| Author |
| The chopping of Prow Prowess - TR |
|
|
14/01/2013 1:36:23 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 lionelterray wrote:
>- so, please don't bother replying to me on this... i have stated facts
>not opinions, they are not in dispute
That's funny Terry, because all my climbing mates in Wollongong (who are smart, sensible people, and very good climbers to boot) have quite vigorously disputed your so-called "facts".
Here's some facts;
-in a very short period of time you've managed to alienate yourself from almost the entire climbing community in the Illawarra
-the climbers down there are, on the whole, extremely good natured and have been trying to moderate your ridiculous views and actions without hurting your feelings
-I'm a vindictive prick, and have no such qualms
-The best and easiest way forward for you right now is to sit down with the active climbers in Wollongong, listen to what they have to say, and come to an amicable compromise (which will require YOU to pull and patch a bunch of your bolts, rather than someone else doing the work for you)
|
14/01/2013 1:59:11 PM
|
I live 60km away from this crag (am i considered a local?) and have never heard of any of these web forums/facebook pages.
|
14/01/2013 2:21:04 PM
|
Neil i think your comment brings up the issue that its not just people who are considered "local". It is ultimatly the wider comunity that needs to be consulted.
This seems to happen easily at most other areas in Australia.
I still haven't found this facebook group or any online disccuion groups.
Maybe Terry could provide links to these but i suspect he wont since hes not going to reply.
|
14/01/2013 4:03:15 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 nmonteith wrote:
>I live 60km away from this crag (am i considered a local?) and have never
>heard of any of these web forums/facebook pages.
There are a few points to be made here:
- The (formally) Wollongong Climbing Community Facebook group was created by Daave who added his Wollongong friends who then added their Wollongong friends. At one stage there was more than a hundred people on this list. You (Neil) and others were probably not on because your Wollongong climbing Facebook friends figured you probably didn't want to be a part of a Wollongong thing.
- The group has since had a few changes and is now administered by Terry. The group name was changed a while back and as of a few days ago was still the Lionel Terray Support Group (formally WCC). Since I posted this TR I have been kicked out of the group and can no longer even find it. Actually, when I search Facebook with a browser that I'm not logged into I still can't find it. As of a few days ago it was down to 40-something members - I'm assuming most people left in protest to the way the group was being run.
- There is an alternate Illawarra and Highlands Climbing Community group which sprung up in direct response to the way the WCC was being administered. Feel free to join though I'm pretty sure you have to be approved as a member (for obvious reasons). It currently has 131 members.
|
14/01/2013 4:11:47 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 Olbert wrote:
>- There is an alternate Illawar
>a and Highlands Climbing Community group which sprung up in direct
>response to the way the WCC was being administered. Feel free to join
>though I'm pretty sure you have to be approved as a member (for obvious
>reasons). It currently has 131 members.
I had absolutely no idea there was that many climbers in Wollongong! And that it was so political...
|
14/01/2013 4:15:07 PM
|
I made the Illawarra and Highlands group to serve as a proper community group and its been a spectacular success. Im the admin and im happy for anyone who climbs in the area or is interested in climbing down this way to join.
|
14/01/2013 4:15:54 PM
|
Unfortunately since I'm no longer a member of the WCC I cannot provide a current transcript of the entire discussion, however, I did copy and past all of the thread (as of 12 Dec) into a word document. I have uploaded it to Drop Box for those who want to read it here.
That is at least half if not more of the discussion that went on. A couple of other people chimed in as well after this point as well.
The final post by Terry was actually a personal message (so I still have it) to all the participants in the discussion which was this:
"
sent to posters on Oli's original '21/11' thread - LG,NR, PN, OK )
HI ok guys, my final recommendations on this - as its consumed too much time with too little benefit.
I believe your case could have been more helpfully put to me, as:
Reasons for chopping Prow Prowess:
a) its presence will cause climbing at MtK to be banned
b) its position causes a safety issue re climbers & walkers
c) the bolts are unsightly in this location
d) it is a worthless climb
e) x no. of regular MtK climbers 'scientifically' surveyed think it should go or NPWS think it should go
With factual examples/data for a) (occurring at 'like' crags), b) & e) provided
Due to the way Oli originally/continued to present the issues to me , the chockstone posts and the 'multi-alias' issue - I am still VERY SUSPICIOUS that all of this might just be a one big nasty "trolling" joke ... But for now I will pretend that you guys are being serious.
During the early days of the MtK project, I of course tried to contact the original developers/guardians of the area = R Young , A Prehn, G Hill
RY never respond to emails/sms/phone calls, AP said 'do what ever you want to the place', GH has been very helpful. After 50 routes, 200+ hours of effort, $2,700+ spent, etc. I also see myself as a guardian of the area.
For lots of factual reasons G Hill and I both think the route can stay. I actually think the bridging start and inclined incuts make it a 'unique' route to the mtn. But of course, you guys are free to do what you wish.
thanks, its been an experience.
p.s. One small piece of background - I have spent the last 11 years (2 to 6 weeks a year) with IFMGA/NZMGA professional guides/climbers (who train for 3-5 years to get their qualif., who must pass exams , must study std. texts, etc.) - they are my mentors, my benchmarks. They determine how I view the HD/Local/IHC climbers.
