Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 114 of total 114 in this topic |
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Dec 4, 2013 - 07:05pm PT
|
It was on this day 29 years ago that I befriended Armondo Menocal, long before he founded the Access Fund.
He is a great fellow, and we are still good friends. We climbed together in several states (no, not inebriation, but that too), even hitch hiking across Utah.
I saw him a few months ago and brought this up, and in theory he said the AF is in favor of closures for legitimate conservation reasons. But that usually applies to black and white issues.
The problem is; we are loving desert routes to death, podding out placements, ankle biting, rounding crack edges, rounding out footholds, cutting unsightly rope grooves, creating drag trails from haulbags on routes easily climbed in a day, leaving tat at good rap chains because people are too stupid to clip the bolts and leave the rap link open.
We can (and are inclined) to do nothing about it. It is a slow process. But I fear that following such a course will lead to a tipping point resulting in massive closures, perhaps galvanized by a tragedy resulting from "climber erosion".
Alternately we can take measures to mitigate the damage, but that ultimately means some form of access restriction, perhaps screening, even if only for education.
Does the Access Fund have the guts to advocate for restricted access to preserve soft rock routes?
If there are howls of protest from current day contributors, does the Access Fund have the wisdom to hear the howls of praise from climbers not yet born?
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
You bring up some good points and, of course, some very, very difficult issues. There is no doubt that climber user days, which have increased dramatically in the desert, are impacting the fragile environments leading to the crags and, in many cases, the climbs themselves.
What to do? Restricting access will be a difficult pill to swallow for climbers. It certainly is not unprecidented.....annual bird closures have become all too common. Bird closures, however, are seasonal, the restrictions you are talking about would be potentially permanent. Again not unprecedented.....think Anasazi petroglyphs, but these are limited and not growing in scope. Is the "slippery slope" metaphor applicable here? What are the criteria to be used? All human outdoor activities have an impact on the environment, what is too much and who makes the call?
Would it be better to try to ameliorate the damage? Obviously trails to climbing areas help with the impact leading to climbs but what about the climbs themselves?
My experience in the desert leads me to define most human use damage to desert climbs as:
rope grooves below belay/rap anchors
crack degradation on aid climbs from piton placements
wearing down and or destroying of face holds
widening of cracks from overuse.....this, by the way, gets more publicity than it deserves because of well known examples like Incredible Hand Crack and Slot Machine.
Interestingly most land managers are less concerned about these issues than they are about the destruction of vegetation on a climb and unsightly chalk and fixed anchors.
What practices can be improved to limit further damage and what degredationt are climbers likely to accept (the wearing down of hand and footholds along Potash road are an example)
Another example would be the polishing that happens with overuse on limestone climbs.
You bring up a great issue, the kind that SHOULD be the focus of forums like this. Hopefully this thread will have the longevity of some of the religious/political ones.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
Alternately we can take measures to mitigate the damage, but that ultimately means some form of access restriction, perhaps screening, even if only for education.
Ron,
flesh this out a bit more. I'm not following if it is pre-requisite with a go no-go approach. Or a 'you must stand here and read this or listen to lecture before you may climb'?
Hueco Tanks has such education and guided tours. But a lot of us thought the response to climbers was overzealous regulation of a user group that was not doing most of the damage. I'm probably wrong and some boulderers were foot dabbing pictographs.
Spell out the details.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
I am not sure what concrete steps the Access Fund would take to restrict delicate routes. I am not sure that folks would obey them. A robust outreach message on the importance of preserving both the features and the nature of established routes could be worthwhile. Not gunna pay for it though.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
Americans, especially American climbers, don't cotton to self-policing, in
case you haven't noticed. I doubt that more than a few even use condoms. I'm
surprised there isn't a bolt ladder alongside Super Crack by now. It is
gonna have to be Big Brother with some serious tooling to get people to sit
up and fly right but my money is on closures sooner than later.
|
|
CClarke
climber
La Paz, Bolivia
|
|
I think you should put this question in the First World Problems thread.
|
|
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
Start a permit / quota system...
No... no way
Ron, just because some climbs get some rope gulleys formed and haul bag rubbing ...
it's not really to much "destruction" when you look at dirt roads and everything else that goes on in our world.
The worst thing is to let the gov do some "wilderness mgmt" deal ... like the Grand Canyon permit system. 10-15 year wait.... what BS
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Ron is mostly talking about Zion. Indian Creek also has similar issues.
Which are: Extreme popularity and fragile rock that wears away from repeated placing of cams/fists.
Solutions?
The Grand Canyon trip is BS, but not because of the permit system. It's because people are content to wait a decade. Whey don't they go somewhere else instead?
Even worse is the Everest model, with heaving crowds of punters dragged up the mountain like cattle. Or sheep.
Why is Everest so popular when there are hundreds of other mountains nearby that offer a vastly richer experience?
Why is the Grand Canyon trip so popular? Where's the adventure in following everyone else? The same rapids, the same beaches, same old same old. Great scenery but stale experience.
People don't use their imagination, they just go where they are told to go. Where their friends have already gone. Where the few guidebooks spell out the routes and ratings. It's easier that way. They want safety, a predictable, good experience.
The Colorado Plateau is vast. Hundreds of miles of cliffs. Thousands, probably. If people spread out from the same old same old places (usually roadside) there'd be no problem and sustainable climbing for centuries to come.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
I don't see this as even a tiny environmental issue. Put all of climbers negative environmental impact things, in total worldwide, next to a single open pit mine project (of which there are many) and it looks even more like a pimple on a nats ass. It's not even worthy of "microgivashits.
So, I give it a less than 1 "meh" on the 1-10 "mehmeter".
meh
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Crunch....you've been around long enough to know that climbers, as a group, are very susceptible to the "herd instinct." They just are NOT going to spread out across all of that glorious wingate on the Colorado Plateau.
The problem is obvious.......the solution not so.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Crunch....you've been around long enough to know that climbers, as a group, are very susceptible to the "herd instinct." They just are NOT going to spread out across all of that glorious wingate on the Colorado Plateau.
The problem is obvious.......the solution not so.
Well, my point was that the most obvious solution/strategy is to restrict numbers of climbers on the worst affected climbs. By fees, permits, or similar.
But there's an alternative, which is to educate, persuade and provide incentives for climbers to want to do other climbs, less popular, less well known, equally fun.
Reality is the best strategy is an all-of-the-above one:
Place subtle restrictions/disincentives to ease pressure on the most popular climbs--like a mandatory Heuco Tanks style education video on clean, low impact climbing, before one's Zion classic climb attempt.
Plus ban on climbing during and after rain/snowstorms.
This thread here:
http://www.supertopo.com/tr/And-they-say-Zion-tends-to-be-climbed-clean/t12202n.html
Show an appalling level of ignorance and laziness by some of us. We can and must do better. Good thing all the trash was found by a climber, not a hiker or ranger.
But what about Indian Creek, where Supercrack and Incredible Hand Crack are on their way to being ugly offwidths full of blood stains, black scuffmarks. I remember the thrill of climbing a freakishly perfect and pristine Supercrack back around 1985. Today, I'd far prefer to find an equally pristine, if not so perfect crack elsewhere than ascend the mess that is Supercrack today.
So, some positive reinforcement to encourage climbers to go visit other, less well known areas--Capitol Reef for instance, or the Henry Mountains, with its excellent granite--is a good idea.
Hey Ron, you got any photos of the ongoing damage to the worst affected Zion cracks?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 12:43pm PT
|
Just spitballing here, a little "future saga";
It is the year 2089, and climber John Doe is visiting Zion for the first time. He sees the rocks, knows the history and wants to climb.
Option A
John Does goes to the visitor center and asks about climbing. He is told that due to the fragility of the rock and the cumulative effect of past use/abuse and a history of tragedies precipitated by anchor failure from worn out podded placements, that Zion has now been closed to technical rock climbing.
Period.
Option B
John Doe has been waiting years for a lottery slot to be one of the few persons allowed to attempt Touchstone this year. He has already submitted a resume to the climbing manager and been screened before paying to enter the lottery, but even so he has to pay an orientation fee and attend an impact mitigation talk.
He then buys the highly detailed topo that was updated by the previous party listing every single fixed anchor, and there are many in the first 70m just to reduce podding, and he is expected to make certain they remain.
He and his partner climb the route.
They are then required to update the topo, and make comments on route condition.
After a decade of working within this system to repeat routes John Doe's skill is recognized.
His status is now upgraded and he can now apply for the lottery for putting UP a NEW route.
When he is awarded a permit he submits his new route proposal to the climbing manager.
The CM gives him the go ahead, and John Doe puts up his bond, and then proceeds to put up a totally bitchin dick wrenching mega classic.
He submits his topo detailing every fixed anchor. His anchor fees are assessed and deducted from his bond which is then returned. (fees for bolts including the cost of the bolt are still less than the fee for placing a pin since a bolt placement requires no further impact. This discourages scarring but still allows for constructive scarring).
John Doe's route becomes so popular and sought after that people paying their topo royalties credits to him for it obviates the need for him to pay any more fees to climb in Zion.
He is now a made man.
OK, neither option is very desirable.
But Option A less so.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
History, and the inevitable march of bureaucracy, will show the rightness
of Toker's Plan B. Hopefully somebody will come up with a morning-after
pill for Plan B.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
I can't say that I support regulation by non-climbing entities for access to popular climbing routes.
I would rather permit/continue the defilement of trade routes in IC and Zion than see people spread out and start grid-bolting my secret mega-slab.
As for the Grand, well, rivers, like towers are dynamic and ever-changing. You never get the same trip twice - although seeing the same trashed campsites again and again is a tad bit sorry. The permitting system for the Grand is phukked. And I think that this would be the case for any kind of quota/resume-required system of climbing management.
Look at routes like Sheep Rock in Arches: blown out holes from recycling pins are now essentially moki steps. Reducing access might achieve the same goals as did the retro-bolting of the first pitch, but folks would be even more adversarial with the NPS than they are currently.
Seems to me that climber-originated, non-governmental solutions (like retro-bolting a pitch that is getting destroyed) are perhaps more timely, realistic, and may not impinge so much upon a given climber's right to access.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 01:46pm PT
|
There was one element of the option B model I forgot to mention;
if a climber employs constructive scarring effectively on a new route and then does a "confirmation", that is; pulling the rope and releading the pitch without a hammer, then no impact fees for pin use are assessed.
This encourages the creation of clean routes, and discourages blasting out placements.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Over and over I see reasons NOT to brag about new areas, NOT to report new routes, NOT to encourage climbers to visit these places.
Who brought all those climbers to the desert to begin with? Who helped plant the see of desire for desert towers?
The single most powerful impact would be to stop publishing new route info - anywhere. No hand drawn topos, nothing.
Forty years ago you were right. Lack of info helped keep the desert remote and unvisited.
But the longstanding habit of not publicizing info about climbing in the desert now works in the other direction. There are guidebooks, but only to a very few areas: Wall Street/Moab; Indian Creek; Zion.
The existing published information now has the effect of crowding ever more climbers into the same small areas.
Too late to go back now. Instead, we almost need more (and/or better) guidebooks to areas like the Henry Mts, San Rafael Swell, Escalante area and Capitol Reef, to draw climbers away from over-used places like Zion and Indian Creek.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
Another title for the thread: Does the Access Fund have the authority to preserve desert routes?
I kinda like the pay-per-piton idea, but again, enforcement is the issue.
And for real, places like IC attract the mobs for a reason: a very high density of established, documented, and cleaned-up routes.
Crappy guidebooks, axle-crunching roads, lower densities of high quality routes, not to mention greater distance from most metro areas conspire to keep most heavy use centered in places like IC/Zion.
On the other hand, I suppose that if the Creek quieted down a bit, I would go back again.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Same rapids, same beaches, same old same old? What other desert rivers have rapids of the same magnitude combined with scenery of the same magnitude combined with trip length of the same magnitude?
That's my point. Just like with Everest, there is nothing with the same "magnitude." And if all you are looking for is "magnitude" then nothing else will suffice.
But all the thousands of other mountains have their own personalities, adventures, challenges. Outside of the Grand Canyon, maybe other river trips can possess equally desirable qualities--solitude, beauty, thrills, etc. that can make up for the lack of "magnitude."
And make up for that 10-year long wait!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 02:37pm PT
|
need more (and/or better) guidebooks
Junkiespeak!
lol
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
if a climber employs constructive scarring effectively on a new route and then does a "confirmation", that is; pulling the rope and releading the pitch without a hammer, then no impact fees for pin use are assessed.
This encourages the creation of clean routes, and discourages blasting out placements.
Good call, Ron. I hammered 3 pins last week in Kane Creek on a new route. That's not many, so, let's say, ten bucks per placement. OK, I'll send 30 bucks to the Access Fund.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 05:17pm PT
|
Not so fast there crunch; I said
fees for bolts including the cost of the bolt are still less than the fee for placing a pin since a bolt placement requires no further impact.
|
|
Juicer
Trad climber
SLC
|
|
The popular buttresses in Indian Creek, easily accessible towers such as the ones in Castle Valley, and the trade routes in Zion are destined to become sacrificial zones to a certain degree. It makes sense from a management perspective to concentrate the use, especially given the fragile nature of the relatively untrammeled areas. There have already been blatant responses to new development in Capitol Reef and in an area adjacent GSENM from land managers. The Eastern Utah lands initiative has the potential to further marginalize climbing potential as most current WSA's would become wilderness. The best climbing in the Henry's is at 9000 feet, so that alone precludes it as a viable alternative to IC.
Good subject, but lame title for this thread. Crying out to the Access Fund as if they don't have enough on their plate with out having to put out stupid internet fires and cries for attention.
Ron,I know you feel strongly about the classic routes that you authored in Zion. Years ago, my partner and I endured your yelling at us from the adjacent raps: "You're not going to make it! You don't have enough time, etc." My partner's response: "STFU, we're fine!" And we were just fine, although a little cold during the night.
If you feel that you need to perpetually "captain" routes like Touchstone and try to preserve them, work through the appropriate channels to help modify the park's CMP at the appropriate time. My bet is that the AF would be with you at the table.
|
|
cragnshag
Social climber
san joser
|
|
Get some of that rock-tex paint that matches the sandstone color and paint a thick layer on the entire cliff every 10 years. Bingo, no more erosion.
I'm not sure there is a good solution to route preservation. Unless you get the gov't involved. They will preserve the routes all right- with one stroke of the pen.
If desert climbers want to keep climbing in these popular places then best keep a low profile and keep big brother out of it. Perhaps this means accepting the human impact that cannot be controlled with simple education like rope grooves, holds wearing away, and widening cracks from hands/feet. And work on the impacts that can be controlled (unsightly fixed anchors, trail stewardship, leave-no-trace education, etc).
Reminds me of that Shantideva quote- If you can change something, why be unhappy? If you cannot change something, why be unhappy?"
|
|
andy@climbingmoab
Big Wall climber
Salt Lake City, UT
|
|
Why are people bagging on the Grand Canyon? There is no ten year wait. Getting a permit isn't that hard if you don't mind going in the winter, and the lottery + followup lottery system works pretty well - i've done two trips in the last 5 years. The campsites aren't trashed, the rapids don't stay the same(left sneak in Hance is gone!), and you could do dozens of trips never repeating the same hikes - the Grand has so much to offer.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
Make it a permit/lottery situation for the most popular routes? I honestly could see a point to that for things like Supercrack. This from a guy who has poached all but one permit peak I wanted to climb. I generally find these kind of regs ridiculous. Usually because they really don't "preserve" much of anything. In the case of truly fragile rock structures I can begrudgingly agree with a need for a lottery.
SC is one of only two routes I've been on where I really felt like too many folks were climbing it and it simply could not handle the traffic no matter what style was used. The other was an easier popular crack to the left of the IC parking lot that was in even worse condition. I'd imagine there are several others in the area as well.
Haven't done anything in Zion though. Perhaps it has some of the same issues.
I would not agree with it for things like The Nose. The days of pitons are gone there and the rock while not completely impervious to normal procedure, does seem to withstand it well enough.
In the end It doesn't matter to me if a handful of routes gain this type of protection. There are many thousands of other obscure climbs to do just a slightly longer hike away. Stuff 99.9% or even more of climbers will never touch
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Yo...dudes! And i thought i was a luddite. It's 2013, guidebooks aside, the internet trumps everything else. An area will only stay unvisited if it's hard to get to or the climbing sucks or both.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Laramie
|
|
in the tragedy of commons a story is told about how a field of a given size is abused by one fellow putting more grazers on a field of fixed size. And so we get the idea of limiting access or use. But whoa, do we have any idea whether there will be so many more climbers in the future? Ask the markets.
Now if that field of a given size were to get bigger, density should decrease. And so are guidebooks the problem or are they the relief with the mention of new routes and new areas?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 07:06pm PT
|
The commons can be reseeded and restored, but climber erosion is cumulative and irreparable.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
here's hoping that the commons stay small. this is why I never ever publish anything more than the barest of detail with regard to my special spots. sucks, but, well, so do people.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
I love it: the big movers and shakers get the goodies and then want to regulate it!
How many pins d'you think that you have placed? I have probably placed fewer than 10, and even fewer bolts. $100. ouch.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Good points by Juicer and Climb2Ski.
When climbing access was threatened around Moab in 2001 by the Delicate Arch ascent, the local Moab community stepped up and worked hard to talk to the land managers and work on rehabilitating relations, working out local, relevant solutions. Which included going to great lengths to hide and camo existing anchors so non-climbers would be less likely to see them.
Best thing is for local climbing community to work together to figure out reasonable, workable steps that will help slow damage and erosion. The Access Fund can help with support but they usually prefer to stay in the background. Local climbers need to band together to agree what is doable, what is not. A local solution to a local issue.
SO, the question then is, Is there a local Zion climbing community? There is one for Indian Creek, the Friends of Indian Creek, basically Moab based:
http://friendsofindiancreek.wordpress.com/
Wh here would consider themselves locals?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2013 - 07:53pm PT
|
Not much nailing at the Creek. Harder to achieve consensus in Zion.
Juicer,
I think the title embraces the paradox. The AF's raison d'etre is access, but if unfettered access today results in lack of access in the future which group of constituents is one ethically obligated too.
How does one do either the greater good or the lesser evil.
Serving only today's constituents is crass politics.
And I would hope to think that for every vocal griper there are multiples who remain silent about appreciating my help. Usually cold nights build character.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Laramie
|
|
but climber erosion is cumulative and irreparable.
Then stop using it and save it or paint the cracks with a dispersant form of silica gel to harden them for such use.
|
|
Juicer
Trad climber
SLC
|
|
I could see the Access Fund and other groups promoting awareness of this issue. It is an unfortunate, long term consequence of climbers and our objective-based mindsets.
The No Star Tuesday concept may be applicable here. It's pretty fun to go after the anti-classics down in the Creek!
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 09:11pm PT
|
Bump for climbing content..
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 09:23pm PT
|
But this is a political debate website, dood.
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
climber
mars...it's near nevada...
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 10:06pm PT
|
hmmm this is a tough one...one the one hand you can't close the door just because you want preservation, on the other hand you can't let everyone nail up fingercracks (mmmm nailups...I'm so guilty of loving it, but I've never done a trade route just random sh#t in the middle of nowhere...is that the answer ?) on the other hand you have the education angle - I haven't taped in sandstone since the Dr yelled at me in the creek about a taped fist being much more likely to blow sh#t out over time, suck it up and learn to climb it with no impact...on the other hand you have completely different fingers (but I've never seen them fing...oh wait, there they go...)
spread out ? education and a permit ? sigh and think back to years ago when no one was there ? I dunno...
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 10:19pm PT
|
The entire National Park Service could take the approach found in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and include this in their governing documents:
Climbing: The following is prohibited:
Leaving gear and equipment used in connection with climbing activities unattended. The gear and equipment shall be removed by the participants before departing the area. This includes but is not limited to pitons, chocks, bolts and all other climbing aids.
http://www.nps.gov/glca/parkmgmt/upload/2013-FINAL-Compendium.pdf
(see pages 6 and 7 for climbing regs)
This National Recreation Area includes Lake Powell and encompasses a big chunk of the Colorado Plateau. With comparatively few established climbs, the NPS has taken a proactive step to limit climber impacts.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 10:25pm PT
|
^this approach really cramps my style, brah.
To follow those rules to a T means no new-routing if the route does not go to the rim or to a summit escapable via simulrap or 2x4 type trickery.
This approach merely makes most new routing a crime. It does not prevent it.
|
|
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 10:40pm PT
|
The Incredible Chimney Crack
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 10:48pm PT
|
^this approach really cramps my style, brah.
To follow those rules to a T means no new-routing if the route does not go to the rim or to a summit escapable via simulrap or 2x4 type trickery.
This approach merely makes most new routing a crime. It does not prevent it.
Well, cramping climbers's style is exactly what Ron is advocating ;-)
The rules for Glen Canyon are overly harsh and incredibly inappropriate; so few folks actually climb there that climbing impacts are effectively zero, whatever climbers get up to. And enforcement in such a vast area is impossible. Besides, the impact of their stupid reservoir is vast and corrosive. They build that and have the cheek to try to restrict climbers? It's insulting.
What is more appropriate is to cramp climbers's style in heavily used areas like Zion, especially the most popular routes. That's Ron's point.
Again, my answer is that a group of interested, local climbers, working together are the solution.
Local answers to local problems! Who are the local Zion climbers these days?
And thanks for the link, albatross!
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2013 - 11:36pm PT
|
Steve it is insulting what they have done up at GCRA. My buddy was spotted climbing an old established route below the dam (in what remains of Glen Canyon). When he got to Lees Ferry the next day, the ranger searched the entire contents of their kayaks. Saw all the climbing gear, were looking for a drill, obviously found no such item and let them on their way. Thank goodness not all climbers smoke weed.
A few years ago I exchanged emails with the Access Fund in regards to the harsh anti-climbing regulations at GCRA. We finally concluded that with so few active climbers in the area it wasn't worth a fight.
I agree the area is vast, with countless adventures to be had. That said, much of the best looking stuff I've seen is right next to the water, right near lots of people (and cops). It's sad that responsible climbers aren't allowed to recreate in this national recreation area. It inspired a line in a poem, "Can freedom be taken away before it is even imagined?"
Ron, sorry for the thread drift. I know you are talking about your amazingly popular trade routes in Zion. I admire your eye toward the future and know you have been prompting this discussion for several decades.
Albert
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 10:16am PT
|
Cramping style is not the objective. It is the by product.
With my model a climber can become a made man through superior performance and not be "cramped" monetarily (though still in part restricted in terms of access).
I have already accepted that some of my routes with shorter approaches will have to be worn out before the "rules" are implemented.
By then the writing will be on the wall, and climbers will be forced to admit that even "clean" climbing is in fact dirty.
Do you really think future climbers will refrain from throwing our generations under the bus when they are dying from blown out placements and attempting to repeat routes that have morphed into nothing like the original climb.
Glen Canyon?
What a joke!
The government destroyed one of the most beautiful places on earth with an obscenity that can be seen from space, but then gets bent out of shape if you leave a rap anchor.
BTW, one little fact that inconveniences them;
the south shore of the lake is the park border. Everything above water is Navaho Indian territory,..
Sorry to interrupt the politard debate with this little inconvenient truth about soft rock, but there is one more thing;
after rules are implemented to protect soft rock, how long will it take land managers whose dominions contain climbing resources composed of harder rock to take notice?,.....
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 10:40am PT
|
Those are some good points, Ron.
I love Ed Abbey as much as the next person. The damn is indeed a monstrosity. It was the land that no one knew. But I do like the fact that the lake now produces hydropower and is one of the best fisheries in the West right now. I've learned to live with the reality.
Was that 1988 when you published the concept of hammered anchors, fixed when necessary?
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 10:51am PT
|
Why are people bagging on the Grand Canyon? There is no ten year wait. Getting a permit isn't that hard if you don't mind going in the winter, and the lottery + followup lottery system works pretty well - i've done two trips in the last 5 years. The campsites aren't trashed, the rapids don't stay the same(left sneak in Hance is gone!), and you could do dozens of trips never repeating the same hikes - the Grand has so much to offer.
Andy's on it. The Grand is a huge and rich experience and you can go every year if you are game to go out of season (the best time, anyway, as the big motor rigs can't go then). The river does change with water level and over time. Who has done all the possible side hikes? No one. But, the biggest thing Andy mentioned is the beaches aren't trashed, which is true.
Rafters have a stronger leave no trace ethic than climbers. In the desert, we could, as a group, choose to walk singular and single file paths to each cliff, skip the chalk, not haul, use camouflaged fixed protection, and always creatively scar so that even the first ascent could nut (most?) everything. Leave no trace is an ethic that, though an abstraction and imperfectly achievable, deserves our attention. We help preserve our access when we are clear that we aren't the only users of natural resources. When we keep that in mind and advocate for other users they are likely to advocate for us, as well. Climbers used to be leaders in promoting a leave no trace ethic and we could return to it. The exercise of this would probably be more rewarding than the trite consumerism culture of chasing the numbers.
Herd instinct does, too, tend to lead to overuse. Exploring and seeking adventure can be the bigger reward than working down the ticklist.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 11:21am PT
|
Actually, Albert, in 1975 when I put up Pervertical Sanctuary, we left all of the 11 pin placements fixed.
They were promptly removed by booty pirates, but the statement was still made.
A student of environmental conservation at CU at the time I wrote a paper amusingly entitled The Impact Of Climbers On Their Environment, and discussed pin scarring, and how it could create a nut placement or possibly a blown out scar. I am also proud to say that, thanks to my working with Greg Lowe, I even discussed the potential of camming devices.
Professor Erikson gave me an -A.
Mark,
are there still beaches?
This business of simulated flooding from the dam is the Bureau of Wrecklamation's conning of the public.
They are not adding sediment. After all, half the power the dam creates is lost before it reaches population centers. The real purpose of the dam is as a sediment trap to protect Hoover Dam.
Lake Foul should fill up with sediment in a few centuries (just look at the sediment accumulations at the north end of the lake or at the Clay Hills Crossing.)
The fake floods keep yielding diminishing returns because there is less and less sediment in the Grand Canyon to stir up and create beaches with.
But you are right that boaters have a stronger environmental ethic than climbers. It is in part because of that that my management plan model borrows from theirs (and hunting and SCUBA).
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 11:36am PT
|
There are still beaches though they are greatly diminished because of the "damn." A shame really that Glen Canyon was lost and the ecosystem of the Colorado in the Grand Canyon so drastically changed.
Nice job on Pervertical Sanctuary and a sound statement for minimizing impact.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 11:55am PT
|
Thanks.
You know eventually the beaches will come back.
What I wonder about is what it will be like when Lake Foul becomes the world's largest tamarisk forest with the river meandering in wild loops before plunging over the dam.
Will global warming be enough to allow alligators to survive the winter? There was one that lived in a cow pond on the Arizona Strip nearby for more than 20 years before animal control took it out.
After some gator lover plants a few babies in some seldom visited side canyon the place could become pretty wild and dangerous again. After all, crocodilians are the most successful dinosaur.
Hippos would be cool too, but a little harder to hide at the put in,..
But I digress from the issue of trying to preserve the most climbs for the most climbers both now and in the future. That is my objective, not cramping people's style.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 12:05pm PT
|
I see that meaningful protections for the places that are being loved to death are necessary. The aspect of hypocrisy rankles a bit, though: first ascentionists are somehow exonerated of responsibility for the physical damage that they do, are sprung from the ethical morass of their opening a new route to crowds that can follow and increase damage/wear. That said, I see that your stimulating the discussion here is intended to ameliorate the after-effects of new-route development.
Perhaps if the NPS or other land managers feel that a problem exists for a given area they could divert some modest sum from their funds to sponsor the election (by voters from the user group) of a council or quorum of local fixtures of the climbing community to act as stewards and to emplace a per-piton fee or some other regulatory framework. That was one sentence, wow!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 12:27pm PT
|
First ascentionists are not exonerated, Max. At least not in my model.
They are vetted and then they pay hefty fees for the privilege of altering the environment, and they are given the incentive to do a good job and create a sought after route because then, every time a party gets a permit for a route, they buy the updated topo and a credit goes toward the first ascentionists.
This gets them one step closer to being made men, whose accomplishments are recognized and allow them to climb without having to pay further fees into the system.
Climbing is, after all, a meritocrasy.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 12:43pm PT
|
That said, I see that your stimulating the discussion here is intended to ameliorate the after-effects of new-route development.
I'd suggest that the aim is to ameliorate the after-effects of those new routes which are extremely popular. Outside of Zion NP and Indian Creek, this is pretty much a non-issue (at least for the next few decades).
Perhaps if the NPS or other land managers feel that a problem exists for a given area they could divert some modest sum from their funds to sponsor the election (by voters from the user group) of a council or quorum of local fixtures of the climbing community to act as stewards and to emplace a per-piton fee or some other regulatory framework. That was one sentence, wow!
Yes. But I think it's putting the cart before the horse. The NPS, to date, have never been concerned with actual wear and tear on climbs in their jurisdictions. It's up to us, the climbing community, to present a case to them that there is an issue and that it requires some kind of action.
The NPS have a way of misunderstanding a and misinterpreting anything to do with climbing. So, we have to present an argument that is thorough and detailed and conservative (ie focused on the specific climbs/crags/areas that are in need off help), drafted with help from the Access Fund and their lawyers.
There has to be a group of interested, volunteer, local (sort of!) climbers who can represent the interests of the climbers of the areas in questions. Indian Creek already has the "Friends of Indian Creek," who are pretty much Moab based.
There is a strong case that an equivalent group, say, "The Friends of Zion" (The Zealots of Zion?) needs to be formed. Ron? Albert? I'm in Boulder, CO, a long way away and I've never climbed in Zion (it's very popularity puts me off), but I've hiked Angels Landing and appreciate that Zion is a special, amazing place and I'd be happy to help with email discussions.
Lastly, yeah, Ron's detailed plans are a great start for discussions. Thanks Ron.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 01:31pm PT
|
Steve,
you make it sound as though Zion and IC are the only places to worry about.
That is very short sighted. They are merely the guinea pigs. They (and there are other soft rock areas already impacted) were chosen as guinea pigs as much for their aesthetic values as their convenience. Easy to access = low hanging fruit.
Despite all their labors climbers are lazy.
But if we were to implement a plan to protect just these areas, you know damn well climbers would get off their butts and areas just a bit further out would become the new low hanging fruit and would soon enough be equally impacted.
Climbers today are like the hunters were over a century ago when states began to view game as state property that hunters had to purchase a license to harvest, and had to obey a set of detailed rules in doing so.
The hunters were saying, "WTF is this?!! I've been hunting for years. I know what I'm doing."
Oft times of course, they did NOT know what they were doing or they were often even aware of abusing resources but out of greed didn't care. In many cases species viability was threatened.
Today the states regulate hunting and most hunters not only obey the rules but understand their need and agree with them. As a result most game populations are thriving under wise management, and hunters as a group contribute more money for wildlife conservation than all the greenies and other former flower children.
But here is the kicker; humans killed over 60,000,000 bison attempting deliberately to exterminate them, but with only a few hundred left they were bred back to full species viability, BUT ONCE A CLIMB IS DESTROYED IT CAN'T BE BROUGHT BACK.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 01:57pm PT
|
The only absolute is a well enforced ban.
What I would like to see is substantial mitigation as well as consideration for future generations of climbers Ron. Go back and read the second John Doe model again.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 02:14pm PT
|
Don't we ask for MUCH from hunters in the way of co-operation, regulation and money?
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 02:15pm PT
|
Steve,
you make it sound as though Zion and IC are the only places to worry about.
They are not the only places to worry about.
But, they are the only places where, in 2013, there is the remotest chance of getting buy-in from desert climbers on any kind of proposal that restricts (or "cramps") climbers in doing whatever they want. Or in doing what they want but paying for the privilege (and cramping numbers that way).
It can be done. In the early 1970s Chouinard managed to get buy-in for clean climbing, to all US climbers, almost overnight.
Heuco Tanks has a mandatory video presentation and various other hoops to jump through and have reduced impacts enormously. Not sure this has buy-in from climbers, but is mandatory, so it sort of does.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 02:22pm PT
|
Do you remember what it was like to pound pins for pro on free climbs?
Climbers didn't "buy in" as much as they wimped out. Nutting is just easier.
They won't buy into my model either.
Either a wise land manager forces them into it or, far more likely, there will be a combination of a string of tragedies caused by blown placements along with obvious visible impacts that causes an outright ban someplace.
Only once people lose something do they appreciate what they had. Only then will climbers be willing to compromise.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 02:39pm PT
|
Trivia;
What gun gave use the expression "the whole 9 yards"?
The Vickers machine gun was so reliable in WW1 that when the germans tried mass assaults from their trenches the brits would shoot entire belts without stopping. The belts were 27' feet long, and their fellow brits would cheer them on saying, "Give 'em the whole nine yards!"
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 02:44pm PT
|
Not sure about the nine yards and WWI guns derivation...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/27/books/the-whole-nine-yards-seeking-a-phrases-origin.html
Thread drift, sorry.
I think the point I was trying to make is that you won't get buy-in on 100 percent of your proposal for the entire desert. No way. Never.
But you can most certainly get buy-in for some part of the proposal, in some specific parts of the desert where is it clear to any reasonable person that the impacts you are concerned about are happening. Climbers try to do the right thing, if some peer pressure is applied. Back when i climbed El Cap a few times in the early 1980s the idea of carrying one's feces up the climb would have been kinda preposterous. Now it's normal and expected.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 02:56pm PT
|
Just because a newspaper referred to the "whole six yards" in 1912 doesn't negate my etymology.
I like it much more than the concrete truck, which would have come later anyway.
And I think that climbers would rather carry their own shlt for days before before paying for what was previously free. They'd be as resistant as hunters a century ago.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 03:42pm PT
|
ONCE A CLIMB IS DESTROYED IT CAN'T BE BROUGHT BACK.
Bears repeating.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 03:44pm PT
|
I didn't even know bears could talk.
;)
edit
What was I thinking?
Yogi
Booboo
Smokey
Winnie
|
|
fluffy
Trad climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 05:08pm PT
|
Eventually we'll have The Incredible Fist Crack and Pente will be perfect golds. Seems unavoidable. Crack size is a management impossibility.
I'm more interested in mitigating ecological and social impacts...which the Access Fund is at least working towards.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 05:40pm PT
|
Eventually we'll have The Incredible Fist Crack and Pente will be perfect golds. Seems unavoidable. Crack size is a management impossibility.
Excellent. Nicely put.
Somewhere between Ron's proposal that we adopt, forthwith, a pay-per-piton, pay-per-climb fee approach (which would be very effective, if unpopular) and fluffy's depressingly fatalistic "there's nothing we can do" (which is what we all do now and we all know is far from optimal) is some kind of happy medium that will slow down damage while getting buy-in from the climbers who are affected.
How do we find that compromise?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 14, 2013 - 05:45pm PT
|
Fluffy,
The first part of that sounds too fatalistic to me.
And I don't think tourists want to view rocks where all the cracks look like runnels and have varnish worn off and replaced with shoe black. In Utah tourism is the major industry, and land managers would step in.
I'm advocating a system that would extend the lives of the routes, conserve for future use, but still rewards high achievers BEFORE a manager goes for the easy fix, a flat out ban.
|
|
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 06:20pm PT
|
Have a voluntary closure like At Devils Tower.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 08:07pm PT
|
Is it just me or am I seeing a consensus building that for at least some fragile routes there is support for well thought out moderate restrictions?
Climbers have self restricted in many ways over the years. We can do it if the need is obvious.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
|
Do you remember what it was like to pound pins for pro on free climbs?
Climbers didn't "buy in" as much as they wimped out. Nutting is just easier.
yeah, that's probably right. esp after cams. and double especially once we all decided pitons were bad but bolts were ok.
a desert sticker/stamp like hunters have strikes me as a reasonable and (comparatively) easily enforceable option for front country climbs in places like zion, or maybe the pop areas at ic. proceeds could get used to help fund visible kinds of projects-- trail regulation, for instance, or anchor-fixing.
limiting numbers of total ascents sounds like an administrative nightmare. and i wouldn't be at all crazy about having NPS get back into the business of formally evaluating climber competence (i.e., bonus luxury line for hard men or locals or whatever.)
much easier to regulate new ascents-- the dresden model would be one way to go. fontainebleau would be another. they both work well enough for their different areas. but neither does much with existing routes.
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
climber
mars...it's near nevada...
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2013 - 01:16am PT
|
so can i bong my way up supercrack or is that in bad taste ? i'm still supposed to lead it naked based on a lost bet years ago...giving a whole new meaning to the 'crack' part...
(jk btw, please don't shoot me...)
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 15, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
|
Steve I am flattered that you would suggest me starting a "Friends of Zion". I haven't done much climbing there at all, too many people, too many climbers. I like the obscure areas.
Ron it's good you keep bringing these ideas to the table. It's clear from the Glen Canyon solution that if we leave it up to the Feds we typically lose. Unfortunately I don't have a lot of faith in much of the younger generation of climbers. They seem to be far more interested in their point score on mountain project or blogging about themselves to be concerned with the natural resource. Still, the concepts regarding conservation of sand climbs are worthy of discussion.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2013 - 11:33am PT
|
This dialogue has given rise to a correspondence with Brady Robinson at the AF, but little has been resolved.
The thing I would like to point out is that in one day a homophobic redneck has generated 3 times the posts on this forum than an issue that goes to the core of our raison d'etre has in weeks.
Future climbers will curse you guys.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:04pm PT
|
Climbing is, after all, a meritocrasy.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:21pm PT
|
Future climbers will curse you guys
Not to put too fine of a point on it but it seems like you might be
addressing the wrong demographic, n'est ce pas? However, you may be
correct inasmuch as the younger demographic probably does not contribute
overly much to the AF, at least on a per capita basis. I hope I am wrong.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:23pm PT
|
And knott the FAs, TV? We, the younger folk, did not open Pandora's Box, merely fail to close or manage it...
I feel that the erosive nature of many desert climbs are what keep them worthwhile, help stave off their dilution to the fairly predictable, reliable cattle trail effect occurring on big popular mountains like Everest. Routes change, will always change, and whether or not we institute a more rigorous allotment/pay-per-abuse/use system, they will continue to fall apart. I just don't see total preservation in their current or more virginal state to be feasible. These towers and cliffs will eventually fall down of their own accord you know. That said, I hate rope grooves and greased-out cracks just as much as the next man.
I DO think, though, that we ought to elect (or maybe some of the old codgers can delegate) small groups of folks familiar with all trade routes in a given area and impose upon them the burden of at least monitoring changes, documenting problem spots of high wear, so that we as climbers can call in the dread guvmint to enact mandatory protections in the event of a crucial feature teetering on the edge of oblivion. This is where climbing rangers, park liasons, can be most effective: as little as I trust the fed to manage my rock climbs, I think that most climbers recognize that climbing rangers better than your average guvmint bear at addressing and meeting the needs of both climbers and resource preservation.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2013 - 12:32pm PT
|
I don't trust the Fed either.
(and I'm not too fond of state government also)
However, with the hunting model, the individual states have done a fair job of educating, licensing, enforcing, and ultimately conserving.
Climbers are more challenged because cumulative wear does not repair itself.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:43pm PT
|
I don't trust the Fed either.
(and I'm not too fond of state government also)
However, with the hunting model, the individual states have done a fair job of educating, licensing, enforcing, and ultimately conserving.
