JosephH

Why? Don't you know where it is?

But there already is a FS climbing area in WA. Personalities aside it seems impractical for there to be two of them in the same state. It would also seem no one got Bryan, Mark, Arent, and Kevin on board before changing it. I don't want it in the guide and I know Jim said several times he didn't want it in the guide and I've relayed that several times to Olson.

What would get the government out of religious ceremonies is make civil unions for everyone the legal basis for all marital rights. Then if people want a religious ceremony on top of that then knock themselves out, but it would carry zero legal recognition or rights.

Wasn't retro'd, it was just moved off the tree - the anchor was there in that exact spot.

I've never understood the point of the FS thing when there is already one up at exit 32 or 38. The place was DZ so what was the impetus behind attempting to change that? It'll always be DZ to me anyway.

I would guess considerably before that from the look of it.

There was an anchor there originally that Jim thought should be restored, others thought differently so it was removed.

Bummer all the way around then...

It is unfortunate the second 'zone will be included against a lot of folks' wishes. It should be listed with no stars and an 'R' rating to keep tourists off it.

As I said, I have no problem with a bunch of anchors going away, but anyone so inclined should be posting up a list of candidates and follow up with a list of what actually got removed. No one wants to be surprised by a missing anchor.

good point, if there wasn't an anchor he would have topped out and it would have never happened. No doubt. Who originally put the SE rap anchors in? Maybe we should make a list of anchors that are candidates for removal. I would have no problem with it at all if folks decided a bunch of them should go away.

Maybe the lucky camper will post up...

So, your idea was we should stay for another 5-10 years, soak another half trillion and 4k or so more young Americans? And you'd be expecting the situation then to somehow be different than it is today? Do tell, in what way?

That's about as lucky as it gets in climbing.

Thanks for the link. There were and are some of the aluminum 'poptop' hangers around from the old days. Pretty scary even when new. Glad we don't have any of those in the pictures. As I said, didn't really recall the details so much as some old stuff actually popping on someone. Looks pretty nasty, glad they didn't get hurt worse. Sounds like someone had a similarly lucky day at Beacon today according to Steve on the other thread.

Bill, I don't recall the exact details, other than sometime fairly recently a couple of old bolts popped on some route during a fall. That caught my attention. I do recall you've posted those pics before so, yeah, those could be the ones.

I think we have two separate issues we are talking about - dealing with the closure and the replacement work I've done. In terms of the closure, you would all be way, way better served if you guys would deal factually with the events, people, law, and policy around it rather than a litany of mis-remembrances, myth, half-truths, urban legend, and misunderstandings of the law, policy, and administration of it. Your comments about the BRSP not setting up annual reviews is, for instance, a good example of misunderstanding the administration of the closure policy - the BRSP has no involvement whatsoever in annual closure reviews, it's solely the province of the WDFW. From my perspective it's pretty hard to offer up suggestions on "how things might be done better in the future, or something that might be constructive" when you are in denial about the circumstances and facts associated with the problem. And that's not even touching on the indoctrination of new young climbers into a veritable cult of misinformation around the closure and an oh-so-hip-and-cool "fuck the man" culture that paints all the agency personnel responsible for administering and enforcing the park and closure as sinister liars bent on fucking climbers. Bottom line for me on the closure is I haven't heard a single viable suggestion on dealing with it from one of you guys that started with, and was based on, facts and reality versus "what we want" and "how unfair it all is". And guess what? I want exactly the same thing you all want and I fully empathize with the fact it 'feels' unfair. And you want to hear a real shocker? No I mean it, a real shocker? Well, I've never stated my personal belief on the matter, but here goes and I'll even quote it for you: Read that baby again as it's the first time it's ever been stated privately or publicly. And what of it? Well, it's just one man's opinion and holds exactly zero weight under the WA state law and policy governing the closure. Nothing about me holding that opinion means diddlysquat in the real world and I can say it as many times as I like and it won't change a damn thing. Sad but true, opinions - even those as informed, lofty, smug, smart, cocksure, righteous, pompous, self-serving, certain, adamant and just plain arrogant as mine - have no effect whatsoever on WA state laws and will never inform WDFW policy on the matter. I know, I know - hard to fucking imagine, isn't it? Unfortunately, nothing about my personal opinion is actionable under the law and neither is anyone's feelings of how unfair it all is. As far as the rebolting issue goes, I've explained my reasoning and specific answers to your questions on the anchors above - you and others are free to agree or disagree with it as you please. As far as the YW bolts go, again selfish reasons related to the Index bolts popping and not wanting to do my full moon climbs on bad bolts ruled that decision. That all the bolts were bad except two which were on their way out is an undeniable fact, the only question for me then was how was one to respond to claims that bad bolts aren't bad and that even if they are they can't be replaced without ruining the route. How do you suggest one should respond to that? How do you have a "dialogue" around that kind of unmovable "diatribe". Neither do I. No apologies necessary. And I've been open to dialog at every stage of things over the last few years, but what I've found is no one has been interested in a dialog of any kind which is based on facts and reality. As far as admitting mistakes go I've backed out of a couple of actions such as the rap setup on the Corner Tree, the anchor on the perch below the Dods tree, and the bolt on the approach to Reasonable Richard. My bad, though none were done for me personally, but rather either for reasons related to keeping heat from the authorities off of climbers in the event of an incident (RR bolt and Corner Tree rap) and / or because Opdycke either agreed with my reasoning (RR bolt) or suggested it (Dods perch anchor). All three met with climber disapproval and I removed them. Little if nothing I do or have done related to climbing is in any way "indiscriminate" - I explained my reasons above - that you may disagree with that reasoning in no way makes anything about my actions indiscriminate or random. Also, in the case of the anchors, in 54 of 68 anchors both bolts were bad and / or spinners so I have no regrets around doing that replacement as I hate suck anchors. I did exactly that and took action accordingly. I'm not going to argue that point with you. Bummer, sorry to hear that and hope it heals up quick.

Larry asked a boatload of questions, I answered him as best I could.

That's a pink signature Dave has taken to...

Larry, opinions are one thing, 14 years of relentless whining and bitching about the closure is another. At what point do you either do something [productive] about it or, having done something and hit the wall with that, simply accept reality, move on, and get the fuck over it? Instead it's a relentless bitchfest twice a year. The gnashing of teeth and the wailing chorus of injustice at the Church of Eternal Persecution is just deafening year after year. And at some point in all that aren't you just using 'the man' and the closure to define yourselves or at least allowing yourself to be defined by it all? What about simply moving on and just climbing somewhere else when it's closed (especially now that there are local alternatives) - anything but another 14 years at the wailing wall.

oh, i got it now... if it isn't in line with yer fucked up thinking then it is nonsense. glad we cleared that up Then you are saying you agree that bad bolts can't be replaced on a climb without screwing it up? Really? Have you thought that one through, Kenny? You are sure welcome to that opinion, but I'm sticking with my "fucked up thinking" on this one because that opinion is never going to get any traction with me (or the rest of the climbing world outside of the Bacon distortion field). If that's the case the ASCA sure is destroying routes cross the country and that poor damn Tyler kid has single-handedly been trashing climb after climb over at Smith and around Oregon; maybe someone should try to persuade him to stop the insanity and help him unfuck his thinking on the matter. Anyone else here think bad bolts can't be replaced without ruining a climb?

I was just rebolting what was there; there are tons of things I'd do differently if I felt it was up to me. I lead that pitch entirely on gear all the time in the daylight, but most folks aren't going to clip those bolts and then place gear backups, so I don't know what the point would be of leaving bad bolts on one of Beacon's most heavily trafficked routes. I didn't feel it was up to me to decide whether existing anchors should exist or not, I just replaced them. The only anchor I moved significantly was the top Flying Dutchman anchor which got moved around the corner and out on the face. I entirely agree with you on the YW anchor at the base of p3; if it were up to me it would just be gone as would a whole bunch of other anchors. But, again I wasn't trying to change routes, just replace what was there. There are lot of anchors which could still be removed at any time as far as I'm concerned and if that's what folks decided they collectively wanted to have happen it would be ok by me. 1. Anything with some 'historical' merit I left, but most of it was just mank, like lots of rusty, plated SMC hangers. 2. I specifically avoided retrobolting anything, that wouldn't be my call to do. 3. I agree with the just-top-out sentiment. 4. Well, I'm all for and about climbers taking personal responsibility for every aspect of their climbing - climbing is incredibly dangerous if you don't, trad climbing especially so. But in these days of learning in gyms and crossing over to trad from sport, those folks don't have the knowledge, experience, or judgment necessary to figure out if a bolt is bad or not when they come out. My personal opinion is that if fixed pro is present and isn't some form of obviously marginal placement, then folks ought to be able to count on it being solid. That said, YW is the only route I have replaced protection bolts on and there only for selfish and traffic reasons. In the case of anchors, the stats speak for themselves, most had bad bolts, lots had bad hangers. The worst being the tire chain anchor on Bluebird at the short two pin crux. The left bolt came off under just the weight of the breaker bar on it when I momentarily took my hands off it to adjust my leash. The other bolt came off with a quarter turn. The first pin above the anchor all but came out with my fingers. If someone had blown that move and tumbled off the column top the odds are stellar the anchor would have failed unless the belayer were very well-stanced. I'm not going to argue the point, that's why I didn't retrobolt, I'm ok with the way things are out there despite the fact that, like Steve, there are no shortage of things I would change if I were doing what I thought should happen. But that wasn't and isn't what I've been up to. I've read all the documentation, fact-checked with climbers and agency personnel who were at those meetings and do understand what went down. In the end climbers turned down a partial closure because it didn't include topping out and did so on the basis that tourist top out and so should climbers - reasonable logic, but a bad decision from my perspective. As for the annual reviews, the BRSP has no part whatsoever in administering the Peregrine closure; their only role is enforcement within the park boundaries. If folks wanted or want an annual Peregrine closure review you'd have to address that concern to the WDFW. Cool with me. The monitoring data for the season could be discussed along with what that data implied in the way of an opening date; but beyond that, nothing in those review meetings would ever change the WA state law or WFDF policy governing the closures. To do that you have to come to those review meetings armed with some form of credible scientific, legal, or policy basis for doing so. That's because our closure is consistent with all the other closures around the nation and the AF supports those closures 100%. I agree, and when I heard what AF had in mind for the CAC membership committee I laid out those fears and the potential for establishing a credible position Beacon locals could use to stake a claim at that table. Guess what? In the end no one was interested and the same old bullshit - that no one should be "talking to the man" - has reigned. That 'tradition' has held sway for 14 years of whining and bitching with NOTHING being done about what you have been bitching about. Is that the plan for the next 14 years as well? Sorry, I just can't deal with it when people whine about shit and then do nothing about it, let alone join the Church of Our Eternal Persecution. That explanation above of my reasoning is about the tenth time I've posted it over the years. But I agree with you it's pointless for one person to try and do it when no one else is interested. That's why I quit that aspect of it all, clearly explained to all the agency personnel I represent no one but myself at this point, and have reverted to my selfish, ruffian ways.

No, I'm from Chicago and know there is no such thing as hope or change. I voted for Hillary who would have started kicking republican ass in a big way on day one, rather than try and talk them to death. Obama was a pragmatic bait-and-switch job you could see coming from a mile away (if you're from Chicago anyway). But compared to McPalin? Not even a remote contest.

Ah, that's exactly what I thought the first time I saw that. That's actually a gull wingset and all that's left of a gull when a Peregrine gets done with one. The Peregrines tend to eat smaller birds until the chicks hatch and then they really start going after the gulls in order to feed themselves and the young ones. The gulls go up the Gorge to feed on young Salmon and other small fish killed coming down through the dams and also head out and back to the dump in Arlington. To the Peregrines the gulls are like a self-serve Sushi train going up and down the Gorge just when they need one. The Peregrines will definitely get after other Raptors, tough. I've seen them take on the Ospreys out there fairly regularly and David related the story of a Peregrine killing an Eagle up at Lake Chelan. The Redtail hawks seem to know not to be a nuisance to them. And the Great Horned Owl is the main predator of Peregrines so the Peregrines will definitely get after them. A couple of years ago one of park's Great Horned Owls turned up with a broken wing and David suspects it was one of the Peregrines that did the deed. By and large the various Raptors coexist and get along in close quarters because they all tend to eat different things: the Peregrines hunt other birds in the air; the Hawks eat small mammals and reptiles on the ground; Osprey eat fish from the river; Eagles are omnivores and will eat about anything; Vultures eat dead stuff; and the Owls eat what the Hawks eat, but hunt at night. There's some occasional overlap, but mostly they don't compete heavily for food and so 'get along' (sort of).

Well, you're definitely right about the selfish part. I rope-solo YW on summer full moon nights without a headlamp which makes p1 / p2 a bit spicier then normal and ups the possibility I might actually dive on one of those bolts. After the Index bolts came off I started looking at the YW bolts and the more I looked the less I liked what I saw given what I'd seen of the bolts in all the anchors I replaced. And legacy? Ha, that's a good one! The only 'legacy' I'm interested in when I'm old is being able to remember my name, not piss on myself, and show up in public with my pants on. No, the whole point of the anchor replacement project was to establish some demonstrable investment of concern, cooperation, time, money, and effort by locals so when the WSP gets around to re-forming the Climber's Advisory Committee (CAC), locals will have something tangible and documented to point to in order to claim we are the responsible, knowledgeable, and cooperating party when it comes to managing climbing at Beacon. That came about in direct response to the AF repeatedly stating they, on the other hand, would be seeking a CAC membership that was a 'proportional representation' of the broader WA / OR climbing community and not be made up of just Beacon locals, i.e. a CAC with at most one Beacon local on it. I don't know about anyone else, but I personally found and find that prospect totally unacceptable and so I set about attempting to establish some form of tangible 'legacy' that locals and the BRSP could point to and be able to claim that locals are the responsible stewards of climbing at Beacon. At the time I started that the only public legacy locals had was a long history of breaking the closure, shit-talking the agencies and people involved with managing Beacon, partying, and endless complaining. Not exactly what you want to point to when it comes time to explain why locals deserve majority representation on any reconstituted CAC.