About this name thing on the rocks at the new place.

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

Not saying anybody's wrong or I'm right...just wondering about this ethics thing. Also, is there someplace I can read up on rock climbing ethics, or is it a personal thing?

Next question: Exactly how does painting a little name near the bottom of a route in a place that can't be used as a hold "ruin" the rock. Its just a 1" high name-tag in acrylic paint anyways. Anybody *that* offended could just take a wire brush to the name and there'd be nothing left.

I thought putting names on the routes was a good idea to be honest. Being a relative noob, I have a hard time spotting good lines. If I'm out there without a crew of experios (word I just made up meaning opposite of noob) then it helps to have the routes identified since I doubt there'll be a guidebook made up for this place anytime soon.

[Fred]

Ian,

no one would ever have expected YOU and others present in this situation to know if writing route names on rock is ethical or not. I for one do not hold any of the "newbs" responsible in this case. And it's not a big deal since it IS a dump but it's a matter of principle. The area does suck but that doesn't mean we can trash it. Like the Woodlot. In this scenario I would have expected the experienced climbers in your crew to set a different example.

As for the wire brushing... don't worry... I'll scrubb them off next time. Luckily it's not serious paint and solid rock.

Peace.

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

ok, but why is it bad to paint a little name if we already cleared out some of the rocks, cut down trees on the landings, built a fire pit, cut a trail in there and compacted a bunch of soil so that new trees can't grow. Is there a logical reason or is it one of those "you just don't" reasons?

Is it cause of dispute over who made the first ascents?

just trying to understand.

[martha]

Ian,

It isn't so much that it 'ruins' the rock. of course it doesn't 'ruin' it. However, it does leave a trace that is there forever, and serves no safety purpose etc (ie bolts). To put something there that is a matter of convienience is just a little on the 'over doing it' side.

As for reading up about this sort of thing...definately. Read Lynn Hill's book. She talks about some of the ethical discussions that came about when sport climbing was first introduced. (one example) Most guidebooks to other climbing areas or websites of other climbing areas have a 'history' and 'route development' section where you can read about the issues surrounding the local ethics, how they developed and how they are maintained. Of course this little bouldering area is of little consequence, but New Brunswick has pretty much a set of ethics based on the developing that has taken place over the last 30 years mostly in Welsford and in some other smaller areas.

John Bowles or Stef Kruse could give you a good list of books as they both have extensive personal libraries on the subject of climbing. There are lots out there. But basically it stands that chipping/glueing holds or otherwise altering the rock is out (unless knocking off loose dangerous blocks etc) and painting route names or anything on the rock is also not accepted. Not anywhere. It has been done like I said in the other thread, in Quebec and in France but even in those areas, they have and are abandoning the practice.


Cara

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

I get it then, and I'd like to read up on that a bit.

But just a point to consider on the safety issue, in a place like Dump where the rock is shaky and its still under heavy development, wouldn't it be safer to have the cleaned and established routes distinguished from the ones that aint? At least until enough people have been there that everybody knows whats up. Again...thinking of the noobs here (like me) that can't always identify the trouble areas.

[dave]

Should have seen there was another topic about this before i posted in the other thread....

[granite_grrl]

Another reason for the leave no trace ethic that Cara didn't mention is for the perception of climbers. Many areas are on private or park land, climbers as a group should do their best to uphold a good image of themselves lest they get kicked off the land as a user group.

If we're friendly, pick up other people's trash and stay on established trails they're more likely to think of climbers as a friendly helpful user group. If we make fire rings, cut down numerous trees, and yell and curse at the rock when we fall off we're not making a very good impression.

I don't think that I really understood access issues until I moved away from NS to Ontario. The local rock is all in parks. Climbing here isn't a right, its a privalige. Maybe it doesn't matter in the area that you are currently climbing in, but if you get in good habits now and make the public perception of the climber a good one it less work you'll have to do later when your local crag is threatened for closure.

[martha]

But just a point to consider on the safety issue, in a place like Dump where the rock is shaky and its still under heavy development, wouldn't it be safer to have the cleaned and established routes distinguished from the ones that aint? At least until enough people have been there that everybody knows whats up.

It is generally pretty easy to tell what lines have been done and what ones haven't in a bouldering or climbing area. New ones are obviously covered in Moss with not even the key holds scrubbed and loose/crap rock is still all over them. I would hope that even a new climber could figure that much out.

Of course, the ones that have been done have chalk on them in places that the rain can't wash, they have little moss/lichen especially on the key holds and they have the top outs cleaned off and usually are trampled at the bottom from crash pads and people.

[Fred]

Ian,

I would also recommend reading up on the history of Fontainbleau and the painting of circuits. You can probably search the net for it. I've been to font and the paint is disgusting. I'm not talking just one little name here or there. They have arrows and numbers everywhere.

Also, if you want next time you see John, Stef or myself at the gym we can just sit down and talk about it a little. You guys seem realy keen on climbing and I think it's important to learn more than just how to climb. This was an honnest mistake for some of you but not others.

Cheers!

[Fred]

http://www.accessfund.org/pdf/BoulderingPaper.pdf

The Access Fund is considered to be the standard in the US. They don't even address the issue of painting because it is a non-issue. However, you can be certain that if noise and chalk are considered problems then surely painting is out of the question. In my experience and travels I consider the Americans (Access Fund) to be the closest in etchical practice. They have very high standards as do we.

I found a bunch of stuff on painting circuits in Font etc on the net. They all seem to agree that painting is from an old generation and is no longer seen as acceptable.

[granite_grrl]

On the subject of painting route names at their base, I couldn't beleive the first time I went to Rattlensnake point near Toronto and I saw numbers painted at the base of the crag. Now, these numbers are painted a yellow that blends in with the rock...but they're there. Its the main way to navagate the cliff.

Ethics are a curious thing. No particular climber owns the rock (unless its on their land or something), and so in reality no one can tell you what to do. To me ethics come down to two things: #1 - preserving access to areas in the future and #2 - respecting others in the comunity.

When #2 goes out the window things like bolting wars occur, suqeeze job routes get put up, draws get swipped off projects, and a general animosity in the climbing community occurs.

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

granite_grrl

Hit that one on the head. Never would have thought that this name thing could generate so much controversy or antimosity. I thought it pretty innocent myself, but apparently the subject is far deeper than I ever imagined (see John's post in "the new spot" thread).

Cara,

Think when you were a brand new climber (which for all intents and purposes I am), did you really find it that easy to spot good, safe lines on the rock? I mean, it doesn't make sense to label in a place like Dover where the rock is solid and doesn't need cleaning, but indicating an established route in a crumbly little outcrop like Dump might keep a newb from pulling a loose rock down in their face or on their spotter. Just something to think about.

out.

[Pierre]

Here's my two cents on this topic

Ignorance is no excuse!

Think when you were a brand new climber (which for all intents and purposes I am), did you really find it that easy to spot good, safe lines on the rock? I mean, it doesn't make sense to label in a place like Dover where the rock is solid and doesn't need cleaning, but indicating an established route in a crumbly little outcrop like Dump might keep a newb from pulling a loose rock down in their face or on their spotter. Just something to think about.

I haven't been climbing for to long either, but I would say part of what lured me into climbing is the problem solving aspect of reading a route. I do find it difficult in reading/finding all the good, safe lines on the rock, however It's usually quite obvious of what's not safe.

At times it would be nice to have some one give me beta when climbing, maybe it would help me move up the grade level quicker.


Later

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

Pierre,

Agreed, its usually obvious what's safe and what isn't

I'm just presenting an alternative that identifying routes could be done for safety reasons, as opposed to simply wanting your route name there for everyone to see. Its one of those "for the sake of argument" things.

I propose though that the names be left up until a topo and a guide can be made so that people unfamiliar with the area can find the good routes. I think that's a reasonable alternative... I don't really care what happens anyway. Whatever satisfies the most people is best I guess. That crappy acrylic paint will be gone by spring anyway.

[martha]

Cara,

Think when you were a brand new climber (which for all intents and purposes I am), did you really find it that easy to spot good, safe lines on the rock? I mean, it doesn't make sense to label in a place like Dover where the rock is solid and doesn't need cleaning, but indicating an established route in a crumbly little outcrop like Dump might keep a newb from pulling a loose rock down in their face or on their spotter. Just something to think about.

out.

I was always climbing with experienced climbers who could put me on routes that were safe and if they weren't I was told 'watch out for that block etc'. I 'apprenticed' so to speak with climbing. (rope climbing... not bouldering cause I could care less about bouldering except as a means of training). It seems that following those with more experience and gaining your own through an apprenticship has gone the way of the Dodo. I still think it is one of the best ways to learn about climbing.

However, I think I would have known, just as I do now, if I was about to pull a chunk of rock out on my head. Either that, or if I wasn't sure, I wouldn't have climbed that route. Only in the last year or two have I started onsighting Trad routes as I was never comfortable before in the 'unknown'.

Bouldering is different though. Cause you can usually see the whole route from the ground, its holds, where the chalk is and if it has been cleaned etc.

I think that the indicator of an established route is simply the fact that it is clean and the others are not. It is pretty obvious, even to a novice in places like the woodlot. In my opinion at least. So if a novice gets on a route that doesn't look cleaned off, and there isn't any chalk on it and the landing is full on tall grass and nothing trampled.. he is likely in new territory. I think any smart person could figure that out. So I think that anyone going to the Dump should know where the routes are and where they aren't. And if not, then go with someone who does! The best way to learn is from others!

again...all my opinion...not trying to insult anyone....

[Ian_the_Barbarian]

Cara,

True enough.

This all makes way more sense to me now anyway...I'm just trying to present alternatives that you may not have thought about, just as you all did in the earlier posts to me. I guess the next question is: when do we make a site guide and forget about this argument crap.

[martha]

keep track of all the problems that go up. the names and grades and orientation to other climbs. draw a topo and fred can post it here on the site for all to have.

[Matt Peck]

I think Pierre is onto a line of thought similar to mine, part of the tradition associated with trad climbing in New Brunswick is the old school notion of leaving some mystery about routes. This is why not every little feature in a climb is dictated in the guidebooks, and why names are not painted upon the route starts. It lends a sense of adventure to climbing, but also has a more tangible aspect: It encourages dialogue and education within the climbing community. Beginning climbers are put under more pressure to seek out more experienced climbers for advice on what a route is like and whether it is within their difficulty range. I agree with Cara that apprenticeship is a KEY componnent of learning to climb. As well as educating a new climber in technique and fostering a sense of what they are capable, it engenders RESPECT and HUMILITY which I think are founding principles of climbing dogma. Don't kid yourself, climbing is a very dangerous activity, and we are priveleged to be both free to access the areas and sound of body enough to enjoy them.
Experienced climbers will teach you history and ethical considerations regarding a craig, this is passed on to new generations from the last and is an important means of safeguarding the future of our climbing areas, both physically (by preserving the rock as much as possible in its natural state) and ethically (by maintaining good style and avoiding the degradation of our sport).
There has recently been a movement away from apprenticeship in NB. My own climbing career saw me start leading probably before I should have been on the sharp end. I have had a few accidents as a result, but I was lucky. I guess if there is one thing I can pass on, it is that experienced climbers are a valuable resource to be exploited by new climbers, preferably to the greatest degree. You do yourself credit by asking questions here, as well as in the community.

[Fred]

well said Mat

I also strongly encourage new climbers to slowly learn climbing through apprenticeship. Heading up unknown routes with little experience and training is a sure way to MAXIMIZE risk for serious injury or death.

[Fred]

Anybody *that* offended could just take a wire brush to the name and there'd be nothing left.

I tried it today with a wire brush. That paint is on there for the long haul.