OCR Text |
Show QMS BMEBS MME Grand thoughts Editor: Sorting fact from rhetoric is nearly near-ly impossible in the debate over the impact of Glen Canyon Dam on the Grand Canyon. High drama at its best, the controversy is characterized characteriz-ed as a classic confrontation between be-tween energy-thirsty electric utilities hell-bent on destroying the Grand Canyon versus devout defenders of the environment. The issues involved in this debate are as rich and complex as the magnificent gorge below the dam. Far from being as absolute as some have portrayed, arguments to date appear to lack both supporting scientific evidence and perspective of the original purposes of Glen Canyon Dam, its primary benefits, and secondary advantages. Good or bad, the dam has had two overriding impacts on the Colorado River. First, it stabilized the wide variations in seasonal flows and water temperatures. Second, Se-cond, it dramatically reduced the amount of sediment swept downstream. What has sparked the latest controversy, con-troversy, however, are fluctuating water releases from the dam used to generate pollution-free electricity on demand. The beauty of hydrogeneration from Glen Canyon Dam is its ability to "follow load" or quickly match generating output with consumer needs. As usage increases, in-creases, more water flows through the turbines to generate more electricity. elec-tricity. Hydro can accommodate fluctuating demand much more readilyand economic ally than fossil fuel generators. Most importantly, impor-tantly, hydropower is environmentally environmen-tally clean. It emits no pollutants, does not foul visibility, nor does it contribute to global warming. What concerns me as a power user is the presumption that power operations are the sole culprit of environmental and recreational damage and viewed as the only solution. This is particularly true since it is not even certain whether the changes occurring in the Grand Canyon are a direct result of power operations or the forces of nature working to restore equilibrium after the massive flooding and resultant damage of the mid-1980s. Many of the perceived negative impacts can be traced primarily to the presence of the dam, not necessarily to its operations. Of particular par-ticular concern is the viability of Grand Canyon beaches that are important im-portant to sustaining wildlife habitat as well as supporting the private and commercial white-water rafting industry. I have floated the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam and some beaches do show signs of erosion, conceivably caused caus-ed by fluctuations in water releases as a result of power operations. But other causes flood flows, wind, the 22,000 people who float the river each year, and the dramatic decrease in sediment available to the river system-must surely have impacts too. No consensus exists on how many rafters the river can support, how many and what size trout can survive, what type of fishing regulations, regula-tions, what size population of humpback chub is necessary before its name is removed from the endangered en-dangered species list, what size and number of beaches are desirable, and how much power must be generated ge-nerated and when. At most, the prevailing vision is to change dam operations. Or, as one river guide has put it, "We are going to slow that process (lss f beaches) so more people can enjoy the canyon before the dam takes it toll on the river. ' ' Lack of long-range vision will produce short-term solutions of questionable value. Through scientific scien-tific investigation and wise management initiatives, the Grand Canyon and its resources can be managed to satisfy the majority's needs. Those who care about the Grand Canyon and we power customers count ourselves among that group must forge a common vision, embrace compromise as a means of reaching consensus, and manage the canyon's resources for the benefit of as many divergent interests in-terests as possible. Lloyd Greiner Bountiful Students choose Editor: In a letter published on your Opinion Opi-nion page Feb. 1 6, Sherrie Johnson stated mat in the Grendel controversy, con-troversy, the major issue in the debate had not been addressed. She expressed the opinion that it was as wrong to force high school students to read certain books they found offensive as to ban them from reading certain books because someone else had found them offensive. It is my understanding that at Viewmont High School, the senior English students have a list from which to select their readings; any student with an objection to any particular book can choose an alternative alter-native from the list. This makes the whole Grendel thing a controversy over a non-issue, in my estimation. If Mrs. Johnson has a concern in this area, she should contact the English Department at the high school. By the time students become seniors in high school, they are either already legally emancipated or getting pretty close. Such students should already be exercising exercis-ing themselves at making mature choices and accepting the consequences conse-quences of their decisions. Paul W. Wendel Centerville The next step Editor: Does the end justify the means? Paul Dunn seems to think so. And so it appears by their silence, that the leaders of the Mormon Church condone bearing false witness if it has benefits in presenting the church's message. The church's behavior in threatening reporter Lynn Packer, and later terminating his employment at BYU for wanting wan-ting to expose these untruths needs to be called into question. What should Paul Dunn now do? He should admit to telling a long series of lies over a long period of timewithout presenting any defensive defen-sive arguments and seek repentance. repen-tance. He should also donate to charity all monies he has received from book and tape, etc. royalties. He should accept any judgment against him given in the future by church leaders, and resign any church leadership positions he now holds until such time as repentance is complete. What should the leaders of the Mormon Church now do? They should issue a statement critical of the actions of Paul Dunn. They should state that when teaching the message of the church, only the truth will be acceptable. An apology to Lynn Packer along with praise for his actions needs to be issued. He needs to be offered a return to his position at BYU, including in-cluding compensation for any lost wages he was denied. What should Lynn Packer now do? Lynn should continue to explore and write about Utah issues. He does an excellent job in the subjects he has covered for the Utah Holiday Magazine. He should look into and write about his efforts to get this story published. It was interesting to learn in an editorial in the Davis County Clipper that "daily newspapers in Utah and elsewhere had access to the story of Dunn's misrepresentations misrepresenta-tions for many months, none who circulate in predominantly Mormon areas dared carry the torch of truth first." Timothy A. Tate Bountiful Hypocrisy Editor: I was appalled that you would perpetrate the ' unacceptable behavior of telling a lie. In an article arti-cle in the Opinion page of Feb. 19, you state: "If you tell a lie and it makes a better story to illustrate a point, then it's OK!" You then say that if a generality is true, it is okay to lie about the specific details involved. in-volved. Activities of this kind are definitely contrary to acceptable standards of our society. Therefore, I decided that you must be trying to make a point by using irony. However, your acclaimed support sup-port of "print-the-truth-at-any-cost journalism" highlights your blatant hypocrisy. It appears that you believe in the above statement, simply put, if you tell a lie and it sells more advertising (to make more money), then it's OK! You claim that you are the Davis County Clipper (a truthful generality), then print your specific location as Bountiful. This little specific detail is a lie. The Davis County Clipper business busi-ness office is located in Woods Cross City. Your business license is issued by Woods Cross City. In truth, you should print your location as Woods Cross, Utah. So I ask, do you condone lies, or condemn them? I guess I'll know with the next edition. Russell S. Mitchell Woods Cross City Linnell praised Editor: Bob Linnell has been an outstanding outstan-ding businessman, an LDS bishop, a mission president and now our mayor. He won election by a landslide. land-slide. I am outraged by allegations of corruption in local government made by Councilwoman ReNee Coon. Her statement "I have literally lit-erally a room full of studies, documents docu-ments and testimonies" points to an obsession with the pipeline issue to the exclusion of other problems related to the city of Bountiful. I find her remarks both nebulous and slanderous and think it is time she either presents her "proof" or resigns her seat on the city council. Merlene Behesti Bountiful |