Geography of the James (Earth Lodge)

As the Willamette River gushes through the pine-covered Willamette watershed, one cannot help but notice its hastiness and desire to do what it does best- reshaping the channel morphology and sustaining a plethora of aquatic life. This hastiness could probably be attributed to its desire to flow freely without human alterations before it suffers again the brunt of man, who has erected dams incessantly at different stages of the river to exploit its grandiose powers for hydroelectric power production and navigation. Even though these efforts by man seem plausible, one thing remains, dams result in an immense reduction of sediment downstream. This reduction if not properly monitored, may consequently have adverse effects on the well-being of the stream ecosystems.

Figure 1: The fast flowing waters of the Willamette River in Lane County, Oregon.

Sediments play an invaluable role of creating diverse ecological habitats. Invertebrates and other micro-organisms rely on the simple habitats engineered by the river currents as the river deposits load and creates new pathways. These habitats support a community of organisms that depend on each other in magnificently interlinked foodwebs, while the river acts as a regulating agent determining the relocation and emergence of new habitats as it erodes bank channels and deposits sediment in different sections. This ensures redistribution of organisms along the river channel thus promoting biological diversity. It is this biological diversity that grants communities formidable strength to withstand perturbations such adverse weather changes by enhancing community succession and colonization of new habitats. However, with reduced sediment amounts due to damming, intermittent biotic populations along river channels are inevitable. These erratic populations if not properly monitored may become extinct. For instance, sensitive micro-invertebrates and migrating birds that rely on such habitats for spawning or foraging may experience a population bottleneck or forced emigration that leads to population outbursts in other ecosystems while leaving unfilled ecological niches in the previous habitats. The ultimate effect is the loss of ecological diversity and species succession, all attributable to damming of hydrologic systems.

Moreover, reduction of sediment downstream has resulted in compromised water table levels. This is because with reduced sediment in a river’s current, the velocity of the river augments. This can be detrimental to the channel morphology as the river uses its grinding powers to make deep incisions into its river bed and causes massive erosion of its banks. The result is a reduction of the subsurface water levels as water percolates deep into

Figure 2: Increased stream velocities cause massive downcutting of their riverbeds leading to lowering of streams and consequently the watertable.

the underground aquifer. Aquatic animals and other riparian vegetation now suffer the brunt of a hydrologic drought. Survival for the fittest demands that aquatic organisms have to either move upstream to escape the adverse effects of the hydrologic drought downstream or die from intraspecific competition for the limited resources with other aquatic animals. On the other hand, the initially water-logged soils of the riparian zone now become dry soils that allow free movement of air between their crevices. Nitrogen is able to accumulate in these soils and is released into water channels when the water table rises during events such as floods or hurricanes. This deposition of nitrogen into water sources has the effect of increasing algal blooms and ultimately causing eutrophication. Likewise, with reduced water levels comes reduced riparian vegetation cover. A huge portion of the invaluable function played by riparian zones as buffer systems is lost and streams become exposed to the raging effects of pollution from nearby ecosystems. This is double tragedy to aquatic life that now have to show forbearance towards the scarce water burden due to diminishing water table levels, and imminent threats from pollution. In the long-term, adverse ecological problems are inevitable.

Evidently, floodplains rely heavily on sediments carried downstream by rivers. These sediments are the veins of floodplains, as they are responsible for the fertile soils that make floodplains agriculturally viable regions rather than pools of waterborne infections such as Bilharzia. Native Americans that lived along the coastal plains of the James River particularly relied on the rich soils of the tidewater region to grow subsistence crops such as corn and beans. These coastal plains produced substantial amounts of food that enabled trade within the Native American tribes. Similarly, today many countries rely on floodplains for food production. These extensive tracts of floodplains play a critical role of

Figure 3: Farming on the Yamuna River floodplains in Delhi.

curbing food insecurity and providing an impetus for economic growth. Moreover, floodplains have proven to be invaluable water filters. Studies show that when floodplains get inundated with water, they act as natural filters that remove excess sediment and nutrients from the water before it enters other hydrologic systems. This is significant to the health of aquatic animals and human beings that draw water from such systems.  Degradation of water quality has particularly been observed along small rivers and at hypoxic regions of large rivers due to loss of floodplain habitat. This loss thus allows excessive nutrients to enter hydrologic systems. Damming consistently reduces the amount of sediments reaching the coastal plains thus massively contributing to the exacerbation of this water quality issue. Ultimately, flood plains that once served the invaluable functions mentioned above become ineffectual areas of no ecological or human significance.

It is eminent that dams cause appalling effects to ecological and hydrologic systems in the long-term. These effects lead to loss of ecological diversity and degradation of land and other water resources. These effects may take time before they are discernible to us because the rather ephemeral benefits we derive from damming such as hydroelectric power production, enhanced navigation and recreation blind us from foreseeing the ultimate ecological impacts of our actions. Unfortunately, the end result is a loss both to man and ecosystems subservient to him.

References:

http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/habitats/riverslakes/benefits-of-healthy-floodplains.xml

https://www.google.com/searchq=reduced+water+tables&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=613&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjtzoSNiNPPAhVJcD4KHRWmBFAQ_AUIBygC#tbm=isch&q=river+incision+&imgrc=vUQzX_y3q0DY7M%3A

https://www.google.com/search?q=floodplain+on+yamuna+river&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=662&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjfz6H_yN_PAhWIoD4KHZ_rDDIQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=yamuna+floodplains&imgrc=dMynlil-XXOmVM%3A

Belmead was 50 or 100 years past its prime. The parking lot could hold hundreds of cars,

Belmead Mansion

but it looked like ours were the only ones it had seen in years. The mansion was proud, but showed its age through its stained walls and worn windows. We were here to kill an invasive species called tree of heaven. When it grows, tree of heaven releases a chemical from its roots that inhibits the growth of other plants around it. We methodically killed these plants with pesticide so that the ones we preferred could live.

Tree of Heaven, native to China

Killing trees of heaven at Belmead felt wrong. Even knowing that it would increase diversity in the riparian zone along the James. Even knowing that the plant is an “invasive” that’s too good at propagating to be left alone. Even knowing that we were making the James better, killing for the sake of life seemed strange. Not in the sense that every living thing is sacred and priceless, because every choice of preference proves it’s not. Rather, in the sense of “who are we to choose one species over another?” Humans already have an oversized role in influencing the biosphere; why can’t we step back and let nature done as it has for millions of years before we started moving game pieces in the first place?

We can’t because to step back would be to ignore our oversized impact on the biota of this earth. Humans have long since passed the point where we can stop interfering with earth’s natural development. We’ve already thousands of species to endangerment and extinction; to limit our interference where we may actually be able to increase biodiversity seems irresponsible. The question now is how best to interfere while holding both biodiversity and human preeminence in the balance.

A lone cormorant waddled through the towering maze of concrete corridors. He looked a little confused and hungry, maybe a little sad. He reminded me of myself waiting in line for the cook-to-order station at dhall. He had come to the fish ladder adjacent to Bosher dam, probably with the intention of getting a delicious fish snack. Although fish ladders were designed to facilitate the safe passage of fish through dams, studies have concluded that predators congregate where fish are forced to concentrate in traveling through the narrow fish ladder. This phenomenon is referred to as a “predator hotspot,” and the lovely cormorant was hoping to take advantage of the fish buffet he hoped to find (Agostinho et al, 2012).

The hungry cormorant, unable to find fish in the empty fish ladder.

Unfortunately for the cormorant, the Bosher dam’s fish ladder is only open at certain times of the year to accommodate seasonal fish migrations, and at the time of our paddle, it was not in use. Though the cormorant would eventually leave on an empty stomach, perhaps he was able to enjoy the views from Bosher dam, just as we were able to.

The Bosher dam

Taking in the scene was beautiful. Downstream, the setting sun painted vibrant hues across the still water. Above the dam, the water swelled up and pooled along the ancient mansions at its banks. Despite the thunderous crash of the spilling water as it raced over the concrete wall of the dam, the entire world felt still for our moment looking at the James. While it provides a scenic spot to rest after some hardcore paddling, the 12 feet high Bosher dam is not in use today. So why is it still in place?

The answer can be seen from the dam. Upstream of the dam where the grand houses sit, wealthy and influential people live along the James and enjoy a good boat ride. They enjoy boating so much that they rallied to protect the Bosher dam and keep it in place because the dam helps pool the water upstream creating a beautiful boating oasis. However, keeping the Bosher dam inhibits many fish species from traveling upstream up to Lynchburg. Though the fish ladder is in place, it is not very effective. The fish ladder is only seasonally operating and often contains predators waiting for meals (like our friend the cormorant). Some fish populations do not use the fish ladder at all. Fish and fishermen alike could benefit from the removal of the Bosher dam.

Souce:

Agostinho, Angelo Antonio, Agostinho, Carlos Sergio, Pelicice, Fernando Mayer, & Marques, Elineide Eugênio. (2012). Fish ladders: safe fish passage or hotspot for predation?. Neotropical Ichthyology, 10(4), 687-696. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1679-62252012000400001

I volunteered at the folk festival this weekend with Jack, Quinn, and Eugene. Quinn and Jack collected donations while Eugene and I picked up stray trash and made sure people put their waste in appropriate bins, which included compost, trash, or recycling. There were sets of these bins stationed almost every thirty feet from each other, yet there was still trash everywhere – napkins flying around, hundreds of cigarette butts, food all over the ground. It made me think about how our kayak guides at Dutch Gap talked about getting rid of the trash cans in their area. They found that people littered way less when trash cans were absent. Could the same phenomenon occur at the festival? If there were fewer trash cans, would people be more encouraged to wait and find a trash can instead of just dropping their waste? I think it’d be an interesting experiment to try.

I also connected the festival to the flowchart in the class notes about creating a sense of community: awareness leads to appraisal leads to action. Many people donated money to keep the festival free for future years. People appreciate the free festival,56io0 ` which leads to them making a donation. Although this doesn’t concern a watershed, the two issues – taking care of watersheds and the festival – are similar in that when people understand its importance, they are more likely to do their part to maintain its quality. However, a middle aged woman came up to us and yelled that we needed to force the younger population to donate because she had “seen a lot of people under the age of forty without stickers!!” When you donate, you get a sticker. This, I felt, also supports the flow chart because the younger people at the festival probably only go to college in Richmond and don’t live here, so they do not attend this festival often or appreciate its significance. The fact that the young people are from different places means that they come from spaces with different characteristics – perhaps where there are not festivals or people are not generous enough to donate at similar events. Whatever the case, they understand different customs than those of Richmond and its folk festival. These people are not aware, so they do not act the same as those who are.

Aside from generally having a good time and doing service, I enjoyed the folk festival because I observed things that I was able to translate to things that we learned in class.