Arches NP Climbing and Canyoneering Management Plan

[Iceaxe]

Arches National Park is beginning work on a management plan to determine what impacts climbing, canyoneering, and associated activities, commercial and noncommercial, have on the park, and to consider how the NPS should further manage or limit those activities. Issues identified to date include effects on natural and cultural resources, increase in use levels, the development of new routes, use of fixed hardware, designation of climbing/canyoneering routes, development of approach trails, visual impacts and the effects of climbing/canyoneering on visitor safety and experiences.

A climbing/canyoneering management planning effort will consider a full range of alternatives to protect resources, visitors and visitor experience while providing for recreational climbing activities. This plan will comply with the Organic Act of 1916, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Arches National Park General Management Plan, and Wilderness Act of 1964. Arches National Park will seek to involve as many individuals as possible who have an interest in or concerns about climbing activities at Arches.

The NPS encourages public participation throughout the NEPA process during which the public has two opportunities to formally comment on the project; once during initial project scoping and again following release of the Environmental Assessment. We are currently in the scoping phase of this project, and I invite you to voice your ideas, comments, or concerns in this effort. These comments will be considered during preparation of the Environmental Assessment.

To submit a comment, please review the scoping brochure by clicking on "Open for Public Comment" on the lefthand side of this screen to access the document.

Contact Information
Sabrina Henry, Planning and Compliance Coordinator
sabrina_henry@nps.gov
435-719-2135

And here is a link to the Actual document
Public Scoping Brochure

The brochure is in PDF format.

[Iceaxe]

And the part that is of interest to all canyoneers is the discussion of a permit system. Now would be a good time to send the park a nice short letter on your thoughts about a permit system and/or anything else that you consider important.

Issues/Alternatives
The following are some additional issues that have been identified through internal and preliminary project scoping:
• Continue with current management
• Define Arches NP climbing ethics
• Sport climbing
• Establishment of new routes via a permit system
• Establish trail systems to and through routes
• Commerical guiding for rock climbing and canyoneering
• Establish use levels for each activity via a permit system
• Bouldering
• Installation/Replacement of bolts, anchors, and software
• Rock grooving
• Group size limits
• Rescue considerations

It might be a good idea to toss around a few ideas or post a couple sample letters for comment to the forum if anyone has some free time to write something up (my time is really limited for the next few weeks). Maybe dust off a few of the old Zion letters regarding the permit system for thoughts.

The one thing I'm certian of is that if canyoneers present a united front with reasonable thoughts and suggestions our voice is more likely to be heard.

My basic thought is everyone should write a letter stating how a permit system detracts from your experience, how you have never considered crowding to be an issue in the Arches backcountry and how a permit system eats up valuable park resources in maintaining and management that you would prefer to see spent on more important projects.

[jman]

If something was to be implemented or decided, what's the timeframe on that?

Like 2011? 2012???

[Iceaxe]

The public scoping period is open from July 12 - August 10, 2010.... so start writing....

This is the first of two comment periods.... I've noticed anything that makes it to the second comment period is pretty much written in stone.... the first comment period is when all the spit balling is done and the best time to make your voice heard.... or at least that has been my past experiance in these dealings...

[Iceaxe]

Anther thought..... consider the nightmare involved if the Lost Springs area was included in a permit system.... a 70 to 80 mile drive each way over a lot of rough dirt roads to pick up a permit....

Yeah.... that sounds fun...

[Iceaxe]

I'm giving this a BUMP....

Folk's really need to spend a few minutes and write a letter so we do not end up with a permit system similar to the trainwreak in Zion.

[moab mark]

I just went in and followed the steps to send in comments and it just kept sending me around in a circle? Has anyone been able to send in a comment electronically?

There is also a management plan discussing Desert Highlight reapplying for a permit.

[Don]

Sounds like they are set on implementing a managment plan. Have you made suggestions about ways you think a management plan could work better than Zion's plan? Or are you just completely opposed to any permit plan? Given the popularity of canyons like Mystery, Pine Creek and the Subway do you see any benefit in the Zion permit system?

[Iceaxe]

OK... first off I just contacted the park about the "continual do loop" their website runs you through. I'll post the info of where to email your letter when I get.

If you want to snail mail a letter it goes here:

National Park Service
Attention: Planning and Compliance
2282 S. West Resource Blvd
Moab, UT 84532

The future of Commercial guiding will be addressed under the new management plan. If I'm reading the arches website correctly the permit for Desert Highlights appears to be an open request for their licence renewal. Matt can probably provide more info and guidance if he would like help from the canyoneering community.

I don't know the exact rules.... but each NP is required to review and update their management plan every so often.

Climbing became a bullseye on the parks radar after Dean Potters climb of Delicate Arch and slack line over the Gossips. This is the fall out from those stunts. Canyoneering got scooped up and tossed in with climbing because the park feels they should be addressed as a unit.

[renshiwo]

Sorry I didn't realize that this thread was here! I've just included the link.

Please review the brochure and submit your comment online at the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) website: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/arch

[moab mark]

Sorry I didn't realize that this thread was here! I've just included the link.

Please review the brochure and submit your comment online at the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) website: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/arch

Hijack, hey non prego chic- Rebecca did you have a boy or girl? Hope all is well.

Have you got the inside track on what the park service is going to do to us poor canyoneers?

Mark

[Iceaxe]

Hijack, hey non prego chic- Rebecca

I didn't realize who renshiwo was.... but now the avatar makes perfect sense.

[Iceaxe]

Here is the DIRECT link to comment on the Arches Climbing and Canyoneering Management plan:

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentId=35115

Please take a minute to post your concerns.

[Don]

Sounds like they are set on implementing a managment plan. Have you made suggestions about ways you think a management plan could work better than Zion's plan? Or are you just completely opposed to any permit plan? Given the popularity of canyons like Mystery, Pine Creek and the Subway do you see any benefit in the Zion permit system?

...

[Iceaxe]

Each National Park is required to have a management plan and keep it updated.... so "YES" the management plan is a done deal.....

One of the options open to the park is to continue with their current management plan. But after the Dean Potter stunts I don't see that happening.

Below are my personal opinions. Feel free to use ideas from the list below when making your own comments.

I oppose any additional permit system outside of the one currently in place with regards to the Fiery Furnace.

Permit systems are the greatest single obstruction to a pleasurable National Park experience. The bureaucratic requirements of the permit system are not conducive to enjoyable recreation. Standing in permit lines and dealing with the logistics of obtaining a permit place an unnecessary burden on the user that has a negative impact on visiting a National Park.

Climbers and canyoneers are not your typical tourists and often operate outside the normal hours of the visitor center, which make obtaining a permit problematic.

The establishment of use levels will do nothing to enhance my park experience. I have enjoyed Arches backcountry for many years and have never considered crowding or over use to be an issue off the tourist trails.

It has been my experience that administration of a permit system uses up valuable resources in money and manpower to operate that could be put to better use.

Poorly run or poorly executed permit systems often create friction between users and rangers turning the two groups into antagonists instead of partners.

Group size should be limited to a maximum of 12 and smaller groups encouraged. Smaller groups move faster with less impact.

I oppose commercial guiding inside Arches National Park. There are extensive areas outside of Arches that are currently available for commercial guiding.

Here is the parks bullet list:

o Continue with current management
o Define Arches NP climbing ethics
o Sport climbing
o Establishment of new routes via a permit system
o Establish trail systems to and through routes
o Commerical guiding for rock climbing and canyoneering
o Establish use levels for each activity via a permit system
o Bouldering
o Installation/Replacement of bolts, anchors, and software
o Rock grooving
o Group size limits
o Rescue considerations

Comment on the items you feel impact or are important to you.

Post your comments here:
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentF...cumentId=35115

[moabmatt]

I oppose commercial guiding inside Arches National Park. There are extensive areas outside of Arches that are currently available for commercial guiding.

Are you for real?

[Iceaxe]

Are you for real?

Sorry Matt, I knew you wouldn't like that.... but I'm not a fan of commercial guiding when privateers have to begin competing against a commercial business for a limited resource (which is what this appears to be heading towards). As a sometimes river rafter I've had to many bad experiences..... outside of that I have nothing against commercial guiding....

[ratagonia]

Sorry Matt, I knew you wouldn't like that.... but I'm not a fan of commercial guiding when privateers have to begin competing against a commercial business for a limited resource (which is what this appears to be heading towards). As a sometimes river rafter I've had to many bad experiences..... outside of that I have nothing against commercial guiding....

I hope many people in the Canyoneering community are more generous than Shane Burrows.

Tom

[Iceaxe]

Hey.... I truly feel sorry for Matt and his permit problems. If it were just Matt and his permit I'd be all for it. But the other commercial outfitters are already lining up hoping for a concession to guide in Arches. If someone can point out positive reasons to void my concerns I'll be happy to change my opinion..... The park asked "for my opinion" and I told them. It was the same response I gave during the last Zion Scoping with regards to guiding. Feel free to express your opinion in your letter to the park.

[moabmatt]

Sorry Matt, I knew you wouldn't like that.... but I'm not a fan of commercial guiding when privateers have to begin competing against a commercial business for a limited resource (which is what this appears to be heading towards). As a sometimes river rafter I've had to many bad experiences..... outside of that I have nothing against commercial guiding....

In that case, why not simply tell the NPS that "if a permit system is implemented then I'm against private groups having to compete with commercial groups for limited permits?" The way you state it, you're basically hosing your good buddy Matt! Would you still be against guiding in Arches if there was no competition for permits?

The irony and reality of it is, Shane, that the park service is not happy with the impacts begat from your beta. Plain, simple and true. They do not like the marked increase in visitation and resultant proliferation of social trails, the increase in visual impacts from new fixed anchors, the heinous rope grooves from careless rope anchoring, the increase in search and rescue callouts, etc. So far this year there have been two rescues of private groups in Tierdrop (a broken leg from some guy who didn't know how to control his rappel and another fella who got his autoblock stuck and couldn't free it on his own - yes, SAR was actually called out to assist someone who didn't know how to disengage his self-belay!) and a near-fatality in Bighorn because someone didn't know how to tie a water knot. Another group a couple years back was led by a leader who got in over his head in Dragonfly and the leader actually prayed to god for the safety of his group! This fella became overwhelmed in this most basic canyon with bombproof fixed anchors with bombproof weather with athletic young men! I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but there is no doubt that the caliber of groups visiting these canyons - and certainly the caliber of leadership of these groups - has gone waaay down as a result of your beta. Believe me, this is what most concerns the NPS right now. Yes, there was another guide service requesting a permit that gave the NPS some pause, but this service was using your beta. And we've seen this other service in the other canyons using your beta. I'm sorry if I sound sour regarding your website beta service, but the reality is that it's f'ing up the park and our business.

Finally, saying that there are "extensive areas" outside the park available for guiding makes it clear you've not applied for a permit to guide on public lands. Yes, there is a lot of BLM land near Moab, but with all the strictly managed designated WSAs (Wilderness Study Areas), ACECs (Areas of Critical Environmental Concern), NSO areas (Non-Surface Occupancy), spotted owl habitat, raptor nesting sites, nesting seasons, bighorn lambing seasons and so on, there are few canyons where permits are readily issued or where guiding isn't significantly restricted. In canyons we are able to get permits for it's not uncommon to have significant restrictions on group sizes, frequency of trips and even whole seasons where guiding is not allowed. The most recent canyon we received permits for is off-limits from April 1st to August 31st. Great, we've got basically three workable months to guide that canyon. By the way, none of these restrictions are imposed on private groups. So what it boils down to is that despite Moab being surrounded by these seemingly less-regulated public lands (BLM and FS) there really aren't the "extensive areas" you mention available to make guiding very viable. And the bottom line for us is that, while there are canyons outside the park, we simply love guiding in Arches. The park is convenient to Moab and the canyons there are great. Losing those canyons for no good reason is really hurting us, both financially and emotionally.

So, as long as you continue to post beta of - and make money from - the canyons inside the park, we'd appreciate it if you can find it in your heart to show a little more support of us guides who love providing safe, enjoyable, low-impact experiences in those canyons to visitors who are not a part of your little circle of friends.