As a climbing community...

DavisMeschke wrote:If you're climbing experience is somehow negatively altered or your feelings get hurt because of a tree being rapped off of them you need to take a long hard look at what's important.

If a route or area is closed because of impact, especially avoidable impact, my climbing experience has been negatively impacted because of it. It's happened before...

DavisMeschke wrote:As long as you aren't leaving webbing, I don't think there's a problem.

Almost everywhere I've climbed leaving some reasonably colored webbing and a rap ring is considered better ethics than pulling a rope around a tree, or even a rock feature in many cases.

sara pax wrote:... KH! I'm sure he's mostly playing devils advocate.

Exactly. These are things climbers don't want to talk about (gyms certainly don't want to take on any more responsibility/"work" than they need - cuts into the profits). As a community we do everything else BUT try the solution that's often right under our nose. As RGold said, we design our solutions around bad behavior instead of correcting the bad behavior. It's like giving in to the crying spoiled child. It only makes things worse later on.

I like the idea of mandatory 'training' before you're issued a permit. Wonder how much time/effort that would require on the part of the Mohonk preserve to implement (looking again at whether this eats into their profit/gives them more reasons to raise the cost of the pass).

The idea of signage has always been a sticking point for me at the preserve. They could have numbered posts at the bottom of each access trail to indicate what area it is [instead of this game of playing 'find the climb', thank god the gunks app and GPS came along, right?], and they could have simple anchor signs at the top of heavily used climbs with an arrow pointing in the direction of the nearest proper rap anchor. This place aint gettin' any less crowded/busy. Time to start thinking proactively. If a sign can save the use of a tree it sure is worth it, right?

Unfortunately what's been done for about a decade now isn't working; as a matter of fact by all measures it's actually getting worse. Time to try something else. [in fairness the new bolted anchors would be new as they only recently have been implemented on a wider scale, but it appears they're not getting used as often as they should or intended -- bear in mind I support the idea of bolted anchors, but not at the expense of all the cliff's trees, if that's the choice we're facing]

I have no (w)rath, just don't take a verbal shit on me and we're fine. ;-)

Positive input yields positive out comes. . . Join in and help. And the guy who says go ahead and rap off trees?
DavisMeschke? You, sir sound like someone we need to re educate!,

Mike, THANK YOU! agreed, agreed, agreed!!! My original post simply asks more experienced climbers to take the time to explain some basic conservation practices to beginners. For those who feel they have a better solution why not spend some energy making your ideas happen. As for DavisMescke, are you joking? Climbing access is being threatened across the country. If we do not become stewards of the land, land managers are going to shut us down.

rgold wrote:...The latest unanticipated side-effect is that as new bolted rap stations have been added, slings on trees, especially trees that were already compromised by rappelling, have been removed. A good thing, right? But climbers hell-bent on rapping from the nearest and most convenient anchor are now putting their ropes directly around the now slingless trees, ignoring bolted stations a short distance away or very brief walk along the top.

Hey Rich,
I'm not noticing this happen at all. The new bolted stations are being used as standard rappels and the slope restoration zones have been respected. In places particularly near the Uberfall such as Havard,Horseman, Black Fly, and Ken's Crack we have been witnessing people rapping directly off of trees. So I am not sure what situations you are referring to.

Kevin Heckler wrote:bear in mind I support the idea of bolted anchors, but not at the expense of all the cliff's trees, if that's the choice we're facing

Hey Kevin, The new bolted anchors appear to be saving the trees not leading to their destruction.

MY situation in a designated wilderness area is you cannot bolt using power tools. And good god, if we're talking about ethics... It's considered unethical to bolt in the Winds! What I'm trying to say is that bolts in the rock are a bit more unsightly than trees with rap marks. Each place is different, and I get that. But blanket statements of "it's WRONG to rap off trees!" are simply not true.

And I don't think that education is the answer. You're talking about having young adults (let's assume 15-23 years old) sit through "educational seminars". Most of them don't want to hear shit like that! We're talking about a segment of the population that already sits through 3-8 hours a day PER 5-day-week of classes.

An older guy who "mentored" me taught that trees are okay to rap off of. There's many climbs in North GA and NC that rapping off a tree is the only way down. Tolerance people.. It's like, 2016 already.

Gunks Apps wrote: Hey Rich, I'm not noticing this happen at all. The new bolted stations are being used as standard rappels and the slope restoration zones have been respected. In places particularly near the Uberfall such as Havard,Horseman, Black Fly, and Ken's Crack we have been witnessing people rapping directly off of trees. So I am not sure what situations you are referring to.

Chris, personal conversations with several climbers (who did say something to the parties involved) indicated to me that they had observed a number of incidents of rappelling directly off trees that were supposed to be saved by the bolting, including, astonishingly, the tree at the top of Baby. I haven't seen any of this myself; I'm going by their testimony.

As for places near the Uberfall, there are trees there with rope scars from more than 60 years ago, which is to say those scars were there before I first started climbing in the Gunks. I think the picture you posted might be one of the examples. If you are going by the scars and haven't actually observed people putting ropes around the trees, it may be that it isn't happening there.

DavisMeschke wrote:What I'm trying to say is that bolts in the rock are a bit more unsightly than trees with rap marks.

Do you really not get this? It's not that the marks are unsightly - grooving the bark from the rope placed directly around the tree WILL KILL THE FUCKING TREE.

Woah. Did not realize. Thanks for pointing that out.

DavisMeschke wrote:Woah. Did not realize. Thanks for pointing that out.

"education"

Touché.

sara pax wrote: Who said anything about an educationalseminar. That's a straw man if I've ever seen one. "Blah blah blah, bolts are bad. Wah" It's 2016, get over that argument. This thread is mostly about the gunks too, not the winds or Georgia. If you must rap off a tree or else perish, rap off the tree, but feel bad about it and tell your friends they shouldn't do it. But, DON'T DO IT AT THE GUNKS. There are rap stations for that. Take 3 minutes to check mountain project before climbing anywhere too because it'll tell you how to get down. More than likely it won't say to girdle a tree.

Well said.

FULL SIZE TREE FAILURE

Marc801 wrote: Do you really not get this? It's not that the marks are unsightly - grooving the bark from the rope placed directly around the tree WILL KILL THE FUCKING TREE.

I enjoy the ecoterrorism side of climbing. rapping off of trees and ripping up vegetation when pulling my rope is almost as fun as trundling rocks!

Marc801 wrote: Do you really not get this? It's not that the marks are unsightly - grooving the bark from the rope placed directly around the tree WILL KILL THE FUCKING TREE.

I've seen it happen. Fundamentally changed the character of some popular-ish canyoneering routes in my current neck of the woods. The refusal to use 36 inches of muted colored webbing around a tree, and just pulling ropes around killed the tree, necessitating the installation of bolts. In so many places girdling a tree isn't a good way to avoid bolt's, it's a good way to guarantee them.

JK- wrote: I've seen it happen. Fundamentally changed the character of some popular-ish canyoneering routes in my current neck of the woods. The refusal to use 36 inches of muted colored webbing around a tree, and just pulling ropes around killed the tree, necessitating the installation of bolts. In so many places girdling a tree isn't a good way to avoid bolt's, it's a good way to guarantee them.

that's fantastic! how do I vote for this?

DavisMeschke wrote:MY situation in a designated wilderness area... An older guy who "mentored" me taught that trees are okay to rap off of. There's many climbs in North GA and NC that rapping off a tree is the only way down. Tolerance people.. It's like, 2016 already.

Davis, I don't know your full situation and you may not be familiar with our situation in the Gunks, so I'll withhold further judgement, but please consider that there are new climbers reading these forums. The Gunks are a heavily used area managed by a private preserve. Sections of the cliff-top and ledge systems have been compromised by overuse and a lack of conservation minded climbing practices. We are trying to work with climbers to reduce impact and reverse so of the damage that is done. If you could state your support for our situation it would be greatly appreciated.

I want to disclose that I am actively involved with the GCC, active in discussions with the Preserve, and I am part creator of the Gunks Apps.

I have climbed in the Gunks for 30 years but climbed almost exclusively at the Millbrook from 2009-2014. Millbrook sees very few climbers so the ledges still have soil and grass, and the trees are healthy. When I started climbing in the Trapps again the environmental damage hit me like a ton of bricks.

Around that time local guide and friend Jason Hurwitz asked me to come to a GCC board meeting. I joined the Anchor Evaluation Committee and along with Jason H, Jason Beaupre, and Dustin Portzline we decided we were fed up and needed to take action.

In reading the reaction to the OP I felt I needed to put on my GCC hat and do some explaining. The first action the AEC took was legal replacement of almost all of the protection bolts in the Trapps with full stainless steel bolts provided by the ASCA. We also started removing the old cables and replacing them with new webbing and in a few cases chain inside webbing. We also upgraded many non-bolted anchors.

While this work continued we opened talks with the Preserve and we were eventually given permission to work with rangers to place new bolted rappel stations after a slow and lengthy review by Preserve staff, rangers, climbers with 50 years of gunks experience, and the full AEC committee.

It was also agreed by everyone that an educational component was necessary, not just new anchors. The AEC designed a brochure for climbers describing conservation practices but it is currently stagnating in an approval stage. There is action towards adding signage, most likely Access Fund LNT type messages, perhaps tailored to the Gunks in the form of a kiosk.

Through the Gunks Apps I have attempted to help climbers find the current bolted anchors by providing topos, descriptions, and directions from the top of climbs. We also decided to start making short entertaining videos that hopefully start conversations at the cliff about making better low impact choices.

We are finally starting to see the fruits of our labor. For the first time in probably 20 years there is grass growing in the sandy erosion gully of Betty. Some of the trees are starting to show improvements. As a climbing community I feel we are at a crucial moment where it's time for all of us to step up and show the Preserve climbers can help manage and protect the Gunks.

Dick Williams has quietly been toiling away for years with countless volunteers rebuilding approach trails and protecting the cliff base from erosion. If it wasn't for his work there are many parts of the cliff base that would be a sandy crumbling slope.

I hear many people throwing out solutions and ideas which is great! Now let's make it happen. We can't sit back and expect the Preserve to jump in and solve the problems. We need to work through our local advocacy groups to share the work load and give back. As Micahel Schneider said upthread, "Positive input yields positive out comes. . . Join in and help."

The GCC's AEC has been keeping track of the work and progress. Below are a series of photos that shows that it can work, we can actually not just stop the damage, but stem erosion, get the soil back, and get the trees thriving again.

Gunks Apps wrote:Hey Kevin, The new bolted anchors appear to be saving the trees not leading to their destruction.

Thanks for clarifying, this is what I suspected and the reason I posted what I did. Some of the other post(s) suggested otherwise [that bolted anchors were causing the tree rappelling], which ran contrary to the purpose of the bolted anchors.

Awesome stuff Chris. Keep fightin' the good fight. :)

Just want to highlight ONE MORE TIME that 99% of new climbers are coming from the gym, and the issues are nearly always related to lack of experience. So having local gyms take a (more?) active role in teaching LNT (and exactly how this pertains to climbing) would nip this in the butt pretty quick. Assuming the gyms care enough to help. They might not.

Instead of hoping a newbie will trip over the information, get the information in front of them on day one or two. The gym seems like the most logical place to start.

Christian Fracchia wrote: It was also agreed by everyone that an educational component was necessary, not just new anchors. The AEC designed a brochure for climbers describing conservation practices but it is currently stagnating in an approval stage. There is action towards adding signage, most likely Access Fund LNT type messages, perhaps tailored to the Gunks in the form of a kiosk.

Kevin Heckeler wrote:Instead of hoping a newbie will trip over the information, get the information in front of them on day one or two. The gym seems like the most logical place to start.

These are great ideas... I think handing out a brochure that isn't excessively wordy and just hammers home a few main points would do the job. And when people sign up the kiosk idea would be good too. I'm a new gunks climber (just top ropes, but since trees are used a lot for anchors it is relevant) and if it wasn't for my reading on this site I wouldn't have known about these conservation practices. In my limited experience I've seen more than a few climbers at Peterskill anchoring off trees right at the edge and not padding them...

Peter T wrote:In my limited experience I've seen more than a few climbers at Peterskill anchoring off trees right at the edge and not padding them...

Aren't the cliff edge trees at Peterskill completely off limits, even if padded?

Marc801 wrote: Aren't the cliff edge trees at Peterskill completely off limits, even if padded?

I'm not sure because I've heard people say they are off limits but others use them... I wasn't able to find anything definitive on the park website. Maybe someone else has? So I'm not sure if they're officially off limits but they probably should be...

I apologize for speaking too soon. Like I said earlier, I didn't know rapping directly off the tree would kill it; I will think better of it in the future. From reading through the replies, I'm beginning to understand the Gunks a little better and again, my fault for jumping to conclusions - situations everywhere are different.

To new climbers: no matter how long you've been climbing, there's always something new to learn. I learned to keep a more open mind.