Off_White Posted September 9, 2002 Share Posted September 9, 2002 As an aside to the whole climbing on private land issue, I believe Washington has a law exempting landowners from liability for recreactional use of their property. As I understand it (check me on this please MattP) the use has to be allowed and free. I think the law was enacted for hunting and off road type uses, probably for the benefit of Weyerhauser and such, so I'm not sure how things go when fixed protection is involved. Still, its a reassuring bit of information to offer to a landowner who's property you would like to climb on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted September 9, 2002 Share Posted September 9, 2002 I have heard of such a law, and one could probably look it up and find it if it exists (though I must say, sometimes I can't find a law when I need it!). But there would be no absolute protection for a landowner even if the law says "no recrational user can sue a landowner in connection with a hazard on that person's land, period" because there are lawyers and judges and juries who ignore the law every day. Lawyers ignore laws because it is pretty much their job to win their case, and judges and juries are more likely to ignore the law because they believe the law as written isn't "just" in the particular situation at hand. But it would be nice reassurance if there were such a statute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted September 9, 2002 Share Posted September 9, 2002 Yes, there are no guarantees, because anyone can sue anyone else over just about anything (and already have!), but I'm pretty sure the statute exists. Maybe I'll ask my favorite reference librarian to get me the number in the RCW for it. Hey, tort reform hasn't raised its ugly head here in my brief tenure. Maybe thats a good thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slaphappy Posted September 9, 2002 Share Posted September 9, 2002 This might help: Â Washington's Recreational Use Immunity statute, RCW 4.24.210, was enacted to encourage both public and private landowners to open their property to recreation by limiting the fear of landowner liability. The essential terms of the statute are this: Any public or private landowner who allows recreational use without charging a fee is not liable for an unintentional injury suffered by a user. Rock climbing is a recreational use within the scope of the statute. Therefore, as long as no fee is charged for climbing and a landowner doesn't intentionally inflict injury upon a climber, the statute exempts a landowner from liability for a climbing injury. Â There is one exception to the general "no liability" rule under the statute. If a recreational user is injured as the result of a "known dangerous artificial latent condition" on the property, liability can occur. In order to meet this exception, the condition creating injury must meet each and every one of the four qualifying terms: 1) it must be inherently dangerous; 2) it must be latent (something that is not readily apparent); 3) it must be artificial (something that is not natural); and 4) perhaps most importantly, it must be known to the landowner, who then fails to warn of the condition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Szyjakowski Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Dru said: so is it granite like pocket desert or gneiss like skaha and macintyre bluff? The rocks are gneiss like skaha....but due to the better access in skaha stay in Canada....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Because there's a lot of fruit? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAA!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle_Tricky Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 The largest man made granite bouldering wall in Washington is is Okanogan County near the ghost town of Ruby. The China Wall is an old mill foundation built that stretches a total of 800 feet in six courses with free-standing sections 30 feet high. The series of terraces and walls were built in 1889 out of hand-hewn refrigerator sized chunks of granite. Truly an awe-inspiring piece of work. But it is on private property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icegirl Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 just gotta make friends with the locals... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Szyjakowski Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 icegirl said: just gotta make friends with the locals... THAT could be a very scary proposition considering all the local redneck freedom fighters who live in the Okanagan valley. Just don't show up in a government like vehicle....unless of course you enjoy harassing "true Americans" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle_Tricky Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 We considered stopping by the compound just down the dirt road from the China Wall. Then we saw the sign at the end of his driveway: "Leave me alone and go away!" The sign had been meticulously lettered in a metal sheet using accurate, close-range gunfire holes to spell out the individual letters. We reconsidered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 slaphappy said: This might help: Â There is one exception to the general "no liability" rule under the statute. If a recreational user is injured as the result of a "known dangerous artificial latent condition" on the property, liability can occur. In order to meet this exception, the condition creating injury must meet each and every one of the four qualifying terms: 1) it must be inherently dangerous; 2) it must be latent (something that is not readily apparent); 3) it must be artificial (something that is not natural); and 4) perhaps most importantly, it must be known to the landowner, who then fails to warn of the condition. So an example of such a condition would be an old water well that had a bad cover over it that someone could step on and fall through. A large loose boulder wouldn't qualify because it was natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
specialed Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 Sounds like my torts I final..... Â Anyway, any Methow / Omak area climbers ever found those "Bhudda" boulders in Mazama. Just a bit West of Fun Rock there's three really good big free-standing boulders. However, there all in someone's back yard, and the owner has turned them into some buddhist sanctuary with paint and buddha figurines and shit. Too bad because they're defenitly the best boulders in the Methow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle_Tricky Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 There's some fairly nice but scattered granitic glacial erratics up on some of the ridges above the valley. Pipestone canyon has some of the coolest non-climbable rock formations around. (funky chunky loose conglomerate shaped into big hoodoos and caves) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slaphappy Posted March 13, 2003 Share Posted March 13, 2003 catbirdseat said: slaphappy said: This might help: Â There is one exception to the general "no liability" rule under the statute. If a recreational user is injured as the result of a "known dangerous artificial latent condition" on the property, liability can occur. In order to meet this exception, the condition creating injury must meet each and every one of the four qualifying terms: 1) it must be inherently dangerous; 2) it must be latent (something that is not readily apparent); 3) it must be artificial (something that is not natural); and 4) perhaps most importantly, it must be known to the landowner, who then fails to warn of the condition. So an example of such a condition would be an old water well that had a bad cover over it that someone could step on and fall through. A large loose boulder wouldn't qualify because it was natural. To my understanding that would be correct. It would also apply to fixed installations (bolts, pins, chains, etc.) that the landowner knew were faulty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 Matt, no one in the 'nogan bolted a sport area & tried to keep it secret. The guy that came along after the initial development (trad climbs & hard sport climbs) wanted to be a"rock star" and bolted up a shitload of routes. This pissed off the Tribe who owned the land & have a lot more respect for nature than this jerkoff. All so he could write a guidebook with a bunch of FA in front of his name. The Tribe consequently closed the area to climbing. Sincere efforts over the years by dedicated locals have improved relations. So it's not a matter of a private crag, but a tenous access issue formed through friendship. Locals fear noteriety will result in visitors in-sensitive or unaware of situation whose behavior might jeopardize present access. Â As for the posts regarding private bouldering, once again the issue isn't about privatizing it but the fact is the semi-arid desert ecosystem it sits in is extremely fragile & beautiful. Use by a handful of locals over the last 20+ years has led to erosion problems. I can only imagine what a couple hundred more climbing days a summer would do. This being said, if you get in touch with the owners, I'm sure they would love to show you their playground. Â And whoever said the bouldering wasn't that great, they must not enjoy V5's & up. Â Just respect the property & wishes of property owners in the 'nogan, there are loads of great spots around. Â And for those people talking about the slabs N of Omak, large loose rock abounds. Helmets for sure, consider cleaning on rappell first, then let your buddy go for the onsight. Â And snakes, lots of snakes. Â That's it, no more beta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 We considered stopping by the compound just down the dirt road from the China Wall. Then we saw the sign at the end of his driveway: "Leave me alone and go away!" The sign had been meticulously lettered in a metal sheet using accurate, close-range gunfire holes to spell out the individual letters. We reconsidered. Â That is probably the most prudent choice in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glacier Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 Move along. Nothing to see here... Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 (edited) Move along. Nothing to see here...]Â Who's that gaper? That place looks like it sucks!!! Â Edited June 9, 2004 by Blowboarder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distel32 Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 yeah, vance is a hoser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Who's Vance? Where is that? Do all those holds fall off when you pull on them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distel32 Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 Who's Vance? Where is that? Do all those holds fall off when you pull on them? Â wtf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 Who's Vance? Where is that? Do all those holds fall off when you pull on them? Â wtf? Â wtf? what? Just wanking you? I'm very aware of location, just wondering who vance was, as I thought photo was of someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distel32 Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 I'm sorry to inform you that the boulder boy cannot be wanked, have you seen this yet blowjobgiver??? It's in the omak region, one of the best boulders in E WA for sure  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 I'm sorry to inform you that the boulder boy cannot be wanked, have you seen this yet blowjobgiver??? It's in the omak region, one of the best boulders in E WA for sure  Distel32, yo bro, check your spelling there. It's a kiteboarding reference, not some homoerotic misnomer practiced by sailers and catholic priests.  Have seen that boulder before, looked a little different with all that white stuff on there. Agree that it is one of best boulders in E. Wash area. However, can think of quite a few comparable quality. Without naming names or giving directions, what do you think 5 best boulders in E. Wash (or more specifically, the 'Nogan) are. Or maybe 5 best boulder problems? Or maybe nothing.Do cliff bands count too?  I was wondering who Vance was, as I thought that was photo of me. Glad to see there are other ugly, skinny legged, weak-sister-boulder-lovin' fiends out there.  Enervate, don't hate.  Blowboarder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 Distel, regardless of whether Glacier or Blowboarder's name is "Vance," it's ill mannered to out people's real names unless they agree to do so. Â I'd also like to point out that you're not in Spray right now, so please behave a little more politely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.