Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 53 of total 53 in this topic |
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 6, 2014 - 05:25pm PT
|
It seems they want to charge us for a special permit. While this sounds sensible in the here and now, it sets a dangerous precedent.
|
|
Bad Climber
climber
|
|
Yeah, Spider, this $/permit thing is ridiculous, not to mention ordering permits ahead of time and such. What a bunch of crap. Of course, my dog wouldn't be allowed. F-'em.
I HATE my government.
Land of the free? Yeah, right.
Check it out:
Visitors to this area
would be required to obtain a Visitor Use Permit through the National Recreation
Reservation Service (NRRS).
 A seasonal closure of the Visitor Use Permit Area would be implemented from
November 16 to July 31, to minimize impacts to MYLF and/or peregrine falcons.
During the open season (August 1 to November 15), Visitor Use Permits would be
reserved in advance through NRRS online or by calling the NRRS toll-free number.
Permits would not be issued by local Forest Service offices.
At least one Forest Service site manager with citation authorization would be onsite each
day that the Visitor Use Permit Area is open. Funding for this site management would be
provided by a combination of grants, partner contributions, user fees, and federal budget
allocations.
The Forest Service would use the NRRS system to provide permit users with educational
information about the area, including regulations, human waste disposal requirements,
and resource protection concerns and requirements.
A limited number of permits would be issued each day, based on site capacity (including
parking capacity at the Kratka Ridge parking lot on CA-2). The permit system would be
governed by an “either/or” quota mechanism that would initially issue permits each day
for no more than 90 persons to access the rock and no more than 30 vehicles (based on
available number of parking stalls) to park at the designated trail head.
The number of visitor use permits issued would be adjusted up or down as determined by
an adaptive management process that would consider the following three
metrics/indicators:
MYLF population reports
Permit compliance
Available funding for onsite Forest Service management
Dogs and other domestic animals would be prohibited (PCT exempt), unless they are service
animals covered under DOJ 28 C.F.R. Part 35.136 – also applies to federal agencies under
Section 504.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Public lands need to be managed. I travel the world and what impresses me about the US is the cleanliness of public lands and the ABUNDANCE of wildlife. This would not be the case without public lands administered by governmental agencies.
Policies sometimes seem bizarre to many of us in the climbing comunity but, believe me, it's better than the alternative of weak environmental laws or weak enforcement of existing laws.
edit: I would hope that rules concerning pets are never an access issue....they're nice to have around but they don't climb.
|
|
overwatch
climber
|
|
Manage it by boycotting it...I am all for protecting wildlife but they can pound their fee. I thought that place was a joke anyway. Overrated zoo...sorry if anyone gets offended
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
hey there, say, spider... say, i was wondering how this was going... thanks for sharing...
thanks for added thought, info, too, to donini...
and other thoughts on all this, too...
i remember back when we all got to write, etc, concerning all this...
i am not a climber, of course, but was still concerned...
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Seems like a reasonable approach to me. They are going to be spending in the neighborhood of $100,000 JUST to provide access for climbing. This will not be charged to climbers in any way.
They feel the need to control the number of people accessing the site, which means a permit system. They are using a national already-existing site that handles permits on federal lands, which charges a fee to recover the cost of the permit system. By doing so they are probably assuring a much larger amount of access. The forest gets none of the money.
They are putting a ranger out there that is an actual employee (volunteers cannot write citations), which will probably run $20k a year---which will not cost climbers anything.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
Thanks for the update Spider. Having said that, comments like this really bother me:
I HATE my government.
Land of the free? Yeah, right. Bad Climber seems like an OK dude, and I do dislike fee programs, but come on. E.B. Sledge, a Marine who later wrote a book about his tour on Peleliu and Okinawa, said he found his return to civilian life difficult, like many returning soldiers, because he could not "comprehend people who griped because America wasn't perfect, or their coffee wasn't hot enough, or they had to stand in line and wait for a train or bus".
Let's get some perspective. If you don't like, provide your thoughts to the Forest Service. Donini is right. Some regulation is good, particularly when you at other areas in other places where regulation is lax or nonexistent.
|
|
overwatch
climber
|
|
Seems like they will be getting our money back in fees and citations because the two times I was there, on weekdays no less, it was crammed with climbers. Could not imagine the scene on a weekend
Anyway, party on I won't be in the way
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Access fees on public lands = double taxation
Tell a friend!
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
I'm with Donini and Ken on this one.
I think this is a very reasonable approach. Limited access is a huge step from NO access. The fee-thing is a downer but I get why they are doing it. Some modicum of control over the inevitable hoards that would descend is in order. I don't think the entire park system is going to fall apart from this particular precedent. If it's not aiming a gun at me, it's not "dangerous".
Like Fat Dad said, you can direct your comments to the Forest Service. Evidently they DO read their mail.
(Minus the fee), this is exactly the outline I've proposed to the park service in several letters to them.
It will be interesting to see what future studies will reveal about the frog. I've read the recent reports. Fire+drought over the last few years has wiped them out in that particular area IMO.
|
|
Bad Climber
climber
|
|
I hear you Fat Dad. I just get so frustrated with the waste and hyper-regulation. Some climbing access is better than none, for sure, but the place,if the plan goes as drafted, will be closed for much of the best season, AND we'll have to pay to walk down there. Cost for access? Climbers would be screaming happy to provide all the labor. I guess it's safe to say that it is unlikely I'll be climbing there again. I'm glad I got to experience it in it's unregulated state for a few trips. Great climbing.
I should be more measured in my tone, I guess: I HATE aspects of my government. Hell, I'm a gov't employee, so the tax payer is on the hook for my livelihood. My gov't gives me a good life. But I see so many stupid things going down, and it drives me crazy. I don't want to drift this thread, but in Cali. we've got this "wheelchair Nazi" who goes around shutting down mom and pop business because some obscure aspect of ADA regulations isn't being met, regulations, btw, that are, just about impossible to meet--truly. Ramp angle off by a fraction of a degree? You're busted. Railing a fraction of an inch to high/low? You're busted. Want to park on a dirt pullout in the National Forest? Pay up.
Gaaaa....
I need a beer. And it's barely 6AM. Haarumph.
BAd
|
|
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
Sucks Balls....
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 7, 2014 - 08:55am PT
|
I thought that place was a joke anyway. Overrated zoo.
Thanks for saying this. It's definitely a B- crag in my opinion. Although LA is surrounded by these. This one is good in hot weather.
The way this reads, the Forest Service seems to be preparing for and onslaught compared to the beach crowd. They could spend a fortune developing an infrastructure for hundreds of climbers each week but then only a handful would show up.
Here in LA our crags seem to go through popularity surges. At one point Devils Punchbowl was a "Scene" now nothing. That scene moved to Williamson in the mid 1990's and was packed. If it opens again, especially under these conditions, I don't see it ever getting more than 50 or 60 a day. Usually less.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
"I don't think the entire park system is going to fall apart from this particular precedent."
The USFS has been trying to make their Fee Demonstration Project permanent in one manner or another for nearly 20 years, and have been slapped back legally repeatedly. Their most recent efforts, however, are showing strong likelihood of becoming permanent.
To make their case, they used trumped up 'evidence' showing that the public approved of such fee-based access, by showing the numbers of people who purchased an Adventure Pass. This Pass had no legislative teeth behind it, but the USFS presented & 'marketed' it in such a way that it appeared to the public that it was mandatory. Each one of these purchases were used as 'evidence' of public support for fee-based access.
The USFS will absolutely hold this up as an example of where the public accepts the idea of a fee-based access in their continued efforts to nationalize the policy. And if this happens, they will certainly concession the permit system to an outside corporation.
Our public lands are our legacy as citizens of this fine country. There is plenty of tax revenue with which to manage them adequately...all we have to do is stop allowing the leadership to squander them away in useless, expensive wars & such.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
By my reckoning the FS had to sell 70 million 'Adventure Passes' to pay
for their new Taj Mahal in Arcadia. Yeah, that's what the little froggies
really need for their protection, ain't it?
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
Yep. This Taj Mahal, as Reilly so aptly calls it,is a long way from the Nat Forest it is supposed to serve. The head ranger's office and visitor center many miles away in urban Arcadia built at a cost of millions? And they want a fee/permit system and a person writing citations at a crag? Tip of the iceberg...
