Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Skillet Creek Bouldering

Select Route:
Damn Black Flys 
Don't Touch That 
River Boulder 1 
River Boulder 2 
State Land Stout T 

Skillet Creek Bouldering  


Photos:  Recent | Best | Popular
Page Views: 3,180
Administrators: Burt Lindquist, Doug Hemken, Chris treggE, Kristine Hoffman (sitewide)
Submitted By: Paul Campbell on May 7, 2011
Forecast:
Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon
Partly Cloudy
49° | 30°
Partly Cloudy
40° | 24°
Clear
43° | 29°
Partly Cloudy
48° | 37°
Chance of Rain
57° | 44°
You & This Area
Best routes for YOU in this area
Your opinion of this PAGE:    [0 people like this page.]
Know the location? Show us! We need it for cool new features!
Sweet overhaning boulder with good features. To ba...

Description 

A secluded crag at the North West corner of Devil's Lake land. Featuring one of the most unique and largest overhanging features in the park. There is a small amount of cliff that is taller (30 to 35ft) and may be worthy of leading but most stuff is 10ft to 25ft tall.

Rock across Skillet Creek is on private land. Please stay within park boundaries.

Getting There 

There is no established trail to this area of the park. The easiest way to get there from Baraboo is to drive up South Shore Rd. like you are heading to the West Bluff emergency trail. After you pass the last house on the west of South Shore Rd. park next to the first electric pole on the right of the road.

From here the boulders are about 10 minutes west into the woods. Jump over a small creek and keep heading west up a gradual hill. The hill will flatten for awhile keep walking about 100 yards and start heading North-West. When the hill starts to go back down you should see rock to the North. If you hit Skillet Creek you have gone too far, head north. Honestly it is pretty easy to find. See map for detail.

Climbing Season



Weather station 3.5 miles from here

5 Total Routes

['4 Stars',1],['3 Stars',2],['2 Stars',1],['1 Star',1],['Bomb',0]
['<=5.6',0],['5.7',0],['5.8',0],['5.9',0],['5.10',0],['5.11',1],['5.12',0],['5.13',0],['>=5.14',0],['',0],['<=V1',2],['V2-3',1],['V4-5',1],['V6-7',0],['V8-9',0],['V10-11',0],['V12-13',0],['>=V14',0]


Featured Route For Skillet Creek Bouldering
My understanding where State Land Stout goes.

State Land Stout 5.11d 7a 24 VIII 25 E5 6a PG13  WI : Devil's Lake : ... : Skillet Creek Bouldering
Climbs the steepest section with good holds. Led on gear in the 90's. ...[more]   Browse More Classics in WI

Photos of Skillet Creek Bouldering Slideshow Add Photo
The crashing wave of overhanging quartzite. This roof is AMAZING! Super solid, amazing sculpted holds everywhere. You will shit your pants!
BETA PHOTO: The crashing wave of overhanging quartzite. This r...
more potential
more potential
John screwing around on the crashing wave.
John screwing around on the crashing wave.
Location of Skillet Creek Bouldering area.
BETA PHOTO: Location of Skillet Creek Bouldering area.
Slightly overhanging face with just enough holds to go?
BETA PHOTO: Slightly overhanging face with just enough holds t...
Just one of about 5-6 cracks up for grabs at Skillet Creek. About 30-35 ft. tall
Just one of about 5-6 cracks up for grabs at Skill...
Potential
Potential
Arete in the middle of the photo looks sweet, as does the overhaning bulge on the right.
Arete in the middle of the photo looks sweet, as d...

Comments on Skillet Creek Bouldering Add Comment
Show which comments
Comments displayed oldest to newestSkip Ahead to the Most Recent Dated Sep 26, 2011
By Paul Campbell
From: Waukesha, WI
May 7, 2011
Please be careful about access in this area. Going over Skillet Creek will put you onto private property. Please stay within park land.
By John W. Knoernschild
From: Wisconsin
May 9, 2011
There's a ton of stuff to be had here guys. From bouldering FAs to short route FAs. I will be posting some pics.
By Jay Knower
Administrator
From: Campton, NH
May 9, 2011
I used to climb back here a lot. Chris O'Connell showed me this spot, and I always enjoyed the relative peace and quiet that this area offered. Chris also said that this rock was some of the oldest exposed rock in the world.

I think I've done most of the variations on the boulder by the river, including a sit start-right to left traverse that I thought was pretty tough. John, I'd rather that the boulder by the river just be listed as having many variations, all unnamed. It seems weird to name the routes on that boulder, given that they've been climbed on for over 20 years and were never identified by names. Paul Jones, Chris, me, and many others have been bouldering back here.

While the steep wall with State Land Stout is the most striking, I think the real hard problems could exist on the blank face to the far right, in the area Chris called "Coyote Canyon". While it's not much of a canyon, and it's connected to the steep wall, it has a different feel. I've heard the main area, with the steep, old rock called "The Projects".

Anyway, this is a special area, and I'd urge anyone who heads out here to treat the area with respect.
By Chris treggE
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
May 9, 2011
It's been the general consensus in WI that the person posting a line gets to name it, unless someone who has been there before either has a name or prefers it another way. As an outside observer, the latter has happened here.
By Jay Knower
Administrator
From: Campton, NH
May 9, 2011
For what it's worth, I do think that your "Don't Touch That" is an FA. I've never known anyone to have climbed that. Plus, you did pull that loose hold off.

Most of the bouldering activity, I think, has been concentrated on the river boulder.
By Burt Lindquist
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
May 9, 2011
Paul Jones just recently mentioned to me about someone (young strong climer... can't remember name just now)has climbed the big overhang back in this Skillet Creek area on trad gear on lead. So it's been done... although I am not sure this is the same overhanging climb as the one pictured on this post. Once again... another cool area I want (have been wanting to) go check out in the Devils's Lake area. This one looks quite secluded for sure... a major PLUS!
By John W. Knoernschild
From: Wisconsin
May 9, 2011
Burt, the young strong climber was Chris O'Connell. We have him up there as the FA. Get out there and have fun!!!
By Burt Lindquist
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
May 9, 2011
Whoops. Apologies John. I thought the caption for the red line stated route unfinished but I see you updated that. So did you try "State Line Stout" yourself? Looks pretty cool. Just wondering what actual gear placements it has?
By John W. Knoernschild
From: Wisconsin
May 9, 2011
No worries Burt. The red line was actually on an undone route. To my knowledge, only State Land Stout has been done. The rest of the overhang may be up for grabs. I was told that State Land was the only route done because it was the only route to offer gear. There is potential for at least 4 lines on this overhang.

I did try State Land. But Paul was taking pics and we only had 2 pads. So once I got to a point where I wouldn't be above the pads, I dropped down. The climbing I did was great and I could see the gear. It's easy to spot.
By Burt Lindquist
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
May 9, 2011
OK. I now actually read the comments on the posting for "State Line Stout" and understand... by the way... the route name makes me thirsty....
By John W. Knoernschild
From: Wisconsin
May 9, 2011
Ya, makes me want a beer. If there are new lines to be had on this thing, just think of the name possibilities. Cheap Swill, Pale Ale, Lager Line...tasty
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 17, 2011
First, let me start by saying this might spur a more general discussion better suited to a forum but I'll try to keep my comments specific to this area.

This is a highly sensitive area and some of the rock near here is absolutely on private land. If you plan on climbing here make sure you know where the park boundaries are, or have permission from the landowners to climb on, or cross their property -- so that we as a climbing community don't make any waves with private landowners.

At one time quiet and highly sensitive areas like this were the closely held knowledge of a dedicated and respectful group of climbers who understood the sensitivity of the area and had good relationships with the local landowners. I fear that posting sensitive areas like this for the general public to see could jeopardize access to this area, areas like it, and possibly even broader access to climbing within the park.

