Invest 3 Hours to Save Access to Your Public Lands

UPLA, BlueRibbon Coalition, SLOREX, and At Your Leisure are cosponsoring a Workshop to be more effective in preserving access to our Public Lands. We need you to invest 3 hours to learn how you can make a difference.

Even though motorized OHV has always had a strong relationship with BLM and Forest Service staff, and been quick to volunteer to complete projects on public lands, we have been at a disadvantage in Travel Management Planning because we have not been as effectively engaged as our opponents. If we fail to improve our strategies,  these closures will expand to affect every outdoor recreationist. Equestrians, campers, rock climbers, base jumpers, snowmobilers, hunters, fishermen, boaters, and mountain bikers will all be affected as more public lands are designated as wilderness, areas with wilderness character, or Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) The elimination of roads and dispersed camping areas will limit access to staging and parking areas, making your favorite areas further and further from accessible roads. Even those clamoring for more wilderness experiences will have much longer treks to get to their favorite areas, a weekend trip now will become a week long trip in the future. Cyclists, rock climbers and canyoneers are currently facing rulings that propose elimination of e-bikes and fixed anchors in National Parks. As remote areas are more limited with accessibility, injuries and rescue attempts will increase and be even more expensive, resulting in further restrictions or closure.

In Utah, there are 25 Travel Management Areas on BLM’s calendar for development or reevaluation of current plans. More are in store for Forest Service and National Monuments.

The importance of understanding the NEPA process, and being able to proactively and effectively participate in the process has never been greater, and we must become smarter and more effective at working together to influence the NEPA process.

Utah Public Lands Alliance, BlueRibbon Coalition, Salt Lake Off Road Expo, and At Your Leisure are cosponsoring a workshop on February 29 to help us all understand how we can make a difference. Our workshop presenter will be Tammy Pike, a retired BLM Travel Management Planner, who is a renowned expert in the NEPA process. Her experience spans 30 years, the last 25 focused on trails, off highway vehicles and travel management planning while both conserving our natural resources AND providing the best recreational opportunities for the public to enjoy now and in the future. She has won countless awards from not only BLM, but the Forest Service, Arizona State Land Department, and many OHV and other recreational groups.  She earned a National Customer Service Award from BLM, one of the highest possible commendations.

Tammy will help us develop a strategy to communicate clearly in the NEPA process at all levels to get our views considered in the process. We believe she is the best person to teach us how to restore balance to a system that has been heavily weighted against us. Making comments is a critical step in influencing final outcomes, and she will teach us how to make comments that are both substantive and effective. Questions and answers are an invaluable part of any discussion, because it allows you to ask your questions  and get answers from an expert. We have a full hour at the end of the program allocated just to your questions and answers where she will be joined by panelists Ben Burr and Simone Griffen from BlueRibbon Coalition, as well as Rose Winn, our new UPLA Public Policy Consultant.

For us to change the tide, we must all come together, and we must start acting as Big As We Are. If you really care about making a difference in keeping our lands accessible, make plans to attend this workshop the day prior to SLOREX opening.

What:            NEPA Comments Training Workshop

Where:          Mountain America Expo Center, 9575 State Street, Sandy UT

When:           February 29 1:30 -4:30

Space is limited, RSVP and submit questions and topics you would like included in the presentation.

#default-btn-0ba25f9254324fbab1bc6d4d029ab966.ico-right-side > i { margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 8px; } #default-btn-0ba25f9254324fbab1bc6d4d029ab966 > i { margin-right: 8px; } RSVP To Attend Here



National Park Service Considering Climbing and Canyoneering Restrictions

The National Park Service is accepting comments through January 30 regarding a policy that would require removal of existing anchors or permits for new anchors to be installed in wilderness or areas with wilderness characteristics. The climbing and canyoneering community seems to be somewhat divided on this currently, if you’re a climber, please read the proposal and submit your comments. Please also help UPLA by emailing your comments to me so that I can understand your views better.

UPLA will submit comments before the deadline, but I am tentatively opposed to the rule for the following reasons:

  1. The national policy would put extreme pressure on local managers to never approve new installations, or replacement of ones that are failing to avoid liability and lawsuits, thus taking the recent action of closure rather than management.
  2. The MRA procedure will discourage user proposals for anchors needed for safety, thus increasing risk to climbers. Liability concerns for park management to permit anchors will raise liability risk concerns, further deterring approval of permits.
  3. Permanent anchors are virtually invisible to anyone not looking for them. When I was caving, we often left attached a bright colored strap just so they could be spotted.
  4. The policy is not just limited to “wilderness” as designated by Congress, but also includes areas with “wilderness characteristics”
  5. Implementation of this policy will inevitably lead to more red tape regarding qualifications of installers, liability of the installer.
  6. The Application form is impractical. I assume climbing teams are often put together right before the climb, making it impossible to complete the form accurately. Privacy concerns about personal information in form being made public.
  7. Review of the Wilderness Act §4(c) is necessary as to whether it “includes anything made by humans” in Reference Manual 41 §3.1. only appears there and not in Act.
  8. I believe local managers or Park Superintendents, are best able to make these kinds of decisions, not a Washington decision.

Here’s the Park Planning Website https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm…

Here is a recommended template with comments suggested by Instructional Canyoneering Resource

I write this letter on behalf of the sport of Canyoneering.
[Name and Who you are as a canyoneer]I’ve been canyoneering for_______ in the this area _______
and canyoneering has impacted my life __________________
In your document: “Evaluation and Authorization Procedures for Fixed Anchors and Fixed Equipment in National Park Service Wilderness Areas” you outline clear and valid concerns regarding the preservation of wilderness. The focal point of this concern seems to be in this line of the document:
“bolt-intensive face climbs is considered incompatible with wilderness preservation”
(*page 7 line 12 National Park Service)
Canyoneering is not bolt intensive.
The bolts that may be visible to the majority of wilderness visitors are at the entrance and exit of canyoneering routes. And although canyoneers are a visitation minority, the bolts inside the canyon are visible only to canyoneers. The bolts inside the canyons can be placed in such a discrete manner that it may take some time to locate them.
Canyoneering is more related to caving, than rock-climbing. Canyons, in a way, are caves with open roofs. They are isolated fragile environments that deserve protection.
It may be counterintuitive, but the most effective way to minimize impact on canyons is through discrete, minimal, bolt installations. First and second generation USA canyoneers have tried Leave No Trace inspired anchoring practices, but time has proven that these practices do not scale as popularity grows, they are not the safest option, and they still scar and alter the wilderness aspect of canyons when combined with frequent visitation.
Preserving wilderness involves managing visitation. Managing visitation involves identifying the methods of least wilderness impact. Closing access to wilderness is not the best answer to build awareness of it, and support for it.
Please keep canyoneering routes open. Leave canyoneering out of the current Minimum Requirements Analysis (MRA), and if you see fit, create a new one that does not harm canyoneering and allows installation of bolts that minimize impact and preserve the wilderness character of canyons. Seek the advice of organizations that are familiar with sustainable, low impact bolting practices like the Washington Canyon Coalition and Canyon Guides International, or sources like the online Bolting Bible Canyoneering section.
Sincerely,
[your name]