Beacon Rock Notice

[syklone]

I ask you by your own standards to stop posting on this web site every time you do anything out at beacon. I have asked you openly along with other people to stop spraying and posting on CC.com about Beacon.

 

To preface this: I have only climbed a Beacon once, and it was with Joseph, so I realise that my input is of little value to the overall discussion.

 

That being said, why are some people here advocating NOT talking about climbing at Beacon? Is it your desire to keep the place secret, and to limit the number of people out there? If that is the case, then I would also ask that if demand for climbing at Beacon was at a level you desire, then what motivation would the State of Washington have in allowing it to occur?

 

I understand peoples motivations on keeping a secret crag a secret, but this is Beacon rock! Hundreds of thousands of people drive by it every year. The fact that climbing exists there is not secret...

 

I'm not trying to create more controversy here, just trying to understand people's position on the issues being brought up.

[JosephH]

Actually for syklone's (troy's) first time out to Beacon and reasonably new to trad in general he did a pretty damn stout and yeoman job helping me with the Pirates and Bluebird anchors - and with the climbing. Don't let his first association with me put you off, he's a solid climber I'd share a rope with anytime, out there or anywhere else.

 

As to your question, it's not that Beacon is a secret per se, and it's not that anyone is actively discouraging anyone from climbing there, but much of the discussion is around not actively encouraging folks to climb there. Even in my BRCA notice postings I understand and share that concern - hell, I used to tell everyone at the gym how horribly bad the poison oak was every year. But in the case of the BRCA postings what is gained is worth the risk as was demonstrated by this year's early open and ability to do a pre-open work session. That doesn't mean everything should be discussed here; somethings are clearly "family" matters and shouldn't be online and I'd have preferred this particular one hadn't. But once it (or any other topic) was broached I'm all for getting folks' cards out on the table and work through it. Also, just for the curious, the BRCA notices each have had a very consistent 250 views in the first week after posting rapidly dropping off to zero - it's never really ever gone up or down from that number. I'm guessing that means there is a total of about 200-320 folks altogether who have any interest at all in climbing at Beacon (throwing in about 100 non-internet users).

 

Fortunately there are "secret" areas out there that of late have seen a lot of traffic when Beacon is deserted which means they're taking some of the pressure off Beacon. And traffic at Beacon has actually has been amazingly light this year so far inspite of an early open (though you couldn't tell by the chalk load on the corner...).

[markd]

Mark, I'd be honored to belay you (or take a shot) if you haven't cranked it yet. If you haven't - call me at 503-869-5772 and lets get it done sat early before the heat, I'd prefer to be ass-deep in the river or lounging at Skamania with a 16 oz cold one by 1pm-2pm when it hits 104 degrees.

 

BTW, righteous pictures BTW. Thanks for sharing.

 

thanks bill. i was unable to make it up this weekend but will be up mid week. you climbing?

 

it was too hot for me to climb this weekend anyway. it was a hot weekend in bend!

[kevbone]

Joe, thats exactly the response I was expecting. You sound like your running for office.

Personally I really don’t care about the bolt. I just don’t like the way you went about it. Did you ask the first accentionist? I know you didn’t. Because if you did, that would be your response to all the crap you have gotten. Your reasoning is “they should have done it right in the first place” Well as much as I agree with that, we cannot go around and change climbs just to satisfy our own insecurities. If that were the case, most of beacon would change by my own hand and drill. But that is not the case, we have some rules that most of us abide by. Messing with an established climb without asking permission from the FA, is one of them, and you know this. Yet you took it upon your self to be the judge and jury. Wrong!

 

Joe, as you know I have been climbing at Beacon for ten years this month, without taking a break. There was never drama until about 2 and half years ago when you showed up, and it’s not really you showing up that is the drama. It’s the use of the internet. You really have stirred up the hornets nest. You and you alone have done this, and no 3 paragraph essay response will make me believe otherwise.

 

As far as posting for the good of other agencies, bullshit you are posting to pet your ego. Just like you did when you brought all the stolen items you have taken from Beacon and dumped them on my garage floor. Are you going to return all the stolen goods you have taken and give back to the rightful owners? (you know who I’m talking about). Why did you replace BRAND NEW anchors with brand new anchors? To stroke your ego. If you don’t think your doing this for your own ego. Well I have news for you.

 

Perception is reality!

[JosephH]

Joe, thats exactly the response I was expecting. You sound like your running for office. Personally I really don’t care about the bolt. I just don’t like the way you went about it. Did you ask the first accentionist? I know you didn’t. Because if you did, that would be your response to all the crap you have gotten. Your reasoning is “they should have done it right in the first place” Well as much as I agree with that, we cannot go around and change climbs just to satisfy our own insecurities. If that were the case, most of beacon would change by my own hand and drill. But that is not the case, we have some rules that most of us abide by. Messing with an established climb without asking permission from the FA, is one of them, and you know this. Yet you took it upon your self to be the judge and jury. Wrong!

 

No, I didn't ask Olson about it, or Nathan as the bolt is at the confluence of both routes. My object was and is access, not the routes per se. Again, in my view you have some responsibility to fix pro appropriate to the grade if you are going to use it - the combination of the need for access and the fact that you are free soloing off the deck - not runout - led to the decision which was not mine alone but Jim Opdycke's as well. And to be honest, Olson's use of bolts in general (and hangers that broach the bizarre) left me little inclined to consult with him on the matter. As far as your hand and drill goes, if the number of bolts next to protectable or pinnable cracks go out at Ozone, I have little doubt but left to your own devices you'd be following in Olson's wake and bolting all the columns out at Beacon. I'll stack my record of one protection bolt in 32 years against yours any day.

 

Joe, as you know I have been climbing at Beacon for ten years this month, without taking a break. There was never drama until about 2 and half years ago when you showed up, and it’s not really you showing up that is the drama. It’s the use of the internet. You really have stirred up the hornets nest. You and you alone have done this, and no 3 paragraph essay response will make me believe otherwise.

 

Actually, I've been climbing there since '80 and relatively steady since '87, two years ago after putting up Lost Warriors in stealth mode is when I got sick of the totally lame situation out there.

 

As far as posting for the good of other agencies, bullshit you are posting to pet your ego.

 

Well, Kevin, I'm certainly not going to convince everyone and have no expectations whatsoever about convincing you. But the truth of the matter is as I stated - the BRCA posts, the work, and the efforts to mend relationships long broken are the only thing giving us, Beacon locals, any saying in the current or future management of climbing out at Beacon. I'd simply encourage you and anyone else here to speak with the BRSP staff or David Anderson of the WDFW if they have any doubts about this statement. I couldn't care less about posting for myself - that's exactly why you never heard from me from '87 to two years ago. Again, things were not "fine" they were completely snafu'd. Again, I'm posting BRCA notices so I can climb before 7/15 some years (like this one), on decent anchors, and without rocks falling on me.

 

Just like you did when you brought all the stolen items you have taken from Beacon and dumped them on my garage floor. Are you going to return all the stolen goods you have taken and give back to the rightful owners? (you know who I’m talking about). Why did you replace BRAND NEW anchors with brand new anchors? To stroke your ego. If you don’t think your doing this for your own ego. Well I have news for you. Perception is reality!

 

Ah, now replacing anchors is theft - that is some novel spray. As to my replacing "BRAND NEW anchors", so far I've replaced a couple of new-ish anchors, but you're really referring to Eric's and Mark's chain anchors. Part of the deal the BRCA struck with the BRSP relative to anchors was to remove all the chain anchors and to paint or replace any "bright" hangers with camo versions. That is what has been happening. As for Eric's thin chain anchors in particular, though only about two years old, they were deteriorating rapidly - the carabiners didn't work on some, or were missing on others(Blownout). As to why I haven't returned Mark's anchors yet? As far as the BRSP is concerned, all the removed anchors are theirs. I've personally petitioned them to be allowed to return Mark's anchors to him once we've completed the Anchor Replacement Project and cataloged, photographed, and weighted the resulting tat and debris that came off.

[kevbone]

Have I gone drill crazy out at Beacon? You know the answer to that. So bringing up other areas is way off the subject.

 

"No, I didn't ask Olson about it"

 

I think this says is all.

 

You completed disregarded a 50 year tradition. Why? Just for access. Thats not up to you, if you dont like it, go climb something else.

As far a thiefing, I was quoting someone else. That is the percetion I was talking about. You were percieved as a thief.

[John Frieh]

KG's first time at Beacon Saturday

 

Sunrise on the corner

[JosephH]

As far a thiefing, I was quoting someone else. That is the percetion I was talking about. You were percieved as a thief.

 

Well, then someone else should get some spine and post up, pm, email, or call me and you should source your comments or at least say they didn't come from you...

[phillygoat]

"As far as the BRSP is concerned, all the removed anchors are theirs."

 

Ah, so that explains why you weren't giving away the brand new nuts that were cleaned!

 

I'll admit I was a bit confused about why shiny hanger/double rap ring anchors were in the same pile as the tat. Now I see.

[crimper]

joseph, i'm the one who conveyed to kevin my opinion that by mindlessly and obsessively replacing gear and anchors out at beacon you have acted as a thief.

 

i said that because you are NOT A LOCAL and if you were, you would have known exactly who installed those chains, and you could have communicated directly with them to ensure that they at least got back the chains they installed. many of these anchors were recent and were installed by current climbers, most of whom know each other. if you really cared, you would have done that.

 

But your loyalty is clearly and solely to the BRSP, and not any fellow climbers. You allude to your desire to follow consensus, but that's a lie and you know it. You just post this stuff knowing full well it's all written in a way that the BRSP will consider you a loyal subject.

 

i also called your actions "theft" becauase i understand you removed decades worth of historical gear from beacon's routes. did you ask anyone, or seek any consensus before you did that? some of us actually liked seeing this tangible evidence of the past, to feel that we were following in the footsteps of our elders.

 

what gives you the right to make these unilateral decisions? how would you feel if someone else went around doctoring your routes, chopping your bolts, removing the anchors you installed. beacon rock just isn't big enough for two joseph's, now is it?

 

I've long known that no email will make you change your future actions, so why am i even writing this? I'm not even sure. I think I'm just coming to the sad realization that you can't be lawfully stopped and so these are my parting words.

 

You and your selfish motivations are a plague and a parasite on Beacon Rock and I hope with all my heart that you never, ever visit or even hear about the crags I care about.

[JosephH]

joseph, i'm the one who conveyed to kevin my opinion that by mindlessly and obsessively replacing gear and anchors out at beacon you have acted as a thief.

 

Well, good of you for finally posting up if that's what you think...

 

i said that because you are NOT A LOCAL and if you were, you would have known exactly who installed those chains, and you could have communicated directly with them to ensure that they at least got back the chains they installed. many of these anchors were recent and were installed by current climbers, most of whom know each other. if you really cared, you would have done that.

 

Bryan, if you read the post above you would see that the decision wasn't mine to make. You fix something on Beacon and it becomes the immediate property of the BRSP. Period. The disposition of the removed anchors is entirely up to them. As I said - and relayed to Mark - he'd get his anchors back when we're done and everything is documented to the BRSP's satisfaction.

 

But your loyalty is clearly and solely to the BRSP, and not any fellow climbers. You allude to your desire to follow consensus, but that's a lie and you know it. You just post this stuff knowing full well it's all written in a way that the BRSP will consider you a loyal subject.

 

Well, again, clearly I'm not really writing this stuff for you. My "loyalty" is to my own climbing interests and to ensure that when any agency has a problem or issue with climbing at Beacon Rock that we are who they turn to first - not someone in Seattle, or in Colorado, or in New York - but us. If you were actually around you might have bothered to look into it yourself. Talk to Jim or Bill if you want to know if your perceptions are correct - or someone else that's actually been around lately and bothered to inform themselves on the issues. And as I said, consensus is a useful construct in many situations, but not all and with regard to BRCA actions and work there are folks who are simply never going to agree - but then I don't agree with much of what has gone on out there over the years as well. Just how much consensus went into the bolting and hanging a lot of that crap up on Beacon to begin with? How about a consensus on whether folks liked being able to climb before July 15th this year?

 

i also called your actions "theft" becauase i understand you removed decades worth of historical gear from beacon's routes. did you ask anyone, or seek any consensus before you did that? some of us actually liked seeing this tangible evidence of the past, to feel that we were following in the footsteps of our elders.

 

what gives you the right to make these unilateral decisions? how would you feel if someone else went around doctoring your routes, chopping your bolts, removing the anchors you installed. beacon rock just isn't big enough for two joseph's, now is it?

 

I've worked with Jim Opdycke relative to leaving "historically significant" anchors, hangers, and fixed pro in place just so folks can see what was previously there. So lots of stuff has remained for folks to see. But, if you consider rusted, '93 plated SMC hangers, industrial mank, or thin 2003 chains historic then we simply part company. Also, as I've said, chains were coming down as part of the deal as was painting or camo'ing any bright hangers. Leaving the existing anchors would have created a real blight, been functionally impossible, and the BRSP's clear objective was to minimize the visual presence of our hardware on the rock, not enhance it. As to ending up systematically replacing the anchors - here is an excerpt of an email I sent to Mark as part of our off-line conversation:

 

"I did start out replacing specific anchors and after no time at all I discovered every anchor I replaced was in terrible shape. Further, it was impossible to tell from the outside what the real condition of the anchor was. Most of the anchors placed in the late 80's and 90's have been the very worst both in corrosion and in quality of the placement (relative to how perpendicular, how far in or out, or what they were even made of). For instance, the Young Warriors p1 and p2 anchor bolts were among the very worst shape of all from a corrosion perspective - who would have guessed? Of the 34 anchors I ended up replacing last year, on 33 of them both bolts were spinners and 28 had significant corrosion in both bolts as well. A very real problem out there has been the fact that anchors have gone in over 50 years with a variety of materials and short of pulling them it is factually impossible to tell the current state / quality of the anchor by its outward appearance. Once I discovered that about 12 anchors into it I set out to systematically replace the anchors with Metolius rap hangers and very high quality stainless steel bolts. You can see the demarc where this change took place by looking at the intial anchors and the subsequent ones (the early ones will be redone in SS in the fall). The point being that going forward folks will know what the anchors are comprised of and when they were put in. That may not mean much now, but in twenty years, knowing that all the bolts were SS and replaced in either 2005 or 2006 will be a great help to whomever ends up looking after the place whenever they start needing to be replaced. It will eliminate the guess work."

 

[Note: Everyone should extend a warm thank you to Bill Coe for supplying very high quality 316 Stainless Steel bolts ]

 

You can disagree with that if you want, but that's the rationale. And as for not being a "LOCAL" because you or anyone else didn't know me or because I didn't know the route names until recently? I've been climbing out there longer than you by a long shot in years, hours, or yardage but for 17 of the past 19 years it was mostly midweek soloing or roped soloing due to work / travel constraints. The difference though is really cultural - I originally come from a climbing area where everything we touched was an FA by necessity if we wanted to climb. And the rock there doesn't have cracks so the routes are not obvious but rather a puzzle to just see. Those combined in that world to make us all grow to dislike guidebooks, any beta, pre-cleaning, pre-viewing or knowing anything (even names) about a route before climbing it. We highly prize and guard that "deliberate ignorance" which is why the only reason I've recently even learned the names of the routes out at Beacon is to be able to communicate with Jim, Bill, and others relative to anchor replacements. The most regrettable part of replacing the anchors has been the necessity of looking at the South face column routes in advance of climbing some of them to do it. I'd much prefer I hadn't seen them and still didn't know their names. Again, it's a cultural thing.

 

I've long known that no email will make you change your future actions, so why am i even writing this? I'm not even sure. I think I'm just coming to the sad realization that you can't be lawfully stopped and so these are my parting words. You and your selfish motivations are a plague and a parasite on Beacon Rock and I hope with all my heart that you never, ever visit or even hear about the crags I care about.

 

Quite a statement for someone that's never tried emailing me but well, again, you can't please everyone - c'est la vie...

[kevbone]

Joe, if you want to catalog all you have done out there, strictly for the BRSP, what if I personally bought you a 3 ring binder with file separators and a shiny new pen. Then you could print off a copy for you constituents at the park. Would that work? I think you cataloging all you do out there is more for you than anyone else. I see your eye light up with pride every time a person comes up and thanks you for doing all this work; I have to grab a hold of you so you don’t float away being how big your head gets.

 

You think I am being sarcastic, well im serious, please find another way to document your work. I can tell from knowing you and seeing you posts and your work with a computer that you are smart. Im sure you can find another way.

[billcoe]

Hi JH,

 

You and I had a brief talk this weekend concerning alienating people via writing style. This is what I was talking about.

 

See you Wednesday.

 

Johnny, almost missed those great Brie pics! Nice! You look like you must have woke up pretty early !

[JosephH]

Bill, no doubt, but I don't belive there are any combinations of facts, words or writing styles that would make the slightest difference with to Kevin or Bryan - so be it...

[kevbone]

Wow, thats I feel about you Joe. No matter what is said or done, you twist it into why your right.....

 

 

Again, Joe, as far as I can tell, no one is telling or asking you to stop helping/fixing anchors. We or I am just asking to stop posting and cataloging it on this web site. Its bad for Beacon.

Edited July 24, 2006 by kevbone

[crimper]

Bill, do you honestly think this is about writing styles? i've made these points over and over to Joseph since last summer, and all he does is explain himself, then stay on the exact same course.

 

That has made me feel pretty damn alienated!

 

As someone (Mark Twain?) once said, one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different result.

 

That being the case, it would be insane of me to expect Joseph to do anything concrete about my concerns. So i'm over it.

 

if the rest of the beacon community doesn't care, then it gets what it deserves.

 

Oh, and as someone else (Edward Abbey?) once said: beware the man who has no enemies.

[JosephH]

Wow, thats I feel about you Joe. No matter what is said or done, you twist it into why your right.....

 

Again, Joe, as far as I can tell, no one is telling or asking you to stop helping/fixing anchors. We or I am just asking to stop posting and cataloging it on this web site. Its bad for Beacon.

 

Again, we disagree - the BRCA posting are quite good for Beacon. A decade of clueless, petty squabbling between climbers and between climbers and land managers was bad for Beacon - very bad. The regular postings of BRCA work relative to the anchor replacement project will be continuing as will other periodic notices at the very least until a the new climbing management plan is in place. Thereafter there will less frequent postings relative to opening dates, pre-opening work sessions, ad hoc temporary closures, emergency safety notices, and the like. Sorry that doesn't work for you, but they are in fact necessary for us to have a saying managing climbing at Beacon Rock. If you (or Bryan) simply bothered to go talk to the BRSP staff sometime you'd have a far better understanding of the issues involved. Also, they aren't even unique to climbing at Beacon - Steve Roti and the Oregon Hang/Paragliding organization are going through exactly the same process and experience relative to their [long tradition of] flying off Hamilton, which is currently closed/banned - it could just have easily been us and climbing...

[kevbone]

Documenting your work is great, Joe, and a decade of clueless, petty squabbling is bad. I agree. Just not on this site. Cant you document it in some other way and give it to the state park in such a way as to I or other people dont see it on the web? Beacause if you dont, it truly shows its all about you.

In other words, if you truly were selfless abou this, you would not tell anybody you were doing it.

 

Facts:

we agree, documenting is good.

We agree, bad blood between climbers and rangers, bad.

 

There has to be another way to keep the rangers in the loop without alerting the world as well?

 

Idea:

Could you post this stuff on the Beacon rock state web site? That way if someone wants to find out whats up they can access it through the state.

[JosephH]

Bill, do you honestly think this is about writing styles? i've made these points over and over to Joseph since last summer, and all he does is explain himself, then stay on the exact same course.

 

Well, on the SE Corner tree rap anchor discussion - I did change course and remove them and after we checked with Lisa Lantz, the WSP SW Resource Steward, the decision was made not to add more gravel to the tree base and so we didn't.

 

Oh, and as someone else (Edward Abbey?) once said: beware the man who has no enemies.

 

An odd person to quote in this context I would think - Edward Abbey was a lot of things, but a master of consensus or particularly mellow words wasn't one of them. And if that's the quote of relevance, then you and Kevin are certainly going out of your way to make me someone to be less wary of...

[kevbone]

"Well, on the SE Corner tree rap anchor discussion - I did change course and remove them and after we checked with Lisa Lantz, the WSP SW Resource Steward, the decision was made not to add more gravel to the tree base and so we didn't."

 

I think the point is, you heard it from several local climbers on this subject and the only thing that changed your mind was the officials, not the climbers consensous.

[JosephH]

Documenting your work is great, Joe, and a decade of clueless, petty squabbling is bad. I agree. Just not on this site. Can't you document it in some other way and give it to the state park in such a way as to I or other people dont see it on the web? Beacause if you dont, it truly shows its all about you.

In other words, if you truly were selfless abou this, you would not tell anybody you were doing it.

 

Facts:

we agree, documenting is good.

We agree, bad blood between climbers and rangers, bad.

 

There has to be another way to keep the rangers in the loop without alerting the world as well?

 

Idea:

Could you post this stuff on the Beacon rock state web site? That way if someone wants to find out whats up they can access it through the state.

 

Kevin,

 

The problem is it's about way more than the BRSP rangers. Beacon Rock sits in the center of a regulatory onion that looks sort of like this:

 

Beacon > BRSP > WSP > WDFW > Tribe Councils > Skamania County > Forest Service > Gorge Commission > Railroad

 

with each successive agency potentially having more power than the previous depending on the context one is looking at Beacon from. And while these are the primary agencies of record for Beacon the list doesn't include any number of agencies with relavant interests in Beacon such as the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (relative with regards to the East face and maintenance of park structures such as the buildings and the trail). No agency would allow us to post on their site and they all potentially need access to the BRCA postings in order to verify we exist and are involved in some recognizable way with the management of climbing at Beacon Rock. Otherwise the WSP, BRSP and WDFW staffs and others can't really legitamize "working" with us in the context of the Climbing, Preservation, or Peregrine Management Plans. The BRCA notices (versus my personal, non-BRCA-labeled postings) are an important vehicle to allow those of us that consider ourselves locals to have a say in what goes down out there.

 

I've very much tried to avoid putting up a dedicated BRCA website by posting BRCA notices here and the WCC site. But seems it's slowly coming down to that I think, but that is definitely not a direction I prefer to go in.

 

[ Edit: And in the scheme of things in the regulatory onion presented above - everyone needs to know the BRSP Staff are Beacon climbers' best friends and allies. They intercede on our behalf with other agencies and interest groups far more often than anyone realizes. There no shortage of folks and groups out there who would just as soon see no climbing at all at Beacon. ]

[ivan]

i hate democracy

[phillygoat]

Hey folks! I'll start by laying my cards out on the table: I'm a noob. That said, I've been fascinated from the start by everything climbing related- the history, the movement, different peoples' relationship to it, etc. While I've long been a lurker on these sites I seldom felt qualified to weigh in due to my inexperience/ignorance on the topics being discussed.

 

Well, three and a half years of reading these threads has left me just as confused as ever, but I'd say more sensitive to the dogma that is often used by either side to "prove" its point. (This is an observation of the internet in general, not specifically the above posts)

 

I'm friends with Kevin and aquainted with Joseph and one thing that has stuck out to me in these Beacon threads is the apparent discrepancy between online and in-person behavior. Hell, I was at the party mentioned above and it seems to me that's as perfect a time as any to get into a discussion/debate- alcohol being a wonderful social lubricate!

 

Crimper: Looking foward to meeting you! It seems to me you laid into Kevin pretty good a couple of threads back much in the manner you disagree with Joseph here. However, Kevin said you still climb with him. I guess my question is: How serious is all this stuff? Is this just typical internet fussin' or is there some reason that I'm missing as to the gravity of posting about Beacon?

 

Here's why I thought I'd post: I'm your (Beacon locals) nightmare! Or at least it would seem. I'm the cliche gym bred sporto who couldn't leave well enough alone and had to start plugging gear...

 

All jokes aside, what's the threat? Sure, people like me are going to trickle to Beacon, but for the most part my observations lead me to believe that climbing with gear is growing at a much slower rate than the bouldering/sport/comp scene. I mean, I run into climbers all the time who think it's nutty to lead on gear.

 

Maybe ANY growth at all stings a bit, because I can only imagine having the place all to yourself back in the day.

 

In closing, I think the message boards do have their place. Kevin told me that anytime a bolt is placed anywhere someone will be upset about it. Seems true. But if that's the case- if there are no "laws" and the rules are in flux- than we need a forum to discuss these things.

 

Or at least I need to read them (haha) because I'm usually somewhere in the middle. Thanks for your time, sincerely,

phillip

Edited July 25, 2006 by phillygoat

[JosephH]

"Well, on the SE Corner tree rap anchor discussion - I did change course and remove them and after we checked with Lisa Lantz, the WSP SW Resource Steward, the decision was made not to add more gravel to the tree base and so we didn't."

 

I think the point is, you heard it from several local climbers on this subject and the only thing that changed your mind was the officials, not the climbers consensous.

 

On adding the dirt, as WSP SW Resource Steward Lisa Lantz's word is final. But my action in removing the anchor were solely due to the consensus of climbers here and had nothing whatsoever to do with my interactions with "the officials".

[iain]

Unfortunately despite the benefits it provides, the internet is sometimes too good at what it does.

 

My understanding is people appreciate the significant time and expense represented by the new anchors, but do not feel the gps locations of loose rocks and bird species, mass of dirt necessary to sustain tree life, train schedules, ambient air temps of tunnel #1 etc need to be broadcast across the planet.