RRC Archives

Well we saw this coming! Props John and Grant! It needed to be done although its sad its the course of action that needed to be taken to get a simple message accross. But it seems the more climbers that come out of the gyms and cities the dumber things get around here. I started climbing in the red AT roadside 15 or so yrs ago. It was an amazing crag with lots of lovely foliage. Now it looks like the trails out by half moon and chimney top. Trashed and over run by ignorance.

Jon and Grant, Let me know what I can do to help. My time is limited these days, but I would love to continue to help improve the area which you so graciously allow us chuffers to use. Feel free to contact me with any requests you might have

Mike Driskell

DriskellHR wrote:Now it looks like the trails out by half moon and chimney top. Trashed and over run by ignorance.

It is amazing that you can see a trail going up to and including the crag occupying perhaps 1% of the GFNP acreage as impact. The trail will look like people use it, period. If you don't like that stop climbing, hiking and and certainly stop reproducing. I put an analysis of RS access trail usage. It included the bad and the good and suggestions about what to do about the bad. People squawking 'bad, bad bad' does not help the situation. Before you climbed at Roadside ever, before the RR tracks were established did it look better? What about after it was clear-cut at the turn of the century?

I don't think that Roadside affords the best opportunity to lionize the community. Roadside has been on average pretty well respected by climbers. It is always clean. There are more climbers picking up after others than there are tossing shit without caring. People keep to the trails which have been tended by the community.

Roadside has an accidental configuration that is well-suited to be a rather popular crag. The cliff line is a small portion of the entire area. Climbers do not have to crisscross the preserve much. Most of Roadside serves species other than humans--a good reason to leave the dogs at home.

The impact up left from Road Side Attraction to Andromeda Strain is minimal. That area is not super popular. The medium popular area of Roadside from the 10 wall to but not including the 7 wall is on a sandstone base that can take human impact very well.

I have 2 opinions about the 7 wall.

(1) Due to the popularity of the 7 wall the impact extends from the base of the cliff, a 2-3 year closure would do it some good. If people tried to get past the closure, chop the routes. I slightly favor this approach.

(2) Ignore 100 meters of ugly. Roadside on average is a gem that is dearly loved and cared for by many people.

We took the permdraws down, picked up some butts and small pieces of trash from the 10-wall to the 7-wall. There were around 6 groups that showed to climb many with the same story. 'We drove xhundred miles all night with RS as the destination.' Those of us who live closer need to appreciate what we have. Thanks for the day Lena, Dustin and Eric Deaton.

caribe wrote:

DriskellHR wrote:Now it looks like the trails out by half moon and chimney top. Trashed and over run by ignorance.

It is amazing that you can see a trail going up to and including the crag occupying perhaps 1% of the GFNP acreage as impact. The trail will look like people use it, period. If you don't like that stop climbing, hiking and and certainly stop reproducing. I put an analysis of RS access trail usage. It included the bad and the good and suggestions about what to do about the bad. People squawking 'bad, bad bad' does not help the situation. Before you climbed at Roadside ever, before the RR tracks were established did it look better? What about after it was clear-cut at the turn of the century?

Yeah Squawking..... thats whats i'm doing.

So I can assume you'll be at the next meeting to educate us on what impact is?

Grant, thanks for answering the serious questions on here. I think alot of people can get educated on this issue from your words. Does GFNP own any of the Zoo, or any rock up and right of the Zoo? We were contemplating a few routes up there, but would seek your permission first if in is yours.

Clearly the climbing community is in full reflection mode with not a little of existential angst about our impacts and how we (me you all of us, as Clevis rightly points out) on one hand love climbing and the natural space it occurs in, but on the other hand find it distasteful what our collective presence in this natural space does to it. How do we resolve this conflicted self image?
We don't think of ourselves as bad people. We are, for the vast majority, conscientious users of the natural spaces/outdoors. I would submit that you would be hard presses to find a more concentrated group of well behaved out door users in any other demographic. But our very presence at the cliff in large numbers has a toll.
But I would like to point out our impacts or our sport and the benefits this sport provides to us as individuals, to the greater culture, and to the local economy of the area, and juxtapose these against the impacts of other user groups, like the ORV/ATV enthusiasts.

For our part, look at the most heavily impacted cliffs where the most concentrated use has occurred. What is the issue here? So, for instance, the 5.9s at Military had for years been the worst example, or now, RS, and maybe the Undertow wall. The biggest concern isn't trash (there is very little b/c we individually pick up after our selves). It isn't impacts of flora and fauna. We avoid the T and E species with no oversight from anyone. The issue is soil compaction. The base gets compacted and over time erodes back from the cliff line variably, depending on how stable the base is intrinsically. So at the 5.9s the base has over the last 15-20 years crept back maybe ten feet? At RS the base of the slabs (on less stable soil ) has erodes down the hill 15 ft?
While this isn't ideal, and we all regret these impacts, in the greater scheme of things, if this is as bad as we get, we are not doing a bad job. Yes, self reflection and continuous quality improvement is good. But based on the figures Rick has for MV, and extrapolating those the the larger area, 10s of thousands of visits are made to the cliff annually with this downside to show for it. Not too bad.

People are coming to what is otherwise a very poor area and spending their recreational time and money. Any rural area would love to have this problem.
People individually are benefiting. Obviously local businesses are benefiting. But also, people are moving the area and setting up long term domiciles. Ask any county judge executive what they would like, and they will tell you ingress of well educated people to their community to buy property and live. Slade and surrounding areas has a veritable ex pat community. They are here because of the climbing.

Greater good is harder to quantify, but is palpable. As more people get into climbing and spend time in the natural world, the awareness of conservation and the issues surrounding access is carried with them. Our sport attracts people who become invested in a community. For the most part people get involved and stay involved for years. I maintain there is a ripple effect with each person as they take their love of climbing and being in the natural space with them throughout their lives.

Look by comparison at any other user group in the area. The ORV/ATVers are transient, have huge irreversible impacts with just one weekend of use. For those who were around, remember Pocketwall before the Jeep jamboree one weekend. Before you could drive to the top of Whites Branch Arch, after one weekend, the road was impassable to even Jeeps. ATVs are worse in that they can access more area and destroy it. Does this user group stick around. Thank God, no. The FS realized early on that ATVs and ORVs were much too destructive and band them from all but a specific area of the NF (RedBird district).

Before we angst over self recriminations of being bad stewards, I think we need to take our existence into perspective. Yes, there is room for improvement. Hardening the bases before masses show up is a easy long term fix. LAC is what the FS calls it. Rick has done it. But by doing this and then gently educating our community about behavior and etiquette, like boom boxes and dog leashing, we will have addressed the majority of the short comings of our numbers.
We are the best, most well behaved, least impactful user group with the most positive impacts on the greater society and local economy of any user group that recreates in the area.

Well said, Hugh!

DriskellHR wrote:

caribe wrote:

DriskellHR wrote:Now it looks like the trails out by half moon and chimney top. Trashed and over run by ignorance.

It is amazing that you can see a trail going up to and including the crag occupying perhaps 1% of the GFNP acreage as impact.

Yeah Squawking..... thats whats i'm doing. So I can assume you'll be at the next meeting to educate us on what impact is?

If we keep going in the direction that many of the posts are taking us; we will just close climbing access in the RRG. Think about what the Limits of Acceptable Change people are thinking about this thread: "Those people are shutting themselves down." I am just begging people to think--pause and think instead of just saying 'amen.' I am the contrarian here because I feel it is necessary.
"People squawking 'bad, bad bad' does not help the situation." Apparently you found this offensive, that was not my intention. Impact study is a soft science and obviously the stuff of opinion. I am neither qualified or inclined to educate anyone about impact. I know that if we are going to climb at cliff X there will be a trail to cliff X and the cliffside will not be pristine.

the lurkist wrote:Clearly the climbing community is in full reflection mode with not a little of existential angst about our impacts and how we (me you all of us, as Clevis rightly points out) on one hand love climbing and the natural space it occurs in, but on the other hand find it distasteful what our collective presence in this natural space does to it. How do we resolve this conflicted self image?
We don't think of ourselves as bad people. We are, for the vast majority, conscientious users of the natural spaces/outdoors. I would submit that you would be hard presses to find a more concentrated group of well behaved out door users in any other demographic. But our very presence at the cliff in large numbers has a toll.
But I would like to point out our impacts or our sport and the benefits this sport provides to us as individuals, to the greater culture, and to the local economy of the area, and juxtapose these against the impacts of other user groups, like the ORV/ATV enthusiasts.

For our part, look at the most heavily impacted cliffs where the most concentrated use has occurred. What is the issue here? So, for instance, the 5.9s at Military had for years been the worst example, or now, RS, and maybe the Undertow wall. The biggest concern isn't trash (there is very little b/c we individually pick up after our selves). It isn't impacts of flora and fauna. We avoid the T and E species with no oversight from anyone. The issue is soil compaction. The base gets compacted and over time erodes back from the cliff line variably, depending on how stable the base is intrinsically. So at the 5.9s the base has over the last 15-20 years crept back maybe ten feet? At RS the base of the slabs (on less stable soil ) has erodes down the hill 15 ft?
While this isn't ideal, and we all regret these impacts, in the greater scheme of things, if this is as bad as we get, we are not doing a bad job. Yes, self reflection and continuous quality improvement is good. But based on the figures Rick has for MV, and extrapolating those the the larger area, 10s of thousands of visits are made to the cliff annually with this downside to show for it. Not too bad.

People are coming to what is otherwise a very poor area and spending their recreational time and money. Any rural area would love to have this problem.
People individually are benefiting. Obviously local businesses are benefiting. But also, people are moving the area and setting up long term domiciles. Ask any county judge executive what they would like, and they will tell you ingress of well educated people to their community to buy property and live. Slade and surrounding areas has a veritable ex pat community. They are here because of the climbing.

Greater good is harder to quantify, but is palpable. As more people get into climbing and spend time in the natural world, the awareness of conservation and the issues surrounding access is carried with them. Our sport attracts people who become invested in a community. For the most part people get involved and stay involved for years. I maintain there is a ripple effect with each person as they take their love of climbing and being in the natural space with them throughout their lives.

Look by comparison at any other user group in the area. The ORV/ATVers are transient, have huge irreversible impacts with just one weekend of use. For those who were around, remember Pocketwall before the Jeep jamboree one weekend. Before you could drive to the top of Whites Branch Arch, after one weekend, the road was impassable to even Jeeps. ATVs are worse in that they can access more area and destroy it. Does this user group stick around. Thank God, no. The FS realized early on that ATVs and ORVs were much too destructive and band them from all but a specific area of the NF (RedBird district).

Before we angst over self recriminations of being bad stewards, I think we need to take our existence into perspective. Yes, there is room for improvement. Hardening the bases before masses show up is a easy long term fix. LAC is what the FS calls it. Rick has done it. But by doing this and then gently educating our community about behavior and etiquette, like boom boxes and dog leashing, we will have addressed the majority of the short comings of our numbers.
We are the best, most well behaved, least impactful user group with the most positive impacts on the greater society and local economy of any user group that recreates in the area.

All that to say this. Don't come to the Red and buy climbing property. You'll get fed up with climbers and shut your little jewel down. Mostly because your selfish and what actual power can you exert over climbers unless you flex up and "shut'er down".

Whether you are Rick with his millions or Bob with his bucks or Grant with his LLC. Eventually you will disenchant yourself with the "romance" of owning it and eventually you'll close it. I think its some sort of"little man" complex. First you rant a little bit about how shitty climbers act, when you knew full well before you bought in. You are surprised at the communities reaction to "kiss and make-up". Third you may stretch the ass-kissing out because it makes you feel "important". Then you make good on your threats and close it. Anticipating the absolute orgy of ass-kissing to try and talk you into opening it back up. I bet you are sitting naked in front of your computer right now with a chubby.

So from me, to all of you; who own climbing areas in the red and have threatened to" shut'er down", who have complained like little girls-about "climbers" when you knew full well what you were getting into before you ever put pen to paper.
Fuck you. Shut it down. Close it up and pull the bolts out of the walls. Call the sheriff whenever you see a climber coming and set up your own little kingdoms. But I want to tell you this. That precious land that you paid so much for is worth about $250 an acre. If you can find a buyer. So shut it the fuck down. And while you're at it, shut yourself down. Fags