You are here

Updated: Budgeting At Grand Canyon National Park Is Not Always As Simple As You Might Think

Share

In a park with many uses -- mule rides, backpacking, river running -- budgeting to meet needs at Grand Canyon National Park is not always easy or simple. Top photo by Cecil Stoughton, National Park Service Historic Photograph Collection; middle photo NPS; bottom photo, Mark Lellouch, NPS.

Editor's note: This rewords the 15th paragraph to reflect that park officials did not say most comments received on the environmental assessment spoke in favor of above-the-rim rides over Inner Gorge rides.

The recent debate over mule rides in Grand Canyon National Park has left park officials, who say they have to live within their budgets and the public's desires, strongly criticized by mule backers, who say trail impacts might be less of an issue if park managers were smarter with how they spend their money.

Unfortunately for outsiders, fully understanding National Park Service budgeting is not always an easy task. There are funds dedicated to specific aspects of a park's operations, overlapping assignments that can make it difficult to tease out how much is spent on a specific area, and, among other things, funds that must be spent within a specific time-frame.

These challenges can be found in just about every one of the 394 units of the National Park System, which makes the following a helpful primer for those trying to understand how spending decisions sometimes are made in their favorite parks.

When Grand Canyon officials in March 2010 embarked on an environmental assessment to help chart the future of livestock use in the park, they pointed out that "an annual budget of approximately $3 million is needed to adequately maintain the park’s corridor trails; however, the park only receives between $1.5 and $2 million annually through entrance fees, concessions franchise fees and other sources for trail maintenance and repair."

"Additionally," they continued, "deferred maintenance costs on inner canyon corridor trails currently exceeds $24 million (GRCA PAMP 2006) – unless management actions are taken in the near future, trails will continue to fall into disrepair and deferred maintenance costs will continue to increase."

The uproar over the park's eventual decision to restrict public mule rides down to Phantom Range in the park's Inner Gorge to 10 mules per day along the Bright Angel Trail, and 10 a day from Phantom Ranch to the South Rim via the South Kaibab Trail, got me wondering about the trail maintenance funding woes, and how easily it might be to move money from another area to help meet those needs.

Since river trips down the Colorado River are a main attraction of the Grand Canyon and require more than a little attention from the park to manage, I figured that'd be a good place to look into the funding quagmire. What I found out is that nothing is entirely cut-and-dried when it comes to park funding.

For starters, Grand Canyon National Park currently spends about $1.4 million a year on river operations -- the permitting office, river patrols, concessions program, rangers staffing the put-in and takeout, environmental audits, and fee collections from river trips, just to name the most obvious tasks.

To cover that $1.4 million, the park receives a little more than $200,000 for river operations in its base funding from Congress, according to park spokeswoman Maureen Oltrogge. Another $600,000 or so comes from private user fees, she added, and the balance -- some $500,000 -- comes from concession fees.

“That pays for us to administer that operation," she said, "and that, too, pays for a ranger at Lee’s Ferry (the put-in), it pays for a ranger at Meadview (the takeout), it pays for river patrol operations."

And often those river patrols are multi-purpose, Ms. Oltrogge continued, explaining that while there might be a river ranger on the boat, there often might be someone working on Inner Gorge trail maintenance, vegetation studies, or archaeological or fisheries research. As a result, here can be a mingling of park funds traveling in that boat.

"It’s not as clean as you can take it from here without affecting something else. As nice as that would be, you just can’t do that," said Ms. Oltrogge.

Indeed, added Barclay Trimble, the Grand Canyon's deputy superintendent for business services, the money generated by river trips has to be spent on river management.

“All the stuff that comes from cost recovery from the privates (trips), that has to be spent on the resources that are being used to generate those fees. So that really can’t be reallocated at all," he said.

As to the furor over just 10 mule rides a day, park officials pointed out that current use patterns overwhelmingly show there are more hikers in the canyon than mule trips. Nearly 200 comments were received on the draft EA, they said in their synopsis, and "a wide variety of comments were received and a majority supported retention of at least some level of stock use in the park." By making more above-the-rim mule rides available, the park was responding to public demand, the officials said.

"I would say we're providing an opportunity for a bigger population, a bigger visitation base, to have that experience" of a mule ride atop the South or North rims, rather than in canyon's Inner Gorge, Mr. Trimble said during an earlier conversation. "We have had several comments over many, many, many years ... about a need for some above the rim. Not everybody wants to spend a full day going down into the canyon, baking in the sun, and coming back out.”

“The opportunity is still there, we are still providing mules down into Phantom Ranch and the North Rim is providing a ride down into the canyon," he added.

In an editorial endorsing the park's preferred livestock plan, the Arizona Daily Sun pointed to the disparity between the numbers of hikers and mule riders in the canyon.

In truth, it hasn't been the mule rides that have increased dramatically but the number of hikers -- hundreds of thousands now use the Bright Angel and South Kaibab trails each year. The two groups have combined to wear out the trails much faster than they can be repaired, resulting in a $20 million backlog of repairs.

But because there are no other viable trail corridors into Phantom Ranch, something had to give, and it was clear that the visitor experiences of 300,000 annual hikers were going to outweigh those of 10,000 mule riders. Deeply rutted trails filled with mule dung and urine, combined with rules of the road that give mule trains priority -- even when they step on a hiker's foot -- made it a foregone conclusion that some of the mules would have to go.

The move to fewer mules in the Grand Canyon is a changing of the recreational guard. While mules long have been associated with the canyon -- Brighty, anyone? -- the demand for mule rides into the canyon at a minimum seems to be slackening, while the influx of hikers determined to hoof it with their gear on their back is climbing.

Under today's budgeting scenario, something had to give, and park officials went into their deliberations with one certainty, as Ms. Oltrogge pointed out during our conversation.

“No matter what decision you make, you’re going to have people happy with it and people who are not," she said.

Featured Article

Comments

Contact Information for Congressman Rob Bishop

Office Addresses and Phone Numbers:

Washington office:
123 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515
ph: 202-225-0453
fax: 202-225-5857

Ogden office (main Utah office):
1017 Federal Building
324 25th St
Ogden, UT 84401
ph: 801-625-0107
fax: 801-625-0124

Brigham City office (staffed only part-time):
6 N Main St
Brigham City, UT 84302
ph: 435-734-2270
fax: 435-734-2290

Salt Lake office (staffed only part-time):
125 South State St, Suite 5420
Salt Lake City, UT 84138-1102
ph: 801-532-3244
fax: 801-532-3


To the complainer remark by anonymous: I 'm working hard at not truly reacting to your remark, LOL, it is so rediculous and out of place, really. It's my experience that NPS politicos (not backcountry rangers) do not really want our help except when they demand it.
There have been offers to assist NPS trail crews that typically get along VERY WELL with the mules. They LOVE the mules in conversations I've had and they admit they could not do their work without them. Last winter while they were working at Tip Off the crews had spend most of their daylight time and energy hiking from Phantom to the worksite above Tip Off and back everyday because they didn't have ENOUGH mules. I personally applied to be a volunteer on trail crew and was approved by the volunteer coordinator in Flagstaff but was never called by Trails Head Billy Allen.
The North Rim Wranglers have been great stewards of the trails. They routinely clean rest rooms at Supai and assist hikers DAILY with issues. The rest room maintenance was volunteer and routinely done before this year when it now is unnecessarily REQUIRED by NPS. Many times this last year the water at Supai Tunnel was turned of with inconsistent notification to hikers. Wranglers picked up the slack and provided water to hikers that were in dire shape. I could go on and on but what I will add that Superintendent Steve Martin has been the most divisive person in charge here that many can remember and came in here with an agenda. All of these arguments are completely unnecessary and not appreciated by those with a level of maturity and hands on experience in the Canyon.


Quote- Keeper: To the complainer remark by anonymous: I 'm working hard at not truly reacting to your remark, LOL.

Why the intimidation? The post was about volunteering your time and not complaining. Usually people get defensive when they get backed into a corner, could it be that the post offends you because its true?

And, yes I have hiked the North Kaibab Trail as well - if i remember correctly, the toilet you are celebrating the cleaning of - is primarily used by the mule riders; my opinion as a taxpayer is, if they dirty it.....they should help clean it.....why not. I think that if the NPS is requiring the concessionaire clean it, maybe thats a good thing.....whatever, its a toilet probably not the core issue here.

Or is this another activity that you feel the government should perform to support private industry at the Grand Canyon. Remember this whole topic is about the limts of spending taxayer dollars, why do you feel the government should spend 1.5-3.0 million dollars to repair trails annually, when the primary impacts come from for a private industry operation that makes a profit from this activity, trail repairs are not cheap.

So, Keeper - do me a favor and follow your own advice and stop name dropping the NPS people that must have upset you somehow, and quit making (Quote): unnecessary and unappreicated arguments, such as the comment you made that the work could not be done without mules.......no duh!

The question you should be asking is, how many mules are absolutely necessary to do the work, and how many mules are absolutely necessary to support the vistor experience. Remember that the NPS is required to preserve and protect these places, in perpetuity, for the enjoyment of future generations, not just your generation or demographic.

Also, before you blow a gasket, ask yourself - how many tax dollars would you spend per mule going down the trail, or per hiker to maintain access to a place that is dear to all of us. This is everyones favorite place, everone not just a favorite place for mules and the mule riders who go down on them.


No gasket problem here, Cheese. Sounds like you might be a local so would offer up something. Just a visit together over a micro or several. I'm not usually violent unless rudeness to my charges or the Canyon is involved :).
With just 0.06 % percent of the Inner Canyon Trails available to mules and their forever transformed riders the issue here needs to be put to rest and NOT with the present EA. It's about the public's need for something REAL that adds perspective to their own importance that I see. Would love to visit with someone as impassioned as yourself. Not much stealth here on this site. My name is Rich Granberg and can be messaged on Facebook. I'll buy the first round:).
Respectively


This is the Peoples Park,http://www.gordonspanel.com/
Quote.Remember that the NPS is required to preserve and protect these places, in perpetuity, for the enjoyment of future generations, not just your generation or demographic.


It seems that the pro-livestock crowd commenting here just wants carte - blanche access to the trails and no responsibility to the impacts of their activity. These commentors also seem to attack or attempt to discredit the comments from hiker groups or anyone that dosent share their opinions. Seem like a bully tactic to me.

Sorry, im my world there are limits to most everything. What suprises me is that the government had not restricted this activity sooner. How many people would go river rafting and what impacts would that have if left unchecked, how many helicpters would fly over the rim if not restricted.......how many mules daily, or should mules be the exception?

The recent EA for livestock use seems to add more mule rides in the park annually (from 8,000 to 10,000-ish), but mostly in areas that are easier/cheaper for the NPS to repair. It appears the areas that have been problematic or really expensive to repair historically, have fewer mules visiting them daily, or none at all. This seems like a good buisness practice to me.

Another irony of all these comments on restriction is that if the concerned parties wanted to bring in their own livestock into the canyon for a ride, they can go as often as they like, almost anywhere they like. the only entity being restricted is the concessionaire.

There are a variety of comments made about removing mules from the canyon.
In the EA I read - there is no mention of removing mules. the only place this comes up is in the emotional comments made by a few ex-wranglers here, or on their facebook page......repeatedly......geezus get over it. Xanterra has been provided with a operating plan and procedures that fit governement maintenance budgets. It dosent effect private use at all - you got a mule, get a permit go ride it in the Grand Canyon - celebrate being American.....whatever. Just stop with the sour grapes on everything Grand Canyon, you make it sound like a bad place, when in fact it is one of the most iconic places in this country and worty of protection and stewardship by the NPS from mule activity or any other activity that effects it negatively.


Keeper - your math is way off. That should read 6%.


Yes, ypw, my figure was indeed incorrect. You think it changes the dynamics of the discussion? I guess it does a bit but getting to what I see as the loss here is not concessionaire profits nor the cost to NPS but the LOSS TO THE PUBLIC because of the priority of sending trail dollars away from established public use to PUNISH a concessionaire (that does not care)! I see myself as someone that is sticking up for the PUBLIC'S experience here! I'd like you or anyone to try and argue I have selfish interests other than it fills me up to see what the experience means to the individuals that I lead. Go ahead and try, it'll be a wasted effort. You are welcome to join me and Yahoo for a brewsky.
Blessings


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.