J'l '13rief 2listory of a£mrg 7Jelme: Fifty Years ofOpposition to Glen Canyon Dam By Mathew Barrett Gross In November of 1996, when David Brower convinced the from the CRSP; the Sierra Club had also won a proviso in Sierra Club's Board of Directors to endorse the draining of the CRSP for a dam to be built to protect Rainbow Bridge Powell Reservoir, an idea that had previously been held by National Monument, which was in danger of being a relatively select group of river runners, environmentalists, encroached upon by the rising waters behind Glen Canyon and Edward Abbey fans was hoisted on the American Dam. Thus, at least publicly, the Sierra Club never relented public. That same year had seen the founding of the Glen on its main objective of protecting the national park system. Canyon Institute, and, less than a year later, hearings were held in the U.S. House of Representatives on the merits of Having achieved victory at Echo Park, however, it the Sierra Club's proposal. To those unfamiliar with the soon became clear to many that Glen Canyon, though not controversy that surrounds Glen Canyon Dam, the a part of the park system, was a place of undeniable proposal may well have seemed to come from nowhere. In beauty, worthy of protection in its own right. Among those fact, however, the Sierra Club's proposal, the founding of who came to this realization was David Brower, then­ Glen Canyon Institute, and the recent formation of the Glen Executive Director of the Sierra Club, who felt a sense of Canyon Action Network are but chapters in a longer story personal responsibility for the Glen's loss. of opposition to the inundation of Glen Canyon. The 1960's were a time of anguish for those who Although Glen Canyon was first suggested as a knew and loved the Glen before the dam, but, by the end dam site in 1919 by E.C. LaRue, Chief Hydrologist of the of the decade, that anguish had given way to anger. In U.S. Geological Survey, it wasn't until the introduction of 1970, Friends of the Earth and Ken Sleight sued the the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) legislation in federal government for allowing the waters of the reservoir 1949 that the likelihood of a dam in Glen Canyon became to enter nearby Rainbow Bridge National Monument, in serious enough to warrant organized opposition. In 1954, a violation of the CRSP. The District court sided with the group of environmentalists in Utah, led by Ken Sleight, environmentalists, but the decision was reversed by the formed the Friends of Glen Canyon, whose objective was Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Sleight and Friends of the to revive a near-forgotten 1938 proposal for a 4.5 million Earth appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the court acre national monument that would encompass Glen refused to hear the case, and the water rose into Rainbow Canyon and much of the Escalante region. Bridge National Monument. Friends of Glen Canyon failed, obviously, to reach 1975 saw the publication of Edward Abbey's The their objective, and their failure was as much a result of Monkey Wrench Gang, a novel that (arguably) introduced a loose organization as it was a result of being drowned out new generation of outdoor enthusiasts to what was lost by the famed battle for Echo Park. When first introduced in behind the dam. Many observers have pointed to the novel Congress, the Colorado River Storage Project legislation as influential in the formation of the environmental group contained provisions to build a dam at Echo Park, in Earth First!, and thus it is appropriate, given the focus of Dinosaur National Monument (as well as at Glen Canyon, the novel upon the destruction of Glen Canyon Dam, that Flaming Gorge, and Bridge Canyon). It was the proposal to Earth First! launched itself into the headlines by unfurling a build a dam inside a unit of the National Park System, three-hundred foot plastic "crack" along the front of the however, that sparked a national debate. For six years, the dam in 1981. Sierra Club, the Wilderness Society, and a coalition of nearly seventy environmental groups from around the Like many Earth First! actions, "cracking" the dam nation worked to defeat the Echo Park proposal, and they was both creative and confrontational. By 1997, however, eventually won. The success of the battle to save Echo the movement to drain Powell Reservoir, led by the Glen Park was galvanizing-- historians mark the Echo Park Canyon Institute, had advanced beyond theatrics and into debate as the birth of the modem environmental movement the realm of hard science. Currently, the Institute is in the United States. conducting a Citizen's Environmental Analysis, based on NEPA guidelines, to study the effects of draining Powell It should be noted, however, that there was never Reservoir. Concurrently, the newly-formed Glen Canyon a "trade" of Echo Park for Glen Canyon. Glen Canyon was Action Network is working to build grassroots support for always in the CRSP legislation, and the objective of the the restoration of Glen Canyon. Thus the movement to Sierra Club and its coalition during the CRSP debate was drain Lake Powell is alive and well, and, forty-six years the protection of the integrity of the park system. When the after the formation of Ken Sleight's ragtag group, Glen CRSP was passed by a slim Congressional majority on Canyon still has its share of friends. March 1, 1956, the Echo Park dam proposal was gone 24 Thank you Mathew for your contribution. GlEN CANYON ACTION NETWORK MEDIA ADVISORY For Immediate Release Contact: Owen Lammers February 11,2000 (435) 259-1063 Technical, Economic and Legal Hurdles to Draining lake Powell not lnsunnountable, but Polmcs ceuld be, New AnaiVSis Reveals The Stanford Environmental Law problem facing the Sierra Club's costs of draining Lake Powell." Journal recently published an 88- proposal. page analysis of the Sierra Club's ENVIRONMENT: In sum, 1996 proposal to restore Glen POWER: Although Glen environmental costs and benefits Canyon on the Colorado River by Canyon's raw generating capacity associated with draining Lake draining Lake Powell reservoir. of 1,300 MW is impressive, it is Powell are presently unclear. not irreplaceable .... Furthermore, Here, perhaps more than any The extensively researched there is currently significant other issue, our current analysis titled, "Undamming Glen surplus of power in the Colorado knowledge is severely insufficient Canyon: Lunacy, Rationality, or Plateau region, so there would be to accurately evaluate the Prophecy" was written by Scott a significant amount of time to consequences. At the same time, Miller, an attorney with the Office find alternative sources of raw the [Colorado] Plateau's native ofthe Solicitor General, U.S. power. By the time additional fishes, the Sea of Cortez's vaquita Department of the Interior. Mr. sources of power are needed the and totoaba, and the delta itself Miller examined: existing laws life-span of Glen Canyon Dam's may not wait for decades of pertaining to the management of powerplant may be considerably study. the Colorado River; technical and reduced; in a few hundred years, economic issues pertaining to accumulated sediments will CONCLUSIONS: This anticipated impacts on water completely eliminate power preliminary analysis of water, storage and energy supply; and production from Glen Canyon power, recreation, and the the variety of impacts associated Dam. environment reveals that some of with changes in the recreational the common assumptions about uses within Glen Canyon. Some RECREATION: Perhaps the most the importance of Glen Canyon key findings are excerpted below. fundamental question concerning Dam and Lake Powell may not be recreation, however, is how much accurate. Even so, analysis has its LAW OF THE RIVER: Ifwe take recreation do we really want on limitations. There are values a close look at the [Sierra Club] Lake Powell and in the Grand involved that simply cannot be proposal, we may find that there Canyon? ... The two-and-a-half balanced with dollars or any other is flexibility still hidden in the million visitors to Lake Powell economic valuations .... Just look rigid Law of the River. We may leave an extraordinary amount to the Florida Everglades, where also find crucial benefits to mak­ of trash on the beaches and on the the federal and state governments ing the Law of the River itself lake. Along Lake Powell's 2,000 have already spent $3.5 billion more flexible. miles of coastline there are only and plan to dedicate nearly $8 forty-six restrooms. Fouled by billion more to habitat restoration, WATER: Practically speaking, human waste, beaches along the or the Columbia River where $3 the effects of draining Lake lake are periodically closed. billion already has been spent Powell on water Visitors consume about five trying [to] save and restore the availability are surprisingly million gallons of gas on their salmon and steelhead. minimal, though not altogether Lake Powell vacations each year. absent. Politically ... Perhaps present recreation "Although preliminary, Miller's speaking, however, effects on should be limited in any case. analysis represents the best water use are the most difficult Doing so might also limit any compilation of facts to date 25 concerning the proposal to drain ecosystems in the Grand any official government position Lake Powell. The barriers to a Canyon," said Lisa Force, of the on the future of Glen Canyon restored Glen Canyon are not so Tucson-based Center for Dam. The Stanford much technical or economic, as Biological Diversity, the nation's Environmental Law Journal also political.