RFC - New Birch Hollow signage - Comments?

The BLM is looking to put in some signs at Birch Hollow - likely in an attempt to put in a voluntary, 12-person group size limit. They have concerns about larger groups disturbing the endangered Mexican Spotted Owl.

How do y'all feel about that? What information should be on the sign? What do you consider to be the trailhead (uh, separate thread for that)?

Comments?

Thanks. :moses:

Point of Clarification:

ZAC is one of the guide services that hold a permit for Birch Hollow, though we do not use it much, and avoid it on weekends. All the guides services are asked to email Tom at BLM Kanab as to what other groups we encounter in the canyon. We file a report with them each month saying how many times we went there and with whom - so they know what the commercial usage is, but have very little handle on what the private usage is. TJ

> From: tmchris@blm.gov
> Date: July 22, 2011 7:56:31 AM MDT
> To: Tyler Hirshfeld <tylerhirshfeld@hotmail.com>, sarah@zionadventures.com,
ks@mclaws.org, info@zionrockguides.com, tylerhirshfeld@hotmail.com,
paragon1@infowest.com, kourtney@zionponderosa.com, stjalliance@yahoo.com,
caleb@zionmountainschool.com
> Cc: Harry_Barber@blm.gov, Misti_Haines@blm.gov, Lisa_Church@blm.gov,
rich@canyonsandcrags.com
> Subject: Re: Birch Hollow groups
>
> Hi Tyler,
>
> Thanks for the update. Unfortunately at this time, we have no rules in
> place that extend to private groups, including any restrictions on group
> size. We have been trying the education approach thus far, but have been
> unable to reach the vast extent of various Boy Scout groups. We may
> eventually need to formulate a Federal Register Notice to enact
> restrictions that allow us to issue citations for violations, if we deem
> that to be a necessity. We are trying to work with Rich Carlson to at
> least better educate Utah scouting groups about the Birch Hollow concerns,
> since it seems that most of our problems lie with the larger scout groups.
>
> We will also be installing informational signs and that trailhead register
> along the Birch Hollow/Orderville Canyon WSA route in the next couple of
> weeks. I will keep all of you permittees informed of our progress, and I
> encourage you all to take advantage of every opportunity to spread the word
> among private groups, including the Boy Scout groups.
>
> Tom Christensen, Outdoor Recreation Planner
> BLM, Kanab Field Office
> 318 N 100 E
> Kanab, UT 84741
> ph. 435-644-4609
> fax 435-644-4620
>
> From: Tyler Hirshfeld <tylerhirshfeld@hotmail.com> > To: <tmchris@blm.gov>
> 07/21/2011 09:04 PM
> Subject: Birch Hollow groups
>
>
> Hey Tom,
>
> We ran into a group of 26 Boy Scouts today descending Birch Hollow. These
> group sizes are becoming more and more common in there lately. We have
> talked about putting a sign up at the trailhead and I still believe that
> will help control number to an extent. When I asked the group leader if he
> knew there was a group limit, he said he has never heard of one in 10 years
> and stated that he didnt think it was written in law. I think this is the
> attitude with most groups descending Birch and is not healthy for the
> canyon. With all the chuch groups, BSA groups, and private groups going
> through the canyon daily, its in bad shape and out of the guides control.
> Possibly send an email out to the Boy Scouts of America that they can
> forward to all of their climbing instructors. Possibly emails out to those
> providing canyoneering beta (e.g. www.canyoneering.net,
> www.zionnational-park.com, etc.) Is there anything us guides can really do
> to help enforce this. Seems most people just laugh at us.
>
> Tyler Hirshfeld
> Canyon Country Guides, LLC
> 907-315-3367
>

I figured this email would be posted up here sooner than later. I think my number one goal when sending this to Tom at the BLM is to state that first off, there are huge groups going through Birch Hollow. Guide companies really have no control of this, all we can do is inform the public, but there is no way possible that we can enforce any rules/ethics on private parties. In my opinion, a sign would be an eye sore, but maybe its needed. I try to stay out of the political side of things but try to help the BLM out the best I can. If that means emailing Tom C. my own personal opinion on things, then so be it. Us guides are the eyes and ears of the public lands that we use and if we are not communicating with the BLM what is going on, it falls back on us in a way. For example, limited guiding.
"Naturally, our preference is to rely on volunteer efforts to alleviate crowding, prior to implementing more restrictive actions. If these efforts fail, we may have no other choice than to limit commercial use in some manner. That could entail assigning dates, limiting trips per outfitter, assigning times of day, etc." -Tom Christensen
If it comes down to me or them, I think group size restrictions would not hurt a bit. And this is just my opinion, How about the larger groups show some respect to others, break up into smaller groups spaced nicely apart and accept the fact that they are in a slot canyon where flow is restricted, and not at a rappelling wall. When one group of 26 occupies the last 4 rappels of Birch at one time, you got issues. I dont want to see signs and limited use in Birch, but if thats what it takes, then thats how it is. If your child robs a bank, you dont want to see him go to prison, but if thats what it takes for him to learn the lesson, then thats how it is.
Now as far as the environmental issues go, the BLM has certain goals they must meet. It's not some guy sitting in his office just sending out some random emails. He has to cater to different environmental and political organizations, and is just trying to balance everything out. Maybe there is Mexican Spotted Owls in the canyon. I have seen two in there in the past 5 years. I dont know if I have disturbed there sex sessions, but obviously someone with higher power believes they need their privacy. Sure there are problems with social trails, trash, and group sizes. They are just trying to get a hold on things.
If you have some constructive suggestions please reply to TJ's post above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tylerhirshfeld

Now as far as the environmental issues go, the BLM has certain goals they must meet. It's not some guy sitting in his office just sending out some random emails. He has to cater to different environmental and political organizations, and is just trying to balance everything out.

---

just to clarify, though perhaps stated in an obnoxious manner for entertainment purposes -

Hmmm, you imply the BLM is the lackey of the environmental movement. Say it ain't so!

It ain't so.

Read the SUWA newletter to get the opposite view - SUWA's newsletter is all about getting the BLM to do their job, or whining about how they don't.

The BLM has obligations under the endangered species act to protect the habitat of the Spotted Owls. Yes, the environmental groups keep pressure on the BLM to do their job, in that category.

The guy in the office, like many guys in offices, has to cater to his boss, who caters to his boss, who caters... you get the idea. But the environmental groups put pressure on some of those bosses - but is not THEIR boss. (That's us!)

Tom :moses:

I think a starting point would be to designate one particular entry into the canyon.

Sign addresses:

group size
this "is" a technical canyon
litter is a problem(pack it in pack it out)

The problem with regulation will come down to enforcement and if the BLM has the budget for it.

I really hate to see any signage, but the area has become a problem.

During the ACA's rendezvous there are often large groups(over 12) that go through, simply because some fail to get permit's in the park and Birch is an easy, no permit required, canyon.

I've never witnessed the scout groups as large as what Tyler has seen, but they are most likely the worst offender in group size and litter.

I would suggest minor regulation and adapt, as is needed. First issue would have to be private group size.

I don't see the guides as a problem, they are already regulated and it serves their best interest to keep group sizes down(quality of trip)

Also serves their interest to keep the canyon clean and I imagine they collectively haul out more garbage than the private sector combined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldno7

I think a starting point would be to designate one particular entry into the canyon.

---

Thank you Kurt.

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratagonia

just to clarify, though perhaps stated in an obnoxious manner for entertainment purposes -

Hmmm, you imply the BLM is the lackey of the environmental movement. Say it ain't so!

It ain't so.

Read the SUWA newletter to get the opposite view - SUWA's newsletter is all about getting the BLM to do their job, or whining about how they don't.

The BLM has obligations under the endangered species act to protect the habitat of the Spotted Owls. Yes, the environmental groups keep pressure on the BLM to do their job, in that category.

The guy in the office, like many guys in offices, has to cater to his boss, who caters to his boss, who caters... you get the idea. But the environmental groups put pressure on some of those bosses - but is not THEIR boss. (That's us!)

Tom :moses:

---

Yes, Thanks Tom for clarifying. Gotta love how the government works.

My intention was not to start a riot, though it was kinda entertaining reading through the "other" thread.

The sign should specify that the canyon is home to an endangered species to help folks understand why they may want to comply with any posted restrictions.

Ken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldno7

I think a starting point would be to designate one particular entry into the canyon.

---

I think there is room for more than one entry point. The KEY is, entry points should have minimal to zero environmental impact. The road entry has minimal to zero impact, as does the down-the-drainage route. The descent down the steep slope is down a scree slope, with not much visual or environmental damage.

Please do not cut around the first rappel. Do the rappel.

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratagonia

I think there is room for more than one entry point. The KEY is, entry points should have minimal to zero environmental impact. The road entry has minimal to zero impact, as does the down-the-drainage route. The descent down the steep slope is down a scree slope, with not much visual or environmental damage.

Please do not cut around the first rappel. Do the rappel.

Tom

---

My point about using only one entry was to have the BLM erect only one sign.

Suggestions for signage:

Plan and Prepare
Birch Hollow is a technical canyon requiring use of ropes and technical climbing gear.
Schedule your trip to avoid times of high use.
Visit in small groups. Split larger parties into groups of 4-6.
Prepare for extreme weather, hazards, and emergencies.
Use a map and compass (or GPS) to eliminate the use of rock cairns or flagging.
Travel on durable surfaces which include established trails and canyon bottoms.

Dispose of Waste Properly
Pack it in, pack it out.

Respect Wildlife
Observe wildlife from a distance. Do not follow or approach them.
Never feed animals. Feeding wildlife damages their health, alters natural behaviors, and exposes them to predators and other dangers.
Avoid wildlife during sensitive times: mating, nesting, raising young.

Be Considerate of Other Visitors
Respect other visitors and protect the quality of their experience.
Be courteous. Yield to other faster canyoneers on the route.
Let nature's sounds prevail. Avoid loud voices and noises.


And with that being said.... The biggest problem Birch has is the permit system in Zion.... if groups fail to get a Zion permit they start looking for the next best option.... if Birch becomes regulated it will just put a lot more pressure on the next best option....

If social trails are an issue I recommend flagging a preferred trail for a year or two until it becomes established and the others have been reclaimed.

anyhoo.... that's my 2 cents. :cool2:

Also, scratching on the walls is a problem in there. How about:

"Scratching or carving names or messages into the canyon walls detracts from the beauty that other people come here to see. It is vandalism. Write your name in the sand, if you must, but do not carve up the walls. Leave the canyon as you find it."

Tom

Tom great point not sure if any of you have been down Mystery at all but that canyon is in the park and there was a bunch of arrows scratched into every walk around trail in the upper canyon where there was a small drop or optional rappel. Also which i was very disappointed at was on the Mystery springs rap on the large boulder toward the bottom someone spent a lot of time scratching in " JOHN USE OTHER BOLT" or whatever the guys name was. In huge letters right as you are standing on the boulder. Also followed with 4 or 5 arrows pointing to the sling under the large bolder. What a bunch of Jack ass's.

I have only done Birch once and we entered right at the NF road. ICE makes a good point, when you cant get a permit in the park Birch or Boundary are really the only other close canyons and Boundary is out of most peoples leagues so they do Birch. There is also that snake alley canyon but is really short, and most people aren't going to drive out to polygamist town to go do water canyon.

Hmmm... It seems to me if the bigger groups just let the smaller groups pass them up this whole situation could be resolved without the need for BLM intervention. I got behind a big group once in Yankee Doodle and it sucked ass. Good thing it's such a short canyon.

I also think there should be places that large groups of boy scouts should be able to go. Birch canyon sounds like the optimal place. I have never noticed trash or scratchings in there and would just pack it out if I saw it. Also did Water Canyon yesterday and besides a single apple core in one of the potholes it was flawless. I guess though it only takes one jerk to screw it up for the rest of us.

you didn't do water canyon with a group of 5 did you. My buddy Harold took a group down water canyon yesterday and they were from St George.

__

I see scout bashing continues to be alive and well. Well, here goes. I see no problem with large-ish groups, scouts or otherwise. I have canyoneered with groups of 20+ or so on a few occasions. We had a great time and we were efficient in the canyons. I have a group of 15 or so right now in my Venture group. Who do I tell to stay home? Obviously Zion is out of the question. So yes, as Ice said, Birch will get pressure on it due to Zion's arbitrary permit system. As I see it, impact is a function of many things including leadership, group make-up, skill, ethics, training, respect, etc. If you put a quota of 50 people in a canyon on a given day, what is wrong with a group of 50? With proper gear, leadership and skill along with canyon ethics, 50 pairs of boots on the ground is 50 pairs of boots whether it is 10 groups of five or one group of 50. I see the worst offenders as poorly trained leaders leading even less trained people, young reckless and invincible young adults, and those who lack respect for "wilderness". I have seen plenty of groups of 3 or 4 who are terribly messy, don't know how to extend rappels to avoid groves and so on. One poor rope pull by 25 groups of two is much worse than one poor rope pull of a group of 50. So in defense of scouts and scout leaders who try to teach ethics, skill, and who focus on good leadership and respect for our beautiful world, I say, quit generalizing. Scouts are an easy target. But what many describe is not what scouting teaches. It is, again, a function of poor leadership, skill and training, just the same as any group who damages the environment, makes too much noise...etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iceaxe

Suggestions for signage:

Plan and Prepare
Birch Hollow is a technical canyon requiring use of ropes and technical climbing gear.
Schedule your trip to avoid times of high use.
Visit in small groups. Split larger parties into groups of 4-6.
Prepare for extreme weather, hazards, and emergencies.
Use a map and compass (or GPS) to eliminate the use of rock cairns or flagging.
Travel on durable surfaces which include established trails and canyon bottoms.

Dispose of Waste Properly
Pack it in, pack it out.

Respect Wildlife
Observe wildlife from a distance. Do not follow or approach them.
Never feed animals. Feeding wildlife damages their health, alters natural behaviors, and exposes them to predators and other dangers.
Avoid wildlife during sensitive times: mating, nesting, raising young.

Be Considerate of Other Visitors
Respect other visitors and protect the quality of their experience.
Be courteous. Yield to other faster canyoneers on the route.
Let nature's sounds prevail. Avoid loud voices and noises.


anyhoo.... that's my 2 cents. :cool2:

---

:2thumbs: I think this is a really good starting place. I would add somewhere in there that it is a privilege to be in such a beautiful area and it is our duty to pass that same beauty on to future generations. I would also add that posting of messages in any form (notes, scratches, etc.) is unacceptable. Don't leave ropes, hand lines or other gear in the canyon. It is generally not considered a "nice" gesture to leave gear for the next group. Also, perhaps an advisory that this canyon tends to have high volume use and to play nice with each other, in other words, make it more clear that this is a high use canyon. No one should expect to have the place to themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scott Card

I see scout bashing continues to be alive and well. Well, here goes. I see no problem with large-ish groups, scouts or otherwise. I have canyoneered with groups of 20+ or so on a few occasions. We had a great time and we were efficient in the canyons. I have a group of 15 or so right now in my Venture group. Who do I tell to stay home? Obviously Zion is out of the question. So yes, as Ice said, Birch will get pressure on it due to Zion's arbitrary permit system. As I see it, impact is a function of many things including leadership, group make-up, skill, ethics, training, respect, etc. If you put a quota of 50 people in a canyon on a given day, what is wrong with a group of 50? With proper gear, leadership and skill along with canyon ethics, 50 pairs of boots on the ground is 50 pairs of boots whether it is 10 groups of five or one group of 50. I see the worst offenders as poorly trained leaders leading even less trained people, young reckless and invincible young adults, and those who lack respect for "wilderness". I have seen plenty of groups of 3 or 4 who are terribly messy, don't know how to extend rappels to avoid groves and so on. One poor rope pull by 25 groups of two is much worse than one poor rope pull of a group of 50. So in defense of scouts and scout leaders who try to teach ethics, skill, and who focus on good leadership and respect for our beautiful world, I say, quit generalizing. Scouts are an easy target. But what many describe is not what scouting teaches. It is, again, a function of poor leadership, skill and training, just the same as any group who damages the environment, makes too much noise...etc.

---

The specific issue in Birch is with the Owls.

The suspicion of the Owl People is that a long period of disturbance will freak the owls out -- so, a disturbance (group of 5), then a quiet period, disturbance, quiet, disturbance, quiet is considered more desirable than the same total amount of disturbance in one continuous burst.

I'm not saying I subscribe to the theory - just saying what the theory is.

Tom :moses:

Kinda the same theory the hospital subscribes to.... "Now try and get some sleep while I poke, prod and check you every 10 minutes and then go clickity clickity click on the computer next to your bed while entering my notes of my poking, prodding and checking." :haha:

Thanks for the clarification.

__