Tree climb report

[Frans]

I had the honor today of being catered to in a magnificant old growth tree climb at Montgomery woods CA.

Gerry B. hosted the climb. Some weeks ago we went to the grove and set a chaser thread. Came back today and pulled a looong kernmantle line up into the lower canopy.
Gerry told me the line is 280' long. Well the rope barely reached the ground when pulled through (140') to the first real limbs!
I climbed up, well struggled up really kinda out of shape, and got into the canopy when I could hear yelling down on the ground. Turns out the Ranger came up and cancelled everything. I couldnt hear her and accidently turned off the radio. (thats my story and I am sticking to it)
Climbed up to about 20' from the top. It got realy brittle and knowing the Ranger whas down there I didnt want to drop any dead limbs/twigs so I stopped. This tree towered over the entire grove.
This tree stands ubove the rest by at least 40'. Making the overall height of the tree in the neighborhood of over 300' easy.
I came down after awhile and talked with the ranger. She seemed cool just wanted to teach us that it was illegal to climb trees on Fed. land. Took down my name and stuff and that was it.
When I came down Gerry said to taake out the single line Kernmantle rope. But I wanted to let another climber in the tree so I said I was tired (not too far off the truth) and to let another climber go up. Musta irritated the Ranger some but she didnt let on. mY friend Juline made the climb and it really showed how out of shape I am in cause he really flew up the rope in half the time it took me to do it.
This climb was hard. I had to thow with my throw line two times the whorls were so far apart. And that is using my long flip lines.
It was a great day for me I just wish I could have shared it with the other climbers who showed up.
The tree is so stout, the limbs so massive I kept thinking of the story of Iron John, one strong unbeatable man who worked the railroad. In my mind I will thinkk of this tree with this name.
THANK YOU GERRY!
Maybe over time we tree climbers can get the same permission that rock climbers have to climb rocks. After all no damage is done to the trees...
Until that time I will keep on climbiing
Frans

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I wonder what code prohibits entry into a tree on fedral lands?

 

[Stumper]

Probably the "I'm the ranger and I want to exert some authority" clause! Seriously, there are a bunch of convoluted regulations regarding "damaging" live trees and wildlife harassment. I doubt that there is any codified statute regarding tree climbing but there is enough interpretive wiggle room to allow a claim of "you can't do that, you have to stop!". I don't think that there is anything much to make an actual charge stick except maybe some misdemeanor stuff about failing to heed an officer if they happen to be standing right there screaming at you and can show some sort of damage you caused

 

[Reed]

You should try peeing in the Rose Garden outside the Oval Office sometime - had a few beers on invitation once and the hassle of waiting for SS escort to the men's room wasn't worth the wait.

 

[NickfromWI]

Frans, where was that tree at? Was it on a National Forest?

I've been told that you cannot climb certain trees in some National Parks, but that national forests were another story.

I've found no rules yet prohibiting tree climbing. It really is up to the ranger that happens to be on duty that day.

love
nick

 

[P_woozel]

It is my understandig on a National Forest you can climb trees, rock faces, waterfalls, etc unless otherwise posted. Maybe this was in a park, state or federal. I wonder if she was thrown off balance by Gerry's pleasant attitude, maybe it didnt mesh with her idea of a woodsman.

 

[ray benson]

Looks like it is a California State Park.Couldn't find any climbing regulations.
http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=434
Ray

 

[Curtis James]

I have never climbed any such mighty tree yet. I imagine it though and I can only imagine. It must be a whole new climb. I bet the view was spectacular.

 

[Burnham]

If one is going to climb on public land it seems like one should know where one is, what agency manages that land, and what the general regs are regarding tree climbing. If one finds oneself questioned by an agency representative, one should at least be informed enough to know who that person works for and what their agency's policy is . I find it somewhat hard to believe that someone as experienced as Beranek is with these types of climbs would not have concluded the same.

When we wish to recreate on public lands we have a responsibility to do it within the rules as much as possible, and in as least disturbing a way as possible if we wish to retain that right. While it is not always the case, often land managers put rules/restrictions in place to address issues caused by inappropriate activities by previous users.

If the rules seem excessively restrictive, and one elects to ignore them, OK, I'm not all that strict a rule-follower either...but then don't be surprised if two things happen: you get into trouble with the agency managing the land, and more restrictions get put in place making it harder for everybody to do what you wished to do .

To the best of my knowlege as an employee of the USFS, generally private, non-commercial recreational tree climbing is not prohibited on National Forests. One could get cited for damage to resources, just like an otherwise legal camper or gold panner could if one's practices were not thoughtful.

National Forests, National Parks, BLM, various State lands, municipalities, all have different rules . The only way to know what they are where you are is to do the research.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I find it somewhat hard to believe that someone as experienced as Beranek is with these types of climbs would not have concluded the same.

I'ts been quite a wile, but if I remember right Ger thought he had his basis covered with permits, but the onsite authority did not know of thier group and would not accept the aperwork as valid. Something like thier for-hire nature invalidated it...

 

[Burnham]

If I'm reading you right, JPS, it seems you are saying that the permit was for a non-commercial activity and Beranek was running a for-fee guided climb. If so, he would indeed be in violation of his permit if the state of Ca. looks at this situation similarly to the USFS. Private recreation activities and commercial recreation activities are apples and oranges to the authorities. One way to see it is that commercial activities tend to be larger groups and of a repetitive nature, thus generating more resource damage. Another way to look at it is that if a profit is being made, the agency wants a cut in the form of permit fees .

Edit: I see now that this thread originated quite some time ago...I'm gonna hafta pay attention to that mo' betta. Not that it changes anything I just put up here :angel: .