JosephH

Found another one yesterday...

=================== Beacon Rock Update - 10/16/05... =================== SE Corner Tree: Slings and rap rings were removed today. SE Corner P2 Anchor: Slings and rings were also removed from this anchor. This anchor on the first pass just had the hangers replaced. It will be redone shortly to bring the two hangers into closer proximity. How many of you actually do this rap or see folks doing it? Grey Sling Swap Out: The gray slings on SE Corner and the main SE descent raps were swapped out for black webbing so they are not mistaken for 'weathered' slings by beginners. General Issues SE Corner P2 Slab Cam Removed: For those of you that hug the dihedral, the mangled cam is now gone. It came out fairly reasonably by manipulating all four cam tips at the same time with fingers. Joseph Healy Beacon Rock Climber's Association

I have no doubt about what you said about the biner coming off and I have my suspicions that they can come unclipped easier than solid gate biner, but I'd have to disagree with you about wiregates fluttering. I have seen and heard numerous instances of the biner below the one that caught a fall coming off and even experienced a case of a biner coming off both the rope and the piece (Tricam) - but none of them were from flutter but rather from the loading process which seems somehow different for that second piece than the one that initiates catching the fall or the ones below it. Odd but it is pattern that I've seen over the years. The second one down is getting snapped hard from a "limp" position by both sides of the rope and no matter how it's clipped it can end up going through some pretty peculiar gyrations on the way to being fully loaded. I certainly can't prove any of this but over decades I've seen a pattern of some pretty strange things happen to the second piece down that doesn't seem to happen to the ones below it which typically just get lifted out if anything goes wrong with them. Where did you take the dive on Mescalito? The small Metolius' are pretty bombproof...

Bill, I very much appreciate the support, but I actually think we've had a pretty good vetting of folks' impressions, desires, feelings, doubts, and fears around the issues. I appreciate the comments of all involved as they give us "locals" the possibility of coming to, as crimper put it, some "understanding"; even if that doesn't necessarily mean a unanimous consensus. Somewhere along the line we, as a locals group, have to start singing something roughly recognizable to outsiders as the "same song" and this is a start, however rough and tenuous. I admit, this is a big change in the status quo, and I/we possibly could have handled it better relative to the community at large, but time and resources being what they were, along with the desire to keep it a "locals" effort, this is how it ended up transpiring. Personally I'd love to see what Vern, Eric, Mark, and yes - even you Kevin - could put up on the NW face and I'd love to reclaim some of the West face routes. In the long, long term (and quite possibly never) I'd love to see three routes up the 600' of black streaked dihedrals on the NE face/corner. No one, though, myself, the BRSP, WDFW, or anyone else is making guarantees or promises of outcomes - but nothing ventured, nothing gained; and to venture we have to vest, risk, and trust again and hope for the best - not all that different a requirement than for climbing itself. It's a political venture to be sure, but one we should be able to navigate if we step up as partners in the process operating in good faith and out in the open. And the last outcome I'd want to see is for any of you motherf#ckers to not show up even if it's to bitch me out. And that includes you Bill - goddamnit, I've been waiting for that f#cking foot of yours to heal; tasting it is alright, but don't stick it all the way in your mouth just yet. Bring that punked out ass out to Beacon Sunday and don't make me come get you...

Bryan, I'd like to think I am open and listening. As I said I'll still be doing updates and they'll contain the types of info I've discussed and for the reasons I've stated. Again, I'm not into route beta - everyone is on their own when they step up to a line. With the caveat that Mark said, that in some instances we'll have to agree to disagree, I'd also like to think that we're arriving at a shared understanding of each everyone's positions as they've represented them and feel I've tried, maybe in a reverse order, to explain the rationale behind my and BRCA's actions. [P.S. I'm going off line for a bit as I have just been slammed with a bunch of work I have to get off and will try to check in a couple of times over the next two days. Thanks to everyone for caring enough to jump in and contribute to the dialogue...]

Peter, It would be much more convient to have a sticky post just for the status updates and all this discussion in a separate one... I assume you mean the arrows; anything is possible, but I frankly doubt it. There was a couple on Young Warriors ahead of us just days before and he put big chalk arrows roughly the same size and shape for his gf to follow and I suspect that is likely who did it. Every year I've been climbing there some sketch activity seems to take place sooner or later and I would guess it was this year's version. Again, anything is possible, but I'd still maintain that the bolts on the routes I've mention have, do, and will attract way more people that otherwise would never visit than the updates ever will. I hear what you're saying about your perception of "tradiness" as a visitor, but I think I can safely say that would be the majority sentiment of the locals, especially the older ones, but then Bill can speak for himself as can Jim O. if you run into him out there.

Mark, Sorry, just saw this post. No I'm not replacing them blindly, more like thoroughly, and I'm checking every single one and so far most all have been deteriorated in some manner or another, badly drilled (many at big angles with stacks of washers under the hanger, spinning badly, or otherwise problematic. Some replacements are in agreement with BRSP to get "brightwork" (chains) off the rock. Surprisingly, many of the newer anchors, like the first two anchors on Young Warriors, were in some of the worst condition. All fixed pins encountered are being inspected, tested, and either reset or replaced. Jim O. is also identifying a few pins that were stolen off routes during a bad rash of that behavior and are being restored. The anchors are being replaced with heavy Metolius Rap hangers and most have been replaced with SS(316) 3/8"x 3-3/4" bolts though some early ones were have 5-piece powerbolts. Most intermediate anchors on the columns are bare otherwise they have dual-figure-8 webbing through two Fixe SS 50kn rap rings. As I've said there is a reason for the updates and they will continue at least through to the end of the project and probably infreqently after that (quarterly or monthly during the season) as the need arises and to show continous dialog and involvement as a vested group. Hopefully most of those would be related to progress on some more of the goals listed in the post above.

That's what I thought, the first half of the 2nd pitch right off the anchor looks pretty damn stout, the upper half looks fun and quite reasonable. Definitely nice climbing by Eric as is most of what I've seen...

Hey, you miserable road tramp! Hell, you're the one with time to burn - we should be roping your ass into getting some of this stuff done, but I know - you're "retired" now, too busy in the Creek, the Valley, and all those other pressing 'the xxxxx's... The crew will be out Sunday for sure and Mark you should come up and join the fray.

Again, I understand the concern and believe me, I hate crowds and basically never go to Smith for that reason; most of my climbing out at Beacon over the years has been roped soloing when I've had the entire place to myself. If I had things entirely my way all the bolts near tunnel #1 and Rythmn Method would go away and nearly all the bolts on Young Warriors as well and I'd go back to lying about how intense the poison oak is every year. As for the updates, the Anchor Replacement Project is part of a trade off/risk to establish a track record that is easily verifiable by other agencies of record to show we're active and vested. Each update so far has had a remarkably steadystate viewership of roughly 250 people over the week following a post which I would guess is a rough approximation of the number of trad-capable climbers in PDX that use the Internet at a fairly high level and on a regular basis. From my perspective it's an necessary and acceptable trade-off to accomplish some of the goals above, I certainly understand some of you may not agree, however...

Ah, you're other pm's and post made me think you were with him when he did it. The anchors on it were replaced and at this point I've been through so many that I can't remember whether the anchor you described was the one at the middle right or higher on the left.

After talking with Bill I wanted to reiterate a point and be explicit about another. I guess my bottom line is if you want to acheive any of the following results: - Get route development on the NW Face opened back up. - Cooperatively monitor the Peregrines to help determine the extent, scope, and duration of each year's closure. - Get the West face out from under the Peregrine closure. - Get the East face closure revisited and reexamined in part or in whole. - Get a clear and shared understanding and agreement on route "cleaning" so we can operate transparently. - Get the fixed pro approval/route development process changed from a per placement basis to a per route basis. - To establish pre-opening and post-closure work sessions to get work done that is too hazardous to accomplish during the open season. - To insure us "locals" are positioned to partner with the BRSP Staff in the next review/revision of the BRSP Climbing Management Plan. And if you think you can do it with no credibility, no track record besides a bad one (in their eyes), and no formal standing - then, hey, go for it. And you may be able to build the requisite relationships with the human beings representing the various agencies by smack-talking them and trying to "hide" information from them on one hand (bad faith) while putting on the appearance of operating in good faith, but I can't - and further, I won't. Again, none of this is a good time for me, I'd rather be doing something else like climbing and putting up routes. From my personal perspective it's a matter of holding on to the events, behaviors, and attitudes of the past while nothing gets done besides endless bitching and moaning or sucking it up, taking a few [minimal] risks, and try to move forward.

Cobra, Sorry I missed your post until Bryan mentioned it above. But to your points, I haven't posted route photos or route beta; what I have done is blog the status of anchor replacements as they are done and made general comments about some of the routes. Some of those comments, particualarly those about the "Flying Dutchman" rap are because we'd very much like to relieve some of the pressure and re-route some traffic off the main SE descent route down Jill's where there is a very high potential for rappellers to dump rock down on folks at the base of the SE Corner. The FD rap is clean and does not have folks hanging out below. Most all my other comments are safety related or about routes or parts of Beacon that essentially are never or very rarely climbed and are badly overgrown - again, the only real "mystery" about them is why the don't get climbed, though I have my suspicions. I mean, how many of you have ever climbed, or when was the last time were on, "Flying Swallow", "Flight Time", "Iron Maiden", or "Riverside"? And just for the record, I despise guidebooks and always have, almost all of my early climbing was FA's, and I only use guidebooks to get to a new area and to understand how it's laid out, not to pick routes - I don't even want to know whether lines are routes or not. I am a big proponent of people developing the skills necessary to look at a line and make judgements about how well you're abilities map to it. I didn't pick up a Portland area guide until last year so Jim could walk the base with me and go over each route's history prior to this work. You won't find me spraying beta about what you need to do a route, just what anchors have been replaced, what routes have been cleaned, and what rope lengths work on desirable raps and what raps to avoid. Again, and that principally to provide a verifiable "audit trail" for some of the more political work down the road.

Mark, I definitely appreciate the concerns, but for me it's matter of needing, on several fronts, to establish an open and transparent credibility to give us as "Beacon locals" a verifiable involvement with ongoing issues at BRSP. Without a coherent track record recognized/recognizable by various agencies of record it makes it very hard for the BRSP staff to justify working with "us" versus someone else ("non-Beacon locals") to set agendas, priorities, and futures. That involves making some trade offs and to some extent there is some risk involved. I suspect, however, that the enduring "mystery" out at Beacon is at least as resilient as the SE Corner tree. But Beacon isn't suffering from any increase in traffic that I've noticed this year - if anything it seems lighter than last year and tapering off fast. I still maintain that keeping it trad is the best way to keep the crowds down and retain the "mystery" of the place. More or less like the movie said, "bolt it and they will come...". Anyone that's lost the mystery out there should think about getting on the many rarely if ever climbed routes above the Grassy ledges or above the "Arena of Terror". P.S. I asked before, when you say the second pitch of FD do you mean from the anchor on the left halfway up taking just the seam in the dihedral, or do you mean from the high anchor on the left then topping out? Also, when are you coming over again?

Maybe he has a point - some secrets just shouldn't be shared...

Do you even think about what you're spraying here before you type? Jim gets consulted on everything that goes on as the original founder of the BRCA and he gets a printed version of all these posts even though he doesn't have a computer. Again, there is more than enough info here, in books, and in people who lived the history that you can avail yourself of for you to figure it out or otherwise "earn" some sense of the past you've clearly missed. Just the listing of our wish list in the earlier post should clue you into the idea that a lot has gone down and that there is a lot of work needs to be done. Oh, and I'm not "protecting" you or anyone else from anything, I'm operating purely out of a desire to protect my own climbing interests out there. I'm also completely comfortable with the reality that some folks are never going to "get" it...

Bryan, Thanks for the posts, but again there are just going to be times and issues where we disagree. Where to even start...? First, I didn't "invite" anyone in particular to CC.com and this is another case where perceptions run way ahead of reality. John and Erik do know how to use a browser, they know all about CC.com and I merely sent them a link so they'd know what section I was posting in. Again, the name of the game is transparency - your opening comment is an expression of exactly the "cops and robbers" mentality I'm talking about. Again, there isn't anything that's goes on or has gone on that the staff doesn't figure out on their own by and large and the whole idea of climber "secrets" is pretty much a figment of our own imagination - those guys live there, not much really escapes their notice. Second, I can't think of anything out there that represents "key and secret information" and the very phrase should absolve me as I can assure you I don't have the requisite decoder ring to be privy to any such information unless you consider info on long-abandoned routes and parts of the crag "secret". If so they are only "secret" due to a lack of interest and neglect. The Anchor Replacement Project is completely open and being "blogged" as it occurs in status updates that include other pertinent info. Exactly what "key and secret information" have I betrayed? And with regards to most of the rest of your comments and particularly ones like "incessantly referring to "threats" and "drama" at beacon that don't exist", I'll probably let Bill or someone else tackle them if they want but you make it clear you don't know much about the history of climbing at Beacon and if you can't perceive any threats to the historical nature of climbing at Beacon after climbing there since 2001 and reading this than I can only assume you haven't been paying attention in either place, to climbing politics in general, and/or have been otherwise pre-occupied. As for what "leadership looks like", I admit Bill, Jim, and I aren't much to look at; what did you have in mind - Lynn Hill and Katie Brown? We would too, if you can get them to do it... [Edit: Bryan, in the spirit of supporting the "leadership" you ought to consider buying Jim a beer or two and plying him for a history lesson...]

Well, I'd say from an ecological perspective everything you say is true, but I for one will find the route a bit sterile once the tree is gone and it's going is has been greatly accelerated by our traffic and use. The gravel/dirt wouldn't primarily be for mechanically holding it down so much as to replenish soil and mechanically provide some protection for the roots. This would basically be in-fill between the roots and not slathered all over the ledge. The dog thing, sigh. Yep, another paradox, I'm one of the half of folks that love you guys (and Gavin too), but hate dogs at crags and think it's wildly inconsiderate to leave unleashed dogs at the base of multi-pitch climbs. Likely I'll manage to stop calling you "Mark" far before this issue is resolved here or anywhere else... Yep, it was me, and I angonized over that for quite some time. Until late last fall that rock had an identical twin along side of it and it was that same Jesus-loving birdie that inadvertantly almost pulled that one down on our third while stepping around it. Everyone always grabbed the top of it while they stepped around it to the ledge, but that day when our birdie did it, it rocked 2-3 inches out and he managed to gently push it back in place. We had to stay late that night and trundle it. The remaining half poses yet another Beacon dilemna: it is arguably one of the single most, dangerous rocks climbers encounter at Beacon. Like its trundled twin it too is loose and everyone's natural inclination is to yard straight out on the top of it while stepping around it; if it cuts on someone in that position it could easily cause a fatality in the air or on the ground below or both. It would get trundled too except there is a good possibility it's weight pressing against the cliff is partially supporting the 4x12 or so structure above it and possibly more. I'd be willing to remove that marking as well, but be aware this rock poses probably the highest rockfall risk on any route out at Beacon; on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd rate it a 9 or 10 because of the combination of all the above factors and the fact that the route is so popular. Thanks, I really do enjoy seeing you out there even if "Mark" imprinted my pre-alzheimers brain the weekend I first met you both. I'll now probably call him "Jason" the next time he comes over. Good luck on Dodd's, I find moving fast for just that first couple of moves is what get's me through it - anytime I move slow there it usually means I'm gonna grip and pitch.

My apologies to all for not being clearer about the overall agenda out there sooner and as I said, and Kevin is reiterating, we aren't likely to see eye to eye on every issue but we'll need to move ahead as a group anyway and try to not let our own differences spill over too much - trust me, we need to stick together in general going forward as in reality we "Beacon locals" are a subset of the total OR/WA climbing population. The best thing we can do is show we are willing to step up to some responsibility; invest the time, money, and energy to back up the claims that we care about the place; and do our best to set aside the past and try to have some decent relationships - especially with the BRSP staff. I can't stress enough how much they are actually in our corner in a world of much larger regulatory and interest group agendas. I definitely hear the trust and fear issues of all of those of you who went through the "Peregrine Wars" and attempts to work issues through back in the '90s. Jim, Bill, Kevin and others are expressing genuine concern but at some point you have to either be willing to let go and move on in good faith or hold on to it all at the expense of losing a voice going forward. My feeling was and is that we've come to that crossroad a decade later and it's time to get re-involved with the processes that manage BRSP - I can certainly understand if some folks don't agree or don't have the heart to go through it all again, but those processes go on with or without us.

We probably need to back way up and I'll put out the short answer to Bryan's question of: My wish list of things to accomplish when we started was the following and still is: a) Preserve the traditional character of climbing at Beacon - there is no need to bolt every route and chain every column top at Beacon, sport climbers have Broughton and Smith, and my goal is to see Beacon preserved in it's "native" character as a trad area which can be summed up as developing routes with gear, then pins, then bolts as a last resort. As Jim Opdycke likes to say, this is, was, and should remain a trad area where you can come have some adventure or train for a big wall. [Endless and ongoing] b) Get route development on the NW Face opened back up. [initiated and in process] c) Cooperatively monitor the Peregrines to help determine the extent, scope, and duration of each year's closure. [initiated and in process] d) Get the West face out from under the Peregrine closure. [broached] e) Get the East face closure revisited and reexamined in part or in whole. [broached] f) Get a clear and shared understanding and agreement on route "cleaning" so we can operate transparently. [Part of defining the route development process...] g) Get the fixed pro approval/route development process changed from a per placement basis to a per route basis. [Part of defining the route development process...] h) To establish pre-opening and post-closure work sessions to get work done that is too hazardous to accomplish during the open season. [Done] i) To insure us "locals" are positioned with at least a shred of credibility to partner with the BRSP Staff in the next review/revision of the BRSP Climbing Management Plan, a process that occurs every couple of years. Rest assured that there are organized and better funded climbing groups/associations who aren't "locals" that are more than ready and willing to step into that role and set the agenda for us "locals" if we don't get half an act together. [Lots of progress over the past year] None of the above, and particularly the last, is possible while we hold, maintain, and cherish a "cops and robbers" approach to [bad] relationships with the BRSP Staff, WSP, WDFW, and other agencies of record. Again, nothing we do out there happens in "secret" in reality - the BRSP staff either knows it's happening when it's going down or they find out shortly afterwards and they've been doing that quite reliably without any help from me for the past decade. Re-forming the BRCA, doing the pre-opening work, the Anchor Replacement Project, monitoring the Peregrines, working with the BRSP on signage, etc. all are designed to build cred for us Beacon "locals" so we have a place at the table the next time everyone sits down to cast "climbing" in the stone of the climbing management plan. Take your pick: hold on to the past and keep playing cops and robbers to maintain an advesarial relationship with the BRSP staff and all the agencies of record and get an agenda set for us; or get a clue, an act, and build some credibility for a change so we have some saying our own fate... - Joseph [P.S. No one likes all this sh#t, and I'd rather just be climbing then pouring time, money, and energy into this, but the writings been on the wall for a long time that things have gone south badly and were only getting worse as time goes along.]

Just to be crystal clear on the tree issue; earlier I posted this: That section in bold was part of my "listening" to those of you who oppose te slings. At Bill's suggestion I'll talk with the BRSP Staff, pull the slings for now and we'll just go with the signage while we continue our discussion. We'll also put together a meeting and those of you who are really interested in the issue and not just spraying can come and we'll work through some of this and you can also get the BRSP perspective firsthand.

Kevin, Just to let you know, I've already talked to one person that said you called and told him to get on the Internet and read this thread - so which is it - you want it quiet or you're actually calling people up and telling them to come here and driving your own argument of proliferation?

Bryan, I haven't "isolated" your sentences, merely referenced them and I haven't refuted anything you've said, merely stated my opinions - they just happen to differ from yours at times. You're more than welcome to yours as is everyone; we certainly aren't likely to be coming to any unanimous consensus on every issue out there, but we can certainly work through them and work with the BRSP on issue that fall under their purvey out there. I first climbed at Beacon in '80, and have climbed there every year since moving here in '87 save one when I was working out of the state. Lots of that was mid-week roped solos and I generally had the place to myself. But I've been climbing there all along and I'm not acting unilaterally or alone. The main secret about Beacon is that most folks run up the same few lines over and over all the time and that a lot of great lines have grown over and are never climbed anymore or extremely rarely. I didn't "define" the bad anchors, overgrown routes, loose rock buildup, or incredibly bad relationships all the way around - I found them. The only real "mystery" out there is why a ton of great routes never get climbed anymore. Exactly how has anything I've said or posted "degraded" or "cheapened" your's or anyone's elses "past experiences" or the "future experiences of others"? Talk about drama. The main thing that threatens to "cheapen" everyone's future experience out there is bolting; the main threat to everyone's past experiences is neglect and abandonment of classic lines. You have some problem that I don't happen to live a 8-to-5 life? That I stay up past your bedtime? Is the fact that I work at night somehow threatening? My mother is dead, thanks, and that's a lot of drama over when and how I choose to live my life... Yes, some of the anchors have been replaced, some of them badly, and I've removed a bunch of hangerless studs from various folks' learning experiences. Also, sometime just the the hangers were replaced, or the old anchors not removed. Also, a bunch of the chain anchors that got slammed in two years ago really pissed off folks at various agencies both for the "brightwork" littering the place and because no one even bothered to notify the BRSP staff further causing bad blood - again, it's not like they didn't notice it happening. In short, some of those anchors work, some don't and for various reasons. This work is happening transparently and with web posting because it is an organized effort coordinated with the BRSP. I couldn't care less about "credit" and I'm not "creating" any changes out at Beacon. I'm simply replacing deteriorated anchors, trying to help repair tattered relationships, trying to get more climbing opened up and opened up early as possible, and trying reclaim some pretty classic old routes that clearly aren't of interest to pretty much anyone, and do it all as transparently as possible so you know and anyone else interested (individuals and agencies of record) know exactly what and who. I am, however, more than willing to take responsibility for all my actions. And again, I haven't been doing any of this alone or in isolation even if I happen to have a schedule that let's me get out to do the anchor work when it's relatively quiet.

Well, Kevin, since you bring it all up this is a good time to talk brass tacks about climbing out at Beacon. I've been climbing at Beacon for a long time and let's get real here; what's been going on out there for over a decade is a train wreck of misunderstanding, miscommunication, inneundo, drama, lies, and behavior on par with Peter Pan and the Pirates with us playing the role of the Lost Children while casting everyone representing any type of authority charged with managing Beacon as the Pirates. Personally, since I've been climbing there I haven't seen climbers - me, you, or the collective whole of us "fix" much of anything. Hell, the deteriorated state of the anchors and the total neglect of all the South face column routes (with the exception of Blownout) and lower SE Corner routes alone speaks volumes more than my paltry fair here on CC.com could ever say. The result of a decade of bad relationships and antagonism between climbers and everyone else involved or interested in Beacon Rock has served no one's interests as witnessed by the total shut down of route development on the NW face and no cooperative interaction relative to monitoring the Peregrine nesting activity for early openings. Now call me a complete asshole, but I've been through some of this before elsewhere and I don't want my climbing at risk out there and don't have any problem saying up front my actions and motivations are completely selfish - and to be honest, I'm not really a community service kind of guy. In that selfish context I took it upon myself to start a dialog with pretty much everyone currently involved with climbing at Beacon and decided I personally and we as a [beacon] community had better get half a clue and something resembling a act together before one was imposed on us by outsiders. To that end I've been working for over a year with Bill Coe, Jim Opdycke, Erik Plunkett, John Ernster, David Anderson, and various other groups and agencies with an interest in Beacon and I can tell you up front that the days of playing cops and robbers are over, we either operate transparently or things will continue to go against us everytime an incident occurs or a regulatory decision point arrives. And there are lots of other players out there, in and out of the climbing universe, that aren't "locals"; all of them better organized and funded than us and more than willing to step in and set agendas for us if we want to keep playing games [of denial] instead of getting real. And Kevin, it's not like the routes, partying, or any other climber activity has actually been successfully hidden from, or escaped, the BRSP staff notice over that past decade - hell, I could get a better party ledge schedule from them then from you guys. And you know what - they don't care that you want to bivouac and party up on the ledge - they like it - it gives the place a little cache. Trust me, all the drama whipped up about "us" versus "them" is strictly coming from us queens - not them; we're simply part of a job they love and if anything they find us pretty f#cking entertaining on the whole. The "webbing [anchors] off the trees" quote was in reference to trees on the columns and elsewhere by substituting pins or anchors as in the case of the Dodd's Jam tree. The SE Corner tree is somewhat of a special case and paradox because I think we can all agree we don't want to see anchors on the ledge and we don't want the tree to die. But as I said earlier, I've already seen and entire cliff top of bigger and better-anchored Cedar trees completely die off from climber traffic/rappelling and the corner tree is looking exactly like those did on their way out - it is not "withstanding us" at all, rather it is showing some real signs of decline due to our impact. Unless you've seen the cycle played out somewhere else already it's no doubt hard to recognize that it's really happening, but it is. If I was strictly following the "webbing off the trees" I would have whipped two anchor sets up there, one for belaying and another for rappelling, but I haven't and instead we have been working with folks (including you here and now) to figure out a way to protect that tree with minimal impact on all our "sensibilities". For me the issue is lots of folks do this rappel - when there is no webbing on the tree at all; that webbing might atract a couple of more folks with the sensibility of lemmings who can't read a warning tag would hardly amount to a significant increase in rappel traffic over the damaging level that exists now. No one is bringing in outside environmental groups, no one is "getting the rock closed", and let's get straight up about one thing: Beacon Rock isn't a secret, and never has been a secret, or a "hidden gem" - what has kept folks away, and keeps them away (other than the poison oak), is the fact that it's a trad area in a predominantly sport state [courtesy of Smith]. Fixed pro anchors have a long history at Beacon, but the reason more folks have been showing up over the years is actually because bolted routes like those by tunnel #1, Young Warriors (overbolted), and Rythmn Method attracted them. And to be completely honest your personal propensity for placing protection bolts (even though you've been admirably restrained at Beacon) does nothing to assauge my fears about more crowds showing up if you were to get as randy with your drill out there as you have elsewhere. Keep it trad and the crowds will go to Broughton and Smith - let fly with protection bolts like some of the lapses that have already occured out there in the past and it will end up a tall, crowded gymfest no different than Broughton or Smith. It really is that simple. Again, anything I or the BRCA does at this point is going to be completely aboveboard and transparent. As for press, the BRSP Staff is currently writing up an intra-agency newsletter article on the turnaround of the relationship with climbers and the special [and desirable] role climbing plays in the park so all the press isn't bad. Let's be clear about another thing, there is nothing "safer" about climbing at Beacon - it's an inherently dangerous place to climb. No amount of cleaning will make it safe, but we can try to eliminate some of the conditions that spawned the football-size rocks that came down on the trail as you come up to tunnel #1 on both Saturday and Sunday last weekend. And from what I can tell, new anchors or not, I'm not sensing any great goldrush to climb the columns on gear. But I want to climb them, and almost all have been abandoned so long they deparately need to be cleaned - "Flying Dutchman" took four hours to minimally clean after the anchor work. The idea here, being selfish again, is if folks know the anchors are there they might actually consider adopting a line or two in the columns and cleaning them so it doesn't take another year to get the job done and get back to just climbing. Again, those days are over and we are actually damn lucky to have the BRSP Staff we do, Erik Plunkett's brother is a climber and John Ernster is an alpine climber once badly injured by rock fall (and he has been on many of the routes there including up to the tree ledge). I've dealt with land manager staffs that don't know climbing, don't like climbing, and don't want climbing - we have the opposite going here and we are damned fortunate to have them... I know your climbing history, and we both know Jim O. Jim would be the first to admit to being a drama queen along with more than a few of us. All the "drama" is completely manufactured by us largely for our own consumption. We'll have to disagree on the postings - everything I do in a role perceived by any agency as pertaining to the BRCA will be done transparently in cooperation with the BRSP staff and posted. As for people "traversing the Grassy Ledges" - serious climber-initiated rock fall is one of the real threats to access out there from the perspective of accidents, damage to the habitat, and damage/obstructions on the tracks. We either start policing ourselves, including making sure less experienced climbers are informed about how to operate out there, or we are at risk. Kevin, I appreciate your passion for the place, and there actually is no shortage of things to "fix" anytime you or anyone else is out there if the desire is genuine. Lots of them are small things: trash, loose rocks, marked up routes, eroded trail sections; others are big like next year's pre-opening work session, reclaiming the South face column routes, or Peregrine monitoring. Once the anchor project is done there will be more BRCA organizational work going on - again, feel free to jump in anywhere along the line and the same goes for anyone else... P.S. We can also start a thread on the Peregrines and closures if you want to get into that [deep historical well of resentment for many]... - Joseph