Shout Box

Who's Online
1 registered (1 invisible), 4 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
#68748 - 09/06/13 12:30 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: Kent]
Lucander Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/03/09
Posts: 226
Loc: Stone Ridge, NY
Originally Posted By: Kent
It's not up to me to educate people.


Then why do you keep posting about this issue?

Top
#68751 - 09/06/13 02:32 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: Lucander]
DavidLewis Offline
stranger

Registered: 11/22/04
Posts: 8
Loc: New Jersey (Northern)
Kent
I wonder if prescriptive easement applies to the land owners that you talk about as climbers have been using the land openly for years and no I'm not talking about the Mohonk Preserve but the climbers themselves??????

Top
#68757 - 09/09/13 03:48 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: TerrieM]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Terrie, first you say this:
Originally Posted By: TerrieM
Well...... we COULD create something like the GUMBA bike patrol and have volunteers who provide the service Julie wishes the rangers might be able to do.

Then you say this:
Originally Posted By: TerrieM
Besides doing that - How would you expect a "Gumby-like" person to know someone is in the No TP Zone without entering that area themselves?

And then when you say this:
Originally Posted By: TerrieM
My suggestion was that the Gumby's would in most cases find decent, respectful climbers who they would wave hello and maybe stop and chat conversationally; that when they came across the occasional one who didn't get the littering, erosion, etc. thing, that was the one they'd talk to about that topic.

And then when I suggest you might want to edit that last, because you say Gumby, when you mean to say GUMBA, you ask if I'm being intentionaly obtude and storm off in a huff.

I'm not being obtuse. You're just not writing clearly.

Similarly, in my opinion you are not thinking clearly when you say:

Originally Posted By: TerrieM
Unless you specifically know who it is who is ripping down those signs, it's inappropriate, in my opinion, to lump all climbers into that category. It's likely one or two people, who may or may not be climbers, who rip down the signs.

One has to be either naive or in willful denial if they think anyone other than climbers has been pulling down the no trespassing signs in the nears.

Top
#68760 - 09/09/13 03:50 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: Lucander]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Originally Posted By: Lucander
Then why do you keep posting about this issue?


I'm trying to provoke other people, those interested in gaining or maintaining access to private land, to educate climbers about how to interact with private landowners.

Top
#68761 - 09/09/13 04:01 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: DavidLewis]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Originally Posted By: DavidLewis
Kent
I wonder if prescriptive easement applies to the land owners that you talk about as climbers have been using the land openly for years and no I'm not talking about the Mohonk Preserve but the climbers themselves??????

This idea floats around every once in a while. In my view, nothing could be more foolish. The left half of Millbrook is on private land, as are all of the Bayards, the middle of the Nears, and all of Skytop, and many other less prominent crags throughout the region.

What do you think the impact of a climber's prescriptive easement claim anywhere nearby will have on access to private land?

Private landowners that do allow climbing on their land do so as a neighborly accommodation. They are being gracious in allowing you to use their land. Any climber claiming a right to climb on private land because they have been graciously allowed to climb their before would be a poster child for the selfish, ungrateful, entitled, and woefully disrespectful climbers out there.

Nothing would have a more deleterious effect on climbing access in the Gunks, and perhaps well beyond the Gunks too.

Brilliant idea. (Heavy sarcasm intended.)

Top
#68762 - 09/09/13 04:14 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: Kent]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
To bring it back to education of climbers here at the Gunks, from time to time I've been corresponding with the Access Fund about educating climbers at the Gunks vis a vis respecting private property.

In contrast to the responses here, their responses have been universally positive and constructive.

Top
#68764 - 09/09/13 05:48 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: tallgirlnyc]
gunkie Offline
member

Registered: 07/19/00
Posts: 120
Loc: New Hope, PA
Originally Posted By: tallgirlnyc
I have already posted on Mountain Project a rant about the Nears becoming an outdoor climbing gym...


I haven't even climbed in the close part of the Nears in a few years because of the overcrowding (but then I haven't been to the Gunks on a non-weekend day for quite a while). The topropes everywhere, people spraying about everything, loud conversations about their latest conquests, people trying to red-point the first pitch of Broken Sling and spending a whole day on that one pitch. I can't even imagine it getting any worse.

Quote:
I am not saying a bunch of careless, smoking, micro trash generating gym rats annihilated the Laurel. I don't know what happened.


Smoking needs to be banned in the Preserve. And the Mtn Laurel didn't pull itself out of the ground.

Quote:
But, I would say, that if there was a consistent ranger presence walking the base of high traffic areas and with that a gentle reminder of trail etiquette, leave no trace principals and general consciousness of our beautiful climbing area it would go a long way to containing some of the devastation.


Fully agree. I also think that there should be an edict in the high traffic areas that limit toproping on popular climbs with decent protection on crowded days. Enforcement would be a simple request by the ranger based on subjective elements. That's it. Maybe eventually this theme would become more of a local tradition. How many pins were driven into Gunks rock after John Stannard's clean climbing push in the early 70's? Not many and this was back in the day when EVERYONE banged pins at every other rock climbing venue on the planet.

I think your idea of educating the newly birthed gym climbers about the ways of the Gunks is appropriate and possibly game changing.

Top
#68767 - 09/09/13 09:12 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: gunkie]
Ralph Offline
member

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

The midwife is going to get busy any day now. New Gym in Queens

Top
#68768 - 09/09/13 09:23 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: Ralph]
tallgirlnyc Offline
member

Registered: 05/12/08
Posts: 194
Loc: Cold Spring NY
Gunkie-thanks for your post and keeping this thread on track-greatly appreciated!

Top
#68769 - 09/09/13 10:00 PM Re: Ranger Presence [Re: tallgirlnyc]
TrappDyke Offline
journeyman

Registered: 06/10/09
Posts: 80
Gunkie, could you suggest some top rope climbs that qualify as having decent protection along with some that don't?

Top
Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored