I need help protecting my Grandma's hometown's natural beauty from the recent influx of climbers.

Gh0stw0lf wrote: Aren't climbers supposed to be about preservation so more people can come and climb and enjoy the view?

Way back climbers came from a hiking/preservation background. But as the years have gone by that has eroded. That is not to say climbers do not care there are many that do but they were probably brought up with an environmental view point (or learned it along the way). New climbers come from all different backgrounds. As such, the idea of preservation is foreign to many. This is especially true of climbers coming out of the gyms. Many do not understand basic ideas like how to shit in the woods. Groups like the Access Fund have started an initiative called "Gym to Crags" to help fill this void. The program is just starting.

As for the climbing manufacturers ... some are very concerned about how their sponsored climbers act and how they give back to the climbing community, Black Diamond, Patagonia, Petzl certainly are. Others, like 5.10 not so much. Perhaps that will/has changed now that they are owned by Adidas.

Fat Dad wrote: As an administrator, haven't you violated Guideline #1? How can expect others to adhere the sites guidelines if you don't do it yourself?

I apologize. I got carried away.

I just wanted to make the point that everything humans do damages the planet. If you want gas for the car to drive to the crag, you have to accept ugly oil wells. You want it to be cheap too? Then you need to accept fracking.

Think about the impact a ski area has on the environment. Extend your thought to the fact that hundreds of thousands of people fly to ski there: millions of gallons of jet fuel, airports, rental cars, condominiums as far as the eye can see... This is the world as it is, and every living human contributes to hastening its demise.

Climbing is no different. And not just sport climbing on stalactites.

Trad climbing is perhaps lower impact but there's gear (aluminum mines, factories), nylon rope (chemical plants), cars (huge list of impacts) and roads to get to the crags (cement factories, gypsum mines). It's not just chalk, trash, trails and erosion.

The people of Guadalcazar want the revenue of visiting climbers but don't like the damage to the area. A balance can be struck, or no balance, it's their decision. Just like it's their decision to build a golf course, or host a Sturgis-like motorcycle festival.

But to point the finger at people who are developing safe routes by cleaning the loose rock and imply that they are doing something wrong, that their impact is unacceptable compared to other types of climbing, is delusional and wrong. Not one of us is blameless.

Fair points, John. I think the reality is that everyone finds it easier to protest tangible, immediate damages (e.g., snapping off stalactites) than those that are more abstract and less noticeable (burning gas, buying new biners, etc.). This isn't the most logical way of looking at environmental damage, but I think it is pretty hard-wired into our thought processes, and takes substantial effort to escape. Maybe it's driven in part by thinking that minimizing fuel consumption is a problem too large and complex for any individual to affect, whereas protecting stalactites is something we (as individuals) can actually control.

On the other hand, there's always the risk of getting stuck in the typical ethical one-upmanship paralysis of "there are bigger problems, therefore the smaller problems don't matter". This type of thinking rears its head in a lot of different ways here on MP ("what's the point in arguing about climbing ethics online when there are children starving in Africa?"). Although it may be technically "true", it's also making an unfair comparison and is counterproductive.

Bottom line is that there is no easy answer, but I think we have to applaud Gh0srWolf for taking an active and thoughtful role in the stewardship of his community and natural resources. Best of luck in finding a resolution!

Usually, to get the attention of climbers, it takes a closure or threat of closure.

Your grandmother likely doesn't have the ability to close those cliffs. I guarantee that if a bunch of kids on vacation saw a sign stating that climbing was punishable by 15 days in a Mexican jail, you would get the attention you need.

I really do not want to side track this thread as it seems like a real effort to preserve some beautiful rock but is the comment about stainless steel bolts in a warm limestone area breaking in 1 to 2 years actually based in real life?

Ben Weigner wrote:I really do not want to side track this thread as it seems like a real effort to preserve some beautiful rock but is the comment about stainless steel bolts in a warm limestone area breaking in 1 to 2 years actually based in real life?

Ben, it is very real.

Thailand, Cayman Brac, and Bermuda have all been through this. John seems to imply that this will happen in limestone if it's warm. I suppose he's got a point. I think everywhere else that has had this problem is next to the ocean though.

Shelf road is limestone and very warm for a lot of the year, it isn't an issue there because they aren't by the seaside. A quick glance at Google Maps tells me it is 200km from the nearest ocean.

They seem to average 24 inches of rain a year. That's a lot. Definitely enough to form acid from the limestone. That's pretty much the short story of how the caves and stalagtites got there. I don't know how many years that it'll take to get through steel absent seawater.

Probably not the negligent timebombs that steel near the sea are.

Thank you for clarifying nice.

I was recently in Puerto Rico climbing and I know there are a lot of bolts being replaced. After speaking to the local developers they seemed quite confident their new SS bolts would last well into the future (i.e. a decade or two). I do not bolt and I do not mean to offend but these point of views seem to contradict.

It really depends on a lot of factors. A few years back, I did a lot of bolting in Bermuda. We wanted to use Ti since it doesn't corrode. All the Ti we found was 3/8" and we just couldn't trust them in soft rock.

We contacted Jim Titt who posts here and got a stack of really really big bolts. 5/8" x 7 to 10 inches out of marine grade 316 steel. They had enough surface area to trust them and his bolts never failed. The oldest ones are going on 5 years now and I have not heard of problems yet. This is probably due to some overkill, since these bolts were about 100kn new.

Awesome information! Thanks a lot.

Just set your grandma up with a pump shotgun with shells full of rock salt. If Joe Kinder shows up she can shoot him in the ass.
"Get your dupa off my tufa!"

Seems convenient for the admin to delete his own Rule #1 violating post when it's been fully quoted in another member's post. You get to look fair by deleting your own post while the post itself lives on. Win win.

M Sprague wrote:Just set your grandma up with a pump shotgun with shells full of rock salt. If Joe Kinder shows up she can shoot him in the ass. "Get your dupa off my tufa!"

A sense of humor? I hope.

What do you really think? The bad pun might give a clue (rolls eyes)

I climbed around Guadalcazar with some friends. I think if you want tourists, they are going to be climbers. An average tourist from Canada or US would rather go to the beach for two weeks than drive around that part of Mexico. We only went there because we've heard about rock climbing. One of the areas, called Gruta de las Candelas, the one with the hole, has a concrete slab inside and a metal fence around, which for me takes away more from the natural beauty than bolts or climbing. I am not saying that breaking tufas and stalactites is cool but I am biased, I can justify a lot of things associated with route development because I like climbing. It seems that route developers there need to talk with the locals, the last thing we need is local people being angry at climbers. Maybe you can limit rock climbing in certain areas where there are fragile features?

Hello, my name is Gunnar, Christian Ehlert Brother, you do now need to worry, we are a Family that is dedicated to promoting rock climbing in many ways for more than 10 years in San Luis Potosi, we also try to do the less damage possible to the environment.

Quoting you "The climbers have been known to all the people within the town to destroy Stalagmites that have been forming in over a metre length. They do so (I'm assuming since I'm no climber) either by accident while climbing and/or drilling as is shown in the video." that's not completely true, Yes i cant deny that once in a while some of the holds brake, that's something that happen everywhere, but to destroy Stalagmites and Stalactites just to clear out the way or for bolting purposes that's not correct.

When we first to "La Cueva de las Candelas" lots and lots of the stalactites were already trimmed, and i say trimmed because it appeared to be done with saws a really clean cut, in the area where the concrete slab is, you can easily put an stair climb to the top and touch the roof of the cave.

Like you say it is nice to see that the town has draw more tourism and with that some economic spill, which is always nice, we actually encourage visitors to pay a visit to the town which has really nice assets like the Church, the architecture and the museum.

Now Quoting John Byrnes "From what I can see in the video and the article, Urs, et al, are putting in stainless steel bolts. In a warm limestone area that is full of stalactites, I expect those bolts will start breaking in 1 to 2 years."

Inside these caves the temperature is not warm as you thing mostly all year round you have cool climate, in other words it's nice and fresh, hehe, also, we dont put only stainless steed bolts, we also use glue-in bolts, and some of those routes are almost 10 years old and they look almost like day one, anyways, what i'm trying to say is that we take care to replace or re-bolt something that to our eyes doesn't look safe.

And just to finish, like i said we try to do the less impact possible, so we do not carve holds, and also we ended up picking up trash from no-climbing tourist that they leave there.

I just put my 5 cents from a very close point of view on the matter, suggestions, comments are welcome, here or on private message, feel free

barnaclebob wrote:Wow, a lot of those formations do not look strong enough to climb or put routes on.

that's basically it. It's rock somebody found, but not quality to climb on. Somehow the area should be closed to their unwanted and unneeded access, since the rock cannot handle human interactions of this degree. Hope closure signs and public messages to climbing mags , etc. will help remove the unwanted damage and help protect the area. Climbers have to realize that just because they are in a different country with less regulation or laws to protect the environment, they can't just go wild and damage a natural area. Best of luck.