From Thomas, July 28, 2008:
I was reviewing the master plan that is posted on the Internet. I'm curious. Rock Climbing isn't really mentioned too much as far as I can find. From what I understand, this is an activity that is frowned upon in any Denver Mountain Park. Am I correct in my understanding of that? If so, why is that the case. It seems like a popular activity in Denver.
Reply from Susan Baird, planner:
Thank you for your letter. We’ll share it with the Master Plan community Advisory Group for discussion, post it for others to read, and keep it on record.
Not many specific activities or sports (rock climbing, dogs off leash, etc.) were discussed in length in the plan. However, using the criteria on page 58, we evaluated each mountain park and parcel against its original intent and character (public access or not, passive use or not, quality of natural resources, etc.) to recommend any new use. Some places take further study (such as raptor studies) which is noted in the plan. What we found overall, especially in the context of other adjacent open space systems that are larger and better funded, was that primarily how Denver Mountain Parks are used today fits their size, their purpose, protection of their resources, and complements other systems. For example, we know that hikers wishing to avoid mountain bicyclists visit the Denver Mountain Parks while Jefferson County Open Space parks accommodate the bicyclists. The Advisory Group and team reaffirmed that the priority for the system is preservation of the natural and cultural resources, with a balance of primarily passive recreation.
In terms of rock climbing, for example, the rock cliffs and faces that have potential for rock climbing were originally purchased to preserve views and the land, and not for recreation. That is why most of them are surrounded by private property and do not provide public access. We do not encourage trespass across private land to reach a Denver Mountain Park conservation area and have no plans to purchase any access to these conservation sites.
Rock climbing is a growing sport with enthusiastic participants. The Plan notes that Denver has a controlled property, Newton Park, just off of Highway 285 near Conifer with the potential for permitted rock climbing for the public which we will explore. And we felt that Stanton State Park, opening in the near future, will accommodate rock climbing demand. In essence, the Master Plan team believes that their small size, the lack of access, and their primary purpose as protection eliminate the DMP rock faces for climbing. We would love to work with the climbing community on rock climbing at Newton Park and any future studies. Thank you.
11 comments:
As a member of the climbing community, I am very curious about why an effort has not been made to work with climbers to create a mutually benificial relationship. Throughout the master plan, the need to encourage more users is a common theme, as is creating working relationships with user groups. Eldorado canyon, Lumpy ridge and North Table Mountain(Golden cliffs) are examples of places where climbers commonly organize trail work and cleanup days.
It’s just hard for me to understand why climbing, or any other form of harmless recreation would be prohibited on public land.
Especially since Denver is publicly pro rock climbing. It doesn't seem right to advertise rock climbing on the front page of the city's website, http://www.denver.org/) then tell people the can't climb in a public park because "the rock cliffs and faces that have potential for rock climbing were originally purchased to preserve views and the land, and not for recreation." Isn’t it public land maintained out of money raised from the public? Wasn't it purchased with public money? Shouldn’t the public have access to it?
The current response from the DMP is unacceptable. The people that have lived in these mountains for many decades will continue to press for their right to freedom of expression.
"the rock cliffs and faces that have potential for rock climbing were originally purchased to preserve views and the land, and not for recreation."
While this new stance from DMP has been offered, it should be noted that surrounding private development with no connection to Dvr is allowed to ingress & recreate within these lands without fear of prosecution, excepting motorized use.
It should also be noted that prohibiting a pro-conservation group that has the ability to manage technical terrain only serves to promote those that wish to harm the surrounding areas & our communities, such as our meth problem, a more ready opportunity move in without much resistance or fear of repercussion.
You will be able to learn more about what is going on in our mountains from the Mountain Project website; which is a community of responsible climbers that care about conservation, education, & climber safety.
We will be more than willing to help develop a responsible guideline & help develop inventory; but, until the stance for arresting climbers in the mountains of Colorado with punishment of 180 days in jail & $999 fine for climbing on rocks is eliminated, there is nothing more to discuss.
Mark Nelson
It seems to me that Thomas and Ryan are right. Denver has a large and very active climbing community who often work with park rangers and other officials to improve access for all groups; such activities include helping with path maintenance, cleaning up trash after other groups, and when possible working with park officials to determine other access issues and assist in remediation those issues.
I know that climbers are not the only active group, but as Thomas mentioned Denver parks are purchased and maintained with our tax money just as much as any other group. I'd like to see our parks open to all active groups provided they are willing to work with officials to address legitimate access issues.
i appreciate DMP's comments that seem to address climber concerns that what may be true or advisable for one parcel may not be appropriate for another. however, as to the concept of preserving 'viewsheds', the concern from the climbing community parallels those popular attacks on conservation easement legislation that these 'viewsheds' often only benefit those residents who live adjacent to them. certainly i agree that it is important to preserve natural areas, but when recreation is allowed in an area, it does not make sense to outlaw certain activities such as climbing, when such use does not directly conflict with the use and enjoyment of other recreational pursuits.
again, i understand that broad-brush policy is not appropriate in most cases. for instance, i agree that climbing is not appropriate within the bounds of red rocks where intoxicated concert goers would be inclined to follow suit...
however, where climbing exists within extremely close proximity to established and 'official' trails, and where climbing will not directly conflict with the usage of other groups, it is inexcusable to except it.
solution? climbers are usually more than happy to consult and meet with land managers, do walk-throughs, and come to logical resolutions on access and stewardship issues relating to the outdoor areas that we know and love.
not all climbing is the same... some involves climbing on boulders well hidden in the trees, which would have slim to no impact on the preservation of a viewshed. in sensitive areas, climbers and other users have demonstrated their willingness to adhere to seasonal closures and similar preventative measures.
unfortunately, a suggestion that having a couple token parks in which climbing is allowed is sufficient will not quell the tide of climbers upset at the DMP's historically restrictive policies. this would be like telling joggers that they can only jog in a couple parks under the DMP's jurisdiction. or, telling bird watchers that they may only view birds in a couple parks.
like most outdoor recreation, the unique combination of setting and rock formations makes each place special and therefore, attractive.
let us work with you and pursue common goals.
--justin jaeger
iclimbbigrocks@hotmail.com
From: Lyle (not anonymous,just not a google blogger)
The subject of allowing rock climbing in Denver Mountain Parks is one that is being talked about more and more in the climbing community. I have been compiling information of the various parks where the climbing community has an interest. I purpose that a few areas be made available to climbers as an indication of Denver Mtn. Parks efforts to meet a growing public demand.
The climbing community is increasing. We are evolving our ethics and standards which includes "Leave no Trace" and proper stewardship of the land, trails and roads. I strive to set an example to my fellow climbers about respect for the land and the land owners/managers. More and more the climbers and hikers are participating in road, trail and land maintenance. I am extremely proud of the organizations and the results they produced in the last few years. This is just the beginning. We need to work together so that we both reach our own goals.
Speaking for myself I don't need to climb every cliff in the Denver Mountain Parks however having a small handful of options would make me feel better about the agency and the public working together for a mutually beneficial agreement. The time has come for public talks to be held with Denver Mountain parks and representatives of the climbing community.
Thank You Susan for your responses and efforts, I appreciate the accomplishments that Denver Mountain Parks has provided for the public over the years. Lyle G.
"In terms of rock climbing, for example, the rock cliffs and faces that have potential for rock climbing were originally purchased to preserve views and the land, and not for recreation. That is why most of them are surrounded by private property and do not provide public access. We do not encourage trespass across private land to reach a Denver Mountain Park conservation area and have no plans to purchase any access to these conservation sites."
So the owners of the land get to use this park that tax payers in denver paid for. No wander they like your plan keep everybody out and we have our own park and people in denver will pay for it. Sounds like a plan to me.
It seems that the only consideration regarding rock climbing is that it '...can have negative impacts on the natural or cultural resources of the system, such as rock climbing on the rocky outcrops on Mount Judge where raptors nest.' A potential nuisance activity to be lumped in with 'walking dogs off leash' [editorial suggestion: perhaps comparing rock climbing to 'walking Pit Bulls off leash' would suggest the true menace to society that climbers represent...]
Ahem.
Listen - there is a vibrant community of conservation-minded climbers in Denver. You are painting with a broad brush by outlawing climbing for all but a handful of rocks.
-Greg German
Ms. Baird
First, I would like to point out that I am high schooler and out of the people who posted, I will be most affected by this ban of rock climbing.
"Develop active recreation such as rock climbing at other
parks to protect sensitive rock faces in the Conservation/
Wilderness Parks." This qoute from the master plan suggests that you are devoloping rock climbing at other parks. What I want to know is where I can climb this weekend where I wont get a $999 fine and six months in jail. Because I really need to finish high school.
Also, it seems this website is based off of the concept of getting more money instead of actually listening to the public. In every response that I have read from the planner, there are complaints about not having enough money and bieng too small. Furthermore, I do not understand why you do not work with the Access Fund, who has the resources to help preserve the rock and trails.
Oh yes, and I thank you for considering me equal to a dog. My social status has been raised significantly.
-Brent
So, is this going to post? I have heard rumors that you guys like to not post comments negative towards "The Cause".
As citizen/taxpayer/homeowner in Denver I find this response flippant and outrageous. Grouping an inherent mountain activity like climbing with "dogs off leash" is absolutely ridiculous. As far as access goes, easements and rights of way are long standing solutions of which you must surely be aware. You are not taking this seriously. I encourage other Denver residents to do what I have and contact your city council member. We obviously need to work with people who will listen.
I strongly agree with Justin Jaeger's post.
Most climbers are more than willing to work hand in hand with the land management for these areas and secure access in a responsible and low-impact way.
To not include climbing as a recognized use for parks that are specifically designed to allow recreation opportunities to Denver residents seems incoherant.
We understand the need for closure due to raptor nesting, or the need to establish clear trails for cliff access. However, to close all of the parks to climbing due to these concerns is unacceptable.
Let us all work together so that we can find a solution that will work on all sides.
Matt Miller
Situner@aol.com
Denver Climbers Coalition
Post a Comment