Is climbing really a Leave No Trace sport?

There is no such thing as "LNT" in the age of global supply chains, and certainly not where climbing is concerned. If only our impacts really were limited to grid bolting and chipped holds!

We drive to the crag in our cars burning fossil fuels, flake out our petroleum based ropes, put on our petroleum based rain gear when the weather closes in, and eat our agri-business lunch waiting for the sun to come back out. Along the way we log into MP from our smart phones loaded with rare metals mined at appalling human and environmental cost. I'm not judging, and am just as guilty as anyone. But any discussion of climbing as an LNT activity is astonishingly myopic and delusional. Bolts and broken holds are about as insignificant as it gets placed in a more realistic context.

Sent from my iPhone (yes, I'm a hypocrit)

So, if this topic isn't a good way to chastise sport climbers, than what is the point?

This is a boring topic. Climbers as a whole are less LNT than many hikers, river runners, BASE jumpers, and backcountry skiers, but quite a bit more LNT than mountain bikers, equestrians, ATVers, and Winnebago Warriors.

I do think that the true hypocrisy arrises when self-mythologized "trad" climbers try to link removable protection and sometimes a ground up ethic not to boldness, but to environmental consciousness. They are simply not the same.

Rather than getting ascetic about leaving no trace, since humans tend to make traces in the parts of the world we live in and visit, why not instead strive to leave an area in a better condition than how you found it. That will not always be possible, but most of the time it will.

Beats hand wringing and serves nature better.

climbingnarc.com/2012/09/cl…

A subsequent Park Service investigation of The Underground Chasm discovered hundreds of illegally placed bolts, fixed rope, burnt Joshua Trees, stashed camping and climbing gear, chipped steps and damage to other nearby trees and plants

How about LNT. Leave No Trash. That is pretty much what I am looking for. Heck, elk and deer leave a trace if they use an area. It is part of the deal. If you want pristine get deep into a wilderness area and start walking. Oh, don't look back either.

camhead wrote: I do think that the true hypocrisy arrises when self-mythologized "trad" climbers try to link removable protection and sometimes a ground up ethic not to boldness, but to environmental consciousness. They are simply not the same.

Amen to that. A neologism that really irks me is "greenpointing," which describes climbing a bolted route without clipping the bolts, and instead placing widgets. It bothers me because it takes the langauge of environmentalism and applies it to bolts, which I think is rediculous. Bolts are an issue of style and aesthetics, not environmentalism. Skipping a bolt isn't "green"; riding your bike to the cag and planting a tree is "green". Overuse of the environmental analogy robs it of its meaning, and distracts from ways that you can have an actual positive impact. So, "greenpointing" is just classic greenwashing of a climbing experience that is not diffferent, envrionmentally, from if the bolts were clipped.

If we really care about minimizing our impact, the "LNT" ethic really has to go. LNT is a good practice in lightly visited areas, but is counterprodctive in highly-trafficed places. One person can come and go from a place and leave no trace; 500 people cannot, no matter how caeful they are. As such, if we want to minimize our crag impact, we either need to all stop climbing (that would be effective) or accept that some "traces" are neccesary to help mimimize the overall impact of climber traffic. Examples are erosion control terraces at crag bases, and rap bolts to prevent people from damaging trees by rapping off of them. Both of these are not "LNT", but instead are a "minimize overall impact" ethic.

Just a little side rant.

Leave No Trace huh? Does anyone else find it funny that the OP, writing about LNT, is one of these d-ba...um, pardon me (Guideline #1 and all that)"car stereo afficiandos", bragging about how loud his booming system is?

I know that I truly enjoy having to hear some assho...I mean some gentleman's selection of Nickelback at 112dB as he cruises the streets.

"2002 Ford Excursion 6.8L V-10 (modified, superchiped) estimated 385 HP / 535 Ft./ lbs. torque
(4) 18" Kicker Solo X's (walled off, 2007 model)
(4) Kicker ZX2500.1's (10,000 + RMS)
(1) Kicker ZX850.4
(11) Group 31 deep cycle batteries
(3) 205 amp alternators
(4) 5.25" Audiobahn 2-way component sets "

forum.realmofexcursion.com/…

Holla atcha boi:

Will S wrote:Leave No Trace huh? Does anyone else find it funny that the OP, writing about LNT, is one of these d-ba...um, pardon me (Guideline #1 and all that)"car stereo afficiandos", bragging about how loud his booming system is? I know that I truly enjoy having to hear some assho...I mean some gentleman's selection of Nickelback at 112dB as he cruises the streets. "2002 Ford Excursion 6.8L V-10 (modified, superchiped) estimated 385 HP / 535 Ft./ lbs. torque (4) 18" Kicker Solo X's (walled off, 2007 model) (4) Kicker ZX2500.1's (10,000 + RMS) (1) Kicker ZX850.4 (11) Group 31 deep cycle batteries (3) 205 amp alternators (4) 5.25" Audiobahn 2-way component sets " forum.realmofexcursion.com/… Holla atacha boi:

Oh Snap! hahahahahaha

edit - he's got all that cash but can't afford any drywall on his bathroom ceiling?

Glenn Schuler wrote: Oh Snap! hahahahahaha edit - he's got all that cash but can't afford any drywall on his bathroom ceiling?

That's because he is saving up for one of those 120 db boom box thingamajigs.

Jon Moen wrote: If we really care about minimizing our impact, the "LNT" ethic really has to go. LNT is a good practice in lightly visited areas, but is counterprodctive in highly-trafficed places. One person can come and go from a place and leave no trace; 500 people cannot, no matter how caeful they are. As such, if we want to minimize our crag impact, we either need to all stop climbing (that would be effective) or accept that some "traces" are neccesary to help mimimize the overall impact of climber traffic. Examples are erosion control terraces at crag bases, and rap bolts to prevent people from damaging trees by rapping off of them. Both of these are not "LNT", but instead are a "minimize overall impact" ethic. Just a little side rant.

Abandoning the idea of Leave No Trace completely doesn't make sense to me, at all. Yes, Leave No Trace practices are rooted in backcountry and wilderness settings, but that's not the entire reach of the program. In fact, the vast majority of outdoor recreation happens in very heavily impacted, "frontcountry" areas like county parks, city parks, etc... these are typically day use areas and car camping places. For the last decade, the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics has had very successful programs, education, and curriculum in place specifically targeted at these "frontcountry" recreation areas. In fact, dozens and dozens of municipalities have contracted services through the Center for Outdoor Ethics to consult these entities in how best to reach their users with minimum impact information, and those programs, across the board, have been wildly successful. So, no, I don't see how Leave No Trace wouldn't apply to "500 people" any less than it applies to the one user out in the middle of some designated wilderness area. Look at it this way: tens of thousands of people attend Burning Man every year (which happens on BLM land) and that event, through the application of Leave No Trace Principles, has only been allowed to continue because those tens of thousands of participants utilize Leave No Trace ethics while they're out there partying in the dessert. So if Leave No Trace can meaningfully be applied to a group like that, why can't it apply to rock climbing?

It seems to me, from reading many of the above posts, that folks are attempting to pigeon hole Leave No Trace into a very literal context. This, of course, is a narrow view of Leave No Trace skills and ethics. No, we can never truly leave "no" trace. However, this isn't the idea. Leave No Trace is about education; education about the various impacts people have when recreating, how to recognize those impacts, and providing the proper tools to minimize or eliminate those impacts. Of course we all cause impacts when recreating outside, to one extent or another. But if you know nothing about Leave No Trace, just remember this: Leave No Trace is about eliminating the avoidable impacts while minimizing the unavoidable impacts. There are A LOT of variables that come into play when deciding what the most ethical decision is in regard to minimizing our impacts. It's not so cut and dry.

Jason Grubb wrote: Abandoning the idea of Leave No Trace completely doesn't make sense to me, at all. There are A LOT of variables that come into play when deciding what the most ethical decision is in regard to minimizing our impacts. It's not so cut and dry.

Leave less of a trace is a lot more honest but still pretty lame.

I liked: Lave a trace; leave the place better than you found it.

I also still support dyingholes for all of those who really care to minimize their "trace"

All I ask of climbers is this:

Don't leave trash at the crag.

Poop a reasonable distance away from trails.

Erosion, excess chalk, etc. are a bummer but much harder to avoid than the prior basic items which, unfortunately, are too much hassle for many people.

I have a problem leaving no skid marks in my tiddy's some times. But it can be done with some focus and practice just like the subject of this thread.

People see the things they want to see. For me, climbing 20 years ago in the US had much more of a LNT ethic than it does today. Bolts, tick marks, fixed draws... that's littering to me. I certainly don't want anyone to get hurt, but it seems there used to be an American boldness that's nowadays lost to the LNT crowd who... see what they want to see. Leave No Trace- that's self explanatory. If someone can walk, or climb in your steps and not tell that you've been there, then you've left no trace. Elk scat or bear tracks, that's by the definition of natural different from chalk and permadraws.