Climbers are more challenged because cumulative wear does not repair itself.
most of the popular desert routes are on federal land. it's going to have to be the fed. The initiative, lobbying, and guidance could come from AF and engaged locals, but that's probably as far as the hunting analogy will take us.
|
|
thebravecowboy
Social climber
Colorado Plateau
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 12:44pm PT
|
Maybe someone with Friends of Indian Creek can help me out, but who in the local BLM office is most responsible for communicating with the pertinent climber's coalition? I doubt that any dedicated climbing ranger exists and I know that this is the case for the BLM lands around Grand Junction. Same for NPS lands in my neck of the woods: no one individual at CO Nat'l Monument is tasked with climber liaison or management. This is problematic and suggests that self-policing is really the only path to the goal of preservation here.
Full-circle edit: this is why TV suggests a primary role for the AF in this issue.
EDIT: Bkay - it's okay because TV will always be armed to da teef to defend himself 'gainst any potential preservationist tyranny. (sarcasm)
|
|
t-bone
climber
Bishop
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:47pm PT
|
Are some climbers here really advocating for government restrictions for climber-worn cracks? Really?
I would think a few minutes on google earth would put climber impacts in perspective.
This is a climbers issue to be addressed by education and rehab/ conservation events which the access fund already does.
There are other organizations to give your money (Center for Biological Diversity, etc.) if you want to "preserve" public lands. But unless you like only looking at pretty cliffs from the road, please don't.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 01:59pm PT
|
Climbing is, after all, a meritocracy.
I don't use acronyms lightly but LOfickingL
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 02:33pm PT
|
I like the idea of a stamp / sticker that klk suggested. Watch the educational video, pay the fee, get the stamp, go climb.
I think the hunting analogy works well in this scenario. As a sportsmen (hunter / fisherman), I spend several hundred dollars a year just on permits / tags / etc. to recreate (boat / hunt / fish). You want your boat on Powell? $30, plus the entrance fee (I believe I pay $60 a year to fish Powell).
About 17 years ago, I worked with the USFS Wilderness Ranger and the Access Fund to produce an educational brochure / bulletin board for a local area, Paradise Forks. Of course there is no way to tell if it made any impact, but I tend to believe that the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to make good decisions. I'll try and post a scan up when I get back from the lake. Have a fun weekend everyone.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2013 - 02:46pm PT
|
Education and self policing can only go so far.
I know people who, although highly ethical climbers, who have gotten sketched out and not only start paddle footing and hammering nuts, but even have cut holds on established climbs!
Human history is studded with examples of people using up resources.
I doubt climbers have the wisdom to do differently.
But as for fed/state;
don't the states enforce hunting laws on federal lands?
Now, even the national parks allow state issued CCW holders.
|
|
Travis Haussener
Trad climber
Salt Lake City
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 03:27pm PT
|
I wish I would have seen this thread when it first came out. But I have a couple comments or opinions which may or may not have already been said.
Number 1: The simplest way to get people out of these places requires very little government involvement. Just get rid of the road. People are inherently lazy...very lazy in fact. I remember cursing the supercrack parking area one time and then driving to a crag that is much more difficult to access and we saw no one. Maybe that's all we need here.
Number 2: As far as this being a very pressing issue. You guys haven't convinced me. IHC is still pretty incredible hands and that's after what, give or take 30 years. I do agree that it has seen wear and tear but the effects aren't that drastic IMHO.
Number 3: I think (and this has already been stated in one way or another) but this is complete cyclical logic. If we're preserving these routes then we must not be climbing on them. If that's the case then they're not climbing routes. So what exactly are we preserving. They can't be routes without climbers. And no matter what (based on your propositions) they're going to get climbed whether that be once a year or 1000x a day.
Number 4: How much weathering do they see from mother nature. Seriously does anyone know the effects of water running down SC, or Generic Crack it can't be good. How much destruction is caused by a single thunderstorm.
EDIT: I focused my comments with respect to IC since I've climbed there more often.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2013 - 04:17pm PT
|
As far as #3 goes, I would like to see a balance. Lets keep some of our best existing routes as a reserve with rationed use so that future climbers will be able to enjoy them, AND give incentive to climbers to come up with effective solutions.
Hardener compounds, perhaps?
|
|
adrian korosec
climber
Tucson
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 05:04pm PT
|
Don't change a thing. Routes have changed and will continue to change. Nothing lasts forever. Get out and climb them while you can!
|
|
Joshua Johnson
Boulder climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 05:17pm PT
|
Ron,
Why are you always trying to stir up sh#t?
Is is because you're short?
|
|
t-bone
climber
Bishop
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 05:30pm PT
|
The "best existing routes" will be the ones that can hold up to repeated ascents. Those that cannot will fall into obscurity (or have fixed gear).
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Laramie
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 05:33pm PT
|
tolker villain,
You are finally getting on track with this statement which is what I said a long time ago in this thread:
Hardener compounds, perhaps?
You have got to do maintenance if you cause wear; we re-weld the mow boards of road graders and the rangers at Mount Rushmore fill cracks on George's Nose with epoxy/sand. How about changing your thread title to this:
Does the Access Fund have the guts to do the Maintenance required to preserve desert routes for sustained climbing?
Paint a dispersant form of silica gel on the sandstone??
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2013 - 06:31pm PT
|
But as for fed/state;
don't the states enforce hunting laws on federal lands?
it depends-- in the areas I'm most familiar with, NPS did most of the enforcement in NPS areas. IN California, and as best I know, most other states, USFS and BLM co-ordinate with state agencies, and state wardens are (or used to be) designated LEO by USDI and the US Fish and Game Commission, to facilitate enforcement on fed property.
Utah is a special cluster because of the State's suit against the Feds.
But there's no climber's equivalent to DFG or DFW or DOW and whatever it's called in Utah. And each of the relevant states has a state park system that could be charitably described as anemic. Climber stamps wouldn't begin to pay for the creation of a new fleet of technically competent public union state employees with LEO certification.
And if a desert conservation effort is going to be consistent, it's going to need to cover AZ and prolly CO and NM, too? I agree that education and self-policing aren't going to be a comprehensive answer. Closures and/or permitting systems are the likely ones. And the feds will be the ones ultimately responsible there.
I find it easy to imagine the Whitney scenario playing out in particular places. Lottery permitting would be like what they do with certain kinds of hunting tags.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 22, 2014 - 05:20pm PT
|
A month and no more posts, too bad this issue didn't make Fox news, cause then you'd be talking about it. Maybe with sensational headlines like ROCK CLIMBERS IMPACTING ON THE ENVIRONMENT!.....
As for that last point about the different states, I find that the vast difference in the climbing regs for Canyonlands vs Zion, which manage similar soft rock resources only undermines the credibility and authority of the park service through it's capricious inconsistency.
As for the libertarian crack, Bruce Kay, a lot of people seem to confuse us with anarchists, whereas we actuall DO care about the rights of others, and not just those of today.
|
|
squishy
Mountain climber
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2014 - 05:59pm PT
|
After the access fund supported and retained a "steward" who likes to cut down trees for routes in the Tahoe area, I stopped all support for the AF...so your question is irrelevant..
|
|
Oplopanax
Mountain climber
The Deep Woods
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2014 - 06:24pm PT
|
In Britain where they have lots of climbers on soft rock, like at Harrisons Rocks, the guidebook author goes out with glue and sand mix to fill in the eroded channels where top-ropes have cut into the stone and so on.
They also banned leading. Top rope or solo only. No metal protection to damage the rock that way, just like Elbesandstein.
Of course you need a pretty long rope to TR Castleton.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2014 - 06:59pm PT
|
My experience in these matters is limited primarily to the east coast. That said.
The permanent cat fight so evident on nearly all ST subjects is perhaps typical of a long term festering dispute.
In the east in 1970 a needed change was effected in just two years without being hindered by emotion. I wonder if Ed's explanation for this unusual success is not correct. People had already decided, whatever our individual desires, that we all needed an answer.
In the east access restriction was never trotted out as the bad guy. Trotting out a bad guy just invites dispute and gives us some one to point at. In the east the question was very simple.
Are you personally willing to see our rock made ugly and the vegetation destroyed? The reply we got was immediate. "NO!"
Just two years later it was all over.
The temptation is to sort through possible corrections before people are willing to say, "I am not willing to have our areas destroyed." When you start out asking the wrong question you get an ST thread. Death.
In 1970 in the east meetings in climbing areas were held and the central question was posed first.
It worked, and worked in every area.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2014 - 08:34pm PT
|
The Wingate outcrop covers hundreds of miles. There are probably 50,000 Indian Creeks, but you need 4WD to get to them. Sometimes you can rap from the rim, but Geebuz there is a shitload of rock around Moab. Indian Creek is just such a strong focal point for climbing. The Wingate outcrop is huge.
That, and there are just more and more climbers every year. Victims of our own success.
At least Ron had the insight to constructively scar some of the Zion routes so that they would go clean. It sounded kind of strange at the time, but decades later it makes perfect sense.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Jan 23, 2014 - 09:05pm PT
|
Good to see this again.
I'm not so sure about having one set of regulations for all of Utah, or all the Colorado Plateau. Canyonlands and Zion and very different places with different issues. Climber impacts in Canyonlands are tiny, barely exist. Whereas in Zion the cracks are getting visibly worn from all the traffic.
Local climber groups who are familiar with the local issues, coordinating with land-managers, are the ideal solution. Land managers without guidance/input form climbers will tend to produce regulations that can be overwhelmingly severe (like Glen Canyon) or too hands off (like Zion). And generally inappropriate.
This is much easier when a big climbing area is located near to a city (like Boulder, CO) not so easy if an area is in the middle of nowhere.
Where do all those Zion climbers come from?
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Jan 23, 2014 - 09:15pm PT
|
This is much easier when a big climbing area is located near to a city (like Boulder, CO) not so easy if an area is in the middle of nowhere.
Where do all those Zion climbers come from?
yeah, virtually all of the major successful access/practice revolutions that i know come from particular places "close" to an organizable or organized urban base: paris, dresden, nyc/gunks. i know less about secc, but they seem to have mobilized a key set of regional urban pops.
other obvious examples come from top-down, often on the heels of local interest groups, i.e., the el cap bosch ban.
where do all those zion climbers come from? i'd guess slc and boulder are prime contributors, with a west coast / international blend heavily represented. but i'm not a local, and don't work on zion/canyonlands issues myself.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jan 23, 2014 - 09:40pm PT
|
i know less about secc,
In the very early 70's the South Eastern Climbers' Coalition invited me down to speak at their big meeting. I did not add much but it was very clear the group was full of energy and quite determined. I came away very impressed by their people.
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Jan 23, 2014 - 11:23pm PT
|
The Colorado Plateau encompasses some 130,000 square miles with all sorts of rock, mostly sandstone, from some of the best to some of the worst in the world. It doesn't seem appropriate to encompass all these areas into the same sort of climbing management plan.
It's admirable that the East Coast climbers were working on these sort of issues over four decades ago in their local areas. We should take some lessons from their experiences with land managers.
Keep the dreams alive.
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA/Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2014 - 12:57am PT
|
Build more indoor climbing gyms! Get people off of real rock!
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2014 - 07:55pm PT
|
To quote the TV:
"As for that last point about the different states, I find that the vast difference in the climbing regs for Canyonlands vs Zion, which manage similar soft rock resources only undermines the credibility and authority of the park service through it's capricious inconsistency."
Ron, as you know I am concerned about the future of climbing, particularly on the CO Plateau. In response to this thread I have been studying some of the rules for some of the major parks on the plateau. Zion, though having perhaps the longest list of rules, laws, prohibitions and regulations, seemed to have no mention of climbing. Grand Canyon, no mention (probably because most of the climbs require hiking, which many climbers today do not seem to do). Glen Canyon has been discussed (this includes Lake Powell). Canyonlands has a similar stance to Glen Canyon, saying leave nothing behind (in effect prohibiting new route development).
In other words the NPS is all over the place in their management of climbing in these areas.
One can read about the regulations on their own by choosing the park website and clicking on the "Management" link. Usually filed under "Superintendents Compendium" or some such title.
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 11:09pm PT
|
I took this pic last week, unfortunately did not get the pic of the bulldozer with the hammer chisel, on the barge, setting new anchors.
This is in the same National Recreation Area in which it is illegal for climbers to place bolts, leave webbing, pins or any other trace of their ascent.
By the way these cables are part of a fairly intricate web which hold "the world's largest floating restaurant" amongst at least a hundred enormous houseboats.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 11:23am PT
|
Nice post albatross.
In other words the NPS is all over the place in their management of climbing in these areas.
Yes, it hurts to think about advocating for stricter regs in one desert park, Zion, while in nearby parks like Glen Canyon the climbing regs are so absurdly draconian. What kind of message would we be sending?
But, I think I see some consistency in the NPS's policies.
For the NPS, one consideration is the nature of the areas where the climbing takes place. Each National Park/Recreation Area has both a front country zone--heavily traveled, where all the main tourist sights are, lots of people, impacts, roads, cars; and a backcountry zone, usually roadless, wild, little visited.
Front-country areas are managed as a "recreational" resource for people to play in--impacts are expected and allowed.
Backcountry areas are managed so as to protect the their wild characteristics
--people can visit but human impacts in the vegetations and wildlife are strictly controlled.
In the desert, parks where the climbing is primarily in the wildernessy areas, like Canyonlands and Glen Canyon, the regulations are stricter.
In Zion most of the climbing is in the heavily trammelled main valley, with almost roadside access. Climbing regs barely exist.
In Arches NP does not appear to fit this pattern, the climbing is mostly roadside, climbing regs are strict. But, for the last 30 years, the regs were really mellow--amazingly so, actually, considering how soft the rock is and how easily it is damaged. It was the proudly publicized ascent of Delicate Arch in 2001 that provoked a fast and very harsh response.
So, in Glen Canyon there are heavy-handed (and possibly illegal) bolts used to tie up boats, while in the vast backcountry, the five people who actually find climbs to do have crazy-strict rules to work around. It fits this pattern.
And so we can come back to Toker's original argument with a better understanding of the dynamics involved.
In Zion the rock itself is being degraded by our heavy use, in fact visibly so these days, yet the rangers seem not to care. The reason they don't care is because the front-country zones containing all the climbing in question is managed for its recreation possibilities. It's so heavily impacted that scars on the cliffs are of no consequence to the rangers.
Toker's argument is that we, the climbing community, should come up with reasonably restrictions that would slow this resource damage. He's right, because the very factors that make Zion such a popular climbing destination--easy, front-country access, with camping, restaurants, bars, parking, guidebooks--are the same factors that make the rangers so hands off.
But we've never done this before. The Access Fund/Alpine Club have never advocated for stricter climbing regulations. It would be controversial enough that it might rip the Access Fund apart. Impetus would have to come from local, Zion/Utah climbers, banding together and negotiating with the Zion rangers. And then they could expect support from AF or AAC, for this instance.
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 12:49pm PT
|
+1 DMT, that's why I stopped drawing topos and reporting climbs years ago.
Interesting analysis, crunch.
What if there were to be a voluntary $15 / year to climb on the Colorado Plateau, $25 to establish new routes. Have a publicity campaign where even the cheapest, lamest dirtbags buy into the program. The money goes into a fund, say managed by the Access Fund. When a certain amount is reached, perhaps $1000, establish a grant for a well educated and concerned climber to spend three weeks climbing and documenting climber resource damage in a park (Zion). Have this person arrange a meeting with resource managers to discuss their thoughts on climbing management. In the end have the grant climber establish a report on their findings. Not sure if this idea makes sense yet, it's something that bounced around my brain for a while. (And no, I am not looking for a new job as a climbing bum).
I like Toker's idea of a lottery system, much like hunting. For instance, in AZ hunters get one chance in their lifetime to kill both a Bighorn Sheep or Buffalo (and they pay big bucks for the tag). It's sad to think it, but one day perhaps in the not too distant future this may be the reality for climbs like Moonlight Buttress (that is if we are still even allowed to climb in Zion).
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 01:18pm PT
|
Over and over I see reasons NOT to brag about new areas, NOT to report new routes, NOT to encourage climbers to visit these places.
Who brought all those climbers to the desert to begin with? Who helped plant the see of desire for desert towers?
The single most powerful impact would be to stop publishing new route info - anywhere. No hand drawn topos, nothing.
First rule of fight club.
But FA ego is the cause of this erosion, make no mistake about it. And I do not place myself above the fray, I've done it too.
