Studying the storm

New report details damage and fury Winter Storm Uri caused across Texas

Pictures like this bring back bad memories.

Texans are painfully aware of the bitter loss caused by Winter Storm Uri; many are still coping with the effects of the storm that set in on February 13. But now, new figures reveal how ravaging the freeze was to the Lone Star State and its beleaguered residents.

At its peak, Uri left close to 4.5 million homes and businesses without power, killed more than 100 people, and caused an estimated $295 billion in damage. The storm became the single biggest insurance claim event in state history.

More than two out of three Texans — some 69 percent — lost electricity at some point during the storm, for an average of 42 hours. Meanwhile, almost half — 49 percent — lost access to running water for an average of more than two days.

Additionally, nearly one-third of residents reported water damage in their home.

These numbers come from a just-released report by the Hobby School of Public Affairs at the University of Houston. The Hobby School conducted the online survey of Texas residents 18 and older who live in the 213 counties served by the Texas Electrical Grid, which is managed by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).

The full report is available here.

Highlighting the frustrations millions have expressed since the storm has passed, nearly three out of four Texans — 74 percent — say they disapprove of ERCOT’s performance during the winter storm, with 65 percent strongly disapproving. Some 78 percent of respondents claim they do not believe that the power outages in their area were carried out in an equitable manner.

Just how many Texans were okay with the council? Only 6 percent say they approve of ERCOT’s widely criticized handling of the storm, per the survey. In the aftermath of the storm, seven ERCOT board members resigned following the near total failure of the state’s power grid.

More than three-quarters of residents surveyed support policy reforms, which include requiring electricity generators to weatherize and boost their reserve capacity and natural gas companies to weatherize in order to be able to participate in the Texas market.

However, a majority of respondents oppose proposals that would require consumers to pay an additional fee in order to fund electricity generator weatherization efforts and to increase the amount of reserve electricity generation capacity, per the study.

The Hobby data produced other notable findings, including:

Some 61 percent of Texans prepared for the storm by buying additional food, 58 percent bought bottled water, and 55 percent filled their vehicle with gas. The next most common preparations were insulating pipes, covering or moving plants, and storing tap water.
A large number — 75 percent — reported difficulty obtaining food or groceries, 71 percent lost internet service, and 63 percent had difficulty obtaining bottled water.
When they lost electrical power and heat, 18 percent left their home, with 44 percent going to a local relative’s home.
Of those who remained in their home without power, 26 percent used their gas oven or cooktop as a source of heat, 8 percent used a grill or smoker indoors, and 5 percent used an outdoor propane heater indoors.
Nearly half of Texans disapprove of Gov. Greg Abbott’s performance during the winter storm, compared to 28 percent who approve.
More than half relied either a great deal, somewhat, or a little on three information sources before, during and after the storm hit: 68 percent on local TV news; 63 percent on neighbors and friends; and 55 percent on The Weather Channel.

The survey was fielded by YouGov from March 9 through March 19, with 1,500 YouGov respondents, resulting in a confidence interval of +/-2.5. Respondents were matched to a sampling frame on gender, age, ethnicity/race, and education, and are “representative of the adult population in these 213 Texas counties,” per UH.

“Winter Storm Uri was a catastrophic weather event that impacted millions of lives across our state,” said Kirk P. Watson, founding dean of the Hobby School, in a statement. “By digging deeper into its impact on Texans, we are learning critical information that will help inform future plans so a tragedy of this magnitude never happens again.”

weather reports city-news-roundup

Animal News

Advocates find false info being fed to Texas legislators on pet store law

Puppy mill dogs do not have a great life.

undefined

A national pet store chain has been implicated in a dishonest campaign to try and influence Texas lawmakers on an upcoming bill making its way through the legislature.

The pet store chain is Petland, and they're engaged in a battle against The Ethical Pet Sale Bill (SB 1652 / HB 3458), which would encourage pet stores to stop selling at-risk animals from puppy mills and support shelters and rescue groups instead.

The Ethical Pet Sale bill has support from rescue and animal groups across Texas, who are all grappling with a glut of animals on the streets and in overcrowded shelters. That pet overpopulation problem gets even worse when pet stores import more animals from puppy mills in states like Missouri and Ohio.

If Texas passes the bill, it will join a growing number of states and cities who've already passed similar laws including Dallas, Austin, Bryan, College Station, El Paso, Euless, Fort Worth, Houston, New Braunfels, Pasadena, San Antonio, The Colony, Sherman, and Waco.

Most reputable pet store chains such as PetSmart and PetCo do not sell cats and dogs. Petland does. The company operates 84 stores in the U.S., and fights bills like this by hiring lobbyists to discourage legislators from supporting these bills.

Phony list
In this case, a two-page summary was distributed to some Texas state senators listing reasons why they should oppose SB ("The evidence from other states, especially California, demonstrates that these types of bans do more harm than good"), plus a list of organizations that are opposed.

Most of the organizations opposed to the bill profit directly from animals, such as Petland and Puppy Dreams, a North Texas chain that also sells animals.

But the list also had surprising names including PetSmart, PetCo, and Pet Supplies Plus — the three largest pet store chains who all have a history of supporting adoption of shelter animals.

Their presence on the list caught the eye of animal advocacy groups such as Texas Humane Legislation Network and Humane World For Animals, who've worked with the big three in the past.

"We became aware of Petland Inc.’s lobbyist apparently sharing the attached document with legislators, claiming the listed pet and pet product industry leaders are opposing this legislation," said a spokesperson from Humane World of Animals (HWA). "We checked in with contacts at Petco, Petsmart, and the American Pet Products Association, and all of them deny opposing this legislation or giving Petland permission to list them on this opposition letter. It’s very possible others listed in this letter also did not give their permission to be included — we only connected with the those listed above at this stage."

CultureMap also contacted the three major pet store chains and received similar responses that they had not been consulted nor did they issue a rejection of the bill, although none wanted to be quoted.

The misrepresentation is concerning because it muddies the water with false information at a time when the bill is still under consideration:

HB 3458 — the version going through the Texas House — passed a House Committee with a 10-1 vote and has been moved up the chain towards passage.

SB 1652 — the version going through the Senate — still needs to get through the Senate Committee, Calendars, and a floor vote.

"By creating a false narrative about the position of the above industry leaders, this letter has the potential to sway lawmakers at a critical juncture in the legislation’s journey," the HWA spokesperson says.

Two Petland stores in the Dallas area — in Frisco and Tyler — have been the subject of undercover investigations. Petland Webster recently settled a lawsuit with several families that the store allegedly sold sick puppies to, and several lawsuits have been filed against Petland Woodlands in Texas, claiming the store sold sick puppies. One pet owner told the House Committee that he'd spent $20,000 on medical care of a puppy he bought at a pet store.

"Banning the retail sale of puppies and kittens is a common-sense solution to protect both animals and Texas consumers," said Dean Senator Judith Zaffirini of Laredo, who filed the bill. "My SB 1652 would help reduce pet overpopulation, promote responsible breeding practices and prevent families from unknowingly purchasing sick animals. With varying local ordinances in place and further action at the city level now restricted, it is important for the state to provide a clear and consistent approach that prioritizes both animal welfare and consumer protection."

politics animals