What causes more environmental damage?

First, where ya gonna park those 100 cars?

At some point, it boils down to a tipping point where infrastructure is all that will work, if you want to keep a place going at all. Those small places may or may not grow, but if they do, get ahead of it. The Fins comes to mind as really at the cusp of untenable without some thought, planning, and structure that looks to the future. City of Rocks is pretty good, ish, at the moment....but headed for growing pains simply because of the explosion of both population and people merely camping. Smith rock, well.... it's in the same boat now as national parks.

And, again, at some point?

Not everyone can be there at the same time. I see no way around that, except for releasing lots and lots and lots of tigers....

Daniel Chode Riderwrote:

You can climb in the rain, you know. Better than the gym and it's probably pretty adventurous for Connecticut.

Climbing in the rain just plain sucks. You should know that being in WA.

Daniel Chode Riderwrote:

Pure trad climbing doesn't clean cracks. Pure trad climbing climbs the purest, cleanest, aesthetic lines.

Er, you should brush up on your knowledge of climbing history. As an immediate example, the Regular Route on Fairview Dome in Tuolumne, a classic, beautifully clean, hideously popular 5.9 that follows cracks for the first 5 pitches was originally done as an aid climb over two days because of all the cracks being filled with mud, stones, and debris. It went free after extensive cleaning.

There are literally thousands of other examples.

Marc801 Cwrote:

Er, you should brush up on your knowledge of climbing history. As an immediate example, the Regular Route on Fairview Dome in Tuolumne, a classic, beautifully clean, hideously popular 5.9 that follows cracks for the first 5 pitches was originally done as an aid climb over two days because of all the cracks being filled with mud, stones, and debris. It went free after extensive cleaning.

There are literally thousands of other examples.

it's NOT TRUE! BULLSHIT! that route is CHOSS! 5.9 is for POSERS!! it's a SPORT CLIMB! etc etc.

Marc801 C wrote:

Yeah but it's better than posting... on.... wait.

Jesse McDonald wrote:

Traveling to the crag is the problem. Not the climbing. 

Long past time for a clean energy revolution!

Jesse McDonald wrote:

Traveling to the crag is the problem. Not the climbing. 

No! The worst part is when there’s vegetation erosion at cliff bases or tops! The emissions from 200 people driving to the crag? Who cares? The materials consumed and emissions generated from all the metal and nylon used in our gear and clothing? Doesn’t matter! Gotta protect the crag shrubs though. That’s where the real environmental impact comes from.

Carolina wrote:

My understanding is that cliff top erosion is one of the single greatest causes of man made climate change.  Pretty sure I read that on Facebook. 

This is 100% correct. Bolts are the second main cause and climbing during raptor closures is the third. 

Simon Goddardwrote:

This is 100% correct. Bolts are the second main cause and climbing during raptor closures are the third. 

You forgot about poop. All that gas....

One candy bar wrapper dropped at the crag releases more climate changing gasses than setting the whole Gulf of Mexico on fire. Also, your crag dogs are bleaching the Great Barrier Reef.

I Fwrote:

Tell that to all the cliffs with receding clifftop vegetation and ever worsening erosion problems.

Sorry I didnt get back sooner, I was out trampling cliffside vegetation at a climbing area yesterday.  

But seriously. Traveling on durable surfaces, stay on established trails and use known existing rappel anchors.  Bury your poo and just be respectful in general.  Plenty of places can be kept nice if used appropriately.  But more often then not, the places with easier climbing access by default have more environmental impact.  

Another way to answer the OP's question might be to have some areas that are well documented, well bolted, with good access to capture 90% of the climbing traffic.  But then people expect that stuff everywhere.  

-1/10

caesar.saladwrote:

-1/10

-1/10=9/10 mod 10, so I guess you approve? 

chris pwrote:

-1/10=9/10 mod 10, so I guess you approve? 

-1/10 = -1*(10^-1) = -1*0 = 0 since 10 = 0 = 10^-1 in mod 10. 

But I think your example works in Q/Z (rationals quotient integers).

David Devillewrote:

-1/10 = -1*(10^-1) = -1*0 = 0 since 10 = 0 = 10^-1 in mod 10. 

I'll admit it's been years and I don't remember how negative exponents work in modular arithmetic, so I'll conceded on this one. 

Carolinawrote:

Sorry I didnt get back sooner, I was out trampling cliffside vegetation at a climbing area yesterday.  

But seriously. Traveling on durable surfaces, stay on established trails and use known existing rappel anchors.  Bury your poo Carry out your poo in a WAG bag and just be respectful in general.  Plenty of places can be kept nice if used appropriately.  But more often then not, the places with easier climbing access by default have more environmental impact.  

Another way to answer the OP's question might be to have some areas that are well documented, well bolted, with good access to capture 90% of the climbing traffic.  But then people expect that stuff everywhere.  

Fixed that for ya.

What about the option for high traffic areas to have  terraced areas at the base,  and portapotties /composting toilets installed before there is erosion. Top anchors also.  

june mwrote:

What about the option for high traffic areas to have  terraced areas at the base,  and portapotties /composting toilets installed before there is erosion. Top anchors also.  

The trailhead to the NC climbing area Shortoff Mountain is in desperate need of a porta- or perma-composting facility! 

Most of the damage from climbing I have seen is on the approach trails rather than the climbs themselves.

In that case the multiple Crags might be worse, but it depends on the situation.

Spreading people out is always a better solution. Just take things to the extreme and this question is easy to answer. The more quality climbing destinations, the less people per year at each one.