slothrop Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 A friend and I did a little climbing at Tum Tum last week, including a pitch that wasn't in our guidebook (by Jim Speaker). It's just around the corner from You Name It, starts with some jams under a flake (~5.9), and has shiny new bolts the rest of the way. Anyone know what it's called? I talked to a guy at Mtn Goat who was surprised to hear about the route, since it implies that someone's been doing some development there. He said the owners of the nearby land aren't too keen on climbers and that the four-star classic dihedral I saw in Speaker's guide, for example, is now off-limits. From the No Trespassing signs we saw, an awful lot of rock is a no-go. What's the deal? Had a good time on what little we did climb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCash Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 The 4 star classic dihedral is R.H. Factor, and is a very good route. Bob Loomis told me he did the FA on it. The 2 cracks to the left and one to the right are good as well. Bummer that it might be closed now. Where is You Name It? Is it on the big dome near the pictograph? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 Yeah, RH Factor. A bird flew out of the crack, which seemed like a bad sign... if the local classic is seeing so little traffic that birds are nesting in it, "No Trespassing" might be for real. You Name It is the 5.6 dihedral just up and right from the parking lot next to the fenced-in boulder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leearden Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 (edited) Yes, the "No Trespassing" sign directly east of the Painted Rocks area is for real. On my last bouldering visit, the landowner whose name is Bob, watched me walk past his No Trespassing sign and onto his property to climb. He was rightfully offended that i'd disregarded his sign. Luckily, he seemed extraordinarily understanding of my plight, and he did not forbid me from returning. He did ask that I telephone him prior to any return visits, and that I not advertise the area or promote any increased climber traffic. As I understood Bob's concerns (in order of importance): -Bob was concerned about legal liability should anyone be injured, and therefore didn't specifically permit climbing on his property -Bob did not want to infringe on anyone's communion with nature -Bob did not want people tromping disrespectfully around his property (he mentioned litter, unauthorized trail cairns, and that someone had smashed the bleached skull of a rodent carcus that had remained untouched in the same place for some time) I estimated to Bob that perhaps 15 climbers regularly commune and search for Zen in this area, which seemed reasonable and non-threatening to him. I told him how much i appreciated using his property, and that I would pick up trash and encourage others to do the same while climbing there. I cannot speak for Bob's wishes toward other climbers, but he was real cool cat to me, please treat him and his property with respect. thank you arden leave no trace Edited May 13, 2006 by leearden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted May 9, 2006 Author Share Posted May 9, 2006 Thanks for the info, Arden. I feel good that we bugged out instead of going on an old guidebook's word that access was OK. I assume that the Painted Rocks climbs off the parking lot are still open. What's with the fence around the boulder? I didn't look at it too closely, though I saw some graffiti. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 -Bob was concerned about legal liability should anyone be injured, and therefore didn't specifically permit climbing on his property Bob should be aware that unless he's charging a fee for use of his land, he has no inherent liability should anyone be injured or killed while recreating upon his property. While I do not know, nor wish to look up, the RCW/WAC citation for this law, perhaps someone like mattp, TLG, or Paul Certa will. We (the FCCC) ran into this same sorta thing at Frenchman Coulee with the old lady who owns the wall where the ice climbs are across the canyon entry road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyf Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 (edited) Info already PM'd to Arden. It's RCW 4.24.210. Edited May 12, 2006 by andyf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Thanks, Andy! Goodonya! The entire citation HERE. Note the "Findings" section at the end of the citation. Shouldn't be any more concern from Bob, as long as he keeps access free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyf Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 Note the "Findings" section at the end of the citation. Yep, I helped write it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leearden Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 (edited) Thanks again for your efforts Andy, I've forwarded the information to Bob. It seems that R.H. Factor is NOT on Bob's property, neither is the bouldering area (Third Canyon) directly east of his property. His property line begins (385 feet) uphill and east of the painted rock boulder, and continues east including the meadow adjacent to the highway, it ends at the first ridgeline that approaches the highway east of Bob's meadow (he doesn't own the third canyon bouldering area but does own the popular trail marked by cairns that we use to access it). I hope I've shed some light on the subject, but I fear i've muddied it. arden Edited May 13, 2006 by leearden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.