[Aug 25, 2014] Jemez Cave (a.k.a. Crystal Cave) is closed to all public access, including climbing

As a reminder, the Jemez Cave (a.k.a. Crystal Cave) - CLOSED of New Mexico is still closed to climbing and public access. I'm told by a contact at the forest service that a few new bolts and project draws may have gone in recently but I haven't verified this information personally. Physical barriers and signage at the cave make it obviously clear that the area is closed.  To be straight, I'm not an authority figure in this and I'm not trying to start a discussion here. I'm just another local climber but have a strong, vested interest in the future of climbing in New Mexico. You can reply to this post calling me names or expounding on your distaste of the government but I I've heard most all of it before. If you don't agree with the closure, contact the Jemez Ranger district of the Santa Fe National Forest and/or the Jemez Pueblo to respectfully voice your concerns and opinion. The fact remains, the cave is closed. Please, regardless of your personal opinions on this closure, and for the sake of the climbing community, do not climb in the Jemez Cave anymore. Thank you.

No photos, unfortunately. I do really hope there are no new bolts--that's ludicrous. But as I understand it, all draws/chains were removed a year or so ago so any new project draws hanging is obvious and easy to document.
I hope to get the chance to get out there with the forest service soon to take a look. I'll post an update when/if that materializes.

David Sahalie wrote:To Jemez ranger dsitrict, all climbers are anonymous. Their report justifying the closure is full of outright lies to pacify the tribe. They could care less about climbers as a user group, and the AF is quite happy to throw them a bone of an area where less than 10 percent of the climbers can even pull onto the routes. If we are really, really good, the FS Jemez tribe will let us continue to climb in the Jemez, if not, they will make up more BS to shut down other areas for cultural and religious reasons. So, being anon makes perfect sense to me.

Having met with the Jemez RD staff regarding climbing in the Jemez in the past, and still having an open dialogue with folks from the district, I disagree with your opinion on this. It's my impression we climbers have a good and valued reputation with the folks at the Jemez RD and Santa Fe NF at large.
The cultural and religious significance of the Jemez Cave is, to me, fairly obvious and I cannot blame the pueblo for wanting to protect it. Furthermore, the style of the development at the cave was pretty tasteless even by my "avid climber and developer" standards which didn't help matters.
It's sounding like I may have an opportunity to meet with members of the Jemez RD this fall about the cave and the situation. If that materializes, I'll share any information I get.

Excellent, the name-calling and insults are finally coming, as expected. Keep it classy, y'all.  Yes, I've checked it out (not that that matters!) It was entertaining but whatever. Definitely not in the league of Rifle, RRG and Maple though. Those areas are different, in my mind, in that they are massive and known for climbing with local climbing coalitions having worked hard with land management entities to manage and balance climbing activities. Also, other areas don't use colored tape on the fixed chains to distinguished routes from each other. That's pretty silly and adds to the already gnarly visual impact of fixed chains. The permadraws in the Jemez cave weren't for groundfall protection, they were for convenience. With my stick clip I could hang every draw in that cave. I'm not sure where you get your historical facts about the cave's history but they're different than what I've heard. Edit to add: I guess if there's another point I'm making in this thread, beyond the simple reminder that the cave is still closed to climbing, it's that I think climbers could have been more low profile with this cave development and perhaps it wouldn't have ended up high on the radar of the Jemez Pueblo. Water under the bridge now, though.

No, I'm not easily insulted and I can handle any internet tough guy business thrown at me. I've been in the internet forum business a while. Furthermore, I'm going to go out on a limb and say my personality is pretty well-suited for representing the climbing user group. Living in Los Alamos, I couldn't make it to the Stone Age meeting in 2012, unfortunately. But I've been a part of other conference calls with Bryan, and others, on this subject as well as attending other forest service meetings to represent the climbing user group so my facts are pretty straight, IMO.

We all have a tendency to hear what we want to hear or to mold facts a bit to fit our views so it's possible we're both wrong I suppose. I agree with you that climbers (and other user groups) don't need to ask permission to place bolts on public lands and this is an excellent freedom enjoyed by climbers. But we can all work to be as low-profile as possible, especially in climbing areas close to highways and/or visited by "the general public."

Re: Pictures, if I get out there I'll take some photos. It would be great to get that sorted out, Mr. Chuffs. Also, if I'm contacted about any further discussions/meetings, I'd love for others to be involved to get a different perspective on the matter. Make no mistake, I'm not going out of my way to be THE spokesperson for all climbers on this matter. I simply enjoy being involved and have a strong passion for climbing in my home state. I'll contact you via personal message if anything comes to fruition. Are you in NM? Your history with this issue and perspective on the situation sounds valuable.

