How about a "new" and different approach?

[Dane]

I never thought I would give more than a passing glance at anything political. Never joined anything for long. It is now obvious this issue needs long term support by all of us.

 

My involvement at Dishman and being forced to look deeper at what the current organizations offer me and like minded friends has been less than inspiring. I find that I have more incommon with climbers willing to speak their minds than attorneys offering dbl talk and conflict avoidance to retain access at all costs.

 

Been a number of folks willing to disagree with the current status quo on issues like Dishman, Infinate Bliss and the most recent rap bolted route on Prusik as examples.

 

I think access at any cost is a terrible idea. I believe the land owners should be the first to know how their land is affected, not the last. I think open public debate is required and important as well as helpful to all involved.

 

If during every issue on climbers, ethics and access we are represented only by the AF and their offshoot the WCC then I believe a majority of climbers are not represented on many occasions.

 

It is time we get together as a group and make a dissenting opinion known. I can tell you from recent converstaions that the ALPS, the Forest Service and the land owners at Dishman would welcome the help. I suspect they is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

What do you think? Suggestions?

[JayB]

Questions - answer any or none as you see fit.

 

1) What specific policy goals would such a group articulate?

2) What specific ends do you hope to achieve? Where?

3) What leads you to believe that a majority of climbers are not represented by the stance of the Access Fund and the WCC?

4) What - exactly - is the nature of the help that the ALPS and the forest service would welcome, and who - specifically - did you speak with on each of these occaisions when they stated that they would welcome the sort of help that you think that a group composed of you and other like minded climbers could provide.

 

If you'd be kind enough to fill in some of the blanks I'll let you know what I think of such a group and your motivations for striving to create it.

[billcoe]

I suspect they is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

They is? ........What?

 

What do you think? Suggestions?

 

Dane, I have a lot of respect for your opinions and willingness to hammer out a divergent (divergent from the mainstream) ethic. I too have seen some just unbelievably frigganly stupid bolting tricks around here as well.

 

I also appreciate that you use your real name. Its way too common that some weak pussy jackass shows up and spouts off attacking with a big angry ignorant filthy mouth, knowing that he can just violently anonymously flame without getting the ass-kicking saying it to our faces normally would bring.

 

However: I suspect you and I radically disagree with some things concerning bolting. On the Prussic thread, for instance, I read your opening post, and Josephs reasoned response. Having climbed with Joseph, I can assure you he maintains a classic "trad" mindset and probably has had this for the 30+ years he's climbed. I haven't seen your response to him yet and would like to read it, (ie that he knows those climbers and they would only bolt if necessary.) If you hit a blank section, why not bolt it?

 

I do not know from your post if you have even seen or done that route? I have not, so I can only read others concerning it and make up my mind based on those posts.

 

My fear: is that climbers hashing these points will give the man another reason to control the "resource". I watched a Yosemite ranger on TV discussing how a "climbers bolt" is violating and permanently changing the environment while (literally) the Part Service was at that exact moment plowing under some trees with heavy equipment to put in a new roadside pullout complete with picnic tables and restrooms to handle the increase in traffic in another part of the park. But that wasn't discussed - and that should have been the focus.

 

If you step back and look at the big picture, when a Glacier point rock fall, or the huge rock fall at lower brother is compared to ALL the bolts in Yosemite, ALL the bolts would amount to no more than a near invisible pimple on a knats ass. Nearly invisible and amounting to slightly more than nothing.

 

That is radically different that what happened at Dishman, where a small area got F*ed up in a huge way with bolts overused, glue on holds, chipping and writing on the walls caused by an apparent few selfish individuals.

 

You asked for my thinking and that’s it. I'm generally OK with the way the world is today. I (generally) have no problem with bolts and would like to try the Prussic Peak route.

 

I think the biggest problem with bolts today, are that kids show up straight out of the gym and want to emulate what they see. They buy a drill and figure they're doing the right thing to make something safer. They are just ignorant and don't know it yet. They should be educated.

 

That’s my opinion. I suppose you'll hear plenty of others as well.

 

I have very high regard for the way you approached the abortion at Dishman. That was a sickening thing. You showed commendable restraint, courage and intelligence.

 

However, from the sounds of it, I do not support your other ideas AT ALL or what you appear to want to do. I suspect most climbers would agree with me, a few with you, and a few would be far on the other side of the discussion. I vote for status quo and leaving it alone. Folks should step up when they see an obvious abortion - but let it lie quietly otherwise, cause its OK to put a few bolts in to protect a climb.

 

I would support downsizing the Forest Service and letting them find real jobs, private sector jobs where they can learn to be productive members of society. I do not want, nor did I vote for them to be, the police of the wilderness.

 

That's my thoughts.

 

 

Bill