Open Letter to NPS about the overnight permit system

An open letter to create dialogue concerning the Yosemite NPS big wall permit program

 

My name is Jim Hornibrook. I’ve been big wall climbing in Yosemite since 1983. As the years have gone by the popularity of our sport has grown, and this growth has recently attracted the attention of the Park Service. I’m writing this letter in response to Yosemite NPS’s proposed two year pilot program which introduces a required permit for overnight climbs in Yosemite which is slated to take effect on 5/21/21. I feel this program is being rolled out far too quickly without proper dialogue with climber advocacy groups and big wall climbers themselves who can give the best and most educated information with which to construct such a program. I’m concerned that this program has been put together in a way that will unduly affect climbers’ freedom to recreate in the park and will unknowingly add danger to an already dangerous activity. It is my considered opinion that the best course of action would be to postpone the pilot program till next season, and in the interim seek feedback from the climbing community as well as climbing advocacy groups such as The Access Fund, the ASCA, the AAC, the YCA and others. By adding many experienced voices to the discussion, NPS will have the best chance at creating a program that maximizes the wilderness experience, protects the environment and avoids introducing any added danger to our sport.

 

Program shortcomings and dangers:

 

Bad data

One of the proposed goals of the program is to “…help climbing rangers better understand use patterns on big walls.” The pilot program will end up with erroneous data because, as Hans Florine states in his book On The Nose half of those who start the route end up retreating. As currently proposed, the permit system will give the impression that there are nearly twice as many climbers ascending El Cap as there actually are. These bad data may lead the Park Service to introduce quotas when the reality of the situation is quite different. Involving the climbing community which is actually out there in the trenches in these decision making processes makes much more sense than having some bureaucrat behind a desk in Washington determining policy decisions based on bad data.

​

Increased danger

Hanging from El Cap for a week is an inherently dangerous undertaking. Besides the actual climbing there are weather and other logistical dangers.

Requiring permits will likely cause climbers to make poor decisions. If you’re planning to climb El Cap but the weather is looking stormy tomorrow, you will wisely hang out in the valley till the valley clears before heading upwards. But with the new permit system there will be a pressure to “climb now” since you have a very narrow window in which to climb. Getting caught on El Cap during a storm has resulted in deaths multiple times over the years.

A similar argument can be made about running low on water, not having the right gear, or suffering a slight injury on the first day or two of a big wall. Where previously parties could be flexible with their climbing plans and bail, regroup and return in a day or two, these parties will now be under pressure to keep going due to the limited window their permit provides which may endanger them. We currently see this on Everest all the time where small windows of opportunity blind climbers to properly evaluate the dangers they face.

​

Inefficiencies

There are several aspects of the Pilot Program which create inefficiencies and delays which can prohibit climbers’ usage of the park.

In-person pick up of permits eliminates the possibility of climbers being able to do a quick weekend big wall trip. It doesn’t affect those living in or near the park or professional climbers who have friends living in Foresta or Yosemite West (two private communities which lie entirely inside Yosemite National Park, but for the rest of the climbing community it’s a deal breaker for weekend big walls.

The program currently requires a minimum four day approval window. This will end the possibility of climbing during a brief winter good weather window or a quick “meet up” of climbers in the valley spontaneously doing a wall together.

​

Possible solutions

I believe there are ways to design this program in a way that eliminates these dangers and other shortcomings:

• Make the permit printable from home so an initial day isn’t wasted meeting up with the ranger. If Park Service feels more education is needed then a five or ten minute video could be put on the website where permits are given and the printing can only occur after the educational video is watched.

• In an effort to gather data for “who climbs what” that the Park Service appears to be interested in, they can create a website on which climbers input their climbing information of what route, were they successful, how many people were in the party, where were the climbers from, how long were they on the route, etc.

• Add a week “buffer period” to the end of the planned climbing period. This will allow parties to not feel pressured by bad weather or a queue at the base of popular routes, etc. As this fix would make the actual climbing time “fuzzy” Park Service SHOULD NOT use the permit time against climber’s stay limit in the park. This also would eliminate the possibility that Park Service is actually implementing this plan in an effort to enforce stay limits in the park.

 

These are fixes that come to me quickly. I’m sure a group of climbers and advocacy groups could do a better job, but that’s the point. We need to have more input and planning before implementing a plan that limits freedom to use the park and introduces added danger to climbing.

​

There is no hurry and no need to implement a plan that has so many problems and limitations. Park Service should temporarily hold off on this program until they can come to a consensus with advocacy groups and climbers to put forth the best possible plan.