# Afternoon disaster in Grand Canyon?



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi folks, I am curious... has your oar powered trip in Grand Canyon had a late afternoon motor boat pass your trip by and snag a camp you were headed for? If you would like to send me a private reply, that's fine too. E-mail is [email protected] Thanks, tom


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

The secret is not to make eye contact


----------



## mkashzg (Aug 9, 2006)

Tom Martin said:


> Hi folks, I am curious... has your oar powered trip in Grand Canyon had a late afternoon motor boat pass your trip by and snag a camp you were headed for? If you would like to send me a private reply, that's fine too. E-mail is [email protected] Thanks, tom


If you want a camp just speak up and communicate and things work out usually. Sounds like somebody got their panties in a wad.


----------



## kikii875 (Oct 25, 2010)

Tom Martin said:


> Hi folks, I am curious... has your oar powered trip in Grand Canyon had a late afternoon motor boat pass your trip by and snag a camp you were headed for? If you would like to send me a private reply, that's fine too. E-mail is [email protected] Thanks, tom


Disaster??? Are you kidding me Tom? Always stirring the pot. I have on multiple occasions motored past an oar trip, found out where they wanted to camp and left it open, only to find out that they didn't take that camp.
Its the friggen Grand Canyon. I have camped in places so small that everyone ended up sleeping on the boat or in the kitchen. It doesn't matter where you camp it can still be a fun camp.
Is this because they locked that other thread?
I am curious ... what possible use will this information be, particularly if you are getting just your angle on the question?
Yours,
Tom Too


----------



## shoenfeld13 (Aug 18, 2009)

While I love to be on the Grand without any motors, we have had nothing but great interactions with outfitters and guides. I'm sure it could happen but I have never experienced someone sneaking up a nabbing a site. Towards the end of my last trip an outfitter gave us a few blocks of ice and a case of beer.


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Kikii,

Once you understand Tom's pervasive anti-Park, anti-motor, anti-commercial world life view, many of the other things he does come into focus. This does seem to be sort of a blatant new approach -- openly fishing for information that he can use to advance those strongly held biases. 

Of course, he's free to do stuff like this here, on his list, or pretty much wherever he wants. And I'm sure what he describes happens occasionally, just as I saw three trip splitting/camp jumping episodes in September -- by privates who were rowing. (And as you point out, he didn't ask for any countervailing information.)

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Tom is a smart, experienced, articulate fellow, who has done some good things for the GC river community, particularly with his publications. But as a tool for real learning, this inquiry brings back that old saying about, "The plural of anecdote is not data." 

FWIW.

Rich Phillips


----------



## chepora (Feb 6, 2008)

No the motor rigs have always been very accomodating and polite. If you had an issue with one of the guides you should take it up with the specific company you had a problem with instead of trying to create an "us" vs "them" rift. We are all boaters.


----------



## okieboater (Oct 19, 2004)

Most private trips are advised to contact a commercial motor rig if they need help.

And, in fact, on one of my bud's GC trips they flipped a 18 ft gear boat and were having a hard time getting it upright. A commercial motor rig came by, stopped and without being asked got on the tubes to do the roll over. Hugs and waves from our crew and they motored off down river.

When in trouble in the GC after the Ranger's, commercial motor rigs are a welcome sight!


----------



## HYSIDE64 (Nov 17, 2010)

*Really Tom?*

This type of inquiry or data collection does not serve the best interest of boaters in the GC. I am sure it has happened to both private and commerical trips. But even with my limited experience in the GC I believe it is the exception.
I have been down the river twice in the GC. Once in July and the other in October without motor rigs on the river. I was impressed and pleased to experience the friendliness and professionalism of the commerical outfitters on both my trips. We talked on the river everyday and worked out camps that would suit us both. The guides willingness to help any priviate boater on the river was impressive. Let's face it the commerical guys help out and save more people than anyone else on the river. 
I was a commerical guide for 12 years in the Northwest and know what it is like to be on the river with other boaters who don't know what they are doing. 
As always there are two sides to every story and I believe if you have a problem with a guide or outfitter, talk to them like an adult and work it out. I have yet to meet an unreasonable or rude guide in the GC.
Everyone who is lucky enough to get a ticket to ride in the GC are there for the same reasons. Why spoil it by trying to create a problem or push a personal agenda.
Just sayin...


----------



## climbdenali (Apr 2, 2006)

Out of five private trips, the only time that a commercial trip took a camp we told them that we'd like to stay at, we deserved it. Our TL started spewing bullshit about how he had to wait 17 years while the commercial guests could afford to buy the place, and how they didn't have any right to ask him to move his boat out of the pull in part of the eddy at Havasu. This all in front of the guests. I stuck around with the boats and a guide in the harbor and chatted and tried to apologize to them, but being a commercial guide myself he was understandably pissed that they were insulted right in front of their guests. It was bullshit, and I called out my TL that evening around the fire with everyone listening. We had gotten every camp we asked for up to that point, and after that, they took the camp we said we were after every time we saw them. Can't blame 'em for that.

The Us vs. Them rift can grow mighty ugly in a hurry if we're not careful to remember that we're all there together enjoying the place, and to me, more importantly- the people.


----------



## swiftwater15 (Feb 23, 2009)

Nope. Never had commercials poach a camp in the grand canyon. Have had them offer us ice, and bring down replacement gear.


----------



## DoStep (Jun 26, 2012)

Nope, hasn't happened yet in 7 trips. My experiences are in line with what I've seen in this thread, the commercial guides are courteous, helpful, and generous.


----------



## sj (Aug 13, 2004)

Tom always has had ulterior motives. Never trusted him.


----------



## turtle83 (Mar 17, 2009)

We had nothing but good vibes from the commercial outfitters on our April trip, we communicated with them at times and about camps and they were extremely respectful. Respect gets respect ya know=)


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)

I've never seen a commercial motor trip pass a private and take a camp. I have seen a lot of privates split their trips to get attraction sites and camps. I've even had a motor rig pass three of our commercial oar boats in the middle of Bedrock (definitely spoke to the company's owner on that one). Typically though, I see cooperation and goodwill in both private and commercial trips and their interactions. What's the point of your query, Tom?


----------



## JHMainer (Jun 27, 2011)

I don't know where the OP is trying to go with this but I am gonna hijack it otherwise. How do people feel about a private group splitting thier group because of a hike? For example, half the group wants to hike too beaver falls and the other half doesn't (it happens) ? Is the proper etiquette to make everyone wait or is it fine to say that portion can float to camp a few miles down stream (doesn't this option relieve pressure at the harbor?) or does this just create more problems?


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi,

I resisted the temptation to start a new thread on, "Good Contacts Between Commercials and Privates in GC", since this one already is gathering information along those lines, despite Tom's embedded negative premise.

I've been a commercial passenger, a commercial crew member, and a private boater rowing or motoring my own rigs. I've never seen anything but courtesy between these two groups, regardless of who had a motor and who was rowing. I've seen help offered, supplies given, advice provided, and lots of respect and camaraderie. GC Dories, OARS, CRATE, Tour West, and AZRA are just a sample of the numerous companies whose boatmen have contibuted to that conclusion.

I'm sure there are instances where discourtesies take place, and yeah, a few anecdotes likely can flow from them. But the norm between the two groups seems to be mellow, courteous, and helpful.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)

JHMainer said:


> I don't know where the OP is trying to go with this but I am gonna hijack it otherwise. How do people feel about a private group splitting thier group because of a hike? For example, half the group wants to hike too beaver falls and the other half doesn't (it happens) ? Is the proper etiquette to make everyone wait or is it fine to say that portion can float to camp a few miles down stream (doesn't this option relieve pressure at the harbor?) or does this just create more problems?


It creates more problems and the Park looks at it as splitting your trip.


----------



## AZJefe (Jun 3, 2009)

In almost 2 dozen trips I've only had other private boaters steal camps.


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

I really question the motive for this kind of inquiry. I've only run the GC 6 times but in 34 years of whitewater boating, I've never had a bad experience with commercial outfitters anywhere, on any river., at any time. Indeed, I learned to rely on them - - they usually know the river better than I do, since they run it more often, and they usually have better access to safety, communications, etc. for the same reason. I guided commercially for 5 years in the late 70's and early 80's and learned real respect for the profession. 25 years of private boating since then and my opinion hasn't changed. I've been aided in rescues, guided to great camps and hikes, offered help in every way possible, including the leftover ice that commercial guides have donated to my friends and I every time I've been in the ditch. What the heck is the problem? Why focus on a negative?

Let's keep this civil OK? If one person has one problem on one occasion, that's no reason to start a "blog" about it.


----------



## psu96 (May 9, 2006)

Tom,
The title you choose is lame.


----------



## swiftwater15 (Feb 23, 2009)

Its people who use pin and clips who are the dirty camp poachers.


----------



## kikii875 (Oct 25, 2010)

*Morning Disaster in Grand Canyon*

Once I get on the river my groover schedule becomes early morning. There have been a few times where there was almost a disaster, but stronger muscle control prevailed.
My suggested solution, a double groover. As Harry Morgan said on MASH about the double latrine "GOOD, THE MEN CAN ENCOURAGE EACH OTHER"


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

kikii875 said:


> Once I get on the river my groover schedule becomes early morning. There have been a few times where there was almost a disaster, but stronger muscle control prevailed.
> My suggested solution, a double groover. As Harry Morgan said on MASH about the double latrine "GOOD, THE MEN CAN ENCOURAGE EACH OTHER"


We rigged the main groover on the top back of a gear boat. More than one person got to enjoy the daytime throne.


----------



## boicatr (Mar 14, 2013)

lhowemt said:


> We rigged the main groover on the top back of a gear boat. More than one person got to enjoy the daytime throne.


And I have blackmail pics to prove it!


----------



## sleighr (Nov 14, 2011)

chepora said:


> No the motor rigs have always been very accomodating and polite. If you had an issue with one of the guides you should take it up with the specific company you had a problem with instead of trying to create an "us" vs "them" rift. We are all boaters.


 Last ride we caught more grief off an oar trip that got their knickers in a twist cuz they asked what camp we were gonna use, I told em, and then our TL changes his mind... Then lays over in the same camp. The nerve of some people... ( I am joking here... I did not sign a binding contract with either party.)
We did camp on a slightly oversized sand bar one night... but if you build a schedule where ya gotta row till nearly dark ya deserve to camp on a sand bar.


----------



## Mark the dude (Mar 18, 2005)

This is starting to sound like a broken record, but I've been down the grand twice and both times the commercial guides we encountered were kind courteous and helpful. Motors or oars, nothing about any of our interactions with them made me think for a second that they might be trying to power ahead and nab our campsites. Sorry if these aren't the types of responses you're looking for Tom.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

*Tom deserves an Honorary PhD in Hyperbolic Studies*

Oh dear gawd, I thought we were going to hear about some terrible thing that happened on the river today. What a relief that it's just Tom being Tom.

I've seen Tom on this crusade before and actually burned a few brain cells thinking about it. The issue all gets back to the evils of motorized travel in the GC and how, in Tom's view, if we only had all oar powered trips, with two commercial and two private groups launching every day of the year, everything would be peachy with the half a million user days allocated on a perfectly even basis between commercials and the "self outfitted boating public," and the GC would provide a real "wilderness experience."

Here's what I figured out: 

Regarding camp poaching - The commercial oar guides are basically professional athletes rowing trips down the river all summer long. Those strapping young lads and lasses are a lot fitter than us old duffers on our yearly or decadal Grand trip. So if the commercial oar guides want to race us to a prime camp or attraction, who's going to win that one?

And now getting to the whole motor vs. all oars scenario:

One of the goals of the GC management plan is to make the Canyon "feel" more like a wilderness experience, even though thousands of people are on the river at any given time for most of the year. But if you're on the river and there are no other groups in sight, that's kind of like the next best thing, right? I mean, short of cutting allocation to reduce the number of permits so the odds of getting on the river are about one in a gazillion, right?

So now under the all oars scenario, those strapping young lads and lasses rowing that commercial trip will come into view behind you. But instead of chugging right by with a motor and being out of sight in a few minutes, they'll slowly catch up, exchange some pleasantries as they row past you, and then slowly row into the distance until they eventually disappear around a bend ahead of your group.

It's a fact of life that commercials are going to be on the GC. Now it's just a question of how long we want to have another oar trip in our view up and down the river. A couple of hours under the all oars scenario? Or 10 or 15 minutes if they motor on by?

As part of the GC planning process, the NPS and others actually ran a computer model that simulated trips going down the river, clotting up at attractions, and so forth. The model showed this phenomenon happening where oar powered groups would be "in contact" with each other for ridiculously long periods. Now Tom will probably tell us all about how the computer model was flawed and produced bad data and all that. But all I have to do is think back to rowing out on Westwater and how quickly we get passed by motor trips versus other oar trips.

-AH


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)

Tom? Tom, are you there?


----------



## jmacn (Nov 20, 2010)

I believe America would be a much better country if all Americans got to experience a GC river trip. Not all Americans are interested/able in becoming private boaters. Having guided many oar and motor trips in GC, I know for a fact that motor clients often wouldn't do well on a 2 week oar trip. Maybe they're a little too old, to young, to sick, to whatever. They are also a much better representation of the working class, as the trips are actually affordable. To do away with motors is to exclude a growing percentage of the American public. Perhaps decades ago, when certain people got soured to commercial motor trips, there was an undesirable guiding culture. These days there is a much more positive guiding culture down there as reflected by the many comments here. GC guides are evolving like everyone else, and I've been witness to many positive changes.


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi All, 

Thank you to the folks who sent private e-mails with your recollections of not so great contacts. 

The reason I asked this question was to try to get a sense of why the NPS wants to decrease the trip lengths of 30 self guided river trips in the second half of April to deal with a 16 trip overrun of a 60 TAOT number that is crossed multiple times a summer. 

As you recall, the question I wanted to have folks comment on was simple. "has your oar powered trip in Grand Canyon had a late afternoon motor boat pass your trip by and snag a camp you were headed for?" Not saying concessions this or oar powered that.

Here's the data I have recieved so far:

When Where Who

2012 May Above LCR Camp Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
2008 no month Not provided Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
2012 July Bass Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
2010 Mid May South Canyon Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
2012 July Mohawak Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
Not provided Cremation Self guided oar trip arrived first with next day exchange, concession trip arrived second, NPS showed up and took concessions side
2012 April 11 209 Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
Not provided Granite Self guided oar trip passed by concession motor trip
Not provided Not provided concession trip wanted camp already taken by self guided oar trip
2001 Ledges Self guided oar trip passed by NPS VIP trip

Countless Times All over oar trip passed by motor trip who went to another camp than the one the oar trip was going to

And aside from the personal attacks, this indeed sizes it up for this simple question:

Countless Times All over oar trip passed by motor trip who went to another camp than the one the oar trip was going to



This has been my personal experience too, that trips would much rather get along, and the vast majority do.


Excellent. This is great anecdotal data. It appears that the proposed change in trip lengths the NPS is proposing do not seem to be based in adverse encounters. The TAOT numbers the NPS cited averaged 62 for the week, and 70 was an identified threshold the NPS wanted to avoid. 


So the next step is to write the NPS and ask them to provide additional data as to the rational behind the NPS impacting so many self guided river trips during a windy low water time of the year, without making schedule adjustments to concessions trips as well. 



By the way, I asked the GCPBA board members about this. Seems they knew all about the NPS proposal to cut back trip lengths in the spring for some time, and fully support the NPS proposal to reduce trip lengths. They were not forthcoming with why this is a good idea, but I assume they will shortly notify their membership about this.


All the best, Tom


----------



## Jensjustduckie (Jun 29, 2007)

Anecdotal data is silly, but good luck. 
"The expression *anecdotal evidence* refers to evidence from anecdotes. Because of the small sample, there is a larger chance that it may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases.[1][2] Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a claim; it is accepted only in lieu of more solid evidence. This is true regardless of the veracity of individual claims"


----------



## Mark the dude (Mar 18, 2005)

10 times in 12 years? Oh my that's awful. That's getting dangerously close to the dreaded one incident per year mark. This truly is an afternoon disaster.


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)

Two Words............ WITCH HUNT


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Tom,

I hate to break it to you, but this Park report is not exactly fresh news, nor has there been any effort to conceal it. 

In fact, GCPBA actually put out the link to this information on its listserv way back on November 19th. That came about when Wally asked me to follow up and see if Steve's report (never provided to us because of the "shutdown") had ever been put on the Park web site. 

We had exactly one non-Board person respond to that post. And I note that when you picked up on it and re-posted on your list later that day, only two people there were interested enough to engage you on the subject. 

Seems like your attempt then (and ongoing) to gin up some level of outrage didn't work very well -- even in the venue you control and shape. I mean, your own list is where one might expect where you'd have the most support. Evidently your hyper-critical approach is not shared by as many folks as you'd like. Even when you keep trying new posts as a variation on an old theme (as you've done here) the response suggests you're offering pretty thin gruel.

I also would point out that you've just made a really weak case, trying to divert attention and justify your original post. Who really believes you somehow were going to link a rather sparse list of occasional unhappy on-river contacts to some structural issue like TOATs? Out of the literally thousands of private/commercial contacts over the last decade, one has to expect an adverse interaction every now and then. You solicit vague reports of 10 incidents over 12 years? Come on... 

If anecdotal information is all you're going to base some future complaint on, or a request for some particular policy, I'll bet it's not going to be very persuasive -- here or elsewhere.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips


----------



## johnryan (Feb 6, 2013)

Tom will, of course, claim to be true what he wants to be true. The problem is that he can't prove it, but will keep on saying it anyway.


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

Seems Tom is trying to make a case for private GC boaters who launch in April not to be the only ones who have days taken off their adventure to satisfy Park policy. At least he working towards having the GCNPS justify their actions. Is this a bad thing? I think not. I also would be disappointed if the GCPBA Board of Directors, who claim defense of private boaters rights is supporting this unfair idea. Please say it is not so.

Instead of expending time gang-piling, a more valuable alternative would be to put personal prejudices aside and work together on the merits of the argument. This should not be as difficult as some seem to want it to be.

I for one do not enjoy spring time GC trips that much due the wind but I would not want to see those trips shortened for those who do enjoy that time of year.

Don Farmer


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

boicatr said:


> And I have blackmail pics to prove it!


good gawd, what's next facebook??? Hell must hath frozen over.....


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Don,

As I say from time to time, GCPBA does its best to represent its members. But we also recognize that our actions have an impact on the broader GC boating community.

Within GCPBA's general membership we have a wide range of folks, with a wide range of views. As you would imagine, not everyone agrees on every issue. And so we have to find a balance among those competing views. We have to figure out -- based on our own experience, the information we receive from the Park and other official sources, general source material like our listserv and this board, member surveys, and other direct input from our members -- what course to chart when stuff like this comes up.

There are folks who have never done a GC trip. There are folks who have been down many dozens of times.

There are rafters, kayakers, SUPers, packrafters, boatmen and passengers.

There are folks who would rather have longer trips in the Spring. But there also are folks who would rather have longer trips in the Fall. 

There are folks who want to see changes in the PATL system (count me among them, believe me.) There are folks who are totally neutral on the PATL situation.

There are folks who love motors. There are folks who hate motors.

There are folks who think the lottery is great. There are folks who think it stinks.

And there are good reasons for the viewpoints they hold on those and innumerable other subjects. All I can say is that there is no one formula that we apply to all issues. We do our best to distill down a position from the information we have available to us from those various sources. 

One other thing. Unlike Tom (who has essentially a one-person operation with a unified world-life view) our Board has wide diversity in its backgrounds and views. Over the years, the Board has been composed of pure recreationalist boaters, former guides and river managers, computer geniuses, a nuclear scientist, mental health professionals, and even a physical therapist. We have a fellow now who has a considerable GC hiking background in addition to his boating experience -- something that already had helped us in absorbing the emerging issues in packrafting. And of course, over the years the Board has represented a nice spread of the major boating interests -- both rafting (motorized and non-motorized) and kayaking. 

We think that kind of diversity is beneficial when it comes to making decisions that impact a diverse boating community. We do our best, but we also know we're not going to make everyone happy.

Hope this helps.

Rich Phillips
Secretary, GCPBA


----------



## Wadeinthewater (Mar 22, 2009)

*Half of the story*



Tom Martin said:


> The reason I asked this question was to try to get a sense of why the NPS wants to decrease the trip lengths of 30 self guided river trips in the second half of April to deal with a 16 trip overrun of a 60 TAOT number that is crossed multiple times a summer.


You forgot to mention the the Park Service is correspondingly proposing to increase trip length from 18 to 21 days for the last half of September.


----------



## johnryan (Feb 6, 2013)

He left that out because that half of the story does not support his prejudice.


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Don,

It occurred to me that I didn't directly address your concern about the way the Board looked at the trip length issue.

As noted in the subsequent posts, Tom de-emphasizes the fact that the corresponding amount of time is added to Fall trips. That's also a prime time of the year with moderating temperatures and no motors. Plus, this shift would give folks more time on the river as the days get shorter. Yes, it's a change that might make lottery dates in that time frame a bit more competitive. But on balance it seems supportable.

To be clear, nothing gets lost to privates in terms of user days or launches. It's a shift in the river experience that will satisfy some and not others. Story of our lives here on the Board...

Have a good one.

Rich Phillips
Secretary, GCPBA


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi Johnryan, Wasn't it Hazlitt who said "Prejudice is the child of ignorance." No, not prejudice my friend, it's just that the fall issue is something else entirely. 

As stated by the NPS, they are offering to lengthen river trips in the second half of September to make up for the decrease in spring trip lengths. This increase in trip lengths from 18 to 21 days is to occur in the last two weeks of September, the start of the motor-free season. 

Trip length was identified as a very important aspect of the river experience in Grand Canyon (CRMP Technical Memorandum, Shelby and Whittaker, pg 67), and a majority of do-it-yourself river runners perceived increasing trip lengths as a good thing. It appears the NPS and others think that it's a good trade having river runners row harder in the spring winds and make the trips longer in the fall, though the NPS has not clearly identified the problem they are trying to address by doing so... if you know, please speak up! 

Overall lottery applications for do-it-yourself river trips throughout the year peak in the summer in a bell shaped curve, with an additional spike in applications, even greater than the summer peak, beginning on the first day of the motor free season starting September 15. In fact, demand for the first and second dates after the motorized watercraft cease operations have risen to over 500 applications for one launch (2012). 

As one shrewd observer noted, why is the NPS adding fuel to this September demand spike while asking folks to row harder and faster in the spring, all the while ignoring the 150 trip loss in the last 5 years? 

By the way, given the drought conditions, the Bureau of Reclamation has just forecast lower water releases for March, April, May and June.

All the best, tom


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

Well Rich, I guess that about sums it up then. You are an expert in double-speak and dancing around an issue; as good as anyone I have come across anyway. Why don't you just take the direct approach and say the GCPBA Board supports the shortened trip length in the spring and leave it at that? Instead, you keep stirring it up over how someone else spins and twists the deal. I am looking for direct answers so I might develop an educated opinion from which to personally advocate from. You and the GCPBA Board are not helping as you should be. Just my opinion.


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Fdon,

Perhaps you posted that before you saw my second message to Don.

Does that information come closer to the mark for you?

Rich Phillips
Secretary, GCPBA


----------



## barry (May 6, 2004)

A disaster is a serious injury in your group, a broken zipper on a dry-suit in cold conditions, lost or broken lid on your groover, or being the guy who gets to a remote put in and realizes his spray-skirt is at home. I have never had a bad day in the GC and my encounters with motor powered groups or commercials has been positive/supportive. Holster your guns Tom.


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

richp said:


> Hi Fdon,
> 
> Perhaps you posted that before you saw my second message to Don.
> 
> ...


No Rich, I was posting direct to the above as well as your previous attempt to answer. Please try as hard as you can to keep it to a Yes, the GCPBA supports the shortened April trips or NO, we do not. I know that is a tall request but a concise, clear answer would be appreciated. TIA


----------



## asleep.at.the.oars (May 6, 2006)

Does anyone else read these threads in the same way they watch car crashes?


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

I only have one complaint about the commercial motor trips on my GC trips.
Every time they pass me on the flat sections they slow down and give me plenty of space. WTF is with that??? I've spent thousands of dollars to buy a boat for rough whitewater. I've taken weeks off a well paying job to play in rough water.

I want them to buzz by real close at full speed. I want to try to surf their wake.
I want MORE whitewater (and beer), not less.

Rant over.


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Fdon,

Yes, GCPBA supports shorter April trips, in concert with an equal number of longer September trips.

Hope that helps.

Rich Phillips
Secretary, GCPBA


----------



## Mark the dude (Mar 18, 2005)

So if the NPS is decreasing private trip lengths in the spring during motor season and increasing private trip lengths in the fall during motor free season doesn't this decrease the overall odds that a given private trip will encounter an afternoon motor rig camp-nabbing disaster?


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hey Mark, Great question. One might think that correct, but motor trips are taking camps from slower 16 day oar trips throughout the summer, not just the 21 day trips that launch the last two weeks at the end of April. 

It doesn't appear to happen that much but some. And, there will still be the same number of trip starts, they will just have to go faster through the Canyon AND get their camps jumped. The concessions trips will still be going as fast as they always do... 

Anyone who is seriously advocating for this can't possibly be serious... right....???? 

They are telling us "Come on folks, row faster! No more layovers you lazy SOB's! Get up earlier and get into camp later! Never mind that it's 4:00 p.m., the river is at 8,000 cfs and that 20 mph wind that has been in your face since before noon in picking up speed. Oh, and ignore that motor boat passing you not making eye contact but making a surf wave for Rich (not P). 

They'd get a stranding ovation telling us to just think of it; everything would be so much better and everyone on those thirty trips so much happier.

Thanks for the laugh. Yours, tom


----------



## Mark the dude (Mar 18, 2005)

Tom,
You're welcome for the laugh. 

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by making the following argument based on the assumption that there is in fact a problem with motor rigs stealing campsites from private boaters (which I am still not at all convinced of). 

Fewer nights in the spring means fewer nights with the possibility of getting your camp stolen by motor rigs. More nights in the fall means more nights not having to worry about getting your camp stolen by motor rigs. The NPS is increasing the amount of private trip nights during non-motor season and decreasing the amount of private trip nights during motor season. Summer is irrelevant in this argument unless the NPS is proposing changes to the summer trip lengths as well. 

I have no feelings either way on the decision. I see it as a wash. They're shifting nights from the spring to the fall. I can see that you're very strongly against it, but I'm just having trouble following your logic.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Maybe it's because I've just had a really long day that I am still completely baffled at how you got from this:



Tom Martin said:


> Hi folks, I am curious... has your oar powered trip in Grand Canyon had a late afternoon motor boat pass your trip by and snag a camp you were headed for? If you would like to send me a private reply, that's fine too. E-mail is [email protected] Thanks, tom


to this:



Tom Martin said:


> The reason I asked this question was to try to get a sense of why the NPS wants to decrease the trip lengths of 30 self guided river trips in the second half of April to deal with a 16 trip overrun of a 60 TAOT number that is crossed multiple times a summer.


How on God's green Earth did you ever make that connection? If a bunch of other folks made the leap too, I just guess it's kind of like "Friends" where it seemed like everyone but me thought it was a good TV show but I just didn't get it...

But seriously Tom, how many years have you been harping on this issue? And with the powers of the interwebs, your own listserve with hundreds of GC boating members, and your passion for getting out in front of folks, do you mean to tell me that's IT? Not even one a year? 

So now I'll brand myself a shill for the NPS and the outfitters in your eyes by flipping the question. How does your anectdotal almost once a year camp stealing compare with the number of incidents you've heard of in which A) a commercial trip helps right a private boater's raft after a flip, B) shares ice, C) nicely coordinates campsites, or D) provides private boaters some kind of assistance in an actual disaster?


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi Mark, you can't see the logic? Well, neither can I. So why would anyone support a change that makes trips worse in the spring? You and I can disagree on what makes a trip worse. You may think a shorter trip will have the potential for less camp jumping so it is better. I would argue the camp jumping will still be the same, as it occurs throughout the summer, but in small numbers, so is not a big deal. Hence my puzzlement in why the need for the change. 

Linking the spring drop to the fall change seems a wash, but each taken separately is seen as a bad mistake by some. Low water, less days and wind in the spring, more competition for the already hard to get fall trips. I agree with you it is totally illogical. 

Hi Andy, Good question about connections. The NPS is worried about TAOT's. But that is not a set limit never to be crossed. It is crossed all the time. Do-it-yourself rive runners have nevr (bold statement here) posted to the Buzz or anywhere else saying they want shorter spring trips. So what IS the problem. We have heard vague rumors of concessions complaints that they are seeing too many self guided trips in the first few weeks of May. 

How many is too many? One, two, ten? The NPS noted from page 32 of the November 2005 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Colorado River Management Plan Vol 1, pg 32, the following: “*Camping at the same site or at nearby sites within sight or sound of another group becomes necessary in some places when there are 70 trips at one time, about the maximum current level.*” 

A TAOT of 70 was seen by the NPS as "about the maximum." The data provided showed a TAOT of 64 for TWO days in a row with a TAOT of 63 the day before that, about May 7th. The very next day, about May 8, the TAOT drops to 59 for the next 5 or six days!. (Granted the NPS provided graph is hard to read). The NPS proposal for this is to severely impact 30 self guided trips. Hmmm...

So what does that mean on the river? Is the real problem that concessions motor trips are "forced" to camp-jump more often. Ok, we need some data, even anecdotal, to see if there is a problem. As we have all seen here on this list, camp-jumping happens, but all summer long, and happens WAY less then good old communication and assistance. You? A commercial shill? I don't know about that, but it looks like you are just saying what we all know, which is folks help each other. That is a good thing.

Andy, look at it this way. Is reducing the trip length of 30 trips in late April going to make the self guided river runners more willing to foster communication and good river will? Maybe. 

But, I would offer that if the self-guided river runners in the last two weeks of April, along with the concessions crews in the same time period and the first two weeks of March were encouraged to work together better, the issue (whatever it is... we really don't have a clear picture of that) might just be resolved. 

All the best, tom


----------



## jmacn (Nov 20, 2010)

I understand why some people don't like motor boats. Believe me I get it. I also understand why the Park will simply NOT be doing away with them anytime soon. Its a big part of their mission to make the Canyon accessible to as many people as possible. For that I'm very grateful because we all know the Canyon's magic can help heal the hardest of hearts. Very, very, few Americans could get the time off away from home, work, and family even IF they could afford an oar powered commercial trip. As most practical people recognize, motor trips have been facilitating life changing experiences down there since Georgie started lapping Nevills' trips that only the wealthy few could afford. A canyon full of oar trips would be much less of a wilderness experience IMO. If complete silence and solitude are top priorities, warm weather GC river trips will not provide that 24 hrs/day. There's plenty of rivers still that can provide that experience, and lucky private boaters with extra time and $$$ can go and make it happen for themselves.


----------



## FrankC (Jul 8, 2008)

Rich said:


> I only have one complaint about the commercial motor trips on my GC trips.
> Every time they pass me on the flat sections they slow down and give me plenty of space. WTF is with that??? I've spent thousands of dollars to buy a boat for rough whitewater. I've taken weeks off a well paying job to play in rough water.
> 
> I want them to buzz by real close at full speed. I want to try to surf their wake.
> ...


And if the chicks could flash their boobs that would be nice too.


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

Hi Tom,
I've yet to do a GC trip, so I can't offer any anecdotal info on camp jumping, etc. My knowledge of how things work in the GC is kind of limited, but I am trying to figure out the issues brought up in this thread.

My questions is this....what is your outcome goal of gathering this information from Mountain Buzzards? Are you hoping to have the powers that be keep things the same as they are now, with no change to the spring & fall private launches? Are you looking for leverage to keep spring the same and maybe increase fall launches? Is the NPS actually using complaints of camp jumping as a reason to make changes? I'm trying to see how camp jumping complaints connects to allocation of launches? Are the concession trips complaining that too many private trips in the spring is lessening the wilderness experience of their motor trip clients? Since I have no GC experience myself, I don't know if spring (motor season) trips are more desirable to private boaters than fall (non-motor) trips, or vice versa, or it's a wash and any trip on the GC is a good trip?

Thanks. It's winter, so I'm bored and looking for any interesting river related discussion to keep me occupied.


----------



## Mark the dude (Mar 18, 2005)

Hey Tom,

I like what you did there. You took my statement "I'm having trouble following _your_ logic" and turned it around to make it seem like I'm having trouble following _their _logic. And then you agreed with me. Because we're on the same side. That was a clever trick. Have you ever considered running for congress?

In seriousness, I am glad to hear that you're having trouble following the logic too. Why would anyone want to have a shorter number of days in the fall? Then you just have to paddle faster in low water, break camp early in the morning because of the limited daylight, not be able to have layover days, etc. Conversely, why would anyone want a longer number of days in the spring if it just means more competition for those already hard to get launch dates and more exposure to those camp thieving motor rigs? I completely agree with you Tom, this is totally illogical. (See what I did there?)

Well it's been fun Tom but I gotta run. I feel like I've been arguing with a toddler on acid.

Mark


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi Catgirl, excellent questions! Let's look at them one at a time. 

My questions is this....what is your outcome goal of gathering this information from Mountain Buzzards? 

I wanted to see if camp-jumping was a problem as the NPS proposal to the Trips At One Time (TAOT) issue seemed very heavy handed. 

Are you hoping to have the powers that be keep things the same as they are now, with no change to the spring & fall private launches? 

Until the problem is identified, yes, no change. The NPS says they want to impact 30 do-it-yourself trips to deal with a TAOT of 64 for two days and 63 for the day before that, while the TAOT in a few weeks in August hovers at 50 or below, and 60 was the target the NPS "aimed" for.

Are you looking for leverage to keep spring the same and maybe increase fall launches? 

Keep the spring the same, yes. Increase the Fall? Hmm.. I don't think so but am open minded about it. A 2009 study showed a majority of DIY river runners want longer trips, not shorter ones. So one would think a longer trip in the fall is good. But the first few days of the start of the motor-free season have the hghest number of lottery applications (over 500 in 2012 for one launch). The NPS proposes to make those trips even more popular then they already are. The lottery competition would increase. Increasing DIY trip lengths in the August months would make more sense maybe...

Is the NPS actually using complaints of camp jumping as a reason to make changes? 

Excellent question. I have heard anecdotal reports that the river concessions are complaining that as they are ramping up in the first few weeks of May, they are encountering a lot of do-it-yourself river runners enjoying the canyon. Too many in their eyes. I wanted to see if this was causing camp-jumping. It doesn't appear to be doing so. 

I'm trying to see how camp jumping complaints connects to allocation of launches? 

The NPS noted that *Camping at the same site or at nearby sites within sight or sound of another group becomes necessary in some places when there are 70 trips at one time, about the maximum current level. *Clearly, there is a limit above which campsite competition increases, and one would expect camp-jumping to increase. 

Are the concession trips complaining that too many private trips in the spring is lessening the wilderness experience of their motor trip  clients? 

Good question. We are asking the NPS for all river concessions correspondence on this issue to better understand their concerns, since the DIY boaters are not complaining. If no one is complaining, the solution to the problem the NPS is trying to fix seems awfully heavy handed.

Since I have no GC experience myself, I don't know if spring (motor season) trips are more desirable to private boaters than fall (non-motor) trips, or vice versa, or it's a wash and any trip on the GC is a good trip?

ANYONE OUT THERE HAVE A SPOT FOR CATGIRL ON YOUR GRAND TRIP? Please contact her! You really should go and i hope that happens soon. 

As to values, some folks will say any Grand Trip is a good trip, and others will say on day two they want OFF! Values differ on how the Colorado River in Grand Canyon should be managed. The NPS has a responsibility to manage the Grand Canyon according to established laws and policies, and hence we arrive at a clash of values when special interest forces a certain management value on the NPS as happened in 1979-1980, but that is a different discussion. 

Gotta run, as winter is a busy time here. Yours, tom


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

Thanks for your response Tom. Perhaps one day I'll get on the GC. It's on my life list, but getting that much time off is hard, and it would likely mean missing my all time favorite Main Salmon trip if I did the GC. I missed the MS last summer due to injury and it broke my heart.


----------



## JHimick (May 12, 2006)

Tom Martin said:


> Thank you to the folks who sent private e-mails with your recollections of not so great contacts.


I call bullshit. Not one single person is willing to post up about a negative experience? Everyone with a negative experience is afraid to do it in an open forum… on The Buzz? Yeah.

Tom - do you not realize that you seriously undermine your credibility by creating a thread called "Afternoon disaster in Grand Canyon"? I remember reading a story when I was a little kid about a boy and a wolf. How's that go?

I hate to pass judgement but you're a serious blowhard. Why not simply ask your question? From what I can gather you simply want to know why the NPS is proposing a new rule. Ask the damn question and wait for an answer before developing your conspiracy theory. You are clearly a very intelligent guy but you're also clearly wasting your gift on this bullshit. Please put your over-analytical brain to more productive use proving something like String Theory, it will be a much greater and more appreciated contribution to this world.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

CG,

If I ever got on a Grand trip (and felt I was up to rowing it), and my work schedule got in the way I would probably quit! 

Hope my employer isn't a buzzard...


----------



## cataraftgirl (Jun 5, 2009)

duct tape said:


> CG,
> 
> If I ever got on a Grand trip (and felt I was up to rowing it), and my work schedule got in the way I would probably quit!
> 
> Hope my employer isn't a buzzard...


Wouldn't life be wonderful if we could raft whenever we wanted to.


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

Sounds like a lot of issues to think about with the changes. I thought our May trip this year was rushed at 18 days myself, largely due to winds. But for others on the trip they would not have been able to take more time off anyways. There are always compromises I guess.

One aspect that works into the issue that has not been brought up yet is daylight. There is almost 2 hours more of light at the end of April then there is in the last 2 weeks of September according to information specific to Flagstaff. Seems to make sense from that variable to consider shifting allocations around. But there is more than one variable here.

Phillip


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

richp said:


> Hi Fdon,
> 
> Yes, GCPBA supports shorter April trips, in concert with an equal number of longer September trips.
> 
> ...


WELL, THIS SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME. FALL DAYS ARE SHORTER AND THERE ARE NO/FEWER MOTORS, SO THAT'S A GOOD TIME TO LENGTHEN A TRIP. That was easy.


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

Well, 2 trips in GC and never a single issue with a commercial, or motor, or for that matter, any other group.
On the first trip commercial groups a) got us unstuck on day 2 when the water dropped b) Celebrated one happy night when we camped close c) Kept us out of trouble at Lava d) helped us unload at Pierce
On the second trip they a) suggested that doing 4 miles a day might cause problems later in the trip, you know, with keeping our schedule b) gave us a great dessert recipe c) gave us beer and ice d) Kept us out of trouble in Crystal.

As a used up old commercial guide I'll just say that commercial guides tend to look at private trips with longing; no bitchy old ladies in tennis shoes to put up with and a schedule that isn't a schedule.

Lots of room in the canyon for everyone, and after about mile 2 everyone tends to drop their attitudes (and hopefully their clothes), or discover that attitude and rivers don't mix very well.


----------



## okieboater (Oct 19, 2004)

"As a used up old commercial guide I'll just say that commercial guides tend to look at private trips with longing; no bitchy old ladies in tennis shoes to put up with and a schedule that isn't a schedule. Lots of room in the canyon for everyone, and after about mile 2 everyone tends to drop their attitudes (and hopefully their clothes), or discover that attitude and rivers don't mix very well."

Schutzie if others followed your advice, life would be a lot easier!


----------



## Phil U. (Feb 7, 2009)

okieboater said:


> "As a used up old commercial guide I'll just say that commercial guides tend to look at private trips with longing; no bitchy old ladies in tennis shoes to put up with and a schedule that isn't a schedule. Lots of room in the canyon for everyone, and after about mile 2 everyone tends to drop their attitudes (and hopefully their clothes), or discover that attitude and rivers don't mix very well."
> 
> Schutzie if others followed your advice, life would be a lot easier!


Yes! Especially, "attitude and rivers don't mix very well." Now to bring that lesson back to our online forums...


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Just to clarify...

I apologize for missing this in the 8-year review. The NPS noted:

"To help with TAOTS, shorten the noncommercial maximum trip lengths from 21 to 18* for the last half of April and increase the maximum trip lengths from 18-21 for the last half of September."

Actually, the charts show the trip length will go from 18 to 21 days in the FIRST half of September. The NPS predicts that the increased trip lengths will not adversly impact the TAOT which (for 2013 at least) were climbing from 56 in Sept 1 to 61 on the 14th and 15th of Sept. This will increase demand for the trips in early September, which runs fron 61 to 228 lottery applications per launch. No where near the lottery applications that happen after Sept 15. Not being too bent out of shape about a TAOT of 64 in early May, means by-all-means, increase the do-it-yourself trip lengths in the first half of September. The DIY total user days were over 14,000 user days short in 2012, so maybe the NPS could make up for that shortfall by increasing trip lengths in early September...

Bottom line, shortening April 16 to April 30 trips in exchange for longer trips Sept 1 to Sept 15 makes no sense. 

Best to you all, tom


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

How long until the buzz has a poll to ban Tom? Oh wait, he's not the one mud slinging names. Come on people, disagree, throw shit around, but do you have to personally attack? Does everyone have to get their digs in on Tom as a person? This is like watching a slow motion group pit bull attack....


----------



## cupido76 (May 22, 2009)

I am not familiar with the rules on the GC, but I feel like I must be missing something here... Unless you reserve specific spots with your permit when you get it, I don't understand why someone getting there before you is a violation of your rights as a private trip boater.

To me that's like complaining that a Ferrari got the best parking spot because you're driving a Beetle.

It seems like luck and timing are required to get the best spots... As it should be.

And let's just say that if you've done the GC enough times to be upset you didn't get a specific camp site instead of just loving that you are there, your life is already better than a lot of people (including me), and I kind of feel like maybe you should stop going if that's such a big problem for you.


----------



## wildh2onriver (Jul 21, 2009)

lhowemt said:


> How long until the buzz has a poll to ban Tom? Oh wait, he's not the one mud slinging names. Come on people, disagree, throw shit around, but do you have to personally attack? Does everyone have to get their digs in on Tom as a person? This is like watching a slow motion group pit bull attack....


^^^ like.


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

lhowemt said:


> How long until the buzz has a poll to ban Tom? Oh wait, he's not the one mud slinging names. Come on people, disagree, throw shit around, but do you have to personally attack? Does everyone have to get their digs in on Tom as a person? This is like watching a slow motion group pit bull attack....


^^^like


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

Nah! Can't ban a guy for havin' an opinion! But, can challenge a guy to explain what the hell he's talking about and why it's relevant!


----------



## coloclimber512 (Aug 29, 2009)

I don't see what the big deal is with the shorter days in the spring, especially when they are made up in the fall. This will allow folks that do not have as much vacation or PTO time to think more about getting on a GC trip. For average people it is tough to get 20+ days off for a float down the Grand. I was not at all interested in a GC trip until my buddies and I did a 10 day trip from lees to Pearce in winter. If this trip was any longer I would have probably declined in favor of something else. I am in the boat with most people and only get two weeks paid time off. These long trips are what takes away the opportunity for a lot of people because they simply can not get enough time off. Did you know America is one of the stingiest countries with vacation and PTO leave? With the average American only gets 13 days Paid Time Off? 

Saving a camp because another party wants it is only a courtesy. There are no rules and no reservations, so at the end of the day the early bird gets the worm. I understand the frustration when that motor boat putts right by you to take your prized sunrise camp spot. Although, with all the positive responses it seem highly unlikely that's this happens but a few times a season. 

I climbed for a long time before I started boating. It was standard protocol to blaze past someone to be the first on route or to get that prime bivy spot. Not one time have I seen a post on the climbing forum about someone crying that they were beat to a spot. They usually just adapt and overcome and make due with what they were delt.


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

richp said:


> Hi Fdon,
> 
> Yes, GCPBA supports shorter April trips, in concert with an equal number of longer September trips.
> 
> ...


Hi Rich,

Thanks for the clarification. It helps tremendously. I do know the complexities of advocating through the lens of a Board of Directors. Been there. Still there. 

Being a fan of risk assessment and consideration of all points of view when making a policy change or taking a position on an issue, I wonder if basic boater/trip safety has been part of the mix on this trip length shuffle by both the Park Service and the GCPBA Board.

Like I said before, I am not a fan of the Spring season due the wind and I suppose the lower flow also. With those two factors affecting downstream travel in a negative fashion I can see trip quality eroding with less days to get through the canyon. That being said, I do know folks who favor that time frame and the shortened trip length will not make them very happy.

Where I think trip safety could come into play is a scenario like this:
Leaving the dynamics of the TLs authority and groupthink out of this, imagine a group faced with the shortened schedule (such as the 18 day alternative) dealing with slow flows compounded by stiff upstream wind and cold daytime temps. They may be forced off river early some days, have to forego some attractions and suffer rower fatigue. These factors can lead to discontent in the ranks and perhaps poor judgment in their decision making. I can envision a group deciding to run a drop late in the day in an attempt to make up time or camp at a desired spot. They may be putting themselves at risk with such a decision for all the obvious reasons including dealing with a late-in-the-day rescue attempt.

From where I am sitting, the safety factor should be right up in the front of the line of considerations when contemplating a change of policy like this one. I hope the Park Service and the GCPBA Board have both considered safety in this process and if NOT, drop what they are doing and inject safety into the decision making mix. I would not want disaster to occur or to even be remotely linked to such a decision without a complete risk assessment happening on the front side of the proposal. 

Perhaps the TOATs objective still is in need of a bit of fine-tuning?

Don Farmer


----------



## richp (Feb 27, 2005)

Hi Don,

Your point is well taken, and frankly I don't know how heavily the Park has weighed the possible safety issue you describe.

But there is another related angle. I seem to recall that earlier in this thread or in a related thread elsewhere, someone noted the daylight differential between Spring and Fall trips does somewhat offset the effect of shortening Spring trips. You have longer days that are getting longer each day in the Spring, whereas you have shorter days that are getting shorter each day in the Fall. It may not be a total wash in terms of hours on the water, but it is something of a compensatory element embedded in the change under discussion. 

However, that's not really the main thrust of what you're saying, and I'll do what I can to highlight it going forward.

Hang in there

Rich Phillips
Secretary, GCPBA


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi Josh, Thanks for your thoughts. 

I would respectfully counter that trying to bend Grand Canyon to our social needs of today is not only ignoring what Grand Canyon has to offer us as a society, but our American heritage as well. The Grand Canyon is about time, and we need to be respectful of one of the 7 wonders of the world and what it has to teach us about time. 

A staffer for a Utah Congressional representative used just your analogy only "better." He noted the vast majority of American's are not river runners and never will be. But they do drive cars, hence the river should become a highway with banked curves and the highway supported on pylons in the river. There would be no way to boat the canyon, but we could all drive our cars through the Canyon in a day, stopping at Phantom Ranch for lemonade. I laughed until I realized he was dead serious.

It should also be noted that “the early bird” has a motor and that’s the only reason they “gets the worm.” It may not be morning sunrise the oar trip wants, but to avoid rowing another three miles to the next camp the other side of a major rapid at the end of an already long day rowing into the wind, a distance the motor boat can cover in 1/3 the time. 

Also, when you climb through another climbing party, you are both muscle powered. A faster rowing trip will overtake a slower rowing trip, but at least the playing field is a little more level. 

Respectfully yours, tom

Ps: Cupido, hope this helps you understand the situation a little better. It's not a Ferrari vs a Beetle, but a Ferrari or a Beettle vs a Bullock cart. Cheers.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Tom,

Like many others in this sampling I'm just not convinced motorized camp jumping is actually a worthwhile issue. Let's assume the incidents you've combed from your list, and everywhere else you've searched, are only 5% of the actual incidents. This means motorized camp jumping only happens about 20 times in the thousands of nights private parties camp in the Canyon every year. And the positive encounters and assistance to private boaters also seem to greatly outweigh, in number and in terms of their impact to private boaters' collective experience, the few incidents of motorized camp jumping that do occur.

Further, if motorized camp jumping were truly the common "disaster" you're telling everyone it is, then _wouldn't there be at least *one* negative experience_ among all the positive stories in MB's current sampling of private boater encounters with GC outfitters shared in this thread?

Most of us would be happier without motors on the Grand. But they're a reality right now and that's not likely to change anytime soon. And frankly I'd rather see trip lengths extended in both the the fall AND the spring. I have made the GCPBA aware I want them to take that message to the table with the NPS and other stakeholders.

But if we don't get extra days in the spring I can live with that considering there's an offset in the fall. And if the GCPBA decides this is not a battle worth fighting right now so they can pursue other goals beneficial to private boaters, I can live with that too.

[EDIT]

After reflection, here are two other points on this issue:

1) Among the rare incidents of motorized camp jumping, isn't it possible that in some or most, the commercial guides have extenuating circumstances justifying changing camps? Such as a sick or hypothermic passenger, equipment failure, etc.?

2) By making a mountain out of a molehill you really poison the waters between the user groups and contribute to animosity between the user groups over a non-issue. Here's my own experience as an example:

After I'd been boating a few years and first started paying attention to Grand Canyon issues, over a decade ago, I read and heard stories about motorized camp jumping and how evil the outfitters were from folks on the GCPBA list and elsewhere - probably even from you. This was at a time before new GC management plan and the GC waitlist was pushing 20 years. Lots of private boaters were, rightfully, very dissatisfied with the situation and even though I'd never been on the GC it raised my ire too. At the time I took on the attitude of a self-righteous victim, wronged by "a system stacked against private boaters" by those rich, nefarious outfitters. This attitude greatly influenced my interactions with commercial outfitters in those days, and in retrospect caused me more negative interactions with outfitters because of MY self-righteous and confrontational attitude - kind of like the incident reported in Climbdenali's post. Doubtless things would’ve come out much smoother if I'd been more understanding of everyone's place on the river and had been more cooperative. 

-AH


----------



## jmacn (Nov 20, 2010)

*Motorboats: Blowing non-boater minds for over 60 yrs*

The motor guide that "jumps" a camp in the afternoon spent all day trying to get there just as the oar trip did. The fact that their day began further upstream might make some think it's fair that they use the 'first come, first serve' camping rule with no guilt about how hard it is to row a boat on a windy day. I too find it rude when a motorboat passes late in the day with no communication/eye contact, but just because it's been a bit of work to get to camp doesn't entitle anyone to it.

The fact that someone isn't a boater, or may never be a boater, doesn't exclude their right to experience this trip. From a commercial passenger (non boater) perspective, yes, 18 days non-motorized is waaaaaay better than 7 motorized. But... time is money. Sad but true. The non-boater who doesn't have the experience and money to afford the precious river time in big heaps every year will still say that day 3 on their once-in-a-lifetime GC motor trip was the best day of their entire life. Or perhaps it inspires them to make some changes in their life or even aspire to become a boater and return to the Canyon for another taste of river time. Respecting your time on the river is diminished by not respecting my time on the river.


----------



## Tom Martin (Dec 5, 2004)

Hi Andy, thanks for your post. 

You noted "Like many others in this sampling I'm just not convinced motorized camp jumping is actually a worthwhile issue."

Well, not knowing, I asked the question. After visiting with a river runner who was still livid about some camp jumping that happened to his trip last summer, I was curious if this may be the reason why the NPS wanted to decrease thirty self-guided river trip lengths in the spring. 

Like you, after looking at the responses, I have come to the same conclusion, pending further information. 

The post title is a question. Not a statement of fact. 

"...telling everyone it is..."? Please. You may have missed my post in this thread stating "Countless Times All over oar trip passed by motor trip who went to another camp than the one the oar trip was going to. This has been my personal experience too, that trips would much rather get along, and the vast majority do."

"Motors on the Grand" is a different topic, one of values and management of a National Park.

You noted "And frankly I'd rather see trip lengths extended in both the the fall AND the spring" Frankly my dear, I am with you!

You then noted " I have made the GCPBA aware I want them to take that message to the table with the NPS and other stakeholders." Excellent! Thank you! But i would caution that your letter needed to go directly to the NPS superintendent. He won't even know this is bugging you as the GCPBA board won't say it's an issue unless they change their minds, which could happen yet. I'd suggest you cc your congressional rep as well. 

You also noted "But if we don't get extra days in the spring..." Andy, it's not about getting extra days in the Spring, but losing them. I assume your statement was a typo. Trip lengths are 21days in April and the NPS is proposing to cut half those trips to 18 days. If you meant "But if we don't get extra days in the FALL..." I would agree with you.

Since 2006, there have been no changes to the CRMP that directly benefit private boaters. The NPS now proposes to adversely impact 30 spring river trips and the GCPBA suports that. I respectfully disagree with their decision, and encourage those of us who do not appreciate the proposed cut backs in April trip lengths to respectfully notify the NPS directly:

Superintendent David Uberuaga 
Grand Canyon National Park
PO Box 129
Grand Canyon, AZ 86023

and cc your congressional representative. 

All the best, tom


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

Schutzie is now confused.

The issue was "camp jumping" by evil, dirty, motorized COMMERCIAL trips who swamped innocent, nature loving oar powered private groups as they raced by to grab the only camp left in the canyon.

The answer is clear; do away with first come first served camps, assign them at the time the permit is issued, and hold everyone to them, NO EXCEPTIONS!! By GOD the rangers better find you where you were assigned to be on the day you were supposed to be there. Violations would start with stiff fines and escalate to permit cancelations (Your permit is canceled; start climbing. You must be out of the canyon by midnight) and equipment confiscation (we're confiscating your boats and equipment, except for the groover; please take it with you when you climb out).

I think the Gates and Yampa now use assigned camps; other government managed rivers as well, and I'm sure all conflict has been eliminated as a result. There is no conflict among boaters on those rivers and we can all thank the government handlers for that. The alternative anarchy of the Grand Canyon experience is all the proof required that the government must regulate our recreation if we are to have a true "wilderness" experience.

Or, we can all recognize that permits issued for 14 days, or 18 days, or whatever are in fact a "strong recommendation" I.E; once you leave Lees Ferry no one cares much when you pull out, provided there are no complaints and no calls for search parties.

Perhaps a better strategy would be to push for more launch dates with shorter duration, recognizing that a 9 day trip will in reality be a 14 day trip. And then, once the park service notes that homesteaders have established gardens at mile 88, we can deal with the permitted VS actual duration issue. 

By then probably some wit will have figured out a motorized oar thingy, capable of enough speed and power that wake boarding in Lava is a possibility, and we can debate that injustice as well.


----------



## malloypc (Jun 6, 2009)

No mention of COMMERCIAL in the OP.


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

and the core issue was never about late afternoon camp poaching. are you just delusional, trying to be cute or is your view from over the hill that grand?


----------



## kikii875 (Oct 25, 2010)

fdon said:


> and the core issue was never about late afternoon camp poaching. are you just delusional, trying to be cute or is your view from over the hill that grand?


The core issue may or may not have been about late afternoon camp poaching, but the OP was. It took quite a while before the "shorter spring/longer fall trips" issue was presented as the underlying reason for the OP.
Don, Schutzie was being sarcastic/tongue in cheek. Lighten up Francis.


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

lighten up??? what's this??? you didn't understand that I was just being sarcastic??? so sorry to step onto the "turf".


----------



## BCJ (Mar 3, 2008)

I find the world to be a simpler place if I just let some people pass me . . . I often get to the same stop light and find them sitting there too. The danger of rattling on about some issues is it often spawns "more rules" and "more management" when what we really need is less. I think that was the message hidden within Schutzie's sarcasm. Thanks Schutzie!


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

If I had a motor in the Canyon I would wait until afternoon and try to gun right past you in the eddy to make the camp just seconds before you.

Camp jumping fool I am. Just how I roll.....


----------



## fdon (Jul 23, 2008)

Well Carve, Your chance is at hand. I launch on 12-28 for -3wks. Start your engine as any and all challenges are accepted! Winner makes great eye-contact as they pass, even smiles as she waves, buys the drinks and provides free ice and gives plenty of sage advice about all the good lines in lava. All the motorheads can provide the cheerline. Rich P. and Tom will compare notes and work in tandem like old plow mules. Shutzie can get an early start on his garden over the hill. We'll have a for real luv fest; rainbows and waterfalls included; it is the Grand Canyon afterall. I hate it when a thread devolves into nothing more than a post building exercise...that's sarcasm for you.


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

Schutzie would be unlikely to plant a garden in the canyon.
Not what I'd waste my time on.

I might depart my group at mile 8, then become a canyon legend perhaps known as the puddle pirate, or maybe the gully whumper, slipping into camps in the wee hours to liberate any alchoholic beverages, tasty food items, and random wimmen unwary enough to wander away from camp at inopportune moments.

And so I could stay in the canyon indefinitely I'd use my mechanically powered oar thingys, making it possible to move up and down the canyon at will.

Mortals would never see me; I would blend into the canyon like a whisper of breeze, awaiting the opportunity to strike at the unwary or camp jumping vermin and slip away before they even know they been struck.

Beware. I am the puddle pirate.


----------

