The Orifice (and Summit Crags): Still Closed

I guess I'll be the "bad guy" again and remind everyone that the Summit Crags on Mt. Lemmon are still closed, no matter what people might say or the fact that the USFS is revamping its website and hasn't gotten the closure page back up yet.

It takes a long regulatory process to alter a closure, and that isn't happening for this particular area anytime soon.

So please wait 20 more days until the closure is lifted (July 1) to climb up there. Doing otherwise hurts all of us. Choosing to climb under the closure could easily get the area permanently closed, and at the very least makes climbers look bad.

The USFS needs to get some signage going...

In the meantime... continue to climb at the other areas on the mountain that do not have closures and that the falcons have relocated their nesting to.

If the USFS is going to have these strict closures, they should really be more knowledgeable to where the falcons are actually nesting. They're nesting in cliffs that do not have closures and as far as I can tell, they are no longer nesting on the Fortress or the other summit crags. But I could be wrong about that, maybe they moved back to the summit crags. I can't recall ever seeing any up there over the last handful of years.

Thanks for the reminder Andy. I remind people of this every year as well. It would be a MAJOR disappointment if the summit crags were ever permanently closed!!!!

O-face season! Less than three weeks away!!!

Yeah, tell me about...they haven't done monitoring in years and have little idea what's actually going on out there. But rules are rules, and if people get caught climbing under the closures, access is at stake.

A few weeks ago, I met the guy who does the raptor surveys. He is a good guy (and fellow rock climber). So the Forest Service DOES know which nesting sites are in use, but (as Andy mentioned) the regulatory process trumps any sound management practices.

Let's remember to be respectful to the Forest Service Personnel. In my experience, they are just as passionate about the outdoors as we are, and equally frustrated by the regulatory bureaucracy.

Hey Zonie, I think I know the AZGFD raptor guy you're talking about. I met him at a meeting last year and actually ran into him on the way down to the Reef a while back while he was on his way back from a survey. Yes, I too think that most agency folk are there because they genuinely love nature, same as many climbers, and I'm sure that's the case for him. And yes, he is a good guy.

I think it's important for users to understand the distinction between AZGFD (Arizona Game and Fish Department)- tasked with managing wildlife, and the USFS (Forest Service)- tasked with managing the landscapes that wildlife need to survive. The two agencies don't necessarily coordinate effectively and, in the case of raptor closures, that seems to be all too true. The falcon's breeding habits, combined with a fairly vast area of potential nest sites, make closure maintenance a difficult job. Add to that consistent budget cuts, overworked employees, and disorganized political inertia and what do you get? Ineffective, outdated Blanket Closures.

As Red pointed out, there are many open crags that falcons currently use for nesting, while other crags remain closed but have not had an active nest for several years.

And no, Zonie, the USFS may not necessarily have an idea of what's going on, as AZGFD does the monitoring (every 3 years, I believe), while the USFS only writes the closure orders when it can, it seems (some of the closures go back to 1991!) and AZGF may or may not keep the USFS updated. Either way, the closures are not properly amended to reflect the variable nesting habits of the falcons from year-to-year, and both falcons and users suffer.

The answer, IMHO: Active monitoring by willing, trained volunteer users (e.g. climbers), a la Boulder County Open Space/Eldorado SP style programs. The closures would be made based on the most up-to-date information available, and would be adaptive to the needs of the falcons during the present season. AZGFD could achieve a higher level of raptor conservation via free monitoring, and climbers could access cliffs not being utilized by falcons. Call me crazy, but I think it just might work. It seems to be pretty damn effective up in CO!

It's because of unwarranted closures that climbers prefer to stay mum about where peregrines might be nesting, much less cooperate with agencies.

It's been thirteen years since the peregrine was taken off the endangered species list. The regulatory process in action.

The closure issue can be an emotional one, but I'm 100% behind observing the closures to preserve the access we have.

Andy, you seem to know something about this. How would someone get involved in volunteer monitoring? Do you have a contact at AZGFD?

a little birdie was telling me (pun intended lol), that part of the reason the f.s. hasnt been updating the closure locations was because theyve had problems in the past with falconers? falconeers? falcon masters? whatever they call themselves, stealing the chicks/eggs. They don't want them to know where the falcons are nesting, AND apparently its not illegal for them to do so, but its illegal for us to disrupt their mating...

thats our legal system at work, boys and girls!

p.s. said "birdie" lives in tucson and cited a raptor researcher for the source of his info. Anyone else hear anything like this???

Larry- I understand your (and others') frustration completely. But, as Boulder County and several other effective programs across the US have shown, there is a way out. In my opinion the way out, should it succeed in establishing a working compromise, will only help to heal and strengthen the relationship between the users and the agencies. And that is something we truly need as outdoor climbers continue to multiply.

Yes, I had a contact at AZGFD, but he seems to have decided that it's better to ignore me...

As for the falconer thing...yes, it irks me too. If it's any consolation, my understanding is that the number of permits granted annually is very small, like 2 or something in that range. But I would question the "birdy's" logic in saying that the agencies would rather not disclose nest sites--they already do. The USFS has been posting crag-specific info for years, and it doesn't take much doing to pick up a "Squeezing the Lemmon", or shoot, just look at this site, and there you go.

ya, i hear you. i was more referring to luke's comment earlier about how they close a specific area for the raptor mating, even though the falcon have moved on to other non-closed areas...