Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 111 of total 111 in this topic |
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Apr 23, 2010 - 07:19am PT
|
Subject: Park Service plans to destroy Christmas Tree Pass climbing area
This is a much bigger problem than I thought.
The "PLAN" actually applies to thousands of square miles of the Lake Mead NRA, not just to Christmas Tree Pass.
If we let the Park Service get away with removing over 200 bolts and destroying 40 established climbing routes in one climbing area, what's to stop them from chopping all of the bolts in Joshua Tree, Yosemite, Red Rocks, etc.???
-------------------------------------------------------------
By proposing to remove all bolts installed near Willow Springs, LMNRA is proposing to destroy the entire Christmas Tree Pass Climbing Area.
I believe that Willow Springs is the approximate location of Dali Dome.
Though Christmas Tree Pass is not all that popular, a lot of climbers have passed through there during the last five years. And, the Rock Climbing.com website has had thousands of hits. See: http://www.rockclimbing.com/routes/North_America/United_States/Nevada/Southern_Nevada/Christmas_Tree_Pass/
Andy Solow cell 415-722-3047
--------------------------------------------------------
Objection Letter
Better to send three copies: by US Mail, by Fax and by Webmail
For Submission of Objection by Webmail - use comment link below
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
Sample Text of Objection Letter
Lake Mead National Recreation Area – (702-293-8990)
Park Superintendent – (702-293-8920)
601 Nevada Hwy
Boulder City, NV 89005-2426
Via Fax to: 702-293-8936
SUBJECT: Objection to LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan/EA -
April 2010
Demand for Extension of Comment Period to July 1, 2010
I strenuously object to the LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan/EA - April 2010 - as written because it discriminates against Rock Climbing, Rock Climbers and wilderness camping.
Because the Lake Mead NRA failed to inform the Rock Climbing community [including but not limited to the Access Fund - http://www.accessfund.org/] that it was planning to constructively prohibit rock climbing in thousands of square miles of the Lake Mead NRA:
I demand that the comment period for the LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan be extended to at least July 1, 2010.
• Grape Vine Canyon, where there are significant historical resources, is at least two miles away from the main Christmas Tree Pass rock climbing area.
• The area of Christmas Tree Pass where Rock Climbing has been an established recreational activity for the last 35 years has zero sensitive historical resources.
• Constructively prohibiting climbing by prohibiting climbing bolts in the Christmas Tree Pass established rock climbing area tramples on the right of rock climbers to use public lands for recreation.
• Climbing bolts are virtually invisible to the naked eye from even a short distance away. In fact, finding the bolts while climbing is frequently very challenging.
• In most other USA National Parks and Recreation Areas including Yosemite National Park, climbing bolts are permitted as long as they are at least 50 feet from any historical resource [i.e. Petroglyphs].
• There is no rational basis for prohibiting new climbing bolts and/or removing existing climbing bolts in Christmas Tree Pass, NV, or anywhere else in the Lake Mead NRA.
If the air space above and around Spirit Mountain is a sensitive historical resource, why did the National Park Service allow the placement of at least a dozen large Cellular Telephone Towers at the tops of the peaks immediately adjacent to Spirit Mountain? Clearly, these Transmission Towers are a much greater disturbance of the air space around Spirit Mountain than a bunch of virtually invisible climbing bolts more than two miles away.
If climbing bolts are prohibited in Christmas Tree Pass, more than 40 multi-pitch rock climbs and many shorter climbs established in Christmas Tree Pass over the last 35 years would be rendered unclimbable.
Prohibiting climbing bolts in Christmas Tree Pass while allowing climbing bolts in Yosemite National Park and hundreds of other National Parks and Recreation Areas throughout the United States is capricious and arbitrary and is a violation of rock climbers’ equal protection rights.
If the Lake Mead NRA finds that climbing bolts are disturbing the “sensitive historical resources” of Christmas Tree Pass, then the LMNRA must also apply the same logic to the Christmas Tree Pass Cell Phone Towers.
Without climbing bolts, there will be virtually zero climbing in Christmas Tree Pass, Nevada and throughout thousands of square miles of the Lake Mead NRA where there are smooth rocks that do not have natural cracks.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 23, 2010 - 07:34am PT
|
To: ALL Climbers who use bolt protection
From: Andrew Solow cell 415-722-3047
Subject: Park Service plan is to remove 200 bolts and destroy Christmas Tree Pass climbing area
Their "PLAN" is to "improve naturalness" by removing climbing bolts.
You know, the bolts that you can't even see when you are only 30 feet away?
All six .pdfs referenced below searched for keywords “climb” and “rock” – results are below.
By proposing to remove all bolts installed near Willow Springs, LMNRA is proposing to destroy the entire Christmas Tree Pass Climbing Area.
Description: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan/EA - April 2010
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkId=317&projectId=16820&documentID=33282
Date Document Posted: 04/09/2010
Comment Period: 04/09/2010 - 05/14/2010
Document Content:
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Table of Contents and Chapter One: Introduction (2.2 MB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Two: Framework for Management, Use, and Admin of the Wilderness Areas (339.0 KB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Three: Management Alternatives, Part 1 (7.4 MB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Three: Management Alternatives, Part 2 (7.8 MB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Four: The Affected Environment (307.8 KB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Five: Environmental Consequences (287.9 KB, PDF file)
• LAKE_Draft WMP/EA - Chapter Six: Consultation and Coordination (189.3 KB, PDF file)
Disclaimer: Links within the above document(s) were valid as of the date published.
Chapter 2, page 46
CHAPTER TWO: FRAMEWORK FOR MANAGEMENT, USE, AND
ADMINISTRATION OF THE WILDERNESS AREAS
Climbing, Mountaineering, and Canyoneering
Rock climbing and scrambling is allowed without the placement of fixed anchors in designated wilderness areas in Lake Mead National Recreation Area and on the adjacent BLM lands. No new permanent means of support (i.e., bolting) can be left in place on routes. In general, fixed anchors discovered in wilderness areas will be removed and the holes patched if removal would not cause undue damage to the rock. Areas close to sensitive resources, such as bird nesting areas, will be closed to climbing or scrambling during nesting periods. Use of climbing equipment (including climbing chalk) within 50 feet of rock art will be prohibited. Climbing, scrambling, or walking upon rock art surfaces will be prohibited.
Chapter 3, page 74
CONCEPT AND SUMMARY
Alternative A provides a baseline for evaluating changes and impacts in the other alternatives. In this alternative, the no-action alternative, the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management would continue to provide minimal management of the eight wilderness areas as has been the case since the wilderness areas were established in 2002. For the foreseeable future, there would be no major change in the management of the wilderness areas. Existing visitor uses (e.g., hiking, rock climbing) would continue.
Chapter 3: Part 1, page 81 & page 97
Bridge Canyon Wilderness
Like Spirit Mountain, Bridge Canyon is a popular destination that likely will receive more use in the future, and potentially could see more impacts compared to the other wilderness areas. Consequently, more proactive management is needed in this area to ensure that wilderness values are protected and the needs of visitors are met.
Under alternative B, the Grapevine Canyon Trail outside the wilderness area would be improved to more clearly direct visitors into the wash and the multiple user-created trails would be restored to natural conditions.
Climbing bolts by Willow Springs would be removed. The bolts do not receive much use, are not NPS sanctioned, and are not consistent with the area’s wilderness character.
Chapter 3: Part 2, page 115
Climbing bolts at Willow Springs would be removed
Chapter 4, page 149
Rock climbing is not a popular activity, due to the nature of the rock resource, although localized climbing occurs. [2nd to last sentence of continuation of last paragraph on page 148]
Chapter 5, page 191
ALTERNATIVE B – PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Apparent Naturalness
Efforts would be made to improve naturalness; these efforts would include the restoration of Tule Springs, the removal of climbing bolts in Bridge Canyon, and the closing of three roads to vehicles and conversion of the roads to routes (two in Spirit Mountain and one in Bridge Canyon).
Chapter 5, page 193
ALTERNATIVE C
Apparent Naturalness
Efforts would be made to improve naturalness; these efforts would include the restoration of Tule Springs, the removal of climbing bolts in Bridge Canyon, and the closing of three roads to vehicles and conversion of the roads to routes (two in Spirit Mountain and one in Bridge Canyon).
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 10:29am PT
|
Thanks for posting this, Andy.
A few have spent several years and a few hundred dollars of SCMA money replacing old bolts in that area.
It's a wonderful place to climb, as you well know, even if it is under the radar of most.
And I know for a fact that the reason you can now hike in the vicinity of the climbing area without seeing spent shotgun shells, etc. is that climbers have been carrying trash out for quite sometime now. That area is far cleaner now than when I first saw it.
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 10:53am PT
|
just think of the jobs that chopping all those bolts will create....
its just like how the government to increase jobs and help the economy has given all this money to cities to improve their infrastructure thru road projects. So they are tearing up streets and roads and sewer lines everywhere and putting all these small business that have been just barely hanging on, that depend on the thru traffic and parking, out of business.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:01am PT
|
Maybe they should remove Las Vegas to improve 'naturalness'?
Oh, and Lake Mead isn't exactly 'natural' is it?
I 'spose it is only natural to shut off all vehicular traffic too.
|
|
Curt
Boulder climber
Gilbert, AZ
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:34am PT
|
Our tax dollars hard at work. It looks to me like we need to lay-off a few thousand more Park Service employees. Obviously, they have nothing worthwhile to do.
Curt
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:41am PT
|
I've always feared things like this. That's why I contribute to the Access Fund. If you haven't already, you need to get them on board.
John
|
|
Bowser
Trad climber
Red River NM
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:44am PT
|
Wow, I am sorry (and pissed) to hear that.
I have been climbing since 1991 and sadly watched our public lands taken from us.
Its to bad these government agencies feel that "management" means closure.
The national service in Northern New Mexico has systematically closed down many of the jeep roads that accessed historical mining sites, fishing lakes and adventure 4-wheeling.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:44am PT
|
Cell phone towers were not allowed - they were foisted on the agency. As part of the government's bid to make money from auctioning off lots of spectrum, it became clear that those billions would not appear due to the siting issues for new towers. So the feds promised to order all its agencies to permit cell towers, thus captuing the more dollars from the frequency auctions. I was part of the cell phone industry as these auctions took place, watching those auctions very closely.
