RRC Archives

hey hey

thank you for starting this thoughtful thread. Winter is the perfect time to invest effort in new opportunities.

History shows us how access to climbing areas are secured (Muir Valley, Torrent, the Ventura's purchase of the Motherlode and the PMRP). These are all examples of where individuals saw the need, developed a vision and did whatever it took to make it happen. Consider for a moment the steps that Rick and Liz went through to secure the purchase of the Muir (thank you Rick and Liz) or what Dr Bob or the Ventura family had to do to secure their properties (thank you). John Bronaugh and Shannon Stuart Smith are also deserving of our thanks. They saw a need and made a plan, made extraordinary effort to take actions which resulted over time (with everyone's support) to the PMRP.

the opening of new crags and the reopening of crags requires time, effort and a plan. time and effort is hard to put into words however here an outline of a plan

1. discovery - climbers have to find areas are deserving of attention (potential routes, interested land owners etc), then, who owns that land (usually a few visits to the PVA's office). if it is crag that was open and is now closed there was a reason.
2. discussions - discussions with the current land owners. there will be concerns about liability, do they want to sell and for how much, long term impact, etc.
3. deals - with the land owner, do you want to own it? if yes then go for it and open it for the public or just your friends . if you don't want to own it yourself, then this is where the RRGCC can help, being a 501c3 helps with liability and taxes etc? how shall we enforce agreements?
4. development - routes, trails, parking lots, relationships, rules, codes of conduct etc
5. dollars - assuming that a climber doesn't want to own it outright. when rrgcc is involved and a lot of money is needed, how do we climbers raise that money? when it is purchased by the RRGCC, we will open it for everyone same as the PMRP.

so . . . it can be done, however it takes a lot of effort from individuals. The RRGCC is supportive of individuals taking action which leads to new climbing opportunities. if anyone has a particular piece of property that they are interested in working on drop me a PM.

smile

rick bost
rrgcc

The rare Virginia big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus), a federally endangered species, occurs at this preserve. The Hood Branch watershed supports one of the most diverse macroinvertebrate communities in the Kentucky River system, indicating excellent water quality. Fortunately, the entire watershed lies within the preserve and state park boundaries, which provides protection for this diverse aquatic community.

thanks again Bill, that's a 2nd degree link. i posted it because i'm just generally insulted that climber's have allowed themselves to be singled out for exclusion due to damaging impacts and think it is time that our collective appreciation for conservation gets more recognition, while also projecting a standard for new climbers. I think if more people knew (myself included) why things are the way they are it would be easier to change other things, and i totally agree with and am excited to learn about the reasoning behind closing pocket wall, in this case.

is that level of clarity with the PMRP crags that are closed available? also, i sometimes feel that the leverage that is used against climbers through the rrgcc should be working the other way, in particular with regards to the Forest Service, but if you look at that link to state natural areas/preserves, hunting is allowed on quite a few despite the damage done to trails and other features.

thanks to both Rick and Bill for taking the time to respond.

sooo ...getting areas that have been closed to climbers in the dbnf reopened is a strength of the coalition? ...or is it an area of growth? If so is an area of growth a bad thing or simply - an area of growth? Is pointing out perceieved areas of growth a bad thing? why?

KD- not sure if you're responding to my post. if so could you quote some fragment and rephrase your question? if not, good luck

clif wrote:hey, i was wondering if someone could familiarize me with the current (rrgcc?) strategy for getting crags reopened. ... is there consolidated agreement that acquisition is the way forward? thanks-

Sorry for the confusion. But I assumed you were asking what has been done to "reopen" climbing areas that had been closed. I believe I have inferred what the strategy is now - had to read between the lines a bit to see it. Thanks for the guidance.

KD wrote:

clif wrote:hey, i was wondering if someone could familiarize me with the current (rrgcc?) strategy for getting crags reopened. ... is there consolidated agreement that acquisition is the way forward? thanks-

Sorry for the confusion. But I assumed you were asking what has been done to "reopen" climbing areas that had been closed. I believe I have inferred what the strategy is now - had to read between the lines a bit to see it. Thanks for the guidance.

i think some confusion about the question remains, were you not inquiring about the strength of the coalition?

KD wrote:sooo ...getting areas that have been closed to climbers in the dbnf reopened is a strength of the coalition? ...or is it an area of growth? If so is an area of growth a bad thing or simply - an area of growth? Is pointing out perceieved areas of growth a bad thing? why?

maybe a different thread? maybe not.

clif, you asked about getting closed crags open in part one of your two part question. I responded that I havent seen any closed crags get open again. That was my answer to the fisrt part of the two part question of your thread. A few others answered either or both parts of your initial two part question. In the course of the online conversation, I mentioned that getting crags reopened was an area of growth for our local climbing advocacy group. Others disagreed and others changed the focus of the thread away from part one of your two part question by steering the thread away from closure (the first part of your two part question and a negative thing) towards future access (the second part of your two part question and a very positive thing, please see italics below). Then you said that I wasn't correctly following your thread, although I was responding to the first part of your two part question that the others had apperantly steered your attention from. I am sorry to have answered only the first part of your two part question. I am also sorry for saying that our local climber advocacy group had an area in which they should become better. I am also sorry that I remained focused only on part one of your two part question. Perhaps I should have been more flexible in my attention span and have changed course from negative things to positive things accordingly. This is certainly an area of growth for me. Thank you for a wonderful converstaion and have a great weekend.

this technique appears to the current policy in regards to the reopening of closed rock climbing areas and I am satisfied with it for the present time.

that's fantastic stuff, glad i was around. guess i'm just hearing ghosts?

Hello

i've heard that there is a coalition meeting soon. is this by invitation only or through facebook? thanks

$250 gets you in, like a Republican "town hall" meeting.