|
|
|
|
edl
Nov 10, 2008, 5:58 AM
Post #1 of 14
(5064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 134
|
Someone took the anchor off a project up at Vedauwoo (Coyote Rocks) sometime this past week. The anchor was extensive, involving several pieces of gear and lots of sling. I had left this anchor on top of the route because it is a hindrance on my partners to get them to go belay me on the thing because it is fairly out of the way. With the anchor in place I could just lower off and clean my gear and leave, instead of having to either go all the way around the formation or solo up and down the easy 5.7 nearby. Both options are time consuming and with the shorter days and shrinking weather window I just wanted to save some time, not so much for my sake but for my friends. As soon as I get my hands on a drill I was planning on putting in some bolts, the anchor was just temporary. If you took the anchor and are reading this, please return my stuff to me. I can understand the appeal of a pile of booty, I know, I've found plenty myself, and of the dozens of cams, slings, biners, etc. I have only NOT returned one or two nuts and a couple crappy leaver biners to their original owners. Please repay the favor. You can message me on this site and I will get back in touch with you with no hard feelings. If anyone has any info that leads to the recovery of my gear, there is a reward available, so please message me.
|
|
|
|
|
suilenroc
Nov 10, 2008, 6:20 AM
Post #2 of 14
(5052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2006
Posts: 581
|
i stole your gear.
|
|
|
|
|
suilenroc
Nov 10, 2008, 6:27 AM
Post #3 of 14
(5046 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2006
Posts: 581
|
suilenroc wrote: i stole your gear.
you asshole! give that man back his gear.!.!.
NO, it is booty!
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Nov 11, 2008, 1:20 PM
Post #4 of 14
(4949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
That sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Nov 11, 2008, 2:30 PM
Post #5 of 14
(4914 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
damn, that sucks, Justin. I assume that this is on the uber-proj that Angry told me about. Hope you get it back.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 11, 2008, 3:28 PM
Post #6 of 14
(4873 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors?
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Nov 11, 2008, 6:01 PM
Post #8 of 14
(4830 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area?
I think the ethic is that if you're a grizzled old has been or a worthless never was you are for some incomprehensible reason allowed to think your opinion is somehow relevant.
At least if this site and st are any guide.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 11, 2008, 6:02 PM
Post #9 of 14
(4828 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area?
Can't answer a direct question eh?
Ken Nichols has been the most prolific climber in CT for 30+ years.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Nov 11, 2008, 6:21 PM
Post #10 of 14
(4809 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area? Can't answer a direct question eh? Ken Nichols has been the most prolific climber in CT for 30+ years.
The direct answer is that convenience anchors are widely accepted and widely utilized. A few years several of them disappeared and all the locals got together to put new ones in. In fact, in the last couple years blatantly unnecessary convenience anchors have popped up on all sorts of other routes. None of them have been removed, when in fact a few should be.
To put an anchor on top of a route that required a low 5th class free solo to access would be very very much accepted in the area.
Would you like to talk out of your ass more?
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 11, 2008, 6:29 PM
Post #11 of 14
(4789 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
angry wrote: olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area? Can't answer a direct question eh? Ken Nichols has been the most prolific climber in CT for 30+ years. The direct answer is that convenience anchors are widely accepted and widely utilized. A few years several of them disappeared and all the locals got together to put new ones in. In fact, in the last couple years blatantly unnecessary convenience anchors have popped up on all sorts of other routes. None of them have been removed, when in fact a few should be. To put an anchor on top of a route that required a low 5th class free solo to access would be very very much accepted in the area. Would you like to talk out of your ass more?
If you are so confident that you are correct then you would not be such a jerk. Obviously there is more going on then meets the eye (or the keyboard). Your attemps to bully and bluster your way through it just reinforce that perception. I asked a simple question that was pertinent.
But if you want to play the know-it-all game then know this - I climbed at Vedauwoo before you were even a twinkle in your papa's eye. You've got aways to go grasshopper.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Nov 11, 2008, 6:45 PM
Post #12 of 14
(4768 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area? Can't answer a direct question eh? Ken Nichols has been the most prolific climber in CT for 30+ years. The direct answer is that convenience anchors are widely accepted and widely utilized. A few years several of them disappeared and all the locals got together to put new ones in. In fact, in the last couple years blatantly unnecessary convenience anchors have popped up on all sorts of other routes. None of them have been removed, when in fact a few should be. To put an anchor on top of a route that required a low 5th class free solo to access would be very very much accepted in the area. Would you like to talk out of your ass more? If you are so confident that you are correct then you would not be such a jerk. Obviously there is more going on then meets the eye (or the keyboard). Your attemps to bully and bluster your way through it just reinforce that perception. I asked a simple question that was pertinent. But if you want to play the know-it-all game then know this - I climbed at Vedauwoo before you were even a twinkle in your papa's eye. You've got aways to go grasshopper.
Justin, I'm doing this to keep your thread on the top.
Eric, I simply called you out for asking a stupid question. Simply put, Edl IS the local ethic. A Scarpelli endorsed, Laramie raised, flared crack jamming, sheep fucking Wyoming boy.
Lets take a little test shall we.
What's the hardest offwidth you've climbed in Vedauwoo.
1)Mother #1
2)Fantasia
3)Boardwalk
4)Worm Drive
5)Squat
6)Trip Master Monkey
7)Monsters Inc
If you answered higher than 3, proceed to yammer, if not, shoot yourself in the face.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 11, 2008, 7:06 PM
Post #13 of 14
(4748 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
angry wrote: olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: angry wrote: olderic wrote: What's the local ethic regarding convenience anchors? What's the local ethic regarding lecturing the most prolific current climber in an area? Can't answer a direct question eh? Ken Nichols has been the most prolific climber in CT for 30+ years. The direct answer is that convenience anchors are widely accepted and widely utilized. A few years several of them disappeared and all the locals got together to put new ones in. In fact, in the last couple years blatantly unnecessary convenience anchors have popped up on all sorts of other routes. None of them have been removed, when in fact a few should be. To put an anchor on top of a route that required a low 5th class free solo to access would be very very much accepted in the area. Would you like to talk out of your ass more? If you are so confident that you are correct then you would not be such a jerk. Obviously there is more going on then meets the eye (or the keyboard). Your attemps to bully and bluster your way through it just reinforce that perception. I asked a simple question that was pertinent. But if you want to play the know-it-all game then know this - I climbed at Vedauwoo before you were even a twinkle in your papa's eye. You've got aways to go grasshopper. Justin, I'm doing this to keep your thread on the top. Eric, I simply called you out for asking a stupid question. Simply put, Edl IS the local ethic. A Scarpelli endorsed, Laramie raised, flared crack jamming, sheep fucking Wyoming boy. Lets take a little test shall we. What's the hardest offwidth you've climbed in Vedauwoo. 1)Mother #1 2)Fantasia 3)Boardwalk 4)Worm Drive 5)Squat 6)Trip Master Monkey 7)Monsters Inc If you answered higher than 3, proceed to yammer, if not, shoot yourself in the face.
Barely #2. my ability sucks. However that has little to do with the issue at hand. The question is whether the convenience anchor was taken because some one saw it as abandoned booty or because they objected to it being there as a convenience. I am quite familar with the phenomenon of the better climbers at an are feeling entitled do do whatever they please. The answer is not black and white.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Nov 11, 2008, 7:16 PM
Post #14 of 14
(4739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Nothing was taken as a statement.
It was almost certainly Laramie HS or UW freshman on a day out cragging. They came across the stuff and had no idea why it was there and were so excited that they took it.
Keeping an ear open at the Backward and UW's wall will probably get it back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
