Each year we poll the guide members, asking them what we're doing right, what we're doing wrong, and what we're simply not doing that we should. About two-thirds of the responses come back blank. A full sampling of the rest are printed on the following pages. (For the sake of space and tact, we left out some of the repetitious ones and the downright personal and mean ones.) In addition to the regular questions, this year we asked where, if anywhere, gcrg should stand on the highly controversial issue of decommissioning Glen Canyon Dam and restoring Glen Canyon.
Responses vary widely, and in most cases where there is a strong voice pushing one way, there is an equally strong one pushing back. This is a sign of some sort of balance, but it points out the improbability that gcrg can ever get a true consensus on many tough issues. (Unionizing, dam decommissioning, wilderness, bqr content, etc.) The best gcrg can do on those is to keep airing the issues. The best you can do is tell the board how you feel, or better yet, run for office.

Things GCRG Should Be Doing

Support wilderness in Grand Canyon.
Insuring long term health of the bqr. It's the best!
Riding BuRec mercilessly to hold them to the eis Record of Decision. There have been illegal releases from the dam with no consequences at all!
Oppose that obnoxious, self-serving outfitters' legislation, it stinks!
Promoting private trip user-day increase.
Keep focused on basic guide issues—stay away from pie-in-the-sky bull like draining the lake.
Being radical when it's necessary. This is an organization of river guides, not mice. There's already a Grand Canyon Trust; let's not be afraid to speak out.
Pizza at meetings & stick to topics under discussion. Rules of order; almost. Otherwise it's just another BS session, maybe have a BS session after all business is conducted so folks who aren't interested can leave.
Work with outfitters to get better wages, etc…. for guides and swampers.
Should be more active in fighting unconstitutional drug testing.
Protect us from Marlene!
Work with the private boating community “gcpba” more closely on management revisions.
The overflights are the most annoying and are the most bothersome and rude disturbance during a “wilderness” river experience.
Support Lew Steiger's history interview with cash, expenses or equipment. Promoting efforts towards guides getting a fair share of the profits made by commercial outfitters.
Working for more equity between commercial/private user days. Boatmen benefits in general (threaten a union—last resort).
Find a way to connect all guides. Then represent a consensus.
Pushing for greater equality between commercial/private usage!
Pressing the nps to be in compliance with the provisions of the proposed potential wilderness designation of the canyon.
Keep an eye on the power of the outfitters.
Don't panic—relax!
Speaking out about the trend of nps control that seems to be increasing. The focus and character of the trips is slowly but surely being changed and eroded.
Take a strong stand on air traffic, Glen Canyon draining, and outfitter price gouging. Keep Lynn happy.
If guides are going to really be professional, they need to be paid and treated like professionals. Or, decide to be amateur and slack off.
Can we put more pressure on the outfitters for more universal benefits for their boatmen?
Come and run the Kern in California. It is good fun and the water is big this year.
More of the same.
We should stay unselfishly involved in the use allocation issue and in promoting living wages, health and retirement benefits for guides.
End overflights. End exchanges. Support private boaters.
Organize, organize, organize. We could be much more powerful as a union.
Keep us well informed on all Park Service policy happenings on the political, ecological and management forefront.
Be careful about the outfitter organization. They want to do licensing—or the fox guards the hen house.
Investigate the reality of costs, benefits, detriments, etc… that decommissioning Glen Canyon Dam would incur.
Focus on supporting guides i.e. Professionalism and being treated as such. Fight drug testing.

Law Enforcement On The River: In response to “Anonymous”: I agree with you that the current full-time river rangers who are down in the canyon are good folks and we should support them and the job they do. Dave Desrosiers and Dave Trevino are great guys: funny, warm and very understanding of the job we are doing as guides, supportive and helpful to the private sector when they are in need. It was never our intention to imply otherwise. Our intent was to address a general trend that has been occurring over the past decade towards a more and more law enforcement oriented river subdistrict and river patrols, as well as just an increase in rules, regs and inflexibility in general. We've all been on the river with people who weren't as understanding as our current rangers and if we don't address this trend, when the guys like Trevino and Desrosiers decide to move on, the enforcement-oriented mandate may simply continue to become more intrusive and restrictive.

Regarding the Issue of “Off-Season Rest” for the Canyon: “Perplexed” is absolutely right that a couple of months “rest”, when fewer river trips are allowed downriver, will not really do anything substantial for the ecosystems of Grand Canyon. One does see more wildlife along the river in the winter months—whether this has any ecological significance is unclear. Perhaps a winter rest would allow a bit more sediment to accumulate on beaches that would not then be carried back to the river by many trampling feet. Perhaps. Truly, in order to allow for any real “recovery” the river corridor would have to be closed off from visitation for a period of years, clearly not a realistic proposal. But a winter “rest” period would allow people traveling in that time to have a true wilderness experience (two trips launching per week is a far cry from two per day). Footprints on beaches would have time to be smoothed by wind and winter rains, there would be no chance of trash accumulating during those times, etc. Perhaps it is more of a philosophical “rest” that we need to give the canyon and the people who wish to travel during those times. gcrg's stance is that increasing allocation and moving it into the shoulder and low-use seasons only serves the purpose of expanding our influence into times when the canyon and her creatures are largely to themselves. It is a trend we do not want to encourage—we don't feel that simply because there are less-used times in the schedule, we should fill them up with the increased demand.
Reducing the entire year to the lowest common denominator is not the answer.

Christa Sadler