Comment from Gopel, Jonathan

I live and recreate in Colorado. Due to the great natural beauty of this state, it's blanked in federal lands, and these lands naturally are managed by a variety of different agencies. As a result, it's not uncommon for me to pass through lands regulated by multiple federal agencies on a single day, or to go climbing on land regulated by one agency on Saturday and another agency entirely on Sunday. Having a consistent set of regulations around climbing between the agencies would be of great benefit to me in establishing expectations for the hardware that keeps me safe. Additionally, the placement and replacement of safe fixed anchors is a major issue. In the past month, I have found everything from anchors installed in the past year, to anchors that must have been over 50 years old and appeared to have been made in someone's garage. These older anchors always give me pause and I think it would be horrible for a failure of an anchor like that to cause the injury or death of a climber because it wasn't able to be replaced for regulatory reasons. I support the recognition that climbing is an appropriate Wilderness activity and that fixed anchors, critical pieces of the climbing safety system, are allowable in Wilderness. I also support provisions to allow climbers to place or replace fixed anchors without authorization in the event of an emergency. I appreciate that the policy protects existing climbing routes that were developed before the PARC Act was passed into law. Legacy Wilderness climbs should remain available in order to preserve America’s rich climbing legacy. Please improve policies to expedite timely replacement of fixed anchors in order to avoid unnecessary barriers to climber safety. The authorization process for new climbing routes that require fixed anchors should be easier to navigate. Please provide a clear path for programmatic authorization, or preauthorization, at climbing areas that do not necessitate case-by-case special use permits.