✩✩ Special Issue: Sand & Sedimentation/Burt Loper/Book Reviews/Comments & Critiques /Much More ✩✩

The Grand Canyon THE Private Boaters Association Regularly y Waiting List Irregular Magazine Volume Seven, Number Four A Forum For Canyon River Runners Winter 2006 / $5oo

Rick Demarest -2006 page two THE Waiting List There’s More In the GCPBA Store

GCPBA store is open 24/7 - We've got Books, Shirts, and Fancy Hats, Cool Hats GCPBA members receive a 25% discount on all items (excluding the EZ CampFire and sale items) Buy something for yourself or as a gift for your upcoming permit holder

River and Desert Plants of the Grand Canyon Walking the Unknown River - a guide to the myriad of lora in the Grand Canyon And Other Travels in Escalante Country by Huisinga, Makarick, Watters - $22.00 by Ann Weiler Walka $13.00

RiverMaps Grand Canyon Guidebook Shirts, with a big GCPBA logo on the back a topographic guidebook for river runners, waterproof - short sleeve (sm thru 2XX extra -sorry NO XL’s) $15.00 by Duwain Whitis & Tom Martin - $24.95 - long sleeve (medium & large - sorry NO XL’s)) $25.00

There Is This River Baseball Caps with “Grand Canyon Private Boaters 2nd edition - a collection of entertaining river stories - Association” embroidery $18.00 Christa Sadler $17.95 The Grand, A Photo Journey Sunblock Caps, with fabric covering your neck from ear to a beautiful private trip pictorial by Steve Miller $30.00 ear and a clip to attach the hat to your shirt or pfd $22.00 Day Hikes from the River GCPBA Stickers well known and lesser known hikes accessed from the river by (red/festive) Free with a book or clothing order $1.00 Tom Martin 1st ed. reg. $16.95 SALE $5.00 - 2nd ed. $19.95 River Otter Handbook for Trip Planning this book helps you plan your rivert trip by Marcia Eschen $24.95 The Hidden Canyon – A River Journey beautiful canyon photoggraphy by J. Blaustein, E. Abbey, M. Litton $19.95 The Doing of the Thing – The Brief Brilliant Whitewater Career of Buzz Holmstrom the story of 1930’s solo Canyon boatman Buzz Holmstrom by V. Welch, C. Conley, B Dimock $20.00 EZ Campfire Wilderness Medical Associates Field Guide (water proof) For winter warm ups without wood comprehensive guide to wilderness emergency response $19.95 on cool canyon evenings $200 + $20 shipping Over the Edge – Death in Grand Canyon contact us for product details. a unique and infromative look at Canyon tragedy by Michael Ghiglieri & Tom Myers(soft) $22.95 (hard) $34.95 10% GCPBA member discount Outward Bound Wilderness First Aid Book To order contact the Treasurer at a veery useful companion for outdoor adventurers - $14.95 [email protected] or visit gcpba.org

Sunk Without a Sound – The Tragic Colo River GCPBA members receive a 25% discount, Honeymoon of Glen & Bessie Hyde - what really happened to Glen Shipping is about $2-6, depending and Bessie? by Brad Dimock (soft) $18.00 (hard) $28.00 on your order. All My Rivers are Gone – A Journey of Discovery SOME QUANTITIES ARE LIMITED Through Glen Canyon by Katie Lee $18.00 ORDER TODAY Winter 2006 page three

Presidents Letter Oars in the Water

ill the pace ever slow down? I hope not. GCPBA has intervened in a lawsuit so we can try to keep the new Wand improved Colorado River Management Plan in place. We’ve held annual board of directors elections and held our annual meeting where Park Service and Hualapai nation representatives gave presentations. We’ve written grant proposals to improve the health of river runners and provide something for their early survival at Lees Ferry. The board has five new members. It is a thoroughbred convention that has me a little overpowered as the jockey. But they are kind to their president and they ask permission before taking on major initiatives. I’m proud of the or- ganization and all its members even though we don’t always agree. We already miss the presence of recently self-retired board members even though they continue performing essential functions for us. RJ edits and publishes and philosophizes. Bob runs the [email protected] list where great conversations about river running take place. Still on our Board Ken is our webmaster – it’s a web and I can’t begin to understand how he and Marshall keep it functioning. But I really appreciate it. New energy in the system is provided by Wally, Bill, Rich, Earl, and Jim. And I really mean energy. There’s fund raising, membership management, governmental relationships, science, and interagency work going on now that wouldn’t be if they weren’t with us. This is the end of an era in a way. Board member Ricardo Martin will no longer be the world’s greatest repeat river runner in Grand Canyon. His inspired and inspiring efforts in providing access for the rest of us has led (unfortunately and unnecessarily) to his being limited to only one trip per year in the Canyon. But he’s graceful about it and will continue helping us ride out this restric- tion until NPS can see fit to change its mind about frequent river trip participants. It may take a few years – until demand from the old waitlist is extinguished – but we think we can get that piece of our access restored. This may be the end of the era but it is the beginning of one as well, one of improved communication and cooperation, one that GCPBA will lead us into. It is the era of adap- tive management. GCPBA intends to make adaptive management mean something. There are laws that allow us to kibitz on the management of our interests and we have experts putting the committees in place right now. We will continue to keep our members advised as we make progress on our issues. As always, we want to hear from our members. After all, this is a volunteer organization and we only want to represent our members’ interests. Let us know and we’ll go to bat for you. Keep boating. Remaining Friends During the Public Administration Process

s part of the federally mandated Grand Canyon Working Group that will suggest rules for the Federal Aviation AAdministration to enforce in the air space over Grand Canyon, 20 or so of us end up on opposing sides of many issues. That is because we each have special interests within the search for substantial restoration of natural quiet and the visitor experience in Grand Canyon. The Park managers have the Park per se at heart but aren’t ignoring their responsibility to keep the place open to visitation. Air tour operators want to fly as many paying seats over the Canyon as they can but they know they have to do it safely and also respect the wishes of other Park users. Ground users want totally free skies like used to exist over Grand Canyon in the 1800s but are willing to admit how difficult it would be to sanitize that air space given the nation’s need to travel safely and knowing that displacing some air routes would add noise to, say, Bryce or Zion National Parks. All of us are driven to create a solution by April, 2008, that satisfies the requirements of Public Law 100-91, The National Parks Overflights Act. Here is just one example of how the conflict plays out. Imagine two friends from youth who end up following slightly different life paths. They both love the outdoors; one flies airplanes and one drives boats – not so different, really, and not wrong or right. They remain friends, possibly drawn closer to each other because of the different and fascinating hobbies they each have and that they get to share with one another. Each hobby grows into a profession and that leads to membership in national organizations. Then the friends each get elected or hired to represent their particular profession’s interests pertaining to flights over the Canyon. Each has page four THE Waiting List an obligation to support their group’s position even though that 2. Pay attention. Minimize side conversations, stay on advocacy puts them in opposition to each other. Should they topic, read the handouts, and LISTEN. stop being friends? Only if they hold the belief that their posi- 3. Tell the truth. After listening, speak if you have to in tion is morally superior to the other’s. order to state a position, ask a question, provide data, or clarify So here we have Heidi and Dave, two names of two real a point. You owe it to the group and to the mission to express people in two real organizations. Heidi speaks for the Aircraft your point of view. If you haven’t done that then there will be Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) that wants to keep as no mercy for you if you decry the outcome. Don’t use half much airspace open as possible in which the 500,000 members truths or condescension because it will be recognized and you can fly their planes. Dave speaks for non-commercial river run- will lose a measure of respect. ners who go to Grand Canyon expecting to be relatively free 4. Don’t worry about the outcome. Let the group decide from the mechanized outside world. General Aviation (GA), what it decides. Knowing you are going to do this makes it represented primarily by AOPA, has four “low altitude” corri- more important to tell the truth in step 3. You are not absolved dors in which they may fly across the Canyon. Nobody knows of responsibility for the public decision but you aren’t totally re- how many flights use the corridors because flight plans aren’t sponsible either. This takes a great faith that the members of the required for low altitude GA and because radar flight tracks group will make a decision representing the best outcome aren’t kept on flights of that type. One of the corridors is right whether it be compromise or one-sided. over the top of one of the quietest places along the Canyon’s So that’s where closing the Fossil Corridor sits. Heidi and river, Conquistador Aisle. Dave and most of the others have lived by the four rules of Heidi and Dave argue their positions with futile efficiency. meeting attendance. The decision to keep the corridor open is Heidi: We don’t know how many General Aviation pilots use the now out of Heidi and Dave’s individual hands. The Working Fossil Corridor. Group can decide to recommend closure or not. Depending on Dave: (setting aside his reluctance to talk but recognizing that that and on what the public has already said about the issue, this is his one chance to influence the public will in his favor), the NEPA team may or may not include closure in a preferred Well, let’s assume that none use it. That means closing it will alternative. In either case, Heidi and Dave have stated their have no impact on AOPA. positions and still remain friends. Heidi: Let’s assume that a lot of pilots use it so closing it will In the aftermath of the decision Heidi and Dave stand to have a big impact. be abused or congratulated by their memberships. It is likewise Dave: If a lot of pilots use it then it’s mucking up this holy sec- with all other advocates and their constituencies on a very long tion of the Canyon. Let’s close the Fossil Corridor to protect the list of topics. They will hear, “you sold out to the commercial Canyon. Let the pilots fly in the other three corridors that are interests,” (Oh, yeah, I’ll give you all the money I got out of already somewhat heavily used. Conquistador Aisle is a uniquely that deal.) or they will hear, “Money is all that matters,” or quiet place because of a relative absence of rapids. “You really stuck it to them.” We’ve heard it all before and are Heidi: Aren’t there motor boats on the river? ready to hear it again. But we know that those voices probably Dave: For six months there are no motor boats. The rest of the come from a tiny minority of our reasonable memberships. The time motors are limited in horsepower, travel direction and best we can say is that we tried. I hope that to us the outcome distance, and must be Quiet Technology. Most of my con- will not represent failure. If it does to someone else, then the stituents don’t use motors anyway. future is their lawsuit, the horizon is their legislation, and their Heidi and Dave admit that all logic trains lead to the same resources will be spent for their cause. Have at it. impasse and so continuing with the arguments isn’t likely to be very fruitful. Resolution of this issue has to come from the heart David Yeamans of the larger community. And the community heart would be well served by living by the four rules for attending meetings. To make meetings, at least 12 days a year of them for three years, most productive and humane there are four rules that seem to help. 1. Show up on time. This gives respect to all attendees and President of GCPBA the planners. People who don’t show up (and you know who you y are) are telling the group that they are only interested in protect- ing their parochial interests and are not interested in solving the problems for which the group was established. Being late (and very few are) might be a sloppy habit or might be unavoidable. Winter 2006 page five

GCPBA Newswire - October 20, 2006 Court Rules In Private Boaters Association Favor

S Court, District 9, Judge David G. Campbell In addition, during the lawsuit and the re-planning period, Uruled October 17, 2006 that both the Grand private boater allocations could be rolled back to the 1980 level. Canyon Private Boaters Association (GCPBA) and This could stall private boater progress for as much as another Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association (GCROA) decade. Other significant CRMP changes imperiled by the RRFW can intervene in the case brought to the court by River lawsuit are that the number of commercial launches has been re- Runners For Wilderness (RRFW). The RRFW suit seeks duced from 640 to 598 and restricted to the busy summer sea- a complete redo of the recently completed Colorado son. Other positive elements of the CRMP that could be set River Management Plan (CRMP), which determines aside: how recreational use of the Colorado River corridor at • A new and innovative permitting system that promises the bottom of the Grand Canyon is managed. The re- to reduce the wait time for a Grand Canyon permit and cently concluded CRMP process, now challenged, took favors both infrequent canyon travelers and first time trip hopefuls. nearly ten years to complete and implement. The law- • Inclusion of guides in trip participant count - suit requests the Court issue an injunction ordering the commercial trips must now count guide use in the total NPS to prepare a new CRMP and Final Environmental number of participants on trips, Impact Statement (FEIS). • A 25% cut in the overall number of participants on Judge Campbell’s order granting GCPBA’s right to inter- commercial trips. Trip size has been reduced from a vene states “The Court believes the Applicants will aid in the maximum of 43 to 32 (including guides). resolution of this case.” Campbell’s ruling also noted, “… Appli- • Reduction in the maximum number of trips launching cants satisfy the requirements for intervention …” on a daily basis from nine to six leading to less attraction The now-implemented plan balances the number of allo- crowding and campsite competition, as well as daily cated user days between non-commercial and commercial contacts on river. interests, providing an equal sharing of recreational use. Previous • Elimination of the new “Small Trip” category which CRMPs, in effect from 1980 to 2006, had allotted 70% of the makes room for more private launches with less resource recreational river use to commercial companies and 30% to non- and social impact than traditional larger trip sizes. commercial groups. Intervener status will allow GCPBA to fully participate in the lawsuit process. Although GCPBA’s previ- The GCPBA Board raised many important questions in its ous efforts had triggered the revision of the CRMP in 2000, the own successful lawsuit, filed in 2000, compelling the NPS to plaintiffs sought to bar both GCPBA and GCROA participa- complete its then stalled planning process. The product of their tion, arguing that neither group has an “interest in the outcome effort, the newly implemented CRMP addresses and resolves of the case.” RRFW argued that there was only a “remote chance many of the board’s long-term concerns. Faced with the prospect that such interests could be impaired if the case is remanded to that the gains private boaters have made could be set aside, the agency to ‘reconsider it’s decision to increase it’s allocation to either for a decade or forever, the GCPBA board sought inter- private boaters.’” vener status in this case. The Court agreed, stating in its ruling If the lawsuit is successful and the NPS is forced by the that the interveners (GCPBA and GCROA) have “asserted inter- plaintiffs to restart the CRMP process as requested, then all est in use and enjoyment of road-less lands” and “assert defenses questions pertaining to balance of allocation, use of motors, of the government rulemaking that squarely respond to the chal- length of trip, carrying capacity, and total recreational allocation lenges made by the plaintiffs in the main action.” would be re-opened for discussion, debate and eventual policy making. There would be no guarantee that the significant gains For GCPBA: Richard Martin, Earl Perry made by private boaters under the new CRMP – most signifi- y cant to private boaters are the increase in the number of private launches from 250 to 503 and the increase in private allocation from 55,000 user days to 115,500 user days - would be retained. page six THE Waiting List A Review of the 2006 GCBPA Annual Membership Meeting

he Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association held it’s annual membership meeting on Nov. 5, 2006 at the TLittle America Hotel in Flagstaff, Arizona. GCPBA President Dave Yeamans welcomed members and guests, which included Mari Carlos, President of the Grand Canyon River Runners Association, to the meeting, and ex- plained his term of office, which is one more year. He gave a brief bio and told of his involvement with the

GCPBA. Dave introduced the new members, and the tions from the last lottery, and that all cancellations will be han- currently seated board members of GCPBA. dled thru the secondary lottery. Steve mentioned that former Dave explained that we have just finished a very produc- waitlisters don’t have to apply to the lottery to keep their tive board meeting, he then handed the meeting over to Mary chances in this or future lotteries. Orton. Mary is a professional meeting facilitator whom GCPBA He went on to say that because of the shorter lead times in hires to make sure the board makes the best and most produc- the new lottery and the opportunity provided by the “potential tive use of it’s face-to-face meeting time. Being an organization alternate trip leader” offering, he doesn’t anticipate many trips with it’s board members spread across the nation, the annual being cancelled at the last minute. Dave mentioned that the board and membership meeting brings together board members NPS is there to answer all the questions, one of the members in a way where tasks and challenges can better be dealt with than mentioned that Steve called her to straighten things out. Earl via e-mails and phone conferences. In short Mary keeps the wanted to know about the no repeat rule and relaxing it in the meetings on track. off season, Steve said that it’s premature to talk about it at this Annual meeting business got underway as Mary went over juncture, that it would be a park decision and he really couldn’t the agenda item by item and gave a brief explanation as to how say at this time, but perhaps revisit it in 5 years. the meeting would function to the audience. River District Ranger Mike McGinnis explained that his- Next our facilitator introduced Steve Sullivan, River Oper- torically there wasn’t a lot of NPS presence on the river corridor, ations manager and Mike McGinnis, River District Ranger. and that because of expanded use authorized by the new CRMP, Steve and Mike introduced themselves and explained their there will have to be new staff added in the future to meet the unique position is with the NPS. Steve handles river permits and new demands. Although rangers know exactly what the new all the facets it takes to issue them. He was the primary schedule will be but there will need to be year round presence in author of the new weighted lottery system. Mike is the man in the future. charge of the ranger activity and all that that encompasses from Dave wanted to know what sort of issues that McGinnis law enforcement to river search and rescue. might foresee with compliance and the new CRMP. Mike said Rich Phillips took the opportunity to make a formal that although not knowing the new regulations, one thing that presentation of the plaque given by GCPBA to Steve Sullivan in could rate as a big issue is firewood - people killing live trees, appreciation for all he and his team and the efforts to maintain and going above the high water mark to gather firewood, which open, informative communications while facilitating a relatively is restricted to collection of driftwood along the river banks only. smooth transition for thousands of people both on the old wait- NPS planners and administrators are hoping are hoping not to ing list and hoping to enter the new lottery. have to make changes, but they are developing a monitoring Sullivan led a discussion about the implementation of the plan to keep track of the potential degradation. McGinnis re- new system, the numbers of people who had availed themselves lated that he thinks they are doing a pretty good job of user edu- of the opportunities that the transition presented, and the sec- cation and as a result the groups that are going on the river are ond lottery. Sullivan related that this was such a new process that better educated. He cited the new river orientation CD as an ex- there wouldn’t be much in the way of changes to it for the first 3 ample. He went on to explain that the river rangers aren’t look- years, he mentioned the turnaround times being short especially ing for infractions, but to help prevent them from happening in during the first year, so that there wouldn’t be much point in the first place. changing things until there is a baseline to build upon. Questions from various members of the audience and the It was explained that anyone that had paid for the initial GCPBA Board touched on a variety of subjects including life lottery wouldn’t have to pay again to enter the secondary lottery jacket regulations, the pros and cons of assigned campsites, held to award unclaimed or declined permits and any subse- which the NPS stated they have no intention of enacting, camp- quent second lotteries. It was mentioned that if you register on- site invasion by arrow weed (a native specie) and the value of the line you could be notified electronically of any upcoming Tamarisk eradication program. lotteries. Steve related that there have only been 3 or 4 cancella- Additional discussion centered on below Diamond Creek Winter 2006 page seven

– lack of campsites and increased competition for those sites due The Park urges boaters to use the potential alternate trip to increased below Diamond traffic, beach erosion caused by jet leader (PATL) option more frequently than was the case in this boat operation, upstream traffic, and the South Cove situation, lottery. No post-lottery PATL selections will be permitted, which as the level of Lake Mead declines threatens the ability of which means some trips might not launch when they otherwise the current South Cove ramp to continue to be used as a take could have, if they had identified a PATL. out. The Park will be using the CRMP adaptive management Ranger McGinnis explained that the South Cove ramp strategy for river issues, as well as adjusting the permitting will be moved downstream a few hundred meters where a new process. ramp will have to be constructed that could access lower reser- There is no reason to think that unclaimed winter dates voir levels, the current ramp can no longer be extended and the will automatically cause those dates to be lost in future lotteries. takeout at Temple Bar is to small and too far away. Once the original lottery fee has been paid, there will be After the conclusion of no extra charges for consideration the session with Steve Sullivan in the secondary lotteries. and Mike McGinnis, Marshall It is estimated that as many reviewed projects underway, in- as 250 dates will be awarded by cluding a review of the portable lottery in the May 2007 lottery campfire, the Lee’s Ferry visitor for the 2008 season. shade pavilion project, and No decision has been made dishwashing research project. on whether there will be a call-in Dave Yeamans gave the group a system for cancellations within 30 review of the Grand Canyon days of a launch date. Work Group overflights project. Ranger/River Issues In conclusion President NPS is moving the location Yeamans discussed the future of of the Lees Ferry ranger GCPBA from his perspectives. building. A visitors shade pavilion He began with talking about is sought, but no funds were ap- the current GCPBA board of proved. directors, complimenting them VP Phillips presents plaque to Steve Sullivan The Park will be instituting for their energy and talent. Yea- staffing pattern changes, includ- mans went on to stress GCPBA’s role to serve as a voice for the ing additional river patrols, during the newly established winter private boater on Colorado River issues, by example pointing to boating season. our continuing efforts to work with the National Park Service by The Park staff are concerned about firewood supply/use in gathering input using surveys and our list server to share with the new winter season. They support the concept and use of park planners, administrators and staff. propane fire-type devices such as the EZ Campfire presented at Following the conclusion of Dave’s remarks, Mary Orton the meeting. opened the meeting for discussion. A friendly exchange of ideas A firewood-monitoring plan is under development. Private and opinions ensued. boaters should leave all “historic” firewood (representing long- ago high water events) undisturbed. Board and Membership Highlights It is not possible to construct a new Pierce Ferry takeout. Permitting Issues Also, the South Cove takeout will be relocated a short distance down the reservoir, due to dropping levels of Lake Mead. Awarded permits in the lottery not paid for will be added Helicopters will be present at Whitmore from April 1 to any list of remaining lottery dates and offered in secondary through September 15, but not later than 10:00 am each day. lotteries, until all are awarded. The Park is working on an inventory that will lead to de- It was noted that some winter launch dates in late 2006 velopment of a campsite guide that should assist in alleviating and early 2007 may be unclaimed because of the short time some competition for camps under the new system. GCPBA available to put together a trip after the first lottery. may be assisting in some aspects of this project. The lottery for the 2008 season will probably be held in A web-based river education program is under develop- May 2007; the lottery for 2009 may be held even earlier in the ment for later in 2007. season. The Park has no interest in trying to regulate or restrict About 600 people on the waiting list have elected to take small river groups to certain campsites. refunds so far; about 1,500 people on the list still have not de- Regulations regarding upstream travel will remain unal- cided whether to take a refund or remain in the system. tered - the boundary remains Separation Canyon. y page eight THE Waiting List

Pre-publication Book Excerpt Grand Old Man of the Colorado

ost Grand Canyon boaters know about Bert Loper’s final, fatal river trip in 1949. Many have seen the remains Mof his boat disintegrating on the talus at Mile 41. But few know much about his first Grand Canyon run in 1939. It was a trip he’d been wanting to make for more than three decades (quit sobbing about the waiting list!), and when he finally made it, he made it in style. He was the second man to run every rapid, and the fifth to run Lava Falls, with Don Harris, hot on his tail becoming the sixth. Their trip was the first to run all their boats through every rapid, and they tied George Flavell for being the quickest trip through the Canyon. And they did it in home- made wooden boats. Not bad for a seventy-year-old man. Quite remarkable for a man who’d spent five months in the hospital that winter with his shoulder out of commission. As this excerpt from Loper’s new biography opens, Loper and Don Harris are making the final formula- tions for their trip. At this point in his life, Loper had rowed for a living as a prospector and freighter, he had rowed for pay as a com- mercial boatman and a science boatman, he’d rowed for film. Altogether he had been boating, on and off, for some forty-six years. Now was was beginning a decade of doing exactly what he wanted to do. He was among the first you might actually call a Grand Canyon private boater. Brad Dimock

n early March Loper checked himself out of the hospi- trip to do. “For heaven sakes just speak up if you would rather Ital. “I was just going along without any change,” he go thru the big canyon with Bert,” wrote Gibson in April: wrote Blake, “so I thought I could doctor myself at Speaking of the Big Canyon, won’t the water be higher than all hell down there around the middle of June? I suppose Bert has home.… My shoulder is not well by a long ways, but it forgotten more about the conditions of the river than I will ever is a lot better than it was.” During his convalescence, he know, but the way I heard it, was that the water ran pretty high had secured a job for the coming summer. On and off there at that time.… I don’t know, I am just askin, and if you for twenty-five years now, Loper had engaged in govern- want to go I for one am game. At least we will be in for some ment science support work—now he had lined up a po- WILD riden.” sition taking geologist Charlie Hunt through Glen Charlie Hunt wrote Loper in April, confirming an early Canyon. Although Hunt would have preferred an open June launch and offering a paycheck of three hundred dollars for boat and boatman. Loper, safely out of the hospital’s clutches, rowboat for the trip, Loper was able to convince his ordered plywood and began building his boat. It looked much friend, Hugh Miser, Hunt’s boss, to let him build a new like Old Betsy—a crude Galloway-style boat. Just what became Grand Canyon whitewater boat for the job. of Old Betsy Loper never said—most likely the beating it took Don Harris had not made up his mind. Loper had: Grand on the Salmon had proven lethal. He did, however, still have the Canyon. He wrote Blake, asking if he wanted to go, saying oars Julius Stone had sent him. “there is no one I would rather go with as much as I would On May 7 Gibson pushed Harris for an answer, “Is every- you.… I may make the trip alone for it is now or never and I thing okay to go down the Green? … Gosh, Don, we don’t want know of no other way I could celebrate my 70th birthday any to let our own enthusiasm run away with us and high pressure better.” you into doing something you don’t want to do.” In the end, Loper wrote to the Harbor Lumber Company, who in Harris opted wholeheartedly for Grand Canyon. Gibson and 1934 had developed Super Harbord, the first marine-grade ply- Klevin followed suit. wood. Nevills had used it for his boats. Loper asked for prices. Loper finished his boat in late May. Since Hunt wanted On March 27 Loper wrote Miser, saying, “My arm is not well Loper for overland work prior to the river trip, Bert, Rachel and but it is so much better that I would not hesitate to start on a their grand-nephew Blaine Busenbark, headed for the Colorado boating trip right now.” to deliver the boat. Twenty miles from the river they got bogged Meanwhile Harris, Gibson and Klevin tried to decide what down in the sands of North Wash. Loper was able to get Arth

The Very Hard Way: Bert Loper and the Colorado River, by Brad Dimock, on March 7, 2006 at 7 pm at Cline Library, Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, Arizona The author will kick off a month long book tour with a presentation and book signing. You can order the book by mail from Fretwater Press at www.fretwater.com Winter 2006 page nine

Chaffin, then operating Hite Ferry, to come up and gather the morning of July 6, they pushed off into Grand Canyon. boat, while the Lopers retreated to Salt Lake. “I will say here and now that if it had not been for Mr. Harris I Charlie Hunt and his assistant Ralph Miller left Salt Lake would not have made the trip.… I had been planning this trip long City with Loper on June 5, 1939. As with Herbert Gregory and before Don was born but there seemed to be a jinx that would head Hugh Miser, Loper was once again allying himself with giants of me off at Lee’s Ferry every time that I tried to go through, and all he Western geology. And once again making lifelong friends. Trav- knew of me was what he had heard, and I knew nothing of him, eling through Green River, Hanksville, and Notom, they spent but in the laying of plans for the trip he would brook no interference five days getting to the river, Loper “loafing” while Hunt and and it was always we ARE GOING THROUGH.” Miller geologized. They spent another four days investigating the Hite area while Loper tinkered with his boat. In February 1908, as stories of Russell and Monett’s They launched on the afternoon of June 15, making four success scorched Loper, he had written, “I surely expect to show miles downriver. The plan was for Loper to the world that I have the nerve to finish the trip.” Now, finally, deliver Hunt and Miller to Lee’s Ferry around The next rapid after three decades and three foiled July 5 and rendezvous with Harris, Gibson, and attempts, Loper was rowing downstream Klevin. was the ill-famed from Lee’s Ferry. In four miles they passed On June 18, they stopped at Red Canyon, Soap Creek, beneath Navajo Bridge, which had by- where “We visited the old workings that I used known as the last passed Lee’s Ferry in 1928. With sheer to work and then returned to the old cabin and limestone cliffs rising five hundred feet on the utter desolation of the place made me feel rapid in Grand either side, they were committed. Recalled rather blue.” At Tickaboo, someone had burned Canyon to be Harris: Cass Hite’s cabin to the ground. Loper’s shoulder successfully run. “We stopped at the first big rapid, which is was working fine, but “my knee is causing me Badger Creek, and pulled into shore and lots of pain and it is with difficulty that I walk The first attempt walked down to take a look. Make an inspec- at all.” was in 1911 when tion on it. I said to Bert, “You think we can While camped at Smith Fork on June 24, Ellsworth Kolb run it?” He says, “Sure we can run it! It’s just Dave Rust and another gentleman stopped in on a matter of how we’re going to run it!” Picked a trip of their own. They camped together that washed out of his out a course. And [Bert] says: “From then on night. Loper typed. Or tried to. “It seems like own boat. Don Harris never asked ‘Can we run it?’ he every time that I get this old typewriter out to He climbed back just asked, ‘How’re we going to run it?’” do some work the wind starts to blow so hard I have to quit …” aboard and The next rapid was the ill-famed At Hall Creek they ran into Arth Chaffin rowed ashore. Soap Creek, known as the last rapid in chugging upriver in one of his cobbled-together Grand Canyon to be successfully run. The floating contraptions, looking like a cross between a garbage first attempt was in 1911 when Ellsworth Kolb washed out of scow and a Model-T. He gave them a ride. his own boat. He climbed back aboard and rowed ashore. Mak- On June 26 Harris, Gibson, and Klevin launched at North ing a second attempt, he flipped his brother’s boat, while Emery Wash and began pursuit. With no geologists along they had cranked the moving picture camera. Blake and Lint wanted to plenty of time to visit side canyons, Hole-in-the-Rock, and run it in 1923, but Kolb forbade it. In 1927, Clyde Eddy vowed make the hike to Rainbow Bridge. On July 2 Harris wrote: to portage Soap Creek. But he got mixed up and portaged “Toward dark the wind receded some and how relieved we were. Badger Creek Rapid, believing it to be Soap Creek. Riding with To our great surprise we heard a husky ‘Ship Ahoy’ from the R. boatman Parley Galloway, Eddy then bounded through Soap bank at mile 24H. We found this to be Bert Loper’s Party and Creek not knowing where he was. He figured it out later, his camped with them tonite.” While Loper and Harris’s new team chest swelling with pride. Most subsequent trips elected to run introduced themselves, Hunt cooked dinner. it. When Loper and Harris pulled over to scout, Harris asked The next morning Harris and company rowed on to Lee’s how they were going to run it. Ferry. Loper, Hunt, and Miller spent another day and a half Soap Creek, wrote Bert, “was much worse so [Don] doing geology, arriving at the Ferry on July 4. Hunt and Miller, seemed very dubious about running it but I told him it was their work done, left with Charlie Hanks. It was a bittersweet fi- made to order, and I will always believe that the foundation for nale to Loper’s career as a government boatman—upon reaching the successful completion of the trip was laid right there.” seventy years of age, he would no longer be eligible for the job. Certainty, believed Loper, trumped doubt and fear. But as one door closed, another was opening. Loper was em- That night, eighteen miles into the trip, Loper mused: barking on a decade of pure pleasure trips. “Nothing serious so far and even Soap Creek Rapid which has a For the next two days Loper, Harris, Gibson, and Klevin rather noted reputation, there is nothing so far that has Cataract wrote letters and made final preparations. At 10:30 on the page ten THE Waiting List tied—I notice that the most of those [boatmen] that have made The next day at mile 24.5 Bill Gibson was swept from Grand Canyon, they seem to discredit Cataract, but if the rapids Harris’s deck by a side-curling wave. He grabbed the safety rope below are much worse than Gypsum or Dark Canyon Rapids, in as he slid off, and climbed back aboard. Not far beyond, Harris Cataract Canyon, then we will be in for some hard work. dropped over a pour-over and filled his cockpit to the gunwales. “There sure is a thrill in running rough water and I hope that For ten miles beginning at mile 20, the rapids come fast and the sense of elation never leaves me, but there is so much more to a thick. Although Harris was a quick study, the learning curve was trip of this kind than the rapids, for the wonders of the majestic steep. Exiting the “roaring twenties,” they paused nearly an hour walls—the grandeur and stupendiousness of the mighty chasms at the verdant waterfall Powell named Vasey’s Paradise, then through which the Colo wends its way is sure an awe inspiring sight pushed off for camp. and I would sure feel sorry for the one who fails to appreciate it.” Klevin took to the kitchen work splendidly. Gibson strove to get the best pictures possible. But something about him was a Gibson’s fears of high water had proved needless. The river little off. Loper later wrote of it, but was infuriatingly vague as to peaked in late May at around 50,000 cfs. By the time they the problem or its cause: launched it had dropped to a meager 10,000 cfs—low water for a wooden boat—and it continued to drop all trip. In fact, it is “There were times I that I did not know just how to take him until good they went as early as they did—by August 3 it had Chet told me something and then I looked at it in another light. dropped to 3,500. There were times that he seemed morose but after I learned then I knew better and it also brought home to me the fact that we are oft times prone to pass snap judgment and I will say that I have never seen anyone that performed his du- ties more thorough or complete.” At noon on the third day they lunched at the confluence of the Little Colorado River. It was at this point that Powell said Marble Canyon ended and Grand Canyon began. (By modern usage, Marble Canyon is considered a subset of Grand Canyon.) The men were making terrific time. They ran rapids of increasing difficulty all day and camped at the head of one of the worst in the canyon, Hance Rapid—a long rocky channel, especially tough at low water. “It was the worst looking one I had seen on the trip to date,” journaled Harris: “Rocks were scattered everywhere in the channel. Bert ran thru first and hit a big rock right at the head of the rapid. No serious harm was done except that this bump threw him off his course and he went way over to the R. Side in a mess of rocks and pours—came thru some of the way prow downstream and hit a couple more rocks. “Take it from me I was plenty nervous about going back to my boat and trying to run it after I had seen what Bert did. Regardless, I went back and shoved off. Luck & God’s blessings were with me. I was able to keep in the channel I had chosen and come thru in fine shape with- out hitting one rock. However, to do this took every ounce of strength I could put into pulling the oars on 2 or 3 different maneuvers to prevent hitting rocks.”

Below Hance the Colorado enters the Granite Gorge, with ominous black schist cliffs rising steeply over a thousand feet on either side. The rapids run bank to bank, often making a portage impossible. Don Harris and Bert scouting Since Powell first described it, the Granite Gorge has Winter 2006 page eleven given boatmen heebie-jeebies and no end of boating problems. time and climbing back on.” They made it another four miles Not Loper and Harris. They ran Sockdolager without a prob- and four rapids before camping. lem. In Grapevine Loper hit a few rocks but without damage. The next day they finished the rapids of the Upper Gran- They landed at Bright Angel Creek at 2 p.m. on their fourth ite Gorge, but not without problems. Loper wrote: day. That’s fast, especially for such low water. “In walking down along one of the rapids I slipped on a slick gran- Loper was pleased and awed. “I have read so much about it ite boulder and hurt my leg quite severely and I also hurt my bad all that it seems as though I had been here before.” He noted knee but all in all I am doing fine.… I struck a couple of rocks and that the Colorado through Grand Canyon, with a paltry drop of came near turning over about 3 times so when I made camp I took about seven feet per mile—far gentler than many easier rivers— the boat out of the river and examined the bottom and everything is had such huge rapids. “The solution to that is that about 99% O.K. and with a lame shoulder and a bum knee we call it a day.” of the fall happens in the rapids and not between—The hazard of a rapid is not always in the amount of fall but how it falls.” That same day they had come across the old Ross He also saw how Wheeler—the rapids that were boat Loper had jagged, rocky, and built in 1914 and difficult at one stage Russell had tried of river flow, might unsuccessfully to wash out entirely at run through a higher flow, and Grand Canyon. “I that every trip en- found that boat counters a different tied up above high river. “I find it is water where Rus- sure a silly thing to sell went to pieces criticize another for and I think I it is seldom that we could, with a little know the stage of work, make an- water he was on.” other trip with The next that same boat.” morning, July 10, Another they rose at 6 a.m. day put them for the hike to through the rapids South Rim, and Loper and the crew check out the abandoned Ross Wheeler of the Middle reached the top Granite Gorge before noon, Loper in the lead. So much for the bad knee. Al- without problems. They lunched at Deer Creek Falls, where a though neither Kolb brother was there, Emery Kolb’s daughter sidestream pours out of a high cliff to the river, and continued Edith showed the movie and had Loper give a short talk after- nine more miles. They camped below Kanab Creek, where Pow- ward. Loper even signed some of Ellsworth’s books for tourists. ell had ended his 1872 expedition. Edith made a long distance call to Los Angeles where Emery was The next morning they scouted Upset Rapid, named in in the hospital. Ellsworth was there visiting, so Loper got to talk 1923 when Emery Kolb flipped there. They picked out a to both. They hiked back to the river that same day, reaching the bouncy run down the left side of the rapid and ran it. Seven beach in the dark. That night Gibson woke up screaming, miles later they pulled into a crevice in the left wall and lunched dreaming he was drifting into Lava Falls on his air mattress. where Havasu Creek pours its blue-green waters into the Col- With the water dropping, they were off early on the morn- orado. “I must have taken on too much Rye Krisp or something ing of July 11. The rapids below Bright Angel are an all-star line because I was in rather a bad way the balance of the day.” They up including many of the biggest rapids in Grand Canyon: camped that night at Stairway Canyon, just a few hundred yards Horn Creek, Granite Falls, Hermit. They ran them without inci- above a minor rapid named Gateway. Loper described the next dent. But Crystal, which only later became a major rapid in a morning: 1966 flash flood, still managed to be the big problem. Harris “We got a fine start and the first rapid was Gate-way canyon had not yet learned to see a pour-over from upstream, and slid rapid which was so unimportant that we never stopped to look it directly into another. “The prow dropped down as the stern over but as we dropped in I told Chet that we were going to miss a started out,” wrote Harris, “and we settled back into this terrible picture and as we dove down—nearly straight and came up like- place about half sidewise. In this position enough of the boat wise we were caught by a side twister and went up-side down. But was facing the water above to push us on out. However, in the we climbed on the overturned boat and caught hold of the edge and mishap Bill was washed off twice, hanging on to his rope each gave a pull and she righted beautifully and all oars was in place but page twelve THE Waiting List we lost our bucket and the grate that we had for to cook on but good teacher and a great pupil—Harris was having better runs other-wise every thing was fine. And while I have been doing this— than Loper. “I learned more about the tricks of the river and off and on—for more than fifty years that is my first capsize so I studying the currents and things from Bert Loper than I did should not feel bad and it makes me feel a little proud of the old from anybody else,” recalled Harris. “Norm knew the river well boat. But while Don was following me he never knew—until I told and was a good oarsman, but he hadn’t the experience in white- him—that I had been up-side-down.” water that Bert had.… He had a knack with oars that I’ve sel- Harris made a small note on the edge of his own journal: dom seen equalled.” “As we started on from Gateway Rapid Bert yelled back to it, They bucked wind and groused for the next two days. “It ‘Kiss my ass.’” seems we all have had a siege of the belly ache and I can’t under- An hour later they were on shore, scouting Lava Falls. As stand why rye crisp and to-mato juice should do that to us.” far as they knew it had only been run once, by Buzz Holmstrom Finally they entered the Lower Granite Gorge. On July 17, the year before. (Later research concluded that Flavell probably Loper rowed into 231-Mile Rapid and got clobbered. “The boat ran it in 1896, Glen and Bessie Hyde ran it in their sweep scow came near capsizing,” wrote Harris: in 1928, and Bob Francy ran it later that fall on his search for “...and during the tilt Chet was tipped overboard. When the boat the Hydes—but Loper and Harris had no way of knowing this.) come out from under the wave Chet was trying to get back on. See- “After looking it over from both sides we decided that we could ing his difficulty he gave up and went on all the way thru the rapid run it,” stated Loper, “and did so.” As it turned out, that was a staying from 30 to 50 feet ahead of the boat all the time. Bert good year to run Lava Falls. Less than two months later a gigan- picked him up below as if nothing had tic debris flow thundered down Prospect Canyon, choking the happened.” rapid into a steeper and more difficult cataract. “Although I had my first up-set of my whole career,” jour- Five miles later they hit the slack water of upper Lake naled Loper that evening, “after running lava falls I feel very well Mead. They stopped at the mouth of Separation Canyon to satisfied—so ends the day—” look for Dr. Frazier’s 1934 plaque—the one he planned to re- By the latter half of the trip—as so often happens with a place in 1939—to no avail. Here three of Powell’s men left in

End of the trip-July 1939 Lake Mead. L-R: Chet Kelvin, Bert Loper, Bill Gibson, and Don Harris Winter 2006 page thirteen

1869, hiking out to their death at the hands of … maybe Shiv- into Frank Dodge, now a retired boatman, and spent the night wits Indians, maybe Mormons, maybe exposure. Loper and on the Dodge’s houseboat. After a day or two of royal treat- Harris rowed another three miles on the slow, placid lake-water ment—by the tour company, Dodge, and others—Klevin and and camped. Gibson left for California and Loper and Harris returned to Salt They had done it. Loper, in his seventieth year, had finally Lake City. Of the trip finale, Don Harris recalled: made it through Grand Canyon. He had shown the world, and “[W]hen we were being towed across Lake Mead after running the had a damned fine time doing it. Grand successfully, Bert got to thinking. He says: “This has been a For the next two days they rowed the calm water that had wonderful trip; ideal. There has never been any friction or con- recently inundated the final forty miles of Grand Canyon. tention. And the age of you three young fellows combined about Loper: “I am too nervous to let Chet row so I do all of that.” equals my age. That’s an old man with three young fellows and there Harris: “Chet swears to hell he’ll never eat RYE KRISP again hasn’t been any friction. So let’s plan to go when I’m eighty, ten years this side of eternity.” Loper: “After watching Chet do a little hence. rowing I became rather wormy so I took the oars.” “I said, ‘Oh, that sounds agreeable to me,’ not even On the evening of July 19 they rowed out of the Grand imagining that he might still be alive ten years later.” Wash Cliffs, where Grand Canyon and the Colorado Plateau formally end, and into the Basin-and-Range country of the Mo- ©2006 Brad Dimock jave Desert. They rowed a few more miles to the small, remote y marina at Pierce’s Ferry and camped. They had arranged for a tour boat to pull them in the next day, so declared their trip officially over. Although they never stated any goals, they had (Editors notes: Bert’s papers and photographs are now in the tied George Flavell’s 1896 record for fastest trip through Grand Special Collections Department, J. Willard Marriott Library, Canyon, and were the first trip to have run all their boats University of Utah - GCPBA thanks Brad Dimock for sharing through every rapid. In the seventy years since Powell’s first voy- with us this chapter from his new book and look forward to age, theirs was the sixteenth trip to complete Grand Canyon. reading the completed volume. Brad is the author of Sunk With- out A Sound, the story of the ill fated honeymoon voyage of “It was then that I expressed—to the boys—my appreciation of the Glenn and Bessie Hyde and co-author of The Doing of the most wonderful trip but their kind consideration shown me for I al- Thing, the Brief, Brilliant Whitewater Career of Buzz Holmstrom) ways tried to remember that I was the old man of the expedition and the only [time] that I was reminded of the difference was their Photo credits, page 10, 11: Bill Busenbark Collection, copies courtesy Brad kindness to me and I will say that I was waited on more on this trip Dimock and Special Collections Department, J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah than about all the rest of my life.… [T]here was never a cross or Page 12: Northern Arizona University, Cline Library, Cline Library Digital harsh word spoken and me being the leader of the trip I often won- Archives, NAU.PH.96.4.114.10 der if there ever was a leader that had the whole hearted support that I had. “… and to think of the many years that I have wended my lonely way along some part of the Colorado water shed and with my blankets unrolled on some sand bar with the starry canopy of heaven over me have I dreamed not only of making this trip but of making it as we did make it with every one of those ferocious rapids conquered, and to think I had to wait untill I had rounded out my three score and ten before the dream came true, so after my little talk of appreciation to them we made our beddown on lake mead for the last time.” Harris was equally enthusiastic, writing, “We all felt the trip was indeed a great success and beyond all doubt the most enjoyed of any ever taken on the Colorado River, regardless of who made the trip or when it was taken.” Gibson’s movie of the expedition shows them throughout the trip having fun—good, solid fun—and perhaps this was the first trip where people really did. The following afternoon the launch arrived from Boulder City. Tying the rowboats single file behind, they motored the four hours across Lake Mead to Boulder Dam. There Loper ran page fourteen THE Waiting List The Potential In Potential Alternate Trip Leaders

“I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.” Ecclesiastes 9:11

t a recent meeting Steve Sullivan, the permit-system ranger for Grand Canyon, noted that he was surprised by Ahow little use people made of the opportunity to designate Potential Alternative Trip Leaders (PATL) when going through the recent lottery. Many of the applications that did list a PATL listed a spouse. It’s important to your trip to put some thought into designating PATLs. Permittees and Their Trips also serve other management goals: for instance, under the sys- tem we had, when groups would all show the same alternate on Requiring a permittee to go on the trip she drew was a re- their applications, then once one person in the group had been sponse by river-managing agencies to piracy, and an attempt to drawn for the date I could immediately cancel the extra applica- be sure permittees were actually old enough, and possessed of tions for it, and give any excess permits drawn by that group to the required experience, to run the trip. In the early days it was others. The San Juan operates this way, as does the Colorado not uncommon to see lotteries packed by obvious recruited hunting license lottery. groups. Whoever was drawn would transfer the trip to the Grand Canyon derives slightly different administrative pirate, and often would not go. So long as there was no or benefits from its version of designated alternates. The cancella- minimal cost to apply, packing a lottery was limited only by tion rate under the waiting list approached 40%. By the time time and ethics. When running the lottery at Dinosaur, I once your number was up, you’d bred small children, contracted got more than 50 applications for the same date, filled in by two grown-up jobs or diseases you used to associate with ‘seniors,’ pens, with 2 handwritings, all late. As my old superintendent had the once-favorite boyfriend or husband reduced to a sour once said in a different context, “There’s dumb, ‘n’ hell, boy, we memory. For one reason or another, permittees would defer and all do dumb sometimes. Cain’t hardly be human ‘n’ not do defer, and some would crap out. The Park worked hard to get dumb. But then there’s Jis’ Plain Dumb. ‘N’ once you git to these trips filled, using an array of early booking and deferment doin’ Jis’ Plain Dumb, they ain’ no savin’ you.” There was no rules, call-in systems, etc, but they were up against 2 problems – saving that group. Grand Canyon logistics daunt a lot of boaters, and the old wait- But the policy of requiring permittees to go on the trips ing list had a lot of dummy demand. So when a trip failed to they drew led to injustice: non-pirate trips that couldn’t go launch, especially after years of deferments and trades, it repre- owing to malignant chance. A for-instance from some close sented a lot of lost work to the agency, as well as a disappoint- friends: the boats were buffed up, trailers loaded, food packed ment to the boaters. and frozen to dry-ice temperatures, everyone eager for the Grand PATLs trip. In the afternoon of the day they were to leave, the permit- The new Grand Canyon system allows a lottery applicant tee’s eye infection worsened to the point that her doctor said it to designate Potential Alternate Trip Leaders. PATLs have to cre- was doubly dangerous, first to risk wetting the eye with contami- ate a profile, cannot apply to the lottery on their own, have to nants, and second, to put off treatment. Naturally her husband confirm independently with the park that they are willing to be a would need to stay with her. The group, which had been plan- PATL for you, and cannot be PATLs for more than one applica- ning to meet in Boulder to start caravanning down to Lee Ferry, tion. When you name PATLs, the number of applications in the did have its meeting in someone’s garage, but the meeting be- lottery is fewer, and depending on how you craft your applica- came a dispirited operation of chipping at stone-frozen layers of tion, the remaining waiting list is drawn down while your food, trying to share it out and figure out what to do with the chances to get a trip, and to make sure that trip launches, go up. next 3 weeks of pre-granted vacation time. Your PATLs can affect your lottery chances. It works thus: Designated Alternates your application can have two forms of preference – the years you spent on the waiting list confer an extra chance per waiting For reasons like this most of the agencies created desig- year, as do the years since you last went, to a maximum of 5. nated-alternate rules. The benefit to the boaters is obvious – the Waiting-years chances are additive. If you have 10 waiting-years trip goes even when the permittee is in a car wreck. But these chances and 5 since-boated chances, you have 15. If you have 10 rules benefited the agencies too. As a former river manager, I can waiting-years chances and your PATL has 8, your application has state that it’s your job to get people on the river, and any mis- 18. But the since-boated chances you and your PATLs bring to chance that keeps them off is an unhappiness. But such rules the application are minimizing; that is, if you and 2 PATLs last Winter 2006 page fifteen boated 5 years ago, and one of your PATLs boated 1 year Do I Have To Fill the Trip? ago, your application has 1 extra chance in the since-boated Because private access to the canyon is such a limited com- category. modity, is a permit holder somehow morally or ethically obligated to Some Considerations in Choosing take as many people down the river as possible on their permit? PATLs Or is it perfectly ok to take the trip you want, with exactly the people you want — even if it means empty spots on your trip? From an administrative perspective, it follows that Rich Phillips you want to get PATLs who: • bring both waiting-list chances and since- Trip composition is an absolute determinant of trip quality. Who boated chances to the application goes, and how many, is (imho) the single most important issue faced • have at least the same number of since-boated by a trip leader. chances as you have aren’t flakes. Trip quality should be one of the top concerns of a competent trip leader...right up there with safety. The best private trips I’ve PATLs need to create a profile, agree to be a PATL, done have been smaller ones where most (or all) of the participants and get it all done in time for the lottery or secondary lot- were veteran Grand Canyon boaters who had similar objectives and tery you’re interested in. Ditherers will get your application expectations. bounced. Conversely, larger trips with a higher proportion of inexperi- From an operations perspective, it follows that you enced people tend to be 1) less efficient 2) more stressful and 3) a lot want to get PATLs who: less fun. And a large trip with an inexperienced trip leader is the • can work as a partial administrative leader, ie, handle worse possible arrangement. all the remaining permit, food, and shuttle details that The phrase “empty spots on your trip” assumes that 16 is the hadn’t been quite finalized when you crapped out. The ideal number, which is nonsense. It could be - with the right 16 peo- sets of administrative leaders and operational leaders ple who agree on trip objectives, get along well with each other, intersect but aren’t congruent. pitch in with chores, etc. Or it could be the trip from hell if hours • can run a trip on the water. I don’t worship Grand are squandered every day in disputes over what happens next, per- Canyon Experience, and there’s something deeply sonalities clash, and when some folks goof off while others get stuck attractive (and for me, irretrievably lost) about launch- with all the chores. ing from Lee Ferry that first time, with weeks of Whoever is organizing the trip (the permit holder or their mystery opening before you. But it still makes sense proxy) should have a clear idea about what kind of trip they are to have your PATL be a seasoned river leader, even if going to do, and communicate that clearly to the other participants. they and the rest of the party haven’t yet seen the If the objective is to see as much as possible, with lots of side hikes, Grand. people will need to be willing to get up at the crack of dawn, pack • Aren’t a spouse. As my friends’ experience showed, their stuff, and get on with the day’s activities. Conversely, if the ob- if the trip isn’t going with the permittee, it won’t ject is to party hard in the evening, stay up late, and sleep in in the be going via a spouse taking it. morning, everyone should be agreeable to that and go along with the • Aren’t flakes. The nexus of friendship is strained by program, whether it’s their favorite thing or not. flaking on lesser trips, and destroyed by flaked Grand Larger groups are slower at everything, and when I go on a pri- trips. Too much time, money, planning, food go vate trip my #1 priority is to see as much as possible along the way. preventably down the tubes. It’s a matter of respect to That means early starts and early camps, if that’s where the hikes are. your pards to select PATLs they can rely on. Smaller groups work best for that objective. The new system set up by the Colorado River Man- If you are organizing a trip, you should have the right to decide agement Plan caters to what I would call real demand – some basics about what it’s going to be like. (if not, who in their people who want a trip next year, are serious enough to join right mind would bother?) just running the rapids and hanging out with others who want to go the next year, and who are at camp holds little interest for me, I’ve been there and done that ready to arrange their lives to make it all happen if they get 180 times already. Your objectives may be different... drawn. No longer will you will be able to defer or swap Is there something immoral or unethical about a solo trip, or a your trip; if you aren’t really ready to go the next year after a couple wanting to be alone on their honeymoon? I don’t think so. lottery, don’t apply. If you do apply and have the good luck But in the first case, a one person trip is “full” just as in the second to be drawn and the bad luck to have to crap out, naming case a two person trip is “full.” it’s nonsense to imply there would be PATLs may help get you drawn and will help ensure that “empty spots” in either case. your trip launches, without you but with the people who Not all trips are alike, the ideal number of folks can vary de- are relying on you. pending on what you want to do. It would be a real shame if every trip was the same, and a disaster if every trip had to have 16 people. Earl Perry y Drifter Smith page sixteen THE Waiting List Down By the Riverside Through the Lens of Craig Lovell

Photographer Craig Lovell took these photos on a private trip in 2006. Craig makes his home in Carmel Valley, CA and San Miguel Allende, Mexico. Additional photo’s by Craig can be viewed at eaglevisions.com ©2006 Craig Lovell Winter 2006 page seventeen page eighteen THE Waiting List

Influence of Glen Canyon Dam Operations on Downstream Sand Resources of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon Scott A. Wright, Theodore S. Melis, David J. Topping, David M. Rubin

he closure of Glen Canyon Dam and the beginning of flow regulation of the Colorado River through Grand TCanyon in 1963 all but eliminated the mainstem sand supply to Grand Canyon and substantially altered the seasonal pattern of flows in the Colorado River. Dam-induced changes in both sand supply and flow have altered the sedimentary processes that create and maintain sandbars and related habitats, resulting in smaller and coarser grained deposits throughout the ecosystem. From the perspective of river management, the ecological implications associated with such changes are not well understood and are the focus of ongoing integrated science studies. The effects of Glen Canyon Dam opera- tions on fine-sediment resources (i.e., sand and finer material), particularly the erosion and restoration of sandbars, are of interest because sandbars are a fundamental element of the Colorado River’s geomorphic framework and the landscape of Grand Canyon (see Webb, 1996; Webb and others, 2002). Sandbars are also of interest in terms of the es- sential role fine- sediment resources play in other ecosystem processes (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995). For example, emer- gent sandbars create terrestrial habitats for riparian vegetation and associated fauna. Similarly, sandbars create areas of stagnant or low-velocity flow that may be used as rearing habitat by the endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha) and other native fish. Recre- ational river runners and other backcountry visitors frequently use sandbars as campsites. Finally, abundant sand and silt deposits near and above the elevation of typical predam floods contain archeological resources and protect those resources from weath- sediment transport and sandbars are examined in the context of ering and erosion. Conservation of Grand Canyon’s fine-sedi- these historical data. Finally, options identified by sediment ment resources is a primary environmental goal of the Glen scientists for testing alternative operations aimed at more Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program. Despite this fact, effective conservation of fine-sediment resources are discussed. the dam’s hydroelectric powerplant operation under the Record of Decision (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1996) continues Background to erode the limited fine- sediment deposits that exist down- Predam Sediment- transport Processes stream. Changes in the abundance, distribution, size, and com- position of sandbars began to occur under the no action period As described by Rubin and others (2002), sandbars below (historical operations) of dam operation from 1963 through Glen Canyon Dam in Marble and Grand Canyons are main- 1991. Sandbar erosion continued despite changes in the opera- tained by fine sediment that is transported by the Colorado tion of the dam that resulted from the implementation of the River through the ecosystem. As sand is carried through these interim operating criteria in 1991 and the modified low fluctu- bedrock canyons by the river, some of it is deposited along ating flow (MLFF) alternative in 1996. The MLFF was the pre- channel margins and along shorelines within hundreds of ed- ferred alternative identified in the 1995 Operation of Glen dies, thus building sandbars. The eddy areas, which are typi- Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and cally located immediately downstream from channel was selected in the Record of Decision (U.S. Department of the constrictions created by tributary debris fans, are susceptible to Interior, 1996). fine-sediment deposition because the flow tends to recirculate The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Grand Canyon and be of lower velocity than the flow in the main channel. Monitoring and Research Center and its cooperators have con- Using historical sediment-transport records from the Lees Ferry ducted extensive monitoring and research on fine-sediment (RM 0) and Grand Canyon (RM 87) gages, Laursen and others transport and sandbar evolution in Grand Canyon. This chapter (1976) and later Topping and others (2000b) identified that presents a summary of the results of studies since the 1970s, as before closure of Glen Canyon Dam, sand would accumulate well as conclusions derived from recent syntheses of streamflow, in the Colorado River channel during late summer, fall, and sediment transport, and geomorphic data from 1921 to 2004, winter. Annual accumulation of sand in the channel during including recent sediment budgets. The effects of the MLFF op- predam years apparently resulted from large sediment inputs erating alternative at Glen Canyon Dam (1996–2004) on fine- from tributaries that occurred during periods of seasonal low Winter 2006 page nineteen flows in the main channel of the Colorado River. Following winter. With regard to the highest flows, dam operations have these periods of sand enrichment in the main channel, spring reduced the 2-yr recurrence interval flood (i.e., the flood that snowmelt floods would erode the accumulated sand from the occurs every other year on average) from 85,000 cubic feet per channel and transport it out of the canyon, along the way de- second (cfs) during the predam period to 31,500 cfs during the positing some of the sand in the low-energy eddy areas and thus postdam period. In the predam era, discharge exceeded 9,000 leading to the building of the high-elevation sandbars. Following cfs only 44.3% of the time, while in the postdam era this per- the spring replenishment of sandbars, some of this sand would centage has gradually increased by decade, from 52.7% in the in turn be redistributed to even higher elevations by winds (Top- 1960s to 82.6% in the 1990s. This decrease in the duration of ping and others, 2000b). On an annual basis, the inputs of sand low flows has important implications for sediment transport to the system would approximately balance the export, main- because Topping and others (2000b) showed that flows less taining equilibrium in background sand storage in the eddies. than about 9,000 cfs result in accumulation of tributary sand inputs in the Marble Canyon and Grand Canyon reaches of the Effects of Lake Powell on Sand Transport river, whereas flows above this generally lead to transport of Before the closure of Glen Canyon Dam in 1963, approxi- new sand inputs through these reaches or erosion of sand from mately 25 million tons (23 million Mg) of sand passed the Lees these reaches. Ferry stream gage annually. With the addition of 1.7 million Dam operations have introduced large daily variations in tons (1.5 million Mg) of sand from the Paria River, which joins discharge to generate hydroelectric power that tracks daily the Colorado River just downstream from Lees Ferry, the total peaks in demand throughout the Western United States. Also, predam annual sand supply to Marble Canyon reached about 27 because peak energy demand varies seasonally in the West, with million tons (24 million Mg). At the end of Marble Canyon, the peak demand occurring in midsummer and winter, the month- Little Colorado River joins the Colorado River and contributed, to-month flow pattern related to dam operation is substantially on average, about 1.9 million tons (1.7 million Mg) to the an- different from natural, predam, seasonal patterns. Highest dis- nual sand supply. Thus, the total predam sand supply to Grand charges in the river now occur during the two seasons when Canyon, from the Colorado River upstream from Lees Ferry and predam discharge had typically been the lowest, midsummer with the Paria and Little Colorado Rivers combined, was ap- and winter. Furthermore, daily patterns of flow in the river proximately 29 million tons (26 million Mg). have been altered by dam operations. For example, during the Today, because Lake Powell traps all of the sediment up- predam period the median daily range in discharge was only stream from Glen Canyon Dam, the Paria River is the primary 524 cfs, whereas in the postdam era the median daily range in- source of sand to Marble Canyon, supplying approximately 6% creased to 8,580 cfs, a value greater than the predam median of predam sand levels. In the case of Grand Canyon, Glen discharge. Before dam operation, the daily range in discharge Canyon Dam has reduced its sand supply to primarily the con- exceeded 10,000 cfs only about 1% of all days; postdam, the tributions of the Paria and Little Colorado Rivers. Other lesser daily discharge range exceeded 10,000 cfs on 43% of all days. tributaries also contribute a small amount of sand to Grand Initially, operation of the dam’s powerplant was character- Canyon, with an estimated cumulative supply that is approxi- ized mostly by unconstrained daily fluctuations that were de- mately 10% to 20% of the mean annual load provided by the signed to optimize electrical generation around peak daily Paria River. Taken together, the contributions of sand from vari- demand, which had patterns that also varied on a monthly ous sources provide Grand Canyon with approximately 16% of timescale related to seasonal changes in energy demand. From its predam sand levels. The findings presented here are drawn 1963 through 1991, these operations typically caused the Col- from Topping and others (2000b) and Webb and others (2000); orado River’s discharge to fluctuate on a daily basis from less readers interested in more details on the predam and postdam than 5,000 cfs to near powerplant capacity of about 31,000 cfs. sediment budgets for Marble and Grand Canyons should con- These so-called “no action” daily operations (because they were sult these reports. considered the no action alternative in the EIS) were first al- tered in 1990 to facilitate experimental release patterns imple- Effects of Dam Operations on Flow Frequency and Duration mented through July 1991 as part of field investigations associated with the EIS on dam operations. The experimental Changes in the flow regime of the Colorado River since flows of 1990–91 were then followed by “interim operating cri- construction of Glen Canyon Dam have also been dramatic in teria” from August 1991 until October 1996, when Secretary of terms of seasonal variability, as well as in terms of daily fluctua- the Interior Bruce Babbitt implemented current Record of De- tions that occur because of “peaking” hydroelectric power gener- cision dam operations. Implementation of the interim operat- ation. Dam operations have altered seasonal variability by ing criteria in 1991, as well as the MLFF in 1996, constrained eliminating long- duration flood flows that occurred during the the change in discharge over any 24-h period to 5,000; 6,000; spring snowmelt and short-duration flood flows that occurred or 8,000 cfs, depending on the monthly volume-release sched- during the late summer and early fall thunderstorm season, as ule specified in the annual operating plan for the Colorado well as the very low flows that occurred during summer, fall, and River Storage Project. The flow history of the Colorado River page twenty THE Waiting List

Figure 1. Instantaneous discharge (A) and daily range in discharge (B) in cubic feet per second of the Colorado River at Lees Ferry (RM 0) between 1921 and 2004 (modified from Topping and others, 2003). Before construction of Glen Canyon Dam, the annual peak flow routinely exceeded 100,000 cfs. Dam operations during the period from 1963 through 1990 were characterized by daily fluctuations from typically less than 5,000 cfs to near powerplant capacity, or about 31,000 cfs, and included the record wet period of the mid-1980s, which resulted in the use of the spillways in 1983 for emergency releases exceeding about 90,000 cfs. Interim operating criteria, which constrained daily release fluctuations, began in 1991 and were followed by the modified low fluctuating flow operating alternative that was implemented as part of the Secretary of the Interior's Record of Decision (ROD) in 1996 (BHBF = beach/habitat-building flow). into Grand Canyon as measured at the Lees Ferry gaging station transport an amount of sand and gravel proportional to the is shown in figure 1. These flow data illustrate a transformation flow and will erode the downstream channel and banks in order of the Colorado River from a fluvial ecosystem with significant to satisfy its appetite with respect to sediment transport. On seasonal variability in the predam era to a postdam river the basis of resurveys of historical cross-sections upstream from ecosystem with little seasonal variability and substantial daily Lees Ferry, approximately 20 million tons (18 million Mg) of fluctuations. material—gravel and fine sediment, including sand—have been Another important aspect of the MLFF operation is the eroded from the first 15 mi (24 km) of the Colorado River schedule of monthly release volumes in relation to the seasonal- downstream from the dam, an area referred to in this report as ity of sediment inputs. Because of energy demand and hy- the Lees Ferry reach (Grams and others, 2004). The amount of dropower economics, monthly release volumes are highest material removed is equivalent to a 6 to 10 ft (2–3 m) drop in during months with high demand, including those in late channel elevation averaged over the entire reach. Most of this summer. Historically, however, the late summer months were sediment was removed by daily, high-release dam operations characterized by low mainstem flows and the highest tributary designed to scour the channel of the Colorado River below the inputs, leading to sediment accumulation during the predam powerplant during April–June 1965 (fig. 1). Daily suspended- era. Postdam, high summer releases coincide with tributary in- sediment measurements made by the USGS at the Lees Ferry puts, leading to rapid export instead of accumulation. Therefore, and Grand Canyon gaging stations indicated that these high not only has the sand supply been drastically reduced through flows in 1965 eroded 4.4 million tons (4.0 million Mg) of fine the impoundment of Lake Powell, but the seasonal timing of sediment (mostly sand) from the Lees Ferry reach and 18 mil- low and high flows has also been both highly compressed and lion tons (16 million Mg) of fine sediment (mostly sand) from significantly shifted to later periods of the year that coincide Marble and upper Grand Canyons. Channel scour was antici- with tributary sand inputs. The information in this section was pated below the dam during its design and was later needed to taken from Topping and others (2003); readers with further in- optimize energy generation within the operating range of the terest in the Colorado River’s hydrology, both before and after hydroelectric powerplant (Grams and others, 2004). Typical the dam was closed, should consult this report. dam releases today do not result in much erosion from the Lees Ferry reach, and as a result very little fine sediment is Status and Trends of Fine Sediment Below Glen Canyon Dam transported downstream to Marble and upper Grand Canyons. Despite the fact that its contributing drainage area is Changes in sand supply and flow regime downstream from approximately 18 times smaller than that of the Little Colorado a dam affect the geomorphology of the downstream channel. River, the single largest sand supplier to the reaches below Glen When a dam traps sand and releases clear water, this clear water Canyon from 1990 through 2004 was the Paria River. Farther is often termed “hungry” because it still has the capacity to downstream in Marble and upper Grand Canyons, the fate of Winter 2006 page twenty one fine-sediment deposits is dependent upon the long-term and maintain eroded sandbars by using only the limited and balance between inputs to the system (i.e., tributary supply) and infrequent tributary-derived sand that enters the river below exports from the system (i.e., mainstem sediment-transport the dam. rates). Although sand inputs have been greatly reduced by the closure and operation of Glen Canyon Dam, the annual main- Recent Findings stem transport—and thus export—has also most likely been The Paradigm of Sand Transport and reduced because of the elimination of the highest flood flows. Storage Used in the 1995 Environmental As a result, two possibilities exist for the postdam fine-sediment Impact Statement balance downstream from the Paria River. First, if the supply from the Paria River and other lesser Marble Canyon tributaries The EIS concluded that sand would accumulate over exceeds the postdam transport rate on an annual basis, then new multiyear timescales in the channel of the Colorado River in sand inputs would accumulate in the channel and in low- eleva- Marble and upper Grand Canyons during MLFF powerplant tion portions of eddies over multiple years. Such accumulated releases in all but the highest release years (U.S. Department of sand supplies would then be available at any time for redistribu- the Interior, 1995). The basis for this conclusion was the as- tion to higher elevation sandbars through release of periodic sumption that the relationship between the water discharge and controlled floods (i.e., beach/ habitat-building flows in the EIS; sand transport in the Colorado River did not change substan- hereafter BHBF) from Glen Canyon Dam. This scenario was the tially over time. This assumption was used because sediment- conclusion reached by Howard and Dolan (1981), Andrews transport data collected in the postdam Colorado River were (1990, 1991), Smillie and others (1993), and the EIS study sparse. Prior to the early 1970s, suspended-sediment concentra- team (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995) for the MLFF tion was measured on a daily basis at the three USGS gaging alternative, leading to its implementation in 1996. Howard and stations that are critical to constructing a sand budget for Mar- Dolan (1981) reached their conclusion by using an estimate for ble and Grand Canyons: the Paria River at Lees Ferry, the Little the sand contribution from the lesser tributaries that is now re- Colorado River at Cameron, and the Colorado River near garded to be about a factor of four too high (Topping and oth- Grand Canyon. The sediment sampling program at the ers, 2000b; Webb and others, 2000). Andrews (1990, 1991) and Colorado River near Grand Canyon gaging station began in Smillie and others (1993) reached their conclusions by using October 1925; the daily sediment sampling programs at the stable sand-transport relationships, also called “rating curves.” A Paria and Little Colorado Rivers began in October 1947. The stable sand-transport rating curve exists where there is a unique Little Colorado River sediment record was discontinued on value for sand concentration for any given flow. This approach September 30, 1970; the Colorado River sediment record at the invokes the assumption that the upstream sand supply is in equi- Grand Canyon gaging station was discontinued on September librium with transport capacity. The methods and data used to 30, 1972; and the Paria River sediment record was discontin- reach the conclusion in the EIS are discussed further in the ued on September 30, 1976. Thus, the only postdam period of following section. overlap between these stations that could be used to construct a Alternatively, if the annual mainstem transport rate (ex- sand budget was the period from closure of the dam in March port) exceeds tributary supply (input), then systematic long-term 1963 through September 30, 1970. Furthermore, no post- dam erosion of fine sediment from the channel would be expected. In sand-transport data were collected within Marble Canyon fact, this second scenario was originally predicted by Dolan and during this early period. others (1974) and Laursen and others (1976) on the basis of To fill this data gap, the USGS began a program of quasi- their early sediment-transport studies related to effects of Glen daily sediment sampling on the major tributaries to the Col- Canyon Dam on downstream resources. In order for high-flow orado River (that is, the Paria River, the Little Colorado River, releases to be effective at restoring and maintaining sandbars and Kanab Creek) and at five locations on the mainstem Col- under this second scenario, controlled floods would need to be orado River in Marble and Grand Canyons (Garrett and others, strategically timed to coincide with or immediately follow tribu- 1993). On the tributaries, this program extended from July tary sand inputs. These early studies predated the concept of through December 1983. On the mainstem, this program in- using controlled floods to restore eroded sandbars; hence, their cluded the periods from July through December 1983 and Oc- estimates of sand transport in the postdam era could only result tober 1985 through January 1986. All suspended-sediment in net export of new sand inputs and continued erosion of exist- samples collected under this program were analyzed for grain ing sandbars of predam origin. More recent evidence presented size to allow use in constructing sand budgets. in the following section further supports the conclusion that this The sand budget for the Colorado River in Marble and second scenario prevails under the current reoperating strategy Grand Canyons used in the EIS was constructed by Randle and and that this situation is leading to systematic, long-term erosion Pemberton (1987) and Pemberton (1987). For tributary sand of fine sediment from the channel bed and eddies of Marble and input, they constructed stable sand- rating curves by using all of Grand Canyons. On the basis of existing data, it is still uncertain the historical and 1983 data from the Paria River, the Little whether or not strategically timed managed floods can restore Colorado River, and Kanab Creek. They also included an esti- page twenty two THE Waiting List mate for the sand supply from the lesser tributaries. Pemberton following section suggest that this assumption is incorrect for (1987) developed stable sand-transport rating curves at the five the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam. mainstem locations based on the USGS 1983–86 data, and the Studies Since 1996 That Refute the EIS states, “The sand transport equations of Randle and Pem- Environmental Impact Statement Findings berton (1987) and Pemberton (1987) were used for these com- putations” (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995, p. 95) in Research and monitoring conducted during and after the reference to the sediment budget presented in figure III-15 of 1996 BHBF experiment, also known as the 1996 controlled the EIS (and reproduced here as fig. 2). Therefore, the EIS sedi- flood, have led to several findings that refute the EIS predic- ment budget was based on the assumption of stable sand-trans- tions for sand conservation and suggest that the implementa- port rating curves. Results of recent studies presented in the tion of this strategy has not led to sustainable restoration and maintenance of sandbars in either Marble or Grand Canyon. Instead, the canyons’ sandbars continue to erode (figs. 3–6). The primary results of several of these studies are briefly sum- marized below:

• Rubin and others (1998) and Topping and others (1999) showed that the sand supply during the 1996 BHBF was not as great as was assumed before the experiment and that the sand on the bed of the river and in suspension coarsened dramati- cally as the upstream supply of sand decreased over time during this flood. This process led to flood deposits that coarsened vertically upward (i.e., inversely graded deposits).

• Topping and others (2000a) demonstrated that the grain size of sand on the bed of the Colorado River can change by over a factor of four as functions of tributary resupply of finer sand Figure 2. Reproduction of figure III-15 from the final environmental impact statement (EIS) (U.S. Department and higher dam releases that winnow the bed and that this fac- of the Interior, 1995), which shows the sand budget as tor-of-four change in bed-sand grain size corresponds to a computed by Randle and Pemberton (1987). Recent change of two orders of magnitude in the concentration of studies refute the conclusion of the EIS that sand sand in suspension (for the same discharge of water). Identifica- accumulates on the bed of the Colorado River over tion of this dynamic process precludes the use of stable sand- multiple years under normal dam operations. (Phantom transport relationships in the Colorado River, thus invalidating Ranch is the location of the Grand Canyon gage.)

A B

Figure 3. Repeat photographs of Tapeats Creek at the Colorado River, Grand Canyon (RM 133.8, right shore). A. (July 1952) This viewdownstream from below the mouth of Tapeats Creek shows a large sandbar with few rocks or boulders exposed. This sandbar was frequently used for layovers during river trips in the 1950s (Kent Frost, courtesy of the photographer). B. (March 27, 2003) Large rocksand boulders are now exposed because of severe beach erosion. New sand was deposited here during the 1996 beach/habitat-buildingflow but was quickly removed. This camp is no longer used, which creates a problem for river runners who want to visit Tapeats Creek (J. Janssen, stake 2676, courtesy of the Desert Laboratory Collection of Repeat Photography). (Figure after Webb and others, 2002.) Winter 2006 page twenty three

A. March 13, 1994 B. March 26, 1996

C. April 4, 1996 D. April 14, 1998

E. June 17, 2000 F. September 11, 2000 Figure 4. Time series of repeat photographs of sandbars along the left shore of the Colorado River near RM 44.5 (Eminence Break) illustrating deposition on the sandbar during the 1996 beach/habitat-building flow (March 26–April 2; high flow occurred between photographs B and C) and subsequent erosion since April 1996. Images provided by Northern Arizona University, Department of Geology in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey. the approach used to construct the sand budget in the EIS. Top- ping and others (2000a) also showed that Randle and Pember- ton (1987) incorrectly predicted sand accumulation in the Colorado River because the data they used to verify their mod- eled stable sand-export relationships were from periods in the mid-1980s, when sand in the river was anomalously coarse and sand-transport rates were anomalously low following prolonged releases above powerplant capacity between 1983 and 1986.

• Rubin and Topping (2001) showed that sand transport in the postdam Colorado River in Grand Canyon is regulated by both the discharge of water and the grain size of the sand available for transport in suspension. This information also contradicts the approach of the EIS, where it was assumed that sand Figure 5. A decrease in elevation of the sandbar transport was regulated only by the discharge of water. surface is seen at jackass creek camp located along the left shore of the colorado river, 23 mi (37 km) down- stream of Glen Canyon dam. Elevations were determined • Topping and others (2000b) showed through their analysis of by examining oblique and aerial photographs of the site the 1965–70 daily sediment- transport data collected by USGS and by field survey of the elevation and the former sand that, under normal powerplant flows, newly input tributary sand surface at its contact with large talus blocks. This graph is exported past the Grand Canyon gaging station within several shows the elevations near one prominent talus block that months. Their analysis of predam data indicated that, prior to was inundated by predam mean annual floods, but since closure of Glen Canyon Dam, sand would accumulate in Marble the dam was completed, the talus block has been inun- dated infrequently (modified from Rubin and others, and upper Grand Canyons only during the 9 months of the year 2002). when discharges were typically lower than about 9,000 cfs. page twenty four THE Waiting List

balance remained negative during water years 2000 through 2004, despite 5 consecutive years in which minimal release volumes (8.23 million acre-feet (10,148 million m3)) from Lake Powell occurred during prolonged drought in the upper Colorado River Basin. These measurements and calculations of sand transport also show that tributary inputs are typically transported downstream and out of the canyon within a few months under typical Record of Decision operations (Rubin and others, 2002).

• Repeat topographic mapping of sandbars (Hazel and others, 1999) showed that the 1996 BHBF did increase the surface area of high-elevation sandbars, but more than half of the sand deposited at higher elevations was taken from the lower por- tions of the sandbars (Schmidt, 1999) rather than being derived from tributary sand supplies accumulated on the channel bed, as originally hypothesized in the 1995 EIS. Figure 6. Changes in sandbar size (total surface area) are shown for 14 long-term sandbar study sites between the Lees Ferry and Grand Canyon gages (RM 0 to RM 87). Area • Repeated surveys of channel cross-sections (Flynn and of bars exposed above water discharges of 8,000 cfs Hornewer, 2003) revealed erosion at 55 of the 57 locations be- decreased by 22% from 1991 to 2004. The 1996 tween 1991 and 1999, even though daily operations were con- beach/habitat-building flow resulted in a net transfer of sand strained during the time series of repeat measurements. from mid elevations to high elevations (modified from Rubin and others, 2002). • Schmidt and others (2004) conducted geomorphic mapping from air photos and land surveys for the predam and postdam • Measurements of the channel bed indicate that tributary sand, periods. They estimated the loss of sand to be about 25% of which is typically much finer than the sand on the bed of the the area typically exposed at base flow in predam photographs, Colorado River, accumulates on the bed for only a short time but estimates range from 0% to 55% depending on study reach before being eroded and transported out of the canyon under and method of analysis. Their studies further suggested that normal MLFF dam operations (Topping and others, 2000a). loss of the sandbar area continued at a relatively steady rate be- tween 1983 and 2002, despite constraints on daily operations • Since August 1999, detailed suspended-sediment transport imposed after 1991. measurements have been collected at the Paria and Little Col- orado Rivers to document inputs and at the USGS gaging sta- Importance of Continuous Long-term tions above the mouth of the Little Colorado River and near Sediment-transport Data Grand Canyon to document export. Initially, these quasi-daily Because of a lack of continuous data on sediment inputs measurements were made by using only conventional USGS and export that would have allowed for a sediment budget methodologies to obtain cross-sectionally integrated samples of based on measured data, the EIS study team used stable sand- suspended-sediment concentration and grain size (methods de- transport rating curves. Stable rating curves assume that for any scribed in Edwards and Glysson, 1999). Because substantial and given flow there is a single value for the corresponding sand rapid (within a day) changes that are due to tributary inputs can concentration and, therefore, a predictable sand-transport rate occur in suspended-sediment concentration and grain size, related to flows released from Glen Canyon Dam. The recent emerging technologies for continuous monitoring of suspended- studies reported above, however, have demonstrated that in the sediment concentration and grain size were tested and imple- postdam Colorado River the relationship between flow and mented beginning in 2001. These technologies include acoustic sand transport is not stable but instead shifts quickly and sub- backscatter and laser-diffraction methods and are described in stantially relative to the grain size of sand on the bed of the detail in Melis and others (2004) and Topping and others river (which is controlled by tributary inputs and mainstem (2004). The detailed sediment-transport measurements allow for flows). Rubin and Topping (2001) and Rubin and others the ability to construct sediment budgets based on continuous (2002) showed that the grain size of the sand in the regulated data instead of on rating curves, a very important distinction Colorado River ecosystem depends greatly on the recent history from the EIS approach of using a limited data set. These data of tributary activity. For example, during low tributary flow pe- show that the overall mass balance of sand (input minus export) riods the only source of sand to the mainstem Colorado River continues to be negative (fig. 7), as originally predicted by is that on the channel bed and in eddies, and that sand tends to Laursen and others (1976). Most significantly, the sand mass be much coarser than tributary-delivered sand because of the Winter 2006 page twenty five

winnowing of the finer sizes. When tributaries are flooding and delivering large quantities of fine sand (fig. 8), however, the supply is no longer limited to the coarser channel bed sand, re- sulting in much higher mainstem sand concentrations and, hence, greatly increased suspended-sediment export for any given flow released from the dam. Because sand transport cannot be predicted based on dis- charge alone, sediment budgets for the Colorado River in Grand Canyon can only be constructed based on measurements of sand transport at a frequency great enough to capture changes in concentration and grain size resulting from tributary inputs. Fundamentally, the conclusions drawn by the EIS team, which are not supported by the more recent data, resulted from a lack of continuous data in the postdam era; that is, if daily records had been continued beyond 1972 and into the EIS pe- riod, then the fine-sediment budget would have been con- structed based on these data rather than on stable rating curves. Recent sediment budgets suggest that under this scenario the conclusions of the EIS would have been different and possibly would have led to a different strategy for operation of Glen Canyon Dam in 1996. Though it is somewhat costly to collect long-term, high-frequency sediment-transport records, in this case it may have prevented 13 yr of dam operations that have continued to erode sandbars from Grand Canyon.

Current Experimental Plan for Fine Sediment

Because recent research has shown that sand does not ac- cumulate on the river bed in Marble and Grand Canyons under normal Record of Decision dam operations, scientists have re- cently proposed two possible field tests of dam operating op- tions that might more effectively conserve limited, downstream sand resources. One approach is to implement floods immedi- ately following large tributary inputs that commonly occur in late summer and early fall. A second approach is to follow trib- utary sand-input events with low flows, in order to limit export and retain most of the sand input, until flooding can be imple- mented. This approach would require a change in the pattern of monthly release volumes and associated dam operations be- cause July and August releases of recent drought years still re- sulted in half of the sand introduced by a tributary flood being exported within days or weeks (Rubin and others, 2002). Figure 7. Mass balance of sand between Lees Ferry and Grand Canyon gages from August 1999 through July 2004 (A) and sepa- In September 2002, the U.S. Department of the Interior rately for sediment years (July–June) 2003 (B) and 2004 (C). Mass (2002) approved implementation of the second approach de- balance is computed by subtracting measured, mainstem suspended- scribed above. Under this plan, changes in dam operations and sand export (10% uncertainty) from estimated and measured sand restoration floods are linked to triggering thresholds based on inputs from the Paria River (20% uncertainty) and Little Colorado sand inputs from the Paria River and lesser Marble Canyon River (30% uncertainty), as well as from estimated inputs from nu- tributaries and retention of sand in Marble and Grand merous lesser tributaries (50% uncertainty). The measurements illus- Canyons. For example, the “autumn sediment input” scenario trate the rapid export of tributary inputs by high dam releases and the continued overall loss of sand from Grand Canyon under the mod- described in the 2002 environmental assessment (EA) (U.S. ified low fluctuating flow (MLFF) alternative, even during the drought- Department of the Interior, 2002) defined a sequence of events hydrology, minimum-volume release years of 2003 and 2004 related to sand inputs and retention that would trigger a 2-d, (modified and updated from Rubin and others, 2002). 42,000–45,000-cfs experimental high flow in the following page twenty six THE Waiting List

January (fig. 9). Significant sand inputs to Marble Canyon that operations. To this end, the feasibility of mechanically trans- exceeded the triggering threshold for an experimental high flow porting fine sediment around Glen Canyon Dam and intro- occurred during September– November 2004. Instead of con- ducing it into the Colorado River below the dam is currently straining operations through December (a winter, peak-demand being investigated. month) in order to retain sand in Marble Canyon as laid out in the 2002 EA, a supplemental EA was prepared that allowed for a Discussion and Future Research Needs hybrid of the first and second ap- proaches to be tested and evalu- Extensive research and ated. Approval of the monitoring of fine-sediment supplemental EA paved the way transport and sandbars since for the experimental high flow the completion of the EIS that began on Sunday, November have resulted in a better un- 21, 2004, when the Bureau of derstanding of the geomor- Reclamation opened the bypass phology of the Colorado tubes of Glen Canyon Dam for River in Marble and Grand 90 h. The peak high flows ran for Canyons and of the effects 2.5 d (60 h) at about 41,000 cfs. of the operations of Glen Scientists will evaluate data col- Canyon Dam on the river’s lected during and after the high- downstream resources. flow event to determine whether Probably the single most or not this strategy succeeded in important finding of this re- enlarging existing beaches and search and monitoring is sandbars. that postdam mainstem Other dam operation sce- sand transport exceeds the narios may be more effective at postdam supply of sand retaining tributary inputs, such as from tributaries on a sea- Record of Decision operations sonal to annual basis, such modified such that equal volumes that the postdam river is in of water are released from the an annual fine-sediment dam each month. Alternatively, a deficit (i.e., export exceeds scenario of seasonally adjusted input). This sediment deficit steady flows, which was an alter- has resulted in a consistent Figure 8. Looking upstream into Glen Canyon from the Paria native in the EIS process, may be River confluence with the main channel Colorado River during downstream pattern of ero- effective. Because of the severely a Paria River flood. Tributary inputs of sand, such as the one sion of channel and sandbar reduced sand supply, however, pictured, now encounter clear Colorado River water because deposits from Marble and even during periods of minimum Lake Powell traps incoming fine sediment. The Paria River is the Grand Canyons despite re- release requirements of 8.23 mil- primary source of sand to Marble Canyon but is only about 6% strictions on daily power- lion acre-feet (10,148 million m3) of the predam sand supply. plant fluctuations required per year the possibility exists that (photo: Scott A. Wright, U.S. Geological Survey). by the implementation of no operational scenario will result the MLFF alternative. in management objectives being achieved for restoring sandbars, The finding of an annual sediment deficit directly contra- simply because of the volume of water that must be released on dicts the critical EIS assumption that sand will accumulate on an annual basis. If so, other, more effective alternatives for the bed of the Colorado River over multiple years under the restoring and maintaining sandbars and related habitats may MLFF operating alternative (and minimum annual volume re- need to be evaluated. leases) and has important implications for the potential success Sediment augmentation, one possible alternative, was of managing tributary sediment inputs. It is also worth noting eliminated during the development of the EIS, partly because of that the EIS conclusion resulted fundamentally from a lack of the belief that sandbars could be restored and maintained by long-term records for tributary sand supply and main- stem constraining the hourly ramping rates and range of daily dam sand-transport rates, illustrating the importance of long-term operations and partly because of concerns about contamination data sets in river management. A continuous sediment budget of sediment upstream in Lake Powell (Graf, 1985). Addition of for the Colorado River in Grand Canyon since construction of sediment—continuously, seasonally, or perhaps only during Glen Canyon Dam, based on high-frequency measurements, floods—may offer greater powerplant operating flexibility and likely would have resulted in a different EIS conclusion about therefore may cost less than further restrictions on annual dam fine- sediment dynamics below the dam, one that may have Winter 2006 page twenty seven prevented the continued erosion of sandbars between 1991 and 2004. A second important finding of recent research and monitoring efforts is that during the 1996 BHBF July 1 - Oct 31 NO the primary source of sand for building high-elevation Fine Sediments >550,000 Continue sandbars was the low-elevation portion of the sandbars Tons? → ROD flows instead of the channel bed as hypothesized in the EIS. (MLFF) This scenario of building high-elevation sandbars at the expense of the low-elevation portions was repeated during the powerplant capacity flow in September YES ↓ 2000 (Hazel and others, in press). This process of sandbar building is supported by the finding of an Switch releases (after Sept.1) absence of multiyear accumulation on the channel to alternating 2 week long, bed: sand cannot be transported from the bed to high- 8,000 cfs steady and 6,500 - elevation sandbars because there is typically little sand 9,000 cfs fluctuating flows available on the channel bed. Neither of these two findings supports the EIS hypotheses, but they have led scientists and managers YES ↓ to reassess the management strategy for sand resources within Grand Canyon. An emerging paradigm is the NO need to strategically time high-flow releases in order to On Oct. 31, Inputs Continue take advantage of sporadic tributary sediment inputs, > 1,100,000 tons? → ROD flows a scenario that requires greater flexibility in the annual (MLFF) operating plan for the dam with respect to both hy- droelectric power generation and economic cost. Only immediately after these inputs is significant sand avail- YES able on the channel bed for transfer to high-elevation ↓ sandbars through high-flow releases. Alternatively, dam releases may be constrained following inputs for a Continue alternating releases. period of time until a high flow can be released from Decide on Dec. 1 which con- serves more fine sediment and the dam; however, during extended periods of above- continue this release. average upper Colorado River Basin hydrology and high storage in Lake Powell, constraining daily opera- tions may not be possible (see fig. 1, 1995 through YES 1998). In the absence of high-flow releases strategi- ↓ cally timed to redistribute tributary inputs to high-ele- vation sandbars, the inputs are exported from Grand On Jan. 1, > 880,000 tons NO Canyon in a period of weeks or months under normal of fine sediment retained? Continue dam operations, leading to continued long-term ero- → ROD flows sion of sandbars. (MLFF) In November 2004, this paradigm of strategi- cally timed, high-flow releases was tested for the first YES time on the Colorado River. Scientists are in the ↓ process of evaluating the results of this experiment. The findings will be critical for the long-term manage- Initiate 2 day, 42,000 - 45,300 ment of fine- sediment resources and sandbars in cfs flow experiment in the first Grand Canyon. If a management approach of strategi- week of January cally timed, high-flow releases, triggered by tributary

Figure 9. Sequence of events established in the autumn sediment input scenario in an environmental assessment by U.S. Department of the Interior (2002) related to fine-sediment inputs and retention to trigger a 2-d, 42,000–45,000-cfs experimental high flow in January. If fine-sediment inputs do not reach specified levels, then modified low fluctuating flow (MLFF) operations, as specified in the Record of Decision (ROD) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 1996), are continued. page twenty eight THE Waiting List inputs, is to be followed, then further research will be required Randle, T.J., and Pemberton, E.L., 1987, Results and analysis of STARS modeling efforts of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon: Glen Canyon Environmental to define the appropriate triggering criteria and to develop high- Studies, Salt Lake City, Utah, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, flow hydrographs (peaks and durations) that may optimize dep- 190 p. osition of tributary sand inputs within eddies while minimizing Rubin, D.M., Nelson, J.M., and Topping, D.J., 1998, Relation of inversely graded export during controlled flood peaks. deposits to suspended- sediment grain-size evolution during the 1996 flood If strategically timed, high-flow releases are deemed inade- experiment in Grand Canyon: Geology, v. 26, p. 99–102. quate for meeting the management objectives for Grand Canyon Rubin, D.M., and Topping, D.J., 2001, Quantifying the relative importance of flow regulation and grain-size regulation of suspended-sediment transport (•), and sandbars, then alternative approaches must be considered, such tracking changes in bed-sediment grain size (•): Water Resources Research, v. 37, p. as further restraints on daily powerplant operations, changes in 133–146. monthly volume release patterns, or sediment augmentation. Rubin, D.M., Topping, D.J., Schmidt, J.C., Hazel, J., Kaplinski, M., and Melis, T.S., 2002, Recent sediment studies refute Glen Canyon Dam hypothesis: Eos, References Transactions, American Geophysical Union, v. 83, no. 25, p. 273, 277–278. Andrews, E.D., 1990, The Colorado River: a perspective from Lees Ferry, Arizona, Schmidt, J.C., 1999, Summary and synthesis of geomorphic studies conducted in Wolman, M.G., Church, M., Newbury, R., Lapointe, M., Frenette, M., Andrews, during the 1996 controlled flood in Grand Canyon, in Webb, R.H., Schmidt, J.C., E.D., Lisle, T.E., Buchanan, J.P., Schumm, S.A., and Winkley, B.R., The riverscape, Marzolf, G.R., and Valdez, R.A., eds., The controlled flood in Grand Canyon: in Wolman, M.G., and Riggs, H.C., eds., Surface water hydrology, The geology of Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, Geophysical Monograph Series, North America, v. O-1: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America, p. 281–328. v. 110, p. 329–341. Andrews, E.D., 1991, Sediment transport in the Colorado River basin, in Commit- Schmidt, J.C., Topping, D.J., and Grams, P.E., 2004, System- wide changes in the tee to Review the Glen Canyon Environmental Studies, Water Science and Technol- distribution of fine-grained alluvium in the Colorado River corridor between Glen ogy Board, Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources, eds., Canyon Dam and Bright Angel Creek, Arizona: final report to the Grand Canyon Colorado River ecology and dam management: Washington, D.C., National Acad- Monitoring and Research Center: Logan, Utah State University, 117 p. emy Press, p. 54–74. Smillie, G.M., Jackson, W.L., and Tucker, D., 1993, Colorado River sand budget: Dolan, R., Howard, A., and Gallenson, A., 1974, Man’s impact on the Colorado Lees Ferry to Little Colorado River: National Park Service Technical Report River in the Grand Canyon: American Scientist, v. 62, p. 392–401. NPS/NRWRD/NRTR-92/12, 11 p. Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, G.D., 1999, Field methods for measurement of fluvial Topping, D.J., Melis, T.S., Rubin, D.M., and Wright, S.A., 2004, High-resolution sediment: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water Resources Investigations, monitoring of suspended- sediment concentration and grain size in the Colorado book 3, chap. C2, 89 p. River in Grand Canyon using a laser-acoustic system, in Chunhong Hu, Ying Tan, Flynn, M.E., and Hornewer, N.J., 2003, Variations in sand storage measured at and Cheng Liu, eds., Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on River monumented cross sections in the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and Sedimentation, October 18–21, 2004, Yichang, China, v. 4, p. 2507–2514. Lava Falls Rapid, northern Arizona, 1992–99: Topping, D.J., Rubin, D.M., Nelson, J.M., Kinzel, P.J., III, and Bennett, J.P., U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 03-4104, 39 p. Gar- 1999, Linkage between grain- size evolution and sediment depletion during Col- rett, W.B., Van De Vanter, E.K., and Graf, J.B., 1993, Streamflow and sediment- orado River floods, in Webb, R.H., Schmidt, J.C., Marzolf, G.R., and Valdez, transport data, Colorado River and three tributaries in Grand Canyon, Arizona, R.A., eds., The 1996 controlled flood in Grand Canyon: Washington, D.C., Amer- 1983 and 1985–86: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-174, 624 p. ican Geophysical Union, Geophysical Monograph Series, v. 110, p. 71–98.

Graf, W.L., 1985, Mercury transport in stream sediments of the Colorado Plateau: Topping, D.J., Rubin, D.M., Nelson, J.M., Kinzel, P.J., III, and Corson, I.C., Annals of the Association of American Geography, v. 75, p. 552–565. 2000a, Colorado River sediment transport: pt. 2: systematic bed-elevation and Grams, P.E., Schmidt, J.C., Topping, D.J., and Goeking, S., 2004, The degraded grain-size effects of supply limitation: Water Resources Research, v. 36, reach: rate and pattern of bed and bank adjustment of the Colorado River in the 25 p. 543–570. km immediately downstream from Glen Canyon Dam: final report to the Grand Topping, D.J., Rubin, D.M., and Vierra, L.E., Jr., 2000b, Colorado River sedi- Canyon Monitoring and Research Center: Logan, Utah State University, 111 p. ment transport: pt. 1: natural sediment supply limitation and the influence of Glen Hazel, J.E., Topping, D.J., Schmidt, J.C., Kaplinski, M., and Melis, T.S., in press, Canyon Dam: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 515–542. Downstream effects of a dam on sediment storage in a bedrock canyon: the relative Topping, D.J., Schmidt, J.C., and Vierra, L.E., Jr., 2003, Computation and analy- roles of eddy and channel storage in the sediment budget for the Colorado River in sis of the instantaneous-discharge record for the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Ari- Marble Canyon, AZ: Journal of Geophysical Research, Earth Surface. zona—May 8, 1921, through September 30, 2000: Hazel, J.E., Jr., Kaplinski, M., Parnell, R., Manone, M., and Dale, A., 1999, Topo- U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1677, 118 p. U.S. Department of the graphic and bathymetric changes at thirty-three long-term study sites, in Webb, Interior, 1995, Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact R.H., Schmidt, J.C., Marzolf, G.R., and Valdez, R.A., eds., The controlled flood in Statement: Salt Lake City, Utah, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, Grand Canyon: Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, Geophysical 337 p., appendices. Monograph Series, v. 110, p. 161–184. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1996, Record of Decision, operation of Glen Howard, A., and Dolan, R., 1981, Geomorphology of the Colorado River in the Canyon Dam: Washington, D.C., Office of the Secretary of the Interior, 13 p. U.S. Grand Canyon: Journal of Geology, v. 89, p. 269–298. Department of the Interior, 2002, Proposed experimental releases from Glen Laursen, E., Ince, S., and Pollack, J., 1976, On sediment transport through the Canyon Dam and removal of nonnative fish: environmental assessment: Salt Lake Grand Canyon, in Proceedings of the Seventh Federal Interagency Sediment City, Utah, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, 112 p., appendices. Conference, Denver, Colo., p. 4-76–4-87. Webb, R.H., 1996, Grand Canyon, a century of change: Tucson, University of Ari- Melis, T.S., Topping, D.J., and Rubin, D.M., 2004, Testing laser-based sensors for zona Press, 290 p. continuous in situ monitoring of suspended sediment in the Colorado River, Arizona, in Bogen, J., Fergus, T., and Walling, D.E., eds., Erosion and sediment Webb, R.H., Griffiths, P.G., Melis, T.S., and Hartley, D.R., 2000, Sediment transport measurement in rivers: technological and methodological advances: Inter- delivery by ungaged tributaries of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, Arizona: national Association of Hydrological Sciences Publication 283, p. 21–27. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 00-4055, 67 p. Pemberton, E.L., 1987, Sediment data collection and analysis for five stations on the Webb, R.H., Melis, T.S., and Valdez, R.A., 2002, Observations of environmental Colorado River from Lees Ferry to Diamond Creek: Glen Canyon Environmental change in Grand Canyon: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Studies, Salt Lake City, Utah, Bureau of Rec., Upper Colorado Region, 156 p. Report 02-4080, 33 p. Winter 2006 page twenty nine Rafting Oregon’s Owyhee

he 6-day, 45-mile trip on the Owyhee River in Eastern Oregon from Rome to Leslie Gulch was quite the Tmost enchanting river I’ve been on. The trip was my husband Walter’s birthday present to me. I had just turned 66. Walter rowed our friend Glen Stockton and myself in our orange 12 foot Achilles rubber raft. With us came Glenn Doster, former Grand Canyon commercial guide paddling a hard kayak. Walt found him via the GCPBA message board (“Anyone want to come on the Owyhee on Wednesday?”). If Owyhee sounds like “Hawaii” it is in fact the 1700’s English spelling of Hawaii. The river was named for three Hawaiian fur trappers that were sent to explore it and never came back. It has two quite perilous sections before the one we rafted. They ne- cessitate many portages through dangerous rapids and the remoteness of these sections mean that only the most intrepid boaters try them. The stretch we went on winds through 3 distinctly different canyons that spill into wide, sweeping valleys. The most spectac- ular canyon was 7-mile Green Dragon Canyon, aptly named for its dark, snaky quality, fin-like rocks waiting to eat your boat and black basalt cliffs on either side of the river rising straight up 1100 to 1500 feet broken in thirds by rolling velvet green talus slopes. The gorge looked like the 17th century Zen ink drawings you sometimes see in art books. The river was only about an eight of mile wide, so you felt you were in a massive slot canyon. Bird melodies accompanied us all the way down river and in our camps. There were few moments when there wasn’t some bird chirping, singing, squawking, swooping wrens, plovers, swallows, phoebes, rock pigeons, kildeer, hawks and phalaropes. We saw many families of Canadian geese herding their young; muskrat, beaver and fish in the water. We were warned about the profu- sion of rattlesnakes but only saw one. There were no mosquitoes or no-ceeums. Our journey took us through several valleys. The most spectacular of which, Rye Grass Crossing, had one of the most beauti- ful hot springs I’ve ever soaked in. It was located 20 feet up from the river. I sat with my back to the river in crystalline clear hot water (108 or so). The water drip, drip, dripped down in many rivulets, each making its own music, along orange-colored traver- tine rock covered in patches with soft, slippery lime-green mosses. The music of those drips was so sweet in contrast to the constant roar of the river behind. The pool was flanked by soft rolling hills of velvet green and maroon grasses and lilies, lupine and rock roses, adding fresh and wild scents to the air. I had an unusual experience when I climbed above the springs to do tai chi. The wind was gently blowing and as I stood there I distinctly felt it blowing right through some transparent spaces inside myself. Feeling the wind inside me was a moment of wonderment and connection with something both mysterious and universal. At 2000 cubit feet per second, the river current is fast with many dozens of rapids ranging from gentle riffles to a dozen Class III and two class IV’s whitewater. Walter’s rowing through a few of the stronger rapids was a little clumsy. He has great skill at read- ing whitewater, but not all the strength he once had, and this recognition was one reason we were happy to have Glen Stockton as our companion onboard the raft; and the supportive back-up of a kayaker. As we get older, learning to work with our limitations becomes the key to enjoying a trip like this one. At the top of one rapid, we entered badly and the current sent us right to a flat rock, where we sat pinned. There were two choices: either try for a slight waterfall drop on the left and or try to walk the boat through rock gardens ahead and on the right. We calmed down, bailed the boat, and assessed the choices. Then Glen put one foot on a rock and lifted the front end of the boat, pushing it into the drop and jumping in at the last minute. Then the boat just spun chaotically and landed on a rock, with the cur- rent beginning to spill a lot of water into the boat. Glen and I moved to the high side of the boat and then the boat spun free-now a heavy barge instead of a cork, the extra weight of the added water is what got us safely through that rapid. In contrast, Glenn Doster’s moves through that same rapid were elegant. He hovered at the top of the rapid in his kayak, as though there were no current, then entered precisely, getting to the bottom of the first turn, waiting just for a moment, then one flip of the paddle, and the boat simply glided between rocks and out the whitewater. No wasted motions. No feeling of the kayak being out of control in a major rapid. Smooth and relaxed. The Owyhee is in quite a remote wilderness and is only raftable a few months of the year, usually April until about mid June. In those six days, we saw 5 other people—two kayakers, and three lone rafters. The weather is extreme and unpredictable: we had 75-degree sunlight; thunderstorms; 36-degree nights and strong up river headwinds that kept us in camp one day. The great pleasure of these trips is the same one of feeling undisturbed with a new lover—of mystery and exploration, magic and vitality, wonderment, with all the senses engaged, all of the time. Diane Rappaport y page thirty THE Waiting List Canyon Book Reviews There’s This River... Grand Canyon Boatmen Stories

his is an updated and expanded version of the original Red Lakes Press Tedition (1994), with a dozen or so new stories and some great new illustrations. On all the trips I’ve done this summer it seemed like someone had a copy of this book, and frequently had their nose in it. It got passed around a bit, and seems to have provided some pretty good on-river entertainment, good enough to distract attention now and then from the spectacular scenery that

was the first ring main attraction. That’s saying something... Most of the stories can be read in a few minutes, only two run to ten or more pages. They are told by experienced canyon boaters, most of whom are (or were at one time) commercial guides. It would be difficult to describe the range of tales to be found here, and in any event an elaborate description would detract from the fun you’ll have checking them out for yourself. There may be an element of exaggeration (!!!) in some instances, and others (I know) have been considerably sanitized for popular consumption. In her introduction, Christa asks “How can you tell if a boatman is lying? His lips are moving.” There’s This River...Grand Canyon Most stories get improved with repeated telling, and if this was billed as a Boatman Stories (2nd Edition) bunch of historical anecdotes it would be aimed at a smaller audience, but probably not Edited by Christa Sadler 2006, anymore “truthful,” whatever that means. All of them are “reality based,” even if that’s This Earth Press, Flagstaff, AZ not a popular concept with the current administration back on the Potomac. 216 pages, Only one seems to be attributed to a “nom de flume” (for obvious reasons), but b&w and color illustrations if you are curious, his real identity is hinted at in the final entry in the “contributors” section. Grab a copy for your next trip, take it along, and pass it around. You (and your companions) will be glad you did, there’s a story in there that will speak to each of you - and probably more than one. Drifter Smith PS: If YOU have a great river story, polish it up and send it off to Ricardo here at the Waiting List, where you’ll be sure to find an ap- Christa Sadler writes about the importance of telling stories .... the Introduction to “There’s This River”

he inspiration for this collection of short stories that order. On my boat one lazy afternoon, floating through Tcame from a young passenger on a river trip back the calm water of the Muav Gorge, she asked to read a copy of in 1991. She was about twenty-five, and she had just the Grand Canyon River Guides’ newsletter. I guess that was a hiked in at the halfway point of the trip about three subtle way of telling me she was tired of hearing about geology. I went on talking with the other three people in my boat, when days before. It usually takes several days for people to she began giggling. She continued to giggle until she finished get “into” the canyon after they’ve joined a trip, whether the newsletter, whereupon she handed it back to me. “That was from the beginning or halfway through. a great story.” I glanced at it: Lew Steiger’s Glory Days. Hmm. She wasn’t really “there” yet, and was still missing her She had only been here three days, didn’t know anyone men- boyfriend, her hair dryer and hot showers, not necessarily in tioned in the story, had never even seen a motor rig. But she Winter 2006 page thirty one enjoyed it nonetheless, enough to remark on it. I started think- rapids don’t usually stay that long. Only five percent of the ing: There are some great stories and storytellers down here, and river is whitewater, and most of this is pretty straightforward people should know about it! once you learn the entry and the one or two moves you might I began rowing here in 1988, after becoming hooked as a have to make. If you’re there for the rapids, you could get commercial passenger in 1985. When I arrived, wide-eyed, wet bored. There are long flat stretches of water, when the wind is behind the ears, and terrified, I sat around on the boats with all more than likely going to be blowing upstream. There is baking the boatmen (both men and women call themselves boatmen) at heat and water so cold it’s often not even refreshing. There are night, and listened to stories of flips, rips, epic hikes, medical sand storms that plaster everything in camp with grit. There’s emergencies, illicit activity, ghosts, wildlife, full moons and ro- the Trip Leader From Hell. mance. Many of the people I was working with had been down But in the mornings a golden band of light moves down in the Ditch for ten years or more, some for as many as twenty- the cliffs towards the river, and in the afternoon that same band five or thirty years. They had made a life of this place, and they moves back up until it is only a sliver at the top, and then it is were telling me, telling each other, about that life. gone. The canyon wrens are only the size of golf balls, but their There are several hundred men and songs echo off the walls as you float by. Side women who presently work, part or full-time, Our stories are canyons here lead to trickling waterfalls with for the fifteen commercial companies in Grand our way of maidenhair ferns and columbine. Raging sum- Canyon. There are many who no longer work learning, bragging, mer thunderstorms create red-brown water- in the canyon as guides, but remain here in falls that plummet eight hundred feet to the their hearts. I have come to respect these people hearing about our river, and turn it brick red in an instant. The more than any I’ve ever met. They are a unique world. We teach stars at night sparkle shamelessly in an uneven bunch, not given to following or joining, yet each other with narrow band bounded by the black silhouettes despite themselves they’ve become a commu- of canyon walls. Some of the rapids here make nity. They are raunchy, rowdy and kind. They our stories ... your gut curl beforehand, and afterwards you are some of the most talented people I know. Our stories make howl as loud as you possibly can, to no one They can take a thirty-seven-foot motor rig us a community. and to everyone. through a rocky rapid at low water, or guide a Your friends are here. You make friends tiny paddleboat through the giant waves of Lava Falls without here. When a group starts out together, many of the passengers missing a stroke. They can cook the best food you’ve ever eaten, think they are just “going on a river trip.” It doesn’t take long bandage a wound, set up a tent during the rain in record time, to discover they’ve signed up for a journey. You become a fam- play the guitar, sing opera, patch a seven foot rip in the boat ily, all of you together, floating through this wild and inaccessi- with a grin on their face. In their other lives these people are ble place. You depend on each other, laugh with each other, teachers, doctors, psychologists, ski instructors, carpenters, come to know each other. As with any family, there are quirks artists, moviemakers, technicians, photographers, masseurs, sci- and oddities, good times and bad. But there is no way you can entists. Good people to have on your side. leave this place without being affected somehow by the experi- And they can tell stories! There are a couple of jokes that ence you’ve just shared. Some of the best friendships I have every passenger hears within the first day or so of a river trip: began on river trips. “How can you tell if a boatman is lying? His lips are moving.” River trips. Always there is the river. She rages, she teases “What’s the difference between a fairy tale and a boatman story? and she plays. She keeps all of us on our toes and gives us rea- A fairy tale begins with ‘once upon a time’ and a boatman story son for a life that we find hard to leave. Even boatmen who begins with ‘no shit, this really happened!‘” We joke about it, have left the river can’t stay away. They come back for private but stories are the butter for our bread. The river community has trips, they bring their kids, they do science that keeps them in a strong storytelling tradition, like the Native Americans and the canyon, they become National Park Rangers. many other cultures. We pass on our lives to the next generation These are people worth knowing. This is a place worth through our tales. Our stories are our way of learning, bragging, knowing. Few in our world are lucky enough to find something hearing about our world. We teach each other with our stories. that they truly love, and be able to stick with it long enough to We find out what hike not to do in mid-July, or where that great turn it into a life. These men and women have learned how to hidden camp is that’s perfect for a small group. We learn about do just that, and this book is a tribute to them and the place new runs in rapids, we mourn some of the mistakes of our they call home. For every story in this book, there are a hun- friends, we laugh at others. Our stories make us a community. dred others that will remain only campfire tales, or yarns spun And this community is tight-knit, for we have a powerful out on the boats late at night. There are more that remain un- common thread that binds us: the river. told: not just tales of adventure and excitement, but stories of a It’s why we came. It’s what inspires our writing, our pho- favorite passenger, a particularly beautiful sunset, or a quiet tography, our paintings, our lives. It’s why we stay. Not just for time in a side canyon that was somehow special that day. These the rapids or the hikes. Boatmen who show up to conquer the stories and artwork are part of the history of a unique Ameri- page thirty two THE Waiting List can community, in an incomparable place. One of the authors told me that his granddad had lived in a sod house on the plains in the 1800s. The stories were never writ- ten down, and they’re gone now. He said he didn’t want that to happen with us. As boatmen at this time in history, we are indebted to some impressive pioneers of the river—people like John Wesley Powell, Robert Stanton, Nathaniel Galloway, Norm Nevills, Doc Marston, Georgie Clark and many others. There has been a great deal of change since those early days. Companies have been bought and sold, equipment has improved, food has gotten fancier. Now all the passengers and boatmen wear special shorts and river sandals, where it used to be cut-off jeans and old tennis shoes. But the river flows on. In time, other boatmen will stand on our shoulders and these stories will be their legends. And so it goes. Christa Sadler River and Desert Plants of the Grand Canyon

his is sure to become the standard non-technical field guide for boaters, hikers, and others interested in plants Tfound below the rim of the Grand Canyon. I first heard about this project five or six years ago when the authors began the first of a series of annual presen- tations at the Guides Training Seminar at Marble Canyon, the annual event sponsored by Grand Canyon River Guides, the National Park Service, and the outfitters who run commercial trips on the Colorado River. From the start, the authors solicited input from their intended audience, people who spend time in the canyon, and enlisted the help of others as well. Few, if any, authors bother to quiz few paragraphs of other useful information: especially distinc- their audience about what they want to see and read about in a tive characteristics, related species, how they may have been proposed book, but (in this case, at least) the result speaks for it- used by native peoples for food or medicine, and so forth. self in a spectacular fashion. Over 80 people contributed to Illustrations - photos and/or drawings - are found on the and/or supported this project, with everything from suggestions facing page. about plants that should be included to At the rear of the book there are a line drawings, photographs, technical re- couple pages of illustrations of plant views of the text, etc. anatomy, leaf and flower shapes and So, for a start, this is a very attractive features, a glossary with definitions for book: the photographs (from many pho- various terminology, and a bibliography. tographers) are well chosen and do a good The Index lists plants by common, as job of illustrating the plants in a way ac- well as genus - species, names - a useful cessible to a non-technical audience. In arrangement for a non-technical addition to over 300 color photographs audience. another 92 line drawings - many by Lisa People who have spent a lot of time Kearsley - capture details not shown in the in the canyon but haven’t learned to photographs. And a thumbnail identifica- identify many plants will instantly recog- tion guide - photos of flowers grouped by nize most, if not all, of the species in- color - serve as a quick index to the plant cluded here, and will find this book a descriptions. pleasant and entertaining way to en- The book begins with a chapter on hance their stockpile of canyon-related Grand Canyon Ecology, a series of short lore but informative articles by experts like Art I’m really impressed with this field Phillips, Larry Stevens, and Gary Paul guide. The beautiful illustrations and Nabhan (to mention a few), that provide clear, non-technical presentation will basic background information. make it useful to anyone interested in Descriptions of individual plants River and Desert Plants plants, regardless of their botanical follow, in four major groups: ferns and of the Grand Canyon background (or lack of it.) And: it’s fern allies, grasses and grasslike plants, by Kristin Huisinga, Lori Makarick, and sized to fit in an ammo box, where it trees, and shrubs & forbs. For each plant Kate Watters will be a welcome addition to many river basic information about size and form of Foreword by Ann Zwinger libraries for years to come. growth, leaf shape, flowers, fruit, flowering Mountain Press Publishing Company season, and elevation range is followed a Missoula, Montana, 2006 Drifter Smith 264 pages, paperback, $22.00 y Winter 2006 page thirty three The Sow of Cisco e were going to run Westwater Canyon over on the Colorado-Utah border on New Years and shoot a video. I Wwas headed out from Denver first, and my boss would come later. He asked if there were anything he should pick up at the whitewater store on the way out of town. “Get us a hand pump,” I said. “I’ll reimburse you.” When he arrived at the Westwater launch it had been dark for hours, and was plenty cold. Single-digits cold. I enquired after the pump. “The pump? Ah, I blew that off.” So we inflated my 16-foot Shoshoni raft, Zoar, by mouth that night. Take a slug or two from a bottle of foul-smelling 151- proof dark rum, and leave the firelight to go into the dark where the sagging boat was gradually assuming a shape. Warm the valve with your bare hand for a while so as to keep your lips from freezing to it. Puff into the raft until you got too dizzy to continue. Stagger back to the campfire, and send someone else out. As there were only 3 of us, it was pretty short rotations, pretty long evening. We (where ‘we’ means those of us who grew up on military surplus rigs) mostly think of a ‘tight’ boat as inflated to around 1.75 psi. You can’t reach that pressure via the human diaphragm - which is why those dramatic movies where the hero rests on the bottom of the river or the pool and breathes through a reed are drivel; you can’t expand the chest against more than about 1psi, so that’s about all you can blow into a raft. Thus it was a sodden sort of boat I took through Westwater that New Year’s weekend - sun-pumping the next morning, when the temperature got up to the high 20s, didn’t provide much tautness. My boat conformed to the water and clinked through the little bergs and cakes, the oars gleaming with a bright sheath of ice. Now it happened that a great sow had taken up residence at the Cisco take-out that winter. Where she came from, whose (other than hers) she was, what her fate, I never found out. It was just one of those oddities a boatman encounters and shrugs about. Like running into a beautiful, viridescent parrot in Echo Park - you can make some conjectures as to its past, but no real knowledge is possible, and there’s no future for it save as peregrine bait. The middle of the high cold desert, no humans in 10 or 15 miles, no real farms for 50 or 60 miles, nothing but tamarisk and cheatgrass to eat, simply no way an enormous pig could have colonized the bright shales of the Morrison, beside the jade-green slushy Colorado. But there she was, a huge sow on the boatramp I wanted to use, taking up nearly as much room as if she’d been a kayaker. I asked her to move and she affably waddled over to a sunny patch of bentonite and flopped down. We got the boat up the ramp and I opened the valves. Instead of the usual, high-tension pop-and-whistle, it was more of a saggy sighing sound, a gently extended exhalation: Paaaaaaaaah. Even in the cold air the stench was ghastly. 3-day-old rotten, lung-aged 151-proof rum with an impertinently fruity bouquet of sulfury stomach-acid. It drove us away immediately. Not so the sow. She lumbered to her feet, trotted over to my plump gray raft, and began to snuffle at it. Republican, here: “Hey. You! You leave that alone! That’s MY raft! That’s OUR halitosis. It’s not yours! You quit licking that boat! Right now! I mean it!” She did not quit licking the boat, nor yet stop nuzzling its valves. She began to make unmistakable advances to the boat. MY boat. She was getting ready to ... present ... to My Boat. She was starting to rub her parts on My Boat. Social conservative, here: “Why, you sluttish creature! You disgusting slattern. Trollop! Boule de suif! You ... you abandoned bitch! That’s a virtuous boat and you can just forget about satisfying your unnatural lust with it.” I made as if to run her off, but she was a Venus of Willendorf of a sow, WAY bigger than I am. She did not leave and she did not give up her unholy intention. Inflamed by its fascinating odor, she made ready to rape My Boat. It was not to be. What saved My Boat from miscegenation was what often saves middle-aged males from ill-advised choices, more often than they generally admit: complete, abject detumescence. ★★★★ Liberal, here: I send you stories, good ones too, and just because they contain some reference to George Bush, always apt refer- ences too, you tell me that it just ruins it for you. So now, for no apparent literary benefit, you have to throw in that gratuitous refer- ence to kayakers and sully what is otherwise a fine and entertaining piece of writing. It’s just not fair, but it’s not your fault—I think you are hurting, and just striking out. Earl Perry and Ben Harding © 2007 y page thirty four THE Waiting List

The Gee Wiz Dept. Where Does That Water Come From? elcome to a new section of the Waiting List where you can find some interesting facts, theories, hypotheses, Wrumors, and ruminations about the natural history of Grand Canyon. I’ve worked in the region long enough to learn a few things that I’ll share here, along with new info I come across. To save space, references for information given here are not included, but are always available on request. After all, this isn’t a scientific journal, just a fun place to pick up a few tidbits for your next Arizona, where groundwater flows from one basin to another on trip. its way toward the Lower Colorado River corridor. But the de- Someone working for the Hualapai Tribe asked me the posits in those basins are really considered separate aquifers. My other day, “what is the biggest aquifer in Arizona?” One might answer is the Redwall-Muav carbonate rock sequence in north- say it’s the interconnected alluvial sediments that fill the valleys ern Arizona. This rock sequence is comprised chiefly of the Red- of the Basin and Range Province of southern and western wall Limestone, Temple Butte Limestone, Martin Formation, and Muav Limestone, and is called the “R-aquifer” or “Redwall-Muav aquifer” for short. The R-aquifer is a continuous system that covers most of northern Arizona, including the large Black Mesa hydrologic basin of northeast Arizona, as well as the Co- conino, San Francisco, and Kaibab Plateaus. This regional aquifer is the source for virtually all large peren- nial springs that issue in the Grand Canyon along the Colorado River and the lower part of the Little Col- orado River (LCR), and is the prin- cipal source of water for the upper Verde River. Grand Canyon springs fed by the R-aquifer include Vaseys, Nankoweap, Blue Springs (on the LCR), Roaring Springs, Hermit, Thunder River, Tapeats, Deer Creek, Kanab, Shinumo, Matkatamiba, Royal Arches, Havasu, and many more. Springs that issue above the R-aquifer in the canyon drain “perched” aquifers, such as the Coconino Sandstone, that are discontinuous, have limited extent, and rely chiefly on seasonal recharge from near-rim precipita- tion. Small springs also issue from rock units below the R-aquifer, such as the Bright Angel Shale, Tapeats Sandstone, and inner gorge Precam- brian rocks, but these rocks have Winter 2006 page thirty five

smaller permeability and the springs often have poor water quality (e.g., Pumpkin Spring). The Tapeats is more important as an aquifer in the far western Grand Canyon area and west of the Grand Wash Cliffs. The Coconino Sandstone (or C-aquifer) is the main aquifer that supplies Flagstaff wells, but is almost completely drained to lower units on the Coconino and Kaibab Plateaus. Groundwater movement and storage in the R-aquifer occurs via a vast network of solution-en- hanced fractures and fault zones. Because the rocks are carbonates (limestones, dolomites, etc.), groundwater enlarges fracture openings by slowly dissolving the carbonate minerals in the fracture walls. Where conditions are favorable for long periods, solution enhancement can result in caverns. Most of the R-aquifer springs mentioned above occur along large fault zones that intersect the canyon and provide permeable conduits for groundwater flow. One of the largest faults zones in Introducing the “Wiz” Arizona is the Mesa Butte Fault, which drains groundwater from all aquifer units it cuts and con- Bill Victor veys it north to the Blue Springs along the LCR and south to large springs that feed the Verde River, such as those along Sycamore Canyon and vicinity. On the south side, the rock layers generally dip away from the canyon. Therefore, groundwater moving along these layers flows away from the canyon and R-aquifer springs on the south are generally smaller and more reliant on recharge from seasonal near-rim precipitation than springs on the north. The big exception is the Havasu Spring system (about 29,000 gallons per minute), which alone accounts for more than 98 percent of the known discharge into Grand Canyon from the Coconino Plateau. The Havasu Spring system is on a large solution-enhanced fracture system along Cataract Canyon and the Havasu Downwarp structural zone, which drain groundwater from the Coconino Plateau. Water quality in the R-aquifer changes across the Grand Canyon and is generally related to the residence time of groundwater in the aquifer system; the longer groundwater is in contact with the rocks, the more dissolved solids it contains. On the Coconino Plateau, R-aquifer groundwater from wells nearer recharge areas, such as at Tusayan and Williams, has less dissolved solids than groundwater at the main discharge area of Havasu Springs. East of the Coconino Plateau, evaporite deposits (gypsum and other playa-related salt residues from evaporation in ancient arid depositional environments) occur in the Paleozoic rocks east of the Co- conino Plateau and impart a much higher salt content to groundwater discharging at Blue Springs (e.g., the Sipapu and other salty springs along the LCR). More on springs and other natural features of Grand Canyon right here in your future issues of the Waiting List. Thanks for visiting this column, see you downriver. Bill Victor y

THE Waiting List, a publication of the Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association, 809 W. Riordan Rd., Suite 100 #431. Flagstaff, AZ 86001. [email protected] The Board of the GCPBA: David Yeamans, President - New Mexico / Rich Phillips, Vice-President, Illinois / Wally Rist - Missouri / Marty Wilson - Pacific Northwest Coordinator - Oregon / Larry Lorusso, Our Photographer - Somewhere Out There Karen Chambless - Grants Coordinator - New Mexico / David Levine, Treasurer, Membership Coordinator - Colorado / Ken Kyler, Maryland, “the DC Connection”-Webguru / Marshall Nichols, Secretary - Colorado / Richard Martin, GCPBA co-founder, Editor Waiting List - Arizona Roger Christenson - Utah / Earl Perry - Planner, Colorado / Jim Kirschvink - Special thanks to: Bob Harris, Newswire Coordinator, gcpba@yahoo groups manager, RJ Stephenson,Waiting List Assistant Editor and David Levine, Waiting List Advertising Manager We welcome and encourage editorial contributions, stories, photos, river news, drawings, cartoons, letters, whatever, and for that we will pay nothing .. but ... we offer our eternal gratitude (we wish we could pay!). Editorial contributions and letters are expressions of the author’s opinion, which may or may not reflect the opinion of the GCPBA. Made on a speedy, cool, G5 Mac, work day music provided by gulchradio.com Send editorial contributions to: [email protected] or: [email protected] or Editor, GCPBA, Box 43, Jerome, AZ 86331 GCPBA is an Arizona 501c3 Corporation. Contributions are tax deductible so give us all your money ... now! Hey! Do it! For advertising information, write: [email protected] All contents ©2007, Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association unless otherwise noted. page thirty six THE Waiting List Resource Protection Ideas From Our e-List Members

CPBA has always been concerned with minimizing the impacts of boaters on the Grand Canyon while allow- Ging for fair opportunities for access. To get more ideas on how to make that happen we went to our [email protected] list and started threads on resource protection techniques, winter warmth, and the propane campfire. Here’s a collection of ideas I’d like to share (complete with conspiracy theories and jabs at the permit system we seem to love). Resource Protection

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, IN THAT ORDER, are the three Rs of waste minimization thinking. Use less, reuse the old materi- als when possible, and recycle them when their utility is spent. Substitution is another great way to conserve. Substitute fossil fuel for firewood. On a river trip I like at least a few no-cook meals (reduces the use of fuel in the Canyon). I sleep on my boat sometimes to reduce the impact to beaches. I try to reuse footprints by stepping in the prints that are already there. Reduce your own footprints by walking on “durable surfaces” like rocks, logs, and dry streambeds.

My own concept of group winter campfires is to have two or three during a 30 day jaunt, not one every night. Fires morning and evening are possible in places like Alaska, but not much in the lower 48, at least in Parks. I suspect the available drift wood in GC will dry up shortly. the water went into the river, with a raft it is tougher. [A few My [additional] things are very elementary. suggestions were made on how to shower. My favorite? With a 1. Take cloth kitchen towels I take 6 for a GC trip so people are friend!] not always grabbing the paper towels. Make the paper towels a little harder to get to. This also might give you enough extra So is it PC to throw driftwood above high water mark space to take that propane fire ring. when you see it? I was down Diamond after Separation flashed and there were Lincoln Logs floating every- I [whomever it was] just re-certified my food handlers permit. where. The lake the next week was scattered all the way to They require sanitary paper towels at both hand wash sites Temple Bar it seemed. We were having lumberjack log rolling (kitchen and groover). They also require that if you touch any- contest on the sweetest Juniper poles. thing (that includes a cloth hand towel )while in the kitchen you should rewash your hands. This is according to the Co- Should we start a campaign? “Throw a piece of drift- conino County Department of Health. For what it is worth. wood above high water mark for the lucky winter hardcores” Is there a EPA standard of ‘leave a little trace’ for survivors? I suggest cutting paper towel rolls in half with a bread knife and I would guess it is not PC to do anything with the drift putting each in a gallon zip lock bag. Keeps them dry and you wood except use it when appropriate. Last summer I saw the use fewer towels. Do this in your pre pack as it makes a little bit Park boat folks dismantle piles of gathered wood and spread it of a mess. out. They spread some of it to below high water mark.

2. Wash out the Ziploc bags and reuse them. Dr. Why (don’t I like sticks jabbing my Thermarest?)

3. Pre chop and pre cook as much as possible to cut own on fuel How about a John Wesley Powell commemorative trip usage and lessen the chance of micro trash from peelings etc. where you eat nothing but beans, biscuits, and bacon? ...or whatever he ate. Do you suppose he had a bottle of whiskey 4. Use a sand stake so you do not damage trees and shrubs - along? perhaps I should make an exception for tammies!5. Shower water is grey water and should not go into the ground. Put it in I was just sitting here checking email reading about the the river. This one is tough I am still trying to perfect my tech- cooking spam on an open fire when Monty pythons “I don’t nique with this. With my cat I could shower on the boat and all like spam” skit came on TV. It was never funnier. Next trip I Winter 2006 page thirty seven am going to have “spam, spam, spam, eggs and spam” for at least one meal GCPBA is buying supplies for free use for its members that we hope will become the core of a firewood conservation Do you think you could cook spam on a propane fire? I effort. wonder how long it would take. Maybe you could stamp the Resource damage includes lost animal habitat from raid- beginning time and end time on it, then do some simple math ing brush piles, illegal harvesting of standing wood, destruction to determine how many chances you have in the lottery. of pre-dam historic high water driftwood piles, increased bank erosion, sharp fragments of broken wood implanted in other- Ask your outfitter to provide 100% organic meals. [Or- wise friendly beaches, unsightly and unnatural accumulations ganic Spam – yummy!] of unused wood at campsites. We asked for your opinions on what to buy and got some Winter Warmth useful responses. As we expect, everybody has their own best ideas and no one solution works for everybody and nobody will Use sunnier camps in winter. Named camps which have get it right on the first try. That’s why we consider this to be a winter sun are pretty well known. prototyping effort. We expect this system eventually to gain wide acceptance among resource sensitive individuals just as the Check out Boatman’s Almanac pamphlet no pictures.doc Boat- groover has. It is not intended to completely replace natural mans Almanac - sun rise and set at camps in the files section of wood campfires but it should make sure we don’t degrade the the gcpba yahoo group site. Use it as a guide; not every time is Canyon for those that come after us tomorrow. Right now it very good. Remember some days you are going to get no direct looks like the Woodie consists of: sun. • artificial, propane fired campfire with ceramic logs What a resource. Thank you GCPBA. • several 20 lb propane tanks – [“composite” tanks are l ighter than steel] and several mini-tanks several Water can be low in the winter and so a lot more sand may “Mr. Heaters” for 20-lb hookup and optional mini- appear. There are several places not named that are good sunny tank hookup camps, and comparing notes on that might be a good direction, • fire blanket for ash overflow though the Park may not like it since those “uncamped” areas • hot water bottles, one for each sleeping bag may be places they don’t want us. This could be one of those un- • windshield sun shades with reflective surface (clamp intended consequences of a new permit system…...Que sera these to your chair back as you sit around the sera. camp fire. A ring of chairs with these acts to block the breeze and reflect any otherwise fugitive calories One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is bringing wood wands/stakes for holding wet items above the with you. I have done this a few times and you can get quite a camp fire lot of wood in an empty groover box. I use scrap framing lumber • (optional) CO detector — we discourage the use of and find I can get two to three nice fires from one box. It’s nice propane appliances in confined spaces.(optional) to have a little wood if you find yourself at a camp with little battery powered fan wood and didn’t plan ahead. It could also cut down on propane needed for artificial fires. A combination of both would seem Propane Campfire ideal.

Carrying pre-cut wood in with you in a dedicated bag or GCPBA has shopped for several propane campfires and box sounds great. I’ll add it to the proposed “casette” of resource we now own a good one. It’s the EZ Campfire. Read our conservation winter comfort tools. I know some people (myself thoughts about it in this issue of the Waiting List and buy it at included) find magic in an actual wood fire from time to time. our store on www.gcpba.org Boy, do I hate candles as a substitute. One of the online sources Make up your own name for this, but woodie is like I’m looking at has campfire in a can that might help in some groover. It’s a capability backed up by equipment. The woodie way. It looks like it forms the “fire ring” portion of a cozy camp- is a fossil fuel augmented safety and resource protection system fire while mostly eliminating trash. Jury’s out on that one. for keeping you warm in winter without raiding historic or other fuel wood resources. The woodie is like the groover. You For those small one-person trips, I have settled into a few have one on the trip because you should. It consists of a large synthetic logs to heat up rocks for a sweat lodge on the day off. rocket box full of reflective material, heaters, fire blankets, Other than that I don’t fiddle with it. Most will be wearing lanterns, and fans. Other bags and boxes contain firewood footwear in the winter so sharp sticks hidden in the sand near you’ve brought with you. GCPBA is working with river outfit- the group area won’t be much of a problem until summer, and I ting organizations such as PRO, Moenkopi Riverworks, would be cussing about it then. Canyon REO, and Cocina del Rio to get the best system page thirty eight THE Waiting List together. It might take a few years but we plan to be here for a while. On a winter trip you have to carry more stuff. (Uhhhh, too bad it’s a non-motor season?????? Could be a reason that motors help conserve the resource — you don’t have to rape the driftwood and high water mark vegetation while simultaneously con- tributing to air pollution [which, by the way, the NPS evaluated in their FEIS]).

Dr. Why (do ashes harmfully increase pH of the river?) Dr. Why (am I always the one to carry the sharp sticks on my boat?)

For the early March trip, we’ll plan on bringing this river kind of Woodie

You mention synthetic logs to heat up rocks for a sweat. I got one called a fire dancer. It had a sticker on it for 180. I talked the guy down to 65. Then I got the log for 20, totaling 85. The log helps to radiate the heat instead of going straight up. I do not know what the BTU rating is but the box states 1 pound per hr. I never turn it up that high and I take a 10 lbs propane bottle just for the fire. That way I don’t have to worry about a mistake using all the propane. If the 10 lbs bottle is out then we have no fire. If a mistake is made and someone leaves the stove on and uses all the propane then I have a backup 10 lbs bottle to finish the trip.

For GCPBA, Dave Yeamans, December, 2006 An Alternative To The Propane Campfire For Winter Camping

Dear Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association Webmaster: n a recent e-mail, you suggested using a propane campfire as an alternative to wood on cold-weather Grand ICanyon trips. I'm writing to suggest a more fuel-efficient system which I use for winter camping in comfort: a "Mr. Heater Portable Buddy" propane heater in a four-season tent. This system could also be used on winter Grand Canyon trips. I do a lot of backcountry skiing and ski mountaineering. When I was younger I did a fair amount of winter camping, but as I grew older I gave it up for many years. It was too uncomfortable. Cooking outside when it's snowing, spending hours lying in a sleeping bag during those long dark winter evenings, and waking up in the morning to a cold tent were not my idea of fun. But I recently developed a "winter camping" system which is so comfortable that we camp out for weekend after weekend during the winter.

The system consists of a Cabellas "Alaskan Guide" eight- gear quite handily. person four-season dome tent, with a "Mr. Heater Portable This setup is almost as comfortable as a cabin. It's like a Buddy" propane heater, a small propane lantern, and a propane portable yurt. You can easily regulate the temperature in the cook stove, all fueled by a bulk propane tank. I keep the tank tent by turning the heater up and down. In the morning you outside the tent, and run a hose into a tower which splits the can just reach out of your sleeping bag, turn on the heater, and propane three ways - to the lantern, which is screwed on top of wait a couple minutes for the tent to warm up. The lantern the tower, and to hoses which run to the heater and the stove. I provides all the light you need in the tent, and in cold weather bolt the tower to a piece of masonite, which also serves as a the lantern and the cook stove help keep the tent warm. A table. To keep the heater and the stove from melting the snow pretty good crowd can hang out in the tent and party in the underneath the masonite, I set the masonite on a piece of closed evening, and if there isn't enough room for everybody to sleep cell foam. The tent is 6'7" tall and over 12' across, so you can in the big tent, the extra people can set up a small tent or so stand up and walk around in it. A picture of the setup is at- outside the big tent just for sleeping in and storing gear. tached to this e-mail ("Art hanging out in the tent"). This setup You definitely want to use a four season tent rather than a is too big to backpack. We haul our gear in with snowmobiles, three season tent in cold weather. Heat quickly flows out as shown in the picture which is attached to this e-mail ("What through all the mosquito netting in a three season tent, but a it takes to tote in all that gear"). A raft could of course carry the four season tent stays surprisingly warm, even without a heater, Winter 2006 page thirty nine and will protect you from blowing snow or sand. dents involves tents blowing away. On one of my Grand Carbon monoxide is always a concern when cooking or Canyon trips, while we were camped at the Upset Hotel (Mile heating in a tent. The "Mr. Heater" propane heaters are adver- 150.5), a fierce storm hit a group camped at the ledge camp at tised as being safe for use in cabins, trailers, tents, ice fishing Mile 151.5 and blew two tents full of gear into the river. On a shelters, and similar enclosures, but I'm always careful to venti- Middle Fork of the Flathead trip in Montana, some friends late my tent. The "Alaskan Guide" tents and many other four were hit by a microburst which sent a Goretex single-wall season tents have panels which can be zipped open and shut to mountaineering tent rolling a long distance down a gravel bar control ventilation. I leave a door or a window open for a couple with a woman and a 50 pound rock inside it. The tent suffered of inches near the floor, and I open the top of one of the ceiling dozens of punctures from abraison on the rocks, which the panels a couple of inches. This creates a small but steady flow of manufacturer (Marmot) obligingly repaired. If you camp in a fresh air through the tent. big tent, you better attach it firmly to the ground, or you could When using a cook stove, I increase the ventilation. end up doing a reinactment of the tornado scene from the Wiz- This system doesn't use very much propane. On a typical ard of Oz. In the winter, I bury sticks in the snow as deadmen. overnight trip, I use less than $2.00 of propane On the Grand Canyon, I tie the guy lines to a for heating, cooking, and light. If you're stick a couple feet long, lay the stick on the sand, thinking of using this kind of system on a win- pile plenty of big rocks on the stick, and then ter Grand Canyon trip, I suggest that you kick sand between and on top of the rocks. At work the kinks out of it, and find out how many Grand Canyon camp sites, you could much fuel you use, by doing some snow pound lenths of angle iron into the sand as mon- camping. ster stakes. One of the pleasures of going on a Grand If wood is available, another option for Canyon trip is cooking, eating, socializing, cold weather camping is a breakdown wood looking at the river and the rest of the scenery, stove. Attached to this e-mail is a picture of a gazing at the stars, and so on while hanging lightweight teepee which a friend of mine owns out in camp. During most times of the year, it ("Brushy Fork II - Hanging out at camp"). My may seem antithetical to the Grand Canyon dome tent is behind the teepee. The teepee has a experience to climb into a windowless tent, zip single center pole. The stove breaks down to a up the doors, and turn on a heater. However, package about 1" x 12" x 20", and the stovepipe on a winter trip with long, dark, cold, and rolls up into something about the size of part of a rainy or snowy nights, it could seem like a roll of paper towels. My friend has brought the pretty good idea. tipi and stove on an early-season self-contained One of the problems of camping on ei- kayak trip on the Middle Fork of the Salmon. ther snow or sand inside a large tent is that if This is also a comfortable winter camping setup, you use conventional tables and chairs, their Carbon but you need to cut and split wood down pretty legs will try to punch through the nylon floor small to feed it into the stove, which may require of the tent into the soft underlying snow or monoxide is both a hand or chain saw and an ax or splitting sand. Rather than using a raised table for always a maul, and you have the hassles of operating a cooking, I use a sheet of masonite sitting on a concern when wood stove and stacking a wood supply in the piece of closed cell foam from a sleeping pad. teepee. I like the cleanliness, lack of hassle, and You could also set a table top on a couple of cooking or turn-the-knob temperature control provided by plastic storage bins. And rather than using heating in a tent my propane heater. chairs, I bring an 18" high twin size air mat- ... I'm always So if you're preparing for a winter Grand tress. Two or three people can sit on this mat- Canyon trip, try doing some winter camping tress like a bench, and others can sit on the careful to with a propane heater. You might decide it offers floor and lean their backs against it. And ventilate my a good way to have a comfortable and conven- somebody can sleep on the mattress at night. tent. ient winter trip on the Grand Canyon.y A common category of camping acci- Peter Dayton page forty THE Waiting List

GCPBA Boat Gear Reviews Winter Warm Without Wood

Turn Back the Hands of Time ll this talk of fires makes me think of a couple of things: one, that back in the day, Nevills and everyone else Aregularly set fires in the Canyon, using the excuse that the BuRec had asked them to do so to keep driftwood out of the intakes at Hoover Dam. Here’s what I wrote in an endnote in HIGH, WIDE, AND HANDSOME, the edited Nevills journals: “What had been a practical necessity in 1938 became an institution–the Driftwood Burn- ers Club—with this trip [1940 Grand Canyon]. Membership was gained by lighting one of the many of piles of driftwood along the river with a single match. Some of these were half a mile long and had been there for cen- turies, so they produced spectacular conflagrations that burned for days. The excuse was given that the Bureau of Reclamation had asked that river runners burn the driftwood so that it wouldn’t end up in the turbines in Lake Mead, but one can’t help but suspect there was a little adolescent pyromania involved as well; very few of the women on Nevills Expeditions’ trips joined the D.W.B.” These fires were gigantic and left big burn scars on the Meanwhile I looked at a propane and ceramic log camp- canyon walls; he also did it in Cataract and other places. Nevills fire on the web. It weighs close to 200 pounds. I think I’ll look loved fires, he would also drag a pile of wood onto a cliff above a for a lighter version to test. campsite in Glen Canyon, then slip off after dinner, climb the I’m serious about this, people. With the proposed num- cliff, fire the wood pile, and then push it off the cliff for a fire- ber of trips in the winter we have to change our way of doing fall, while he stood on the cliff and shouted out his story about business in the outdoors. We get to be the grownups, here. Yogi the River God. On a 1948 trip in the Grand, they torced a There (in my narrow and unscientific view) is not enough big driftwood pile that had two cans of gas stashed in it, for one wood to last. The Canyon needs it more than we do. So let’s of Marston’s upruns, causing a truly memorable fire that Jim use propane. Rigg barely escaped from when it went up; he did lose his eye- What is the best techno-geek solution? Who is using al- brows and chest hair. His other favorite fun pastime for his trips ternatives now? I’d like to see some field testing and a real, was to search the mines around Tanner for crates of old dyna- dedicated program to develop and use (Heaven forbid that we mite, then haul it off away from camp and shoot at it with a pis- actually end up requiring) non-firewood heat. We developed tol until it exploded. That was for the “safety” of the trip too. groovers. Anybody want to go back to the old way? The other thing this reminds me of is a 1989 private trip I Dave Yeamans took in the Grand; it was an early spring trip and quite cold, so we took advantage of the fire rule and made driftwood fires. We would get them going by using a raft pump to add air, and had Time For A Different Way no problems melting aluminum as we burned the trash, which of course we were careful to carry out. The only thing that EZ Campfire would not burn was a dutch oven cobbler one of the cook crews made, that they covered with a big slab of cheddar cheese. It was hen we first started to look for a propane camp- inedible and went straight into the trash; we named it The Great Wfire in response to the Grand Canyon National Cheese Plug, and it lived in the trash the whole trip. Even when Park Service’s concern about depleting the firewood re- we used the pump to heat the fire enough to melt cans, it was serves along the Colorado River In Grand Canyon Na- unfazed. I always imagine it living still in the landfill in tional Park, I was surprised at the daunting selection Seligman, Arizona. Roy Webb available, every shape, size and configuration known to man, coming from distant places such as Canada and Yeah, I was a pyro, too, in Cataract in ‘64. Mission — Australia. keep the reservoir from filling up with wood. Boy, was that Figuring there was going to be a bit of research to be wrong on every level you can imagine. Leave the wood. Burn done, I set about my task. First I established criteria in which to propane. search by, first thing was it had to be simple, with as few parts Winter 2006 page forty one as possible, secondly it had to be easy to use, and thirdly be complete lack of noise, the unit made little more than a soft miserly in it’s consumption of fuel while providing a decent hiss at the moderate setting. As the unit sets up on it’s case amount of heat. Some that were available had glowing embers, there is a 3 inch area for air to flow under it, there is no possi- ceramic fire logs, and most of these units required assembly in bility of scorching the earth beneath it. I could hold my hand varying degrees. The prices and shipping costs were as daunting under the unit with no chance of getting burned for an indefi- as the units, not to mention that there were more than a few nite amount of time. It comes with a very high quality brass companies that couldn’t be bothered to answer my questions. quick connect which allows the hose and regulator to be stored I decided to look further and refine my search. After a inside the unit after it cools down for a nice compact and easily while, one unit kept standing out as it met all stored unit. I believe you could easily the criteria easily, and that was the EZ store 2 of these inside a standard Campfire unit. The company owner an- rocket box with room to spare for swered all my questions satisfactorily and it lighters and such. I mention 2 as was decided that this would be the first unit while testing it was discovered that if that would be tested in real life conditions by more than 6 or 8 people were around yours truly. it, it put you a little far from the heat, Skeptical from the start, I thought from so for larger groups in winter condi- what information I had that this must be tions, to actually feel the heat at a de- flimsy, and consume a great deal of fuel. Boy, cent level, you would want to carry 2 was I wrong. I first tested the unit in my and use a “Y” adaptor for the hoses to boathouse, well not inside, but on the the propane bottle. ground outside the boathouse. I very easily The unit measures 12”X14”X3” hooked it to a 20 pound composite propane and provides not only heat, but light tank, which allowed me to visually see the re- as well, more than a regular campfire maining fuel level as the unit burned. I lit the as the flames are constant, negating unit at a low setting, and was instantly sur- the need to carry an additional prised at the amount of heat it put off at such lantern. It’s rated at 95,000 BTU, a low setting. I gradually increased the setting which is double that of a 4 burner on the regulator, which was quite linear, and stove at full blast, and then some. It has a large knob that was easily operated with gloved hands, lists at just under $200.00 plus the cost of shipping, which in until it was at full blast. our case was $20.00. I know that sounds a Instantly I noticed that there wasn’t much difference in little on the expensive side, but compared to many of the other flame height OR heat distribution between a moderate setting units available which can cost up to $400.00, I thought it and high. I backed it down to a moderate setting and settled in rather reasonable, especially considering we boaters routinely at what I thought was a good distance. Well, I found myself spend that much on a regulation firepan. I would recommend moving back after my legs were getting quite warm until I was using 25 hours to a 20# propane bottle for an initial guideline about 5 feet from the unit. The flames were approximately 2.5 as your settings may be higher than what I tested the unit at. feet high, and quite visually appealing as well as giving off a great I like the idea that it sets up in under a minute, and goes deal of light. back together just as fast, there is zero clean up, no ashes to deal I thought to myself, this isn’t half bad; people could warm with at all. It’s the ideal thing to have in your boat in the event up to this idea rapidly (pun intended), but what about the fuel you have someone who has just had a long cold swim, just consumption? To make a long story short, in testing in my boat- whip it out and the swimmer can get warmed up fast. All and house, and at the Westwater Ranger Station, I burned the unit all, I’m quite pleased with the EZ campfire, and would not hes- for about 29 hours, and still had an inch of propane in the bot- itate to recommend it to anyone that’s interested in a quick and tom of the cylinder. Yes, you can turn it up higher and burn clean alternative to a wood fire. more fuel, but as I said before, the medium level that I had set it at for testing produced plenty of heat. I was also surprised by the Marshall Nichols y page forty two THE Waiting List

Private Trip Journals MAYHEM ON THE MIDDLE FORK

By Bill Victor Edits and Contributions by Alvin Brown, Mike Holstrom, and Jim Rolf

Put-in: Cape Horn Ck (Marsh Ck) May 26, 2003 Take-out: Carey Ck on Main Salmon June 3, 2003

his story is about a river trip that deeply affected the lives of its participants and other parties on the river at Tthat time. I was going to offer it to the Waiting List in 2003, but I felt more time needed to pass. It describes conditions and calculated risks common to skilled boaters that routinely run the Middle Fork and much more challenging rivers at flood flow. I found myself dwelling on this trip long after it was over and felt the need to get it down on paper for my friends and myself to whom it was unique. There were two tragic deaths that occurred and I apologize to any readers who are family or friends of the deceased for raising what can only be very painful memories. However, those events are important parts of the story and serve to educate future boaters of the potential hazards present. Many feel that the rivers of central Idaho’s Frank Church minutes to reach shore or another boat in the swift-moving River-of-No-Return Wilderness, particularly the Middle Fork of water. There are plenty of other hazards that require boaters to the Salmon, rank along side the Grand Canyon and Alaska as have helmets and life jackets, as well as good self-rescue tech- the best in the West for multiple-day wilderness river trips. My niques, rescue equipment, and the experience to use them. At invitation for this trip came in October 2002 from my Califor- flood flows, there are few eddies to stop in or to set up rescues nia boating friend, Mike Holstrom. It would be my third early from, and it is often difficult to land a boat among the bushes season Middle Fork trip with Mike and this year we planned to and trees along the flooded banks of the river at peak flow. continue on down the Main Salmon after the confluence. Fewer Knowing these facts, our group prepared accordingly. people try for early season permits because the weather can be Idaho had had less than average snow pack accumulation cold and the hypothermia risk to swimmers is high in the icy until late spring storms raised it to or higher than average. Cold river. In addition, the normal launch site at Boundary Creek is temperatures persisted through most of May, but a heat wave often snowed in and inaccessible, and there is the risk of logjams hit the northwest over our Memorial Day weekend launch and and peak river flows from snowmelt runoff, especially in May. continued through the following week. Projections of peak flow But for many skilled boaters, the early season means little com- stage generally ranged from 6 to 7 feet (about 8,000 to 10,000 petition for campsites and an opportunity to run some great cubic feet per second [cfs]) at the Middle Fork Lodge stream- whitewater through the pristine wilderness. gage, although it was acknowledged that the snow was on the This year was very special for me because there was room verge of melting and warm weather could push the peak flow on the trip for my two daughters, Erin (22) and Katie (19). My higher. A compounding concern was that the Middle Fork friend of 30 years, Alvin Brown, would be bringing his daughter, basin had also had large forest fires and four consecutive years Ashley (21), and another friend, Jim Rolf, would bring his son, of drought. A rapid snowmelt now could bring a large amount Hamilton (20). The seven of us would be coming from Arizona. of downed timber into the river, causing hazards for boaters. Other trip members included Bob Marley from New Mexico, The Middle Fork Ranger District reported that the road Brian Sweeney from Colorado, and Mike Holstrom (trip leader), to the Boundary Creek launch site would be snowed-in until Mike Luksic, Jim Pisula, and Lucy Clem from California. The about June 10. Therefore, we planned to launch at the headwa- 13 of us would be rowing three self-bailing rafts and four ters near the confluence of Cape Horn and Marsh Creeks, catarafts. about 17 miles upstream from Dagger Falls. Several of us had run this upper section together 3 years prior and knew it meant PRE-TRIP PREPARATIONS we would run a challenging narrow swift creek and Dagger Trip preparations included bringing dry suits, not just wet Falls, a Class V rapid. As long as there was enough flow, we suits. The near freezing river will put a swimmer in the grip of considered Marsh Creek a great run. The whole trip would hypothermia in a few minutes. The dry suits and thick thermal cover 117 miles to the Cache Bar takeout, and a total of 203 layers worn underneath give the swimmer a few more critical miles to the Carey Creek takeout. Winter 2006 page forty three

Idaho boaters are diligent in sharing information about pine forest, and occasional undercut snow banks. We rarely peak runoff conditions. Therefore, we had the advantage of could see, much less communicate with, other boats because frequent trip reports on the Idaho Whitewater list server from the river was noisy and swift and the sections between bends in boaters that were running the river during the previous 2 weeks, the river were short. I often rounded a bend only to see the raft as well as firsthand reports from observation flights, so we knew ahead of me disappear around the next bend, even though we the location of major obstacles that were sighted. However, new had agreed to always keep the raft behind in sight or slow down obstacles can occur hourly that time of season and every boater (hah!). The flow seemed to increase constantly as we passed must be ready to respond to new conditions. Although our boat- many unnamed tributaries that were swelling to flood stage men had many years of experience on various types of rivers, with snowmelt. As veteran Idaho boater Vince Thompson, who none but our trip leader had been on the Middle Fork at a launched on Marsh Creek the day before us, later wrote on his higher stage than about 5.3 feet (about 5,500 cfs). Idaho Whitewater list server, “There are very few eddies on We all converged from different directions on Stanley, Marsh Creek at this level and it was a big Class IV read and Idaho, on the afternoon of May 25 and began to transfer food to run, with some Class V thrown in. You could easily argue the coolers, fill water jugs, and partially rig some boats that would entire run was Class V given the remoteness.” The Middle Fork be taken inflated to the launch site. A trip meeting held that is born at the confluence of Marsh Creek and Bear Valley night served to provide additional information on river condi- Creek, about 8 river miles from our launch site. tions, vehicle shuttle arrangements, safety concerns, running order for the boats, and camps. I had a computer connected to the Internet to obtain real-time flow data and, at that time, the flow was about 6.5 feet (about 9,000 cfs) at the Middle Fork Lodge gage. DAY 1, MAY 26

After an early breakfast in Stan- ley, we drove westward to the launch site along Highway 20. A last check of the river flows showed the Middle Fork at 6.8 feet (about 9,500 cfs) and the Main Salmon at White Bird at 61,000 cfs and rising. The weather was warm and we were stripped loading our boats in the snow and mud. A low pack bridge crosses Marsh Creek about 3 miles As we rigged our boats, a US Forest Service ranger ap- below the launch; there was just enough clearance below this proached us with the picture of a man and asked us to be on the bridge to float all the boats under. We knew to expect a fallen lookout for Von Jones, who had been lost from a trip the previ- log that formed a river-wide obstacle around a blind corner ous day. Authorities were mounting a search and rescue effort. about 5 to 6 miles below our launch. The tilt of the log allowed Jones had a tragic accident swimming the swift icy waters of rafts barely enough clearance to run under it near the right Marsh Creek and had not been seen since he disappeared into a bank, but rising water was decreasing the clearance. We hole. This news raised the stakes and the level of intensity for planned to scout the log from river right, stopping across from our group. Jim P. and Lucy decided to follow their best instincts, an upstream island. preferring to fly in to meet us at the Indian Creek airstrip and Von Jones Drowning: Approaching this landing we saw skipping Marsh Creek and the upper 41 miles of our trip. Jim P. two groups. One group was camped and had lost Von Jones, a owned the raft that Mike Luksic was going to row. 27-year-old man from Glendale, AZ, and Burley, ID, to the river on the previous day, May 25, only 3 miles into their trip. MARSH CREEK: We launched at 12:30 P.M. Flow on This group had launched with seven men in four boats. We Cape Horn and Marsh Creeks was swift and high. Our first ob- later learned that Jones’ family was among the despondent stacle was a low bridge about 100 yards downstream from the group and the previous day had watched helplessly as Jones dis- launch site. We lined some higher profile rafts and rowed the appeared into a hole in the river. Grief was written all over their others under the bridge. At this point, my memory of Marsh faces and they were later evacuated by snowmobiles. Jones’ Creek is a blur of fast moves around logjams, islands, rocks, and tragic tale was reported on July 13, 2003, in the Arizona holes in a narrow twisting path through steep canyons, thick Republic, Phoenix, AZ. page forty four THE Waiting List

According to the newspaper report, Jones’ boat had hit the into the water. Within seconds, yet another party came through bank of an island, and he fell out. His two passengers saw that the mess with two women in the water. “Within minutes, we’d he had made it to the riverbank and was standing in knee-deep gone from having a pleasant breakfast to just a disastrous situa- water as they floated downstream. The water wasn’t too choppy tion,” one of the kayakers said in the newspaper article. Monti- as he re-entered the river and started swimming after the boat. eth was rescued and some in his group removed the log that When Jones, wearing only a wet suit and life jacket, reached the had taken their friend. Vince Thompson’s group aided Bartley’s boat, it was floating through whitewater and slamming up and group and Vince was able to deliver a message intended for down around him. Jones slipped beneath the boat. When he Bartley’s wife. surfaced, one of the men on his boat tried to pull him in, but he was too heavy to lift. By then, Jones had been in the frigid water Onward to Dagger Falls: We proceeded downstream for several minutes and was exhausted from his struggles. His and I felt a heightened awareness as we passed the remnants of boat hit another large boulder and the collision sucked the boat the log strewn along the right bank. A short distance past the and Jones down into a hole in the water. The boat flipped, log, Alvin Brown had some trouble. While making a sharp spilling out the other two men, who were flushed out and made move around a logjam, Alvin’s upstream oar popped out and it to shore. Despite two previous searches, Jones’ body was not his cataraft ran up on the next logjam, snapping his Carlisle oar recovered until the July 4, when his family returned at lower in half. Brian and Bob both purposely bumped him as their water and found him in the same hole where he had disap- rafts passed from behind, but that only served to strand him peared. higher on the logs. Alvin climbed out on the logjam and The other unidentified group reported they had kayaked 8 pushed his cataraft, which was quickly carried away by the miles downstream to the Bear Valley Creek confluence looking strong current. He jumped for his boat, but wound up in the for a second drowning victim from another trip, then hiked back water. He quickly climbed back in the boat and worked to get up to this camp. They said they had removed the main log his spare oar into place; however, the spare oar would not stay obstruction, but warned us of a lot of other wood in the river in the widened oarlock. At this point, his spare oar did not below along a series of S-turns. Our group may have been the have a safety line tied to the frame and it began to float away. first through after the river-wide obstruction was removed. Alvin leaned over to reach it and nearly fell out of the cataraft again. He had missed the oar and was now straining to stay in Matthew Bartley Drowning: At this somber camp, we the boat. The first spare oar was lost, but he managed to put his learned that a second man had been lost in the river the previous other spare oar into position. After regaining control of the day after a tragic encounter with the logjam we were going to boat, he floated up to the remainder of the group who had scout. Matthew Bartley, a 47-year-old man from Hamilton, pulled over to wait for him. I gave him one of my spare oars so Montana, had been a commercial river guide for 20 years. His that he would have a spare. group consisted of 17 people in three rafts, three catarafts, and The remainder of the trip to Dagger Falls was demand- nine kayaks. Bartley’s full story was reported on July 4, 2003, in ing, but within our level of competence. However, the section The Ravalli Republic, Hamilton, MT. This group had been run- of most concern to me was a few miles upstream from Dagger, ning the Middle Fork together for years. Bartley reportedly where a log jutted out from an island on river right at the top made the fateful decision to wear nothing more than a shorty of a minefield of holes and boulders. I saw the raft ahead of me wet suit with no helmet or life jacket as he started out that disappear at the next bend and felt somewhat exposed as I morning. We met his passenger, Jimmy Montieth, later in the worked my way left to right, dodging obstacles and realizing trip at Indian Creek and he said that they were lined up per- there was no help if I took a swim. That feeling made me look fectly to run under the log with Montieth huddled low in the behind and try to close up the distance to the next boat so I bow of the raft. There was just enough room in the rising waters could be in position to help him, if necessary. Thankfully, no for the oar stands on the raft to pass under the log. After they help was needed and we all made it to the scout above Dagger cleared the log, Montieth turned around to give Bartley a high Falls at about 4:00 P.M. five only to see him flying backward over the stern. No one Along the way we passed Jeff Erney’s trip, who was deal- knows why he didn’t duck as they approached the log; perhaps ing with a cat tube punctured by logs. Jeff’s trip included his he was trying to take one more stroke on the oars. He was hit brother, Richard, Marcie Keck, Barry and Craig Hatch, and squarely in the face by the log, knocking him out the back of the several others. Mike H. knew them and agreed to share camp raft and into the river. Though four people were watching for that night at Gardell’s Hole. him, they never saw any signs of him after that moment. Montieth, from Maine, had one glass eye and had never rowed a DAGGER FALLS: Surprisingly, even though the Boundary raft. Nevertheless, he jumped into the rowing seat and took Creek road was closed, there were a lot of people on the obser- control of the oars. He tried to get to shore, but his raft was vation platform overlooking Dagger Falls. They turned out to quickly pinned against another logjam. A few moments later, a be the Bartley group, and they had completed the grueling raft from another group collided with his raft and Montieth fell portage of Dagger Falls. After Bartley’s accident, their group Winter 2006 page fourty five was not feeling up to running Dagger Falls, a rapid they usually all the while banging into the log sharing our space. Bob and all run. Who could blame them? Although Dagger is intimidat- Katie pulled Alvin’s boat to shore and Katie held it as Bob came ing, the left side of Dagger provides a relatively safe, if rough, to help me. passage and boats that follow this path are simply flushed down- The shore was rocky and only 2 to 3 feet wide, and was stream. Dagger is much more dangerous below a river stage of 4 bounded by a steep slope of crumbly sand with nothing to tie a feet because the rocks at the bottom begin to be exposed or are rope to. The nearest substantial tree was 20 feet up slope and covered by less water. We ran the falls in two groups with those difficult to reach. It was all our tired threesome could do just to clearing it pulling into eddies below to set up rescue. Two of the hang onto the three boats in the violent eddy. It took us about kayakers from the Bartley group ran the falls with us. All runs 90 minutes to line the log out of the eddy, line the two upright were clean and we continued downstream. catarafts downstream to a mooring location, and prepare to flip Bob’s raft, all the while fighting the strong eddy current by BELOW DAGGER: At this point, it was about 5:00 P.M. physically holding onto the boats. We knew we were too few to and we had been on the river for 4-1/2 hours with no time for flip Bob’s raft, but to our relief, we suddenly saw Hamilton lunch. Many of us were exhausted from trip preparations, the across the river making hand signals. Brian, Hamilton, and rigging, and 17 miles of whitewater, and were eager to reach Erin had seen some of the trouble and had waited downstream camp at Gardell’s Hole, a mere 3 miles downstream from Dagger on river left for flipped boats and swimmers to come floating Falls. Little did we know that much more action awaited us by. When they didn’t see any, they sent Hamilton upstream to down river that day. Only two obstacles lay between us and investigate. I signaled him to ferry their raft to our side and camp: an unnamed hole on river right at about mile 1.2 (as bring two oars, as Alvin’s remaining oars had been torn from his measured in the river guide below Boundary Creek, which is cat and were downstream. mile 0); and Murphy’s Hole, a large unmapped hole at about We eventually saw the three of them hiking toward us mile 2. Mike Holstrom made sure we were forewarned about the along river right. Brian reported that he saw Alvin very close to holes and we moved downstream. Holstrom’s cat before they went out of sight around the next The boats ahead of me cleared the left side of the first hole, bend. Brian, a long-distance runner, had a lot more stamina left which didn’t look too big from upstream. I was exhausted and than Bob or me and it showed. He directed our exhausted didn’t pull away from the hole as hard as I should have, thinking minds and bodies to set up a z-drag on Bob’s raft, which he an- I could just clip the edge and be OK. I caught much more of it chored by climbing up the dangerous slope to the sturdy tree and it was much bigger than I anticipated. I started to surf until above. We did not dare try righting the raft the easy way I jumped onto the front of my cataraft, pushing the boat on (counter-balancing with flip lines in the river) in this violent through. A small violent eddy next to the hole sucked me to the eddy, because we did not want anyone being sucked into the right shore where I found that my right oar had been bent to a hole and back into the main current. After trying a couple of 60-degree angle. I was fighting to keep from recirculating into versions, we finally found a combination of pulleys and carabi- the hole while I went for my spare oar. neers that allowed us to muscle the boat up and over onto Following my poor line, Alvin also went into the hole and shore, using a round log against shore to help roll the boat over. began surfing. Brian saw all this and was able to pull away and As the raft finally rolled over upright onto the narrow pass the melee. Bob, however, followed Alvin and his 15-foot shore, another river trip was approaching the hole. It was the raft crashed onto the side of Alvin’s cat and flipped. Alvin was Erney group and I began waving the lead boatman, Barry catapulted out into the main current and floated downstream. Hatch, away from the hole. Barry took notice and pulled hard Bob and Katie, together with Bob’s flipped raft and Alvin’s up- to clear the hole with his raft, but the next three boats (two right cat, were pulled into my small eddy. As Bob swam for catarafts and one raft) ran straight into the hole. One cat and shore, he reached out and made a clutch grab on Katie and they the raft flipped. The raft and its boatman and passenger were both quickly self-rescued to shore. Meanwhile, I was frantically flushed out into the main current and floated downstream. blowing on my whistle to get the attention of the downstream They self rescued to shore river right a few hundred yards boats before they rounded the next bend so that they could get downstream from us. The catarafts and their boatmen (the Alvin out of the water. The noise drowned out the whistle, but Erney brothers) were pulled into our eddy. The flipped raft, at the last moment, Jim Rolf and Mike H. looked upstream, saw however, continued downstream and did not find its way into Alvin in the water, and began rescue and loose oar retrieval. The an eddy until Dolly Lake, 17.5 miles down river. We helped the eddy was even more crowded because we shared it with a 30- men in our eddy right the flipped cataraft and they helped us foot log that was making it difficult to maneuver. Luckily, as get Bob’s raft back into the water and lined down to our other Bob’s flipped raft passed me on its way back to the hole (and boats. After we were settled in, they took their cats down river, possibly out into the main current), I reached down into the but the swimmers were shook up about the flip and chose to water for a throw rope that was attached to Bob’s frame, but had hike downstream toward the Gardell’s Hole camp. come unraveled in the eddy. I hung onto the rope and my oar in ALVIN’S RESCUE: We learned later that Alvin had not one hand as I rowed to keep Bob’s boat and me out of the hole, quite reached Holstrom’s boat and made a self rescue on river page forty six THE Waiting List left. Despite his dry suit and heavy fleece under layers, he THREE CAMPS: Now we were spread out along the river began to feel the icy cold of the river seep into his bones. At in three groups. My group was too exhausted to risk more trouble one point during his swim, he just lay back in the water and down river and it was almost dark, so we made a bivouac in the began to sink into a dangerous relaxed state (he said later forested area where we had lined and moored our boats. We were that he felt he was not far from giving up). About that time well equipped because we had all our own equipment; we only he saw that the boats downstream had seen him and were lacked a groover. Brian, Hamilton, and Erin carried their gear up maneuvering for rescue. This gave him an extra boost of en- to our location for the night and we all made chopsticks out of ergy and he rolled over and began swimming with the last twigs to eat our food. Erin, Katie, and Brian really lifted our spir- remaining strength he had. He came within about 20 feet of its that night with their upbeat attitude and ability to see humor Holstrom’s cataraft, but was unable to catch it. With no in it all. strength left, he saw that he had made it close Jim and Ashley, who had located above enough to the left bank to catch a tree branch At one point Murphy’s Hole to wait for us, decided to and he pulled himself out of the river, where he during his swim, camp there when no one passed them. laid on the riverbank catching his breath for he just lay back in All of Ashley’s gear was on other boats several long moments. and they did not know that we were not When Alvin finally looked up from the the water and far upstream from them. Jim gave Ashley riverbank, there were no boats in sight. The res- began to sink into a his sleeping bag and they each had a tent. cue boats had been swept downstream with no Jim slept in a chair by the fire. They had chance to eddy out. During his swim, Alvin dangerous relaxed no matches, but got some from the two had lost track of which boats were ahead or be- state-he said later swimmers of the Erney group as they hind. He began to hike downstream. He knew that he felt he was hiked by. They had freeze-dried food and that, although he was on the wrong side of the water, but no utensils, so opted for trail river, it could not be far to the camp at not far from mix and Tecate. Jim did not get much Gardell’s Hole. It had taken a half-mile or more giving up. sleep on that cold night. Holstrom, Luk- for the rescue boats to eddy out. Because it was sic, and Alvin fared the best, being fed by impossible to hike the river’s edge, the half-mile hike meant the Erney group and sharing the gear they had among themselves climbing steep slopes and talus that took almost an hour to for the night. negotiate. All three camps spent most the night not totally knowing Holstrom and Luksic (with Ashley Brown) had pulled the fate of one another. Holstrom, Luksic, and Alvin only learned to the right shore, reconnected, and were now across the of our situation late in the evening, when the Erney brothers made river from Alvin. Ashley stayed on river right with Jim Rolf, it to camp and brought word that we had flipped a boat and de- who had also landed there. She was overwhelmingly relieved cided to camp where we were. They also brought word from us to to hear her Dad blowing his whistle from the opposite send a boatman to row Alvin’s cat. Erney’s group sent out a rescue shore. Holstrom and Luksic ferried Luksic’s raft across the party that night to find the two men from the flipped raft (both in river, unfortunately landing downstream from a large tribu- their 60’s and new to river running). They found the men and led tary separating them from Alvin. After locating Alvin, they them back by flashlight, locating camp with whistles at about threw him a rope and, as they held one end, he used it to midnight. The two men had hiked in the dark for hours. Now pendulum out into the Middle Fork across the mouth of the knowing that the hike upstream was possible, Alvin volunteered tributary. Then the three of them ferried the raft back across early the next morning to retrieve his boat and his daughter. the river. After reclaiming Holstrom’s cataraft, those three DAY 2, MAY 27 floated downstream to the Gardell’s Hole camp. Not long We awoke this sunny morning to the happy sound of Alvin after arriving at camp, they saw a flipped raft coming swiftly trekking into our camp carrying an oar and looking down river with Barry Hatch and Marcie Keck in hot pur- chipper. We were so glad to see him alive and he got lots of hugs suit in another boat, and Craig Hatch close behind. Barry as well as flack. He had hiked past Jim and Ashley on the way and actually caught the raft in the current above Sulphur Slide told them about yesterday’s events. Jim and Ashley broke camp Rapid and, with Marcie holding it, he was able to get to the and went down river for breakfast. Our camp ate a quick breakfast right shore. However, at that point he was too exhausted to and began loading our rafts for Day 2. I straightened my oar be- pull both rafts into the Gardell’s Hole eddy and was in dan- tween two trees and made it my only spare. ger of being sucked into Sulphur Slide Rapid, so told Marcie While we were breaking camp, the Bartley group that had to let it go. It was a horrible sight to see that boat head portaged Dagger Falls encountered the now infamous unnamed down river with no one to chase it. Spent, they slowly made hole above our camp. their way back up the eddy to camp. Two boats flipped and we helped land their other boats at Winter 2006 page forty seven our camp as the kayakers rescued the swimmers. After all they up in the entrance and block the path for boats behind. Seeing had been through, the intensity showed plainly in their eyes as this shallow rock and already turned to the right to ensure I they dealt with this additional incident. Alvin fixed his oar situa- could pull left of the large boulder, I entered the slot back- tion and we were all ready to rejoin our friends. Flows had not wards, clearing the shallow rock completely. From the corner of risen much from yesterday. my eye, the falls looked absolutely huge and when I could take Murphy’s Hole was easily skirted on the right between the my eyes off of my immediate surroundings, I saw Luksic’s hole and the right bank, but the hole was a monster. The harder flipped raft floating ahead of me and Luksic and Ashley swim- path around the left side of the hole was nearly blocked by a ming on either side of the river. large log extending from the left shore. We could easily have As I turned around to see if I needed to help anyone be- negotiated this hole the previous dusk, but were glad we didn’t hind me, I was shocked to see Brian’s raft exiting the falls up- risk it in our exhausted condition. side down with Brian, Erin, and Hamilton holding the safety We reached Gardell’s Hole and hung out with the Erney line and seemingly in coordinated control of their situation. group for about an hour while the others in our Alvin had hung up momentarily on that group loaded their gear. We discussed the rapids ... the hole was a shallow rock in the sneak and Jim Rolf for Day 2 extensively with the Hatch brothers monster ... We had rammed him from behind hoping and Mike H., which included most notably could easily have they could both push on through. Jim was Sulphur Slide Rapid right out of camp, Velvet in danger of pinning on the large boulder, Falls at mile 5, and Powerhouse Rapid at mile negotiated this hole but they both pivoted through the sneak 11.2. We intended to camp at Sheepeater Hot the previous dusk, after a few long moments. In the mean- Spring (mile 13), which had saved those of us but were glad we time, however, Brian had seen the blocked wearing only wet suits from hypothermia in a passage and was forced to pull right of the snowstorm on our May 2000 trip. That 2000 didn’t risk it boulder and run the worst part of the trip had convinced me to buy a dry suit for all in our exhausted falls. Alvin spotted Ashley on the right future early season Middle Fork trips. We bid condition ... shore, but could not get over in time to farewell to the Erney group, who had ferried a collect her. I rowed against the current to boat across river to send someone hiking upstream in the hope intercept Brian’s raft and picked up Erin and Hamilton. Brian of arranging flights out for some of their group. stayed with his raft to assist others who might help him land it. Our group ran Sulphur Slide Rapid, which was easier at Just then, I saw Luksic standing on the left bank and I moved this high flow, and regrouped after Ramshorn Rapid above over to allow him to jump onto the front of my boat as I passed Velvet Falls, a river-wide hole and Class IV rapid. At high water, by. there is a narrow left sneak at Velvet, between the left bank and a Holstrom had slowed in preparation to picked up Luksic large boulder at the left side of the falls. There is also possible after seeing him go right of the boulder. After getting Luksic, passage between this boulder and the falls, which is the tradi- the seat and seat bar broken from Luksic’s frame floated up and tional run at lower flows. If trouble occurs and you can’t make Holstom grabbed it and started chasing the raft. They caught either of these options, common wisdom says to pull over into the raft, but Luksic was a little disoriented from the flip and the right side of the falls to avoid the worst part and try to run had difficulty securing the raft; he fell back into shallow water it. Our group intended to sneak left of the boulder and bypass and the raft again was floating free downstream. Luksic climbed the falls altogether. safely on the left shore where I picked him up and Holstrom went to intercept Brian and his upturned raft, bringing them VELVET FALLS: Our running order through Velvet safely to river left. was: Holstrom; Luksic and Ashley; Bill; Alvin; Jim; Brian, Erin, I could see Alvin and Jim behind me, but not Bob’s raft and Hamilton; and Bob and Katie. The trick to the approach at with Katie in it. My worst fear was that they were wrapped on Velvet is to hug the left shoreline. Holstrom moved to the left the large boulder or in a reversal at the bottom of the falls. I shoreline early and was in good position to run the sneak, which called out to Jim and Alvin, but they couldn’t hear me. I was he made no problem. Directly ahead of me, Luksic seemed to be really getting concerned when I finally saw the gray Avon come too far out in the river and, as the boulder drew near, he sud- around the bend behind me and I breathed a huge sigh of re- denly pulled far right choosing the third option of running the lief. They had pulled over on river right to pick up Ashley, who falls. Luksic later said that the drop from top of the falls to thankfully had self rescued. trough was longer than his raft, which was about 15 feet. So, the two flips appeared to be clean with no injuries. Though I saw all this happen right in front of me, my There was an eddy on river left into which Mike Holstrom had mind was totally focused on lining up for the left sneak. There helped Brian land his flipped raft, but Mike Luksic’s (actually was a small pour-over immediately upstream from the sneak, but Jim Pisula’s) flipped raft had gone downstream ahead of every- it was easily run. A more serious obstacle was a shallow rock in one. I pulled into the same eddy, unloaded my passengers, and the left side of the narrow sneak that could cause a boat to hang helped Brian and others flip his raft the “easy way” with flip page forty eight THE Waiting List lines. Meanwhile, Luksic jumped on Holstrom’s cataraft and knocked him out onto some ammo cans on the front of the Hamilton boarded Alvin’s cataraft and they left to chase the cataraft. Things are a little fuzzy for Alvin from this point on, fugitive raft. We followed several minutes later after securing as even weeks later he identified some time gaps in this event everything and everyone. that he can’t explain. However, he thinks he only laid there for a few moments when he realized that he had to get up and row ALVIN’S ACCIDENT: The following account of the his boat. He fell back in his seat and almost passed out, but he subsequent events that day is a result of post-trip discussions still had his wits about him and knew he was in a dire situation with the group. At this point, our group was in crisis response that he couldn’t ignore. He grabbed his oars and tried to row, mode. Many good decisions were made, but as is true of all acci- but was still near to losing consciousness with blood clouding dents, 20/20 hindsight sheds light on errors and provides infor- the vision in his uninjured eye. He thought he was close to mation useful for the boating community and our own future Holstrom and Luksic, who were trying to catch up from be- trips. hind. He tried to tell them he needed help, but he couldn’t Alvin was able to reach the fugitive raft first and was at communicate verbally over the roar of the river. least 100 yards ahead of Holstrom and Luksic. As Alvin ap- Although they saw some blood, they did not get a good proached the flipped raft, he directed Hamilton to use a throw view of the injury and didn’t understand Alvin’s condition. rope and be ready to board the raft. As they approached the raft, They thought he had escaped serious injury because he seemed Hamilton tied one end of the rope to Alvin’s ... he heard the to be in control of the oars and did not frame. When Alvin warned Hamilton to be (could not) give a distress signal. Luksic ready to board the raft with the throw rope, sound of the wanted to be dropped on shore so he could Hamilton made the novice error of jumping stretched rope work on recovering his raft, but this move too soon and into the river. Fortunately, he allowed Alvin to drift further away from did not become part of the problem and was snapping. them. After dropping Luksic off, Holstrom able to quickly climb up on top of the raft. His next sensation continued downstream, now about ¼-mile Alvin hollered at Hamilton to tie the rope, not was of something behind Alvin, but thought Alvin looked to realizing that it would stretch to full length be in control and concluded that he would and become a dangerous situation. exploding in eddy out and be OK. Holstrom felt he However, things seemed to be going well front of him and would be more useful back at the pinned as they approached the left bend in the river at hitting the left side raft, so he landed his cat on river right and The Chutes Rapid (about mile 8) because began to hike back upstream. There was no Alvin was able to push Hamilton and the raft of his face. confirmation by hand signal, whistle, or to the right shore upstream from a large log- voice that Alvin was either OK or in distress, as Alvin was in no jam located several feet from the right shore. Rescue of the raft condition to give such a signal. If Holstrom had known the ex- seemed within their grasp; however, Alvin was still out in the tent of Alvin’s injuries, he certainly would have kept up the current and, as he was swept away from Hamilton, no human chase. could have held both boats back. Hamilton called to Alvin to By some inner strength, Alvin was able to stay conscious cut the rope, but Alvin couldn’t hear him, and because he was and, though disoriented and weak, able to continue rowing in approaching the logjam rapidly, there was no time for anything the swift current looking for any eddy to pull into. He was still but pulling on the oars. Water was flowing past both sides of the fearful that he might pass out and knew that he was too weak logjam, but as Alvin’s boat and the raft approached it, he could to negotiate a rapid or any kind of hazard for that matter. Find- not see if there was a clear path in the narrow channel between ing an eddy was imperative, but at this flow, they were few and the shore and the logjam, where the current on the outside of far between. Alvin had to row about a mile downstream from the left-hand bend wanted to take them. He chose to pull to- the logjam before finding a small eddy on river left. The eddy ward the center of the river and go around the left side of the was across from Elkhorn Bar Camp, about 2 miles upstream logjam. Meanwhile, the towed raft pinned on the upper end of from Powerhouse Rapid. Had he lost consciousness or other- the logjam and stopped. As Alvin was flushed down river, the wise been unable to land his boat, Powerhouse Rapid (Class rope began to tighten and, sensing the danger, Alvin dove into IV) or any hazard before that could have been his demise. his footwell and prepared for the jolt when the rope would stop Somehow, Alvin tied his boat to a tree and lay on the the forward motion of his cat. ground waiting for help to arrive. Alvin did not know how At this point, Alvin remembers deciding to cut the rope, badly he was injured and could not treat himself, though he but just as he rose from his footwell with knife in hand, he heard knew there was a lot of blood. It must have been very difficult the sound of the stretched rope snapping. His next sensation was to lay there alone, on the edge of shock, uncertain if he would of something exploding in front of him and hitting the left side bleed to death or lose his eye, hoping that someone would of his face. The immediate pain was excruciating and he come soon. After a while, he realized that with all the trouble remembers saying something like “Oh my God!” The impact upstream, with two flipped boats and five swimmers scattered Winter 2006 page forty nine up and down the river, it might be sometime before help could Holstrom was with him. arrive. We were trying to decide what to do about the raft, when Alvin was able to make it back into his boat to get water we saw someone hiking along the upper slopes downstream and a first aid kit, then he bandaged his wound as best as he from us. The color of the life jacket and helmet looked like could, putting a pile of gauze on it. His eye was swollen shut and Alvin’s and we breathed a sigh of relief thinking it would be a there really wasn’t much to bandage. He thinks he was either repeat of yesterday morning. However, as he drew closer, we dozing or passing in and out of consciousness as he lay on the could see that it was our trip leader carrying the cross bar and bank. At one point, he became aware that a group of kayakers seat that had been part of Jim Pisula’s frame. When asked where and a raft was passing by (possibly part of the Bartley group), Alvin was, Mike told us the story and indicated he was sure but his effort to flag them down was too late and he didn’t even Alvin had made it to an eddy downstream. We didn’t feel bother using his whistle. Later, a Blackhawk helicopter operated comfortable without sending someone down to find Alvin, so by the National Guard flew low overhead, but did not notice Jim Rolf was selected to go and the rest of us went about trying him and he had no way to signal it. The helicopter was part of to recover the raft. the search and recovery effort for the lost men from the other Once again, after reviewing our options, most of us felt it trips. He continued to lay down and rest while waiting for his was too dangerous to send someone onto the logjam. In the compadres, as he knew they would be there shortly. meantime, Luksic had been studying how to cross over to the The others and I finally reached the big boulder field at logjam and was able to snag a throw rope on the logjam to use The Chutes and saw the yellow raft pinned on the logjam. The as a pendulum for crossing the channel. Before we could set a current along the right bank was very swift safety line for him from shore, he suddenly and everyone except Jim and me made the As I approached, I started wading across. Bob Marley was stand- pull out to shore quickly. Jim and I banged saw none of the ing downstream with a throw bag, but that along the right shore for about a half-mile relaxed behavior was a rash move that luckily ended well. Luk- before landing our cats in some flooded sic made it across, climbed up on the logjam, bushes. Mike Holstrom was downstream normally and worked his way on top of the logs toward from us, but we could not see him or his associated with the raft. We threw a rope to him and rigged boat. We moored our boats and immediately reaching camp at an anchor around a large boulder. Before set- started hiking upstream to the others. ting pulleys, we all pulled as Luksic pushed When I was still about 100 yards from day’s end. and jostled the raft, trying to get it unhooked the pinned raft, the air was split by the sound of the Blackhawk and off the logs. The raft came loose relatively quickly. Luksic helicopter. The men in the huge helicopter obviously saw the jumped in it and we pulled the raft to shore. The NRS frame raft on the logjam, and circled it, coming lower to investigate and fittings were bent and the seat crossbar had sheared clean and assess the problem. For several amazing moments, it hovered through the aluminum cores, but the Aire raft was not dam- stationary about 150 feet above the river in that narrow canyon aged and Luksic was able to make it river worthy with a few and the prop wash created a maelstrom of wind and water spray. straps and spare oars. Our group did not communicate with the helicopter and it left With the raft recovered, we quickly loaded our boats and the scene after making sure no one needed evacuation. Little did headed downstream to look for Alvin and Jim. As I had the we know that Alvin could have used it. longer hike back to my boat, I was one of the last to reach We gathered along the shore next to the logjam and began Alvin’s location. As I approached, I saw none of the relaxed assessing the situation. There was a narrow swiftwater channel behavior normally associated with reaching camp at day’s end. between the logjam and the near shore. To affect a rescue of the Everyone was scurrying around and I could see Alvin being raft, we would need someone to cross the narrow swiftwater tended to in a prone position. My heart sank and my stomach channel and climb onto the logjam to tie ropes to the raft and twisted as the possibilities raced through my mind. The eddy help jostle it off the logs. Although the logjam appeared to be was so small we had to make a barge of the rafts to get them all sturdy, there was no way of knowing for certain and we felt it unloaded. was too dangerous to have someone over there. It was too risky Alvin had been alone about an hour before Jim Rolf to put someone on the logjam because it could break up or the found him, and they had been together something less than an person could fall in the water and be caught or crushed between hour when the rest of our group arrived. The injury was to the logs, with no hope of help. Mike Luksic was motivated to Alvin’s left eye, which was swollen to the size of a small grape- cross over to the logjam because he felt responsible for Jim fruit, but bleeding externally very little. However, he had been Pisula’s raft. gagging and vomiting blood as the internal hemorrhaging The rest of the boatmen had learned that Alvin had had around his eye drained into his sinuses and down his throat. some sort of accident, though the details were sketchy and there The survival instinct of Alvin’s body had kept him conscious was no information on any injury. Although we felt anxious to until Jim found him, then he just let go and started going into go looking for him, there was some comfort in thinking shock. With that type of injury, there was not much Jim could page fifty THE Waiting List do for Alvin except keep him comfortable and treat for shock. looked OK, so we put Alvin in Brian’s raft with Erin and he Thankfully, the left side of his face was numb from the trauma even took a paddle to help out. Brian is a rock solid boatman and pressure of swelling, so he was not complaining of much and we were confident to have him carry Alvin in his raft. pain. The draining of blood down his sinuses was subsiding. Alvin was alert and even able to help paddle assist in calmer After we arrived, there were enough people to set up his tent and stretches, but Brian insisted he hunker down in the front of the move him inside onto a cot. raft in the rapids. Hamilton was called on to row Alvin’s It was difficult getting the neck gasket of his dry suit off cataraft. He had rowed on the San Juan and other Class II-III over his head, but we did and could then get him into dry rivers, but this would be a big challenge for him. He accepted clothes. We were well equipped with major first aid kits and the responsibility without hesitation, agreeing to follow the line could dress his wound, medicate, and make him comfortable. of boats. Ashley, Erin, and Katie took turns caring for Alvin during We had two major rapids to run before reaching Indian the night, but Ashley slept with him and never really left his Creek (mile 24.7): Powerhouse Rapid (Class IV); and Pistol side. They kept the bloody drainage from his eye cleaned off Creek Rapid (Class IV-). Powerhouse was big and powerful, with a warm wet washcloth and, after a warm meal, he fell into a with many big waves and holes. Everyone worked their way deep sleep. In checking for concussion, the through this long rapid in good form and we uninjured eye was not dilating erratically, but There were many were soon passing our with the other eye swollen shut, we could conversations intended camp the night before, Sheepeater. not check for differential dilation. However, At Dolly Lake (mile 19.1), we found he was giving other positive signs, so we let about the best way the big eddy full of large timber floating him sleep. It hurt to look at our injured to get Alvin out of around in circles. We also found the Erney friend, but I think he knew that and tried to the canyon ... We group raft that had flipped below Dagger on make it easy on us by down playing the Day 1; someone had righted it and tied it to whole thing in typical Alvin fashion. regretted not shore. It only had one oar remaining and a The river flow had not changed much having a satellite broken seat. We learned later that Vince since we put in on Marsh Creek; it was still phone. We waited Thompson’s group had done secured the about 6.8 feet and 9,500 cfs. This camp was adrift boat. Our lead boat entered the eddy, grassy and had plenty of room for everyone to decide until we but the rest of us didn’t as we did not want to to spread out. I think most of us would have could assess his get tangled with the 20- to 50-foot timber. preferred sleeping without a tent except for condition again in Brian who had entered the eddy had the heavy dew and the worry about ticks. a hard time getting clear and back into the Mike Holstrom the morning. main current. He ended up having to line the repaired a hole that an underwater rock had boat from shore out of the bottom of the made in his cataraft where it was moored during recovery of Jim eddy while the Pisula’s raft. injured Alvin and Erin pulled at the oars. There were many conversations about the best way to get A couple of miles later we ran Pistol Creek Rapid, which Alvin out of the canyon. Some wanted to send a few boats ahead was big and pillowy. All runs were clean. to Indian Creek Ranger Station and send for a rescue helicopter As we cleared the rapid, we had a chance to see how the to airlift him out. Others wanted to take him down by boat. We forest undergrowth had begun to recover at Pistol Creek camp regretted not having a satellite phone. We waited to decide until from the firestorm that destroyed it in the summer of 2000. we could assess his condition again in the morning. This had That fire had blasted down Pistol Creek canyon and exploded been another long day and we all slept hard. up the opposite slope, traveling up the mountain in 10 min- utes. At Indian Creek Ranger Station, the US Forest had cov- DAY 3, MAY 28 ered the historic cabins in Mylar sheeting and, even though the The usual suspects were up early making coffee when air temperatures reportedly reached as high as 400°F., the cab- Alvin emerged from his tent under his own power. He took a ins survived. few steps, lit a cigarette and began urinating in the bushes. I After leaving Pistol Creek Rapid, we floated past the guess the night’s sleep did him some good. He was actually in Pistol Creek Ranch, where construction was still underway to pretty good spirits and seemed to be willing to ride in a raft restore cabins destroyed by the fire. down to Indian Creek. His eye was not draining as much and he Soon we reached Indian Creek Ranger Station and was not dizzy like he was the previous night. We knew that a airstrip. Jim P. and Lucy, scheduled to join us there had sent swim could risk infection and even be fatal for Alvin, but the as- word that they had decided not to do the river. The Bartley sessment of the rapids ahead was that we could easily make it group was there and 12 of the 16 people were flying out. At the without further incident. After a cold breakfast, we rigged our Ranger Station we made arrangements for a flight for Alvin and boats and gave Alvin more time to be observed. Everything Ashley to Salmon, ID, filled our water jugs and bought our Winter 2006 page fifty one permits for the Main Salmon. The Kitchen If there can be a prosthetic eye; he was able to attach all Creek blowout had forced the Main his eye muscles to it. After the surgery, Salmon against the right bank, which any humor in the Alvin spent the rest of Thursday in the eroded a section of the road to the Corn situation, it Idaho Falls hospital. On Friday, he was Creek Ranger Station. Therefore, permits came when released and they drove straight home to for the Main were being issued at Indian Flagstaff. He was back at work at the US Creek. Jimmy Montieth, the Forest Service the following Tuesday. We learned that the Middle Fork had one-eyed passenger We had an uneventful float down to started to rise again and was now up to 7 of Matt Bartley gave our next assigned camp at Marble Creek feet (10,000 cfs); the Main was also rising (mile 31.6). The river was running very and had reached 70,000 cfs at the White Alvin lots of swiftly along the left bank at this camp and Bird gage. There was some discussion of all advice, including it was difficult to land boats among the few of us taking out at Cache Bar and forego- never setting his openings in the flooded brush. With the ing the Main run, but in the end we river rising, we saw some very large trees bought permits for those going all the way beer down on his floating in the river past camp. Because we to the Carey Creek take out. blind side. were on the outside of a bend in the river, While Alvin rested in the shade of a the trees were coming close to our rafts. tree at the Indian Creek launch site await- One tree actually scraped one of the rafts ing evacuation, Jimmy Montieth, the one- when I was on it unloading gear. We lined eyed passenger of Matt Bartley, chatted the boats downstream to a safer location with him. Montieth spent an hour coach- before calling it a night. ing Alvin about life with one eye. Of It had been a beautiful day and we course, at this point, we weren’t sure the were ready to have a normal river trip. I eye was gone, but he explained that even was especially proud of the way Ashley, so, Alvin would be bandaged for a time Erin, Katie, and Hamilton had handled and would need these tips. If there can be everything so far; they had all made posi- any humor in the situation, it came when tive contributions to the trip and refused he gave Alvin lots of advice, including to let the events or the river conditions af- never setting his beer down on his blind fect their resolve. We cooked some steaks side. and salmon and the whiskey was broken Saying farewell to Alvin and Ashley, out. We had a party that night and it was and the remaining nine of us put our the first fire for many of us that trip. Alvin awaits evacuation seven boats back on the river. Erin and Everyone felt better now that Alvin was on Katie were now the paddlers in the front of Brian’s raft, while his way to get medical attention. Many lies were told around Hamilton rowed Alvin’s cataraft. the campfire that night. Alvin and Ashley were picked up a few hours later by the DAY 4, MAY 29 shuttle plane. About 30 hours after his accident, Alvin and Ash- ley arrived at the clinic in Salmon, only to learn that Ashley This was the first day we could focus on the river and not would have to drive him another 3 hours to a specialist in Idaho problems. Day 4 was bright and sunny and the river rose from Falls. Luckily our vehicles were in Salmon and had not been 7 to 7.8 feet (10,000 to 13,000 cfs). This was a leisurely day; shuttled yet by Blackadar. Dog tired, Ashley made the drive to the river was flowing about 10 miles per hour and we only had Idaho Falls only to sit in the emergency room another 90 min- 11.6 miles to reach our next planned camp, Pine Creek Flat at utes due to a mix up in hospital communications. Ashley cried mile 43.2. Our next rapid was a short distance at Ski Jump, for the first time since the whole ordeal had started when this which was a very large nearly river-wide hole. We all ran right happened. Finally at about 2:30 or 3:00 A.M. Thursday morn- and missed it. Soon we came to Sunflower Hot Spring, a ing, Ashley called her mother, Linda, in Flagstaff to give her the beautiful set of small pools with a little waterfall. It was a pleas- news as Alvin went into surgery. Alvin’s operation lasted 3 or 4 ant float down to our next camp, although we had to keep our hours and he woke up to learn officially that his eye was gone. eyes open for all the large logs sharing the river with us. The ap- The impact from the rope had had a ripping affect and had proach to camp was tricky as there was not much of an eddy. almost surgically removed the front of his eyeball as well as much of the white sclera; the eye could not have been saved. It BOB’S ACCIDENT: We had reached camp early, so there had also crushed the lower part of the orbital socket. Amazingly, was plenty of time to set up the horseshoe pits, take siestas, his eyelid and surrounding tissue were intact. The doctor in- showers, or hikes, and do a little boat maintenance. As I was on stalled a metal plate to rebuild the orbital socket and gave Alvin my boat, I noticed the adjacent cataraft had a spare oar with a page fifty two THE Waiting List hose clamp that was cutting into my tube. I readjusted the tie up earlier and had already visited the Simplot Ranch to request a and called Bob Marley over from an adjacent raft to look at the flight to Salmon. damage. He came onto my boat and stepped into footwell to get Our first task was to derig one of the boats and send it a better look. Bob knew I didn’t have a floor in my footwell, but back with Bob on a shuttle plane. We selected the smallest he forgot and took a step down through the frame with his right boat, Jim’s 14-foot cataraft, to minimize cargo weight and cost. foot. Jim would row Bob’s raft down to Cache Bar. We took several This all happened behind me. Now, Bob is a tall fellow trips to carry Jim’s boat and Bob’s personal gear up the steep and he was hip deep into my footwell with his right leg, but his embankment and to the far end of the airstrip. Then we walked left leg was stretched horizontally across the top of my boat. He up to Loon Creek Hot Spring for some R&R. Loon Creek was had tried to stop his fall and had jammed his left wrist on an flooding and was quite impressive compared to earlier years I ammo can on the way down. Now he was gingerly holding his had seen it. The main hot spring tub was only a few feet from wrist in pain saying he thought he broke it. I climbed around the raging stream. We enjoyed a walk upstream from the hot behind him, clasped my hands around his chest and lifted him spring to scout some of the difficult reaches of the Loon Creek up onto the front deck of my cataraft. He immediately laid all run. the way back, closed his eyes, and his muscles began flinching. Later in the afternoon, we said farewell to Bob. The eight He had passed out, probably because his chest was compressed of us launched the remaining six boats to reach our camp for as I lifted him up. that night at Sheep Creek (mile 65.3; 16 miles downstream). I began blowing my trusty whistle and to my surprise all Bob’s plane arrived late afternoon and took him to Salmon, ID, came running to help, even those on shore. We carried Bob to a for medical attention at the clinic. The only rapid of any size comfy chair in the shade and brought him a bucket of cold was Tappan Falls, which was washed out; I barely recognized water for soaking his wrist. Bob’s body had clearly gone into the right run due to the high water. There had been reports of a shock and his face was ashen. It seemed to help when Mike blowout on Aparejo Creek (mile 62.5), but the high water had Holstrom rubbed his temples. Later, we immobilized his wrist either covered up much of it or washed it away. and laid him down on a Paco pad in the shade to let him sleep. Sheep Creek camp was a difficult landing for several of We were hoping his wrist was OK to row the next day because the boats. This camp is a wide-open park on the upstream side we had no more spare boatmen. of Sheep Creek and we camped between two other groups. Shortly thereafter, the Erney group came to shore for a Some of us hiked up Sheep Creek and found some Big Horn visit. They were going to continue down the Main Salmon also, sheep as well as Indian petroglyphs. We definitely had fun that so we talked about the rapids on that swollen river. They were a night and all three camps enjoyed the fine evening. couple of days behind schedule and were going to make as many miles as possible. We wished them well and did not see them DAY 6, MAY 31 again that trip, though we have since boated together on the Middle Fork. One of the first stops the next morning was the Flying B Ranch at mile 66.8. Here we could fill our water jugs and buy DAY 5, MAY 30 souvenirs. We launched and got ready for the big water rapids. The river finally reached peak flow early that morning at 8.2 nother sunny day, but with clouds building to the feet or about 14,000 cfs at the Middle Fork Lodge gage Awest. Bob’s wrist was no better this morning and (25,000 cfs at the mouth) and was moving very fast. was likely fractured, so we started weighing our options. A short distance downstream from the Flying B is The nearest airstrip was at Simplot Ranch on Loon Haystack Rapid. In 2001, one of our rafts wrapped on a large Creek, about 6 miles downstream. boulder near the bottom of this rapid and took 5 arduous As we were breaking camp, two kayakers passed by and we hours to z-drag it off. Today, we ran the far left route around flagged them down. These two young men were running the en- this huge rapid without mishap. As we cleared the rapid, I tire river from Marsh Creek to Cache Bar in two days, averaging looked upstream and saw only a few inches of the wrap boulder more than 60 miles per day. One was a commercial boatman on sticking out of the water; this boulder had been about 10 feet the Middle Fork and he graciously agreed to row Bob and his out of the water in 2001. Most of us didn’t know what to boat down to Loon Creek. We quickly packed Bob’s gear and expect at these flows and, therefore, had some anxiety about the helped them launch. traditionally big rapids until we saw them. However, these A refreshing rainstorm blew over us on the way to Loon flows washed out most of the big rapids or provided sufficient Creek. The river was continuing to rise and reached a stage of room over the flooded banks to easily sneak around the worst about 8 feet (13,400 cfs) on Day 5. There were still many logs in parts. the river and we had to constantly beware of colliding with them After Jack Creek Rapid, we marveled at the tremendous or being skewered. We landed in the trees at Loon Creek because flow gushing down Waterfall Creek, and we stopped at Veil the gravel bar was under several feet of water. Bob had arrived Falls for lunch. Several of us hiked up to Veil Falls, where the Winter 2006 page fifty three geology and waterfall were spectacular. Others napped by their 80,000 cfs at the White Bird gage and probably about 45,000 boats. cfs at the confluence. Redside and Weber Rapids were huge, but we sneaked the We approached the boat ramp at Cache Bar and had to worst parts. Soon we approached our next camp at Ship Island, do a double take. The walls of the dressing rooms above the mile 84.5. Due to the difficult landing in bushes and trees at this ramp were only sticking out of the water about 6 inches. We high flow, we staged in an eddy above Papoose Creek and sent landed Brian’s and Bob’s rafts on the ramp and the rest of us one boat down along the shore every 5 minutes. At high water, floated around to an eddy below. this was a small, but pleasant camp and the weather was so beau- X-rays revealed that Bob had hairline fractures on both of tiful we really enjoyed our time there. We watched the current the arm bones just above his wrist. It was a good thing he didn’t and logs speeding past try to push it and con- our camp. Even though tinue rowing. Brian’s the river had peaked that truck had been shuttled morning, it was already to Cache Bar. We all dropping noticeably. pitched in to get their We were all very gear packed and loaded tired, but Erin took the in their trucks. lead in the kitchen and We launched from cooking for our group. Cache Bar about 3:30 She, Katie, and Hamilton P.M., and floated 90 stepped up to the plate minutes to our camp at and were amazing the Upper Lantz Bar, 15.5 whole trip. They really miles downstream from made a contribution, not Cache Bar. Cache Bar is to mention keeping spir- mile 41.6 and Carey its high. Creek takeout is mile The next day 127.6 in Main mileage would be the take-out at system. We calculated Cache Bar for Brian, and that the river was moving the rest of us needed to about 10.5 miles per decide what we were hour there. Although the going to do. In the end, Main was swift, there we decided to let Brian Sittin’ & Soakin’ In Sunflower were many large eddies to take Erin and Katie to JJ stop in or mount rescues and Teena Suprise’s house in Salt Lake City, while Holstrom, from. The river did the strange things that high-volume cur- Luksic, the Rolfs, and I ran our boats down to the take out at rents do every time the channel changes direction – big eddies, Carey Creek, another 86 miles. Any other option would have eddy fences, boat-size whirlpools, and huge standing waves. Al- taken longer and cost more, and we really wanted to see the though most of the rapids on the Main were reduced to big Main Salmon. standing waves at this flow, some were truly a sight to behold and made the boats feel very small. There were many rapids DAY 7, JUNE 1 that reminded me of the roller coaster ride in Hermit Rapid in the Grand Canyon. Many tributary creeks joined the Main as This was the first day most of us decided to wear wet suits we floated down river. The flow was so fast, we reached camp instead of dry suits. The river stage had dropped about a foot, as with plenty of time to explore and fix dinner. measured at camp with sticks, but was still more than 20,000 cfs in the lower part of the Middle Fork canyon. At this flow, we DAY 8, JUNE 2 would reach Cache Bar in about 90 minutes. Upper and Lower Cliffside Rapids were big, as were Rub- After breakfast we prepared to make some miles on the ber and Hancock Rapids, but all were easily sneaked. House river. This was not a difficult task because the river was growing Rocks Rapid was almost entirely covered by water – a big sur- in volume; although the flow had peaked, we were constantly prise as the boulders in this rapid are house-size. Finally, Jump- passing tributaries that added more flow to the river. The big Off Rapid was run and we entered the final straight away to the water continued to provide thrills and the eddies were enor- confluence. We could see Bob Marley’s white truck waiting at mous. The canyon was very big here and, in many ways, felt the confluence and he waved his new cast at us as we turned the like floating the big water in Grand Canyon. We made a much- corner onto the Main Salmon. The Main was flowing more than needed stop at Bathtub Hot Springs (mile 69.5). page fifty four THE Waiting List

We were watching out for two rapids: Elkhorn Rapid at It was not surprising to learn that many Middle Fork mile 86.7; and Whiplash at mile 89.4. Elkhorn was a right sneak permits had been canceled due to the high water, and I am sure passed some very big waves and a huge pour-over in the middle the reports of the two deaths did little to encourage permit at the bottom of the wave train. Whiplash really got our atten- holders. Despite the unlikely incidents that occurred with Alvin tion; it was a giant backward S-turn, which took the entire flow and Bob, we generally responded well to the situations as they of the river straight into a sheer wall river right near the end of occurred and everyone rose to the occasion with poise and great the S. It was not possible to cut left out of the main current attitude. Hindsight affords us the chance to be armchair much ahead of the wall because the left side of the river was analysts. Lessons learned from our trip include: strewn with large pour-overs, boulders with big holes, and Never allow two boats be hard tied together during whirlpools below. The best move was to time a hard downstream a rescue. backward ferry as soon as the pour-overs on the left were passed. Always confirm beyond doubt that everyone involved in an Even then, the current took the boats right up to the wall and even on shore, incident is OK and safe before tending to then down a big wave train. If one was pushed into the wall or equipment. did not make the left pull, Take all neces- the giant pillow waves off sary precautions for the wall could instantly rescuing equipment flip a boat and/or circu- and be willing to late it upstream to a very abandon equip- nasty eddy above the wall. ment to avoid un- We all ran the rapid well, necessary risks to although our youngest people. boatman, Hamilton, took Add kayakers the E-ticket ride right up to the trip for better to the wall. We camped at swimmer rescue ca- Lower Bull Creek (mile pability. 115.8), making a total of Be equipped 58.7 river miles in about with a satellite 5 hours. phone for emer- gency communica- DAY 9, JUNE 3 tions. Erin and KT We had less than 12 I believe the miles to get to the Carey Creek take-out, so we were able to following lessons are learned from the Jones and Bartley make some miles on the highway as well that day. Chittam accidents: Rapid was notable due to its huge waves, which stood several of Never re-enter cold and/or swiftwater to swim in hopes of our boats on end. Vinegar Creek Rapid also had big waves, but catching a boat; try to solve the problem from shore instead of mak- was an easy run. Soon we reached the take-out and quickly de- ing yourself a potential victim. rigged our boats. We parted company and headed down the Have the proper equipment to run cold swiftwater, which road. may require dry suits. Always wear your life jacket on the water and wear your hel- EPILOGUE met in situations where you might need it. The following weekend, I drove to Flagstaff to pick up my Never take the river for granted; always try to anticipate gear and visit Alvin. Alvin was in good spirits and his eye almost potential problems and take steps to avoid them. looked normal, except for a little residual swelling. He has had This high-water experience showed us a different and several subsequent operations to fix residual problems with the beautiful face of the Middle Fork. Many of the others and I will eye, but is doing well and even rowed the Grand Canyon with continue to take early season Middle Fork trips. As far as my me only a year after the accident. He has worked hard to adapt feelings about the trip, Brian Sweeney put it best, “I think it to monocular vision, as evidenced by his continued dominance was the camaraderie formed by the group while facing danger. in horseshoes. He has an amazing spirit and, in typical Alvin It’s a feeling that runs down deep and makes certain trips, and fashion, refuses to feel sorry for himself, focusing instead on the the people in them, unforgettable.” future and always talking about the next river trip. And he really does set his beer down on the good eye side as protection. An Bill Victor entertaining, if somewhat inaccurate, article was published y about Alvin on June 21, 2003, in the Arizona Daily Sun, Flagstaff, AZ. Winter 2006 page fifty five Lee’s Ferry Facilities to Be Renovated

he Lee’s Ferry area of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (GCNRA) has been approved for refurbish- Tment. The multimillion dollar project will take place over the next five to seven years, as funds become available, according to the GCNRA information office. Although Lee’s Ferry is the launch point for Colorado River trips through the Grand Canyon National Park (GCNP), it actually lies within the boundary of GCNRA. Both the National Park and National Recreation Area provide ranger support at the launch. GCNP rangers oversee activities relating to downstream travel. GCNRA supervises river activities between Glen Canyon Dam and the Lee’s Ferry boat launch and take out. The Grand Canyon/Glen Canyon boundary is approximately one mile downriver from Lee’s Ferry. Projects to be undertaken, according to the recently issued electrically powered repeater. The project includes the construc- Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI): tion of a small building to house essential equipment, a 40 to Rehabilitate Roadside Drainage Structures Located along Lees 60 foot tower with antenna, overhead electrical service from Ferry Access Road, including Cathedral Wash and No Name nearby electrical lines and installation of a small section of new Wash. This project will replace eroded culverts and create im- primitive road to access site from existing road. proved drainage patterns to help control erosion of the existing Establish the Arizona Road Hiking Trail. This project will in- roadway. clude placement of permanent posts to mark path of trail, trail Lees Ferry Compound Upgrade. This project will replace the ex- construction to improve visitor safety and creation of a isting Grand Canyon NP visitor contact station, add updated brochure and interpretive plan for the trail. maintenance buildings and covered parking for boats and other Stabilization of erosion of the Paria River bank. This project equipment. It will also replace the dated water treatment facility. will be conducted in phases. The first phase will be a complete Remove Curb at Graded Raft Launch Ramp. This project will hydrological study of the affected area and identification of pos- remove a length of curb that is obstructing unloading of float sible construction scenarios. The second phase would construct equipment for private parties heading downriver through Grand the scenario that would have the least amount of impacts and Canyon NP. control erosion and protect the bridge that crosses the Paria River and the road to Lonely Dell Ranch. Replacement of Floating Courtesy Dock. This project will de- molish the existing courtesy dock, which is in poor repair and Replacement of the USGS Gauging Station on the Paria River. replace it with a new dock in the same location. This project would construct a new gauging station across the Paria River from the existing largely nonfunctional gauging sta- Replacement of Potable Water Intake at the Colorado River. tion. The existing gauging station, which has been in place This project will remove the existing water intake pipe that has since 1922, will remain as a part of the Lees Ferry Lonely Dell been corroded over time by mineralization in the water from the Historic District. Colorado River. Omitted from the project was a proposal for some sort of visi- Install Narrowband Repeater for Grand Canyon National Park tor shade pavilion. The only shade in the area is provided by On the Paria Plateau Overlooking Lonely Dell Ranch. This proj- Tamarisk trees, a non-native invasive specie scheduled to be re- ect will replace the existing underpowered, under range solar moved as part of an on going Tamarisk removal project. powered wide band radio repeater with a new permanent, Source: NPS y page fifty six THE Waiting List What Does the GCPBA Board Do?

rom time to time, a question comes up about what GCPBA and its Board really do. And as we move into a Fnew year, with new initiatives, it’s appropriate to answer that question for members and constituents through- out the river community. GCPBA was organized for the purpose of representing the interests of private Grand Canyon boaters. Re- peated surveys of the membership and the Board over the years have identified a single unifying interest for the organization – access. And while a number of important secondary areas are also part of the picture, GCPBA has concentrated on expanding access to the Grand Canyon for private boaters. Doing that in today’s complex regulatory and organiza- • Publishing, this magazine, the Waiting List, our occasional tional environment – and doing it effectively – involves far more journal and other materials for the benefit of our mem- than just designing a letterhead and throwing up a web site and bers and the general boating public. listserv. The Board engages in a wide range of activities, among Developing environmental conservation strategies like which are the following: • the propane campfire and funding studies on the effectiveness • Participating in the analysis of, and response to, major of river dish washing systems. documents such as the Colorado River Management Plan. GCPBA’s Board serves without compensation. Most • Reviewing a wide range of other documents originating with individual Board members provide phone, postage, and other the Park and other agencies, looking for relevance to services to the organization without reimbursement. Some private boaters, and drafting and submitting responses as members have never even requested reimbursement for their needed. GCPBA-related travel. • Monitoring and responding to web site and listserv The Board represents a wide range of river-runners, and inquiries about GC boating and GCPBA. the Board itself is composed of folks with widely varying inter- • Traveling to meetings with the Park Service and other ests and views. So a major, ongoing task is to find consensus on issues as they arise, and determining the most effective means agencies and organizations, such as the Overflights group. of addressing them. That results in a need for ongoing commu- • Corresponding with other agencies and organizations, nication and coordination. by phone, mail, and internet. Finally, the Board continually seeks feedback from mem- • Managing and coordinating activities such as the annual bers and interested constituents in the river community. We do Auction, the Store, and the web site. that through the GCPBA web site email links, the Yahoogroups • Administering a membership roster and bookkeeping GCPBA listserv, monitoring other listservs and bulletin boards, and direct membership surveys. system for the organization. We are dedicated to serving our membership and the GC • Advocating for specific programs that benefit boaters, such boating community at large. Help us keep making access possi- as the Park’s proposed shade pavilion at Lees Ferry. ble while protecting the resource by joining if you are not a • Developing fund-raising initiatives to support member, by perhaps giving a gift membership from our store if organizational goals. you already are a member, and by providing us with the feed- • Participating in joint discussions with other interested back we need to stay in touch with the needs of the private GC boating community. organizations, such as the GCROA, GCRRA, American Whitewater, and the Hualapai Tribe. Rich Phillips Vice President, GCPBA y Winter 2006 page fifty seven “HEY! Where Are You Camping Tonight?” The advice to communicate with river trips you come into contact with is passed out frequently and freely. My years of experi- ence tells me that that while intentions are good, communication skills are not always good.So...I am listing a few points that may help out communications on the river. By example standing on the beach at 7:30 am shouting out to a passing motor rig “where are you planning to camp tonight?” and the reply of a friendly wave from crew and passengers may be sincere attempts at communicating, but may not be actually com- municating. To begin with, often the river is simply too noisy to be able to be heard half the river width away, but if you are heard, I offer the following: This one is very important and I’ve seen both commercial and 1. beaches and mile markers and even visitation sites are not always privategroups not do it. You come into Carbon Creek or some called by the same names for different folks. If possible have a map similar place and find boats on the beachwith no one there, in hand (even a pad of paper for sketching camp sites, trails and everyone is hiking but are they planning to stay?It’s two-o- rapid runs) and both parties refer to it. clock and there is no camp set up but … I’ve gonedownstream 2. Commercial guides and their passengers are not jerks by their rather than cause conjestion only to find that same groupfloat- mere presence. Treat each other in a courteous and friendly manner, ing by our camp a couple of hours later. I’ve even run up trailsa contacts should be fun, friendly and informative. couple of miles or more to find someone in commercial groups 3. Every trip (private and commercial) should have a TL and assis- whoknows what is going on. tant TL that knows what the plans are and has the authority (and “Where are the guides?” - “Up ahead.” - “How far?” - responsibility) to speak and to commit for the entire group....It may “Don’tknow.” - “Are you staying here?” - “Don’t know.” And on be nice that all the participants know what is going on but it is very you go until you finallyfind a guide.The “someone” that stays confusing for all of them to be talking on behalf of the group about behind with the boats definitely needs to know what the trip plans. plans are. Bob Marley a. our TL is Mary.... you should probably talk to her ... she is A simple, obvious solution: if you are going to camp, un- the one with the San Diego Padres baseball hat on and I load therafts. You don’t need to unload and/or set up every- think she has on a red t shirt - I will tell her you are looking thing if you wantto start off for a hike: gear bags and boxes on for her. the beach, ratherthan on the rafts, and a single table set up in b. When off hiking if at all possible leave someone with the the kitchen area arean obvious indicator that you plan to camp. boats who knows the days plans and who can speak for the Now it’s possible the plan is to (maybe) take the camp if group. they comeback late from the hike, or (maybe) go downstream 4. Don’t say you understand if you really don’t or are confused. if they get backearly. But I think that’s sort of bogus...and in- 5. use words like thanks, have a good one, you need anything, considerate of othergroups. Everyone down there understands the needs for changing plans. A possible (but maybe risky) approach: assume they are Be understanding of others changes and try to keep you own not camping,pull in a set up your own camp. I think (hope I changes to a minimum. Wally Rist don’t get flamed for this!) if it’s a commercial tripand they haven’t unloaded the boats, you’d be safe in assuming theplan … 2007 will be a great test for the entire boating community in is to go on down river after the hike... In any event, that’sthe Grand Canyon to make all the interchanges between all groups, assumption I would make. If it’s a noncommercial trip, I try to positive ones. It starts with communication and simply commu- never make any assumptions... nicating with the various trips that you bounce into each day, Here’s a pet peeve: I get to my intended camp, another what your proposed plan is. Then be flexible!The new small party is tiedup in the shade (it’s hot!) but not making any ef- trips of 8 people offers unlimited possiblities. Camping in fort to unloadanything. I pull over, ask if they are planning to unique small camps can be a huge perk to a trip. Most of the camp there (‘causeI would if they weren’t), they say “Yes”, I say time you can not camp there because of your trip size. Seeing “Fine, see youdownstream.” new parts of the canyon is always a joy. Small trips always have We go to the next camp about a half mile downstream, more flexibility, with their schedule, allowing for new and dif- then go hiking. From a vantage point high above the river, we ferent experiences on the trip. I really can not see how these see the group that saidthey were going to use our intended trips would be “looked down on”, for any reason.One other camp has now moved across theriver and downstream to an- fantastic tool that I would recommend for all trips, is to get a other camp. Our originally intended camp -my favorite in the copy of the launch schedule that overlaps your particular trip. whole canyon - is vacant. Knowing which trips might be catching up to you and which Needless to say, we ignored everything they had to say ones are right out in front on a similar schedule is priceless. about campingafter that. Drifter Smith These are available from the Lee’s Ferry Rangers! Ceiba page fifty eight THE Waiting List QUAGGA MUSSELS INVADE LAKE MEAD

he newly discovered mussel in Lake Mead are not The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Serv- Tzebra mussels as previously reported in earlier alerts, ices (2006) recommendations on management with the zebra they are quagga mussels (Dreissena rostiformis bugensis); mussels apply equally to the quagga mussel (http://www.des. state.nh.us/factsheets/ bb/bb-17.htm).“If you are in the power however, this may be even worse news. The taxonomic generation industry, plan now for the mussel’s invasion to your identifications were confirmed by Lake Mead National facility.” Recreation Area’s Resource Management Division’s Kent “When boating in infested waters, be sure to “de-mussel” Turner, yesterday. The Quagga mussel was likely trans- your boat before you leave the area. “De-musseling” includes per- ported from the Great Lakes, where it has become as im- forming the following activities AWAY FROM ANY SURFACE portant (and possibly more important) an invader as WATER: zebra mussels . The threat represented by this species to • Drain the bilge, live wells and engine cooling system. the Colorado River and its tributaries is equal or greater • Dump bait (or other) buckets. than that posed by zebra mussels, particularly as quagga • Inspect the boat by checking the hull, trim plates, an- mussels can colonize soft as well as hard substrata. chors, and the trailer. The U.S. Geological Surveys Non-indigenous Aquatic • Wash down the boat with hot water (140 oF), if mussels Species website has the following to say about the quagga mussel are found, and allowing the boat and trailer to sit (http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet. asp?speciesID=95). for 2-5 days dry.” “Dreissena bugensis is a small freshwater bivalve mollusk that ex- If you are boating on any segment of the Colorado River, hibits many different morphs; yet, there are several diagnostic or know others who are, let’s at least follow these basic recom- features that aid in identification. The quagga mussel has a mendations to slow the invasion down. rounded angle, or carina, between the ventral and dorsal sur- We continue to encourage all of us to consider the estab- faces…The quagga also has a convex ventral side that can some- lishment of a Colorado River Non-native Mussel Committee, times be distinguished by placing shells on their ventral side; a with representation from the Upper Basin Fisheries group, the quagga mussel will topple over, whereas a zebra mussel will not. Glen Canyon Dam AMWG, the Lower Basin MSCP, the Col- Dreissena’s ability to rapidly colonize hard surfaces causes orado River basin state fisheries departments, the National Park serious economic problems. These major biofouling organisms Service, National Forest can clog water intake structures, such as pipes and screens, there- Service, the Bureaus of Reclamation and Land Management, the fore reducing pumping capabilities for power and water treat- Tribes, other relevant organizations, as well as ment plants, costing industries, companies, and communities. recognized experts on the biology of this species. Recreation-based industries and activities have also been im- Please pass this information along to anyone who might be pacted; docks, breakwalls, buoys, boats, and beaches have all able to use the information. been heavily colonized. Quaggas are able to colonize both hard and soft substrata so their negative impacts on native freshwater Larry Stevens, Science Advisor mussels, invertebrates, industries and recreation are unclear. Grand Canyon Wildlands Council, Inc. P.O. Box Many of the potential impacts of Dreissena are unclear due to 1594, Flagstaff, AZ 86002 y the limited time scale of North American colonization. Grandcanyonwildlands.org; [email protected] Nonetheless, it is clear that the genus Dreissena is highly poly- morphic and has a high potential for rapid adaptation to ex- Editors note: River runners need be aware of the potential for the treme environmental conditions by the evolution of allelic inadvertent transmission of this pest from Colorado River/Lake frequencies and combinations, possibly leading to significant Mead environs to other popular rivers as river running gear is not long-term impacts on North American waters (Mills et al. normally confined to just one river. 1996). D. bugensis lacks the keeled shape that allows D. poly- As noted in the article D. bugensis is able to attach itself to morpha to attach so tenaciously to hard substrata; though, D. both soft and hard surfaces, therefore there is potential for attach- bugensis is able to colonize hard and soft substrata (Mills et al. ment to raft hull, dories, kayaks, inflateable kayaks, boat trailers 1996). The ability to colonize different substratas could suggest and other pieces of river running gear. that D. bugensis is not limited to deeper water habitats and that When removing removing gear from the water at the end it may inhabit a wider range of water depths. Dreissena bugensis of a trip, be sure to inspect your equipment for potential has been found at depths up to 130 m in the Great Lakes (Mills attachment by this fast reproducing critter. et al. 1996, Claxton and Mackie 1998). Winter 2006 page fifty nine

From the Editors Deck End of the Trip-Good Bye to the Super Super oe Alston is retiring as the Superintendent of the Grand Canyon National Park. River runners have had the good Jfortune to have Joe at the helm since 2000, taking over after the departure of Robert Arnberger who infamously pulled the plug on the Colorado River Management Plan process, citing irreconcilable differences between the vari- ous river constituencies as making it impossible to craft any sort of worthwhile plan, as it would most likely end up in court. End up in court, the National Park Service did anyway. Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association, along with American Whitewater and others filed suit against the NPS to restart the planning process. The suit was settled in 2002 and the Park Service was able to begin anew with the planning process, which as we all know was implemented a year ago. Into the mess left in Arnbergers wake stepped Joe Alston, former Superintendent of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. All of us in the river running advocacy world wondered what would the new superintendent be like? Would he focus on us the at- tention we thought our mission deserved? Speaking for myself, the guy who was GCPBA’s “point man” throughout the planning process Joe was just the right guy at the right time. Not an overly verbal or emotional leader, the new superintendent brought an open house feeling to park management. Questions asked were questions answered. Under his leadership an outstanding planning staff was assembled, and GCPBA’s relationship with the Park went from contentious to that of working side by side to hopefully put together a plan that would finally crack open the parks log jam called the “wait list” that guaranteed anyone wanting to lead a private trip in the Grand Canyon could be stuck waiting decades. Many times during the process I and my contemporaries from other points on the advocacy wheel went to the Superintendent with our “greatest ideas yet.” Joe always listened to them commented and told us he would consider them. We knew for sure they’d be considered but until the end we didn’t know what would be incorporated in the final plan. When word began to trickle out that the outfitters (GCROA) and the private boaters, (GCPBA/AW) were working together to try to contribute ideas and scenarios for a more harmonious river community, the Superintend- ent let us know that private boaters and commercial inter- ests finding ”common ground would mean a great deal to the Park “ and that they would carefully consider what agreements and proposals that we, together, might offer. Superintendent Alston offered the steady hand of leadership throughout the four year period of time it took to develop, what is in my opinion a tremendous step for- ward for all GC river runners and river running hopefuls. The Record of Decision was announced in January of 2006. With that announcement came a whole new day for non-commercial river runners. An innovative new lot- tery system was imposed, thousands of people on the old wait list now have confirmed launch dates, there are twice as many private launches available as previously under the old plan, a fifty percent increase in the number of private summer launches and parity in user days between private and commercial recreational boaters. Not to forget the thousands of more people that will be able to enjoy a Grand Canyon experience because of Alston’s leadership. So, Superintendent Alston for the guy who had to climb on board a boat wrapped on the rocks, you did a fine job setting the ship right. For me, you are an inspiring leader and we here a GCPBA wish you well. Ricardo y page sixty THE Waiting List

Just thoughtI’d pop in and say hi! Happy 10th birthday GCPBA- you’re wonderful! Al Winter 2006 page sixty one page sixty two THE Waiting List

Support GCPBA...It’s A Private Trip... Join Us!

membership: 1 yr $25 / 10 yrs $200 / Forever $350 or more send to: GCPBA, 809 W. Riordan Rd., Suite 100, #431, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Winter 2006 page sixty three

gulchradio.com gulchradio.com Hey kids tune in to the Ric & Roll show on gulchradio 87.7 somewhere in Arizona or on gulchradio.com everywhere in the universe mon-fri 5 am to 8 am MST and his famous geezer rock show - oldies sundays 4 to 6 MST - Friday nights from 6 to 9 the Chazman plays the new tunes on the Gulch gulchradio.com PARTNERSHIP FOR SALE Fast growing river supply company. Promotion and shows will be your part of the deal. I can keep you out there and on rivers for as long as you like. $400k required for 50%-includes property. tuffriverstuff.com 800-421-7007 page sixty four THE Waiting List Winter 2006 Show Us Your Boats (photo: Craig Lovell©2007) Craig (photo:

Bert’s beached, bleached and broken boat basks in the Canyon sun on a summer day, 2006

the Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association 809 W. Riordan Road Suite 100,#431 Flagstaff, Az 86001

www.gcpba.org [email protected]