Jump to content

Beacon Rock CMP: Public input needed!!!


LostCamKenny

Recommended Posts

Greetings folks and happy holidays!

 

Last fall, the Beacon Rock Climbing Association submitted a climbing management plan to the Washington State Parks and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. In the thirteen months since that time there has been NO RESPONSE from either agency as to approval of the plan or even comments for improving it. Public response has been just slightly better but we are still hurting for a healthy response from the community.

 

Posted here on this thread are links to the climbing management plan and I humbly ask everyone to take a look at the plan. It totals seven pages (one of which is a cover page) and takes but a few minutes to read. This is an important step: getting everyone to read it and make comments based on the plan's usefulness as a governing and lawful document within the Washington Administrative Code. An official open comment period should follow with the Parks and The WDFW in a few weeks and having enough public input and understanding on the issue will only help the cause. Please, if you have any affinity for Beacon Rock, take a few short minutes to read it over and comment. Even if you have no dog in the fight we invite your comments. Links are below. If one doesn't work please try the other. Comments can be made at either link.

 

Thank You!

 

Link to BRCA Facebook

 

Beacon Rock Climbing Association blog

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One other note: we all have common ground in this issue. Years past have shown us that even the wildlife biologist will agree to the southwest face being open year-round. This has been common knowledge for several years and no one is talking about it or trying to make it happen. To have this face opened would represent a victory for access at Beacon Rock, and it would also pave the way for more negotiating concerning the southeast face. Please take the time to offer comments and feedback at either of the aforementioned links. Our voices are our most useful tools and with the many individuals who are as outspoken as we know them to be, it seems like there should be plenty of folks to speak up for this. Please take the time to read and understand the CMP, and offer something to the conversation.

 

Again, thank you all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opening the SW face is no problem other than the hellish nightmare of cleaning the lines of oak. But there is no connection between that face and any other relative to the Peregrine closure.

 

If by 'southeast face' you mean the east face then you don't want to go there as it will only open climbing on the entire rock to renewed scrutiny by the tribes. You'd also have to pay for the necessary EIS and review by the WDAHP as otherwise those funds would come out of the BRSP's now non-existent budget and that's not going to go over well.

 

If you mean your proposed 'buffer zone', that will be decided on its technical merit and it's extremely unlikely any amount of public comments will influence that decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the SW face is no problem other than the hellish nightmare of cleaning the lines of oak. But there is no connection between that face and any other relative to the Peregrine closure.

Ah ha... See there is common ground! The cleaning WILL happen - that is of least concern. Opening it is what matters. It would be great if you could use your influence with David Anderson to help with this, Joseph.

 

If by 'southeast face' you mean the east face...

Nope, we mean the southeast face, the river face - where the majority of the climbing happens. The east face as you describe is another area of common ground that everyone has. No one is pushing to climb there right now so it seems logical to leave that alone.

 

If you mean your proposed 'buffer zone', that will be decided on its technical merit and it's extremely unlikely any amount of public comments will influence that decision.

Even if it is extremely unlikely we will let the public voice sound off and make their comments. Everything you have added here can help the conversation, but with respect to the process everyone will be heard who wants to be heard, and we will not move forward on just one person's ideas. Thank you for being constructive, Joseph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone's voice should be heard and it just isn't about my personal opinions or those of any other individual or group. That's been the whole point. And as I've been trying to get across since 2005, all discussions of the Peregrine closure, and indeed all aspects of climbing-related management, are (i.e. should be) dealt with publicly, honestly, sincerely, transparently, and professionally (unemotionally) dealing only with substantive technical merits of the associated scientific, legal, and policy issues.

 

Stoke, angst, indignation, and hoorah - however deeply held or experienced - have no place at the table when dealing with these issues. It's not that anyone is insensitive, unempathetic, or even unsympathetic to the climbers' plight - it's just how government and the science work and a matter of 'cooler heads'. Good to see some of that reality finally sinking in some, even if the principal motivation for all this remains as single-minded and emotionally-driven as ever.

 

P.S. As far as common grounds on the SW face go, I obliged Jeff Thomas and we rebolted those anchors so they're ready to go, but unless you can get permission to use Crossbow-laden diesel to soak and burn the hundreds of individual oak plants count me out (see tool list and safety gear in my post describing the scope of the problem in the other thread) - and I've done several of those routes and know how cool they are, particularly LLL, but it's just that ugly of a situation and not one to be underestimated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the SW face is no problem other than the hellish nightmare of cleaning the lines of oak. But there is no connection between that face and any other relative to the Peregrine closure.

Ah ha... See there is common ground! The cleaning WILL happen - that is of least concern. Opening it is what matters. It would be great if you could use your influence with David Anderson to help with this, Joseph.

 

Specifically with regard to opening the SW face, I believe WDFW is willing to entertain this within the context of an established cooperative, non-adversarial, working relationship around all aspects of WDFW's interests at Beacon, but my understanding was/is the issue was actually more one of a BRSP issue than WDFW one and that would be worth checking with Erik, by way of Karl. But trust me, having rapped it recently, opening it is the easy part, cleaning it will require several suicide cleaning missions - better start working on Ivan straight away.

 

As far as my "influence" with WDFW goes, it's entirely limited to what I can factually state, not what my personal opinion is (and they do know what my opinion on the closure is - but it's just that, another opinion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought was backpack sprayers with Crossbow and diesel when it's good and dry. Let it soak for awhile, say a week, and then, just as it starts to rain, hit it again and light it off. Then as you say, move in for the survivors. Anything else is going to be fairly gruesome given how many individual plants are rooted way back in the crack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought was backpack sprayers with Crossbow and diesel when it's good and dry. Let it soak for awhile, say a week, and then, just as it starts to rain, hit it again and light it off. Then as you say, move in for the survivors. Anything else is going to be fairly gruesome given how many individual plants are rooted way back in the crack.

in theory, mechanical means are the only permited forms of plant management, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at 2,4-D use rules in Washington State (Pg-11) you'll notice the WS Department of Transportation no longer uses the 2, 4-D or Triclophyr for control

 

Page-9 states Crossbow can be used in abandoned orchards.

 

I can't see Beacon falling under the classification of an abandoned orchard. Beacon Rock brand fruit?

 

In any case application of a chemical like that requires an WS pesticide applicators license or supervision by a license holder.

 

http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/effects/24d/attachment-d.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

That'll be a real trick for about 2-300 individual plants rooted two feet back in a narrow crack system and grown into a series of continuous mats, but with the tools and suit I listed earlier on the other thread and three or four days you might pull it off (that estimate being based on the three days it took to really clean out Flying Circus). Better to do it this time of year if a couple of stretches of dry days come along than any other time of year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...