Who does it belong to?

[bob]

Me …
Them …
Us …
Who cares; I’m going to do what I want to anyway …
I don’t care, I got my project …

[bob]

For those who may not know me I am Bob Matheny and I own Torrent Falls. I have allowed access to this privately owned crag, albeit on a limited basis, since I closed the purchase of the property in 2007. Bottom line … it costs me a fair amount of cash to keep Torrent open to climbing, (insurance costs, property maintenance costs, etc.) on an annual basis and all of these costs would simply increase with unlimited access and they would go away with closure. This is an issue that should be of some concern to all land owners with cliff on their property and to anyone wishing to climb anywhere in Kentucky. I am not as concerned about my cash outlay as I am about the air of entitlement that seems to exist in and among the climbing community (please see the comments section for Torrent in the online guidebook). The least expensive and troublesome route of dealing with these issues is to simply close the property to climbing. It has been suggested that I create further signage, greater web presence, etc. to address these issues; however, I feel that anything that I have to “do” is an imposition on me and should not be a part of allowing general access to my property.
In a nutshell the climbing community should realize that the easiest way to deal with access issues for private property owners is to close all access and that the response from every climber should be “WE CAN POLICE OUR OWN” in an effort to prevent closure.

[One-Fall]

Bob, I would like to meet with you this week or next to talk over some things and offer some help. Dinner is on me if you have time.


To my fellow climbers: losing Torrent is not acceptable. I personally think it is the best stone in the Red. Please, if you know someone who is breaking the rules, remind them gently to what is at stake. If they still don't listen, I have some BIG friends that can change their mind.

I know most of us do the right thing anyway.

[clif]

Rick and Liz Weber have pretty strong opinions about this as well. Though, I wonder if it's really just climber's or the sampling. We're a nation of exceptionalists.

[pigsteak]

If most of us did the right thing, we would not be hearing from Bob.

[KD]

Was it the online guidebook comments that prompted your concern or something else? With all due respect, Bob climbing has been promoted to the saturation point and beyond in the Red for several years now. Every crag is loaded up for the most part on a given weekend with nice weather. It's your land - close it if you feel you should - you can do anything you want with it. That wont solve the issue of entitlement though - the sport has become so mainstream its "just like an outdoor gym..." All the cool kids have come to play partly because they were invited and promoted to. Once climbing loses it's sexiness and once the cool kids get 40 plus with arthritis it'll go away just like all such before.

[toad857]

Hmm. Since it was closed to the public, I have only climbed at torrent a handful of times (rented cabins.. great time!). I really don't know how many people are there on a daily basis.. to tell you the truth, I always just imagined that since 2007 the place has been pretty much empty. Apparently not! It makes me sad to think that even with limited visitors the place is still being stressed to this point.

I think that capping the number of daily visitors was a great idea (apparently it isn't enough, but it's definitely a step in the right direction...I always hoped it would evolve into a great model). Maybe also requiring a fee? The trick, of course, is how to pull that off without further imposing on you, the landowner. I agree that you shouldn't have to bother with that. I'm sure the Webers feel the same way about Muir.

[toad857]

In a nutshell the climbing community should realize that the easiest way to deal with access issues for private property owners is to close all access and that the response from every climber should be “WE CAN POLICE OUR OWN” in an effort to prevent closure.

Deserves repeating.

[climb2core]

I have climbed at torrent once since the gates were closed. We rented a cabin for 4 days last fall and had a great experience. During my time there I noticed three distinct groups: the cabin renters, the guided groups and the locals. My thoughts were that Dr Bob owns the land and may invite whom he likes on hIs property. My understanding of the current situation is that there is now a 4th group... The uninvited guest. How do you get rid of them? Maybe ask the first 3 groups to do more policing. It is hard to provide a solution with only a vague accounting of the problem and extent of it. Torrent has always been one if not the favorite crag of mine and I would be willing to help out in anyway I can. What about a "friends of torrent" that set up a volunteer calendar of checking in on things?

[Clevis Hitch]

Blah, Blah, Blah...Fucking close it! I would. Who gives a fuck anyway! Close fucking Muir while you're at it!

It blows my mind that someone can be the President of the climbers coalition and be all about "Saving access" then the first thing you know its "If we own it they can't close it" .Then its Bob bought torrent to "Save" it. First thing to happen a gate went up...Climbers were told to climbe elsewhere. Then the depth of hypocrisy hits you and you open to "a select few who apply online" all the while its open to all the cool kids all the time.

Why are you on here asking permission to close your own land to climbers. Close it. Let'm drop and breathe a little.

Another amazing thing about this situation is that the RRGCC tells people all the time that Kentucky has a recreation law that prevents landowners from being sued if they allow climbers to climb on their land. Then you carry insurance. Is that insurance because of the cabins or the climbers. It sounds a little disingenious...

All the haters will hate but the truth is still true.