Deseret News | High flow: Glen Canyon Dam water release to move sediment downstream

Reader comments
High flow: Glen Canyon Dam water release to move sediment downstream

Wondering | 8:01 a.m. March 5, 2008

While I think maintaining an ecosystem is important I still wonder why when the lake is way down we have to let 41,000 cubic feet per second of water out of the lake. That is about 48 billion gallons of water California is going to benefit from and what good will it be for Utah, nothing.

Makes one wonder whose pockets are being lined over this one. Do you suppose some of the decision makers work in the Utah legislature also?

Anonymous | 8:04 a.m. March 5, 2008

Why do all reporters continue to parrot the false notion of "delicate ecosystems"? From news reports every ecosystem is "delicate", from the desert, to the jungles, the rain forests, the oceans--it doesn't matter. Environmentalists have completely brainwashed the public about this. In fact, all ecosystems are extremely hearty, they are resilient, they are tough, they are nearly impossible to kill. Life is a powerful force, and it adapts, it comes back, it survives.

How about we be truthful for awhile and start calling these ecosystems for what they are, very, very hearty; very very tough, very very resilient.

Decieved | 8:22 a.m. March 5, 2008

This is no more than political lies to John Q. Public. It's all about under the table politics, and some financial gain for water. It benefits Vegas and other downstream users and is no more than that. How stupid do these people think we are? Everytime Lake Mead gets critically low we get this same weak reason for a water release.

Comments continue below

Jake | 8:50 a.m. March 5, 2008

The upper Colorado states never use their full allotment of water. Releasing a drop in the bucket from the resevoir will have no effect whatsoever on the use that any of those states have for that water.

It is laughable to suggest that all ecosystems are not delicate. Humans have caused faster and more widespread extinctions than any non-catastropic meteor event in the earth's history. Dumping a little water out of a damn to try to mitigate our harm is the very least we can do to maintain a balance between human development and comfort on the one hand, and healthy and robust natural habitat on the other.

Get rid of the Dam | 9:11 a.m. March 5, 2008

Its been proven that running rivers and not stopped ones allow for better water usage. Open lake bodies lose millions of gallons to evaporation, much more that natural river flow. Utah doesn't benefit from the power source the dam creates and Utah will consistently lose control of water rights to bigger communities south.
Utah is just too bull-headed in thinking the recreational use of Powell somehow negates the cons of having this dam.
Its going to be one of those things that we will regret when it happens but do nothing till it does.

Gotta love it | 9:18 a.m. March 5, 2008

You gotta love it when the burocrats urged by environmentalists try to simulate nature and play God.

Our tiny tantrums insisting that nature do what we want it to and the earth conform to our plans always remind me of how small we are when compared to the forces of nature.

Bye Bye Lake Powell | 10:03 a.m. March 5, 2008

For quite some time (many since 1966) the environmentalists have been trying to get rid of Lake Powell. Apparently they see this as their chance. The lake is down 100 + feet and should start filling this year. However, if the environmental movement can keep the level down -- or drop it, as it appears they want to do -- then that makes it that much easier to drain permanently in the future. When environmental fanatics quit drinking water and using electricity, then we should listen to them. Until then, let's look out for the good of the many, not be swayed by hypocritical environmental fanatics (which have infiltrated our Parks, BLM, and Forest Service departments.)

To Anonymous | 10:04 a.m. March 5, 2008

I'm not a conservationist or anything like it, but those comments are so silly, I laughed. I really thought you were being sarcastic.

Anonymous | 10:07 a.m. March 5, 2008

Hmm the water is being released. That does defeat the purpose of a dam. hmm rivers may lose less water to evaporation but we don't get any use from that water in a storage capacity which is the purpose of the dam. The dam's purpose outweighs all of the envirmental effects. It is that benifical. Oh and I use to be a local resident for full discloser. I enjoyed lee's farry. I enjoyed the cold water on a hot day in the canyon. I enjoyed haveing a wash machine run off of dam electricity. i would have perfered nuclear power but you can't have everything. Oh and I like trout. so what is the downside to the dam. well the beaches in the canyon aren't as good. and all that silt at the bottom of lake powel isn't good. And a fish died. four fish to be more specific. hmmm....

This will reduces bio diversity | 10:27 a.m. March 5, 2008

The dam is already low, releasing this water for better or worse, reduces the amount of electricity it is able to produce. Making this electricity with coal instead increases green house gases. This causes global warmning. This will kill of a lot of fragile eco systems. This will reduce bio diversity.

LOL | 10:45 a.m. March 5, 2008

One hardly needs environmentalists to get rid of lake Powell - God is doing a very good job of it.

Thomasson | 11:51 a.m. March 5, 2008

The water that is being released will help the canyon and all the farmes and drinking water down stream. i beleive that this is a good thing but to keep in mind that the dam also needs to be untilized properly for electricy. "Bowing down to the gods of enviromentalism" is not the answer but being good stewarts to the land is. Let us not fall "prey" to the presure brought on by the exstremist who would love to see all of us "eating grass" and running around naked but again I call for the good stewardship of the land and being mindful to protect it from both side.. the mass poluters and the the enviromental extremist.

Make Lake Powell Bigger | 12:50 p.m. March 5, 2008

Do these "Eco-terrorists" who advocate removing Glen Canyon Dam and other dams, returning all rivers to their "wild" state, while asserting that water usage will improve, really think that we are that stupid?

We live in a desert. Dams like Glen canyon have made this possible. We drink water and irrigate our crops instead of dumping it all into the Pacific Ocean. Progress is good. Look at the way people lived here 500 years ago before there were any dams.

I say make Lake Powell bigger. And stop releasing 'wasting' water to move the mud around a little bit in the river bottom below.

Lake Mead | 1:19 p.m. March 5, 2008

My brother worked for the Las Vegas Water Department. He told in 2004 that even if didn't rain another drop ever again--there was enough water in Lake Mead to provide Las Vegas' water needs through the year 2027. Lake Mead doesn't need the water. Period.

What would happen . . . | 1:21 p.m. March 5, 2008

if they got rid of the damn. They would get rid of St. George. Get the eco-freaks out of the way, so the 100,000-plus residents of Washington County can live their lives. Don't make us lose our city from some dang sand crab.

Anonymous | 6:09 p.m. March 5, 2008

Last time they did this they flush 2/3 of the endangered species down stream. Maybe we can get the rest of them this time and be rid of them.

abbey | 6:45 p.m. March 5, 2008

Hayduke Lives!

JackSumner | 7:41 p.m. March 5, 2008

This is the Grand Canyon, a place that everyone should see before they die. And the Colorado River is the living heart of the canyon. Glen Canyon Dam has changed the river, but these scientists are attempting to restore some of the natural scene. From the tone of some of the comments above, it sounds like many of you would agree with an old political slogan: "Not one penny for scenery!". It sounds pretty ignorant to me. Selfish, too; this isn't going to break the bank.

river runner | 11:52 a.m. April 17, 2008

Make Lake Powell bigger.....are you that dumb???? I launched the day of the release and saw before MY own eyes new beautiful beaches....sorry folks it worked.

Anonymous | 6:11 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Actually you have it all wrong. "gotta love it" It's not that we want nature to do what We want but more nature do what it was intended to do..HELLO!!!

You gotta love it when the burocrats urged by environmentalists try to simulate nature and play God.

Our tiny tantrums insisting that nature do what we want it to and the earth conform to our plans always remind me of how small we are when compared to the forces of nature.

Alee | 10:12 p.m. Sept. 10, 2009

nice page

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.