Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Josh Higgins
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Dec 21, 2006 - 10:22am PT
|
Yo peeps, time to act. I got this in an e-mail today. I plan on doing my part since this potential closure is bullshit!
Dangerous New Precedent Could Close
Access to Multiple National Forest
Recreational Areas
Stop the Closures…Act NOW!
 Instructions Below --
Deadline for public comment ends on
January 12, 2007
The Cleveland National Forest in San Diego, California is about to impose access closures to ALL forms of recreational use at four National Forest areas: Corte Madera Mountain, El Cajon Mountain, Rock Mountain, and Eagle Peak. Very alarming is that this information is not available to the public via the Forest Service website, the Federal Register, or SOPA (Schedule Of Proposed Actions) as required within the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969.
These closures will ban ALL human activity within a ˝ mile radius of any current or future golden eagle, prairie falcon, or “other cliff-nesting species” nests, even though these “other” species types are not explicitly identified in the proposed closures. However, given that the closures are in part being based on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1916, of the over 800 birds listed, many are quite common such as the swallow, hummingbird, and raven. The results could be catastrophic by not only closing local areas, but establishing legal precedent for widespread closures across all U.S. National Forest! These closures affect climbers, hikers, backpackers, mountain-bikers, horseback riders, and off-road enthusiasts alike, setting legal precedent to close off multiple recreational areas within any National Forest!!!
Join this important letter writing campaign (instructions at the bottom) and tell the Cleveland National Forest that you oppose all closures of this type! If no comments are received during the public comment period, the Forest Service will assume that we support their proposals and they will close our recreational areas.
Tell the Cleveland National Forest that you oppose these closures because:
1. These closures are inconsistent with the USFS multiple use mandate, “as set forth in law…to meet the diverse needs of people,” and as such do not adequately take into consideration the unique value of climbing, hiking, backpacking, mountain-biking, horseback riding, and off-roading on forest lands.
2. The Forest Service is misinterpreting its legal authority to use the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), together with the Golden Eagle Protection Act, to close large tracks of our public lands for passive uses, be it hiking, riding, picnicking, or rock climbing. This is a radically extreme method to limit recreational use on our public lands given that the MBTA was initially entered into by congress in 1916 to prevent the over-commercialization of “migratory” birds.
3. In particular, the Corte Madera proposed closure is being based on the “historical” presence of eagles since golden eagles have not nested there for over 15 years. As such, this measure is extreme and onerous and based on unscientific reasoning.
4. The proposed closure limit distances are arbitrary because they are not based on exact nest locations, not accurately depicted from presumed nests on the USFS closure proposal maps, or based on sound scientific evidence.
5. The Golden Eagle and Prairie Falcon are not threatened or endangered species and therefore do not need drastic protection measures like these closures to breed successfully.
6. Climbers, Hikers, and other National Forest users have co-existed with wildlife peacefully for decades; therefore, among other factors, changing climate conditions and decline of natural prey populations are more likely to blame for any suspected loss in bird numbers.
7. These closures are inconsistent with bird closure precedent already established nation-wide.
Simply cut-&-paste the above reasons to TWO separate letters (added comments definitely help)
Title each of your letters separately (it is VERY IMPORTANT that the titles are accurate)
First letter -- Comments to proposed seasonal closures at Corte Madera Mountain & El Cajon Mountain
Second letter -- Comments to proposed seasonal closures at Rock Mountain & Eagle Peak
Send directly to the Cleveland National Forest at:
kwinter@fs.fed.us
Kirsten Winter
Cleveland National Forest
10845 Rancho Bernardo Rd #200
San Diego, Ca 92127
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 01:57pm PT
|
Almost missed this thread. Uh - oh.
I sadly must admit to all San Diego climbers that this is probably my fault. I live in Duncan Hunter's district, and after writing him on all kinds of issues over the years he probably has gotten pissed (at least he responds with a letter and his own signature and I have a stack of them even though he spits out the GOP talking points every single time) and has decided to retaliate against Klimmer. "What would piss off Klimmer the most? Let me see . . . hhhmmmmmmm . . ."
OK, on a serious note thanks for the heads up.
I don't know why the seasonal closures aren't enough? I care about the raptors, I'm a long-time Sierra Club member and worked several years in environmental consulting before teaching. I will write my letters to the above mentioned official you requested, and even CC a copy to Duncan (although he is a worthless GOP presidential hopeful wannabee). This affects all user groups not just climbers: climbers (by the way, great climbing areas), hikers, free-flight pilots (some of the best flight sites are in the above mentioned areas also), Mtn. Bikers, horse trail riders etc.
One thing to do is reach out to all user groups and let the FS know how we feel in a massive unified voice. The Horse Trail Riders have an especially effective voice at this time with this current administration --- "What you're not going to let all these young republican Ronald Reagan wannabees ride their horses on our public lands! That's it. Get W (Dubya) on the phone right this minute. I will have your job."
I will call my good friend Tom Donnelly, who is now one of the Access Fund/Access Issues Coordinators for our region, and see what is up and what more can be done. I will let the San Diego free-flight club SDHGPA know and get them to write letters also.
Thanks again for the heads up.
Glenn Simpson
PS
One day I will get something out of Duncan. While he runs for President, I'm going to sell off all of his worthless signed letters he has written me over the years before he falls flat on his face, for top dollar on E-Bay to his prostrate GOP worshippers.
On edit: Rereading your post. Are you saying this is a permanent closure, or only seasonal closures? Now I'm a little confused. If it is permanent, by all means this is not a good thing. If this is seasonal, then what are the limits of the season, from when to when for each crag? Then that is another matter. Please explain. Thanks.
|
|
Trashman
Trad climber
SLC
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 02:09pm PT
|
i've been meaning to chime in too. i'll get a longer more detailed post in later, but i've got some FS studies you should ref. in your letters.
the local heli outfit managed to buy a study claiming heli's hovering within 100 yds of raptor nests does not affect mating behavior. should get you some leverage relating to "impacts". i'll get all the specifics for you guys this weekend.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
one pass away from the big ditch
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 02:35pm PT
|
Trashman,
Can you send me a copy too?
That is fairly powerful evidence, if a valid study, that even climbers at that distance won't affect mating behavior.
Thx !!
Munge
|
|
Trashman
Trad climber
SLC
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 02:37pm PT
|
no prob, iirc it's linked in their EIS, so shouldn't be too hard to get the info on here. i've got a 4 hr flight on friday, so i'll dig it up then, probably post around sat.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 03:00pm PT
|
All proposed closures are Dec 1 thru May or so.
That leaves only about 1.5 months from mid Oct thru November for good climbing weather on these south facing cliffs.
The first closure is all of Corte Madera.
It mentions that the USFS is working with the BLM on a closure for the western crags of El Cajon Mtn, which is BLM land.
The USFS part of El Cajon Mtn is the eastern part (the Wedge aka El Cap Wall) and they are not proposing a closure there.
The second closure is Eagle Peak & Rock Mtn, which are more obscure places.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 03:05pm PT
|
About heli's and raptors. . .
When I worked in environmental consulting for a few years ('90 - '95) a team of biologists/ornothologists in our San Diego office where invited on a massive survey by helicopter with the USF&WS throughout San Diego County for an update raptor count. That was probably '93ish. They used helicopters and closely buzzed all of the afore-mentioned San Diego Crags and many more spotting nesting raptors by eye-sight and binoculars. This was not the first time they had done this and it was not the last.
They dismiss the suvey impact as minimal and that the raptors don't associate the helicopters with humans, so its all ok.
Hey, one of the best experiences in free-flight is sharing thermals with raptors. We look for them to spot thermals and they look for us to spot thermals. We call them "local pilots" and use them accordingly. I have had countless experiences with raptors of all species, flying just off my wing-tip in thermals or other types of lift. We are sharing the air and we are brothers. It is an incredible experience. Mutual respect. Very rarely do you ever hear of a pilot getting attacked. That is very, very rare. I believe the impacts are minimal if at all.
What is the plan exactly? Are we talking permanent closures or seasonal closures? Anyone know? I really can't believe it would be permanent closures.
Edit:
Thanks I got the dates of the proposed closures. Guys, I will have to think about this one. Seasonal closures are the norm. Raptors do need to have babies mostly undisturbed at those times. I do know it cuts down on the useable dates, but that is the way it goes. I will check it out some more.
Now if it was a permanent closure, I would have a heart attack and sue.
|
|
Josh Higgins
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 21, 2006 - 05:02pm PT
|
Here's a sample letter my friend wrote. Remember, you have to send TWO SEPARATE letters for the two pairs of areas. Read my first post if that's unclear. If anyone learns more about this issue, please post. Also, if you do send an e-mail post here to encourage others and to bump the tread please!
Josh
To: Cleveland National Forecast
From:__ concerned outdoor enthusiast
Subject: Comments to proposed seasonal closures at Rock Mountain & Eagle Peak
I am vehemently opposed to the proposed closure of Corte Madera Mountain, El Cajon Mountain, Rock Mountain, and Eagle Peak to recreational activities such as climbing, backpacking and mountain biking. These proposed measures are draconian, unfair, undemocratic, and run counter to the spirit of the National Forecast Service multiple use mandate: “to meet the diverse needs of people.
The Forest Service is misinterpreting its legal authority to use the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), together with the Golden Eagle Protection Act, to close large tracks of our public lands for passive uses, be it hiking, riding, picnicking, or rock climbing. This is a radically extreme method to limit recreational use on our public lands given that the MBTA was initially entered into by congress in 1916 to prevent the over-commercialization of “migratory” birds.
In particular, the Corte Madera proposed closure is being based on the “historical” presence of eagles since golden eagles have not nested there for over 15 years. As such, this measure is extreme and onerous and based on unscientific reasoning.
The proposed closure limit distances are arbitrary because they are not based on exact nest locations, not accurately depicted from presumed nests on the USFS closure proposal maps, or based on sound scientific evidence.
The Golden Eagle and Prairie Falcon are not threatened or endangered species and therefore do not need drastic protection measures like these closures to breed successfully.
Climbers, Hikers, and other National Forest users have co-existed with wildlife peacefully for decades; therefore, among other factors, changing climate conditions and decline of natural prey populations are more likely to blame for any suspected loss in bird numbers.
These closures are inconsistent with bird closure precedent already established nation-wide. I urge you to reject this ban on recreational activities in the Cleveland National Forest.
Sincerely yours,
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 06:50pm PT
|
Josh, where can one look on the internet to find info on this. Obviously there must be such, or how did you learn about this?
I would like to look at the arguments and issues.
Thanks!
|
|
crotch
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2006 - 07:05pm PT
|
I couldn't find any information about the proposed closures on the Cleveland National Forest website. Where can we find out about the public comment period?
|
|
mtwoodsonguide
Big Wall climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 12:09am PT
|
bump
There hasn't been a Golde Eagle at Corta since 1991, there was nearly no climbing activity prior to 93.
Golden Eagles and Prarie Falcons are catorgorized as LC. Species cannot be assigned the Least Concern category unless they have had their population status evaluated.
closing a mile of National Forest, by the same logic (or lack of), all of Yosemite Yalley should have a seasonal closure for Perigrines (at least they once were on the endangered species list).
Lets face it, if anyone was stupid enough to get to close, and one of these things didn't want you around, it would have no problem getting rid of you. A golden Eagle can take down a deer. a Prairie falcon is considered the most aggresive raptor.
I go up on a flat roof on the water front during seagull breeding season and have to bring a second guy who swings a stick while I work. I'm scared of a stupid seagull, imagine what one of these would do to a skinny rock climber tied into a belay..
I grew up in Washington state where there were Bald Eagle nests in the trees above peoples houses, having troube picturing the need for this.
Send that damm letter
|
|
T-REX
climber
san diego, ca
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 05:32am PT
|
Hey all, Jeff Brown here. My wife, Keli Balo, and I are responsible for getting the initial info. on this thing out to folks so I'd like to follow up with a couple of comments.
First off, thanks for posting Josh!
Everyone else, we’re hearing your comments...still trying to pull together the rest of the beta on this thing and post it here just as soon as possible so people can evaluate both the issues and the arguments (we will include reasoning for each of the seven opposition points mentioned in the original post in order to show why these closures are far more stringent than necessary, as well as get the actual proposals on-line...look for a post from Keli "Ladysmith").
For now I'll try to at least address a couple of your other questions.
1st) As stated in the original post it is very alarming that this information is not available to the public via the Forest Service website, the Federal Register, or SOPA (Schedule Of Proposed Actions) as, one would assume, would be required. Specifically, the Forest Service is not bound by law to post on either their website or in the Federal Register, only in SOPA (and possibly not even there if certain "requirements" allow for exclusion). SOPA is a bit of a slippery one. It is only published quarterly and has specific deadlines for information to be submitted for printing.
The proposals in question were officially dated 12/11/06 which falls after the last printing of SOPA. If the Forest Service office handling this issue, Cleveland, decided they were required to publish and provided the info. to the printers in time, than we can expect to see it show up on January 2nd, 2007 right here http://www.fs.fed.us/sopa/. That's right, giving joe public ten whole days to first become aware that SOPA even exists, then rally his concerned joe public bros, and get all their pertinent well thought-out joe public arguments in for review! Don't hold your breath...but also don't worry, we essentially strong-armed them into mailing us copies as soon as they were available (printed 12/11/06, we received it three or four days later...haven’t slept all that much since).
side note -- thankfully my wife still has ONE strong arm! ;)
Now than, one can only guess why these proposals were not posted for the general public, but the fact remains, they were not posted for the general public. Sadly though, they are real, and you will see them here. Be forewarned, at first blush they will seem rather innocuous...we will do our best to illustrate that they are far from innocent...not your typical raptor closures at all...if they were, we wouldn't even be talking about it!
2nd) The closures being proposed are seasonal in nature, but have nothing to do with sound scientific reasoning in the natural world...they are, currently, set to run from December 1st through May 30th, regardless of species, regardless of established bird closure precedent set nation-wide (think Yosemite, Lovers, Smith, City, etc.), regardless of whether or not a nest is active (in the case of Corte Madera the closure is being based on nests that haven't been used in over 15 years...because, even according to the biologist, Dave Bittner, who developed the closure parameters, there have been no eagles nesting there in over 15 years), and regardless of the fact that closing off over 500 acres of public land for each nest is extreme...but, of course, extremism is exactly what we’re fighting here.
Make no mistake folks, we are not talking about newly improved public lands management policy. We are talking draconian measures to a perceived problem that will ban ALL human activity within a ˝ mile radius (over 500 acres each) of any current or future golden eagle, prairie falcon, or “other cliff-nesting species” nest, even though these “other” species types are not explicitly identified in the proposed closures, and even though these nests may not be active! Given that the closures are, in part, being based on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, of the over 800 birds listed, many of these species are quite common such as the swallow (let's just leave out the hummingbird and raven for now).
And yes, in the wrong hands the results could be catastrophic by not only closing local areas, but establishing legal precedent for widespread closures. Try this little example on for size (if you do this little bit of homework and follow the links I'll provide, reading through the information presented there, you'll no doubt see why fighting this thing is a good idea): Think, land management administrator looking for a tool to restrict climbing...think, administrator looking to the Cleveland National Forest precedent of 2007...think, administrator remembering that swallows are on that list...think, bird biologist reminding him of the study here (read this and you'll see that it mentions Tahquitz as well as how to deal with the climbing issue) http://www.dfg.ca.gov/hcpb/info/bird_ssc.shtml#Black_Swift, and that this agency here http://www.dfg.ca.gov/hcpb/species/ssc/sscbird/sscbird.shtml, lists the swallow to be of equal concern as the golden eagle and prairie falcon (thinks back to precedent of 2007 established just south of his rock of concern on "similar" public lands for species of equal standing), and PRESTO -- climbing closure enacted 2,640 feet in a straight line every direction from that oh so classic climb, The Vampire (remember the 1/2 mile radius), and because the swallows nesting season runs the whole summer...well, you guessed it! Hey, anybody know how to get in touch with Kevin Thaw...he might want to comment on this proposal!
"Nah, not for the swallows, no way", you say. O.k., how about for the falcons that so love the west face bulge every summer?
Hmmmmmm, wonder if there are any birds in the Needles?
O.k., enough of the climbing thing...let's look at the heart of this issue and how it affects "joe-everyone"! These closures in their present form affect every public land user out there BECAUSE we are not simply talking about specific restrictions to climbing on particular sections of cliffs and crags. As I said before, if we were dealing with responsible proposals of two to three hundred foot buffer zones for specifically identified bird species with ACTIVE nest sites (and not the proposal statement of "other cliff-nesting species") we wouldn't be discussing this crap!
Unfortunately, we are talking about potential future access restrictions to potentially very large areas of public lands (think numerous overlapping nests with a restriction of 500 acres each, and think outside of our little brush covered slopes here in San Diego...think large conifers where 80% of golden eagle nesting occurs). What we are talking about is a legal precedent to close off multiple areas of our National Forest AND other public lands (did I mention that our forest service, under the management of the USDA, is working with our local BLM, under the Department Of The Interior, to legally establish closures on El Cajon Mountain). Restrictions like this affect everbody, be they climbers, hikers, backpackers, mountain-bikers, horseback riders, or off-road enthusiasts alike!
Lastly (until we post the actual proposals and specific arguing points), and also unfortunately, is that the USFS quite possibly already has the authority, based on previously established acts and precedent, to enact these closures no matter what we say.
But I’d like to leave you all with this thought . . . should we really allow a President to take us to war just because he can, or should we vehemently oppose such a drastic measure?
Thanks for your time, we'll try to post soon.
Jeff
p.s. Hey josh...wonder if you could modify that title to catch everyone's attention...something about San Diego & All Climbing on Public Lands? just a thought, thanks!
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
So. Cal.
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 05:45am PT
|
Riddle me this, Batman:
Why are *cliff nesters* so sensitive to human presence that they need a half-mile radius to themselves, while tree nesters (Eagles, Owls, Hawks) do just fine nesting in trees directly adjacent to busy trails?
|
|
Josh Higgins
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 22, 2006 - 10:59am PT
|
Jeff, I don't think that I can change the title. As soon as I posted I realized I should have used a more inflammatory title, possibly even something to do with sex...
Dave Kennedy is working on this issue. If you want to receive the Access Fund update from him, go to the Access Fund website and join SANDAC. He said there will be an e-mail coming.
I found out about this issue in an e-mail from a fellow climber. I've e-mailed Dave Kennedy and look forward to his official reply through SANDAC/AF and I've also e-mailed the Cleveland National Forest (CNF) and they told me they would mail me more information.
In addition, here's an update I received:
Sorry about this update, the CNF e-mail server can't handle so many e-mails going to Kirsten's inbox. Please see the update I received below:
Two things...update from me on flyer, and NEW e-mailing instructions from the forest service web-systems-administrator (so please forward this update to everyone you already mass mailed...sorry, but they just called back and said kirsten winter's e-mail won't be able to handle a serious response).
1st -- (important) New flyer with updates, corrections (oops, and instructions.
2nd -- (most important) If you e-mail your response and it kicks back, your comment will not be recognized or counted...if this happens you either MUST send in a hard copy, or forward it to Attn. Kirsten Winter. This way if her system crashes (I certainly hope it does), all your VERY IMPORTANT comments will be saved, counted, and make a difference!
And hey, if their mailroom server crashes, all the better...annnnnnnd, should this actually happen to you (wouldn't that be great...let's shoot for it), please send in a hard copy letter anyway...I say we run-up the scoreboard on this one!!!
Print tons of copies and pass them out to everyone you see over the holidays!
p.s. personally, I think a hard copy letter mailed in is always better (heard once that agencies equate ten e-mails to one actual letter), but whatever works for you, just please, please, please get those comments in before January 12th!!!
p.s.s and to those of you who've received two "updates", sorry for that too...it's been a very busy week...the forest service printed their draft proposal on Dec. 11th, we received it on the 14th, i've been trying to get answers from them on important question ever since...and just haven't slept all that much!
o.k., thanks again...Happy Holidays!!!
|
|
ladysmith
climber
san diego, ca
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 01:58pm PT
|
Some explanation of the 7 points outlined in the opposition flyer:
1. Inconsistency with USFS “multiple-use mandate” = Corte Madera, El Cajon Mtn and Rock Mtn are located on National Forest lands. These are not National Parks, wilderness areas, wildlife refuges or any other special designation areas, and as such, must be managed under the multiple-use concept. Please note that other public activities allowed on forest service lands include mining, logging, grazing and other much more invasive and harmful activities, yet passive recreational uses (hiking, climbing) are being targeted.
2. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects “migratory” birds from “take”, which includes the killing of birds, destruction of active nest or eggs, hunting, collecting, or shooting of migratory birds. This law does not include harm or harass in the explicit definition of “take”, and therefore; this law does not specifically prohibit activities that could potentially “harm” these birds. The FS is misinterpreting section 715n of the MBTA to enact widespread closures. The MBTA was enacted by congress in 1918. The Forest Service is using ideals, morals, and current thinking and melding them to fit a law that congress never intended to be interpreted this way.
3. Corte Madera has not supported nesting eagles since 1991. The FS is basing this closure on an inactive nest. How can they close an area in our public lands for an animal that does not even exist where they say it does?
4. The closure limits are arbitrary…The historical nest at Corte Madera is located on the cliff face. The center of the closure circle as shown on the FS map, is nowhere near the cliff face, it is shifted north. This was done to avoid closing a portion of the Espinoza Trail which would incite the very powerful off-road community.
5. The Golden Eagle and Prairie Falcon are not listed as endangered or threatened by the State or Federal government. Widespread closures are usually enforced by land managers because they are required to protect species under the Endangered Species Act. The prairie falcon population in San Diego County has historically been low and continues to remain stable. The species of concern designation that the falcon receives from California Department of Fish and Game and the Fish and Wildlife Service is based on the rapid decline of the raptors in the central valley of California. It is also important to remember that San Diego is at the edge of the range of the prairie falcon, and this will result in a more sparse population than areas in the middle of its range. The golden eagle is fully protected in the state of California, which means you can not hunt golden eagles or destroy their active nests (eggs, chicks, ect). The San Diego population of eagles is declining due to habitat loss. The explosion of development throughout the county has resulted in eagle nesting locations and foraging habitat being lost. The decline in eagles has nothing to do with forest service visitors hiking, biking and rock climbing in large open space tracts.
6. The Forest Service and all land managers need to do more research on the topic of raptor nesting disturbance. Not one of the references listed (of which 70% are more than 20 years old) specifically targets rock climbing as the cause for declines in breeding success. A host of other factors could be responsible for unsuccessful breeding to include: drought conditions, drop in prey populations, increase in predator populations (snakes, turkey vulture, etc), climate change, death of breeding adult (age, incident), aging breeding pair, chemical bioaccumulation, pest or disease, and others. Rock climbers should not take the blame for what is likely a combination of factors that affect raptor breeding. Show me a study that makes a strong correlation, better yet, can defend a causal correlation between rock climbing and the death of incubating eggs, chicks, fledglings or the inability of adults to breed or make nest.
7. This closure is defined as a ˝ mile radius around nests or alternate nest sites to all human activity. Precedent across the country has been a seasonal closure of a 330 foot buffer around each active nest, resulting in protection of the nesting raptors and also preserves some climbing in the area. Examples of seasonal, partial cliff closures using the 330 foot buffer include: Boulder Canyon, CO, Cochise Stronghold, AZ, Whitesides Mtn, NC, Lovers Leap, CA, and Acker Rock, OR. This closure is more than 5 times the size of the widely accepted closures. The Forest Service is not being consistent with precedent and with regional guidelines.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 03:50pm PT
|
Ladysmith,
Nice post. Points 1, 4, and 7 are especially effective. Getting into the science debate can be effective, however it can also be a land-mine, you can get environmental consultants to say anything for either side, and there are many studies out there that you are not privy to in the consulting world.
Another very powerful user group they probably and purposefully don't want to piss-off are Horse Trail Riders. Very, very powerful. And I've seen horse trail riders on Espinosa Trail.
There has been raptors nesting on Corte Madera since 1991, I don't care what the annual bird count or study says. I've seen them in the breeding season (early 90's most likely but after '91) when I have gone out there with a good friend of mine Jim Bahr, and fellow adventure junkie who at the time was working in the same environmental consulting firm I was, and we have become life-long friends since, and he is one damn good zoologist and birder, not to mention he was licensed by the USF&WS to do endangered bird surveys. They do not consistently use the crag year to year, that is very normal for raptors. One year they use it, the next year they don't, or maybe for a few years, then all of a sudden they are back. They like to move and get around.
One of the worst impacts to nesting raptors are ORV users especially on Espinosa Trail (not even sure if they are supposed to be on Espinosa Trail) outside the designated ORV area. IT IS THE NOISE that is one of the biggest impacts. I have personally witnessed noisy dirt bikes come screaming down the trial, and then seen several raptors take to flight with the noise heard and then thermal the cliff for a while before settling down again on their nests.
I would say once again, the most powerful points you have made are 1, 4, and 7. They are being over zealous and radically changing how it has historically been done with limited in size seasonal closures. And it does seem that their closures unfairly affect one user group above all others --- climbers. That I can agree with.
The decision to close should be done on a year by year basis. If they are NOT nesting that year at a particular crag, then why close it? If they are then go with a reduced in size seasonal closure, or close that crag in use for that short season. There are enough birders out there each year in San Diego County who do the annual bird count that this information is known. San Diego County is a major national birding region. The top birders, and USF&WS know from year to year where raptors are breeding in San Diego County and on what crags. San Diego County is one of the top birding regions in the nation, because of our unique geography and temperate climate and proximity to Baja. Some of the biggest witnessed birding lists are achieved here in San Diego County each year, and each winter in all the US (it is a birder kinda thing).
The information is known without draconian measures, and good decisions can be made each year and be made known to the community at large. I'm sure the climbing community would abide by seasonal closures at cliffs that are in use for that season, and the Access Fund can play a big part in this as well as the local chapter here. I think an intelligent balance is achievable and the way to go. Maybe even some climbers would get into birding as a result?
There is a tribute that was shown on KPBS on John Denver's life where John is working with a nationally known raptor specialist/scientist and they are rappelling into "active" nests up in Idaho (I believe) that are perched on basaltic cliffs. It is a very powerful and incredible film. Worth watching and more evidence that human close contact does not necessarily adversly impact raptor populations. They were doing it for science!!!!
Glenn Simpson
"Klimmer"
|
|
T-REX
climber
san diego, ca
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 05:55pm PT
|
Hey folks,
I just found out from our AF coordinator that the Forest Service will now be posting this information on their website on Jan. 2nd (yeah, that's timely) and extending the comment period out to Jan. 31st...hmmmmm, they must have caught wind of the buzzzzz and figured we all mean business...though, admittedly I feel it may be a mixed blessing (more on that later, maybe).
O.k. than:
Klimmer, you are making some excellent points, much appreciated, though I'd like to clear up what may be some confusion for folks and then make a few points:
Aside from the "other cliff nesting species" comment found in the proposals (which is a major issue in that it allows for broad inclusion of many, many, many very common birds), the forest service proposal primarily deals with the Prairie Falcon and Golden Eagle.
Ladysmith's comments about Corte Madera, specifically, are that the GOLDEN EAGLES have not nested there since 1991 (this has actually been conceeded to by the man behind the push for these closures, Dave Bittner, Executive Director of the Wildlife Research Institute http://www.wildlife-research.org ).
You are exactly right in all your other comments about the Prairie Falcon Raptors at Corte Madera...especially your point about the high level of noise from the off-roaders causing them to repeatedly flush from their nests. I have personally witnessed this myself while actually climbing. That is, while climbing at a safe distance from the falcons while they were nesting, being no disturbance to them at all, off-roaders (mostly motorcycles) have raced through on the Espinosa Trail down below and caused the falcons to take flight, screeching in the process...and yet, not even this has caused the falcons to stay away! They repeatedly nest year, after year, after year...
Everybody, it is important to note that the Espinosa Trail is well within the 1/2 mile radius of the raptor nests, which is what the proposals seek to require for closure, yet when the forest drew up their maps they specifically located the circle of inclusion BACK AWAY FROM the Espinosa Trail. Why? Because they don't want to play their hand and accidentally rally the off-road community in opposition. Once again, we as climbers are being unfairly targeted when, in fact closing the crags to climbing will not be of any benefit.
The forest service knows this and Dave Bitner knows this. Make no mistake, we are bing unfairly singled out as a user group to implement expansive closures in an attempt to "quietly" set new "closure boundary precedent". Once set, they will then have legal precedent to further their fight against the off-roaders and close down not only Espinosa Trail. They will have unfairly used us to enact overly expansive closures to do what Dave Bittner has been lobbying the forest service to do for the past ten years.
I confirmed from the forest service some time ago that Dave Bittner wants them to close all gates on Cleveland National Forest roads in order to keep the public out during nesting season. His attempts are nothing less than draconian...he appears to want our National Forest to be treated as preserves. They are not preserves. They are our outdoor recreation areas and we must fight to keep them open.
enough for now, more later...
oh yeah, who out there can get this into the hands of the other user groups...Equestrian, Hiking, Back-Packing, Mountain-Biking, etc.?
|
|
T-REX
climber
san diego, ca
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2006 - 07:06pm PT
|
It's later, so here's another comment...
If you think this isn't your issue because it doesn't affect the crags you climb at, think again. Never mind a golden eagle, all it takes is for a prairie falcon (I'd like to remind people, this is not the sensitive "perigrine" falcon that was itself DELISTED from the endangered species list, but rather the very common "prairie" falcon we keep talking about), to take up residence ANY TIME IN THE FUTURE at your favorite crag, regardless of whether it escapes this round of closures, to cause that crags COMPLETE closure...remember the 1/2 mile radius, that's 2,640' in all directions...and that means COMPLETE CLOSURE FOR SURE!
Future closures outside of San Diego are only a matter of time...remember, the USFS is already working with the BLM on this thing...let's keep getting the word out...and if you happen to be friends with some of the Big Names Of Climbing that frequent this board, than let's get them up to speed to...get them to realize that this DOES affect them...at their Yosemite, at their Needles, at their Lovers Leap, and so on!!!
Cheers...
|
|
esoteric1
Trad climber
san dieco, ca
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2006 - 12:32am PT
|
here is a link to the off roaders, my computer is on the fritz or id try it myself.
http://www.sdorc.org/
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!