Give One to Chuy Reyes

Earlier I posted that the El Paso Water Improvement District (EPWID) was at it again. They were mowing grass along the Franklin Canal at the El Paso Zoo. I asked some wildlife and horticulture experts and discovered three things. First, it's not nesting season so legally the mowing is allowed even though other wildlife uses the drain. 

Secondly, I was also told that mowing keeps the vegetation low and somewhat manageable. Not mowing would mean unmanageable vegetation, which can leave a breeding ground for different animals and insects, some good some not. The grasses do help to hold the canal bank together.

Mr. Reyes, the Manager of EPWID, stated that "the mowing is part of the maintenance of our property, we have to keep the vegetation down so that our vehicles can patrol the canal banks." The water district is responsible for the maintenance, operation and upkeep of 400 miles of canals and 350 miles of drains from the New Mexico State borderline to the Hudspeth County line. Reyes said: "Simply we patrol to make sure water flow is not blocked and could cause over topping and flooding and we deliver irrigation water to some 32,000 accounts from small gardens to large farms and to the City of El Paso for treatment and utilized for potable water."

All of this sounds reasonable. The fight that we picked in the past had to do with the destruction of habitat and nests. The vegetation in that case did not impede patrolling and, in fact, served to shade the water and thus cut down on evaporation. 

As far as the canal at the Zoo, it is probably a moot point about mowing anyway. The Zoo has plans to concrete that section and build over the canal to create more area for their educational programs. After I emailed Reyes and expressed my concern about mowing the riparian area, he responded: "Sorry for your concern about the riparian zone but we are in the process of working out an agreement with the El Paso Zoo where they want to concrete that area of the canal so there won’t be any riparian to worry about."

And that's the third thing that I learned. It's true that Reyes is reasonable. However, when he says "there won't be any riparian to worry about" because the Zoo will concrete the area, there is a values difference at play. I'm not criticizing Reyes. I am, however, observing once again a common value in El Paso that makes environmentalism and conservation so difficult: we don't have to worry about nature as long as we can build over it, plow it down, build on top of it, etc. There is no attempt to live in community with nature in spite of the fact that architects and landscapers throughout the world are finding better ways.

It makes sense to mow. It also makes sense to blend in and preserve.

Water District At It Again

The El Paso Water Improvement District #1 (EPWID) is at it again. They are currently mowing the vegetation along the Franklin Canal by the El Paso Zoo. You will recall that they plowed through vegetation in the riparian zones of drains in El Paso's Upper Valley. This was during nesting season for birds and mammals. As a result the El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) wrote a new policy to be more mindful of animal habitats. EPWU responded to the concerns of environmentalists. When asked about mitigating the loss of vegetation in the Upper Valley, Mr. Jesus (Chuy) Reyes only had this to say: “I am not interested in replanting native vegetation.” 

elpasonaturally has reached out to Mr. Reyes and is asking him about the benefit of mowing along the canals.

More later on this developing story.

Stalled!

Stalled!

A simple request by the EPWU to have an easement across an abandoned water drain owned by the El Paso County Water Improvement District has been delayed now for months because the water district board won't act on it. EPWU wants to provide water for the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park from the Bustamante water treatment plant; but the water district has stalled the pipeline project and done so without accountability or transparency. (Read Judy Ackerman's post on the subject HERE.)

The water district had the matter on their October 2014 agenda. It went into executive session and never made it out. The matter was not brought up in November and December. In answers to pleas to allow the easement, District Manager Chuy Reyes only says that he is working on an agreement with John Balliew. It appears that Reyes wants to dictate when and how much water will go to the wetlands as a condition for the agreement. 

It is difficult to understand what goes on behind the closed doors of an executive session especially one so tightly controlled by a clandestine coterie: the water district board. In addition to their lack of public accountablily and transparency is their violation of Texas State Law by failing to post all of their agendas and minutes online. Just take a look at their gaps in posted minutes.

The Board meets the second Wednesday of each month at 8:30 AM in Clint, TX. There next meeting then will be January 14, 2015. The address for the water district office and board meetings is 13247 Alameda Avenue.  It may be a long drive but worthwhile to press the water district board to act on an easement with the EPWU and to do so without any conditions.

Rio Bosque Pipeline - Your Action Needed!

Click image to enlarge.

Dear Friends,

The Rio Bosque Wetlands Park needs your help.  Please contact members of the El Paso County Water Improvement District # 1 (EPCWID#1) and ask them to approve a license to allow completion of the pipeline from the Roberto Bustamante Waste Water Treatment Plant (RBWWTP) to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park.  A sample letter and EPCWID#1 members’ contact information are below.  Please e-mail, phone, and / or send a US Postal letter to all members. 

Also, plan to attend the next meeting of the EPCWID#1 Board, Wednesday, 14 January 2015, 8:30 AM, District Board Room, 13247 Alameda Ave, Clint, TX.

Background:

Construction of the pipeline is almost complete except for where it would cross a drain owned by EPCWID#1.  The drain, abandoned for at least 30 years, has filled in and is nonexistent in the area of the pipeline.  In July 2014, EPWU Public Service Board awarded the contract for pipeline construction and expected completion by 26 December 2014.  Without a license from EPCWID#1, the project will be delayed increasing the costs and unnecessarily complicating the pipeline design.

EPWU owns the effluent from the RBWWTP which produces an average of 28 million gallons per day, but they have no facilities to hold that water.  Once water enters infrastructure owned by EPCWID#1, the water belongs to EPCWID#1.

In the early 1990s Rio Bosque Wetlands Park was identified as the preferred site for a wetland project to mitigate for natural habitat loss caused by the American Canal Extension.  The wetland project at the Park was designed to utilize effluent from the adjacent RBWWTP.  Currently, the Park only receives water from RBWWTP for a few months in the winter.  To realize its potential for critical habitat restoration, ecosystem services, aquifer recharge, and economic benefit from eco-tourism, the Wetlands Park needs water.

Wetlands ecosystem services provide a myriad of benefits to El Pasoans including clean air, clean water, and esthetic, cultural and spiritual value.  Services provided by wetlands include stormwater storage, nutrient removal and climate regulation.  Using extremely conservative estimates by highly regarded researchers, Robert Costanza et al, the value of the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park ecosystem services would be over $1 million per year. 

Farmers benefit from having water in the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park because it will recharge the aquifer they pump from to irrigate their fields.  The water from the RBWWTP will improve the quality of the water in the aquifer which according to Art Ivey is so salty, "We're pouring poison on our [pecan] trees.”  (El Paso Times, 15 Dec 2014).  There is also the possibility of extending the pipeline to a proposed regulating reservoir immediately south of the Park which will capture “tail” water and make it available to farmers.

Sample Letter:

Dear EPCWID#1 Board Member,

I implore you to approve a license that will allow completion of the pipeline from the Roberto Bustamante Waste Water Treatment Plant to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park by allowing the pipeline to cross the Rio Intercepting Drain right-of-way. 

Without the license, El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) will need to design and engineer a more convoluted route for the pipeline that will increase the expense to all EPWU rate-payers and delay completion of the pipeline. 

Adding water to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park will benefit farmers by recharging and improving the quality of the aquifer.  Farmers will also benefit when the pipeline is extended to the proposed regulating reservoir where “tail” water can be utilized by irrigators. 

Sincerely,

Your Name and Contact Information

EPCWID#1 Board members’ contact information: 

Name	Position	E-mail
Jesus Reyes	General Manager	jreyes@epcwid1.org
Johnny Stubbs	President	Jpstubbs8210@gmail.com
Art Ivey	Vice President	tudiiv@hughes.net
Indar Singh	Secretary	None
Miguel Teran	Board Member	mteran@cpmellc.com
Larry Ceballos	Board Member	lceballos2012@yahoo.com

US Postal address:  PO Box 749, Clint, TX 79836-0749

Phone:  915-872-4000

Riverside Canal at the Rio Bosque Should be Preserved not Lined with Concrete

Click to enlarge image. Canal is red line at top of park boundary.

I attended the meeting of the Texas Water Development Board at the TecH2O Center this morning. The reports were basically nodding-off boring with the exception of Malynda Cappella's briefing on Zero Discharge Desalination. ZDD's not exactly a party pleaser but the presentation made it so. I didn't stay for the report on the Texas v. New Mexico litigation. I did hear Chuy Reyes, the General Manager of Water Improvement District #1. You can always count on Chuy to say some things that make you shake your head and wonder if God at some point ran out of neurons.

Mr. Reyes trumpeted the cornucopia of El Paso farmers: pecans, Pima cotton, corn, wheat, chili, onions and alfalfa. Then he said that "some of us" are working to get dairy farms back to El Paso. Mind you that his remarks were made in the context of water conservation and what the water district was doing for water conservation. Pecans, cotton, dairy farms - these are all pretty heavy consumers of water. When the Texas State Wildlife Biologist, Lois Balin, addressed the board following Chuy, she began with a suggestion that less water hungry crops could replace our current guzzlers. Her words fell on the deaf ears of what could pass for the Dallas Country Club - a board of 4 men, 1 woman and no Hispanics or blacks. Not one asked Ms. Balin a follow-up question about crops or the Rio Bosque.

Reyes went on to talk about the need to concrete all canals. There is some virtue in concreting canals - but there is never any virtue in destroying wildlife habitats and precious ecosystems in the process. Balin's principal point was the need to preserve the less than one-mile stretch of canal which borders the Rio Bosque. It is earthen - river alluvian. Ms. Balin said that, on her most recent visit to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park, she counted 25 species of birds using that canal, observed soil invertebrates and, of course, the rich plant life. Concrete some of the canal beyond the borders of the wetlands sure, maybe. But don't concrete line that portion that makes up the precious ecosystem of the Rio Bosque. People who see only the dollar and cents of concrete lining canals can at least understand the dollars to be gained by ecotourism. Again, a similar area in New Mexico brings in $18 Million a year in tourism.

It would, however, be nice if these concrete loving folks would understand one other very simple concept. If I lose a gall bladder and a kidney, I can limp along. If other vital organs start shutting down, I'm in trouble. An organism needs the complexity of organs, glands, skin, blood and sinew working together to be healthy, live and keep on living well for a length of time. Now think of the living world as one big organism. It's made up of vertebrates such as ourselves, invertebrates, things flying, things crawling, microscopic things making processes work in soil and in gut. If you start shutting things down in this organism, life becomes less healthy and less lengthy. 

A less than one mile stretch of canal with a rich ecosystem should be preserved. 

Rio Bosque News Is Better than Imagined

I had the opportunity to speak in person with Mr. John Balliew, the CEO of the El Paso Water Utilities this morning. The topic of conversation was the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park. Our visit followed my Monday blog post More Good News for the Rio Bosque. The post raised some anxieties among members of the conservation community. 

To help visualize what I'm going to say, take a look at the map below. You will definitely want to enlarge it (maybe in a different tab) and refer back to it:

Rio Bosque Wetlands Aerial Map 

The map shows the relationship among the Bustamante Treatment Plant on the right, the Rio Bosque in the center and the Socorro Ponds/Reservoir on the left. The Socorro Reservoir is the project that Mr. Chuy Reyes and his engineer both from the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 proposed to the PSB this past Wednesday. They have worked out an arrangement with the EPWU for ponding areas to reserve water for El Paso County farmers. Currently, stormwater moves down the river past our County and to the Hudspeth County reservoirs. Because of the arrangement, the WID#1 will be able to capture that water for our farmers and owe water back to the EPWU. (The EPWU owns the land where the ponds will be.) The water owed back to the EPWU will be used to help irrigate the Rio Bosque.

The red line on the bottom of the map indicates where a pipeline will go from the Bustamante to the Socorro Ponds. It is the extension of that pipeline that has delayed going to bid since the pipeline will also be part of the relationship among the ponds, the Bosque and the Bustamante.

Bottom line: the Rio Bosque will have 3 sources not just 2 for water: directly from the Bustamante, from the turnout at the Riverside Canal as it currently gets from the WID#1, and now water from the ponds owed to EPWU by the WID#1.

One big concern that some had as the result of Monday's post was the TCEQ authorization. The new authorization (now being finalized) mentions nothing about "effluent" only Type I and Type II reclaimed water. Balliew explained that "effluent" often is Type II reclaimed water as its turbidity and bacterial counts are low enough to be re-categorized. In other words, what may be called effluent, is most often Type II water that the TCEQ will permit to go to the Bosque. Note again that the new authorization allows for water from the Bustamante to be used for the irrigation of "constructed wetlands".

But the news just gets better. The EPWU has already begun working with the Army Corps of Engineers to produce a wetland park at the Rio Bosque much like the Rio Grande Valley State Park in Albuquerque. (You can still see online an initial presentation of this Corps of Engineers project from 2010 complete with a virtual tour.) Add to this vision of the Bosque another one: the EPWU is acquiring other drains so that one day you may indeed enjoy walking along a parkway from Ascarate to the Bosque.

A final P.S. about an EPWU project I get super-excited about: Our utility has become quite successful conserving water; and let us hope that they conserve much more and that the City will indeed move toward some enlightened rainwater strategies that will help even more and perhaps to codifying truly water savings building practices.  A downside of that success though is the fact that they are selling less of their product thus making staying in business, so to speak, more difficult. Mr. Balliew has proposed new products: producing phosphorous and nitrogen for commercial use. Currently EP farmers purchase millions of dollars of fertilizer. Also currently, most of the nitrogen and phosphorous available from water treatment is lost. Capture it. Sell it. Voilá! New products. Balliew and company are working on it. Now, if only the TCEQ (and EPA) would allow the use of the effluent "cake", rather than being forced to bury that product that also contains needed soil micronutrients, local growing industries could benefit. I say this as one who has asked for years now why we don't sell Zoo Doo as they do in Seattle for example.

Again, the news at and for the Rio Bosque just gets better and better.

EPWU Issues New Policy Mindful of Wildlife

A new policy regarding the clearance and dredging of irrigation drains was authorized by EPWU CEO John Balliew this past Friday. The policy was written in response to the massive destruction of animal habitat, including bird nests, and vegetation along the Montoya and Nemexas drains this past summer. That destruction was ordered by El Paso Water Improvement District Manager Jesus "Chuy" Reyes following a brush fire and a complaint by a prominent El Paso attorney. The El Paso Water Utilities was forced to help with the clean-up by prior agreements with the water district.

The extreme clear cutting of the drains resulted in an outcry from people living in that area of the Upper Valley, the El Paso conservation community and wildlife experts. Elpasonaturally had a number of posts about the operation beginning here.

John Balliew acted quickly to develop a new water utility policy that would be more mindful of animal life and vegetation. He put EPWU attorney, Lupe Cuellar, in charge of writing that policy. Ms. Cuellar worked with wildlife experts such as John Kiseda and Rick LoBello of the El Paso Zoo and Urban Wildlife Biologist, Lois Balin, along with leaders in El Paso's open space community. Very significantly she worked with utility field operations - the persons who actually do the work of maintaining the land. The new policy is written as a guide for field management.

Sensitivity to the nesting season and limiting the amount of vegetation to be cleared away during any given operation are central to the policy. Before any work can be done the EPWU's Environmental Planner will make an evaluation. That person has been identified as Valerie Provencio, the utility's archaeologist with expertise in ecology. A calendar governing the scope of operations was adopted as part of the project.

Here is the memorandum stating the policy and initialed by Balliew:

EPWU Canal Clearing Policy 101813

Pipeline to Bosque Under Design and Lessons Learned

Click on image to enlarge.

Three bits of good news that should be shouted from atop every peak on the Franklin Mountains: 

First, the El Paso Water Utilities does have direct right-of-way access into the Rio Bosque.

Second, plans to build a direct pipeline from the Bustamante Treatment Plant to the Rio Bosque for the purpose of supplying effluent is being designed.

Third, Water Improvement District Mis-Manager, Chuy Reyes, not only can do nothing about it, he is irrelevant in the process.

Let's take a look.

In the very bottom far left triangle in the map above, the Park and the treatment plant abut each other at the Riverside Drain. Recognizing this fact and having spoken with Mr. Reyes, environmental activist, Judy Ackerman, wrote to the CEO of the EPWU:

"Thank you very much for all the efforts of EPWU to create a direct connection from the Bustamante WWTP to El Paso’s Rio Bosque Wetlands Park that will allow the opportunity for waste water to be utilized at the Park in the future. The Park needs the water.  Several of the Park’s mature trees have died this season due to lack of water.

"By the end of July, El Paso County Water Improvement District # 1, should have received more than 13,333 Acre Feet [the amount actually varies as I understand it based on how much is released from Elephant Butte during any given season - though I could stand to be corrected] of effluent from the Bustamante WWTP  – the amount obligated to them by the Third Party Contract.   Any remaining BWWTP effluent, between now and 15 Feb 2014, is EPWU’s to utilize as you choose.  If you directed that effluent into the Riverside Intercepting Drain, instead of the Riverside Canal, it would be available to the Bosque.  

"Mr Jesus 'Chuy' Reyes is on record saying he will cooperate fully with EPWU to deliver effluent to the Bosque via the Riverside Intercepting Drain if you choose to utilize your effluent that way.   Here is a link to audio clips of my conversation with Mr Reyes on 23 Oct 2012.

"I encourage you to send BWWTP effluent to the Bosque as soon as possible since it will greatly benefit EPWU, the Park, El Pasoans, and visitors from far and wide.  Thank you for considering this option."

In a swift rebuke, Mis-Manager Reyes caustically replied:

"I don't know where you are getting your calculations from, but you have no authority or are you or the Bosque in anyway connected to our agreement with our 2001 contract with EPWU. EP#1 will continue to use the effluent water for irrigation of crops until late SEPTEMBER [emphasis his]."

So, what caused Ackerman to believe that she had heard otherwise from Mr. Reyes?  The interviews on the audio clips that she mentions: 






On record, Mr. Reyes says: "It's their [EPWU's] water. What they do with it is their business." And: "I'm willing to cooperate with them [EPWU] in anyway..." Note that he never disputes that one-third of the effluent belongs to the EPWU even during irrigation season. Note that he agrees that, even if all the water goes into the drain, one-third could be pumped to the Rio Bosque Wetland Park as directed solely by the EPWU even during irrigation season. Note that he suggests that the EPWU build some direct line to the Bosque. (Deal! It's in design.) Note that, when Ms. Ackerman honestly and innocently writes John Balliew with the facts after having spoken to Mr.Reyes, Mr. Reyes lambasts her claim! Note the audio tapes. Note who is honest and note who is obviously dis-honest.

Lessons to learn:

First, Mr. Chuy Reyes is irrelevant to talks about supplying water to the Rio Bosque from the Bustamante plant.

Second, it seems to be the case that for a long time there were some backroom handshakes and winks of eyes between the EPWU and the WID. There is now new management at the EPWU. All deals between the EPWU and the WID should be made public and transparent.

Third, other than buying water from the WID and other contractual agreements, the EPWU should have as little to do with Mr. Reyes and the WID as possible. Winks and handshakes no longer count (and the old ones should be accounted for.)

Fourth and finally, some in El Paso's environmental community should cease acting as if Mr. Reyes matters at all regarding the Rio Bosque.  This means that they can speak out when Mr. Reyes destroys habitat and vegetation during nesting season as he has been doing in the Upper Valley. He's not a friend. He's not useful. He's the Manager of a Water District operated under antiquated laws about water rights and rights of capture that really should be the hot-button issues for conservationists along with protecting habitat and the natural open space of our mountains and Chihuahuan Desert.

El Cucuy is no longer scary, boys and girls.

Please Contact the USFWS

It appears that the Water Improvement District rushed in to destroy vegetation and habitat during nesting season at the Montoya and Newmexas Drains.  They were without authority on this as the agreement to maintain those particular drains is between the United States (Department of Interior/Bureau of Reclamation) and the City of El Paso – EPWU being the stormwater agency of the City.  After the fire, EPWU began clearing out burned debris per agreement with the United States.  WID then stepped in and began clearing out everything.  When I asked Chuy Reyes whether he would be open to mitigation of the area with native plants, his email response was: “I am not interested in replanting native vegetation.”  There can be little doubt that the destruction of habitat had to include birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (hummingbirds, grackles, etc.) as well as endangered species possibly the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.  An investigation by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service is called for.  It would be helpful if the USFWS heard from numerous people asking for an investigation.  At the very least an investigation will probably mean that Mr. Reyes and the WID will think twice before destroying wildlife habitat again.  

The two FWS staffers to contact are:

Delivan Roper, 575-382-2177, ext. 107; delivan_roper@fws.gov

Albert Gonzalez, 915-471-6320; albert_gonzalez@fws.gov

People can reference any of my posts on the subject at www.elpasonaturally.blogspot.com.  

Please help to get the word out.  Would you please urge Judy to get an email blast out ASAP.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Asked to Investigate Destruction of Endangered Flycatcher

Help the Southwest Willow Flycatcher in El Paso

The destruction of habitat along the Newmexas and Montoya Drains in El Paso's Upper Valley by environmental criminal, Chuy Reyes, and the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 has possibly destroyed not only migratory birds such as hummingbirds and grackles, but the endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.

Interestingly, a channelization project was set to begin later in the fall near the terminus of the Montoya Drain at the Rio Grande near the El Paso Electric Plant.  The project's guidelines call for sensitivity not only to migratory birds but also to the Willow Flycatcher.  The project was/is set to start on September 15, 2013 - after nesting season.  There is also mention of a proposed wetland habitat project.  In other words, Chuy Reyes and the WID were already aware of the bird nesting issues prior to their extreme destruction of vegetation and habitat along the drain.

Here is a copy of the 2013 Channelization Project:

RioGrandeChannelizationProject.2013 by jimhtolbert434

If you are outraged (and you should be), then ask the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to investigate now.  The FWS staffer that enforces the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is Delivan Roper.  Please contact him to discuss limitations on vegetation removal during the nesting season. Here is his contact information:

Delivan Roper
USFWS
Law Enforcement

575-382-2177, ext. 107
delivan_roper@fws.gov

5686 Santa Gertrudis Drive
Las Cruces, NM 88012


For further reading:

A Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Note Figure 8, p. 11 showing nesting and breeding season; also see pictures of habitat including salt cedars.)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species Profile of Southwestern Willow Flycatcher

Chuy Reyes and Water District likely violated the Migratory Bird Treaty Act

Below is a summary of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.  The devastating clearing of the Nemexas/Montoya Drain by Chuy Reyes and the WID#1 probably killed hummingbirds and grackles and other migratory birds.  It is still not clear whether Chuy had any authority over the drain to begin with since the agreement regarding maintaining the drain is between the United States of America (Department of Interior/Bureau of Reclamation) and the City of El Paso.

The actions by the WID are being reported to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

Elpasonaturally has learned that the EPWU was only cleaning up burned debris after the fire which sparked a single complaint from a prominent El Paso attorney which led to the clearcutting and dredging of the drain during nesting season. The WID then went in and began clearcutting everything forcing EPWU to have to haul away the debris from all vegetation being destroyed by the WID.

According to wildlife biologist,Lois Balin, above is a picture of true wetland plants that do absorb all kinds of toxins.  These include mainly cattails, sedges, and rushes.  "A wetland is part of the water treatment process," according to Balin. 

Below is a summary of the Migratory Act which was copied from here.  I have bolded and italicized the penalty section.  Will Chuy Reyes have to serve six months to two years for his actions? He may very well have to do so.

MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT 
16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712, July 3, 1918, as amended 1936, 1960, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1978, 1986 and 1989.
Overview. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act implements various treaties and conventions between the U.S. and Canada, Japan, Mexico and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. Under the Act, taking, killing or possessing migratory birds is unlawful.

Prohibited Acts. Unless permitted by regulations, the Act provides that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take, capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not. Subject to limitations in the Act, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) may adopt regulations determining the extent to which, if at all, hunting, taking, capturing, killing, possessing, selling, purchasing, shipping, transporting or exporting of any migratory bird, part, nest or egg will be allowed, having regard for temperature zones, distribution, abundance, economic value, breeding habits and migratory flight patterns. Regulations are effective upon Presidential approval. §§ 703 and 704.

The Act makes it unlawful to:   ship, transport or carry from one state, territory or district to another, or through a foreign country, any bird, part, nest or egg that was captured, killed, taken, shipped, transported or carried contrary to the laws from where it was obtained; import from Canada any bird, part, nest or egg obtained contrary to the laws of the province from which it was obtained. § 705.

Arrests/Search Warrants. To enforce the Act, authorized Department of Interior employees may:   without a warrant, arrest a person violating the Act in the employee's presence or view; execute a warrant or other process issued by an officer or court to enforce the Act; search any place with a warrant. All birds, parts, nests or eggs that are captured, killed, taken, offered or sold, bartered, purchased, shipped, transported, carried, imported, exported or possessed contrary to the Act will be seized and, upon conviction of the offender or upon court judgment, be forfeited to the U.S. and disposed of by the Secretary. § 706.

Violations/Penalties. According to the Act, a person, association, partnership or corporation which violates the Act or its regulations is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of up to $500, jail up to six months, or both. Anyone who knowingly takes a migratory bird and intends to, offers to, or actually sells or barters the bird is guilty of a felony, with fines up to $2,000, jail up to two years, or both. (Permissible fines are increased significantly by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, as amended in 1987, which is summarized separately in this Handbook.)

All guns, traps, nets, vessels, vehicles and other equipment used in pursuing, hunting, taking, trapping, ensnaring, capturing, killing, or any attempt on a migratory bird in violation of the Act with the intent to sell or barter, must be forfeited to the U.S. and may be seized and held pending prosecution of the violator. The property is to be disposed of and accounted for by the Secretary. § 707.

Miscellaneous. The Act should not be construed to prevent states and territories from making or enforcing laws or regulations not inconsistent with the Act or which give further protection to migratory birds, nests and eggs, if such laws and regulations do not extend open seasons. § 708.

