Settlement Reached in Grand Canyon River Management Litigation. Go here for more.

On February 23, 2000 after three years of activity, then Superintendent Robert L. Arnberger of Grand Canyon National Park temporarily suspended work by his staff on the ongoing revision of the National Park Service’s Colorado River Management Plan. Also known as the CRMP, this is the National Park Service's planning document that governs access to and activities within the Colorado River corridor within Grand Canyon National Park. Last formalized by the National Park Service in 1989, the plan was under active government review beginning in the fall of 1997 until the Superintendent’s decision to suspend this effort.

In making his decision, Superintendent Arnberger cited limitations of funding and personnel, federal requirements for strategic planning which he felt the agency could not meet given these budgetary and human resource constraints, his consideration of the park’s other pressing priorities, unresolved user conflicts with a stark lack of public consensus on various fundamental river management questions, and twenty years of inaction by the U.S. Congress on the Grand Canyon National Park wilderness recommendation.

Frustrated by the Superintendent’s decision, a group of individuals and another group of advocacy organizations joined by individuals, each of whom had long planned to use the CRMP revision process to advance one particular political agenda or another, each sued the government in federal court challenging the decision. The first case was filed on March 9, 2000 in the Tenth Circuit in US District Court in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The second case was filed in the Ninth Circuit on July 5, 2000 in US District Court in Phoenix, Arizona. Because of the potential for conflicting judgments on substantially similar issues, the government asked the Arizona court to consolidate both cases in New Mexico. On the 14th of February, 2001, the court denied the government's motion, clearing the way for this case to proceed.

Recognizing that both cases may affect the interests and activities of its member concessioners and the public they serve, the Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association asked the courts to grant the Association the right to participate in the cases as an Intervenor. In both cases, these requests were granted by the courts. A judgment in the first case is possible at any time. As noted above, the parties in the Arizona case reached a negotiated settlement in January of 2002. For more about the underlying controversies that gave rise to these lawsuits, please review the materials available on our Issues and Politics page. Also, please find below downloadable versions of the major court documents pertaining to each case. These documents are presented as "pdf" files and require the Adobe Acrobat Reader program to open and view.

In the United States District Court
For the District of New Mexico

RANDALL et al

v.

NORTON et al Civil No. 00-349 MV/WWD-ACE

In this case, nine individual private boaters from around the country challenge the government’s decision to halt the Colorado River Management Plan revision process and the current recreational use allocation ratio for the Colorado River within Grand Canyon National Park for professionally-outfitted users versus self-outfitted users. Plaintiffs seek a court order compelling a redistribution of the available recreational use by the National Park Service and assert a statutory right of "free access" to the river for the purpose of personal recreation and a constitutionally protected interest in rafting the river. In the opinion of the government defendants and the Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association, these legal claims are without merit.

PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF

DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE BRIEF ON MERITS

INTERVENOR’S RESPONSE BRIEF

DEFENDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR MOOTNESS

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR MOOTNESS

DEFENDENT'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR MOOTNESS

INTERVENOR'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR MOOTNESS

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED HEARING AND INTERIM RELIEF

In the United States District Court
For the District of Arizona

GRAND CANYON PRIVATE BOATERS ASSOCIATION et al

v.

ALSTON et al Civil No. CIV 001277-PCT-PGR

In this case, various advocacy groups joined by individuals asserted that the National Park Service has violated certain laws governing management of Grand Canyon National Park. The issues raised related to how the National Park Service conducts land management planning, the current recreational use allocation ratio for the Colorado River between professionally-outfitted users and self-outfitted users, the use of motorized watercraft on the Colorado River, and various procedural requirements relating to how the agency operates. Plaintiffs sought a court order barring the use of motorized watercraft in the park and the resumption of the Colorado River Management Plan revision process. The parties in this case reached a negotiated settlement in January, 2002. Use the link below to access the text of the settlement agreement for more information.


PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL