Wild and Scenic Rivers: Three Columbia Tributaries

All photos © Alison M. Jones

This week’s blog in our series on Wild and Scenic Rivers focuses on the Crooked, Metolius and McKenzie Rivers – three Oregon tributaries to the Lower Columbia River. All three were added simultaneously to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System on Oct. 28, 1988. NWNL documented these tributaries in Oct. 2017 during its 5th  Columbia River Basin Expedition. More about this Pacific Northwest, transboundary watershed is on our Columbia River General Characteristics page. For more on the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, read Part 1 of this blog series.

Crooked River

(Scroll over photos for captions)

The Crooked River reach from the National Grassland boundary to Dry Creek (17.8 miles) is designated as a “Recreational” National Wild and Scenic River. According to the National Wild and Scenic River website, this part of the  Crooked River is a popular destination for outdoor activities, including whitewater boating, hiking, kayaking and fishing for steelhead, brown trout and native rainbow trout.

Metolius River

On the Metolius River, 28.6 miles between the Deschutes National Forest boundary and Lake Billy Chinook are part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. In this section, 17.1 miles are designated as “Scenic,” and 11.5 miles are designated as “Recreational.” The Metolius River and its headwaters, pictured above, are well known for beautifully clear water and excellent opportunities for fly fishing. The Lower Metolius is now managed as a “primitive area” with no motorized access.

McKenzie River

On the McKenzie River, 12.7 miles are designated as “Recreational” under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act – from Clear Creek to Scott Creek (not including the Carmen and Trail Bridge Dam Reservoirs). According to rivers.gov, the McKenzie River is recognised for a combination of “outstandingly remarkable values of fish, scenic quality, recreation, hydrology/geology, and water quality.” Its exceptionally-high water quality offers great habitat for many wild fish, including three native species: rainbow, bull and cutthroat trout.

More information about the National Wild and Scenic River System is at rivers.gov.

The Clean Water Act: Its Beginnings in the Columbia and Raritan Rivers

By Isabelle Bienen, NWNL Research Intern
(Edited by Alison M.  Jones, NWNL Director)
All photos © Alison M. Jones unless otherwise noted

Isabelle Bienen is Northwestern University junior studying Social and Environmental Policy & Culture and Legal Studies. As NWNL Summer Intern, she wrote a 5-blog series on the history, purpose and current status of the U.S. Clean Water Act [CWA] in NWNL’s three US case-study watersheds. Her 1st blog was CWA Beginnings in the Mississippi River Basin.

Jones_070708_OR_6995.jpgColumbia River, Astoria OR

Columbia River Basin

The Pacific North West’s Columbia River Basin empties more water into the Pacific Ocean than any other river in the Americas. Starting at its Canadian Rocky Mountains source, it runs for 1,243, collecting water from the U.S. states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Nevada, and Utah.1 The Columbia River is one of the most hydroelectric river systems in the world, with over 400 dams that provide power, irrigation and flood control.1 This river basin has positively impacted urban development, agriculture, transportation, fisheries and energy supplies across a significant swath of the western United States.

Jones_070628_OR_5171_M.jpgJuvenile fish bypass at the McNary Dam in Oregon

However large, unregulated industry in this watershed caused the Columbia River system to become severely polluted. Salmon populations were heavily affected by this pollution, especially when combined with the dams presenting migratory barriers to salmon going upstream from the ocean to cool, freshwater tributaries for spawning.  Before such the pollution and dam impacts Columbia Basin provided spawning habitat for one of the largest salmon runs in the world.1

The many indigenous Native Americans in this basin, including Colville, Wanapum, Yakama, Nez Perce, Chinook and other tribes, had relied on plentiful and healthy salmon populations as their primary source for food, trade, and general cultural use. The depletion of the salmon, below 10% of the population numbers before the hydro-dams, today severely impacts their cultural traditions and livelihoods.

Jones_110924_WA_6020-2.jpgMembers of the Chinook Nation at a Canoe Reparation Ceremony in Washington 

Additionally, pollutants in today’s remaining salmon are very dangerous to human health. It is estimated that members of Columbia Basin tribes eat about 2.2 pounds of fish daily. However, based on water quality issues, the Department of Health’s recommended limit for fish consumption is just one 7-ounce serving per month – ⅓ of their usual per day consumption .7

Jones_070627_WA_4800.jpgIrrigation wasteway carrying polluted water to Columbia River

Hanford Nuclear Site on the Columbia River in Eastern Washington poses another water quality concern for Columbia River Basin stakeholders. Hanford’s nine nuclear reactors “have produced 60% of the plutonium that fueled the US’s nuclear weapons arsenal, including plutonium used in the bomb dropped on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945.”2 These reactors are no longer operating; but their nuclear waste is stored here in leaking, single-cell tanks right on the Columbia River Basin.2 Groundwater containing remnants of radioactive waste from Hanford Nuclear Site still flows into the Columbia River, per an EPA project manager at a Hanford Advisory Board 2017 meeting.3

Jones_070625_WA_4429_M.jpgHanford Nuclear Site: Laboratory and Chemical Waste Storage Unit

Industrial pollution from the Portland Harbor Superfund Site was added to the EPA’s National Priorities List in December 2000, after years of contamination from industries in the Willamette River, a major tributary to the Lower Columbia River Basin and critical salmon and steelhead migratory corridor and nursery.4 The Portland Harbor Superfund Site is rife with PCB’s, PAH’s, dioxins, pesticides and heavy metals that are a health risk to humans and the environment. In January 2017 the EPA accepted a remedy for cleaning up Portland Harbor. By the end of the year, Dec. 2017, the EPA agreed to a Portland Harbor Baseline Sampling Plan.4

This 2017 cleanup is an example of usage of the Superfund Law, “a U. S. federally funded program used to clean up sites contaminated by hazardous pollutants.4  Cleanup of this harbor is beneficial to the international commerce on the Willamette River, which provides economic stability to many global communities. The river is also a migratory corridor and breeding habitat for salmon and steelhead trout, especially important for local tribes for natural and cultural purposes.4

Jones_070620_WA_0708.jpgMidnight Mine,WA: old uranium mine on Spokane River, now Superfund Site 

Being a transboundary river starting in Canada, the US reaches of the Columbia have been threatened by Canada’s Teck Cominco zinc smelting plant in Trail, Canada, right on the banks of the Columbia, just 12 miles upstream of the US-Canada border. Since 1896, Teck Cominco has dumped zinc slag and remnants of copper, gold, and other pollutants into the Columbia River and spewed toxins into the air that killed acres of upstream forests.

This Canadian Teck Cominco plant has polluted 12 miles of the Columbia River in Canada and many miles further downstream in the U.S.  Due to elevated lead counts in the blood of children eating salmon in Washington State, U.S. Native American tribes took Teck Cominco to the U.S. Supreme Court and won their case with a decision that demanded Teck Cominco reduce its large groundwater plume of toxins.5 Ultimately, a Washington state judge ruled that Teck Cominco is liable for contaminating the Columbia River and  responsible for funding its clean up.

Raritan River Basin

Jones_150511_NJ_0933.jpgColonial Era mill on South Fork of Raritan River, Clinton NJ

On the East Coast, the Raritan River Basin drains water from 6 New Jersey counties and 49 New Jersey municipalities, making it the largest watershed in the state, covering approximately 1,100 square miles.5 With approximately 1.5 million people living in the Raritan River Basin, New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the nation. This places intense pressure on the need to maintain both healthy and adequate supplies of fresh water.6  

In the mostly-rural Upper Raritan Basin, its North Branch and South Branch continue to provide a clean, fresh water habitat for endangered wild brook trout. However, this location now faces issues of nonpoint-source pollution from agricultural runoff via rainfall or snowmelt. The most common pollutants found in such runoffs include excess fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides, fecal matter, oil, grease and other toxic chemicals.8 Due to the many dairy farms in the Upper Raritan, runoff of pollutants – and especially fecal matter – flow downstream and impact the Lower Raritan River.  

Jones_090621_NJ_0979.jpgFish head washed onto bank of Raritan River in Perth Amboy NJ

Lower Raritan Basin polluting sources are different from Upper Raritan nonpoint sources. For centuries, high amounts of industrial waste have polluted the Raritan Bay and the Lower Raritan River, which forms at the confluence of the North Branch and South Branch of the Raritan. Since the Colonial Era, mills and factories lined this New York-Philadelphia water corridor, using the river for dumping their waste.

Additionally, today’s Lower Raritan River Basin is also heavily polluted by sewer discharge and more impermeable surfaces in increasingly-high densities of urban and suburban areas. In these highly built-up centers, sewn together with surfaces of concrete and cement, pollution is exacerbated by frequent flood-runoff and rainfall that is not absorbed into the soil. The increasing intensity of storms, attributed to climate change, worsens this problem.

Jones_090515_NJ_4550.jpgSpillway for runoff into Raritan River, New Brunswick, NJ

Lack of control in Combined Sewer Overflow points (CSO’s) is especially prevalent in Perth Amboy. Director of the Clean Water Division in EPA’s Region 2 states, “Combined sewer overflows are a very serious public health and environmental problem in a number of New Jersey’s communities….”9 CSO’s send diluted and untreated sewage water into the Raritan waterways.  Perth Amboy has over ten CSO locations. In 2012, the EPA took action against Perth Amboy in 2012 in regard to their lack of compliance with minimum controls of CSO’s causing pollution spikes in the Raritan River.9 In 2015, the Christie Administration announced a new permit system for NJ requiring CSO reduction plans and signage for residents at discharge points noting serious health effects of overflow fluids.  Of the 217 CFO’s in NJ addressed by the 25 new permits, 16 were Perth Amboy. This step has allowed much-needed infrastructure upgrades .9

15_0003b.jpgGraphics of a CSO (by NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection)

As of 2015, the Raritan River Basin had 20 federally registered Superfund sites and 200 state-registered toxic sites.9 Thus, marine life, recreation, commercial fishing businesses and much of New Jersey’s supply of clean fresh water were highly degraded by water pollution in the Raritan Basin. That year the EPA tracked about 137 pounds of toxic chemicals in the waters of the Raritan Basin’s Middlesex County alone.5 Overall, New Jersey releases about 4.7 million pounds of toxic chemicals into its waters. This represents the most toxins per square mile of water in the U.S.5

Jones_110522_NJ_9261.jpgFly-fishing for trout in the South Branch of the Upper Raritan River, Califon NJ

The threats outlined above taken together have impacted both the creation and implementation of the CWA in the Raritan River Basin. These Raritan River issues and those of the other 2 watersheds NWNL is documenting (See Blog 1 in this CWA Series), represent threats to waterways nationwide.  Pollution of all types still carries weight today in political and legislative decisions involving the Clean Water Act. Blog 3 in this series will focus on health threats addressed by the CWA that span the U.S. as a result of water pollution, thus further highlighting the need for water safety protection.

Sources:

  1. US Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 6/19/18, published 2017, IKB, link
  2. Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, accessed 7/11/18, published 2017, IKB, link
  3. Courthouse News, accessed 7/11/18, published 2017, IKB, link
  4. Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 7/11/18, published 2017, IKB, link
  5. The Sierra Club, accessed 7/19/18, published 2018, IKB, link. 
  6. Raritan Headwaters, accessed 7/3/18, published 2009, IKB, link
  7. The Spokesman-Review, accessed 7/26/18, published 2012, IKB, link
  8. State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: Land Use Management, accessed 7/26/18, published 2018, IKB, link
  9. Rutgers University, accessed, 7/26/18, published 2018, IKB, link.

Wild and Scenic River: Deschutes River

In 1988, sections of the Deschutes River in Oregon were added to the Wild and Scenic River System. From Wikiup Dam to the Bend Urban Growth boundary; from Odin Falls to the upper end of Lake Billy Chinook; and from the Pelton Reregulating Dam to the confluence with the Columbia River: all are designated segments. A total of 174.4 miles of the Deschutes River are designated: 31 miles are designated as Scenic and 143.4 miles are Recreational. No Water No Life visited the Deschutes River during a Columbia River Basin expedition to Oregon in October of 2017. For more information about the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act read the first part of this blog series.

More about the Deschutes River

Historically, the Deschutes provided an important resource for Native Americans as well as the pioneers traveling on the Oregon Trail in the 19th century.  Today, the river is heavily used for recreational purposes like camping, hiking, kayaking, rafting, wildlife observation and especially fishing. The Lower Deschutes provides spawning habitat for fish such as rainbow trout and chinook salmon. The river also provides riparian habitat for other wildlife like bald eagle, osprey, heron, falcon, mule deer, as well as many amphibians and reptiles. The riparian vegetation is dominated by alder trees.

The following are photographs taken during the 2017 expedition to the Deschutes River.

Jones_171024_OR_5595

Jones_171024_OR_5636

Jones_171026_OR_6326

Jones_171024_OR_5611

Jones_171024_OR_5840

 

Sources:

https://www.rivers.gov/rivers/deschutes.php

 

All photos © Alison M. Jones.

 

Hatcheries: Helpful or Harmful?

By Bianca T. Esposito, NWNL Research Intern
(Edited by Alison Jones, NWNL Director)

NWNL research intern Bianca T. Esposito is a senior at Syracuse University studying Biology and minoring in Economics. Her research focuses primarily on how watershed degradation affects biodiversity.

Salmon Fish Ladder.jpgFigure 1. Salmon utilizing a manmade fish ladder to bypass a dam in their quest for migration. (Creative Commons)

“Elders still tell stories about the tears tribal fishermen shed as they watched salmon throwing themselves against the newly constructed Grand Coulee Dam.”
-John Sorois, Coordinator of Upper Columbia United Tribes

What are the impacts of hatchery and why do we need them? Hatcheries were created in the late 1800’s to reduce the decline of fish populations caused by hydroelectric dam development. Hatcheries (Figure 2) are part of a fish farming system that produces artificial populations of anadromous fish for future release into the wild. Upon release, these fish enter a freshwater location, specifically a tributary, with no dam to bypass on their way to and from the ocean. Anadromous fish, such as salmon, white sturgeon and lamprey spend most of their life at sea, but return to their native tributaries in freshwater to spawn. Once anadromous fish spawn, they die off and the life cycle is continued to be carried out by the next generation of juveniles. Since returning to their native breeding grounds is a necessity for anadromous fish, hatchery-raised fish released into tributaries without dams is one way to combat this impediment of migration that dams have created.

In this blog, we will look at hatcheries as they relate to the declining salmon populations in the Columbia River Basin.

Besides hatcheries, another way for salmon to bypass the dams constructed along the Columbia River Basin is with the use of fish ladders or fish passages built on the dams (Figures 1 and 3). However, these methods can be harmful to the salmon. Fish ladders require that salmon climb up many platforms to access the reservoir on the other side of the dam. There is evidence that supports claims of an increased rate of exhaustion in salmon utilizing the ladder. Ultimately this leads to avoidance of the ladder and decreased migration rates of salmon.

Jones_070623_WA_1904.jpgFish ladder at Rocky Reach Dam on the Columbia River

Hatcheries are an attempt to overcome this low success rate of released salmon returning to tributaries. Stock transfers are one hatchery approach whereby salmon eggs are incubated and hatched in one part of the basin and then shipped to streams all over for release. This method of stock transfer is used to re-populate areas in which salmon populations are declining, or in places they no longer inhabit. However, because of the changes in location, these farmed salmon have trouble returning to the reassigned tributary, since  instinctively they would return to their birth stream.

Another major problem hatcheries face is that once artificially-grown salmon are released, they still have to face the same problems that confront wild salmon. These challenges include water pollution, degraded habitats, high water temperatures, predators and overfishing. However, the salmon who mature on the farm have no prior experience on how to handle these threats, which is one reason they face very low survival rates. Overall, these artificial salmon are not considered as “fit” for survival, nor do they have the ability to adapt to the environment in which they are released because they grew up on a farm.

USFWS Fish Transfer to Little White Salmon NFH (19239836984).jpgFigure 2. The raceways where salmon are kept at Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery in Washington State. (Creative Commons)

In the 1980’s fisheries moved towards a more “ecosystem-management” approach. They began conserving wild, naturally spawning stocks, as well as hatchery-bred fish. Yet, the overbearing problem with this method was that if hatchery-bred fish were to mate with wild fish, it could cause genetic and ecological damage.

A shift has been made towards utilizing “supplementation facilities”, a more natural, albeit artificial environment for raising the fish that includes shade, rocks, sand, and various debris typical of their natural habitat. This natural approach allows the salmon somewhat “ready” for the wild. The idea behind this technique is that after the salmon are released into streams and spend time in the ocean, they know to return to that tributary to spawn, instead of the hatchery. While this method has increased the number of adult salmon returning to spawn, it still bears the negative possibility of genetically compromising the remaining gene pool of the wild fish.

Besides the genetic problems faced with breeding artificial salmon alongside with wild salmon, breeding solely within hatcheries can also ultimately lead to inbreeding depression. This results in the salmon having a reduced biological fitness that limits their survival due to breeding related individuals. Additionally, artificial selection and genetic modification by fish farms can also cause reduced fitness in reproductive success, swimming endurance and predator avoidance. Another reason farmed salmon are not as “fit” as wild salmon is due to the treatment they receive in the hatchery. The food salmon are fed is not healthy for them – its main purpose is to make them grow faster. This forced rapid growth can lead to numerous health problems.

Diseases experienced in fish farms are also experienced in the wild. They occur naturally and are caused by pathogens such as bacteria, viruses and parasites. What exacerbates disease in a fish farm is overcrowding, which makes it fairly easy for the disease to spread throughout the hatchery. Specifically with viral infections, those who may not show symptoms of disease can be carriers of the virus and transmit further, whether in the farm or after their release into the wild. Consequently, once they are transported and deposited across river basins to be released, these diseases then go on to affect wild salmon with no immunity to the disease they have acquired. This decline in wild salmon has also caused declining effects in their predator populations, such as bears, orcas and eagles.

John Day Dam Fish Ladder.jpg Figure 3. The fish ladder at John Day Dam in Washington State. (Creative Commons)

Along with all the negatives that come with farm fish, the high production from hatcheries eliminates the need to regulate commercial and recreational harvest. So, because of the production from hatcheries, overfishing continues. Hatcheries have become a main source of economic wealth because they provide for the commercial harvests, as well as local harvests. A permanent and sustainable solution to combat the decline of wild salmon populations remains to be found. This problem continues to revolve around the construction and use of hydroelectric dams which provide the main source for electricity in the region; greatly reduce flood risks; and store water for drinking and irrigation.

The concept that hatcheries are compensating for the loss of fish populations caused by human activity is said by some to be like a way to “cover tracks” for past wrongdoings because it does nothing to help the naturally wild salmon at all. Hatcheries are only a temporary solution to combat the decline of the salmon population.

Jones_070615_BC_3097.jpgFish and river steward on the Salmo River

What we really need is an increase of spawning in wild salmon and to ensure that they have a way to survive the dams as they make their way to sea. Reforestation and protection of small spawning streams is one part of the solution. A more permanent, albeit partial, solution would be to find a way to advance the electricity industry reducing the need for hydropower. Until we find a way to make this happen, hatcheries seem to be a helpful way to continue to support the salmon-based livelihoods, as well as human food needs and preferences. Unfortunately, hatcheries do nothing to help the current situation of wild anadromous salmon in the Columbia River Basin.

In April of this year, the Lake Roosevelt Forum in Spokane WA outlined a 3-phase investigation into reintroducing salmon and steelhead to the Upper Columbia River Basin in both the US and Canada. In March 2016, Phase 1 began, dealing with the planning and feasibility of possible reintroduction. The study, expected to be released in 2018, concerns habitat and possible donor stock for reestablishing runs. All work on the studies are mostly complete and are predicted to be suitable for hundreds to thousands, or even millions of salmon. Forty subpopulations of salmon species have been identified and ranked for feasibility, including the Sockeye, Summer/Fall Chinook, Spring Chinook, Coho and Steelhead. The Confederated Tribe of the Colville Reservation stated they are waiting for one last permit from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Then they can begin the second phase of the decades-long research process using pilot fish release this fall.

Jones_110912_WA_2832-2.jpgChinook hatchery salmon underwater

Phase Two will be the first time salmon have returned to the upper Columbia River Basin in almost 80 years. This blockage came from the completion of the Grand Coulee Dam in the late 1930’s and Chief Joseph Dam in 1955. The Confederation Tribes of the Colville Reservation fish managers plan to truck these salmon around the dam, since constructing a fish ladder would be too costly. Funding currently comes from tribes and federal agencies. Possible additional funding may come from the Environment and Climate Change Canada and the renegotiation of Columbia River Transboundary Treaty.

Renegotiations of the 1964 Columbia River Transboundary Treaty between the United States and Canada is currently underway. The first meeting took place in Washington D.C. on May 29 and 30, 2018. Just weeks ago the U.S. emphasized their stance on continuing careful management of flood risks and providing a reliable and economical power source while recognizing ecosystem concerns. The next meeting will take place in British Columbia on August 15 and 16, 2018. However,  tribes are not pleased with their exclusion from negotiating teams. Tribes excluded consist of the Columbia Basin’s Native American tribes, primarily in Washington, Oregon and Idaho, and First Nation tribes in British Columbia, Canada.

Jones_070614_BC_0372.jpgMural of human usage of salmon in British Columbia

NWNL Director’s Addendum re: a just-released study: Aquaculture production of farmed fish is bigger than yields of wild-caught seafood and is growing by about 6% per year, yielding 75 million tons of seafood.  While it is a very resource-efficient way to produce protein and improve global nutrition and food security, concerns are growing about the sustainability of feeding wild “forage fish,” (eg: anchovies, herring and sardines) to farmed fish so they will grow better and faster. These small fish are needed prey for seabirds, marine mammals and larger fish like salmon. A June 14 study suggests soy might be a more sustainable alternative to grinding fishmeal for farmed seafood and livestock.

Bibliography:

Close, David. U.S. Department of Energy, accessed June 5, 18 by BE, website
Northwest Power and Conservation Council, accessed June 12, 18 by BE, website
Animal Ethics, accessed June 12, 18 by BE, website
Aquaculture, accessed June 12, 18 by BE, website
Luyer, Jeremy. PNAS, accessed on June 12, 18 by BE, website
Simon, David. MindBodyGreen, accessed on June 14 by BE, website
Kramer, Becky. The Spokesman-Review, accessed on June 14, 18 by BE, website
Harrison, John. Northwest Power and Conservation Council, accessed on June 14, 18 by BE, website
Schwing, Emily. Northwest News Network, accessed on June 14, 18 by BE, website
Office of the Spokesperson. U.S. Department of State, accessed on June 14, 18 by BE, website
 The Columbia Basin Weekly Fish and Wildlife News Bulletin, accessed on June 14, 18 by BE, website

Unless otherwise noted, all photos © Alison M. Jones.

Wild and Scenic River: Snake River

On December 1, 1975 the Snake River in Oregon was added to the Wild and Scenic River System. 32.5 miles of the river are designated as Wild; and 34.4 miles as Scenic. In addition, the Snake River Headwaters in Wyoming is also in the Wild and Scenic River System. 236.9 miles of the Snake River Headwaters are designated as Wild; 141.5 miles as Scenic and 33.8 as Recreational. The Snake River is a major tributary to the Columbia River, one of NWNL’s Case Study Watersheds. The following photos are from various NWNL expeditions to the Hells Canyon reach of the Snake River in both Oregon and Idaho, part of the designated section of the river. For more information about the Snake River view the NWNL 2014 Snake River Expedition on our website. For more information about the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act read the first part of this blog series

Jones_140515_OR_1396

Jones_140516_ID_1543

Jones_140515_OR_1386

Jones_140515_ID_1311

Jones_140516_ID_7198

Jones_140516_ID_6668

All photos © Alison M. Jones.

 

Sources:

https://www.rivers.gov/rivers/snake.php

https://www.rivers.gov/rivers/snake-hw.php

 

NWNL “Pool of Books” 2017

NWNL has compiled a list of new and old favorite books about water issues and our case-study watersheds for your reference for gifts and for the New Year. Many of the authors and publishers are personal friends of NWNL. All of them are worth reading. The links provided below go to Amazon Smile, where a portion of all purchases go to an organization of the buyers choice. Please help support NWNL by selecting the International League of Conservation Photographers to donate to.

Jones_170612_NE_3783

Global:

Rainforest by Lewis Blackwell (2014)

Replenish: The Virtuous Cycle of Water and Prosperity by Sandra Postel (2017)

Water from teNeues Publishing (2008)

North America:

The Salish Sea: Jewel of the Pacific Northwest by Audrey Della Benedict & Joseph K. Gaydos (2015)

Rancher, Farmer, Fisherman: Conservation Heroes of the American Heartland by Miriam Horn (2016)

The Last Prairie: A Sandhills Journal by Stephen R. Jones (2006)

Yellowstone Migration by Joe Riis (2017)

Sage Spirit: The American West at a Crossroads by Dave Showalter (2015)

Heartbeats in the Muck: The History, Sea Life, and Environment of New York Harbor by John Waldman (2013)

East Africa:

Serengeti Shall Not Die by Bernhard & Michael Grzimek (1973)

Turkana: Lenya’s Nomads of the Jade Sea by Nigel Pavitt (1997)

To the Heart of the Nile: Lady Florence Baker and the Exploration of Central Africa by Pat Shipman (2004)

India:

A River Runs Again: India’s Natural World in Crisis, from the Barren Cliffs of Rajasthan to the Farmlands of Karnataka by Meera Subramanian (2015)

World Conservation Day 2017

In honor of World Conservation Day, NWNL wants to share some of it’s favorite photographs from over the years of each of our case-study watersheds.

Trout Lake in the Columbia River Basin
Jones_070630_WA_5507

 

Aerial view of the largest tributary of the Lower Omo River
Ethiopia: aerial of Mago River, largest tributary of Lower Omo River

 

Canoeing on the Mississippi River
Jones_140920_LA_3950-2

 

Fisherman with his canoe on the shore of Lake Tana, source of the Nile River
Ethiopia: Lake Tana, source of the blue Nile, fisherman and canoe on the shore.

 

Wildebeests migrating toward water in the Mara Conservancy
K-WIB-410.tif

 

Raritan River at sunset
Jones_090515_NJ_4585

 

All photos © Alison M. Jones.