I heard blade runner was in the closed section of military wall, but when I went there and looked it seems to be right on the edge of the closed off area. Would it be kosher if I climbed up Danita Dolores and swung over or boulder-traveresed over to the lower section of the route, starting outside the closed area? I've wanted to climb that route for a while now, does the closure apply to rock above the fenced off area too? It seems like no harm would be done as long as I never touched the ground in the study area.
Another thing, when I looked into the fenced off area I saw quite a few large boulders. It seems like we could lay some planks between the boulders and still have access to a few of the climbs without ever setting foot on the ground. Would something like that be too much of a pain in the ass? or even cool with the FS folks?
blade runner
-
Guest
-
the lurkist
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 2:07 pm
yeah. how about "no".
Does anyone think it ironic that the impact made by the FS fencing off the area under the Skull, et al.. has been way more damaging that any impact that occured under the Skull all the years folks were climbing there. The soil erosion/ compaction of the trail skirting the fence, and now the new fence damanding yet another trail has made any rationale of fencing the area for protection of artifacts that we 1. know are insignificant according to the principle author of the study commissioned by the FS and Cecil Ison, and 2. are protected by a layer of cow dung forming a natural barrier to compaction and camp fires, again according to the principle author of the level 2 excavation, irrelevant.
I, for one, have had enough of bull from the FS on this matter. I am sure they may be sympathetic to climbing, whatever, but I wish the FS Ranger Joy Malone would summon some political courage and face down the irrationale, prevaricating, and overbearing Archeologists and remove the fences. The FS should be dealing with climbing in a substantive manner, dealing with facts, not political footballs.
The RRGCC, although their hands are full, should be forcing the issue with the FS
Does anyone think it ironic that the impact made by the FS fencing off the area under the Skull, et al.. has been way more damaging that any impact that occured under the Skull all the years folks were climbing there. The soil erosion/ compaction of the trail skirting the fence, and now the new fence damanding yet another trail has made any rationale of fencing the area for protection of artifacts that we 1. know are insignificant according to the principle author of the study commissioned by the FS and Cecil Ison, and 2. are protected by a layer of cow dung forming a natural barrier to compaction and camp fires, again according to the principle author of the level 2 excavation, irrelevant.
I, for one, have had enough of bull from the FS on this matter. I am sure they may be sympathetic to climbing, whatever, but I wish the FS Ranger Joy Malone would summon some political courage and face down the irrationale, prevaricating, and overbearing Archeologists and remove the fences. The FS should be dealing with climbing in a substantive manner, dealing with facts, not political footballs.
The RRGCC, although their hands are full, should be forcing the issue with the FS
"It really is all good ! My thinking only occasionally calls it differently..."
Normie
Normie
-
Roentgen Ray
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:28 pm
I would advise not skirting the fence (literally and figuratively) by traversing over from Danita Dolores; here's why. The last time I spoke to Shannon (granted, it's been a little while) The FS was ok with opening the area to climbing. However, as it turns out, the FS doesn't really own the rights to that bit of land. It is native american land, so we all were tresspassing: the FS, the archaeologists, and the climbers. So, as it last stood, the tribal leaders were to have a meeting where they would discussed the matter of opening military to climbing, after visiting the site. The tribal leaders would then vote as to whether or not the area should be opened to climbing. I don't know if or when the vote occured or is to occur. That being the case, err on the side of cautious and respectful by not climbing the route please. Because you know, the minute you get half way up the route, the tribal leaders are bound to come up for their inspection. That wouldn't bode well for climbers as a mindful group.
Quod me nutrit, me destruit.