|
|
|
|
t.vegas
Oct 16, 2008, 1:29 AM
Post #1 of 14
(7929 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 59
|
The BLM has a new management plan that is up for review in Las Vegas.
Among other issues, it seeks to partially end the "bolting ban" currently in place in the wilderness areas and the Calico Hills.
There is a survey that is currently available to be filled out after the proposed plan, the survey can be found here:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=eUgP4wReMzw6hqGJ7Gb2DA_3d_3d
The management plan itself is here, and the climbing section begins on page 18:
http://www.lvclc.org/files/pdf/BLM-WildernessPlan.pdf
If you climb at Red Rocks, or plan to climb there, please take a moment to read the proposal, and fill out the survey. Some people feel that there are some serious issues with the plan as written, and unless people start to chime in, this could dramatically change the climbing areas here.
As of this time the number of surveys returned to the BLM have been minimal at best. The more voices that are heard, the better chance there is to make sure that the new plan strikes a harmonious balance with all climbers and the public as well.
Please take a few moments to review the plans and add your voice!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nkane
Oct 16, 2008, 3:06 AM
Post #3 of 14
(7855 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2006
Posts: 143
|
Surveys are fun!
What do y'all think about the bolt quota? would an FA party have to abandon a new line on the Buffalo Wall because they ran out of legal bolts?
|
|
|
|
|
t.vegas
Oct 20, 2008, 8:57 AM
Post #4 of 14
(7790 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 59
|
Thanks Factor! Forgot to add the clicky *chuckles*
The bolt quota is certainly an issue, but at the same time I think they are attempting to allow more bolting - without mass grid bolting insuing.
My personal issues with the plan as written is that its covered in broad strokes. There seems to be far too many holes for the BLM to jump back through, saying, "Oh that wasn't what we really meant". I would really like to see more specifics.
I also feel that the plan doesn't cover all climbers well; and that they arent really covering safety issues.
We are allowed to replace old bolts and anchors, but if an open cold shut has a new bolt we have to leave it?
Also, im not too keen on the lottery system.....5 routes drawn a month? So FA parties just have to hope that their route gets drawn, if not, travel back again next month?
At any rate, whether you agree with the plan as written or not (so far, its about 70/30 that people dont), the important thing is that we take the time to fill out the survey. That way, the people writing this at least know that we are concerned!
This plan can easily be adapted as a "national" one, as the government loves to cookie cutter plans like this into "one size fits all".
But the most important thing is that as many people that can chime in on this do, so that decisions can be made that are truly to the overall satisfaction of us (the user group) rather then the agenda of the BLM or private parties.
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Oct 21, 2008, 5:41 AM
Post #5 of 14
(7703 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Oct 21, 2008, 6:08 AM
Post #6 of 14
(7687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
USnavy wrote: Personaly I think the bolts specifications section is BS. At the moment the specification only calls for the use of 3/8" 3.5" long expansion bolts. Well in some cases such bolt may not be sufficient (such as on overhangs or to protect against factor two falls). The specification should allow for stronger bolts such as 1/2" 5 piece Rawl / Powers expansion bolts and titanium staple U bolts. The specification should promote the usage of glue in bolts because glue in bolts is most suited type of bolt for sandstone. In fact most manufacturers do not recommend the use of expansion bolts in sandstone and suggest users use only glue in bolts.
well, the problem with glue-ins is that you cannot use them for 24hrs after you place them- which makes them good for replacement bolts, tougher for FA bolts.
that aside, while a glue-in is the best possible option, a 2.75", 3/8" 5-piece is an absolutely bomber bolt and is considered the standard bolt for Red Rock in the canyons.
i've talked with the ASCA about it, and they believe the specification should read a 2.75"/3/8" bolt or longer as the situation demands. (softer rock would obviously necessitate a bigger/longer bolt) considering that they've done the vast majority of replacement work in Red Rock over the last few years, i'll go with their recommendations.
|
|
|
|
|
t.vegas
Oct 24, 2008, 9:39 PM
Post #7 of 14
(7577 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 59
|
Hey vegas, im glad you chimed in on this thread - good to see you're still around and about :)
I also think that the ASCA has very solid recommendations and as you said, the experience to back them up.
Did you notice any other points in the plan that you had issues with?
