The Lake Houston Chamber has launched its latest campaign in a series of flood mitigation efforts. Called the “Plea for DDG,” it is designed to:
Help educate residents and business owners about three key proposals that could address the root causes of flooding in the Lake Houston Area
Help turn out a crowd at Harris County’s flood bond meeting on July 10, 6 p.m., at Kingwood Park High School.
Purpose of Flood Bond Meeting
The purpose of the flood bond meeting is to solicit input from residents on the things that they believe will best help the largest numbers of people.
DDG: More Detention, Dredging and Gates
DDG stands for more Detention, Dredging and Gates, three proposals that will reduce flooding here.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is NOT addressing this giant sand bar in its dredging project – a big reason why we need to get the County to address additional dredging in its flood bond package.
Harvey taught us that we had vulnerabilities. We had more water coming downstream than the San Jacinto’s current channel and the Lake Houston Dam could handle in a timely way. We need to fix those problems so residents know that a 1% storm will leave a home above the 100-year flood plain high and dry. Likewise for a 500-year flood. To do that:
More upstream detention will mean less water coming downstream at us.
It’s simple. Logical. Achievable. And should restore drainage to original design assumptions.
Now we just need to get enough people to show up and request these things at the bond meeting for the county to include them in the bond package.
Drag your friends, relatives and neighbors to this meeting…especially the ones that didn’t flood.
Remind them that the flood affected this entire community. Tell them why more detention, dredging and gates are so important.
Get them to request more dredging, detention and gates from the County. These three measures could help virtually everyone who lives in the area.
DDG: A two step process
We have to make sure we get the right measures into the bond package. Then we have to get people to vote for it.
Right now, nothing is more important to the future of this area.
This bond package will be used to:
Pay for capital projects outright
Qualify us for federal matching grants that could triple the amount of dollars available to us (beyond the amount voters approve).
Free up money in the Flood Control District’s current capital budget so that the Distict can step up maintenance on ditches (which we also desperately need).
So tell everyone you know to “Plea for DDG” – more detention, dredging and gates – at the bond meeting on July 10, 2018, 6-8 p.m., at Kingwood Park High School.
The rapid growth of sand mining along the San Jacinto has contributed to an increasing rate of sedimentation of the river and Lake Houston.
Consequences of Increased Sedimentation
Sediment has contributed to:
Flooding that cost residents and businesses billions of dollars in damages during Harvey.
Forcing taxpayers to spend tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars in dredging costs to restore the river’s carrying capacity and reduce flood risk.
Decreasing the capacity of Lake Houston at a time when the City is about to add 1.5 million users to it’s main water system.
Increasing the City’s water purification costs, which are passed along to customers.
Impairing fish populations and recreational opportunities
Ignoring Best Management Practices for Buffer Zones
Following best management practices that are common in other states – especially those that mandate buffer zones between mines and rivers – might have prevented or reduced many of these problems. But those practices were not followed here; miners mine so close to the San Jacinto that dikes are broken repeatedly. When caught, miners pay fines averaging $800.
The Lone Exception In Texas
With one exception, Texas has shown little desire to force miners to follow best management practice for setbacks in flood prone areas. That exception is the John Graves Scenic Riverway, a pilot project on a small portion of the Brazos River near Mineral Wells, about 40 miles west of Fort Worth.
Legislation Addressed Water-Quality Impacts from Sand Mining
The legislation that created the Riverway forms a precedent for imposing stricter regulations on sand mining in the Houston region. The name “Scenic” belies the major purpose of the legislation, which was to address water-quality impacts from rock, and sand and gravel mining operations.
Perhaps there’s an opportunity to create a protected area much like that one here.
Statewide Survey Found Widespread Noncompliance
The TCEQ conducted a statewide survey of 316 quarries in 62 counties, beginning in April, 2004. It revealed that noncompliance with permits was a statewide problem. It also revealed that noncompliance sometimes resulted in significant detrimental effects to water quality. One such area was the one that eventually became the John Graves Scenic Riverway area, where best management practices were not being followed.
Reclamation of quarries and financial provisions to ensure reclamation
Restoration of receiving waters in the event of an unauthorized discharge
Prohibition of mining within two hundred feet of the river and the hundred-year flood plain
Prohibitions against locating quarries in areas subject to frequent flooding.
Brazos River Authority photo shows setback of mines from the Brazos River in the John Graves Scenic Area, one of the main requirements of legislation.
Contrast the previous photo with this one. On the San Jacinto, mines operate within the floodway with as little as 40 feet of separation from the river. One mine (lower right) operated with a broken dike for more than 3 years. Dikes in this area have been broken and breached at least six times since 2015.
Model For San Jacinto
The Brazos River protection plan could benefit not only the Lake Houston Area, but Houston itself and other upstream communities, such as Porter as well.
The San Jacinto River, one of the main sources of the area’s drinking water, flows through, not around, sand mines on a regular basis. The mines are not only located within the 100-year flood plain, many are located within the FLOODWAY! This means they are in the main flow of the river during floods and experience higher velocities. Approximately 150,000 cubic feet of water per second flowed through these mines during the peak of Harvey, washing out roads and dikes.
USGS Maps Show Mining in Floodway
Twenty-square miles of exposed sand and sediment exist within these mines between I-69 and I-45. This screen capture below is just upstream from I-69.
Some West Fork mining operations are not only in the floodplain, they are in the FLOODWAY! The Red/Aqua cross-hatched areas above show the floodway, while the Aqua shows the 100-year flood plain.
Other sand mines farther upstream are in the 100-year flood plain as well. Some are also in the floodway. See for yourself.
Photos Contradict TACA Claims
TACA, the Texas Aggregate and Concrete Association, claims that water “backs into mines during floods,” but quite the opposite is true; it roars through them, ruptures roads and dikes, and carries exposed sand downstream.
Other tributaries contribute sediment to Lake Houston and the West Fork. However, other tributaries do not have 20 square miles of exposed, unprotected surface on their banks in the form of sand mines. And other tributaries are not flushed with an additional 80,000 cubic feet of water per second when Lake Conroe opens its flood gates as it did during Harvey.
Mines Contribute to Loss of River and Lake Capacity
Lake Houston is losing capacity at a rate of increase that parallels the rate of growth in sand mining.
Houston City Council Member Dave Martin says that the San Jacinto River and Lake Houston will soon supply drinking water to more than two million people, including residents of Houston, Humble, Bellaire, Jersey Village and other cities.
However, Lake Houston is rapidly losing capacity because of sedimentation at a time when demand for its water is increasing exponentially.
The capacity of Lake Houston is decreasing at an increasing rate. By 2011, the Lake had already lost 25% of its capacity. Results of the sedimentation survey done this year have not yet been released.
Mines Contribute to Turbidity, Increasing Water Treatment Costs
Every time it rains, turbidity in the water increases the City’s water treatment costs, by 20% to 100%, according to Houston City Council Member Dave Martin. “We also see significantly more challenges in capturing and removing the solids through the plants dewatering facilities.”
Dredging a tiny 2.1 mile stretch of the West Fork of the San Jacinto is likely to cost taxpayers up to $70 million – and that does not even include the giant bar at the mouth of the West Fork that is backing water up, contributing to flooding, rerouting the river through neighborhoods and threatening infrastructure.
That estimated $70 million is just the tip of the iceberg. Maintenance dredging that returns the river and lake to their original design capacities could cost far more.
$70 million covers dredging only from River Grove Park to a few hundred yards past the West Lake Houston Parkway Bridge. It does not include the East Fork, the West Fork between Fosters Mill and the Lake, the giant mouth bar at the junction of the West Fork and the Lake, Lake Houston above the FM1960 Bridge, or West Fork upstream from River Grove.
That’s an additional 13+ miles. And keep in mind that the U.S. Army Corps is only dredging to pre-Harvey depths. Returning the lake and river channel to their original 100-year flood design capacity would require deeper dredging. That would cost more per mile than the current project between River Grove and Kings Harbor.
Make Mines Part of the Solution, Not the Problem
Prohibiting mining within the 100-year flood plain will create a natural buffer between mines and the river that can trap sand before it becomes a problem.
As mines play out in the area between I-69 and I-45, they can help solve our sedimentation and flooding problems by being:
Restored as wetlands
Refilled to their natural grades with the spoils from dredging
Turned into detention ponds.
Previously, some miners have remediated sand pits after they played out, but many others have not. This pit, for instance, one block north of Townsen next to North Houston Ave. in Humble has been left unfenced, ungraded and unplanted for years. It currently poses a danger to children who play in it and businesses building around it.
