Public comment on wilderness area fixed hardware

Robert Swrote:

The hyperbole and entitlement so on display in this thread almost make me want the proposed policies to go into effect.

Sounds like something a narc from Wilderness Watch would say

Alan Rubinwrote:

So, is it really wrong, for us to believe that we are 'entitled' to climb within those lands and to use the equipment that we feel necessary as we do so, as we and our predecessors have done for those 100 years?

It is when we know folks are bending those rules and bringing in power tools to save time at the expense of all of us. We only seem to police ourselves by calling people out on the internet occasionally then go about our days forgetting about it.

 I've been  watching the ATV/OHV community for 30+ years and while I know there are a few responsible riders out there, I  find that many of them have no sense of right and wrong and need more rules and closures to help them understand their impacts. An article i read this morning goes into this a bit, closures do help open some eyes, help people understand the rules better and bring them together politically which may result in better overall behavior and trails being  opened back up.

I know the Access fund tries but it seems to me their efforts on the whole gym to crag initiative fizzled out in favor of growing the hobby/sport and recruiting more donors with promises of t-shirts and bumper stickers at gym events. 

Acadia NP near me has has had strict rules about climbing in place for a long time that are fairly easily enforced by the locals and the skeleton crew they run on and while  it can be a major PITA sometimes it also has its merits.  

I'd like to see the end result on this wilderness fixed anchor ban before I'm 100% convinced its wrong, right now my gut feeling tells me it has some credibility. 

Alan Rubinwrote:

I've been stewing over this post for hours, and feel that I need to respond.

"Hyperbole"---maybe, but in the approximately 100 years that technical climbing has been practiced in this country, much of it within the boundaries of our National Parks, Forests, and other Federal lands--and a good percentage of that in areas now designated as Wilderness, these proposed policies will establish the legal framework for potentially the most drastic and widespread regulation of our activity ever considered. This isn't an exaggeration, this is a fact. If you disagree, please post up with any contradictory examples. I understand that these proposals, if finally adopted as is, might not be strictly enforced or that any enforcement will be 'spotty' , but that doesn't change the fact that they contain the potential for very significant limitations, even potentially draconian ones, in the future. It is 'head in the sand' thinking to not be concerned about them based on a belief that they won't be enforced ( and for most who think that way, their belief is that it won't be enforced in a manner that effects THEM).

Mt Williamson. NPS already has the "legal framework" to ban climbing at any crag, any time, anywhere. Canyonlands and Arches. NPS already has the "legal framework" to ban fixed anchors, any crag, anywhere, any time. 

Entitled---again, maybe, to some extent. These days though, 'entitled' is a word or, better, concept that is being greatly overused. But even if it may be considered to be entitled, the actuality is that much of the basic 'geology' necessary for us to practice our chosen activity--mountains and many cliffs--are within public lands administered by those Agencies---and often, within those parts of those lands deemed, however questionably in certain situations, to be Wilderness. In many, if not most, of these areas, it is those specific geologic features that are the very reason those areas have been designated as such.

Climbing is a legitimate and appropriate use of wilderness. Climbing activities can fulfill important park and wilderness recreational purposes and can help preserve wilderness character by providing opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation. Both sentences are direct quotes from the NPS proposal.  

It is a component of the reasoning for the designation of these areas, including Parks and  Wilderness, that they not only be protected from commercial exploitation ( especially destructive exploitation) but that the lands also be available and accessed for compatible recreational activities ( generally and historically in Wilderness areas---non-motorized and non-destructive). Climbing is a recreational activity that is uniquely compatible with such areas, but does, in many instances, require the use of fixed anchors to be done safely---and in many situations, to be done at all. So, is it really wrong, for us to believe that we are 'entitled' to climb within those lands and to use the equipment that we feel necessary as we do so, as we and our predecessors have done for those 100 years?

Where does guided climbing fit into this paradigm? It is commercial activity. Consider the Casual Route, Diamond. There's about 8 weekends (=16 days) per year when this is in good climbing condition. Guided parties (there's ads online, minimal experience needed) will be on this route for many of those 16 days. The experience of climbing iconic routes in wilderness, the exact "recreational activity" that you state "is uniquely compatible with such areas" is being eroded. And not by NPS, by us.... I have no easy answers to this. I have friends who are guides. I like wilderness, I like climbing. I'd like for the experience of climbing such iconic routes to remain unchanged.

A wider point is that we were once a community of a few thousand. We climbers are now several million strong. Much as I'd love for things I have enjoyed for decades, like, say, climbing iconic routes in wilderness areas, to remain as they once were, I don't think that's an option.      

K Pwrote:

It's the shortest approach in the canyon ya weiner. 

I'm Lazy. I like your comment.

I agree we should chop all the bolts. Replace them with RB’s (removable bolts). Much more LNT, much more aesthetic. Time to put back some authenticity to the redpoint for the bolt clippers.

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

I agree we should chop all the bolts. Replace them with RB’s (removable bolts). Much more LNT, much more aesthetic. Time to put back some authenticity to the redpoint for the bolt clippers.

Finding a removeable bolt holes many feet above your last removeable bolt would certainly add some spice to runout Tuolumne style face climbing!

Jim Malonewrote:

Finding a removeable bolt holes many feet above your last removeable bolt would certainly add some spice to runout Tuolumne style face climbing!

If ur ok with a reflective shiny bolt and hangar, you should be ok with a silver paint outlining the bolt hole.

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

I agree we should chop all the bolts. Replace them with RB’s (removable bolts). Much more LNT, much more aesthetic. Time to put back some authenticity to the redpoint for the bolt clippers.

These don't exist anymore. Climbtech joined Werner Co and now solely supply work at height equipment.

Nathan Pwrote:

These don't exist anymore. Climbtech joined Werner Co and now solely supply work at height equipment.

I’ve got a friend who uses them all the time to protect his projects. Im sure if the market for it is there, someone will supply it. Chopping bolts is a good way to create that market ;). 

When you fall on RB's they tend to get fixed. Do the math. Visualize the outcome. They have a place in climbing but are not a "solution." 

Redacted Redactbergwrote:

I agree we should chop all the bolts. Replace them with RB’s (removable bolts). Much more LNT, much more aesthetic. Time to put back some authenticity to the redpoint for the bolt clippers.

Literally the dumbest solution I’ve ever heard. I’m sure you’re trolling, but in the off chance you’re not, or someone else takes your troll to heart, I would first encourage you to study more, and think less before formulating an opinion. 

Salamanizer Skiwrote:

Literally the dumbest solution I’ve ever heard. I’m sure you’re trolling, but in the off chance you’re not, or someone else takes your troll to heart, I would first encourage you to study more, and think less before formulating an opinion. 

Study more, think less. Roger that! Sounds like you're speaking from experience. Will comply.

Salamanizer Skiwrote:

Literally the dumbest solution I’ve ever heard. I’m sure you’re trolling, but in the off chance you’re not, or someone else takes your troll to heart, I would first encourage you to study more, and think less before formulating an opinion. 

Oh yikes, I was studying more (on mp) and thinking less which lead me to buy a bunch of RB's. 

Also why is this still stickied? 

Those of you who claimed to have developed routes or even entire crags with RBs, or claimed to have friends who have done so, can you please share the results?  If you are not just making this shit up, sharing the viability of such a project would be a valuable community contribution. 

Adam Rwrote:

Oh yikes, I was studying more (on mp) and thinking less which lead me to buy a bunch of RB's. 

Also why is this still stickied? 

Not sure why it’s stickied. Maybe an admin did that (I don’t think I had the power to do that- can’t find a way to remove it). As the comment period is well past, it seems like it could be un-stickied. 

Frank Steinwrote:

Those of you who claimed to have developed routes or even entire crags with RBs, or claimed to have friends who have done so, can you please share the results?  If you are not just making this shit up, sharing the viability of such a project would be a valuable community contribution. 

People are saying this? And you believed them? 

Adam Rwrote:

People are saying this? And you believed them? 

I do not…that is why I am requesting proof…because I have not seen any hint of such routes/crags in the wild. 

Frank Steinwrote:

I do not…that is why I am requesting proof…because I have not seen any hint of such routes/crags in the wild. 

https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e58fa613-5b01-4bb4-ab3e-9b57b906bb04/episodes/9ca5cf21-e45d-4c2a-95e5-418da9e64f48/first-ascent-podcast-at-the-forefront-of-bolt-innovation-with-dave-quinn-of-team-tough-bolt-products

Frank Steinwrote:

I do not…that is why I am requesting proof…because I have not seen any hint of such routes/crags in the wild. 

I am aware that the English father and son duo of Roland and Mark Edwards developed a number of routes and crags, several of quite substantial difficulty, in the Costa Blanca region of Spain making heavy use of 'removable bolts'. The routes are included in the Rockfax guide to that area, but I have no idea to what extent, if at all, they get repeated. And, if they have been repeated, did the subsequent parties use the same technology, or replace them  with 'proper' bolts?