Friday, June 3, 2011

Ingram Events Journal, 1966-8, part 2, 1967

* As 1966 closed, and with the kitchen-sink strategy in disarray, Secretary of the Interior Udall ordered the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a series of studies (30-some) on ways to finance and pump water for the Central Arizona that did not require either of the Grand Canyon dams. As always a professional agency, Reclamation complied.

This is a good place to bring up one of my most important contacts, Dan Dreyfus of Reclamation. I had begun "researching" the technical and financial underpinning of the river projects in 1965, writing letters asking for information to various agencies including Reclamation. This led eventually to telephone calls, which as some sort of public liaison, Dan would handle. My goal was not to expose a scandal, but to understand how Reclamation worked, in order to seek out ways to show that the dams were not the only way to go about getting what was most essential, water for Arizona (the silliness of that idea is another whole topic). So in my questioning, I tried to educate myself, and in that process Dan was invaluable, without ever going beyond his remit as a government employee. In the 1970's, Dan moved on to the staff of the Senate Interior Committee, where we again were able to cooperate during the legislative struggle over GCNP. As I think back on the people I was involved with then-- Dan, Tom Foley, Sterling Munro, Mo Udall -- in more than a cursory way, I feel greatly privileged. As a erstwhile student of political science (sic) at MIT and Columbia, I had no better teachers, -- and at those schools, I had some of the finest (B. Mazlish, L. Martin, R Wood, W. Sayre, K. Deutsch)


13 Once again, Rep. Aspinall held hearings "only to hear new matter". So I testified on the proposed National Water Commission as the proper venue to consider such big issues as population control, inter-regional water transfers and giant hydroelectric cash registers. 

There was intensive activity in New Mexico to oppose the authorization of Hooker dam in the Gila Wilderness.  This was a touchy matter, Hooker being Senator Anderson's quid, and given his stature, including being one of the movers behind the Wilderness Act of 1964,. 

Indeed, the Senate was now the focus of action, since Senator Hayden was wiling to work with Secretary Udall on a bill with non-dam alternatives in it, and Aspinall in the House was not.

Testified before the Senate Interior Committee on a no-dam CAP. Vivid memory: pro-dam Senator asking me what I was an expert in. We contacted 26 Senate offices, with most being interested. Our idea was to provided movement that would convince Aspinall and his allies that the dams would not be authorized. 
Refined the boundaries of the proposed "complete" GCNP; wrote an article; bills introduced. At some point, Senator Case of New Jersey took up this cause, and introduced a bill on his own.

17-8 In San Francisco for a Board meeting to discuss Hooker dam. The question of whether to advocate an alternate was troubling. 

24-9 Lobbying in DC, as the Senate Interior Committee marked up a bill that barred dams in the western end of the Canyon.

I worked on a paperback-size project book about the Canyon for the Club. 

25-6 Trip into the Gila to take pictures of areas to be inundated to present to Senator Anderson.

14 Albuquerque group meeting to oppose Hooker

27 Discussion in Phoenix with Club chapter and hunters' group on GCNP boundaries.

9-14 In DC, visit with Anderson staff and with Udall. The latter was most likely to change the language to allow for a Hooker alternative. A local delegation met with Senator Anderson to make our case, including presenting him with the photographs . He was not hostile to our plea that the legislation allow for the possiblity of a non-Wilderness alternative.

At home, got a call from Rep. Saylor (our long-time ally) blistering my ear about our lobbying on Hooker undermining his efforts.

26-7 In Tucson to talk about Hooker

*These notes are obviously incomplete and possibly disordered. They are therefore only a beginning on the much more detailed work that needs to be done on my main set of anti-dam files. My only excuse is that they seemed like a refreshing excursion into something more personal than the bureaucratic history I have been writing.

No comments:

Post a Comment