Grand Canyon Gets Flooded, Turns Out It's Man
by Jasmin Malik Chua, Jersey City, USA on 03. 6.08
Millions of gallons of water coursed through the Grand Canyon on Wednesday in a flood designed to force healthy river sediment through the ecosystem. The dam is releasing four to five times its usual flow during the three-day flood, which U.S. officials hope will be enough to restore the sandbars on the Colorado River downstream. (The canyon has been flooded twice before, in 1996 and 2004.)
Before the dam was constructed in 1963 to generate hydroelectric power, natural flooding from the warm and muddy river built up sandbars that are essential to native plant and fish species. With its sediment blocked by the dam today, the river runs cool and clear, a marked change that has helped speed the extinction of four fish species and push two others, including the endangered humpback chub, near the brink.
But is it a case of too little, too late? Environmentalists say that one giant flush isn't enough to restore the river—and may actually cause more harm than good.
“This so-called experiment ignores the results of a decade worth of research obtained with more than $80 million tax dollars,” Jeff Ruch of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibilities tells Times Online, claiming the flood went against the latest scientific evidence. “This week’s high-flow stunt is nothing but a green wash to mask another betrayal of the Grand Canyon by its political custodians."
One flood isn't enough, Steve Martin, superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park, tells the Los Angeles Times, citing 10 years of research that at a cost of $80 million had shown that the flooding as planned could irreparably harm the surrounding ecology and resources. In fact, he says, holding off follow-up floods for months would leave endangered species, sandbars used by river-rafting trips, and archaeological treasures at river's edge diminished "almost to the point of no return." ::AP, ::Reuters, ::Times Online, and the ::Los Angeles Times
It bothers me that they refer to this as an experiment.
doh - our fault again.
Gary
http://cancerlinks.blogspot.com/
The cold reality that we are causing whole species to go extinct, ecologies to shift, and priceless historical artifacts destroyed right in one of our prized national landmarks just to have electricity. I love it and need it as much as everyone else, but it is truly daunting to think of how much harm befalls the rest of the world in every area for it.
Well, ecosystems aren't exactly dying, but they are changing. You make a drastic change to anything and nature will adapt, and faster than you think. I think the problem is that 1) it's not enough to sustain the marine ecosystem, and 2) it's harmful to the ecosystem that has been taking its place.
I love when people say "O, we need to use more renewables like hydroelecric......", and then they bitch about how bad dams are on the local environment. You can't have it both ways, make up your mind.
Like it or not, the Colorado River was changed forever with the construction of the Hoover Dam and the Glen Canyon Dam. The eco-systems around these areas are adapting to the change, and evolving with the new environment. Unfortunately it will never return to it's natural state, but I think the research and experiments need to continue to find the appropriate balance.
I think that "Flush" just digs out the vegetation that only holds by grasping on those loose rocks and taking away with it all the soil.
I don't know how they think. I just see it has if nature was a crap flushing it down the drain.
That damn is a big toilet reservoir.
"They could just let it flow at a regular debit..."