7/10/2026 – The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) has published a Draft Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) Guide for Flood Resilience in Texas. It’s one of a number of documents in development for the next iteration of the State’s Flood Plan. And they are seeking stakeholder feedback.
The 314-page document is a 130 meg download, so don’t try to view it on your phone. But it is well researched, written, and illustrated. It seeks to equip local officials, engineers, community planners, and flood-related professionals with the knowledge they need to go beyond gray. Community activists may also find the Guide helpful in initiating discussions with those groups and pointing out opportunities.
Practical Step-By-Step Guide
The draft guide presents a clear framework for planning, implementing, and maintaining NBS as part of comprehensive flood resilience strategies. It includes solutions at both the watershed-scale and neighborhood scale. It is a practical step-by-step framework for:
Initiating
Planning
Implementing projects.
The guide contains 13 chapters in those three broad categories:
Laying the groundwork for NBS
Introducing NBS for flood resilience
Embracing guiding principles for NBS
Assessing ordinances incentives and Regulations
Establishing funding strategies
Integrating NBS into planning processes
Understanding flood risk and identifying flood-risk opportunities
Evaluating NBS feasibility and alternatives
Designing and building NBS
Applying watershed NBS design and construction considerations
Applying neighborhood NBS design and construction considerations
Applying coastal NBS design and construction considerations
Maintaining and adaptively managing NBS
The concepts are not theoretical. They are being successfully implemented across Texas – from floodplain buyouts to stormwater parks, regional watershed planning, and living shoreline projects. And the attractive illustrations from around the state encourage readers to dig in and explore.
Photo of Fort Work Stormwater Park courtesy of Freese and Nichols, Inc.
From Planning to Identifying Opportunities and Construction
As I was browsing through it, two chapters forced me to dig down immediately: Chapter 6 on Planning and Chapter 7 on understanding flood risk and identifying NBS opportunities.
A table in Chapter 6 mentioned examples of needs in the San Jacinto watershed including “Preserve and restore … river floodplains to improve … natural storage, and resilience to compound flooding.”
Chapter 7 includes sections on determining flood risks and identifying flood risk hot spots. It also included an “Opportunity Matrix Tool” to help convert “Needs” to “Solutions.”
Subsequent chapters include the nuts and bolts of how to do that. The work is broken up into quick, readable sections with charts, tables, graphs, photos and illustrations that help readers grasp concepts at a glance.
How Green and Gray Can Work Together
All in all, for those threatened by flooding and those who represent them, this guide presents a step-by-step framework for implementing nature-based solutions, either alone or in combination with other flood mitigation projects. The emphasis is on how green and gray solutions can work together. And that’s refreshing.
7/9/2026 – A young couple that is considering buying a home in my neighborhood asked me a simple question yesterday? “What is the current flood risk?” The home they were considering flooded during Hurricane Harvey. But that was an extreme event. And they wondered whether mitigation activities since then would prevent it from flooding again.
I tried to explain the various mitigation efforts since then and the current status of each. However, I quickly realized that the scale, complexity, relative impact and timing of the efforts make the task of estimating “current” flood risk virtually impossible. They are all at different stages. And few are complete.
Flooding neighborhood near Kingwood Country Club in May 2024, a less-than-Harvey event, but which still saw one of the largest releases ever from Lake Conroe.
What Goes into Calculating Flood Risk?
Flood risk is not static. Estimates change constantly. Predicting what will fall from the sky and where once every 100 or 500 years is only part of the battle. To name just a few things, we also need to understand:
How the landscape is changing
Where people are building
How they are building, i.e., elevated structures vs. slab on grade
What they are doing to offset increased runoff
Soil types and rates of infiltration
Changes in land-use patterns, i.e., forestry vs. retail development
Timing effects, such as the “stacking effect” at confluences, can erode margins of safety
Changes in regulations in and across different parts of a watershed
Impacts of Uncertainty and Misunderstanding on Estimates
Understanding the impact of those factors on uncertainty may require a graduate degree in statistics. Every flood risk estimate contains uncertainty arising from:
Then, layer on semantic confusion. To most people, a “100-year flood” sounds like one that happens once a century. But it actually has a 1% annual chance of occurring in any given year. Theoretically, you could have back-to-back-to-back 100-year floods, as we did in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
A 1% chance is no guarantee that a flood of that magnitude will only occur once every 100 years.
In fact, a 1% annual chance flood has a 26% chance (about 1 in 4) of occurring during the life of a 30-year mortgage. And that assumes nothing changes in the watershed. This often surprises people. Here’s how to calculate it.
And here’s how the probabilities break down for various return periods.
Annual Chance
Return Period
Chance Over 30 Years
10%
10-year flood
95.8%
4%
25-year flood
70.6%
2%
50-year flood
45.5%
1%
100-year flood
26.0%
0.2%
500-year flood
5.8%
Interaction of Factors Can Amplify Risk
Many of the issues above interact in ways that can amplify risk. For example:
Rapid urbanization increases impervious cover and runoff
Sedimentation and subsidence reduce channel conveyance
Reservoir operations influence the timing and magnitude of downstream flows
In combination, these factors mean that flood risk is not static. It evolves as the watershed, the built environment, regulations, and flood mitigation activities change…at different rates…across dozens of jurisdictions.
Complexity, Timing Make Current Risk Virtually Unknowable
The scale, complexity, interaction and timing of these factors makes accurate assessment of current flood risk virtually impossible eight years after data for the new flood maps was collected in 2018.
During that time, Harris County and City of Houston have engaged in many mitigation activities, i.e., dredging. But since the dredging, sediment from sand mines and natural erosion has built back in somewhat. But how much?
Confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork showing sediment pollution coming from West Fork and its sand mines.
There are no current surveys of water depth that I know of.
Advice for Homebuyers
Given all the uncertainty, experts recommend that homebuyers:
Look beyond FEMA flood maps. They are valuable, but have limitations and may be outdated.
Research the property’s actual flood history. Don’t rely solely on the seller’s disclosure. Talk with neighbors—they often know the area’s history better than anyone.
Study the topography, local drainage, storm sewers, elevation, nearby creeks, and ditches
Consider how the area is changing. Runoff can increase over time in a rapidly urbanizing watershed
Don’t assume “never flooded” means “never will.”
Understand the residual risk behind flood-control infrastructure. Levees, reservoirs, detention basins, and drainage projects reduce risk in smaller floods, but increase it in larger ones by creating a false sense of security that encourages people to build in risky areas
Evaluate flood insurance – even if it’s not required.
Think long term. Ask how conditions could change in 10, 20 or 30 years
Be cautious with unusually attractive prices. Sometimes a lower purchase price reflects higher flood risk. That doesn’t automatically make it a bad purchase, but you should weigh the discount against higher insurance costs, potential repair costs, and resale challenges.
Ask yourself “If this home flooded, could I recover financially and emotionally?” If the answer is no, that should weigh heavily in your decision to buy the property.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/9/2026
3236 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/20240504-DJI_20240504114254_0331_D.jpg?fit=1100%2C619&ssl=16191100adminadmin2026-07-09 20:23:442026-07-09 21:29:33The Complexity of Accurately Estimating Current Flood Risk
7/8/2026 – The Conroe City Council will consider at its July 9 meeting a motion by the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) that would double the rate of groundwater pumping which already exceeds the natural recharge rate of the aquifer. If approved, the new maximum pumping rate would exceed the recharge rate by 3X.
This isn’t the first time LSGCD has made such requests. Back in 2021, they fought the other members of Groundwater Management Area 14 for the right to ignore subsidence, one of the consequences of excessive groundwater withdrawal.
Back then, LSGCD fought any mention of subsidence in its desired future conditions (DFCs). And as a consequence, southern Montgomery County is sinking at one of the fastest rates in the region. See below.
Harris-Galveston Subsidence District Map from 2025 Groundwater Report. Compiled using Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR).
Differential subsidence also contributes to flooding by forming bowls in the landscape and reducing the gradient of rivers and streams. It can also reduce the safety margin between foundations and floodplains.
Last but not least, excessive groundwater pumping mortgages the area’s future. Subsidence is irreversible. Once the water is withdrawn and the ground above it has collapsed, the storage capacity is reduced considerably.
Communities that grow dependent on groundwater may not find it there to accommodate future growth or generations.
One of the region’s leading hydrologists told me, “They are going to pump themselves into a problem that they can’t fix. This has already been demonstrated all over Harris County. Some people are willingly turning a blind eye … for what? To save a little bit of money?”
