JosephH

Ok, so I see you're still having problems with reading comprehension. Is there anything I can do to help you with that...?

Safety Last! What desperate people did before climbing gyms...

Brrr....humbug. Advertising does not "establish" communities. Advertising promotes awareness of climbing. Climbing gyms then act as the economic engines allowing folks to act on that awareness and sustain a relatively steady-state annual tidal flow of new bodies. Some of those new 'climbers' join or form 'communities', both real and virtual. Me? Being totally misanthropic, I'd be all for about an 85% overnight slash in the demographic, but that is never going to happen so long as the gyms and drills are powering the whole affair.

Not really - it wasn't something that varied from person to person - you've just been had by another Opdyckian troll.

Ah, now that finally explains all of Ryan's 'le buffe' ascents - a desperate bid for ass sponsorship.

Well, if he is in it I wouldn't want to be the husband - pretty much ranks up there with leaving the infant seat with the kid in it on top of the car as you drive away...

The '- / +' designation was never an indicator of how sustained a route was any more than letter grading is - it was simply a gerneral indicator of the difficulty of the crux prior to the common use of letter grading.

So, what's the consensus then on The Bumbling?

Yes, it was a joke, though you could do Flying Circus, but it's just a lot easier to layback it.

All it means is the demographics have exploded. Back in the day the ratio of climbers who sucked to those who were good couldn't support even a half dozen of the best climbers in the U.S. Today every climber with more than two pairs of shoes and an internet connection thinks they have a shot. It tells you that ratio is through the roof these days and that represents a pool of loose change everyone hopes to take a drink from.

Look, so what if Potter and O'Neill can link-up Half Dome's Regular Route, the South Face of Watkins, and the Nose in about the same amount of time. No doubt they could do the SE Corner in a sub-5 minute time - but, you made it up and back down alive, had an adventure, made the movie, and are ready for whatever comes next. And what the hell, you climbed Snake Dike! Can't beat that with a frigging stick no matter how you look at it.

Ssshhhh! It took a year to remove them the last time someone scratched arrows up the entire corner for their second because they apparently couldn't follow the rope...

Now wait a damn minute here - I am my own sponsor and just how the the hell do you folks propose I make it through the winter, let alone crank it all back up again next summer, without my two main forms of hope and motivation...

I was once told by someone who would know that, "it doesn't matter who you are, EVERYONE gets schooled hard in the Valley at some point or another." I've certainly gotten a bit of mine.

As I said on the other thread, I often lack in patience and social grace...

Hmmm. With all due respect, I would posit that people looking at that anchor and thinking twice about it says more about the state of trad knowledge and experience today. The interpretation of "08" is a matter of basic common sense and at the very least should have conveyed the notion that it was an actively maintained anchor. There was nothing about the appearance of the anchor that should have given one pause from a materials standpoint. Two independent 1" sliding-X slings installed in 2008 would be solid to hang your car from for the next five years minimum. Testing has shown one inch milspec sling material is bomb after completely fading out to white, and the fading wasn't significant on the anchor in question. The tie-wraps keep the the tandem sliding-X slings paired and organized and they do actually afford all necessary inspection of the installation. BUT, you do have to some idea what you're looking at and some familiarity with the materials in question. That anyone would think they're better off replacing two independent slings and SS rings of any age with a badly installed single sling and ring combo (or just skipping the webbing and rings altogether) defies all notions of common sense and logic. Bottomline? However well intended, it was a bad judgment call from a trad climbing perspective and one that belies either rank inexperience, gross incompetence, or both. In either case it was done by someone who doesn't realize they have neither the experience nor judgment to be making such calls on such a public and well-travelled venue. But, c'est la vie.

Now that's funny...

Believe me, I wish that were the case, but it isn't and down that road lies future bolt wars, never seeing early opens, never getting the West face out from under the closer, and no possibility of ever lifting the Peregrine closure. It's fundamentally a fantasy of folks inclined to wish Beacon were a reality distortion field where everyone can remain 12 years old forever - no one wishes that were the case more than me. And no one hates dealing with this shit more than I, but more to the point, no one resents not being able to climb out there than I do. It's the cards we've been dealt, however.

Well, as much as some folks think I do, it's not like I make this shit up. It's all in down in b&w dictated by WA state law and boils down to whether local trad climbers or folks from the broader NW climbing community will control Beacon's destiny over the long haul. I certainly understand the inclination and illusion we can permanently ignore the situation, but it's simply not the reality. Also, and contrary to what Andrew may think, I'm pretty much selfish, have lousy social skills, and most of the time I don't have much interest in or use for "community". And if I were good at 'organizing' we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. I think Andrew and I do have some things in common, though. I have to be interested enough at any given time to bother even being a climber, let alone be a solid climber, and I don't think he's all that much different in that regard.

I had my gear jacked out of the vehicle in SE back in '93 and it was completely out of sight to boot. My renters insurance covered it without so much as asking for a list - they just asked for a number that would replace it and sent me a 2k check. Good renters insurance is worth it. Most have strict limits on the amount they cover for electronics, computers, cameras, and jewelry so be sure and ask about those and maybe get additional coverage which is still cheap.

At Beacon, as opposed to say alpine granite of your choice, pins basically weld in place largely unaffected by the freeze thaw cycle. Again, prior to stainless bolts being widely affordable, pins have outperformed non-SS bolts in every respect out at Beacon. Beyond what I've written in the post above and here, I'm not sure how else to explain why the two are releatively indistinguishable as fixed protection, or why the CMP, WSP Resource Steward, and the BRSP have an interest in managing the inventory of fixed installations on the rock - this is not any different than at any number of other [publicly managaged] climbing areas around the country. You do not need an application for a new route; you do need an application for the installation of fixed protection or anchors whether on a new route or retro'ing an existing route. The new application process described in the post above greatly simplifies the process by switching it from a per piece to a per route applicaiton.

Well, first off I'd say your perception that "Pins by their nature are not really permenant" is incorrect, that even a quick survey of Beacon or most older climbing areas will show that in fact the pins have far out lasted the older non-SS bolts, and by a long shot. Out at Beacon it would be more accurate to say "Bolts by their nature are not really permenant", because they haven't performed nearly as well as the pins. That's from the performance perspective. From the removal perspective I can chop a bolt out there faster than I can pull a pin. From my perspective, pin or bolt, fixed pro is just that and all fixed pro installations will need checking/maintanence at least once a decade. Ivan's recent aid revival has employed non-clean aid, which I'd be more concerned about if they were using the tactic on lines that saw any free ascents. But non-clean aid climbing shouldn't be confused with the application of fixed pro - when I put up an FA and apply fixed pro, be it a pin or a bolt, it's just that - fixed - as in I have no intention of it ever coming out. All FAs or retro fixed pro needs to go through the relatively painless fixed pro application process as per the CMP. So offhand I'd say you're just confusing intent and application - non-clean aid climbing with the application of fixed pro - they're two very different endeavors with different intent and results on stone.

How's that midlife retirement going? Not to worry, I'm sure you'll see rock again before you're 50 or so...

Bill, I don't doubt that, but some placements require bending of the pin on the way in and those will do it where the hard steel won't. In those cases I guess I'd take half the strength as opposed to none, but will have a look around for those test results of Ed's.

No one is doing any blasting for the suggestion, just trying to sort things out...