^tHtO/^Cp. NOAA Technical Report NMFS CIRC-393 r?^e&;y>. Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study— Texas: Area Description RICHARD A. DIENER SEATTLE, WA September 1975 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND / National Marine ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION / Fisheries Servire Fisheries Service NOAA TECHNICAL REPORTS National Marine Fisheries Service, Circulars The major responsibilities of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are to monitor and assess the abundance and geographic distribution of fishery resources, to understand and predict fluctuations in the quantity and distribution of these resources, and to establish levels for optimum use of the resources. NMFS is also charged with the development and implementation of policies for managing national fishing grounds, development and enforcement of domestic fisheries regulations, surveillance of foreign fishing off United States coastal waters, and the development and enforcement of international fishery agreements and policies. NMFS also assists the fishing industry through marketing service and economic analysis programs, and mortgage insurance and vessel construction subsidies. It collects, analyzes, and publishes statistics on various phases of the industry. The NOAA Technical Report NMFS CIRC series continues a series that has been in existence since 1941 . The Circulars are technical publications of general interest intended to aid conservation and management. Publications that review in considerable detail and at a high technical level certain broad areas of research appear in this series. Technical papers originating in economics studies and from management investigations appear in the Circular series. NOAA Technical Reports NMFS CIRC are available free in limited numbers to governmental agencies, both Federal and State. They are also available in exchange for other scientific and technical pubHcations in the marine sciences. Individual copies may be obtained (unless otherwise noted) from D83, Technical Information Division. Environmental Science Information Center, NOAA, Washington, D.C. 20235. Recent Circulars are; 315. Synopsis of biological data on the chum salmon. Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum) 1792. By Richard G. Bakkala. March 1970, iii + 89 p., 15 figs., 51 tables. 319. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory. Ann Arbor. Michigan. By Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. March 1970, 8 p.. 7 figs. 330. EASTROPAC Atlas: Vols. 1-7. Catalog No. I 49.4:330/(vol.) 11 vols. Available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402. 331. Guidelines for the processing of hot-smoked chub. By H. L. Seagran, J. T. Graikoski, and J. A. Emerson. January 1970. iv + 23 p.. 8 figs.. 2 tables. 332. Pacific hake. (12 articles by 20 authors.) March 1970, iii + 152 p.. 72 figs.. 47 tables. 333. Recommended practices for vessel sanitation and fish handling. By Edgar W. Bowman and Alfred Larsen. March 1970, iv + 27 p., 6 figs. 335. Progress report of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Center for Estuarine and Menhaden Research, Pesticide Field Station. Gulf Breeze, Fla., fiscal year 1969. By the Laboratory staff. August 1970, iii + 33 p., 29 figs., 12 tables. 336. The northern fur seal. By Ralph C. Baker. Ford Wilke. and C. Howard Baltzo. April 1970. iii + 19 p.. 13 figs. 337. Program of Division of Economic Research, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, fiscal year 1969. By Division of Economic Research. April 1970, iii + 29 p.. 12 figs., 7 tables. 338. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory, Auke Bay, Alaska. By Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, June 1970, 8 p., 6 figs. 339. Salmon research at Ice Harbor Dam. By Wesley J. Ebel. April 1970, 6 p., 4 figs. 340. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Technological Laboratory. Gloucester, Massachusetts. By Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. June 1970. 8 p., 8 figs. 341. Report of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory. Beaufort, N.C., for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968. By the Laboratory staff. August 1970. iii + 24 p.. 11 figs., 16 tables. .342. Report of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory, St. Petersburg Beach. Florida, fiscal year 1969. By the Laboratory staff. August 1970, iii + 22 p., 20 figs.. 8 tables. 343. Report of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory, Galveston, Texas, fiscal year 1969. By the Laboratory stafi. August 1970, iii + 39 p., 28 figs., 9 tables. .344. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Tropical Atlantic Biological Laboratory progress in research 1965-69. Miami. Florida. By Ann Weeks. October 1970, iv + 65 p., 53 figs., .346. Sportsman's guide to handling, smoking, and preserving Great Lakes coho salmon. By Shcaron Dudley, J. T. Graikoski, H. L. Seagran, and Paul M. Earl. September 1970, iii + 28 p., 15 figs. 347. Synopsis of biological data on Pacific ocean perch, Sebastodes alutus. By Richard L. Major and Herbert H. Shippen. December 1970, iii + 38 p., 31 figs., 11 tables. 349. Use of abstracts and summaries as communication devices in technical articles. By F. Bruce Sanford. February 1971, iii + 11 p.. 1 fig. 350. Research in fiscal year 1969 at the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Biological Laboratory, Beaufort, N.C. By the Laboratory staff. November 1970, ii + 49 p., 21 figs., 17 tables. 351. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base, Pascagoula, Mississippi, July 1, 1967 to June 30. 1969. By Harvey R. Bullis, Jr. and John R. Thompson. November 1970, iv + 29 p., 29 figs.. 1 table. 352. Upstream passage of anadromous fish through navigation locks and use of the stream for spawning and nursery habitat. Cape Fear River. N.C, 1962-66. By Paul R. Nichols and Darrell E. Louder. October 1970, iv + 12 p.. 9 figs,, 4 tables. 356. Floating laboratory for study of aquatic organisms and their environ- ment. By George R. Snyder. Theodore H. Blahm, and Robert J. McConnell. May 1971. iii -f 16 p., 11 figs.. .361. Regional and other related aspects of shellfish consumption — some preliminary findings from the 1969 Consumer Panel Survey. By Morton M. Miller and Darrel A. Nash. June 1971, iv + 18 p., 19 figs., 3 tables, 10 apps. 362. Research vessels of the National Marine Fisheries Service. By Robert S. Wolf. August 1971. iii + 46 p., 25 figs., 3 tables. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. 364. History and development of surf clam harvesting gear. By Phillip S. Parker. October 1971, iv + 15 p., 16 figs. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402. 365. Processing EASTROPAC STD data and the construction of vertical temperature and salinity sections by computer. By Forrest R. Miller and Kenneth A. Bliss. February 1972. iv + 17 p., 8 figs.. 3 appendix figs. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. 366. Key to field identification of andromous juvenile salmonids in the Pacific Northwest'. By Robert J. McConnell and George R. Snyder. January 1972. iv + 6 p., 4 figs. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 20402. 367. Engineering economic model for fish protein concentration processes. By K. K. Almenas. L. C. Durilla, R. C. Ernst, J. W. Gentry, M. B. Hale, and J. M. Marchello. October 1972, iii + 175 p.. 6 figs.. 6 tables. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C. 20402. 368. Cooperative Gulf of Mexico estuarine inventory and study. Florida: Phase I. area description. By J. Kneeland McNulty. William N. Lindall, Jr., and James E. Sykes. November 1972. vii + 126 p.. 46 figs., 62 tables. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. .369. Field guide to the anglefishes (Pomacanthidae) in the western Atlantic. By Henry A. Feddern. November 1972, iii + 10 p., 17 figs.. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Continued on inside back cover. NOAA Technical Report NMFS CIRC-393 Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study— Texas: Area Description RICHARD A. DIENER >« O ■| a Q §■ SEATTLE, WA September 1975 '^ UNITED STATES / NATIONAL OCEANIC AND / National Marine ^ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE / ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION / Fisheries Service Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary/ Robert M Wtiite, Administrator / Robert W Schonmg, Director ^^^^^co' The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not approve, rec- ommend or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned in this publication. No reference shall be made to NMFS, or to this publication furnished by NMFS, in any advertising or sales pro- motion which would indicate or imply that NMFS approves, recommends or endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly or indirectly the advertised product to be used or purchased because of this NMFS publication. CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 The Texas coast 1 Dimensions 2 Vegetation 2 Marshlands and the coastal prairie 2 The upland plant zones 3 Geology 4 Geological history 4 Formations 4 Aquifer systems 4 Estuarine bottom sediments 5 Stream discharge 5 Principal environmental properties 5 Temperature 5 Salinity 6 The fauna 6 Clam beds 6 Oysters 6 Natural oyster reefs 6 Private oyster reefs 7 Artificial reefs 7 Populations 7 Economic development 7 Industries 7 Agriculture 7 Fisheries and waterfow^l hunting 8 Commercial fisheries 8 Sport fisheries and waterfowl hunting 8 Pollution 8 Domestic wastes 8 Industrial wastes 9 Agricultural pollution 9 Condition of estuarine waters 9 Channelization and fill 9 Summary 10 Acknowledgments 11 Literature cited 11 Figures 1. The upper Texas coast and adjacent segment of Louisiana showing the Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay study areas 13 2. The central Texas coast showing the Matagorda Bay-Brazos River Delta, San Antonio Bay, Aransas Bay, and Corpus Christi Bay study areas 14 3. The lower Texas coast showing the Laguna Madre study area 15 4. Major vegetational areas along the upper Texas coast 16 5. Major vegetational areas along the central Texas coast 17 6. Major vegetational areas along the lower Texas coast. Much of the Laguna Madre not occupied by submerged vegetation represents wind-blown soils with little or no vegetation 18 7. The origin and development of the Texas shoreline: (A) the late Pleistocene following sea level stage; (B) the early Recent rising sea level stage; and (C) the Recent standing sea level stage 19 8. Late Pleistocene and Recent features of the central and lower Texas coast: (A) the standing sea level stage during the Illinoian-Wisconsin interglacial period, (B) the beginning of the filling of the Ingleside Lagoon to become the Ingleside Formation, (C) the Texas coast during the Pleistocene- Wisconsin glacial stage showing the remains of the barrier islands and lagoons, and (D) developing features of the Recent standing sea level stage 20 9. Successive growth stages of the modern delta of the Colorado River, September 1908 to April 1941 21 10. The upper Texas coast showing major physical features and their geological age 22 11. The central Texas coast showing major physical features and their geological age 23 12. The lower Texas coast showing major physical features and their geological age 24 13. Generalized cross section of the Houston-Galveston region showing major water-bearing formations 25 m 14. Bottom sediment types in the Galveston Bay study area 26 15. Bottom sediment types in the Matagorda Bay study area 27 16. Bottom sediment types in the San Antonio Bay study area 28 17. Bottom sediment types in the Copano- Aransas Bay study area 29 18. Bottom sediment types in the Corpus Christi Bay study area 30 19. Bottom sediment types in the upper Laguna Madre 31 20. Observed surface saHnity gradients during periods of high (May) and low (November-December) freshwater discharge into Sabine Lake during 1958 32 21. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Galveston Bay area for 1963-1966 33 22. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Matagorda Bay area for 1964-1966 37 23. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the San Antonio Bay area for 1964-1966 40 24. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Copano-Aransas Bay area for 1965-1966 41 25. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Corpus Christi Bay area for 1963-1966 42 26. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the upper Laguna Madre and adjacent portions of Baffin Bay for 1963-1966 43 27. Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the lower Laguna Madre for 1963-1966 44 28. Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs and private oyster leases in the Galveston Bay area 46 29. Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs and private oyster leases in the Matagorda Bay area 47 30. Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs and private oyster leases in the San Antonio Bay area 48 31. Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs in the Copano-Aransas Bay area 49 32. Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs and private oyster leases in the Corpus Christi Bay area 50 33. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the Galveston Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 51 34. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the Matagorda Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 52 35. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the San Antonio Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 53 36. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the Copano-Aransas Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 54 37. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs in the Corpus Christi Bay area established by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 55 38. Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs in the Laguna Madre area established by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 56 39. The Sabine Lake area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed to shellfishing 57 40. The Galveston Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed— or conditionally approved — to shellfishing 58 41. The Matagorda Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed— or conditionally approved— to shellfishing 59 42. The San Antonio Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution and waters closed— or conditionally approved — to shellfishing 60 43. The Copano-Aransas Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed to shellfishing 61 44. The Corpus Christi Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed to shellfishing 62 45. The Laguna Madre area showing known sources of domestic pollution, industrial pollution, and waters closed to shellfishing 63 46. The upper Texas coast showing major U.S. Army Corps of Engineers navigation projects 64 47. The central Texas coast showing major U.S. Army corps of Engineers navigation projects 65 48. The lower Texas coast with major U.S. Army Corps of Engineers navigation projects 66 49. Known fill areas in the Sabine Lake area 67 50. Known fill areas in the Galveston Bay area 68 51. Known fill areas in the Matagorda Bay area 69 52. Known fill areas in the San Antonio Bay area 70 53. Known fill areas in the Copano-Aransas Bay area 71 54. Known fill areas in the Corpus Christi Bay area 72 55. Known fill areas in the Laguna Madre area 73 Tables 1. Monthly and annual average precipitation from selected stations in counties contiguous to the Texas estu- aries for 1969 ■ ■ ■ • • 74 2. Monthly and annual average air temperature for selected stations in counties contiguous to the estuaries of Texas for 1969 74 3. Dimensions of estuarine study areas along the Texas coast 75 4. By study area, the major types and approximate acreage of emergent and submerged vegetation along the Texas coast 76 5. Summary of silt data for some of the major Texas rivers 77 6. Depth changes in Texas bays with estimated silt loads per 100 yr and shoaling and scouring rates for periods of record and adjusted for 100-yr periods 77 7-1. Stream discharge for Sabine River, 1951-1968 78 7-2. Stream discharge for Cow Bayou. 1951-1968 79 7-3. Stream discharge for Neches River, 1951-1968 80 7-4. Stream discharge for Village Creek, 1951-1968 80 7-5. Stream discharge data for Trinity River, 1951-1968 81 7-6. Stream discharge for San Jacinto River, 1954-1965 81 7-7. Stream discharge for Buffalo Bayou, 1951-1957, 1962-1968 82 7-8. Stream discharge for White Oak Bayou, 1951-1968 82 7-9. Stream discharge for Brays Bayou, 1951-1968 83 7-10. Stream discharge data for Sims Bayou, 1953-1968 83 7-11. Stream discharge for Greens Bayou, 1953-1968 84 7-12. Stream discharge for Halls Bayou, 1953-1968 84 7-13. Stream discharge for Clear Creek, 1951-1968 85 7-14. Stream discharge for Chocolate Bayou, 1951-1968 85 7-15. Stream discharge from Oyster Creek, 1951-1968 86 7-16. Stream discharge from Brazos River, 1951-1968 86 7-17. Stream discharge for Big Creek, 1952-1968 87 7-18. Stream discharge from Fairchild Creek, 1951-1955 87 7-19. Stream discharge from Dry Creek, 1957-1968 88 7-20. Stream discharge from San Bernard River, 1954-1968 88 7-21. Stream discharge from Colorado River, 1951-1968 89 7-22. Stream discharge from Lavaca River, 1951-1968 89 7-23. Stream discharge from Navidad River, 1951-1968 90 7-24. Stream discharge from Guadalupe River, 1951-1968 90 7-25. Stream discharge from Coleto Creek, 1953-1968 91 7-26. Stream discharge from San Antonio River, 1951-1968 91 7-27. Stream discharge data for Mission River, 1951-1968 92 7-28. Stream discharge from Aransas River, 1964-1968 92 7-29. Stream discharge from Nueces River, 1951-1968 93 7-30. Stream discharge from San Fernando Creek, 1965-1968 93 7-31. Stream discharge from the Rio Grande, 1951-1968 94 8. The cumulative average annual discharge, area volume, and ratios of discharge to volume of area for seven major Texas estuarine areas 94 9. Extremes in surface water temperatures at seven locations along the Texas coast 95 10. Natural (public) and private oyster leases on the Texas coast 95 11. Artificial and experimental oyster reefs established on the Texas coast by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 97 12. Population records of Texas counties and Cameron Parish, La., contiguous to the seven estuarine areas of Texas, 1850-1960 99 13. Population records of Texas cities, 1850-1950, in counties contiguous to Texas estuaries and having a popula- tion of as much as 2,500 in 1960 or during any previous date 100 14-1. County (Tex.) or Parish (La.) populations, densities, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Sabine Lake area 101 14-2. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Galveston Bay (Tex.) area 101 14-3. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Brazos-Colorado Delta and the Matagorda Bay (Tex. ) area 102 14-4. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the San Antonio Bay (Tex. ) area 102 14-5. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Copano- Aransas Bay (Tex.) area . 102 14-6. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Corpus Christi Bay ( Tex.) area . . . 103 14-7. County densities, populations, and city populations in 1960 and 1970 in the Laguna Madre (Tex.) area 103 15. Population projections for selected communities in counties contiguous to the seven estuarine systems of Texas 104 16. Characteristics of mineral production in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La. ) contiguous to the seven estuarine study areas as of 1963 106 17. Characteristics of commercial activities in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La.) contiguous to the seven study areas as of 1963 106 18. Status of agriculture as of 1964 in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La.) adjacent to the seven estu- arine study areas 107 19-1. Texas commercial catch from the Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay areas, for the year 1968 107 19-2. Texas commercial catch from the Matagorda and San Antonio Bay areas for the year 1968 108 19-3. Texas commercial catch from the Copano- Aransas and Corpus Christi Bay areas for the year 1968 108 19-4. Texas commercial catch from the Laguna Madre area and the Gulf of Mexico for the year 1968 109 19-5. Total commercial catch from the Texas waters for the year 1968 110 20. Status of the commercial fishing industry by estuarine area along the Texas Gulf coast in 1967 Ill 21. Sport fishing and waterfowl hunting by estuarine study area on the Texas coast during 1968 112 22. Domestic waste quality data from known outfalls in the seven estuarine areas of Texas, 1967-1969 113 23. Industrial waste quality data from known outfalls in the seven estuarine areas of Texas, 1967-1969 118 24. Pesticides in waters and sediments from selected Texas study areas 123 25. Approximate acreage of estuarine surface water declared as closed and conditionally approved for shellfish- ing by the Texas State Board of Health 123 26. Dimensions of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Channels along the Texas Coast as of 1968 124 VI Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study- Texas: Area Description RICHARD A. DIENER' ABSTRACT Seven Texas estuarine areas are described in terms of their dimensions; major vegetation types; geology and geological history; drainage basins and stream discharge records; hydrological, biological, and benthic properties; populations and economic development; pollution; and navigation projects. These areas include the Sabine Lake, Galveston Bay, Matagorda Bay-Brazos River Delta, San Antonio Bay, Copano-Aransas Bay, Corpus Christi Bay, and the Laguna Madre. A list of pertinent literature is also presented. The estuaries cover over 1,532,000 acres (620,460 hectares) of open waters and are surrounded by an additional 1,141,400 acres (462,267 hectares) of marshlands and tidal flats. They are formed from either drowned river mouths or the development of barrier islands and peninsulas, and are late Pleistocene and Recent in age. Approximately three-fourths of the more than 39,000 cubic feet per second entering these waters from gaged streams enters Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay. Water temperatures are generally lower on the upper coast than the lower coast during the winter but are relatively uniform during the summer. Salinities generaUy range from about 5 to 25%o except in the Laguna Madre area where hypersalinity is common. A rich and varied fauna displaying many varied life-history types is supported by these waters. Human populations in Cameron Parish, La. and Texas counties contiguous to the seven estuarine areas increased from 31,751 persons in 1850 to 2,962,125 persons in 1970. A sharp increase resulted when oil production began in 1901, and an economy based on manufacture of petrochemicals, shipping, and other industries expanded. Beef cattle and cotton are the mainstays of Texas coastal agriculture, with rice important on the upper coast while citrus fruits are important to the economy of the lower Laguna Madre area. The Texas coast is also important for its sport and commercial fisheries and for waterfowl hunting. Pollution from domestic and indsutrial sources has forced the closing of about 325,090 acres (131,661 hectares) of open bay waters to shellfishing and an adflitional 16,600 acres (6,723 hectares) closed on a conditional basis. Over 1,050 miles (1,691 km) of Federal navigation channels are situated on the Texas coast, the most important of which is the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, which extends from the Sabine River to Brownsville. Large areas of open estuarine waters, especially in the Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay areas, have been displaced by large spoil areas. INTRODUCTION There has been a growing need for documentation and classification of the physical and biological characteristics of coastal waters throughout the Gulf of Mexico. Demands upon water resources of Gulf coast estuaries and associated watersheds are producing rapid and marked changes in the estuarine evironment. Increased use of freshwater, much of it for human consumption, is hastening construction of dams and diversion channels, and this reduces flow to Gulf estuaries. Construction of channels and placement of spoil, activities associated with exploitation of mineral resources, and construction for waterborne commercial and recreation- al facilities are altering water circulation and interchange patterns in the estuaries. Flood control and hurricane protection structures also modify estuarine conditions. Effects of such modifications upon estuarine flora and fauna are noticeable, but these effects have not been cataloged for the northern Gulf. Preparation of reports that evaluate proposed water resource projects is often laborious and time-consuming because background information on coastal areas is not easily available. The Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study was designed to provide background informa- tion on coastal waters of the states bordering the Gulf. 'Gulf Coastal Fisheries Center, Galveston Laboratory, NMFS, NOAA, Galveston. TX 77550. The planning and organizing of the format were done under the auspices of the Estuarine Technical Coordinat- ing Committee (ETCC) of the Gulf States Marine Fisher- ies Commission, composed of representatives of the fish- ing industry and of the State and Federal conservation agencies in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Partial funding for the study in Alabama, Louisi- ana, and Mississippi was provided through the Commer- cial Fisheries Research and Development Act (Public Law 88-309, as amended). The Galveston and St. Peters- burg Beach Laboratories of the Gulf Coastal Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, un- dertook the Texas and Florida portions of the study largely because other uses were made of Public Law 88-309 funds in those states. Members of the ETCC developed work outlines that all participants agreed to follow so that methods of study would be similar and the results comparable. The material presented here uses the format of the Area Description portion of the report. THE TEXAS COAST The Texas coastline is nearly 370 miles (595 km) long. Climate of coastal Texas ranges from humid in the Sabine Lake area (Port Arthur), where the average annual precipitation exceeds 55 inches (1,397 mm), to semiarid in the Rio Grande Delta (Port Isabel), where annual rainfall slightly exceeds 25 inches (635 mm) (Table V. Temperature likewise exhibits considerable variation along the Texas coast. Port Isabel's average January temperature of 62.2°F a6.7°C) contrasts with the 53.6°F U2.0°C) recorded for the Port Arthur and Houston airports (Table 2). Average rainfall ranges from less than 30 inches l762 mm) in the Rio Grand Delta to over 55 inches (1,397 mm) in the Sabine Lake area. The growing season is usually more than 300 days. Tidal marshes and mud flats border all of the estuaries which, with the exception of the Laguna Madre, are too turbid to support extensive growths of submerged vegeta- tion. The dense salt marshes typical of the humid estuaries of the upper Texas coast are gradually replaced on middle and lower coasts with mud flats and with small marsh plants that tolerate high salinity. Texas estuaries have two basic shapes: 1) simple (oval) and 2) complex (branching or dendritic). All are in the second category except Sabine Lake (Figs. 1-3). Geomorphologically, Texas estuaries are of two types: 1) coastal plain, composed of drowned river mouths, and 2) bar-built, in which an offshore sand bar partially encloses a body of water (Pritchard 1967). The first type is represented by Sabine Lake, Galveston and Trinity bays, Matagorda and Lavaca bays, San Antonio Bay, Copano Bay, Corpus Christi Bay, and Baffin Bay. Estu- aries of the Brazos and Colorado rivers and of the Rio Grande have filled. Examples of the second type include East and West (Galveston) bays, eastern Matagorda and East Matagorda bays, Espiritu Santo Bay, Aransas and Redfish bays, and the Laguna Madre. Most Texas estuaries have relatively shallow depths that permit mixing of surface and bottom waters through the action of wind-driven waves and normal flow of tidal currents, thus they were considered to be one-layer sys- tems. Emery and Stevenson (1957) define two types of estuaries based upon tidal and salinity features: 1) normal or "positive" type, and 2) hypersaline or "negative" type. The former is characterized by having upstream salinities lowered by adequate river discharge -and mixing; the latter, found in arid regions, is characterized by poor land runoff, limited tidal influence, and salinities higher than those of the adjacent ocean. The bays of Texas from Sabine Lake to Corpus Christi Bay are examples of the former; the Laguna Madre is representative of the latter. DIMENSIONS Each of the seven Texas estuarine study areas is described by a set of boundaries: seaward, landward, and internal (Figs. 1-3). Seward boundaries were established by custom, by the definition of estuaries by Pritchard (1967), and by procedures established by Pearcy (1959). Pritchard states that an estuary is a semienclosed coastal body of water which has a free connection with the open ocean and within which seawater is measurably diluted with freshwater derived from land drainage. Pearcy described methods for defining the geographical boundar- ies between bays and the territorial sea, but for purposes of this paper, the method of drawing the coastline between headlands, islands, and peninsulas will suffice. Landward boundaries of the estuarine study areas were determined by limited field observations of the landward penetration of plants characteristic of the coastal marshes and by examination of aerial photographs of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service and topographic maps of the U.S. Geological Survey. Internal boundaries between open waters of estuarine study areas were established arbitrarily except where historical precedent dictated otherwise. Inland, these boundaries approximate established boundaries of river basins, and they are used for the purpose of pollution studies contained in this report. Table 3 lists the area, depth, tidal range, and volume of major waters in the seven estuarine study areas. Areas were measured on maps of the U.S. Geological Survey and charts of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey with a compensating planimeter. The values in Table 3 are averages of the results. Depths are averages of the most recent soundings at mean low water (MLW) exclusive of navigation channels. Average tidal range data are from the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The tides are diurnal. The volume at MLW is the product of the area and the average depth; the volume at mean high water (MHW) is the product of the area at MHW and the average depth plus average tidal range. Intertidal volume is the difference between the two volumes. The total open water area major estuaries of the Texas coast at MHW is 1,532,430 acres (620,634 hectares) or 0.74 times the area recorded for Chesapeake Bay, Ameri- ca's largest estuary. VEGETATION The wide variation in climate on the Texas coast causes the principal plant zone— the coastal prairie and marshes— to have many floral differences within its range. This area covers approximately 9.5 million acres (3,847,500 hectares) (Correll and Johnston 1970) of which about 884,000 acres (358,020 hectares) are marshlands of various types. In addition, approximately 50,000 acres (20,250 hectares) of marshlands are in the Sabine Lake area in Louisiana. Inland, this zone borders three other plant zones: 1) the timber belt, 2) the post oak savannah, and 3) the Rio Grande Plains (Figs. 4-6). Each plant zone usually grades imperceptibly into its neighbor, and elements of all three zones occur in isolated areas on the barrier islands and peninsulas that border the Gulf of Mexico and along the numerous watersheds that traverse the coastal prairie (Correll and Johnston 1970). Marshlands and the Coastal Prairie Marsh areas were planimetered from U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps, scales 1:24,000 and 1:62,500 (Figs. 4-6). Emergent and submerged vegetation in each of the seven estuarine areas were plotted and acreages computed from modified State Land Tract maps prepared by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Table 4). Submerged plant growth is scattered in the Texas estuaries, its growth and abundance being dependent on water depth, turbidity, and salinity. The usually turbid estuaries of the upper and central Texas coast have scattered patches of plant growth generally in depths of 6 feet (1.8 m) or less, whereas the less turbid estuaries of the Copano-Aransas and the Laguna Madre areas have com- paratively large areas of submerged vegetation. The algae Enteromorpha, Lyngbya, Polysiphonia, Ul- va, and Gracilaria occur in the seven estuarine study areas, but their distributions are sporadic and are not differentiated in Figures 4-6. They appear primarily in spring and early summer. Dominant submerged vascular forms include widgeon grass, Ruppia maritima; turtle grass, Thalassia testudi- num; and Halodule beaudettei. Manatee grass, Cymodocea manatorum, is widespread in the lower Laguna Madre. The coastal marsh, including the beach community described by Tharp (1926), consists of plants in zones influenced by varying degrees of tidal inundation, and it forms a broad belt of intergradation with the coastal prairie. Marsh soils consist mainly of acid sands, sandy loams, and clay. The coastal marsh is best developed in the Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay areas. Dominant species include smooth cordgrass, Spartina altemiflora; saltmeadow cordgrass, S. patens; coastal dropseed, Sporobolus virginicus; and horn- ed rush, Rhynchospora comiculata. The Spartina altemi- flora marsh is one of the major emergent plant communi- ties that surround parts of the estuaries on the upper Texas coast. Individual plants attain their maximum growth midway between low- and high-water levels. Areas in the S. altemiflora marsh above the high-water level frequently are invaded by saltgrass, Distichlis spicata, and Monanthochloe littoralis. Also large amounts of the salt- marsh bulrush, Scirpus maritimus, occur in sections of this marsh that border estuarine waters of low to moderate salinity. The beach community occupies isolated sand ridges and dunes on the upper Texas coast, but it increases in importance to the west and south, invading large areas of mud flats. Depending on the frequency of tidal inundation, dominants include vidrillos, Batis maritima; seaside \ helio- trope, Heliotropium curassavicum; Monanthochloe litto- ralis; glassworts, Salicomia bigelovii; sea purselane, Se- suvium maritimum; coastal dropseed, and a sea blite, Suaeda linearis. The sand dunes of the lower Texas coast, especially those of Padre Island, are characterized by unique floral assemblages in addition to elements of the beach com- munity described above. The coastal bluestem, Schizachy- rium scoparium, is the leading dominant on many of the dunes along with sea oats, Uniola paniculata, while gulf dune paspalum, Paspalum monostachyum, is characteristic of the sandy depressions between the dunes. The coastal prairie lies between the marshlands and the three mesic plant zones represented by the timber belt, post oak savannah, and the Rio Grande Plains. It forms an irregular arc, as wide as 80 miles (129 km) in places, stretching from the Sabine Lake area to the Rio Grande. It encompasses a nearly level, slowly drained plain less than 150 feet (46 m) in elevation with numerous sluggish rivers, creeks, bayous, and sloughs. It is charac- terized by level grasslands that support ranching and farming, low flat woodlands (especially along streams), swamps, and freshwater marshes. Upland prairie soils are usually heavy-textured acid- clays, clay loams, and sandy loams. Much of the prairie is grazed by cattle in large land holdings where the better soils are under cultivation or are improved pastures. Wildlife, especially deer, is an important consideration in range management. Vegetation of the coastal prairie is predominantly tall grasses including big bluestem, Andropogon gerardi; seacoast bluestem, Schizachyrium scoparium; eastern ga- magrass, Tripsacum dactyloides; Gulf muhly, Muhlenber- gia capillaris; Panicum spp.; and others. Major invaders, usually indicators of overgrazing, fires, or other disturbances, include mesquite, Prosopus glandulosa; oaks (especially live oaks, Quercus virginiana); prickley pear, Opuntia sp.; and several acacias. Acacia spp. Other invaders are broomsedge, Andropogon virgin- icus; smut-grass, Sporobolus poiretii; western ragweed, Ambrosia psilostachya; tumble grass, Schedonnardus pani- culatus; and many annual weeds and grasses. The vegetation of the river bottoms that cross the coastal prairie is different from that of the uplands. The principal species include sedges, Cyperus sp.; pecan, Carya illinoensis; bur oak, Quercus macrocarpa; lizards tail, Saurus cemuus; and bald cypress, Taxodium distichum. Subdominants are Texas hackberry, Celtus laevigata; eastern cottonwood, Populus deltoides; and black willow, Saiix nigra. Farther west and south, Celtus laevigata, Populus deltoides, and cedar elm, Ulmus crassifolia, be- come increasingly dominant. All of these give way to forms more typical of the marshlands or the beach communities as such factors as periods of soil inundation and salinity increase. The Upland Plant Zones Of the three upland plant zones forming the interior boundary of the coastal prairie and marsh zone, the timber belt has the greatest amount of woody vegetation (Fig. 4). It is characterized by extensive pine and pine-hardwood forests with intermittent swamps and occasional cultivated land or pasture land. Large areas of undisturbed vegetation in southeast Texas are referred to as the "Big Thicket," the preservation of which is the object of several conservation groups. The major timber species in southeast Texas include the longleaf pine, Pinus palustris; loblolly pine, P. taeda; blackjack oak, Quercus marilandica; post oak, Q. stellata; and the red oak, Q. rubra. Many hardwoods such as elm, Ulmus spp.; magnolia, Magnolia spp.; hickory, Carya spp.; and maple, Acer spp., are also present in the overstory. The post oak savannah begins near the western margin of Harris County and terminates near the western margin of Victoria County (Figs. 4, 5). Dominant woody species include Quercus marilandica, Q. stellata, and black hick- ory, Carya texana. Major grasses include little bluestem, Schizachyrium scoparium; switch grass, Panicum virga- tum; purple-top, Tridens flavus; silver bluestem, Bothri- ochloa saccharoides; wintergrass, Stipa leucotricha; and Chasmantium sessiliflorum. The eastern margins of the Rio Grande Plains extend from approximately the northern margin of Refugio County south to beyond the Rio Grande Delta (Figs. 5, 6). It is characterized by short live oaks, Quercus virginiana; Q. stellata; and honey mesquite, Prosopus juliflora, the latter species frequently being an indicator of overgrazing. Numerous grasses are interspersed in the grasslands, including species of Setaria, Paspalum, Chloris, and Trichloris. Low saline areas are characterized by Gulf cordgrass, Spartina spartina; sacaton, Sporobolus wrightii; and saltgrass, Distichlis spicata. In the extreme southern part of the Rio Grande Valley, small groves of a native palm, Sabal texana, still survive the encroachment of agriculture. In these groves and in the surrounding country occur shrubs, vines, and herbs that have their affinity farther to the south. GEOLOGY Geological History During the last Pleistocene glacial stage (the Wiscon- sin), the sea was about 450 feet (137.3 m) lower than it is today, and the shoreline was from 50 to 140 miles (80.5 to 225.4 km) seaward of the present shoreline (Le Blanc and Hodgson 1959). Rivers such as the Sabine, Trinity, Brazos, Colorado, Guadalupe, Nueces, and Rio Grande flowed across this broad plain, deeply eroding trenches (Fig. 7A) that were often more than 100 feet (30.5 m) below the adjacent upland surface (Van Siclen 1961). During this period the valley surfaces attained much of their final forms, now preserved beneath the alluvium that filled most of the valleys. As the last of the great Pleistocene glaciers melted during the early Recent, the sea rose and drowned the lower portions of rivers, thereby forming a series of estuaries (Fig. 7B). The landward, or mainland shorelines of present-day Galveston, Matagorda, San Antonio, Copano, and Corpus Christi bays, and nearly all of Sabine Lake originated in this period. About 5,000 years ago the sea level reached its present position (Le Blanc and Hodgson 1959), and the barrier islands and peninsulas were formed (Fig. 7C). The rising sea not only occupied the lower parts of valleys but it also weakened the river currents near river mouths, and this caused deposition of mud, sand, and gravel. This process continues to this day (Table 5). Stevens (1951) discussed the silt loads of Texas streams in detail. A direct relationship exists between the size and load of each stream and the configuration and characteristics of the shorelines where the streams meet salt water. The streams with large drainage areas (the Brazos, Colorado, and Rio Grande rivers) possess large deltaic plains that have filled their estuaries. The smaller streams have considerably smaller deltas that are developing at the heads of the estuaries. The rates of change of depths due to shoaling or scouring in various Texas bays are listed in Table 6. Price (1933) described the possible origin of certain marine terraces during the Illinoian-Wisconsin intergla- cial period of the late Pleistocene. Ingleside Lagoon and the mature barrier islands were probably formed when currents carrying sediments alongshore developed bar- rier islands and created the lagoon (Fig. 8A). As time progressed, the river carried sediments into the lagoon and built broad deltaic plains (Fig. 8B). When the Pleistocene glaciers developed (the Wisconsin, etc.), the sea level dropped, exposing a broad plain (Fig. 8C). The lagoon gradually filled with waterborne and wind-driv- en sediments, and the barrier islands became a terrace as high as 30 feet (9.2 m) in some places (Fig. 8D). The present barrier islands — Galveston, Matagorda, St. Joseph, Mustang, and Padre islands — and the Boli- var and Matagorda peninsulas are the results of process- es similar to those that formed the marine terraces described above. They originated near the end of the late Pleistocene with rising sea level and developed further in the early Recent. Originally many began as narrow strips of land, but coastal deposition of sedi- ments in association with longshore currents, winnowing processes, and bayward sediment deposition increased their lengths and widths to present dimensions. The result was separation of the lagoons from the Gulf. The building of a second Colorado River Delta below Matagorda is unique in the geology of the Gulf coast. A log jam developed in the Colorado River prior to 1690 below the town of Bay City and above the town of Matagorda (Wadsworth 1966). Between 1925 and 1929 the log jam and associated debris were removed from the stream by a dredging company, and the accumulated sediments in the river were carried downstream where a delta developed rapidly on the original undivided eastern arm of Matagorda Bay. Growth of the Colorado River Delta between September 1908 and April 1941 is shown in Figure 9. In 1936, a channel for handling flood discharges from the Colorado River was cut through the delta and Matagorda Peninsula to the Gulf (Wadsworth 1966). Most of the spoil from the dredging was placed along the western bank of the channel. In August 1940, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cut the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway through land paralleling the northern shores of East Matagorda Bay, eastern Matagorda Bay, and across the northern limits of the developing delta near Matagorda. The spoil deposition and additional growth of the delta from these dredging activities severely limited the once flourishing oyster-fishing industry in eastern Matagorda Bay (Weeks 1945). A paved road has since been constructed along the east bank of the channel between Matagorda and the Gulf of Mexico. Large trees and other vegetation on sides of the channel now mark the "site of waters once forming the undivided eastern arm of Matagorda Bay. Formations Exposed geologic formations on the Texas coast are chiefly late Pleistocene or Recent. Pleistocene formations consist of inland sediments, usually 5 feet (1.5 m) or more thick. They occur in the uplands and generally lie between the alluvial valleys of the major rivers (Figs. 10-12). The deposits forming the inland boundaries are primarily Beaumont clays between Sabine Lake and the Laguna Madre. Also, Live Oak Bar and Ingleside forma- tions are situated primarily between San Antonio Bay and the upper Laguna Madre. All are underlain by increasingly older Pleistocene deposits. The Recent deposits consist of broad alluvial river valleys, low-lying lands characterized by salt marshes, filled river valleys, barrier islands, and peninsulas. Aquifer Systems Geologic formations that yield water to wells are known collectively as the Gulf Coast Aquifer Sands and consist of interbedded layers of sand and clay on the Texas coast. These formations occur at the surface throughout the region and dip gently beneath the sur- face toward the Gulf of Mexico (Winslow 1961). Their dip is greater than the slope of the land surface and, therefore, the formations at the outcrops are beveled by the land surface. The alternation of sand and clay layers and their structure are ideal for the occurrence of artesian water (Fig. 13). The predominantly sandy zones shown in Figure 13 are the important water-producing formations. These zones consist of extremely irregular beds of sand and gravel and some beds of silt and clay that may grade into each other laterally and vertically in relatively short distances. The predominantly clayed zones shown in the section are more persistent than the sandy zones and contain many irregular sandy beds. The crosshatched boxes on the cross section indicate the zones now being exploited extensively in the Houston region. Some of the deep formations, although not now used, could yield additional large supplies of groundwater of usable quality to wells in the northern part of the region. Rainwater enters the outcropping sandy zones as recharge, moving down the dip of the beds to the wells. Originally, wells throughout the Gulf coast aquifer re- gion flowed above the land surface. However, extensive pumping in some areas had caused water levels in the wells to decline; by 1961 the water levels had dropped to as much as 270 feet (82.3 m) below sea level in the Pasadena area where pumping is the greatest (Winslow 1961). Groundwater temperature in the Houston region is about the same— 68°F (20°C)— as the average air tem- perature. Temperature increased about 1°F for each 200 feet (61 m) depth to about 1,600 feet (488 m). Below 1,600 feet, the average rate of increase is slightly greater. See Winslow (1961) for data on mineral content. Figure 13 shows the approximate position of salt water in the formations underlying the Houston-Galve- ston area and may typify conditions throughout the coastal region. The salt water probably was present in the sediments at the time of their deposition. As sea level fell, freshwater began to percolate through the formations, tending to flush out the salt water; incom- plete flushing of the deeper formations resulted in re- tention of much salt water. ESTUARINE BOTTOM SEDIMENTS The distribution of bottom sediments in six of the seven estuarine study areas is summarized in Figures 14 through 19. Only Sabine Lake remains univestigated. The results vary because of the types of techniques used to analyze