real bouldering guide

[max]

quote:

---

Originally posted:

dyno, you are wrong to compare bouldering wihth hijking.....first of all the trails are alreadyt there and are managed(well suppossedly) by the deforrest service.

 

the trails and they 'damage' that it took to create them has been done, and hopfully it was done with the idea of as little impact as possible. whereas your pad toting little buddies will trample anything to reach a boulder, they will remove vegatation and stomp all over the plant life that resides at the base....this is all new with little consideration of the enviroemtn surronding it. i know that the blm is studying boulder base impact in the bishop area. and from what i see on thier website the impact is serve....too bad you boulders didnt hypew this shit 10yrs ago when it could have been grandfathered in.....

 

either way have fun and dont f$%k up the enviroment.....

I think if you replace "hiking" with "climbing", what dynomerchant said seems resonable, and the above refutation falls short. Obviously visual inspection is an incomplete analysis, but many "climbing" areas (including squamish, leavenworth, vantage, owens, yos...) have recieved far greater impacts than anything I've seen at any of the bishop bouldering areas. And we've seen on this board scientific analysis of climbing's impact on crag ecosystems.

 

Summary: from what I've seen, climbing impacts ("[removing] vegatation and [stomping] all over the plant life that resides at the base....with little consideration of the enviroemtn surronding it.") are just as great if not more than bouldering impacts.

 

Also, I very much agree with "either way have fun and dont f$%k up the enviroment....."

[dyno_merchant]

quote:

---

Originally posted by erik:

dyno, you are wrong to compare bouldering wihth hijking.....first of all the trails are alreadyt there and are managed(well suppossedly) by the deforrest service.

 

the trails and they 'damage' that it took to create them has been done, and hopfully it was done with the idea of as little impact as possible. whereas your pad toting little buddies will trample anything to reach a boulder, they will remove vegatation and stomp all over the plant life that resides at the base....this is all new with little consideration of the enviroemtn surronding it. i know that the blm is studying boulder base impact in the bishop area. and from what i see on thier website the impact is serve....too bad you boulders didnt hypew this shit 10yrs ago when it could have been grandfathered in.....

 

either way have fun and dont f$%k up the enviroment.....[/QB]

---

your right, i shouldn't have compared it to hiking and bouldering does have a large impact on the surrounding areas.

 

now to comment on other posts about hidden areas...

 

my feelings on why hidden areas aren't always good (when it comes to bouldering)...one of the biggest reasons that bouldering has such a large impact is because people don't manage the areas well from the start (as apposed to trails made by the FS). SPEAKING FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH OTHER HIDDEN AREAS I HAVE BEEN TO...first-people hide an area (especially if its awesome) and are all secretive. Then-other people start find out but there isn't any good information on parking, trails and special environmental impacts that should be avoided. these new people tromp all over the hill sides looking for the boulders and end up creating 10 times as much impact as if they had good information to start with. im not saying that every area someone climbs at needs a guide with grades and all that but the first people to develop a new bouldering area have (I think) a responsibility to at least tell a newcomer where to park, what trails to use and special environmental impacts that should be avoided if that person has found out about an area and wants to go there. instead i see most developers so selfish about their area that they continue to lie to people about locations of boulders and then the above tromping continues... then the area developers complain that all these "nimrods" are ruining the area because of all the trails they are adding and vegetation they are trampling and such.

 

Blah Blah Blah

 

Im getting sick of listening to myself rant on this issue...I see both sides...I guess for me it comes down to...

 

IF YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO GO TO YOUR SECRET LITTLE AREA MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T GO THERE EITHER! AND IF YOU DO HAVE A SECRET AREA, FINE! BUT WELCOME NEW PEOPLE TO YOUR AREA IF THEY FIND IT AND GIVE THEM THE GOOD WORD ABOUT HOW THEY SHOULD TREAT THE AREA TO MINIMIZE IMPACT. DON'T BE ANOTHER ASSHOLE ABOUT IT-WE ALL HAVE RUN INTO ENOUGH OF THEM IN THE CLIMBING COMMUNITY!

 

lets all be friends...yay!

[dyno_merchant]

quote:

---

Originally posted by max:

---

I think if you replace "hiking" with "climbing", what dynomerchant said seems resonable, and the above refutation falls short. Obviously visual inspection is an incomplete analysis, but many "climbing" areas (including squamish, leavenworth, vantage, owens, yos...) have recieved far greater impacts than anything I've seen at any of the bishop bouldering areas. And we've seen on this board scientific analysis of climbing's impact on crag ecosystems.

 

Summary: from what I've seen, climbing impacts ("[removing] vegatation and [stomping] all over the plant life that resides at the base....with little consideration of the enviroemtn surronding it.") are just as great if not more than bouldering impacts.

 

Also, I very much agree with "either way have fun and dont f$%k up the enviroment....."[/QB]

 

I totally agree with Max and I also agree with "either way have fun and don't f$%k up the environment....." and I also agree with drinking beer and I also agree with.............

[Charlie]

what is the url for smoot's site?

[mikeadam]

Charlie,

 

http://climbingwashington.com

 

Good site!

 

Mike

[Charlie]

Local Hardmen on thier way to Castle Rock!....we're not worthy

[ruddersbox]

Those "hard men" ain't bitchin that there is no guide book. Go find the problems for your self, take some time, and emmulate those pictured men and bring an f'n keg of Rouge Smoke to keep the Miller lite dbags away.

[Son_of_Caveman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ruddersbox:

Those "hard men" ain't bitchin that there is no guide book. Go find the problems for your self, take some time, and emmulate those pictured men and bring an f'n keg of Rouge Smoke to keep the Miller lite dbags away.

---

[erik]

one thing this picture makes me wonder about, is over the years bringing large amounts of beer to the crag has always caused the fight as to who carries it. and obviously there is also the the question on foam reduction after a serious hauling session. maybe we need a guide to beer in the backcountry....tread light drink heavy!!

 

i appoint specialed to investigate this subject and report back with findings.....

[crazyjizzy]

Smoot wasn't invited to that kegger. It was Pat McNerney batchlor party, and Smoot tagged along as Jim's sycophant. If Dean wasn't so drunk, he would have given the boot to Smoot.

[erik]

quote:

---

Originally posted by crazyjz:

sycophant.

---

does that mean knob gobbler??

[specialed]

quote:

---

Originally posted by erik:

one thing this picture makes me wonder about, is over the years bringing large amounts of beer to the crag has always caused the fight as to who carries it. and obviously there is also the the question on foam reduction after a serious hauling session. maybe we need a guide to beer in the backcountry....tread light drink heavy!!

 

i appoint specialed to investigate this subject and report back with findings.....

---

Research is under way to develop a special "keg harness" for big wall keg hauling purposes. Beer as the only supply on a big wall is very practical. You combine all of you sustenance needs (fluids and carbohydrates) into one easily digested substance for all day long use, not just breakfast, and it gives you the confidence for the scary A4 pitches.