Tag Archive for: sediment pollution

Reduce Flood Risk from Sand Mining in Two Minutes

1/22/25 – The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has proposed new Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Sand Mines. But they do nothing to address flood risk from sand mining here in the Lake Houston Area.

Sediment pollution from upstream sand mines has contributed to flooding more than 13,000 homes and businesses in the Lake Houston Area. Yet despite more than a billion dollars in damages and almost $200 million spent on dredging in the last five years, fewer than 100 people have protested the new, but ineffective BMPs as of noon today.

To encourage more people to get involved, below I’ve summarized the problems and suggested solutions that you can submit verbatim. The process should take less than two minutes.

The Problem

Local sand-mining practices accelerate and add to the rate of natural erosion. That helps create sediment blockages that reduce conveyance of rivers, back water up, and build higher flood peaks.

west fork mouth bar
Sand deposited during Hurricane Harvey was 8-10 feet above the water line in places. It backed water up into Kingwood, Atascocita and Humble, and stretched 3,400 feet.
East Fork Mouth Bar cost $18 million to dredge.
East Fork Mouth Bar after Imelda grew 3,700 feet.

Both of these blockages have since been dredged. But more sand continues coming with each new flood due to questionable management practices at upstream sand mines. See suggestions below.

Be Part of The Solution

Please add your voice to those protesting the omission of BMPs that address our issues. Providing public comment. Only three days remain before the deadline Friday night.

It should only take a minute or two. Follow these simple steps.

  1. Download this PDF from ReduceFlooding.com. Save it to your desktop. You’ll attach it to the webform in step 3.
  2. Copy all text between the two lines below.
  3. Go to the TCEQ web page for submitting comments. Paste the text and attach the PDF.
RE: APO BMP List Proposal

TCEQ’s attempt to create a helpful list of Best Management Practices for Aggregate Production Operations is an exercise in willful blindness. It completely ignores issues mandated by the legislature, as well as others that reduce water quality and increase flood risk.

The issues you do address are addressed in a vague and/or self-evident manner that render them inadequate.

In addition to more specificity, I would like to see BMPs that help mines in the Houston region avoid inundation and pit capture. 

Most mines on the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto were inundated last year. Floodwaters swept industrial waste downstream into Lake Houston, the drinking water supply for two million people. 

The rivers also broke through the dikes of at least six of those mines. The rivers now run through pits instead of around them. This flushes sand and sediment downstream, where it reduces conveyance, blocks drainage and contributes to flooding.

Addressing these issues requires building mines on higher ground, farther from rivers.

I recommend doubling the minimum setback from 100 to 200 feet for mines in the San Jacinto watershed. That will put the mines on higher ground, farther from the floodway.

I also recommend leaving forests undisturbed in the widened buffer zone. That will reduce the velocity of floodwater and, with it, the volume of sediment carried downstream. It will also decrease the likelihood of pit capture, by increasing the amount of time that it takes a river to migrate into a mine. The forest will also help capture sediment that may escape a mine.

Finally, the wider buffers will give rivers more room to spread out during floods. Right now, dikes are supposed to protect mines from a hundred-year flood. But when mines build tall dikes on one side of a river, they double the volume of water flooding the other side. And when they build tall dikes on both sides of a river, water has no room to spread out without invading the mines. The tall dikes effectively eliminate ALL floodplains and turn rivers into erosive firehoses.

I have attached a PDF that shows visual proof of the need for BMPs that address our main sand-mining concerns in the San Jacinto Watershed.

I also support the concerns and list of alternative BMPs supported by Texans for Responsible Aggregate Mining.

Send a message to Austin that you want the protection you pay taxes for. Get all your friends, neighbors and relatives to submit comments, too.

For more information about sand mining in the Houston region as it relates to the Proposed BMPs, consult these posts.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/22/25

2703 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Better Sand-Mining BMPs Needed to Control Sediment Pollution

1/13/25 – The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has proposed new Best Management Practices (BMPs) for mining in response to a mandate from the 2023 session of the Texas Legislature. However, in my opinion, the recommended BMPs will do little to nothing to help control sediment pollution from mines in the Lake Houston Area.

The BMPs feel like little more than a half-hearted attempt on the part of a reluctant regulator to create the illusion of environmental protection.

You can find the proposed BMPs at this page on the TCEQ website. You may submit comments on them electronically. To be considered, TCEQ must receive your input by 11:59 p.m. on January 24, 2025. Your email should reference “APO BMP List Proposal.”

Please let the TCEQ know what you think even if you disagree with me.

Notable Omissions

The TCEQ’s recommended BMPs do not really address the biggest mining issues we have in the upper San Jacinto watershed.

I urge you to urge TCEQ to develop BMPs that address:

  • Discharge of sediment-laden water
  • Pit capture (when a river starts flowing through a mine)
  • Periodic flooding.

The proposed BMPs do not cover these issues at all.

The final report of a TCEQ investigation into a West Fork pit capture last year didn’t even mention the phrase. Do they not consider it a problem? I sure wish the TCEQ could enlighten us on this issue. I documented seven instances of pit capture in the Lake Houston watershed last year alone. There may have been more; many mines are in remote, difficult-to-access locations.

Sediment Pollution Reduces Water Quality, Increases Flood Risk

All three of the bullet points above add up to a big problem called “sediment pollution.” Dredging costs for the City of Houston and Army Corps approached $200 million dollars as of October 2023. Better BMPs would likely have reduced or delayed that expenditure of public funds.

dredging cost summary
At an October 2023 town hall meeting in Kingwood, Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin presented this summary showing dredging costs totaling $186 million.

But those costs paled in comparison to the damages to 13,000 homes and businesses that flooded in the Lake Houston Area behind giant sand bars that formed sediment dams at the mouths of the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto.

Nor do the costs reflect extra water filtration at the City’s Northeast Water Purification plant.

To be fair, nature causes some erosion. The question is whether local mining practices accelerate it.

Photos of Sediment Pollution Related to Discharges, Pit Capture and Flooding

See the pictures below. I will submit these as part of my comments on the draft BMPs. Feel free to submit them as part of yours, too.

Confluence West Fork and Spring Creek near US59 Bridge. This is a frequent sight. Twenty square miles of mines are upstream on the right in a 20-mile reach of the river.
San Jacinto East Fork capturing a mine in Plum Grove.
Effluent from the Hallett Mine settling pond (white in upper right) on San Jacinto West Fork escaping into adjacent property owned by others.
Close up of same effluent from same pond
Dike of abandoned Williams Brothers Mine (upper right) eroded by the San Jacinto West Fork (lower left) about to give way…
…was taken out by flooding from Hurricane Beryl shortly after I took the photo above this one.

Hallett sold the San Jacinto West Fork sand pit below to a real estate developer. Within months, the river captured the pit.

West Fork flows into the pit at the north end…
…and flows out at the south end.
The pit in question is to the right of the S-turn in the river (middle). Here you can see both the entry (lower right) and exit (upper right) breaches in the dikes.

River Speed During Floods High Enough to Stir Up and Carry Even Largest Particles of Sand

Now, let’s discuss the speed of floodwaters and whether it’s sufficient to entrain sand in pits and carry it downstream.

Flood inundated both sides of the West Fork during May 2024. My drone measured logs floating through the captured pit at 5 MPH, more than fast enough to scoop up and carry off the largest grains of sand and other sediment. See below.
Industry-standard graph shows the speed necessary to erode, transport and deposit sand/sediment of different particle sizes. Blue line indicates measured speed of water. Red indicates range of typical sand sizes.
Another West Fork pit capture at the Hallett Mine after floodwaters receded. Notice how natural channel of the river has been virtually cut off.
Effluent from the Hallett Mine (upstream in upper right) polluting the West Fork at the Northpark/Oakhurst Ditch (middle foreground). Water flows right to left.
Reverse angle shows proximity of pollution to homes.
Same ditch blocked by sand increases flood risk for those homeowners.
Farther downstream, the Kingwood Diversion Ditch (top middle) also became blocked by sediment. A Harris County Flood Control District study found that the Diversion Ditch was one of the two most dangerous flooding problems in Kingwood.
Broken dike at the Triple PG sand mine in Porter. Industrial waste water is flowing out of the mine into White Oak Creek which joins Caney Creek and the San Jacinto East Fork before flowing into Lake Houston.

Horrifying! Aren’t they? The truly horrifying part is that I have thousands of similar shots. These are not isolated instances.

This is THE biggest environmental problem in the Lake Houston Area. We have industrial waste polluting the drinking water supply for 2 million people and the TCEQ BMPs don’t even address the problem.

Please register your opinion with the TCEQ at: https://tceq.commentinput.com/?id=NdefHRZiG. Help improve the quality of life for your family and community.

Don’t forget to reference “APO BMP List Proposal” when you submit the web form. Greater setbacks of mines from rivers could solve all the problems discussed above.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/13/25

2694 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.

Contractor Only Partially Complies with BMPs at Foster Elementary Reconstruction Site

1/6/2025 – Before New Year’s Day, I posted about the lack of best management practices (BMPs) at the Foster Elementary reconstruction site in Kingwood. A contractor let sediment-laden runoff escape the site, fill the street and flow into unprotected storm drains. Photos taken yesterday after a storm front passed show that it’s still happening.

Partial List of Sediment Control BMPs for Construction Sites

The EPA considers sediment a major source of pollution. And not following best practices to control it can clog storm drains, channels and streams, raising flood risk. I quote from the Agency’s brochure: “Sediment fills up storm drains and catch basins to carry water away from roads and homes, which increases the potential for flooding.”

To reduce the potential for flooding, the EPA recommends several best practices. They include, but are not limited to:

1. Silt Fencing around the perimeter to intercept and slow down runoff, so sediment can settle before water flows off the construction site.

2. Stormwater-Inlet Protection, such as sandbags, placed around stormwater inlets to capture sediment before it enters the storm drainage system.

3. Sediment Control Logs (Wattles) filled with straw or other materials to capture sediment before it leaves the site.

4. Mulching with organic materials such as straw, hay, or wood chips to help to protect soil.

5. Sediment Basins & Traps to capture sediment from runoff until it settles out of suspension. 

6. Erosion Control Mats or Blankets to stabilize disturbed soil and prevent erosion.

7. Stormwater Diversion Channels to direct runoff to sediment-control ponds or a controlled discharge areas.

8. Construction Entrance/Exit Stabilization with gravel to minimize tracking of mud onto roads from construction vehicles.

9. Geotextiles to stabilize soil.

Slight Improvement, But Still Lacking

After the last post, the Humble ISD contractor did add straw wattles (#3 – sediment control logs) in front of the main construction site entrance.

But storm drain inlets remained unprotected. And part of the perimeter lacked silt fence.

As a result, sediment still escaped the site, entered the street, and entered the storm sewer. See the photos below taken by Chris Summers, a local resident and retired commercial photographer, after a recent storm front dropped .84 inches of rain on 1/5/25.

Entrance to construction site shows wattle roll that was not present for previous storm.

While that showed some improvement, other parts of the perimeter still lacked protection and let water escape.

No silt fence.
Wattle roll did not cover the critical area, letting sediment laden water escape into storm sewer.
Also, inlet not protected with sand bags.

Summers says he took the photos above after the storm front on 1/5/25 passed through.

How much effort does it take to drop a couple sand bags next to a storm sewer inlet? Could it cost much more than coffee and a danish? There’s just no excuse for this.

Sound Off to the School Board

I have already emailed members of the Humble ISD school board and suggest you do, too. We have lots of good contractors in the area that know how to follow best practices.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/6/25 with photos by Chris Summers

2687 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.

Better Construction Management Practices Could Reduce Silt-Laden Runoff

12/29/24 – Several rounds of intense rain in the past week triggered a slew of emails from concerned residents about the need for better construction management practices to control sediment-laden runoff.

Chris Summers, a retired commercial photographer, included pictures of the runoff from the Foster Elementary site in Kingwood’s Trailwood Village. Contractors recently cleared the site for reconstruction of the school. Summer’s photos illustrate the dangers from sediment pollution and the need for better construction management practices.

A Major Source of Sediment Pollution

Construction site runoff is a major source of sediment pollution. Construction typically involves large-scale disturbance of soil, which can significantly increase the amount of sediment carried away by stormwater runoff. This sediment-laden runoff can have serious environmental impacts, especially when it enters local water bodies, such as Lake Houston..

Clearing, excavating and grading disturb soil. Stripping away vegetation makes soil more prone to erosion. So, when it rains, the exposed soil can easily wash away into nearby water systems.

In many cases, vegetation or other stabilization measures (e.g., erosion control blankets, mulching) may not be installed until later stages of construction, leaving the site vulnerable to sediment loss in the meantime.

Construction sites are most vulnerable during heavy rainfalls, which can lead to significant runoff, especially from areas without adequate sediment-control measures.

In many cases, construction schedules are not aligned with seasonal weather patterns, so sites may be left exposed during periods of heavy rain. This can lead to water-quality degradation, increased costs for water treatment, higher water bills, and infrastructure damage.

Excessive sediment can clog stormwater systems, leading to flooding and costly repairs.

Regulations and Best Management Practices

Due to the significant environmental impact of construction-site runoff, many countries and regions have strict regulations and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control it. In the U.S., for example, the Clean Water Act requires construction sites to control stormwater discharges through permits such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This often includes implementing sediment control measures like silt fences, sediment basins, and erosion control methods.

Rainfall and Soil Saturation in Last Week

The HCFCD gage at West Lake Houston Parkway and the San Jacinto West Fork shows that the area near Foster Elementary received about 2 inches of rain in the last few days.

That made the soil go from “wet” to “saturated.”

And that radically increased runoff.

Photos of Foster Elementary Construction Site After Heavy Rains

Summers’ photos show the need for better construction management practices to control sediment-laden runoff.

Silty water streamed out of the site after an intense rain.

The flow was steady and strong.

Water exited the site in multiple places and filled half the street.

Inlets had no protection. (See #8 below).

The site had large areas of disturbed and unprotected soil.

Runoff left inches of soil in the street. Imagine what the storm sewer looked like…

…especially since storm-sewer inlets were unprotected by any of the usual methods. (Again, see #8 below.)

Ways to Reduce Sediment-Laden Runoff

Here are several common and effective methods used to minimize silt-laden runoff. They represent best construction management practices.

1. Silt Fencing intercepts and slows down water flow, allowing sediment to settle before water flows off the construction site. It’s normally installed around the perimeter.

2. Sediment Basins & Traps capture sediment from runoff until it settles out of suspension.

3. Erosion Control Mats or Blankets stabilize disturbed soil and prevent erosion. They are most often used during the early stages of construction.

4. Mulching with organic materials – such as straw, hay, or wood chips – helps to protect soil while promoting vegetation growth. They are most effective when applied immediately after soil is disturbed.

5. Planting Vegetative Cover, such as fast-growing grass, can also help stabilize soil and reduce runoff. Plant roots bind the soil, making it less susceptible to erosion. Vegetation also slows down the flow of water, reducing the energy available to carry away sediment.

6. Sediment Control Logs (Wattles) are tubular barriers filled with straw or other materials. When placed along the contours of the construction site, they capture sediment before it leaves the site.

7. Stormwater Diversion Channels direct runoff to sediment-control ponds or a controlled discharge areas.

8. Stormwater-Inlet Protection, such as sandbags, can be placed around stormwater inlets to capture sediment before it enters the storm drainage system.

9. Shallow temporary or Permanent Vegetative Swales collect runoff and allow it to slowly infiltrate into the soil while trapping sediment in the vegetation and soil.

10. Construction Entrance/Exit Stabilization with gravel minimizes the tracking of mud onto roads from construction vehicles. But the gravel must be regularly maintained.

11. Grading can help control water flow and minimize erosion by directing water flow away from disturbed areas towards sediment control features.

12. Geotextiles can also provide erosion control and soil stabilization.

Need for Regular Inspections

Regular inspections and maintenance ensure that all erosion and sediment control measures are installed functioning properly.

Compare the measures in this list to the photos above. With the exception of gravel at the entrance, Summers’ photos show that few of these measures appeared to be implemented at the Foster construction site.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/29/24 with photos by Chris Summers

2679 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.

Damn the Downstream Consequences, Colony Ridge Expansion Continues Relentlessly

Damn the downstream consequences, including sediment pollution, increased flood risk and monstrous dredging costs. Colony Ridge, the controversial 30+ square-mile, Liberty County development that markets to Hispanics – while flaunting drainage, environmental and fire regulations – is clearing and paving thousands of additional acres.

Not even Google Earth can keep up with the developer’s relentless expansion. On 8/12/23, I flew over Colony Ridge in a helicopter and found huge areas where 3-week-old satellite imagery was already hopelessly out of date.

Google Earth image from 7/18/23. Red/yellow highlighted areas changed radically within three weeks.


With the exception of areas protected by the Houston-Conroe and Tarkington Bayou Mitigation Banks, the highlighted areas above have largely been cleared and/or paved.

The RED area now has paving not visible in the satellite image. The YELLOW area was being cleared and paving was just starting even though the image shows none of that. So what do these areas look like from a few hundred feet?

Pictures Taken 8/12/23 over Red Area

I shot the four pictures below on 8/12/23. They represent dozens of others. The red area already has most streets, but no fire hydrants.

Pictures Taken over Yellow Area

The two pictures below show some of the development activity taking pace in the yellow area.

Looking west across newly cleared area.
Looking N at part of Colony Ridge expansion.

What kind of homes will go here? To predict the future, look to the past.

Homes on Parade

Colony Ridge is the world’s largest trailer park. One Plum Grove resident who lives near a northern entrance to Colony Ridge says she routinely sees up to seven mobile homes per day going into the development – seven days per week.

It’s hard to know exactly how many new homes arrive each day, because there are other entrances. But if you assume the max for this one entrance, 50 homes a week times 52 weeks makes up to 2600 homes per year.

Colony Ridge Expansion
Manufactured home making its way through the main commercial area of Colony Ridge.
Room with a view…of severe erosion.

Note the erosion in photos above and below. It will make its way downstream into the East Fork San Jacinto. These ditches are typical of Colony Ridge. The eroded sediment will reduce conveyance of the river and contribute to flooding.

Poverty: The Mother of Pollution

Ghandi once said, “Poverty is the mother of pollution.” That’s certainly the case here. But I would modify the saying. While poverty may be the mother of pollution; greed is the father.

The poverty of the residents doesn’t cause sediment pollution. But a business plan built on high-interest-rate, owner financing that targets impoverished people with few options does.

The developer seems to have found a target market that is less concerned with their environment than survival.

It’s a market ripe for exploitation where corners can be cut. Residents have few options and can’t complain.

And the developer shows little interest in changing a business model that fuels relentless expansion and growth. Damn the downstream consequences.

In virtually every area I have photographed, he has not planted vegetation on the banks of the channels. Nor has he used silt fences or installed backslope interceptor swales to reduce erosion as Liberty County regulations require.

Instead of the developer bearing those costs, downstream residents in the Lake Houston Area do. Since Harvey, the Army Corps, Harris County and City of Houston have spent more than $220 million of your tax dollars to dredge excess sediment shed from rivers of mud like this.

Colony Ridge drainage ditch.
Working drainage is a luxury.

The poverty in Colony Ridge is crushing. I’ve seen people sleeping in tents trying to save enough money to buy a camper to live in.

No bathroom in sight. Do Liberty County health codes really allow this?
Christmas dinner. Enlargement of this photo from Christmas 2020 shows food on the table in the foreground.
One small part of Colony Ridge. The market for a piece of the American dream stretches endlessly in Liberty County.

The estimated population of Colony Ridge is now greater than the three largest cities in Liberty County (Cleveland, Dayton, and Liberty) put together. No one knows what the population is with certainty because of the large number of undocumented aliens who did not participate in the last census.

And the Colony Ridge developer is expanding into Harris and Montgomery Counties. ReduceFlooding will monitor progress of those areas to see if they, too, contribute to sediment accumulation, dredging costs, and flooding.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/9/23

Posted by Bob Rehak 2202 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.

Biden Changes Trump’s Changes to Water Regulations

The Associated Press reported on December 30, 2021, that the Biden administration had reversed Trump-era changes to water regulations, which themselves were changes to Obama regulations and other previous administrations. This is getting to be like a tennis match. “Advantage Downstream.”

The EPA regulations have changed numerous times over the years. Enforcement changes, too.

The problem: Changes affect both water quality downstream and land development upstream. That’s why the rules change so often. Competing interests! Public health and safety vs. economic expansion.

Rivers Before the EPA and Clean Water Act

About two thirds of Americans alive today had not yet been born when Cleveland’s Cuyahoga River caught fire in 1969. So they have no memory of the event that helped give birth to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970.

The Cuyahoga River caught fire a total of 13 times dating back to 1868. It is still rated one of the most polluted rivers in America by almost every group that compiles lists. Photo: Cleveland State University Library.

Shortly after its founding, the EPA dispatched photographers all around the country to document environmental abuses.

The photographers took about 81,000 images, more than 20,000 of which were archived. At least 15,000 have been digitized by the National Archives. They form a time capsule showing the way things were.

Warning: These images are disturbing…for people on both sides of the political net.

Why the Changes This Time?

The AP article by Jim Salter and Michael Phillis says, “The Trump-era rule, finalized in 2020, was long sought by builders, oil and gas developers, farmers and others who complained about federal overreach that they said stretched into gullies, creeks and ravines on farmland and other private property.”

However, the writers continued, “…the Trump rule allowed businesses to dump pollutants into unprotected waterways and fill in some wetlands, threatening public water supplies downstream and harming wildlife and habitat.”

They quoted Kelly Moser, Senior Attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center’s Clean Water Defense Initiative. She said, “Today, the Biden administration restored needed clean water protections so that our nation’s waters are guarded against pollution for fishing, swimming, and as sources of drinking water.”

At Issue: Definition of “Waters of the U.S.”

Meanwhile, courts at various levels are still pondering the definition of “Waters of the U.S.” At issue: How far up in the branching structure of a river may the government enforce regulations? As far as it’s navigable? One level up from that? Two? Three? Infinitely? And do the rules apply to desert areas the same way they do to subtropical areas like SE Texas?

The Biden administration decision is a setback for various industries. It broadens which wetlands, streams and rivers can be regulated under the Clean Water Act.

But given the impacts to public health and the immense economic interests at stake, this won’t be the last time we see the rules change. An army of lobbyists is likely mobilizing right now.

Local Impact

Several developments in the Lake Houston Area contained wetlands affected regulation changes. Consider, for instance, the case of Woodridge Village. The Army Corps ruled that it contained wetlands, but that the wetlands didn’t fall under their jurisdiction because of rules in effect at the time. So there was no violation of the Clean Water Act. Hundreds of homes in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest flooded, partially as a result of the environmental destruction.

In this area, sediment pollution is one of our most serious concerns. We’ve seen repeated and almost constant releases into the West Fork from 20-square miles of sand mines immediately upstream from us.

Confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork by 59 Bridge. TCEQ found that Liberty Mines discharged 56 million gallons of white waste water into the West Fork.
Repeated and multiple breaches at Triple PG mine discharged sediment-laden water directly into Caney Creek. This one lasted for months.

Searching on the word “breach” in ReduceFlooding.com pulls up 116 stories, many of which show multiple breaches.

But mining isn’t the only upstream issue at stake. So is sediment pollution from new development.

Drainage ditch in Artavia. March 2020 in West Fork watershed
Eroding ditch in Colony Ridge (East Fork Watershed) due to lack of backslope interceptor systems and grass.

Making Private Expenses a Public Cost

The EPA lists sediment as the most common pollutant in rivers, streams, lakes and reservoirs. It has contributed to flooding thousands of homes in the Lake Houston Area.

West Fork mouth bar almost totally blocked the river where it meets Lake Houston.
East Fork Mouth Bar grew 4000 feet in two years between Harvey and Imelda.

Both mouth bars above have since been dredged at great public expense, but abuses continue. I just wish we could all find a way to live together. This should not be a case of health and safety vs. economic development. We need all three for communities to prosper.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/2/23

1952 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.