Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control Association

2600 Prospect Ave. NE

Albuquerque, NM 87107
lmazur@amafca.com
Marth 4, 2016
Dear AMAFCA,
I am writing this analytical paper in response to the way I, and many others in the
community, feel about current construction done by the Flood Control Authority. It seems your
work has reached a level of environmental harm that seems unnecessary. While flood control is
important and human life and property should always come first when compared to conserving
the environment, it seems as if conservation and protection isnt even a concern. We believe the
damage done and the damage that could be done in the future warrants AMAFCA to have more
concern about their environmental impact in the future.
There have been many instances where no caution was taken at all in the project and this
is disappointing to me. An organization such as this one needs to take more care and
responsibility for the actions they take and utilize more caution when working in the future.
Thats why I have compiled all the evidence, both primary and secondary, into this paper to best
present my point and argument that the Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control
Channel needs to be taking more precautionary measures towards the environment in the future.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Dylan Cuellar
2600 Prospect Ave. NE
Albuquerque, NM 87107

Flood Control and its Environmental

Impact Here in Albuquerque:
Can more be done to prevent
destruction?

By,
Dylan Cuellar

Intro:
As a staple of our society that we live in, local government is an important element to
keep it running at its full potential. While there are many different parts of local government and
they all have an effect on the environment, Im going to focus most of my efforts and interest in
the impact that local flood control has on the environment when conducting community projects
and whether they should be more cautious in their efforts to be less harmful to the environment
during the projects.
Flood control projects are very important to community. They protect lives, save
property, and can be beneficial to many other areas like water treatment and the environment.
However, while local government should have a responsibility to be at least aware and protective
to the environment, too many times here in Bernalillo County it seems like the Albuquerque
Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control Association has no care about natural impact. As AMAFCA,
the organizations main job is to take rain water that comes off the mountain and stream it into
the Rio Grande. This is done using arroyos that channel water into either the north or south
diversion channels which are large north/south running channels that have outfall spots at the
very north and south end of Albuquerque that take the water into the river. On the west side on
Albuquerque a similar process takes place moving water off the mesa and channeling it into the
river as well however it is done with a lack of diversion channels. These waterways, while
extremely important for life and property of people in Albuquerque, is the site of many instances
of environmental destruction caused by you.
AMAFCAs main focus is usually centered on three different kinds of flood control;
traditional channels, non-traditional channels, and dams and levees. Traditional channels are

channels that are made out of concrete that quickly move water down an area and are entirely
man made. The traditional channel I will focus on is the North Diversion Channel, specifically
the outfall area, and how it affects shorebird populations that are migrating through New Mexico.
Non-traditional channels are water channels that are more nature made or flood plains
that AMAFCA just monitors and works onto to be the most effective flood plain it can be. The
non-traditional channel I will be discussing will be the Calabacillas Arroyo in the west side and
how AMAFCA construction decimated an important bird colony living there.
Lastly, there are dams and levees and, while I dont have an example to talk about in this
paper, their main use is to catch and hold water to prevent flooding or to reduce the help spread
out the water that gets drained off the mesa or mountains.
To begin the evaluation of the effects AMAFCA has been having on the environment, the
first of two areas Im going to discuss is the North Diversion Outfall channel. The main problem
people have had with this area and how its been treated by the
flood control authority is the ongoing construction and
renovation done there every year. The environment there is
repeatedly bulldozed, destroyed, and ripped apart for what seems to be unnecessary reasons.
Whats more frustrating is this outfall is an important wetland needed by shorebirds that migrate
from up north in Canada, where they breed, to their winter grounds in South America.
Furthermore, shorebird numbers in that area seem to be declining over the recent years harboring
worry that the repeated construction is having actual adverse effects to the shorebirds.
The other place I am going to evaluate in this paper is the Calabacillas Arroyo. As a non-

traditional channel/floodplain that carries water from the Mesa to the Rio Grande, its a perfect
area for cavity nesting birds such as Bank Swallows to make their nests in the dirt on the sides of
the arroyos. This is an important bird colony as well as this is the only known colony of the
declining Bank Swallow here in our home state of New Mexico.
However, during the winter of 2015, maintenance was done on the
area that caused the destruction of the Bank Swallow colony and all
its nests, quite a problem for an important struggling species.

Methods:
Hoping to tackle this problem head on, I used a variety of methods to gather information.
First, I surveyed the general population. I asked many different kinds of questions to find how
they felt about things such as local government, environmental impact, and their knowledge on
the flood control here in Albuquerque. This helped me get a better idea of possibly how active
people are in at least learning and understanding about the kind of local government that is
effecting them and their environment here in Bernalillo County. Unfortunately, I did run into a
few limitations while trying to set up this survey however.
At first, mostly Facebook friends took the survey as I initially put the link up on
Facebook. After getting very few responses and time was starting to run short, I made a bold
move and just decided to manually interview everyone in my English 219 class. At this point I
was able to get up to the required 50 people needed to survey; however, my population was
extremely skewed towards younger people. I had shared my survey with my parents, hoping that
through them, I could survey a group of people in an older generation than mine. However my
parents didnt share the survey until a few days after I did the survey in class so the number of

people surveyed shot up from the low 50s to mid-70s. This helped me gain a wider age group of
people surveyed and at least somewhat curve the ratio of old people to young that I had initially
surveyed. Also, something I was expecting to be a limitation and after seeing my data I realized
my hunch was true, I would garner a large liberal population coming from a younger crowd in a
democratic state and county.
I also held a few interviews as well to gain information from people more knowledgeable
than I. First off, I interviewed the developmental review engineer for AMAFCA Lynn Mazur.
Over the course of a few emails I was able to gain information on AMAFCA and the type of
work that had happened at these places that Ive had grievances with.
I also thought it prudent to interview two birdwatchers who have seen the impact of
AMAFCA has done on the places where theyve birded for many years. One of which is my
father, Louis Cuellar, who has lived and birded in Albuquerque since 1994. The other is a
birdwatcher whos been in Albuquerque since the 1980s
by the name of Chris Rustay. Rustay, along with birding in
these spots and seeing the impact there over time like my
dad, works in local government in the forestry sector so he
has had lots of experience and knowledge about the
effects on the environment that things like AMAFCA can have.
I did run into one limitation with interviewees as I also tried to interview Pima County
Flood Control in Tucson, Arizona. They have found enormous success with their flood control in
a similar environment to Albuquerque as well using flood control to have a mass benefit towards
the environment. I reached out to them over their online contact but, sadly, never got a response
back.

Lastly, I also used sources online to find more information about the effect of flood
control, and local government, on the environment. I used two peer reviewed resources found on
the UNM online library so I could learn this information through trusted sources. Also, I went
out looking for more sources than just those online and found some really helpful ones. These
include papers posted from wildlife organizations and ornithologist societies (people who study
birds).

Results:
The results of the general population survey were very surprising to me. As I mentioned
before, I expected my population sample to come out somewhat more liberal than conservative,
and as expected, the end result saw the results extremely skewed more towards liberals than
conservatives. The first question was mainly to see where people stand in respect to the
governments impact on the environment and whether they see the impact being negative,
positive, or a bit of both. These results were spread well between people thinking it had a
negative effect and those who thought it had a positive impact on the environment.
After that, I wanted to see how people felt and what they knew about the Albuquerque
flood control authority by asking if they thought Albuquerque was in any danger of flooding and
if they knew the name of the flood control authority here. Many people thought Albuquerque was
safe from flooding and not too many knew the flood control authorities name, which wasnt a
surprise to me, either even though the organization has signs with your name everywhere around
town where flood control is deemed necessary.
Then I got into the personal opinion questions, and this is where I got pretty surprised at
my results. I asked questions such as Should flood control take on projects to specifically
benefit the environment once in a while? I expected answers to be split between people who

