Instead of exploring one topic in depth, tonight, I’ll summarize a number of topics related to flood mitigation with just a few sentences on each.
West Fork Mouth Bar Dredging
Mouth bar dredging is going faster than expected. Great Lakes Dredge and Dock has not encountered buried trees in that region of the river as they did upstream. Of the 500,000 cubic yards being paid for by FEMA, Great Lakes had already removed about 150,000 as of last Saturday. If they were able to keep that rate, they should be closer to 200,000 cubic yards by now.
West Fork Mouth Bar with Great Lakes Dredge. Drone image courtesy of Franz Willette, BCAeronautics.
That would make them approximately 40% done. Still no word on what comes next. 500,000 cubic yards represents only about a quarter to a third of what needs to be removed to eliminate the backwater effect created by sediment build up. Neither the City, County, State, nor Federal government has yet announced plans for removing the rest. Money is available. But a “placement” permit for the spoils remains elusive.
I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Army Corps five weeks ago for the plans for this project. I think if they had any I would have gotten them by now. This doesn’t exactly involve national security, but people are acting like it does. That worries me.
Kings Harbor Dredging
Callan Marine expects to be done within 10 days and will start demobilizing. This should be welcome news for residents of Kings Lake Estates who have had to live with the noise of booster pumps since the dredging project moved into this reach of the river.
Callan Marine Dredge that has worked the Kings Harbor area for several months.
Ben’s Branch Desilt Project
HCFCD has desilted the upper portion of Bens Branch near Northpark Drive and Woodland Hills. Attention now is shifting farther south, below Kingwood Drive.
Bens Branch near North Park and Woodland Hills
Way back in April, Harris County Flood Control thought it might start work on this project by July. Think August now. The county has already bid the project and awarded the contract. The contractor will remove 77,000 cubic yards of sediment from the area near West Lake Houston Parkway. That’s about 7,700 dump-truck loads. Get ready. Removing all that could take through the end of the year. The City of Houston, though, still has not completed work on the easements that would allow the desilting project to go all the way to the West Fork.
Bens Branch between the Kingwood YMCA and Library. That little spec in the background is a HCFCD surveyor.
Here’s the latest status report from Harris County Flood Control. Currently HCFCD is obtaining the bond and insurance information from the contractor. A pre-construction meeting will take place in the near future at which HCFCD and the contractor will set the notice-to-proceed date. Ultimately, the contractor should be on the ground working before the end of August 2019.
Three-Phase Taylor Gully De-Snag and De-Silt Projects
Think of this in three separate phases: East Fork to Mills Branch, Mills Branch to Bassingham, and Bassingham to the new construction project project across the Montgomery county line.
Between 2/12/2019 and 4/18/2019, HCFCD in-house crews completed an earthen channel desilt project and a backslope drain repair project from Bassingham Drive to Mills Branch Drive.
Currently HCFCD in-house crews are focusing on the Montgomery County line to Bassingham. They are desilting an earthen channel, pruning the fence line, repairing backslope drains, creating new interceptor structures and outfalls, regrading backslope swales, repairing ruts, and installing gates and signs.
Flood Control will also fix the broken concrete rubble at the downstream end of the concrete drop structure which is downstream of Mills Branch Drive. Before they leave, crews will double check the flow line of Taylor Gully from Bassingham Drive to Maple Bend Drive and remove any siltation blocking flow if needed.
Regarding the last segment, Flood Control removed many downed trees in the natural part of Taylor Gully leading to the East Fork after Hurricane Harvey. Since then, residents have reported more trees that have fallen into the channel. Flood Control has scheduled the removal of these downed trees in Fall/Winter 2019.
Erosion on the downstream natural portion of Taylor Gully threatens homes in Woodstream Village. Flood Control will once again de-snag this area this fall or winter. Photo Courtesy of Chris Kalman.
San Jacinto River Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan
This study (partially funded by FEMA HMGP funds) will guide future decisions (and funding) for large flood damage reduction projects upstream of Kingwood. Think additional detention that could help offset future releases from Lake Conroe during floods. While consultants have not yet identified suitable areas for new reservoirs, they have reportedly ruled out Lake Creek because of new developments spring up in the area. The project was expected to take about 15 months and kicked off in April. Flood Control expects to have the final report by the fall of 2020. For videos and more background info on the study, click here.
As part of the project, the consultant will recalibrate hydrologic models using new Atlas 14 data from NOAA. This project could also affect additional gates for the Lake Houston Dam and maintenance dredging.
Woodridge Village Development
A judge has set a trial date in July of 2020 for all the lawsuits resulting from the May 7th flood this year. Meanwhile construction continues. Jeff Miller shot this video last week showing the status of the crucial S2 detention pond adjacent to Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest.
Video Courtesy of Jeff Miller showing the status of construction in S2, the Woodridge Village detention pond adjacent to the homes that flooded on May 7th in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest.
I have also received reports of the developer bringing in fill to raise the northern section of the property. If true, neighbors should be on high alert.
Lake Conroe Lowering by SJRA
Lake Conroe is normally at 201 feet above sea level. To create an extra buffer against floods during the peak of hurricane season (August/September), the SJRA will start gradually lowering Lake Conroe on August 1. They hope to get to 200 feet by August 15 and 199 feet by September 1. They will hold that level until October and then let the lake gradually rise back to its normal level. The National Hurricane Center expects no tropical activity anywhere in The Atlantic or Gulf during the next 5 days.
Inundation Map of Huffman Area from Harris County Flood Control.
Based on an analysis of Harvey flooding in three watersheds (East Fork, Luce Bayou and Cedar Bayou), the flood control district is investigating:
Stormwater Detention Basins
Channel Maintenance
Channel Modifications
Voluntary Home Buyouts
The District should make final recommendations by this fall.
Montgomery County New Development and Construction Practices
Four people called me in the last two days about flooding on their properties due to construction practices on new, nearby developments. Complaints involved filling in of wetlands and natural streams; altering or blocking natural drainage; plus elevating property and regrading it to drain onto neighbor’s property.
Part of the Woodridge Village development above Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest. Many other developments are starting up in MoCo that will drain into the West Fork.
Not sure what’s happening all of a sudden. This may be MoCo’s answer to urban renewal. According to victims, commissioners seem unconcerned. According to New Caney ISD reports, as many as 4,000 new homes could soon be built in this area. Main focus seems to be between Sorters and West Fork along 1314 up to highway 99. More news to follow.
Romerica High-Rise Project
This isn’t really a mitigation project. But it would require one if built. Romerica’s spokesperson has indicated they plan to re-apply for a permit once they find ways to respond to all the concerns raised during the public comment period for the Corps permit application. However, Romerica’s PR agency has not said when that may happen. Meanwhile they have taken down many of the websites about the project. One remains: TheHeronsKingwood.com.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/28/2019 with imagery from Jeff Miller, BCAeronautics, and Chris Kalman
698 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/BCAeronautics-Mouth-Bar-4.jpg?fit=1500%2C1125&ssl=111251500adminadmin2019-07-27 23:23:442019-07-27 23:27:21Status Reports on 10 Lake Houston Area Flood Mitigation Projects
Aeschylus, the ancient Greek playwright coined the phrase, “The first casualty in war is truth.” The same is true of water wars. In an attempt to justify unlimited groundwater pumping from the Jasper aquifer, a headline in a Montgomery County online newspaper trumpeted, “University Of Houston Study Shows No Linkage Between Deep Groundwater Production And Subsidence In Montgomery County.” But wait! Is that what the study really said? The article did not provide a link to the actual study. So how could you tell if the review was accurate? It’s not. Below are just a few of the reasons why.
Contradictions Between Study and Newspaper’s Summary
The UH study didn’t study Montgomery County. It looked only at Harris-Galveston Subsidence District Regulatory Areas 1 and 2. They cover only SOUTHERN Harris and Galveston counties! Researchers found no subsidence associated with the Jasper there. That’s because virtually no one pumps the Jasper there (See Jasper well location map below). The article’s anonymous author forgot to mention that though.
“Don’t Extrapolate Results,” But They Did
The UH study also carefully cautions readers not to extrapolate the results from the study area to other areas. But the newspaper did it and forgot to mention the caution also.
Newspaper Falsely Claims Study Suggests “No Subsidence”
The newspaper author claimed that the study “suggests that Montgomery County utilities, municipalities, homeowner’s associations, and other large-scale groundwater users could draw water production from the Jasper aquifer without causing any subsidence at the surface of Montgomery County.” The UH study makes no such suggestion.
Claimed “No Need for Regulation,” Contrary to UH Findings
The newspaper author goes on to claim that the study “also suggests that, as long as groundwater production comes from the Jasper or lower formations (such as the Upper Catahoula Formation), there is little need, if any, for any groundwater regulation whatsoever.” Again, the UH study makes no such suggestion.
Quite the contrary, the UH study says that regulation was effective in slowing the subsidence found in other aquifers along the gulf coast that were being depleted, such as the Evangeline and Chicot.
Newspaper Claim of 100% Annual Recharge Not Substantiated by Study
The newspaper author also says that, “Since the quantity of groundwater in Montgomery County is essentially unlimited, and since Montgomery County aquifers enjoy almost 100% recharge annually after production drawdowns have occurred, there would seem to be no reason whatsoever to regulate groundwater production from the Jasper aquifer and the Catahoula aquifer.” The study makes no mention of recharge rates in either of those aquifers.
Newspaper Implies “No Need for Regulation” but Study Says It Helped
Finally, the anonymous newspaper author concludes by saying, “The University of Houston study suggests that it’s time for the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District to bring the entire over-regulation of groundwater to a crashing halt.” The study made no such recommendation.
Inferring that the UH scientists even implied that would require turning the the study’s findings on their head. Quite the contrary. The study explicitly states that regulations implemented in 1975 with the formation of the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District slowed out-of-control subsidence.
Newspaper Article Not Signed
Jumpin’ Jasper! What’s going on here? Who wrote this unsigned article? Was it someone who stands to profit financially from pumping the Jasper dry?
Why Water Not Pumped From Southern Part of Jasper
For the record, the Jasper dips toward the coast along a roughly north-to-south axis. The Jasper aquifer contains fresh water in Montgomery County and northern Harris County. But south of that, it becomes brackish. The water is too salty to use. That’s a big reason why virtually no one pumps it in the southern part of the region.
This map shows the freshwater limits of the Jasper aquifer in 2010. For the most part, the freshwater portion of the Jasper aquifer does not extend to the area of interest studied by the UH scholars.
The down-dip part of the Jasper toward the coast also goes very deep. At the southern limit of freshwater, depth ranges to thousands of feet in places (see bottom of colored area below). Why would you drill that deep if you could get fresher water from aquifers like the Chicot and Evangeline much closer to the surface?
Subsidence Already Noted in Northern Part of Jasper
Those are the reasons why the UH scholars do not associate subsidence with the Jasper in southern Harris and Montgomery Counties. That does NOT mean subsidence won’t happen in other areas where utilities DO pump the Jasper. It already has.
However, USGS well-water height readings north of Highway 99 show severe drawdown near the population centers in southern Montgomery and northern Harris Counties. And surprise, surprise! That also happens to be the area where most subsidence has occurred in Montgomery County.
Unsustainable Pumping Rates
While the advocates of unlimited groundwater pumping want you to believe that the aquifer recharge rates in Montgomery County equal the drawdown rate, they don’t. The Jasper aquifer is being drawn down in populated places at more than 10 FEET per year (see graph below). But USGS estimates that the recharge rate for the Jasper is as little as ONE-TENTH of an INCH per year. That means some utilities have been using up Jasper water 1200 times faster than nature replaces it.
This well drilled in the Jasper aquifer near the Woodlands showed an average decline of approximately 10 feet per year (about 180 feet in 18 years).
Ground level declines produce fault movement and subsidence. They translate to infrastructure damage and flooding.
As water levels decline, water wells begin to have problems producing. They lose “yield,” which means they can’t produce as much water in a given time period. This requires the wells to run longer to meet demand. It costs more to lift water. Longer run times increase maintenance costs. Pumps have to be lowered. The motors have to be upsized, which requires electrical rewiring.
Some well pumps can’t be lowered any farther, which may mean abandoning and replacing the well. Some water level decline is expected. But those who argue that Montgomery County has an unlimited supply of water are just ludicrous. The harder you pump, the more decline you get, and with that comes all the consequences of declines.
Why People Want to Believe the Unbelievable
Montgomery County residents have found the change from well to surface water financially difficult. People WANT to believe that unlimited groundwater pumping is safe. I just hope they don’t wind up putting all their water lillies in one pond, so to speak.
Selective Perception Amplified by Selective Deception
Selective perception is a well known cognitive bias. It describes the process by which people perceive what they want to in media messages while ignoring opposing viewpoints. However, in this case, it seems that selective deception is amplifying the bias.
Don’t take my word. Read the newspaper article and then read the actual study on which the article is based. I provide links so you can make up your own mind; the newspaper article did not.
Other Useful References
Below are some other useful publications from the U.S. Geological Survey which is part of the Department of the Interior.
USGS Subsidence home page. Contains dozens of useful publications on Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence, plus raw data in numerous formats.
Note: All thoughts in this post represent my opinions on matters of public interest and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Screen-Shot-2019-07-26-at-12.33.30-AM-copy.jpg?fit=1500%2C715&ssl=17151500adminadmin2019-07-27 01:22:302019-07-27 02:27:17Truth is the First Casualty In Water Wars, Too
Judge Lauren Reeder of the 234th Judicial District Court has set the trial date in the Elm Grove/North Kingwood Forest flooding case for July 13, 2020.
The docket control order issued by Judge Reeder also lays out the general order of events in the case. On or before:
12/16/2019, all parties to the case must be added and served, a legal process called “joinder.” Inviters this case, more than 200 individual plaintiffs are suing the defendants. Interestingly, the defendants do not yet include the parent company, Perry Homes, or LJA Engineering Inc., the company that designed the development and its detention systems.
4/13/2020, all expert witnesses for parties seeking affirmative relief must be named.
5/13/2020, all other expert witnesses must be named.
6/12/2020, the court will hold a status conference to discuss discovery limitations and alternative dispute resolution (i.e., mediation). The discover period ends on 6/12. All pleadings, amendments and challenges to expert testimony must also be heard by this date.
On 6/29/20 at 1:30 pm, Judge Reeder has scheduled a docket call at which all parties to the case must be prepared to discuss every aspect of the case.
Judge Reeder also tentatively scheduled the trial for 7/13/2020.
Construction on the Woodridge Village development will continue during the pre-trial phase. This has some residents concerned. While the construction of detention ponds is encouraging, any flaws in the construction of the engineering plans will be set in concrete before the case goes to trial. If there are flaws, that could affect flooding for years to come.
Jeff Miller, an Elm Grove resident, reports that two more culverts have been added to Taylor Gulley where it bisects the northern and southern portions of Woodridge Village.
Posted by Bob Rehak on July 25, 2019 with help from Bill Fowlerand Jeff Miller
695 days after Hurricane Harvey
All thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public policy and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Culverts.jpg?fit=1500%2C867&ssl=18671500adminadmin2019-07-25 14:06:432019-07-25 14:08:21Judge Sets July 2020 Trial Date in Flood Case
Status Reports on 10 Lake Houston Area Flood Mitigation Projects
Instead of exploring one topic in depth, tonight, I’ll summarize a number of topics related to flood mitigation with just a few sentences on each.
West Fork Mouth Bar Dredging
Mouth bar dredging is going faster than expected. Great Lakes Dredge and Dock has not encountered buried trees in that region of the river as they did upstream. Of the 500,000 cubic yards being paid for by FEMA, Great Lakes had already removed about 150,000 as of last Saturday. If they were able to keep that rate, they should be closer to 200,000 cubic yards by now.
That would make them approximately 40% done. Still no word on what comes next. 500,000 cubic yards represents only about a quarter to a third of what needs to be removed to eliminate the backwater effect created by sediment build up. Neither the City, County, State, nor Federal government has yet announced plans for removing the rest. Money is available. But a “placement” permit for the spoils remains elusive.
I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Army Corps five weeks ago for the plans for this project. I think if they had any I would have gotten them by now. This doesn’t exactly involve national security, but people are acting like it does. That worries me.
Kings Harbor Dredging
Callan Marine expects to be done within 10 days and will start demobilizing. This should be welcome news for residents of Kings Lake Estates who have had to live with the noise of booster pumps since the dredging project moved into this reach of the river.
Ben’s Branch Desilt Project
HCFCD has desilted the upper portion of Bens Branch near Northpark Drive and Woodland Hills. Attention now is shifting farther south, below Kingwood Drive.
Way back in April, Harris County Flood Control thought it might start work on this project by July. Think August now. The county has already bid the project and awarded the contract. The contractor will remove 77,000 cubic yards of sediment from the area near West Lake Houston Parkway. That’s about 7,700 dump-truck loads. Get ready. Removing all that could take through the end of the year. The City of Houston, though, still has not completed work on the easements that would allow the desilting project to go all the way to the West Fork.
Here’s the latest status report from Harris County Flood Control. Currently HCFCD is obtaining the bond and insurance information from the contractor. A pre-construction meeting will take place in the near future at which HCFCD and the contractor will set the notice-to-proceed date. Ultimately, the contractor should be on the ground working before the end of August 2019.
Three-Phase Taylor Gully De-Snag and De-Silt Projects
Think of this in three separate phases: East Fork to Mills Branch, Mills Branch to Bassingham, and Bassingham to the new construction project project across the Montgomery county line.
Between 2/12/2019 and 4/18/2019, HCFCD in-house crews completed an earthen channel desilt project and a backslope drain repair project from Bassingham Drive to Mills Branch Drive.
Currently HCFCD in-house crews are focusing on the Montgomery County line to Bassingham. They are desilting an earthen channel, pruning the fence line, repairing backslope drains, creating new interceptor structures and outfalls, regrading backslope swales, repairing ruts, and installing gates and signs.
Flood Control will also fix the broken concrete rubble at the downstream end of the concrete drop structure which is downstream of Mills Branch Drive. Before they leave, crews will double check the flow line of Taylor Gully from Bassingham Drive to Maple Bend Drive and remove any siltation blocking flow if needed.
Regarding the last segment, Flood Control removed many downed trees in the natural part of Taylor Gully leading to the East Fork after Hurricane Harvey. Since then, residents have reported more trees that have fallen into the channel. Flood Control has scheduled the removal of these downed trees in Fall/Winter 2019.
San Jacinto River Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan
This study (partially funded by FEMA HMGP funds) will guide future decisions (and funding) for large flood damage reduction projects upstream of Kingwood. Think additional detention that could help offset future releases from Lake Conroe during floods. While consultants have not yet identified suitable areas for new reservoirs, they have reportedly ruled out Lake Creek because of new developments spring up in the area. The project was expected to take about 15 months and kicked off in April. Flood Control expects to have the final report by the fall of 2020. For videos and more background info on the study, click here.
As part of the project, the consultant will recalibrate hydrologic models using new Atlas 14 data from NOAA. This project could also affect additional gates for the Lake Houston Dam and maintenance dredging.
Woodridge Village Development
A judge has set a trial date in July of 2020 for all the lawsuits resulting from the May 7th flood this year. Meanwhile construction continues. Jeff Miller shot this video last week showing the status of the crucial S2 detention pond adjacent to Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest.
I have also received reports of the developer bringing in fill to raise the northern section of the property. If true, neighbors should be on high alert.
Lake Conroe Lowering by SJRA
Lake Conroe is normally at 201 feet above sea level. To create an extra buffer against floods during the peak of hurricane season (August/September), the SJRA will start gradually lowering Lake Conroe on August 1. They hope to get to 200 feet by August 15 and 199 feet by September 1. They will hold that level until October and then let the lake gradually rise back to its normal level. The National Hurricane Center expects no tropical activity anywhere in The Atlantic or Gulf during the next 5 days.
Huffman Area General Drainage Improvements
Harris County Flood Control met with community members on July 11 to discuss the status of improvements to Huffman area drainage. They are too numerous to list here. But Flood Control has a page on its web site dedicated to Huffman now. Here is the presentation from the Community Meeting.
Based on an analysis of Harvey flooding in three watersheds (East Fork, Luce Bayou and Cedar Bayou), the flood control district is investigating:
The District should make final recommendations by this fall.
Montgomery County New Development and Construction Practices
Four people called me in the last two days about flooding on their properties due to construction practices on new, nearby developments. Complaints involved filling in of wetlands and natural streams; altering or blocking natural drainage; plus elevating property and regrading it to drain onto neighbor’s property.
Not sure what’s happening all of a sudden. This may be MoCo’s answer to urban renewal. According to victims, commissioners seem unconcerned. According to New Caney ISD reports, as many as 4,000 new homes could soon be built in this area. Main focus seems to be between Sorters and West Fork along 1314 up to highway 99. More news to follow.
Romerica High-Rise Project
This isn’t really a mitigation project. But it would require one if built. Romerica’s spokesperson has indicated they plan to re-apply for a permit once they find ways to respond to all the concerns raised during the public comment period for the Corps permit application. However, Romerica’s PR agency has not said when that may happen. Meanwhile they have taken down many of the websites about the project. One remains: TheHeronsKingwood.com.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/28/2019 with imagery from Jeff Miller, BCAeronautics, and Chris Kalman
698 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Truth is the First Casualty In Water Wars, Too
Aeschylus, the ancient Greek playwright coined the phrase, “The first casualty in war is truth.” The same is true of water wars. In an attempt to justify unlimited groundwater pumping from the Jasper aquifer, a headline in a Montgomery County online newspaper trumpeted, “University Of Houston Study Shows No Linkage Between Deep Groundwater Production And Subsidence In Montgomery County.” But wait! Is that what the study really said? The article did not provide a link to the actual study. So how could you tell if the review was accurate? It’s not. Below are just a few of the reasons why.
Contradictions Between Study and Newspaper’s Summary
The UH study didn’t study Montgomery County. It looked only at Harris-Galveston Subsidence District Regulatory Areas 1 and 2. They cover only SOUTHERN Harris and Galveston counties! Researchers found no subsidence associated with the Jasper there. That’s because virtually no one pumps the Jasper there (See Jasper well location map below). The article’s anonymous author forgot to mention that though.
“Don’t Extrapolate Results,” But They Did
The UH study also carefully cautions readers not to extrapolate the results from the study area to other areas. But the newspaper did it and forgot to mention the caution also.
Newspaper Falsely Claims Study Suggests “No Subsidence”
The newspaper author claimed that the study “suggests that Montgomery County utilities, municipalities, homeowner’s associations, and other large-scale groundwater users could draw water production from the Jasper aquifer without causing any subsidence at the surface of Montgomery County.” The UH study makes no such suggestion.
Claimed “No Need for Regulation,” Contrary to UH Findings
The newspaper author goes on to claim that the study “also suggests that, as long as groundwater production comes from the Jasper or lower formations (such as the Upper Catahoula Formation), there is little need, if any, for any groundwater regulation whatsoever.” Again, the UH study makes no such suggestion.
Quite the contrary, the UH study says that regulation was effective in slowing the subsidence found in other aquifers along the gulf coast that were being depleted, such as the Evangeline and Chicot.
Newspaper Claim of 100% Annual Recharge Not Substantiated by Study
The newspaper author also says that, “Since the quantity of groundwater in Montgomery County is essentially unlimited, and since Montgomery County aquifers enjoy almost 100% recharge annually after production drawdowns have occurred, there would seem to be no reason whatsoever to regulate groundwater production from the Jasper aquifer and the Catahoula aquifer.” The study makes no mention of recharge rates in either of those aquifers.
Newspaper Implies “No Need for Regulation” but Study Says It Helped
Finally, the anonymous newspaper author concludes by saying, “The University of Houston study suggests that it’s time for the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District to bring the entire over-regulation of groundwater to a crashing halt.” The study made no such recommendation.
Inferring that the UH scientists even implied that would require turning the the study’s findings on their head. Quite the contrary. The study explicitly states that regulations implemented in 1975 with the formation of the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District slowed out-of-control subsidence.
Newspaper Article Not Signed
Jumpin’ Jasper! What’s going on here? Who wrote this unsigned article? Was it someone who stands to profit financially from pumping the Jasper dry?
Why Water Not Pumped From Southern Part of Jasper
For the record, the Jasper dips toward the coast along a roughly north-to-south axis. The Jasper aquifer contains fresh water in Montgomery County and northern Harris County. But south of that, it becomes brackish. The water is too salty to use. That’s a big reason why virtually no one pumps it in the southern part of the region.
The down-dip part of the Jasper toward the coast also goes very deep. At the southern limit of freshwater, depth ranges to thousands of feet in places (see bottom of colored area below). Why would you drill that deep if you could get fresher water from aquifers like the Chicot and Evangeline much closer to the surface?
Subsidence Already Noted in Northern Part of Jasper
Those are the reasons why the UH scholars do not associate subsidence with the Jasper in southern Harris and Montgomery Counties. That does NOT mean subsidence won’t happen in other areas where utilities DO pump the Jasper. It already has.
However, USGS well-water height readings north of Highway 99 show severe drawdown near the population centers in southern Montgomery and northern Harris Counties. And surprise, surprise! That also happens to be the area where most subsidence has occurred in Montgomery County.
Unsustainable Pumping Rates
While the advocates of unlimited groundwater pumping want you to believe that the aquifer recharge rates in Montgomery County equal the drawdown rate, they don’t. The Jasper aquifer is being drawn down in populated places at more than 10 FEET per year (see graph below). But USGS estimates that the recharge rate for the Jasper is as little as ONE-TENTH of an INCH per year. That means some utilities have been using up Jasper water 1200 times faster than nature replaces it.
Truth or Consequences
Ground level declines produce fault movement and subsidence. They translate to infrastructure damage and flooding.
As water levels decline, water wells begin to have problems producing. They lose “yield,” which means they can’t produce as much water in a given time period. This requires the wells to run longer to meet demand. It costs more to lift water. Longer run times increase maintenance costs. Pumps have to be lowered. The motors have to be upsized, which requires electrical rewiring.
Some well pumps can’t be lowered any farther, which may mean abandoning and replacing the well. Some water level decline is expected. But those who argue that Montgomery County has an unlimited supply of water are just ludicrous. The harder you pump, the more decline you get, and with that comes all the consequences of declines.
Why People Want to Believe the Unbelievable
Montgomery County residents have found the change from well to surface water financially difficult. People WANT to believe that unlimited groundwater pumping is safe. I just hope they don’t wind up putting all their water lillies in one pond, so to speak.
The only thing worse than expensive water is no water. Or no water plus infrastructure damaged by subsidence.
Selective Perception Amplified by Selective Deception
Selective perception is a well known cognitive bias. It describes the process by which people perceive what they want to in media messages while ignoring opposing viewpoints. However, in this case, it seems that selective deception is amplifying the bias.
Don’t take my word. Read the newspaper article and then read the actual study on which the article is based. I provide links so you can make up your own mind; the newspaper article did not.
Other Useful References
Below are some other useful publications from the U.S. Geological Survey which is part of the Department of the Interior.
USGS Subsidence home page. Contains dozens of useful publications on Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence, plus raw data in numerous formats.
Hydrogeology and Simulation of Ground-Water Flow and Land-Surface Subsidence in the Northern Part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System, Texas By Mark C. Kasmarek and James L. Robinson, 2004
Groundwater Withdrawals 1976, 1990, and 2000–10 and Land-Surface-Elevation Changes 2000–10 in Harris, Galveston, Fort Bend, Montgomery, and Brazoria Counties, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5034, By Mark C. Kasmarek and Michaela R. Johnson
Land Surface Subsidence in Harris County between 1915 and 2001.
Water-Level Altitudes 2016 and Water-Level Changes in the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper Aquifers and Compaction 1973–2015 in the Chicot and Evangeline Aquifers, Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5034, U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey
Evaluation of Ground-Water Flow and Land-Surface Subsidence Caused by Hypothetical
Withdrawals in the Northern Part of the Gulf Coast Aquifer System, Texas, Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5024, U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey by Mark C. Kasmarek, Brian D. Reece, and Natalie A. Houston
Also, don’t forget to check out the subsidence tab under the Reports page of this web site.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/27/2019
697 Days after Hurricane Harvey
“Is There Deep-Seated Subsidence in the Houston-Galveston Area?” by Jiangbo Yu, Guoquan Wang, Timothy J. Kearns, and Linqiang Yang, Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, National Center for Airborne LiDAR Mapping, 312 Science & Research Building 1, Room 312, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204-5007, USA. Copyright © 2014 Jiangbo Yu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, International Journal of Geophysics, Volume 2014, Article ID 942834, 11 pages.
Note: All thoughts in this post represent my opinions on matters of public interest and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
Judge Sets July 2020 Trial Date in Flood Case
Judge Lauren Reeder of the 234th Judicial District Court has set the trial date in the Elm Grove/North Kingwood Forest flooding case for July 13, 2020.
Background of Case
On May 7th of this year, heavy rains fell on 268 acres that had been clear cut by subsidiaries of Perry Homes (PSWA, Inc. and Figure Four Partners LTD.) and their contractors. Contractors working on the new development, Woodridge Forest, had not yet installed detention ponds to control the runoff. Approximately 200 homes flooded during the rain event.
Video shows that much of the water flowed down streets near Taylor Gully instead of flowing into the gully itself at a controlled rate as it should have. The defendants blamed the flooding on God. But the hydrology report prepared by LJA Engineering showed that the detention ponds in the development should have held more than a foot of rain, far more than actually fell that day. One issue in the case may be whether the developer acted negligently by clearcutting so much acreage before installing adequate detention.
Schedule Between Now and Trial Date
The docket control order issued by Judge Reeder also lays out the general order of events in the case. On or before:
On 6/29/20 at 1:30 pm, Judge Reeder has scheduled a docket call at which all parties to the case must be prepared to discuss every aspect of the case.
Judge Reeder also tentatively scheduled the trial for 7/13/2020.
To see the entire original docket order, click here.
Woodridge Village Construction Continues
Construction on the Woodridge Village development will continue during the pre-trial phase. This has some residents concerned. While the construction of detention ponds is encouraging, any flaws in the construction of the engineering plans will be set in concrete before the case goes to trial. If there are flaws, that could affect flooding for years to come.
Jeff Miller, an Elm Grove resident, reports that two more culverts have been added to Taylor Gulley where it bisects the northern and southern portions of Woodridge Village.
Posted by Bob Rehak on July 25, 2019 with help from Bill Fowler and Jeff Miller
695 days after Hurricane Harvey
All thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public policy and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.