YES! I do need more photos for the Cochise Guidebook

Tim Lutz wrote:Fact: Jimbo should do a 'mea culpa' to Scott for dragging him and Tanya through the internet mud. Fact: Because relationships are more important than rock ethics. So why does Scott have to answer to Jimbo for his alledged transgressions? Are you like a trad God or something? If he sacrifies a fatted calf in your name does he get a case of beer and/or a handjob?

Umm... It's not just him that's asking questions.

Eric D wrote:Tim - It's not a question of person a vs. person b. It's a question of respecting widely accepted guidelines in the climbing community.

This is more like it.

Years ago someone posted a photo that really summed the end result of my ethics vs your ethics in Arizona.

Is that Scott's ass and Geirs head? or Geir's ass and Jimbo's head? Either way, there are some heads jammed way up some asses searching for more shit to sling, all the while the rest of the country is laughing their asses off at the shit show.

I would like to some day climb more of Scott's routes, and would not like to see them chopped, but because my head is not in a metaphorical elephants ass, then I guess my opinion doesn't count.

I could be convinced otherwise w some real evidence, but I'm pretty sure neither Jim nor anyone else ever said anything negative about Tanya, unless you count thread drift and asking polite questions about a timetable for completion of the guidebook as "dragging her through the Internet mud."

Let's try not to fabricate things wholesale.

Thanks JQ. I think your opinion counts for more than anyone's since that's the way most of us AZ climbers feel. I think the 7 or 8 (and you know who you are) could learn from the old saying. It's better to let others think you're an ass than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Tanya was asking for pictures. That's it. If you have some pictures to offer her then send them. Otherwise, just move along.

Is that photo going in the guidebook?

Mike Diesen wrote:Thanks JQ. I think your opinion counts for more than anyone's since that's the way most of us AZ climbers feel. I think the 7 or 8 (and you know who you are) could learn from the old saying. It's better to let others think you're an ass than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Tanya was asking for pictures. That's it. If you have some pictures to offer her then send them. Otherwise, just move along.

It's not often Mike and I agree on things, but this is definitely an exception.

I am looking forward to buying the guidebook as it will undoubtedly contain many never before documented Scott Ayers' lines, which in my experience are excellent. I have Kerry's Backcountry Rockclimbing in Southern Arizona and Geir's Toofast Topos: 50 Multipitch Climbs In Cochise Stronghold. I see another guidebook and another voice as a welcome addition.

I despise that every Cochise thread devolves into an ethics discussion and would like to see us as a community move past this contentious issue. It hurts Southern Arizona climbing. So how can we move forward?

Folks have legitimate concerns regarding past and future development and ethics in the Stronghold. That Scott Ayers, one of the most prolific developers, refuses to be involved in the conversation leaves those with concerns no outlet other than to vent. This venting and anger then creates an uninviting environment which if I was Scott I would avoid as well. It's a vicious cycle. To make matters worse I suspect that the voices in this thread do not represent the majority opinion on ethics.

Scott and Tanya, consider engaging the community. This advice in this article seem pertinent.

To those of you upset about some of the choices Scott has made in developing Cochise, present your case to the community. If abominations exist let's deal with them and move on. Let's not dwell in bitterness and rehash old battles.

I personally could care less if a single bolt placed twenty years ago crosses Poetry In Motion. If you want to place gear and avoid the twenty year old bolts on Endgame do it. If a small amount of glue keeps you from climbing the line left of Endgame avoid it. Climbing and its associated ethics have evolved and will continue to evolve.

Jesus H Christ Russ, give it a rest. This thread was asking for Pictures. Do you have any? No. Then move along. We're all sick of these threads being hi-jacked with the same tired old stuff.

Yeah, we're a bunch of dysfunctional motherfuckers, but in the end, I mostly find the interplay of the personalities I've known in the Southern Arizona climbing world utterly fucking fascinating (and all this set in a primitive landscape of stunning beauty as a bonus).

"I guess I could be pissed off about what happened to me, but it's hard to stay mad when there's so much beauty in the world.

Sometimes I feel like I'm seeing it all once, and it's too much. My heart fills up like a balloon that's about to burst and then I remember to relax, and stop trying to hold onto it. And then it flows through me like rain and I can't feel anything but gratitude for every single moment of my stupid little life.

You have no idea what I'm talking about I'm sure, but don’t worry, you will someday."

Thank you Jimbo for the facts, Thank you Eric D for remembering climbers guidelines/ethics. Thank you JQ for realizing your opinion does not count. Thank you Hendrixson for your insight, but you seem to miss the point, "oh just by pass the bolts on the cracks, by pass the glued bolts". What am I supposed to do, sit by and see the Stronghold made bolt climber friendly by the least common denominator/bolts, chipping, ect.
This attitude toward chiseling, crossing lines and glued on bolts are not just an Arizona thing. If one looks at the actions of Kennedy and Kruk on Cerro Torre chopping Maestri's bolt ladder is a global thought in general. Protecting our climbing resources in the best possible way should be our goal.

Keep up the good work Scott.

It is difficult for me to envision Cochise in any form other than how it exists today. For the entirety of my experience the routes in question have been there. It is easy for me to suggest skipping a bolt since in my experience that bolt has always been there. Likewise I would likely be angry if the routes I enjoy were altered. The trouble is that the experience I know and seek to preserve came twenty or thirty years after the one Peter Noebels and others fell in love with.

With the passage of time more and more users will come to know Cochise as it is not as it was. Those people like myself will then want to preserve their experience.

I offer no solution but I am left with a deeper sympathy for those like Peter Noebels who are trying to restore the experience they love. I don't necessarily agree with it but I do respect it.

brian benedon wrote:The truth is I don't know much of whats been done in Cochise. I do know that this is not a perfect world, people are not perfect, they make mistakes, I know I have regrets. I also know that you can not please everybody. I know I've spent atleast 60% of my 25 years climbing SA routes. They are among the best routes that I've climbed, I repeat them often. That's my opinion..... Thanks Scott! The number is that low because I spend much of my time climbing my own routes which I have kept secret in part because of unappreciative people such as those nay sayers on this post. I would guess that End Game gets climbed more times in one season than Day's or Poetry has ever been climbed. I've climbed Day's of future Past. I would never climb it again or recommend the route. I've climbed End Game 3 times and would climb it again. I would also guess that popular opinion would be for the new routes over the poorly protected, unmaintained old routes, that rarely get climbed, and that there are only a select few old butt-chapped hard-men, compared to many climbers that appreciate the hard work thats been done so that many can enjoy the beauty of Cochise. When I topped out on Day's, many years ago, there was no anchor. There was a death block rappel in the dark chasm. SA fixed the dangerous condition, only to have some f..., with very bad judgement CHOPP the well camouflaged anchor. I don't care who the f you think you are, but those kind of irresponsible and inconceivable acts are not ok. I would glue in the bolts too if I was dealing with that type of mentality. Scott does not make routes safe for himself ( he solos .11) Unlike our forefathers, SA goes back and fixes his poorly protected routes so the majority of climbers can have fun on them and go home to their loved ones......Again; community service. Keep up the good work Scott. Love, Brian

Brian,

I think few people here would argue argue about a good new rap anchor. I have actually placed some of these myself, and likewise they were chopped.

Likewise, I think few people would argue an FA retrofitting routes that he or she established, with the caveat the rest of the FA party were involved in the decision.

However, since it appears as if I am one of the "butt-chapped hard men" you mentioned, I will respond that adding bolts to (or right next to) other people's routes is a legitimate concern. Likewise, manufactured holds are a legitimate concern. To condone these actions directly or indirectly seems to instigate controversy.

Hendrixson wrote:It is difficult for me to envision Cochise in any form other than how it exists today. For the entirety of my experience the routes in question have been there. It is easy for me to suggest skipping a bolt since in my experience that bolt has always been there. Likewise I would likely be angry if the routes I enjoy were altered. The trouble is that the experience I know and seek to preserve came twenty or thirty years after the one Peter Noebels and others fell in love with. With the passage of time more and more users will come to know Cochise as it is not as it was. Those people like myself will then want to preserve their experience. I offer no solution but I am left with a deeper sympathy for those like Peter Noebels who are trying to restore the experience they love. I don't necessarily agree with it but I do respect it.

Thanks John, nice post.

J Q wrote: because my head is not in a metaphorical elephants ass, then I guess my opinion doesn't count.

Peter Noebels wrote: Thank you JQ for realizing your opinion does not count. .

Thanks for admitting that your head is in a metaphorical elephants ass. Now we are both better for the experience and I hope we both learned something!

Man-up and start your our forum. Give Tanya back her post.

I think a civil ethics conversation is a good thing. hate full rhetoric turns people off.

We need move forward, otherwise it's just the same old crap.

Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

I get the sense that all of the Scott apologists will be quick to forget and we will see a repeat of the past in one form or another in the Stronghold.

Tim, "Scott's alleged transgressions", WTF, alleged only in your mind and Scott's.

Brian, I'll be happy to move forward when Scott grows some balls and admits to Southern AZ climbers that he fucked up. Otherwise he's just a cowardly figure hiding in the shadows while his tools do his fighting for him. I can't respect that and I can't trust any of his future actions until he does.

I say again, to Tanya, best of luck with the new guide I'm sure it will be awesome.

I have a lot of other interests besides climbing. I like to shoot, 4 x 4, build campers, fix cars, weld and wood work. I spend time on other site forums to get information about the particular activity I'm working on at the time and discuss solutions. Although there are disagreements, for the most part, on these sites, they are respectful of each other. Mountain Project is a trash site. The only thing I really need to say to the few on here that have ruined MP is you really need to get over Scott.

Tim,

I assume you did the climb before we chopped the chipped pitch, yes? No? Well imagine that, you actually don't have clue what was done up there like those of us that saw it up close and first hand, so maybe you should STFU.

Scott doesn't owe me an apology, he owes the entire Southern AZ climbing community an apology.

I guess your 5 year old niece would be OK with Scott or anyone else chipping and entire pitch in the Stronghold. Congratulations to you and her. Too bad the rest of the climbing world doesn't agree with either of you.

Here's another idea. If Scott had just left the thing unchiseled and had a 5.12 A0 climb, everyone would have been cool with that. Get it, an aid pitch not a free pitch. No chipping just aid. Tough concept for you I know but try to visualize as best you can.

2 or 3 of the best cracks I have ever done(think granite finger cracks) were made possible by aid chippers/rock vandals. I don't hate on them.

At least you az boys aren't afraid of admitting you chopped shit I'll give you that, here in my region(ct) the choppers are big gaping vaginas, as cowardly as cowards get.

youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4P…