Beacon Rock Notice

[billcoe]

I'd like to hit this one first if it's OK to show Joseph some support. JH can hit it later.

 

Joseph:

 

1) My concern has been confirmed: the opinions of others do not affect you. Like fuel to the fire, you will isolate my sentences and refute them, as you are far too invested in your Beacon Rock "improvements" to ever acknowledge that you could actually be wrong about any of them. Rather, you just think of the best response that will once again validate your past and future actions. It's like talking to a really smart wall.

 

I agree Josephs smart, but really, he brought it here to have that open discussion. That is why it gets publicized here, so that YOU can be involved. I would like to think he'd back off when he is wrong. Now you are here, and you were not here before - and your input DOES matter.

 

2) Nobody has seen you at Beacon Rock before the last two years. Who gave you the authority to unilaterally make yourself the spokesperson for an entire climbing area? No, don't answer that question, that's just what you want to do. It's a rhetorical question. That means you ought to think about it, for once.

 

So he climbed out there years ago and moved away. Now he's back. I don't see how that is a criticism. JH maintains a trad ethic that is in keeping with the best traditions at Beacon. As far as having the authority over a whole climbing area, he doesn't. That is the State parks staff who labor daily out there. JH just showed up looking to help out. And he has.

 

3) Have you ever even considered that through your admittedly selfish efforts and prolific online commentary you are de-mystifying Beacon, revealing its secrets, and changing its character? Who are you to think you have ALL the answers to a problem YOU have defined? Do you think that you are more important than other climbers? (those are also rhetorical, don't answer them)

 

This one looks to cut to the core of your thoughts Crimper, it should be answered don't you think?

 

4) By the way, MOST OF THE CLIMBERS AT BEACON DO NOT READ THIS WEBSITE. YOU ARE ONLY WRITING FOR YOUR OWN GRATIFICATION, AND SPREADING INFORMATION FORMERLY EARNED BY ACTUALLY CLIMBING AT BEACON. YOU ARE DEGRADING AND CHEAPENING OUR PAST EXPERIENCES, AND THE FUTURE EXPERIENCES OF OTHERS BY SPRAYING ALL OVER THE WEB.

 

Part 1 - its true many climbers at Beacon still do not own computers. As far as writing for his own gratification, no I don't think that is correct at all. JH bills by the hour in his personal life. It is a hell of a lot higher than you might imagine I suspect. He gets no money for doing this, but I believe it is his desire to make a better situation for everybody (all of us) which drives him to do all of this unpaid labor. I do not think JH describing that he cleaned off Flying Dutchman will lead to a line to climb it, but I could be wrong.

 

(PS they are going to start reading it now, as they become concerned, through word of mouth and that thing called the telephone,.....

 

Well that’s a good thing. I'm amazed how this is spreading myself, yesterday my son overheard a conversation on the Max Train discussing this very thing, and my name was invoked in that conversation 2 or 3 times. Welcome all to the net.

 

5) WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE AT BEACON? WHY ARE YOU POSTING COMMENTARY AT 3 AM ON A WEEKNIGHT?

 

SERIOUSLY!

 

That’s a JH question; I suspect I would not give it justice.

 

6) fyi: the anchors (or parts of them)at the top of dastardly crack, both pitches of blownout, bluebird, pipeline, and blood sweat and smears were all replaced within the last two years without any email commentary and without your help. and you know what? those anchors work, and nobody needed to post about it on the web.

 

7) You seem to want all the credit for the changes you are creating at Beacon, but are you prepared to accept the blame?

 

I'm not sure about all the credit. JH had a kid ask him once while he was out there (this is after he had replaced about 20 of the anchors himself) if he was helping Kevin replace the anchors. JH said yes and that was all he did say about it.

 

I have presented to JH my fears that opening up these disagreements and issues (like the SE Corner Tree discussion right now) would or could lead to a closure. I still have that fear, and it's a huge fear that some little issue we drag forward could lead to us climbers getting a big raw shaft in a big unlubricated way, but I will admit that when I meet the park people my fear diminishes greatly as my trust increases - they are very open and happy to have this kind of input, and I have seen NO negative hits yet with none on the horizon, and it's been going in an open manner for quite some time.

 

It might be time to examine our former habits and question the existing status quo.

 

Time to let the old fears go and move forward?

 

For next year, if we can confirm that the birds are NOT nesting on Beacon: there may not even be a closure. If they are not at Beacon, then where are they? Somebody needs to step forward and help monitor and figure this out?

 

You in?

[billcoe]

Am I gonna have to volenteer to drag a computer over to Jimmy O's house to get him in on this?

