Ecological Overlay for the Trinity River for support of Development of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Daily Average Discharge (cfs) 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 Elm Fork Trinity River near Carrollton (08055500) Gage 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Month Figure 8. Monthly median, interquartile range (boxes), extended range (1.5 X quartile = line) and outliers (*) for daily average flows recorded at the USGS Elm Fork Trinity near Carrollton, (08055500) gage from 1907 through 2008. Daily Difference in Flow (cfs) 80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 Elm Fork Trinity River near Carrollton (08055500) Gage 95% CI for the Mean 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Month Figure 9. Monthly mean and 95% confidence intervals for daily difference in average daily flows between successive dates recorded at the Elm Fork Trinity River near Carrollton (08055500) gage from 1907 through 2008. 41 Environmental Institute of Houston November 17, 2009 Trinity River Basin Biological Overlay 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12
The remaining priority gages, although exhibiting different absolute levels in flow and differences in flow variation, generally followed the same seasonal patterns exhibited by the Elm Fork gage. As expected, stream flow generally increased as you move downstream. Throughout the basin seasonally the lowest average stream discharges occur during the months of July through October with associated reductions in daily and short-term flow variability (Figures 10- 37). In contrast, average daily flow rates are elevated and exhibit the largest daily and short-term fluctuations during the months of March through May or June (Figures 10-37). During these periods stream velocities would generally increase and the probability of overbank (flood) flows would increase. In addition, sediment transport capacity would also increase. These patterns in average daily flow and flow variability can affect instream habitat components (e.g. depth, cover, and velocity), larval drift, nesting behavior, and availability of riparian habitat (e.g. overbank flooding, and connectivity to oxbow lakes and associated wetlands. In addition, increased river flows in the spring months have a higher capacity for downstream sediment and nutrient transport including deposition in estuaries. This has major implications for fluvial processes including bank erosion, channel stability and pollutant transport. Preliminary estimates of draft 7Q2 values for selected gages in each major segment of the Trinity River are provided in Table 7. These were obtained from TCEQ water quality standards staff in September 2009 and are subject to change. (Kiesling and Flowers 2002) conducted limited hydrological analyses of the Trinity River using 34 representative stream gages from the upper basin including tributaries down to Lake Livingston. They summarized various monthly flow statistics and conducted an IHA analysis (Richter et al. 1996). They summarized each of the main group statistics provided by IHA. They noted that based on IHA Group 1 statistics (magnitude of monthly water conditions) the maximum monthly average flows occur in May for all main stem gages and most sites had minimum flows in August. When reviewing IHA Group 2 statistics (magnitude and duration of annual extreme flow conditions), they found base flows (annual seven-day minimum flows) were generally increasing over time and most evident downstream of Dallas-Fort Worth area. They concluded that this was likely due to population growth and increased wastewater treatment plant discharges over time. They also evaluated IHA Group 4 statistics (frequency of high and low flow pulses in the aquatic environment). They found that there has been a long-term significant decline in the frequency of low flow pulses, however during the latter period of their study this trend had reversed somewhat. The frequency of high flow pulses had however increased over time. (Kiesling and Flowers 2002) also conducted an analysis of the effects of Benbrook Lake, Joe Pool Lake, Elm Fork Reservoirs (3) and East Fork Reservoirs (3). They found that for most reservoirs the frequency of downstream low flow pulses declined, while monthly median flows increased. Trinity River hydrology has to varying degrees been influenced by the construction of dams and reservoirs. In addition, these structures and associated reservoirs generally trap sediments and increase residence times which can effect nutrient processing in addition to attenuating flood pulses depending on dam operations (Collier et al. 2000; Yeager 1993). Although the magnitude and frequency of some components of the river’s hydrology have likely changed due to dam construction, water diversions, and increased urban and wastewater loading, the remaining local fauna have most likely evolved or retained life history traits that allow them to persist under these conditions. Based on our limited analysis we did not see any large shift in hydrology post dam construction at the other gage sites in comparison to the Elm Fork site. However, we did not 42 Environmental Institute of Houston November 17, 2009 Trinity River Basin Biological Overlay
Page 1 and 2: Ecological Overlay for the Trinity
Page 3 and 4: Alligator Gar .....................
Page 5 and 6: List of Figures Figure 1. Distribut
Page 7 and 8: Figure 40. Long terms trends in dis
Page 9 and 10: Figure 78. Flow versus fall water t
Page 11 and 12: Figure 114. Flow versus winter wate
Page 13 and 14: Figure 154 . Distribution of focal
Page 15 and 16: community to determine if they can
Page 17 and 18: Background Senate Bill 3 (SB 3), pa
Page 19 and 20: 5. Base flows should be identified
Page 21 and 22: Methodology Hydrology Summary In or
Page 23 and 24: Figure 2. Distribution of USGS prio
Page 25 and 26: Figure 3. Location of TCEQ/CRP wate
Page 27 and 28: We also provided estimates of draft
Page 29 and 30: Table 3. Continued OUR BONNNER Hend
Page 31 and 32: Table 4. Biological codes used in t
Page 33 and 34: Figure 4. Location of historical in
Page 35 and 36: Table 5. Candidate focal invertebra
Page 37 and 38: Freshwater mussels represent a uniq
Page 39 and 40: Results Hydrology Summary Graphical
Page 41: Figure 7. Monthly mean and 95% conf
Page 45 and 46: Flow Rate (cfs) 45,000 40,000 35,00
Page 47 and 48: Flow Rate (cfs) 150,000 140,000 130
Page 49 and 50: Daily Average Discharge (cfs) 16000
Page 51 and 52: Daily Average Discharge (cfs) 14000
Page 53 and 54: 52 Environmental Institute of Houst
Page 57 and 58: Flow Rate (cfs) 105,000 100,000 95,
Page 61 and 62: Table 8. Preliminary list of 7Q2 es
Page 63 and 64: within the basin during 1968 throug
Page 65 and 66: Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 12 10 8 6 4
Page 67 and 68: Using historical USGS data we prepa
Page 69 and 70: 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 Water Temp. (
Page 71 and 72: D.O. (mg/L) Grand Prairie Instantan
Page 73 and 74: USGS Gage at Grand Prairie Instanta
Page 75 and 76: Phosphate unfltrd mg/L 9 8 7 6 5 4
Page 77 and 78: Temp. deg C Rosser Instantaneous Di
Page 79 and 80: D.O. mg/L Rosser Instantaneous Disc
Page 81 and 82: 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Period of Re
Page 83 and 84: NO3 unfltrd mg/L as N 20 15 10 5 0
Page 85 and 86: Trinity River at Trinidad (08062700
Page 87 and 88: Temp. deg C Trinidad Instantaneous
Page 89 and 90: D.O. mg/L Trinidad Instantaneous Di
Page 91 and 92: NO3 + NO2 unflt rd mg/ L as N 10 8
Page 93 and 94:
Phosphate unfltrd mg/L 12.5 10.0 7.
