The Dam Poll
In October of 2001 we sent out
a poll reexaming the opinions of Grand Canyon River Guides’ (gcrg)
Membership regarding which management options of Glen Canyon Dam they
preferred. Cards sent to guide members were green, to general members,
yellow. As prescribed by Grand Canyon River Guides’ bylaws, the
gcrg guide membership continues to be the “guiding body” with
regard to gcrg policy. In a de facto, yet very real sense, Grand Canyon
river guides act as stewards of the river corridor; they are the most
familiar with its resources, and they have made, as individuals, the greatest
personal investments in this region. Even so, we on the gcrg Board very
much wanted to know the opinions of our general members as well. Perhaps
surprisingly, as you’ll see, the opinions of these two membership
categories were similar.
For gcrg, taking a “stand” on any particular issue has never
been easy. One of the traits that characterizes our guide membership is
a diversity of opinions. While, arguably, it was very possible for the
gcrg Board to formulate its own consensus opinion and then present it
as representative of gcrg, we on the board felt that this sort of representative
“government” was a bit pompous in that a true poll of our
membership was not only possible but also easy—and, of course, inarguably
accurate.
What this poll revealed was a number of minor revelations. First, while
notoriously weak when voting on past issues, on this one, 35.5 percent
of guide members responded (262 of 738 guide members) and 35 percent of
general members (406 of 1,083) responded. This, for the record, is a strong
response.
In that a primary question of this poll was whether or not gcrg should
take a position regarding the management options of Glen Canyon Dam, here
is the break down. Of guide members, 217 said yes, take a position; 22
said no, don’t; 23 more said we should defer taking a position.
Of general members, 347 said take a position; 16 said, no, don’t
take a position, and yet 23 more said defer taking a position. Hence,
no matter how you cut the numbers, 87 percent of responding members said
gcrg should take a position. And do so now. But what position?
This is where the rubber meets the road. The table in this article illustrates
how the opinions shuffled into place. Clearly the preferred option of
Grand Canyon River Guides’ membership is to endorse a full-scale
Environmental Impact Study of the entire Colorado River Basin—upstream
and downstream of Glen Canyon Dam—with a focus to illuminate the
true ecological, social, and economical effects of each management option
of Glen Canyon Dam operation, including, and this is the critical point,
full consideration being made in all research as to the effects of decommissioning
of Glen Canyon Dam as a hydropower plant and subsequently draining Lake
Powell.
As is obvious in these data, a fairly close second preferred option—endorsed
by 34 percent each of guide and general members is to decommission Glen
Canyon Dam as a power plant now. In these members’ opinions, adequate
data supporting this decommission option already exist.
A total of nine percent of gcrg members favor retaining Glen Canyon Dam
as an operational hydropower plant—and hence with a relatively full
reservoir behind it—more or less in a business as usual manner.
Only two percent of gcrg members rejected the above three options in favor
of other personally held options.
Note that the most favored option, the full-scale,
entire-basin eis is neither an extreme nor an unprecedented concept. National
environmental impact research on the scale required here has been accomplished
for the Columbia River Basin and for the Everglades.
The combined Fall meeting of Grand Canyon River Guides and Colorado Plateau
River Guides at Sand Island last November helped expand the vision of
several gcrg Board members as to the severity of the upstream impacts
created by Glen Canyon Dam operations and the need to reevaluate the ecological
and economic parameters of the dam’s operation before the damages
it has been causing become even more difficult and expensive to mitigate.
This awareness of the current severe levels of degradation of several
of our nation’s irreplaceable natural wonders has prompted the board
of Grand Canyon River Guides to take a stand by presenting an organizational
stance in regard to Glen Canyon Dam operations and to the levels of acceptable
damage of such operations.
This concern lies firmly within the stated goals of Grand Canyon River
Guides. Indeed it is our top goal, namely: “Protecting Grand Canyon.”
Gcrg has demonstrated its long dedication to this goal in 1991 in the
original Glen Canyon Environmental Studies eis process, in the passage
of the 1992 Grand Canyon Protection Act, and by participating in the current
adaptive management process influencing Glen Canyon Dam operations.
We’d like to thank all of you who took the time and the 21-cent
stamp to let the world know your assessment and opinion of the most preferred
option with regard to Glen Canyon Dam operations and the best protection
for Grand Canyon.
Michael P. Ghiglieri
“Other” comments
We thought it only fair that we include what folks meant
when they checked “Other position” on this poll. One or two
longer comment pieces were included as “Dear Eddy’s”
in this issue.
General Member—“Other” comments
• “E” (Retain Glen Canyon Dam as an operating hydropower
plant) with the condition that it be decommissioned when our foreign oil
dependency decreases to less than fifteen percent of total oil demand.
• “F” (Endorse a full scale eis) with the goal of “D”
(Decommission Glen Canyon Dam)
• Endorse recommendations of the Rubin et al (usgs) memorandum of
August 2000, now!
• Replace the dam with low head hydro for power and an almost natural
river. “Low head hydro” uses natural flow and diverts part
of the flow for power returning water downstream. See rivers in Europe!
Guide Member—“Other” Comments
• Study the issue considering water use and politics, power needs
and production costs, environmental impacts of production. The issue is
bigger than the ecosystem of the Colorado River. The dam will go away
eventually. When is the right time frame?
• I prefer to be downstream…
• Really a combo of “D” (Decommission) and “F”
(Endorse eis). Decommission the dam and explore the steps/mitigations
to do it “best”/most desirably.
• Create a constant flow schedule and creative plan for beach deposition.
• Allow a forum for all positions regarding Glen Canyon Dam.
• Drain the reservoir to the intakes, continue power plant operations!