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
I don't have a problem with an agency like the USFS operating in a facility like that. Our public lands deserve to be prioritized and managed effectively, and that takes a functional workplace and a place where the public can get good information.
What galls me is the idea that such a facility had anything to do with the revenues generated by the Fee Demo Project. Or that the revenue might have come from subsidized access to our lands for various extractive purposes. Or that the poorly managed subsidizing process would be compensated for by fee programs.
That really pisses me off.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 7, 2014 - 10:34am PT
|
Our public lands are our legacy as citizens of this fine country. There is plenty of tax revenue with which to manage them adequately...all we have to do is stop allowing the leadership to squander them away in useless, expensive wars & such.
Very well stated. As is your quote above.
Our land managers deserve the best. The best personnel, training, equipment, facilities and funding. The cost of ONE fricking weapon of destruction would cover this for years.
I addition to responding to the survey, please cc Adam Schiff the local Rep or whom ever your Rep of Congress is. It's those goofballs who don't get it.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
This thing is a couple of miles from my house, on extremely valuable land situated between the 210 freeway and the Santa Anita racetrack. WTF? Does the head ranger like betting on the horses during his lunch break? Seriously, I watched this building go up, and I looked up the budget, which did not mention the cost of the land. This means one of two things; either the USFS already owned the property (worth millions) in which case they should have sold it, or they bought it and did not list it as part of the budget for the project. Either way we, the tax and fee paying public, got robbed.
FWIW if they had built a reasonably nice facility in the Nat Forest where visitors to the forest would actually see and use it, and we already owned the land I would not be so peeved, but instead they built a facility far more extravagant than Joshua Tree National Park's fine visitor center and offices, and it is nowhere near the Nat Forest on very valuable property.
What is "not to get" about this?
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Let's not let this thread get derailed (too much). Suffice it to say that fee-based access is a dangerous trend.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
Suffice it to say that fee-based access is a dangerous trend.
I agree 100%.
But I don't see where it's off topic to point a out gross waste of funds at a time when fees for all sorts of access are increasing or being leveed anew.
Whatever... Cheers!
|
|
guyman
Social climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
Spider is correct in his thinking that not to many climbers are going to use/pay for the right to climb there....
and with the BEST of the climbing shut off... they will not get the numbers they need.
not enuf for a full time Ranger prowling around the place.
Willie is not and never will be the GUNKS. And at the GUNKS they only pay the RANGER some sort of part time mim wage.
meth
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
A Fee for using Public Lands sounds like it could establish a precedent that would spread like wildfire across the whole USA.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
1) They listened to none of our comments from last winter and came back with a more draconian plan, showing they have no intention of reasonableness.
2) 95% of the protection of this plan could be accomplished for free. Just close the climbs along the stream, and provide a way bag box such as done in Red Rock. If the ANF insists on closing the short trail, the improved long trail can also be done for free with volunteer labor. Adding the ranger and permits is actually a net loss with the added bureaucracy and very little added benefit.
3) 30 cars per day is far too low. There is plenty of room for 50 cars. More could just park further away if they want to.
4) Closure of the entire area until Aug 1 is illegal. The ANF has illegally muddled the reason for the seasonal closure claiming it is due to both the frogs and the falcons, so that they can claim an endangered species is involved.
5) The frogs don't need any seasonal closure; just need people to stay away from the streambanks.
6) The Falcons affect only a few climbs near Being There. The ANF has an overly broad interpretation of falcon nesting buffer zones. Falcons are no longer endangered and are quite common. Some nest on Torrey Pines Beach only 100' from hundreds of people walking below on the beach.
7) The ANF permit system plan is somewhat copied from what the Cleveland national forest has done in San Diego county at Cedar Creek Falls and is planning for Three Sisters Falls. At both of those locations crowds and impacts are far different than Williamson Rock. There were up to 500 cars per day parking at Cedar Creek west trailhead, garbage, drinking, deaths from cliff jumping, deaths from heat exhaustion, etc.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
no fees.
regulated usage.
require a mandated review of the whole process at end of the year.
precedent is critical.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
They listened to none of our comments from last winter and came back with a more draconian plan, showing they have no intention of reasonableness.
So, what part of bureaucracy don't you get? ;-)
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
Forest Service is under the Department of Agriculture. This should be funded as part of the core budget, providing public access to public areas, while investing in the protections needed to preserve endangered species.
Where else can we trim Agricultural spending in America to pay for this? How about killing off insurance subsidies for tobacco growers. Did you know that U.S. taxpayers spend about $34 MILLION per year to provide below-market-rate insurance policies to tobacco growers so they can afford to stay in business killing Americans? Seems like they should pay market rates for their insurance policies or go out of business. Imagine if the tobacco growers had to abandon that product because it wasn't as lucrative, and they had to grow fruits or vegetables?Oh, the horror! Here's the view from the other side:
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/05/22/2649748/bid-to-end-crop-insurance-subsidy.html
Being a little more balances in considering it, the farmers would still have a tough time making a profit with fruits and vegetables because of North American Free Trade Agreement that lets large corporations import fruits and vegetables from thousands of miles away at a cheaper price because of international differences in labor laws and cost of living. Consumers are happier, producers can't compete as well. But at least if the government is going to subsidize something to manage some economic reality and maintain a farming industry in America in spite of stuff like NAFTA that benefits large-corporations, any subsidies we have should be helpful to the average consumer rather than hurtful.
Or, how about corn subsidies? We've got corn so cheap now that we get high fructose corn syrup sweetened products that are slowly killing Americans, and it's cheaper than normal nutrient-based food. Check the latest issue of National Geographic.
Access to nature in Angeles National Forest is just another special-interest group among many demands across the country. It would seem like a tough sell by our local representatives to earmark funds for recreation when other representatives from different parts of the country are claiming their earmarks (e.g. agricultural subsidies) create jobs and save families and the economy.
At some point there should be a higher level of arbitration in our country, thinking about what kind of country we want to invest in, rather than responding to knee-jerk short-term needs. I for one (and probably most people who enjoy exercise in natural environments) would prefer that our country invested in activities that enabled more access to healthy living rather than activities that enable more and cheaper access to unhealthy food and cigarettes. Why should the US invest in subsidies that encourage a lifestyle that will become a further economic burden to taxpayers for future health expenses? The value of the short-term jobs created from agricultural subsidies for unhealthy products do not outweigh the long-term costs.
Rather than dumping the savings from these wasteful and policy-distorting programs into general deficit reduction, the funds can be reallocated to healthy living activities, such as basic access to public lands with whatever investment required to meet environmental preservation mandates.
Who is going to lobby for something like this? Access Fund? Nature Conservancy? Sierra Club? Those will all lose the press-war against starving farmers and their poor destroyed families because of these heartless rich people who want to go rock climbing for free.
|
|
Roots
Mountain climber
Tustin, CA
|
|
R.I.P. Williamson
..plenty of other places to go.
|
|
crusher
climber
Santa Monica, CA
|
|
Well if all areas near streambeds are permanently closed, even though by August there is no water left the crowd will thin - there isn't a whole lot of beginner terrain left if the Stream Wall is closed. It would be a shame not to have the London Wall for the "allowable" climbing season though.
Is the permit thing on a daily basis or do you apply for a permit for the whole "season" (sorry I didn't have time to read the links yet)?
I was sort of surprised to even see this, figured they'd bury it in red tape and Willie would just remain closed.
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
... and what??? our stupid Adventure Pass doesn't count?;)
To clarify, I'm against the fee/permit thing. Sounds like an enforcement nightmare.
Good luck keeping climbers off the Stream and London Wall unless they are prepared to chop all the routes.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Of course, my dog wouldn't be allowed.
See? It's not all bad.
And I agree with the Monrovians about the new HQ.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
My guess is the bolts will be chopped on permanently closed climbs (within 10m = 33' of the stream includes Mushroom, London, Stream, Mushroom, Stash. Action #1 seems to also close anything on the south side of the stream even if it's more than 33' away, since you're not supposed to cross the stream, such as the Far side, Little Tokyo, etc.
