JosephH

Bill, I think there is ample precedent for bolting at Rocky Butte and Broughton's both. I do agree if you are going to do a cleaning job at a place like RB then by all means do it right. Do we carry responsibility if someone dies run out on Snake Dike - I don't think so. And 'lazyness', hmmm - as in I didn't go out and proactively or preventively make some aspect of a crag safe when otherwise I wouldn't be out there at all? If that's what you mean, then no, I don't believe that either. I've done lots of run out stuff over the years, though probably not as much as Jim; it's not a matter of curing me, it's a matter of my and anyone else's choice to make or not. And I've lost two friends to climbing accidents so I do understand the consequences and the context when I talk about these issues. The bottom line as I've said elsewhere several times is that if bolts disappeared tomorrow you'd see climbing as an industry collapse overnight losing I suspect about 70% or the folks who today identify themselves as "climbers". Again, I'm pragmatic, I understand it isn't going to stop. But as far as I'm concerned any suggestion that wholly bolted routes aren't the #1 reason and only reason people are climbing in the numbers they are today is utter nonsense. Pretty much every problem we face today is related to that drill-driven proliferation. Every time you put in a protection bolt you can be sure you're directly contributing to it. As far as Stein's Pillar is concerned, my understanding was that it wasn't traditionally bolted, if that's wrong so be it, if it's suddenly being rap/grid-bolted as a new sport destination then I'd question the necessity and motive. Likely the reason would be to escape the crowds bolted lines attracted somewhere else would be my guess.

Congrats to markd on his photo at RC.com: Smith photo

Now that is a classic line of Dingus', but I just don't buy the line at all - by that reasoning we sh/wouldn't be climbing at all. And to be honest I typically see that line employed to justify an "anything goes" and an "I'm getting mine" approach by folks that have gone over as you said, to the "dark side". Again, nothing but respect for your history, climbing, your choices, and even the way you've set up your life, but this is something we'll have to disagree on. There will always be issues and problems outside of climbing - that doesn't negate the seriousness of the issues within the context of it once we decide that's where our time and energies are going versus somewhere else. I'd also be curious to know if coming off the career you have of many life and death stories and experiences set the stage for a different perspective and a desire to just enjoy your retirement without too many concern for the 'details'? That's completely legit in my eyes too, not that you need my ok or approval for anything in or out of climbing...

Jim, I sure wish it were that simple. But access issues, degradation of rock, trails, trees, etc. are all a result of crowding and providing "safe climbing" resources to a growing population of climbers unprepared and uninterested in dealing with anything else. That in turn attracts more of the same in a spiral that is not without consequences. Maybe it's the different areas we both started climbing in. In Southern Illinois the pristine hollows are stunning and the impact of chalk, bolts, draws, and crowds are significant and immediate; in Southern Oregon that probably isn't quite as much the case (and from what I saw at Jurrasic 50 gallon drums of epoxy and several napalm strikes to clean up the oak would be more in order). But I grew up with a LNT sensibility that I've never strayed far from, I suspect you didn't. But to simply say "it's all just fun" is fine if you ignore the consequences or don't consider them an issue - I can't. I have enormous respect for your climbing, and enjoyed meeting you, but we obviously disagree on this particular front. I've never placed a protection bolt and don't care for seeing every unprotected rock in the US bolted for the sake of "fun". That said, I hope we can hook up out at Beacon when I get back in town...

Just like to know who's in these conversations. There's a guy down your way named Vern and I thought you might be him...

Cobra and Corvallis, who are you guys? I don't know everyone's handle here...

"I would say to each their own." The problem is some folks don't want to see bolted lines in a setting like that and that constitutes a valid "their own" as the person putting them in. I'm not a local over there, but if I was camo'ing wouldn't be my solution of choice. The perspective that anything and everything can and should be bolted is somehow ok, legitimate, or some sort of laissez faire or cute anarchist stance blows, a fascist one is more like it.

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...]