RRC Archives

I still say the oil company must believe they have a legal right to restrict access - and they very well may. They aren't stupid, and they also are not obligated to provide the RRGCC with their reason.

Dear jeffers mz,
What you say makes sense.

Why would they care if people used the surface as long as their equipment was not blocked? I think that the oil company is trying to hide something. There is probably some sort of ecological disaster that is back there that they don't want us to see.

If there was and the RRGCC bought the land are they in any way liable?

TrueNorth said:

By the way Gretchen, if you haven't done so already, may I suggest: Make notes of everything that was said. Don't leave it to memory. The more details the better. Include who was there and witnessed the conversation, what exactly was said and by whom. What the officer looked like if your don’t have his name. Include dates and time. If this is the information being sent out, lets document it, in case it needs to be referenced in the future.

The same advice should be heeded by any RRGCC member who might have contact w/Charmane or any law enforcement officer during this period.

Maybe there's some high official of Charmane that is a climber and wants the place to themself. Heck, maybe all the Charmane people are climbers and are tired of waiting in the long Disneyland like lines of Oil Crack and the Arena. They're people too.

so is the official RRGCC stance that only RRGCC members are free to go ahead and climb on Murray property? Even now that the gates have been put up? What if the mineral rights owners actually do have a legal basis for restricting access and climbers are fined? Will the RRGCC provide legal council to these climbers if they need it?

Also, what will be the RRGCC's stance in the case that an out-of-towner or other non-RRGCC member gets into a legal bind climbing on Murray property? Is the message really that non-RRGCC members are not currently permitted on Murray property? If so, shouldn't this be made more clear?

Unless the cost, in THEIR perception, of the gates outweighs the benefit, then the gates will stay up until the balance, again in their perception, changes.

What if we put locks over their locks on the gate. There inability to get to their equipment without a blowtorch, would certainly have to alter their perception. Lets force them to pick the lesser of 2 evils.

Just kidding. Please don't heed the advice of a over worked Caffeine addict.

Sandy wrote:Is the message really that non-RRGCC members are not currently permitted on Murray property? If so, shouldn't this be made more clear?

I am SO glad someone asked this question.

Hey guys,
just as a side note: should you decide to go ahead and climb on the Murray property, PLEASE carefully inspect all bolts and all approach trails, high and low. You may say I am overreacting, but if they feel that future access to their oil is threatened then illegal gates could be just the beginning. Anyone ever see the booby traps they concoct for pot patches?

Mj

this is better than perry mason re-runs....

here is a novel idea..why doesn't everyone take one weekend off in Oct or November from climbing...the weekend you would spend irritating the situation at Murray could be spent better...how about adopting a local oil family, and teaching their kids to climb? and then buying dinner at Miguel's for the whole family?

however you spend it, just don't climb at Murray until this is resolved...why is that so difficult?
o, that's right..because we are entitled to our recreation...my bad.