Let Your Voice Be Heard

Which "Alternative" do you prefer?

Send your GMP feedback to the Park using their on-line form. It only takes a second - the form is tiny.

Not ready to submit your preference? Read on to find out more.

Park General Management Plan

The Pinnacles General Management Plan is under review. As a member or fan of Friends of Pinnacles you have already demonstrated an active concern for the future of climbing at the Park, so do your part. There are only a handful of days left to give the Park your feedback regarding the plan.

We know that at 325 pages it is a bit much to ask you to read the entire GMP, especially since there is little in it specific to climbing, but it is still VERY important that you let your voice be heard with regard to helping the Park choose a "Management Alternative."

FOP has tried to summarize the "Alternatives" for you and provides additional information about the GMP that we think you may find valuable, both as a climber and a Park visitor. We call out climbing specific elements along with significant differences between the Alternatives.

For details you may also want to review the Summary Tables of Alternatives and Impacts section in Chapter 3 of the GMP.

FOP has also posted a simplified version of the summary tables on our Web site.

What Is The GMP

As most of you already know the General Management Plan (or GMP) is a document, created by the Park, which "articulates a vision and overall management philosophy for Pinnacles that will guide decision-making for the foreseeable future." According to Superintendent Karen Beppler-Dorn, "foreseeable" means 10 to 15 years. This "articulated philosophy" will be based on one of four "Alternatives" that the Park is asking us to, essentially, vote on.

What The GMP Is NOT

The GMP does not establish any specific policies related to climbing or route development in the Park. Those policies will be established in the "Climbing Management Plan" (or CMP) to be completed in the 2013/14 time frame.

BE AWARE! While all four Alternatives allow for continued climbing activity, each has (or lacks) provisions that could affect climbers indirectly OR impact the specifics determined later in the CMP.

What Are The "Alternatives"

To keep things as simple as possible FOP has created a greatly simplified summary of the 4 Alternatives calling out key elements of each and identifying Pros and Cons for each "relative to the climbing community." To paraphrase a great saying: "One park user's pros are another park user's cons."

Based on previous review by the general public (2008), four Alternatives have been identified. Each Alternative describes a strategy for managing and mapping each of the five *Park "Zones."

* details on Management Zones can be found in Chapt. 3, page 45

Note: The Park has already endorsed Alternative "D" - a "hybrid" of elements from the other alternatives. Friends Of Pinnacles also endorses Alternative "D."

ALL of the GMP alternatives specifically state that climbing will continue as a recognized activity.

Alternative "A" (Continue Current Management - No Change)

This basically means "stay the course" or don't make any changes to current policies. These current policies would be be officially documented along with baseline conditions for monitoring progress.

Pros		Cons
Attitudes and Regulations relative to climbing go unchanged Access to areas remains the same		No new access opportunities (new trails) No West Side camping No Backcountry camping

Alternative "B" (Emphasize Backcountry Experience - Back To Nature)

This alternative focuses on the backcountry experience. Implementation includes: expanded "primitive" wilderness designations, reduced facilities and resources, restoration of wilderness where feasible.

Pros		Cons
More solitude More wilderness Some trail expansion		Reduced parking access (Moses Springs possibly removed, Chaparral removed) No West Side camping No Backcountry camping More "primitive" designations could result in access limitations for climbers Group size limitations proposed

Alternative "C" (Expand Visitor Experience - More Visitors)

This alternative expands an array of visitor use opportunities; the focus being more visitors experiencing more of the park.

Pros		Cons
More facilities More trails West side and backcountry camping Increased educational, cultural and recreational opportunities		Significant increases in visitor traffic possible Reduced parking access (Chaparral moved) Reduced solitude possible Expanded general use opportunities and traffic could affect climber access

Alternative "D" (Link People and Resources - focus on stewardship and sharing)

This is the Park and FOP endorsed alternative. The plan is a hybrid of the other alternatives, blending the strengths and advantages from the other alternatives. This plan changes the focus from a more physical orientation to a more visceral, broad view perspective. In essence this alternative promotes resource preservation and sharing through education and encouraging stewardship across all affected communities.

Pros		Cons
Better facilities More trails West side and backcountry camping Increased educational and cultural opportunities		Reduced parking access (Moses Springs possibly removed, Chaparral moved)

That completes your "crash-course" in the General Management Plan for Pinnacles.

So... Submit Your Comments Today!

You can also download a mail in version of the Feedback Form.