Fixed Anchor Management at North Cascades National Park

Transcription

1 Fixed Anchor Management at North Cascades National Park Revised January 9, 2014

2 Issue Description National Park Service designated wilderness provides exceptional opportunities for climbers to experience untrammeled landscapes, appreciate solitude from a unique vantage, and test physical and inner strength through adventure recreation. These opportunities epitomize some of the intended uses of wilderness as described in the Wilderness Act of 1964; therefore, the National Park Service recognizes climbing as a legitimate and appropriate use of wilderness. 1 Climbing shares a long history with the National Park Service, and climbers, such as David Brower, were critical to the development of the institutionalized concept of wilderness. The confluence of adventure and deep appreciation of pristine natural condition draws climbers from around the world to seek wilderness experiences in the National Park System. Fixed anchors, defined by the Access Fund and the USDA Forest Service, 2 as climbing equipment (e.g. bolts, pitons or slings) left in place to facilitate ascent or descent of technical terrain, are a critical component of a climber s safety system (Exhibit A). Fixed anchors are typically placed by the first ascentionist on technical ascents where removable anchor placements are not possible or for descents (rappels) that would be otherwise impossible without a fixed anchor. The vast majority of climbers have never placed a fixed anchor, opting instead to climb established climbing routes thereby avoiding the burden of the careful deliberation and labor associated with placing a fixed anchor in wilderness. 3 Equally, most climbers favor some form of fixed anchor regulation in wilderness in order to preserve wilderness character. 4 North Cascades National Park removed fixed anchors from a descent (rappel) route on Forbidden Peak, a popular and accessible alpine climb in August, Although at the time there was no fixed anchor ban, a wilderness district ranger contends there was a no-bolting policy. 5 On May 13, 2013, National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis signed Director s Order #41: Wilderness Stewardship (DO#41) which includes guidelines for wilderness fixed anchor management. The Director s Order instructs that fixed anchors do not necessarily impair the future enjoyment of wilderness or violate the Wilderness Act, that fixed anchors should be rare and that [a]uthorization will be required for the placement of new fixed anchors ; however, if unacceptable impacts are occurring in wilderness as a result of climbing, the park superintendent may deem it necessary to restrict or prohibit the placement of fixed anchors. 6 On July 1, 2013, North Cascades National Park Superintendent Karen Taylor-Goodrich signed a superintendent s compendium that states [n]o fixed anchors may be placed at any location on a natural feature within the Stephen Mather Wilderness of North Cascades National Park Service Complex. Fixed Anchors are defined as those devices that require the drilling of a hole into the natural feature (rock) to install a bolt and hangers typically used to facilitate ascent or descent of the mountain. 7 North Cascades National Park does not provide any documentation of unacceptable impacts as a result of wilderness climbing activity, but instead justifies the fixed anchor (bolt) moratorium through 36 CFR 2.1(a)(1)(iv) 8 and by stating, 2

3 [a]fter careful consideration the NPS has established a mandatory moratorium on installing new fixed anchors in an effort to maintain mountaineering routes in the park as historically natural as possible. In keeping with the long history of traditional mountaineering in the North Cascades (largely absent of fixed anchors) this moratorium exercises the authority provided by 36 CFR, Part II, Sec 1.5(c) which will be strictly enforced. 9 The Access Fund is concerned that the North Cascades National Park fixed anchor (bolt) moratorium is incongruous with national policy, based on misinterpretation of federal regulation, unnecessarily compromises wilderness climber safety, and negatively affects wilderness use-patterns. We believe that some level of fixed anchor (bolt) use must be allowed wherever climbing is allowed, and that the appropriate level of use should be established on an area-by-area basis. This belief is based on our intent to protect the integrity of wilderness character and natural resources while ensuring climber safety and wilderness experience. This document outlines the Access Fund s position on the North Cascades National Park fixed anchor (bolt) moratorium and removal of rappel anchors on Forbidden Peak, and details our recommendations for a fair, nationally relevant and sustainable wilderness fixed anchor policy. The Access Fund The Access Fund is a national advocacy organization whose mission keeps climbing areas open and conserves the climbing environment. A 501(c)3 non-profit supporting and representing over 2.3 million climbers nationwide in all forms of climbing rock climbing, ice climbing, mountaineering, and bouldering the Access Fund is the largest climbing advocacy and conservation organization with over 10,000 members and affiliates. We encourage an ethic of personal responsibility, self-regulation, and Leave No Trace practices among climbers; and work closely with local climbers, land managers, environmental organizations, and other interest groups to manage and preserve climbing areas throughout the United States. The Access Fund has a long history of working cooperatively with federal land managers on the appropriate management of fixed climbing anchors in designated wilderness. We have been working since 1989 with all of the federal wilderness management agencies to resolve the issue of how fixed anchors should be managed, and we have also negotiated directly with the environmental community to achieve broad support for a national policy which allows, but appropriately manages, the use of fixed anchors in wilderness. The Access Fund has also worked with several national parks around the country on climbing policies related to fixed anchor use. North Cascades National Park Wilderness Fixed Anchor Management The Access Fund supports the North Cascades National Park s interest to preserve a wilderness experience that reflects a raw style of mountaineering in a range that has changed little since Fred Beckey made first ascents of now-popular peaks. 10 However, contrary to the North Cascades National Park decision to ban bolts, the Access Fund believes that a raw style of mountaineering must include the ability to make critical safety decisions similar to the ones Fred Beckey made when he placed a variety of fixed anchors in order to safely facilitate his historic ascents and descents. This belief is in accordance 3

4 with the National Park Service position that [t]he occasional placement of a fixed anchor for belay, rappel, or protection purposes does not necessarily impair the future enjoyment of wilderness or violate the Wilderness Act. 11 The Access Fund supports the ban on power drills in wilderness, and actively promotes the concept that bolts should be placed as a last resort. Fixed anchors are not only critical for safety, but are also a significant tool for resource management: they can be strategically placed to minimize climbing impacts to geology, soils, vegetation, and wildlife in wilderness areas. 12 This function is sacrificed if any use of fixed anchors is prohibited. In our experience, concerns about fixed anchors are almost never related to measurable resource impacts that may be associated with the placement of these traditional climbing tools, but rather to philosophical convictions. 13 The Access Fund position on wilderness fixed anchor management is based on the following principles: 1. Climbing is an officially recognized, appropriate activity in wilderness and fixed anchors are necessary tools for wilderness climbing. 2. Fixed anchors should be rare in wilderness. 3. Public input is critical and mandatory for the management of fixed anchors. Climbers need to have a voice in managing key elements of the climbing safety system. For this reason, DO#41 clearly provides that Wilderness parks with climbing use will exchange information on best practices, work together on service wide implementation, and communicate with stakeholders and wilderness users Maintenance of existing fixed anchors is essential to fixed anchor management in wilderness. 5. Wilderness fixed anchor management must provide provisions (programmatically or case-bycase basis) to allow climbers some level of control, while in a wilderness setting, to make decisions regarding fixed anchor placements where no other options are available. Such policies allow climbers to make legal, critical decisions regarding personal safety in unforgiving conditions often experienced in rugged wilderness. Only a very small minority of climbers partake in wilderness-based first ascents that involve the placement of fixed anchors; however, the ability of climbers to place a de minimus number of wilderness fixed anchors is a privilege worth protecting because it embodies outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation 15 associated with the purest forms of wilderness exploration. 6. Administrative actions regarding fixed anchors must be well substantiated and noticed to the public. The Access Fund maintains that any decisions regarding fixed anchors should be grounded in a firm understanding of resource capacity, associated impacts, and acceptable rates of change to the natural and social environment. Fixed anchor management alternatives should be evaluated before any decisions are made to restrict the use of fixed anchors. All administrative changes to the condition of fixed anchors (e.g., removal) should be wellpublicized to help mitigate potential negative impacts to climber safety. North Cascades National Park s unilateral decision to remove rappel anchors (bolts) from a Forbidden Peak descent route in August, 2012 and subsequent fixed anchor (bolts) moratorium in July, 2013 are problematic because they are inconsistent with NPS national policy, based on loose interpretation of federal regulation, fail to integrate public input and compromise climber safety (elaborated below). It is 4

5 the Access Fund s position that fixed anchors are neither necessary nor appropriate for all climbing routes; however, we believe that the appropriate level of fixed anchor use should be established based on the unique attributes of the climbing resource and the visitor use patterns. Specifically, the Access Fund takes issue with these North Cascades National Park initiatives: 1. Removal of bolted rappel anchors on Forbidden Peak. North Cascades National Park decided to remove both new and longstanding bolted anchors from an established, and often crowded, descent route on Forbidden Peak. American Mountain Guide Association certified climbing guides deemed the rappel bolts necessary for two reasons. First, the new set of bolts had replaced an antiquated fixed anchor constructed of tattered slings and loose rock which was both unsightly and of dubious integrity. Secondly, the longstanding bolted rappel anchor facilitated a clean descent path that avoided the loose ascent couloir which has been the location for several rock-fall related accidents. The Access Fund believes that climbers must be allowed a high degree of control when making decisions that directly relate to their safety. The descent of a well-established and heavily used climbing route, such as Forbidden Peak, is a quintessential example of when to allow fixed anchors, under the provisions of DO#41, in order to facilitate acceptable visitor flow, safe conditions and natural resource protection. In addition, park staff removed the bolts without any public input and ignored the recommendations of local experts. Lastly, park staff neglected to notify the public of their actions thereby creating potentially hazardous conditions for unsuspecting climbers who may have relied on the existence of these descent anchors. 2. Establishing a fixed anchor (bolts) moratorium based on 36 CFR 2.1(a)(1)(iv). North Cascades National Park s fixed anchor (bolts) moratorium is based on an interpretation of the federal regulation that prohibits the destruction or defacement of a mineral resource or parts thereof. Bolts do not fit within the scope or intent of that regulation for two reasons. First, that interpretation contradicts the premise for the guidelines presented in DO#41. That is, if bolts were considered to destroy entire, or parts of, mineral resources then the National Park Service would not have endorsed their use under any conditions nor provided general authorization guidelines. Second, studies, including an environmental assessment at Granite Mountain Wilderness, 16 indicate that fixed anchors do not create a significant environmental impact. Management of fixed anchors should be directed by visitor flow patterns, and potential associated impacts, instead of ideology. 17 For these reasons 36 CFR 2.1(a)(1)(iv) should not be interpreted to prohibit or limit the use of fixed anchors Establishing a fixed anchor (bolts) moratorium as an interim policy. North Cascades National Park intends to engage the public in a planning process to address climbing related issues as time and resources allow. Until that time, this moratorium on the installation of new fixed anchor bolts in all areas within designated wilderness will take effect through the Superintendent's Compendium. 19 An interim fixed anchor policy should not be prohibitive or overly restrictive due to a park unit s resource limitations prior to the development of a climbing management plan or an amendment to an existing plan. 4. Lack of well-substantiated analyses to support a fixed anchor moratorium. The National Park Service uses well-established policies for appropriate wilderness regulation. Establishing the 5

6 minimum amount of regulation that would effectively achieve the desired result for managing an area as wilderness is a fundamental principle for managing visitor activities in wilderness. 20 This principle is recognized in wilderness management practices as the minimum regulatory tool. 21 Informing and educating visitors should be used as a less intrusive solution prior to implementing regulations. 22 Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act calls for outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation ; thus, regulation that hinders unconfined recreation, such as wilderness climbing, must be carefully considered and result in the lowest effective level of regulation or enforcement needed to achieve the protection of that wilderness mandate. North Cascades National Park s fixed anchor (bolts) moratorium the highest level of regulation may have intended to preserve a raw style of mountaineering to address their mandate to preserve wilderness character, 23 however it actually results in restricting an appropriate, recognized activity which supports a critical component to wilderness character as defined by the Wilderness Act: unconfined recreation. In fact, North Cascades should have conducted a well-substantiated analysis of the fixed anchor ban prior to implementing the moratorium. A Minimum Requirement Analysis (MRA) may have been useful for an assessment of the fixed anchor (bolts) ban because it provides a framework for assessing viability for allowing prohibited administrative actions that might negatively affect wilderness character 24 such as banning an appropriate wilderness activity. Administrative actions are expressly directed at preserving the five components of wilderness character (i.e., untrammeled, natural, undeveloped, solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, and other features of value) from the prohibited uses described in Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act: there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area. 25 The ban on fixed anchors (bolts) at North Cascades National Park, without evidence that bolts result in unacceptable impacts to wilderness resources or character, or interfere significantly with the experience of other park visitors, 26 is outside of the Park Service s administrative mandate to preserve wilderness. In sum, the MRA is only used for administrative actions by agency staff, not for regulating visitor activities, 27 so it is not an appropriate tool for assessing fixed anchor authorization processes or regulations because climbing in wilderness has been officially recognized as an appropriate wilderness visitor activity. 28 That is why DO#41 specifically identifies the MRA process only for the administrative purpose for facilitating future rescue operations. 29 Therefore, frameworks such as Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) 30 and Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) are more relevant for analyzing potential regulations for a visitor activity 31 such as wilderness climbing. 6

7 Recommendations The Access Fund acknowledges that wilderness management is complex, that there are multitudes of conflicting stakeholder concerns, and that North Cascades National Park is challenged by budget cuts and resource limitations. Despite those obstacles, the NPS continues to provide outstanding opportunities, for a variety of visitor groups, to experience a world-class wilderness resource. Climbers will continue to grow in proportion to other wilderness users as it is likely that public demand for activities such as rock climbing will increase relative to other outdoor activities in the near future. 32 The Access Fund is optimistic about developing an appropriate and workable alternative to the current fixed anchor management at North Cascades National Park. We would like the park to agree that administrative actions regarding fixed anchors (e.g., bolt removals or route closures) must be well-substantiated and noticed to the public. We are interested in collaborating with the park to create a working group that would be included in the planning process to address climbing related issues in a formalized plan. We hope the park will integrate input from the public, as well as climbing experts (guides and local and national advocacy groups), in the evaluation of wilderness climber use patterns in order to develop sustainable strategies to improve flow and safety. 33 The Access Fund endorses a climbing management plan or an amendment to an existing plan that integrates a programmatic or case-by-case fixed anchor authorization process. 34 We urge North Cascades National Park to consider an assessment, by NPS and local experts, of the current state of the Forbidden Peak descent route, and to allow the descent route to be reequipped as per their recommendations. The Access Fund deeply appreciates North Cascades National Park wilderness and is interested in being part of a process to improve climbing management, visitor flow and wilderness experience. 1 Jonathan Jarvis, Director s Order #41: Wilderness Stewardship, Section 7.2, National Park Service, US Department of the Interior (May 13, 2013). 2 Federal Register, Vol. 64, No 209, Department of Agriculture, 36 CFR Chapter II, Forest Service, Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Fixed Anchors in Wilderness, at: 29/pdf/ pdf 3 Studies indicate that the vast minority of climbers (<20% based on site specific samples) have ever placed a bolt. It is reasonable to assume that an even smaller minority of climbers have placed a bolt (hand drilled) in a remote wilderness setting based on documented climber use-patterns. Schuster, R. M., Thomson, J. G., & Hammitt, W. E. (2001). Rock Climber's Attitudes Toward Management of Climbing and the Use of Bolts. Environmental Management, 28(3), Murdock, E.D. (2010). Perspectives on Rock Climbing Fixed Anchors Through the Lens of the Wilderness Act: Social, Legal and Environmental Implications at Joshua Tree National Park, California (Unpublished). Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arizona. Reighart, S. (2007). Rock Climber Perspectives on Management Issues in the Red River Gorge (Unpublished). Thesis, Ohio State University. 7

8 4 The majority of climbers support some level of regulation on fixed anchors in general, especially in designated Wilderness. Access Fund (2011) Access Fund NPS Fixed Anchors in Wilderness Survey, at: Attarian, A. (1999). Factors influencing responsible rock climbing behavior (Unpublished). The American Alpine Club, Golden, CO. Waldrup, R., & McEwen, D. (1994). Rockclimbing and Wilderness; A Study of Climber's Attitudes Toward Wilderness, Climbing Impacts and Regulation. Trends, 31(3), Wallace, G. N., & Trench, K. (1996). A Study of Rock Climbers in Joshua Tree National Park: Implications for the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) Management Framework (Unpublished). Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University. 5 Jackson, Jeff (2013). TNB: Death on Forbidden Peak: Was the NPS Complicit?, Rock and Ice, at: (accessed Dec 23, 2013). 6 Director s Order #41. 7 Karen Taylor-Goodrich, Superintendent s Compendium, North Cascades National Park Service Complex, US Department of the Interior (July 1, 2013). 8 36CFR 2.1(a)(1)(iv) Preservation of natural, cultural and archeological resources, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the following is prohibited: (1) possessing, destroying, injuring, defacing, removing, digging, or disturbing, from its natural state: (iv) a mineral resource or cave formation or parts thereof. 9 National Park Service, North Cascades National Park website, Plan Your Visit/Climbing, at: (accessed Dec 18, 2013) Director s Order # As an example, the 2013 Joshua Tree National Park Superintendent s Compendium prohibited the use of vegetation for climbing anchors and subsequently (September, 2013) approved a permit for the placement of a bolted fixed anchor in wilderness in order to protect a Pinyon pine tree previously used as a descent anchor. 13 Dolan, T. (2000). Fixed Anchors and the Wilderness Act: Is the Adventure Over? University of San Francisco Law Review, 34, Director s Order # Wilderness Act of 1964, Pub. L , Sec. 2(c)(2). 16 U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, F. S. (1996). Environmental assessment for the Granite Mountain Wilderness: decision notice and finding of no significant impact and pre-decision. Unpublished manuscript, Prescott, AZ. 17 Murdock, E.D. (2010). Perspectives on Rock Climbing Fixed Anchors Through the Lens of the Wilderness Act: Social, Legal and Environmental Implications at Joshua Tree National Park, California (Unpublished). Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arizona. 18 As an example, Rocky Mountain National Park sites 36 CFR 2.1 as a regulation that guide[s] park management of climbing activities to prohibit chipping, gluing or gardening and the park programmatically authorizes the placement of fixed anchors in wilderness: Backcountry and Wilderness Management Plan (2001), Rocky Mountain National Park, National Park Service, Colorado Hendee, J. C., Stankey, G. H., & Lucas, R. C. (1990). Wilderness Management. Golden, CO: North American Press. 21 National Wilderness Steering Committee (2006). Guidance White Paper #3, Minimum Requirements Decision Process. National Park Service. 22 Id. 23 Wilderness Act. 24 National Park Service, 2006 NPS Management Policies, Chapter 6: Wilderness Preservation and Management, Minimum Requirement. 25 Wilderness Act. 26 Director s Order #41. 8

9 27 Carlson, Tom (2013). Minimum Requirement Analysis #1 MRA and The Wilderness Act, Arthur Carhart Wilderness Training Center, January 22, 2013 Webinar, at: 28 Director s Order # Id. 30 Zion National Park conducted a VERP analysis and determined that a programmatic authorization (allowance) of fixed anchors was appropriate in wilderness: Backcountry Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (2007), Zion National Park, National Park Service, Utah. 31 Carlson, Tom (2013). Minimum Requirement Analysis #2 The MRA Process, Arthur Carhart Wilderness Training Center, January 28, 2013 Webinar, at: 32 Cordell, H.K. (2012). Outdoor Recreation Trends and Futures: A Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. US Dept. of Agriculture, National Forest Service, Southern Research Station, p As an example, visitor flow analysis of Yosemite National Park s Half Dome cable route was the basis for a plan that improves both safety and wilderness experience without unnecessary prohibitions. See Half Dome Trail Visitor Use Monitoring Report (2012), Yosemite National Park, National Park Service, US Dept. of the Interior at: 34 As per Director s Order #41 guidelines. 9