Water Quality & Quantity Issues in the Nueces River Basin
Nueces River Basin 1,084 stre a m mile s • 16,950 mi 2 (10,848,000 a c re s) • 23 Co untie s • Ata sc o sa , F rio , & Sa b ina l rive rs inc lude d •
Private Lands Hunting • F ishing • L ive sto c k Gra zing • Wa te r rig hts • Othe r issue s? •
Recreational Use Cho ke Ca nyo n L a ke • L a ke Co rpus Christi • Ga rne r Sta te Pa rk • L o st Ma ple s Sta te Na tura l Are a • Othe rs •
Texas Land Trends
Texas Land Trends
Texas Land Trends Year 1-100 100-500 500-1000 1000-2000 2000+ 1997 89,861 684,746 714,803 1,023,695 7,528,766 2002 96,637 709,805 734,946 983,103 7,373,542 2007 129,893 757,763 711,372 944,634 7,298,734
Texas Land Trends
Water Quantity Nue c e s Rive r F lo w (539,700 a c re -fe e t-pe r-ye a r) • Gro undwa te r • E dwa rds Aq uife r (no rth) o Ca rrizo -Wilc o x Aq uife r (so uth) o 3 o the rs o Re se rvo irs • Cho ke Ca nyo n (695,000 a c re fe e t) o L a ke Co rpus Christi (257,000 a c re fe e t) o
Water Use Munic ipa l • 500,000 pe o ple re ly o n the re se rvo irs a s prima ry wa te r so urc e (Co rpus o Christi) L ive sto c k • I rrig a tio n • Mining • Ma nufa c turing • Stre a m E le c tric • Oil & Ga s •
Future State Water Demands
Water Quality 11 o f 17 se g me nts • liste d a s impa ire d T DS, L o w DO, Ba c te ria , o Chlo ride , Nitra te s, 11 o f 17 se g me nts • liste d with c o nc e rns Chlo ro phyll-a , L o w DO, o I mpa ire d ha b ita t, Nitra te s, & Ba c te ria 3 o f 17 se g me nts • with no c o nc e rns o r impa irme nts Uppe r se g me nts with little o flo w
Oil and Gas – Eagle Ford Shale L a ndsa t 1993- • 2014 - CDA E stima te d • inc re a se : o 23,000 we ll pa ds o 84,000 a c re s o 65% o f c o nstruc tio n o c c urre d 2011-2014 13
Oil & Gas
Night Time Illumination
The Scenario T he Nue c e s Rive r Ba sin is o ve r 90% na tive ra ng e la nd • T he re a re e a rly sig ns o f lo ss a nd fra g me nta tio n o f • priva te rura l wo rking la nds Ma rke t va lue o f the se la nds is skyro c ke ting , ma king • it inc re a sing ly diffic ult to ke e p rura l la nds rura l T he ma jo rity o f the wa te r b o die s ha ve so me fo rm o f • impa irme nt T he E a g le F o rd Sha le ha s “c ha ng e d the g a me ” •
The Response Ho w do we a ddre ss wa te r q ua lity a nd q ua ntity • c o nc e rns in the Nue c e s Rive r Ba sin fro m a c o nse rva tio n fina nc e pe rspe c tive ? 1. Wha t is the pro g ra m struc ture ? Who a re the pla ye rs? • “Funding Plan” Ho w do e s the mo ne y flo w? • 2. Wha t po lic y c ha ng e s a re ne e de d,? L o c a l, sta te , fe de ra l, no ne ? • 3. Wha t is the imple me nta tio n pla n? Who imple me nts? • Whe n do e s imple me nta tio n o c c ur? • 4. Ho w c a n we sc a le the se ide a s up? Ca n the pro g ra m b e sc a le d up fro m rive r b a sin • to sta te o r na tio na l? 5. Wha t sc ie nc e a nd a na lyse s is ne e de d?
Recommend
More recommend
