Home

Closures 2008

Status Reports

Baboquivari
Flagstaff
Jacks Canyon
McDowell Mountains
Pinnacle Peak
Prescott

MCDOWELL SONORAN PRESERVE

Status: 11-01-99

The following are the meeting minutes from a meeting Bill and I attended, as explained below. This is the tentative high-level blueprint for managing climbing in the McDowells. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 623-878-3914 or email me at wschroeter@sprintmail.com.

Bill Berkley, Scottsdale resident and commissioner on Scottsdale’s McDowell Sonoran Preserve Commission (MSPC), and I, Wayne Schroeter, Arizona Mountaineering Club Access representative, met with Bob Cafarella, Preservation Director and Carla, Executive Director of the McDowell Sonoran Land Trust and Preserve Commissioner (Carla is chair of the Planning Committee of the Preserve Commission), on Oct 29. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the conceptual framework for how the recreational activity of climbing will be managed in Scottsdale’s new McDowell Sonoran Preserve. (Also invited but unable to attend were Tom Matthews, Regional Coordinator for the Access Fund, and Paul Dief, Board Member of the Access Fund. I spoke to both Tom and Paul prior to the meeting to make sure we asked all the proper questions.)

It is important to note that although Scottsdale has purchased much of the southern Preserve area (consisting mainly of the McDowell Mountains) and about 800 acres of the northern Preserve area, the city still needs to complete the acquisition of the rest of the land, including the bulk of the northern area, which includes Little Granite Mountain and Cholla Mountain and consists mainly of State Trust Land. Plans are moving forward under the assumption that all the land called for in the two Scottsdale elections will eventually be acquired.

We started by discussing the PRESERVE PHILOSOPHY.

First and foremost, the Preserve is intended to preserve the natural state of the land. Passive recreational activities that are compatible with this preservation will be managed with this in mind. Currently, mountain biking, hiking, horseback riding and climbing are among the recognized passive recreational activities. Representatives of these user groups participate on committees of the Preserve Commission.

Second, motorized vehicles will not be allowed in the Preserve, so dirt bikes and ATV’s will be prohibited from entry, effective at the time Scottsdale takes possession of the land. Visitors using the Preserve will park in designated access areas, and will hike, bike or horse-ride to their intended destinations.

Third, trails will be designated that are compatible with the allowable passive recreational activities. The Planning Committee of the Preserve Commission is working with each user group to identify trail and other needs and issues. For example, mountain bike trails already exist and were mapped prior to Scottsdale’s vote to establish the Preserve. However, when this information was presented to biologists, they concluded that there were too many trails, and that these trails would fragment wildlife habitat. The biking community has been asked to help consolidate trails – i.e., choose the best ones, etc. – to better preserve the land. (See below under “use and amenities” for a discussion of the trails needed by the climbing community.) Once trails are designated, visitors to the Preserve will be required to stay on them. Discontinued trails – and there are many social, or braided, trails – will be revegetated.

Fourth, if user groups’ needs change, they may apply for a permit to go off-trail. For example, if someone in the equestrian community wants to explore building a new trail, he or she may apply for a permit to check out the new route. Climbers will be allowed the same opportunity. There is no guarantee that such permission will be granted; each request will be looked at on its own merit.

In discussing the Preserve’s philosophy, I told Bob and Carla that both Tom and Paul, representing the Access Fund, were in agreement with the basic philosophy of the Preserve, and that neither has an objection to the above guidelines governing trails. The Access Fund has supported other management plans that preserve public lands, and has helped to develop guidelines that limit human impact.

Next, we discussed USE AND AMENITIES. Two main access areas are planned that are of the most interest to climbers: the Gardener’s Wall – Sven Slab area, on the north end of the McDowells, and the Little Granite Mountain access area near 136th Street and the power-line road north of Dynamite Boulevard.

The Gardener’s Wall – Sven Slab parking area is intended to be primarily for climbers and hikers. (Equestrians would like their main access to be on the northeast side of the McDowells; bikers are interested in areas farther north. Equestrians and mountain bikers may use this parking area to access trails that stay in the desert area north of the McDowells). Bob asked what facilities we might need in this area. Bill and I told him we basically need parking and restrooms (human waste is one of the two biggest problems most public land managers face; the other is braided trails). Although drinking water would be nice for some people, we climbers have always taken our own supply and can continue to do so. Water is not yet an option, as that infrastructure has not reached the area. Also, we discussed the location of the parking area. We suggested a location that provides equi-distant access to Gardener’s Wall and Sven Slab. While this will increase the approach time over today’s, we are only talking about perhaps a ten-minute increase. We felt that locating the parking closer to one area or the other would encourage the creation of social trails, or shortcut trails, perhaps from the developed area north of Pinnacle Peak Road, which could create problems in the neighborhoods.

The Little Granite Mountain access area will be used routinely by all user groups, although it may be of more importance to climbers. We didn’t discuss the actual amenities required at this location (water, restrooms, etc.), but we did discuss the location itself, perhaps just north of the power-line road and just west of 136th Street. The location of the parking area may add up to ten minutes to the approach time to the most-used climbing areas (Lost Bandanna Wall and the Loaf). It is .4 miles from the gate to the road with the old rusted water tank. This will also be the closest access point for both Cholla Mountain and the northern areas of Little Granite, such as Mogul Wall. It takes about 30 minutes to hike from this access area to the Mogul Wall parking area (based on my hike after the meeting). It will be about a 3.5-4 mile hike to today’s Cholla Mountain parking area.

We noted that it would take longer to get to our historical climbing areas at Little Granite and Cholla, but neither Bill nor I have a concern about that. Under current State Land Department management, we can drive a little closer, but we also have noisy motorbikes to contend with. In the Preserve, we will have a more natural area to climb in. The areas that are the most popular now will be almost as accessible as they are today; the areas that are not as accessible now will be less accessible. The benefit to us will be the ability to climb in a more remote area, without distractions such as buildings, cars, etc. Without the Preserve, we would face the probability of climbing on walls overlooking tile roof communities or golf courses – see Pinnacle Peak Park.

We then discussed MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP AND LIABILITY CONSIDERATIONS.

Along with discussing the facilities, we talked about the climbing areas themselves. The intent of the Planning Committee of the Preserve Commission has been to allow climbing in the historical climbing areas. I suggested to Bob and Carla that we use the areas as defined in Greg Opland’s guidebook, Phoenix Rock II. Most of the areas in the McDowells are well-known to the Committee already: Tom’s Thumb, Sven Slab, etc., but the Little Granite and Cholla areas are somewhat new to them. However, it would be unfair to ask Bob and Carla to commit to this proposal as yet, since they have not looked at the guidebook, and since we are dealing only with a conceptual framework at this time. The task of officially designating all the historical climbing areas will be handled later; again, however, the current intent is to allow climbing in the “historical climbing areas.”

In order to get to the climbing areas, we will have to designate and possibly build “destination trails.” These are user-group specific trails, such as climbing access trails. They do not have to conform to the trail specifications of “primary” or “secondary” trails; e.g., so many feet wide, limited to a certain percentage grade, etc. These destination trails will lead us to the climbing areas and between the climbing areas. When the time comes to designate or build these, we will work in a “management partnership” with the city. Bob stated that he would like to have the climbing user group’s help in building these trails. Again, Phoenix Rock II already suggests the historical trails used to access these areas, and we will probably use this as a guide to recommend trails to the city. I envisioned the main climber trail at Little Granite as being a “U” enclosing the southern end of the mountain, instead of making a complete circuit, to better protect it as a “climber trail,” and not for use as a bike or horse trail. This will help keep non-climbers out, which is a concern of the city. Also, it will always be the intent to use existing trails rather than build new ones, if possible, and abandoned trails may be revegetated. Other user groups will work with the city to build, maintain or consolidate their own special interest trails.

Bob indicated there is the expectation the climbing community would adopt the access area at Gardener’s Wall and Sven Slab in terms of the minimum maintenance that will be required. I indicated this is something the community has done frequently in other locations and should not be an issue here. Bob also raised the point of seeking funds from the community to assist in providing the limited amenities required in the access area.

As regards “climbing management,” the city currently intends to take a hands-off policy, and is expecting the climbing community to police itself. This applies to new routes in the historical climbing areas, fixed anchors, etc. We simply have to abide by the same guidelines as all visitors to the Preserve. Signage will be important as will monitoring use and impact on the Preserve.

I noted that Tom, Paul and I have met with Bill Exham, Scottsdale’s Community Services Director, and Bill has collected information from us and from other sources (about how other communities handle the recreational activity of climbing) and passed it on to Scottsdale’s Risk Management Department. This department must analyze the liability risk the city is exposed to and make recommendations to the City Council about how to minimize this risk. This analysis will probably be the basis for evaluating climbing in the Park and in the Preserve, although there may be some differences.

I left the meeting feeling that the climbing user group has been well-represented, and that the needs of our group have been well-met. We will retain historical use of the climbing areas; we will be responsible for self-policing these areas; and we will have trail access and Preserve management policies that will help preserve the recreational activity of climbing for future generations.