Good point, Wes.
As to "flaredcrack's" questions...Most of what you say are very good points, some are not quite right but close, and I can understand where you coming from.
On the subject that organized climbers is an oxymoron, in some sense there may be some truth to that. Climbers, as a group, are intentionally non-conformists which has contributed greatly to climbing opportunities being slowly taken away from climbers who have resisted a potentially highly, effective way to help themselves, get organized. Another group of non-conformist came to understand this and, although I am not a supporter of their activity, the gains they have on behalf of their sport have made by organizing are impressive. I am referring to the NRA. But organizing climbers, or anyone, does not have to downward spiral into a bureaucracy. On that point, I disagree. I do agree that most organizations tend to become bureaucratic, but that is not necessary if the need to “control a few” is replaced with an “culture of discipline,” instead. I like the following quote on this subject…
“…the purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline…Most companies build their bureaucratic rules to manage a small percentage of wrong people…Avoid bureaucracy and hierarchy and instead create a culture of discipline.” (Good to Great, Collins, 2001, page 121)
Now climbers are big on self-discipline but not too big on a culture of discipline. An organization could use a culture of discipline, doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do, to preserve climbing, as a way to avoid “controlling.” That has been my personal hope for the Coalition.
You are right to object to being disrespected. Amateurish jargon is not helpful. But not every thing a “member” of the Coalition does is the same thing as the Coalition doing it. People are free to be both good and not so good. The Coalition is not the military and is not bureaucracy trying to control people, yet. I suspect Chester and Bruisebrother are speaking more from their own perspective than as a spokesperson for the Coalition, which they are free to do. Unfortunately, there is a lot attributing to the Coalition for things members of the Coalition do, just like the Forest Service over generalizes about what climbers do and attributes behavior to all climbers for what a few climbers do.
As to the Coalition working behind the scenes instead of telling the Forest Service that we don’t need to work with them anymore because we buying land instead. I am so glad that you brought this up.
First, nothing could be further from the truth. The Coalition is very much working behind the scenes with the Forest Service…but it is just that, behind the scenes. And we will continue to do so. For example, I met with the District Ranger, Joy Malone, this past Wednesday, we had a very good talk about the Forest Plan, (among other things that we are working on behind the scenes on), and I am using her input to write a “climber comment kit” that should be available by tomorrow, to all climbers. She gave me some good tips.
Second, buying this land DOES NOT mean the Coalition is not working with the Forest Service. Buying this land is about SECURING climbing on private land. We cannot purchase Forest Service land, but we can be strongly engaged in the public comment period, which we are. We can continue to do be good stewards on Forest Service land, which we are, by having another Rehab project on Adopt-A-Crag day, September 6. Another reason I met with Joy, to discuss the Rehab Project. But the only way to secure climbing on private land is to BUY IT. This has become a 21st Century reality for climbers..especially in the Eastern US. That is why the Southeastern Climbes Coalition is buying Boat Rocks, and other local climbig organizations are buying land too. It is a solution who's time has come.
Third, NO, there will be no climbing fee. That is the point of raising the money to buy it so we don’t have to charge. Please donate so we can keep this open AND the Forest Service open. There may be some rules. Can't help it...sometimes we need a little guidance.
Fourth, as to who will police this board land. Well, no one has had to too much so far, I do not suspect too much will change. Dope smoking is still illegal as far as I know, but I don’t anticipate an “Anti-Dope Smoking Squad” tracking down violators.
Finally, your best point…Why not just let climbers continue to climb the way they have in the past? Good question. The answer…Because some climbers are drilling holes in the bottom of the boat below the water line. Not every climber knows how to behave. As you implied climbers are hard to organize. But the brutal reality is we are all affected by what other climbers do. There are a whole lot more climbers today than back in the good old days. We are losing climbing opportunities at an alarming rate. The Forest Service, the State Park, private land owners are all kicking us off, or regulating, climbers in ways no one could have imaged. Avoidance behavior is not a mature response to a serious, and real problem. Organizing ourselves, becoming disciplined, acting responsible and coming up with solutions, is the mature, rational response.
The Coalition is NOT about control, the Coalition is about challenging ourselves to get organized to accomplish something more, than just sticking our heads in the sand and asking why can’t we just be left alone, and go climb.
Change is hard…think of it as evolution. Your comments can help us evolve, and not become extinct.
Shannon
Weird Vibe
The other day, I was up at the large overhang to the left of Indian Stairway. As I entered the area an image of the past began to appear. I set on my haunches and allowed the vision to become vivid. It appeared that a group of ancient Indians where living there. They seemed to be gathered in several family units. As dusk settled in they began to build fires for the last meal of the day. “Fires” I thought, in overhangs Holy Shit!
About that time a young man in his early 20’s returned from chipping a new route around the corner and told everyone about his first accent. The Chief thanked him for his work and informed the tribe this young man had earned the right to name the route. Holy Shit I thought now they are defacing the land. It was everything I could do to sit still and allow all this to happen.
Next, one of the old lady went over to cut a piece of meat from a freshly killed deer hanging from a near by tree. In doing so she tromped all over a batch of white haired golden rod. I couldn’t take much more, but then...
One on the young children went over and took a dump not more than 50 feet from the campsite and within 10 feet of the water supply.
First fires, then trampling endangered spieces, defacing the rock and then pissing too close to a water supply. I couldn’t take it any longer. I grabbed my environmental bible and my Forest Service pamphlet; somebody had better set these people straight. I ran into the middle of the whole damn pack. You should of seen their faces. I spooked the hell out of them. And then as quickly as they appeared they began to disappear. I swear just as the old lady faded back into the past, she smiled and flipped me off.
Sorry Shannon, I couldn't help it. Just thought a little humor might be fitting.
About that time a young man in his early 20’s returned from chipping a new route around the corner and told everyone about his first accent. The Chief thanked him for his work and informed the tribe this young man had earned the right to name the route. Holy Shit I thought now they are defacing the land. It was everything I could do to sit still and allow all this to happen.
Next, one of the old lady went over to cut a piece of meat from a freshly killed deer hanging from a near by tree. In doing so she tromped all over a batch of white haired golden rod. I couldn’t take much more, but then...
One on the young children went over and took a dump not more than 50 feet from the campsite and within 10 feet of the water supply.
First fires, then trampling endangered spieces, defacing the rock and then pissing too close to a water supply. I couldn’t take it any longer. I grabbed my environmental bible and my Forest Service pamphlet; somebody had better set these people straight. I ran into the middle of the whole damn pack. You should of seen their faces. I spooked the hell out of them. And then as quickly as they appeared they began to disappear. I swear just as the old lady faded back into the past, she smiled and flipped me off.
Sorry Shannon, I couldn't help it. Just thought a little humor might be fitting.
True North--- I think you should take your humor to the flame board.
We have farms that raise cattle, sheep and pig for you to eat. We have plumbing that allows us to dispose of our waste, or the knowledge to do it in a way that doesn't spoil our water supplies. (I've been personally told not to swim in the Mill Creek because it is a water supply.) We value our cliffs and would like to keep them from becoming soot covered because of the sheer numbers of climbers. Back then, the White Haired Goldenrod was not endangered because ther weren't Millions of people trampling through the woods. Also, try taking a poll, I think the majorty of climbers here would not endorse chipping.
Bryan
We have farms that raise cattle, sheep and pig for you to eat. We have plumbing that allows us to dispose of our waste, or the knowledge to do it in a way that doesn't spoil our water supplies. (I've been personally told not to swim in the Mill Creek because it is a water supply.) We value our cliffs and would like to keep them from becoming soot covered because of the sheer numbers of climbers. Back then, the White Haired Goldenrod was not endangered because ther weren't Millions of people trampling through the woods. Also, try taking a poll, I think the majorty of climbers here would not endorse chipping.
Bryan
Learn to swim
Flaredcrack:
With 3 posts to your name visible to date, you might be new to the area, and perhaps overlooking somehow what the Coalition is all about...but I could be wrong.
Regardless...
Do you realize if the Murray Property is not immediately secured that we may in fact loose our "right" to climb there for ever?
Do you realize that the Coalition is a group of climbers (just like you are a climber) who are trying to secure that land for ALL CLIMBERS?
Sure, I would prefer people respect the land, the earth... and even people, but right now, time is running out quickly. We have to act. Help secure that land and then debate "how" to act if need be.
There would not be a debate about how to climb and how to act if there were no climbing...so let's (again) take it one step at a time and secure this land for climbing.
Now then...CLIMB ON!
With 3 posts to your name visible to date, you might be new to the area, and perhaps overlooking somehow what the Coalition is all about...but I could be wrong.
Regardless...
Do you realize if the Murray Property is not immediately secured that we may in fact loose our "right" to climb there for ever?
Do you realize that the Coalition is a group of climbers (just like you are a climber) who are trying to secure that land for ALL CLIMBERS?
Sure, I would prefer people respect the land, the earth... and even people, but right now, time is running out quickly. We have to act. Help secure that land and then debate "how" to act if need be.
There would not be a debate about how to climb and how to act if there were no climbing...so let's (again) take it one step at a time and secure this land for climbing.
Now then...CLIMB ON!
! Enough with all that detestation ALREADY !
Smile & be thankful for what you have.
Smile & be thankful for what you have.
Bberlier: Your right, we do have farms that pump the livestock full of hormones, with feedlots that you can smell 10 miles away with runoff that is uncontrolled. All this so you can buy your hamburger for 99 cents wrapped in paper with a big M on it. We do piss every day in our water supply. Every time you flush your john, where the hell do you think it goes? How many chemicals do you think is used to neutralize your shit, toilet paper and condoms before it is dumped back in the water supply. Have you ever seen the sludge off of water treatment filtration screen? Hell the funny thing is; some communities use this sludge to fertilizers food crops. You want to talk about the “Mill Creek”? The “Mill Creek” in Cincinnati has been lined with concrete due the run off from industrial plants such as Sun Chemicals and Proctor and Gamble. It runs down to the Ohio River upstream of the Louisville water intakes. All in the name of progress. I know of one climber who recently retired from P&G and now has more time to climb in the Gorge. Nice guy, P&G was pretty good to him. Raised a family etc.
The sheer numbers of climbers has decreased the price of your equipment on your rack and allowed money to be spent on research for new technology such as cams. It has also increased the number of potential members for the RRGCC, therefore reducing the average cost you will have to contribute to buy the land you want to buy.
Recreational land use comes with negative and positive effects, as does our existence. Buying land for climbing can and will lead to “conflicts of interest” and the need to compromise.
Shannon recently posted the following in another thread:
“There really is no, "they." There is no, "RRGCC." There is no "staff," no leaders, no organization, really. Just a bunch of climbers. Just me. And John, and Hugh, and Gretchen, and Wes, and JB, and Lee, and Ray, and Sandy, and all the rest of the volunteers, and you. There is no one, and everyone. WE are the RRGCC.
... We say there is an RRGCC to the Forest Service. We say it to ourselves. But organizations are just legal fiction. Organization don't really exist, except as a legal construct, people do. There is no climbing community, there are only people who climb. ...”
Sounds great... however some legal construct (fiction or not) will have their name on the loan and/or deed to this new property. Taxes will need to be paid; insurance will need to be maintained. Property management...hell before long someone will suggest that maybe a “land use policy” should be written. Perhaps if we establish a policy, maybe we should enforce it. Hell maybe we could copy text out of the new Forest Service Plan. No wait... we are still six month away from that being approved. What should we do in the mean time, about issues regarding signage?
Maybe all this has been worked out. Shannon has done a lot for this area. If she is willing to take on this challenge, more power to her, God knows she deserves the right to pursue it. I personally think it is risky, but then I haven’t contributed enough to the church to tell the minister how to preach his/her sermons.
What I do know is this: The US Forest Service is a political entity. Other political activist group such as mountain bikes, horsemen, 4 wheel and off road vehicles, fly fisherman, etc. all will be competing with the climbers for land use. Individuals within the State and USFS have great concerns about Archeological issues. Shovel testing and an Archeological report exist. Closures are forthcoming. One user group “the backpackers and campers” have already been banned from rock shelters. Not rock shelters deemed as Archeological sites but all rock shelters.
Gretchen recently raised concerns about the cost of banners to advertise for fundraisers. Am I missing something here? How can an organization stretched so thin in one area hope to make a mayor land purchase? Is it being purchased on a land contract? What happens if the RRGCC defaults on the loan? Who controls the mineral rights? What happens if Roadside becomes available? Should it be purchased also? Will there be enough money to pay the taxes and provide legal council if required to keep climbing open in the Gorge?
Who should establish the code of ethics? Who should enforce them? How do you work with the USFS when they have changed administration five times in the last 2.5 years? How do you disperse climbers when no new routes are being approved? How do you climb without soil compaction? What routes will be approved on this newly acquired land? Who will approve it? Will 5.3 sport routes be allowed? 5.4? 5.5? 5.6?.
Tell me when you want me to stop, because I’m fired up and can go on if you want me to.
Welcome to reality! The decision the USFS deals with everyday is now yours. The frustration vented about the USFS can now be distributed between the USFS and the RRGCC leadership. The compromises and resolution to conflict is now your responsibility as the new land manager. My guess is we will symbolically “step on a plant, build a fire, and chip a notch” all in the name of "reaching the objective" or maybe "just to exist".
And when we do, that old lady with missing teeth, with a chunk of deer meet in one hand and a defiant finger in the air will be laughing her ass off at us.
The sheer numbers of climbers has decreased the price of your equipment on your rack and allowed money to be spent on research for new technology such as cams. It has also increased the number of potential members for the RRGCC, therefore reducing the average cost you will have to contribute to buy the land you want to buy.
Recreational land use comes with negative and positive effects, as does our existence. Buying land for climbing can and will lead to “conflicts of interest” and the need to compromise.
Shannon recently posted the following in another thread:
“There really is no, "they." There is no, "RRGCC." There is no "staff," no leaders, no organization, really. Just a bunch of climbers. Just me. And John, and Hugh, and Gretchen, and Wes, and JB, and Lee, and Ray, and Sandy, and all the rest of the volunteers, and you. There is no one, and everyone. WE are the RRGCC.
... We say there is an RRGCC to the Forest Service. We say it to ourselves. But organizations are just legal fiction. Organization don't really exist, except as a legal construct, people do. There is no climbing community, there are only people who climb. ...”
Sounds great... however some legal construct (fiction or not) will have their name on the loan and/or deed to this new property. Taxes will need to be paid; insurance will need to be maintained. Property management...hell before long someone will suggest that maybe a “land use policy” should be written. Perhaps if we establish a policy, maybe we should enforce it. Hell maybe we could copy text out of the new Forest Service Plan. No wait... we are still six month away from that being approved. What should we do in the mean time, about issues regarding signage?
Maybe all this has been worked out. Shannon has done a lot for this area. If she is willing to take on this challenge, more power to her, God knows she deserves the right to pursue it. I personally think it is risky, but then I haven’t contributed enough to the church to tell the minister how to preach his/her sermons.
What I do know is this: The US Forest Service is a political entity. Other political activist group such as mountain bikes, horsemen, 4 wheel and off road vehicles, fly fisherman, etc. all will be competing with the climbers for land use. Individuals within the State and USFS have great concerns about Archeological issues. Shovel testing and an Archeological report exist. Closures are forthcoming. One user group “the backpackers and campers” have already been banned from rock shelters. Not rock shelters deemed as Archeological sites but all rock shelters.
Gretchen recently raised concerns about the cost of banners to advertise for fundraisers. Am I missing something here? How can an organization stretched so thin in one area hope to make a mayor land purchase? Is it being purchased on a land contract? What happens if the RRGCC defaults on the loan? Who controls the mineral rights? What happens if Roadside becomes available? Should it be purchased also? Will there be enough money to pay the taxes and provide legal council if required to keep climbing open in the Gorge?
Who should establish the code of ethics? Who should enforce them? How do you work with the USFS when they have changed administration five times in the last 2.5 years? How do you disperse climbers when no new routes are being approved? How do you climb without soil compaction? What routes will be approved on this newly acquired land? Who will approve it? Will 5.3 sport routes be allowed? 5.4? 5.5? 5.6?.
Tell me when you want me to stop, because I’m fired up and can go on if you want me to.
Welcome to reality! The decision the USFS deals with everyday is now yours. The frustration vented about the USFS can now be distributed between the USFS and the RRGCC leadership. The compromises and resolution to conflict is now your responsibility as the new land manager. My guess is we will symbolically “step on a plant, build a fire, and chip a notch” all in the name of "reaching the objective" or maybe "just to exist".
And when we do, that old lady with missing teeth, with a chunk of deer meet in one hand and a defiant finger in the air will be laughing her ass off at us.
You have asked several questions…questions you have asked before about what the RRGCC is going to do with the land, money, legal costs, etc., so, I will offer what I know. Then I will ask you some questions.
1.) No, the RRGCC does not have enough money to pay for the entire amount. The owner is willing to offer owner financing, with so much down and reasonable terms. As you know “to buy” the land requires coming up with the down payment and then paying the agreed to amounts in the specified time. So, yes, the RRGCC is watching (and has always watched) its budget. The point of asking for donations, is we don’t have the money. We are not necessarily stretched any thinner than any non-profit raising money for a large project, or a family that takes on a mortgage.
