River Restoration

3.5 million miles of water run throughout the United States; and since the country’s conception, over 80,000 dams have impounded 600,000 miles of these waters [1]. Dams were originally constructed to provide water to towns and establishes energy sources for mills and later hydroelectric plants. Because these dams were constructed decades ago, they’re reaching a critical point of obsoleteness where they cause more harm than good. Dam removal is increasingly popular across the country to address the ecological problems including habitat loss and sedimentation, despite potential for downstream harm, removing dams is more environmentally and economically cost effective than upgrading them. The Marmot, Glines Canyon, and Elwha river dam removal projects each highlight different challenges of dam removal, but overall

From the San Francisco Bay to streams and rivers of Oregon, salmon populations have been steadily decreasing over the past two decades but more rapidly within recent years. In general, fish populations in the Pacific Northwest region have always fluctuated, but the overall trend continues on a downward slope to extinction. While natural phenomena such as flooding and predators of the food chain do affect salmon populations, human activity poses the greatest threat by far. The four main reasons of salmon plummeting are as followed: Harvest, Hatcheries, Hydropower, and Habitat. It’s clear that water ecosystems and management of human activity threaten salmon as a whole. Whether it’s a bay, river or stream- whatever body of water that contains salmon should be subject to ethics that guide our actions as a part of achieving a better overall environment.

     The Klamath Lake, along with other various rivers, lakes and canals that surround it, are the basis for almost 500 species of wildlife in southern Oregon and parts of northern California. It also serves as the most important factor in a farmer’s livelihood; their irrigation. The basis for the water crisis that is going to today in this region is that the current water levels and somewhat water quality are diminishing and reeking havoc on the area’s

Beside these arguments, there is also a more quantitative side to the debate. The ecological detriments of the Glen Canyon Dam have been well-documented. Extensive changes were brought about in the Colorado River ecosystem by the construction of the Glen Canyon Dam. Most of these alterations negatively affected the functioning of the system and the native aquatic species of the river. The reduced supply and transport of

The State of Colorado has suffered from a water shortage in recent years; a difficult situation which is easily visible when viewing the quickly shortening length of the Colorado River. Lake Mead, for example, is roughly 130 feet lower than it once was, marked by the stained rock which towers above the current water level. “The river has become a perfect symbol of what happens when we ask too much of a limited resource: it disappears. In fact, the Colorado no longer regularly reaches the sea” (Zielinski, 2010). Legislation was implemented early on to address this issue, though the results were (perhaps not surprisingly) rather unanticipated, regarding

Along this journey created by nature, the river interacts with man’s influence to encapsulate the full geographic experience of this region. The succession of dams along the river’s path is a major contribution to how man has decided to mesh with the river. The dams have created reservoirs for water supplies, harnessed energy to provide electric power to the southwestern region, and controlled flooding. Flood control was the main concern at the time between the years 1905 and 1907 when large floods broke through the irrigation gates and destroyed crops in California. The flooding was so large it actually created a 450 square mile sea, named the Salton Sea. As a result of this major disaster, ideas were formulated to

McEwen and Weintraub both state evidence on the information on their articles. They both give support which makes me believe them both. In McEwen’s article “River Plan Too Fishy for my Taste Buds” he states that their is to many problems with legislation and their is no funding, but at the same time everyone els wants to restore the river. In other hand Weintaub in his article “River Restoration Project Offers a Sprinkiling of Hope” he is all for it and he wants the changes.

In the ¨River Restoration Project Offers a Sprinkling of Hope¨, Ron Jacobsma, general manager of the Friant Water Authority, said “We hope to get double duty out of that water by taking it the long way around.¨ As Jacobsma is a general manager of the Friant water Authority, this offers us his experience, his ideas and his thoughts of how we can have hope for the project. President Barack Obama signed the Omnibus Public Lands Bill in March, the agreement turned into federal law when he signed it. The parties had been working on the restoration plan for more than two years laying the groundwork for the physical changes to come. When the president signed it, it made them get the approval which he supported for them to continue the process. The credibility of the author right has now been believable because he provided us with the ethics of President Obama and Jacobsma. The river will not necessarily end up to its full, natural path along its entire length. Too much has changed in the decades since the dams construction. They would use canals along some stretches to carry the water short distances and to ferry the salmon upstream. This is showing us logos with facts and information it offers an explanation on how to solve one of the problems with the plan. A professor named Peter Moyole, from UC Davis also had his opinion on the project. He said “We have never done anything on this scale”, but we were willing to try it and approve of the

“One, it’s tied to putting salmon back in the river. Two, there is no funding for dams or river recirculation technology that would maximize Sierra water runoff and lessen the economic devastation to some San Joaquin Valley farmers.” (McEwen 1)

Yet, humans have limited control on natural events, so this only reinforces the importance of managing water wisely. Recently California’s government has begun to focus more on sustaining and restoring the water supply. Dale Kasler (2016) articulates in his article some of the steps they have decided to make to solve this serious issue. The government has made the following investments: “$415 million for watershed restoration and other environmental aid for Lake Tahoe; up to $335 million for two proposed reservoirs in California, including the Sites reservoir north of Sacramento; $880 million for flood-control projects on the American and Sacramento rivers in Sacramento; and $780 million for flood-control projects in West Sacramento” (para. 10). This could be the first step to restoring the water to California. But these

For over one hundred years the salmon population in the Columbia Basin has been drastically decreasing, due to overfishing and man made obstacles. The Columbia Basin Fish Accords have given a one billion dollar grant to tribes and states for habitat restoration projects. However, the conflict still rages between the native tribes of the area, and the federal government whose roadblocks such as dams prohibit the free flowing rivers that bring salmon back to the spawning grounds. The effort to keep salmon coming back up the river while keeping the dams intact is the struggle that the federal grant hopes to solve.

We farmers of San Francisco live a simple life, we take little but give to the greatest extent and all we ask is for the expulsion of the Raker Act. The act that will allow San Francisco to dam Hetch-Hetchy, which is a main river in Yosemite National Park. While major consequence and major contribution will arise, the end does not justify the means with the creation of a dam and the signing of the Raker Act.

Daniel Weintraub in the article, “River Restoration Project Offers Sprinkling of Hope”, claims that only 12% of the San Joaquin River was recovered for the fish the river’s residents. Weintraub supports his statement by explaining that the project of restoring the San Joaquin River is bringing hope for the river’s residents. The author’s purpose is to show that the project will work so that people can join the project and help restore the San Joaquin River. The author writes in an informative tone for his

Water resources in the state of California have deteriorated drastically as a result of the current drought event in the west coast of the United States. This has resulted in insufficient supplies of water to residents of southern California, as well as the devastation of wildlife and aquatic ecosystems that are characteristic of this area. This policy analysis will provide the context of the issue, as well as possible solutions, followed by a proposed policy plan to reach the policy goal of equitable and reliable water allocation in the state of California, drought resilience, as well as restoration of the destroyed ecosystems.

The Meramec Watershed has been threatened by multiple dam projects for the past two hundred years (East-West Gateway Council of Governments, 2007). However, through continued efforts by local land owners and interested parties, this river has never been dammed. In the Meramec’s more recent history, the Meramec Lake project was brought forth in the 1970s and successfully stopped in the early 1980s by grassroots efforts from local activists (East-West Gateway Council of Governments, 2007). In fact, the U.S Army Corps of Engineers were so confident the dam would get official approval, construction for the project began before the debate was over. Today, remnants of the initial construction can be seen in parks such as Meramec State Park and Meramec Spring Park, yielding to the natural ecosystems and geology that dominate the