Michigan communities invest millions in their rivers. Will it bring returns?

On a recent sunny fall morning, a couple dozen people paddled in bright-colored kayaks past factories, a docked freighter and miniature mountains of industrial materials on southeast Michigan’s Lower Rouge River.

“This is really exciting to have this many people out here kayaking the Rouge because, when I was a kid, the Rouge was so dirty they told you, ‘Don’t touch it,’” said Sally Petrella, watershed ecologist with Friends of the Rouge, which organized the paddling event.

The river was once so polluted it famously caught on fire . Petrella told attendees it has “a long way to go,” but restoration efforts have made it “safe enough for you to be out here paddling.”

Communities across the state are pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into rivers like the Rouge, hoping for both environmental and economic returns.

Battle Creek has pitched a project to renaturalize part of the Kalamazoo River that runs over concrete. Grand Rapids is working to restore rapids to the Grand River downtown. A state park is being built around Flint’s riverfront. The state announced earlier this month it’s investing $89 million to clean up the Detroit, Kalamazoo and other rivers.

Backers envision more riverside development bringing tourists to kayak, fish and otherwise enjoy cleaner waterways that are more hospitable to native plants and animals.

Economic impact studies aren’t always completed for such projects, but many point to a 2007 Brookings Institution study that predicted a $3 return for every $1 invested in waterway restoration. A study on the Huron River in 2017 found the river produced $53.5 million in economic activity annually, while a 2023 White River study pegged its economic impact at $20 million.

“We’ve actually done studies in Muskegon that have showed a 6-to-1 return on investment,” said Alan Steinman, a professor at Grand Valley State University’s Annis Water Resources Institute and a co-author of the Michigan Blue Economy report. “The number is less important than the concept that, ’Oh my God, these properties really do have inherent value, cultural value and economic value that had none associated with (them) prior to the restoration effort.”

Kris Martin, an urban planner with Battle Creek Unlimited, the firm helping to look into whether part of the Kalamazoo river should be renaturalized, said removing the aging concrete channel would make the river “a greater amenity to the downtown.”

“Right now, it’s not accessible for the public at all,” he said. “And it’s quite dangerous.”

Martin said costs for the project will depend on the path forward but are expected to be “in the millions.” An economic cost-benefit analysis is expected to be a component in the next report released by the US Army Corps of Engineers.

For the Flint state park project, an economic analysis is not currently planned, because it would cost money, but project spending includes $30.2 million plus a $41 million endowment for future operations and maintenance.

As for Grand Rapids, the project is estimated to cost at least $19 million. Economic impact for the project as it stands today has not been publicized.

Even when the economic impact is not calculated, administrators say river restoration projects can be a worthwhile investment.

Starting in the mid-2000s, the Traverse City area began what has been deemed the largest dam removal project in Michigan’s history. Three dams along the Boardman River were taken out to reconnect coldwater streams and restore fish habitat. The project cost more than $27 million.

Conservation Resource Alliance — which served as the project manager and financial administrator for the effort — said it doesn’t actually know what the economic benefits have been.

“It’s something that’s really hard to quantify and would take a lot of time and investment from the partner collective that removed those dams to do so,” said Gavin MacDonald, communications manager for Conservation Resource Alliance.

But MacDonald said that, anecdotally, the payoff is that the dam removals restored a more free-flowing river that benefits fish and people.

“The river is now navigable, so you can paddle large stretches of the Boardman River,” MacDonald said. “It’s made it more accessible for the people that live in the region and the people that visit to explore and be more connected with nature.”

Sometimes the payoff is known.

For decades, prime downtown waterfront property in Detroit included vacant buildings and abandoned lots. The area has now been transformed to a nationally recognized waterfront that includes greenways and parks, more than eight miles of trails, places to get a drink and go sledding. About $2 billion in public and private dollars have been invested into the project so far and the Detroit Riverfront Conservancy says visitors spend $82 million a year.

The Huron River’s water trail was designated a part of the National Water Trail System in 2015. Elizabeth Riggs, deputy director at the Huron River Watershed Council at the time, had a hunch that the water trail and other restoration work benefitted the river, but she wanted proof.

“I and others working on the campaign were keen on trying to tell that story of (the river) in dollar terms — which is, as we know, a good way to tell a story — to try to reach as many people as possible, and to help convince decision-makers to invest in rivers and protecting them and restoring them,” she said.

The watershed council commissioned a study, published in 2017 by Grand Valley State University, to evaluate the economic impact of the Huron River. Researchers found that the river and its water trail were estimated to generate $53.5 million in economic output annually and that the river provided $150 million a year in economic value services through recreation, flood reduction, harboring rare organisms and more.

In 2023, Grand Valley State University also published an economic assessment of the White River. The river is located in west Michigan and runs through the Huron-Manistee National Forests . It’s fed by coldwater streams and can support salmon and trout.

The study found that nearly 70,000 visitors came to the White River in a year and that the river’s total economic impact was valued at $20 million.

“It’s a good number to know,” said John Stivers, secretary of the White River Watershed Partnership.

But he said that, when it comes to the White River, it’s a little complicated.

The river was designated as a Country-Scenic River by the Michigan Natural Resources Commission in 1975. Development on certain stretches need to go through a Natural Rivers Zoning Review Board, he said, and the river is further protected because it runs through national forest land.

Stivers said some people see the White River as a secret and they want to keep it that way.

“There are a lot of people that love it the way it is and aren’t really too interested in turning it into a high economic engine,” he said. “It’s a balance.”

This story was originally published by Bridge Michigan and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.