61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 1

Hidden Passage the journal of glen institute Issue XIII, Summer 2006 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 2

“ May Never Be Full Again”

Glen Canyon Institute by Wade Graham President S o read the front page headline of The Salt Lake Tribune,Sunday, April 2, 2006. It Richard Ingebretsen was not April Fools’ Day, but the Bureau of Reclamation reluctantly acknowledging — sotto voce,with no press conference, all the while playing it down — what GCI has Board of Trustees been saying since our hydrology study came in last spring: that there is no longer Mikhail Davis enough water to fill all 60 major reservoirs on the Colorado, much less both of the Ed Dobson Big Two, Mead and Powell. Wade Graham The new plan, agreed by the seven Basin states, is that the Lower Basin’s Margaret Hoffman will be topped up first by allowing annual releases from the Upper Basin’s Lake Nancy Jacques Powell exceeding the Compact-mandated “minimum objective release” of 8.23 mil- Rick Ridder lion acre-feet — until such time as Mead is considered full enough for comfort, at Lea Rudee which point the Lower Basin will accept less than the annual 8.23 for some period, Dave Wegner in order to partially refill Powell, second.In English, the idea is that when there is extra water, the Lower Basin will be taken care of first; then it will, in its turn, give up Development Director some more extra water to let the Upper Basin refill Powell in times of need. A mutual aid society. A lovely story. Amy Collins The first hitch is the “extra water.” This arrangement, while it claims to soberly cope with the new reality, ignores the basic fact that the demand curve (going up for Advisory Committee 100 years ) crossed the supply curve (going down for 100 years) in 2001-2, and the Dan Beard two will never meet again. The water users continue to believe that drought did it to Steve Black them, not the deficit of their own making. There may in future be “extra water” on Philmer Bluehouse Ryan Brown occasion, but not the majority of the time — that is, not enough of the time to refill Niklas Christensen both reservoirs. Even the most conservative hydrological assumptions make this clear Agustin Garza [see Hidden Passage XII,Spring 2005] — without even accounting for global warm- Peter Lavigne ing, any increment of which will push the system into gross deficit in a hurry. Katie Lee The second hitch is that — if protecting Mead is a priority, and it apparently is — Daniel McCool Powell can never be completely refilled, as the Bureau made clear by putting an Francis McDermott unprecedented limit on the ambitions of the Upper Basin: henceforth, it will aim to Bruce Mouro maintain Powell at a new high (“mean”) level of between 3,630 and 3,640 feet above Tom Myers sea level — 60-70 feet below full pool. Powell hit an historic low of 3,555 feet last Page Stegner Flake Wells year — 33% of live capacity and 145 feet low— and will perhaps rebound to 3,660 Bill Wolverton feet this summer, before falling again. What the announcement signifies is that, in spite of the diplomatic niceties, the Lower Basin will protect Mead at any cost, including now agreeing to give the Upper 1520 Sunnydale Lane Basin credit for any water in excess of 8.23 maf flowing past Lee’s Ferry. Their his- Salt Lake City, 84108 torical refusal to do so was the primary reason for building Dam, so tel (801) 363-4450 now we have come (nearly) full circle. Powell was never strictly necessary, and now fax (801)363-4451 it is being put on a lower shelf, with no one seeming too upset. [email protected] What happened? Up until a year ago, the Bureau had never prepared shortage cri- www.glencanyon.org teria, only surplus criteria, because it was convinced it was in the business of the busi- ness of its beneficiaries, selling optimism and business as usual; that the good times, Hidden Passage circa 1964, would always roll. Even after six years of drought, with the largest reser- Issue XIII Summer 2006 voirs on the river falling scarily below half-full and Las Vegas looking at hanging intakes, it clung to the fiction of “normal,” keeping the taps on full as though noth- Editor ing was happening. This year, the second year with “normal” or above-normal snow- Wade Graham pack, the pinch nevertheless began to sink in. Press coverage (much of it stoked and [email protected] fanned by Glen Canyon Institute, we would like to add) showed the public that the water system’s promise of no problem was a mirage. The water agencies themselves fear the future and one another — especially fearful are the smaller ones, vulnerable to drought, global warming and the machinations of their big brothers. Last year, we Cover: Hanging garden in cathedral in the Desert. Back Cover: Hole- page 2 in-the-Rock. Photos by Philip Hyde 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 3

brought the news to some of them, visiting with Dennis outside Alaska. It’s bigger than every national park in the lower Underwood at the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 48 states except Yellowstone, Olympic and Death Valley. That California and Pat Mulroy at the Southern Nevada Water means: bigger than (though not by much), big- Authority. None challenged our numbers, or, very convinc- ger than Glacier, bigger than Yosemite, bigger than North ingly, our assumptions. Cascades. That it is still relegated to the fourth-tier status of a Their new assumption, on the other hand, rests on the stan- National Recreation Area, its resources focused on three com- dard optimism: that they can refill both Mead, and to some mercial marinas, its backcountry open to drill rigs, is a travesty. extent, Powell. Over the medium term, it is more likely that it will be a problem to keep Mead full most of the time. Some of the time it will be full, and flood flows will be captured at . The latter’s only real function will be flood con- trol — consistent with the dam’s authorizing legislation, which mentions flood control as one purpose, but doesn’t mention recreation at all. Lake Powell will be a rump reservoir, in effect an overflow pond, a far cry from its brief career as “The Jewel of the Colorado.”Over the longer term, the depleted Colorado will often flow through the dam, either at dead pool, a run-of-the-river project delivering warmer but still sediment-free water to Grand Canyon, or with a sedi- ment bypass, effectively making the standing dam irrelevant. Lake Powell is going away, sooner or later. After 10 years of pointing this out, we can now be assured of this. The water users themselves, faced with the choice between Lake Mead, which In this issue is a remarkable photo essay by Bill Wolverton, directly supplies water and power to Las Vegas, Southern backcountry ranger at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area California and Central Arizona, and Lake Powell, which sup- and a pioneer GCI supporter, who has been hiking, studying plies water to virtually no one and power to a coddled few, will and photographing the guts of the Glen for 27 years. His elo- make the change for us. It’s not if, but when — and how, and quent timelines demonstrate Glen Canyon’s powerful ability to under what circumstances. And, most importantly, under what restore itself as the reservoir pulses and recedes. Here it is. stewardship of the fragile glories of the 1.25 million acres of There is no further argument needed about the Glen’s ability to Glen Canyon already managed by the National Park Service. restore itself. Also in this issue is Richard Ingebretsen on the Here is where the real battle now lies. Friends and lovers of the possible St. George pipeline, Dave Wegner on the Grand Glen and the Colorado Plateau must help bring their plight to Canyon lawsuit, and Steve Trimble on the legacy of the great the attention of people in 50 states and beyond — the land’s American photographer Philip Hyde. real owners. Publicize it, go see it, tell it on the mountain. Glen Believe it or not, the endgame for Glen Canyon is beginning. Canyon must become the nation’s fourth largest national park Stay with us. , May, 2005, looking down the extended boat ramp. photo by Wade Graham page 3 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 4

Glen Canyon Restored

Text and Photos by Bill Wolverton

“……we can shut down the Glen Canyon power plant, open the diversion tunnels, and drain the reservoir. This will no doubt expose a drear and hideous scene: immense mud flats and whole plateaus of sodden garbage strewn with dead trees, sunken boats, the skeletons of cattle and long-forgotten hatchery-bass fishermen. But to those who find the prospect too appalling I say, give Nature a little time. In five years, at most ten, the sun and wind and storms will cleanse and sterilize the repellent mess. The inevitable floods will soon remove all that does not belong within the . Fresh green willow and tamarisk, box elder, and red- bud will reappear; and the ancient drowned cottonwoods, (noble monuments to themselves) will be replaced by young of their own kind. With the renewal of plant life will come the insects, the birds, the lizards and snakes, the mammals. Within a generation – thirty years – I predict the river and the canyons will bear a decent resemblance to their former selves. Within the lifetimes of our children the living river, heart of the canyonlands, will be restored to us. The wilderness will again belong to the people.”

hese words of Edward Abbey’s were Coyote and no further. But when I got T published over a generation ago, home I found the Wilderness Society (Slickrock,Sierra Club Books, 1972) less magazine waiting in my mail with an than a decade after the diversion tunnel article by Phil Hyde confirming what gates of the dam in Glen Canyon were had happened: that Coyote had turned closed and the tunnels permanently out to be at a lower elevation than pre- plugged with concrete, and before its viously believed, and had been flooded reservoir, known as “Lake” Powell, had some 10 feet deep. even filled completely for the first time. The harm from this first brief inunda- It has now been 43 years since the death tion was fairly minor though, and by the of Glen Canyon. The reservoir took 17 time I came back again in September, years to fill initially, and has since been 1982 much of it had faded. The layer of drawn down and refilled several times in slime had washed out and the bathtub accordance with the vagaries of the ring was not as noticeable. I came back weather. Each significant drawdown has again in both March and May of 1983, given canyons that had been drowned a just before the big disaster when they chance to begin fulfilling Abbey’s pre- overfilled the reservoir in order to save dictions. So was he right? From what I the spillways from being torn out as they have seen, most emphatically yes. were used for the first time. I heard about I started as a Mechanical Engineer this, but after having seen the relatively with the Southern Pacific Railroad out minor effects and subsequent recovery in my home state of California, working from the first inundation, did not expect there 11 1/2 years before being laid off in Two-step waterfall in Davis Gulch, buried to see much more harm. the summer of 1982. I first visited the for decades under reservoir water and sedi- How wrong I was. Canyons, a remnant of ment, falling free again. The top step The next trip was a Sierra Club trip I Glen Canyon, in April, 1979, going down appeared sometime in 2003, and the lower led in April, 1984, first to Fools Canyon Coyote Gulch to the river before "Lake" step the following year, as floods flushed the and then down the river to Coyote. What Powell reached full pool for the first time sediment out. Note the height of the sedi- we found as we approached Coyote was and ruined the Coyote - Escalante con- ment terrace above the fall, and the remnant appalling - nothing but a vast mudflat fluence. I didn't realize it at the time but clinging to the wall on the left. At least 30 covering everything, the whole place I was hopelessly hooked on canyon feet have been washed out here. utterly ruined, the riverbanks and all but country after just that first trip. I the tallest vegetation buried. The amount returned in April, 1980, just before full pool was reached in June of mud carried by the river in just that one season was stagger- that year, and I came back for the third time in September, ing. It was hard to tell just how deep it was at the actual conflu- unaware of what had happened, and discovered the conse- ence because I didn’t know any good landmarks, but upstream at quences: the bathtub ring and a layer of slimy muck in the the log ladder that gets past a big boulder jam it became quite streambed in lower Coyote. I couldn't believe it at first, because clear just how disastrous it really was, and I nearly came unglued. the map showed the reservoir backing up only to the mouth of The outrage I felt was beyond description. I wanted to scream.

page 4 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 5

I had taken pictures of lower Coyote and the confluence with the snowpack on Boulder Mountain in quite a few years, setting the river on each of the previous trips, and I took a few more of this stage for a major runoff on the Escalante that spring. Then in just disaster. one short season most of what was left of the river mudflat was Over the next two years I led four more Sierra Club trips there, cut down, flushed down farther into the reservoir, leaving only and although they were all different, they each visited the con- perhaps 2 or 3 feet to go as near as I could tell. The summer fluence of Coyote and the Escalante. By 1986 I had about given floods then quickly flushed most of it out of lower Coyote, and up on finding another engineering job, couldn't stand the by the spring of 1997 it was beginning to look almost like it did California rat race anymore, and couldn't get enough of the before being flooded. Subsequently though, the reservoir rose canyons, so I packed up and moved to Escalante and immedi- again with some wetter years and, even though it never reached ately signed up as a volunteer for Glen Canyon National the level it had in 1983, it slowed the streams down so much that Recreation Area. After volunteering for about a year and a half I they could not keep the sediment moving, and by 2000 lower was hired by them as a seasonal ranger. Coyote was filled in with just about as much sediment as it had By 1987, after having endured the heartbreak of seeing one of been in 1983. The dry years since then, with the reservoir having the most special places I had ever known get ruined, I realized fallen to its lowest level since first being filled, have since allowed that much of the mud in lower Coyote was actually above the full Coyote to flush itself out almost completely. pool level of the reservoir, and that theoretically it should some- I eventually got into the rest of the lower side canyons of the day flush out. So I went back and carefully duplicated some of Escalante, plus a few others of the Glen, although not until they my original slides from before the ruination. I then went back had already been flooded to full pool by the reservoir, so I never each year and did the same thing with the key locations for com- saw them unspoiled. However, with subsequent major draw- parison and to see just how much progress was being made. It downs, especially the most recent one, I have witnessed Abbeys was painfully slow at first, because of high water in the reservoir “drear and hideous scene” transformed again into living, recov- and lack of any really good runoff on the Escalante. By February ering, beautiful canyons. The following photos are offered as evi- 1993 though, after a series of dry years, the reservoir had gone dence that perhaps Abbey was right in his prediction. The reader down almost 88 feet, the lowest it had been since first reaching can be the judge. full pool in June 1980, and the winter of 1992-93 left the biggest

LOWER COYOTE GULCH AT THE FARTHEST POINT REACHED BY THE RESERVOIR

April 28, 1980, before inundation. April 18, 1987, 4 years after the 1983 April 21, 2005, almost completely overfilling of the reservoir, still filled in flushed out, after several cycles of flush- with sediment deposited in 1983. ing and refilling.

page 5 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 6

ESCALANTE RIVER AT COYOTE GULCH

March 16, 1983, after 1980 initial April 27, 1984: Confluence of May 11, 1993: vegetation growth on filling of reservoir that flooded Coyote and the Escalante after the the mudflat 9 years later. Far more the confluence of Coyote Gulch 1983 overfilling, with everything than should be there, but not at all and the Escalante. Some evidence covered by mudflat. unlike the dense bottomlands along of that event can be seen in the the Green River and others, including background, but there was little Glen Canyon before the reservoir. harm done in the foreground. Much of it is Tamarisk, but there are plenty of willows along with a few cottonwoods and box elders. Until 1987 this bend was still mostly bar- ren, and the majority of this vegeta- tion grew in just 6 years or less.

WILLOW GULCH

May 19, 2000 and March 30, 2005. A “drear and hideous scene” being transformed back into a living canyon. Remnants of the mudflat remain, and probably will for a long time, but are becoming overgrown with mostly willows, not all Tamarisk. The tamarisk that gets established on these mudflats that later get cut down when the reservoir recedes does not look like it is thriving. It is hang- ing on, and probably will for a long time, but it will probably never get very big. If it were to be removed it would never get re-estab- lished under any natural conditions because it is too far above the stream. Farther upstream in Willow, where it has had more time to recover, willows are by far the dominant riparian plant. Tamarisk is present, but far from dominant.

page 6 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:08 PM Page 7

WILLOW GULCH LOOKING INTO THE NORTH BRANCH

August 8, 1990: nothing but mudflat. June 8, 1992: A little of the mudflat has been washed out, and the entrance to the north branch has become completely choked with vegetation.

April 10, 2003: major downcutting of the mudflat has March 30, 2005: much more of the mudflat has been occurred, and all of the vegetation has been washed out. washed out and vegetation is starting to reappear.

page 7 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 8

NARROWS OF 50 MILE GULCH

March 11, 2004: upper part of narrows. Note remnant of mudflat at right. This had been completely filled in, but is now scoured out all June 13, 2004: Same narrows at left, the way to bedrock, with only the telltale remnant as evidence of the taken from down in the bottom look- reservoir. ing back toward where as shot at left was taken from. This had been filled in with at least 20 feet of sediment, now gone without a trace.

June 13, 2004 and February 22, 2004: two other views of the narrows, a bit farther February 8, 2005: “The Subway” in 50 downstream. The whitish patch on the wall in the background is the bathtub ring, Mile. A remnant of sediment just outside the only remaining evidence of the reservoir. This had also been filled in with at the lower end of this spectacular feature least 20 feet of sediment, all of which is gone. An unknown amount remains in the is at least 10 feet high, evidence that there bottom, waiting for a bit more time with low reservoir levels had been at least that much here. More remains to be flushed out, given time.

page 8 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 9

TWILIGHT CANYON

April 26, 2004: two views of a beautiful side canyon of Twilight that had been drowned and buried in 15 to 20 feet of sediment, now gone all the way down to bedrock.

April 26, 2004: Twilight Canyon looking upstream at the entrance to this side canyon, coming in at left. Significant down- cutting of sediment has already occurred.

April 25, 2005: (a closer view of the background of the shot at left) 364 days later, the canyon floor has dropped at least 15 feet. Note the lack of any bathtub ring below the sedi- ment, and the fading of that above it compared to the previ- ous year. (That’s Dan Glick, National Geographic writer.)

page 9 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 10

MEANDERS OF REFLECTION CANYON 50 MILE GULCH

One of the most spectacular views I have had into any canyon “a drear and hideous scene” – the reservoir from the rim, even with the reservoir. mudflat in 50 Mile Gulch in May 1991 during one of the early significant drawdowns of the reservoir.

March 9, 2004: from the west rim.

By 2004 many feet of mud had been flushed out of 50 Mile and a beau- tiful little spring returned to life. (At the lowest point February 10, 2005: same area from the east rim. Note the fading of of the right the bathtub ring in only a years time where it has been well exposed wall, above.) to the weather. On steeper walls and cliffs it is going to last a lot This had longer, but in many places the striping from rain runoff is growing been com- back over it. pletely buried under the mudflat in the low wall at the entrance to the side canyon in the previous picture and is now flowing again and plant life is getting re- established in it. It is the only spring in 50 Mile that visitors can get good water from. (Note the amazing resemblance to Philip Hyde’s cover photo.)

page 10 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 11

The foregoing photos have shown the potential for recovery from inundation by the reservoir only in a relatively short time frame, and mostly flushing of sediment and fading of the bathtub ring, with only a little bit of a look at vegetation recovery. So far, with a few exceptions, vegetation has not had enough time to really recover yet. For that reason the following two photos are offered as evi- dence of the potential. They show a section of Coyote Gulch between Jacob Hamblin Arch and Coyote Natural Bridge, far from the part of Coyote that was flooded by the reservoir. The first was taken on April 20, 1979, and the second on June 9, 2001. In 1979 the streambed was wide and shallow, with minimal vegetation anchoring the banks. By 2001 rushes and other plants had become estab- lished across most of the width of the formerly wide streambed, leaving only a narrow stream channel with stable, well anchored banks, able to withstand the vigorous floods resulting from thunderstorms. It cannot be said for certain why this change has taken place, but the most likely reason is the ending of cattle grazing. In 1979 cows had had their way with the canyon for decades, and their evidence was plentiful. They were banished about 1980. If 21 years without cows can allow the vegetation in a canyon to come back as well as it has in Coyote, then it would seem reasonable to assume that the same can happen after the reservoir is gone.

COYOTE GULCH

April 20, 1979 June 9, 2001

page 11 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 12

The Lake Powell to St. George Pipeline — Has Anyone Heard of Global Warming? by Richard Ingebretsen T he thirst for water and runaway growth can crossing through a Native American reserva- its total storage capacity more than half of the never be quenched for developers. The latest tion. However, the pipeline will largely fall time. But consumptive use is expected to plan to allow massive growth where it makes under current highway rights-of-way. Only increase to 5.4 million acre feet per year which no sense at all is in Utah’s Dixie — St. George. 60,000 acre-feet would make it to St. George, would keep the level of Lake Powell to 25% or The plan is to build a water line from Lake the other 10,000 would go to the city of less one half of the time. Powell to St. George, a city built smack dab in Kanab and other future developments along But that is not the bad news for the river — the middle of the desert. It will deliver around the 130 miles of pipeline. From Lake Powell global warming is. 70,000 acre feet of water annually to this the water would be pumped uphill for a small The and its water resources growing area that developers hope will allow portion of the journey; gravity would then are particularly susceptible to the effects of a city of 65,000 people to grow to nearly pull the water into St. George where it would climate change due to the current warming of 500,000 people over the next 30 years. the earth’s atmosphere. The effects of The pipeline is to be subsidized prima- global warming are almost too incom- rily by raising the Utah Sales tax for all prehensible to believe. But we are seeing Utah residents. Developers are hopeful them already. The premise is that as the that the taxes will be raised soon, even earth’s temperature rises, water from the though the project will likely not start for oceans evaporate, and then the water 15 years. The idea is to spread the raise itself becomes a greenhouse gas, causing over a long period of time so that the an alarming increase in the rate at which impact to tax payers will not be as severe the temperature rises. With more mois- and will go unnoticed by taxpayers. ture in the atmosphere and increased The need for water from Lake Powell temperatures, there will be more rain in is based on a report prepared in 1998 by the valleys and a marked decrease in the Boyle Engineering, now referred to as snowpack in the mountains. The the Boyle Report. It made a number of Colorado River Basin relies on snow- population growth and water needs pro- pack for 75% of its water source. While jections for St. George and Washington global warming models disagree on the County, Utah. To the glee of developers, exact amount, all models agree that the report predicted that St. George there will be at least a 25 – 30% reduc- could reach a population close to 500,000 by fill a reservoir and power a hydroelectric tion of water in the Green and Colorado 2045. It concluded that the region would plant. Sales of the electricity created would Rivers by the year 2039. This is a huge loss for eventually run out of water using current pay for part of the pumping costs. Kanab a river that is already in deficit to demand. sources. Therefore it was recommended that would have to pick up a share of the price. So with the increased demand on water, a Lake Powell to St.George pipeline be built as But the costs of the water project are and with the enormous decrease in avail- "the best solution to future water shortages." staggering. Engineering studies commis- able water due to the continued effects of The report did not take into account the sioned by the Washington County Water global warming there will not be enough current or future effects of global warming. Conservancy District (WCWCD), the water to fill the rivers, or fill Lake Powell, Water for the pipeline would come out of Utah Division of Water Resources (DWR) and much less fill a pipeline traveling to St. Utah’s allocation of Colorado River water. show that the pipeline construction costs George If you don’t believe this, drive The water for the pipeline would be stored in would be around half a billion dollars — down and look over the edge of Lake Flaming Gorge Reservoir where 70,000 acre too high to begin construction now. Powell. It is less than half empty right now. feet annually would be released down the Raising revenues will take some time. But, the WCWCD and the DWR don’t Green River into Lake Powell. The pipeline But more revealing are recent studies that seem to care and are not giving up. They are would pump this water from Lake Powell, 7 indicate Lake Powell is going to be much currently trying to lobby Congress and the miles north of Glen Canyon Dam, over 120 lower,even empty,than it has been in the past. Utah Legislature to appropriate funds for the miles of land into the Sand Hollow Reservoir There is a strong possibility that Lake Powell project. As water in the region becomes even located 10 miles east of St. George. The will empty and then remain very low. scarcer, the benefits of piping water in are pipeline is currently planned to follow Assuming that Upper Basin consumptive predicted to outweigh the costs of construc- Highways 89 and 59 as much as possible use remains at the current 4.1 million acre tion. The WCWCD still predicts the project through Utah, avoiding wilderness areas, but feet, Lake Powell will be less than 50% full of will be complete by 2030.

(Wade Graham photo) page 12 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 13

But, is the pipeline really needed? Do we ment plans in 12 municipalities in model took into account economic factors really have to raise statewide sales taxes? Washington County. Population projections like price elasticity, as new water supplies are Do we really need to take water from a of the Boyle Report were based on 1988 data tapped prices go up and people conserve river, where there really is no more water to prepared by the Utah Governor’s Office of more and per capita water use goes down. be taken? Do we need to hurt the fragile Planning and Budget,and did not account for The Boyle Report didn’t take these factors ecosystem of the Colorado Plateau? Do the factors such as the availability of developable into account. Based on the new population residents of St. George really want to see land, land use, and zoning. Per capita water growth and water use estimates, the that city get that big so fast? Is growth in a use in the Boyle Report was also somewhat Hydrosphere Report concluded that no new desert a really good thing when conserva- miscalculated according to Hydrosphere, as water sources would have to be developed. tion isn’t the main priority? all classes of water use were included in the The current water sources would be more To answer these questions, let’s first look at estimate with the underlying assumption that than enough if cost effective conservation the city. St. George Utah is the most rapidly all sectors, commercial, industrial and resi- methods are employed. growing city in the state of Utah, growing dential, would grow in direct proportion to Utah has had a history of 50% government 73% from 1990 to 2000. And that is nothing population growth. The Hydrosphere Study subsidized water use and today it has the compared to what some experts predict for found the Boyle Report used outdated and cheapest consumer water prices in the coun- the future. The problem is that it just happens flawed data, therefore future water demand try. These cheap prices have encouraged over- to be located in the driest county in the consumption. Utah is the second driest second driest state in the country. More state in the country (Nevada is the driest) remarkably, St. George already has the yet it has the highest per-capita water highest per capita water consumption consumption, between 300 - 320 gallons rate for desert cities in the U.S. and quite per person per day compared to an aver- possibly the entire nation. Residents use age of 245 gallons per day for other west- a staggering 335 gallons per person per ern states and 180 for the nation. The day. For comparison, Phoenix uses only political pressure to maintain the current 170 gallons per person per day, half that water consumption system is high and of St. George. This is because city ordi- each time there is a water shortage politi- nances designed to conserve water have cians and planners jump to increase sup- proved invaluable in reducing water use. ply rather than conserve water. Similar ordinances in other cities such as Utah politicians, as are most politi- Las Vegas, Tucson, and Los Angeles have cians, are oblivious to global warming. proved invaluable as well. But neither St. Water conservation is viewed as a bad George nor Washington County have thing by Utah politicians. When it ordinances in place for water conserva- comes to education, health care, and tion or landscaping, and apparently that social services, many legislators are does not bother the Washington County figures were overestimations as well. eager to cut budgets and make agencies Water Conservancy District, for they are Hydrosphere concludes that water use prove they need more money. When it pressing on developing the pipeline without rates will be significantly lower than those comes to water development, they can’t one word of conservation. reported by the Boyle Report and that in seem to throw tax money at it fast enough. Several years ago, the Grand Canyon Trust, order to satisfy realistic water needs of the There are adequate supplies of water for cur- a Flagstaff-based environmental organiza- region in the future, no imported water will rent Utahns and future generations with a tion commissioned a study by Hydrosphere be required. In addition, the study suggests renewed emphasis on conservation. But Resource Consultants to explore solutions to environmental concerns must be addressed, amazingly, state legislators have rejected pro- the inevitable growth of St. George and sur- particularly the potential impact of exotic fish posals to establish a task force to look into rounding areas. The study concluded that species on native species in the Upper Virgin increasing water conservation. Even a simple Washington County can accommodate pro- River basin which are listed as threatened and bill to change the name of the Utah Division jected water use needs for the next 50 years endangered. In fact, the Study shows that of Water Resources to the Utah Division of using water conservation measures, and that "based on the Governor’s Office of Planning Water Resources and Conservation never the proposed pipeline from Lake Powell to St. and Budget 1999 population growth scenar- made it out of committee. George is not needed. ios in Washington County, few additional In Utah the lack of financial conservation The Hydrosphere Study questioned the water supply projects would be needed to incentives goes beyond the consumer. two basic assumptions of the Boyle Report. meet future water needs." County water boards have a disincentive to They made a more conservative population The Hydrosphere study also found that conserve water in their districts. Water board estimate of 340,000 by 2050. The report Boyle had grossly overestimated future water revenue is based largely on how much water claimed that Boyle had overestimated popu- use. Hydrosphere used an economic/financial they deliver. The more water they deliver the lation growth based on consolidated develop- model for determining future water use. The more money they receive. This provides

(Wade Graham photo) page 13 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 14

GCI Stands Up for the Native Fish in the Grand Canyon

by Dave Wegner O n February 16, 2006, Glen Canyon Colorado River, while not possessing the offered no alternatives or ideas on how Institute, along with four other con- glamour of Pacific Salmon, Bald Eagles, to reverse the downward trend in the servation groups, filed suit in U.S. or Grizzly bears, are unique and found populations of the species. Business as District Court against the Department of only in the Colorado River system. By usual is the modus operendi of the the Interior and the U.S. Bureau of the Endangered Species Act, the govern- Bureau of Reclamation. Even more sur- Reclamation on behalf of the humpback ment is responsible for the protection of prising was the total silence of the U.S. chub, other listed fish species and the these species. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has the natural habitats of the Grand Canyon. In 1986, the Department of the administrative responsibility to protect This is the first time in the history of Interior, because of identified impacts listed species and enforce the Glen Canyon Institute that we have and legal challenges, initiated an envi- Endangered Species Act. It was this bla- entered into litigation to protect species ronmental impact statement on the tant lack of effort to do the job that and the landscape of Glen and Grand operations of Glen Canyon Dam. Congress required in the Grand Canyon Canyons. The reason that this lawsuit Congress, unwilling to trust the Bureau Protection Act and the Endangered became necessary is because the govern- of Reclamation to complete the EIS in a Species Act that has forced Glen Canyon ment has failed miserably in protecting timely manner, passed the Grand Institute and others to initiate the law- the species and their habitats. Canyon Protection Act. In 1996, the suit. In 1992, Congress passed the Grand Department of the Interior completed The Institute is working cooperatively Canyon Protection Act with direction to the EIS and implemented a revised oper- with the Center for Biological Diversity, reverse the demise of the Grand Canyon ational pattern at Glen Canyon Dam the Arizona Wildlife Federation, Living and the decline of endangered species, with the stated intent of protecting the Rivers, the Sierra Club, and the Western including the humpback chub. Glen native fish species. Environmental Law Center on this litiga- Canyon Dam was authorized in 1956 In November 2005, the Department of tion. Stay tuned as this effort will stimu- prior to the passage of the National Interior held a conference and published late much discussion and review over the Environmental Policy Act. The Act today a report that stated that the actions taken next several months. Our goal is to do would not allow for the construction of at Glen Canyon Dam since 1996 have what is right for the species and their Glen Canyon Dam because of its impacts not met the goals of protecting the habitats. on the species and habitats of Glen and humpback chub or its habitats. —Dave Wegner is Science director of Grand Canyons. The native fish of the Amazingly, the Department of Interior GCI.

INGEBRETSEN, continued state government agencies like raise your taxes to pay for a wasteful and the DWR. The last session of needless water project to be drawn from a financial disincentives for water conservation; the Utah legislature produced a bill that was reservoir with an uncertain future. County boards that spend money on conser- immediately signed into law by Governor Remember we live in a desert surrounded by vation efforts find that the more successful Huntsman that moves the process forward a fragile ecosystem and that other living they are the smaller their budget becomes. of raising statewide taxes to pay for the proj- things rely on water from the Colorado The result is most counties in Utah increase ect. There is still hope that saner heads will River. The best solution calls for conserva- supply as water becomes scarce. prevail and that the project will be defeated. tion of the already existing water in the How big can a city get in the desert? Las But the planning process has begun and southern Utah desert areas so that it is in line Vegas is a good model to look at. This is a major decisions will have to be made and with everyone else in the West. Cheap water city that is growing at a faster rate than St. water is always controversial and complex, in St. George has already led to over con- George. But in its 2007 water budget plan- with the outcome of development and recla- sumption. Bringing in more water only fuels ners have declared that there are no new mation proposals unpredictable. the problem.What we need are conservation sources of water and that Las Vegas will Contact your legislators. Encourage them incentives that require water users to pay a have to become a "mature" city unless to learn about global warming and plan for higher percentage of the costs, and city and stronger water conservation will work or mountains with much less snowpack and county ordinances designed to reduce water other sources of water can be found. rivers with less water. They should plan consumption and allow for wise growth. The WCWCD still plans to complete con- water conservation. They can no longer rely struction on the pipeline by 2030. So far the on the Colorado and Green Rivers for more — Richard Ingebretsen is president of Glen only holdup is funding for the project. There water as it is just not there. Don’t let them Canyon Institute. ([email protected]) is strong backing from Utah politicians and

