VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Fish & Aquatic Habitats

Existing Condition Report

VALLES C ALDERA TRUST

State of Sandoval and Rio Arriba Counties P.O. Box 359 Jemez Springs, NM 87025 (505) 661-3333 [email protected]

SWJML NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 2 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE

Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Introduction The streams of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) contain a variety of native fish as well as introduced rainbow and brown trout. These waters used to contain cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii virginalis) (Anschuetz & Merlan, 2007). Stream and fish surveys of the two major streams/rivers, East Fork Jemez River and San Antonio Creek, of the Valles Caldera have been conducted (2001 and 2002) as well as twice yearly fish sampling at permanent monitoring stations in lower, middle, and upper reaches of each stream (2003-2009). These two streams contain a mixture of the following species:

Native: Rio Grande chub (Gila pandora), fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), longnose dace (Rhinicthys cataractae), and Rio Grande sucker (Catostomus plebeius)

Non-native: rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), brown trout (Salmo trutta), and white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) – one individual found

Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species Table1 – Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Species

Common Name Scientific Name Status Known to Potential to Occur? Occur? Rio Grande silvery Hybognathus Endangered No No minnow amarus Rio Grande silvery Endangered No No minnow critical NA habitat Rio Grande Oncorhynchus Candidate No Yes cutthroat trout clarkii virginalis

The Rio Grande silvery minnow with designated critical habitat is listed as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This species and its critical habitat do not exist within the Valles Caldera. Rio Grande silvery minnow designated critical habitat is found within the Jemez River which the East Fork Jemez River is a tributary of, and this river is found within the VCNP but the mainstem of the Jemez River is outside the scope of this existing condition analysis. This species will not be further discussed within this document. The Rio Grande cutthroat trout is a candidate species for listing under the

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 3 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

ESA. It is also a regional forest sensitive species and is discussed with the other forest sensitive species.

Sensitive Species The Valles Caldera streams contain two species, and used to contain one other species, that are listed on the Forest Service’s regional sensitive species list. The species are:

Table 2- Regional Sensitive Species of the Valles Caldera National Preserve

Common Name Scientific Name Known to Potential to occur? Occur? Rio Grande sucker Catostomus plebeius Yes Yes Rio Grande chub Gila pandora Yes Yes Rio Grande cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarkii No Yes trout virginalis

Historical Condition Historically the streams and wetlands of the Valles Caldera sustained a native fish assemblage including Rio Grande cutthroat trout. Stream morphology and pattern was significantly altered in the late 1800’s with the advent of commercial ranching, timber development, mineral extraction, and geothermal exploration as well as the road building associated with these activities (Anschuetz & Merlan, 2007). Historical accounts referenced in Anschuetz and Merlan describe the major valley bottoms as marshlands “teeming with trout”. Aerial photos from 1935 show even at that time that some portions of San Antonio and Jaramillo Creeks, and East Fork Jemez River valleys remained as wetlands with a network of small, narrow, and very sinuous channels, vegetated completely by herbaceous plants. Cover for fish was probably from deeply undercut banks in loamy material and water depth itself. The relatively deep and narrow water column, with minimal exposure to the sun, probably tempered the already warm waters from volcanic source. Pool quality was likely relatively poor, developing in the main, at pressure points in over-developed bends.

Existing Condition – Habitat

East Fork Jemez River The East Fork of Jemez River (Map 1) provides 21.43 miles of fish habitat; fish are found from this river’s mouth to its headwaters. There are 4 perennial tributaries to the East Fork Jemez River, of which only two have official names: La Jara Creek and Jaramillo Creek (USDA-Forest Service, 2002). La Jara Creek is a shallow, high-gradient, cold water stream originating from a spring (Viera & Kondratieff, 2004). Jaramillo Creek is a narrow, deep stream with temperatures that can exceed 23°C. Ammonia and aluminum within this creek can be found in levels exceeding state water quality standards (Viera & Kondratieff, 2004). Habitat data is not available for the two other unnamed tributaries. Fisheries data is unavailable for any of these tributaries except for Jaramillo Creek. This

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 4 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

tributary was sampled as part of a brown trout size study. A few brown trout were captured in Jaramillo during sampling in 2003 (Aquatic Consultants, Inc., 2003). Species other than non-native trout were not reported for Jaramillo in the 2003 study.

Riparian conditions along the East Fork Jemez River, and its tributary Jaramillo Creek, are improving in the perennial reaches below the spring to the preserve’s southern boundary (TEAMS Enterprise Unit, 2007) according to repeated Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) Surveys (Table 3 and Table 4). In the intermittent reaches above, riparian conditions have not improved and are classified as “functioning–at-risk” (TEAMS Enterprise Unit, 2007). Water quality in the East Jemez was found to have a high degree of exceedence of turbidity standards. Water temperature exceeded standards to some extent on all streams but particularly, in terms of total duration of record, on East Fork Jemez River (Moser E. , 2009). Moser (2009) speculates that the warm water temperature of the perennial streams of the caldera may be influenced by bedrock source area. Unusually warm temperatures were recorded during field reconnaissance during summer 2009 for high elevation sites with good forest cover. Further, the stream valleys are largely created by faulting associated with volcanism, and warm and mineralized springs occur throughout the VCNP drainages.

The 2001 stream inventory by Forest Service (USDA-Forest Service, 2002) found that pool quantity was properly functioning but lacked quality. Simino indicated pool volume was reduced from accumulated sediment related to bank erosion and upland runoff. Simino also cited poor quality for trout from a lack of large woody debris (LWD), although the open valley forms and moderately low flows for downstream transport suggest large wood may not have been historically available for pool development.

Table 3 - PFC survey results for East Fork Jemez River, 2000 and 2006

Segment 2000 PFC determination 2006 PFC determination 1 FARn FARu 2 PFC FARd 3 NR NR 4a FARn FARn 4b FARn PFC 5 PFC PFC 6 FARu PFC 7 NF FARu 8 PFC PFC *PFC = Proper Functioning, NF = Non Functional, NR = Non Riparian, FAR = Functioning at Risk (n = no trend, u=upward trend, d= downward trend)

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 5 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Table 4 - PFC survey results for Jaramillo Creek, 2000 and 2006

Segment 2000 PFC Determination 2006 PFC Determination 1 PFC PFC 2a FARu PFC 2b FARu FARu 2c FARu PFC 3 PFC PFC *PFC = Proper Functioning, NF = Non Functional, NR = Non Riparian, FAR = Functioning at Risk (n = no trend, u=upward trend, d= downward trend)

San Antonio Creek San Antonio Creek Figure 1 provides 30.5 miles of fish habitat; fish are present from its mouth to its headwaters (USDA-Forest Service, 2003). This creek has four perennial tributaries: Sulfur Creek, San Luis Creek, Rito de los Indios, and a fourth, unnamed tributary. Sulfur Creek is a naturally acidic creek (pH 2 to 4) that is characterized by sulfur springs and geothermal activity (Viera & Kondratieff, 2004); it is unlikely this creek is supporting any fish species. Rito de los Indios Creek is a very shallow, first order stream with largely gravel and some coarse sand (Ibid 2004). Fisheries data is not available for this stream. Habitat and fisheries data are not available for San Luis Creek or the unnamed tributary.

The main stem San Antonio Creek was likely altered from excessive runoff prior to the large scale logging in the 1960’s. Moser (2009) concludes from comparison of 1935 aerial photographs with those from 1996 that gully forms in the caldera had been initiated in the early 20th century, probably by sheep grazing. Sheep use tends to concentrate on upland slopes. The main stem of San Antonio Creek as well as Jaramillo Creek showed massive accumulation of transportable sand and gravels that had widened and straightened the channels. The larger source of the accumulated sediment was probably the eroded banks of the channels themselves

References from oral history in Anscheultz and Merlan (2007) describe the bottoms of the valleys as marsh lands, and the trout occurring in the marshlands or streams emanating from marshes. The 1935 photographs show a broad wet bottom still exists in both Jaramillo and San Antonio valleys, with multiple channel traces indicating a much dispersed flow (Moser E. , 2009). By 1996 these same valley sections have deeply incised single-thread channels. Moser concludes that though single-threaded channel reaches presently show recovery, the pattern itself may represent a large shift from a wetter, dispersed flow environment. In consulting aerial photos, the channelization seemed to occur prior to the industrial logging of the 1960’s.

San Antonio Creek and its tributary Rito de los Indios have shown some improvement in riparian conditions according to PFC surveys (Table 5 and Table6) (TEAMS Enterprise Unit, 2007), although water temperature at several locations in San Antonio Creek exceeds Forest Service and New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED) standards for salmonid development. The Forest standards classified San Antonio Creek

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 6 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats as not properly functioning for salmonid development at all sites except station 5 located near the headwaters. The NMED standards classified two of the five sites as not properly functioning for water quality (State of New Mexico, 2002). Other water quality factors that were found to be not properly functioning include the pH of the stream was neutral to basic and often exceeds 8.8 and ammonia and aluminum levels can occasionally exceed water quality standards (USDA-Forest Service, 2003). According to the 2002 survey other physical parameters that were not properly functioning included relative sediment content in riffles, the density of LWD, and pool development, and width-to- depth ratio (USDA-Forest Service, 2003).

Table 5 – PFC survey results for San Antonio Creek, 2000 and 2006

Segment 2000 PFC determination 2006 PFC determination 1 PFC PFC 2 PFC PFC 3 NR NR 4 PFC PFC 5 PFC PFC 6a FARu FARu 6b FARu PFC *PFC = Proper Functioning, NF = Non Functional, NR = Non Riparian, FAR = Functioning at Risk (n = no trend, u=upward trend, d= downward trend)

Table 6 - PFC survey results for Rito de los Indios, 2000 and 2006

Segment 2000 PFC determination 2006 PFC determination 1 PFC PFC 2 FARn PFC 3 PFC PFC *PFC = Proper Functioning, NF = Non Functional, NR = Non Riparian, FAR = Functioning at Risk (n = no trend, u=upward trend, d= downward trend)

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 7 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Figure 1 - Major Streams and their tributaries within the Valles Caldera National Preserve

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 8 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Existing Condition - Fish

Rio Grande sucker (Catostomus plebeius)

Species description: The Rio Grande sucker is a member of the Castomid family. This sucker is characterized by its small size, soft ray fins, and a fleshy, subterminal mouth (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005) (Calamusso, Rinne, & Turner, 2002). The Rio Grande sucker is usually found in low gradient, low velocity streams (Calamusso, Rinne, & Turner, 2002). Specimens have been collected in pool, riffle and glide habitat types.

The historic range of the Rio Grande sucker included the Rio Grande Basin of Colorado and New Mexico, the Mimbres River, and six rivers in Mexico (Calamusso, Rinne, & Turner, 2002). This fish has been introduced and populations have established in the Rio Honde, Gila River basin, and the San Francisco River drainage (Calamusso, Rinne, & Turner, 2002). Currently, the Rio Grande sucker is listed as endangered in the Colorado portion of its distribution. Within its northern New Mexico range the Rio Grande sucker appears to be in decline. A recent survey of the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests also found a decline in range and abundance of Rio Grande sucker (Calamusso, Rinne, & Turner, 2002).

Rio Grande sucker abundance and condition can be negatively impacted by the deposition of fine sediments (Swift-Miller, Johnson, & Muth, 1999); this fish usually favors larger, coarse substrate. Competition from introduced fish has been a major factor in the decline in abundance of the Rio Grande sucker. The white sucker has especially contributed to the decline of the Rio Grande sucker (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005). Other factors contributing to the decline of the Rio Grande sucker include habitat destruction and alteration, decreased water flow and increased water temperature (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005).

Existing condition in the project/action area: The Rio Grande sucker is native to the streams of the Valles Caldera (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005) and is currently found within several streams of the Valles Caldera. A 2001 survey of the East Fork Jemez River found Rio Grande sucker present in all reaches (USDA-Forest Service, 2002). A 2002 snorkel survey of San Antonio Creek found Rio Grande suckers present in the lower reaches of San Antonio Creek (USDA-Forest Service, 2003) (Parmenter, 2009). Electro-fishing surveys at a lower, middle and upper permanent monitoring site in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 found Rio Grande sucker (Chart 1) present in the East Fork Jemez River but not in San Antonio Creek (Parmenter, 2009). This data shows populations of Rio Grande sucker appearing to be varying over time with a downward trend in the upper and middle reaches of the East Fork Jemez. The sizes of the Rio Grande suckers that were sampled as part of this permanent monitoring station ranged from 8 to 200+ mm.

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 9 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

In the past, the San Antonio was stocked with rainbow trout twice a year by New Mexico Game & Fish in two locations (USDA-Forest Service, 2003). The East Fork Jemez River has also been routinely stocked with rainbow trout (USDA-Forest Service, 2002). Stocking of brown trout began in the 1930’s, if not before (USDA-Forest Service, 2002). Currently, stocking of rainbow trout and brown trout does not take place, and these species are naturally reproducing (Moser J. S., 2009). As part of an effort to increase the assemblage of native fish, Rio Grande sucker, along with other native species, were moved from the East Fork Jemez River to San Antonio Creek in 2007. During the spring 2009 survey of the permanent monitoring station in the lower reach of San Antonio Creek, 28 suckers (Figure 3) were found (Parmenter, 2009). In September 2008 a fish sampling survey was conducted as part of graduate student research; juvenile Rio Grande suckers were found in a lower reach of San Antonio Creek (Anderson, 2009). Adult Rio Grande suckers were also found but it is unlikely that repatriation of this species will be possible in these upper reaches given the large piscivorus brown trout populations (Figure 4 and Figure 5) (Anderson, 2009). Brown trout sampled at the permanent monitoring station ranged from 6 to 350+ mm.

Current overall physical habitat conditions, such as temperature and sediment, along with competition and predation from brown trout and potentially white sucker could be limiting current suitability of the streams of the Valles Caldera for the Rio Grande suckers. The improving physical conditions could likely lead to more suitable conditions for this species.

Figure 2 - Number of Rio Grande suckers found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 10 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Figure 3 - Number of Rio Grande suckers found in the lower reach of San Antonio Creek during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009

Figure 4 - Number of brown trout found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 11 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Figure 5 - Number of brown trout found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of San Antonio Creek during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009

Rio Grande chub (Gila Pandora) Species description: The Rio Grande chub is a small fish averaging five and a half inches in length that is found in both rivers and lakes. This species is often confused with other members of the Gila genus. The Gila chubs’ two dark lateral stripes with occasional dark spots and a silvery color overall (Sublette, Hatch, & Sublette, 1990) differentiate it from other members of this genus. There is limited information on the habitat preferences of the Rio Grande chub; they have been found in pools with overhanging banks and brush and seem to prefer sand over cobble substrate. Spawning takes place in riffles with breeding likely taking place March through June (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005). During a survey of streams in the Santa Fe and Carson National Forests Rio Grande Chub were found in many streams but were only present in reaches with a gradient of less than two percent at elevations between 5,600 and 9,200 feet (Calamusso & Rinne, 1996).

Historically the Rio Grande chub was abundant and widespread throughout the Rio Grande basin, the Pecos River basin, and the San Luis Closed basin (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005). Currently, the Rio Grande chub is likely expatriated form the main stem of the Rio Grande but still found in the Rio Grande tributaries. This fish is considered to be widespread throughout suitable habitat in the Rio Grande basin of New Mexico (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005).

Two major factors have lead to the decline of the Rio Grande chub, the first is competition and predation from introduced species such as brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), and the second is habitat alteration. Habitat is fragmented by impoundments and water diversions, while grazing, mining and other land use practices impair habitat. Water impounds further degrade habitat for the Rio Grande chub with changes in the thermal regime caused by water impoundment releases (Rees, Carr, & Miller, 2005).

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 12 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Existing condition in the assessment area: The Rio Grande chub has been found within several streams of the Valles Caldera. A 2001 survey of the East Fork of Jemez River found Rio Grande chub present in all reaches (USDA-Forest Service, 2002). A 2002 snorkel survey of San Antonio Creek also found Rio Grande chub present in all reaches (USDA-Forest Service, 2003). Electro-fishing surveys at permanent monitoring stations within the East Jemez River and San Antonio Creek in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 found Rio Grande chub present in the East Fork Jemez River (Figure 6) but not in San Antonio Creek (Parmenter, 2009). Populations of this fish appear to be varying over time in the East Fork Jemez with what looks like a downward trend but more years of data would be needed to confirm this assessment. The sizes of the Rio Grande chubs that were sampled as part of this permanent monitoring station varied from 43 to 200+ mm.

Rio Grande chub, along with other native species, were moved from the East Fork Jemez River to San Antonio Creek in 2007 in an effort to increase the native fish assemblage. The Rio Grande chub was not found during subsequent San Antonio Creek permanent monitoring station surveys. However in the fall of 2008 a fish sampling survey conducted for graduate student research found juvenile chub in a lower reach of San Antonio Creek and adults in a middle reach (Anderson, 2009). It is unlikely that repatriation of this species will be possible in these upper reaches given the large piscivorus brown trout populations (Figure 4 and Figure 5).

Current overall physical habitat condition could probably support this species but there is limited information on the habitat preferences of this species. The biological component (e.g. non-native trout) could be limiting current suitability.

