Garrett Schniewind
guide, owner-operator: Canyon Explorations,
president: Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association

   After considerable thought, loss of sleep, and a review of notes scribbled in the night, my own perspective on the CRMP revision processes has come together in my head. It did not come easily. Despite, or maybe because of my intimate relationship with the Colorado River corridor within the Grand Canyon- professionally, personally, emotionally -I have worked hard to understand and include the perspectives of others in my thinking.

   A perspective, according to the dictionary, is “a broad view of events or ideas in their true nature and relationships.”

   On any given controversial issue now part of this debate, I can argue with the best of them. I can tell you why helicopters should stay at Whitmore, why motorized access is good for the canyon, why the current allocation mix is appropriate. And I don’t use helicopters or motors.

   However, what I will try to explain here is how my conclusions on these many different issues fit into my larger perspective on CRMP revision.

   Some may criticize me as being self-interested. Yet, I feel strongly about my ability to separate my legitimate concerns about my industry and profession from my thinking about what is really, truly best for the Grand Canyon and for the American public who desires to interact with it.

   As a starting point, I think it is important to consider the good things about current management practices. There is danger in pursuing change for change’s sake only. We should remember that sometimes, there are good reasons for the way things are.

   There are many positive aspects of the management plan. In fact, I believe there are so many good things about the current Grand Canyon river experience that they are too numerous to list here. However, I will offer just a few:

   -opportunities for solitude

   -availability of physical and mental challenges

   -occasions for spiritual growth or renewal

   -opportunities for broad public access with minimal impacts

   -diversity of available trip types and trip character

   -exposure to a striking natural environment

   The Grand Canyon river experience is about a different mode of living, one that offers meaningful lessons for our lives in the “normal” world. It’s about self-discovery, rejuvenation, a glimpse into the natural processes that shape the world. It can even be about rebirth. Underlying it all is living life in a more basic form: food, shelter, fun, time with friends both old and new, and the opportunity to share.

   What should not, cannot be lost in the revision process is the diversity of currently available experiences. This is a real danger as many will use the revision process as a means to satisfy, or worse, instill some purist, elitist notion of the Grand Canyon river experience on those who seek it.

   Let’s face it. There are those who think people who don’t share their view of what the Grand Canyon experience should be, should be sent elsewhere. There are those who think the Grand Canyon itself deserves protection from the impure visitor. This type of thinking is motivated not by altruism, but by the notion that those who don’t measure up should be excluded.

   Some people don’t like short trips. Or motors. Or helicopters. Or passenger exchanges. Or professional guides. Or interacting with other canyon visitors.

   However, it is the current diversity of available river trip experiences, which these elements make possible, that provides a very broad sweep of the American public (in all its tremendous diversity) access to the Grand Canyon river experience.

   Different people, from widely different backgrounds and with different comfort levels about what it means to delve into a new experience can find a place to start or continue their journey.

   Not everyone would choose to take a private trip. Nor would everyone choose to ride on a paddle boat or to be in a wilderness setting for more than three days. Availability of different choices helps ensure that the Grand Canyon experience can be shared by most everyone. Sharing means the power of the experience is amplified, spread, used with positive result.

   As any river guide will tell you, people are touched by the Grand Canyon. Its power is obvious. Narrowing the types of experiences available will lessen its power, not increase it.

   On a Grand Canyon trip, people are awed by nature and their place in it. This has been happening for years under the current management system. People come away from the trip with a greater respect for and a profound appreciation of the wilderness experience. This power flows from the reality of wilderness, not some legal definition found in some law library. The CRMP process should not be used to deprive those people, who may not score high on some kind of wilderness purity test, of the chance for this enlightenment.

   Of course, there are problems with the current management system. One obvious problem is the private permit management system. This is a real problem that must be solved. I am convinced that the problem lies not within the size of the private allocation, which I believe more than fairly reflects the size of this specific user group within the population, but with how the private allocation is administered. The outfitting community is at work formulating constructive suggestions on how to address this problem, and is currently working with private boaters and others to devise a better system.

   Because people care passionately about the Grand Canyon, it is difficult not to make judgments about what the true river experience should be. We all have strong feelings about our ideas. About this, I would simply say: if one wants to have a certain experience in Grand Canyon, they should choose it and go do it, but should stand clear and let other thinking adults choose the type of experience they desire.

   Is it wise to contemplate change? Of course. Should we change just for the sake of change? No.

   Throughout this process, let’s remember that what’s better for some is not always better for all. We must share the Grand Canyon. This is not to say that some parameters should not exist on what experiences are available on the Colorado River. But let’s keep in mind that the current parameters found in the existing CRMP work well at achieving the goals of protecting the resource and providing a high quality visitor experience for a broad range of the public.