[Awclist] Rio Chama Flows: Better boating?

[Steve Harris]

Thanks to a "heads up" on recent discussions from my boating buddy,  
Paul Bauer of NM Tech, I recently subscribed to the Adobe Whitewater  
Club's listserve, where I read with interest feedback from members who  
had received Rio Grande Restoration's  Fall, 2011 "Rio Chama Flow  
Optimization Project" newsletter.  This was a report on boater/angler- 
expressed desires for future management of Rio Chama flows, from a  
meeting held on August 26 at El Vado Ranch.

I'm writing to explain the project a little more fully and to  
encourage the Club to join in further deliberations on the future  
management of flows out of El Vado Reservoir.

As boaters, we're all aware of the plight of Western Rivers, where a  
century of water development for irrigation has resulted in the  
declining health of our river ecosystems, noticeable as dams, canals  
and other engineering projects, the decline of native aquatic and  
riparian species, the invasion of exotic species, altered stream flows  
and, in the extreme, desiccated rivers (see the Salt at Phoenix, the  
Gila above its confluence with the Colorado, the LA River and portions  
of our own Rio Grande).

Whether our society can continue to have the economic  benefits of  
water diverted from rivers AND the benefits of living rivers is an  
open question-with the collective mindset bent toward maximum  
utilization of water and the political and economic powers tilted  
sharply toward exploiting rivers at the expense of their protection.   
In the past quarter-century, an "environmental flow" movement has  
sprung up around the West, seeking to restore natural uses of rivers  
in balance with the more dominant economic uses.  (Some of you may  
have heard about "Protect the Flows", a private group in the Colorado  
River basin, or state environmental flow programs like Colorado's or  
Texas'.)

I founded Rio Grande Restoration in 1994, to try to embody that  
movement here in New Mexico and grow it some legs.  We've made a  
little bit of progress:  in 1996 we encouraged San Luis Valley water  
users to leave 16 cfs in the Rio Grande, instead of the zero common to  
past drought years, we helped enact Strategic River Reserve  
legislation enabling the state to purchase water for stream flows, and  
allocate River Ecosystem Restoration funding to help finance local  
river restoration projects.  In 2007, we oversaw introduction of a  
legislative memorial that declared a river flow protection policy for  
NM.   Our guiding philosophy, like the "e-flow movement" in general,  
has been to employ science to determine "how much water a river needs"  
and to foster new inclusive, collaborative and accountable political  
processes to secure some water from continuing development to the  
future benefit of river.  In the process of advancing the "Protect  
River Ecosystems" memorial, we were urged to make a test case of some  
New Mexico river, one that would demonstrate whether science and  
cooperation could make a positive result-hence the Rio Chama project.

We recognize the Rio Chama to be a shared resource, a radical enough  
idea in a region whose legal institutions are designed mainly to  
privatize water and determine its ownership.  The Rio Chama's universe  
of co-dependents include: fish and forests, Conservancy District  
irrigators, acequia communities,  the Albuquerque Water Utility, local  
landowners (some of whom graze and some of whom do not), the Los  
Alamos County electrical utility, public land and resource managers  
(the BLM, Forest Service, fish agencies), federal and state water  
managers (Reclamation Bureau, Army Corps and Interstate Stream  
Commission), downstream water users (El Paso-Juarez, Las Cruces), and  
of course (way down the totem pole) private and commercial boaters,  
spin, bait and fly fishers.  Chama water, though relatively abundant,  
is still limited, and the current decisions about its distribution are  
complex, even chaotic.

The critical assumption of the Chama Project is that the stream flow  
needs of all these interests can be protected or "optimized", through  
a process of analysis, planning and negotiation.   One step along the  
way is to bring the recreational communities together to agree on an  
idealized annual flow regime to accomodate both boating and fishing.   
As a boater (I also own Far-Flung Adventures), I recognize that the  
weekend recreational release program has enhanced boating on Summer  
weekends, but that it has entailed unintended consequences also,  
including much reduced flows in the middle of the week, a potential  
stressor on the little benthic invertebrates at the bottom of the food  
web-made even more destructive by Reclamation's rapidly increasing and  
decreasing water releases from El Vado, low releases made necessary to  
compensate for high weekend flows. (This regime is sometimes referred  
to as "jerking the river around").

The first step toward achieving harmony among recreationists was the  
August 26 meeting at Cooper's.  I was frankly surprised to hear one  
private boater's statement (reported in the newsletter) that "1000 cfs  
is too fast", just as I was surprised at another boater's comment  
(posted on this list) that "1,000 cfs is marginal for my 14' raft".   
This indicates that there is a whole spectrum of opinion (and skill  
levels!) to be considered and accommodated by the Project.  I  
apologize to Tim Scofield, who did indeed inform us that he had talked  
to a number of boaters, whose consensus opinion was that 800 cfs was  
too low, as well as Frank Walsh whose opinion, that 600 cfs was the  
"too low" point, also went unreported.

Another forseeable controversy for the Chama Project to grapple with  
is the acceptibility of changes to the timing of the current weekend  
rec release program.  My own opinion is that BLM could compensate for  
lower (~600 cfs) flows on August weekends by permitting more boating  
during the relatively high runoff period (May-June), with the  
reasonable objective of "no net loss" of permit opportunities.

It is clear that the whole enterprise is going to be a balancing act,  
requiring the give-and-take of all the stakeholders.  The payoff, we  
hope, will be healthier river and a healthier regard for NM rivers,  
overall.   If this test case should succeed, it will advance RGR's  
mission to officially protect flows, throughout the state.

We are at the point of planning for another recreationists meeting in  
February, probably at the Rio Grande Gorge Visitor's Center.   
Remembering that the outcome will be based on "government by those who  
show up" and that boaters' relative influence in the political ecology  
of river control can only be enhanced by collaboration with outfitters  
and trout lovers, I invite you to shoot me an e-mail, tell me you want  
to attend, so that I can send out a Doodle poll to all potential  
participants and arrive at a date for this next session.

I look forward to hearing more discussion.

Steve Harris
Rio Grande Restoration
HCR 69 Box 3-C
Embudo, NM 87531

home/office: 575-751-1269
fax: same
Mobile: 575-770-2502

steve.harris39 at gmail.com