226894 research outputs found
Sort by
Letter Concerning Letter about Bridge and Marble Canyon Dam
No full textLetter: To Ethel W. Thorniley, from Ottis Peterson, Oct 10, 1966 (carbon copy), page 1140
OCT 10 1966
Mrs. Ethel W. Thorailey
757 Drexel
Betroit, Michigan 43215
Dear Mrs. Thorniley:
Thank you very much for your letter of August 4 concerning the Bridge and Marble Canyon Dam controveray with particular reference to my note in the magazine American Forests.
In the American way you are clearly entitled to your opinion and I appreciate your expressing it as I expressed mine. I do not wish to get into a controveray with you because we have elearly opposing idear on this metter, but I would like to point out a few discrepancies in your letter which clearly reflect the errors of commission, omission, and innuende which exist in the materials of the preservationist side of the argument which you have clearly been reading.
The Havasu Fails which I agree with you are most beautiful will not be drowned in the lake nor affected in any way since the Bridge Canyon Reservoir at its maximum would back up only a short distance into the Havasu Creak Canyon. Slenilarly, neither Marble or Bridge Canyon Dam or Reservoir would have any effect on any wild life refuge that we are awere of. The closest refuge is downstream from Hoover Dam and the Bureau of Reclamation has just completed an agreement by which the water needs of this refuge will be supplied by the operational pattern of the river downstream from Hoover Dam.
You mention the government breaking faith with the people by urging the construction of these dems. Actually, it is the seven basin States, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Navada, and California, that have been sponsoring their proposed authorization in the Congress. The official government position is that only Marble Canyon Dam and Reservoir should be deferred. I wish to call your attention to the fact that the Marble Canyon Dam and Reservoir are not in either the Grand Canyon National Park or Momument.
As far as breaking faith is concerned, it appears to me, and this is a personal opinion, that the preservationist organizations are breaking faith by refusing to recognize a reservation for further Reclamation development which was contsined in the authorizing legislation for Grand Canyon National Park in 1919 and a withdrawal of public lands for power purposes which wasEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,769,163 byte
Letter Concerning Letter about Bridge and Marble Canyon Dam
No full textLetter: To Ethel W. Thorniley, from Ottis Peterson, Oct 10, 1966 (carbon copy), page 2recognized in the Grand Canyon National Movement Presidentist Proclamation setting aside that area as a national movement in 1932. Speaking of breaking faith, you will want to be eware that the Sierre Club, one of the principal entagonists in the controveray, adopted a resolution in 1949 endorsing the construction of the Bridge Canyon Dam under certain conditions. All of these conditions have been met and, in fact, a lower dam is now proposed than that endersed by the Sierra Club in 1949. Nevertheless, the Club has now done a 180 turnabout and opposes any development of any kind on the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon area including not only the Grand Canyon National Park and Monument, but the entire stratch of the Canyon as well as the Marble Canyon which is upstream from Grand Canyon National Park.
To our best knowledge, Senator Goldwater made no assertion at any time that the Canyon would not be flooded at all. He did make a strong point that the Grand Canyon National Park would not be affected in any way with the exception of a 13-mile stretch of the Colorado River in the depth of the Canyon where the river forms the boundary of the National Park. Mr. Goldwater, who has traveled the length of the Grand Canyon on may occesions, expresses a personal opinion that he would prefer the construction of the Bridge Canyon Dam and Beservoir to the Marble Canyon Dam and Reservoir if a compromise could be worked out which makes only of one of them necessary.
Concerning evaporation, there would be only minor losses from either Marble or Bridge Canyon Reservoirs or both because they would be located in deep canyons where the sun and wind would not have the high evaporative effect which now exists on other reservoirs in open areas in the southwest. As a matter of fact, it appears possible that the reduced temperature of the water released from storage in these reservoirs will result in an overall reduction in evaporation from the total reservoir system. However, we are making further studies on this and are not yet prepared to state it as a positive fact.