"
|
14/01/2013 4:27:56 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 Sonic wrote:
>Im the admin and im happy for anyone
>who climbs in or is interested in climbing to join.
I might just take you up on that. Do you also argue about blue tarps and dogs?
|
14/01/2013 4:31:36 PM
|
To those that suggest it might be able to be done on gear, you probably could but not exactly safe. I didn't notice any placements on the top third although I wasn't exactly looking for any.
Somebody also suggested that it's waiting for it's first trad ascent in a PM but I'm not sure of this as the route history is kinda dubious. According to TheCrag.com the route was FA'd this year, however, at some point late in the WCC discussion thread Terry claimed that this was an old route. He mentioned the dude who had supposedly done it (I can't remember and can't verify now) and he mentioned existing bolts. There is no mention of this route in the 1994 Rockclimber's Guide to Wollongong and Nowra.
And apart from all that from what I have been told by various old farts that everything at Mt Keira has been climbed or soloed anyway so any new bolting is actually retroing of old solos.
|
14/01/2013 4:54:58 PM
|
At minimum it needs an original name. There is a Prowess on every continent and at least a couple in Australia.
I would hardy call Graheme Hill the be all and end all of climbing ethics! That guy has no self control when it comes to grid-bolting choss. (and yes I know the irony of that statement!)
|
14/01/2013 6:15:07 PM
|
G'day,
Just some objective analysis on this one, since -other than Mt Alex, Wingello and Mt Gibraltar,- I'm hardly a "wollongong climber", and can only offer an analytical view as a 3rd party viewing all the evidence presented to the masses.
In response to your justification:
a) its presence will cause climbing at MtK to be banned
This is speculative and will depend on precisely what is outlined in the Management Plan for Mt Keira with respect to climbing an bolting.
b) its position causes a safety issue re climbers & walkers
Not knowing the climb, from the pictures and what people have said, this is probably a fair statement.
c) the bolts are unsightly in this location
Aren't all bolts unsightly, irrespective of where they are? I guess, what I'm trying to say is that though it may or may not make a piece of rock unsightly, and possibly draw unwanted attention to the bolting that IS going on at Mt Kiera, I'm not too sure that this is justification to chop someone elses route.
]d) it is a worthless climb
That's too subjective to be a valid argument. At least half the routes in the Blue Mountains are worthless climbs =P Hehe.
e) x no. of regular MtK climbers 'scientifically' surveyed think it should go or NPWS think it should go...
Not really a valid argument... But I suppose that Rome IS the Mob.
My overriding point is: that as a 3rd party looking it, this whole affair seems to bring with it the air of a lynch mob, rather than a validly sought consensus achieved from a round table discussion with all the parties involved. Worthless or not, a route is still the invested vision (however obscured), time and effort of the bolter/first ascensionist. It feels strangely totalitarian that this vision should be crushed because The Authority says so, at odds with the Individual.
I do appologise if I offend anyone, but that's merely my analysis of the issue, based on what I see as a curious bystander.
Regards,
-Paul
|
14/01/2013 6:27:42 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 PThomson wrote:
>G'day,
Maybe I should have been more clear - the above quote was Terry's last response to the argument - and doesnt really reflect what I and some others were arguing.
My argument was solely based on point a - that the route may lead to climbing getting banned or managed at MTK. All the other points were irrelevant to the argument (except for maybe point c which relates back to a). I'm not really sure why Terry mentioned those.
I'm not going to re-write my argument for point a, if you want to read it go look at the transcript, everything that can be said is there.
On the consensus point I'm not really sure how much more consensus you can get: despite mentioning it in three forums and talking to people whilst out climbing you are the first (aside from Terry) who has questioned the chopping. Not that there is anything wrong with you disagreeing but I'm not sure how much more consensus I can get.
Edit: I'm not meaning to jump down your throat for disagreeing.
|
14/01/2013 7:00:36 PM
|
Just realised that my internet history has the address of the Lionel Terrays MTK support group (orig. WCC). Once again, to join, you will need to be approved by the admin.
|
14/01/2013 7:15:54 PM
|
I get a content unavailable message...
|
14/01/2013 7:21:07 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 ajfclark wrote:
>I get a content unavailable message...
Hmmm...not sure, maybe you have to be added to the group. I figured I couldn't see it because I was kicked out. In that case good luck getting in, you'll have to be Facebook friends with someone in the group who can suggest you to the admin.
|
14/01/2013 7:35:17 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 ajfclark wrote:
>I get a content unavailable message...
same here.
|
14/01/2013 7:41:38 PM
|
This is becoming more interesting and entertaining as it goes and the subject of poor old deceased Lionels name being used as an alias hasn't even been broached - and now the IFMGA/NZMGA are being brought into it - soon we'll need a climbing degree.
|
14/01/2013 8:02:44 PM
|
god told me to skin you alive......
|
14/01/2013 8:18:34 PM
|
On 14/01/2013 Dangermouth wrote:
>god told me to skin you alive......
Hmmm, the message I got was about skinless chicken...
|
14/01/2013 9:08:23 PM
|
But the skin is where all the flavour is.
|