I personnally say F#$% the park.In the climbing future,He chose to be a follower,not a leader.He could have "managed"proper usage.He chose to take a anti-usage stance.His loss.
I mean a real loss,not some sort of euphamism.
Money....not spent at his park.
You know why I'm not worried.Its because this sandstone cliffline goes all the way to Alabama before it peters out. 8)
It's a sad day when you realize that you are a small turd in a big bowl!
While I totally support the Murray purchase, I do worry about an unintended side-effect. once we own the property, some people will say, "The climbers own their own rock, they don't need access to this rock." and close areas to climbing. I've seen it over and over with other things. Sure, buying the Murray property means securing access to about 200 routes, but if it leads to closing all public land climbing, that's about 800 routes lost. I am not screaming that the sky is actually falling, but I am saying that it's a danger in this situation.
Tomdarch:
While anything "could" happen, I don't think that any one is suggesting that:
1. Let's buy some property.
2. Let's forget about all other issues.
Before, during, and after the purchase, this battle has to be a diplomatic one. We all have an interest in something, and we all have to come to terms.
Lack of education, lack of respect for property, carelessness and lack of respect to our surroundings will innevitably place the gate keepers against us.
So, let me ask you a question now:
What will you be doing to protect your climbing, and every one else's climbing?
! Enough with all that detestation ALREADY !
Smile & be thankful for what you have.
…some people will say, "The climbers own their own rock, they don't need access to this rock." and close areas to climbing…
Since this seems to be a reoccurring concern expressed by some climbers I asked the Stanton District Ranger, Joy Malone, and a few other FS people in the Supervisor’s office about this theory. They do not see the connection. The reason being is that climbing is considered “dispersed” recreation versus “developed” recreation by the FS. It would be the case if climbing was developed recreation, like campgrounds, where the FS had to “build” the facilities. The FS does count up the number of private campgrounds in the surrounding area to off set their obligation to the recreating public. But since climbing is dispersed recreation the issue becomes protecting resources from the adverse impacts of (dispersed) recreation.
Speaking of adverse impacts from dispersed recreation, the Stanton Ranger District has recently hired a full-time recreational planner, Tim Eling, to conduct the Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) process for the Stanton District for the next several years. The RRGCC had lobbied the FS strenuously, on behalf of climbers, for this “better” management approach for the Red River Gorge Geologic Area (RRGGA) and is extremely pleased by this positive step. The LAC process will replace the previous management approach of subjective “best guess” recommendations from FS specialists, archaeologists and biologists, with objective, measurable standards set with input from the recreating public. This is by far the BEST, LONG-TERM solution for fairly protecting climbing opportunities on public land. The process will be long, contentious, and exciting and the RRGCC will be there, providing dedicated and diligent representation for all climbers throughout the process. We encourage any climber, or concerned citizen, to become involved. This is the first known case of LAC being applied to a climbing area and is considered the greatest success story in the nation by a local climbing organization of ensuring the future of climbing access on Forest Service land with so many sensitive resources and access issues.
When the RRGCC successfully purchases the Murray property AND completes the LAC process, 86% of all current climbing opportunities will be (truly) secured for the first time in the history of climbing at the Red, on both public and private land. That’s progress!
But we’re not stopping there! As part of the RRGCC’s long-term vision and mission to ensure quality climbing opportunities for all climbers at the Red, the RRGCC has been laying the ground work behind the scenes for a dynamic and powerful strategic plan for Pocket Wall, too:)
You know the most F'ed up thing about all this.....In 5-25 years.They will come in and log all of the National Forest. When that happens, it will put all of the big words and phrases that people use into their true place. "Dispersed"","developed","impact","limits of acceptable change"......"Red River Gorge Geological Area"
It will all give way to one word......MONEY.
Shannon,I am not Knocking your efforts,I am coming to believe that you are noble,even if your efforts are in vain.I guess you can't help but fight the powers that be.It's just sad about the money part.In a better world.....
Establish policy that leads to acceptable and/or needed change:
When restructuring or structuring any organization it is essential in leading, guiding and controlling those within (or affiliated) with the organization. When it is deemed restructuring is required, existing policies will be modified and often strengthened in order to achieve the new objectives.
For example: Lets say that a corporate organization is suffering from poor productivity due to absenteeism and tardiness from the employees. But due to no policy or a policy that had been neutralized (due to improper implementation) management’s hands are tied in correcting the problem.
Common Solution: Management examines the situation and predetermines the end objective and then rewrites and often adds to the existing policy. They might add a drug-testing program. They believe this will weed out questionable individuals who often have attendance issues and rehire pre-screened employees.
Or perhaps a company, with no previous drug-testing program, finds themselves needing to downsize and they would like to accomplish this without increasing their unemployment rating. They may consider “establishing a new policy” regarding drug testing. Who can morally argue with drug testing? They would announce the plans 90 days before the new policy would affect current employees, all new hires would be immediately tested. End results: Downsizing without political fallout, loss of employee good will, or increase in unemployment rating.
I do not write this with a clear insight into managements predetermined end objective. It seems to me that many on the management team are passionately divided. As the LAC is written these passion will surface and some may even try to embed these beliefs into the new policy. Those countering these views will try to do the same.
Due to the possability of and the ease of manipulation, I don’t embrace Shannon’s enthusiasm towards the implementation of a new policy. But I’m damn glad the RRGCC is involved.
JH:
When you say that it will all give way to one word: money…Don’t you think it would be better to try diplomacy first?
Why insult the decision makers?
Why spit in their faces (do you think that getting all bent out of shape at them will provide better access to climbing)?
Diplomacy, in its simplest form is staying calm.
You can trespass, insult the “owners”, trash the land, but instead:
why not educate yourself about their needs and show a little respect to the land you’re on and the people who own it?
! Enough with all that detestation ALREADY !
Smile & be thankful for what you have.
J.H. there is some truth to what you say about money and the RRGCC has not ignored that important part of the equation either. We have been collecting data, doing the research, establishing the contacts, and when the time is right we will be prepared.
True North I am a hard-nosed skeptic who loves to ask the hard questions, not afraid to challenge people or be challenged, believes passionately in people and their basic goodness while always guarding against self-interest, but will never hold it against them. And I will never sacrifice principle because it is the easy thing to do. I understand your lack of enthusiasm for the implementation of a new policy. On the other hand, the RRGCC will be there every step of the way advocating passionately for the responsible management of resource protection and climbing opportunities and I don’t think it is going to be all that easy for anyone to manipulate the outcome. In any event, we’re all going to find out soon enough.
Shannon: You and I have often debated over approach, but very seldom over the end objectives. I like your last comment. Short precise, with determination, strength and balance.
But honestly I thought I was the hardened decrepit hard-nosed skeptic, and you the more Henry Clay mediator type. These threads are not going to be near as interesting if you and I both start taking on the same personalities.
In regards to it being easy to manipulate: once the process is understood, it's easier than one thinks. I will admit, I have no experience of working within a government agency. However from what I have seen, the bureaucracy, politics, passions and personal agendas seem to have a lot of similarities with the private sector. I do believe it will be harder to manipulate with the RRGCC involvement then without. If the time comes when you feel the door being closed...well we can start looking for the hidden agendas. Hopefully that time will never come.
