g orton

The Willamette National Forest is conducting an Environmental Assessment (EA) as required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to expand its seasonal Peregrine Closure in the Keith Creek Drainage of the Menagerie Wilderness, Oregon. This is a complex issue made more so by a lack of (in my opinion) professional accountability and willingness by local biologist to identify and consider the Best Available Science or develop a monitoring plan where there are data gaps to access reasonable management of Peregrine Nest Sites (eyries) and climber access (Information Quality Act). As to not overwhelm the reader to this ongoing issue I will provide a history, background information, and responses to the Forest Service's Proposed action in multiple posts. Please note: the Forest is asking for public comments to its Proposed Action. The deadline for your comments is SEPTEMBER 3, 2013. http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=38620 Please be respectful in your comments as to not alienate those within the agency who would share your views. I would also encourage others who provide comments to the Forest to post your comments here also. The five posts that follow are: 1) My summary of the Menagerie History and History of the current access issues. 2) Map of Current, Proposed (Forest), Recommended (Climbers) closures at the Menagerie. 3) The Access Fund's response letter to the Forest Service. 4) Southwest Oregon Climbers response letter. 5) Greg Orton's summary of information provided by the Forest Service in response to an Access Fund Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request concerning all records of communications concerning seasonal closure of the Menagerie. Note: Reduced public access on Public Lands to overly restrictive Peregrine closures is a National issue. I've provided a lot of information here. Much of it you can just skim, some of it you will want to spend more time reading. Rarely will you be presented with such a candid look at an issue that affects your access. - greg BRIDGE ROCK TURKEY MONSTER CHICKEN ROCK

Thanks to meetings between the Forest Service and the Access Fund the 1st and 5th Walls a the Williamson Cliffs just north Klamath Falls will be reopened to climbing. We will be holding a trail day to work with he Access Funds, trail crew on September 13 and 14. Anyone who would like to help out or would like to learn more about this climbing area are encouraged to attend. greg

Ray Williams leading pitch 2 over the overhang on Taste of Honey (****.10b), Honeycombs. photo courtesy RW.

One of those days when I wished I had something besides my cell phone. Sorry for the poor quality. Ray Williams last Sunday making the crux move over the overhang, pitch 2 of HangTen, ***.10a, McKinley Rock.

August?? My understanding is that this would be over kill even if you were referring to Peregrine. T.J. Cade P.H.D. et al. [1996. Guide to management of peregrine falcons at the aerie. The Peregrine Fund.] Suggest lifting closures two weeks after the young have fledged. Locally this would typically lift closures anywhere from June 1-15 (lower elevations) to July 1-15 (higher elevations). One responder mentioned the need for a 200 ft closure, (I think in response to peregrine management). Pyke, Kathryn M.S. 1997. [Raptors & climbers, guidance for managing technical climbing to protect nest sites. Access Fund] lists 'physical features as visual barriers' (ie topography and vegetation), physical features as sound barriers (ie ridges or cliff faces of different aspects), vertical height (birds appear less tolerant to disturbances at or above the nest level), viewshed (area visible from the nest site), Pattern of climbing use (considering all of the above with desired access), prior disturbance history and tolerance (what are the observed correlations between climbing access and nesting success?). These guidelines have been used successfully to manage peregrine and climbers in Yosemite, Smith, Eldorado, Devil's Towers, and other's. Significant 'outliers' from this rational approach to management currently are Summit Rock, Ca and the Menagerie, OR. Last year the State and Access Fund established an agreement for managing Summit Rock using the guidelines above. However, talks between climbers and the Forest Service at the Menagerie have stalled, and the Menagerie now maintains the most arbitrary and restrictive Peregrine closure anywhere. Why? In my mind, there appears to be a lack of professional accountability, and a cultural entrenchment among Forest Service biologists.

The Callahans are dry, warm, and sunny above a sea of valley fog!! If you are up there this weekend be sure to take your camera and share your pictures. Gates are open to the top (Saturday and Sunday), but I recommend driving in from the Touchstone gate. We had black ice on Callahan Road last weekend.

Below is the link to BLMs lates flyer that explains their Recreation Planning and lists dates and locations of Public Meetings they will be holding: BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT OR-13-07 Contact: Jodi Bean For release: Jan. 16, 2013 (503) 808-6291 Interactive workshops seek public input on recreation area, river use PORTLAND, Ore. – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is currently involved in Resource Management Planning (RMP) on more than 2.5 million acres in western Oregon. Recreation and visitor services will play a role throughout this planning effort. To answer several planning questions related to recreation area management and Wild and Scenic Rivers, the BLM with partners: Travel Oregon, Outdoor Alliance and other local community partners, are hosting four public participatory design charrettes. The charrettes are interactive workshops that will solicit input related to recreation values, setting character and experiences important to the public in a collaborative and participatory manner. Workshops will run from 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. with technical assistance provided by professionally trained landscape architects and the National Park Service, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance program. The schedule is as follows: Tuesday, Jan. 29 at the BLM District Office, 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, Ore. Wednesday, Jan. 30 at the Umpqua Business Center, 522 SE Washington Ave, Roseburg, Ore. Thursday, Jan. 31 at the Public Library, 225 North 5th St., Springfield, Ore. Tuesday, Feb. 5 at the Mazamas Mountaineering Center, Portland, Ore. In addition to the workshops, the public may use two web-based interactive sites to assist the BLM answer several recreation related planning questions. These surveys will be active until Feb. 18 and can be found at: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/rmpswesternoregon/reccomments.php and http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/rmpswesternoregon/rivercomments.php The BLM and its partners encourage you to get involved and help plan for the future as we look at defining the role recreation plays on BLM lands throughout western Oregon.

PLEASE HELP!!!! BLM is looking for peoples input on future recreation opportunities in Western Oregon. They have a website with a form you can fill out: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/rmpswesternoregon/reccomments.php This address will take you to the questionnaire although I haven't gotten it to work, but you can send them a email from the site as well. I was told the more climbers and climbing groups we have responding the better. This is a great opportunity for recommending a land exchange or purchase between BLM and Weyerhaeuser to have the Callahans managed for rock climbing, mtn biking, hiking, and horse back riding. Please request a land swap or purchase of the east side of Reston Ridge in the Callahans between WGS 84 10T 453340m.E., 4784835m.N. and 10T 454908m.E., 4786421m.N. The website also has a list of public meetings that will be held. We only have until February 18th to bring this to BLM's attention. Please help!!!!! The Access Fund is already in the background on this one.

Good! "Purpose?" do your really think there should be a purpose to your climbing?

Here is another thought.

Good point. Here is another idea. Any suggestions?

I've updated the list below to include your comments, JoeR. Great comments! Keep them coming. BOLTING Pressure from route development into sensitive areas and more visible locations has raised the level of national concern from State and Federal land managers. These concerns have the potential for initiating a regulatory response unless climbers can find common understanding at the national level to lobby and self-manage our activities. The following is a draft summary of potential guidelines for route development, maintenance, and corrective actions. Obviously with more discussion each item could be greatly expanded. “No one climber at any time has been more than his group or more than his generation.” – Geoffrey Winthrop Young Route setting is deeply rooted in tradition and mentoring, yet each generation views the rock with new eyes finding possibilities of technique, style, or form that eluded those before. To that end climbing ethics are historically rooted in maintaining the climbing environment and essential elements of the climb while allowing for change. “Change is inevitable. It is what tradition in climbing is all about.” – Allan Watts, 1980s Rock climbing is a self-regulated sport with a history of ethics by which we climb. Open forum and debate are essential elements to self-managing our activities. Debate brings needed reflection on our past to help guide our future. The practice of adding bolts to existing routes, over protecting, under protecting, over development, altering the rock, ratings, and first ascent styles are historic debates that continue today. “A climbing party pools its ability and its confidence. The longer and closer its association, the less are its individuals conscious of how much they contribute and how much they draw from the collective power.” – Geoffrey Winthrop Young Recognize that climbing styles are on a continuum (figure 1) and not a dualistic activity. There is more to climbing styles than “Sport” or “Trad”. Perceptions of what will be acceptable route and area development is often influenced by the experience, preconceived expectations, and exposure to the climbing continuum of the climbers visiting the area. Figure 1: The climbing style continuum. In established crags: Become knowledgeable of local history and the ethics under which an area has been established. Order of decision making at established crags: a) Local history and the ethics under which an area has been established. b) Original Area Developer Consensus. c) Original Route Developer. d) Consensus of route developers with area knowledge. e) Consensus of non-development lead climbers with area knowledge. When modifying an existing route: 1. Gain approval from the original route or area developers. 2. Modifications of a route shall not detract from the inherent qualities of the climb. 3. Priority shall be provided to modifications that increase climber safety, while weighing the original style and nature of the climb. “…One more bolt would make it accessible to many more climbers. One more bolt would rob it of a tremendous amount of atmosphere, excitement and challenge, of its spirit and so of its quality. It would become just another route…” – Peter Gulyash. When taking corrective actions: 1. Gain approval from the original route or area developers. 2. Corrective actions shall not detract from the inherent qualities of the climb. 3. Make every effort to restore the rock to its original condition. 4. Evaluating, upgrading and/or replacing lower quality or damaged existing anchors with ones of equal or higher quality is the personal decision and responsibility of every climber who uses the route, without exception. 5. Generally adding new belay anchors, rappel anchors, and chain is a personal decision and responsibility of every climber who uses the route, unless restricted by the ethics of the area. 6. Use camouflage or other means to reduce the visibility of anchors where appearance is or may become a concern. In new crags or unclimbed rock in established crags: "If I meet the impossible. I'm not going to be killing any dragons, but if anyone wants to come with me, we'll go to the top together on the routes we can do without branding ourselves murderers." - Reinhold Messner Become knowledgeable of local history and the ethics under which climbing has evolved in your region. 1. Your actives should not detract from the inherent qualities of the climbing environment. For example: • Do not alter the rock by chipping. • Identify, manage to limit climber impacts to sensitive plants and animals in the area. • Keep the number of trails to a minimum. 2. Remain open to constructive criticism, strive for consensus. Guidelines for route development “Maybe the natural line goes at a grade easier than you wanted, but man you really wanted to put up that harder line. Don't let your ego wreck what could have been a classic.” – JoeR, Cascadeclimbers.com • Follow the natural line, learn to read the rock and don’t force your lines. • Plan bolt positions for places that protect the cruxes adequately, avoiding awkward clips, and make sense in the sequence of moves. * Give passive protection priority over fixed anchor placement. • Aspire to place the minimum number of fixed anchors required to protect the lead climber. • Consider both Risk and Consequence of a fall before placing a fixed anchor. For example, a 5.7 section on a 5.11a route may carry a high consequence but low risk for a leader fall and may not warrant the same level of protection required through a crux move. • The use of motor operated drills is prohibited within congressionally designated wilderness. • Remain up-to-date on materials and methods for placing fixed protection. =============================================================== COMMENTS: Luveshaker – It's important for someone who develops sport routes to be aware of what other climbers think. Problem is most people won't say much on what they really think because they have been taught that in order to do that you have to bash an individual’s effort and/or style. I've noticed other climbers will usually respect someone's development if they don't have a f'off-I'm doing it my way-attitude, even if their style is different than the norm. Of course tolerance disappears when a climber pushes the boundaries when considering their environmental impact(s), and jeopardizes land use opportunities. JoeR – Maybe the answers lie in challenging my ethics to be acceptable to the community rather than challenging the community to roll over so I can do it my way. Good and classic routes seem to share some common characteristics. Here are a couple that I've thought of, other folks probably have more ideas. 1: Follows the natural line. Maybe the natural line goes at a grade easier than you wanted, but man you really wanted to put up that harder line. Don't let your ego wreck what could have been a classic. Years down the road your ego will thank you, because people will remember that classic and seek you out and praise you. You get nothing for putting up another forced soon forgotten line. 2: Bolt position makes sense. Are you planning the bolt positions for places that protect the cruxes adequately? How about the clips? Is the crux of the route going to be making awkward clips, or do the clips make sense in the sequence of moves? 3. Makes you say "Wow, that was fun" The fun factor can't be overstated. What makes your potential route special? Does it visit a fantastic place? Maybe the moves are really great. Point is, why put all that effort into developing if the route isn't going to be memorable? Plaidman – I have never chopped a bolt. The only ones that I would chop are the ones that the first acentionist would sanction JoeR – The person(s) then can feel that their bolting ethic is fine and dandy, however grudgingly the community accepted the route. Throw in some hubris and a cult of personality and good luck having a frank discussion about a route someone has bolted. I haven't and won't chop the bolts on Toybox for a few reasons, chief among them is that it was retro bolted with permission of the FA team. None of the 3 in the FA team chopped them. Why should I impose my ethics if Corvington, Modrell, and Cornell could deal with the bolts? The route not only escaped the chop from the FA team, but other route developers. There were a lot of routes getting put up in the past decade. Their decision making process is more well informed than mine, and I don't chop as an extension of my respect for them. Sure, I complain about bolting practices. It has become somewhat of a dark joke whenever it comes up, which is rarely. Point is, I would rather spend energy on getting better so I can climb the proud routes than worry about another bolt-sprayed slab that has nothing to do with me. Chetcat - Maybe it’s better to have one bad example, that developers can point to and use as a cautionary tale, rather than a series of poorly bolted crags? Buckaroo - ""2) when is it ok to add to an existing route? Never ""3) when is it appropriate to chop bolts on a route?"" Any established trad area. Any time permission was not asked or granted from first ascencionists. Any time bolts are near natural protection, cracks etc. Any time a trad climber with big balls is in the mood. Bolting New Routes Checat - Appropriate bolt spacing is subjective - but most climbers worth their salt can identify when a bolts been placed a. at a stance reasonable to clip, b. prudent give the last piece of protection below said bolt. Bolts placed on lead. The bolts are where there are stances practical for bolting (also practical for clipping) and there isn't excess because excess would mean a ridiculous day bolting for the FAist. (greg: just because a route is bolted on lead does not mean you should not go back and assess the placements. My biggest runouts tend to be when I’m bolting on lead) If a route is bolted on rappel - have the creativity and awareness to understand where a bolt would have been potentially placed on lead, where a stance would have occured because that same stance will work for route-leaders. Climb the route a couple of times on tr if your rap-bolting make sure you have the best places for bolts where the leader is assuming the amount of risk you have in mind for the route, but are avoiding R or X situations. (Question greg: when is a R really and R? Some climbers seem to complain about a route being run out once there feet are above the last clip.) Bolt as little as you need to. (greg: needs more.What is “as little as you need?” Does this mean that if you are bolting a 5.10a route you will bolt closer through the .10a sections and run out easier sections?) Chetcat - Look at the situation at Castle Rock near City of Rocks - there they have a climbing ranger with eons of experience with route development. New route goes thru a formal process on paper with images and proposed bolts. He reviews, he climbs the route, makes edits changes theoretical placements of bolts based on whats practical - he then hands back edited and approved route paperwork. Its then on the developer to bolt the route within these terms. (greg: my greatest fear is that this is where climbing is headed. Is this really what we want? Nationally there is also discussion that local climbing clubs would require a review and approval before new routes are established on lands they’ll manage.) Chetcat - What you may think of as "run-out" or "over-bolted" may be completely different from what the next person thinks, but if you pull from multiple opinions and get a range of values BEFORE you bolt, you'll probably get that spacing worked out better. (greg – Do you feel many climbers are stuck on the expectation that a route is either a “Trad” route with natural pro or a “Sport route” where they will be able to clip before their toes have left the last bolt, just like they’ve learned in the gym. I have read comments that many of the routes in Western Oregon “are not very sporty”. I like that. I think there is room for the third definition to take some of the sterility out of the discussion.) Billcoe - It's always been local (crag) ethics and tradition, with a nod to the dude or dudette who climbed it first, trump all. This can clearly be seen as differentiated at Yosemite (attempt to climb with as little bolts as the FA can get away with) and Smith Rocks (which has runout routes and closely bolted face climbs depending on who FA'ed it mixed in with some sweet gear only cracks). Plaidman - Good word – “differentiated” Billcoe - In 1999 (at age six) at Rovinj in Croatia Adam climbed 6a/5.9 routes with bolts every half meter. Luvshaker - I personally think it's very cool to have different styles (i.e. bolt spacing) even at the the same crag, even lines right next to each other. Sometimes I just aint in the mood to run it out, so the more bolts the better-no shame in that. But, when I start up a difficult route with less bolts it's game time! I love having to focus on movement, and not rely on grabbing a quickdraw if things don't feel just right. There is a reason I have walked by Dreamin so many times. But when I do that route, it's gonna be WAY sweeter!I don't care where you climb in the world, or grade you climb. More commitment is going to equal a different (I believe richer) experience for most climbers. Those are the routes you want to hear someone talk about around the campfire. (greg: good point, but how do we describe and accept variety?) Eldiente - I do understand, on clean, steep rock it makes sense for the bolts to be widely spaced. Yay for airy whippers into space! On blocky terrain I'd rather see the bolts close together. However, there is a precedent all over Oregon for dirty, lose routes with widely spaced bolts. (Smith has tons of dirty routes with widely spaced bolts as does Wolf rock etc) JoeR - He is the only person so far in this discussion who has developed at both ends of the bolt spectrum(Moolack+Flagstone) AFAIK. The other interesting thing, is that I've never heard anyone bag on his ethics or attitude, or claim that he puts his ego ahead of the community. http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/566859/Doug-Robinson-Sean-Jones-rap-bolt-South-face-of-Half-Dome

Here is a thought:

Here is a summary of what I'm taking from this discussion. Hopefully it is readable. It looked better in Word. I'd be interested in hearing if this covers your concerns, why or why not. Is there something that needs to be added to the list or taken out... BOLTING Pressure from route development into sensitive areas and more visible locations has raised the level of national concern from State and Federal land managers. These concerns have the potential for initiating a regulatory response unless climbers can find common understanding at the national level to lobby and self-manage our activities. The following is a draft summary of potential guidelines for route development, maintenance, and corrective actions. Obviously with more discussion each item could be greatly expanded. “No one climber at any time has been more than his group or more than his generation.” – Geoffrey Winthrop Young Route setting is deeply rooted in tradition and mentoring, yet each generation views the rock with new eyes finding possibilities of technique, style, or form that eluded those before. To that end climbing ethics are historically rooted in maintaining the climbing environment and essential elements of the climb while allowing for change. “Change is inevitable. It is what tradition in climbing is all about.” – Allan Watts, 1980s Rock climbing is a self-regulated sport with a history of ethics by which we climb. Open forum and debate are essential elements to self-managing our activities. Debate brings needed reflection on our past to help guide our future. The practice of adding bolts to existing routes, over protecting, under protecting, over development, altering the rock, ratings, and first ascent styles are historic debates that continue today. “A climbing party pools its ability and its confidence. The longer and closer its association, the less are its individuals conscious of how much they contribute and how much they draw from the collective power.” – Geoffrey Winthrop Young In established crags: Become knowledgeable of local history and the ethics under which an area has been established. Order of decision making at established crags: a) Local history and the ethics under which an area has been established. b) Original Area Developer Consensus. c) Original Route Developer. d) Consensus of route developers with area knowledge. e) Consensus of non-development lead climbers with area knowledge. When modifying an existing route: 1. Gain approval from the original route or area developers. 2. Modifications of a route shall not detract from the inherent qualities of the climb. 3. Priority shall be provided to modifications that increase climber safety, while weighing the original style and nature of the climb. “…One more bolt would make it accessible to many more climbers. One more bolt would rob it of a tremendous amount of atmosphere, excitement and challenge, of its spirit and so of its quality. It would become just another route…” – Peter Gulyash. When taking corrective actions: 1. Gain approval from the original route or area developers. 2. Corrective actions shall not detract from the inherent qualities of the climb. 3. Make every effort to restore the rock to its original condition. 4. Evaluating, upgrading and/or replacing lower quality or damaged existing anchors with ones of equal or higher quality is the personal decision and responsibility of every climber who uses the route, without exception. 5. Generally adding new belay anchors, rappel anchors, and chain is a personal decision and responsibility of every climber who uses the route, unless restricted by the ethics of the area. 6. Use camouflage or other means to reduce the visibility of anchors where appearance is or may become a concern. In new crags or unclimbed rock in established crags: "If I meet the impossible. I'm not going to be killing any dragons, but if anyone wants to come with me, we'll go to the top together on the routes we can do without branding ourselves murderers." - Reinhold Messner Become knowledgeable of local history and the ethics under which climbing has evolved in your region. 1. Your actives should not detract from the inherent qualities of the climbing environment. For example: • Do not alter the rock by chipping. • Identify, manage to limit climber impacts to sensitive plants and animals in the area. • Keep the number of trails to a minimum. 2. Remain open to constructive criticism, strive for consensus. Guidelines for route development • Give passive protection priority over fixed anchor placement. • Aspire to place the minimum number of fixed anchors required to protect the lead climber. • Consider both Risk and Consequence of a fall before placing a fixed anchor. For example, a 5.7 section on a 5.11a route may carry a high consequence but low risk for a leader fall and may not warrant the same level of protection required through a crux move. • The use of motor operated drills is prohibited within congressionally designated wilderness. • Remain up-to-date on materials and methods for placing fixed protection. ===============================================================

If anyone with a drill is intersted. Harold and I will be sinking bolts into the SE side of Acker Rock this Sunday. We have the Lookout rented Sunday night. FS has supplied the bolts. We will be rappelling and counting a rare buckwheat. Let me know if you are interested. Beers on me. greg

Bolting New Routes, Summary Checat - Appropriate bolt spacing is subjective - but most climbers worth their salt can identify when a bolts been placed a. at a stance reasonable to clip, b. prudent give the last piece of protection below said bolt. Bolts placed on lead. The bolts are where there are stances practical for bolting (also practical for clipping) and there isn't excess because excess would mean a ridiculous day bolting for the FAist. (greg: just because a route is bolted on lead does not mean you should not go back and assess the placements. My biggest runouts tend to be when I’m bolting on lead) Chetcat - If a route is bolted on rappel - have the creativity and awareness to understand where a bolt would have been potentially placed on lead, where a stance would have occured because that same stance will work for route-leaders. Climb the route a couple of times on tr if your rap-bolting make sure you have the best places for bolts where the leader is assuming the amount of risk you have in mind for the route, but are avoiding R or X situations. (Question greg: when is a R really and R? Some climbers seem to complain about a route being run out once there feet are above the last clip.) Bolt as little as you need to. (greg: needs more.What is “as little as you need?” Does this mean that if you are bolting a 5.10a route you will bolt closer through the .10a sections and run out easier sections?) Chetcat - Look at the situation at Castle Rock near City of Rocks - there they have a climbing ranger with eons of experience with route development. New route goes thru a formal process on paper with images and proposed bolts. He reviews, he climbs the route, makes edits changes theoretical placements of bolts based on whats practical - he then hands back edited and approved route paperwork. Its then on the developer to bolt the route within these terms. (greg: my greatest fear is that this is where climbing is headed. Is this really what we want? Nationally there is also discussion that local climbing clubs would require a review and approval before new routes are established on lands they’ll manage.) Chetcat - What you may think of as "run-out" or "over-bolted" may be completely different from what the next person thinks, but if you pull from multiple opinions and get a range of values BEFORE you bolt, you'll probably get that spacing worked out better. (greg – Do you feel many climbers are stuck on the expectation that a route is either a “Trad” route with natural pro or a “Sport route” where they will be able to clip before their toes have left the last bolt, just like they’ve learned in the gy? I have read comments that many of the routes in Western Oregon “are not very sporty”. I like that. I think there is room for the third definition to take some of the sterility out of the discussion.) Billcoe - It's always been local (crag) ethics and tradition, with a nod to the dude or dudette who climbed it first, trump all. This can clearly be seen as differentiated at Yosemite (attempt to climb with as little bolts as the FA can get away with) and Smith Rocks (which has runout routes and closely bolted face climbs depending on who FA'ed it mixed in with some sweet gear only cracks). Plaidman - Good word – “differentiated” Billcoe - In 1999 (at age six) at Rovinj in Croatia Adam climbed 6a/5.9 routes with bolts every half meter. Luvshaker - I personally think it's very cool to have different styles (i.e. bolt spacing) even at the the same crag, even lines right next to each other. Sometimes I just aint in the mood to run it out, so the more bolts the better-no shame in that. But, when I start up a difficult route with less bolts it's game time! I love having to focus on movement, and not rely on grabbing a quickdraw if things don't feel just right. There is a reason I have walked by Dreamin so many times. But when I do that route, it's gonna be WAY sweeter!I don't care where you climb in the world, or grade you climb. More commitment is going to equal a different (I believe richer) experience for most climbers. Those are the routes you want to hear someone talk about around the campfire. (greg: good point, but how do we describe and accept variety?) Eldiente - I do understand, on clean, steep rock it makes sense for the bolts to be widely spaced. Yay for airy whippers into space! On blocky terrain I'd rather see the bolts close together. However, there is a precedent all over Oregon for dirty, lose routes with widely spaced bolts. (Smith has tons of dirty routes with widely spaced bolts as does Wolf rock etc) JoeR - He is the only person so far in this discussion who has developed at both ends of the bolt spectrum(Moolack+Flagstone) AFAIK. The other interesting thing, is that I've never heard anyone bag on his ethics or attitude, or claim that he puts his ego ahead of the community.

Once you get past the sarcasm and personal insults there are some good thoughts here. Below is a summary of what you've written about the issue of what to do about poorly bolted routes: Luveshaker – It's important for someone who develops sport routes to be aware of what other climbers think. Problem is most people won't say much on what they really think because they have been taught that in order to do that you have to bash an individual’s effort and/or style. I've noticed other climbers will usually respect someone's development if they don't have a f'off-I'm doing it my way-attitude, even if their style is different then the norm. Of course tolerance disappears when a climber pushes the boundaries when considering their environmental impact(s), and jepordizes land use opportunities. JoeR – Maybe the answers lie in challenging my ethics to be acceptable to the community rather than challenging the community to roll over so I can do it my way. JoeR – The person(s) then can feel that their bolting ethic is fine and dandy, however grudgingly the community accepted the route. Throw in some hubris and a cult of personality and good luck having a frank discussion about a route someone has bolted. Plaidman – I have never chopped a bolt. The only ones that I would chop are the ones that the first acentionist would sanction. Joe - I haven't and won't chop the bolts on Toybox for a few reasons, chief among them is that it was retro bolted with permission of the FA team. None of the 3 in the FA team chopped them. Why should I impose my ethics if Corvington, Modrell, and Cornell could deal with the bolts? The route not only escaped the chop from the FA team, but other route developers. There were a lot of routes getting put up in the past decade. Their decision making process is more well informed than mine, and I don't chop as an extension of my respect for them. Sure, I complain about bolting practices. It has become somewhat of a dark joke whenever it comes up, which is rarely. Point is, I would rather spend energy on getting better so I can climb the proud routes than worry about another bolt-sprayed slab that has nothing to do with me. Chetcat - Maybe its better to have one bad example, that developers can point to and use as a cautionary tale, rather than a series of poorly bolted crags? Buckaroo - ""when is it ok to add to an existing route? Never ""when is it appropriate to chop bolts on a route?"" Any established trad area. Any time permission was not asked or granted from first ascencionists. Any time bolts are near natural protection, cracks etc. Any time a trad climber with big balls is in the mood.

Thanks Julian. I'm glad I asked. KirkW, where did you find the oportunity to do this on Eagles Dare? Maybe when it crosses over to the left in the middle of the first pitch?

======================================================== I've Z clipped only once. It happened on one of the 5.8 pitches on Eagles Dare on Acker rock. ======================================================== KirkW, !!Su huevos es muy rumboso!! Julian, maybe you can fill me in on what you consider a z-clip. I interpreted your comment as referencing when routes have been spaced close enough that you can easily clip bolts on the next route over. Please clearify for me. If this is the case Kirk you be the man!!! Eagles Dare is the only route on Acker's Southwest face. Your accomplishment is definitly note worthy!

I'll begin a fresh bolting discussion, hopefully a little broader than a discussion of Moolack and Flagstone. 1) who decides what the appropriate spacing should be? It seems to me that the consensus on spacing keeps changing. 2) when is it ok to add to an existing route? This is sometimes not as simple as, "it should remain as the first ascent team did the route." I have gone back and add bolts to routes I've done on lead because I was in the zone at the time and would not expect anyone else to necissarily be in the same frame of mind. 3) when is it appropriate to chop bolts on a route? 4) what favorite quotes do you have on bolting style or ethics?

Callahans is closed again, this time for fire season. Typically gates will be open with access to the upper trailheads once the fire season ends.

FYI for anyone interested in the Williamson Cliffs. The Access Fund has been working with the FS to improve climber access to the cliffs. Last week we met with an AF trail crew representative and the FS and looked at options for climber access along the base of the 6 walls. So far discussions seem to be going well and we hope to have an Adopt A Crag trail day sometime next spring. This will be a big project and we'll need all the help we can get.