July 1, 1997 L7617(ACAD)
Memorandum To: Regional Director, Northeast Region
Attention: Deputy Regional Director
From: Superintendent, Acadia National Park
Subject: Finding of No Significant Impact, Climbing Management Plan, Acadia National Park
This memorandum records the management alternative selected by the National Park Service (NPS) for climbing management at Acadia National Park. This decision was made after public review and comment on a Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (National Park Service 1996) and after careful consideration of legislative mandates, applicable regulations, and NPS policies.
Background and Need for Action
An increase in rock climbing over the last fifteen years has led to crowded conditions at popular climbing areas and unacceptable effects on natural and cultural resources at Acadia National Park (ANP). The recognition of these effects, coupled with an NPS climbing management initiative, prompted park staff to address climbing management issues. Climbing must be actively managed to preserve park resources and provide high quality experiences for climbers and other visitors.
History of Planning and Public Involvement
While developing the Draft Climbing Management Plan, park staff met extensively with local climbers to discuss relevant issues and contacted by mail all known climbing groups or organizations using the park. Local climbers reviewed an early draft of the plan, helped reformulate issues, and made recommendations to the park. A list of individuals and organizations consulted is provided in the Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, released for public comment in April 1996 (Attachment 1). Copies were sent to more than 100 organizations or individuals in the conservation and climbing communities. Twenty-six written comments were received. A synthesis of public comments and responses to specific comments are found in Attachment 2. Letters from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State Historic Preservation Officer representing agencies with a collateral responsibility for natural and cultural resource management are found in Attachment 3.
Alternatives Considered
The Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment presented a continuum of increasingly restrictive management alternatives related to major issues, beginning with existing minimal management of climbing. Major issues included: installing fixed protection and cleaning climbing routes of soils and vegetation (new route development), managing climbing groups and commercial climbing operations, managing individual climbers, and closing climbing areas or specific routes to protect natural and cultural resources. Most alternatives related to new route development included forming a committee of climbers, park staff, and others to review and make recommendations on proposed routes. Alternatives varied by the degree of management and how many climbing areas would be managed. Alternatives addressing the increasing amount of commercial use included continuing existing management using an incidental business permit program, more strict administration and enforcement of the incidental business program, and managing commercial climbing through a limited number of NPS-sanctioned concession operations.
To address the growing amount of climbing use and the effects of crowding at popular cliffs, the Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment included alternatives ranging from not managing climbing groups or individual climbers to increasing restrictions on group size, requiring permits or reservations to climb, and developing and enforcing carrying capacities at some areas. Alternatives to protect natural resources included closures to protect endangered species, closures to protect any impacted resources, and temporary or permanent research and preservation closures. Alternatives related to protecting cultural resources included prohibiting climbing on carriage road bridges and prohibiting climbing on both carriage road and Park Loop Road bridges. A complete prohibition on climbing, not managing climbing, and "education only" alternatives were not considered reasonable. The preferred alternative included restricting the installation of fixed protection and route cleaning to nine specified climbing areas, limiting commercial groups to only NPS-sanctioned concessions, instituting a permit and reservation system for individuals to be implemented as needed, instituting a permit system for groups including a reservation system for Otter Cliffs and a group size limit of twelve, closing areas to protect natural resource based on available scientific information, and prohibiting climbing on all carriage road and Park Loop Road bridges.
Selected Alternative
The selected alternative is largely the preferred alternative from the Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, with minor changes based on public comments and NPS policies and guidelines. A Climbing Management Plan will be developed to guide management of climbing for the next three to five years at ANP. A climbing advisory group consisting of climbers, park staff, and others will make recommendations to the superintendent on climbing issues. The advisory group will work through the existing Acadia National Park Advisory Commission. Installing fixed protection (including pitons) and cleaning routes of vegetation and soils will be permitted only at designated climbing areas and only with the prior approval of the superintendent. The climbing advisory group will review proposals for new route development and make recommendations to the superintendent through the Advisory Commission. If approved, climbers will be issued a permit that covers fixed protection, route cleaning, and the use of a power drill. The advisory group will also review proposals for the replacement or removal of fixed protection.
Individuals climbing at ANP will be required to register annually and have the registration card, referred to in the Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment as a permit, in their possession while climbing. No fee will be charged for registration, and there will be no restrictions on the number of cards issued. Registration cards will be widely available at climbing areas and park offices. Climbers will be required to sign Daily Use Logs at some areas to help monitor climbing use levels. All organized climbing groups will be limited to a maximum group size of twelve persons, including guides. Group leaders will be required to register annually under the same conditions described for individuals above. Group reservations for Otter Cliffs will begin in 1998 and will be required from Saturday of Memorial Day weekend through Labor Day. Decisions related to regulating commercial climbing businesses will be deferred until the NPS completes a Commercial Use Plan, currently being developed. Climbing and bouldering will be prohibited on all park bridges to protect cultural resources. To protect natural resources, ANP climbing areas will occasionally be closed or climbing otherwise restricted according to NPS regulatory procedures. Closures or restrictions will be based on available scientific information, preferably quantitative information from research and monitoring programs, showing adverse effects to natural resources such as flora, fauna, soils, or rocks.
The Selected Alternative also includes other actions such as monitoring, research, education, and ecological restoration. Rationale For the Decision: The primary purpose of the park is to protect resources for future generations. Recreational use is permitted provided it meets NPS policy guidelines and its effects can be managed at an acceptable level for protecting natural and cultural resources. All recreation activities have effects on park resources. The NPS must determine when those impacts become unacceptable. Using fixed protection and route cleaning are conscious and deliberate climbing practices. For most other visitors and under most other circumstances, these practices are violations of park regulations and are therefore unacceptable. Historically, these practices have been ignored by ANP. However their current status and rate of recent development (see Attachment 4, Status of ANP Fixed Protection) are such that park managers must manage them to protect park resources and visitor experiences. The effects of these practices are long-term or perhaps irreversible. Most of the better climbing resources in the park are already developed with fixed protection and cleaned routes. The selected alternative prevents the expansion of these practices to new areas and controls their continued use in areas where they have already occurred. Leaving existing fixed protection intact is consistent with leaving other developments in the park (trails, roads, etc.) intact. Restricting further development of climbing routes with fixed protection and route cleaning is also consistent with the General Management Plan (National Park Service 1992) for the park, which seeks to limit developments. The selected alternative also preserves more visitor experience options for present and future climbers and other visitors. ANP cannot provide all kinds of climbing opportunities. Park climbing resources are not extensive, and the goal of resource protection takes priority.
The selected alternative preserves an adventure climbing experience that is "clean" in its strictest sense, and thus compatible with the resource protection goal. Using power drills for approved fixed protection is safer for climbers and faster and quieter for all visitors, and is thus a good solution for preventing the degradation of visitor expereriences. Group climbing has become popular and the number of climbing areas suitable for beginners is limited. Reservations are now needed at Otter Cliffs to prevent three or four groups from arriving on the same day, impacting resources and the experiences of other climbers. Through continued education and good climbing use data about the number of groups and the locations used, climbing can be managed more effectively to protect resources and provide a quality experience. A group size of twelve was selected based on three conditions: the small size of park climbing areas, the desire to reduce the sense of crowding that may occur at these areas, and the need to protect park resources. Larger groups have been shown to reduce the quality of visitor experiences. Other studies show the extent of soil and vegetation damage depends more on group size than frequency of use (Kuss et al 1990).
A full-day reservation rather than two half-day reservations, as recommended in the Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, was selected for two reasons. First, it would avoid potential conflicts between groups in the middle of the day. Second, it gives groups larger than twelve an option of breaking their group into two smaller groups for a half day of climbing each and a half-day of another activity. A limitation on the number of days that can be reserved by any organization prevents organizations from dominating the reservation procedure at the earliest opportunity. Limiting organizations to ten days, or about 10% of the season, is felt to be a reasonable choice at this time, but may change in the future. Climber registration is for education and measuring climbing use. Effective climbing management will require communicating regulations and guidelines to climbers. An annual registration card, easily obtained in the field or at park offices, will keep climbers updated about policies. Estimates of climbing use will help establish climbing area carrying capacities if they are needed in the future. All carriage road and Park Loop Road bridges are cultural resources protected by several federal laws. The carriage road system, including bridges, is on the National Register of Historic Places and the Park Loop Road, including bridges, has been nominated for the Register. The Code of Federal Regulations prohibits walking on or climbing an archeological or cultural resource. NPS 77, the National Park Service Natural Resources Guideline (National Park Service 1991), states that National Register sites merit absolute resource protection; therefore climbing and bouldering on the bridges will be prohibited.
Why Other Alternatives Were Not Selected
Alternatives A and B were not selected because they would not prevent or substantially reduce unacceptable and largely irreversible damage to rock, soils, and vegetation associated with new route development, would not preserve "clean" climbing opportunities sufficiently, would not protect the historic and structural integrity of Park Loop Road bridges adequately, would not handle problems of crowding and increased use at Otter Cliffs, and would not preserve the park sufficiently as an environment evolving through natural processes minimally influenced by human activity. Alternatives D and E were not selected because they would unduly restrict the freedom of climbers, increase the burden on park staff for removal and inspection of fixed protection, patrol of climbing areas, and approval of all new routes, and result in extensive damage to rock as fixed protection is removed. Finding of No Significant Impact The National Park Service has carefully considered the potential impact of the selected alternative, as described above, for managing climbing in Acadia National Park and has determined that the implementation of the selected alternative will not cause significant impact on the human environment, and therefore, an environmental impact statement will not be prepared.
Paul F. Haertel Concurred: ________________
Marie Rust Regional Director, Northeast Region National Park Service
Attachments 1. Draft Climbing Management Plan and Environmental Assessment. 2. Synthesis of Public Comments and Responses to Specific Public Comments. 3. Collateral Compliance Responsibility. 4. Status of ANP Fixed Protection. References Kuss , F.R., A.R. Graefe, and J.J. Vaske 1990 Visitor impact management: a review of research. National Parks and Conservation Association. Vol. 1 Washington, D.C. 256pp. National Park Service 1996 Draft climbing management plan and environmental assessment. Acadia National Park, Maine. April 1996. 39pp. 1992 General management plan. Acadia National Park, Maine. October 1992. 99pp. 1991 Natural resource management guideline (NPS 77). May 1991.
