HOT TOPICS CAFÉ

THREATS TO THE GRAND CANYON

Thursday, November 17, 2016 6 - 7:30 p.m. Museum of Northern Arizona Facilitated by Jona Vance, Director, Philosophy in the Public Interest 2 PROGRAM

6:00 p.m. Welcome and Introduction Jona Vance, Director, Philosophy in the Public Interest 6:05 p.m. Presentation of Information NAU Grand Canyon Semester, student presentations 1) The Troublesome Trout 2) One a Scale of 1 - 10 How Invasive is it? 3) Deer Creek and the Intersection of Recreation and Traditional Cultural Properties 4) Native Culture in the Grand Canyon: Are We Losing It? 5) The Impacts of Water Extraction for Development in Tusayan, AZ 6:30 p.m. Round Table Discussions NAU Grand Canyon Semester Full Circle Questions: What values are at stake? Who shares these values? Where should we go from here? 7:05 p.m. Open Dialogue and Recap of Discussion

SPECIAL THANKS TO OUR PARTNERS, SUPPORTERS AND VENUE HOSTS! 3

The Troublesome Trout

Researched by Eric Blair and Victoria Hess ecosystem for the endangered species, like the humpback chub, to respawn and come back to the ecosystem (NPS 2016) The program uses either weirs THESIS: (fish traps) or electro-fishing in order to remove the Within Grand Canyon National Park, it is essential for presence of trout within the main spawning creek. all of the trout to be eradicated from the Colorado River in order to recover the aquatic ecosystem through innovative species management and through The trout have provided huge economic boom for cooperation with surrounding native cultures. nearby cities to the National Park like Page and Tusayan. It also has created a strong fishermen culture around the River as multiple blogs across the internet are devoted to the trout fishing in the Grand KEY TERMS Canyon. Invasive Species A species that is: 1) non-native (or alien) to the Although it is estimated by the Park Service that the ecosystem under consideration and. 2) whose trout living in the river have actually decreased in introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or size, programs have been put in place in order to environmental harm or harm to human health determine how Glen Canyon Dam is affecting the (Executive Order 13112). fishery and are giving suggestions towards how the dam can be better managed towards the benefit of Ecosystem the trout. A complex set of relationships among the living resources, habitats, and residents of an area. It In a study done by Yard et. al., groups of trout includes plants, trees, animals, fish, birds, populations were tested for stomach content and the microorganisms, water, soil, and people data was sorted for analysis. According to the study, (forest.mtu.edu). the proportion of fish eaten in the category of vertebrate prey was about 90.3 percent. Out of that 90.3 percent, only 22 percent was actually BACKGROUND identifiable and that could be given a species label. Out of that 22 percent, humpback chub was actually 27.3 percent of the content. Although that is only a INFORMATION third, it is the largest percentage of preyed-on fish that was identifiable within the trout stomachs (Yard, In 2016 the budget to deal with the invasive species 477). On emphasis, that means nonnative trout have of trout in the Colorado River was just over a million been consuming - around the time of this study - an dollars and by 2017, it will increase to just over one average of 85 percent more native and possibly and half million dollars (USBR 2016). endangered fish than nonnative fish. The Bright Angel Creek Trout Reduction Project was designed to reduce the number of non-native brown and rainbow trout in the creek to provide a stable

What is your opinion about killing all of the trout DISCUSSION that is now in the Colorado River? QUESTIONS What are the unforeseen cultural/economical/physical/social costs from removing all these trout? Who should be responsible for the negative impacts caused by the trout introduction? How can we better manage the balance of native and non-native species in this habitat? 4

STOMACH CONTENTS of: 5

On a Scale of 1 - 10 How Invasive is it?

Researched by Paige Lighthipe, Andrea Smith Southwestern Willow Flycatcher and LeAnn Zuniga A songbird native to Southwestern states that was officially listed as endangered in 1995 due to INTRO INFORMATION: extreme habitat loss along riparian zones. Tamarisk was listed as an invasive species after its introduction in the late 1800s. BACKGROUND Triggered an aggressive social reaction and management regime by the mid-20th Century. INFORMATION Tamarisks are very adaptable to different habitats, The southwestern willow flycatcher is an endangered meaning they can grow in diverse and widespread bird that has adopted tamarisk as its new habitat, after areas. The tamarisk has a similar physical structure having more than 80% of its native habitats destroyed. to native plants providing adequate, or sometimes preferred habitats for the southwestern willow The negative stigma surrounding the tamarisk is flycatcher. leading to undue harm to the environment because of the vigorous reaction it has caused. There is often an initial negative social and management reaction to invasive species. Invasive We make the argument that due to the Tamarisks’ species such as the tamarisk lead to aggressive social integration into riparian areas it should be further action and opinion. It has been found that language studied and selectively removed. and terms regarding invasive species and immigration often parallel each other.

Executive Order 13112 gives a legal definition to KEY TERMS invasive species, under which tamarisk falls. The southwestern willow flycatcher, which often nests in Non-native Species tamarisk, is protected under the Endangered Species A species introduced into a habitat outside of its Act, which allows for ecosystem protection. natural range. Non-native species could have been introduced intentionally or unintentionally, and may result in beneficial or negative impacts on the Tamarisk beetle and other management strategies environment in which it was introduced. (fire, chemical) were management decisions made with little prior research. This poses a management Riparian Ecosystem conundrum when tamarisk removal begins to cause habitat loss for species like the endangered Vegetation or habitat associated with bodies of water southwestern willow flycatcher. or the existence of intermittent surface or groundwater drainage. Hawks Aloft, Inc. Photo: Tim Carlson, Tiff Over Tamarisk Tamarisk (saltcedar) General term for several species of shrubs native to Eurasia and Africa, and considered invasive to the Southwestern United States. It was introduced in the early Twentieth Century as a method of erosion control.

Tamarisk Beetle (saltcedar beetle) Biocontrol introduced by the Department of Agriculture in 2001 and defoliates the tamarisk. The beetle is considered one of the better management alternatives to tamarisk removal. 6

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Are tamarisks invasive? If you had to rate tamarisk as an invasive species on a scale of 1-10 how would you rate it? What can we learn from the tamarisk and southwestern willow flycatcher that can be applied to other relationships between invasive and endangered species? How can we redefine how we view invasive species, officially and/or socially? What do you propose is a better way to manage tamarisk? 7

“It is a spot of reverence. . .Tribal youth are taught that when you die, your spirit goes to Deer Creek. You don’t fully understand it ‘til you see it” Charlie Bullets, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Deer Creek and the Intersection of Recreation and Traditional Cultural Properties

Researched by Molly Carney and Dan Cameron with landscapes putting cultural and natural values before recreation. THESIS: Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) The narrative of recreating in the Grand Canyon A Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) is a must change; an ideological shift to place based property/landscape that is eligible for inclusion in recreating must occur, alongside respecting the National Register of Historic Places based on its mandation, resulting in a behavioral change, associations with the cultural practices, traditions, allowing for cultural healing and preservation to beliefs, ways of life, arts, crafts, or social institutions occur within sensitive areas, such as Deer Creek. of a living community. Hopi Tribe A TCP is eligible by 1) rooted in that community’s ASSOCIATED Zuni Tribe history, and 2) important in maintaining the Hualapai Tribe continuing cultural identity of a community. Southern Paiute Tribe TRIBES Southern Paiute Consortium (SPC) A group created by the Kaibab area tribes that integrates cultural and tribal values into federal monitoring efforts. In addition to ecological KEY TERMS responses to Glen Canyon Dam this group monitors Sacred Landscape impacts from recreationists in the Grand Canyon. An area where spiritual power is separated throughout the environment in general, although Backcountry Management Plan there are interconnected special places that form an A current policy made by Grand Canyon National intersection between physical and spiritual worlds. Park in the final stages of decision periods. This plan outlines several different directions that the park Place Based Recreation could take management goals in the future with A new understanding of how we recreate and engage varying use restrictions for the backcountry. 8

BACKGROUND CURRENT STATUS of INFORMATION DEER CREEK Deer Creek is a culturally significant space in Grand “Climbing and/or rappelling in the creek narrows, Canyon National Park. Until a recent policy shift with or without the use of ropes or other technical canyoneers were recreating in the narrows of the equipment is prohibited. This restriction extends canyon. The narrows are now closed but hikers and within the creek beginning at the southeast end of river runners are still able to access the patio area of the rock ledges, known as the “Patio” to the base of the canyon. Deer Creek Falls (National Parks Service).”

Culturally significant spaces are formed over years of occupancy and use by native groups in the Grand PROPOSED STATUS Canyon. Many of these places are being heavily recreated in and damaged by physical and spiritual CHANGES impacts of visitors. Alternative A (current) As in Compendium, reviewed annually Recreation groups such as canyoneers are adamantly opposed to restrictions of their access Alternative B due to the precedent of their use. Taking away their Permanent restriction access now inflames tempers and creates hostility toward area tribes. Alternative C Unrestricted access The National Park service is currently shifting their Alternative D management strategy for culturally significant places Same as B and restricted patio to one river trip at a time to accommodate tribal values. CONCLUSION DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Deer Creek is a prime case study for the Is there a need for a balance between recreation fundamental change in ideology that needs to happen when approaching sacred landscapes. Using and cultural properties in Grand Canyon? a place first approach, recreationalist and Indigenous How can we shift recreators perspective of cultural peoples will be able to co-inhabit culturally delicate landscapes to include place based recreation? areas with minimal tension. It is vital to respect the spiritual sensitivity of a property first, recreation How do we find a balance between western policy comes second. and traditional values in the Grand Canyon? What steps can be taken to integrate current cultural perspectives into the visitor's experience? 9

Native Culture in the Grand Canyon: Are We Losing It?

Researched by Kellesey Jane, Abbey Johnson, and Megan Romanchok ENVIRONMENTAL Development within the canyon is causing a loss of THREATS Native American cultural identity due to differing views of what constitutes sacred land, the financial Deer Creek disparity of many tribes who see land as sacred, and Recreation: degradation of natural structures and the cultural and environmental impacts of native plants from climbing equipment. development and increased visitation. Confluence Light pollution, Noise Pollution affecting the wildlife in the area, Waste from restaurants and humans, Litter, Groundwater pumping affecting seeps and KEY TERMS springs, degradation from riverwalk, endangerment Confluence to threatened species. Where the Little Colorado and Colorado River join. Deer Creek A side canyon along the northeast side of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon held sacred by the Paiute (Brennan et. al.). Escalade Project Development plan for a gondola-style tram attraction that would take up to 3 million people down from the east rim to the confluence area per year, hotels, commercial businesses, and a riverwalk. PEOPLE and THEIR SACRED PLACES There are multiple sacred landscapes in and around the Grand Canyon. These Include: The Confluence of the Colorado River and the Little Colorado River and Deer Creek.

The threats facing these sacred landscapes include: The Escalade Project, cnyoneering and foot traffic.

These threats have a bigger impact on Native American culture. Native American culture and religious beliefs are place-based. If these places are destroyed, the culture will be lost. 10

Escalade Project Plan

HOW ARE THESE STATISTICS: PLACES PROTECTED? DEER CREEK Deer Creek The policy and management of Deer Creek is Traditional Cultural Property. currently under review for the update of the Legislation Protecting Deer Creek. Backcountry Management Plan. Confluence There is not much. The proposal is on Navajo land and some tribal members support the Escalade STATISTICS: Project. Bennet Freeze and agreement between Navajo and CONFLUENCE Hopi. There are three endangered species that will be Tribal Council Vote. threatened further by the Escalade Project: Razorback Sucker, Humpback Chub, Mexican Spotted Owl.

This project will cost the Navajo Nation $65 million according to the Save the Confluence website. 11

The Impacts of Water Extraction for Development in Tusayan, AZ

Researched by Adrian Skabelund, Savannah Hook, of the town was owned by two families, the and Mark Streeter Halversons and Thurstons, until the town’s incorporation. A constant struggle between development and conservation creates an ever present threat to the There are now multiple development proposals from Grand Canyon. Tusayan developments are a both Stilo Group and the Town of Tusayan. The Stilo microcosm of the larger regional conversation about Proposal is at Kotzin Ranch while the Towns water-rights and use regulations in the Western developments are at Kotzin Ranch and Ten X Ranch. United States. The Town’s development at Ten X Ranch is already BACKGROUND starting. The “Kaibab Village” proposal raises the town’s consumption from an annual use of 175 acre-feet of INFORMATION water to 681 acre-feet of annual water use by 2024. Tusayan is located just south of the entrance to the Grand Canyon springs support biological South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park. communities with diversity 100 to 500 times that of The Town of Tusayan was incorporated in April of the surrounding landscape. 2010 and created the ability for the town to acquire Out of the 1800 total species found within the Grand land from the Stilo Group. Canyon, around ten percent of them survive solely at The 2010 census reports, the town's population was the springs, and many are endemic. only 558 and from end to end it covers no more than 144 acres. Until very recently the town itself owned almost no land and still provides no services to its residents. All 12

TIMELINE of TUSAYAN DEVELOPMENTS: 1920 1994 2010 2015 Town Settlement Canyon Forest Village Proposal Town Incorporation Stilo Proposal

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS When it comes to new developments, what do you feel is the balance between providing service to visitors and protecting the park?

Do private corporations have a responsibility to balance these concerns or is this the realm of the federal government alone? How should the town’s desire to build homes and a community be handled?

Where should the water come from? Colorado River pipeline, groundwater extraction in Tusayan, trucked in water from Valle or elsewhere. Which is the lesser evil?

Is it reasonable to suggest that all future development should forever cease in Tusayan?

Recurring threat to the Grand Canyon: How can we protect the Grand Canyon from threats that never truly go away?

Full Circle Questions

To be perceived as threatening, something must be What values are at stake? contrary to the perceiver's goals or values. For example, losing your job is threatening if you need Who shares these values? the job to live well. But if you have a better job available and are looking for a reason to leave, being Where should we go from here? let go may be desirable rather than threatening. NOTES:

NAU’s Philosophy in the Public Interest is non partisan and does not endorse any position with respect to the issues we discuss. Philosophy in the Public Interest is a convener for civil discourse.

Contact us: 928-523-8339 | [email protected] | nau.edu/ppi SOURCES

Cohn, Jeffrey P. “Tiff over Tamarisk: Can a Nuisance Be Nice, Too?” BioScience, vol. 55, no. 8, 2005, pp. 648–654. Hatten, James R. "A Satellite Model of Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax Traillii Extimus) Breeding Habitat and a Simulation of Potential Effects of Tamarisk Leaf Beetles (Diorhabda Spp.), Southwestern United States." USGS Publications Warehouse RSS. N.p., 8 Aug. 2016. Web. 26 Oct. 2016. National Invasive Species Information Center. "Invasive Species: About NISIC - What Is an Invasive Species?" United States Department of Agriculture. N.p., 24 May 2016. Web. 29 Oct. 2016. Sahagun, Louis. "Lawsuit Filed to Protect Endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher." Los Angeles Times. N.p., 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 25 Oct. 2016. Shafroth, Pat. "Tamarisk Tensions." BioScience 55.10 (2005): 822. JSTOR. Web. 29 Oct. 2016. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan. Albuquerque, New Mexico. i-ix + 210 pp., Appendices A-O Betz, Eric. "Park Service to Tusayan: Where Is the Water?" Arizona Daily Sun. N.p., 28 Feb. 2014. Web. 26 Oct. 2016. Clark, Roger. “Submit Your Comments on Road to Tusayan Development.” Grand Canyon Trust. 11 May 2015. Web. 10 Nov. 2016. Duthie, Eric. Personal interview. 17 October 2016. Grand Canyon National Park, Division of Science and Resource Management. “Issues and Concerns Regarding Proposed Groundwater Developments Near the South Rim.” United States Department of Interior. 4-25. 6 June 2016. Web. 27 Oct. 2016. Rice, Steven E. "Springs and Seeps: The Life Source of Grand Canyon." Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia (2005): n. pag. Canyon Views, 2013. Web. 27 Oct. 2016. Tusayanfuture. "“Downtown Tusayan” Coming Soon?" Tusayan's Future: Building a Better Tomorrow. Tusayanfuture, nd. Web. 26 Oct. 2016.