Traveling the Willamette River Greenway

Travis Williams has spent a lot of time on the Willamette River. He’s the executive director of the environmental nonprofit Willamette Riverkeeper and the author of the new book “Willamette River Greenways.” The book explores the history of the Willamette River Greenway, a nearly 200-mile corridor of public lands along the river from near Eugene to Portland. Williams joins us to talk about the history and future of the greenway, and what he loves about the Willamette.

Note: The following transcript was created by a computer and edited by a volunteer.

Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB, I’m Dave Miller. More than 50 years ago, the idea for a Willamette River Greenway was introduced to the public during a governor’s race. The idea was a nearly 200 mile long collection of public lands for recreation and conservation along the Willamette River. A version of this idea did eventually become a part of state law. But as Travis Williams says, the Greenway we have today is a ragtag fugitive fleet of floodplain assemblages, and a mishmash of watery forest properties. For more than 20 years, Williams has been the executive director of the environmental nonprofit Willamette Riverkeeper. Williams tells the history of the program in his new book, Willamette River Greenways, but he has bigger goals as well. The book is part memoir, and part manifesto, an urgent call for policymakers, and for all Oregonians, to reassess and reassert our “green ways”, our ways of being ecologically minded. Travis, welcome back.

Travis Williams: Hey, thank you.

Miller: The Willamette River Greenway, as I noted just now, was proposed first by then-treasurer Bob Straub, very publicly, when he was running for governor in 1966. What was the idea that he had borrowed and wanted to make happen?

Williams: That’s a great question, and I think your use of the term borrowed bears some mention of the many people around the United States who have been clamoring for more public lands wherever they might be living, along a river or elsewhere. And there were folks down in the Eugene and Springfield areas who had been bending the ears, so to speak, of Bob Straub and others. And it was said that a university professor, Karl Onthank, at the University of Oregon had handed both candidates at that time information about this concept of a Greenway. And of course, in that election that occurred in 1966, McCall was the winner. And I think the unique thing at that time actually was the fact that you had two candidates of differing political parties. And when Straub made this proposal, McCall said, “Wow, that’s actually a good idea. If I become governor, I will try to implement this.”

So over the next few years, when, when McCall did become governor and he was sworn in, apparently he sat down with then-Transportation Commissioner Glen Jackson, for which the Glenn Jackson Bridge is named over the Columbia River, the I-205 bridge, and said “well, what am I supposed to do with this Greenway?” And he pointed to a gentleman who was also in the room named Dave Talbot, who was also the Director of Parks at that time, which was under the Oregon Department of Transportation, and said “have him do it.”

And what happened after is really an up and down story of several years of effort to acquire lands from willing sellers along the Willamette River. And there was some really good success initially. I think what then happened is the larger parcels which that program had envisioned really didn’t come into public ownership outside of Eugene and a couple of other areas. So there was an earnest effort, and over time, it became connected to Oregon’s land use planning system. When that was developed in the early 70s, Goal 15 was created, and Goal 15 is the Willamette River Greenway.

Miller: What does it mean that this was enshrined as one of the state’s official land use goals?

Williams: As part of the Commission of Land Conservation and Development, it sets a specific option for the state to acquire land along the Willamette. And the other piece of this, which I probably don’t talk about enough in the book, but there are certain rules for development along the Willamette River, whether you’re in an agricultural area or an urban area, if you want to build a house or if you want to develop a property in some other fashion, you have to comport to rules that are either set by the county or the city that you’re in. And of course, that creates a lot of variation and how it’s implemented typically. But the other piece of this gave the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department the option to purchase land along the Willamette, and/or to receive lands from donors, which has happened over time as well.

Miller: How big is the gulf right now between what the river Greenway program is, what it looks like, the collection of lands that make it up, and what the initial idea was?

Williams: It’s pretty wide. So when Governor Straub became governor, he was not necessarily happy with what was clearly becoming the end result in terms of creating Goal 15. His original concept, or at least a proposed concept that he had part ownership of at least, was a much more robust set of developed parklands along the Willamette, as well as undeveloped lands that would serve the environment. And that was a really robust goal in keeping with the other efforts of that time, whether we look at the Bottle Bill or the Beach Bill, things of that nature that were precedent setting and really large in scope. It has been said in one of the biographies of Governor Straub that he was really not all that happy about the final product.

Today, if you look at it, we have a valley that is becoming ever more populated. We have just shy of 15,000 acres of land that can be considered part of the Willamette Greenway. That is including the Coast Fork of the Willamette south of Eugene, as well as the Middle Fork of the Willamette south of Eugene, and then the entire 187 miles of the Willamette, you have a relative sprinkling of public properties all along that stretch. Some of those are big parks, people have maybe heard of Champoeg State Park, which is wonderful, Willamette Mission State Park, and others. But the reality is there are stretches of river that really have very few public access points. And looking ahead, this got me to thinking with the concept of the Greenway, that we could really reinvigorate this entire effort to meet multiple challenges.

Miller: I do want to talk about the future, but one more question first about the past. I’m wondering if you have identified big inflection points over the last 50+ years. Times when, if different decisions have been made or different approaches had been taken, that the river would look very different today.

Williams: I think what’s been happening in regard to the river is that we celebrated some successes that happened over 50 years ago. Since that time, and I think you could also make this case statewide, we’ve been kind of resting on our laurels to some degree, and we continue to point to those things that happened decades and decades ago.

Meanwhile, we have this new established status quo that, even in 2022, we see things that are occurring along the Willamette, and I think you can make the case statewide, that environmentally are really not where they should be. So whether that is water quality impacts with toxics in the river, which are there today in 2022, degradation of riverside lands in the case of the Willamette, air deposition in certain areas of products that might not be good for water quality or for those using the river. I think there’s a lot of good examples of that. And I think if you’re looking for an inflection point, there’s not one single thing, other than pointing to the things that have happened decades back, and not charting a continued course in the right direction. Resting on our laurels if you will.

Miller: Last summer, I camped with some friends on a gravel bar island on the river. Totally lovely, but we could hear the motor running basically the whole time on the other side of the bank for what I assumed was an irrigation pump. And then when the winds blew in certain directions, there was a distinct smell of manure. It’s a funny blend of wildness and the feeling of having gotten away from some aspect of built up human society, but smack dab in the middle of industrial, agricultural farmlands, at least this place was. What percentage of the river would you say is essentially like what I’ve just described?

Williams: I would say there’s a good percentage Dave. And even if you happen to be on one of the larger Greenway parcels, and for those who aren’t familiar with them, 100 acres is a good size for the Willamette. The larger ones are up to 1000 acres. And it’s not to blame our friends in agriculture, but there’s been kind of a way of doing things that has persisted for a long time. And in the case of smelling manure come across the river, if you’re out there canoeing or kayaking, and you want to just enjoy it for a day or go out for a night or two, being inundated with that type of smell, and even with those operations supposedly operating under specific rules to help that not emanate very many miles from the origin point, too often that can occur. And I could say the same thing for smelling products that are applied to the land that then drift in the air. Again, there are specific rules around that, but too often, I personally and I think I know many others feel like they experience situations that don’t seem right.

And I think that hinges on the fact that, in the case of the Oregon Department of Agriculture, you have an entity that is a state agency that both promotes agriculture, but they also enforce environmental rules. And I think there is an inherent conflict of interest in that.

Miller: You write about a place that you’ve come to love called Holcomb Island Landing. And you note that after you looked at some maps from the late 1800s, you realized that unlike a lot of places on the river, this site hasn’t really changed that much in 120+ years. What are the hallmarks of it? How do you know that this is old land?

Williams: That was a really interesting case. We went there some years ago, and I described going out there with a friend of mine Scott Youngblood. This goes back nine or ten years, and we’ve had various adventures trying to get to the site, because it’s off of a side channel to the Willamette, which explains in part why it hasn’t been utilized all that much.

But on another trip out there with a botanist, we were able to, we felt, discover a whole range of native wildflowers which were very unique to the Willamette River floodplain. And when I went home that night, I took another look at the Google Earth images and then brought up some maps from the US Army Corps from the late 1800s, and the property looked pretty much the same. And I think it spoke to the fact that this is an area that had, at least from what we can tell, had never been tilled. No one had tried to grow anything on it. It was relatively low in the floodplain. But here it was, thriving. And as I speak, it still is. This beautiful property with native wildflowers that really has pretty much stayed the same throughout the decades.

And I think there’s a few other places like that along the way. And I took care to not mention every little jewel. Some of those should be left to the explorer with a water trail map to go find. But there are places like that up and down the Willamette that do exist, and are really pretty cool and very worthy of protection.

Miller: I’m curious how you reckon with the last issue you were just touching on there. In that case, not wanting to talk about all these so-far largely undiscovered gems so they won’t be too trampled on. But I imagine there’s a tension: the more you get Oregonians, or anybody, to really fall in love with this river, and imagine what it could be, the better chance you have of achieving your political goals. But also, the more people that you encourage to visit these places, the busier it’ll be, maybe the more river traffic or the more trash. And maybe visits would have to be rationed the way they are in some national forests now in central Oregon, say. How do you think about the push and pull of getting people out there?

Williams: It’s a great question because it is always a bit of a tension. To date, I think things have been pretty manageable. There will always be certain sites along any public resource that maybe reflect what the lowest common denominator can do to a campsite or otherwise.

But generally speaking, I think folks who seek the canoe or kayak or just go for a stroll at one of the larger sites along the river have a similar ethic, or they’re able to learn about it. And I think when enabling folks to gather the information that they need to go out there and explore, and try camping along the Willamette for the first time or simply go out for a paddle and a canoe or kayak for a day or two, we take pains to really inform people about best practices, and certainly leave no trace at campsites and anywhere you get on the river.

So it is a balance, but I think it’s one that has been managed pretty well. Even looking ahead, if we’re even doubling the amount of people who might use the Willamette, or maybe increasing it by 20% over the next five years, I feel pretty confident that the overall message between organizations like mine and Oregon State Parks and Rec, and all of the local park ownerships up and down the river are really on the same page on that front.

Miller: How do you think about your work at the nonprofit in the context of Native peoples who live in the valley now, and whose ancestors have had intricate relationships to this river going back 10,000 years?

Williams: Yeah, that’s a great question. Personally, I’ve always been interested in the First Peoples across the United States, and did a lot of reading in my youth at a variety of resources, and well into my twenties and I continue to this day. I don’t profess to be an expert on the topic. But in regard to peoples in the Willamette Valley, as an organization, we have really worked to establish relationships. We have good partnerships with the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, as well as others. And we really talk about it a lot.

I think there’s been one topic in recent years that has really enabled us to further our partnerships, if you will. We do a lot of work on freshwater mussels. And folks may not know what those are, but they look like a marine mussel. As an adult, they’re about as big as your hand. But those muscles in the right conditions are able to live over 100 years in the Willamette River. And some of those animals were first foods for people in this valley and beyond. And having that level of respect and partnership in doing research and sharing information is something that we really prize.

In the book, there’s a chapter called the Willamette Mission. And of course, that takes its name from the park that is just north of Salem. But I kind of look back to that first Methodist missionary that was on the main channel of the Willamette at that time, and sort of looked at what occurred after those first waves of white people showed up, the missionaries and French trappers from the Hudson Bay Company and beyond, and sort of looked at that as a good example of what has happened to both people and the environment since that time. And that’s not to blame any one religion or missionary site. But for me, it helped crystallize that whole question, and document just a bit of the story that came after.

Miller: I want to turn back to those mussels as part of your process of discovery, and what you’ve learned in terms of first foods. I feel like we’ve talked a lot on this show about salmon, but much less about freshwater mussels. You focus in particular on the Western Pearlshell Mussel, and note that at one point you chanced upon a really immense bed of these mussels. What was it like?

Williams: It was pretty amazing. At the time, I didn’t really have a good idea of what they were or what role that they really served in the ecosystem, let alone their own amazing life history. But these freshwater mussels, you’re talking about a site which Willamette Riverkeeper actually owns called Norwood Island. And the side channel there, when I first paddled it maybe in 2001, 2002, had thousands and thousands and thousands of mussels.

When we acquired the island a few years ago, we went back and did a study in 2017 of that side channel to document the relative health of that population as well as its overall abundance, trying to get an idea of whether they were reproducing or not. What we did find out was that we have over 40,000 muscles in that side channel. And again, the vast majority of them are black shells, they’re deeply pitted in places, they will fit in the average adult stand and take up pretty much your whole hand when you’re holding them. They’ve got some real heft to them. And all these muscles have been filter feeding on that side channel for decades. But what we found out was they’re not reproducing. And this is where we do go back to the story of salmon, or anadromous fish in the Willamette, spring chinook or winter steelhead, because those fish serve a role. When the little glochidia, the juvenile mussel that is released from the female, floats around in the water column for a time until it can attach to a host fish. And it’s believed that those two species of fish are the host fish for these muscles, and then it rides around on that for a period of time, and then it drops back off of the fish, and if it’s lucky, gets into the bottom of a river channel and starts to filter and grow.

The point of bringing all that up as you can see the connections between the fish and what might impact the presence of fish like that. Whether it’s water quality, the temperature of a river, the habitat that has been affected by humankind, and start to see that there are pieces of this that can directly affect whether mussels are able to reproduce or not. And I think, to a person, when we talk about these this species, and you look at them and you can find the shells from dead ones up and down the Willamette in places, when you mentioned that they can filter the Willamette’s water, with everything that we put in it and every way that we affect that water quality, or the timing of the arrival of high flows or lower flows, the fact that they can live in that and grow is pretty astonishing, and that they have an opportunity at least to live over 100 years old is really pretty astonishing. People are typically just blown away by that.

Miller: I want to turn to your hopes or your policy prescriptions. One of them is that you’re suggesting that the state acquire, in one way or another, around 1000 acres of currently privately held land along the river, every year for 20 years. How does that compare to the amount of land that’s on sale or on offer in any given year?

Williams: The way I see it is there are multiple properties that come onto the market over time. And in the Willamette right now, there is a generational shift that people have been talking about actually statewide in regard to how to keep these properties in agricultural production. What I have suggested, and it’s not a new suggestion, this is happening in multiple states, is that within this time, we take the opportunity to acquire a bit of land for another type of production. And that is floodplain land that provides habitat for a range of species. It can help cool the water in some instances, land even that’s in agricultural production today, that’s low in the floodplain, might be turned back to its former function. And so while it may not be agricultural production, it can produce cool water and healthy habitat.

And if we think about this in terms of climate change, this type of thing is absolutely necessary on the Willamette. If you go up in an airplane or fly a drone just a little bit above the river and look around a bit, you will see that the vast part of the landscape is dominated either by agricultural production or cities that have been built right along the shore line. And to suggest that we can acquire a bit of that land back over a period of decades, both for climate resiliency and to help sustain the whole range of wild species that inhabit the Willamette, I think it’s the right thing to do.

And to your question, if we were to even get half of what I would recommend, we would be surpassing what we’ve been doing for the last 20 years. And don’t get me wrong, there’s been a lot of great work happening with a lot of great organizations and people to restore habitat throughout the entire basin, both on the tributaries and the main stem Willamette. But frankly, we really have to do more. And I think organizations like Willamette Riverkeeper are now acquiring land or taking it from people who would donate land. There’s a series of land trusts who are doing the same thing. I think the time is now to really make a push, and direct funding toward those types of acquisitions that will really help sustain the river for the long haul.

Miller: But what has being on the river meant for your own health?

Williams: Thanks for asking that. Dave. I’ve had type one diabetes since I was six years old, so that’s been 46 years. And I think no matter where you come from in the health spectrum, spending time outside is really good for one’s mental and physical health. And personally, if I’m able to go out there and paddle for a day, and stop and hike around some of these Greenway sites that we’ve been talking about, I’ve noticed over the years that does a lot for me, I would say even more so when I’m out there for a few days at a time. And I think getting more folks out there, getting them in a canoe, getting them in a kayak, camping along the river for a night or two, you’re moving a lot, and you move your body. It may not be a cardio workout like running, but it really has a very beneficial result when I do that. And I think you could say that for a lot of other folks, getting them out there and having them see and experience the Willamette in that way, or many of the other public spaces that are open to us.

Contact “Think Out Loud®”

If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show, or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook or Twitter, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.