Public comment on wilderness area fixed hardware

C Millerwrote:

Taken from the comments of [I can't believe it's a girdle] in Joshua Tree National Park:

"The bolts on this climb are in need of replacement.  At this time, JTNP, has found wildlife, vegetation, and cultural conflicts with climbing in this area and has denied the request to replace them."

This is not a good sign.  Having watched the video presentation of a JTNP meeting on this issue a year ago, I feared that the process looked like it would be dominated by extremists who can find impacts anywhere, with no consideration of reasonableness.

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

sport climbing is inconsistent with managed wilderness areas.

Wilderness areas are managed inconsistently 

Many of these wilderness areas weren’t really destinations until people started climbing at them.

Darren Mabewrote:

Wilderness areas are managed inconsistently 

National guidelines would tame that inconsistency some.

tom donnelly wrote:

This is not a good sign.  Having watched the video presentation of a JTNP meeting on this issue a year ago, I feared that the process looked like it would be dominated by extremists who can find impacts anywhere, with no consideration of reasonableness.

Hopefully this is not where it ends for that JTNP route.  Anyone follow up with them?

Or maybe climbers have already burned bridges with JTNP in that bonfire thread. 

cieneguita wrote:

This unique climbing wall is probably in the pusch ridge wilderness

https://www.mountainproject.com/area/109256040/orifice-wall

Is this an installation?

Wow, that’s an interesting specific case. Yes, it looks to me like it’s *just* inside of the boundary, but the scanned topo, the FS layer, and the map builder topo don’t draw the boundary in exactly the same place. The boundary doesn’t follow the ridge as you might expect, I think because they needed to allow for the 4x4 road on the ridge to continue to be used.

Furthermore the Pusch Ridge wilderness area is something of a failure. It was designated in a desperate attempt to save the bighorn sheep population there, but it did not. Now there’s some signs that  a re-introduction program might be having some success. I personally have mixed feelings about aggressive re-introduction programs (as we are purposefully choosing some “winners” worth saving and ignoring others, making a significant human impact on the ecosystem) and the hiking and dog restrictions don’t apply to the area the crag is located in.

My gut says yes, chain permadraws don’t belong in wilderness. But also you can probably see motorized vehicle traffic 500ft from the crag…

Wiled Horse wrote:

<guidelines>

You excluded the “some” part of my post … which, yes, is consistent with “guidelines”, lol.

Bill Lawrywrote:

You excluded the “some” part of my post … which, yes, is consistent with “guidelines”, lol.

Did you know the white border on a stop sign means it's optional?

Darren Mabewrote:

Did you know the white border on a stop sign means it's optional?

I hear you.  See you around.

Many of these wilderness areas weren’t really destinations until people started climbing at them.

Many? Name some please?

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

Many? Name some please?

Joshua Tree National Monument had very few visitors the first time I climbed there.

Smith Rocks 

Estes Park

Telluride Skiing, climbing 

Gunnison, though that’s for skiing

Whistler/Blacomb again for skiing 

Banff for skiing 

Mt Rainier, before climbing became very popular 

Mt Shasta 

North Cascades 

Mammoth/Lee Vining

Squamish 

Patagonia 

These are only places I can verify anecdotally from the early 1970s.

Yosemite/Tuolumne

Etc.

Outdoor use of wilderness has always been a thing in the USA since the days of Muir/Teddy Roosevelt.

UK nearly every view has a golf course or links course. Hunting in every woodland region…

Scotland, Ben Nevis and Glen Coe …

France, Near Paris and Grenoble, Mt Blanc,

Switzerland, Germany, though I’ve only done guided in Switzerland.

I’ve not been to Himalayas etc yet, but…

Just responded very quickly, if I gave it some thought, many more. Of course we can also look up more?

Not just Europeans either…

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

I think a sincere debate can be had around whether a single bolt constitutes an installation. A line of bolts to anchor chains, hmmm, that's starting to look a little installey to me. 10-bolted routes at a sport crag? That's a development, man, a genuine installation. No two ways about it - sport climbing is inconsistent with managed wilderness areas.

Egregious and thoughtless route setting with power tools, agree.

Anchors and anything dealing with safety especially out of sight from casual hikers or walkers should not be regulated except by the climbing community.

Safety and climbing access are why sites such as this one exist.

We have very different definitions of wilderness areas. 

Here's my definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wilderness_areas_of_the_United_States

Li Hu, literally none of your examples are wilderness as defined by law.
i really hate to be captain obvious, but I’m starting to get the sense that some people don’t understand that designated wilderness is a legal designation that comes with its own regulations. 

Li Huwrote:

should not be regulated except by the climbing community.

.

How's that working out for you 

Frank Steinwrote:

Li Hu, literally none of your examples are wilderness as defined by law.
i really hate to be captain obvious, but I’m starting to get the sense that some people don’t understand that designated wilderness is a legal designation that comes with its own regulations. 

You may be right for some points some of us are making. Some of us have strayed into discussing areas outside of designated wildernesses. Still, considering what has happened outside can inform what can / could happen inside.

Also, at least the USFS proposed guidelines allow imposing climbing restrictions on FS land that is outside of wilderness - not a distinction I care about but worth mentioning in the context of your last post.

Darren Mabewrote:

How's that working out for you 

Hahaha, not very well.

Bill Lawrywrote:

Hopefully this is not where it ends for that JTNP route.  Anyone follow up with them?

I'm not even sure how a followup appeal process would work.  1. Does the park publicly release the full details and evidence of their finding?
2.  What adjustments or mitigation could be made to the rebolting that would make it acceptable?

tom donnellywrote:

I'm not even sure how a followup appeal process would work.  1. Does the park publicly release the full details and evidence of their finding?
2.  What adjustments or mitigation could be made to the rebolting that would make it acceptable?

I haven't seen any details and don't know if there are possible alterations that could be made to the route - good question.

I haven't climbed this route.  Still, I sent a query to the email address on the JTNP Bolting page.  Maybe I'll hear something back after the holiday weekend.

The route gets only a few ticks a year on the MP page.  

In just one wilderness on Mt. Lemmon are the following crags, many with sport routes:

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/125381797/fixed-anchors-wilderness#ForumMessage-125392366

BUMP - Here is my comment on the NPS Proposal: 

Rock climbing and its occasional reliance on fixed anchors (bolts, slings around trees or boulders, etc.) has been a historically important and precedented activity that predates the 1964 Wilderness Act. By definition, rock climbing occurs on strong and durable rock surfaces. At times, fixed anchors are needed to supplement the natural protection of a rock climb or when a section of stone is so clean that no weakness to place natural projection can be found.  When contrasting a rock climb to other permissible uses of Wilderness like Hiking and Hunting - it's impact on the Wilderness Character is substantially less. Trails can be seen from a great distance, erode surfaces, and affect wildlife corridors. Hunting involves shooting rifles with metal bullets at wildlife.  Here with hunting, we have a large auditory impact, and abandoned property in the form of bullets.  Climbing on the other hand, involves the placement of a three inch durable steel bolt - and has no further auditory impact.  If bolts are classified as installations under RM 41:. 2 “Installation” – anything made by humans that is not intended for human occupation and is left unattended or left behind when the installer leaves the wilderness (RM41). Be this definition, bullets and their use should be regulated just like fixed anchors.  To not allow the metered use of fixed anchors, but to permit the unmetered use of bullets and other debris associated with firearms is not consistent in the way that Wilderness is managed. 

Rock climbing needs Management Plans - there is no doubt about this fact among most all climbing organizations. We need plans that are consistent across different Wildernesses and not subject to the particular opinions of a Wilderness Supervisor. Reinterpreting fixed anchors as "Installations" is not the way to manage climbing.  Let's manage the real impact of rock climbing, which is the trails and staging zones that occur beneath cliffs and let the life saving, 3 inch bolts be. In conclusion, an MRA can be a valuable tool to manage climbing - but should be considered holistically, with consistency across Wilderness Areas and rock climbing should not be held to a different standard than other legitimate Wilderness recreational activities - like hunting, fishing, or hiking.