The Trout Creek Guide

[billcoe]

I eventually came to realize that that attitude, except when we as climbers truly are sneaking around in places we have no legal right to be, is backward thinking. It was pointed out by several people, including the BLM, that exposure from a guidebook or even that Climbing article could give us climbers a stronger voice as a user group, should access really become an issue. That is, of course, if we don't give the BLM reason to suggest we're making a negative impact on the land or other user groups-people hunting, grazing livestock, etc. It's far from an even relationship between usage, impact and access when we're dealing with public land.

 

The land is BLM but access is deeded to the ranch above. The rancher is totally cool with us being there so long as we don't drive accross his farm up top...but he currently has the ranch for sale (251 acres for 1.3 million or you can get the house all the farm equipment and the BLM-lease for around 6.5 mil, if anybody's interested) and a different owner could be a different attitude. Even if we have the legal upper-hand, it is a relationship we need to be considerate of.

 

Yeah, good point. That was one of the things we had discussed. I pointed out Smith Rocks as a model for growth. I can remember when it took a raft to go climb there in the springtime, and we had the entire place to ourselves. I actually sometimes like it better now as there is less loose rocks and significantly more routes along with that easier access.

 

However, the system is working well even with (or because of) the hordes that arrive from all over the world. The state makes good money, climbers get to climb some awesome stuff, and the impact is almost nil once the first trails and the bridge were put in. If you go to Smith next year it will look just like it did last year, despite the huge user groups (including hikers and picnickers) all enjoying the place.

 

I wish there could be a guarantee to get this harmony happening in other places....but alas.....it seems like it changes from area to area.

[alexbaker]

Anyone who says Trout Creek is remotely hard to find is full of shit. We woke up one morning, knowing nothing about the place, looked it up on the internet, printed directions and the guide in < 5 min. No different than going to say, Smith Rock, for your first time. Went climbing. Bugabooed was there and was extremely nice and energetic. Case Closed

 

Alex

[gorgeouos]

Just curious, what routes were done to the top and later had anchors added?

 

Also, my 2¢, TC is a full blown area now (amazing that took so long in this day and age) and withholding info does little except to perpetuate the attitude issues here in c.o.

 

Not to say that the folks climbing at TC in 2001 2002 had attitude issues. But its not uncommon to hear "I just moved here and the locals are such jerks. No one will say anything except how to get to Meadow Camp." Two years later: "Just checked out an awesome new stash of stone, we're tryin to keep it on the downlow.." And on and on it goes...

[him]

gavin took bushwacker to the rim, and a later crew threw an anchor in it, thinking it was an fa. the story is the same for fissuremen, if i'm not mistaken. there are other routes that might get more traffic if they had an anchor (ie lou dog).

 

i was chatting with phillip and jeff yesterday about this whole issue of a crag's development, and we were equating trout's trajectory to life stages. early interest (2001ish) was that adolescent phase where you don't want any one to play with your toys. 2004 was the time of the juvenile, where you recognize that you need to share, but still don't like it or want to talk about it. last year seemed like a good year for maturing for the crag, with a sense of community/sharing/psyche. hopefully 2008 will see more development of the community (ie mature adult status) and people can just get out and dig the climbing. it's all about life stages.

 

this place will see more traffic... but don't be scared. there will always be things to climb. hell, two new routes went up yesterday... and one of them 8 feet right gold rush... the most climbed route at the place.

Edited February 16, 2008 by him

[JosephH]

It's all good, but don't kid yourselves - people were on that stuff in the 80's and 90's - so you probably want to dial your 'early interest' calendar back a bit. 'Early interest' this time around would be more accurate. As for FA's and anchors, a lot of hard boys from Bend were up there in spates over time and I'm guessing short of getting them over there to walk the base line-by-line it might be a hard call to say just when the FA of a lot of them really was.

 

I'd also say there are a lot of parallels between Ozone and TC relative to the overall hush/spew noise ratio - the difference being proximity. It's a bit strange to do both of them simultaneously and then turn around and wonder how the cat got out of the bag. but hen squabbling over such matters and the fallout from guides and articles is hardly anything new either.

 

[bugabooed]

For sure, "early interest" is very relative. Some of those guys in the 80's were climbing harder on passive gear then many of us can manage with our piles of ultra-light camming units. We have walked the cliff with a couple of the guys from the 80's but other climbs, and interests, and parties over the years have possibly scewed things in their memories. I'm guessing they did more than they can now remember. Plus, there surely have been many other visitors that have quietly sent several of the "new" additions to the crag before or since then. Imagine if Croft visited the place around when he solo bitzed areas like Arapalise.

 

With that in mind, all the new activity in the guide is listed as first recorded ascents (FRAs) and names and dates have been adjusted, Suzuki for example, whenever more info comes out. Like "Him" pointed out, it is a process; we're adjusting to the growing pains and trying to be as accurate as possible.

 

BTW, Him's "new" route is among the very best at the crag and somehow the early interest (this time around ;-) let it sit untouched until 2008. Come on out and give it a go! It is the plum line to the Alchemy anchor and, although it appears to be "R", the pro is reasonable. The other "new" classic is a couple lines to the left of Gateway, it does not yet have an anchor, so carefully pick your way to the rim. They are both around 5.11+.

Edited February 18, 2008 by bugabooed

[chrismael]

Hey Jeff,

I read the other thread a couple weeks ago. I was lazy or tired though and never posted anything in your defense. Today, I was out "exploring" a little bit and I remembered the issue. I swore to log on and chime in regarding many items now resolved. Sorry to be a day late. Your interest and work at TC has consistently been thoughtful, responsible, and open to others' opinions.

