112 



Letter to editor, Washington Post, August 4, 1966,, on Colorado 

 River Dams. 



ifour editorial &quot;Colorado 

 Raver Issue&quot; (July 14) fails to 

 consider various important as 

 pects of the matter which 

 seem to prove that neither 

 one or both dams would add 

 to the available water supply. 

 Hence the Grand Canyon 

 should be protected against 

 them. 



The water in the Col 

 orado River is already over- 

 commited. Further storage 

 would not add to the supply. 

 Rather It would diminish it 

 through evaporation and seep 

 age into the banks of the res 

 ervoirs. It would also by evap 

 oration contribute, to the salin 

 ity of the water which 

 reaches Mexico, a very gore 

 point with Mexico. Other 

 dams on the lower Colorado 

 . can each store about three 

 years average flow 1 of the 

 river. 



The Reclamation Service 

 apparently envisions the sale 

 of power to be generated at 

 Marble Gorge and Bridge Can 

 yon as useful in helping fi 

 nance other water projects in 

 the lower basin including 

 importing water from outside 

 the Colorado River Basin. 

 However, Senator Anderson is 

 quoted as reporting that Glen 

 Canyon Dam &quot;is generating 

 power at six mills per kilowatt 

 hour. That is almost too high 

 to be competitive. At the new 

 Four Corners plant in this 

 State (New Mexico) with coal 

 to generate steam, power is 

 being generated at four mills 

 , per kilowatt hour.&quot; 



The recreational values 

 claimed are not supported by 

 Secretary Udall s Bureau of 

 Outdoor Recreation which re 

 ports &quot;No additional recrea 

 tion benefits, can be claimed 

 for the proposed Bridge Can 

 yon Dam because of the unus 

 ual existing recreation values 

 of the proposed reservoir area 

 and the adverse effects the 

 dam and reservoir would have 

 on these values.&quot; 



Thus it boils down to the 

 fact that the two proposed 

 dams would waste water, 

 &quot;woTrnrsazrio Its salinity, and&quot; 

 that power can be had by 

 cheaper means. So, what ar 

 gument is there, for impairing 

 the Grand Canyon, invading 

 the Park and the Monument, 

 and seriously diminishing the 

 flow of the river which creat 

 ed the canvon? 



