Stop the NPS from Chopping Bolts at Christmas Tree Pass

The Lake Mead National Recreation Area Bolt Choppers are at it again!

Please use either one of the links below to post your opposition to the latest NPS bolt CHOPPING plan. Comments are due on or before March 23, 2014.

Access Fund Comment Tool
accessfund.org/c.tmL5KhNWLr…

Park Service Comment Link
parkplanning.nps.gov/docume…
then click on "Comment on Document"

My Personal Comments
To Whom It May Concern:

Christmas Tree Pass, NV, aka: Bridge Canyon Wilderness, hosts over 90 specific rock climbs, many with fixed anchors, and some that Dick Richardson (RIP: 05/11/1998) and I personally installed between 1977 and 1980, more than 35 years ago. Several of these climbs receive traffic regularly. Yet the area remains pristine with abundant solitude and few group encounters.

The proposed wilderness management plan draft will unnecessarily impose severe restrictions on the long-time, appropriate activity of rock climbing.

The Department of Interior’s practice is well-established regarding the management of climbing and protection of cultural resources. Many land managers post closure information, implement physical barriers to protect specific locations, and close all climbing routes within a 50-foot buffer of a discrete cultural resource site.

National Park Service management policies (DO#41) support continued climbing at Christmas Tree Pass (Bridge Canyon Wilderness), including the use of fixed anchors, and NPS practice is well-established at numerous parks around the country that effectively balance climbing, Wilderness character, and cultural resources.

The Plan’s definition of ‘bolt-intensive face climb’ is inappropriate and should not be used to determine whether the NPS will remove fixed anchors. Management actions must be well-substantiated and based on measurable resource impacts, scientific analysis, and public input.

This would be the first Wilderness plan in the country to propose a systematic reduction of climbing fixed anchors.

Bolt removal on this scale is simply unprecedented and unnecessary.

I would appreciate it if you would STOP trying to destroy the climbing area that Dick Richardson (RIP: 05/11/1998) and I and many others sacrificed tens of thousands of hours to establish over the last 35 years.

Andrew Solow
San Francisco, CA
Cell 415-722-3047
http://www.accessfund.org/c.tmL5KhNWLrH/b.5208267/k.8C84/Action_Center/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=tmL5KhNWLrH&b=5208267&aid=520695 http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentID=57044

Where's the "like" button for this post?

Thanks for the links.
I submitted my comments to the NPS site in just a few minutes.

Commented on the plan. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

commented.

Letter sent!

very bold and sobering act on the part of a federal body. this is a direct attack on a specific outdoor recreation.

excerpt from the "alternative b" which is labeled in the document as the "preferred alternative". this label alone should be disturbing to anyone that owns a pair of climbing shoes:

More proactive management
also would be given to the Black Canyon,
Pinto Valley, Spirit Mountain, and Bridge
Canyon wilderness areas to address existing
and potential impacts. No fixed anchors and
equipment for climbing activities would be
permitted in the Spirit Mountain
Wilderness; all existing fixed anchors and
equipment would be removed if it can be
done so without damaging rock faces. In the
Bridge Canyon Wilderness no new fixed
anchors or fixed equipment would be
permitted, with the exception of permitted
replacement anchors. After an inventory of
climbing routes is completed, the National
Park Service would work with tribes and
partners to reduce the concentration of
some of the existing bolt-intensive face
climbs at certain climbing areas in the Bridge
Canyon Wilderness.

now here's an odd one:

The removal of
fixed anchors and equipment in the Spirit
Mountain Wilderness and the reduction in
concentration of some bolt-intensive face
climbs at certain climbing areas in the Bridge
Canyon Wilderness would reduce the
number of climbers using the climbing areas
at one time, therefore increasing
opportunities for solitude. Use of climbing
equipment (including climbing chalk) within
a minimum of 50 feet of rock art would be
prohibited. Because only a few climbers are
typically present at these areas at a given
time, the impact on opportunities for
solitude would result in a long-term, minor,
beneficial impact on the visitor experience.

so although you admit it would be a minor long term benefit you agree that the preferred method is to permanently remove routes?

Although the reduction in bolt-intensive
face climbs would be directed by Director’s
Order 41, there would probably be longterm,
negligible to minor adverse impacts for
some climbers who would no longer have
access to some of the existing bolt-intensive
face climbing opportunities in these areas.

"negligible to minor impact"? based on what exactly? how did they conclude that the impact would be minor? was a representative climbing group or coalition contacted and consulted to arrive at this conclusion?

thanks andrew for bringing this up. although it doesnt affect my immediate area i see this as an issue we should all be very concerned with. actions like this, once implemented, can easily be reference to gain steam for future such management plans.

Letter sent...... I encourage everyone to take action.

Letter sent, come on climbers!

Letter Sent, this is a very slippery slope we do not want to go down!!

The problem we are having here is that land managers Greg Jarvis and Jim Holland {retired but still obsessed with chopping bolts} think that it is their job to protect the Wilderness from people.

In fact, land managers are supposed to manage the wilderness in a way that both preserves the wilderness and makes it available for safe recreational use by the people, some of whom are rock climbers.

Unfortunately, Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Holland have injected their personal bias against rock climbing and rock climbers into this process. And, they have used a substantial amount of public money in their naked and repeated attempts to constructively ban rock climbing in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness area (aka: Christmas Tree Pass) during the last five years.

Andrew Solow

Bump to keep this at the top of the list...... Save a crag versus arguing with strangers on m.p.

Bump

I think that place is scary but adapted the OPs letter and submitted.
Steve

bump

Bump!

Typically, the LVCLC echoes the comments of the AF and is a part of their comment letter. In this case we submitted a separate letter and we encourage you to do the same.

We understand from the AF that over 250 comments have already been received by the NPS in regards to this proposed plan. Although that is great, we know that quality is better than quantity.

If you have not already, we urge you to use the links Andrew provided above to submit comments regarding your experience at Christmas Tree Pass.

Of importance is how we, as climbers, need wilderness to have the type of experience that is a core value of our ethics and traditions. We, too, seek to protect these wild places and that our interests run aligned with land managers in that respect. We just feel they are going about it the wrong way.

What happens at Christmas Tree Pass is important and could set a very negative precedent for climbing access across the country.

I'm working on my response, but I have a question for anyone that's climbed in the Christmas Tree Pass area: from the photos it looks like some (most) of these routes would be extremely difficult to protect using only trad gear (i.e. to climb trad if existing bolts are removed). Can anyone confirm this?

If that's true, the draft wilderness management plan seems to greatly underestimate the impact on the climbing community of removing existing bolts (described as negligible to minor negative impact on climbers on page v of the summary).

You are correct. You can't do 90% of the climbs at Christmas Tree Pass without climbing bolts. Land managers Greg Jarvis and Jim Holland are maliciously and intentionally trying to destroy that climbing area. They are obsessed with chopping bolts and restricting access. They hate climbers and climbing period.