Figure 6 - Number of Rio Grande chub found in the lower and middle reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009

Rio Grande cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii virginalis) Species description: Rio Grande cutthroat trout (RGCT) is a member of the Oncorhynchus clarkii species; this species is composed of 14 subspecies and several

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 13 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

distinct racial forms ( (Pritchard & Cowley, 2006)). RGCT possess the bright slashes on the underside of the maxillaries and are brightly colored on the sides and belly but differ from the most closest related cutthroat, the greenback and Colorado cutthroat trout, by the fewer scales in the lateral line and more pyrolic caecae (Behnke, 1992).

RGCT have been found in a variety of habitat types from mainstems to small, first-order streams. The RGCT species requires a variety of habitat types for different life stages. Suitable gravel is required for spawning and juvenile trout need slower waters for development. As adults increase in size they tend to move into the faster moving waters of the main stem while also relying on pools and woody debris for refugia (Pritchard & Cowley, 2006).

Historically the range of RGCT is thought to have included the Rio Grande drainage of Colorado, New Mexico and Texas; the Pecos River drainage of Colorado, New Mexico and Texas; and the Canadian River drainage of Colorado and New Mexico. The historic range may also have included the headwaters of the Rio Conchos in Mexico (Hendrickson, et al., 2002). Currently the RGCT is found in tributaries of the Rio Grande in Colorado and New Mexico; the Carnero and Sanguache drainages in Colorado; tributaries of the Canadian River in Colorado and New Mexico; and tributaries of the Pecos River in New Mexico (Pritchard & Cowley, 2006).

The Rio Grande cutthroat trout has been extirpated from its historic range by a number of factors. Currently, the greatest threat to the RGCT comes from non-native trout such as brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), brown trout (Salmo trutta), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and other forms of cutthroat trout. These introduced species can lead to increased competition and predation as well as interbreeding with rainbow trout and non-native cutthroat trout (Pritchard & Cowley, 2006). Other threats to the RGCT include migration barriers, over-fishing, habitat disturbance, and disease.

Existing condition in the assessment area: Rio Grande cutthroat trout are not currently found within the project area. Historically RGCT was found in streams throughout the preserve. The stocking of non-native trout in the late 1800’s and early-1900’s was probably the main cause of the extirpation of RGCT from the streams of the Vales Caldera.

From the 2002 East Fork Jemez River stream inventory report: A cultural report from 1892 states that the mountain streams fed “Los Valles” (VCNP) and that the streams “teem with mountain trout”. This report pre-dates fish stocking in the . The first recorded stocking in New Mexico occurred in 1896 (Sublette, Hatch, & Sublette, 1990). The mountain trout that this report talks about is likely Rio Grande cutthroat trout. During 1936, a creel census was conducted throughout the state in USDA-Forest Service waters. Included in this report is a stocking history for the East Branch [Fork] Jemez River. During the years 1932-1936, 88,300 rainbow trout and

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 14 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

13,500 Yellowstone cutthroats were stocked. During 1936 the creel census recorded that 30% of the fish caught were rainbow, 50% were Yellowstone cutthroat, and 20% were brown trout. No RGCT were caught in the East Fork Jemez River. However, this report does not say where the creel census was conducted or where the fish were caught or stocked. One can conclude that brown trout were stocked prior to 1932 (USDA-Forest Service, 2002).

From the 2003 San Antonio Creek stream inventory report: RGCT has been extirpated from San Antonio Creek since the 1950’s by exotic trout introductions through competition, hybridization and predation (Sublette, Hatch, & Sublette, 1990). German brown trout is a piscivore, consuming fish like RGCT, and the populations of brown trout in the Valles Caldera appear to be remaining constant for the most part (Figure 4 and Figure 5). Brown trout also compete with native fish for food and living space in the river. (USDA-Forest Service, 2003).

Current overall physical habitat conditions could probably support this species though RGCT populations could be limited by excessive temperature and a lack of LWD in some reaches as well as fine sediment. However, the biological component (non-native trout) could be limiting to the suitability of the streams of the Valles Caldera for the future reintroduction of RGCT. The improving physical conditions of the streams of the VCNP could lead to improved physical habitat for future reintroductions of RGCT.

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 15 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

List of Preparers

Marie Rodriguez Valles Caldera Trust Project Leader Brooke DeVault USDA Forest Service Fisheries Biologist

List of Tables

Table1 – Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Species ...... 3 Table 2 - Regional Sensitive Species of the Valles Caldera National Preserve ...... 4 Table 3 - PFC survey results for East Fork Jemez River, 2000 and 2006 ...... 5 Table 4 - PFC survey results for Jaramillo Creek, 2000 and 2006 ...... 6 Table 5 – PFC survey results for San Antonio Creek, 2000 and 2006 ...... 7 Table 6 - PFC survey results for Rito de los Indios, 2000 and 2006 ...... 7

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Major Streams and their tributaries within the Valles Caldera National Preserve ...... 8 Figure 2 - Number of Rio Grande suckers found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009 ...... 10 Figure 3 - Number of Rio Grande suckers found in the lower reach of San Antonio Creek during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009 ...... 11 Figure 4 - Number of brown trout found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009 ...... 11 Figure 5 - Number of brown trout found in the lower, middle and upper reaches of San Antonio Creek during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009 ...... 12 Figure 6 - Number of Rio Grande chub found in the lower and middle reaches of East Jemez River during permanent monitoring station surveys, 2003-2009 ...... 13

Works Cited

Anderson, M. (2009). Personal Communication with Robert Parmenter, Science and Education Program Manager. Jemez Springs, NM: Valles Caldera National Preserve. Anschuetz, K., & Merlan, T. (2007). More Than a Scenic Mountain Landscape: Valles Caldera National Preserve a Land Use History. RMRS-GTR-196. 277p. Fort Collins, CO: USDA-Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Aquatic Consultants, Inc. (2003). Valles Caldera National Preserve, 2003 Stream Surveys. 26p. Unpublished Report.

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 16 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

Behnke, R. J. (1992). Native Trout of Western North America. Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society, Monograph 6. Calamusso, B., & Rinne, J. N. (1996). Distribution of Rio Grande Cutthroat trout and its occurrence with the Rio Grande sucker and Rio Grande chub on the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests. USDA-Forest Service Technical Report RM 272:157-167. Calamusso, R., Rinne, J. N., & Turner, P. R. (2002). Distribution and Abundance of the Rio Grande sucker in the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests, New Mexico. The Southwestern Naturalist , 47(2):182-186. Hendrickson, D. A., Espinoza Perez, H., Findley, L. T., Forbes, W., Tomelleri, J. T., Mayden, R. L., et al. (2002). Mexican Native Trouts, a review of their current systematic and conservation status. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries , 12:273- 316. Moser, E. (2009). A hydrologic assessment of the Valles Caldera National Preserve. 22p. Unpublished inservice specialist report USDA-Forest Service, TEAMS Enterprise Unit. Moser, J. S. (2009). Personal Communication with Dr. Roboert Parmenter, Valles Caldera Trust, Chief of Science and Education. Jemez Springs, NM: Valles Caldera National Preserve. Parmenter, R. (2009). 2003-2009 Fish Monitoring Data. Jemez Springs, NM: Valles Caldera National Preserve; unpublished. Pritchard, V. L., & Cowley, D. E. (2006). Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii virginalis): a technical conservation assessment. Rocky Mountain Region: USDA-Forest Service, Species Conservation Project. Rees, D. E., Carr, R. J., & Miller, W. J. (2005). Rio Grande chub (Gila pandora): a technical conservation assessment. USDA-Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Report. State of New Mexico. (2002). Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Report for the Jemez River Watershed. Santa Fe, NM: Environment Department, Surface Water Quality Bureau. Sublette, J. E., Hatch, M. D., & Sublette, M. (1990). The Fishes of New Mexico. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press. Swift-Miller, S. M., Johnson, B. M., & Muth, R. T. (1999). Factors affecting the diet and abundance of northern populations of Rio Grande sucker (Catostomus plebeius). The Southwestern Naturalist , 44(2):148-156. TEAMS Enterprise Unit. (2007). Existing Rangeland Condition Report - Valles Caldera National Preserve, 68p. Porterville, CA: USDA-Forest Service, Region 7, Unpublished In-Service Report.

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 17 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats

USDA-Forest Service. (2002). East Fork of the Jemez River Stream Inventory Report. and Valles Caldera Trust. USDA-Forest Service. (2003). San Antonio Creek stream inventory report. Santa Fe National Forest and Valles Caldera Trust.

Viera, K., & Kondratieff, B. (2004). Survey of selected aquatic insect taxa of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, Sandoval County, New Mexico. 74p. Fort Collins, CO: C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagriculture Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University.

SWJML VALLES CALDERA NATIONAL PRESERVE Page 18 Existing Condition Report – Fish and Aquatic Habitats