|
chadnsc
Jul 13, 2010, 7:07 PM
Post #2 of 13
(2414 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449
|
Well I suppose if you smart off and tell the guy who basically controls access to the crag to 'go fuck yourself' you get what's coming to you. Those two climbers are idiots.
As for the for mentioned superintendent thinking about closing the entire park for because he / she saw another group of people climbing without helmets. . . . that's just weak.
I suppose the superintendent could create a guideline that climbers are to wear helmets.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 13, 2010, 7:11 PM
Post #3 of 13
(2408 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
edit: The following is based on the article being accurate. Obviously I wasn't there, so maybe there's more to the story.
Access at Bon Echo has always been a slightly strange thing in my eyes. I think the Memorandum of understanding is pretty reasonable, but it always feels like the park reserves the right to close off climbing at any time since the agreement is made on an annual basis. Maybe I'm a little off there. Regardless I don't think that climbers should ever take access there for granted, and should remain civil when dealing with park staff and other users. Stick up for themselves? Yes, definitely, but in a manner that reflects well on climbers... like slashing car tires and then framing the boaters for it. Wait, did I say 'civil' before? I don't actually know what that means.
Helmets are a good idea at Bon Echo, but I don't see how it's the superintendent's business to go around arbitrarily banning people for not wearing them. It's a Provincial Park, not his private property. If it is going to be decided that helmets are required, it should be done as a matter of policy and not as a matter of whim. Really though, I don't think it should be done at all.
(This post was edited by kriso9tails on Jul 13, 2010, 7:18 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
darkgift06
Jul 13, 2010, 8:55 PM
Post #4 of 13
(2295 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2009
Posts: 492
|
I found out about this a while back, my opinion is that if they do not make these types of rules public info, or post them at the entry to the park, then there not a real law/by-law/rule or what ever else you want to call them.
Sounds like the park official was a little power happy.
|
|
|
|
|
the_climber
Jul 14, 2010, 9:55 PM
Post #5 of 13
(2118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2003
Posts: 6142
|
I'm on the fence on this one. I think climber's should wear helmets, I also thing they should make the decision themselves.
As for the 1 year ban... Lets get real about it, they were banned for not choosing their words appropriately. The park ranger, well if you look into the story, they've had a rough summer so far, and the two climbers didn't exactly come across lightly to my understanding. It's also an area that has seen difficulties in maintaining good relationships with respect to access throughout it's history. It comes down to not handling oneself in curious/respectful manner and bad timing.
No-one harps on the ski resorts for requiring helmets to bike in the summer now do they... different activity, but similar thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 15, 2010, 12:02 AM
Post #6 of 13
(2045 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
the_climber wrote: As for the 1 year ban... Lets get real about it, they were banned for not choosing their words appropriately. The park ranger, well if you look into the story, they've had a rough summer so far, and the two climbers didn't exactly come across lightly to my understanding. It's also an area that has seen difficulties in maintaining good relationships with respect to access throughout it's history. It comes down to not handling oneself in curious/respectful manner and bad timing.
According to the article, two more people were also banned, but were perfectly polite about it. It's a Provincial Park. There is something very wrong with the superintendent acting like a dictator.
In reply to: No-one harps on the ski resorts for requiring helmets to bike in the summer now do they... different activity, but similar thoughts.
Well, the major issue here is that there isn't any such rule at Bon Echo where climbing is concerned, so it's unjust to ban people who were operating within the established rules at the time. If the rule was made, it would have to include everyone who spends time at the cliff base and on the cliff side.
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Jul 15, 2010, 1:41 AM
Post #7 of 13
(1992 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
I do think it was only 2 climbers banned.
Look here about 1/2 through the pages.
http://ontarioclimbing.com/forum/index.php?topic=762.msg12772;topicseen#new
binrat
|
|
|
|
|
Rudmin
Jul 15, 2010, 2:23 AM
Post #8 of 13
(1968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2009
Posts: 606
|
I was there that day, but didn't have any problems with rangers, just a lot of helmet warnings from the Alpine Club. It probably didn't help that some dude had just died on the cliffs a few days earlier. Cliff jumping not climbing, but it still puts the park on edge.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 15, 2010, 2:30 AM
Post #9 of 13
(1961 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
I see. The article was unclear there, but it is clear in the thread in your link. I don't think I would have mouthed off to the park authorities, but I probably would have lodged a formal complaint if they tried to stick me with a ban.
|
|
|
|
|
darkgift06
Jul 15, 2010, 5:12 PM
Post #10 of 13
(1816 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2009
Posts: 492
|
so are there actually rules at the park that you require helmets? signage? a list of rules? posted requirements when climbing?
if not, then its all bs & the guy who banned them is looking for serious trouble, they could very easily make a legal suite about it & win.
If a guy were to go & free solo there do you think he would have issues? I feel its there the same thing, wearing a helmet or using a rope there all personal choices.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 15, 2010, 5:29 PM
Post #11 of 13
(1798 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
I haven't been there in four years or so -- perhaps someone who is more in the know can chime it --, but the only thing I recall in terms of rules was this: http://www.climbers.org/rules-climbing-bon-echo.
(This post was edited by kriso9tails on Jul 15, 2010, 5:29 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
hendo
Jul 17, 2010, 10:43 PM
Post #12 of 13
(1650 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2003
Posts: 42
|
I was there just after the cliff jumper died but pulled out before the helmet brouhaha.
The story is somewhat more complicated than the Gripped article presents.
The guy who was killed had been drinking -- we could see a line of beer cans going up the rocks behind Turtle Rock to the point where he made his final jump.
He would have had to be an Olympic broad jump champion to leap clear of the cliff by that point. His last stance was about 12 feet horizontally in from the lake.
He jumped, didn't clear the rocks, hit them, bounced into the lake and drowned.
It was very distressing for the park staff, and this distress contributed to the confrontation a week later between the superintendent (who was not in uniform) and the two helmet-less climbers.
Until this confrontation, there was no known rule about mandatory helmet usage at Bon Echo. I immediately checked the Memorandum of Understanding and it wasn't there. And the Alpine Club's website didn't mention a rule either; only that the club strongly recommends helmets be worn.
Since the confrontation, it seems both the park and the club have openly made it a rule. There are loaner helmets at the ACC hut for those who show up unaware of the new requirement.
What else?
In the flurry of e-mails that zoomed around in the days after the confrontation, I pointed out that there could be an awful lot that the park superintendent knows about that we're unaware of. For instance, it's within the realm of possibility that there has been a threat of a lawsuit arising from the drowning. (I'm not saying there has been, just that it's possible and we wouldn't know about it.) Or the park super's bosses could be breathing down his neck. It was the second drowning in two years involving a non-climber coming off the rocks.
In short, the super may have been feeling the heat last weekend for reasons we're unaware of.
I believe the club is going to sit down with him and just talk things out and find out where climbers stand.
An aside: The park superintendent does have the authority to ban climbing on the spot. (A previous superintendent was notorious for confrontations with climbers.) In recent years, relations between climbers and the park have improved vastly, and to keep it that way calls for a calm, diplomatic approach.
|
|
|
|
|
darkgift06
Jul 19, 2010, 4:02 PM
Post #13 of 13
(1523 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2009
Posts: 492
|
thanks for the info. :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