Looks like there isn't a lot of love between the agency and climbers there. Bad economic times lead to "facility prioritization", road decommissioning, etc. They are all excuses to get rid of the problem people, the pesky ones that won't stay in their cars on the asphalt.
BTW - there is Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Access FUnd and the NPS. They were supposed to include the Access Fund and the local affiliate in discussions about climbing management policy. Sounds like this superintendant didn't bother with that step.
http://www.accessfund.org/atf/cf/{1F5726D5-6646-4050-AA6E-C275DF6CA8E3}/AF%20NPS%20MOU.pdf
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 11:55am PT
|
Up to now, there's been no issues between climbers and rangers. This is something we need to address, but I would not call it warfare between the park service and climbers. Not yet, anyway.
Hell, you can climb for days there and never see anybody else, ranger or climber.
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 12:03pm PT
|
Even if this proposal passes... I wonder where the cash-strapped park service will drum up the $ to actually pay someone to do the chopping. Sounds pretty expensive and time consuming. Totally lame too. The chopping f-s up the rock worse than just leaving the bolts. Morons.
|
|
Ezra
Social climber
WA, NC, Idaho Falls
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 12:47pm PT
|
Verry sad,
I just renewed my access fund membership!
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 01:28pm PT
|
Up to now, there's been no issues between climbers and rangers
Actually, Gary, that's only in recent history. In 1970, while I was visiting my family in Beirut, riots broke out in the Valley. When I got back to the States, there was very evident hostility between rangers and climbers, mainly because climbers looked like hippies. We still had some rangers who were climbers, and therefore helped to calm things down, but it got bad enough that Robbins published a blurb in Summit warning climbers of the hostility. The Vulgarian Digest published a story from about the same time of the rangers seeing these hippie freaks up on the rocks (Bishop's Terrace, if I remember rightly), figuring they were up to no good (so to speak), and ordering them to come down immediately.
I have to agree with Bowser -- too often these days, we confuse "management" with closure and micro-regulation. In a way, we did it to ourselves when we supported bans on outdoor activities we didn't like. For that reason, I think all of this is a symptom of a much bigger problem. The mountains are a public resource, but all too often, we want to make them our resource at the expense of the public. Only too late do we realize that the public includes us.
John
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 03:33pm PT
|
Bump!
Climbing bolts by Willow Springs would be removed. The bolts do not receive much use, are not NPS sanctioned, and are not consistent with the area’s wilderness character.
That's an interesting line. The fact that the bolts are not used much is being held as a reason for their removal. I guess we all better get out there and start using 'em.
And what the heck is an NPS sanctioned bolt? I thought they didn't want to get involved in that stuff due to potential liability issues. Or is this a new tactic: get involved, determine a liability issue and then ban bolts?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:21pm PT
|
That's an interesting line. The fact that the bolts are not used much is being held as a reason for their removal.
Hey, I use those bolts every time I'm out there! And yeah, people should get out there and climb. If you like your climbing primitive, you'll like it. And you'll get a ton of respect for what Andy, Dick Richardson, Lynn Robison and Joe Hancock have done out there.
John, I was referring to the pass, btw. I've never even seen a ranger out there, much less had any sort of trouble with one.
|
|
Loomis
climber
*_*
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:30pm PT
|
Man does a poor job of regulating himself and even worse at playing god.
Don't those land (mis)managers have anything better to do with their budget?
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:34pm PT
|
Gary, I don't see any bolts in your picture...
What bolts?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:45pm PT
|
Kris, that's exactly what I was thinking on the pitch that I led before that picture was taken. That look of relief on my face? That was because I was going to get to follow the rest of the climb!
Maybe sometime a few bolts are removed, and the only real change is that the route will take more commitment.
Rox, have you climbed there? It's hard to imagine these routes needing any more commitment. You go down there and jump on a route and get back to me about commitment. Maybe you'll just cruise them, I don't know.
Those routes were put up on lead and drilled by hand. Before it was a wilderness area. If you ask me it's a cultural landscape, which according to the park service document is to be protected. Which is going to be part of my comments.
Don't place them [bolts] in sight of the ground EVER
I assure you, that's generally not a concern at the pass.
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:55pm PT
|
You want to stop these problems? Stop publishing route books. Actually, it looks like a guidebook could have prevented the NPS from saying that the bolts "do not receive much use."
But their logic makes sense. And most trails in Wilderness don't receive much use, so we might as well tear them down. That way when everyone applies for a permit for the John Muir Trail, it will be easier to deny 99% of them because the trail is too crowded...
Time for us to scream and shout to let managers know that just because an area is remote and rarely visited doesn't mean that they can shut out an entire section of the Wilderness enjoying public.
And, Rokjox, the area is like Joshua Tree but with far fewer cracks and a lot more open, grainy slabs - not an area that you can climb much at without bolts. If this passes, and they pull the bolts and stop 90% of the current nearly-zero climber use, they'll just come out in a few years with a no-climbing rule and no one will complain.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 04:58pm PT
|
Or let your voice be heard.
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 05:01pm PT
|
The one thing that doesn't change is that the crags don't BELONG to climbers. Sure they do - they are public, which means all of us own them.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 05:23pm PT
|
Public lands do not mean access denied, either.
|
|
aldude
climber
Monument Manor
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 05:48pm PT
|
Or revolt...
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 07:17pm PT
|
Well, the least you can do is be a member of the AF, get your friends to join, and write comments online - obviously you have enough time!
I can see how some folks might say "chop all bolts, then only the few who know how to get an equalized tri-cam and lowe ball can climb here" - but that's just a dumb argument for a simple reason. The most likely way land managers will see to accomplish it is to just ban climbing altogether. And even if they find some way to chop all bolts and enforce bolting bans, once the bolts and most climbers are out, full climbing bans are just around the corner. Even unroped scrambling could be banned after that..."too dangerous" or "too irresponsible since the people who fall don't have to pay the consequences of ending up brain damaged..." etc etc etc.
Join the AF - send in only a few bucks to keep your name on the member list - and write a few emails. No big deal, and a lot quicker than endless internet debates...
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 07:17pm PT
|
Loomis said: Don't those land (mis)managers have anything better to do with their budget?
This is exactly what it is all about. They have to constantly expand their 'turf' to justify their existence. If they maintain the status quo then they fear cutbacks.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2010 - 07:23pm PT
|
I do belong to the AF - since it was formed. The need for it hasn't gone away.
Some of us want climbing to be a legitimate use of public lands, and we think public should recreate there. Otherwise my tolerance for putting lands under public management decreases radically.
Letter writing will commence.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2010 - 04:04pm PT
|
What Rokjox fails to understand is that National Park Service employees work for the people. That's us!
Our system is supposed to be "by the people" and "for the people".
Public employees are supposed to be public servants, not dictators!
They are supposed to ask us what we want and do what we tell them.
That's why they are required by law to solicit comments before they do anything like constructively banning rock climbing by banning bolts.
The proposed Christmas Tree Pass climbing bolt ban is a test case.
If we let them get away with banning and chopping bolts anywhere, the slabs in Yosemite will be next.
So, send in your objection letters before May 14th.
And, join the Access Fund. They are opposing the proposed CTP bolting ban.
If you need any help with your objection letter, feel free to Email me or give me a call. Email: alsolow@earthlink.net Cell: 415-722-3047
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 24, 2010 - 04:10pm PT
|
Greg, there is a guide book to Chrismas Tree Pass. The third iteration will be printed sometime soon.
If you want a copy, just send me an Email.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2010 - 07:51pm PT
|
Andrew, I clearly know more about the structure of the government than you do.
you got to love this...the unemployed for three years RJ who lives off his old lady is a civics guru..ROTFLMAO!!!
|
|
Two Pack Jack
climber
The hills
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2010 - 08:03pm PT
|
The slabs in Yosemite will NOT be next. You all are getting paranoid.
I do agree that I did not see much in that document (i must admit I only read about 25 pages), that mentions how minimizing bolts and removing them would add to the environmental protection. After all the park service's mission is to preserve and protect for future generations.
It seems that if they are going to allow people to go into the backcountry without permits and shoot guns, then a few bolts will not seriously impact someone's experience of the natural setting.
A WORD of ADVICE: If you write a letter, and please do to show your support, try your hardest not to use a derogatory, demeaning or inflamitory tone. Someone working for NPS will read the first few lines and throw it in the trash. Nothing ever gets accomplished through hateful messages, write a letter, cool off for a day, come back and read it and edit what you wrote then send it off.
A few bolts chopped near native american art which may have been stupid routes anyways doesn't brush my feathers, and this is probably all that they would do. This being said, the language in the document was very ambiguous. People who work for NPS really do care about the places they are trying to protect, please be wary of the idea that each of us has the right answers about everything. NPS has to deal with many complex land management issues, and it is important to try and accomodate everyone.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2010 - 08:15pm PT
|
gee thanks for you wisdom RJ. as a 54 yr old its been a while since i have received a lecture rom such a stud as you.
LMAO.
looser.
|
|
Nkane
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2010 - 08:34pm PT
|
Submitted my letter - based on andrewsolo's but slightly modified.
Rockjox, the Administrative Procedure Act says that agencies like the NPS have to solicit and consider comments before promulgating rules. The fact that they didn't contact the Access Fund despite the MOU is pretty disheartening.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 25, 2010 - 09:16am PT
|
Hey Rokjox,
The Christmas Tree Pass bolt chopping case which involves the chopping of more than 200 bolts, has been described to me by Access Fund staff as a case that could set a very bad prescedent.
If the Park Service is successful in its plan to constructively destroy an entire 35 year old climbing area with more than 40 routes by prohibiting new bolts and chopping more than 200 existing bolts, this could establish a prescedent that any Federal, State or Local agency might use to prohibit and chop bolts and constructively prohibit face climbing anywhere in the USA.
If the Christmas Tree Pass matter does not resolve without litigation, the case has the potential to become prima-facie because the burdon of proof in future cases could shift from the Public Agencies to the Climbers.
