Debate over wilderness rock climbing at center of federal review

The U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service have proposed national guidance for anchors fixed on rocks across wilderness areas — a point of increased concern among climbers and conservation advocates in recent years.

In an article early this year titled "A War on Wilderness Climbing?" the sport's national leader in advocacy, Boulder-based Access Fund, emphasized that some of America's most accomplished climbers have also been some of its greatest wilderness champions. The article viewed the connection "under serious threat" by federal land managers' review of fixed anchors in designated wilderness.

Under threat are thousands of routes, including along the iconic likes of El Capitan in Yosemite National Park and the Diamond in Rocky Mountain National Park, said Access Fund's interim executive director, Erik Murdock.

New report quantifies economic power of outdoor recreation in Colorado

The Forest Service and National Park Service have issued two proposals regarding bolts or pitons or other gear placed as "protection" for clipping into ascents, descents and traverses.

The proposals "both speak to the same general themes," Murdock said. "The primary theme is that the agencies are switching from the presumption that fixed anchors are appropriate and legal and can be managed to they are prohibited. This is a major paradigm shift."

Fixed anchors were described as "prohibited installations" in a 2022 planning document out of Joshua Tree National Park. The language suggested an infraction of the 1964 Wilderness Act, which calls for "no structure or installation" in designated wilderness. Following Joshua Tree, Access Fund saw similar language emerge in planning for Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park, the historic climbing destination in western Colorado.

Thus followed the government's review of the equipment, while debate continued over the stated stance of Access Fund and several other climbing advocates: "that conditional use of fixed anchors is an historic activity that is fundamentally allowed in wilderness areas."

In their recent management proposal, the Forest Service and National Park Service confirmed the rightful place of climbing.

It "has long been an important and historically relevant form of primitive or unconfined recreation consistent with the wilderness character of many wilderness areas," the Forest Service proposal reads.

It adds: "The placement of a fixed anchor or fixed equipment does not necessarily impair the future enjoyment of wilderness or violate the Wilderness Act, but the establishment of bolt-intensive climbing opportunities may be incompatible with the preservation of wilderness character."

For new and existing anchors, that compatibility should be determined under "a Minimum Requirement Analysis, as funding and resources allow," both agency proposals suggest.

That's a scientific, in-depth analysis that would determine such "minimums" as bolts "providing outstanding opportunities for primitive or unconfined recreation," as listed as an example, or "directing climbers" in a way that "protects sensitive resources such as cultural resources or nesting bird habitat."

For your bucket list: 8 of the best 'destination hikes' across Colorado's state parks

The proposed guidance "will help provide a consistent process for installing new or replacing existing fixed anchors," National Park Service Director Chuck Sams said in a statement, and "ensure that we are managing these important areas for the benefit of current and future generations."

But climbing advocates see a Minimum Requirement Analysis as lumping their sport into the same category as buildings and roads — "installations" the Wilderness Act sought to block, they say, not climbing. They continue to push for access through federal legislation called Protect America's Rock Climbing Act.

Wilderness advocates have opposed the legislation.

Fixed anchors represent "the proverbial crack in the armor for wilderness," read a letter earlier this year signed by more than 40 wildlife and conservation organizations nationwide.

Permanent bolts and pitons, the letter said, "degrade wilderness character through lasting signs of human development and by attracting and concentrating use in sensitive landscapes." Allowing them "would take the extraordinary measure of weakening the 1964 Wilderness Act," the conservation groups claimed, only "to appease the climbing preferences of a narrow constituency of recreationists."

The letter referred to division among climbers over the matter. It quoted George Ochenski, famed for decades of first ascents, as saying bolting "is bringing sport climbing into the wilderness, and it belongs in the gym or non-wilderness rocks."

Many anchors are simply a matter of safety, from preventing falls, proponents have countered.

275-acre Colorado mountain land plot to be added to national forest

If deemed damaging or inappropriate, "land managers have the tools to manage them," Murdock said. "If climbing negatively impacts an ecosystem like raptor (nests), or a cultural resource like a petroglyph, the climbing community does not want to be part of those negative impacts."

The proposals are "not about what's going on on the ground," he added. "This is a new ideological argument. It's about a new interpretation of the Wilderness Act."

The Forest Service and National Park Service say they will later finalize policy based on public feedback. Comments can be submitted through a project webpage: https://tinyurl.com/mwrj48dm