The Act cannot be construed to prevent the breeding of migratory game birds on farms and preserves, and the sale of birds lawfully bred to increase the food supply. § 711.

In accordance with the various migratory bird treaties and conventions, the Secretary is authorized to issue regulations to assure that the taking of migratory birds and their eggs by the indigenous inhabitants of Alaska is permitted for their nutritional and other essential needs during established seasons. § 712.

Is Chuy Reyes Necessary?

Agreement on El Paso Drain Maintenance 

Above is a copy of the outdated and expired agreement between the United States of America (Department of Interior/Bureau of Reclamation) and the City of El Paso.  Basically the City agrees to maintain the Nemexas-Montoya Drain since it needs the drain as part of its stormwater control.  No where is there any mention of the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1, the organization whose General Manager is Jesus "Chuy" Reyes.  Yet, when a single complaint resulted in a call to the WID, Reyes ordered the total clearing of vegetation (and with it habitat) in the Nemexas-Montoya Drain which required the El Paso Water Utilities to participate as the agent of the City of El Paso charged with stormwater maintenance and control. By what authority did Chuy Reyes order such radical clearance? 

[Are you paying attention El Paso Times?]

A similar issue involves the IBWC's dredging of the Rio Grande at the Licon Siphon north of Las Cruces.  One issue with the dredging had to do with endangered species.  In a meeting attended by Mr. Reyes, Reyes mentioned that his authority to supercede concern for endangered species was "emergency".  Obviously Mr. Reyes determines what is an emergency there being no objective criteria transparent to anyone else for defining an emergency.  But the bigger question still looms: by what right does Mr. Reyes have to order the massive clearance of the drains when the agreement never mentions the Water Improvement District.  In an Open Records request today I asked Mr. Reyes the following:

"As the agreement to help maintain the drain that we have been discussing is between the City of El Paso (the EPWU being the City’s entity) and the United States (via the Bureau of Reclamation), where does the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 fit in?  Does WID have a separate agreement with the Bureau?  If so, may I please get a copy of that?  If not, would you please document what authority the WID has over the drain which would obligate the EPWU to assist in maintaining it."

No reply yet.

I have been in email conversation with Mr. Jeff Hild, the Legislative Director for Rep. Beto O'Rourke, regarding the destruction along the drain.  He was unaware of any federal connection that might involve Mr. O'Rourke's office as I was until now.  I wrote him the following email attaching the agreement which you read at the top of this post:

Jeff,
Attached is the outdated and antiquated agreement which requires EPWU to help clean the drain in question.  The agreement is between them and the United States of America because the United States of America owns the drain!  You’ve got your federal hook!
The agreement was written prior to the popularization of environmental concerns. It is pre-Rachel Carson.  It was also written when there was probably more farm land in the Upper Valley than residences.  We now know that vegetation plays a key role in cleaning up water as it moves to a river. Besides vegetation and animal habitat provide much for the human spirit – something that can’t be easily quantified.  A new agreement must show more environmental sensitivity, proper and ongoing land and habitat management.  
You may be told that it was good to remove the salt cedars.  Yes, that’s true; but they should have been removed and replaced with native cottonwoods or other trees over the long-run and never during nesting season.  As this was federal land, then as a civil engineering friend of mine pointed out: “If federal funds or federal property is involved you could not disturb the area during nesting season if threatened or endangered species are present.”  Several Audubon people have told me that the Southwest Willow Flycatcher was present.  Perhaps we ought to investigate what kind of fine or jail term Chuy Reyes should serve.
I hope that the Congressman’s office will get involved especially with the EPWU and John Balliew, the CEO, and Robert Andron, the Attorney for the utility.  I know that Beto knows both well. They should be encouraged to draft a more sensitive document that will maintain the drain while protecting the plants and wildlife and the ecosystem services that they provide.  Working with Mr. Reyes is probably pointless and may even be unnecessary as the agreement again is between the United States and the City of El Paso. When I asked Mr. Reyes if he might be interested in mitigation, he responded: “I am not interested in replanting native vegetation. The drain will be maintained the proper way, the way the City of El Paso and EPWU are required to do so, this is an agriculture drain and not a habitat."
I look forward to your response at your very first convenience please.
Jim Tolbert

Mr. Reyes may be acting without authority and it may be that he really is unnecessary for many agreements.  In a side issue also reported here at elpasonaturally, getting water to the Rio Bosque seems to have been held up for a long time by Chuy Reyes.  (Perhaps he has to use the rest of the water to help his friends in Hudspeth County keep their reservoirs filled. Are you paying attention El Paso Times?)

