Shout Box

Who's Online
1 registered (slevin), 10 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 12 of 13 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 >
Topic Options
#48897 - 10/22/09 02:39 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Originally Posted By: GOclimb
First of all, congrats on the send. What a cool roof, you must've been psyched!

Second:
Quote:
I do think that Rangerrob and all the other armchair ethicists have been slacking, however, because all that fixed gear was still on the route. Some selfish litterbug aid climber deprived me of a true trad ascent, and I cried the real tears all night.


What gear do you mean? I've only been on the route once - I aided it, oh, around five or six years ago. I can say pretty confidently that every nut, cam, and ballnut I clipped were ones that I placed, and I removed. None were fixed. As for pins, I don't recall what there was in situ, but if they were there, they were very few, and didn't do much either to get me out the roof, or over the lip (the aid crux).

GO


Hey Gabe,

Here are the details of the gear from both times that I was on the route (Memorial Day, and Columbus Day). From the fixed pin anchor at the back of the roof, there is/was a stopper that is clippable from the stance, barely. There is another stopper about four feet from that, and another about a foot above that (right in the meat of the undercling to sloper crux). From there, there is a fixed pin about four feet farther in a horizontal crack (right next to a bomber red or gold camalot placement).

I did place one cam at the lip, after I had thrown my foot over my head: a purple or green camalot just to protect the final mantle.

Here is a video of a guy doing it barefoot with entirely fixed gear as far as I can tell. He is using pre-placed draws, and there is probably a mob of angry trad climbers led by rangerrob waiting at the base to club him to death with their hexes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myb6didvFKM

Here is a video of D.D. DuLac at the Petzl Rocktrip a few years ago doing it (skip past about five minutes of bad techno and Euros bouldering to get to the good stuff). The video quality is not great, but it looks like he may be placing a cam near the final pin. He also is not doing it on fixed draws, but that's because he is a cheese-eating surrender frog who warms up on 13+. I don't know if he drilled a couple monos to avoid the handjams, though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-NuZIvObBA

Anyway, hope that clears some stuff up.

Top
#48908 - 10/22/09 07:50 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Dude, you have this vision of me that I think is hysterical. Hexes? I think you need to come off your high horse a little man. It's Kansas City, not exactly groundbreaking. I wasn't angry actually, I was psyched to go up and score a bunch of gear that someone left on a route. I was angry when I got back and it was all gone. Grrr!

Top
#67377 - 02/07/13 04:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Doug Online   content
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
Old thread bump!

This thread was linked in another forum and I just wanted to comment on something that I didn't see mentioned. It's dead in here anyway smile

Reviewing the posts above it sounds like Ranger Rob, ready to dole out justice for failing to meet the area's standard and lured by free gear, headed back to the overlook parking lot around 10:30PM to scavenge. It is unclear to me if he actually parked there, or parked elsewhere to avoid talking to the suspected owners of the gear.

How long would it take to clean the route, plus the walk in and out? Longer than the parking time limit for the overlook?

And doesn't the preserve officially close after dark? Not often (ever?) enforced I think, but still their rule?

And it sounds like this "cliff scavenger thing" is somewhat regular?

Maybe I've mucked up the details Rob, but it sounds like you are regularly willing to break laws and/or property owner rules to enforce a non-binding "area ethic"? Doesn't sound like an ethical high ground to me.

I'd probably have asked the folks in the lot if it was their gear - seems like a good chance to educate them on what I felt was the area ethic if that was the main concern.

Top
#67380 - 02/08/13 02:44 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
Once, while people were trying to free Twilight Zone I went to the trouble to repel down only to check out the chipped off hold. Later I was been accused of robbing all the gear off the climb more than once. I guess it was a lot gear and trouble to get it all on there. Someone else must have got on it right after I did and took a small rack of gear, and maybe even noiced me on it. I becase their scapegoat.

One time I heard a story of man in a very old and small town who lost an expensive watch. After some time he finally remembered that he had taken it off at a drinking fountain the day before. Reluctantly passing by again he went to ask an old man sitting by the fountain if he had seen it. The old man was watching it to make sure no one took it, it was still there.
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#67381 - 02/08/13 02:48 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: donald perry]
TrappDyke Offline
journeyman

Registered: 06/10/09
Posts: 80
Doug, I'm not seeing how you came to that conclusion.

Top
#67383 - 02/08/13 03:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: TrappDyke]
Doug Online   content
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
Which conclusion? All I was saying was that Rob was going on about upholding the area ethics, but it sounded like he was willing to bend or break laws and/or property owner rules to do so. And that it is a semi-regular activity.

Second, not talking to the people at the lot that he suspected the gear belonged to made it seem he was really more interested in scoring free gear than educating them on their ethical shortcomings.

How I arrived at my first, maybe incorrect, conclusion:
- It sounded like Rob planned to park at the overlook to go in and scavenge the gear around 10:30PM.
- I think the overlook parking has a 30 minute time limit.
- I think the preserve is closed at dark.
- I think it could take him more than 30 minutes to strip the route (he mentioned nuts he did get out later took some work - he gave up on one after 20 minutes effort)

To my second point, Rob mentioned that he'd "deserve a good ass whipping" if he saw them and hid in the boulders until they left to get the gear. Right after that he talks about coming back to scavenge and said he saw a group and wondered if it was their gear. Why not ask? He'd prefer to spend the effort in the dark cleaning up for them only to hand it back to them the next day when they ask a ranger about it?

The whole rant just didn't seem to line up to me.

Maybe I'm just missing something everyone else gets, or am misunderstanding something. It wouldn't be a first.

Top
#67384 - 02/08/13 04:57 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Doug]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Hey Doug. You seem to be pointing out a bunch of things that don't really address the purpose of the original thread. You're also talking about parking rules and ethics in the current context, instead of when it was originally posted. Which was 2009, and when it was still very acceptable to park there for 30 minutes to an hour. As far as the Mohonk Preserve closing at sunset, sure it says that on their brochures and at their kiosks, but if you tell me that you've never been on the property after sunset or before sunrise you then you probably have not been climbing here very long. It widely accepted that people use the preserve outside of those hours. WIDELY accepted. I appreciate the points you bring up, but it seems like you may have another reason behind bringing these points, besides the letter of the law. Do you agree or disagree?

Top
#67385 - 02/08/13 06:06 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Doug Online   content
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
I'm not sure what reason you are hinting at, but I guess I disagree that I have it. If you are insinuating that I may personally dislike you or something - I don't really know you but you've seemed alright online (even if prone to ranting).

I thought the thread was about ethics of the situation and I didn't see your plan of action to be ethically superior to the actions of the folks leaving gear. The whole premise of the thread seemed overblown. Your posturing as someone out to enforce the ethics of the area while sneaking back later and possibly breaking some rules (widely disregarded or otherwise) did not line up in my head.

If you were really up for returning gear to its owners, why not ask the group you suspected might have been the owners?

It all just sort of rubbed me the wrong way, so why not discuss it in the forum? Risk of bumping one of the other active threads out of sight? wink Wasn't this thread to stir debate and piss people off?

And about those rules - I said I wasn't positive on them.

I knew there was a switch on parking enforcement but wasn't sure when. I'm pretty certain I had friends getting parking notices (if not actual tickets) about the 30 minute limit in Spring 2009. A quick search shows a thread here only a few days after your original post complaining about ticketing at the overlook lot. I even found a post in 2006 saying that parking in the overlook lot all day was annoying Gardiner residents.

And yes, I knew that if there was a rule about closing at dark it was clearly not strictly enforced. I've even been on the property after sunset. On these occasions I was finishing up my day though, not heading in to teach someone else about other "consensus" rules.

Top
#67387 - 02/08/13 07:45 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Doug]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Actually I appreciate you posting on this thread. I've since re-read the whole thing and I found it really entertaining. I still stand by the initial intent of the thread, and by the style and ethics opinions I offered. I think I could have refined how obstinate I was only 4 short years ago. I find now that being a little nicer helps smile

I did actually read a little motive in your post that seemed like it went beyond the seemingly innocuous rules I may have violated. If you didn't have a different opinion of the ethics and style debate than I apoligize. If you are implying I may possibly be a little hypocritical because of offenses, then I respect that too. I personally don't see the correlation between parking in the lot 45 minutes versus 30 minutes, and local climbing ethics.

If I remember correctly back to that evening, the group hanging out in the pull off was pretty generic looking, and nothing about them suggested that there was a high probablity that they were climbers, and even more...the climbers in question. It was merely a wondering thought in my head. "Wouldn't it be ironic/funny/coincidence if we walked out with gear hanging off our harness that belonged to the people standing there and none of us realized it"

I love ethical debates and I could go back and forth forever with them. It's always interesting to see how peoples brains work, and how they draw conclusions for themselves. Of course...mine are always the best smile

Top
#67388 - 02/08/13 11:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Ralph Offline
member

Registered: 02/01/07
Posts: 141
Rob,

Here's an explanation of brain workings How Our Brains Work (Yeah, I click on stuff on the right side of the page that has nothing to do with what I'm watching)

Top
Page 12 of 13 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored