Home ›

Running Lava Falls In Grand Canyon National Park: What Would Major Powell Think?

Submitted by Kurt Repanshek on June 5, 2009 - 3:00am

Running the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon sure has changed since Major Powell first attempted it. NPS photo of Lava Falls by Mark Lellouch.

Much has changed when it comes to running rivers since Major John Wesley Powell first floated the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon. What do you think he'd say of today's voyages down the iconic river?

Where it took the one-armed major and his men three months to navigate the Green River from Wyoming down to the confluence with the Colorado at present-day Canyonlands National Park and on south through the Grand Canyon, today you can float the Colorado through the canyon in two weeks or less. More so, the crafts used today have more give and can take more than then wooden boats the major went with.

What follows are two videos of rafters navigating the infamous Lava Falls, one shot with a hand-held camera in August 2006, the other with a high-def camera just last month. Aside from the quality of the footage, the videos reflect two very different approaches to tackling the Colorado River. One, by muscle-powered rafts, the other by motor-propelled rafts that hint at the industrialization of running the Colorado.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on June 5, 2009 - 8:42am.

Yes, industrialization is a good term to discribe the concessions services that have the lions share of summer access to the river today. Powell, who was the only person on his first trip with a lifejacket floating in a very tippy boat and who was traveling down the "great unknown" missing a hand, just might be aghast. The Colorado river in Grand Canyon has become commercialized and motorized. Powell might just tell us that in order to make sure we manage our National Parks "...in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for future generations." we need to re-visit how the river is managed today. Yours, Tom

Submitted by Dan P. (not verified) on June 5, 2009 - 10:08am.

Oh, for heaven's sake. Industrialized? I am hard pressed to believe that an outboard motor in the muddy Colorado threatens to impair Grand Canyon. For that matter, it's an act of wild projection to suppose that Powell would somehow be offended at the thought of an easier trip down the Colorado.

If motors offend, take a paddle tour. If rafts offend, take a dory. But let's not get our knickers in a twist just because more customers prefer the safety and relative ease of a motorized trip.

Submitted by R Scofield (not verified) on June 5, 2009 - 10:21am.

I say we put the wooden canoes back on the river and let Humphrey Bogart captain one. That would make a great movie. Wait that's already been done. Never mind.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on June 5, 2009 - 11:04am.

This article title appears at first glance to indicate a volcanic eruption in the canyon... Perhaps Rafting Lava Falls, would convey the point better?

Submitted by YosemiteSteve on June 5, 2009 - 12:45pm.

Steven M. Bumgardner
Videographer/Producer

As the person who shot and edited the footage of the motor powered raft, I'd like to share my thoughts. Floating down the Grand Canyon has always been a life goal of mine, and I was thrilled to have the chance last month when I picked up this freelance gig. I'd always assumed that I'd run the Colorado with my friends, in human powered rafts and kayaks, and I'm not the type to book a trip with one of the big river companies. Of course, to run 200 miles of river takes a big chunk of time, usually at least 3 weeks, and of course, most people (except retirees and the unemployed) don't have that much vacation time. A 7 day power raft trip does allow a lot of people to have this amazing experience. It probably isn't as powerful of an experience that a longer, human powered trip would be, but let's compare that with the South Rim. We seem to accept that it's okay for 3-4 million people to drive there and peek over the edge. Perhaps they should all walk there? The South Rim is far more industrialized (Railroads, buses, old power plants, uranium mines, etc.) than the river corridor.

Personally, I think Powell would have preferred a nice, big S-Rig w/ a 60 horse Honda outboard motor, but instead, he used the tools he had.

Submitted by Kurt Repanshek on June 5, 2009 - 12:50pm.

First off, I was remiss in not identifying Steve as the videographer of the HD version. His works in Yosemite have shown up elsewhere on the Traveler and his eye has opened up much of the national parks to folks who otherwise might not have seen them.

As for the "industrialization" comment, let me recount a short story. In college back in West Virginia I spent weekends guiding white-water trips on the Cheat and New rivers. Early on in that "career" our trips would have the rivers to ourselves. There were few other raft companies, and those that did exist were spaced out nicely so you could sense some solitude. By the end of my college days, these river trips had turned into what I've called Rubbermaid convoys, with one trip backing up behind another at the head of a rapid. The experience of being in a river canyon with a small group of people, the feeling of being out in nature, had been greatly diminished not only by the other trips in front and behind you, but by the associated pressure of having to race through the rapid so the next trip could do the same.

Should Colorado River trips turn into that? How many engine-powered rafts carrying a dozen or more passengers charging down the river should there be? How does that impact the experience, let alone the resources (any idea how many groovers are needed for these commercial runs?)? How "easy" should these sorts of experiences be made for visitors?

Should there be a tram to the top of Half Dome or the Grand Teton in the cause of allowing more folks to experience the view from atop those wonderful places? Or should they remain as they are, making your ascent that much more of an achievement?

Those are tricky questions the Park Service has to balance in coming up with answers. But I fear that if we focus on perfecting the "ease" of enjoying these experiences that we'll lose something much, much more valuable.

Submitted by YosemiteSteve on June 5, 2009 - 1:07pm.

Steven M. Bumgardner
Videographer/Producer

Thanks, Kurt, for the tip of the hat.

To answer your questions about how many, that's a set answer. Rafting the Colorado in the Grand Canyon is heavily regulated (http://www.nps.gov/grca/parkmgmt/crmp.htm). My impression is that the largest impact of motor rafts is sound disturbance from the motors. All camps are below the high water line, and I must say that Wilderness River Adventures runs a tight ship, and we always left a spotless camp behind us.

The idea of building trams to Half Dome or Grand Teton have actually been suggested in the past (of course, wilderness designation precludes such developments today), but of course, what you're talking about is development, creating new infrastructure that will persist 24/7. That's very different than a motor boat interrupting your serentity for the 5 to 10 minutes it takes for it to pass you.

One final thought: The management of the Colorado requires the use of motorized boats, and on our trip, we passed 3 different NPS boats (all motorized), 2 USGS science trips (motorized) and an Arizona Fish & Game crew at the Little Colorado (about 6 motorized boats.)

Submitted by Rick Smith on June 5, 2009 - 1:19pm.

When Grand Canyon's current superintendent, Steve Martin, was a young river ranger there, the NPS patrolled the river in oar-powered rafts. At one time, I believe they even had a dory. Too bad those days are gone. The management of the Colorado does not REQUIRE motorized boats, but it is easier that way.

Rick Smith

Submitted by YosemiteSteve on June 5, 2009 - 2:28pm.

Steven M. Bumgardner
Videographer/Producer

Require is a strong word, but Arizona Fish & Game, working on chub restoration (http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/research_humpback_chub.shtml), was using motorized rafts to electro-shock non-native fish. Their "patrol" area around the mouth of the Little Colorado goes a couple of miles downstream, and then "requires" that they return back upstream through a few small rapids back to their basecamp.

I'm definitely not an advocate for motorized recreation, and I think the term 'motor sports' is an oxymoron. I was shocked to see so many motorized boats on the Grand Canyon. I had no idea. But by day 7 of my trip, in a place as immense as the Grand Canyon, with millions of visitors coming to the park each year, I started realizing that a little outboard motor stuck on the back of a raft was a very powerful and practical tool, and I wouldn't hold my breath thinking that it might someday go away.

BTW, Superintendent Martin floated down the Colorado River this spring, in a motorized boat.

Submitted by Judy Dippel, "motorized" guest (not verified) on June 6, 2009 - 9:51am.

Interesting comments! As a "guest" to the Canyon who was on the Wilderness River motorized trip (Steve's video), and as a person from Oregon who is environmentally conscious, I'm disappointed to hear cristicism of what was a marvelous, and environmentally responsible trip. Yes, we've paddled ourselves, (and kayaked) down the DeShutes, the Snake, the Rogue, etc., but we chose a motorized trip down the Colorado. Time was the biggest factor in that decision, and the thrill of experiencing more of the Canyon, and to have the opportunity to enjoy more back trails...in the time we had.
What would John Wesley Powell think? I believe he would have used the latest and safest means available to see and experience as much of the Canyon as humanly possible. I think he would have felt as we did; humbled and privileged to be within this great place for a short time. Perhaps he would have resisted the regulations, but thousands of people today appreciate the necessity of those.
I was in awe of the high standards and precedents set, and the respect our guides and group had for the land, and for every other person on the river. How often did I hear our "captain" holler out to other rafters (motorized or otherwise), "Need anything?" ... "Doing OK?" ... "Ice? Sure."
Yes, the motors were a quiet churning, but I hardly call that industrialized. More like "industrious," as was one guest on our trip who was 76. Her spirit longed to see and do what oar rafters and kayakers do, and the motorized trip allowed her to do so. I live in Eugene, the "green" capital of Oregon. I'm tired of people who condemn those who respectfully choose other options. That makes us no less committed to doing our part in keeping the Canyon pristine. Broaden your thinking...there is more than one right way! And Steve, Mark and I send thanks for all your good work...and friendship! Kudos to Wilderness River Adventures, too!
Judy Dippel

Submitted by Ed Gaffney (not verified) on June 7, 2009 - 7:42pm.

I don't think oars vs. motors is the real conflict, both means of transport have an impact. The conflict is love vs. stewardship. The point is to get people out there enjoying our parks and still minimize the impact, regardless of their preferred method of travel or use of the parks facilities. The NPS needs to set responsible limits. I think overall they've done good job at most of the parks I've visited. There will always be conflict over what is considered reasonable/responsible use.

By the way, I was on an oar-powered raft trip in 1993 in the canyon. When a motorized raft went by us, I knew everyone on that raft would've switched places with me in a heartbeat.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on June 7, 2009 - 11:59pm.

I am wondering if anyone knows of a website or blog that people can contact if they are interested in rowing on a private trip which may have some space available.

Submitted by Kurt Repanshek on June 8, 2009 - 6:47am.

Excellent question, Anonymous. If anyone does know, please pass word on to the Traveler. It would be a great addition to our content.