Reply To: CALM, draconian regulations on climbing

The questions and comments I would like to be put forward to CALM are as follows:

1. What would the permit system entail? And what is CALM’s definition of lawful authority?

I personally do not see a problem with a permit system say on a yearly basis that says “I am going to rock climb / abseil on CALM land within the next 12 months and am aware that it is a dangerous activity Blah blah blah”. At least CALM then has a register of climbers who intend to climb on public land. For visiting climbers I also do not see a problem with a similar system. The question here is ease of access and registration of activity. This is what climbers hate. We hate the idea of going out of our way to register. We want to be able to jump in the car on a Friday and wake up sat morn ready to climb. Not wait till 10.00am when the CALM office opens (if it opens at all on weekends) However, in areas like Bluff Knoll, Kalbarri it is as easy as placing you name in a registration book and I don’t hear too many outcrys about this form of registration. It is a question of getting methods of registration to particular areas that best suit the area. For remote nonpatrolled/gated areas, internet registration is one suggestion…

2. I fully support the implementation that all commercial operators and not-for-profit groups conducting rock climbing/abseiling with dependent participants must also be registered under the National Outdoor Leader Registration Scheme or hold current equivalent accreditation.

3. The CALM Regulations also prevent climbers from drilling bolt holes, gluing bolts, chipping or drilling holds and gluing on holds, as an aid to climbing. This point I strongly disagree with and question 1. The reason of such decision. 2. How they intend to police this regulation. 3. How this effects areas that have established bolted climbs and the potential for future development 4. If it applies to all CALM land or just “no bolting zones”. I would also like to see a clearer definition on “No bolting zones” and “Wilderness climbing areas” as questioned previously in the bolting thread. CALM together with strong input from CAWA impose these imaginary lines. It is not clear to climbers however where these lines are and why they were put there in the first place. And can the be (re)moved?

4. I fully support a government organisation that promotes a public voluntary organisation like CAWA and references articles like the CAWA Code of Ethics. I do however feel that review and update of CAWA’s climbing and bolting ethics is required to fall in line with climbing majority of today. I acknowledge climbing history and the efforts and “style” that past climbing areas and lines were put up in however I don’t feel that we should be stuck in this “history”.

5. I fully support permanently or temporarily closing sites to abseiling and rock climbing if rock wallabies or nesting birds are likely to be significantly disturbed, or if other fauna or values are being unacceptably impacted. Access to these areas can however be improved by provision of access points (CAWA promotes this). And for climbers, tracks are not often the best means of preventing environmental impact. This would mean installing rap station see point 3.

My 2 cents