SCC Community Forum

shannon stegg wrote:Wow, when the shoe is on the other foot, the faceless masses seam to change the topic mighty quick.

?!

My name is Wes, I'm one person, and I don't think I'm the one changing the topic. If you're asking me for evidence, you're asking the wrong guy. I'm not an SCC board member and I have no clue who sent what bolts to whom when. If you're asking Jason, he's not here. But you have his phone number.

I can tell this is going nowhere fast, but let me just make sure I have this right... you won't tell me which of your routes at YB have been retro bolted until I tell you whether or not the SCC paid for the bolts on those routes...? Is that right?

No, that is not right, like I said in an earlier post, I saw only a few retro- bolts.I have been met with such anger and hate that I am afraid I will need help from locals like James Dobbs, and Greg Allen, and Stewart Coffield to make it even possible to accomplish this goal. I would love to climb with the young guys that took me to the side the night of the Huntsville meeting and thanked me for all the routes they had climbed of mine. There is a happy medium.

If I may interject..

I was lounging in my tent yesterday after an ice climb on a prominent peak in the Wind River Range.. I was cooking some chili mac and mostly enjoying myself in the sun. Walking up on the glacier was a very unassuming man, he came over to my tent and we started chatting.

Long story short, we talked a while and I told him I learned to climb in the southeast. He named off some great climbs he'd done in North Carolina. The topic changed to access. Word for word, this man looked me in the eye and said, "How bout that shit on Mountain Project?!"

I think it's time we get this straightened out.

zekem wrote:^^what?

Typical of the level of respect dished out by the SCC.

"My name is Wes, I'm one person"

Ha! Best post of the day! It's like an insult wrapped up in a metaphor wrapped up in a joke. Well done.

But Monkey Boy, we will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

wwes wrote:But Monkey Boy, we will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

Don't bet on it.

Dana Bartlett wrote: I don't know if this would surprise you, but that atmosphere is exactly what some people want in a climbing area.

And people wonder why Ben doesn't want the SCC in his back yard.

I've been reading this thread for a few weeks now, and I attended the SCC meeting at SSA a few months ago. Admittedly, I'm not as privy to the issues as some, mostly because I haven't climbed at the main contentious areas (YB,deep creek). I've been an SCC member for several years and pretty much assumed, like alot of people it seems, that the coalition makes decisions with the best interests of southeastern climbers in mind. In recent years, and especially in light of the SCC meetings and MP dissent, I've come to realize that the umbrella term 'climbing' means different things to different people. Some want nothing more than to carry around a pad and chalk bucket and crush boulders, some want to hang draws sport climbing, some wanna plug gear and climb high, and of course there's the beloved gym climbers who rarely (if ever) touch rock. Some like it all. Whatever your fancy, I think we all owe each other respect and should not only appreciate the fact that we like different things, but embrace it. I see so much in-fighting and bickering that it takes away from the activity I love more than anything. If we can't come together and find a solution that works for everyone, what does that say about the climbing community and climbers in general? I'm not pointing fingers at anyone but myself really, because I've been as guilty as anyone in the past for bringing crowds to crags, over impacting areas and not having a better big picture view of what I do having an influence on the future of climbing. But that's the beauty of all this and an extension of the climbing metaphor that I can draw on virtually any aspect of life; things change, people can change, and whether you adapt or not can mean you keep going or bail (or worse). Ive had the pleasure of climbing with some of the 'old gaurd' like Shannon (only mention him BC hes already opined), and in my opinion they just want the established areas and ethics preserved. These guys knew years ago what was coming, that climbing is fucking awesome, and more and more people would get into it. I mean, who publishes a guide book hoping only a few people buy it? Should REI only sell you gear? I just remember one of the things that attracted me to climbing was the freedom and lack of some required license or course just to get out and rope up. But there's a critical limit to it all. With the growing numbers, we gotta find some common ground.
I realize the perceived misuse of funds and unethical bolting practices are at the heart of this issue, but I can't speak on that. I don't know the whole story. I'm not writing this to ruffle feathers or take a stance one way or the other, I'm writing this to appeal to climbers of my generation- its hard for us to imagine a world without guidebooks, gyms, and MP, where word of mouth and reputation were the discussion forum, but I've been told that's how it was. Not saying any of our modern conveniences are bad at all, but I've always loved history and piecing together the puzzle of the past that brings us to present day. I fear that if we don't humble ourselves and slow our roll a bit, we won't be enjoying the same crags in 10-20 years, or sooner. Just look at how many areas have been shut down in the past (Jamestown, YB, Steele,tallulah, sunset) and consider all the effort, time, and money it took to regain access. Again, this is a self-evaluation I'm making publicly to encourage others to do the same. I think we could all find some way to improve the state of climbing in the southeast while still pursuing our interests and not sacrificing our precious autonomy. So on that note, I'll be volunteering my time and energy more in the future and contacting the SCC board members to see what else I can do.

Just had to say my piece after reading all this and not knowing whether to laugh or cry. Feel free to call me a pussy due to the lack of name-calling and teeth-gnashing, or any personal attacks otherwise. I think the heat is really getting to us down here.

No Dana, I am not surprised. That is why we build climbing gyms, they are not to be confused.

Micheal's points are well taken. I do think there is some middle ground SOMEwhere. So with that said, where is the middle ground on the core issues?...which as I recall are as follows:

1.) "We are not the crag police"...pretty much started the whole thing. Ethics.
2.) The SCC Board appointing others to serve for life or as long as they want.
3.) The SCC Board condoning and advertising trespass.
4.) And most recently, Documenting and preserving routes owned by the SCC.

Answers:

1.) I've seen a draft of some language that I thought was pretty good. Adopt it.
2.) Terms. Out with the lifers already. Ya need new help...really.
3.) Stop posting closed routes on the web and video'n yourselves shamelessly trespassing.
4.) Just get started...it's not as hard as we're making it sound.

I was traditional climbing at Devil's Tower. We did Bon Homme, El Matador, and finished up Sunday on New Wave. This was all done on reconstructed feet by the way. We drove over to Franks and we were hungry. His servant (4 1/2ft Indian girl) is hand feeding the dirt bags eggs and bacon out of a plate. Then I had to take a hot one so I did what any real climber would do and go find the bathroom. I hobbled over and proceeded to do the deed. I put a few bucks in the donation bucket and sat down. I look up and noticed a few stickers in front of my face. This picture pretty much sums up this whole thread.

Cheers.

This crap is one of the reasons why I moved out West. I'll be in CO National Monument next weekend on Steamboat Rock if anyone needs me.

....

I apologize to the thousands of climbers who see this as a pissing contest. Even though when I finally whipped out my list, they are still keeping theirs zipped up, I fail to see why we can not be better stewards of our properties. Private or owned by us. For those who say it is all about ego, your wrong! I would of loved to see this been about preserving and protecting, but those two things might be a thing of the past here in the Southeast.

Can someone point me to the list? I've yet to see a list other than Paul's very informative list of routes at Steele.

Probably because there is no list.....

shannon stegg wrote: I apologize to the thousands of climbers who see this as a pissing contest. Even though when I finally whipped out my list, they are still keeping theirs zipped up, I fail to see why we can not be better stewards of our properties. Private or owned by us. For those who say it is all about ego, your wrong! I would of loved to see this been about preserving and protecting, but those two things might be a thing of the past here in the Southeast.

Thanks, Shannon. While I care about retro-bolting, I am much more concerned about the deeper issues of preserving and protecting.

If we can (mostly) agree on what it means to be good stewards that would go a long way to sorting out the questions related to specific routes and climbing areas.

It seems most people, myself included, have expressed that they would like to see term limits implemented for SCC personnel. As far as posting rules and ethics at crags, I think that's a good idea. A lot of places already have that kind of thing. The problem is really enforcement; it's kind of an honor system, unless you consider ostracization fair punishment. I would agree with your trespassing beef. I don't know specifically what you're referring to, but I think the obvious solution is just not to publicly display your trespasses. The fact that this is one of the issues is pretty sad- the solution could not be easier- it's a matter of less effort; You don't have to do anything extra to not post pictures of trespassing, you do less. I don't know the person involved, but as a matter of principle, he or she should step down and set an example *if what you'e referring to is as black and white as "heres a picture of me, mr/ms SCC board member, climbing this route on private property". I think people's respect for someone increases exponentially when you're able to say 'hey I was wrong, my bad' rather than hunker down from a position of stubborn pride. Besides, as a board member of an organization like the SCC, your job should always be to act in the best interest of those you represent and advocate for. It seems to me that after reading all this, lots of people think that the higher-ups are just self-serving. I don't know, but I do know we live in a world where perception is (sadly) just about everything. Once you cross the line of trust, especially with someone's donated money, there's really no going back.

I know I came in on the tail end of this thing, and everyone is probably sick of it, but it seems like everyone has kinda put their dicks away and is looking for a real solution. I would implore everyone who has taken the time and energy to opine here and attend meetings to stay the course (not saying you aren't). If we let it go, everyone will be busy climbing in a couple months and the issues will be worse later on. I contacted the SCC, and I'm planning to ask what the current thoughts are of the board members regarding everything Paul has repeatedly enumerated (as well as Shannon's bolt inquiry. I never saw an answer to that, and buying and maintaining hardware at SCC crags is really high up on the list of SCC duties I believe). If they have already expressed their viewpoints and I missed it in the 4000 pages of this thread, I apologize, but don't think it's too much to ask to have an official statement posted on the SCC website, at least.

Paul:

1. Looks good to me, for the most part. But I think we should recognize that the main point of the language (the version I've seen anyhow) is that bolts can't be added or removed without written permission from the SCC. We're essentially leaving it up to SCC judgement. That's fine by me and is (in my opinion) probably the best way to handle it, but I fear it may just lead to more arguments later. The SCC may give permission to add or remove bolts in ways that people don't like.

2. If everybody wants term limits, we should have term limits. But I personally don't totally understand the rationale behind them. We shouldn't have lifetime board members that are inactive and don't do anything or that do something crazy, like bolt Punk Wave - they should definitely go. But if it's a good, active board member, I'm totally fine if they want to serve for "life". For example, I don't really know Scott Perkins, but if he was willing to be a board member for the next 15 years, I would be inclined to let him. I find it hard to believe that there are too many climbers with that kind of experience lined up to be board members. Actually, I find it hard to believe that there are a whole lot of anybody at all lined up to be board members. I'm afraid if 4 year terms or something are implemented, we'll run out of potential board members pretty quick. So I understand part of the rationale for term limits, but I'm not sure how that should work. Maybe allow board members to serve for life but have some sort of mechanism by which board members can be removed?

3. I agree, the SCC should not do this. But if their history of doing this consists entirely of the Steele example, I think it's a little silly to throw them under the bus for it and accuse them of "condoning and advertising" trespass, at least in any widespread and significant way. Routes were posted on MP a long time ago by a single board member (and, let's not forget, some non-SCC board members). And those videos would only look like trespassing to someone with intimate knowledge of the layout of Steele - for example, I don't see any trespassing going on in those videos because I don't know where the hell they are. I'm not trying to justify it - just put it in a little context. So I agree with the point you're making, but I disagree that this is a terrible infraction on the part of the SCC. I also think it's a bit disingenuous that the position seems to be no trespassing *unless nobody finds out*. If the position is no trespassing, it should be no trespassing - not trespass, but keep it quiet. If the "old guard" never climbed on private property there would be a lot fewer routes in the SE. But the silent trespassing approach is not going to work now that there are so many climbers. It also seems a bit disingenuous that the main (only?) example of the SCC doing this that has been presented so far happens to be on the property of somebody party to this argument. But you're right - the SCC and its board members should not condone or advertise trespass.

4. This seems like a non-issue. I'm sure the SCC would be willing to keep a copy of a route database somewhere. It would probably help them when they get requests to add/remove bolts somewhere. But the work is going to be done by a volunteer. How many routes are at YB, like 50? I imagine a motivated local could list them all on a spreadsheet in 15 minutes. If someone thinks this should be done, I think that person should just do it.

Rhett Burroughs wrote:This crap is one of the reasons why I moved out West.

Cool story Rhett. But wait, did you move out West?

Nah he just listed a bunch of routes in WYOMING and a picture of him climbing at Devils Tower, which happens to be in WYOMING, which happens to be in the WEST.

On point No. 1 regarding the fixed anchor policy...if they never get added where they shouldn't, removal of them will be a non-issue. Cleaning up what exists currently will be dirty business. We've proven that here if nothing else.

On point No. 2 regarding terms...if we have to throw out the good with the bad every few yrs to keep the bad from becoming entrenched. So be it. They aren't gonna vote anyone off the board. There is at least one right now that EVERYbody knows should go and instead of just doing it all they talk about is giving him a "soft exit"...and he's still there.

Point No. 3 regarding trespass....you did a pretty good job of softening the blow, but that video is damning evidence. They had JUST BOUGHT THE CLIFF. Do you think they didn't know where the property lines were? This purchase was deliberately intended to be a trespass easement from the get go and if you wanna start down that road again I have PLENTY more to say on this. I'll save it for now in the interest of playing nice and being constructive.

4 we all agree is as simple as motivated locals taking a little initiative...be it property managers or whomever.

DavisMeschke wrote:Nah he just listed a bunch of routes in WYOMING and a picture of him climbing at Devils Tower, which happens to be in WYOMING, which happens to be in the WEST.

Thanks for clearing that up Davis. I'm not sure how I missed it, especially since Rhett's entire contribution to this thread and the last has been to repeatedly tell us that he's moving out West and how much better it is and to share pictures of stickers he found in an outhouse.

Are all trad climbers too dense to get jokes? No wonder you're all so pissed.