Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
You potentially will never be able to climb in some wonderful areas if you do not speak up NOW - it is time for climbers to be heard and you only have until Jan 16, 2024
|
Dear Climbing Friends, This post is to make you aware of a MAJOR looming risk that will change climbing in the USA if it is not defeated. Some very powerful lobbying groups (Wilderness watch and many who signed on with them) have yet again gotten the attention of our Forest service and Park service leadership and are aggressively pushing to make ALL fixed anchors (bolts, pitons, slung trees, left behind gear, slung rocks) illegal in National forest service wilderness and National parks. This is NO anchors - NONE - no SLINGS to rappel in a storm, no pin or bolt at that point in the middle of a new first ascent where you are looking at a death fall, no fixed wire, nothing. Anyone who has climbed any route on a major wall in the wilderness knows that there is the time when you are forced to retreat, there is a time where gear gets stuck, there is a time when the better part of valor demands a fixed piece of gear. Since this is non-refutable, the obvious solution is for the forest service and parks administrators to prevent that from ever occurring by making climbing illegal. Don't think for a second that could not occur - it already has for other sports like BASE jumping and for white water kayaking in some parks. It can occur with climbing. There is a public comment period going on right now. However, we only have until Jan 16, 2024 to make our comments known. Those who have insight say less than 1000 total comments have been made and they suspect a significant portion of them come from the lobbying groups who want to end fixed protection. (This is not a time to split hairs over the bolting controversy. This is much bigger and time is running out. We can fight the over bolting in wilderness wars at the level of the Access fund, not in the public land management sphere. ) YOUR VOICE NEEDS TO BE HEARD!! Here is my recommendation: WRITE THE LETTER RIGHT NOW on your word processor, copy it and paste it into the links provided below and check it off your to-do list. Suggestions:
Go here and post it - SOON. Also forward your concerns and letter to every climber you know – everyone who values this sport needs to say something. |
|
Repetition is the key to success? |
|
Why are these groups, Wilderness watch and many who signed on with them, lobbying against climbers specifically? |
|
I just forwarded this message to 70 climbers emails. Consider forwarding this to your climbing friends. |
|
Tim, I appreciate your efforts here. I was engaged with this issue some 20 years ago with the AAC but need to reengage now. It would be helpful if there were a consolidated list of the climbing resources that might be affected. Is there one you could point to? Specific arguments are more persuasive than generalized ones. |
Jordan Daywrote: I just wrote both agencies. Let's keep this issue visible on MP against the corpulent tide of Grigri threads. |
F r i t zwrote: If someone wants to copy and paste their letter here we may have more luck. It’s easy to copy a letter and send it off. Another thing to sit down and write it. |
|
Here is my letter, I think you should personalize it with your own feelings and experiences, but no matter what you should send something heartfelt even if it is brief. Jan 1, 2024 Dear US forest service (National Park Service), As an avid climber for the last 44 years I am very interested and concerned about the new policies you are developing regarding fixed anchors in America’s wilderness lands. There are three points I would like to clarify initially that I feel are hard to dispute by anyone knowledgeable about climbing:
2. Fixed anchors are well established devices used to protect climbers both during ascent of otherwise unsafe expanses of rock, and as points of protection for safe belays and for safe escapes (rappelling). They have been used for half a century or more. They are not prohibited installations under the Wilderness Act. 3. Prohibiting fixed anchors or removing already existing anchors will create serious safety issues to climbers AND to the rescue squads dispatched in an emergency (at which point the rescue squads will be forced to create fixed anchors for safety reasons).
The recent explosion of climbers and bolt-protected routes does not invalidate the above points, it only forces an increased scrutiny of their impact on the natural resource in which they are occurring. Any ruling that entirely bans climbing and fixed anchors is a blow against traditional established land use. While I agree that “sport climbs” – a method that requires extensive bolting of steep rock faces and sometimes slings attached to those bolts– should be limited in the wilderness, I disagree that this can be translated into a policy of no fixed anchors whatsoever. I understand that distinguishing what is a sport climb and what is an acceptable use of fixed anchors in the wilderness may be a difficult definition to conquer, but I believe with the input of the Access Fund and climbers we can all come up with a reasonable agreement. What then is the real reason for the NPS and USFS desire to regulate climbing and fixed anchors? I hope it is to minimize environmental impact, especially in light of climbing’s increasing popularity. If so, a well thought out evaluation of climbing’s actual environmental impact should be considered. A compromise that is fair both from an environmental standpoint and from a comparison to other traditional land uses and their relative impact needs to be developed. For example, to eliminate safe climbing practices (occasional fixed anchors) but to allow safe trail construction so humans and horses can get into the wilderness would not be a fair compromise. Both are necessary for safety, and the later has far more visual impact than the former. The majority of climbing cliffs in the wilderness are in areas where the non-climbing public rarely ventures closer than a few thousand yards, and most fixed anchors, especially bolts or pitons (especially if camouflaged), are invisible to anyone not standing very near them. To imply these fixed anchors are a blight on the wilderness experience while sitting on your horse walking down a mud filled, torn up trail, past stacked cairns, blazed trees and occasional trail signs, to your camp with large tents and a camp fire is silly. I hope you seriously consider these comments. We all have different ways of self-affirmation. Whether some government officials respect it or not, some of us do this through climbing and other “risky” behaviors, and we leave very little impact at all. I for one have never found any outlet as rewarding and satisfying (including my job as an emergency physician in major trauma centers caring for extremely sick and injured patients) as climbing large unexplored rock faces in our nation’s wilderness. I do not believe the impact I make is as significant as many other uses that are condoned in our forests. Whether you believe it or not, we as a group are very supportive of wilderness preservation. However, this issue of fixed anchors is making me closely re-evaluate what “environmentally conscious” actually means and reconsider a number of donations I make to environmental groups. Please be careful and thoughtful of all of us. Sincerely, Tim Wolfe, MD |
|
Feel free to copy/pasta. I'm sure some of you can clean up the logic but I do feel a valid point lays within this. Dear NPS, Access to our beloved parks is so honorably protected by your sector of government. The NPS system has provided countless memorable, some may even say life altering, experiences in the people's land you manage. My experience as a visitor in these parks started as someone searching for a nice view and a creek to swim in but in the last two years my ambitions have shifted to scaling vertical terrain. To the more horizontally inclined visitors these climbs of plum orientation expose the basic human fear of falling. Often times the parks service installs fixed railings, trails, cairns/indicators (often installed by patrons) or other safety measures to manage that feeling on horizontal surfaces. My simple question is this: at what specific degree do fixed safety enhancements become illegal? I by no means am a proficient climber but most climbers can scale 5.9 with far less effort than your average day hiker tackles a 2 mile loop. Allow fixed anchors to remain. Create stricter rules if you must but give our environmentally conscious community a chance to remain safe while enjoying a different orientation from the average visitor. Thank You, |
|
The proposed USFS guidance is here: Proposed FSM 2355 Climbing Directives .docx I would suggest you read it before commenting. I have yet to look at the NPS equivalent. |
Brandon Smithwrote: This is a good line. Thanks for sharing. |
|
This FAQ is helpful for more details and context. https://www.accessfund.org/latest-news/wilderness-climbing-faq |
|
Jim Martin - We are far from an unregulated group. Existing regulations already severely limit bolt in Wilderness areas. This new proposal adds yet another layer of unfunded and unnecessary restrictions. |
|
Comments submitted to both agencies. |
|
It would be a good idea to get your facts straight Jim Marin. Nothing you claim Bingham did is as you say. Ignorance can be remedied, but stupid can't be fixed. |
|
I am sorry to see this discussion go back to sport climbing and over bolting and personal grievances. Honestly that is a different topic, related, perhaps causative to some degree, but not the same issue as faces us right now. (I actually have some sympathy to that point of view and do not agree with motorized drills in the wilderness -which if their illegality would be enforced would solve 95% of the over bolting in wilderness areas). The issue at hand here is ANY fixed anchors. If you have ever climbed a multipitch route and gotten caught in a storm or gotten in over your head or it is too dangerous, or you have had to do a dangerous traverse - you know for a fact that you have to leave gear behind and rappel or pendulum. That is a fixed anchor and that is necessary for safe climbing. Sometimes it’s a bolt, more often slings and gear, but it is some fixed gear left behind. So let us refocus on the topic at hand – fixed anchors in the wilderness. If Wilderness watch has their way – and they have been pushing this for decades – climbing will be severely impacted in many places. For those of you dissing the Access Fund, please tell me what you are doing to mitigate this issue beyond complaining about your disagreement with their exact methods in these forums? If you are actively working via other means in a way you think is more productive – then thank you. Otherwise maybe you should try to help in a constructive fashion. Complaining about your differences with their legal approach won’t help defeat the current issue in the limited few days available. I personally know a climber attorney who has put in hundreds of free work hours (just in the last two months, many more over the years) to helping all of us maintain our access to climbing. He is a VERY bold climber and had established a large number of “death routes” at very high levels over the decades that are rarely climbed. Nevertheless he respects the diversity of climbing and the fantastic climbing opportunities that fixed anchors offer to we lesser climbers. He is working to defend our rights and not just complaining online. He has found the most effective method of accomplishing this is through the Access Fund. Maybe they are not doing it YOUR WAY, but they are at least trying, dedicating tons of personal time and working for all of us. I for one have a lot of gratitude that they are doing this as I am a simple man and cannot do that hard legal work. Thankfully they are doing it for us. Finally, for those saying that what we write does not matter – just take what you get. The rest of us should try in whatever small way we can. I know back in 1999 many of us in the public commented to the USFS and NPS and with the help of the Access Fund we led the way to blocking the previous Wilderness watch attempt at outlawing fixed anchors. We are fighting a nearly identical battle right now and your public comments submitted SOON matter. Your public comments supporting climbing access have impact, certainly silence and apathy do nothing. Furthermore, failure to address this now may lead to not only loss of our access to wilderness climbing it may also spill over to access to forest service and BLM lands (as it has in some places). |
|
To get us back on topic and for those who need different ideas to write their letter(s) here is another bit of information on this subject. You should all read the letter that the Wilderness Watch group wrote to NPS/USFS where they strongly oppose fixed anchors. Here is a link to the Wilderness watch letter: Fixed anchor sign-on ltr-final (wildernesswatch.org) For those of you who do not recall - this group has been working this angle for decades and nearly got anchors outlawed 25 years ago - luckily defeated by active climber opposition with the help of the Access fund. We are back at it again. I wrote a second letter to the park service addressing the WW misinformation which I provide below for those who need more ideas for their personal letter. Jan 7, 2024 Dear USFS and National park service, First of all I must state that I do not disagree with their premise that “over bolting” to create what is known as “sport climbs” in the wilderness is probably not an appropriate use of the wilderness. I define a sport climb as a line of bolts up a rock face that are positioned close enough together such that almost any fall is safe and the climb does not require the use of removable gear. In general these routes are drilled using a battery operated rotary hammer drill. On rare occasions they are drilled by hand but this takes considerably more time and effort and results in fewer sport climbs being created. I think there are already laws in place that address this: It is illegal to use a battery operated rotary hammer drill in the wilderness. Unfortunately this law is not enforced and the result has been a proliferation of sport climbs in wilderness areas. I believe that simply enforcing this law would be sufficient to mitigate the “problem” since very few climbers will actually hand drill an entire “sport climb.” To me it would make more sense to enforce the rules that you already have on the books rather than just create additional rules.
However, what I strongly disagree with in the above referenced letter is that climbers should not be allowed to place ANY fixed anchors on a cliff. That is a recipe for disaster (death, disability, inability to make rescues, etc.). Any experienced climber immediately recognizes that many of the opinions provided in the Wilderness watch letter are disingenuous and misrepresent the truth. Below I quote the obvious misleading sections and the rebuttals to those sections.
Misleading quote 1: “The use and maintenance of fixed anchors in Wilderness is, and always has been, prohibited by the Wilderness Act’s ban on “installations.” (Paragraph 2) This is not factual. This issue has been discussed for decades by park and forest service employees, attorneys and the public. I specifically recall commenting on it in 1999. Climbing hardware has never achieved the Wilderness Act definition of an “installation” and is not in the act’s definition of an installation. To imply that it is in the definition and is prohibited is misleading and not true. Since this is the basis for their entire remaining letter, it puts in question the rest of their “facts.”
Misleading quote 2: “a climber may have to accept that a route that cannot be climbed without bolts should not or cannot be climbed at all. …….. Noted climber, George Ochenski, recently told a Salt Lake Tribune reporter that the notion that a ban on fixed anchors is effectively a ban on climbing in Wilderness is, “Total bulls***.” Ochenski climbed first ascents in Wilderness for five decades and never used a bolt. And he is fine with the notion that some rock faces may never be climbed, ‘which would certainly be no crime against humanity.’” (Paragraph 5) First of all I want to know how a climber knows that a route cannot be climbed until they attempt to climb it? That is the ONLY way you know it cannot be climbed. And what do you as a climber do if you get far up the rock face and discover it is unclimbable? Jump to avoid leaving any fixed anchors on the way down? Of course not. You have to rappel and in doing so you must leave fixed anchors on the rock to safely descend. It is very doubtful that these authors and their “expert” actually have tried to climb a rock face that is too difficult for them or they would recognize this. How can their “expert” be held out as a “noted climber” with five decades of experience who fails to know this obvious fact? Further research into their “expert” shows him to be a journalist and conservationist but does not show any evidence of notable climbing achievements. In fact I grew up in his back yard (Western Montana) and climbed extensively there for many years. I have never met nor heard of him and am not familiar with him as anything of a local expert. So this man’s opinion is not an expert opinion. Rather I suspect he was carefully selected by the Wilderness Watch authors because he would say what they wanted, not what is closer to the truth - which is that fixed anchors are sometimes absolutely critical to prevent death and to allow exploration of unclimbed rocks.
Misleading quote 3: Walter Bonatti is definitely a great and renowned climber. His heyday was in the 1950s and 1960s when many rock faces were unclimbed. He used a technology very similar to bolting but of the prior era – pitons. Pitons cause a lot of damage to the rock, certainly more than bolts, and when left behind as they often are, they too are “fixed anchors.” I am not sure how this quote by him is meaningful in terms of the fixed anchors discussion– he just used pitons rather than bolts to create fixed anchors and many fixed piton anchors still exist on routes he established in the Alps.
Misleading quote 4: “Perhaps as-yet-unattainable wilderness climbs should simply be left as a challenge to the next generation of climbers. In June 2017, for example, big wall climber Alex Honnold made the first free-solo ascent of El Capitan in Yosemite, completing the 2,900-foot Freerider route in under four hours.” (Paragraph 6) This statement is nonsense regarding the discussion of fixed anchors and shows the complete lack of insight of these authors. Alex Honnold is recognized by many as the boldest rock climber in the history of the sport. There has never been another human being who has equaled the daring ropeless ascents he has made. Furthermore, if the authors of this letter actually watch the academy award winning documentary of the ropeless ascent he made on El Capitan they would realize he rehearsed the climb using a rope clipped into bolts, pitons and fixed climbing hardware. He fell multiple times working out the proper sequence of moves. He could not have done that ropeless ascent without those prior rehearsal attempts using those fixed anchors. In addition, the movie has a great quote that basically says that what Mr. Honnold did is essentially equivalent to asking an Olympic gymnast (who has also pre-rehearsed their moves) to execute a perfect routine and earn a gold medal – OR DIE. That is what would have happened to Mr. Honnold if he had not used the fixed gear and rope during his rehearsal and if he had not then successfully climbed the route without a rope. Is this a standard that the Wilderness Watch experts believe other wilderness adventurers need to achieve to be allowed to climb in or our national parks and wilderness areas: Succeed first try or die? Please let them to go first if that is the case.
Misleading quote 5: “In the first catalog for his company Chouinard Equipment, later to become Patagonia, legendary climber Yvon Chouinard pioneered removable climbing chocks and a manifesto of “clean climbing.” He wrote, “We believe the only way to ensure the climbing experience for ourselves and future generations is to preserve (1) the vertical wilderness, and (2) the adventure inherent in the experience… The fewer gadgets between the climber and the climb, the greater is the chance to attain the desired communication with oneself—and nature.” (Paragraph 7) Yvon Chouinard was a great climber and a visionary. Removable gear which he created has revolutionized rock climbing. A big push for removable gear occurred because his company’s major product – pitons – were causing damage to the rock because the pitons were removed (leaving a scar) rather than being left in place as fixed anchors. This was very bad for his brand. His quote is part of his marketing literature to push climbers into purchasing his new products and using fewer pitons. However, it did not result in his company abolishing pitons from their sales inventory because they were still needed in selected situations and they still generated money. Bottom line is it was a good business decision and good marketing: Both products were needed (increased his company profit) and the removable gear was good for the environment so it helped his company’s brand. Pitons are still sold by this company (now known as Black Diamond Equipment). So the quote above once again is misleading and taken out of context. The real solution in the wilderness is removable gear where possible AND fixed anchors like pitons and bolts in selected situations.
For the above reasons I hope you will recognize that the writers for Wilderness Watch letter used selective information and quotes to mislead the reader and push them towards their view rather than provide to a balanced viewpoint. They are Straw man arguments. I hope you will discount most of what they say as biased propaganda and not factual information.
Sincerely,
Tim Wolfe
|
|
Dr. Tim Wolfe gets Forum MVP of 2024. Not too early to call it. Bump for writing letters if you haven't, and reminding partners to do so if you have. |
|
Tim, I hope everyone who climbs on or near any Wilderness area will be sure to comment. |
|
I'm curious about Tim's comment that the ban on power drills in Wilderness has not been enforced - and there's been a proliferation of sport routes in Wilderness. Where is this happening? I don't know of any recent bolted routes in Idaho Wilderness... |
|
For whatever it's worth, I read all the things from both pro and against, and work let me rant about it on camera for 5 minutes. Certainly not enough time to result in anything more than a loose summary, but here it is: https://youtu.be/SaNM1nRkxaM |
