Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Let's not let this thread get derailed (too much). Suffice it to say that fee-based access is a dangerous trend.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
Suffice it to say that fee-based access is a dangerous trend.
I agree 100%.
But I don't see where it's off topic to point a out gross waste of funds at a time when fees for all sorts of access are increasing or being leveed anew.
Whatever... Cheers!
|
|
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
Spider is correct in his thinking that not to many climbers are going to use/pay for the right to climb there....
and with the BEST of the climbing shut off... they will not get the numbers they need.
not enuf for a full time Ranger prowling around the place.
Willie is not and never will be the GUNKS. And at the GUNKS they only pay the RANGER some sort of part time mim wage.
meth
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
A Fee for using Public Lands sounds like it could establish a precedent that would spread like wildfire across the whole USA.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
1) They listened to none of our comments from last winter and came back with a more draconian plan, showing they have no intention of reasonableness.
2) 95% of the protection of this plan could be accomplished for free. Just close the climbs along the stream, and provide a way bag box such as done in Red Rock. If the ANF insists on closing the short trail, the improved long trail can also be done for free with volunteer labor. Adding the ranger and permits is actually a net loss with the added bureaucracy and very little added benefit.
3) 30 cars per day is far too low. There is plenty of room for 50 cars. More could just park further away if they want to.
4) Closure of the entire area until Aug 1 is illegal. The ANF has illegally muddled the reason for the seasonal closure claiming it is due to both the frogs and the falcons, so that they can claim an endangered species is involved.
5) The frogs don't need any seasonal closure; just need people to stay away from the streambanks.
6) The Falcons affect only a few climbs near Being There. The ANF has an overly broad interpretation of falcon nesting buffer zones. Falcons are no longer endangered and are quite common. Some nest on Torrey Pines Beach only 100' from hundreds of people walking below on the beach.
7) The ANF permit system plan is somewhat copied from what the Cleveland national forest has done in San Diego county at Cedar Creek Falls and is planning for Three Sisters Falls. At both of those locations crowds and impacts are far different than Williamson Rock. There were up to 500 cars per day parking at Cedar Creek west trailhead, garbage, drinking, deaths from cliff jumping, deaths from heat exhaustion, etc.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
no fees.
regulated usage.
require a mandated review of the whole process at end of the year.
precedent is critical.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
They listened to none of our comments from last winter and came back with a more draconian plan, showing they have no intention of reasonableness.
So, what part of bureaucracy don't you get? ;-)
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
Forest Service is under the Department of Agriculture. This should be funded as part of the core budget, providing public access to public areas, while investing in the protections needed to preserve endangered species.
Where else can we trim Agricultural spending in America to pay for this? How about killing off insurance subsidies for tobacco growers. Did you know that U.S. taxpayers spend about $34 MILLION per year to provide below-market-rate insurance policies to tobacco growers so they can afford to stay in business killing Americans? Seems like they should pay market rates for their insurance policies or go out of business. Imagine if the tobacco growers had to abandon that product because it wasn't as lucrative, and they had to grow fruits or vegetables?Oh, the horror! Here's the view from the other side:
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/05/22/2649748/bid-to-end-crop-insurance-subsidy.html
Being a little more balances in considering it, the farmers would still have a tough time making a profit with fruits and vegetables because of North American Free Trade Agreement that lets large corporations import fruits and vegetables from thousands of miles away at a cheaper price because of international differences in labor laws and cost of living. Consumers are happier, producers can't compete as well. But at least if the government is going to subsidize something to manage some economic reality and maintain a farming industry in America in spite of stuff like NAFTA that benefits large-corporations, any subsidies we have should be helpful to the average consumer rather than hurtful.
Or, how about corn subsidies? We've got corn so cheap now that we get high fructose corn syrup sweetened products that are slowly killing Americans, and it's cheaper than normal nutrient-based food. Check the latest issue of National Geographic.
Access to nature in Angeles National Forest is just another special-interest group among many demands across the country. It would seem like a tough sell by our local representatives to earmark funds for recreation when other representatives from different parts of the country are claiming their earmarks (e.g. agricultural subsidies) create jobs and save families and the economy.
At some point there should be a higher level of arbitration in our country, thinking about what kind of country we want to invest in, rather than responding to knee-jerk short-term needs. I for one (and probably most people who enjoy exercise in natural environments) would prefer that our country invested in activities that enabled more access to healthy living rather than activities that enable more and cheaper access to unhealthy food and cigarettes. Why should the US invest in subsidies that encourage a lifestyle that will become a further economic burden to taxpayers for future health expenses? The value of the short-term jobs created from agricultural subsidies for unhealthy products do not outweigh the long-term costs.
Rather than dumping the savings from these wasteful and policy-distorting programs into general deficit reduction, the funds can be reallocated to healthy living activities, such as basic access to public lands with whatever investment required to meet environmental preservation mandates.
Who is going to lobby for something like this? Access Fund? Nature Conservancy? Sierra Club? Those will all lose the press-war against starving farmers and their poor destroyed families because of these heartless rich people who want to go rock climbing for free.
|
|
Roots
Mountain climber
Tustin, CA
|
|
R.I.P. Williamson
..plenty of other places to go.
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
Well if all areas near streambeds are permanently closed, even though by August there is no water left the crowd will thin - there isn't a whole lot of beginner terrain left if the Stream Wall is closed. It would be a shame not to have the London Wall for the "allowable" climbing season though.
Is the permit thing on a daily basis or do you apply for a permit for the whole "season" (sorry I didn't have time to read the links yet)?
I was sort of surprised to even see this, figured they'd bury it in red tape and Willie would just remain closed.
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
... and what??? our stupid Adventure Pass doesn't count?;)
To clarify, I'm against the fee/permit thing. Sounds like an enforcement nightmare.
Good luck keeping climbers off the Stream and London Wall unless they are prepared to chop all the routes.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Of course, my dog wouldn't be allowed.
See? It's not all bad.
And I agree with the Monrovians about the new HQ.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
My guess is the bolts will be chopped on permanently closed climbs (within 10m = 33' of the stream includes Mushroom, London, Stream, Mushroom, Stash. Action #1 seems to also close anything on the south side of the stream even if it's more than 33' away, since you're not supposed to cross the stream, such as the Far side, Little Tokyo, etc.
Climbers who want the rest of Williamson open should accept that. The only other option is not chopping them, so then someone might still climb them, and get the whole area closed down.
--There are enough moderate routes elsewhere, such as the main wall, summit block, etc, not just near the stream.
 a new permit will be needed every time you go there. They don't say what the fee will be. The online cost of the reservation system alone is $6 each. Only above that would anything go to the ANF. If they install a new bathroom and repave the parking, and put in an overly expensive trail, they can claim those are improvements that climbers need to pay for.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
What, the bolts are bothering the frogs? Seems like the chopping would too.
|
|
rincon
Trad climber
Coarsegold
|
|
First of all, I can't figure out what the parking quota is supposed to accomplish? Only 30 cars per day...what about the cars for people hiking Mt Williamson, or day hiking on the PCT? There is no shortage of parking spots that is for sure. Currently you can park all along hwy 2 and in the many turn outs. Look forward to a bunch of no parking signs going up.
Can you imagine that many people are going to bother to get an advance reservation just for a quick sport climbing session? I don't think it'd be worth the hassle myself...just to go there and deal with some ranger rick and all the rules...and they're taking away most of the best climbs.
And no restrictions on the PCT, except now you have to poop 100' from the stream, and bury it...not sure why that wasn't already the rule.
Good posts splater!
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
There sure is a lot of speculative grousing going on about this. I'm going to wait and see what actually happens before I complain about it.
I'm surprised at all the negativity. This is good new people. Willi is reopening. Don't like the regulations? Keep climbing wherever you've been climbing for the last 8 years.
Just a guess, but I suspect the pullouts will stay open for parking to facilitate hikers.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 8, 2014 - 07:40am PT
|
I've been working on my letter and I've hit on an idea.
Some land managers just don't know how to deal with rock climbers. Someone qualified needs do extensive research and write a manual for land managers to use in dealing with climbing areas.
IF you have the time to read it, here is my first rough draft of the things they should know when making decisions on what to do:
1) Willamson Rock is not considered a high quality climbing area. It is metamorphic gneiss with a decomposing quality to it. Climbers prefer granite and rock that is stable. Some parts of Williamson Rock have the desirable quality but most does not.
2) There are many options around the region with climbing at Idylwild in the San Jacinto Mtns considered to be the high quality area in summer months. If Williamson Rock is closed, we will go somewhere else. It would be nice if it was open because we like variety.
3) Convenience to access determines popularity. Climbers can tend to be social and group together where access is easy. When this happens, land managers may experience the need to manage. Williamson Rock is close to the road and the Short Trail, built by climbers, provided quick access. If that trail is closed and only the Long Trail is allowed for access, this will reduce the number of climbers. Very few climbers would consider walking all the way from the parking lot at Krakta Ridge. They would simply choose to go some where else.
4) A climbing area can become popular for a period of time. But then the popularity goes away, almost always. The rise in popularity can usually be traced to one person or a small group of persons who put up new routes. Media promotion can cause this or the publication of a guide book. When an area gets too crowded, many climbers choose to go elsewhere. Thus popularity can hit a critical mass where people have to wait to get on climbs, at which point decline begins. One way to manage and over abundance of climbers in an area is to do nothing and the matter will sort out with a natural decline in popularity.
5) Climbers like variety. They don’t like to do the same old climbs over and over. The average climber might visit a place like Mt Williamson once or just a few times a year.
6) Climbers will not pay a special fee to climb on public lands. There are many reasons for this. The proposed fee system in the current plan is doomed to failure. It is likely there would be an organized boycott so any personnel or infrastructure would go to waste. An EIA that does not include a survey of this would be incomplete.
7) In the past Williamson Rock may have achieved a level of popularity with Rock Climbers that caused an overwhelming amount of traffic and problems for land managers. This is likely never to happen again since this boom was driven by new route development. Land managers at Joshua Tree National Park have successfully implemented new route bans to persevere natural resources and control overcrowding in sensitive areas.
IF you do choose to read all of this I welcome suggestions. Feel free to take from this and make it our own.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
They would simply choose to go some where else.
Isn't that the point? Then the 'land managers' can stay in their cushy offices in the Taj Mahal,
which they are so richly deserve according to some.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!