JosephH

If it qualifies then it is no different than any other project qualifying for tax-exempt bonds, what's the problem? Or is it with the notion of tax-exempt municipal bonds in general?

I bet so.

Hmmm, I'm no crimper either and think it's mostly a matter of getting your feet setup well and then bumping your right foot up one level so you can then reach up to the horizontal seam with your right hand with no problem. Both those pins are solid and I'd wing on them any time if it's any comfort. P5 is fine, you just want to be sure and do the Opdycke variation straight up and left of the last bolt (over the angled fin) continuing straight up and definitely not bail out right at the bolt which will put you face-to-face with the rock I'd recommend people stay as far away from as possible.

You must be doing the p3 crux differently than I am as it's barely 5.9- once you sort out the moves. And a 5.9 way over the p4 crux? I must be doing it way different from you.

It was up a little way on p1 and I threw it down to the base in case someone came back for it. I suspect it belongs to the guys that were leaving when I walked up. One was older and bearded, the other younger, less experienced, and wearing brown Kaukulators. Didn't get their names.

There are definitely small, but very positive handholds on the variation I do of it. I agree with the 10a rating on the move, though.

I wouldn't argue the contrived point by any means given it's a shuffle to the left and you're up. How was it done on the FA? Up and over or stage left?

I suppose it's possible the variation of the p4 crux I do is harder than necessary and different from some 5.9 variation I missed that others may do, but it is secure throughout the move though definitely a solid 5.10 move.

Yeah, I'd agree with that. But how many people actually do that move versus the slab walk-around to the left?

I'd say it's by and large a 5.7 with an occasional moment of 5.8 (p1), 5.9 (p2, p3), and a 5.10ish one-move boulder problem (p4).

Possibly, the properties are wholly under the jurisdiction of the BLM which essentially defers all control to the Gorge Commission (GC). There's a pretty good chance they could be convinced at OZ given evidence of pre-Scenic Act climbing, but then again places like the RC could easily sour the water in general with those guys if they decide they don't like all the un-camo'd hardware. I've been around enough dealings with them on the windsurfing and buiding front that I can say you definitely don't want those guys pissed at you. Again, OZ is a done deal, but publishing DZ is a wholly unnecessary risk from my perspective. Obviously an unpopular view and it sounds like those dice are being rolled regardless of any such concerns. [ Edit: and if folks are concerned about the future of OZ then they really should open a dialog with Justin at WSDOT and try to get some more parking and a recognized use status of some sort from WSDOT now that there is some breathing room in the schedule - if you don't ask and work for it they're just as likely as not to cordon off the whole thing with a guard rail when they finally get around to that part of the project again. ]

Hopefully I'll start getting funny sometime soon because my birthday's this week and I'm told I've been old for quite some time. My daughter was home from UW and sitting on the couch with my wife when a trailer from the new George Clooney movie came on; she went "eeewwwwwhhhh, but he's ssoooo old!" Pretty much leaves me a relic no matter how you look at it - and not funny at all yet.

Yeah, I did that PR stuff, but I also followed it up with a deep dive into the science, environmental treaty law, and politics spending a couple of years involved in getting sanctuaries and protections established. That involved talking to all parties from bureaucrats and politicians to ambassadors and ministers of nations hostile to any form of environmental or species protection. You can't get much done with just a one-dimensional in-your-face approach to this shit. Like any other form of dealing with the law and government - the uninformed and naive get ruthlessly fucked no matter how 'just' or 'fair' their deal is. Seen it happen way too many times. And I suppose it might somehow be warm-fuzzy-and-comfortable to say 'we got fucked by the man' for fourteen years, but I anyway just can't go there or empathize past a point.

PRCs is up on the BRSP shelf and has been ever since it was published. Unfortunately, from '96 - '05, the only thing locals had to show in the way of legacy was breaking the closure, digging out the NW face, bolting above the drinking fountain, and shit-talking 'the man'. Not exactly the 'legacy' you want to head to the table with, particularly when the AF is saying they'll be insisting on 'broad proportional representation' of [responsible] OR/WA climbers at the table (read - not locals). If they reconstituted the CAC tomorrow you guys would get eaten alive by the ensuing politics unless the AF radically changes it's story. What you want is a documentation trail of cooperative work and local investment of time, effort and funds into something tangible the WSP, BRSP, and WDFW can understand, see and document on their side of things if necessary. That and some demonstration that you've taken the time to understand the broader legal, policy, and management context climbing happens in. Again, total bullshit, boring as snot, and entirely inconvenient I know. Oh well.

Hmmmm, "mostly with utter bullshit", I suppose so if facts are irrelevant, bullshit, and you just make shit up as you go along. God forbid anyone throw water on the party, like mentioning those inconvenient parking concerns - clearly total bullshit and anyway, you guys and Olson no doubt have all those WSDOT bases covered. And "knows better"? Yeah, I suppose dealing with reality and simple facts can give that appearance in a land-of-the-blind sort of way - but at least my spiel doesn't change from week to week or depend on who I'm talking to. And lawdy! Laws, agencies, gubament men - all the sorts of boogymen and details that can blow anyone's high or self-constructed bubbaland. As for the "Beacon Rock Updates", I'm guessing you've just been having a tough time following along the last couple of years let alone days. Nothing about those updates have never been about ego or me; they've been a public documentation trail to establish at least a semblance of a basis for locals to claim a reasonable stake at the table of a reconstituted CAC - nothing more, nothing less. Since abandoning that effort I don't do them beyond pre-open work issues or safety notices related to changes or rockfall. I could give a rat's ass about 'legacy' or whatever other "bullshit" you seem to imagine, and good lord baby jesus knows I'd have a hard time handling any more friggin' acolytes and disciples. Obviously gonna have to brush up on my man-cult skills.

Yeah, not only did I read it, that's why I posted it. The fact that it's been deferred means nothing will be changing and DZ will still have no off-shoulder parking and still only have the south side of the road available. Publish if you need to, and it sounds like people need to, but don't be surprised if it ends up a clusterfuck like Ozone and puts parking at both places in jeopardy.

You're welcome. Yeah, saw the place mobbed that one day which I took as a sign of things to come as things like guidebooks and trails happen, I consider those to be such a downer. They are slated to straighten the set of curves immediately before Ozone and I believe after DZ with no work actually involving either, so the parking situation would remain unchanged at both beyond the likelihood of it being taken over for construction equipment during the project. Looks like the project is still on track and the bottom line is you don't want to piss off WSDOT, Skamaia County public works guys, or the cops in any way and screwing up the parking or passing shoulder on the DZ stretch of 14 could easily do that. Publish if you must, but don't be surprised if it causes a problem in the not too distant future.

I disagree. DZ doesn't need the pressure of mob scene. Seen it with with 28 folks once and it was your classic full on PRG-O zoo, might be your idea of a good time out there, definitely not mine. That would be a bit of naive wishful thinking and the parking situation cannot be "resolved easily enough". WSDOT is making no plans for 'adding to the existing road'; in fact, if anything they will likely co-opt existing parking for equipment once the project launches. WSDOT, even more so than WDFW, doesn't care about climbers, "benevolent use", 'what is right' or 'what is fair'. And you don't want them to start caring about climbers, because if they do it will likely be dealing with us an unnecessary nuisance on the side of their road to be eliminated. You're a WA public teacher, how sensitive would the WDOE likely be with regard to local concerns of what is "benevolent use", 'what is right' or 'what is fair'?

I don't. And as I said, I just didn't and don't get the point of two FS's in the state of WA or the relentless need to publish it. Does that mean the parking issues are of no concern to you and that you're all for publishing it?

A trail absolutely does NOT need to be built between the two. And you need yet more attention for a couple more of your routes or what the fuck is your deal with needing it published? It's moronic and sad that people need their egos stroked in this way and are willing to throw a little area like this under the bus to get it and a couple of bucks - let alone jeapordize Ozone parking in the process.

Ozone has at least some extended off-shoulder parking to the west end and another good off-shoulder spot at its east end. DZ has no such off-shoulder parking. In fact, we are parking on the south side of the road in what has been used by the semis for passing even if it isn't marked for that purpose. Ozone's parking situation is about right for the load it gets - DZ can only accommodate so many cars on the south side of the highway and anyone parking on the north side is going to cause real trouble for us and likely Ozone as well. The parking issue alone should be causing some serious concern about publishing the place. Doubly so given that whole stretch of 14 is slated for rennovation and road straightening. And while Justin King, the WSDOT manager for the project is currently cool with Ozone parking, he could easily become less so if any hassles develop on the DZ stretch of the road. From my perspective this is a case of climbers acting as if no one else existed, not seeing the bigger picture, and not really thinking the whole thing through. It could very easily lead to a situation which would result in a state and / or county review of parking at Ozone and put parking at both Ozone and DZ at risk - and for what? Seems pretty ego-centric, shortsighted, and stupid to me.

The difference it would make is a PRG-O clusterfuck and the fact there is limited parking in a stretch of road I suspect WDOT and the local cops aren't thrilled we're using on top of the PRG-O parking. And if anyone ever parks on the north side of the road in the shoulder designed and actively used by semis to allow cars to pass then the tickets will really start to fly and there could easily be some county/state inquiry on DZ and PRG-O as a result. And if there are only a handful of trad climbers then there is no reason at all to publish it is there? And why do you care one way or the other - why exactly do you want it published?

Then what would you get out of it being in a guide?

Are you talking the pin for the safety line or the anchor you can't see for Excalibur and Crankenstein? The pin / safety line to the old FD anchor was because I used FD as the haul point for all the work on the main South Face column anchors and maneuvering a 80 pound pack down and across to getting setup on the anchor or getting off of it wasn't safe otherwise - not really necessary now, but nice to have if you do the FD rap all the time. It also duplicated part of the fixed line setup the other Andrew from CO had setup up on that old anchor and which ran from there up and over to the fir tree on Grassy Ledges above Blownout. The anchor you can't really see at your feet with the lines that go down to Exalibur and Crankenstein replaced the bulk of the long fixed rope setup he had. He had setup that fixed rope and retro-lowered the four anchors along there six feet so over the edge so he could TR / headpoint those lines and so he wouldn't have to top out onto a short, desperate, high-angle, gravelly slope. I don't know about you, but retro'ing those lines with gym anchors so they could be TR'd, headpointed, and not top out didn't seem ok and the WSP and BRSP were repeatedly complaining about his long fixed rope rig which was highly visible from the boat launch. I removed the TR anchors, rebolted the orginal top out anchors which he'd removed, and cleaned up the top gravel/edge situation as best I could. The safety anchor and lines fixed down to Excalibur and Crankenstein anchors served to replace his far more visible fixed rope which allowed safe access to and from the tops of those lines and again allowed me to hump a work load down to restore the original anchors. And those route anchors also now sport a mesh bag on one bolt with a TR rig in it that will extend the anchor down to where Andrew had his TR anchors in case he showed back up to TR those lines or anyone else was so inclined. I.E. that anchor, and the two lines from it down to the lower route anchors, and the TR rigs in the bags functionally replicate Andrew's whole setup in a far less intrusive way that is not visible from the boat launch (and with restored original anchors that allow you to top out the routes). Also, the little ledge at the top of Excalibur is the only place on Grassy Ledges you can stage and lower a litter over the edge clean and lower it to the ground in one shot in an emergency in the unlikely event there ever there was one. And hey, were you questioning Andrew when he retro'd all those those original anchors for TR / headpointing?