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Oct 24, 2008, 10:20 PM
Post #8 of 14
(7550 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
my primary concern with the plan is that it establishes a strict framework that does not work in reality nor is it in any way enforceable, nor does it encourage the community to participate.
there is a really good conversation on this topic over on mp.com-
http://www.mountainproject.com/...r_feedback/106267758
it addresses many of my concerns with the plan and some thoughts by others on how to improve it.
i should also note that the plan being developed by the BLM will serve as a template for bolt plans across the country in all BLM climbing areas- Red Rock is just the first. it's very important that all climbers, not just locals, get involved in this one.
|
|
|
|
|
kennoyce
Oct 24, 2008, 10:36 PM
Post #9 of 14
(7538 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338
|
That is exactly what I thought when I read it. it is much too strict, not enforceable, and will surely be used in climbing areas all over the country if it gets passed. I took the survey, and voiced my opinions in each of the comment boxes. I think that there should just be rules like, no anchor within 50 feet of the ground, no sport climbs in wilderness areas, camoflage all anchors to match the rock, and no rap stations requiring webbing.
|
|
|
|
|
glahhg
Oct 24, 2008, 10:45 PM
Post #10 of 14
(7529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 69
|
You don't have to read the whole 44 page plan. I've snipped the relevant rock climbing section and pasted it below, so those of you who are lazy like me can fill out the survey.
ROCK CLIMBING:
Climbing itself does not require a separate permit (for example, to use removable or existing
fixed protection). However, other permits for use of the area (for example placing new fixed
anchors, overnight bivy camping, or late exit parking) may be required where applicable. Areas
may be closed (permanently or seasonally) to climbing when needed to prevent degradation to
wildlife, plants, cultural resources, or recreational opportunities. Areas within 50 feet of rock art
are closed to climbing. The agencies are responsible for identifying permanently or seasonally
closed areas with the exception of rock art which is self identifying.
The agencies will maintain a climbing inventory which will serve as the identification of routes,
and of those with approved fixed anchors. A permit will be required to place additional new
fixed anchors. Each new permitted route will be added to the climbing inventory. Fixed anchors
may not be placed with power drills, only hand drills are allowed for the placement of new fixed
anchors.
Replacement or removal of existing fixed anchors. Replacement of existing worn or unstable
fixed anchors on routes identified in the climbing inventory may be accomplished by the public.
So as to minimize impact to the rock, all fixed anchors must be stainless steel, minimum 3/8”
diameter and minimum 3 ½” deep (and comply with other guidelines) to assure the longest
durability possible and the least frequent replacement. A permit for bolt replacement must be
obtained a minimum of two weeks in advance. The removal of fixed anchors may occur under
the same permit if removal would not substantially change the character of the climb or descent.
All holes must be patched. If the proposal for removal would cause a substantial change in the
character of the climb or descent, public comment and additional analysis would be required
prior to permitting.
Agency removal of existing fixed anchors. The removal of existing fixed anchors may occur in
areas permanently closed to climbing so as to prevent degradation to wildlife, plants, cultural
resources, or recreational opportunities. These proposals would be subject to additional analysis
and public comment.
New fixed anchors. One of two permit types will be required for the placement of new fixed
anchors. The first permit type is for minimal bolt placement on long routes, and would not
require specific identification of fixed anchor locations prior to issuing the permit. The first
permit does not require public evaluation. The second type is for more than minimal bolt
placement or areas within 100 feet of the base of the cliff system, and will require identification
of approximate fixed anchor locations prior to issuing the permit. The second permit requires
agency and public review prior to issuance of the permit.
Permit 1 - The area (generally the wall and the approximate route) must be specified to obtain
the permit, however the location of fixed anchor placements does not need to be identified in
advance. The following conditions apply:
• No fixed anchors within the first 100 feet from the base of the cliff system.
• Three or fewer fixed anchors (including those used for belay/rappel anchors or lead
protection) on a climbing pitch above 100 ft from the base of the cliff system (This does
not mean an average of 3 fixed anchors per pitch on the climbing route).
• The route must not be a previously existing climb, or within 20 feet of an existing climb
recorded in the agency maintained climbing inventory (with the exception of the initial or
final 20 feet of the climb if starting or ending at a previously existing climb).
• Placement must adhere to requirements and guidelines established to minimize impact to
the wilderness resource as specified in the permit.
• Placement of fixed anchors for a rappel decent route separate of the new climbing route
would be allowed under the permit if no other decent route previously exists for the wall.
Permit 2 – The specific route must be identified in advance as well as the approximate location
of fixed anchors. This permit is required if any of the following conditions apply:
• Any placement of fixed anchors within the first 100 ft from the base of the cliff system.
• More than three anchors (including those used for belay/rappel anchors or lead
protection) per climbing pitch on any segment of the route.
• Placement of fixed anchors on any previously existing climb recorded in the climbing
inventory.
• Placement of fixed anchors for the sole purpose of canyoneering or sport rappelling
descent.
A two week agency review will be required for permit 1. Applications for permit 1 may be made
on any day the federal government is open for business. A 30 day agency and public review will
be required for permit 2. Applications will be accepted on the 10th of every month (or the next
following day the federal government is open for business). Only one permit application may be
made per person. Five permit applications will be drawn at random for evaluation. Public
endorsement or opposition will be considered in determining if the proposal meets the objectives
and guidelines for new route development. Permit applications that provide a diversity of
aesthetic and enjoyable routes, are dispersed so that wilderness solitude is maintained, increase
the variety of difficulty and applied technique, and comply with all other guidelines may be
approved. The permit request may be denied if a majority of public opposition to the route is
expressed. If the permit request would exceed the guidelines for bolt density within the area, it
will be denied. If the permit request includes a decent route that would cross sensitive resources
or have the potential to cause undue soil erosion, the climbing route would be denied if an
alternate decent route is not possible. The following considerations will be used in determining
the appropriateness of a climb under permit 2:
• A route on a significant independent rock feature as compared to addition of a route to a
rock feature or wall with existing routes.
• Routes that follow an obvious feature or a direct line on the path of least resistance on a
wall would be favored compared to indirect routes or routes that end in the middle of a
face.
• Longer routes would be favored over short routes.
• Routes that are farther away from other existing routes would be favored as compared to
routes close to others.
• A difficult climb in an area with many easier climbs, or visa versa, would be favored.
The following rules apply for all new fixed anchor placements or replacements:
1) If placing traditional gear is possible (for example, cracks are present which would
accept chocks, cams, etc) no new fixed anchors will be permitted.
2) To assure fixed anchors are durable and do not require replacement for the longest
period of time possible (replacement which would cause impacts to the rock surface), all
new fixed anchors must be stainless steel, minimum 3/8” diameter and minimum 3 ½”
deep.
3) All bolt hangers and chains permitted within the first 100 feet from the base of the cliff
system must be painted a color that blends with the rock surface.
4) No fixed anchors will be permitted on cliffs identified by the agency as being occupied
by sensitive species if climbing is determined to be detrimental to the species.
5) No fixed anchors will be permitted within 50 feet of rock art.
6) Permitee must provide a route diagram and route description to the agency within 30
days after the fixed anchors have been installed.
7) A descent route must be specified for all new routes.
Recommendations:
1) Paint bolt hangers and chains above 100 feet.
2) Where possible, existing climbing bolts within 100 feet from the base of the cliff
system should be painted with a color similar to the surrounding rock.
3) Webbing, rope, or other nylon materials should not be left except in emergencies or
under unexpected circumstances requiring timely action to remain safe.
(This post was edited by glahhg on Oct 24, 2008, 10:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Oct 26, 2008, 7:33 AM
Post #11 of 14
(7467 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
|
|
|
|
|
t.vegas
Oct 27, 2008, 12:06 AM
Post #12 of 14
(7418 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 59
|
Yeah, I know there is a great thread on this on mp.com - my reasoning about starting a thread on this subject here, is so that we can reach out to a larger number of people.
The more boards we access, and the more people we can get to link any of these threads and complete the surveys, the more chance that we can get this issue to be handled in a manner which is best for everyone.
As you said, this is going to be a template for all BLM climbing plans in the future - lets make sure its right now rather then try to fight it later.
|
|
|
|
|
kennoyce
Oct 27, 2008, 5:42 PM
Post #13 of 14
(7357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338
|
I said not within 50 feet because we are talking about a wilderness area, This area should not be a sport climbing area. There is plenty of sport climbing already within Red Rocks, and 50 feet is enough that no non climber will be able to see the bolt to be bothered by it (not that I think this is a problem personally, but it is the rational that they are using for the no anchor within 100 feet of the ground rule). I am not a trad only person, I do enjoy sport climbing as well, I just feel that within a wilderness area, bolts should be kept to a minimum which is not what sport climbing does. There is also plenty of rock within red rocks that isn't wilderness area, so the rules don't apply to those areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
