 |
|
|
|
The Destruction
of the Grand Canyon
(link to Grand Canyon section of FAQ)
|
|
|
On a visit to the Grand
Canyon in 1903, Teddy Roosevelt spoke to a group of bystanders,
insisting that protecting the Grand Canyon was a basic duty of the
American people. Expressing his concern, he said, “Keep this
great wonder of nature as it is. Do nothing to mar its grandeur,
for the ages have been at work upon it. Keep it for your children,
your children’s children, and all who come after you.”
Sadly, Teddy Roosevelt's warning was ignored when in 1963, Glen
Canyon Dam was completed twelve miles above Lee’s Ferry and
Marble Canyon. The warm, sediment-laden natural flow cycle of the
Colorado River was impounded by the dam, and cold, clear, and regulated
flows were released into the Grand Canyon. This drastic change in
water quality has damaged the Colorado River ecosystem, endangering
many native plant and wildlife species in the Canyon. The unique
wildlife of Grand Canyon National Park has also been irreversably
damaged. |
| |
|
“Keep
this great wonder of nature as it is. Do nothing to mar its
grandeur…”
-Teddy Roosevelt |
|
| |
Cold Clear Water in the Desert?
The Colorado River historically carried an average of 275,000 tons
of sediment through the Grand Canyon every day. Prior to the dam,
huge spring floods and dynamic flow patterns replenished beaches and
aquatic habitats with massive deposits of nutrient-laden sediment.
Besides blocking 95% of this crucial sediment, the water released
from the bottom of the dam is unnaturally cold. River temperatures
that used to range from 35-85 degrees, are now a steady 46 degrees
year round. Native fish species are unable to spawn in the cold water,
but non-native species thrive under these conditions, increasing competition
and predation of native species. |
|
| Endangered Species
The Colorado Pikeminnow, and the Bonytail Chub, have been wiped
out of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon because of Glen Canyon
Dam. The Humpback Chub, and the Razorback Sucker, are listed as
Endangered Species. Despite efforts to alter flows from the dam,
only about 1100 adult Humpback Chub remain in the Colorado River.
In less than forty years, the cold, clear water from Glen Canyon
Dam has caused the extirpation of rare native fish and wildlife
in the Grand Canyon: the Southwest River Otter, the Colorado Pikeminnow,
and the Bonytail Chub. Other native fish species are endangered
and on the brink of extinction. With shrinking populations, these
endangered species face a grim future unless the natural flows of
the Colorado River are restored soon. |
|
|
Saving the Grand Canyon…Once
Again
Shortly after Glen Canyon Dam was authorized by Congress, the Bureau of
Reclamation announced plans to build two giant dams in the Grand Canyon,
flooding this gem of the National Park System. Having realized too late
the unbearable sacrifice of Glen Canyon, public opposition swelled and
soundly defeated the Grand Canyon dams. Forty years later, we have learned
that the Grand Canyon is in peril once again. Starving for a free-flowing
Colorado River, the fragile ecosystem of the Grand Canyon is in need of
public support once again.
Growing Public Support for the Grand Canyon
Shortly after Glen Canyon Dam was completed, the negative downstream impacts
became apparent in the Grand Canyon. Over the next thirty years, as the
health of the fragile ecosystem declined, public concern over the health
of the Grand Canyon steadily grew. In 1982, the Bureau of Reclamation
initiated a science-gathering program called Glen Canyon Environmental
Studies to measure the impacts of the Dam. In 1989, an Environmental Impact
Study (EIS) on the operation of Glen Canyon Dam was announced. Under the
Bureau of Reclamation’s direction, the EIS only considered an assortment
of dam release options and refused to consider the option of decommissioning
Glen Canyon Dam. The Bureau of Reclamation was slow to begin work on the
EIS until the United States Congress stepped in and ordered the timely
completion of the study bypassing the Grand Canyon Protection Act. |
The Grand Canyon Protection
Act of 1992
In 1992, in response to the growing public concern over the health of the
Grand Canyon, the U.S. Congress passed the Grand Canyon Protection Act.
Essentially requiring all damages to the Grand Canyon to be mitigated, the
Act required dam operations to become secondary to the health of the Grand
Canyon ecosystem. The Act also required the ongoing operational EIS to be
completed in a timely manner. Despite the clear mandate, action taken by
the Bureau of Reclamation has fallen far short of fulfilling the congressional
intent of the Act. |
The Artificial Flood
of '96
Shortly before the completion of the EIS in 1996, Secretary Babbitt
decided to authorize an artificial flood in the Grand Canyon to help
build beaches and habitat that had been scoured away by the sediment-hungry
clear water released from the dam. In attempt to mitigate the damage
to the Grand Canyon, the Bureau of Reclamation released an artificial
flood from the dam to mimic the high flows of former spring runoffs.
While the flood temporarily restored beaches and improved backwater
habitat, less than a year later, the beaches and new habitat were
gone--eaten away by the clear sediment-hungry water. |
| |
The
Artificial Flood of 1996 |
|
Completion of the EIS and the Adaptive Management Program and
the Grand Canyon Crisis
The EIS was completed in 1996 and a Modified Low Fluctuating Flow (MLFF)
was recommended for dam operations. To measure the effects of the new
operational guidelines of the dam, the Adaptive
Management Program (AMP) was also initiated to ensure that the protection
mandate of the Grand Canyon Protection Act was fulfilled. Consisting of
the various stakeholders in the Grand Canyon (including the traditional
water and power interests, relevant government agencies, the affected
tribes, and recreation and environmental representatives), the Adaptive
Management Workgroup (AMWG) makes recommendations to the Secretary of
the Interior on how to operate the dam based upon scientific evidence.
While appearing structurally sound, the consensus-building AMP process
has been fraught with difficulties since it began in 1997. AMWG has essentially
become ineffective in solving the Grand Canyon’s growing problems
while costing taxpayers $10 Million annually. Two major baseline resources
in the canyon (sediment and native fish) have been steadily monitored
and have each demonstrated downward trends. Endangered native fish populations,
(namely the Humpack Chub), have dropped from 5000 to 1100 since the passage
of the Grand Canyon Protection Act. Of the few “band-aid”
approaches attempted by the AMP to keep the precious sediment in the system,
none have succeeded. |
| While some traditional
stakeholders in AMWG work to stall progress in the canyon by proposing
these “band-aid” solutions, the health of this biological
gem continues to deteriorate as endangered species populations decline.
The Bureau of Reclamation has studied many different options for
operating the dam without further harming the Grand Canyon, but
with little success. The environmental studies in the Grand Canyon,
costing more than $100 million taxpayer dollars, have provided conclusive
evidence that Glen Canyon Dam is the major source of the problem
in the Grand Canyon. The only real solution for the declining health
of the Grand Canyon is a free-flowing Colorado River.
Help us restore a healthy Colorado River, and save the Grand Canyon
once again. Join Glen Canyon Institute
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
