Environmental Considerations Environmental Considerations in Regional Water Planning in Regional Water Planning

Dan Opdyke, PhD, PEDan Opdyke, PhD, PE

Water Resources BranchWater Resources Branch

Charting the CourseNovember 17, 2006

OverviewOverview

•• Planning statutes and rules related to the Planning statutes and rules related to the environmentenvironment

•• Selected topics from the 2Selected topics from the 2 rdrd round of planninground of planning

•• RWPG policy recommendations related to the RWPG policy recommendations related to the environmentenvironment

•• RWPG proposals for the next two yearsRWPG proposals for the next two years

TPWD’s Role In State Water Planning

Non-voting member of each region

Review and commenton plans

Technical assistanceto regions

Regional Water Planning Rules and the Environment

• Require consideration of environmental water needs when planning for future water needs

• Provide potential recognition for river and stream segments of unique ecological value

• Promote water management strategies that are cost effective and environmentally sensitive

• Require a quantitative reporting of environmental factors

• The environment is not explicitly recognized as a Water User Group

Quantitative Reporting of Quantitative Reporting of Environmental FactorsEnvironmental Factors

•• TopicTopic–– Required by TAC Required by TAC §§357.7(a)(8)(A)(ii)357.7(a)(8)(A)(ii)

(a) Regional water plan development shall include the (a) Regional water plan development shall include the following:following:

(8) Evaluations of all water management strategies the regional water planning group determines to be potentially feasible by including: (A) a quantitative reporting of:

(ii) environmental factors including effects on environmental water needs, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and effect ofupstream development on bays, estuaries, and arms of the Gulf of Mexico;

Quantitative Reporting of Quantitative Reporting of Environmental FactorsEnvironmental Factors

•• Implementation in RWPsImplementation in RWPs

–– Typically high/medium/low or score such as 1Typically high/medium/low or score such as 1--55

–– Region DRegion D•• Of 64 Of 64 WMSsWMSs, all scored a 1 (little or no impact) including , all scored a 1 (little or no impact) including

23,902 ac23,902 ac--ft/yr from a new pipeline from Toledo Bend to ft/yr from a new pipeline from Toledo Bend to Hunt Co. for Steam Electric useHunt Co. for Steam Electric use

–– Region HRegion H

•• Leveraged existing tools to quantify frequencies of Leveraged existing tools to quantify frequencies of meeting freshwater inflow targets with meeting freshwater inflow targets with WMSsWMSs

Quantitative Reporting of Quantitative Reporting of Environmental FactorsEnvironmental Factors

•• ConcernConcern–– Lack of complete information to set prioritiesLack of complete information to set priorities

–– Delayed identification of possible fatal flawsDelayed identification of possible fatal flaws

•• Potential ResolutionPotential Resolution–– Document rationale for each scoreDocument rationale for each score

–– Enlist agency assistanceEnlist agency assistance

–– Continue devoting resources to task, especially for Continue devoting resources to task, especially for large large WMSsWMSs

Ecologically Unique Stream Ecologically Unique Stream SegmentsSegments

•• TopicTopic–– TWC TWC §§16.051(f): The legislature may designate a 16.051(f): The legislature may designate a

river or stream segment of unique ecological river or stream segment of unique ecological value. This designation solely means that a state value. This designation solely means that a state agency or political subdivision of the state may not agency or political subdivision of the state may not finance the actual construction of a reservoir in a finance the actual construction of a reservoir in a specific river or stream segment designated by the specific river or stream segment designated by the legislature under this subsection. legislature under this subsection.

–– Such consideration helps the RWPGs understand Such consideration helps the RWPGs understand the natural resources in their region and avoid the natural resources in their region and avoid impacts to these resources.impacts to these resources.

Ecologically Unique Stream Ecologically Unique Stream SegmentsSegments

•• ImplementationImplementation

–– Region E has recommended 7 segmentsRegion E has recommended 7 segments

–– Region H has recommended 8 segmentsRegion H has recommended 8 segments

E H

Ecologically Unique Stream Ecologically Unique Stream SegmentsSegments

•• ConcernConcern–– Other regions are reticent to support designation because of Other regions are reticent to support designation because of

perceived uncertainty regarding effectperceived uncertainty regarding effect–– In 2007 draft SWP, this designation is proposed as In 2007 draft SWP, this designation is proposed as

mitigation for future reservoirs:mitigation for future reservoirs:•• “The Legislature should designate all river or stream segments “The Legislature should designate all river or stream segments

of unique ecological value recommended in the 2006 Regional of unique ecological value recommended in the 2006 Regional Water Plans and the 2007 State Water Plan for protection Water Plans and the 2007 State Water Plan for protection under Texas Water Code, Section 16.051(g) as mitigation for under Texas Water Code, Section 16.051(g) as mitigation for future reservoirs.”future reservoirs.”

•• This sentence is not included in the final draft of the 2007 staThis sentence is not included in the final draft of the 2007 state te water plan that was released Mondaywater plan that was released Monday

•• Potential ResolutionPotential Resolution–– Recognize that the simple prohibition of state funding for a Recognize that the simple prohibition of state funding for a

reservoir at a site does not constitute adequate mitigation for reservoir at a site does not constitute adequate mitigation for a reservoir built elsewherea reservoir built elsewhere

Reservoir MitigationReservoir Mitigation

•• TopicTopic–– Reservoir construction requires mitigation for lost Reservoir construction requires mitigation for lost

habitathabitat

•• ImplementationImplementation–– Region CRegion C

•• Default assumption:Default assumption:

•• Recommended reservoir permitting and mitigation costs Recommended reservoir permitting and mitigation costs are close to this formula. Deviations are not explainedare close to this formula. Deviations are not explained

•• Frye & Curtis 1990 (TPWD & USFWS report) for Marvin Frye & Curtis 1990 (TPWD & USFWS report) for Marvin Nichols: Nichols:

permitting + mitigation cost = 2 × conservation pool land acquispermitting + mitigation cost = 2 × conservation pool land acquisition costition cost

mitigation area = 2.5 mitigation area = 2.5 -- 9.7 × conservation pool9.7 × conservation pool

Reservoir MitigationReservoir Mitigation

•• ConcernConcern

–– Mitigation costs more uncertain than many other Mitigation costs more uncertain than many other cost elements cost elements

–– Planning Planning vsvs permitting level of effort permitting level of effort

•• Potential ResolutionPotential Resolution

–– Fund projects (e.g., Region DFund projects (e.g., Region D’’s SOW priority #1) s SOW priority #1) to improve estimates of mitigation requirementsto improve estimates of mitigation requirements

–– Leverage reservoir study currently being funded Leverage reservoir study currently being funded by TWDBby TWDB

Land StewardshipLand Stewardship

•• TopicTopic–– Voluntary land stewardship can increase Voluntary land stewardship can increase

groundwater levels and streamflowsgroundwater levels and streamflows–– Many ancillary benefits to soil, wildlife, water Many ancillary benefits to soil, wildlife, water

quality, etc.quality, etc.

•• ImplementationImplementation–– Considered, but not recommended, in some Considered, but not recommended, in some

regions due to lack of certainty, e.g., Gregions due to lack of certainty, e.g., G–– Recommended at some level in other regions, Recommended at some level in other regions,

e.g., F, Le.g., F, L

Land StewardshipLand Stewardship

•• ConcernConcern

–– Yields difficult to estimate and depend onYields difficult to estimate and depend on

–– Affects the connection between groundwater and Affects the connection between groundwater and surface water surface water –– which is not well represented by which is not well represented by the GAM and WAM tools the GAM and WAM tools

•• Potential ResolutionPotential Resolution

–– Coordinate research Coordinate research

–– Improve predictive toolsImprove predictive tools

Climate ChangeClimate Change

•• TopicTopic–– Climate change has potential to change both Climate change has potential to change both

temperature and precipitationtemperature and precipitation

–– Possible widePossible wide--ranging impacts to water and ranging impacts to water and ecosystemsecosystems

•• ImplementationImplementation–– Discussed briefly and qualitatively in final draft Discussed briefly and qualitatively in final draft

2007 SWP2007 SWP

–– Not mentioned in 2006 RWPsNot mentioned in 2006 RWPs

Climate ChangeClimate Change

•• ConcernConcern–– PeerPeer--reviewed research suggests substantial reviewed research suggests substantial

negative consequences for streamflows and water negative consequences for streamflows and water suppliessupplies

•• Potential ResolutionPotential Resolution–– Compile what research has been doneCompile what research has been done–– Quantitatively discuss uncertaintiesQuantitatively discuss uncertainties–– Support coordinated application of climate change Support coordinated application of climate change

models to Texas hydrology with focus on models to Texas hydrology with focus on implications for water planningimplications for water planning

Groundwater SustainabilityGroundwater Sustainability

•• TopicTopic–– Sustainability is difficult to define and quantifySustainability is difficult to define and quantify

•• ImplementationImplementation–– Region K Region K

•• “Sustainability is defined as balancing groundwater “Sustainability is defined as balancing groundwater withdrawalswithdrawalswith natural recharge…”with natural recharge…”

•• ConcernConcern– If “withdrawals” = pumping = recharge, then springflows = 0

– If “withdrawals” = pumping + natural discharge = recharge, then the Region K goal simply states a long-term physical fact

Groundwater SustainabilityGroundwater Sustainability

• Implementation (again Region K)–– ““groundwater availability values from the GAM runs were to

maintain 90 percent of the streamflow contribution from the aquifer compared to a no pumpage run during the worst drought of record year.”

• Concern– Time scale of response of aquifer may exceed 50 year

simulation period.

• Potential Resolution– Recognize the implications of definitions of “sustainable”– Recognize that some definitions of sustainable only apply to

the 50-year planning horizon – they may not be sustainable in the longer term

– Set transparent, quantitative targets

Policy Recommendations from Policy Recommendations from the RWPGsthe RWPGs

•• Region ARegion A–– Accounting for brush control as new surface waterAccounting for brush control as new surface water

•• Region DRegion D–– Early evaluation of mitigation requirementsEarly evaluation of mitigation requirements

•• Region GRegion G–– Establishment of a Water Conservation Establishment of a Water Conservation

Awareness ProgramAwareness Program

•• Region H Region H –– Clarify agency rules on quantitative environmental Clarify agency rules on quantitative environmental

analysisanalysis

Policy Recommendations from Policy Recommendations from the RWPGsthe RWPGs

•• Region KRegion K–– State should seek the voluntary conversion of State should seek the voluntary conversion of

existing water rights to environmental uses existing water rights to environmental uses

•• Region LRegion L–– Ecosystem health, quality of life, and growth Ecosystem health, quality of life, and growth

management for Texasmanagement for Texas

•• Region NRegion N–– All water resources of the state are All water resources of the state are hydrologicallyhydrologically

interinter--relatedrelated

Intro to the 3Intro to the 3rdrd CycleCycle

•• No need to redo portions of the plan No need to redo portions of the plan that are expected to remain unchangedthat are expected to remain unchanged

•• Focus on special studiesFocus on special studies

•• TWDB solicited proposals from RWPGsTWDB solicited proposals from RWPGs

Some Encouraging ProposalsSome Encouraging Proposalsfor the Next Two Yearsfor the Next Two Years

•• Region C #1: ConservationRegion C #1: Conservation•• Region F #2 & #5: Brush Control and Region F #2 & #5: Brush Control and

Watershed ResponseWatershed Response•• Region H #1: Effect of Region H #1: Effect of WMSsWMSs on instream on instream

flowsflows•• Region K #2: Environmental Impacts of Region K #2: Environmental Impacts of

WMSsWMSs•• Regions A, J, O, & others: Groundwater Regions A, J, O, & others: Groundwater

studiesstudies

SummarySummary

•• Environmental considerations help to Environmental considerations help to prioritize prioritize WMSsWMSs

•• Stakeholders must continue to find the Stakeholders must continue to find the appropriate balance of effort between appropriate balance of effort between planning and permittingplanning and permitting

•• Each planning cycle improves our Each planning cycle improves our understandingunderstanding

•• TPWD is happy to helpTPWD is happy to help