Niagara Glen Bouldering Ban Proposed!

[mick]

Below text copied from http://www.ontarioaccesscoalition.com/i ... &Itemid=60

The Niagara Parks Commission has recently released a draft of their Land Management Plan on their website which has a recommendation to eliminate bouldering in the future to reduce environmental impact. http://www.niagaraparksnature.com/Welcome.html

Now is the time, as climbers, to speak up and let the Niagara Parks Commission know that banning bouldering is not the answer. For all those that have had the opportunity to climb at the Glen or wish to in the future, please email your comments or a letter to the following:
Mail to Marika Kozachenko at: enviro@niagaraparks.com
Copy Debra Whitehouse at: dw@niagaraparks.com
Copy Ontario Access Coalition at: webmaster@ontarioaccesscoalition.com

Your comments supporting bouldering must be received before the October 19th, 2008 deadline. Follow the instructions below to use the sample letter. Feel free to include some of your own personal comments. It will only take a few minutes of your time to help preserve access to bouldering at the Glen.

Thanks,
Ontario Access Coalition

Copy and paste the following addresses into your email:
Mail to Marika Kozachenko at: enviro@niagaraparks.com
Copy Debra Whitehouse at: dw@niagaraparks.com
Copy Ontario Access Coalition at: webmaster@ontarioaccesscoalition.com

Copy and paste this into the Subject line of your email:
Concerns about NPC’s Environmental Land Management Plan

Copy and paste the letter below into the body of your email:
Marika Kozachenko
Niagara Parks Commission
P.O.Box 150
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6T2

RE: DRAFT Environmental Land Management Plan

Dear Marika,

I write to state my opposition to the Niagara Park Commission's proposed “Recommendation 11: Eliminate bouldering activities in the Niagara Glen” outlined in the above draft plan. Like all boulderers, I cherish the unique beauty of the Glen and urge the NPC to implement a creative solution to decrease visitor impact while maintaining the access to the Glen that boulderers have enjoyed for more than forty years.

The NPC should not unilaterally close the Niagara Glen before formally adopting a bouldering management plan. Such action is unrealistic because all visitors scramble to some degree on the hundreds of rocks in the Glen and all visitors equally contribute to trail erosion. Furthermore, boulderers are excellent stewards of the environment. At a minimum, you should explore the less severe climbing management prescriptions that have built positive relationships between climbers and managers in other Ontario parks before you ban bouldering.

I am aware that the NPC is reviewing the management of nature trails at the Niagara Glen to minimize the environmental impact of visitors. Clearly marked trails and the removal of some unsanctioned trails would greatly reduce erosion. Access to boulders that are not on existing sanctioned trails should be clearly marked and restrictions to certain areas could be explored before total closure of this area is considered.

Lastly, as a boulderer and outdoor enthusiast, I strive to be an excellent steward of the environment. I maintain leave no trace when visiting the Niagara Glen and pick up trash left by less conscientious visitors. Understanding that improvements and maintenance to the park are expensive, I would consider a user fee to boulder at the Niagara Glen.

I am adamantly opposed to Recommendation 11's elimination of bouldering in the Niagara Glen.

Yours truly,
Last Updated ( Friday, 19 September 2008 )

I spent the summer in Ottawa, and although I never got the chance to climb at Niagara Glen, I heard it was amazing and I hope to go there some day.

I will be writing a letter as President of Climb Nova Scotia in opposition Recommendation 11 and I encourage you all to do the same. Here in Nova Scotia we lost access to the Terrence Bay boulders several years ago and with it some classic lines. Had we acted sooner and addressed the concerns of landowners and regulators earlier, it is possible that we might have saved that area. Let's work together and preserve Niagara Glen for the next generation of climbers to enjoy.

mick

ps. The NPC Environmental Management Plan proposal can be viewed here:
http://www.niagaraparksnature.com/files ... t=Plan.pdf
See page 44 for the Recommendation 11 to "Eliminate bouldering activities in the Niagara Glen"

[martha]

Done.

Fred and I bouldered there during the summer of 2006. It was hot as hell the days we were there, but we still managed to climb a few lines and had a good time. I'd definitely go back climbing there if I were in the area again.

Cara

[granite_grrl]

I hate Ontario.

The problem is I don't understand how you can not allow bouldering? Do you ticket every person/kid/dog scrambling to the top of those boulders? I guess they can be byassed against people carry those funny looking packs down there.

The only thing I can thing I think they can reasonably do is bad chalk, but.....

.....every time I go down there you find a new fire ring, underage kids are frequently drinking down there smashing their bottles, the amount of garbage is horrible (most climbers will haul up at least a bit of garbage too). We've even come accross a syringe down there (scary!).

They can't even stop the unattended fires, drugs and alchol...and they want to go after the climbers...weak!!!

[chossmonkey]

They can't enforce the current rules, so they will just add more.

[*Chris*]

Well...

I read the draft management plan as well as the background research papers cited in the section on bouldering. I've got to say that if I were the manager, I wouldn't be convinced by the letter above. They are clearly approaching this issue from a conservation biology standpoint and it seems that their issue with boulderers is not addressed. The study they cite make a pretty compelling case that climbing in the Niagara Escarpment causes the loss of plant species. That's what the letter should address. Not trail erosion, and not picking up litter that others have left behind. To be honest, if I were serious about maintaining access, I'd rewrite this letter and be prepared to make some stronger cases about why bouldering at the Glen isn't a serious threat to the moss/herb/lichen species which make a home on limestone outcrops.

1) Can it be demonstrated that only a small fraction of the total boulders or crags of the region have developed climbing? If that's the case, then one could argue that there is plenty of other habitats for these types of species.

2) If not, then could the climbing community voluntarily offer to 'retire' some proportion of the developed bouldering and allow it to recuperate to a natural state? A widely accepted (but arbitrary) number of 12% is a common target for protected areas worldwide. Essentially, retiring 12% of the climbing might be what it takes to maintain access to the other 88%.

It is definitely worth mentioning that the research they are basing their decision on actually recommends against closing access! In their paper, they instead propose maintaining the existing access but placing a moratorium on new development. Mentioning that in the letter might help make the case. Finally, since places like this can't ever actually enforce rules themselves... offer to self-police the issue!

I was going to attach the paper... but this won't let me attach a .pdf... too bad. Just message me if you want a copy. It's an interesting read... but it contains multivariate statistics... so be warned!

[chossmonkey]

Good points Chris.

[mick]

I agree that the above sample letter is a bit lacking. I will be writing my own rather than simply forwarding that one. That said, it's better than nothing for those who might not have the ambition to research the issue, yet still wish to support it and seems to be the official response of the Ontario Access Coalition.

I am interested in reading the pdf you found, please post a link or email it to me at micklevin@gmail.com. Also, I looked for "McMillan, M.A. & Larson, D.W. (2002). Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada. Conservation Biology, 16(2), 389-398." and was unable to find a free copy online. Perhaps I will check at my school's university archives. If you find that, I'd be interested too.

cheers
mick

[chossmonkey]

I agree that the above sample letter is a bit lacking. I will be writing my own rather than simply forwarding that one. That said, it's better than nothing for those who might not have the ambition to research the issue, yet still wish to support it and seems to be the official response of the Ontario Access Coalition.

Heh!!

It wouldn't be the third time the OAC really dropped the ball.


A less then perfect letter is still probably better than no letter.

[mick]

Hey Chris,

Thanks very much for passing along that study. After reading it, I'm not terribly surprised by the results. I suspect that much of the plant matter lacking from climbing routes was removed when the route was initially cleaned. The study goes on to mention that it takes upwards of two years for biota to return following the cessation of climbing... I wonder if there would be any point in temporary closure of particular boulders, given those climbing areas would probably get cleaned (with wire brushes and the like) again once reopened.

The closing paragraph is quite telling as the authors "therefore discourage the closure of currently climbed areas in southern Ontario" since doing so would increase "the proliferation of climbing routes in currently unclimbed areas in southern Ontario [with] the potential to cause widespread and long-lasting negative effects... Land managers should instead prohibit the establishment of new climbing routes in both climbed and unclimbed areas."

Hopefully the authorities come to a rational conclusion about Niagara Glen climbing at the end of this. I must say that I personally feel that rubbish, broken glass, fire pits, and erosion are all more harmful to the park, and perhaps easier to address, than a decline in lichen biodiversity.

mick

[granite_grrl]

I agree that the above sample letter is a bit lacking. I will be writing my own rather than simply forwarding that one. That said, it's better than nothing for those who might not have the ambition to research the issue, yet still wish to support it and seems to be the official response of the Ontario Access Coalition.

I am interested in reading the pdf you found, please post a link or email it to me at micklevin@gmail.com. Also, I looked for "McMillan, M.A. & Larson, D.W. (2002). Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada. Conservation Biology, 16(2), 389-398." and was unable to find a free copy online. Perhaps I will check at my school's university archives. If you find that, I'd be interested too.

cheers
mick

Parts of this paper have been discussed on RC.com and the ACC Toronto section newsletter. If I recal the end result was climbers like to climb on vertical to overhanging rock that doesn't start with much in the way of vegitation in the first place (and to add anchors at the top of certain routes to prevent cliff edge erosion). I think McMillan used to post a lot on RC.com under ecocliffchick. I haven't seen her for quite a while.

Much in the same way boulderers like overhanging rock where little to no vegitation tends to grow. The vegitation can keep the slabby, dirty rock.

[*Chris*]

I agree that the above sample letter is a bit lacking. I will be writing my own rather than simply forwarding that one. That said, it's better than nothing for those who might not have the ambition to research the issue, yet still wish to support it and seems to be the official response of the Ontario Access Coalition.

I am interested in reading the pdf you found, please post a link or email it to me at micklevin@gmail.com. Also, I looked for "McMillan, M.A. & Larson, D.W. (2002). Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada. Conservation Biology, 16(2), 389-398." and was unable to find a free copy online. Perhaps I will check at my school's university archives. If you find that, I'd be interested too.

cheers
mick

Parts of this paper have been discussed on RC.com and the ACC Toronto section newsletter. If I recal the end result was climbers like to climb on vertical to overhanging rock that doesn't start with much in the way of vegitation in the first place (and to add anchors at the top of certain routes to prevent cliff edge erosion). I think McMillan used to post a lot on RC.com under ecocliffchick. I haven't seen her for quite a while.

Much in the same way boulderers like overhanging rock where little to no vegitation tends to grow. The vegitation can keep the slabby, dirty rock.

Perhaps... I think she's got several papers. In this particular paper (focus on moderate 5.7-5.9 routes), her conclusions are that there is a clear reduction in species abundances, species go missing on well-travelled areas, and the remaining community composition is changed considerably. Her recommendation to managers is again to place a halt on new route developement... and she clearly recommends against banning existing access. The damage having already been done.

[granite_grrl]

I agree that the above sample letter is a bit lacking. I will be writing my own rather than simply forwarding that one. That said, it's better than nothing for those who might not have the ambition to research the issue, yet still wish to support it and seems to be the official response of the Ontario Access Coalition.

I am interested in reading the pdf you found, please post a link or email it to me at micklevin@gmail.com. Also, I looked for "McMillan, M.A. & Larson, D.W. (2002). Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada. Conservation Biology, 16(2), 389-398." and was unable to find a free copy online. Perhaps I will check at my school's university archives. If you find that, I'd be interested too.

cheers
mick

Parts of this paper have been discussed on RC.com and the ACC Toronto section newsletter. If I recal the end result was climbers like to climb on vertical to overhanging rock that doesn't start with much in the way of vegitation in the first place (and to add anchors at the top of certain routes to prevent cliff edge erosion). I think McMillan used to post a lot on RC.com under ecocliffchick. I haven't seen her for quite a while.

Much in the same way boulderers like overhanging rock where little to no vegitation tends to grow. The vegitation can keep the slabby, dirty rock.

Perhaps... I think she's got several papers. In this particular paper (focus on moderate 5.7-5.9 routes), her conclusions are that there is a clear reduction in species abundances, species go missing on well-travelled areas, and the remaining community composition is changed considerably. Her recommendation to managers is again to place a halt on new route developement... and she clearly recommends against banning existing access. The damage having already been done.

Its also possible that it was a different study and/or the fluffist parts of it were pulled out for the ACC newletter.

I'll do some digging tomorrow and see if I can find those two sources I seem to remember.

[granite_grrl]

Okay, aparently I was remembering things wrong. Except her user name on RC.com, that let me track down the right story. Oh, and it was talked about in Gripped sometime in the spring/summer of '06 I think, that's where I remember reading about it originaly.

Her name is Kathryn Kuntz, her paper was originally to refute the findings of the 2002 paper in terms of actual climbing routes.

This is her abstract:
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~umatthes/CERG/abstracts/Kuntz2.htm

And this is her talking about her paper on RC.com not long after:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1324229;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

Unfortunally she said her paper wasn't avalible online, but maybe you can search through someone's older Gripped magazines and find the article in there. I'm sure I have that particular magazine at home or I'd never have remembered the article in the first place.

[Fred]

quite the name wha!!

[jeremy benjamin]

quite the name wha!!

I don't get it? Whats wrong with the name Kuntz?

[jeremy benjamin]

Here is the abstract for the McMillan and Larson 2002 paper for those who are interested. I was able to download the PDF here... http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/jour ... 3/abstract but access may be dependent on a Dal library subscription to the journal since I did it from the Dal network.


Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada
Michele A. McMillan AND Douglas W. Larson*
Department of Botany, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada
*Address correspondence to D. W. Larson; email dwlarson@uoguelph.ca

Abstract:The cliffs of the Niagara Escarpment support unique and diverse plant communities. Although recreational rock climbing has become extremely popular in North America over the past two decades, little is known about the effect of this sport on the natural biota. We examined the ecological effects of rock climbing on vascular plant, bryophyte, and lichen communities along the Niagara Escarpment in southern Ontario. We made comparisons among randomly selected climbed and unclimbed rock outcrops by sampling from three positions: plateau (or cliff edge), cliff face, and talus (or cliff base). Density, percent cover, species richness, and species diversity of vascular plants were lower on climbed outcrops than on unclimbed outcrops. In addition, the proportion of alien plants was three times greater in climbed areas than in unclimbed areas. The frequency and richness of bryophyte species were also significantly lower in climbed areas. The frequency of lichens was the same on climbed and unclimbed cliffs, but species richness was significantly lower in climbed areas, and community composition differed between climbed and unclimbed areas. Our results suggest that rock climbing has significant negative effects on all aspects of the vegetative community on cliffs. Therefore, we recommend that conservation plans be modified to include specific policies regarding recreational rock climbing for lands containing exposed cliffs. For example, we suggest that the establishment of new climbing routes be banned in protected areas along the Niagara Escarpment.

[*Chris*]

Okay, aparently I was remembering things wrong. Except her user name on RC.com, that let me track down the right story. Oh, and it was talked about in Gripped sometime in the spring/summer of '06 I think, that's where I remember reading about it originaly.

Her name is Kathryn Kuntz, her paper was originally to refute the findings of the 2002 paper in terms of actual climbing routes.

This is her abstract:
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~umatthes/CERG/abstracts/Kuntz2.htm

And this is her talking about her paper on RC.com not long after:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1324229;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

Unfortunally she said her paper wasn't avalible online, but maybe you can search through someone's older Gripped magazines and find the article in there. I'm sure I have that particular magazine at home or I'd never have remembered the article in the first place.

Thanks for the reference. I just got done reading the Kuntz and Larson (2006) paper and found it quite interesting. I'm a little weary of their sample design limiting it to routes > 5.10 and >= vertical. I highly doubt that their results are valid beyond those specific circumstances. Certainly we've got loads of moderate trad potential here for future route developement on granite... and it would make an excellent oppertunity for future study. At least they do a good job of limiting the application of their results to other areas. If anyone wants the full-text article, just message or email or pm me.

[mick]

The deadline for submitting comments on the Niagara Glen Environmental Land Management Plan (which recommends banning all bouldering at the Glen) is Sunday, October 19th at noon. If you haven't already voiced your opinion, please consider doing so.

Below is my letter to the NPC if anyone is interested. Feel free to borrow from it for your own letter. See previous posts for contact info and full documentation.


Marika Kozachenko
Niagara Parks Commission
P.O.Box 150
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6T2

RE: DRAFT Environmental Land Management Plan

Dear Ms. Kozachenko,

I am writing in opposition to Recommendation 11 of the Niagara Parks Commission's Environmental Land Management Plan which, if enacted, would "Eliminate bouldering activities in the Niagara Glen". I have read the NPC's report and supporting studies concerning bouldering's impact on biodiversity and I appreciate your concerns. According to the NPC report:

At present the Niagara Glen is being promoted as an ideal location for bouldering by various websites including rockclimbing.com, getbeta.com, and glenbouldering.com. However, these activities pose a serious threat to biodiversity within this already environmentally sensitive area. A study conducted on rock climbing in the Niagara Escarpment found that rock climbing causes considerable damage to vascular plants, bryophytes, and lichens and in some cases rare species are threatened by rock climbing activities (McMillan & Larson 2002). Until bouldering activities are controlled in the Niagara Glen, this ecosystem of international conservation significance will not be able to restore itself completely.

After reading McMillan and Larson's Effects of Rock Climbing on the Vegetation of the Niagara Escarpment in Southern Ontario, Canada upon which the NPC's Recommendation 11 is seemingly based, I noted that the McMillan and Larson come to a somewhat different conclusion. Although they certainly agree that their "study provides strong evidence to suggest that rock climbing causes considerable damage to vascular plants, bryophytes, and lichens on the Niagara Escarpment in southern Ontario." they also note that "Some highly disturbed environments can recover rapidly with a temporary removal of the disturbance (Cole 1994)."

McMillan and Larson conclude that, "Closure of areas with heavy recreational use is not advised, however, because visitors tend to respond to such closures by moving into previously undisturbed or less disturbed habitats, thus increasing the areal extent of damage ( Jim 1989; Cole 1993, 1994)" and furthermore, "the proliferation of climbing routes in currently unclimbed areas in southern Ontario has the potential to cause widespread and long-lasting negative effects. We therefore discourage the closure of currently climbed areas in southern Ontario. Land managers should instead prohibit the establishment of new climbing routes in both climbed and unclimbed areas."

I urge you to reconsider banning bouldering outright in the Niagara Glen. Damage to plant biodiversity occurs largely when a boulder or climb is first cleaned, rather than over time, according to the very study the NPC cites in its report. I would suggest that the NPC work with climbers to preserve existing areas, rather than close them down and incent development elsewhere.

Climbers, in my experience, are careful stewards of the environment. Other world-class climbing destinations have encountered similar challenges in the past and have seen land management organizations work with climbers to find a solution. Some alternatives would include temporarily closing one or more specific areas of the Glen each year, promoting foreign species removal days, erecting erosion protection in high traffic areas, ensuring proper signage and trail maintenence, soliciting donations, or requiring a toll from users of the bouldering areas with funds going towards area upkeep. Also, an immediate ban on the development of new, previously untouched boulders certainly seems both more appropriate and realistic than a ban on climbing outright.

As the President of Climb Nova Scotia (the provincial focal point between land owners, regulators, and climbers), I am familiar with the challenges that arise during access negotiations. Although Nova Scotia's climbing areas do not see the volume of traffic that Ontario does, our ecosystem is just as rich and potentially fragile. Climb Nova Scotia is very concious of biodiversity and erosion issues and we work diligently to craft solutions that are acceptable to all stakeholders.

Please consider the impact that might be caused elsewhere, should Niagara Glen's bouldering be closed.

Sincerely,

Mick Levin
Climb Nova Scotia President and Chair
http://www.climbnovascotia.ca

[peter]

An article in today's Globe and Mail on this topic may be found at:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... eMain/home

[chossmonkey]

An article in today's Globe and Mail on this topic may be found at:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... eMain/home

Thanks for the link.

[martha]

The comments to this article by non-climbers makes me want to scream. YAR!