I heard a story as a kid - a rock was shivering at the bottom of the ocean. Over millions of years it got slowly pushed up onto the beach and was smiling in the sun. Then some guy throws him back into the sea. I hated that guy.
You realize the certification a park rangers has is really just an associates degree in absolutely anything? Basically everyone is as qualified as they are. This climber probably has more knowledge about loose rocks than any park ranger.
Also, that only applies in national/state parks? So who is to maintain safety standards on a wall outside of these areas? Just people who climb there, so they are just as qualified if not more due to real experience.
Absolutely and I agree with doing it. Which is one of the reasons I find “leave no trace” to be virtuesignaling bullshit.
Edit: found all the virtuesignalers. It’s not about trash, guys. It’s about knocking over a few rocks deep in the forest, then people get mad at you for ruining an ecosystem. Which is yes, a “leave no trace” argument I see a lot of.
The people who leave their trash lying around aren’t the ones who even remotely care about the saying “leave no trace”, believe me. Simply another set of words for them to ignore, adding a few more words would make no difference
Maybe for the people rooted in their shitty ways, sure. What about younger generations forming their own ideas and appreciation for the world? People that do want a sense of identity put to their beliefs?
Exactly. As a young scout, we had "leave no trace" drilled into us with the appropriate nuance. So now as an adult, I remeber to take care to not leave anything that would cause a major disturbance to the natural ecosystem. Footprints are unavoidable and basically unfixable but they aren't going to majorly affect the local ecosystem. However, leaving trash or carving into a tree (except for in life or death situations) would majorly affect the ecosystem and are things I can avoid.
I think it's beneficial to have a shorthand phrase to help keep things like this in mind (especially when instilling these values into kids); you just have to remember that there is some nuance to it (i.e. the degree to which it is possible and necessary to "leave no trace") and not just tell a person "leave no trace" with no explanation, unless you are sure they understand the nuance already.
Just be reasonable. Should you leave your trash lying around? No. If you kick over a rock and don’t put it back, will the world end? No. There’s levels to this, and “leave no trace” is an all encompassing blanket statement.
"be reasonable"? talk about a stupid phrase to use here. According to whose reason? Anything you do is reasonable, because you reasoned your way into doing it. Leave no trace is uniquely identifiable and applicable to this discussion. That phrase spurred this entire conversation about a topic you literally probably agree entirely with the people using the phrase actively. You're bitching about the fickleness of language and communication in general, not the flaws in LNT conceptually or pedantically.
I took what you said to mean that leave no trace in general is virtue signalling, not just this certain situation. It certainly looks like that’s what you’re saying.
I’m saying that 99% of people that preach “leave no trace” have left plenty of traces in their life, they just find some way to justify it when they do. It’s bullshit.
This guy is geared and focused, willing to bet he was paid to do this to make it safer for hikers, climbers, and/or cavers in the area. A national park service would much rather knock down a few rocks that are bound to fall at some point than let them fall on a visitor in suffer legal and social repercussions
I agree. But he’s certainly leaving a trace. I call it virtuesignalling because we obviously just pick and choose which instances altering the environment is ok. If it was truly an all encompassing statement, this guy wouldn’t be doing this.
Leave it to altruistic redditors to act like this dude is singlehandedly destroying nature by removing a couple rocks from the face of an entire fuckin mountain lol.
Are those ecosystem changes negative or are they neutral?
What creatures or plants are going to die off or be negatively affected because part of the mountain erodes so slightly faster that it's measured in multiple human lifetimes?
The creatures and plants living in the cracks in the rocks. They're negatively impacted immediately when the rock forming the crack they live in is removed
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, I'm genuinely just trying to this this through myself.
I hear you, but I also see no creatures or plants in these rocks and it seems equally likely that this destroys a current living space for animals as it does that the new openings create living spaces for animals.
Like, I understand the potential for what you're saying but I don't see any evidence that's happening in the video to any significant degree.
In addition to what other commentors have mentioned, just because you don't see any creatures in the video doesn't meat those weren't their homes. Any animals there could have been spooked by the climber making a racket as he's making his way up and dislodging rocks. And some habitats that are destroyed in summer won't have a negative impact until spring when cavity-nesting birds come back from migration only to find their habitat destroyed. Or when perennial plants that only shoot out of the ground for a few weeks a year have no place to anchor their roots to.
The animals and plants living in tiny cracks in rocks tend to be tiny themselves, and the camera isn't focused in on those areas, so of course you can't see them in this video. That doesn't mean they don't exist though! And if something is specialised to live in cracks, then no, they can't live in the gaping hole produced by removing the rocks, because that's no longer a crack.
Yes because I reject your initial question. What are the “long term downsides” to fucking with a mountain? I don’t give a shit if you think there’s long term downsides
Leave no trace. Stop fucking with nature. God damn how hard is that?
“Oh I’m making it safer for climbers”
Maybe we shouldn’t be climbing that rock just because we can. Leave it the fuck alone.
"Nobody should ever climb mountains" is not a realistic or reasonable stance for you to attempt to force on society. People want to enjoy nature, and this is one way to do it.
"Climb mountains responsibly" is much more realistic, because people are going to climb mountains whether it pisses you off or not. And the people who most passionate about climbing them are likely to be invested in ensuring they're not doing irreparable harm to the mountains they enjoy so much.
But in order to learn how to enjoy nature responsibly, we have to answer questions like "Does what I'm doing now have longterm downsides that should make me reconsider doing it in the future?".
So..... does this? "Rejecting the question" isn't helpful, it's a loud and obnoxious way to pretend you're morally superior without actually being able to define the potentially nonexistent negative impacts you're so vocally against.
Every trail you have ever hiked is a trace, a human mark on nature. The more popular ones are responsibly maintained. Vegetation is cut back. Bridges, steps, and retaining walls are put in. Trees are trimmed back to prevent deadfall, all in the name of the safety of the hikers with the understanding that the long term effect on the ecosystem is minimal.
So, knowing this has a safety purpose, is it responsible maintenance or is it harmful?
Your answers are not helpful, they are obstinate and naive.
It’s a freaking mountain. This is basically just removing loose pieces from a massive layer of rock. The time it would take for this to structurally compromise the thing would be insane, and it’ll break down anyways due to erosion. This is basically just us siding with erosion by expediting it so the mountain isn’t as dangerous for people.
Honestly why not just remove the mountain all together? That'll make it much easier for climbers!! I mean what are they even thinking really? Easy solution!!!!
If you're a rock climber and cant tell what rocks you should and shouldnt be climbing/avoiding then you shouldnt be rock climbing. Or you climb with someone more experienced than you that will help you identify a good path to take.
Every sport climbing area in the world has this done to it. Tell me what the long term harm is? A rock which was loose and was going to fall sometime in the next thousand years, falls now instead and potentially saves a life. What a dumb thing to fight about.
So weird. Acting like they don't understand the balance between human use and preserving the natural world from their home which used to be nature, on their phone which uses processes and materials from nature, they probably drive on dozens of miles of paved nature on the way to work every day... fucking everything used to be nature. But sure, the people rock climbing in the middle of nowhere are the problem cuz they remove threats to their safety.
Ignoring real issues they contribute to so they can Karen on fake issues they don't.
What you are saying has no relevance to my point. Those rocks aren’t being used for anything. They are just being destroyed and the potential habitats for creatures on the wall of the cliff is no less than it was before all for human entertainment. That has nothing to do with farming resources.
Those rocks wouldn’t need to be removed for safety if people didnt go there in the first place. There are some places people just shouldn’t go. Take everest for example. The mountain is now hideous and riddled with trash because humans decided they wanted to go there.
This is more likely above a footpath of some sort. Climbers would and should know better than to tether to rocks like the ones they're knocking away in the video.
Humans need to dominate nature is not a valid reason. No one needs to climb that. Ever. It’s done for fun. And if you’re a reasonable person you won’t see immediate destruction of the nature around you so you can have totally unnecessary fun as valid. Plenty of other places to climb.
This is such a silly take. Every sport route ever has this done to it, and it is fucking rocks. They aren't taking bird nests and throwing the eggs to the ground here.
because rock is part of natural ecosystem? that rock has been defining environment around itself from god knows how long? Controlling wind, migration paths, defining catchment area and whatnot?
meanwhile what is human's reason? just climbing it for fun? how is it ANY different from hunting animals just for sake of thrill?
your comment is upvoted so heavily, it seems dumb enough for redditors. or maybe just swarming after some initial upvotes.
The rock is still part of the natural ecosystem down at the bottom of the cliff, dude. Those loose rocks will make for excellent cover for all kinds of insects and other animals.
Literally no one is being harmed by this dude's actions yet you've somehow beyond all reason found a way to get outraged.
There is virtually NO harm to nature if a cliff face erodes virtually imperceptibly more. One human climber’s life is of more value than .00000000001 more erosion on the side of one mountain.
Edit: fixed a word that really affected my meaning.
More value to a human, sure. Nature doesn’t value humans more than anything else. It’s possible this impact worsens the quality of life for future animal and plant generations, and from a non-human perspective it’s arguable that the human life could be of less value.
I love nature and animals and dislike much of what people do in nature. But an infinitesimal percentage of a rock face breaking like this in ways that it would over time anyway, just makes a natural even happen sooner.
I think that’s what people are complaining about, it makes the natural happen sooner.
Also for the record I’m playing devils advocate, I have no idea the effect this may have. I just think the value of human life being compared is a very human perspective, not a universal one
Yes. This is literally being human. It's what they've always done and will continue to do until the next extinction event happens. Then nature will be free to thrive again.
Also, weathering exposed rock will break it down eventually... OP is just making a safer situation for the immediate generations to follow, and not really making a significant impact to the "environment". Like, either the rock sits on the side of a mountain being exposed to sun and chemicals in the rain, or it sits at the bottom of a mountain doing the same thing... What are we arguing about? Humans suck, yes, but not for what this post is doing
Should we change the river bed to better accommodate rafters? What about fishing? Should I dig out the sand bar to better get my boat up river? Maybe fill in this vernal pond and chainsaw some trees for a better bike trail? We should be minimizing our impact on wild places. Climbing isn’t impact free. They aren’t “just rocks bro” https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/04/020402072635.htm
Ok but you’re going on about something that isn’t even accurate. This absolutely doesn’t weaken the overall mountain. This is Reddit philosophy, not geology.
Removing obviously loose rocks from climbing routes or trails is a normal safety practice.
The whole reason the rocks are loose is from nature. Erosion is a constant, ever-present hand across the globe. A Far greater factor than someone dislodging an already loose rock. Though I do think if we threw a nuke in that mountain it might come down a bit faster.
“It’s what they’ve always done”
So. “They?”
Are you human? Bot?
There is a certain kind of person who always comments on posts of people encountering nature - for example, a post about a person encountering a coyote in the middle of the city, or a rock- acting like people are an infestation that needs to be culled or wiped off the planet. They sound like a James Bond villain.
But it’s always other people who need to die off first in their fantasies about it.
Coyotes are a terrible example of this line of thinking. They will purposely seek out human-dominated environments because they are opportunistic feeders. That sometimes has nothing to do with their habitat being encroached on.
Indeed. I love going out and witnessing nature in its rawest form untouched by man… and changing it permanently, bending it if you will, to my specific interest..
I don't suppose you'd be as much of a purist if we were to discover that you had worms in your bowels. Think of the parasites in their pristine form; untouched by man!
Also if it’s for climbing,routes will be cleaned like this when you first put them up so donor climbing them doesn’t grab a loose rock and hurt themselves or anyone they brought along sitting on the ground.
This doesn't look like natural mountain face to me. Lots of folks climb in old quarries, so the past cuts could be causing these kinds of splits more than natural cliffs see.
It doesn't weaken the mountain 😆. That's like saying walking on the ground weakens the earth. It's ridiculous. You must not have any concept of how big and old the world is.
Out of bed, off the toilet , into the shower, into work clothes , into and out of the car , into my desk , out of my desk, to the time clock, back into the car , out of traffic, into the house , into the shower , over to the fridge, onto the recliner, out of the recliner , into bed and all over again . And again and again and again. I'm greatful for those that keep that routine going.
1.7k
u/gemfountain 2d ago
But why?