I've never liked "locals only" or worse yet "in-crowd only" attitudes, but I don't think that's the situation here. I think this area was kept quiet out of respect for landowners and the area itself.

Aside from any jeopardy that may or may not result to access here from the publicity this area is now receiving I feel like something else is being lost here too. I can remember hearing about places like this as a budding climber and getting butterflies in my stomach. Waiting for the time when I too would be entrusted with the whereabouts of an area like this created a sense of reverence for the place. I also remember the great sense of pride and accomplishment when the day finally came that I was entrusted with the knowledge, and what a heavy responsibility the knowledge of such a revered place felt like.

Areas like this create benchmarks for young climbers, first they're told the stories of the place, through the stories they come to respect and revere the place, then brought there and entrusted with the knowledge, and can someday, when they feel they trust someone enough, share it themselves. Maybe I'm an old, washed-up, never-was, sell-out now -- but I think traditions and experiences like this are part of what made my time as a climber so rewarding and I hope we're not depriving younger climbers of their opportunity for experiences like this.

Ultimately I guess my message is this:

The Devil's Lake portion of MP seems to be caught up in a race to post every meaningless and meaningful piece of rock in the area. For some areas this may make them more meaningful, for some less meaningful, and perhaps even endanger some. I hope that in the future people have enough respect for the areas they're posting to consider the impact to the area and the community as well as their "rankings" in the points race.
By Tradoholic
May 18, 2011
If the rock is on park land it's fit to be posted.

Most rock out there needs to be climbed more to keep it clean and to disperse the crowds.

Things are posted here for the historical record that sadly is so often lost and to psyche those up who need some motivation to get out there and climb something new.

I highly doubt this area will be overcome with people anytime soon anyway, they're are probably too busy running laps on Brintons. If people want that "I've earned it" experience they should avoid MP.

So, yea you're sounding old and elitist. How about you make a map of the private land so people don't go on it.

One more point for me on my way to 18th on the all time list!
By sweatpants
From: Broomfield, CO
May 18, 2011
#316 here I come :-)
By Doug Hemken
Administrator
May 18, 2011
The best defense against abuse is good information.

The best defense against crowding is lack of parking, lack of trails, and a hike of more than 5 minutes.
By Paul Campbell
From: Waukesha, WI
May 18, 2011
Hi James, while I understand your fears for this area I believe they are unfounded. The rock in most of the area is clearly on park land according to the official park map and google maps. (except across Skillet Creek which I have clearly posted)

I researched a way to access the area from park boundaries for the exact reason of staying off people's private land. And I also believe this area will be RARELY visited. No trail, 10-15 minute walk through hellish Wisconsin woods, obscure and dirty etc.

Places like The Reserve were kept secret for extended periods of time out of fear of the crowds, and now it is public and hardly anyone is up there.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 18, 2011
Nick Rhoads wrote:
If the rock is on park land it's fit to be posted.


Fair enough, I'd even say it more strongly, in that I think if it's on public land people have the right to post it. Note that I never called for the immediate removal of this post and others like it - I said, "I hope that in the future people have enough respect for the areas they're posting to consider the impact to the area and the community as well as their "rankings" in the points race." I'm not arguing whether or not someone has the right to post this area or not, I'm asking people to fully accept the responsibility that comes along with that right.

Simply having the right to do something does not mean that it's a beneficial or moral action that should be done. For instance, I have the right to bulldoze my house, but that's not beneficial to me or anyone else. I also have the right to stand on the square in Baraboo and shout racial epithets at the top of my lungs, but that is not a moral action. So while I'll agree that Paul is within his rights to have posted this area, I won't agree that it is a good thing.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
Most rock out there needs to be climbed more to keep it clean and to disperse the crowds.


I'm going to assume your "...to keep it clean..." argument is an attempt to keep this discussion light and friendly and not an actual argument, if I'm wrong in this please forgive me. As far as dispersing the crowds is concerned you have a valid point. But later in your post you say:

Nick Rhoads wrote:
I highly doubt this area will be overcome with people anytime soon anyway, they're are probably too busy running laps on Brintons.


So if that's the case, then of what benefit (from a dispersal of crowds point of view) is it to post the area? I'll certainly agree that overcrowding in popular areas of the park is a problem, but people have had the whereabouts of many other areas of the park available to them since the Swartling guide first came out and this has done little to ease the congestion. The fact of that matter is that the highest quality stone in the park is concentrated and as a result so are the climbers.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
If people want that "I've earned it" experience they should avoid MP.


I'm curious to hear your justification for this comment. Still, even if I was oblivious to MP, and every area I went to was new to me but everyone else knew about, it wouldn't have the same kind of aura as a closely held, out of the way climbing area shared only when a new climber was considered trustworthy enough to be in possession of the knowledge.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
Things are posted here for the historical record that sadly is so often lost and to psyche those up who need some motivation to get out there and climb something new.


I think of all the points you make, perhaps the historical record is the best one you offer, but we as a community need to be careful about how we do it. Lest our history change from the warm stories passed by word of mouth from generation to generation around a warm campfire,to postings on a website about how about how climbers once had a tradition that involved campfires and stories.

As for the point you make about motivating others I don't see it. Who are you to say who needs to be psyched up? Moreover, who are you to say that posting places like this will improve the psyche of others? I for one am decidedly not psyched that this area has been posted.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
So, yea you're sounding old and elitist. How about you make a map of the private land so people don't go on it.


Well I certainly am old -- elitist, maybe at times and in some respects, but I don't think I'm being elitist about this situation. Perhaps I unwittingly am being that way, but we're climbers, and to some degree we're all elitist, it comes with the territory. So if you'd like to cast the first stone here feel free Nick.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
One more point for me on my way to 18th on the all time list!


Congrats, I hope you make it. You'll have created enough free user-generated content to keep the site up for a while longer, and the ad revenue pumping in.
By Paul Campbell
From: Waukesha, WI
May 18, 2011
Actually I just double checked with the Sauk County Property Map they have online. The rocks are located in Municipal lot #0414 for the Town of Baraboo.

The owner of this lot is The Department of Natural Resources.

Just to clear up any doubts. :)
By Tradoholic
May 18, 2011
James, actually, yes, the "more people will keep it clean" argument is for real. Some of us take time to clean up some rock with a bit o'scrubbin but if no one climbs it it quickly becomes overgrown again. See "Murder Slab" at Burma for an example.

I think Paul and John have accepted the responsibility for posting this ;) Besides, that argument is moot as I think most of us agree it won't be overrun.

The "ease the congestion" argument was a joke, you just got the joke and the seriousness switched around.

This is on PUBLIC LAND so waiting for a "trustworthy" young climber to tell really has no merit. I just saying, if someone wants to be surprised some day with a great find then they should avoid MP.

I surf MP to get psyched up to climb new things and so do many others. I can't tell you how many times people come up to me at the gym that are motivated to get out there and climb something based on what myself and others have posted. If these posts don't motivate you or you don't like them for whatever reason DON'T SURF MP!

I am proud to produce content for this site and I hope the owners make a million dollars on it (they don't, I've spoken with one founder) because it's a great resource. Tomorrow I will be climbing in a new area outside of Taos that isn't in any guidebook and the only way I would have found it is on MP. Yea, I guess you would have preferred that I wine and dine a few locals, earn their trust, then when I've sucked enough old climber dick I would finally be led to their crown jewel super secret crag. But I didn't have to do that because the guys down here put alot of work putting up routes and they are more than happy to see others enjoy the fruits of their labor. Why?!?!? Because they enjoy climbing and they want others to do so too! It's the same as your "tradition" except these guys trust the users of MP and they would rather skip the bullshit and just show us where it is so we can enjoy it.

Really, it sounds like to me that you are pissed because now your precious personal secret area is now perverted all over the internet. So, YES you are being an elitist prick and instead of bitching about it being posted in the first place how about you suggest some sort of management plan to reduce this impact you are so concerned about.

Gunning for #17 on the all time poster list!
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 19, 2011
Nick,

I'm of the opinion that two reasonable people can disagree, and have a reasoned and respectful (possibly even light-hearted) discussion about that disagreement. Evidently that is not the case here. Suffice it to say that I lack the insecurity about myself and my opinions to resort to name calling and brow-beating - I'll let both stand on their own merits.

You and I are equally entitled to our opinions, we also both have the right to call each other all sorts of names. I however have made and will continue to make the conscious decision not to exercise the latter.

This is exactly what I am talking about when it comes to the type of responsibility that comes with all sorts of different rights. Just because you can, does not mean you should. Discretion and respect are equally important when it comes to dealing with another person as they are when posting a climbing area on the internet - at least in my (according to you, not so humble) opinion. Perhaps if we all exercised our right to be polite and respectful with as much vigor as you exercise the right not to be, then maybe the world would be a better place.

Cheers,
James
By Tradoholic
May 19, 2011
Well James, have you now scolded me enough to be proud of yourself again? Do you feel like a bigger man? I hope so. God forbid we call each other names! GOSH!

You have lost all wind to your argument here and you are now grasping at straws, avoiding all the substance of facts. In your mind you probably think you've won. That's nice, I hope it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but Skillet in posted on MP and here to stay!

Admins, please delete all this bullshit, or maybe move it to the forums so we can continue our salacious comments without clogging up this area with useless info.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 20, 2011
Nick Rhoads wrote:
Well James, have you now scolded me enough to be proud of yourself again? Do you feel like a bigger man? I hope so. God forbid we call each other names! GOSH!


Actually Nick, I'm not trying to scold you or boost my ego. I'm trying to have a respectful and reasoned conversation about an issue that I consider to be important in the climbing community. Perhaps you're not the person to have that conversation with.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
You have lost all wind to your argument here and you are now grasping at straws, avoiding all the substance of facts. In your mind you probably think you've won. That's nice, I hope it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but Skillet in posted on MP and here to stay!


First I've never asked for Skillet to be deleted, I think I've made that clear from the get go. Second, exactly how does asking that you act like an adult in our discussion discredit my argument? As far as I can tell I have addressed every point you've made, and I think I've done so concisely. Other than restating the same arguments and adding some insults you haven't said anything new since your first post.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
Admins, please delete all this bullshit, or maybe move it to the forums so we can continue our salacious comments without clogging up this area with useless info.


Interesting that the person claiming that I'm an "elitist prick" and want to take stuff off the site (when I've never said that) is the one calling for censorship.

In the end Nick, your technique of bullying people into submission will not work with me. If you want to convince me that you're point of view is correct, then you'll have to do so with reason. Simply stating something as the truth, and then brow-beating any doubters might work in your tiny sphere of influence, but in the larger world there are people that won't accept that as valid.
By Burt Lindquist
Administrator
From: Madison, WI
May 20, 2011
James? What exactly makes this Skillet Creek area extra sensitive and/or more sensitive then any other location within DLSP? Is it because it lies on the perimeter of the park or maybe because it is so close to Wheelers Campground? Is it loaded with great plants (more so then other locations in the park)? I have heard about the geologic significance... age of the rocks... I understand you are concerned about info for this spot showing up on MP.com and that this place has special meaning for you. I understand your concern. Is there in fact a private land owner nearby that is anxious about climbers or anybody visiting this area? I think if the discussion were to focus on these types of topics concerning what makes this place great... we can inform folks and warn them positively about the potential for ruining it.. I am unsure about your original statement above about how folks visiting this special location could jeapordize climbing in the rest of the park.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 20, 2011
Burt,

Thanks for nudging us back in the right direction. I'll try and take your questions one at a time.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
What exactly makes this Skillet Creek area extra sensitive and/or more sensitive then any other location within DLSP?


I think it's a number of things, some of which you touch on.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
Is it because it lies on the perimeter of the park or maybe because it is so close to Wheelers Campground?


I think the answer here is yes. I don't want to see climbers in general catching a bad rap for trespassing on anyone's land. The area is very close to private land, some of which is indeed the campground. There are also rocks within sight of this area that are definitely on private land, as Paul mentioned.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
Is it loaded with great plants (more so then other locations in the park)?


I'm not a botanist, but I would guess the flora and fauna in this part of the park are more pristine than in other, more heavily traveled, parts of the Park.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
I have heard about the geologic significance... age of the rocks...


Yes, but as with the plants in the area I can't say that for sure.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
Is there in fact a private land owner nearby that is anxious about climbers or anybody visiting this area?


No one in particular has expressed any concerns to me. However, speaking from the point of view of a landowner, I can say I wouldn't want people on or crossing my property without permission for a number of reasons - not the least of which is liability.

Burt Lindquist wrote:
I am unsure about your original statement above about how folks visiting this special location could jeopardize climbing in the rest of the park.


Let's just say I speak from experience when it comes to posting an area and then witnessing it's subsequent closure.

Rib Mountain which I originally posted here is now closed to climbing.

Albeit less remote than Skillet Creek, it used to be a quiet area, where a climber could be away from the crowds - rarely would you ever even see another set of climbers there. Climbing there was very under the radar. However after I posted it there was a rush to bag "FA's" and list routes. The area gained in popularity rapidly, and the climbing became not-so-under-the-radar.

Then this happened:
A mob at the Orb.
A mob at the Orb.


And then the park was closed to climbing. Can I prove causation in this chain of events? No, I can't, but the correlation is there. So I apologize if it makes me nervous when we start posting every seldom visited crag on the internet. Sometimes you just can't put the genie back in the bottle I guess.

Thanks again Burt for pushing back in the right direction. I hope that helps explain my point of view.

Cheers,
James

[Edit to add:]Admittedly there are differences between Skillet and Rib, but there are also similarities.
By SteveSchultz
May 20, 2011
I stayed clear of this one for just so many different reasons but the Rib comparison is just too much.

Only want to say one thing here. Rib was officially closed to climbing in 2005 when the DNR reworked their land plan and designated the main area of the park a "State Natural Area". Please note that this actually happened a full year before you posted Rib here on Mountain Project and had next to nothing to do with the amount of climbers up there, but rather the park wanting to save an area and lessen impact in certain situations.

Lastly, a good majority of the problems at Rib went up well before it was posted on Mountain Project.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 20, 2011
Steve,

You make some valid points. I was unaware Rib was closed prior to the posting on this site -- as I'm sure many people were since there were Boulder Bashes being held without any regard for the closure. Even still it doesn't seem like the park felt it necessary to enforce the ban until after scenes like the one pictured above started happening.

I'm also aware that a good majority of the problems went up at Rib prior to it being posted here. I know many of them were done at least 6 or 7 years prior to being posted here and I'm sure many long before that.

Like I said, I can't prove the causal chain from being posted to enforcement of the closure, but I am sure scenes like the one above did nothing to help the situation, as it doesn't look like much effort is being made to "save an area and lessen impact" as you say were the goals of the park's closure.

Long story short I would hate to see this type of scene develop at Skillet, whether a closure ensued or not. As I said there are some differences between the two areas, but there are some similarities as well.
By jon jugenheimer
From: Madison
May 20, 2011
If I remember correctly to my undergrad days, the Baraboo Quartzite is only 1.5 billion years old. The rocks located @ the Skillet creek are the same age as the rocks on the east bluff that we climb every day of the year. These rocks are super old, but not the oldest on the earth.
By Tradoholic
May 20, 2011
So James, your concerned that posting Skillet will jeopardize access in the park?!?!? That Rib analogy is quite the stretch! If you knew anything about access issues you would know that establishing climbing as a historical recreation in a certain areas actually HELPS our cause!
Plus we have already established that this is on public land and that the access across public land is clearly stated in the description.

Your non-answers to Burt are clearly comical. We've heard your weak argument and we are not swayed. So, how about you say what you want? Do you want all posts to be screened for potential access issues? If so, that has been done here and we disagree with your concerns. Do you want us to consider what we post and the access issues? I think Paul and John did that by clearly stating the sensitivity of this area and public land.

Give us a break dude, you are obviously arguing for the sake of arguing, I hope you are keeping entertained.

By Brad Werntz
May 21, 2011
If you'll allow an old-timer to chime in: Chris O'Connell took me to this area sometime around 17 years ago. It's a neat feature not too far from Wheeler's. We climbed a lot of the stuff as boulder problems, right up to the lip of the overhang. The top-outs were soil-covered and chossy, so we dropped off at the lip before things turned to dirt and ferns.

That place is built like a woodie: A sloping roof and a sloping floor. You can drop off at about any place and get the same (very spot-able) fall.

But I digress.

This is never going to be a high-traffic area, for too many reasons to list. I'm confused. What's the controversy?
By Tradoholic
May 21, 2011
Ah, this one is really bringing the observers out of the woodwork!

Anyway, lets start over. I promise to be nice ;)

Please tell us why this area is special and shouldn't have been posted. We've established it's on public land and that the approach is also on public land. We've also established that this probably won't become over-run soon. We've established that Rib is a separate scenario because that land has been designated by the DNR for a completely different purpose than Devils Lake. We've established there is no direct knowledge of any special plants or animals. Perhaps, yes, the oral tradition is lost but I would consider that a minor tragedy.

What's the real story? Do you grow pot here? Did someone bury a body here? Is this where Baraboo locals lose their virginity? I'm am baffled.

If there is a legitimate reason this place should't have been posted I would like to know. We've gone over the current possibilities. What else is there?

Personally, when I post on MP I do think of possible consequences but I can not for the life of me figure out why this is such a big deal.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 21, 2011
Nick,

I'm not near a computer and typing on my phone is a pain - I was going to get back to you Monday with a decent response, but it's raining so I have some time. I will say I'm glad that you want to have a real discussion about it.

If you'll re-read my initial post I think you'll find I was simply trying to point out the extra-sensitivity of this area. Aside from that I wanted to make the more general point that not every area needs to be posted, and that for some areas posting may do more harm than good.

I think this is one of those areas for a variety of reasons. Maybe this spot won't be overrun as a result of posting, and maybe it will. I do think likelihood of a scene like the one picutred above developing is far greater now, than it was before the area was online. I think we can all agree that would be a bad thing, even if it had no impact on access.

Why not stack the odds in our favor as a community and keep some places as quiet, under-the-radar spots?

What harm will be done if every V0-V?? in Sauk County isn't listed on MP?

My whole point is that, inarguably, not posting an area will not damage the area or the community, but posting it has the potential to do so. This is a general concern not specific to this area and I voiced this general concern in my initial post after I cited what I believe to be the specific concerns of this area - which is why I said in that initial post that it may create a discussion better suited to a forum, since it wouldn't specifically be related to this area.

I have to believe that there is at least some common ground in what I've just said.

Enjoy Taos.
Cheers,
James
By Tradoholic
May 22, 2011
Yes, and I think this will end up just like the reserve with very little traffic.

James, in your initial post you indirectly call out myself with this quote: "The Devil's Lake portion of MP seems to be caught up in a race to post every meaningless and meaningful piece of rock in the area. For some areas this may make them more meaningful, for some less meaningful, and perhaps even endanger some. I hope that in the future people have enough respect for the areas they're posting to consider the impact to the area and the community as well as their "rankings" in the points race"
For the record I am on a mission to post everything within the park boundaries for reasons I posted above. However, I do consider access issues when I do so and as of yet I haven't needed to hold anything back. I think John and Paul also considered access when they posted this and that's why your comments seemed so inflammatory.
Your opinion that this area is sensitive is valid but it's just one opinion among many and as I've personally learned on MP, sometime fortunately sometimes unfortunately, majority rules.

I think I might go bolt this area later. LOL!
By Paul Campbell
From: Waukesha, WI
May 22, 2011
So you guys did boulder this Brad? That's exactly the information I was hoping to hear. I was thinking that sloping boulder would keep the landing safe. Very cool!

Also when you guys are done arguing it would be great to have this page cleaned up.
By Doug Hemken
Administrator
May 22, 2011
Rib Mountain, mentioned above, has everything to do with the WI Natural Areas Preservation Council doing an end run around climbers, and nothing to do with private property owners.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 23, 2011
Chris treggE wrote:
This reminds me a little of the Reserve discussion. If you look now, before it gets edited, the argument looks similar but somehow different with regards to posting directions on how to get there. ;)


I just had a chance to check that out Chris, too funny! I'll get to that in a second.

Doug Hemken wrote:
Rib Mountain, mentioned above, has everything to do with the WI Natural Areas Preservation Council doing an end run around climbers, and nothing to do with private property owners.


I don't think I ever suggested the Rib closure had anything to do with private landowners. I am of the opinion that 17 people in a 20' diameter circle boulder bashing might have had an impact on the enforcement of that closure, and even if it didn't, it's not a scene that should be associated with climbing, at least outside of the gym.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
For the record I am on a mission to post everything within the park boundaries for reasons I posted above. However, I do consider access issues when I do so and as of yet I haven't needed to hold anything back.


I'm honestly not trying to be a total ass here Nick, since maybe you were kidding or maybe your mind has changed since you made these comments in July of 2008 regarding The Reserve.

Nick Rhoads wrote:
Sweaty, you gotta earn this one, it's not hard to find, you just gotta find it. There are so many ways to get there and no good trail, I don't think anyone could tell you how to exactly get there. Happy hunting!


and:

Nick Rhoads wrote:
Actually, there is an in between and the reserve is it. I think, hence, "The Reserve". I also think this is exactly why Remo posted it this way. MP isn't on the front page of the NY Times and I world consider this posting still "down low" because there are no directions on it. It's great you got directions! I couldn't remember my why up there if I tried! Post more pics of the problems! Someone's got to do the dirty work. Now, I wouldn't have just dished it out to you. I would have let you hike your sweaty ass around that damn hill until you found it. It's a good workout.


I'm just curious about how to reconcile the 2011 opinion and the 2008 comments. I'm not saying you don't have the right to change your mind, you do - lord knows my attitudes and opinions on many things have changed in shorter spans than 3 years. I'm just interested in hearing what caused the change - perhaps your path to enlightenment could illuminate my own.
By Tradoholic
May 23, 2011
Correct, I changed my mind and support posting everything that is on public land for reasons I have already explained above.

Really, I just hate FIBS and I wanted sweaty to suffer trying to find it.
By James M Schroeder
From: Sauk County, WI
May 23, 2011
Good thing I'm a "Winsonsinite" or I'd hate to see where this would have gone.
By Andy Hansen
From: Longmont, Colorado
May 23, 2011
Really, c'mon? This discussion has gone on far too long!
By sweatpants
From: Broomfield, CO
May 23, 2011
i still cry at night because of Nicks mistreatment of me.
By Dick McKernzy
From: Madison, WI
Jun 10, 2011
Take a chill pill dudes, it's only rock. There's enough to go around.
By Paul Campbell
From: Waukesha, WI
Sep 26, 2011
Would love to see some people out here once the leafs start falling off. Just a re-post of what Brad said that was lost in the debate:

We climbed a lot of the stuff as boulder problems, right up to the lip of the overhang...

That place is built like a woodie: A sloping roof and a sloping floor. You can drop off at about any place and get the same (very spot-able) fall.


Lots of FA's out there too! Do it!