think local government and the flood control authority should only bother working on projects
that benefits the community and will save life and property (which is the true priority of flood
control) and those who feel that those projects are necessary but that it would be good for the
flood control to give back to the environment here and there. They could do this by conducting
projects with no real communal benefit, but hold a benefit towards the environment in one way
or another. To my surprise a huge majority of people surveyed believed that flood control should
take on those specific environmental projects once in a while. I got the same extremely
environmentally conscious answers for my other three opinion questions, seeing a vast majority
wanting to support environment just as much, if not more, through flood control when compared
to the usual flood control mission of just improving the community.
From the peer reviewed articles I gathered pertaining to flood control, while I was not
able to find much specific to Albuquerque flood control or local governments environmental
impact in Albuquerque, but I was able to find a lot of data relating to the subject. However, my
most helpful peer review article I found talked a lot about a similar problem in Pima County, AZ.
While I was not able interview Pima County flood control to compare their work to that of here
at AMAFCA, this article kind of made up for it. It discusses how Pima County used flood plains
to protect a plant species, called the Huachuca Water Plant, from becoming more endangered; an
effort I havent witnessed here in Albuquerque. This is a fantastic example of flood control going
out of their way to conduct a project, not for the benefit of people or the community, but for the
environment.
I also read an article talking about the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, which
uses flood control to benefit the environment. While an interesting comparison to the work here
done at AMAFCA, it doesnt seem too similar, as they work in small drains that use river water

to benefit wildlife near the river while AMAFCA mainly has huge projects to put water back into
the river. It does reach some sort of comparison in the way that flood control can be a means to
better a natural environment and that efforts can be used by a flood control association to better
the environment without causing a stir against it for communal reasons.
I continued to do some online research as well to boost my knowledge about the things
going on environmentally that relates to the impact AMAFCA is
having in New Mexico. First, I researched about Bank Swallows
and their population and colonies. This is how I learned the
colony destroyed here was the only colony found in all of New
Mexico. This kind of destructive impact has also been happening
in California with Bank Swallows nesting colonies being
destroyed by similar flood control affiliations in the coastal state.
This has caused populations to drop so much that it is now a
threatened species there. The article about the Bank Swallow colony in New Mexico mentioned
similar problems here and how this bird could become a threatened species here.
To learn more about important shorebird wetlands like the ones at the Tramway Wetlands
I did some research on New Mexicos IBAs. An IBA stands for Important Bird Areas and are
spots in the state recognized by the New Mexico Audubon Society as important for a certain kind
of bird species that needs to be protected more. I assumed Tramway Wetlands would be one but I
was mistaken; the 6 that had shorebird impacts were Bitter Lakes, Elephant Butte, Holoman
Lakes, Lower Rio Grande Bosque, Percha SP, and the Rio Grande Nature Center. Most of these
places are somewhere along the Rio Grande, where the Tramway Wetlands also lie. Whats more
shocking to me is that, besides Bitter Lakes and maybe Elephant Butte, Tramway Wetlands has a

larger and possibly more important shorebird list and need for protection than the other spots. I
wonder if it will ever be listed as an IBA but I was unable to find any records or information
about that.
There were a few interviews conducted to help get more relevant information on the
subject at hand and Im first going to begin with the Developmental Review Engineer here at
AMAFCA, Lynn Mazur. I sent her an email asking her vaguely about what AMAFCA does here
in Albuquerque and what environmental precautions do they take. I got a long response that I
will try to condense as best as I can.
Here at AMAFCA it seems, according to this quote from the email, that wildlife
conservation is not a consideration when conducting projects. This really stood out to me as it
seems local government should be having at least
some consideration towards the environment,
evidenced by the kind of impact Ive listed in this
paper. The email went on to explain how the
environment will come into discussion when projects
directly affect endangered species, and that when this
happens, the US Fish and Wildlife service will step in and try to mandate the project. Sometimes
FEMA and the New Mexico Office of State Engineers will also regulate. However, these seem
like rare occurrences if wildlife is usually not a consideration here.
What was a consideration, according to Ms. Mazur, is aesthetics; something that seems
pretty minor, in my eyes, when compared to environmental destruction. She also briefly
mentioned some projects who have some environmentally beneficial flood habits; however, they
didnt pertain too much to the main questions that I had, so I sent a follow up email to be able to

get better, more specific, answers. I asked her about tramway, the bank swallow colony, and
grass cutting, as much as I could, and got some interesting and thought provoking responses.
She mentioned that grass gets mowed to allow for water to flow more freely and also for
weed control. In addition, it seems homeless people like to set up shop sometimes in grassy
areas. For the Tramway Wetlands, she mentioned that the project was never meant to be a bird
wetland it just was a coincidence it happened that way. However, she did mention that USFWS
did intervene on this project as one of their dams became a trap for fish and minnows (silvery
minnow is actually endangered) and they had to reorganize their construction to necessitate that
problem.
About the Calabacillas Arroyo with the Bank Swallows, Ms. Mazur discussed that
construction was done in this area in late 2014 and early 2015 with the association working to
better grade control structures and bank protection along the arroyo. She mentioned the wildlife
grade here is not stable, as well as saying that USFWS gave them the go ahead on letting this
project happen, something that shocks me as there is easily accessible information as well as
general knowledge among many birdwatchers that this is an important flood plain for the Banks
Swallows.
In contrast to the comments made by the developmental engineer here at AMAFCA, I
interviewed two long time birdwatchers that live in Albuquerque and who have witnessed the
impact AMAFCA has made to the environment over time. I will first discuss the interview I held
with Chris Rustay, who is not only a bird watcher but he also works in the forestry division in the
government.

I began by asking him if he thought AMAFCA is negatively harming the environment at

the Tramway Wetlands and he answered with an expressive yes. He sees the work at the
Tramway Wetlands as being unnecessarily harmful to the environment in many ways one of
which actually has to do with the destruction of the grass there. He knows that one of the main
purposes of the Tramway Wetlands, which is at the North Diversion Outfall Channel that leads
into the river, is to clean the water of pollutants and filter out trash before that water enters the
river. He sees no reason why our flood division wont just use the grass to help naturally filter
out trash and waste from the water instead of building these possibly harmful man-made
structures to do the job. The grass, in his opinion, is a very necessary part of the environment
there for all types of animals, especially birds.
The second question I asked him was whether or not hes seen a decrease in shorebirds
coming to the Tramway Wetlands every year during migration and he replied hes definitely seen
a decrease, especially in the last few years, when hes seen more construction and renovation
that, to him, seems unnecessary for the area. In recent years, he says, more concrete structures
have been being built digging into the wetland and destroying large portions of wildlife. This, in
his opinion, has led him to see a drop in shorebirds, a drop that worries him.
Third, I asked him if he feels like our flood control authority could be doing more to
improve or at least be less harmful during projects and he, as one would expect from the past few
answers, believed they definitely could be doing more or at least to him be more conscious about
the effects theyre having on the environment.
Lastly, I asked him if hes seen AMAFCA have a mass benefit or mass negative effect to
the environment and, again, he said that it was having a negative effect. He did mention one time
when AMAFCA paired with the Valle de Oro NWR to provide a more environmentally friendly

flood control impact there, but thats the only time hes ever seen a positive benefit. The rest of
the time, he sees a negative effect its a negative, effect like ruining shorebird habitat and
decreasing shorebird numbers overtime, destroying Bank Swallow colonies, or unnecessarily
taking out grass and wildlife.
However, he does understand that without AMAFCA, there would be no Tramway
Wetlands. He did agree that even though they had no consideration for environment when
making the North Diversion Flood Control Channel, if they hadnt made it, there would be no
excellent wetland for shorebirds in the first place. It just needs more notice and caution in the
future for renovations in order to protect as much of the environment without being too
detrimental to a project.
Louis Cuellar brought up similar points, thinking that AMAFCA is hurting the
environment at the Tramway Outfall, that shorebird numbers have decreased, that AMAFCA
could be much more conscious in their efforts, and that AMAFCA does impact the environment
in an almost exclusively negative way. He did expand on the idea that the Rio Grande is
important flyway for migrating shorebirds as they fly from the Canadian Territory to the South
American waters. To have wetlands along the river is vital for their migration and survival and
should be preserved as much as possible.
They both did discuss the idea that shorebird numbers and the quality of a wetland
massively depends on rainfall amounts. They mentioned that AMAFCA could use methods to
make sure a certain amount of water is being flooded into the wetland to benefit the environment
there, but some years just dont have enough rain or too much rain to make a good wetland. It
might be a disappointment, but it happens, and it could be whats causing the decline in shorebird

species right now. However, they do believe that the destruction in habitat that the flood control
is causing the source of this decrease instead.
The last research I did was on the website eBird. While Tramway does not have good
enough records to compare data for many years in the past, there was a good comparison
between the Bank Swallows from the year at the Calabacillas Arroyo before construction and
after. The year before, there was an average of 70 birds seen for every visit with high counts at
around 250 bird species. Those numbers dropped by almost a quarter the next summer when the
average went down to fifty with the Bank Swallows trying to repair their colony, and the high
count only getting up to 185.

Bank Swallow Population: Calabacillas Arroyo Bank Swallow Population: Calabacillas Arroyo
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Summer 2014 (high count)

Discussion and Conclusion:

Looking back on my data, it seems that the majority of the population considers
environmental conservation to be an important part of our society to the majority of the
population. So why isnt it a bigger priority to our flood division? While I think most would
agree that it should not be their main concern, it should be larger than it is. The people think
there needs to be more environmental responsibility, the research says it as well, and in my

opinion, common sense warrants it. People like to see that the environment is prospering in their
community, so we should be doing more about it. I understand the Tramway Wetlands has
become a trap for endangered fish species, but why all the man-made construction nearly yearround thats been going on for years now? What major benefit is this going to do?
Why not find a long term environmental/man-made fused plan that can better preserve the
environment there but also lets the minnows get to the
river safer, and filters the water before channeling it

into the

river? While I dont know enough about this to say this

is

definitely the best idea, isnt it more logical that the

minnows

would probably be getting to the river better with less

man-made

intervention or at least a blend of man-made and nature

to get

them there?
Why bulldoze the grass? Couldnt the grass be used
natural filter as suggested by Chris to catch trash and

as a
then even

use community projects to clean up the trash caught?

Furthermore, it seems like this idea would be cheaper
than the ongoing heavy maintenance thats been going on there for years. Again, I dont have all
the information, but I emphasize that my report is based on whether AMAFCA should be more
cautious when planning and undergoing projects, and I believe that these ideas and conclusions
to me show that we can be using more caution when approaching projects and their
environmental impact.
Speaking of which, it seems like there definitely should have been more caution during the
construction at the Calabacillas Arroyo. I would assume that a usual environmental impact study

would reveal that the construction done at this spot would completely destroy a nest colony of
birds; especially a fragile one like the Bank Swallow. I understand that construction needed to be
done to save this floodplain from collapsing and washing away, possibly causing property
damage; but wouldnt it have been better to look at the plan more cautiously in respect to the
impact it would have and come up with an idea that would save property and the wildlife
colony? I feel like if a study would have been done and more attention would had been paid to
the impact they would have had to this area, then they would have realized there was actually a
bird colony, 200 to maybe 300 strong at least. They could have figured out a just as good of an
alternative method had they made the effort.
I wouldnt be surprised if AMAFCA could even get funding from environmental divisions of
the government for doing preservation work like this to protect a species. Even more shocking to
me is that Fish and Wildlife didnt catch this. More consultation should be done before acting on
projects with wildlife impact like this. They could even meet with birdwatchers,
environmentalists, and other people who probably know and understand the environment in the
areas that projects will be done at and can give them better ideas about how to conduct their
projects while also keeping conservation in mind.
While its true that wetland habitat does depend on rainfall in regards to how beneficial it will
be to the birds so AMAFCA as being at least somewhat at fault for the lack of shorebirds, more
evidence seems to put AMAFCA being at least somewhat at fault. Therefore, overall, I feel that
for the most part my argument is confirmed and backed up by the evidence I gathered; and I
would urge AMAFCA to take more care into how they impact the environment of our city during
construction, maintenance, and building of community flood projects.

Works Cited (MLA):

Online Sources:
"Bank Swallow (Riparia Riparia)." Bank Swallow. New Mexico Avian Conservation
Partners, n.d. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
"Bank Swallow." Threatened. Point Blue, n.d. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Peer Reviewed Sources:
Gensler, David, Ramchand Oad, and Kristoph-Dietrich Kinzli. "Irrigation System
Modernization: Case Study Of The Middle Rio Grande Valley." Journal Of Irrigation &
Drainage Engineering 135.2 (2009): 169-176. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb.
2016.
Griggs, Jennifer. "Listening To Coherences Communities Of Birdsong And Ecologies Of
Pollution." Journal Of The West 50.1 (2011): 83-90. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22
Feb. 2016.
"Priority IBAs for New Mexico." Priority IBAs for New Mexico. New Mexico Audubon, n.d.
Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Titus, Priscilla J., and Jonathan H. Titus. "Ecological Monitoring Of The Endangered
Huachuca Water Umbel (Lilaeopsis Schaffneriana Ssp. Recurva: Apiaceae)." Southwestern
Naturalist 53.4 (2008): 458-465. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Zeman, Nicholas. "New Mexico Moves To Sue EPA Over Animas River Cleanup." ENR:
Engineering News-Record 275.20 (2016): 12. Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Feb.
2016.
Interviews Conducted:
Cuellar, Louis. Personal Interview. 21 Feb, 2016.
Mazur, Lynn. Emailed Personal Interview. 17 and 22 Feb, 2016.
Rustay, Chris. Personal Interview. 24 Feb, 2016.

Appendix:
Emails with Lynn Mazur:
(February 17. 2016)
Dylan,
I remember meeting you at Piedras Marcadas Dam when you were a high school
student. I am pleased to hear that you are continuing your education. UNM is a
good school (though not my alma mater).
You ask a very good question, and I will try to answer simply. Our mission is
protection of life and property from flooding. When we design a flood control
project, that protection is our primary focus. Wildlife conservation is not a
consideration, unless mandated by U.S Fish & Wildlife Service in environmentally
sensitive and/or endangered species areas. Starting in the 1990s, AMAFCA became
more focused on making projects more aesthetically pleasing, and that morphed
into making them more environmentally friendly, as well. For instance, Las
Ventanas Dam in Ventana Ranch subdivision was one of the first that had a
landformed embankment, that is, more curving than some earlier dams. I should
also point out that we are regulated by FEMA and the New Mexico Office of the State
Engineer (OSE) criteria that limit the amount of landscaping that can be done on
dam embankments. We cannot have trees or large woody vegetation on dam or
channel embankments that are higher than adjacent ground. Those are considered
to be levees. As you know, our dam pools inside the dams are good wildlife
habitat. That is a result of our construction but not a design consideration.
One of the first channels that had a more environmentally friendly design was the
San Antonio Arroyo. It was designed to have small side pools to capture some water
during low flows. We have to be careful to not hold water too long because the OSE
has water rights requirements. If any individual or entity holds water longer than 96
hours, you must purchase water rights. But that is a whole other issue. I mention it
because it is a design consideration for our projects.
You will see some recent AMAFCA projects that are still fairly straight concrete
channels. Our standard now is tinted shotcrete, which rougher and more natural
looking. Some of those channels were designed, constructed and entirely financed
by private developers. They enter into an agreement with AMAFCA to build to our
specifications and then turn it over for AMAFCA maintenance. They do that to
reclaim floodplain area for more buildable area. We work with the developer during
design, but we are limited on what we can require for a project they are paying for.
Hope this is a start. Contact me if you want more information, photos, etc.
Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo

Flood Control Authority

Lynn M. Mazur, P.E., C.F.M.
Development Review Engineer
2600 Prospect Ave NE
Albuquerque, NM 87107
Office: (505) 884-2215
Mobile: (505) 362-1273

(February 22, 2016)

Good morning, Dylan,
I will reply to your questions from this email and the previous one. My answers will
be brief. If you require more information, you can request to peruse our files
through the Freedom of Information Act.
Why does grass get mowed? Primarily for flood control, to allow the water to
flow freely. Also for weed control. AMAFCA can be cited by the City for tall weeds.
We also dont want grasses to grow too tall because we have had homeless camps
in our facilities.
North Diversion Channel projects AMAFCA has no designated wetlands in its
facilities. What was good habitat for birds in the NDC outfall area turned out to be
not so good for fish. There was a fish kill in 2004 in the area, and AMAFCA got into a
lot of trouble with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS). FWS also identified the
potential for the outfall area to trap silvery minnow, which, as you probably know, is
an endangered species. That precipitated a project to regrade the area so that we
would have positive drainage to the river. The project also constructed better
maintenance access and provided easier maintenance by removing some concrete
tiger teeth dissipation structures. The project was modeled in the UNM hydraulics
lab and, at the time, was the largest model UNM has ever built for AMAFCA.
Another potential problem that AMAFCA had been aware of for years was a
hydraulic jump at the railroad bridge that posed a safety hazard to the railroad. The
model showed that the project would move the jump downstream of the bridge. All
applicable permits, including those for environmental impacts, were obtained from
FWS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), Bernalillo County and other agencies.
Other than a few clean-up items, the project is complete in that area.
Calabacillas Arroyo Im not sure what section of the arroyo you are asking
about. AMAFCA did have a construction project in late 2014 and early 2015
between Golf Course and Eagle Ranch. This project was constructed under our new
Regional General Permit with the COE. We have to notify the COE and provide
plans, but the new permit allows a more streamlined process. The COE will consult
with FWS, if necessary, and they did give concurrence on this project before
construction.
We have slowly been constructing grade control structures and bank protection
along the length of the arroyo based on a study prepared in 2000. The study
showed what measures would be needed to protect properties from the erosive

effects of the arroyo. The vertical arroyo banks that are favorable for some birds
and other wildlife are not stable. In 2006 in this section of the arroyo, a storm cut
into the bottom of the vertical bank, and it sloughed off leaving a power pole
dangling in the air. The slope has since been stabilized. A lot of the improvements
along the Calabacillas Arroyo are not visible because the bank protection and grade
control structures are backfilled with native soil and reseeded.
Hope this information helps your project.
Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo
Flood Control Authority
Lynn M. Mazur, P.E., C.F.M.
Development Review Engineer
2600 Prospect Ave NE
Albuquerque, NM 87107
Office: (505) 884-2215
Mobile: (505) 362-1273

List of Interview Questions:

1. Do you think AMAFCA is negatively harming the environment at Tramway?
2. Have you seen a decrease in shorebirds overall at the Tramway Wetlands and, if so, is
it to the best of your knowledge because of the work done by AMAFCA?
3. Can AMAFCA be doing more to improve or at least be less harmful to the
environment when conducting projects?
4. Has there been any times youve seen AMAFCA have a mass benefit or mass harm to
the environment?
Graphs of the other questions on Survey Monkey: