|
|
 |
2009-03-02 00:00:00 |
|
|
|
In the last minute, we have decided to dedicate one full page for access issues in the 8a yearbook. Please give us details, in the comment field, for your local access problem which could help the community to have better contact with the landowners etc. If somebody have a picture which illustrates access issues, please send it in high resolution today to jens@8a.nu.
We will also add a field to the crag data base where members can report about the latest local access issues.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-03 02:18:11 |
|
|
It's good to know that access is so important to 8a, er Jens, er 8a - I get confused? The point is, access is really important to them or him. So important in fact, that after putting together a system for ranking ascents and then using that system to make pseudo competitions between climbers and proclaim some better than others, then denegrating other country's grading scales, then reporting on news that isn't news, then providing training articles that make no sense, then generating debates that aren't debates, then updating the site so that people can update their scorecard from their iPhone (is that available yet?) ... after all of this, 8a is dedicating a whole page to access issues. I am grateful that access is such a priority at 8a. They (him) really care about climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-03 07:18:44 |
|
|
Good development Jens.
Here' s some food for thought.
http://www.accessfund.org/boulderproject/pub.php
TO PUBLISH OR NOT TO PUBLISH
To publish or not to publish. That is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous publications
some food-for-thought before you spray the web or mags with beta for the locals' crag.
A guidebook authors perspective.....
By Mick Ryan
Guidebooks are about sharing information. Someone collects local climbing knowledge and, for a small price, shares it with the rest of the climbing community who donıt have that local knowledge. There are very few climbers, if any, who have not used a guidebook.
It sounds simple but in reality the publication of climbing information is like traversing a minefield blindfolded (and I donıt mean the hard work involved in researching and compiling that information which is more akin to hard labor in a Siberian concentration camp). The big question and quandary is whether to publish or not, especially on the Eastern Sierra.
Why the dilemma? Why not publish and be dammed? There are several reasons.
An area might be environmentally sensitive, land managers might want to avoid a honey pot situation and its associated impacts, and quite often some local climbers might want to keep the area to themselves.
Where an area has been bouldered on for many years and has already been documented in guidebooks and has been exposed in the climbing media (magazines, the internet and videos) the decision is easy and there is no reason not to publish. A good example is the Peabody Boulders in the Buttermilk.
Other, newer areas pose more difficult questions. If itıs a new area and it's good, word-of-mouth inevitably gets out and word-of-mouth amongst climbers is one of the most effective means of publicizing an area. Personal recommendations about an area between climbers are usually devoid of media hype and are taken seriously. But the media, photographers and climbing journalists, are often hot on the heels of word-of-mouth.
So do we publish as soon as we find out about an area? I first try to talk to those climbing at an area and find out if they have any concerns. An area might too small for a mass onslaught of climbers; it might have difficult access through a sensitive area, all legitimate concerns. If local activists just say, ²we want to keep this area to ourselves² alone that is not a good enough reason not to publish. However a period of grace is respected so that those that discovered the area can grab all their first ascents.
I then usually talk to one of my very environmentally aware climbing mentors in Bishop to get their take on things. The next stop is the land managers' office, usually the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land management to get their advice.
It may be of interest to some that the number of published bouldering areas on the Eastern Sierra are far fewer than have not been published. A good example of this is the Volcanic Tableland where less than 10% of the bouldering has been published. Through an agreement between the BLM and this author, the majority of bouldering on the Tableland will not appear in a ROCKFAX guidebook. That is not to say that you canıt boulder at these areas, you can, but to avoid a "honey pot" situation that guidebooks or any media exposure can create, these areas, some with sensitive ecological and cultural resources, are left for your self-exploration.
If an area already has public access, if it is by a road and already has a network of established trails, if there are no sensitive or endangered species in an area, maybe if it has already been exposed to grazing, stock trails, hikers, bird-watchers or mining, then there really is no reason not to publish.
I obviously have a vested interest in bouldering areas as not only do I play there but I also collect, present and sell information about them to other climbers. But I can only do that if climber impacts are low and these areas remain open. Consequently like many climbers on the Eastern Sierra I work very hard to help educate climbers about minimum impact climbing behavior and work closely with land managers, especially the BLM. Itıs called enlightened self-interest. Good climber behavior and low impacts mean we have access and that means I can boulder at an area and publish information about an area. If climbers behave irresponsibly and impacts are high, access may be restricted or denied out right and that means I can't write about that area or even have fun there. It should be obvious that it is in my interest, all our interests, to keep climber impacts low and not publish information without thought and consultation with others.
For example whilst ROCKFAX was preparing our guidebook to Las Vegas Limestone we were instrumental in the closing down of several areas that were extremely ecologically sensitive in the Desert National Wildlife Refuge, although most local climbers were ignorant of these concerns. On the other hand we also helped keep open some areas where, without lobbying land managers could have imposed restrictions on our activities.
In this MiniGUIDE I have devised a method that may help limit user-visits by having different levels of exposure about areas. The more established areas are given the full treatment: an introduction, maps, directions, action photographs, and topos and problem descriptions.
Newer areas, where there are few conflicts, are described just with a photograph, a brief description, directions and maybe a map to help you find the boulders. At these areas I don't provide topos. You are on your own and this kind exposure does limit the number of climbers visiting the area.
For some areas I haven't even provided directions but have just mentioned their existence. It is up to you to find out about these areas by asking around. This limits the number of climbers visiting an area to the most adventurous and inquisitive individuals.
Some areas I've made no mention of at all.
And lastly some areas I donıt know about.
So this is the model I am using for the documentation of Eastern and Sierra bouldering information. Through a combination of climber education about low-impact behavior and having different levels of guidebook exposure to bouldering areas it is the intention to spread the impact load, reduce impacts overall and help keep climbing areas open. At the same time information is presented to suite the varied tastes of the climbing community.
The criteria are described below.
1. Full Coverage
A high-use area well know in the climbing community. Managed intensively by local land managers in conjunction with the Access Fund and local climbers.
These areas get the full coverage in the guidebook including full topos and problem/route descriptions. A social climbing experience.
2. Medium Coverage
A lesser know area where documentation of the climbing is limited to reduce visitor numbers. A description of the area, directions and photographs may be provided. These areas are managed lightly by land managers and local climbers.
3. Minimal Coverage
An area where high visitor numbers could have detrimental effects although access is open and low frequency visits are acceptable. Mentioned in the guidebook but no directions. Individuals must search out those ³in the know². No management apart from use-trails and good behavior by those who visit. A more wild climbing experience for those who like adventure.
4. No Coverage
A very sensitive area but access is open. Highly secret areas. Word of mouth only. No mention in any climbing media. No management apart from use-trails and good behavior by those who visit. Getting close to true self-reliant adventure and exploration.
5. No Coverage - No Climbing
Areas where there is climbing potential but the area is too sensitive to allow access. Do not go here.
I think this tiered approach to publicity about bouldering areas, a mix of coverage that promotes directed-exploration and self-exploration is healthy for the climbing community and for the future of bouldering. Importantly it helps protect the land where we recreate. It satisfies the diverse needs of the climbing community from those who want to go to the popular areas and do the classic problems to those who want solitude at some remote boulder garden following their nose without referring to a guidebook. I, like many, put myself in both camps depending on my mood.
Importantly I believe it may find favor with land managers who all across America have concerns about the explosion in the popularity of bouldering.
Time, dialogue amongst the climbing community and the climbing media, and importantly with land managers will tell.
This philosophy is partly based on the semi-primitive management of BLM lands instilled in me by Joe Pollini and Jim Jennings at the BLM Bishop Resource Area. I thank and acknowledge them for their help.
Michael Ryan
ROCKFAX GUIDEBOOKS
http://www.rockfax.com
|
|
|
|
|
 |
2009-03-03 07:44:56 |
|
|
@sidepull
Thanks!! You just made my day! That was exactly what I wanted to hear. I have always thought that it is us here in Sweden that are the whiniest people in the world but now I know there are some yankees that are worse!
Keep it up!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-03 13:42:14 |
|
|
|
@ sidepull: I find it really sad that you started the thread with negative comments. I you had started in a positive way, writing about some local access issues, I guess, others would have continued the thread in a similar way which would have helped the climbing community.
There are 2 000 crags in the 8a data base and hopefully, this will be the best access data base in the world... but not if just people complain like Yorrick Hollertal, alias sidepull.
So please add your local access problem and maybe it will be the start of something good.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-03 19:46:09 |
|
|
I hope you are not going to make a habit of naming those with aliases just because they write something you don't like
And I hope that if people do send in access information then you will check the information with the local club or federation before printing it.
For info on access in England and Wales go here
|
|
|
|
|
 |
2009-03-03 21:45:39 |
|
|
I'm not sure which is sadder, my whining (I prefer satire - please wiki "satire" if you don't understand) or the utter lack of attention to the irony of the original request. Don't get me wrong, I applaud (in my own way) 8a.nu for including space about access - it's critical. I applaud Mick for including valuable, useable content to the cause. But in the same breath, I'm shocked by the irony of it all. 8a.nu is dedicating one page - ONE PAGE - to the issue and they only realized it might be worth including at the last minute? I should add about one hundred exclamation points and 300 more question marks here. So, perhaps to correct my opening sentence, I'm not sure which is sadder, the fact that no one else is stunned by the irony of the situation or the notion that this is simply symbolic of the priorities that this site has for climbing - 84 pages of numbers and bullshit rankings and 1 page about access.
Note: While I agree it's bad form for Jens to publish my name, that's not hard information to get. Moreover, I jabbed him first so I can empathize with the need to retaliate. Whether owners of ostensibly public sites should operate this way and what it does for developing a community of users is open for debate.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 09:27:31 |
|
|
|
@ sidepull: Please compare the 8a yearbook to other printed magazines. In the first 8a yearbook we dedicated the inside backcover to the environment and this time we dedicate the inside back cover to Access.
have you ever seen a printed magazine dedicated the inside back cover to anything but advertisement. The normal climbing magazines have some 50 % advertisements. The 8a yearbook has only 12 % ads and then we dedicate the second best page, where we could have made money, for Access.
Compared to other magazines we are much better setting the environment and Access in focus. Further more, the 8a yearbook is free of charge. Is not this good enough. Why do you all the time just complain? I guess something we must be doing OK?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 11:23:23 |
|
|
I am just appalled by your reactions, Jens. With so many visitors you should know by now that you CAN'T ever make everyone happy, even in the impossible hypothesis that what you do is actually perfect.
You just can't go on a personal crusade as soon as someone casts a stone at you, but rather admit that 8a talks about climbing with its bias, which is your choice, and not necessarily a bad one, many people have interests in performances!
Last but not least, don't ask for compliments, ever. The more you ask, the more people will be critical, it's basic psychology. As a matter of fact, you do a great job, which is not flawless indeed, but whose isn't?
If you want to become the champion of environmentally friendly climbing, just start with showing pictures of the most popular crags at the end of the summer, like Ceuse. Tons of garbage, scattered around, left by those so-called friends of Mother Nature who label themselves as climbers. Rather than access, which is a very sensitive question which should be left to local initiatives, you can easily show people the consequences of their current attitude on their playground.
Why not initiate 8a Clean Up days on some popular crags, where the local 8a members would do some useful cleaning and promote a more respectful attitude towards an environment which is also very often a private property?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 12:18:31 |
|
|
|
I have 100+ times been personalized attacked saying that I am doing a bad job!
I know this is part of the job as we have a comment field were I also answers criticism as I did this time. Answering questions, like I am answering sidepull and Luis, should not be called personal crusade.
In fact, I have never done any personal crusade, in spite of the 100+ personal attacks towards me.
8a do not want to become "the champion of environmentally friendly climbing", but we will take opportunities to make an impact. It would be a great thing to organize an 8a clean up day.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 13:27:43 |
|
|
|
Ok, I'll say it otherwise.
When people criticize anything about 8a or you, you should never answer as Jens, but as 8a, even if the criticisms were specifically directed towards you.
The day you stop fighting back, the attacks will also decrease in number and violence, your own attitude is actually encouraging such behaviours.
As for the "champion" thing, is was just irony. Despite its tone, Sidepull was not far from the truth when it comes to 8a's main preoccupation... So your answer, trying very seriously to demonstrate how dedicating a full page (out of how many?) to environment-related topics proves your concern, was actually very funny.
You should also meditate the note, closing Sidepull's last answer, it is full of valuable common sense.
Louis
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 14:26:11 |
|
|
|
I like comments on how 8a could improve. In many cases, such comments have changed the way 8a works. (One thing is that I should write personal comments like I am doing now - which goes against your advice as I should never answer as jens. It is not easy when you are criticized whatever you do ;)
I also like debates. In many cases I have learnt from them.
However, I do not like personal attacks...but it seems that is something I have to deal with if I want other 8a members giving us advice on how we could improve?
As I said before, I am proud that 8a have taken the second best advertisement spot in the yearbook to talk about Environment and this year to talk about Access. It seems like we are doing more than other printed magazines on these issues.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 15:16:09 |
|
|
Jens you are confusing criticism with personal attacks.
Thought I would point that out before pulling you up on your claim "It seems like we are doing more than other printed magazines on these issues". I am guessing that you have never seen Summit magazine - the BMC's publication - which always has stacks of access info.
It would also be good if you stopped attacking others (in this case other magazines) while trying to defend yourself. It is not becoming.
I made the point earlier about checking info before you print it - will you do this as the one thing that is worse than no information is inaccurate information.
With only one page you will find it hard to give any details about individual access issues, why not use the page to point people in the direction where they can find the up to date info eg the link to the BMC that I gave earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 15:49:45 |
|
|
|
@ Graeme: How can you say, "confusing criticism with personal attacks."? I have not done any definition. I have just said that I like comments and debate.
I said, "It seems like we are doing more than other printed magazines on these issues." Do you really consider this as an "attack"?
We have 2 000 crags listed on 2 000 pages. I guess this makes it a perfect platform for an access data base.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 16:16:26 |
|
|
Jens, it seems you're missing a few key issues:
1) Attacks or compliments? Whenever someone posts you should count it as a compliment because it signals that you have created a community where there wasn't one before. For that matter you should take it as a compliment everytime someone registers an ascent or signs up, it means you've done something good.
2) The 84:1 ratio of performance to access is sad. Celebrating it when it was admittedly a last second addition is worse. Back in the 70's Chouinard, Robinson, Robbins and a host of others advocated for clean climbing because they realized that the growth of the sport was having a negative impact on the opportunity to practice the sport. An 84:1 ratio puts us back about 30 years. If 8a wanted to be really proactive about this issue it would have done a lot more a lot sooner. Without cliffs and boulder fields there is nothing to score for the precious scorecard. I admit that 84:1 is better than 84:0, but you act like it's a radical contribution when it's really a pittance compared to what could be done if 8a really wanted to show leadership on this issue.
3) Debate is healthy. Dissenting opinions are healthy. Diverse ideas are healthy. They aren't all personal attacks. The issue, Jens, is that when someone disagrees you tend to lash out. In fact, you lash out far more often than I criticize. And, as noted by others above, when you lash out you "feed the fire" or create more fodder for future critique. Let people criticize and consider the ideas for what they are, ideas. Had you viewed my post this way, you would have realized at least "good" things:
a) I was simply suggesting you could have done more and maybe you put this in your idea book for next year's yearbook. Or maybe you make changes to the site that allow people to record the access issues of crag when they record scores.
b) You'll notice that no one had posted about this until I did. My satire might have been too pointed but it generated discussion and there are now a lot of ideas here, both suggestions about how you (Jens) might respond to future situations but also data on access.
Good luck. I hope for better things in the future, especially regarding 84:1.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 16:44:43 |
|
|
|
@ Sidepull: Thanks!
In the near future it will be possible to add access issues for each of the 2 000 crags in the data base. This information will be listed also at the first page as the First Ascents.
Regarding the 84:1, as I said, I do think this is good compared to other printed magazines. At this point, it does not make any difference to have 84:10, as we do not have any specific information. The general idea to dedicate the inside back cover to Access is a good first step...for which I am proud of!
The idea of the news was actually to gather access problems that we could print in the yearbook. I guess as, the thread started in another way, nobody seems to bother to give specific details that was the idea. I think that is sad!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 16:52:03 |
|
|
Well, if you feel I killed this thread you could:
A) start a new one and make sure the first response is a model of the type of response you'd like.
B) start to re-route this thread with an example of the kind of information you want.
I agree it's a first step. I agree 1 is better than nothing. I hope you push this and integrate it more fully into the site. But obviously that's my bias.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 19:53:51 |
|
|
Jens
Yu still haven't answered my question about whether you will check any information before you publish it. Individual climbers may not know the official access information and it could cause problems if you publish wrong information.
Publishing links to the official access information would be a better idea eg UKC links to the BMC page for the ip to date official info. I am sure that other federations or clubs have similar web pages that are up to date.
Graeme
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 20:27:50 |
|
|
I'll critcise you Jens.
You are seen as disrepectful and ignorant when you write absolute bullshit like this.
"Compared to other magazines we are much better setting the environment and Access in focus."
What a crock of shite.
Have you actually done any research to substantiate this claim.
No you have not.
Have you contacted any of the magazines in the World?
No you have not.
Go here:
http://www.accessfund.org/partners/corplist.php
Access Fund USA supporters.
DIAMOND MEDIA $20,000+
Alpinist 2003
Backpacker Magazine 2004
Climbing 1991
Rock & Ice 1993
URBAN CLIMBER MAGAZINE 2004
Contact the other magazines and climbing media in the world, internet and guidebooks and find out.
Find out how much money they donate to access and conservation and how much editorial they run and events they organise.
I think you owe those USA climbing magazines an apology on your so called news page.
At the very least.
Mick Ryan
UKClimbing.com
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 20:30:45 |
|
|
|
@ Graeme: All the 8a members will be able to publish access info to the data base. This means that anybody can update it if necessary. We will also make it possible to link the information, as you suggest.
@ Michael: I read most climbing magazines but I have never seen any magazine dedicate the inside back cover to the Environment or the Access. Actually and normally, most of the time there is no information about the Environment or the Access. 8a has dedicated a full page for this every year (every issue) and thus, "Compared to other magazines we are much better setting the environment and Access in focus."
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 23:10:04 |
|
|
Jens "@
Graeme: All the 8a members will be able to publish access info to the
data base. This means that anybody can update it if necessary. We will
also make it possible to link the information, as you suggest."
I think you are wrong to do this, allowing individuals to post access information can lead to incorrect information. This could be either because of:
1) a genuine mistake or
2) deliberately misleading information posted either by a landowner/special interest group that want to 'discourage' climbing
You might think this last point is verging on paranoia but experience in the UK has shown it is not.
Ok thats the constructive criticism over. Now for what you would call a personalized attack. Although in reality it is not actually a personal attack, it's just criticism (a personal attack is something really quite nasty).
""I
read most climbing magazines but I have never seen any magazine
dedicate the inside back cover to the Environment or the Access.
Actually and normally, most of the time there is no information about
the Environment or the Access. 8a has dedicated a full page for this
every year (every issue) and thus, "Compared to other magazines we are
much better setting the environment and Access in focus"
Complete and utter inaccurate, egotistical and arrogant b*llshit.
I mentioned Summit magazine earlier, you seemed to have ignored that as it didn't fit in with your argument.
Mick mentions 5 US magazines that have contributed $20,000+ in a single year. And thats real cash not some advertising space that you may or may not have sold at full price.
Putting some Access information in the yearbook is a worthy thing but please stop pretending that 8a is "much better" than other magazines - it is like comparing chalk with cheese as the yearbook is not even really a magazine as it is only a once a year publication, it is more like an annual report.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 23:12:21 |
|
|
You are very mistaken Jens and are wrong.
The climbing magazines in the USA and some in the UK are very proactive when it comes to access and conservation, including full page adverts, access and conservation articles, donations of cash to access organisations, and organising conservation days.
8a.nu has come to this late in the day, but I am glad you have joined in.
Mick Ryan
UKClimbing.com
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-04 23:19:17 |
|
|
Word of advice Jens and this may have to take a big shift in attitude from you. I hope you are listening and that you understand what I am going to say.
As a climbing media - internet, guidebook, magazine - you first have to admit to yourself that what you do will increase impacts at cliffs and that you will attract people to cliffs who may behave badly and threaten access.
In short Jens, you, by your actions at 8a.nu may cause access problems.
I admit this through my work with guidebooks and UKClimbing.com.
When you fully take this on board and admit that you produce adverts for cliffs and routes ONLY THEN can you start to think seriously about what you can do to educate climbers and help in access and conservation at the worlds climbing sites.
Mick
UKClimbing.com
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2009-03-05 14:12:38 |
|
|
You have a unique opportunity to make a difference Jens especially with your global audience of young sport climbers and boulderers.
You have the power to make a positive impact on access and conservation.
I'm sure you are aware of this but you really need to put your thinking cap on.
As Graeme said be wary of letting anyone update access at crags in your database - perhaps better to have a local to adopt-a-crag.
Your home page could carry a permanent crag behaviour message.
As well as a full page ad in your year book perhaps run monthly articles on crag access and conservation. I would be very willing to contribute.
How about a 8a.nu award for good crag guardianship and access work.
Possibilities are endless.
Off to train.
Over and out.
Mick Ryan
UKClimbing.com
|
|
|
|
|
|