**REMOVED**

[coinslab]

++++REMOVED++++

[Scott P]

Nice, but keep in mind that repelling or using ropes to access ruins is illegal.

Edit: This applies only to BLM and NPS land. If it was on private land then it is OK.

[coinslab]

I don't think i said anything about a rope or repelling.

[Udink]

Nice, but keep in mind that repelling or using ropes to access ruins is illegal.

Pfft...never heard that one before.

[coinslab]

For starters repelling is because of the chains in the rock but ropes ARE NOT i know because Rennee Barlow with Range Creek uses one every time a granary is spotted. Therefor NOT illegal. Dunno where that one came from.

[Scott P]

For starters repelling is because of the chains in the rock

Your original message said you rappeled into the indian ruin, but it has been edited. PS, rappelling has nothing to do with chains in the rock.

but ropes ARE NOT i know because Rennee Barlow with Range Creek uses one every time a granary is spotted. Therefor NOT illegal. Dunno where that one came from.

Actually, using ropes to access an indian ruin is illegal to the general public. Rennee Barlow is an archaeologist and probably has permission. If you ask her if it is illegal, I would bet she would agree.

I wasn't posting to start an arguement, but only to inform you that rappelling into ruins (which is what your original message said) is illegal (as is using ropes to access ruins). I assume that many people don't know it is, so I thought I would mention it.

Using a simple handline (as it sounds like you did in your edited post) is different than using one to climb to a ruin or rappel to one, so I don't think what you did would fit in that catagory and wouldn't worry about it.

[coinslab]

Then why bother mentioning it and getting everyone mad. I still am fuming over here.

[IntrepidXJ]

Then why bother mentioning it and getting everyone mad. I still am fuming over here.

I wasn't posting to start an arguement, but only to inform you that rappelling into ruins (which is what your original message said) is illegal (as is using ropes to access ruins). I assume that many people don't know it is, so I thought I would mention it.

[Udink]

Actually, using ropes to access an indian ruin is illegal to the general public.

Scott, do you have a source for this? I have a hard time believing that it's unequivocally against the law to use ropes to access ruins. I did some searching around, checked out the Antiquities Act, etc., and can't find any mention of this activity being illegal.

[Brian in SLC]

Actually, using ropes to access an indian ruin is illegal to the general public.

Scott, do you have a source for this? I have a hard time believing that it's unequivocally against the law to use ropes to access ruins. I did some searching around, checked out the Antiquities Act, etc., and can't find any mention of this activity being illegal.

Been illegal for some time.

"Ropes and other climbing aids are not allowed to access ruins or other cultural sites"

Both in the BLM and NP management plans.

-Brian in SLC

[Reedus]

Had no idea South Horn Mountain had ruins. I have climbed up to the old mine shaft before, but never knew there were ruins up there

[Scott P]

Then why bother mentioning it and getting everyone mad. I still am fuming over here.

Coinslab, I wasn't mad nor will be mad at you; I only thought it is important to mention it because many people aren't aware of the law. My post was more to the general audience here, rather than you personally.

Even if you did rappel (and it sounds like you didn't), it sounds like it would have been done 100% innocently. I just don't want anyone to get into trouble. I wasn't aware of the law either until I was warned by a ranger one time.

Anyway, I asked someone from the BLM if they wouldn't mind adding to the discussion.

[coinslab]

Even if thats the case it's the dumbest law on earth. If archeologists can do it so should we I mean really + i didn't repel so why and where did this conversation even come from. I tied a rope around a tree just in case we fell so we didn't die BUT we didn't use it whatsoever. Whoever is coming up with these laws are idiots seriously are they going to make it a law that you can't see anything which requires climbing. IT'S DUMB. I'll ask Renee and Kevin for their opinion. That seems like a law that requires knowledge what if you were repelling and happened to come across a granary does that make it illegal?

[Brian in SLC]

i didn't repel so why and where did this conversation even come from.

Could have come from the climbing forum where you posted:

We are as i speak leaving for the trip to the great mudbrick house of millsite state park. The house can easily fit 7-8 full grown men inside and requires a bit of repelling with a rope.

Also, you state that you used a rope. In my mind, at least, that's "a climbing aid" even if you didn't rappel.

Even if thats the case it's the dumbest law on earth.

Its actually not THAT dumb. The BLM is mandated by law to try to protect culteral resources.

Below is some of the stuff the BLM uses for planning, from the Monticello office (surfed up attached to planning documents as they developed their latest management plan). Gives some of the reasons and a flavor for what they are trying to do.

-Brian in SLC

Recreational use creates the single largest indirect "demand" on cultural resources within the Monticello FO planning area. Indirect "use" of or "demand" on cultural resources by recreational activity is defined, for this section, as impacts to cultural resources that detract from their traditional, scientific, public, experimental, and/or public use values. These uses or demands are, in most cases, inadvertent and result from visitors lack of awareness regarding the presence of the resource; or a lack of education as to the importance of avoiding damage to cultural resources, or the cumulative impacts of multiple visitors on such resources; or from increased erosion on cultural sites adjacent to heavily-used recreation areas. Other uses or demands are intentional and result from concerted efforts to collect artifacts from sites, remove rock art as souvenirs, or add one's name or other notation to a rock art panel. Specific conflicts between recreational land uses and cultural resources are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.6.3 of this document.

Staff of the Monticello FO have identified several trends in recreational use of FO planning area lands in recent years. These trends include marked increases in OHV use, rock climbing, and the dissemination of recreational information via the Internet by members of the public (including information on cultural resource site locations). Trends identified from the Recreation Management Information System for the 2001 and 2002 Fiscal years suggest there has been a slight decrease in registered visitors engaging in camping, backpacking, and non-motorized boating and substantial increases in hiking, OHV use, and general non-motorized events and activities (including rock climbing). Further recreational trend information related to OHV use comes from OHV registration data from the Utah Department of Motor Vehicles (see Chapter 11

[coinslab]

SERIOUSLY!!! STOP IT!!! I DON'T WANT TO READ YOUR DUMB ARTICLES THE ROPE WAS SITTING THERE WE DIDN'T USE IT. STOP SLAMMING ME FOR NOTHING THIS IS GETTING ANNOYING NOW. ALL POSTS FEEL THE NEED TO FLAME ME SERIOUSLY GUYS LEARN TO TREAT PEOPLE WITH RESPECT!! AND I DID NOTHING WRONG. UDINK AND REEDUS ARE THE ONLY DECENT PEOPLE HERE REST OF YOU NEED SOME RESPECT LESSONS.

[Brian in SLC]

SERIOUSLY!!! STOP IT!!! I DON'T WANT TO READ YOUR DUMB ARTICLES THE ROPE WAS SITTING THERE WE DIDN'T USE IT. STOP SLAMMING ME FOR NOTHING THIS IS GETTING ANNOYING NOW. ALL POSTS FEEL THE NEED TO FLAME ME SERIOUSLY GUYS LEARN TO TREAT PEOPLE WITH RESPECT!! AND I DID NOTHING WRONG. UDINK AND REEDUS ARE THE ONLY DECENT PEOPLE HERE REST OF YOU NEED SOME RESPECT LESSONS.

I don't think anyone is meaning any disrespect.

But...you do kinda bring it on yourself...

I don't think i said anything about a rope or repelling.

I didn't need the rope till coming out for a handhold but someone else was working the rope out for me and kept on yanking back which was very annoying but i withstood it.

Geez, flamed? No one's even made fun of your spelling or grammer...yet...

Ha!

-Brian in SLC

[coinslab]

thanks, thanks a lot.

[denaliguide]

this verbage is often included in many RMP's. i'm just the messenger here. not flaming just trying to inform. i don't believe it has any effect on private lands.

coinslab, try not to take all this so personel. lots of people read these posts and maybe some don't know the proper etiquette for visiting these sensitive cultural sites. when you include lines like

"I didn't need the rope till coming out for a handhold but someone else was working the rope out for me and kept on yanking back which was very annoying but i withstood it"

in your original post. you can see how it can be confusing.

taken from this source. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-20532.pdf

Vehicle access, including OHVs/mechanized, limited to designated
routes; unavailable for private/commercial use of woodland products
except for limited on-site collection of dead wood for campfires, driftwood
collection only would be allowed within floodplains; available for
livestock use October 1

[coinslab]

Wouldn't your arm be considered a climbing aid? Where the ruins are is owned by my grandfather so how could that be considered illegal?

[Scott P]

i didn't repel so why and where did this conversation even come from. I tied a rope around a tree just in case we fell so we didn't die BUT we didn't use it whatsoever.

The original title of the thread said that you rappelled to the ruins and was changed after I posted. After that you changed the thread and said that you only used it as a handline or wrapped it around your body. Now you say you didn't use a rope at all, so I was only responding to the orginal message about the rappelling?

Where the ruins are is owned by my grandfather so how could that be considered illegal?

If it was on private land, than it isn't illegal and you did nothing wrong. As said, even if it was public land, if you didn't know it was a law, then you still didn't do anything wrong. It was only a reminder. If it was on private land, then no harm or wrong done and it's not a big deal at all.

PS, I'm confused why you think anyone is flaming you? No one did that.