|
|
|
|
drector
Jul 28, 2003, 5:21 PM
Post #26 of 63
(6285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
Has anyone actually read the Forest Service explanation. It is a ton of material and actually has little to do with religion. Of course the whole thing was sparked by religion and since the FS had no leagal way to close it based on religion, they opted for the alternative which is to make the site a cultural site of some type. I can't recall the actual designation to it just amounts to the site needing to be kept in a state that is appropriate for the period of it's cultural significance. Of course the culture there during that period is almost 100% Wahoe Indian culture.
That means that if hikers, bikers, and picnicers show up in huge numbers, the site will be closed to them too. Of course their actions will have to piss off the Natives or the FS will not even hear about it.
It's a shame that this was not a trad area and that it had pavement added to the area. If it had been more remote and less bolted then a voluntary ban might have worked.
After seeing lots of peoples opinions, I have come to the conclusion that there was no possible compromise and that someone had to lose in this situation. I'm hoping to use that fact the next time an area is being examined for closure since it could be used to bring bad publicity to the FS for singling out climbers.
My final thought is that the FS should have tried to turn over the area to the Washoe. I think that if they are the ones that instigated this and they are the sole beneficiary for the closure then they should have to take care of the place and enforce any closure. After all, it's their culture that is being preserved at this culturally significant site. The only culture of mine that is there is the tunnel.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 5:29 PM
Post #27 of 63
(3647 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
I know I am ressurrecting an old old thread but I just wanted to comment to drector's post.
It is absolutely rediculous that they are using the word "cultural" instead of "religion". Just because a religion is associated with a certain culture, doesn't mean you can suddenly make this a cultural issue.
I see a similiar argument in the whole "intelligent design" bullshit. Just because you call it a different name doesn't mean it's not religion and thereby unconstitutional......
|
|
|
|
|
drector
Jun 9, 2009, 5:59 PM
Post #28 of 63
(3640 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
Are you stalking me ;-)
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 6:10 PM
Post #29 of 63
(3635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level.....
|
|
|
|
|
agdavis
Jun 9, 2009, 6:36 PM
Post #30 of 63
(3629 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2009
Posts: 310
|
[quote "roughster"]I agree! If it gets closed, lets return it too it's pre-climber state:
- Piles of trash everywhere
- Old tires
- Human Crap (as in feces)
- No nice flagstone paths (going to have to pull them all up)
- Weeds and thistles. (we'll have to retransplant some of these back into the area)
- Loosely glue on a ton of rubble and death blocks climbers knocked off. Mind you, they need to be precariously perched and ready to fall at any time.
I mean, we climbers are ruining their "spritual" experience! Lets give it back to them. Oh, and everytime a climber is in the Tahoe area, feel free to "drop a load" on by.[/quote]
+1
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Jun 9, 2009, 6:53 PM
Post #31 of 63
(3624 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: I know I am ressurrecting an old old thread but I just wanted to comment to drector's post. It is absolutely rediculous that they are using the word "cultural" instead of "religion". Just because a religion is associated with a certain culture, doesn't mean you can suddenly make this a cultural issue. I see a similiar argument in the whole "intelligent design" bullshit. Just because you call it a different name doesn't mean it's not religion and thereby unconstitutional......
The decoupling of culture and religion is a recent artifact of western Christian practices. Religion and culture aren't easily separable.
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 6:58 PM
Post #32 of 63
(3620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
styndall wrote: desertwanderer81 wrote: I know I am ressurrecting an old old thread but I just wanted to comment to drector's post. It is absolutely rediculous that they are using the word "cultural" instead of "religion". Just because a religion is associated with a certain culture, doesn't mean you can suddenly make this a cultural issue. I see a similiar argument in the whole "intelligent design" bullshit. Just because you call it a different name doesn't mean it's not religion and thereby unconstitutional...... The decoupling of culture and religion is a recent artifact of western Christian practices. Religion and culture aren't easily separable.
No, they're not. So why pretend that we're talking about culture when we're really talking about religion? You can't separate out the culture and make laws only for that.
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 7:04 PM
Post #33 of 63
(3618 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
agdavis wrote: [quote "roughster"]I agree! If it gets closed, lets return it too it's pre-climber state: - Piles of trash everywhere - Old tires - Human Crap (as in feces) - No nice flagstone paths (going to have to pull them all up) - Weeds and thistles. (we'll have to retransplant some of these back into the area) - Loosely glue on a ton of rubble and death blocks climbers knocked off. Mind you, they need to be precariously perched and ready to fall at any time. I mean, we climbers are ruining their "spritual" experience! Lets give it back to them. Oh, and everytime a climber is in the Tahoe area, feel free to "drop a load" on by.[/quote] +1
From what I understand, they weren't even using the area till climbers cleaned it up.....
|
|
|
|
|
WyoCrackLover
Jun 9, 2009, 7:31 PM
Post #34 of 63
(3610 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2009
Posts: 8
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level.....
Couldn't agree with the issues at Devils Tower more.
The original "marketing strategy" behind the Devils Tower CMP was two-fold:
1. Cross-Cultural education.
2. Mutual Respect.
All one has to do today to see the ultimate result is to step inside the Visitors Center. As a climber, you immediately feel like a second rate citizen... even though compliance is consistently at 80%.
All this with not ONE shred of archaeological evidence that "Native Americans" ever assembled at the Tower.
Except for that one... that's locked in a vault... at Mt. Rushmore... that the NPS won't show anyone...
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 7:37 PM
Post #35 of 63
(3604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
WyoCrackLover wrote: desertwanderer81 wrote: LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level..... Couldn't agree with the issues at Devils Tower more. The original "marketing strategy" behind the Devils Tower CMP was two-fold: 1. Cross-Cultural education. 2. Mutual Respect. All one has to do today to see the ultimate result is to step inside the Visitors Center. As a climber, you immediately feel like a second rate citizen... even though compliance is consistently at 80%. All this with not ONE shred of archaeological evidence that "Native Americans" ever assembled at the Tower. Except for that one... that's locked in a vault... at Mt. Rushmore... that the NPS won't show anyone...
What's this vault stuff?
And I can dig mutual respect. I can give them the area once in a while if I know they're going to be there before hand and can plan accordingly. However under no circomstances should the goverment be stepping in and saying "thou shalt not climb here because XYZ group wants to practice whatever hokey religion they happen to believe in"
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Jun 9, 2009, 7:37 PM
Post #36 of 63
(3604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
A few questions from the ignorant:
=> how does one "close" a rock?
=> what is the penalty for climbing there? Hiking there?
|
|
|
|
|
WyoCrackLover
Jun 9, 2009, 7:52 PM
Post #37 of 63
(3600 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2009
Posts: 8
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: WyoCrackLover wrote: desertwanderer81 wrote: LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level..... Couldn't agree with the issues at Devils Tower more. The original "marketing strategy" behind the Devils Tower CMP was two-fold: 1. Cross-Cultural education. 2. Mutual Respect. All one has to do today to see the ultimate result is to step inside the Visitors Center. As a climber, you immediately feel like a second rate citizen... even though compliance is consistently at 80%. All this with not ONE shred of archaeological evidence that "Native Americans" ever assembled at the Tower. Except for that one... that's locked in a vault... at Mt. Rushmore... that the NPS won't show anyone... What's this vault stuff? And I can dig mutual respect. I can give them the area once in a while if I know they're going to be there before hand and can plan accordingly. However under no circomstances should the goverment be stepping in and saying "thou shalt not climb here because XYZ group wants to practice whatever hokey religion they happen to believe in"
In a public forum 2 years ago, during the "re-review" of the success of the CMP, the NPS was asked if there was any historical evidence of assembly (other than NA Oral History). Their response was that they have one artifact that the NPS has preserved in a vault at Mt. Rushmore.
To clarify: the Government does not actually say "Thou Shalt Not Climb"... they say "Thou Shalt Respect Other Cultures... PLEASE?"
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 7:55 PM
Post #38 of 63
(3595 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
shimanilami wrote: A few questions from the ignorant: => how does one "close" a rock? => what is the penalty for climbing there? Hiking there?
Cave rock is right alongside the roadway. Unless you go during the middle of the night and it's a rare cloudy night.... the cops are going to see you.
And I would assume that there is a fine.
|
|
|
|
|
desertwanderer81
Jun 9, 2009, 7:56 PM
Post #39 of 63
(3592 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272
|
Maybe at Devil's Tower, but not at Cave Rock.
They clearly said, "These guy's religion is more important than your climbing. Suck it"
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 11, 2009, 5:14 PM
Post #40 of 63
(3535 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
agdavis wrote: [quote "roughster"]I agree! If it gets closed, lets return it too it's pre-climber state: - Piles of trash everywhere - Old tires - Human Crap (as in feces) - No nice flagstone paths (going to have to pull them all up) - Weeds and thistles. (we'll have to retransplant some of these back into the area) - Loosely glue on a ton of rubble and death blocks climbers knocked off. Mind you, they need to be precariously perched and ready to fall at any time. I mean, we climbers are ruining their "spritual" experience! Lets give it back to them. Oh, and everytime a climber is in the Tahoe area, feel free to "drop a load" on by.[/quote] +1
No that would be a horrible idea.
The flagstones can go though.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 11, 2009, 5:29 PM
Post #41 of 63
(3529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: agdavis wrote: [quote "roughster"]I agree! If it gets closed, lets return it too it's pre-climber state: - Piles of trash everywhere - Old tires - Human Crap (as in feces) - No nice flagstone paths (going to have to pull them all up) - Weeds and thistles. (we'll have to retransplant some of these back into the area) - Loosely glue on a ton of rubble and death blocks climbers knocked off. Mind you, they need to be precariously perched and ready to fall at any time. I mean, we climbers are ruining their "spritual" experience! Lets give it back to them. Oh, and everytime a climber is in the Tahoe area, feel free to "drop a load" on by.[/quote] +1 From what I understand, they weren't even using the area till climbers cleaned it up.....
The way you phrase this suggests you have no direct personal knowledge of this issue, at all. When you say ' climbers' you surely mean a handful of self-appointed locals who sorta moved in there and did what they wanted, like paving the floor, etc.
Personally I think the fucking paving stones were the camel that broke the straw's back. What you basically had - whether these locals care to admit it or not - was a small group practically seizing control of a public and cultural resource, for their own amusement and none other.
Now we climbers do that, don't get me wrong. I do that.
All I am saying is there are two sides to this story and you will rarely get the full scoop from a Tahoe local, no offence to them.
The rock is so insignificant in any meaningful terms that this is and will remain a local thing. The Washoe were here long before spandex clad sport climbers decided Cave Rock was their playground.
All that said I agree with you that allowing an indian group to exert control over public land resources on religious grounds is the same as allowing a christian group to erect a cross on public lands - with all the attendant precedence in law concerning 'come one, come all.'
The only way to reclaim Cave Rock now is
1. Constitutional challenge - who has the money for THAT?
2. Form a Cult of Climbing, fix it with enough trappings to get recognized as a cult, then claim access on cultural grounds using the 'if you let them you have to let us.'
But the bolts are being pulled or have been pulled. I think the biggest reason for this is - 'they' (someone in the government) know that the Washoe access is tenuous at best and built on very shakey constitutional grounds.
But I think they also know that if the bolts come out, they will not likely go back in - ever. The end result to a constitutional challenge now would be - FINE! Climbers can come back. But no fixed pro.
That would be a very.... 'hollow' (haha) victory indeed.
Smart fuckers, to pull the bolts. The locals know what it means. Put a fork in Cave Rock - it is one and truly OVER.
RIP Slayer.
DMT
(This post was edited by dingus on Jun 11, 2009, 5:30 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 11, 2009, 5:37 PM
Post #42 of 63
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: WyoCrackLover wrote: desertwanderer81 wrote: LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level..... Couldn't agree with the issues at Devils Tower more. The original "marketing strategy" behind the Devils Tower CMP was two-fold: 1. Cross-Cultural education. 2. Mutual Respect. All one has to do today to see the ultimate result is to step inside the Visitors Center. As a climber, you immediately feel like a second rate citizen... even though compliance is consistently at 80%. All this with not ONE shred of archaeological evidence that "Native Americans" ever assembled at the Tower. Except for that one... that's locked in a vault... at Mt. Rushmore... that the NPS won't show anyone... What's this vault stuff? And I can dig mutual respect. I can give them the area once in a while if I know they're going to be there before hand and can plan accordingly. However under no circomstances should the goverment be stepping in and saying "thou shalt not climb here because XYZ group wants to practice whatever hokey religion they happen to believe in"
Actually saying to climbers 'you can't climb here because this is a religious cultural site' is not and should not be offensive. And it certainly WOULD NOT be unconstitutional.
Saying ONE religious group could have access whilst all the other could go pound sand - that would be unconstitutional.
I must tell you - climbers come off as terribly petty and selfish over this issue. I've done it. You're doing it. You're making big noise about the legality of it all when at the root you are only interested in climber access.
How is 'climber access' different from Washoe access, at the end of the day?
I don't have a problem at all with the volunteer thing at Devils Tower. Not one bit. Course I don't climb there haha, sorta like most people and Cave Rock.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 11, 2009, 5:39 PM
Post #43 of 63
(3517 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
shimanilami wrote: A few questions from the ignorant: => how does one "close" a rock? => what is the penalty for climbing there? Hiking there?
In this case its simple Shimi... they are pulling the bolts. End of the line for that place. Whatever happens to its Washoe cultural status the place is no longer suitable for climbing. No WAY those bolts are going back in now... no way.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jun 11, 2009, 7:42 PM
Post #44 of 63
(3488 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
desertwanderer81 wrote: WyoCrackLover wrote: desertwanderer81 wrote: LOL, did I dredge up any of your other posts? I was just looking for this one specifically because of Devil's Tower and how much it bothers me on a fundamental level..... Couldn't agree with the issues at Devils Tower more. The original "marketing strategy" behind the Devils Tower CMP was two-fold: 1. Cross-Cultural education. 2. Mutual Respect. All one has to do today to see the ultimate result is to step inside the Visitors Center. As a climber, you immediately feel like a second rate citizen... even though compliance is consistently at 80%. All this with not ONE shred of archaeological evidence that "Native Americans" ever assembled at the Tower. Except for that one... that's locked in a vault... at Mt. Rushmore... that the NPS won't show anyone... What's this vault stuff?
And where's Geraldo Rivera when you need him?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Jun 11, 2009, 8:13 PM
Post #45 of 63
(3471 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
dingus wrote: I don't have a problem at all with the volunteer thing at Devils Tower. Not one bit. Course I don't climb there haha DMT
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then... they came for me... And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
"First they came…" is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
Some people get offended when one compares life-and-death situations (Nazis) with recreation (rock climbing access)--but some people get offended about anything. The point is the same--if you really care promoting climbing access (I do as do many other climbers, many climbers don't), get involved and do what you can.
That doesn't mean all climbing access everywhere all the time, just as if you care about 2nd Amendment rights that doesn't mean you think everyone should be able to own/possess any type of weapon everywhere, or if you care about abortion rights that you think every pregnant woman should allowed to have an abortion up to 1 minute before giving birth, with no restrictions.
Truth is that climbing access is under attack for largely the same reasons in many places (it causes "psychic damage" to (some) Indians or would-be "pioneers" (City of Rocks) or whomever).
If you think that's wrong, do what you can to make your voice heard.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Jun 11, 2009, 8:24 PM
Post #46 of 63
(3466 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
pfwein wrote: Some people get offended when one compares life-and-death situations (Nazis) with recreation (rock climbing access)--but some people get offended about anything.
Are you kidding me?
You're either a terrible troll or else determined to really earn the abuse folks here heap upon you.
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Jun 11, 2009, 9:27 PM
Post #48 of 63
(3447 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
k.l.k wrote: pfwein wrote: Some people get offended when one compares life-and-death situations (Nazis) with recreation (rock climbing access)--but some people get offended about anything. Are you kidding me? You're either a terrible troll or else determined to really earn the abuse folks here heap upon you.
I'll spell it out if you'd like, but it would be better for you to try learn yourself, just like a climber benefits from having to learn a sequence rather than always have someone point out the beta. But if you're really stuck, I'll try to help.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Jun 11, 2009, 9:38 PM
Post #49 of 63
(3442 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
pfwein wrote: k.l.k wrote: pfwein wrote: Some people get offended when one compares life-and-death situations (Nazis) with recreation (rock climbing access)--but some people get offended about anything. Are you kidding me? You're either a terrible troll or else determined to really earn the abuse folks here heap upon you. Sorry you don't get it. Not everyone does. You can think a little longer/harder if you'd like to learn something, or just move along. Doesn't matter to me. I'll spell it out if you'd like, but it would be better for you to try learn yourself, just like a climber benefits from having to learn a sequence rather than always have someone point out the beta. But if you're really stuck, I'll try to help.
Please teach me about the use of historical analogies, you illiterate tool.
As a professional historian, I am accustomed to seeing folks use and abuse historical examples in all sorts of ridiculous ways. For the most part, I just sort of laugh or occasionally wince. But since I post here regularly, when someone posts something especially egregious, I pretty much have to say something.
You have just likened the Washo and the Feds to Nazis and climbers to the European Jewry of the 1930s. To deflect against the obvious criticisms, you say that "some people get offended about anything." Worse, it wasn't even a joke-- it was an apparently serious contribution to a reasonably serious thread in a blue forum.
You're putting together a remarkable history of your own on this site.
|
|
|
|
|
pfwein
Jun 11, 2009, 10:02 PM
Post #50 of 63
(3433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Posts: 353
|
k.l.k wrote: Please teach me about the use of historical analogies, you illiterate tool. As a professional historian, I am accustomed to [pompous rant continues]
As a professional historian, do they teach you to make appeals to your own (perceived and delusional) prestige, and to make ad hominem arguments against those with whom you disagree?
If your posts on this thread reflect the overall quality of your thinking, please consider a new line of work.
In any event, and as I'm sure the good readers of this thread who have not received the benefit (haha) of your training as a "professional historian" comprehend:
the comparison is not of the DT situation to Nazi Germany, if is of the relationships of the various actors (i.e., Dingus's I don't care about DT closure because I don't climb there is in fact analogous to the actors in the cited poem).
Do you get upset when someone says something is as easy as "taking candy from a baby" because only a really, really mean person would do that? (Please don't answer that; I know that a professional historian has at least heard of the concept of a rhetorical question.)
If you don't like the analogy, great. But you don't need to rant against anyone--you can save that for "professional historian" work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
