Cochrane Lane cliffs CLOSED today for Maintenance

[Dom]

And BTW, Range Control had been notified. I called in to let them know.

[Ken P]

Notified of closure or maintenance?

[Dom]

Maintenance and made sure that they didn't have any activities planned in the area on Saturday.

[Stef]

Sorry Marty, I agree with Shawn. That post was heavy-handed and hit the wrong tone altogether for a volunteer organization. I have been climbing in Welsford for 13 years and put in my time on the R&I club exec, teaching, and scrubbing routes. I don't climb as much anymore, so I don't feel the need to give up my few free Saturday's building trail. Still happy to contribute for some more bolts, lumber etc.. if asked. I also don't recall electing anyone from Ascent NB to represent my interests and certainly not to ban me from climbing at Welsford if I wanted to. I think ultimately this organization is a good idea, but I hope this doesn't set a precedent for how it intends to operate.

Respectfully,

Stef.

[Ken P]

+1

[Dom]

I also don't recall electing anyone from Ascent NB to represent my interests and certainly not to ban me from climbing at Welsford if I wanted to.
Stef.

Stef thanks for your past contributions. I doubt anyone misses the old bolts your donations replaced.

But Really Stef? First, Your post contains no "Good work boys" no "Great job maintaining the crags". I feel this one day closure is overshadowing what we did. In the words of Chris N. : Let's not loose sight of the much needed work that was completed last weekend by a solid crew. It's hard enough to get people to come out and help, f"ck we'll be lucky if anyone shows up next year after yet another negative comment by someone who wasn't there.

As for Ascent, the AGM was advertised. I certainly voted. Close to 20 climbers voted. You can't hold it against Ascent that you weren't present on the day of the first AGM.

http://climbeasterncanada.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7910&p=40759&hilit=ascent#p40759
https://www.facebook.com/events/136091483262633/

[austinconrad]

It's hard enough to get people to come out and help, f"ck we'll be lucky if anyone shows up next year after yet another negative comment by someone who wasn't there.

Hopefully that's not the case.

[Stef]

But Really Stef? First, Your post contains no "Good work boys" no "Great job maintaining the crags". I feel this one day closure is overshadowing what we did. In the words of Chris N. : Let's not loose sight of the much needed work that was completed last weekend by a solid crew. It's hard enough to get people to come out and help, f"ck we'll be lucky if anyone shows up next year after yet another negative comment by someone who wasn't there.

As for Ascent, the AGM was advertised. I certainly voted. Close to 20 climbers voted. You can't hold it against Ascent that you weren't present on the day of the first AGM.

http://climbeasterncanada.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7910&p=40759&hilit=ascent#p40759
https://www.facebook.com/events/136091483262633/

Hi Dom,

I do appreciate the work put in. I chimed-in on Facebook to thank everyone who put in work that day.

I was in Africa on a job during the AGM. Was there a proxy vote system in place? If so, I missed it and apologize.

My comment was negative, but please take it in the spirit of constructive criticism. I think the heavy-handed approach will damage the credibility of your organization.

Regards,

Stefan.

[STeveA]

As a climber I am opposed to closing the cliff for any reason. If an area needs to be sealed off for trundling then do it just for that area. I volunteer my time, but do not believe that others should be force to volunteer, and I have no problem with them not.

[Terry_M]

In all honesty, I thought this is how the day would go :
A bunch of folks show up to the trail head in the morning, maybe 20 or 30 of us. We all spread out to do whatever needs to be done. This would have presented the potential for work going on ALL OVER CL, not just the new trail or Lower Dawn. So I would think it would make perfect sense for that one day, as to minimize the risk of injury, that the cliffs be closed to climbing.

In retrospect, maybe a better plan is needed for trail day next year. Put a post on CEC, or a poster at the sign in box about all the areas that will be affected that day. So those who absolutely need to go climbing that same day to send their 5.10 proj and hopefully get sponsored by BD can do so.

Hilarious thread everyone, thanks for that!

Terry

[Adam]

In all honesty, I thought this is how the day would go :
A bunch of folks show up to the trail head in the morning, maybe 20 or 30 of us. We all spread out to do whatever needs to be done. This would have presented the potential for work going on ALL OVER CL, not just the new trail or Lower Dawn. So I would think it would make perfect sense for that one day, as to minimize the risk of injury, that the cliffs be closed to climbing.

In retrospect, maybe a better plan is needed for trail day next year. Put a post on CEC, or a poster at the sign in box about all the areas that will be affected that day. So those who absolutely need to go climbing that same day to send their 5.10 proj and hopefully get sponsored by BD can do so.

Hilarious thread everyone, thanks for that!

Terry

i understand why people might object to the cliff being closed, but just as Terry describes, i expected a lot more people to show up (ex: the ones who said they were going to be cleaning at simpson) and if we had to rope off each section of cliff where people were working, it would time away from doing actual work when a full one-day closure would do the trick.

if you are hell bent on climbing on trail maintenance day, i suggest just going to one of the other half dozen crags within an hour's drive. that way those of us working don't have to worry about dropping rocks on people and anyone not wanting to help out can climb without worry of having stuff dropped on them.

so in future, i think it will be reasonable to close a cliff on trail maintenance day, but we should give the notice earlier, and make what effort we can to minimize the closure (note: it won't always be Cochrane Lane). that being said, let's all be understanding and appreciative of the work being done and try to accommodate the work being done instead of being annoyed at a closure.

[Pierre]

Was this really a Ascent NB event?

The only clue that Ascent NB might be involved in this event was form Marty’s post which was posted the day of.

I’m not convinced harassing people into volunteering their time is a constructive approach to gaining popularity and increasing membership of the organization. If you haven’t noticed we’re not the only ones that use the area - should we provide the hikers with shovels and harass them into trail work because they walk on the trails?

Looks like the main reason for wanting to Close the cliffs is for safety reasons. However I'm not convinced this is a problems. I think the best way to avoid safety issues is with a solid plan and stick to the parameters outlined in that plan. You can’t just randomly pick areas to clean and trundle on clean up day. This approach would definitely put people in harms way. If your going to have large number of people cleaning - organization and planning is key. If Ascend NB is going to take the lead on this yearly event maybe they need to form a committee and formulate a formal work plan. If this plan is done right and communicated appropriately we should not need to close the whole area to climbing.

But Really Stef? First, Your post contains no "Good work boys" no "Great job maintaining the crags". I feel this one day closure is overshadowing what we did.

Maybe next year Ascend NB trail committee can issue you boys a Certificate/Award for the Good work you've done. Hopefully it will make you feel better

[Dom]

Pierre, you've never been to a clean-up/trail maintenance day and now you're an expert in how it should be handled? How about starting by answering the RBloc questions on the board.

[Adam]

how many people were actually affected by this closure? i'm pretty sure it is a big fat ZERO. people sure have their knickers in a twist about this when no one was actually affected. the closure is for safety reasons and i think it is a good part of the plan. if you disagree that's fine, but if you want to change for next year, then get involved and make it happen instead of complaining about what the volunteers are doing to ruin your day.

You can’t just randomly pick areas to clean and trundle on clean up day. This approach would definitely put people in harms way.

why not? because you say so? it definitely isn't 'random', but it is not all predetermined before 'the day'. as a group we go there with the intention of doing work, and yes, it would be awesome if we could line everything up beforehand and only close the minimal area possible, but it makes our work easier if we can close the entire cliff.

for all of you that feel this is overbearing, i'd suggest that you join in next year and do the work of flagging off each area that we're working on so that the rest of us can focus on the nitty gritty. if someone steps up, then next year we'll avoid a total closure. anyone wanna step up?

should we provide the hikers with shovels and harass them into trail work because they walk on the trails?

i think this is a little absurd Pierre. of course hikers aren't going to be harassed into helping, but we would definitely try to dissuade/warn any would be hikers of the danger. we should have a sign up next time advising people to not hike in the area that day, or that they do so at their own, potentially fatal, risk.

[Dom]

As always, all of this would be better discussed/argued over a beer as internet messages can be misinterpreted quite easily. Maybe I wouldn't sound like a prick in real life .

I guess my overall message is we should encourage the trail maintenance/route cleaning type of activities and think twice of negatively criticizing on a public forum as it has may impact participation to these types of activities in the future

Like everything, a balance is needed and negative criticism only makes the balance tip one way.

[Shawn B]

Best post award goes to....Pierre. Could not have said it better.

And btw...Pierre has contributed more volunteer hours towards improving climbing in NB than most of the people who were there on any "trail day". You just don't hear about it. Don't belittle his efforts just because they may not be on your list of things that need to be done or they are not on "trail day". Its insulting.

I was hoping this thing would just fizzle out but I guess not. Seems to be getting less civil. To the closure crew... take a look through the posts...you are in the minority.

[austinconrad]

As always, all of this would be better discussed/argued over a beer as internet messages can be misinterpreted quite easily. Maybe I wouldn't sound like a prick in real life .

Agreed Discussions over the internet have a way of excalating quickly. I'm just as guilty ad the next guy. A discussion over a beer is always better.

[Adam]

Don't belittle his efforts just because they may not be on your list of things that need to be done or they are not on "trail day". Its insulting.

Shawn, i presume you're referring to me as 'belittling' him since i think i'm the only one who responded to him. i don't know what i said to belittle his efforts - no, i'm not aware of his efforts, but nowhere did i say he doesn't do anything. what exactly are you referring to? how is what i said insulting???

[Adam]

Shawn, i presume you're referring to me as 'belittling' him since i think i'm the only one who responded to him. i don't know what i said to belittle his efforts - no, i'm not aware of his efforts, but nowhere did i say he doesn't do anything. what exactly are you referring to? how is what i said insulting???

ah probably Dom's post. didn't see that at first. nvm

[STeveA]

Since Cleaning is becoming such a controversial issue, I suggest we have a moratorium on Cleaning Days until there is a White Paper looking into the long term impact on the environment and on the community as a whole.

[Dom]

Since Cleaning is becoming such a controversial issue, I suggest we have a moratorium on Cleaning Days until there is a White Paper looking into the long term impact on the environment and on the community as a whole.

Haha good one Steve! Are you going to start a protest in order to get your idea adopted?
In response, I will go to the Court to get an injunction to stop all of you protesters from writing on this forum.

[*Chris*]

Ascent NB should take careful stock of the feedback it's received over this. There are several important lessons to be learned from the comments Shawn, Stef, Pierre, etc. have brought forward. I've also heard from a few other concerned people who have not chosen to engage here on this forum. To be honest, I wasn't under the impression that this was an ANB activity. I thought this was still an informal group interested in doing some digging in November. However... perhaps I'm mistaken about that. It wouldn't be the first memo I've ever missed.

ANB needs to figure out how to work for the entire community. As of today... I think it represents at best the 20-30 folks who showed up to the AGM and preamble meetings. It is so far a very small club and in no position to dictate anything to anybody.

It's my understanding that the new exec and board will be meeting for first time quite soon. I think we'll have a good discussion about what we've learned here.

[Pierre]

i think this is a little absurd Pierre. of course hikers aren't going to be harassed into helping, but we would definitely try to dissuade/warn any would be hikers of the danger.

BTW Adam.. I was using sarcasm to illustrate my point. Yes what I'm stating here is absurd but it's no more absurd than forcing fellow climbers to pickup a shovel.

You can’t just randomly pick areas to clean and trundle on clean up day. This approach would definitely put people in harms way.

why not? because you say so? it definitely isn't 'random', but it is not all predetermined before 'the day'.

I'll try to briefly answer your questions Adam.

why not?
Acting haphazardly with a large number of people who all have their own agenda/priorities is surely a recipe for disaster and in my opinion it is a huge safety risk. To me it's a no brainer. Focusing on the nitty gritty is definitely importart but we shouldn't lose sight on peoples safety. Without having a solid plan you my be able gain efficiency in the work being done, but is the potential cost of someone getting hurt worth it?

because you say so?
I'd only make that suggestion if I had Club President under my name...

but if you want to change for next year, then get involved

I am getting involved - that's why I'm voicing my thoughts on CEC.

[Adam]

BTW Adam.. I was using sarcasm to illustrate my point. Yes what I'm stating here is absurd but it's no more absurd than forcing fellow climbers to pickup a shovel.

ah well you didn't put a winky emoticon - how was i to know it was sarcasm? i jest but I do think it is different than asking a climber to pick up the shovel IMO. the work being done is to benefit climbers, not hikers. hikers may also use the trail but we aren't there to make the hikers' day better. and so, if we are all there to do work for the climbing community, then yes i think it is reasonable to expect anyone showing up that day to lend a hand. i'm not suggesting their entire day be hijacked, but that they could help for 20-30 min. many hands make light work. this is especially the case if we have clearly communicated this ahead of time, as we will next year.

You can’t just randomly pick areas to clean and trundle on clean up day. This approach would definitely put people in harms way.

ah i guess our interpretation of your statement are different. it seemed you were suggesting our decisions of where to go were 'random' because it hadn't all been decided before we arrived. i wasn't suggesting people go up to the top and randomly pick rocks to chuck off - of course that would be incredibly dangerous. acting 'haphazardly' isn't a quality i see in many climbers, so i'm surprised you would suggest this.

on the contrary, what might seem random to an outsider may very well be adequately controlled by the insider. for example, if we arrive on maintenance day and send people to cliffs A, C, and E, this is directed, but that might still seem random to the outsider who shows up and doesn't contribute to the trail maintenance day and hasn't consulted on what areas are being worked on. needing to flag off each area is a waste of effort when we can just say 'this cold day in november please abide by a closure' and can get as much work done as possible while minimizing any dangers'.

[cory]

As entertaining as it has been reading this thread, I wasn’t planning on contributing anything. (Shawn, Stef, and Pierre have done a good job summing up my thoughts.) Then I started receiving requests via text and email to write something. Grab a beer, it's a long one...

To theriault: I don’t think this was an ascentNB event, but your signature includes your role with this organization. Surely you can see how your initial post can be read as authoritarian and beyond your scope of command. Whether that was your intention, or error, you were given the opportunity in the next three posts to save face by saying “yes it was a joke”. All three posters opened that window for you. You didn’t even have to admit you were wrong in your objective (whether you think you are or are not), simply made an error in your English writing. This is a tactic used by effective leaders to sit on the fence, achieve the objectives of their supporters, and quell any unrest in their detractors. You are new in your role, so please treat this as a learning opportunity.


To those who contributed to the trail work that day (you have been thanked repeatedly and hope that you are doing it for other reasons than praise, though Dom’s post to Stef on Wed may indicate otherwise.) and are offended by those who did not participate:
Intimidating, guilting, or demanding others to participate in your projects is at least as assholic as walking past a hardworking crew without thanking them and lending a hand for a few minutes. There are numerous reasons why someone may not have participated in this or any other trail event that you are aware of. Below is a partial list. Assuming everyone is #7 is ignorant and offensive to everyone else. As you keep it up, you’re creating more and more #9’s.
1 Occupational commitments.
2Family responsibilities.
3 Injury.
4 They contribute more than their share of time and money into other volunteer pursuits. Though they don’t do much with climbing, they feel it all evens out in the end.
5 Disinterest.
6 It was actually a nice climbing day (one of the last of the season) and they hoped to take advantage of the weather and send a project instead (The grade and their personal motives and goals are irrelevant. Bringing this up is petty and offensive Terry_M.)
7 They are freeloaders.
8 They don’t seek recognition for their efforts therefore don’t announce their achievements.
9 They find the organizers of the event self-righteous, irrational, or generally hard to get along and work with.


To the president of ascentNB, and Dom:
Like Chris said, only 23 people attended the inaugural AGM and not all voted. UNBR&I, which is the largest climbers organization but certainly not the only one in the Province, (and many do not belong to any) has well over 100 members. Any actions taken by ascentNB or its leaders do not reflect or represent the greater NB climbing community as a whole.


To the board and executive of ascentNB:
Only 23 people attended the inaugural AGM. You must ask yourselves why such a small sample decided to attend. Below are some possibilities:
1 They do not see the need for a new organization. Given the historically strong UNBR&I, this is certainly understandable.
2 They savour the fringe status that climbing (like surfing) has, and oppose organization of any type.
3 They don’t foresee any threat to climbing access.
4 They realize that the Base Commander has final say as to who/what takes place on the Base, regardless of the size or scope of any user group.
5 They don’t like authority and bureaucracy, and can appreciate the irony of forming an organization of this type to battle against imagined threats from other authoritarian or bureaucratic powers.
6 They feel flying under the radar as a bunch of independent individuals is far safer to preserving access, rather than drawing attention to ourselves as a collective.
7 They know how simple it is for a civilian group, business, or individual to complete a standardized DND form thereby gaining access to DND property.
8 They know that UNBR&I is strong, and that any conflicts the club may be having with URec pertain only the the wall (which is URec property) and in no way can affect or threaten the Club’s activities and involvements in outdoor climbing. Nor can they limit who is eligible to join UNBR&I which for decades has permitted undergraduate, graduate, alumni and public/community members.
9 Occupational commitments.
10 Family responsibilities.
11 Injury.
12 Disinterest.
13 It was actually a nice climbing day and they arrived early to climb, or went elsewhere.
14 They find the organizers of the event have a superiority complex, are self-righteous, irrational, and generally hard to get along and work with. Given the completely arbitrary and absurd clause in the constitution that requires “board candidates to demonstrate their ability to climb ‘sticky fingers’.” They’ve got good supporting evidence for this one.


To those who are arguing over the benefits of closing all of CL versus select trails and cliffs:
Closing the entire climbing area exceeds any of our authority. A warning that a crew was organizing that day to perform work that could pose a short term risk to climber safety, and asking them to contribute or advising to climb elsewhere would be more appropriate. Like many safety protocols, roping off sections is tedious and time consuming. It is still a good idea. I’d hate to be the one to get a shovel-full of dirt and rock tossed on my head by a scrubbing crew. I’d also hate to be the guy with the shovel, so tend toward redundancy when undertaking such tasks (posted warnings, spotters on the trail or roping areas off, yelling “rock”).

[STeveA]

The cleanup day was not an Ascent NB event. It was the same as it has always been; simply a group of climbers who got together to put in a day of cleaning rather than climbing. Please do not allow this discussion to disparage your feeling for Ascent NB whose main goal is keeping climbing areas open not closed.

[theriault]

Then I started receiving requests via text and email to write something. Grab a beer, it's a long one....

this is very sad... some people need more hobbies or have to much time in front of computers

To theriault: I don’t think this was an ascentNB event, but your signature includes your role with this organization. Surely you can see how your initial post can be read as authoritarian and beyond your scope of command. Whether that was your intention, or error, you were given the opportunity in the next three posts to save face by saying “yes it was a joke”. All three posters opened that window for you. You didn’t even have to admit you were wrong in your objective (whether you think you are or are not), simply made an error in your English writing. This is a tactic used by effective leaders to sit on the fence, achieve the objectives of their supporters, and quell any unrest in their detractors. You are new in your role, so please treat this as a learning opportunity..

Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:33 am - paragraph 3 please read it again....

I’m certainly always open to suggestions and feedback and I apologize if the first post came off as abrupt, that certainly wasn’t my intention. However, while I will totally apologize for the presentation of the message, I’m not convinced that the content should change. We’ve designated one day of the year to clean.

The cleanup day was not an Ascent NB event..

I second that Steve, Posting as Ascent was premature and I will bite the bullet for it, I since created a Ascent/Escalade NB CEC profile for the Organisation to use in the future and all communication Via this profile will have been accepted/revised by the exec members

[Terry_M]

You're f@cking hilarious Goodman! There was no pettiness in my post, it was obviously a joke (I'm no 5.12 climber). If you want to take that to heart go right ahead. In reality, it is actually your post that I would find to be rude and offensive.

14 They find the organizers of the event have a superiority complex, are self-righteous, irrational, and generally hard to get along and work with.

I like how you use "They" instead of "I"

Munson this weekend?

Terry

[Adam]

thanks for reiterating that Steve.

@Cory,

you seem to have some major issues with Ascent NB. i'm disappointed you used this venue to vent them. it is quite apparent to me that the points you bulleted are not applicable to anyone but yourself and only serve to expose your contempt for something that everyone else supports. everyone who attended the meetings and AGM, with the exception of yourself, was very supportive of the initiative.

the turnout at the AGM was actually quite good in my opinion, and was a representative cross section of the NB *outdoor* climbing community. yes, UNBR&I has 'hundreds' of members, and each of them are now a member of Ascent NB, but most do not climb outside and apparently were not concerned enough to attend (or couldn't as you suggest). no doubt more people could have attended, such as yourself, but were unable or unwilling. that is democracy for you. as a group we decided it was time for this association. you have excluded yourself at your own discretion. we would love for you to be a part of this, but for some reason you continue to refuse it. so be it, but don't come on here and declare that we have some sort of superiority complex b/c we didn't stop when you said you didn't like the idea. that clause about sticky fingers was put in there for a reason (to ensure a arbitrary but sufficient level of experience), and when people showed dissatisfaction with it at the AGM, we changed it to accommodate the opinions held there that day. it was not a sign of some supposed superiority complex. suggesting otherwise is paranoia.

in any case, none of this relates to the current thread. we have already settled that it wasn't Ascent NB's decision to 'close' CL, and the nature of any future 'closure' (using quotes b/c as you correctly state, no one has authority to actually stop people from going there, but rather it is a 'requested, voluntary avoidance' of the place).

so, if you have issues with Ascent NB's existence and/or mandate, i suggest you approach the executive (Marty T, Greg H, and Chris Norfolk) to describe your concerns, or wait till the next AGM to suggest bylaws or ammendments to the constitution. if you had been at the AGM you could have voted against the constitution, but you would have been defeated by 23-1.

[MaDelaney]

I've been following this thread with interest, entertainment and to an extent - disbelief! I suppose that I must fall into that 'freeloader' category - as my contributions to the NB climbing community has been limited to projects at Munson and McQuirk, as well as volunteering at our local gym. ... Disbelief - in the personal attacks (that appear to me as having nothing to do with the thread topic) on those offering comments and thoughts. Call me naive? ... best stop here .... for fear of having my feelings hurt!