Also, Sir Chuffs, I don't feel like I'm being divisive here and I'm not sure how my comments are hurting the climbing community. Can you be more specific? The fact is the cave is still closed and I feel we, as climbers, need to respect that no matter our personal opinions on the matter. I was given information (not yet verified by me) that it appears climbing activities have been taking place in the cave still. If true, those kinds of actions will hurt the climbing community much more than anything I can say here. I have a hard time believing this is true and I hope we can do our best to dispel the misinformation.

Sorry if I'm missing something but the "IMPLEMENTATION" section of the document states:

"This Order shall be in effect when signed and shall remain in effect until rescinded or until until one year following the effective date, whichever occurs first."

So it's been one year, this seems to mean that the closure is no longer in effect. Did I read that correctly? Was there a different closure order issued other than this one?

Interesting that signage would override a written proclamation (assuming another one hasn't been issued). I can see how climbers could be confused by the verbiage on the closure order posted by David Sahalie, and the signage posted at the crag.. It would be easy to assume that the signage was outdated and hasn't been removed, given the pace at which the FS seems to operate.

I just spoke with the recreation officer from the Jemez Ranger Station and confirmed that the area is indeed under a continued temporary closure order. Violation of the closure could result in a maximum $5000 fine. When first closed 2.5 years ago the duration of the closure was for one year which happens to be the maximum duration of a temporary closure order. It has been renewed twice since the original order and is likely to be renewed annually until the Forest Service updates their management plan for the area.

The archaeologists from Bandolier have investigated the site and drafted a report which is still waiting to be finalized. No word on when the report or management plan might be completed and available for public review. Things don't always move at lightning speed in our federal government. The draft report has identified many artifacts at the site both in disturbed and in unexcavated areas. Given the status of the cave on the National Register of Historic Places, the presence of artifacts, and the desire of Jemez Pueblo to rebury the infant remains that were removed during the time of the original excavation, it is unlikely that the area will ever be open to climbing in the future. This happens to be one of those battles that is just not worth fighting and we should probably all move on. Continued violation of the closure area will only serve to strain relations with the Forest Service and could adversely impact management decisions at other climbing areas within the District.

Bryan Pletta
NM CRAG

+1^

The efforts to address this situation are commendable and the patience and perseverance of those within NMCRAG in dealing with an intractable government bureaucracy are noteworthy, there are a few things to consider when looking forward:
1) Giving up on this situation sets precedence for other areas. This one comes on top of other ridiculous closures like Cave Rock where the tribes weren’t concerned when the highway was bored through the crag, but later the huge archaeological preservation need was perverted into a basis to close the area to just climbers. In Idaho, the BLM is attempting to use the potential existence of arrow heads in the dirt as an archaeological reason to close climbing areas there. Under that faulty logic the entire United States would be closed. Each one of these BS closures needs to be opposed.
2) Why is closure to climbing the only option? In very popular climbing caves in Europe that contain archaeological resources, like the Cova Gran at Santa Linya, climbing is still allowed and the areas that need protection from climbers are covered by plywood platforms.
3) The USFS works for ALL US taxpayers, the land belongs to ALL of us, and closing the land to support the preferences of one small group is just plain wrong.
4) Temporary closures have a one year limit for a reason, that they should expire. Multiple rolling temporary closures or baseless closures are just unaccountable government bureaucrats not doing their job. Why should climbers be cooperative with such an unreasonable government agency?

I've never met a climber that likes to climb in a dump. I've never met a climber that doesn't get concerned when an adverse threat like soil erosion, litter, or vandalism threatens the areas in which they frequent. If anything, it is my impression that climbers in general ( I know there are exceptions) will go out of the way to maintain their crags. I'd like to cite the new trail to the El Rito crags as an example. Los Alamos Mountaineers went out of their way to develop a new trail to prevent soil erosion and damage to the crag. My point is, that a place like crystal cave might be better off being frequented by climbers rather than being forgotten and frequented by transients, the high school party crowd, etc. Climbers are more likely to become alarmed if Crystal cave was to get trashed with beer bottles, syringes and graffiti and are MORE likely to clean it up, as well as take action to prevent it from happening again.

Thousands of years from now what are archeologist going to rediscover at Crystal Cave? A few bolts? Or remnants of beer bottles, syringes, trash bags, and diapers?

