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] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: society for the protection of nh forests  (Read 1807 times)

darwined

  • Guest
society for the protection of nh forests
« on: October 25, 2013, 02:38:37 PM »

Has anyone ever worked with this organization regarding access?  Do they have an official policy regarding development on land "under their umbrella"?
Logged

strandman

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4592
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2013, 04:04:43 PM »

sounds like the group from a while back that was horrified seeing bolts on Sundown ???
Logged

danf

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2013, 08:42:07 PM »

Don't know how climber friendly they are, but the forest up the road from me has nothing posted.  Hunted it a few times with no issues.  I keep spying some rock that may be on their land, but still haven't tried to find it on foot yet...
Logged

lucky luke

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1461
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2013, 12:37:53 PM »

Has anyone ever worked with this organization regarding access?

Forest in nh have a long history. I know a little about the forest close to cathedral and white horse ledge. There was restoration plan to have today's results. There is all kind of animal of the food chain, including bear and moose. That mean that the restoration of the forest was good.

With a population of nearly 180 millions people on the east cost of US, one can't expect that we will return to wild forest. The manager have to think at many use of the land and they do it. One challenge is climbing: should we have access to one cliff with many bolts or many cliff with no bolts? I think that both can exist...

In the past, climber clean trails and the "trip" of climbing was not just a question of climbing high, but also to enter a wild section of the environment: the cliff. As soon as they have client to bring in the cliff, most guide was contributing to the development of the area. The nature was in balance between the natural life and "artificial" management of human. With the growing number of adept of climbing, cathedral was over crowded and people look around. When the cliff as no crack, they begin to place bolt for their own pleasure without any environmental plan. In that way, access found is a great resource as they can participated to environmental plan and decide where, in the wild, we should create an artificial indoor wall for the pleasure of the climber ( the imagery was a little bit too strong as outside won't ever be an indoor gym...but it is easy to understand).

The question is should we completely remove the cliff where the fauna and wildlife is in balance with artificial management of human? Cathedral is it going to disappear between the trees in a way that nobody will use it...as an old cemetery where no body go any more. They construct a place to relax and eat in front of the kiosk, but it is practically impossible to see the cliff. A management plan could be to cut four or five trees (first level of tree in the succession of vegetative community) to allow people to see all the cliff and the pleasure of the climber doing there sport quietly in the nature; to allow the climber to struggle for there life on a piece of rock in a sunny day in the cliff, far from the work competition of any hard climber.       
Logged

darwined

  • Guest
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2013, 02:21:19 PM »

Thanks Luke.
Logged

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2013, 04:35:04 PM »

Thanks Luke.

Yup, I feel enlightened.
Logged

strandman

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4592
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2013, 04:58:00 PM »

I think we have to cut down trees at Cathedral so people can see the bolts   ???
Logged

darwined

  • Guest
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2013, 05:57:44 PM »

I think we have to cut down trees at Cathedral so people can see the bolts   ???

If we're going to start talking public works initiatives, let's get rid of all that talus at the base of Cannon.  We could sell little chunks of the old man to all the folks who bought "pieces of the Berlin Wall"(chunk of concrete).
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 12:09:15 AM by darwined »
Logged

krankonthis

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 85
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2013, 07:22:35 PM »

yeah lets go back to blueberry bushes at the base of cathedral and get rid of the damn trees.
Logged

smartpig

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • There is only one kind of magic and this is ‘doing
    • Valhalla Publishing
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2013, 01:53:26 PM »

You all can look at history: between 1860 and 1920 about 87% of New Hampshire forest was for the most part mowed down (God bless ole John Henry!) and the rivers were polluted (one good thing Nixon did with the clean water act of 1972 http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act). So, the forest we see around us is not the original primary forest (primarily softwoods) but impacted into the man induced secondary forest (mixed hard and soft woods- making the birch and maple the iconic New England trees). Hail, hail, the gifts of the Industrial Revolution. So, yes, as climbers, we should be more respectful/mindful of the micro-ecology of cliffs. Their must be an expert among us who can speak to what real impact that cleaning of cracks, scrubbing of lichens, and the disruption and annihilation of critters tiny and not so tiny has on New Hampshire's cliffs. As a climber who has done his share of un-earthing new routes, it has been my observation that if the routes do not get climbed it does not take long for mother nature to fill in the cracks and reestablish plants and critters. Most of the original equipment returns. The real question, however, is what rare and fragile plants and animals get annihilated and never come back and become local extirpated or made outright extinct? also, even things grow back, is it the original stuff?

I have been a major part of establishing routes on what have become high use areas. In particular I refer to Echo Crag, Mt. Oscar, and the Beer Walls over in the Adirondacks. I have always been disturbed and alarmed at how the base of these areas ecology have been majorly impacted. When I first walked into the base of Echo Crag back in 1992 for the most part the base of the cliffs were a field of Trilliums. Now they only remain in isolated clumps. The foot traffic has been so great that trail work has been needed to prevent trail erosion. Has anyone noticed the markers at Oscar measuring, over time, the extent of the reduction of soil from climber traffic. I believe their has been a post here about that- Ward Smith I believe has been involved with this project. (who can speak to this?) I know that the base of my climb Live Free or Die (5.9++??) at the Beer Walls is about three feet longer than when I first climbed it in 1982 with Rich Leswing.

Putting up routes in particular, and the climbers who follow, because they became popular climbs and/or areas, is really a self serving act. It is ego driven. Nature has no say in the matter as to our handy work.  Do we give up climbing and recreation? Probably not. Can we better educate, manage, and self regulate our selves as a climbing community? You betcha we can. John Henry's drive for timber and profits is what helped drive the creation of NH and national conservation groups, our NH State Parks, and the White Mountain National Forest. We cannot undo our acts of the past, but we can become great advocates and stewards of our land and crags into the future.

Any grad students out there want to take this on: the environmental impact of climbers on NH crags?

Logged
Jamie Cunningham
Franconia, NH

Jamie Cunningham Photography: http://www.jamiecunninghamphoto.com

The Notches guidebook Facebook page ("like" it!):
https://www.facebook.com/groups/valhallapublishing/

darwined

  • Guest
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #10 on: October 27, 2013, 02:36:41 PM »

I had a minute to look into this a bit further and it turns out no fixed route development is permitted on reservations managed by the Society for the Protection for NH Forests.  The only cliff mentioned specifically, in their official policy, is Devil's Slide where rock climbing is prohibited.

This is prolly of note to folks inquiring lately(about Devil's Slide).
Logged

strandman

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4592
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #11 on: October 27, 2013, 05:23:14 PM »

Well said jamie.... I prefer to put up f/a's that don't get done  ;) that way everyone gets the cleaning experience.

i have seen huge impacts in bouldering areas, some climbs in Lincoln Woods are feet longer
Logged

danf

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2013, 05:33:19 PM »

no fixed route development
Define this a bit better.  No fixed pro at all I'm assuming, but cleaning rock, tree anchors...?
Logged

lucky luke

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1461
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2013, 10:40:49 PM »

You all can look at history: between 1860 and 1920 about 87% of New Hampshire forest was for the most part mowed down (God bless ole John Henry!) and the rivers were polluted (one good thing Nixon did with the clean water act of 1972 http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act). So, the forest we see around us is not the original primary forest (primarily softwoods) but impacted into the man induced secondary forest (mixed hard and soft woods- making the birch and maple the iconic New England trees). Hail, hail, the gifts of the Industrial Revolution. So, yes, as climbers, we should be more respectful/mindful of the micro-ecology of cliffs.

Knowing the history is very important. In most guide book before, there is a description of the geology. Should we have a description of the ecology of the area and of the watershed? At least, we most gave to people the information and basic civism to protect the nature.

The gunks and, particularly, Mt Washington is good examples of that: many users and a fragile environment. At each side, there is extremist who want or a total interdiction of human or a complete occupation by human. A line in the middle as delicate as a plant. Delicate plant that stay years after years under snow, ice, rain and hot dry summer...are not so delicate.

I know that there is environmental plan in many state and that in some place climbing is not part of the regulation. and we don't have any information on that.

Admin al, could it be possible to have a section on the forum for environmental discussion? As a biologist-climber, I am for "leave has more trace than other animal do". We all know that beaver construct dam, but we always qualify that as "natural". As the white mountain forest authorize hand bolt placement only, we can understand that it is not the bolt the problems, but too much bolt   
Logged

Admin Al

  • NEClimbs Administrator
  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7069
  • Climb 'till your forearms turn to jelly!
    • NEClimbs
Re: society for the protection of nh forests
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2013, 09:24:35 AM »

Admin al, could it be possible to have a section on the forum for environmental discussion? As a biologist-climber, I am for "leave has more trace than other animal do". We all know that beaver construct dam, but we always qualify that as "natural". As the white mountain forest authorize hand bolt placement only, we can understand that it is not the bolt the problems, but too much bolt   

I don't think that a section is necessary. however if you want to start your own thread about environmental concerns, have at it... it would be better to keep them in one place than strewn over other unrelated threads.
Logged
Al Hospers
____________________________________
my music
 https://www.facebook.com/BlackMountainRamblers

web hosting, design and software programming:
 http://www.cambersoft.com
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.595 seconds with 24 queries.