulf-Houston RCP (Headwaters to Baywaters Initiative)





7. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Conduct Research on Ecosystem Service and Economic Valuation of Bay Resources Description Detail the Ecosystem Services provided by Galveston Bay and Upland Habitats and Determine an Economic Value for Each. Projects & Accomplishments (1) Initial White Paper completed by Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) (2005?). (2) Research being carried out by Harte Research Institute and Gulf of Mexico Alliance - study completed for Galveston Bay in 2012. (3) Paper by the SSPEED Center on Mid Coast completed in 2014. (4) Ecosystem services viewer by Dr. David Yoskowitz TAMU Corpus Christi. (5) Houston Wilderness and The Nature Conservancy have each addressed Galveston Bay ecosystem services. Lead Implementers GBEP Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs



Houston Wilderness Houston Wilderness and The Nature Conservancy have each addressed Galveston Bay ecosystem services (->ES Primer (2016)





8. Issue Area Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied Research and Monitoring Specific Objective Complete Coastal Resiliency and Acclimation Studies Description Characterize the risks to coastal habitats from rising sea-levels, altered precipitation patterns, and changes to the frequency and size of tropical systems. Determine the impacts and ecosystem adaptations to changing patterns. Projects & Accomplishments (1) The Bureau of Economic Geology completed a sea level change analysis in (2005?). (2) SSPEED Center has worked in recent years to evaluate coastal resiliency and change due to storms and sea level rise. Lead Implementers GBEP Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs








9. Issue Area Increase Access to Galveston Bay Ecosystem Information Specific Objective Support Tracking the Status and Trends of Environmental and Stressor Indicators of Galveston Bay Ecosystem Health Description Obtain, analyze, and synthesize routine monitoring data sources needed to determine the status and trends of bay indicators, parameters and stressors directly related to the health and sustainability of the bay in formats that increase access and understanding. Projects & Accomplishments (1) GBEP has produced the Status and Trends on an annual basis to meet Legislative Budget Board measure. Status and Trends has been used to gather and maintain data related to the Bay to prevent loss of data and prevent the need for costly restarts and maintain continuity and knowledge. (2) The Galveston Bay Foundation and Houston Advance Research Center have begun to produce an annual report card based on Status and Trends work and previous GBEP indicator development. (3) The State of the Bay report builds on the Status and Trends information, reports on changes to environmental and social indicators, summarizes resource management efforts to preserve and protect Galveston Bay, and summarizes the latest Galveston Bay research. Lead Implementers M&R Subcommittee Galveston Bay Council Budget & Priorities Subcommittee



Industry Partner w/industry





10. Issue Area Increase Access to Galveston Bay Ecosystem Information Specific Objective Expand the Dissemination of Easy to Access Galveston Bay Monitoring and Research Description Disseminate monitoring and research results through a variety of active and passive outreach vehicles for consumption by different audiences, including GBEP partners, decision makers, bay user groups and the public. Projects & Accomplishments (1) In addition to passive outreach in the form of reports GBEP, project contractors, and technical stakeholders (e.g. Master Naturalist) present at the Biennial State of the Bay Symposiums, technical presentations at the behest of local organizations, and at workshops. (2) The GBEP website and Galveston Bay Information Center have also been used to house monitoring and research reports, National Green Book series, and project location/information. Lead Implementers M&R Subcommittee GBEP TAMU Galveston Bay Foundation (GBF) HARC Various Research Institutions, Agencies, and NGOs



Galveston Bay Foundation? TPWD - Data for Status & Trends Industry

No response.





M&R Exercise #2 - Costs and Feasibility of Targeted Outputs RES-1* Conduct Biological Stressor Monitoring and Research Evaluate the influence of biological stressors (e.g. harmful algal blooms, Toxoplasma gondii, Perkinsus marinus (Dermo), invasive species and commercial and recreational harvest) on aquatic, semi-aquatic, and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. RES-2* Conduct Geochemical Stressor Monitoring and Research Investigate the effect of geochemical stressors (e.g. eutrophication, biomagnification of legacy toxins and endocrine disrupters) on aquatic, semi-aquatic and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. Evaluate fate and transport through the environment and develop baselines for future comparison. RES-3* Conduct Physical Stressor Monitoring and Research Study the influence of physical changes to the estuary (e.g. litter and illegal dumping, modified freshwater inflows, bay circulation, coastal erosion, shoreline hardening, land use changes and loss or fragmentation of habitats) on aquatic, semi-aquatic, and terrestrial species populations found in the Galveston Bay watershed. RES-4* Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Contact Recreation Initiate and complete studies that characterize the public's contact recreation risks from waterborne pathogens in bay and bay tributaries; conduct bacteria source tracking to characterize sources of pathogens and evaluate the emergence of new pathogen indicators. RES-5* Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Seafood Consumption Identify sources and evaluate remedial actions to address legacy pollutants, surface run-off, illegal dumping and air deposition that can affect the size of recreational shellfish harvest areas or number of seafood advisories. Known pollutants of concern include PCB, Dioxin, and mercury. RES-6* Evaluate Best Management Practice (BMP) Demonstration Projects Evaluate the effectiveness of best management practices (BMPs) to address non-point source (NPS) and point source (PS) pollutants and improve water quality. Evaluation of data from either built BMPs with available data or from future planned demonstration BMPs would be studied. New projects would be instrumented or monitored to collect stormwater run-off in watersheds containing impaired waters.


RES-7* Conduct Research on Ecosystem Service and Economic Valuation of Bay Resources Detail the ecosystem services provided by Galveston Bay and upland habitats and determine an economic value for each. RES-8* Complete Coastal Resiliency and Acclimation Studies Characterize the risks to coastal habitats from rising sea-levels, altered precipitation patterns, and changes to the frequency and size of tropical systems. Determine the impacts and ecosystem adaptations to changing patterns.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support the State of the Bay Symposium and Proceedings. $0 - $200,000 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

Short Collect Data and Create Data and Mapping Research Hub (Database).


Short Support the Development of White Papers, Journal Publications, Technical Presentations, and Workshops.


Medium Create the State of the Bay Characterization Report. $0 - $200,000 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Conduct The Galveston Bay Plan Update. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Create the Research Synthesis Report. $0 - $200,000 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

Long-Term Conduct The Galveston Bay Plan Revision. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

*The Targeted Outputs for all eight Research Specific Objectives are the same and were grouped during Exercise #2.


ACS-1 Support Tracking the Status and Trends of Environmental and Stressor Indicators of Galveston Bay Ecosystem Health. Obtain, analyze, and synthesize routine monitoring data sources needed to determine the status and trends of bay indicators, parameters and stressors directly related to the health and sustainability of the bay in formats that increase access and understanding.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Create Status and Trends Report, Post Status and Trends to the Website.


Short Support Development of the Galveston Bay Report Card. $0 - $200,000 3/3 Respondents Agreed None

Medium Create the State of the Bay Characterization Report. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/3 Respondents Agreed None



ACS-2 Expand the Dissemination of Easy to Access Galveston Bay Monitoring and Research. Disseminate monitoring and research results through a variety of active and passive outreach vehicles for consumption by different audiences, including Galveston Bay Estuary Program (GBEP) partners, decision makers, bay user groups and the public.



SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE?

Short Support the Regular State of the Bay Symposium and Proceedings.


Short Collect Data and Create Data and Mapping Research Hub (Database).


Short Support the Development of White Papers, Journal Publications, Technical Presentations, and Workshops.


Medium Create the State of the Bay Characterization Report. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/3 Respondents Agreed None


Long-Term Create the Research Synthesis Report. $200,000 - $1 Million 3/3 Respondents Agreed None



M&R Exercise #3 - Implementation Feasibility

100% (10/10) M&R objectives were considered strongly supporting.

40% (4/10) were considered easy to implement.

