McKenzie Long | Climbing and Our Changing Relationship with Public Lands

McKenzie Long started climbing like many of us did, indoors, in a midwestern climbing gym, far from the vast landscapes and towering rock formations of the American West. But her love of climbing – and dream of becoming a writer – led her to those places soon enough, and also led her to consider our relationships with those places. Her book, This Contested Land: The Storied Past and Uncertain Future of America’s National Monuments, explores those relationships and their impact.

Photo: Veronica Palmer

McKenzie’s writing has earned her much praise; she won Nowhere Magazine’s “This Land Is…” contest in 2018 and was named the Terry Tempest Williams Fellow for Land and Justice at the Mesa Refuge in 2019.

Photo: Jeff Fox

Photo; Jack Cramer

DISCUSSED IN THIS EPISODE:

• McKenzie’s journey from climbing gym employee to published author.

• What IS a national monument exactly? And how is it different from a national park?

• The unfortunate reality of politicians using legislation regarding national monuments for their own benefit.

• McKenzie’s hopes for the future of national monuments and public lands, as both a climber and a parent.

FULL EPISODE TRANSCRIPT:

McKenzie Long  00:05

Maybe this is one of the main things I wanted to convey with this book, was that places are important to people and then people are also important to those places.

Kris Hampton  00:36

What's up, everybody? I'm your host, Kris Hampton. Welcome to the Power Company Podcast brought to you by powercompanyclimbing.com. Spring is imminent, thank goodness, maybe more than any other year, I just cannot wait. We've had a lot of snow here this year, more days than I'd like under 20 below 0. So I'm very ready for warmer days, wildflowers, and some sport climbing. Yes, sport climbing. Boulders too, of course. But I'm excited to be getting back on a rope and see if I can recapture some of what I used to feel while clipping bolts. We'll see. I've been detailing that process for the Patrons. So if you're interested, consider getting involved, the link's right there in your show notes. Anyway, this past Christmas, my wife and daughter and I decided to head toward Bishop to learn how to go on bouldering trips with the baby. And as soon as the idea of that trip began germinating, I had one interview on my mind. I'm so happy that it worked out and that I can bring it to you today. I met McKenzie Long at Rock Quest gym where I trained in Cincinnati, Ohio. And she eventually left to be a writer and I followed her career from afar. And I know that it's completely nonsensical, but I'm always a little proud when someone from Cincinnati or Red River Gorge makes their mark on the climbing community in some way. Since leaving, McKenzie has interned with Alpinist magazine, written and become managing editor for Outdoor Gear Lab and written two guidebooks, including Super Topo's second edition of High Sierra Climbing, and she was just getting started making her mark. Then in 2018, she won Nowhere magazine's "This Land Is" contest and in 2019, was named the Terry Tempest Williams Fellow for Land and Justice at the Mesa Refuge. And in 2022, she released a beautiful book called "This Contested Land: the Storied Past and Uncertain Future of America's National Monuments". In the book, she explores the relationship that we humans have with public lands, and how our relationships shape the future of those same public lands. I've been thinking a lot about the same themes. McKenzie's book not only helped me connect some dots, but it pushed me into thinking about things in totally different ways. Let's get into it. 

Kris Hampton  03:37

First thing I want to know, like when I, when I read the book, I was pretty immediately, like I've written my own little book, you know, this is a much more substantial undertaking than what I did. And it's built on this idea that sort of germinated in your climbing but then grew into this obviously, much bigger thing. And you and I know each other from a gym in Cincinnati. So I'm curious what that journey looked like: from gym employee in Cincinnati, Ohio, to doing all the research it took and the travel it took and the time spent writing it took to put this book, "This Contested Land" together.

McKenzie Long  04:28

That's sort of like my life trajectory in some ways. It's starting in Cincinnati, fell in love with climbing. I moved out to Jackson, Wyoming to be an unpaid intern at Alpinist magazine. And that was my first experience of mountain town life or like a really outdoor-centric community. And at the time, I was like, "Oh, I'm gonna be here forever. I just love it so much." But I was only there for a couple of years before I ended up coming out here to the Mammoth/Bishop area, because there's more rock climbing out here. And my partner at the time, him and I were both really obsessed with climbing at Indian Creek. And so we would go there every April and October and spend a whole month there. And right around 2016, we we split up. And I remember, it was in the spring, and he left and immediately went to Indian Creek. And I stayed back, and was packing up our apartment and stuff. And I decided not to go that year. And I just felt like sort of a loss of the place. And I wouldn't blame him for that, it was like my own decision to not go, but it felt... I did feel like, oh, this place that I've come to love so much like, I don't, like I just miss it. And it was very, like visceral, missing of it. And then that winter was when President Obama designated Bears Ears National Monument, which includes Indian Creek. And I remember one of my climbing friends saying, "Oh, well, there's no way that this is going to be good for climbing there." And I was like, "Huh, I wonder if that's true or not, I actually have no idea what it means for the climbing there." Or the rest of it for that matter, because the monument is huge and Indian Creek is actually just a very small part of it. And the times that I was climbing there, I felt like it was, it was a very free place, there wasn't paid camping, you could kind of camp wherever. I mean, at first, there was only one bathroom and a really long line to wait in for it in the mornings. And now there's more parking lots and more bathrooms and campsites and things like that. And some of that I think was changing even before it became a monument. But um, I think for me the combination of having had this feeling of separation from one place that I had really come to love, and also being curious about what this national monument meant for this place I loved, inspired me to start looking into what a national monument was. And the first thing I realized is there wasn't really that much written about national monuments. There's tons and tons of stuff out there about national parks. And so to me, I was like, "Oh, this seems like a little bit like uninvestigated." And so I wanted to look into it more. And I wanted to talk to other people about what Bears Ears or the area around Bears Ears meant to them. And as I was realizing how much of a story there was around that place, it kind of expanded and made me curious about other places around the country. And so yeah, I went on a journey to visit and talk to a lot of people.

Kris Hampton  07:50

Yeah, well, number one, I didn't know you moved to be an unpaid intern. I think that's, that's a big, scary leap. I think that's wonderful. Number two, one of the things I really love about the book is that there are all these personal experiences of yours in there. And what you just mentioned, this, you and your partner splitting up – that and there was this sense of loss for Indian Creek, like that was our place now he's there and it's not my place anymore. And I think that sort of carries over through the whole book, where some people feel a sense of loss when a monument is stripped of its status. Some people feel a sense of loss when it's given its status, for whatever reason. So I think it's really brilliant. And makes it for, makes for a compelling reading to add your own personal life into there. I actually, I was so engrossed in it when I was reading it that I got up late one night... because I didn't want to have the lights on and keep the baby awake, I got up and I got an orange Post-It and fashioned it to the lens of my headlamp, so the light would, wouldn't be as bright and would be orange. And I spent probably 30 minutes making this thing so I could lay in bed and read it without waking anyone up. So, so I love that you have that stuff in there. But what was it about Indian Creek, first of all, that drew you in so deeply that it then launched this investigation?

McKenzie Long  09:37

Well, I mean, initially it was just the climbing and feeling just really challenged by and inspired by the climbing there. But I think the longer I spent climbing there, the more I realized that I was just like loving the desert and the place itself so much. There's just amazing light there in the mornings and evenings and there's really complex life. I think coming from Ohio, I had the sense that deserts were wastelands with nothing in them, but it seems actually like, very complex and full of life there. I mean, even the soil is alive there, cryptobiotic soil. And, and so learning that about the desert and falling in love with it and having so many special experiences with friends there made it really wonderful. And I think sort of what I was mentioning the the sense at first, that there was a lot of freedom there that we could go and spend a month there and not have to pay for camping. And we could kind of do whatever we wanted. And I felt like it was really open for me having a relationship with that type of place that felt like me, and that place kind of had a bond.

Kris Hampton  10:59

Yeah, I think it's really important to find those places and cultivate those relationships. You know, I think it's something a lot of climbers do. But I also think it's the thing a lot of climbers miss, I certainly came into climbing more from the athletic standpoint, and perspective. And that's what drove the first I have 15, maybe even 20 years of my climbing was, was that athletic gymnastic pursuit. And it really wasn't until spending a lot more time in the west and, and spending time in the West, not on two week trips, where I get to like roam around in these areas by myself, that I really started to think more deeply about the land and the landscape and what it means and how it's changed and what it's meant to other people, you know, throughout history. And I just I think it's so important to cultivate that kind of relationship with the landscape around us.

McKenzie Long  12:11

And I think climbing is uniquely suited to that as well. Because like, when you think about it, you have to get to know the rock in order to climb well on it. And at least for me, when I go to new places, sometimes the climbing feels really hard at first because you're trying to figure out what that rock is like, and what is the character of the place. And then once you figure it out, you're like, Oh, now now I know how I can approach this. And so it is kind of a getting to know the intricacies of a place when you go there.

Kris Hampton  12:40

Yeah, I think so it feels really good to do that. I think, let's dive a little bit into the book in This Contested Land is essentially, Well, I'll let you say what the book is. And then I'd love for you to sort of explain the difference between a national monument and a national park.

McKenzie Long  13:00

Okay. Um, well in This Contested Land, I visit 13 different national monuments. And they're all newer ones, they were all designated 1996. And later. And I talked about, I think I talked about a lot of different things in each chapter. And with each monument. So sometimes I talk about the environmental challenges, sometimes they talk about the modern, political, back and forth or challenges. And I talk about the history, some of the natural history, some of the human history. And I talked to a lot of different people that care about these places, whether they were advocates for the monuments becoming designated, or biologists that have studied some of the wildlife around there, or just people that have a long history with the place. And I tried to find what some of the stories behind the places are. So the main difference between a national park and a national monument is that National Parks are created by Congress. So they're voted on. And I think throughout that process, there's probably lots of compromise that happens to get to the final vote that approves the park. And national monuments, with a few exceptions are created by presidential proclamation, which means that there's no vote. And I think in practice, presidents do require some broad public support before they will designate a monument but the reality is they can just sign a piece of paper and create a monument with no one say yeah, which is kind of wild. It is wild. I don't think there's a lot of things that the President can do that way. And so understandably, it makes some people angry every time a monument is designated because they feel like they didn't have a say or it's not the right thing for that state or things like that.

Kris Hampton  14:57

It feels like this big government land grab.

McKenzie Long  14:59

Yeah. Exactly. And so I think technically, when a president creates a monument, it has to be on land that's already federally managed. So Forest Service or BLM land is most common. And so it's not actually changing ownership or changing hands, I guess. But it is changing the management status and what's allowed to happen on that land.

Kris Hampton  15:21

It's not like an eminent domain situation where they're like, Oh, we want this to be a national monument now or taking your property? Yeah.

McKenzie Long  15:29

I think there are sometimes private land holdings within the boundaries, and then they work on exchanges with that, but yes, not like eminent domain.

Kris Hampton  15:38

And there are quite a few other differences that that I think are really important to the stories that you tell in your book, one of those is that if there are grazing and mining rights in an area, they generally speaking, stay the same as that right?

McKenzie Long  15:57

Yeah, usually, um, leases such as like water and grazing leases stay the same once the monuments created. I think even mining leases usually remain. And I think sometimes if a monument is created, and there are grazing or mining leases, they might work towards trying to purchase those and eventually work towards moving it out. But often they don't, they don't try to remove leases that are already in existence.

Kris Hampton  16:26

And then they don't really allow new ones.

McKenzie Long  16:29

Often they don't. And I think one thing that's like, um, maybe like a nitpicky thing about it is that the whatever, amid whatever managing agency is in charge of that place, it kind of the monument is then administered based on their values, which is a little bit different. Like if it's the National Park Service, it's going to be a little bit more focused on preservation and tourism. If it's the BLM, there's a lot more stuff that's allowed on BLM land than is allowed in a national park. And so then, a BLM administered monument would allow more things on the land. Yeah,

Kris Hampton  17:12

I think that part of it's fascinating that not all national monuments are overseen by one entity, like the National Park Service's, yeah, there's BLM National Forest National Park. And it gets divvied up sometimes they're overseen by multiple agencies, right?

McKenzie Long  17:31

Yeah, because a monument could cross boundaries between national forests and BLM. And so rather than consolidate it, they just share the management of the monument.

Kris Hampton  17:41

As someone who collaborates with other people, a lot just with another single person, I can't imagine trying to collaborate with a whole other agency on how we're going to keep this land organized in the way that we want it to.

McKenzie Long  17:57

Yeah, I don't know how they do it, it's probably really challenging. But I think that that's also sometimes like why some of these places are success, because they have to, they require so many people then to get invested in it and care about it that in some ways, I think that that's been a positive. 

Kris Hampton  18:13

I think that's one of the things I really love about your book, too, is I come into everything with a cynical point of view, like, "Oh, wow, two organizations are trying to run this, it's gonna be fucked up." But you provide this other perspective quite often in the book. Like, I think it's, maybe it's clear to me because I've known you for a long time, that you're coming at it from one perspective, but you're giving the other perspective a voice a lot of the time. Was that what the plan was going in? Or did you have the idea that like, I want to push my own agenda?

McKenzie Long  18:54

No, I actually was trying really hard to try and give voice to multiple opinions. I didn't want to come out and make a really one sided book, I wanted it to show different perspectives. And I don't think I hide my opinion at all. I think I make it pretty clear what it is, I think. But I guess in today's day and age, I feel like things can often be so polarized, and I don't feel like we need more of that. And I wanted to I wanted to show a more nuanced and more balanced view, because national monuments are often very polarized issues. And especially when the more I got into it, and the more I talked to people that oppose monuments, there's actually a lot of commonalities there and the people that oppose monuments, and the people that are for monuments, for the most part, they often want very similar things. And they often the reason why they're arguing is because they're so passionate about these places, and they care about them so much. And so I mean, obviously that's not true with everything, but I was surprised that how much common ground there was even for people that don't agree at all on the main issue.

Kris Hampton  20:05

Yeah, it surprised me to read some of these perspectives sort of starting to blend and come together. At least from your point of view, I imagine those people with those differing perspectives aren't seeing the overlap nearly as much. But, but like I said, that's one of the things I love about this book, because I, my, my voice is a punch-you-in-the-face kind of a voice where I'm just like, "I'm going to give you my opinion, because it's right," you know. So it's hard for me to step back sometimes and look at the other, the other perspective.

McKenzie Long  20:42

That's funny, because that's like the exact perspective I was trying not to exhibit in the book.

Kris Hampton  20:48

That's great. That's great, right? I think we need all types, you probably need more of you more than we need more. So one of the like, the incidents, I guess, that illustrates the back and forth, that a national monument is maybe victim to is the Bears Ears situation, it went from Obama to Trump and now Biden and it's being changed constantly, it becomes this. It's a ping pong game. I think you describe it as ping pong somewhere, whether it was in another podcast or in the book. But talk to me a little bit about that. And I think there were two other monuments that Trump rolled back that Obama had given protection, is that correct?

McKenzie Long  21:40

And there was one other monument that he reduced the size of, and then one monument in the Atlantic, it was a marine monument that he removed the fishing restriction that came with the monument designation.

Kris Hampton  21:53

I'm not even going to try to pronounce the name of that monument. Do you? Do you know how to pronounce it without looking at it?

McKenzie Long  22:00

Well, so I think you're talking about a different one. But um, that's one in Hawaii. And the only reason I know how to pronounce it is because there's a video on the website of it, and I've watched it like 100 times trying to pronounce right but I think it's Papahānaumokuākea. Okay, but the the one that he changed was actually a different monument in the Atlantic. That's Northeast Canyons and Seamounts, I believe.

Kris Hampton  22:27

Got it. Got it. Okay, I had my two marine monuments confused? Well, let's talk about that political ping pong. I remember very clearly, when the like celebration of Bears Ears when Obama designated it, and then the fury among in the climbing community when Trump rolled those protections back. And at the time, I was like, "What is everyone up in arms about? This thing's only been in existence a few years to begin with." And I think that's a really short sighted view of it. It's obviously been in existence for much longer, it just didn't have that protection on it. And and I think it sent a signal when Trump rolled it back, kind of an anything goes signal. Whether that's just my again, my point of view the the cynic in me or not? I don't know. But I'm curious what your take on it all was? 

