RRC Archives

Wow, this thread is more suffused with condescension than any others that I've seen recently. Great work, guys!

take them on a night hike to Dip wall.

Sunshine wrote:So you teach them by breaking the law!

it's actually not the law but a suggested group size. i'm working with the options we have, not the ideal. since we cannot hold to the superficial aspect of the guideline, we hold strictly to the intent: minimize impact in every way possible. this includes packing out everything, including apple cores and banana peels. even if it is "goofy".

if you climb at night along FS9 you have the crags to yourself and the impact seems less because you can't see it.
Hey paul thanks for taking newbies climbing.

Funny2me. Of course none of us ever break any real laws - like speeding or drinking and driving. You know, things that might actually cost real lives rather then a very slight, even negligable, increase in impact.

Duppyc

Assumptions are all anyone can go on right now. The event hasn't happened yet. And my point is with all the problems I have read on this website in the last month.

Dogleash - To whom it may concern I don't have a dog
Fire building
Torrant Falls
Land closures
Ect.

Why do anything to draw attention to climbing.
And I'm sure Paul will do a fantastic job monitering his group and no harm will come of it.

Wes wrote:Funny2me. Of course none of us ever break any real laws - like speeding or drinking and driving. You know, things that might actually cost real lives rather then a very slight, even negligable, increase in impact.

Curious though, at what point do you think that speeding and drunk driving became laws? Surely it was not before any mode of assisted transportation was invented. Perhaps it started as a general guideline that everyone tried to follow. You know, don't get drunk and ride you're horse home, cause you might trample someone. But then, some folks took some liberties, I mean, it's not like they were breaking the law or anything, and I'm sure they were as careful as they could be.

Then one day, someone who was likely well intentioned, trampled someone elses right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and this "general guideline" was made into law. I think that the general point of this discussion is at what point does it become ok? Unfortunately at the moment, we're the judge of that...at least until it becomes a law.

a thought: if we took as much thought and energy as we put into this board and put it towards securing climbing in the red, we'd have nearly all our access issues resolved.

a few questions (and they aren't meant to accuse anyone or point fingers or anything, they're just questions for pondering):

how many people are at military, left flank, roadside, motherload, drive-by, etc any given weekend?
what constitutes a group? all the people in one car? so if we were to take fifty people in ten cars, the group would be ok?
what is the purpose of the guideline? what's it trying to accomplish? is adherence to the guideline the purpose or is the intent/goal of the guideline the purpose?

at the load on saturday i was part of a group of about ten. we drove separate for the most part. weren't we a group outside the guidelines? granted, we weren't on dbnf land. but the impact was still had.

fine, we want to police ourselves, let's do it. set a strict, inflexible number that pays no heed to the purpose for which it was created. let us focus so much on meeting that number or guideline that we completely abuse the purpose and feel at liberty to do so since we're "within guidelines" or "obeying the law". if anyone has worked intimately with the government or other bureaucracies, you'll understand the danger of this type of thinking.

again, we do our best to keep the impact negligible. we're following all of the guidelines except one. and, in my opinion, we're meeting the intent of that guideline anyway.

i'll encourage this discussion as long as it's fruitful and productive. to this point, it has been to some extent. but when it starts to get accusitory and off-base, then i'll walk away from it because it's no longer useful for anyone, just a waste of time and a way for people to express their self-righteousness. i appreciate the input, suggestions, and considerations..

paul,

if you want us to take some climbers off your hands for the day, say the word. I bet everyone on here is going to line up and offer to take 2 of your group with them.

sunshine, wes, wood, meadows, et al. you all up for this?

i'll offer to chaperone 2 climbers in the southern region if you need it.

I love situational ethics. If the situation doesn't call for ethics, my decision of course, then I have none. See I am learning. Cool.