Freshwater ecosystems are poorly represented in global networks of protected areas. This situation underscores an urgent need for the creation, application, and expansion of durable (long-term and enforceable) protection mechanisms for free-flowing rivers that go beyond conventional protected area planning. To address this need, we must first understand where and what types of protections exist that explicitly maintain the free-flowing integrity of rivers, as well as the efficacy of such policy types. Through policy analysis and an in-depth literature review, our study identifies three main policy mechanisms used for such protections: (1) River Conservation Systems; (2) Executive Decrees and Laws; and (3) Rights of Rivers. We found that globally only eight counties have national river conservation systems while seven countries have used executive decrees and similar policies to halt dam construction, and Rights of Rivers movements are quickly growing in importance, relative to other protection types. Despite the current extent of protection policies being insufficient to tackle the freshwater and biodiversity crises facing the world’s rivers, they do provide useful frameworks to guide the creation and expansion of protections. Ultimately, as countries act on global calls for protections, policy mechanisms must be tailored to their individual social and ecological geographies.

No abstract

The confluence of the Little Colorado and Colorado Rivers is an Indigenous socio‐ecological landscape, revolving in large part around water resources. Substantial surface and groundwater use within the Little Colorado River (LCR) basin threatens the water sources of the confluence, springs in the LCR basin, and specifically the Hopi Sipapuni—a sacred site of cultural emergence. To address concerns about diminished flows of sacred springs, we engaged in praxis through collaborative, reciprocal, community‐based research processes. Through the lens of anticolonial theory, we ask: Can federal policies be employed in an anticolonial pursuit of water and sacred site protection? How do Indigenous grassroots organizers envision protection and work to re‐Indigenize water management? Semi‐structured interviews with Indigenous community organizers and federal land managers were coupled with policy analysis of the National Historic Preservation Act/Traditional Cultural Properties, the ongoing LCR Adjudication, and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Findings point to multifaceted, complex, and contradictory themes that elucidate the continued influence of colonization on water governance and the degree to which protection solutions can be anticolonial. Criteria were generated for anticolonial protective pathways that highlight the centrality of reciprocal relationships, Indigenous Knowledges, and meaningful inclusion. While details about protection pathways for the confluence and Sipapuni are many, the salient finding is that the struggle for water protection in the LCR is the struggle for protection of inherent Indigenous rights.

No abstract

Dams are socio‐ecological structures fundamentally serving human population growth and economic development. Yet, dams have significantly reduced landscape connectivity, altered hydrologic and geomorphic dynamics, and are a leading cause of freshwater biodiversity decline. As dams age and are no longer used for their original intended purpose, they increasingly threaten both humans and ecosystems. Consequently, dam removal is an increasingly accepted strategy to restore river systems across the United States; since the 1970s, more than 1,400 dams have been removed. As the removal trend continues, important decisions must be made regarding which dams are still ecologically and economically viable and which are optimal for removal to facilitate restoration and subsequent protection. Therefore, it is critical to prioritize dams for removal where rivers, freshwater resources, and ecosystem services will benefit most. To that end, this study uses geospatial analysis and a multi‐criteria decision framework to evaluate dams suitable for removal in the western United States in watersheds with existing conservation priorities, and to examine watershed dynamics in which they are situated. Results reveal 24 top‐ranked dams no longer performing essential ecological and social functions as optimal sites for removal to restore waterways. Of these top‐ranked dams, four are already in the planning process for removal, indicating the model is performing as intended. These results are critical for managers and policymakers to understand where dam removals could enhance overall riverine connectivity and where river restoration could result in subsequent protection of newly free‐flowing river segments in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.