specialed Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 Thinker said: specialed said: That NPS blurb doesn't really make clear what he was doing exactly? Lighting pools of white gas on fire? What does that do? Unless is blackens the rock it doesn't do much or any damage. Johnny Law sez (from here ): SECTION 2.13 - FIRES (a) (1) Open campfires are restricted to Government provided grills and are prohibited in backcountry or wilderness areas. Jeez ED, what kinda lawyer are you gonna make? If a simple guy like myself can type "joshua' and 'fire' into google and find the applicable CFR to answer your Q I really don't see much hope for you. And BTW, have you fixed that 'problem' we talked about last time? Climb on, Bro! Its pretty clear he was breaking the law, but so what? ITs illegal to sleep in your truck in the valley but everyone does it. My question was whether his actions deserved all the "shame on you" responses he got - what harm did he actually cause? And bro, I've got so many problems I don't even remember which one your talkin about. Quote
E-rock Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 I think what deserves the "shame on you" (and probably all the finger shakers agree) is Thesenga's attitude. The guy is a high-profile representative of the climbing community and he walked into court without a bit of remorse for what he'd done. So what if he didn't think it was such a big deal, he should have thought about the bigger picture and how his attitude affects the NPS attitude towards climbers. Quote
ryland_moore Posted April 23, 2003 Posted April 23, 2003 I do not think that his being fired had as much to do with his initial action as it did to his attitude towards the whole situation. His friend, who was extremely apologetic, got off much easier, did not back talk, act like a smart ass, and take responsibility for his actions. Sure,everyone can get a little out of hand once in a while, but this guy continued to act like a premature ass even when in court, and had the audacity to continue to believe that setting fire to cliff faces in a national park was o.k. I think that is the reason that he was fired, not that he slipped up and had every opportunity to right his wrong. Quote
Thinker Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 Wasn't Thesenga the guy some new climber was posting on all the boards about awile back? Some climbing mag editor had pulled all the bolts on new climber's new route even though it sounded like the climber gone thru the normal local channels to make sure there were no objections. Anybody else recall that? As far as breaking the law vs doing something destructive, I wonder if his actions risked starting a wildfire, the fighting of which we all would have subsidized thru our taxes. Ed, I was just ribbing you about the "slimy-balls passive pro at City of Rocks" brew-haha awhile back. Peace. Quote
specialed Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 Don't think he's gunna start much of a wildfire in the desert. Quote
Gordonb Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 The problem with the desert is that the ecosystem is very slow. Not like the PNW where after a couple years it may be hard to see that the whole forrest has burned. In the desert a 10 foot burn circle may be visable after many years. I was at the top of cyclops rock last month, looking down on intersection rock near the hidden valley campsite and you could clearly see where the road went before it was moved. You don't fuck with the desert because it is very slow to recover. Quote
specialed Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 Don't think he's gunna start much of a wildfire in the desertt. Quote
Off_White Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 If you wanna fuck shit up, go join the anarchists in Eugene. While the long term physical damage may be debatable, the stupidity of perceived "leaders" in the climbing community pointlessly fucking with public land managers in the modern era is undeniable. Quote
richard_noggin Posted April 24, 2003 Author Posted April 24, 2003 kinda like a moderator sling'n the fword around? Deleting posts for political views? Freedom of speech? kinda like the man .Above the law? Quote
Off_White Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 Oh, right, I'm not in spray, am I? If you're offended go ahead and imagine one of those cutesy euphemisms in those f-word slots, or make an official "notify moderator" request and either I or someone else will change them. I don't understand your implied accusations though. Since when have I deleted posts for political views? I'm hardly above the law, either of the legal sort or the website rules, and I'm as subject to moderation as you are. Freedom of speech is a non issue, you're in a private space and you don't have any, though you're given far more leeway than you would in a mall, a newspaper, or a courtroom. Got a problem with that? Here's your coat, here's your hat, what's your hurry? Quote
MATT_B Posted April 24, 2003 Posted April 24, 2003 specialed said: Don't think he's gunna start much of a wildfire in the desertt. Actually he could. I spent the better part of a summer working there and saw more than one fire started by ligntning. There was one that went up just outside of Yucca Valley. I think it was in black rock canyon. Anyway the whole hill just outside of town was lit up at night. There where some homes that where threatened. Lots of smoke. The usual wild fire stuff. Just because there are no trees doesn't mean it will not burn. Quote
richard_noggin Posted April 24, 2003 Author Posted April 24, 2003 Off_White said: Oh, right, I'm not in spray, am I? If you're offended go ahead and imagine one of those cutesy euphemisms in those f-word slots, or make an official "notify moderator" request and either I or someone else will change them. I don't understand your implied accusations though. Since when have I deleted posts for political views? I'm hardly above the law, either of the legal sort or the website rules, and I'm as subject to moderation as you are. Freedom of speech is a non issue, you're in a private space and you don't have any, though you're given far more leeway than you would in a mall, a newspaper, or a courtroom. Got a problem with that? Here's your coat, here's your hat, what's your hurry? You did not delete the post Republican = Totalitarian enactments? As a moderator you should reframe from the use of the fword and the cword and set an example. Anyone that surfs this board knows what caveys about. If I where to be verbally theratened by his avatar I would just sling it back at him. So you whacked his Pee Pee, he has seen enought punishment give him back his avatar. And yes unless it is vulgar I should have freedom of speech. I have my hat and coat , think your man enought to show me the way? Quote
Sphinx Posted April 25, 2003 Posted April 25, 2003 richard_noggin said: Off_White said: Oh, right, I'm not in spray, am I? If you're offended go ahead and imagine one of those cutesy euphemisms in those f-word slots, or make an official "notify moderator" request and either I or someone else will change them. I don't understand your implied accusations though. Since when have I deleted posts for political views? I'm hardly above the law, either of the legal sort or the website rules, and I'm as subject to moderation as you are. Freedom of speech is a non issue, you're in a private space and you don't have any, though you're given far more leeway than you would in a mall, a newspaper, or a courtroom. Got a problem with that? Here's your coat, here's your hat, what's your hurry? You did not delete the post Republican = Totalitarian enactments? As a moderator you should reframe from the use of the fword and the cword and set an example. Anyone that surfs this board knows what caveys about. If I where to be verbally theratened by his avatar I would just sling it back at him. So you whacked his Pee Pee, he has seen enought punishment give him back his avatar. And yes unless it is vulgar I should have freedom of speech. I have my hat and coat , think your man enought to show me the way? Is the "c-word" 'caveman'? Quote
Dru Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 next thing you know the tool wiill bust someone for hauling a keg up on top of intersection rock. i say props to thesenga and boo to his wimpy employers. good for him for paying his fine and not weaseling i personally got rid of a whole can of white gas in 0.2 seconds in indian cove new years 1995. boom! Quote
Bronco Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 Those boulders sometimes get mouthy and need to be punished too! Quote
Dru Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 there is an account of rock flaming in 8 mile camp ground icicle, in the august publication Canadian Alpine Journal 1986. also includes the line "Hey, are you guys fags?" as a greeting between straight males. surprisingly did not incite much heated response to the editor. Quote
Off_White Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 You know, the Chief used to have a lot fewer trees on it. Maybe this August you can spearhead an arson campaign to clean it up Dru. Say about 20 people scattered across Bellygood each with a five gallon can. Bet you could make a bundle selling tickets in Squish. Firefall: Canadian Style. Quote
specialed Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 We used to (try to anyay) burn trees at Snowbowl to make the trees more skiiable. Never really worked though... Quote
Dru Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 On the FA of Squamish Buttress, Beckey and co. lit a fire on the ledge between the Apron and upper Buttress to cook their horsecock on. It started a small forest fire which burned for several hours until a rainstorm extinguished it. See CAJ 1959 or 1960 for details. Quote
Off_White Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 Dru said: On the FA of Squamish Buttress, Beckey and co. lit a fire on the ledge between the Apron and upper Buttress to cook their horsecock on. It started a small forest fire which burned for several hours until a rainstorm extinguished it. See CAJ 1959 or 1960 for details. See, a totally acceptable traditional techinque. I'm sure the magistrate would see it your way. Quote
chucK Posted May 16, 2003 Posted May 16, 2003 Check it out. JT's side of the story "However, I feel it is important to set the record straight. Apparently because I was editor of an outdoor magazine, the National Park Service has chosen to make me their example of climber misbehavior in national parks. This has resulted in inaccuracies, and exaggerations on the Internet and newspapers about the incident. " Who's lieing? Feds or JT? Did I miss this being posted earlier? Quote
Attitude Posted May 16, 2003 Posted May 16, 2003 The guy is guilty of setting an inappropriate fire in a national park. Both sides agree. Being drunk is no excuse. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.