Poll: Would you rat on a Wilderness Power Driller?

[Lambone]

...but never criticize others for what they choose to do. quote by Tommy Caldwell

good for him, I think that's bullshit.

 

you will command way more respect than for talk'n smack.

I don't really strive to command respect or much of anything else for that matter. Commanding people are lame.

 

Those who talk smack and do nothing are part of the problem not part of the solution.

 

So far it looks like 44% of voters on this thread would chose to be part of the solution.

 

Peter Croft just put up a bolted route in an alpine setting in the high sierra ...He has done something possitive.

...Try it...

 

No thanks. Should I also start soloing because Peter Croft does it?

 

I prefer gear protcted Alpine routes, including belays.

[mattp]

Bone,

 

As best I can tell, you seem bent on attacking me and exposing my "hypocrisy" only as a jab. I've explained to you why I don't want to "take the stand" on bolting issues and once again I will say: I believe it does not help my organizational efforts to take any stand on bolting issues. Many others agree, and they have asked me not to do so. You continue your jabs, and I hope others see as I do that it looks like you raise them only when you don't like a point I've made in a debate.

 

Le me ask you this: besides beating your chest on this site, or "raising important issues" as you call it, what have you done to help climbers and climbing in Washington?

 

I have gone to lots of public meetings over the years and have participated in lots of crag cleanups and trail projects. I have put up some routes that I am proud of, and I have removed a lot of litter bolts and tat. I maintain a website where climbers can get topos and route beta for free. I have met with several Forest Service personnel and responded directly to their concerns as well as encouraging others to do the same.

 

As far as I can tell, those who most loudly criticize the WCC or rail about bolting practices on this website have rarely gotten involved in any such efforts and certainly have not put as much into any of these things as those who they attack.

 

I believe you can see that I have been extremely restrained in responding to your taunts in the last three weeks. I'll discuss real issues if you want to, but I'm not interested in exchanging insults. If you want to be an ass, why don't you attack someone who wants to play in the sandbox with you?

[Cpt.Caveman]

I didn't know you were keeping attendance records of meetings or that it was some sort of prerequisite to have on opinion expressed here.

 

Also, I am a criticizer of bolting. I don't want to meet with a bunch of people that are grouped together in order to figure out ways to trick the FS into thinking they are obeying the law so smokey doesn't come out and see them. That's exactly the stuff I think should not go on.

 

 

I can see it now - meet up with rap bolting crew in a meeting so they can push down their ethics on me in mass.

 

Sounds like straight people going to a gay bar looking for some action.

[Lambone]

Matt,

 

I have simply been asking you questions here. I haven't made accusations, I haven't asked you if you have used a power drill in the Wilderness. I also haven't denied that you have done alot for the climbing community in Washington, but thanks for reminding me...or "beating your chest" about it...in your termenoligy. I simply asked you how you feel about this law in particular. You responed by basically saying it is not a big deal and other laws are more important...at least that's how I read into your reply. I'm sorry if you precieve that as an attack. You asked me about my opinion towards people who break laws in Yosemite and elsewhere, how come I can't ask you something? This issue is very real to me, is it not real to you? Personaly the preservation of Wilderness in this country for my children to enjoy would probly be the #1 most important real issue to me.

 

When I first heard about the WCC I thought..hey cool idea, way to go. Then I inquired about the organizations stance on specific issues such as illegal wilderness bolting. Nothing, no reply. I asked several times in several different threads, and looked for information on the WCC web site. Still nothing. Personaly I like to investigate a group before I offer support to it, I want to know what they are about and where they stand on important issues. I think this is a fair enough inquiry, correct?

 

So I'm sorry you take it as an attack on you personaly, but being a co-founder of this group I would expect that you'd be at least up front with people on where you stand. If you are not willing to be up front and open, then forget asking for my support to represent the climbing community.

 

I apologize for calling you a chickenshit...that was a cheap shot, however I still feel that if your not willing to stand up for what you believe in and voice those beliefs openly....chickenshit may be a fitting title.

