Oscar Hover

ESRM 100

The Colorado River Dams: Water Rights and Conservation in the American Southwest

Access to water always has been, and always will be, a primary necessity for any society.

Humans cannot survive without it, nor can the plants and animals we eat. The Mojave Desert is

the driest desert in North America. Water has always been a limiting resource, and organisms

have evolved to thrive on crumbling sand and under harsh sunlight. A mile below the desert as

we picture it, though, is a river that collects water from parts of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and

Arizona. The Colorado River cuts its way through the desert, carrying water, debris, and power

(harnessed by turbines in dams)

towards the sea. Until 2019,

hydropower was the most

productive of the renewable

energy sources in use in the

United States, which also include

solar power, wind power,

geothermal energy, and biofuel Figure 1: Hydroelectric dam technology – Tennessee Valley Authority

(“Renewable Energy Production and Consumption by Source”). Although wind power has now

exceeded hydroelectric power generation, hydropower continues to be one of the most important

renewable energy sources. This energy is derived from water’s natural movement towards lower

elevations due to gravity. The moving water runs past a wheel or turbine, which in turn rotates

under the force of the rushing water (“Hydroelectric Power: How It Works”). This turning

motion is used to directly move machines (in the case of historical waterwheels) or to power an

engine that produces electricity (Figure 1).

Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

Waterwheels were first used in Ancient Rome and became increasingly popular during

the Middle Ages (Diamond, 358-359). The power harnessed from moving water enabled humans

to make advances away from a reliance on muscle power and toward the use of larger machines.

It allowed humans to efficiently grind grain and move water for irrigation, which led to great

advances in food production. Large amounts of grain could be processed at one time with little to

no physical strain on the people involved. Mill power was also used to make paper efficiently,

which paved the way for easier record-keeping and mass communication. By now, most uses for

waterwheels have been taken over by hydroelectric dams, which can handle much larger bodies

of water and therefore harness much more energy.

All renewable energy infrastructure (including dams, windmills, and solar panels, among

others) in some way physically disrupts the environment around it. Solar panels intrude upon

habitats and prevent plant growth in many cases, and windmills are obstacles for birds and bats

and can create low frequency vibrations that disrupt animals (including humans) and plants

(Friedland, 208). There are different types of dams that accompany different side effects. Smaller

dams, or run-of-the-river systems, do not build up reservoirs behind them, and use the natural

flow of the river to power turbines (Friedland, 200). This corresponds to a much less extreme

environmental impact than other types of dams, since there is minimal flooding upstream, and

flow downstream is not interrupted. However, because the dams rely on the natural flow for

energy, the power production is highly unpredictable, especially in the modern day when

droughts are becoming increasingly common.

Larger dams that use water impoundment are generally much more predictable (Friedland

201). They block rivers almost completely, creating reservoirs behind them. This provides a

manageable and reliable water source. The Hoover Dam and the Glen Canyon Dam are examples
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

of water impoundment dams. Their massive concrete walls block the Colorado River, creating

Lake Mead and Lake Powell, respectively (Stevens, 132,138). Lake Mead is the largest reservoir

in the United States by volume, with a capacity of

28,255,000 acre-feet. Lake Powell, above the Glen Canyon

Dam, has the second largest capacity in the United States at

27,000,000 acre-feet. Due to drought and overuse, flow into

Lake Powell and Lake Mead are currently at about thirty

percent their normal rates (Fadeley). The lakes’ volumes

have decreased substantially in the past twenty-two years. In

2000, the beginning of the water year saw Lake Powell at

ninety-four percent capacity (Bureau of Reclamation News Figure 2: The Hoover Dam, looking upstream
toward Lake Mead - Bureau of Reclamation
Release). This year at the same time, it was at forty-eight

percent capacity.

The Hoover Dam (Figure 2), completed in 1936, was the first hydropower dam on the

Colorado River, and it had immense social and political, as well as environmental, impacts. Its

construction set a precedent for future dams and was one of the most successful projects

involved in the New Deal, which was instrumental in drawing the Great Depression to an end.

Thousands of people worked on the construction of the dam, an employment phenomenon that

demonstrated and encouraged the survivability of the west (“Hoover Dam - Colorado River

AZ”). However, the division of water rights that came with the dam created some political

turmoil in the Southwest and led to questionable decisions regarding resource management.

In 1928, Congress authorized the Colorado River Compact, which included the construction of

the Hoover Dam (then called Boulder Dam) (Reisner 125). Also included in the compact was the
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

allocation of water from the river, divided amongst California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico,

Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. The estimates of river volume were from the Reclamation

Service and suggested an average flow of 17.5 million acre-feet per year. The region was divided

into two basins, upper and lower. Each basin was allocated 7.5 million acre-feet, and one million

acre-feet were to be sent to Mexico. The final million acre-feet were allocated to the general

lower basin, “whose delegates had threatened to walk out of the negotiations if they didn’t get a

better deal” (Reisner 125). Such were the tedious politics surrounding water rights. The upper

division’s water is divided into percentage amounts for each state, but the lower basin’s is

divided into absolute amounts (see Table 1). This system was problematic, even then, simply

because “the average annual flow of the Colorado River was

nowhere near 17.5 million acre-feet.”

Region State Allocation as ratified, per year

Upper Basin Colorado 51.75%*
New Mexico 11.25%
Utah 23.00%
Wyoming 14.00%
Lower Basin California 4,400,000 acre-feet
Arizona 2,800,000 acre-feet
Nevada 300,000 acre-feet
*The Upper Basin’s allocations are reported as percentages of the basin’s 7.5 million acre-feet per
year.

Table 1: Colorado River water state allocations for Upper Basin (Upper Colorado River

Basin) Compact and Lower Basin (Amending Section 9 of the Boulder Canyon Project Act)
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

The construction of the Hoover Dam was near the beginning of a “federal dam-building

program on a forty-year binge” (Reisner, 148). Although it is likely that the program would have

been favored by the public anyway, the Dust Bowl of the mid-1930’s was another reminder of

what could happen to land, people, crops,

and livestock without reliable water. On

November 11, 1933, a storm blew through

South Dakota, stripping most of the topsoil

off farms it tore through. The wind blew dirt

and silt throughout the west, over 756

counties in nineteen states. “People were

vomiting dirt. […] Everything was covered

by great hanging drifts of silt” (Reisner,

149). The storms continued through the

summer of 1934, and the National

Resources Board determined that thirty-five

Figure 3: Dust bowl effects in the American Southwest, 1935-1938 -
million acres were “essentially destroyed,” US Dept. of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service

125 million acres were “severely debilitated,” and one hundred million acres were in “marginal

shape” (Figure 3) (Reisner, 150). The Dust Bowl began as a drought. The over-plowing and

grazing of the land loosened the soil and allowed the wind to tear up the devastating dust.

In 1963, twenty-seven years after the Hoover Dam was built, the construction of the Glen

Canyon Dam was completed (Stevens, 122). The mid-1950’s were full of irrigation projects and

plans, of course accompanied by heated debates about water and land rights. The finances of the

Hoover Dam had been relatively favorable compared to those expected for the Glen Canyon
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

Dam. Paul Douglas, a senator from Illinois, was one of the most vocal politicians in opposition

to the building of the dam. He argued in Senate that at the Hoover Dam the average cost of

hydroelectricity per kilowatt hour was 115 dollars. At Glen Canyon Dam, it would be at least

463 dollars (Reisner, 141-142). However, Douglas’ most convincing argument against building

the dam was that the irrigation plans were financially unreasonable. Land initially worth very

little (as low as fifty dollars an acre) would have to be sold to farmers for closer to two thousand

dollars an acre to pay for the dam. Even after irrigation, the land would only be worth about one

hundred dollars an acre (Reisner, 143). Douglas’ calculations were correct, but westerners, led

by Joseph O’Mahoney, were restless in their request for irrigation infrastructure to higher

elevations. They appealed by describing their dry and barren homes, and all the people and land

that could be saved by a reservoir. President Eisenhower signed the Colorado River Storage

Project (CRSP) bill into law in 1956, and construction of the Glen Canyon Dam began.

The environmental troubles from water shortages that came to light in the twentieth

century were no surprise. The idea of white settlement in the west had always depended on the

miraculous existence of water that, no matter how hard the settlers farmed, would simply not

come reliably (Stegner 2-5). John Wesley Powell, after whom Lake Powell is named, was one of

the most influential figures in the settlement of the west in terms of water management. Many

politicians and pioneers of the time were convinced by the ‘rain follows the plow’ mentality, and

the idea that “the whole billion acres of the remaining public domain could be irrigated, as if the

whole West could be reclaimed” (Stegner 343). This worried Powell immensely, as in 1893 he

predicted that only about twelve percent of the remaining wild land could be effectively irrigated

and made suitable for agriculture. Western expansion continued at an accelerating pace, and
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

today the Colorado River is responsible for providing water to 40 million people (“Glen Canyon

Dam Current Status).

The downstream effects of the Hoover Dam and the Glen Canyon Dam were somewhat

similar. In the Grand Canyon (in between the dams), visitors and scientists can see these effects

up close. More than 20,000 people boat through the Grand Canyon on the Colorado River every

year, enjoying the spectacular views and unplugged lifestyle of living on the river. The river is

not nearly as wild as it used to be, though. With such a large watershed, the river should be

warm, muddy, and unpredictable. However, the water is cold and sometimes extremely clear,

and there are daily tides and normal fluctuations in flow. This is a result of the time the water

spends in Lake Powell, slowly cooling down and sinking towards the bottom. Because the

sediment has time to settle out and the turbine intakes are deep beneath the surface, the water that

is released from the Glen Canyon Dam is cold and clear. The flows released are timed to fit the

electricity needs of the regions the dam powers (Stevens, 125).

The geology and behavior of the river have changed as well. Sand bars have eroded, and

rapids have become more predictable. The ecology of the riparian habitat experienced one of the

largest changes that some boaters noted. With more controlled flows and less variability in river

level, shore habitats have become much more stable. Trees can grow and animals can build

homes without being washed away by high rainfall far upstream. This added space, though, has

allowed more invasive species

to establish themselves in the

Grand Canyon, including the

tamarisk tree, which now covers

about a third of the shoreline of

Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

the river (Sevigny). The trees crowd out native populations of other species of plant, such as

cottonwood and willow, increase soil salinity, and burn easily, even when green (“Tamarisk Leaf

Beetle”). In an effort to reduce the number of trees, scientists introduced the tamarisk leaf beetle,

a small insect that solely eats tamarisks, to the river in 2001. The beetle population did well, and

about fifteen percent of the trees have been affected (Figure 4). However, the damage done to

these trees calls to question the benefits that the trees had. For instance, they kept other,

potentially more harmful, invasive species out, and they provided habitat for some birds,

mammals, and reptiles on shore. This aided an ongoing debate concerning how much humans

should interfere with the wilderness, even in response to problems they caused.

One successful wildlife restoration project run by the Department of the Interior is the

Macroinvertebrate Production Flow at Glen Canyon Dam (Fadeley). Called the bug flow, this

experiment was designed to make conditions more favorable for insect eggs to be laid and

survive on rocks at river level. These bugs are important in the riparian food chain, as they are

common prey of some native fish, birds, and reptiles. During a bug flow, days on the weekend

have a low, constant river level (no normal daily tides), while the weekdays are normal (Figure

5). This allows a window of time

for bugs to lay their eggs on rocks

without danger of the water

dropping and the eggs drying out.

The bug flow project started in

2018 and has continued from May

Figure 5: Bug flow river levels in May 2018 – National Park Service
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

1 to August 31 every year since. River insect populations have risen, as have populations of their

predators.

Only one dam has been built on the Colorado River since the Glen Canyon Dam. The

Windy Gap Dam was completed in 1985 near Granby, Colorado (“Windy Gap Reservoir –

Granby”). This dam, though it had many ecological effects (as all dams do), did not change the

river nearly as much as did the Hoover Dam, the Glen Canyon Dam, and other proposed dams

that were never built. One such dam was Marble Canyon Dam, and the beginnings of its

construction can be seen near river level (Fadeley). What is now some rebar and drilled holes in

the canyon wall was expected to be a dam that would back the river up for 53 miles, flooding

some of the most scenic parts of the canyon. Floyd Dominy, a commissioner for the Bureau of

Reclamation, supported the construction of the dam, citing the recreational area it would create

for visitors. He argued that flooding the canyon would make it much easier for visitors to get in a

boat and see the beautiful, striped walls up close. In 1966, “many considered [the Marble Canyon

Dam] inevitable” (Stevens, 95). However, that year, the director of the Sierra Club (David

Brower) released a massive ad campaign that argued against the flooding of Marble Canyon and

the building of the dam. His most famous headline was “Should We Also Flood the Sistine

Chapel so Tourists Can Get Nearer the Ceiling?” Comparing the canyon to famous art was a

smart move, and the campaign to save protect the Grand Canyon became mainstream.

Unprecedented numbers of people who would have otherwise likely been uninvolved in the

damming of the west wrote letters to Congress, inspired into conservationism by Brower’s

campaign. In 1968, Public Law 90-537 was passed, preventing any dams from being built in

Grand Canyon or Marble Canyon without congressional approval, bringing the progress on

Marble Canyon Dam to a close (Stevens, 95). Marble Canyon National Monument was created
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

in 1969, stretching from Lee’s Ferry (fifteen miles downstream from Glen Canyon Dam) to the

confluence with the Little Colorado River (almost eighty miles downstream from the dam). In

1975, Marble and Grand Canyon National Monuments were legally combined into Grand

Canyon National Park, protecting the canyon and river all the way from the Glen Canyon Dam to

Lake Mead (Stevens, 96).

Many rivers around the United States have undergone undamming projects. One of the

most successful of these projects was the restoration of the Elwha River on the Olympic

Peninsula of Washington (“Elwha River Restoration”). The Elwha Dam and the Glines Canyon

Dam were built in the early 1900’s to generate hydropower for the growing population of the

western coast, disrupting the prolific wildlife of the river, including massive populations of

salmon, trout, and their predators. The Elwha Dam was removed in 2011, and the Glines Canyon

Dam in 2014. Since then, the restoration has been an incredible success. Wildlife populations are

recovering, and the river flows freely again, returning sediments to natural spots. Many dams

have been considered for removal, but the Glen Canyon Dam and Hoover Dam are likely very

low on the list. The only time the dams were almost destroyed was entirely involuntary in 1983.

Early hot weather caused rapid snowmelt, which led to “record inflow into a full Lake Powell

reservoir,” bringing the water level to the top of the dam (Stevens, 93). Releases to relieve the

reservoir reached ninety-two thousand cubic feet per second (standard flows are eight thousand

to sixteen thousand cfs). To keep the lake from breaching the dam and tearing away at its

structural integrity, engineers braced

plywood on top of the concrete to provide

a couple more feet of protection (Figure

Figure 6: Pieces of plywood are added to the top of the Glen Canyon
Dam in 1983 to prevent breaching - Bureau of Reclamation
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

6). This added height was enough to save the dam, but the damage done to the spillways cost

more than twenty million dollars to repair.

On trips through the Grand Canyon on the Colorado River, some guests will hear the

story of the 1983 flood and imagine the beauty of the river returning to its true, wild self. It is

likely that, in a similar fashion to the recovery of the Elwha, wildlife would begin to resemble

what it was sixty years ago. Tamarisk trees would be swept away, and native species may once

again find their niches. However, the Colorado is not the Elwha. Even if the dams were taken out

in a controlled manner, the consequences would be devastating. The river would be much more

difficult to navigate, given daily unpredictability and massive seasonal changes. Los Angeles,

Las Vegas, Phoenix, and all the areas in between would no longer receive power from the river.

The farmland and recreational areas around Lake Powell and Lake Mead would become

unfarmable and less accessible. Most of the food production that relies on the Colorado River

would become impossible, and food shortages would affect millions of Americans. The current

conditions are posing these problems as well. The Southwest may soon have to rely on some

other source for electricity to light, and water to survive.

Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

References

“Bureau of Reclamation News Release: Water Experiment to Be Conducted along the Colorado

River While Maintaining Hydropower Production This Summer.” Grand Canyon

National Park Arizona, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 4 May

2020, www.nps.gov/grca/learn/news/bor-news-water-experiment-to-be-conducted-along-

the-colorado-river-while-maintaining-hydropower-production-this-summer.htm.

Diamond, Jared. Guns, Germs, and Steel the Fates of Human Societies. W.W. Norton &

Company, 1999.

“Elwha River Restoration.” Olympic National Park Washington, National Park Service, U.S.

Department of the Interior, www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/elwha-ecosystem-

restoration.htm.

Fadeley, B. (Grand Canyon raft trip leader). (2021, July). Conversations on Glen Canyon Dam,

its projects (bug flow), and proposed dams in the canyon. [Personal Communication].

Friedland, Andrew J., and Rick Relyea. Essentials of Environmental Science. 2nd ed., W.H.

Freeman, 2016.

“Glen Canyon Dam Current Status.” Upper Colorado Region, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 16

July 2021, www.usbr.gov/uc/water/crsp/cs/gcd.html.

“Hoover Dam - Colorado River AZ.” The Living New Deal, Department of Geography UC

Berkeley, livingnewdeal.org/projects/hoover-dam-colorado-river-az/.
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

“Hydroelectric Power: How It Works.” USGS Science for a Changing World, United States

Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Department of the Interior, www.usgs.gov/special-

topic/water-science-school/science/hydroelectric-power-how-it-works?qt-

science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects.

Reisner, Marc. Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water. 2nd ed.,

Penguin Books, 1993.

“Renewable Energy Production and Consumption by Source.” U.S. Energy Information

Administration, EIA Independent Statistics and Analysis, 2020,

www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data /browser/index.php?tbl=T10.01#/?f=A&start

=1949&end=2020&charted=6-8-9-14-7-10.

Sevigny, Melissa. “Scientists Map Non-Native Tamarisk Beetles in Grand Canyon.” KNAU

Arizona Public Radio, NPR, 20 Apr. 2018, www.knau.org/post/scientists-map-non-

native-tamarisk-beetles-grand-canyon.

Stegner, Wallace. Beyond the HUNDREDTH MERIDIAN: John Wesley Powell and the Second

Opening of the West. Houghton, Mifflin, 1954.

Stevens, Larry. The Colorado River in Grand Canyon: River Map and Guide. 6th ed., Red Lake

Books, 1983.

“Tamarisk Leaf Beetle.” Glen Canyon National Recreation Area AZ, UT, National Park Service,

U.S. Department of the Interior, 9 Apr. 2015, www.nps.gov/glca/learn/nature/tamarisk-

leaf-beetle.htm.
Oscar Hover
ESRM 100

“Windy Gap Reservoir – Granby.” Uncover Colorado,

www.uncovercolorado.com/activities/windy-gap-reservoir/.

United States, Congress, Bureau of Reclamation. Reclamation: Managing Water in the West -

Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study, Executive Summary, Dec. 2012.

United States, Congress, Bureau of Reclamation. Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, Upper

Colorado River Commission, 1948.

United States, Congress, Cong. House. Amending Section 9 of the Boulder Canyon Project Act,

1928. 70th Congress, bill H.R. 5773.

Picture Credit

Figure 1: Tennessee Valley Authority

Figure 2: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Figure 3: US Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service

Figure 4: Samantha Seis, New York Times

Figure 5: National Park Service

Figure 6: Bureau of Reclamation