If I had been president Roosevelt I'd have told them to forget that cork; we don't need no stinking bathtub in the dessert.
Seriously, the economic forces driving dams aren't going away. And, as flood control they do enhance the lives of those living down stream. And, like it or not, we have a longer, more stable running season in the Grand Canyon because of that stinking cork named for the canyon it killed. And, hydro electric generation is the cleanest and over the long run cheapest electricity we can get right now.
Displacing the native population, if compensation is fair and relocation assistance is done right doesn't have to be a bad thing afterall.
That said, we don't really need a 600' cork in the river to achieve the goals of flood control, water management and hydro generation.
If Glen Canyon dam had been say half it's height we'd at least have some of Glen canyon to enjoy, and the flood control, and the water management and the cheap clean hydro. In dry years maybe we'd have to ask the Las Vegas bunch to tone it down a bit..........or a lot..........but then I'd think that was a good thing in any case.
And who thinks megalopolis LA wouldn't benefit from a decrease in population? I mean, do we really need all those damn people out there?
I still dream of the day that Glenn Canyon fails, and I'm at say, mile 25 sitting in my 18' Avon, nose downstream, ready to ROCK!!