DCramer

Just bringing this to the top again. Here is a section copied from the State Parks Website referring to access of "closed" parks: QUESTION: The parks are on public lands. If they are closed, can the public still gain access to the land for recreational purposes? Answer: Because of liability and safety considerations, State Parks would close gates, lock buildings and turn off some utilities. Only minimal staffing would remain in place for stewardship and security activities. State Parks discourages the public from placing themselves and their families at risk by entering closed parks. It is the hope that the parks can be mothballed or temporarily closed until the economy recovers sufficiently to reopen them to the public If you want to ensure continued legal access to the Deception Pass crags I would make an effort make your opinion heard. Earlier today I called the State Parks and left a message asking how access would/could be effected by the closure of Olallie Park. I will post again when/if my call is returned. D

Sorry I am pressed for time right now but here is My report: I called Wenberg State Park and asked how access might be affected. The response: The situation is currently unclear but since the parks provides essentially no services at the Town Walls access to the Town Walls probably will not be affected. On a pragmatic note enforcement would be nearly impossible. Here is a link to the Parks Dept. site. Specifically the page on which they discuss closures. Access has the potential of being an issue at some locations! At the bottom are suggestions for how to provide feedback. http://www.parks.wa.gov/budgetcuts.asp Here is a link showing how to find your state reps. Be sure to give them feedback too! http://dfind.leg.wa.gov/dfinder.cfm

I think I have seen this list before a few years ago - last time this threat arose. If anyone feels like a park on this list should stay open they should NOT be shy in advocating for their position. Asking for clarification as to what "closure" really means is also important. If there are shades of gray we should use them to preserve access. I believe that the Town Walls are managed through the Wallace Falls State Park. Although I cannot see how access to the Town Walls can seriously be threatened, I will make a call and report back any information I collect. Any volunteers willign to do the same for 38?

Report from the UW earler today: First pitch of DH will be wet as will the first pitches of GD and TC. Upper pitches s/b dry. People I spoke with weren't on those routes (in the general area)but seemed confident the routes wouldn't be too wet to have fun. They also said it became so warm they had to take their jackets off! Have fun.

Jon's comments made me go back and read the R&I article. Technique details aside I think the biggest takeaway is to create a workout with a limited number of lifts working opposing muscle groups. I would throw out the regular wrist curls and seated one arm pulls. I would also use more reps and less weight for the lateral raise. Additionally I would add forearm pronation and supination excercises. The goal is to have a small (4-5) core group of excercises (eg Bench, Lat Pull, Dips, Squats) augmented by a few other supporting excercises. The core group excercises all have a power orientation. Anyway thats my plan for world domination. Am I out to lunch Courtney?

I don’t read climbing mags but I checked out that link and was surprised how closely it matched with a program prescribed to me by Karl K. I even purchased a one-arm handle to do it that is still at the Seattle Vertical World. One thing that he thought very important was dips. The R&I article has no mention of them. The other significant difference was that he liked squats and not dead lifts. Courtney. What do you think of the R&I program, Dips and Squat vs. dealifts? [ 02-26-2002: Message edited by: DCramer ]

I can attest to the fact that Pope and Dwayner are in fact two separate individuals. I use to think I dated Donna but this thread has got me worried. Although......it does explain a few things.

quote: Originally posted by DCramer:[QB][/QB] Corrected post above. I can't ever post right.

quote: Originally posted by DCramer: [QB]Can't really respond to your question JayB at least with regard to wildness retrobolting but as far as non-wilderness rock routes there has been some of what I consider over the top retro bolting. Especially at some somewhat popular TR locations. Some of these have been removed and some haven't. Overall I do not think it is that big of a problem. I think that TRs or those routes easily accessable for TRing think DDDare prime targets for such activity simply because of the ease of access. Since these routes are often so visible and have a tradition of not being bolted their "violation" becomes all the more noticeable.[QB]

Can't really respond to your question JayB at least with regard to wildness retrobolting but as far as non wilderness rock routes there has been some of what I consider over the top retro bolting. Especially at some somewhat popular TR locations. Some of these have been removed and some haven't. Overall I do not think it is that big of a problem

Will - See above.

