Dear Eddy: Buttals and Rebuttals

Regarding River Rage, by Bob Grusy, bqr 13:2
My name is Bob Woodward. I'm a
private boater from Flagstaff. I've
been a member of gcrg for several
years and enjoy the bqr for the same reasons
that many do—the wide spectrum of coverage
from historical narratives to having a finger
on the pulse of what is currently happening
along the River. I'm also a board member of
Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association
(gcpba), but what I am about to write is
strictly my own personal opinion and is in no
way associated with or affiliated with gcpba.
I am very troubled by the editorial on page
two of the Spring 2000 bqr entitled ‘River
Rage' written by Bob Grusy. I do not know
Bob Grusy—I am sure he must be a first rate
boatman and probably a helluva guy, but this
editorial is quite disturbing.
There has been controversy along the
River in the past as there is controversy now.
What is the problem now? Plain and
simple—the problem is with allocation of
user-days. Mr Grusy does not address this in
his editorial. Do the concessionaires have a
problem with the Park Service? I think not.
They have always enjoyed a cozy relationship
with the Park Service. Don't get me wrong—I
think the concessionaires provide a valuable
service to the people of the world. Not
everyone wants to be a private boater and for
those that don't, from what I've seen, the
concession services available in Grand
Canyon run first rate trips that provide
people with a wonderful lifetime experience.
The problem lies in the fact that if someone
wants to take a trip with a concessionaire,
they can make a phone call to a 1-8 0 0
number and probably be on a trip within a
few weeks or certainly less than a year,
whereas if someone wants to put together a
private trip with family and friends, they
have to get on a waiting list that may take
twenty years. Twenty years!
It's not tragic that “someone had to come
to the conclusion that a lawsuit is the best
course of action”. It is more a measure of
how untenable the situation has become for
people trying to get private permits. What
other course of action has been effective?
Again, twenty years! And not only is the wait
that long, but thanks to the current set of
rules in place—those on the waiting list are
effectively banned from the river for the
entire time they are on the waiting list. Two
trips and you lose your place. Imagine telling
the first 7,0 0 0 people that sign up for
commercial trips that if they take the trip
they will be banned from the River for the
next twenty years. Of course no such
restrictions are in place for commercial
passengers or employees.
I don't see bitterness and hatred. I do see
this type of editorial being exactly the thing
that will promulgate that, though. I have
nothing but respect and admiration for the
commercial guides that I have met in the
Canyon. I've never had a bad experience with
a commercial guide and I feel confident that
they can say the same with regard to the
trips that I've been on. I personally have no
bitterness or hatred—I have a problem. The
problem being “Why does Randy Rafter from
the East Coast who has been warming up on
the Gauley and wants to do his Dream Trip
down the Canyon have to wait twenty years to
get a permit?”
Mr Grusy writes “Where is the understanding?”
Well, where is the understanding?
Mr Grusy poses two questions. The first
has nothing to do with the problem. The
second addresses progress in managing the
Park. What progress has been made vis-avis
the private boater? How has the private
boaters situation improved (progressed) in
the last twenty years? If the Park Service is
doing such an outstanding job of managing the
Park, why are private boaters waiting
twenty years to get a permit? Maybe they're
managing the Park very well in most areas,
but private access to the River is not one of
them.
Mr. Grusy writes that “each and every one
of us must be big enough and strong enough to
share.” Does that mean that the concessionaires
are willing to share some of the lion's
share of the allocation pie? The queue for
private permits grows longer and longer. Are
the concessionaires willing to share?
We all do love this Canyon—I do. We all do
want to protect this place of beauty. I think
there is a strong inclination to attempt to
sweep the “private problem” under the rug.
In my opinion, this editorial has something of
a “head in the sand” nature to it. We're not
going away and there are more and more of us
every year. The status quo has been very good
to the concession services for many years. It
will be uncomfortable to upset it. No one
wants to kill the golden goose, but maybe it
wouldn't be too bad if the goose got taken off
full feed.
With all due respect, I think if Mr. Grusy
and gcrg are earnest in their ideology of
working together and understanding, then it
would be more productive to come forth with
ideas and suggestions on how to address the
real problems that confront all the user
groups.
Bob Woodward

