Texas Coast Report Cards - Expanded Document

The Texas Coast

Ecosystem Health Report Card 2023: Expanded Document

Photo by Larry Ditto Nature Photography

1

The Ecosystem Health Report Card is a quantitative evaluation of ecosystem status

This Report Card uses local, state, and national datasets alongside stakeholder input to evaluate how current conditions compare to long-term trends. The scoring strategy and graphic display are meant to give a high-level summary of quantitative analyses of ecosystem indicators for a broad audience to inform management decisions for the Texas coast.

A healthy score represents a well-balanced system that supports current uses. A vulnerable score indicates that negative influences from human and natural pressures are being observed.

An unhealthy score occurs where measured values are consistently outside the range of what is expected based on reference conditions.

Scoring thresholds were determined by statistical analyses with stakeholder input, professional judgment, and expert review.

Score bar Unhealthy 1

Vulnerable 1.5

Prioritize immediate actions

2

Prioritize proactive solutions

Healthy 2.5

3

Prioritize balanced growth

Datasets and written R code for analyses are available by request (amie.west@tamucc.edu)

2

Water Methods & Scoring Criteria

Nutrients Scale > 20% 10-20% < 10%

Score 1 2 3

Source: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Surface Water Quality Monitoring, retrieved via the Surface Water Quality Web Reporting Tool Data description: Chlorophyll a: Percent of values exceeding criterion (11.6 µg/L) over the period from 2015-2021 Dissolved oxygen: Percent of values below criterion (5 mg/L) over the period from 2015-2021 Note: Nutrient score is the average of the chlorophyll a score and the dissolved oxygen score

Beach bacteria Scale > 20% 15-20% 10-15% 5-10% < 5%

Score 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Source: Texas Beach Watch, Texas General Land Office, U.S. EPA, retrieved via BEACON 2.0 Data description: Percent of days in 2021 under Beach Watch contamination advisory (Tier 1 beaches)

3

Freshwater Inflow† The freshwater inflow score is the average of the water supply score and the salinity score

Water supply (high flow)

Water supply (low flow)

Scale > 20% 16-20% 12-16% 8-12% < 8%

Scale > 20% 16-20% 12-16% 8-12% < 8%

Score 1 1.5 2 3 2

Score 1 1.5 2 3 3

Source: Texas Water Development Board Data description: Percent of monthly values in last 7 years < 10th or > 90th percentile calculated over the period from 1981-2020 Note: Separate scores were calculated for high flow and low flow, then averaged

Salinity Scale > 20% 5-20% < 5%

Score 1 2 3

Source: Texas Water Development Board, Conrad Blucher Institute at Texas A&M-Corpus Christi, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Data description: Percent of daily values in last 7 years < 10th or > 90th percentile calculated over the period of record*

*Time period varies by bay based on data availability See Page 8 for step-by-step method description

†

4

Habitats Methods & Scoring Criteria

Wetland area Scale > 10% loss 10% loss-10% gain > 10% gain

Score 1 2 3

Source: National Land Cover Database, Total area of wetlands by county (acres) retrieved via Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium Enhanced Visualization and Analysis Tool Data description: Percent change in area covered between 2001 and 2019

Seagrass coverage Scale > 50% loss 20-50% loss 20% loss-20% gain 20-50% gain > 50% gain

Score 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Source: Dr. Ken Dunton, UTMSI Data description: Change in percent coverage of all seagrass species between 2011 and 2021*

*Time period varies by bay based on data availability

5

Wildlife Methods & Scoring Criteria Colonial waterbirds†

Source: Texas Colonial Waterbird Society

Scale > 2 years 2 years 1 year 0 years

Data description: Number of years in last 7 years where total number of nesting pairs was < 25th percentile calculated over the period from 1992-2021 for each species

Score 1 1.5 2 3

Finfish† Scale 7 seasons 6 seasons 5 seasons 4 seasons 3 seasons 2 seasons < 2 seasons

Scored species: Black Skimmer, Great Egret, Reddish Egret, Roseate Spoonbill, Tricolored Heron, Great Blue Heron, Brown Pelican, Caspian Tern, Forster’s Tern

Source: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Score 1 1.3 1.6 2 2.3 2.6 3

Data description: Number of seasons in last 7 years where gillnet catch per unit effort was < 25th percentile calculated over the period from 1982-2021 Note: The 25th percentile was calculated for Fall and Spring separately; final score is the average of the Fall score and the Spring score for each species Scored species: Spotted Seatrout, Black Drum, Red Drum, Atlantic Croaker, Southern Flounder

Shrimp & Blue Crab†

Source: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department

Scale > 2 months 2 months 1 month 0 months

Data description: Number of months in last 3 years where trawl catch per unit effort was < 25th percentile calculated over the period from 1992-2021 for each species

Score 1 1.6 2.3 3

Oysters† Scale > 25% 10-25% < 10%

Note: The 25th percentile was calculated separately for each calendar month; final score is the average of 12 monthly scores Source: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department

Score 1 2 3

Data description: Percent of months in the last 5 years where dredge-based abundance estimates were < 25th percentile calculated over the period from 2002-2021 Note: The 25th percentile was calculated separately for each calendar month in each bay; the final score is the areaweighted average of the monthly bay scores

See Page 8 for step-by-step method description

†

6

Community Methods & Scoring Criteria Coastal economies Scale <0 < 75% 75-90% 90-125% > 125%

