Forums: Climbing Information: Regional Discussions:
Anchors, or not
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Regional Discussions

Premier Sponsor:

 


Rmsyll


Nov 8, 2007, 8:38 AM
Post #1 of 19 (3180 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 22, 2007
Posts: 20

Anchors, or not  (North_America: United_States: North_Carolina: Central: Pilot_Mountain)
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Pilot Mtn. NC State Park staff has said that Carolina Climbers' Coalition was at Pilot Mtn. on Oct. 22 to replace some anchors. We take for granted that these installations are granted. No, they are provided, by the CCC.

I've been told by CCC that the costs, including the hardware, a generator to run the drills, labor, etc., are also provided by CCC. Now, who provides that? Well, either you do, by donating to CCC, or you don't and take the climbing they have been making possible for granted. It isn't granted, it is provided--or, it isn't. I figure that if you are not donating the funds to CCC, you are stealing the facilities you use, even if that's only the lower-off anchors for a Trad climb.

So, do what you have the conscience to do?


Knox_Harrington


Nov 8, 2007, 9:30 AM
Post #2 of 19 (3148 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 7, 2007
Posts: 36

Re: [Rmsyll] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rmsyll wrote:
So, do what you have the conscience to do?
I'm going to grab my drill and replace some anchors myself!!!

I get what you are getting at, but you are way off base to say people are stealing by not contributing funds.


Not to be rude or anything, but perhaps you should proofread your posts before hitting the submit button. At first I thought I was retarded when I had to read your post twice before starting to get half a clue what you were getting at. Looking at some of your other posts it seems to be your writing style.


moose_droppings


Nov 8, 2007, 9:36 AM
Post #3 of 19 (3140 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3356

Re: [Rmsyll] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rmsyll wrote:
Pilot Mtn. NC State Park staff has said that Carolina Climbers' Coalition was at Pilot Mtn. on Oct. 22 to replace some anchors. We take for granted that these installations are granted. No, they are provided, by the CCC.

I've been told by CCC that the costs, including the hardware, a generator to run the drills, labor, etc., are also provided by CCC. Now, who provides that? Well, either you do, by donating to CCC, or you don't and take the climbing they have been making possible for granted. It isn't granted, it is provided--or, it isn't. I figure that if you are not donating the funds to CCC, you are stealing the facilities you use, even if that's only the lower-off anchors for a Trad climb.

So, do what you have the conscience to do?

I've donated to the CCC and I've never been to either of the Carolinas.


knieveltech


Nov 8, 2007, 10:15 AM
Post #4 of 19 (3100 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [Rmsyll] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rmsyll wrote:
Pilot Mtn. NC State Park staff has said that Carolina Climbers' Coalition was at Pilot Mtn. on Oct. 22 to replace some anchors. We take for granted that these installations are granted. No, they are provided, by the CCC.

I've been told by CCC that the costs, including the hardware, a generator to run the drills, labor, etc., are also provided by CCC. Now, who provides that? Well, either you do, by donating to CCC, or you don't and take the climbing they have been making possible for granted. It isn't granted, it is provided--or, it isn't. I figure that if you are not donating the funds to CCC, you are stealing the facilities you use, even if that's only the lower-off anchors for a Trad climb.

So, do what you have the conscience to do?

So are you the official CCC online grovel and bitch intern this year? Last time I checked the CCC financial report they aren't hurting for cash, and with the new Ashboro initiative rolling on all eight cylinders (huge props to Mike Dean) recruitment (read membership dues) has got to be at an all-time high.

As far as stealing resources is concerned, that's a lot of bullshit in a tiny package. If you're really wanting to do something to help the local climber's group, go pay your dues, volunteer for a trail day, have a coke and a smile and STFU. While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech


dashclimber306


Nov 8, 2007, 6:36 PM
Post #5 of 19 (3052 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2007
Posts: 44

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

\ wrote:
While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech

yeah pilot sucks man, you have like 6 posts about it, whats the deal?


dashclimber306


Nov 8, 2007, 6:37 PM
Post #6 of 19 (3051 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2007
Posts: 44

Re: [dashclimber306] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I meant the OP not knieveltech


knieveltech


Nov 8, 2007, 7:01 PM
Post #7 of 19 (3034 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [dashclimber306] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dashclimber306 wrote:
\ wrote:
While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech

yeah pilot sucks man, you have like 6 posts about it, whats the deal?

I wouldn't go so far as to say all that, Pilot is what it is. In my opinion it's a fantastic place to take a huge clot of new climbers and introduce them to some spicy toproping (and it definitely gets spicy once the rocks and beer bottles start raining down from the top of the crag), then everybody retires back to the campground for a round of "shit! hide the beer!".

I just wish they'd restore access to the pinnacle. It's the only point out there where someone can't drop shit on you from the trail.


(This post was edited by knieveltech on Nov 8, 2007, 7:02 PM)


ja1484


Nov 8, 2007, 7:12 PM
Post #8 of 19 (3026 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 1935

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
dashclimber306 wrote:
\ wrote:
While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech

yeah pilot sucks man, you have like 6 posts about it, whats the deal?

I wouldn't go so far as to say all that, Pilot is what it is. In my opinion it's a fantastic place to take a huge clot of new climbers and introduce them to some spicy toproping (and it definitely gets spicy once the rocks and beer bottles start raining down from the top of the crag), then everybody retires back to the campground for a round of "shit! hide the beer!".

I just wish they'd restore access to the pinnacle. It's the only point out there where someone can't drop shit on you from the trail.


Further still, tales from old-timers that were around when the Pinnacle still had access indicate that Pilot would be as good a trad crag as Moore's Wall if the Big Top were open for business. It really seems to be a shame, climbing wise, because the areas that do have access are decidedly...mediocre.


joshy8200


Nov 8, 2007, 7:17 PM
Post #9 of 19 (3021 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 646

Re: [moose_droppings] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

moose_droppings wrote:
I've donated to the CCC and I've never been to either of the Carolinas.

Thank you for your contributions to the area! Anytime you need info on NC climbing...send me a pm.


knieveltech


Nov 8, 2007, 7:48 PM
Post #10 of 19 (3012 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [ja1484] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ja1484 wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
dashclimber306 wrote:
\ wrote:
While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech

yeah pilot sucks man, you have like 6 posts about it, whats the deal?

I wouldn't go so far as to say all that, Pilot is what it is. In my opinion it's a fantastic place to take a huge clot of new climbers and introduce them to some spicy toproping (and it definitely gets spicy once the rocks and beer bottles start raining down from the top of the crag), then everybody retires back to the campground for a round of "shit! hide the beer!".

I just wish they'd restore access to the pinnacle. It's the only point out there where someone can't drop shit on you from the trail.


Further still, tales from old-timers that were around when the Pinnacle still had access indicate that Pilot would be as good a trad crag as Moore's Wall if the Big Top were open for business. It really seems to be a shame, climbing wise, because the areas that do have access are decidedly...mediocre.

Definitely as good or even better maybe. I've heard vague rumors that the State shut it down due to soil erosion/compaction concerns. If that's the case, one has to wonder if a concerted access initiative couldn't gain some traction if fixed top anchors where part of the sales pitch. No topout, no erosion.


dudemanbu


Nov 8, 2007, 8:03 PM
Post #11 of 19 (3006 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 2, 2005
Posts: 941

Re: [moose_droppings] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

moose_droppings wrote:

I've donated to the CCC and I've never been to either of the Carolinas.


same. eventually i'll get a helicopter so i can make the approach to rumbling bald. after all, i helped pay for it.


elnero


Nov 8, 2007, 8:14 PM
Post #12 of 19 (2996 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 28, 2006
Posts: 191

Re: [dudemanbu] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'm way more annoyed by climbers at pilot leaving wrappers, tape, dogs and their 12 clueless anoying friends at the base of climbs than not donating money for anchors...


ja1484


Nov 9, 2007, 4:42 AM
Post #13 of 19 (2975 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 1935

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
ja1484 wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
dashclimber306 wrote:
\ wrote:
While I definitely appreciate folks putting in the time, effort, and expense to maintain the local anchors, this ham-handed attempt to parley a voluntary effort at a local chosspile into some kind of guilt-ridden fund raiser is at best ill-advised.

Paid in full til next January,

-Knieveltech

yeah pilot sucks man, you have like 6 posts about it, whats the deal?

I wouldn't go so far as to say all that, Pilot is what it is. In my opinion it's a fantastic place to take a huge clot of new climbers and introduce them to some spicy toproping (and it definitely gets spicy once the rocks and beer bottles start raining down from the top of the crag), then everybody retires back to the campground for a round of "shit! hide the beer!".

I just wish they'd restore access to the pinnacle. It's the only point out there where someone can't drop shit on you from the trail.


Further still, tales from old-timers that were around when the Pinnacle still had access indicate that Pilot would be as good a trad crag as Moore's Wall if the Big Top were open for business. It really seems to be a shame, climbing wise, because the areas that do have access are decidedly...mediocre.

Definitely as good or even better maybe. I've heard vague rumors that the State shut it down due to soil erosion/compaction concerns. If that's the case, one has to wonder if a concerted access initiative couldn't gain some traction if fixed top anchors where part of the sales pitch. No topout, no erosion.


State shut it down after (surprise) some moron tourist decided to kill himself by attempting to lower himself down the pinnacle using only his hands on a rope, no real technical rope equipment. Ironically, he did not fall from the rope, but had stopped to (rest? think? whatever?) on a ledge, and the ledge subsequently gave way under him.

Now, the reason cited for continued closure is most often concerns about erosion and conserving the habitat on top of the pinnacle...both of which don't hold much water in my book.


knieveltech


Nov 9, 2007, 6:32 AM
Post #14 of 19 (2939 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [ja1484] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ja1484 wrote:
State shut it down after (surprise) some moron tourist decided to kill himself by attempting to lower himself down the pinnacle using only his hands on a rope, no real technical rope equipment. Ironically, he did not fall from the rope, but had stopped to (rest? think? whatever?) on a ledge, and the ledge subsequently gave way under him.

Now, the reason cited for continued closure is most often concerns about erosion and conserving the habitat on top of the pinnacle...both of which don't hold much water in my book.

Huh. That's the the first I've heard of the touron angle. Makes sense though. I assume that was back in the days when there was a ladder to the top, yeah? It seems to me that without the easy top access your average touron's got no way to repeat history (unless they decided to body rappel down from the parking lot, good luck preventing that). That leaves the standard erosion/conservation arguments, both of which could be mitigated.
How about Hanging Rock? Any idea why the state banned climbing on the main formation?


MikeSaint


Nov 9, 2007, 7:34 AM
Post #15 of 19 (2910 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 19, 2007
Posts: 426

Re: [elnero] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

elnero wrote:
I'm way more annoyed by climbers at pilot leaving wrappers, tape, dogs and their 12 clueless anoying friends at the base of climbs than not donating money for anchors...

My last climb at Pilot I carried out a bunch of trash at the Ampitheater...

Damn slobs.


ja1484


Nov 9, 2007, 7:56 AM
Post #16 of 19 (2899 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 10, 2006
Posts: 1935

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
How about Hanging Rock? Any idea why the state banned climbing on the main formation?


IIRC, there was a climbing accident resulting in a fatality there some years ago that led to the closure for Hanging Rock itself for climbing. As best I can tell, it's stayed closed just because - some heinous combination of preserving the rock, deterring fixed anchors/bolts, preserving peregrine nesting sites, preventing further injuries/accidents, preventing further erosion/trail breaking are things I have heard at one point or another. I'm not really sure what the exact motivation is.


knieveltech


Nov 9, 2007, 10:11 AM
Post #17 of 19 (2872 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 1, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [ja1484] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ja1484 wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
How about Hanging Rock? Any idea why the state banned climbing on the main formation?


IIRC, there was a climbing accident resulting in a fatality there some years ago that led to the closure for Hanging Rock itself for climbing. As best I can tell, it's stayed closed just because - some heinous combination of preserving the rock, deterring fixed anchors/bolts, preserving peregrine nesting sites, preventing further injuries/accidents, preventing further erosion/trail breaking are things I have heard at one point or another. I'm not really sure what the exact motivation is.

Figures. Damn shame too. There are some classic lines on that formation. I'd love to rack up a bunch of wide pro and do the chimney that splits the face. Ahh well. Maybe one day Mr. Cobourn'll make the surprise announcement that back-channel talks have finally netted some kind of climber-friendly consensus and they'll reopen that formation. In the mean time I won't be holding my breath.


dashclimber306


Nov 9, 2007, 12:52 PM
Post #18 of 19 (2844 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2007
Posts: 44

Re: [knieveltech] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The pinncle and hanging rock would both be amazing. if those were open the piedmont area would start to rival the rest of the state. too bad...


chezdillon


Nov 16, 2007, 10:23 AM
Post #19 of 19 (2768 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 66

Re: [Rmsyll] Anchors, or not [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Wow, tough crowd.

Rmsyll, it is worth noting that the rc.com community has played a significant role in CCC fundraising efforts. Countless rc.com users, and climbers from across the country, have put their money where their mouth is for the Rumbling Bald and Laurel Knob efforts. Check out carolinaclimbers.org for the fundraising details of the last few years.

The anchor replacement efforts at Pilot, Stone, and other NC parks are not the main focus of the CCC. Nor is the CCC the only group in the southeast engaged in anchor replacement efforts.

I think it might be more productive to take this conversation to Pilot and the climbers that frequent that crag. Mentioning the replacement efforts should be at most a conversation starter for educating newer climbers about the access issues in NC.

I am sure the CCC appreciates the enthusiastic support, and I hope to see you out enjoying the fine NC climbing soon.

- Jeff


Forums : Climbing Information : Regional Discussions

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook