Lessons From The Midwest Floods

Posted on April 7, 2008 | Filed Under Flood Protection, Great Lakes, Great Rivers, River Renewal

RW_blogRebecca Wodder
President

Missouri Flood Relief

Disastrous floods. We experienced them back in December in the Pacific Northwest. Now, more recently, devastating floodwaters submerged parts of the Midwest.

We know that these kinds of rain storms and flooding will become more frequent and severe with global warming. How can communities prepare? What lessons can we learn?

One thing is certain: while engineered solutions like levees are necessary in some places, for the most part they are costly and can create a false sense of security. Levees can encourage unwise floodplain development and increase flood damage costs, while also destroying some of the natural features that prevent downstream flooding, as well as river access and fish and wildlife habitat.

Take the Missouri River. In 1993, the Missouri River flooded, in what local residents came to call the “Great Flood,� one of the most destructive in the history of the Mississippi River basin. 70,000 people were evacuated, 50,000 homes damaged, nearly 50 people killed and a total cost in damage exceeding $16 billion dollars.

Following the floods in 1993, American Rivers helped convince the Federal Emergency Management Agency to use some of the disaster relief funds to help families move out of harm’s way. The agency worked in nine states to move roughly 10,000 homes and businesses to higher ground and to restore floodplains so that they could act as natural buffers. One village downriver from St. Louis picked up and moved two miles away to a site 400 feet above the Mississippi floodplain. When another flood hit the region two years later, these people were high and dry.

But this example of smart rebuilding is the exception, not the rule. In the very area that in 1993 was under 10 feet of water, developers have built strip malls, office parks and 28,000 new homes! In the St. Louis area, there’s been more building on the floodplain since 1993, than in its entire prior history.

The victims here are the families that invested their life savings in these homes, believing the promise of developers and local elected officials that they were safe. These false promises continue, and we owe the families in America’s river communities better.

We can’t rely on the engineered fixes of the past. While levees will still play a role in flood management, we need to focus on common-sense, cost-effective natural flood protection solutions like restoring wetlands, keeping people out of harm’s way in the first place, and allowing rivers to follow natural, meandering channels.

Our approach must be to work with nature and not against it. Working with nature, we can have clean, healthy rivers that make communities more resilient, more able to withstand droughts and floods in the years to come.

This post was first published on Treehugger.

About this Post
Permalink | Trackback | | Print This Article | 1 Comment
Like it?   digg | hugg | del.icio.us | furl | reddit

6 Month Update on America’s Most Endangered Rivers: 2007

Posted on October 22, 2007 | Filed Under Alerts, California, Deep South, Endangered Rivers, Great Lakes, Great Rivers, Mid-Atlantic, Northwest, Outreach, Southeast, Southwest

ChesleaChelsea Lane-Miller, Associate Director of Outreach
Outreach Events and Activities

recreation-tbaThough it may be hard to believe, it’s been six months since we released our America’s Most Endangered Rivers: 2007 Edition report. That means it’s time to check in and see what’s happened on each of the ten rivers. Read closely — there are new opportunities for you to take action and to learn more.

Santa Fe River
The people of Santa Fe are making steady progress on efforts to bring their namesake river back to life. In July, Mayor David Coss delivered the annual State of the City address to the people of Santa Fe, in which he said, “I am happy to announce to you today that I am proposing 1,000 acre-feet of water be dedicated to the Santa Fe River by next spring through adoption of the city’s Long Range Water Supply Plan. This means that we will have enough water to keep riparian vegetation alive in stretches of the River during the summer months. While there are still many challenges to work through as we strive for sustainable water policies in Santa Fe, this 1,000 acre-feet will be the first designation of water to a river anywhere in the state.”

The city now plans to hold town hall meetings and discussions with all key stakeholders so that the community of Santa Fe can come together in support of a common vision of a living river that will eventually be adopted by the City Council.

San Mateo Creek
Though the proposed Foothill South toll road still poses a real threat to San Mateo Creek, opposition to this ill-advised project continues to grow. Editorials in the L.A. Times and North County Times both say that the toll road is not worth it, and stories in the San Diego Tribune and Orange County Register show that nearly 70% of local residents are opposed to the road.

In other positive news, California Rep. Susan Davis (D - San Diego) successfully introduced an amendment in the Armed Services Committee that would remove several exemptions from state environmental laws that the TCA obtained in order to build the proposed toll road. The House version of the bill passed and the Senate is currently debating the bill.

Additionally, American Rivers and Surfrider Foundation supporters recently sent comments to the California Coastal Commission (CCC), urging them to deny approval of the toll road to protect San Mateo Creek and Trestles Beach, which draws surfers from all over the world. There’s still time for you to tell the CCC how you feel. Act now!

Iowa River
Conservation groups in Iowa are working to draft a set of rules that would keep the Iowa and other rivers in the state from becoming more polluted, but the state Department of Natural Resources is dragging its feet. People in Iowa want clean rivers, and they’re not going to wait forever to get them!

Take the University of Iowa in Iowa City. In response to the listing of the Iowa River as one of AMERICA’S MOST ENDANGERED RIVERS:2007 Edition, the University is organizing several events on the River, including three bus tours and a talk about the river as part of their Civic Engagement Program.

Plans are also in the works to organize a local group in Hardin County, Iowa to work on improving the river. These discussions include farmers and local people.

Upper Delaware River
The Upper Delaware River continues to face a grave threat from powerline plans by New York Regional Interconnect, a private power company. In order to protect the Upper Delaware Wild and Scenic River, U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer and Hilary Rodham Clinton have introduced legislation to block federal approval of this highly controversial proposed power line route. If it becomes law, the legislation will stop the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission from unilaterally establishing power line routes through New York State. It would also prohibit FERC from overriding New York State’s siting process and eliminate the agency’s ability to use eminent domain to confiscate private property.

There’s a big incentive to pass the Clinton-Schumer legislation - on October 2nd, the Department of Energy (home to FERC) issued their final designation of the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors. The one on the east coast includes the Upper Delaware River, essentially paving the way for the proposed power line. Stay tuned for your chance to express your support for the Clinton-Schumer bill.

White Salmon River
Designating the White Salmon River as one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers has helped to raise awareness and support for the removal of Condit Dam. Since the listing, local efforts have: turned back a threat from the local electric company to start condemnation proceedings as a way to stall or prevent removal; hosted informational meetings to stir discussion and share facts about dam removal with the community; and appear to be turning back a move by Klickitat County to rezone a large area along the river most critical to salmon restoration. Fish scientists continue to make plans for salmon restoration - some think that rainbow trout found upstream of the dam may actually be steelhead (genetically identical to rainbow trout) that were able to adapt to freshwater life. This means that there may still be native species of steelhead in the river only waiting for the chance to return to the ocean and resume their anadramous life cycle.

It is important that FERC keep dam removal on track. Public support for dam removal is high and growing - the listing of the White Salmon generated 300 comments to the agency. Also, the tremendous public support for the recent removal of the nearby Marmot Dam on the Sandy River just outside of Portland makes Condit Dam an obvious and excellent next step for supporting people and salmon in the Columbia basin.

Neches River
The fate of the Neches River is still up in the air. Proponents of the Neches River Refuge are waiting for a judge to rule in the lawsuit filed by the City of Dallas to eliminate the refuge. Meanwhile, the Texas state legislature has designated the area as a “unique reservoir site” for Fastrill Reservoir, but the state designation will become relevant only if the refuge is overturned.

The Neches River made an appearance in Sierra Club’s America’s Wild Legacy report. They highlighted threatened wild places in each state - including the Neches in Texas. Efforts to designate the river as a National Scenic River are still in motion as well.

Kinnickinnic River
The Kinnickinnic is on the path toward restoration. Although Wisconsin is still working on budget issues that affect the project, once the state funding is in place the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency appears likely to provide the federal match for removal of the contaminated sediments. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is close to having final designs for the remediation, and the Environmental Analysis and permits are close to being completed. Dredging is expected to start next spring, and finish by early fall.

The good news is that it appears likely that a project upstream on the Milwaukee River at Estabrook Dam will also receive funding. This project would also remove PCB-contaminated sediments from behind the dam, and further upstream. Cleanup is scheduled to being next spring.

Neuse River
In early September, elected officials in North Carolina floated the Neuse River to learn about threats to the river’s health, and ways to help protect the river. Upper Neuse Riverkeeper Dean Najouks led them on the trip. He talked about how rainwater running off of lawns, parking lots, golf courses and roads - collectively called stormwater - can harm a river, and how low impact development can help to alleviate these problems. For many, it was an eye-opening experience. Hopefully this trip will help to pass a bond measure in Wake County, NC that would preserve 30% of the county’s land as open space - something that would help to reduce the amount of stormwater funneled into creeks and rivers.

There are still many challenges facing the Neuse River, including a drought this year. Additionally, the state just approved a sewage plant expansion for Johnston County and is endorsing a plan to grant the City of Raleigh a variance request to allow more than 1000 acres of polluted ground water to leach into the Neuse River - that would be more than 120,000 lbs of nitrogen per year for the next 30 years, without any treatment or mitigation. A local blogger explains how you can speak out for the Neuse on this issue.

Lee Creek
Arkansas’ Lee Creek continues to face an uphill battle, but efforts to protect this Extraordinary Resource Water are not over yet. In early October, changes to the regulations that protect Extraordinary Resource Waters (ERW) in Arkansas were passed unanimously by the PC&E Commission. These changes provide a way to delist the river as an ERW, which would normally prohibit dam construction, if a community has no alternative source of drinking water. Although this opens the possibility for constructing a dam on Lee Creek, there must be ample proof that it’s absolutely necessary for drinking water. Project proponents have not been able to show this because cheaper and more ecologically sensible alternatives exist for local drinking water.

Additionally, the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), which passed the Senate and House in late September, renews the 1967 authorization of the Pine Mountain Dam - proposed for Lee Creek - along with 14 other water projects in the state. Funding for study of the dam proposal is provided but there is no guarantee that any funding will be provided for building the dam. Furthermore, the project cited by the Act authorizes the dam for flood control - not water supply - meaning that the dam would still be in opposition to state law protecting ERWs.

Chuitna River
The listing of the Chuitna as one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers has brought much deserved attention to the plight of this remote treasure. Elevated awareness has coalesced locals and concerned citizens have redoubled their efforts to protect the Chuitna from destructive strip mining. PacRim Coal, the company pushing for the coal mine is moving forward with its plans, including permit requests to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Local citizens and others submitted a petition in June requesting that lands within the fish-rich Chuitna watershed be deemed “unsuitable” for coal strip mining. DNR Commissioner Tom Irwin of Alaska DNR denied the petition on July 16th claiming lands within the petition area are exempt. The DNR decision is under appeal. The nearby communities of Tyonek and Beluga rely heavily upon this area for their year-round subsistence fishing and hunting.

While the State of Alaska continues to push this project forward, efforts to slow the project and extend the timeline have been successful — the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) is now expected to be released as early as summer 2008. The development of this mine would not only devastate thousands of acres of prime fish, moose, and bear habitat but would also emit huge quantities of CO2 and other greenhouse gases from coal combustion.

About this Post
Permalink | Trackback | | Print This Article | Leave a Comment
Like it?   digg | hugg | del.icio.us | furl | reddit

States Vary on Sewage Right-to-Know Policy

Posted on August 21, 2007 | Filed Under Clean Water, Deep South, Great Rivers, Healthy Waters, Mid-Atlantic, Northwest, Sewage, Southeast

baerKatherine Baer, Director
Healthy Waters Campaign

Have you been enjoying your summer, splashing in your stream and swimming in your local lake? You may think you know whether it’s safe to take a dip, but depending on where you live, there’s a good chance you have no idea.

What's in Your WaterGiven that there is no consistent national standard requiring sewage system operators to alert the public about spills, states play a critical role in keeping their citizens safe. But what states require public notification after a sewer overflow - in which states can you dive into your local lake or river confident that you won’t be paddling through the waste your neighbor flushed down the drain the day before?

The answer: it depends where you live. American Rivers just released a report, What’s In Your Water: The State of Public Notification in 11 U.S. States (PDF), reviewing public notification policies across the country and found that Americans are not treated equally when it comes to their right to know, with many citizens kept in the dark.

There is wide variation among and even within the 11 states we investigated. In some states, strong notification laws are undermined by a complete lack of enforcement. In other states, the public regularly receives warnings about sewage spills despite a lack of laws or regulations requiring notification. Here is a snapshot of how these selected states compare:

Of these 11 states, only Maryland stands out as an example of states with strong public notification, showing how vulnerable many Americans are to sewage pollution and confusion over whether it’s safe to swim. It is precisely because of this information gap in many states that Congress must pass a consistent national public notification requirement. H.R. 2452, the Raw Sewage Overflow Community Right to Know Act would require all states to ensure that their residents are informed of sewage spills.

Until we can eliminate sewage pollution, let’s end the policy of silence and allow all Americans to take their health and safety into their own hands by improving state and federal right-to-know policies.

The full report is available at www.americanrivers.org/RightToKnowReport.

About this Post
Permalink | Trackback | | Print This Article | 4 Comments
Like it?   digg | hugg | del.icio.us | furl | reddit

Best places to live with most endangered rivers?

Posted on July 13, 2007 | Filed Under Endangered Rivers, Great Rivers, Outreach, Southwest

ChesleaChelsea Lane-Miller, Associate Director of Outreach
Outreach Events and Activities

recreation-tbaThe August 2007 edition of Outside Magazine has a feature article called “Where to Live Now”, which describes the 30 best towns to live in for fit, fun adventure. Interestingly, two of the places they recommend living — Santa Fe, NM and Iowa City, IA are home to two of this year’s Most Endangered Rivers — the Santa Fe River and the Iowa River. You might be thinking that sounds a bit odd — how can good towns for outdoorsy people also have the country’s most endangered rivers? It’s a good question.

In the write-ups about each of the towns, they include a section called the perfect 48 hours, which describes the coolest things you can do in that town in 48 hours. For both of these cities, the perfect 48 hours involves some water-based activity, but neither recommends doing the activity on the rivers that run right through the center of the town. For Iowa City, they recommend renting a kayak to paddle on Lake MacBride and in Santa Fe, they recommend fishing on the Pecos River.

beaver2-groenfeldtCertainly both of these towns have much to offer for outdoor enthusiasts and cultural connoisseurs. But imagine if they could boast clean, healthy rivers in addition to their other attractive qualities. It’s not impossible. Iowa has a chance to adequately enforce the Clean Water Act, and Santa Fe has an opportunity to bring its namesake river back to life. Both towns would reap a myriad of benefits from a healthy river at their centers — for one, they could get themselves off of the most endangered rivers list and cement their place on the list of best places to live.

If you are thinking of moving to one of these cities, check out some of these blogs to get a sense of the local flavor: Choosing Santa Fe; Fly Fishing Report for Northern New Mexico; Iowa Compact…let’s be “Green” together; Natural Living Des Moines.

About this Post
Permalink | Trackback | | Print This Article | 1 Comment
Like it?   digg | hugg | del.icio.us | furl | reddit