I'd like to also point out that transients, or people just looking for a place to get high, are a lot less likely to heed nor care about signage stating that the place is off limits. Those people are just going to end up stashing their trash and vandalizing the place while the people that care are going to stay away and know nothing about it because they will be respecting the signage.

The forest service and the pueblos might be shooting themselves in the foot by kicking climbers out because of a few bolts, and alleged hold chipping.

Hello, my name is Eily Schroeder, and that is my real name :) I loved climbing at Crystal Cave and was very close to sending Dope when the cave was closed. I went to the meeting, I asked a lot of questions, I talked to the lawyer, but in the end, we were told by both the lawyer and the head of NM CRAG, that we should back off because it was a lost cause. Two and half years later, I am not surprised that we are being told the same thing by Bryan Pletta..."that it is just not worth fighting" for. Well, it really sucks that someone who is supposed to be representing the climbing community can come to such a conclusion, but luckily, I have a lot of free time on my hands these days. I worked for the VA for a while and I have a special awareness for what the federal government will try to get away with without supervision. I am pretty sure they won't have a very good answer for how they can endlessly initiate "temporary closures," but I am excited to hear what they come up with. I plan to make a visit to the Jemez Ranger District Office in person, and will continue on to the SFNF Supervisor's Office if I have to. I could represent any interested user group who just wants to know what is going on with this closure, and I have a right to know. What is there to show for this 2.5 year closure? What are the plans for the future? How many temporary closures is the FS allowed to instigate? I will let you all know what I find out... If you want it done right....

Eily from ABQ wrote:Hello, my name is Eily Schroeder, and that is my real name :) I loved climbing at Crystal Cave and was very close to sending Dope when the cave was closed. I went to the meeting, I asked a lot of questions, I talked to the lawyer, but in the end, we were told by both the lawyer and the head of NM CRAG, that we should back off because it was a lost cause. Two and half years later, I am not surprised that we are being told the same thing by Bryan Pletta..."that it is just not worth fighting" for. Well, it really sucks that someone who is supposed to be representing the climbing community can come to such a conclusion, but luckily, I have a lot of free time on my hands these days. I worked for the VA for a while and I have a special awareness for what the federal government will try to get away with without supervision. I am pretty sure they won't have a very good answer for how they can endlessly initiate "temporary closures," but I am excited to hear what they come up with. I plan to make a visit to the Jemez Ranger District Office in person, and will continue on to the SFNF Supervisor's Office if I have to. I could represent any interested user group who just wants to know what is going on with this closure, and I have a right to know. What is there to show for this 2.5 year closure? What are the plans for the future? How many temporary closures is the FS allowed to instigate? I will let you all know what I find out... If you want it done right....

uhmm, holy anonymous asshats batman you just blew your cover....

I swore to myself I would not wade into this morass; however, I felt there might be some value in explaining a couple of the key issues related to Crystal (Jemez) Cave. In particular, I wanted to introduce the legislation that provides the framework for how the Forest Service (USFS) is trying to manage the cave. First, I have a couple mea culpas so everyone can slag on me for my limited perspective.

--I attended the NMCRAG meeting about Crystal Cave at Stone Age, as did several other posters in this thread. I wish everyone would participate when these types of meetings occur, even though I understand other obligations can make it difficult.

--I attended a follow-on meeting with NMCRAG representatives Bryan Pletta and Jason Halladay at the Jemez Ranger District to discuss the Crystal Cave situation with the USFS. They had their archaeologist present, along with other recreational specialists so we heard a variety of perspectives. In so much as I contributed anything to the meeting it was the perspective of an archaeologist who deals with somewhat similar situations all the time on a professional basis.

--I have never stepped foot in the Crystal Cave. I can climb hard enough to enjoy the routes there, although the cave never appealed to me for aesthetic and style reasons. I may, however, want to climb in the cave in the future and having it open benefits those who had been climbing there and any other potential users. I empathize with those who may have lost an area that was important to them.

--I have to make a living working with agencies like the USFS and BLM, so I will try to be as neutral as possible and just present facts and will note my views where possible. If you want to know my personal opinions just talk to me in the real world.

--I tried to use simple terms to explain the issues and whenever possible greater detail is given with footnotes or links to the original legislation or guidance from the various agencies.

--I apologize for the length of this multi-part post, but I am fairly passionate about these issues.

Background:

Crystal Cave is an archaeological site on USFS property that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places1 (NRHP) for its important information potential2. Excavations at the cave in the mid-1930s, along with some later excavations in the 1970s, found the earliest evidence of agriculture in the Jemez area with fragments of corn dating to 500 B.C. and remains of squash. Additionally, these excavations by UNM resulted in the removal of a single infant burial, which was understood to be of Native American ancestry. Cave sites are almost always very important because of the excellent preservation; these are the only places where we can usually find cool items like feather capes or yucca fiber sandals. Any site that exhibits early evidence of agriculture is significant because of the profound social changes that accompany agriculture. Simply put, this is a big deal for the public and archaeologists and helped change and refine our understanding of New Mexico’s prehistory.

It is not clear to me whether the entire site was excavated, but I feel the remaining important information potential lies primarily in any significant buried deposits that could still be present (this is my opinion, rather than that of the USFS). Further, the USFS feels that the soot on the cave roof is an “archaeological feature created from past habitation/use….with the potential to provide information that could be used to date the site further, and could be used in ethnobotanical analysis. Re-analysis of the cave may result in the documentation of additional modification of the cave walls and ceiling resulting from past habitation and use.3”

All of the above describes why Crystal Cave is listed on the NRHP for its contributions to our understanding of prehistory, i.e., why the agencies and archaeologists consider it to be important. In addition, Jemez Pueblo claims cultural affiliation with this site, and considers it, along with many others, to be important to their tribe. I don’t know why they consider it important (one obvious reason could be the infant burial, which they likely consider an ancestor) and I don’t see many reasons to speculate. In this case it is sufficient to say they do consider the cave to be important for reasons known to them (more on the implications of this later).

1. The NRHP is the official list of the United States’ historic places worthy of preservation. More information is located here: nps.gov/nr/.
2. There are variety of ways a historic resource can be eligible to the NRHP, including important information potential (criterion D), which is explained in greater detail here: nps.gov/nr/publications/bul….
3. The closure order for the Crystal (Jemez) Cave is located here: fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DO….

Existing conditions:

Since I have not seen the site, I will do my best to describe it based on discussions with the USFS and other climbers. Please feel to correct me if I make a statement in error. The cave has been used by a variety of individuals over the years due to its proximity to the highway. Updates to the archaeological site files from the 1970s to the 1990s always make reference to vandalism and erosion as major concerns with the site condition. As this will be important later, it is clear that the major impacts to the site have been ongoing for decades well before climbers began to use the cave in the early 2000s. Past impacts included typical things like trash, extensive campfires that also resulted in soot on the roof, and erosion from foot traffic. After climbers developed the cave there are about 50 to 60 bolts in the roof. According to the USFS, the use of the cave by climbers resulted in erosion due to increased visitation with climbers as the dominant user group.

USFS and their Statutory Obligations:

The USFS (and the entire federal government or those private entities who apply for federal permits or have projects on federal lands) is required by certain legislation to consider the impact of their actions on the natural, cultural and human environment. There are lots of laws that apply here, but the big ones the USFS is concerned with relative to the Crystal Cave are the National Environmental Policy Act1 (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act2 (NHPA). NEPA deals with almost all impacts to the environment and is a form of umbrella legislation that rolls up and considers lots of other laws like NHPA, Endangered Species Act, etc.

The NHPA is what I deal with all the time, and it asks federal agencies to consider if a project or activity has any adverse effects on a historic property, which means a resource that is listed on or eligible/potentially eligible to the NRHP. Further, if an undertaking has an adverse effect then the USFS has to consider if that project or activity should occur or if there is a way to mitigate this impact. Throughout this entire process (referred to as the Section 106 process), agencies are required to engage with consulting parties (those with some significant interest in the outcome or affected landowners for example), which includes tribal governments. In particular, the federal agency and a interested tribe or Pueblo have a special form of government-to-government consultation that is privileged and often not subject to public disclosure. As a result, the public may never now why the Pueblo considers this site important as the tribe may consider this information to be confidential. Tribes therefore have a unique role clearly defined in the Section 106 process and their viewpoints are of critical importance, albeit not always the deciding factor in what decision an agency may make. For example, many local tribes were opposed to extending Unser Boulevard through the Petroglyph National Monument in Albuquerque, but the Corps of Engineers decided to complete the project anyway with a variety of efforts in place to mitigate the adverse effects.

1. Wikipedia has an adequate explanation of the NEPA process located here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natio…
2. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has a Citizens Guide to the NHPA and Section 106 Process located here: achp.gov/docs/CitizenGuide.pdf

Impacts to the Crystal Cave and Potential Mitigation:

The NHPA considers an adverse effect to be something that impacts the qualities that make a site eligible to the NRHP. As discussed above, Crystal Cave is listed on the NRHP for its important information potential (criterion D in terms of the NRHP1), which mostly includes the buried cultural deposits that may remain. At present this is the only reason the site is listed on the NRHP. Given that Jemez Pueblo appears to consider the cave as important to them, Crystal Cave also may considered a traditional cultural property1 and eligible to the NRHP for other reasons (criterion A in terms of the NRHP2).

So what types of adverse effects might be occurring when climbers use the cave? The closure document states: “increasing popularity and demand for sport overhead rock climbing in Jemez Cave is in direct conflict with the preservation and protection of Jemez Cave.” That is pretty generic, but the document goes on to list a couple of primary impacts and what is being impacted. Since we don’t know the perspective of Jemez Pueblo and how climbing may affect why they consider the site important, I have to skip this issue. (1) Climber traffic on the ground leads to erosion of potentially significant buried cultural deposits and (2) climbing on the roof impacts the soot or cave feature that may have some important research value.

Given these impacts, how could the USFS design a management plan to mitigate these adverse effects and allow for climbing to occur at the cave again? Dealing with erosion is fairly straightforward and has been used elsewhere to great effect. Put down some type of cloth barrier, bring in clean fill as overburden up to whatever depth is necessary, then stabilize the site and approach trail so erosion is no longer an issue. A labor- and cost-intensive solution to be certain, but if everyone interested in climbing at the cave donated monies or time this would be a reasonable solution for the USFS despite their current lack of funding. This also would have been a great solution for the Mushroom Boulder at Hueco Tanks, but from a bureaucratic perspective a closure is much easier most of the time.

How could the USFS mitigate the impacts from climbers as “their shoes smear some of the soot each time they climb in the cave and chalk marks are left on the sooted roof?” I don’t really think the USFS can distinguish whether a hold is chipped and the Crystal Cave climbers seem to agree no modification occurred so I will skip that perceived impact. Before answering that I have to go back to the past/existing conditions at the cave to note that campfires were very common over the decades prior to climbing. In my opinion, this type of impact severely diminished the information potential in the soot before climbers ever got there. Further, I have not seen any extensive body of research that indicates roof soot is an important dataset when it has been so impacted subsequent to the original prehistoric use of the cave. From my perspective, there would therefore be no need to mitigate for climbers impacting the cave roof since the information potential in the soot has already been so heavily compromised.

1. A traditional cultural property is an historic property whose significance is derived from the role the property plays in a community's historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices, which is explained in greater detail here: nps.gov/nr/publications/bul….
2. There are variety of ways a historic resource can be eligible to the NRHP, including its association with important events in the past (criterion A) or its important information potential (criterion D), which is explained in greater detail here: nps.gov/nr/publications/bul….

Conclusion:

Sweet, if only I ruled the world or ran the USFS then mitigation of impacts and a management plan would be straightforward and folks could climb at the cave again! Well, I totally understand why it is not so simple. Critically, none of us really understand the concerns of Jemez Pueblo (including perhaps the USFS) and their perspective is critical to shaping any management plan. This leaves me thinking that the best thing to do is remain engaged in the process, voice your opinion in a constructive way, and try to understand the decisions being made while being respectful of the various parties and perspectives. Don’t get me wrong because I know how much patience this requires and how painful it is—the glacial pace of decision-making at the USFS can drive anyone mad even when one considers how understaffed they are. My condolences to those who lost their important climbing area and are pissed about it. I really hope we can avoid similar situations in the future.

William

As retribution against Jemez Pueblo for closing crystal cave, I am making a pledge to ban any business related to this tribe. I encourage other climbers to do the same.

I will never buy any gas, Jolley Rancher push pops, doritos, mountain dew, Sour Skittles, Beef Jerkey, Peanut Butter M&Ms, bubble Yum,hot Cheetos, red Bull, Beer (hey cousin wha happen..uh), or lays Potatoe chips from thier gas stations ever again!

Road side Indian Tacos? Fuck off, packing a sandwich instead. Oh ya, me and La Lloronna are putting a curse on the Jemez Pueblo Too ! Ha! Take that!! Close my Crystal Cave I'll show you!

I agree 100% with Lafayette, I too have decided not to purchase anything from Jemez Pueblo businesses. While it may have a negligible effect, if enough people did it, perhaps it would begin to hurt the Pueblo's revenue source. If I had infinite money I would love to purchase a billboard just outside their boundary's urging people not to purchase from the Pueblo.

(From the Article) I'm not surprised they managed to issue 1900 speeding citations, there is a cop there every time I go through the Pueblo. Is this for genuine safety concerns or to get extra revenue to hire more lawyers for land grabs?

I'll stop now before I really start ranting...