RRC Archives

itmeansgod wrote:This "drastic solution" seems like it's just a more bureaucratic method of closing Torrent. Of course, Mark should do whatever he sees fit, and it's somewhat possible that he'll close the crag entirely and tell all of his climber friends to go screw themselves, but it's much more likely that the crag's being "closed" will mean that those who know the owner will still get to climb there, and if they ask him if they can bring over a friend or two one day, he'll say yes. This still constitutes closing the crag to the general public. And while this solution isn't terrible (I have a suspicion that a lot of local people will like it, a lot of non-local people won't), or even unlikely, it's exactly what we're trying to avoid, and hopefully it will be the last resort.

you hit it on the spot exactly.

actually, when i first read about this idea i shared the same thoughts and concerns of Naw about it sounding elitist from a non-local perspective. however, i think almost any solution other than keeping Torrent fully open to the public will seem unfair to the majority of climbers who are not friends with Mark. i liked some of the other ideas mentioned in the other thread more, but this one is still better than closing the crag completely (or to locals only).

By the way naw, look at my location, I freakin live in NC. Like others have said, whats the difference for a visitor if it is closed or friends only. With that being said, I have to agree with Sunshine. The friends bringing friends won't work. I give it a few months before everyone is back climbing becuase the are a friend of a friend or they just say f it and start climbing becuase they think its BS.

We just need to seriously police it ourselves for as long as we can.

Wow, I've never had a post so misunderstood. Maybe I need to go back to English 101.

besides feeling left out and/or not privileged are you selfish enough to have the stance of, "well, if i can't be there, no one else should"

In actuality, I ended the post by saying that if locals wanted to police the area and take care of the crag than they deserved to climb there and the rest of us who didn't want to deal with a "sponsor" system would go climb somewhere else.

The whole point of the 4-5 threads on this site right now is to make you aware of the loss/losses of crags, both public and private that is going on as we sit here typing because the few idiots are ruining it for the rest of us. So yes by all means, go to another crag and another so you don't have to conform to some rules, and hopefully you will always have a place to climb.

Once again completely misunderstood here. If I don't want to conform to a "sponsor" system to be able to climb at a crag, does that somehow make me some land-destroying jerkoff? I've been to just as many trail days and policed just as many crags as you have, so don't start accusing me of running away from "rules". You don't even know me.

The only point of my post was to provide another side to the option suggested at the beginning of the thread from the perspective of someone who doesn't get to visit regularly. I've been to Torrent and I think the climbing there is some of the best I've seen at the Red, especially the 11/12 walls. I'd really like to be able to climb there again, and I'm definitely up for any solution that provides that access. All I was saying is that I think that the whole "friends bringing friends" system makes it easier for locals and more difficult for visitors. The end of my post was simply to point out that if that's the way it happens then maybe that's for the best because hopefully the locals will take care of the land and preserve their right to climb there and the visitors who don't want to deal with the system will go climb somewhere else, which is probably for the best.

I understand your point naw but you must admit that the tone of your posts was that of a petulant child who cannot have what he/she wants. That's why you received the response that you did.

Well, my apologies if I came off like an ass then. I think I was about 3-4 cups of coffee into a 14 hour workshift...makes me a little irritable.

"By focussing on Torrent I think the point is being missed that "responsible climbing" is crucial to maintaining open public access to all climbing areas public or private. Not following guidelines in ANY area jeopardizes access. I pulled out my copy of the RRGCC video "The Freedom to Climb is Not Free" the other night and watched it. At the end of the video the point is made that ideally ALL climbers need to know and follow responsible climbing guidelines in ALL areas to protect our access. "

I think that Capitan Static has the correct idea, we need to spread the word that the actions we have chosen to take in the past while at our local/favorite crags will not be tollerated anymore. If we dont want to be able to climb at some of these places than we can keep up the same ol' stuff that we have been doing. If we would like to be able to climb there in the future, we need to emphasize the need of keeping our/your crags free from litter and other "stuff" such as fowl language, obnoxious dogs ...etc. I am not a local and probably never will have the priveledge of climbing at torrent and many of these places if they are to be shut down to the public and only locals will be allowed to climb there. I think there are better ways to go about fixing this problem. We know where our actions are leading us if we do not make a drastic change as a "climbing community". Remember this is too big of a job for just the locals, and its not purely the fault of the non-locals either, we need all of us to come togather to work on the problems that we have created for ourselves. Also, we cannot have a pointing of fingers here, it gets us nowhere.

Is there anyway to get the word out at miguels, not only around the fire, but to the whole place and have some sort of meetings held there? At this meeting we could perhaps have the owner come and talk to the group and tell us his concerns and how he believes that we can meet his demands in order to keep the place open. I personally feel that he does not want to close the place, but is almost left with no other options. But I could be wrong, I have not met him or spoken with him about this topic.

Perhaps, a sign needs to go up, or something, letting all the people who are visiting or whatever to see the problems that the climbers are creating, if the information gets out there that what we are doing on privately owned land is ruining our likelyness of being allowed to climb there in the future and that everybody can make a difference by purely packing any trash they may have/find out, or doing something small will greatly help the cause of the people fighting to keep these places open to the people that have ruined them. I beleive that more people will conform to a new code of conduct or something, know that this place can and will be closed forever if we do not change our ways ASAP. (just a suggestion)
Another suggestion, I heard there was a trail day at torrent recently, I did not know about this until after the fact. How can we get this information out to the climbers who are down there? I was there that weekend and didnt even know about it. Is there a way to make announcements at Miguels or something?

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR EFFORTS IN KEEPING PLACES LIKE TORRENT OPEN -- THE CLIMBING COMMUNITY NOW HAS TO MAN UP TO OUR PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE CREATED FOR OURSELVES AND FIX THEM FOR OURSELVES.

p.s. I am not a local, just a guy from MI who's love for climbing in the Red is just begining and I would truly hate to see something like this happen. I think that we need to find a way to show the people what they are doing is wrong and that in order to fix the problem, we must fix ourselves first. I am not saying that I am a saint and that I have never broken any of the rules before. I am just trying to figure out a way that all of us can help keep the places that we have come to love open for many more years to come.

randomboulder wrote:i liked some of the other ideas mentioned in the other thread more, but this one is still better than closing the crag completely (or to locals only).

I think you're missing what I was saying. We're talking on these threads to try to come up with alternatives to closing Torrent Falls to the public. This is not an alternative, this IS closing Torrent Falls to the public. And while I'm not going to bitch and moan if Mark decides that this is the right thing to do, I don't think that this solution needs to be advocated, because it's basically what's going to happen in the end anyway, if no one does anything. So why waste time talking about something that's not even really a solution?

I'm not really optimistic when reform is required in short order regarding climbers. There are conflicts within any argument the community might make. Climbers are a mix of outdoors purists, environmentalists,athletes,rebels,antiestablishmentalists, and mindless punks. Just like nearly every other avocation.
You don't stop trying to steer the fleet in the proper direction but you know, as a matter of principle, some will resist. And for what ever reason they will be defended for it. It's happened here before.
I think the best that might be done is some permanent signage that is short and sweet as to the outcome of bad behavior, and direct confrontation from fellow climbers. We'll be known
as the dicks in the gorge, so toughen up.
I'm a little dismayed when things like littering (anywhere), potty-mouth in someones backyard or around kids, or pet responsibillity come up. These aren't climbing specific issues. These are just being a grown-up or not. And in this case, you can be a grown-up at 12 and you could be a punk at 50.

I guess this may be extreme for some, but you could always have a policy like LRC in Chattanooga. It's a bouldering spot on a golf course, and in order to get in you have to sign up on the internet the morning of and print out a pass to get in. They also only allow a limited number of people to climb per day. They have quite a few other rules, such as not allowing people to walk shirtless from the parking lot but you can take your shirt off once you get into the woods, etc. Unless there's some kind of system that forces accountability it all really boils down to self policing. I've also had friends that were forced to leave certain crags on national park land because they hadn't gotten passes as the visitors center. On the other hand, just getting the information out would do a lot I think. As a perfect example, the first time I went to Torrent I parked in one of the spots you're not supposed to park in. After we got out I happened to glance over and see the sign telling you not to park there, so I moved my car from in front of the cabins. I could have easily missed the sign, and it wouldn't have been me doing anything wrong on purpose, just ignorance. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I think that forcing people to read the local rules in one way or another, combined with people at the crag who aren't afraid to enforce those rules on each other, would solve 95% of the problem.

I think Mark and his family have been much too gracious with the $2 suggested donation policy. The climbing community should volunteer to raise this to AT LEAST $10 per person, per day. That's what we all pay to climb plastic in a gym... why should we pay less for real rock on private property at one of the best sport crags in the country?