Camping at Palisades Park

I just had a great weekend at Palisades, spent most of the time hiking and setting TR for the kids. Wouldn't it be great if we could camp there, just a short stroll from the crag? Well....I had a lengthy conversation with one of the employees who informed that there is a plan on file with a full scale campground, RV hook-ups, primative camping, bathhouse, etc. However, some years ago, the powers to be didn't follow through with it after election and county commissioners were changed around a bit. He feels that all it would take to respark that fire is some letters sent to the commissoner's office letting them know how much we would enjoy the privilege of camping at the park.
Anyway, I thought I'd drop a line to see what y'all thought or if anyone has tried to push the issue before. Let me know, good or bad!

crawl19 wrote:.....a full scale campground, RV hook-ups, primitive camping, bathhouse, etc......Let me know, good or bad!

Bad. Why does every area need to be blown out? Sad that everyone needs so much convenience at the cost of the landscape. You might be interested in checking out Sandrock....already manicured to your liking.

Horse Pens 40 is 13 miles to the South. There is a lot of camping available in Blount, St. Clair, and Etowah counties.

UncleBen wrote:Bad. Why does every area need to be blown out? Sad that everyone needs so much convenience at the cost of the landscape.

Yes, it would be tragic to lose the pristine wilderness experience that's one of the hallmarks of climbing at Palisades.

JL

Melodrama, aside... Wilderness, it ain't. Are you saying, though, that you'd prefer Palisades get the Sandrock treatment? Would you not prefer the park stay quaint?

UncleBen wrote: Bad.

+1

UncleBen wrote:Are you saying, though, that you'd prefer Palisades get the Sandrock treatment?

Your question presumes two things as givens:
1. The only choices are to leave Palisades as it is, or give it the "Sandrock treatment" (whatever that is).
2. The "Sandrock treatment" is a bad thing.

I haven't been to Sand Rock in a while so can't say whether #2 is valid, but I certainly don't agree with #1.

JL

saxfiend wrote: Your question presumes two things as givens: 1. The only choices are to leave Palisades as it is, or give it the "Sandrock treatment" (whatever that is). 2. The "Sandrock treatment" is a bad thing. I haven't been to Sand Rock in a while so can't say whether #2 is valid, but I certainly don't agree with #1. JL

I have a question.

Are you trying to aggravate Alabamians?

I have never been to Sandrock, so no comment on that. As far as the wilderness goes the camping layout plan (from the past) would be on the far north end of the park so it pretty much wouldn't be seen if you were at the cliff line.
Bottom line I just wanted to know the climbing community thoughts on the matter.

There's plenty of camping within an hour of Palisades. One of the best things about the place is that it's usually low key and low crowds. Will available camping onsite change that? I dunno... We certainly don't need another sandrock--unless you want to build it in Baton Rouge. )

Nathan Self wrote:unless you want to build it in Baton Rouge. )

That's a great idea.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste

The park went through a fairly extensive makeover maybe 10+ years ago, with a lot of grooming and amenities added for visitors. Historically, the bulk of the visitorship has been local.....and adding a campground would not likely change that, is my guess.....given the location. I've not seen any of the plan that was proposed then shelved.....but if done properly, seems like it might be nice. Guess it would all come down to cost-benefit for the county. SR redevelopment was funded by Obama stimulus money from what i understand, and those days are over. I think it unlikely that camping fees would offset cost of development over a reasonable length of time. Maybe the county is sitting on a bunch of cash waiting to be spent.

The worst thing that could happen to Palisades is if someone bought the adjacent property and made the SCC put up a bunch of no trespassing signs. Now I'm going west for a few weeks.

Strange you think that would be the worst thing, because I'm pretty sure something similar happened at a different Alabama crag, and it was the best thing that happened there.

Unless the implied consensus is that private property should be given to the "community?"

...the strange universe where restriction or prohibition of climber access is considered a "best thing"

Just want to mention that there is camping at Noccalula Falls. I've never camped there myself but hear tell its okay. There is some single track trails there as well, recently established by a local mnt biking group....supposed to be a pretty good trail running/mnt biking resource. Its right in the sweet spot for a few regional climbing areas....so put it on your maybe list

I'm slightly confused- is the prohibition of access being caused by the county? Or is it because a private land owner wants to maintain the sanctity of their property?

We obviously know the answer, but my confusion comes from what gives the "community" the right to private property? It's not public land that is being held hostage from climbers, it is a tax paying citizen's private property.

So if respecting ones property rights isn't the best thing, then my friend, that is indeed a strange universe.

The community has no "right" to private property. The holders of private property are often times generous in allowing access because....well, it can be for a variety of reasons, one of which might be that a sense of common cause is shared between owner and the community. Sometimes its a money thing....a negotiation.....access has then been monetized. Sometimes, like in Great Britain, where they don't have a Nat'l Park system like we do here, there is in various places an implied agreement between the access-desiring public and the holder, that though the land is private, the public has permission to visit or pass through, because the value of open space has been agreed (conditionally, by both owner and visitors) to be greater than the value of restricting access on principal alone.

In the case of Palisades, the climbing community has no right to climb at the park. It is a permission granted by the owner, the county.....likely because they are a benevolent enterprise and have something like a mission statement or intended purpose to provide recreational opportunities for visitors.

Would camping fall in line with that purpose? Sure. Is providing camping resources at the park economically feasible for the county? Don't know.....it's probably a complex consideration

Fair points, and I agree, mostly.

Except for the point implying a land owner would want to restrict access on principle alone... That seems tough to rationalize.

My earlier concerns were the blatantly sarcastic and derragatory comments regarding the private property around a different Alabama crag, not necessarily whether or not camping at palisades would be a good idea. I personally don't think it's necessary, but if the county wanted to open a campground at palisades, I wouldn't try to stop them.

Well, Ryan is sort of calling me out ahead of my big reveal...
And, I am glad Bernard mentioned the single track trails at Noccalula....
But, I am still struggling to understand John's socialist motives....
To Ryan's point....

It was about this time last year that the referenced "No Trespassing" signs went up....boomboxes, dogs, TP, etc...in the backyard...old news.
I am sure Bernard will wail in disagreement.
Raul P has certainly enjoyed the solitude....as have I.

What some did not "appreciate" is that I wanted the peace and quiet, devoid of dub-step on the side of Chandler Mtn....that's really all.
And the loose dogs....
Well, that, and distance from weirdly-motivated SCC reps, but I digress.

That peace and quiet afforded me the opportunity to reflect.
And so I did....

My position concerning Oneonta/Palisades comes from that of the old country boy.
I drive through Oneonta every day and I cut my climbing teeth at Palisades.
It's a nice place.
Wilderness? No.
RV material.....Not in my opinion.
Camping? Currently prohibited.
Should it change....I hope it never does.

The solution?
RV's aside.....
A "climber/biker hostel" within walking distance of the crag....the closest crag to Birmingham....and not too far from Palisades or HP40.

Due to lifestyle/occupational changes, it seems needful for me and my program to be closer to our Birmingham business.
Thusly, we have been remodeling our 4bd/2bth house to accommodate something akin to the Crashpad in Chattanooga, but with more capacity.
There is climbing on property, we are close to HP40, paddling, MTB, and great road-biking....all in the foothills of the Appalachians.

What many don't know is that while those signs have been up....
And traffic, off of SCC land has been down.....
I have been thinking heavily of the climber of today.
Because, I am clearly not that guy.
I have heard the ramblings and have thought long and hard.
What does today's Southern Sandstone Enthusiast want the most?
Convenience, safety, and a feeling of "community"...plus, dub-step, clean sheets, and a dog-park-like crag.

My expectation is that the 50 or so newly rap-bolted routes, the newly carved downhill MTB trails, the three campsites down in "the bottom", and the forthcoming completion of a B&B restoration/remodel, would go that direction.
We will also be leaving our dog kennels intact for boarding during the day....if your crag dog isn;t the most perfectly behaved lil' angel there ever was.

I mean....bacon breakfast watching the sunrise, a quick stroll to the crag, and a safe parking/camping/climbing spot moments from HP40 and miles away from much more good stuff seems appreciated among "the community".
And, since my curmudgeonly-self has real life to tend to....
Why not?

This is me giving back to "the community"...in greater volume than the odd composting-shitter or trailday-bushwhackery.
I plan to devoid myself of participation....
I have been in contact with a property management group, have an AMGA certified guide set up to staff the place and guide the masses, have been in consult with two trail-building teams, and have plans for expanded parking/camping as well as a chair lift and zip line.
The Birmignham Bicycle Club is all about the idea concerning a great staging/camping place for two or three of their centuries per year.
The Harley riders that stop of on top of Chandler Mtn have also experessed interest in camping locally....away from HP40.
Frankly, this should be something of a hick-paradise for the Atlanta, Birmingham, and Huntsville climbing crowd....not to mention the paddlers, road-bikers, and motorcyclists that frequent the area.
A "soft opening" has already proven interest.

Of course, there's a climbing easement and the liabilities to consider, but I have enlisted the help of some of the local gyms to hook us up with good representation.
In the meantime, they've been advising on the sport routes and potential climbing wall on the property.

The kicker?
This will all be brought to you for free by Obama, the SCC, and a big pile of silliness.
Take yer RV to Pigeon Forge.

Ryan7crew wrote:Now I'm going west for a few weeks.

Are you moving out West? I moved to Wyoming.