Tag Archive for: lake lowering

Lake Conroe Association Fighting Seasonal Lowering in Advance of SJRA Vote to Reconsider Policy

Efforts have started already to lobby against the seasonal lowering of Lake Conroe again next year. They seem to be organized and inspired by the Lake Conroe Association again. I understand that the lowering inconveniences some Lake Conroe residents, especially boaters who live in areas like Grand Harbor where the water depth is shallow to start with. However, the inconvenience pales in comparison to the damages suffered in the Lake Houston Area. The lowering helps provide a buffer against downstream flooding during the wettest months of the year. The SJRA will vote on whether to extend the lowering policy at its February board meeting.

A Campaign of Misinformation

The Lake Conroe Association and its proxies are deliberately spreading falsehoods to rile up people against the lowering. The same misinformation contained in the Lake Conroe Association presentation on their news page, is repeated in the website Stop Draining Lake Conroe (https://www.stopdraininglakeconroe.com) and the Grand Harbor YouTube video below.

For the Record…

StopDrainingLakeConroe.com states that:

Lake Houston dredging is complete and completely out of funding. Four fifths of the mouth bar on the West Fork remains in place. Harris County Flood Control has allocated $10 million to help dredge it. See item CI-61. The State of Texas allocated $30 million in SB500. Plans for that project should be announced next week according to State Representative Dan Huberty. The City of Houston has also filed for another FEMA Grant for additional dredging.

Lake Conroe homes are being damaged by the lake lowering. Really? How does that work? Is it the same as 250,000 CFS coming through your living room? That’s what happened to 81 townhomes in Forest Cove. See below.

One of 81 empty townhomes on the West Fork in Forest Cove after the Lake Conroe release. Note the bulk-heading. Harris County Flood Control demolished this building earlier this month. Many others remain, affecting property values around them.

Lake lowering is damaging bulk-heading around Lake Conroe. How does that work? Does evaporation destroy the bulk-heading? See the bulk-heading along the West Fork above.

There is no science to support the original action by the board, or for continuing this action plan. See these engineering reports by Frees & Nichols.

Downstream residents are trying to turn this into a permanent plan. Please tell me who. I’m not aware of any organized effort. The plan has always been to reconsider the lowering every year until flood mitigation measures such as dredging were complete.

SJRA is throwing away $5.33 million of water revenue. It would only be throwing away the revenue if it could sell the water. But there’s no unfilled demand due to water shortages in the lake. And the water replenishes itself as rain falls from the sky.

Water level of Lake Conroe is at 198. That’s an exaggeration to rile up the people in Grand Harbor, who normally only have four feet of water. The lake level is normally at 201′ and currently at 198.82′. That’s 198 and ten inches. So those Grand Harbor people have half their normal water, not one quarter. Current release rate is 0.

Lake Conroe only provided 15% of the water that flooded Kingwood. Lake Conroe only affects the West Fork, but the statistic includes the East Fork. During Harvey, West Fork flooding caused the vast majority of the damage. The Lake Conroe release comprised ONE-THIRD of the water coming down the West Fork through the highly populated Humble/Kingwood corridor where virtually 100% of the businesses are located. Lake Conroe released 80,000 CFS of the 240,00 CFS coming down the West Fork. So the 15% statistic is extremely misleading.

Video Makes Many of Same False Claims And Some More

The video includes many of the same false claims and a few new ones. Let me focus on the new ones.

The video states or implies that:

Describing the lowering as Seasonal rather than Temporary implies we are trying to make it Permanent. I’m not sure how you get from either of those words to “permanent.” This is a logical fallacy. It’s a falsehood designed to inspire fear.

Recent events show that Lake Conroe is being unfairly blamed for downstream flooding. Kingwood still flooded during Imelda “even though we didn’t release anything” during Imelda. Please! The vast majority of all Kingwood flooding during Imelda was street flooding or related to Woodridge Village. Some homes did flood on the East Fork, but I can’t believe any of those residents would blame it on a fictional release from Lake Conroe that wasn’t coming down the West Fork.

There was an “organized effort” in Kingwood to send an unspecified number of “letters” to the SJRA board thanking them for not releasing during Imelda. So what is it? Are we allegedly blaming you for flooding us during Imelda or thanking you for not flooding us? Show me the letters. I’m not aware of any such organized effort. See the comment above.

Kingwood is trying to increase the lowering to 3 feet and Kingwood is winning that fight by a large margin. I’m aware of no effort to increase the lowering and no fight that we’re winning by a large margin.

Wading birds that require shallow areas are being destroyed. Duh! They’re saying birds need shallow water, but they want to make the lake deeper. So if water depth had something to do with destroying birds, who would be destroying them?

Boating Vs. Flooding

Let’s face it. The big reason Lake Conroe residents don’t want to see their lake lowered is that it makes boating more difficult. No argument there.

But the big reason Lake Houston area residents want more dredging is not boating. It’s to reduce flood risk. The mouth bar forms a sediment dam behind the dam that reduces the conveyance of the river through the heavily populated Humble/Kingwood corridor. And until it’s dredged, we need the help of Lake Conroe residents. The lake lowering strategy gives us the only effective way to mitigate flooding for now.

After the Army Corps removed 500,000 cubic yards of sediment from the West Fork mouth bar, Imelda promptly redeposited much of it. Here’s what it looked like after Imelda.

700 yards south of the mouth bar, RD Kissling, a kayaker, photographed himself in 1 foot of water AFTER the Corps finished dredging and after Imelda.

Compare These West Fork Damages

Tens of thousands living north of the West Fork who used I-69 for commuting experienced massive traffic jams every day for 11 months while TxDoT reconstructed the southbound lanes after Harvey. Photo taken 6/19/2018.

We are certainly sensitive to Lake Conroe lifestyle considerations. But during Harvey, Lake Houston Area damages on the West Fork alone included:

Gear Up for a Fight

More on this in future posts. Lake Houston Area residents need to gear up to fight the falsehoods and ensure that Lake Conroe seasonal lowering policy remains in place for another year.

Harvey knocked out the Union Pacific Railroad bridge over the San Jacinto River near I-69 and disrupted rail traffic for months. Photo taken 9/14/2017.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/22/2019

815 Days since Hurricane Harvey

SJRA Board Votes to Maintain Lake-Lowering Policy for Another Year

At its February 28th meeting, the San Jacinto River Authority voted to maintain its lake-lowering policy for another year. The policy calls for lowering Lake Conroe one foot below normal pool level (from 201 feet to 200) during the wettest months in Spring and two feet during the peak of hurricane season.

Extra Safety from Flooding

Until other mitigation measures can be put in place, the plan gives downstream residents an extra measure of safety from massive releases like those experienced during Hurricane Harvey. Those include dredging and additional flood gates for Lake Houston.

This is good news for the Lake Houston Area where Harvey made approximately 11,000 people homeless overnight.

Complaints from Lake Conroe Association in January Meeting

The Lake Conroe Association set the stage for conflict last month. The Association testified that last year’s lowering had a negative impact on business and home values in the area. They also maintained that the Board had acted unilaterally – without consultation – and that the project was only supposed to last through the end of dredging.

Having been at last year’s meeting where the proposal was discussed, I would disagree with these statements. The board considered dredging and gates for Lake Houston. The board also acted on the report of a consultant hired to review the proposal.

Mark Micheletti, a SJRA board member, said the board had received no complaints from businesses on the lake and that a check with realtors found no negative effect on home prices.

Reportedly, the Lake Conroe Association had also collected signatures on a petition asking for the policy to be reversed. At today’s meeting, the room was crowded with spectators, but I did not see the Association’s president, Mike Bleier. The association presented no petition.

The cataclysmic impacts on Lake Conroe’s economy did not materialize. Because of evaporation, the lowering really only amounted a little more than a foot in the fall.

Speaking for Kingwood

During the public comment section of the meeting, three Kingwood residents, Bill Fowler, Amy Slaughter and I, spoke FOR continuing to lower the lake. So did one Lake Conroe resident who flooded during Harvey.

I pointed out the fact that dredging was NOT yet complete and that the river still had an exaggerated flooding response to moderate rainfalls because of sediment dams. Fowler talked about normal evaporation levels in the lake and how the lowering was not as great as the targets would imply. Slaughter mentioned the impact of flooding on her family and recent Supreme Court rulings on inverse condemnation.

The Lake Conroe resident said he wished the Lake were lowered year round. He flooded during Harvey and thought that the lower levels would actually help Lake Conroe home values.

“But what if there’s a drought?”

When it came time to speak AGAINST the lowering, one man spoke up. He used water conservation as his main argument and posed the specter of drought.

When the board began debating the measure, Jace Houston, SJRA’s general manager, pointed out that many people misunderstood the measure. He said that the SJRA was not going to lower the lake beyond the 1- and 2-foot levels in the policy. If the lake was already down a foot due to evaporation, for instance, the SJRA would release no additional water.

Chuck Gilman, Director or Water Resources and Flood Management, thenshowed a series of slides that led to discussions about:

  • Lake-lowering strategy
  • Progress of the current West Fork dredging and Lake Houston Gates projects
  • Rainfall averages and historical lake levels by month
  • How the lowering and subsequent raising of the lake worked last fall
  • Staff recommendations
Graph presented by Chuck Gilman showed how gradual lowering and natural refilling of Lake Conroe worked last year.
Gilman also showed a slide discussing the status of additional gates for Lake Houston.

To see all the slides in the original high-resolution PDF format, click here.

Brenda Cooper, a new SJRA Board Member, then mentioned that some Lake Conroe residents had approached her to voice their disapproval of the project.

Motion Passes Unanimously

Board President Lloyd Tisdale finally called for a voice vote. “All members present voted FOR the lowering,” said Mark Micheletti, one of the Lake Houston Area’s two members on the SJRA board. “The vote could not have gone better from the Lake Houston area’s perspective.”

The SJRA will continue to lower Lake Conroe seasonally. The measure will come up for discussion again next February.

Community Reaction

Bill Fowler, Vice Chair of the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiation, said, “I was impressed by the Board’s firm grasp of the importance of lowering Lake Conroe on a seasonal basis for downstream residents. Their willingness to help until permanent solutions can be implemented impressed me.”

Kaaren Cambio, another SJRA board director from the Lake Houston area, said, “I’m happy that the board is balancing the needs of both upstream and downstream communities.

Amy Slaughter, the Kingwood lawyer whose home flooded badly, said, “They did the right thing.”

Posted by Bob Rehak on February 28, 2019

548 Days After Hurricane Harvey