« Experimental Flow Statement by Terry Gunn // Price tag for flood of Grand Canyon: $8M Arizona Daily Sun »
Public Comment Period is Over
Posted on February 15th, 2008 by TGunn
Comments should be submitted to:
GCexpReleases@uc.usbr.gov.
The Environmental Assessment is available for public review on the Internet by following the link at www.usbr.gov/uc/envdocs/ea/gc/2008hfe/index.html
4 Responses to “Public Comment Period is Over”
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I am opposed to the underhanded handling of the Colorado River by government bureaucrats. It took years to regulate the water flow from Glen Canyon Dam to perserve the recreational benefits below the dam. The first planned FLOOD flow was hugely unsuccessful relative to the objectives (rebuild beaches in the Grand Canyon). I would like to know why another one is planned when the first was not successful. Who is behind these experiments? Where do we complain to Washington?
My public comments are as follows:
Do not conduct this experiment and instead investigate nondestructive methods of building beaches in the Grand Canyon and to use common sense and sound judgment in dealing with this and all future planned experiments on the Colorado River.
Remove the proposal for low steady flows in September and October from the experiment. I support clean energy and encourage the use of power generation from Glen Canyon Dam.
I support the NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE.
I support the NO ACTION ALTERNANTIVE.
Water. It’s the lifeline of Arizona. It’s amazing to me that in a time of major growth and reduction of resourses, that anyone would even consider the waste of our most vital element of survival. Lake Powell has been at a low pool for how long? Lake Mead has been at a low pool for how long? Instead of wasting more water it seems we should be concentrating on preserving water, and doing everything within our powers to bring these lakes back to full pool. There was a recent study done by the Scripps Instutue of Oceanography that should be taken in to consideration before one more drop is wasted. The study’s findings indicated that there is a 10 percent chance that Lake Mead could be dry by 2014 and a 50 percent chance that reservoir levels will drop too low to allow hydroelectric power generation by 2017. There is a 50 percent chance the lake will go dry by 2021, the study says. We need to conserve upstream water, to make sure our lives don’t come to an abrupt stop. Please, for my sons generation, do not waste this water.
Once again a goverment dept./bureau is kicking a dead horse so to speak. Previously the Bureau of Reclimation has experimented and failed in The Grand Canyon. They need to consider other non destructive methods of building beaches in the GC. There are always alternative answers, one which can accomplish the desired goal and sustain all recreational activities and thier associated economies.
In this time of record high fossil fuel costs, depleted supplies and most importantly the need for clean energy sources, to plan to reduce flows in September and October, which of course will lower electrical output from Glen Canyon Dam, requiring made up electric to be generated elsewhere in a non clean energy plant. I oppose the scheduled low flow .
I as well support the No Action Alternative