It would be challenging to find anyone who claims that the Grand Canyon is not one of the most awe-inspiring and magnificent landscapes on the planet. Although, according to Yelp, some people may not fully appreciate the extent of its awesomeness, most people, and certainly the majority of the 5.5 million visitors a year would attest, it is a pretty neat place.

In 2007, I was fortunate to walk across the canyon, rim-to-rim, with a small group of intrepid hikers. The instant your boots cross the threshold between the flat benches that form the rim and edge of the steady descent into the canyon itself, your perspective on everything changes – the crunch of your footsteps on the gravel becomes much more audible, the bounce of your pack as the elevation declines becomes a bit more rhythmic, and you start to notice things that you can’t see from the rim – the nooks and crannies that give a place with so much grandeur and expanse it’s character and romance. The Grand Canyon sits smack dab I the middle of a huge, dry, high-altitude desert, but the intimate spaces, the seeps, springs, and waterfalls that cling to life in this harsh world, provide the life and imagination a place to thrive, survive, and prosper.

Ribbon Falls along the route from the North Rim to Phantom Ranch

As author Kevin Fedarko proclaims, the Grand Canyon should be one of the most valuable, and protected, parcels of real estate in the country. As a World Heritage Site and one of the Natural Wonders of the World, the landscape has earned the accolades and respect around the globe. But as he also points out, the canyon itself is surrounded by threats from all four points of the compass and above. Because of the unprecedented assault on the sanctity of the canyon, American Rivers teamed up with local partner Grand Canyon Trust and listed the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon as Americas Most Endangered River in 2015.

The threats we identified in the listing were daunting – a proposal to build a resort development on the East Rim of the canyon, next to one of the most sacred sites to nearly a dozen Native American tribes, where a tramway would shuttle up to 10,000 people per day down to river level, and a restaurant and gift shop would await their money. Uranium mining around the circumference of the park, which currently and historically has created a pathway for radioactively contaminated water to flow to the Colorado River, was restarting operations. And finally, a proposal to expand the sleepy little village of about 600 residents, Tusayan, into a substantial resort destination, with 2,200 new homes, a couple million square feet of commercial space, a dude ranch and a European-style spa less than 10 miles from the Park entrance, all without a clear plan of where their water would come from.

Lush oasis at Indian Gardens – a welcome sight for hot hikers

Grand Canyon National Park Superintendent Dave Uberuaga has stated that while the Escalade project (the tram) may be the most visible and obnoxious threat to the experience of the Grand Canyon, it was the Tusayan proposal that would cast the longest term and most irreparable harm to a wide expanse along the South Rim. Decades of hydrologic study has already linked existing groundwater withdrawal from Tusayan as diminishing the natural groundwater flows within the canyon itself. This groundwater is what feeds the life-sustaining micro-oases tucked within the small spaces along the South Rim. Places like Hermit Springs, Indian Gardens, and the blue waters of Havasu Falls – features directly at risk from irreversible harm to the groundwater along the South Rim.

But since we listed the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon as Most Endangered in 2015, two significant things have happened. First, in May of 2015, newly elected Navajo Chairman Russel Begaye declared that the tram project would not happen on his watch – at least if he had anything to do with it. Last week, the Forest Service flatly denied the town of Tusayan’s application for right-of-way permits for roads and utility easements that would have cleared a major obstacle for the expansion to move forward. Without these easements, the town does not have permission to develop across Forest Service land, which surrounds the town on all sides.

Bright Angel Creek, Grand Canyon

Although representatives from the development group in charge of the town had stated publicly that they would not use groundwater for the expansion, almost nobody believed that they had any other option. On top of that, Stilo never put forth a comprehensive, public plan for how they would provide water to the increased number of thirsty mouths, while protecting the fragile groundwater directly connected to the canyon. As a result, when the Forest Service opened the public comment period and held public meetings in the area to gather feedback on the project, the vast majority of the comments they received were against the proposal.

According to Kaibab National Forest Service Supervisor Heather Provencio, they received more than 105,000 petition signatures, as well as more than 35,000 letters on the proposal, with the vast majority of those opposing the proposed roads and infrastructure.

You spoke out. The Grand Canyon won.

When I think back to my traverse across the canyon, it is the kind features that were spared by this decision that stand out the most. Ribbon Falls (sacred to the Zuni), Indian Gardens and Havasu Falls (both important to the Havasupai), Elves Chasm, and so many more. These are the places that cool the skin and refresh the mind. These are the places of maidenhair ferns and Canyon Tree Frogs. These are the places of intimate beauty.

Point Imperial, Grand Canyon National Park

The very character of the canyon is what we all just stood up for – but as David Brower once noted, the immediate threat may be gone for now, but the place where the project was proposed does not disappear. The Confluence will not go away, Tusayan will not go away (and there is certainly a need for more hotel beds near the Park), the Uranium in the ground will not go away. Case in point – there is scuttlebutt on the Navajo Reservation that the proponents of the tram project are back, and leaning on local legislators to push through permissions to build the project. But the message is that if development is to happen near one of our most treasured natural landscapes, that it must be done in a thoughtful, deliberate, and public way in order to protect the very reasons why the place is so precious to begin with. Without that, deterioration of the experience and quality of our most important natural landscapes is a non-starter.

This article was written by David Kuczkir and appeared originally in Canoe & Kayak Magazine’s digital edition.

The juggernaut of these waterways is the Ashley River, a South Carolina State Scenic River. Ashley’s 24,000-acre historical district, with 130 historical national landmarks, is one of the largest in the country. The network of waterways is an all-year playground for canoeists and kayakers. What’s more, paddling Ashley is tantamount to traveling back to the days when everyday life depended on the ebb and flow of the tides.

The 36-mile Ashley River is tidal and flows from her swampy headwaters in Berkeley County, South Carolina, to the famed steepled city, Charleston. In February 2014 the conservation organization American Rivers anointed Ashley a Blue Trail. According to American Rivers Senior Director Gerrit Jöbsis, “A Blue Trail is a waterway adopted by a local community that is dedicated to improving family-friendly activities, such as fishing, paddling, and wildlife-watching, and conserving riverside land.”

The Ashley River Blue Trail (ARBT) is 30 miles in length, from Sland’s Bridge to the mouth of Towne Creek, and is split into the north and the south trails.

The sweet spot of the ARBT, and of the river, is a 15-mile swath between Drayton Hall, a pre-Revolutionary plantation, and Bacon’s Bridge. Paddling upriver, the first six miles is a no wake zone, home to three world-renown riverside plantations: Drayton Hall, Magnolia Plantation and Gardens, and Middleton Place.

The 1738 main house on Drayton Hall, framed in romantic early-English gardens, is remarkably the only intact plantation house on the river. The 24 other significant plantations were either burned in the Revolutionary or the Civil Wars, or destroyed in the 1804 hurricane or the 1886 earthquake.

Magnolia Plantation and Gardens, founded in 1672, has the oldest naturally landscaped gardens in America. Thick with flowering camellias, azaleas, crape myrtles and fragrant magnolias that pop throughout the seasons, the gardens are the birthplace of the American tourism industry.

Middleton Place was established in 1755. Visitors from around the globe pay homage to the symmetrical Butterfly Lakes (twin lakes that resemble butterfly wings) and the meticulously manicured gardens. The Garden Club of America has called the 65-acre oasis “the most important and most interesting garden in America.”

The river affords gorgeous vistas of the gardens, and of the Drayton house.

The Ashley River Heritage Trail (ARHT), a trail within a trail, is a 5.5-mile float between Middleton Place and Bacon’s Bridge. “It stretches into the upper reaches where the water’s skinny, more suitable for paddlers,” explains Jöbsis. The surroundings are intimate, dimmed by the canopy of massive oak boughs snaking out over the slow-flowing, tannin-colored water.

The ARHT showcases eight archeological sites comprised of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century shipwrecks and landings that are all exposed at low tide.

Near the northern terminus lies a well-preserved 1697 trading town, Colonial Dorchester State Historic Site. Archeological digs are ongoing. The 1757 fort is the best preserved tabby fortification in the country. Portage along the bank then explore this unique historical landmark.

Both trails only scratch the surface of Ashley’s repertoire of things to do and see. According to Jöbsis, “The great thing about the Ashley is it’s tidal.” Plan the tides right and you can cover a lot of river in one day. Jobsis’ enjoys paddling Ashley’s myriad of creeks, “They are an excellent sanctuary for paddlers from motorboats and allows one to get lost among the tidal marshes.”

If you Go:

The 55-room Inn at Middleton Place is located on the scenic Ashely River. Rooms have fireplaces and floor-to-ceiling windows that afford sweeping vistas of the Ashley and of the sunrise. Call 800-542-4774, 843-556-0500 or e-mail reservations@theinnatmiddletonplace.com

Outfitters and Guides

Sun and Moon Kayaking provides guides and outfitting services for kayaking. Call 843-452-6917 or e-mail mark@sunandmoonkayaking.com

Charleston Kayak Company provides guides and outfitting services for kayaking, canoeing and paddle boarding. Also offered is a unique guided-kayak tour of the Blackwater Cypress Swamp (Nov thru April). Call 843-628-2879 or e-mail charlestonkayak@gmail.com

Flow Info: NOAA Tide Predictions for the Ashley River

Be sure to check out the Ashley River Blue Trail map to learn where to access the river and find these historic sites and start planning your Ashley River Blue Trail adventure today!

Our new film, “Walt,” shares his story and captures his determination to restore the river.

When it comes to news about the drought in California, we’re all tired of “fish versus farms” stories that offer false choices and no solutions. Enter Walt Shubin, a farmer who has been fighting to restore the health of the San Joaquin River for decades. Walt remembers the river when it was wild, when its waters flowed, and it was home to abundant fish and wildlife.

[su_quote cite=”Walt Shubin”]I’ve had a love affair with the San Joaquin River since the first time I saw it. I feel that all rivers are national treasures. When that river was wild, it was so beautiful. It was sacred, spiritual. It was a feeling I can’t even describe. [/su_quote]

Learn more and find out how you can help the San Joaquin River, which American Rivers named America’s Most Endangered River® in 2014.

“Walt,” produced by filmmaker Justin Clifton, is part of our series of films using creative storytelling to inspire river conservation. First, we released Parker’s Top 50, about a child’s action-packed adventures along some of the Northwest’s most beautiful rivers. Next came The Important Places, an award-winning film about a father and son reconnecting on a Grand Canyon river trip. This summer, we released Flint, featuring the beauty of Georgia’s Flint River.

All of these films were featured at the Wild & Scenic film festival – and we have more exciting film projects planned for 2016.

[su_youtube url=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/wtRWnAOnf7g” width=”1020″ height=”580″]

They’re at it again. An opinion piece in The New York Times co-authored by Senator Lisa Murkowski tries to put a positive spin on harmful hydropower legislation.

But behind all of the talking points about clean and green energy, the truth is that the hydropower industry’s so-called “Unlock Hydro” bill is an attack on healthy rivers and your right to have a say in how your rivers are managed.

Here is why President Obama vowed to veto the legislation:

1. The hydro legislation is an extreme power grab: The legislation represents a major power grab by already powerful energy companies including Pacific Gas & Electric, Duke Energy, Exelon and Southern Company. The bill would gut environmental protections and curtail the ability of states, tribes, local communities and recreation and conservation interests to have a say in how dams are operated. By trying to “streamline” the dam relicensing process, energy companies are steamrolling your values.
2. Giant loopholes for energy companies: This legislation creates major loopholes for dam owners so they can avoid requirements to protect fish, wildlife or clean water. It also undermines the rights of states and Native American tribes to protect these values on their lands.
3. Rivers pay the price: Poorly operated hydropower dams can dry up rivers, kill fish and wildlife, and cause major damage to communities and businesses that rely on healthy rivers. There’s nothing “clean” or “green” about that. If hydropower is so clean, why are hydro companies lobbying Congress to get them out of complying with the Clean Water Act?

It’s time to stop this legislation in its tracks. Learn more about H.R. 8 and take action for rivers today.

This fall American Rivers led the first phase of efforts to restore iconic Hope Valley Meadow. This 1600-acre meadow complex is one of the largest and most beloved in the Sierra. Hope Valley is located just south of Lake Tahoe and is a popular recreation destination, as well as an integral ecological component of the West Fork Carson River, home to an important recreational fishery and the drinking water supply for many communities in Western Nevada.

Although strikingly beautiful, historic grazing and other human impacts have created a deeply eroded stream channel throughout much of the meadow. Wet meadow plants that rely on shallow groundwater can no longer thrive at the water’s edge, creating high, bare banks that do not provide cover for fish or birds. Without this anchoring vegetation, these banks erode easily, continuing the cycle of erosion and soil loss, negatively affecting water quality.

Project site before stabilization.

To address this problem, American Rivers led an effort to repair these streambanks and help the meadow recover. In October, we completed the first phase of this effort, in which we stabilized 130 feet of especially high, eroding streambank using a structure made of large logs. The structure will limit future erosion and provide habitat complexity for fish.

Repair also included planting willows to help to re-establish vegetative cover that will provide shade and habitat for birds and further stabilize the bank. The remainder of the project, which will stabilize an additional 7000 feet of stream channel primarily using native vegetation, will be completed next summer.

The project is an important milestone for the local community that has been pushing for restoration for over 20 years. It has also been a highly collaborative effort which has surely contributed to its success, with partners including the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Alpine Watershed Group, Friends of Hope Valley, Institute for Bird Populations and Trout Unlimited, and funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Sierra Nevada Conservancy, California Wildlife Conservation Board, Wildlife Conservation Society, and Bella Vista Foundation.

Standing on a brushy bank in soggy raincoats, we watched as the Puyallup River carried whole trees past us on swift silty-brown waters.  Beside us a trickle of water began to meander through a breach in the riverbank and across a bed of dark glacial sediment. Days of rain across western Washington had engorged the region’s creeks and rivers, bringing many of them to flood stage. This is exactly what members of American Rivers’ River Restoration team and staff from Pierce County had come to see; a river using its floodplains.

Michael Garrity, Brian Graber, Eileen Shader, and Jonathon Loos visit restored floodplains on the Yakima River in eastern Washington

This breach was not a natural feature of the riverbank, in fact, the riverbank we were walking on was not a ‘riverbank’ at all. It was a manmade levee historically built to protect adjacent lands from flood.

This particular reach of the Puyallup River is the site of a recently completed floodplain reconnection project by the Flood Control District of Pierce County, Washington. The levee breach we stood beside was the result of that project; a restored connection between the main channel of the Puyallup and the braided floodplain we had just walked across.  We cheered on the trickle of water as it steadily crept onto the floodplain, charting a patient but clear course towards the historic side-channels of the Puyallup River.

A half-century ago the Puyallup was the focus of significant straightening and levee building, efforts intended to corral the river into a single channel and more quickly move flood waters and sediment downstream. Levees provided communities with an artificial sense of control over where the river could move and how often it could overtop its banks. Being perceived as reasonably safe from flood, the levees opened the river’s floodplains for people to cultivate and build on.

High waters can access historic side-channels of the Puyallup River as a result of levee setback projects by Pierce County in western Washington

Fast-forward to 2015 on the Puyallup River, where levees are being intentionally breached or setback to reconnect the river with its floodplains. Across the nation, people are beginning to recognize that floodplains benefit people, fish and wildlife, and the economy.

Communities of the Pacific Northwest are leading the way in acting on this through floodplain reconnection and restoration. Regional efforts resulted in the Floodplains by Design program, a partnership with Washington State’s Department of Ecology, the Puget Sound Partnership, and The Nature Conservancy. Floodplains by Design uses a competitive process to fund multi-benefit floodplain restoration projects that “improve flood protection for towns and farms, restore salmon habitats, improve water quality, and enhance outdoor recreation”.

It might seem counterintuitive to remove a levee to improve flood safety. After all, a levee is constructed to provide flood protection in the first place. The consequences of engineered flood control protection, such as levees and dams, are multifaceted, and not always obvious. A leveed river doesn’t stop flooding, it simply moves flood waters downstream more quickly. Oftentimes this results in more damaging floods downriver. Where a river isn’t constrained by levees, floodwaters can overtop riverbanks and spread across floodplain lands. In doing so, floodplains provide storage volume for floodwaters. Floodplain habitats slow moving water and allow debris and sediment to settle. By just allowing a river to access its floodplains flood levels can be lower, slower to occur, and overall less damaging in downstream reaches.

Most people likely think of floodplains as risk zones that require hazard mapping, extra building requirements or flood insurance. It turns out that a floodplain is more than just a land development term.

Floodplains support some of the most productive and diverse ecosystems on the planet, and support rivers and the surrounding environment. A river’s floodplains provide habitat for fish and wildlife, supply nutrients and shelter that enhance fish reproductive success and growth rates and help regulate in-stream temperature conditions and water quality.

Floodplain restoration efforts by Yakima County on the Yakima River reconnect salmon with vital spawning habitat in the floodplain

When a river is leveed it becomes disconnected from its floodplain. Floodplain lands are often developed in response, eliminating the natural and beneficial functions they provide to ecosystems and people.

The impacts of floodplain loss are many, but one of the most apparent is the decline of floodplain dependent fish species.

This is the case in the Puget Sound watershed, where a combination of riverbank armoring and levees, alongside residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural development has resulted in a large scale loss of functioning floodplains. Endangered Chinook salmon, Steelhead and Bull trout depend on access to floodplain habitat features like log jams to spawn and grow. Puget Sound Chinook salmon populations are at 10% of their historic numbers today as reported by The Puget Sound Partnership, and are heavily supplemented by hatchery released fish.

As the current Lapham Fellow for American Rivers I’m working with our River Restoration Team to enhance our floodplain restoration program. American Rivers is a national leader at restoring rivers from headwaters to the sea through dam removal; we want to spur similar success in restoring connection between rivers and their floodplains. By learning from the successes of Washington’s Floodplains by Design program, and engaging with local leaders that have enabled those successes, we can position ourselves to enable floodplain restoration in river basins across the country.

As we stood in the rain along the Puyallup River in December, big grins on our faces, we were watching a river retake its floodplain for the first time in decades. The next day we had the opportunity to visit other successful floodplain reconnection projects on the Yakima River in eastern Washington. Excitement about these projects and the benefits they’re bringing to communities and rivers is palpable among local, county and state professionals. Witnessing these projects in action (especially during a week of downpours and flooding) helps us define what successful floodplain restoration looks like, and reaffirms the serious need for such work to continue. We’re eager to get started.

Fire and water: two elements necessary for life, remedies for one another, contradictory, and in this case, important factors for overall watershed health.

American Rivers staff recently helped organize and oversee a controlled burn at Murphy Meadow. After a few years of hard work to align schedules and obtain burn permits, “Burn Day” was upon us and, cameras in hand, we chattered excited as we drove to meet the folks from Terra Fuego who would conduct the burn.

[su_youtube url=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/FwjMptB5GvA” width=”1020″ height=”580″]

Murphy Meadow, high above the South Yuba River Canyon, is located in the Sierra Nevada foothills and hosts a variety of interesting creatures. I spotted a Sierra Alligator Lizard and a bobcat in the half-day I was there watching the burn.

In addition to providing invaluable wildlife habitat, meadows sequester carbon, act as natural reservoirs for water storage, and improve the water quality of rivers. However, increased wildland fire suppression has led to meadows slowly being overtaken by conifers, gradually converting them to forested landscapes, rather than open spaces that offer unique habitat and hydrologic benefits. Performing prescribed burns is one way to reduce conifer encroachment and preserve the ecological function of the meadow.

Performing prescribed burns of these areas can be traced back to the Native Americans of the region, who would systematically burn swaths of land in order to clear brush and understory growth. Ron Goode of the North Fork Mono tribe describes how clearing growth from areas that were once meadows improves their ability to absorb snowmelt, allowing the water to enter aquifers and decrease fuel loads for large wildfires. For the Murphy Meadow burn, we worked with members of the local Sierra Native Alliance.

In addition, burning can be an effective way to remove invasive plant species because they are often not adapted to fire like California native species. But with development of rural areas and changes in fire management policies, setting fire to any area has become more and more challenging.

Once burned, we reseeded the meadow with native species including wildflowers. Clear of invasive species, newly sprouting conifers, and ladder fuels, the meadow is now a canvas of potential for new growth. Almost immediately, the meadow is showing signs of new life: the beginning shoots of the many native grasses and wildflower seeds that we planted will add greenery and color to the charred mounds of deergrass. The newly cleared area will also reduce fire danger for uphill homes by providing an important fire break in the event of a wildfire.

Controlled burning is just one way American Rivers is working to restore meadows, which are important hydrologic features of river headwaters. Better management of river headwaters sites can mean improved response to climate change and increased water supply reliability—both major benefits for drought-ridden California. Fire will bring life to this landscape again. And I can’t wait to see what it looks like.

In December, we were disappointed to read some ugly comments from Illinois Senator Mark Kirk about his “evil plan” (his words) to turn the Mississippi River into “one huge ag drag strip” (again, his words) by allowing the private sector to “widen and lengthen all the locks and dams.”

Come again?

Senator Kirk’s appears to be talking about an effort to use a new infrastructure financing plan called the Public Private Partnership Pilot Program to implement the lock expansion components of the Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP). The Pilot Program is the brain child of the Illinois Congressional delegation, namely Congresswoman Cheri Bustos and Senators Mark Kirk and Dick Durbin. It is intended to diminish federal subsidies for navigation infrastructure. Since navigation is the most heavily subsidized mode of transportation (about 90 percent of barge infrastructure spending is paid for out of the General Treasury), we hoped an increase of private investment would be a good thing.

Unfortunately, when it’s used to pay for programs like NESP, the privatization of America’s rivers starts to look a bit scary.

Lock and Dam 24 on Mississippi River

See, NESP isn’t supposed to “widen and lengthen all the locks and dams on the Mississippi River.” The program is a dual-purpose authorization to invest in ecosystem restoration and navigation efficiency.

The ecosystem restoration component invests in aquatic habitat rehabilitation like restoring floodplain access and rebuilding islands. The navigation efficiency component invests in small-scale and non-structural alternatives that will reduce congestions at some locks and dams on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers. If those measures aren’t successful, then the Corps will construct new, bigger locks at specific dams on the Upper Mississippi River System.

While my description sounds like a reasonable enough program, many proponents of the program want to jump right to building new locks, while ignoring the cheaper nonstructural navigation improvements and the environmental restoration. While NESP has been authorized by Congress, it has not been funded because it continually fails to pass a benefit-cost analysis smell test. The Nicollet Island Coalition detailed the problems with NESP here.

Unfortunately, the draft NESP Public-Private Partnership Pilot looks more like a mash up of NESP’s ugliest features. The proposal completely ignores the “Ecosystem” part of the Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program, despite the fact that Congress requires the ecosystem and navigation projects to be funded, planned and constructed comparably and at the same time. Funding over the past year to develop NESP into a Pilot Project has focused exclusively on the navigation part of the program. Not a dime has gone to ecosystem restoration – it’s not even mentioned in the draft.

The draft NESP Pilot Program also ignores the program’s Congressionally approved implementation timeline that requires the Army Corps of Engineers to implement small-scale and non-structural navigation improvements first. These measures are cheaper and have a smaller environmental footprint. Following the completion of these projects, the Corps must then do an economic evaluation and reconsider the plan to build new locks.

Regardless of these requirements, the draft NESP Pilot Program says that if the private sponsor wants new locks right now, they will get new locks right now through the Public-Private Partnership.

Who is the private sponsor for NESP? The Illinois Soybean Association.

While the Illinois Soybean Association is willing to put up some of the money to build new locks on the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers, they still expect to make their money back, and then some. At the November 2015 Upper Mississippi River Basin Association Meeting, they outlined several options to recoup their investment, including:

• Subsidies from the Illinois general treasury,
• A lockage fee for barges,
• Tariffs on goods being transported, and/or
• A tax on all recreational boaters – including paddlers.

That’s right. Paddlers. Such a proposal adds insult to injury. Not only is the ability of generations of river recreationists to enjoy a free-flowing river impeded by the lock and dam system, now they may be asked to pay for that privilege.

Politicians usually try to sugar coat their evil plans, but the Public Private Partnership Pilot Program for NESP is being pretty open about advancing environmentally detrimental projects that aren’t in the public’s best interest – and make those of us who would prefer a free-flowing river pay for it.

Congress has launched at least fourteen legislative attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps’ Clean Water Rule since it was proposed in April of 2014 – this week marks one more.

The Clean Water Rule restores important safeguards to small streams and wetlands that are needed in order to protect our drinking water supplies, economy and environment. It also provides clarity for all stakeholders as to which waters are and which waters are not protected by the Clean Water Act. Unfortunately, polluters and their allies in Congress have become desperate to avoid the possibility of having to get a permit before filling in or polluting our nation’s waters and are now trying to use the Congressional Review Act to block the Clean Water Rule and any iteration of it in the future.

The U.S. House of Representatives is voting on a resolution under the Congressional Review Act to block the Clean Water Rule [S.J. Res 22]. The resolution does far more than just reject the Clean Water Rule; it prevents the EPA and Army Corps from ever developing a new rule that is “substantially similar.” Therefore if S.J. Res. 22 is enacted, EPA and the Army Corps will be prohibited from taking the necessary steps to protect our drinking water from polluters.

The scientific foundation of the The Clean Water Rule is the accompanying scientific report Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence, a compilation of more than 1,200 individually peer reviewed scientific studies. The Connectivity Report itself was formally peer reviewed by a Science Advisory Board. The science is conclusive: small streams and wetlands exert a strong influence on the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of downstream waters and are interconnected with navigable waters hydrologically and ecologically. Due to this scientifically proven connection to larger bodies of water, small streams and wetlands are protected under the Clean Water Rule.

The comment period for the Clean Water Rule lasted almost seven months. During that time more than 1 million comments were submitted to the EPA, and of those comments more than 800,000 were in favor of the Clean Water Rule. The EPA and Army Corps reviewed those comments very carefully and incorporated them into the final Clean Water Rule which was published in June of 2015.

The final Clean Water Rule is based on sound science and had ample public input and support. Congress should be protecting our clean water rather than trying to protect polluters.

Winter rain is starting to bring welcome relief to dehydrated California, but with an epic El Niño sending storm after storm our way, how do we prepare for too little water and too much all at once? Despite the historic and continuing drought, emergency response officials are already busy planning for floods and mudslides in the months to come.

How do we capture more water from this wet winter while diminishing floods? Slow that water down, and sink as much of it into the ground as we can.

Storm drains often pour straight into creeks and streams increasing flood risk downstream

In cities and towns, that means relying on green infrastructure like rain gardens to capture stormwater from our rooftops and streets.

For instance, the roof on a 30 by 30 foot building catches more than 500 gallons of water from just a single inch of rain. Those 500 gallons can go straight into the storm drain and contribute to flooding, or they can go into a rain garden to soak into the ground.

Much of the water will still make its way to nearby streams and rivers, but more slowly. Even better, if you have a rain barrel installed, that water can help meet your landscape water needs on the way.

That may not sound like a huge difference, but when you consider an entire neighborhood it adds up quickly.

This rain garden catches stormwater from a large parky lot and in Nevade City, CA and sinks it into the ground

Watch where water goes in your own neighborhood the next time it rains—are green spaces soaking up the water, or does it pour into storm drains? Working together with neighbors and encouraging your town to adopt green infrastructure practices wherever possible can make a big difference.

Where we point our stormwater can mean helping reduce the drought or dealing with a harsher winter floods.

Find out more about polluted runoff from storms and green infrastructure practices.

When considering the challenges faced in the upper Flint River, water use and land use change tend to dominate the conversation. However, there’s another big ‘change’ out there that deserves serious consideration—the ‘change’ of the climate. Considering that some of the worst impacts of climate are expected to be felt through the changing hydrologic cycle, this is an issue that cannot be ignored.

Many of the policy discussions surrounding climate change focus on mitigation—how to slow or reverse the trend of a warming planet in the medium- to long-term. On the ground, we talk about climate change adaptation—how to prepare for an increasingly erratic climate today. Climate scientists’ latest predictions for Georgia envisage a similar amount of rain (compared to current conditions) on average, but it will probably come from storms that are more intense and less frequent, resulting in an overall decrease in water availability along with an increase in adverse environmental impacts from stormwater flooding. Additionally, we can expect a lot more days above 95^oF, more large hurricanes, and a more frequent occurrence of flood and drought over the next century. Nothing we do in the short term will change these outcomes, but we can adapt.

American Rivers and The Conservation Fund recently attended a workshop by the Wildlife Conservation Society on how to integrate climate predictions into conservation planning. For the upper Flint River, the shoals became a primary focus. The shoals are shallow sections of river with fast currents and small rapids, which are home to the shoal bass (a prized endemic sport fish), the recently discovered Halloween Darter, and several species of threatened and endangered mussels. In previous droughts, the Flint River dropped enough to dry out the major shoals. Based on the climate predictions for the region, there is a high risk that these shoals will spend even more time without water running through them during future droughts, resulting in further loss of habitat and recreational opportunities like fishing or paddling.  S.O.S.—Save Our Shoals!!!

After two days of considering the predictions, challenges, opportunities, and the potential actions that could be taken from a ‘climate informed’ perspective, we left confident that our plan for the upper Flint River is a solid first step to address the anticipated impacts of climate change. However, maintaining flexibility in our plan will be vital as better science becomes available. We also learned that adaptation can be fun!

The Hydrologic Regimes They Are A-Changin’
Adapted from The Times They Are A-Changin’ by Bob Dylan

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have an altered hydrologic regime
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone, or bone dry
If your river to you
Is worth savin’
Then you better start adaptin’
Or you’ll sink like a stone
For the hydrologic regimes they are a-changin’