For immediate release:
October 10, 2016
Contacts: John Weisheit, Colorado Riverkeeper: 435-260-2590
Tom Martin, River Runners for Wilderness: 928-556-0742; 928-856-9065
Robin Silver, Center for Biological Diversity: 602-799-3275
(Moab, UT) On October 7, following six years of study, the Bureau of Reclamation released revised guidelines for operating Glen Canyon Dam. Though the dam is viewed by many as integral to the Colorado’s existing water delivery infrastructure, leading Colorado River observers point out that the new operating regime, scheduled to take affect next month, is based on antiquated objectives propped up by outdated science.
“In this era of climate change it’s unbelievable that Reclamation continues to employ modeling results that suggest shortages are decades down the road when their reservoirs are at all time lows,” says John Weishiet with Living Rivers/Colorado Riverkeeper.
The new guidelines rely entirely on surface water forecasts from Reclamation’s widely criticized 2012 Colorado River Water Supply and Demand Study. In October of last year 23 Colorado River scholars requested Interior Secretary Jewell engage the National Academy of Sciences to review these findings, due numerous deficiencies. And just last week the journal Science reported that if current trends continue, “We find that regional temperature increases [in the Southwest] alone push megadrought risk above 70, 90, or 99% by the end of the century.”
Principally, these new guidelines are to improve habitat conditions for endangered native fish in Grand Canyon National Park, downstream of the dam. However, beyond downplaying climate change, Reclamation stresses its new guidelines are not required to “…create a plan for providing water to the Colorado River in Grand Canyon during extended drought.”
“Glen Canyon Dam inflicts the greatest harm on Colorado River native fish, once among the most unique assemblages in the world,” says Robin Silver with Center for Biological Diversity. “Interior’s cavalier attitude toward providing water for thier recovery is wholly inconsistent with its mandate under the Endangered Species Act.”
So too is Reclamation’s mismanagement of Colorado River flows, says Tom Martin with River Runners for Wilderness. “The biotic community in the river below the dam has been devastated and is in desperate need of sediment, much more woody material, water temperature and flow regime consistent with the river corridor’s historic natural conditions, not just prescriptions for redoing old experiments that perpetuate business as usual."
Lack of complete information on water scarcity is not the only major omission the public should be concerned about. The study also lacks a truthful and up-to-date assessment of the known safety risks associated with the continued operations of Glen Canyon Dam.
“We may be in a drought situation now, but no credible scientist denies the basin won’t again experience a major flood even as climate change persists,” add Weisheit. “New research reveals that historic flooding on the Colorado River is of a frequency and magnitude twice what Reclamation has planned for, and Glen Canyon Dam almost failed from a comparatively minor flood in 1983.”
“The more we try to work with Glen Canyon Dam, and the complexities of the impacts it creates, the more we really need to address whether it might be best to eliminate it from the system altogether,” stresses Weisheit. “Better we do this in a controlled way then before nature does it for us.” ###
