DOCSLIB.ORG

In the Supreme Court of the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO and STATE OF COLORADO, Defendants. ______________________________ On New Mexico’s Motion To Dismiss Texas’s Complaint and the United States’ Complaint in Intervention and Motions of Elephant Butte Irrigation District and El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 for Leave To Intervene __________________ FIRST REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER __________________ A. GREGORY GRIMSAL Special Master 201 St. Charles Avenue Suite 4000 New Orleans, LA 70170 June 28, 2016 Page TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ..............................................................................................3 II. Background Principles of Water Law ......................................................8 A. The Doctrine of Prior Appropriation .............................................8 B. The Doctrine of Equitable Apportionment..................................19 III. The Historical Context: Events Leading to the Ratification of the 1938 Compact ...................................................................................26 A. The Geography of the Upper Rio Grande Basin.........................26 B. The Natural Behavior of the Rio Grande Lends Itself to Boundary and Resource Disputes ...............................................27 1. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago creates the International Boundary Commission to handle boundary disputes .............................................................27 2. Resource disputes lead to a plan for an international dam and reservoir on the Rio Grande .......31 3. The Republic of Mexico lodges a formal claim for damages alleging misappropriation of water from the Rio Grande by United States citizens ........................34 4. The Harmon Doctrine is rejected in favor of referring the international dispute to the International Boundary Commission for amicable solutions.............................................................................40 5. A competing plan for a privately funded reservoir and dam on the Rio Grande interferes with the negotiation of a convention between the United States and Mexico .............................................................46 C. Legislative Attempts Toward Solving the Problems Regarding Reclamation of the Western Arid States, Including the Equitable Distribution of the Waters of the Rio Grande ...................................................................................53 1. The debate between cession versus a comprehensive federal scheme for reclamation of western arid lands leads to the 1902 Reclamation Act and the creation of the Reclamation Service .............53 2. Congress establishes the Rio Grande Project operated by Reclamation...................................................75 i Page 3. Irrigation districts are established to guarantee the feasibility of the Rio Grande Project ................................86 4. An international convention settles Mexico’s claim for damages due to alleged misappropriation of Rio Grande waters by U.S. citizens ........................................88 D. The Completion and Operation of the Rio Grande Project ........90 E. The 1929 Interim Rio Grande Compact......................................93 1. The Rio Grande Compact Commission is established to address the 1896 embargo still in force....................................................................................93 2. The Secretary of the Interior lifts the 1896 embargo, causing compact negotiations to break down...................................................................................98 3. A temporary compact is negotiated ................................100 F. The 1938 Rio Grande Compact..................................................106 1. The Rio Grande Compact Commission reconvenes on the eve of the expiration of the 1929 Interim Compact ...........................................................................106 2. The National Resources Committee is called upon to triage and assist in the resolution of the interstate water dispute in the Upper Rio Grande Basin ................................................................................109 3. A final compact apportioning Rio Grande waters is signed...............................................................................127 4. Ratification of the 1938 Compact proves difficult..........138 5. Performance under the 1938 Compact...........................151 IV. New Mexico’s Motion To Dismiss Texas’s Complaint .........................161 A. Standard of Review....................................................................164 B. Texas Has Stated a Claim Under the Unambiguous Text and Structure of the 1938 Compact ..........................................166 ii Page 1. The text of the 1938 Compact requires New Mexico to relinquish control of Project water permanently once it delivers water to the Elephant Butte Reservoir..........................................................................167 2. The structure of the 1938 Compact integrates the Rio Grande Project wholly and completely, thereby protecting both deliveries to and releases from Elephant Butte Reservoir ...............................................169 C. The Purpose and History of the 1938 Compact Confirm the Reading That New Mexico Is Prohibited From Recapturing Water It Has Delivered to the Rio Grande Project After Project Water Is Released from the Elephant Butte Reservoir ..........................................................................175 D. Application of the Supreme Court’s Doctrine of Equitable Apportionment Also Prohibits New Mexico From Recapturing Project Water After That Water Is Released from the Elephant Butte Reservoir Through the Administration of the Rio Grande Project ................................181 V. New Mexico’s Motion To Dismiss the United States’ Complaint in Intervention......................................................................................188 A. The United States’ Litigation Roles Within Original Actions Resolving Interstate Stream Disputes.........................191 B. The 1938 Compact Does Not Transform the United States’ Federal Reclamation Claims into Compact Claims By Virtue of Its Utilization of the Project To Effect the Apportionment of Rio Grande Waters to Texas and New Mexico.........................................................................................198 C. The Court Should Nevertheless Exercise Its Discretion To Extend Its Original, But Not Exclusive, Jurisdiction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1251(b)(2) To Hear the United States’ Project Claims Against New Mexico .........................................200 VI. Elephant Butte Irrigation District’s Motion To Intervene .................205 A. The Applicable Legal Standard for Intervention......................207 B. EBID Has Not Met the Standard for Intervention...................211 iii Page 1. EBID’s motion to intervene is procedurally deficient ...........................................................................214 2. EBID fails to satisfy its burden to establish a compelling interest that is unlike the interests of other citizens of the State ...............................................218 3. EBID has not rebutted the presumption that New Mexico adequately represents EBID’s interests in this litigation ...................................................................224 4. Practical considerations militate against permitting EBID to intervene ...........................................................229 C. Conclusion ..................................................................................230 VII. El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1’s Motion To Intervene...............................................................................................231 A. The Applicable Legal Standard for Intervention......................233 B. EP No. 1 Has Not Met the Standard for Intervention .............234 1. EP No. 1 fails to satisfy its burden to establish a compelling interest that is unlike the interests of other citizens of the State ...............................................234 2. EP No. 1 has not rebutted the presumption that Texas adequately represents EP No. 1’s interests in this litigation ...................................................................238 C. Conclusion ..................................................................................240 APPENDIX Act of May 31, 1939, ch. 155, 53 Stat. 785………………...…...,,………….APP. A H.R. 14326, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 13846, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14072,56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14088, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14192, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14203, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14338, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 14250, 56th Cong. (1901); H.R. 13847, 56th Cong. (1901).………………………………………………………………….………APP. B H.R. 9676, 57th Cong. (1902); S. 3057, 57th Cong. (1902)….…………….APP. C S. 3057, § 5 (ordered reprinted as agreed to in the Committee of the Whole, February 28, 1902)….....……………………….….………………………..APP. D S. 3057, 57th Cong., § 8 (Reported with amendments, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, April 7, 1902) …………………………………………………………………………………APP. E iv Page Letter from J.A. Breckons to Sen. F.E. Warren (Apr. 3, 1902), Francis E. Warren Papers, Box 5, Folder 3, Am. Heritage Ctr., Univ. of Wyoming…………………………………………………………….………...APP. F THE OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWELFTH NATIONAL IRRIGATION CONGRESS HELD AT EL PASO, TEXAS, NOV. 15–16–17–18, 1904 (Guy Elliott Mitchell, ed. 1905).………………………………………………………………….……….APP.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The History of the Rio Grande Compact of 1938
    The Rio Grande Compact: Douglas R. Littlefield received his bache- Its the Law! lors degree from Brown University, a masters degree from the University of Maryland and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles in 1987. His doc- toral dissertation was entitled, Interstate The History of the Water Conflicts, Compromises, and Com- Rio Grande pacts: The Rio Grande, 1880-1938. Doug Compact heads Littlefield Historical Research in of 1938 Oakland, California. He is a research histo- rian and consultant for many projects throughout the nation. Currently he also is providing consulting services to the U.S. Department of Justice, Salt River Project in Arizona, Nebraska Department of Water Resources, and the City of Las Cruces. From 1984-1986, Doug consulted for the Legal Counsel, New Mexico Office of the State Engineer, on the history of Rio Grande water rights and interstate apportionment disputes between New Mexico and Texas for use in El Paso v. Reynolds. account for its extraordinary irrelevancy, Boyd charged, by concluding that it was written by a The History of the congenital idiot, borrowed for such purpose from the nearest asylum for the insane. Rio Grande Compact Boyds remarks may have been intemperate, but nevertheless, they amply illustrate how heated of 1938 the struggle for the rivers water supplies had become even as early as the turn of the century. And Boyds outrage stemmed only from battles Good morning. I thought Id start this off on over water on the limited reach of the Rio Grande an upbeat note with the following historical extending just from southern New Mexicos commentary: Mesilla Valley to areas further downstream near Mentally and morally depraved.
    [Show full text]
  • Leasburg Diversion Dam Flows Along the Rio Grande River About a Mile and a Half Northwest of Fort Selden Historic Site
    H. Davis with the U.S. military was Explore History, Where It Happened surveying the area for use as a military Visit New Mexico Historic Sites and explore the state’s most important places. post. These seven historic sites and one historic property highlight the traditions and Today, the Diversion Dam is part of culture of New Mexico. It is an experience LEASBURG Leasburg Dam State Park, designated a you won’t forget. state park in 1971. DIVERSION DAM Help Preserve Fort Selden Help us preserve Fort Selden by becoming a site volunteer or by making a designated gift to the Museum of NM Foundation for the Fort’s preservation and interpretation. 100% of your gifts will be used to support Fort Selden. Become a Friend of Fort Selden Join other community members as we work to form a non-profit group to support the Fort. Call us for more information at 575-202-1638. The Leasburg Diversion Dam flows along the Rio Grande River about a mile and a half northwest of Fort Selden Historic Site. This diversion dam is vitally important to the region because water is one of New Mexico’s most important commodities. For thousands of years the Rio Grande has been a source of water for travelers, settlers, and livestock and provided water for crop irrigation. Fort Selden Historic Site However, the Rio Grande is an extremely powerful force of nature. It 1280 Ft. Selden Rd. Radium Springs, NM 88054 is a naturally moving river whose path changes on an almost yearly basis. Phone (575) 526-8911 Regional Office: (575) 202-1638 nmhistoricsites.org In the mid-19th century, settlers in the two flood controls in Picacho North and through to the Juarez Valley can have Upper Mesilla Valley were looking for Picacho South; and diversion dams access to water when needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges and Opportunities for Water of the Rio Grande
    Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 43,3(August 2011):367–378 Ó 2011 Southern Agricultural Economics Association Challenges and Opportunities for Water of the Rio Grande M. Edward Rister, Allen W. Sturdivant, Ronald D. Lacewell, and Ari M. Michelsen The Rio Grande has headwaters in Colorado, flows through New Mexico, and serves as the United States.–Mexico border in Texas, emptying into the Gulf of Mexico. Snow melt in Colorado and northern New Mexico constitutes the water river supply for New Mexico and the El Paso region, whereas summer monsoonal flow from the Rio Conchos in Mexico and tributaries, including the Pecos River, provides the Rio Grande flow for southern Texas. The region is mostly semiarid with frequent long-term drought periods but is also characterized by a substantial irrigated agriculture sector and a rapidly growing population. International treaties and interstate compacts provide the rules for allocation of Rio Grande waters between the United States and Mexico and among Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. Water rights in Texas have been adjudicated, but the adjudication process was based on a wet period; hence, contemporary Rio Grande water rights are overallocated. Issues related to the waters of the Rio Grande include: frequent drought, increased municipal demand caused by a rapidly increasing population, supply variability, underdeliveries from Mexico, increasing salinity, inefficient delivery systems, health issues of the population, no economic/financial incentives for farmers to conserve, and water is not typically priced for efficiency. Stakeholders are interested in identifying solutions to limited water supplies while there is increasing demand. There are several activities in place addressing Rio Grande-related water needs, including enhancing delivery distribution efficiency of raw water, conversion of rights from agriculture to urban, improving both agricultural irrigation field distribution and urban use efficiency, developments in desalination, and litigation.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Law of the Rio Chama The Utton Transboundary Resources Center 2007 History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation Susan Kelly UNM School of Law, Utton Center Iris Augusten Joshua Mann Lara Katz Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama Recommended Citation Kelly, Susan; Iris Augusten; Joshua Mann; and Lara Katz. "History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation." (2007). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/uc_rio_chama/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Utton Transboundary Resources Center at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law of the Rio Chama by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. SUSAN KELLY, IRIS AUGUSTEN, JOSHUA MANN & LARA KATZ* History of the Rio Grande Reservoirs in New Mexico: Legislation and Litigation" ABSTRACT Nearly all of the dams and reservoirson the Rio Grandeand its tributaries in New Mexico were constructed by the federal government and were therefore authorized by acts of Congress. These congressionalauthorizations determine what and how much water can be stored, the purposesfor which water can be stored, and when and how it must be released. Water may be storedfor a variety of purposes such as flood control, conservation storage (storing the natural flow of the river for later use, usually municipal or agricultural),power production, sediment controlfish and wildlife benefits, or recreation. The effect of reservoir operations derived from acts of Congress is to control and manage theflow of rivers.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Project
    Rio Grande Project Robert Autobee Bureau of Reclamation 1994 Table of Contents Rio Grande Project.............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Project Authorization.....................................................6 Construction History .....................................................7 Post-Construction History................................................15 Settlement of the Project .................................................19 Uses of Project Water ...................................................22 Conclusion............................................................25 Suggested Readings ...........................................................25 About the Author .............................................................25 Bibliography ................................................................27 Manuscript and Archival Collections .......................................27 Government Documents .................................................27 Articles...............................................................27 Books ................................................................29 Newspapers ...........................................................29 Other Sources..........................................................29 Index ......................................................................30 1 Rio Grande Project At the twentieth
    [Show full text]
  • CRWR Online Report 11-02
    CRWR Online Report 11-02 Water Planning and Management for Large Scale River Basins: Case of Study of the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Transboundary Basin by Samuel Sandoval-Solis, Ph.D. Daene C. McKinney, PhD., PE May 2011 CENTER FOR RESEARCH IN WATER RESOURCES Bureau of Engineering Research • The University of Texas at Austin J.J. Pickle Research Campus • Austin, TX 78712-4497 This document is available online via World Wide Web at http://www.crwr.utexas.edu/online.shtml Copyright by Samuel Sandoval Solis 2011 The Dissertation Committee for Samuel Sandoval Solis Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Water Planning and Management for Large Scale River Basins Case of Study: the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Transboundary Basin Committee: Daene C. McKinney, Supervisor Randall J. Charbeneau David R. Maidment David J. Eaton Bryan R. Roberts Water Planning and Management for Large Scale River Basins Case of Study: the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Transboundary Basin by Samuel Sandoval Solis, B.S.; M.S. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May, 2011 Dedication Dedico esta tesis doctoral a Sil, mi amor, mi esposa, mi alma gemela, mi completo, mi fuerza, mi aliento, mi pasión; este esfuerzo te lo dedico a ti, agradezco infinitamente tu amor, paciencia y apoyo durante esta aventura llamada doctorado, ¡lo logramos! A mis padres Jesús y Alicia, los dos son un ejemplo de vida para mi, los amo con toda mi alma Acknowledgements I would like to express my endless gratitude to my advisor, mentor and friend Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002 Federal Register, 67 FR 39205; Centralized Library: U.S. Fish
    Thursday, June 6, 2002 Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Rio Grande Silvery Minnow; Proposed Rule VerDate May<23>2002 18:22 Jun 05, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06JNP3.SGM pfrm17 PsN: 06JNP3 39206 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 109 / Thursday, June 6, 2002 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: 1. Send your comments on fishes in the Rio Grande Basin, this proposed rule, the draft economic occurring from Espan˜ ola, NM, to the Fish and Wildlife Service analysis, and draft EIS to the New Gulf of Mexico (Bestgen and Platania Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 1991). It was also found in the Pecos 50 CFR Part 17 2105 Osuna Road NE, Albuquerque, River, a major tributary of the Rio RIN 1018–AH91 NM, 87113. Written comments may also Grande, from Santa Rosa, NM, be sent by facsimile to (505) 346–2542 downstream to its confluence with the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife or through the Internet to Rio Grande (Pflieger 1980). The silvery and Plants; Designation of Critical [email protected]. You may also minnow is completely extirpated from Habitat for the Rio Grande Silvery hand-deliver written comments to our the Pecos River and from the Rio Grande Minnow New Mexico Ecological Services Field downstream of Elephant Butte Reservoir Office, at the above address. You may and upstream of Cochiti Reservoir AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, obtain copies of the proposed rule, the (Bestgen and Platania 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • Border Wars & the New Texas Navy
    Digital Commons at St. Mary's University Faculty Articles School of Law Faculty Scholarship 2013 Border Wars & The New Texas Navy: International Treaties, Waterways, And State Sovereignty After Arizona v. United States Bill Piatt St. Mary's University School of Law, [email protected] Rachel Ambler Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.stmarytx.edu/facarticles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bill Piatt and Rachel Ambler, Border Wars & The New Texas Navy: International Treaties, Waterways, And State Sovereignty After Arizona v. United States, 15 Scholar 535 (2013). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law Faculty Scholarship at Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Articles by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BORDER WARS & THE NEW TEXAS NAVY: INTERNATIONAL TREATIES, WATERWAYS, AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY AFTER ARIZONA V. UNITED STATES BILL PIATT* RACHEL AMBLER** "Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may." -Sam Houston' * Dean (1998-2007) and Professor of Law (1998-Present), St. Mary's University School of Law. ** Student at St. Mary's University School of Law and Law Clerk at Pullman, Cappuccio, Pullen & Benson, LLP, San Antonio, Texas. 1. Samuel Houston, of Texas, In reference to the Military Occupation of Santa Fe and in Defence of Texas and the Texan Volunteers in the Mexican War, Address Before the Senate (June 29, 1850), in DAtiy NAIONAL INTELLIGENCER (Washington, D.C.), Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Grande Project
    RIO GRANDE PROJECT El Paso Field Division 10737 Gateway Blvd. West, Suite 350 El Paso, TX 79935 U. S Dept. of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation RIO GRANDE PROJECT CURRENT HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN U. S Dept. of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation ALBUQUERQUE AREA OFFICE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ~ I CO ·· - ·· - ·· AZ:NM I • AMARILLO RIO GRANDE PROJECT MEXICO %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME Upper Rio Grande Basin (Basin Avg.) Rio Chama Basin (Basin Avg.) 600 ~-----------------., 140 ...--:-------------:--;:--:-;:-=--~ w ~500 .------------~ ~ 120 ~~-------~~~~ ~ Avg=Avgo ~400 #---------------~~~~ ~ 100 ~H*--~.----~~=-~ ~ Avg=Avg o w 9SNOTEL 4 SNOTEL ~300 ~-----------~ Sites ~ 8o ~UW~~.J~~~----~ ~ 60 ~~~~----~~--~ Sites ~200 rr~----------~ 0 40 ~-----------~ ~ ~100 ~~~~~""~~~-----~ 20 ~-----------~ o ~~~~~TITITTI~~~~Trrrrrn 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 OCT. 01,2006 to APR. 30,2007 OCT. 01,2006 to APR. 30,2007 %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME %OF AVG. SNOW WATER EQUIVALENT vs TIME Sangre de Cristo Mtn Basins (Basin Avg.) Jemez River Basin (Basin Avg.) 160 ...-----------------., w 140 +-----~------~ ~ 120 ~---~~~~-~--~ w 120 ...-------~--~-----------­ ~ Avg=Avgo ~ 100 ~------~1r~r---~~~~ ffi 100 +--+--~----+-~------~ ~ Avg=Avgo ~ 80 ~~~-~---~---~ 9SNOTEL ffi 80 +------1~----r---------­ Sites 3 SNOTEL ~ 60 ~~~~-----~==~~ ~ 60 ~----~------~---------­ Sites ~ 40 ++~~~-----~~-"~ o~ 40 ~~r-~------~~-------­ 20 ++--------~~~~ ~ 20 ~~~~--------+--------- o ~~~~~~~~~~~~nTM o ~~~~~~~ITTI~ITnTITITTITIT 10/1 11/6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 10/1 11 /6 12/18 1/29 3/12 4/23 6/4 7/16 OCT.
    [Show full text]
  • First Interim Report of the Special Master
    No. 141, Original ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO and STATE OF COLORADO, Defendants. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On New Mexico’s Motion To Dismiss Texas’s Complaint And The United States’ Complaint In Intervention And Motions Of Elephant Butte Irrigation District And El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 For Leave To Intervene --------------------------------- --------------------------------- FIRST INTERIM REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER --------------------------------- --------------------------------- A. GREGORY GRIMSAL Special Master 201 St. Charles Avenue Suite 4000 New Orleans, LA 70170 (504) 582-1111 February 9, 2017 ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Authorities ............................................. xiv I. Introduction ............................................... 4 II. Background Principles of Water Law ........ 9 A. The Doctrine of Prior Appropriation .... 9 B. The Doctrine of Equitable Apportion- ment ..................................................... 23 III. The Historical Context: Events Leading to the Ratification of the 1938 Compact ........ 31 A. The Geography of the Upper Rio Grande Basin ....................................... 32 B. The Natural
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Rio Grande Project, New Mexico,” Vol
    Middle Rio Grande Project Andrew H. Gahan Historic Reclamation Projects Bureau of Reclamation May 2013 Table of Content Table of Content .............................................................................................................................. i Middle Rio Grande Project ............................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 1 Historic Setting ............................................................................................................................ 2 Project Authorization .................................................................................................................. 8 Project Construction .................................................................................................................. 12 Post Construction ...................................................................................................................... 17 Use of Project Water ................................................................................................................. 19 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 23 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Use of Rio Grande Silvery Minnow
    HABITAT USE OF RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW Robert K. Dudley and Steven P. Platania Division of Fishes, Museum of Southwestern Biology Department of Biology, University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131 submitted to: David L. Propst New Mexico Department of Game and Fish State Capitol, Villagra Building P.O. box 25112 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504 and James P. Wilber United States Bureau of Reclamation 505 Marquette NW, Suite 1313 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 17 December 1997 Dudley & Platania 1997. Habitat use of Rio Grande silvery minnow. FINAL-DECEMBER 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary purpose of this study was to characterize habitat use of Rio Grande silvery minnow at two sites, Rio Rancho and Socorro, in the Middle Rio Grande, NM. Habitat use was determined through a series of measurements of depth, velocity and substrate taken in the area where fish were collected. Habitat availability was measured along permanent transects at each site. Rio Grande silvery minnow was relatively abundant at both sampling localities, but was more numerous and comprised a greater percentage of the total catch at Socorro than at Rio Rancho. Red shiner, western mosquitofish, flathead chub, fathead minnow, longnose dace and white sucker were present in moderate numbers at both sites, but the other 12 species collected during the study accounted for less than 5% of the total catch. Although the abundance of fish varied widely across time within sites, the majority of all fish were collected at the Socorro, NM site. The mesohabitats most commonly occupied by all size-classes of Rio Grande fishes were low water velocity habitats over small substrata.
    [Show full text]