Laserfiche WebLink
<br />r--- <br /> <br />...-' <br /> <br />c;:l <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />M~:.~\ <br />C. (;(J <br /> <br />~i~) <br /> <br />Monument from the original 80 acres to 203,885 acres. The pro- <br />clamation includes a proviso, interpreted by many, to allow for <br />the construction of Echo Park and Split Mountain Reservoirs. (9) <br />Proponents of the expansion immediately seek appropriations for a <br />road to the quarry area. (10) <br /> <br />1946 TO 1950--The U. S. Bureau of Reclamation features Echo Park <br />and Split Mountain in its comprehensive Colorado River Basin Plan. (11) <br />The two projects combined would initially produce the equivalent <br />of some 2.4 million barrels of oil a year in hydroelectric generation <br />and the Commissioner of Reclamation cites the national emergency <br />(Korea) and indicates that construction of the projects could assist <br />in meeting power demand for defense purposes. (12) <br /> <br />1950 TO 1956--The organized environmental movement, led by. the <br />Sierra Club, attacks the project as a violation of the National Park <br />System, marshals forces from throughout the nation to stop considera- <br />tion of the two projects, and urges construction of alternative <br />dam sites, chiefly Cross Mountain. As proposed at that time, Cross <br />Mountain is a 5.2 million acre-foot reservoir that would inundate <br />the town of Maybell and back water up to the town of Craig, a <br />distance of some 79 miles. Environmentalists in an unrelenting <br />attack, led by the Sierra Club, degrade the power benefits of Echo <br />Park and Split Mountain, as well as the lesser evaporation losses of <br />those two projects as compared with others, while emphasizing that <br />no promise was made when the Monument was expanded and no considera- <br />tion should be given to projects in a Monument so long as such al- <br />ternatives as Cross Mountain exist. The battle is so fierce that <br />Senator Arthur V. Watkins, of utah, a strong proponent of the water <br />projects, ultimately concedes that regardless of the legal right to <br />construct the projects and regardless of ultimate victory in any <br />court battle, the pressure is too severe to attempt to build the <br />projects (see footnotes in text). <br /> <br />ECHO <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />ECHO <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />ECHO <br /> <br />ECHO <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />ECHO <br /> <br />FEBRUARY 14, 1977--The Colorado River Water Conservation District, <br />a l5-county, quasi-municipal entity, is issued a preliminary permit <br />to study the Juniper-Cross Mountain Hydroelectric Project by the <br />Federal Power Commission. The project is envisioned as two dams <br />covering essentially the same area as the previously proposed Cross <br />Mountain reservoir only much smaller--it does not inundate the town <br />of Maybell. <br /> <br />SEPTEMBER, 1979--Peak and Prairie, a publication of the Sierra <br />Club's Rocky Mountain Chapter, publishes a story on wild and Scenic <br />Rivers attributed to the American Wilderness Alliance. The story <br />urges a call to action and a propaganda campaign and states in part: <br />"A myriad of water and power projects threaten the Green and Yampa. <br />They would destroy or impair the outstanding natural values of the <br /> <br />-2- <br />