Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Dogs in Blue Mountains National Parks.

chris

7-Aug-2007
9:06:45 PM

There has been a trend over the past year for climbers to take dogs into the crags within national parks in the Blue mountains, especially Diamond Falls and Bowens Creek.

The access to both of these areas is precarious, and for some time in the past, Bowens Creek was actually closed to rock climbing, though it seems to be tolerated these days. I'm not sure how long that will last if national parks finds out about the dog problem.

I've put some information onto the ACA website outlining reasons that dogs are not allowed into national parks, and I hope this will convince the climbers involved.

In the meantime, I'm hoping that a bit of peer pressure will help stop this practice!

Some of the climbers involved (all Blue mtns locals) are well known to Victorian climbers, and have spent extended "tours of duty" in Araps and the Gramps.... so please don't refrain in giving them a word or two if you see them. I'm sure Victorian climbers feel the same about dogs taken into national park crags (imagine 3 or 4 dogs running around the base of Taipan wall).

rodw

7-Aug-2007
9:50:39 PM

Still don't care...but this is chockstone so im sure you will get plenty of the outrage that you desire.

Pommy

8-Aug-2007
9:02:07 AM

Yep - it shits me too.
I’m also thinking that the higher the grade you climb, the more right you have to bring a dog into national parks.

Eg.
Climb 22’s – you can bring a quiet dog that is tied up and sits quietly all day
28 – you can bring a big dog that starts fights with others and generally runs riot
30 – grade 30 allows you to bring two yapping pieces of shit that bark all day at anything and everything
32 – bring a dog that steals food, socks, runs off, barks, and if anyone complains about it, tell them to get !@#$%

Disclaimer: This program is based purely on fictional characters and any resemblance to people living or deceased is purely co-incidental!

cruze

8-Aug-2007
9:41:10 AM

I don't have a dog, but I have always wanted to bring my tropical fish to the crag. I can't bear to be parted from them for more than about 5 minutes. I couldn't imagine forking out the $20 a night for them to go into a fishery. How would they ever forgive me.

widewetandslippery

8-Aug-2007
10:00:58 AM

(imagine 3 or 4 dogs running around the base of
>Taipan wall).

Mexican ladies day.

n00bpwn3r

14-Aug-2007
6:00:40 PM

Hay Chris, why don't you just up your grades so you too can take a dog to the crag, or is it you just don't like dogs? The crags your whinging about are hardly pristen wilderness areas, in fact the human shit left behind I find far more offensive, especially when you get the full monument effect with the bog roll purched on top like some glorious banner!
No I think the problem here is that you want the crags just the way you like them and like to chuck a tantie when you don't get your own way.
By the way I take my dogs to the crag and I smoke there too, butts taken home of course.

nmonteith

15-Aug-2007
9:31:33 AM

Dogs have no place in national PArks. Its a bloody simple rule that the general public has to follow, and
climbers are not a special case. So many of the Blue Mountains crags are council parls where dogs are
allowed. Why don't these people just leave the mutt at home when they visit the rare Nat Park crag.

anthonyk

15-Aug-2007
1:01:14 PM

cross post from the ACA forum

yes people have impact and scare animals away. should we ban people from national parks? not very likely. but basically you're saying if we cause trouble we may as well take dogs to make it worse. i'm no expert on biology but i'm pretty sure dogs and cats have a more distinctive predator smell than we do, which gets left in their urine and faeces. so they do have a different impact to people.

the animals may not hang around when we are there but they might be sleeping near by or hang out when people are gone. if they are more threatened by the smell of dogs they may not go there at all, even if you don't see them.

and its not just the 10m from the base of the crag and the walk in, smells carry over a much wider area, just because you can't smell it doesn't mean its not there.

i don't know many people who would take a dog on a walk in a national park so why take it climbing. there's crags on council land you can take a dog to.

doing what you want isn't always the best idea because just because you've convinced yourself its ok doesn't mean it doesn't have a bad impact on some of the other locals. maybe just trust advice from parks people when they say its a bad idea to bring them.

nmonteith

15-Aug-2007
1:10:17 PM

if dogs are ok - can i bring my gun? That Bowens walk-in is too far, so i think i'll just chop the lock on the
gate and drive down.

widewetandslippery

15-Aug-2007
1:21:13 PM

I think everyone should be armed in a national park. If the masses show up at a popular crag and you are pasting the walls they all leave and a good crag is one with no one there. Love guns and dogs. Don't you?

IdratherbeclimbingM9

15-Aug-2007
1:22:15 PM

A gun could be handy to shoot the feral XR250's ... or the gnarly knobby attitudes astride them?
Heh, heh, heh.

chris

15-Aug-2007
8:49:11 PM

Thanks guys for keeping this thread current!
Helen Ellis has made a post on ACA, and they have decided to stop taking their dog to Bowens, so hopefully they will start to spread the word a bit and encourage others to do the same.

Adrian Laing has also notified that there is a dog ban at one of the non-national park crags, Logan Brae.
He has said that the council is uncomfortable with dogs at Shipley and the Glen, too (non national park crags). I don't think it's really fair to ban climbers taking dogs to Shipley and the Glen, though, while bushwalkers still can. The Blue Mtns Climbing access group is apparently negotiating about this with council at the moment, so hopefully this will be resolved one way or the other in the next few years.

I'm going to have a chat with some other dog owners on the weekend and hopefully get them to support this issue.

As I've said before, the aim is to get people to stop taking their dogs to national park crags only. I think the non-national park crags are a different issue, and this is up to the owner (of both the crag and the dog!).

vwills

16-Aug-2007
6:24:00 PM

I wrote a witty and erudite response for the ACA only to realise I hadnt logged in, and my pearls disappeared into the ether! I'll try again here: but its no longer any of the above

In summary:
I sometimes have to mind my sisters dogs on weekends and I don't want it to interfere with climbing. But I would not consider taking them into a National Park or on private property eg Logan Brae because
a) its forbidden
b) getting caught could have repercussions for all climbers

But I have seen people with dogs at Bowens and it does make you think "if so and so is bringing their dog here, then why shouldn't I?" I end up going somewhere else (like Mt York- yuck), but I am sure the presence of dogs at Bowens etc influences some people to bring their own. Peer pressure is the answer and hopefully it will be resolved without rangers resorting to fines and access bans.

I'd also prefer not to have dogs running around at Shipley for safety reasons. But other crags I don't see a problem with obedient and controlled animals with owners who clean up their crap. A few people took the opportunity to have a general dog bashing session on the ACA site and made unsubstantiated claims that dogs are vandalising the Glen? Puhlease- can you tell in between the chalk, the human caused erosion and the toilet paper?

They said they didnt want to see dogs at crags. Frankly they can go home and curl up with their cats. I am subject to things I'd rather not see at the crag as well (lycra tights, hairy backs, top ropers and envirovandal children) but I tolerate them. 90% of climbers respond favourably to my mutts which are generally obedient, usually too buggered from the walk in to run amok, sit and look cute if they want food rather than steal it, get cleaned up after, keep others kids entertained for hours and don't mind a bit of rock climbing themselves.

adski

16-Aug-2007
6:57:32 PM

Vanessa, I feel your pain. The same thing happened to me at the ACA site, how much bigger a turn off could you get for a first interaction with a website?? To the guys at ACA: the site can never take off when the first interaction with a new user is:

- you're invited in
- you find a conversation which interests you enough to bother a considered contribution
- you craft your thoughts in a manner worthy of a valued relationship, because first impressions count
- the bouncer takes your witty prose, screws it up and swallows it, kicks you out and gives you a form to fill in with a 5 minute cooling off period before you can try again.
- you go back to Chockstone, or if you're a bolter with a short fuse / drunk and or trigger happy / confused, patriotic and deskbound, you find yourself staring at a green screen.

I'm still fuming from the above happening to me 12 mths ago, i'm infuriated to see the basics of interaction for fist time users at ACA are still so very wrong.

Vanessa, please can you explain your concept of envirovandal children?

If a person ran towards me while I was standing on a cliff edge, stared at me, ground dirt into my rope and stole my lunch, I'd think they were f#cking idiots and shouldn't be there. The same goes for dogs. Chris, if I hadn't run into you in person recently I would be calling on the phone to let you know I appreciate how you've championed this one.

TLockwood

16-Aug-2007
8:42:22 PM

On 16/08/2007 adski wrote:
>Vanessa, please can you explain your concept of envirovandal children?

I think it may refer to kids at crags who want to break branches on tree's 'cos its fun, or run around in the bush like its a playground without realising the erosion they are causing, write on the rock with bits of charcoal, break rocks, etc, etc. They probably don't know any better and proper parenting should be encouraged.

close Vanessa?

vwills

16-Aug-2007
8:49:24 PM

something like that. Stuff like I used to do when I was a kid!

TLockwood

16-Aug-2007
8:53:50 PM

thats all i was trying to remember too :P

chris

17-Aug-2007
9:43:48 PM

Thanks Ness for coming out in support of not taking your dog into NPs!
I agree.... it's peer pressure that's going to change things, but you are also right that there are a lot of crags (not in national parks) that dogs should be quite welcome at!

As I am soon to be a dad, though, I am hoping that kids stay welcome at all crags!
In 10 years time when my offspring are burning me off, I will be quite willing to talk about a ban on children!!

vwills

17-Aug-2007
10:41:07 PM

Didnt mean to imply I dont like kids at crags, though the ones that warm up on your project- for- the- year could perhaps be banned. The children I meet most often are great, and as I also have to mind the sisters children at times I am slowly crag training them. They have lagged behind the dogs in crag suitability however due to greater disobedience and disinclination towards long approaches !

There are 19 messages in this topic.