Draft Central Utah Project notes by Dorothy Harvey, 1978-1979

Page 1

1445 N. 10 St. Manitowoc, Wis. 54220 April 16, 1979 IMPORTANT RE: DELIBERATE COVER-UP OF CUP ALTERNATIVES BY UTAH'S ELECTED OFFICIALS, SECRETARY ANDRUS, AND PRESIDENT CARTER ???? I think the support of CUP development is tied in with hydro-power development which is dependent on CUP development. Until we received the Draft of the now called Bonneville M & I System (delayed until Appropriations hearings were well through) none of us knew that the renamed Jordanelle M & I System included a proposed power development! A power component is included with the Jordanelle Dam. (Utah Power & Light) What we have then is three individual power developments in CUP - Diamond Fork, Bonneville and Utah Lake. CUP development is not to produce water for irrigation or industrial sale in the Salt Lake Valley (Kennecott Copper has all the water rights it needs) or even for municipal needs ( these can be supplied after CUP is completed by Van Dam's dual water management system). CUP development is for power production primarily for export from Utah. (I heard a Utah Power & Light official discuss the extent which Utah supplies Idaho power at a Symposium on Idaho's future in Pocatello in 1977.) The key to Federal support of CUP development emerged from a statement made to me by Sen. Hatch's Aide, Frank Madsen. Madsen stated that President Carter had told Senator Hatch - face to face - that his staff had told him there were no alternatives to the CUP; therefore, the President would have to support CUP. The President made this statement "nine months ago". Kathy Fletcher was the staff person. Yet, I was in Washington lobbying Congress in May, 1978. I spoke briefly with Kathy Fletcher at hearings, as an opponent of CUP development, and she was unwilling to discuss the CUP with me - indicating it wouldn't be stopped by the President. To whom did Fletcher go to determine whether alternatives existed or not? While we didn't have our Issues Paper pub­lished at that time, Van Dam's report conclusions were already released. Why did Fletcher not pursue this aspect of CUP development with us? In a March 22, 1979 news release, Secretary Andrus applauds Utah State efforts to get the Ute Tribe back into negotiations which include Ute dependency on CUP development and saying, "We've invested too much in the Project - Indians and non- Indians - to risk killing it now on the basis of disagree­ments which are not directly related to the Project itself."