The Author Responds:
The problem with the private boater's
waiting list is a very complex and
complicated one. It is frustrating for
anyone wishing to do a private trip to think of
waiting twenty years for a chance to go down
river. But to think that the only way to resolve
the length of this wait is to sue the Park
Service is a huge mistake. It is a reflection of
just how bad the situation has gotten. That is
the tragedy of river rage. Litigation will end
not in the desired conclusion between private
and commercial uses, but rather a change only
for the sake of change. Not for everyone's best
interest, not even for the best solution for the
problem, designed by lawyers, not by private
boaters. It will end up no more fair or unfair
than the current system. But at least it will
cost someone a lot of money, time, and wasted
energy. That is what I think is sad.
There is a huge misconception out there that
all a commercial river passenger has to do is
call up, sign up and send in their money and
they can go anytime they wish. As hard as it is
to believe, this statement is not true. There is
one and only one reason the commercial
waiting list is not any longer than it is: the
simple fact that the Park will not allow any
outfitter to book more than two years in
advance.
There is another misconception, and that is
that the commercial passenger is paying for
access to the river. This also is not the case.
They are paying a price for a guided river trip
outfitted by a professional river company.
These outfitters are restricted to a set number
of user days as well as a set number of launch
dates. These outfitters in turn outfit the trip,
pay guides, carry insurance, buy equipment,
and pay a concession fee to the Park Service in
order to run these trips. Right, most of them
make a good living at it. Most of them have
been doing it for over thirty years. Their
reputation speaks much louder than their
profits.
Believe me, I agree there are a lot of problems
with the current system. But the lack of
management by the Park Service has not
caused these problems. It also has not been
caused by the perceived greed of the outfitters.
In fact, a fair share of the problem lies in the
hands of the private boaters. People are on that
list by choice. Although I know that I will
offend a lot of private boaters by writing this,
the fact is that there is more than a fair share
of dishonest boaters out there contributing to
the length of the waiting list. People that place
names of other people, friends, relatives,
anyone with a social security number on the
list. Some of these people have no idea what the
trip is all about. These names are placed on the
waiting list in order to secure a spot for
someone else to run the trip for them. In turn,
these boaters run one or more trips each year.
Over the course of a summer, I see a lot of the
same faces on private trips over and over. I'm
not saying this happens a lot, but it does
happen. Not that there is anything wrong with
this, but it does inflate the list. I think a
person should be allowed to go down river as
often as she or he can. The only thing is, let's
face it, in doing this under the current system
you are denying other honest folks on the
waiting list a chance to go down river. Private
boaters that know how to work the system are
not having any problem with the system.
There are, as hard as it may seem to
believe, entrepreneurs out there that know
how to work the system and are running
“pirate” trips, not private trips: trips run as
private trips for profit. These trips destroy
the integrity of the system and increase the
length of the waiting list. This practice has to
stop.
Currently, there is a thirty percent cancellation
rate in the waiting list. Right, there are
a lot of reasons for this, why wouldn't someone
cancel if they are going to have to wait ten
years and after ten years find out they may
have to wait another two or three years due to
over demands on the current system. This is
sad.
There are a lot of loopholes in the current
system. To many, it seems as though it is not a
fair system. But the solution to this problem is
not through a lawsuit. This lawsuit is a waste
of time, money, and energy. Nor, is the solution
to just live and let live with your head in
the sand. The answer is to put our energy into
a coalition for reform: a coalition made up of
folks on the waiting list, folks from the Park
Service, river guides and outfitters. It would
be all the same folks that are going to be in
that courtroom anyway. Why not work together
to improve the system rather than fighting
over allocation?
There are a lot of good folk out there that
want to get down river on their own private
trip. They deserve a fair chance to get down
river. There are ways to streamline the
current system. Use computer modeling to
update the current database in order to learn
more about the people on the waiting list and to
make the system a lot more user friendly.
Increase trip size from 1 6 to twenty for those
who want more folks on their trip. Look at
user days for private trips (not all private
trips use their full 1 6 days in the summer).
Putting these days back into the system would
allow more private use. These are just a few
ideas: there are a lot more workable solutions
to this situation.
Let's work together to build a better
system.
Bob Grusy

I've had some thoughts regarding the gcrg
association for quite some time. After
attending the past meeting at Marble Canyon
I thought I might as well share my feelings
with the powers that be, so to speak.
I caught the end of Joe Shannon's talk about
Glen Canyon Dam and the effect it is having on
the river. At the end, he threw out some questions
aimed at Grand Canyon guides asking,
“Where is your voice?” Andre then rebutted,
speaking about time demands and lack of
resources and the officers of gcrg being spread
so thin with so many issues that at times he
also wondered where the voice of the guides
was himself.
I've been a Grand Canyon guide for the last
16 seasons and in that time I've done my share
of B.S.ing with other guides, and while I'll not
be so bold as to say I speak for anyone else, I do
think it important to impress upon the association
the growing feeling of discontent in
regards to the direction that gcrg has taken
these past years.
It seems that the focus of gcrg has become
purely political. While I understand that the
political arena is important, as a guide I don't
feel that political issues are the only concerns
facing gcrg. If the voice of the Grand Canyon
guides has become somewhat “muffled” I feel
the reason for this is the fact that the support
the guides expect from their own association
has been lacking. Retirement plans, health
plans, consistent pay rates based upon experience,
just to name a few. I understand some
companies within Grand Canyon have implemented
policies to benefit their guides, i.e.
profit sharing, 401k's, but the majority of
the concessionaires view guides as being, “a
dime a dozen”.
As guides we've made a conscious decision to
spend our lives in the outdoors. Turning people
on to the world we live in, and in doing so
hopefully opening their eyes to the political
issues our environment faces. We realize our
voice isn't enough. Public outcry has always
been and always will be the motivating force
with politicians. Maybe if some of the concerns
directly affecting us are addressed, we would
pay more money to gcrg in the form of dues or
whatever to help offset the financial burdens. I
know I would. It seems a shame that anything
done to benefit a guide always seems to come
post-humously.

Georgie Rapid
On july 12, 2000, the Arizona State
Board on Geographic and Historic Names
approved a name change decision to
rename 2 4-Mile Rapid to Georgie Rapid.
Rosalyn Jirge, a former friend, passenger,
and crew member for Georgie, was the name
change sponsor.
The application for this name change has
now gone to the U.S. Board on Geographic
Names. They will be considering final
approval over the next month or so. If you
have sentiment for or against the name
change, please send your comments to:
Mr. Roger L. Payne, Executive Secretary
U.S. Board on Geographic Names
U.S. Geological Survey
523 National Center
Georgie Rapid

It is disappointing to learn that Superintendent
Rob Arnberger is leaving Grand Canyon
National Park (he's been appointed regional
director for the National Park Service's Alaska
Region). It does seem as if the National Park
Service, in its divine wisdom, has a way of
transferring its personnel just when we are
starting to get to know them. Not that we have
always seen eye to eye on every issues over the
past six years, but Superintendent Arnberger
has been helpful and responsive on many of our
concerns from the Coast Guard threat to overflights.
At times his job must have seemed like
an endless river with one difficult rapid after
another. Gcrg would like to say thanks for
taking the time to listen to and speak with
everyone on the boat. Hopefully the new
Superintendent will share those same concerns
Changing of the Guard
and We'll Miss ‘Em
Changes are as usual happening within
the faces of Grand Canyon National Park.
This time we're losing a couple
favorites—Ed Cummins, who contributed
greatly to making our time at Lees Ferry a
pleasant one, and Dave Trevino, river ranger
extraordinaire. It's not every day you get to
work with Park personnel like these two
guys.
Ed is moving on to Oklahoma and Dave's
new post will be Washington, DC. Good luck

If you're doing any kind of research on the
Grand Canyon or Lower Colorado River,
you'll want to bookmark this URL—
http://www.grand canyon.org/biblio/This online
bibliography is an indispensable resource
compiled by gcrg members Earl Spamer, and
co-contributors Dan Cassidy and Richard
GC Online Bibliography
The gcrg yard sale successfully raised over
$300 for the organization. Thanks so
much to those who donated time and items
to the sale. Some “best buys” not found at
many other yard sales included a vide variety
of recreational equipment and the highly
desirable “KaplinskyJuicer".