page 14 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 15

Celebrating Canyon Defender Philip Hyde

by Stephen Trimble P hilip Hyde died March 30 at age 84, and with his passing we Hyde’s ties to the mountains led to his first publication in the lost the last of a generation of pioneering landscape photogra- Sierra Club Annual in 1951. He soon became primary conservation phers. Ansel Adams is better known, but Hyde - even more than photographer for the club. Beginning with his work for This is Eliot Porter - became our model for committing a career and a life Dinosaur in 1955, Philip Hyde photographs helped define the genre to conservation through color photography. Back in the 1970s, my of “coffee table conservation book.”When the Bureau of Reclamation generation of Baby Boomer landscape photographers came of eyed the Grand Canyon in the 1960s for its next dam projects, David age. We read Edward Abbey’s Desert Solitaire (1968) and Abbey’s Brower, executive director of the Sierra Club, responded with Time text paired with Philip Hyde’s pho- and the River Flowing: Grand tographs in Slickrock (1971). We Canyon (1964), featuring Hyde as moved to the Southwest and took primary photographer. Hyde agreed our first river and backpack trips. that he was down there photograph- We came to photography and the ing “because we wanted to keep the land at the same time, on fire with dam builders out,”but the place itself idealism and imagination. was most important: “I just went The Sierra Club’s large-format about my business, and here was this photo books shaped what we saw magnificent canyon full of wonder- through our viewfinders. We stud- ful things to photograph.” ied the pages, absorbing Eliot These “battle books,” as Hyde Porter’s sense of design and Philip called them, reshaped the image of Hyde’s warm response to big views. the Grand Canyon in the American I still journey downcanyon accom- imagination. The canyon became a panied by a memorized inventory symbol of endangered wilderness, of these pictures. We knew that the the Colorado a symbol of the free- Grand Canyon was saved from flowing power of threatened rivers. dams, in part, by Philip Hyde’s pho- The books and the campaign also tographs. We knew the power of transformed the Sierra Club into a nature photography. For every national organization. place, Hyde said, “there will always Hyde's son, David, remembers be people that want to exploit it, waiting endlessly with his mother and there will always be people - when his father stopped their vehicle hopefully - that want to save it and for a "picher," as the elder Hyde pro- keep it as it is.”Even with the risk of inviting the crowds into par- nounced it, with a rising lilt to his voice. adise, better to publish your photographs and rally the troops. "I had no idea what he was even looking at," David Hyde What’s in the frame of the photograph matters artistically, to be says. "No one else would ever have seen it. He saw something…" sure, but what’s outside the frame can destroy it. His father said, simply, "It's a matter of seeing, just looking Philip Hyde first saw the Southwest as a boy in the early 1930s, around, opening your eyes. I seek to bring out what is there, when his father, a painter, took the family to Europe by way of a rather than to impose a personal sense of design." David Hyde car-camping trip from California across the United States. When says, "My Dad was just out there loving the place to death, and Hyde’s snapshots from a 1938 Boy Scout backpacking trip in he wanted to show other people the place that he loved." Philip Yosemite framed more scenery than people, he knew something Hyde wrote that he found in his work "an unending discovery about where he was headed. Stationed in Kansas during World of the infinite variety and beauty in the universe." War II, Hyde headed to Denver on furloughs just to see the moun- The legacy of his photographs will forever remind us of both his tains. As he neared the end of his service, he pored over a set of wonder and his devotion to Western wild places. WPA Federal Writer’s Project guides to the states in the post library, dreaming of photographing those national parks and wild — Stephen Trimble is a Salt Lake writer and photographer places - mapping his lifework. He wrote to Ansel Adams, asking (www.stephentrimble.net). He interviewed Philip Hyde in where he might find further training. His timing was perfect. 2005 for his book, Lasting Light: 125 Years of Grand Canyon Hyde entered Ansel’s new photography program at the California Photography (Northland Publishing; June 2006). This article School of Fine Arts in the fall of 1947. originally appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune. Photo by Philip Hyde page 15 61897_Nwsltr1v5.qxd 6/14/06 2:09 PM Page 16

“What we found as we approached Coyote was appalling — nothing but a vast mudflat covering everything, the whole place utterly ruined, the riverbanks and all but the tallest vegetation buried. The amount of mud carried by the river in just that one season was staggering. It was hard to tell just how deep it was at the actual confluence because I didn’t know any good landmarks, but upstream at the log ladder that gets past a big boulder jam it became quite clear just how disastrous it really was, and I nearly came unglued. The outrage I felt was beyond description. I wanted to scream. I had taken pictures of lower Coyote and the confluence with the river on each of the previous trips, and I took a few more of this disaster.” — Bill Wolverton, inside this issue.

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED