Grand Canyon Issues
What Can You Do?
Tell your congressional representative and Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar that science and law should be followed in Grand Canyon National Park. See our goals for specifics.
Share this page
The Trust and NPS urged Reclamation to consider a SASF alternative that complied with and implemented the legal requirement set forth in the 1994 Biological Opinion. In violation of law, Reclamation did not consider a SASF alternative that comported with the 1994 Biological Opinion.
The Grand Canyon Trust sues Reclamation over ESA, NEPA, and GCPA claims
On March 17, 2008, the Grand Canyon Trust filed in federal court a legal complaint containing eight claims, including Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and Grand Canyon Protection Act (GCPA) claims.
ESA Section 7(a)(2) mandates that Reclamation’s Glen Canyon Dam operations neither jeopardizes the endangered humpback chub in the Colorado River nor destroys or adversely modifies the chub’s designated critical habitat in the Grand Canyon. In its Biological Opinion, USFW determined that Reclamation’s dam operations, which involve water releases under a MLFF regime, violate these ESA prohibitions.
Moreover, Reclamation has not implemented the 7-month water release program called “seasonally adjusted steady flows” (SASF), as USFW required. Consequently, Reclamation’s operations are adversely impacting river flows, sediment loads, and temperatures, which, in turn, harm the chub and degrade its habitat by eliminating seasonal flows, destroying shoreline habitats, and preventing river warming.
Reclamation’s Experimental Plan for Glen Canyon Dam damages Grand Canyon resources and violates federal law. The Trust’s sixth through eighth claims challenge this 2008 Experimental Plan on the grounds that it violates NEPA, the GCPA, the ESA, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Reclamation prepared an environmental assessment (EA) and issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 2008 Experimental Plan. The EA/FONSI violates several federal laws:
- Reclamation failed to provide adequate notice and public comment for the EA/FONSI.
- Reclamation’s assessment of impacts and conclusion violated NEPA.
- Reclamation failed to adequately consider the NEPA significance factors.
- Reclamation ignored impacts to Grand Canyon National Park’s natural, cultural, and recreational resources, as well as impacts to the humpback chub and its critical habitat.
Interveners
The Colorado River basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and California) have intervened in the Trust’s lawsuit. The Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA), Central Arizona Project, and California’s Imperial Irrigation District have also intervened.
Your donations and membership dues make our work in Grand Canyon possible.
