LRC V2, N1, January 2002
Ecologists have known for years that the operation of Glen Canyon Dam is causing negative impacts on the Colorado River ecosystem in Grand Canyon National Park. The Grand Canyon Protection Act was passed a decade ago to force action to reduce environmental damage downstream of the dam. Yet scientific data show the situation is worsening.
LIVING RIVERS and other groups are calling for an immediate overhaul of the dam management program set up by the Act. The program was established in 1996 following completion of an environmental impact statement on dam operations. A stakeholders group known as the Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG) guides scientific research and management activities. According to Randy Peterson, Director of Adaptive Management Programs for the Bureau of Reclamation (BuRec), the AMWG has operated since 1997 with an annual budget of roughly $8 million. But many wonder if the AMWG is capable of making the necessary changes required to protect and restore the native ecosystem.
?The science shows that the program is failing,? said David Haskell, retired Science Director of Grand Canyon National Park, and former AMWG representative for the Park Service. ?The program has been extremely successful and effective, not in complying with the Grand Canyon Protection Act, but in demonstrating that as long as the dam continues to be operated for water and power needs, the ecosystem will continue to be degraded. Five years and forty million dollars have bought us the knowledge that nothing?s improving.?
In a letter delivered to the AMWG at its January meeting, LIVING RIVERS was joined by a number of groups in demanding action. Among the key concerns is the structure of the process that has accorded hydropower production equal importance to restoration of native habitat.
?Protecting native fish and other species is a higher priority than generating cheap hydropower,? said David Sherman, a Sierra Club representative in Flagstaff. ?Changes are needed now to get the adaptive management program on track and in compliance with the law.?
LIVING RIVERS is seeking a supplemental environmental impact statement on dam operations to address the rapid decline of the river?s ecosystem. The Grand Canyon Protection Act and other laws require agencies to protect the park?s riverine environment, but the responsible federal agencies have failed to make progress toward this goal. Management has not benefited the endangered humpback chub. Non-native trout, on the other hand, thrive despite scientists? warnings that trout prey on native fish and compete for a limited food supply.
?Science shows that changes are needed, but those changes have not been implemented,? said Dr. Robert Witzeman, of Maricopa Audubon Society in Phoenix. ?There is resistance to doing what needs to be done.?
LIVING RIVERS is also calling on the AMWG to recommend changes in dam operations to mimic natural, seasonal fluctuations in river flows, remove non-native fish, and reintroduce and recover endangered native fish. Scientists now openly wonder whether it is possible to adequately mitigate the impacts of Glen Canyon Dam. Decommissioning may prove to be the only option. Time is running out for the Grand Canyon, and hard choices must be made. LIVING RIVERS will continue to press for doing what?s right for the river.
