On 14/09/2009 nmonteith wrote:
>Interestingly there was certainly a bit of friction between the VCC and
>the ACA about the route database. At the time of it's launch I tried to
>convince the VCC to use the ACA database as a back end for recording new
>routes, but the VCC didn't like the idea of another organization holding
>the master data file.
I'm not sure it was quite that simple. A major stumbling block was that the VCC (in theory at least) made money from selling guides, and hence there was some resitsance to giving the info away for free. (In reality the guide breeak even if that.) Also, the VCC is commitee driven, and no sinlge person on the commitee really has the authority to make a unilateral decision - so a lot of thngs just don't happen - the organisation just can't respond in a timley fashion, a lot of the time. Don't get me wrong - the VCC run some great trips, I've been a member ever since starting climbing, and always will. They do a great job serving as a state based body. The ACA should not worry about this role (as others have said, the void does not exist), but concentrate on what they do well (the climing route database), which the VCC, despite the best intentions of several members, has struggled to get of the ground. If you took the trips, cliffcare, and representation role of the VCC, combined it with the forum / internet presence of chockstone, and the on-line routes of the ACA, you'd have a great combination. You just need a local club / body in each state.
Cheers |