A group of persons interested in resolving the water issue at the Bosque has been holding clandestine meetings at the home of Judy Ackerman in 2013. Those who are part of this hush-hush group include from UTEP: John Sproul, Scott Cutler, Vanessa Lougheed, John Walton, etc.; John Balliew; from the IBWC: Gilbert Anaya, Rebecca Little Owl; Mike Landis from the Bureau of Reclamation; David Will from TCEQ; Friends of the Rio Bosque; Ruben Vogt from the County; Charlie Wakeem, and others including Chuy Reyes. 

At the last meeting it was brought up that the license with the TCEQ which has prevented some irrigation from the Bustamante directly to the Bosque may be moot anyway.  In fact, a bid to do the pipe directly from the Bustamante to the Rio Bosque may go out to bid in August.  The Water District would be cut out of the deal.  Chuy Reyes was not at the meeting.  My question with the Bosque and more pertinently with the Drain is this: Is Chuy Reyes necessary?  Does he really have the authority that he claims to have? To whom are he and the Water District accountable?

"This is an agriculture drain and not a habitat"

"I am not interested in replanting native vegetation. The drain will be maintained the proper way, the way the City of El Paso and EPWU are required to do so, this is an agriculture drain and not a habitat." - Chuy Reyes

The quote above is in response to my message to Chuy Reyes just a while ago asking him about mitigation of the vegetation along the drain: "In a previous email I asked you if you would be interested in mitigating the clear cutting of the drain/canal by replanting native vegetation.  You have not responded. I look forward to your answer." His email was marked at 4:33 p.m. 7/8/2013.

I suggest that many of us request that the drain be mitigated now that he has destroyed habitat, killing animals and destroying nests.  Neanderthal attitudes such as Chuy's must be eradicated from El Paso culture.  His email is jreyes@epcwid1.org.

Quoting Mahatma Gandhi again: “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

Reyes Claim about Wildlife Complaints Untrue

Finally the El Paso Times did a story on the widespread and extensive destruction of vegetation and habitat along the Montoya drain/canal in the Upper Valley.  Read Aaron Martinez's Clearing Canal is Harming Wildlife.  A slideshow from that report appears here.  One inaccuracy in the story is that it says that I am a resident of the area.  I am not.  When Rick LoBello was able to get a reporter to come see the damage, I called several people who do live in the area and they joined us in talking to Mr. Martinez last Friday.

The most glaring untruth reported in the story however was a statement by Chuy Reyes, the mis-Manager of the Water Improvement District which he gave to the reporter: "I have not received any complaints on any wildlife problems due to the cleanup."

Oh really? No complaints?  I've talked to numerous people who said that they complained.  One person even shared with me an email exchange (which I have saved) that he had with Mr. Reyes beginning July 2nd in which Reyes claims that his complaints about the bulldozing are exaggerations (see images attached to this story as well as EP Times slideshow mentioned above for visuals of the exaggeration) and sarcastically retorts: "Have you not heard about the fires all over the western United States? I am the person responsible for this decision, I am concerned with life and property since the fire 2 weeks ago."  (I'm sure that Mr. Reyes must advocate for clear cutting all forests in the country in order to prevent forest fires.)

FYI. I have just emailed an open records request to Reyes asking for the agreement between EPCWID#1 and the EPWU which required the involvement of the EPWU with the massive destruction of habitat along the drain and canal.  I also requested the same from Mr. John Balliew, CEO of EPWU, on July 3rd and, getting no response, made a follow-up request this morning and copied Bob Andron, EPWU attorney, and PSB member, Dr. Rick Bonart.  If the "no response" response continues, I'll take the matter to the Attorney General of the State of Texas. 

Where we met the reporter and where we have met previously is on the corner of Montoya Drive and Meadowlark Drive (map) - ground zero if you will as the initial complaint which sparked the destruction of habitat came from this area.  Southeast of there at West Sunset Road and River Bend Drive (map) you can see the destruction of habitat beginning south of the intersection and going north.  Here are pictures that I took last Friday: 

 South of intersection (Sunset and River Bend) showing bare drain. 

Click image to enlarge.

North of intersection where there is still vegetation and habitat. 

Click image to enlarge.

The "beast" looms over the same area in the picture above.

Click image to enlarge.

EPCWID#1 Worker. Motto on truck reads: "Thanks to the Rio Grande".