Climbing impacts and science

[captain static]

I am wondering if we are being trolled here? Again, backing up what Johnny just said, an excerpt from my comments on the DBNF Plan:

the rock climbing documented in the Bronaugh guidebook affects approximately 18,835 linear feet or 3.57 miles of cliffline. In a workshop given by the Forest Service concerning making comments on this Plan, it was indicated that a cliffline width of three hundred feet was used to estimate the total area of the Cliffline Prescription Area. Without going into the details of the math, it is estimated that rock climbing activities in the DBNF affect only 3.57 miles of cliffline out of a total 3,058 miles of cliffline. Or from a land area perspective, climbing affects only 130 acres or 0.12% out of a total of 111,205 acres of Cliffline Prescription Area in the DBNF.

In the larger scheme of things at RRG our impact is minimal.

[the lurkist]

Anecdotally, my experience is that even on the most impacted, used routes in the red (routes at Left Flank, Military, Road Side, etc) the rock stands up to the use amazingly well. No polish, very little rock wear, only superficial chalk accumulation, etc.... The rock seems to be proving itself maintenance free.

The obvious impact, as we all know, is the base. Soil compression, erosion, focal plant death, etc... all of which can be mitigated and controlied with a pro active preparation of the base. Even the worst impacted bases that have been neglected with on going use can be rectified with one to two afternoons of work. Assuming a thoughtful approach is given to avoiding T and E species, and understanding the minimal amount of cliffline we affect, trying to spin climber impacts into anything more than what they are is a purely craven attempt at political gain.

Science is helpful in elucidating truths otherwise not appreciated, but in this instance, as they say, "this ain't rocket science". No pun intended.

[tomdarch]

I'll chant my mantra: the more development there is, the less impact there will be as the result of spreading out the climbers in the area. Maybe, someday the FS will realize this.

[Guest]

this discussion reminded me of an article in the Louisville Courier-Journal last Sunday:
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnew ... 13140.html

"State wants to turn parks into cash cows"

Newly hired Parks Commissioner George Ward said that there is plenty of room for development and that keeping the parks beautiful remains a core value. He defended the more commercial approach, saying it will trim costs and boost the number of visitors, which in turn will drive up revenues and draw more tourists to businesses near the parks

Heavy use — also a growing issue at America's most popular national parks — has left a toll at Natural Bridge, Graham said.

"The level of trash in all areas has increased significantly, the noise at popular attractions is high, and the impact on the overall area is visible through destruction of trails, plant life and natural rock formations," Graham said.

none of these visitors are climbing... Hello Starbucks!