One point of clarification I do not necessarily agree everyone who is against bolting is an asshole. In the context of my discussion with my friend I was playing devil’s advocate and suggesting that even if my friend was right and they all were all assholes their opinion still mattered. Sorry for the confusion. Alas, my associate was not the well respected climber of DDD fame. BTW I think that a survey wasn’t even needed for DDD it was simply a bad idea. Pope: “but what bolting advocates are doing goes beyond discussion: “Does that mean you do not deign to even engage the other side in a discussion? I hope not. I never said I find the bitching about bolts annoying what I find annoying is that we make it a conflict. You appear to not even want to engage the otherside. I must admit however that I would be more engaged in the debate if I felt you were making an honest effort to persuade me or help others to empathize with your viewpoint. I would hazard that both you and your buddy Dwayner could be pretty persuasive if you chose. As for my brilliant discourse let me start off by saying that climbing is such a broad category of activities that the goals and aspirations of some practitioners may be unrecognizable to those at other end of the spectrum. For example, for years the AAC refused to publish non-summit rock climbs because they weren’t considered “real” mountains. To expect all climbers to believe in and value the same things is not reasonable. Are those who see sport crags as just another “ski area” wrong? The real trick is to bring these disparate views together or at least expose them to the “other side.” Darryl

It is nice to see civility being given at least a moment of respect on this board. For the next step I say we should try for “constructive engagement.” When I first started posting here I thought great this could be a wonderful facility to help to create a true community of NW climbers. I was particularly interested in the “bolting’ debate and access related issues. If Dwayner, Pope, et al are serious then I ask why not constructively engage in a discussion. Clearly the tired “sport climbers are effete castrati” line is BS and having loss its patina of humor can only serve as an impediment to positive change. The whole traditional v. sport conflict is a tired cliché promoted mostly by the mags and yet, oddly enough, this argument has been adopted as a means of expression by those who have condemned both sport climbing and those very mags. Although the recent pattern seems to be to make unambiguous statements that are later moderated and the argument slightly adjusted. On the other hand about ten years ago I was discussing putting up sport routes with someone and they said you don’t understand modern climbing! (I was advocating restraint) I have been “dissed” on this site for being a goofy bolter. Yet after face to face discussion of recent bolting activities with many current activists they have come back later and accused me of chopping their routes. It is truly an amazing world. It is easy to whine about bolting on this site yet not one person has ever in over 25 years of putting routes up in Washington has ever contacted me and discussed bolting, cleaning or whatever. That the rock is a limited natural resource has been stated by both sides. The debate itself rages over a continuum bound by the endpoints: All humans off earth and Do whatever you want to do. From a moral/ethical point of view the difference between points can only be determined by social norms. It is in climbers’ best interest to generate these norms themselves. The willingness of the various groups to compromise their position in creating these norms seems to be tenuous at best. I say we are in the same boat and truth be told most of us are probably not that far apart. As far as the site goes I thought that the excitement and enthusiasm the creators have for what they do is contagious and inspiring. Stuck at work sometimes it is easy to forget what fun climbing can be. Speaking of which I have to get back to it. This part added after a terribly boring work related lunch: One bolt advocate and I mean he thinks bolting by cracks is OK type of advocate called me up and after finding out I did not chop his route started whining to me about the DDD debacle (quick aside: It always comes up because it is so atypical) He mentioned the debate on this site and how all the anti-bolters were ass$%^& how he wanted no part of any discussion with them. I responded saying ok I agree they are all assholes but that their opinion not their generally BS argument should be considered. He said something to the effect of “F%$# those ass#$$%.” He also said, similar to what I wrote above, that he received lots of pro-comments but virtually no anti-comments on a face to face basis. Now this guy does some very bold traditional climbing, doesn’t bolt for any self promotion but honestly feels it is ok. The argument that sport climbers are ego fueled wimps was obviously set to insult not convince and so it did not/does not move him but he was receptive to the fact that other might have different views and that maybe these views might warrant respect. I guess I see the anti-bolters missing an opportunity. Dwayner and Pope are surely capable of writing a more persuasive commentary. I am somewhat sympathetic to their conclusion but feel that the issue is so big as to have many causes and solutions; however, enumerating and discussing them all could be an enjoyable activity. Darryl [ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: DCramer ]

I use to know him when he lived in Seattle. Never spent much time with him as we have very different interests in climbing. He always seemed ok in person maybe a bit over the top with enthusiasm and self-promotion but I wouldn’t hesitate in going out for a beer with him. I went climbing with his wife once and she seemed like a great person so he can’t be all goofy.

I think that there should be a replacement effort for the vandalized routes at Vantage. If the routes were vandalized by someone trying to make some sort of philosophical statement, it is especially important that an effort at restoration be made. If bad behavior always wins out, the stage is set for worse behavior in the future. That said perhaps now would be a good time to think about what routes should be restored as lead climbs and which routes should be TRs and which routes should be left fallow. I am currently starting a remodel job on my house and in moving stuff around I came across an old box of pictures. In it were some pics from the early and mid eighties taken at Vantage. I will try to post a couple to this thread over the weekend. Trying to reconcile the difference between Vantage then and now I would say that the trails along the base have a far greater impact than all the bolts. Of course all the people on a sunny spring weekend are an even bigger impact. Up until the late 80s every day I spent at Vantage my party was the only one there. Part of me thinks that perhaps the “vandal” is perhaps acting out of a reaction to the sheer popularity of the place. The popularity problem is a thorny problem. Things like staying on trails, controlling pets, picking up litter, smiling can all have an impact. Using camouflaged hangers, camouflaged chains instead of webbing can help as well. Darryl

I wouldn’t put too much stock in Clint’s map. Recently there has been some development in the area. The road is unfortunately gated but it has been regraded and ends near the boulders. The boulder field itself is quite expansive and I have been unable to find some boulders a second time. Remember it is western WA so moss will grow and rain will fall. Rumor has it some people have been cited for trespassing in the area so be careful if you go there. Land ownership is somewhat chaotic maybe someone will take up the challenge and go visit the county and get some info. This is one area that does have much potential. There is another bouldering spot. (ok but not great) near the river west of the Town Walls. Banks Lake has a lot of granite and after having been called a reprobate bolter I have to stake the claim as putting up (10 or so years ago) the first multi-pitch intentional top rope route in Washington at Banks Lake. We even had a gas powered roto-hammer and a shit load of hardware. We just thought what the hell this is a fun route as a top rope.

Sehome does have some good problems especially one I think its rated V6 in the Henrie guide. This is a standout problem. The boulders below the Zeke’s Wall (granite) have the potential to be one of the best bouldering spots in WA. Some of the boulders are as big as houses. Currently access may be a bit difficult. If this area becomes developed the boulders would be far better than those in Leavenworth. In the Tieton there are some problems near the river by the parking lot for the Cave Wall.

Got the directions from Mike but didn't make it out there yet. :-( Seems that kids and grad school are more of an impediment to climbing than marriage.

Dru - I agree about jumping out on the lead thats why I suggested that leading on TR can be very instructive. The factors I mentioned and your racking idea can all be experienced safely while on TR. Of course as soon as you shed the TR things will be a bit different. I think the best way would be to try to incorporate many of these ideas into a training plan. I have got to get some work done.

Well there are many ways to skin a cat. I would just caution that bouncing around on pieces near the ground does not guarantee that you know how to place good pieces on lead. The fear factor is only one small aspect of traditional leading. Another aspect is strategic placement of pieces to minimize drag, outward pulls on pro or simply to reduce the size of your rack. Unfortunately this pretty much has to be learned (and relearned?) by direct experience. Buy, bring and use plenty of full length runners. Also consider the difference between the strength of a piece and how secure it is. A piece may be wonderful as long as the pull direction is in one direction but worthless if the pull is in another direction. Many times a “good” piece can be dislodged by the pull of the rope. Try all these ideas and remember that the one consistent point of agreement is that you should start off with routes easier than you could TR or Sport lead.

Good point to consider. It can also let people know, esp. gym hounds, how much easier things are to TR than lead without regard to the fear factor.

Another thing to try would be to try placing pro while top roping. That is simulate a true lead. Finding the right piece on your rack, finding the right place on the rock to place pro, and placing a piece all take on a different feel while actually free climbing.(as opposed to fiddling around on the ground or on aid) I would also suggest not being shy about placing alot of pieces.

Trask – The SLM’s summit is well worth the fight. Go back next week and try again. The summit register is a hoot to read. Pope, Dru et al – My mention of the maint. group meeting was merely to provide a concrete example of people who quite probably would contribute here but choose not to because of some of the attitudes often expressed here. Spray is not all bad but I do think that “one bad apple” does give the whole genre of expression a bad name. I do not think that a significant portion of Cascade Climbers will ever be consistent posters here. This is probably a good thing. I do think that increasing the pool of posters from 20 to 100 would be of great benefit to the site and to Cascade climbing in general.

You're right Jon and Tim have done a great job in designing this site.

Dru - I am not against spray per se but also realize that a small percentage of the spray repells a significant portion of the climbing community. It is simply a fact. That many come to this site by accident is interesting yet hardly of relevence to my post. BB's like this have user groups. One common problem that seems to plague all BB users is extreme forms of spray. It is not something unique to climbers but rather something unique to people. One point of clarification. I feel bad that some might think that if you didn't respond to my post about a crag maint. meeting I think that you have nothing to offer. I brought that meeting up because this site was specifically discussed and spray was mentioned by all participants. The factr that someone might post a message criticalof the site not because CC.com sucks but because it is kinda cool and could be cooler seems to elude everyone here. [ 01-04-2002: Message edited by: DCramer ]