 

That being said, I hope you enjoy jet-setting from Chamonix to Patagonia with all the other independently wealthy climbing guide authors!

cv

[AvlNC]

bugabooed,

thanks for the response. i think it is nice to see a thought encouraging thread with different viewpoints vs deterioration into rants and spray. a few of us from bend/pdx are heading out there tomorrow. maybe we'll run into ya.

[bugabooed]

i wish, but i'll be working. have fun. tomorrow looks like the best day for a while.

[gorgeouos]

gavin took bushwacker to the rim, and a later crew threw an anchor in it, thinking it was an fa. the story is the same for fissuremen, if i'm not mistaken. there are other routes that might get more traffic if they had an anchor (ie lou dog).

 

I think these both happened after guide 2.0 was out. I'm wondering which routes motivated the need for the original guide as described by bugabooed at the top.

 

[G-spotter]

Aren't there driving directions to the crag in the latest article on it in Rock and Ice?

[bugabooed]

Yeah, good points about attitude and issues with keeping things on the downlow. As far as routes done to the top and anchors added prior to recording them...not long after I started visiting Trout Creek I heard that, Lively Up Yourself (the very first thing I climbed out there with JR) along with all of the routes in the immediate area from what we call Sleepy Hallow to Shasta had been done by guys in the 80's like Watts, Ramsey, etc to the top of the crag. That turned out to be inaccurate but for some time I thought it was the case and it's not to say they weren't done by somebody else. That's one reason why there are no anchors or names on the moderate climbs that access the top to the left of Lively Up Yourself. Later, John Rich and I walked the cliff and tried our best to line up a rough topo he'd drawn of the handful of routes he and his friends knew of in the late 80's.

 

It seemed that John and pals, had done both Two Step Right and Two Step Left (at least) to the top of the pillar. By that time, I had already put an anchor a little bit higher to serve both of them. Going to the rim from there requires climbing up and right into the last 20 feet of the route we call Double Trouble. So, I wouldn't have put in those anchors had I known...and that's one of the reasons Double Trouble doesn't have an anchor itself.

 

I also put an anchor on JR Token before learning the route was most likely done to the top. Although there was a ton of ambiguity with old hand drawn topo. It actually showed, as best as John could make out, that bolts had been placed under the roof, right where the anchors are currently. There were no signs of bolts or drill holes up there before I placed the anchor in 02. I was a bit confused but figured it was better to assume the route had been done to the top and credited it that way. It is possible to move left around the roof on marginal terrain to get to the top via 5.9ish climbing.

 

Info surfaced later about Mr. Squiggles, Suzuki, Sleepy Hallow and the two routes 'him' referenced. Hopefully, as mention in the guide, more will come out to shed clearer light on the crag's history.

 

 

Edited February 28, 2008 by bugabooed

[gorgeouos]

Thanks for the history. It is very interesting which routes have evidence of prior accent and which appear to have been ignored. How is it possible that Two Step was climbed but not Gold Rush?! U1 but not Space Between? Why would a 5.13 crack climber who has scoured NA for first and second accents of the best cracks climb one route and never return? Bizarre

[bugabooed]

You're welcome. I don't know either. What I've gathered from some of the old Smith crowd is that most people (at least the ones I've mentioned) came, checked it out and went back to Smith. That's pretty much what still happens. Apparently Suzuki went out there with Brooke S. and they led a couple routes. Maybe they also did the one to the right that we call Purple Pinky Eater or the next one over we call Space Mission and so on all the way over to Gold Rush (including several of the routes we still haven't attempted) and then just forgot or decided that they only wanted to mention Mr. Squiggles and the one to its left to be mysterious.

 

I'm as surprised as you and I agree with what your getting at, especially with lines like Gold Rush. I've had the same thoughts and conversations with people. That's why I mentioned in the guide that areas like this should be viewed with a bit of mystery and our hats should be off to the unknown pioneers that quietly came and went after they had their adventures. Just because someone hasn't bothered to come forward about an ascent doesn't mean they didn't do it. Anything that potentially tops out, which really, is almost anything at a crag like this, could/should have been climbed before. Gold Rush isn't exactly hiding, none of the routes up there are. I would say there is a good chance that a lot of the routes recently equipped with anchors are not FAs, especially on the main wall where little to no cleaning is required before hitting the rim rock finishes.

 

If it weren't for the half a dozen mankey bolt anchors that were left up there, I wouldn't have added more at other stances. I seriously doubt John, Brett, Jamie, Nate, Gavin, Pat, or others would have either, at least not without really thinking about it. With that said, most people that visit the crag seem psyched and in agreement with where anchors have been placed. If somebody comes forward who spent time out there and wants a grade or a name adjusted or anchors removed I imagine it would happen. It would be awesome to hear that Ramsey or Suzuki or Sandahl or Watts or whoever did a bunch more or all of the routes. I think most of the people up there would still be excited on the climbing and the view regardless. I know I would be.

 

 

 

[Checat]

Early in this threads existance someone winked in Moolack along with areas like ozone, area 51, cougar, etc... when people started making comparisions to how trout creek developed/re-developed in relative obscurity.

 

Having taken a lot of heat for years for my attempts at putting together a guide for moolack, I can only point out that keeping great records of people ascents as history occurs(which I've tried to do there) dismisses all the ambigouity surrounding these hush hush areas, and years later people appreciate.

 

I think we collectivly as climbers would love to know more and more about trout, moolack, jannu spires, detroit res... etc... and by doing the things he's done (bugabooed aka TC author) he has at the very minimum brought the area and its history into perspective for all of us to having this debate: Good job bugaboo, cascade climbers are generally aloof to areas outside smiff, col riv gorg etc...

 

just my take

 

peace