|
<br />r,
<br />
<br />"","l~,lf'~
<br />. __:I-
<br />
<br />';"r.',.-;
<br />
<br />136
<br />
<br />PUBLIC LAND LAW REVIEW
<br />
<br />[Vol. 15
<br />
<br />1994]
<br />
<br />GRAND CANYON PROTECTION ACT
<br />
<br />137
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />amount of destruction to one of the natural wonders of the world-the
<br />Grand Canyon. Glen Canyon' Dam introduced the hand of man into the
<br />Grand Canyon. and forever altered its natural ecosystem. For thirty years,
<br />the Canyon has been adapting to the "new" Colorado River created by the
<br />Bureau of Reclamation when it sealed off the diversion tunnels and
<br />subdued another facet of the untamed West. Unfortunately, this adapta-
<br />tion has been anything but stable. Parties unconcerned with the Grand
<br />Canyon ecosystem have made decisions that severely affect the natural
<br />environment. Increasingly, however, many parties interested in and
<br />affected by Glen Canyon Dam have worked toward a goal of equilibrium,
<br />where dam operation would be "tuned in" with the environment down
<br />river, The culmination of these efforts is the Grand Canyon Protection Act
<br />(GCPA).'
<br />The GCPA was signed into law on October 30, 1992 as part of the
<br />omnibus water bill passed at the end of the 102d Congress,4 The Act's
<br />preamble states that widely fluctuating releases of water from Glen
<br />Canyon Dam severely damage the river corridor downstream by eroding
<br />beaches, destroying wildlife habitat, killing native endangered fish, and
<br />endangering archaeological sites,~ To combat these problems, the GCPA
<br />mandates that the Secretary of the Interior "operate Glen Canyon Dam, , '
<br />in such a manner as to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve
<br />the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and GI~Il Canyon
<br />National Recreation Area were established,'" 'Thus, the GCPA gives,
<br />priority' to' pro~ection of the Grand Canyon, and all."other values must"
<br />operate, within this man$!ate, .
<br />. As with most reform legislation, the passage of the GCPA is just the
<br />
<br />beginning, Protection of the Grand Canyon will occur only when real
<br />changes are made in the deciJiop~tp~~i~~ H~,~e~es that contr~l the
<br />operation of Glen Canyon Dam. ~\~~~~We,s:~;~;.~he.~treu);.
<br />quo, particularly the energy industfy'(Si.'1'riditional stra,tfglehord' 'on the
<br />dam's operation. The GCPA is an important first step, demonstrating that
<br />natural resource decisions.in the West will no longer be driven solely by
<br />special interests.
<br />. This article will focus on the GCPA and its attempt to balance
<br />operations at Glen Canyon with environmental conditions at the Grand
<br />Canyon so that a maximum benefit may be extracted from both. In
<br />addition, the article evaluates the Get' A as a model for fu ture legislation
<br />that will address the allocation of a limited natural resource with numerous
<br />competing demands on its use. Section II begins by looking at the history of
<br />the dam, and Section III reviews the impacts of its operation. Section IV
<br />examines the history and the text of the GCP A, and Section V evaluates its
<br />strengths and weaknesses. Finally, Section VI evaluates the future
<br />implications of the GCP A.
<br />
<br />II. HISTORY OF GLEN CANYON DAM
<br />
<br />3. Grand Canyon Prote<:tion Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-575, 106 Stat. 4600 (1992)
<br />[hereinafter GC?A].
<br />4. David Hoye, Canyon Protection Approved: San Carlos Apache Water Accord Also Included
<br />in Landmark Bill, PHOENIX GAZETTE, Oct. 31, 199-2, at AI.
<br />5. ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND, CONFLICT ON THE COLORADO RtVER 1 ((992) [hereinaf-
<br />terEDFJ.Seeaiso 137 CONGo REc.SI2,942 (daily ed. Sept. 13,1991) (statement of Sen. McCain).
<br />Timeisrunningouton thepark's beaches-so manyofwhichhave been scoured away by the
<br />erratic release of water from Glen Canyon Dam. Time is running out for ancient Indian
<br />ruinsandculturalsites.Timeisrunningoutforthedisappearingriparianvegetationandthe
<br />wildlife it supports. Time is running out for endangered !ish species. And time is running out
<br />for us to do the right thing.
<br />
<br />Since the early twentieth century, a dam was destined to be built in
<br />Glen Canyon; the only question was when. As early as 1916, the chief
<br />hydrologist for the United States Geological Survey recommended a dam
<br />at Glen Canyon to contain the wild Colorado.' Political realities, however,
<br />dictated that no river development would take place until each state was
<br />assured a chance to acquire a fair share of the river water.s The Colorado
<br />River Compact of 1922 (Compact) apportioned the w~ters of the river
<br />between the upper basin states and the lower basin states.9 The boundary
<br />between the two basins was set at Lees Ferry, a point downstream of Glen
<br />Canyon near the Utah-Arizona border.1o By allocating the Colorado
<br />River's flow, the Compact provided some protection for the six upstream
<br />states against the explosive growth in CaliFornia and thus the possible loss
<br />
<br />1d.
<br />
<br />6. GCPA ~ 1802(a). Congress has identified the Grand Canyon as "an object of scientific
<br />interest, being the greatest eroded canyon within the VnitedStates" and warned unauthorized persons
<br />"not to appropriate, injure or destroy any feature" of the monument. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION,
<br />OPERATIO:>! OF GLEN CAl"\ON DAM-DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 5-6 (1994)
<br />[hereinafter EIS]. See also 16 U.s.C. U 221, 228a (1988). Glen Canyon Natural Recreation Area
<br />was established to -provide for public outdoor recreation use and enjoyment of Lake PoweU and lands
<br />adjacent thereto... and 10 preserve scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to public
<br />enjoyment of the area." 16 V.S.C. S %Odd.
<br />
<br />7. RUSSELL MARTIN, ASTORY THAT STANDS LIKE A DAM: GLEN CANYON AND THE STRUGGLE
<br />FOR THE SOUL Of THE WEST 2()"21 (1989).
<br />8. See COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE GLEN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ET .ilL
<br />COLORADO RIVER ECOLOGY AND DAM MAN"GEMENT 13 (1991) (hereinafter GCES COMMITTHi:
<br />9. Id. The upper basin states are Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The lower basin
<br />states are Arizona, Califomia, and Nevada.
<br />10. TheCompactguarantees the lower basin states a f1owof75 million acre feet (maO every ten
<br />years, or 7.5 maf annually. David H. Getches, Competing Demands for the Colorado River, 56 U.
<br />COLO. L REV.413,417 (1985). Additionally, a subsequent agreement with Mexico requires delivery I
<br />of 1.5 mafta that country with the obligation allocated between the upper basin and lower basin. See
<br />Treatywith Mexico, T.s. No. 994, 59 Stat. 1219 (1944). The totalamountofwaterthat must therefore
<br />be delivered to the lower basin is appnmmately 8.25 mar annually. Getches, suprQ at 417_19.
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />,,\\
<br />
<br />"
<br />., 'J'
<br />
<br />
|