While there is a need for more specialized research on the ecological impacts of dams and dam removal, several studies indicate that dam removal can be a highly effective river restoration tool to reverse these impacts and restore rivers. Angela T. Bednarek, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Pennsylvania recently conducted a comprehensive review of the short- and long-term ecological impacts of dam removal. Bednarek conducted a literature search to identify and review all available published (and many unpublished) studies on dam removal to determine if and how dam removal can be effective in improving water quality and restoring fish and wildlife habitat in and around a river. Her study focused on numerous ecological measures that are critical to assessing the positive and negative impacts of dam removal both from short- and longterm perspectives, including:

• Flow;
• Shift from reservoir to free-flowing river;
• Water quality (e.g., temperature and supersaturation);
• Sediment release and transport; and
• Connectivity (e.g., migration of fish and other organisms).

While there are some limited short-term ecological consequences of dam removal, Bednarek’s study found that the long-term ecological benefits of dam removal—as measured in improved water quality, sediment transport, and native resident and migratory species recovery — demonstrates that dam removal can be an effective long-term river restoration tool.

This paper summarizes Bednarek’s findings and comments on Bednarek’s call for additional research to further the scientific community’s knowledge of the ecological impacts of dam removal. The paper is organized into five sections: (1) reestablishment of a natural flow regime; (2) transformation from reservoir to river system; (3) change in river temperatures and oxygen levels; (4) sediment release and transport; and (5) migration of fish and other organisms. Bednarek’s paper was published in the journal, Environmental Management, in spring 2001 (Bednarek, Angela. 2001. “Undamming Rivers: A Review of the Ecological Impacts of Dam Removal.” Environmental Management 27(6):803-814.). To obtain a copy, please contact the Rivers Unplugged campaign at American Rivers by calling (202) 347-7550.

Georgia reservoir proposals on the drawing board, for example, could total $10 billion in taxpayer and ratepayer dollars. The report also shines a light on recent water supply reservoir projects that provide cautionary tales of communities burdened by expense and debt.

The report outlines the following financial and resource risks inherent in the pursuit of new water supply from reservoirs:

• Reservoirs are highly expensive, racking up debt for ratepayers and taxpayers.
• A reservoir’s price tag is typically a moving target.
• Reservoir financing plans often rely on inflated population growth projections, ultimately leaving existing residents holding the bag.
• In order to remain full, a reservoir depends on increasingly uncertain rainfall. And, a reservoir loses water when high temperatures cause evaporation.
• Reservoir water is a contested resource subject to competing demands in the river system.

The report also offers five key recommendations for local leaders who seek to reduce their communities’ risks—both financial risks and closely linked water resource risks—in planning for enough clean water for the future:

• Optimize existing water infrastructure first.
• Plan for water use to decrease as a community grows.
• Pursue flexible water supply solutions, like efficiency measures.
• Demand accurate assessments of costs.
• Examine water availability to minimize resource risks.

As communities endeavor to find ways to secure water supplies, it is critical that decision-making add to a community’s flexibility and resilience. The high-price, high-risk water supply reservoir strategy can leave a community financially vulnerable, tying up assets and leaving taxpayers and ratepayers on the hook without a guarantee that the water will be there when they need it.

There is a more prudent and proven path to providing water supply and ensuring flexibility for the future, one rooted in stewardship of public dollars and natural resources both. As Southeastern communities move forward to develop strategies to meet tomorrow’s needs, the communities that choose a prudent path will be better positioned—from both a financial and water resource perspective—to address the needs of today and the future.

This guide is intended to be a resource for community and watershed advocates that provides clear examples of new stormwater permits that encourage or require “low impact development” or “green infrastructure.”  These permits represent an emerging new generation of regulatory approaches and reflect the emerging expertise of water advocacy organizations, stormwater professionals and permitting agencies.  Our goal is to provide information about new trends in stormwater permitting and examples of permits that demonstrate leadership toward standards that will build green infrastructure and compliance with water quality standards.  With this tool, we hope to inform and inspire continued progress toward stormwater permitting and management that protects our rivers and other shared waters, invigorates healthy communities, and provides cost-effective solutions for stormwater managers.

The guide is organized as a matrix that combines model permit language along with excerpts from comment letters that have helped to drive this evolution.  The concerns raised by watershed advocates, and the support they often provide to state permit agencies, frequently have been instrumental in shaping better stormwater permits. We hope that providing examples of the expertise shown by both communities that we can inform a broader movement toward better control of urban stormwater.

Download One-Pagers:

1. Clean & Safe Water Guide
2. Equitable Flood Risk Management Guide
3. Title VI Environmental Justice Complaints & Compliance Guide
4. Local Land Use Planning & Zoning Guide
5. Public Participation Guide
6. Community Science Guide

Each guide provides a basic overview of federal laws and policies. In addition to explaining legal avenues, the toolkit highlights numerous case studies where community organizers have implemented policy tools to address local environmental justice issues. Special thanks to our community partners for helping develop this report and sharing their stories, including the Intrenchment Creek Community Stewardship Council in Atlanta, GA, Coalition for the Delaware River Watershed, Lowcountry Alliance For Model Communities (LAMC) in Charleston, SC, Corazón Latino, Community Health and Empowerment through Education and Research (CHEER), The Waccamaw Indian People of South Carolina, and Freshwater Future in Toledo, OH and Flint, MI.

The Water Justice Toolkit was produced as part of the Anthony A. Lapham Fellowship. This fellowship honors the memory of Anthony A. Lapham who served for many years on the board of American Rivers, including as its Chair. The goal of the Lapham Fellowship is to develop the next generation of skilled leaders who can promote practical environmental solutions that achieve measurable results for natural and human communities.

DOWNLOAD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The ideal approach to resolving the adverse impacts of stormwater would be to return the landscape to its natural cover. A highly cost-effective, efficient, and viable solution is to adopt “green” infrastructure practices that protect, restore, and replicate nature’streatment of stormwater. Green infrastructure includes low-impact development practices at new and re-developing sites, and the incorporation of features such as rain barrels, green roofs, and permeable pavement on already-developed sites. Green infrastructure is becoming widely understood and accepted, and is being implemented on the ground in cities across the nation, including Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

The challenge to broader implementation in smaller municipalities throughout the Commonwealth is ensuring that regulatory, management, and funding institutions work in concert to promote the use of green infrastructure. To begin with, Pennsylvania is challenged by historical patterns of funding water management that have prioritized wastewater treatment and drinking water delivery over stormwater management. Traditionally, funding also has favored hard structural solutions to management (known as “gray” infrastructure) rather than nonstructural or “green” practices that address the problems associated with runoff at its source. Further, regulation of stormwater management has failed to sufficiently integrate greener solutions and to promote nonstructural practices in the management of Pennsylvania’s water resources.

The unfortunate result is that Pennsylvania has received a failing grade for its management of stormwater. In 2009, the Chesapeake Stormwater Network ranked Pennsylvania last of five Chesapeake Bay states on its Baywide Stormwater  scorecard. With an overall grade of “D” for implementing a stormwater program that meaningfully protects and restores the Bay, Pennsylvania received an “F” with regard to its funding of stormwater management needs to address the 21st century challenges posed by aging and deteriorating infrastructure, increasing demands on water use, and impacts of a changing climate.

Today, Pennsylvania has an unprecedented and timely opportunity to transform its water infrastructure. Following federal guidance, state regulations are being revised to incorporate greener approaches to stormwater management. Also, suggestions to adopt innovative management practices, including green infrastructure and conservation measures, are evolving from stakeholder discussions. Finally, funding institutions are quickly adapting to finance green infrastructure, catalyzed in part by the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which includes investments in green infrastructure and water efficiency advocated for by American Rivers. In 2009, $44.6 million in federal stimulus funds directed toward Pennsylvania for water infrastructure has leveraged more than $66 million in spending the state describes as “green.”

It is imperative to seize this chance to make progressive and institutional “green” investments to avert “pouring money down the drain.” Pennsylvania’s rivers and communities depend upon clean water and require a swift remedy to current infrastructure woes. “Green” solutions have the added benefit of facilitating the resilience rooted in nature that communities need to adapt to the impacts of climate change on vital freshwater resources.

Towards those ends, American Rivers has investigated the capacity of Pennsylvania’s funding institutions to support efficient and cost-effective green infrastructure practices to enhance sustainable water management over the long term. Our findings highlight several recommendations for formalizing funding for green infrastructure that will help Pennsylvania municipalities achieve clean and abundant supplies of fresh water for healthy communities and future generations.

These recommendations will facilitate efficient and cost-effective green practices to address Pennsylvania’s stormwater management challenges. The results will yield benefits in the form of reduced tertiary treatment costs, decreased flood damages, and healthier ecosystems and communities throughout Pennsylvania that are also better prepared to adapt to a changing climate.

Saracino & Mount, LLC, was asked to assemble a panel of independent experts to review portions of the Plan to help guide decision making by two non governmental organizations: The Nature Conservancy and American Rivers. Guided by a narrow set of questions about how the Plan would impact water supply and endangered fishes, the panel reviewed the Plan documents and conducted analyses of data provided by the project consultants. The following document is a summary of our results.

Fortunately, we have five feasible, affordable, common-sense solutions that can be implemented now to protect the flow of the river, ensure greater economic vitality, and secure water resources for millions of Americans.

1. Municipal conservation, saving 1 million acre-feet
2. Municipal reuse, saving 1.2 million acre-feet
3. Agricultural efficiency and water banking, saving 1 million acrefeet
4. Clean, water-efficient energy supplies, saving 160 thousand acrefeet
5. Innovative water opportunities, generating up to 1 million acrefeet

Proven Solutions, Progress We Can See

Federal, state and local officials can help make most these changes today, and start reaping many benefits within a year or two. A few solutions will require longer-term collaboration among governments and users, sometimes a rarity in today’s national political and economic climates. Yet, Colorado River basin states and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation have a solid record of increased cooperation over the last two decades. What’s more, many basin states are already taking steps to update their state water plans with innovative, creative ideas for improving water management. The common-sense and money-saving approaches outlined here are the best path forward. We’ve already seen strong progress; dozens of successful programs have already been implemented. From citywide conservation efforts to innovative rainwater capture, to successful and mutually beneficial agricultural solutions, we know these work. What’s more, we know they are the most efficient, cost-effective, widely available steps we can take right now to solve our supply/demand gap on the Colorado River without doing any harm, while continuing to grow our western economy.

Bringing Federal Policy into the 21st Century

Many federal policies still encourage the same backward-looking water management approaches that didn’t work in the past and are even less suited to the future. Federal funding and policies reward wasteful water use and support destructive, inflexible infrastructure projects, while important programs that would help save water or preserve valuable wetlands and floodplains fall woefully short of what is needed. There is a widespread failure to plan for and address the changing conditions we know are coming. Too many federal policies are moving us in the wrong direction and making communities and wildlife more vulnerable.

The following ten reforms are some of the best ways we can change outdated federal policies and embrace a forward-looking approach to water management. They represent proactive steps Congress and the Executive Branch can take to address climate change.

1. National Flood Insurance Program: Change flood insurance rates and maps to ensure they reflect risk and discourage construction and reconstruction in vulnerable areas
2. Farm Policy: Reward farmers for being responsible stewards of land and water resources and encourage better flood management practices on agricultural lands
3. Bureau of Reclamation: Develop comprehensive water management plans for Reclamation projects to create greater flexibility and improve the health of rivers
4. Energy Policy: Integrate water management and energy planning and ensure that energy and water are being used as efficiently as possible
5. Clean Water Act: Restore protections to wetlands and streams and improve implementation and enforcement of protections for all waters
6. Water Resources Development Policy: Reform the principles that guide construction of federal water infrastructure projects to minimize damages to rivers, wetlands, and floodplains and prioritize more cost-effective, flexible projects
7. Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Funding: Reform funding criteria to ensure that funded projects embrace green infrastructure and can adapt to changing conditions
8. National Forest Management: Diversify Forest Service management practices to prioritize effective water management
9. Transportation Policy: Ensure that funded projects minimize impacts on surrounding water resources and wildlife populations
10. Wildlife Management: Better coordinate federal actions and invest in climate change planning to help maintain healthy fish and wildlife populations