2 cents worth:
My personal opinion for what its worth, is that the ACZ is outdated and is in desperate need of revision. Emil and i have both had conversations with “the powers that be!!” and both around the time when the new bolting guidelines were revised and publicised.
This conversation mainly prompted by the disbelief that it wasn’t tackled at the same time, while public input was being sort.
The initial response was similar to that when i started seeking assistance for SCWA. The condescending line of “who are these supposed people you are talking about that are keen for revision and change……are they JUST your friends”.
These were the initial responses, which after a bit more conversation and alot less elite posturing were on the same track.
Im not attacking CAWA or any one individual, but it seems that this whole process that all climbers (not just the native albanians)have a right to be a part of, is held up by misinformation and fear. There is no reason it cant be handled in a similar open forum to that of the bolting guidelines. But this time i strongly believe it should be something that is reviewed and agree upon by all WA climbing fraternitys. Meaning CAWA members, Non-members, Local albany/stirling ranges climbers, new routing individuals…….you get the picture. Not just the handful of CAWA members who turn up to annual meetings. that isnt a dig at CAWA, as i for one appreciate the efforts of the volunteers involved, but i thinnk is it easy to become strongly influenced by the opinions of individuals and not truely have a balanced view of the history and ethics being discussed.
That aside, i believe that the ACZ does have some merit in sensitive areas like The Gap where the visual nature of certain routes MIGHT! have a negative impact on climbing. Also in areas were the environmental impact of such activities many simply not be worth it!(dieback, endangered flora and fauna). But these issues really need to be looked at realistically and not just taken on face value alone.
I think it is sad that some people through fear and lack of experience, would rather lump “bolting” in one big basket and imagine the worst case grid bolted scenario, than too actually look at the creative way in which we as “Australians” have embraced the genre of mixed climbing and written it into our policies and guidelines.
Brett D wrote:
“maybe some widely spaced P’s mixed with natural pro, but I pray we don’t see ‘consumer friendly’ classics peppering these wild places & keep the unique ‘out there’experience alive”
this pretty safely sums up the right way forward(IMHO)and i have no doubt that all these areas will be still just as “out there” with the careful addition of a few well thoughtout mixed/bolted routes.
In terms of GIMBS, I dont really care to argue, as there really is only a few individuals that place them and that is a personal choice. My personal opinion is that it is kind of pointless putting them on harder routes as most people end up pre-placing hangers/draw anyway, which in the end vetos any hope of a real onsight.
.In terms of rings/hangers sanitizing the experience, thats just crap!, get over it!, they may be the “neuvo carrot” and we should all see some historical significance in them. But the truth is it has still altered the rock and people will still bail if they really need too!(whether through being scared or necessity, it doesnt matter!).
as many have said before, its all hot air and the people bolting will continue to do so with what ever is floating their boat at the time.
I really hope this discussion is the last time we have to discuss the ACZ in its current form and look forward too being a part of process.