2.) No, we will not own the mineral rights, only surface rights. Charmane Oil has the mineral rights and I presume will continue to do so.
3.) The title will read, “Red River Gorge Climbers’ Coalition, Incorporated.” Non-profits and for profits are corporations under the law. That’s what I meant by legal fiction. The same thing happens if we default that happens when any corporation defaults, the mortgage holder has the right to take the title back. The advantage of incorporation is no one person is personally liable, the corporation is.
4.) Yes, taxes have been budgeted.
5.) No, we do not have the money on hand for any lawsuits. I have spoken to the Access Fund, who in turn is in contact with the ACLU about litigation, if need be. Even the Access Fund does not have the money for a lawsuit. And even if we did not buy this land, we would not have the money for litigation.
6.) Management of the land will fall to the board of the RRGCC. They are the ultimate decision makers in a corporation. They may choose from a variety of ways, to come up with a code of ethics, but I suspect they will ask the Executive Director and CAC to help come up with guidelines.
7.)We just keep on working with the FS the way we always have, no matter how many administration changes they go through.
8.) The rules for the FS land, soil compaction, etc., will most likely come out of the LAC process.
9.) The rules for the newly acquired land, again will mostly likely come from the CAC and ED, with board of director oversight.
You are absolutely right about the RRGCC now being in the role of land managers. There is a crucial difference, however…the federal laws you seemed to be particularly fired up about DO NOT apply to private land. The RRGCC will not have to worry about White haired goldenrod, or archaeological sites.
But I take your point about the managing of the land. It will be difficult and we do not have all the answers. I raised all these same concerns, myself, with the board of directors and the Task Force. In the end, the pros and cons were assessed and a decision was made to go forward as part of the RRGCC’s mission to protect responsible climbing. Time will tell how it all turns out. It is risky, but not irresponsible. I personally (not the RRGCC) ultimately decided that it would be irresponsible not to try to protect the Murray property for climbing.
And yes, there will be “conflicts of interests,” that is part of the human condition. How we choose to deal with them is up to each of us.
Here are my questions for you, Jeff:
What are you really fired up about? Why be fired up, why not offer useful suggestions, mature, rational solutions, instead of casting dispersions on the RRGCC, demanding to know, “What are we going to do about it? Is the RRGCC going to have enough money to sue the FS? Enough money to buy Roadside?” You haven’t made any financial contribution to the RRGCC, you have graciously allowed us to meet at the Hostel and offered your premises for future meetings, for which we were/are thankful. What is your real concern? Why “attack” (my word) the RRGCC?
It feels very much like you are venting…raging against a Forest Service “insiders” scam to use archaeological sites to close climbing, to take something away from climbers under false pretenses, or worse, the “screwed up” (my words) logic of valuing a past people (your toothless old woman) over contemporary people, climbers. You seem to be raging about a double standard of them (Native Americans) being able to step on white-haired goldenrod, but we can’t. Is this helpful for climbers to hear and read in the long run, for you to vent and try to tell funny stories about visions?
It feels very much like you are trying to fire up climbers against the FS…and you seem to be condemning this land purchase because as you suggest, the RRGCC won’t be able to do both, work with the FS AND manage this land. This land purchase does not change anything between the RRGCC and the FS. If anything it significantly improves things. Ask them if you don’t believe me.
But who’s interest are you concerned about? What are you concerned about? The RRGCC not protecting climbing? Your climbing? All climbers? Commercial guiding services? The RRGCC has been very concerned, worked very hard, done more than I can tell, on this subject advocating strenuously on climbers behalf to the FS. We have earned their respect and made tremendous progress for climbing (ask them), by representing ALL climbers interests, by being firm, informed, and fair. And we will continue to do so.
I mean no disrespect, Jeff, but what climbers need to succeed, on public land with the FS or on private land, are mature discussions, not raging, not finger-pointing, not fault finding, and not derisive dispersions. Not huffing puffing, beating our chests, stamping our feet, we need to pull together, grow up and find workable, fair solutions, for everyone.
Will you help us do that?
Shannon
1.) No, the RRGCC does not have enough money to pay for the entire amount. The owner is willing to offer owner financing, with so much down and reasonable terms. As you know “to buy” the land requires coming up with the down payment and then paying the agreed to amounts in the specified time. So, yes, the RRGCC is watching (and has always watched) its budget. The point of asking for donations, is we don’t have the money. We are not necessarily stretched any thinner than any non-profit raising money for a large project, or a family that takes on a mortgage.
2.) No, we will not own the mineral rights, only surface rights. Charmane Oil has the mineral rights and I presume will continue to do so.
3.) The title will read, “Red River Gorge Climbers’ Coalition, Incorporated.” Non-profits and for profits are corporations under the law. That’s what I meant by legal fiction. The same thing happens if we default that happens when any corporation defaults, the mortgage holder has the right to take the title back. The advantage of incorporation is no one person is personally liable, the corporation is.
4.) Yes, taxes have been budgeted.
5.) No, we do not have the money on hand for any lawsuits. I have spoken to the Access Fund, who in turn is in contact with the ACLU about litigation, if need be. Even the Access Fund does not have the money for a lawsuit. And even if we did not buy this land, we would not have the money for litigation.
6.) Management of the land will fall to the board of the RRGCC. They are the ultimate decision makers in a corporation. They may choose from a variety of ways, to come up with a code of ethics, but I suspect they will ask the Executive Director and CAC to help come up with guidelines.
7.)We just keep on working with the FS the way we always have, no matter how many administration changes they go through.
8.) The rules for the FS land, soil compaction, etc., will most likely come out of the LAC process.
9.) The rules for the newly acquired land, again will mostly likely come from the CAC and ED, with board of director oversight.
You are absolutely right about the RRGCC now being in the role of land managers. There is a crucial difference, however…the federal laws you seemed to be particularly fired up about DO NOT apply to private land. The RRGCC will not have to worry about White haired goldenrod, or archaeological sites.
But I take your point about the managing of the land. It will be difficult and we do not have all the answers. I raised all these same concerns, myself, with the board of directors and the Task Force. In the end, the pros and cons were assessed and a decision was made to go forward as part of the RRGCC’s mission to protect responsible climbing. Time will tell how it all turns out. It is risky, but not irresponsible. I personally (not the RRGCC) ultimately decided that it would be irresponsible not to try to protect the Murray property for climbing.
And yes, there will be “conflicts of interests,” that is part of the human condition. How we choose to deal with them is up to each of us.
Here are my questions for you, Jeff:
What are you really fired up about? Why be fired up, why not offer useful suggestions, mature, rational solutions, instead of casting dispersions on the RRGCC, demanding to know, “What are we going to do about it? Is the RRGCC going to have enough money to sue the FS? Enough money to buy Roadside?” You haven’t made any financial contribution to the RRGCC, you have graciously allowed us to meet at the Hostel and offered your premises for future meetings, for which we were/are thankful. What is your real concern? Why “attack” (my word) the RRGCC?
It feels very much like you are venting…raging against a Forest Service “insiders” scam to use archaeological sites to close climbing, to take something away from climbers under false pretenses, or worse, the “screwed up” (my words) logic of valuing a past people (your toothless old woman) over contemporary people, climbers. You seem to be raging about a double standard of them (Native Americans) being able to step on white-haired goldenrod, but we can’t. Is this helpful for climbers to hear and read in the long run, for you to vent and try to tell funny stories about visions?
It feels very much like you are trying to fire up climbers against the FS…and you seem to be condemning this land purchase because as you suggest, the RRGCC won’t be able to do both, work with the FS AND manage this land. This land purchase does not change anything between the RRGCC and the FS. If anything it significantly improves things. Ask them if you don’t believe me.
But who’s interest are you concerned about? What are you concerned about? The RRGCC not protecting climbing? Your climbing? All climbers? Commercial guiding services? The RRGCC has been very concerned, worked very hard, done more than I can tell, on this subject advocating strenuously on climbers behalf to the FS. We have earned their respect and made tremendous progress for climbing (ask them), by representing ALL climbers interests, by being firm, informed, and fair. And we will continue to do so.
I mean no disrespect, Jeff, but what climbers need to succeed, on public land with the FS or on private land, are mature discussions, not raging, not finger-pointing, not fault finding, and not derisive dispersions. Not huffing puffing, beating our chests, stamping our feet, we need to pull together, grow up and find workable, fair solutions, for everyone.
Will you help us do that?
Shannon
Shannon: Two years ago you ask me to join the RRGCC. I turned you down, based on a need to determine the RRGCC relationship with the USFS. Since then we have waited to see who would be the long term District Manager. Joy now seems to be this individual. In lieu of joining the RRGCC True North offered you and the RRGCC our facility and funding for any educational program you wanted to organize in the interest of promoting “ethical land use and ethical climbing”. The money available for this training superceded your corporate membership fee. Up until recently I never heard from you. The offer still stands.
Joy spoke highly of the RRGCC and their efforts. She also told you that closures where forthcoming and there was nothing the RRGCC could do to prevent these closings. This is not posturing or chest pounding. It is fact.
As I work with Joy I have come to appreciate the logic and forethought she applies to her decision making process. Don’t even suggest that True North does not work hard, to work with the USFS. You know as well as I, situation existed and still exist that Joy is trying to get a handle on. These issues affect True North as a legitimate guide service as well as the RRGCC. Not to give her time to work through these issues would be wrong.
I am glad to see that you are openly and aggressively answering these issues. If there is disgruntlement between the small proactive group and the masses, it is largely due to inadequate communication. It may be frustrating, but the responsibility for adequate, complete and comprehensive communication falls upon the leaders.
In regard to my motives: I am a small business owner in a capitalist system. I am not a non-profit organization; I have not inherited money or have a trust fund. I do not have large amounts of cash socked away. In a capitalist system it is essential to make money. If I do not, I fail. Everything my family and I worked for will be lost. We lay it on the line every day. It is a mandate to make money, to do so we: provide a great service for a great price. We do not charge anyone until the services are rendered and our customer is completely satisfied. Then we charge a fair price. We pay our bills at the end of the day, invest most everything else back into the business and live off the rest. So to you and all the readers on this and all future threads: My motive is to make money, doing what I love to do, in an ethical fashion. Welcome to a capitalist system.
After Joy’s comments in the recent RRGCC meeting, I was ready to join your organization. It is my feeling that a concentrated effort for political action is and will be required. The USFS has political pulls in several areas, from several users groups. They are and will always be a ‘government agency”, therefore it become hard to separate politics from government. It wasn’t until we spoke in the parking lot that I became aware of the RRGCC quest to purchase land. This moves you from a political activist organization to “land managers”. Naturally this immediately raised concerns. The RRGCC is a wonderful grass root organization. To take on such a large challenge is ricky. What is your contingency plan if this fails? As a leader what will be the political fall out? If you fail, will you be as effective as you have been in the past.
As I have said in the past: If this is a quest you want to undertake, you deserve the opportunity more than anyone else. No one questions your rights to this conquest, just be careful.
So now I’m left with a few questions: Do I throw in with a group of climbers on a quest for a summit? A summit I question rather or not they will reach. Do I become involved with a expedition team who seems to have problems communicating and motivating the sherpas who are essential to this quest? Is there a well laid out plan and route? Are they prepared with options and contingence plans? Has anyone on the team been on this mountain or similar mountains?
