In this article I ask how does movement infrastructural heritage emerge? What controversies and contrasting interests are associated with it? Might researching such conflicts shed light on the dynamics operating between societal and individual needs and landscapes? With that in mind, I draw upon ethnographic extracts from my research on rock climbing and mountaineering heritage in Poland and, to some extent, in Slovakia. I consider this kinaesthetic activity as an example of social practice where heritage, infrastructures and movement coalesce into a complex mixture of aesthetics, ethics, skills, and knowledge. These elements, learned and practised by generations of climbers, together turn rocky landscapes into vibrant arenas of sociocultural activity. They are also, however, marked by controversies related to climbing infrastructures. How do such tensions emerge and to precisely what do they refer? 

[climbing, infrastructures, heritage, environment, movement]