Climbers who want the rest of Williamson open should accept that. The only other option is not chopping them, so then someone might still climb them, and get the whole area closed down.
--There are enough moderate routes elsewhere, such as the main wall, summit block, etc, not just near the stream.
 a new permit will be needed every time you go there. They don't say what the fee will be. The online cost of the reservation system alone is $6 each. Only above that would anything go to the ANF. If they install a new bathroom and repave the parking, and put in an overly expensive trail, they can claim those are improvements that climbers need to pay for.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
What, the bolts are bothering the frogs? Seems like the chopping would too.
|
|
rincon
Trad climber
Coarsegold
|
|
First of all, I can't figure out what the parking quota is supposed to accomplish? Only 30 cars per day...what about the cars for people hiking Mt Williamson, or day hiking on the PCT? There is no shortage of parking spots that is for sure. Currently you can park all along hwy 2 and in the many turn outs. Look forward to a bunch of no parking signs going up.
Can you imagine that many people are going to bother to get an advance reservation just for a quick sport climbing session? I don't think it'd be worth the hassle myself...just to go there and deal with some ranger rick and all the rules...and they're taking away most of the best climbs.
And no restrictions on the PCT, except now you have to poop 100' from the stream, and bury it...not sure why that wasn't already the rule.
Good posts splater!
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
There sure is a lot of speculative grousing going on about this. I'm going to wait and see what actually happens before I complain about it.
I'm surprised at all the negativity. This is good new people. Willi is reopening. Don't like the regulations? Keep climbing wherever you've been climbing for the last 8 years.
Just a guess, but I suspect the pullouts will stay open for parking to facilitate hikers.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 8, 2014 - 07:40am PT
|
I've been working on my letter and I've hit on an idea.
Some land managers just don't know how to deal with rock climbers. Someone qualified needs do extensive research and write a manual for land managers to use in dealing with climbing areas.
IF you have the time to read it, here is my first rough draft of the things they should know when making decisions on what to do:
1) Willamson Rock is not considered a high quality climbing area. It is metamorphic gneiss with a decomposing quality to it. Climbers prefer granite and rock that is stable. Some parts of Williamson Rock have the desirable quality but most does not.
2) There are many options around the region with climbing at Idylwild in the San Jacinto Mtns considered to be the high quality area in summer months. If Williamson Rock is closed, we will go somewhere else. It would be nice if it was open because we like variety.
3) Convenience to access determines popularity. Climbers can tend to be social and group together where access is easy. When this happens, land managers may experience the need to manage. Williamson Rock is close to the road and the Short Trail, built by climbers, provided quick access. If that trail is closed and only the Long Trail is allowed for access, this will reduce the number of climbers. Very few climbers would consider walking all the way from the parking lot at Krakta Ridge. They would simply choose to go some where else.
4) A climbing area can become popular for a period of time. But then the popularity goes away, almost always. The rise in popularity can usually be traced to one person or a small group of persons who put up new routes. Media promotion can cause this or the publication of a guide book. When an area gets too crowded, many climbers choose to go elsewhere. Thus popularity can hit a critical mass where people have to wait to get on climbs, at which point decline begins. One way to manage and over abundance of climbers in an area is to do nothing and the matter will sort out with a natural decline in popularity.
5) Climbers like variety. They don’t like to do the same old climbs over and over. The average climber might visit a place like Mt Williamson once or just a few times a year.
6) Climbers will not pay a special fee to climb on public lands. There are many reasons for this. The proposed fee system in the current plan is doomed to failure. It is likely there would be an organized boycott so any personnel or infrastructure would go to waste. An EIA that does not include a survey of this would be incomplete.
7) In the past Williamson Rock may have achieved a level of popularity with Rock Climbers that caused an overwhelming amount of traffic and problems for land managers. This is likely never to happen again since this boom was driven by new route development. Land managers at Joshua Tree National Park have successfully implemented new route bans to persevere natural resources and control overcrowding in sensitive areas.
IF you do choose to read all of this I welcome suggestions. Feel free to take from this and make it our own.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
They would simply choose to go some where else.