 

Also, props to Kevin for working the phones in a frenzy and bringing this issue up to the top of the heap with some previously unheard voices. Bring more.

 

Joseph, Jim and I are old, I does my heart good to see others, who will be here long after I pass, care so much.

 

It gives me hope and happiness.

[JosephH]

Joseph:

 

1) My concern has been confirmed: the opinions of others do not affect you. Like fuel to the fire, you will isolate my sentences and refute them, as you are far too invested in your Beacon Rock "improvements" to ever acknowledge that you could actually be wrong about any of them. Rather, you just think of the best response that will once again validate your past and future actions. It's like talking to a really smart wall.

 

Bryan, I haven't "isolated" your sentences, merely referenced them and I haven't refuted anything you've said, merely stated my opinions - they just happen to differ from yours at times. You're more than welcome to yours as is everyone; we certainly aren't likely to be coming to any unanimous consensus on every issue out there, but we can certainly work through them and work with the BRSP on issue that fall under their purvey out there.

 

2) Nobody has seen you at Beacon Rock before the last two years. Who gave you the authority to unilaterally make yourself the spokesperson for an entire climbing area? No, don't answer that question, that's just what you want to do. It's a rhetorical question. That means you ought to think about it, for once.

 

I first climbed at Beacon in '80, and have climbed there every year since moving here in '87 save one when I was working out of the state. Lots of that was mid-week roped solos and I generally had the place to myself. But I've been climbing there all along and I'm not acting unilaterally or alone.

 

3) Have you ever even considered that through your admittedly selfish efforts and prolific online commentary you are de-mystifying Beacon, revealing its secrets, and changing its character? Who are you to think you have ALL the answers to a problem YOU have defined? Do you think that you are more important than other climbers? (those are also rhetorical, don't answer them)

 

The main secret about Beacon is that most folks run up the same few lines over and over all the time and that a lot of great lines have grown over and are never climbed anymore or extremely rarely. I didn't "define" the bad anchors, overgrown routes, loose rock buildup, or incredibly bad relationships all the way around - I found them. The only real "mystery" out there is why a ton of great routes never get climbed anymore.

 

4) By the way, MOST OF THE CLIMBERS AT BEACON DO NOT READ THIS WEBSITE. YOU ARE ONLY WRITING FOR YOUR OWN GRATIFICATION, AND SPREADING INFORMATION FORMERLY EARNED BY ACTUALLY CLIMBING AT BEACON. YOU ARE DEGRADING AND CHEAPENING OUR PAST EXPERIENCES, AND THE FUTURE EXPERIENCES OF OTHERS BY SPRAYING ALL OVER THE WEB.

 

(PS they are going to start reading it now, as they become concerned, through word of mouth and that thing called the telephone, of the detrimental impact your actions may be having)

 

Exactly how has anything I've said or posted "degraded" or "cheapened" your's or anyone's elses "past experiences" or the "future experiences of others"? Talk about drama. The main thing that threatens to "cheapen" everyone's future experience out there is bolting; the main threat to everyone's past experiences is neglect and abandonment of classic lines.

 

5) WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE AT BEACON? WHY ARE YOU POSTING COMMENTARY AT 3 AM ON A WEEKNIGHT?

 

SERIOUSLY!

 

You have some problem that I don't happen to live a 8-to-5 life? That I stay up past your bedtime? Is the fact that I work at night somehow threatening? My mother is dead, thanks, and that's a lot of drama over when and how I choose to live my life...

 

6) fyi: the anchors (or parts of them)at the top of dastardly crack, both pitches of blownout, bluebird, pipeline, and blood sweat and smears were all replaced within the last two years without any email commentary and without your help. and you know what? those anchors work, and nobody needed to post about it on the web.

 

Yes, some of the anchors have been replaced, some of them badly, and I've removed a bunch of hangerless studs from various folks' learning experiences. Also, sometime just the the hangers were replaced, or the old anchors not removed. Also, a bunch of the chain anchors that got slammed in two years ago really pissed off folks at various agencies both for the "brightwork" littering the place and because no one even bothered to notify the BRSP staff further causing bad blood - again, it's not like they didn't notice it happening. In short, some of those anchors work, some don't and for various reasons. This work is happening transparently and with web posting because it is an organized effort coordinated with the BRSP.

 

7) You seem to want all the credit for the changes you are creating at Beacon, but are you prepared to accept the blame?

 

I couldn't care less about "credit" and I'm not "creating" any changes out at Beacon. I'm simply replacing deteriorated anchors, trying to help repair tattered relationships, trying to get more climbing opened up and opened up early as possible, and trying reclaim some pretty classic old routes that clearly aren't of interest to pretty much anyone, and do it all as transparently as possible so you know and anyone else interested (individuals and agencies of record) know exactly what and who. I am, however, more than willing to take responsibility for all my actions. And again, I haven't been doing any of this alone or in isolation even if I happen to have a schedule that let's me get out to do the anchor work when it's relatively quiet.

[billcoe]

Some points we should also discuss.

 

Climbing on the NW side should be open.

 

Cleaning moss off of routes is a good thing.

 

If there are no birds the rock should not be closed.

 

The East face should be open for climbing.

 

_________________________________________________

 

I think the tree is a flash point because the park service was invited in on it and there is so little trust amoungst some of us. It is a public park. They are paid to work there (they love that place as much as we do BTW and they do a damn fine job balancing the many many issues out there).

 

Should we as climbers work with them? Joseph believes so and he does. Some of you think not. Perhaps if some of you were in contact with them like he (lesser extant I) am, you would have more trust and less fear about them?

[kevbone]

Just to let you know someone called me and told me about the web and what is being said, just to let you know.

[JosephH]

Kevin,

 

Just to let you know, I've already talked to one person that said you called and told him to get on the Internet and read this thread - so which is it - you want it quiet or you're actually calling people up and telling them to come here and driving your own argument of proliferation?

[JosephH]

Just to be crystal clear on the tree issue; earlier I posted this:

 

I'm all for a sign and we are in the midst of having one made up, but my [somewhat pessimistic] opinion is it will not stop folks from doing the rap. So the rings were installed after discussion with BRSP relative to helping protect the tree. Again, this is to protect the tree, not climbers. The rings are installed, but I'm open to talking with BRSP and backing off to just a sign and a warning tag (on the tree) and seeing what happens. But if people are seen doing the rap after that then the solution is likely going to either be webbing or anchors. I for one definitely do not want to see anchors on the ledge, but again, doing nothing is leading to the loss of this tree due to direct human impact.

 

That section in bold was part of my "listening" to those of you who oppose te slings. At Bill's suggestion I'll talk with the BRSP Staff, pull the slings for now and we'll just go with the signage while we continue our discussion. We'll also put together a meeting and those of you who are really interested in the issue and not just spraying can come and we'll work through some of this and you can also get the BRSP perspective firsthand.

[rbw1966]

I wasn't going to weigh in on this, since I haven't climbed out there at all this year for various reasons, but what the heck. Its finally slower at work and the vicodin kicked in.

 

I've been climbing out at Beacon off and on for close to 10 years or so now. Like many others, Opdyke took me on my first trad climb (smoking bowls at every belay). In all that time, the only 'controversy' I have ever heard about centered around the bird closures and climbers violating the closures.

 

For the sake of full disclosure, I was busted climbing there once during a closure. The ranger that cited us (I don't recall his name) was very nice and civil about it, but he did mention he had had bad experiences with climbers out there during the closures. Not once--let me say this again--not ONCE did he mention any other point of concern.

 

We talked to the ranger about doing some sort of community service project in lieu of the fine, such as climber awareness projects concerning the bird closures, anchor replacement, etc. but in the end he didn't seem terribly interested (i.e. he didn't return my calls). Overall, my impression was that he recognized climbers as a problem only with respect to the birds, and perhaps trash--which is more of a problem with tourons hiking the trail.

 

Thats why I was pretty surprised to hear about this new collective Joseph has organized. Apparently things have really gone to shit out there. Anchor replacement has been ongoing for years, some bad some good. I applaud the efforts at replacing anchors, cleaning routes, building consensus and bettering the relationship with the park staff (was it REALLY a problem before?) but this whole tree thing seems kind of overblown. Is a tree growing on a rock really threatening access?

 

I love Beacon for its mellow, laid back trad attitude and ethic. In all the time I have climbed there, park staff presence was minimal--I can't recall ever seeing a ranger while I was climbing until I regrettably did something stupid (i.e. break the law). In reading this bickering about a tree I am reminded of the bolt wars of the east coast.

 

I am hereby volunteering my services to help with bird watching. Bill, drop me a note when you need someone and I will be there if I can.

[JosephH]

We probably need to back way up and I'll put out the short answer to Bryan's question of:

 

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE AT BEACON?

 

My wish list of things to accomplish when we started was the following and still is:

 

a) Preserve the traditional character of climbing at Beacon - there is no need to bolt every route and chain every column top at Beacon, sport climbers have Broughton and Smith, and my goal is to see Beacon preserved in it's "native" character as a trad area which can be summed up as developing routes with gear, then pins, then bolts as a last resort. As Jim Opdycke likes to say, this is, was, and should remain a trad area where you can come have some adventure or train for a big wall. [Endless and ongoing]

 

b) Get route development on the NW Face opened back up. [initiated and in process]

 

c) Cooperatively monitor the Peregrines to help determine the extent, scope, and duration of each year's closure. [initiated and in process]

 

d) Get the West face out from under the Peregrine closure. [broached]

 

e) Get the East face closure revisited and reexamined in part or in whole. [broached]

 

f) Get a clear and shared understanding and agreement on route "cleaning" so we can operate transparently. [Part of defining the route development process...]

 

g) Get the fixed pro approval/route development process changed from a per placement basis to a per route basis. [Part of defining the route development process...]

 

h) To establish pre-opening and post-closure work sessions to get work done that is too hazardous to accomplish during the open season. [Done]

 

i) To insure us "locals" are positioned with at least a shred of credibility to partner with the BRSP Staff in the next review/revision of the BRSP Climbing Management Plan, a process that occurs every couple of years. Rest assured that there are organized and better funded climbing groups/associations who aren't "locals" that are more than ready and willing to step into that role and set the agenda for us "locals" if we don't get half an act together. [Lots of progress over the past year]

 

None of the above, and particularly the last, is possible while we hold, maintain, and cherish a "cops and robbers" approach to [bad] relationships with the BRSP Staff, WSP, WDFW, and other agencies of record. Again, nothing we do out there happens in "secret" in reality - the BRSP staff either knows it's happening when it's going down or they find out shortly afterwards and they've been doing that quite reliably without any help from me for the past decade.

 

Re-forming the BRCA, doing the pre-opening work, the Anchor Replacement Project, monitoring the Peregrines, working with the BRSP on signage, etc. all are designed to build cred for us Beacon "locals" so we have a place at the table the next time everyone sits down to cast "climbing" in the stone of the climbing management plan. Take your pick: hold on to the past and keep playing cops and robbers to maintain an advesarial relationship with the BRSP staff and all the agencies of record and get an agenda set for us; or get a clue, an act, and build some credibility for a change so we have some saying our own fate...

 

- Joseph

 

[P.S. No one likes all this sh#t, and I'd rather just be climbing then pouring time, money, and energy into this, but the writings been on the wall for a long time that things have gone south badly and were only getting worse as time goes along.]

[billcoe]

In reading this bickering about a tree I am reminded of the bolt wars of the east coast.

 

I am hereby volunteering my services to help with bird watching. Bill, drop me a note when you need someone and I will be there if I can.

 

 

Hi RBW: You make some good points. My foots been tweaked and I haven't climbed for over a month, but I still have an opinion and you should too. Good to hear from you Rob and the monitoring offer is appreciated.

 

Kev, OK no props for you then, but I'd like to see this be more inclusive and have more people getting involved rather than less. Phone calls are good, lets encourage involvement.

 

While I'm on that subject 1 bone to pick with Crimper. Joseph has asked for involvement throughout this process, thinking on it: Crimper makes it out like its been a 1 man show and no input wanted or needed from others and thats just not true. Maybe you just noticed the door was wide open and walked in, but it's been open for a long time. Joseph has continually asked for help, advice and input. That Joseph has put more effort into it than anyone else is true. I tend to be distracted with my family, my business and lots of other things. It's been that way for me for 20 years at least. I look over at Jim Anglin's free time wistfully and hopefully. (Wheres he been lately, he lives closer to Beacon than any of us and sounds like he was almost doing laps there daily this spring).

 

I guess some of us remember the days that the trail to the park was the RR tracks and the parking is now a boat ramp and they're wasn't anybody else climbing and no rangers. I miss those days some but they're long gone so why try to go back to them. If anyone else remembers climbing on a 120' long goldline or a Willians Harness you'll probably agree with that statement.

 

Times change. The question is how do we move forward? To start with, lets try not be all pissy with each other, and keep this on a positive note. Climbing is what we like, not this kind of crap. We do this crap so that we can climb.

 

Beacon will be a spritual and happy place no matter what we say or do, but let's not be negative with each other. I like the idea of knowing who we really are in real life, not the pretend life of the internet. Many of us know each other already - we can be honest that way to start with.

 

Regards:

 

Bill (Coe)

 

ps - thank JH, forgot about the West face, there's some real fine looking lines over there underneath all that poison oak.

[kevbone]

I suppose the end result needs to be the rock that never closes, and is open for all kinds of rock climbing all year round. What ever it takes to make friends with everybody, I have never harbored any ill wish on anybody out there, for Beacon is my church where I go to pray. I just did not want to see webbing on the tree. Times do change and it seems now we have to abide by the rules of the times. We ( the climbers ) should be better organized, I agree. We never have had any fire power as the higherups have gathered to decide the fate of the closures. So if this gathering of information will help get the rock open, I am behind it. For the goal is realy to climb year round.

 

Joe, initialy I was called upon to read the site about the tree, and as I got more involved I called some other locals who might have an opinion. I was not trying to make it out that I have not got others interested about it.

 

As from the start of the meetings ( down at the lucky lab ) I am willing to do what it takes to get the rock open. I guess we will just have to disagree about posting all that you do online.

 

I am willing to help with anchor replacements as you have seen, and want to be involved in the meetings.

 

Joe/Bill, I am just scared about losing all of Beacon rock to online banter. We are all in this together and share a love for the special place in the gorge. We might disagree about how we do things, but if we didnt, we would not be human. As you all know I and we are very passionate about Beacon and we all have to find common ground to tread on, so we can move forward to clean up our church.

[JosephH]

My apologies to all for not being clearer about the overall agenda out there sooner and as I said, and Kevin is reiterating, we aren't likely to see eye to eye on every issue but we'll need to move ahead as a group anyway and try to not let our own differences spill over too much - trust me, we need to stick together in general going forward as in reality we "Beacon locals" are a subset of the total OR/WA climbing population. The best thing we can do is show we are willing to step up to some responsibility; invest the time, money, and energy to back up the claims that we care about the place; and do our best to set aside the past and try to have some decent relationships - especially with the BRSP staff. I can't stress enough how much they are actually in our corner in a world of much larger regulatory and interest group agendas.

 

I definitely hear the trust and fear issues of all of those of you who went through the "Peregrine Wars" and attempts to work issues through back in the '90s. Jim, Bill, Kevin and others are expressing genuine concern but at some point you have to either be willing to let go and move on in good faith or hold on to it all at the expense of losing a voice going forward. My feeling was and is that we've come to that crossroad a decade later and it's time to get re-involved with the processes that manage BRSP - I can certainly understand if some folks don't agree or don't have the heart to go through it all again, but those processes go on with or without us.

[jefrick]

Kevin called me up and told me about this whole discussion, so here comes yet another opinion. First, I've been climbing at Beacon full time for only the last three years, so my moral and historical authority may not be as legit as that as some of you old timers. However during that time, I've befriended and have been excepted as part of the crew, a fact for which i am grateful. That said, here's my two cents on topics that have caught my eye in the above hullabalaoo.

1) I don't really get the whole save the tree thing. The tree seems solid enough to me--she don't wobble around. I am also skeptical that any amount of dirt/gravel humped up there will mechanically anchor the tree. Has anyone consulted with a biologist or other authority (past hort experience don't count) as to the practical viability of this plan. And though my lefty enviropals (which is all of my pals, really) will probably wince at this, who gives a fuck about a single tree anyhoo. from a biological perspective, the tree as an individual is meaningless---populations are what matter. i can see the social value of the tree and what it means to the climbers, but let the damn thing be. it's gonna go sometime, unless of course you decide to hump a ton of molten brass up there and cover the tree in that. my mother did this with some baby shoes of mine 35 years ago, and they are still in pretty good shape.

 

2) As to the dog thing, it's my guess that it is going to be a very cold day in hell indeed before Arent W. puts Lakota and Masamba on leashes. Ditto with Barley or Stewarts dog. If you see somebody's dog shit on the trail, make 'em knock it off. As soon as my dogs are a little older, I promise that they too will be off leash.

 

3) I agree with all that the arrows scratched into the rock on Young Warriors is total bullshit. No one though has mentioned the "loose" block atop Y.W. that someone wrote "loose" on with a Sharpie. A little, stoned, Jesus-lovin' birdie told me that it was Joseph. True? Whoever did it, I think that is foolish as well.

 

4)Finally, good job to Joseph for all the hard work on the anchor replacement. I'll probably see you all out there soon enough (weather permitting), where one lucky soul will get to catch me on undoubtedly numerous falls on my next stab at Dod's. thanks to all---jason

[JosephH]

1) I don't really get the whole save the tree thing. The tree seems solid enough to me--she don't wobble around. I am also skeptical that any amount of dirt/gravel humped up there will mechanically anchor the tree. Has anyone consulted with a biologist or other authority (past hort experience don't count) as to the practical viability of this plan. And though my lefty enviropals (which is all of my pals, really) will probably wince at this, who gives a fuck about a single tree anyhoo. from a biological perspective, the tree as an individual is meaningless---populations are what matter. i can see the social value of the tree and what it means to the climbers, but let the damn thing be. it's gonna go sometime, unless of course you decide to hump a ton of molten brass up there and cover the tree in that. my mother did this with some baby shoes of mine 35 years ago, and they are still in pretty good shape.

 

Well, I'd say from an ecological perspective everything you say is true, but I for one will find the route a bit sterile once the tree is gone and it's going is has been greatly accelerated by our traffic and use. The gravel/dirt wouldn't primarily be for mechanically holding it down so much as to replenish soil and mechanically provide some protection for the roots. This would basically be in-fill between the roots and not slathered all over the ledge.

 

2) As to the dog thing, it's my guess that it is going to be a very cold day in hell indeed before Arent W. puts Lakota and Masamba on leashes. Ditto with Barley or Stewarts dog. If you see somebody's dog shit on the trail, make 'em knock it off. As soon as my dogs are a little older, I promise that they too will be off leash.

 

The dog thing, sigh. Yep, another paradox, I'm one of the half of folks that love you guys (and Gavin too), but hate dogs at crags and think it's wildly inconsiderate to leave unleashed dogs at the base of multi-pitch climbs. Likely I'll manage to stop calling you "Mark" far before this issue is resolved here or anywhere else...

 

3) I agree with all that the arrows scratched into the rock on Young Warriors is total bullshit. No one though has mentioned the "loose" block atop Y.W. that someone wrote "loose" on with a Sharpie. A little, stoned, Jesus-lovin' birdie told me that it was Joseph. True? Whoever did it, I think that is foolish as well.

 

Yep, it was me, and I angonized over that for quite some time. Until late last fall that rock had an identical twin along side of it and it was that same Jesus-loving birdie that inadvertantly almost pulled that one down on our third while stepping around it. Everyone always grabbed the top of it while they stepped around it to the ledge, but that day when our birdie did it, it rocked 2-3 inches out and he managed to gently push it back in place. We had to stay late that night and trundle it. The remaining half poses yet another Beacon dilemna: it is arguably one of the single most, dangerous rocks climbers encounter at Beacon. Like its trundled twin it too is loose and everyone's natural inclination is to yard straight out on the top of it while stepping around it; if it cuts on someone in that position it could easily cause a fatality in the air or on the ground below or both. It would get trundled too except there is a good possibility it's weight pressing against the cliff is partially supporting the 4x12 or so structure above it and possibly more. I'd be willing to remove that marking as well, but be aware this rock poses probably the highest rockfall risk on any route out at Beacon; on a scale of 1 to 10 I'd rate it a 9 or 10 because of the combination of all the above factors and the fact that the route is so popular.

 

4)Finally, good job to Joseph for all the hard work on the anchor replacement. I'll probably see you all out there soon enough (weather permitting), where one lucky soul will get to catch me on undoubtedly numerous falls on my next stab at Dod's. thanks to all---jason

 

Thanks, I really do enjoy seeing you out there even if "Mark" imprinted my pre-alzheimers brain the weekend I first met you both. I'll now probably call him "Jason" the next time he comes over. Good luck on Dodd's, I find moving fast for just that first couple of moves is what get's me through it - anytime I move slow there it usually means I'm gonna grip and pitch.

[crimper]

Whether this is true or not, I've been informed that Joseph has invited the BRSP - or the Rangers, if that's what is meant by BRSP - to follow our online dialogue, and I want everyone else posting here to be aware of that. Hello, BRSP!

 

Also, Bill Coe wants to know who "we" are, so my name is Bryan Smith, I'm 29, and I've been climbing at Beacon since 2001. We may even have met before!

 

Personally, I have no bone to pick with the BRSP, and since 2001, I have never observed, let alone been a part of, the "drama" that Joseph claims has "threatened" our access to Beacon. It seems to me that Joseph has "manufactured" the drama and the threat in order to be the "savior" at beacon.

 

And don't get me wrong, I've often thought that there was a huge leadership void to be filled at Beacon (I agree that an immature and unfortunate "cops and robbers" mentality has existed), and Joseph has assumed the mantle that none of us would accept, but I never thought that the leadership would look like this!

 

Here is my concern: maybe someone from BRSP could post here and explain precisely what "drama" and what "threat" Joseph is "saving us" from, because I have never see it.

 

Joseph, you talk about your goal of "preserving the traditional character" of Beacon from some "threats" - yet I have never seen any threat to that character until YOU started your obsessive postings, revealing key and secret information, and encouraging more people than ever to climb at Beacon as you inform them of new anchors, traverse possibilities, newly cleaned climbs and other aspects of Beacon THAT I KNOW BETTER THAN TO MENTION HERE.

 

You are the threat. As has been said elsewhere, there was no "controversy" until you started your postings.

 

There is new sport route development in the Portland area and elsewhere in Oregon being done by Beacon climbers - but those climbers are NOT putting sport routes in at beacon, because they respect and understand the trad character at beacon. So what are you "protecting" Beacon from? Where is the controversy?

 

Specifics, please. If there is a specific threat to Beacon, either because BRSP plans to close the rock to climbing, or because you are aware of rap-bolting that has occurred or may occur, please share these threats with us.

 

Otherwise, you remind me of a certain man who took a nation to war over some weapons that just had to be there, but, uh, never were there - yet the war goes on.

 

So, again, what are you protecting Beacon from?

 

To summarize:

 

replacing anchors, cleaning routes, increasing seasonal access and access to other parts of Beacon, and improving relationships with the rangers: these are positive contributions and I thank you for them.

 

It is important to give credit where it is due, and you deserve credit for those efforts of yours.

 

However, revealing climbing "beta" for beacon, thus encouraging increased traffic at beacon by people who maybe shouldn't be there, placing slings on a tree so people will rap of a tree they shouldn't be rapping off of (or even calling attention to the tree in the first place), and incessantly referring to "threats" and "drama" at beacon that don't exist, are simply not helpful to preserving beacon's character.

 

In short, as has been said elsewhere, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Don't invent problems just you can "solve" them. More information and pure transparency is not always

better. I am sure you can find a balance between transparency and restraint.

 

And hey, BRSP: The climbers are the ones who truly respect and protect Beacon. We maintain the trails, we pick up the trash, we support the local economy, and almost all of us abide by the closure rules.

 

Anybody from BRSP want to add any comments?

[JosephH]

Bryan,

 

Thanks for the posts, but again there are just going to be times and issues where we disagree.

 

Where to even start...?

 

First, I didn't "invite" anyone in particular to CC.com and this is another case where perceptions run way ahead of reality. John and Erik do know how to use a browser, they know all about CC.com and I merely sent them a link so they'd know what section I was posting in. Again, the name of the game is transparency - your opening comment is an expression of exactly the "cops and robbers" mentality I'm talking about. Again, there isn't anything that's goes on or has gone on that the staff doesn't figure out on their own by and large and the whole idea of climber "secrets" is pretty much a figment of our own imagination - those guys live there, not much really escapes their notice.

 

Second, I can't think of anything out there that represents "key and secret information" and the very phrase should absolve me as I can assure you I don't have the requisite decoder ring to be privy to any such information unless you consider info on long-abandoned routes and parts of the crag "secret". If so they are only "secret" due to a lack of interest and neglect. The Anchor Replacement Project is completely open and being "blogged" as it occurs in status updates that include other pertinent info. Exactly what "key and secret information" have I betrayed?

 

And with regards to most of the rest of your comments and particularly ones like "incessantly referring to "threats" and "drama" at beacon that don't exist", I'll probably let Bill or someone else tackle them if they want but you make it clear you don't know much about the history of climbing at Beacon and if you can't perceive any threats to the historical nature of climbing at Beacon after climbing there since 2001 and reading this than I can only assume you haven't been paying attention in either place, to climbing politics in general, and/or have been otherwise pre-occupied.

 

As for what "leadership looks like", I admit Bill, Jim, and I aren't much to look at; what did you have in mind - Lynn Hill and Katie Brown? We would too, if you can get them to do it...

 

[Edit: Bryan, in the spirit of supporting the "leadership" you ought to consider buying Jim a beer or two and plying him for a history lesson...]

[billcoe]

Some points noted from previous posts.

 

Hi,

 

 

1) The free parking pullout to the east of the main [pay] parking lot has limited space, if you are the first ones out there on a weekend please do not park parallel to the road - park diagonally facing Southeast to make the most of the space.

 

I appreciate trying to get people ot use the F*ican space effeciently so that I don't have to pay.

 

Thanks!

[crimper]

First off, I just want people to know that BRSP has been made aware of this thread, and our postings. My comment was made to inform people of this, not to bias them in any way (or play "cops and robbers" as you say). I invited BRSP to comment, and maybe they will - though probably it's more fun for them to lurk and laugh at us as we talk in circles.

 

Second, since my whole point is that you should not be posting certain details about Beacon, I am obviously NOT going to mention what I consider unmentionable - got it?

 

Further, I don't consider these "secrets" to be the kinds of things the BRSP would care about, and I don't care whether they know them or not. Rather, these "secrets" concern beta for climbing at and enjoying Beacon that typically is earned by actual time spent climbing there, and which should not be gained just by reading your posts. In other words, please don't destroy the mystery of discovery for other people, and don't dilute what the current climbers enjoy. I'm sure you can appreciate that.

 

 

Third, you still have not described the "threats" to beacon that you are "protecting" us from. I find it noteworthy that you punted my question on to Bill Coe for some conciliatory support.

 

So I am continuing to ask you to justify your comments about threats to Beacon. If you are going to refer to these threats, and use them to justify your postings and your efforts, I am going to call you out and ask you to name them.

 

Anybody else out there aware of any threats to beacon besides overexposure?

[billcoe]

Another point.

 

 

2) The anchors with light gray slings are brand new with two independent 1" webbing slings slung in a figure 8 with two 50kn stainless rings through the X in the figure 8; this configuration allows them to equalize across both anchors and automatically adjust to rapping in any direction. They need no additional slings and cordage - and in fact, adding slings will just screw up the mechanism. Please do not add any slings or cords to the new anchors as it's a hassle to go remove them. If you have any questions about the anchors or see anchors you feel have a problem email to Beacon.Rock@AvaSys.com

 

This was a nagging little issue with the park folks that big shiny silver chains kept just showing up annonunced, furthermore, I heard Gandolph the Grey Himself bitch about it and had some others take down the chains which were thoughtfully placed at the top of his route adn returned to the helpful person who has spent their money and time to put them there: P2.

 

Thank you for spending your own money and time to help repair the relationship and the anchors. (personally I don't give a f if they are there, I use them: others certainly do for various reasons.)

[crimper]

And Joseph, quit playing up your ties to Opdycke. If anything, it probably embarasses him the way you use his name like it's a privilege or something. You're not the only one to get your history lessons from him.

[billcoe]

Another point.

 

4) Jim Opdyke has restored the lost arrow piton that was traditionally near the top of the first pitch of the Southeast Corner if anyone wonders where it came from...

 

I don't know why Gandlolf himself wanted to do that, but it's a great thing in that it was there historically and will help some hapless beginner from decking at some point.

 

Announcing that act on this forum undoubtedly prevented the first person who saw it from ripping it right back out of the rock as booty. Thank you for doing that.

[billcoe]

Another point.

 

A Little Consideration - leaving unleashed dogs at the base of multi-pitch routes and covering the entire area at the base with your gear is a complete drag for folks coming up after you who don't know your animals and need some room to "suit up" as well. So a little consideration please, leash your dogs at all times if you must bring them out, pack out their waste, and don't monopolize the entire base of multi-pitch climbs.

 

I love dogs. I was out just Tuesday evening (finally testing my foot) with a regular partner who has a great labrador that loves (and was last night) running wild and free. I alway turned my pups loose when I had them cause they were so easy going and social. Unfortunatly, some folks just hate dogs. (to a degree that sometimes they will poison them.)

 

Thank you for speaking up for the people who don't like fido eating their lunch while they are up a pitch, or don't appreciate the joy it gives a pooch to mark your backpack or rope, and for and asking people to be considerate.

[billcoe]

Something else.

 

I think we'd all like to see the tree there for many years: It's a great belay point and nice to get a slight bit of shade sometimes, and it's a worthy project.

 

OK, I was wrong about the rest of you wanting this, must have been speaking strictly for myself. I didn't want the tree to be blown off and see somebody put in bolts and rap anchors.

[JosephH]

And Joseph, quit playing up your ties to Opdycke. If anything, it probably embarasses him the way you use his name like it's a privilege or something. You're not the only one to get your history lessons from him.

 

Do you even think about what you're spraying here before you type? Jim gets consulted on everything that goes on as the original founder of the BRCA and he gets a printed version of all these posts even though he doesn't have a computer. Again, there is more than enough info here, in books, and in people who lived the history that you can avail yourself of for you to figure it out or otherwise "earn" some sense of the past you've clearly missed. Just the listing of our wish list in the earlier post should clue you into the idea that a lot has gone down and that there is a lot of work needs to be done.

 

Oh, and I'm not "protecting" you or anyone else from anything, I'm operating purely out of a desire to protect my own climbing interests out there. I'm also completely comfortable with the reality that some folks are never going to "get" it...

[Stewart]

Hey Crimper, My dog Lucy and Barley just had a close encouter with the mother bear just this July. I was on grass ledge when the bear came right up to the railroad tracks. The bear headed back to the river where I caught a glimpse. I was impressed, but Lucy says she felt THREATENED. Now whenever I suggest going to Beacon she just tucks her tail. She was also attacked by a huge owl at a local crag this spring. This thing had at least a 5ft wing span. Again, I was impressed, she fet THREATENED. Eversince then she argues with me every time I try to leash her up. Oh sh*t, did I just admit to talking to my dog? Also, I'm threatened by Blood Sweat and Smears and the direct start to Bluebird. Peace, Stewart