McKenzie Long  23:34

Well, I think that one of the most important aspects of Bears Ears was that the whole concept for it was indigenous-led. So there was indigenous groups working on this monument, its land that's important to them and their history and their communities now, and they really wanted it preserved. And they wanted to have a say, in what happens there. So they were the ones advocating for the monument and lobbying with the government to create the monument. And so when it was created, bomb Obama also, in the proclamation that designate the monuments, instituted tribal co management so that they could have a say in how the monument was run, and that's the first time that's happened. And so it was a really huge success for all of those people that had been working really hard for it. And so then when Trump rolled it back, it was kind of a slap in the face to all of those people that had achieved this wonderful thing. Because not only did he shrink it by 85%, which is a huge difference. He got rid of the tribal co management and was just basically ruining what they had worked so hard for. And then also what was interesting about it is, so Obama was able to create the monument with a proclamation, but no president has Um, eliminated a monument by proclamation before and he didn't eliminate it but he shrank it. But I don't think there wasn't quite a precedent in the law to know if that's allowed. the Antiquities Act, which is the law that allows presidents presidents to make monuments only talks about creating them, not altering them or shrinking them or removing them. And so there were a lot of scholars that were like, wait a minute, I don't I don't know if he can do that. But before that question has ever been answered, they rush through a management process to kind of read decide how that whole place was going to be managed. And and then the administration's changed, and Biden reinstated it so. And the question still isn't really answered in terms of presidential power and what the President can and cannot do. So if that doesn't get answered, by the time there's next president? Who knows? Maybe it'll be Trump again.

Kris Hampton  26:02

Don't even say that.

McKenzie Long  26:05

But the next president could choose to make it smaller again, because there hasn't really been a firm ruling saying that they can or can't do that.

Kris Hampton  26:14

Do you get the sense? I certainly do. I'm, you've spent a lot more time in this. So I'm curious what your sense of this is. But is it more a sense that there isn't someone in government who actually cares about the environment? And it's more just used as a political pawn? Or is there someone in there who's actually looking at all sides and saying, I just don't see the logical reason to keep this monument at its size?

McKenzie Long  26:49

Well, this is where I'm going to be cynical, but I think you're right, it does seem like monuments are used more as a political pawn than it is an actual sincere desire to protect or care about these places. I mean, if you look at when presidents create monuments, you can also kind of tell like, they're most often made by Democratic presidents in their second term, like they, they want to get reelected first, and then they're like, "Okay, now it doesn't matter. I can make as many monuments as I want." But they're not really doing that. At the beginning, I was predicting that Biden wasn't going to make any monuments till after midterms. But he actually did make one. And he's talking about another one. So but I guess it's back to the midterms now. But yeah, it seems like it's more, more to please certain people and look a certain way than it is.

Kris Hampton  27:45

Yeah, I that's the sense I get from it as well. It feels to me like, I just listened to a great podcast about best selling albums by some of the top groups you've ever heard of. And it's almost always the album that comes after their actual really great album, that becomes the best seller. It's often not their best album, it's just their best seller, because they've put this thing out that everyone loved. And now everyone's going to rush out and buy the thing. So they can slack off on their next album. That's interesting. That's sort of how it feels. With national monuments. And the way you just described it, like their their second term is when they're going to start doing these things, because they're looking for reelection and whatever. You go to 13. You said, when you started the project, did that did that idea originally show up? I need to go to all 13 of these places? Or was it first day, I can just write about these things. Because I know when I'm creating a podcast about a topic I don't know a lot about, I don't feel like I need to go to Mongolia to learn about reindeer, I can learn about them on the internet, do my little thing. Well, what was the reason to go there?

McKenzie Long  29:15

Well, that's an interesting question. Because I don't think it ever crossed my mind that I could write about them without going there. And, I mean, I proved that to myself, because I would before I would go, I would do all this research, and I would have an idea of what the place would be like, and then I would go there and it would be completely different than what I thought. And like, I remember when I went to Rio Grande Del Norte in New Mexico, I thought I was gonna go and learn about water rights because the Rio Grande is a big part of the monument and, and I just I had one idea of what the place was going to be about. And then when I got there and talked to people, it was an entirely different story. I mean, it was a little bit about water, but it was so different being there and talking to the people there, that I could never have figured that out on the internet. And I'm not trying to diss people that write things based on research they do. But for me and for this, when what I really wanted to convey was a sense of these places and really get a feel for them, it felt important to me to go there. And, and that also gave me a visual sense of what I could write about.

Kris Hampton  30:25

I think that's fascinating. Because if we look at places like Red River Gorge, or Joe's Valley, and a lot of climbing areas that are adjacent to small communities, climbers tend to come in with this, "I don't want to interact with the locals or the lawmakers, I want to do my thing," you know, and everyone's kept at a distance as much as possible. What was it like going into these areas? And how did you connect with the people you connected with? How much of it was researching ahead of time and setting up interviews versus meeting people through, you know, local chain of events or whatever?

McKenzie Long  31:11

Mostly, I did a lot of cold calling. And I would try and set up interviews before I got there. There were some people that I met while I was there. And it was hard because I had never written a book before. I didn't really have any cred to be like, "Hey, will you talk to me about this really personal things such as your connection to this place?" But for the most part, I was kind of astounded by how open and generous a lot of people were in southern New Mexico. With Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks, I got in touch with this guy named Angel Pena, and it was just a random email I sent to a guy who looked like he was connected to this place. And he had, he had been a really strong advocate for designating the monument. And he was just incredible. He was like, "Oh, yeah, you should come, I'm gonna call all my friends and all of the people I know, that have worked to create this monument, and we're all gonna go out and have beers." And I got to talk to, like, 10 different people who all cared about this place. And then the next day, I went out with him and his daughter to his very favorite place. And like, he just he spent a lot of time with me, telling me about what was amazing about this place. And he didn't need to do that. Like, he just did that out of the goodness of his heart and his passion for the desert out there. And for the most part, that's how it felt with the people that I ended up speaking with is they were excited to tell me about the places that they cared so much about because sort of like my connection to Indian Creek, they had connections to these places, and they were eager to talk about it.

Kris Hampton  32:49

I loved that story with Angel Pena and his daughter out with you. I thought that was beautiful, especially being a new parent to a new daughter myself. 25 years after my first daughter. I loved hearing that. And again, that's, that's one of the things that makes the book so enjoyable to read, are all these personal experiences you're having with people. It is feels like when a monument is created, there's a heavy lean toward conservation. Is that fair to say? Yeah, whether it's for archaeological reasons, or biological, ecological, whatever it is, there's some sort of conservation in there. How do you – I'm gonna make a statement and I'm curious what your take on the statement is – the statement I hear repeated over and over in some way, shape, or form, and that's that climbers are better stewards of the land and conservationists than X-recreation, you know, whether whatever that other recreation is, climbers are better. How do you feel about that?

McKenzie Long  34:10

I think that's really interesting. And that's actually something I thought about a lot while I was writing this book, because I think I used to think that, too. And I say my opinion has shifted a little bit now. Because like, if you talk to ranchers, like I would say climbers think that they're way better stewards of land than ranchers who are destroying the land. But if you talk to the rancher, they actually think the opposite. They feel like they care for the land very much and the climbers are the ones destroying it. And, and I think that, that both can be correct in a way like, I think we need to be, we as climbers need to be a little bit more honest with ourselves about our impact. I mean, if you look at Indian Creek, climbers are in some ways destroying it. Like the most popular cracks there, the rock is not the same as it was before. The cracks are widening a little bit, they just are rounding, rounding. Like just the fact that so many climbers are going there, have created parking lots and bathrooms, and those are things that are necessary, but at the same time, that's not actually like great for the place. And I'm not saying that there shouldn't be climbing there. I don't think that. But I do think that we need to recognize the impact that climbing does have and understand that. And that might mean that sometimes, there's places that we shouldn't climb. Like, I used to think, like, I remember looking at walls that were close to climbing and thinking, "Oh, it's such a tragedy, like, we should definitely be able to climb there. There's so much great stuff there." And now I think, you know, I think there's some places that we probably just shouldn't climb, and it's okay, there's plenty of other places that we can climb. And that's wonderful. And it's a beautiful gift. And we should appreciate that gift that we can climb there. But, you know, if there's places that are really sacred to some people, or they're like, a spiritual place for someone, like, we don't need to climb there, perhaps, you know.

Kris Hampton  36:07

Yeah, I feel the same way. And I, I think it's only human to feel like your user group does a really good job, you know, at all of these things. And I think when you step back and take a more objective look at the impact of climbers, and I mean, frankly, the selfishness of climbers, we don't do a great job. And you know, I, we're in Bishop right now, and yesterday was my first day ever bouldering in Bishop, and I watched a climber totally ignore one of the signs that said, you know, that that area was off limits. Just walk right past the sign, didn't didn't even look at it. And I thought, you know, we've all seen photos of Bishop from 25 years ago versus now. And the area around the boulders has changed pretty dramatically. So it's definitely, we have a lot of impact, whether we believe it or not, and I don't think it's enough to just in your head believe that you care about the environment if your actions are doing the exact opposite. Yeah, I think that's what we do a lot of the time.

McKenzie Long  37:30

I do think climbers, as a total generality, think, like, "Well, if there's climbing there, then we should be able to go there." And, and, like, so ignoring a sign like that someone's like, "Oh, but there's good climbing there. I just really need to climb it." And yeah, I think that that attitude could be evaluated a little bit more. But on the flip side of all this...

Kris Hampton  37:51

See this is what I love about you: "On the flip side."

McKenzie Long  37:54

I do think that recreation is what makes people care about places. Like if it wasn't for climbing and camping, I wouldn't have cared enough to write this book, which isn't really about climbing at all. And I think that for a lot of people that's true; that without outdoor recreation, and whatever their sport is, they wouldn't actually care about protecting places at all, because then it doesn't affect their life at all. And this is just one example, but if you look at some of the nonprofits, like conservation nonprofits like the Audubon Society, that's about protecting birds mostly for birds' sake, it's a little bit promoting bird-watching, which is a type of recreation, but it's mostly just about protecting birds. And then if you look at Ducks Unlimited, which protects wetlands for ducks, but at its core, it's about shooting ducks. Ducks Unlimited makes about twice as much revenue a year as Audubon Society. And it's because the people that care about that type of recreation, then also care about protecting it, and so in like recreation does have some benefit, because it does allow people to then have the relationships with these places that are special.

Kris Hampton  39:09

You've got a great point. In, in Lander, a lot of the people who go the hardest for conservation are the hunters. They're, they're interested in keeping these, the habitats for the species growing and thriving so that the species can grow and thrive, so that they can hunt. So I think you're right. I don't say that very often. But I think you talk about and I may be, I may be piecing together several parts of your book, so tell me if that's what I'm doing, I've built this image in my head. I don't remember which park you are, which monument you were at. But you wake up and realize you're closer to a, you hear a car and you realize you're closer to a road than you thought you were. And then there's also this butterfly, the Mardsden Skipper. Is that right? That inhabits this endangered grassland? And the Pacific Crest Trail goes right through the grassland. Is that right?

McKenzie Long  40:22

Yeah. Next to it. Yeah.

Kris Hampton  40:26

And you allude to in that chapter, whether it's worth it having the trail go through... like you're there to see this grassland and see this butterfly, and you question it, should there be a trail through it? Or should we just sort of lock it away? 

McKenzie Long  40:48

Yeah, And I don't know that I ever, I mean, I asked that question. But I don't know that I ever even come up with a full answer. Because I do think that it's important for people to see the beautiful places of the world. And that access to places is important. But at the same time, it's sometimes it's tough to justify, especially with something like the Pacific Crest Trail that's getting more and more popular and having more and more people hike on it, that maybe it is threatening the life of this butterfly that lives in this one little tiny place. And I think that the balancing act of trying to allow people access to places and protect places, is something that a lot of parks and monuments are grappling with right now. And I don't pretend to know the answers to that, because I can see both sides for that. But I do think that, yes, some really popular outdoor places like you can see this at Zion and Yosemite and places like that. They're like trying to figure out how to manage swarms of people that come there, because the place is so special, but also trying not to overrun it and ruin it at the same time.

Kris Hampton  42:05

Yeah, I feel that way about uh, you open the book, you and your sister are looking through ruins. I don't, you're not in Indian Creek. Where are you , are you in Bears Ears?

McKenzie Long  42:18

We're in Bears Ears. It's like more south than Indian Creek, but not near Indian Creek.

Kris Hampton  42:25

And I feel that way about ruins. There's just something about, even though they are a man made thing, knowing where they're at and promoting people going there seems strange to me for some reason. Like, I want to know where they are, you know, I want to go look at them. But I don't feel like they should be these publicly known things that people can just go walk through. And I'm not sure why that is. I can't, I can't grapple with that in my head enough for it to make sense.

McKenzie Long  43:05

I actually think that I don't know if it's the BLM or the Park Service, but there's like a rating system for ruins like that. Where there's like, the ones that are publicly known that are on maps. And that's one level. And then there's ones that are like commonly known but not on maps or anything. And so if you ask a ranger, they can tell you about them. And then there's ones that are really secret that they won't tell you about at all. And I kind of liked that, because in some ways, it's like, well, there's these ones that everyone can go see. And that's fine. But we're also going to try and keep some things a little more special and protected.

Kris Hampton  43:45

And you want to know where are those? 

McKenzie Long  43:47

Yes of course I do. And I tried to find out. But I think that there's always the desire to know but maybe it's good that they're not publicizing that. I think it's the same with certain trees, like the ancient bristlecones that are right outside Bishop here are I think some of the oldest trees in the world. And they won't tell you, like they're even named, but they won't tell you which one is which or where exactly they are.

Kris Hampton  44:13

Yep. I remember. I had this experience at RockQuest where used to work where we met. Years ago, my friend Jeff came in and was telling us about this tree that he had heard about. And he knew the name of the tree. And he had gone to the library and researched and researched and figured out where this tree was. And then my friend Justin, who's standing there says, "Oh yeah, it's in this place. Right?" And Jeff was like, "How do you know that?" He's like, "Oh, I heard a podcast about it last week." Jeff's like, "No one knows that." Justin's like, "Well, clearly they do." So I want to know where all those things are, but you're right, I'm glad they're, they're not publicized and that they do have that, you know that rating system, especially in a world where it's so easy to go to a place, post its coordinates to, you know to fulfill your Instagram influencer quota for the month or whatever. It's so easy to drive people to these places and make them seem like it's easy to get there. There's no prerequisite adventuring required, you know, and, and there's some part of me that's like, are we gatekeeping by doing that? Are we protecting and conserving by doing that or just being selfish by doing that? I don't know. It's such an interesting question to grapple with. And I think you, you illustrated it really well with that butterfly, that you never even saw?

McKenzie Long  46:09

No, I think I was there in the totally wrong season.

Kris Hampton  46:14

It's maybe poetic justice that you didn't see that.

McKenzie Long  46:17

Yeah, I think it was, I know that it's there. And its habitat is being protected. Somewhat at least.

Kris Hampton  46:24

Yeah. You as we get deeper into the book, you give some perspectives that surprised me. Not in that they exist, but that you went there and talk about these perspectives. And one of those perspectives is Cliven Bundy. Is that his name? And that like, that seems like the far extreme. But you make a fairly successful case, whether you were trying to or not, to say they love this land. So talk to me a little bit about that. I'm wrestling with that.

McKenzie Long  47:18

Um, well, so I didn't actually get to talk to Cliven Bundy, which would have been really interesting. But I did talk to...

Kris Hampton  47:25

Maybe a little scary. 

McKenzie Long  47:26

Yeah, it probably would have been scary. I did talk to this man named Ken Watson, I don't really want to link him up with the Bundys, but he is anti-monument. And one thing that I thought was really interesting about talking to him is that I actually agreed with him on a lot of things. And I didn't think I would going into the conversation. But he was like, he was like, well, when they make a monument, you don't even know what it's really going to be like until they make the management plan which can take 10 years. He's like, "Why would I trust the government to make a management plan that I agree with?" And I was like, he makes a good point. Because I feel like no matter who you are, you think the government has done some good things and some terrible things. And so why would we trust the government to protect this place that we have a relationship with, and that we care about very deeply? I don't actually know why I think the government can do a good job with that. But I guess I'm just optimistic. And so I understand where he's coming from and why he doesn't want a monument in his place. You know. And I think that that's, I mean, the Bundys are a little bit, perhaps more out there than that. They actually think of, of the land that's in Gold Butte national monument as their right, their land, like their inherited land from their family, and they don't believe the government can even own land.

Kris Hampton  48:48

And they're willing to arm themselves. 

McKenzie Long  48:50

Yeah, exactly. So yeah, they're like kind of the far extreme. And I don't know necessarily what the Bundys opinions are. I would like to think that they care for the land, but they could also just perceive it as a place that they can use for their own benefit. Because I know that they graze on land without paying for leases, and things like that. So. But I do think that there are plenty of people who oppose monuments that actually very deeply care about the place just as much as the monument supporter would.

Kris Hampton  49:26

Yeah. How much of this do you think is just the natural human resistance to change?

McKenzie Long  49:33

I think there's a lot of that for sure. Because, yeah, what Ken was saying is he's like, "Well, if they make a monument here, it's going to bring more tourists and change this place even more. And I just want it to stay the way it is. I don't think there's any reason to change it." But if you look at it, because he lives near Yellowstone National Park, up in Idaho, and if you look at where he lives, like there's already a lot of changes happening. There's already more tourists coming because people are getting more interested in going outdoors in general. And so, perhaps a monument would be better at keeping there the same? Maybe not? I don't know, it's hard to say.

Kris Hampton  50:15

Yeah, I think, I think it's a really interesting concept that both sides are just unwilling to accept change. And that's the... even if naming it a monument changes nothing, they're still resistant to it. And I think I've seen that a little bit in the climbing community. I'm a proponent of changing names. And if we want to get even deeper into that, I'm a proponent of stripping away this artificial power we've given to first ascensionists, to have control over names and bolts and all of these other things. And, and it makes no difference if we do that. Really. It's just the change of it that people have a really hard time with. "Why are we changing the name? We can't change the name. It's been this name for the last 10 years," you know, I'm like, "Well, but it didn't... it wasn't a named thing for the millennia before that."

McKenzie Long  51:17

Yeah, It's just a name. 

Kris Hampton  51:19

Yeah, who cares If we change it? You know, in your head, you can call it whatever name you want to, feel free. And I've actually gotten some pushback for suggesting that I'll call a route whatever I want to call it. I want to give it a different nickname, that's what I'll call it. You know, and people are like, "But it's this name." It doesn't have to be." And I think that's what it comes down to is we're all so scared of change that we aren't looking at the details. We aren't looking below the surface at all to see what the other side wants. And why they're so resistant to the change.

McKenzie Long  51:57

Yeah, kind of like the controversy about rebolting Snake Dike. Have you heard about that?

Kris Hampton  52:02

Yeah. Exactly. I mean, exactly like that. Like, it's obviously a dangerous thing. And I can see both sides. I appreciate the history. I appreciate the boldness with which it was established. But there's lots of opportunity to be bold out there if you want to. And if you don't want to clip the bolts, don't clip the bolt. Yeah, you know. So I don't know.

McKenzie Long  52:27

Yeah, I don't know about that, either. But you're right. It is like really a big resistance to change, ultimately. Otherwise, it wouldn't even be an issue. Right?

Kris Hampton  52:36

Yeah, totally, that that's how I feel about it, for sure. There's one part of the book I really want to talk about, that I found really interesting. In fact, I told multiple people about it right after I read it. And that was this idea that the owner of of land – which is this concept I think is really interesting as well, ownership of, of this land that's been here forever – and I don't remember what tribe it was, but they signified whose land it was through song. Like if you could sing about the land and its characteristics, then it was your land, which means it was a lot of people's land, and all you needed was to know it intimately. I think that's beautiful and fascinating.

McKenzie Long  53:38

I do, too. Like when the woman told me about that, I was just like, whoa, what an amazing concept. Because I feel like in our modern society today, we we look at places and fence them off, and we say, No trespassing, this is mine, you can't come here. And I just really liked the idea of if you know this place, like you said, if you know this place intimately, and you can talk about it and sing about the different intricacies of it, then, then you're part of that place. And that place is part of you. And that's all it takes.

Kris Hampton  54:13

Yeah, I remember, you know, celebrating, and the whole community celebrating the first land acquisitions by climbing groups, you know, the Access Fund, or the Red River Gorge Climbers Coalition was one of the very first and that left me wondering a little bit about that whole idea. And we are in like, we are playing the game. So so we have to play the game by its rules to some degree. So we couldn't just sing about the land and it's ours to climb on freely, you know. But it does make me question the idea of just continuing to do things the way we always have, when I read something like that, that seems so simple and effective.

McKenzie Long  55:02

Like you're saying, we shouldn't be trying to own places.

Kris Hampton  55:05

Well, in an ideal world that doesn't exist anymore. That would be amazing. Yeah, if you can sing about the Red River Gorge, then then you can climb there openly. Yeah. I love that idea that you have to spend time with a place and you have to get to know it more intimately in order to call it yours. Yeah, I like that idea a lot.

McKenzie Long  55:30

I do, too. And that was kind of like, one of the main things I wanted to convey with this book was just how intimately people can come to know places and care about them. And that the places are important to people, and then people are also important to those places.

Kris Hampton  55:51

Yeah, I think that's, I think that's such an important part of the book. You make another statement in there that just popped into my head with what... it was another statement that I really love that I just want to ask you about before we wrap this up. You mentioned how when we, when we designate something a national monument, or apply a conservation status to it or something, we call it "setting it aside." And you question that use of the word and anytime someone questions a usage, my ears perk up, because I love the intricacy of language. And you question why aren't we setting aside things for oil or drilling or ranching instead of setting them aside for conservation?

McKenzie Long  56:45

Yeah, it seems like we should be making a special exception for like, "Okay, we're gonna drill here because we really need to," rather than being like, "Well, everything's open for drilling, but we'll just put these places over here so we can save them." That sort of seems like what we're doing. And it feels like it should be the opposite.

Kris Hampton  57:03

Yeah, I agree. I hadn't thought of that at all until I read it. And it sort of hit me like a little bomb. That that's the way we refer to it. And I, I really believe that changing the way you talk about something can eventually have the effect of changing the way we think about something and the way everyone else thinks about something as well. So changing that language seems important.

McKenzie Long  57:29

Hmm, yeah, I think you're, I totally agree with you that, yeah, the way we talk about things does affect the way we think about things.

Kris Hampton  57:39

How has writing this book changed your relationship with climbing? I feel like when I started climbing, and I went out, like I mentioned at the very top of this thing, I gave no consideration toward the history of this land. It was all about who was the first ascentionist, who put these bolts in, that's the person I revere right now, you know? How has writing this changed your relationship with it?

McKenzie Long  58:13

I think I've become a lot more aware of, like you said, history, and in particular, indigenous history and learning a little bit about the people who were there first, and who regionally cared for the land and still do. I don't think I thought that much about that before. And I think that – maybe this is a lot more shallow, but – climbing is so goal oriented and focused on keeping your physical abilities up and making these achievements. And I've been really into climbing for, like, more than 10 years. And I think that with writing this book, I kind of allowed myself to relax a little bit on my goals and some of the things that I had been aiming for, and allowing myself to enjoy different aspects of places and some quieter moments. Like, I was like, Oh, I'm actually kind of getting really interested in watching birds and my friends are all teasing me. They're like, what, like birds now? And, and maybe that's also just like, part of my age or the season of my life. But I just feel like I was allowing myself to appreciate a lot of different things and finding joy outside of just setting goals and trying to send projects or things like that. Which I think both are good.

Kris Hampton  59:44

Yeah, I agree. Can you combine the two like simultaneously? Are there moments when you're climbing where you're taking completely out of the climbing for, you know, to notice the world around you? Or do you have to separate the two? Even if you're out on the same day that you're going climbing do you have to walk away from the climb to do it? I'm curious.

McKenzie Long  1:00:12

I hadn't ever considered it in those terms before. But I would say, I don't know, maybe on like a long route sitting at a belay, I can look out and be like, "Wow, I'm just in this incredibly beautiful place right now, I'm really lucky to be here." So I don't think you always have to be totally separated from the climbing. But also, I mean, that's one of the beauties of climbing is that you're totally focused on just that. And I think that's also why climbing is so appealing. And so I think it's nice to appreciate, it's nice to appreciate places, and it's also nice to appreciate the movement and the meditation of climbing.

Kris Hampton  1:00:49

Yeah, I feel like climbing has become a vehicle for me for further exploration. Whether that's physical exploration or not, I, before this trip, I read several things about the history of the area. Whether it's mountaineering history, and I'm not at all interested in mountaineering, or its indigenous history, interesting facts about the area, I love reading about those things before I go to a new place. And then while I'm at the place, its interesting. I think bouldering allows this in a way that maybe sport climbing doesn't, that when I'm not climbing, I can explore and feel separate from the climbing. Whereas like, if I'm at a crag, I'm at the crag, you know. And the, the act of bouldering is so condensed, that it's like I focus in these really brief moments, and then I can look around a little more and notice the, the plants and you know, signs of wildlife. Or in Hueco, one of our favorite things is to go look at the different indigenous art that's around the park. So I do think, for me anyway, I need to separate them somehow. It's really hard for me to do both at the same time. It's hard for me to remember to turn around and look at the top of a sport route and notice the setting.

McKenzie Long  1:02:37

It is hard to remember. Because I've had, I've had friends be like, "Oh, make sure you look at the view at the top." And then I just don't even remember, I just get lowered right down. But I mean, I think this is one of the things that attracted me to climbing to begin with is that climbing inspires you to go to different places, like there's so many places I've gone that I wouldn't have gone if it wasn't for climbing. And I think that that's a beautiful part of the sport that can really open your eyes to different places.

Kris Hampton  1:03:07

Yeah, like reading the book. I remember a lot of my own first experiences with some of the things you're talking about, like the smell of creosote. And now I'm, I'm a new parent, again, you're a new parent. What are your hopes for the national monuments, the conservation, what are your hopes for this contested land for your son?

McKenzie Long  1:03:44

Well, I really do hope that there's plenty of wild places for him to explore as he grows up. And ideally, I would love for there to be more monuments and more protected places and more places that are going to be free from development. So there's still plenty of wildness to be found. And also, what I really hoped for him and maybe this is asking too much of humanity. But I hope that people can listen to each other more and perhaps find the nuance and complexity of situations a little more rather than the polarized thinking that's really common right now. I feel like that would make a much better place for my son to grow up. But we'll see what happens with that.

Kris Hampton  1:04:33

You're starting to sound like a pessimist like I am. Maybe I'm rubbing off on you. I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.

McKenzie Long  1:04:39

I could, I could do with a little more cynicism, I think.

Kris Hampton  1:04:44

I learned so much from your book that you know, has, has really colored the way that I look at things now. Not in a good or bad way, just in a different way. Especially when trying to consider other people's perspective, which is something I try to do and I'm not really good at so... So I'm glad that, that you wrote this book. And I think everyone out there will get a lot out of it, far more than the fact of this is what a national monument is, this what a national park is, that you're liable to get if you go googling the difference. This is a really experiential way to learn the difference between the two. Thank you, McKenzie, it was a real pleasure to sit down and talk through these things with you. Your book is a gift. And I'm working really hard to be less cynical. So thanks for bringing your balanced approach, you make it look much easier than it actually is. And I hope we get to sit down and talk more sometime, maybe in Wyoming. If you want to hear more from McKenzie I asked her to read a few specific really beautiful sections of her book, and I've put together a more highly produced narrative style episode using those passages. You can find it on the Plug Tone Outdoors channel right now. At the post for this episode, you can find ways to learn more about McKenzie, read more of her writing, and direct links to the book, This Contested Land. If these themes resonate with you at all, it's a must read. And if you spend time outside on our public lands, these themes should resonate with you. If not now, hopefully, they eventually do. As always, the Power Company Podcast is brought to you by Power Company Climbing. You can learn, grow, and excel with us at powercompanyclimbing.com where you'll find links to the Power Company Climbing Academy, and the Knowledge + Community Hub. If you want to support the podcast, you can do that at patreon.com/power company podcast or by sharing what we do on your social media. You can find us on Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube at @powercompanyclimbing , but never never ever ever on Twitter because we don't tweet, we scream like eagles.