65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:29 AM Page 1 Hidden Passage the journal of glen institute Issue XIV, Winter 2007 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:29 AM Page 2

The Times They Are a’Changin’

Glen Canyon Institute by Richard Ingebretsen President I n 1995, when we first began working to restore , we were called Richard Ingebretsen “nuts” by water managers, “crazy” by ’s Senator Orrin Hatch and “insane” by water skiers, but as Bob Dylan wrote, “The Times, They Are a Changin’.” Now, our Board of Trustees proposals are taken seriously — even by the Bureau of Reclamation, which last Mikhail Davis year took a page from our script in announcing that it would no longer seek to Ed Dobson completely re-fill reservoir, but instead would store more water down- Wade Graham stream in . Margaret Hoffman So what has brought about this change? Nancy Jacques The main issue, of course, is water, or more importantly, the lack thereof. The Rick Ridder huge growth of the number of people in the West has strained the water system to Lea Rudee almost failure. has “run out” of their share of River water, yet Dave Wegner Los Angeles is expected to grow by millions over the next two decades. Las Vegas is growing at the rate of 12,000 people each month and will overgrow its share of water in 2007. And, not to leave out of the equation, Phoenix is expected Development Director to double its size within 15 years. If that is not enough, scientists are expecting the Amy Collins effects of global warming to reduce the snowpack in the by 30 percent within the next 25 years. The gets 90 percent of its water Advisory Committee from snowmelt. It is clear that the plumbing system that water managers have Dan Beard built is going dry. Steve Black Furthermore, each day tens of thousands of tons of sediment are deposited Philmer Bluehouse into Lake Powell. Have water managers considered the consequences of this Ryan Brown Niklas Christensen alarming fact? Lake Mead and Lake Powell are no more than half full and drop- Agustin Garza ping rapidly. Does it make sense to have two partly-full reservoirs in the high Michael Kellett desert that each evaporate enough water every year to supply Los Angeles? The Peter Lavigne priceless species of the are going extinct. Is that the legacy that Katie Lee we want to leave our children? Daniel McCool Because of all of this, forward-thinking organizations such as Glen Canyon Francis McDermott Institute have moved to center stage in the debate. Lake Powell, which has flooded Bruce Mouro Glen Canyon since the mid-1960s, has dropped to its lowest level in 40 years, and Tom Myers for the first time in decades, more than 40 miles of the mainstem of Glen Canyon’s Page Stegner Flake Wells landscape have been exposed, along with hundreds of miles of the Glen’s 125 Bill Wolverton major side . Nothing short of millennial-type floods can possibly fill Lake Powell again. Even if these occur, the water will be drawn down by users in short order. So, whole sections of Glen Canyon are now out of water, in all likelihood 1520 Sunnydale Lane permanently, and will restore. Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 In order for the West to survive and grow we can not rely on archaic laws and tel (801) 363-4450 agreements that were written over a half a century ago. We need to have new agree- fax (801)363-4451 ments that make sense in a rapidly-changing world. We need bright, innovative [email protected] and creative minds to solve the problems of western water. We can’t be afraid of www.glencanyon.org change, but must embrace it, guide it and move forward boldly. We must preserve the earth’s species and beautiful places and moreover, must work to reverse the Hidden Passage mistakes of the past when we can in order to preserve the future. Issue XIV Winter 2007 Water managers must listen to voices raised in defense of our landscapes and resources. They must not fear us, but rather take our message to heart. We are not Editor anti-growth, nor are we against using the nation’s natural endowment. Instead we Wade Graham promote sane growth and better use of these scarce resources. We all have the [email protected] opportunity and obligation to help affect that change so that water is delivered in a much more environmentally sound way and that Glen Canyon and the Grand Canyon can be allowed to restore and sustain themselves. Cover: recently-exposed narrows of Cascade Canyon once covered by 20 feet of page 2 sediment. Photo by Jim Kay — jameskay.com 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:29 AM Page 3

An Dubious Milestone: The Colorado River Storage Project Act Turns Fifty by Dave Wegner O n Thursday, October 19th the Bureau of Reclamation cele- brated the 50-year anniversary of the Colorado River Storage Project Act and the first construction activities at . Under heavy security and with no members of the public present, the bureau and its parent agency, the Department of the Interior, toasted and congratulated them- selves on top of the dam. With the reser- voir behind the dam at 49% of capacity and the knowledge that the reservoir will continue The development of the CRSP was users of Colorado River water. to drop in elevation, one has to wonder based on several assumptions that are Wouldn’t it be nice if the Department what the future holds for the CRSP. now being tested and being proven of the Interior used the anniversary as The CRSP was the vehicle by which incorrect for the future: (1) snowmelt an opportunity to step up and do the the plumbing system of the Colorado would be the primary source of water; right thing by thinking about the next River was developed using taxpayer (2) the dams would store water behind 50 years of CRSP through a compre- money. The intent of the Act was to cap- them during the runoff and slowly hensive, basin-wide Environmental ture water, primarily for irrigation use release it during the irrigation season; Impact Statement? An EIS process that downstream. A secondary objective was (3) the Upper Basin would use Powell as this time around would include public the generation of electricity which was to the primary release valve to regulate the discussion and review, and an honest pay back the taxpayers within an initial amount of water that is delivered to the and transparent discussion of goals and 50-year period of time. The payback has Lower Basin states. objectives for the next 50 years. Glen been extended many more years now On this anniversary of CRSP the Canyon Institute continues to publicly and of course the taxpayers are going to Bureau should reflect on the past and call for a basin-wide EIS to evaluate the end up paying a larger percentage than realize that the Act as it was intended in future of water management in the was originally agreed to. The reality is 1956 will not and cannot continue to basin, to integrate environmental con- that the revenue generated from the provide the same functions as it did cerns, address Native American needs, CRSP dams has paid back a small per- then. Climate change, increased popula- and ensure that the river continues to centage of the original public loan and tion, changing demands (drinking water support the social needs of the water- more importantly has served as the open rather than irrigation water), reduced shed. Instead of the piecemeal checkbook by which the other dams and runoff volumes, endangered species approach of the past, let’s use the tech- irrigation projects in the basin were impacts, National Parks and reserva- nology and knowledge we’ve gained to funded. I like to refer to it as the tions, federally mandated Native work towards a comprehensive review Christmas Tree of CRSP: every orna- American water deliveries, and aging and development of a suite of opera- ment on that tree is funded out of a infrastructure all require an integrative tional options that reflect our changing checkbook backed by public funds. and cooperative discussion including all world. Glen Canyon Dam, April 15, 2005, water level 145 feet below full pool. Photo by Jim Kay — jameskay.com page 3 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:29 AM Page 4

The Flood of ‘06

by Wade Graham

October is normally a dry month on the , Canyon National Recreation Area, was on the scene to witness with high pressure squatting over the region. This last October, and document the events. In the last issue of Hidden Passage though, saw rainstorms of biblical proportions in the [HP XIII, Summer 2006], Bill shared with us a powerful, Colorado River basin, particularly in the south, with record- exquisite photo-essay demonstrating the restoration of parts of smashing flows gauged on the Dolores, San Juan, San Rafael, the drainage over the 27 years that he has been Fremont/Dirty Devil, Escalante, and Paria Rivers in the first exploring it. Here, he offers us another chapter of the ongoing half of the month. Especially remark- able was rainfall in the immediate neighborhood of Lake Powell. The Escalante and the Dirty Devil ran bank-to-bank for successive days. The latter stream surged 15 feet or more at Hanksville, Utah on October 6 and 7. It flooded again on October 17 and 18. The exact peak flood elevations, flow and volume exceeded the parameters of the US Geological Survey’s gauging equipment, and hydrologists are still working, backwards, to get a fix on the flood. Measured inflow into Reservoir Powell in October was 1,018,000 acre-feet, 184 story, documenting the effects of the flooding of October, 2006 percent of the long-term average. The unmeasured inflow — on some of the same canyons. from all the small and medium tributaries emptying into Glen When he got back to dry land, he wrote us: “A small part of Canyon, might have been as high as 350,000 acre-feet. It all Glen Canyon has made a significant step toward recovery this added up to an unprecedented pulse, raising the reservoir level fall. You know about the drowning of the confluence of Coyote by more than six feet in just three weeks. (On October 1, Gulch and the Escalante River when the reservoir first filled, Powell was at 3601 feet elevation; on November 1, it topped which was never supposed to happen. You also know about the 3,608 feet , storing 12.53 million acre-feet, or 52% of capacity.) gradual flushing out of the sediment that was deposited there The flooding scoured most drainages on the north side of from my photodocumentation.” the Colorado River canyon down to bedrock, stripping away Now, we can see what the non-gradual flushing out of sedi- layers of sediment deposited by the reservoir in the last four ment looks like, and a little bit of what nature is capable of decades, as well as some much, much older. Newly-revealed when she wants to do some house cleaning. features such as waterfalls, water staircases, pools and alcoves that had been entombed in mud again felt the sun and the air. —[Hydrology data from Tom Ryan, Bureau of Unfailingly, Bill Wolverton, backcountry ranger for Glen Reclamation.)

The Escalante River in flood,seen from just above Neon Canyon, October, 2006. Photo by page 4 Bill Wolverton. 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:30 AM Page 5

Restoration in the Escalante River: After the October Floods Text and photos by Bill Wolverton T his past October 6th the Escalante River, after some three the middle of the river. It had been almost completely buried inches of rain regionwide, sustained a mega-monster flood, in the mudflat in the 1983 overfilling. Since then the gradual the likes of which has not been seen in decades, certainly not in downcutting had cut a channel around the left side of it, and the 27 years that I have been acquainted with it. From the evi- floods were working into the right side, but by then the dence I have seen in three places so far it was at least 20 feet remaining mudflat was too high above the river for the usual deep in the main channel, and spilled over the banks and floods to be able to flow over it and breach it. This time I found flowed wall to wall in most places. On Sunday, October 29th, I that the boulder was once again out in the middle of the river paid a visit to the river in the vicinity of , and and most of the river was actually flowing to the right side of what I found was astounding. After dropping into lower it, and the mudflat remnant between the boulder and the right Coyote from 40 Mile Ridge I first climbed out the north side hand wall of the canyon was gone completely. This left a small and down to the river between Coyote and Stevens Canyon, slickrock ledge that I remember having to climb down from in and where I descended to the river I found that ALL of the veg- order to continue upriver in 1979 exposed again for the first etation that had grown up in the reservoir mudflat had been time in some 25 years. Down around the bend there was more completely flattened, buried, or washed away. I went upstream very large tamarisk gone completely. Along the way in this to Stevens Canyon and found more of the same. Sad to say stretch there were also river cobblestones along the exposed though, it was quite a disaster for some really nice places — bars, instead of nothing but mud, and large rocks that had really ruined a couple of very nice campsites on the river below been buried for a quarter century were once again visible. The Stevens. I then went on downstream to the confluence with river was actually looking like a river again, with several small Coyote. Along the way it was still more of the same, but I also rapids instead of a sluggish, slow moving pond. For years now found that some huge stands of tamarisk that had grown up in I have found it depressing being in this part of the river, know- the mudflat in the vicinity of Stevens Arch had been com- ing how it used to look, and have avoided it, but not any more. pletely washed away. Approaching the downstream side of It is beautiful. Still somewhat scarred, but beautiful. Stevens Arch there is a large boulder that had originally been in

BEFORE: Escalante River at Coyote Gulch. ESCALANTE RIVER. At Coyote Gulch after flood of 10-6-06. May 11, 1993. Tamarisk and willow flats grown October 30, 2006. in previous six years. [from HP XIII, p. 6]

page 5 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:31 AM Page 6

One of the most astounding things though, was just below Coyote on the right side of the river. Before the reservoir the river had flowed right up to the slickrock wall from the entrance to Coyote on down around the left bend below. After the reser- voir mudflat was deposited in 1983 the river cut a channel into it but left a long remnant of it on the right side below Coyote that subsequently got completely overgrown with tamarisk. I had resigned myself to figuring that it was going to be permanent, but after this flood it was almost completely gone, with only two narrow strips of it left, plus a few odd clumps of mud clinging to the slickrock wall, which could be easily removed with a ESCALANTE RIVER. At Cow/Fence canyons without the shovel. Then, as I was standing there con- reservoir. October 30, 2006. templating this miracle, something rather unnatural caught my eye in the slickrock at the entrance to Coyote, and I did a double take, hardly believing what I was seeing — the benchmark! I practically shouted it out loud. The long-lost benchmark at the entrance to Coyote that I had only heard of – could have seen in 1979 before the mud- flat but don’t remember, probably because I was so awestruck by the grandeur of the place. The benchmark that had shown that the confluence of Coyote and the Escalante was supposedly safe from inundation, but which proved to be wrong, now exposed again for all to see. 3,705 feet elevation it showed. I literally had tears of joy in my eyes. Later comparison with a 1979 photo of the confluence showed that the streambed is now cut down almost to its original level. Not quite, but probably less than a foot to go. This flood was so big that it actually flowed OVER the mudflat on the inside of the river bend just below Coyote for the first ESCALANTE RIVER. At “Rose” Canyon, without the reser- time since it was deposited, and knocked down, washed way, or buried much of the voir. October 30, 2006. large and dense tamarisk that had grown up on it, so that there is once again some open ground there. Much higher than it was of course, but beginning to bear a resemblance to what it used to look like.

page 6 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:32 AM Page 7

DAVIS GULCH. New cutting in ancient DAVIS GULCH. New waterfall exposed by sediment. October 31, 2006. erosion of ancient sediment. October 31, 2006.

DAVIS GULCH. Without “Cess Powell”.October 31, 2006.

page 7 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 8

I went on up Coyote and found that it had sustained a flood bigger than any I had ever seen also, and it had overtopped all of the remaining mudflat remnants, knocking over all of the willows that had grown up on them. (I got rid of all the tamarisk a couple of years ago.) It also cut into them somewhat, but there is still some progress to made here. I suspect that the force of the flood in Coyote was tempered somewhat by the fact that the river was so high and pooled up back into Coyote. The backed- up water from the river flood left a very obvious high water line, where there has never been evidence of water before. A few more floods in Coyote without the river ESCALANTE RIVER. At “Rose” Canyon, without the reservoir. being so high may make some real differ- October 30, 2006. ence. The stream bed has been lowered enough now that there are rocks exposed that I had long forgotten about. The next day I hiked the rim of the Escalante River canyon from 40 Mile Ridge (south of Coyote) downstream to where I could see the reservoir, which was between Cow/Fence and Explorer Canyons. The flood had greatly enlarged the channel through the mudflat, which had been quite narrow in places, and there are now exposed bars alongside the river that will make hiking it much easier in places. In the past the channel has been so narrow that there was no place to walk except in the river. Also, the river was flowing fairly clear past Coyote, although Coyote was muddy and adding a bit of muddiness to it. However, as I made my way along the rim the river appeared to get much muddier, and sand waves could be seen building up and shifting and collapsing, indicating ongoing sediment transport downstream, all to the good. Of course there was an enormous raft of flotsam from the flood ESCALANTE RIVER. Below “Rose” Canyon, just below Explorer Canyon — bigger than without the reservoir. October 30, 2006. any I have ever seen. There are also very large remnants of the reservoir sediment along the river that are going to remain there indefinitely, since the river has now cut a channel large enough to handle a record-breaking flood. They mostly have

page 8 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 9

vertical cut banks that will generally be impossible to climb, and they are heavily overgrown with tamarisk. After these two hikes I went into 50 Mile Gulch to check on progress of the erosion of a remnant mudflat there that is still occupying a part of the original slickrock channel and causing a waterfall that shouldn’t be there. At one point this had finally been cut back to expose a bit of slickrock wall, but it will probably be a long time before enough of this is washed away for the stream to find its original channel, unfortunately. From there I went over to Davis Gulch and found that another flood had ripped out a huge section of ancient sediment upstream from the head of the reservoir, following one that did the same thing a couple of years ago, and completely transformed it into a brand new canyon with a brand new 15 foot waterfall, never seen during European presence in North America. I may have been the first one to see it and realize its significance, although there was one other set of footprints in the area. Amazing. Downstream in the reservoir zone the canyon continues its recovery, with an abundance of native vegetation coming back, with- out too much tamarisk. The stream has now cut down to bedrock for most of the way from the head of the reservoir to the two step waterfall that only appeared about two years ago.

—Bill Wolverton

BEFORE: Davis Gulch in1995, after 30 feet of sedi- DAVIS GULCH. Without the reservoir. ment were cut out in two years. [from HP XIII, p. 4] October 31, 2006.

page 9 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 10

Revisiting the

This is an unedited, never-before published essay by founding by Glen Canyon Institute board member Dave Brower. We are grate- ful to Mikhail Davis of the Brower Fund for permission to run it. As Mikhail says, “That Brower keeps getting smarter all the time.” In these paragraphs are a century of wisdom — and a single ker- nel of insight that may get us, and Glen Canyon, out of the mess we’ve made. Still seeing the way through… T hank the prescient people who produced the interstate compact divvy- ing up Colorado River water, even if they didn’t know at the time how bright they were. When they specified that the water was to be used for domestic and agricultural purposes, they didn’t know how wise they were in giving short-shrift to the generation of hydro-electric power.

They were eager to see that as little water as possible was to be wasted in the ocean. Inundation en route was OK, no matter what was inun- dated. They didn’t think, for almost the entire dam-building enthusiasts’ century, in letting river nutrients reach marine flora and fauna. After all, the ocean had enough water already. No littoral moraines, please.

They were even shorter than that on what they had inklings of. Like the atomic bombers, in their ignorance of radiation, the macroatomic dammers forgot about evaporation. Water has the nasty habit of not only falling down as rain, which can be troublesome, but also falls up as vapor, and where it lands few people know.

Glen Canyon dammers knew some of the vapor would end up in Kansas, but where else, and what good would it do? Or how much bad?

They came up, eventually, with 600,000 or so acre-feet per year. Lake Mead disappears a similar amount. They never figured out, we fear, how many dams it would take to vaporize the entire river. There probably weren’t enough good dam sites to permit that to happen, and after all, the dams would eventually fill with sediment and lose their ability to vaporize much.

What they called bank storage would cure itself even faster, they thought. As a reservoir filled, water would invade the interstices in the river’s [reservoir’s] bank, but could be counted on to flow back into the reservoir as it drained.

Then Powell filled all it could of Glen Canyon, and they were surprised. It was no surprise that the evaporation stayed away. But it was a surprise to find out how much percolation forgot to come back.

So Powell was losing about a million acre-feet a year, not just the 600,000 they had expected to go to Kansas and east.

That was bad enough. But they hadn’t figured how much more they would lose, and still haven’t.

Back in the early 1950’s, at the time of the Echo Park battle, USGS hydrologist Luna Leopold, Aldo’s son, advised me to stick to my bird-watching and not bother with the Bureau of Reclamation’s data on evaporation. Being pretty Dutch, I stubbornly kept bothering and got away with it — even a little bit famous briefly.

Luna was embarrassed enough to tell me about another bad habit of rivers. They aggraded. Fill a dam up and the sediment will aggrade upstream, starting at a given dam [??], at the rate of one and a half feet per mile. Glen Canyon Dam’s builder, , didn’t want to hear it. I didn’t want to forget it. Glen Canyon Dam, the Bureau of Reclamation said, would create Lake Powell, extending 186 miles up the Colorado. Add a foot

Brower shooting footage that would become GCI’s video Let the River Run, page 10 ca. 1967. 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 11

and a half per mile and you will eventually have a new resource of sediment at the head of the reservoir that is 273 feet higher than the full reservoir first was at the head. And that new resource will be deeper still upstream as the river engineers itself up until a higher river gradient tells it to quit.

Maps and graphs may help me, but I’ll make a guess for now and come back a century or two later to check. If the river gradi- ent was a uniform1.5 feet per mile all they way up, aggradation would be tiring to think about. Floyd Dominy wouldn’t like it.

But there is another factor to play with.

As the sediment builds, Lake Powell doesn’t. It clogs. So do all the side canyons. At Rainbow Bridge, the clog could rise, as I remember it, some forty feet above where the stream now is and endanger the bridge’s abutment.

But concentrate on what happens to the area-capacity curve of Powell as a whole. As the sediment in Powell deepens, the capac- ity lowers and the area extends. And it is the area, not the depth, that the vapor and storage are going to mess with. The water of the reservoir can rise no higher than Glen Canyon Dam lets it, but it will stay higher more of the time. Meaning more evapora- tion and probably more bank storage.

In the Echo Park battle, the Bureau engineer (???) tried to confuse me by talking about the arithmetic of cones, and even drew a diagram on the House hearing room blackboard to confuse me further. But he lost. I had all the cone I needed in the Bureau’s area-capacity curve at my elbow, and the Bureau got the Rubber Slide Rule Award for stretching the truth in the Salt Lake Tribune.

My curve is buried in the Bancroft Library in Berkeley. I’ll just ask the Bureau to tell you how much Colorado River water they’ll be losing at Lake Powell as aggradation takes its toll.

Floyd Dominy won’t want to hear it. Compact managers need to.

Since Powell is going to lose more and more hard-to-get water as time goes by, it will save all hands a lot of waste and pollution — and frightful ecological and economic chaos — to let the river run through Glen Canyon Dam as soon — before ?? - as possi- ble.

They built Glen Canyon Dam, so they say, to keep control of the Upper Basin states’ water.

There is a better way to ( ??? ) water without wasting more and more of it. At no cost whatever, nature provides a service that permits water to flow downhill — so long as it isn’t dammed.

So let the river run again on its old schedule. Simply agree to measure the flow as it passes Lee’s Ferry and store it as Upper Basin water, with an invisible label on it, at Lake Mead.

Lease the water, at our ( ??? ) figure, to the Lower Basin states until the Upper Basin figures how to use it, accessibly, upstream.

That means more water for all. Without all that Powell pollution, it will go better with your bourbon, if you use it, and no one will have to sweat out an unbearable, unaffordable economic cost downstream.

And Glen Canyon can again be the place admired so movingly instead of remaining an obscenity disgrac- ing his name and obliterating the ultimate wonder of the world he discovered.

A simple paragraph, composed half a century ago, could have saved all this trouble then, and can spare it now. Not a moment too soon.

page 11 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 12

Floyd Dominy: The Grand Master of the Colorado River Storage Project by Dave Wegner

O n this 50-year anniversary of the Colorado River Storage River we are destined to revisit it again and again. Project Act it is only appropriate that we look back on the key My wife, Nancy Jacques, and I visited with Floyd on a beau- person who made it all happen. Floyd Dominy was the tiful summer day in Virginia. After a hectic drive from Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation from 1959 Georgetown, he met us at the door with enthusiasm that belies through 1969 and was intimately involved in the design, devel- the fact that he is 96 and one-half years old, and, as he contin- opment and implementation of the CRSP. Floyd’s manage- ues to remind me, he is not getting any younger. Never at a loss ment of the Bureau during the Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson for words, Mr. Dominy wanted to talk. Filled with memorabilia and Nixon Administrations will be remembered for the exten- from over 50 years of federal service, entering Floyd’s house is sive development of the Colorado River and, environmentally, like entering a museum to water development in the West and as setting the stages for the problems we have today in the the history of the Bureau of Reclamation. His house and garage watershed. are a testament to the power and connections that he wielded We are all familiar with the classic exchanges on the at Interior and in Congress. Pictures of Mr. Dominy with pres- Colorado River between Floyd Dominy and David Brower cap- idents, heads of state, diplomats, dignitaries, and engineers are tured by John McPhee in his book Encounters with the everywhere. There are bookends from the abutments of Glen Archdruid. These two, opposed perspectives defined the debate Canyon Dam, a musket, a painting of a Chinook salmon, and over conservation and water management for years and con- of course a large painting of directly behind his tinue to do so today. There remains a lot to be learned from chair. Floyd Dominy even today considers himself the most both of these voices from the past to help guide us into the important commissioner the Bureau of Reclamation has ever future. That brings us to this trip to Dominy’s farm in Virginia. had. I worked for Floyd as lead scientist on the Glen Canyon Of most interest to me were the stories that Mr. Dominy had Environmental Studies when we began them in 1983. It was on of the decision process regarding CRSP and Glen Canyon a fairly regular basis that I was summoned to Wahsington, D.C. Dam. The development of the Colorado River did not happen to brief the commissioner or the Secretary of the Interior on overnight – it was a long process and strategy that took into the effects of Glen Canyon Dam. One of the most intimidating consideration developing relationships with Congress, local walks in the Interior building is down the long hallway to the and regional water users, and most importantly, developing an commissioner’s office. Following you along every step are por- elite corps of engineers and hydrologists within the bureau. traits of the former commissioners, staring down at you. The Ultimately, the Denver Federal Center evolved to house and one portrait with the most inherent power and force of char- support Floyd’s engineers. In Mr. Dominy’s day, the chain-of- acter is undoubtedly that of Mr. Dominy — character he still command was short and decisions were quick: no leadership radiates today. councils, no protracted decision process, and no debate once I began a different relationship with Mr. Dominy not long he made up his mind. Dominy prided himself on knowing after I left the Bureau of Reclamation when we periodically what was going on in every office of the Bureau of Reclamation found ourselves debating each other about the value of Glen and on his ability to get things done. Canyon Dam and the history of Colorado River development. Nancy and I intend to put together the results of our visits As every good conversation should evolve, ours usually did in with Dominy in a format that will record the words and stories the nearest hotel bar. Over the years we found ourselves con- that were gathered and will continue to be gathered. tinuing to discuss what has evolved on the Colorado River and Comparing the original intent of CRSP with how it is being developing a friendship that continues today. The journey of used today is a classic case of the unintended consequences of life often gives us the opportunity to learn about people and a single decision. It is clear that Dominy’s original goal for places that we never would have thought possible. My friend- water development evolved from his early life in Nebraska and ship with Mr. Dominy is one of those instances: it does not and his deep seated desire to help the small farmers make sense on the surface; but then, life doesn’t always make and ranchers of the West. The outcome of large cities and sense. unsustainable agriculture endangering the region’s resources Mr. Dominy wants to keep the record straight and I want to was not what he originally envisioned. This documentation better understand how we arrived at the CRSP. I remember a will be coupled with discussions that I have had with others long time ago some advice that a congressman gave me regard- (David Brower, Katie Lee, Martin Litton and Marc Reisner, ing trying to reverse environmental damage: You must under- author of ). Stay tuned for the next installment stand how we got there if you are to fix any problem. Unless we — Floyd Dominy’s perspective on Echo Park, David Brower, understand the history of the development of the Colorado Martin Litton and the fight over Glen Canyon Dam.

page 12 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:34 AM Page 13

The Humpback Chub Has Its Day in Court: Success Challenging the Department of Interior by Dave Wegner T his past September 1, 2006 the U.S. District Court in Phoenix new information and data has been acquired on the relation- ruled that the Department of the Interior must reassess the ship between the fish and its habitat. The most important issue impacts of the operations of Glen Canyon Dam on the down- was brought forth by the government’s own scientists last stream population of humpback chub and its habitat in the October, when they reported that the population of humpback Grand Canyon. This was a victory for the environment and chub had dropped by over 50 percent, portending disastrous one that has been a long time coming. The lawsuit was brought consequences for the species. before the court by a consortium of conservation groups, The consortium of conservation groups agreed that the including Glen Canyon Institute, the Center for Biological bureau had not satisfied the original agreement and that they Diversity, Arizona Wildlife Federation, Living Rivers, and the were not going to do anything without legal intervention. The Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club. The case was court decision requires the Bureau of Reclamation to initiate a argued by the Western Environmental Law Center. supplemental EIS on the impacts that Glen Canyon Dam is A bit of history may help to put the importance of this ini- having on the humpback chub populations and to complete it tial victory in context. In 1973, immediately after the passage by October 15, 2008. Statements made by the Department of of the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife the Interior indicate that they are still considering if they have Service concluded that the operation of Glen Canyon Dam was to abide by the timeline set by the court. having a negative impact on the downstream Grand Canyon What’s next? populations of the humpback chub and other native fish • GCI will be working with the other conservation groups to species. The Fish and Wildlife Service attempted to get the implement a strategy to ensure that the BOR completes the Bureau of Reclamation to study the impacts and mitigate some supplemental EIS on the timeframe identified by the courts of the negative aspects. They had very limited success in chang- (October 15, 2008). ing the way the Bureau did business at the dam. • Ensure that the technical and scientific information is inte- As a result of the continued negative impacts on the envi- grated into the process in a scientifically valid, supportable and ronment, a series of environmental studies were initiated in transparent process. 1983, the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies. Two key prod- • Raise funds to continue to support our legal and scientific ucts evolved from the GCES work: the Grand Canyon review and attend meetings to ensure that the BOR lives up to Protection Act of 1992 and the completion in 1996 of the Glen their obligations (this is where you can help directly!) Canyon Dam Operations EIS. The USFWS developed, as part • Ensure that the Department of the Interior lives up to the of the EIS, a Biological Opinion on the impact of the proposed requirements of the 1996 EIS, Grand Canyon Protection Act, operational changes on the downstream species. The and the requirements outlined in the Glen Canyon Dam Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives agreed to in the EIS out- Adaptive Management program. lined a series of actions that the Bureau of Reclamation should • WE NEED YOUR HELP TO ENSURE THAT GCI CON- do in order to protect and recover the humpback chub. In the TINUES TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT DO decade since the Biological Opinion was agreed to, significant THEIR JOB. As a result of the successful court-approved settlement with the Department of the Interior, THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ANNOUNCES PUBLIC MEETINGS to outline their approach and identify issues to be evaluated in the EIS process. Our efforts are being lumped with the Department of the Interior’s efforts to review the Long-Term Experimental Plan for the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. The meetings are scheduled as follows:

* Thursday, January 4, 2007 - 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm, Embassy Suites, Phoenix Airport at 1515 North 44th Street, Cholla Room, Phoenix, AZ. * Friday, January 5, 2007 - 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm, Hilton Salt Lake City Center, 255 South West Temple, Salon 1, Salt Lake City, UT

It is imperative that the Department of the Interior fully address the issues outlined in the court settlement. Glen Canyon Institute will be fighting to ensure that this happens. We ask that if possible that you attend one of the meetings. We are developing a list of talking points for the meetings and will make them available to you on our website prior to the meeting. Please call us if you have any questions. —DW

page 13 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:35 AM Page 14

A WATERSHED EVENT IN SALT LAKE CITY Wallace Stegner Center Twelfth Annual Symposium: The Colorado River and the 1922 Compact. University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of Law. Friday and Saturday, March 2-3, 2007. Speakers include the biggest water buffaloes in the business, including Bob Johnson, new Commissioner of Reclamation, and Patricia Mulroy of the Southern Water Authority, as well as our friends Niklas Christensen, climate research scientist at the University of Washington, Jack Schmidt, geomor- phology professor at Utah State University, and Glen Canyon Institute President Richard Ingebretsen. This promises to be a rich and surprising conference. Please come out to see new ideas and old hackles raised, and to support the restoration of Glen Canyon.

EDITOR’S NOTE:

Thanks to contributors, espe- cially Jim Kay and Bill Wolverton for their generosity and years of commitment to documenting the Glen Canyon region.

Thanks also to our staff work- ing with Amy and Rich in Emigration Canyon: Simon Williams — Communications Coordinator; Eric Balken — Membership Coordinator; Weston McCool — Administrative Assistant.

SUBMISSIONS to Hidden Passage are always welcome. Send queries to editor at [email protected] or GCI at the address on page 2.

Recently-flushed section of Oak (Secret) Canyon at location once 130 feet below sur- page 14 face of reservoir. Photo by Jim Kay — jameskay.com 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:35 AM Page 15

UPSTREAM of th e Gle n A San Juan Rive r Journe y to Support Gle n Canyon Ins titute July 3-7, 2007

W ild Rive rs Expe ditions is ple as e d to pre s e nt "Ups tre am of th e Gle n," a San Juan Rive r journe y to be ne fit th e Gle n Canyon Ins titute and its w ork to re s tore a h e alth y Colorado Rive r th rough Gle n Canyon.

Th is five day, 58-m ile e xpe dition into th e re m ote low e r canyon of th e San Juan Rive r--ups tre am of its conflue nce w ith th e Colorado Rive r and Gle n Canyon--affords s om e of th e Colorado Plate au's m os t w onde rful s ce ne ry and s olitude . As it cuts de e ply into th e Monum e nt Upw arp, th e San Juan form s a s pe ctacular canyon rich w ith ge ologic h is tory, de ligh tful s ide canyons and biological dive rs ity.

As trip s ch olar, Dr. Rich Inge bre ts on w ill dis cus s th e h is torical, conte m porary and future dim e ns ions of Colorado Rive r w ate r cons e rvation as it re late s to th e Colorado Rive r s ys te m , its canyon e nvironm e nts and Gle n Canyon. W e w ill als o, of cours e , le arn about GCI's im portant w ork th e re in, for w h ich w e s e e k to rais e $8000 th rough donations s te m m ing from trip proce e ds .

In addition to le arning about th e s e is s ue s and th e canyon's ge ology and natural h is tory, our days w ill be s pe nt floating by raft or inflatable k ayak , h ik ing s ide trails and canyons , and ge ne rally e njoying th e canyon country s ple ndor. Eve nings cam ping along s andy be ach e s w ill include s e le cte d re adings , dis cus s ions , h um or and s tar gazing. Cos t: $1100 pe r pe rs on For m ore inform ation, ple as e contact: As w ith all W ild Rive rs trips , th is be ne fit W ild Rive rs Expe ditions at fe ature s caring, profe s s ional guide s , de licious , h e alth y m e als and e xce lle nt inte rpre tation of th e 800.422.7654 / w w w .rive rs andruins .com / rive r's ge ologic and natural h is torie s . Th is is a w ildriv@ frontie rne t.ne t gre at trip for a gre at caus e ... Ple as e join us !

page 15 65391_Nwsltr4.qxd 12/19/06 10:35 AM Page 16

Boat in recently-exposed section of Oak (Secret) Canyon with water level 140 feet below full pool. Photo by Jim Kay — jameskay.com

Never let them beat you down as being doomsters or naysayers. Because if you are against a dam, you're for a river. It's time to let this river run free. — David Brower, last speech at Glen Canyon Dam, March, 2000.

Pre-Sorted Standard US Postage PAID Bountiful, Utah Permit No. 1

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED