Should we backfill the Grand Canyon?

Question

Every year thousands of desert animals fall to their deaths (mainly after nightfall) off the sheer cliffs of the Grand Canyon. This senseless loss of life can be stopped if we backfill the Grand Canyon. Please join Friends of the Desert at www.friendsofthedesert.org.

(

Answer 1

its the circle of life so no, we should leave it how it is

Answer 2

I think it is a great idea. However, the reality of the situation requires the Corps of Engineers, EPA, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of Fish and Wildlife, et al. to perform various impact studies.

The Corps of Engineers will need to either create a giant culvert system to allow the Colorado River to continue to California or else the State of California would file an injunction to stop the project. Another option might be to simply divert the river around through central Arizona and then westward across Nevada into California, but I would foresee additional lawsuits alledging loss of water by evaporation as the water moved through the desert areas.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs would have to make decisions based on the finding of archaeological evidence of prehistoric Indian activity within the canyon. Those sites have to be preserved at all costs, so that requires building what would amount to underground structures to protect the sites while making them accessible to the public and to those studying the artifacts. Every site containing ANY artifacts would have to be protected from the backfilling.

The Bureau of Land Management would be involved with the BIA in the evaluation and subsequent protective measures. Any potentially valuable commodity or prospective grazing lands or timber lands would have to be evaluated and a development plan created.

The Fish and Wildlife biologists and botanists would have to do a riparian survey to determine if ANY critter habit, breeding grounds, nesting grounds, migration paths, etc. are impacted by the backfilling. Any that are found will have to be protected from further decline or negative impact. This may require removal and reintroduction into a similar environment, the creation of protected status for the critter and it's environs which may necessitate another (yet separate) underground chamber with access to the river, dirt, rocks, cliffs, sky, etc. while making it available to the public and those studying these critters (be they plant or animal).

Years of study would be needed to satisfy the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Diverting the river may expose hazardous material to the atmosphere or expose workers to potential hazardous material. If it is found that workers could actually fall into the Dihydrogen Oxide which would be diverted out of the canyon, protective measures would be needed since that can cause death.

Similar studies would have to take place at the site from which the back-fill dirt is to be obtained.

So from a practical point of view, I think the best thing would be to just kill all the animals in the Grand Canyon to prevent their accidental lingering death from falls.

Answer 3

assuming this kwestion is no joke I also assume that GOD knew what he was doing when he created the Grand Canyon and so he knew before that some of his living creatures may loose their lives there until HE decides to erode the entire canyon to a plain surface or backfill it up again Himself by applying forces of nature he only can control. So leave it as it is!!

Answer 4

Are you kidding?? That would...1 be impossible (the grand canyon is 10 miles wide and 277 miles long) and 2 would leave many jobless as it is a huge tourist attraction.

Not a good question dude.

Answer 5

Darn, it's too bad that link doesn't work.

I definitely think we should divert the river, destroy the canyon-bottom habitat, financially ruin the folks whose businesses depend on Grand Canyon tourism, and lose this recreationally and scientifically important site for the sake of a jackrabbit.

Answer 6

That would be pointless, in fact you would be ruining nature even more. Animals may fall off the sides, but more animals would die by filling it. We would be destroying thousands of creature's habitats! Mankind did not create the grand canyon, mother nature did, and I think we should leave it that way. Let's not destroy our wonderful planet even more than we already have.

Answer 7

I thought animals see fairly well at night. I don't think you really have a concept as to how much dirt, and sand it would take to fill in the grand canyon. I say NO ~

Answer 8

actually more people fall off the rims - thats why those signs are posted and the rim of the canyon is not desert but Ponderosa Pine forest. the desert doesn't start until you get below the Supai

Answer 9

That is dumb. You rather kill all the fishes at the bottom of the Grand Canyon so you can save animals on top who can see in the dark (not counting humans). Where is the logic in that ....

Answer 10

It might make the canyon walls collapse if not careful and continous supply there well might not always be fulfilled. Maybe we should just construct a bunch of safety nets all over the place. jk.

:)

Answer 11

Yes, with idiots that think that the grand canyon was the result of the biblical flood. There was one on TV the other night. I nearly died laughing!