De-constructing the Mississippi River

Deconstructing the Mississippi River Restoring a Continental System Through the Integration of Flexible Infrastructure Haley Heard Thesis Supervisor Alan Berger Professor of Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Thesis Reader Pierre Belanger Professor of Landscape Architecture Harvard, GSD Thesis Reader Case Brown Professor of Landscape Architecture Clemson University

DECONSTRUCTING THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER: Restoring a Continental System through the Integration of Flexible Infrastructure Haley Heard Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 20th 2010, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of City Planning.

ABSTRACT The most prevalent social and economic issues plaguing cities are symptomatic of much bigger underlying environmental problems. Cities are governed by legislation set within artificial political boundaries, however ecology systems surpass and are not restricted by these boundaries. The decisions urban designers and planners make on behalf of a city influences the natural environment, which in turn can affect other cities negatively. This thesis addresses the current disconnect between the way cities are planned, their artificial boundaries, and the larger, underlying ecological systems. The purpose of this research is to create new methods of design and planning from ecological scale thinking.

This thesis uses the Mississippi River as a case to illustrate how ecological scale thinking can reframe present urban design and planning paradigm. The research aims to answer the following questions: What are the principal causes of the Mississippi River’s ecological degradation, and what measures can be taken to restore the River’s quality? By regionalizing the organization of political jurisdictions, this will allow urban designers and planners to account for externalities and rebuild damaged ecological systems at the geographical scale.

Over the past century, man-made interventions have transformed the Mississippi River, altering it from its natural form and processes. These augmentations have been the result of planning decisions, which ignore the larger ecological system of the River. This thesis demonstrates that the existing political juggernaut consists of many actors only considering problems within their own jurisdiction, and therefore make decisions in a vacuum.

Instead of making a complete overhaul of the man-made system, this thesis proposes solutions utilizing the existing infrastructure and the waste it produces. It concludes by proposing a new management model: a Sediment Network that redistributes the waste sediment throughout the Mississippi River Basin in the form of new commodities. The Sediment Network illustrates at both the local scale and continental scale, how cities can utilize the sediment as a medium for urban revitalization, restore the River’s health, and finally become an instrument for redistributing political power in order to achieve a more holistic form of planning.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and support of many amazing people. Their constant and continuous encouragement allowed me to achieve things I never thought possible. Firstly, I would like to thank those who guided this journey over the last year. I would particularly like to extend my appreciation to Professor Alan Berger for his constant mentorship, patience and insight. He taught me to think critically, and break through conventional models in order to create better solutions.

I would also like to thank Pierre Belanger, professor of Landscape Architecture at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and Case Brown, associate professor of Landscape Architecture at Clemson University. They both shared a vast amount of knowledge on landscape, urbanism, and regional planning with me, and my thesis reached a higher level of intellect because of their feedback.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to both Duncan McIlvaine and Grant Heard. Duncan is the best listener I know, and without his mentoring and patience, I would have never had the epiphanies from which my greatest ideas in graduate school were realized.

My brother Grant Heard, who is a bottomless resource and always ready to dispense information, helped me locate data and gave me a crash course in geology, which was a critical component to my thesis.

I would like to thank the great friends I had while at MIT, which have provided me with priceless intellectual exchange and warm support. Some of them deserve a special mention for their invaluable friendship: Aditi Mehta, Daniel Daou, Kristin Simonson, and Benjamin Brandin for their constant support and willingness to help me with this thesis and other work throughout my time at MIT. I would also like to express my appreciation and gratitude to Brandon Maitre. Thank you for unconditionally supporting me.

Even during the most stressful times, you stood by my side. The time spent in Cambridge would not have been as pleasant and wonderful without their presence.

4

Haley Heard

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would also like to thank three very special professors that have been an integral part of my academic career. Professor Eran Ben-Joseph believed in me and advocated for me even before he knew me. Dr. Michael Murphy and Dr. Nancy Volkman, both my professors from Texas A&M University, taught me to value education and helped me to realized that higher learning is a platform from which you can make a significant difference. Without their recommendation, my experience at MIT would not have been possible.

Above all, I would like to extend a special thanks to my parents Larry and Ann Heard. Their constant and unconditional encouragement helped me believe that any goal I was willing to work for was within my reach. Most of all, I would like to thank my mother. Without her influence, none of my achievements would have been possible. She taught me one of the most priceless lessons that I have utilized while at MIT and will continue to utilize throughout my life. She taught how to create beauty and value out of the most mundane things, even something as mundane as dirt.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

5

6

Haley Heard

CONTENTS Abstract

5

Acknowledgements

6

Introduction

11

disconnect: Ecology and Policy

Ecology and Policy Disconnected

New Orleans, City of Susceptibility

Changing the Scope and Scale of Planning

15 16 17 19

Political Juggernaut

Federal

Regional

State

Municipal

21 22 24 24 25

Tale of Two Rivers

Natural Man-made

Economic Importance

Evidence of an Unhealthy River

27 28 31 34 36

Chronology of the River

Prehistoric

Colonial

Industrial Era

Modern Era

39 40 40 40 44

Threats to the River

Factors of Ecological Degradation

Regional Sedimentation Problems Threats at Every Scale

47 49 49 52

Dirt Economies

Problem Opportunity Solution

59 61 62 62

Sediment Network

Sediment Harvesting Process Sediment Index Economic Impact

65 66 68 68

Local Strategy

Site Selection Criteria

Site Analysis

Urban Revitalization

What is Dirt Worth? Implementing Sediment Locally

73 75 76 78 80

Conclusion

83

APPENDIX

89

Bibliography

99

Biographical Note Deconstructing the Mississippi River

104 7

8

Haley Heard

INTRODUCTION

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

9

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this thesis is to both conduct independent research to find out what areas of urban design and planning might be able to interact better with ecological systems and also to develop new methods of design from ecological scale thinking. The research aims to answer the following question: What are the principal causes of the Mississippi River’s ecological degradation, and what measures can be taken to restore the river’s quality?

In recent years, many issues concerning the Mississippi River have been brought to the public’s consciousness through media coverage of catastrophic events. Experts are beginning to realize that these catastrophic events may not be merely coincidental, but are actually the culmination of the compounding effects caused by man-made interventions to the River system. The purpose of this thesis is to understand the cause of degradation to the ecological systems in the Mississippi River Basin and explore new types of interventions in which to minimize these effects.

The Mississippi River is a landscape of conflict. For centuries, people have attempted to tame the river for flood protection, while also exploiting its potential for hydrological-power and navigation.

Through advances in engineering technology, and policies passed

by Congress, this great River has become one of the most highly engineered hydrological systems in the world. These policies however, are not part of a grand vision; rather reactionary laws passed in order to convey a sense of security after flood events or to further prosperity.

These policies include the 1890 Rivers and Harbors Act and the 1928 Flood Control Act. Mark Twain once wrote, “The Mississippi River will always have its own way; no engineering skill can persuade it to do otherwise…”

(Eruption)1 Yet after two hundred years of engineering, the Mighty Mississippi is beginning to reveal the devastating effects caused by interrupting the processes of this complex ecological system. Experts 1 “Mark Twain quotations - Mississippi River.”

10

Haley Heard

INTRODUCTION believe that without intervention, many of the ecological systems in and around the River will soon collapse.

The conflict now lies between maintaining the structures that provide a navigation channel and flood protection or saving the remaining ecological system by opening the floodplain back up to restore the natural hydrologic processes. This begs the question, how can the Mississippi River be deconstructed in order to alleviate the conflict between natural fluvial processes and modern engineering?

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

11

12

Haley Heard

DISCONNECT: ECOLOGY & POLICY

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

13

DISCONNECT: ECOLOGY & POLICY The problem with urban design and planning today is that it is bounded by the very notion of the “city”. The city is an area that is governed by legislation set within artificial political boundaries, however ecology and the natural environment are not confined to any such boundaries. This historical notion of the city has dominated the legislation, jurisdiction, and ideology of how cities are planned.

The dilemma of the historical notion is that the source of many urban problems actually lies beyond the city’s boundaries. Many cities are incapable of planning outside of their boundary, because they do not have the political authority or do not benefit economically from planning at a mega-region scale. Some critics claim that cities do not care about the region, because they don’t account for the effects to the region or for the region’s resources.2 The term “urban design” was formulated in the 1950s. Over the past sixty years, three generations of urban designers have approached complex problems without successfully integrating natural systems.

Urban design and planning can be further criticized for not concentrating on these spatial and system problems more, but rather focusing on issues related more closely to sociology and economics.

The next generation of practitioners in urban design and planning will have to address the challenge of thinking spatially outside of the jurisdictions that have been created, and that sociology and economics needs to be intertwined with the realities of the natural systems when decision-making and problem-solving. The large overarching question is, how can urban designers and planners begin to address issues that deal with systems that extend beyond the scope of their political jurisdiction?

Ecology and Policy Disconnected As discussed, currently, in the fields of urban design and planning there is a major disconnect between what designers and planners do in practice versus what they promote in academia. The problem in urban design and planning is that the silos only address their own 2 Belanger, 2010, April 28, “Deconstructing the Mississippi River- Thesis Defense.”

14

Haley Heard

DISCONNECT: ECOLOGY & POLICY specific problems. The only disciplines within the field that actually address the large-scale ecological issues are supposedly Planning and Landscape Architecture, and they do so inadequately, because they are constricted by the scope and client of each individual project. Within these inadequacies, however, lies an opportunity to rectify the situation and address very large-scale problems linked to natural systems in the real world. This problem provides planners the opportunity to create methods of problem solving that deals with large-scale ecological systems in the way different scales are addressed by the current discipline silos.3 In order to demonstrate how urban design and planning can successfully address large-scale ecological system, this thesis investigates the Mississippi River watershed. One of the reasons the Mississippi River has been chosen is because of the artificial political jurisdictions that intersect the natural functions of the river.

New Orleans, City of Susceptibility The most prevalent social and economic issues plaguing cities are symptomatic of much bigger underlying environmental problems.

Instead of identifying and treating the problems at the source, planners are trained to recommend solutions that treat the symptoms within their specific silo/jurisdiction and a within a defined set of parameters, i.e. block, district, city, region. However, the most basic unit of ecology is defined by geography, primarily the watershed. Urban design and planning’s incapacity lies in the fact that forces external to the planner’s scope and/or jurisdiction affect ecological systems. Thus, problem solving within the city boundary is important, but irrelevant without addressing the entire system.

The problems associated with non-systemic urban design and planning along the Mississippi River System are seen most prevalent in New Orleans, Louisiana. New Orleans is considered the “Inevitable City” due to the fact that it is located at the highest point of elevation 3 Berger, 2010, April 28, “Deconstructing the Mississippi River: Thesis Defense.”

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

15

DISCONNECT: ECOLOGY & POLICY on the mouth of the Mississippi River and is the first and largest port on the largest North American waterway. It was discovered by Spanish explorers in the 1500s, but was first settled by the French in the 1700s. New Orleans is a hydrologic civilization and is accustomed to flooding and coastal storms, such as the infamous Hurricane Katrina.

This research explores: why was Katrina so much more devastating than other storms in New Orleans’ past? Was Hurricane Katrina a coincidence, a so-called “perfect storm”, or was it actually a constructed catastrophe? This thesis aims to show that the catastrophes caused

by Hurricane Katrina were signs of ecological system failure.

On August 29, 2005 Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast as a category 5 hurricane. In the course of two days, as it traveled across the Gulf of Mexico the hurricane gained enough energy to be elevated from a category 1 to a category 5. It was the most devastating storm in New Orleans history. Exports believe that the storm was more devastating than others for several reasons. First, Katrina became increasingly powerful as it approached the Gulf Coast because it had significantly more area and time over the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico to absorb energy. Second, citizens had a false sense of security. Contrary to historic belief, they believed that the City had been engineered to be indestructible and that the Mississippi River wouldn’t be able to penetrate the levee walls that had been built around them for protection. Finally, the last reason presented by experts explaining the storm’s damage is that in the past 50 years, the Gulf Coast marshlands have lost over 2000 square miles. This not only allows a storm more time to absorb energy from the warm waters of the Gulf, but it also means there is significantly less protection. The storm hits land several hundred miles closer to New Orleans with much greater force. As the coastal marshlands are whittled away, so are the coastal city’s protection against storms and surge, leaving them exposed and vulnerable.

The destruction that occurred during Hurricane Katrina, demonstrates how intimately connected cities are with their underlying ecological 16

Haley Heard

DISCONNECT: ECOLOGY & POLICY systems. Engineering structures throughout the Mississippi River system are destroying the natural ecological processes and the effects are compounding downstream. Even modern engineering cannot remedy it’s own problems. Unfortunately, New Orleans experienced the ramifications of the system failing.

Changing the Scope and Scale of Planning The impairment along the Mississippi River is the culmination of many decisions being made at several points and scales throughout the entire river system. Effluents from municipal scale land uses to the harm caused by large-scale, federal engineering efforts have impacted the River. The case of New Orleans and the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina is evidence that urban design and planning must stretch its scope beyond one site, one state, or one political system and shift the paradigm of urban design and planning to the scale of geography.

The reason to rethink this paradigm is because now urban designers and planners realize that the traditional way of thinking doesn’t account for the externalities in other regions. Urban designers and planners should regionalize the organization of political jurisdictions and the planning process to the fullest possible extent, through a gradient that extends from the local scale all the way through to a continental scale. Once this happens, only then will planning and design begin to account for the externalities. Urban designers and planners can begin to understand through these new organizations that the current patterns of urbanization cannot persist. Why? There is a collapse happening in the ecological systems in every region that are now compounding into a continental scale. Urban design and planning must address the problems at all these scales and should take part in both the physical design of urbanization and the policy design to control the aspects of urbanization at a mega-region/ continental scale.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

17

18

Haley Heard

POLITICAL JUGGERNAUT

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

19

POLITICAL JUGGERNAUT The problem with the United States, from a planning perspective, is that there is no concept of regional planning, much less continental planning. In the history of planning in the United States, regional planning has always failed, because there are too many actors and no regional authority.

Along the Mississippi River, there is a planning juggernaut consisting of several layers of actors; one at the federal scale, two subcommissions at the mega-region, ten states, and one hundred-twenty five cities at the local scale. In the realm of design and planning, this tangled web of decision-making has been detrimental to the singular overarching ecosystem. The reason this organization of decisionmaking is so harmful is because the actors within the juggernaut are not considering problems outside their jurisdiction and are only concerned with their own municipalities and/or their own silos. This is ultimately creating the concept explored by philosopher Garrett Hardin in “Tragedy of the Commons”. When multiple individuals act independently for their own self-interest, they will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource. Thus the tragedy of planning is that it does not acknowledge the implications a city’s decisions have on the jurisdiction next door.

Federal- Mississippi River Commission The Mississippi River is overseen by the Mississippi River Commission, and run by the Secretary of War. The Mississippi River Commission has created a unique situation in the United States, in that they have given one agency, US Army Corps of Engineers, complete control over the Mississippi River. The US Army Corps of Engineers is a planning body that oversees the entire system, which uses a top-down method of planning to effectively and efficiently achieve its goals for the Mississippi River. Although, the US Army Corps of Engineers has been highly successful in achieving their goals, they stand as an example of how detrimental top-down planning can be when the agency does not have a holistic set of priorities. The US Army Corps of Engineer’s primary focus is maintaining the navigational channels 20

Haley Heard

POLITICAL JUGGERNAUT

Mississippi River Commission U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Secretary of War

$

Sub-Commissions-2

$

Upper Mississippi River

Lower Mississippi River

$

States- 10 Minnesota

$

Wisconsin

$

Iowa

$

Illinois

$

Missouri

$

Governor Kentucy $

$

Tennessee

$

Arkansas

$

Mississippi

$

Louisiana

$

Cities- 125 Mayor

Bemidji,

Prescott

Preston

Galena

Hannibal

Columbus

Tiptonville

Barfield

Tunica

Morganza

Grand Rapids

Diamond Bluff

Lansing

Savanna

Louisiana

Hickman

Reverie

Tomato

Greenville

St. Francisville

Jacobson

Hager City

Marquette

Fulton

Clarksville

Memphis

Osceola

Vicksburg

New Roads

Palisade

Maiden Rock

McGregor

Cordova

Portage d’ Sioux

W. Memphis

Natchez

Baton Rouge

Hassman

Stockholm

Guttenberg

Moline

St. Louis

Helena-West

Donaldsonville

Aitkin

Pepin

Dubuque

Rock Island

Ste. Genevieve

Arkansas City

Lutcher

Riverton

Nelson

Bellevue

New Boston

Cape Girardeau

New Orleans

Brainerd

Alma

Sabula

Keithsburg

Commerce

Pilottown

Fort Ripley

Buffalo City

Clinton

Oquawka

New Madrid

Little Falls

Fountain City

Le Claire

Dallas City

Caruthersville

Sartell

Trempealeau

Bettendorf

Nauvoo

St. Cloud

La Crosse

Davenport

Warsaw

Coon Rapids

Stoddard

Buffalo

Quincy

Minneapolis

Genoa

Muscatine

Alton

Saint Paul

Victory

Burlington

Kaskaskia

Nininger

Potosi

Ft.Madison

Chester

Hastings

De Soto

Keokuk

Grand Tower

Prairie Island

Ferryville

Thebes

Red Wing

Lynxville

Cairo

Lake City

Prairie du Chien

Maple Springs

Wyalusing

Camp Lacupolis

Cassville

Reads Landing Wabasha Weaver Minneiska Winona Homer Dakot Dresbach La Crescent, Brownsville

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

Political Juggernaut The diagram above illustrates the hierarchy of the political juggernaut along the Mississippi

21

POLITICAL JUGGERNAUT for economic and national security purposes. They have constructed several structures to modify and control the River in many ways including, the navigational lock and dam system, the levee system, cutoffs, channelization, etc. However, while they look at the River as a system, their priorities are wrong and thus the system fails. The problem with the US Army Corps of Engineer’s thinking is that it only addresses the control and use of the River first, and ignores the effects their modifications have on the River environment. Their narrow and skewed priorities have augmented the Mississippi River’s form and its processes throughout the entire system to achieve this control.

This in turn has been the direct cause of the Mississippi River system’s failures.

