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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The policy is not just limited to “wilderness” as designated by Congress, but also includes areas with “wilderness characteristics”
- Implementation of this policy will inevitably lead to more red tape regarding qualifications of installers, liability of the installer.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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]