sediments. Should detailed data on sediments be desired for Texas estuaries, the reader should contact Shell Oil Company, Humble Oil and Refining Company, or other oil companies headquartered in Houston where maps are available for scientific study. STREAM DISCHARGE Diversity of stream flow on the Texas coast exceeds that of the other Gulf states because the coast lies in the transition zone between the humid southeastern United States and the arid plateau of Mexico and Texas. One result is that streams of the upper Texas coast display relatively uniform seasonal flow while those of the central and lower coast have frequent periods of low or no flow. With two exceptions. Tables 7-1 through 7-31 record discharge data from water supply publications of the U.S. Geological Survey of all gaged streams which empty into Texas estuarine areas. Data for the San Jacinto River (Sam Houston Dam spillway) were com- puted from a scale of water heights prepared by the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; those of the Rio Grande were furnish- ed by the International Boundary Commission, U.S. Section, El Paso, Tex. In each table, the data through the "Mean" line were copied as they appeared in these publications. Monthly means were calculated to the near- est whole number when the mean exceeded 99.9, to the nearest tenth when the mean fell between 10.0 and 99.9, and to the nearest hundredth when the mean fell between 1.00 and 9.99. The number in the lower right corner of each table (under "The Year" and to the right of "Mean") is the mean of "The Year" column not the "Mean" line; it differs slightly from the number calculat- ed by averaging monthly means because individual fig- ures in "The Year" column are calculated from the sum of daily discharges divided by 365 (or 366), not from the sum of monthly mean discharges divided by 12. Table 8 shows the combined average discharge of gaged streams on the Texas coast and the volumes of the seven estuarine systems. The trend is toward small- er streamflow with distance west and south; in fact, the flow to Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay accounts for over three-quarters of the flow to all Texas estuaries. PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROPERTIES Because of their relatively shallow depths and broad surfaces, Texas estuaries are vulnerable to sudden and often drastic environmental changes. Sudden drops in water temperature caused by cold fronts have been known to produce fish kills often over a wide area. Moreover flood dishcarges from contributing watersheds may suddenly depress salinities throughout an estuary, destroying or severely reducing one or more of its fisheries. Personnel of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department described a sudden freshening of Corpus Christi Bay due to floods that destroyed the oyster fishery in 1963. Temperature Table 9 contains average and extreme low February surface water temperatures and average and extreme high July temperatures from seven locations on the Texas coast. Temperature extremes greater than those cited in Table 8 often occur in shallow isolated pockets where there is little tidal exchange. Personnel of the Galveston Laboratory, National Marine Fisheres Ser- vice, NOAA, recorded a February low of 3°C and a July high of 39°C in parts of Galveston Bay between 1963 and 1966. Fish kills frequently accompany rapid temperature decreases that result from the sudden arrivals of cold fronts in late fall and winter (Gunter and Hildebrand 1951). They occur most frequently on the upper Texas coast. Gunter (1941) found that rapid temperature drops —one as great as 40°F (about 22°C) within a 4-h period — have resulted in the death of millions of marine organisms. A change of 20°F (about 11°C) within a 5-day period is not unusual (Skud and Wilson 1960). Unpublished data in files of the Galveston Laboratory show that in relatively deep water, including navigation channels, surface water is generally warmer than bottom water in summer and cooler than bottom water in winter. However, the mixing of waters by wind and tide tends to equalize surface and bottom temperatures in shallow areas. Salinity Except for unusaully high salinity in the Laguna Madre, and occasional periods of extremely low salinity in Corpus Christi Bay, the salinity in Texas estuaries generally lies between about 5 and 25%o (Figs. 20-27). Hedgpeth il953) noted that salinities above 70%o were not uncommon in the upper Laguna Madre, including a record high of 113. 9%o between 1946 and 1948 before the dredging of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway in 1949. However, extremes of 55%o to a low approaching that of seawater were recorded in 1963 and 1965 in the upper Laguna Madre (Fig. 26). The Laguna Madre, unlike other Texas estuaries, has no major stream dis- charging into it. Other salinity extremes, i.e., from a low of 1.5%o to a high of 75.05%o, have been recorded in the upper reaches of Alazan Bay (Breuer 1957). Corpus Christi Bay has received periodic flood dis- charges from the Nueces River, and these caused ex- ceedingly low salinities throughout the bay. Personnel of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department suggest that such flooding contributed to the virtual elimination of the once flourishing oyster fishery in the bay prior to 1963. THE FAUNA Like plants, animals are restricted to certain seg- ments of the estuarine habitat according to their toler- ance to chemical and physical conditions. Salinity is the factor most frequently considered. The faunal compo- nents of an estuary can be divided initially into two categories: incidental species and estuarine-dependent species. Incidental species are freshwater or ocean in- habitants that venture into the estuary accidentally, that perform no life function there other than possibly feed- ing, and that must return to the original habitat or eventually perish (Diener 1964). These forms are usually present in small numbers. Estuarine-dependent species are those that normally utilize the estuary during part or all of their life cycle for such purposes as breeding, feed, or developing into juveniles or subadults (Diener 1964). Skud and Wilson (1960) divided estuarine-dependent species into transients and residents. The majority of the more abundant forms are transients, examples being menhaden, Brevoortia sp.; mullet, Mugil sp.; and shrimp, Penaeus sp. The transients are "semicatadromous" in that the adults spawn offshore and the young move into less saline waters. The residents, on the other hand, spend their entire lives within estuaries. The oyster, Crassostrea virginica, is one example of a resident. The literature pertaining to the various aspects of the fauna of Texas estuaries is too voluminous to cite in detail in this publication. However, considerable informa- tion may be obtained from personnel of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department at Seabrook, Rockport, and Austin, Tex. and from its series of Annual Reports, Marine Laboratory, Rockport, beginning in 1949. Much of the data include checklists of many species ranked according to their relative abundance. The series Contributions to Marine Science (formerly Publications of the Institute of Marine Science), first published by the University of Texas in 1945, contains many papers on the biota of Texas coastal waters. Clam Beds The quahog clam, Mercenaria mercenaria, has sup- ported essentially no commercial fishery in Texas since about 1900. Prior to 1900, a small fishery did exist. The species occurs in lower Galveston Bay near Port Bolivar and near Carancahua Reef in central West Bay and occupies a combined area of about 4 acres (1.6 hectares) (William R. More, Texas Parks and Wildlife Depart- ment, Seabrook, Tex., pers. commun.). A similar spe- cies, M. campechiensis, occurs in Mesquite Bay (Schultz 1962) and in South Bay (Breuer 1962a). Other clams, Rangia sp., have been found from Sabine Lake to Copano Bay, but their local distribution has been studied only in Galveston Bay where R. flexuosa lives throughout much of Trinity Bay and in small areas in upper Galveston and East bays (C. R. Mock, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Gal- veston, Tex., pers. commun.). Oysters Oyster reefs of varying sizes are present in all of the estuarine systems of Texas but reach their best develop- ment between Galveston Bay and Corpus Christi Bay. The American oyster, Crassostrea virginica, is the species most frequently encountered, although another species, C. rhyzophorae, has been reported from the hypersaline waters of the lower Laguna Madre. Reefs formed by oysters are frequently extensive, and they often divide the bays into segments and alter circulation patterns. Oysters are attacked by a variety of predators and parasites, and they are also susceptible to being covered by silt, not only through natural processes but by dredging and spoil deposition operations. Moreover, shell reefs that are important places for the setting of oyster larvae (spat) are being exploited for construction materi- al in bays between Galveston and Corpus Christi. Natural oyster reefs. — Natural oyster reefs are de- fined herein as reefs which have been built up over many years, perhaps centuries, and are open to public harvest. In addition to providing a valuable commercial fishery for the economy of the Texas coast, the reefs provide a habitat for various food organisms and shelter for many species of fish, several of which are valuable to sport and commercial fisheries. Figures 28 through 32 show the approximate locations of the major oyster reefs; Table 10 gives their areas. Oysters grow wherever conditions are favorable — on pilings, bulkheads, seawalls, and on reefs ranging in size and shape from small mounds to long ridges extending several miles. Oysters of premium commercial quality are found near the mouths of typical estuaries where salin- ity ranges from 10 to 30%o. Here, growth is rapid and the fluctuating salinities reduce predation. Oyster grow- ers often plant medium-sized specimens in waters where salinity is about 25%o and harvest them before preda- tors and parasites become established (Butler 1954). Breuer (1962a) believes that certain oysters in the lower Laguna Madre may represent a distinct physio- logical race because they spawn and grow rapidly in salinities greater than 40%o. Of the 3,242,000 pounds (1,471,868 kg) of oyster meat taken from Texas waters in 1968, about 88% came from Galveston Bay (Orman H. Farley, Branch of Statis- tics and Market News, National Marine Fisheries Ser- vice, NOAA, Galveston, Tex., pers. commun.). The potential harvest from Galveston and from other bays is endangered by steadily increasing pollution. Private oyster reefs. — Figures 28 through 32 show the locations of private oyster leases as of 1 May 1967 in the estuaries between Galveston and Corpus Christi bays, and Table 10 gives their acreage. Leases are granted to individuals or corporations upon application to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Tex. A total of 5,219 acres (2,113 hectares) of bay bottom is currently leased for oyster cultivation. Commercial fishermen hold several leases in areas where oysters do not occur naturally. They obtain oys- ters from reefs (public or private) in the areas designated as unsuitable for commercial shellfishing due to poor water quality and transport them to their leases where water quality is acceptable. Here the oysters remain, generally for about 1 mo, until they rid themselves of undesirable foreign matter. They are then harvested and placed on the market. This practice is overseen by the Texas Department of Health. Artificial reefs.— Figures 33 through 38 show the locations of artificial fishing reefs established by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, and Table 11 gives known statistics. They were established for the purpose of oyster research. POPULATIONS Paralleling a national trend, the population of coun- ties and cities larger than 2,500 bordering Texas estu- aries has increased steadily since 1850 (Tables 12-14.7). Nueces County experienced the most rapid rate of in- crease—from 698 in 1850 to 237,544 in 1970. The Corpus Christi area began rapid growth with the development of chemical, petroleum, and shipping industries after World War II. Other growth centers are Harris County (includes Houston), which increased from 4,668 in 1850 to 1,741,912 in 1970, and Jefferson County (Beaumont and Port Arthur), which increased from 1,836 to 244,773 in the same period. The City of Beaumont recorded the greatest relative growth from a population of 151 in 1850 to 115,919 in 1970. In the same period the population of Houston increased from 2,396 to 1,232,802. Vulnerability to hurricanes have slowed or discour- aged development in Galveston, Matagorda (Matagorda County), and Indianola (Calhoun County). Galveston re- newed its growth after temporary slowdowns in the late 19th century and in the early 1900's, but Mata- gorda remains a small town of 700, and Indianola no longer exists. Population projections reflect the industrial potential of such cities as Houston, Corpus Christi, Beaumont, and Port Arthur (Table 15). Many other communities should grow because they are either commuter towns near major cities or because they contain industries, tourist attractions, or outstanding recreational facilities. Although population density based on county statistics is greatest in the Galveston Bay area, high densities exist also on the western shore of Sabine Lake and on Corpus Christi Bay (Tables 14.1-14.7). ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The production of minerals, petrochemical manufac- ture, construction, agriculture, shipping and shipbuild- ing, miscellaneous manufacturing, and tourism are major socioeconomic activities along the Texas coast. Sport and commercial fisheries and waterfowl hunting, also impor- tant activities, are described in a subsequent section. The following narrative describes the commerce and agriculture in the 18 counties and Cameron Parish, La. that lie contiguous to the seven estuarine study areas of Texas. Data for Cameron Parish were obtained from Parish officials at Cameron. Data for the Texas counties were compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Census in 1963 and published in the Texas Almanac (A. H. Belo Corporation 1967). Industries The centers of commerce and industry on the Texas coast are centered about the Houston-Galveston, Corpus Christi, and Beaumount-Port Arthur metropolitan areas. These centers are, in turn, supported by a large mineral producing industry which had its beginning near Beau- mont when the Spindletop Field began producing in 1901. Table 16 summarizes mineral production on the Texas coast, and Table 17 lists the major features of commerce and industry. The City of Houston, the most populous city of Texas, is the nation's third ranking seaport and a leading center for petrochemicals, petroleum production, and related supplies. Houston is also a center for pipe- line transmission, and a large science-based industry which is centered primarily about the nearby Lyndon B. Johnson Manned Spacecraft Center in the Clear Lake area. Outlying communities such as Pasadena, Channel- view, Deer Park, and Baytown are sites for numerous petrochemical plants and refineries which line the Hous- ton Ship Channel. Like Houston, Beaumont-Port Arthur and Corpus Christi are also centers for the petrochemical industry, which is supported largely by nearby productive mineral deposits. These centers are also major termini for nu- merous railroads which carry large amounts of freight to their factories and processing plants and to their wharves for shipping to distant ports. Agriculture The agriculture of the Texas Gulf coast is based on beef cattle and cotton. Other valuable products include rice in the upper section of the coast and citrus fruit in the Rio Grande Valley. The features of this agrarian economy are summarized in Table 18. In addition to the features described in Table 18 each county has numerous agribusiness establishments related to the agricultural products of the area. Large grain storage facilities are located at Corpus Christi and Hous- ton. Cotton gins are situated in Calhoun, Jackson, Mata- gorda, Nueces, Refugio, San Patricio, Victoria, and Willacy counties. Saw mills and rice mills are located in Jefferson and Orange counties. Fisheries and Waterfowl Hunting Commercial fisheries. — Tables 19.1 through 19.5 show the 1968 commercial fish harvest from Texas waters including the Gulf of Mexico. Information of this type is collected and summarized by the Division of Statistics, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Galveston, Tex. Most of the harvest, in terms of poundage and value, consists of species classified as estuarine-depend- ent (Skud and Wilson 1960; Diener 1964). For the period 1960-68, estuarine-dependent species comprised about 98% (by poundage) of the catch in all but 2 yr. In 1960 and 1961 these species comprised 96 and 70% of the catch, respectively, and these values reflected drops in the shrimp and menhaden harvest. The reduction in percentage of estuarine-dependent species in the catch was most pronounced in 1961 when shrimp trawling was prohibited in Sabine Lake and the shrimp harvest was low. Large-scale menhaden, Brevoortia patronus, and commercial shrimp, Penaeus aztecus and P. setiferus, make up the bulk (by weight) of the catch of estuarine- dependent species. Dockside value of the Texas catch has followed similar trends for the same period. Estuarine-dependent species comprised 89% of the value of the catch in 1960 and 1961, the percentage increased to 91% in 1962, and it remained around 99% through 1968. The species of great- est value are the shrimp. The value of Texas landings continues to rise, chiefly due to inflation. For example, the 223 million pounds landed in 1960 were valued at $25.3 million, and the 127.6 million pounds landed in 1968 were valued at $43.7 million. The decline in catch of menhaden accounts for most of the drop in poundage, while the increase in value of shrimp and oysters accounts for the steady increase in value of the catch. Table 20 summarizes the status of the commercial fishing industry in Texas for 1967. The Galveston Bay area contains the greatest number of seafood processing plants, but the greatest number of people in the fishing industry are employed in the Brownsville (Laguna Ma- dre) area. Oyster processors predominate in the Galves- ton area, and shrimp and general seafood processors predominate in the Brownsville area. The products of shrimp and general seafood processors rank first and second, respectively, in terms of gross wholesale value. Sport fisheries and waterfowl hunting. — Table 21 sum- marizes the status of sport fishing and waterfowl hunt- ing on the Texas coast during 1968. Galveston Bay has the most sport fishing pressure — 2,186,800 man-days — while the Sabine Lake area shows the least amount of pressure— 85,000 man-days. According to Belden Associates (1960), the foremost popular sportfishes are spotted seatrout, Cynoscion ne- bulosus; redfish or red drum, Sciaenops ocellata; drum, Sciaenidae; and assorted Flounder, Paralichthys sp. There is some confusion with the term "drum," as this pro- bably includes several species. Other fish, in order of number taken, include Atlantic croacker, Micropogon undulatus; sea catfishes, Arius felis and Bagre marinus; sand seatrout, Cynoscion arenarius; whiting, Menticir- rkus sp.; sheepshead, Archosargus probatocephalus; red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus; Spanish mackerels, Scomberomorus sp.; Florida pompano, Trachinotus caro- linus; and others. A summary of waterfowl hunting is also given in Table 21. The greatest pressure is in the Galveston Bay area with 28,300 man-days, and the least amount of pressure is recorded for the Sabine Lake area. The Texas coast is the terminus or stopover for many migratory game birds on the Mississippi and Central flyways. As a result, many species of ducks, geese, and other migratory game birds are to be found there during the winter. POLLUTION Of all of man's adverse effects upon the estuarine habitats of fishes and wildlife, pollution is one of the more insidious and most destructive. Depending on the nature and amount of pollutant, damage to an estuary may range from rendering a segment of the estuary unsanitary for human use to alteration of the water chemistry and destruction of bay bottom, vegetation, and biota. Thi; problem of pollution is expected to worsen as domestic and industrial growth occurs. In the past, documentation of the occurrence of pollution in the coastal waters of Texas has not been thorough or complete, but such documentation is im- proving. An increasing number of pollution sources are being located, and others are being monitored more frequently. New and improved water treatment facilities are being constructed along the coast for the treatment of domestic and industrial wastes. Due to increasing public concern, the types of pollu- tion being monitored are also increasing. For example, in 1967, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated a program of monitoring the types and quantities of agricultural pesticides at selected stream gaging stations throughout Texas. It can be expected that all Federal, State, and local agencies concerned with pollution and its control will increase their surveillance as laws and funding enable them to do so. Domestic Wastes Data on quantity and quality of discharges of domes- tic wastes are collected by the Texas Water Quality Board. Examples of such data are presented in Table 22, based on a survey taken during 1967-1969. Table 22 contains data on discharge volume, BOD (Bioglogical Oxygen Demand), ortho-phosphates, nitroge- nous compounds, suspended solids, and chlorides, and the sampling, done on an irregular basis, is continuing. Table 22 gives information on known outfalls within the seven estuarine study areas of Texas, and Figures 39 through 45 show the approximate locations of these outfalls. Locations of all outfalls except those in the Galveston Bay area may be identified with those in Table 22 through Texas Water Quality Board Permit Numbers. Code numbers follow the permit number for the Galveston Bay area segment of Table 22 and corre- spond to numbers found on Figure 40. Domestic pollution in Texas is being monitored, and the resulting data are being recorded by Federal and State agencies. The U.S. Public Health Service main- tains, and is updating, domestic pollution data in its inventory of municipal and industrial waste facilities. The Texas Water Quality Board monitors effluent quali- ty and quantity from domestic waste treatment facilities and establishes standards and policies which such facili- ties must follow. Industrial Wastes Unlike domestic wastes, industrial wastes are more varied and complex. Data on quality and quantity of effluent containing these wastes were taken from an assemblage collected by the Texas Water Quality Board, and they are presented in Table 23 based on a survey taken during 1967-69. Table 23 contains data on discharge volume, pH, BOD, COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand), and major chemical characteristics, and the sampling, done on an irregular basis, is continuing. Information on known outfalls within the seven estuarine study areas of Texas is given in Table 23, and Figures 39 through 45 show the approximate locations of these outfalls. On the figures, locations of all outfalls except those in the Galveston Bay area may be identified with those in Table 23 through Texas Water Quality Board Permit Numbers. Code numbers follow the permit numbers for the Galveston Bay area segment of Table 23 and corres- pond to numbers found on Figure 40. Like domestic pollution, industrial pollution in Texas is being monitored, and the resulting data are being recorded by Federal and State agencies. The U.S. Pub- lic Health Service maintains, and is updating, industrial pollution data in its inventory of municipal and industrial waste facilities. The Texas Water Quality Board moni- tors quality and quantity of effluent from industrial sites and establishes standards and policies which industry must follow. Agricultural Pollution Until 1967, no known attempt was made in Texas to monitor the quality and quantity of agricultural pesti- cides entering the waters of Texas. In 1967, the U.S. Geological Survey began to collect relevant data on some compounds from selected points on a random schedule. These compounds included Aldrin, DDT (1,1,1- trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl) ethane) and its by-prod- ucts, DDD (6,6'-dithiodi-2-naphthol) and DDE (1.1-di- chloro-2,2-bis-(p-chorphenyl)ethylene), Dieldrin, Endrin, Hepatachlor, Hepatachlor epoxide. Lindane, BHC (Ben- zene hexachloride), Menthol Parathion, Parathion, 2,4-D, Silvex, and 2,4,5-T. Available data suggest that use of pesticides is sea- sonal and differs slightly between the upper and lower coastal regions (Childress 1965, 1966, 1967). Insecticides were found in Texas streams throughout the year, but they appeared to be more abundant between March and September. A peak appeared on the lower coast during March and on the upper coasts during April. Both coastal areas displayed declines in quantities of insecti- cides around September. Herbicides appeared in Texas coastal streams through- out the year but were most abundant between March and August. There appeared to be little variation be- tween upper and lower coastal areas. Childress (1965, 1966, 1967) surveyed pesticide use on the Texas coast and reported on the amounts of these chemicals in the tissues of estuarine fishes, shell- fishes, and certain birds. Sabine Lake, a well-known rice-producing area, was not surveyed. The rice-producing areas of the upper coast and the citrus fruit-producing areas of the lower coast received the greatest applications of pesticide. Tissues from samples of fish and oysters from all Texas bays contained pesticides, but highest concentrations were found in samples from the lower Laguna Madre. Table 24 shows the extent of application and total amounts of pesticides present in water and sediment samples from selected Texas estuaries. The insecticides for which tests were made included DDT (also DDD and DDE), and Dieldrin, and the herbicides included 2,4-D, Silvex, and 2,4,5-T. Condition of Estuarine Waters Pollution from domestic, industrial, and agricultural sources is a threat to the estuaries of Texas. Large areas have been declared closed to shellfishing, especial- ly the harvest of oysters, due to existence of various pollutants and associated high counts of coliform bacteria over long periods of time. Sabine Lake has been closed to the harvest of oysters (Fig. 39), and much of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway which cuts through land areas is considered to be heavily polluted. Figures 39 through 45 show the polluted and condi- tionally approved portions of the Texas estuaries— those areas where oyster fishing is prohibited or conditionally approved by the Texas State Board of Health — as deter- mined by counts of coliform bacteria. Conditionally ap- proved waters are those normally polluted but which may have sufficiently low counts of coliform bacteria over long periods of time to permit oyster fishing. Table 25 gives the approximate acreage of polluted (or closed) and conditionally approved waters in each of the seven Texas estuaries. The size of conditionally approved waters varies to some extent, depending upon the amount of runoff from the land and discharge from major tributaries. During periods of high discharge of freshwater, an area may be polluted, whereas during periods of low discharge the same area may be clean enough to allow oyster harvesting. The boundaries of polluted and conditionally approved shellfishing areas may be modified as determined by continuous sampling by the Texas Department of Health in cooperation with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, the Texas Water Quality Board, and several local and Federal agencies. In the Galveston Bay area, oyster fishermen fre- quently take oysters from polluted waters and trans- plant them on private reefs in the approved waters of West Bay and lower Galveston Bay. This practice is described in detail in a previous section. CHANNELIZATION AND FILL A network of navigation channels constructed by the Galveston District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and by numerous local groups interconnects the coastal areas. Local groups include navigation districts, oil com- panies, industrial firms, municipalities, county govern- ments, and developers of both domestic and industrial properties. hrough 48 show the general location of the Texas coast as described in Table Lrmy Corps of Engineers, the largest navigation channels on the Texas coast, more than 1,050 miles (1,691 km) of id proposes to construct an additional 45 (Table 26). The largest channel on the the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway which of the coast from east of the Sabine •abel and Brownsville. he construction of navigation channels was first conducted by State or private rly as 1857, the first channelization in ea was completed. The State of Texas shallow-draft channel between Aransas iristi bays. A number of other small dredged by various private interests eefs and through upland obstructions. ■ments began about 1892 with construc- 1 5 feet (1.5 m) deep by 40 feet (12.2 m) Bay on the present Intracoastal Water- udies showed that a 9- by 100-foot (2.7- nnel was needed between the Sabine- ay and Corpus Christi. id faster boats came into use, it was arge the channel again. On 23 July 1942 IS obtained to dredge the channel to 12 ' by 38.1 m) between the Sabine River . The amount of boat traffic and boat eased since 1942 and studies for the 16 by 150 feet (4.8 by 45.7 m) have ;s the channels maintained by the U.S. Engineers on the Texas coast. Included )resent or existing dimensions) and pro- or authorized) dimensions— length, bottom th at mean low tide (MLT). Generally, laving dimensions greater than projected e constructed by local or private in- fill in the bays of Te)fas resulted from ;poil from the dredging of navigation is 49 through 55 show major fill areas, are based on modern charts and the vailable. The most significant fill areas bine Lake in which the Corps of Engi- designated a large area in the open ake for disposal of spoil (Fig. 49). The ;y Dyke and Pelican Island in lower vere built with spoil from construction of [arbor and numerous navigation channels. SUMMARY States Marine Fisheries Commission ini- ative inventory of U.S. Gulf of Mexico .1 years ago. This paper constitutes the 1 part of the Texas inventory. Similar ade simultaneously in Alabama, Florida, Mississippi. tory combines original observations with e literature on dimensions, vegetation, ne bottom sediments, stream discharge, inmental properties, fauna (oyster and clam beds), human populations, economic development, pollution, and channelization and fill. 3. The length of the Texas Gulf coast is approxi- mately 370 miles (595 km), and the coastal climate varies from humid to semiarid. 4. Estuaries of the Texas coast consist of two basic shapes: 1) simple (oval) and 2) complex (branching or dendritic). Sabine Lake is representative of the first category, and the remaining estuaries are of the second. 5. The open water area of major estuaries of Texas (1,532,430 acres = 620,634 hectares) is 0.74 times the area of America's largest estuary, Chesapeake Bay. 6. There are approximately 1,141,400 acres (462,267 hectares) of marsh vegetation (emergents) surrounding Texas estuaries and 249,365 acres (100,992 hectares) of submerged vegetation. 7. Geologically, Texas' Gulf coast estuaries were formed from either drowned river mouths or from the development of barrier islands and peninsulas. The Bra- zos, Colorado, and Rio Grande rivers possess large deltaic plains that have filled their estuaries. Aquifer systems in the Gulf coast consist of gently sloping interbedded layers of sands and clays. Exposed geologic formations are chiefly Recent or late Pleistocene. 8. Stream discharge on the upper Texas coast is much greater than that on the central and lower coast. The Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay areas receive over three-fourths of the total gaged discharge entering the seven estuarine areas. 9. Average February water temperatures range from 63.7°F (17.6°C) at Port Isabel to 55.6°F (13.1°C) in the Gulf at Galveston according to records of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. Average July water temperatures are about the same at all stations, ranging from 83.4°F to 87.4°F (28.5°C to 30.2°C). 10. Estuarine salinities generally range from about 5 to 25%o except in the Laguna Madre area, where hypersalinity is common. Large rivers depress salinity at the heads of bays and throughout entire estuarine areas during periods of flooding. High salinities approaching 35%o (the approximate salinity of Gulf of Mexico surface water) are common about tidal passes. 11. Estuarine faunal elements may be divided into two primary groups: incidentals which are typical of the freshwater or oceanic habitats, and estuarine-dependents which spend part or all of their life cycles within the estuary. Estuarine-dependent species are classified as transients that spend only a part of their life cycle in the estuary, or residents that utilize the estuary for their entire life cycles. 12. The total measured acreage of natural and pri- vate oyster leases on the Texas coast is 7,287 acres (2,951 hectares) and 5,190 acres (2,102 hectares), respec- tively. Oyster production is foremost in the Galveston Bay area where approximately 5,880 acres (2,380 hectares of natural or public reefs and 2,768 acres (1,120 hectares) of private leases are located. 13. Human population increased from 31,751 persons in 1850 to 2,962,125 persons in 1970 in Cameron Parish and Texas counties contiguous to the seven estuarine areas. Harris County had the greatest population in 1970 with 1,741,912 persons while Kenedy County had the least, 678 persons. 14. The extraction of petroleum, natural gas and natural gas liquids along with the manufacture of petro- chemicals, miscellaneous chemicals, shipping, and ship- 10 building and repair are the most important commercial activities on the Texas Gulf coast. Other major socio- economic activities include production of metal products, lumber and wood products, tourism, and recreational activities. 15. Texas coastal agriculture is based primarily upon the production of beef cattle and cotton. Rice is impor- tant to the economy of the upper Gulf coast of Texas while citrus fruit production is important to the Rio Grande valley. 16. Fisheries and waterfowl hunting are important to the Texas coast. Commercial fisheries yielded 7.7 million pounds from Texas waters in 1968. The gross wholesale value of fishery products during 1967 was valued at $95.2 million. Sportfishing and hunting activities on the Texas coast consumed approximately 6,395,500 and 66,200 man-days, respectively, in 1968. 17. Pollution from domestic and industrial sources has forced the closing of about 325,090 acres (131,661 hectares) to shellfishing. Of the total of about 1,532,430 acres (620,634 hectares) of open estuarine water in Texas, an additional 16,600 acres (6,723 hectares) of open estuarine waters have been closed on a conditional basis. 18. There are currently over 1,015 miles (1,634 km) of Federal navigation channels within the seven estu- arine study areas. These channels, along with numerous private channels, destroy or seriously alter estuarine areas and adjacent marshlands. The most significant channelization has taken place in Sabine Lake and Gal- veston Bay where large areas of open estuarine waters have been displaced by large spoil areas. The largest channel is the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway which paral- lels the coast from Sabine Lake to Port Isabel. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my appreciation to numerous people for their aid in the preparation of the publication. Personnel of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, namely Daniel Patlan, J. Kneeland McNulty, Ernest A. Anthony, James E. Sykes, Richard J. Hoog- land, W. Lee Trent, K. Neal Baxter, Richard A. Neal, Richard J. Berry, and Charles W. Caillouet have all aided directly or indirectly through their advice or furnishing information pertinent to the work. The secre- tarial staff and other employees of the Galveston Bio- logical and St. Petersburg Beach laboratories due consid- erable appreciation for their efforts in data compilation and preparation of the text are Maxine H. Kamleiter, Helen Turczyk, Kathryn L. Ireland, Petronila C. Prado, Carolyn L. Smith, and Ruth W. Yanch. J. Y. Christmas of the Gulf Coast Research Labora- tory, Ocean Springs, Miss., and Ted B. Ford and William S. Perret of the Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission, New Oreleans, have given considerable aid in preparation of the manuscript and data pertaining to Sabine Lake; Johnnie H. Crance, formerly of the Ala- bama Conservation Department, Dauphin Island, has been helpful with respect to the initial preparation of maps. Representatives of the Texas Water Development Board and the Water Quality Board have contributed much needed data pertaining to water resources in the state. Kenneth C. Jurgens and Terrance R. Leary of the Te>as Parks and Wildlife Department and its staff of fieli biologists have been of aid in supplying data pertaining to hydrological, chemical, and biological pro- perties of Texas coastal waters. It is impossible to cite all, but their names and published reports are found throughout the publication. Personnel of other Federal agencies have also given much aid. Among these are John G. Degani, Keith Kraai, and Sidney H. (Pete) Wilkirson of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Robert S. Stevens, Albuquer- que, N.M., who have supplied data pertaining to sport fisheries and wildlife. Edgar W. Mauney and George Marines of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Galves- ton District) have given information pertaining to vari- ous physical features of the coast. Numerous individuals from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and Geological Survey, Austin, Tex., have given considerable informa- tion relative to water supply and quality. LITERATURE CITED BELDEN ASSOCIATES. 1960. The salt water fish harvest of Texas sportsmen Septem- ber 1959-August 1960. The second statewide survey of fishing habits and the catch of redfish, speckled trout, flounder, and drum off the Texas coast. Conducted by the personal inter- view method for the Texas Game and Fish Commission. Belden Associates, Dallas, Tex. A. H. BELO CORPORATION. 1967. Texas almanac and state industrial guide 1968-1969. A. H. Belo Corporation, Dallas, 704 p. BREUER. J. P. 1957. An ecological survey of Baffin and Alazan Bays, Texas. Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci., Univ. Tex. 4(2):134-155. 1959. Experimental rehabilitation of the commercial oyster in the project area, especially in the Port Isabel area. Project M-9-D-3, Job G-1. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. 1959, 4 p. 1962a. An ecolgical survey of the lower Laguna Madre of Texas, 1953-1959. Univ. Tex., Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. 8:153-183. 1962b. Construction of artificial reefs in the upper Laguna Madre. Project M-V-D-1, Job 2. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. Sep. 1961-Dec. 1962, 2 p. BUTLER, P. A. 1954. Summary of our knowledge of the oyster in the Gulf of Mexico. In P.S. Galtsoff (coordinator), Gulf of Mexico. Its origin, waters, and marine life, p. 479-489. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Fish. Bull. 55. CHILDRESS, U. R. 1960. Preliminary survey of oyster bottoms in San Antonio and Espiritu Santo Bays. Project M-5-R-1, Job B-2a. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. 1960, 6 p. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the San An- tonio Bay system. Project MF-R-6, Job 15. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 447-476. 1965. A determination of the source, amount and area of pesti- cide pollution in some Texas bays. Project MP-R-1, Job 1. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1965, p. 245-255. 1966. An investigation into levels of concentration, seasonal variations, and sources of pesticide toxicants in some species from selected bay areas. Project MP-R-2. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1966, p. 39-53. 1967. An investigation into levels of concentration of various pesticide toxicants in some species from selected Texas bay areas. Project MP-R-3, Job 1. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1967, p. 1-17. CORRELL, D. S.. and M. C. JOHNSTON. 1970. Manual of the vascular plants of Texas. Tex. Res. Found., Renner, Tex., 1881 p. 11 DAY. D. S. 1959. Inventory of bottom types present and a mapping of their locations with a description of stations. Project M4- R-1. Job D-2. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. 1958-1959. 8 p. DIENER. R. A. 1964. Texas estuaries and water resource development pro- jects. Proc. 9th Annu. Conf., Water for Texas, p. 25-31. Texas A&M Univ., Water Resour. Inst. DI.TPUY, A. J., D. B. MANIGOLD, and J. A. SCHULZE. 1970. Biochemical oxygen demand, dissolved oxygen, selected nutrients, and pesticide records of Texas surface waters, 1968. Tex. Water Dev. Board. (Austin), Reg. 108, 37 p. EMERY, K. 0., and R. E. STEVENSON. 1957. Estuaries and lagoons. I. Physical and chemical charac- teristics. In J. W. Hedgpeth (editor). Treatise on marine ecology and paleoecology. Vol. I. Ecology, p. 673-693. Geol. Soc. Am. Mem. 67. GUNTER, G. 1941. Death of fishes due to cold on the Texas coast, January, 1940. Ecology 22:203-208. GUNTER, G., and H. H. HILDEBRAND. 1951. Destruction of fishes and other organisms on the South Texas Coast by the cold wave of January 28-February 3, 1951. Ecology 32:731-736. HAWLEY, W. C. 1963. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the upper Laguna Madre. Project MF-R-5, Job 18. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1963, p. 473-478. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the upper Laguna Madre. Project MF-R-6, Job 18. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 499-504. HEDGPETH, J. W. 1953. An introduction to the zoogeography of the northwest Gulf of Mexico with reference to the invertebrate fauna. Univ. Tex., Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. 3:107-224. HEFFERNAN, T. L. 1959. Inventory of the bottom sediment types present in Area M-6. Project M0-6-R-1, Job D-2. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. 1958-1959, 2 p. JOHNSON, R. B. 1963. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the lower Laguna Madre. Project MF-R-5, Job 19. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1963, p. 479-486. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the lower Laguna Madre. Project MF-R-6, Job 19. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 505-512. LE BLANC, R. J., and W. D. HODGSON. 1959. Origin and development of the Texas shoreline. Second Coastal Geogr. Conf., La. State Univ., Coastal Stud. Inst., p. 57-101. MARTINEZ, R. 1963. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the Corpus Christi Bay system. Project MF-R-5, Job 17. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1963. p. 467-472. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the Corpus Christi Bay system. Project MF-R-6, Job 17. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 491-497. 1965. Coastal hydrographic and meteorological study. Project MH-R-1, Job 8. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1965, p. 169-212. 1966. Coastal hydrographic and meteorolgical study. Project MH-R-2, Job 8. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1966, p. 105146. MORE, W. R. 1963. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the Galveston Bay system. Project MF-R-5, Job 13. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1963, p. 437-452. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorological study of the Galveston Bay system. Project MF-R-6, Job 12. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 413-424. MUNRO, G. J., and B. D. KING III. 1964. Hydrographic and meteorolgical study of the Matagorda Bay System. Project MF-R-6, Job 14. Tex. Parks Wildl. Dep., Coastal Fish. Proj. Rep. 1964, p. 435-446. PEARCY, G. E. 1959. Measurement of the U.S. territorial sea. Dep. State Bull. 40:963-971. PRICE, W. A. 1933. Role of diastrophism in topography of Corpus Christi area, south Texas. Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. 17:907- 962. PRITCHARD. D. W. 1967. What is an estuary: Physcial viewpoint. In G. H. Lauff (editor). Estuaries, p. 3-5. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci., Publ. 83. SCHULTZ, R. L. 1962. A survey of the invertebrate species present in Mes- quite Bay and Cedar Bayou Pass. Project M-6-R-2, Job B-2. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Lab. Proj. Rep., 1960-1961, 16 p. SHENTON, E. H. 1957. A study of the foraminifera and sediments of Matagorda Bay, Texas. Masters Thesis, Texas A&M College, College Station, 88 p. SHEPARD, F. P. 1953. Sedimentation rates in Texas estuaries and lagoons. Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. 37-1919-1934. SHEPARD, F. P., and G. A. RUSNAK. 1957. Texas bay sediments. Univ. Tex., Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. 4(2):5-13. SIMMONS, E. G. 1957. An ecological survey of the upper Lagfuna Madre of Texas. Univ. Tex., Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. 4(2):156-200. SKUD, B. E., and W. B. WILSON. 1960. Role of estuarine waters in Gulf fisheries. Trans. 25th North Am. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf., p. 320-326. STEVENS, C. S. 1951. The silt load of Texas streams. Tex. J. Sci. 3:162-172. STEVENS, H. R., JR. 1959. A survey of hydrographic and climatological data of Corpus Christi Bay. Project M-7-R-1, Job El. Tex. Game Fish Comm., Mar. Fish. Div. Proj. Rep. 1958-1959, 18 p. THARP, B. C. 1926. Structure of Texas vegetation east of the 98th meridian. Univ. Tex. Bull. 2606, 97 p. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. 1965. Surface water and temperature and salinity, Atlantic coast. North and South America. Environ. Sci. Serv. Ad- min., Coast Geod. Surv. Publ. 31-1, 2nd ed.. Wash., D.C., 88 p. 1968. Climatic atlas of the United States. Environ. Sci. Serv. Admin., Wash., D.C., 80 p. 1969. Climatological data, Texas. Environ. Sci. Serv. Admin., Annu. Summ. 74:405-429. VAN SICLEN, DE W. C. 1961. Scenery and recent sediments along the coast. In Geo- logy of Houston and vicinity, Texas, p. 3-17. Acad. Libr. Comm., Houston Geol. Soc, Houston, Tex. WADSWORTH, A. H., JR. 1966. Historical deltation of the Colorado River, Texas. In M. L. Shirley and J. A. Ragsdale (editors). Deltas in their geo- logic framework, p. 99-105. Houston Geol. Soc, Houston, Tex. WEEKS, A. W. I 1945. Quaternary deposits of Texas coastal plain between Bra- zos River and Rio Grande. Bull. Am. Assoc Pet. Geol. 29:1693-1720. WINSLOW, A. G. 1961. Ground water in the Houston region. In Geology of Houston and vicinity, Texas, p. 33-35. Acad. Libr. Comm., Houston Geol. Soc, Houston, Tex. 12 'kristi Jles- Hi s. Sd. 62-112, iata of . Cam D,C„ Sen-, In Geo- id. Libr. /»M, CoifflU'i s « .S -S ■g i i a a .9 CD a 13 14 l I Figure 3.— The lower Texas coast showing the Laguna Madre Study area. The shaded area approximates the extent of marsh vegetation and tidal flats 15 a ^ 9 a o •a a e I 16 I i 5 a " a 1 •a a I 17 Figure 6.— Major vegetational areas along the lower Texas coast. Much of the Laguna Madre not occupied by submerged vegetation represents wind-blown soils with little or no vegetation. (Modified from: Correll and Johnston 1970; unpublished daU, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department). 18 3 .9 ■5 e BQ « t El CD 5^ ■3 § 0 u c:?^. Ul j^/ s ^^ j<^ / 4*-/ ,-t/ Ik y^ -, .r >7 Uj / /\ 0 u. 3 A. $ / 7 <^/ 0 / '^\ 0/ iy/ / x*- ' n/ ^/ / 0 jz-^'--~. */ 0/ « / 0/ Hi \ -^ /' z UJ V-^ < ^ - "~~- --hi I 0/ - X 0 Z 10 0 z -^rX 0 / / z / 0/ UJ / ae < u ' y *ir^ / U// "( I X z / UJ UJ ■ U - to 3 (/) 0 \ Q / UJ . a. lU X \ 0/ Z) . K ot a. ) ^\ < 19 ;:;: THE ^DESERT :;:i:Y4. GULF OF MEXICO anoe jiTHE^pESERT \\:[^ \ GULF OF MEXICO ■'the DESERT:? Miles GULF OF MEXICO Q^l^' MOt Figure 8.— Late Pleistocene and Recent features (shaded areas) of the central and lower Texas coast: (A) the standing sea level stage during the Dllnoian-Wisconsin interglacial period; (B) the beginning of the filling of the Ingleside Lagoon to become the Ingleside Formation; (C) the Texas coast during the Pleistocene-Wisconsin glacial stage, showing the remains of the barrier islands and lagoons; and (D) developing features of the Recent standing sea level stage. (After Price 1933.) 20 COLORADO RIVER Fij^e 9.— Successive growth stages of the modern delta of the Colorado River, September 1908 to April 1941. (After Wadsworthl966.) 21 "in ■g V) 'in o u X b UJ 5 "in u. O u. -J 3 O 1- ui UJ o 0- 1- •2 22 23 MEXICO -^>^>;>^ ^0 I- < < rr -J ** z < a! ^ H i_ UJ -I ^ "^ 9 i o 2 3 < 5 p < 0 ^ o «i >< 1 < P UJ UJ Q- ^ > I- < CD < t ^< f^ o z o D Q ores o Q UJ cr Q. ^S $^Ss I 00 ^L q:' u. UJ X o roT to o. CM CO tr UJ OJ o_. UJ o _J 9-1 oJ J z o <-> ^ .s '&) I I o _i o o o o o o o UJ o o o o o o in > If) o in o in o UJ _J ~^ CJ OJ ro < 133d Nl Hld3a u (n 25 Figure 14. — Bottom sediment types in the Galveston Bay study area. (C. R. Mock, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Galveston, Tex. pers. conunun.) 26 Q GO o s .s OD 27 Figure 16. — Bottom sediment types in the San Antonio Bay study area. (After Childress 1960.) 28 1 = MUD 2=SAND 3=MUD&SAND 4 = MUD&SHELL 5 = EXPOSED REEF Figure 17. — Bottom sediment types in the Copano-Aransas Bay study area. (After Heffernan 1959.! 29 Fig^e 18. — Bottom sediment types in the Corpus Christi Bay study area. (Modified after data published by Stevens 1959.) 30 QUARTZOSE-SAND AND SILT EXPOSED TIDAL FLATS OF VARIOUS SEDIMENT TYPES I KILOMETERS 0 5 10 ^..-..J 1 10 0 5 NAUTICAL MILES 27°- MEXICO 1 = CLAY 2 = SILTY SAND 2 1 = CLAYEY SAND 2 3 = SILTY SAND 6 = SAND-SiLT-CLAY S=SAND M = MUD CM = CLAY.HARD MUD R = MARL ROCKS Note QUARTZOSE=SAND SMALL ROCKS 26°— Fig^e 19.— Bottom sediment types in the upper Laguna Madre. (After Simmons 1957; Breuer 1957; Sbepard and Rusnak 1957.^ 31 LOW DISCHARGE SALINITY GRADIENT HIGH DISCHARGE GRADIENT SALINITY GU LF OF MEXICO Figure 20. —Observed surface salinity gradients during periods of high (May) and low (November-December) freshwater discharge into Sabine Lake during 1958. (Data from: Texas Company, Gulf Oil Corporation, City of Port Arthur; the Texas Parks and WQdlife Department. 32 Figure 21.— Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Galveston Bay area for 1963-1966. (Sources: unpublished data from Galveston Biological Laboratory, National Marine Fisheries Service; More 1963, 1964; Martinez 1965, 1966.) 33 TRINITY RIVER -29« Figure 21.— Continued. 34 Figure 21.— Continued. 35 TRINITY RIVER -29' Figure 21.— Continued. 36 $ .9 I $ s a •a s a a =1 4> 37 1 « 3 .s I 1^' 38 39 c i ir> (0 0 " S o> 1 5 1 s ^ 3 5 I S5 40 s CQ i* 5 I 41 NAUTICAL MILES 27»30- Figure 25.— Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the Corpus Christi Bay area for 1963-1966. (From Martinez 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966.) 42 Figure 26. -Distribution of average annual surface salinity in the upper Laguna Madre and adjacent portions of Baffin Bay for 1963-1966. (From Hawley 1963, 1964; Martinez 1965, 1966.) 43 44 I 45 29* TRINITY RIVER I KILOMETERS 0 5 10 M l-H 1-^ 1 3'^2 3^'^3^30 29 2 2 17 >^^^ ^-V24-^;-^. Q^ <:>J^25 ^'b^, D & A-PRIVATE LEASES ■ & 1-NATURAL REEFS NOTE See table 10 for more details GULF MEXICO Figure 28.— Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs (solid and numbered) and private oyster leases (open and lettered) in the Galves- ton Bay area (see Table 10). Locations and areas plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 46 •9 g e 4 -w V s ta a Is a. ^ I a a < I 47 MATAGORDA BAY D & A-PRIVATE LEASES ■ -NATURAL REEFS NOTE; See table 10 for more details. 05'- 40' _L_ 96*»30' J L. 28o_l Figure 30.— Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs (solid) and private oyster leases (open and lettered) in the San Antonio Bay Area (see Table 10). Locations and areas plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 48 10' I ' ' 05' D&A-PRIVATE LEASES ■ & 1-NATURAL REEFS NOTE See table 10 for more details. 28*=*- '-^^^ KILOMETERS 0 5 10 l=r-i=-i i-l : 0 5 NAUTICAL MILES 10 =1 Figure 31 . - Approximate locations of natural oyster reefs in the Copano- Aransas Bay area ( see Table 10) . Locations and areas plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and Wilife Department. 49 50 51 eg M 4) H ^ s II so •e 5 a iS eg a a < I 52 I i MATAGORDA BAY 40' _L_ 96''30' ■ ■ L. 28o_i Figure 35. — Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the San Antonio Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. (Plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; see Table 11.) 53 — I — r » I I 05' 15' KILOMETERS 0 5 10 0 5 10 NAUTICAL MILES Figure 36.— Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs established in the Copano-Aransas Bay area by the Texas Parks and Wfldlife Department. (Plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and WUdlife Department; see Table 11.) 54 Figure 37.— Approximate locations of artificial and experimental oyster reefs in the Corpus Christi Bay area established by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. (Plotted from charts furnished by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; see Table 11.) 55 Fi^e 3«.-Approxii^te locations of artificial and experin.ent oyster reefs in the Laguna Madre area established by the Texas Parks and Wfldlife Department (see Table 11). (Modified h-om Breuer 1959. 1962h ) 56 Figure 40. — The Galveston Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution (see Table 22), industrial pollution (see Table 23), and watei closed— or conditionally approved — to shellfishing. (Modified from Texas Water Quality Board data and from Texas Board of Health maps.) 58 59 Figure 42.— The San Antonio Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution (see Table 22) and waters closed— or conditionally approved— to shellfishing. (Modified from Texas Water Quality Board data and from Texas Board of Health maps.) 60 1 1 15' 10' = CLOSED WATERS = DOMESTIC WASTE = INDUSTRIAL WASTE 1 1 1 1 05' ^ OUTFALLS : OUTFALLS Fig^e 43.— The Copano-Aransas Bay area showing known sources of domestic pollution (see Table 22), industrial pollution (see Table 23), I and waters closed to shelUishing. (Modified from Texas Water Quality Board data and from Texas Board of Health maps.) 61 62 1 = CLOSED WATERS i=DOMESTIC WASTE OUTFALLS ' = INDUSTRIAL WASTE OUTFALLS TEXAS ^^,J..^ MEXICO 98' GULF OF MEXICO I 10757 --15' -- 10 --5 KILOMETERS 0 5 10 Lmii I 0 5 10 tm ^ U I NAUTICAL MILES 26' MATAMOROS 97* Figure 45.— The Laguna Madre area showing known sources of domestic pollution (see Table 22), industrial pollution (see Table 23), and waters closed to shelUishing. (Modified from Texas Water Quahty Board data and from Texas Board of Health maps.) 63 e I/) - i a a 9 « H I 64 I 65 Figure 48.-The lower Texas coast with major U.S. Army Corps of Engineers navigation projects (see Table 26.) 66 1 o „ \ o O -T u UJ ro . \ Z^, " X — UJ CD > -T 1 CO \ LLJ ^ _2 UJ \ £ i \ LL O ■v vv 1 z^ I >- \ LL ,> hr ' ^^~ """^^^"-^ \ ^ i \ D \ ^ C V \ )\ ^K, r^ \ DC 0. >^. V ^^^ \i ../^ #1 LU ])■ ^^^k V^ w^. (J/ 1 > ( ^H v^^^Oi^ :j DC VY /^L V^r^ :■ (/) ( ^^ / J LU N\ O Q ^^. Z' .[ I J '/ H ilj ^Ik^ ^ ^^^^/ i U / m -" ^^ ■ ^^H^^ LU >// ^ -1 ^-J^ ^1 w^^^ « Z /r^ ^^--^^ # < \ r y\ QC LU - .ii^' LU ^ \^ III ■ ■>■ DC < a> fv u 1 _) .\ / / 'lO -iz. o _i .1 ^^^'W^^ If) IT) LL A A_,<<^ (/) ,\ ■ LU .1 • If) < U \ " O Q Z II 1 67 TRINITY RIVER -29' MEXICO Figure 50. — Known fill areas in the Galveston Bay area. 68 •5 •o u eg 60 S e o a 69 Figure 52. — Known fill areas in the San Antonio Bay area. 70 15' — I r — I — I r 05' = INDICATES FILL AREAS GULF OF MEXICO KILOMETERS 0 5 10 L-i ■-■ u-l 5 10 NAUTICAL MILES Figure 53. — Known fill areas in the Copano— Aransas Bay area. 71 o GO 72 Figure 55. -Known fiU areas in the Laguna Madre 73 Table 1 . --Monthly and annual average precipitation from selected stations in counties contiguous to the Texas estuaries (from U. S. Department of Commerce 1Q68. 1969) through 1969. Stations (County) Years of Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual record 1/ 4. ,43 4. 50 23 4. 44 5. 05 4. 35 5.43 4.67 3. 17 4. 04 5.03 80 5. 95 54.29 56 4. . 36 4. 18 ,79 4.27 4.64 4. 46 6. 96 5. 06 5.49 3.43 3. 77 4. 94 55.35 24 4, ,23 4. 45 44 3. 94 4. 94 4.29 6. 00 5. 49 4.88 2.88 3.46 5.09 53.09 21 4, ,43 4.22 25 3. 80 4.72 3.75 5. 53 4.21 4.83 3.73 4.48 4.76 51.71 83 3. ,72 3.21 , 40 3.42 4.43 3. 38 5. 15 3. 55 3.81 3.60 4. 04 4. 10 45.26 53 3. ,78 3.44 ,67 2.80 4. 32 3.69 4. 29 4.27 4.26 3.77 3.86 4. 36 45. 51 97 3, ,46 2.88 86 2. 59 2.79 2.65 4.79 4. 39 5. 09 2.86 3. 56 3.89 41.81 55 3. ,63 3.84 , 18 3.20 3.90 3. 51 5. 53 4.82 5.44 3.80 3.70 4.61 49. 16 58 3, ,03 3.06 , 37 3. 22 3.29 2.70 3. 53 4.24 5.03 3. 51 2.95 3.65 40.52 58 2, ,65 2.79 ,41 3. 18 3.88 3. 38 3.45 3. 18 4. 10 3.49 2.65 2.72 37.88 77 2. , 34 2. 34 , 32 2.62 4. 12 3. 04 3.61 3. 13 4.23 3.48 2.36 2.61 36.20 81 1. ,63 1.70 , 44 2. 14 2. 99 2. 39 2. 32 2.77 4. 40 2.76 1.72 2.08 28.34 67 1, , 91 1.62 ,42 1.68 3.21 2. 18 2.01 2. 50 5. 16 2. 31 1. 12 1.49 26.61 57 1, ,83 1. 15 , 30 1.45 3.48 2.46 1.94 3.00 4.65 2.57 1. 37 1. 33 26.53 97 1, , 35 1.48 , 04 1. 55 2. 36 2.96 1.68 2.77 4. 99 3.53 1. 32 1.72 26.75 54 1. ,48 1.22 ,03 1.66 3. 14 2.58 1.89 3.08 4. 57 2.68 1.25 1. 51 26. 09 45 1 , ,66 1. 35 , 15 1.69 1.98 2.49 1.21 2. 19 4. 97 3.05 1.75 2. 31 25.80 Beaumont Filter Plant (Jefferson) Port Arthur (Jefferson)A/ Port Arthur Airport (Jefferson) Baytown (Harris) Houston City (Harris) Houston Airport" (Harris ) Galveston City (Galveston) Angleton (Brazoria) Matagorda (Matagorda) Edna (Jackson)!^ Victoria Airport (Victoria) Corpus Christi Airport (Nueces) Sarita (Kenedy) Raymondville (Willacy) Brownsville Airport (Cameron) Harlingen (Cameron) Port Isabel (Cameron) — To convert to metric, 1 inch = 25.4 millimeters — No records for 1968; complete through 1967. — Station closed 1968. Table 2. --Monthly and annual average air temperature for selected stations in counties contiguc 1968. 1969) through 1969. to the estuaries of Texas (U.S. Department of Commerce Stations (county) Years of Jan. feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov, Dec. Annual record Number - - - D. agrees F W 50 53.9 56.3 61.3 68.8 76. 1 82.2 83.5 83.6 79.7 72.0 61.0 55.4 69.4 24 53.6 56.0 61.1 68.2 74.7 80.6 81.9 82. 3 78.2 70.3 59.7 54.8 68.4 82 54.6 57. 1 62.4 69. 3 76.2 82.2 83.9 84. 1 79.8 72.4 61.6 56.5 70.0 44 53.6 55.8 61.3 68. 5 76. 0 81.6 83. 0 83.2 79.2 71.4 60.8 55.7 69.1 97 54. ■? 56.8 61.4 68. 5 75.8 81.7 83. 1 83.3 80. 1 73.5 63.0 57.2 69.9 54 54.7 57.6 61.8 68.5 75.0 80. 5 82.3 82.3 78.8 71.5 61.7 57. 1 69.3 41 56.3 58.7 63.0 69. 5 76. 3 81.9 83.7 83.8 80. 0 73.2 63. 3 58.2 70.6 68 55.4 58.0 63.2 70.0 76.2 81. 3 83.2 83.4 79. 1 72.6 62.4 57.2 70.1 81 57.4 60.4 65.2 71.7 77.5 82. 3 84. 1 84.2 80.8 74.5 64.1 59.2 71.7 53 60.5 63.2 68.2 74.6 79.7 83. 3 84.9 85.0 81.5 75. 3 66.3 61.6 73.6 107 61.4 64. 0 67.9 73.9 79.0 82.7 84.0 84. 1 81.2 75.9 67.6 62.9 73.7 53 61.5 64.3 68.7 75.0 79. 9 83.6 85.2 85.4 81.9 76.2 67.6 62.6 74.3 45 62.2 64. 3 67.7 73.2 78.5 82.4 83.7 83.7 81.9 77.3 69.6 64.3 74.0 Port Arthur (Jefferson>— Port A rthur Airport (Jefferson) Houston City (Harris) Houston Airport (Harris) Galveston City (Galveston) Angleton (Brazoria) Matagorda (Matagorda) Victoria Airport (Victoria) Corpus Christi Airport (Nueces) Raymondville (Willacy) Brownsville Airport (Canneron) Harlingen (Cameron) , , Port Isabel (Cameron)— - "C = 5/9 ("F - 32). 2/ 3/ Station closed 1968. Incomolete records for 1968: March and Aoril based unon combined 1967 and 1968 data. 74 1/ Table 3. --Dimensions of estuarine study areas along the Texas coasts- Study area Mean low water rface area Mean high water£/ Depth at mean low water. Maximum Average 3/ Average tidal range Volume Mean low water Mean high water Maximum intertidal volume Sabine Lake Sabine L-ake Sabine Pass Galveston Bay East Bay Trinity Bay Galveston Bay (upper) Galveston Bay (lower) LakeAnahuac (Turtle Bay) Scott -San Jacinto Bay Clear Lake Dickinson Bay Moses Lake (Dollar Bay) Offats Bayou Jones Lake West Bay Chocolate Bay Bastrop-Oyster Bay Matagorda Bay East Matagorda Bay Matagorda Bay Oyster Lake Tres Palacios Bay Turtle Bay Carancahua Bay Salt. Redfish lakes Keller Bay Lavaca Bay Swan Lake Lavaca River Estuary Chocolate Bay Powderhorn Lake Cedar Lakes Complex San Antonio Bay Espiritu Santo Bay San Antonio Bay Guadalupe Bay Mission Lake Hynes Bay Ayers Bay Mesquite Bay Copano Bay St. Charles Bay Mis sion Bay Copano Bay Port Bay Mission Lake A ransas Bay Corpus Christi Redfish Bay Corpus Christi Bay Nueces Bay Oso Bay Laguna Madre Upper Laguna Madre Lower Laguna Madre. South Bay- La Badilla Grande Complex Baffin Bay Alazan Bay Cayo del Infernillo Laguna Salada Cayo del GruUo 6/ 43 960 1 360 33 370 83 310 69 890 89 380 4 660 3 230 1 260 1 520 2 130 1 180 1 040 44 390 4 890 9 690 37 810 167 570 2 450 9 440 1 280 12 160 920 4 770 39 97 0 860 740 1 440 2 890 3 760 38 940 76 530 2 07 0 1 820 6 580 2 220 8 080 8 410 3 760 41 740 1 650 100 56 220 9 630 73 820 18 470 5 07 0 47 240 175 160 4 380 31 870 13 86 0 700 3 230 4 470 Feet 3 10" 44, 830 1, 36 0 33. 690 86, 240 70, 080 90, 390 4, 850 4, 310 1,280 1, 540 2, 140 1, 200 1. 050 45. 420 4, 920 10, 410 39, 080 170, 130 2. 570 9. 860 1. 760 12. 300 950 4, 850 40. 080 880 760 1,760 2. 970 3. 840 40.630 77.700 2. 090 2. 400 6.610 2. 550 9, 220 8.730 3. 760 42, 930 2, 000 100 59, 220 13, 420 75,560 18. 550 5, 070 68. 360 329.740 7, 300 32. 610 14, 750 1.630 3. 530 8. 470 24 40 12 17 42 44 5 40 14 6 36 28 2 25 12 20 5 36 12 12 5 7 4 8 36 3 13 12 14 12 9 -.5/ 3 12 12 6 2 9 9 25 17 40 3 15 12 26 36 12 5.1 0.2 9.765.9 10, 349.8 583.9 556,8 633.8 77. 0 3.3 1.2 4.796.8 6,603. 9 1.807. 1 5.2 1.0 18,870.7 23,291.0 4,420. 3 5.7 1.0 17,353.1 20,452.9 3,099.8 6.5 1.4 25. 307.0 31, 105. 3 5,798. 3 2.1 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 1.8 T.o 253.2 525.6 ZT2.4 2.7 0.9 148. 1 200. 7 52.6 2.1 0.7 139.0 187. 8 48.8 5.2 0.5 482.4 531. 3 48.9 14.5 1.0 745. 3 810.2 64, 9 1.6 1.0 72.4 118.9 46.5 3.9 0.9 7,541. 1 9,496. 7 1. 955.6 2.6 0.6 553.8 685.8 132. 0 3.2 0.7 1 , 350. 7 1,768.4 417. 7 3.4 0.4 5, 599.8 6.468. 8 869. 0 8.0 0.7 58, 394.7 64.474. 5 6.079. 8 2.7 0.5 288. 1 358.2 70. 1 4. 1 0.6 1.685. 9 2.018.6 332.7 2.5 0.6 139. 3 2 37.6 98. 3 3.8 0.5 2.012.8 2. 303. 8 291. 0 1.2 0.5 48.0 70. 3 22. 3 3.2 0.6 644.8 802.8 138.0 4.2 0.7 7. 312.5 8.554.8 1.242. 3 1.4 0.1 52.4 57.4 5. 0 8.0 0.2 257.8 271.4 13.6 2.7 0.5 169.3 245. 3 76. 0 2.2 0.7 276. 9 375. 1 98. 2 2.1 0.5 343. 9 434. 9 91. 0 5.9 0.3 1.0.007.7 10.973.0 965.3 4.6 0.3 15, 334.7 16,584. 5 1.249. 8 2.7 0.2 243.4 264. 0 20.6 2.4 0.2 687.8 748.6 60.8 3.2 0.3 309.4 388.7 79. 3 3.4 0.2 1 . 196. 6 1 , 445. 8 249.2 3.6 0.2 1. 318.8 1 , 445. 0 126. 2 1.9 0.1 311. 1 327. 5 16. 4 3.7 0.3 6,727. 3 7. 480. 1 752. 8 2.2 0.2 158, 1 209. 0 50. 9 7.8 0.4 19, 101.7 21. 1 52. 7 2. 051. 2 2.0 0.4 838,9 1.402. 9 564.0 10.5 0.7 33,763.7 36.863.6 3.099.9 2.2 0.4 1,770.0 2. 100.8 330.8 1.6 0.9 353.3 552, 1 198.8 2.8 0.7 5,761.7 10,422. 1 4.660.4 4.7 1.0 35,860.8 81, 871. 8 46.011.0 1.5 1.5 286. 1 953. 9 667.8 7.7 0.5 10,689. 5 11,648. 0 958. 5 2.9 0.5 1. 750. 8 2. 184. 5 433.7 0.7 0.5 21. 3 85.2 63.9 2.8 0.5 393.9 507.4 113. 5 2.8 0.5 545. 1 1.217.5 672. 4 - Conversion factors: t acre = 0. 4046 hectares; 1 foot = 0. 3048 meter; 1 cubic foot = 0. 028 3 cubic meter. 2/ Do- Monthly and yearly mean di scharge in c ubic feet pe r second (c f.s.)i/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept, The year 1951 2. 12 2.84 4. 90 9. 15 5. 12 48. 3 3. 33 7. 74 4. 62 6. 38 1. 02 34.9 10.9 1952 1.93 3. 32 3.36 2.11 64.6 4. 30 83. 3 22. 7 7.06 20.4 3.95 6. 61 18.3 1953 2.70 37.8 85.0 20.2 55.6 4. 56 8. 22 346 9.33 9.25 78. 1 24. 0 57. 1 1954 8.33 45.9 51. 3 64.8 5.41 4.44 18.8 4. 04 2. 92 140 100 9.25 38. 5 1955 19.2 5. 45 2. 43 24.6 155 2.92 4. 23 3. 76 5.29 19. 6 13.3 24. 1 22.4 1956 22.4 2.25 7.85 37.3 26.3 2. 26 8. 44 20. 6 12.9 11.2 3.37 1.67 13. 1 1957 2.91 5.08 11.3 2.91 9. 79 138 1 50 39. 5 20. 0 5. 12 2.77 52. 5 36. 6 1958 270 144 16. 6 1 75 83.4 9.12 29.8 7. 60 26. 3 6. 18 13.9 52. 3 69. 5 1959 18.3 12. 1 4.31 17.4 234 6. 86 202 86.9 35. 8 134 i49 90. 5 89.8 1960 89.4 95.2 152 78. 7 161 16. 1 22.4 8.48 235 69. 6 95.1 25.8 86. 9 1961 183 190 213 159 468 20. 0 34. 0 10. 0 189 282 14.7 276 167 1962 13.0 262 78.3 21.2 37. 1 11.8 37. 2 40. 3 111 20. 0 8.39 23. 7 54.8 1963 26.9 115 73.4 115 80.5 14.8 9.82 33.8 58. 1 16. 5 11.2 30.3 48. 5 19 64 15.0 20. 7 47. 6 37. 8 64.4 92. 5 34. 9 49. 9 24. 7 11.3 26.4 31.9 38. 0 1965 10.7 27.9 52.6 26. 5 86.2 8.8 7.8 48. 4 23. 7 9. 1 15.7 20.4 27.8 1966 16. 5 60.3 62.2 72. 8 1 57 45.2 279 136 54. 5 17. 5 31. 5 18. 8 79.2 1967 34. 5 5.03 20. 2 29. 4 13.0 8. 51 31.2 20. 6 10. 8 32.7 26. 1 80.9 26. 1 1968 37.7 6. 51 37.8 70.4 14.2 37. 4 35. 6 338 179 30.8 20. 4 93. 4 75.3 Mean 42. 9 57.8 51. 2 53. 5 95. 5 26.3 55. 5 67.9 56. 0 46.7 39. 6 49. 7 53.3 1/ Enters Galveeton Bay via Buffalo Bayou; drainage area: 84,7 sq, miles; period of record: May 1936-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 68. 3 c.f.s, for 32 years; extremes: 3, 550 c. f. a. May 10, 1968, no flow at times 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 82 Table 7- 9.--Stream discharge for Brays Bayou, 1951-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0750 at Houston, Tex., lat. 29° 41.8', long. 95° 24.7')-'. year 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 I960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 Mean 64.7 80.2 81.6 75.9 133 47.7 82.9 85.7 113 60.8 53.7 72,6 1/ Enters Galveston Bay via Buffalo Bayou; drainage area: 88.4 sq. miles; period of record: May 1936-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 90. 5 c. f . s. for 32 years; extremes: 1 2, 600 June 26, 1960, 0. Ic.f. s. Oct. 11-12, 1937, Mar. 14, Apr. 1, 1958. 2/ Liter per sec. = c.f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hect ares. Table 7- 10. --Stream discharge data for Sims Bayou, 1953-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 07 55 at Houston, Tex. , lat. 29 ° 40. 4', long. 95° 17.3')-. ct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 6. 82 5. 69 5.98 13.8 12.4 70.7 9. 08 11.3 14.7 8.33 8. 9 34. 6 16.9 6.41 12.6 6.99 5.67 68.6 8.38 97. 9 30.4 9.23 16.9 10.3 12.2 23. 5 7. 54 36. 5 106 36. 6 82.4 8. 63 11.8 299 19.4 15.4 236 73.8 78.2 14.2 146 109 65.7 9.8 9. 12 93.9 22. 3 9. 12 22. 5 12.9 8. 54 43. 6 13.6 13.6 14.9 53.3 220 7.39 12.8 21.2 22. 2 26.3 44. 7 43. 4 39.8 14. 1 9.86 15.6 46. 6 34.8 12. 5 17. 1 61. 5 27. 6 10.3 14.8 15.9 23.4 12. 9 19. 1 29.0 10.6 18.6 207 146 66.9 27.2 13.7 19. 6 3 6. 3 50.7 222 240 16.7 155 101 19. 4 45.4 18.4 19. 7 26.4 27. 5 87. 3 81. 1, 117 23.0 16. 1 22. 0 548 26.6 299 42.9 36. 6 127 101 48. 1 114 188 180 211 132 172 26.4 24.2 19. 8 498 42. 6 136 35.0 138 241 91. 6 201 178 387 38.9 43. 5 21.3 261 320 37. 6 318 176 22.7 241 47.2 36. 7 26.3 26.3 60. 9 81. 5 161 53.7 36.7 62.4 71.0 79. 8 158 186 171 109 33.4 22. 6 30.6 220 65.7 25.0 53. 6 95.9 1 5. 6 74. 0 121 65.3 172 111 46.0 41. 4 31.0 24.2 37. 5 50. 9 65.4 25.8 55.6 127 35.1 89.9 24. 1 24. 7 63. 5 46. 5 30. 4 42.7 41. 5 50.4 49.1 80. 9 161 114 2 62 112 402 382 35.8 42. 9 70. 1 50. 3 146 70. 4 2 6. 8 37. 2 67.4 56.4 36.7 70.0 55. 5 40. 5 67. 2 57.4 79. 0 55.4 58.7 30.4 59.2 159 41.0 81.9 67. 1 274 568 183 48. 1 258 152 Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in cubic feet per second (c. f s.^' Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1953 5.68 24. 2 70.7 25.2 76. 0 7.82 9.75 135 13.9 8. 56 130 63. 5 47. 5 1954 8. 03 83. 1 100 24.9 9. 69 6. 12 13. 1 18. 0 10. 0 17. 0 13.4 6. 53 25.9 1955 10. 4 5. 8 5.03 37.7 182 4. 56 8.98 10.7 5.41 11.4 12.9 13. 1 24. 6 1956 5. 19 3. 43 5. 04 14.9 23. 0 5. 35 9.97 16. 6 9.83 4.53 6. 38 7. 50 9.26 1957 4. 87 10.7 15.2 5.77 13. 3 284 150 31. 5 57. 8 8. 12 11.2 26. 5 51. 8 1958 214 209 13.3 109 97.4 11. 3 21.8 10. 1 6.98 22.8 9. 52 152 72. 6 1959 19. 0 9. 17 7.6 1 1. 4 470 15. 6 249 69.5 25.8 218 196 51.4 109 1960 92.6 131 126 83. 1 120 10.9 11.9 9.86 386 24. 4 86. 0 22. 2 91.3 1961 124 45. 0 201 177 192 16. 5 19.7 10.7 176 228 12.7 226 118 1962 8.24 151 39.8 19.7 9. 12 11.7 30.8 28.7 87. 0 14.8 14. 0 16.4 35.8 1963 23. 3 60. 5 111 97.7 68.4 20. 4 1 1.4 10.7 68. 9 23.8 11. 3 14.6 43. 3 1964 8. 58 47.9 103 34. 1 146 55.4 16. 2 12. 8 9.25 9. 06 12. 5 24.3 39. 5 1965 11.8 39.4 150 19.6 46.4 10. 1 10. 3 67. 1 26. 4 14. 5 12. 8 17.8 35.6 1966 21.5 50.6 98. 0 88. 6 233 53.3 264 383 24.8 23. 0 38.7 79. 0 112 1967 29.4 12. 6 16.9 39.6 52. 0 20.8 44. 6 27.4 12.4 40. 8 25.2 43.4 30. 3 1968 18.7 12. 1 29.3 149 26. 4 49.7 62. 1 274 326 53. 1 27. 2 74. 8 92. 0 Mean 37.7 55.9 68.2 58. 5 110 36.4 58.2 69.7 77.8 45. 0 38.6 52.3 58. 6 l_/ Enters Galveston Bay via Bviffalo Bayou; drainage area 64. 0 sq. nniles; period of record: Oct. 1952-Sept, 1968; average discharge: 58. 7 c. f. s. for 16 years; extremes: 8, 030 c.f. s. June 26, 1960, 0. 9c.f. s. Aug. 7, 1955. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 83 1 Table 7- 1 l.--Stream discharge for Greens Bayou, 1953-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0760 at Houston. Tex., lat. 29° 55.1', long. 95° 18.4')—. Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in cubic feet per second (c f.s.,^ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1953 0 9. 50 43.3 8.34 23.8 1 27 9. 17 266 1.90 3. 52 25. 1 8.81 33.7 1954 1. 71 18. 8 28. 2 50. 5 1.67 0 40 3.78 5. 59 0. 12 273 27.9 3.71 35.2 1955 9.40 0.41 0 9.37 107 0 05 1. 05 1. 57 1.39 16. 1 12.4 7. 01 13.2 1956 16.9 0 1. 51 14.9 18. 6 0 38 0. 13 0.25 1.28 1.43 24. 4 1. 97 6. 82 1957 0. 11 1. 04 2. 10 0. 06 0.35 64 9 47. 0 20.6 1. 61 0. 45 0.81 48.9 15. 7 1958 166 98.3 4.40 136 63. 5 3 24 2.22 7. 26 2.22 2.25 5. 89 16.9 42.4 1959 5. 16 6.82 0. bO 5. 53 92.2 4 36 116 128 12.3 82. 6 1 14 11.7 48. 1 1960 74.0 23.8 89.3 54. 1 103 8 40 6. 10 3. 17 180 37. 3 42. 5 18. 5 53. 1 1961 92.9 129 166 137 353 20 6 9.63 4.69 91.6 291 12. 1 443 144 1962 4.82 124 62.3 17. 5 25.4 7 45 15.2 22. 5 19.5 44.4 5. 19 8.26 29.6 1963 18. 1 108 53. 1 77. 9 59.5 7 35 4. 27 5. 18 7. 11 6.25 3.73 8. 19 29.6 1964 62.4 4.71 20.7 19.7 34. 3 66 8 83. 0 215 53.6 5.81 6. 84 10. 3 48.8 1965 4.60 9. 56 15. 5 8.98 23.4 5 50 4. 44 23. 1 9.51 8.41 12. 1 19.6 12.0 1966 9.77 29.9 93.7 58.8 149 22 3 240 130 9.34 10.7 32. 0 23.3 66.6 1967 52.3 4.26 8. 20 16. 5 7. 61 5 42 18.7 13.4 8.76 13.9 11. 1 66. 5 18.9 1968 11.4 4.63 24. 0 62. 6 8. 37 23 2 19.9 148 173 14. 7 9.73 41.4 45. 1 Mean 33.0 35.7 38.3 42. 3 66. 8 15 0 36. 2 62. 0 35.8 50.7 21. 5 46. 0 40. 1 1/ Enters Galveston Bay via Buffalo Bayou; drainage area: 7Z. 7 eq. miles; period of record: Oct. 1952-Sept. 1968; average discharge 40.2 c.f. s. for 16 ~ years; extremes: 7, 000 c.f. s. July 30, 1954, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 7- 12.--Stream discharge for Halls Bayou, 1953-1968. {U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0765 at Houston, Tex., lat. 29° 51.7', long. 95°20.1')-. Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in c ubic feet per second (c f.s.)i/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. g ept. The year 1953 0 3.99 12.4 4.77 11. 5 1. 32 1. 63 100 1. 16 1.30 4 94 1.35 12.2 1954 2.43 15.9 13. 3 ' 21.7 1.57 0.49 2.93 2. 09 0.08 74. 0 4 91 0.65 11.8 1955 5.92 3. 05 0. 67 10. 4 76.9 0. 38 0. 67 1. 19 0. 85 12.6 23 0 13. 1 11.9 1956 4. 84 0.38 2. 15 9.41 11. 5 1. 31 0.95 0.99 2. 00 0. 42 1 95 0. 25 2.99 1957 0.95 0.62 1.75 0. 30 1. 05 22. 0 30.7 8. 97 2. 32 6. 96 0 84 23. 4 8.32 1958 44. 6 44. 9 3.80 48. 1 31.9 4. 68 12.8 3.98 3.99 1.95 5 67 25.8 19.2 1959 4.64 5. 36 1.78 4.98 90. 1 5.67 45.3 63. 6 10. 8 85.9 71 6 3.99 32. 5 1960 28.3 9. 58 37. 0 31.4 50.9 6. 16 5. 09 1. 65 76. 5 25. 1 11 0 5.27 23.8 1961 38.2 75. 1 77. 5 60.9 127 9.98 9.45 5.25 67. 0 149 8 03 146 63. 8 1962 1.91 70. 1 40.9 13. 3 15. 9 4. 52 8. 95 15.7 29.4 12.9 1 61 1.98 18. 0 1963 8. 03 34.6 25.9 38.4 30. 8 5. 07 3. 19 2.39 4.74 4.98 0 78 2. 23 13.3 1964 3. 88 2. 64 9. 34 5.82 9.81 17. 1 17. 2 55. 5 8.73 1.36 14.7 13. 2 13.3 1965 2. 25 7.63 14. 4 4. 33 9.97 2.51 3. 16 6. 16 3.98 2.08 15. 6 26. 0 8. 13 1966 9.97 27.7 64.3 43. 8 89.8 17. 6 89. 7 46. 4 12. 1 5. 53 6 84 12.0 35. 0 1967 27.2 2. 16 4. 02 8. 69 5.47 3. 10 7.94 11.4 4.96 9.22 8 68 35. 1 10.7 1968 8. 58 2. 33 12.4 44. 4 7.32 18. 0 16. 0 79.2 106 9. 96 5. 62 31.9 28. 5 Mean 11.9 19. 0 20.0 21. 8 35.6 7.4 15.9 25.2 20.8 25. 1 11. 5 21.3 19.5 \_l Enters Galveston Bay via Buffalo Bayou; drainage area: 24.7 sq. miles; period of record; Oct. 1952-Sept, 1968; average discharge: 19.6 c.f. s. for 16 years; extremes: 3, 400 c. f. s. Sept. 12, 1961; no flow at times. 2_l Liter per sec. - c. f. s. x 28, 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 84 Table7-13. — Stream discharge for Clear Creek, 1951-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0770 near Pearland, Tex., lat. 29° 35.8', long. 95° n.Z')^( Monthly and yea rly mean disc harge in cubic feet per second (c t.s.yi/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1951 16.4 0.23 0.48 3. 78 3. 17 12.4 8.75 8. 90 9. 10 1. 04 1. 31 48. 3 9. 46 1952 8.21 1. 03 0. 53 0.76 14.9 1. 13 44. 6 27. 6 29.2 21. 1 6. 18 35.7 15.8 1953 10.7 15.0 53.5 20. 1 53. 0 5.26 14. 5 68.7 14. 3 11.8 81. 0 56. 5 33.6 1954 2.21 50. 5 69.9 18.8 2. 54 2. 13 7. 12 11.7 6.27 6.81 25. 5 11.8 18. 0 1955 2.92 0. 44 0. 03 11. 5 104 0.28 5. 64 30. 0 0. 84 1.85 61. 5 23. 3 19.7 1956 1.27 0 0.01 0. 81 8.39 0. 37 5. 11 16. 3 2.73 2.25 7.90 8.41 4.44 1957 0.28 0. 09 5.41 0 0.46 169 109 44. 5 70. 3 3. 86 7. 50 28. 5 36.7 1958 132 85. 6 6.72 60. 2 51.7 3.74 7,47 7.41 3.78 14. 1 10. 4 71. 5 37.8 1959 6. 56 1.76 0.42 2. 30 300 8.21 113 42.7 14. 5 118 127 33. 6 62. 3 1960 1961 1962 44. 6 60.2 73. 1 ..1/ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- .- .. .. .. -. .. .. .- .. .. .. .. .. 1963 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.93 2. 56 17.7 10.7 6.92 7. 52 -- 1964 0.64 5. 13 28.8 4.45 64. 5 14. 3 4. 97 9. 06 4. 55 11. 3 12. 1 16. 1 14. 5 1965 4.36 16.4 61.6 2. 11 12.8 3. 19 3.55 34.7 20.9 7.25 5. 00 5.40 14.8 1966 2.57 14.7 36.0 39. 1 145 15.4 150 230 30.7 22. 5 41. 0 13. 1 61. 0 1967 4.02 1. 15 0.86 7. 56 12.5 6.86 16. 6 11. 5 12.7 16.9 23.8 13. 0 10. 6 1968 3.39 0. 69 2. 15 71.5 6.33 11. 1 27.8 198 219 25.7 5.38 16.7 49. 1 Mean 13.9 13.7 19. 0 17.2 55.6 18. 0 36.9 52.8 31.3 18. 8 29. 6 27. 2 27. b 1/ Enters Galveston Bay; drainage area: 38.8 sq. miles; period of record: April 1947-Dec. 1959, March 1963-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 31.7 c.f. s, ~ for 17 years; extremes: 2, 170 c.f. 3. March 18, 1 957, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec, = c, f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. Table 7- 14.--Stream discharge for Chocolate Bayou, 1951- 1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0780 near Alvin, Tex. , lat. 29° 22.3', long. 95° 19.2'^' 1/ Monthly and yea rly mean dis charge in c ubic feet per second (c f.s.)2/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1951 22. 5 0. 03 0. 65 11.2 11. 1 47. 1 39. 5 66.2 94.5 48. 8 76. 0 204 51. 8 1952 16.7 1. 65 3.87 0.95 81. 8 29. 8 318 233 84.5 69.0 38.9 93. 0 80. 4 1953 17.2 31. 4 90. 6 16. 5 83.4 10. 1 26.7 252 90. 7 133 270 276 108 1954 8.78 291 133 51. 3 6.70 15.3 40.9 94. 3 57.4 56.8 102 42.3 75.2 1955 10.4 0.96 0.23 33. 6 205 1.63 18.9 51.4 59.3 75. 5 72.6 46. 1 46.8 1956 0.89 3. 19 3.01 1. 62 18.7 2.97 23. 1 35.7 30.7 21.3 38.7 19. 5 16.6 1957 4. 37 1. 08 0.92 0. 16 5.73 379 135 123 244 32.6 38. 3 48. 3 84.8 1958 289 238 17. 1 138 -1/ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 1959 -- -- -- -- -- 20.4 66.4 100 128 4 06 512 81. 6 -- 1960 90.2 259 171 115 176 12. 1 20.7 33.9 3 54 67.4 187 62. 3 128 1961 82.6 101 332 365 117 10.7 22. 3 43.6 489 408 97.6 409 207 1962 7.57 280 45. 3 6.81 4.33 6.43 67. 2 52. 0 108 152 60. 9 62. 5 70.9 1963 65.7 124 249 30.7 30. 6 5.81 33. 7 40. 0 160 120 49. 0 37.7 79. 0 1964 18.6 12. 0 46. 0 17. 3 75.8 51.7 25. 5 46.4 43. 2 80. 3 43.8 64. 9 43.7 1965 9.03 58.3 226 10. 3 24.4 U. 3 39.9 88. 1 84.2 89.9 63.2 46.2 63. 0 1966 18.2 86.9 173 130 395 23.9 199 336 165 127 200 79. 5 159 1967 49.2 17. 0 2. 19 27.8 53. 1 37. 3 53.4 105 79.5 87. 6 58.4 54. 6 52. 1 1968 17. 6 2. 26 4. 22 357 18.2 21. 6 215 340 876 91.2 54.7 58.4 171 Mean 27.4 79.3 92.5 73.4 81. 6 41. 6 79.9 121 188 103 90.6 100 89.8 _!_/ Enters Galveston (West) Bay; drainage area: 87.7 sq. miles; period of record: Jan. 1947-Feb. 1958, March 1959-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 96. 0 c. f. 3. for 19 years; extremes: 7, 400 c. f. s. Oct. 8, 1949, no flow at times. Z_/ Liter per sec, = c, f, s, x 28. 3; 1 sq. nniles = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. 85 TableT-15, Stream discharge from Oyster Creek, I951-19b8. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 0790 near Angleton, Tex., lat. 29° 09. 5', long. 95" 28.5')-' Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (c. f. s. ) 2/ ^vea" °'^'- ^°^- '-'^'^- ■'*"• ^^^- Mar. Apr. May Jiine July Aug. Sept. year la?l 43. 3 4b. 3 45.3 47. 1 44. 2 95. 4 46. 7 66.2 134 80. 3 74. 2 134 71. 9 1952 80.4 91. 2 99. 4 91.8 146 71. 5 340 137 151 82. 8 83.2 80. 1 120 1953 72.1 78. 3 102 71. 1 122 132 132 375 132 130 138 229 143 1954 135 481 233 180 141 179 78. 3 140 183 99. 6 70.3 65.4 165 1955 77. 6 76. 9 75. 1 80. 4 173 83. 1 39. 7 29.4 150 121 7Z.8 129 91.7 1956 49.6 31. 9 25. 7 127 134 129 146 153 105 20. 6 89.6 109 93. 1 1957 109 147 133 146 57.6 199 197 3,767 324 162 131 165 467 1958 267 286 149 216 202 131 142 153 154 131 66,0 183 173 1959 115 105 124 43.1 454 123 199 165 153 2 53 303 148 180 1960 155 155 218 206 205 130 74. 3 93. 1 245 179 150 81. 7 158 1961 184 168 395 577 200 128 133 146 580 585 147 820 339 1962 168 462 253 148 128 129 86. 0 95.3 166 147 144 168 175 1963 157 143 256 204 136 103 156 161 75. 1 160 168 163 157 1964 149 104 182 147 161 168 149 148 148 1 11 144 151 147 1965 27.0 36. 2 160 72.6 108 79. 2 114 678 433 165 1 67 163 184 1966 66. 7 116 200 I 13 264 74. 8 137 333 97.8 22. 2 74.6 129 135 1967 150 132 119 136 162 157 164 157 146 161 192 171 154 1968 163 143 147 450 135 123 253 355 1 , 000' 202 132 150 271 T7 Enters Gulf Intracoastal Waterway; drainage area: 211 sq. miles; periodof record: Oct. 1944-Sept. 1968, average discharge: 171 c. f. s, for 24 years; extremes: 10,600 c.f.s. May 10, 1957, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 7- 16. --Stream discharge from Brazos River. 1951-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 145 near Juliff, Tex., lat 29 " 27. 3', long. 95° 31.9')-^, Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (c.f.s. y~ Water ^^^^ ^^^ ^ ^^^^ -j^^^^ P^^ Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. ^^ year year 1951 2.423 969 809 913 1,265 916 1 ,054 455 3,230 151 156 1 ,060 1,119 1952 766 572 600 502 989 1,319 5,158 4,961 3,139 316 0. 90 38.4 1,52 5 1953 61.2 357 3,755 4,557 2,172 4,027 877 27,220 1 ,282 261 455 1,816 3,949 1954 3,024 3,820 8, 348 2,352 928 283 289 6,352 2,149 171 289 176 2,368 1955 544 816 42 5 539 4,681 914 4, 183 3, 707 4,914 1,059 883 663 1,914 1956 10, 510 978 639 899 2,492 919 540 4, 740 246 109 138 429 1.870 1957 586 1,170 966 576 826 3,890 17,870 77,210 53, 580 14, 110 2,814 1,393 14, 650 1958 28, 660 18, 160 7,878 9,455 14,010 14,010 5,446 26,290 3,813 5,454 1,314 4,818 1 1 . 630 1959 3,817 2,040 1,553 1,277 6,027 2,027 14, 640 7,760 4,629 3,488 1,891 1 . 137 4,160 1960 23,330 10,910 10,260 I 6,200 12,890 6,454 3,193 7,359 8,101 4,917 1,483 1,054 8,857 1961 7,882 17,310 25, 650 36, 020 34, 540 13,650 5,361 2,143 15,120 14,860 4.493 12,900 15,710 1962 5,245 5,326 6,355 3,930 3,976 2,273 1,452 2,455 4,041 2,255 3.528 6,890 3,972 1963 4,609 2,378 7,196 4,245 4,406 1 ,971 2, 507 607 2,755 1,394 161 355 2, 709 1964 681 950 993 833 2,126 3,524 1 , 341 2,110 1,858 861 315 2,465 1 , 500 1965 2.902 4,156 2.735 7,573 18,160 5,802 6, 810 41 , 1 50 18, 920 4, 720 3,158 1,492 9.751 1966 1,979 6,873 8,612 3,983 8,128 6,915 11,710 37,150 4,881 1,054 2,971 11 ,070 8, 785 1967 5,254 1,548 1.352 1,115 829 323 1 ,423 2,095 2, 137 995 981 1,124 1,605 19 68 1,039 4,683 2,749 I 7,970 12, 490 1 5, 220 16,820 36,060 28, 120' 17, 080 2,487 3, 614 13,200 Mean 5,739 4,612 5,048 6,274 7,274 4,690 5,593 16.101 9,050 4,075 1,528 2,916 17 Fntere Gulf of Mexico; drainage area: 44,100 sq. nniles; period of record: May 1949-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 6, 036 c. f. s. for 19 years; extremes: 95,200 c.f.s. May 6-7. 1957, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 7- 17.--Stream discharge for Big Creek, 1952-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 1 50 near Needville, Tex., lat. 29° 28.6', long. 95°48.7')i' Monthly and yearly mean di scharge in c ubic feet per second (c f.s.,^/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1952 ..3/ -- -- -- -- -- 125 59.7 7. 31 3.48 1. 05 0.7 0 __ 1953 0.41 17. 0 27.6 1.83 12. 1 0. 82 0. 27 146 0. 16 0. 48 145 106 38.4 1954 1.73 27.7 86.9 13. 1 0.40 0 0 8. 57 0. 06 0.90 1. 11 0. 19 11.9 1955 0.23 ' 0. 01 0 10. 6 85. 0 0 0.70 26. 1 1. 05 12.4 3. 53 7. 84 11. 8 1956 0.24 0 0 19. 3 12. 6 0 1.26 5.28 3.39 0. 02 0. U 0. 60 3. 54 1957 0 0 0. 18 0 0. 16 130 126 12.7 16.8 0.33 0.25 23.3 25.9 1958 172 96.8 0.70 62. 4 42. 0 0.60 0. 48 1.61 1.73 1.34 I. 27 31.7 34. 3 1959 15. 5 0.83 1.98 1.79 223 2.35 143 25.7 1.44 8. 60 81. 0 2.20 40.9 1960 254 120 65. 3 27. 5 45. 3 1. 17 15.2 1.45 467 4.77 43.8 1.36 86. 8 1961 82. 2 15.8 108 61. b 93. 0 0.89 7. 56 1. 94 222 166 1.26 168 77. 1 1962 0.80 40. 8 16.6 0. 15 0. 04 0. 03 4. 66 11. 3 11.7 b. 06 0. 82 26. 5 9.93 1963 0.87 4.59 91.2 65.4 20.3 0.37 0.35 0. 33 11. 1 9.21 0.81 0. 55 17.2 1964 0.31 1.38 24. 1 11.8 49. 1 64. 5 1. 31 1. 51 5. 11 1.49 1. 54 18.7 15. 0 1965 14.4 17. 1 42. 0 55.4 61. 7 0. 39 1. 10 17. 4 11.9 3. 15 2.41 2. 11 18.9 1966 20.8 103 57. 6 39. 0 94. 7 3.79 137 135 7.96 4. 48 8.77 30.8 53. 1 1967 1. 49 0. 11 0.38 9. 36 3. 63 0.86 6.20 17. 5 2. 00 7. 69 57. 7 34. 4 11.9 1968 26.4 0.43 30.7 70.9 18. 2 13.0 12. 0 102 201 14. 5 3. 35 21.2 42.8 Mean 36.9 27.8 34. 5 28. 0 47.5 13. 6 28. 5 32. 0 60. 2 15. 0 22. 1 29.7 31. 1 - J°t"= <^""°| Mexico vte Brazos River; drainage area: 42. 3 sq. mUes; period of record: May 1947-June 1950, March 1952-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 29.7c.f. s. for 18 years; extremes: 10,400 c.f.s. June 26, 1960, no flow at times. P • " o, average Z/ Liter per sec.' = c.f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 3_/ -- = no or incomplete data. Table 7- 18.--Stream discharge from Fairchild Creek, 1951-1955. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8-1155 near Needville. Tex. ,lat. 29° 26. 7Mong. 95° 4 5. 7')- Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in c ubic feet per second (c f. s. ^' Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Ju ne July Aug. S ■pt. The year 1951 0 0 0 0. 24 0. 08 18. 6 19.5 6.49 2.75 0 0 36. 5 6. 99 1952 10. 6 0.36 0. 01 0 46. 1 0. 50 62.5 37,4 0. 58 6. 30 0 0 13.5 1953 0 8.70 8.95 1.23 9. 42 0.86 0 92.8 0 0 103 43.8 22.6 1954 7.29 42. 0 34.6 11.3 0. 16 0 0 0.77 0 0 6. 00 0. 24 8. 58 1955 0. 03 ..3/ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Mean 4. 47 12. 7 10. 8 3. 19 13.9 4.99 20. 5 34. 3 0. 83 1. 57 27.2 20. 1 12.9 2_/ Enters Gulf of Mexico via Big Creek and Brazos River; drainage area: 24. 9 sq. miles; period of record: May 1947 -Oct, 195 5; average discharge 14. 9 c.f. s. for 7 years; extremes: 2,560 c.f. s. May 18, 1953, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. 87 Table 7- 19. --Stream discharge from Dry Creek, 1957-1968. (A. U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 1 65, lat. 29° 30.3', long 95° 42. 6', near Richmond; B. 8-1164, lat. 29° 30.7', long 95 ° 44. 7 ' , near Rosenberg, Tex. )i/_ Monthly and yearly mean di scharge in cub ic feet per second (c. ,f.s.)i/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. J; an. Feb. Mar. A Pr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1957 (A) 0 0 0. 10 0 0. 17 33. 1 28. 8 5. 02 12.8 3.31 3.24 0.62 7.28 1958 (A) 50.2 145 ..3/ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- — 1959 (B) 2.39 0. 19 C. 19 0. U 38. 0 0.46 21.3 4. 31 1.61 1.81 6. 59 1.31 6.28 1960 (B) 50.4 31. 0 14. 0 4. 73 14.4 0. 10 53. 2 4.29 80. 5 3.82 21. 1 1.31 23. 1 1961 (B) 42.9 6. 64 28. 9 12.9 20.7 0. 04 2. 10 1.28 46.2 48.2 0. 26 39.0 20.7 1962 (B) 0 5.27 1. 31 0 0 0.98 4. 57 12.0 9.77 2.23 24. 6 4.24 5.45 1963 (B) 0.49 1.47 15.7 11.0 4. 24 0. 01 8. 13 11.8 3.98 3. 12 0. 57 1. 50 5. 19 1964 (B) 0. 04 0.25 5. 10 1.97 7. 66 5.48 2.25 4.97 4.03 7.75 3.29 4.73 3.95 1965 (B) 3.65 0.48 5.30 5. 11 15.7 31.6 3. 80 5.44 2.75 1. 57 2. 55 0.38 6. 50 1966 (B) 4. 37 22.7 12. 5 8. 14 20. 6 2.34 34. 0 30.7 3. 36 3. 03 2.81 9. 82 12.7 1967 (B) 0. 034 0 0. 013 1. 31 37. 0 1.09 11.9 7.35 0. 872 7.78 5.21 5.39 6.27 1968 (B) 3.97 0 9. 51 lb. 5 4. 17 2.63 25. 1 28. 8 47.8 19.3 8. 84 8. 40 14. 6 Mean 9.8 b. 1 8.4 5.b 14.7 7. C 17.7 10. 5 19.3 9.2 7. 1 6.9 10. 1 U Enters Gulf of Mexico via Big Creek and Brazos River, A. (Station 8-1165) drainage area: 10. 3 sq. miles; period of record: May 1947-June 1950, Oct. 1956-Sept. 1958; average discharge not determined, extremes: l,790c.f.s. Oct. 15, 1957, no flow at times. B. (Station 8- 1 1 64) drainage area: 8.53 sq. miles; period of record: Oct. 1959-Sept. 1968; average discharge: lO.lc.f.s. for 10 years; extremes: 2,410 c.f.s. Oct. 31, 1959, no flow at times. 2_/ Liter per sec. = c, f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. 1/ Table 7- 20.- -St ream discharge from San Bernard River, 1954-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8-1175 near Boling, Tex. , lat. 29° 18. 8', long. 95°53. 6')~ Monthly and year ■ly mean discharge in cub ic feet per second (c, ,f.s, .)^/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May J ^.ne July Aug. Sept. The year 1954 .-1/ -- -- ^" -- -- -- 1 14 24. b 34. 5 1 18 88. 5 -- 1955 17.4 10. 5 62. 4 182 983 12.9 2b. 0 41b 89. 1 58. 1 81. 2 150 169 1956 15. 0 5.23 7. 17 147 135 5.97 37, 1 22. 8 10. 4 10. 7 26. 8 35.2 37.9 1957 3.27 7.90 28. 4 6. 57 17. 0 2, 142 9b9 1, 133 390 28. 9 67. 3 136 414 1958 3, 326 1,258 180 1 ,246 921 149 27.2 293 34. 2 53. 5 62. 9 673 685 1959 276 92.7 109 130 2, 149 178 2, 244 636 168 133 619 171 561 1960 437 1,468 475 574 579 128 83. 6 354 2, 901 1, 146 252 140 707 1961 781 770 1, 064 1 ,441 2,651 164 98. 1 111 2, 314 1,417 229 3,069 1, 159 1962 58.6 679 174 44. 5 124 40. 6 89.7 163 297 310 111 192 189 1963 52.4 19. 8 340 482 263 40. 1 15.2 37. 4 138 168 158 101 151 1964 58. 1 115 293 57.7 638 555 18. 1 49. 8 268 110 111 427 223 1965 296 273 337 765 67 5 90. 5 24. 9 601 96. 0 109 117 150 293 1966 314 1, 190 659 418 1, 024 154 849 1,623 157 193 232 270 587 1967 121 8. 19 7. 83 51.4 15.2 8. 69 90.7 271 199 155 257 629 151 1968 589 31.2 69. 3 1 , 509 174 153 117 1, 942 3, 938 1, 056 196 394 848 Mean 453 423 271 503 739 272 334 546 785 353 180 466 441 1/ Enters Guli Intracoastal Waterway; drainage area: 727 sq. miles; period of record: May 1954-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 441 c.f.s. for 14 years; ~ extremes: 21,200 c.f.s. June 28, 1960, 2.4 c.f.s. Nov. 28-30, 1956. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. mUee = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. 88 Table 7- 21. --Stream discharge from Colorado River, 1951-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 625 near Bay City, Tex. , lat. 28° 58.4', long. 96° 00. 7 ' )-{ Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second {c .f.s.>i/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July (■ "g- Sept. The year 1951 692 680 788 841 1 ,045 529 295 446 1 ,489 71 . 4 299 1.289 700 1952 635 439 406 344 450 345 979 1,830 454 503 235 763 616 1953 390 622 1,940 1,374 1, 612 714 458 4,924 178 619 898 1 . 508 1.273 1954 1,315 884 1,62 5 784 403 260 384 676 222 193 545 474 651 1955 453 378 362 485 1,646 296 436 1 ,418 2, 640 1,511 1 541 1.073 1,014 1956 2,508 1 ,793 898 497 994 388 472 886 815 164 367 314 840 1957 286 226 297 249 348 2,037 5,027 27, 750 24, 560 4, 058 1 757 4, 975 5,980 1958 12,820 8,559 6.173 6,146 9.910 7,537 5,050 5,611 3,544 3,412 2 080 3,804 6, 200 1959 2,330 2,609 1,035 1,231 3,675 1,348 7,564 2,926 1,500 844 2 506 2,575 2,491 1960 10,410 6,010 4,408 4,205 4, 954 3,693 3,829 5,898 8,909 2,566 1 949 1,113 4,829 1961 4,944 7,059 3,708 4,849 8,289 4,682 3, 672 1,877 8, 613 7, 675 2 876 1 1 . 1 60 5,743 1962 1,736 4,713 3,580 2, 672 1,058 700 562 341 1,183 582 275 888 1, 525 1963 813 681 1,358 979 1,637 577 387 355 384 636 313 393 705 1964 352 318 343 258 482 800 125 227 505 115 1 14 878 375 1965 766 695 573 2,233 4,850 774 368 6,250 6,364 1,369 189 447 2,051 1966 1,018 3,464 4,101 1,890 1,966 1,556 2.154 6,532 1,129 428 583 93. 9 2,081 1967 588 851 297 270 246 257 324 453 294 1.00 311 2.67 5 544 1968 1,101 1,329 677 8,228 6,700 5,908 6,859 10, 130 12.050- 3,375 739 1 .907 4,900 Mean 2,397 2,295 1,809 2, 085 2,792 1,800 2, 163 4, 362 4.157 1 , 562 976 2.018 2, 362 \_l Enters Gulf of Mexico and Matagorda Bay via Giolf Intraooastal Waterway; drainage area: 41, 650 sq. miles; period of record: April 1948-Sept. 196 average discharge: 2, 312c.f. s. for 20 years: extremes; 84, 1 00 c . f. s. June 26, 1960, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 1/ Table 7-22. --Stream discharge from Lavaca River. 1951-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 640 near Edna, Tex., lat. 28° 57.6', long. 96° 41.2')-. Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (c.f. s. )~ ^ear'' °'^'- ^°'^- ^^'^- ''*"• ^'^^- ''^"' ^P"^' "^^^ "'""'^ ■'"'^ ^"S- ^"^P'' year 1951 5. 13 5.66 10.9 14.8 17.9 19. 5 15.8 11. 3 322 6.77 1.92 141 47. 2 1952 28. 9 14. 0 14. 0 10. 9 37.0 24. 0 240 1,295 202 29. 4 19. 9 17. 3 162 1953 4.16 287 386 49.8 58. 5 32.6 50.1 682 27.2 18. 5 232 112 163 1954 25.8 18. 1 16. 5 16.2 13. 5 12.2 85.2 69. 1 6.21 2. 14 5.24 7. 60 23.2 1955 1.58 0. 14 0. 28 9.73 649 1 5. 7 32.0 695 110 12.2 151 43.8 140 1956 5.05 2.24 4.85 5. 57 18.3 6. 58 4. 43 8. 16 0.94 16. 7 0. 50 0.41 6. 12 1957 0.95 0.003 32.6 0. 05 83.0 447 1 ,424 460 310 15.4 5.09 169 244 1958 1,904 1 . 158 120 668 1 , 186 166 7 5. 8 387 31.0 121 14.9 387 514 1959 229 66. 8 116 60. 3 1.169 105 1 , 328 342 141 59. 0 71.2 75. 1 306 1960 265 234 170 187 223 82.4 116 85. 1 1 . 084 183 639 78.9 278 1961 3.631 852 594 951 1, 148 163 116 92. 9 1 , 364 5 64 82.2 2,073 966 1962 157 1,097 125 95.9 96.3 72. 6 624 96.2 239 54. 5 20. 9 154 234 1963 58. 7 35. 6 60.3 83.0 318 49.4 30. 0 29. 5 29.2 72. 5 7 SI 6. 57 63. 4 1964 5.08 19.8 38.9 36.4 73. 2 89.1 74. 3 30. 5 296 17.6 26.4 193 74.2 1965 40. 9 10. 7 14. 9 595 1.006 82.8 71. 2 1,621 686 49. 1 32.2 20. 8 349 1966 87. 5 818 279 123 290 1 50 586 734 143 86.6 45. 1 35.8 280 1967 19.0 18.7 21.9 24. 6 21.6 27.0 74.8 38.0 11.8 4. 39 19.2 1,885 178 1968 841 84.2 46.3 998 154 165 222 1,361 1 , 930 208 61 . 8 1 i 1 516 _!_/ Enters Matagorda B ay; drainage area: 826 sq. miles; period of record: Aug. 1938-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 276 c.f. s. for 30 years; extremes: 73.000c.f. s. July 1 , 1940, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c.f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258.9 hectares. Table 7-23.--Stream discharge from Navidad River, 1951-19b8. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 645 near Ganado, Tex. , lat. 29° 01.5', long. 96° 33.1') Monthly and yearly mean dis charge in c ub: ic feet per second (c. .f.a.)^/ ■A'ster year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. fi ipr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1951 17.9 4.94 9. 51 11.3 14.7 65.2 32.6 18.1 947 15. 0 34.9 404 130 1952 84.2 22. 6 15. I 9. 14 99. 7 43.8 908 1,601 281 49. 0 40. 5 121 273 1953 12.0 398 704 106 1 17 34.5 31. 6 1,410 32. 2 83. 4 549 1,012 376 1954 41. 1 24.4 71. 8 13. 8 9. 50 8.98 16. 6 79.4 2. 04 2. 94 21.3 48. 4 28.6 1955 23.8 0.34 0.36 14. 0 831 5.38 28. 8 619 185 23. 5 107 288 172 1956 45.9 0 0 8.98 79. 1 0 24. 9 1.05 8. 69 0. 21 22. 6 39.5 18.9 1957 1.18 0.65 44. 7 0. 19 114 1,166 1 ,941 1 , 349 1,372 18. 4 25.5 509 544 1958 3,109 1 , 660 125 1 ,033 1.530 150 80. 0 512 37. 5 1 57 63.4 616 751 1959 253 189 398 214 2,212 132 2 ,723 446 855 132 341 234 661 1960 859 637 623 540 660 135 249 375 3,474 666 1,306 287 815 1961 2,680 1,591 1,060 1 , 525 2,966 198 128 82,7 2,435 1,062 168 4,419 1,508 1962 119 1,101 93.1 102 129 76.0 668 152 357 237 73.4 280 280 1963 42.2 13.8 177 240 307 39.5 30.1 49.6 69. 4 348 79.3 75. 5 122 1964 20.4 103 202 43.6 272 158 37.6 52. 7 494 117 115 507 175 1965 114 52.9 14.4 570 804 52.0 74.2 2,552 726 151 99. 2 175 448 1966 233 1,487 550 337 727 355 895 1,801 497 2 62 306 190 634 1967 79.9 10.4 17.4 36.5 18.2 17.2 111 125 67. 0 100 361 3,582 374 1968 983 73. 1 30. 7 2 .723 250 226 257 2,019 4,905- 530 142 367 1,043 Mean 484 409 2^9 418 618 159 457 735 930 219 214 730 464 l_/ Enters Matagorda Bay via L-avaca River; drainage area: 1,063 sq. miles; period of record: May 1939-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 497 c,f. e. for 29 years; eactremes: 64, 500 c. f. s. July 2, March 26, 1940, no flow at times. Z_/ Liter per eec. = c. f. e. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 1/ Table 7- 24. --St ream discharge from Guadalupe River, 1951-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1765 at Victoria, Tex. , lat. 28° 47. 6', long. 97° 00. 7'p ^ Monthly and ye arly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (( = .f.s.>i/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1951 355 354 409 393 424 427 455 564 2,279 310 186 375 542 1952 238 315 326 336 401 335 590 1,350 1 ,355 472 180 3,993 819 1953 707 963 1 ,884 1,652 834 650 731 2,551 336 319 485 1 , 730 1 ,074 1954 1,684 693 886 582 505 413 484 702 246 147 108 107 548 1955 121 200 242 259 950 329 290 771 797 214 211 158 374 1956 100 107 183 195 255 158 157 224 59. 7 53. 9 37. 6 51.6 132 1957 164 59. 6 486 118 410 1,165 4.147 6,954 5,312 676 355 3,859 1 ,973 1958 7,945 4,209 1 ,990 4,070 8, 645 3,922 2,01 5 4,293 1,764 1,248 743 2,013 3,541 1959 1,852 2,229 1,450 1,271 1,967 1,302 3,304 1,675 1,132 1,290 826 739 1,580 I960 2,504 1 ,299 1,114 1 , 431 1 , 509 1 ,204 1 , 300 2, 392 2,854 2, 635 1,805 1 ,091 1 , 764 1961 9,217 7,761 3,289 3,833 4, 640 2,459 1 , 619 1,151 6,855 2, 637 1,175 1 , 901 3,865 1962 1,035 2,235 997 906 902 781 945 746 881 51 1 332 736 914 1963 651 687 805 697 1,044 663 738 489 368 304 172 201 565 1964 213 775 474 450 808 1 , 198 678 447 559 2 60 271 716 568 1965 834 966 526 1,599 4,735 1,271 1,220 4,327 4,018 1,116 698 707 1 , 812 1966 1,275 1,969 2,620 1,235 1,669 1,589 2,051 2,606 1,200 893 640 869 1 , 551 1967 878 703 596 596 541 512 474 392 280 209 302 9,335 1,234 1968 2,270 2,213 1,114 7, 1 30 2, 348 1 , 869 2,907 4,991 6, 178 1,669 9 62 1,649 2,941 Mean 1 ,780 1 , 540 1 , 077 1 ,486 1.810 1,124 1,339 2,034 2,026 831 527 1 , 679 1,433 1/ Enters San Antonio Bay; drainage area: 5,198 sq. mUes; period of record: Nov. 1934-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 1,593 c.f.s. for 33 years; extremes: 1 79, 000 c. f. s. July 3, 1936, 14 c.f.s. Aug. 20, 1956. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. £. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 7- 25.--Stream discharge from Coleto Creek, 1953-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 770 near Schroeder, Tex. , lat. 28" 49. 9', long. 97° 11.2') . Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in c abic feet per second (c f.s.ji/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. J an. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June J ily Aug. Sept. The year 1953 8. 51 126 46. 5 7.85 8. 84 4. 81 4. 27 225 6. 65 0.90 236 65. 6 62. 3 1954 27.4 6.46 3.44 3. 66 2.87 2. 01 4. 03 32.4 0. 62 0.24 0. 14 0.21 7. 03 1955 0. 58 0.36 0.29 0. 17 67. 1 0. 70 1.45 57.4 3.95 0. 18 18. 0 6. 72 12.7 1956 1.31 0. 33 0. 38 1. 05 0. 36 0. 33 0.31 11.9 0.22 0. 08 0. 01 9.81 2. 18 1957 41. 6 61.7 3.20 0.25 4. 55 91. 0 560 264 240 1.92 0. 44 78. 8 112 1958 155 435 16.9 286 1, 122 57.2 23. 3 2 54 12.7 13.4 0. 68 119 201 1959 143 21.8 22.8 14. 9 182 22. 3 307 104 14. 3 5.86 3. 53 17.2 70.4 1960 29.2 7. 58 5.73 10. 1 10.6 7. 57 6. 24 6. 65 84. 5 68. 7 80. 2 12. 5 27. 6 1961 895 238 164 98.9 138 26. 7 19.7 19.8 156 34. 5 5. 83 14.2 151 1962 4.45 48.8 7.33 6. 57 23. 6 7.29 34.2 6.68 84.2 2.68 0.27 68. 6 24. 2 1963 3.65 4. 36 23.2 9.07 21.2 5.73 2.97 1. 63 8. 18 20. 3 0. 05 0.29 8. 34 1964 0.28 4.22 16. 1 19.7 52. 5 24. 5 3. 03 4.23 0.38 0. 32 86. 8 52.7 22. 0 1965 1. 11 0.41 1.25 113 3 54 14. 3 5. 02 303 313 6.93 2. 25 0.98 90.9 1966 39.3 6.99 32.5 15. 1 27. 1 8. 09 58. 5 147 200 50.4 3. 35 9.96 36. 1 1967 2. 02 1.05 1.72 3.93 2.30 2. 51 4. 82 2. 58 0. 073 0. 056 11.0 4, 690 388 1968 1, 015 63.4 23.2 146 46.7 32.7 16. 5 641 488 45. 0 12. 3 350 24 1 Mean 149.9 64. 1 23 46 128. 9 19. 1 65. 6 130 89. 5 15. 6 28.8 343. 5 90.9 1/ Enters San Antonio Bay; drainage area: 369 aq. miles; period of record: Jem, 1930-Dec, 1933, Oct, 1952-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 88. 3 c. f, s. for 19 years; extremes: 122,000 c.f.s. Sept. 21, 1967, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 7- 26.--Stream discharge from San Antonio River, 1951- 1968. {U. S. Geological Survey Station 8-1885 at Goliad, Tex. , lat. 28" 38. 9'. long. 97° 2 3. 1 ' )T Mo nthly and y early mean discharge in cub ic feet per second (c i.s.^' Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. A Pr- May June July Aug. Sept. The year 1951 131 126 132 125 199 174 195 493 1.113 121 90. 2 790 306 1952 1 50 156 150 137 214 175 316 499 176 166 77. 4 3 306 456 1953 149 226 256 271 164 171 206 941 85 124 324 1 319 353 1954 234 156 196 150 124 1 12 159 261 126 82. 5 49. 9 66.8 143 1955 124 133 86. 5 127 352 177 89.3 314 166 69 165 243 169 1956 75. 1 76.2 115 104 107 83.9 86.8 192 26.2 52. 4 60. 6 200 98.2 1957 368 156 382 110 167 492 2 515 2,904 2,321 164 109 2 025 974 1958 952 896 296 1 ,641 2,884 638 367 2.065 454 505 196 932 974 1959 1,202 1,608 582 464 516 399 638 621 350 342 226 221 59 7 1960 679 396 335 394 382 394 350 318 572 518 553 248 429 1961 2.520 1,769 944 868 1,358 685 423 267 1,368 1,012 383 363 994 1962 554 799 342 331 325 245 327 252 697 166 146 318 374 1963 153 235 379 215 385 198 209 154 126 113 47. 9 150 196 1964 295 344 245 214 537 446 193 1 52 290 88. 8 472 207 289 1965 316 599 229 568 1 , 778 324 462 2,605 732 231 173 177 676 1966 596 240 710 292 360 322 487 596 268 187 241 377 390 1967 207 162 183 194 175 175 186 169 71.4 175 394 12 050 1.165 1968 1.052 969 385 4 309 1,014 647 678 2.063 843- 538 292 854 1.141 Mean 542 502 330 584 613 325 438 826 543 258 222 1 324 540 j_/ Enters San Antonio Bay; drainage area: 3,921 sq. miles; period of record: June 24-March 29, Feb. 1939-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 554 c. f. s. for 33 years; extremes: 1 38, 000 c. f. s. Sept. 23. 1967, 1.2 c.f.s. June 16, 1956. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. b. x 28. 3 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 91 Table 7- 27. --Stream discharge data for Mission River, 1951-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 895 at Refugio, Tex., lat. 28° 17.5', long. 97° 16. 7'p'. '.Vate year "'■■ "'"• ■""'• ^ ^"- """■ '•f'-- """y •'"">= J^iy '*'ug. sept. -j. May June July Aug. Sept. '^^^ IJfl 2.3 3 3.01 3.51 3. 47 3. 18 3. 18 3. 11 8. 97 27.8 3.03 3. 36 399 38.2 1952 8.93 4.36 5.00 4.20 12.2 4. 16 14. 4 253 15.8 6.88 4.25 859 98. 5 1953 23.7 16.8 15. 1 11. I 9.78 8.35 9. 65 67. 5 5. 15 3.48 96.3 231 41. 5 1954 171 10.9 7.01 6.11 5.35 5. 02 6.73 4. 66 3.28 3.18 3.23 3.79 19. 5 1955 24.2 3.74 3.83 4.36 4. 33 3.97 3.7 0 3. 18 3. 64 3.99 4.82 19. 8 6.97 1956 5.09 4.20 3.38 5.65 3. 16 29.1 3.76 30. 5 2. 15 2.02 3. 57 2.32 7.99 1957 2.07 1.47 46.2 2.23 2. 18 93.5 504 269 256 7.02 2. 52 71.6 105 1958 3.79 42. 1 6.39 386 1, 178 35.3 24.0 46. 6 11.3 5.64 2.65 101 146 1959 212 32.2 19.1 12.4 210 18.6 9. 37 26.6 105 5. 41 24. 1 10.3 56. 0 1960 272 21.0 8. 27 10.7 88.2 79.9 12. 5 15.3 431 29. 1 60. 1 20. 5 87. 0 1961 1,122 110 374 214 252 29.6 108 16.4 47. 1 69.4 7.35 13.6 198 1962 5.84 21.6 6. 55 6.31 5.26 5.58 5.23 3.24 2 54 8.04 2.20 184 41.9 1963 5. 39 39. 0 37. 5 6. 14 5. 15 3.77 2.25 11.0 2. 52 1. 55 1.16 11.8 10. 6 1964 1.97 24.4 5.15 5.83 17. I 7.83 2. 77 10.6 2. 02 57.2 29. 5 1. 94 13.9 1965 1.82 2.03 3.82 27. 5 226 6.25 6. 52 264 16.4 2.06 2. 13 1. 69 45. 7 1966 8. 07 26. 6 56.8 16.8 46.4 5.39 244 807 30.8 174 51.8 25.2 126 1967 6. 16 4. 14 4. 15 5.20 4. 66 3.36 2. 51 96.3 2.26 2.65 92. 3 7,646 647 1968 o35 66. I 35. 4 47.9 71.0 22.4 1 5. 4 1,110 272- 92. 5 18. 8 22.9 203 y Enters Copano Bay via Mission Bay; drainage area: 690 sq. miles; period of record: July 1939-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 98.1 c.f. s. for 29 years; extremes: 1 1 6, 000 c. f. s. Sept. 21, 1967, 0.7 c.f. s. at times. 2^/ Liter per sec. = c.f. s. x 28.3; 1 sq. miles = 258.9 hectares. Table 7- 28.--Stream discharge from Aransas River. 1964-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8- 1 897 near Skidmore, Tex., lat. 28° 16.9', long. 97°37.2'P. Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (c . f . s . )—' Water ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ j^^^ ^^^^ ^ ^ j^^ j^^^^ j^. The year ^ j b i' ^^^^ 1964 ..£./ -- -- -- -- -- 0. 51 16.9 2. 56 28. 5 1965 0.06 0. 17 0.72 1. 82 56. 2 22. 6 5. 28 51. 5 19.7 0. 07 1966 9.30 1.68 2, 78 1.38 1. 64 0. 54 110 191 1.75 0. 59 1967 0. 12 0.31 0.85 1.34 1. 10 0. 67 0. 30 21.9 0.02 8.43 1968 85.2 4. 53 2.25 3.95 2.91 1. 67 1. 43 177 30. 4 9. 3b 1.21 8.67 27.7 29.6 2,356 199 1. 67 7. 14 27. 6 Mean 31.5 2,17 1.96 2.23 1.88 0.96 37.2 129 10.7 6.12 10.8 790 84.7 1/ Enters Copano Bay; drainage area: 247 sq. nniles; period of record: Oct. 1965-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 8.7 c.f. s. for 4 years; extremes: ~ 82,800c.f. s. Sept. 22, 1967, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c, f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or inconnplete data. 92 Table 7- 29c-Stream discharge from Nueces River, 1951-1968. (U. S. Geological Survey Station 8- 2 1 1 0 near Mathis, Tex.,lat.28° 02.3', long. 97° 51.6')-' Monthly and yearly mean disc harge in cubic feet pe r secon d (c f.s.)^/ Water year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. S ept. The year 1951 216 59.6 47.6 42.4 45. 0 42. 7 48. 1 970 2, 318 67. 0 67. 4 3 126 583 1952 313 69.2 40. 5 44. 3 59.3 75.3 1 57 399 1,381 155 76. 4 175 244 1953 55.3 45. 5 44. 1 51.2 46.2 52.8 70. 0 1,320 73.4 82. 4 386 6 725 741 1954 1,068 687 44. 1 44. 4 58.8 60.4 52. 5 60. 4 929 2,362 86. 6 77. 8 465 1955 72.4 129 58.4 48.5 54.4 69.2 74. 1 281 255 90. 3 99. 6 385 135 1956 672 61.5 45.4 52.0 52.9 59. 0 49.0 70. 1 106 110 183 740 184 1957 63 5 108 93.3 60. 4 63.6 321 2,663 9,482 8,142 109 106 1 735 1 962 1958 2,033 780 91.3 4 994 5,165 4, 377 87.2 83. 5 104 166 188 659 1 538 1959 4, 168 3,372 325 394 155 I H 87. 5 95. 3 114 845 132 98. 5 829 1960 4, 354 318 107 95.3 131 73.3 87. 6 85. 8 231 298 889 480 602 1961 2,534 1,584 1.000 837 1,163 182 290 122 1,369 457 457 ZOO 847 1962 110 105 102 107 112 95.6 107 133 103 1 33 1 28 90. 7 111 1963 107 83.6 65.6 88.3 83.4 90.1 110 146 128 143 157 108 109 1964 107 85. 1 7 5. I 75.4 68.6 82.7 109 103 133 133 157 116 104 1965 3,092 384 73.8 69.1 1,257 515 104 2,655 875 158 1 32 123 787 1966 96.0 95.3 86. 3 76.4 93.6 96.7 131 3,346 896 209 132 115 452 1967 120 116 104 94. 5 85.4 108 144 140 164 171 152 24 950 2 167 1968 3,418 339 350 3 582 689 447 102 4, 399 542 ■ 512 111 131 1 232 Mean 1,287 467 152 597 521 381 248 1,327 992 344 202 2 224 727 j_/ Enters Corpus Christ! Bay; drainage area: 16,660 sq. miles; period of record: Aug. 1939-Sept. 1968; average discharge: 826 c.f. s. for 29 years; extremes: 138, 000 c. f. s. Sept. 24, 1967, 6. 8 c.f. s. Aug. 15,1940. 2/ Liter per sec. = c.f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. 1/ Table 7-30. — Stream discharge from San Fernando Creek, 1965-1968. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 8-2119 at Alice, Tex. ,lat. 27° 46. 3', long. 98° 02. 0') Monthly and yearly nnean discharge in cubic feet per second (c. f. s. )— 1/ Water The Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. year 0.73 0.79 1.36 2.22 15.6 4.96 1,023 85.9 2.09 4.76 4.66 Mean 18.0 1.54 1.97 2.26 1.85 1.61 12.76 37.6 1.96 2.56 2.80 343 35.3 1/ Enters Lagtma Madre via Grulla Bayou; drainage area: 507 sq. miles; period of record; Dec. 1964-Sept. 1968, average discharge: 35. 3 c.f. s. for 3 years; extremes: 16, 900 c.f. s. Sept. 23, 1967, no flow at times. 1965 __i/ -- -- 1. 08 3. 12 28. 6 2.20 30.9 1.30 0.74 1966 42. 5 1. 55 2.99 2.88 2. 13 1. 63 35. 1 89. 6 1.93 1. 58 1967 2. 00 1.44 1.45 2. 01 1. 64 1.43 1.28 1. 95 1. 54 1. 30 1968 9.62 1. 63 1. 49 1.90 1. 78 1. 78 1.90 21. 3 2. 43 4.82 2/ Liter per sec. = c.f. a, x 28. 3; 1 sq. mile = 258. 9 hectares. 3/ -- = no or incomplete data. 93 Table 7- 31. -Stream discharge from the Rio Grande, 1951-1958. (U.S. Geological Survey Station 4750 near Brownsville, Tex., lat. 25° 52', long. 97 ° 23' )- Monthly and yearly mean discharge in cubic feet per second (c. f. s. y~' 2/ '.i.'ater year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. 1 he year IQM ' 620 60. 4 43. 4 0.9 9. 9 9.8 18.9 2,370 1 , 360 98. 3 159 4 390 930 1952 1 270 52 6 54. 4 3.9 2. 4 0. 7 3. 7 160 1,360 1,330 150 16. 5 408 1953 13. 8 18. 0 5. 5 9.0 11. 3 5.7 20. 0 1. 1 0 0 1 ,020 5 220 523 1954 3 780 482 277 118 110 33.4 534 74. 1 615 249 85. 5 79. 0 541 1955 461 96. 6 112 105 119 52.6 152 101 133 2 52 98. 4 207 158 1956 30. 7 75. 7 69. 0 80.8 86. 0 44. 3 95.4 67.3 40. 8 21. 4 13. 3 16. 0 53.2 1957 12. 3 21. 6 9. 3 4. 6 19. 0 34.8 14.7 524 372 18. 2 3. 5 22. 1 88.4 1958 29. 7 57. 1 8. 5 31.8 65. 5 76.2 34.6 175 178 210 29. 9 589 123 1959 9 220 8,870 7,800 3. 640 6.510 5.870 2,130 551 833 468 526 415 3,890 1960 735 326 279 423 610 422 638 449 432 461 394 884 503 1961 501 432 295 363 262 250 567 523 631 290 911 2 250 606 1962 715 534 436 240 239 209 422 349 569 350 192 137 366 1963 13S 125 200 185 116 82.0 91.6 203 507 222 84. 8 113 172 1964 210 137 135 51.0 105 117 111 312 169 85. 1 69. 0 72. 1 131 1965 108 92. 3 181 68. 5 215 73.9 65.6 542 173 146 134 121 160 1966 170 128 112 146 748 570 255 1 , 030 1,020 3,100 1,590 6 290 1,136 1967 778 361 155 225 135 131 99. 6 601 317 162 375 8 680 1,096 1968 12 000 3.870 2.910 3,410 2,570 1,600 1,220 2,080 779 1 ,420 5,966 1 880 2,863 1,821 900 505 359 1 , 743 _1_/ Enters Gulf of Mexico, some overflow into Laguna Madre and South Bay: drainage area: 182,215 sq. miles: period of record: Jan. 1934-Sept. 1965: average discharge: 2,117 c.f.s. for 26 years; extremes: 31,700 c.f.s. Oct. 8, 1945, no flow at times. 2/ Liter per sec. = c. f. s. x 28. 3; 1 sq. miles = 258. 9 hectares. Table 8.--The cumulative average annual discharge, area volume, and ratios of discharge to volume of area for seven major Texas estuarine areas. Estuarine areas Cumulative average annual discharge Historic 1951-1968 Approximate ratio of discharge Volume of estuarine area to volume of area x 10 at mean lo\v water Historic 1951-1968 Sabine Lake Galveston Bay , Matagorda Bay- San Antonio-Espiritu Santo bays Copano-A ransa s bays Corpus Christi Bay Laguna Madre — c. f . s 1,2/ 15 334 11 521 9, 149 7 554 3, 085 3 07 8 2 235 2 063 182 189 826 727 37 37 Ft. M\o' 10, 333 78, 040 76, 902 -'27,780 27,617 36,726 55, 309 1 8 25 12 151 44 1,480 1 10 25 14 146 51 1,480 1/ To convert to metric, 1 cubic foot = 0. 0283 cubic meter; I acre = 0. 4046 hectares. 2/ ~ Compiled from Table 7. 1 through 7. 31. 3/ Computed from Table 3. 4/ — Excludes Brazos River Delta streams; Colorado River flows only partially into bay. 5/ — Excludes Mission Lake. — Affected by Rio Grande only during heavy discharge. 94 Table 9. -Extremes in surface water temperatures at seven locations along the Texas coast'{U.S. Department of Commerce, 1965) Station (period of record) Temperature " F- 1/ February ^71 Average^' July Maximum Average Galveston (Gulf coast) Sept. 1958-Dec. 1962 46 85.8 Galveston (Channel) Jan. 1922-Dec. 1962 97 Freeport Harbor May 1955-Dec. 1962 Rockport Jan. 1948-Dec. 1954 62.2 Port A ransas June 1958-Aug. 1967 90 Brazos Santiago ^ / June 1958-Dec. 1962- Port Isabel April 1944-Dec. 1962 63.7 - "C = 5/9 (°F-32). 2/ Data recorded to nearest degree; averages computed to nearest tenth. 3/ — Records not complete. Table 10.--Natural (public) and private oyster leases on the Texas coast. (Data from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Seabrook, Tex. ) !/' Study area (Figure reference) Public reefs Figu Figure Galveston Bay (28) Symbol Name Barrel! Acresi' 3/^2.0 symbol A number(s) Acresl' 1 171-A 14. 1 2 Bart's Pass 265 9 B 268-A 50. 3 3 Bayview 3/40 0 C 299-A 100. 0 4 Beasley's 3/91 3 D 301-A 100. 0 5 Deep 3/15 0 E 311-A 6 De George 3/ 2 0 350-A 134. 1 7 Dollar 3/292 5 F 346-A 49. 9 8 Dow 162 1 G 347-A 100.0 q Fisher 151 8 H 350-A 10 Hanna 1.429 2 395-A 121.0 11 Humble Camp 3/5 0 I 351-A 12 Lewis 3/1 0 352-A 197.65 13 Little Tin Can 2 0 J 353-A 14 Lost 15 2 354-A 15 Moody 3/500 0 355-A 16 Red Bluff 3/20 0 356-A 200.0 17 Redfish (N) 406 9 K 357-A 33.32 18 Redfish (S) 1 .632 0 L 359-A 19 San Leon 20 0 360-A 84. 9 20 Scott's 3/50 0 M 361 -A 100.0 21 Shelton 3/80 0 N 357-A 22 Switchover 118 0 368-A 23 Tin Can 3/9 0 36 9 -A 167.4 24 Todd's Dump 390 7 O 372-A 25 Unnamed 3/80 0 373-A 26 Unnamed 3/ 1 0 374-A 27 Unnamed 3/ 3 0 375-A 200. 0 28 Unnamed 3/ 3 0 P 376-A 29 Unnamed 3/ 2 0 377-A 82. 0 30 Unnamed 3/ 4 0 Q 378-A 31 Vingteune 67 3 R S T U V W X y 4/ 4/ 379-A 380-A 381-A 382-A 386-A 383-A 384-A 387-A 388-A 389-A 390-A 391-A 392-A 393-A 394-A 396-A 397-A 162. 3 59. 12 91.5 80.7 75.7 27.2 34.4 160.41 183.9 86.87 71.68 95 Table 10. — Continued, Study area (Figure reference) Public reefs Private leases Figure ,^ symbol Name Acres— Figure Lease 2/ symbol number(s) Acres'— /Natural reefs generally not A 162-A 24.60 known by name, area not B 310-A 25.00 determined/ , C 312-A through 319-A 741.65 D 329-A 27. 30 E 332-A 333-A 334-A 118.90 F 336-A 24.40 G 344-A 29.20 4/ 370-A 35.44 4/ 371 -A 21.80 4/ 385-A 61.67 /Natural reefs usually not A 320-A known by name; there are 321 -A approxirriately 7, 200 acres 322-A in this study areaV 328-A 363. 34 B 323-A through 327-A 410.40 Matagorda Bay (29) San Antonio Bay (30) Copano-Aransas bays (31) 5/ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Corpus Christi Bay area ( 32)~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Long Pauls Daggar Jay Bird Half Moon Copano Shellbank Lone Tree Lap Reef Bank Spaulding Proverty Midway Hawkins Mitchill Tucker Mason Alta Vista Mathew Edison Little Oso Oso Bulkhead Shamrock Long La Quinta Portland Indian Point Causeway Ingleside Donnel 256. 19 /No private leases in 24.79 Copano-Aransas Bay area/ 30.70 167.63 85. 94 41. 52 35.09 26.14 21.67 104.45 46.24 1 A 336-A 275.40 3 B 362-A 1 363-A 36.94 8 4/ 364-A 82.40 9 4/ 365-A 84.70 70 4/ 366-A 68.50 15 11 2 3 4 83 174 8 32 93 17 11 20 _ Sabine Lake reefs are scattered; no map showing their scattered oyster reefs in the Laguna Madre. ^' 1 acre = 0.4046 hectare. _ Approximate. 4 / _ Not shown on the cited figure. _ Oyster fishing practically destroyed by flood waters in 1963. location is known to exist. There are 96 Table 11. --Artificial and experimental oyster reefs established on the Texas coast by the Texas Pai-ks and Wildlife Department. (Data from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Seabrook and Rockport, Tex. ). \J Study area (Figure reference) F i gu r e symbol Name A rea Galveston Bay { 33) Matagorda Bay (34) San Antonio Bay (35) Copano-A ransas bays (36) Acre 3/ 1 Clamshell 2 Courthouse 3 Dry Hole 4 Eagle Point 5 Experimental 6 Fourbit 7 Gaspipe 8 Halfway 9 Lonesome 10 Missing 11 Range Light 12 Spoonbill 13 Sunflare 14 Switchover 15 Triangle 16 Trinity 1 Big Bayou 2 Dressing Point 3 Forked Bayou 4 Galliniper 5 Mitchill's 6 Oliver Point 7 Raymond Landing Shoal 8 Sand Point 9 Schicker's Point 10 Shell Beach 11 Well's Point 12 Unnamed 1 Bray's 2 Chicken Foot 3 Panther Point (N) 4 Panther Point (S) 5 Josephine 6 Rattlesnake 1 Cape Carlos 2 Copano 3 Half Moon 4 Hall's 5 Iron Stake 6 Light 25 7 Lone Tree 8 Paul's Mott 9 Peanut 10 Pin Tail 11 Poverty 12 Shellbank 13 Two by Four 10. 1 7. 0 15. 6 33. 2 10. 33. 1 .3/ 1 17. 8 3. 2 + 118. 1 97 Table 11. --Continued. Study area (Figure reference) F i gu r e symbol Name Area A en 2/ Corpus Christi Bay (37] Laguna Madre (38) 1 Alta Vista -- 2 Bay Central -- 3 College ' -. 4 Indian Point -- 5 Long -- 6 Mason's .'. 7 Mathew's -. 8 Oso -- 9 Portland -- 10 Shamrock -- 1 (Upper Laguna Madre) 1. 00 2 (Upper Laguna Madre) 1. 00 1 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0.25 2 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0.25 3 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0.25 4 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0.25 5 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0. 25 6 (Lower Laguna Madre) 0.25 1/ ~ No experimental reefs are situated in the Sabine Lake area. — 1 acre = 0. 4046 hectares. 3/ — -- = no estimate. 98 VS Si (M O * in m o* t- r- > in O* V - %o o ^ 966 1,824 1,716 2,106 2,064 2,219 3,469 4,252 7,006 698 2,906 3,975 7,673 8,093 10,439 21,955 22,807 51,779 92,661 165,471 221,573 288 1.600 2.324 1.585 1.239 1.641 2.814 4.050 7.691 10.383 10.113 10.975 200 «eO 602 1.010 1.312 2.372 7.307 11.386 23.836 28,871 35,842 45,021 S « o o" o 17- I o -*■ — o - - 5 i I n 6 3 X S 5 ■ a o > S > i .2 -2 'is-. 9 e a! H •ruj *; « " rt « 5 £ A V a 5 iZi'i i 2 99 ffllOOZOQ.Cl.Q,>* i5i5^* I cQ u 0. a. c 3 * q! ^ u « z ■;; -^ -^ » ^ « re- ^ a o » J « C Q, c 3 5 ijiyy f ^ lii ~ E" X 0 = "S ^ 2 "> O M « O 0 t; £ 5 .S . S f S OS ec « H u < to u £ S a. a J ro I s: J a. a « 100 Table 14,1. ■ County (Tex. ) or Parish (La. ) populations, densities, and city populations in 1950 and 1970 in the Sabine Lake area. (Data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census.) County (or Parish) 1960 1970 County population density '^'■ty population population County area 1960 1970 T7 TT ^ Number/sq. mi. — Cameron Parish- 6,909 8,191- 1,444 4.8 5.6 Jefferson County 245,659 244,773 945 259.9 259.0 Beaoxnont — Groves Nederland Port Arthur Port Neches Sabine Sabine Pass Orange County 60,357 71,170 356 169.5 Bridge City Orange Orangefield West Orange 1/ Number Sq. mi. — 6, 909 3/ 8, 191- 1 ,444 245,659 244,773 945 119, 175 115, 919 17,304 18,067 12.036 16,810 66,676 57, 371 8,696 10, 894 260 50 500 650 60, 357 71, 170 356 4,677 8,614 26,605 24,457 500 700 4,848 4,820 To convert to metric, 1 sq, miles = 2. 59 sq. km. 2/ — No cities exist in the Sabine Lake area. 3/ — Estimated. 4/ City totals do not tabulate to county totals. Table 14-2. --County densities, populations, and city populations in I960 and 1970 in the Galveston Bay {Tex.) area. (Data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. ) County (or Pariah) City 1960 Population 1970 Population County area County population density 1960 1970 Number/sq. mi.— 2/ Brazoria County- 76,204 108,312 1,422 53.6 76.1 Chambers County 10,379 12,187 617 16.8 19.7 Anahuac 1,985 1,881 Galveston County 140.364 169,8123/ 429 327.2 395.8 Bacliff 1,707 2,000-, Caplen 30 35- Galveston 67,175 61,809 , Gilchrist 750 ^°°1,/ High Island 500 300- Hitchcock 5,216 5,565 Kemah 5 50 1,144 La Marque 13, 969 16, 131 Port Bolivar 400 ^^'^5/ San Leon 100 900- Texas City 32,065 38,908 Harris County 1,243,158 1,741,912 1,711 726.6 Baytown 28,159 43,980 Channelview 1,150 12,000 Deer Park 4,865 12,773 Galena Park 10,852 10,479 Houston 938,219 1,232!802 La Porte 4,512 7,149 Morgans Point 560 593 Pasadena 58,737 89,277 Seabrook 500 3, 81 1 Shoreacres 518 1,872 1, 018. 0 1/ - To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 sq. km. 2/ - No cities exist in the Galveston Bay area. - Seasonal populations: Bacliff, 2 , 806; Caplen, 1 00; Gilchrist, 2, 000; High Island, 800; San Leon, 3,000. 101 Table 14-3. --County densities, populations, and city populations in 1 96 0 and 1 970 in the Brazos -Colorado Delta and the Matagorda Bay {Tex. ) area. (Data from the U. S. Bureau of the Census. } County (or Parish) 1960 1970 County pc 'pulat: ion density City Population Population County area I960 1970 ----- Number Sq. miles 11 Numbe: r/sq. mi.i^ Brazoria County— 76, 204 108, 312 1, 422 53.6 76.1 Clute 4,501 6,02 3 Freeport 11,619 11,997 1,268-' Jones Creek-Gulf Park 1,895 Lake Jackson 9,651 13,376 Calhoun County Port Lavaca 1, , 4 / Port O'Connor- 16, 592 17,831 536 30. 9 33.2 8,864 10,491 900-' 950 Point Comfort 1,453 1,446 Jackson County_' 14, 040 12,975 854 16.4 15. 1 Matagorda County 25, 744 27,913 1, 140 22.6 24.4 Collegeport 100 200 Matagorda 650 700 Palacios / / Victoria County — 3.676 3,642 46,47 5 53,766 893 52.0 60.2 1/ 2/ To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 sq. km. Includes most of the Brazos -Colorado Delta area. 3/ Jones Creek only. Matagorda Bay area only. Seasonal population, 2,000. There are no cities in the Bay area. Table 14-4. --County densities, populations, and city populations in I960 and 1970 in the San Antonio Bay (Tex. ) area. (Data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. ) County {or parish) city 1960 population 1970 population County a rea County population density 1960 TTTO 2/ Aransas County Calhoun County Long Mott Port O 'Connor Seadrift Refugio County Austwell Tivoli Victoria County- 4/ Number 7,006 8,902 16, 592 17,831 100 ''°3, 900- 950 1,082 1,092 10, 975 9, 494 287 284 400 500 46,475 53,766 Sq. miles i' 276 536 1/ 893 Number /sq. milesL' 25.4 32.2 30.9 33.2 1/ To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 eq, km. 2/ ~ No data for cities in Bay area. 3/ — Seasonal population: 2,000. There are no cities in the Bay area included since Channel to Victoria extends through the San Antonio Bay. Table 14-5. --County densities, populations, and city populations in I960 and 1970 in the Copano-A ransas Bay (Tex. ) area. (Data from the U. S. Bureau of the Census. ) County {or parish) city 1960 population 1970 pop\alation County area County population 1960 I density 1970 Aransas County 7,006 Number - - - 8,902 2/ 2/ Sq. miles - 276 Fulton 350 1, 101- Lamar 50 150- Rockport 2,989 3,879 Refugio County 10,975 9,494 771 Bayside 3/ 150 350 San Patricio County 45, 021 47,288 680 Nunnber/sq. miles — 1/ 14.2 66.2 12. 3 69.5 — To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 sq. km, 2/ Seasonal population: Fulton, 5,000; Lamar, 300. 3/ — There are no cities in this Bay area. 102 Table 14-6. --County denaities, populations, and city populations in I960 and 1970 in the Corpus Christi Bay (Tex. ) area. (Data from the U. S. Bureau, of the Census. ) County (or parish) city 1960 population 1970 population County area County popula4:lon density 1960 '■ [970 Number ----- Sq. miles - Aransas County , Aransas Pass — 7,006 8,902 276 6,956 5,813 Nueces County 221,573 237, 544 838 Corpus Christi 167,690 204, 525 Port A ransas 824 1,218 San Patricio County Aransas Pass^' 45,021 47,288 680 6,956 5,813 Ingleside 3,022 3,763 Portland 2,538 7,302 1/ 66.2 1/ Number /sq. nniles — 25.4 32.2 264.4 283.4 69. 5 1/ 2/ To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 sq. km. The community of Aransas Pass is situated in both Aransas and San Patricio counties. Table 14-7. --County densities, populations, and city populations in I960 and 1970 in the Laguna Madre (Tex. ) area. (Data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census. ) County (or parish) city 1960 popxilation 1970 population County a rea County population density I960 ' r970 Cameron County Brownsville Laguna Heights Laguna Vista Port Isabel Kenedy County Kleberg County Nueces County Willacy County Port Mansfield Number - - - - - 151, 098 140. 638 48,040 52, 522 550 2/600 141 287 3, 575 3,067 884 678 30,052 33, 166 221, 573 237, 544 20,084 15, 570 100 100 Sq. miles — 883 1,407 850 838 595 Number /sq. nniles 1/ 0.6 35.4 264.4 33. 8 0.4 39.0 283.4 26.1 1/ To convert to metric, 1 sq. miles = 2. 59 sq, km. 2/ — Seasonal population: 900. 