Tallulah Gorge Peregrines

Y'all can try to put lipstick on this pig all ya want. This..."here's some money...go forth and bolt."...Is some BULLshit.

Table Rock SC still has blanket closures of their wall and peregrines haven't existed there in over a decade. Do you know how difficult it is to even get a meeting with them to reverse this closure? Near impossible! A meeting with them regarding climbing management probably hasn't happened in at least 4 years, around the time of the trail day we had. How Stephen S managed to get that event still amazes me. Still we are left with one of the most radical walls in the SE being closed during three months of it's prime season. We only get from late November to Dec. 31 where it is cold enough, and of that month or so, maybe only a day or two where conditions are dry enough to climb the majority of the routes. Getting any sort of change to occur by a state run bureaucracy seems nonexistant or to paraphrase discussions regarding access at here and other places: "it will happen, if you just give it a few decades".

I do applaud NC SP's handling of the Moore's wall closures. It used to be that the north side was another blanket closure. They evaluated the area and realized they weren't nesting anymore. It is nice seeing an state park work more closely and trust climber advice regarding access. History has shown that they are the exception and not the rule when it comes to state park-climber relations.

I also commend Will C's efforts at Tallulah, but it is really just gesturing until he talks to someone who can actually make changes or get a larger force involved like the SCC should be or the AF.

Paul Barnes wrote:Y'all can try to put lipstick on this pig all ya want. This..."here's some money...go forth and bolt."...Is some BULLshit.

I don't know. I can think of one case where I think it was a great idea. Specifically Rocky Face Park in Alexander County NC. It's an old quarry and the county provided money for hardware. Being a quarry it's not a destination climbing area but it's very popular with beginners/gym climbers and it took a lot of pressure off of other areas.

Will Eccleston wrote:Jim, with regard to that last comment, I have to note that Brad McLeod himself fully supported SCC-funded bolting, and not just at SCC crags. I'm not, however, in total disagreement with you. SCC-funded bolting opens a can of worms. What about at areas the SCC owns though? If there were a process to determine what should and should not be bolted, would you still oppose SCC-funded bolting at crags that the SCC owns?

I said such groups should not be involved in 'putting up' (i.e. creating new) routes--obviously I don't have a problem with hardware replacement, as long as it's one to one. I do see that as a function of such groups.

However, it seems like a clear conflict of interest between 'preserving', which is supposed to be the mandate, and 'creating'. Obviously putting up sport routes favors one group of climbers over another. Then you introduce the whole idea of 'someone'--a committee, no doubt--determining what should and should not be bolted, which inevitably leads to political decisions and cronyism (ahem, CCC). Most importantly from my old time perspective, climbing is supposed to be an individualistic and slightly anarchic sport. BITD there used to be a lot of pious chest thumping about the FA as an 'artistic' statement, which I thought was a load of crap. But there's no question that some of the most interesting routes are the result of the vision of one or two people, whereas I guarantee you that bolting by committee on SE sandstone will lead to the lowest common denominator, that being highly sanitized grid bolted utterly vapid lines put up by the politically connected.

TomCaldwell wrote: I do applaud NC SP's handling of the Moore's wall closures. It used to be that the north side was another blanket closure. They evaluated the area and realized they weren't nesting anymore. It is nice seeing an state park work more closely and trust climber advice regarding access. History has shown that they are the exception and not the rule when it comes to state park-climber relations.

Actually, relations with the state parks are better than they have ever been and all of the park superintendents where there is climbing are very supportive. I realize people get frustrated with the speed of progress at Chimney Rock in particular, but the relationship there is very strong. I was standing in the parking lot with the park superintendent last year as the comp started and he was asking when we were going to do it again and we were talking about other areas to open in the future. Pretty cool.

Will Eccleston wrote: I have to note that Brad McLeod himself fully supported SCC-funded bolting, and not just at SCC crags.

Just change the name to The Southeastern Sportclimbing Coalition and be done with it.

Cornelius Jefferson wrote: He was absolutely right to let people know that perigrines were present and acting pissed. The condescending way you mischaracterized his post was self-serving, mean and uncalled for. Climbers have a responsibility to self-police regarding these situations and a broader duty to protect these birds whether you think that's worthy or not. You come off as an ornery selfish crank whose only concern is his own access to climbing, blinded by a searing anger at any number of land managers and user groups who interfere with your God-given right to climb any rock at any time. Get a grip.

Thanks for contributing to the discussion... I can see you are well versed in the history of the area and access issues.

It is not just my access, it is everyone's. It just so happens I live very close to this place, and others with often unnecessary closures where the birds don't exist. I wear my passion for these places on my sleeve. You misinterpret my opinions towards conservation of plant and animal species. You don't have to close down an entire wall to insure the safety of these animals. Like I said several pages ago, there are places that aren't closed that climbers and the birds coexist and have for a long time. Local history has shown that once these closures go into effect, it is near impossible to ever get it changed.

Speaking of closures that will probably never get changed and regarding Bryan's post. Pilot could have spread out climbers if they would open the pinnacle. That is closed due to ravens (really?!) and a plant species that is abundant as a weed just a few miles west.

TomCaldwell wrote: Speaking of closures that will probably never get changed and regarding Bryan's post. Pilot could have spread out climbers if they would open the pinnacle. That is closed due to ravens (really?!) and a plant species that is abundant as a weed just a few miles west.

As I said earlier, some things bear reading all the details. The state park biologist (who is also a climber) wrote up a comprehensive explanation of the pinnacle closure. It's worth a read as it lays out the thinking behind it: carolinaclimbers.org/pilot-…

We still bug them about it from time to time, because that's how we roll.

C'mon Paul. Are you not interested in fixing the actual issues anymore? Were you ever? That post is not true nor is it helpful.

Brian Payst wrote: As I said earlier, some things bear reading all the details. The state park biologist (who is also a climber) wrote up a comprehensive explanation of the pinnacle closure. It's worth a read as it lays out the thinking behind it: carolinaclimbers.org/pilot-… We still bug them about it from time to time, because that's how we roll.

Thanks for the link Brian. I know you guys are doing a good job. I don't think we have the rampant problems that this thread is portraying the SCC as having. The route committee had good intentions, but was sullied by just one individual. I can't comment on the politics of the time, but maybe they did have a case. It was a way to prevent retro bolting until the history was established.

I like trade-offs like the one outlined in that link. The NC SP seems to be the shining light with state run access in the region. I hope they keep the balance between conservation and access. The last comment in that link is sort of interesting. The assertion that the park manufactures these rare species by needing to continually replace them???

Speaking of trade-offs, a good one would be to open the opposite side of Tallulah to climbing or just to close a smaller section to the birds like at Looking Glass or Whitesides. There is a long climbing history over there with many already established routes. Did they at least close off the overlooks directly above the nesting site so tourists don't kick rocks down at them? Nothing a peregrine parent can do to stop falling rocks.

I think the reasoning for the other side of Tallulah being closed is a similar theme to what was mentioned in the Pilot link, ease of rescue. This is baffling to me, since a trad ethos is to be self-reliant. I think this was the main reasoning for building that gravel road to the Cereal Wall and I believe would be a MAJOR issue at GT. Oh the cell phone age!

Will Eccleston wrote:C'mon Paul. Are you not interested in fixing the actual issues anymore? Were you ever? That post is not true nor is it helpful.

I am...but dammit man...that stuff from Todd this morning got me fired up. I still wanna hear somebody answer for this:

"We funded the Southeastern Climber’s Association to go climb, develop, and bolt routes all over Lookout Mountain, Signal Mountain, Mowbray Mountain, and Monteagle Mountain. And they’re still going. They’re establishing between 25-35 new routes across this area, improving and promoting Chattanooga as an innovative outdoor city."

I think there need to be answers to a lot of questions, and many of them will have perfectly good answers that just weren't made public enough (transparency issue). There will be others for which the answers do not satisfy everyone, and hopefully some of those questions will result in change that is satisfactory to most folks. But not everyone is ever going to be happy. That's how it is with politics.

Just try to remain constructive, because when people aren't, it reduces the possibility that anything good will come out of this. And I know you know that. And I know you're fired up. And I know why. Just sayin'...please try.

Point taken.

I just want somebody to run up in here right quick with a publicly transparent answer to THAT^^^...and so do some others. I know they're watchin. Quit lurkin and step up.

Paul Barnes wrote:Point taken. I just want somebody to run up in here right quick with a publicly transparent answer to THAT^^^...and so do some others. I know they're watchin. Quit lurkin and step up.

Not trying to speak for anyone else, but I wouldn't read so much into a description like that from the UnFoundation (note that was not put out by the SCC and it's not posted to the SCC web site anywhere).

Reading their other project descriptions "We can’t really think of a better way to create awareness and bring folks together than a parade!" "We couldn't pass up an opportunity to support bringing indie bands to Chattanooga while giving back to our community. I mean, who do you think we are? "They are going to hype themselves with cool and likely it will be inaccurate when it comes to climbing (as most media posts are). I used only my hands and feet to type this.

Will Eccleston wrote:But not everyone is ever going to be happy.

We ain't in a fairy tale.

Again, I believe we are about to see a shift, as per Will's commentary.

Right is right and the Southeast needs to 'get right'.

Brian may be right about the accuracy of that UnFoundation description. Sure would be interesting to read the grant proposal and then hear exactly what the money went for. Can't seem to find that detail on the website.

Brian Payst wrote: description like that from the UnFoundation (note that was not put out by the SCC and it's not posted to the SCC web site anywhere).

Yeah I dont think I'd put anything about bolting routes all over Lookout Mountain, Signal Mountain, Mowbray Mountain, and Monteagle Mountain on there either if I were them.

--- Invalid image id: 110506703 ---

"....christened with steel."

chris·ten
ˈkris(ə)n/
verb
give (a baby) a Christian name at baptism as a sign of admission to a Christian Church.

synonyms: baptize, name, give the name of, call

"...retro-bolted and hyper popular..."

This doesn't even add up.

"...rob someone of a future climbing experience..."

But, it was done in the past.

I stopped buying guidebooks a long time ago, but, errrr....
What?

"...retro-bolted and hyper popular..."

...means everybody loves it now that we dumbed it down. Stated as justification.