Documenting is Developing

Frank Blackwrote:

Most climbers have an innate understanding that bolting should be done thoughtfully. You can't un-drill a hole.

It's a somewhat smaller group of climbers that understands how posting a new area to Mountain Project has a much bigger impact than placing a bolt.

I'm a big fan of this site - I think it provides an unmatched service to the climbing community. I've added my fair share of routes - to areas where climbing is an explicitly permitted activity. I'll continue to do so. But I think more could be done to increase awareness that the impact of posting often far outweighs that of drilling.

Without developing there would be no documenting.

Checkmate.

Tal Mwrote:

God forbid we try to introduce nuance into the conversation on MP. You can totally be given permission to develop on private land and still be asked to keep it lowkey by the owners - just like you can develop on area that don't have access issues when it's 10 climbers using the area on a given weekend that suddenly faces access issues when it's 100 climbers using the area on a given weekend. Development doesn't only need to happen with the expectation that the area can support a menagerie of gumbies - otherwise those would be the only areas available to climb in.

You must’ve missed the “without permission” part but beyond that, all sounds reasonable to me. Just as the choice to not develop an area that would only support or be accessible to the minority is a reasonable choice as well.

Idk bout y’all, but I’m team Tal and appreciate their development. 

You shouldn’t, it’s all choss.

Was thinking about this thread yesterday - just to illustrate the point of the impact of publishing to MP. Last week we posted a new crag to mountain project (Abattoir). Got a report within 18 hours that a friend overheard a group at the local climbing gym already talking about going there. The area seems like it saw more traffic than it ever has this weekend, the first weekend it existed online. 

I’m sure this effect depends on the greater region it’s posted to as many folks are likely not following many regions on MP but just another warning to be sure of the impact of your actions when posting a new area. In this case, this is an area that was developed with being a potentially highly active crag that also will self limit traffic based on its limited parking in mind but not every location has a high carrying capacity, as previously discussed.

Tal Mwrote:

You shouldn’t, it’s all choss.

Was thinking about this thread yesterday - just to illustrate the point of the impact of publishing to MP. Last week we posted a new crag to mountain project (Abattoir). Got a report within 18 hours that a friend overheard a group at the local climbing gym already talking about going there. The area seems like it saw more traffic than it ever has this weekend, the first weekend it existed online. 

I’m sure this effect depends on the greater region it’s posted to as many folks are likely not following many regions on MP but just another warning to be sure of the impact of your actions when posting a new area. In this case, this is an area that was developed with being a potentially highly active crag that also will self limit traffic based on its limited parking in mind but not every location has a high carrying capacity, as previously discussed.

Quit making them seem so cool then!

Benton Hodgeswrote:

What about just not climbing or bolting on private land without permission/land with access issues? Not every rock face and cliff band needs to be ascended and claimed as an FA.

"Tell me you live in the mountain west without telling me you live out west"

MattHwrote:

"Tell me you live in the mountain west without telling me you live out west"

Current Wyoming resident. Former Chattanooga, TN resident. I understand the frustrations of private land and access issues well. It certainly is nice to be in the mountain west now. Public access lands are abundant, and one of the reasons why I choose to live out here.

What do you think is the solution for sticky private land and access issues? You know, besides leaving a meme quote as a response. 

Benton Hodgeswrote:

What do you think is the solution for sticky private land and access issues? You know, besides leaving a meme quote as a response. 

eminent domain.

PWZwrote:

eminent domain.

You have my vote! 

I miss Trevor in these trying times. 

Benton Hodgeswrote:

What do you think is the solution for sticky private land and access issues? You know, besides leaving a meme quote as a response. 

Despite my tongue in cheek response, I think the solution is what people have already been doing, hence my meme quote. You're the one dissatisfied with the status quo. The stance of 'only climb on public land' only works in places with an abundance of public lands. Until there's some pie-in-the-sky law that private property of significant recreational value is not allowed (or requires a public easement/right to roam), the east coast will have far more climbing on private land than public, and some of that will be with permission, and some will be without.

I think it's unreasonable to expect otherwise, and many now-climber-owned crags were developed in this fashion. It's a lot harder to sell an access fund acquisition of a blank undeveloped cliff than a tricky-access but otherwise established crag. I also don't think it's morally wrong to poach a private cliff - the logic is the same as adverse possession. If they don't notice your presence, who's been harmed? Nor do I think it's a sin to climb somewhere and not tell the whole climbing world about it. Nobody's being gatekept - they're just not being spoonfed.

I do wanna call out as well that many times the private land climbers are illegally recreating on is private as in hundreds or thousands of acres owned by a company (mining, ranch, water company buying land for water rights, etc) - not on John and Jane Doe’s 2 acre land they spent decades saving up for. The last case around water company land is really common in the front range as well. Just in case any non east coast climbers are confused as to how it’s working out there and why many folks feel it’s not a moral transgression

MattHwrote:

Despite my tongue in cheek response, I think the solution is what people have already been doing, hence my meme quote. You're the one dissatisfied with the status quo. The stance of 'only climb on public land' only works in places with an abundance of public lands. Until there's some pie-in-the-sky law that private property of significant recreational value is not allowed (or requires a public easement/right to roam), the east coast will have far more climbing on private land than public, and some of that will be with permission, and some will be without.

I think it's unreasonable to expect otherwise, and many now-climber-owned crags were developed in this fashion. It's a lot harder to sell an access fund acquisition of a blank undeveloped cliff than a tricky-access but otherwise established crag. I also don't think it's morally wrong to poach a private cliff - the logic is the same as adverse possession. If they don't notice your presence, who's been harmed? Nor do I think it's a sin to climb somewhere and not tell the whole climbing world about it. Nobody's being gatekept - they're just not being spoonfed.

A fair point of view. Surely others can exist on a spectrum. I think you took a leap on my opinion on this matter from a question and a sentence, but you articulated your thoughts well.

Benton Hodgeswrote:

You have my vote! 

I mean, thanks to the electoral college, I sort of already did on an overcounted basis

Nathan Sullivanwrote: don't document things on private land or with other access issues, 

Definitely this. If it’s private land and not open to the public, it’s private land that just gives climbers a bad name.
Occasionally access issues can be resolved if people respect boundaries.

Tal Mwrote:

I do wanna call out as well that many times the private land climbers are illegally recreating on is private as in hundreds or thousands of acres owned by a company (mining, ranch, water company buying land for water rights, etc) - not on John and Jane Doe’s 2 acre land they spent decades saving up for. The last case around water company land is really common in the front range as well. Just in case any non east coast climbers are confused as to how it’s working out there and why many folks feel it’s not a moral transgression

That’s all good until you get busted with a felony trespass charge

june mwrote:

That’s all good until you get busted with a felony trespass charge

Yeah I mean I didn’t say it was legal just because they’re corporations. Ethical =\= Legal

FWIW I believe you only get a felony trespass if you trespass with the intent to commit a felony. Otherwise it’s a misdemeanor.

Tal Mwrote:

Yeah I mean I didn’t say it was legal just because they’re corporations. Ethical =\= Legal

FWIW I believe you only get a felony trespass if you trespass with the intent to commit a felony. Otherwise it’s a misdemeanor.

You do know that a corporation is just a group of people.

You really don’t need to drill holes in every 500 million year old rock just so you can climb it. 

Greg Dwrote:

You do know that a corporation is just a group of people.

You really don’t need to drill holes in every 500 million year old rock just so you can climb it. 

Well ignoring the fact that I don’t develop on private property regardless of who it is owned by, and that you helped install bolts on the exact formations that I’m developing on, thats a pretty gross misrepresentation of what a corporation is and what power they have in American society. This thread is not the space for that conversation.