Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
meg - tp
Trad climber
kingman, az
|
|
|
May 16, 2010 - 09:20pm PT
|
Comments submitted, but please no bumps - this forum already has more bumps than Kirstie Ally's inner thighs.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 02:11am PT
|
Sounds to me like The Chief is advocating respect for the Wilderness Act. That is by far in the best interest of the climbing community. Advocating respect for the Wilderness Act is a good thing.
But, automatically assuming that anything a government employee says is the gospel and then demanding that we all automatically lick the boots of government employees is a bad thing.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 02:18am PT
|
Franklin,
You have posted over 9,500 times on Supertopo.
Why don't you just give everybody a break and go back to posting on the Central Idaho Mountains back country skiing blog where they love you....
FRIDAY, JANUARY 8, 2010
Response to a Comment
Earlier today a comment was posted on the Christmas Day post and although not everyone saw it, I think it is worth responding to. For reference, here is the text,
Posted by Anonymous:
http://centralidahomountains.blogspot.com/2009/12/feliz-navidad.html
The best way to respond here is point by point so that is what I am going to do. The first couple sentences serve to use the name calling fallacy so its not even worth discussing so lets jump to the heart of Rokjox’s argument....
1. Run Names....
2. Crowding....
3. Danger to new backcountry traffic....
4. Publicity
The way you are thinking of the blog is, misguided, if anything. The vision for the blog is that it can one day be obsoleted by an Idaho City Avalanche Center. The publicity that the blog brings to the area is no different than the traffic any other Avalanche Center would.
As far as people coming up, contrary to what you propose, I full heartedly encourage people to find knowledgeable mentors and get up there to do things hands on. The notion of “protecting” the area from “outsiders” is ridiculous. The area is as much yours, as mine, as anybody else’s. Don’t wrong people for doing what they enjoy just because it means you might have to choose to ski at Winter Corner or Freeman instead of Pilot one day. Thus far, I have yet to see every parking lot full, and until that happens, there shouldn’t be a problem.
5. Snow Reports
More than anything else, this is what gets me, personally, riled up. I will lead of with the fact that any person who has completed Avalanche Level 1, knows that spatial variability occurs. Let me repeat that, AVY LEVEL 1 TEACHES SPATIAL VARIABILITY. To correct your point actually, you do not even have to be 500 ft away. you get spatial variability in pits dug right next to each other. The essence of your point can be seen as flawed if we simply extend it to other Avy Centers. The point you are making is that Snow Reports can’t be trusted. Ok, so what is the point of having Avy 1, Avy 2, the Payette Avy Center, the Sun Valley Avy Center, National Avalanche School, AMGA, AAA, AIRE, or anything else? That, is what you are suggesting.
The better interpretation of your intent is that due to spatial variability, we should have caution and insight when creating forecasts. Lucky for us, forecasts are not solely based on pits. Good forecasts are based on temperature data, wind data, observation of recent activity, etc. And finally, in any Avy course you might take, you are taught that forecasts should be taken as a guideline and that you should air to the side of safety. Meaning, maybe you see if a super wind-loaded area when the report said that the winds were calm. USE YOUR JUDGMENT.
So while Pilot may not be a “beginner” area, with the right precautions such as looking at the forecast and going out with a mentor, newcomers can have fun and become knowledgeable simultaneously.
Closing Remarks
The last remarks you make serve no purpose and imply that no one, but you has experience in the area. This is of course a ridiculous notion. Chago alone as skied there rougly 20 years. He was actually the first person in Idaho to purchase randonee gear at that. John Taggart has also been here forever and is a leader as an avalanche educator. I could go on and on, but the point is that you are not the only one. I can also be sure that you can’t say you have been skiing in that area since you were 12 as I have been.
Again I digress though, rather than devolve into a discussion of who is the manlier man, here is my point. WE WILL NOT STOP POSTING FORECASTS AND OBSERVATIONS THAT HELP SKIERS MAKE SAFE AND INFORMED DECISIONS IN ORDER TO PREVENT ACCIDENTS. We, the contributors and readers of the blog, are willing to work with you. I have met several from the community here and what it has started is a fantastic collaboration on the mountain. It is creating a community that cares about one another. It creates a community where we can all share in the same joint interest: to enjoy the majesty and wonder of the mountains. As we have from the beginning, we extend a hand of friendship.
Pedro Rodriguez
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 17, 2010 - 05:14am PT
|
For those of you who don't remember me, that's because there isn't much to remember.
I started climbing in the early 1970s and quit back in the late 1980s. The only time since then that I thought much about climbing is when I tried to contact my old climbing partner and discovered that he had been dead for six years - Dick Richardson, RIP - 5/11/1998.
I have heard that Richardson died from a broken heart when his neck and back problems forced him to quit climbing - Cause of death: depression, massive weight gain and a heart attack.
Richardson is the one who did most of the bold face climbing leads at Christmas Tree Pass back in the late 1970s. Feeling guilty about loosing touch, I decided to post a bunch of photos and route descriptions of Richardson's (and my) CTP routes on Rockclimbing.com, primarly as a memorial to Richardson. I had just finished posting everything that I had Re: CTP when Lake Mead NRA published their Bolt Chopping plan.
The only reason I am posting on Supertopo and other rock climbing forums is because allowing any United States Government agency to ban climbing bolts on public land for no good reason WILL set a bad precident that could be used to ban climbing bolts anywhere in the USA.
So please send your Objection letters to:
Lake Mead NRA: LAKE Draft Wilderness Management Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
P.S. I apologize for my participation in the foregoing public exhibition of 7 monkeys f*#king a football. Let's just cool it and work together to stop the climbing bolt ban. If anyone wants a piece of me, just send me a private Email and I will send you my contact information. But, let's not digress any further in a public forum.
Remember, the Park Rangers are reading these posts.
Andrew Solow, San Francisco, CA
|
|
Urmas
Social climber
Sierra Eastside
|
|
|
May 17, 2010 - 01:17pm PT
|
I don't see anything wrong with Andrew's mannerisms[sic]. He's merely suggesting that people write articulate letters with the intended goal of influencing policy in a direction favorable to climbers. This is how it's done in a democracy. Powerful special interests don't just wait for bureaucrats to tell them what to do, they hire lobbyists to influence policy. We don't have those resources. The best we can do is to go on record advocating our position on the issues.
Rick, you seem to blame climbers for the proposed restrictions. I really don't believe this is the case at CTP. The NPS has claimed that the area is not used much by climbers. Impacts result from use. If there is little use, there is by definition little impact. I think the LM is trying to score points with some more powerful interest group at the expense of climbers.
If we don't stand up for ourselves, no one else will!
|
|
Urmas
Social climber
Sierra Eastside
|
|
|
May 17, 2010 - 04:21pm PT
|
Rokjox, I don't think anyone is questioning the right of land managers to establish regulations in their domains. And as they are public servents, we the people have a right to express our support or lack thereof for their policies. These policies are rarely instituted because one individual has a dislike of a certain user group. They are brought about by a political process in which we citizens have a civic duty to participate - if we care.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 01:39am PT
|
Spoke with the Chief earlier today. It seems that he has many years of experience dealing with land managers and other government employees in multiple situations regarding access to rock climbing resources as well as during his 20+ years in the US Navy.
Chief has found that modern day land managers have a lot of power; and once they get pissed off, it can be very difficult to get them to work with you. It's pretty easy to use our tax dollars to hire someone with 3 PhDs to find a few rare frogs, or allege that the mating rituals of raptors and big horn sheep would be disturbed by rock climbing and then use more of our tax dollars to hang us up in court for years arguing about it. There are also Native American Treaty rights at issue in many wilderness areas including Bridge Canyon and Spirit Mountain.
The Lake Mead NRA people who I have spoken with during the last several weeks were very polite, but not particularly cooperative. We did get an extension of time until July 1st to Object to their bolt chopping plan. And, one land manager told one rock climber orally that he has no plans to chop bolts at Christmas Tree Pass.
But, we still haven't been able to find out if any Native Americans are claiming that climbing bolts negatively impact on their cultural resources. And, according to Lake Mead NRA public affairs officer Andrew Munoz, bolt chopping is still on the table.
So, please ask every rock climber you know to send in an Objection to the Christmas Tree Pass bolt chopping plan.
Lake Mead draft Plan
OFFICIAL COMMENT LINK
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 06:24am PT
|
Chief. Please keep writing. But, please remain calm and don't assume things that are not in evidence. This isn't a horror movie yet. And, you are frightening the children.
The only thing I can see so far that is going to be difficult is people's personalities, mine in particular. I have a seething hatred for authority, especially when it is irrationally exercised.
Most climbing areas in the Southwest have issues with Treaty rights. But only a couple of them have total climbing bans.
As far as I know, the only two places in the Spirit Mountain and Bridge Canyon Wilderness areas (aka: Christmas Tree Pass) that are sensitive or sacred are Spirit Mountain and Grapevine Canyon. Those two specific sites are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The entire area is NOT listed, just the two sites. Folks have been running cattle, discharging fire arms and 4-wheeling on the rest of that land going back to the late 1800s. And, they've been climbing in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness since 1976. I quote from the Access Fund May newsletter: The NPS proposal also fails to identify actual conflicts caused by climbing that would make this location any different from the dozens of wilderness areas around the country where climbing and some level of fixed anchor use is allowed. That's the rub. Zion National Park, Joshua Tree National Monument and several other places where Native American Cultural Resources are present all have wilderness management plans that allow bolt protected rock climbing, as long as it is at least 50 feet from any petroglyphs. At Christmas Tree Pass, it's more like one mile from any petroglyphs.
Maybe the land manger is hiding his Native American contact list from us because he is trying to obtain claims of cultural resource sensitivity and significance to prop up his bolt chopping plan with before we have a chance to speak with the Native Americans?
Finally, if there are any treaties in force, they didn't prevent more than a dozen nasty looking cell phone towers from being installed at the summit of Christmas Tree Pass, immediately adjacent to Spirit Mountain. So, I guess cell phone tower revenue is more important than protecting the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain.
P.S. For dummies like me, please provide the exact names of the three places you are referencing.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 18, 2010 - 03:50pm PT
|
Thanks for posting. It's not a new twist. It's just another detail that I didn't post until today.
I'm not sure if any of the tribes get any money from the cell phone towers. But, they definitely got visual blight immediately adjacent to Spirit Mountain. Imagine if someone put ten cell towers next to Ship Rock???
Regarding the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain: Walking up and down or hiking on Spirit Mountain is NOT prohibited in the Lake Mead draft Plan. But, no signs or trail markers are to be installed to mark the trail.
We'll just have to wait and see if anyone is complaining about climbing bolts. But, almost all of the bolts are in Bridge Canyon at least 1.0 mile from either Spirit Mountain or Grapevine Canyon (more like 2 miles in most cases). When I contacted the Mojave Tribe about a month ago, they were unaware that anyone had been climbing in Bridge Canyon or that climbing bolts had been installed.
FYI: Lake Mead NRA says they are expediting their response to my informal request for information concerning the cultural sensitivity of Spirit Mountain and Grapevine Canyon which they say they are required to treat as a FOIA. And, the Mojave Tribe's cultural resource person has been ducking my calls. Will post any new information as soon as I receive it.
|
|
andrewsolow
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2010 - 03:16pm PT
|
Last Chance to post an objection to the bolt chopping plan.
The comment period closes on Friday 07/02/2010 at 11:59 PM.
Lake Mead draft Plan Comment Link: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?parkID=317&projectID=16820&documentId=33282
The draft Lake Mead Wilderness Plan as published proposes comprehensive bolt removal and constructively bans all rock climbing in the Bridge Canyon Wilderness by banning climbing bolts which provide 95% of the leader protection in this area. No other form of leader protection is available on the featureless rock walls of Christmas Tree Pass.
Though the Lake Mead NRA has been consulting with the Access Fund about rock climbing at Christmas Tree Pass, they have refused to rescind their bolt chopping plan as published back in April 2010.
If Lake Mead NRA succeeds in perfecting their constructive rock climbing ban, places like Yosemite and Joshua Tree will be next.
Access Fund Action Alert & Comment Link: http://www.accessfund.org/c.tmL5KhNWLrH/b.5208267/k.8C84/Action_Center/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=tmL5KhNWLrH&b=5208267&aid=14437
From the Access Fund CTP Action Alert
This wholesale removal of climbing anchors is unprecedented.....
There is no rational basis for this constructive rock climbing ban.
In their response to a recent FOIA request, Lake Mead NRA admitted that the Native Americans who have treaty rights in this area have not complained about the presence of climbing bolts at Christmas Tree Pass. And, as far as I know, neither has anyone else.
Don't let one irrational Park Planner ban rock climbing at Christmas Tree Pass and set a precedent for banning rock climbing nationwide. Submit your objections today!
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2010 - 03:29pm PT
|
Thanks for the reminder. I just submitted my comments via the form (VERY EASY!!) and encourage others to do so.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!