Permanent Anchors Don't Belong In Wilderness

by: George Nickas -  Wilderness Watch, Missoula MT

Wilderness is defined in the Act as "an area where the Earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man...retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements...which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions...."  The Act goes on to state that "except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act...there shall be no...structure or installation within any such area." (emphasis added).  The installation of permanent fixed anchors or any other structure clearly violates these basic tenets of Wilderness law.

It has been suggested by some that climbing routes employing permanent fixed anchors are nothing more than "vertical" trails on par, legally, with other constructed trails in the Wilderness.  However, there are clear differences.  Trails that are determined by the agency to be necessary for administering the Wilderness are allowed, under the exception in the law noted above, but personally constructed routes, bolted or otherwise, are not.  In other words, just as a casual hiker or horseback rider can't build his/her own trail in the Wilderness, neither can a climber.  Imagine the condition of our Wildernesses if everyone could do otherwise.

Others will argue that a ban on permanent anchors will make it so climbers will never (or never again) be able to ascend some mountain peaks.  That might be so.  Maybe some areas will be left to the birds, spiders, bats, mosses and lichens that are better equipped to be there.  When approaching a climb, each person will have to decide whether to attempt a particular route based on their own desire, level of skill and degree of risk he/she is willing to accept.  But the "right to access" argument begs another question:  What of the thousands who still won't be able to scale the peak even with fixed anchors?  Should they be allowed additional structures to get them to the top?  Maybe a headframe with pulleys, slings and rope for starters.  It's worth noting that when Congress made a specific exception in the Americans With Disabilities Act to allow disabled persons to use wheelchairs in Wilderness, it  also made it clear that managers were not to "construct any facilities or modify any conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such use."  Contrast this approach with the demands that climbers deserve special facilities and the right to modify Wilderness lands.

It's also worth pointing out that fixed anchors are only one of several exceptions now being sought by recreation interests using Wilderness Areas.  Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) is pushing a bill for commercial outfitters that would grant them the right to establish permanent camps with permanent structures in Wilderness.  Hiking groups in Washington and Oregon are opposing limits on visitor use and have succeeded in getting a local Congressman to insert language in the Forest Service's appropriations bill telling the agency that it can not manage Wilderness to protect solitude.  An amendment was added to the recently passed national transportation bill (ISTEA) that will give motorboaters more access to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, while helicopter-tourism companies wanting to haul time-strapped tourists into remote Alaska Wildernesses are seeking the same.  In every case, as in the controversy over rock bolting, these groups argue that the Wilderness Act is being implemented too strictly, that their use is an "historic use" and that they should be allowed to use the Wilderness in a manner unchanged.  Where does it end?

"Wilderness" as Roderick Nash has written, "requires restraint."  In 1964, the American public agreed to restrain some uses on these lands in order to secure the remnants of our wild heritage.  Now it is up to those who use and love Wilderness to practice some restraint.  A ban on the use of permanent anchors will not eliminate climbing.  Rather, it will ensure that climbing is done in a manner that upholds both the spirit and letter of the Wilderness law.  As an editor of Climbing magazine recently mused of the impact of such a ban, "We'd be required to tread lightly; we'd be turned back more often.  We'd be forced to experience the mountains as if we were the first climbers there."

Yes, experienced as Wilderness.

George Nickas, Policy Coordinator
Wilderness Watch
Box 9175
Missoula, Montana  59807
406/ 542-2048
wild@wildernesswatch.org

This document was placed onto the web by Wild Wilderness.  To learn more about ongoing industry-backed congressional efforts to motorize, commercialize, and privatize America's public lands, contact:

Scott Silver, Executive Director,
Wild Wilderness
248 NW Wilmington Avenue,  Bend  OR 97701
Phone (541) 385-5261    E-mail: ssilver@wildwilderness.org