slothrop

After climbing at the Pearly Gates this past Saturday, I see what Retrosaurus is referring to. I thought I'd add my two cents of constructive criticism in case the FAs are reading. The first route ("bolt near the bottom") I'm guessing is Easy Pickins. The main feature of this route, two thin cracks separated by a sloping stance, is short but worthy. The bolt placements leave something to be desired, however. That first bolt is quite close to a protectable crack and is near your knee when you get to a good stance to clip it, anyway. I traversed in from the right on this route, since a "direct" start is quite a bit harder. IMHO, this first bolt is unnecessary and could be removed. The second bolt, near where you can traverse off left to Cloud Nine or right to No Room for Squares, is also close to a protectable crack and awkward to clip from the good stance after the crux. I'd say this bolt would be a lot better if it were two feet higher (my partner that day agrees) and might protect an ankle-breaking fall better that way. Pearly Gates is the next route Retrosaurus mentions, with the bolt at the roof. It's true that there is easy pro above the roof that you can place from a no-hands rest. Since the route was near my lead limit, I was happy to clip the bolt at the roof before thrutching into the chimney/rest. Without the bolt, I probably would have looked more carefully for pro just after the crux to protect me from hitting the slab below the roof if I slipped moving into the chimney. I think there were a couple potential placements, though none would protect against an ankle-breaker. Applying the principle of "protect for the leader at his/her limit", the roof bolt is reasonable. The climb itself is one of the most fun pitches I've done in a while. Thanks to the folks who have established routes at Pearly Gates, it's certainly one of the best crags in the Icicle.

Well, it sounds like the riggers did a good job and I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt... but we should go up and look to make sure they didn't miss anything. I do agree that the larger issue is the overall impact of a herd of desperate, bonking adventure racers and their handlers: shitpiles, trampled veggies, PowerGel wrappers, etc. Looks like Fairweather's been posting on the SPQ forum: http://www3.subaruprimalquest.com/forums2.0/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=2&threadid=184

They're all really spendy compared to a nylon windbreaker.

WTF? Sounds like the bolt war is on.

You all realize that this article is why Merv or dwayner or whoever posts all those clown pictures.

Here's a fact check on the debate from the Annenberg Center: http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=271 Plenty of misquoting, inflated figures, and flubbed words all around. My favorite is this, though: Ah, the irony!

Just buy some two-buck Chuck and STFU.

That would be awesome. And make Cheney take a shot whenever he says "flip-flop" or "trial lawyers". Edwards drinks for every rhetorical toss of his golden locks.

If you did, why did you vote for Clinton, Dukakis, or Carter? Each had limited experience in the world, had communication problems, and had their share of gaffs. Greg, that's ridiculous and you know it. Clinton and Carter are both quite clearly more experienced, worldly, and articulate than Bush. Dunno about Dukakis, I was too young when he was in the news. Everyone screws up their lines when speaking publicly, but Bush takes it to another level. Clinton and Carter have written books. Bush admits he doesn't even like to read the news. There's no contest.

Cross Spain off your list, Scott. They withdrew on May 21. BBC news story How many troops could Afghanistan possibly spare? Don't they have more trouble to take care of at home? 1000 Australians: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/13/iraq.australia.troops/ 3000 Italians: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120336,00.html And, of course, the Poles: the Polish military presence is to be reduced next year (source: http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2004/Aug/10-505037.html).

27 more would do it for me. Seriously, it would be nice to involve the real power players of the world with the conflict, not just the smaller states that we can convince with a little military aid (or the threat of withholding such aid).

Yeah, maybe Kerry just needs something to differentiate himself from Bush on this issue. Or maybe he thinks bilateral negotiations will work if the Koreans can actually trust us. They certainly don't trust Bush. So why not get others into the mix in Iraq, too? Put more muscle behind our efforts there? That's Kerry's plan, but Bush isn't willing to cozy up to Europe and get it done. How did negotiations w/N Korea fail under Clinton? Under Clinton, there were IAEA inspectors in N Korea monitoring their reactors. See the timeline on this site, it's pretty interesting: http://cns.miis.edu/research/korea/nuc/iaea94.htm And from CNN.com: "Under the so-called Agreed Framework signed in 1994, North Korea said it would no longer seek to develop nuclear weapons and in exchange, the United States, Japan and South Korea agreed to help build two light water nuclear reactors to replace the plutonium-producing reactors Pyongyang was using." Clinton was President in 1994. Can he take personal credit for the agreements? Maybe not. But it sure looks like the US under Clinton negotiated successfully with N Korea to keep their nuclear program in check. Since Bush took power and publically insulted the Koreans ("Axis of Evil") after ignoring them for nearly two years, they have resumed their nuclear program and kicked out the IAEA. That sounds like a huge failure of diplomacy to me. Bush knows his government could never negotiate with North Korea on its own because the Koreans don't trust us now. I'm sure they're hoping Kerry gets elected.

I don't really get the impression that Kerry wants to hand every negotiation or conflict over to the UN. That's just hyperbolic speculation. For one thing, Kerry specifically supports bilateral negotiations with North Korea. That's just us and them in a room, no UN to be seen. Bush's complaint about that approach alienating China carries some weight, but that's what we have diplomats for. An armed conflict with North Korea, much more likely under Bush, would do much worse things for Sino-American relations than some diplomatic snub. It's one thing to hand everything over to international allies, but quite another to get their support (what Kerry is proposing).

I was impressed with Kerry. He sounded decisive, especially when talking about controlling nuclear proliferation. Kerry's attacks on Bush's record never sounded shrill or off-base, and Bush's responses lacked coherence and variety. You could have turned the debate into a drinking game: take a shot whenever Bush says being President is "hard work". Cry me a river.

From the looks of that map, Hubba Hubba Falls would have to get blasted out of existence... probably much of the lower Icicle Buttress, too. So the decision is purely in the hands of the Nat'l Science Foundation, while the UW profs (incl. Wick Haxton) are just advocating for it?

We could propose to the FS that they ask for compensation from the race organizers for cleanup costs, including proper bolt removal and waste disposal. Then we volunteer our services for bolt removal, so competent guys like mattp can do the job right, and suggest that we be compensated in a small way, perhaps just for materials (epoxy). Formally offering to help clean things up could only improve our relations with the land managers. I like the idea of contacting climbers in the areas where the next event is to be held. It would be great if SPQ got some input from local climbers about how a race might impact climbing areas.

If climbers or hikers had bolted the Granite Sidewalk, it would be easy to solve the problem after discussing it among ourselves. Since the adventure race is a non-local corporate event, we can't just sit down with them at the bar and ask what the hell they were thinking. There are contracts, laws, and agreements involved, so I agree that we should try to do things the right way when talking with land managers. However, we should be able to express to SPQ that they are not welcome to slam bolts in on a 3rd class approach or shit all over the woods just because they have big corporate sponsors and don't have to live with the mess in their backyards.

Well, the first thing I think we'd want is the removal of the bolts (and any egregious shitpiles) at the event planners' expense. We could also ask the FS to allow public comment in advance of such a huge commercial incursion into public lands. Or, at the least, indicate our (as in "us climbers") displeasure at this particular event.

Huh? That's weird. I tried the link from another computer and it asked me to sign in first. *shrug* I betcha the Subaru site's moderators chop the thread before the bolts get chopped on Exfoliation Dome.

Pfft. Go register yerself if you want to contribute to the thread. (You can use a fake name, just need an email address.) It starts like this:

Done. You have to register to read the forum, I think.

Like on a road trip, where you might have a laptop and wireless access? I don't bother to bring a computer with me on trips because it'd probably get stolen. Back at home on my wired DSL connection and desktop PC, I'll write TRs and post photos, etc. I've got a laptop with WiFi, but just use it for work when I need to get out of the house (I work from home). The only real advantage of wireless internet access today is that it gives you mobility within a small space (coffeeshop, campus quad, office, library) and you don't have wires to tangle with. WiFi isn't yet widespread enough that you can expect to get online from everywhere, or flexible enough that you can drive around with a constant connection. It's also more prone to eavesdropping and someone stealing your bandwidth than a wired connection. That said, it's often easier to get public internet access with a wireless connection than with a wired one. Not many coffeeshops have Ethernet jacks, but many have wireless access points.

Dude, the sky is so photoshopped in the photo. Hey Geek, when are we going to Squamish again?

Well, I didn't climb anything outside of Jack's, but the Mace looked really cool and we almost climbed a 6-or-so pitch moderate route on the Elysian Buttress, which is on Elden Mtn. right outside of Flagstaff. As for Jack's... on Casino Cliff, Ten the Hard Way was pretty cool and Take the Money and Run is good, too (you can easily clean your draws by climbing Mickey Goes to Vegas and traversing to the anchor if you can't pull the crux roof ). In the Cracker Jack area, You Don't Know Jack was so fun I led it twice. The canyon itself is really beautiful, so it's worth it to walk back to the Cracker Jack area.

Last week my girlfriend and I were in Flagstaff and spent an afternoon and a morning sport climbing at Jack's Canyon. We'd never been on limestone before and it was a lot of fun. As willstrickland said, the grades were "soft like kitten"--one route I thought was 5.7 is 5.10a in the Dr. Topo guide. But crazy pockets and edges were everywhere! I wish I was strong enough to send some of the wicked overhanging shizzle we saw: The area is like Smith crossed with Exit 38: orange, lots of pockets, desert, grid-bolted. From one stance I was able to reach four bolts (new personal record!), all within a foot or three of a nice chimney. Once I stopped muttering to myself about the local style, the climbing was a lot of fun. I convinced Betsy to lead a couple routes at her lead limit and, despite the cursing, she sent 'em both and enjoyed herself thoroughly. Camping on the canyon rim was awesome! We had the place to ourselves until after dark, when one other couple showed up. We lay awake for a while listening to an elk bugling and a pair of owls hooting at each other. After that, we went to Walnut Canyon to see some cliff dwellings and then to the Grand Canyon, arriving after dark. We walked out to the rim in the moonlight and could just make out vague towering shapes in the huge space in front of us. What an amazing place! Later, in Sedona for a wedding (ostensibly the purpose of our trip ), we hiked up Bell Rock. I wished I had a rope, because a nice-looking pitch of fifth class climbing led to the top from our high point. From a comfy ledge we got a view of Couthouse Butte: There's so much climbing to do in Northern Arizona... I was really impressed with the area, especially compared to the sprawling hellhole that is Phoenix. I definitely want to go back. Thanks to all you cc.commies who lent me guidebooks, gave suggestions on what to climb, or offered the company of their local friends.