When a rock climb is retro-bolted, does the 'ownership' and 'rights of veto' (ala the debate in connection with Monkey Puzzle), then 'pass onto' the person who added the new bolts ?> Mikl is concerned about, (the once), 'well respected...head route' of Bloodline @ Camels Hump ; > Simon Parsons ( our thoughts are with you ,dude),(see Chockstone interview) , wants Seize The Day @ Duck Reach ,Tas, to be 'restored to its original condition'.
Maybe it's a bit like sealing an out-back gravel road : some people enjoy the closer involvement with, and challenge of 'nature' (gravel) ; while others simply love to 'cut-sick' on anything that is an extension to their industralised, world experience : (Kyle in Rock : 'people don't want adventure any more' ).
Who is committing the 'heinous crime' ? The ' improver' or the 'restorer' ? ; Who then 'owns' the 'original' , ' improved', or 'renovated / restored' rock climb ?
Warm 'n' fuzzy / flack 'n' spray contributions are all welcome on this 'parliamentary' thread.
Luv ya'al , HEX |