One reoccurring issue regarding wilderness management in general, and the revision of the Colorado River Management Plan (crmp) in particular, is the concern of imposing an elitist, purist notion of “wilderness experience” on the rest of us (see G. Schniewind's letter in last month's Perspectives). Wilderness experiences are very personal, subjective and as diverse as the number of individuals who immerse themselves in wilderness. How can anyone, let alone a bureaucracy, define what that experience should be?
Wilderness experience depends upon a human being encountering honest-to-God, in the flesh (or ground or water) “Wilderness”. Period. So, what is wilderness? While each of us searches for a personal meaning, agencies like the Park Service must look to the Wilderness Act for guidance. Contrary to some views (see G. Schniewind's letter) laws are not inherently evil or irrelevant. They protect our property, discourage us from killing each other, and in the case of the Wilderness Act, provide reasonably good descriptions as to what constitutes wilderness.
According to the Act, Wilderness is “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled [uncontrolled] by man … retaining its primeval character and influence.” While that goal is often difficult to achieve, it does provide a clear mandate, first and foremost, to take care of the land. The second important aspect of wilderness applies to (but does not define) human experience. Wilderness is an area that “has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.” The only way to achieve that condition is to allow, but not exceed, use levels expected in wilderness. Measurements of use relating to experience are usually defined as numbers of people or groups encountered. How are these numbers derived? Researchers go out and ask wilderness users. Study results give the managers and the public an idea of a range, or spectrum, of use levels acceptable to the wilderness visitor.
Because some folks accept higher use levels than others, agencies should provide opportunities for a variety of preferences within the wilderness. This range should fall within wilderness spectrum described above, and can be accomplished by dividing the wilderness into zones of variable use. In some zones encounters with other groups should be expected. In other areas the visitor should find no one. Another method, employed on the River, is simply to allow the higher use in the summer, with progressively lower levels in the fall, spring, and winter seasons. No one tells anyone what to think or feel, only what to expect.
The distinction between managing for a wilderness experience and managing the wilderness experience is not a fine line. The former, based on the Wilderness Act, requires the intelligent interpretation and application of ecological and sociological principles tempered with humility. It simply requires preserving ecological characteristics of wilderness and keeping the level of use within the visitor's expectations of a wilderness setting. This is the principal goal of the crmp revision process. The latter, managing (i.e, controlling) the experience itself, is illicit, futile demagoguery based in ignorance and arrogance. Telling people what or how to think has nothing to do with revising a river management plan. The challenge of wilderness management is to protect the environment and, God willing, provide humanity the opportunity to experience a wilderness setting. No brainwashing or microchip brain-implants required.
Wilderness's preciousness lies not only with its immense richness of life and scenery, but also its scarcity. Designated wilderness constitutes less than two percent of the conterminous United States. The Grand Canyon and its river afford something unique even within the context of wilderness. It is not another roadside attraction nor the grand cash register. It is not yet Central Park nor Disneyland. It is something different, something rare and immensely valuable. If our first priority in wilderness is care of the land and its community of life, the second is to assure for the traveler the time and space for discovery. That discovery may be of place, or purpose, or something altogether different, but it will be their discovery.

Kim Crumbo