Sacrificing virgins
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:57 pm
The recent push to raise money for the Murray property caught me between wanting to contribute yet worried about subsidising the abuses and ambivalence I see in some climbers/recreationalists.
As both efforts to include other user groups, particularly mountain bikers, goes forward and the apparently large untapped potential for new routes are developed, I want my money to buy some measure of confidence that those people who choose to use the area respect my ethics, which are a modest revision on the Leave No Trace ideas, essentially recognizing that I go to the woods to visit an area where human's impact is negligible, at worst the impact is indulgent in it's deference toward enjoying man's absence.
What??
At the John and Alex Crag/Trail work day this past fall, I was saddened that a maturing beech tree near (about 6 feet and probably 20 years old) from the base of "Happy Trails" at the Gallery was completely cut down to a four inch stump; when earlier that morning I had seen the two branches which had extended toward the climb while appreciating what a beautiful tree it was becoming along the base of the wall, the always striking contrast between the lucid green and smooth gray order of the tree (especially in the sun) against the swirling mix of browns, reds, oranges and yellows of the rock. Plus the nice natural shelving that the roots frequently create for gear.
Omitting the possibilty of an emergency bolting situation, on my too infrequent trips to the Red I'd be willing to spend time on project route development projects if given some time. It is just that once the area around the base of a climb is cleared and compacted by users it is highly unlikely that anything else will take root, so preservation should be the first course of action.
And I promise to never post another treatise on ethics, thanks for your attention.
As both efforts to include other user groups, particularly mountain bikers, goes forward and the apparently large untapped potential for new routes are developed, I want my money to buy some measure of confidence that those people who choose to use the area respect my ethics, which are a modest revision on the Leave No Trace ideas, essentially recognizing that I go to the woods to visit an area where human's impact is negligible, at worst the impact is indulgent in it's deference toward enjoying man's absence.
What??
At the John and Alex Crag/Trail work day this past fall, I was saddened that a maturing beech tree near (about 6 feet and probably 20 years old) from the base of "Happy Trails" at the Gallery was completely cut down to a four inch stump; when earlier that morning I had seen the two branches which had extended toward the climb while appreciating what a beautiful tree it was becoming along the base of the wall, the always striking contrast between the lucid green and smooth gray order of the tree (especially in the sun) against the swirling mix of browns, reds, oranges and yellows of the rock. Plus the nice natural shelving that the roots frequently create for gear.
Omitting the possibilty of an emergency bolting situation, on my too infrequent trips to the Red I'd be willing to spend time on project route development projects if given some time. It is just that once the area around the base of a climb is cleared and compacted by users it is highly unlikely that anything else will take root, so preservation should be the first course of action.
And I promise to never post another treatise on ethics, thanks for your attention.