Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta

Crag & Route Beta

Area	Location	Sub Location	Crag	Links
VIC Arapiles	(General)	(General)	(General)	[ Arapiles Guide \| Arapiles Images ]

Author

Excavation at Animal Acts


IdratherbeclimbingM9

13-Jun-2012
5:10:51 PM

On 13/06/2012 dalai wrote:
>Didin't say I was part of the angry mob. Whole issue appears to be making a mountain out of a molehill...

~> That won't stop a Chocky flaming...
Heh, heh, heh.


Miguel75

13-Jun-2012
5:17:32 PM

On 13/06/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 13/06/2012 dalai wrote:
>>Didin't say I was part of the angry mob. Whole issue appears to be making
>a mountain out of a molehill...
>
>~> That won't stop a Chocky flaming...
>Heh, heh, heh.

Thanks for the correction M9. Let's not let truth or logic get in the way of a good old fashioned Chockstone stoning/lynch mob...

I bags the big rough looking rock and 3-4 of the smaller sharp ones;)


salty crag

13-Jun-2012
5:21:26 PM

>Thanks for the correction M9. Let's not let truth or logic get in the way of a good old fashioned Chockstone stoning/lynch mob...

>I bags the big rough looking rock and 3-4 of the smaller sharp ones;)

"He that throweth the first stone..."


Miguel75

13-Jun-2012
7:30:02 PM

On 13/06/2012 salty crag wrote:
>"He that throweth the first stone..."

...gets the greatest satisfaction?
...laughs last?
...lives in a glass house?
...builds up lactic acid faster?

I don't know the end of your biblical riddle as I wagged that sunday school class:(

kieranl

13-Jun-2012
10:11:53 PM

On 13/06/2012 dalai wrote:
>... Whole issue appears to be making
>a mountain out of a molehill...
It's both yes and no to that.
Yes, it's a fairly minor disturbance compared to a lot of the other impacts we have on the areas that we climb on. Also the area below the boulder was already quite cleared and compressed by years of use.
No, in that it's symptomatic of the thoughtless manner in which we change the environment for no real purpose. It's a doodling that's almost absent-mindedly whittled away at the base of this boulder. It just puzzles me that the person doing it could have thought they were doing something useful. It also puzzles me that others knew about it but don't appear to have thought it worth querying the digger.
I'm aware of the conflicts inherent in my own climbing. I look for new cliffs and climbs, create tracks, put in bolts, all for my own enjoyment. Who am I to judge someone scraping out a bit of dirt from below a long-established boulder problem?
So, it's not the end of the world, just another little niggle.

hero

14-Jun-2012
10:00:12 AM

" It just puzzles me that the person doing it could have thought they were doing something useful."

Perhaps that could be the motto of Chockstone's Secret Squirrel Page

or perhaps, more succinctly and more generically, question your beliefs

Wendy

14-Jun-2012
12:03:09 PM

Some years ago, we had some kids disappear from our group at Dec Crag who were found excavating that hole around past ferrets. Rather a lot of dirt and stones had been moved. We made them clean up and try put the rocks back and also instill the message that these sort of actions disturb environments, promote erosion, etc etc. But I'm not sure really what the difference is? I expect if it had been some random teenagers, people would look rather differently at it. This guy was hardly the first person to cut laps of animal acts. I certainly have, because it involves getting pumped without having to get very far off the ground, which is quite high in my bouldering priority list, and I've bumped into plenty of other out there doing so as well.

At the risk of sounding like Sol here, we do live in a world of conveniencing climbing in lots of ways, of which people seem to like to complain about rap anchors a lot. This sort of conveniencing seem way greater impact to me. It's like when I went to Norton Summit for the first time in umpteen years a while ago. Bouldering there was really quite fine without the entire cave worth of carpet and cushioning. Climbing there was really quite fine when you had to put your own draws on. Still, at least that's a manky old quarry out of site of virtually everyone. But it's interesting what people can decided to enhance a place with if you don't go there for 10 years. It used to look like a crag. Now it looks like someone's garden woody.


JamesMc

14-Jun-2012
9:24:50 PM

On 14/06/2012 Wendy wrote:
> But I'm not sure really what the difference is

The difference is this. If you trash the environment in a state or national park, Parks Vic can prosecute you if they can be bothered. If you trash aboriginal heritage, not only can PV prosecute you, but AAV can prosecute PV for failing to protect the site. This might focus PV's attention. And I guess AAV might prosecute you too.

And there's Aboriginal heritage everywhere, though mostly far from obvious to the untrained eye. Particularly under rock overhangs.

This is why it's illegal to camp under rock overhangs in the Grampians. And why digging under rock overhangs is not a good thing to do.

JamesMc


E. Wells

14-Jun-2012
11:10:01 PM

If its illegal to camp under rock overhangs, why are there so many artifacts and tools there, looks like somebodies done it plenty of times. There is alot of stuff in the dust at Nowra creags such as South Central.


ChuckNorris

14-Jun-2012
11:42:44 PM

so are all of you nay sayers above saying you've never cleaned out a bivvy under a convenient rock? If nay, then you've probably never bivvied out under a convenient rock - so Fk off as you have no clue.

to the rest of you: whilst I agree the photos don't give any perspective to the moral danger of this sacrilege, I would also suggest that the reason for this shortfall may not reside in the resolution of the camera in KL's camera.

molehill out of the molar boulder.

egosan

15-Jun-2012
9:21:58 AM

On 14/06/2012 JamesMc wrote:
>The difference is this. If you trash the environment in a state or national
>park, Parks Vic can PROSECUTE you if they can be bothered. If you trash
>aboriginal heritage, not only can PV PROSECUTE you, but AAV can PROSECUTE
>PV for failing to protect the site. This might focus PV's attention. And
>I guess AAV might PROSECUTE you too.
>
>And there's Aboriginal heritage everywhere, though mostly far from obvious
>to the untrained eye. Particularly under rock overhangs.
>
>This is why it's illegal to camp under rock overhangs in the Grampians.
>And why digging under rock overhangs is not a good thing to do.
>
>JamesMc

Given that climbers are usually doing their thing in the wilderness far from any government presence. Given that many climbers are the types that didn't play lots of team sports and choose to do a relatively solitary pursuit. Given that chockstone is full of poorly socialized shut ins. Your fear mongering about the heavy hand of government censure is probably not the best way to motivate your audience not to mess about under overhangs.

Maybe try to appeal to our innate sense of right and wrong. Attempt perhaps to re-align our moral compasses through education.

hero

15-Jun-2012
9:23:51 AM

I have a moral compass?


Eduardo Slabofvic

15-Jun-2012
9:38:09 AM

On 15/06/2012 hero wrote:
>I have a moral compass?

Yeah. It always points South West


ajfclark

15-Jun-2012
9:52:45 AM

On 15/06/2012 Eduardo Slabofvic. wrote:
>On 15/06/2012 hero wrote:
>>I have a moral compass?
>
>Yeah. It always points South West

That's a penis, not a moral compass...

Oh, hang on...

kieranl

15-Jun-2012
10:00:46 AM

On 15/06/2012 egosan wrote:
>Given that climbers are usually doing their thing in the wilderness far
>from any government presence. Given that many climbers are the types that
>didn't play lots of team sports and choose to do a relatively solitary
>pursuit. Given that chockstone is full of poorly socialized shut ins. Your
>fear mongering about the heavy hand of government censure is probably not
>the best way to motivate your audience not to mess about under overhangs.
>
>
>Maybe try to appeal to our innate sense of right and wrong. Attempt perhaps
>to re-align our moral compasses through education.
>
>
Sol,
James is simply telling it like it is. His earlier posts about archaeological implications got some snorts of derision so education about consequences probably seemed a more logical step.
Don't delude yourself that what climbers get up anywhere in the Grampians is "far from any government presence". Parks are very aware of climbers activities in the Grampians, even in what we consider the remote parts of the Victoria Range.
It isn't hard to find out what the situation with indigenous heritage is in our parks and elsewhere. Why is it up to James, another climber, to have to spoon-feed us information that is readily available, including elsewhere on this forum? Are we so precious that we can't cope with a few straightforward facts?

Wendy

15-Jun-2012
10:43:16 AM

On 14/06/2012 JamesMc wrote:
>lots of stuff i am already aware of

I think you missed my point. When a bunch of school kids on a guided group do a bunch of destructive excavation, we (in this case, guides and teachers) tell them off. And everyone usually gets really gnarky about guided groups and teenage boys doing damage. When a visiting climber does it, however, we (being the almighty chockstone forumites) say, hey it's ok, it's a community service. That's the bit that i want to know what the difference really is. Animal acts had been done how many trillions of times in the last 30 years? Even by wussy old me, so how bad could the landing be?

egosan

15-Jun-2012
10:58:27 AM

On 15/06/2012 kieranl wrote:
>Sol,
>James is simply telling it like it is. His earlier posts about archaeological
>implications got some snorts of derision so education about consequences
>probably seemed a more logical step.
>Don't delude yourself that what climbers get up anywhere in the Grampians
>is "far from any government presence". Parks are very aware of climbers
>activities in the Grampians, even in what we consider the remote parts
>of the Victoria Range.
>It isn't hard to find out what the situation with indigenous heritage
>is in our parks and elsewhere. Why is it up to James, another climber,
>to have to spoon-feed us information that is readily available, including
>elsewhere on this forum? Are we so precious that we can't cope with a few
>straightforward facts?

