A decades-long debate over how to manage wilderness climbing may be nearing a close. Land-management agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service and agencies within the Department of Interior, released draft guidance in mid-June on the use of permanent anchors — basically metal points of attachment for ropes — in wilderness areas, as directed by Congress’ 2025 Protecting America’s Rock Climbing (PARC) Act.
“A lot of people and user types are vying for the same piece of real estate, and climbers are part of that,” said Erik Murdock, deputy director of programs, policy and government affairs at the Access Fund, a nonprofit that advocates for climbing access and environmental conservation. The new guidance helps secure climbers’ place in the mix, he said. But some wilderness advocates argue that it too loosely regulates uses that violate the Wilderness Act’s intention. Even though climbing has long been a popular activity in designated wilderness areas, and, in many places, it predates their creation, the Wilderness Act generally prohibits permanent infrastructure — and this is where the controversy arises.
When climbers scale a rock wall, they periodically place protective devices in the rock face to secure their ropes so they can be safely caught if they fall. They may also do so at the top of a route, so that they can rappel back down. There are a variety of ways to do this, and certain kinds of protection — such as spring-loaded cams that can expand to fit in a crack along the route — are removable. But others are permanent, or “fixed,” anchors. On long stretches without cracks to place gear, for example, climbers might drill bolts directly into the rock to attach metal loops called hangers. Where there are small cracks, they might hammer in a small spike with a loop at one end, called a piton. Or they might install ropes or slings around a boulder, tree or other object and leave them there to enable a safe descent by rappel.
The rules proposed in June for these permanent fixtures vary by agency. The National Park Service, for example, would require climbers to seek special-use permits or broad permission from a superintendent before drilling new bolts. But climbers on Bureau of Land Management land could place a small number of bolts without authorization. The Forest Service, which manages half of the country’s public-land climbing, directs local offices to work with climbers and climbing groups to create management plans for wilderness and non-wilderness climbing areas. While Murdock and other climbers quibble with some of the details, he said they were “overall workable policies.”
“There are plenty of places in the wilderness where you don’t need a fixed anchor, and typically the ethic has been if you don’t need a fixed anchor, you don’t bring one.”
Others worry that the new guidance could initiate a climbing free-for-all in the country’s last protected spaces. Several Forest Service regional offices have lost many or all of their wilderness staff over the past 18 months to deferred resignations and cuts by the now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. They likely lack the capacity to create new plans or monitor new and existing routes that contain permanent anchors, said Dana Johnson, policy director with the Montana-based environmental nonprofit Wilderness Watch. “We’re squeezing wildlife into smaller and smaller pockets of protected space,” she said, “and we have a lot of people waiting in line for more access.”
Johnson’s concerns mirror those of some Biden administration officials. Fears of damaging protected areas through overcrowding and using too many permanent bolts led the administration to propose a national directive in 2023 prohibiting new fixed anchors in all wilderness areas and requiring review of existing climbing routes. Two years later, Congress reversed that course with the PARC Act, which codified recreational climbing — including using, placing and maintaining fixed anchors — as an appropriate use in wilderness areas.
But the fight over permanent anchors misses the bigger issue, said Zach Lentsch, who owns Wyoming Mountain Guides and frequently takes clients into designated wilderness areas. Hikers, backpackers and other quiet recreationists also contribute to wilderness overcrowding, he pointed out. Places like Lonesome Lake near the famous Cirque of the Towers in the Wind River Range contain dangerous levels of E. coli from human poop, for example, and banning a narrow use like fixed anchors would never solve that problem. Instead, he argued, agencies should work with all wilderness users to create permit systems to limit use where needed, or require campers to use special bags to contain and pack out their feces.
“If you’re not a climber, it might seem like climbers are going out there willy-nilly and putting ugly hardware into the walls,” he said. “There are plenty of places in the wilderness where you don’t need a fixed anchor, and typically the ethic has been if you don’t need a fixed anchor, you don’t bring one.”
The public comment period on the Forest Service proposal ended July 20, and the Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service comment periods end Aug. 14.
We welcome reader letters. Email High Country News at editor@hcn.org or submit a letter to the editor. See our letters to the editor policy. Reporting for this story was supported by the Mighty Arrow Family Foundation.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
