America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2005

W W W.AM E R I C A NRI V E R S.O R G

A O L K E Y W O R D:AM E R I C A N RI V E R S

ten rivers reaching

the crossroads

in the next 12 months

20th Anniversary Edition

20 Years of Saving Rivers

With this edition of the America’s Most Endangered Rivers report, American Rivers celebrates 20years of cooperative action to highlight rivers across the country facing pressing threats and uncer-tain futures. The first of its kind, this annual effort has contributed to a long and growing list of vic-tories — saving rivers and the benefits they provide: clean water, public health, wildlife populations,economic opportunity, and opportunities for family outdoor fun.

The America’s Most Endangered Rivers report is the voice of large and growing watershed protection and restoration movement. American Rivers solicits nominations annually from thousands of river groups, conservation organizations, outdoor clubs, and individual activists. Over the past 20 years, 399 organizations have participated in the effort.

Our staff and scientific advisors review the nominations for the following criteria:

■ The magnitude of the threat to the river■ A major turning point in the coming year ■ The regional and national significance of the river

This report is more than a warning: it offers solutions, identifies those who have the power tosave the river, and highlights opportunities for the public to speak out.

This year, American Rivers thanks and recognizes Bert and Barbara Cohn, whose financial support has made this campaign possible for the past ten years. “Everychild should have the opportunity to swim or fish in a nearby river orstream,” the Cohns say. By spreading the word about threats to ourrivers, and highlighting rivers in the most precarious of situations, theCohns hope more attention will be paid to our water sources beforethey become endangered.

about american rivers

American Rivers, founded in 1973, is the leader of a nationwide river conservation movement.American Rivers is dedicated to protecting and restoring healthy natural rivers, and the variety oflife they sustain, for the benefit of people, fish and wildlife.

On the Cover:

The concentrations of pollutants shown on the front cover label do not necessarily reflect a nationalaverage, and will vary depending on the region, type of sewer and treatment system, and the volume ofstormwater in the system. The current numbers are based on a moderate climate with moderate rainfall,and were obtained from the U.N. Department of Technical Cooperation for Development.

Printed on 20 percent post-consumer recycled paper, using the waterless printing process. Waterless printing conserves

water and eliminates the use of volatile compounds (VOCs), linked to the deterioration of the ozone layer, used in con-

ventional printing.

Ta b l e o f C o n t e n t s

Introduction

When It Rains, Sewage Pours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Map: Most Endangered Rivers of 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Most Endangered Rivers (by rank)

1. Susquehanna River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

2. McCrystal Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

3. Fraser River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

4. Skykomish River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

5. Roan Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

6. Santee River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

7. Little Miami River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

8. Tuolumne River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

9. Price River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

10. Santa Clara River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

20 years of saving rivers together . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

AM

ER

ICA

NR

IVE

RS

PH

OT

OL

IBR

AR

Y This is the situation along the Susquehan-na River — which tops this year’s America’sMost Endangered Rivers list. One hundred andtwenty three major sewer systems in theSusquehanna River watershed link toilets andfaucets from New York to Maryland. Wherethe Susquehanna widens and becomes theChesapeake Bay, vanishing sea grasses anddwindling seafood harvests provide evidenceof poor sewage treatment and frequent sewagespills upstream.

A Threat to HumanHealthUntreated human sewage teems with salmo-nella, hepatitis, dysentery, cryptosporidium,and many other infectious diseases. One hun-dred years ago, epidemics of these diseaseshelped limit the life expectancy of a U.S. citi-zen to about 50 years. Estimates vary for howmany people sewage still sickens or kills eachyear, but they are all large.

Germs linger even after the stench ofsewage has dispersed. Healthy adults maynever realize that yesterday’s swim causedtoday’s cough, diarrhea, or ear infection.Young children, their grandparents, and peoplealready weakened by illness are more likely tobecome seriously ill or die. Scientists believeas many as 3.5 million Americans get sickeach year after swimming, boating, fishing, orotherwise touching water they thought wassafe. A 1998 study published in the Interna-tional Journal of Epidemiology blamed waterpollution for one-third of all reported gas-troenteritis cases and two-thirds of all earinfections.

It’s not just the people who play in andaround the water who are at risk. Between1985 and 2000, the Centers for Disease Con-trol (CDC) documented 251 separate diseaseoutbreaks and nearly half a million cases ofwaterborne illness from polluted drinkingwater in the United States. Another study bythe CDC and the National Academy of Sci-ences concluded that most illnesses caused byeating tainted seafood have human sewage asthe root cause.

The price of sewage spills isn’t just mea-sured by the number of illnesses and deaths.

2 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

W h e n i t R a i n s , S e w a g e P o u r s

Where does human waste minglewith household chemicals, per-sonal hygiene products, pharmaceuticals, andeverything else that goes down the drains inAmerican homes and businesses? In sewers.

And what can you get when rain, pesti-cides, fertilizers, automotive chemicals, andtrash run off the streets and down the guttersinto those very same sewers? Sewage backingup into people’s basements. Sewage spillingonto streets and parks. Sewage pouring intorivers and streams.

Each year, more than 860 billion gallons ofthis vile brew escapes sewer systems acrossthe country. That’s enough to flood all ofPennsylvania ankle-deep. It’s enough for everyAmerican to take one bath each week for anentire year.

After bursting out of a pipe or manholecover, this foul slurry pollutes the nearestbody of water. Downstream, some of it maybe pumped out, treated, and piped into morehomes and businesses. From there, it goesback into a sewer system, and the cycleresumes.

SEWER SPILLS AND

OVERFLOWS THREATEN

TO MAKE LIFE’S SIMPLEST

PLEASURES UNSAFE.

I n t r o d u c t i o n ◆ 3

Runaway DevelopmentTodayPoorly planned development compounds theproblem of aging infrastructure. As urban areassprawl into the countryside, new expanses ofconcrete and asphalt increase the amount ofstormwater surging into sewers — and theamount of pollution spewing out.

Consider this: A single acre of wetlands canhold up to 1.5 million gallons of rain or melt-ing snow. When that wetland is replaced by aparking lot or big box store, that water runs offand often winds up in the sewer sys-tem. Trees help keep water out ofsewer systems, too. In fact, the groupAmerican Forests estimates that asWashington, D.C.’s tree canopythinned by 43 percent between 1973and 1997, the amount of stormwaterrunning into the city’s aging sewersystem increased by 34 percent.

In the 1980s and 1990s, a boom inlow-density, poorly planned develop-ment devoured millions of acres ofwetlands, forest, and other habitatacross the country. American Rivers estimatesthat metro Atlanta, for example, now contendswith an additional 56 to 132 billion gallonsmore stormwater each year than it did before1982. That’s as many as three and a half tankertrucks of polluted water running into the

Recreational economies like those in WinterPark and Granby, Colo. could suffer if sewagemakes the Fraser River (#3 on this year’s list)unapplealing or unsafe to swim and fish in.There are countless rural towns in the sameposition nationwide.

The prognosis is for these problems to getworse… and soon.

Treatment Plants fromYesteryear To understand why this is happening, it’shelpful to know some history. For centuriesmost American sewage poured into the near-est river or creek with little or no treatment,and few people gave it a second thought. Thatchanged when Congress passed the CleanWater Act in 1972 and the federal governmentbegan making significant investments to mod-ernize sewage treatment infrastructure servingcommunities across the country.

Today, many of the plants built with thatinitial investment are undersized or are nearthe end of their effective lives. There are600,000 miles of sewer pipes across the coun-try and the average age is 33 years. Some pipesin cities along the eastern seaboard are nearly200 years old. Some are even made of wood. In2001, The American Society of Civil Engi-neers gave America’s wastewater infrastruc-ture a “D” grade overall.

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

NATIONWIDE CAN’T KEEP

UP WITH RAPID, POORLY-

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

3.5 million Americans

get sick each year

after swimming,

boating, fishing, or

otherwise touching

water they thought

was safe.

USD

AN

RC

S

AN

DR

EW

HA

RV

EY

4 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

W h e n i t R a i n s , S e w a g e P o u r s c o n t i n u e d

sewer for each resident each year. Oldersewage systems combine stormwater withhousehold sewage, but even in systems wherethey are separated some stormwater ends upin the sewer, where it contributes to rawsewage overflows.

The compounding problems of aging sys-tems and new development are illustrated byOhio’s Little Miami River (#7 on this year’slist). Cincinnati’s Sycamore Creek SewagePlant can’t handle its existing base of cus-tomers and has polluted the Little Miami withillegal discharges at least 840 times during thepast five years. Adding insult to injury, a pro-posed bridge across the river would open newareas along the river for development, increas-ing pressure on the already inadequate facility.

Solution: Invest More toProtect Clean WaterThere is no getting around the fact that solv-ing this problem will be expensive. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) esti-mates that sewer and wastewater treatmentcapital replacement will cost between $331and $450 billion, or $17 to 23 billion per yearfor the next 20 years. Former EPA administra-tor Christine Todd Whitman warned that

without this level ofinvestment, sewage prob-lems could return to1970s levels by 2016.

This is a job that is toobig for states and localitiesto do on their own, andthe public knows it.

“Clean water has nolocal boundaries… Ameri-cans believe this is anational problem and notjust a local responsibility,”wrote noted pollster FrankLuntz in February 2004.“As they see it, a 21st Century nation shouldNOT have a 19th Century system to keeptheir water clean.”

Congress and the White House aren’t lis-tening to the public. The federal governmentwill invest just over $1 billion to help repairand build sewage treatment plants in 2005.That works out to just $3.70 per U.S. resident— about a penny a day — to help maintainvital public health infrastructure that mostpeople use every day. In fact, the federal con-tribution to wastewater treatment systems inthe United States has declined by about 70

AN ALL-TOO-RARE SIGHT:

NEW SEWER PIPES AWAITING

INSTALLATION. FEDERAL

SPENDING CUTS MAKE THE

PROBLEM WORSE.

