We had 7 INCREDIBLE years....but unfortunately there will not be another Beulah Rock Festivus.
Thank you to Cliff Axelsen, who has risked everything he owns annually to allow the Festivus to happen.
Thank you to all the Sponsors for your support, as it would not have been possible without you!
Thank you to everyone that made the journey to the Festivus and made it such an amazing weekend and event.
Thank you to anyone who volunteered time, gear, expertise or anything else to help things run smoothly.
Access to Beulah for climbing is closed.
On 19/06/2013 FatCanyoner wrote:
>Access to Beulah for climbing is closed.
Why?
Not that I really care, as it was all about bouldering after all, but for the sick bastards that participate in that form of climbing, I sort of feel half sorry that they have lost an opportunity.
scavaging for boulders along a dry creek bed me and a friend were struck by an odd earthy overhang not typical of granite, nope nothing to say it was granite - no quartz, mica or feldspar. this rock was fine grained, finer than sandstone - sedimentary I believe possibly mudstone like nowra's cheesedale. no layering tho it was just a plain face about 4m h x 9m l.
searching around for holds we found some oddly shape nubins resembling fragments of bone. at the time we'd not thought much of this.. we worked the only featured face problem on this bit of rock... simple straitforward footers and simmetrical hand holds 5 nubins on each one for each finger. we brushed and brushed excited by its unusualness... the problem was a simple one move wonder to this slope we called the cranky cranium.. as it resembled a rather oversized skull.. there were even shallow mono pockets resembling eye socktes! freaky hey.. anyway we persisted. def the sloper cranium was the easier option here - the dbl mono's were just to spoogy, not to mention my mates joky squeels every time i nearly stuck it - 'EYE EYE Captain' he says. anyway after getting spanked like a monkey on this boulder we decided to move on. my friend wanted to take a few pics, so finding a good spot to get full view we scrambled back and yup yup we sawd it.. 8-9ft maybe the cranky sloper finish protuded to an obvious glossy skull shape - the mono's definatly look easier from this angle. but strangely what was more concerning was the skeleton like appearance, the footers resembled phalanges, the crimpy body.. well thats exacktly what it was - ribs. useless as intermediates but thats what they looked like. not to mention the open arm appearance. a fossilised yowie - 'clouted with a mountin of mud while doing a star jump'. my mate hastily took the pics saying he'd send them to the museum. i havent heard from him you know, i thought the dirt bagger did a runner with my new camelots.
On 19/06/2013 ashfall tuff wrote:
>there is also the story of the fossilised yowie..
>
>scavaging for boulders along a dry creek bed me and a friend were struck
>by an odd earthy overhang not typical of granite, nope nothing to say it
>was granite - no quartz, mica or feldspar. this rock was fine grained,
>finer than sandstone - sedimentary I believe possibly mudstone like nowra's
>cheesedale. no layering tho it was just a plain face about 4m h x 9m l.
>
>
>searching around for holds we found some oddly shape nubins resembling
>fragments of bone. at the time we'd not thought much of this.. we worked
>the only featured face problem on this bit of rock... simple straitforward
>footers and simmetrical hand holds 5 nubins on each one for each finger.
>we brushed and brushed excited by its unusualness... the problem was a
>simple one move wonder to this slope we called the cranky cranium.. as
>it resembled a rather oversized skull.. there were even shallow mono pockets
>resembling eye socktes! freaky hey.. anyway we persisted. def the sloper
>cranium was the easier option here - the dbl mono's were just to spoogy,
>not to mention my mates joky squeels every time i nearly stuck it - 'EYE
>EYE Captain' he says. anyway after getting spanked like a monkey on this
>boulder we decided to move on. my friend wanted to take a few pics, so
>finding a good spot to get full view we scrambled back and yup yup we sawd
>it.. 8-9ft maybe the cranky sloper finish protuded to an obvious glossy
>skull shape - the mono's definatly look easier from this angle. but strangely
>what was more concerning was the skeleton like appearance, the footers
>resembled phalanges, the crimpy body.. well thats exacktly what it was
>- ribs. useless as intermediates but thats what they looked like. not to
>mention the open arm appearance. a fossilised yowie - 'clouted with a
>mountin of mud while doing a star jump'. my mate hastily took the pics
>saying he'd send them to the museum. i havent heard from him you know,
>i thought the dirt bagger did a runner with my new camelots.
On 20/06/2013 ashfall tuff wrote:
>On 19/06/2013 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>>
>>?
>
>it seems rather coincedental the year we find what looks like a fossilised
>yowie it just stops.
>
>anyhow thanks.
Thanks for the elaboration. You had me wondering ...
an update from the festivus page s to why its not continuing. It was a great event and we loved being a part of it.
As much as Cliff and I love the Festivus, we decided that the exposure to public liabiltiy risk was just too much, and although the Festivus was amazing in every way, it is just not worth everything we own.
We talked with lawyers and insurance companies about the event and it became obvious:
waiver forms are not worth the paper they are written on, regardless of how comprehensive
the cost to have insurance cover the 4 day event would be prohibitively expensive
it is not whether you win or loose a law suit, it is the thousands upon thousands of dollars spent defending yourself and/or settling out of court
nobody is accountable for their own actions anymore
if someone dies, or is severely injured, someone will come looking for money and it is simply not possible for Cliff or I to be removed from harms way
Yes, the Festivus could go for another 20 years with nothing like that ever happening, we are just not willing to risk it anymore.
Think about it and put yourself in Cliff or my position while looking at your Family, your home, your car, your company, and see if you would make the same decision.
On 20/06/2013 Hawkman wrote:
>an update from the festivus page s to why its not continuing. It was a
>great event and we loved being a part of it.
>
>
>As much as Cliff and I love the Festivus, we decided that the exposure to public liabiltiy risk was just too much, and although the Festivus was amazing in every way, it is just not worth everything we own.
>
>We talked with lawyers and insurance companies about the event and it became obvious:
>waiver forms are not worth the paper they are written on, regardless of how comprehensive
>the cost to have insurance cover the 4 day event would be prohibitively expensive
>it is not whether you win or loose a law suit, it is the thousands upon thousands of dollars spent defending yourself and/or settling out of court
>nobody is accountable for their own actions anymore
>if someone dies, or is severely injured, someone will come looking for money and it is simply not possible for Cliff or I to be removed from harms way
>Yes, the Festivus could go for another 20 years with nothing like that ever happening, we are just not willing to risk it anymore.
>
>Think about it and put yourself in Cliff or my position while looking at your Family, your home, your car, your company, and see if you would make the same decision.
Sad.
Another nail in the common sense coffin, and while that lid is being banged shut, we die outside a slow death by a thousand cuts...
I am not a boulderer, but the 'modern attitude litigious society' gets up my nose on their behalf this time.
On 20/06/2013 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 20/06/2013 Hawkman wrote:
>>an update from the festivus page s to why its not continuing. It was
>a
>>great event and we loved being a part of it.
>>
>>
>>As much as Cliff and I love the Festivus, we decided that the exposure
>to public liabiltiy risk was just too much, and although the Festivus was
>amazing in every way, it is just not worth everything we own.
>>
>>We talked with lawyers and insurance companies about the event and it
>became obvious:
>>waiver forms are not worth the paper they are written on, regardless
>of how comprehensive
>>the cost to have insurance cover the 4 day event would be prohibitively
>expensive
>>it is not whether you win or loose a law suit, it is the thousands upon
>thousands of dollars spent defending yourself and/or settling out of court
>>nobody is accountable for their own actions anymore
>>if someone dies, or is severely injured, someone will come looking for
>money and it is simply not possible for Cliff or I to be removed from harms
>way
>>Yes, the Festivus could go for another 20 years with nothing like that
>ever happening, we are just not willing to risk it anymore.
>>
>>Think about it and put yourself in Cliff or my position while looking
>at your Family, your home, your car, your company, and see if you would
>make the same decision.
>
>Sad.
>Another nail in the common sense coffin, and while that lid is being banged
>shut, we die outside a slow death by a thousand cuts...
>
>I am not a boulderer, but the 'modern attitude litigious society' gets
>up my nose on their behalf this time.
I'm also not a boulderer but I also would have liked to have visited some day. However with public liability the way it is and a complete lack of personal* responsibility these days I think most people understand why the event was not worth the risk to the organisers.
* Personal also applying to family members who want to sue, often against the wishes of the person hurt.
On 20/06/2013 ajfclark wrote:
>On 19/06/2013 Miguel75 wrote:
>>Apologies for not embedding.
>
>That's ok Miguel:
>
now I may be a little out of touch but i thought embedding refers to a geological process of sedimentary layering.. and some how Miguel75 had escaped this, and is now running around encino man style. tho by your post ajfclark its actually something to do with i.t. Sorry i've got a lot of catching up to do.
On 20/06/2013 ashfall tuff wrote:
>On 20/06/2013 ajfclark wrote:
>>On 19/06/2013 Miguel75 wrote:
>>>Apologies for not embedding.
>>
>>That's ok Miguel:
>>
>
>
>now I may be a little out of touch but i thought embedding refers to a
>geological process of sedimentary layering.. and some how Miguel75 had
>escaped this, and is now running around encino man style. tho by your post
>ajfclark its actually something to do with i.t. Sorry i've got a lot of
>catching up to do.
Definitely, including your concepts involved with retrobolting Kaputar.
Thats very sad- lack of access.
A couple of months ago I spent a few days around Wharepapa in New Zealand. Almost all of the crags are on private farm land. The NZAC seems to have negotiated on behalf of climbers to maintain access and prevent any liability. They have even got toilets built etc. Some farmers want to be contacted as a matter of coutesy, but many seem happy for access providing climbers follow the code of conduct (eg stay out during lambing/ no dogs etc).
Can any legal people explain why we cannot have this situation in Australia? I realise NSW is one of the more litigious areas outside the USA, but tort reform a few years ago seemed to help significantly in reducing liability (eg of councils).
I know NZ does have a national compensation scheme, but surely ther is more to it than that...