Define access issues?

[trackrunner]

define access issues? mine just access to be allowed to do a canyon. against closed canyons by public land managers, against restrictive/unreasonable permit process.

would not include roads vs. wilderness. I think there is existing groups that handle those issues.

mods perhaps this may be the first post to split into a new topic if needed.

[restrac2000]

define access issues? mine just access to be allowed to do a canyon. against closed canyons by public land managers, against restrictive/unreasonable permit process.

would not include roads vs. wilderness. I think there is existing groups that handle those issues.

mods perhaps this may be the first post to split into a new topic if needed.

I think keeping interest at the "access" level right now versus getting down to specific details is important. Defining broad agendas gives something for a potential BOD to work with. If and organization forms then it can hash out the details during meetings, wether web-based or in person. The level of detail you are talking about is extremely important but might be step 3 or later.

I agree with Shane on this part. Let an initial BOD create a broad mission statement within a topic, like access, and then create the structure to democratically deal with the specifics. The broad mission statement could even be kept and specific, "position statements" can be created and voted on for each region or site. Great job for multiple committees. There are models out there that have been successful at uniting diverse and even historically antagonistic stakeholders. Or, the mission statement could be changed, amended, etc based on the outcomes of the first meetings. Several options.

My hope at such an early stage would be to unite the broader community to support the democratic process. Hopefully with the right infrastructure people will feel empowered and develop a sense of franchise...even if individuals have to compromise on specific details. I think prioritizing a vote versus specific outcomes helps reach those goals.

Phillip

[nelsonccc]

Access is incredibly important. I think most of us come from backgrounds in other sports where we have seen successful access issues resolved as well as areas closed forever. It's important to me that the new association tackles, head-on, a lot of the issues that come with unrestrained access, miss-use of resources, and general access. I don;t think it should be a SUWA or Anti-SUWA thingy but more of something patterned after the ZCC. It would be nice to be a part of something that is out there preserving access and educating newcomers to the issues involved with access.

[ghawk]

Access is incredibly important. I think most of us come from backgrounds in other sports where we have seen successful access issues resolved as well as areas closed forever. It's important to me that the new association tackles, head-on, a lot of the issues that come with unrestrained access, miss-use of resources, and general access. I don;t think it should be a SUWA or Anti-SUWA thingy but more of something patterned after the ZCC. It would be nice to be a part of something that is out there preserving access and educating newcomers to the issues involved with access.

yes :nod:

[SRG]

The Access Fund is a national climbing advocacy organization that, as the name implies, focuses on access issues. I'm not sure what their presence is like in Southern Utah, but where I live in Boulder CO they have done some great things, I personally climb at a few places that are only open to the public because of the Access Fund.

Their 5 main areas of focus are:
Climbing management policy
Local support & mobilization
Stewardship & conservation
Land acquisition & protection
Education

Their website may have helpful info.
http://www.accessfund.org/site/c.tmL5KhNWLrH/b.4861253/k.BDBB/Home.htm