Regional- Upper and Lower Mississippi Commission The Mississippi River is separated into two basins, the Upper and Lower Mississippi River Basin. Each of the basins is overseen by their own commission, however they each fall into the traditional planning trap.

Each commission looks at problems within its own area, regardless of whether the problem originates outside their jurisdiction. The Upper Mississippi River Commission has been successful in working with all the states within the basin to oversee and control waste emissions into the River. This in turn has had a positive effect on the Lower Mississippi River, but the disconnect between the planning bodies still has not been able to solve the problems associated with the Gulf of Mexico hypoxia or sedimentation issues.

State- 10 Adjacent States, 35 in the Watershed Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, giving the Environmental Protection Agency jurisdiction over that which the river traverses.

Currently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) jointly monitors all states with the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), to ensure water quality along the River remains at a healthy level. 4 However, individual states have the power to permit industrial land practices along the 4 Committee on the Mississippi River and the Clean Water Act, National Research Council, “Mississippi River Water Quality and the Clean Water Act: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities.”

22

Haley Heard

POLITICAL JUGGERNAUT River, such as manufacturing and agriculture, which depend on the federal navigation channels for importing and exporting goods. Some of the byproducts from these practices are harmful to the River, yet are not monitored by the EPA or USACE. By-products like sediment can disturb the geomorphology of the water, causing turbidity (cloudy water) and harming aquatic life.

Municipal- 125 Adjacent Cities According to the US Constitution, the power to zone land belongs to local governments. Each of the 125 municipalities along the River has the right zone in a vacuum according to what is most beneficial to their city. However, because they only have the authority to make decisions within their own jurisdiction, cities disregard the external effects their decisions might have on other municipalities within the same ecological system. Viewing urbanization in aggregate throughout the entire Mississippi River system, one can see that local zoning is creating adjacent land uses that is damaging to the River.

Americans have a romantic and idealized perception of the Mississippi

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

23

24

Haley Heard

TALE OF TWO RIVERS

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

25

TALE OF TWO RIVERS

Mississippi River Valley

River. The River provides a nostalgic vision of a pristine landscape that

26 Navigational Dams

is considered one of America’s most important landmarks. Contrary to how many Americans envision the River, the actual picture reveals two very different streams of water. The Mississippi River has been altered to be an engineering marvel. At many points the River looks

Minneapolis St. Paul

Lock & Dam System

more like an industrialized machine rather than the iconic and bucolic vision of nature. The River has been stripped of its natural mystique in the name of economic progress.

s

oi

n Illi

Natural UPPER

Geography of the Mississippi River System

Mis

sou

ri R

iver

LOWER

St. Louis

The Mississippi River is one of America’s most valuable resources. The

o

i Oh

River derives its name from the Chippewa Indians meaning “great river”. It is approximately 2,300 miles long, from Lake Itasca in northern

r

ve

Ri

Ark

ans

as R

iver

Minnesota to its delta in southern Louisiana, where it empties into the

r

ve

Ri

Memphis

Gulf of Mexico. Over the entire course of the river, it falls 725 feet in elevation. 5 It touches 10 states, which are separated into two regions divided by the convergence of the Ohio River, the Upper Mississippi River, (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin) and the Lower Mississippi (Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and

Re

d

Ri

ve

r

Baton Rouge New Orleans

Louisiana). 6 The watershed is the third largest in the world, covering 1,837,000 square miles (41% of the continental United States).

5 Chambers, The Mississippi River and Its Wonderful Valley - Twenty-Seven Hundred And Seventy-Five Miles From Source To Sea. 6 “Mississippi River Anatomy.”

Mississippi Sub-Basin

Mississippi River Valley The diagram above illustrates the Mississippi River Basins, along with major cities and tributaries.

Mississippi River Sub-basin The diagram to the left illustrates the Mississippi River watershed and the major dams that lie within.

26

Haley Heard

TALE OF TWO RIVERS Ecological Habitats and Wildlife Species The river is important to the survival and livelihood of both people and animals. Approximately 50 million people rely on the Mississippi River and/or its tributaries as their primary source of drinking water.

However, the true value is found in the richness of its habitats and the wildlife these habitats support. The river is an important resource for the survival of many of North America’s wildlife species. 7 The Mississippi River system is the largest and one of the most complex river systems in North America. Its habitats provide food and shelter for many of North America’s wildlife including 50 species of mammals, 150 species of fish, over 125 species of mussels, and 270 species of birds, which reside in or travel through this corridor.8 Mammals Large numbers of mammals thrive near the river. Whitetail deer, bats and raccoons are found throughout the river corridor, while other species such as river otter, beaver, and fox are found in scattered pockets within the corridor.9 Over the last century however, human encroachment has threatened these habitats and many of the North American Flyway

mammals have had to adapt. The fragmentation of these habitats has lead to endangerment for many species, raising concern for several conservation agencies.10 Birds This rich floodplain provides a home for 400 species of wildlife, containing 40 percent of North America’s waterfowl. The Mississippi River creates an unobstructed valley that is conducive for migratory birds. In fact, the Mississippi River Valley is one of four major North

7 “Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Animals (U.S. National Park Service).”

8 “Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Mississippi River Facts (U.S. National Park Service).”

9 “Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Animals (U.S. National Park Mississippi Basin Migratory Patterns Service).”

Source: US Wildlife and Fisheries 10 Images found on left from top to bottom: http://www.menaar.com/arkansas/arkansas_facts.htm; The diagram illustrates the North http://www.worldwildlife.org/wildworld/profiles/g200/g146_lg.html American Flyways, which are primary http://article.wn.com/view/2010/03/12/Climate_Change_Threatens_Migratory_ routes birds use annually to migrate.

Birds_Report_Says/ http://www.saraswatibhawan.org/ppmmississippi.html Deconstructing the Mississippi River

27

TALE OF TWO RIVERS American Flyways for migratory birds. It is the longest migratory route in the western hemisphere. Well timbered and watered, the entire region affords ideal conditions for the support of hosts of migrating birds. Another factor in determining the importance of this route is that it is used by large numbers of ducks, geese, shorebirds, blackbirds, sparrows, warbler and thrushes.11 Reptiles & Amphibians At least 145 species of amphibians and reptiles inhabit the Upper Mississippi River environs. Several species of turtles, snakes, salamanders and frogs are found throughout the River. The reptile and amphibious populations are sensitive to changes in habitat quality, and chemical pollutants and atmospheric warming can significantly affect their populations.12 Fish There are 260 species of fishes in the Mississippi River. This makes up 25% of all fish species in North America. 13 However, many factors including exploitation, dams (block migration routes), navigation activities (habitat loss), and contaminants, have lead to the decline in many of the fish populations.

Invertebrates Mussels are important indicators in establishing water quality and a river’s health. The health of the mussel populations is intimately tied with the health of the river. There are 38 documented species of mussel in the Upper Mississippi River and as many as 60 separate species of mussels in the Lower Mississippi River.14 In recent years, the mussel population has begun to recover, but these populations are still vulnerable due to poor water quality.

11 “North American Migration Flyways.”

12 “Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Mississippi River Facts (U.S. National Park Service).”

13 Ibid.

14 Ibid.

28

Haley Heard

TALE OF TWO RIVERS Man-made The Mississippi River’s potential to become America’s super highway was realized early on, due to its broad spans. However the Mississippi River in its natural state is not deep enough in the upper basin, so in order to connect the northern states and make the river viable for shipping and trade, the River had to be engineered with a lock and dam system.

Engineering Characteristics The history of development along the Mississippi River has primarily been overseen by the US Army Corps of Engineers. In 1802, the Army Corps of Engineers was formed to maintain the navigational channel of the river. The first interventions started in 1829, when the Corps began removing snags, closing secondary channels, and excavating rocks and sandbars along rapids in the Upper Mississippi River Basin.

The first major engineering project was the 1848 Illinois and Michigan Canal to connect the River to Lake Michigan. Through the 1930’s twenty-nine lock and dams were built, altering the River’s form and processes into what the River is today.15 There are several examples of engineering interventions that USACE uses as methods of river improvements.

Dams Dam barriers are commonly constructed across a watercourse, to hold back water, often forming a reservoir or lake. Dams are also sometimes used to control or contain rockslides, mudflows, and the like in regions where these occurrences are common. Dams are made of timber, rock, earth, masonry, or concrete or of combinations of these materials.16,17

15 “Mississippi River Commission.”

16 The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008, “Encyclopedia.com articles about dam.”

17 Images on left from top to bottom: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mississippi_River_Lock_and_Dam_ number_22.jpg http://www.johnweeks.com/bridges/pages/lockdam01.html http://ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/displayimage-toprated-39-1129.html http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf/2009/11/corps_could_be_helping_re build.html Deconstructing the Mississippi River

29

TALE OF TWO RIVERS Lock A lock is a stretch of water enclosed by gates, one at each end, built into a canal or river for the purpose of raising or lowering a vessel from one water level to another. A lock may also be built into the entrance of a dock for the same purpose. When the ship is to be raised to a higher level, it enters the lock and a gate is closed behind it. Water is let into the lock until its level equals that of the water ahead. The forward gate is then opened, and the ship progresses on the higher level. The procedure is reversed when the vessel is to pass from a higher to a lower level. As many locks as necessary are used in a given waterway.

Most modern locks are made of concrete, although some have walls of steel-sheet piles or floors of natural rock or sand. 18 Cutoffs Cutoffs are a method of shifting the river laterally in order to channelize it. This method typically involves straightening a meandering channel and thus eliminating meander migration and shortening the river.19 Levees According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, a levee is an embankment built along a river to prevent flooding by high water. Levees are the oldest and the most extensively used method of flood control. They are constructed by piling earth on a surface that has been cleared of vegetation and leveled. From a broad base the levee narrows to a flat crown, on which sandbags or some other temporary protection may be placed to contain unusually high waters.20 Canals A canal is an artificial waterway constructed for navigation or for the movement of water. Canals are also used to provide municipal and industrial water supplies. The drainage of wetlands may be accomplished by means of a canal. Canals can be used for flood 18 The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008, “Encyclopedia.com articles about locks.”

19 The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008., “Encyclopedia.com articles about cutoffs” 20 The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008., “Encyclopedia.com articles about levee.”

30

Haley Heard

TALE OF TWO RIVERS

Homes fronting the Forty Arpent Canal in Meraux

Canals dredged through marshlands

America’s Economic Conduit In reality the river has been augmented to promote economic progress. The governing bodies of the Mississippi River value the economy of the river over the river’s ecological health and have altered it to run as efficiently as possible.

After dredging through the coastal marshlands Images from top-left to bottom right: http://www.nww.usace.army.mil/planning/er/millcrk/mctoc2_3.htm http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf/2009/11/post_16.html http://www.epa.gov/msbasin/photopops/gulf11_pop.html http://chl.erdc.usace.army.mil/navnews-v3

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

31

THREATS TO THE RIVER control by diverting water from threatened areas into storage basins or to other outlets.21,22 Economic Importance Due to the river’s hydrology, the Mississippi River Basin area encompasses the nation’s most productive agricultural and industrial regions. The Mississippi River is the nation’s chief navigable water route that is kept open for shipping and national security purposes. Barges and towboats on the Mississippi River System carry sixty percent of the agricultural goods, industrial products, and raw materials transported on inland waterways.

The Mississippi River Valley brings in $7 billion from forest and agriculture products and $29 million from manufacturing each year.

The river’s navigational channel is an important contribution to the United States’ economy as well, moving 470 million tons of cargo annually, mainly wheat from the Midwest and petro-chemicals from the Gulf of Mexico.23 Recreation is an important industry also. A recent study by the U.S. Geological Survey estimated over 12 million daily visits by recreationists take place each year in the Upper Mississippi River. These visits supported over $1.2 billion in national economic impacts (1990 price levels) and over 18,000 jobs nationwide. The Lower Mississippi Region generates $128 billion and 771,000 jobs through industries directly related to the River and its surrounding environs.24 21 The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008, “Encyclopedia.com articles about canal.”

22 Images on the next page from right to left and top to bottom: 23 “Water transportation of freight, not elsewhere classified (SIC...: Information from Answers.com.”

24 “Economic Impacts of Recreation on the Upper Mississippi River System.”

Lock and Dam System The graphic to the left shows the elevation of each dam along the first two reaches of the Upper Mississippi River, the corresponding cities and population, and the adjacent land uses.

US Geologic Survey Land Use / Land Cover This graphic illustrates the area of land in the zones that overlay the Mississippi River, according to the USGS that are currently being used for agriculture.

32

Haley Heard

11,559 27,671

6.0 23.1

35,026

10.9 107

57.1

1983

156 Elevation in meters

Rangeland Mixed crops Corn and soybeans

1946

154

326

152

Source:Smith et al. (1996).

1928

150 148

1891

THREATS TO THE RIVER 146 144

2000 Lock

0

4000Dam 6000 8000 10,000 and System Distance in meters

12,000

14,00

op

ul

at io n

2.

85

142

7

135

,6 2 12

3 ,7 2

4

,9 1 92

131

16

17

18

130

129

O lle ,M vi rk s

21

Sa ve r

20

500

to n

19

-4

,M

O

Ke o

-4

ku

,4

k,

550

90

15

02

14

7

13

0, 69

12

600

132

-1

11

IA

rg ,I A1 10

,I A48 D ,9 Ro ave 42 ck n p Is or la t, nd IA , I -2 L 46 ,8 86

9

Cl in to n

8

133

uq ue ,I A-

be tt en

7

De b

6

Gu

650

5a

7

6, 78 N2

se ,W I1

,M na 5

River Mil

134

Cr os

4

La

3

W in o

700

Re d

2

5

W in g, M

1

Cross-sectional pro

5, 68

750

N1

M m in St illi nea . P on p o au lis l, ,M M NN p

799

135

Cl a

22

River Mil

39

3

24

134

Al to

n

IL

-2

9,

25

450

133

26

400

132

131

350 130

300 950

129

900

850

800

750

700

650

600

550

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

US Geologic Survey Land Use / Land Cover

Suspended sediment, total phosphorus, and nitrate yields in runoff by dominant land use in the United States for 1980–1989.

Wheat Urban Forest Rangeland Mixed crops Corn and soybeans

3503 8056 10,858 11,559 27,671

3.5 41.7 22.1 6.0 23.1

11.2 192 89.3 10.9 107

35,026

57.1

326

Iowa

158

Coarse sediment t dam structure

Illinois 1983

156 Elevation in meters

Land use

Agriculture cultivated crops hay/pasture

Runoff (kilograms per square kilometer per year) Suspended Total sediment phosphorus Nitrate

1946

154 152

Source:Smith et al. (1996).

1928

150 148

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

33

144 142

799

1891

146

0

2000

4000

6000 8000 10,000 Distance in meters

12,000

14,000

16,000

TALE OF TWO RIVERS Evidence of an Unhealthy River The augmentation of the Mississippi River is severely compromising the River’s health, to the point of entire system collapse. The species native to the Mississippi River Basin are showing signs of stress and are dying at a rapid rate. In every ecosystem the lowest invertebrates are the most sensitive species and act as the canary in the mine shaft.

In the case of the Mississippi River, there are almost 300 species that are critically endangered and/or on the verge of extinction– a direct result of human threats to the river.25 25 “USACE Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Protection and Management System.”

USACE Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species List This illustration shows examples of Invertebrates animals indigenous to the Mississippi Major causes of decline to mussel species is attributed to destruction of habitat River that are threatened or endangered (deforestation, riparian zone destruction) by siltation, dredging, channelization, due to man-made interventions. impoundments, and pollution.

USACE Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species List

Freshwater Mussels Yellow sandshell Lampsillisteres: Endangered

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra: Endangered

Washboard Megalonaias nervosa: Endangered

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Higgins eye pearlymussel Lampsilis higginsii: Endangered

Wartyback Quadrula nodulata: Endangered

Spike Elliptio dilatata: Endangered

Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria: Extirpated / Endangered

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Round pigtoe Pleurobema plenum: Extirpated/ Endangered

Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata: Endangered

Rough pigtoe Pleurobema plenum: Extirpated/ Endangered

Black sandshell Ligumia recta:

Rock-pocketbook Arcidens confragosus Endangered

34

Haley Heard

TALE OF TWO RIVERS Vertebrates Major causes of decline to most of the vertebrates within the Mississippi River Valley have been directly related to man-made alterations to the river (i.e., dams, levees, channelization, etc.) This has caused loss and/or unsuitable habitat, as well as, loss of diversification and pollution.

Marine Mammal West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus: Endangered

The primary cause of death is watercraft collision (30%); other deaths may be attributed to water control structures and navigational locks. Threats also include coastal development, alteration of water flow to natural springs, loss of seagrass beds, and natural causes such as red tide and cold events.

Birds

Fish Interior least tern Sterna antillarum athalassos: Endangered

Man-made alterations (i.e., dams, channelization) affecting the natural processes of erosion and inundation of interior river systems have caused increased vegetation along shorelines thus, creating unsuitable habitat for the species

Colonial Waterbirds Various Species: Specie of Concern

Terrestrial Mammal Louisiana Black Bear Ursus americanus luteolus: Threatened

Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis: Endangered

Gray Bat Myotis grisescens Endangered

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened

Many important caves were flooded and submerged by reservoirs. Other caves are in danger of natural flooding. Even if the bats escape the flood, they have difficulty finding a new cave that is suitable

Walleye Stizostedion vitreum: Species of Concern

Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu: Species of Concern

Gulf sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchusdesotoi Threatened

Paddlefish Polyodon spathula: Species of Concern

Present threats include loss of nesting habitat mainly to development in coastal areas and waterways, electrocution, and shooting

Piping plover Charadrius melodus Threatened

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus: Species of Concern

Pallid sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus: Endangered

Decline is due to degradation of habitat. Dams and channelization have altered the functions and have produced a less diverse ecosystem of which the pallid sturgeon is dependant on. Regular widths, constant velocities, and control of erosion produced by channelization have limited the assemblage of backwaters, sloughs, and sandbars required by the species. Dams have altered the natural river dynamics by modifying flows and reducing diversity to the system. Levee construction has eliminated natural flooding and reduced floodplains.

Increased clarity from decreased sediment transport of once very turbid waters makes the pallid sturgeon more susceptible to predation. (USFWS 1993).

Marine Turtles Loggerhead Caretta caretta: Endangered

Freshwater Turtles Western Painted Turtle Chrysemys picta bellii Rare

Common Map Turtle Graptemys geographica: Endangered

Spiny Softshell Turtle Apalone spinifera Species of Concern

Common Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina: Sensitive Species

The primary causes of decline in this species are shrimp trawling, coastal development, increased human use of nesting beaches, and pollution

Kemp’s Ridley Lepidochelys kempii: Endangered

Chemical pollution is linked to population decline (Ryan et al. 1986).

Primary threat has been the increase of trawling in the Gulf which impacted a large portion of the reproducing population.

Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata: Endangered

Commercial exploitation which is primarily shells but also includes leather, oil, perfume, and cosmetics.

Green turtle Chelonia mydas: Threatened

The major cause of the decline is the commercial harvest of food, eggs, and calipee. Other threats include commercial shrimp trawling and degradation of habitat.

Populations may be substantial in waterways with abundant mollusks.

Mature males outnumber mature females (Pluto and Bellis 1986).

Smooth Softshell Apalone mutica: Rare

Density indicates a sex ratio of males to females of 2.5:1. Some studies have indicated that 37 percent of the population is composed of immature individuals.

Ringed-sawback Turtle Graptemys oculifera: Threatened

Papermill effluents, sewage, industrial waste, habitat modification and water quality degradation are the most often cited reasons for declining numbers of ringed map (McCoy and Vogt 1980; Stewart 1988).

False Map Turtle Graptemys pseudogeographica Threatened

Declining populations are attributed to several factors, including water pollution, river channelization, reduction of suitable nesting sites, siltation, and unlawful shooting

Blanding’s Turtle Emydoidea blandingi: Species of Concern

Wetland alteration or destruction is believed to be an important factor in the decline of several populations of Blanding’s turtles (Kofron and Schreiber 1985).

Ouachita Map Turtle Graptemys ouachitensis: Species of Concern

Some studies have shown a large female-biased sex ratio (3:1), which may be due to either the effects of temperature-dependent gender determination (Shively and Jackson

1985).

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

35

36

Haley Heard

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

37

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER There have been several important events throughout the life of the Mississippi River. The events recorded in the Mississippi River’s history are primarily the events caused by human interaction. The River’s chronology has been categorized in the following eras: prehistoric,

MOUND-BUILDERS Prehistoric inhabitants of North America who constructed earthen mounds for burial, residential and ceremonial purposes. Predates pyramids 1000 years.

colonial, industrial, and modern.

Although humans have been influencing and have been influenced by the Mississippi River for thousands of years, it is important to note that effects humans have had in the past century have been the most significant.

Prehistoric Era- Mud Builders Archeologists have found that the earliest human interaction along the Mississippi River dates back to around 800 AD. This is the first date of human presence along the river with the Mississippi Mound

RIVER DISCOVERY The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

Builders. Between 800 and 1400 A.D., towns and cities crowded the banks of the Mississippi River. The people could focus their energies on other things such as blossoming art and crafts, since the burden of survival was lighter. These early natives began to construct large ceremonial mounds along the Mississippi River. These mounds could span up to 35 feet high or may have been included in a series of pattern-arranged structures. Mound Builders most often built several mounds that were arranged around a rectangular plaza, with the village at its edges. By 1500 AD, The Mound Building civilization began to disappear due to the fact that the Mississippi River Valley had deteriorated significantly.26,27 26 “Mound Builders of the Mississippi River - Four Rivers Realty.”

27 Images on next page from top to bottow: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3509/3266803008_1c6367e903_m.jpg http://www.city-data.com/forum/general-u-s/468075-pictures-americas-river cities-2.html http://www.farmplusfinancial.com/blog/wisconsin-farm-loans/ http://aboutabride.wordpress.com/2008/09/ http://lh4.ggpht.com/_x4IbJRRDYn4/SmjW3yIQ5zI/AAAAAAAAHoA/

R4Lyno1WMcI/sky%20full%20hay%20basket_thumb%5B1%5D.jpg http://www.ronsaari.com/stockImages/tennessee/MemphisSkylineAtDusk1.php http://www.happytellus.com/gallery.php?img_id=900 http://www.flickr.com/photos/aforero/451760343/flickr.com/photos/

wallyg/2498843328/ http://mri.audubon.org/news-events/obama-sutley-support-wetlandsrestoration http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/west_bay_diversion_project_ on.html

38

Policies and Geo-Ecologies: Time Line This graphic to the right depicts the chronology of the Mississippi and where the corresponding events took place along the River. It also shows the cultural quality found along the River.

Haley Heard

Environmental degradation from river construction and alterations leads to new policies to protect the Mississippi River.

ENVIRONMENT RESPONSE

War time commerce and flood events leads to reactionary policies to institute river engineering and construction

CONSTRUCTION ERA leads to reactionary policies increasing more engineering

FLOODS & POLICIES Destruction from floods Destruction from floods leads to the beginning of Mississippi River Commission

RIVER COMMERCE & GOVERNANCE The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

RIVER POTENTIAL The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

RIVER DISCOVERY

pyramids 1000 years.

Prehistoric inhabitants of North America who constructed earthen mounds for burial, residential and ceremonial purposes. Predates

MOUND-BUILDERS

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER

Policies and Geo-Ecologies: Time Line

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

30 years

80 years

39

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER Colonial Era-River Discovery The first Europeans discovered the River and began exploring in the 1500s and settling along the River in New Orleans in the 1700s. The first explorer credited with discovering the Mississippi River is Spanish

RIVER POTENTIAL The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

explorer Hernando De Soto in 1541. However, the French were the first Europeans to establish settlements in the valley and extend their control. French explorer, Robert de La Salle settled New Orleans in 1718, and claimed the Lower Mississippi River as French territory. France and Spain fought for control of the rich territory for many years, but the territory finally became property of the United States in 1803 with the Louisiana Purchase.28 Industrial Era River Potential Until the early 20th century, the River was perceived as a wild,

RIVER COMMERCE & GOVERNANCE Destruction from floods leads to the beginning of Mississippi River Commission

incontrollable force and man would have to be flexible in order to live near it. At the beginning of this era, President Roosevelt realized the harm industrialization could have on the Mississippi River, as well as other river systems, and instituted the Inland Waterway Commission.

The Inland Waterway Commission was President Roosevelt’s attempt to mitigate the damage of development along the River and to have a commission of conservationists assemble a body of best practices for the River ecological health. The commission was an integral component of the Conservation Policy of 1907, which would prepare “a comprehensive plan for the improvement and control” of US river systems. The Inland Waterway Commission urged that future plans for navigation improvement take account of water purification, power

FLOODS & POLICIES Destruction from floods leads to reactionary policies increasing more engineering

development, flood control, and land reclamation.29 Although the early twentieth century was marked by strong conservation efforts, promoted by the incumbent political power, the conservation era ended with Theodore Roosevelt’s presidential term.

Dealing with a nation at war, the proceeding legislative powers viewed 28 “Mississippi River Information and History - Four Rivers Realty.”

29 “Roosevelt Plans To Employ Rivers” The New York Times.” 1907, March 17.

40

Haley Heard

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER river control as a conduit to transport goods from the interior of the United State, stimulate the economy, and protection against floods.

The need and desire to control the River and harness its energy had been present for many years, but in the 1930s, when the technology and legislative power became available, controlling the River became a real possibility.

Floods and Policies Early in the twentieth century, many farms and urban areas began to experience flooding throughout the Mississippi River Valley. The Flood Control Act of 1928 authorized work that would give the various basins protection against Mississippi River floods only, although the tributary streams within the basins caused frequent flood damage that could not be prevented by the main stem Mississippi River Inland Waterway Commission Announcement

Inland Waterway Commission Announcement This New York Times article on March 17, 1907 announces President Roosevelt’s plan to create the Inland Waterway Commission to oversee the health of America’s waterways and protect them during industrialization.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

41

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER protective works. Later amendments to this act have authorized work to alleviation tributary flood problems.

Modern Era

CONSTRUCTION ERA War time commerce and flood events leads to reactionary policies to institute river engineering and construction

Construction At the end of the 1920s and the beginning of the 1930s, the technology to build dams was invented and the United States was desperate for work. Congress saw this as the perfect opportunity to authorize the US navigational lock and dam system. Under the 1928 Flood Control Act, Congress authorized a series of locks and dams on the Mississippi River to secure national security and to spur economic growth. The lock and dam system deepened the shallow water of the Upper Mississippi River to create a 9’ deep x 400’wide navigational channel to accommodate multiple-barge tow.30 After the navigational lock and dam system was finished, the negative effects required river improvements to become apparent throughout the River. The Mississippi River continued to change and adjust its course creating the need for sustained management by USACE. In the 1950’s, the US government scientists determined the Mississippi River was starting to switch to the Atchafalaya River channel because of the much steeper path to the Gulf of Mexico. The change in course would destroy the navigation channel that USACE spent millions of dollars and years creating, as well as hurt the shipping economy. Therefore, Congress authorized another major engineering effort to control the Mississippi River by building a $300 million control station. The control station took several years to construct, but was finally finished and opened for use in 1986.

Engineering efforts, also known as, river improvements are still being practiced today.

However, the effect of the engineering

controls became very apparent shortly after they were put in place.

Only 30 years after USACE built the river control mechanisms, the environmental systems began to show signs of distress, and even collapse.

30 “Mississippi River Commission.”

42

Haley Heard

CHRONOLOGY OF THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT RESPONSE Environmental degradation from river construction and alterations leads to new policies to protect the Mississippi River.

Environmental Response 1972 Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act, passed in 1972, was a landmark piece of legislation that vastly improved the health of US waterways by helping to eliminate toxic pollutants and runoff. Prior to the bill’s passage, toxins, heavy metals and other industrial by-products too easily polluted rivers. The Clean Water Act has improved the health of the river drastically, but it has been a political uphill battle in doing so.

The implementation of the Clean Water Act stands as another example of how the current political overlays do not coincide with ecological systems. Many of the states along the Mississippi River, especially states in the Lower Mississippi Basin view the river’s water quality as a federal responsibility. There is very limited coordination among the states to monitor the water and ensure that actions from the Upper Mississippi River states’are not impacting the water quality for the states downstream in the Lower Mississippi Basin. Therefore, the Mississippi River is an “orphan” from a water quality monitoring and assessment perspective as a result of limited interstate coordination.31 Looking at the chronology of the Mississippi River, it is easy to notice that humans, along with technological innovation, have had a dramatic impact on the Mississippi River. A system that took millions of years to create, and has experienced 1200 years of human interaction with virtually no impact, has now almost been completely destroyed. It only took 30 years for man-made technologies to undo the river system that has severely compromised the system’s health, and 80 years to begin a spiral into total system collapse.

31 Committee on the Mississippi River and the Clean Water Act, National Research Council, “Mississippi River Water Quality and the Clean Water Act: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities.”

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

43

44

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE RIVER

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

45

THREATS TO THE RIVER The main threat to the Mississippi River system is the disconnect between the environmental system and the political overlays along the system. More specifically, creating control mechanisms through engineering to protect and support the economies upstream creates a conflict between the artificial political boundaries and environmental systems and the way they interact. The conflict is literally a product of the way we engineer around those two frameworks.

The lock and dam system deepened the River and created a ninefoot navigation channel in the Upper Mississippi River. This allowed barges to access the inland waterway system of the Midwest, making America’s “bread-basket” accessible to the world. In fact, 472 million tons of cargo, worth $54 billion, is transported via the Mississippi river every year.32 Engineering the River has created a navigational channel that has brought economic growth. In turn, this economy that the river helped create is now putting an increasing amount of pressure back onto the River, and thus creating a perpetual need for more control. This has lead to a collapse of many habitats along this system.

The control system created by the US Army Corps of Engineers has contributed to weakening the system.

The infrastructure used

to control the River also alters the River’s natural hydrologic and geomorphologic processes. The threats to the system aren’t foreign, they are natural processes that are being amplified due to the intervention.

32 “Water transportation of freight, not elsewhere classified (SIC...: Information from Answers.com.”

46

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE RIVER Factors of Ecological Degradation There are primarily five factors that have caused ecological degradation throughout the River System:33,34 1. Flood Control- Embankments, Floodwater storage techniques, Water diversion methods, Monitoring and regulation of carrying capacity.

2. Navigation- Canals, Dredging, Locks and Dams, Revetment, Channelization alters the natural hydrology of the river.

3. Accelerated Subsidence- Wetlands that act as a natural barrier for the coast, are no longer receiving nutrients and sediment due to dam and levee obstruction.

4. Urban encroachment- Wetlands within the riparian area of the river, act as a sponge absorbing toxins before they enter the water system.

They are being drained for agriculture and real estate development.

5. Water Pollution- Urban storm water runoff, agriculture pesticides, transportation, industrial and petrol- chemical manufacturing damage the sensitive aquatic system by raising the temperature and/or adding toxic chemicals to the water.

Regional Sedimentation Problems All of the above-mentioned factors are harming the River, but the threat that has altered the Mississippi River’s processes the most, causing the most damage, is the creation of the navigational channel through damming and channelization. Current commercialization along the Upper Mississippi River continues to further channelization of the River corridor for navigational purposes. The pooling effect caused by damming the River has been beneficial in that it created reservoirs for cities and industries in areas of the River, which would otherwise be very shallow. However, this interference has decreased the amount of sediment that is carried to the Mississippi Delta by the River. In turn, the backwaters and non-channelized areas are experiencing increased 33 “Gulf Coast’s Mississippi Delta.”

34 Walker, “Wetland Loss in Louisiana.”

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

47

THREATS TO THE RIVER sedimentation buildup at a rate of 1.5 to 2 inches per year.35

Along the Lower Mississippi River a more critical situation is occurring.

First, The levee system south of St. Louis has turned the River into a “pipe”.36 The levee system protects the surrounding communities from flooding, but it also interrupts the natural sedimentation processes.

The bifurcation of the sedimentation process deprives the Mississippi River system’s marshlands much-needed nutrients and sediment.

River training structure and bank revetments cutoffs are also causes of sedimentation decline. Prior to the engineering efforts on the Mississippi River, meandering and riverbank erosion was a major source of suspended sediment. Riparian sediment-storage sites along the The Mississippi River.

River have also been altered by river engineering, which plays a major (Credit: Jerry Ting) role in their transfer deficiency.37 Second, the inter-coastal wetlands are disappearing due to several factors including disappearing coastline, dredging which causes salt water to invade the freshwater marshes, killing trees and grass, while steadily increasing erosion. The loss of these wetlands is detrimental to the entire coast, because it will ultimately lead to lost habitat and wildlife, lost economies, and will leave coastal cities vulnerable and exposed to coastal storms. The sediment that is carried by the River no longer gets deposited along Gulf Coast Plume. (Credit: NASA) the riverbanks or wetlands. Instead the sediment is directly deposited At the mouth of the Mississippi River, a hotspot of land-based impact on marine

at the mouth of the Gulf of Mexico, blocking the navigation channel. ecosystems is re-occurring annually.

The river’s sediment plume can be seen

In order to unblock the navigational channels, taxpayers’ dollars are in the satellite image above. spent each year to dredge sediment. Several million tons of nutrient rich sediment is pushed into the Gulf of Mexico, where it harms the sensitive aquatic ecosystems.

Another threat created by engineering the River, is the creation of a plume at the mouth of the Mississippi River. A plume is an area of concentrated nutrients that creates a “dead zone”. The dead zone is caused by an overgrowth of algae that feeds on the nutrients 35BHOWMIK, “Sedimentation of four reaches of the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers.”

36 DEAN, “Dams Are Thwarting Louisiana Marsh Restoration, Study Says.”

37 Meade and Moody, “Causes for the decline of suspended-sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940 – 2007††,” pp.44.

48

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE RIVER and takes up most of the oxygen in the water.

38

Over the past 30,

years a plume has been forming in Gulf of Mexico at the delta of the Mississippi River. This plume forms in the spring and last until the fall.

The plume extends over 20,720 square kilometers creating a “dead zone” due to the hypoxia created by nutrient discharge. Research has proven that this is due to the system’s threats mentioned above that are compounded throughout the River System.39

38 “Human Impact on Coastal Areas and Marine Ecosystems.”

39 “ScienceDirect - Geomorphology : Flood management along the Lower Mississippi and Rhine Rivers (The Netherlands) and the continuum of geomorphic adjustment.”

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

49

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM Threats at Every Scale Local The Upper Mississippi River System as well as the Lower Mississippi River System are experiencing different types of threats.

The

degradation to the entire Mississippi River is happening at several scales, as well.

Disruption to the river process starts at the local scale, with each individual dam. This is a very simple process that is creating serious impacts throughout the system. Through the natural erosion and the sedimentation processes, runoff from the surrounding landscape is deposited into the River. Some of the finer grain sediment, like silt, is very light and buoyant and is carried by the River until it is deposited into low-lying flood plains and/or to the mouth of the River (the Mississippi River Delta). However the coarser grain sediment, like sand, is too big and heavy to flow passed the dams and therefore is captured behind the structures.40 The trapped sediment has raised the riverbed on average 33’, which is backfilling and blocking the navigational channels, as well as, creating lost capacity in the reservoirs. It is also important to note that the coarser sediment carries less pollution, meaning the finer sediment that is carried to the Lower Mississippi River System has a higher concentration of pollution.41 Regional The local scale disruptions combine to have a larger impact on the Mississippi River system. Looking at the dams collectively as a system shows that the dams are causing a regional compounding effect on the River’s hydrology and geomorphologic processes. A majority of the sediment loads originate from the west, primarily the Missouri River, collected by the highly erodible soils in the Great Plains. In contrast, the majority of water runoff is discharged for the east, primarily the Ohio River.42 Prior to 1900, the Mississippi-Missouri River system carried over 400 million metric tons of sediment per year from the 40 “Sediment and Sedimentation - Sediment Size.”

41 Julien, “Review of Sedimentation Issues on the Mississippi River,” 47.

42 Meade and Moody, “Causes for the decline of suspended-sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940 – 2007††,” 39.

50

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM

size x 20

Navigational Dams

Sediment Separation

Coarse 2mm

Fine 1/16mm (silt)

(Sand)

Source: USACE Construction of Lock and Dam no. 22 on the Mississippi River

Coarse se dam struc

Sediment Backfilling at the Lock and Dams Iowa

158

Illinois 1983

Elevation in meters

156

1946

154

11 meter rise (lost capacity)

152

1928

150 148

1891

146 144 142

0

2000

4000

Sediment Separation This graphic to the top has magnified the size of coarse and fine sediment. It shows that there is significant variation between the sand that gets trapped behind dams and the silt that is carried past.

6000 8000 10,000 Distance in meters

12,000

14,000

16,000

Cross-sectional profile of the Upper Misssissippi Riv

Sediment Backfilling the Lock and Dams This graphic to the right and bottom is a cross-sectional profile illustrating the rise 135after of the riverbed due to backfilling construction of the dams in the Upper Mississippi River.

River Mile 175.0

134 Deconstructing the Mississippi River

133

51

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM headwaters in the interior of the United States to the Gulf of Mexico.

However, sedimentation transport has decreased substantially since the construction of dams along the Upper Mississippi River. The average transport in the past two decades (1986-2006) has decreased to 145 million metric tons per year.43,44 The backfilling of each individual dam has collectively decreased the sedimentation of the entire River approximately 60 percent over the last 100 years. Water and sediment discharge data that has been collected for over 60 years shows that the navigation dams have trapped 100-150 million metric tons. In 1980, the sediment discharge measured average 255 million metric tons per year, and in 2006 the discharge declined to 170 million.45 The increased deposition in the Upper Mississippi River has lead to a compounding effect of subsidence in the Lower Mississippi River.

Continental The compounding regional effects of sedimentation, along with other factors, are now leading to a continental system collapse. The Upper Mississippi River is experiencing backfilling, lost capacity, topsoil loss, habitat loss, and high concentrations of agricultural nutrients and pollutants. These effects compound throughout the system.

As a result, the Lower Mississippi River is experiencing habitat loss, sinking marshes, hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico, economic loss, coastal exposure and vulnerable cities. To put this in perspective, Louisiana has 40 percent of America’s wetlands, yet is experiencing 90% of the wetland loss. This loss is equivalent to 35 square miles each year or a football field every 30 minutes.46 Sediment, which is the lifeblood for many of the habitats along the Mississippi River, has been declining at a rate of 3 percent per year 43 Meade and Moody, “Causes for the decline of suspended-sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940 – 2007††.”

44 Data for graphics (right ): Review of River Mechanics by Pierre Y. Julien Hsieh Wen Shen, J. Hydr. Engrg. 130, 377 (2004), 45 Ibid., pp. 40.

46 “Louisiana Begins Wetland Repair with Mississippi River Sediment.”

52

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM Sediment Flow Measurement : 1981 to 1989 1891: 400 million tons

M R

Mississippi River

Missouri River

Missouri River

Ohio River

Coarse sediment trapped behind dam structure

Arkansas River

Arkansas River

Red River

Red River

llinois Gulf of Mexico

600

1989: 145 million tons Suspended-sediment

Gu

discharge, in millions of metric tons per year Mississippi River

Mississippi Missouri River River DECLINE OF SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER

Mississippi River

Ohio River

Ohio River

Missouri River Arkansas River

Coarse sediment trapped behind 16,000 Red River dam structure

0

600

Gulf of Mexico

f theSuspended-sediment Upper Misssissippi River discharge, in millions

Millions of metric tons per year

ippi

xico

0

Ohio River 500

Arkansas River

Arkansas River

400 300 200

Red River

100 1950

1960

Sediment Flow Measurement: 1891-1989 Sediment concentrations in the Mississippi River have decreased at least 70-80% from pre-development conditions. The sediment deposition Sediment behind dams 1985 on Upper Mississippi65 5 River is blocking navigational channels 19 197 causing lostDECLINE capacity for OF reservoirs, as SEDIMENT DISCHARGE well as, causing wetland loss for the Gulf Coast.

Red River

Wisconsin

Minnesota

1970

1980 Iowa

of metric tons per year

5.0 PPI RIVER

O

Missouri River

Gulf of Mexico Illinois

1990

0

2000

600

Gulf of Mexico

Suspended-sediment discharge, in millions of metric tons per year

Missouri Kentucky

IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER Tennessee

Arkansas

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

Mississippi

Louisiana

53

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM over the past 40 years.47 Some scientists have suggested breaking the dams to restore the River’s processes and allow sediment to continue pass the dam structures. Dr. Harry H. Roberts (a researcher with Nature Geoscience) claims that even if dams were broken and the trapped sediment was somehow released, that sediment is polluted and could potentially harm the deteriorating wetlands much more than leaving the dams intact.48 Another issue to touch on is how to give the issue of regionalism more traction. Incentivizing it economically is where the true American Continental Collapse

The graphic to the right shows the effect

values come in. A redistribution of the way activities are played out compounding threats throughout the Mississippi River Basin are having on

along the River is necessary, because cities are the market drivers the system. Collectively, the threats are

causing unprecedented catastrophes

for the use of the adjacent floodplains. So how can the Mississippi on both cities and ecological systems River processes be restored without destroying the structures that is Louisiana Coast Wetland Loss Source: USGS causing the River System to collapse?

47 Meade and Moody, “Causes for the decline of suspended-sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940 – 2007††,” pp. 46.

48 DEAN, “Dams Are Thwarting Louisiana Marsh Restoration, Study Says.”

54

The graphic below shows that amount of land Louisiana is predicted to lose (according to the historic rate of loss) between 1932 and 2050. This amount of erosion is unprecedented, due to the sedimentation loss after the navigational dam structures were built.

Haley Heard

THREATS TO THE SYSTEM Continental Collapse

sediment backfilling decreased water capacity top soil & nutrient loss pollution from agriculture and development

UPPER LOWER

habitat loss sinking marshes hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico coastal exposure economic loss vulnerable cities

propagating channel degradation in the upstream direction. Channel deepening and widening have caused problems at stream crossings and have resulted in gully encroachment into cultivated fields. A diffusion model and a hyperbolic model, each describing channel degradation, were solved using a Laplace transform approach. A close-form solution was obtained for the diffusion model, but numerical methods were necessary for evaluation of the inverse transform of the hyperbolic model. A closed-form asymptotic solution was found for the hyperbolic case. Both solutions were found to be in very good agreement with actual results (Hjelmfelt and Lenau 1992).

Upland Erosion Agricultural landscapes have been more sensitive to climatic variability than natural landscapes because tillage and grazing typically reduce water infiltration and increase rates and magnitudes of surface runoff. Studies have been completed to determine how agricultural land use has influenced the relative responsiveness of floods, erosion, and sedimentation to extreme and nonextreme hydrologic activity occurring in watersheds of the upper Mississippi Valley. The Illinois River Basin has been of particular interest due to its land use characteristics and size. Soil erosion and deposition of sediment into surface waters is a natural process that has been accelerated by land altering changes brought about by man. Intensive agriculture, land clearing, urban construction, drainage of wetlands, levee construction and alteration of stream segments in both the Illinois River Basin and lower Mississippi Valley have significantly increased the rate of erosion waste on Upper Mississippi River and the amount ofIndustrial sediment entering stream tributaries, the Illinois River and its backwater lakes and sloughs (FigureUS 8).Fish and Wildlife Service Source:

Figure 8: Sheet erosion in Upper Mississippi River basin Sheet Erosion inthethe Upper Mississippi Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture

Basin Source: USDA

River

New Orleans after hurricane Katrina Source: Colligan Wordpress

Louisiana Wetland Loss Source: USGS

Dredging to clear navigation passages Source: USACE

Louisiana Coast, Gulf of Mexico ‘Dead Zone’ Source: Louisiana University Marine Cosortium

Turbidity after dredging Source: USACE

Gulf of Mexico hypoxic ‘Dead Zone’ Source: NOAA

9

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

55

56

Haley Heard

DIRT ECONOMIES

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

57

DIRT ECONOMIES Instead of completely overhauling the system that currently causes destructive flooding, erosion, and decreased water quality, several opportunities can be explored. The opportunity this paper focuses on is sediment. Primarily, the problem is that sediment gets trapped behind dams and cannot be carried through the entire system. This thesis attempts to restore the sediment’s ultimate fate, again allowing it be deposited at the mouth of the Mississippi River in the intercoastal marshlands.

Removing the dams is not a reality for several reasons. First, it would destroy the navigation channels which is the lifeline to a large percentage of the mid-west’s economy. Second, the investment for the infrastructure has already been made, and would create conflict with the powers that created the dam system. Finally, deconstructing the dam system would be even more harmful to the River than leaving it intact because the destruction of the dams would release polluted sediment trapped behind the dam downstream.

Rather than proposing to remove the dams, the intervention most appropriate for this system is to create a network that capitalizes on the way the system currently functions with the existing infrastructure.

With this in mind, this proposal establishes a network that addresses issues with design and planning at the local, regional, and even at the scale of geography, with a medium that is as small as a grain of sediment. In other words, shifting the scale of urban design to the scale of territories.

58

Haley Heard

DIRT ECONOMIES Sediment Transfer Strategy & Network

PROBLEM

OPPORTUNITY

Engineering systems along the Mississippi River have reversed the natural geomorphological processes of the river

1

Diminished Reservoir Capacity

Urban

2

Wetland Subsidence

1 2 3 Systemic Sediment Harvesting

Ecological Restoration

Decreased Water Quality

Habitat Loss

Agriculture

Green Economies

Forest

Waste Urban Sludge Sediment Agri. Pollution Sediment

Sediment

Commodity Fertilizer A Organic Fill

B Compost/ Topsoil Urban Forestry

C Clear Cut

Reclamation

a b a b Flooding

SOLUTION Adjacent Land Use

Dams create to opportunity to harvest sediment

Vulnerable Coastal Cities

Wetland

Sediment Separation

D Foundation Sand

Problem In the upper stretches of the River there is too much sediment, and in the lower stretches there is too little. The problem is two pronged: First, agricultural runoff from the Upper Mississippi River creates sediment. The dams that have been built throughout the Upper Mississippi River system have disrupted the natural processes of the River, which leads to: 1. Blocked navigational channels and diminished capacity of the reservoirs in the Upper Mississippi River Basin.

2. The opposite is true of the Lower Mississippi River. The loss of sediment in the Lower Mississippi River Basin leads to subsidence, which is a natural process of erosion and Sediment Transfer Strategy and Network The graphic above shows the liabilities that engineering the Mississippi River has created and opportunities and solutions that are the result of the problem.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

compaction of soil. However, without the continual deposition of sediment to rebuild the land that naturally would maintain a balanced elevation, the wetlands are disappearing under the sea.

59

DIRT ECONOMIES Opportunity In the case of the Mississippi River, the problem is also the solution.

The dams capture sediment and contain it behind the structure.

This presents an opportunity to harvest the sediment and use it as a medium to create a commodity out of it. Changing the perception of dirt as waste to a new commodity allows the opportunity to restore ecological processes and habitats that our previous interventions have destroyed, but still facilitate economic gain. Ultimately, the right solution should not be a choice between economy and ecology, the effective solution should create an opportunity for them to reinforce each other.

Changing the perception also presents the opportunity to create a new economy from dirt that adds an economic benefit to the system. The new economies include, but are not limited to, systemic sediment harvesting for ecological restoration and the creation of a variety of green economies. These economic resources include soil fill for construction and brownfield remediation, nontoxic agriculture fertilizer and topsoil, and a medium for ecological system enhancement.

Solution The solution to addressing concerns with trapped sediment is the sediment itself. Creating a commodity out of the sediment allows the opportunity to harvest and redistribute it throughout the Mississippi River System in many different forms. According to studies done

by US Geologic Survey (USGS), there are seven land uses along the Mississippi River, but there are four major adjacent land uses that produce a particular type of sediment. These commodities are conducive for implementing the new commodities that use the sediment as a medium. The flexibility to use dirt in different ways at different scales is a testament to its value. Therefore, there are four different ways to use this commodity in order to have a positive impact at different scales.

60

Haley Heard

DIRT ECONOMIES The four sediment types include: 1. Urban- In urban areas the sediment can be used for brownfield reclamation and land fill for strip mines or low-lying areas. Mixing the sediment with urban sludge creates two types of commodities.

Organic Fertilizer- the high nitrogen content is very good for

agriculture

Land Fill/ Brownfield Reclamation- the high nitrogen content

also allows soil remediating plants to establish and grow faster, therefore remediate the soil faster.

2. Agriculture- Sediment runoff adjacent to agricultural land has a high nutrient content. This sediment can get recycled and turned into compost and topsoil 3. Forests- Cities can use the sediment to create urban forests that act as a buffer between communities and harmful, adjacent uses. The sediment can also restore topsoil from clear-cut forest.

Urban Forestry - sediment can also be used to facilitate the

growth of urban forestry

Clear-cutting Remediation- sediment can also be used to

remediate soil in forest that have suffered from significant

erosion due to clear-cutting.

4. Wetlands- Wetland loss is occurring throughout the Mississippi River System in both the Upper and Lower basins. The sediment captured behind the dams in the Upper Mississippi River is extremely critical in reconstructing wetlands, particularly the coastal wetlands along the Gulf Coast. The coarse granular sand of the Upper Mississippi sediment is critical because it builds the foundation for the wetlands and resists compaction and sinking. The coarser sediment is able to do this because it is less dense than the clay silt.49 Wetlands use the sediment as a foundation to stop subsidence and build them up to a healthy elevation.

49 Walker, “Wetland Loss in Louisiana.�

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

61

62

Haley Heard

SEDIMENT NETWORK

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

63

SEDIMENT NETWORK

The sediment network is an ideological way to look at a problem such as deconstructing the Mississippi River. Most problems at this scale try to change the entire system, instead of trying to build something positive out of a systemic problem.

The key as an urban designer and planner is to come in and incrementally identify opportunities within that system, which would then spin out large-scale positive effects on the system. The sediment network approach is incremental, in that it wedges itself between the site design scale and the systemic scale.

There is optimism in a network that approaches problem solving at a myriad of scales. The proposed sediment network literally takes an object as miniscule as a grain of sand and turns it into a local, regional, and even a national economy. It proposes that the sediment that is left behind dams to become a product of waste, invisible under the surface of the water, and turns it into a productive thing that can lend itself to a national authority.

Sediment Harvesting Process The sediment harvesting process is essentially a process of moving dirt.

Each step of the sediment transfer process creates new jobs, which will facilitate economic gain. Creating a sediment network along the River also helps to re-imagine industrial use to have a positive effect on the River, while still growing the economy.

Step 1: Dams In areas where the riverbed has trapped and accumulated sediment, a

Sediment Transfer Process

hopper boat sucks dredged material and pumps it through an intake The graphic to the right shows literally how to move dirt- Each step of the

pipe (drag arm) to hoppers where it is stored. The slurry water is sediment transfer process creates new drained and discharged during the dredge operation.

64

jobs which will facilitate economic gain. Creating a sediment network along the river also helps to re-imagine the industrial use to have a positive effect on the river while still growing the economy.

Haley Heard

SEDIMENT NETWORK Step 2: Dredging Once the hoppers are full, the vessel moves to a sediment discharge station, where the sediment is pumped out of the hoppers.

Step 3: Transport After the sediment is unloaded, a conveyer belt moves it to an on-site storage silo. Sediment remains in the silo until the train arrives, where the sediment is then dispensed. The train transports the sediment to different areas to be distributed accordingly.

Step 4: Sediment Plant and Distribution The sediment is transported from the dredging station using existing rail lines to a sediment plant. From there, the sediment is divided and categorized into one of the sediment commodities. The sediment is then sent to a distribution station where it will be directed to its final designated area.

Sediment Transfer Process

1 Dam

2 Dredging 3 Train

4Sediment AUrban Plant

A

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

B Agriculture CForest

B

C

DWetland

D

65

nfrastructure

toration

Pool Land Use/Cover Change

Criteria

Dirt Economies

Land Use / Land Cover

SEDIMENT NETWORK % change over 100 years

Major Land Uses

St. Paul, MN

0% Marsh

Fertilizer

8% Woody Terrestrial

Fill

6% Marsh

5

Whitman, MI

Fill Forest Restoration

5a

without building something immediate and tangible out of it. 50 The 40% Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil Fill

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil

17% Agriculture

Forest Restoration

20% Marsh

Fertilizer

8% Agriculture

20% Marsh

Compost / Top soil

Wetland Restoration

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

1% Agriculture

Fill

24% Woody Terrestrial 16% Urban

90%

how and where the best use20%of the 80% sediment will be.

5% Grasses

Trempealeau, WI

10%

the adjacent communities and the agency overseeing the sediment,

48% Woody Terrestrial

6

60%

Sediment Index organizes the Mississippi River’s information to help

11% Grasses

5% Urban

60%

Wetland Restoration

22% Woody Terrestrial

Winona, MI

40%

Forest Restoration

5% Agriculture

5% Urban

10%

Compost / Top soil

5% Grasses

13% Marsh

Dirt Relocation Strategy

Fertilizer

21% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

Dirt Relocation Strategy

60% have to invest in the sediment order for this system to work, 40% cities

4% Grasses

36% Woody Terrestrial

4

90%

% On Site

Wetland Restoration

10% Agriculture

9% Marsh

% Shipped

how can the perception of the whole watershed be changed? In

16% Marsh

4% Urban

Fill   Forest Restoration 

The Sediment Network turns the system on itself and asks the question,

3% Agriculture 19% Urban

Compost / Top soil 

Wetland Restoration

Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Alma, WI

Dirt Economy

Sediment Index

21% Woody Terrestrial

3

Sediment + Nutrient Extraction + Urban Sludge

0% Grasses

71% Urban

Hager City, WI

Sediment

Existing Infrastructure

Major Land Uses 0% Agriculture

2

Sediment + Urban Sludge

Dam

Agriculture

1989

    Fertilizer

Sediment + Nutrient Extraction

Rail

Development

1891

Hastings, MN

Urban Sludge + Sediment

Tributaries

Dams

1

Dirt Economy Typology

Mississippi River

Forest Restoration

50%

50%

The Sediment Index is an incremental approach that compiles Wetland Restoration

7

Dresbach, MI

17% Marsh

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

8% Urban

8

Genoa, WI

20% Marsh

Fertilizer

20% of the Mississippi River, and80% the adjacent land in between to establish Compost / Top soil

0% Agriculture

Fill

9% Urban

9

Wetland Restoration

sediment commodity type and need. Adjacent land uses indicate the Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil

2% Agriculture

Fill

1% Urban Guttenburg, IA

19% Marsh

11

Compost / Top soil

25%

runoff. The change in the 75% adjacent land use indicates the need for

6% Agriculture

14% Marsh

20%

Fertilizer

4% Grasses

2% Urban

80%

type of nutrients that might have been collected and mixed with the Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

27% Woody Terrestrial

Dubuque, IA

Forest Restoration

5% Grasses

26% Woody Terrestrial

10

Forest Restoration

10% Grasses

26% Marsh

50%

Fill

Wetland Restoration

17% Woody Terrestrial

Harper’s Ferry, IA

Compost / Top soil

50% information from 26 navigation lock and dams in the first two reaches

8% Agriculture

18% Woody Terrestrial

Fill

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

25% certain types of sediments75% and therefore specifies where sediment

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

2% Agriculture

Fill

22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

12

Bellevue, IA

13% Marsh

will be redistributed. The Sediment Index assembles the following Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

1% Agriculture

Fill

24% Woody Terrestrial 8% Urban

13

Clinton, IA

14% Marsh

information:

14

Compost / Top soil Fill

2. Adjacent75% Land Use 25% / Land Coverage

4% Marsh

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

7% Agriculture

Fill

14% Urban

15

25%

75% 1. Navigational Lock and Dam System

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

30% Woody Terrestrial

Davenport, IA

15%

Fertilizer

7% Agriculture 12% Urban

85%

Wetland Restoration

7% Grasses 24% Woody Terrestrial

Hampton, IL

Forest Restoration

Forest Restoration

3. Percent Land Use Change Over 100 Years

Wetland Restoration

0% Marsh

Fertilizer

3% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

5% Agriculture

Fill

5% Woody Terrestrial 48% Urban

95%

5%

4. Existing Infrastructure

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

16

Mascatine, IA

5% Marsh

Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

17% Agriculture 25% Woody Terrestrial 12% Urban

17

New Boston, IA

Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil

12% Urban 2% Marsh

Fertilizer Compost / Top soil

7% Urban

Fertilizer

3% Marsh

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

retain sediment depending on the current adjacent land use can 20% how80% Fertilizer

0% Grasses

38% Agriculture

5% Woody Terrestrial

21

Quincy, IL

0% Marsh

Hannibal, MO

24

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil Fill

Forest Restoration

This amount of sediment manufactured to become organic fertilizer Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

6% Grasses

50% Agriculture

Compost / Top soil Fill

10%

90%

50%

50%

would have a value of $30 million per year.

22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

Fill

Wetland Restoration

17% Woody Terrestrial

1% Marsh

Compost / Top soil

dam traps approximately 420 80%carloads of sediment per year.

20% train

4% Grasses

Winfield, MO

90%

100% 0% and sediment waste to produce organic fertilizer. In Minneapolis, the

30% Agriculture

25

10%

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

0% Marsh

0% Urban

Fill

Wetland Restoration

4% Grasses

2% Marsh

Compost / Top soil

more value monetarily by creating an industry that uses their sewage

16% Woody Terrestrial

Clarksville, MO

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

64% Agriculture 1% Urban

Fill

Wetland Restoration

4% Grasses

61% Agriculture 1% Urban

Compost / Top soil

facilitate it. For example, an urban area such as Minneapolis may gain

11% Woody Terrestrial

22

Compost / Top soil

100% 0% The Sediment Relocation Strategy is based on the decision to ship or Fill

14% Urban

100%

Wetland Restoration

20% Woody Terrestrial

0% Marsh

0%

Forest Restoration

57% Agriculture 3% Urban

20

Fill

Economic Impact

5% Grasses

Canton, MO

Forest Restoration

5% Grasses 27% Woody Terrestrial

19

Fill

Wetland Restoration

34% Agriculture

Keokuk, IA

6. Economic45%Impact55%of Sediment Network

1% Marsh 6% Grasses 25% Woody Terrestrial

18

45% 55% 5. Dirt Reallocation Strategy

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

17% Agriculture

Burlington, IA

Fill

Forest Restoration

Wetland Restoration

26

Alton, IL

2% Marsh

Fertilizer

3% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

35% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial 4% Urban

Fill Forest Restoration

50 Berger, 2010, April 28. “Deconstructing the Mississippi River: Thesis Defense.”

Wetland Restoration

66

Mississippi River Delta

Haley Heard

SEDIMENT NETWORK Sediment Network Index

Mississippi River Systemic Infrastructure Building Economy Through Ecological Restoration Reversal of Urban Consumption

Pool Land Use/Cover Change

Criteria

Dirt Economies

Land Use / Land Cover

Dirt Economy Typology

    

Reach 1

  

Dams 1891

1

1989

% change over 100 years

Major Land Uses

Existing Infrastructure

Dirt Economy

% Shipped

% On Site

Dirt Relocation Strategy

Dirt Relocation Strategy

St. Paul, MN

0% Marsh 0% Grasses

Fertilizer

8% Woody Terrestrial

Fill

Major Land Uses 0% Agriculture

90%

10%

40%

60%

40%

60%

60%

40%

10%

90%

20%

80%

50%

50%

50%

50%

80%

20%

80%

20%

75%

25%

75%

25%

85%

15%

75%

25%

75%

25%

95%

5%

55%

45%

45%

55%

0%

100%

0%

100%

20%

80%

10%

90%

0%

100%

20%

80%

10%

90%

50%

50%

71% Urban

2

Hastings, MN

6% Marsh 4% Grasses 3% Agriculture 21% Woody Terrestrial 19% Urban

3

Hager City, WI

16% Marsh 4% Grasses 10% Agriculture 36% Woody Terrestrial 4% Urban

4

Alma, WI

9% Marsh

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Fertilizer Compost / Top soil Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

Fertilizer

5% Grasses

Compost / Top soil Fill

5% Urban Whitman, MI

Fill

5% Agriculture 21% Woody Terrestrial

5

Fertilizer

13% Marsh

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

11% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

17% Agriculture

Forest Restoration

22% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

5a

Winona, MI

20% Marsh 5% Grasses 8% Agriculture 48% Woody Terrestrial

Fertilizer Compost / Top soil Wetland Restoration

5% Urban

6

Trempealeau, WI

20% Marsh

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

1% Agriculture

Fill

24% Woody Terrestrial 16% Urban

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

7

Dresbach, MI

17% Marsh

Compost / Top soil Fill

18% Woody Terrestrial 8% Urban

8

Genoa, WI

20% Marsh

Compost / Top soil

26% Marsh

Fertilizer Compost / Top soil

19% Marsh

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

6% Agriculture

Fill

2% Urban Dubuque, IA

Wetland Restoration

Fill

27% Woody Terrestrial

11

Forest Restoration

5% Grasses 2% Agriculture 1% Urban Guttenburg, IA

Fertilizer

Fill

26% Woody Terrestrial

10

Wetland Restoration

0% Agriculture 9% Urban Harper’s Ferry, IA

Forest Restoration

10% Grasses 17% Woody Terrestrial

9

Fertilizer

6% Grasses 8% Agriculture

14% Marsh

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

2% Agriculture

Fill

22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

12

Bellevue, IA

13% Marsh

Compost / Top soil Fill

24% Woody Terrestrial 8% Urban

13

Clinton, IA

Reach 2

14% Marsh

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

4% Marsh

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

7% Agriculture

Fill

14% Urban

15

Fertilizer Compost / Top soil

30% Woody Terrestrial

Davenport, IA

Wetland Restoration

Fill

12% Urban

14

Forest Restoration

7% Grasses 7% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial

Hampton, IL

Fertilizer

6% Grasses 1% Agriculture

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

0% Marsh

Fertilizer

3% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

5% Agriculture

Fill

5% Woody Terrestrial 48% Urban

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

16

Mascatine, IA

5% Marsh 4% Grasses 17% Agriculture 25% Woody Terrestrial 12% Urban

17

New Boston, IA

Compost / Top soil

Compost / Top soil

5% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

57% Agriculture

Fill Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

0% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

Compost / Top soil Fill Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

0% Marsh

Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

64% Agriculture 16% Woody Terrestrial 1% Urban

Fill Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

2% Marsh

Fertilizer

4% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

30% Agriculture 17% Woody Terrestrial 0% Urban

25

Wetland Restoration

4% Grasses 61% Agriculture

Winfield, MO

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

1% Urban

24

Fill

0% Marsh

11% Woody Terrestrial

Clarksville, MO

Wetland Restoration

0% Marsh

5% Woody Terrestrial

22

Wetland Restoration

20% Woody Terrestrial

14% Urban

Hannibal, MO

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

38% Agriculture

21

Fill

3% Marsh

3% Urban

Quincy, IL

Wetland Restoration

5% Grasses

7% Urban

20

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

34% Agriculture

Canton, MO

Fill

2% Marsh

27% Woody Terrestrial

19

Wetland Restoration

6% Grasses

12% Urban

Keokuk, IA

Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

25% Woody Terrestrial

18

Compost / Top soil Fill

1% Marsh 17% Agriculture

Burlington, IA

Fertilizer

Fill Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

1% Marsh

Fertilizer

6% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

50% Agriculture 22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

Fill Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

26

Alton, IL

2% Marsh

Fertilizer

3% Grasses

Compost / Top soil

35% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial 4% Urban

Fill Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration

Mississippi River Delta

Sediment Network Index The graphic above shows what kinds of land uses and land use changes occur along the river at each dam. It also illustrates the strategy to redistribute sediment throughout the River System according to the needs of each adjacent land use.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

67

SEDIMENT NETWORK However, a less urbanized location along the Mississippi River, such as Debuque, Iowa adjacent to dam 11, will value sediment differently.

Debuque, Iowa is located near one of The Nature Conservancy’s priority conservation area, and therefore the sediment’s environmental benefit is much more important. In this location the sediment will be used to rebuild wetlands as habitat for endangered species indigenous to this area of the river.

The sediment network is not confined to the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Areas in the Lower Mississippi River Basin that are not adjacent to the dams have ownership over the sediment, as well. Louisiana just launched a $28 million program this year to rebuild their wetlands; the state would use this sediment for this project.51 Moving forward, the proposed sediment index will evolve in order to relay the value of sediment and movement better. Adding weight to the sediment flows will create a new taxonomy of sites along the River based on their accumulation of sediment, a free resource that has been identified through this research. This is one way to inform a new agency of priority areas in which they should focus their resources. This will create a new series of surface evaluations across the Mississippi River Basin. The urban effect determines where this could be developed, assessing the value of sediment in accordance with all the surface typologies throughout the basin. In every urban area, there are surfaces, such as brownfields and strip mines, with no ecological productivity. Applying a percentage of the remediating soil from the sediment network to these places, will raise the ecological productivity, thus amplifying the value of urban surfaces. The family of surfaces will then create a new package of economies, creating a new market that can be speculated upon and then traded.52

51 “Louisiana Begins Wetland Repair with Mississippi River Sediment.”

52 Brown, 2010, April 28. “Deconstructing The Mississippi River- Thesis Defense.”

68

Haley Heard

20% Marsh 5% Grasses

ge teria

8% Agriculture

8

urban/ developed sand/ mud

Fertilizer

Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil

Compost / Top soil

Wetland Restoration

Wetland Restoration

Criteria

unknown

20%

48% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

Mississippi River

20% Marsh

Tributaries

6% Grasses

Rail

1% Agriculture

Dam Development

Fertilizer

Dirt Economy Typology

    Fertilizer

16% Urban

Major Land UsesFertilizer Existing Infrastructure 100 years 17% Marsh

DirtExisting Economy Infrastructure

Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil 10% Grasses Fertilizer 6% Marsh 0% Agriculture Fill 4% Grasses Fill 17% Woody Terrestrial 3% Agriculture Forest Restoration 9% Urban Forest Restoration 21% Woody Terrestrial Wetland Restoration

19% Urban 26% Marsh

Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil 5% Grasses Fertilizer 16% Marsh 2% Agriculture Fill 4% Grasses Compost / Top soil 26% Woody Terrestrial 10% Agriculture Forest Forest Restoration Restoration 1% Urban 36% Woody Terrestrial Wetland Restoration

4% Urban 19% Marsh

Fertilizer % Shipped Dirt

Economy

Compost / Top soil

102

50% 90%

Guttenburg, IA Fill Hastings, MN Fertilizer Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Fill

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer

80% 40% Dam 11

Fill

Fill Forest Restoration

113

Dubuque, IA Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Hager City, WI

Compost / Top soil Example of the Sediment Fertilizer Network being utilized in an environmentally Fill Compost / Top soil vulnerable area.

80% 40%

Forest Restoration Restoration Forest

12475% Fill Compost / Top soil Forest Restoration Fill

60%

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer

75% 10%

Fill Compost / Top soil

13 5

Clinton, IA

Forest Restoration Restoration Whitman, MI Forest Wetland Restoration

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer

85% 20%

Fill Compost / Top soil

Forest Restoration Wetland Restoration Wetland Restoration

14 5a 75% Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer Fill Compost / Top soil

50%

Forest Restoration Fill

Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

Wetland Fertilizer Restoration

Compost / Top soil

50% 10%

50% 90%

20% 60%

80% 40%

20% 60%

80% 40%

25% 40%

75% 60%

25% 90%

75% 10%

15% 80%

85% 20%

25% 50%

75% 50%

25% 50%

75% 50%

Hampton, IL Winona, MI

Wetland Restoration Forest Restoration

7% Agriculture Fill Compost / Top soil 6% Grasses 30% Woody Terrestrial Restoration 8% Agriculture Forest Fill 14% Urban 18% Woody Terrestrial Wetland Restoration Forest Restoration

Dirt Relocation St % Shipped

Fertilizer

Wetland Restoration Forest Restoration

Fertilizer River 17% Marshthe Mississippi Deconstructing

% On Site

50%

Bellevue, IA

Compost / Top soil Alma, WI Fertilizer

Fertilizer Restoration Wetland

Fill Compost / Top soil

Fill

 Forest Restoration 

Wetland Restoration

Debuque, Iowa Wetland Restoration Fertilizer

Fertilizer Wetland Restoration

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer

Compost / Top soil 

Fertilizer

Wetland Restoration Forest Restoration

Fertilizer

50% 

Forest Restoration Sediment + Nutrient Extraction + Urban Sludge  Wetland Restoration

Forest Restoration

24% Woody Terrestrial 1% Agriculture Forest Restoration Fill 12% Urban Terrestrial 24% Woody

6% Grasses

Sediment + Urban Sludge

Fertilizer

/ Top soil 6% Grasses The graphic above is Compost an enlargement Fertilizer 20% Marsh of the1% Sediment Index.

It illustrates Fill 5% Agriculture Grasses Compost / Top soil how different areas throughout 24% Woody Terrestrial 8% Agriculture the Mississippi River Forest will Restoration utilize Wetland Restorationthe 8% Woody Urban Sediment Network depending on the 48% Terrestrial Wetland Restoration land use.

16% Urban 4% Marsh

Sediment + Nutrient Extraction

Fertilizer

5% Urban Fertilizer 13% SedimentMarsh Utilization

7% Grasses 20% Marsh 7% 6% Agriculture Grasses

Fill

Wetland Restoration Restoration Wetland

4% Grasses Compost / Top soil Fertilizer 13% Marsh 2% Agriculture Fill 11% Grasses Compost / Top soil 22% Woody Terrestrial 17% Agriculture Forest Forest Restoration Restoration 2% Urban 22% Woody Terrestrial Wetland Restoration

5% Urban 14% Marsh

Fill

Wetland Restoration

Compost / Top soil 4% Grasses Fertilizer 9% Marsh 6% Agriculture Fill 5% Grasses Compost / Top soil 27% Woody Terrestrial Restoration 5% Agriculture Forest Fill 2% Urban 21% Woody Terrestrial Wetland Restoration

5% Urban 14% Marsh

Compost / Top soil 

1891

Dirt Economy St. Paul,Typology MN

 Example of the Sediment Network Forest Restoration Wetland being utilized in an urban areaSediment  Restoration

Compost / Top soil 6% Grasses 0% Marsh 8% Agriculture Fill 0% Grasses Fertilizer 18% Woody Terrestrial Major Land UsesForest Restoration 0% Agriculture 8% Urban Wetland Restoration Fill 8% Woody Terrestrial

71% Urban 20% Marsh

Harper’s Ferry, IA

open water

Sediment Utilization

Dam 1Urban Sludge + Sediment     Fertilizer Compost / Top soil Minneapolis/ St. Paul, MN

Mississippi River Urban Sludge + Sediment Compost / Top soil Tributaries Sediment + Nutrient Extraction Rail Fill Sediment + Urban Sludge Dam Forest Restoration Sediment Development Sediment + Nutrient Extraction + Urban Sludge Wetland Restoration Agriculture

24% Woody Terrestrial

Agriculture

91 50%

Fertilizer

80% Dams SEDIMENT NETWORK

Dirt Econom 20%

15 6

Compost / Top soil Fertilizer

75% 50%

Davenport, IA

Trempealeau, WI Fill Compost / Top soil Forest Restoration Fill

Wetland Restoration Forest Restoration

69

70

Haley Heard

LOCAL STRATEGY

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

71

LOCAL STRATEGY Regional planning has not been successful because cities are dealing

St. Louis, MO

with a spatial phenomenon right now, and the shifting scales confuses a lot of urban designers and planners. Currently, urban design and planning is realizing that in order to deal with systemic problems, there must be a leap to a regional scale. This leap is beyond the traditional scale of practice and therefore it becomes hard for the practitioner to visualize solutions to systemic problems. The regional scale is too big and a grain of sand is too small.

The creation of a Sediment Network along the Mississippi River allows urban designers and planners to address many different problems at many different scales through the use of one medium- sediment.

The Sediment Index demonstrates how to redistribute sediment at a system-wide scale, but in order to make the proposal viable, the proposal must show how sediment is appropriated at the local level.

One of the aspirations of this thesis is to resist doing a site design, and yet still showing the Sediment Network can be implemented locally.

This project does site design differently in that it is not bound by singular client site issues. Instead, the project shows how to engage the understanding of dealing with zoning land in parts. It is neither a planning project, nor a policy project. These implications exist, but mostly the design proposed here operates within the existing zoning.

The local scale briefly illustrates the implementation of the sediment network in East St. Louis, Illinois. It shows how the network could be implemented at a municipal scale and create substantial change for that community. The purpose of translating the sediment into a new medium shows how a place, such as East St. Louis, Illinois could prop itself up both spatially and economically. Can a new sediment network become an economy that brings a neighborhood or a city out of a welfare state? The local implementation strategy helps to imagine how this could be possible.

72

Haley Heard

LOCAL STRATEGY East St. Louis, IL Illin R ois iver

1

sis Mis

2

sip iver pi R

Mi

ssi

ssi

pp

iR

3

ive r

Lock and Dam No.26

Mi

ss

ou

ri

Riv er

4 5 6

iver

pi R

issip

Miss

Site Selection Criteria East St. Louis, Illinois is the site selected to demonstrate the Sediment Network implementation at a local scale. The site selection is based on the following criteria.

1. St. Louis and East St. Louis comprise the 2nd largest urbanized area on the Upper Mississippi River.

2. East St. Louis is located directly after navigational dam 26.

3. East St. Louis is located in an area of the Upper Mississippi River that has seen some of the most significant change over the past 100 years.

4. Infrastructure such as rail, industry, port exists, as well as all of the proposed land uses exist on site.

5. It has suffered from environmental degradation and is susceptible to increasing exposure to river processes.

6. There is historic polarization between the two cities. East St. Louis has historically been the poor, industrial dumping ground for St. Louis and suffers from an enormous amount of urban decay.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

73

LOCAL STRATEGY Site Analysis Within the existing site there are several existing land uses. Many of the land uses create an interesting juxtaposition between industrialized, residential, rural, or agricultural land uses. These land uses include the following. 53 1. U.S. Steel -mill and coking factory 2. U.S. Steel -cooling pond 3. Agriculture inside River cutoff 4. Lake Horseshoe- Oxbo Lake 5. Sediment Island 6. Agriculture 7. Runoff diversion channel 8. Existing Wetlands 9. Existing Wetlands 10. Abandoned Gravel Pit 11. Race Track 12. Golf Course 13. Empty Land 14. Abandoned Foundation Pad 15. Blighted Neighborhood 16. Water Treatment Plant 17. Existing Riparian edge 53 Site images for St. Louis, MO ( pg. 74) and East St. Louis, IL (pg.75): http://pool.twincitiesdailyphoto.com/2008/st_louis_downtown-01.jpg www.ballparks.com/baseball/national/stlbpk.htm http://aboutabride.wordpress.com/2008/09/ flickr.com/photos/78469770@N00/101527228/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/78469770@N00/84626049/ http://stl.prettywar.com/archives/2008_05.php http://builtstlouis.net/eaststlouis/images/murphybuilding06.jpg http://www.steeltrapmind.org/2005/08/four-aces-home-of-disco-riders-mc-east html

74

Haley Heard

LOCAL STRATEGY Site Analysis

4 2

1

5 6 3 7

8

St. Louis, MO

East St. Louis, IL 12

15

11

10

9

13 16 14

17

Legend Project Boundary Road Railroad Proposed River Connection Channel Dam

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

75

LOCAL STRATEGY Urban Revitalization 1. Urban Brown Field Reclamation: The existing U.S. Steel site is cleaned with sediment and sludge mixture to remediate the soil, allowing for future housing and retail development.

Strip Mine Reclamation: The strip mine and gravel pit are filled with the urban sediment mixture. The nutrient-rich mixture expedites the reclamation process.

2. Agriculture Organic Fertilizer: The nutrients from agricultural sediment can be sequestered to create a rich, organic fertilizer. This fertilizer is a nontoxic alternative for the environment, while safe for the adjacent communities.

Top Soil Replacement: Due to improper farming and land cultivation, much of America’s fertile topsoil has eroded away into the Mississippi River over the past 100 years. However, harvesting the nutrient-rich soil from the river can replenish agricultural topsoil.

3. Forests Urban Forestry: Planting forests within the urban realm creates a buffer between communities and less desirable land uses, mitigates

Site implementation The graphic to the right illustrates how different areas in East St. Louis, IL can be revitalized using sediment from the Sediment Network.

storm water runoff, acts as a wildlife corridor, and establishes an interconnected open space network for the city. Planting these forests with a forest sediment mixture will promote growth in a hindering environment.

Forest Reclamation: Clear-cut forests are very susceptible to erosion and nutrient loss, making it difficult to regenerate. Replenishing the topsoil and adding nutrient-rich sediment can expedite the growing cycle, so that certain areas will be more productive, and virgin forests will be less susceptible to clear cutting.

4. Wetlands Wetland Reconstruction: Wetlands are a vital habitat along the Mississippi River, offering respite for migratory birds and a home 76

Haley Heard

LOCAL STRATEGY Site Implementation 2

3

Organic Fertilizer

1 Forest Reclamation

2 3

Urban Forestry

4

1

Wetland Reconstruction

2

Wetland Reconstruction

Brownfield Reclamation

4

Topsoil Replacement

3

1

Strip Mine Reclamation

4

1 Urban

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

2 Agriculture

3 Forest

4 Wetland

77

LOCAL STRATEGY for some of North America’s most vulnerable wildlife. Wetlands also act as a riparian buffer, filtering water before it enters the river. The coarse sediment is a foundation for wetland plants and can be used to rebuild the 60% of wetlands that have largely been lost in North America.

What is Dirt Worth? Implementing Sediment Economies The four sediment commodities create an opportunity for the sediment to be distributed to several different places, for various uses. Each commodity has its own spatial distribution, as well as, a specific value that is either economical or environmental. The value of each commodity is determined by the need of each user. The value assigned to each of the proposed commodities is based on the approximate net sediment accumulation behind each dam per year.

Each of the sediment commodities has a specific set of clientele. Cities and developers are the most appropriate clients for the urban sediment commodity.

Farmers and gardeners are most likely to utilize the

agricultural sediment commodity to add nutrients for healthier crops and gardens. Parks department, lumber companies, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services can use the forests commodity to build buffers throughout the city and use it to build parks. The forest sediment can also be sold to parties interested in quickly rebuilding forested areas that have been clear-cut. The Nature Conservancy and the Gulf Coast states are the most likely candidates to utilize the wetland sediment commodity in order to rebuild the wetland habitats throughout the Mississippi River and Delta system.

The local scale sediment network strategy is a critical component in illustrating the significance waste sediment has as a medium for urban revitalization. It exemplifies the magnitude that physical, spatiallyoriented design and planning can have on one place and system.

More importantly, the Sediment Network shows the impact urban design and planning can make when problem solving becomes a 78

Haley Heard

LOCAL STRATEGY Dirt Economies- What is Dirt Worth?

Landscape Urban

Agriculture

Forest

Wetlands

Commodity

Users

unit price

acreage

Local Economy

National Economy

Brownfield Reclamation Medium

Cities Developers

$ 15/ cuft

6 acres/10’

$ 37.5 million

$ 975,000,000

Land Fill

Cities Developers

$ 6/cuft

6 acres/10’

$ 15 million

$ 390,000,000

Organic Fertilizer

Farmers Gardeners

$0.05 / sqft

$ 370,000

$

Topsoil/ Compost

Farmers Gardeners

$ 45 million

$ 1,170,000,000

$ 18/ cuft

172 acres/ 4” 172 acres/ 4”

9,620,000

City Park Dept.

230 acres/ 3”

5980 acres

Forest Reclamation Medium

Lumber Companies U.S. FWS

230 acres/ 3”

5980 acres

Wetland Reconstruction Foundation Material

Nature Conservancy Gulf Coast States

14 acres/ 4’

364 acres

Urban Forestry Base

Dirt Economies- What is Dirt Worth?

The above graphic proposes commodities based on net sediment accumulation per year.

These commodities are utilized by clients and will create new economies within the Sediment Network.

matter of instituting decision-making at a hierarchy of scales. When this happens, the decision-making process becomes less about being democratic and more about solving problems at the source, wherever the problems may lie. When the environment speaks louder than the local politics, the sediment can become an instrument to give power to the places that need it the most. 54 54 Berger, 2010, April, 28. “Deconstructing the Mississippi River: Thesis Defense.”

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

79

80

Haley Heard

CONCLUSION

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

81

CONCLUSION Over the past 80 years, the United States has spent billions of dollars building and maintaining the navigation lock and dam structures along the Mississippi River. This effort has allowed America’s economy to grow considerably, but this growth has come at a price – an environmental cost. After 80 years of so-called “river improvements” we are now seeing signs that the River’s entire ecological system is collapsing. Losing these irreplaceable resources are not just a loss to the natural environment; They also indicate the beginning of the urban system collapse as well.

Cities are built on and around ecological systems. These systems flow in and beyond the city limits and have an immense impact on the way cities are designed and function. When a city’s ecological systems are degraded or even ignored, it is only a matter of time before the repercussions become apparent. In the case of New Orleans, this understanding came too late. However, the misunderstanding is not just in New Orleans, it is the compounding mistake from every city, every state, every commission, essentially every planning jurisdiction in the entire Mississippi River Basin.

In order to avoid catastrophes caused by the nescient failures of urban design and planning, the profession must begin to reimage what regional planning and environmental policy should be. This project pushes back at a much larger scale, illustrating that the issues surrounding many cities do not actually lie within the boundary of the city. Specifically, the challenges New Orleans is facing today and, will continue to in the future do not lie in New Orleans. New Orleans’ future actually lies in the regional understanding of what is happing in the watershed of the Mississippi River Basin. The devastation that happened to New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina was not caused by a natural disaster; rather, it was a constructed disaster. Regardless of whether or not there was corruption in the federal government, US Army Corps of Engineers, or the state and local governments, is irrelevant. It is irrelevant because the devastation that culminated during Hurricane Katrina was the compounded affect of a much larger 82

Haley Heard

CONCLUSION problem.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River is less about tearing down the existing infrastructure, and more about tearing down the conventional management structure to create a new type of planning that is comprehensive in its approach, considering all scales of the landscape (from municipal to continental) and all uses (economic to environmental).

In order to create a more comprehensive approach to planning along the Mississippi River, this project proposes the creation of a new agency that will oversee all the planning agencies along the Mississippi River. The agency will consist of a varied board with representatives that are industrialist, environmentalist, urban designers and planners from all the jurisdictions along the Mississippi River System. They will be charged with harvesting and regulating the Sediment Network.

They will create a planning system that promotes the health of environmental systems within our cities along the river, while also creating new industries from the Sediment Network. The power of the new agency will be distributed between all the jurisdictions along the River. The amount of power each jurisdiction receives will be determined annually, based on each jurisdiction’s vulnerability within the system and their annual environmental performance.

The existing structure of authority, the Army Corps of Engineers, has been in place for over 100 years. They have proven that top-down authority is the most efficient way to make change, but they have also proven that without the right values or priorities, this management approach is detrimental. The shift in power will rely on the federal government bestowing power to an agency that values the holistic approach to problem solving. On the other hand, creating a new authority of conflicting interests throughout the Mississippi River Basin could create the same paralyzation in planning as the existing political juggernaut along the River.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

83

CONCLUSION There is more than one approach to create a new agency for the Mississippi River. One option is to create a new agency with less authority. This agency would be a watchdog over the Army Corps of Engineers.

Another option is to keep the same agency, the US

Army Corps of Engineers, and try to adjust their value system so that the priority shifts from control and maintenance of the navigational systems to overseeing the health of the entire system and its surrounding communities. Regardless of the form the agency eventually assumes, there is a call for “avant-gardism” associated with the regional project. The form of regional planning has not materialized yet, because there hasn’t been a true shift in the ideology of regionalism. The new ideology in regional planning calls for the understanding of dis-urbanization. Dis-urbanization is not about taking cities apart and getting rid of buildings, but a restructuring of the regional urban pattern. Once this is achieved, only then will cities be restored and the field of Urban Design and Planning will gain the knowledge of how to solve problems at every scale.

84

Haley Heard

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

85

86

Haley Heard

APPENDIX

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

87

APPENDIX

De-constructing the Mississippi Restoring A Continental System

Mississippi Sub-Basin

Ecological Systems are Defined By Two Key Characteristics:

Tributaries and Dam network

(1.) the unit of nature is often defined in terms of a geographical boundary, such as a watershed, and (2.) abiotic components, plants, animals, and humans within this unit are considered to be interlinked.

The Mississippi River Ecosystem FACTS Length: 2,320 miles Stretches the North American Continent spanning 2 countries The Watershed : drains 41% of the US = 1.25 million sq mi includes 31 states; 2 Canadian provinces The River: Falls 725 feet Touches 10 states Is separated into 2 Regions, upper and lower defined by the convergence of the Ohio River

Mississippi Political Juggernaut There is a disconnect in the design disciplines between the scale in which we affect ecological systems and the conventional scale professionals address urban problems. In order to address the challenges that have arisen out of the Mississippi River, designers need to operate beyond geopolitical boundaries and begin planning at a mega-region and even the continental scale.

Mississippi River Valley 26 Navigational Dams

Mississippi River Commission U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers

Minneapolis St. Paul

Secretary of War

Lock & Dam System

Sub-Commissions-2 $ s oi

Upper Mississippi River

r

ve

Ri

$

Lower Mississippi River

$

n

Illi

UPPER

Mis

sou

St. Louis

ri R

iver

LOWER io

Oh

r

ve

Ri

Minnesota

$

Wisconsin $

Iowa $

Illinois

$

ans

d

iver

Ri

Tennessee $

Kentucy

Arkansas $

Mississippi $

Louisiana

$

Mayor

as R

Re

$

$

Governor

Cities- 125

Memphis

Ark

States- 10 Missouri $

ve

r

Baton Rouge New Orleans

Bemidji, Minnesota

Prescott, Wisconsin

Preston, Iowa

Galena, Illinois

Hannibal, Missouri

Columbus, Kentucky

Tiptonville, Tennessee

Barfield, Arkansas

Tunica, Mississippi

Morganza, Louisiana

Grand Rapids, Minnesota

Diamond Bluff, Wisconsin

Lansing, Iowa

Savanna, Illinois

Louisiana, Missouri

Hickman, Kentucky

Reverie, Tennessee

Tomato, Arkansas

Greenville, Mississippi

St. Francisville, Louisiana

Jacobson, Minnesota

Hager City, Wisconsin

Marquette, Iowa

Fulton, Illinois

Clarksville, Missouri

Memphis, Tennessee

Osceola, Arkansas

Vicksburg, Mississippi

New Roads, Louisiana

Palisade, Minnesota

Maiden Rock, Wisconsin

McGregor, Iowa

Cordova, Illinois

Portage Des Sioux, Missouri

West Memphis, AR

Natchez, Mississippi

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Hassman, Minnesota

Stockholm, Wisconsin

Guttenberg, Iowa

Moline, Illinois

St. Louis, Missouri

Helena-West Helena, AR

Donaldsonville, Louisiana

Aitkin, Minnesota

Pepin, Wisconsin

Dubuque, Iowa

Rock Island, Illinois

Ste. Genevieve, Missouri

Arkansas City, Arkansas

Lutcher, Louisiana

Riverton, Minnesota

Nelson, Wisconsin

Bellevue, Iowa

New Boston, Illinois

Cape Girardeau, Missouri

New Orleans, Louisiana

Brainerd, Minnesota

Alma, Wisconsin

Sabula, Iowa

Keithsburg, Illinois

Commerce, Missouri

Pilottown, Louisiana

Fort Ripley, Minnesota

Buffalo City, Wisconsin

Clinton, Iowa

Oquawka, Illinois

New Madrid, Missouri

Little Falls, Minnesota

Fountain City, Wisconsin

Le Claire, Iowa

Dallas City, Illinois

Caruthersville, Missouri

Sartell, Minnesota

Trempealeau, Wisconsin

Bettendorf, Iowa

Nauvoo, Illinois

St. Cloud, Minnesota

La Crosse, Wisconsin

Davenport, Iowa

Warsaw, Illinois

Coon Rapids, Minnesota

Stoddard, Wisconsin

Buffalo, Iowa

Quincy, Illinois

Minneapolis, Minnesota

Genoa, Wisconsin

Muscatine, Iowa

Alton, Illinois

Saint Paul, Minnesota

Victory, Wisconsin

Burlington, Iowa

Kaskaskia, Illinois

Nininger, Minnesota

Potosi, Wisconsin

Fort Madison, Iowa

Chester, Illinois

Hastings, Minnesota

De Soto, Wisconsin

Keokuk, Iowa

Grand Tower, Illinois

Prairie Island, Minnesota

Ferryville, Wisconsin

Thebes, Illinois

Red Wing, Minnesota

Lynxville, Wisconsin

Cairo, Illinois

Lake City, Minnesota

Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin

Maple Springs, Minnesota

Wyalusing, Wisconsin

Camp Lacupolis, Minnesota

Cassville, Wisconsin

Reads Landing, Minnesota Wabasha, Minnesota Weaver, Minnesota Minneiska, Minnesota Winona, Minnesota Homer, Minnesota

88

Haley Heard

3.5 41.7 22.1 6.0 23.1

11.2 192 89.3 10.9 107

35,026

57.1

326

Iowa

158

Red River

Red River

Illinois

Creating America’s Super Highway 1983

Elevation in meters

156

0

Gulf of Mexico

152

Lock and Dam System Elevation of Upper Mississippi River

146

85

144

2. n la ti o

2000

4000

6000 8000 10,000 Distance in meters

12,000

po

pu

0

3

Tennessee

Mississippi

Louisiana

131

-4 ,4 02

k,

M O to n,

River Mile 175.0

cultivated crops hay/pasture

Wisconsin

3

Minnesota

39 9, -2 IL Al

to

n

s, M O -3 54 , .L ou i

26

St

400

Iowa

1985 133

132

1975

Illinois

1965

Missouri Kentucky

Arkansas

130

300

129

Mississippi

550

500

System Wide Threats 1. Geologic Factors

a. Sea Level Rise- Regional Levels are higher than Eustatic Levels (18-24 cm/yr above global level) b. Susidence and Compaction: -Primary Consolidation- consolidation occurring in only one-dimension due to vertical

stresses and settlement of voids

450

1980

400

350

300

250

200

150

The Tale of Two Rivers

500 400

Runoff (kilograms per square kilometer per year) Suspended Total sediment phosphorus Nitrate

Land use

300

R2 = 0.42

dikes Decline = - 1.1 million metric tons per year

300

100 100

144 142

Reality

Perception

3

4 5

5a

6

7

8 9

10

11 12

600

13 14

15

16

17

18

550 19 20

500

22 24 25

26

400

1. Flood & Navigation Control- reduced sediment a. Dams - 434x106 tons(1850) reduced to 255x106 = 41% Reduction - Reduction in amount and in texture (coarser grain foundation sediment no longer passes dams) b. Levees - All sediment directed out of the mouth of distributaries - Overbank flooding- deprives marshes of nourishment, maintenance and subsidence compaction. c. Cutoffs d. Revetments e. Dredging 2. Pollution a. Agricultural runoff: pesticides, nutrient runoff b. Sewage effluents 3. Highway and Canal Construction a. Highways- North-South highways built on natural levees (minimal impact), East-West block natural drainage courses. b. Canals- Hunting and trapping (historical use) - General Navigation - Petroleum Exploration Access

Direct Impact: Wetlands are converted to waterways, spoilbanks, widening from canal bank erosion.

Indirect Impact: Canals create an artificial drainage network which alters marsh hydrology--changes surface and ground water flows--restricting nutrient and sediment to some areas while over exposing other areas.

350

300 950

900

850

800

750

700

650

600

550

500

450

Mississippi Flyway

America’s Landmark America has a romantic vision of the Mississippi River that has been historically portrayed by authors such as Mark Twain. It is one of America’s most prized landmarks.

America’s Economic Conduit In reality the river has been augmented to promote economic progress. The governing bodies of the Mississippi River value the economy of the river over the river’s ecological health and have altered it to run as efficiently as possible.

3. Fluid Withdrawal: depressurization of

a. Aquifers- mainly in Metropolitan areas (ie. New Orleans)-ground water withdrawal next to the largest fresh water source in North America b. Hydrocarbon- Subsidence from oil and gas fields.

Threatened, Endangered, & Sensitive Species

Due to Man-Made Alterations to the River The Mississippi River Valley is critical habitat for 286 state-listed or candidate species and 36 federal-listed or candidate species of rare, threatened or endangered plants and animals endemic to the Mississippi River Basin.

Vertebrates

Invertebrates

Major causes of decline to mussel species is attributed to destruction of habitat (deforestation, riparian zone destruction) by siltation, dredging, channelization, impoundments, and pollution.

Major causes of decline to most of the vertebrates within the Mississippi River Valley have been directly related to man-made alterations to the river (i.e., dams, levees, channelization, etc.) This has caused loss and/or unsuitable habitat, as well as, loss of diversification and pollution.

Interior least tern Sterna antillarum athalassos: Endangered

Man-made alterations (i.e., dams, channelization) affecting the natural processes of erosion and inundation of interior river systems have caused increased vegetation along shorelines thus, creating unsuitable habitat for the species

Colonial Waterbirds Various Species: Specie of Concern

Terrestrial Mammal Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis: Endangered

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened

Present threats include loss of nesting habitat mainly to development in coastal areas and waterways, electrocution, and shooting

Piping plover Charadrius melodus Threatened

Marine Turtles Loggerhead Caretta caretta: Endangered

Freshwater Turtles Western Painted Turtle Chrysemys picta bellii Rare

The primary causes of decline in this species are shrimp trawling, coastal development, increased human use of nesting beaches, and pollution

Kemp’s Ridley Lepidochelys kempii: Endangered

Spiny Softshell Turtle Apalone spinifera Species of Concern

Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata: Endangered

Smooth Softshell Apalone mutica: Rare

Green turtle Chelonia mydas: Threatened

Ringed-sawback Turtle Graptemys oculifera: Threatened

Commercial exploitation which is primarily shells but also includes leather, oil, perfume, and cosmetics.

The major cause of the decline is the commercial harvest of food, eggs, and calipee. Other threats include commercial shrimp trawling and degradation of habitat.

Fish Common Map Turtle Graptemys geographica: Endangered

Populations may be substantial in waterways with abundant mollusks.

Mature males outnumber mature females (Pluto and Bellis 1986).

Common Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina: Sensitive Species

Chemical pollution is linked to population decline (Ryan et al. 1986).

Primary threat has been the increase of trawling in the Gulf which impacted a large portion of the reproducing population.

Density indicates a sex ratio of males to females of 2.5:1. Some studies have indicated that 37 percent of the population is composed of immature individuals.

Papermill effluents, sewage, industrial waste, habitat modification and water quality degradation are the most often cited reasons for declining numbers of ringed map (McCoy and Vogt 1980; Stewart 1988).

Ouachita Map Turtle Graptemys ouachitensis: Species of Concern

False Map Turtle Graptemys pseudogeographica Threatened

Declining populations are attributed to several factors, including water pollution, river channelization, reduction of suitable nesting sites, siltation, and unlawful shooting

Blanding’s Turtle Emydoidea blandingi: Species of Concern

Mississippi Basin Migratory Patterns Source: US Wildlife and Fisheries

Freshwater Mussels Yellow sandshell Lampsillisteres: Endangered

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra: Endangered

Washboard Megalonaias nervosa: Endangered

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Higgins eye pearlymussel Lampsilis higginsii: Endangered

Gulf sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchusdesotoi Threatened

Wartyback Quadrula nodulata: Endangered

Spike Elliptio dilatata: Endangered

Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria: Extirpated / Endangered

Paddlefish Polyodon spathula: Species of Concern

Strange Floater Strophitus undulatus: Threatened

Round pigtoe Pleurobema plenum: Extirpated/ Endangered

Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata: Endangered

Rough pigtoe Pleurobema plenum: Extirpated/ Endangered

Black sandshell Ligumia recta:

Walleye Stizostedion vitreum: Species of Concern

Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu: Species of Concern

Wetland alteration or destruction is believed to be an important factor in the decline of several populations of Blanding’s turtles (Kofron and Schreiber 1985).

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus: Species of Concern

Rock-pocketbook Arcidens confragosus Endangered

Some studies have shown a large female-biased sex ratio (3:1), which may be due to either the effects of temperature-dependent gender determination (Shively and Jackson

1985).

Pallid sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus: Endangered

Decline is due to degradation of habitat, mainly due to impoundments and channelization. Dams and channelization have altered the functions and have produced a less diverse ecosystem of which the pallid sturgeon is dependant on. Regular widths, constant velocities, and control of erosion produced by channelization have limited the assemblage of backwaters, sloughs, and sandbars required by the species. Dams have altered the natural river dynamics by modifying flows and reducing diversity to the system. Levee construction has eliminated natural flooding and reduced floodplains. Increased clarity from decreased sediment transport of once very turbid waters makes the pallid sturgeon more susceptible to predation. The removal of snags has reduced the amount of organic material limiting habitat for aquatic insects, a major food source for pallid sturgeon (USFWS 1993).

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

21

450

4. Human Factors

Many important caves were flooded and submerged by reservoirs. Other caves are in danger of natural flooding. Even if the bats escape the flood, they have difficulty finding a new cave that is suitable

4000

2

650

- Marsh maintenance and growth >= decomposition - Wetland Types: 1. Saline 2. Brackish- experiencing highest rate of erosion 3. Freshwater 4. Swamp Forest

Gray Bat Myotis grisescens Endangered

2000

1

700

3. Biological Factors

Louisiana Black Bear Ursus americanus luteolus: Threatened

0

750

1. Landslides 2. Floods 3. Hurricanes- highest surge and intense waves at the right of hurricane path--causing erosion and saltwater inundation

The primary cause of death is watercraft collision (30%); other deaths may be attributed to water control structures and navigational locks. Threats also include coastal development, alteration of water flow to natural springs, loss of seagrass beds, and natural causes such as red tide and cold events.

200

R2 = 0.14

Wheat 3503 3.5 11.2 0 0 Urban 8056 41.7 192 Iowa 1930 1950 1970 1990 158 2010 Forest 10,858 22.1 89.3 Rangeland 11,559 6.0 10.9 Year 156 Mixed crops 27,671 23.1 107 Corn and 154 Annual suspended-sediment discharge at Tarbert soybeans 35,026 57.1 326 Landing and construction of engineered dikes and bank revetment along the

2. Catastrophic Factors

West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus: Endangered

400

Decline = - 15 million metric tons per year

799

-Oxidation of Organic Matter c. Change in Deposition Centers

Birds

2000

146

-Secondary Compression- compression of soil that takes place after primary consolidation. Secondary consolidation is caused by creep, viscous behavior of the clay-water system, compression of organic matter, and other processes.

Marine Mammal

1990

revetments

152 at Tarbert Landing Lower Mississippi River, 1920-2007. Solid circles correspond to the annual suspended-sediment discharge and the trend lines been fit by least-squares regression. The lower dased line corresponds to dike construction in the Source:Smith et al.have (1996).

150 Memphis District of the lower Mississippi River and the upper dashed line correspondes to the bank revetment construction in the 148 Vicksburg District of the Lower Mississippi.

Louisiana

1903 Lake bed at different years

600

1970

Tennessee

350

650

1960

Suspended sediment, total phosphorus, and nitrate yields in runoff by dominant land use in the United States for 1980–1989.

200

134

131

700

0 1950

600

Agriculture 135

25

450

750

200

Lake bed at different years

24

800

400

1903

ill

21

22

850

Water 600

129

Cl ar ks v

500

Sa ve r

20

36 1

ku Ke o 19

900

2000

7 18

550

950

1990

Sediment

130

-4 90

17

Kentucky

Arkansas

e, M O

16

Missouri

132

69

15

0,

14

-1

13

IA

12

1980

Elevation in meters

11

65 5 19 197

Cl in

10

600

1970

Illinois

1985

133

to n, IA -4 D 8, Ro ave 94 ck np 2 Is ort la , nd IA , I -2 4 L 6, 88 6

91 1, Ag, I er D eb uq

9

Aue ,I

nb

8

1960

Iowa

River Mile 175.0

134

92 ,7 24

e, W I-

te

7

ut

6

650

G

5a

11 2, 62 7

-2 6, 78 5 Cr os s

5

135

La

4

W in

3

on a, M N

Re d

2

100

Wisconsin

Minnesota

W in

1

700

200

1950

America’s Bread-Basket 1891 Damming the Mississippi River allows the transport of 472-million tons of cargo (petroleum, coal, chemicals, and grain ) worth $54 14,000 16,000 billion each year

Cross-sectional profile of the Upper Misssissippi River

-1 5, 68 7

750

g, M N

M m in St illi nea . P o n po lis au ,M l, M N N -

799

300

DECLINE OF SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER

148

142

400

1928

150

Cubic kilometers per year

Source:Smith et al. (1996).

Gulf of Mexico

Suspended-sediment discharge, in millions of metric tons per year

1946

154

600

500

Cumulative Revetment or Dike Construction, kilometers

3503 8056 10,858 11,559 27,671

Arkansas River

Millions of metric tons per year

Wheat Urban Forest Rangeland Mixed crops Corn and soybeans

Coarse sediment trapped behind dam structure

Arkansas River

Annual suspended-sediment discharge, million of metric tons

Land use

Ohio River

Missouri River

Ohio River

Threats to the System Runoff (kilograms per square kilometer per year) Suspended Total sediment phosphorus Nitrate

Mississippi River

APPENDIX

Mississippi River

Missouri River

Suspended sediment, total phosphorus, and nitrate yields in runoff by dominant land use in the United States for 1980–1989.

89

400

350

300

250

200

150

Environmental degradation from river construction and alterations leads to new policies to protect the Mississippi River.

ENVIRONMENT RESPONSE

War time commerce and flood events leads to reactionary policies to institute river engineering and construction

CONSTRUCTION ERA Destruction from floods leads to reactionary policies increasing more engineering

FLOODS & POLICIES Destruction from floods leads to the beginning of Mississippi River Commission

RIVER COMMERCE & GOVERNANCE The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

RIVER POTENTIAL The Mississippi River’s potential of commerce and trade, as well as flooding and devastation is discovered

RIVER DISCOVERY Prehistoric inhabitants of North America who constructed earthen mounds for burial, residential and ceremonial purposes. Predates pyramids 1000 years.

MOUND-BUILDERS

APPENDIX

Political & Geo-Ecologies

Time line: political augmentation of the river

Every political Act implemented along the river has been a reaction due to a crises or economic stimulousNo comprehensive plan or master vision

CHRONOLOGY OF RIVER AND POLICY

90 CULTURAL AND GEO-ECOLOGIES

30 years

80 years

Haley Heard

APPENDIX

ediment, total phosphorus, and in runoff by dominant land use in the s for 1980–1989.

Threats at Every Scale

3503 8056 10,858 11,559 27,671

11.2Navigational Dams 192 89.3 10.9 107

3.5 41.7 22.1 6.0 23.1

35,026

57.1

1946

154

Source: USACE Willow revetment mattress construction used for bank protection from 1800-1900s. The willow revetment was found not to be an effective technique to control bank erosion along the Mississippi River.

11 meter rise (lost capacity)

152

1928

150

DECLINE OF

148

** Coarse sediment is the primary foundation for the coastal marshlands. Since the construction of the dams, the sediment is blocked and settles, creating lost capacity behind the dams and deficiencies below the dam.

1891

146

Source: USACE Construction of Lock and Dam no. 22 on the Mississippi River

144 142

0

2000

4000

6000 8000 10,000 Distance in meters

2 Regional: Compounding

14,000

16,000

+

Cross-sectional profile of the Upper Misssissippi River 135

1989

1891

Decline of Sediment Discharge

12,000

River Mile 175.0

145 million tons

400 million tons

1985

134 4 5a

6

7

8 9

10

Ohio River

11 12

13

Coarse sediment trapped behind 14 dam structure

15

16

Illinois

Arkansas River

Arkansas River

Red River

Red River

17

18

1983

Gulf of Mexico

1946

1891

6000 8000 10,000 Distance in meters

12,000

0

600

Gulf of Mexico

14,000

16,000

500

131

400

200

130

100 1960

1970

Sediment

133

65 5 19 197

Missouri Kentucky

Tennessee

133

Arkansas

132

Mississippi

Louisiana

131

750

650

600

550

500

450

400

350

Lake bed at different years

UPPER River Mile 175.0

LOWER

200

0 The state is losing 25 to 35 square miles of wetlands each year, nearly 1950 1960 1970 a football field every 30 minutes

400

describing channel degradation, were solved using a Laplace transform approach. A close-form solution was obtained for the diffusion model, but numerical methods were

Iowa

1985 1975

Illinois

1965

Missouri Kentucky

130 1980

130

Louisiana Wetland Loss Source: USGS

revetments

2000

dikes Decline = - 1.1 million metric tons per year

1903 Lake bed at different years

400

300

R2 = 0.42

200

R2 = 0.14

100

New Orleans after hurricane Katrina Source: Colligan Wordpress

0 1930

Arkansas

1990

129

100

brought about by man. Intensive agriculture, land clearing, urban construction, drainage of wetlands, levee construction and alteration of stream segments in both the Illinois River Basin and lower Mississippi Valley have significantly increased the rate of erosion and the amount of sediment entering stream tributaries, the Illinois River and its backwater lakes and sloughs (Figure 8).

Tennessee

131

129

Louisiana has 40% of America’s wetlands, yet is experiencing 90% of the loss.

necessaryloss for evaluation of the inverse transform of the hyperbolic model. A closed-form habitat asymptotic solution was found for the hyperbolic case. Both solutions were found to be in very good agreement with actual results (Hjelmfelt and Lenau 1992). sinking marshes 300 Upland Erosion hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico Agricultural landscapes have been more sensitive to climatic variability than natural landscapes because tillage and grazing typically reduce water infiltration and increase coastal rates and exposure magnitudes of surface runoff. Studies have been completed to determine how agricultural land use has influenced the relative responsiveness of floods, erosion, and200 sedimentation toloss extreme and nonextreme hydrologic activity occurring in watersheds of economic the upper Mississippi Valley. The Illinois River Basin has been of particular interest due to its land use characteristics and size. Soil erosion and deposition of sediment into vulnerable surface waters is acities natural process that has been accelerated by land altering changes

Wisconsin

Minnesota

134

132

400

million to attempt to restore the sediment backfilling 600 coastal wetlands. decreased250 water capacity 300 200 150 top soil & nutrient loss 500 Decline = pollution from agriculture and propagating channel degradation in the upstream direction. Channel deepening and - 15 million metric tons widening have caused problems at stream crossings and have resulted in gully development per year encroachment into cultivated fields. A diffusion model and a hyperbolic model, each

129

133

131

600

Louisiana is spending $28.3

700

135

Water

1903

130

800

1975 1965

132

Illinois

1985

=

Lake bed at different years

Iowa

River Mile 175.0

134

2000

1985

Wisconsin

26

135

1990

134

25

Cross-sectional profile of the Upper Misssissippi River

1980

129 Sediment concentrations in the Mississippi River have decreased at least 70-80% from pre-development conditions135 River Mile 175.0

3 Continental: System Collapse Minnesota

1903

300

1950

Suspended-sediment discharge, in millions

of metric tons per year Sediment deposition behind dams on Upper 19 Mississippi River is blocking blocking 20 navigational channels as well as causing lost 21 RIVER DECLINE OF SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE MISSISSIPPI capacity for reserviors, which many cities, 22 farms and industries rely on for their water supply 24

1928

132

Ohio River

Missouri River

65 5 19 197

133

Mississippi River

Mississippi River

Missouri River

Millions of metric tons per year

5

Cumulative Revetment or Dike Construction, kilometers

26

Illinois 1983

156

Fine 1/16mm (silt)

(Sand)

Iowa

158

Cubic kilometers per year

00

size x 20

Coarse 2mm

Coarse sediment trapped behind dam structure

Cross-sectional profile of the Upper Mississippi River

Sediment Classification Magnified x 60

Annual suspended-sediment discharge, million of metric tons

3

Sediment Backfilling at Lock and Dams

Sediment Separation

326

et al. (1996).

+

1 Local: Engineering

Elevation in meters

Runoff (kilograms per square kilometer per year) Suspended Total sediment phosphorus Nitrate

1950

Dredging to clear navigation passages Source: USACE

1970 Year

1990

Turbidity after dredging Source: USACE

0 2010

Mississippi

Louisiana

1903 Lake bed at different years

0

Annual suspended-sediment discharge at Tarbert Landing and construction of engineered dikes and bank revetment along the Lower Mississippi River, 1920-2007. Solid circles correspond to the annual suspended-sediment discharge at Tarbert Landing and the trend lines have been fit by least-squares regression. The lower dased line corresponds to dike construction in the Memphis District of the lower Mississippi River and the upper dashed line correspondes to the bank revetment construction in the Vicksburg District of the Lower Mississippi.

Industrial waste on Upper Mississippi River Source: US Fish and Wildlife Service

Figure 8: Sheet erosion theUpper Upper Mississippi River River basin Basin Sheet Erosion in in the Mississippi Source: U.S. Departmentof of Agriculture Source: US Department Agriculture

Louisiana Wetland Loss Source: USGS

Louisiana Coast, Gulf of Mexico ‘Dead Zone’ Source: Louisiana University Marine Cosortium

Gulf of Mexico hypoxic ‘Dead Zone’ Source: NOAA

9

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

91

APPENDIX

Dirt Economies

Sediment Transfer Strategy & Network Commodity is sediment shift the value system- harness, exploit, the river’s natural processes to promote the health of the river and create a new economy coupling natural infrastructure with the man-made infrastructure that has been a detriment to the river for over 100 years in order to create new clean industries depending on surrounding land uses.

PROBLEM

OPPORTUNITY

SOLUTION Adjacent Land Use

Dams create to opportunity to harvest sediment

Agriculture runoff on the Upper Mississippi River creates sediment

Urban Sludge

Urban

1

Diminished Capacity

2

Polluted/ Toxic

1 2 3 Systemic Sediment Harvesting

Green Economies

Waste

Sediment

Agriculture

Ecological Restoration

Agri. Pollution Sediment

Sediment

Forest

Sediment

Wetland

Separation

Commodity Fertilizer A Organic Fill

B Compost/ Topsoil Cut C Clear Reclamation

D Foundation Sand

Process Moving Dirt- Each step of the sediment transfer process creates new jobs which will facilitate economic gain. Creating a sediment network along the river helps to re-imagine industries that have a positive effect on the river while still growing the economy.

1Dam 1

In areas where the river bed has trapped and accumulated sediment, a hopper boat sucks dredged material and pumps it through an intake pipe (drag arm) to hoppers where it is stored. The slurry water is drained and discharged during the dredge operation.

2Dredging 2 Once the hoppers are full, the vessel moves to a sediment discharge station, where the sediment is pumped out of the hoppers.

3Train 3 After the sediment is unloaded, it is moved by a conveyer belt to an on-site silo.

Plant 4 Sediment 4 Sediment is stored in the silo until the train arrives, where it is dispensed from above.

5 the train transports the sediment to the different areas of the park to be distributed accordingly.

5 The sediment is transported by train from the dredging station using existing rail lines. From there, it is delivered to the unloading station at the sediment park.

AUrban

Sediment that has a high level of toxicity is ran through a detoxification process.

CForest

B

DWetland

After detoxification, the clean soil is moved and separated according to its future use.

10 Sediment from the A Mississippi River is full of nutrients and is considered by some the most fertile soil in the world. Some of the sediment extracted is packaged and sold to farmers as a source of fertilizer and top soil restoration.

Some sediment will be loaded into a dump truck and transferred to allocated areas throughout the park.

A

92

BAgriculture

6 Once the sediment arrives at the park, it is unloaded, tested, and separated according to its toxicity level.

C

10 Sediment is used to build new habitat around the park until it is eventually eroded and washed back into the river to be carried to the delta marshlands. Thus helping to restoring the natural sediment load and deposition rate of the river.

D

Haley Heard

APPENDIX

Mississippi River Systemic Infrastructure Index Building Economy Through Ecological Restoration Reversal of Urban Consumption

Pool Land Use/Cover Change

Criteria

Dirt Economies

Land Use / Land Cover

Dirt Economy Typology

J J

Reach 1

1891

1

= 5600 ft3

J J J

Dams St. Paul, MN

1989

% change over 100 years

Existing Major Land Uses

Existing Infrastructure

% On Site

% Shipped

Hopper Car Loads per year

0% Marsh 0% Grasses

Major Land Uses 0% Agriculture 8% Woody Terrestrial

10%

90%

420

60%

40%

187

60%

40%

187

40%

60%

280

90%

10%

47

80%

20%

93

50%

50%

233

50%

50%

233

20%

80%

374

20%

80%

374

25%

75%

350

75%

25%

350

15%

85%

397

25%

75%

350

25%

75%

350

5%

95%

444

45%

55%

257

45%

210

Dirt Relocation Strategy

Organic Fertilizer = $28.2 million/yr

71% Urban

2

Hastings, MN

6% Marsh 4% Grasses 3% Agriculture 21% Woody Terrestrial 19% Urban

3

Hager City, WI

16% Marsh 4% Grasses 10% Agriculture 36% Woody Terrestrial 4% Urban

4

Alma, WI

9% Marsh 5% Grasses 5% Agriculture 21% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

5

Whitman, MI

13% Marsh 11% Grasses 17% Agriculture 22% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

5a

Winona, MI

20% Marsh 5% Grasses 8% Agriculture 48% Woody Terrestrial 5% Urban

6

Trempealeau, WI

20% Marsh 6% Grasses 1% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial 16% Urban

7

Dresbach, MI

17% Marsh 6% Grasses 8% Agriculture 18% Woody Terrestrial 8% Urban

8

Genoa, WI

20% Marsh 10% Grasses 0% Agriculture 17% Woody Terrestrial 9% Urban

9

Harper’s Ferry, IA

26% Marsh 5% Grasses 2% Agriculture 26% Woody Terrestrial 1% Urban

10

Guttenburg, IA

19% Marsh 4% Grasses 6% Agriculture 27% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

11

Dubuque, IA

14% Marsh 4% Grasses 2% Agriculture 22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

12

Bellevue, IA

Nature Conservancy Priority Area Lost Mound National Wildlife Refuge = 45 Acres of land reclamation

13% Marsh 6% Grasses 1% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial 8% Urban

13

Clinton, IA

14% Marsh 7% Grasses 7% Agriculture

Reach 2

24% Woody Terrestrial 12% Urban

14

Hampton, IL

4% Marsh 6% Grasses 7% Agriculture 30% Woody Terrestrial 14% Urban

15

Davenport, IA

0% Marsh 3% Grasses 5% Agriculture 5% Woody Terrestrial 48% Urban

16

Mascatine, IA

5% Marsh 4% Grasses 17% Agriculture 25% Woody Terrestrial 12% Urban

17

New Boston, IA

1% Marsh 6% Grasses 17% Agriculture

55%

25% Woody Terrestrial 12% Urban

18

Burlington, IA

2% Marsh 5% Grasses 34% Agriculture

100%

0%

0

100%

0%

0

80%

20%

93

90%

10%

27% Woody Terrestrial 7% Urban

19

Keokuk, IA

3% Marsh 5% Grasses 57% Agriculture 20% Woody Terrestrial 3% Urban

20

Canton, MO

0% Marsh 0% Grasses 38% Agriculture 5% Woody Terrestrial 14% Urban

21

Quincy, IL

0% Marsh 4% Grasses 61% Agriculture 11% Woody Terrestrial 1% Urban

22

Hannibal, MO

47

0% Marsh 4% Grasses 64% Agriculture

100%

16% Woody Terrestrial

0%

0

1% Urban

24

Clarksville, MO

2% Marsh 4% Grasses 30% Agriculture

80%

20%

93

90%

10%

47

17% Woody Terrestrial 0% Urban

25

Winfield, MO

1% Marsh 6% Grasses 50% Agriculture 22% Woody Terrestrial 2% Urban

26

Alton, IL

2% Marsh 3% Grasses 35% Agriculture 24% Woody Terrestrial

50%

50%

233

4% Urban

Total =

5649

Mississippi River Delta

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

93

APPENDIX

Site Selection Criteria

Incorporating Sediment Network Locally ois Illin r Rive

Site Selection Criteria 1.

Convergence of the 3 rivers- Mississippi, Illinois, Missouri

sis Mis

2. Oldest River Testing Gage- USACE- St. Louis division

sip

Mi

pi R

ssi

ssi

iver

pp

3. One of the largest cities on the Upper Mississippi River iR

ive r

4. Last navigational dam 5. Area of Most significant change in past 100 years- from sedimentation and urbanization

Lock and Dam No.26 Mi ss

6. 1993 Flood- considered the worst flood on Mississippi

ou

ri

Riv er

7. Environmental Legacy of the Engineering- dams, levees, embankments, cutoffs 8. Existing infrastructure- rail, highway, canals, etc.

9. East St. Louis is a dried-up industrial city in need of new industry for economic development

East St. Louis, IL

St. Louis, MO

scale 1:1,000 scale 1:10,000 scale 1:1mile

iver

pi R

issip

Miss

Symbolic gesture to reconnect / deconstruct the river Flood Control system Restore natural processes Create park to absorb obnoxious recreational uses Utilize “suburban� existential/ wasted spaces Job creation

SITE Analysis

Utilize stimulus money- for green industry

Sedimentation Program and Process -Park development to incorporate/ mitigate existing uses.

Project Boundary Road Railroad Proposed River Connection 4

Channel

2

1

Dam 5

Catalogue of Existing Uses

6

1. U.S. Steel -mill and coking factory 3

2. U.S. Steel -cooling pond

7

3. Agriculture inside River cutoff 8

4. Lake Horseshoe- Oxbo Lake 5. Sediment Island

St. Louis, MO

East St. Louis, IL 12

15

11 13 16 14

10

6. Agriculture 7. Runoff diversion channel 8. Existing Wetlands

9

9. Existing Wetlands 10. Abandoned Gravel Pit 11. Race Track 12. Golf Course

17

13. Empty Land 14. Abandoned Foundation Pad 15. Blighted Neighborhood 16. Water Treatment Plant 17. Existing Riparian edge

94

Haley Heard

APPENDIX

East St. Louis

Urban Revitalization through Sediment Network The sediment network can be implemented locally at a continental scale

2

3

Organic Fertilizer

2 3

Topsoil Replacement

Urban Forestry

4

1

Brown Field Reclamation: The existing U.S. Steel site is cleaned with sediment and sludge mixture to remediate the soil, allowing for future housing and retail development Strip Mine Reclamation: The strip mine and gravel pit are filled with the urban sediment mixture. The nutrientrich mixture expedites the reclamation process

2

Organic Fertilizer: The nutrients from agricultural sediment can be sequestered to create a rich, organic fertilizer. This fertilizer is a non-toxic alternative for the environment, while safe for the adjacent communities Top Soil Replacement: Due to improper farming and land cultivation, much of America’s fertile topsoil has eroded away into the Mississippi River over the past 100 years. However, harvesting the nutrient-rich soil from the river can replenish agricultural top soil.

Wetland Reconstruction

Brownfield Reclamation

4

1 Forest Reclamation

3

Wetland Reconstruction

Strip Mine Reclamation

1

Urban Forestry: Planting forests within the urban realm creates a buffer between communities and less desirable land uses, mitigates storm water runoff, acts as a wildlife corridor, while creating an interconnected openspace network for the city. Planting these forest with a forest sediment mixture will promote growth in a hinderingly environment.

Forest Reclamation: Clear-cut forest are very susceptible to erosion and nutrient loss, making it difficult to regenerate.

Replenishing the topsoil and adding nutrient-rich sediment can expediate grown cycle, so that certain areas will be more productive, and virgin forest less susceptible to clear cutting.

4

1 Urban

2 Agriculture

3 Forest

Wetland Reconstruction: Wetlands are a vital habitat along the Mississippi River, offering a respite for migratory birds and a home for many of North America’s most vulnerable wildlife. Wetlands also act as a riparian buffer, filtering water before it enters the river. The coarse sediment is a foundation for wetland plants and can be used to rebuild the 60% of wetlands that have laredy been lost in North America

4 Wetland

Dirt Economies- What is Dirt Worth?

Proposed industries to spur economic development Landscape Urban

Agriculture

Forest

Commodity Brownfield Reclamation Medium

Cities Developers

$

Land Fill

Cities Developers

$

Organic Fertilizer

Farmers Gardeners

$

Topsoil/ Compost

Farmers Gardeners

$

City Park Dept.

$

Lumber Companies U.S. FWS U.S.A.C.E. Nature Conservancy Gulf Coast States

$

Urban Forestry Base Forest Reclamation Medium

Wetlands

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

unit price

Client

Wetland Reconstruction Foundation Material

$

Local Economy

National Economy

$

$

$

$

$

$6.1 Billion

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

95

96

Haley Heard

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

97

BIBLIOGRAPHY Belanger, Pierre. “Deconstructing the Mississippi River- Thesis Defense,” April 28, 2020.

Berger, Alan. “Deconstructing the Mississippi River: Thesis Defense,” April 28, 2010.

BHOWMIK. “Sedimentation of Mississippi and Illinois Rivers.”

four

reaches

of

the

Brown, Case. “Deconstructing The Mississippi River- Thesis Defense,” April 28, 2010.

Chambers, Julius. The Mississippi River and Its Wonderful Valley Twenty-Seven Hundred And Seventy-Five Miles From Source To Sea. Mcmaster Press, 2007.

Committee on the Mississippi River and the Clean Water Act, National Research Council.“Mississippi River Water Quality and the Clean Water Act: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities.” http:// www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12051&page=65.

DEAN, CORNELIA. “Dams Are Thwarting Louisiana Marsh Restoration, Study Says.” The New York Times, June 28, 2009.

“Economic Impacts of Recreation on the Upper Mississippi River System.” http://www.umesc.usgs.gov/reports_publications/ recstudy.html.

“Gulf

Coast’s Mississippi gcplacesmis.html.

Delta.”

http://www.ucsusa.org/gulf/

“Human Impact on Coastal Areas and Marine Ecosystems.” http:// geology.com/press-release/coastal-area-impact/.

Julien, Pierre Y. “Review of Sedimentation Issues on the Mississippi River.” Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University: 2005, November.

“Louisiana Begins Wetland Repair with Mississippi River Sediment.” http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2009/2009-04-14093.asp.

98

Haley Heard

BIBLIOGRAPHY “Mark Twain quotations - Mississippi River,” May 15, 2010. http://www. twainquotes.com/Mississippi.html.

Meade, Robert H., and John A. Moody. “Causes for the decline of suspended-sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940 – 2007††.” Wiley InterScience Hydrolic Processes, no. 24 (October 13, 2009): pp 35-49.

“Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Animals (U.S. National Park Service).” http://www.nps.gov/miss/naturescience/ animals.htm.

“Mississippi National River and Recreation Area - Mississippi River Facts (U.S. National Park Service).” http://www.nps.gov/miss/ riverfacts.htm.

“Mississippi River Anatomy.” http://www.americaswetlandresources. com/background_facts/detailedstory/ MississippiRiverAnatomy.html.

“Mississippi River Commission.” http://www.mvd.usace.army.mil/mrc/ index.php.

“Mississippi River Commission.” http://www.mvd.usace.army.mil/mrc/ index.php.

“Mississippi River Information and History - Four Rivers Realty.” http:// www.4rivers.com/mississippi/info.html.

“Mound Builders of the Mississippi River - Four Rivers Realty.” http:// www.4rivers.com/mississippi/info-mounds.html.

“North American Migration Flyways.” http://www.birdnature.com/ flyways.html.

“ROOSEVELT PLANS TO EMPLOY RIVERS; He Appoints a Commission to Investig... - Article Preview - The New York Times,” March 17, 1907. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=990CE 5DB163EE233A25754C1A9659C946697D6CF.

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

99

BIBLIOGRAPHY “ScienceDirect - Geomorphology : Flood management along the Lower Mississippi and Rhine Rivers (The Netherlands) and the continuum of geomorphic adjustment.” http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science?_ob=Ar ticleURL&_udi=B6V93-4SXYFV4-1&_ user=501045&_coverDate=10%2F01%2F2008&_rdoc=1&_ fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ s e a rc h St r I d = 1 2 0 3 5 7 8 6 0 3 & _ re r u n O r i gi n = g o o g l e & _ acct=C000022659&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=501 045&md5=f93ae8953f46e8f53830f3fe923cecbb.

“Sediment and Sedimentation - Sediment Size.” http://science.jrank. org/pages/6039/Sediment-Sedimentation-Sediment-size. html.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008. “Encyclopedia.com articles about canal.” http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/ canal.aspx.

“Encyclopedia.com articles about dam.” http://www.encyclopedia. com/topic/dam.aspx#citationanchor.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008. “Encyclopedia.com articles about levee.” http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/ levee.aspx#citationanchor.

“USACE Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Protection and Management System.” http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/ tessp/list.cfm?Code=District&Step=2&Type=MVD. “Water transportation of freight, not elsewhere classified (SIC...: Information from Answers.com.” http://www.answers. com/topic/water-transportation-of-freight-not-elsewhereclassified.

100

Haley Heard

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

101

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Haley Heard is a graduate of the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at MIT; she holds a Bachelors of Landscape Architecture from Texas A&M University. Before attending the graduate program at MIT, Heard worked for several interdisciplinary design firms in Washington D.C., Dallas, Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia. Heard has won several awards including, High Recommendation from the 2010 3rd International Holcim Forum, first place in the 2009 Affordable Housing Development Competition and an Honorable Mention in the 2008 US Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Natural Talent Design Competition.

Additionally, Heard worked as a Teaching Assistant for the Mumbai Urban Design Studio in Fall 2008 and for the Advanced Seminar in Landscape + Urbanism in Spring 2010.

102

Haley Heard

Deconstructing the Mississippi River

103