Safety Trumps Leaving No Trace

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 101 - 120 of total 123 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Melissa

Gym climber

berkeley, ca

Jun 27, 2014 - 10:35am PT

Dingus? I don't understand your post? There's a bolt at my foot. It's just supposed to be funny. I'm not going to go crazy in Berkeley over a bolt in Norway.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:37am PT

Melissa,

for some time I did not see the bolt and hanger in your pic.

Now all is clear.

ps also I would not have thought of the setting as a rock climbing area with so little background to view.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:39am PT

Mark Force,

It may be that with you I miss read the tone you attempt to present?

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Jun 27, 2014 - 10:40am PT

I'm curious who, if anyone on this thread, truly advocates LNT and climbing simultaneously. Merely approaching, climbing and descending a route leaves some trace. As soon as you thrown in the need to rope up, the trace gets biggers. It seems to me that Dingus McGee makes that point with his OP, and I'm searching in vain to find someone who contradicts it.

John

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:45am PT

jammer,

oh yes, the metamorphic outcrops. Either gneiss or granite gneiss. No I have not climbed on them much but they can have classy short climbs on them. Nice steep face with features. And cracks. Have at 'em.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:47am PT

What is the correct version of LNT?

Mark Force where are U?

Melissa

Gym climber

berkeley, ca

Jun 27, 2014 - 10:47am PT

I don't think anyone disputes that LNT isn't fully consistent with existing. These seem to be the issues in dispute: The folks who see LNT as a fundamentalist principle to be adhered to in the strictest of terms or rejected out of hand see discussing it with those who see it as goal or guiding principle for minimizing impact when possible as hypocrisy, and then there are others who don't have fundamentalist blinders on, but don't desire to reduce impacts either or who disagree with what constitutes undesirable impact also arguing that it is not an interesting principle.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:56am PT

jammer,

you and anyone else do not have to ask me for permission. Part of it is public land and some of those rock may be the Kennedy private lands.

I have ask the Kennedy people about climbing on them and they had no problem. But I suggest if any ranch people approach you in that allotment ask if climbing on such and such a rock poses any problem.. It seem this way of asking leaves them with a feeling of cooperation.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 10:58am PT

jammer,

I have already said I do not care to second guess what LNT means. I have my version of it. And I know a version of it is not IT.

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Jun 27, 2014 - 10:58am PT

Jammer,

I would, fo course, argue that the proper ideal should be to leave the optimal trace.

;>)

John

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Jun 27, 2014 - 11:20am PT

BTW, Dingus, I usually find out who's land it is, then ask pre-emptively. I have found being caught on someones land, regardless of how respectful you are being or why you are there, is a good way to jeopardize access, both for that day and going forward into the future. Please try to clean up your act regarding that if you don't already since other people may want to climb there as well..

Amen, jammer! I learned to climb at Little Table Mountain, a volcanic plug near Fresno, on private, cattle grazing land. It had every variety of climbing except low-angle slabs, and was excellent training for high angle face climbing, cracks, and aid.

We always went to the landowner and asked permission to climb. We never got turned down. Unfortunately, lots of others (climbers and otherwise) started to go there without permission. These were primarily teenagers and they often engaged in that no-no of cattle country -- shooting while livestock was present. They also committed that no-no of my presence, viz. shooting while drinking. I saw no reason to re-enact the attack on Point Du Hoc (i.e. climb with bullets flying by).

Fed up, the landowner closed the entire cliff and its environs to everyone about 20 years ago. The landowner went so far as to get Madera County to abandon a public road that aided access. OK, it was a dirt road, but it was still a public right-of-way. While he doesn't blame the climbers, he just thought it was too hard to keep some off but not others. This way, anyone there who is not a ranch employee (or a steer) is trespassing.

Too bad.

John

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 11:29am PT

jammer,

good, the LPWHMP is a cooperative mixture of lands with some small parcels of both public and private lands. Most of the allotment is entirely open to public recreation--that is camping is allowed. Signs show this parcel's breakdown.

But the Kennedy people will often approach you for a chat.

Mark Force

Trad climber

Cave Creek, AZ

Jun 27, 2014 - 11:34am PT

It may be that with you I miss read the tone you attempt to present?

Dingus, that is likely; think of us as climbers sitting around a fire and having a hot debate.

What is the correct version of LNT?

I'm no authority or holder of the Truth! LNT has a history back to Olmstead, Muir, and Brower. I'd argue back to Thoreau and Whitman. I think a lot of us have been arguing over semantics. LNT is an unachievable ideal. Existing leaves trace. Our trace in the bigger world is a huge issue and we all need to wrestle with that and minimize our adverse impact on resources because they're finite and it's in all of our long-term interests to share. We could stand to have less people in the world along with consuming less, but that's territory where angels fear to tread!

So, LNT is really about making choices that minimize impact while still leaving you leeway to play. Call it a minimal impact ethic; call it whatever you want. Seems like that, fundamentally, is something we can all agree on. The devil is in the details.

Dingus, you have certainly acted lawfully according to BLM guidelines and respectfully by asking landowners permission to climb on their land. Nice.

Now, as for my opinion about bolting in relation to a minimal impact ethic...
1) BLM wilderness rules are good - hand drill only.
2) Convenience bolts suck. Don't bolt where there is a usable crack, including belays.
3) Bolting short face climbs that are easily top-roped sucks.
4) Gridbolting sucks; if that is your idea of climbing, there are gyms for that.

There is my opinion. Doesn't mean it is right, but I do believe it is a solid minimal impact ethic for climbing. It preserves the resource, leaves room for "sport" and "trad" climbing, and decreases the chance of being severely regulated from outside.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 12:16pm PT

Mark Force,

in my experience I see increasing evidence that texting and email media are somewhat to quite tone deaf. The mind responds so quickly to the quirk of a slight tone and can be wrong. The evidence is in the additional symbols we now add to ironic statements and short messages to let the receiver know that all is good [with what we have said]. For example: lol, lulz, :) etc.

While giving an in person speech we would not hold up the symbol of the smiling face. We read the crowd; they read us well enough and have no need for the tone-directing symbol. This part[tone] of communication does not move over the internet unless we add symbols.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 12:25pm PT

Mark Force,

some sport climbers have only draws. Getting gear consumes resources too. One bolt could keep a group of climbers from having to acquire such gear.

Which way consumes less resources? adding one bolt or everybody having a #2 friend for one placement? There certainly is a lot less metal in one bolt/hanger combo than 20 #2 friends.

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Jun 27, 2014 - 01:13pm PT

I think sport climbing also adds to the ability of the rock resource to accommodate more climbers in a given time period. If every party has to fiddle around placing and removing gear, building anchors, etc., it simply takes longer.

Mind you, I mostly climb without fixed gear, largely looking for routes off the beaten path, but I enjoy sport climbing, too, and I appreciate that others did the hard work so I don't have to.

John

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2014 - 01:17pm PT

John,

I see and know your point that fiddling with gear causes less through-put per route than an all bolted situation would make for but like you I am mostly out in woods climbing with a few friends.