103 Table 15. Population projections for selected communities in counties contiguous to the seven estuarine systems of Texas. (Modified from Texas Water Development Board data. ) Estuarine area Sabine Lake Galveston Bay- Galveston Bay {cont. Community County Population 1960 1990 2020 Beaumont Jefferson 119, 175 239,400 496,000 Bridge City Orange 4,677 7, 100 10, 000 Groves Jefferson 17, 304 33, 900 62,000 Lakeview Jefferson 3,849 8,400 12,000 Nederland Jefferson 12, 036 24, 400 44,600 Orange Orange 25,605 51, 000 121,600 Pear Ridge Jefferson 3.470 8.400 12,000 Port A rthur Jefferson 66,676 118,600 248,000 Port Neches Jefferson 8,696 17,600 32,200 Vidor Orange 4,938 13, 400 20, 000 West Orange Orange 4, 848 8, 100 15,000 Alvin Brazoria 5,643 25,600 74,400 Anahuac Chambers ' 1,985 4,300 9,000 Baytown Harris 28, 159 59, 100 111,600 Bellaire Harris 19,872 26,900 31,000 Deer Park Harris 4, 865 12, 300 18,600 Dickinson Galveston 4,715 13, 500 34,000 Galena Park Harris 10,852 22,400 31,000 Galveston Galveston 67, 175 92,600 124,000 Highlands Harris 4,336 8,700 18,600 Hitchcock Galveston 5,216 19, 400 37,200 Houston Harris 938,219 2,165,700 3,968,000 Jacinto City Harris 9,546 17,700 24,800 La Marque Galveston 13,969 34,900 68,200 La Porte Harris 4,512 12,600 24,800 League City Galveston 2,622 9, 800 30, 000 Pasadena Harris 58,737 88,700 124, 000 South Houston Harris 7,523 12,300 18,600 Texas City Galveston 32, 065 76,600 148,800 W. University Place Harris 14,628 16, 100 18,600 104 Table 15. --Continued. Estuarine area County Population Community 1960 1990 2020 Angleton Brazoria 7,312 18, 400 43,400 Clute Brazoria 4,501 12,600 24, 800 Freeport Brazoria 11,619 24, 100 62, 000 Lake Jackson Brazoria 9,651 15, 300 24,800 Sweeney Brazoria 3,087 9, 600 24, 800 Bay City Matagorda 11,656 24, 100 43,400 Edna Jackson 5,038 7, 400 11 ,200 Palacios Matagorda 3,676 8,500 18,000 Port Lavaca Calhoun 8,864 27, 100 49,600 Victoria Victoria 33,047 82,900 158,700 Refugio Refugio 4,944 6,200 8,000 Rockport Aransas 2, 989 4, 100 5, 200 Sinton San Patricio 6, 008 14, 400 37,200 Taft San Patricio 3,463 4, 400 5,500 Aransas Pass San Patricio- A ransas 6,956 12,600 24, 800 Bishop Nueces 3,722 6,800 12,500 Corpus Christi Nueces 167,690 371, 700 930, 000 Ingleside San Patricio 3,022 6,200 9,500 Mathis San Patricio 6,075 14, 400 37, 200 Portland San Patricio 2,538 6,200 9,500 Robstown-San Pedro Nueces 17,900 35,000 74,400 Brownsville Cameron 48, 040 83, 600 130,200 Harlingen Cameron 41,207 78,500 124.000 Kingsville Kleberg 25,297 46,600 93,070 La Feria Cameron 3,047 6,700 12,000 Port Isabel Cameron 3,575 6,700 12,000 Port Mansfield Willacy 100 4,800 7,500 Raymondville Willacy 9,385 17,400 37, 000 San Benito Cameron 16,422 30,000 49,600 Matagorda Bay -Brazos River Delta -Matagorda Bay San A ntonio Bay Copano-A ransa 3 Bay Corpus Christi Bay Laguna Madre 105 Table 16. --Characteristics of mineral production in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La, ) contiguous to the seven estuarine study areas as of (From the Texas Almanac, A. H. Belo, Corporation 1967) County (Parish) Characteristics Mineral production units Major mineral products Petroleum Cement Natural gas liquids Natural gas Salt Sulphu r Sand and gravel Lime Clays Borite Shell Bromine Magnesium Stone 378 178 144 248 70 1/ — From parish authorities. Cameron, La. 2/ 3/ . — X denotes major activity. Table 17. --Characteristics of commercial activities in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La. ) contiguous to the seven study areas as of 196 3. (Fronn the Texas Almanac, A. H. Belo, Corporation 1967) County (Pa rish) Characteristic s E S o < o E u U > O rt K ? C OJ -1' 93 472 118 642 60 914 8,810 91 1 , 505 0 106 828 198 1,262 137 1,451 11.225 168 2,210 1 14 63 21 241 16 136 2,829 17 403 0 3 73 19 125 4 96 2, 048 9 220 0 "^^ o cc w Service based industries Retail outlets Wholesale outlets Manufacturing establishments Major manufacturing activities or services Food products Wearing apparel and fabrics Lumber and wood products Printing and publishing Petrochemicals Chemicals (other) Stone, clay and glass Primary metals Fabricated metals Machinery Transportation equipment Administrative (auxiliary) Starch Beer Cotton processing Shipping Shipbuilding and repair Fertilizer Aircraft Rice rolling Concrete Tourism 127 167 1,308 273 65 245 280 64 232 328 1.909 505 155 432 518 117 28 42 400 43 11 52 89 19 7 21 165 51 2 22 36 10 — From parish authorities, Cameron, La. 2/ -- = no data. 3/ X denotes major activity. 106 Table 18. --Status of agriculture as of 1964 in the Texas counties and Cameron Parish (La. ) adjacent to the seven estuarine Almanac, A. H. Belo Corporation 1967) study areas. (Modified fronn the Texas County (Parish) Agricultural statistics U CQ U Number of farms 2/ Average size (acres)" 479 52 1,425 244 1,754 409 1.435 999 489 667 243 849 Acreage under irrigation (Thousands) 100 0 Major agricultural products 2/ Beef cattle x— x Dairying Poultry Lumber Cotton X Rice X Grain sorghums x Figs Truck c rops Citrus fruit Peanuts Soybeans Feed grain Corn Flaxseed _ From parish authorities , Cameron, La. i.' 1 acre = 0. 4046 hectare. .1' X denotes nnajor activity. 56 282 45 374 322 2,122 585 365 922 t/i 546 16 209 839 747 33, 338 4.410 765 60 45 838 206 773 499 10 4 263 676 1 2, 159 802 0 19 071 547 550 692 5 36 Table 19. 1. --Texas commercial catch from the Sabine Lake and Galveston Bay areas, for the year 1968. (Modified from the Branch of Statistics, National Marine Fisheries Ser- vice, Galveston, Tex. } Species Sabine Galveston Landings Landings 2/ Croaker --~ -- 17,700 812 Drum, Black 1,200 92 54,400 4,075 Drum, Red 9, 100 1,812 21,200 4,413 Flounders (unclassified) 500 100 31,900 6,887 King Whiting (Kingfish) 200 9 18,100 902 Mullet -- -- 8,300 360 Sea Catfish (Gafftopsail) -- -- 13, 700 751 Sea Trout (Spotted) 46,200 9,635 174,200 37,279 Sea Trout (White) -- -- 16,400 1,649 Sheepshead (Saltwater) 200 13 20, 300 1,251 Unclassified (food) -- -- 130,800 6,730 Reduction and animal food -- -- 12,900 554 57, 400 11,661 519, 900 65,663 Crabs, Blue Oysters Shrimp, Brown and Pink Shrimp, White Squid Total Grand Total 788,800 3, 300 75,700 867, 800 925, 200 63,167 1,542,600 2,838,700 769 307,800 33,896 2,514,000 700 97, 822 7,203, 800 109,483 1/ 1 pound = 0. 45 kilograms. 2/ 107 128,007 1,250,805 48, 924 1, 145, 479 102 2, 573, 317 2,638, 980 Table 19, 2.--Texa9 commercial catch from the Matagorda and San Antonio Bay areas for the year 1968. (Modified from the Branch of Statistics, National Marine Fisheries Ser- vice, Galveston, TeK. ) Species Matagorda Landings San Antonio L^ndmgs Croaker 3 000 209 2/ Drum, Black 50 300 3 96 0 14, 800 1,277 Drum, Red 121 200 23 839 31,800 8,402 Flounders (unclassified) King Whiting (Kingfish) 50 4 500 700 10 740 239 9, 900 3.080 Mullet 1 800 227 .. Sea Catfish (Gafftopsail) 20 800 1 172 5,200 532 Sea Trout (Spotted) Sea Trout (White) 267 1 900 100 52 895 146 81,200 21, 542 Sheepshead (Saltwater) Unclassified (Food) 19 10 400 400 1 484 652 18,300 2,100 Total 551 100 95 56 3 161, 200 36,933 Crabs, Blue 933,300 74,679 Oysters 228,600 119,640 Shrimp, Brown and Pink 82,100 15,623 Shrimp, White 2,364,500 836,401 Squid 500 70 Total 3,609,000 1,046,413 Grand Total 4,160,000 1,141,976 472, 500 163, 800 1, 203, 200 1 , 839, 500 35, 301 69, 378 1 pound = 0. 45 kilograms. 2/ Table 19. 3. --Texas commercial catch froin the Copano-A ransas and Corpus Christi Bay areas for the year 1968. (Modified from the Branch of Statistics, National Marine Fish- eries Service, Galveston, Tex. ) Species Copano-A ransas Landings Val Corpus Christi Landings Pounds 1' Pounds — 1/ Croaker 1,900 149 Drum. Black 59,700 6.369 Drum, Red 105,600 24,221 Flounders (unclassified) 27,200 6,845 Mullet 12,300 578 Pompano 900 426 Sea Catfish (Gafftopsail) 15.400 1,948 Sea Trout (Spotted) 199,000 45,607 Sheepshead (Saltwater) 40,100 3,397 Unclassified (food) 800 38 Reduction and animal food 46, 900 1, 982 Total 509,800 91,560 2 500 42 200 14 500 - 600 .2/ 700 48 500 2 700 2, 300 246 5,921 3, 382 147 10,982 356 U4,000 Crabs, Blue 197 500 16 186 Oysters 8 300 3 516 - - Shrimp Brown and Pink 12 700 3 017 600 377 Shrimp Whit Grand Total Total 1,736 600 617 975 633 700 228 450 1,955 100 640 694 6 34 300 22 8 827 2,464 900 7 32 254 748 300 250 032 I pound ■= 0. 45 kilograms. 108 Table 19. 4. --Texas commercial catch from the Laguna Madre area and the Gulf of Mexico for the year 1968. (Modified fromi the Branch of Statistics, National Marine Fisheries Service, Galveston, Tex. ) Species Laguna Madre Gulf of Mexico Landings Value Landings Value Finfish Pound 1/ Dollars Pound 1/ Dollars Cobia (Ling) 2/ .. 23, 900 2,886 Croaker 3, 100 292 110,400 4, 115 Drum, Black 422,600 61,422 32,200 3, 938 Drum, Red 584, 900 141,297 36,600 8, 103 Flounders (unclassified) 32, 500 8, 380 183,100 39,259 Groupers -- -- 93,000 9,646 King Whiting (Kingfish) -- -- 96,000 4,966 Menhaden -- -- 51 073,400 674,242 Mullet -- -- 5, 100 272 Pompano 2, 100 962 1,000 423 Sea Catfish (Gafftopsail) 2, 000 199 16,000 996 Sea Trout (Spotted) 713,600 170,285 340,700 70, 925 Sea Trout (White) -- -- 2, 500 248 Sheepshead (Saltwater) 53,600 4,834 38,400 2,877 Snapper, Red -- -- 1 127, 500 366,843 Spanish Mackerel -- -- 3, 000 331 Snook 900 85 -- -- Unclassified (food) -- -- 51, 900 3,014 Reduction and animal food -- -- 16,900 661 Warsaw- -- -- 7,400 866 Total 1, 815, 300 387,756 53 259,900 1, 194,611 Shellfish Crabs, Blue 124, 100 9, 928 24, 800 1, 985 Oysters 2,600 1,27 5 -- -- Shrimp, Brown and Pink 34, 900 7,753 63,509,800 35,637, 100 Shrimp, White 41, 300 28,631 10,637,600 6,858, 368 Other -- 177,700 26,023 Squid -- -- 10,000 1,051 Total 202, 900 47,587 74,359,900 42,524,527 Grand Total 2,018,200 435,343 127,619,800 43,719,138 1/ — 1 pound = 0. 45 kilograms. — - - = no data. 109 Table 19. 5. --Total commercial catch from the Texas waters for the year 1968. (Modified from the Branch of Statistics, National Marine Fisheries Service, Galveston, Tex. ) Species Landing a TT Cobia (Ling) Croaker Drum, Black Drum, Red Flounders (unclassified) Groupe rs King Whiting (Kingfish) Menhaden Mullet Ponnpano Sea Catfish (Gafftopsail) Sea Trout (Spotted) Sea Trout (White) Sheepshead (Saltwater) Snapper, Red Spanish Mackerel Snook Unclassified (food) Reduction and animal food Warsaw 23,900 138.600 67 7,400 924,900 336,200 93, 000 119,000 51, 073,400 27,500 4,000 73,800 1,871,300 20,000 193,000 127,500 3,000 900 193. 900 79,000 7,400 1, 2, 886 5, 823 87, 054 215,469 75,438 9,646 6.116 674,242 1,437 1, 811 5,679 419, 150 2, 043 16, 312 366, 843 331 85 10,434 3,287 866 56,987,000 Crabs, Blue Oysters Shriinp, Brown and Pink Shrimp, White Other Squid Grand Total 4, 083,600 3,242,000 63, 951,200 19, 206,600 177,700 11,200 90,672, 300 329, 323 1,444,614 35,713, 553 10, 130, 009 26, 023 1,223 47,644,745 147,659, 300 49,549,727 1 pound = 0. 45 kilograms. 110 r Table 20. --Status of the commercial fiahing induetry by estuarine area along the Texas Gulf coast in 1967. (From Statistical Branch, National Marine Fisheries Service, Galveston, Tex. ) Estuarine area, type of firm, by-products Producing firms Gross wholesale Sabine Lake General seafoods, unpackaged Crabmeat, picked Oysters, shucked Shrimp, raw headless Industrial fish products Total - - - - - Number - - - - 3 1 25 23 1 23 4 U6 1 104 i/27 8 3/ 52, 552 29, 148 405,554 437,454 924,708 Galveston Bay- General seafoods, unpackaged 13 Seafood specialty 1 Crabmeat, picked 3 Oysters, shucked 28 Shrimp, raw headless 6 Processed shell 2 Total 148 129 10 34 380 153 52 4/ 2/ 3, 991,740 46, 500 126,32 3 1,226,033 2,608,674 1,644, 000 677 2/c 9,643,270 Brazos River-Matagorda Bay General seafoods, unpackaged Crabmeat, picked Oysters, shucked Shrimp, raw headless Total 12 3 13 lA 225 86 344 746 4/ 1, 150 177,441 269, 139 19, 489,743 19, 936, 323 San Antonio-Espiritu Santo bays General seafoods, unpackaged Oysters, shucked Total Copano-A ransas bays General seafoods, unpackaged Oysters, shucked Total 12 46 41 17 37,608 Corpus Christi Bay General seafoods, unpackaged Crabmeat, picked Shrimp, raw headless Total 324 3 99 426 4,200 1,7 97,66 5 1, 801, 865 Laguna Madre General seafoods, unpackaged Seafood specialty Crabmeat, picked Oysters, shucked Shrimp, raw headless Total 28 2 1 2 15 4A- 536 579 200 585 2, 701 1^3, 189 1,408,643 28, 000 115,691 61, 156, 839 62,709, 173 Texas Coast General seafoods, unpackaged Seafood specialty Crabmeat, picked Oysters, shucked Shrimp, raw headless Industrial fish products Processed shell Grand Total 72 3 9 49 35 1 2 i(;r 1,302 589 346 1,395 3, 815 104 52 "T7 .ii-24, 991,740 1,455, 143 388, 516 1,827,651 85,458,475 437,454 1,644, 000 5,836 95,202, 979 1/ — Peak of employment. 2/ Estimated. 3/ Complete data not available. 4/ Excludes duplicate firms and employees. Ill Table 21.--^port fishing and waterfowl hunting by estuarine study area on the Texas coast during 1968. (Data from the Division of River Basin Studies, U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife; Fort Worth, Tex. ) Estuarine study areas Sport fishing estimated Waterfowl hunting (estimated) Sabine Lake Galveston Bay Matagorda Bay San Antonio Bay Copa no -Aransas bays Corpus Christi Bay Laguna Madre Total estuarine Gulf of Mexico TOTAL 1/ — The U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries values one man-day at $9. 55 and one man-day of waterfowl hunting at $7. 82. 1/ Man-days" Man-days Birds taken 85,000 1,050 2, 100 2,186,800 28,300 70, 200 864, 000 8,450 16, 900 137,000 4,460 9, 000 242,000 7,640 12, 000 962, 700 9,100 22,800 1,238, 000 6,200 10,000 5,715, 500 65,200 143,000 680,000 1,000 2,000 6,395,500 66,200 145,000 112 Table 22 .--Domestic waste quality data from known outfalls in the seven estuarine areas of Texas, 1967-1969. {Data from the Texas Water Quality Board, Austin. ) Study area. River basin or coastal plain. Permittee (number) county Discharge BOD^ Gal.- flow/ Ortho day X 10^ PO^ pH (mg/1) Observed value or range Nitrogen (mg/l) NH3 NO, Suspended solids {mg/1} Volatile Fixed Total Chlorides (mg/1) Sabine Lake Area (Fig. 39) 1. Nueces River Bapin Groves, City of (South Plant) (10094) Jefferson Groves, City of (North Plant) (10094) Jefferson Jefferson Co. FWSDI (10652) Jefferson Jefferson Co. WCID9(East Port Neches) (10517) Jefferson Port Arthur (Main Plant) (10364) Jefferson Port Arthur (Lakeside Park) (10364) Jefferson Port Neches (10477) Jefferson 1,000 7. 5 18 17.9 500 7.5 55 14.6 90 2.8 5 1.6 6.6 25 56.0 5,000 7.4 75 32.0 7.7 19 42.0 1, 000 7. 4 12 18.8 2/ Galveston Bay Area (number following permit number refers to map code. Fig. 40) 1. Trinity-San Jacinto Coastal Basin Baytown, City of (Baytown W. Main) (10395) 13 Harris Baytown (West Baytown Plant) (10395) 14 Harris Baytown (Baytown Lakewood) (10395) 15 Harris Baytown (East District) (10395) 16 Harris Deer Park, City of (So. Plant) (10519) 32 Harris Deer Park (North Plant) (10519) 9 Harris Harris Co. WCID #55 (Seabrook) (10671) 61 Harris La Porte (10206) 39 Harris 1,800-2,350 2-16 7.4-7.7 22.0-28.0 9.8-11.6 0.1-0.9 0.9-3.4 1-14 6-11 12-21 22-95 12-27 34-72 440-470 7.5-7.8 75-80 33. 0-96 6 23. 0-28. 0 960-1, 100 7.0 25 25.0 2.0 500-1, 500 6.7-7.6 1-23 9. 5-25 0 1.0-1.6 144 8.0 4 0.2 7.4 180-790 7.7-7.8 3-15 18.0 22. 0 216-1, 080 7. 5 3-5 .- 600 7.3 7 7-15 10-28 113 Table 22. --Continued, Observed value or range Study area, Discharge BOD5 3al.i' flow/ River basin or coastal plain, Gal.i' flow/ Ortho Nitrogen (mg/1) Suspended solids (mg/1) Chlorides y X 10^ PO4 pH (mg/1) Permittee (number) county day x 10^ PO4 NH3 NOj NO, Volatile Fixed Total (mg/1) Galveston Bay Area tcont. ) 2. San Jacinto River Basin Bacliff MOR Average 303 0 (10627) 64 Galveston 7.0 Bayview MUD 28 4 (10770) 63 Galveston 8,0 -- -- -- -- 16 43 59 Frank L. WiUaert (Lower Estates) -- 30 ■ (10790) 56 Galveston 8,1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 Galveston Co, WCID (Dickinson #2 Pit. ) (10173) 66 Galveston Galveston Co, WCID 8 (Alta Loma) (10174) 74 Galveston Harris Co, FWSD 47 (Channelwoods) (10794) 6 Harris Harris Co, FWSD 6 (10184) 8 Harris Hitchcock, City of (10690) 75 Galveston Houston (Mmeda Plaza) (10495) 55 Harris Bayshore MUD STP (10523) 44 Harris City of Friendswood (Pit, #l-old) (10175) 57 Galveston City of Friendswood (Pit, #2-new) (10175) 58 Galveston Clear Lake, City (Pit, #1 -small) (10539) 49 Harris 7.2-7,6 45,0 16,6 0,2 0.3 17-316 10-192 Clear Lake City (Pit, #2-large) (10539) 49 Harris 200-288 9-10 7,0-7,2 -- 432 7 7.9 -- 135 30-70 7,7 -- 65 9 7. 1 49.0 288 19 7.6 -- 375-700 5-8 7.2-7.6 -- 29-75 15-72 7.1-7.7 53.0 120-145 1-16 7.1-7.4 39,0 120-130 2-5 7.3-7.4 -- 125-300 5-189 7.2-7.6 45, 0 400-1, 200 9-45 7,5-7.7 25,0-28, 114 Table 22. --Continued, Study area, River basin or coastal plain, Permittee (number) county Discha rge Gal.i'' flow/ day X 10^ pH (mg ^ Observed value or range Nitrogen (mg /I) NO, Suspended solids (mg/l) Volatile Fixed Total Chlorides (mg/I) Galveston Bay Area {cont. ) 2. San Jacinto River Basin (cont.) Dept. of U.S. Air Force (Ellington AFB) (10755) 33 Harris Galv. Co. WCID#12 (Kemali Pits. 1 & 2 series) (10029) 62 Galveston Galveston, City of (Main Pit. ) (10688) 84 Galveston Harris Co. Clr. Wds. Dist. STP (10858) 53 Harris Harris Co. WCID #45 (Webster) (10520) 52 Harris Harris Co. WCID #50 (EI Largo) (10243) 47 Harris Harris Co. WCID #56 (Fairmont Pit. Subd.) (10185) 40 Harris Harris Co. WCID #75 (Lbr. Cove Subd. ) (10106) 46 Harris Harris Co. WCID #83 (Nassau Bay 1-2) (10526) 51 Harris Lagoon Utility Co. (Swan Lagoon) STP (10676) 50 Harris League City (Main Pit. ) (10568) 59 Galveston League City (Glen Cove) (10568) 60 Galveston Shore Acres, City of, STP (10758) 45 Harris 350 7.9 4 288-303 7.4 14-45 23.0 6,500 7. 1 179 7.0 70-75 7.3-7. 5 3-11 20.3 230-295 7.1-7.6 45-75 160-260 7.0-7.6 27-45 50.0-75 115 7.6 7-14 26. 0 70-150 7.6-7.9 1-6 610-730 7.1-7.6 5-55 36.0 20-132 7.0-7. 3 1-40 46.0 800 7.5-7.6 2-4 24.0 75 7.5-8.2 5-28 21.0 0.3 29-35 29-53 89 0 15.5-30.5 0.5 4.0 0.2 16-32 53-61 53-209 2-120 0.3-1.4 8-23 1-30 3.1 10-23 13 0.3 10-399 1-127 2-15 1-6 0.3 12-20 35-62 b-17 10-20 115 Table 22. --Continued. Study a rea. River basin or coastal plain. Permittee (number) county Discharge Cal.i' flow/ day X 10 pH Ortho Observed value or range Nitrogen (mg/1) Suspended solids (mg/1) Chlorides NO-, NO, Volatile Fixed Total (mg/l) Matagorda Bay Area {Fig. 41) 1. Colorado River Basin Matagorda WDWSC (Matagorda Pit.) (10913) Matagorda 2. Colorado-Lavaca Coastal Basin 50 8.4 19.5 0.1 12.6 Palacios, STP (10593) Matagorda Point Comfort, City of, STP (10599) Calhoun Port Lavaca, City of, STP (10251) Calhoun San Antonio Bay A rea (Fig. 42) 230 7.7 5 39.0 105 7.7 45 51.5 650 7. 0 28 39.0 0.1 15.0 0. 1 0. 3 2.0 0.9 43 27 Seadrift, City of, STP (10822) Calhoun 30 53.0 1.0 9.8 Copano-A ransas and Corpus Christi Bay Areas (Figs. 43 and 44) 1. San Antonio-Nueces Coastal Basin Amer. Liberty Oil Co. (Seagull Inn STP) (10669) Aransas Aransas Pass, City of, STP new (10521) San Patricio Corpus Christi (Stephen Water Pit.) (10401) Nueces Corpus Christi (Broadway STP) (10401) Nueces Nueces WCID #40 outfall 1 (10846) Nueces Rockport, City of (STP outfall 1) (10034) Aransas 15 7. 5 3 26. 0 500-650 7. 5 13-68 22.0-34.0 400 7.7 47 0.2 0.000 7. 2 29 24. 0 45 7. 9 6 0.2 ^ 300 8.1 2 13.0 0.2 8.6 0. 1 0. 1-0. 3 0.1 0.1 1.8 1.6 0.1 4.7 13-80 5-24 18-104 0.1-1.0 999 999 999 27 1 10 17 27 116 Table 22. — Continued. Observed value or range Study area, Discharge BODc; River basin or coastal plain, Gal.l' flow/ Ortho Nitrogen (mg/1) Suspended solids (mg/1) Chlorides Permittee (number) county day x 10^ PO4 NH3 NO2 NO Volatile Fixed Total (mg/1) pH ~ (mg/1) Copano-A ransas and Corpus Christi Bay Areas (Figs. 43 and 44) (Cont. ) 2. Nuecea-Rio Grande Coastal Basin Gregory, City of, STP outfall 1 36-55 55 (10092) San Patricio 7.2-7.7 26.0 32.0-45,0 0.1 0.1 21-77 15-79 36-156 -r Ingleside, City of, STP outfall 1 324 210 (10422) San Patricio 7.1 -- 37.5 0.1 0.1 -- -- 96 Corpus Christi, City of, OSO STP 5,000-8,600 6-77 (10401) Nueces 7.1-7.3 15.0-34.0 1.0-17.0 0.2 0.5 23 2 13-25 1.0 Flour Bluff 50 5 (10401) Nueces 7.4 19.0 0.2 0.1 14.0 -- -- 10 1.0 Portland, City of, LEST outfall 650 160 (10478) San Patricio 7.0-7.6 52.0-63.0 28.0-33.0 0.2-0.3 0.1-0.3 130-409 59-129 189-538 U.S. Naval Air Sta. (STP Corpus Christi) 1,000-1,250 11-140 (10635) Nueces 7.5-7.7 13.0-15.0 8.2-29.5 0.1-1.9 0.3-2.4 21-27 1-14 28-35 0.8-1.0 Laguna Madre Area (Fig. 45) 1. Lower Rio Grande River Brownsville (Filter Pit. #1) (10397) Cameron Brownsville (Filter Pit. #2) (10397) Cameron Brownsville (STP outfall 1) (10397) Cameron Brownsville Nav, Dist. (Turning Basin) (10332) Cameron 8.4 0.2 1.0 0.1-0.2 0.3 11-13 27-34 Brownsville (Fishing Harbor) (10332) Cameron Los Fresnos, City of, STP outfall 1 (10590) Cameron Park CMSNRS (Cameron City) (Isla Blanca Pk. ) 6-30 (10757) Cameron 7.2-8.2 0.2-19.5 0.2-28.0 0.5-0.6 0.3-0.5 Port Isabel, City of, STP outfall 1 300-310 30-85 (10350) Cameron 7.1-8.5 6.4-14.0 1.0-7.5 0.1-1.5 0.1-0.3 Valley Mun. Util. Dist. (Country Club STP) 12 45 (10852) Cameron 7.0 22.0 17.0 0.1 0.3 — To convert to metric, 1 gal. = 0. 0037 cubic meters or 3. 78 liters. 200 11 7.5 0.2 -- -- 600 35 7.3 0.2 -- -- ,500-5, 000 45-110 6.9-7.2 15.0-24.0 18. 0-33.0 0. 1-0. 2 __ 1-2 8.4 0. 2 1. 0 0. 1-0.2 8.2-8. 5 1 0.2 1.0 0. 1 -0. 2 60 60 7. 0 22.0 21.0 0.1 117 Table 23. --Industrial waste quality data from known outfalls in the seven estuarine areas of Texas, 1967-1969. (Data modified from the Texas Water Qxiality Board, Austin. ) Study area. River basin or coastal plain. Permittee (number), county Discharge Gal.i'^ flow/ day X 10^ pH Observed value or range BOD5 (mg/1) COD (mg/1) Other parameters Type (mg/l)A'' Sabine I^ke Area (Fig. 39) 1. Neches River Basin Ameripol, Inc., Texas U.S. (00512) Jefferson B. P. Corp. (Pt. Arthur Refinery) (004911 Jefferson -2/ 510 10 840 120 NHj-N Phosphate Sulphate 12 1.8 Gulf State Util. Co. (Sabine Power Sta. (00330) Orange Jefferson Chem. Co., Inc. (Pt. Neches Pit. (00585) Jefferson Neches Butane (00511) Jefferson Pure Oil Co. (Beaumont Ref. (00316) Jefferson Texaco, Inc., Port Neches (00416) Jefferson GuUOilCo., U.S. (Pt. Arthur Ref.) (00319) Jefferson Texaco, Inc. (Pt. Arthur Pit. ) (00414) Jefferson Galveston Bay Area {number following pernnit number refers to map code (Fig. 40) 1. Trinity-San Jacinto Coastal Plain A. O. Smith Corp. of Texas (00672) 1 Harris 3,600 2 35,280 11.5 11.6 725 550 780 1,320 NHj-N 38 7.1 15 -- NHj-N Phosphate IZ 1. 8 .5-10.0 240-287 318-480 Phosphate Alkalinity (tot) Hardness 7.0 452 42 5.8 15 -- LAS (detergent) NHj-N 0.4 5.8 .2-8. 3 75-85 200-500 Sulfate NHj-N Alkalinity (tot) 720 34 98 6-. 6 65 330 Alkalinity (tot) Hardness 28 114 Iron Sulfate 31 138 Ashland Chem. Co. (Baytown Pit. (00549) 11 Harris 5.7 Humble Oil and Ref. (Baytown Ref. ) (00592) 12 Harris 6.9 Richfield Chem., Inc. (Syn. Resins Pit. (00662) 4 Harris Turbidity NO3-N 750 225 The Upjohn Co. (Organic Chem. Mfg. ) (00663) 31 Harris San Jacinto River Basin Air Products and Chem. (La Porte) (01280) 36 Harris Chromium Zinc Best Fertilizer Co. (La Porte Rd. Pit.) (01204) 38 Harris 6.4 Celanese Plastics Co. (Deer Park Pit. ) (00544) 29 Harris Alkalinity (tot) 118 Table 23, --Continued, Study area. River baain or coaatal plain, Permittee (number), county- Discharge Gal.i^ flow/ day X 10^ pH Observed value or range BOD5 (mg/1) COD (mg/1) Other parameters Type (mg/l)i Galveston Bay Area (cent. ) 2. San Jacinto Riv'er Basin (cont. ) Chemstron Chem. (La Porte Pit. ) (01220) 42 Harris Crown Central Pet r. Corp. (Pasadena Pit. ) (00574) 17 Harris Diamond Shamrock Chem. (Monument Pit. ) (01000) 30 Harris Diamond Shamrock Chem. (Greens Bayou) (00749) 5 Harris E. I. Du Pont (La Porte) (00474) 41 Harris Equity Export Corp. (Grain Export Pit. ) (01205) 34 Harris 94-112 129 5 576-864 3.0-5. 5 7 8-144 7. 3-9. 0 1 3,000-4,300 3.0-8.5 120-660 900-1,440 25-3,150 25-1,740 Alkalinity (tot) Chromium Phenols A rsenic DDT 0.7 0.8 0.2 0.9 Ethyl Corp. (Pasadena) (00492) 18 Harris 18,000-34,000 9-140 130-250 Sulfate Lead 940 3.2 General Analine and Film Corp. (Texas City) (01263) 69 Galveston Grief Bros. Cooperage Corp. (La Porte) (01217) 43 Harris Hard Lowe Chem. (Clear Creek Pit. ) (00951) 54 Harris 5-210 10-740 Chromium Copper 27-45 225 Hess Terminals (Galena Park Pit.) (00671) 23 Harris "°|l)¥8ftHf lfa°rri