Report on Water Availability Assessment in the Klamath Basin and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction and Regional Context

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) Water Resources Mission Area is conducting a comprehensive assessment of water availability in the Klamath Basin, a region spanning southern Oregon and northern California. This initiative is critical for addressing the complex balance between human and ecological water needs, directly supporting the principles of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The basin, which is the ancestral home of the Klamath, Yurok, Karuk, and Hoopa Valley Tribes, faces significant water management challenges that impact its diverse wetlands, forests, and agricultural lands.

The region’s challenges align with several key SDG targets, including:

• Water allocation conflicts and demands from agriculture and Tribal nations.
• Ecological degradation, including declining populations of salmon and sucker fish, which threatens biodiversity (SDG 14, SDG 15).
• The impacts of drought and climate change, which compromise water security (SDG 13).
• Poor water quality due to nutrient loading and subsequent algal blooms, which impacts water safety and ecosystem health (SDG 6).

A landmark Tribal-led effort in 2024 saw the removal of four major dams on the Klamath River, the largest such project in U.S. history. This action aims to restore river health and improve fish migration, contributing to SDG 15 (Life on Land) and SDG 14 (Life Below Water).

USGS Integrated Water Availability Assessment (IWAA) and SDG Alignment

The USGS is employing an integrated science approach to evaluate both water quantity and quality. This work provides the scientific foundation for integrated water resources management, a core target of SDG 6.5. The primary objectives of the Klamath Basin IWAA program are:

1. To determine the primary controls on water availability in the Upper Klamath Basin.
2. To analyze the effects of dam removal on sediment transport, river geomorphology, and downstream habitat.
3. To understand the linkages in water availability between the upper and lower basins following the dam removal.

Focus Area 1: Controls on Water Availability in the Upper Basin

This component of the study addresses the chronic strain on water resources from drought, agriculture, and the needs of endangered species. By refining the basin’s water budget—the balance between water supply and demand—the USGS is working to reduce management uncertainties. This directly supports SDG 6.4, which calls for ensuring sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater.

• The research focuses on groundwater and surface water interactions, particularly in the Williamson River Basin.
• Identifying groundwater recharge zones and their contribution to streamflow is essential for predicting the effects of drought and climate change.
• This information empowers decision-makers to manage water resources more effectively, enhancing resilience to climate-related hazards as outlined in SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Focus Area 2: Ecosystem Response to Dam Removal

The removal of four dams presents a unique opportunity to study large-scale river restoration. The USGS is monitoring the resulting changes to water quality, sediment movement, and river shape (geomorphology). This research is fundamental to achieving SDG 15.1, which targets the conservation and restoration of inland freshwater ecosystems.

• Baseline data collected from 2018-2023 is being compared with post-dam removal data (2024-2026) to track the river’s response.
• A key focus is documenting how the release of fine sediment impacts aquatic habitat for endangered fish species.
• This work directly contributes to SDG 15.5, which aims to protect threatened species and halt the loss of biodiversity. The findings will inform future dam removal projects and river restoration efforts globally.

Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 13: Climate Action
• SDG 14: Life Below Water
• SDG 15: Life on Land
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution. The article directly addresses this by mentioning one of the ongoing challenges in the Klamath Basin is “poor water quality from nutrients and algal blooms.” The USGS assessment of whether water is “safe to use (water quality)” also aligns with this target.
   • Target 6.5: Implement integrated water resources management. The article describes the USGS’s “integrated science approach to evaluate water availability and support water management decisions in the Klamath Basin.” This approach, which considers competing demands (Tribal, agricultural, ecological) and spans two states, is a clear example of integrated water resources management.
   • Target 6.6: Protect and restore water-related ecosystems. The entire article is centered on the Klamath Basin ecosystem. The “Tribal-led effort” to remove four dams is explicitly intended to “improve fish migration and river health,” which is a direct action towards restoring a water-related ecosystem.

2. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards. The article identifies “drought” and “changes in climate” as ongoing challenges. The USGS’s work to create a “water budget” helps “predict the effects of drought and other changes,” thereby strengthening the region’s resilience and capacity to adapt to climate-related water stress.

3. SDG 14: Life Below Water

   • Target 14.2: Sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems. Although focused on a river, this target is relevant as the Klamath River flows to the Pacific Ocean and supports anadromous fish like salmon. The efforts to remove dams to “improve fish migration” and address “declining salmon… populations” are actions to manage and restore the health of an ecosystem that is vital for aquatic life.

4. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.1: Ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems. The article highlights the Klamath Basin’s “wetlands, forests, and agricultural lands” and the focus on restoring the Klamath River’s health. The dam removal project is a significant restoration effort for an inland freshwater ecosystem.
   • Target 15.5: Protect biodiversity and natural habitats. The article explicitly mentions the need to address “declining salmon and sucker populations” and to “protect endangered species.” The studies on how dam removal affects “aquatic habitat” are directly linked to protecting biodiversity.

5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making. The article points to “water allocation conflicts” and “tensions persist among Tribal water rights, Federal water management, and agricultural water demands.” The mention of a “Tribal-led effort” for dam removal and the USGS’s role in providing scientific information to “decision makers” to “balance competing needs” highlights the importance of inclusive and informed decision-making processes to manage conflicts over shared resources.

Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • Indicator for Target 6.3: The article implies an indicator by mentioning “poor water quality from nutrients and algal blooms.” Progress could be measured by the ambient water quality, specifically monitoring the concentration of nutrients and the frequency of algal blooms.
   • Indicator for Target 6.5: The article describes the implementation of an “integrated science approach” and the development of a “water budget.” This points to the indicator 6.5.1: Degree of integrated water resources management implementation, where the USGS program itself is evidence of progress.
   • Indicator for Target 6.6: The article states that the USGS is tracking “how the river responds to dam removal” by comparing conditions before and after. This implies indicators such as the change in the extent of water-related ecosystems over time, measured through “sediment transport, river shape, and habitat” data.

2. SDG 14 & 15: Life Below Water & Life on Land

   • Indicator for Target 15.5: The article mentions “declining salmon and sucker populations” as a key issue. An implied indicator is the population status of endangered species. Improved fish migration and habitat post-dam removal should lead to an increase in these populations, which can be monitored. The Red List Index could be a relevant high-level indicator.
   • Indicator for Targets 14.2 & 15.1: The focus on restoring “river health” and “aquatic habitat” implies that progress can be measured by the health and coverage of the freshwater ecosystem. The USGS is collecting “sediment and river channel data” to establish a baseline and track changes, which serve as direct measurements for this indicator.

3. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Indicator for Target 13.1: The article mentions the USGS work helps “decision makers predict the effects of drought.” This implies an indicator related to the adoption and implementation of national and local disaster risk reduction strategies, where the use of scientific water budget models for drought management would be a measure of progress.

Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: mavensnotebook.com