What Sherman is doing is providing the mining company with the ammunition to say "we compromised with the climbers and did everything in our power to provide them with an alternative location."

Is the mining company paying Sherman? Sounds like it. Is what he is doing basically "pr" for the mining company? Sounds like it. Is he a sellout? Sounds like it. I'm sure there are plenty of locals scouting out new areas for the good of the community. What Sherman is doing is providing the mining company with the ammunition to say "we compromised with the climbers and did everything in our power to provide them with an alternative location."

At least Sherman is trying to find some compromise and actively working with the mining company rather than b---- on some internet forum. We're all hypocrits if we don't at least understand the need for mining.

John is NOT supporting the closure for Queen Creek. His employment is based on his ability to locate and develop NEW climbing areas, in this case as an alternative to climbing at Queen Creek.

As a geologist who is commonly employed by the mining industry, John understands the the plight of Queen Creek and also knows that the power of a mining claim is much more powerful than a bouldering contest.

If John does not succeed in locating a suitable climbing area to compensate for the loss of Queen Creek he DOES NOT support the closure of the area. Unfortunatly, the mining company will close it anyway.

What you, and perhaps others, are missing here is that Resolution Copper will use Sherman's input to divide the climbing community in their opposition to closing Oak Flat to climbing--irrespective of what John's final verdict is.

Curt

Does John post on this forum? Maybe we can get his insight?

but perhaps with John Sherman's help and expert crag finding ability, something good will come of this tragic loss.

Kind of a sock in the eye for local Phoenix/Queens Creek climbers that statement. Are they crap at finding new areas? Finding new areas isn't rocket science and John does not have a monopoly on finding and "developing" new areas.

Perhaps Rio Tinto are employing John because of his celebrity firepower in the climbing world. " Hey look we have John Sherman on our side. We must be the good guys." says Rio Tinto (subtext: if you are a climber and diss John Sherman you are a bad guy).

Seems to be a lot of fauning support for John from his accolytes, some justified undoubtedly but much just celebrity adulation without any objectivity.

Why is this so?

Can he not speak for himself?

Or has he signed a gag order on condition of collecting the lucre come payday?

Mick (Ryan)

Why would Sherman want to argue with a bunch of inter-net nerds that have no idea what they are talking about? Get real people.

Curt, haven't you talked to John about this? My point is why would he come here to talk about it.

Sure, I have talked to John about this and I intend to speak with him soon again. I also posted earlier that I doubt he would want to chime in here, but not because posters here are "internet nerds."

Curt

If we lose QC that will be a loss and I don't quite understand how that relates to what John is doing. There is no such thing as a replacement for QC, it is unique as all areas are, for better or worse. It does occupy an important niche in the phx climbing community because it offers a lot of climbs relatively close to the valley, with climbing options throughout the 4 seasons, for example the pond during winter, atlantis during summer. finding another area doesn't seem related to this loss of QC. there is so much rock in AZ, and i mean from established sport to unclimbed adventure, that we really don't need another "established", easy access area in another location. we already have plenty of those all over the state.