40th anniversary of 1975 GCNP Act; press release

   

Celebrating a 40th Anniversary, with a Lifetime of Work Ahead

JANUARY 3, 2015 was, in Tucson, sunny, coolish, a southwestern winter's day. A fine day for celebrations, and at 10 a.m., as John Weisheit of Living Rivers, reminded me, it was the moment to note and celebrate the 40th anniversary of the presidential signing and thus final enactment of the 1975 Grand Canyon National Park Enlargement Act. 

This moment was important enough to John to bring him from Moab into my backyard that bright Saturday along with Tom Martin of River Runners for Wilderness, Chris Forsyth & Doug Nering, Grand Canyon Hikers and Backpackers Assoc., and Rich Rudow & Jason Bowman, Coalition of American Canyoneers, to note the past, celebrate its accomplshments, and lay down the markers for what we all hope will be a future where the Canyon gains greater protections while continuing to offer its advocates, connoisseurs, & new-comers unique chances for the enjoyment and adventure of being for and in that place, the Grand Canyon. 

A world of commentary and "yes,but"s could be generated on that last, long, sentence, but Saturday, 1/3/15, was for celebration. To be sure of a happy event, those gathered above, in surreptitous cahoots with my family, organized a presentation as a surprise to me (a survivor's prerogative) of  an "unsung hero" (blush) award for reasons shown on these plaques, elegant and eye-catching:

Text on the left:   Grand Canyon Hikers and Backpackers Association

Presents to Jeff Ingram its Unsung Hero Award  

In Recognition of his Outstanding Contribution to the Preservation of the Grand Canyon

   And on the right:

Tatahatso's towering limestone pillars, discovered in 2007, were nearly lost forever under the waters of Marble Canyon Dam. In the 1960's, Jeff's tireless efforts with the Sierra Club helped stop the dam from being built, saving boundless known and unknown natural beauty.  Jeff's work on the 1975 Grand Canyon Enlargement At cemented enduring protection for these places by making them part of Grand Canyon National Park. We're proud to present Jeff our Canyoneering Descender Award for Conservation.  Thank you for helping save Marble Canyon and Western Grand Canyon; today an inseparable part of Grand Canyon National Park.

Jeff Ingram - Canyon ACE     

Coalition of American Canyoneers    Access through Conservation, Education and Safety (ACES)

There was also a press release of unabashed generosity and accuracy, accompanying this entry on the same date here. 

Bewilderingly, for as we all know, the Grand Canyon "is a profitless locality", I was also rendered a bit shaky by their organizations awarding me $4000, a generous act that I can only hope to render some thanks for by continuing this blog, hoping that it somehow benefits the Canyon and its lovers.

Here are photos of some of the principals:

                                           JI

Laughter: Rich R, Ji, Jason B

My grandson, Quinn, already intimate with the Canyon's floor and depth

GCHBPA: Doug N, & Chris F, JI, + Jason, John

Chris F, GCHBPA award, JI

Tom M, picture-taker (though these are all by my daughter Mrill Ingram), Rich R

ACanyoneeringA, JI

Also intimate with the Canyon's interiors: Hazel C, my granddaughter Miranda, JI

ACA award with Rich, JI, Jason

Doug, Chris, Hazel, Miranda, JI, Jason, John

Jason, Chris, JI (the Canyon is a serious place)

Now, what about that commentary?   Next entry.

A Pause for Reflection; On The Canyon's North Side

The Denver Service Center, along with the staff of Grand Canyon National Park, not only met the congressional deadline for reporting on whether the Kanab and Uinkaret plateau lands were suitable for retention in the Park, but used the period of 1975 to become acquainted with the larger reaches of the Canyon's North Side in the Arizona Strip. The immediate job would be to update and expand the recommendation for Wilderness, due on the President's desk in January 1977. However, the even larger task would be to come to know the lands from Kanab Canyon west to the Shivwits, in order to evaluate them as possible candidates for adding to the Park. Since these, called the Adjacent Lands, were under the administration of the Forest Service (most of Kanab Canyon) and the Bureau of Land Management (west side of Kanab, the upper ends of Whitmore and Parashant Canyons, and the grand back-country viewing platforms of the multi-fingered Shivwits). Sharing the BLM features (except for Kanab) is the Lake Mead National Recreation Area (part of NPS, of course, but for all that, a turf that would be defended by the NRA staff).

The matter of the Grand Canyon Wilderness was inextricably wound up in the question of removing motorized craft from the river, and that history has been told, all the way up to its sad denouement as the commercial river operators (whether motorized or rowers) banded together to protect their oligopoly and conservative river operations by pressing well-placed bureaucrats in the President's Office of Management and Budget to keep the excellent NPS Wilderness proposal away from Congress. (See my Hijacking A River: A Political History of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, 2003. It is available -- along with many other invaluable books on the Canyon, river running, and the Park -- from Vishnu Temple Press in Flagstaff, http://www.vishnutemplepress.com/.)

Study 1: The Park Suitability Report, February 1976

Due on 3 Jan 1976, the Secretary's findings & recommendation were contained in the report dated Nov 1975. Copies were distributed to the public in February. These came in the form of ordinary stapled paper report by NPS; the fancy leather-bound presentation copies were for Congress.

The cover letter to Congress, 23 Jan 1976, was signed by Ass't Secretary Nathaniel Reed, and made three major points:

1. Significant archeological resources, possessing exceptional value, may exist bringing information on the movement of prehistoric people, their changing lifestyles, and other unresolved problems.

2. Geologically, there were ancient drainage patterns on the Kanab Plateau that could lead to better understanding of the Grand Canyon's formation. Biologically, the communities would help in interpretation, as control areas for evaluating changes from human activities, and in analyzing the environment of prehistoric cultures.

3. Scenically, there is a sense of spaciousness in the sweeping plateau lands through which the Colorado has cut the Canyon, lending diversity to visitors' viewing experience.

   Furthermore, the areas could only benefit the local economy marginally in grazing, logging, & hunting activities. 

  The study concluded that the lands therefore are "not 'unsuitable for park purposes'", and ought to be retained within the Park. 

Study 1: Park Suitability of the former Monument lands on the Kanab & Uinkarets Plateaus

A reprise: The Grand Canyon National Monument (number 2) that President Hoover established in 1932 recognized the impact & remnants of volcanic action on the Canyon,  as well as the different and startling configuration of the Canyon itself -- a section where  geologic actions had brought a younger set of rocks to river level. NPS interest was definitely stimulated by features near the river. In the same period, there was considerable thought being given as to how to classify and dispose of or administer the public lands of the Arizona Strip west of Kanab Creek. The character of these lands, away from the river, moved from evidence of the volcanic-drowned nature of Toroweap Vally with its cliffs and old flows to the open, extensive reaches of Kanab Plateau, running on toward the Utah border. 

That being a time when NPS officials at GCNP were still learning what the Grand Canyon actually was, it can not be too surprising that GCNM2 was a big fella, taking in a big swath of the rolling, above-rim lands as well as those in and near the canyon. More detailed study to  come up with the most appropriate boundary was urgent because of the complaints of the dozen or so ranchers who ran stock there -- a task that Minor Tillotson, first as Superintendent and then Regional Director, dedicated himself to over the next 20 years. He got lots of advice from the residents of Arizona and Utah north of the Grand Canyon who were used to the Arizona Strip, all the way down to the Colorado, being their (free) grazing range. Negotiations through the 1930's did finally lead to a boundary brought closer to the river, but which still included lands to protect approaches to the side canyons, e.g. Tuckup, those flatter lands of the plateau that graziers wanted to continue to use. (The Grand Canyon National Monument #2 story in detail is told in several posts, Jan-Mar 2012.)

A "new" Park; A "new" Reservation. 1975: What is to be done with these creations?

Tritely enough, the Presidential signature marked the end of the gestation stage of the Grand Canyon National Park Enlargement Act and the beginning of its life as part of the living law that governs how the Grand Canyon and especially its National Park are to be treated in the political-legal framework of American society. That sentence is not only a trite metaphor but carries major ironies: Enlargement? Or shrinkage? Expansion of a national Park? or an Indian Reservation? And whatever the intent, it is all too clear 40 years later, that much of the Act has been ignored in letter, spirit or both. 

Helping Hands: The Navajo, The Secretary, And Saving The Grand Canyon

A proposal  to construct a tramway from the rim of the Grand Canyon at the far southern end of Marble Canyon to its floor at the Confluence of the Colorado and Little Colorado rivers would locate the structure on land of the Navajo Nation immediately adjacent to lands in Grand Canyon administered by Grand Canyon National Park. This scheme would be destructive of Navajo and Grand Canyon values and land alike.

An existing political mechanism authorizes the Department of Interior to work cooperatively with the Navajo Nation for the preservation and interpretation of the Grand Canyon and to enhance the Navajo environment and economy. This cooperative, resource-protecting approach to human activity in the eastern half of the Grand Canyon was directed by Congress almost forty years ago in the 1975 Grand Canyon National Park Enlargement Act, PL 93-620, sections 2, 3a, 5, and 6.