WSP01516 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . ,-~ ~..) -t(~,. :~ .:"J 5 must be considered. It thl! cost ot providing thl! present operation ot Glen Canyon Da~ is the 1088 or destruction ot the Grand Canyon. then that price is too high. The thrust of the EIS and the decision to be made at Glen Canyon is not to do away with power production. Rather it must be to r.quire that the energy be produced in a way that will best maintain the irreplaceable values ot the Grand Canyon and the quality ot the river experience within it. Below .e this .anaged river tlows on. over gravel bare that now host spawning rainbow trout. on. benefit of the changes that have be.n mad.. Yet e~en as the cold water trom the depths or the ~~ke supports trou~. the varyjng flows'expose spawning bed., strand adult fish. and fruatrate tishermen. Isn't th.re wisdom in doing the beet with what we have? Isn't there a rel/ponsibility tor the natural resources we have chosen to affect? And, at Gl.n Canyon DaD, a public project. ian't there a need tor a kinder hand at the controls? There is a decision to b. .ade, and a time to be a part ot that decision. The is.ue is clear. Th~ p~esent method ot operating the daa, particularly peaking power releases. i. causing serious d...g. to the Grand canyon. Operation of the d_ can b. changed consistent with Colorado River Compact requirements. The Bureau of Reclaaation and the Western Area Po~er Administration have asserted that power has pr imacy over other resources. That assertion is contrary to law, reasonable public policy, and goer:! sense. What can be done about it? The Bureau should prepare a sound. comprehensive, scientifically valid, objective !nvironaental Impact Statement. Planning to complete a Draft EIS by Dec.mber ot 1991 is not unreasonable, but the Secretary ot the Interior should co_it now to add whatever tille is needed to tbat schedule baaed on the results of the scoping procees and the requireients 'of the scientific ressarchers to provide essential data. Attempting to complete a Final !IS and reach a decision prior to December ot 1992 is unreasonable and foolish. Equally important, the researchers must b. provided with flows that they need tor study in the river. In the past, the Bureau and WAPA have been reluctant to provide test flows. That must change, and tor the research period such test flows must be the priority tor dam operations. There will be a cost to changing dam operations. Ultilllate energy users, including me when I turn on the lights in my office to write this, will pay more for electricity. It would . be good to Ienow what that cost really is. but up to now information prOVided by the energy producers has been unreliable ~:' ,- :f '; "> ,".', :1 l;; ~-~; ~ ~t '''I ';7>,1 , 'J','.' pC! ~.~"" ,~.~ , "" ." ~ I "'"r- ;..-' "';'. :,".; ~,~ '''I t,.' I l":', ~. '*': ",- ;~ I ,fj ~.' :<~ ,I - -'