RRC Archives

Torrent Falls wrote:What hurt me in the BBQ was Jeepers, locals, and Four Wheelers that used to come.

Local support hurt?

Ballss wrote:

Torrent Falls wrote:
The amount of climbers eating at the BBQ is greatly appreciated, but the climbing market segment is insignificant. What hurt me in the BBQ was Jeepers, locals, and Four Wheelers that used to come.

So apparently my money is appreciated but insignificant?

yes. but don't let that hurt your feelings. any business making good bank does not want to rely on one customer for their revenue stream.

pigsteak wrote:

Ballss wrote:

Torrent Falls wrote:
The amount of climbers eating at the BBQ is greatly appreciated, but the climbing market segment is insignificant. What hurt me in the BBQ was Jeepers, locals, and Four Wheelers that used to come.

So apparently my money is appreciated but insignificant?

yes. but don't let that hurt your feelings. any business making good bank does not want to rely on one customer for their revenue stream.

OUR money. Semantics. Comes around to bite me eh Meadows?

I guess the bleeding heart liberals closed a lot of the off-road trails in the forest .... and so now there aren't as many 4 X ers around..... and they really liked eating at the bbq, now they are much scarcer - this hurt the business. damn the environmentalists!

Alright. So Im not a climber and if this hurts anyones feelings I apologize but this is just my opinion from having been to the Daniel Boone are many times over the last few years, and I have been to the falls and the BBQ.

Lets all think about a really nice park or some venue we have been to that is open to the public but not "Policed". Im willing to bet very few of these places are trashed or abused much, some yes, but not much.

I have personally always thought that a big reason Torrent sees a lot of abuse from its users is due somewhat to the fact that the place appears neglected. Now Im not talking about the climbing part of the area, but the construction ramp thats still in place below the cabin under the 11 wall after many years. The old toilet in the back of the water fall that even if it wasn't being paid for or maintained any more should at least be removed. The mankey trails that lead up to the top of the cliff for the cabin patrons that have old rope and rotten boards.

As for the Via Ferrata, if there are 5,000 users a year at $31 each you would think that with $155,000 minus the $2500 of equipment rental minus the overhead of food and employees at, Im guessing $40,000 per year you would still have over $112,000 to maybe finish that eye sore of a building and maybe put in something other than some tarps at the BBQ. Oh, and maybe do a little work on some of bolts holding up the bridge so it doesn't come crashing down on some boyscout group.

So in my opinion I think that maybe the fact that the place looks trashed, maybe contributes to it being trashed.

reason is not welcome here... duh!

Just in case you need a break...

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/South_Park

Kyle: Oh, fuck! I'm sorry Jesus! Don't kill me!

Cartman: Ow! You stepped on my foot you pigfucker!.
Stan: Dude! Don't say pigfucker in front of Jesus!
Cartman: Meh, fuck you!

Kyle: You're such a fat fuck, Cartman, that when you walk down the street, people go "God DAMMIT, that kid's a big fat fuck!"

ha ha ha

thanks Wes

Steve wrote:The impacts at Torrent are going on at popular crags no matter the who owns the land, no matter the style of climbing. The same problems that cause private land owners to shut down a crags can shut down precious trad crags on National Forest land. The problem isn't that climber's needed to change their behavior when climbing at Torrent Falls, but that climber's need to change their behavior no matter where they're climbing. While Torrent Falls might be Mark's backyard, Muir Valley the Weber's backyard, the PMRP the Coalition's backyard, and the National Forest is OUR backyard we all gotta learn to not fuck it up.

Thank you Steve for stating the crux of the matter. Our behavior & numbers create impacts that in turn can jeopardize access. Like the Webers the RRGCC also considered charging for access but chose not to. Charging for access is not a complete solution unless everyone charges including the USFS. If everyone does not charge there will be many who will avoid the charge and go climb where it is free. This would just displace the impacts from one place to another. I remember when the Mountain Parkway was a toll road, the first toll was just before the Slade exit. Being the true dirtbags we were at the time, we would get off at Stanton and drive the back roads to avoid the toll.

Information on minimum impact climbing/expected climber behavior/area specific rules has been widely disseminated. The most obvious place for climbers to find such information is in Ray's guidebook. The USFS/PMRP/Muir/Torrent all have kiosks with posted rules. Specific to the situation with Torrent, information appeared in the Access Fund e-News, the RRGCC Newsletter, & was posted on this website, the RRGCC website, on rockclimbing.com and was subsequently picked up by other climbing related websites. It is not like the information isn't out there.

I agree that person to person communication/peer pressure is the most effective way to influence people & in this regards the RRGCC did conduct several "meet & greets" at various crags in an attempt to raise awareness. However such an approach is very time/labor intensive.

"Taking our message to climbers" was a significant part of the RRGCC's strategic planning last year and will certainly be a major item of discussion this year. Along the lines of Liz Weber's suggestion perhaps the RRGCC could arrange a summit of private landowners & the USFS to discuss ways to raise awareness about low-impact practices and keep crags open? The USFS is very interested in educating people about low-impact practices.