NEClimbs.com forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Reading the forum on your cell phone? There's an easier way. We've enabled a Tapatalk app that makes browsing the forum a whole lot easier. Check it out in the iPhone or Android store if you don't own it already.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Rumney Parking  (Read 243 times)

mtn goat

  • Guest
Rumney Parking
« on: May 27, 2003, 05:29:55 AM »

Does anyone know what's up with the parking at Rumney? I was the a couple of weeks ago and there were dozens of cars parked along the road  :o. Has there been an agreement between the town and the RCA or is it still illegal?
Logged

jay conway

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2003, 07:18:37 AM »

Very illegal, you will get towed eventually. There is overflow parking down at the church, in the center of the town, you will have to walk but its a lot better than getting towed and a lot better for access. You can always find parking if you get up early!
jay
Logged

Erik N

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2003, 04:46:30 AM »

I knew Rumney was popular but I didn't realize it needed an over flow parking lot!  It sounds like they may need to add more bolts to accommodate the masses.
Logged

radair

  • NEClimbs Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 106
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #3 on: May 28, 2003, 06:38:54 AM »

Erik, obviously you don't get it.

The bolts are already there, thus accommodating the masses. Now more parking needs to be added to accommodate the masses asses.

If those cheap bastids at NH State Parks would put in larger parking lots we could add bolts and get more masses on Cathedral & Whitehorse. That big curving corner left of the Prow is a bit tricky to protect and should have a couple "big shineys". After all, the wooden wedge used on the first ascent is long gone so some safe pro must be installed.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2003, 06:39:58 AM by radair »
Logged

Erik N

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2003, 07:29:35 AM »

Rob,
If we add more bolts to Cathedral can we use your yard as the overflow parking lot?
Logged

ed esmond

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2003, 09:40:55 AM »

In this and the Arrete Z Vous thread, I noticed that some climbers seem to have problems with the "masses..."

It seems like they think climbing is being ruined by the "masses...."

Perhaps they think the "masses" shouldn't enjoy climbing....

I wonder why that is... Perhaps, they think climbing should only be for the "elite," like themselves....

It also seems like they somehow think that they aren't part of the "masses..."

I wonder how they could have develped such an attitude...

It's not like any of these climbers were really that special, or anything.....

ed esmond

ps, Jay is correct, if the lot at Rumney is full, please park behind the Rumney  Public Library.

Logged

dogboy

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 555
  • What?
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2003, 11:02:23 AM »

I absolutely agree with Ed...and I'm a little surprised that some people who I know to be reasonable seem to have this sort of elitist attitude.  It's public land folks...and we're all part of the public.  If you don't like the "masses" climbing on "your" crags, then you better find your own private cliff to buy.  The last time I checked Sundown, Cathedral, Whitehorse, Rumney, and even cliffs like Woodchuck and Crag Y belonged to the state/federal government...and not to a bunch of over-40 cranks armed with bad attitudes and chisels.  
Logged
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.

radair

  • NEClimbs Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 106
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2003, 11:15:26 AM »

OK, I'll take the bait, dammit.

Elitist attitude? Please! This is not about being elitist, it's not about "masses", it's about a simple breach of ethics.

Aretez-vous is a blatantly obvious line in the middle of the cliff, right above the approach trail. It was done over 20 years ago and has been in all three editions of Webster's guidebook.

Bolted routes are great. Traditional 5.10 routes that have been retro-bolted to "make them safe" are not. There are plenty of "safe" bolted routes to climb. Why can't the traditional dicy leads have a place, too?

P.S. Who are the "over-40 cranks armed with bad attitudes and chisels"?

Logged

mtn goat

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2003, 12:08:16 PM »

OK folks...enough!!!! This was a simple question I asked about the parking at rumney and if the situation has been resolved. I think this is a far more important issue right now than a climb being bolted. The reason, the "masses"  that are parking in the street are jeopordizing our access to a great climbing area. Of all people you should know that Ed. People worked hard to secure the access to rumney and it is about to be taken away if the "masses" don't get their "asses" off their shoulders. Now, I've said my piece, now shut up and climb.  ;D
Logged

ed esmond

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2003, 12:35:29 PM »

Since I wasn't fishing, it doesn't matter to me if you take the bait or not...

But, if it's not about being "elistist" or the "masses" why was it mentioned repeatedly (and by you, I might add) in both this and the other thread.  

If you said it, I must assume you meant it.....

In the other thread you said Rumney shouldn't enter into the discussion of rebolting Arretez-vous, and I agree with you.  My post was meant to show that... Sundown (N. Conway"s perennial squabbling over "ethics") and Rumney are two differnt situations.

And I also agree with you... retro-ing a route without the FA'ers permission isn't right....

But, why does every, single time that anyone... anywhere in New England, mentions bolts or bolting (whether it was done poorely or well) there has to be a chorus of the "over fourty cranks" who feel the need to rant about Rumney AND the how the "masses" are ruining climbing?

Now it seems, just mention "parking" and the same crowd has to start with the same tired old noise again.....

Don't believe that they do?  Just reread this and the other thread and see how many people did just that...

Believe me, it's getting old, very old....  And it does nothing to resolve the problem.  (But then, I don't think that was their intent anyway..)

ed esmond

ps. Chris, You're right.... Parking and  climbers careless walking in the road are the two biggest issues between the local residents and climbers at Rumney.  The RCA is always trying to "educate" the community, but it's really up to every climbers to tell other climbers when they are screwing up.

So if you see another climber doing something stupid... say something to them politely, but be sure to say something.
Logged

dogboy

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 555
  • What?
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2003, 12:40:03 PM »

I don't think you've been out weilding a chisel, Rob...but others have.  There's really no point in naming names...I didn't really want this to turn ugly in the first place.  I would, however, say that the following quote is a bit over the line:

"Erik, obviously you don't get it.

The bolts are already there, thus accommodating the masses. Now more parking needs to be added to accommodate the masses asses.

If those cheap bastids at NH State Parks would put in larger parking lots we could add bolts and get more masses on Cathedral & Whitehorse. That big curving corner left of the Prow is a bit tricky to protect and should have a couple "big shineys". After all, the wooden wedge used on the first ascent is long gone so some safe pro must be installed."

I think this is the kind of thing Ed was referring to when he used the term "elitist" and questioned the derisive attitude toward the "masses."  Whether you intended this or not, both yours and Erik's posts seem to me to imply:

a) The folks who climb at Rumney are chumps and deserve what they get.

b)  "Real" climbers would be better off if "their" sport had never become popular (although I think the folks in the valley who rely on climbers for their livelihood might disagree).

c)  You should be forced to climb in RR's with wooden pegs until you've proven yourself worthy.

d)  Climbing is a club into which those in the know must admit you before you're consider worthy to share the cliffs.

e)  Real climbers are made of a stuff finer than the rest of the masses, and so have a greater say in the future of the sport.

Maybe I missed the point of your post...but I don't really think so.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2003, 12:42:18 PM by jeffc »
Logged
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.

mtn goat

  • Guest
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2003, 12:47:38 PM »

P.S. - The "masses" with their "asses" on their shoulders is NOT directed or to disrespect anyone here. It came out the wrong way. It is directed toward the people who may not understand the tenuous situation that Rumney is in right now. I know a coupe of people who worked hard to have rumney the place it is as a world class climbing area and I would like to see stay that way. Ed and Dogboy, i do agree with you about the "elitist"  and the masses, we are all part of the masses.  
Logged

radair

  • NEClimbs Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 106
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2003, 01:03:45 PM »

The problem with an internet message board is that it is difficult to show humor. My post to Erik above was completely in jest. No doubt in my mind that his was also. I was going to mention that it was all tongue in cheek, but I thought it was dead obvious and no one could possibly take it seriously. I mean come on, putting bolts where there was a wooden wedge!?!

I have no problems whatsoever with Rumney, the number of bolts there, or the climbers there (except those who park in the wrong place and threaten access). Nowhere in any of my few posts did I say a bad word about Rumney; frankly I think it's a really cool place.

Ed, in my three posts regarding Aretez-vous, nowhere did I mention "elitist", and used the term "masses" once: "If we have to make all climbs safe for the masses, shouldn't we really just be top-roping?" I stand by that statement. I certainly never said or implied that the masses are ruining climbing.

OK, I'm done. Please e-me if you'd like to take this discussion further.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2003, 01:08:04 PM by radair »
Logged

dogboy

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 555
  • What?
Re: Rumney Parking
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2003, 01:11:14 PM »

You are entirely right, Rob...much is lost in the translation from the keyboard to the screen.  It is so counterproductive for climbers to spend their time fighting among themselves...sometimes I don't think we realize how good we have it.  Access to local cliffs is (compared to MTB access, for instance) comparitively unrestricted...we should be working together to keep it that way.  We are all on the same team...and from a regulator's point of view, when something goes wrong and it's time to restrict access, we'll all, in his or her eyes, be part of the "masses"....


Take Care, All
Logged
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.392 seconds with 22 queries.