"You cannot save a place you do not know and love, you cannot behave ethically toward something you do not know and love, and you cannot behave ethically toward a planet as an abstract proposition". The prophetic words by Aldo Leopold identifies for us the key essence to the restoration of Glen Canyon. We as a culture behaved unethically towards the environment and cultural heritage in 1956 when the decision was made to build Glen Canyon Dam. We did not know it well enough to save it. We did not understand the issues or the long-term impact of those decisions. We must understand, we must appreciate and we must take bold steps forward on behalf of the resources and Glen Canyon, if we are to work for solutions instead of band-aids for the shortsighted decisions of the past.
The Glen Canyon Institute has a simple mission, the restoration of Glen Canyon. The alternatives for how to accomplish this will be evaluated in the Citizens Environmental Assessment. The Glen Canyon Institute's objective is to convince Congress, the Department of the Interior and most importantly the people, that restoring Glen Canyon is viable. We believe that the government that guided the dam's construction should be responsible for accepting the responsibility to restore it.
Glen Canyon Dam was built during a time before the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, or any other federal laws that protect the resource and define a process for decision-making, existed. The state and federal "water buffaloes" and developers lobbied the congressional delegations to develop and control the Colorado River. Their battle cry was that the economic and social future of the West rested with ensuring that the downstream water-hungry users of California, Arizona and Nevada did not lay claim to their undeveloped water. Glen Canyon would protect the dowry of the Upper Basin states from the water lecherous developers to the south. Glen Canyon was born as a political dam and continues to exist as one today.
The trade-off in 1956 when Glen Canyon Dam was authorized for construction was that there would be no Echo Park Dam built to drown Dinosaur National Monument. Protecting the monument from drowning was a valuable and important cause, but as in all cases, there are two sides to every story. The trade off on this victory was the drowning of Glen Canyon.
The area of the Colorado River known as Glen Canyon has had a long and valuable history, both culturally and biologically. Culturally it was home to thousands of Native Americans who lived in the side canyons and sowed seeds in the wet sands along the river. It was on these wet sands that they planted and harvested their crops. In this environment ancient civilizations evolved and cultures refined. The Native Americans came and went from the Colorado River area depending on climate and outside threats. Tragically, as the reservoir filled their history was drowned. Contractors raced about the basin salvaging all that they could find though their efforts were too little and too late. Thousands of ruins and artifacts are under the waters of Reservoir Powell waiting to be warmed by the sun once again.
The biological integrity of the Colorado River watershed was defined by its uniqueness and diversity. The watershed evolved in isolation, separated from the oceans and as a result developed a unique assemblage of fish, insects and amphibians. These species evolved within the dynamic boundaries of seasonal hydrology, climate and geology, adapting to the habitats, large ranges in river flows and heavy sediment load. The species developed specific life history strategies to accommodate the variability of the watershed and river. They were unique and not found in other rivers.
Glen Canyon Dam changed the dynamic nature of the river system by choking the flow of water, stealing the sediment and changing the water quality of the downstream releases. Changes began to occur immediately in 1956, as the flows of the Colorado River were constrained. In the Grand Canyon, the life-giving sediments were cut off; the high spring flushing flows terminated and the lifeblood of the aquatic ecosystem was compromised. This was nothing though to the desecration that occurred to the ecological integrity of Glen Canyon. An environment born of the river was converted against its will to a bathtub. A beautiful bathtub not withstanding, but a stagnant body of water none-the-less.
So What? The Reservoir is Just Slower Moving Water
A dammed river creates a large stagnant body of water defined as a reservoir. Species that evolve in a river environment typically cannot survive in the stagnant waters. They need flow, direction and seasonally, without it they become disoriented and are quickly lost. Rivers downstream from dams also exhibit different characteristics than natural rivers. Over fourteen years of study conducted by the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies documented that the river environment downstream of the dam has changed. The artificially supported ecosystem is now dependent on daily flow regimes rather than seasonal ones and exotic species that depend on cold water regimes rather than seasonally warm ones. Exotic species take over temporarily, supported by a water regime that is artificially controlled by water users and politics.
The Bureau of Reclamation and the water developers contend that Reservoir Powell is essential to meeting the water delivery requirements downstream and that draining the reservoir would cause the unraveling of water management in the West. In a report completed by the Environmental Defense Fund for the September 1997 Congressional hearing, using the Bureau of Reclamation's own projections and model, the following conclusions were made:
The delivery of water to the Upper Basin states doesn't change at all.
Average annual deliveries to the Lower Basin States would only be affected approximately 1% of the time (dry/dry years)
There will be a reduction in the existing loss due to evaporation by approximately 37% for the entire Colorado River system
There will be an average increase in flow of 444,000 acre-feet per year to Mexico (for either consumptive use or for restoring the delta)
A concern has been voiced that the electrical rates will skyrocket and that the distribution of electricity would be disrupted. Currently there is a glut of capacity and energy on the market. So much energy exists on the short-term that economically marginal power plants are closing. Information generated by EDF, using Reclamation models and numbers, showed that the scenario without Glen Canyon dam and power plant would result in an average annual reduction of 3% of total electrical consumption in Colorado, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico. That's barely a blip on the electrical market. Clearly the electricity produced is not critical to survival.
Hydroelectricity is sold at Glen Canyon at both long-term and immediate-market rates. The sale rates are variable and dependent on whether the electricity is sold on a short-term or long-term basis. The short-term cost of the electricity will not go up. Reservoir Powell basin traps sediments as they enter the stagnant waters. These sediments accumulate in the upper portion of the reservoir, and over time will fill the reservoir basin in. The timeline for when the filling of the reservoir basin will occur is variable and dependent on the regional climate, runoff, sediment availability and upstream conservation practices. The estimates range from 150 years to 700+ years. The issue then is not how long it will take but what will we do about it?
The short-term impact of increasing sedimentation and accumulation of heavy metals is another real concern. The Upper Colorado River watershed sediments were deposited in marine environments over 200 million years ago. Marine sediments are composed naturally of low levels of heavy metals including Mercury, Arsenic, Barium, and Selenium. Low levels of these metals move at rates defined by nature and the seasonal transfer of sediments. Such movements have not resulted in any profound environmental effect. With the reservoir in place however, the sediments are being unnaturally trapped and are being reduced chemically to forms that migrate into the water column and are picked up (assimilated) by the algae and zooplankton. Eventually the metals are bioaccumulated into the fatty tissues of the Striped Bass and other game fish in Reservoir Powell. Is it a problem? Well, EPA and the Fish & Wildlife Service seem to think so when they issue advisories on how much fish flesh to consume. Will this cause catastrophic impacts in the Colorado River? Not likely at the present rates, but who knows? Bioaccumulation can occur at rates that have secondary effects that we don't totally understand yet.
There is valid concern over what would occur to the demographics and economy of Page. The town was developed on land acquired in a trade with the Navajo Nation in the 1950's and was developed as a government and contractor town. Over the years it has developed and incorporated around an economy that is largely driven by Reservoir Powell summer recreation and the Navajo Generation Station. Clearly there would be a change in the recreation demographics of the area. Recreation would change from mega-houseboats, speedboats and jet skis to one defined by rafting, canoeing, hiking and biking. The type of recreation would change but the economics of the area would evolve and survive.
There has also been concern that the coal fired power plant outside Page, the Navajo Generation Station, will have to close down. The power plant is not dependent on the reservoir except for cooling water. The cooling could be accomplished by other means. It does not depend or need Glen Canyon dam to survive. Its existence is there because the people decided in 1968 that they did not want more dams in the Grand Canyon. Its location is defined by its access to Black Mesa coal and the electrical distribution market to Central Arizona. That will not change.
Glen Canyon Dam will not last forever. An interesting and troubling fact is that Glen Canyon, and more than 750 other federal dams in the United States, have no decommissioning language. In other words, the government built these dams without any forethought. What will be done with them once they reach their life span? Today the Department of Energy is decommissioning nuclear power plants and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is decommissioning private dams. What is being done about the dams that Reclamation or the Corp of Engineers has built?
My God, What a Stinking Mess Would be Left!
The Glen Canyon Institute is proposing a slow, scientifically coordinated draining of Reservoir Powell, a drainage plan that would follow the seasonal and annual hydrology to slowly bring down the level of the reservoir. Catastrophic draining of the reservoir would be bad for both Glen and Grand Canyon biological resources. GCI is proposing a drainage plan that would take 10 to 15 years to complete. Over the years the water would slowly drain out of the sandstone and sediments, moving the sediments from the side canyons and delta and transporting the water and sediment slurry downstream.
As the sediments become exposed, they will be eroded and transported into the main channel and either moved downstream or provide substrate for the revegetation of plants. Experiments and studies conducted in the Grand Canyon during the 1996 experimental flood found that if the timing is right, native plants could out-compete the non-native tamarisk and other species. The springs that have been drowned would be re-exposed and revitalized by native plants and species supplied from other areas in the watershed.
It is proposed that as the waters drop each year, conservation groups, public groups, the Presidents Youth Conservation Corps, and others are employed to pick up the exposed trash and aluminum. There may be a gold (aluminum) mine in cans alone! Experienced people and contractors would handle heavier objects (i.e. boats, motors, jet skis, batteries, etc.).
The beauty and biological integrity of Glen Canyon will slowly emerge as the waters of the reservoir drop. There will be seasonal ups and downs in water levels for several years but the trend and intent is to get back to a river in a time frame that will allow for the greatest good for the resources. Evidence already gathered from backcountry rangers and conservationists have documented the water level variations in side canyons, indicate that within a year or two the side canyons will flush themselves clean of sediment and the white "bathtub" ring will be gone within a 5 to 10 year period of time. Environmental resources will emerge and the biological integrity of Glen Canyon will be reestablished.
Will the river and canyon return to what it looked like in 1869? Of course not. Those days are gone. Too many people, upstream constraints, exotic species and water quality problems exist. What we are striving for is the restoration of the physical processes that define a river. Processes that over time will restore riverine habitats. With that will come the reestablishment of the biological processes and resources. Native species will have an opportunity to reestablish their presence and integrity. Non-native species will continue to be present though in much reduced numbers. They are not built to survive in the dynamic nature of the unconstrained Colorado River.
A Pipe Dream or a Dream of Substance?
Without a vision of the future we are constrained to continue on the existing path of natural heritage loss. We are at a critical juncture in the road. One route takes us down the short-term path of continuation and environmental capitulation - continuation of the loss of resources and an unsustainable future. The other path, though longer and more circuitous, and full of speed bumps, leads to a sustainable environmental future. A future with the heart of the Colorado River ecosystem restored.
The Glen Canyon Institute and thousands of people across the country and around the world are willing to stand up and demand that the decision made to drown Glen Canyon in 1956 be revisited. We are not required to continue down a road of decisions that do not make environmental sense today. If we as a people were not allowed to revisit the past, then many of the basic freedoms of choice that we so enjoy today would never have come to pass. The time is here; the time is now to ask the question.
Free the river, restore Glen Canyon!