The Inevitable Peaks Crag Question

jackson wrote:if a bolt is installed in a cliff and no one else is around, does the Hilti make a sound?

I don't see a problem with The Peaks staying out of print. Different places are developed in different ways, and we should respect that. It's great that there are areas (including several crags in the Flagstaff area) where lots of info is available. It's also great that there are some areas where that isn't the case.

When I first went to The Peaks I asked questions, and through those questions found out that the place was developed with a "show & tell" only ethic. I have respected that, and wish others would also.

I would vote to keep The Peaks off the internet & out of print. Delete the threads, also. That's just my 2 cents on the matter.

There is one Yosemite ranger over on Supertopo named Keith Lober (who goes by MTucker), who is adding fuel to the fire of climber discord about The Peaks area. I wonder if he is one of the "anonymous" posters here. He seems to have a hard-on for first-ascentionists who use bolts - maybe he is a bit jaded from multiple Yosemite debacles.

The Peaks thread on Supertopo

It doesn't help the community in any way, this taking things personally.

It would be wise to remember that every action that doesn't benefit the community hurts ALL of us, including the person posting the threats and allegations.

All the anti-publishers should read the Last Chance Canyon thread that is somewhere on here. It's in new mexico.

Same situation, great local crag, some access issue, though the forest service was well aware of the climbing, and fighting it being posted on MP.

I was against it at that time, but I've since changed my mind. To hide crags is antithesis to why mountain project exists. Any sort of NIMBY'ism that comes out of the perceived crowds reeks of elitism. That isn't something the climbing community (key word there), should be proud of. You don't own that crag, no one cares how many dollars worth of bolts and labor you put into it. It's a resource, on public land, it deserves to be public. To act as if the "locals" have any true ownership of a public resource, and at its root that is what this is about, is absurd and I think that in itself is dangerous to access.

Access issues in this case are kind of ridiculous. Why, why, why would you bolt up (with power no less) an area without prior consent from the areas managers and then expect a good relationship with said managers? Then get angry when the public, who is not responsible for the developers ethics (or lack there of), wants that resource to be ... public. That makes no sense, it's a horrible way to go about opening new terrain. You have to develop a relationship of trust with your local powers at be. Bolting behind their back is not the way to go about it.

At any rate these battles are never won by the anti's. The information will be let out, the best thing to do it at this point is to not let it turn into a war of attrition. That makes everyone look bad, and doesn't shed good light onto climbers as a user group.

@ pk4k: "The only part I disagree Manny is the anonymity issue. It's still an individual alleging bad style." This whole thing was begun by a user that hijacked an account (Base1361) to post the area; when denied he went to supertopo and created a map (MTucker: Keith Lober) and began a rant over there pointing at mp.com. Now he has had to change the user name to base9999 and probably a few others that ring to his style. If you are man enough to complain about people, using their names, sack up and put up your dukes under your name.

If you don't believe me, look at the timing of both site's posts and the map that MTucker/Keith Lober (disgruntled yosemite ranger/jerk)supposedly found and posted.

If you want to be anonymous and post information, great. If you want to stir things up by making blatantly unfounded allegations about bolting cracks (I have not seen a single crack bolted; but some gear may have been usable instead of a bolt maybe a few times); power drills in wilderness (was he there? did someone confess their sins to him?) and all sorts of other wild conjecture on his part, then I have a problem with anonymous posters.

Consider yourself outed, Lober:

"You two are degrading the thread even more.

Lame"

Au contraire, mon ami! You are degrading climbing discussions by hiding your real name. That way you can continue to spew and choose new and more interesting screen names to degrade any rational discussion on subjects that need an open discourse, the future of the peaks is only one.

Well, I never expected this thread to end on a happy note. And it hasn't, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

The aggressive pursuit of anonymity by the chief proponents of both publishing the crag, as well as, getting the place closed is strange to say the least. All I can say to that is, if you really believe in what you are saying, why can't you back it with your own name? It certainly undermines the usefulness and integrity of your cause, as well as, these forums, and pretty much renders them useless for any sort of serious information exchange. It is a sad thing, but deep down inside every climber is a human being. And sometimes there is just no accounting for taste, or behavior.

The FS knows, and has known about the climbing up at the Peaks Crag for some time, and do not seem bothered by our presence, or our actions at this area. At the very least they have decided to turn the other way. I don't think they WANT to have to do anything. If you get my drift.

THE PARKING AREA IS THE LARGEST VISIBLE IMPACT WE HAVE IN THIS AREA.
With this in mind I would like to raise again the parking issue on Forest Rd 522. It has been expressed to me that this is the biggest issue climbers face right now as an access issue. And I couldn't agree more. First, please carpool, or mini pool from other public parking areas just a ways down from Snowbowl Rd. on Fort Vally Rd. Secondly we all just need to simply step up and take a little more time to park in a respectable manor. The reason is because if the FS needs to get heavy equipment through there for emergencies or for any reason, they are not going to be pleased to find any sort of vehicular obstructions. If the pull out is full (and I think it holds probably 10 vehicles?)maybe consider another alternative. There is Freidlien Prairie bouldering up FS Rd 522. There is also bouldering at Viet Springs on Snowbowl Rd, just a little ways up. Another close alternative is West Elden, on Elden Lookout Rd. If the lot is full for the Peaks Crag, the crag is probably going to feel crowded anyways. There should also be no parking in the campsites if you are not actually camping there. Also, please keep your dogs on leashes until you get to the climber's trail (I'm guilty too!). There are other user groups roaring by on motorized and mountain bikes the first bit of that trail, and if dogs on the loose cause an accident, this would also be bad news for the home team. The FS does not want to be receiving complaints about this or anything for that matter due to our vehicles. Any headache for them, is bad news for us. Worst case scenario, please park parallel, and off the road as much as possible if the lot is full. Again, their biggest concern is obstruction of the roadway. Like I said, right now, they have a live and let live attitude toward the whole thing, but if problems with vehicles or complaints arise, then so do the chances of them simply closing the entire area. Again, the FS doesn't want to have to do anything with anything regarding us being up there climbing. It is just that simple. And I think we should all be very grateful.

There is also the issue of crags "needing" to be published. Off the top of my head I can think of more than a dozen local spots that are not posted, and there is no one beating down a freaking door to my inbox demanding to know why. No where is it written that crags have to be published on Mountain Project or any of the other similar sites. But, yes, I do think as administrator for this region, I should respect the wishes of the local community on this matter. They are leaving this area out of the new local guidebook, and right now, I don't think it needs to be on MP either. That, in no way means we are elitists greedily hording our rock. No, it means we are concerned about the areas in our backyard, and yes, our continued access to them. Why shouldn't we be? Localized communities of climbers have been around since the beginning, and they will be around for the rest of climbing's history. If you want to go against the sway of the community here, then that's your choice. Anyone could go to RC and post this crag, but no one has. And no one has sent me a single email even wondering why the crag wasn't posted on MP. Not one. No one. The crag has been wide open now via word of mouth for years, and only one person, who we can't even verify is a climber, has tried to post it. Doesn't that say something? Sure if you want to go against the common sense of the local community that is your choice, but I don't really think the "Base????" character has thought this all through, or has his facts straight. The problem with being an asshole, is that while the asshole may not know it, the rest of world sees it clear as day.

That being said, there is a ton of info on MP about local Flagstaff and Sedona areas. Much of this, I have tried to make as straight forward as possible so the visiting or local climber can maximize their time or simply enhance their adventure. I mean there is so much climbing listed for the greater Flagstaff/Sedona area it makes my head spin sometimes. And yes, what is on MP is only part of it. If the visiting climber can't find the Peaks Crag without the help of MP, then god help them with any of life's bigger challenges. And if they can't find something else to climb, then I don't know what to tell you. I can tell you that we are trying to come up with more grass root ways of getting all the pertinent info available. You may have to talk to a real person, or physically go somewhere to view it, but we are working on it. Any ideas should be directed to Will Cobbs thread "The Answer to the Inevitable Peaks Crag Question". I just think it would be more useful there than in this thread.

And that's all I've got for the moment. Please spread the word on the parking issues, and let's help the FS out by not causing any issues in the first place. Thank you.

JJ Schlick wrote: The problem with being an asshole, is that while the asshole may not know it, the rest of world sees it clear as day.

The problem with being an asshole, is that while the asshole may not know it, the rest of world sees it clear as day.

I think keeping the crag off the interweb and avoiding the beta getting into the hands of the anonymous, digital-defecators is a good idea.