Isn't that the point? Then the 'land managers' can stay in their cushy offices in the Taj Mahal,
which they are so richly deserve according to some.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
Regarding the frogs.
The San Gabriels are full of countless canyons and streams which are difficult, often nearly impossible to get to. Even John Muir commented on how inaccessible these mountains are. But the USFS is using a study of a short stretch of a roadside stream to determine the health of this species. Seems like a stretch to me.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Is the permit thing on a daily basis or do you apply for a permit for the whole "season" (sorry I didn't have time to read the links yet)?
I see people saying over and over, that the "fee" is for climbing. It is not. It is for reserving a permit to access the area.
If you think this is a slippery slope, you are decades late. Think Whitney, Think Rainier, think Half-Dome. Think permits for backpacking.
You will pay the same fee as the person who gets a permit to go have a pic-a-nic lunch down at the rock. The fee is not for climbing, and saying so simply means that your comments will otherwise be dismissed.
HOWEVER, the suggestion above, is interesting. They have such a system on Rainier, where you can get a 1 week permit, or a season permit.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
No fee-based access to USFS land!
Tell a friend! (And your congressional representative!)
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
Another regressive tax on the working class.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
in 1994 one of those fuking yellow frogs bit me on my leg
you've got six legs?
certainly suggests the hypothesis you love flying around sh#t...
as for user fees, ask your 'Gunks climbing friends about that... fact of life there.
Toula's Rock 'n' Road gives Williamson three stars (the same number as Pinnacles... JTree gets four stars, as did Yosemite, Tuolumne...)
|
|
sowr
Trad climber
CA
|
|
Thanks for posting Chris. I think any change of state would be beneficial, not only to climbing but would perhaps alleviate pressure on other local crags - Holcomb comes to mind.
I think we need to prove that we can be worked with, and that we are cooperative as a community. This angry young man stuff seems cool but it's going to bite us. We need to network and form relationships with the authorities.
I think the notion that a limited opening of Williamson to climbing would reduce crowds at other crags might be used as one of your points.
Good idea to use only the long trail.
It should be up to us to help educate visitors to the crag. This is a critical point, as a lot of climbers are going to be coming straight from the gym.
I'm happy to help in writing things up etc.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
Spider Savage wrote
>>I've been working on my letter.. and I've hit on an idea.
IF you have the time to read it, here is my first rough draft of the things they should know when making decisions on what to do:
>> 1) Williamson Rock is not considered a high quality climbing area.
Disagree. Lots of climbers like it.
>> 2) There are many options around the region with climbing at Idyllwild.
Disagree. There are actually limited options in hot summer. Williamson is the only big summer crag in the entire ANF.
>> 3) ...Very few climbers would consider walking all the way from the parking lot at Krakta Ridge.
>> 4) A climbing area can become popular for a period of time. But then the popularity goes away, almost always. The rise in popularity can usually be traced to one person or a small group of persons who put up new routes.
Disagree. If it were reopened, it would again become popular.
>> 5) Climbers like variety. They don’t like to do the same old climbs over and over. The average climber might visit a place like Mt Williamson once or just a few times a year.
Disagree. Lots of climbers used to and would again go a lot more than that. There is no such thing as an average climber.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
I think we need to prove that we can be worked with, and that we are cooperative as a community. This angry young man stuff seems cool but it's going to bite us. We need to network and form relationships with the authorities.
Bingo.
If we are good stewards, and demonstrate good ethics, then things can change.
Actually working to build that trail (in the right way) would do a lot to help.
The forest is looking at spending a LOT of scarce money to build infrastructure just for climbers.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 10, 2014 - 08:59am PT
|
SOWR - Yep, Holcomb is the new popular summer area, as per my "new area" theory.
Splatter - Good. Need more people to chime in and bash my write up with their wisdom. It's how we get places.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2014 - 04:41pm PT
|
The Center for Biological Diversity controls the Federal government.
|
|
overwatch
climber
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2014 - 05:16pm PT
|
Try the Black Tower area if you want to beat the crowds and the heat. You will need gear though
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2014 - 05:32pm PT
|
Climbing may be allowed at Williamson in 2016.
On a very restricted basis.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 53 of total 53 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!