Instead of Federal, State and Local Public Agencies having to prove that climbing and bolts are harmful to the environment and to any "cultural resources" that are present, Climbers might have to prove that climbing and bolts are not harmful to same.
So, please send in your objection letters before May 14th.
For submission of Objections to the LAKE MEAD NRA Draft Wilderness Management Plan by Webmail - use the comment link below:
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Solow, VP
Gladding & Michel, Inc.
Investigative Offices
Cell 415-722-3047
http://www.gladding-michel.com
CA-PI #: 15321
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 25, 2010 - 11:01am PT
|
GENERAL AGREEMENT
between
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
and the
ACCESS FUND
http://www.accessfund.org/atf/cf/%7B1F5726D5-6646-4050-AA6E-C275DF6CA8E3%7D/AF%20NPS%20MOU.pdf
This General Agreement is made and entered into this 4th day of June, 2009 by and between the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, hereinafter called the NPS and the Access Fund, a non-profit corporation.
ARTICLE 1: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
WHEREAS, the NPS Organic Act (16 U.S.C. I-l(a)) and the General Authorities Act (16 U.S.c. 1,2-4) provide key management authority for units of the National Park System, including the direction to preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.
WHEREAS, the NPS is committed to providing appropriate, high quality opportunities for visitors to enjoy the units of the National Park System consistent with its stewardship responsibilities.
WHEREAS, the Access Fund is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to keeping climbing areas open and to conserving the climbing environment.
WHEREAS, the Access Fund represents the American climbing public and is the recognized leader in advocating on behalf of the climbing community, establishing climbing ethics, promoting volunteerism, and helping to establish appropriate land-use management on Federal and non-Federal lands.
WHEREAS, the Access Fund works closely with land management agencies, environmental organizations, climbing groups, and outdoor businesses on conservation projects, land acquisitions and climbing policy.
WHEREAS, Access Fund members desire to use the National Park System for recreational purposes, the Access Fund may provide support, volunteer labor and/or funds to the NPS through this MOU or subsequent agreements for accomplishment of mutually beneficial climbing programs, projects and activities.
WHEREAS, climbing is permitted in park areas as determined by NPS laws, regulations, and policies assure protection of a park area's natural, scenic, wildlife and aesthetic values while promoting visitor safety and the appreciation of park resources.
WHEREAS, climbing is managed successfully in a variety of park areas, including wilderness areas, around the country including Yosemite National Park in California, Denali National Park in Alaska, Canyonlands National Park in Utah, and Acadia National Park in Maine, as well as in many National Recreation Areas managed by the NPS.
WHEREAS, this agreement between the NPS and the Access Fund will benefit the NPS, the resources it manages, visitors to units of the National Park System, the Access Fund, its membership, the climbing community, and the public generally.
THEREFORE, the NPS and the Access Fund desire to cooperate and mutually agree to collaborate as described below.
ARTICLE II : TERMS OF AGREEMENT
Both parties mutually agree to the following terms:
A. The Service agrees to:
I. Make the terms of this agreement available to Park Superi ntendents and provide information to Park Superintendents that can be used by them and shared with climbing organizations that explains and documents the regulation of climbing opportunities within units of the National Park System. Such documents will be developed for the benefit of Park Superintendents to ensure that appropriate administrative processes are followed for the designation of climbing areas within units of the National Park System, and to provide a description of the types of places where climbing is permitted without further administrative procedure under NPS regulations. These terms are intended to ensure that the designation of park resources appropriate for climbing shall remain the responsibility of the NPS subject to all applicable laws, regulations, and policies of the NPS; shall not result in impairment of the resources and values of the National Park System; and shall fully respect other applicable agreements.
2. Engage with the Access Fund and the climbing community, subject to the availability of personnel and funds, and at the discretion of individual park superintendents, in the development of mutually beneficial work projects and activities, the compilation of information regarding the availability of climbing opportunities on National Park System lands, access trail construction and maintenance projects, and educational efforts in units of the National Park System.
B. The Access Fund agrees to:
I. Promote this partnership with the NPS to members and state representatives and affiliate organizations and encourage collaboration with the NPS on mutually beneficial projects or activities.
2. Work with the NPS to identify appropriate partnership opportunities (trail projects, administrative studies, education programs, etc.) and jointly pursue such projects or activities, when appropriate and at the discretion of individual park superintendents, and to facilitate improved understanding and communication between technical climbers, recreational climbers, public agencies, and the general public.
3. Develop and maintain a communication network for contacting climbers through a system of local, state and regional Access Fund organizations.
4. Offer teclmical assistance to land managers and communities involved in technical and recreational climbing projects, educational activities, opportunities, and management; and make Access Fund program information available to the NPS.
5. Maintain a database and library of publications related to climbing activities that can be made available to park personnel and the public.
6. Provide education, training and instructions to its members and the public when appropriate, regarding Leave No Trace, stewardship and NPS regulations, and encourage the incorporation of these programs in all activities.
7. Obtain NPS approval prior to publication of any cooperative NPS/Access Fund printed materials intended for public distribution regarding recreational activities on NPS lands.
8. Delegate, when appropriate, to an affiliate organization or organizations any task that is better suited to local, state or regional organizations.
9. Offer technical assistance to local NPS units on the identification of new climbing opportunities.
C. Both parties mutually agree to:
1. Collaborate, subject to availability of staff and other reso urces, in the development of educational materials to inform the public of this partnership between the NPS and the Access Fund.
2. Meet annually to discuss activities under this Agreement and identify specific areas of mutual interest for the coming year.
3. Collaborate in the preparation of an annual synopsis of the partnership, including synopsis of program successes and program areas needing improvement. Staff capacity for this synopsis will be provided through the Washington Office at the discretion of the Associate Director, Partnerships and Visitor Experience.
4. During the first year of this agreement, seek to develop at least one pilot project.
5. Identify opportunities to collaboratively participate in regional and national meetings in the form of presentations, panel discussions, and training.
ARTICLE III: TERMS OF AGREEMENT
A. This Agreement shall become effective on the date of the last signature and will remain in effect for 5 years. Modifications to the Agreement may be proposed by either party and shall become effective upon written approval of both parties.
B. Nothing in this Agreement shall obligate the Government to expend funds or to enter into any contract or other obligations with the Access Fund. This Agreement is neither a fiscal nor a funds obligation document. Any activities involving reimbursement or contribution of funds between the parties of this Agreement will be handled in accordance with applicable law, regulations, and procedures.
ARTICLE IV : KEY OFFICIALS AND LIAISONS
The personnel listed below are identified as key staff and are considered essential to the work being performed under this Agreement:
National Park Service
• Christopher K. Jarvi, Associate Director, Partnerships and Visitor Experience,
National Park Service - Washington, D.C.
• Rick Potts, Chief, Conservation and Outdoor Recreation Division,
Access Fund
• Brady Robinson, Executive Director, Access Fund - Boulder, Colorado
• Jason Keith, Policy Director, Access Fund - Moab, Utah
Prior to any changes in key officials by either the NPS or Access Fund, written notice will be given reasonably in advance.
ARTICLE V: SPECIAL PROVISIONS
A. Any material prepared by either party for informing the public about th is partnership, will be submitted to the other party's key official(s) (see Article IV) for formal review and approval prior to its release.
B. This agreement will not in any way suggest endorsement by the NPS of a product or service. No Access Fund member advertising or promotional materials will carry the NPS arrowhead logo or other official text or emblems that might suggest product or NPS endorsement.
C. This Agreement does not establish authority for noncompetitive award to the Access Fund or its members of any contract or other agreement. Any contract or agreement must comply with all applicable requirements for competition.
ARTICLE VI: REQUIRED CLAUSES
A. Civil Rights - During the performance of this agreement, the participants agree to abide by the terms of Executive Order 11246 on non-discrimination and will not discriminate against any person because of race, color, disability, age, religion, sex or national origin. The participants will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed without regard to their race, color, disability, age, religion, sex or national origin.
B. Officials Not to Benefit - No Member of Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of this agreement, or to any benefit that may arise there from.
C. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as binding the NPS to expend in any one fiscal year any sum in excess of appropriations made by Congress, for the purposes of this Agreement for that fiscal year; or as involving the United States in any contract or other obligation for the further expenditure of money in excess of such appropriations.
D. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be inconsistent with or contrary to the purpose of or intent of any Act of Congress affecting or relating to this Agreement.
E. Nothing in this Agreement shall restrict the NPS from entering into similar agreements, or participating in similar activities or arrangements, with other public or private agencies, organizations, or individuals.
F. No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or any other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, a jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, whether before or after the introduction of any bill, measure, or resolution proposing such legislation, ratification, policy, or appropriation;
but this shall not prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its departments or agencies from communicating to any such Member or official, at his request, or to Congress or such official, through the proper official channels, requests for legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business, or from making any communication whose prohibition by this section might, in the opinion of the Attorney General, violate the Constitution or interfere with the conduct of foreign policy, counterintelligence, intelligence, or national security activities. Violations of this section shall constitute violations of section 1352 (a) of title 31.5
ARTICLE VII: TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing the other party with written notice 60 days in advance.
ARTICLE VIII: AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have signed their names and executed this General Agreement.
By: Daniel N. Wenk, NPS Acting Director Date: 5/21/2009
ACCESS FUND
BY: Brady Robmson, Executive Director Date: 6/4/2009
|
|
dustonian
climber
RRG
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2010 - 12:09pm PT
|
Rokjox=climbers' worst enemy. Can't you go to another forum and finally stop calling yourself a climber? You owe it to yourself and all of us.
I wrote my letter, thanks for the update.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2010 - 02:17pm PT
|
I fail to see how Rokjox is anybody's enemy when he makes some cogent arguments that some of you don't seem to agree with. Maybe I just don't understand the meaning of 'discussion'. While he may be guilty of hyperbole I really struggle to understand the mean spirited personal attacks. As a long-suffering observer I have to say that the personal attacks are not begun by him usually.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew,
What the heck is up with this:
ARTICLE VII: TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing the other party with written
notice 60 days in advance.
That sounds like it was put in there by the NPS so they could tell the Access Fund to go shove it when the NPS is tired of dealing with the AF. And why did the AF sign this agreement with that kind of language in it?