Page 95 and 96:
Trinity River at Crockett (08065350
Page 97 and 98:
Temp. deg C USGS Gage at Crockett I
Page 99 and 100:
USGS Gage at Crockett Instantaneous
Page 101 and 102:
NO3 + NO2 unflt rd mg/ L as N 8 7 6
Page 103 and 104:
Phosphate unfltrd mg/L 4 3 2 1 0 0
Page 105 and 106:
Trinity River at Romayor (08066500)
Page 107 and 108:
cfs 20000 15000 10000 5000 Annual M
Page 109 and 110:
Temp. ( C ) Romayor Instantaneous D
Page 111 and 112:
D.O. (mg/L) Romayor Instantaneous D
Page 113 and 114:
USGS Gage at Romayor Instantaneous
Page 115 and 116:
USGS Gage at Romayor Instantaneous
Page 117 and 118:
Loading estimates for total nitroge
Page 119 and 120:
TSS (mg/l) 250 200 150 100 50 0 080
Page 121 and 122:
Suspended solids and associated tur
Page 123 and 124:
The USGS conducted fish-community s
Page 125 and 126:
Figure 135. Discharge and differenc
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 136. Historical Estimates of
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 139. Comparisons between tot
Page 131 and 132:
Figure 143. Location of geomorpholo
Page 133 and 134:
(Phillips 2008) defined these zones
Page 135 and 136:
A strongly meandering channel in a
Page 137 and 138:
Bay estuary, and Galveston bay. Som
Page 139 and 140:
above the estuary. The capacity of
Page 141 and 142:
Figure 145. Location of published a
Page 143 and 144:
Figure 147. Numbers of fish taxa re
Page 145 and 146:
Estimated River Mile 600 500 400 30
Page 147 and 148:
substratum and nest spawners. The f
Page 149 and 150:
Table 11. Original fish community g
Page 151 and 152:
Table 12. Suggested changes and del
Page 153 and 154:
Similarity Fish Guilds Based on Clu
Page 155 and 156:
Table 13. Continued. SPECIES COMMON
Page 157 and 158:
Table 13. Continued. SPECIES COMMON
Page 159 and 160:
Flow (cfs) 20 15 10 5 0 0 Distribut
Page 161 and 162:
Year of Collection 2010 2000 1990 1
Page 163 and 164:
Figure 159. Spatial distribution of
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Largemouth bass are found in lakes,
Page 173 and 174:
Figure 165. Largemouth bass (backwa
Page 175 and 176:
A habitat suitability index (HSI) m
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Percina sciera (dusky darter) Based
Page 181 and 182:
Figure 171. Frequency distribution
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Figure 173. Conceptual structure fo
Page 187 and 188:
Table 14. Summary of life history r
Page 189 and 190:
Figure 174. Conceptual structure fo
Page 191 and 192:
Figure 176. Smallmouth buffalo (flo
Page 193 and 194:
Table 15. Example of habitat Guilds
Page 195 and 196:
average chlorophyll-a levels are fl
Page 197 and 198:
Appendix 1. Listing of Primary Lite
Page 199 and 200:
Priegel, G.R. 1967b. The freshwater
Page 201 and 202:
Goldstein, R.M., and T.P. Simon. 19
Page 203 and 204:
Suttkus, R.D. 1963. Order Lepisoste
Page 205 and 206:
Perry W. G., Jr., and D. C. Carver.
Page 207 and 208:
Hildebrand S. F. and I. L. Towers.
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
White Bass Balon, E. K. 1981. Addit
Page 213 and 214:
Blackspot Shiner Bean, P.T., C.S. W
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Evans, J.W., and R.L. Noble. 1979.
Page 219 and 220:
Paddlefish Alexander, C.M., and T.A
Page 221 and 222:
Pitman, V.M. 1992. Texas Paddlefish
Page 223 and 224:
Literature Cited Abbott, J. C. 2006
Page 225 and 226:
Clingenpeel, G. 2002. Trinity Basin
Page 227 and 228:
Houston Advanced Research Center. 2
Page 229 and 230:
Longley, W. L., editor. 1994. Fresh
Page 231 and 232:
Simon, T. P. 1999b. Introduction: B
show all

Ecological Overlay for the Trinity River for support of Development of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?