|
dirtineye
May 23, 2005, 10:11 PM
Post #26 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
1. chalk is ugly.
2. once you get a thick coating of chalk on a hold, the hold is worse than if it had nothing. filling in the texture of the rock with chalk and then puting a layer of loose chalk on top is just dumb. when the color of the rock is totally obscured by chalk, that is too much chalk.
|
|
|
|
|
jcpace
May 23, 2005, 10:28 PM
Post #27 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Posts: 155
|
In reply to: The general public could care less about chalk. The environmentalist whackos would like you to think that the general public cares about chalk. The people who complain about things so trivial need to get a grip. Maybe they should try chalking up.
Joseph, what's so whacko about caring for the environment? I guess you're not a fan of 'no trace'. Maybe you're the kind of guy that leaves his trash behind because the only people who will care are 'environmentalist whackos'. Get a grip? I have. Maybe you're the person who needs to get a grip because from my perspective, you're the one who is out of line. The bottom line is that as climbers, we should be the ones who care the most for the environment. If the chalk that we're leaving is leaving a lasting impact of the rock, then we should look into alternatives to chalk.
|
|
|
|
|
td
May 23, 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #28 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 63
|
In reply to: 1. chalk is ugly. 2. once you get a thick coating of chalk on a hold, the hold is worse than if it had nothing. filling in the texture of the rock with chalk and then puting a layer of loose chalk on top is just dumb. when the color of the rock is totally obscured by chalk, that is too much chalk.
The hold would be even worse with no chalk, if it had been used by greasy fingers. At least the chalk mostly rinses off, carrying with it the organic finger paste.
The ugly part can go beyond aesthetics. I think chalk was part of the reason some of the lava tube entrances in Oregon got closed to climbing.
I still need to try some of the new anti-sweat products.
|
|
|
|
|
bler
May 23, 2005, 11:05 PM
Post #29 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 302
|
1 word : 'cocaine corner'
wait, thats two, but oh well..
|
|
|
|
|
corcovado
May 24, 2005, 6:07 AM
Post #30 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 17
|
I would predict that the chalk marks will become a serious access issue in the future. It'd be a good idea to change some things before we have to.
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
May 24, 2005, 7:31 AM
Post #31 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
In reply to: Joseph, what's so whacko about caring for the environment? I guess you're not a fan of 'no trace'. Maybe you're the kind of guy that leaves his trash behind because the only people who will care are 'environmentalist whackos'. Get a grip? I have. Maybe you're the person who needs to get a grip because from my perspective, you're the one who is out of line. The bottom line is that as climbers, we should be the ones who care the most for the environment. If the chalk that we're leaving is leaving a lasting impact of the rock, then we should look into alternatives to chalk.
Chalk does not damage the environment, only an environmentalist whacko would think that. Thanks for making my point.
As far as trash goes, I always make an effort to pick up my trash and other people's trash when I am mountaineering or rock climbing. Equating the use of chalk with leaving trash behind is a very poor comparison. Horrible in fact.
Along the lines of picking up trash, it is the GENERAL PUBLIC who leaves more behind than climbers.
Once again, if chalk marks on a few ugly as hell sport crags seems like a big problem to you, you have lost all perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
jcpace
May 24, 2005, 8:02 AM
Post #32 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2003
Posts: 155
|
In reply to: Chalk does not damage the environment, only an environmentalist whacko would think that. Thanks for making my point. Once again, if chalk marks on a few ugly as hell sport crags seems like a big problem to you, you have lost all perspective.
I don't think I've afforded you the luxury of any point being made. I think you have a unique perspective on nature. Where are you climbing? "Ugly as hell sport crags"? What the fuck is that? You don't climb where I do, I can tell. :P
|
|
|
|
|
ryrock
May 24, 2005, 8:41 AM
Post #33 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2005
Posts: 22
|
i've never heard a climber call describe their climbing area as 'ugly as hell'. if you lead your first trad or redpoint your first 5.11 or something on a crag in the middle of rosie o'donnell's belly button, i bet a climber wouldn't call it ugly. sorry for the mental picture.
but i agree that whether or not chalk is actually ugly/harmful/smelly/whatever, that it will likely be used as fodder in future access battles warrants an attempt to change. and us people who tend to think that a change is needed should be the first to change, maybe? i think some famous person said that.
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
May 24, 2005, 6:00 PM
Post #34 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
In reply to: In reply to: The general public could care less about chalk. The environmentalist whackos would like you to think that the general public cares about chalk. The people who complain about things so trivial need to get a grip. Maybe they should try chalking up. I agree, though maybe not so vehemently. When it comes to chalk, there's no evidence I know of that says it's anything but an eyesore.
I would never argue that chalk is the bain of climbing access - obviously other issues like climbing on pictographs/petroglyphs, destruction of foilage, etc., are more damaging. That said, chalk is an eyesore and I think we take it for granted. I think if all climbers were aware that chalk might be ugly then they would also be aware of the other damages.
|
|
|
|
|
coloredchalker
May 24, 2005, 8:00 PM
Post #35 of 35
(3015 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 550
|
In reply to: The general public could care less about chalk. The environmentalist whackos would like you to think that the general public cares about chalk. The people who complain about things so trivial need to get a grip. Maybe they should try chalking up.
Environmentalist whackos, general public, it doesn't really matter. If your climbing area gets shut down because you didn't take obvious and easy steps to conserve the natural look then you've got no one to blame but yourself.
If You take the necessary actions a good place may still get shut down or become more stringent but at least you won't be to blame.
Then you can point your finger at others and call them flippin idiots. just kidding.
Rock Chalk Get with it! (sorry couldn't resist the promo) :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
