Participation in River Passage

Due to public demand, multiple organizations are working to resolve the issue of damming in Wisconsin’s rivers. The River Alliance of Wisconsin works to educate people on the effects of dams and provide resources so anyone can remove dams in the rivers they care about.

http://www.wisconsinrivers.org/images/Documents/Dams/Dam%20Removal%20-%20A%20Citizens%20Guide%20to%20Saving%20Rivers.pdf

Ozaukee County has gone a bit further in their initiative. In 2006 they started receiving grants of $10 million to improve fish passage in streams in the Milwaukee River watershed and Lake Michigan basin. The Milwaukee Audubon society has taken on the project to reconnect 142 miles of streams back to the Milwaukee River. As of December 2013, 126 miles of streams have been reconnected to 8,295 acres of wetlands. This initiative is increasing the numbers of threatened and endangered fish species, providing jobs and volunteering opportunities for local people, and providing education on stream ecology. Volunteers can contact the project director to receive a worksheet and document an impediment. They have them mapped but it's time consuming to gather minor details, though they may be very important when determining whether or not a fish can pass through. Volunteer involvement is very important here.

Because of human activity and some natural causes, rivers and streams have been blocked and fish can't pass through to their spawning grounds in the wetlands. Some passages are man made, like culverts but poorly designed. The metal bottom and narrow sides of culverts cause water to move more quickly so some fish can't swim through. Some culverts are placed too high for fish to jump into and some have been over grown or filled with sediment and the water can be too shallow. Dams completely block fish passage in most cases. Other impediments include railroad ballast deposits -- where crushed stone that is placed on track bridges fall through the cracks into the river below, creating a dam. Natural blockages will also form from fallen branches and built up debris. This is affecting fish populations, including some species of concern. 

Source: http://www.co.ozaukee.wi.us/2102/Types-of-Large-Scale-Impediments

Some of the improvements the Audubon Society has made include redesigning road crossings and converting culverts to in-stream structures and open span bridges. These provide fish passage during any flow event and minimize flood risks by being as close to natural river systems as possible. They improve sediment flow and water quality. And they have minimal effect on the roads they pass under so they have low maintenance costs. Removing dams is the most effective way of opening fish passage, but it can also be very expensive. In addition to improving the river's ecology, the removal of dams improves recreational purposes of rivers and eliminates the need for maintenance.

In their most innovative and costly construction The Audubon Society created a fish passage to go around the Mequon-Thiensville dam. The dam was constructed in 1982 and provides hydropower for a mill. The water level difference is 6.5 ft and causes a 700 acre impoundment. The fishway meanders 800 ft and includes pools and riffles to allow fish to swim up stream past the dam. The long distance allows even weak swimmers to make their way upstream. This and other Ozaukee projects use the northern pike as a reference fish because they are not very strong swimmers and jumpers. If the northern pike can pass the impediment then mostly native fish will be able to as well. There is also a livestream showing all the marine life that passes through the fishway. Anyone who watches the video can fill out a report on what they saw and contribute to the ongoing monitoring of the project.

The stream can be found here: http://www.co.ozaukee.wi.us/1248/Fishway-Camera

Source: https://wi-ozaukeecounty.civicplus.com/957/Mequon-Thiensville-Fishway

Source: https://wi-ozaukeecounty.civicplus.com/957/Mequon-Thiensville-Fishway

http://www.co.ozaukee.wi.us/619/Fish-Passage

Milwaukee's Waterways Actors Analysis

Milwaukee has been home to some very effective initiatives that have focused on cleaning up our local waterways.  While many Milwaukee initiatives are primarily volunteer based, strong local organizations have captured the attention of local citizens and created vast volunteer networks.  The Milwaukee River Greenway Coalition is a great example of how vast Milwaukee's volunteer networks are and boasts members that include: Urban Ecology Center, River Revitalization Foundation, Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Milwaukee Environmental Consortium, Village of Shorewood, City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee County, Friends of Estabrook Park, Milwaukee Friends Meeting (Quakers), and Cambridge Woods Neighborhood Association.  The Milwaukee River Greenway Coalition is a clear example of network governance on a local scale.  Private landowners, state organizations, and NGOs have banded together to combine volunteers and resources.  Collectively they have removed PCBs, established nature preserves, and generated public awareness to the severe pollution problems that negatively impact Milwaukee's waterways.  Generating public awareness can result in an ever increasing amount of volunteers and resources that will continue to improve our local rivers and waterways into the future.  Local volunteers have also been able to preserve natural habitats in Milwaukee County Parks and fight against invasive species.  Unfortunately for Milwaukee, the intensive pollution of our rivers before the Clean Water Act was enacted in 1972 has resulted in the high number of volunteers and resources needed to revitalize our waterways.  Milwaukee has a rare responsibility to ensure the cleanliness of our waterways because of our proximity to Lake Michigan.  PCB and invasive species control has been found to be difficult in our rivers and smaller waterways, but removing toxins and controlling invasive species in the Great Lakes is almost impossible.   

(below shows the Milwaukee River watershed-can see how it flows into Lake Michigan)

The eight hypothesis presented by Evans in our textbook were very thought provoking, and I think some of them can directly be seen in the revitalization of Milwaukee's waterways.  

Networks and Markets are the best things that we have 

From the perspective that networks are the best things that we have, I would argue that Milwaukee has shown that networks can be the most effective way to govern waterways.  Clear networks like The Milwaukee River Greenway Coalition have proven to be very effective in increasing public awareness to waterway pollution, generating volunteers and resources, and establishing specific initiatives with specific goals.  The fact that we currently do not have a universal solution to water pollution that could be implemented by a hieratical governance entity shows the importance of focusing on local networks.  Local actors can establish clear goals like the removal of the Estabrook Dam, and this can further strengthen local networks. 

(below shows volunteers working to clean up the Milwaukee River)

 

Governments matter 

Even though governance has been shifting towards a more local level, government entities and policies are still important.  The Clean Water Act is a great example of a government policy being enacted and stopped point-source pollution into Milwaukee waterways.  The shortcomings of the Clean Water Act have been well documented, and today Milwaukee is still affected by non-point source pollution.  Another issue with the Clean Water Act is how the protection of water gets fuzzy between surface and ground water.  Although the shortcomings are apparent, the Clean Water Act is still very important regarding Milwaukee's waterways.  The Milwaukee Riverkeeper has a link on its website where citizens can report pollution affecting local waterways.  Milwaukee Riverkeeper then directs the information to the EPA and appropriate action can be taken.  The EPA helped remove significant amounts of PCBs from Lincoln Creek through a $20 million clean up project in 2011.  Even though environmental governance has shifted away from governmental entities like the EPA, these entities still have significant resources that can be funneled into local projects.  Evans also makes an interesting point that network governance might provide a stepping stone towards regulatory change.  Local actors working together here in Milwaukee might establish more effective or efficient strategies to remove PCBs and these strategies could be then spread through government entities and applied in other areas that have similar pollution.  

(below shows the area that was cleaned up in Milwaukee River and Lincoln Creek)
 


Sources:
http://milwaukeeriverkeeper.org/milwaukee-river-greenway-coalition/
http://www2.epa.gov/milwaukee-estuary-aoc/lincoln-creek-milwaukee-river-channel-legacy-act-cleanup
 http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/115447964.html