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2010 - 05:16pm PT
|
If you oppose this proposal, the best thing you can do is simply submit a comment on-line. It would take less time to do that reading all the above comments, or even posting some of the very articulate discussion above.
In this area, removal of all the bolts is a defacto ban on climbing and future climbing. This is what I submitted, I encourage everyone to set out their own thoughts.
I object to the Draft Wilderness Management Plan to the extent that it proposes:
"Climbing bolts by Willow Springs would be
removed. The bolts do not receive much use,
are not NPS sanctioned, and are not
consistent with the area’s wilderness
character."
There is no rational basis provided (nor does one exist) for this proposal.
The statement that the bolts do not receive much use is untrue and is irrelevant in any event. As a matter of fact, bolts and other fixed climbing anchors have been updated and replaced by climbers over the years.
The fixed anchors are a minimum necessary tool for climbing in this area. In this area, fixed climbing anchors (including bolts) are necessary for safely climbing the major of the routes. The proposed removal of the bolts is, in effect, a ban on climbing.
Many of the fixed anchors have been in place for 35+ years. They do not visually intrude on the landscape and do not affect the wilderness character in any respect.
Fixed climbing anchors are permitted and exist in many wilderness areas managed by the BLM, UPS and USFS. This proposal is in conflict with National agency policy and unreasonably abolishes a legal, human powered, non-intrusive wilderness activity that is traditional to the area.
Studies conducted in other National Parks (e.g.: Joshua National Park) show that fixed anchors neither affect the wilderness character or visitor experience.
I have climbed in this area several time over the years and enjoy it for its remoteness and wilderness feel. However, the fact that climbing is not a predominate use in this area and offers climbers solitude (isn't that the idea of Wilderness) is now being used against climbers by effectively proposing to ban the activity altogether.
Since it appears that this proposal will have a major impact on a legal wilderness activity, I find it odd that climbers and climber organizations such as the Access Fund were not consulted or permitted input into this process. As such, to the extent the Draft Plan addresses climbing, it is fatally flawed and uninformed. It also gives the appearance of a deliberate attempt to clandestinely ban climbing -- with the hope that this ill-advised proposal would fly under the climbing community's radar.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 26, 2010 - 03:13am PT
|
As evidenced by the recent intentional effort to sneak in their constructive climbing ban without notice to local climbers or the Access fund, Agreements like the MOU between the National Park Service and the Access Fund are about as binding as a pile of old Indian treaties.
The sixty day clause simply means that if one of the parties no longer wants to be bound by the agreement, they are supposed to give the other party 60 days notice.
In this case, the National Park Service simply broke the agreement.
As to the usefulness of the Access Fund:
If we get enough objection letters, this matter may settle out of court. But, if this issue ends up in Federal Court:
It costs anywhere from $30,000 to $300,000 to litigate a case like this one. Other than the Access Fund, do any of you folks personally have that much spare change just lying around? Or, do any of you know of any other organization that will take the case?
If any of you do happen to know of another public interest law firm that might want to assist with this problem, please let us know.
|
|
Gunkswest
climber
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2010 - 09:16am PT
|
Here's what I just submitted:
This comment concerns the proposed removal of bolts in the Christmas Tree Pass/Grapevine Canyon area of Lake Mead National Recreation Area.
I have climbed at Christmas Tree Pass since the mid-1980s and know that climbing has occurred in the area since at least the late 1970s. Rock climbing has been a legitimate activity at Lake Mead NRA, adjacent Bureau of Land Management lands and nearby National Park Service sites for decades.
I am very opposed to any federal planning document or policy proposal that advocates the removal of bolts unless those anchors are in close proximity (50-100 feet) to historic or prehistoric rock art or some other similarly sensitive resource.
That some of the Christmas Tree Pass/Grapevine Canyon fixed anchors are in designated wilderness is not in my opinion a legitimate reason for their removal. Fixed anchors are and have been allowed in federally designated wilderness throughout the United States. Many fixed anchors around the country were in situ long before the Wilderness Act was passed and clearly did not degrade an area's potential to become designated wilderness.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 12:53pm PT
|
Sent in my comments today.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 05:15pm PT
|
Uh,.... excuse me, liability for injuries to somebody who thought that there was a fixed anchor for safety????
Sheesh.
Yeah, right the "LAKE" MEAD (or if you prefer the closer "LAKE" MOHAVE) rangers out to preserve "naturalness" uh,.... except for the cell towers and the circus on the "lakes".
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 05:22pm PT
|
comments sent
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 05:28pm PT
|
"Climbing bolts by Willow Springs would be removed. The bolts do not receive much use, are not NPS sanctioned, and are not consistent with the area’s wilderness character."
NPS sanctioned? Who came up with that? And who decided that bolts were not consistent with the wilderness character? Were they getting complaints? Of course not. It's just some guy deciding how he wants things to play out in his wilderness.
JL
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 05:39pm PT
|
Thanks to everyone who's sent in comments. I think we can make a positive impact on the decision. It's worth fighting for.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 05:59pm PT
|
I believe that the most effective fight would not be to write letter to the NPS, (I did btw) who appear to have already decided this matter, but to our congressmen and Senators.
It's more important that you get it in, than it get in perfect. Just make sure you have a point they can understand.
The fact that the NPS can waste our money on this kind of a frivolity should be enough to outrage any taxpayer. It's not just the $ they will pay to chop the bolts, it's all the admistrative funds for their staff of idiots to poorly micromanage something that should be a total non-issue. They can and do micromanage these kinds of issues so as to be able to increase their budgets and importance, that's exactly what we are seeing here IMO. If they have this kind of money to borrow from the Chinese to just waste for no reason, they are essentially saying that they have already taken care of the real important Park Service issues and this is all that is left and they have plenty of money to piss away on: we have the obligation as citizens to cut their funding. Cut it! CUT THEM OFF! Fire the extras and let them get real jobs where they can be productive members of society and produce something of value.
I'd rather this money come back to us taxpayers or at least go to a military rec center in some afgan shithole, to help feed a family or teach a poor inner city kid to read myself.
Rox, you should be pissed at this useless, needless and stupid waste of scarce resources! I recommend all of us pass on one needless Supertopo post and write them right now.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
I've been climbing for 38 years and prefer cracks, but I'm pissed at this total waste of my money anyway. They think we the people have unlimited $ to fund this kind of stupid stuff? Bullsh#t.
__
To congressman, feel free to copy and paste:
"The Park Service plan is to remove 200 bolts and destroy Christmas Tree Pass climbing area. Their "PLAN" is to "improve naturalness" by removing climbing bolts. You know, the bolts that you can't even see when you are only 30 feet away? (Reference - LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan reference link http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkId=317&projectId=16820&documentID=33282 )
The fact that the NPS can waste our money on this kind of a frivolity should be enough to outrage any taxpayer. It's not just the $ they will pay to chop the bolts, it's all the administrative funds for their staff of idiots to poorly micromanage something that should be a total non-issue. If they have this kind of money to borrow from the Chinese to just waste for no reason, they are essentially saying that they have already taken care of the real important Park Service issues and this is all that is left and they have plenty of money to piss away on: we have the obligation as citizens to cut their funding. Cut it! CUT THEM OFF! Fire the extras and let them get real jobs where they can be productive members of society and produce something of value.
I'd rather this money come back to us taxpayers or at least go to a military rec center in some afgan shithole, bike lanes, to help feed a family or teach a poor inner city kid to read myself. "
Sent copies to my congressman, both senators and Tom Coburn of OK.
Senator Coburns
Dear Mr Coburn:
I have appreciated your views of helping the taxpaying citizens of our country out, there is one more current egregious example I would hope you could find time to look into. .
The Park Service plan is to remove 200 bolts and destroy Christmas Tree Pass climbing area. Their "PLAN" is to "improve naturalness" by removing climbing bolts. You know, the bolts that you can't even see when you are only 30 feet away? (Reference - LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan reference link http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkId=317&projectId=16820&documentID=33282 )
The fact that the NPS can waste our money on this kind of a frivolity should be enough to outrage any taxpayer. It's not just the $ they will pay to chop the bolts, it's all the administrative funds for their staff of idiots to poorly micromanage something that should be a total non-issue. If they have this kind of money to borrow from the Chinese to just waste for no reason, they are essentially saying that they have already taken care of the real important Park Service issues and this is all that is left and they have plenty of money to piss away on: we have the obligation as citizens to cut their funding. Cut it! CUT THEM OFF! Fire the extras and let them get real jobs where they can be productive members of society and produce something of value.
I'd rather this money come back to us taxpayers or at least go to a military rec center in some afgan shithole, bike lanes, to help feed a family or teach a poor inner city kid to read myself.
Warm regards and deepest respect sir:
|
|
Loomis
climber
*_*
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2010 - 08:40pm PT
|
Bump for Mr. Solow and keeping xmas tree pass a multi recreational use area.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 28, 2010 - 05:49am PT
|
All we can do for now is try to convince all of the rock climbers you know to send in objection letters.
Official COMMENT Link: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
Current Status - May 6, 2010:
Comment period for filing Objections extended to July 2, 2010.
I understand that the Access Fund has filed consulting party status regarding the Lake Mead NRA bolt chopping plan. But as of May 6th, Lake Mead NRA is refusing to retract and re-write their idiotic plan.
The Issue
The Director of the National Park Service signed an MOU with the Access Fund about a year ago.
NPS//Access Fund MOU: http://www.accessfund.org/atf/cf/%7B1F5726D5-6646-4050-AA6E-C275DF6CA8E3%7D/AF%20NPS%20MOU.pdf
The MOU theoretically requires the NPS to consult with the Access Fund before taking any action that affects access to Climbing resources. But, Lake Mead NRA is claiming that publishing a draft Plan is not an action.
The MOU also specifically requires the NPS to distribute copies of the MOU to all of its Park Superintendents, something that was obviously not done in this case.
The Lake Mead National Recreation Area, a part of the National Park Service, published their proposed plan to chop 200 bolts in Christmas Tree Pass without consulting with the Access Fund first. Now that the draft "Plan" has been published without consultation, the Lake Mead NRA plans to Consult with the Access Fund. But, they refuse to withdraw their bolt chopping plan and re-write it. So, the MOU has only limited utility.
I'm not a lawyer. And, I have no idea what either the Access Fund or the NPS will decide to do. But, hopefully, common sense will prevail and the Lake Mead NRA will replace their bolt chopping plan with a sensible resource management plan that includes bolted climbing in Christmas Tree Pass.
NPS could base a sensible plan on the one recently adopted for Zion. National Park which includes bolted climbing.
I understand that the Access Fund will be publishing something sometime soon.
---------------
If the MOU is just like one of the many Indian Treaties that our government routinely broke during the 1800s, we can expect a shipment of small pox contaminated blankets sometime soon.....
Please continue to submit Objections thru July 2, 2010. or until Lake Mead NRA capitulates and permits climbing bolts at Christmas Tree Pass.
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2010 - 06:50am PT
|
Rokjox, you never climb bolted routes? You never use bolt or rap anchors? What makes you think that the Park service won't ban crack climbing? And slings tied around trees, etc? Are you a troll?
Most bolted routes were put up without asking permission. Most hiking trails were formed without asking permission. That's historical precedent and should be grandfathered in as an easement. Many bolted routes predate areas becoming protected or having bolting bans.
The Access Fund does some good things but it is far too meek in its response to climbing area closures. For example it should have sued to re open Williamson Rock in Los Angeles County. There are no shortage of climber lawyers that should volunteer to litigate closures and bolt removal actions.
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2010 - 06:57am PT
|
"It costs anywhere from $30,000 to $300,000 to litigate a case like this one."
The majority of that is labor. If legal staff donate their time the cost will be minimal.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2010 - 01:48pm PT
|
The deadline for comments is May 14, so don't delay.
|
|
Manny
Social climber
tempe
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010 - 10:32am PT
|
Comments sent. I really enjoy the area and would hate to see the bolts removed.
|
|
pyrosis
Trad climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010 - 11:00am PT
|
Comments sent.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010 - 12:43pm PT
|
You guys rock!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010 - 09:17pm PT
|
Hope you'll get to read my comments.
Basically reminded them that after somebody gets hurt and sues them the victim's lawyer can cite the warning of potential for such an accident in my comments prior to the removal thus illustrating their negligence.
If I was a land manager I wouldn't want an "I told you so" like that hanging over me.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010 - 09:58pm PT
|
comments sent
|
|
Wack
climber
Dazevue
|
|
|
Apr 30, 2010 - 12:09am PT
|
CTP sees very little traffic. 20 minutes of hiking reveals fewer foot prints then a half hour past Way Gone Dome in the Wonderland. We are several trillion $$ in the hole and have money to spend chopping bolts, wonderful. On the plus side we did not see 1 Barker in 4 days at CTP so refitting the climbs won't be hard to do.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 30, 2010 - 04:38am PT
|
Be careful of rattle snakes if you visit Christmas Tree Pass this time of year. There are virtually no snakes from mid October to mid April.
Take particular care if you encounter a Mojave Rattlesnake, aka: Mojave Green. A 2mg dose of Mojave Rattlesnake venom is fatal if not treated immediately. The average envenomation from a defensive strike is about 10 mg or 5 times the lethal dose. Mojave Green venom is 16 times more powerful than Sidewinder venom.
Mojave Rattlesnake
Crotalus scutulatus
From http://digital-desert.com/wildlife/mojave-green-rattlesnake.html: This is probably the most dangerous snake in North America. It is aggressive, fairly large-bodied, and has a complex venom composed of hemolytic and neurotoxic elements. It is responsible for several deaths each year, including in recent years a prominent snake toxin expert. This snake should be avoided.
[An adult snake will usually deliver about 10% of it's venom sack capacity with each defensive strike or bite. Baby rattlesnakes only carry about 40 mg of venom. But, they have no control and they deliver all 40 mg with one bite. Fortunately, their fangs are much shorter than those of an adult snake.]
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Don't forget to post your comments.
|
|
Lake Mead NRA Public Affairs
climber
Boulder City, NV
|
|
Hello everyone,
We want to make sure everyone has a chance to submit their input on the proposed wilderness mangement plan. So we've extended the comment period to July 2, 2010. The website will be updated soon to reflect the new deadline.
Andrew Munoz
Public Affairs Officer
Lake Mead National Recreation Area
National Park Service
(702) 293-8691
andrew_munoz@nps.gov
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Thank you!
|
|
BooYah
Social climber
Ely, Nv
|
|
Excellent news.
This is a cool place, worthy of our notice & care.
:-)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Wow. Then NPS posting up on Supertopo AND moving out a comment deadline, that's got to be considered pretty damn responsive in anyone's book. That also seems like a first worth acknowledging and means it's probably worth setting aside the usual bitching and badmouthing and trying to work constructively on this with those folks if you care about CTP.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Morning bump.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
I like arguments against inappropriate bolting - however, nothing about the CTP bolts is 'inappropriate' other than possibly the runouts.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Those runouts certainly get the juices flowing. That's why I sent in my comments.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
wow, this is great news!
Thx Andrew!
|
|
Urmas
Social climber
Sierra Eastside
|
|
I just sent in a letter. They may not have to take these into account, but that should never be an excuse for not getting in their face. Public outcry has caused some things to change.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 6, 2010 - 08:14pm PT
|
Hello Everyone,
Earlier today, I spoke with the Public Affairs Officer for Lake Mead NRA and one of the Access Fund attorneys at length.
The following is my interpretation of what I heard during these two telephone conversations:
Current Status - 5/6/2010:
In my recent conversation with Lake Mead NRA Public Affairs Officer Andrew Munoz, I learned that Andrew Munoz is a very nice person. Unfortunately, I also learned that Lake Mead NRA is refusing to withdraw their bolt chopping plan and re-write it so that Rock Climbing bolts are permitted at Christmas Tree Pass, NV.
That means that all we got out of Lake Mead NRA so far is polite conversation and an agreement to delay bolt chopping until after July 2nd.
So, the constructive ban on Rock Climbing at Christmas Tree Pass, NV is still on the table. And, we still need to submit Objections to the bolt chopping plan.
This will be a precedent setting case for Rock Climbing nationwide. If the NPS in the guise of the Lake Mead NRA succeeds in constructively banning Rock Climbing at Christmas Tree Pass by banning climbing bolts, you can be sure that NPS, BLM and USFS will try to ban bolted climbing in a lot of other places throughout the USA.
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
Sample Objection - previously posted on Supertopo
Lake Mead National Recreation Area – (702-293-8990)
Park Superintendent – (702-293-8920)
601 Nevada Hwy
Boulder City, NV 89005-2426
Via Fax to: 702-293-8936
Via Webform to: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
SUBJECT: Objection to LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan/EA - April 2010
I object to the Draft Wilderness Management Plan to the extent that it proposes:
"Climbing bolts by Willow Springs [and throughout the Lake Mead National Recreation Area] would be removed. The bolts do not receive much use, are not NPS sanctioned, and are not consistent with the area’s wilderness character."
In the Christmas Tree Pass rock climbing area, removal of all the bolts is a defacto ban on climbing and future climbing. If implemented, this proposal would also constructively ban rock climbing on smooth walls throughout the Lake Mead National Recreation Area.
There is no rational basis provided (nor does one exist) for this proposal.
The statement that the bolts do not receive much use is untrue and is irrelevant in any event. As a matter of fact, bolts and other fixed climbing anchors have been updated and replaced by climbers over the years.
The fixed anchors are a minimum necessary tool for climbing in this area. In this area, fixed climbing anchors (including bolts) are necessary for safely climbing the majority of the routes. The proposed removal of the bolts is, in effect, a ban on climbing.
Many of the fixed anchors have been in place for 35+ years. They do not visually intrude on the landscape and do not affect the wilderness character in any respect.
Fixed climbing anchors are permitted and exist in many wilderness areas managed by the NPS, BLM, and USFS. This proposal is in conflict with National agency policy and unreasonably abolishes a legal, human powered, non-intrusive wilderness activity that is traditional to the area.
Studies conducted in other National Parks (e.g.: Joshua National Park) show that fixed anchors neither affect the wilderness character or visitor experience.
If climbing bolts are prohibited in Christmas Tree Pass, more than 30 multi-pitch rock climbs and many shorter climbs established in Christmas Tree Pass over the last 35 years would be rendered unclimbable. NPS must not be allowed to constructively ban rock climbing at Christmas Tree Pass just because Christmas Tree Pass does not receive as much use as Red Rocks, NV or Yosemite, CA.
Since it appears that this proposal will have a major impact on a legal wilderness activity, I find it odd that climbers and climber organizations such as the Access Fund were not consulted or permitted input into this process. As such, to the extent the Draft Plan addresses climbing, it is fatally flawed and uninformed.
The Draft Plan also gives the appearance of a deliberate attempt to clandestinely ban climbing -- with the hope that this ill-advised proposal would fly under the climbing community's radar.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 7, 2010 - 08:13am PT
|
Another Sample Objection Letter
Lake Mead National Recreation Area – (702-293-8990)
Park Superintendent – (702-293-8920)
601 Nevada Hwy
Boulder City, NV 89005-2426
Via Fax to: 702-293-8936
Via Webform to: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
SUBJECT: Objection to LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan/EA - April 2010
It has come to my attention that the NPS is considering implementing a ban on the placement of fixed climbing anchors In the Lake Mead NRA - although I found no mention of this issue on their website. Furthermore, Lake Mead NRA is apparently proposing to remove 200 or more anchors that are already in place.
As an avid rock climber, mountaineer, and advocate for the preservation of wilderness, I am adamantly opposed to these proposals which will deny recreational use of public land to a sizeable community of outdoor enthusiasts without appreciable enhancement of aesthetic, historical, or environmental values or qualities.
Fixed anchors have been employed by climbers in the U.S. since the 1930's.
They were first placed by the likes of David Brower, Ansel Adams, Francis Farquahr, and others, without whose passion for climbing in wild places, we would have no Wilderness act. In fact the political activism of these early "bolters" created the foundations of enlightened land use policy today. These pioneers were convinced that recreational use of wilderness would motivate public support for preservation. They would surely have argued that the negligible impact of fixed anchors, responsibly placed, would be a small price to pay for the education and motivation of legions of future environmental stewards.
While there may be places where anchors have proliferated beyond "responsible" levels, Christmas Tree Pass is not one of them. All anchors have been placed in traditional style, ground up, and by hand. They are few and far between - much to the chagrin of inexperienced climbers. In fact it's hard for even a trained climber to spot most of them.
To ban the placement of new anchors would be senseless enough. But removing those already in place would be the height of folly. Not only would precious funds be wasted in this effort, but the impact of such a project would be equivalent to the impact of many years of normal climber traffic. Finally, scars would remain. Even a bolt hole filled with a rock/epoxy mixture can be detected upon close examination. Would this be progress?
In conclusion, I urge you and your colleagues in the National Park Service to retract these proposals which would benefit neither the environment in the LMNRA, the climbing community, or the larger public, should these proposals be adopted in the Lake Mead NRA, or anywhere else.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 8, 2010 - 02:33pm PT
|
Christmas Tree Pass BOLT CHOPPING Update
As of Saturday, May 8th: The two primary issues for Rock Climbers are still Bolt Chopping and Native American Treaty Rights. Here's why:
On Thursday, May 6th, a local climber from Bullhead City, AZ met with a particular Lake Mead NRA Park Planner (who I believe to be the source of the bolt chopping plan) at Christmas Tree Pass, NV, took him on a tour and showed him some of the main formations and routes.
After wandering around CTP for a couple of hours, the Park Planner orally agreed that the bolts are virtually invisible and that 95% of the bolts are in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness, NOT in the Spirit Mountain Wilderness where the mountain itself is a designated cultural resource which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Based on his meeting with the Park Planner, the local climber reported that the Park Planner seems to have changed his opinion; and he no longer believes that chopping bolts at Christmas Tree Pass is a good idea.
However, the Lake Mead NRA has NOT withdrawn their bolt chopping plan. And, Lake Mead NRA has specifically told both me and one of the Access Fund attorneys that Bolt Chopping is "Still "On the Table"
That local climber agreed with me that all we can do for now is keep sending in Objection letters in opposition to bolt chopping and give the Access Fund, the Las Vegas Climbers Liason Counsel (LVCLC), the local climber from Bullhead City, AZ and others a chance to consult with Lake Mead NRA and the indigenous Americans with treaty rights in the area and try to negotiate a new wilderness management "Plan" that permits rock climbing bolts.
The local climber specifically requested that we be polite so that the Lake Mead NRA personnel don't get their hackles up.
The new deadline for Objecting to the bolt chopping plan is July 2nd.
Will post another update as soon as I learn anything new.
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 11, 2010 - 07:56pm PT
|
That's great news!
But then again, the local community doesn’t gain much economically from a bunch of climbers clipping those damn offensive bolts!!! Hmmmmm… We’re not a minority here, are we? Discrimination? Or criminalization?
On the contrary! Twice a year we rent casino rooms for three nights each trip. We go out for meals in Bullhead City as well as Laughlin. We buy gas, ice, beer. We haul out trash every time we go out there, though it's getting harder and harder to find spent shotgun shells since we've been cleaning up for years now.
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 11, 2010 - 09:45pm PT
|
Gary, nice that you guys support the locals like that, but among climbers, is that the norm?
Any thoughts on my original question?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 11, 2010 - 10:35pm PT
|
About other users? If you think it's relevant, why not? It's a National Recreation Area after all, and we want to recreate!
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 11, 2010 - 10:47pm PT
|
OK, thanks Gary. Just wanted to make sure that there weren’t any “why not’s” that I might have (easily) overlooked. Think I’ll include that stuff in my comments.
|
|
Soulsurfer
Trad climber
carlsbad, Ca
|
|
|
May 11, 2010 - 11:11pm PT
|
A little history about Christmas tree pass. To those who do not know, it got its name from all the beer cans hung from the bushes on either side of the road as you get off 163. Think red necks having a good time back when there was only the Riverside casino and Edgewater. This was 30 yrs ago or more. This was(is) my second home as my parents had a second house above Katherine landing. Went boating on Lake Mojave in the summer and rode dirt bikes and shot up the desert and played Johnny Cash the rest of the time
We noticed a very big change in Park service Rangers (ie hostile and harrassing) I guess 20-25 yrs ago. Since then we have had run ins with them but they mostly leave us alone on the Az side. We had a run in where we were hunting up there and basically had a standoff with the ranger. He called the Kingman sheriff for back up and when the sherifff came out to meet my dad he apologized and made the ranger leave.
Any ways, the rangers and park system have a lot of power now and do not like people messing around in 'Their' park system.
This looks like just another tighting of the screws by the park service to keep 'the man' in check while visiting 'Their' park.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2010 - 05:29am PT
|
Our best weapon is to submit Objections to the Lake Mead NRA Draft Plan.
Object Online
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
For rock climbers, the most important thing to object to is the climbing bolt ban because that would effectively ban face climbing throughout the Lake Mead NRA and set a precedent that could be used to ban climbing bolts nationwide.
Without the liberal use of expletives, I cannot adequately express my displeasure with the local bureauocrats whose "Draft Plan" is nothing more than a solution in search of a problem.
The new deadline for submission of Objections is Midnight, July 1, 2010.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 13, 2010 - 12:27pm PT
|
Thanks for posting, Andrew.
Expletives won't do us any good, reasoned responses will. So if you haven't already, submit your response soon.
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
May 13, 2010 - 03:11pm PT
|
Take 5 minutes and send in an objection to the proposed plan.
It is easy and each individual response has an impact and counts.
Complacency is our enemy.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 13, 2010 - 04:17pm PT
|
May I ask a question, Chief? Have you ever been to Christmas Tree Pass?
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
May 13, 2010 - 06:17pm PT
|
Over the years a number of people have said that climbers have no more right to use public lands as they please than Weyerhaeuser has unilaterally to come in and clear cut the Valley. We had a chance to define a paradigm centered on cooperation. It would appear that chance is now gone and we will have much more of what you see in this and other threads.
We have made an exceedingly foolish trade.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
May 13, 2010 - 10:19pm PT
|
BBA:
What we all have been running into is behavior that causes potential friends to become determined opposition.
I have even run into, "People who think their opinion matters."
We are taxpayers. Write to the NPS and the FS expressing your opinion AS A CLIMBER. Opinion within the climbing community is split. The duly constituted authorities need to know that.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 14, 2010 - 01:29am PT
|
BTW: Yes I have. Several times as I recall on my many RT's to Flagstaff and down to Cochise, back in the early to mid 90's. When I played there, the bolts were 1/4ers w/Leeper Hgrs as I recall and were damn few and far between. Real Slab Climbs and just the way I like em. Reminded me a lot of Herb's, Scott's and Greg's routes on Owens Ridge as well as the few routes that were established on Entrance and other Domes in Cochise.
And when you passed through the entrance station did you stop off at the visitor center to check if you were up to date on the regulations?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 14, 2010 - 06:47pm PT
|
Thanks for the response, Chief, and not answering the question. And thanks for putting words in my mouth. When you get to the Pass and get to know it, perhaps then you can speak intelligently of the situation.
Good day.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2010 - 06:09pm PT
|
Dick Richardson and I personally placed close to 200 bolts in Christmas Tree Pass before 1980. And, a lot of other people placed bolts at CTP long before it was ever designated as a Wilderness Area. All of the original bolts were placed by hand on the lead.
So, if the Park Ranger is claiming that there were only 70 or 80 bolts in place at CTP until last year, he is misinformed.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2010 - 09:40pm PT
|
I think we all agree that we don't want thousands of bolts thoughtlessly installed with power drills. But, I don't believe that has occurred at Christmas Tree Pass. And, I hope that everyone including Park Rangers supports replacement of old, rusty 1/4" bolts which is ongoing at Christmas Tree Pass.
Several comments deleted. I have since learned that they were false.
|
|
Slice
Boulder climber
Valley
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 01:00am PT
|
Hey Andrewsolow and Gary, is The Chief correct in posting that you guys and your climbing buddies are using power drills and are Rap Bolting in the Wilderness? One more question, if you guys put in over 200 bolts before 1980, and a lot more have been put in since then, then how many of these gudam bolts actually are there in CTP? Looks to me like there's a shitload of bolts already established there. Good reading to say the least.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 16, 2010 - 01:04am PT
|
The LEO added that had folks come in to their office and generate some plans as to the need for rebolting and to establish some standards/protocols from which new routes/bolts can be added in this area, this whole deal could have been avoided.
I tried talking to the LEO nearly a year before LMNRA published it's bolt chopping plan. The only thing I got from the LEO at that time was ATTITUDE, the claim that the air space for ten miles around Spirit Mountain is sacred, and the admonition that human beings aren't supposed to be using the area for recreation.
The LEO didn't even know where 10% of the bolts at CTP were until a climber who lives in Bullhead City, AZ took him on a tour of CTP about a week ago and pointed out some of the primary rock formations and routes.
The only reason the LEO is pretending that no climber ever tried to speak with him about CTP climbing issues until recently is because his bolt chopping plan is predicated on the lie that nobody ever climbs at CTP; and the LEO is trying to deflect attention from the large number of objections that LMNRA has already received to their CTP bolt chopping plan.
FYI: the primary CTP rock climbing area covers about 10 square miles and includes more than 30 different crags and 80 routes, several of which are 3 to 5 pitches in length. A new guide book will be published shortly.
Take 5 minutes and send in an objection to the proposed plan.
It is easy and each individual response has an impact and counts.
Complacency is our enemy.
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
Andrew Solow, CPI #s: 15321 & 24831
Christmas Tree Pass Resident
1977, 1978 and 1979
2-3 months each year
|
|
Slice
Boulder climber
Valley
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 01:21am PT
|
Andrewsolow, can you answer my questions I asked in my prior post please. Also, is the LEO a local Native American? Isn't Spirit Mountain and that entire Christmas Tree Pass spot some kind of local Native America spiritual location or something with all them Petroglyphs located all over? If it is, I can see why the LEO, if he is Native American would have a bone to pick with you guys.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 16, 2010 - 01:39am PT
|
Far as I know, the LEO or "local environmental officer"? is a 50ish white guy who has grown children and has been living in southern Nevada for many years.
Spirit Mountain, located in the Spirit Mountain Wilderness on the north side of Christmas Tree Pass road is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The Grape Vine Canyon Petroglyphs site is located in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness Area on the south side of CTP Road. The petroglyphs site is also listed on the National Register. The petroglyphs are concentrated in the lower part of Grapevine Canyon.
Most of the 30+ rock formations that have been climbed to date are located at least one mile away from either the Grape Vine Canyon petroglyph site or Spirit Mountain. There is a route location map in the new CTP Rock Climbing Guide. But, the guide hasn't been published yet.
The U.S. National Wilderness Preservation System Map (Wilderness.net link below) has great high resolution images of the CTP area. Just zoom in and out and pan around and you will be able to see all of the major rock formations.
Spirit Mountain & Bridge Canyon Wilderness Maps
http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&latitude=35.2260136374&longitude=-114.701843776&zoom=13
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 16, 2010 - 02:39am PT
|
Andrewsolow, can you answer my questions I asked in my prior post. There are a lot of bolts at CTP because it is a large area with a lot of separate rock formations.
If CTP was located closer to a population center like Las Vegas, there would be a lot more routes and a lot more bolts.
Almost all of the bolts at CTP were placed on the lead, not on rappel. There is one small crag about 60' high that has several routes on it that were allegedly rapp bolted, but not by me. I don't climb anymore.
Regarding $400.00 battery operated roto hammers, many people own one. Probably appropriate when used for replacing bolts, but illegal to use in a Wilderness Area.
Hopefully, one of the things that will come out of this discussion are regulations or a permit system that allows for powered replacement of old bolts and hand installation of new bolts in Wilderness Areas. If the fine is big enough and the Park Rangers enforce the law, that should stop people from rapp bolting all over the place.
Only problem is, it's too much work for the Park Rangers to monitor and enforce. Easier to just chop all of the bolts.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 02:45am PT
|
"Take 5 minutes and send in an objection to the proposed plan.
It is easy and each individual response has an impact and counts.
Complacency is our enemy."
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
Complacency is our enemy.
"Complacency is our enemy."
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 03:10am PT
|
The Chief would be on your side in an instant Andrew if he knew for a fact that one or more LEOs were power tripping and not doing their job properly. Managers can be unduly influenced by the opinion of a single manager or LEO. We're all climbers, and his opinions are formed from his experiences.
You have to know that The Chief frequents some areas that range from very overbolted (Clark Canyon) to what-were-they-smoking-and-how-could-they-possibly-afford-that-many-bolts-obscenely overbolted (Alabama Hills). And he has seen some pretty lame behavior on the part of climbers and good behavior on the part of some very tolerant land managers.
But accusing people of rap bolting with power drills with no evidence is pretty lame. Counting bolts is pretty lame if you don't know the area (start counting individual bolts in a Christmas Tree Pass size chunk of your favorite well known area - take Josh or Yosemite or Red Rocks for instance...) If you do some bolt counts on 1970s summers in Tuolumne, 100 bolts is no problem with a hand drill - well before a power drill was ever invented. I'd bet that Clevenger pushed 100 (or more) in a single summer.
Chief, do you want to give the benefit of the doubt to the LEOs when you found out that the LEO was completely wrong on one of his key objections? He told you that there were no more than 65-80 known bolts up to Spring 2009, yet Andrew personally placed around 200 bolts before 1980? Even if we were to assume that not a single bolt was placed 1980-2009, then still the LEO had his facts wrong by a factor of 3.
Chief, what happens if a ban at CTP seems like a swell model to other land managers, bolt bans and removals start at more crags - starting of course with the places that "no one cares about" - and in another 5 years, you are not even allowed to place anchor bolts on a new trad route on the Ruby Wall?
Climbers are definitely overbolting in places, but everyone should write in and protest blanket bans, let alone managers proposing to chop bolts for no good reason!
Complacency is the enemy...everyone write!
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 16, 2010 - 05:11am PT
|
Thanks Greg.
Chief is right about climbers who are way too quick to drill and do not have a sense of style and ethics that prevents them from drilling on rappel.
But, Chief is wrong about these particular bureauocrats. However, these land managers can be reasoned with, particularly if we send them a couple of thousand Objection letters.
Also helpful, the Access Fund has weighed in as the 'Consulting Party' on the Lake Mead draft Plan. See: http://www.accessfund.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=tmL5KhNWLrH&b=5000939&ct=8395599
The Park Service is NOT the enemy. And, neither is this particular land manager.
But, the Park Service works for the people, not the other way around like Chief was indoctrinated by the US Navy.
The biggest problem I see for the Park Service and the land managers is the difficulty of managing an area as large and remote as Christmas Tree Pass.
The Park Service & the BLM are streatched so thin in the Lake Mead NRA that they have trouble just driving up and down Christmas Tree Pass Road twice a day. They don't even have enough Park Rangers to prevent vandals from shooting paint balls at the 1,500 year old petroglyphs in Grapevine Canyon.
Suppose they actually had to have someone spend 7 days a week 12 hours a day at least six months a year patroling the Christmas Tree Pass climbing area on foot? There are no trails and it is slow going even for young people in excellent physical condition.
Really controlling what goes on in a place the size of Christmas Tree Pass means using drone aircraft with cameras, a capability the Park Service doesn't have.
Hopefully sanity will prevail because some sort of cooperative partnership is the only choice that makes any sense at CTP.
The only way that the Park Service and the BLM could completely eliminate human impact from this area would be to close Christmas Tree Pass Road between Grapevine Canyon and S/R 95. Hopefully, it won't come to that.
|
|
Wack
climber
Dazevue
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 08:22am PT
|
"The Park Service & the BLM are streatched so thin in the Lake Mead NRA that they have trouble just driving up and down Christmas Tree Pass Road twice a day. They don't even have enough Park Rangers to prevent vandals from shooting paint balls at the 1,500 year old petroglyphs in Grapevine Canyon."
The Park Service needs to prioritize how they allocate their resources. Instead or worrying about some bolts that only climbers see they should be busting the vandals with PB guns.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 11:17am PT
|
Slice: Hey Andrewsolow and Gary, is The Chief correct in posting that you guys and your climbing buddies are using power drills and are Rap Bolting in the Wilderness?
Slice, The Chief is completely uninformed as to the situation at Christmas Tree Pass.
Yes, a power drill has been used at Christmas Tree Pass in an ongoing bolt replacement project. We've been replacing the old 1/4"ers that Andrew Solo, Dick Richardson, Lynn Robison, Joe Hancock and others put in on lead with hand drills. If Chief had ever actually climbed there he would recognize instantly that this area is not overbolted and the routes were placed in good style.
A power drill has been used, though not always, in this replacement project.
Communication is a two way street, and it has failed in both directions at the Pass.
There are no NPS facilities at the Pass. There is no visitor center, no entrance station, no rangers. There are a few signs, none of which state that you are entering a wilderness area.
We made the honest mistake of not getting an up to date map of an area that we know like the backs of our hands. We should have driven to a ranger station at some point just to see what's going on in the area, for sure. With the road and microwave facility adjacent to Spirit Mountain, it truly never occured to us that it was a wilderness area. It was just the Pass as it had always been.
Had we known of the wilderness designation a power drill would not have been used. I am pissed at myself.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 06:15pm PT
|
The maps that Andrew posted in fact state where the different WA are, plain as day, Gary.
And as you well know, Chief, there are NPS maps that do not show any wilderness area.
Communication is a two way street.
Thank you for your help in this situation.
|
|
meg - tp
Trad climber
kingman, az
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 09:20pm PT
|
Comments submitted, but please no bumps - this forum already has more bumps than Kirstie Ally's inner thighs.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 02:11am PT
|
Sounds to me like The Chief is advocating respect for the Wilderness Act. That is by far in the best interest of the climbing community. Advocating respect for the Wilderness Act is a good thing.
But, automatically assuming that anything a government employee says is the gospel and then demanding that we all automatically lick the boots of government employees is a bad thing.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 02:18am PT
|
Franklin,
You have posted over 9,500 times on Supertopo.
Why don't you just give everybody a break and go back to posting on the Central Idaho Mountains back country skiing blog where they love you....
FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 2010
Response to a Comment
Earlier today a comment was posted on the Christmas Day post and although not everyone saw it, I think it is worth responding to. For reference, here is the text,
Posted by Anonymous:
http://centralidahomountains.blogspot.com/2009/12/feliz-navidad.html
The best way to respond here is point by point so that is what I am going to do. The first couple sentences serve to use the name calling fallacy so its not even worth discussing so lets jump to the heart of Rokjox’s argument....
1. Run Names....
2. Crowding....
3. Danger to new backcountry traffic....
4. Publicity
The way you are thinking of the blog is, misguided, if anything. The vision for the blog is that it can one day be obsoleted by an Idaho City Avalanche Center. The publicity that the blog brings to the area is no different than the traffic any other Avalanche Center would.
As far as people coming up, contrary to what you propose, I full heartedly encourage people to find knowledgeable mentors and get up there to do things hands on. The notion of “protecting” the area from “outsiders” is ridiculous. The area is as much yours, as mine, as anybody else’s. Don’t wrong people for doing what they enjoy just because it means you might have to choose to ski at Winter Corner or Freeman instead of Pilot one day. Thus far, I have yet to see every parking lot full, and until that happens, there shouldn’t be a problem.
5. Snow Reports
More than anything else, this is what gets me, personally, riled up. I will lead of with the fact that any person who has completed Avalanche Level 1, knows that spatial variability occurs. Let me repeat that, AVY LEVEL 1 TEACHES SPATIAL VARIABILITY. To correct your point actually, you do not even have to be 500 ft away. you get spatial variability in pits dug right next to each other. The essence of your point can be seen as flawed if we simply extend it to other Avy Centers. The point you are making is that Snow Reports can’t be trusted. Ok, so what is the point of having Avy 1, Avy 2, the Payette Avy Center, the Sun Valley Avy Center, National Avalanche School, AMGA, AAA, AIRE, or anything else? That, is what you are suggesting.
The better interpretation of your intent is that due to spatial variability, we should have caution and insight when creating forecasts. Lucky for us, forecasts are not solely based on pits. Good forecasts are based on temperature data, wind data, observation of recent activity, etc. And finally, in any Avy course you might take, you are taught that forecasts should be taken as a guideline and that you should air to the side of safety. Meaning, maybe you see if a super wind-loaded area when the report said that the winds were calm. USE YOUR JUDGMENT.
So while Pilot may not be a “beginner” area, with the right precautions such as looking at the forecast and going out with a mentor, newcomers can have fun and become knowledgeable simultaneously.
Closing Remarks
The last remarks you make serve no purpose and imply that no one, but you has experience in the area. This is of course a ridiculous notion. Chago alone as skied there rougly 20 years. He was actually the first person in Idaho to purchase randonee gear at that. John Taggart has also been here forever and is a leader as an avalanche educator. I could go on and on, but the point is that you are not the only one. I can also be sure that you can’t say you have been skiing in that area since you were 12 as I have been.
Again I digress though, rather than devolve into a discussion of who is the manlier man, here is my point. WE WILL NOT STOP POSTING FORECASTS AND OBSERVATIONS THAT HELP SKIERS MAKE SAFE AND INFORMED DECISIONS IN ORDER TO PREVENT ACCIDENTS. We, the contributors and readers of the blog, are willing to work with you. I have met several from the community here and what it has started is a fantastic collaboration on the mountain. It is creating a community that cares about one another. It creates a community where we can all share in the same joint interest: to enjoy the majesty and wonder of the mountains. As we have from the beginning, we extend a hand of friendship.
Pedro Rodriguez
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 05:14am PT
|
For those of you who don't remember me, that's because there isn't much to remember.
I started climbing in the early 1970s and quit back in the late 1980s. The only time since then that I thought much about climbing is when I tried to contact my old climbing partner and discovered that he had been dead for six years - Dick Richardson, RIP - 5/11/1998.
I have heard that Richardson died from a broken heart when his neck and back problems forced him to quit climbing - Cause of death: depression, massive weight gain and a heart attack.
Richardson is the one who did most of the bold face climbing leads at Christmas Tree Pass back in the late 1970s. Feeling guilty about loosing touch, I decided to post a bunch of photos and route descriptions of Richardson's (and my) CTP routes on Rockclimbing.com, primarly as a memorial to Richardson. I had just finished posting everything that I had Re: CTP when Lake Mead NRA published their Bolt Chopping plan.
The only reason I am posting on Supertopo and other rock climbing forums is because allowing any United States Government agency to ban climbing bolts on public land for no good reason WILL set a bad precident that could be used to ban climbing bolts anywhere in the USA.
So please send your Objection letters to:
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
P.S. I apologize for my participation in the foregoing public exhibition of 7 monkeys f*#king a football. Let's just cool it and work together to stop the climbing bolt ban. If anyone wants a piece of me, just send me a private Email and I will send you my contact information. But, let's not digress any further in a public forum.
Remember, the Park Rangers are reading these posts.
Andrew Solow, San Francisco, CA
|
|
Urmas
Social climber
Sierra Eastside
|
|
|
May 17, 2010 - 01:17pm PT
|
I don't see anything wrong with Andrew's mannerisms[sic]. He's merely suggesting that people write articulate letters with the intended goal of influencing policy in a direction favorable to climbers. This is how it's done in a democracy. Powerful special interests don't just wait for bureaucrats to tell them what to do, they hire lobbyists to influence policy. We don't have those resources. The best we can do is to go on record advocating our position on the issues.
Rick, you seem to blame climbers for the proposed restrictions. I really don't believe this is the case at CTP. The NPS has claimed that the area is not used much by climbers. Impacts result from use. If there is little use, there is by definition little impact. I think the LM is trying to score points with some more powerful interest group at the expense of climbers.
If we don't stand up for ourselves, no one else will!
|
|
Urmas
Social climber
Sierra Eastside
|
|
|
May 17, 2010 - 04:21pm PT
|
Rokjox, I don't think anyone is questioning the right of land managers to establish regulations in their domains. And as they are public servents, we the people have a right to express our support or lack thereof for their policies. These policies are rarely instituted because one individual has a dislike of a certain user group. They are brought about by a political process in which we citizens have a civic duty to participate - if we care.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 01:39am PT
|
Spoke with the Chief earlier today. It seems that he has many years of experience dealing with land managers and other government employees in multiple situations regarding access to rock climbing resources as well as during his 20+ years in the US Navy.
Chief has found that modern day land managers have a lot of power; and once they get pissed off, it can be very difficult to get them to work with you. It's pretty easy to use our tax dollars to hire someone with 3 PhDs to find a few rare frogs, or allege that the mating rituals of raptors and big horn sheep would be disturbed by rock climbing and then use more of our tax dollars to hang us up in court for years arguing about it. There are also Native American Treaty rights at issue in many wilderness areas including Bridge Canyon and Spirit Mountain.
The Lake Mead NRA people who I have spoken with during the last several weeks were very polite, but not particularly cooperative. We did get an extension of time until July 1st to Object to their bolt chopping plan. And, one land manager told one rock climber orally that he has no plans to chop bolts at Christmas Tree Pass.
But, we still haven't been able to find out if any Native Americans are claiming that climbing bolts negatively impact on their cultural resources. And, according to Lake Mead NRA public affairs officer Andrew Munoz, bolt chopping is still on the table.
So, please ask every rock climber you know to send in an Objection to the Christmas Tree Pass bolt chopping plan.
Lake Mead draft Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 06:24am PT
|
Chief. Please keep writing. But, please remain calm and don't assume things that are not in evidence. This isn't a horror movie yet. And, you are frightening the children.
The only thing I can see so far that is going to be difficult is people's personalities, mine in particular. I have a seething hatred for authority, especially when it is irrationally exercised.
Most climbing areas in the Southwest have issues with Treaty rights. But only a couple of them have total climbing bans.
As far as I know, the only two places in the Spirit Mountain and Bridge Canyon Wilderness areas (aka: Christmas Tree Pass) that are sensitive or sacred are Spirit Mountain and Grapevine Canyon. Those two specific sites are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The entire area is NOT listed, just the two sites. Folks have been running cattle, discharging fire arms and 4-wheeling on the rest of that land going back to the late 1800s. And, they've been climbing in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness since 1976. I quote from the Access Fund May newsletter: The NPS proposal also fails to identify actual conflicts caused by climbing that would make this location any different from the dozens of wilderness areas around the country where climbing and some level of fixed anchor use is allowed. That's the rub. Zion National Park, Joshua Tree National Monument and several other places where Native American Cultural Resources are present all have wilderness management plans that allow bolt protected rock climbing, as long as it is at least 50 feet from any petroglyphs. At Christmas Tree Pass, it's more like one mile from any petroglyphs.
Maybe the land manger is hiding his Native American contact list from us because he is trying to obtain claims of cultural resource sensitivity and significance to prop up his bolt chopping plan with before we have a chance to speak with the Native Americans?
Finally, if there are any treaties in force, they didn't prevent more than a dozen nasty looking cell phone towers from being installed at the summit of Christmas Tree Pass, immediately adjacent to Spirit Mountain. So, I guess cell phone tower revenue is more important than protecting the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain.
P.S. For dummies like me, please provide the exact names of the three places you are referencing.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 03:50pm PT
|
Thanks for posting. It's not a new twist. It's just another detail that I didn't post until today.
I'm not sure if any of the tribes get any money from the cell phone towers. But, they definitely got visual blight immediately adjacent to Spirit Mountain. Imagine if someone put ten cell towers next to Ship Rock???
Regarding the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain: Walking up and down or hiking on Spirit Mountain is NOT prohibited in the Lake Mead draft Plan. But, no signs or trail markers are to be installed to mark the trail.
We'll just have to wait and see if anyone is complaining about climbing bolts. But, almost all of the bolts are in Bridge Canyon at least 1.0 mile from either Spirit Mountain or Grapevine Canyon (more like 2 miles in most cases). When I contacted the Mojave Tribe about a month ago, they were unaware that anyone had been climbing in Bridge Canyon or that climbing bolts had been installed.
FYI: Lake Mead NRA says they are expediting their response to my informal request for information concerning the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain and Grapevine Canyon which they say they are required to treat as a FOIA. And, the Mojave Tribe's cultural resource person has been ducking my calls. Will post any new information as soon as I receive it.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2010 - 03:16pm PT
|
Last Chance to post an objection to the bolt chopping plan.
The comment period closes on Friday 07/02/2010 at 11:59 PM.
Lake Mead draft Plan Comment Link: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
The draft Lake Mead Wilderness Plan as published proposes comprehensive bolt removal and constructively bans all rock climbing in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness by banning climbing bolts which provide 95% of the leader protection in this area. No other form of leader protection is available on the featureless rock walls of Christmas Tree Pass.
Though the Lake Mead NRA has been consulting with the Access Fund about rock climbing at Christmas Tree Pass, they have refused to rescind their bolt chopping plan as published back in April 2010.
If Lake Mead NRA succeeds in perfecting their constructive rock climbing ban, places like Yosemite and Joshua Tree will be next.
Access Fund Action Alert & Comment Link: http://www.accessfund.org/c.tmL5KhNWLrH/b.5208267/k.8C84/Action_Center/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=tmL5KhNWLrH&b=5208267&aid=14437
From the Access Fund CTP Action Alert
This wholesale removal of climbing anchors is unprecedented.....
There is no rational basis for this constructive rock climbing ban.
In their response to a recent FOIA request, Lake Mead NRA admitted that the Native Americans who have treaty rights in this area have not complained about the presence of climbing bolts at Christmas Tree Pass. And, as far as I know, neither has anyone else.
Don't let one irrational Park Planner ban rock climbing at Christmas Tree Pass and set a precedent for banning rock climbing nationwide. Submit your objections today!
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2010 - 03:29pm PT
|
Thanks for the reminder. I just submitted my comments via the form (VERY EASY!!) and encourage others to do so.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 111 of total 111 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!