DO

CU

PIC

.CO

M

AM

ER

ICA

NR

IVE

RS

PH

OT

OL

IBR

AR

Y

Clean water

has no local

boundaries…

Americans

believe this

is a national

problem and

not just

a local

responsibility.”

Pollster Frank Luntz

February 2004

“

Projects like these prevent sewage over-flows as surely as bigger pipes — and costless. That’s why the law recognizes them as alegitimate use of federal clean water dollars.But there are other pots of money that can betapped to stop sewer spills before they start.For years, Congress has directed a portion ofthe federal transportation trust fund to fightair pollution; lawmakers should follow suitand earmark a portion of those dollars toreduce the stormwater running off federallyfunded roads and into overflowing sewers.

Clean water. It’s essential. It’s irreplace-able. Every time we enjoy it, we are moreindebted to the generation that spent somuch and worked so hard in the 1970s and1980s to guarantee it for us. If Americanstoday want our children and grandchildren tosplash along the shore at sunset or drink fromthe faucet without worry, then it’s time for usto live up to that example. It’s time to make the commitment to keep raw sewage out ofour water.

Rebecca R. WodderPresident

I n t r o d u c t i o n ◆ 5

percent since the 1980s. President Bush isseeking further cuts in 2006.

As a first step towards rectifying this situa-tion, Congress should reject further cuts andinstead increase funding for the Clean WaterState Revolving Loan Fund to $3.2 billion in2006 and beyond. Increasing investment to$10.85 per U.S. resident per year would be agood start, but it’s not enough. As a secondstep, lawmakers should establish a dedicatedfederal trust fund to disperse aid to water utili-ties on a consistent basis — something Con-gress has already done for airports, barges, andfederal highways.

Finally, while Congress must appropriatethe necessary funds, the EPA must enforcewater protection laws regarding sewage dis-charges. Together, sufficient funding and vigi-lant law enforcement will encouragecommunities and sewer utilities to repair theirsystems, protect their citizens, plan wisely for future growth, and budget for capitalreplacement.

Solution: Invest SmarterIt isn’t enough to simply invest more. Protect-ing and expanding natural areas helps preventstormwater from rushing into the sewer in thefirst place — stopping sewer overflows beforethey start. That’s investing smarter.

In fact, planting trees, constructing orrestoring wetlands, and creating rooftop gar-dens are often the most cost-effective ways to

expand the capacity ofsewer systems. A single

mature tree with athirty-foot crowncan keep 4,600 gal-lons of water outof the sewer each

year. For less than$300,000, it’s possi-

ble to construct an arti-ficial wetland that can

intercept 3.25 million gallons of stormwaterotherwise destined for the sewer. In June 2003,Ford Motor Company planted ten acres of veg-etation on the roof of its Dearborn, MI truckfactory, keeping as many as four million gal-lons of rain out of the sewer system each year.

PLANTING TREES AND CON-

STRUCTING OR RESTORING

WETLANDS ARE OFTEN THE

MOST COST-EFFECTIVE

WAYS TO KEEP SEWAGE OUT

OF RIVERS AND STREAMS.

USD

AN

RC

S

NE

LSO

NR

OSS

9 3 7

10

8

5

6

4

America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2005

2

1. Susquehanna River

2. McCrystal Creek

3. Fraser River

4. Skykomish River

5. Roan Creek

6. Santee River

7. Little Miami River

8. Tuolumne River

9. Price River

10. Santa Clara River

1

S u s q u e h a n n a R i v e r ◆ 7

N E W Y O R K , P E N N S Y LVA N I A , M A R Y L A N D

THREAT: SEWE R POLLUTION AND DAM CONSTRUCTION

#1 S u s q u e h a n n a R i v e r

LEFT: AN INFLATABLE

DAM, LIKE THE ONE SHOWN

HERE, WOULD CREATE A

FILTHY CESSPOOL ALONG

THE SUSQUEHANNA RIVER

IN WILKES-BARRE.PA

BU

RE

AU

OF

STA

TE

PAR

KS

DO

NW

ILL

IAM

S

Summary Throughout the Susquehanna River water-shed, aging sewer systems discharge enormousvolumes of raw or poorly treated sewage,which eventually flow into the ChesapeakeBay. Unless local, state, and federal lawmakersinvest in prevention and cleanup, the Susque-hanna will remain among the nation’s dirtiestrivers and more and more of the ChesapeakeBay will become a dead zone.

The River The Susquehanna River begins near Cooper-stown, New York and flows 444 miles throughPennsylvania before broadening into a vasttidal estuary at Havre de Grace, Maryland.The Susquehanna drains 27,510 square miles— more than any other American river on theAtlantic coast. The West Branch of theSusquehanna winds through a rural landscapein central Pennsylvania that attracts huntersand anglers from throughout the region. Theriver boasts trophy smallmouth bass, arebounding population of American shad,large annual spawning runs of herring, andone of the longest stretches of free-flowingriver in the eastern United States.

For centuries, the Susquehanna has been ahard-working river. Many early industrialcities, including Binghamton, Scranton,Wilkes-Barre, Harrisburg, Lancaster, and York,were built along the river and its major tribu-taries. Four large hydroelectric dams have

blocked the river since the early 1900s, andcountless mill dams have plugged the Susque-hanna’s tributary streams since before theCivil War. A century of coal-mining in theupper watershed has left a legacy of acid minepollution to the river, and the infamous ThreeMile Island nuclear power plant is locatedalong the river downstream of Harrisburg.

The Susquehanna contributes half thefreshwater flows to the Chesapeake Bay, thelargest estuary in North America. The Chesa-peake Bay Foundation calls the river and thebay “two integral parts of one ecosystem.”The Chesapeake was once the most produc-tive estuary in the world, but today excessivenutrients in polluted runoff from farms andurban areas, and untreated and poorly treatedsewage cloud the water, suffocate fish, killunderwater grasses, and devastate oyster andcrab harvests. Despite these woes, the bayremains a major stopover for millions ofmigratory waterfowl and shore birds, and is animportant tourism and recreation destinationon the East Coast.

The Threat In the city of Wilkes-Barre, local officials hopeto construct a giant inflatable rubber damacross the river to create a deep-water play-ground for jet skis and party barges. Ironically,this misguided scheme will graphically revealthe extent and consequences of pollution andaging sewer systems found throughout theriver basin.

It’s hard to imagine pleasurable boating andrecreation in the reservoir — there are 16sewage outfalls that pour untreated humanwaste into the very reach of river where thecurrent would pool behind the dam. Twenty-three more outfalls empty into the river with-in 15 miles upstream.

An afternoon thundershower is sometimesall it takes to start raw sewage gushing intothe river. Records show that in March 2002just two of the 16 outfalls sent 150 milliongallons of human feces, industrial wastewater,stormwater, hygiene products, pharmaceuti-cals, and food scraps into the Susquehanna.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service warnedthat sewage spills into the dam’s impound-

8 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

ment would lead to “unpleasant odors,unsightly algae blooms and deposits of sus-pended wastes within the pool.” The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) addedthat “impoundment of poor quality riverwater may pose significant risks to humanhealth from exposure to bacterial pathogens”like E. coli, salmonella, dysentery, and others.Dam proponents have withheld a study thatconcluded that the dam would trap so muchpollution from abandoned mines upstreamthat the “river bottom, rock surfaces, bridgepiers, boat bottoms, and safety buoys maybecome discolored, discouraging the generalpublic from using the water for recreationalpurposes.”

Unfortunately, these troubles are not limit-ed to the reach of river through Wilkes-Barre.EPA data reveals that similarly deficient sewersystems are found throughout the Susquehan-na River watershed. On the river’s mainstem,for example, there are 10 combined sewer out-falls in Binghamton, 70 in Scranton, PA, and65 in Harrisburg. On the West Branch of theSusquehanna, there are 12 in Clearfield, fourmore in Williamsport, and the list goes on.

Even where wastewater treatment is pro-vided, it is largely inadequate and fails to useavailable technologies that remove excessnutrients and pathogens from discharged efflu-ent. Of 123 large sewage dischargers in thePennsylvania portion of the Susquehanna

basin, the Chesa-peake Bay Founda-tion has determinedthat nitrogen dis-charges from 97 ofthem are “unaccept-able.” According tothe EPA, theSusquehanna con-tributes about 40percent of the nitro-gen and 20 percent of the phosphorous thatflows into the bay. Much of this runoff comesfrom agricultural and urban sources, in addtionto raw or poorly treated sewage.

High levels of phosphorous and nitrogen inthe water can cause algae blooms that suck upoxygen and block out the light that nearlyevery living thing in the water needs to sur-vive. In recent years, a “dead zone” of waterdevoid of fish from Annapolis, MD, to NewportNews, VA has appeared in the Chesapeake Bayeach summer. Dwindling fish populations havecaused the number of licensed commercialfishermen in the bay to drop from 14,000 tofewer than 10,000 in recent years.

Without action, these problems will onlygrow worse. According to the U.S. GeologicalSurvey, the population in the Chesapeake Baywatershed will increase from about 15 milliontoday to 18 million by the year 2020.

What’s at Stake The prospect of greater pollution in theSusquehanna River looms over the economicprospects of the Mid-Atlantic states. The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that anglersspent more than $580 million fishing in theCommonwealth of Pennsylvania in 2001 —and fishing is just one of the many economicactivities that depends on clean water. In fact,economists have estimated that the drinkingwater, waste assimilation, recreational use,electricity production, seafood harvest,tourism, and other benefits of clean water inthe Chesapeake Bay watershed contribute morethan $1 trillion to the region's economy eachyear.

