Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
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.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!