2
Landscapes, Commodities, and Ecosystems: The Relationship Between Policy and Science for American Rivers

William L. Graf

Arizona State University

Tempe, Arizona

INTRODUCTION

With the exception of the land from which they flow, America's rivers are the nation's most valuable natural resource. During the mid-twentieth century, the social values that America ascribed to its rivers dramatically changed from an exclusive emphasis on economic development to include preservation. The resulting conflict between development and preservation is mirrored in the scientific investigations of rivers that have supported policy objectives. Previous research founded in reductionist analytic approaches has given way to more holistic investigations rooted in general system theory. The purposes of this paper are to explore the nature of scientific research for rivers against the changing background of cultural values and to examine the interface between science and policy, especially as exemplified by the actions of the Water Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council and the National Academy of Sciences.

RIVERS AS LANDSCAPES

The first intellectual views of American rivers adopted a holistic, interconnected systems perspective. In the early 1800s, when engineers were tinkering with individual river components, geomorphologists were barely beginning to see the interconnections among parts of stream networks, ecologists were enmeshed in species classification, and American artists were



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources 2 Landscapes, Commodities, and Ecosystems: The Relationship Between Policy and Science for American Rivers William L. Graf Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona INTRODUCTION With the exception of the land from which they flow, America's rivers are the nation's most valuable natural resource. During the mid-twentieth century, the social values that America ascribed to its rivers dramatically changed from an exclusive emphasis on economic development to include preservation. The resulting conflict between development and preservation is mirrored in the scientific investigations of rivers that have supported policy objectives. Previous research founded in reductionist analytic approaches has given way to more holistic investigations rooted in general system theory. The purposes of this paper are to explore the nature of scientific research for rivers against the changing background of cultural values and to examine the interface between science and policy, especially as exemplified by the actions of the Water Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council and the National Academy of Sciences. RIVERS AS LANDSCAPES The first intellectual views of American rivers adopted a holistic, interconnected systems perspective. In the early 1800s, when engineers were tinkering with individual river components, geomorphologists were barely beginning to see the interconnections among parts of stream networks, ecologists were enmeshed in species classification, and American artists were

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources depicting rivers as complex landscape systems with physical, biological, and human dimensions (Nygren, 1986). Beginning in the 1820s, painters of the Hudson River School, deriving guidance from the works of Thomas Cole and Frederic Edwin Church, became the first identifiable group of American artists (Driscoll, 1981). They included in their works detailed expressions of the fluvial geomorphology and riparian ecology along New England rivers. For much of the remaining nineteenth century, artists continued this systematic viewpoint rather than singling out particular components for emphasis (Wilmerding and Mahe, 1984). These early painters also provided the first representations of environmental damage from river mismanagement, showing water pollution and forest destruction resulting from reservoir inundation. The Hudson River School's success continued during the 1830s when Carl Wimer and George Catlin depicted western rivers as complex, interactive mosaics of physical landscapes and biological communities with human significance. Perhaps most remarkable is the record of hundreds of watercolor paintings by Karl Bodmer during his two-year excursion on western American rivers beginning in 1832 (Goetzmann, 1864), with geomorphic features, plant and animal species, and human populations accurately represented as dynamic, interactive systems. RIVERS AS COMMODITIES As the nineteenth century progressed, however, the engineering, scientific, and legal professions did not continue this systematic tradition. General American culture has always viewed rivers as simply water, a commodity that could ameliorate an uncertain but potentially productive environment. Anglo-Americans developed a complex set of laws to govern water withdrawals from streams (Trelease, 1979), all founded on the basic precept of river as a water commodity. Major federal initiatives grew out of this commodity-based perspective and became refined into the missions of navigation and flood control by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, irrigation development by the Reclamation Service (later the Bureau of Reclamation), and surveying and data collection by the U.S. Geological Survey. Congress created the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers after the War of 1812 with the expressed purpose of widening the Ohio River channel for barge traffic; the involvement of the Corps in navigation improvement on rivers has continued to the present day (Clarke and McCool, 1985). The Corps' mission was to ensure that rivers would be cheap and efficient conduits for commodity transport, thus justifying a national investment in regional development and economic prosperity. In 1912 the Congress authorized the Corps to undertake

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources flood control projects as site-specific responses to endangered enterprises near rivers (Holmes, 1979). The Corps' activities, emphasizing eastern states because they were the locations of the great flood losses (Figure 2.1). led to the construction and maintenance of thousands of projects that altered river environments throughout the nation. As the American frontier moved into increasingly arid western areas, it became apparent that agriculture in the new areas would be possible only with federal investment in irrigation projects (Powell, 1878). As the culmination of a broadly based political and economic movement for irrigation development, Congress established the Reclamation Service as a major agency in 1902 (Hays, 1959). Renamed the Bureau of Reclamation in 1923, the agency's mission was to develop large dams and delivery systems to provide water to agricultural producers, a function that limited the bureau's geographical range to western states (Figure 2.2). The Bureau constructed most of the nation's largest dams, and its works impacted every major river in the central and western United States (Figure 2.3). The manipulation and marketing of rivers as commodities by the Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation required information about the resource, giving rise to monitoring and investigative activities of the U.S. Geological Survey. The Geological Survey established an internal irrigation survey in 1888 to coordinate the evaluation of potential dam sites and their withdrawal from the public domain, but this politically risky business led to the demise of the irrigation survey and congressional restrictions on the Geological Survey (Stegner, 1953). In the area of water research, the Geological Survey consequently pursued a lower-profile course of stream gaging, mapping, and water quality analysis (Rabbitt, 1980). The Water Resources Division generated significant scientific developments, but as with investigations in all federal water agencies the primary political force behind the research was the management and use of rivers as resource commodities (Graf, 1992). The combined efforts of the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation together with other agencies and private companies built more than 2 million dams on the nation's rivers; 87 dams impound reservoirs of a million acre feet or more of storage (Table 2.1). The reservoirs are a significant component of the nation's hydrologic cycle because they have the capacity to store an amount of water equal to three years' annual runoff from the nation (Table 2.2). By about 1960 the ethic of river control for beneficial economic development and the associated frenzy of dam construction reached a zenith, and thereafter the number of starts for new structures declined (Figure 2.4). Federal funding for water projects became more difficult to

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Figure 2.1 Regional distribution of flood damages in the continental United States, 1902–1937, during a period of emphasis for the flood control efforts of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, showing the importance of the eastern states in losses. Source: Data from U.S. Department of Agriculture, reprinted by permission from Hunt (1974). Copyright ©1974 by W. H. Freeman Company.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Figure 2.2 Regional distribution of irrigated lands in the continental United States, showing the emphasis for reclamation efforts in the western states. Source: Data from U.S. Department of Agriculture, reprinted by permission from Hunt (1974). Copyright ©1974 by W. H. Freeman Company.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Figure 2.3 Distribution of large dams (those with reservoir capacity of 1 million acre feet or more) in the continental United States. Source: Data from U.S. Department of the Interior (1986), U.S. Department of the Army (1986), van der Leeden et al. (1990).

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources TABLE 2.1 Census of Dams in the Continental United States Reservoir Capacity (acre feet) Number Total Capacity (acre feet) >10,000,000 5 121,670,100 1,000,000 – 10,000,000 82 186,480,100 100,000 – 1,000,000 482 136,371,900 50,000 – 100,000 295 20,557,000 25,000 – 50,000 374 13,092,000 5,000 – 25,000 1,411 15,632,000 50 – 5,000a 50,000b 5,000,000 <50c 2,000,000b 10,000,000 Total   508,803,100 a Mean reservoir size estimated to be 100 acre feet. b U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' estimates. c Mean reservoir size estimated to be 5 acre feet. SOURCE: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' data. obtain, all of the best sites had been developed, and the new competing ethic of preservation had grown to formidable proportions. RIVERS AS OBJECTS OF PRESERVATION Preservation of wilderness attributes of landscapes slowly emerged in American culture (Nash, 1973; Oelschlaeger, 1991), almost always in conflict with the prevailing development ethic (Graf, 1990). Beginning in the 1920s, an increasingly organized effort involving resource managers and public user groups pressed for the establishment of formal wilderness areas on federal lands to preserve natural environments. Even after passage of the 1964 Wilderness Act, preservation of river environments was problematical. In the Southwest, for example, proponents of dam and irrigation projects opposed wilderness designations because potential reservoirs might extend into the

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources TABLE 2.2 Distribution of Water in the Continental United States Compartment Volume (km3) Ground water 126,000 Freshwater lakes 19,000 Soil moisture 630 Reservoirs 627a Water vapor, atmosphere 190 Ice and glaciers 67 Salt lakes 58 Active rivers 50 Total 146,632 a Calculated from Table 2.1. SOURCE: Federal Council for Science and Technology (1962). preserved areas, an arrangement prohibited by the new law (Baker, 1985). Recognizing the special problems in preserving river environments and fresh from political victories that prevented the construction of dams in Dinosaur National Monument and Grand Canyon National Park, the preservation movement secured approval of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1968 (Tarlock and Tippy, 1970; Goodell, 1978). The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act did not give natural objects legal standing in the traditional sense (Stone, 1974), but it lent statutory legitimacy to an alternative to development. The act established a national system that included rivers in varying levels of preservation, and it prohibited dam construction in all river segments included in the system (Coyle, 1988). The dramatic increase in river preservation occurred coincidentally with the dramatic decrease in dam construction (Figure 2.5), partly reflecting the shift in American cultural values placed on rivers. By the time the act appeared, only about 2 percent of the nation's streams remained in undisturbed natural conditions (Echeverria et al., 1989). Engineering structures had coopted many potential wild and scenic rivers, but since 1968 the system has grown

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Figure 2.4 Dates of closure for large dams (those with reservoir capacity of 1 million acre feet or more) in the continental United States. Compare with the trends in Figure 2.5. Source: Data from U.S. Department of the Interior (1986), U.S. Department of the Army (1986), van der Leeden et al. (1990). sporadically to include 125 reaches totaling almost 10,000 miles of river (Huntington and Echeverria, 1991). The mileage preserved in the system is still a small fraction of the length of river inundated by reservoirs and includes less than one-third of 1 percent of the nation's total natural river courses (Table 2.3). Like the nation's largest dams, the distribution of preserved river segments is heavily weighted toward the West (Figure 2.6).

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Figure 2.5 Dates of establishment for segments of the Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Compare with the trends in Figure 2.4. Source: Data from American Rivers, Inc. (1990). The stage for continued conflict between development and preservation is now established on the map of American rivers. Preserved segments and potential candidate segments for preservation are juxtaposed with clams and reservoirs whose operations strongly affect downstream reaches. Unwittingly, the political and economic processes have produced a situation wherein the management objectives of closely associated structures and preserved segments are opposed to each other, but because of strong interconnections in the river systems they cannot be managed in isolation from each other. The constituen-

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources TABLE 2.3 River Mileage in the United States Status Miles Data Source Total rivers and streams 3,200,000 Echeverria et al. (1989) Rivers and streams now under reservoir waters 600,000 Echeverria et al. (1989) Rivers and streams suited for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System 64,000 U.S. Department of the Interior (1982) Rivers and streams included in the Wild and Scenic Rivers System 9,452 American Rivers, Inc. (1990) cies of all the river resource management agencies have therefore expanded dramatically, and agencies that once competed now must deal with each other with at least a semblance of harmony. These new holistic problems make significant new demands on science for their resolution. SCIENCE FOR RIVER MANAGEMENT Scientific investigations of American rivers have always been the handmaidens of public policy for riverine resources. Geomorphology developed as a distinct science within geology and geography at the close of the nineteenth century (Chorley et al., 1964), and the first hydrology textbook appeared in 1904 (Chow, 1964). The emergence of these sciences coincided with the burgeoning interest in water resource development early in the twentieth century, when scientific investigations of river processes were usually related to assisting in the solution of engineering problems. Gaging and analysis of western river discharges, for example, were largely in support of the search for suitable rivers and sites for the construction of large federal clams (see, e.g., LaRue, 1925). Investigations into the hydrologic and geomorphic impacts of various land use practices resulted from efforts to understand and control erosion and sedimentation that threatened water resource development (see, e.g., Thornthwaite et al., 1942). When these early scientists and associated engineers (such as Frederick H. Newell, an early director of the Reclamation Service) became part of the administering bureaucracy, they brought their engineering and science with them. They were administrators

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Gilbert, G. K. 1877. Report on the Geology of the Henry Mountains. U.S. Geographical and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Glacken, C.J. 1967. Traces on the Rhodian Shore: Nature and Culture in Western Thought from Ancient Times to the End of the Eighteenth Century. University of California Press, Berkeley. Goetzmann, W. H. 1984. Karl Bodmer's America. Joslyn Art Museum and University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Goodell, S. K. 1978. Waterway preservation: The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 7:43–82. Graf, W. L. 1988. Fluvial Processes in Dryland Rivers. Springer-Verlag, New York and Berlin. Graf, W L. 1990. Wilderness Preservation and the Sagebrush Rebellions. Rowman & Littlefield, Totowa, N.J. Graf, W. L. 1992. Science, public policy, and western American rivers. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 17:1–24. Grove, R. H. 1992. Origins of western environmentalism. Scientific American 267(1):42–47. Hays, S. P. 1959. Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Holmes, B. H. 1979. A History of Federal Water Resources Programs and Policies, 1961–1970. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Hunt, C. B. 1974. Natural Regions of the United States and Canada. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco. Huntington, M. H., and J. D. Echeverria. 1991. The American Rivers Outstanding Rivers List. American Rivers, Inc., Washington, D.C. LaRue, E. C. 1925. Water Power and Flood Control of the Colorado River Below Green River, Utah. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 556. USGS, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Layton, E., Jr. 1971. The Revolt of the Engineers: Social Responsibility and the American Engineering Profession. Press of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Leopold, L. B. 1990. Ethos, Equity, and the Water Resource. Transcript of 1990 Wolman Lecture, Water Science and Technology Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences. Leopold, L. B., M. G. Wolman, and J.P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco. Nash, R. 1973. Wilderness and the American Mind. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. National Research Council (NRC). 1983. Safety of Existing Dams: Evaluation and Improvement. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1984. Water for the Future of the Nation's Capital Area . National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1985. Safety of Dams: Flood and Earthquake Criteria. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1987. River and Dam Management: A Review of the Bureau of Reclamation's Glen Canyon Environmental Studies. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1989. Irrigation-Induced Water Quality Problems: What Can Be Learned from the San Joaquin Valley Experience. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1990. A Review of the U.S.G.S. National Water Quality Assessment Pilot Program. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1991a. Colorado River Ecology and Dam Management. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Research Council (NRC). 1991b. Opportunities in the Hydrologic Sciences. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources National Research Council (NRC). 1992. Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. Nygren, E.J. 1986. Views and Visions: American Landscape Before 1830. Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. Oelschlaeger, M. 1991. The Idea of Wilderness. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Powell, J. W. 1878. Report on the Lands of the Arid Region of the United States, with a More Detailed Account of the Lands of Utah. U.S. Geological and Geographical Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region, Washington, D.C. Public Land Law Review Commission. 1970. One Third of the Nation's Land: A Report to the President and to Congress by the Public Land Law Review Commission. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Rabbitt, M. C. 1980. Minerals, Lands, and Geology for the Common Defense and General Welfare: Volume 2:1879–1904. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. Schumm, S. A. 1977. The Fluvial System. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Stegner, W. 1953. Beyond the Hundredth Meridian: John Wesley Powell and the Second Opening of the West. Houghton Mufflin Company, Boston. Stone, C. D. 1974. Should Trees Have Legal Standing?: Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects. W. Kaufmann, Los Altos, California. Tansley, A. G. 1946. Introduction to Plant Ecology. Allen & Unwin, London. Tarlock, A.D., and R. Tippy. 1970. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. Cornell Law Review 55:707–739. Thorn, C.E. 1988. Introduction to Theoretical Geomorphology. Unwin Hyman, London. Thornthwaite, C. W., C. F. S. Sharpe, and E. F. Dosch. 1942. Climate and Accelerated Erosion in the Arid and Semi-Arid Southwest, With Special

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources Reference to the Polacca Wash Drainage Basins, Arizona. U.S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin 808. USDA, Washington, D.C. Tinkler, K. J. 1985. A Short History of Geomorphology. Barnes and Noble, Totowa, N.J. Trelease, F. J. 1979. Water Law: Cases and Materials. 3rd Edition. West Publishing Company, Minneapolis, Minn. U.S. Department of the Army. 1986. Annual Report FY86 of the Secretary of the Army on Civil Works Activities. U.S. Department of the Army, Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1982. The National Rivers Inventory. USDI, National Park Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1986. Statistical Compilation of Engineering Features on Bureau of Reclamation Projects. USDI, Bureau of Reclamation, Washington, D.C. U.S. Forest Service. 1991. U.S. Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Map. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C. van der Leeden, F., F. L. Troise, and D. K. Todd. 1990. The Water Encyclopedia. 2nd Edition. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Mich. von Bertalanffy, L. 1950. An outline of general system theory. British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 1:134–165. von Bertalanffy, L. 1962. General system theory—a critical review. General Systems 7:1–20. Wilmerding, J., and J. A. Mahe. 1984. The Waters of America: 19th-Century American Paintings of Rivers, Streams, Lakes, and Waterfalls. New Orleans Museum of Art, New Orleans.

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources APPENDIX 2A LARGE DAMS OF THE UNITED STATES The following table identifies dams in the continental United States with reservoir capacity of 1 million acre feet or more. Dates for Tennessee Valley Authority dams are initial year of hydropower production; others are dates of closure. Sources of data: U.S. Department of the Interior (1986), U.S. Department of the Army (1986), van der Leeden et al. (1990).   DAM RESERVOIR RIVER STATE CAPACITY DATE 1 Hoover Mead Colorado AZ/NV 28,500,000 1936 2 Glen Canyon Powell Colorado AZ 27,000,000 1964 3 Garrison Sakakawea Missouri ND 23,923,500 1956 4 Oahe Oahe Missouri SD 23,337,600 1962 5 Fort Peck Fort Peck Missouri MT 18,909,000 1940 6 Grand Coulee F.D. Roosevelt Columbia WA 9,390,000 1942 7 Kentucky Kentucky Tennessee KY 6,129,000 1944 8 Libby Libby Kootenai MT 5,809,000 1972 9 Fort Randall Francis Case Missouri SD 5,603,000 1953 10 Bull Shoals Bull Shoals White AK 5,408,000 1952 11 Denison Texoma Red TX 5,312,300 1944 12 H.S. Truman H.S. Truman Osage MO 5,202,000 1982 13 Shasta Shasta Sacramento CA 4,550,000 1945 14 Sam Rayburn Sam Rayburn Angelina TX 3,997,600 1965 15 Eufaula Eufaula Canadian OK 3,825,400 1964 16 Flaming Gorge Flaming Gorge Green UT 3,788,700 1964 17 Hungry Horse Hungry Horse S.F., Flathead MT 3,470,000 1953 18 Table Rock Table Rock White MO 3,462,000 1959 19 Dworshak Dworshak N.F. Clearwater ID 3,453,000 1972 20 Clarks Hill Clarks Hill Savannah SC 2,900,000 1952 21 Grears Ferry Grears Ferry Little Red AR 2,844,000 1962 22 Hartwell Hartwell Savannah GA 2,842,700 1961 23 Blackley Mt. Ouachita Ouachita AK 2,768,500 1955 24 John H. Kerr Kerr Roanoke VA 2,750,300 1952 25 Red Lake Red Lake Red Lake MN 2,680,000 1951 26 Wright Patman Marion Sulphur TX 2,654,300 1957 27 Cooper Cooper Santee SC 2,560,000 1985 28 Buford Sidney Lanier Chattahoochee GA 2,554,000 1956 29 Norris Norris Clinch TN 2,552,000 1936 30 John Day Umatilla Columbia OR/WA 2,500,000 1968 31 Painted Rock Painted Rock Gila AZ 2,491,700 1959 32 Trinity Clair Engle Trinity CA 2,450,000 1962 33 New Melones New Melones Stanislaus CA 2,400,000 1979 34 Tuttle Creek Tuttle Creek Big Blue KS 2,346,000 1962 35 Elephant Butte Elephant Butte Rio Grande NM 2,110,000 1916 36 Center Hill Center Hill Caney Fork TN 2,092,000 1948 37 Barkley Barkley Cumberland KY 2,082,000 1964

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources   DAM RESERVOIR RIVER STATE CAPACITY DATE 38 Canyon Ferry Canyon Ferry Missouri MT 2,050,519 1954 39 San Luis San Luis San Luis CA 2,040,000 1967 40 Whitney Whitney Brazos TX 1,999,500 1953 41 Norfolk Norfolk North Fork AR 1,983,000 1943 42 Marshall Ford Travis Colorado River TX 1,953,936 1942 43 Beaver Beaver White AR 1,952,000 1963 44 Big Bend Sharpe Missouri SD 1,884,000 1964 45 Millwood Millwood Little AK 1,854,930 1966 46 Red Rock Red Rock Des Moines IA 1,830,000 1969 47 Keystone Keystone Arkansas OK 1,737,600 1964 48 Navajo Navajo San Juan NM 1,708,600 1963 49 Dale Hollow Dale Hollow Obey TN 1,706,000 1943 50 Stockton Stockton Sac MO 1,674,000 1969 51 American Falls American Falls Snake ID 1,670,000 1978 52 Monticello Berryessa Putah CA 1,600,000 1957 53 Sardis Sardis L. Tallahatchie MS 1,570,000 1940 54 McNary McNary Columbia OR/WA 1,550,000 1953 55 Cherokee Cherokee Holston TN 1,541,000 1942 56 Oologah Oologah Verdigris OK 1,519,000 1963 57 Douglas Douglas French Broad TN 1,461,000 1943 58 Fontana Fontana L. Tennessee NC 1,443,000 1945 59 Clarence Cannon Mark Twain Salt MO 1,428,000 1983 60 Palisades Palisades S.F., Snake ID 1,401,000 1957 61 Stanford Meredith Canadian TX 1,382,478 1965 62 Broken Bow Broken Bow Mountain Fork OK 1,368,230 1968 63 Tiber Elwell Marias MT 1,368,157 1956 64 Kaw Kaw Arkansas OK 1,348,000 1976 65 Roosevelt Roosevelt Salt AZ 1,336,700 1936 66 Yellowtail Bighorn Bighorn WY 1,328,360 1966 67 Fort Gibson Fort Gibson Grand OK 1,284,400 1953 68 North/Dry Falls Banks Columbia WA 1,280,000 1951 69 Island Park Island Park Henry's Fork ID 1,280,000 1938 70 Tenkiller Tenkiller Illinois OK 1,230,000 1952 71 Coolidge San Carlos Gila AZ 1,222,000 1928 72 Abiquiu Abiquiu Rio Chama NM 1,212,000 1963 73 Kinzua Kinzua Allegheny PA 1,180,000 1965 74 Watts Bar Watts Bar Tennessee TN 1,175,000 1942 75 Milford Milford Republican KS 1,160,000 1965 76 Albeni Falls Albeni Falls Pend Oreille ID 1,153,000 1952 77 Owyhee Owyhee Owyhee OR 1,120,000 1932 78 Strawberry Strawberry Strawberry UT 1,106,500 1974 79 Pickwick Landing Pickwick Landing Tennessee TN 1,105,000 1938 80 Belton Belton Leon TX 1,097,600 1954 81 Wheeler Wheeler Tennessee AL 1,069,000 1936

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources   DAM RESERVOIR RIVER STATE CAPACITY DATE 82 Guntersville Guntersville Tennessee AL 1,049,000 1939 83 Alamo Alamo Bill Williams AZ 1,046,310 1968 84 Seminoe Seminoe North Platte WY 1,017,273 1939 85 Pathfinder Pathfinder North Platte WY 1,016,507 1909 86 Folsom Folsom American CA 1,010,000 1956 87 Pine Flat Pine Flat Kings CA 1,000,000 1954

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources APPENDIX 2B RIVERS IN THE U.S. WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM The following table identifies rivers formally included in the U.S. Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Data source: American Rivers, Inc. (1990), updated to include all additions as of July 1, 1992.   RIVER STATE MILES YEAR 1 Middle Fork, Clearwater ID 185 1968 2 Eleven Point MO 44.4 1968 3 Feather CA 77.6 1968 4 Rio Grande NM 52.75 1968 5 Rio Grande TX 191.2 1978 6 Rogue OR 84.5 1968 7 St. Croix MN, WI 200 1968 8 Lower St. Croix MN, WI 27 1972 9 2nd Lower St. Croix MN, WI 25 1976 10 Middle Fork, Salmon ID 104 1968 11 Salmon ID 125 1980 12 Wolf WI 25 1968 13 Allagash ME 95 1970 14 Little Miami OH 66 1973 15 2nd Little Miami OH 28 1980 16 Chattooga NC, SC, GA 56.9 1974 17 Little Beaver OH 33 1975 18 Snake ID, OR 66.9 1975 19 Rapid ID 26.8 1975 20 New NC 26.5 1976 21 Missouri MT 149 1976 22 Missouri NE, SD 59 1978 23 Flathead MT 219 1976 24 Obed TN 45.2 1976 25 Pere Marquette MI 66.4 1978 26 Skagit WA 157.5 1978 27 Upper Delaware NY, PA 75.4 1978 28 Middle Delaware NY, PA, NJ 35 1978 29 North Fork, American CA 38.3 1978

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources   RIVER STATE MILES YEAR 30 Lower American CA 23 1981 31 Saint Joe ID 66.3 1978 32 Alagnak AK 67 1980 33 Alatna AK 83 1980 34 Aniakchak AK 63 1980 35 Charley AK 208 1980 36 Chilikadrotna AK 11 1980 37 John AK 52 1980 38 Kobuk AK 110 1980 39 Mulchatna AK 24 1980 40 North Fork, Koyukuk AK 102 1980 41 Noatak AK 330 1980 42 Salmon AK 70 1980 43 Tinayguk AK 44 1980 44 Tlikakila AK 51 1980 45 Andreafsky AK 262 1980 46 Ivishak AK 80 1980 47 Nowitna AK 225 1980 48 Selawik AK 160 1980 49 Sheenjek AK 160 1980 50 Wind AK 140 1980 51 Beaver Creek AK 111 1980 52 Birch Creek AK 126 1980 53 Delta AK 62 1980 54 Fortymile AK 392 1980 55 Gulkana AK 181 1980 56 Unalakleet AK 80 1980 57 Klamath CA 286 1981 58 Trinity CA 203 1981 59 Eel CA 394 1981 60 Smith CA 325.4 1981 61 Verde AZ 40.5 1984 62 Tuolumne CA 83 1984 63 Au Sable MI 23 1984 64 Owyhee OR 112 1984 65 Illinois OR 50.4 1984 66 Loxahatchee FL 7.5 1985 67 Horsepasture NC 4.2 1986

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources   RIVER STATE MILES YEAR 68 Cache la Poudre CO 76 1986 69 Black Creek MS 21 1986 70 Saline Bayou LA 19 1986 71 Klickitat WA 10 1986 72 White Salmon WA 9 1986 73 Merced CA 113.5 1987 74 Kings CA 81 1987 75 Kern CA 151 1987 76 Wildcat Creek NH 14.5 1988 77 Sipsey Fork, West Fork AL 61.4 1988 78 Big Marsh Creek OR 15 1988 79 Chetco OR 44.5 1988 80 Clakamas OR 47 1988 81 Crescent Creek OR 10 1988 82 Crooked OR 15 1988 83 Deschutes OR 173.4 1988 84 Donner und Blitzen OR 72.7 1988 85 Eagle Creek OR 27 1988 86 Elk OR 19 1988 87 Grande Ronde OR 43.8 1988 88 Imnaha OR 77 1988 89 John Day OR 147.5 1988 90 Joseph Creek OR 8.6 1988 91 Little Deschutes OR 12 1988 92 Lostine OR 16 1988 93 Halheur OR 13.7 1988 94 McKenzie OR 12.7 1988 95 Metollus OR 28.6 1988 96 Minam OR 39 1988 97 North Fork, Crooked OR 32.3 1988 98 North Fork, John Day OR 53.8 1988 99 North Fork, Malheur OR 25.5 1988 100 N. Fk., M. Fk., Willamette OR 42.3 1988 101 North Fork, Owyhee OR 9.6 1988 102 North Fork, Smith OR 13 1988 103 North Fork, Sprague OR 15 1988 104 North Powder OR 6 1988 105 North Umpqua OR 33.8 1988

OCR for page 11
Sustaining our Water Resources   RIVER STATE MILES YEAR 106 Powder OR 11.7 1988 107 Quartzville Creek OR 12 1988 108 Roaring OR 13.7 1988 109 Salmon OR 33.5 1988 110 Sandy OR 24.9 1988 111 South Fork, John Day OR 47 1988 112 Squaw Creek OR 15.4 1988 113 Sycan OR 59 1988 114 Upper Rogue OR 40.3 1988 115 Wenaha OR 21.6 1988 116 West Little Owyhee OR 57.6 1988 117 White OR 46.5 1988 118 Bluestone WV 17 1988 119 Rio Chama NM 24.6 1988 120 Middle Fork, Vermillion IL 17.1 1989 121 East Fork, Jemez NM 11 1990 122 Pecos NM 20.7 1990 123 Clarks Fk., Yellowstone WY 20.5 1990 124 Niobrara NE 95 1991 125 Missouri NE 39 1991