|
<br />of the river, has an additional source
<br />of waste: "bank storage," absorption of
<br />water into the porous rock of the shores.
<br />The engineers estimated it at 15 per
<br />cent. In January 1965 it was reported
<br />at 25 per cent. Any reservoir, moreover,
<br />steadily loses efficiency either through
<br />slumping of talus slopes and friable
<br />strata, or through silting, both of which
<br />decrease the volume of water stored in
<br />proportion to its surface area.
<br />~p turn wP"t rbm.hn;ln;nll' hurea1L<;
<br />of t e federal l!overnment are the Bu-
<br />reau of Reclamation and the f
<br />!!;l~eerS, t ir , t e. Soil Conserva-
<br />tion ervice, is relatively unimportant.)
<br />The first was authorized by the New-
<br />lands Act of 1902, to impound and dis-
<br />tribute irrigation water for the recla-
<br />mation of arid land. The second "just
<br />growed," transferring its activities from
<br />military to civilian works, principally
<br />flood control, as the West was pacified.
<br />Some people think the Engineers should
<br />have been out of business in the West
<br />when the last Indians entered reserva-
<br />
<br />tions. Some think the Bureau of Recla-
<br />mation has done all its essential work
<br />and should dissolve.
<br />But no bureau, once established, has
<br />ever dissolved, and none has willingly
<br />dwindled. Both the Engineers and Re-
<br />clamation are still immensely powerful,
<br />and they remain competitive. Though
<br />the one technically deals in Hood control
<br />dams and the other in irrigation dams;
<br />both in practice build multipurpose
<br />dams whose costs are largely paid out
<br />over the years by the sale of hydro
<br />power. It is of the essence that neither
<br />is authorized by law to build any kind
<br />of power. plant but a hydro plant inci-
<br />dental to a dam. To survive. both must
<br />build dams. To persuade Congress to
<br />authorize dams they must guarantee
<br />economic and saleable hydro power. To
<br />guarantee maximum power efficiency
<br />they must plan higher dams, and since
<br />the easiest and most logical sites have
<br />already been built on, the new projects
<br />grow more and more grandiose, involv-
<br />ing main-stem rivers and even whole
<br />
<br />- ~O-
<br />
<br />river systems. And while this enlarge.
<br />ment goes on, the irrigated fields pro-
<br />duce larger surpluses and the price sub.
<br />sidies grow. One is reminded of George
<br />Santayana's definition of a fanatic: One
<br />who redoubles his efforts as he loses
<br />sight of his aim.
<br />Not unnaturally, critics of any dam
<br />proposal scrutinize it for optimistic fig-
<br />uring of cost-benefit ratios and POwer
<br />sales probabilities and hidden write-offs,
<br />and they suspect that, in the circum-
<br />stances, bureaus forced by law to soln.
<br />every water and power problem by :1
<br />dam with a maximum power capacit\'
<br />may overlook alternative solutions to th~
<br />problem as well as public values that
<br />compete with water and power. Pure
<br />power dams, like the defunct Echo
<br />P;p'k and the proposed Bridge Canyon,
<br />always stimulate private power compa-
<br />nies to offer to produce power at a com-
<br />petitive price from local coal or gas
<br />reserves, at no cost to the taxpayer.
<br />Rampart Dam, which it is estimated
<br />would cost a billion and a third dollars
<br />( and these estima tes are characteris-
<br />tically low) would produce enormom
<br />amounts of power a long way from mar.
<br />kets and of dubious saleability, at the
<br />cost of displacing some Indians, drown-
<br />ing out the breeding ground of millions
<br />of migratory wildfowl, and destroying
<br />the salmon run of the Yukon system
<br />above the damsite. Opponents say Alas-
<br />ka's power needs could be amply sup-
<br />, plied from Alaskan coal and natural gas.
<br />Bridge Canyon, designed to produce
<br />power to pump water from Lake Havasu
<br />into the fields of Maricopa and Pinal
<br />counties, Arizona, to produce further
<br />cotton surpluses, is by the arguments of
<br />conservationists absolutelv unnecessarv.
<br />since the consortium of 'private pow~r
<br />cDmpanies known as WEST has offered
<br />to produce competitive power from local
<br />coal.
<br />
<br />IN none of these pro~ects has water
<br />bppn a ~on~irlpr~ltinn R nn P-<:l..lr HJQuld
<br />hrJ-ve nrnvidpd nonp R,;(lq~ rnn)'on
<br />would nrovide none. both would have
<br />w,,&:"rorl conrno hy ~p1"~~(Hn~ it nut And
<br />the last thin!! Alaskans need is mort'
<br />wa.tar. So if a dam produces no water,
<br />and if the power can be produced in
<br />other ways, it begins to seem a needles.;
<br />desecration to inundate superb scenery.
<br />especially scenery that, as in the Echo
<br />Park and Bridge Canyon proposals, is
<br />part of the ~ational Park System, guar.
<br />anteed by Congress against any sort (If
<br />"impairment."
<br />In defense of their projects, the bu-
<br />reaus emphasize the outdoor recreation
<br />and the beauty that their reservoirs cre-
<br />ate. Floyd Dominy, commissioner of the
<br />Bureau of.Heclamation, recentfv took (ll
<br />aggressive public relations in d~fense of
<br />Lake Powell, created by the Glen Call-
<br />yon Dam, and in a glossy brochurecele-
<br />
|