RRC Archives

I just saw this in Access Fund press release. Two grants announced in the same release:

"Friends of Muir Valley — Muir Valley Parking Improvements/Expansion
A grant was awarded to Friends of Muir Valley to improve and expand parking at Muir Valley, which hosts over 20,000 visitor days each year and growing. Lack of parking was beginning to cause serious access issues, with the current lot overflowing and many climbers (some of whom traveled a great distance) having to turn away. This project will help expand and improve the current parking lot and build an auxiliary parking lot for an additional 27 vehicles, accommodating oversized vehicles such as buses and RVs. Much of the design and labor will be donated. "

I am really happy to see that FOMV is geting this grant to expand the parking lot, it is much needed. This grant sounds pretty straightforward to me.




But am I the only one who feels weird about this one?

"Red River Gorge Climbers Coalition — Graining Fork Nature Preserve (Roadside) Restoration
A grant was awarded to Red River Gorge Climbers Coalition (RRGCC) to help private land owners restore and address climber impacts at Roadside Crag in the Graining Fork Nature Preserve near Torrent, Kentucky. The owners closed the highly popular climbing area due to climber impacts and disrespect for rules, and this project will help address these impacts before public access is re-considered. Pending a plan for re-opening, the Access Fund and the RRGCC will work together with the landowners using volunteer labor to implement trail improvements, stabilize base areas to address severe erosion, and install an informational kiosk at the trailhead and other trail signage."

The wording is so strange and vague...

"this project will help address these impacts before public access is re-considered"-- am I not understanding this correctly? Access fund will put money in, and the access will be maybe reconsidered? As in, maybe re-opened, and maybe not, depending on how the owners feel about it? The owners are entitled to feel however they feel, of course, and to keep it closed forever, if they are so inclined, but why would Access Fund put money into these improvements, without some assurances that the money would actually be used to preserve access and reopen it?

i've mixed feelings about contributing to the access fund in general if funds are then funneled to even 'quasi' private landowners. but i don't mind helping with trail days or volunteering. i would add though that the last time i was at Muir there was a sign posted on a tree that clearly implied that if donations didn't step up Muir would be closed... not much difference between the two?

I think it sounds shady on the surface. Lets hope there were some behind the scene assurances given that the crag will be re-opened. I can't imagine access grants would be given out frivolously and that the owners would take money for that purpose without making good on it. So all in all, I think it is good news and bodes well that there will be at least some access to Roadside.

true, but if they don't re-open roadside, is it so obscene to think that the land owners deserve the restoration grant to counter years of unchecked abuse. "$5,000 to help build trails on your land so we can climb there in the future", is not that much different than "Thanks for letting us crap all over your property for 20 years, here is some cash and manpower to help rebuild what we destroyed"

krampus wrote:true, but if they don't re-open roadside, is it so obscene to think that the land owners deserve the restoration grant to counter years of unchecked abuse. "$5,000 to help build trails on your land so we can climb there in the future", is not that much different than "Thanks for letting us crap all over your property for 20 years, here is some cash and manpower to help rebuild what we destroyed"

They bought it in 2004. Crap all over their land? Rebuild what we destroyed? The primary impact from rock-climbing was soil compaction. How are you going to rebuild that?

You should strongly support both proposals. Must I expound?

yes, but before that, isn't the root problem still not being addressed? and in that case, doesn't this subsidize the closure of crags??

clif wrote:yes, but before that, isn't the root problem still not being addressed? and in that case, doesn't this subsidize the closure of crags??

In the case of Muir, the Webers first and the community second have put their all into stewardship. There is a huge amount of capital and sweet equity that a few thousand $ from the access fund will never meet. People come here from BF Egypt and they climb, but they rarely give back. Some of them give to the access fund. I think the dollars that come back via that route are under paid and the AF is aware of that.

Roadside is a similar issue. If you bought Roadside a hundred k or so, what would 5k here or there do for you in terms of policy-setting? No, 5k here and there to maintain the venue plus a little sweat equity from the community is not a big policy setter. Once it is fixed, whatever has to be done, the community will have to maintain the land-owner's policy for management of impact and the community will have to maintain a sense of stewardship over the place.

Hello Kids with Toys:

I am submitting a grant to the Access Fund
http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 160227.htm?

This indispensable tool will increase safety at your local crag and reduce expenses for troublesome year after year road maintenance. Additionally, I will use it to run a business in Alaska so me and my bros can strike some lines, so, it will pay for itself. Do the community some good!! -donate now.

thanks.

If the access fund will grant me some money to fix up my property I WILL allow climbers to come over and climb. Not maybe - will. Even if a hippy puts up a hammock, I wont be a pussy and get all ...pussied out about it. You can climb all you want. If you leave a permadraw I wont act like somebody with a sprained vagina and make everybody miserable and run everybody out I will let people climb. Not that I am saying that anybody is a pussy or has sprained their vagina, or even acted like that, I'm just saying that I wont if you grant me some money.