River Health Is Critical for U.S. Communities: Key Learnings from EESI’s Resilient and Healthy Rivers Briefing Series

Rivers are the lifeblood of society, supplying nearly 70% of drinking water in the United States and serving as vital habitats for more than 80% of U.S. species. Yet today, many of America’s rivers face growing threats from climate change, pollution, water scarcity, and habitat degradation. The Environmental and Energy Study Institute’s (EESI’s) briefing series, Resilient and Healthy Rivers, explored practical solutions that researchers and practitioners are implementing to revitalize and manage some of the nation’s most important waterways.

The five-part briefing series featured 22 experts who shared insights from across the Colorado, Columbia, Mississippi, Ohio, and Tennessee river basins. Each river plays a distinct and irreplaceable role in the U.S. economy and environment. The Colorado River provides drinking water to 40 million people, or about one in every 10 people living in the United States. The Mississippi River watershed covers 31 states, with one in 12 people on Earth consuming goods that traveled on its waters. The Columbia River is the largest salmon-producing river in the contiguous United States. The Tennessee River supports rich biodiversity, including 58 fish species found exclusively in its waters. And finally, the Ohio River Basin is home to 69 million acres of natural ecosystems. Given the ecological, economic, and societal value of these basins, the need for sustainable river management is critical and far-reaching.

Despite the diversity of the challenges facing these river systems, there are notable through lines:

• Healthy riverine species are essential to overall river health, and vice versa. Restoration efforts to support both are underway.
• River health is deeply interwoven with agricultural production.
• The federal government has a significant role in managing activities in major river basins, making federal policy and funding critical for resilience.

Panelists across all five briefings made clear that building resilience and restoring river health requires engagement at every level—from local to regional to federal—and must be informed by community input, scientific evidence, and strategic investment.

Takeaway 1: Healthy riverine species are essential to overall river health, and vice versa. Restoration efforts to support both are underway.

A river’s ability to provide for humans is based on the health of its ecosystems, and a plethora of species play a role in supporting every ecosystem. As Bo Baxter of Conservation Fisheries, Inc., a nonprofit hatchery in Tennessee, explained during the Tennessee River panel,

Across river basins, organizations are working to understand and support riverine flora and fauna. Conservation Fisheries has worked over the last four decades to grow and release 86 different native fish species—many of them endangered—amounting to more than 300,000 fish. Meanwhile, Raise the River has revitalized over 1,500 acres of former delta habitat along the Colorado River, boosting species richness by 80% compared to surrounding depleted areas.

Conservation Fisheries, Inc., hatchery | Credit: Bo Baxter

In the Northwest, the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership, a part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) National Estuary Program, has restored more than 5,000 acres of habitat, and has collaborated with partners to carry out restoration projects across another 35,000 acres. The Partnership is also committed to long-term habitat monitoring efforts. Executive Director Elaine Placido explained during the Columbia River briefing that her organization is continuously exploring creative ways to fund its work. For example, researchers are studying how to maximize the carbon sequestration potential of restored ecosystems, which could make future projects eligible for carbon credits in a carbon market.

Along the Mississippi River, researchers collaborating with the Mississippi River Cities and Towns Initiative are already quantifying the carbon sequestration potential of restoration projects, and have estimated that natural infrastructure projects across 100,000 acres in nine states have captured 230,000 tons of carbon dioxide.

Takeaway 2: River health is deeply interwoven with agricultural production.

Growing food—and growing crops to feed livestock to produce food—requires an ample supply of water, much of which comes from rivers. Both too much and too little water can be a problem. In some parts of the country during certain times of the year, riverine flooding can impact farms and increase the amount of fertilizer, pesticides, and manure that pollute rivers. In other regions, water is scarce and demand is sky-high. In all cases, agricultural production is tied to river health, and holistic interventions are needed to safeguard the future of both.

The Mississippi River is susceptible to agricultural runoff from 31 states and two Canadian provinces. This nutrient pollution spurs algal blooms in the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America), where the Mississippi ends. When a bloom dies off, its decomposition depletes the water of oxygen. This has led to a hypoxic zone—an area that cannot sustain aquatic life— in the Gulf. The EPA’s Mississippi River/Gulf of America Hypoxia Task Force works with partners and other federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Geological Survey, to decrease nutrient runoff from agriculture in order to reduce the extent of the hypoxic zone.

Within the Mississippi River watershed, the Tennessee Aquarium benefits from a $10 million grant under the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Regional Conservation Partnership Program, which is supporting the goals of the Hypoxia Task Force. As described during the Tennessee River briefing, the program helps farmers adopt practices that keep manure and soil out of streams, such as cover cropping, fencing livestock out of stream areas, and rotational grazing.

In the Colorado River basin, about 52% of the river’s water is used for irrigated agriculture—more than 60% of which goes to growing alfalfa and grass hay for cattle feed. Under current Western water law, the oldest water users get access to water first while newer farms see severe cuts during droughts. National Geographic Explorer and EESI panelist Caitlin Ochs described the experience of the Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch Enterprise in Colorado:

The Ute Mountain Farm went on to develop a climate adaptation plan, which includes steps like reducing leaks in the irrigation system to make the most efficient use of all water.

Also during the Colorado River briefing, Sustainable Waters President Brian Richter explained that farmers and ranchers will need to adopt different approaches. He suggested that transitioning to less water-intensive crops, reducing total harvests, temporarily fallowing land, and permanently retiring some farmland will be necessary in order to sustain agriculture in the region. The federal government has a role in incentivizing these actions. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation received funding through the Inflation Reduction Act (P.L. 117-169) to pay farmers to temporarily fallow land.

Takeaway 3: The federal government plays a significant role in managing activities in major river basins, making federal policy and funding critical for resilience.

Foundational environmental laws like the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Environmental Policy Act form the legal backbone for river conservation. The federal government also manages infrastructure like dams and reservoirs, is responsible for superfund sites, and engages in long-term planning and negotiations.

For decades, programs such as the EPA’s National Estuary Program have provided key resources for communities to protect riverine and estuarine systems. The National Estuary Program, which was established in 1987 through an amendment to the Clean Water Act, has leveraged local, state, and private funds to yield a 17-to-1 return for estuary restoration.

Despite this significant return on investment, federal funds for key programs highlighted through this briefing series are no longer flowing. Funding related to pre- and post-disaster efforts have been especially impacted. Until April 2025, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program provided pre-disaster mitigation funds across the country, including to riverine communities. The Army Corps of Engineers’ Lower Mississippi River Comprehensive Management Study, a major project designed to reduce damage from hurricanes and storms and better manage flood risks, is also on pause due to lack of funding.

In the case of the Ohio River Basin, there has been no coordinated federal investment in the watershed to date. However, panelists from the region underscored that federal support has enabled significant strides towards cleaner water in other parts of the country, and that work could be replicated in the Ohio River Basin.

During his remarks at EESI’s Ohio River briefing, Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.) underscored both the need for investment in the Ohio River and the possibility for continued progress in the coming years:

Rep. McGarvey speaking at EESI’s Ohio River briefing

The federal government has a unique management role in these river basins, and the extent to which it embraces or abdicates this responsibility will have ripple effects on the trajectory of the rivers, their ecosystems, and their surrounding communities.

EESI’s Resilient and Healthy Rivers briefing series underscores a powerful reality: restoring our rivers is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor. It takes local collaboration, public-private cooperation, and federal frameworks working together. Success in restoring and sustaining river systems will depend on science-based planning, consistent funding, cross-sector coordination, and public trust. Above all, addressing climate change is essential for lasting river resilience.

Authors: Whitney Orloff and Anna McGinn