Fixed Anchors in the Wilderness

[olyclimber]

http://www.accessfund.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=tmL5KhNWLrH&b=7903133&ct=13134839&notoc=1

 

Secton 7.2

[Raindawg]

Stepping out of exile to celebrate a (partial) victory:

United States Department of Interior, Director's Order #41, May 13, 2013. Expect more to come in terms of other wilderness areas nationally.

 

"7.2 Climbing

 

The 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. HOWEVER, CLIMBING PRACTICES WITH THE LEAST NEGATIVE IMPACT ON WILDERNESS RESOURCES AND CHARACTER WILL ALWAYS BE THE PREFERRED CHOICE.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF BOLT-INTENSIVE FACE CLIMBS IS CONSIDERED INCOMPATIBLE WITH WILDERNESS PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT DUE TO THE CONCENTRATION OF HUMAN ACTIVITY WHICH THEY SUPPORT, AND THE TYPES AND LEVELS OF IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH SUCH ROUTES. Climbing management strategies will address ways to control, and in some cases reduce, the number of fixed anchors to protect the park's wilderness resources or to preserve the "untrammeled," "undeveloped," and "outstanding opportunities for solitude" qualities of the park's wilderness character.

FIXED ANCHORS OR FIXED EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE RARE IN WILDERNESS. Authorization will be required for the placement of new fixed anchors or fixed equipment. Authorization may be required for the replacement or removal of existing fixed anchors or fixed equipment. The authorization process to be followed will be established at the park level) and will be based on a consideration of resource issues (including the wilderness resource) and recreation opportunities.

Authorization may be issued programmatically within the Wilderness Stewardship Plan or other

activity-level plan, or specifically on a case-by-case basis, such as through a permit system. Prior to the completion of the park's Wilderness Stewardship Plan or other activity-level plan, the park superintendent may approve new fixed anchors or fixed equipment on a case-by-case basis.

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. Proposals for the placement of fixed anchors or fixed equipment for the administrative purpose of facilitating future rescue operations must be evaluated through a MRA.

"CLEAN CLIMBING" TECHNIQUES SHOULD BE THE NORM IN WILDERNESS. THIS INVOLVES THE USE OF TEMPORARY EQUIPMENT AND ANCHORS THAT CAN BE PLACED AND REMOVED WITHOUT ALTERING THE ENVIRONMENT (E.G. SLINGS, CAMS, NUTS, CHOCKS, AND STOPPERS)[/size] Practices such as gluing or chipping holds, and damaging or removing vegetation on or at the base of climbing routes, are prohibíted by NPS regulations (36 CFR 2.1). THE USE OF MOTORIZED EQUIPMENT (E.G. POWER DRILLS) IS PROHIBITED BY THE WILDERNESS ACT AND NPS REGULATIONS (36 CFR 2.12). Climbers are encouraged to adopt Leave No Trace principles and practices for all climbing activities, including packing out all trash and human waste."

 

It looks as if the clean-climbing revolution, long dismissed for convenience, is still a going notion, eh? Expect it to be a trend as my buddy, "pope" and others predicted.

 

[pink]

as long as the fixed anchors are GMO free

[matt_warfield]

And DDF NSA and DWA free (a new acronym for people who want Dwayner to quit bitching about this issue). We can't all be RuMr. It's a relay race.

 

I am going to convert Muslims to Christians as soon as I've had breakfast. Its part of my bucket list.

 

[JasonG]

Wow, Raindawg, that's some font jujitsu you got going on.

[curtveld]

Actually he should be posting some kudos on this TR

 

[Bronco]

From the news today:

https://www.seattletimes.com/life/outdoors/federal-proposals-could-curtail-climbing-anchors-in-wa-wilderness/

I have to wonder how this would effect Darrington as most of that is in the Boulder River Wilderness area.

 

[JasonG]

Thanks @Bronco!  Commented tonight....

Also good to see Kurt fighting the good fight still.

[mthorman]

Yea everyone should be commenting.  Also just a point to remember that there are actually 2 different proposals.  One is for the NPS and the other is for the USFS.  You can probably just copy and paste your comment but make sure to hit them both.  Both proposals are both linked in the 2nd paragraph of the article above.

[JasonG]

Ohhh....need to find the other!