LAVA FALLS, Ariz. – America’s beloved natural wonder, the Grand
Canyon of the Colorado River, isn’t natural any more.

It looks better than ever. New vegetation growing along the
river supports a wildlife paradise with trout, bald eagles and
an endangered bird and snail. The layered cliffs still soothe
city dwellers trying to escape earthly woes.

But now a decade-long, $60 million series of government
studies reveals ecology and geology out of whack. Initial
changes caused by the Glen Canyon hydroelectric dam, completed
in 1963, set off a chain of subtler changes that are remaking
the Grand Canyon.

Alien species of insects, plants, fish and birds are invading
the river corridor. Avalanches of mud and rocks – crashing from
the Grand Canyon’s 529 side canyons – clog currents that once
had the power to blow through debris. (Storm-born debris closed
parts of Grand Canyon National Park in March, ripping through
trails and the main water pipeline to tourist camps at the
bottom of the canyon.)

The changes are driving a debate over dam operations and the
possibility of artificially restoring balance in the altered
Grand Canyon. When U.S. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt decides
this year among various proposals for the canyon’s fate, his
Grand Canyon policy will set a precedent for wilderness
nationwide. On the Colorado River alone are 10 federal dams.
Scientists say the dams are remaking river corridors.

“”In 90 years of building dams, we never used to look at
downstream impacts,” said Dan Beard, head of the Bureau of
Reclamation. “”Those days are over.”

Anyone in the West who uses electricity and water depends at
least indirectly on the Grand Canyon. That guarantees political
pressure to maximize power and control the flow of the Colorado
River.

In Colorado, Gov. Roy Romer’s administration is blocking a
federal project to revitalize the Grand Canyon by simulating
natural floods. Officials in Colorado, where the river begins as
rivulets at the Continental Divide, sided with power merchants
opposing the floods.

The power merchants, with annual revenues of $110 million,
say releasing water for a simulated flood would cost about $3
million in lost potential sales. Colorado and other high-growth
states oppose letting water flow freely toward California. They
want to keep as much water as they can.

“”We’ve altered the Grand Canyon river corridor forever, and
we’re never going to put it back unless we take all the dams
out,” says JimLochhead, Romer’s director of natural resources.
“”We think some touching up can be done. But it needs to be done
within our operating rules for the river.”

The problems go back 32 years, when the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation plugged the Colorado River at the top of the Grand
Canyon with the 710-foot-tall Glen Canyon hydroelectric dam. The
dam changed natural processes. It ended floods that scoured the
canyon about every two years. It replaced the Colorado’s wildly
fluctuating flows. It turned the Colorado’s ruddy color a
picturesque green, because the dam traps 60 million tons of
sediment that used to flow down every year. It shifted the
Colorado’s temperature range from 32 to 82 degrees to a
narrower, cooler 46 to 50 degrees, because there’s no longer any
silt to absorb the sun’s heat.

These changes triggered the sweeping subtler changes
scientists are documenting today. For example, cooler water
favors bass and trout (and eagles that eat trout) at the expense
of endangered native fish such as the humpback chub.

Dam builders say they never anticipated the subtler changes.
Now even power producers are concerned about remaking nature’s
Mona Lisa.

“”We can’t be singularly focused on just generating power;
the Grand Canyon is a special place,” says Ken Maxey, manager
for the Western Area Power Administration, a federal energy
agency based in Golden. It sells power generated at the dam to
millions of people across the West.

Nature periodically reshaped the Grand Canyon more radically
in the past. The question is how far man wants to go. Scientists
say it’s possible to restore balance to the Grand Canyon by
mimicking nature.

“”We now know enough to take better care of the canyon,”
says Bob Webb of the U.S. Geological Survey. He has become one
of the government’s top scientists, the charismatic leader of
dozens of canyon missions.

Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., are discussing various dam
flow regimens that might suit recreationists, power merchants
and the few endangered species. The leading proposal would
control river level fluctuations caused by adjusting dam
turbines to meet power demand.

There’s also a plan to heat the Colorado River south of the
dam. Bureau of Reclamation engineers would attach huge concrete
vents to the dam and pull warmer water from the reservoir
surface, instead of cooler deep water, through dam turbines.

Critics are skeptical, but few howl anymore about boycotting
power or blowing up the dam.

Environmentalists readily acknowledge the difficulty of
mimicking natural floods: Water let through the dam, unlike
natural river water, carries no silt. This hungry water erodes
beaches as it tries to pick up silt downriver.

“”There’s no way you’re going to get the Grand Canyon back the
way it was,” says Charles Van Riper of the National Biological
Service. “”Ignorance is bliss.”

The Grand Canyon still awes more than 5 million visitors a
year. In a recent Bureau of Reclamation survey, citizens said
they are willing to pay more money, in the form of higher
electricity rates or taxes, to preserve the Grand Canyon.

“”If you don’t keep some natural places intact, then you
won’t know what good is,” says Larry Stevens, one of the
government’s leading canyon ecologists. “”We can alter the
course of evolution. How much do you want to alter the future of
life on this planet? How much do you want to alter the future
not only of humans but all life?”