Re: (Fwd) Comments on Colorado River Management Plan

Judy Zachariasen (judyz@gps.caltech.edu)
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 14:47:44 +0600


>Judy, it's your turn to cook.
>
>Propose a system to reallocate user days to reflect the true
>demand of private and commercial boaters.
>
>Ben
>

OK, this is totally off the top of my head, but I'll give it a shot:
Warning - this may make no sense whatsoever

I'm not sure on the numbers here, but this is a demo -
Say 20% of users now are private and 80% are commercial peeps. And the
average wait for a private trip is 10 years, while the average wait for a
commercial trip is 2 years. To get an estimate of how many people are
sitting around wanting and waiting for a trip at any one time, what if you
multiply 20 by 10 years = 200, and 80 by 2 years = 160. Total of 360. So,
200 out of 360 or 55% of user demand is private and 45% is commercial. So
allocate user days like that. And everybody waits 3.6 years to go (does
that work?). Allocation could be adjusted if one or the other sector starts
developing a longer wait list. Actually, I'm assuming there still wouldn't
be a formal NPS waitlist for commercial trips but each company would
develop one which would end up about 3.6 years because of fewer launch
days.

The result of this is that private use goes way up and commercial use goes
way down, if you don't increase overall use. But, that is what people want,
to be equitable, right? This does drive some companies out of business and
companies will sell out their permits etc because they won't be able to
make enough money with fewer user days. So, you end up with fewer
commercial companies running trips, which may be good or may be bad,
probably some of both. I think fewer companies running trips might be
better for the Canyon than the many that would result from total
deregulation. See my comments about proprietorship etc in previous post.
Ben, please tell me what you think about that issue - do you not see a
problem in having unregulated commercial outfitting? I really worry about
the impact.You would also have a lot more privates on the water at any one
time. The different aspects of commercial and private trips would still be
maintained mostly. It would probably mean a shorter trip for privates since
there are more of them - maybe only 16 day trips allowed rather than 18,
which is a pity still.

I don't think there would be any great difference in the ultimate
percentage of private versus commercial people doing this than with the
common pool thing. The allocation would be similar, but private and
commercial list would still be kept separate. My objection to some of
Ben's ideas was not with the change in numbers of private vs. commercial
people but just with introducing a bunch of changes to the system that I
thought could really wreck commercial boating and possibly damage the
Canyon more (from unchecked competition among unlicensed companies in a
more difficult market). All I am saying is, figure out the relative demand
for private vs. commercial trips and allocate days accordingly. Don't mess
with the rest of it.

There are certain changes that would result from reallocating no matter how
you do it, i.e. the probable shorter limit to private trips. That's the
nature of the beast with limited resources. I wonder, folks - how much does
the value of waiting less time compare with doing a longer trip? Would you
be willing to have a longer wait time for an 18-day trip? Or would you
rather forego the longer trip in order to get your permit within 4 years?

I'd like to hear people's ideas about having this approximate 50-50
distribution between private and commercial, if the commercial system were
relatively unchanged except for its size. Do you think the Canyon would see
more wear and tear or less? I'm inclined to think the damage will increase.
I am biased because in my experience in Idaho, commercial trips are more
careful about environmental impact and not littering and protecting the
resource than privates. Overall, of course. My company happens to b
pathologically (well, in a good way this time) committed to minimizing
impact, so frankly, we look good compared to most private trips we see.
This is not to say that there are not private trips that are equally
committed, but there are some real idiots out there. On commercial trips,
the impact of idiot passengers can often be damped by a guide with
knowledge. A whole trip full of idiots has no controls. I also think there
will be more safety incidents, since, in general, commercial boatmen are
more experienced than private boatmen. This may well be a price worth
paying for decreasing the substantial inequity that now exists - I'm
inclined to think so. But I do think there will be more accidents and
safety incidents with more privates.

Well, Ben, those are some more thoughts. I'd like to hear what you think
about some of the things I mentioned previously. My comments regarding
people willing to make a sacrifice deserving something had mostly to do
with the cancellation policy which is actually more related to an earlier
discussion on the list, but it seemed related so I threw it in. (Of course,
I'm currently desperately trying to get a cancellation and getting nowhere
which might mean I think the whole system should be changed but apparently
not. And I don't have auto speed dial. But I do have lots of time off this
spring.)

And, Ben, I couldn't tell from your post if you were pissed about what I
said. Hope not - it's just supposed to be food for thought. I took your
comments that way - I was just trying to get people to think about some of
the consequences of various actions, not just jump on a bandwagon. And I
welcome comments about the consequences of what I suggest because I have
probably not thought of many of them. Actually, I'm thinking of several
problems right now, for example the decrease in commercial user days would
result in still higher prices for commercial trips because of the increased
demand relative to supply. Nevertheless, that would happen no matter how
you reallocated launches if commercials end up losing total user days. Lots
to think about - it's not an easy problem no matter what, the fundamental
problem being too many people wanting to use a limited resource. It crops
up in every part of life and it means people don't get to have everything
they want when they want it. So it goes - we should have lived earlier (of
course, then I'd be barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen sink so
it's probably better for me now).

Tootles, Judy

====================================================================
To subscribe, send email to majordomo@songbird.com, with "subscribe
gcboaters" as the only line in the message body. To unsubscribe send
"unsubscribe gcboaters". For further information send "info
gcboaters", or see http://www.songbird.com/gcboaters
====================================================================