DMT
We actually agree on this DINGUS!!!
Best logical and realistic post on this thread.
Not really. Cat was out of the bag a long, long time ago.
There was a hard lesson learned about secrecy when they made Lake Powell. Years of desert rats keeping the petroglyphs and waterfalls, hidden grottos and incredible beauty of Glen Canyon secret, so as to protect it from outsiders, Fight Club style, backfired when the Govt could say there was nothing worth protecting and flood the entire vast system. Broke David Brower's heart.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 01:21pm PT
|
Albatross, I really like your idea of creating a video presentation of the damage we are talking about in this thread. That'd be a great first step; showing what damage is being discussed. With a video you can show what damage is being done, how it's being done, how the rock can better be treated.
Funding?
Fees from FAs and for climbing on the Colorado Plateau would be near impossible to collect. Again, there would have to be buy-in by active local climbers (and the guide services?) for any of this to happen. Have the Access Fund or AAC set up a specific fund? Perhaps the guide services could chip in a bit of money per client per climb? Paging the Larry....
EDIT: the AAC has a number of grants available, some might work for just this kind of project:
http://www.americanalpineclub.org/grants
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 01:40pm PT
|
Both good replies as to the aspect of reporting. We are living in a vastly different world than 1950.
crunch, what about a massive campaign by climbers, through ST, Access Fund, AAC, whoever, basically implying there may be long term use problems with some of our resources and we are looking to investigate this further. If enough well known climbers, guides, groups, organizations bought into it it could work. Somehow get it to the point where climbers feel it is important that they support this cause.
Not to derail this into a sportsmans (hunter / fisher people) battle, but that group realized long ago there were problems with game management and took steps to be proactive. We now have probably the most well managed game population in the world. And these folks pay a lot of money to enjoy their pursuit. In addition, these groups promote honest, legal hunting. Which is something rockclimbers have done a terrible job as far as promoting ethical resource use.
A huge problem I see with a video or photo presentation is the management folks might see this and decide to end all rock climbing in that area. It's a delicate proposal that would need to be handled very carefully, yet if the managers saw that climbers were being proactive it might prove to be beneficial.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 21, 2014 - 03:19pm PT
|
Well I'm glad that people are appreciating the conflicting interests that the thread title implies.
There is another issue where values collide;
paddlefooting behavior.
As climbers we are all about challenging ourselves and pushing our limits, but when many climbers get close to their maximum free climbing abilities they can get sloppy and flail, which can result in rock damage.
Can people be expected to climb well within their abilities to conserve rock?
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 03:27pm PT
|
A huge problem I see with a video or photo presentation is the management folks might see this and decide to end all rock climbing in that area.
Hmmmmm. Good point. Actually, that's why I like the video component of the presentation idea. If any random concerned climber goes to meet a random land manager, who knows where things will go.
But a good video controls the message.
It should firmly establish a strong, historic legacy tying climbing strongly to the park in question. It should make clear that climbing is a valuable, valid, long-established use.
In Zion it dates back 46 years to the first ascent of the Pulpit by Eric Bjornstad and Fred Beckey in 1967. Most other parks throughout the West have long connections with climbing and climbers. Canyonlands NP it goes back to 1962 (two years before the park existed). Arches NP Dark Angel, early '60s.
(Other user groups don't have such a strong legacy. That's partly why other human-powered activities like base jumping, slack-lining and mountain biking are treated poorly in the National Park system. We climbers have always been there. We sort of get grandfathered in.)
Anyway, once that's dealt with, the video should illustrate exactly what damage/wear and tear the climbing community want to show and explain why it adversely affects climbers' experiences. There should be suggestions (TK) for improving the experience for future users of the rock. There needs to be specific, easily achievable measures (TK, TK) that land-managers can adopt (or adapt) to better sustain the high-quality recreational values that the park is tasked with promoting.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 21, 2014 - 03:51pm PT
|
It goes back a lot farther than 46 years crunch.
What about Donald Orcutt? The Crawford cousins on the Steamboat? Glen Dawson? Fritz Weisner?
|
|
Joshua Johnson
Boulder climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 03:58pm PT
|
There was one element of the option B model I forgot to mention;if a climber employs constructive scarring effectively on a new route and then does a "confirmation", that is; pulling the rope and releading the pitch without a hammer, then no impact fees for pin use are assessed.
This encourages the creation of clean routes, and discourages blasting out placements.
This whole thread was created so Ron could stroke his short man little ego.
Look at me...look at me...
Snore.
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2014 - 04:05pm PT
|
It goes back a lot farther than 46 years crunch.
What about Donald Orcutt? The Crawford cousins on the Steamboat? Glen Dawson? Fritz Weisner?
Doh, sometimes my blatherings about history are paddlefooted flails. Sorry.
I'll go sit in a corner for a while.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 21, 2014 - 04:34pm PT
|
Sorry Steve.
Joshua, your harping on my stature is a complement. For a number of years people who had never met me figured I was 6'+.
Keep it up. It reflects well of you.
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Mar 16, 2014 - 09:04pm PT
|
It would appear that the Access Fund does indeed have the guts to preserve desert routes.
Ron, I understand you are specifically talking about degradation of the features and protection on sandstone routes, particularly on the Colorado Plateau. This link to the activities is in regards to Christmas Tree Pass, an area where the NPS is seeking to actually remove all climber placed anchors.
Bolt removal proposal at Christmas Tree Pass:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=2362839&msg=2365114#msg2365114
Less than a week left to comment on this proposal.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 17, 2015 - 01:03pm PT
|
Wrong rock.
It was the Chevy on Castleton Tower, and climbers made the lumber into an FU for planes.
look at the virgin cryptogams getting trompted,....
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2015 - 02:00pm PT
|
Over and over I see reasons NOT to brag about new areas, NOT to report new routes, NOT to encourage climbers to visit these places.... Who brought all those climbers to the desert to begin with? Who helped plant the see of desire for desert towers? The single most powerful impact would be to stop publishing new route info - anywhere. No hand drawn topos, nothing.
First rule of fight club.... But FA ego is the cause of this erosion, make no mistake about it. And I do not place myself above the fray, I've done it too.
DMT
Dingus, I used to think you were a curmudgeon about this. But I see now that I just didn't have as much experience to reach the conclusion you reached.
People DO have herd instincts. I think it's not just because they want a safe known experience... it's also because people want to BRAG about what they did, and there are certain rules to increase the effectiveness of that bragging. The people you brag to have to know about the reputation of whatever your conquest is/was. Saying "ho man I did this waay runout rad new climb, probably 5.11c" doesn't sound as cool as "I climbed the Bachar-Yerian but I skipped a bolt." Thus, the guidebooks form the nucleus that creates a common set of knowledge and community reputation that increases the gnar-value of any bragging we do.
So it's the egos of the FA party who publish the info, and the ego of all of us who lay claim to a conquest after the fact. And maybe not just ego as a self-aggrandizing vice, but perhaps in a kinder light it's a more universal desire to be part of the community of folks who have inspired us, shown us the way to do what we do.
We humans have an impact in whatever activity we do, and the more popular it becomes the greater the impact. My personal strategy has been to spread out my impact in less popular places. Same incremental impact, but less noticeable results because of where I choose to make that impact.
I don't think there's a specific right answer, in terms of selectively publicizing areas to concentrate use and impact, versus the viral spreading of impact as a consequence of folks find and developing and publicizing new areas. One thing I do know, after traveling around a lot in the western states and enjoying the scenery: there is such a mind-boggling amount of rock to be climbed all over, there is no need to go traveling far to find something new and great. And there is no risk in the next few generations of running out of lonely and isolated rock if you don't want to see people. In terms of real impact to nature- rope grooves and such are a non-issue for Mother Earth. It only matters to us humans who consider it a climbing resource that changes from our prior expectations. Crack-based plant species and ecosystems, that's another matter. But in the scheme of things, huge storms can wipe out entire vegetated canyons and natural succession begins anew- we climbers really aren't changing much in the world in geologic terms, but it does have an aesthetic consequence to be considered among the rights of other folks who use the same resources.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 114 of total 114 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!