Primary concern is negative environmental effects
Editor:
I live with my wife and daughter adjacent to Devil’s Glen Provincial Park and some MNR land known as the Reinhold Property. My wife and I have been put in the position where we have to speak out about the evolution of a large scale rock climbing destination that does not align with the intended land use. For the last 12 years we have been contacting the provincial park, the MNR, the Niagara Escarpment Commission, the Ontario Alliance of Climbers (OAC) and many more regarding our concerns about the negative effects of bolting and overdevelopment of bolted rock climbing routes in this area. Our primary concern has always been the negative environmental effects that this activity has had on the fragile south facing cliff face forest, not the sport of climbing itself. All the policies, documents and scientific papers written about this area support protecting this area as a nature reserve, with a focus on protecting the natural values. Ontario Parks will have to clarify their position on this issue, and how they plan on managing the increased use in this fragile ecosystem. There are currently 130 bolted rock climbing routes, a 94 per cent increase in Devil’s Glen Provincial Park since 2014. None of these routes have received permission from land managers.
Anyone familiar with Devil’s Glen, or has been climbing there since 2010 will have noticed the explosion in bolted route development. Little care or regard has been given to ecologically sensitive areas as many new routes appear in provincially significant buffer zones. Rock climbers have identified this area as a “grey” or murky area in regards to regulation and enforcement which has resulted in overdevelopment with no oversight from land managers. I wish this was an isolated instance, however it is very similar to the way climbers overdeveloped other climbing areas like Lion’s Head and the Swamp, two other areas that were mentioned in The Echo.
If Ontario Parks decides it is going to officially permit rock climbing, or they plan on continuing with their “blind eye” historical use approach then we suggest they give consideration to the environment first and foremost. We as a family have suffered other effects from this activity and the overdevelopment; trespassing, parking, litter, noise, etc., as well as online pressure. Trespassing could be limited if the OAC removes any maps that they may have previously posted that passes through private property. Parking should not occur on 124 or the 10th Concession, as both are dangerous sections of road with limited sight lines, high speed limits, large trucks and farm vehicles. Ontario Parks should expand their current parking for all park users.
As we move forward it is my hope that we will appreciate and value our natural environment. Care and regard should be given in equal amounts to the smallest of snails or to the largest of eagles, and even the small and scraggly cedars that are so incredibly old and resilient. We did not create any of the policy, scientific research or partake in the designation of the land. We simply want the protections in place to be applied, so this special place can be enjoyed by future generations.
Adam Pearce,
Singhampton.