He continued, “It is shortsighted and puts a burden on future generations. Water isn’t free or cheap. We have just been lucky for a long time, but there are too many people here now and it is time to be smart.”
Montgomery County Concerned Citizens
According to Paul Cote, a MUD president in MoCO for more than ten years and a leader of Montgomery County Concerned Citizens, the July 9 meeting of Conroe’s City Council is a crucial moment for Conroe’s water future.
He urges people to attend and protest the increase in groundwater pumping rates.
He suggests:
Respectfully oppose the LSGCD’s request for support regarding the proposed DFC increase.
Advocate for the City of Conroe to abandon the proposed GRP Global Amendment.
Urge the Council to promote with State Leadership the need for a Countywide Unified Water Authority to promote a Regional Water Plan.
There are serious questions in my mind about whether LSGCD’s proposal is sustainable. Water infrastructure projects can take decades to build. The time to start was decades ago. In my opinion, we can’t continue kicking this can down the road.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/8/26
3235 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/WATER-FUTURE-2.jpg?fit=1100%2C641&ssl=16411100adminadmin2026-07-08 17:29:582026-07-08 18:10:03LSGCD Proposes Pumping Groundwater 3X Faster Than It’s Being Replenished
TWDB Publishing Nature-Based Solutions Guide
7/10/2026 – The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) has published a Draft Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) Guide for Flood Resilience in Texas. It’s one of a number of documents in development for the next iteration of the State’s Flood Plan. And they are seeking stakeholder feedback.
The 314-page document is a 130 meg download, so don’t try to view it on your phone. But it is well researched, written, and illustrated. It seeks to equip local officials, engineers, community planners, and flood-related professionals with the knowledge they need to go beyond gray. Community activists may also find the Guide helpful in initiating discussions with those groups and pointing out opportunities.
Practical Step-By-Step Guide
The draft guide presents a clear framework for planning, implementing, and maintaining NBS as part of comprehensive flood resilience strategies. It includes solutions at both the watershed-scale and neighborhood scale. It is a practical step-by-step framework for:
The guide contains 13 chapters in those three broad categories:
The concepts are not theoretical. They are being successfully implemented across Texas – from floodplain buyouts to stormwater parks, regional watershed planning, and living shoreline projects. And the attractive illustrations from around the state encourage readers to dig in and explore.
From Planning to Identifying Opportunities and Construction
As I was browsing through it, two chapters forced me to dig down immediately: Chapter 6 on Planning and Chapter 7 on understanding flood risk and identifying NBS opportunities.
A table in Chapter 6 mentioned examples of needs in the San Jacinto watershed including “Preserve and restore … river floodplains to improve … natural storage, and resilience to compound flooding.”
It was exactly what I have been advocating for the Scarborough property and San Jacinto West Fork sand-mining gauntlet. Then the chapter discussed ways to identify and reach out to stakeholder groups.
Chapter 7 includes sections on determining flood risks and identifying flood risk hot spots. It also included an “Opportunity Matrix Tool” to help convert “Needs” to “Solutions.”
Subsequent chapters include the nuts and bolts of how to do that. The work is broken up into quick, readable sections with charts, tables, graphs, photos and illustrations that help readers grasp concepts at a glance.
How Green and Gray Can Work Together
All in all, for those threatened by flooding and those who represent them, this guide presents a step-by-step framework for implementing nature-based solutions, either alone or in combination with other flood mitigation projects. The emphasis is on how green and gray solutions can work together. And that’s refreshing.
Click here to download the document. Warning 130 Megs.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/10/26
3237 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The Complexity of Accurately Estimating Current Flood Risk
7/9/2026 – A young couple that is considering buying a home in my neighborhood asked me a simple question yesterday? “What is the current flood risk?” The home they were considering flooded during Hurricane Harvey. But that was an extreme event. And they wondered whether mitigation activities since then would prevent it from flooding again.
I tried to explain the various mitigation efforts since then and the current status of each. However, I quickly realized that the scale, complexity, relative impact and timing of the efforts make the task of estimating “current” flood risk virtually impossible. They are all at different stages. And few are complete.
What Goes into Calculating Flood Risk?
Flood risk is not static. Estimates change constantly. Predicting what will fall from the sky and where once every 100 or 500 years is only part of the battle. To name just a few things, we also need to understand:
Impacts of Uncertainty and Misunderstanding on Estimates
Understanding the impact of those factors on uncertainty may require a graduate degree in statistics. Every flood risk estimate contains uncertainty arising from:
Then, layer on semantic confusion. To most people, a “100-year flood” sounds like one that happens once a century. But it actually has a 1% annual chance of occurring in any given year. Theoretically, you could have back-to-back-to-back 100-year floods, as we did in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
In fact, a 1% annual chance flood has a 26% chance (about 1 in 4) of occurring during the life of a 30-year mortgage. And that assumes nothing changes in the watershed. This often surprises people. Here’s how to calculate it.
And here’s how the probabilities break down for various return periods.
Interaction of Factors Can Amplify Risk
Many of the issues above interact in ways that can amplify risk. For example:
In combination, these factors mean that flood risk is not static. It evolves as the watershed, the built environment, regulations, and flood mitigation activities change…at different rates…across dozens of jurisdictions.
Complexity, Timing Make Current Risk Virtually Unknowable
The scale, complexity, interaction and timing of these factors makes accurate assessment of current flood risk virtually impossible eight years after data for the new flood maps was collected in 2018.
Since then, Montgomery County has been one of the fastest growing counties in America. Yet it didn’t update its floodplain regulations until 2025. And there’s no way to quantify how vigorously it has enforced its regulations.
During that time, Harris County and City of Houston have engaged in many mitigation activities, i.e., dredging. But since the dredging, sediment from sand mines and natural erosion has built back in somewhat. But how much?
There are no current surveys of water depth that I know of.
Advice for Homebuyers
Given all the uncertainty, experts recommend that homebuyers:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/9/2026
3236 Days since Hurricane Harvey
LSGCD Proposes Pumping Groundwater 3X Faster Than It’s Being Replenished
7/8/2026 – The Conroe City Council will consider at its July 9 meeting a motion by the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) that would double the rate of groundwater pumping which already exceeds the natural recharge rate of the aquifer. If approved, the new maximum pumping rate would exceed the recharge rate by 3X.
This isn’t the first time LSGCD has made such requests. Back in 2021, they fought the other members of Groundwater Management Area 14 for the right to ignore subsidence, one of the consequences of excessive groundwater withdrawal.
Earlier that year, LSGCD voted to double groundwater pumping and treat subsidence as a PR problem.
Back then, LSGCD fought any mention of subsidence in its desired future conditions (DFCs). And as a consequence, southern Montgomery County is sinking at one of the fastest rates in the region. See below.
Consequences of Excessive Groundwater Pumping
Subsidence can trigger geologic faults, crack pavement, foundations, walls, pipelines, storm sewers and more, leaving residents/taxpayers as unintended casualties of a water war where the private companies that pump groundwater always seem to get their way.
Differential subsidence also contributes to flooding by forming bowls in the landscape and reducing the gradient of rivers and streams. It can also reduce the safety margin between foundations and floodplains.
Last but not least, excessive groundwater pumping mortgages the area’s future. Subsidence is irreversible. Once the water is withdrawn and the ground above it has collapsed, the storage capacity is reduced considerably.
One of the region’s leading hydrologists told me, “They are going to pump themselves into a problem that they can’t fix. This has already been demonstrated all over Harris County. Some people are willingly turning a blind eye … for what? To save a little bit of money?”
He continued, “It is shortsighted and puts a burden on future generations. Water isn’t free or cheap. We have just been lucky for a long time, but there are too many people here now and it is time to be smart.”
Montgomery County Concerned Citizens
According to Paul Cote, a MUD president in MoCO for more than ten years and a leader of Montgomery County Concerned Citizens, the July 9 meeting of Conroe’s City Council is a crucial moment for Conroe’s water future.
He urges people to attend and protest the increase in groundwater pumping rates.
He suggests:
Meeting Details
The meeting will be held at Conroe City Hall, 300 W. Davis, Conroe, on Thursday, July 9, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. Arriving early is important to sign up for public comment.
There are serious questions in my mind about whether LSGCD’s proposal is sustainable. Water infrastructure projects can take decades to build. The time to start was decades ago. In my opinion, we can’t continue kicking this can down the road.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/8/26
3235 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.