Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (BEST) Program: Environmental Contaminants and their Effects on Fish in the Rio Grande Basin S# S# S# S# S#S#S# S#S#S#S# S# S# # S S# S# # S S# S# S# S# # S# S# S S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# S# # S# S# # S S#S# S S# S# S# S# #S# S# S# S# S#S S# # S# SS# S# S# S#S# Scientific Investigations Report 2004—5108 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover. The U.S. map shows the Rio Grande Basin (green) and stations sampled in this study (orange). Shown in gray are major river basins and stations in the conterminous U.S. sampled during other Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends Program (BEST) investigations. Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (BEST) Program: Environmental Contaminants and their Effects on Fish in the Rio Grande Basin By Christopher J. Schmitt, Gail M. Dethloff, Jo Ellen Hinck, Timothy M. Bartish, Vicki S. Blazer, James J. Coyle, Nancy D. Denslow, and Donald E. Tillitt Scientific Investigations Report 2004—5108 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Schmitt, C.J., Dethloff, G.M., Hinck, J.E., Bartish, T. M., Blazer, V.S., Coyle, J.J., Denslow, N.D. and Tillitt, D.E., 2004, Biomonitoring of Environmental Status and Trends (BEST) Program: Environmental Contaminants and their Effects on Fish in the Rio Grande Basin: U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, Columbia, Missouri, Scientific Investigations Report 2004—5108, 117 p. Preface iii Preface The study described in this report was conducted as part of the Biomonitoring of Environmen­ tal Status and Trends (BEST) program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). BEST evolved from two earlier Federal monitoring programs: the National Pesticide Monitoring Program (NPMP) of the 1960s and the National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program (NCBP) of the 1970s and 1980s (Schmitt and Bunck, 1995). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) participated in the NPMP and maintained the NCBP by monitoring concentrations of persis­ tent contaminants in freshwater fish and avian wildlife through 1986. BEST was initiated in the 1990s to build on information produced by these earlier programs and to provide more biologically relevant information regarding potential contaminant effects on lands and species under FWS management. The program was transferred to the National Biological Survey in 1993, and ultimately to USGS in 1996; its primary goal is to measure and assess contaminants and their effects on selected U.S. species and habitats. One component of BEST continues to monitor contaminants and their effects on fish in large rivers. The 1997 Rio Grande Basin (RGB) study, which was implemented together with a companion investigation of the Colum­ bia River Basin, was part of this effort. The 1997 investigations represented continuations of a pilot study conducted in the Mississippi River Basin during 1995 (Schmitt, 2002a). Together with ongoing investigations in other basins, these studies comprise an expanded continuation of the NPMP/NCBP freshwater fish monitoring networks; four NCBP stations in the RGB were sampled as part of the 1997 study. Acknowledgements This study was conducted jointly by USGS, through the Columbia Environmental Research Center (CERC) in Columbia, Missouri and the National Fish Health Laboratory of the Leetown Science Center (LSC) in Kearneysville, West Virginia; USFWS, through its Ecological Ser­ vices Field Offices in Albuquerque, New Mexico and Corpus Christi, Texas; and by cooperat­ ing scientists at the University of Florida, Gainesville (UF). Many individuals representing USGS, USFWS, UF, and other organizations contributed substantially during the conduct of the investigation. C. Bunck (USGS) managed the BEST program and S. Finger coordinated most of the work at CERC. M. Wilson (USFWS-Albuquerque) and C. Lee (USFWS-Corpus Christi) supervised field portions of the study. Chemical analyses were conducted at labora­ tories operated by Mississippi State University and the Research Triangle Institute through contracts managed by the Patuxent Analytical Control Facility (PACF) of the USFWS; J. Moore and P. McDonald of PACF facilitated this part of the study. Laboratory analyses for biomarkers were conducted by D. Nicks and S. Birke (CERC); D. Bowling, K. Spring, and E. Frankenberry (LSC); and M. Chow and K. Kroll (UF). A. Donahue (CERC), J. Smith (USFWS, Albuquerque), D. Buckmeier (Texas Parks and Wildlife, Ingram, Texas) and E. Buckner (Missouri Department of Conservation, Columbia, Missouri) aged the fish. The study was partly funded through a Research Work Order with the USGS-Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at UF; F. Percival, Unit Leader, and T. Gross of the USGS Florida- Integrated Science Center facilitated this agreement. A. Donahue also managed the data and prepared report graphics. P. Anderson assisted with the preparation of the maps and obtained data and information from extant sources. N. Bauch and C. Crawford (USGS-Colorado and Indiana Water Resources District Offices, respectively) obtained and summarized the NASQAN data as part of an ongoing project. B. Wright (Oregon Department of Fish and Game, Cor­ vallis, Oregon) and M. Ellersieck (University of Missouri-Columbia) assisted with statistical analyses. D. Buckler (USGS-CERC), M. Mora (USGS-CERC Field Research Station, Brazos, Texas), J. Whyte (AScI, c/o USGS-CERC), J. Lusk (USFWS-Albuquerque), J. Moring (USGS- Austin, Texas) and C. Caldwell (USGS-New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, New Mexico State University) reviewed all or parts of earlier versions of the report and provided additional information. R. Lipkin (CERC) managed the bibliographic database and prepared the report for publication. iv Environmental Contaminants and their Effects on Fish Contents v Contents Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Rio Grande Basin Overview ............................................................................................................... 4 Hydrology and Infrastructure ...................................................................................................4 Ecoregions and Climate ............................................................................................................. 5 U.S. Dept. of the Interior Resources at Risk from Contaminants in the Rio Grande ........ 5 Extant Sources of Information on Contaminants in the RGB........................................................ 6 Major Sources of Contaminants to the Rio Grande ....................................................................... 9 Agriculture ................................................................................................................................... 9 Municipal Wastes ..................................................................................................................... 10 Mining and Energy Extraction ................................................................................................ 10 Industry....................................................................................................................................... 11 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................................. 12 Collection Sites and Sampling Dates ............................................................................................. 12 Target Species and Sampling Strategy .......................................................................................... 12 Monitoring Methods Overview........................................................................................................ 12 Field Procedures ................................................................................................................................ 16 Fish Collection ........................................................................................................................... 16 Sample Processing................................................................................................................... 16 Laboratory Analyses ........................................................................................................................