The Ethics of Place in Urban Areas

June 23, 2012October 27, 2012

This weekend I’m at Santa Clara University in California’s Silicon Valley at one of my favorite professional conferences: the annual gathering of the Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences. Like the literature and environmental folks I hang out with at ASLE‘s biannual conferences, these folks in AESS are my professional tribe: educators, students, writers, scientists, and activists working on every conceivable kind of issue or project related to environmental education and sustainability. (In fact, I’m struck by how pervasive a theme sustainability has become at the AESS conferences, despite the fact that it is not explicitly a part of the organization’s name or identity).

This morning I’m part of a presentation panel entitled “Ethics of Place in Urban Areas,” which was organized by my colleague and friend Gavin Van Horn of the Center for Humans and Nature in Chicago. Here he describes the context, themes, and over-arching issues our panel addresses:

Place has become a topic of increasing scholarly attention and research. Place is particularly relevant to environmental studies and environmental sciences, because place provides a spatial anchor of memory and meaning in which care for the natural world is fostered. Most work in moral philosophy and Western ethics is abstract in the sense that it seeks to discover standards of right and wrong that are universally valid and applicable. Paradoxically, moral psychology tells us that ethical thinking and our sense of value are rooted in the lived experience in a specific place, with specific natural and social characteristics, landscapes, and cultures. The session panelists submit that an ethics of place which roots our ethical obligations more concretely and locally is essential for a more robust environmental future. We examine the ways in which ethics might be re-envisioned to include a respect for complexity and multiplicity of place in an urban context.

Our presentations integrate urban agriculture and alternative economies, landscape aesthetics, urban water quality, environmental education, and the ethics of care to discuss the ways in which place can inform an ecological ethic that is democratic and participatory in its orientation. Our approach is rooted in the disciplines of geography, political science and bioethics, religious studies and ethics, urban ecology, and sustainability studies. While addressing conceptual and ideological questions about the ethics of place, we profile on-the-ground case studies and relevant research from each panelist’s community-based work. Our goal is to engage audience members in a dialogue about how scholars and citizens can better understand how to cultivate respect for and engagement with nature in metropolitan areas – spaces frequently misunderstood as un-conducive to an ethics of place.

Photo by Ryan Hodgson-Rigsbee (2010)

My presentation, “Exploring the Chicago River: Ethics, Sustainability, and a Sense of Place” (view pdf of slideshow) looks at this waterway/ecosystem as one key manifestation of urban nature in Chicago. I explore how scientific and artistic engagement with the river can contribute to one’s sense of not just the river’s history, ecology, and identity, but also that of Chicago in particular and watersheds more generally. As my abstract notes,

The degraded yet undeniably charismatic urban waterway, the Chicago River, is a mighty fine place to contemplate the tangled relationships among water quality, land use, and sustainability within cities and suburbs. As a site for exploring urban nature, an object of analysis in the scientific assessment of water quality and urban ecology, and a case-study in landscape aesthetics, the Chicago river provides students and citizens myriad opportunities to develop a sense of place. More generally, experiencing urban rivers — and understanding their function within the complex watersheds of metropolitan regions — can foster not just ecological literacy about urban ecosystems but also ethical engagement with one’s community.

You can also view a Powerpoint slideshow of my presentation (here with annotations) that features several photographs of the river by Ryan Hodgson-Rigsbee, who collaborated with me on a Mindful Metropolis cover story about the Chicago River back in 2010. Read more about rivers here on this blog, as well.

From the Chicago Portage to the Iron Street Farm: An Urban Landscape Exploration

June 5, 2012September 22, 2016

Last Saturday was the first field trip opportunity of the summer for my PLS 392 Seminar in Humanities class at Roosevelt, the focus of which is “Representing the Urban Landscape.” After last summer’s trip to Canal Origins and Stearns Quarry Parks on Chicago’s Southwest Side, I decided to choose two different urban areas to explore — but sticking with the theme of how water and the land interact through time and space.