If you (and others) had maintained a concentrated effort as a political activist organization with a primary interest to maintain climbing on public land., I would have joined the night of the USFS meeting. Now I honestly, don’t know.
I will say this, “I appreciate your candor, And willingness for this discussion to take place in a public forum”.
Jeff
Joy spoke highly of the RRGCC and their efforts. She also told you that closures where forthcoming and there was nothing the RRGCC could do to prevent these closings. This is not posturing or chest pounding. It is fact.
As I work with Joy I have come to appreciate the logic and forethought she applies to her decision making process. Don’t even suggest that True North does not work hard, to work with the USFS. You know as well as I, situation existed and still exist that Joy is trying to get a handle on. These issues affect True North as a legitimate guide service as well as the RRGCC. Not to give her time to work through these issues would be wrong.
I am glad to see that you are openly and aggressively answering these issues. If there is disgruntlement between the small proactive group and the masses, it is largely due to inadequate communication. It may be frustrating, but the responsibility for adequate, complete and comprehensive communication falls upon the leaders.
In regard to my motives: I am a small business owner in a capitalist system. I am not a non-profit organization; I have not inherited money or have a trust fund. I do not have large amounts of cash socked away. In a capitalist system it is essential to make money. If I do not, I fail. Everything my family and I worked for will be lost. We lay it on the line every day. It is a mandate to make money, to do so we: provide a great service for a great price. We do not charge anyone until the services are rendered and our customer is completely satisfied. Then we charge a fair price. We pay our bills at the end of the day, invest most everything else back into the business and live off the rest. So to you and all the readers on this and all future threads: My motive is to make money, doing what I love to do, in an ethical fashion. Welcome to a capitalist system.
After Joy’s comments in the recent RRGCC meeting, I was ready to join your organization. It is my feeling that a concentrated effort for political action is and will be required. The USFS has political pulls in several areas, from several users groups. They are and will always be a ‘government agency”, therefore it become hard to separate politics from government. It wasn’t until we spoke in the parking lot that I became aware of the RRGCC quest to purchase land. This moves you from a political activist organization to “land managers”. Naturally this immediately raised concerns. The RRGCC is a wonderful grass root organization. To take on such a large challenge is ricky. What is your contingency plan if this fails? As a leader what will be the political fall out? If you fail, will you be as effective as you have been in the past.
As I have said in the past: If this is a quest you want to undertake, you deserve the opportunity more than anyone else. No one questions your rights to this conquest, just be careful.
So now I’m left with a few questions: Do I throw in with a group of climbers on a quest for a summit? A summit I question rather or not they will reach. Do I become involved with a expedition team who seems to have problems communicating and motivating the sherpas who are essential to this quest? Is there a well laid out plan and route? Are they prepared with options and contingence plans? Has anyone on the team been on this mountain or similar mountains?
If you (and others) had maintained a concentrated effort as a political activist organization with a primary interest to maintain climbing on public land., I would have joined the night of the USFS meeting. Now I honestly, don’t know.
I will say this, “I appreciate your candor, And willingness for this discussion to take place in a public forum”.
Jeff
Thanks, Jeff. I appreciate your feedback, comments, concerns and questions and the opportunity to try to answer them.
Q: What is your contingency plan if this fails?
A: We did a basic cost benefit analysis and risk assessment before undertaking the Murray Project. At Derby Fest we distributed a “Project Proposal” with the stated Purpose and Need, Mission, Vision and Project Goals. The Goals are:
· Acquire Bald Rock Fork-Coal Bank Hollow (BRF-CBH) in furtherance of RRGCC mission and larger, long-term vision.
· Acquire BRF-CBH without jeopardizing the financial welfare, future, or stability of the organization.
· Acquire BRF-CBH without sacrificing the Coalition’s other goals and priorities.
· Acquires BRF-CBH without exposing any board members, staff, or volunteers to liability.
· Acquires BRF-CBH in a timely fashion.
We drafted a budget, and estimated the cost to the RRGCC to complete the Murray Project within the guidelines of the goals. We calculated what would happen if we did not meet our targeted financial objectives. No matter how we looked at it, except for the additional ‘personal’ commitment (volunteer hours and effort) the RRGCC always benefited. We had more money, we had resources, we had more clout (with the FS), we had more visibility, we had more members, we had more of everything. The one thing it was going to cost was, “us.” The board of directors, myself, and the other volunteers were going to have to give more hours, give more effort, give more of our personal time, give more time to answering questions, make more sacrifices, like exposing ourselves to public scrutiny and criticism, etc. The decided the worse thing that could happen would we have a lot more money and an our climbing would suck.
Q: As a leader what will be the political fall out?
A: Political fall out from whom? From climbers? Or do mean the FS and others? Well, I am not entirely sure anyone knows the real answer to that question. But in the end, the Task Force members and other RRGCC volunteers who are familiar with me and the RRGCC impressed upon me one thing…”If you, Shannon, ‘talk’ to people you will be able to explain. It is the right thing to do, and if they could hear you, they will understand.” There was no doubt in anyone’s mind on that point. So, I would have to say there could be political fallout IF I fail to communicate successfully what we are doing and why. Other than that I do not anticipate any other fall out than the general, garden-variety, complaining that goes on.
Q: If you fail, will you be as effective as you have been in the past.
A: I do not see why not. Already, since the moment we mentioned to the FS we were going to buy land I have had nothing but VIP treatment from the FS. Ben and I have had good talks about State and Federal funding that the RRGCC can now bring to the table. He has graciously walked me through the funding process from Congress and how the RRGCC can lobby were he cannot to help the DBNF get the money they need to protect resources and provide recreational opportunities. We recognized money is power, and power is politics. Our status grew quickly in the game of politics because we had a lot more to offer, other than mere demands and complaints. We were “organized” and now viewed as an extremely, potent recreational group. If anything I would say it is the Murray Project that we have to thank for that.
Q: Do I throw in with a group of climbers on a quest for a summit? A summit I question rather or not they will reach.
A: I take these to be rhetorical questions and will leave these for you to answer.
Q: Do I become involved with a expedition team who seems to have problems communicating and motivating the sherpas who are essential to this quest?
A: Communication has been a serious problem for the RRGCC. Lets look at why that is. I am sitting in front of my computer in a bedroom in my house answering this post. I am not employed by the RRGCC. I volunteer my time. I set my own hours and my number one activity is climbing. When I stay house to do Coalition business, as I did all last week, I do not climb. Climbing is EXTREMELY important to me. I climb at least four days a week. I train to climb, I diet to climb, I run to climb. Climbing is my passion.
Since I am not employed, do not get compensated, and every hour I sit here in front of my computer I give up something that is very valuable to me I struggle with, “How much time to do I owe the hundreds of climbers who demand more of my time? How do I manage my time effectively to do the most good?”
For the first four years of the RRGCC it took days of meetings between myself and FS personnel to learn, trust, and understand each other. Every hour I spent with a FS employee was an hour I could have spent communicating to climbers. We formed the RRGCC Local Rep Network to bridge the information gap, we have intermittently printed the RRGCC newsletter, we have a web site with several articles I have written, all in attempt to communicate. The usual non-profit stuff that generally everyone complains about.
So, I had to make a choice with the 20-40 hours a week I allot to work on Coalition work how to spend my time effectively. As we grew the organization in the beginning, I chose to “invest” my time building trust and understanding with the FS. Now, that we feel we have invested wisely there we have to invest in learning from, and communicating better, with climbers. It was a trade off. Perhaps wrong. But I am only one person. I think I would have to say I would pretty much have had to do it the same way. I am only one person as much as I would like to think I am super-person. I am not.
As Julie always tells me, the truth is always the best answer. I did not communicate better because I am just a climber, not “the leader.” I am learning. I knew nothing about non-profit organizations, the FS, NEPA, etc., when we started this. But we have learned a lot and keep on learning. I, and the rest of the volunteers, are just climbers doing the best we can. I am afraid we may be a victim of our own success. We are capable, competent people, doing an outstanding job. But we are just climbers, folks. Many times we find we make the information available and no one bothers to ask, or read, or come to the meetings.
Q: Is there a well laid out plan and route? Are they prepared with options and contingence plans?
A: Yes.
Q: Has anyone on the team been on this mountain or similar mountains?A: No. The Access Fund has some experience in this field and we communicate closely with them. The SECC, and we, share a lot, but no one has done this exact thing before. We are forging new territory. But know this, I have been attend Access Fund board meetings as a member for three years now, and am fairly knowledgeable about the big climbing picture. This is the “next trend” in climbing access. I do not know if it will last, or be a bleep on the scale. But “I” believe, and so do a handful of other knowledgeable activists, that local climbing organizations across this country are going to wake up to this reality.
“If you (and others) had maintained a concentrated effort as a political activist organization with a primary interest to maintain climbing on public land., I would have joined the night of the USFS meeting. Now I honestly, don’t know.”
I do not understand this last comment, Jeff. Perhaps you can explain further before I assume, incorrectly, what you trying to say.
I will say this…we HAVE NOT changed one iota of our strategy as a political activist organization towards the FS. We are not abandoning our commitment to protecting climbing on public land. This is NOT a zero sum situation. We did subtract here to get more over there. We “grew” the Coalition to handle the extra workload of purchasing the Murray, we did not shrink the time we will devote to protecting climbing on public land.
You can interpret our buying this land as confidence about our relationship with the FS, the LAC process, and the future of climbing on public land, not our turning our backs and walking away. We are finally reaping the reward of all those years I was working inside with the FS and not communicating with climbers:)
I am excited, very excited, how the Murray Property will give the RRGCC, and in turn all climbers, tremendous opportunities we could never, ever have achieved before. Especially, on PUBLIC land. ALL PUBLLIC lands, including state land…we have not forgotten about Pocket Wall.
But we need the climbing community to understand what is at stake, and to be on board. We will do whatever it takes to explain what you need to know to understand why we all win, why WE (RRGCC) are so committed to this project, how it works, and what we all need to do.
This cannot happen without climbers…YOU…everyone reading these words, right now.
Shannon
I am sorry for these long posts. It seems the only way until we get a lot of this ground covered. Please bear with us. I'll get better...
Thanks.
Q: What is your contingency plan if this fails?
A: We did a basic cost benefit analysis and risk assessment before undertaking the Murray Project. At Derby Fest we distributed a “Project Proposal” with the stated Purpose and Need, Mission, Vision and Project Goals. The Goals are:
· Acquire Bald Rock Fork-Coal Bank Hollow (BRF-CBH) in furtherance of RRGCC mission and larger, long-term vision.
· Acquire BRF-CBH without jeopardizing the financial welfare, future, or stability of the organization.
· Acquire BRF-CBH without sacrificing the Coalition’s other goals and priorities.
· Acquires BRF-CBH without exposing any board members, staff, or volunteers to liability.
· Acquires BRF-CBH in a timely fashion.
We drafted a budget, and estimated the cost to the RRGCC to complete the Murray Project within the guidelines of the goals. We calculated what would happen if we did not meet our targeted financial objectives. No matter how we looked at it, except for the additional ‘personal’ commitment (volunteer hours and effort) the RRGCC always benefited. We had more money, we had resources, we had more clout (with the FS), we had more visibility, we had more members, we had more of everything. The one thing it was going to cost was, “us.” The board of directors, myself, and the other volunteers were going to have to give more hours, give more effort, give more of our personal time, give more time to answering questions, make more sacrifices, like exposing ourselves to public scrutiny and criticism, etc. The decided the worse thing that could happen would we have a lot more money and an our climbing would suck.
Q: As a leader what will be the political fall out?
A: Political fall out from whom? From climbers? Or do mean the FS and others? Well, I am not entirely sure anyone knows the real answer to that question. But in the end, the Task Force members and other RRGCC volunteers who are familiar with me and the RRGCC impressed upon me one thing…”If you, Shannon, ‘talk’ to people you will be able to explain. It is the right thing to do, and if they could hear you, they will understand.” There was no doubt in anyone’s mind on that point. So, I would have to say there could be political fallout IF I fail to communicate successfully what we are doing and why. Other than that I do not anticipate any other fall out than the general, garden-variety, complaining that goes on.
Q: If you fail, will you be as effective as you have been in the past.
A: I do not see why not. Already, since the moment we mentioned to the FS we were going to buy land I have had nothing but VIP treatment from the FS. Ben and I have had good talks about State and Federal funding that the RRGCC can now bring to the table. He has graciously walked me through the funding process from Congress and how the RRGCC can lobby were he cannot to help the DBNF get the money they need to protect resources and provide recreational opportunities. We recognized money is power, and power is politics. Our status grew quickly in the game of politics because we had a lot more to offer, other than mere demands and complaints. We were “organized” and now viewed as an extremely, potent recreational group. If anything I would say it is the Murray Project that we have to thank for that.
Q: Do I throw in with a group of climbers on a quest for a summit? A summit I question rather or not they will reach.
A: I take these to be rhetorical questions and will leave these for you to answer.
Q: Do I become involved with a expedition team who seems to have problems communicating and motivating the sherpas who are essential to this quest?
A: Communication has been a serious problem for the RRGCC. Lets look at why that is. I am sitting in front of my computer in a bedroom in my house answering this post. I am not employed by the RRGCC. I volunteer my time. I set my own hours and my number one activity is climbing. When I stay house to do Coalition business, as I did all last week, I do not climb. Climbing is EXTREMELY important to me. I climb at least four days a week. I train to climb, I diet to climb, I run to climb. Climbing is my passion.
Since I am not employed, do not get compensated, and every hour I sit here in front of my computer I give up something that is very valuable to me I struggle with, “How much time to do I owe the hundreds of climbers who demand more of my time? How do I manage my time effectively to do the most good?”
For the first four years of the RRGCC it took days of meetings between myself and FS personnel to learn, trust, and understand each other. Every hour I spent with a FS employee was an hour I could have spent communicating to climbers. We formed the RRGCC Local Rep Network to bridge the information gap, we have intermittently printed the RRGCC newsletter, we have a web site with several articles I have written, all in attempt to communicate. The usual non-profit stuff that generally everyone complains about.
So, I had to make a choice with the 20-40 hours a week I allot to work on Coalition work how to spend my time effectively. As we grew the organization in the beginning, I chose to “invest” my time building trust and understanding with the FS. Now, that we feel we have invested wisely there we have to invest in learning from, and communicating better, with climbers. It was a trade off. Perhaps wrong. But I am only one person. I think I would have to say I would pretty much have had to do it the same way. I am only one person as much as I would like to think I am super-person. I am not.
As Julie always tells me, the truth is always the best answer. I did not communicate better because I am just a climber, not “the leader.” I am learning. I knew nothing about non-profit organizations, the FS, NEPA, etc., when we started this. But we have learned a lot and keep on learning. I, and the rest of the volunteers, are just climbers doing the best we can. I am afraid we may be a victim of our own success. We are capable, competent people, doing an outstanding job. But we are just climbers, folks. Many times we find we make the information available and no one bothers to ask, or read, or come to the meetings.
Q: Is there a well laid out plan and route? Are they prepared with options and contingence plans?
A: Yes.
Q: Has anyone on the team been on this mountain or similar mountains?A: No. The Access Fund has some experience in this field and we communicate closely with them. The SECC, and we, share a lot, but no one has done this exact thing before. We are forging new territory. But know this, I have been attend Access Fund board meetings as a member for three years now, and am fairly knowledgeable about the big climbing picture. This is the “next trend” in climbing access. I do not know if it will last, or be a bleep on the scale. But “I” believe, and so do a handful of other knowledgeable activists, that local climbing organizations across this country are going to wake up to this reality.
“If you (and others) had maintained a concentrated effort as a political activist organization with a primary interest to maintain climbing on public land., I would have joined the night of the USFS meeting. Now I honestly, don’t know.”
I do not understand this last comment, Jeff. Perhaps you can explain further before I assume, incorrectly, what you trying to say.
I will say this…we HAVE NOT changed one iota of our strategy as a political activist organization towards the FS. We are not abandoning our commitment to protecting climbing on public land. This is NOT a zero sum situation. We did subtract here to get more over there. We “grew” the Coalition to handle the extra workload of purchasing the Murray, we did not shrink the time we will devote to protecting climbing on public land.
You can interpret our buying this land as confidence about our relationship with the FS, the LAC process, and the future of climbing on public land, not our turning our backs and walking away. We are finally reaping the reward of all those years I was working inside with the FS and not communicating with climbers:)
I am excited, very excited, how the Murray Property will give the RRGCC, and in turn all climbers, tremendous opportunities we could never, ever have achieved before. Especially, on PUBLIC land. ALL PUBLLIC lands, including state land…we have not forgotten about Pocket Wall.
But we need the climbing community to understand what is at stake, and to be on board. We will do whatever it takes to explain what you need to know to understand why we all win, why WE (RRGCC) are so committed to this project, how it works, and what we all need to do.
This cannot happen without climbers…YOU…everyone reading these words, right now.
Shannon
I am sorry for these long posts. It seems the only way until we get a lot of this ground covered. Please bear with us. I'll get better...
Thanks.
.