Squamish adopts Guidelines for route dev. in Smoke Bluffs

[squamish climber]

This news kind of flew under the radar last month but it could have a big impact on route development and climbing resource management in Smoke Bluffs Park.

On May 7th Squamish District Council adopted the following motion recommended by the Smoke Bluff Park Advisory Committee:

THAT the Smoke Bluffs Park Committee recommends to Council THAT Council adopt the BC Best Practices Guide for Rock Climbing Route Development in the Squamish Areas Provincial Parks – Stawamus Chief, Shannon Falls, and Murrin as a best practices guide applicable in principle to rock climbing route development in the Smoke Bluffs Park.

Here is part of the Chief newspaper story on this:

Smoke Bluffs climbing guidelines set
MAY 16, 2013

REBECCA ALDOUS
Climbers will soon have a new set of rules to follow when developing new climbing routes in the Smoke Bluffs Park.
Earlier this month, District of Squamish officials adopted B.C. Parks’s best practices guide on outlining route development in rock climbing in one of Squamish’s most popular parks.
The document highlights principles regarding rock climbing route cleaning, including development of new climbing routes, and balances climbers’ needs with protecting the environment and public safety, officials said. The creation of the document was a cooperative effort between B.C. Parks, climbers and access groups, Coun. Susan Chapelle said at the May 7 council meeting.
“It will probably set a standard for rock climbing worldwide,” she said.

The Best practices Guide can be found on the BC Parks website here.

[rolfr]

A step in the right direction, with a lot of consideration put in by all the parties.

My one concern is section 1.4

Role of the Climbers Advisory Group (CAG)
The role of the CAG is to advise BC Parks on the management of the three Squamish area Provincial Parks—Stawamus Chief, Shannon Falls, and Murrin—about climbing related issues. The CAG is a group of dedicated individuals appointed by the SAS to represent the interests of the climbing community. The CAG members volunteer their time for this purpose.

There is not enough transparency in a SAS appointed group, individuals within SAS who have entrenched ideas about bolt placement, style and acceptable practices could appoint like minded individuals. This may not be the case, but appearances of a predetermined agenda could undermine the process and alienate the climbing public.

I strongly suggest that the advisory group be more inclusive and open to a publicly agreed upon board. I applaud SAS for their initiative but challenge them to find a more democratic process.

A well thought out White Paper and it should be a guidline for other areas.

Rolf Rybak