 

That's all, have a nice day

[willstrickland]

MattP, try it like this:

 

"I feel that advocating a rigid "stance" on the issue, through the WCC, would be counterproductive. Each cirucmstance is unique, and unique circumstances call for unique solutions. We strive to work with the land managers to reach reasonable solutions in each case, and a "set" position would not work toward convincing those managers that we are open and flexible with respect to solutions.

My PERSONAL view is...blah blah blah...but since I seek to represent all climbers, that is not necessarily the position I take to the table while in a representative role"

 

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but I think this may be a way to get your own view out there without the specter of compromising your flexibility. I really just want to hear your personal take on it. You say "I'll discuss real issues"...so go ahead.

[Lambone]

that's bullshit Will, either they support the law or they don't.

 

Take a stand, what kind of wishy washy group that is afraid to speak up against anything would expect to accomplish any goal whatsoever.

 

and if the founders of the group are violators of this law themselves (maybe so, maybe not?) ...then I find it hard to support their cause.

 

It's not fucking rocket science were talking about here.

 

Edit: But that is much farther then i am even taking this here....I'm asking mattp for his personal opinon, not to speak for the WCC group. I understand if he wouldn't want to do that in this forum, makes sense. So where can I find the information, give me the link? Is there a link? If not I'd recommend the group creat one...one way or another.

 

[willstrickland]

Easy bulldog. I'm not advocating that stance. You should be well aware of my pesonal feelings on the issue. I am just speculating on what I see as the likely scenario, and looking to construct a means for MattP to voice his personal take on the issue of power drilling in wilderness.

[Lambone]

that's cool Will I appreciate your help, but it's pretty obvious he won't.

 

and you know what...that's fine, because that approach alone pretty much answers my question.

 

Just don't gimme that "you keep picking fights" bullshit mattp. You came into this thread on your own will, and started debating, and now you don't want to respond to the questions being asked of you. Sorry, but if you don't like it, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

 

almost half the voters would rat on a power driller. nice

[chucK]

I haven't been as active as I should be in WCC, so I could be wrong here, but maybe the reason WCC hasn't taken an official position on some of these issues on their website and elsewhere is because they've only had one (1) meeting so far.

 

Perhaps the founders of this group like Mattp don't want to presume what the rest of the people getting involved wish to support, so they are waiting to get a consensus before forming an official position?

 

Maybe if you got involved they might even want to listen what you have to say?

[Stefan]

Man was not designed to touch every fragment of this earth.

[Lambone]

ok chuck fair enough. but it's still getting off topic. I didn't ask for the WCC's stance initialy, I asked for mattp's stance, since he was engaging in the discussion/debate.

 

still, more to your point....if the WCC even had to consider whether or not to support the Wilderness Act or not, and spend months establishing a concensus....this would be a deciding factor for me personaly. I'm not speaking for anyone else, or telling people how they should feel or what they should do, this is just where I'm coming from.

 

If the goal of the WCC is to establish a good relationship with landmanegers through collective organization, then I don't understand the issue with saying, "Yes, we support the laws established by the Wilderness Act and the FS who enforces them."

 

Right? That is...I guess, unless they DON'T? Which is what i'm trying to figure out.

[DCramer]

I a have been somewhat involved with the WCC and can honestly report that as far as I have seen the WCC has no official position regarding “Wilderness Bolting.” The WCC is still forming and encouraging more climber participation so that it can find its voice.

 

Before the first meeting I attended Matt encouraged me to moderate the presentation of my own views and in hind site I am glad I followed his advice. At the meeting I did state that intensive development such as that at Exit 38 is not a pattern I would like to see presented a “model” or typical way for climbers to develop crags. I wasn’t called an “anti-bolter” and I have had several subsequent discussions with people considered “pro-bolters” about the issue all in a friendly and constructive manner.

 

The WCC isn’t Matt and although I believe he is an effective representative for Washington climbers I hope he becomes less and less the face of the WCC – not because his involvement lessens but because others increase their involvement. Several months ago when the WCC first appeared there were two CC.com posters who gave Matt shit for not “representing them.” My personal counsel to Matt was to ignore the internet sprayers. His explicit rejoinder was that he wanted them involved. He tried to engage them and encouraged them to participate. To date neither of them have attended any meetings or signed up on the website.

 

The WCC is simply what we make it.

 

As far as wilderness bolting I can’t imagine any way that the WCC would ever support anything other than climber adherence to the existing rules, regulations and policies that any land manger creates.

[Cpt.Caveman]

Maybe if you got involved they might even want to listen what you have to say?

 

Just sitting here on this board expressing my opinion I get the impression I wouldn't be welcome. Do they really want a meeting where people are going to speak their mind? Or is it a formal hooray we are all blessed to do as we pleased anyway? From my point of view the people criticizing the bad bolting actions might not want to attend a meeting with the tone already set like that... If such a group is going to label them as nuisances, or whatever wording they want to use then I would suppose the meeting would be over before it started.

[Dru]

As far as wilderness bolting I can’t imagine any way that the WCC would ever support anything other than climber adherence to the existing rules, regulations and policies that any land manger creates.

 

Snowmobile groups argue for more snowmobiling in parks and so on....

 

Why shouldn't a climbers group argue for more climbing? Or the ability to place bolts via powerdrill instead of hand drill. Not that currently illegal practices should be ignored, but advocate for changing the law to permit?

[Lambone]

yeah dru, true dat. If that's their goal then they should strive for that. I'm not saying they shouldn't.

 

What I am saying is that I'd want to know about it, so that I would not be a part of that effort to change the law.

[DCramer]

I would hope that the WCC does advocate for climbers! I for one would like to see Peshastin Pinnacles open during the winter months.

 

As I said before I do not think that there is a hidden agenda to change bolting restrictions in the wilderness.

 

Spray on!

Edited September 22, 2004 by DCramer

[Lambone]

Thanks DC, spraying is fun...glad to see someone in the WCC crew can be a little more lighthearted about it then mattp.

 

I didn't accuse the WCC of having a hidden agenda. Just trying top figure out that if that agenda is not hidden, why mattp won't share it, i only pick on mattp because until now he has been the only "WCC guy" participating in these cc.com discussions.

 

As far as I can tell there are two possible agendas. Both for advocating climbers, and opening access. One working to change the current laws that restrict power drills in Wilderness. Or, the opposite.

 

Still not sure where some people stand, but I'd like to thank folks like Bug, Dru, Willstricland, Merv, Caveman, etc...for at least being straight-up about how they feel, either for or against. Again, no one is under obligation to voice their opinion openly, that is why I started the poll.

 

But if you come into the thread and start going on about this or that...better be ready to get off the fence.

 

cheers

[Dru]

yeah dru, true dat. If that's their goal then they should strive for that. I'm not saying they shouldn't.

 

What I am saying is that I'd want to know about it, so that I would not be a part of that effort to change the law.

 

exactly. if they publically advocate changing the law they will lose some climber support. but i imagine if they do NOT advocate to change the law they will still be supported by some of those those who still personally advocate changing the law

[Bug]

I like DCramer's post. I have personally not been involved with WCC but will try to make the time. There is the real problem. People like me do not make it a priority and the few that do are over-represented in the organization. I have not seen anything that has led me to believe that there is an existing agenda for WCC other than "to give climbers a voice". Having organized and been involved in several groups that seek public input and attempt to accomplish a variety of goals in the political and Agency arenas, I can say that getting YOU there is the hardest part. Everybody has an excuse. Then they blast the outcome. It is no different than not voting and complaining about who got elected. Leave the WCC out of this thread. Give it a chance. It is not Matt. Matt is not it. If or when it actually does something, you might have reason to blast. But even then, your blasting is bullshit if you have made no effort to influence the outcome in a constructive way.

[mattp]

Run some searches and you will see that my basic "position" on these matters has remained the same for three years: virtual and on-the-ground bolt wars have done little to stem the tide of bolting and have had the net effect of driving most climbers away from any real discussion of these or other issues we face.

 

The WCC does not have to take a position on this or any other issue in order to facilitate communication between climbers and between climbers and land managers or other outside parties - and certainly not at this stage. Who knows where this effort will lead us, but at this point we are not working to change any regulations or to aid or discourage law enforcement efforts with respect to any specific regulation. We ARE working to encourage climbers to take a more realistic look at the issues we face and to promote cooperation and communication between climbers and land managers.

 

Bug and Cramer are right on: if you don't even try to get involved other than to throw stink bombs on this website, you really have no right to complain about what somebody else does when you are not there.

[Lambone]

yeah ok, I'm sorry I even mentioned the WCC...shouldn't have pulled it into this thread. I'll drop it because obviously there is not yet enough organization to make a definite stance, that's fine. Still think they will eventually need a position when it comes to negotiating with the FS.....call me crazy.

 

But, I'll still attempt to figure out what mattp is all about, especialy when he engages in debates and starts asking other people questions. I don't feel he is above scrutiny just because of his involvement with the WCC.

 

ok, got some work to do...it's been fun.

[Cpt.Caveman]

Run some searches and you will see that my basic "position" on these matters has remained the same for three years: virtual and on-the-ground bolt wars have done little to stem the tide of bolting and have had the net effect of driving most climbers away from any real discussion of these or other issues we face.

 

Actually I see the problem as this.

 

I started debating instead of insulting and threw you guys a curve ball. Then lambone formed a different opinion and struck you out.

 

Then we continued along that path and now some of you are poor sports in the debate IMHO. Some might even use the term whiners..

 

You continue to use terms such as stink bombs when people really debate. That is poor if you ask me. You continue to discredit opinions and ethics because others have not been seen at meetings or other gatherings. Again poor. Maybe lambone donated 1000$ instead of his attendance... Then you call for participation in a group that has no opinion yet with the preset tone that some might get ignored because all of the above.

 

 

[mattp]

Sorry to disappoint some of you, but I remain convinced that there is no reason for me to state my position on this or other "hot button issues" in this conversation. In light of our history on this website, I question Lambone's assertion that he cares what I think and I am convinced he would attempt to use whatever I might say against me -- even if I came out in complete agreement with him on this issue and could "prove" that I always have been.

[Lambone]

That's a load of crap matt. I would repect your opinon, and your honesty. I may not agree with it. So far every post you have directed at me in this thread has in some way painted me out to be a bad person....when all I did was ask for your opinion., and you accuse me of throughing around insults. Who is really doing the insulting here matt?

 

Let's say Dru says he thinks people should be able to use power drills anywhere. Fine, he has an argument that he's intitled to. Did I diss him for it, no...at least i don't think so....run some searches...

 

My grievance with you specificaly, is that you'd come into this thread debating...as you did, on page 3, call out people on their opinions and through a bunch of backhanded questions to them. Yet when someone flat out asks you where you stand regarding the issue being discussed, you plead the 5th and play the I'm in the WCC so I can't vioce an opinion card.

 

I have good friends and partners who have power drilled in the Wilderness in the past. they are still my friends. I appreiate that they aren't afraid to let people know their beliefs. That's fine, doesn't mean I can't disagree with them and still be their friend.

[mattp]

Bone, let's not start a "BS contest" here.

 

I asked no backhanded questions in this thread, I only asked whether you were consistent in stating the position that you did - and you never really answered but apparently got pissed about being questionned about this and launched out at me. You then say "I haven't attacked you.... and I haven't asked whether you bolted in the wilderness.." yet you've done so at least twice in the last week.

 

You are perfectly free to not answer my questions, as I am free to not answer yours.