Trashing Tassie 2.0

A refreshing read Pat. I completely agree. Thanks caring enough to put this together and start the overdue discussion. 

Hey Pat,

I was overseas when you posted this, hence my late reply. No doubt you are now aware you were actually quite mistaken in your premise 'that the climbing community rarely discusses the issues these days', as the concerns you raise have been much discussed in the recent past. The climbing community chose to hold a live discussion around pipes route development in a way that avoided online vitrol and personal attact, we encouraged respectful discussion, and published some very well thought out results. Sorry if they were slightly tricky to find, I understand that has been rectified. I would note that CCT and non-member local climbers were involved, and also that indigenous opinions were aired in this discussion. The minutes are available to CCT members, 

As the CCT president at the time (now handed over to Langy), I chaired the community discussion around the pipes and feel compelled to speak up here. While I personally support your right to a passionate opinion and respect that you clearly care a lot about the cliffs, I put it to you that both the title of your post and the tone of your letter are both good examples of how online vitriol is indeed usually instigated! Online debates in public forums have previously proven corrosive rather than productive in our community and threatened cliff access directly. I hasten to add that I have been an active partipant in such debates the past, but our community learned from our mistakes and that is probably why no one debated your post online. 

I have chosen to reply publically as I agree with you that we need to be able to have difficult discussions to maintain a vibrant and cohesive community. I think it is timely for Tassie climbers consider how to productively raise such concerns without inadvertently instigated online vitriol, or degrading the climbing community, or threatening access  -  this is very real concern. Current options in our community for raising ethical concerns include:

1) Emailing the relevant crag stewards and/or the CCT committee. Such emails have prompted round table discussions in the recent past. 

2) If you feel an online discussion will be productive, then consider posting on the CCT members forum (you have to be a member to be able to log into the CCT members area to post and read). 

3) Contact the relevant people directly - it is not usally that hard to find their email or phone number asking around in Tas. 

4) join the CCT, attend meetings and table concerns. I would say the current and recent CCT committe members hold a healthy diversity of ethical positions, which is pretty much essential for a healthy CCT. 

For what is it worth, I'd be happy to chat and share more details of our recent process offline if you think that will be helpful. Best regards, Hamish

Hi Hamish,

Thanks for your response. I’m always happy to chat offline, my email is pateberhardrick@gmail.com if you want to get in touch.

Firstly, this post was not intended to undermine the CCT and your previous discussions about the thorny issue of unsustainable bolting.

There are a growing number of people who are unhappy with the status quo for bolting in Tasmania, in which a small number of individuals are consistently bolting routes that go against established ethics and basic route development principles.

Clearly, private discussions about these issues to this point have failed to impact the trajectory of bolting on the pipes and elsewhere.  Whilst CCT publications are an important part of bolting self-regulation, in isolation they haven’t had an impact on the current state of new route development. The Organ Pipes working group is a good example of this, where only a tiny cross section of the community were involved, and which heavily biased towards ‘experienced FAs’ (in many cases, prolific bolters). The results of this discussion were not publicised effectively, and this worthwhile initiative slipped through the cracks along with any broader awareness of the issue it could have created. Personally, the only reason I knew this process was conducted was because a member of the working group mentioned it to me.  

The aim of my post was not to spark a vitriolic online bun fight, but rather to initiate some thought about the state of bolting – especially on the pipes – among those who climb in Tasmania, whether members of the CCT or not. I am also not suggesting that the CCT should endeavour to consult everyone who goes climbing in Tasmania every time a difficult issue arises. But I do think that encouraging more public scrutiny – or at the very least, open discussion – of bolting activities, and regaining some form of accountability to basic climbing ethics, is an important step towards sustainable bolting and avoiding the access issues that everyone is concerned about.

Cheers, Pat