Score 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Source: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (commercial landings) and Travel Texas (travel and recreation) retrieved via Travel Texas Data Download Data description: Commercial landings: Growth rate in monetary value over the period from 2002-2021 (in 2015 dollars) by bay Travel and recreation: Growth rate over the period from 20022021 in total direct earnings generated by travel spending (in 2015 dollars), by county; both scores compared to average Texas growth rate in GDP for the same period Note: Coast wide scores compared to average U.S. growth rate in GDP for the same period

Community resilience Source: American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau retrieved via Community Resilience Estimates Datasets

Scale > + 19 points + 17-19 points + 15-17 points + 13-15 points + 11-13 points + 9-11 points + 7-9 points + 5-7 points + 3-5 points + 1-3 points U.S. average (21.57%)

Score 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2

Data description: Estimated percent of population in 2019 with 3 or more risk factors compared to average for the U.S. Risk factors include income to poverty ratio, single or no caregiver, crowding, communication barrier, unemployment, disability, no health insurance, age 65+, no vehicle access, no Internet access.

Scale (cont.)

- 1-3 points - 3-5 points - 5-7 points - 7-9 points - 9-11 points - 11-13 points - 13-15 points - 15-17 points - 17-19 points > +19 points

Score (cont.)

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3

7

Step-by-step scoring

Determine reference period

Freshwater Inflow: 1981-2020 Colonial waterbirds: 1992-2021 Finfish: 1982-2021 Shrimp & Crab: 1992-2021 Oysters: 2002-2021

Bin data

Freshwater Inflow: NA Colonial waterbirds: NA Finfish: Season (Fall & Spring) Shrimp & Crab: Month Oysters: Month & minor bay

Calculate threshold for each bin

Freshwater Inflow: 10th & 90th percentile Colonial waterbirds: 25th percentile Finfish: 25th percentile Shrimp & Crab: 25th percentile Oysters: 25th percentile

Establish assessment period

Freshwater Inflow: 2015-2021 Colonial waterbirds: 2015-2021 Finfish: 2015-2021 Shrimp & Crab: 2019-2021 Oysters: 2017-2021

Calculate the number of observations in each bin outside threshold value

Apply scoring scale to each bin

Oysters only

Calculate the average of bin scores

Calculate the area-weighted average of minor bay scores 8

Bay Results Quantitative scores and trends

Aransas Bay

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.6 3/3 2 2.5 2 1.6 Insufficient data 2 1.5 1 3 3 1.5 3 1 1.5 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.4 2.7 2.2 1.8 3 2.8 1.6

Trend* nd nd nd

nd nd nd nd nd nd + nd nd -

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

11

Corpus Christi Bay

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.8 1/3 2 1.9 2 2.1 Insufficient data 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1.5 3 2.8 2.7 2.5 2 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.8 na 1.5 2.8 1.7

Trend* nd + +

nd nd nd nd + nd + nd nd na

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

12

Upper Laguna Madre

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients (chla trend) Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2 1.5/3 2 Insufficient data 2.5 1.8 Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data 2.8 3 3 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.2 2.7 2.8 na 1.5 1.5 1.6

Trend* + +

+ + + nd nd na

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

13

Lower Laguna Madre

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients (chla trend) Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.3 3/3 1.8 3 1.5 2.3 Insufficient data 3 3 2 1.5 3 3 3 3 3 2.8 3 3 2.8 2 2.3 2.9 3 2.7 na 1.5 1.8 1.3

Trend* nd nd +

nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd na

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

14

San Antonio Bay

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients (chla trend) Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.2 2/3 2 Insufficient data 2 Insufficient data Insufficient data 1 1 3 1 1.5 1 3 3 3 3 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.8 1.8 3 2.3 1.3

Trend* nd nd +

nd + + + nd nd nd

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

15

Matagorda Bay

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.3 3/3 1.5 1.2 2 Insufficient data Insufficient data 1.5 1 3 1 1 1 3 1.5 3 2.7 2.3 3 3 2 1.9 2.4 2.6 2.9 1.5 1.5 2.3 1.5

Trend* nd nd

nd nd + nd + nd + + nd -

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

16

Galveston Bay

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients (chla trend) Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 2.3 1/3 1.7 2.7 1.8 Insufficient data Insufficient data 1 1 1 1 1 1.5 3 1 1.5 2.7 2.5 2.8 2.3 1.7 2.3 2.5 3 3 1.6 1 2.4 1.8

Trend* + +

nd nd nd nd + nd + nd nd + + -

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

17

Sabine Lake

Water

Habitat

Colonial waterbirds

Fisheries

Community

Indicator Nutrients Inflow (high/low) Salinity Beach bacteria Wetland area Seagrass coverage Tidal flats Black skimmer Great egret Reddish egret Roseate spoonbill Tricolored heron Great blue heron Brown pelican Caspian tern Forster’s tern Spotted seatrout Black drum Red drum Atlantic croaker Southern flounder Blue crab Brown shrimp White shrimp Pink shrimp Oysters Commercial landings Travel & recreation Resilience

Score 3.0 1.5/3 2 3 2 Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data Insufficient data 2.8 2.7 3 2.8 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.6 na 1.1 1.5 2 1.8

Trend* nd +

+ + + + nd nd + na -

*Seasonal Kendall trend test No trend detected (nd) - Declining trend + Increasing trend

18

Acknowledgments This Report Card was developed in partnership with many stakeholders and organizations. This report was made possible in part through a grant from the Texas General Land Office (TGLO) providing Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 funding to the State of Texas and awarded under the Texas Coastal Management Program. The views contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the views of the TGLO or the State of Texas.

Suggested citation: West, A., Wetz, M., Beseres Pollack, J., 2023. Texas Coast Ecosystem Health Report Card: Expanded Document. Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi.