RRC Archives

ynp1 wrote:does anybody else ever get sick of weber spraying about how great is little fucking muir valley is? that is all that guy can talk about. we have a post about roadside and he gets all bent out of shape because we are not talking about how great his muir valley is. Fuck dude, we all know about muir valley and all the good things YOU have done for it.... THANKS

You behave like a petulant child. When someone gives the climbing community an extraordinary GIFT, endeavors to learn more about safety and remains active in other areas of the climbing community you proceed to criticize the fact that people support him? HE is organizing the trail work to Roadside after his trail day. Back off.

i'm sorry Meadows, that i dont suck everybodys dick on the board. im not trying to stay cool with all the lexington climbers like you do and many others on here. i am just myself and you can take it or leave it.

My vote is leave it.

ynp1 wrote:i'm sorry Meadows, that i dont suck everybodys dick on the board. im not trying to stay cool with all the lexington climbers like you do and many others on here. i am just myself and you can take it or leave it.

Thank you for that wild, inaccurate assumption and for further proving my point.

Spragwa, you are right. i am glad for what he has done. am sorry i jumped on him about the muir thing. i just think it would have been cooler of him to just say he was going to set up a thing for RS and leave muir out. i over reacted. i hope you all can forgive me. i dont want to leave.

I can provide lots of rocks for retaining walls also, but I will need help hauling them.

Cool Ynp1.

Thanks Rick and Karla. When/if Grant approves it I'm game to help and I know others will be raring to go as well. Roadside will continue to be a high traffic area so we should throw together and try to minimize the base erosion.

ynp1 wrote:i'm sorry Meadows, that i dont suck everybodys dick on the board. im not trying to stay cool with all the lexington climbers like you do and many others on here.

that is just not true.
I am on this board,Meadows never did that to me, therefore IT IS NOT TRUE. It's just Logic.

Ultra wrote:If I may make a suggestion...use the dead trees that you find around where you are going to work. God knows there's enough of them after the beetle blight. The pressure treated lumber you are talking about using has cyanide in it. It's not healthy.There has been measures taken by the manufacturers to change the formulas but there's so much of it in stock that is toxic. You don't know what you get.

If you can, use a lighter style reinforcement like what was used to traverse the creek bank at solar collector. That way you don't use any metal which looks ugly and can be dangerous if you fall on it.

Anyway... that's my two cents

Thanks for your suggestions, Ultra. In the end, it is up to Stephens and Haight as to whether or not pressure treated wood is used on their property. I know that this kind of wood is used throughout our national parks for trail work, but that doesn't mean it is safe. There seem to be two sides of this issue with the proponents showing studies that a very minimal amount of arsenic leaches into the soil from treated fence posts -- overall, less than what occurs naturally. The other side argues that even miniscule amounts can be proven to be detrimental to our health. So, what's to be believed. Guess I need to look into this more.

As for using dead trees for trail reinforcing, we've found that especially those in contact with the ground don't hold up long at all -- they just rot away. The two exceptions are locust, cedar, and to some extent, sasafras.

One thing we will be using for reinforcement posts at the "M" word place are 3-inch diameter concrete posts that we make from cardboard tubes filled with concrete and a rebar imbedded. The cardboard is soaked off, and you end up with a concrete post that has the surface color and appearance of RRG sandstone.

I'm not familiar with the lighter style reinforcment you referred to. Can you PM me with details.

Rick

toddc wrote:I can provide lots of rocks for retaining walls also, but I will need help hauling them.

Nope. Sorry. This is an inadequate gesture of charity. In order for it to be considered legitimate you would need to deliver those rocks to the cliff line within 10 lateral feet of where they will finally be placed, landowner approving, of course. [/b]