Hickory UWCD No. 1
Management Plan: 2009-2019
TIME
PERIOD
REGIONAL COOPERATION AND COORDINATION
ECONOMIC ENTERPRISE IN THE HICKORY DISTRICT
STATEMENT OF GUIDING PRINCIPLES
GROUNDWATER RESOURCES OF THE HICKORY DISTRICT
HICKORY AQUIFER
EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER
ELLENBURGER-SAN SABA AQUIFER
MANAGED AVAILABLE GROUNDWATER IN THE DISTRICT
METHODOLOGY
FOR CALCULATING DISTRICT WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND
GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY IN THE HICKORY DISTRICT
SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER USE IN THE DISTRICT
ESTIMATE OF RECHARGE FROM PRECIPITATION TO SURFACE WATER
BODIES,
AND FLOWS INTO, OUT
OF, AND BETWEEN THE EDWARDS AND TRINITY GROUPS
COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL
RECHARGE TO THE EDWARDS-TRINITY
AQUIFER FROM PRECIPITATION
DISTRICT WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS BY COUNTY
SURFACE WATER RESOURCES OF
THE HICKORY UWCD
PROJECTED
SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES
TOTAL
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES OF THE DISTRICT
ACTIONS, PROCEDURES, PERFORMANCE AND AVOIDANCE FOR PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
TRACKING METHODOLOGY
MANAGEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
GOALS
1.0
PROVIDE FOR EFFICIENT USE
2.0
CONTROL AND PREVENT WASTE
3.0
ADDRESSING NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES
4.0
ADDRESSING CONJUNCTIVE SURFACE WATER ISSUES
5.0 ADDRESSING DROUGHT CONDITIONS
6.0 ADDRESSING CONSERVATION
MANAGEMENT GOALS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE DISTRICT
STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT BY THE DISTRICT
The Hickory Underground Water Conservation District No. 1 strives to conserve, preserve, prevent waste, protect, and recharge the underground waters of all aquifers within the legal boundaries, as far as practicable to minimize the draw-down of the water table and the reduction of artesian pressure within the District Boundaries.
This amended plan becomes effective upon approval by the Board of Directors and remains in effect until an amended plan is approved or December 1, 2013, whichever is later. The plan may be revised at anytime, or after five years when the plan will be reviewed, revised or amended and is approved as administratively complete by the Texas Water Development Board.
At the request of area citizens, the Texas Water Development Board entered an order on December 29, 1975, delineating a subdivision of the Hickory Aquifer Underground Water Reservoir in Concho, Kimble, Llano, Mason, McCulloch, Menard and San Saba Counties. In November 1981, a petition was submitted to the Texas Water Commission calling for the creation of the Hickory Underground Water Conservation District No. 1 (District). At a hearing on June 9, 1982, before the Texas Water Commission the petition was granted and the District thus created.
The confirmation election required by state statute
was held on August 14, 1982; the District was officially established with a 94%
approval of voters in those areas of
Concho, Kimble, Mason, McCulloch, Menard and San Saba within the District
boundaries.
On August 12, 1999 the
petition of creation was amended by the TNRCC (now Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality) to include all aquifers within the legal boundaries and
management jurisdiction of the District.
On January 11, 2003, landowners of Mason County
petitioned the District to annex the remainder of Mason County not currently in
the District, and on May 03, 2003, in a special election held at the Mason
County Courthouse the remainder of Mason County was annexed into the District
with approval of 88% of the voters.
Regional
Cooperation and Coordination
Regional Water Planning Groups
In 1998 the District was apportioned into two Regional
Water Planning Groups established pursuant to § 16.053 of the Texas Water Code Concho, Kimble, Mason, McCulloch and
Menard are located in Region F and San
Saba County is in the Lower Colorado Regional Water Planning Group (Region K).
The District’s Regional planning responsibilities are within a 46-county area,
stretching from Matagorda Bay to the Pecos River in West Texas.
Groundwater Management
Area 7
In 2003 the Texas Water Development Board designated
the boundaries of 16 groundwater management areas in Texas. The District lies
entirely within Groundwater Management Area 7, which encompasses 34 counties
and 21 groundwater conservation districts within an area of approximately
42,000 square miles. The groundwater management area was designated for the
Edwards-Trinity aquifer, but also includes all or portions of the minor
Lipan-Kickapoo, Hickory, Ellenburger-San Saba, and Dockum aquifers, as well as
a small portion of the Ogallala aquifer,
The District participates in the mandatory joint
planning process mandated by 36.108 of the Texas Water Code and is actively
working with the other 20 GMA- 7districts to develop Desired Future Conditions
for the Edwards-Trinity aquifer. The
District is also meeting with relevant GMA 7 districts and conferring regularly
with the Texas Water Development Board to establish Desired Future Conditions
and assist in the calculation of Managed Available Groundwater for the Hickory
and Ellenburger-San Saba aquifer formations, for which Groundwater Availability
Models are not available, nor are any scheduled for completion before the end
of 2010 when initial DFCs must be submitted to the Board
West Texas Regional
Groundwater Alliance
The District is a member of the West Texas Regional
Groundwater Alliance. The regional alliance consists of seventeen (17) locally
created and locally funded districts that encompass almost 8.75 million acres
or 13,000 square miles of West Texas. This West Texas region is as diverse as
the State of Texas, making it necessary for each member district to develop its
own unique priority management goals and rules to best serve the needs of its
constituents.
In 1988, four (4) groundwater
districts; Coke County UWCD, Glasscock GCD, Irion County WCD, and Sterling
County UWCD signed the original Cooperative Agreement. Since then the number of
groundwater conservation districts in the area has more than quadrupled. The
current member districts are:
|
Coke County UWCD |
Crockett County GCD |
Glasscock GCD |
|
Hickory UWCD |
Irion County WCD |
Lipan-Kickapoo WCD |
|
Plateau UWC & SD |
Santa Rita UWCD |
Sterling County UWCD |
|
Sutton County UWCD |
Menard County UWD |
Lone Wolf GCD |
|
Hill Country UWCD |
Jeff Davis County UWCD |
Middle Pecos GCD |
|
Permian Basin UWCD |
Wes-Tex GCD |
|
The Alliance was created to implement common
objectives of coordinating and facilitating the conservation, preservation, and
beneficial use of water and related sources. Local districts monitor the
water-related activities of the farming and ranching, oil and gas, industrial
entities and municipalities
The Hickory Underground Water Conservation District
No. 1 is located near the geographical center of Texas and is comprised of
approximately 1,683,080 acres, including portions of: McCulloch, Menard,
Kimble, San Saba, Concho counties and the entirety of Mason County. In 2003 the
District gained approximately 433,000 acres with the annexation of the
remainder of Mason County that had not been included when the District was
initially created.
Principal industries of the District are listed in the table below. The District's economy is based to a large degree on agriculture; 12% of the acreage in the District is cropland. Principal municipalities in or near the district boundaries are Brady, San Saba, Mason and Eden.
Economic
Enterprise in the Hickory District1
|
County |
Economy |
|
Concho |
Livestock production, tourism, hunting, fishing |
|
Kimble |
Livestock production, tourism, hunting, fishing |
|
McCulloch |
Agribusiness, tourism, manufacturing, silica sand |
|
Mason |
Ranching, hunting, tourism |
|
Menard |
Agribusiness, hunting and tourism, minor oil and gas production |
|
San Saba |
Gov/Services, retail pecan industry, tourism, hunting |
Statement of Guiding Principles
The Hickory Underground Water Conservation District
No. 1 (District) is created and organized under the terms and provisions of
Article XVI, Section 59, of the Constitution of Texas and Chapter 36 (formerly
Chapter 52) of the Texas Water Code, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, and the
District’s actions are authorized by, and consistent with this constitutional
and statutory provision, including all amendments and additions. The District
is created for the purpose of conserving, preserving, recharging, controlling
subsidence, protecting and preventing waste and as far as practicable to
minimize the drawdown of the water table and the reduction of artesian pressure
of all Aquifers within the district boundaries. In order to carry out its
constitutional and statutory purposes, the District has all the powers
authorized by Article XVI, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution, and Chapter
36 of the Texas Water Code, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, together with all
amendments and additions.
The District's purposes and powers are implemented
through promulgation and enforcement of the District's regulations. These
regulations are adopted and revised under the authority of Subchapter E,
Chapter 36, Texas Water Code, and are incorporated herein as a part of the
District's management plan.
The District is within the Colorado River basin and
is bisected by the Llano and San Saba Rivers, as well as numerous other creeks.
Drainage is typically from west to east.
There are two major geologic features within the District. The Llano Uplift
(Central Basin) is in the eastern and southern portions of the District. This
feature is made up of ancient Cambrian rocks ranging in age from 1.0 to 1.2
billion years old and comprises granite and older metamorphic rocks. The
northern and western parts of the District are in the Edwards Plateau region
and are made up of Cretaceous Age limestone, dolomite, and marble.
The District elevation ranges from 1,100 to 2,300 feet above sea level.
Groundwater Resources of the Hickory Aquifer2
The Hickory Aquifer is the primary source of the
District’s groundwater, which is used for irrigation, public water supply,
industrial, stock, and the domestic needs of the people and entities served.
The Hickory Aquifer occurs in parts of the counties in the Llano uplift region
of Central Texas. Discontinuous outcrops of the Hickory Sandstone overlie or
flank exposed Precambrian rocks that form the central core of the uplift. The
down dip artesian portion of the aquifer encircles the uplift and extends to
maximum depths approaching 4000 ft. Most of the water pumped from the aquifer
is used for irrigation. The largest capacity wells, however, have been
completed for municipal water supply and industrial purposes in the Mason, Eden
and Brady area.
The Hickory Sandstone Member of the Cambrian Riley
Formation is composed of some of the oldest sedimentary rocks found in Texas.
In most of the northern and western portions of the aquifer, the Hickory can be
differentiated into lower, middle, and upper units, which reach a maximum
thickness of 480 feet in southwestern McCulloch County. In the southern and eastern
extent of the aquifer, the Hickory consists of only two units. Extensive block
faulting has compartmentalized the Hickory Aquifer, thus restricting hydrologic
connection from one area to another.
The Edwards-Trinity Plateau Aquifer underlies the
Edwards Plateau east of the Pecos River and the Stockton Plateau west of the
Pecos River, supplying water to all or parts of 38 counties.
The aquifer consists of saturated sediments of lower
Cretaceous age Trinity Group formations. Natural chemical quality of water
ranges from fresh to slightly saline. The water is typically hard and may vary
widely in concentrations of dissolved solids and bicarbonate. The salinity of
the groundwater tends to increase toward the west.
Well yields are typically low in the eastern portion
of the Edwards-Trinity, consequently there is little pumpage from the aquifer
within the District. Nevertheless, in some instances water levels have declined
as a result of pumpage. Historical declines have occurred in the northwestern
part of the District. Rapid population migration from the cities of Austin and
San Antonio will add considerably to usage.
The Ellenburger-San Saba Aquifer underlies 4,000
square miles in parts of 15 counties in the Llano Uplift area of Central Texas.
Discontinuous outcrops of the aquifer generally encircle older rocks in the
core of the Uplift. The remaining down-dip portion contains fresh to slightly
saline water to depths of approximately 3,000 feet below land and surface.
Water produced from the aquifer has a range in dissolved solids between 200 and
3,000 mg/l, but usually less than 1,000 mg/l. The quality of water deteriorates
rapidly away from the outcrop areas. Approximately, 20 miles of more down-dip
from the outcrop, water is typically unsuitable for most uses.
Most of the deep municipal wells, which supply the City of Brady, produce an
unknown amount of water from the Ellenburger-San Saba sequence of rocks. A
large portion of the water supply for the City of San Saba is believed to be
from the Ellenberger-San Saba and Marble Falls Aquifer.
The Marble Falls Aquifer occurs primarily in the
portions of McCulloch and San Saba counties within the District. Smaller
amounts of water are also used for rural domestic supplies, watering of
livestock and irrigation. Only small portions of Mason and Kimble counties are
affected by this aquifer.
The Marble Falls Aquifer occurs in several outcrops, primarily along the
northern and eastern flanks of the Llano Uplift Region of Central Texas.
Groundwater occurs in fractures, solution cavities, and channels in the
limestone of the Marble Falls Formation of the Pennsylvanian Bend Group.
Maximum thickness of the formation is 600 feet. Numerous large springs issue
from the aquifer and provide a significant part of the base-flow to the San
Saba River in McCulloch and San Saba counties and to the Colorado River in San
Saba and Lampasas counties.
Existing data for the Marble Falls aquifer show that
it contains mostly fresh water in outcrop areas and becomes mineralized a short
distance down-dip from the outcrop areas. However, very few data exist to
evaluate the brackish water that is present.
Most wells producing from the Marble Falls aquifer produce fresh groundwater on
the outcrop, while groundwater becomes highly mineralized within a relatively
short distance of the down-dip. However, because the areal extent of the Marble
Falls aquifer is relatively limited, and because much of the existing data
indicate that the aquifer has limited groundwater availability, the Marble
Falls aquifer must be considered a very limited source of brackish groundwater.
Due to the presumed deep nature where brackish groundwater would be located,
and the low productivity of the aquifer, relative costs are expected to be
moderate to high.
Managed Available Groundwater in
District Aquifers
The District is actively participating in joint
planning with 20 other groundwater districts in GMA 7 pursuant to Section
36.108 of the Texas Water Code, but Desired Future Conditions for District
aquifers within the management area have not yet been adopted and are not due
to the Texas Water Development Board until 2010. Once the desired future
conditions have been adopted by GMA 7, an estimate of the managed available
groundwater can be determined. The District may amend the management plan at
that time.
Methodology for Calculating District
Water Supply and Demand
Irrigation and Livestock: Irrigation and livestock numbers for counties are
allocated to the District in proportion to the percentage of the area of the
respective counties within the District as follows: Concho, 11.43%; Kimble,
2.55%; Mason, 100%; McCulloch 73.03%; Menard, 13.45%; San Saba, 55.71%.
Mining, Electric Generation and Manufacturing: No mining, electric generation or manufacturing takes place within the District in Concho, Kimble and Menard Counties. All mining in Mason, McCulloch and San Saba counties takes place within District boundaries. Electric generation estimates for Mason, McCulloch and San Saba Counties are included within District boundaries, but all estimates are zero. All manufacturing in Mason, McCulloch and San Saba counties takes place within the District.
Municipal
and County Other:
The municipalities of Brady (McCulloch County), Eden (Concho County), Mason
(Mason County), and San Saba (San Saba County), and the Millersview-Doole WSC
(Concho and McCulloch Counties) and Richland SUD (San Saba and McCulloch
Counties) are within District boundaries and are included in the respective
data tables. The municipalities of Junction (Kimble County) and Menard (Menard
County) are outside of District boundaries and are excluded from the data
tables. The county data for the County Other Water user Group is apportioned in
all counties based upon the percentage of county area located within the
District. See the Irrigation and Livestock methodology discussion for the
respective percentage values.
District
totals within tables may vary by an acre-foot due to rounding of numbers.
TABLE 1.
GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY (SUPPLY) IN THE HICKORY
DISTRICT
(Extrapolated
from 2007 State Water Plan, 3/30/2007)
|
County |
Aquifer |
2000 |
2010-2060 (annual supply) |
|
Concho |
Edwards-Trinity |
916 |
1404 |
|
|
Hickory |
1634 |
1634 |
|
|
Lipan |
744 |
744 |
|
|
Other
Aquifer |
64 |
56 |
|
Kimble |
Edwards-Trinity |
682 |
611 |
|
|
Ellenberger-San
Saba |
6 |
6
|
|
Mason |
Edwards-Trinity |
2982 |
3828 |
|
|
Ellenberger-San
Saba |
4650 |
4650 |
|
|
Hickory |
76492 |
76492 |
|
McCulloch |
Edwards-Trinity |
3630 |
6024 |
|
|
Ellenberger-San
Saba |
12066 |
12066 |
|
|
Hickory
|
92124 |
92124 |
|
|
Other |
188 |
76 |
|
Menard |
Edwards-Trinity |
2573 |
2066 |
|
|
Ellenberger-San
Saba |
|
21 |
|
|
Hickory |
|
4573 |
|
|
Other |
31 |
6 |
|
San
Saba |
Ellenberger-San
Saba |
5679 |
3164 |
|
|
Hickory |
3643 |
2030 |
|
|
Marble
Falls |
6897 |
3842 |
|
District Total (acre-feet) |
215,001 |
215,417 |
|
Of the total
215, 417 acre-feet of annual groundwater supply of the District for the
period 2010-2060, 43,780 acre-feet is annual recharge to District aquifers, the
remaining 171,637 acre-feet is from aquifer storage.6
TABLE 2.
Summary of Historical Groundwater Use
Within the District
(See the Methodology section for
data apportionment criteria.)
(Source: Historical Groundwater
Pumpage, Texas Water Development Board Water Use Survey database website,
5-14-08
(Acre-feet)
CONCHO
COUNTY
(11.43% of land area is within the
District)
|
Year
|
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
682 |
0 |
0 |
538 |
0 |
58 |
1278 |
|
2000 |
582 |
0 |
0 |
275 |
0 |
49 |
907 |
|
2001 |
614 |
0 |
0 |
225 |
0 |
49 |
888 |
|
2002 |
613 |
0 |
0 |
397 |
0 |
50 |
1059 |
|
2003 |
586 |
0 |
0 |
171 |
0 |
32 |
789 |
KIMBLE
COUNTY
(2.55% of land area is within the
District)
|
Year |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation |
Mining
|
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6.0 |
0 |
10.0 |
16.0 |
|
2000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1.2 |
0 |
9.6 |
10.8 |
|
2001 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1.3 |
0 |
9.3 |
10.6 |
|
2002 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1.3 |
0 |
8.4 |
9.7 |
|
2003 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1.3 |
0 |
6.5 |
7.8 |
MASON
COUNTY
(100% of land area is within
District)
|
Year |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
920 |
0 |
0 |
8,856 |
6 |
493 |
10,275 |
|
2000 |
890 |
0 |
0 |
10,223 |
140 |
350 |
11,603 |
|
2001 |
850 |
0 |
0 |
9,499 |
6 |
396 |
10,751 |
|
2002 |
1772 |
0 |
0 |
9,866 |
0 |
327 |
11,965 |
|
2003 |
744 |
0 |
0 |
9,276 |
0 |
801 |
10,821 |
MCCULLOCH
COUNTY
(73.03% of land area is in District)
|
Year |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
3040 |
0 |
0 |
1467 |
140 |
455 |
5102 |
|
2000 |
3049 |
637 |
0 |
2038 |
23 |
546 |
6293 |
|
2001 |
1849 |
669 |
0 |
1489 |
140 |
396 |
4543 |
|
2002 |
1847 |
489 |
0 |
1518 |
140 |
480 |
4474 |
|
2003 |
1984 |
704 |
0 |
2531 |
140 |
366 |
5725 |
MENARD
COUNTY
(13.45% of land area is in District)
|
Year |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation* |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
84 |
0 |
43 |
127 |
|
2000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
50 |
0 |
46 |
96 |
|
2001 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
56 |
0 |
45 |
101 |
|
2002 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
56 |
0 |
40 |
96 |
|
2003 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
25 |
0 |
46 |
71 |
* Most groundwater irrigation in Menard County takes place in
the Hickory aquifer.
SAN
SABA COUNTY
(55.71% of land area is in District)
|
Year |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Electric |
Irrigation |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
1999 |
1039 |
24 |
0 |
614 |
163 |
482 |
2322 |
|
2000 |
1161 |
24 |
0 |
256 |
163 |
531 |
2135 |
|
2001 |
1226 |
24 |
0 |
197 |
163 |
488 |
2098 |
|
2002 |
1077 |
24 |
0 |
205 |
163 |
489 |
1958 |
|
2003 |
1074 |
7 |
0 |
419 |
163 |
245 |
1908 |
TABLE 3.
Estimates of Recharge from Precipitation,
Discharges to Surface Water Bodies, and Flows Into, Out of and Between Edwards
and Trinity Groups
in the
Edwards-Trinity Aquifer within District Boundaries
(Source:
GAM 08-34, TWDB, May 28, 2008)
(acre-feet/year.
All numbers rounded to nearest acre-foot )
|
Management
Plan Requirement |
Aquifer
or Confining Unit |
Results |
|
Estimated annual amount of recharge from
precipitation |
Edwards Group Undifferentiated Trinity Group |
4,450 7,797 |
|
Estimated annual volume of water that discharges from
the aquifer to springs and any surface water body including lakes, streams
and rivers |
Edwards Group Undifferentiated Trinity Group |
3,705 11,425 |
|
Estimated annual volume of flow into the District
within the Edwards -Trinity aquifer in the District |
Edwards Group Undifferentiated Trinity Group |
1,508 5,403 |
|
Estimated annual volume of flow out of the District within the Edwards - Trinity aquifer in the District |
Edwards Group Undifferentiated Trinity Group |
1,061 2,755 |
|
Estimated net annual volume of flow between the
Edwards and Trinity Groups in the District |
Edwards Group into the Undifferentiated Trinity
Group |
1,264 |
Estimates
of Recharge from Precipitation, Discharges to Surface Water Bodies, and Flows
Into, Out of and Between Aquifers
in the Hickory Aquifer
No GAM Available
Estimates
of Recharge from Precipitation, Discharges to Surface Water Bodies, and Flows
Into, Out of and Between Aquifers
in the Ellenburger- San Saba Aquifer
No GAM Available
Table 4 below compares the recharge numbers from GAM 08-34, dated May 28, 2008, from the Texas Water Development Board, and those from GAM 07-32, received from the TWDB on December 12, 2007, pursuant to a request from districts in GMA 7 participating in joint planning in accordance with Section 36.108 of the Texas Water Code, for a determination, inter alia, of estimated recharge to the Edwards-Trinity aquifer from precipitation under drought-of-record conditions.
TABLE
4.
COMPARISON
OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECHARGE TO
EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER
FROM PRECIPITATION
|
|
Recharge – GAM 08-34 |
Recharge – GAM 07-32 TWDB
12/11/07 |
|
Concho County |
|
674 |
|
Kimble County |
|
670 |
|
Mason County |
|
1,915 |
|
McCulloch County |
|
3,692 |
|
Menard County |
|
2,086 |
|
San Saba County |
|
0 |
|
District Total (acre-feet) |
12,247 |
9,037 |
TABLE
5.
DISTRICT
WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS BY COUNTY
2007 ADOPTED STATE WATER PLAN
(See the Methodology section for
data apportionment criteria.)
|
County |
Water Use |
2000 |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
CONCHO |
IRRIGATION |
294 |
491 |
489 |
487 |
485 |
483 |
482 |
|
CONCHO |
LIVESTOCK |
62 |
89 |
89 |
89 |
89 |
89 |
89 |
|
CONCHO |
COUNTY
OTHER |
19 |
22 |
23 |
23 |
23 |
23 |
23 |
|
CONCHO |
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
116 |
130 |
135 |
135 |
135 |
135 |
135 |
|
CONCHO |
MUNICIPAL-Eden |
413 |
569 |
589 |
589 |
589 |
589 |
589 |
|
CONCHO TOTAL |
(acre-feet) |
905 |
1,301 |
1,325 |
1,323 |
1,321 |
1,319 |
1,317 |
|
KIMBLE |
IRRIGATION |
16 |
25 |
24 |
23 |
22 |
21 |
21 |
|
KIMBLE |
LIVESTOCK |
12 |
17 |
17 |
17 |
17 |
17 |
17 |
|
KIMBLE |
COUNTY
OTHER |
5 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
|
KIMBLE Total |
(acre-feet) |
33 |
48 |
47 |
46 |
45 |
44 |
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MASON |
IRRIGATION |
10,223 |
10,079 |
9,936 |
9,792 |
9,648 |
9,505 |
9,363 |
|
MASON |
LIVESTOCK |
534 |
1,036 |
1,036 |
1,036 |
1,036 |
1,036 |
1,036 |
|
MASON |
MINING |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
|
MASON |
COUNTY
OTHER |
174 |
195 |
198 |
200 |
201 |
201 |
202 |
|
MASON |
MUNICIPAL
- Mason |
715 |
749 |
753 |
755 |
756 |
757 |
757 |
|
MASON
Total |
(acre-feet) |
11,652 |
12,065 |
11,929 |
11,789 |
11,647 |
11,505 |
11,364 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
IRRIGATION |
2,088 |
2,062 |
2,037 |
2,011 |
1,985 |
1,959 |
1,934 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
LIVESTOCK |
659 |
750 |
750 |
750 |
750 |
750 |
750 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
MANUFACTURING |
680 |
844 |
929 |
1,004 |
1,075 |
1,137 |
1,233 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
MINING |
140 |
154 |
159 |
162 |
165 |
168 |
171 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
MUNICIPAL-Brady |
1,875 |
1,898 |
1,931 |
1,931 |
1,931 |
1,931 |
1,931 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
255 |
256 |
261 |
261 |
261 |
261 |
261 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
Richland
SUD |
116 |
116 |
118 |
118 |
118 |
118 |
118 |
|
MCCULLOCH |
COUNTY
OTHER |
15 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
|
MCCULLOCH
Total |
(acre-feet) |
5,828 |
6,089 |
6,194 |
6,246 |
6,294 |
6,333 |
6,407 |
|
MENARD |
IRRIGATION |
423 |
815 |
813 |
810 |
807 |
804 |
802 |
|
MENARD |
LIVESTOCK |
56 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
|
MENARD |
COUNTY
OTHER |
14 |
14 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
|
MENARD
Total |
(acre-feet) |
493 |
916 |
914 |
911 |
908 |
905 |
903 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SAN SABA |
IRRIGATION |
1,866 |
1,805 |
1,747 |
1,691 |
1,636 |
1,583 |
1,532 |
|
SAN SABA |
LIVESTOCK |
664 |
664 |
664 |
664 |
664 |
664 |
664 |
|
SAN SABA |
MANUFACTURING |
24 |
28 |
30 |
31 |
32 |
33 |
35 |
|
SAN SABA |
MINING |
163 |
163 |
163 |
163 |
163 |
163 |
163 |
|
SAN SABA |
MUNICIPAL – San Saba |
892 |
893 |
895 |
896 |
897 |
897 |
898 |
|
SAN SABA |
Richland SUD |
185 |
193 |
208 |
220 |
232 |
233 |
235 |
|
SAN SABA |
COUNTY OTHER |
122 |
130 |
143 |
154 |
164 |
165 |
167 |
|
SAN
SABA Total |
(acre-feet) |
3,915 |
3,876 |
3,849 |
3,819 |
3,788 |
3,738 |
3,693 |
|
District
Total |
(acre-feet) |
22,826 |
24,294 |
24,257 |
24,133 |
24,003 |
23,844 |
23,728 |
Surface
Water Resources of the Hickory UWCD No. 1
The only surface water impoundment used for purposes
other than livestock consumption is Brady Lake. The normal pool capacity is
30,000 acre-feet with a calculated annual firm yield of 2,2528
acre-feet. Currently the City of Brady is not utilizing this water; however the
city will construct a 3mgd R.O. Treatment Plant to provide the City of Brady
adequate water supplies to blend with the Hickory Aquifer wells in order to
maintain a Radium 226/228 level below state and federal standards. Current Brady
Lake pumpage is approximately 9 acre-feet annually for domestic purposes.
The San Saba and Llano Rivers bisect the District;
however, only a small amount is used for other than livestock and domestic
purposes.
TABLE 6.
District
Surface Water Usage by County and Category in 2004:
Water Use
Survey – Historical Water Use
|
County |
Municipal |
Manufacturing |
Irrigation |
Electric |
Mining |
Livestock |
Total |
|
Concho |
44 |
0 |
143 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
197 |
|
Kimble |
0 |
0 |
56 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
58 |
|
Mason |
0 |
0 |
115 |
0 |
0 |
524 |
639 |
|
McCulloch |
21 |
0 |
364 |
0 |
0 |
91 |
476 |
|
Menard |
0 |
0 |
414 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
424 |
|
San Saba |
133 |
0 |
2229 |
0 |
0 |
124 |
2486 |
|
Total
(acre-feet) |
198 |
0 |
3321 |
0 |
0 |
761 |
4280 |
TABLE
7.
PROJECTED
SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES
2007 ADOPTED STATE WATER PLAN
(See the Methodology section for
data apportionment criteria.)
|
|
2000 |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Concho County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run of River Irrig. |
75 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
|
Livestock |
20 |
14 |
14 |
14 |
14 |
14 |
14 |
|
Run
of River County Other |
8 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
0 |
92 |
85 |
123 |
112 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kimble County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run of River County
Other |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Run of River Irrig. |
50 |
38 |
38 |
38 |
38 |
38 |
38 |
|
Livestock |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mason County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Livestock |
628 |
451 |
451 |
451 |
451 |
451 |
451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Menard County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run of River County
Other |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Run of River Irrig. |
466 |
395 |
395 |
395 |
395 |
395 |
395 |
|
Livestock |
15 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McCulloch County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run of River Irrig. |
402 |
93 |
93 |
93 |
93 |
93 |
93 |
|
Livestock |
150 |
120 |
120 |
120 |
120 |
120 |
120 |
|
Brady |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Manufacturing |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
0 |
161 |
164 |
238 |
216 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Saba County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run of River Irrig. |
4,902 |
4,902 |
4,902 |
4,902 |
4,902 |
4,902 |
4,902 |
|
Livestock |
0 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
|
County
Other |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
DISTRICT TOTAL
(acre-feet) |
6,719 |
6,435 |
6,431 |
6,543 |
6,510 |
6,182 |
6,182 |
* Apportioning
surface water irrigation by land area in accordance with the methodology
discussed on page 8 yields the values in this table; however, the Menard County
WCID observes that no surface water irrigation takes place from the San Saba
River in the portion of Menard County within Hickory District boundaries.
TABLE
8.**
TOTAL
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES OF THE DISTRICT
|
|
2000 |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Surface Water |
6,719 |
6,435 |
6,431 |
6,543 |
6,510 |
6,182 |
6,182 |
|
Groundwater |
215,001 |
215,417 |
215,417 |
215,417 |
215,417 |
215,417 |
215,417 |
|
TOTAL
(acre-feet) |
221,720 |
221,852 |
221,848 |
221,960 |
221,927 |
221,599 |
221,599 |
**
Compilation of Table 1 and Table 7.
Table
9.
PROJECTED WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
IN THE 2007 ADOPTED STATE WATER PLAN
(See the Methodology section for data
apportionment criteria.)
Groundwater
resources of the Hickory Underground Water Conservation District No. 1 could
potentially be developed to implement, or be impacted by, the following water
management strategies which are included in the adopted 2007 State Water Plan.
CONCHO COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Irrigation |
Irrig.
Conservation |
Conservation |
0 |
748 |
1,496 |
1,496 |
1,496 |
1,496 |
|
Eden |
Advanced
Treatment |
Hickory
aquifer |
392 |
392 |
392 |
392 |
392 |
392 |
|
Eden |
Bottled
Water Program |
Hickory
Aquifer |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
Eden |
Replacement
well |
Hickory
Aquifer |
322 |
322 |
322 |
322 |
322 |
322 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
Subordination |
Colorado
River MWD System |
34 |
42 |
1 |
7 |
0 |
0 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
New/Renew
Water Supply |
Colorado
River MWD System |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
118 |
118 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
749 |
1,505 |
2,212 |
2,218 |
2,329 |
2,329 |
KIMBLE COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
County
Other |
Subordination |
Llano
River Run-of-River City of Junction |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
|
Irrigation |
Irrig.
Conservation |
Conservation |
0 |
74 |
147 |
147 |
147 |
147 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
9 |
83 |
156 |
156 |
156 |
156 |
MASON COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Irrigation |
Irrig.
Conservation |
Conservation
|
0 |
746 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
0 |
746 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
1,491 |
MCCULLOCH COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Brady |
Conservation |
Conservation |
77 |
192 |
214 |
222 |
230 |
239 |
|
Irrigation |
Irrig.
Conservation |
Conservation |
0 |
1,977 |
394 |
394 |
394 |
394 |
|
Brady |
Subordination |
Brady
Lake |
2,170 |
2,170 |
2,170 |
2,170 |
2,170 |
2,170 |
|
Richland
SUD |
Advanced
Treatment |
Hickory
aquifer |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
|
County
Other |
Bottled
Water Program |
Hickory
aquifer |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Richland
SUD |
Bottled
Water Program |
Hickory
aquifer |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
Richland
SUD |
Replacement
Well |
Hickory
aquifer |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
113 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
Subordination |
Colorado
River MWD System |
67 |
81 |
1 |
14 |
0 |
0 |
|
Millersview-Doole
WSC |
New/Renew
Water Supply |
Colorado
River MWD System |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
228 |
228 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
2,541 |
4,647 |
3,006 |
3,027 |
3,249 |
3,258 |
MENARD COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
County
Other |
Develop
Hickory Supplies |
Hickory
Aquifer |
20 |
21 |
20 |
20 |
19 |
19 |
|
Irrigation |
Irrigation
Conservation |
Conservation |
0 |
23 |
46 |
46 |
46 |
46 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
20 |
44 |
66 |
66 |
65 |
65 |
SAN
SABA COUNTY
|
WUG |
Water Mgmt Strategy |
Source |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Richland
SUD |
Municipal
Conservation |
Conservation |
13 |
22 |
19 |
15 |
14 |
15 |
|
County
Other |
LCRA
Contract Renewals |
Highland
Lakes System |
20 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
|
Total |
(acre-feet/year) |
|
33 |
42 |
39 |
35 |
34 |
35 |
Table
10.
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY NEEDS
IN THE ADOPTED 2007 STATE WATER PLAN
(See the Methodology section for
data apportionment criteria.)
Agricultural Water Supply Needs
|
WUG |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Irrigation |
2,441 |
2,421 |
2,402 |
2,383 |
2,361 |
2,342 |
|
Livestock |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total agricultural water supply
needs |
2,441 |
2,421 |
2,402 |
2,383 |
2,361 |
2,342 |
The remaining total projected water
supply needs for the six counties in which the District lies which could be
impacted by or implemented with District groundwater supplies are as follows:
Non- Agricultural
Water Supply Needs
|
WUG |
COUNTY |
2010 |
2020 |
2030 |
2040 |
2050 |
2060 |
|
Eden |
Concho |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Millersview Doole |
Concho |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
42 |
42 |
|
County Other |
Concho |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
County Other |
Kimble
|
9 |
7 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Mason |
Mason |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
County Other |
Mason |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Mining |
Mason |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Brady |
McCulloch |
870 |
884 |
865 |
845 |
833 |
833 |
|
Millersview-Doole |
McCulloch |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
80 |
80 |
|
Richland SUD |
McCulloch |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
County Other |
McCulloch |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Manufacturing |
McCulloch |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Mining |
McCulloch |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
County Other |
Menard |
20 |
21 |
19 |
17 |
16 |
16 |
|
San Saba |
San
Saba |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Richland SUD |
San
Saba |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
|
County Other |
San
Saba |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Manufacturing |
San
Saba |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Mining |
San
Saba |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Non-Agricultural Water
Supply Needs |
|
899 |
912 |
887 |
865 |
974 |
976 |
|
Total Water Supply Needs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the year 2060 the total projected groundwater
demands of the District are estimated at 23,262728
acre-feet. While this number appears to be well within available supplies,
Federal Drinking Water Standards relating to the levels of radionuclides in
much of the Hickory water supply will significantly diminish the availability
of groundwater for public water supply purposes. According to the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality, public water supplies in Mason County do
not exceed the Federal radionuclide standards. However, the cities of Brady and
Eden, as well as other municipal systems, may be impacted by the Federal
standards. Projected municipal demand in Brady and Eden is estimated at 1,931
acre-feet in 2060.
The City of
San Angelo well field is permitted for production of 12,000 acre-feet from the
Hickory aquifer. The wellfield has not been developed, so permitted supplies
are not yet being conveyed to and used by the City. However, levels of
radionuclides exceeding Federal drinking water standards in the San Angelo well
field will render the supply unusable without treatment or blending with water
from other sources.
ACTIONS,
PROCEDURES, PERFORMANCE AND AVOIDANCE
FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
The District will implement
the provisions of this plan and will utilize the provisions of this plan as a
guidepost for determining the direction or priority for District operations and
activities. Operations of the
District, all agreements entered into by the District and any additional
planning efforts in which the District may participate will be consistent with the
provisions of this plan.
The
District has adopted rules relating to the permitting of wells and the production of groundwater and
continues to review and revise those rules in accordance with the best
scientific evidence available and pursuant to changes in state laws and
regulations. The rules adopted by the
District shall be pursuant to TWC § 36 and the provisions of this plan.
All rules will be adhered to and enforced. The promulgation and enforcement of
the rules will be based on the best technical evidence
available.
The
District shall treat all citizens indiscriminately.
Citizens may apply to the
District for discretion in
enforcement of the rules on grounds of adverse economic effect or unique local conditions. In granting
of discretion to any rule, the Board
of Directors shall consider the potential for adverse effect on
adjacent landowners. The exercise of said discretion by the District Board shall not be construed as limiting the power of the District Board.
The
District will seek cooperation in the implementation of this plan and the
management of groundwater supplies within
the District. All activities of the District
will be undertaken in cooperation
and coordinated with the appropriate state, regional or local management entity.”
The District manager will provide a report of staff
activities to the Board of Directors at quarterly board meetings to insure
management objectives and goals are being achieved.
MANAGEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Goal 1.0 To provide the most efficient use
of groundwater
Management Objective
1.1 Annually the district will provide educational materials identifying
conservation measures for the efficient use of water. Annually, two (2)
District newsletter issues will be published that contain water conservation
information. Handout packets with conservation literature will be provided at
the annual McCulloch County Soil and Water Conservation 5th Grade Field Day or
one other water-related function.
Performance Standard
1.1a Number of newsletters published annually containing water conservation
information.
1.1b Number of annual events where conservation material was provided.
Management Objective
1.2 To monitor groundwater availability over the five-year management period;
the District will identify and monitor 50 wells for annual water level
monitoring and obtain quarterly water levels on the monitored wells.
Performance Standards
1.2 Number of monitor wells measured
quarterly.
Goal 2.0 To control and prevent the waste of groundwater.
Management Objective
2.1 Once each year the District will loan flow meters to assist at
least one irrigating farmer within the District to evaluate irrigation systems
and reduce waste.
Performance Standard
2.1 The number of District farmers who receive loans of flow-meters to assist
in evaluating their irrigation systems.
.
Goal 3.0 Addressing natural resource issues that impact the use and availability of groundwater and are impacted by the use of groundwater
Management Objective
3.1 The
District will identify at least twenty (20) wells to be used as water quality
monitoring wells that will be sampled annually.
Performance Standard
3.1 Number of monitor wells sampled annually for water quality.
Goal 4.0 Addressing conjunctive surface water management
issues.
Management Objective
4.1 Meet at least once annually with City of Brady to
discuss and review potential use of surface water resources in the area.
Performance
Standard
4.1 Number of meetings with City representatives annually.
Management Objective
4.2 Meet at least once
annually with Lower Colorado River Authority staff member to review potential conjunctive
groundwater/surface water resources in the area.
Performance
Standard
4.2 Number of meetings with LCRA staff annually.
Goal 5.0 Addressing Drought Conditions
Management Objective
5.1a Annually monitor the Palmer Drought Severity
Index (PDSI), notifying all District public water suppliers of severe drought
conditions when they occur.
5.1b Notify area residents, in the
District newsletter, of severe drought conditions when they occur.
Performance Standards
5.1a Report
the current drought status of the District to the Board of Directors at
quarterly meetings.
5. 1b Annually report to the Board of Directors the number of times area residents are notified of severe drought conditions in the District newsletter and the number of times that letters are sent to public water suppliers warning of severe drought conditions.
Goal 6.0a) Addressing Conservation
Management Objectives
6.a)1. At least once annually the District will
provide educational literature promoting water
conservation in a public educational presentation.
Performance Standard
6.a)1. Report to Board of Directors annually number of times water conservation information was distributed to area residents or in public informational or educational meetings.
Goal 6.0 (b) Addressing rainwater harvesting
Management Objective
6.b)1 The
District will display rainwater harvesting manuals publicly at the district
office and at least once annually provide notice in the District newsletter
that manuals on rainwater harvesting is
available to residents in the District office.
Performance Standards
6.b)1 Report to the Board of Directors annually on
the number of times notice was
published in the District newsletter about the availability of Rainwater
Harvesting manuals in the District office.
Management Objective
6.b)2 Include
information on rainwater harvesting in one public education presentation
annually
Performance Standards
6.b)2 Report
to Board of Directors annually the number of educational presentations that
included rainwater harvesting information.
Goal 6.0 (c) Addressing brush control
Management Objective
6.c)1 Meet
once annually with NRCS to discuss prioritizing brush control for EQIP funds or
other federal conservation funding.
Performance Standards
6.c)1 Report
to Board of Directors annually on the number of meetings held with NRCS
officials regarding priority conservation funding for brush control.
36.1071 (a) Management Goals Not Applicable to the
District
Goal 1.0
Controlling and Preventing Subsidence
The rigid geologic framework of the region precludes significant subsidence
from occurring. This goal is not applicable to the operation of the District.
Goal 2.0 Addressing recharge enhancement
The Texas Water Development Board, at the request of the District, completed a
study of an area within the District to evaluate the possibility of beneficial
artificial recharge of this area of the Hickory Aquifer. Evaluation of the
Hickory Aquifer and Its Relationship to Katemcy Creek and Its Major Tributaries
for Beneficial Recharge, McCulloch and Mason Counties, Texas, is available in
the District Office. This study, along with subsequent studies, does not
support an economically feasible recharge program.(top)
Goal 3.0 Addressing precipitation enhancement
The District has investigated participation in the
West Texas Weather Modification program which performs cloud-seeding operations
out of San Angelo, Texas, but had determined that it is not economically
feasible.
Goal 4.0
Addressing in a quantifiable manner the Desired Future Conditions of the
district aquifers.
The District is actively participating in the joint
planning process in Groundwater Management Area 7 pursuant to Section 36.108 of
the Texas Water Code. However, the GMA 7 Districts have not yet adopted Desired
Future Conditions, which are not due for submission to the Texas Water
Development Board until 2010.
Statement of Commitment by Hickory Underground Water
Conservation District No. 1, to
Effectuation of the District Groundwater Management Plan.
The District will implement the provisions of this
plan and/or future amendments and will utilize the provisions of this plan, or
amended plan, as guidance for implementation of District goals, in promulgating
District Rules and selecting,
evaluating, and carrying our district programs, activities and hydrogeologic
studies.
1 Texas Almanac 2002-2003, 2000 Census Data, The Dallas
Morning News
2 “Hickory Water Data” prepared for Hickory UWCD No. 1 by Harden and Associates,
August 1986, and aquifer maps obtained from Water for Texas, 1997, TWDB
3 Edwards-Trinity Aquifer information obtained from TWDB website:
http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Brackish%20GW%20Manual/08-Edwards-Trinity(Plateau).pdf
Report by LBG-Guyton Associates
4 Aquifer maps obtained from Water for Texas, 1997, TWDB
5 Ellenburger-San Saba Aquifer information obtained from TWDB website:
http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Brackish%20GW%20Manual/26-Ellenburger-SanSaba.pdf
Report by LBG-Guyton Associates
6 Marble Falls Aquifer information obtained from TWDB website:
http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Brackish%20GW%20Manual/27-MarbleFalls.pdf
Report by LBG-Guyton Associate
7 Table 3.1-1, Region F Regional Water Plan, TWDB, January 2006
8 Table 3.2-2 Region F Regional Water Plan, January 2006