Ferdinand G. Rebechini’s massive sculpture of Father Jacques Marquette, explorer Louis Jolliet, and an unnamed Native American guide, erected 1989 at the Chicago Portage National Historic Site (M. Bryson)

We convened first at the Chicago Portage National Historic Site in Lyons, IL (on Harlem Ave just north of the Stevenson/I-55 expressway) for a guided tour run by the Friends of the Chicago Portage volunteer organization. Our two-hour walking tour through this historic site within the Cook County Forest Preserve was led by local historian Jeff Carter, a longtime member of the Friends of the Chicago Portage volunteer organization. FCP runs tours, produces educational documents and videos, organizes clean-up days for the preserve, and advocates for the creation of an interpretative center that could enhance the educational and public outreach value of the site.

Portage Creek, a tributary of the Des Plaines River, where Marquette and Jolliet canoed and portaged in their journey north to Chicago in 1673 (M. Bryson)

As it is, though, the Chicago Portage — sometimes referred to as Chicago’s Plymouth Rock because of its incredible historical significance to the city’s and state’s geography, cultural history, and economic development — is a wonderful out-of-the-way place to visit. Its woods, meadows, ponds, and creeks not only harbor a rich array of wildlife, but serve as a space-and-time capsule of the days of the late 17th century, when European explorers such as Jacques Marquette, Louis Jolliet, and René Robert Cavalier, Sieur De La Salle walked and canoed the area with the help of Native American guides.

After an extremely pleasant picnic lunch at the foot of the remarkable Marquette and Joliet sculpture at this Cook County Forest Preserve site (one of only two Nat’l Historic Sites in IL), we headed up Interstate 55, into Chicago proper, to Growing Power’s Iron Street Farm — at 7 acres one of the biggest among the many urban farms operating within Chicago’s city limits.

Lavender pots and the big mural at Iron Street Farm (M. Bryson)

Located in a former truck depot / distribution center at Iron and 34th Streets in Chicago’s Bridgeport neighborhood, the Iron Street farm represents a 21st century adaptive and sustainable re-use of a post-industrial 20th century urban site. As such, it’s both an actual and symbolic transformation of the land — not to mention an aesthetically (as well as ecologically) significant improvement of the area.

Lily Bryson (age 10) walks through one of the many hoop houses at Iron Street (M. Bryson)

Iron Street farmer and tour guide Erica Hougland shows my kids the red wiggler worms in one of the many vermiculture compost bins inside the farm’s building (M. Bryson)

Iron Street Farm has a Chicago River connection, too. It’s located right on the west bank of Bubbly Creek, the infamously polluted yet still fascinating industrial tributary of the South Branch of the Chicago River.

A view of Bubbly Creek, looking southwest from the roof of Iron Street Farm (M. Bryson)

So not only does the rooftop of Iron Street’s building provide a good view of Bubbly Creek, but also any rain that falls on the farm property is retained there, on-site, for use in growing plants and accelerating the decomposition of compost piles — rather than entering the stormwater sewer system and contributing to the combined sewage overflows that still plague the Chicago waterway system.

Both of these sites within the urban landscape — the Chicago Portage and Iron Street Farm — are connected by the history and present status of Chicago’s waterways; and both are intimately linked to how we can re-imagine and redevelop the city’s natural resources for the benefit of water quality, wildlife, and our own human experience.

For more pictures of this field trip, see these Chicago Portage and Iron Street Farm annotated photo albums.

Paddling Bubbly Creek: Water, Food, and Urban Ecology

May 2, 2012June 20, 2012

This past Sunday, 29 April 2012, students from my SUST 350 Service & Sustainability class joined staff and student interns from Growing Power‘s Chicago Lights Urban Farm for a canoe trip on Bubbly Creek, aka the South Fork of the South Branch of the Chicago River. This was the second of two field trip experiences for RU undergrads and Growing Power Youth Corps job interns who have been working together in the Spring of 2012 at the Chicago Lights Urban Farm. (The first was a road trip to Growing Power’s original farm site on Milwaukee’s Northwest Side.)

Paddling south on Bubbly Creek (M. Bryson)

Led by Friends of the Chicago River, this outdoor adventure introduced RU undergrads and Cabrini-Green teens and young adults to river ecology, wastewater policy, Chicago history, and urban biodiversity — not to mention the no-less-important skills of teamwork and good paddling technique. Most of the day’s participants had limited to no canoeing experience prior to our adventure; but they learned quickly with the help of a pre-launch paddling lesson by our Friends of the Chicago River guides, and by the end of our 2.5 mile journey had proven themselves adept at handling a canoe on one of America’s most infamous urban waterways. Talk about baptism by fire . . . er, wastewater effluent!

This industrialized and heavily polluted channel on Chicago’s South Side got its name years ago from the methane gas that bubbled up from the bacterial decomposition of organic waste on the creek’s bottom. Bubbly Creek was the notorious dumping ground for the Chicago Stockyards for decades. Things were so bad in 1909 that a chicken was photographed walking across the sludgy surface of the river.

Paddling south on Bubbly Creek; to the right (west) are 34th Street and the Iron Street Farm (M. Bryson)

The South Fork’s revolting environmental history inspired me to take urban sustainability seminar students to the waterway as our capstone field trip back in May of 2009 — and I’ve been canoeing Bubbly Creek with my students ever since.

The mild spring weather, sluggish current, and lack of boat traffic made for exceptional paddling down the one-and-a-quarter-mile length of Bubbly Creek this past Sunday. Our view was one of arresting images and stark contrasts. Along some stretches, vegetation reclaimed the industrial riverbank. Elsewhere, pipes stuck out from concrete or steel embankments, water from area street-level drains trickling from their openings — a hint of the deluge that would ensue were it to rain. We floated slowly and quietly under massive railroad and highway bridges, the dim roar of traffic far above us.

Near the headwaters of Bubbly Creek; on our right is the massive Racine Avenue Pumping Station. Each of its eight pipes is 5 feet in diameter. This station pumps wastewater from this area of Chicago southwest to the MWRD's Stickney wastewater treatment plant -- the largest such facility in the world. In times of significant rainfall, these pumps reverse and pump untreated combined sewage into Bubbly Creek, where the water levels quickly rise three feet. (M. Bryson)

Visible evidence of pollution was everywhere — old plastic garbage bags hanging from trees; floating bottles and cans; the occasional used condom (nicknamed “Chicago River Whitefish” by jaded river veterans); and the infamous bubbles, still percolating up from the murky depths. At times the faint stench of sewage drifted over us.

Yet, we also saw encountered wildlife, including Canada geese, Mallard ducks, a juvenile red-tailed hawk, and a green heron (one of the three heron species native to Illinois). Tree swallows swooped over the water, hunting for insects, and red-winged blackbirds and white-throated sparrows sang lustily from the brush riverbanks. Although we didn’t see any that day, beavers are known to be active along the creek, despite its persistent pollution. Such observations provided a dramatic ecology lesson: while Bubbly Creek is still in rough shape, it has come a long way from its earlier environmental desecration.

A significant moments of our trip occurred as we paddled southward along an imposing, rusted metal retaining wall on the east bank of the river; to the west was a more vegetated riparian zone that ended at a chain link fence.

Malcolm, a longtime Growing Power Youth Corps intern on his first canoeing adventure, points to the Iron Street Farm with his paddle (M. Bryson)

The view itself was unremarkable, save for the fact that we knew what was on the other side of that fence, mostly hidden from view on the high bank: the Iron Street Farm, one of Growing Power’s urban farming operations in Chicago that occupies several acres of former industrial land just west of Bubbly Creek at the intersection of Iron and 34^th Streets. With a large building that has been adapted and re-purposed for integrated indoor urban agriculture (aquaponics and vermicomposting) and a bike repair facility, as well as extensive grounds for several hoop houses and even more composting bins, Iron Street Farm represents a sophisticated 21^st-century post-industrial refashioning of a 19^th century industrial landscape.

Iron Street Farm, as seen from Bubbly Creek (M. Bryson)

And what of the connections between the water of the creek and the food growing enterprise along its west bank? They are many and various, as we discussed while “rafting up” our canoes at the southern terminus of Bubbly Creek, where we contemplated the urban ecology of stormwater runoff and combined sewage overflows while floating in the shadow of the massive Racine Avenue Pumping Station. Every drop of water that falls on the compost-enriched soil of Iron Street Farm not only is utilized by edible plants in food production, but also is diverted from the sewer system of the city, thus reducing the total amount of surface run-off that results (in times of sufficient precipitation) in the release of untreated sewage into Bubbly Creek and the many other channels of the Chicago Area Waterway System.

Hoop Houses at Iron Street Farm; Bubbly Creek is just past the fence to the right (M. Bryson)

Beyond this systematic analysis, though, was a more emotional revelation about urban waterways that I felt may have occurred, tacitly but undeniably, amongst us on our trip — one that runs counter to the fears of the uninitiated that scary creatures lurk in the deeps, or that urban rivers are degraded beyond reclamation. Given the chance to experience a river, up close and personal, people of all ages respond to its rough and imperfect charms.

If we can learn to love and value the likes of Bubbly Creek — if we can see that a channelized, polluted, and long-neglected waterway has the potential to become, well, a river again — then just about anything’s possible.

Ivory (foreground) and Deja, two of the Growing Power Youth Corps interns who work at the Chicago Lights Urban Farm (M. Bryson)

Our group combined folks from Roosevelt University's SUST 350 Service & Sustainability class, Growing Power staff and Youth Corps interns, and guides from Friends of the Chicago River (M. Bryson)

Want to see more? Check out these annotated slideshows of our RU-Growing Power canoe trip on Bubbly Creek as well as the Iron Street Farm.

Great Lakes Commission Releases Asian Carp Study

February 5, 2012January 26, 2013

For the last several months, the Great Lakes Commission and the US Army Corps of Engineers have been conducting parallel studies on the feasibility of re-separating the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds here in the Chicago Region. This challenging process is motivated by the threat of Asian Carp moving northward from the Illinois Waterway system through the Chicago and/or Calumet Rivers and into the Great Lakes.

While the Corps’ study is wide-ranging and focused on the Asian Carp threat throughout the Mississippi River and Great Lakes basins — and thus on a much slower timetable, to the frustration of many environmentalists and regional governmental leaders — the Great Lakes Commission has just released its full report, “Restoring the Natural Divide,” to the public. As noted here by the Chicago Tribune’s Andrew Stern and Sandra Maler,

Keeping the invasive Asian carp out of the Great Lakes will involve re-reversing the flow of the Chicago River — an engineering marvel completed a century ago through a complex network of rivers, canals, and locks, a new study said on Tuesday.

The study proposed three options to separate the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River basin near Chicago and keep Asian carp and other invaders out but all three would require re-reversing the flow of Chicago river which now carries Chicago’s treated waste water away from its Lake Michigan drinking water.

“Physically separating the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds is the best long-term solution for preventing the movement of Asian carp and other aquatic invasive species, and our report demonstrates that it can be done,” said Tim Eder, executive director of the Great Lakes Commission, sponsor of the study with several other interest groups.

The prolific Asian carp have populated the Mississippi River and many of its tributaries and now threaten the $7 billion fishery in the lakes, which contain one-fifth of the world’s fresh surface water and supply 35 million people with drinking water.

The invasions by Silver and Bighead carp, first introduced to control algae in commercial fish ponds, have prompted promotional efforts to catch them as a source of cheap protein or for sport fishing, but their populations have exploded.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is conducting its own long-term study on possible separation of the watersheds that is due to be completed in 2015, has erected electric underwater barriers at a canal bottleneck near Chicago to try to keep the carp at bay, but some marine experts fear the carp may have already bypassed the barriers.

Several states bordering the lakes have demanded stronger action and have filed a suit against the Army Corps calling for quick action to erect separation barriers and speed up its study.

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette, who is pursuing the states’ lawsuit, praised the Commission’s study, saying “with thousands of jobs and a spectacular ecological resource at stake, we can no longer afford to wait for the federal government.”

Commercial shippers and the recreational and tour boat industries have opposed closing locks and dams between the two watersheds, saying it would destroy their businesses. Previous federal court rulings have also noted closing locks permanently would worsen flooding during storms.

Four Indiana congressmen issued statements objecting to the economic cost to the northwest corner of the state if plans are undertaken to permanently divide the two watersheds. . . .

Environmental groups backed the separation plans, with Marc Smith of the National Wildlife Federation saying the study “puts solutions on the table that are both feasible and affordable.”

The Commission’s 18-month-long study estimated the total cost of erecting barriers to achieve ecological separation and measures to address water quality, flood prevention and alternative transportation at up to $9.5 billion.

The least costly option, the “Mid System” approach, would cost between $3.3 billion and $4.3 billion and involve erecting four barriers including one near the existing O’Brien Lock nearly Lake Calumet. At that point, a facility could be built to transfer cargo between river barges and trains, trucks, or lake-going boats. A second barrier on the Chicago River could be equipped with a system to lift and transfer recreational boats from one side to the other.

Another option would place five barriers in waterways closer to Lake Michigan, and a third would place one barrier further downstream. Both pose significant transportation and flood management challenges, raising the costs to more than $9.5 billion, the study said.

The study projected a two-phase implementation of the plans with an initial target to erect barriers by 2022. Flood protection depends in part on completion by 2029 of a $3.7 billion system of tunnels and reservoirs designed to divert Chicago area’s stormwater, a project begun in the early 1970s.

Besides Asian carp and its ability to scour the lakes’ food supply and out-compete other fish species, the Army Corps has identified 39 other invasive species — 10 poised to enter the lakes and 29 ready to invade the rivers — that could traverse the two watersheds and threaten the ecological balance. Those include fish such as the northern snakehead, plants such as the water chestnut and mat-forming hydrilla, and crustaceans such as the spiny water flea.

A total of 180 non-native aquatic species are established in the Great Lakes, and 163 are established in the Mississippi River basin.

What will be interesting to see is how the Great Lakes Commission’s report impacts the current dialogue about the best way to proceed in keeping the Asian Carp at bay while simultaneously assuring the economic and environmental sustainability of the Great Lakes-to-the-Gulf of Mexico shipping connection. In the meantime, I recommend the Report’s extensive website, which also features abundant video and image resources.

New Book on the Chicago River’s Reversal

January 6, 2012January 6, 2012

The reversal of the Chicago River — one of the great engineering projects of the late 19th century — impacted both the watersheds of the Chicago Region as well as the economy of the city and its suburbs. While that transformation and its consequences have been much discussed, a new photo book significantly adds to that documentation, as discussed by a recent article in the Chicago Sun-Times:

Beginning in 1894, photographers set out to document the mammoth project. Some of those 22,000 images are now featured in the recently released book by Richard Cahan and Michael Williams, “The Lost Panoramas; When Chicago Changed its River and the Land Beyond.” Few of the images have ever been seen before, the authors say. The negatives were recently discovered by accident in a basement of the James C. Kirie Water Reclamation Plant in Des Plaines.

“Nearly every photo is panoramic in nature — wide-angle, unobstructed views of a world that no longer exists,” the authors write.

The book, published by CityFiles Press, retails for $45. Cahan is a former Chicago Sun-Times picture editor.

Walking through Wetlands: Conservation and Restoration in the Upper Des Plaines River Watershed

December 5, 2011December 6, 2011

My SUST 220 Water class at RU took its third field excursion on Saturday, Oct. 29th, to the Des Plaines River Wetland Demonstration Project (DPRWDP) located in northern Lake County near the town of Wadsworth, IL. Our group took a walking tour through part of the experimental wetlands of the site, much of which is land owned by the Lake County Forest Preserve and managed by staff from Wetlands Research, Inc. The goals of our visit were to learn about wetland ecology and restoration practices, understand the mechanics and implications of wetland mitigation, and assess the water quality of the two streams that run through the wetland complex — the Des Plaines River and Mill Creek.

Des Plaines River Wetland Demonstration Project site (M. B. Radeck)

Our tour was led by Jill Kostel, senior environmental engineer with the Wetlands Initiative, and Kathy Paap, an ecologist and former site manager here at the DPRWDP. Weather-wise, this day was a glorious late October specimen; temps were mild and the wind was low, which allowed us to conduct our water sampling in maximum comfort and enjoy the exercise afforded by an autumnal hike.

We started our three-hour tour with a brief orientation to the site by Jill and Kathy near the double-wide trailer that serves as their on-site office, then got back into a few cars for a short ride to a downstream site along the Des Plaines in one of the wetland restoration parcels that is managed within the DPRWDP.

This mitigation bank site is called Neal Marsh and covers 54 acres. Here a “riffle dam” was constructed a few years to oxygenate the water and provide enhanced hydrology for the wetlands in this area.

Next we returned to the main site’s parking area, then took a mile hike down a pathway that wound through several experimental wetlands on the northern end of the restoration site. We made a few stops along the way to discuss the impact of wildlife on the wetlands (e.g., beaver), the process by which water flow is controlled through the system, the kinds of experiments one can perform in such an “outdoor laboratory,” the threat of invasive species to wetlands (e.g., common carp), the ecological benefits of wetlands to wildlife and humans, and the process of wetland mitigation.

At the mid-point of our journey, we stopped at two nearby sites to take some water samples. The first was on Mill Creek, which enters the wetland preserve from the west and carries wastewater effluent from a sewage treatment facility as well as run-off from about a 20+ square mile area.

Then, we walked a bit further to a bridge that arched over the confluence of Mill Creek with the Des Plaines River, which flows in from the north and receives surface run-off from a mosaic of suburban development that is buffered to some extent by the riparian zone of the Lake County Forest Preserve. There we could observe the confluence as well as take water samples directly from the Des Plaines. We worked at streamside in small groups to analyze the samples using the Hach Surface Waters chemistry lab as well as the portable Urban Waters LaMotte kit. You can view a summary of our results here: Water Quality Results for DPRWDP 29 Oct 2011 (pdf).

Images of our trip were captured by Mary Beth Radeck, a SUST major at RU and member of our 220 Water class. See this slideshow for a whole lot more.

Watersheds, Carp, and the Future of Chicago’s Water

October 21, 2011September 19, 2012

On Thursday, Oct. 13th, I took some time away from my normal professorial duties to attend a lunchtime forum entitled “Chicago’s Water: Protecting Our Precious Resource,” sponsored by the Chicago Council on Science and Technology. The event was held in the 18th floor “Wolf Point Ballroom” in the Holiday Inn Chicago Mart Plaza, literally right off that parking lot that sits on Wolf Point. Floor to ceiling views of the Chicago River and the skyline made for a dramatic setting for the event and the ensuing conversation about the history and future of water management in Chicago.

Combined Sewage Outfall on the Chicago River, in the Loop (M. Bryson)

I couldn’t help but notice the remarkably clear view of the Combined Sewage Outfall (CSO) location where my students and I rafted up our canoes the previous weekend in the Loop and discussed the impact of stormwater overflows of untreated wastewater on the ecology of the Chicago River. It was both odd and inspiring to view that location from up high, only a few days later.

This exceptionally interesting forum featured a keynote address by Debra Shore, an Metropolitan Water Reclamation District commissioner who, unlike most commissioners past and present, actually has a long track record in environmental conservation and advocacy. She is one of the drivers of the recent turnaround in MWRD policy with respect to the disinfection of wastwater. Shore’s presentation highlighted the history of Chicago’s development and its relation to the river, the technological changes that have been wrought upon the latter, the key issues facing us in the 21st century (water quality, Asian Carp, hydrological separation, etc.), and a broad question at the end: “Can Chicago become Nature’s Metropolis for the 21st Century?” In the latter, she implied that how we manage the river will be a large part of the answer to that question.

Shore’s keynote was followed by an immensely interesting panel discussion moderated by Howard Learner, an attorney who runs the Environmental Law and Policy Center (a local environmental think-tank and non-profit). The panelists included Tinka Hyde, acting director of the USEPA Region 5’s water division; Andrew Richardson, an wastewater engineer and CEO of Greeley and Hanson; and Martin Felsen, a principal architect at the UrbanLab design firm and professor at IIT who specializes in the design of green infrastructure in urban environments.

One key theme that repeatedly came up during the forum’s dialogue was the notion of separating the watersheds as a way to improve water conservation and prevent invasive species (notably the carp) from entering the GLs. Surprisingly, none of the engineers on the panel or in the audience claimed that such a separation was technically impossible, or even too costly to attempt. What they repeatedly cited was the need for the political will and creation of effective avenues of communication and collaboration to do it. If that happened, then the technology could be brought to bear productively. This view was even espoused by Dick Lanyon, the longtime engineer for and then manager of the MWRD who retired in 2010 and who was at this meeting (coincidentally, I sat next to him and got to bend his ear for several minutes after the program). Lanyon is a key source about water management in the Chicago region in Peter Annin’s 2006 book, The Great Lakes Water Wars .

Another issue that was discussed was the status of the current studies underway to assess the feasibility and impacts of hydrological separation. The Army Corps of Engineers’ study was cited several times, favorably, despite it’s rather slow projected timeline that has raised the pique of neighboring Great Lakes states; and Tinka Hyde, the EPA rep, noted that USEPA was collaborating with the Corps on this process.

One vision of how the hydrology of the Chicago Region might be transformed by re-separating the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds (Milwaukee Journal-Star)

No mention of the long timeline was made. Neither was the parallel and comparatively fast-track study by the Michigan-based Great Lakes Commission even mentioned. I was going to ask a question about this in the Q-and-A period, but the panel ran out of time since there was so much discussion after the formal presentations.

Those interested in following up on the status of the GLC’s planning process, as well as learning more about the environmental and ecological prospects of hydrologically separating the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds can read more about it here and/or attend a public webinar on Oct. 24th for the GLC’s Chicago Area Waterway Study.

Paddling the Chicago River’s North Branch

October 12, 2011November 9, 2011

The Chicago River is a once-natural waterway humans have thoroughly transformed. Dredged, straightened, polluted, and famous for having its flow reversed at the turn of the last century, the river is nevertheless a complex ecological system that fulfills an amazing array of economic, social, and environmental functions — from transportation conduit to wastewater repository to recreational resource to wildlife corridor. It’s also an excellent place to observe the visually arresting urban landscape and its compelling blending of nature and the built environment.

Wolf Point, the Chicago River in downtown Chicago (M. Bryson)

Such a vantage point affords a unique perspective on the ways in which we use and abuse water, and suggests that we need science, policy, and active citizen engagement to forge a more sustainable future for this much-maligned yet storied river.

On Saturday, October 11^th, students in my SUST 220 Water and PLS 391 Seminar in Natural Science classes at Roosevelt University took a canoe trip with me on the North Branch of the River, from Goose Island on the near-North Side of the city to Wolf Point in the heart of Chicago’s Loop — the place where the North Branch meets the South Branch, and ground zero in the history of Chicago’s development from a frontier town to a world metropolis. Our trip was led by expert river guides with the Friends of the Chicago River organization, which has long advocated for the conservation of the river and helped raise its public profile since the late 1970s.

Launching canoes at the North Avenue Turning Basin (M. Bryson)

This was the fourth such trip I’ve taken with my RU students since the spring of 2009, the previous three trips taking place on Bubbly Creek, a notoriously-polluted tributary of the South Branch that for many decades absorbed the waste from the Chicago Stockyards. These field experiences give us a chance to explore urban nature first-hand and think about

how water moves through those ecosystems and sustains their biotic communities;
what kinds of pressures urban or suburban development exert upon these ecosystems;
the impact of such pressures on water quality, flooding, etc.;
conservation and/or restoration strategies that can improve the quality and sustainability of these aquatic ecosystems;
the significance of water quality to the overall sustainability of urban systems, both in terms of nature and people.

Our trip began at a canoe/kayak launch site at the turning basin at North Avenue, the widest spot along the entire Chicago river system. We proceeded down the North Branch, which runs along the west bank of Goose Island — itself a fascinating place in Chicago’s geographic and cultural history that was made an island when industrialist (and later Chicago’s first mayor) William Ogden had a canal dug to the east to excavate clay for brickmaking and to increase the area’s industrial waterfrontage.

A barge near the Morton Salt Company distribution facility, one of the many industries on the North Branch (M. Bryson)

Once home to Irish immigrants who kept geese and other livestock on their property, Goose Island has seen successive waves of industry and residential development over the decades; in this sense, it is a microcosm of Chicago’s own dynamic development as an industrial city. Since the late 1990s and early 2000s, it has become a thriving Planned Manufacturing District.

As we paddled southward toward Chicago’s Loop and passed the southern tip of goose Island, we learned to keep well to the right of the river channel to avoid the many tour boats and private craft that ply these waters. The presence of many diverse watercraft on the river testifies to its importance as a cultural and recreational amenity as well as tourist attraction — all of which have positive economic impacts for the city. The water here offers stunning views of bridges, factories, residential developments, and other waterfront properties — such as the massive Montgomery Ward catalog warehouse built in 1908 — which together constitute a colorful tapestry of the urban landscape.

The 2.3 million-square-foot Montgomery Ward warehouse (M. Bryson)

The presence of urban wildlife in the river corridor, including numerous Canadian geese and Mallard duck sightings as well as evidence of beaver activity, highlight the river’s identity as a living ecosystem and value as wildlife habitat. This green face of the river was particularly evident in the North Branch Canal (east of Goose Island), through which we paddled on our way back from Wolf Point.

Those ecological musings are complicated by consideration of the many Combined Sewage Outfalls (CSOs) that exist along the riverbank, outlets that frequently release untreated sewage directly into the river in times when precipitation exceeds a certain threshold (about a half-inch, depending upon size of the area experiencing rainfall). These outfalls are not confined to industrial sections of the river; 265 of them occur all along the length of the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS),

including this industrial yet scenic stretch of the North Branch and at the confluences of the North and South Branches in the Loop. Paddling near such an outflow is a disquieting and disturbing experience, as it brings one face-to-face with the question, “where does our waste go when we flush our toilets?” The answer: right here, quite often.

Indeed, the fecal coliform test we performed later at our canoe launch site confirmed the presence of (though did not quantify) coliform bacteria colonies in the water, which are indicators of fecal coliform — despite the fact that it had not rained in several days prior to our trip. Students also performed a variety of other water quality tests for physical and chemical variables such as temperature, turbidity (cloudiness), pH, hardness, dissolved oxygen, nitrate, phosphate, and chlorine. (You can view a summary of our results here as a pdf.)

Such a profile gives us a snapshot of the water quality at a given moment in time. In this case, overall quality was deemed fair to decent by such measures as temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen; but elevated nitrate and phosphate levels (nutrients that result from industrial and urban pollution that can cause algal blooms and subsequent oxygen depletion) as well as the water’s fairly turbid nature and the definitive presence of coliform bacteria show there is much room for improvement. Had it rained that day or the previous day, many of these chemical indicators would’ve been measurably worse. Fortunately, the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) has recently moved to begin planning a final stage of disinfection for treated wastewater at two of its treatment plants, a move that will certainly lessen the chronic bacterial contamination of the water.

Heading south into downtown Chicago on the river; Wolf Point and the skyline (M. Bryson)

Paddling a polluted urban waterway is decidedly much different than journeying along a pristine stream in an uninhabited wilderness. But it may be an unparalleled way to way to experience a city’s landscape and to contemplate the complex processes of urban ecology represented by the movement of water with that landscape.

Taking Stock of the Chicago River

September 22, 2011November 25, 2011

The Chicago River has been in the news quite a bit these last few months, and for a waterway long treated as a transportation corridor and sewage receptacle, its future is looking brighter — even as city officials, water quality experts, wastewater treatment engineers, and environmental activists admit there’s a long, long way to go. Today on public radio WBEZ’s local affairs radio show, Eight Forty-Eight, the Chicago River was a main topic of conversation between host Alison Cuddy and Henry Henderson of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Henderson was the first head of Chicago’s Department of Environment, an agency that ironically may come under the chopping block in Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s recent plans to address major budget shortfalls. (A prospect which illustrates that even as progress can be make on one environmental front, two steps back can occur on another.)

The good news: after a major turnabout in the summer by the MWRD, which now plans (finally) to eventually add a final disinfection stage to its wastewater treatment process before releasing treated water back into the river, the mayor’s office announced on 19 Sept 2011 that it will seek to “make the Chicago River the city’s next environmental frontier” by funding major restoration efforts in the river’s riparian corridors and by building four boathouses along the river to increase boating access and activity along the waterway. While the latter effort will not directly improve the quality of the river’s water, any increase in recreational use of the waterways adds to the perception of their economic and cultural value, and inspires us to see the rivers as living ecosystems rather than just channelized barge pathways or open sewers.

Also see this article by the Chicago Tribune’s environmental reporter Michael Hawthorne for more details on the various plans for the river and the proposed locations for the boathouses — one of which is planned for a new park located near the mouth of Bubbly Creek, one of the historically most polluted sections of the river.

Such developments are well-timed for my SUST 220 Water class this semester at Roosevelt, since we’re planning a canoe trip on the North Branch of the Chicago River from Goose Island to Wolf Point on October 8^th with Friends of the Chicago River. Expect a report on that urban nature adventure!

Michael Bryson

Professor & Director of Sustainability Studies @RooseveltU, Chicago IL

Category: Rivers