Health, Uses & Threats
The longevity of our Founding River is of the upmost importance. In order to keep the James thriving and beautiful for years to come we, as its stewrds, must do everything in our power to maintain its health, conserve its uses and minimize its threats. Below, you will find a brief overview of these three topics. For more information on the uses of the James, read our 'Explore the River!' pages.
Health
When Captain John Smith and the first settlers touched down upon the lands of the New World, the James River was a mighty river, bountiful with food for Indians and settlers alike. The banks of the river were heavily forested, nourished by crisp, clean water. Oysters in abundance lined the river bed, as if waiting to be harvested by future settlers. Atlantic sturgeon roamed the waters of its breeding ground, dominating the river ecosystem. However, over the past four centuries, rapid industrialization, overfishing and pollution have turned this picturesque scene into a distant memory.
During Richmond's younger years, settlers were able to use the James' abundance to their advantage. They used the
bountiful nature of the river to feed their children, water their crops and clean their belongings. These men and women were able to take as much as they wanted, whenever they wanted, without having to worry about the longterm sustainability of the James. However, before long, citizens of our growing and industrializing city began to neglect the river, selflessly using it for personal advancement. More and more people began to flock to Richmond, a booming city of the 19th century. This influx of people lead to increased usage of the James' resources. Taking the James for granted, they dumped their waste into it, overfished it and slowly but surely depleted these non-renewable resources. It did not take long before the effects people had on the river began to show. Sturgeon, among many other fish, began to disappear. Richmond natives stop recreating on the James' waters, afraid of what was beneath the muddy surface. However, no one took iniative, allowing this cycle pollution and neglect to continue, until it reached a breaking point. Around fourty years ago, the Department of Fish and Wildlife surveyed the river and what they found was disturbing. The James River was the most polluted river in America, the product of years of waste dumping, ash runoff and neglect of its natural beauty. It was at this point when numerous organizations decided to make a change: to clean up the James. Since that lowest point, the James, aided by these local groups, has been in a steady upward fight towards regaining its natural state. While this fight is not over, many major steps have been taken that have made lasting improvements to our water. Simply going to the river one can see the progress that has already been made. Hotspots, such as Belle Isle and Pony Pasture, are filled with people enjoying the clean water of the James. Kayakers and paddlers have returned to the rapids of the River City. All in all, many more improvements are needed, but the James is in a great place.
State of the James
Every two years, the James River Association publishes its State of the James Report, a comprehensive health assessment of the river. The State of the James provides a report card on the ongoing effort to bring the James River back to full health. This report is designed to examine the status and trends of indicators in four categories – Fish and Wildlife, Habitat, Pollution Reductions, and Protection and Restoration Actions – that are interconnected and build on one another to achieve a healthy James River. For each indicator, the James River Association has identified and compiled a key measure of river health with quantitative benchmarks having been set for what is needed to achieve a fully healthy river. When possible, the benchmark is a goal that has been set by the state or an authority on a specific indicator.
​
For the first time in decades, and since the JRA has published the State of the James report, the river's health has improved to a B-. As you can see from the chart to the right, over the past decade, the James has continued to make steady improvements in all major categories. Furthermore, according to the JRA, the James is on track to meet its 2017 health goals as part of the Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan. The indicators used to measure the river's health are interwined with one another. Fish and wildlife populations depend on habitat to provide their critical needs for life. The greatest factor affecting the quality of habitat and wildlife in the James River basin is the amount of pollution that enters our waterways, ultimately flowing into the James. Finally, the report assesses progress on the restoration and protection actions needed to reduce damaging pollution and return the James to a healthy, diverse ecosystem. Thus, it is not just one thing that one person can do to fix our river. We must all be doing everything in our power to control our environmental footprint.
James River Association- State of the James Report
To read more about the State of the James, click here.
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Threats
The greatest threat to the health of the James River and its tributaries is pollution in the forms of excess nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. These pollutants cause a wide variety of problems in the river and streams and serve as an indicator of other forms of pollution such as bacteria and toxins. All of this pollution contributes to a decline in the health of, and habitat for, aquatic organisms. It can also threaten human health and drinking water supplies. In addition to the more tangible impacts, pollution also results in a general decrease in the aesthetics of the river and in people’s ability to enjoy it, which can also have substantial impacts on local economies and jobs in communities that rely on the river.
​
As part of the multi-state Chesapeake Bay cleanup effort, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established specific limits for the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution that can enter each part of the Chesapeake Bay, including the tidal James River. Accordingly, Virginia has developed a state-specific plan to meet these pollution limits and achieve the water quality standards for the James River.
The benchmarks used throughout the pollution section of this report are derived from the pollution limits for the James River that were set forth by Virginia and the EPA. JRA tracks annual monitoring data for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution. However, progress toward established pollution limits is measured using a 10-year rolling average that eliminates the influence of annual weather variations.
​
Phosphorus Pollution Reductions –
75% (+2% 2-Year Change)
Fueled by the 1980s phosphate detergent ban and improvements at wastewater treatment plants over the past several decades, 75% of the phosphorus reductions needed for the James River have been achieved. However, the steady phosphate reductions that were seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s have now plateaued, indicating that additional measures need to be taken in order to reach the goal. Virginia recently passed legislation that removes phosphorus from maintenance lawn fertilizers and improves fertilizer management by golf courses and commercial lawn care companies. There is hope that these measures along with the increased implementation of agricultural and urban stormwater practices called for in Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay cleanup plan will be sufficient to reach the goal.
Sediment Pollution Reduction - 4% (-2% 2-year change)
Despite erosion control regulations, stormwater management requirements, and investments in soil conservation practices, little to no progress has been achieved toward reaching sediment pollution limits for the James. Sediment plays an important role in the health of the James River’s streams as well as its tidal waters. The lack of improvement in sediment pollution indicates that stronger measures need to be taken to restore riparian forests and other natural buffers that help to filter runoff before it enters the river. Virginia has recently passed stronger stormwater management and erosion control regulations that may help, but targeted stream restoration may also be necessary in order to address major sources of sediment pollution.
​
Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution
Although nitrogen and phosphorus at healthy levels are essential nutrients for life, the James River is being over fed with too much of these nutrients. These excess nutrients are coming from three dominant sources: wastewater, urban stormwater, and agricultural runoff. Too much nitrogen and phosphorus in the water result in excessive algal growth. This in turn decreases water clarity and prevents essential sunlight from reaching underwater grasses. The increased algae growth often occurs in harmful or nuisance species that out-compete beneficial algal species which are important food sources for fish and other aquatic life. Certain algal species can also be toxic to aquatic life and humans. As these algae die they decrease dissolved oxygen creating “dead zones” or areas where there is not enough dissolved oxygen available to support aquatic life.
​
Nitrogen Pollution Reduction- 43% (+8% 2-Year Change)
Although nitrogen levels are regularly exceeding the annual limits, recent years have shown a slowly decreasing trend in the long-term adjusted average, indicating that some progress is being made. This is supported by the fact that we are currently 43% of the way to reaching target loads, an 8% improvement since the 2011 report. While vast improvements have been made to limit nitrogen pollution from wastewater treatment plants, as populations grow there will be the need for additional work to maintain those levels. More immediately, additional actions need to be taken to reduce nitrogen pollution from agriculture and urban stormwater runoff.
Protection and Restoration Actions
As previously mentioned, nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment are the forms of pollution that are currently having the most impact on the health of the James River. The largest sources for these types of pollution are wastewater, agriculture and urban stormwater runoff. Despite vast improvements in the treatment process, wastewater from sewage and industrial plants is still the leading source of nitrogen pollution and the second largest source of phosphorus pollution to the James. Agriculture continues to be the largest source of phosphorus and sediment pollution as well as a major source of nitrogen, which comes from fertilizers and animal waste. Urban stormwater pollution results from a multitude of sources including everything from the products we use on our lawns to streambank erosion from overwhelmed urban streams. As land development continues, urban stormwater runoff, which is already a major source of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment, will continue to be a growing source of pollution to the James River.
There are many approaches that can be used by citizens, businesses and government to reduce the amounts and impacts of these pollution sources. The techniques featured in this report represent the practices that have been identified as having the greatest impact on pollution reduction. The success of these practices to date is varied, however one thing is clear: greater implementation of these as well as other practices is needed to restore the health of the James River.
​
Wastewater Treatment Pollution Reduction –
112% (+22% 2-Year Change)
Tremendous financial investments have been made to upgrade wastewater treatment plants in order to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. Each treatment plant must maintain a permit that details how much pollution can be in the water that they discharge. These pollution limits are set by the State of Virginia. In 2013, wastewater treatment plants were exceeding the required reductions for both nitrogen and phosphorus, making a significant impact in the amount of nutrient pollution in the James. However, it is important to note that as populations continue to grow, wastewater treatment plants will have to handle larger amounts of waste and additional work will be necessary to maintain these reductions.
​
Agriculture – 34% (+6% 2-Year Change)
Agricultural pollution reduction practices are some of the most cost-effective methods available. As part of Virginia’s cleanup plan for the Chesapeake Bay, the state has set goals for agricultural pollution reductions and has identified many practices that can be used to achieve them. The practices listed below represent the most important agricultural pollution reduction practices and the implementation levels reported to the state. Because reporting these practices is only required when state funding is used to implement them, it is likely that there are practices that have not been reported. As most farmers require financial and technical assistance to implement pollution reductions, future progress will depend largely on increased state or federal funding.
​
Continuous No-till – 44%
Continuous no-till farming helps maintain healthy soil by preventing erosion and reducing fertilizer loss. In 2012, 25,464 acres of cropland were farmed using continuous no-till methods.
​
Winter Cover Crops – 30%
Winter cover crops prevent erosion by keeping the fields covered in the winter rather than leaving them barren. This technique also reduces fertilizer runoff because the winter crops will take up the leftover fertilizer from the growing season. In 2012, 16,262 acres of winter cover crops were reported.
​
Farm Nutrient Management – 29%
Nutrient management plans provide farmers with a plan for the amount, type and timing of fertilizer applications. These plans can play a significant role in reducing nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. In 2012, 109,591 acres of farmland were operated using nutrient management plans.
​
Livestock Fencing
Not only does fencing livestock out of streams and rivers reduce streambank erosion, sediment and pathogen pollution, it has also been shown to improve herd health. In 2012 a total of 9,450 acres of pasture fencing was installed.
Development – 35% (+5% 2-Year Change)
With the addition of more roads, rooftops and other impervious surfaces, development causes dramatic changes to the landscape and can lead to substantial amounts of pollution both during and after construction. There are many practices that can be implemented to reduce the pollution that results from development, several of which are listed below.
​
Low Impact Development Policies – 30%
Low impact development policies provide localities with ways to reduce the amount of impervious cover (i.e. streets, sidewalks, etc.), preserve vegetation, create green space, and minimize land disturbance. All of these practices aid in reducing pollution. Although there are several localities in the watershed that are strongly encouraging low impact development opportunities, as of 2012, localities in the James River watershed on average had adopted only 31% of the policies recommended by the state.
​
Urban Stormwater Management Practices – 64%
Urban stormwater management includes practices that filter stormwater runoff, reduce impervious surfaces, collect and store stormwater, and increase infiltration or the ability of rainwater to soak into the ground. These practices are important because they minimize the amount of water that is entering the stormwater system. In 2012 over 19,000 acres of urban stormwater management practices were documented in the James River watershed.
​
Urban Nutrient Management – 11%
Similar to agricultural nutrient management plans, urban nutrient management plans reduce pollution by ensuring the proper type, amount and timing of fertilizer applications. Urban nutrient management plans are common for businesses that have large amounts of green space or grass, such as golf courses. In 2012 only 11% of the targeted 166,186 acres of urban lands had documented nutrient management plans in place.
​
Natural Area Conservation – 56% (+3% 2-Year Change)
The James River watershed is known for the scenic beauty of its natural areas. Not only do these areas provide countless recreational opportunities and critical habitat for wildlife, they also play an important role in filtering pollutants and erosion prevention. Natural area and riparian buffer conservation efforts throughout the watershed continue to be strong. However, development continues to threaten these areas. Conserving and restoring natural areas is an important part of the pollution reduction plan and as populations continue to grow, it becomes increasingly important to find a balance between development and conservation of green spaces.
​
Riparian Buffer Restoration – 26%
Riparian or streamside buffers are vegetated areas along the banks of rivers and streams. These buffers play an important role in pollution reduction, stream health and provide important wildlife habitat. The James River cleanup plan calls for over 60,000 acres of riparian buffer restoration. In 2012, 16,064 acres of buffer or 26% of this goal were restored.
​
Land Conservation – 86%
As part of the Chesapeake Bay 2000 Agreement, Virginia set a goal of protecting 20% (1,337,843 acres) of the land in the James River watershed. Gov. Kaine, Gov. McDonnell and a Presidential Executive Order all established additional goals bringing the total preservation goal to 1.65 million acres. As of 2012, over 1.4 million acres (86%) of this preservation goal was achieved.
​
Conservation of natural areas and restoration of riparian buffers throughout the watershed continues to rise, however, so does the amount of land we need to restore and protect. Natural areas and buffers are constantly threatened by expanding development. Finding a balance between development and natural areas represents an important step in the continued progress toward improved water quality.
​
Summary
The stalled pollution reductions for the James River underscore the need for stronger action. Like a boat rowing against the tide, our efforts and investments over the past decade have only kept pace with the growing population and development. Additional progress in reaching a fully healthy river will require a full commitment to Virginia’s new cleanup plan for the James River.
Uses
Being outdoors opens up limitless possibilities for the uses of the James River. Below are some of the most common.
​
Drinking Water: Richmond's Water Treatment Plant was built on the banks of the James River in 1924. Before then, more than 300 years ago, Richmond's drinking water came from numerous springs and an open stream flowing from the Capitol across Main Street. Over the years the plant has been upgraded and enlarged to meet growing demand. Today, Richmond's Department of Public Utilities' (DPU) water plant can produce up to 132 million gallons per day (MGD) straight from the James River.
​
Recreation: Each year, thousands of visitors enjoy the James River's beautiful scenery and clean water. From hikers and bikers to swimmers and paddlers there are activites for all kinds of adventure seekers. Both along the water itself and throughout the watershed there are numerous state parks, forests and campsites enabling Virginias to enojy the outdoors. Want to get active? Explore our 'Recreation' page to plan your next trip!
​
Commerce: Since settlers firt touched down in the New World, the James River has been an epicenter of commerce. First, the James enabled settlers to trade with their Native American neighbors. Continuing into the industrialized era, the development of canals helped Richmonders ship tobacco and other crops up and down river. Today, the James sees less import/export traffic, but remains a useful power source for many factories along the river.
​
Transportation: Crossing from one side to the other, the James River has always been a main source of transportation for Virginias. Before the invention of trains and automobiles, settlers used the James to travel between cities along the river for trade and travel. Today, the river remains a useful source of transportation for paddlers and other outdoorsmen.
In the Press
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
“
James River Association Objects to Draft Permit to Dewater Coal Ash Ponds at Dominion’s Chesterfield Power Station
James River Assoc., Article
“
Flood Water Height Signs Installed Around Richmond to Showcase Recent Flood Levels