Designation of Critical Habitat for the Rio Grande Silvery Minnow Draft Environmental Impact Statement U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 June 2002 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Designation of Critical Habitat for the Rio Grande Silvery Minnow Lead agency: United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Cooperating agencies: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs States and counties where the proposed action is located: New Mexico: Bernalillo, Sandoval, Socorro, and Valencia Counties; Abstract: This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) examines the impact on the environment of the designation of critical habitat for the Rio Grande silvery minnow (Hybognathus amarus), an aquatic species listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The silvery minnow was historically one of the most abundant and widespread fishes in the Rio Grande Basin, occurring from Espanola, New Mexico to the Gulf of Mexico. It was also found in the Pecos River from Santa Rosa, New Mexico downstream to the confluence of the Pecos with the Rio Grande in Texas. The minnow now occurs only in the Rio Grande in New Mexico, from Cochiti Dam downstream to Elephant Butte reservoir, five percent of its former range. Most of the minnows are found in the reach of the Rio Grande from San Acacia Diversion Dam to Elephant Butte, in Socorro County. Once a species is listed under the ESA, federal agencies must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and ensure that actions they authorize, fund or carry out do not jeopardize the species continued existence. Once critical habitat is designated, federal agencies must also consult to ensure that actions they authorize, fund or carry out do not adversely modify designated habitat. The ESA requires the Service to designate critical habitat for endangered species to the maximum extent prudent. Critical habitat includes occupied and occupied areas “essential to the conservation of the species,” and “conservation” is defined as actions necessary to bring the species to the point where it can be delisted. The Service proposes to designate as critical habitat for the minnow the currently occupied reaches of the Rio Grande in New Mexico, referred to as the Middle Rio Grande. Impacts of this alternative include an increased scope of consultations, which will be expanded to include effects of actions on critical habitat, as well as some changes to the actions to avoid adverse modification. It is likely that efforts will be made to increase the flow in the Rio Grande in areas that now experience drying events, and that this acquisition of water could impact agricultural communities. While a voluntary water market is important to maintaining silvery minnow habitat, the secondary impacts on the communities could be substantial. Efforts to minimize drying events, combined with river restoration activities for the minnow, will impact favorably on riverine and riparian ecosystems but, depending on the reduction in irrigated cropland, could reduce forage for the migratory bird population. This DEIS also analyzes the impacts of three other alternatives: (1) Designating the Middle Rio Grande, except for the Cochiti reach, the northern reach of the Middle Rio Grande and one that has undergone major changes since Cochiti Dam went online in 1975; (2) Designating the Middle Rio Grande except the San Acacia reach, the southern reach on the Middle Rio Grande and one that experiences significant drying during parts of the year; (3) Designating the Middle Rio Grande as well as two extended reaches within the minnow’s historical range, the Pecos River from Sumner Dam to Brantley Reservoir in NM and the Rio Grande in Big Bend NP and the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River in Texas. A no action alternative is also analyzed. Public Comment: Public comments on the DEIS are welcome and will be accepted through September 4, 2002. Public comment meetings will also be held during this period. A final EIS will then be prepared. Comments should be directed to: Joy Nicholopoulos, Field Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2105 Osuna Blvd., NE, Albuquerque, NM 87113. H. Dale Hall Acting Regional Director Acronyms and Abbreviations AMAFCA Albuquerque Metropolitan Area Flood Control Authority BA Biological assessment BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior BO Biological Opinion bluntnose shiner Pecos bluntnose shiner BLM Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CID Carlsbad Irrigation District Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CWA Clean Water Act, also known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act DEIS Draft environmental impact statement EA Economic analysis under Endangered Species Act EIS Environmental impact statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act, 16 USC sections 1531-1544 ESA Work Group Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Act Collaborative Program flycatcher Southwestern willow flycatcher FR Federal Register FSID Fort Sumner Irrigation District IBWC International Boundary and Water Commission LPVRWP Lower Pecos Valley Regional Water Plan LFCC Low Flow Conveyance Channel MRG Middle Rio Grande MRGCD Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area NEPA National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC sections 4321-4370d NMDGF New Mexico Department of Game and Fish NMHPD New Mexico Historic Preservation Division NMISC New Mexico Interstate Stream Comission NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System NPS National Park Service NWR National Wildlife Refuge OSE Office of the State Engineer, State of New Mexico OSM Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior RGWSR Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River RPA Reasonable and prudent alternative under the ESA (see glossary) RPM Reasonable and prudent measures under the ESA (see glossary) Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior silvery minnow Rio Grande silvery minnow (Hybognathus aramus) iii SSCFCA Southern Sandoval County Arroyo Flood Control Authority TMDL Total maximum daily load TPW Texas Parks and Wildlife, State of Texas TNRCC Texas Natural Resources and Conservation Commission URGWOP Upper Rio Grande Water Operations USC United States Code USIBWC International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. Section WMA Waterfowl Management Area iv Table of Contents Page Abstract ..................................................................... i Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................... iii Summary ..................................................................S-1 Chapter 1. Purpose and Need for Action ....................................... 1-1 Introduction .......................................................... 1-1 Purpose of the Action ................................................... 1-1 Need for the Action .................................................... 1-3 Background .......................................................... 1-4 Rio Grande Silvery Minnow ....................................... 1-4 Decision to List the Rio Grande Silvery Minnow as Endangered ........... 1-6 Original Designation of Critical Habitat .............................. 1-6 Present Proceeding to Prepare an EIS and Redesignate Critical Habitat ............ 1-8 Overview of the Scoping Process ................................... 1-8 Issues Raised During Scoping ...................................... 1-9 General Considerations ..................................... 1-9 Silvery Minnow .......................................... 1-10 Alternatives ............................................. 1-11 Impacts ................................................. 1-12 Permits Required for Implementation ..................................... 1-14 Related Environmental Planning ......................................... 1-14 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action .......................... 2-1 Development of Alternatives ............................................. 2-1 Alternative A – No Action Alternative ..................................... 2-5 Description of the Alternative ...................................... 2-5 Actions Associated with the Alternative .............................. 2-5 Alternative B – The Middle Rio Grande from Cochiti Dam to Elephant Butte Dam, And the Lower Jemez River ................................. 2-5 Description of the Alternative ...................................... 2-5 Actions Associated with the Alternative .............................. 2-8 Alternative C – Exclusion of the Cochiti Reach .............................. 2-8 Description of the Alternative ...................................... 2-8 Actions Associated with the Alternative ............................. 2-10 Alternative D – Exclusion of the San Acacia Reach .......................... 2-10 Description of the Alternative ..................................... 2-10 Actions Associated with the Alternative ............................. 2-10 Alternative E – Designation of Selected Reaches of the Middle Rio Grande, the Lower Rio Grande, and the Pecos River .......................... 2-12 v Description of the Alternative ..................................... 2-12 Actions Associated with the Alternative ............................. 2-14 Alternatives Considered But Not Selected