Talk:Rio Grande - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 184.96.242.182 (talk) at 13:19, 23 August 2022 (→Geography: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:19, 23 August 2022 by 184.96.242.182 (talk) (→Geography: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rio Grande article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Template:Vital article Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Rivers High‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Fisheries and Fishing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Colorado / New Mexico / Texas High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to create, improve, and update Misplaced Pages articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the Add topic tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!
	New Mexico portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Mexico (assessed as Top-importance).
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Mexico High‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

endorheic basins

"the endorheic basins that are adjacent to and within the greater drainage basin of the Rio Grande increase the total drainage-basin area" - that makes zero sense. By definition, endorheic basins do NOT form part of the DRAINAGE basin of the Rio Grande. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.157.125 (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

water rights

A number of Texans I know claim that while Texas gave up the land around the Rio Grande in 1850, it retained the water rights, particularly as regards navigation. This means that if the river had enough water in it, one could boat all the way into Colorado while remaining in Texas. I seriously doubt this, but was wondering if anyone on this site might have further information.165.91.64.232 (talk) 07:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)RKH

Name

rio grande is pronounced rio gran-de, not rio grand.51grizzly (talk) 17:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC) Does anyone know a source that describes the history of the different names for the river on each side of the border? Tom e r 09:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I can't find a source but Rio Grande is Portuguese, whereas Río Bravo is Spanish. Kewpid 02:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Río Grande is Spanish too (with the accent on the i), my assumption is that the í=>i is a result of the fact that, generally speaking, English orthography doesn't preserve diacritics in words it kyfes from other languages. It means the same thing in Spanish as it does in Portuguese, but that doesn't answer the question of where the name Río Grande came from and why the name Río Bravo is now used for the river in Spanish. :-\ Tom e r 08:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

It seems that it was once referred to as the "Río de Las Palmas" by the early Spanish explorers. (See in es:Francisco de Garay: "Aunque Francisco de Garay nunca puso pie en Tejas, su nombre ha sido frecuentemente relacionado con la historia del estado por error. Profundamente enraizado en la historiografía del estado esta la idea equivocada que él desembarcó en la boca del Río Grande (llamado Río de las Palmas) en 1523 y que exploró el río brevemente antes de proceder hacia el Río Pánuco. Verdaderamente, después que vientos contrarios empujaron sus embarcaciones a más de 160 kilómetros al norte de su objetivo original, él desembarcó en la desembocadura del río Soto la Marina, unos 240 kilómetros al sur del Río Grande. Fue a este río al cual Garay le dio el nombre por el cual seria conocido en tiempos coloniales, Río de las Palmas.") ...but my Spanish isn't very good.

McAllen, Texas is nicknamed the "City of palms".

Anyone?

--Jerome Potts (talk) 00:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, see http://www.library.ci.corpus-christi.tx.us/newkingdom/reinochapter2p6.htm --Jerome Potts (talk) 12:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it is misleading to mention that it is known as Rio Bravo "in Mexico," "south of the border," etc. The real distinction, as far as I know, is that it is known as "Rio Bravo" in the entire Spanish-speaking world, not just Mexico. It is only in the US, and other countries which have taken the US name for the river, where it is known as "Rio Grande." Cospelero (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:25, 20 February 2012 (UTC).

All of this fails to answer the question asked by the first poster here, which I also am curious about: why does it have two names? Río Grande is Spanish (which is not to say we don't mispronounce it). I think if a bunch of us "gringos" were to name it, we wouldn't give it a Spanish-language name (it'd be the Sam Houston River or something like that). That makes me think the name Río Grande precedes English-speaking colonization. Any idea how it got that way? 155.213.224.59 (talk) 17:07, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Addition after name

To note that the name is indeed of Spanish origin, and not Portuguese, could (Originally: Río Grande) be placed in the first sentence?

I don't think its necessary. The Portuguese thing was merely someone showing off by reminding us it needs the accent. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 17:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Mouth of the Rio Grande

Is it possible to actually reach the mouth of the river? It seems that it comes to an abrupt end just before reaching the Gulf of Mexico, with a sandy strip of beach between the river's end and the gulf. Can one get near this area, or would they be detained by border agents? Anyone been to the mouth? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 10:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Depends what source you look at. Most images from Google/others were taken during a major drought, and shows the sandbar at the mouth. Wet weather since then has broken the bar and it flows, albeit very slowly, into the Gulf. This section of beach has always been accessible by going to the end of State Highway 4 and going south a couple miles. There is a border patrol checkpoint about halfway between the coast and Brownsville that is always open. 25or6to4 (talk) 03:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

So if I were to park my car at the end of TX-4 Boca Chica Highway and walk along the beach in a time of drought, I could actually walk across the US-Mexico border and see the Rio Grande dump into a Texan estuary and not directly into the Gulf? Is this actually allowed, or would I not be permitted on the beach there? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 12:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Technically, yes you could keep walking for a while. There's no access issues. Not sure if it would be considered an estuary. Reading the estuary page, I think it would need a water connection to the Gulf of Mexico. During drought, the river is completely closed off from the Gulf. The current imagery from Google Maps for the mouth of the river was taken 1/04/06, and 2005 was the driest year since 1953, so it shows a likely extreme, but it was nothing more than a long skinny lake at that time. 25or6to4 (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps estuary was the wrong choice of words. Anyway, I could walk right up to the border without being harassed? Have you done it? Also, how can you find the date on which google earth phots were taken? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 13:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

rio grande is a river. a river is called rio grande because they wanted to call it that is proble means nothing at all and they just made that up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.4.200 (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Rio Grabde is big river186.177.3.215 (talk) 13:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

discharge

I believe that the present-day extremely low discharge only started around the 1800s or so with irrigation... before irrigation, the natural flow of the river was actually much higher, thence the river being called the Rio Grande, not "Rio Pequeño" or "Rio Largo pero Pequeño" or something like that. There were some accounts by the Spanish of the river being 500-1500 feet wide in places, and deep enough for steamboats and large sailing ships to navigate up to beyond present El Paso. Judging by this I'd assume the long term discharge of the river to be in excess of 20,000-40,000 cfs, though today we all know it has shrunk to less than 900 cfs. I cannot find any sources though. And also pictures make the Pecos River look a lot larger than the most exaggerated discharge data that I can find. Just by the geobox picture on the Pecos page I'd safely assume a flow of at least 3,000 cfs, if not more, unless it's in a flood of course. Shannon _contribs 21:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Here it says that 800,000 acre feet of water are used in the San Luis Valley alone annually for irrigation purposes, equal to about 1,103 cfs, and that the discharge up to 1943 at Rio Grande City was 5.1 million acre-feet per year or 7,034 cfs. Shannon _contribs 21:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

(Italicized lines are notes, don't figure in the final total) -Apparently, river flows below the Conchos have been reduced by about 87 percent due to human activities leaving 13% of the original flow - but where? Could be anywhere from 6,500 cfs below the Rio Conchos, to 26,950 cfs at Rio Grande City, to 11,350 cfs at Brownsville/Matamoros!
-In 1942, the average discharge for the river at Rio Grande City was 9,600 cfs, and 7,384 cfs at the mouth - and that was considered an year with "below average precipitation with high rates of evaporation".Cite error: The <ref> tag name cannot be a simple integer (see the help page).

Colorado and New Mexico

San Luis Valley: ~800,000 acre feet diverted (1,103 cfs)
Conejos River - diversions unknown? average flow 176 cfs at Lasauses (down from ~220 cfs in early 20th century)
Red River - no significant diversions, average flow 78.3 cfs at Questa
Rio Hondo - small diversions? average flow 34.8 cfs at Valdez
Embudo Creek - diversions unknown, average flow at Dixon, 82.4 cfs
Rio Chama - average flow 571 cfs at Chamita
- some diversions data in following note - major "Acequias" (ditches) divert about 137.5 cfs from the river (more likely, more exist)
- Abiquiu and El Vado reservoirs evaporation rate unknown
Santa Cruz River - average flow at Cundiyo, 31 cfs
Pojoaque River - no accurate data, only one high up USGS gage, estimated about 50 cfs
Cochiti Dam and downstream diversions (Angostura, Isleta and San Acacia) - unknown, USBR site says about 90,000 acres are irrigated
- Angostura diversion capacity 650 cfs; Isleta 1,070 cfs; San Acacia - 283 cfs
USGS says annual Rio Grande flow at Albuquerque = 1,300 cfs
Rio Puerco average annual discharge - 62,000 acre feet or about 85.5 cfs
Elephant Butte Reservoir - evaporation rate 250,000 acre feet per year, or almost 345 cfs
Caballo Lake - according to previous evaporation rate, about 75,400 acre feet per year or 104 cfs
Percha, Leasburg, Mesilla, American, Riverside diversion dams (Diversion capacity 3,725 cfs, obviously not utilized fully; irrigated lands ~ 125,000 acres)
River is dry most of the year by the time it reaches El Paso/Juarez

TOTAL: Natural flow at El Paso/Juarez must be at the very least, 3410 cfs.

Border stretch to mouth

Lots of irrigated fields downstream… probably sustained by groundwater pumping, a bit of flow restored
Rio Conchos - discharge at Ojinaga, about 848 cfs
- Presa de Boquilla evaporation rate - unknown
stuff in between… mostly dry washes and stuff. River flows into wild lands around the Big Bend.
Pecos River enters - average flow 265 cfs near Langtry
- Spanish explorers and early American settlers wrote that the Pecos was originally very large - in the 1800s, the river was "up to 100 feet wide, 10 feet deep and exhibited a fast current with only a few places suitable for crossing" … that suggests a pre-irrigation flow of more than 3,000-5,000 cfs. (2010 water use in the basin was 807,453 acre feet or some 1,114 cfs.) Also there is a lot of introduced saltcedar in the basin, which uses up a lot of the river's flow (more than 55,000 acre feet per year or 76 cfs)
Devils River - average flow near mouth, 362 cfs (Pristine!)
Amistad Reservoir evaporates 230,000-310,000 acre feet per year or 317-427 cfs, averaging to 372 cfs
At least six or seven smaller tributaries enter from both sides between Amistad and Falcon… flow unknown, but probably insignificant
Rio Salado enters in Falcon Reservoir, average flow 354 cfs. River has a drainage area of more than 23,000 square miles… problem there? Used extensively for cotton irrigation, which consumes a LOT of water.
- Even estimating an average production of 0.1 cfs per square mile , the Salado would still have an average discharge of over 2,300 cfs.
- Rio Salado "Average Annual 'Unused' Run-off A. F. Per Sq. Mi." (not sure about this definition) was roughly 23.9 between 1900 and 1942… amounting to 557,420 acre feet per year, roughly 769 cfs, or 415 cfs above the present flow (data not exactly sure, has to be more.)Cite error: The <ref> tag name cannot be a simple integer (see the help page).
Rio San Juan - 370 cfs. Annual flow about 866,096 AF from 1900 to 1942, or about 1,195 cfs.
Rio Alamo - 130 cfs, but annual flow was 101,342 AF from 1900-1942, about 140 cfs…

TOTAL natural flow produced from this stretch must be at least 7,836 cfs.

Totals

Adding the two reaches we get a discharge of approximately 11,246 cfs… not counting evaporation/transpiration from other reservoirs and also a lot of diversions/tributaries have not been figured in. Shannon _contribs 04:31, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Then here, according to Rivers of North America, that ever-useful book:

About 300 cfs lost to evaporation/irrigation use between Cochiti Reservoir and Albuquerque.
Between there and Elephant Butte Dam, the river loses another 200 cfs.
460 cfs is diverted from the river at El Paso-Juarez.
Rio Conchos original flow about 210 cfs higher than today.
Some 4,100 cfs are diverted from the river from upstream of Amistad to the mouth.

This indicates that the river's historic flow was at least 5,270 cfs greater than today. (This does not even account for evaporation loss from Falcon and Amistad.) Shannon _contribs 04:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Notes for this section

I think I've read something about this somewhere--will try to find where. Pre-development flows were definitely higher. Not sure about sailing vessels reaching El Paso (ocean sailing I assume?), but certainly there's been a major change--some of which may be natural rather than development-caused, of course. Also, the Spanish name came from observations nearish El Paso and Albuquerque, not Brownsville, for what it's worth. Pfly (talk) 09:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Side Note about name

Will everyone make sure that when editing, it is the Rio Grande, not the Rio Grande river, since in Spanish, Rio already means "river". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.89.196 (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

This is correct. This academic source discusses the issue. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 22:12, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation

How do you pronounce this river in English? 75.151.57.113 (talk) 21:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Just pronounce the bold capital letters. RE-Oh GRAND-hEY
-AMAPO (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Geography

Ojinaga Mexico is due south of presidio Texas not due south of el Paso Texas. So I believe the rio conchas enters the Rio grande at ojinaga again in the big bend area. 184.96.242.182 (talk) 13:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Categories: