55 



I guess I did my level best to get the float community to support 

 that. I want good management in this canyon. I don't want free- 

 for-all, and I want to know how many boats I can expect to run 

 into on a given trip, on a given weekend, and I was willing to try 

 my best to support the draft environmental impact statement and 

 figure out a way to work in the State one week and go other places 

 on those other weeks. 



That plan did not receive enough support from other user groups 

 or from float groups, for that matter, to go forward at the final en- 

 vironmental impact statement. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. Let me ask you, Mr. Hughes, on the days that 

 we would eliminate powerboaters, then the floaters would have ex- 

 clusive use. The days that the powerboaters would be using the 

 river, does that mean the floaters would not be using the river? 



Mr. Hughes. On the draft environmental impact statement 

 which is history now and not part of any proposal, yes, that was 

 the case. The wild river was to be shared one week — shared in a 

 manner where one week there was only nonmotorized use and one 

 week there was motorized use, but that alternative didn't receive 

 enough support to move through the planning process. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. And that would be exclusive motorized use, no 

 floaters? 



Mr. Hughes. Yes, that was the proposal. That was, once again, 

 not on the entire river, but just on the upper portion of the wild 

 river section. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. So what you are telling me is that there would 

 be no exclusive use for Jetboaters over and above the floaters on 

 the area that is not in the primitive designation. 



Mr. Hughes. With the plan that we have now, the only exclusion 

 is that 21-mile section for 24 days, although powerboaters can cer- 

 tainly use the other 48 river miles during those days, but during 

 this week on/week off option which was a long time in the past that 

 it was discussed as a viable option, powerboaters would have had 

 the wild river to themselves for a period of time just as rafters 

 would have. 



Mrs. Chenoweth. I would like to ask Mr. Cooley if he has any 

 more questions. 



All right. I would like to also ask Mr. Bailey some questions. 

 During the process of developing the LAC management plan, you, 

 of course, have testified that you were one of the two members of 

 that task force who refused to agree to the consensus recommenda- 

 tion. 



Do you see any conditions under which you would be willing to 

 work in good faith with powerboaters toward an equitable, shared 

 use plan? 



Mr. Bailey. Yes, I certainly always would be willing to work 

 with the powerboat constituency and have worked with them 

 through the LAC process. 



I might add just to clarify that our disagreements with the LAC 

 plan came in the middle of trying to approve a specific facet of that 

 plan. It wasn't something that came out and we said, no, we don't 

 want it. It was something that was in the middle of being devel- 

 oped, and we said, no, we feel that adjustments need to be made. 



