Check out this Washington Post article, in the Metro section. I have already said something about this debate. And judging from the discussions on the PATC mountaineering and DC outdoor rockclimbing listservs, climbers are not enamoring people with them. Okay, some may ponder the utility of implementing costly new regulations that impact climbers for the sake of saving two shrubs ... but what concerns me is this 'no compromise attitude.' The climbing community has decided if the NPS takes this one step to regulate and restrict climbing, it will become a downward spiral.
I say let 'em bolt the climbs, how many times have climbers expressed happiness that crags were bolted anyway? Other parks already require permitting for climbing (yes it makes it more difficult) and for a popular area like GF, this could cause some serious climbing scheduling havoc ... and if they are shutting down two areas, namely Dr. Needlepoint and Sandbox (temporarily they claim) that could also be problematic. Right now climbers look like they don't give a sh*t about the environment and are holding a victory (keep the status quo) or nothing approach ... which may soil our reputation.
3 comments:
I climb with a group that holds the environment in very high regard. Many of our climbs are in remote locations where a respect for nature is almost manditory. I share your sentiment about bolting, if it's all or none, this is definitely a positive compromise.
care to tell us what group that would be or where you climb?
by group, it's just about 10-15 friends but not some organization or formalized society. most are rescue, so lots of exposure to fun scenarios.
some of the public places are still out of the way for this area: seneca rocks and new river. mostly look for the unknown "deep insertion" locales though...
Post a Comment