Sponsored By
ROCK
HARDWARE
Chockstone Photography
Australian Landscape Prints |
Chockstone Forum - General Discussion
General Climbing Discussion
| Author |
|
|||||
6:22:29 AM |
On 18-Sep-2019 gfdonc wrote: >Is the "do not add" message intended to appear against all cliffs? Anyone >know why? I think it's pretty well known that new routes added to an inappropriate place got us into this mess - and also dodgy stats about growth generated from thecrag.com were used as evidence against climbers. I personally think it's wise to stop developing new routes when we have already lost over 30% of the climbing and trying to get that back. I'm not convinced there is another Eureka Wall or Muline out there waiting to be discovered to replace the real ones. The biggest concern from TOs and PV is that areas currently unharmed could potentially be harmed by climbers in the future. We have to remember that the routes in Black Range are on a crag that still isn't an SPA (it's not even in the Grampians). |
|||||
8:44:45 AM |
Not an outsider anymore! This continued divisiveness within the VCC clique has gone on long enough! I can't sit back and allow particular people to speak on my behalf anymore, so I have rejoined the VCC! I am fortunate to live in Melbourne so will be able to have a vote! |
|||||
11:46:09 AM |
On 19-Sep-2019 Crepuscular wrote: >As far as I recall, when all the access stuff blew up in the media and climbers were being portrayed as environmental vandals the VCC president was completely MIA. On 20-Sep-2019 dalai wrote: >where was the VCC president when the bans blindsided the climbing community? The notion that the VCC was absent during these incidents is absolute fiction. Here's what actually happened. 04/04/19: Parks add the infamous "hole in rock art" photo to their website. 05/04/19: CliffCare sends a letter to parks stating that the image "appears to be incorrect and biased information supplied by either Head Office or the Grampians office" and demanding they remove it. 26/04/19: The Age publishes an article in which Simon Talbot accuses the current generation of climbers of no longer being conservationists, and instead drilling boulders to set speed records. In response, I personally wrote to the journalist and demanded that he correct all the inaccuracies in his article, while Paula contacted Simon Talbot and demanded that he pull his head in. In response, he pledged to no longer comment in the media on the topic, and he appears to have stuck to that. Martin, how about practicing what you preach and ceasing dividing the climbing community by attacking the VCC committee? |
|||||
11:57:48 AM |
On 21-Sep-2019 nmonteith wrote: > >this was what your President first said on national radio: > >Paula Toal - "Climbers in ignorance have gone into places where we have >done harm. That really upsets me." > >Journo - "Did any of you, before this year, have any understanding of >the cultural heritage of this place?" > >Paula Toal - "No, i wasn't personally aware" > >Mark Gould - "I experienced complete surprise in the beginning, gone through >some sort of confusion, into anger and now I'm feeling, probably the strongest >feeling is a sense of almost guilt and shame" Yes, and that's an entirely appropriate response. Refusing to accept responsibility, and instead pushing the blame onto Parks is NOT what traditional owners want to hear. Native Title is coming, and climbers need to admit to TOs that we have be climbing and have been bolting the rock without consent. Without that, it seems unlikely that we'll ever be permitted back in. Whereas this was the response to Mike attempting to blame Parks Vic. Subsequent comments suggested Mike had been attempting to contact TOs and was being ignored. 
|
|||||
12:05:06 PM |
On 20-Sep-2019 mountaineer wrote: >On 19-Sep-2019 Crepuscular wrote: > >>The club appears to be just squirreling money away for no justified reason >>- i.e. they could be charging members less than half what they do and >still >>be in the black. >Not really. Not really? I'm sorry but where's your explanation? Here are the figures from last year's VCC accounts: Income from membership fees = $20,887. Net income AFTER all expenses = $10,904. In other words if the club had only charged people half of what it actually did so that membership income was only $10,443 there still would have been a (small) surplus (or do you want to tell me there's a problem with my maths?). Other club activities such as maintaining bouldering walls are NOT a net cost to members - the club receives council grants for those activities and actually makes a small profit on them. The point is this has obviously been going on for quite a few years to the point where the club is now holding a substantial amount of cash. Even if you discount the value of guide book stocks which are probably only worth 1/10th of what is claimed (the club really should get out of the guide book business) the club had over $90K net in cash as of last year. As there would have been no expenses for the AE Officer or for Argus for half of this year I'd expect this years surplus should be even higher than last year. This is a problem. First, VCC membership is now very poor value for money and I'm sure many dozens, perhaps hundreds of climbers don't even consider joining mainly for that reason so instead of a club that is broad and open and genuinely representative of the wider climbing community we have one that is small and inward looking and has every appearance of being run by a clique of perhaps little more than half a dozen people. Second, continually accruing large surpluses each year with a small membership and no apparent plan with what to do with the money makes you a target. So now the current VCC committee is apparently all in a panic because some 'bad dudes' are coming to take over. Well who's fault is that? As I said, I have no association with the ACAV. It may well be that their approach is a bit too hot headed. $100K is a lot of money & I'm concerned that it is put to good use and not that a large proportion of it is wasted on fruitless legal fees and I certainly don't want the climbing community to be tainted by right wing nut jobs like the Liberal Democrats. But at the same time I think the VCC is well overdue for a shake up. The idea that if the climbing community is simply meek and patient then Parks Vic will surely deal with us in good faith all in good time is just a fairy story. The situation has fundamentally changed this year and it's high time for the VCC to recognized that. |
|||||
12:21:20 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: > I personally wrote to the journalist and demanded that he correct all the inaccuracies >in his article, while Paula contacted Simon Talbot and demanded that he >pull his head in. In response, he pledged to no longer comment in the media >on the topic, and he appears to have stuck to that. Great no more comments, but the mud had already been flung and stuck! What was needed was an immediate and proactive media campaign to counteract those comments. >Martin, how about practicing what you preach and ceasing dividing the >climbing community by attacking the VCC committee? Attacking the VCC committee? I am a passionate member of the Victorian climbing community and, been climbing probably longer than you have been alive! I have only the best interest of climbing in the State in mind and therefore cannot sit idly by while Philipp continues his toxic online campaign. I would be questioning him regardless of whether he is on the VCC committee. The fact that he is the VP only makes his behaviour more petty and disgraceful! |
|||||
12:25:11 PM |
>On 21-Sep-2019 Crepuscular wrote: > As there would have been no expenses for the AE Officer or for Argus for half of this year I'd expect this years surplus should be even higher than last year. The access officer was employed for the entirety of last financial year, and had a very steep increase in hours for the latter part of the financial year so the expenses related to that are greatly increased on the previous financial year (~3 times). This meant the club made a loss - absorbing this is exactly why the club has been "squirelling money away". Had the A&E Officer not resigned, as indicated above, the plan was to increase their hours further, I imagine to part time instead of casual. This would have further drained the funds from the organisation. When a new A&E officer is found, it will again cost the club a substantial chunk of cash - far more than previous years. This would not be possible in the medium to longer term with the current income & expenses of the organisation. The full reports for the 2018/19 FY will be available on Tuesday evening. |
|||||
12:32:21 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dalai wrote: > >I would be questioning him regardless of whether he is on the VCC committee. Yes, but your "where was the VCC president when the bans blindsided the climbing community?" and "nothing but crickets chirping from the VCC" comments were not directed at that individual, they were tarring the whole VCC committee. |
|||||
1:08:47 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: >Yes, and that's an entirely appropriate response. Refusing to accept responsibility, >and instead pushing the blame onto Parks is NOT what traditional owners >want to hear. Native Title is coming, and climbers need to admit to TOs >that we have be climbing and have been bolting the rock without consent. Dave, if you've ever waded into Chockstone over the years you'll probably know that I've been a vocal critic of shitty development in Victoria for a decade. However, given the general ignorance of outsiders about; how climbing works, how broad the divide is between the various factions, and most crucially what percentage of exposed rock we have (or should have) any interest in climbing on, I really think that admitting to any wrongdoing on behalf of the whole community was a bad idea. In no way do I think that the acaq has a better negotiation strategy (or is more likely to succeed) than the vcc, but from the outside you look very much like a parochial club representing only the interests of your members. That is what has gotten peoples backs up. You've been dropped into an access dispute over a climbing area of global significance, and you must be seen to be representing the broader community. There needs to be an "access only membership" so that interstaters like myself can join and support access negotiations without having to subsidize pig roasts for Melbourne bumblies. Getting branch stacked and ousted from your own organization was something you should have seen coming. If you survive, I hope that some of these suggestions are taken on board. |
|||||
1:26:36 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: >On 21-Sep-2019 dalai wrote: >> >>I would be questioning him regardless of whether he is on the VCC committee. > >Yes, but your "where was the VCC president when the bans blindsided the >climbing community?" and "nothing but crickets chirping from the VCC" comments >were not directed at that individual, they were tarring the whole VCC committee. They are valid questions not asked just by me. The VCC were up till recently the only official voice of climbing in the state and left the climbing community wanting when we needed them the most! Why else would people feel the need to create a new body? |
|||||
4:38:20 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: >On 19-Sep-2019 Crepuscular wrote: >>As far as I recall, when all the access stuff blew up in the media and >climbers were being portrayed as environmental vandals the VCC president >was completely MIA. > >On 20-Sep-2019 dalai wrote: >>where was the VCC president when the bans blindsided the climbing community? > >The notion that the VCC was absent during these incidents is absolute >fiction. Here's what actually happened. > >04/04/19: Parks add the infamous "hole in rock art" photo to their website. >05/04/19: CliffCare sends a letter to parks stating that the image "appears >to be incorrect and biased information supplied by either Head Office or >the Grampians office" and demanding they remove it. >26/04/19: The Age publishes an article in which Simon Talbot accuses the >current generation of climbers of no longer being conservationists, and >instead drilling boulders to set speed records. In response, I personally >wrote to the journalist and demanded that he correct all the inaccuracies >in his article, while Paula contacted Simon Talbot and demanded that he >pull his head in. In response, he pledged to no longer comment in the media >on the topic, and he appears to have stuck to that. Dave, I think your reply here goes to prove how ineffective the VCC were in responding, it is not a record to be boasting about. Firstly, you quote 4th April as the first date the VCC responded to Park Victoria's media smear campaign but in fact Simon Talbot well and truly kicked it off over six weeks earlier, on the 18th of February. I think "absent" is an entirely apt description. If more of a fuss had being made earlier then maybe things like Parks taking the ABC TV to the Grampians and showing them graffiti for them to attribute to climbers, wouldn't have happened. Secondly, it was obvious to many of us that a smear campaign was going on, the "bolt-in-rock-art" photo was significant because it was the first clear rebuttal we had to a pretty serious false allegation. Sure write a letter a letter and demand it's removed, along with every other piece of BS they had on their web site, but just writing a letter and helping Parks cover this up is entirely the wrong response. Thirdly, thanks for that but you're not the only one who wrote to that The Age journalist. |
|||||
4:46:35 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: >Whereas this was the response to Mike attempting to blame Parks Vic. Subsequent >comments suggested Mike had been attempting to contact TOs and was being >ignored. > > Dave, why are you quoting John Clarke's social media comments? Why do you think that is significant? |
|||||
5:04:43 PM |
Why has there not been a formal reprimand from the VCC to disassociate Philipp's behaviour and comments from that of the club's? I make two comments and you say I am dividing Victorian climbers and attacking the VCC committee. Philipp has used his position of influence as VCC Vice President making numerous unfounded accusations via FB, here and his blog aligned to his Alpine club about ACAV and individuals and there is nothing but silence! His latest suggestion is slinging mud at me and I'm sick of it! The guy is delusional and should have been reprimanded and removed with a vote of no confidence long ago! |
|||||
7:16:01 AM |
The war continues as people desperately ask why we can't just work together? Then turn around and viciously attack the VCC comittee like they're in cahoots with Parks. If there's one thing that will help the cause, it's hypocrisy! | |||||
4:17:01 PM |
On 21-Sep-2019 onsight wrote: > >Dave, why are you quoting John Clarke's social media comments? Why do >you think that is significant? Well, I thought I made this clear, but I believe the opinions of traditional owners are of the upmost importance when discussing access issues. |
|||||
5:40:46 PM |
>Whereas this was the response to Mike attempting to blame Parks Vic. Subsequent >comments suggested Mike had been attempting to contact TOs and was being >ignored. > > Is there a proof climbers did harm to rock art places? Yes there was a bolt placed NEAR art place, was immediately removed, that's it. Nothing comparing to what day visitors do all the time. It is PV who smeared climbers so if Mike did blame PV he was absolutely correct. And just for the record, the fact that someone is a TO does not make them always right. They may be misinformed, or they could be just wrong. |
|||||
6:16:17 PM |
On 22-Sep-2019 silver_13 wrote: > >Is there a proof climbers did harm to rock art places? Depends on what you define as harm. Climbers have never been shown to have drilled directly into rock art in Victoria, however we have climbed directly over rock art, and we have put up adjacent climbs which are unacceptable close to rock art. To take an extreme definition of harm, TOs have even objected to the permanent chalk stains left on overhangs. >Yes there was a bolt placed NEAR art place, was immediately removed, that's it. I think you might be getting mixed up with the "fake" bolt, which was actually part of a cage installed by Parks Vic. As far as I'm aware the bolts installed around rock art (in the Black Range) were never removed. >Nothing comparing to what day visitors do all the time. That's not an excuse though, because damage caused by tourists is should not be acceptable either. If anything, that's a reason to ban hikers, not a reason to give climbers free reign. |
|||||
6:59:44 PM |
On 22-Sep-2019 dave_s wrote: > >Depends on what you define as harm. Climbers have never been shown to >have drilled directly into rock art in Victoria, however we have climbed >directly over rock art, and we have put up adjacent climbs which are unacceptable >close to rock art. To take an extreme definition of harm, TOs have even >objected to the permanent chalk stains left on overhangs. > Agree that climbs that are unacceptable close to rock art, should not be climbed. Is there a list of such climbs, anyone knows what they are and where they are? A granular approach should be taken, not just banning 500 sq km. Talking about chalk marks, well chalk use can be limited or banned in some areas but at the and of the day world changes, there are 25mln people in Au now and there will be heaps more soon. People do change environment and chalk marks are nothing comparing to steel rails installed by PV. > As far as I'm aware the bolts installed around rock art (in the Black Range) were never removed. > Apologies, I had impression the bolt close to Black Range art, was removed. >That's not an excuse though, because damage caused by tourists is should >not be acceptable either. If anything, that's a reason to ban hikers, not >a reason to give climbers free reign. > The fact that any visitors are allowed to Grampians means that PV and TOs do accept reality. This in turn does mean that climbers should be allowed free reign because we do a lot less damage than day visitors (let alone PV themselves) |
|||||
7:05:43 PM |
The bolts placed near rock art at Black Ians and the Black Range were removed almost immediately (back in 2017 I believe). | |||||
8:28:52 AM |
On 22-Sep-2019 Silver_13 wrote: >This in turn does mean that climbers should be allowed >free reign because we do a lot less damage than day visitors (let alone >PV themselves) No the fuch it doesn't! We need to be a responsible, self-regulating user group who demonstrate that we have limited scope to our ambitions and that we'll come down hard on members of the community who display gross disregard for common sense. People are massively critical of the vcc for not doing enough, but the two individuals who have done more than anyone else to really fuch things up are Kent and Ramon. I'm a bit curious as to whether the critics have been sending any shit to those two? |
| There are 56 messages in this topic. |
Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Landscape Photos Australia
Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.
Australian Panoramic |
Australian Coast |
Australian Mountains |
Australian Countryside |
Australian Waterfalls |
Australian Lakes |
Australian Cities |
Australian Macro |
Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo |
Landscape Photography |
Landscape Photography Australia |
Fine Art Photography |
Wilderness Photography |
Nature Photo |
Australian Landscape Photo |
Stock Photography Australia |
Landscape Photos |
Panoramic Photos |
Panoramic Photography Australia |
Australian Landscape Photography |
High Country Mountain Huts |
Mothers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Mothers Day |
Mothers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Mothers Day |
Wedding Gift Ideas |
Christmas Gift Ideas |
Fathers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Fathers Day |
Fathers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Fathers Day |
Landscape Prints |
Landscape Poster |
Limited Edition Prints |
Panoramic Photo |
Buy Posters |
Poster Prints