Defunct Humble sand pit on North Houston Road just north of Townsend Blvd. Note steep, unvegetated slopes, lack of berms, lack of fencing, and proximity to back of new bank building on adjacent property – all violations of best practices in most states.
Fortunately, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to use this pit and one other as a placement site for the spoils from its current emergency dredging project.
Let’s create a protected waterway on the San Jacinto, much like the John Graves area on the Brazos.
Posted July 1, 2018 by Bob Rehak
306 Days since Hurricane Harvey
00adminadmin2018-07-01 12:57:012018-07-01 12:57:01A Model for the Future of the San Jacinto
House Bill 571 became the law of Texas in 2011. It requires sand miners to register with the state and follow “applicable environmental laws and rules.” So I put on my Sherlock Holmes hat and tried to determine what those were. After weeks of searching, I had my first clue as to why sand mines on the San Jacinto don’t follow guidelines that are common in other states.
Simply googling “Texas sand mining best management practices (BMPs)” does not hit the mother lode. So you keep on searching, not knowing whether the information doesn’t exist or you’re just searching the wrong way. You keep thinking, “With a state as business-friendly as Texas, there must be a clear, simple articulation of guidelines somewhere!”
I finally gave up and asked someone at TCEQ to just send me environmental rules, regulations and BMPs for sand mining. It took three tries, but yesterday, I finally got usable information. And the answer is…! THERE ARE NONE FOR THIS PART OF TEXAS … with the exception of a few EPA guidelines about refueling trucks within sand mines, some elements of the Clean Water Act, and a couple pages in a 133 page application.
The person helping me at TCEQ said that there appear to be:
No rules that include a setback distance between a sand mine and the San Jacinto River.
No restrictions on TCEQ permitting of sand mines in flood prone areas.
Texas does have guidelines for sand mining along the Brazos River in the John Graves scenic area of the Edwards Aquifer. However, they don’t apply to the San Jacinto River. And they have huge loopholes. For instance, see section 2.5 Stream Crossings and Buffers on Page 8. “Haul-road crossings through the buffer zones should be constructed ONLY WHEN NECESSARY [emphasis added].”
The experience of researching Best Management Practices for sand mining in Texas reminded me of filling out an IRS tax form – minus all the clarity in the IRS forms.
This lack of clarity is a big part of our problem in my opinion.
So what is a burly, cigar-chomping sand miner wearing a Caterpillar gimme cap on a bulldozer supposed to do? Put the dozer in gear and make money, of course. End of rant.
Posted on June 28, 2018 by Bob Rehak
303 Days since Hurricane Harvey
00adminadmin2018-06-28 17:19:232020-04-11 08:57:04Researching Sand-Mining Best Management Practices, or Lack Thereof, In Texas
Lake Houston Chamber Launches Plea for DDG
The Lake Houston Chamber has launched its latest campaign in a series of flood mitigation efforts. Called the “Plea for DDG,” it is designed to:
Purpose of Flood Bond Meeting
The purpose of the flood bond meeting is to solicit input from residents on the things that they believe will best help the largest numbers of people.
DDG: More Detention, Dredging and Gates
DDG stands for more Detention, Dredging and Gates, three proposals that will reduce flooding here.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is NOT addressing this giant sand bar in its dredging project – a big reason why we need to get the County to address additional dredging in its flood bond package.
Harvey taught us that we had vulnerabilities. We had more water coming downstream than the San Jacinto’s current channel and the Lake Houston Dam could handle in a timely way. We need to fix those problems so residents know that a 1% storm will leave a home above the 100-year flood plain high and dry. Likewise for a 500-year flood. To do that:
Less input. More throughput. Faster output.
It’s simple. Logical. Achievable. And should restore drainage to original design assumptions.
Now we just need to get enough people to show up and request these things at the bond meeting for the county to include them in the bond package.
Drag your friends, relatives and neighbors to this meeting…especially the ones that didn’t flood.
Remind them that the flood affected this entire community. Tell them why more detention, dredging and gates are so important.
Get them to request more dredging, detention and gates from the County. These three measures could help virtually everyone who lives in the area.
DDG: A two step process
We have to make sure we get the right measures into the bond package. Then we have to get people to vote for it.
This bond package will be used to:
So tell everyone you know to “Plea for DDG” – more detention, dredging and gates – at the bond meeting on July 10, 2018, 6-8 p.m., at Kingwood Park High School.
For more information about the Chamber’s campaign, see recoverLakeHouston.com.
Posted 7/2/2018 by Bob Rehak
308 days since Hurricane Harvey
A Model for the Future of the San Jacinto
The rapid growth of sand mining along the San Jacinto has contributed to an increasing rate of sedimentation of the river and Lake Houston.
Consequences of Increased Sedimentation
Sediment has contributed to:
Ignoring Best Management Practices for Buffer Zones
Following best management practices that are common in other states – especially those that mandate buffer zones between mines and rivers – might have prevented or reduced many of these problems. But those practices were not followed here; miners mine so close to the San Jacinto that dikes are broken repeatedly. When caught, miners pay fines averaging $800.
The Lone Exception In Texas
With one exception, Texas has shown little desire to force miners to follow best management practice for setbacks in flood prone areas. That exception is the John Graves Scenic Riverway, a pilot project on a small portion of the Brazos River near Mineral Wells, about 40 miles west of Fort Worth.
Legislation Addressed Water-Quality Impacts from Sand Mining
The legislation that created the Riverway forms a precedent for imposing stricter regulations on sand mining in the Houston region. The name “Scenic” belies the major purpose of the legislation, which was to address water-quality impacts from rock, and sand and gravel mining operations.
Perhaps there’s an opportunity to create a protected area much like that one here.
Statewide Survey Found Widespread Noncompliance
The TCEQ conducted a statewide survey of 316 quarries in 62 counties, beginning in April, 2004. It revealed that noncompliance with permits was a statewide problem. It also revealed that noncompliance sometimes resulted in significant detrimental effects to water quality. One such area was the one that eventually became the John Graves Scenic Riverway area, where best management practices were not being followed.
Key Elements of Legislation Protecting Water
Legislation that formed the area focused on stormwater discharges and their effect on water quality. Key provisions included:
Brazos River Authority photo shows setback of mines from the Brazos River in the John Graves Scenic Area, one of the main requirements of legislation.
Contrast the previous photo with this one. On the San Jacinto, mines operate within the floodway with as little as 40 feet of separation from the river. One mine (lower right) operated with a broken dike for more than 3 years. Dikes in this area have been broken and breached at least six times since 2015.
Model For San Jacinto
USGS Maps Show Mining in Floodway
Twenty-square miles of exposed sand and sediment exist within these mines between I-69 and I-45. This screen capture below is just upstream from I-69.
Some West Fork mining operations are not only in the floodplain, they are in the FLOODWAY! The Red/Aqua cross-hatched areas above show the floodway, while the Aqua shows the 100-year flood plain.
Other sand mines farther upstream are in the 100-year flood plain as well. Some are also in the floodway. See for yourself.
Photos Contradict TACA Claims
TACA, the Texas Aggregate and Concrete Association, claims that water “backs into mines during floods,” but quite the opposite is true; it roars through them, ruptures roads and dikes, and carries exposed sand downstream.
Other tributaries contribute sediment to Lake Houston and the West Fork. However, other tributaries do not have 20 square miles of exposed, unprotected surface on their banks in the form of sand mines. And other tributaries are not flushed with an additional 80,000 cubic feet of water per second when Lake Conroe opens its flood gates as it did during Harvey.
Mines Contribute to Loss of River and Lake Capacity
Lake Houston is losing capacity at a rate of increase that parallels the rate of growth in sand mining.
Houston City Council Member Dave Martin says that the San Jacinto River and Lake Houston will soon supply drinking water to more than two million people, including residents of Houston, Humble, Bellaire, Jersey Village and other cities.
However, Lake Houston is rapidly losing capacity because of sedimentation at a time when demand for its water is increasing exponentially.
The capacity of Lake Houston is decreasing at an increasing rate. By 2011, the Lake had already lost 25% of its capacity. Results of the sedimentation survey done this year have not yet been released.
Mines Contribute to Turbidity, Increasing Water Treatment Costs
When the State protected the Brazos in the early 2000’s, sand mining was not nearly the problem on the San Jacinto that it is today.
Every time it rains, turbidity in the water increases the City’s water treatment costs, by 20% to 100%, according to Houston City Council Member Dave Martin. “We also see significantly more challenges in capturing and removing the solids through the plants dewatering facilities.”
USGS shows how the clarity of Lake Houston changes before and after every major storm.
Add Dredging Costs to the Damage Assessment
Dredging a tiny 2.1 mile stretch of the West Fork of the San Jacinto is likely to cost taxpayers up to $70 million – and that does not even include the giant bar at the mouth of the West Fork that is backing water up, contributing to flooding, rerouting the river through neighborhoods and threatening infrastructure.
That estimated $70 million is just the tip of the iceberg. Maintenance dredging that returns the river and lake to their original design capacities could cost far more.
$70 million covers dredging only from River Grove Park to a few hundred yards past the West Lake Houston Parkway Bridge. It does not include the East Fork, the West Fork between Fosters Mill and the Lake, the giant mouth bar at the junction of the West Fork and the Lake, Lake Houston above the FM1960 Bridge, or West Fork upstream from River Grove.
That’s an additional 13+ miles. And keep in mind that the U.S. Army Corps is only dredging to pre-Harvey depths. Returning the lake and river channel to their original 100-year flood design capacity would require deeper dredging. That would cost more per mile than the current project between River Grove and Kings Harbor.
Make Mines Part of the Solution, Not the Problem
Prohibiting mining within the 100-year flood plain will create a natural buffer between mines and the river that can trap sand before it becomes a problem.
As mines play out in the area between I-69 and I-45, they can help solve our sedimentation and flooding problems by being:
Previously, some miners have remediated sand pits after they played out, but many others have not. This pit, for instance, one block north of Townsen next to North Houston Ave. in Humble has been left unfenced, ungraded and unplanted for years. It currently poses a danger to children who play in it and businesses building around it.
Defunct Humble sand pit on North Houston Road just north of Townsend Blvd. Note steep, unvegetated slopes, lack of berms, lack of fencing, and proximity to back of new bank building on adjacent property – all violations of best practices in most states.
Fortunately, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to use this pit and one other as a placement site for the spoils from its current emergency dredging project.
Let’s create a protected waterway on the San Jacinto, much like the John Graves area on the Brazos.
Posted July 1, 2018 by Bob Rehak
306 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Researching Sand-Mining Best Management Practices, or Lack Thereof, In Texas
“Say what?”
House Bill 571 became the law of Texas in 2011. It requires sand miners to register with the state and follow “applicable environmental laws and rules.” So I put on my Sherlock Holmes hat and tried to determine what those were. After weeks of searching, I had my first clue as to why sand mines on the San Jacinto don’t follow guidelines that are common in other states.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) website is bewildering. TCEQ documents posted online contain:
Simply googling “Texas sand mining best management practices (BMPs)” does not hit the mother lode. So you keep on searching, not knowing whether the information doesn’t exist or you’re just searching the wrong way. You keep thinking, “With a state as business-friendly as Texas, there must be a clear, simple articulation of guidelines somewhere!”
I finally gave up and asked someone at TCEQ to just send me environmental rules, regulations and BMPs for sand mining. It took three tries, but yesterday, I finally got usable information. And the answer is…! THERE ARE NONE FOR THIS PART OF TEXAS … with the exception of a few EPA guidelines about refueling trucks within sand mines, some elements of the Clean Water Act, and a couple pages in a 133 page application.
The person helping me at TCEQ said that there appear to be:
Texas does have guidelines for sand mining along the Brazos River in the John Graves scenic area of the Edwards Aquifer. However, they don’t apply to the San Jacinto River. And they have huge loopholes. For instance, see section 2.5 Stream Crossings and Buffers on Page 8. “Haul-road crossings through the buffer zones should be constructed ONLY WHEN NECESSARY [emphasis added].”
The closest we come to articulating BMPs for sand mining along the San Jacinto: two pages within a PERMIT APPLICATION (see pages 62 and 63 of 166) to operate a sand mine. There are also some attachments to a letter from the TCEQ to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about the nationwide permitting process in Texas (see image at top of page). Neither of these are intuitive places to search for BMPs.
The experience of researching Best Management Practices for sand mining in Texas reminded me of filling out an IRS tax form – minus all the clarity in the IRS forms.
So what is a burly, cigar-chomping sand miner wearing a Caterpillar gimme cap on a bulldozer supposed to do? Put the dozer in gear and make money, of course. End of rant.
Posted on June 28, 2018 by Bob Rehak
303 Days since Hurricane Harvey