Monitoring and Research Plan Area Action Specific Objective Ease of Implementation Support of GBEP Mission

RES-1 Conduct Biological Stressor Monitoring and Research -0.69 1.85

RES-2

Conduct Geochemical Stressor Monitoring and Research -0.15 1.69

RES-3 Conduct Physical Stressor Monitoring and Research -0.23 1.31

RES-4

Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Contact Recreation 0.43 1.50

RES-5

Conduct Monitoring and Research to Address Limits to Seafood Consumption -0.57 1.36

RES-6

Evaluate Best Management Practice (BMP) Demonstration Projects 1.14 1.57

RES-7

Conduct Research on Ecosystem Service and Economic Valuation of Bay Resources 0.14 1.71

RES-8 Complete Coastal Resiliency and Acclimation Studies -0.21 1.07

ACS-1

Support Tracking the Status and Trends of Environmental and Stressor Indicators of Galveston Bay Ecosystem Health -0.21 1.79

ACS-2

Expand the Dissemination of Easy to Access Galveston Bay Monitoring and Research 1.36 1.64


Very Easy



DRAFT – Appendix D: Public Comment Log

APPENDIX D: PUBLIC COMMENT LOG

{Content coming after Open House}

DRAFT – Appendix E: Technical Crosswalk

APPENDIX E: TECHNICAL CROSSWALK


Action PlanAction

NumberAction Description Plan Priority Area Action Number

HP-1 Restore, Create, and Protect Wetlands HC-1, HC-2, HC-3

HP-2Promote Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material to Restore

and Create WetlandsHC-1, HC-2

HP-3Inventory Degraded Wetlands and Fund Remedial

MeasuresComplete

HP-4Implement a Coordinated System-Wide Wetland

Regulatory StrategyComplete

HP-5 Acquire and Protect Quality Wetlands HC-1

HP-6Develop Economic and Tax Incentive Programs to Protect

WetlandsNot Applicable

HP-7 Facilitate Bird Nesting on Existing Sites HC-2, HC-3, SC-1

HP-8 Build Nesting Islands Using Dredged Material HC-2, SC-1

HP-9 Reduce Erosional Impacts on Wetlands and Habitats HC-2, HC-3

SP-1Implement a Bay-Wide Effort to Strengthen Species

ManagementSC-1, RES-1*

SP-2Return Oyster Shell to Designated Locations Within the

BayHC-2, HC-3, SC-1

SP-3Promote the Development of Oyster Reefs Using

Alternate MaterialsHC-2, HC-3, RES-1*

SP-4Set Aside a Portion of Reef Habitat as Scientific Research

Areas or PreservesHC-1, SC-1, RES-1*

SP-5Encourage Continued Development of Gear to Reduce

Commercial By-CatchComplete

SP-6 Conduct Educational programs About Catch and Release PEA-2*, PEA-3*

SP-7Investigate Potential Measures to Reduce Impingement

and EntrainmentComplete

SP-8Develop Management Plans for Endangered or

Threatened SpeciesComplete

SP-9Improve Enforcement of Prohibitions Against

Introductions of Exotic SpeciesComplete

SP-10Identify and Implement Techniques for the Control of

Problem Exotic SpeciesSC-2, RES-1*, RES-2*

PH-1 Develop a Seafood Consumption Safety Program PHA-1, RES-2*, RES-5*

PH-2 Enhance TDH Shellfish Sanitation Program PHA-4, RES-1*

PH-3 Develop a Contact Recreation Advisory ProgramPHA-2, PHA-3, RES-1,

RES-4*

Principal Action Section

Support Habitat Conservation, pg. 75.

Support Species Conservation, pg. 83.

Promote Public Health and Awareness, pg. 61.




National Bycatch Reduction Strategy.

Support Public Education and Awareness Initiatives, pg. 113.

Section 316(b) of Clean Water Act

Regulatory organizations address development of plans.

TPWD and TDA designated to regulate/enforce introductions.

1995 CCMP Action Plans and Actions2018 CCMP Revision

Action NumbersH

AB

ITA

T P

RO

TEC

TIO

N

PR

OTE

CT

AN

D S

UST

AIN

LIV

ING

RES

OU

RC

ES

PU

BLI

C

HEA

LTH

PR

OTE

CTI

ON

ENSU

RE

SAFE

HU

MA

N A

ND

AQ

UA

TIC

LIF

E

USE

SPEC

IES

PO

PU

LATI

ON

PR

OTE

CTI

ON

PR

OTE

CT

AN

D S

UST

AIN

LIV

ING

RES

OU

RC

ES




Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.


Legislative institutions address development of incentives, and are subject

to change during legislative sessions.




Support Species Conservation, pg. 83.


1 of 4

Action PlanAction


FW-1Complete Current Studies to Determine Freshwater

Inflow Needs for the BayFWI-2, RES-3*

FW-2Expand Streamflow, Sediment Load, and Rainfall

MonitoringFWI-2, RES-3*

FW-3Establish Management Strategies for Meeting Freshwater

Inflow NeedsFWI-1

FW-4Establish Inflow Regulations to Protect the Ecological

Needs of the EstuaryFWI-1

FW-5 Explore Means of Providing Sediment to the Estuary FWI-2, RES-3*

FW-6 Reduce Water Consumption FWI-3, PEA-2*

FW-7Evaluate the Effects of Channels and Structures on Bay

Circulation, Habitats and SpeciesRES-3*

SD-1Promote Planning to Facilitate Natural Resource Damage

AssessmentsComplete

SD-2Identify Simplified Damage Assessment Procedures for

Small Oil SpillsComplete

SD-3Facilitate Effective Restoration of Galveston Bay's Natural

Resources Damaged by SpillsHC-2, HC-3

SD-4Facilitate Spill Cleanup by Advance Shoreline

CharacterizationComplete

SD-5 Improve Trash Management Near the Shoreline PS-1

SD-6 Remove Trash from Storm Water Discharges PS-1

SD-7 Publicize Environmental Harm Caused by Illegal DumpingPS-1, SP0-3*, SPO-4*,

PEA-1-3*

SM-1 Establish a Planning Program for Shoreline Development Not Applicable

SM-2Identify Appropriate Residential Shoreline Development

GuidelinesNot Applicable

SM-3Identify Appropriate Commercial and Industrial Shoreline

Development GuidelinesNot Applicable

SM-4Minimize Negative Effects of Structures and Dredging on

Publicly Owned LandsRES-3*

SM-5 Improve Access to Publicly Owned Shorelines Not ApplicablePR

OTE

CT

AN

D S

UST

AIN

LIV

ING

RES

OU

RC

ES

Sustain Freshwater Inflows, pg. 91.




Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied

Research and Monitoring, pg. 125.

NRDA trustees participate in GBC planning process.



Action not selected by stakeholders as a priority in 2018 CCMP; will be

reevaluated for inclusion in future revisions.

Requirement of NRDA and regulated by CG and GLO.


GLO Oil Spill Tool Kit and NOAA Environmental Sensitivity Maps

Improve Water Quality Through Point Source Pollution Abatement, pg. 53.



Action not selected by stakeholders as a priority in 2018 CCMP; will be

reevaluated for inclusion in future revisions.Action not selected by stakeholders as a priority in 2018 CCMP; will be

reevaluated for inclusion in future revisions.Action not selected by stakeholders as a priority in 2018 CCMP; will be

reevaluated for inclusion in future revisions.Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied


SPIL

LS/D

UM

PIN

G

PR

OTE

CT

AN

D

SUST

AIN

LIV

ING

RES

OU

RC

ES

ENSU

RE

SAFE

HU

MA

N A

ND

AQ

UA

TIC

LIF

E

USE

FRES

HW

ATE

R IN

FLO

W A

ND

BA

Y

CIR

CU

LATI

ON

PR

OTE

CT

AN

D S

UST

AIN

LIV

ING

RES

OU

RC

ES


Action Numbers


SHO

REL

INE

MA

NA

GEM

ENT

2 of 4

Action PlanAction


WSQ-1Reduce Contaminant Concentrations to Meet Standards

and CriteriaPHA-5, RES-2*

WSQ-2Determine Sources of Ambient Toxicity in Water and

Sediment PHA-5, RES-2*, RES-5*

WSQ-3 Establish and Adopt Sediment Quality Criteria PHA-5

WSQ-4 Perform TMDL Loading Studies for Toxics PHA-5

WSQ-5 Support Clean Texas 2000 Pollution Prevention Program Not Applicable

WSQ-6 Reduce Nutrient and BOD Loadings to Problem Areas RES-2*

WSQ-7Perform TMDL Loading Studies for Oxygen Demand and

NutrientsRES-2*

NPS-1Implement Storm Water Programs for Local

Municipalities

NPS-1, NPS-2, NPS-4,

PS-1

NPS-2Perform Pilot Projects to Develop NPS Best Management

Practices for the Galveston Bay Watershed


NPS-4, PS-1, RES-6*

NPS-3Identify and Correct Priority Watershed Pollutant

ProblemsNPS-1, PS-1, RES-2*

NPS-4 Establish Residential Load Reduction Programs Not Applicable

NPS-5 Correct Malfunctioning Shoreline Septic TanksNPS-1, NPS-2, NPS-3,

NPS-4, RES-6*

NPS-6Implement NPS Reduction Plan Program for New

DevelopmentPS-1

NPS-7 Establish Roadway Planning to Minimize NPS Effects PS-1

NPS-8Implement NPDES Storm Water Program for Area

IndustriesComplete

NPS-9Prevent Degradation of Bay Waters by Known Industrial

Groundwater PlumesComplete

NPS-10 Develop Inventory of Agricultural Non-Point Sources NPS-1

NPS-11Coordinate and Implement Existing Agricultural NPS

Control Programs


NPS-4, RES-6*

NPS-12 Adopt Regional Construction Standards for NPS Reduction PS-1

NPS-13Implement Toxics and Nutrient Control Practices at

Construction SitesPS-1

NPS-14Require Sewage Pumpout, Storage, and Provisions for

TreatmentNPS-1, NPS-2, NPS-4

NPS-15Require Use of Marine Sanitary Chemicals That Can Be

Treated in POTWsNPS-1, NPS-2, NPS-4

NPS-16Implement Washdown Controls and Containment

MeasuresNPS-1, NPS-2, NPS-4

Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement, pg.

45.




45.


45.


45.Action not selected by stakeholders as a priority in 2018 CCMP; will be

reevaluated for inclusion in future revisions.



45.Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement, pg.

45.Improve Water Quality Through Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement, pg.

45.




Action Numbers



45.


WA

TER

AN

D S

EDIM

ENT

QU

ALI

TY

ENSU

RE

SAFE

HU

MA

N A

ND

AQ

UA

TIC

LIF

E U

SE

NO

NP

OIN

T SO

UR

CES

OF

PO

LLU

TIO

N

ENSU

RE

SAFE

HU

MA

N A

ND

AQ

UA

TIC

LIF

E U

SE



Clean Texas 2000 program not continued. Not found in 2018 CCMP.

Addressed by TCEQ/EPA TPDES/NPDES programs.

Addressed by TCEQ/EPA RCRA/Superfund programs.


45.


Research and Monitoring, pg. 125.Collaborate with Research Institutions to Support Focus Area Applied


3 of 4

Action PlanAction


PS-1Determine Location and Extent of Bypass and Overflow

ProblemsPS-2

PS-2 Eliminate or Reduce Bypass and Overflow Problems PS-2

PS-3 Regionalize Small Wastewater Treatment Systems PS-3

PS-4Improve Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement for

Small Discharges PS-3

PS-5 Implement a Dry-Weather Illegal Connection Program PS-1

PS-6Issue NPDES Coastal General Permit or Eliminate Harm

From Oil Field Produced Water DischargeComplete

RSC-1 Establish a Research Coordination Board Complete

RSC-2 Identify Research Needs From an Ecosystem Perspective RES-1,2,3,4,5,6, 7, 8

RSC-3 Continue State of the Bay ProcessACS-1, ACS-2, RES-1,

RES-2

RSC-4 Increase Funding for Galveston Bay Research RES-1,2,3,4,5,6, 7, 8

PPE-1Establish Citizen Involvement as an Integral Part of the

Galveston Bay ProgramSPO-1

PPE-2 Continue and Expand the State of the Bay Symposia SPO-2, SPO-3, SPO-4

PPE-3Develop and Implement a Long-Range Adult Education

and Outreach Program

PEA-1, PEA-2, PEA-3,

NPS-2*, NPS-4*

PPE-4Develop Specific Curricula for Use in Galveston Bay

Watershed School DistrictsPEA-3

PPE-5Continue to Develop Effective Volunteer Opportunities

for CitizensSPO-1

PPE-6 Maintain a Citizen Pollution Reporting System SPO-1

PPE-7

Develop and Implement a Strategy for Informing,

Educating, and Providing Support for Local Government

Involvement

NPS-4*

PPE-8Provide Assistance for User Groups Affected by

Implementation of The Galveston Bay Plan

PEA-1, PEA-2, PEA-3,

SPO-2, SPO-3

ACS-3

*Crossover Action. An action that influences other areas of the CCMP.

Increase Access to Galveston Bay Ecosystem Information, pg. 137.


Research and Monitoring, pg. 125.Preserve Galveston Bay Through Stakeholder and Partner Outreach, pg.

105.Preserve Galveston Bay Through Stakeholder and Partner Outreach, pg.

105.






Addressed by TRC and TCEQ.

Established and merged with Monitoring Subcommittee to form

Monitoring and Research Subcommittee.




PU

BLI

C P

AR

TIC

IPA

TIO

N A

ND

ED

UC

ATI

ON

ENG

AG

E C

OM

MU

NIT

IES

1995 REGIONAL MONITORING PROGRAM

Preserve Galveston Bay Through Stakeholder and Partner Outreach, pg.

105.Preserve Galveston Bay Through Stakeholder and Partner Outreach, pg.

105.


45.

Support Public Education and Awareness Initiatives (PEA), pg. 113

PO

INT

SOU

RC

ES O

F P

OLL

UTI

ON

ENSU

RE

SAFE

HU

MA

N A

ND

AQ

UA

TIC

LIF

E U

SE

RES

EAR

CH

INFO

RM

SC

IEN

CE-

BA

SED

DEC

ISIO

N

MA

KIN

G

2018 REGIONAL MONITORING PROGRAM, pgs. 135 and 145



Action Numbers


4 of 4

DRAFT – Appendix F: Bibliography

APPENDIX F: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Credits for page 71: H-GAC Community and Environmental GIS (CE GIS) Description: The dataset was developed based on 2015 LandSat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) and the Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS) scenes of 30m resolution acquired from the USGS. Four scenes with 0-5% cloud cover were used to cover the entire area. Using supervised and unsupervised classification techniques in ENVI remote sensing package, the imageries were classified into 10 major land cover classes. Classification classes were determined based on the NOAA and NLCD land cover classification schemes. The output cell size is in 30m resolution. City of Houston. About Houston - Facts and Figures. Retrieved February 27, 2018, from

http://www.houstontx.gov/abouthouston/houstonfacts.html Ellis, A., Jankowski, P., Martinez, R.G., Pherigo, J., Phillip, J., and Valliani, N. (May 2017). Houston Facts 2017.

Retrieved from http://www.houston.org/assets/pdf/economy/Houston_Facts_2017.pdf Environmental Protection Agency. (2004). National Coastal Condition Report II. Retrieved from

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-10/documents/nccriicomplete.pdf Galveston Bay Foundation and Houston Advanced Research Center. (2015). Galveston Bay Report Card – 2015.

Retrieved from http://www.galvbaygrade.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Galveston_Bay_Full_Report_updweb.pdf

Galveston Bay Foundation and Houston Advanced Research Center. (2016). Galveston Bay Report Card - 2016. Retrieved from http://www.galvbaygrade.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/2016_Galveston_Bay_Full_Report_8-5-16-webSized.pdf

Galveston Bay Foundation and Houston Advanced Research Center. (2017). Galveston Bay Report Card - 2017. Retrieved from http://www.galvbaygrade.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2017_Galveston_Bay_Full_Report.pdf

Gonzalez, L. (2011). Chapter 8: The Bay's Living Resources. In Lester, L. J. and Gonzalez, L. A. (Eds.) The State of the Bay: A Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem, Third Edition (pp. 1-56). Houston, TX. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Galveston Bay Estuary Program.

Guillen, G., Mokrech, M., Oakley, J., and Moss, A. (2014). Armand Bayou Water Quality Improvement Grant: UHCL Created Stormwater Treatment Wetland. Retrieved from https://www.uhcl.edu/environmental-institute/research/publications/documents/13-003armandbayouwaterqualityimprovementfinal.pdf

Houston Advanced Research Center. (2017). Galveston Bay Status and Trends [website]. Retrieved from http://www.galvbaydata.org/www.galvbaydata.org/WaterSediment/WaterQuantity/FreshwaterInflowsG

roupGBFIG/tabid/217/Default.html Houston-Galveston Area Council. (2014). Basin Highlights Report: How’s the Water. Retrieved from

http://www.h-gac.com/community/water/publications/hows-the-water-basin-highlights-report-2014.pdf Houston-Galveston Area Council Socioeconomic Modeling Group. (2016). Building Inventory [Database based on

the Certified Appraisal Roll data collected and processed from individual County Appraisal Districts of Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, Harris and Liberty counties].

Houston-Galveston Area Council. (2017). [Graph and map illustrations of the demographic forecast in 8-county Houston-Galveston region]. 2017 H-GAC Regional Growth Forecast. Retrieved from http://arcgis02.h-gac.com/RGF2017/

Jacob, J. S. and R. Lopez. (2005). Freshwater, Non-tidal Wetland Loss Lower Galveston Bay Watershed 1992-2002: A Rapid Assessment Method Using GIS and Aerial Photography. Webster, TX. Texas Coastal Watershed Program.


Lester, L. (2011a). Chapter 2: An Overview of the System. In Lester, L. J. and Gonzalez, L. A. (Eds.) The State of the Bay: A Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem, Third Edition (pp. 1-34). Houston, TX. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Galveston Bay Estuary Program.

Lester, L. (2011b). Chapter 7: Key Habitats. In Lester, L. J. and Gonzalez, L. A. (Eds.) The State of the Bay: A Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem, Third Edition (pp. 1-34). Houston, TX. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Galveston Bay Estuary Program.

Lester, L. J. and Gonzalez, L. A. (Eds.) (2011). The State of the Bay: A Characterization of the Galveston Bay Ecosystem, Third Edition. Houston, TX. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Galveston Bay Estuary Program.

M.G. Forbes, et. Al. (2012). Nutrient Transformation and Retention by Coastal Prairie Wetlands, Upper Gulf Coast, Texas. Wetlands (2012) 32:705–715. Waco, TX. Society of Wetland Scientists.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2017, October 10). What is resilience? Retrieved from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/resilience.html

Office of the State Demographer. (2016). Introduction to Texas Domestic Migration. Retrieved from http://demographics.texas.gov/Resources/Publications/2016/2016_04-13_DomesticMigration.pdf

Omenn, G. S. (2006). Grand Challenges and Great Opportunities in Science, Technology, and Public Policy. Association Affairs, 314, 1696-1704.

Port Houston Authority. Overview. Retrieved from http://porthouston.com/about-us/ Port of Galveston. Port of Galveston by the numbers. Retrieved February 26, 2018, from

https://www.portofgalveston.com Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Army Corps of Engineers, 531U.S. 159 (2001). Texas City Terminal Railway Company. The Port of Texas City. Retrieved February 26, 2018, from http://tctrr.com/ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. (2014). TCEQ_AU_Line_2014 [Polyline shapefile]. Austin: Texas

Commission on Environmental Quality. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. (2017). Environmental Flows [website]. Retrieved from https://www.tceq.texas.gov/permitting/water_rights/wr_technical-resources/eflows Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Water Quality Division. (2015). 2014 Texas Integrated Report of

Surface Water Quality for the Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d). Retrieved from https://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/assessment/14twqi

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2017a). Port of Galveston [Flyer]. Retrieved from https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/economic-data/ports/docs/galveston.pdf

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2017b). Port of Houston [Flyer]. Retrieved from https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/economic-data/ports/docs/houston.pdf

Texas Department of Transportation. (2016). Gulf Intracoastal Waterway: Legislative Report—85th Legislature. Retrieved from https://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/tpp/giww/legislative-report-85.pdf

Texas Water Development Board. Bays & Estuaries. Retrieved February 26, 2018, from http://www.twdb.texas.gov/surfacewater/bays/index.asp

Texas Water Development Board. Texas Instream Flow Program. Retrieved February 26, 2018, from https://www.twdb.texas.gov/surfacewater/flows/instream/

