Challenges and opportunities for dam removal projects in Texas Lessons that can be learned from other states Ryan McGillicuddy – Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Stronach Dam, Fish in the Pine River, MI

Background Nationwide: 75,000 dams listed on the National Inventory of Dams Estimated 2.5 million nationwide Texas: Over 7500 dams listed on the National Inventory of Dams 1000s more undocumented dams 74 dams failed in Texas between 1989 and 2009.

Benefits of Dams Water supply Hydropower Flood control Navigation Recreational opportunities Starcke Dam, Marble Falls, TX Flood

Impacts of Dams Alter fish and wildlife habitats and natural fluvial processes – Alter the dynamic transport of water and sediment – Barrier to passage of nutrients and aquatic organisms – Change water temperatures – Contaminated sediments – Floodplain isolation and reduced peak flows – Shift from lotic to lentic habitat less suitable for native species, increases generalist species and may decrease diversity Aging infrastructure poses risk to property and safety. Life expectancy of the average dam is 50 years. Average dam age in the U.S. is 51 years. Many dams are now obsolete

Dam Removal: A New Option Once perceived as anti-progress Increasingly accepted as an option for restoring waterways Advancing science documenting effects of removal Successful projects have brought visibility, provided positive examples Costs are better understood: – Wisconsin, repair 3X the cost of removal – Pennsylvania, average cost of $75,000 Nonetheless, a difficult process requiring the coordination of multiple stakeholders and regulatory agencies

According to American Rivers: Englewood Dam, Englewood, Oh 1,057 recorded dam removals in the US 593 since in 2012 Pennsylvania alone has removed ~275 since 1999, and ~50 since 2010 No recent removals in the Southwest

Questions How do state programs regulate dam removal and to what extend do they assist in the process? What are the variables that lead to success? What can Texas learn from these successes?

Study Area Examined efforts in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Texas. Mostly small and/or obsolete dams

Variables Reviewed Legal framework/Permitting process Agency structure and interagency coordination Technical guidance provided Availability of funding and/or financial assistance Public outreach and stakeholder involvement

Successful PracticeStates that use this practiceComments PartnershipsNH, PA, WI Partners may act as advocates where states cannot and may be sources of additional funding. Helps to distribute work load. Skilled Grant CoordinationNH, PA, WI Essential for reducing costs to state and dam owners. Increases number of successful projects. Consistent State FundingPA, WI Directly assists dam owners and increases number of successful projects. Multiple Guidance Documents AvailableNH, WI Provides important information to dam owners and stakeholders. Assistance with Project DesignPA, WIMay reduce project costs for dam owner. Regular Interagency CoordinationNH, PA, WI Enables consistent approach from state regulatory bodies, state fish and wildlife agencies, federal agencies, historic commissions, etc. Active Dam Safety ProgramNH, PA, WI Helps to identify potential projects. Can acts as a form of outreach. Single Point of ContactNH, PA, WISimplifies process for dam owner. Public Notice PeriodPA, WI Required by law in states listed. May help to address stakeholder concerns early in process. USACE State Programmatic General Permit NH, PA, WI Satisfies federal Clean Water Act permitting requirements. Single Permit ApplicationNH, PA, WI Simplifies process for dam owner. A permit waiver in the case of PA.

Other considerations for Texas Geography: Surface water

Giant freshwater prawn (Macrobrachium carcinus) American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) Shovelnose Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus platorynchus) Paddlefish (Polydon spathula) Species with lifecycles impacted by dams

Water Rights

Drought

Funding Grant TCEQ authority to levy fines for dam safety violations. Increase funding for dam safety program, including grants for dam owners with limited means. Fishing license surcharge ($1) for river restoration projects, including dam removal. Approximately $2 million. All require legislative action.

Funding, cont’d Improved technical assistance from agencies (project design, grant writing assistance, etc.) should lower cost. Partnerships Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership Desert Fish Habitat Partnership Guadalupe Bass Restoration Initiative Local watershed groups Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) funds USFWS Fish Passage Program

Fish Passage Program Ottine Dam removal project. San Marcos River, Ottine, TX

Mitigation Banks Used to offset permitted impacts to waters of the U.S. For-profit model Increasing number of stream restoration banks in Texas Limitations: Small order streams Existing policy does not favor in-channel restoration

Questions?