If elected officials aren’t willing to investthe resources necessary to clean up the Susque-

S u s q u e h a n n a R i v e r c o n t i n u e d

CH

ESA

PE

AK

EB

AY

FOU

ND

AT

ION

DO

NW

ILL

IAM

S

A CRAB PICKER FACES AN

UNCERTAIN FUTURE. FAILING

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

ALONG THE SUSQUEHANNA

RIVER THREATEN CRAB

POPULATIONS AND SEAFOOD

INDUSTRY JOBS THROUGHOUT

THE CHESAPEAKE BAY.

S u s q u e h a n n a R i v e r ◆ 9

hanna River and restore the Bay, an irreplace-able piece of America’s natural and culturalheritage will be lost.

The 12-Month OutlookIn February 2005, State Senator Ray Musto,representing the town of Pittston along theSusquehanna River, introduced a bill to senda $1 billion bond referendum to Pennsylvaniavoters. The funds would establish a Com-bined Sewer Overflow Grant Program to helpcommunities clean up the Susquehanna andother Pennsylvania rivers. The full GeneralAssembly should approve the measure beforeit adjourns.

Also in February, President Bush asked theU.S. Congress to cut clean water aid to Penn-sylvania by more than $14 million in 2006and to slash other Chesapeake Bay cleanupmeasures, as well. Federal lawmakers shouldnot only reject the proposed cuts, they shouldprovide an additional $12 billion in assistance

CONGRESS SHOULD STEP

UP THE AMOUNT OF AID IT

PROVIDES TO STATES TO MOD-

ERNIZE SEWAGE TREATMENT

ALONG THE SUSQUEHANNA.

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/SUSQUEHANNA2005

DO

NW

ILL

IAM

S

that the governors of Pennsylvania, Maryland,and Virginia have requested to aid in theSusquehanna and Chesapeake Bay cleanup.

Luzerne County officials are expected toapply for permits from the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers and the Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Protection in April 2005 forconstruction of the inflatable dam nearWilkes-Barre. The agencies will review theapplications and accept public comments forbetween three and six months.

Both agencies have the authority and thelegal obligation to deny the permits on thegrounds that the dam will worsen water pollu-tion problems, impede the recovery of migra-tory fish populations, and drown significantwetlands and shore-bird habitat in the riverabove Wilkes-Barre. It’s just common sensenot to create a recreational destination in acesspool.

ContactSARA NICHOLAS, American Rivers, (717) 232-8355, snicholas@amrivers.orgBILL GERLACH, Chesapeake Bay Foundation,(717) 234-5550, bgerlach@cbf.orgDON WILLIAMS, (215) 513-9870, susquehan-na@netcarrier.com

trout, black bears, mountain lions, and thelargest elk herd in the state, the Valle Vidalattracts hunters, anglers, campers, hikers,skiers, and horse-back riders fromacross the coun-try. Grazing con-tinues in theValle Vidal, pro-viding vital sup-port for northernNew Mexico’sagricultural com-munities. Thefamed PhilmontScout Ranch,located adjacent to the eastern half of theValle Vidal, has served as an annual gatheringplace since 1939 for Boy Scouts from acrossthe nation to experience backpacking andcamping adventures.

The ThreatOne of America’s largest natural gas compa-nies, El Paso Corporation, seeks to drill up to500 wells in 40,000 acres of Valle Vidal,including the entire McCrystal Creek water-shed. If the area is opened for gas extraction,the wells and associated infrastructure couldpollute McCrystal Creek, damage its pristinewatershed, kill its fish, and drive awaywildlife.

Coal bed methane drilling extracts naturalgas trapped within a coal formation or seamby water pressure. This method releases mil-lions of gallons of groundwater from the coalseam. This water can contain dangerouslyhigh levels of dissolved solids, toxins, salts,and carcinogens and is often discharged insuch large volumes that it scours out thereceiving stream.

The intensive drilling proposed by El PasoCorporation would be accompanied by a denseweb of roads, pipelines, well pads, and com-pressor stations in primary wintering range forthe area’s 2,500 elk, forcing the animals toabandon critical winter habitat, disruptingreproduction and herd movements. The con-stant din of heavy machinery would shatterthe silence. Diesel smoke from trucks would

1 0 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

RA

YW

AT

T

SummaryMcCrystal Creek and much of the pristineValle Vidal area that surrounds it face theprospect of intrusive coal bed methanedrilling. Unless the U.S. Forest Service resistsWhite House arm-twisting, the agency’spromise to protect McCrystal Creek will bethe next — but probably not the last —promise to posterity that will be broken in thequest for fossil fuels.

The RiverThe Valle Vidal, or Valley of Abundant Life, isa 100,000-acre unit of the Carson NationalForest in northern New Mexico’s Sangre deCristo Mountains. McCrystal Creek drains theeastern portion of this wondrous landscape,including areas that may be opened fordrilling. McCrystal Creek and its largest tribu-tary, North Ponil Creek, have been identifiedby the Forest Service as possessing outstandingecological and cultural values and being suffi-ciently pristine for inclusion in the NationalWild and Scenic Rivers System. The valleyboasts exceptional numbers and varieties offish and wildlife, as well as remarkable sceneryand recreational opportunities.

Home to the native Rio Grande cutthroat

N E W M E X I C O

#2 M c C ry s t a l C r e e kTHREAT: COALBED METHANE DRILL ING

AL

AN

LA

CK

EY

AL

AN

LA

CK

EY

COALBED METHANE DRILLING

COULD TRANSFORM AN

OUTDOOR PARADISE INTO AN

INDUSTRIALIZED AND

POLLUTED LANDSCAPE.

defile clear mountain air.Ironically, another energy company,

Pennzoil Corporation, donated the Valle Vidalto the American public in 1982 for its out-standing wildlife and recreational values. TheU.S. Forest Service has invested heavily in pro-tecting and enhancing the Valle Vidal’s specialwildlife population and initially resisted over-tures by El Paso Corporation to drill in thearea — until the White House Energy TaskForce began to intervene aggressively. InAugust 2004, the Los Angeles Times quoted ananonymous Forest Service official, whodescribed “almost weekly” phone calls fromthe White House.

What’s at Stake? The Valle Vidal and McCrystal Creek’s pristinewaters, clean air, scenery, and wildlife are irre-placeable assets for the nearby communities ofnorthern New Mexico whose economies areheavily dependent on the Valle Vidal for recre-ation income. Drilling could pollute the waterswhere cattle and elk drink, delivering a sharpblow to the area’s recreation and agriculturaleconomy. Hispanic ranchers with a 400-yearhistory of grazing the Valle Vidal could be dis-placed.

The area’s other major source of jobs is like-wise on the line. Elk hunters, trout anglers,horseback riders, hikers, skiers, and camperscould shift their attention and dollars to otherdestinations. Thousands of Boy Scouts whohave hiked into the area from the adjacentPhilmont Scout Ranch would lose the trailswhere they learn about nature and self-reliance.

The reputation of the U.S. Forest Service isalso on the line. If the agency succumbs toWhite House pressure to develop lands donatedto the American people for their enjoyment, itwill compromise public faith in similarpromises in the future.

The 12-Month OutlookIn May 2005, the U.S. Forest Service willrelease a draft of their “Proposed Action,”which will detail what activities will beallowed to take place in the Valle Vidal. Theperiod of public notice and comment followingthe release of the “Proposed Action” will bethe first chance for the public to speak for theprotection of McCrystal and North PonilCreeks from pollution and against drilling in

M c C r y s t a l C r e e k ◆ 1 1

METHANE DRILLING COULD

DISPLACE HISPANIC RANCH-

ERS WHO HAVE GRAZED THEIR

HERDS IN THE VALLE VIDAL

FOR GENERATIONS.

GA

RY

KR

EL

LE

R

FOR MORE INFORMATION ORTO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICAN-RIVERS.ORG/MCCRYSTAL2005

the Valle Vidal.After finalizing the study, the agency will

complete its Forest Plan Amendment for theValle Vidal Unit in late 2005, officially deter-mining whether the proposed drilling can pro-ceed. The public will then have anotheropportunity to speak out for conservation andprotection of McCrystal Creek and the entireValle Vidal.

Contacts:CHAD SMITH, American Rivers, (402) 423-7930, csmith@americanrivers.orgBRIAN SHIELDS, Amigos Bravos, (505) 758-3874, bshields@amigosbravos.orgJIM O’DONNELL, Coalition for the Valle Vidal,(505) 758-3874, jodonnell@vallevidal.org

1 2 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

IF DENVER PUMPS MORE

WATER OUT OF THE FRASER

RIVER, WHAT’S LEFT OVER

MAY NOT BE SAFE TO SWIM IN.

KIR

KK

LA

NC

KE

C O L O R A D O

#3 F r a s e r R i v e r THREAT: WATER WITHDRAWALS AND TRANS-BASIN DIVERSION

Summary For years, the Denver Water Board hassiphoned out 65 percent of the Fraser River’swater and piped it across the mountains tofuel runaway development along the FrontRange. Now it plans to take most of the rest.Unless the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers putsa stop to the water board’s plans, there won’tbe much left in the river except effluent fromlocal sewage plants.

The River The Fraser River forms in the snowfieldsalong the Continental Divide in the RooseveltNational Forest. The river flows 29 milesnorth and west before it joins the ColoradoRiver, itself only a modest mountain streamat that point. The Fraser teems with trout, andPresident Dwight D. Eisenhower enjoyedmany summers fly-fishing in the river’s cold,clear waters.

The communities of Winter Park, Fraser,Tabernash, and Granby depend on the FraserRiver to provide their drinking water, carryaway their treated sewage, and entice visitorsduring the summer months when the ski liftsaren’t running. Unfortunately, the Fraser’swater is also coveted by faraway cities. TheDenver Water Board captures the river in theMoffat Collection System outside of WinterPark, diverting water through the RockyMountains to the expanding communities ofthe Front Range.

The Threat The Denver Water Board, Colorado’s largestutility, plans to assert its rights to increase theamount of water it takes from the Fraser Riverfrom 65 percent to a whopping 85 percent ofthe river’s flows. Insisting the extra withdraw-al is crucial to meet anticipated growth, theutility intends to deliver the water to suburbs,cities, and corporations in the Denver metro-politan area.

A recent scientif-ic study foundthat such adramatic fur-ther reduc-tion instreamflows wouldcause theFraser to failhealth stan-dards. There sim-ply wouldn’t beenough clean water left inthe river to dilute the germs and chemicals inthe effluent flowing out of the sewage treat-ment plants — an uninviting prospect for flyfishermen, paddlers, and parents whose chil-dren want to play in the deceptively clearwater.

Other existing problems would get worse aswater levels dropped. Each winter, road crewsspread magnesium chloride and more than6,000 tons of traction sand on U.S. Highway40 to keep the roads open for skiers and truck-ers. These wash into the Fraser, slowly pollut-ing the river and choking it with sand becausethe flow isn’t strong enough to wash themaway.

The water board’s additional water with-drawals would reduce stream flows in theriver to the bare minimum levels — or evenlower — recommended by the Colorado WaterConservation Board to sustain wildlife, fish,and a generally healthy stream. Water temper-atures in the river rise as flows shrink, dimin-ishing the numbers and varieties of fish andwildlife.

KIR

KK

LA

NC

KE

KIR

KK

LA

NC

KE

F r a s e r R i v e r ◆ 1 3

What’s at Stake Since 1999, a drought has starkly revealedhow important adequate water levels in theFraser River are for the surrounding communi-ties. Poor fishing in the depleted river hasdamaged the Fraser’s reputation amonganglers, who are choosing to go elsewhere. Inthe ski resort town of Winter Park, authoritieshad to deny a request to expand a housing pro-ject from 250 to 500 units, citing the lack ofwater. The communities along the FraserRiver are facing the prospect of a perpetual,man-made water shortage imposed upon themby faraway city dwellers.

The 12-Month Outlook In fall 2005, the Denver Water Board will sub-mit an Environmental Impact Statement tothe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, describingtheir plan to divert and store 85 percent of theFraser River. To secure the permit to store thewater, the board must prove the withdrawalswill not damage the environment or affectother downstream senior water rights. TheCorps will make its decision about the diver-sion in December.

To protect the Fraser and the communitiesthat depend on it, the Corps should considerthe cumulative impacts of all utilities with-drawing from the Fraser and other Colorado

River tributariesand deny thewater board’sproposal toexpand FrontRange storagecapacity. Theagency shouldalso insist thatthe water boardmaintain accept-able minimum

flows in the river and provide for seasonalfluctuations. This need not impose a hardshipon the Front Range. Conservation, reuse andefficiency measures could meet the needs ofthe growing population for the foreseeablefuture. Experts at the Colorado State Universi-ty Cooperative Extension estimate that mostColorado residents use more than 200 gallonsof water per capita per day, while their neigh-bors in Arizona manage just fine with 160 gal-lons — 20 percent less.

The small towns along the Fraser River

need federal and state assistance to constructstate-of-the-art sewage treatment plants to pro-tect the river that supports their livelihoods.Unfortunately, President Bush has asked Con-gress to cut clean water aid to the state of Col-orado by almost $3 million in 2006. Congressshould reject those proposed cuts and increasefunding for the Clean Water State RevolvingLoan Fund to $3.2 billion in 2006, of which$25.5 million would go to Colorado.

ContactJAMIE MIERAU, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550 ext. 3003, jmierau@americanrivers.orgADAM CWIKLIN, Trustee, Town of Fraser, (970)420-0797, adamcwiklin@yahoo.comKIRK KLANCKE, East Grand Water QualityBoard, (970) 726-8691, wpwwsd@rkymtnhi.comKEN NEUBECKER, Colorado Trout Unlimited,(970) 328-2070, eagleriver@eagleranch.com

EY

EW

IRE

THE FRASER RIVER IS A

POPULAR DESTINATION FOR

RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS

ALIKE, AT LEAST FOR NOW.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ORTO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICAN-RIVERS.ORG/FRASER2005

CO

LO

RA

DO

TR

OU

TU

JLIM

ITE

D

1 4 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

WA S H I N G T O N

THREAT: RUNAWAY DEVELOPMENT

#4 S k y k o m i s h R i v e r

POORLY PLANNED DEVELOP-

MENT DEVOURS WORKING

FARMS AND FORESTS,

POLLUTING RIVERS ACROSS

THE COUNTRY. THE

SKYKOMISH COULD BE NEXT.

SummaryRunaway development threatens to foul theclear waters of the Skykomish River, knownfor its fishing and other outdoor activities,working farms, forests, and rural quality oflife. Unless the Snohomish County Councilplans responsibly for growth and acts to pro-tect the river, the very characteristics thatmake the valley so attractive to its residentscould be lost.

The RiverThe Skykomish River begins as a series ofsmall streams trickling off snowy mountainpeaks in the Mount Baker-SnoqualmieNational Forest, northeast of Seattle. As theriver flows west, it leaves forested slopes andmoves through a landscape of family farms.The river’s north and south forks meet nearthe town of Index, and where the Skykomishjoins the Snoqualmie River they form theSnohomish River, which flows into PugetSound at the city of Everett.

The Skykomish was the first river desig-nated in Washington’s Scenic Rivers Program.Local residents cherish the river and enjoyopportunities for salmon and steelhead fish-ing, whitewater boating, and other family out-ings. The “Sky” lures families from across thestate to enjoy these activities, as well.

The ThreatThe Skykomish River valley is at grave risk ofbeing loved to death. The population of Sno-homish County, one of the fastest growing inthe state, has increased by 30 percent since1990 and is expected to expand by a thirdagain by 2020. Without a strong plan to man-age growth, runaway development will dam-age the health of the river and diminish thequality of life for watershed residents.

Poorly planned development devoursforested shorelines and working farms. This isa nationwide problem because conventionalconstruction practices for big box stores, stripmalls, and parking lots smother habitat andlead to massive increases in pollutedstormwater running into local streams andrivers. Stormwater carries high loads of pesti-cides, fertilizers, metals, automotive chemi-

cals, trash, and other pollution. In the worstcase, stormwater can cause sewer systems toleak or overflow, filling rivers and streamswith disease-causing germs. Concrete andother impervious surfaces prevent rain fromrecharging groundwater, causing lower riverflows and leading to even greater pollution.

Lower water quality is a big reason whywild steelhead and salmon numbers on theSkykomish aren’t what they used to be. Therewas a time when the river’s renowned wintersteelhead fishery lasted through winter untilApril. In recent years, low returns forced thestate to close the fishery in February. Withoutprotections for the river, fish numbers willcontinue to decline. Implementing protectionsnow would be more cost-effective than payingfor expensive restoration measures in theyears to come.

As part of a locally-driven salmon recoveryprocess, a diverse group of Snohomish Countyfarmers, developers, local governments, tribes,and others have drafted a plan to protect andrestore the Skykomish River. The draft planreveals that without suitable land protections,salmon and steelhead will continue to decline.

What’s at StakeThe Skykomish’s clear, clean water and thesalmon, steelhead, and char that swim in itare in danger. Farmers and other residentshave set an example for neighboring countieswith their efforts to restore salmon runs, butthis investment will be lost if runaway growth

SCO

TT

CH

UR

CH

NR

CS

S k y k o m i s h R i v e r ◆ 1 5

reduce the amount of stormwater that pol-lutes the Skykomish River and protectgroundwater supplies. The Snohomish CountyCouncil should also reject proposals for new“Fully Contained Communities” — new citiesthat would likely replace forests with pave-ment and pollution.

The county will release the plan andaccompanying studies in May and June 2005.After a series of public hearings, the CountyCouncil will make its decision on the Com-prehensive Plan before the end of summer.

At the same time, the county is updatingits Critical Areas Ordinance, which governsdevelopment in environmentally sensitiveareas like wetlands and stream corridors. Tosafeguard the Skykomish and protect property,the Snohomish County Council should adoptmeasures protect-ing the main chan-nel and tributarystreams with sci-ence-based buffers,stronger stormwa-ter controls, andlow impact devel-opment methodsthat limit impervi-ous surfaces andenhance native veg-etation. The countywill release theupdate and a studyof its environmen-tal implications forpublic comment inspring or summer2005.

ContactAMY SOUERS

KOBER, AmericanRivers, (206) 213-0330 ext. 23, akober@americanrivers.orgJOHN MAURO, Pilchuck Audubon Society,(425) 252-1927, john@pilchuckaudubon.org RICH SIMMS, Wild Steelhead Coalition, (425)941-7041, wscmembership@yahoo.com

UNLESS SNOHOMISH COUNTY

ACTS TO PROTECT THE

SKYKOMISH, THE AREA’S

CLEAN WATER AND FISHING

COULD BE LOST.

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/SKYKOMISH2005

transforms the valley.The quality of life for everyone who lives

in the Skykomish River valley is also at stake.One local city chamber of commerce touts thescenery and excellent fishing on theSkykomish as reasons to move to the area, butout-of-control development jeopardizes thosevery qualities. Congested, dangerous roads canbe a major problem without thoughtful land-use planning. Family farms and rural areaswould be harmed or eliminated by gridlockand sprawl, and increased air and water pollu-tion would threaten the safety and health ofcounty residents.

The 12-Month OutlookSnohomish County is drawing up two blue-prints for the future that provide current resi-dents with their best chance for protectingtheir property and lifestyle, while preservingclean water, salmon and wildlife, for genera-tions to come.

The county is revising its ComprehensivePlan — its broad vision for growth and devel-opment. To protect the Skykomish River andquality of life, the county should direct newdevelopment to existing urbanized areas. TheCounty Council should protect natural areas,expand public transit, establish parks, and linkresidential and commercial areas with hiking,biking and walking trails. These steps will

DU

GG

AN

HA

RM

AN

1 6 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

The ThreatFactory farms have already blighted large areasof neighboring North Carolina, and now Ten-nessee’s weak environmental rules are beckon-ing. Many Johnson County residents opposeconstruction of an industrial dairy operationnear a family neighborhood that will furtherpollute Roan Creek.

Two companies, Maymead Inc. and HighMountain Hosteins, propose to confine 699milk cows in a large barn in a residentialneighborhood outside Mountain City. Thecows would produce more than 12 million gallons of animal waste each year. That ismore than the sewage produced by the 18,000people living in Johnson County. The liquidanimal waste will bestored in huge lagoons ona Roan Creek tributary.

Concentrated animalfeeding operations, betterknown as factory farms,like the one under con-struction near RoanCreek, are notorious waterpolluters. If completed, the dairy facility couldfoul the Roan in several ways. Liquid manurecould seep into groundwater below the holdingponds, contaminating nearby wells, springs,and Roan Creek. Once the lagoons fill up,manure will be spread onto farm fields, whichcould later wash into Roan Creek. Most omi-nously, the manure lagoons could spill during astorm, sending a wave of liquid manure downthe valley and eventually into Roan Creek.

Factory farms aren’t just undesirable, theyare dangerous. Bacteria, viruses, mold, heavymetals, antibiotics, hormones, and noxiousgases escape the lagoon pits into the surround-ing air and water, threatening the health ofworkers and neighbors. The stench irritatesnoses, eyes, and lungs up to a mile away. Thelist of ailments associated with factory farmsincludes salmonella, E. coli, listeria, cryp-tosporidium, blue baby syndrome, bronchitis,asthma, miscarriages, and more. In fact, factoryfarms cause so many waterborne and respirato-ry illnesses that in 2003 the American PublicHealth Association called for a national mora-torium on factory farm construction.

T E N N E S S E E

THREATS: FACTORY DAIRY FARM

#5 R o a n C r e e k

SummaryThe streams and rivers of the AppalachianMountains have largely escaped the scourge offactory dairy farming — but that may be aboutto change for Tennessee’s Roan Creek. UnlessTennessee officials establish and enforcestricter rules, cow manure could foul thestream, expose residents to disease, and jeopardize the region’s economic prospects.

The RiverLegend has it that in 1760 Daniel Boonenamed Roan Creek, in the eastern corner ofTennessee, for an injured horse he recoveredthere. The stream begins near the town ofTrade and flows 20 miles into Watauga Reser-voir. Roan Creek drains an Appalachian valleyof small farms, country stores, scenic byways,and fishing holes.

In 1998, the Tennessee Rivers AssessmentProject identified Roan Creek as a river of“local significance, fully supportive waterquality, and an excellent fishery.” Just sevenyears later, the river’s pollution problems are agrave concern. Mountain City’s sewage treat-ment system is now so inadequate that lastyear plant operators were caught spreadingsewage sludge on frozen ground within RoanCreek’s watershed in the middle of the night.Agriculture, quarrying, and gravel mining practices have also contributed to the stream’sdecline.

MANY FACTORY DAIRY FARMS

ARE NOTORIOUS WATER POL-

LUTERS. ROAN CREEK COULD

BE NEXT TO BE SPOILED.

KE

LLY

AL

DR

IDG

E

USD

A/N

RC

S

USD

AN

RC

S

R o a n C r e e k ◆ 1 7

FOR MORE INFORMATION ORTO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICAN-RIVERS.ORG/ROAN2005

those proposed cuts and increase funding forthe Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund to$3.2 billion in 2006, of which $46.4 millionwould go to the state of Tennessee.

ContactERIC ECKL, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550ext. 3023, eeckl@americanrivers.orgSTEVE FERGUSON, Johnson County Citizens’Committee for Clean Air and Water, (423) 727-2543, fergusons@appstate.eduBARRY SULKIN, Tennessee Public Employeesfor Environmental Responsibility, (615) 313-7066, tnpeer@peer.org

What’s at StakeFor factory farm neighbors, the stakes couldn’tbe higher than the water they drink and the airthey breathe, but the damage caused by factoryfarms extends far into the surrounding com-munity. Researchers at Iowa State Universityhave implicated factory farms for tearing thesocial fabric of rural life — depressing propertyvalues, curbing business growth, and drivingaway residents.

All this would be devastating to an impov-erished county whose economic future hingeson the promise of fresh air, clear water, andclean country living to attract new residents,visitors, and businesses. If High Mountain Hol-steins’ factory farm harms the area’s reputationalong with Roan Creek’s water, a handful oflow-wage dairy jobs will come at a terribleprice for the county as a whole.

The 12-Month OutlookIn the coming year, Johnson County citizenswill continue to challenge the construction ofthe factory farm near Roan Creek, citingnational studies and strong evidence that suchfacilities are detrimental to communities, localeconomies, and water quality.

Some 1400 local residents petitioned stateofficials in opposition to the original permit tobuild the factory farm. The permit coverage,issued by the Tennessee Department of Envi-ronment and Conservation, appears to violatethe agency’s own rules, which state that theagency “cannot authorize additional loadingsof the same pollutants” into streams that arealready polluted. The department should actresponsibly and withdraw the coverage for thefactory farm.

The Tennessee legislature will be asked torevisit state laws that govern factory farming,and also to review the rights of citizens regard-ing current agency practices. The legislatureshould provide Tennesseans with strongerrecourse when factory farms poison wells, pol-lute air or water, or depress property values.This would encourage factory farms across thestate to be better corporate citizens.

Mountain City and small towns throughoutAppalachia need federal and state assistance toacquire the state-of-the-art sewage treatmentplants that will protect the rivers that are theheart of their communities. Unfortunately,President Bush has asked Congress to cut cleanwater aid to the state of Tennessee by almost$5.25 million in 2006. Congress should reject

KE

LLY

AL

DR

IDG

E

THE TENNESSEE LEGISLA-

TURE SHOULD GIVE CITIZENS

RECOURSE WHEN FACTORY

FARMS POISON WELLS,

POLLUTE THE AIR, OR

DEPRESS PROPERTY VALUES.

ThreatsToday, the ocean-going ships that sailed far upthe Santee in centuries past would runaground within sight of the sea. That’s becausemuch of the river’s water never makes it to themouth. Instead, a massive hydropower systemcaptures almost all the water and redirects it,with a large portion going into the adjacentCooper River, which empties into the Atlanticin Charleston harbor, some 30 miles to thesouth.

Most of the time, Santee Dam releases justa trickle into its namesake river — only threepercent of its natural flow. The Corps of Engi-neers funnels a little more water into thelower 50 miles of the river, but released vol-umes are erratic and do almost as much harmas good to the river and the floodplain forest.

With flows choked off, much of the bottom-land forest is transforming from rich, floodedwoods of tupelo and cypress trees draped withSpanish moss into an ordinary forest of oaksand sycamores. Many of the back channels andsloughs where alligators once lurked and fishspawned have dried up. The Santee’s fish com-munity is so distressed and depopulated thatscientists had to examine other coastal riversto figure out which fish species should befound in the Santee’s waters.

Thanks to this degradation, the SanteeRiver has been nicknamed “the forgottenriver.” Despite boat ramps and trails to theriver, fishing is poor and recreational use islow. Although most of the north bank of theriver is in private hands, there are no substan-tial communities for many miles on eitherside of the river. Human activity in the flood-plain is largely limited to a few tree farms andhunting leases.

What’s at Stake This excessive degradation of the Santee Riveris inconsistent with the values of South Carolinians. In a 2002 survey, 89 percent ofstate residents reported that they thought itwas “very important” that “freshwaterresources must be safe and well protected inSouth Carolina.”

The degraded river is also a lost opportunityfor the state’s economy. Outdoor recreation is

1 8 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

S O U T H C A R O L I N A

THREAT: HYDROPOWER DAM

#6 S a n t e e R i v e r

MOST OF THE TIME, THERE’S

NOT MUCH OF THE SANTEE

RIVER LEFT BETWEEN ITS

BANKS.

SummaryFor decades, an enormous hydropower damcomplex has drained one of the East Coast’slargest rivers virtually dry. Unless state regula-tors stand up to a powerful and uncooperativeutility and demand that some of that water beput back, the Santee will continue to be SouthCarolina’s “forgotten river.”

The RiverThe headwaters of the Santee River flow fromthe Appalachian Mountains in western Northand South Carolina, braiding together on SouthCarolina’s coastal plain to form the riversoutheast of Columbia. Shortly thereafter, theriver is impounded into an expansive systemof dams, canals, and reservoirs jointly operatedby the state-owned utility Santee Cooper andthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. After exit-ing Lake Marion, the river, much reduced involume, flows through an unpopulated areaalong the northern edge of the Francis MarionNational Forest for almost 90 miles to the sea.

The Santee River Basin drains one of thelargest watersheds on the Atlantic coast and is

GE

RR

ITJÖ

BSI

S

GE

RR

ITJÖ

BSI

S

home to 125 species of fish, including Ameri-can shad, herring, striped bass, and the endan-gered shortnose sturgeon. During the colonialperiod and the first decades of American inde-pendence, the Santee River was an importantshipping route, and rice and indigo plantationslined its banks.

S a n t e e R i v e r ◆ 1 9

THE SANTEE'S FISH

COMMUNITY IS SO

DISTRESSED AND

DEPOPULATED THAT

SCIENTISTS HAD TO

EXAMINE OTHER

COASTAL RIVERS TO

FIGURE OUT WHICH

FISH SPECIES

SHOULD BE FOUND

IN THE SANTEE'S

WATERS.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/SANTEE2005

big business in the state — and would be evenbigger if the Santee River were the destinationit has the potential to be. The U.S. Fish andWildlife Service reports that in 2001, anglersspent more than $550 million on trips andtackle in South Carolina. Wildlife watchersspent another $256 million.

The 12-Month OutlookAs degraded as the Santee River is, it doesn’thave to be that way forever. Santee Cooper’slicense for the hydropower project will expireon March 31, 2006. This presents an opportuni-ty for the South Carolina Department of Healthand Environmental Control to require changesthat will restore much of the river’s formerrichness and diversity.

Santee Cooper has publicly signaled itsreluctance to put more water in the river andhas resisted conducting some of the studies rec-ommended by South Carolina and federal offi-cials. During 2005, Santee Cooper will releasean analysis of the benefits of restoring flows to

the river. Citizenswill depend onstate and federalexperts to scruti-nize the docu-ment todetermine theflows needed torestore this publictreasure.

With studyresults in hand,state environmen-

tal officials should require Santee Cooper tooperate the hydropower facility in a mannerthat ensures enough clean water in the SanteeRiver for South Carolinians to fish, swim, andboat. Even a modest increase in flows wouldreinvigorate much of the floodplain forest, fillsloughs and back channels, and lead torebounding fish and wildlife populations andrecreational opportunities along the river.

The state’s vigilance here will foreshadowwhat is to come elsewhere. Duke Power, SouthCarolina Electric & Gas, Progress Energy, andAlcoa are all poised to follow Santee Cooperand re-license 18 more dams affecting riversthroughout the state. If state regulators don’tstand up to Santee Cooper, other utilities willtake advantage and resist steps to restore otherrivers in South Carolina.

ContactROBBIN MARKS, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550 ext. 3051, rmarks@americanrivers.orgGERRIT JÖBSIS, South Carolina Coastal Con-servation League and American Rivers, (803)771-7114, gerritj@scccl.org, gjobsis@american-rivers.org

GE

RR

ITJÖ

BSI

S

SCD

NR

2 0 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

O H I O

THREAT: SEWAGE AND POLLUTED RUNOFF

#7 L i t t l e M i a m i R i v e r

OHIO RESIDENTS CLEANED UP

THE LITTLE MIAMI RIVER

ONCE ALREADY; NOW AGING

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS

AND PROPOSED ROADS

THREATEN THEIR HARD WORK.

Summary Proposed wastewater plant expansions andnew bridges and roads are poised to polluteOhio’s Little Miami River with more sewage,stormwater, chemicals, and trash. Unless thestate insists on modern sewage treatment andsensible transportation planning, the crownjewel of Cincinnati’s and southwestern Ohio’soutdoor destinations could be sullied beyondrecovery.

The River The Little Miami originates near CliftonGorge State Nature Preserve, outside of Day-ton, and flows south through gorges, woodedbluffs, and rolling farmland. The river emp-ties into the Ohio River on the rapidly grow-ing eastern fringe of metropolitan Cincinnati.The Little Miami River is home to dozens offish species, including three state endangeredfish, and more than 250 bird species.

At least three million people live withinan hour’s drive of the Little Miami River, andmany of them are attracted to the river.According to official estimates, more than100,000 people canoe the river and over200,000 enjoy riverside trails each year.Although the river is part of the NationalWild and Scenic Rivers System, its waterbecomes progressively more polluted as itflows past each of the 20 aging sewage treat-ment plants along the river.

The Threat During the late summer and other low-flowperiods, up to 70 percent of the water flowingin the lower Little Miami is sewage planteffluent. One of those plants, Sycamore CreekSewage Treatment Plant, chronically violatesits discharge permits by releasing untreatedsewage into a tributary of the Little MiamiRiver. Despite this, the Ohio EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) granted a permit toexpand operations without repairing its leakycollection system and without upgrading tothe most sophisticated treatment technologyavailable. The plant will be authorized todump up to 32 million gallons of inadequatelytreated wastewater containing germs and highlevels of pollutants like nitrogen and phospho-rus into the river each day.

And that’s just the beginning. The OhioEPA is reviewing expansion applications forup to seven sewage treatment plants along thelower Little Miami.

Road construction and the subsequent realestate development boom threaten to makethese pollution problems in the Little MiamiRiver much worse. The U.S. and Ohio Depart-ments of Transportation are planning the East-ern Corridor Project, a package of proposednew roads and bridges intended to speed traf-fic through Cincinnati and its eastern suburbsand exurbs. A key aspect of this project is a$1.4 billion bridge and highway projectthrough ten miles of the Little Miami RiverValley that would seriously harm the river andits watershed.

The likely site for the bridge would be the“Horseshoe Bend” section of the river, thereach that supports the largest variety of ani-mals along the entire length of the LittleMiami. The highway would spur developmentin the valley, and the new big box stores, stripmalls, and other development would increasethe amount of polluted stormwater runninginto the river as well as further stress theregion’s already inadequate sewage treatmentinfrastructure.

LIT

TL

EM

IAM

I,IN

C.

LIT

TL

EM

IAM

I,IN

C.

LIT

TL

EM

IAM

IIN

C.

L i t t l e M i a m i R i v e r ◆ 2 1

WITHOUT FRESH RESOLVE

TO PROTECT THE LITTLE

MIAMI RIVER, THE CROWN

JEWEL OF CINCINNATI’S

OUTDOOR DESTINATIONS

COULD BE SPOILED.

What’s at Stake Boasting a 60-mile greenway/bikeway andopportunities for family outings that drawhundreds of thousands of people each year, theLittle Miami contributes much to the qualityof life in southwestern Ohio. When the lowerreach of the river was initially deemed toodegraded for National Wild and Scenic Riverstatus, Cincinnati citizens and governmentagencies rolled up their sleeves, cleaned updumps and pollution, reforested the riverbank,and restored the river. In 1980, the lower Lit-tle Miami received the prestigious Wild andScenic designation.

Twenty-five years later, the fruits of thesecitizens’ labor are at risk. Without freshresolve to protect the Little Miami, it won’tbe long before wild animals along the river arerare, the scenery along this river is mostlytrash, and the breeze along its banks is any-thing but fresh.

The 12-Month Outlook Ohio EPA could rule on applications forexpansion at several sewage treatment plantsat any time. The state should require allplants in the watershed to fully modernizetheir treatment technology when upgrading.This will ensure that illegal spills of untreatedsewage end and that treated wastewater willbe within national Clean Water Act waterquality standards.

Communities in the Little Miami water-shed need federal and state assistance toacquire modern treatment facilities. Unfortu-nately, President Bush has asked Congress tocut clean water aid to the state of Ohio bymore than $20 million in 2006. Congressshould reject those cuts to clean water pro-grams, and increase funding for the CleanWater State Revolving Loan Fund to $3.2 billion in 2006, of which almost $180 millionwould go to the state of Ohio.

The Federal Highway Administration andthe Ohio Department of Transportation willreveal the details of the Eastern Corridor Pro-ject and seek public comment in spring 2005.The agencies will identify their preferredoptions for reducing traffic congestion andspecify any new bridges and roads they wishto build. The agencies should drop the propos-al to build a new bridge over the Little MiamiRiver and instead recommend expanding masstransit in the Little Miami River Valley.

Contact InfoQUINN MCKEW, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550 ext. 3069, qmckew@americanrivers.orgMIKE FREMONT, Rivers Unlimited, (513) 761-4003, mike@riversunlimited.orgERIC B. PARTEE, Little Miami, Inc., (513)965-9344, partee@littlemiami.comANDREW BETTS, Sierra Club, (513) 891-2299,abetts@cinci.rr.com

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/LITTLEMIAMI2005

2 2 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

#8 T u o l u m n e R i v e rTHREAT: WATER DIVERSIONS

C A L I F O R N I A

WATER IS PUMPED FROM

HETCH HETCHY RESERVOIR

TO SAN FRANCISCO,

MORE THAN 150 MILES AWAY.

Summary The City of San Francisco has proposed a new pipeline that could increase the water itremoves from the Tuolumne River by asmuch as 70 percent. These additional diver-sions would deplete 100 miles of productive,pristine river habitat and compound pollutionproblems in San Francisco Bay. Unless SanFrancisco invests in making its existing sup-plies go further, California could lose some of its best salmon and steelhead runs, world-class outdoor recreation, and the economicdiversity this river now provides.

The RiverThe Tuolumne River begins within YosemiteNational Park east of San Francisco in theSierra Nevada range. One of the earliest defin-ing moments of the environmental movementwas John Muir’s failed effort to halt a dam onthe river in Yosemite’s Hetch Hetchy Valley.Below Hetch Hetchy, 83 miles of TuolumneRiver are designated Wild and Scenic. Thisarea is home to bald eagles, world-class fly-fishing, and thrilling whitewater. After pass-ing Modesto, the Tuolumne joins the SanJoaquin River, meanders north through thefragile Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, andempties into San Francisco Bay and the Pacif-ic Ocean. The lower reach boasts the largestrun of wild salmon in the San Joaquin Valley.

The Tuolumne is a lifeline to many on itsjourney from the Sierra Nevada to the Pacific.

The recreational bounty of the upper reachesmeans jobs and economic diversity in Califor-nia’s mountain towns. Downstream, the riverirrigates 300,000 acres in the San Joaquin Val-ley, one of the most productive agriculturalregions in the nation. Ultimately, the riverprovides 85 percent of the drinking water for2.4 million people in San Francisco and sur-rounding communities.

The ThreatSan Francisco is poised to increase the amountof water it can remove from the TuolumneRiver by up to 70 percent. Today, it takes anaverage of 235 million gallons each day. A $4 billion project, known as the “Water System Improvement Program,” includespipelines and reservoirs that would increasewithdrawal capabilities to 400 million gallonsper day, with no safeguards preventing harm-ful diversions.

Because the city removes water close to theriver’s source, increasing diversions wouldhave dire consequences for most of the river.Falling water levels mean shrinking habitat,fewer fish, and fewer family fishing trips. Lesswater in the river means fewer rafting adven-tures and less business for local hotels andeateries, as well.

About the only thing that goes up as waterlevels go down is the concentration of pollu-tion. Less Tuolumne water means a dimin-ished ability to dilute agricultural and urbanwastes and runoff in the river. And with lesscool water coming from the mountains, theriver would become warmer, contain less oxy-gen, and produce fewer salmon. The extradiversions could reduce flow levels at themouth of the San Joaquin to as little as 34 per-cent of the natural average. Water managersmust sometimes request emergency releasesof clean water from Tuolumne reservoirs tomeet water quality standards in the delta. SanFrancisco’s plans could foreclose this option.

What’s at StakeOne of the nation’s finest wild rivers is at risk.For decades, Californians have rallied aroundthe Tuolumne River. In 1984, they secured itsdesignation as a National Wild and Scenic

TU

OL

UM

NE

RIV

ER

TR

UST

TU

OL

UM

NE

RIV

ER

TR

UST

T u o l u m n e R i v e r ◆ 2 3

THE TUOLUMNE IS ONE

OF AMERICA’S FINEST

WILD RIVERS — AT LEAST

FOR NOW.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ORTO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICAN-RIVERS.ORG/TUOLUMNE2005

River. They restored Chinook salmon runsfrom fewer than 100 fish just ten years ago toas many as 15,000 in recent wet years. Theresults of those efforts are jeopardized.

Families that spend quality time togetherrafting, fishing, and enjoying scenery along theTuolumne will lose out if San Francisco devel-ops its plans. And so will rural communitieslike Groveland that rely on tourism to comple-ment the agriculture and timber industries.

The city of San Francisco is confronting achoice between further depleting a magnificentresource or using its existing water supplymore efficiently. Its reputation as one of Amer-ica’s most environmentally enlightened citiesis on the line.

The 12-Month OutlookIn spring 2005, the San Francisco Public Utili-ties Commission will begin work on a year-long environmental review of the WaterSystem Improvement Program, describingoptions and recommendations for protectingits water system from earthquakes — andwhether to increase the amount of water ittakes from the Tuolumne.

The commission justifies increased with-drawals by forecasting a 14 percent increase indemand by 2030. However, using data devel-oped by the Pacific Institute, conservationistsestimate that San Francisco area water userscould cut consumption of Tuolumne watermore than 30 percent by upgrading appliancesaround the home and altering their landscap-ing practices.

San Francisco should diversify its watersupply options and embrace cutting-edge waterconservation and efficiencies to meet waterneeds rather than withdrawing additionalwater from the Tuolumne River. The cityshould establish a watershed improvementprogram to fund land acquisition and recre-ation projects, provide for in-stream habitatenhancement, and maintain high-quality recre-ation flows in the entire Tuolumne watershed.

In November 2004, the CaliforniaResources Agency began reviewing indepen-dent studies that found that San Franciscocould meet its needs for safe, reliable watersupplies without O’Shaughnessy Dam inYosemite National Park. Removing the damwould restore the free-flowing Tuolumne Riverthrough Hetch Hetchy Valley, once one ofAmerica’s most stunning landscapes. The city

AM

ER

ICA

NR

IVE

RT

OU

RIN

GA

SSO

CIA

TIO

N

should incorporate the results of this reviewinto its long-term water planning, and developa plan for a water supply that avoids addition-al withdrawals from the Tuolumne River.

ContactSTEVE ROTHERT, American Rivers, (530) 277-0448, srothert@americanrivers.orgJENNA OLSEN, Tuolumne River Trust, (415)292-3531, jenna@tuolumne.orgERICH PFUEHLER, Clean Water Action, (415)369-9160 ext. 312, epfuehler@cleanwater.orgSPRECK ROSEKRANS, Environmental Defense(510) 658-8008, S_rosekrans@environmen-taldefense.org

2 4 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

U T A H

THREAT: DAM CONSTRUCTION AND DEWATERING

#9 P r i c e R i v e r

The Threat The Sanpete Water Conservancy District hasdusted off an old proposal to build a dam atthe Gooseberry Narrows upstream of the con-fluence of Gooseberry and Fish creeks andScofield Reservoir. The irrigators envision cre-ating a 17,000 acre-foot reservoir and pipingabout a third of the water each year across theWasatch Plateau to Sanpete County, whereapproximately 250 irrigators would use mostof it to grow a third cutting of alfalfa eachyear. It is likely that this water would one daybe transferred to municipal use.

Below the dam, reduced water levels wouldbe measurable for many miles. Portions ofGooseberry Creek could drop by as much as74 percent. Fish Creek could drop by as muchas 24 percent. These lower flows would leadto lower water levels in Scofield Reservoir, theonly water supply for Carbon County. The fire

A PROPOSED DAM WOULD

DROWN A POPULAR

RECREATIONAL AREA AND

DEPLETE THE PRICE RIVER.

Summary Near the remote headwaters of the PriceRiver in central Utah, the Bureau of Reclama-tion is under pressure to build a dam andreservoir to take away one community’s waterand pipe it over the mountains to another.Unless the local water district comes to itssenses and the Forest Service strengthenswatershed protections, communities along thePrice River could lose their water, theirwildlife, and their hopes for a more prosperousfuture.

The River The Price River officially begins at ScofieldReservoir in central Utah, on the edge of theWasatch Plateau. The river flows south andeast through the towns of Helper and Pricebefore emptying into the Green River. On thisjourney, the Price is bordered by dramatic1000-foot canyons that are home to desertbighorn sheep and mountain lions. Springtimeflows offer adventurous rafters the chance to

float a spectacular, roadless gorge.Native American petroglyph

panels are found along thePrice River, and Butch

Cassidy and the WildBunch reportedlyused the river canyonas a travel route. ThePrice River is a Utah

Blue Ribbon Fisheryand is wild enough to

qualify for inclusion inthe National Wild and Scenic

Rivers System. As stunning as the Price River is, two

important tributaries rival the mainstem forbeauty, fisheries, and recreational values.Gooseberry Creek and Fish Creek drain theeastern slope of the Wasatch Plateau in theManti-La Sal National Forest in central Utah,coming together just upstream of ScofieldReservoir. Like the Price, both streams meritfederal Wild and Scenic protection. Fish Creekis home to a stunning variety of bird species,and the Fish Creek National Recreation Areais a popular destination for hiking, fishing,and horseback riding.

DA

VID

BR

OW

N

DA

NM

ILL

ER

EY

EW

IRE

DA

VID

BR

OW

N

P r i c e R i v e r ◆ 2 5

release its management plan for the Manti-LaSal National Forest. The agency should recom-mend including Lower Gooseberry and Fishcreeks in the National Wild and Scenic RiversSystem, a prestigious designation that wouldend the prospect of dam construction on theseremarkable rivers once and for all.

Contact InfoGARY BELAN, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550 ext. 3027, gbelan@americanrivers.orgMERRITT FREY, Utah Rivers Council, (801)486-4776, merritt@utahrivers.org

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/PRICE2005

departments in the towns of Price, Helper, andWellington warn that the water diversioncould hamper their ability to fight fires.

Siphoning this much water out of the PriceRiver watershed would not only reduce theamount of water for Carbon County residentsto meet their basic needs, it would compro-mise the outdoor activities that their familiesenjoy and that draw visitors from around thestate. Lower flows in Gooseberry and Fishcreeks would damage popular fisheries forrainbow and cutthroat trout. Scofield Reser-voir is currently designated a Utah Blue Rib-bon Fishery, but lower water levels wouldmake it less attractive to anglers, boaters, andcampers.

Above the dam, valuable habitat would bedrowned, including 100 acres of wetlands, amile of upper Gooseberry Creek, and 4.3 milesof small tributary streams. Downstream,towards the confluence of the Price and theGreen rivers, lower flows would shrink habi-tat available to the endangered pikeminnow,the top native predator in these waters butnow perilously close to extinction.

What’s at StakeThe Gooseberry Narrows Dam would not onlytake water from one community and give it toanother; it would also suck money from thepublic purse. The project’s official price tag isoptimistically pegged at $25 to $30 million.Even at the conservative cost of $25 million,providing this water will cost taxpayers $4,620per acre-foot.

Recreation and tourism are increasinglyimportant aspects of the economy along thePrice River. The communities can ill-afford tohave some of their most valuable assetsdrowned or depleted to provide subsidizedwater to other areas that have other options.

The 12-Month Outlook The Sanpete Water Conservancy District ispressuring the Bureau of Reclamation toadvance the Gooseberry Narrows Dam propos-al and release its findings for public reviewand hearings. The Bureau should reject thedam and instead act on an alternative plandeveloped by community groups that proposesmeeting Sanpete County’s needs by improvingthe efficiency of existing water delivery andirrigation systems.

In summer 2005, the Forest Service will

USF

WS

THE BUREAU OF RECLAMA-

TION SHOULD REJECT THE

PROPOSAL, WHICH WOULD

TRADE WILDLIFE HABITAT

FOR LOW VALUE CROPS.

2 6 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

C A L I F O R N I A

THREAT: RUNAWAY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT

#10 S a n t a C l a r a R i v e r

MUCH OF THE SANTA CLARA

RIVER REMAINS SCENIC AND

NATURAL.

Summary Until recent years, the Santa Clara River haslargely escaped the intense developmenttransforming most of Southern California, butdevelopers are now eyeing the river and adja-cent lands for a massive expanse of new con-dominiums and shopping centers. Unlessregulators hold new development to highstandards, Southern California will lose itslast significant natural river.

The RiverThe Santa Clara River, Southern California’slongest free-flowing river, rises on the north-ern slope of the San Gabriel Mountains in LosAngeles County and flows through VenturaCounty to the Pacific Ocean. During its 87-mile journey to the sea, the river meanderspast mountains, desert, and berry and citrusfarms. The river and its associated aquiferprovide drinking water and carry away treatedsewage from communities such as SantaClarita, Fillmore, Santa Paula, and Ventura.

Sixteen species of animals and plants thatare close to extinction cling to existence inthe river and in the forested corridor along thebanks. At the mouth of the Santa Clara inVentura County, brown river water collideswith ocean waves and white foam. The sandand sediment carried by the river settles outto nourish the area’s world-famous surfingbeaches.

The Threat Developers are seeking permits to build fourhuge housing projects and develop more than2,000 acres along the Santa Clara River. Additionally, Newhall Land and Farming isseeking approval for the five-village NewhallRanch Project, one of the largest urban devel-opment projects ever proposed in Los AngelesCounty.

If the developer secures the required per-mits for Newhall Ranch, it will unleash itsbulldozers on 19 square miles of natural areasstraddling the upper Santa Clara River,including 141 acres located on the river’sfloodplain. The developer plans to smother 15miles of tributary streams with concrete andchannelize 17 more.

These are the same heavy-handed and out-moded practices that have ruined almostevery other river in Southern California. Theconsequences of burying and channelizingstreams, paving wetlands, deforesting river-banks, and the false security and hidden hazaards of buriedbank stabilization arewell-documented —polluted water, trash-strewn banks, and van-ishing wildlife.Importantly, this typeof development canalso increase the fre-quency and severity offlash floods, such asthose that swept com-munities along the Santa Clara in early 2005.

Even though construction has yet to start,the loss to the community has begun.Newhall has already closed about 15 miles ofthe Santa Clara and its shoreline to the public.As bad as the Newhall Ranch Project wouldbe, there is more to come. Another 8,500 acresof development are on the drawing board.

What’s at StakeUnless developers use 21st century techniquesto reduce the damage that traditional develop-ment would have on the Santa Clara, the lastmajor natural river in the area could be lost.The condition of the river is not just a senti-

AN

DR

EW

HA

RV

EY

AN

DR

EW

HA

RV

EY

USF

WS

S a n t a C l a r a R i v e r ◆ 2 7

mental matter. Newhall Ranch and otherdevelopments will send more pollution down-stream, and increase the risk of flash floods.

By fragmenting the riparian corridor andfouling the river with polluted runoff, overlyaggressive development will push the south-ern steelhead trout, southwestern arroyo toad,the red-legged frog, and other endangeredspecies closer to extinction.

The 12-Month Outlook Newhall Ranch developers have alreadysecured preliminary approval for their projectfrom Los Angeles County and are awaitingfinal county approval for the first stage. Theyare also awaiting permits from the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers to fill wetlands and modifyshoreline along the Santa Clara River.

The Corps should deny Newhall Land’sapplication — and every other floodplaindevelopment permit along the Santa ClaraRiver — until it has completed an $8.2 mil-lion river study launched in September 2004in partnership with Ventura and Los Angelescounties. The study should examine cumula-tive impacts, as well as identify opportunitiesfor sound watershed planning, and managinggrowth in the area to protect the river forfuture generations of southern Californians toenjoy.

In early summer 2005, the Corps and thedeveloper will each release environmentalstudies of the Newhall Ranch project. Bothdocuments should disclose the full range ofconsequences of the proposed developmentalong the Santa Clara, and include strong pro-visions to prevent development in the river’sfloodplain.

Communities along the Santa Clara Riverwill need state-of-the-art sewage treatmentplants to preserve their water quality in theface of future growth. Unfortunately, Presi-dent Bush has asked Congress to cut cleanwater aid to the state of California by morethan $25 million in 2006. Congress shouldreject those proposed cuts and increase fund-ing for the Clean Water State Revolving LoanFund to $3.2 billion nationwide.

ContactsSERENA S. MCCLAIN, American Rivers, (202)347-7550 ext. 3004, smcclain@amrivers.orgRON BOTTORFF, Friends of the Santa ClaraRiver, (805) 498-4323, bottorffm@verizon.net

TERESA SAVAIKIE, Santa Clara River Alliance Coordinator, (661) 263-9624, bigbadmean@aol.comPETER GALVIN, Center for Biological Diversity, (707) 986-7805, pgalvin@biological-diversity.orgDR. SHELLEY LUCE, Heal the Bay, (310) 453-0395, sluce@healthebay.orgDANIEL COOPER, Lawyers for Clean Water,(415) 561-2222 ext. 103, cleanwater@sfo.comMATI WAIYA, Ventura Coastkeeper, (805) 382-4540

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO TAKE ACTION:

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANRIVERS.ORG/SANTACLARA2005

AN

DR

EW

HA

RV

EY

MORE AND MORE OF

THE RIVER IS BEING

SQUEEZED BY POORLY

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

2 8 ◆ A m e r i c a ’ s M o s t E n d a n g e r e d R i v e r s o f 2 0 0 5

1000 Friends of Florida1000 Friends of

WashingtonAdobe Whitewater ClubAlabama Rivers AllianceAlaska Center for the

EnvironmentAlaska Clean Water

AllianceAlaska Rainforest

CampaignAlaska Wilderness LeagueAll Indians Pueblo

CouncilAllagash AllianceAllagash Canoe TripsAlliance to Save the

MattaponiAltamaha RiverkeeperAmerican Canoe

AssociationAmerican Littoral SocietyAmerican WatershedsAmerican Whitewater

AffiliationAmigos BravosAnacostia Watershed

SocietyApalachicola Bay & River

Keeper, IncApalachicola National

Estuarine Research Reserve

Appalachian Restoration Campaign

Arbor Hill Environmental Justice Corporation

Arctic ConnectionsArkansas Game and Fish

CommissionArkansas Wildlife

FederationAtlantic Salmon

FederationAudubon ArkansasAudubon DallasAudubon Society of

New JerseyAudubon Society of

OmahaB.A.S.S. Inc.Bass Anglers Sportsmen's

AllianceBC WildBeartooth AllianceBiodiversity AssociatesBlue Mountain Audubon

SocietyBracy Tucker BrownBucksport Town CouncilBurruoughs AudubonCahaba River SocietyCalifornia Hydropower

Reform CoalitionCalifornia Native PlantSociety, Monterey Bay

ChapterCalifornia TroutCanadian Nature

FederationCarmel River Steelhead

AssociationCarmel Valley Property

Owners' AssociationCascade Gateway Citizens

AllianceCatawba RiverkeeperCenter for Biological

DiversityCenter for Conservation

and Use of Natural Resources

Central Arizona Paddlers Club

Central Cascade AllianceCentral Coast Fly FishingCentral States Education

CenterCharlotte County (FL)

CommissionChattahoochee

RiverkeeperChehalis River CouncilChesapeake Bay

FoundationCitizens for Alternative

Water SupplyCitizens for the Preserva-

tion of Powers Gulch and Pinto Creek

Citizens to Preserve the Upper James River Valley

Clarendon Chamber of Commerce

Clark Fork – Pend Oreille Coalition

Clean Up Our River Environment (CURE)

Clearwater Biodiversity Project

Coal River Mountain Watch

Coal River Watershed Preservation Association

Coalition for a Clean Minnesota River

Coalition for Health Concerns

Coalition for Outer Connector Alternatives

Coalition for the Valle Vidal

Coastal CoalitionColorado Environmental

CoalitionColorado River AllianceColorado River Regional

Sewer CoalitionColorado Trout UnlimitedColorado Whitewater

AssociationColumbia Gorge

Audubon SocietyColumbia River Inter-

Tribal Fish CommissionConcerned Citizens for

Nuclear SafetyConservation Federation

of MissouriConservation FundConservation Law

FoundationCoosa River Basin

InitiativeCrooked Creek CoalitionDallas Historic Tree

CoalitionDarby Creek AssociationDefenders of WildlifeDucks UnlimitedEarthjusticeEarthWaysEast Grand Water

Quality BoardECHO River TripsEcological Environmental

Experiment for Everyone, Inc.

Ecology CenterEnlightened EnergyEnvironmental AdvocatesEnvironmental DefenseEnvironmental Federation

of Southwest FloridaEnvironmental Health

CoalitionEnvironmental Working

GroupEverglades CoalitionEvergreen Legal ServicesEyak Preservation CouncilFish FirstFlorida Defenders of the

Environment

Hackensack Meadowlands Partnership

Hackensack RiverkeeperHardee County Citizens

Against PollutionHeal the BayHelp Save the Apalachi-

cola RiverHigh Country Citizens’

AllianceHoopa Valley TribeHoosier Environmental

CouncilHorse Creek Community

AssociationHousatonic Environmen-

tal Action LeagueHousatonic River

InitiativeHuachuca Audubon

SocietyHudson River Sloop

ClearwaterIdaho Conservation

LeagueIdaho Rivers UnitedIllinois Stewardship

AllianceInterstate Commission on

the Potomac River BasinInstitute for Agriculture

and Trade Pol