We can disregard Braden Parker's intense plea to restore the Colorado River until his arguments make more sense ("Save the Colorado River," Readers' Forum, June 2). Glaring deficiencies include his fabricated "energy experts" designating the dam's power output as insignificant, scientifically unsubstantiated water seepage through sandstone and a "tremendous amount of sediment" settling against the dam when actually the sediment settles where the Colorado River enters Lake Powell, 100 miles to the north.
Against the "pros" the major con is Parker trying to con us over to his flawed viewpoint.
Donald B. Gunderson
Salt Lake City
- In our opinion: Mounting evidence suggests...
- About Utah: A big deal just got bigger
- In our opinion: U.S. Conference of Catholic...
- In our opinion: Trump unmatched as a...
- My view: Have we crippled our kids with a...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Politicos...
- Robert J. Samuelson: Whatever happened to the...
- Letter: Good Samaritan
- In our opinion: Trump unmatched as a... 69
- In our opinion: Mounting evidence... 39
- George F. Will: The low depths of... 27
- Letter: Good Samaritan 22
- In our opinion: U.S. Conference of... 20
- Letter: Inversion concerns 19
- My view: Keystone Pipeline not in... 17
- A. Scott Anderson: Inversions will... 16