TRINITY RIVER AUTHORITY 
2008 BASIN 
HIGHLIGHTS REPORT 
Introduction 
 The Texas Clean Rivers 
Program (CRP) was created by the 
72nd Texas Legislature in 1991.  
This program provides the Texas 
Commission on Environmental 
Quality (TCEQ) with quality as-
sured data that is used to make per-
mitting decisions throughout the 
state.  The CRP is funded, in part, 
by fees assessed to water and 
wastewater permits.  
 The TCEQ partners with 
river authorities to administer the 
program in each of the river basins 
in Texas through a biennial con-
tract.  This partnership benefits 
both the TCEQ and the river au-
thorities.  The TCEQ leverages 
funding with the river authorities 
to greatly extend the capacity of 
the program and receives significant quantities of data and 
local knowledge that can be used in decision making proc-
esses.  The river authorities receive funding that can be 
used for routine monitoring, special studies, and public out-
reach.  In addition, the TCEQ provides guidance and a pro-
grammatic framework that enables each river authority to 
apply consistent methods for accomplishing Clean Rivers 
Program goals. 
 Each year, the CRP partners produce a Basin High-
lights Report describing the water quality conditions in 
each of their basins.  Every fifth year, a Basin Summary 
Report is produced which includes a detailed analysis of 
water quality data.  These reports are made available to the 
TCEQ as well as citizens to provide them with an explana-
tion of water quality on a basin-wide scale and updates on 
special study and public outreach activities. 
West Fork Trinity River near River Legacy Park in Arlington. 
Introduction 1 
This Year’s Highlights 2-5 
Water Quality Monitoring 6 
Basin Maps 7-8 
Special Studies 20-21 
Stakeholder Participation and 
Public Outreach 22 
Web Site 23 
Water Quality Conditions 9-19 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
THIS YEAR’S HIGHLIGHTS 2 
Drought 
 Extreme drought conditions 
that plagued the Trinity River basin 
and the entire state of Texas for sev-
eral years were alleviated in 2007.  
Many lake levels throughout the state 
were approaching critically low lev-
els with some lakes in the Trinity 
basin more than 17 feet below con-
servation pool level.  Within the 
counties that are wholly or partially 
contained by the boundaries of the 
Trinity River basin, 102 public water 
supply systems were affected by vol-
untary or mandatory rationing by 
February 1, 2007.  The Drought 2007 
map to the right displays the extent 
and location of the affected public 
water supply systems.  
 In May and June of 2007, 
heavy rains swept across Texas and delivered much 
needed water to the state.  However, this water ar-
rived in a series of large rain events that caused 
heavy flooding in several areas of the state.  The 
Drought 2008 map below shows that as of January 
1, 2008, there are no public water supply systems 
within the Trinity River basin that are affected by 
restrictions.   
 Typically in Texas, especially in the Trinity 
River basin, precipitation occurs in a few heavy 
events in the fall and spring with a distinct lack of 
rain throughout the summer months.  This leads to 
increases in water demand during these months trig-
gering increases in water  restrictions to help prevent 
water shortages. 
 The graph on the following 
page compares the most recent ten 
year period to the drought of re-
cord from 1947 to 1957.  The tem-
perature and precipitation values 
are taken from a continuous 
NOAA dataset that has been col-
lecting data from a gage currently 
located at Dallas/Fort Worth Inter-
national Airport.  During the 
drought of record, this gage was 
located at Fort Worth Meacham 
Airport and later moved to the 
Greater Southwest International 
Airport.  It is interesting to note 
that the average total precipitation 
for the most recent ten year period 
is approximately six inches greater 
than during the drought of record.  
THIS YEAR’S HIGHLIGHTS 3 
Dry marina on Lake Benbrook—August 23, 2006. 
However, during these same time periods, the popu-
lation of Texas has drastically increased.  According 
to US Census Bureau estimates, the average popula-
tion of Texas increased from 8.25 million during the 
drought of record to 21.8 million during 
the most recent ten year period, an in-
crease of about 164%.  Official US Cen-
sus counts for counties within the Trinity 
River basin increased 250% from 1.7 mil-
lion in 1950 to 5.9 million in 2000.  
These population measures illustrate the 
fact that limited water resources in the 
Trinity Basin and the entire state are be-
ing utilized by a significantly larger 
population than in the past.  Therefore, it 
is important to always practice water con-
servation measures in order to avoid wa-
ter shortages and mandatory water restric-
tions. 
 More information on drought and 
public water supply systems can be found 
on the TCEQ website at http://tceq.state. 
tx.us/nav/util_water/drought.html.  To 
find more information on water conservation, please 
visit the Texas Water Development Board website at 
http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/assistance/conservation/ 
pubs.asp. 
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
19
47
19
48
19
49
19
50
19
51
19
52
19
53
19
54
19
55
19
56
19
57
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
Po
pu
la
ti
on
 (
m
ill
io
ns
)
Pr
ec
ip
it
at
io
n 
(I
nc
he
s)
 a
nd
 T
em
pe
ra
tu
re
 (F
)
Annual Precipitation Total (Inches) and Average Temperature (F) vs. Total Texas 
Population Estimate (millions) and Trinity Basin Counties Census (millions)
Yearly Avg Temp Yearly Total  Precip Multi‐Year Avg Temp
Multi‐Year Avg Total  Precip Official Texas Census Estimate Trinity Basin Counties Census
Drought of Record
19
47
 
19
48
 
19
54
 
19
55
 
19
56
 
19
49
 
19
50
 
19
51
 
19
57
 
19
52
 
19
53
 
19
98
 
19
99
 
20
05
 
20
06
 
20
07
 
20
00
 
20
01
 
20
02
 
20
03
 
20
04
 
Po
pu
la
tio
n 
(m
ill
io
ns
) 
Pr
ec
ip
ita
tio
n 
(In
ch
es
) a
nd
 T
em
pe
ra
tu
re
 (F
) 
THIS YEAR’S HIGHLIGHTS 4 
Water Quality Assessment 
 In the summer of 2007, the Texas Commis-
sion on Environmental Quality released the 2006 
Texas Water Quality Inventory and 303(d) List.  The 
Water Quality Inventory details the results of the 
water quality assessments conducted by the TCEQ.  
Waterbodies that are found to be not supporting 
their designated uses are placed on the 303(d) list 
where they are prioritized for Total Maximum Daily 
Load development, standards review, or collection 
of additional data. 
 The Water Quality Conditions section of this 
Basin Highlights Report will outline the results of 
the 2006 Texas Water Quality Inventory and 303(d) 
list.  This assessment utilizes data collected between 
December 1, 1999 and November 30, 2004. 
 
TRA CRP Data Management and Integration 
System 
 Over the past several years, the TRA CRP 
has increased the amount of data that is processed 
and submitted to the TCEQ for use in water quality 
assessments and permitting decisions.  As the 
amount of data increased, procedures were devel-
oped to increase the efficiency with which the data 
were processed.   Data are currently received by 
CRP staff in a variety of hardcopy and electronic formats which are then converted into a consistent 
electronic format.  After conversion, 
the data are then quality assured and 
further processed into a format com-
patible with TCEQ data management 
programs.  In all, this is a complicated 
process that involves several discrete 
steps, both automated and manual. 
 In 2007, TRA CRP staff initi-
ated a project  to integrate these steps 
into a more streamlined data manage-
ment system.  The goal of this system 
is to reduce the time spent processing 
the data into a consistent, quality as-
sured format and begin providing our 
partners with more useful information 
in a shorter timeframe.  To that end, 
the TRA CRP purchased a software 
package called EnviroData from Geo-
tech Computer Systems, Inc.  Enviro-
Data is an open source software that Red Ear Slider observed at Marine Creek in Fort Worth—November 28, 2007. 
Site characterization form used at urban stream stations. 
THIS YEAR’S HIGHLIGHTS 5 
can be tailored to individual 
needs and will automate many of 
the steps that are currently com-
pleted manually, thereby in-
creasing the efficiency and accu-
racy of the data management 
process. 
 In 2008, CRP staff will 
begin working with partner 
agencies to develop a standard 
data submittal format as well as 
a data report package that may 
include data summaries, graphs, 
photos, indications of trends, and 
site characteristics among other 
things.  It is hoped that the gen-
eration of the data report pack-
ages will serve many purposes 
such as providing information to 
be used in partner agency annual 
reports and increasing the fre-
quency with which water quality data are reviewed. 
 
Urban Stream Site Characterizations 
 By utilizing routine water quality monitoring 
data collected by the partner agencies, the TRA CRP 
has been able to leverage funds provided by the 
TCEQ in other areas such as special studies and 
public outreach and education.  However, this has 
prevented TRA CRP staff from becoming intimately 
familiar with each of the partner agencies sampling 
sites.  
 In the fall of 2007, TRA CRP staff con-
ducted a project to gather information about all the 
urban stream stations in the DFW metroplex.  All 
sites that are sampled by the cities of Arlington, Ir-
ving, Grand Prairie, and Fort Worth were visited by 
CRP staff.  At each site latitude and longitude were 
determined, upstream and downstream photos were 
taken, a rapid habitat characterization was con-
ducted, and a flow measurement was calculated at 
all sites that were wadeable and accessible.   
 The latitude and longitude readings were 
used to verify each station location against the state-
wide station list.  Photos were taken to document 
flow status and surrounding conditions.  The rapid 
habitat characterizations consisted of a sketch of the 
observed stream reach, observations, water and sub-
strate descriptions, bank characteristics, and avail-
able habitat types.  These habitat characterizations 
were designed to mimic a full habitat assessment as 
described in the TCEQ Surface Water Quality Moni-
toring Procedures, Volume 2: Methods for Collect-
ing and Analyzing Biological Assemblage and Habi-
tat Data.  However, as this project was designed to 
only characterize the stream habitat rather than fully 
assess it.  This method allowed CRP staff to visit 46 
sites in a short time span to ensure that weather and 
flow conditions were similar at all sites.  In addition, 
flow measurements were collected at all sites possi-
ble.  In general, only sites located on the Trinity 
River or one of its branches were not measured for 
flow as these sites are not wadeable.  All other 
stream sites were measured either using a Marsh-
McBirney electronic flow meter or by calculating a 
flow estimate when the water level was too low or 
direct access to the stream was impossible. 
 The results of this project will be sent to 
TCEQ to increase the pool of information available 
to the assessment team.  CRP staff intend to conduct 
these habitat characterizations for each season and 
potentially select representative sites to conduct 
more in depth habitat and biological assessments. 
Flow measurement at Village Creek and IH-30 in Arlington—November 27, 2007. 
WATER QUALITY MONITORING 6 
 The TRA Clean Rivers Program has been 
built upon a volunteer monitoring network that pro-
vides for its routine water quality monitoring data.  
This monitoring network includes the cities of Ar-
lington, Dallas, Fort Worth, Grand Prairie, and Ir-
ving as well as the TRA Lake Livingston Project 
and Tarrant Regional Water District.  In addition to 
these entities, the TRA has its own in-house moni-
toring program.  Approximately 150 sites are moni-
tored on a routine basis by the partner network. 
 These agencies have been sampling for their 
own purposes, such as watershed protection and 
stormwater permitting, for many years.  In order to 
leverage CRP funds, TRA has formed a volunteer 
partnership with these agencies allowing the TRA 
CRP to utilize funds for special studies and public 
outreach activities.  Each agency in the partner net-
work has agreed to follow guidelines set forth by the 
Clean Rivers Program.  In return, the TRA CRP fi-
nancially supports each partner agency’s program to 
various degrees ranging from providing sampling 
supplies and equipment to compensation for analyti-
cal costs.  The TRA CRP also provides non-
financial support to the partners.  This can include 
training for new staff, additional manpower for sam-
pling, and analysis of data. 
 A routine water quality monitoring program 
is defined by its lack of bias to specific conditions 
such as weather and flow and their effects on water 
quality.  As such, data are collected on a predefined 
schedule without regard to weather or flow; except 
in cases where extremely severe weather or flow 
prevent the safe execution of a scheduled sampling 
event.  It is the goal of this sampling approach to 
obtain a full range of weather and flow conditions in 
a dataset of approximately 5 to 10 years.   
 Routine water quality monitoring is also con-
sidered to be the long term sampling of individual 
sites.  Routine sampling sites are identified with this 
in mind.  Therefore, these sites are generally located 
in areas with easy and safe access in order to ensure 
long term sampling at that location.  These locations 
typically remain static unless situations arise which 
make the location less desirable to the objectives 
such as construction, damming, or inaccessibility.   
 The routine water quality data provided by 
the partner agencies is used by TCEQ to conduct 
biannual assessments of waterbodies.  The assess-
ments determine if each waterbody is meeting its 
designated uses such as drinking water supply, con-
tact recreation, protection of aquatic life, and fish 
consumption.  The waterbodies are also assessed to 
determine if there are any concerns for nutrient lev-
els and algal growth.  The results of the assessments 
are used to make decisions to protect the waterbod-
ies including permitting decisions and studies to de-
termine the sources of impairments and potential 
corrective actions. 
Entity Monitoring Type Sites Parameters 
City of Arlington Routine 12 Metals, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
City of Dallas Routine 37 Metals, Field 
City of Fort Worth Routine 6 Bacteria, Field 
City of Grand Prairie Routine 22 Metals, Organics, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
City of Irving Routine 6 Metals, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
TRA LLP Seasonally Biased 6 Diurnal Field 
TRA LLP Routine 22 Metals, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
TRWD Seasonally Biased 6 Diurnal Field 
TRWD Routine 39 Metals, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
TRA GO Routine 13 Metals, Nutrients/Conventionals, Bacteria, Field 
To view the statewide moni-
toring schedule, please visit 
http://cms.lcra.org. 
WA
T
E
R
 
Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y
 
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
I
N
G
 
TA
R
R
A
N
T
D
E
N
T
O
N
W
I
S
E
E
L
L
I
S
J
o
e
 
P
W
o
r
t
h
E
a
g
l
e
 
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
G
r
a
p
e
v
i
n
e
B
e
n
b
r
o
o
k
A
r
l
i
n
g
t
o
n
E
c
h
o
C
o
m
o
F
o
s
d
i
c
W
I
S
E
E
L
L
I
S
L
E
O
N
J
A
C
K
D
E
N
T
O
N
N
A
V
A
R
R
O
D
A
L
L
A
S
C
O
L
L
I
N
P
O
L
K
T
A
R
R
A
N
T
C
O
O
K
E
H
O
U
S
T
O
N
K
A
U
F
M
A
N
L
I
B
E
R
T
Y
F
R
E
E
S
T
O
N
E
H
I
L
L
P
A
R
K
E
R
A
N
D
E
R
S
O
N
W
A
L
K
E
R
H
E
N
D
E
R
S
O
N
T
R
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
G
R
A
Y
S
O
N
M
O
N
T
A
G
U
E
J
O
H
N
S
O
N
C
L
A
Y
S
A
N
 
J
A
C
I
N
T
O
G
R
I
M
E
S
A
R
C
H
E
R
Y
O
U
N
G
R
O
C
K
W
A
L
L
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
S
L
I
M
E
S
T
O
N
E
V
A
N
 
Z
A
N
D
T
H
A
R
D
I
N
H
O
O
D
L
i
v
i
n
g
s
t
o
n
L
a
v
o
n
C
e
d
a
r
 
C
r
e
e
k
R
a
y
 
R
o
b
e
r
t
s
R
i
c
h
l
a
n
d
-
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
s
L
e
w
i
s
v
i
l
l
e
R
a
y
 
H
u
b
b
a
r
d
B
r
i
d
g
e
p
o
r
t
J
o
e
 
P
o
o
l
G
r
a
p
e
v
i
n
e
W
o
r
t
h
E
a
g
l
e
 
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
B
e
n
b
r
o
o
k
B
a
r
d
w
e
l
l
N
a
v
a
r
r
o
 
M
i
l
l
s
A
r
l
i
n
g
t
o
n
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
 
C
r
e
e
k
A
m
o
n
 
G
.
 
C
a
r
t
e
r
W
h
i
t
e
 
R
o
c
k
H
o
u
s
t
o
n
 
C
o
u
n
t
y
W
e
a
t
h
e
r
f
o
r
d
W
a
x
a
h
a
c
h
i
e
E
c
h
o
C
o
m
o
0
8
2
3
0
8
2
1
0
8
2
0
0
8
2
2
0
8
0
5
0
8
1
8
0
8
2
7
0
8
3
5
0
8
1
3
0
8
0
1
0
8
0
2
0
8
0
3
0
8
0
4
0
8
3
6
0
8
3
7
0
8
1
7
0
8
3
9
0
8
1
4
0
8
1
5
0
8
1
6
0
8
3
8
0
8
1
9
0
8
4
1
A
0
8
3
1
0
8
3
2
0
8
3
3
0
8
1
1
0
8
1
2
0
8
3
4
0
8
1
0
0
8
2
6
0
8
2
5
0
8
2
4
0
8
4
0
0
8
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
8
0
8
0
8
2
9
0
8
0
6
0
8
4
1
0
8
3
0
0
8
2
8
0
8
0
6
A
,
 
0
8
0
6
B
,
0
8
2
9
A
µ
O
n
l
y
 
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
 
S
e
g
m
e
n
t
s
 
a
n
d
 
R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
s
 
s
h
o
w
n
.
 
 
C
o
l
o
r
 
c
o
d
i
n
g
 
b
a
s
e
d
 
o
n
 
a
l
l
 
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
 
o
f
 
t
h
e
 
s
e
g
m
e
n
t
 
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
 
u
n
c
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
e
d
 
a
r
e
a
 
b
a
s
e
d
 
o
n
 
t
h
e
 
D
r
a
f
t
 
2
0
0
8
 
T
e
x
a
s
 
W
a
t
e
r
 
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
 
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
.
A
q
u
a
t
i
c
 
L
i
f
e
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
 
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
 
U
s
e
F
i
s
h
 
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
P
u
b
l
i
c
 
W
a
t
e
r
 
S
u
p
p
l
y
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
e
d
 
U
s
e
s
S
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
 
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
A
l
g
a
l
 
G
r
o
w
t
h
N
u
t
r
i
e
n
t
s
F
u
l
l
y
 
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
T
h
r
e
a
t
,
 
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
,
 
U
s
e
 
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
,
 
o
r
 
U
s
e
 
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
 
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
 
D
a
t
a
N
o
n
‐
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
N
o
t
 
A
s
s
e
s
s
e
d
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
 
S
t
a
t
u
s
I
n
s
e
r
t
 
M
a
p
 
o
f
 
T
a
r
r
a
n
t
 
C
o
u
n
t
y
W
A
T
E
R
 
Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y
 
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 
 
9 
 TRA divides the Trinity River basin into ten 
subwatersheds.  Each subwatershed is bounded by a 
dam or confluence with the main stem of the river. 
The map on page 7 displays these subwatersheds 
including the active sampling stations and discharg-
ers within the Trinity basin. 
 The map on page 8 displays a summary of 
the 2006 Texas Water Quality Inventory for the 
Trinity River basin.  The full assessment can be 
found on the TCEQ webpage at http://www.tceq. 
state.tx.us/compliance/monitoring/water/quality/data
/wqm/305_303.html#y2006.  The map includes 
color coded icons of each designated use or secon-
dary concern and its corresponding level of support.  
As this map is intended to provide a summary of the 
assessment, the icons present an overall representa-
tion of the entire segment.  For finer detail of each 
segment, please see the reports available at the web-
site above. 
 In this section, box plots of selected parame-
ters will be displayed for each subwatershed as well 
as a brief description of the 
watershed.  A box plot 
graphically displays data 
through a five number sum-
mary.  This consists of a 
minimum number, maxi-
mum number, and three 
quartiles.  The three quar-
tiles that form the box are 
drawn at 25%, 50% 
(median), and 75% of an 
ordered set of data. The dif-
ference between the first 
and third quartile is called 
the interquartile range. The 
minimum and maximum 
endpoints of each whisker 
are calculated as 1.5 times 
the interquartile range away from the first and third 
quartiles.  If any data point is greater than this calcu-
lated value, it is considered an “outlier”.  Outliers in 
this sense are viewed as being numerically distant 
from the majority of the data; it does not necessarily 
indicate an erroneous data point.  If the actual mini-
mum or maximum values present in the dataset are 
less than the calculated values, the whiskers termi-
nate at the actual values. 
  The red lines located on the graphs represent 
screening levels (dashed) or standards (solid) for 
each water body type.  As these levels and standards 
may vary through segments, streams, or reservoirs, 
the lines move up and down at the transitions be-
tween each of these.  
 The graphs chosen for each subwatershed are 
an overall representation of the water quality for that 
area.  The assessment unit numbers and sample sizes 
(N) are listed on the x-axis of each graph.  Assess-
ment units are a grouping of stations defined by 
TCEQ as being representative of a specific area 
within a segment.  Surface samples from December 
1, 1999 to November 30, 2004 were selected for 
analysis.  The data for all stations within an assess-
ment unit were averaged together by date and pa-
rameter and the resultant data were used to create 
the box plots.  The accompanying Water Quality 
Descriptions are based on the 2006 Texas Water 
Quality Inventory which utilized the same date 
range as specified above. 
 The images above the box plots are general-
ized line diagrams of each subwatershed.  Below are 
descriptions of the elements of each diagram.  To 
the extent possible, all these features are positioned 
on the line diagram in their approximate locations in 
the subwatershed.    
Outliers 
Maximum 
3rd Quartile (75%) 
2nd Quartile (50%) 
1st Quartile (25%) 
Minimum 
* 
* 
Example of a Box Plot. 
Example of a Subwatershed Line Diagram. 
Clear Creek
Texas ReservoirTexas 
River
12345
98765Texas MWD
13 MGD
Texas MWD-
Clear Creek
2.3 MGD
Main channel(s) of the subwatershed 
Tributaries to the main channel or arms of the 
reservoirs 
Reservoirs  
Assessment units used in the box plots 
Dischargers—name and permitted flow 
Indicate that the discharge flows into an inter-
mediate stream before flowing into the main 
segment 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 10 
811_01 809_12
809_01
810_01
West 
Fork
Bridgeport 
Reservoir Eagle Mountain Reservoir 
Big Sandy 
Creek
Lake 
Amon G. 
Carter
City of Bowie
1.25 MGD
City of Decatur
1.2  MGD
811_03811_04 810_02
809_10
809_08 809_05
Lake 
Worth
West Fork Trinity River 
Segments—807, 808, 809, 810, 811, 812, 834 
Boundaries—From Lake Worth dam north into 
Archer and Montague Counties 
Subwatershed Description—Headwaters are con-
sidered the start of the Trinity River.  Predominant 
agriculture is cattle grazing with a significant 
amount of oil and gas drilling.  Urbanization in-
creases as the West Fork approaches Fort Worth. 
Water Quality Description—The West Fork below 
Bridgeport Reservoir (Segment 810) was found to 
be not supporting the contact recreation use due to 
elevated E. coli levels.  There are several tributaries 
that flow into 810 that are similarly impaired.  On 
past assessments, aquatic life and general use in the 
West Fork above Bridgeport Reservoir (812) was 
found to be impaired due to depressed Dissolved 
Oxygen (DO), Chloride, and Total Dissolved Solids 
(TDS).  Due to a lack of more recent sampling in 
this segment, these impairments have been carried 
forward to recent assessments.  There is a fish con-
sumption ban on Lake Worth (807) due to PCBs in 
fish tissue.  Nutrients and algal growth are of con-
cern in Eagle Mountain Reservoir (809).   
809_01 (n=11)809_05 (n=11)809_08 (n=11)809_10 (n=11)809_12 (n=10)810_01 (n=44)810_02 (n=31)811_01 (n=11)811_03 (n=10)811_04 (n=11)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
809_01 (n=29)809_05 (n=29)809_08 (n=29)809_10 (n=29)809_12 (n=26)810_01 (n=20)810_02 (n=0)811_01 (n=20)811_03 (n=19)811_04 (n=20)
50
25
0
809_01 (n=29)809_05 (n=29)809_08 (n=29)809_10 (n=29)809_12 (n=27)810_01 (n=51)810_02 (n=32)811_01 (n=39)811_03 (n=0)811_04 (n=0)
10
5
0
E. coli (MPN)
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 11 
824_03 824_01
839_01
823_03
823_02 822_01
826_01
825_01
Elm 
Fork Lake Lewisville
Lake 
Grapevine
Denton 
Creek
Lake Ray Roberts
Isle Du Bois Arm
Hickory Creek
Little Elm CreekCity of Gainesville
4.14 MGD
City of Denton Pecan Creek
15 MGD
Upper Trinity Reg. Water
4.5 MGD
N. Texas 
MWD
5 MGD
City of The Colony
3.39 MGD
City of Flower Mound
10 MGDCity of Dallas
5 MGD
Trinity River Authority
2.5 MGD
Trophy Club 
MUD
1.4 MDG
City of Grapevine
5.75 MGD
City of Lewisville
12 MGD
840_01
Elm Fork Trinity River 
Segments—822, 823, 824, 825, 826, 839, 840 
Boundaries—From Frasier dam in Dallas north into 
Montague County 
Subwatershed Description—Gently rolling plains 
with patches of forest in lowlands.  Predominant ag-
riculture is row-crop, cattle grazing, and dairy in the 
northern portion.  Considerable urbanization in the 
southern half of the watershed. 
Water Quality Description—Aquatic life, general, 
fish consumption, and public water supply uses are 
fully supported in a majority of the Elm Fork with a 
few exceptions.  There are concerns for depressed 
DO in Little Elm Creek (823A) and the Elm Fork 
below Lewisville Lake (822).  In addition, Copper in 
Stewart Creek (823B) was found to not be support-
ing aquatic life use.  There is a concern for low pH 
in a small portion of the Elm Fork above Ray Rob-
erts Lake (824).  The contact recreation use is not 
supported in several areas of this subwatershed due 
to elevated E. coli or Fecal Coliform levels includ-
ing the Elm Fork above Ray Roberts Lake and the 
Elm Fork below Lewisville Lake (822) and its tribu-
taries.  Nutrient and algal growth concerns are found 
throughout most of the subwatershed. 
822_01 (n=30)825_01 (n=12)826_01 (n=8)823_02 (n=0)823_03 (n=11)839_01 (n=0)840_01 (n=7)824_01 (n=10)824_03 (n=23)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
822_01 (n=32)825_01 (n=12)826_01 (n=13)823_02 (n=6)823_03 (n=22)839_01 (n=6)840_01 (n=14)824_01 (n=23)824_03 (n=23)
4
2
0
822_01 (n=39)825_01 (n=21)826_01 (n=20)823_02 (n=7)823_03 (n=22)839_01 (n=8)840_01 (n=16)824_01 (n=25)824_03 (n=24)
4
2
0
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
Orthophosphate (mg/L)
821_01
820_02
820_01 820_04 819_01
East 
Fork Lake Lavon Lake Ray Hubbard
Rowlett 
Creek
Pilot Grove 
Sister Grove 
N. Texas MWD-Wilson Creek
32 MGD
City of Garland 404 MGD
N. Texas MWD
1.2 MGD
N. Texas MWD
2 MGD
N. Texas MWD
2.25 MGD
City of Dallas
15 MGD
N. Texas MWD
25 MGD
City of Seagoville
1.7 MGD
City of Garland 
Duck Creek
30 MGD
City of Garland Rowlett 
Creek
24 MGD
N. Texas MWD-Rowlett Creek
24 MGD
820_06 820_05
East Fork Trinity River 
Segments—819, 820, 821 
Boundaries—From Lake Ray Hubbard dam north-
east into Grayson County 
Subwatershed Description—The landscape is 
mostly flat prairies.  Southern portion is heavily ur-
banized.  In addition, the surface waters receive sig-
nificant effluent.  The northern reaches contain sig-
nificant row-crop farming operations. 
Water Quality Description—Aquatic life, general, 
and public water supply uses were fully supported in 
Lakes Lavon and Ray Hubbard (821 and 820), how-
ever, there was inadequate data available to assess 
the contact recreation use.  Nutrients and algal 
growth were a concern in both of these reservoirs.  
Muddy Creek (820C), a tributary to Lake Ray Hub-
bard, was found to be not support the contact recrea-
tion use due to elevated Fecal Coliform levels.  In 
addition, Muddy Creek was also noted as having a 
concern for depressed DO.  The East Fork below 
Lake Ray Hubbard (819) was fully supporting of the  
aquatic life, contact recreation, and general uses but 
had concerns for nutrients. 
819_01 (n=34)820_04 (n=49)820_01 (n=56)820_05 (n=49)820_02 (n=57)820_06 (n=19)821_01 (n=8)
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
819_01 (n=28)820_04 (n=14)820_01 (n=23)820_05 (n=14)820_02 (n=23)820_06 (n=0)821_01 (n=7)
5
4
3
2
1
0
819_01 (n=25)820_04 (n=8)820_01 (n=11)820_05 (n=8)820_02 (n=11)820_06 (n=0)821_01 (n=0)
40
30
20
10
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Total Phosphorus
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 12 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 13 
Clear Fork Trinity River 
Segments—829, 830, 831, 832, 833 
Boundaries—From the confluence with the Lower 
West Fork Trinity River near SH80 and Vickery in 
west Fort Worth northwest to Parker County 
Subwatershed Description—The terrain here is 
mostly flat with some gently rolling prairie.  The 
southern reaches are heavily urbanized but, in gen-
eral, the population is relatively low.  Primary agri-
culture is cattle ranching with some row-crop. 
Water Quality Description—The Clear Fork above 
and below Lake Weatherford (833 and 831) was 
found to be not supporting the aquatic life use due to 
depressed DO.  These findings are based on limited 
data due to a lack of sampling in these segments.  
There are concerns for algal growth and  nutrients in 
these segments.  Lake Weatherford and Benbrook 
Lake (832 and 830) are fully supporting all desig-
nated uses with concerns for nutrients and algal 
growth in Benbrook Lake.  There is a fish consump-
tion ban on the lower portion of the Clear Fork be-
low Benbrook Lake (829) and Lake Como (829A), a 
small urban lake in Fort Worth, due to legacy pollut-
ants, including DDE and PCBs, in fish tissue. 
829_02 (n=21)830_01 (n=20)830_02 (n=20)830_03 (n=20)831_01 (n=19)831_03 (n=29)831_04 (n=14)831_05 (n=8)832_01 (n=12)833_03 (n=11)
15
10
5
829_02 (n=20)830_01 (n=20)830_02 (n=20)830_03 (n=20)831_01 (n=14)831_03 (n=6)831_04 (n=12)831_05 (n=6)832_01 (n=12)833_03 (n=6)
40
20
0
829_02 (n=21)830_01 (n=19)830_02 (n=19)830_03 (n=19)831_01 (n=14)831_03 (n=13)831_04 (n=12)831_05 (n=6)832_01 (n=12)833_03 (n=7)
1.0
0.5
0.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
832_01
831_05
830_02 830_01 829_02
Lake Weatherford Clear 
Fork
Benbrook Lake
Brazos Electric Power Coop.
85 MGD
City of Weatherford
2.7 MGD
830_03833_03
831_04
831_03
831_01
Trinity River Authority- Red 
Oak   3.5 MGD
Village Creek Mountain 
Creek Lake
806_01 841_01
803_07
803_01
804_04805_01
803_05803_11
Main Stem Lake Livingston
Elm Fork White Rock 
Creek 
East  Fork Cedar  Creek Big 
Elkhart 
Creek
White Rock Lake
City of Fort Worth
166 MGD
Trinity River Authority
162 MGD
City of Dallas Central
150 MGD
City of Dallas Southside 110 MGD
City of Huntsville
4.15 MGD
T.D.C.J.
1.5 MGD
City of Crockett 2 MGD
T.D.C.J. 2.85 MGD
T.D.C.J. 
1.44 MGD
City of Palestine
4.7 MGD
813_01 HoustonCounty 
Lake
804_01
Main Stem Trinity River 
Segments—803, 804, 805, 806, 813, 827, 835, 841 
Boundaries—From the Lake Livingston dam north 
to the Lake Worth dam in Fort Worth 
Subwatershed Description—Begins in the densely 
populated Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex and mean-
ders 200 miles southeast.  Development along the 
upper northwest portion is extensive. 
Water Quality Description—The upper half of the 
Main Stem Trinity River is fully supporting the 
aquatic life use.  There are two tributaries of the 
Lower West Fork (841) which have concerns for 
aquatic life use due to depressed DO.  Contact rec-
reation and fish consumption use is not supported in 
the upper half of this subwatershed.  E. coli and Fe-
cal Coliform levels were found to be impaired in 
many of the small urban streams that flow into the 
Main Stem.  A fish consumption ban due to legacy 
pollutants in fish tissue has been placed on much of 
the river from Lake Worth dam to FM 85, just south 
of Rosser.  Lake Livingston (803) was found to be 
not supporting general uses due to Sulfate and sev-
eral portions of the lake were found to be not sup-
porting aquatic life use due to depressed DO.  Con-
cerns for nutrients and algal growth are found 
throughout this subwatershed. 
803_01 (n=47)803_05 (n=13)803_07 (n=13)803_11 (n=40)804_01 (n=38)813_01 (n=19)804_04 (n=42)805_01 (n=11)841_01 (n=74)806_01 (n=47)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
803_01 (n=32)803_05 (n=12)803_07 (n=13)803_11 (n=33)804_01 (n=34)813_01 (n=12)804_04 (n=50)805_01 (n=6)841_01 (n=97)806_01 (n=92)
27000
24000
21000
18000
15000
12000
9000
6000
3000
0
803_01 (n=41)803_05 (n=11)803_07 (n=14)803_11 (n=41)804_01 (n=41)813_01 (n=19)804_04 (n=49)805_01 (n=11)841_01 (n=80)806_01 (n=52)
2
1
0
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
E. coli (MPN)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 14 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 15 
Lower Trinity River 
Segments—801, 802 
Boundaries—From Trinity Bay north to Lake 
Livingston dam 
Subwatershed Description—South of the Lake 
Livingston dam, the Lower Trinity gingerly trav-
erses the flat coastal prairie.  Near the end of her 
voyage, Houston taps into this perennial water 
source before it passes through the Wallisville salt-
water barrier and into Trinity Bay. 
Water Quality Description—The Lower Trinity 
River is fully supporting the aquatic life and contact 
recreation uses.  There was no data on this subwater-
shed for fish consumption use.  Portions of the river 
below Lake Livingston dam (802) were found to 
have concerns for general use due to elevated pH 
levels and public water supply use due to Sulfate.    
The tidally influenced terminus of the Trinity River 
(801) was found to be fully supporting all uses as-
sessed.  A tributary to this segment of the river, Old 
River (801B) was found to have concerns for algal 
growth. 
801_01 (n=21)802_01 (n=21)802_02 (n=0)802_03 (n=21)802_04 (n=11)802_05 (n=0)
40
20
0
801_01 (n=0)802_01 (n=26)802_02 (n=9)802_03 (n=28)802_04 (n=18)802_05 (n=9)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
801_01 (n=23)802_01 (n=33)802_02 (n=31)802_03 (n=34)802_04 (n=22)802_05 (n=14)
10
9
8
7
6
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
E. coli (MPN)
pH (units)
802_05 802_02 801_01
Lower Trinity
802_04 802_03 802_01
Village Creek 
Segments—828 
Boundaries—From the Lake Arlington dam south-
west into Johnson County 
Subwatershed Description—Village Creek is the 
smallest of the subwatersheds.  It begins in the rural 
sandy soils of the Eastern Cross Timbers and emp-
ties into Lake Arlington.  The reservoir is an impor-
tant water source for Arlington and NE Tarrant 
County. 
Water Quality Description—Lake Arlington (828) 
is fully supporting the aquatic life, contact recrea-
tion, general, fish consumption, and public water 
supply uses.  There are concerns for algal growth in 
some portions of the lake.  There has been tremen-
dous growth and development in the upper reaches 
of the Village Creek subwatershed in recent years 
and this development is ongoing.  This rapid urbani-
zation makes continued water quality monitoring 
important and provides an opportunity to determine 
the effects of upstream development. 
828_02 (n=11)828_06 (n=11)828_07 (n=11)
200
160
120
80
40
0
828_02 (n=12)828_06 (n=12)828_07 (n=12)
50
25
0
828_02 (n=10)828_06 (n=10)828_07 (n=10)
0.8
0.4
0.0
E. coli (MPN)
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
NO2/NO3 (mg/L)
828_07 828_06 828_02
Village 
Creek Lake Arlington
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 16 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 17 
Mountain Creek 
Segments—838 
Boundaries—From Mountain Creek Lake dam west 
to Johnson County 
Subwatershed Description—The Blackland Prairie 
soils support an abundance of row-crop agriculture 
in this highly rural watershed.  It is important to 
monitor the water quality in Mountain Creek due to 
increasing urbanization. 
Water Quality Description—The Mountain Creek 
subwatershed is fully supporting the aquatic life, 
general, fish consumption, and public water supply 
uses.  There are concerns for nutrients in the Moun-
tain Creek arm of Joe Pool Lake (838).  The assess-
ment found issues with E. coli in two tributaries to 
Joe Pool Lake.  Sugar Creek has concerns while 
Walnut Creek did not support the contact recreation 
use due to elevated E. coli levels.  Like Village 
Creek, the Mountain Creek subwatershed is experi-
encing rapid growth and development.  Joe Pool 
Lake is also an important water source for the Dallas 
Fort Worth Metroplex, therefore, it is important to 
continue monitoring the lake and its tributaries. 
838_03 (n=14)838_01 (n=14)838_02 (n=29)
0.030
0.015
0.000
838_03 (n=15)838_01 (n=16)838_02 (n=67)
9
8
7
838_03 (n=15)838_01 (n=16)838_02 (n=66)
15
10
5
Orthophosphate (mg/L)
Ph
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
0.05 
6.5 
838_01
838_02
838_03
Walnut 
Creek
Mountain 
Creek
Joe Pool Lake
Sugar 
Creek 
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 18 
Richland-Chambers 
Segments—814, 815, 816, 817, 836, 837 
Boundaries—From the Richland-Chambers Reser-
voir dam northwest into Johnson and Hill Counties 
Subwatershed Description—Agriculture is pre-
dominant across the flat to gently rolling prairies of 
the subwatershed.  Urbanization has been slow in 
this area and the population remains low.   
Water Quality Description—The contact recrea-
tion, general, and fish consumption uses are fully 
supported in the Richland-Chambers subwatershed.  
Navarro Mills Lake (817) was found to have con-
cerns for nutrients as well as public water supply use 
due to Atrazine.  The remainder of the subwatershed 
is fully supporting the public water supply use.  A 
portion of Chambers Creek above Richland-
Chambers Reservoir (814) is not supporting the 
aquatic life use due to depressed DO.  Richland-
Chambers Reservoir (836) was found to have a con-
cern for aquatic life due to depressed DO in the 
lower portion of the Chambers Creek arm.  In addi-
tion, there were concerns for nutrients and algal 
growth in several portions of the reservoir. 
836_01 (n=28)836_02 (n=31)836_05 (n=28)836_06 (n=6)817_01 (n=15)836_03 (n=29)836_04 (n=12)814_01 (n=0)815_01 (n=12)816_01 (n=12)
80
40
0
836_01 (n=27)836_02 (n=29)836_05 (n=26)836_06 (n=26)817_01 (n=24)836_03 (n=54)836_04 (n=24)814_01 (n=66)815_01 (n=23)816_01 (n=12)
15
10
5
836_01 (n=27)836_02 (n=27)836_05 (n=27)836_06 (n=5)817_01 (n=12)836_03 (n=28)836_04 (n=11)814_01 (n=51)815_01 (n=12)816_01 (n=12)
1.0
0.5
0.0
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
Navarro Mills 
816_01 815_01
836_04
817_01
836_01
836_06
Waxahachie 
Creek
Richland 
Creek
Lake 
Waxahachie
Bardwell 
Reservoir
Richland-Chambers 
Chambers 
Creek
City of Waxahachie
5.5 MGD
814_01 836_03
836_02
836_05
WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS 19 
Cedar Creek 
Segments—818 
Boundaries—From Cedar Creek Lake dam north 
into Rockwall County 
Subwatershed Description—Cedar Creek Reser-
voir was created to satisfy the water demands of Fort 
Worth and Tarrant County.  Development has been 
intensive near the reservoir, but the watershed re-
mains sparsely populated. 
Water Quality Description—Cedar Creek Reser-
voir (818) was found to be fully supporting of the 
aquatic life, contact recreation, fish consumption, 
and public water supply uses.  A majority of the res-
ervoir, however, is not supporting general use due to 
elevated pH levels.  Additionally, there are concerns 
for nutrients and algal growth in many portions of 
the reservoir.  Cedar Creek Reservoir serves as a 
major water supply for the Dallas Fort Worth 
Metroplex and it’s water quality is monitored 
closely.  Although urbanization is limited in this 
subwatershed, agricultural BMPs and land use prac-
tices are important for this portion of the basin to 
protect the designated uses, specifically the public 
water supply use. 
818_01 (n=29)818_04 (n=26)818_06 (n=29)818_08 (n=16)818_09 (n=26)818_10 (n=10)818_11 (n=6)818_13 (n=11)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
818_01 (n=26)818_04 (n=27)818_06 (n=30)818_08 (n=16)818_09 (n=27)818_10 (n=10)818_11 (n=7)818_13 (n=11)
0.4
0.2
0.0
818_01 (n=30)818_04 (n=27)818_06 (n=68)818_08 (n=35)818_09 (n=27)818_10 (n=11)818_11 (n=27)818_13 (n=11)
11
10
9
8
7
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
Total Phosphorus
pH
6 
818_11818_13
818_10
818_09
Cedar 
Creek Cedar Creek Reservoir
City of Terrell 
4.5 MGD
City of Kaufman
1.2 MGD
818_06
818_08
818_04
818_01
SPECIAL STUDIES 20 
Water Quality in Urban Streams 
 In the summer of 2007, an analysis of mu-
nicipal water quality data was completed by Dr. 
James Grover of the University of Texas at Arling-
ton.  Data collected by the cities of Arlington, Fort 
Worth, Grand Prairie, and Irving were included in 
the project.  The analyses were focused on determin-
ing trends in water quality parameters, similarities 
between sites, and potential areas of concern. 
 Data analysis showed exceedances typically 
occurred under expected conditions.  For example, 
E. coli levels tend to be elevated  in small to me-
dium sized streams and Chlorophyll a levels are 
higher in broad channels with open surroundings.   
Principal components analysis indicated that for 
some cities, adequate water quality characterization 
might be possible using fewer sites. 
 
Necessity of Orthophosphate Field Filtration 
 During the FY2006-2007 contract, the TRA 
CRP studied the differences between field and lab 
filtered orthophosphate (OP) samples.  Two stream 
sites and two reservoir sites were selected to repre-
sent the range of conditions found in the Trinity 
River basin.  Samples were collected for one year 
using uniform methods to prevent contamination 
and reduce variability.  Resultant data were then 
analyzed by Dr. James Grover. 
 Data analysis showed that there was no sig-
nificant difference between OP samples filtered at 
the lab and samples that were filtered in the field.  
As a result of this study, TCEQ has agreed to accept 
lab filtered OP samples from the TRA into the state-
wide database. 
 
West Fork Double Bayou UAA 
 The West Fork Double Bayou and Cotton 
Bayou were both found to be impaired for depressed 
dissolved oxygen on the 2002 Water Quality Inven-
tory.  Due to the impairment and increasing develop-
ment in the area, H-GAC and the USGS conducted a  
use attainability analysis (UAA) during FY 2007.  
The goal of this UAA is to determine the extent and 
source of the impairments, whether natural or an-
thropogenic.  The UAA will also determine the level 
of aquatic life use the waterbodies can realistically 
support and if the current standards are appropriate.   
 The TRA Lake Livingston Project collected 
water quality samples and diurnal dissolved oxygen 
on the West Fork Double Bayou .  These sampling 
events coincided with habitat and biological sam-
pling conducted by the USGS.  
 An interim report for this study is available 
on the H-GAC website at http://www.h-gac.com/ 
community/water/maps/documents/Cotton_bayou_ 
combined.pdf.  The final report for this study is 
scheduled for completion in FY2008. 
 
Trinity Bay Nutrient Loading 
 Intensive sampling began on this project in 
July 2004 and will continue indefinitely.  Samples 
are collected monthly from six sites located on 4 
major tributaries to Trinity Bay.  This sampling is 
intended to enhance the fixed monitoring in the 
lower basin and to acquire data on inflows into the 
bay.  With this data, total loadings into the bay and 
the relative contributions from each of the tributaries 
can be determined. 
 
Trinity River Wasteload Allocation 
 The last wasteload allocation for the Trinity 
River was conducted in the 1990s and is used to de-
termine the assimilative capacity of the river and the 
limits of each discharger.  Increasing development 
in the metroplex has made it imperative to recalcu-
late the wasteload allocation.  In FY2007, The Trin-
ity River Compact (Dallas, Fort Worth, TRA, 
NTMWD) contracted with consultants to complete 
this task.   
 The model used to generate the wasteload 
allocaction was updated with information on reuse 
permits and utililzed a more real world view of in-
stream flows and discharges from treatment plants.  
Initial modeling results indicate that, under current 
effluent limits, discharge flows in the upper Trinity 
River and East Fork (segments 841 and 805) can 
increase by approximately 70% and still meet the 
dissolved oxygen standards in those segment. 
 Additional modeling and analysis work is 
planned for FY2008 as the Compact continues this 
project. 
 
SPECIAL STUDIES 21 
Trinity River Fish Population Summary/Survey 
 In FY2007, the TRA CRP contracted with 
the University of Houston-Clear Lake to compile 
information on all available literature pertaining to 
fish populations in the Trinity River.  After and ex-
tensive review of academic, government, and pub-
lished literature, a total of 89 documents were found.   
 These documents were scanned into PDF 
format, where applicable, and used to assemble a 
database and annotated bibliography.  The database 
contains information on the location and time of col-
lection, equipment used, species collected or ob-
served, unit of effort and catch per unit of effort, 
numbers of species or taxa, and any other data that 
was provided in the original 
report.  At this time, no water 
quality data is included in the 
database due to inconsisten-
cies in format and coverage. 
 The TRA CRP will 
contract with UH-Clear Lake 
during the FY2008-2009 con-
tract to provide a summary 
and an analysis of the data.  
The goal of this project is to 
determine historical trends in 
fish communities and popula-
tions in the mainstem of the 
Trinity River.  The data will 
also be used to identify any 
data gaps and will potentially 
guide future monitoring and assessments of fish 
populations. 
 
Trinity River Continuous Monitoring Station 
 The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station 
has operated and maintained a continuous water 
quality monitoring station on the Trinity River at 
Liberty.  This station collects field data as well as 
conventional parameters.   
 In order to allow for the continued operation 
of this station, the TRA CRP provides funding for 
ancillary materials, supplies, and travel costs. 
 
Trinity River Information Management System 
 In FY2007, as part of Governor Perry’s Trin-
ity River Basin Environmental Restoration Initia-
tive, the TRA CRP in cooperation with TCEQ 
funded the Trinity River Information Management 
System (TRIMS) through the Texas A&M Univer-
sity Institute of Renewable Natural Resources.  
 TRIMS is a web-based mapping system that 
includes data layers for waterbodies, roadways, cen-
sus tracts, landfills, discharges, and oil and gas 
wells, just to name a few.  Users without specialized 
geographic information system (GIS) programs and 
training can easily access this information for mak-
ing land use decisions in the basin. 
   To use TRIMS, please visit the website at 
http://trims.tamu.edu/. 
TRIMS interactive map viewer with selectable layers. 
Continuous monitoring station on the Trinity River at Liberty. 
STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION & PUBLIC OUTREACH 22 
Stakeholder Participation 
 The TRA CRP is guided 
by a group of basin stakeholders.  
These stakeholders include basin 
monitoring agencies, city manag-
ers and mayors, volunteer groups, 
and interested citizens.  Each 
year, meetings are held to provide 
the group with information about 
the program and its activities as 
well as to solicit ideas for special 
studies that may address specific 
concerns.  To learn more about 
the program and how to get in-
volved, please visit http://www. 
trinityra.org/BasinPlan/CRP/tra_ 
crp1.html. 
   
Educational and Public Outreach Activities 
 The TRA CRP and staff are involved in vari-
ous public outreach and educational programs via 
funding for programs and participation at various 
events. 
 CRP staff take part in several educational 
and outreach events throughout the course of the 
biennial contract.  Some of these events include GIS 
Day at local colleges, Gator Fest in Anahuac 
(http://www.texasgatorfest.com/), and Celebrating 
People and Planet at UT Arlington.  At these events, 
CRP staff set up informational displays and answer 
questions about the Trinity River basin. 
 The Waterborne Education Center (WEC) is 
located in Anahuac, near Trinity Bay.   The WEC 
operates two 45-foot vessels, the Smith Point and the 
Moss Bluff, which are used as floating classrooms 
capable of carrying approximately 25 students.  
Classes consist of field labs that demonstrate the im-
portance of the Trinity’s tidal and coastal ecosys-
tems.  The TRA CRP provides funding for the pur-
chase of educational supplies and equipment.  If you 
would like more information on the WEC, please 
visit http://www.txwaterborne.org/. 
 The River Legacy Parks and Living Science 
Center is located in North Arlington on approxi-
mately 1,300 acres of donated land.  The parks pro-
vide paved and natural trails, picnic and play areas, 
as well as wildlife habitat.  The Living Science Cen-
ter, built using sustainable design, is an educational 
facility that includes interactive exhibits, classes, 
and an animal room.  The TRA CRP provides fund-
ing for the purchase of supplies and equipment used 
in the Living Science Center.  To learn more about 
the Parks and Center, please visit http://www.river 
legacy.org/.  
  Texas Watch is a program that monitors the 
quality of waterbodies in Texas through volunteers 
activity.  This program is administered by Texas 
State University in cooperation with TCEQ and the 
U.S. EPA.  The TRA CRP supports a trainer for this 
program as well as many active volunteer via moni-
toring kits.  To learn more about Texas Watch and to 
view monitoring data, please visit  http://texaswatch. 
rivers.txstate.edu/. 
 
Trash Clean-Ups 
 Several trash clean-ups are supported by the 
TRA CRP including Trash Bash, Navarro County 
Clean-Up Day, and Walker County Proud.  Funding 
for supplies and landfill fees is provided to the or-
ganizers of these beneficial events.   
 Volunteers at these events remove many tons 
of debris, tires, and other waste which is then recy-
cled or properly disposed of by event organizers.  In 
addition, volunteers are able to experience the im-
portance of their local water resources and how they 
are impacted by human activities.   
Living Science Center at River Legacy Parks 
WEBSITE 23 
 The TRA CRP maintains a website that con-
tains information on the program in general  as well 
as specific information about current activities.  The 
main webpage can be found at http://www.trinityra. 
org/BasinPlan/CRP/tra_crp1.html. 
 The Activities page gives a general overview 
of CRP tasks and links to a page where information 
for upcoming and past 
meetings are posted.  
The Reports page al-
lows users to view and 
print past Basin High-
lights and Summary Re-
ports as well as the final 
reports for all completed 
special studies and the 
most current basin-wide 
Quality Assurance Pro-
ject Plan (QAPP).  The 
Studies page briefly de-
scribes the special stud-
ies planned for the cur-
rent biennial contract and lists studies conducted in 
the last contract.  The Monitoring & Data page links 
to the TRA Data Viewer where a user can obtain 
data via an interactive map.  Also found on this page 
is a link to the Statewide Monitoring Schedule 
hosted by Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA).  
The Pictures page contains images of CRP activities 
and sampling locations 
in the Trinity River ba-
sin.  The Public Partici-
pation page discusses 
some of the educational 
and outreach programs 
that the TRA CRP par-
ticipates in as well as 
some of the trash clean-
ups that are funded.  Fi-
nally, the Partners page 
provides links to other 
agencies in the state that 
participate in the Clean 
Rivers Program. 
Visit us online at http:// 
www.trinityra.org/Basin 
Plan/CRP/tra_crp1.html for 
information on meetings and 
to view reports, photos, and 
data. 
PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 
The preparation of this report was financed through grants 
from the  
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 
The Trinity River Authority of Texas 
 
http://www.trinityra.org