Bolting at Beacon Rock

[JosephH]

Just noticed this is actually where this post belongs so I'm moving it...

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I checked with Erik (Park Manager) and John (Ranger) today just to be clear on what the official word is on bolting/fixed anchors at Beacon - here is what John said:

 

Washington state law delegates it to individual management plans and the management plan for Beacon is currently under revision. The current status on bolting, however, is that it is only allowed for safety purposes and if anyone feels there is a need to replace or add a bolt/fixed anchor they should write it up and submit it at the station where it will be evaluated and approved or not. The basic gist of what I took away is that replacing spent rap anchors or the odd rare route bolt would be acceptable, wholesale (or even retail) bolting for route development would not be an acceptable use.

 

I think this is a case where everyone probably needs to work together closely with Erik and John on this issue as they are very keen to see climbing remain open at Beacon. This isn't about their personal wants/desires, however, as there are other forces at work - not all of them local or as sympathetic to climbing as Erik and John. John (who is a climber) said he communicates regularly with Jim O. and has a lot of respect for him so if there are any questions about bolting it might be best to check first with Jim, but also do write up the need, pass it by Jim and ask him to talk with John and Erik about it. John also said that if anyone sees a problem (like the nut missing on the right anchor for "Wrong Gull") that he would like to be notified.

 

Even though I've been climbing at Beacon on and off for 24 years, it's not "my" area ("my" main area and fa's were back east on sandstone in John Gill's wake) - I have nothing but the utmost respect for all of you who developed Beacon. But I do care about the place and my access to it and to be honest, their policy works for me. I also don't believe much positive can come from a "damn the man" attitude out there as in this case, from what I've seen over the years, Erik and John are, and have been, working with us (climbers) to preserve access. Again, it's my adopted "home", but you guys are the real "home boys" and I just thought I'd this all along. You might want to put your heads together and figure out if you can play a part or have a say in the management plan revisions.

[rbw1966]

Andy Fitz of the Access Fund has been working with the officials at Beacon as well.

 

John must be new. The Ranger that used to work at Beacon was definitely NOT a climber.

 

Rob

[JosephH]

Good to know, I was wondering who the Regional Coordinator for WA was when I was looking at the Dishman fiasco thread. I think John has been working there for a couple of seasons (I'm used to talking with Erik), and he is a rock/alpine climber with about ten years experience.

 

He is very committed to keeping access open at Beacon, but I don't believe he's at all supportive of turning it into another outdoor gym ala' Broughton. I think everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and assume they have our broader collective interests in mind when working with the complex legal apparatus and processes associated with access and park management.

 

Those "broader collective interest" might not align with every individual's idea of paradise but we should get to keep climbing there and such is the world we now live in now...