This guest blog by Lin Wellford is a part of our America’s Most Endangered Rivers® series on the Buffalo National River.

Once upon a time, we could all agree on what it meant to ‘sustain’ something. It meant achieving a balance that could be maintained over time. Healthy natural systems are the template for establishing sustainable practices.

In Europe, where people lived and farmed long before the “New World” was discovered, sustainability is mandated by limited resources and dense populations. Historically, farmers have been the masters of sustainability, striking a careful balance between what they put into the soil and what they could expect to take from it in the way of crops. Farmers were the original environmentalists, because they were the first to see that maintaining a careful balance allowed them to grow healthy crops year after year.

A couple of summers ago, the EPA was criticized for accidentally breaching an earthen dam, releasing mine waste from a leaking storage lagoon into a local river. The waste turned the waterway a startling yellow-orange hue that stained the rocks along the shore long after the polluted spill had moved down river. But why was the waste-filled lagoon left behind for a taxpayer-supported government agency to deal with? It’s the same old story— once the company extracted the value and profit from the mine, they declared bankruptcy and just walked away, leaving all of us with their mess.

Thirty years ago, as untapped natural resources began to get harder to find, restless corporations started to focus on a new profit center: food. People had to have it, and because farmers were historically good stewards of their land, there weren’t a lot of regulations in place to restrict operations. In short order, independent farmers found themselves being shut out of the meat market, with no way to sell their poultry or hogs.

But, surprise! Corporations soon came along with a friendly proposition for the very folks they’d just run out of the business.

First it was contract chicken and turkey growers, who raised the birds, but did not own them, and settled for a slender slice of the profits. To make a decent living, contract growers have to take on huge debt and build more poultry houses. It is also their part of the deal to dispose of the waste.

Hogs were a little trickier. They are large mammals, and can really produce a lot of waste. And again, the contract grower will own that waste although he will own not one of the thousands of pigs he feeds and houses.

Already the EPA reports that agricultural waste from these kinds of industrial operations are a leading cause of impaired waterways. Eventually, the evidence will be beyond dispute. But for now, weak regulations and lack of enforcement are allowing concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to wreck our rivers.

Do we really have to wait until every precious river and stream in the country is unfit for human use before we stop the pillaging, and then raise taxes just to clean up the mess?

Please join us in telling the State of Arkansas to protect the Buffalo River and deny permits for C&H Hog Farms’ poorly sited facility on Big Creek.

[su_button url=”https://act.americanrivers.org/page/692/action/1″ background=”#ef8c2d” size=”5″ center=”yes”]Take action »[/su_button]

---

Author:  Lin Wellford

Lin Wellford has made her home in the Ozarks for more than 40 years. A retired author/artist, she now devotes her talents to environmental issues and community causes.

Last week, the state celebrated the second anniversary of Colorado’s Water Plan. Over the last two years, the state has made solid progress funding grants to advance water projects and increase funding for stream management plans. However, the challenges identified in the plan are significant. A swelling population is stretching our water resources, and climate change is having an impact, by reducing flows on the Colorado River. We need to pick up the pace toward implementing all of the Plan’s water solutions if we are to reach our goal of securing clean reliable water for our communities, preserving our agricultural heritage, and protecting our rivers. Over the next few months, We Are Rivers will highlight the Colorado Water Plan through a series of episodes breaking down the opportunities, challenges, and successes to date from Colorado’s Water Plan. Join us for the first installment, as we look back at the last two years of the water plan and identify a sustainable path forward.

Growing up in New York, I envied the posters pinned up in my middle school hallways that honored Colorado landscapes like the Maroon Bells, Dinosaur National Monument, the Great Sand Dunes, and of course the Colorado River as it weaves through canyons and deserts. But moving to Colorado six years ago, tacking on to Colorado’s growing population, I haven’t exactly made life easier for the state’s water managers. Without the native badge, I empathize with the influx of people flooding into Colorado who have recreational fervor, career hopes, and of course adventure in mind, straining the West’s already overtapped water supply.

Colorado’s population is projected to double by 2050, with most of the growth occurring on the Front Range, where about 80% of the people live. With about 80% of the state’s water coming from west slope snowpack, the imbalance is striking. Additionally, like many other states across the Southwest, Colorado is experiencing higher temperatures, reduced precipitation, and earlier and faster runoff. With growing population and climate change impacts, how can Colorado work to close our gap in supply and demand? Through increased collaboration, dialogue, and efficiencies, the Colorado Water Plan sets out to address this grand dilemma.

The Colorado Water Plan sets a goal of conserving 400,000 acre-feet of municipal and industrial water by 2050. By 2025, if the Water Plan objectives are met, 75% of Coloradans will live in communities that have water-saving actions incorporated into land-use planning. Furthermore, by 2030, the plan sets out to A) re-use and share at least 50,000 acre-feet of water amongst agricultural producers, B) cover 80% of locally prioritized rivers with Stream Management Plans, and C) ensure 80% of critical watersheds with Watershed Protection Plans. In order for a project to utilize the Water Plan’s budget to meet these goals, the proposed conservation project must be appropriate in that it addresses real needs and is cost-effective, sustainable, and supported by local stakeholders.

The state has taken a great step forward by allocating $10 million per year for Water Plan Implementation grants. While this is a first step, we must further fund the plan’s broader strategies as well. Public investment in water projects must be smart, which starts with meeting all of the “criteria” in the Colorado Water Plan. Before any new, significant projects are proposed, the state should apply all of the Water Plan’s criteria in order to demonstrate that the state is committed to investing in (or endorsing) only projects that use public resources wisely, protect rivers and wildlife, and reflect community values. The last two years have seen state funding disproportionately spent on costly structural projects while sustainable, cost-effective methods, such as water reuse and flexible water-sharing agreements have been undervalued and underfunded. Creative conservation projects are essential in upholding the Water Plan to sustain the natural beauty of Colorado’s rivers and streams and ensure a safe and reliable drinking water supply.

However, it is important to note that there is nothing legally binding in the Water Plan that requires Colorado to abide by its outlined goals. Therefore, the success of the plan solely relies on the motivation of everyday people to work together as a community to hold politicians and basin roundtables accountable with respect to the plan. I encourage you to learn more about where your water comes from and what you can do as an individual to reduce your water consumption. We all need to work collaboratively to reduce our demand for water.

As we celebrate the second anniversary of Colorado’s Water Plan, we have an opportunity, and a responsibility to rally behind the premise of the Plan, keeping Colorado beautiful and sustainable for all. Join us over the next few months as we dive into the mechanics of Colorado’s Water Plan, and why it is so important to see it succeed.

This guest blog by Lin Wellford is a part of our America’s Most Endangered Rivers® series on the Buffalo National River.

How would you react if a neighbor did something that suddenly altered your quality of life or the value of your property?

For too many folks in a rural areas, this isn’t just a rhetorical question. People who live in the country understand the realities of farming and raising animals. They know that in the spring, cattle growers may get a load of chicken litter applied to their pastures to help the grass grow, and the smell will be noticeable for a few days. Sometimes animals get out in the road and it’s neighborly to alert their owner. You might get stuck behind a slow-moving tractor now and again.

That’s life in the country. People look out for each other. They try to get along and be considerate.

If a neighbor decided to build a rural factory, complete with constant truck traffic in and out, plus industrial sounds and smells (very unpleasant smells at that, and not just a few times a year, but nearly year-round)… what would you do?

Neighbors surrounding an industrial-scale hog operation in tiny Mount Judea, Arkansas, have been living this new reality since discovering that a local man bought property up on a hill in the heart of their community. The factory turns out piglets by breeding 2500 sows in rotation, producing something like 80,000 animals yearly. The owners and proponents call it a farm.

Officially, it is classified as a confined animal feeding operation, or CAFO for short. In other words, it’s an indoor feedlot for pigs. Two giant metal buildings stand windowless, with exhaust fans running around the clock to keep the enclosed hogs from suffocating. The animals never see daylight, except through the slats of a truck transporting them to the facility where they will be finished, meaning fattened, before being shipped one last time to a slaughter house.

As someone who used to enjoy bacon and a good barbequed spare rib, learning about how pork is now mass produced was a real eye-opener. It is well known that pigs are as smart, perhaps even smarter, than many dogs. Yet these CAFO animals spend their entire lives either pregnant or nursing babies, within metal confinement pens inside these buildings.

The pig, who is curious and playful under normal circumstances, never experiences the sun on its back or ground under its feet.

The cement floors have metal grates, allowing waste to accumulate in a pit beneath the building. The floors are washed off at intervals and the pits are emptied into outdoor lagoons (basically open sewage ponds). From there the waste these animals produce, over 2 million gallons a year, is pumped into trucks and taken to a patchwork of fields where it is sprayed out onto the ground as often as possible.

Neighbors complain privately about the smell, the flies, and the traffic as the spray trucks make their circuit from the sewage lagoons to the fields and back. But no one complains too publicly. No one wants to be a bad neighbor.

In Pennsylvania, a family farm that operated for generations switched to this industrial model of mass producing swine. The neighbors had a year to make formal complaints, but they liked their neighbors and trusted them. The farmers, in turn, trusted the corporation that assured them this was a safe and efficient way to make a good living.

It was only after a year of operation that the constant presence of sprayed manure was impossible to ignore. By then, Pennsylvania law said nothing could be done. One neighbor found that she could not keep her swimming pool water clear after numerous treatments. Finally the pool tech asked if there was a CAFO in the area. She told him there was. He shrugged and said there was no way to counter the effects of airborne pollutants.

If what is in the air is messing up pool water, what is it doing to our rivers and streams, not to mention our lungs?

Many states are passing laws to protect landowners’ ‘right to farm’, even though the definition of farming has been altered radically in the past few decades. Shouldn’t neighbors also have the right to protect their way of life from being ruined by one landowner‘s choice to turn his farm into a factory?

The operators of these facilities don’t even own the animals under their care. But they do own the manure that is left behind and many find that the fields used to dispose of waste rapidly accumulate more nutrients than they can use. The result over time is often hay that is too high in nitrogen to make healthy fodder. Excess nutrients also find their way into the water table, impacting private wells and, eventually, local waterways.

Environmentalists are scolded for their reaction to having such an over-sized operation placed in fragile, environmentally sensitive areas. But the fact is that similar CAFOs have a history of polluting groundwater and rivers. The corporations will deny this up to the moment that the evidence becomes irrefutable. Contract growers will be left holding the mortgage for the facility, and the public will be on the hook to clean up the mess, while the corporation moves on to find another poor rural area in a state with lax environmental laws they can take advantage of.

Please join us in telling the State of Arkansas to protect the Buffalo River and deny permits for C&H Hog Farms’ poorly sited facility on Big Creek.

[su_button url=”https://act.americanrivers.org/page/692/action/1″ background=”#ef8c2d” size=”5″ center=”yes”]Take action »[/su_button]

---

Author:  Lin Wellford

Lin Wellford has made her home in the Ozarks for more than 40 years. A retired author/artist, she now devotes her talents to environmental issues and community causes.

How do you save a river running dry? One creek at a time.

That’s the spirit of the Upper Flint River Working Group – a voluntary, collaborative forum in which conservation groups, water utilities, and other stakeholders come together for open dialogue on how to restore drought resilience to one of the region’s most important rivers.

Twice a year, in a meeting room at a Methodist church in a bucolic setting on the edge of the Georgia countryside, the Working Group gets together for the better part of an afternoon. We talk about the year’s weather (and its impact on the river), about key challenges in conservation on the Flint, about new opportunities for partnership, and we share updates about ongoing projects throughout the basin.

One of those projects is on Flat Creek in Fayette County, where the county water system director is leading an effort to better manage reservoirs to sustain both his water system and its downstream neighbors for the future. While the water system has already taken on the low-hanging fruit of improved management practices, American Rivers is working closely as a partner to provide science-based recommendations for long-term sustainable management. We don’t know when the next drought will strike the Flint, but we do know that this team effort is already resulting in a healthier Flat Creek and will result in a healthier Flint River, too.

[su_button url=”https://www.marketplace.org/2017/07/27/sustainability/in-era-water-ownership-sparks-disputes-georgia-water-agency-share-supply” background=”#ef8c2d” size=”5″ center=”yes”]Listen in for more »[/su_button]

 

Almost one year ago, I conceived the idea to run across South Carolina, all in the name of river and freshwater resource conservation. I reached out to American Rivers early in the process and they were excited to partner with me. We named the project Running For Rivers, and later came to an agreement with RES, LLC to be the presenting sponsor. I am a biologist and ultra marathon runner, and have been working and running in South Carolina for many years. For work, I focus on the conservation and management of freshwater, estuarine, and marine resources. In my running life, I love to get out in the wilderness and try to run next to rivers and streams; it brings me peace and great joy to run next to flowing water. This project truly brought together two of my greatest passions.

Over the year of route planning and logistics, it was clear that the route was going to be close to 300 miles. I made the decision to round it up to an even 300 miles. I then decided to attempt to tackle the 300-mile journey in 3 days (72 hours). Very few people have ever accomplished that distance in that time, but it is always important to dream big and go after goals that may seem “impossible.” Additionally, “300 miles in 3 days” had a nice ring to it.

On Thursday Nov. 2 at 10:07 in the morning, I began running toward the ocean from the NC/SC Border (Eastern Continental Divide), near the Middle Saluda River. After about 8 miles, it was apparent to me that something was wrong. I had trained for 4-6 months, but I was feeling fatigued and my quads were already hurting with 292 miles left. At about mile 10, I left a quiet gravel road and stepped onto a very busy 2-lane secondary highway where vehicles were flying by me, barely giving me an inch. Much of the next 2 days were characterized by few sidewalks, lots of traffic at high speeds, and generally just feeling “off.” The constant onslaught of high-speed traffic (often with distracted drivers) was much more draining than I had anticipated.

Ultimately, I pushed hard and grinded through some rough miles and a lot of pain, all while passing near or over the South Saluda, Reedy, Little, Bush, Broad, Congaree, and Saluda Rivers. I made it 150 miles to Columbia, SC in about 53 hours. After very tough circumstances and heavy heart, I made the decision to stop. The 150 miles would have been impossible without my amazing crew and pacers, which included my fiancé Laura and her cousin Mel, my endurance logistics masters Lauton and Kenny, ultra-running maniacs Justin and Andres, and communications director Dan. I would not have been able to make it more than 20 or 30 miles without the crew; they were truly amazing.

Additionally, the adventure would been extremely tough without all of the support and generosity from RES, American Rivers, Badwater, Orvis, NipEAZE, Crevar Chiropractic, and all of our other sponsors.

I guess we will call this Running For Rivers Part 1. Stay tuned for Part 2…

Learn more about Keith’s adventure at www.RunningforRivers.com

Ushering in a new chapter for the Neuse River and City of Raleigh, removal of the unsafe and obsolete Milburnie Dam began on Wednesday, November 15.

Why dam removal?

This obsolete dam hadn’t produced power in years and much worse, it had caused the death of 15 people, who drowned in the hydraulic created at the abandoned powerhouse. Removing the dam eliminated this public safety hazard. It will also restore the health of the Neuse River.

What benefits will the dam removal bring?

Milburnie Dam was the last impediment to migratory fish on the Neuse River from the coast, particularly shad and striped bass. The six mile long impoundment will return to its free flowing state and fish will return to their historic spawning grounds. As a part of the project, 7 years of monitoring will be performed to see how the biological and physical characteristics of the river change after dam removal. The Neuse will not only benefit from the removal of the dam, but the site of this project will be protected in perpetuity under a conservation easement.

American Rivers has advocated for the removal of Milburnie Dam for over a decade. Restoration Systems is managing and funding the project with private dollars. Mitigations credits will be generated by this project into a mitigation bank. This dam removal is the continuation of a comprehensive river restoration effort, including four previous dam removals downstream and on Neuse River tributaries.

This guest blog by Lin Wellford is a part of our America’s Most Endangered Rivers® series on the Buffalo National River.

The Ozark Mountains of Northwest Arkansas are, in my opinion, the most beautiful and natural part of the state. The region is also home to our most beloved and storied river, the Buffalo.

Almost fifty years ago, outdoorsmen and environmentalists joined forces to beat back a plan to dam the river in two places, generating hydropower by impounding a series of man-made lakes. For many Arkansans, this made no more sense than it would to dismantle Mount Rushmore for road gravel! Previously, the majestic White River had been dammed to create a chain of lakes and power stations that altered the character of Northwest Arkansas. Enough already!

After the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was finally sent packing, lawmakers decided that the river needed even more protection, and they worked to have 134 miles of the Buffalo declared a National River. This was the first time that an American river was designated as a national park.

In the decades since, countless scouts, church groups, families, sportsmen, and nature lovers have come to enjoy and be enchanted by the Buffalo River. Camping on a wide gravel bar under a sky crowded with stars, hearing whippoorwills cry and current swirling around rocks, can be a life-altering experience. It certainly was for me.

The first time I kayaked and camped with friends, I fell head over heels for the mystical ‘Buffalo blue’ waters, said to be an effect of dissolving limestone. Since that trip, there have been more visits than I kept track of— with family, with friends, with members of the Ozark Society, on river clean-ups, and later, with my grandchildren. What a thrill to introduce youngsters to this amazing river! We made an art out of ‘slow-floating’ taking our time on a sultry summer day, paddling just long enough to feel the heat, then choosing a deep pool or a narrow riffle to stop and soak and splash the day away. As I watched the kids leaping into the water, I wondered if they would return one day with their own families, making a whole new generation of memories.

The stunning news that a factory-sized hog operation had not only gotten a permit, but was nearly built and ready to begin raising pigs along a major tributary of the Buffalo River took me and many others by surprise. The more we learned, the worse the news got. Millions of gallons of untreated hog feces and urine would be captured below enclosed metal sheds and flushed into open lagoons where it would stew like a foul soup until the slurry could be pumped out and sprayed on the surrounding fields and pastures.

Some of Arkansas’ most renown hydrogeologists were quick to point out that the facility sat on a karst topography, a limestone substrate prone to fracturing, sinkholes, and caves. Just down the hill from the waste lagoons is Big Creek, a major tributary to the Buffalo River. The area is riddled with caves, dotted with sinkholes, and covered in many places by topsoil so thin and rocky that growing row crops is not an option. A 6500-head confined animal feeding operation (CAFO) will inevitably impair this jewel of a river. Why on earth would a giant agricultural corporation choose such a fragile and precious place? It had to be a mistake!

Much later, someone explained that corporate agriculture has figured out that if they could site one such facility in a sensitive area, they could eventually ‘take the state’. I also learned that they look for places where jobs are scarce and people are desperate to find ways to make a living on their land. Next, convince those folks into believing that the environment won’t be harmed, that new jobs will be created, and that the relentless application of potent hog waste will make the grass greener and the hay more plentiful.

But in the decades since this type of intensive animal production was first touted as the “way to feed the world,” testing shows waterways are being spoiled by the over-application of animal waste all over the country. Traditional farms operated sustainably for hundreds if not thousands of years. Now, after just four years, the pastures used to dispose of waste from this one CAFO are testing above optimum for nutrients. What the grass can’t use bonds with the soil and runs off during heavy rain or percolates through the porous and shallow soils. Even proponents admit that some of the hog waste ends up in the river.

Meanwhile, only a handful of minimum-wage jobs were created, while almost a thousand jobs that depend on tourism are at risk. If the river is no longer beautiful to look at or safe to swim or fish in, what will those people do? Will even more residents decide to become contract hog growers? Why not, if the river is already ruined?

That’s why I joined the effort to get this poorly-sited hog factory removed from the watershed. The Buffalo was set aside for all Americans present and future. The next generations will need beautiful and natural places to enjoy just as we have. All Americans have an obligation to pass on the best of our country to those coming up behind us.

Please join us in telling the State of Arkansas to protect the Buffalo River and deny permits for C&H Hog Farms’ poorly sited facility on Big Creek.

[su_button url=”https://act.americanrivers.org/page/692/action/1″ background=”#ef8c2d” size=”5″ center=”yes”]Take action »[/su_button]

---

Author:  Lin Wellford

Lin Wellford has made her home in the Ozarks for more than 40 years. A retired author/artist, she now devotes her talents to environmental issues and community causes.

Join us this week on our podcast, We Are Rivers as we discuss the issues, opinions, and concerns surrounding Glen Canyon Dam, Lake Powell, and the concept of Fill Mead First in Episode 5: Glen Canyon – Tough Decisions surround a Colorado River Flashpoint.

Fifteen miles upstream from Lee’s Ferry, Glen Canyon Dam halts the Colorado River. Over 50 years ago, before the last bucket of concrete hardened in the 714-ft tall Glen Canyon Dam, Glen Canyon, whose magnificence was said to rival the Grand Canyon was just upstream. As Lake Powell filled, becoming the second largest reservoir in the United States, Glen Canyon was drowned under hundreds of feet of water. Since its creation, all the way through the present, Glen Canyon Dam has had its supporters and adversaries.

There are a variety of issues, opinions, and concerns surrounding Glen Canyon Dam, and whether this dam that has created many controversies over its 50 years of existence should be removed, or at least bypassed. In Episode Five, we hear from a trio of voices on the issue of Glen Canyon Dam, New York Times Bestselling Author Kevin Fedarko, Glen Canyon Institute President Eric Balken, and American Rivers’ Intermountain West Communication Director Sinjin Eberle.

In this episode, we seek to understand the dam’s purpose, its impact on the Upper and Lower Basin water management, and the concept of restoring a world currently under water.

Water levels in both Lake Powell and Lake Mead are low. Bathtubs rings paint the sandstone of both reservoirs demonstrating just how far the lake levels have dropped in the last 15 years. To reduce the impacts of both Lake Powell and Mead reaching critical levels, a number of proposals have been suggested, including an idea that’s received a fair bit of media attention in the last few years, Fill Mead First.

Fill Mead First suggests that drawing down Lake Powell and sending most of its water downstream to be stored in Lake Mead would conserve more water than if the two reservoirs stand alone, because reduced surface area means less evaporation. Fill Mead First does not advocate removing the dam, but instead restoring a somewhat free flowing river by re-opening the diversion tunnels around the dam, and drawing the reservoir down to a low level, called “dead pool.” The water formerly contained in Lake Powell would make its way through the Grand Canyon, to be stored in Lake Mead, raising the surface elevation of the largest reservoir in the United States.

While there are advocates for the Fill Mead First position, draining Lake Powell would have huge, political ramifications. And some believe, the benefits of such a plan are simply not significant enough, at this time, to merit stern consideration. The Upper and Lower Basins are just beginning to cooperate more effectively to reduce risk to future Colorado River water supplies through drought contingency planning. These relationships and collaborations are critical to the overall health of the river and the seven states, two countries, and 37 million people that depend on water in the Colorado River Basin.

It is critical that we reduce water supply risk in the Upper and Lower Basin systems first before draining Lake Powell. And, much more study is needed to confirm whether such a plan would be viable in the first place. Jack Schmidt, a professor at Utah State University, characterizes the potential water savings like this:

The likely water savings to be gained by shifting most water storage to Lake Mead are relatively small in relation to other anticipated changes in runoff in the watershed, especially those associated with climate change. Not only are the savings relatively small, but the uncertainty in the estimated savings is large. Thus, it is not good public policy to implement the Fill Mead First plan at this time. At some future time, however, the potential savings in shifting the primary location of water storage to Lake Mead may be viewed as large. It is critical that the federal government initiate new studies of evaporation loss and ground-water seepage at Lake Powell to resolve these uncertainties so that future decisions about reservoir management can be made with much less uncertainty.

At this time, Lake Powell serves an important role in the balance of the basin, particularly from the perspective of the Upper Basin. In addition to hydropower generation (which a portion of proceeds fund of a number of conservation programs), the Upper basin depends on Lake Powell for water storage to provide security for mandatory deliveries from the Upper Basin to the Lower, especially in drought years. Additionally, the establishment of a demand management program, a key component to drought contingency planning, which compensates water users to voluntarily reduce water use and store the saved water to reduce risk is dependent on Lake Powell. Without Lake Powell in place, in the event of a prolonged drought or supply imbalance in the Upper Basin, the impacts across the Colorado Basin could be dramatic.

It is critical to focus on ensuring that the water demands across the entire Colorado Basin are systematically balanced. In other words, water authorities and interests (such as farmers, municipalities, and tribes) who use Colorado River water, all must continue to work towards collaborative mechanisms that increase water conservation before the contentious debates on Fill Mead First are initiated.

While the viewpoints surrounding Glen Canyon are vast, and often heated, the most important thing when discussing the dam is to maintain open and respectful dialogue to all viewpoints, even fundamentally different ones. Join us as we dive into the complexities surrounding Glen Canyon Dam in Episode 5 of We Are Rivers.

We Are Rivers is now available on both iTunes and Stitcher. Subscribe to stay up to date with new episodes. And, if you find We Are Rivers educational, interesting, and inspiring, please take a moment to rate and comment. This helps others discover this series too! We appreciate your support!  

Thanks to the efforts of tribes, fishermen, farmers, conservation groups, and the dam owner PacifiCorp, four dams on the Klamath River in Oregon and California are slated for removal in 2020.

But we need to clear the next obstacle – please speak up by Nov. 6 to keep this restoration effort on track and ensure success.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the federal agency responsible for hydropower projects, must transfer the dam license from PacifiCorp to the entity responsible for decommissioning, the Klamath River Renewal Corporation. FERC has opened a public comment period until November 6, and we need you to weigh in to support the transfer.

The Klamath River was once the third largest producer of salmon on the West Coast. Removing the dams will restore the river, revive ailing salmon and steelhead runs, and revitalize fishing, tribal and farming communities.

The four Klamath dams produce a nominal amount of power, which can be replaced using renewables and efficiency measures and without contributing to climate change. A study by the California Energy Commission and the Department of the Interior found that removing the dams and compensating for the loss of power production with efficiency measures and other sources would save PacifiCorp customers up to $285 million over 30 years.

Learn more about the Klamath River restoration effort.

Thank you for speaking up for the Klamath River!

How to submit your comment to FERC:

1. Go to https://ferconline.ferc.gov/quickcomment.aspx

2. Enter your information including e-mail. Open automatic e-mail from FERC, follow link from there to submit comment.

3. In the docket field, enter # P-2082-062 to specify the project.

4. Fill in comment form using our sample letter below, or your own. If you have a personal story, please include it!

FERC requires comments be submitted by November 6th.

Sample letter:

I am writing to support the transfer of the four aging dams on the Klamath River- JC Boyle, Copco No. 1, Copco No. 2, and Iron Gate- to the Klamath River Renewal Corporation (KRRC), and their ultimate removal.

The four Klamath River dams have blocked access to hundreds of miles of salmon and steelhead productive habitat for 100 years. The dams cause toxic algae blooms, reduce productivity of the river, block spawning grounds, and block off cold source water. Removal of the four Klamath dams represents an excellent opportunity to bolster salmon recovery on the West Coast.

The decommissioning and ultimate removal of the four Klamath dams not only makes economic sense, but would greatly benefit the Klamath salmon fisheries and all other Klamath Basin public resources that have been adversely affected by these four dams over the past century.

I urge FERC to approve this proposed License Amendment and transfer to the KRRC for purposes of removing the four Klamath dams and overseeing the restoration of the Klamath River.

This is a guest post by Eric Straw, who paddled a body of water in all 50 states over the summer of 2017 for his Canoe 50 Campaign.

I already miss the rivers… It’s true, even after just returning from paddling a natural body of water in every state. Fortunately, as I discovered on my Canoe 50 Campaign, I don’t have to venture far to find a river. None of us do. From Delaware to the Dakotas and from Mississippi to Montana, every state in the union has a place to paddle, explore, and discover nature anew.

I have a multitude of stories and takeaways from my half-year excursion. Fresh off the water, here are a few that stick out. First off, I believe, more than ever, that our riparian areas are proper focal points for protection and barometers for overall ecosystem health; they are worth seeing, they are worth protecting and they are — along with our diverse population — what makes our nation exceptional.

Despite being from the suburbs, I grew up with a love for the outdoors. As a kid I collected wildlife sightings like baseball cards. For me, the only thing akin to finding a Ken Griffey Jr. rookie in a pack was seeing a rare animal in the wild. Both occurrences put me in a state of bliss only rivaled by an unguarded bowl of candy. Along this canoe trip, I remained enamored by chance encounters with wild animals; my first bear sighting is a prime example.

Paddling down Pine Creek Canyon, Pennsylvania, I floated under passing white clouds, above the glinting water and between the steep canyon walls cloaked in green. The evening set in with a warmth only a fine summer day can provide. Then I saw it — 200 yards down river — the unmistakable shape of a black bear. Trying to calm my excitement, I put on my zoom lens as the bear began crossing Pine Creek. In silence, I canoed downstream as the bear reached the opposing bank and began walking along the shore, towards me. Soon, I was only 30 feet from 300 pounds of fur, teeth, and claws. At a loss for creativity, I called out “Hey bear!” The lumbering creature stopped, turned and looked right at me before disappearing behind a wall of shaking leaves. I passed over the next riffle, dumb grin plastered upon my face. While the spell of baseball cards wore off long ago, I doubt the spell of wildlife ever will.

I didn’t plan this quest with the goal of reinvesting faith in the American People, but after the 2016 election, it became an enduring part of my canoe trip. In every state, I encountered strangers from all walks of life. After meeting hunters, vacationers, bikers, immigrants, fishermen, kids, and retirees, I came away with one thought — people are complicated, but mostly good.

In six months of driving backcountry roads, leaving my car overnight and camping alone, no one ever stole from me. On the contrary, the people I met offered kindness. Countless individuals provided help, rides, meals, beers, etc. On four occasions, strangers gave me cash out of the blue. One kayaker in the Florida Keys put a hundred-dollar bill in my hand. “Go get yourself a good meal and have a great trip,” were his only conditions. I’ve long touted the kindness of the American People, but even I was overwhelmed with the sheer volume of kind gestures during the course of my long paddle.

Now, like most of us, I have many frustrations with our political climate and the normalization of viewpoints that trend in frightening directions. On the nature side alone, I think it’s a shame that the mere word environment has become so polarized. It’s a shame professing a love of nature might somehow instigate a vicious political argument. It’s a shame people feel they need to be either on the side of the economy or the environment, as if improving either inherently destroys the other.

But, after meeting with a broad swath of America and canoeing with people of all political persuasions, I can say this: we all don’t boil down to a choice between, what many regarded as, two poor options. Red state or blue state, I found that the American People, on a whole, do care about how they’re going to leave this land for their kids and grandkids. Whether it’s a turkey hunter in rural Virginia, an outfitter in Alaska, or a Paiute Tribe member in the high deserts of Nevada — people give a damn about their natural world. That should give us all hope.

 

Along with all the human interactions, the memories of the waterways I canoed will endure. Setting out, I was almost more excited about visiting the unassuming, low tourism budget states than the postcard destinations. Instead of finding mundane, unattractive water bodies, I was floored by the scenic rivers and unsung wilderness areas in states rarely noted for their natural beauty. In April, I swam in the clear blackwater stream on a Wild and Scenic River in Southern Mississippi. In May, I saw thousands of arctic migratory Red Knots gather by spawning horseshoe crabs at the mouth of the Mispillion in Delaware. In June, I surprised a family of river otters, playing in a shallow riffle, in the hills of Ohio. So on and so forth. My canoe quest was a never-ending showcase of American splendor in places you would and wouldn’t expect.

Classic beauty isn’t the reason our rivers deserve our respect and stewardship. Ecosystem health, human well-being, and an array of non-aesthetic factors are as essential. But, boy does it help to stir hearts and open wallets when you realize how stunning our rivers are to behold. I’ve raised money for American Rivers throughout my journey because I believe our nation needs this kind of organization to raise the profiles of endangered waterways and protect natural places, from the unassuming to the majestic. I believe America’s rivers and wildlands are what make us exceptional and they’re worth protecting — grab a paddle and go see for yourself.

Please help me reach my fundraising goal for American Rivers by donating here.

Read more of my state by state adventures at www.shamelesstraveles.com

Let’s talk trash, or more specifically, litter.

American Rivers has teamed up with dedicated litter picker-upper and blogger, Erin Fitzgerald, on an initiative to, you guessed it, pick up litter. But this is no ordinary litter cleanup; we’re adding a twist. Think scavenger hunt.

Are you having flashbacks to your youth? We hope so, because this is going to be fun! It’s an invitation—an opportunity to clean up your favorite trail, park, riverbank, or neighborhood. If you have kids, we encourage you to invite them along. It’s a great stewardship activity for all ages.

And like any good scavenger hunt, there are prizes.

How it Works

Starting this month and throughout next year, we’ll announce a “Litter of the Season.” Then the hunt is on to find the challenge litter, take a picture of it, and tag it to your personal Twitter or Instagram account with the hashtags #MakeAPactPackItOut and #RiverCleanup.

Rules & Reminders:

• Discard of the litter responsibly (recycle it or put it in the trash).
• Feel free to keep the hunt going – you can pick up and tag as much litter as you find, but you’ll only get one entry per person for each season.
• Your picture(s) will populate American Rivers’ Virtual Landfill and Erin’s online gallery, Make a Pact, Pack It Out.
• Grow the scavenger hunt – share this blog post and your trash photos with your friends, family, and co-workers to encourage them to join you (maybe a little friendly competition to see who finds the most of the challenge litter).

 

Timing

The first scavenger hunt kicks off on Friday, October 27 and ends on Monday, November 6. Your picture(s) must be uploaded to social media account(s) with the hashtags #MakeAPactPackItOut and #RiverCleanup by 11:59 PM, Pacific Standard Time on November 6 to be eligible to win (see complete rules for more details).

Anticipated Scavenger Hunt Seasons

Don’t miss a season – make sure to check American Rivers’ The Current blog and Adventures in Thumbholes’ blog for information on timing. Scavenger hunts will also be announced on social media, so make sure you’re connected (@AmericanRivers and @Thumbholes on Instagram and Twitter).

• October/November 2017
• March 2018
• July 2018
• October 2018

Prizes

Each Litter Season will have a different treasure (prize) up for grabs. Prizes will be in the spirit of sustainability and stewardship. At the conclusion of each scavenger hunt, a winner will be selected at random from all entries.

As environmental stewards, we know picking up and packing out litter not only keeps our trails looking great, but all of our wild places. When litter is left on our lands, rain and floodwater can carry it into storm drains and then quickly into our creeks, rivers, and even oceans.

We look forward to seeing your submissions, as they represent stories of stewardship and care behind every piece of litter picked up. While traditional scavenger hunts focus on a treasure – here the treasure is knowing you left the environment better than you found it.

---

Author: Erin Fitzgerald is a trail runner from Portland, Oregon. Her blog, Adventures in Thumbholes, has two initiatives (Small Change and Make a Pact, Pack It Out) that focus on stewardship and giving back to the communities where we race and adventure. Erin’s passion for preserving wildplaces has earned her the reputation of a litter-picker-upper, which she happily embraces.