His earlier posts? While he may make valid points regarding indigenous heritage, have no relevance to Animal Acts boulder. It is not a cave nor a shelter. It has already had generations of climbers stomping all over the landing.

On 12/06/2012 JamesMc wrote:
>Digging under rock overhangs in the Grampians has significant cultural
>heritage implications (archaeology). I couldn't think of a better way to
>get access prohibited.

On 13/06/2012 JamesMc wrote:
>OK, I got my geography wrong.
>I'm a climber, not a boulderer. Same issue apples though.

On 13/06/2012 JamesMc wrote:
>As for what to do next, probably no real harm done IF there are no artifacts
>there. Better to get a friendly archaeologist to take a look, then clean
>it up.
>
>Anyone have a contact for Andy Long or Roark Muhlen-Schulte?

Regarding my commentary on JamesMc's rhetoric, I stand by my point. Prohibitions have never worked well in influencing behavior. Education is proven to work. He obviously has a point he wants to make. A point about protecting archaeologically interesting sites in caves that I am entirely sympathetic with.

kieranl

15-Jun-2012
11:28:35 AM

On 15/06/2012 egosan wrote:
>His earlier posts? While he may make valid points regarding indigenous
>heritage, have no relevance to Animal Acts boulder. It is not a cave nor
>a shelter.
Unless we're archaeologists we don't have the expertise to make that call.

> It has already had generations of climbers stomping all over
>the landing.
>
True. but that doesn't change it's status. If it was an indigenous site, it would still be an indigenous site, just a bit trampled.

dalai

15-Jun-2012
12:28:30 PM

On 15/06/2012 kieranl wrote:
>On 15/06/2012 egosan wrote:
>>His earlier posts? While he may make valid points regarding indigenous
>>heritage, have no relevance to Animal Acts boulder. It is not a cave
>nor
>>a shelter.
>Unless we're archaeologists we don't have the expertise to make that call.

Since when would the indigenous peoples bother with such a low traverse boulder problem? I'm sure they were more interested in the highballs...

Access T CliffCare

15-Jun-2012
3:18:42 PM

I always watch the threads on Chockstone with great interest and much of the time my own lack of it prevents me from commenting too heavily. I tend to use these questions and discussions in articles or further informing my knowledge of the interests of the climbing community and dealings with land managers.
The cultural heritage issue is something that has been on the list of things to do further work on ever since my involvement with the Manic Depressive site at Bundaleer. http://www.chockstone.org/forum/Forum.asp?Action=Display&ForumID=1&MessageID=44659
http://vicclimbingclub-cliffcare.smugmug.com/Access-Environment-at-Climbing/BUNDALEER/3069588_pVjVPL#!i=167367757&k=m3a4f
It is something that comes up regularly in my discussions with PV and especially with concern in the Victoria Range, Grampians ,which has the largest concentration of Aboriginal sites and this is only that which they know of.

I’m not sure whether Kierans original posting was aimed at the cultural heritage aspect of the boulder cleaning or more from a point of unnecessary actions which contribute to further degradation of the site. As with most threads on Chockstone, and as many normal verbal discussions go, new tangents get added in. Cultural heritage issues may not apply to this particular boulder (as Kieran noted though, we are not experts so we wouldn’t really know). But from a big picture perspective though, it’s probably not a good idea to be neatly clearing around the boulders - in the long run this ends up being another way of educating more climbers that this is the accepted way. The problem with half of the issues we deal with is ignorance and just blindly doing what was done before and what other people are doing around you, without questioning the whys and why nots. But as Dalai said, he’s cleared a rock or two for a better landing. It’s a really difficult line to draw as to what is acceptable and what’s not acceptable. Whenever any new area, bouldering or climbing is developed we are going to have a negative impact so it’s being aware of this and trying to put in place measures to minimize impact both now and future rather than contribute to. (cont)

There are 51 messages in this topic.