Chugach State Park Permanent Anchor Ban

[wfinley]

For those of you who live near Anchorage & for those of you who visit - please comment.

 

Click here for text only version of the above.

[johnkelley]

This shouldn't be a suprise to anyone. I'm suprised it took the csp this long. Lots of new bolts have been going in everywhere. All of those retro bolts at sunshine ridge, pivot point, crack in the woods, etc. plus all of the replacements. Guess the park didn't like that.

 

 

[wfinley]

John - the park plan calls for stuff like a new road at Glen Alps and lists military training, commercial lodges and commercial power development as "Compatible" uses within the park. Insinuating that the park has some sort of environmental ethos attached to this ban (because of a handful of new bolts at Crack in the Woods?) is ridiculous when you you look at how the plan embraces development elsewhere in the park.

 

This ban would impact everyone... including the anchors you leave behind.

[johnkelley]

Since you think my ideas are ridiculous maybe you can offer a reason why the CSP has proposed this ban? It's obvious they aren't into all of the recent climber impact.

[johnkelley]

Just noticed the photo credit on that flier you posted. That's the same guy who retro bolted crack in the woods. WTF?

[wfinley]

Maybe they proposed the ban so when people complain about the park's emphasis on development they can tout their dedication to wilderness values by pointing to the anchor ban.

 

As for impact ... These are the same land managers that wants to build new ATV trails near Bird. They could care less about impact.

 

 

 

 

 

[johnkelley]

Maybe they don't like all of these bolts showing up everywhere.

[Calder]

Either way a ban on fixed anchors in the CSP would suck. The flyer brings up a lot of good points to bring up to the DNR, but so does John. I think figuring out the reason why they are proposing this ban is essential information to have before proposing a rebuttal. Any and all communication to the "authorities" needs to come from a unified voice of climbers. It needs to be well thought out, and offer ways forward that appeal to both parties.

 

If the reaseon for the ban IS that the DNR is angry about retro bolting, then this issue needs to be adressed to them in a way that shows the climbing community in Anchorage is concerned as well. How can we show the DNR we are concerned about our environmental impact (even if they aren't)? Any anchors will be camoflaged, efforts will be made to mininmize fixed anchors, climber information campaigns, etc. All of that stuff that we should be doing anyways needs to be imparted to them.

 

Anyone know if the AF has been contacted yet? They're pretty good at this stuff...

[johnkelley]

I don't think it's the retro bolts. I think it's the rapid increase in the number of bolts and the increased traffic that comes with them.

 

The attitude of most local climbers has changed. Most make no effort to keep a low key profile. The opposite is pretty much the norm now. Both the replacments and the retro bolts have been highly publicized by the bolters. Gotta sell guide books and stuff and don't forget the photo credit. Often claiming they're do the rest of us some kind of service. No effort has been made to try to hide/camo the bolts. The idea of remaining low impact has been completely ignored. A lot of climbers are to lazy to park in a pullout. Parking right on the side of the road has pissed the park off. I can tell by all of the no parking signs. There are ALOT more then there used to be.

 

In the last few years Sunshine Ridge, Pivot Point, Crack in the Woods and a few others have all seen heavy retro bolting. The ASCA's web site list maybe fifty or so replacements.

 

The idea that all of these new bolts and the newly proposed bolting ban are in no way connected is ridiculous.

 

 

[wfinley]

First of all I have to ask if you’ve read the plan? As I’ve stated before – the plan calls for lots of development. A $40 million road within the park, 3 caretaker homes, 2 backcountry cabins, a new ATV trail in Bird and many many new trails. The plan removes all of Crow Pass from the Wilderness Zone – thus greatly reducing the overall amount of wilderness in the park. Likewise the plan lists commercial power development, hydroelectric generators and commercial lodges as compatible and calls for ATV tours within the park to be permissible. When you take any of the above points and compare them to a handful of bolts in road-cut above the busiest highway in Alaska the notion of impact becomes moot.

 

As for your specific points….

 

Gotta sell guide books and stuff and don't forget the photo credit. Often claiming they're do the rest of us some kind of service. No effort has been made to try to hide/camo the bolts.

There hasn’t been a new guidebook for CSP rock in over a decade so linking increased numbers to guidebooks is a poor arguement. Anchorage has seen a demographic shift in the past decade and there are more young people into outdoor sports. Demographics plays a far greater roll than blogs, forums or guidebooks.

 

As for service... Kelsey has been very public about the replaced bolts. That’s a good thing. Most of the bolts down on the highway were placed in the 80s. Most of them are 1/4 inch stubbies that spin and wouldn’t hold shit yet most of them still get climbed on a regular basis. Replacing them is a service – and most climbers are thankful for that. It would suck to break a leg because some old-school climber (who thinks climbing on loose roadcut with bad bolts is character building) managed to stop anchor replacements.

 

I agree that camouflaging anchors is ideal - but I don't think neglecting to do so is causation for an all out ban.

 

A lot of climbers are to lazy to park in a pullout. Parking right on the side of the road has pissed the park off. I can tell by all of the no parking signs. There are ALOT more then there used to be.

I call BS on this. I climb down there on a regular basis and have not seen instances of this. More no parking signs? The only no parking signs added in the past 15 years have been the ones at McHugh – and those were put up because of the new lot built 10 years ago.

 

The idea that all of these new bolts and the newly proposed bolting ban are in no way connected is ridiculous.

Let's get some perspective here. You’re talking about replacement bolts in roadcut and about 15 retro bolts (half of which have been removed). I'm sorry but I really have a hard time seeing how these are fodder for an all-out ban. Retro bolts (and the online rants that have stemmed from them) might be part of it - but there has to be another reason.

 

 

* * *

 

 

I think figuring out the reason why they are proposing this ban is essential information to have before proposing a rebuttal.

According to a post at SuperTopo liability is one of DNR’s concerns.

 

Anyone know if the AF has been contacted yet? They're pretty good at this stuff...

I contacted the AK representative but he’s out of town on business.

 

 

 

[johnkelley]

Finley you need to get your head out of your ass. Sunshine Ridge got over 20 retro bolts placed on it. Crack in Woods got around 10 or so. Pivot point recieved around 20 retro bolts.

 

For you to imply that I am the cause for this ban is complete horse shit.

 

The idea that I like climbing on old bolts is retarded.

 

As for Kelsey. He gave us a very poorly written guide book, retro bolts on Crack in The Woods, on and on.

[Kelsey]

John : I think your blinded by your want to always blame me for everything that bothers you. Besides, Sunshine Ridge probably only has half that amount of bolts. Also most have been removed except for the anchors. That happened years ago. I'd say about 4 or 5?

 

If you don't like the book the write one better. Geez, its just a constant stream of complaints out of you. Most of them are unfounded.

 

The amount of people that have thanked me for coming out with a guidebook far outweighs your negative attitude. I love climbing and I enjoy helping others climb. If they are excited to go climbing because of something I wrote then that is a good thing to me.

 

Stop exaggerating everything to fit your cause. If you are going to build some sort of argument perhaps you should actually find the truth first instead of just assuming why something is happening. Your problem from the start.

 

[johnkelley]

Let's see... There was no problem then you (Kelsey) come along and drill a bunch of bolts and now there is a proposed anchor ban. Hum...?

[johnkelley]

Kelsey - Sunshine ridge STILL has around 20 retro bolts on it. Five pitches of retro bolts were added. Many have been chopped but there is still about 20 left

 

 

Edited October 13, 2011 by johnkelley

[genepires]

dog fight on the internet! holding true to the tradition at cc.com.

 

I thought AK was the land of freedom from the restrictions on the lower 48? Sounds like the same crap as down here.

[wdietsch]

What would Sarah do ??

 

[WCC]

What would Sarah do ??

 

 

Quit.

[Kelsey]

Sarah would probably just sell the whole thing to buy a second tour bus! Although, it is the Seward Highway so.....

 

genepires, Thank you for the reminder that I am now contributing to a fight on the internet. Reminds me of an old saying "In an internet fight it doesn't matter who wins. You're still an idiot."

 

The plan was originally drafted in 2008.

 

Reason for Plan Revision

Since the last plan was adopted in 1980, much has changed. The population of Anchorage

and surrounding areas has grown resulting in increased use of the park. This use has stressed

park facilities that are often beyond capacity and caused access impacts to neighboring

communities. Recreational uses and technology have changed since the park was established

placing new demands on park facilities that could not have been previously anticipated. The

previous plan was published with the knowledge that nearly 10% of the park area was

selected by Eklutna Inc. and there would be land management implications associated with

their selections. Land selection decisions have been made and management implications

need addressing. Additionally, as with all management plans, continuous review is necessary

to insure that the concepts and recommendations reflect the changing needs of the public and

the purposes for which the park was created.

Planning Process

The Department of Natural Resources began a comprehensive planning process to revise this

plan in the Spring of 2008. The planning process not only included a revision of the 1980

Master Plan but also a revision of the 1986 Trails Plan for the park and the development of

a joint State/Municipality of Anchorage Chugach Access Plan. Public scoping workshops

were held in Anchorage, Eagle River and Indian to gather information and identify issues and

concerns. Over 170 people participated in these workshops and over 135 written comments4 May 2011 Chugach State Park

Management Plan

Chapter 1: Introduction

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT

were received during the scoping period. To learn more specifically how people wanted to

use and develop the park, additional focus group meetings were held throughout the

remainder of 2008 with a variety of user groups.

The Department decided after the scoping phase to focus on the development of the trail

management and access plans initially. The thinking was that the input received on these

plans would help inform the development of the overall management plan and ultimately

make it a more comprehensive document. The draft trail management plan was issued for

public review in August of 2009 and the comment period extended until mid October 2009.

The draft access plan was released for review in January of 2010 and the comment period

ended the beginning of May 2010. Public meetings were again held during each comment

period in a variety of communities and a tremendous amount of input was received. The

input resulted in a clearer vision for access and park trails as well as for the management

concepts and facility proposals contained in this document.

This plan has been issued for public review. After the public comment period is over, the

plan will be revised as needed based on the input received. A final plan is then prepared for

the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources to adopt. Once adopted, the plan

becomes the policy of the Department and is implemented by staff

[Jake_Gano]

What would Sarah do ??

 

 

"Drill baby drill"

 

Sarah = retrobolter!!!

[Jake_Gano]

Retrobolting sucks... but nothing chaps my ass like the Man telling me what I can or can't do on public property. If this passes I'm doing some fly by night drilling just on the point of the matter.

[johnkelley]

Finley - How would this ban have any effect on Yukla? Out of all the new lines I've done there (seven lines) NONE HAVE ANY FIXED GEAR! I do the my best to leave no trace. You should take that off of your flier.

[wfinley]

Hey John - contrary to what your ego tells you, you're not the only one who has ever climbed Yukla.

 

Everytime you post on any forum it...

 

rapidly

 

devolves into a

 

spray fest.

 

Go climbing and stop spraying.

 

 

[johnkelley]

There's no fixed gear on Nantina either, just the hardest line in the park. There is no fixed gear on any of the lines I've done here.

 

As usuall you ignore the facts.

 

Take your our advice.

 

As for me... Two new lines in the last two weeks, a grade IV and a grade V. I wish I could do more but that all I have in me.

 

You call it ego but it's a fact.

 

In the last two weeks I've put up more pitches, bolt free, then you have done in your entire lifetime. Another fact.

 

How would this effect Yukla? THere are no fixed anchors on Yukla.

 

 

[johnkelley]

I can see why you would want to use Yukla as an example but the reality of it is that it would be totally uneffected by an anchor ban. There are no fixed anchors on it. Why is it on your flier? Get your facts straight.

 

 

[johnkelley]

Pioneer Peak doesn't require a rappel. What's it doing on your flier? Again, get your facts straight.

 

A big huge Kelsey Gay photo credit is poor style. Really, the fucking rap bolter gets a photo credit? A very poor choice.