The crmp revision process has moved into Phase Two. “Yeah?” you say, “wake me when something interesting happens.” OK, wake up. It may seem like the process marches on indefinitely but there truly is a plan, and this is it.

After countless hours of poring over illegible handwriting, figuring out if that really was a swear word and wondering if that bomb threat was really serious, the team from the Park came out with a summary of the hundreds of comments received discussing issues and solutions for the new crmp. On May 16, the Park held a public information meeting in Flagstaff to let us all in on the next step. Here is a general summary of what they came up with.
All our comments were boiled down to eight major categories:

1. Access and Allocation of Use: focuses on the user-day system of allocation, and the “split” between commercial, non-commercial and administrative use. Will also deal with overall use levels and allocation of use by season.
2. Distribution and Volume of Use: focuses on computer simulation and mathematical modeling to examine encounter levels, numbers of people in a given area at a time, campsite use, etc.
3. The Non-commercial Permit System: focuses on developing a new permit system for non-commercial boaters that improves access and reduces the wait period.
4. The Spectrum of Outfitter Trips and Services: focuses on evaluating the types of trips and services provided currently to ensure that an appropriate range of services is provided the public.
5. Resource Stewardship: Management and Protection of Natural and Cultural Resources: focuses on examining impacts to the natural and cultural resources along the river with the intent of lessening those impacts and defining standards for resource conditions within the Park. Will also examine campsite information.
6. Wilderness Management: focuses on managing the river corridor as potential wilderness and achieving the legal requirements of the Wilderness Act.
7. The Lower Colorado River Gorge: focuses on assuring continued access to the Lower Gorge, protection of the resources and improving cooperative management of the river from Diamond to Lake Mead between the Hualapai and the Park.
8. Public Education: focuses on facilitating dissemination of information on issues and processes.

Of these eight main topics, the Park chose the first five as important enough to create public work groups to discuss the issues and come up with solutions for these areas. The deadline to sign up for a work group was June 15, but if you are interested in being involved in one of these groups, contact us and we can dial you into what's going on. The Park has also set up a website to let people know what's happening and to post information. Its address is: www.crmp.com. Gcrg will have representatives at each work group; as of this writing the format of the meetings, dates and how often we would meet were still up in the air.
The deadline for these groups to come up with solutions is November 1, although we are trying to get that pushed back a little. If you are interested in contributing or have some thoughts, please let us or the Park know so that your voice can be heard. This is our continued chance at public involvement, an opportunity to speak directly to Park personnel about our concerns, not just write a letter. We'll be working directly with members from all constituencies in these work groups, so who knows what we could accomplish? The Park is aiming for a draft plan early next year, so this summer and fall will be really important. We'll keep you posted. Imagine that.

Christa Sadler

There's a lot going on for the river these days, programs and plans that will directly influence river trips in Grand Canyon for many years to come: the Colorado River Management Plan, the draft Wilderness Management Plan, and Adaptive Management Program for the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. Then there are other plans that have indirect, yet very important impacts on the river experience: the Overflights Act and the Canyon Forest Village development at the entrance to the south rim of Grand Canyon.

Grand Canyon River Guides has about 2,000 members in 49 states and six foreign countries. We are mostly river guides and their clients, with some river outfitters, private boaters, and various others. Gcrg represents a broad range of people who care a lot for Grand Canyon. So, make yourself heard! Here's my perspective on what's up.
Colorado River Management Plan: The crmp is the Park Service's set of rules on how people get to go down the river: who, what, when, where, how, how fast, how often, etc. Public input began September, 1997 and continued into early 1998. The biggest issue has centered around private river runners wanting more access. The Park has compiled public input and currently organized focus groups on five major topics. Contact Linda Jalbert at gcnp to find out how you can be involved. My opinion: Demand will always exceed supply. The pie is only so big and should not get bigger. Even with commercial allocation in high demand, the private waiting list should be reduced to 3-4 years. It can be done. Commercial outfitters have contributed valuable solutions to this problem. They can also help correct other inequities in the system by providing reasonable benefits and compensation for their guides (AzRA and Arizona River Runners have made great strides) and providing opportunities for average-income people to go down the river who are otherwise excluded by the high prices (Western River Expeditions ought to bring back Georgie's program for the common people).

Wilderness Management Plan: Grand Canyon National Park's draft wmp is now available for public comment. It states how the Park Service will meet its mandate to manage the back country of Grand Canyon according to wilderness precepts, until Congress decides whether or not to designate it as an official Wilderness Area. My opinion: it is a wilderness and we ought to keep it that way. Allow motor boats on the river, but only if they are the quieter, non-polluting, four-stroke motors. Motor boats whisk people through the canyon quickly and with relatively little impact. They offer shorter trips for those with little time. Hurrah to the outfitters who are voluntarily making the transition to quiet technology (Arizona River Runners leads the pack!) Thanks to all you motor boatmen who respectfully throttle down when passing others.

Adaptive Management Work Group: The amwg is composed of 25 stakeholders on the Colorado River, appointed by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, to advise him on how best to operate the dam to preserve the river ecosystem (mandated by the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992). As the representative of recreational river runners, I meet monthly with the Technical Work Group to plan and work out issues. So far, we've mostly dealt with endangered species issues and another possible flood flow to rebuild beaches in Grand Canyon. A flood flow is not going to happen this year, although we thought it might. But, it could very well happen in the future. We're developing the possibility of an even higher flow, maybe 60,000- 80,000 cfs for a couple of days, when hydrologic and ecosystem conditions are right for it. My opinion: river scienctists need to reach out to river runners by willingly providing their knowledge and not competing for critical camps. It's the only way people will continue to support the science and monitoring on the river.

Overflights Issue: This continues to be contentious. A few businessmen make big dough in this market, and continue to side with the faa against the nps and Hualapai Tribe to gain more access. My opinion: Take it back to 1984 levels as mandated by Congress. Everybody else is regulated, why not them? For over 25 years, I've led backpacking groups into the canyon and floated commercial groups down the river. I've also taken a commercial helicopter overflight over the eastern canyon. There's no comparison between the experiences. One is profound and meaningful; the other is just a short thrill. Tourists who want to fly over the canyon can have a more exciting and less expensive aerial experience watching the imax film in Tusayan.

Canyon Forest Village: There is big pressure to build a gateway community at the entrance to the south rim of Grand Canyon. In the U.S. Forest Service eis process (Alternative H) Canyon Forest Village (cfv) promises a comprehensive, environmentally-concerned, planned community with housing, infrastructure, environmental education, and lots of new retail and hotel space. The local hotel owners in Tusayan are struggling to show the Forest Service that it's not necessary.

Why should river runners be concerned? Because any new development will require water, which would be sucked out of the regional aquifer beneath the plateau. Do this for awhile, and dozens of small seeps and springs that sustain the desert ecosystem in Grand Canyon (Elves Chasm, Havasu) will begin to dry up. But, now cfv has come up with a “solution” to this problem. They have struck a deal with commercial and governmental agencies to ship water by train from the Colorado River in Needles to their proposed development, resulting in more water to be recharged into the aquifer through time! My opinion: assuming a gateway community is necessary, this Rube Goldberg plan may just be a viable solution to a very critical issue.

These issues are all about the kind of experience people want to have in Grand Canyon. They are also about respecting the integrity of the primitive experience and the ecosystem. There is much money to be made by a very few people with commercial interests. We should be wary of the motivations of commercial interests, and work to create opportunities for solitude, time, and personal involvement. The concept of a wilderness experience has fuzzy boundaries. Let's be sure we create an enlightened vision for human access to this incredibly precious place. As Teddy Roosevelt once said, standing on the rim in 1903:

“Leave it as it is. You cannot improve on it. The ages have been at work on it and man can only mar it. What you can do is keep it for your children, and all who come after you.”

André Potochnik