JJ, thanks for being open about this issue and NOT being an anonymous coward!

Ian F. said, "I would prefer no knew crags be published. but the ego of some developers, and the urge to be known always seems to trump, the simple enjoyment of just getting out there."

Spoken like a true bottom feeder that has never, and will never, spend hundreds of dollars and days and days putting up new routes, but is more than happy to chime in about everyone else's routes or areas.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, after doing so much work and spending so much money, it is actually more about seeing others really enjoy the fruits of our labors than it is about pumping our egos.

If it was was all about ego we would just put up scary death routes and dare anyone to try them. Then beat our chests in glee when anyone backed off, chanting "that's right we're bad asses".

The fact is, Ian, it's a whole lot cheaper and easier just to run up some new route that is well within our ability not bothering to drill many bolts or clean off the loose stuff. But what's the point of that. So now we've done a route that a very few climbers will ever do,(Oo ain't we bad) as opposed to bolting and cleaning a line many people will enjoy for years to come.

All the routes you have done in your climbing career didn't just appear overnight when the route fairy came by. Nor are they there just because some climber needed and ego boost.

Remember if it wasn't for all us ego head developers you wouldn't have anything to "just get out there" and climb.

Scott McN, that is awesome!!!!!!!!!!

I am a criminal defense attorney. I previously defended (for free) a climber wrongly accused of climbing related crimes. I will donate my services again--- if it becomes necessary. I would hate to see access lost because of an unmeasured response.

Public land, period. MP admins assisting in some mis-guided local AREA climbers'(I doubt any of them actually live on the USFS land that the crag is on) desire to keep this PUBLIC resource to themselves, by censoring what info is allowed on MP, when there is NO COMPELLING ACCESS-RELATED ISSUE, is bullshit IMO.

Maybe you could go ahead and pull all the Joshua Tree info? I'm a Josh local and homeowner, and am tired of the thousands of non-local climbers showing up and clogging the 100 routes out of 8000 that are actually worth climbing. Respect our local wishes, dammit, and remove the JT info. Silly, no? Same deal with your little AZ pile. At best you're delaying the inevitable a few years.

Will S wrote:Public land, period. MP admins assisting in some mis-guided local AREA climbers'(I doubt any of them actually live on the USFS land that the crag is on) desire to keep this PUBLIC resource to themselves, by censoring what info is allowed on MP, when there is NO COMPELLING ACCESS-RELATED ISSUE, is bullshit IMO. Maybe you could go ahead and pull all the Joshua Tree info? I'm a Josh local and homeowner, and am tired of the thousands of non-local climbers showing up and clogging the 100 routes out of 8000 that are actually worth climbing. Respect our local wishes, dammit, and remove the JT info. Silly, no? Same deal with your little AZ pile. At best you're delaying the inevitable a few years.

JJ Schlick wrote:Well, I never expected this thread to end on a happy note. And it hasn't, but there is light at the end of the tunnel. The aggressive pursuit of anonymity by the chief proponents of both publishing the crag, as well as, getting the place closed is strange to say the least. All I can say to that is, if you really believe in what you are saying, why can't you back it with your own name? It certainly undermines the usefulness and integrity of your cause, as well as, these forums, and pretty much renders them useless for any sort of serious information exchange. It is a sad thing, but deep down inside every climber is a human being. And sometimes there is just no accounting for taste, or behavior. The FS knows, and has known about the climbing up at the Peaks Crag for some time, and do not seem bothered by our presence, or our actions at this area. At the very least they have decided to turn the other way. I don't think they WANT to have to do anything. If you get my drift. THE PARKING AREA IS THE LARGEST VISIBLE IMPACT WE HAVE IN THIS AREA. With this in mind I would like to raise again the parking issue on Forest Rd 522. It has been expressed to me that this is the biggest issue climbers face right now as an access issue. And I couldn't agree more. First, please carpool, or mini pool from other public parking areas just a ways down from Snowbowl Rd. on Fort Vally Rd. Secondly we all just need to simply step up and take a little more time to park in a respectable manor. The reason is because if the FS needs to get heavy equipment through there for emergencies or for any reason, they are not going to be pleased to find any sort of vehicular obstructions. If the pull out is full (and I think it holds probably 10 vehicles?)maybe consider another alternative. There is Freidlien Prairie bouldering up FS Rd 522. There is also bouldering at Viet Springs on Snowbowl Rd, just a little ways up. Another close alternative is West Elden, on Elden Lookout Rd. If the lot is full for the Peaks Crag, the crag is probably going to feel crowded anyways. There should also be no parking in the campsites if you are not actually camping there. Also, please keep your dogs on leashes until you get to the climber's trail (I'm guilty too!). There are other user groups roaring by on motorized and mountain bikes the first bit of that trail, and if dogs on the loose cause an accident, this would also be bad news for the home team. The FS does not want to be receiving complaints about this or anything for that matter due to our vehicles. Any headache for them, is bad news for us. Worst case scenario, please park parallel, and off the road as much as possible if the lot is full. Again, their biggest concern is obstruction of the roadway. Like I said, right now, they have a live and let live attitude toward the whole thing, but if problems with vehicles or complaints arise, then so do the chances of them simply closing the entire area. Again, the FS doesn't want to have to do anything with anything regarding us being up there climbing. It is just that simple. And I think we should all be very grateful. There is also the issue of crags "needing" to be published. Off the top of my head I can think of more than a dozen local spots that are not posted, and there is no one beating down a freaking door to my inbox demanding to know why. No where is it written that crags have to be published on Mountain Project or any of the other similar sites. But, yes, I do think as administrator for this region, I should respect the wishes of the local community on this matter. They are leaving this area out of the new local guidebook, and right now, I don't think it needs to be on MP either. That, in no way means we are elitists greedily hording our rock. No, it means we are concerned about the areas in our backyard, and yes, our continued access to them. Why shouldn't we be? Localized communities of climbers have been around since the beginning, and they will be around for the rest of climbing's history. If you want to go against the sway of the community here, then that's your choice. Anyone could go to RC and post this crag, but no one has. And no one has sent me a single email even wondering why the crag wasn't posted on MP. Not one. No one. The crag has been wide open now via word of mouth for years, and only one person, who we can't even verify is a climber, has tried to post it. Doesn't that say something? Sure if you want to go against the common sense of the local community that is your choice, but I don't really think the "Base????" character has thought this all through, or has his facts straight. The problem with being an asshole, is that while the asshole may not know it, the rest of world sees it clear as day. That being said, there is a ton of info on MP about local Flagstaff and Sedona areas. Much of this, I have tried to make as straight forward as possible so the visiting or local climber can maximize their time or simply enhance their adventure. I mean there is so much climbing listed for the greater Flagstaff/Sedona area it makes my head spin sometimes. And yes, what is on MP is only part of it. If the visiting climber can't find the Peaks Crag without the help of MP, then god help them with any of life's bigger challenges. And if they can't find something else to climb, then I don't know what to tell you. I can tell you that we are trying to come up with more grass root ways of getting all the pertinent info available. You may have to talk to a real person, or physically go somewhere to view it, but we are working on it. Any ideas should be directed to Will Cobbs thread "The Answer to the Inevitable Peaks Crag Question". I just think it would be more useful there than in this thread. And that's all I've got for the moment. Please spread the word on the parking issues, and let's help the FS out by not causing any issues in the first place. Thank you.

I found it on Google Earth with other clues before his post. It didn't inspire me to pack my bags.

Over the years you always hear about these super secret places. There's always someone saying it's the new wherever. Usually they turn out to be some tiny one shot deal.

No doubt this is a nice little spot. Since it's new everybody wants to see what up. Since it's up in the trees and cool it's going to be popular all summer long and there's a huge population base just a couple of hours away.

Some of JJ's points do make good sense. Like if the parking area is full likely so is the crag. If there were a page here listing the number of routes people could count the cars and guestimate how many climbers per car. Then they might say to themselves it's not worth the hike in.

If there were a page for the area JJ could put an info alert at the top stating a few common sense guidelines. Like if the pull outs full don't just park along the road. Seems like a no brainer but some people need to be told.

Mike I can't see anybody from CO packing their bags to climb in NAZ during the summer. Now if you want to enjoy some fun in the sun winter climbing come on down to SAZ. There's so much rock down here none of the locals will get their panties in a bunch.

I just might take that advice. Thanks to FB I actually have contacts there.

Mike Lane wrote:I just might take that advice. Thanks to FB I actually have contacts there.

WildernessRespect wrote:Looks like we will have to pick up the climbing here in the spring.