Trinity and San Jacinto and Galveston Bay Basin and Bay Expert Science Team. (2009). Environmental Flows Recommendations Report. Retrieved from https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/watersupply/water_rights/eflows/trinity_sanjacinto_bbestrecommendationsreport.pdf

United States v. Rapanos, 190 F. Supp. 2d. 1011 (2002). U.S. Census Bureau: Housing Division. (2016). Housing Units Intercensal Tables: 2000-2010. Retrieved from

https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/tables/2000-2010/intercensal/housing/hu-est00int-02-48.xls


U.S. Census Bureau: Population Division. (2016). Quick Facts - Texas. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/TX

USDA National Agricultural Library, Executive Order 13112 (1999). Vajda, A., Barber, L., Gray, J., Lopez, E., Woodling, J., and Norris, D. (2008, March 25). Reproductive Disruption in

Fish Downstream from an Estrogenic Wastewater Effluent. Environmental Science & Technology. 42 (9), pp 3407–3414. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0720661

White, W., Tremblay, T., Wermund Jr., E.G., and Handley, L. (1993). Trends and Status of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in the Galveston Bay System, Texas. Houston, TX: Galveston Bay Estuary Program.

Williams, B., Szaro, R., and Shapiro, C. (2009). Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Guide. Washington, D.C.: Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior.

DRAFT – Appendix G: Additional Resources

APPENDIX G: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

All website and document links included in The Galveston Bay Plan, 2nd Edition are current as of publication date

{March 5, 2018).

GBEP Website www.gbep.texas.gov Regional Monitoring Database (Status and Trends) http://www.texascoastalatlas.com/AtlasViewers/StatusAndTrends/SnTatlas.html Galveston Bay Report Card http://www.galvbaygrade.org/ Basin Highlights Report – How’s the Water http://www.h-gac.com/community/publications/water-resources.aspx Texas Department of State Health Services Website - Fishing Advisories, Bans, and FAQs about Bodies of Water - Seafood and Aquatic Life https://www.dshs.texas.gov/seafood/advisories-bans.aspx EPA Impaired Waters and TMDLs: Program Overview: Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) https://www.epa.gov/tmdl/program-overview-total-maximum-daily-loads-tmdl TCEQ: Watershed Protection Plans for Nonpoint Source Water Pollution https://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/nonpoint-source/mgmt-plan/watershed-pp.html Water Resources Information Map www.h-gac.com/Go/WRIM GBAN http://www.galvbay.org/GBAN Trash Bash www.trashbash.org HERE in Houston http://www.hereinhouston.org Invasive Field Guide http://www.galvbayinvasives.org/ State of the Bay Report - 2011 http://galvbaydata.org/www.galvbaydata.org/StateoftheBay/tabid/1846/Default.html Texas Coastal Atlas www.texascoastalatlas.com

http://www.gbep.texas.gov/

http://www.texascoastalatlas.com/AtlasViewers/StatusAndTrends/SnTatlas.html

http://www.galvbaygrade.org/

http://www.h-gac.com/community/publications/water-resources.aspx

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/seafood/advisories-bans.aspx

https://www.epa.gov/tmdl/program-overview-total-maximum-daily-loads-tmdl

https://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/nonpoint-source/mgmt-plan/watershed-pp.html

http://h-gac.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=30b802d67f5d4a2aa7915cc30bca9318

http://www.galvbay.org/GBAN

http://www.trashbash.org/

http://www.hereinhouston.org/

http://www.galvbayinvasives.org/

http://galvbaydata.org/www.galvbaydata.org/StateoftheBay/tabid/1846/Default.html

http://www.texascoastalatlas.com/

Mailing Address

Galveston Bay Estuary Program 17041 El Camino Real, Ste. 210 Houston, Texas 77058

Contact Us

(281) 218-6461 www.gbep.state.tx.us [email protected]

http://www.gbep.state.tx.us/

Appendices - h-gac.com€¦ · 177 DRAFT – Appendices Appendices APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY APPENDIX B:...

Documents

Transcript of Appendices - h-gac.com€¦ · 177 DRAFT – Appendices Appendices APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY APPENDIX B:...