Lake Level following 3 day flush - CRC still open

Status
Not open for further replies.
My point was to say, before the dam there was ups and downs to the runoff and NO consistency to the flows, but no bitching because it was " all natural".. They did say that this was to help the chub habitat, then changed to something else , when even they realized how stupid it sounded... If one has no brain capacity, it's very hard to be a genius...
 
I have called this exactly what it is from the beginning. The CHUB flush. I used to get alot more upset over it, until I realized that it doesn't change the yearly water release at ALL. The allocation will be released regardless, drought or not. Every drop released for the chub flush, counts for the yearly totals, so there is no use getting so upset over their continued failed experiment :cool:
 
But "I" think the wasted "experiment" does impact the trout fishery down stream as is supported by the documents I have read in the last few days.
The "experiments" are scheduled to continue beyond 2020 even though we know what the outcome is going to be. I ask again WHY?
The deleterious effects of the fall HFEs are well known. The outcome, each and every time, is well known and repeatable. They are well documented. Why do we continue with them? When does an "experiment" become "normal operating procedure"?
Nobody on the water boards wants to address that question.
Or, at least, I haven't found that question asked or answered.
 
But "I" think the wasted "experiment" does impact the trout fishery down stream as is supported by the documents I have read in the last few days.
The "experiments" are scheduled to continue beyond 2020 even though we know what the outcome is going to be. I ask again WHY?
The deleterious effects of the fall HFEs are well known. The outcome, each and every time, is well known and repeatable. They are well documented. Why do we continue with them? When does an "experiment" become "normal operating procedure"?
Nobody on the water boards wants to address that question.
Or, at least, I haven't found that question asked or answered.

When the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies (GCES) began in the early 1980's, it was only supposed to last a couple years. The purpose of it was to integrate operations of Glen Canyon Dam to be more compatible with downstream resources and users. Then phase 2 of the GCES started around the mid 1980's and that was only expected to last a few years. Then as more studies were conducted, more questions had to be answered, then more monitoring needed to be done, and more "nice to know but so what projects" were funded. The GCES snowballed into a monster that kept going and growing. Additional funding was then needed for adaptive management programs, more people were hired, larger facilities were built, and the government got bigger and bigger. It was a democrats dream come true.

In August 2018, Trump tried to cut funding for the GCES and terminate it. Here is a link about it.

http://www.knau.org/post/jobs-research-risk-after-government-defunds-grand-canyon-programs

In September 2018, Congress passed legislation to fund it. Here is a link to that info.

https://azdailysun.com/news/congres...cle_9db81d95-2459-5f92-962f-3aa60db663f9.html

I think the only way some of these projects will stop is if Congress stops the funding. Biologists or other scientists are not going to support terminating projects and decreasing funding because they would be out of a job. The federal government is legally obligated to protect the Grand Canyon so the agencies are not going to stop anything. So research projects are continued and what starts out as an experiment, becomes normal operating procedure.
 
Last edited:
When the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies (GCES) began in the early 1980's, it was only supposed to last a couple years. The purpose of it was to integrate operations of Glen Canyon Dam to be more compatible with downstream resources and users. Then phase 2 of the GCES started around the mid 1980's and that was only expected to last a few years. Then as more studies were conducted, more questions had to be answered, then more monitoring needed to be done, and more "nice to know but so what projects" were funded. The GCES snowballed into a monster that kept going and growing. Additional funding was needed, more people were hired, larger facilities were built, and the government got bigger and bigger. It was a democrats dream come true.

In August 2018, Trump tried to cut funding for the GCES and terminate it. Here is a link about it.

http://www.knau.org/post/jobs-research-risk-after-government-defunds-grand-canyon-programs

In September 2018, Congress passed legislation to fund it. Here is a link to that info.

https://azdailysun.com/news/congres...cle_9db81d95-2459-5f92-962f-3aa60db663f9.html

I think the only way some of these projects will stop is if funding stops. Biologists or other scientists are not going to support a decrease in funding because they would be out of a job. So projects are continued and what starts out as an experiment, becomes normal operating procedure.

23 million dollars funds the GCES annually? ANNUALLY? Holly Cow!! That is a lot of tax dollars spent, ANNUALLY! I almost started a rant on government spending atrocities, but I'll refrain.......although I really want to go for it as government waste and inefficiency drive me absolutely crazy.......and it obviously doesn't matter which political party is driving the boat......
 
All for doing what?
Drawing the same outlines of sand bars year after year?
We have us a government funded gravy train here, WOW!
Thanks for the informative post fursniper.
 
23 million dollars funds the GCES annually? ANNUALLY? Holly Cow!! That is a lot of tax dollars spent, ANNUALLY! I almost started a rant on government spending atrocities, but I'll refrain.......although I really want to go for it as government waste and inefficiency drive me absolutely crazy.......and it obviously doesn't matter which political party is driving the boat......

Maybe this 23M figure is why entry fees went to $30.00 per vehicle. $60.00. We were caught off guard this year when we entered the gate at AP.
I can't recall for sure but seems like last year was $28.00 for truck and boat total. Must be my old age memory.
 
Maybe this 23M figure is why entry fees went to $30.00 per vehicle. $60.00. We were caught off guard this year when we entered the gate at AP.
I can't recall for sure but seems like last year was $28.00 for truck and boat total. Must be my old age memory.

We paid $50 per vehicle going into BF in sept for a year's privilege.
 
We paid $50 per vehicle going into BF in sept for a year's privilege.

Just an FYI, if anyone is 62 or over you can get a lifetime senior pass for nation parks and recreation areas. I believe it costs $80 and LP is the only place that I had to pay to access but I did get 50% off. I paid $25 for a year pass. It has paid for itself several times over in my case. Any federal land that I have entered has accepted it and the national parks are free. The card is good for a vehicle or a motorcycle or the card holder and three persons 16 & over where per person fees are charged. I know most of you can not get this because of age but there must be some of you on this site that are my age! I went to our local Forrest service office to buy it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top