Finally, I am enclosing a copy of a letter to the aditor of the Salt Lake Tribune of Detober 5, entitled "Water Resources protected." This letter is from an obvious preservationist of the Wasteh Mountain Club who protests any further delay in enlargement of the wilderness aear of the High Uinta Mountains Utah. I personally believa that the relustance of the Western States to place any more lands in the wilderness areas or in national parks or monuments is because of the inflexibility of the preservationist organizations once these lands are placed in the "deep freeze" for posterity. Mr. Viavant eslla attemtion to a provision in the Wilderness Act which would permit further development in the wilderness area, but like the reservation in the Grand Canyon National Park and Monument for reclamation and public power purposes, once these ereas are set aside, the preservationist organizations are adamant in their opposition to any development which may be found necessary.
2Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 3,105,854 byte
Cover Sheet to Mr. Orren Beaty
No full textCover sheet: To Orren Beaty, from Ottis Peterson, 10/10/66UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
10/10/66
FROM: Assistant to the Commissioner-Information
TO: Mr. Orren Beaty
Room 6151
A copy of this exchange has gone to Morley Fox.
Ottis PetersonEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 408,028 byte
Notes--WEST Avoid "Socialized Power" Label
No full textNotes: Orren Beaty, page 1WEST avoid "socialized power" label
Schultze = Alternatives
1. Raise price of water add Hoover - Davis revenues
2. Nuclear Federal contribution to such a plant for pumping.
Problem: Where does it end?
limit.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 1,274,722 byte
Memo Concerning Possible Plans of Attack
No full textMemorandum: To John J. Rhodes, from Morris K. Udall, September 22, 1966 (thermofax), page 1September 22, 1966
KEMO TO: Honorable John J. Rhodes
FROM: M.K.U.
Since our Arizona meetings, I have been cegitating over possible plans of attack for next year and on the airplane the other day I shotched an analytical approach which I submit for your consideration and discussion.
I-The Power Centers
I deal start with the hard fast that in drafting a strategy we want necessarily with a number of power conters which have divergent interests and views. Some of these are sufficiently potent that they are indispensable and simply must be for the bill (or willing to accept is) if it has any chance to pass (in '67). I would include these as indispensable supporters:
1. Senator Hayden
2. Chairman Aspinall (which means probably that the afficial position of Colorado must be at least unopposed).
3. Senator Jackson (which means that the Pacific Northwest interests must not be opposed, and preferably for the bill).
4. Senator Anderson (meaning How Howise, etc.).
5. The Administration. (While it is theoretically possible to pass a bill without LBJ support, we should probably list this power center as indispensable).
Other power centers are important; if possible, we cught to have as many of then with us as possible, but in the right circumstances we could pass a bill over from 1 or more objections. In this catogory, I would list:
6. John Saylor.
7. The conservation organizations and their spokesman, including the New York Yimss, Washington Post, etc.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,233,992 byte
Translation of Article Appearing in El Mexicano
No full textReport: Translation of article appearing in El Mexicano (Mexicali, B.C.) on May 13, 1963, "Endeavor to Deliver Salt Waters to Mexican Throughout Entire Year" (thermofax
Upper Colorado River Commission Cover Letter
No full textCover letter: From Ival V. Goslin, Executive Director, Upper Colorado River Commission to Stewart Udall, October 1, 196
Letter Discussing Commissioner Dominy's Testimony Before the House Public Works Appropriations Subcommittee
No full textLetter: From Edwin A. Martin, to Stewart Udall, October 4, 1963 (carbon copy
Department of State Official Business Cover Sheet
No full textCover sheet: From ARA/CMA to RM Sayre, 196
Translation of Article Appearing in "El Mexicano", Mr Udall
No full textReport: Translation of article appearing in El Mexicano, Baja California, of November 20, 1963, "Mr. Udall," by Rafael Martinez Reles (thermofax