Colorado River Project: River Report Summer 2003

• Description: Colorado River Project: River Report Summer 2003 Getting to know the great unknown
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 6/16/2003
• Author: Newcom, Joshua
• Title: Colorado River Project: River Report Summer 2003
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

dip. And then, suddenly, as quickly as it
began, it ended. We paddled into an
eddy and raised our paddles into the air,
touching the tips, like knights at the
Round Table in a celebratory salute and
a cheer. My personal hurrah was that I
managed to stay in the boat.
We set up camp for the night in the
heart of Marble Canyon. And when I
finally drifted off to sleep underneath
the starry sky, I dreamed of bumping up
and down in a boat.
No Politics Aside
Let there be no illusion. As much as
there exists the entirely romantic notion
of piloting a boat down the Colorado
River, immersed in the nature and
grandeur of the Grand Canyon and
removed from the elements of modern
society, there are strong politics attached
to river running. And most of the
politicking, as in much of the water
realm, revolves around who gets to use
the river.
The overarching theme for the
discord that surrounds river running is
the manner in which Grand Canyon
National Park (and specifically, the
portion of the Colorado River running
through it) is managed. Currently, a
1989 Colorado River Management Plan
for Grand Canyon National Park is
undergoing revision by the NPS. The
first plan was instituted by NPS in 1981
following years of discussion about the
growing use of the river and the impacts
of such to environmental and cultural
resources in the canyon. It also was a
mean of addressing the distribution of
river use between commercial outfitters
and private /non - commercial boaters.
The current revision of the plan was
prompted, in part, by a 2002 settlement
over a lawsuit. The lawsuit was brought
against NPS by private boaters who were
upset that, in 2000, the NPS decided to
halt efforts to revamp the 1989 manage-
ment plan and allow private boaters
greater access to the river.
"Although the plan will address many
issues, two of the main issues are the
allocation of use among the commercial
A view of heading down the "Great Unknown" on the motor raft.
and non - commercial river runner, and
how much, if any, motor use should be
allowed," said Rick Ernenwein, lead
NPS planner for the park.
Both carrying capacity and motorized
rafts have created a rift in the river
running community, generally viewed
as a close, tightly knit group.
In essence, there are two main
opportunities to boat the Colorado
River. One is to sign up with one of the
16 commercial outfitters and pay to be
floated down the river. The other is to
add your name to a list of over 8,000
other names and wait for your turn to
boat the river on your own. One can
also take advantage of any awarded non-
commercial trip cancellations — about 30
to 40 percent are canceled.
When the 1981 management plan
was created, NPS established "user days"
to regulate use of the river. User days are
divided between the commercial and
private trips, and every person boating
the Colorado is assigned a user day for
each day he or she is on the river.
Percentages of these user days were
assigned to commercial outfitters and
the private boaters based on traditional
usage at the time. The commercial
outfitters, called "concessioners" by the
NPS, have 115,500 user days annually
allocated among themselves. From that,
NPS gets a sliding scale percentage of
profits that has steadily increased over
the years to nearly $29 million in 2001.
The private trips have fewer user days
annually — 54,450. The user days of
both of these groups are divided between
• primary season (May- September) and
• secondary season (the other months).
The result is people have two options:
Pay to boat the Colorado River on a
commercial trip ($8,000- $12,000 for a
family of four) or wait 15 years to do it
on your own, as only about 250 self -
guided trips are allowed annually.
There is potential for the revised
management plan to increase the
number of user days. "At this point in
the planning process, very little is off the
table," said Ernenwein. "Both an
increase and a decrease in total use, as
well as the current use level are all still
being analyzed."
Ernenwein said the NPS will conduct
"carrying capacity analysis" to determine
what, if any, increases could be made to
accommodate more non - commercial
trips. Should an increase be permitted, it
must take into account the resulting
impacts of user increases to areas such as
the limited beach campgrounds along
the river and put -in and take -out
locations.
Mark Grisham, executive director of
the Grand Canyon River Outfitters
Association, said that any increase in
SUMMER 2003 • RIVER REPORT • COLORADO RIVER PROJECT • 7