Route Guide - iPhone / Android - Partners - Forum - Photos - Deals - What's New - School of Rock
Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Consolidating the Washington home page
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 2 of 3.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
By Pete Spri
Dec 1, 2013

I agree with you on your third point. I'd probably dump the "leavenworth area" and lump that into the regional description: Central Eastern Cascades and Leavenworth/Wenatchee-based climbing (sort of like Jon did for Seattle, e.g.). It would be easier like you are saying to just divide it by climbing areas within the Central Eastern Cascades, ie:
Peshastin Pinacles
Tumwater Canyon
Icicle Creek
Stewart Range
etc etc.


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 2, 2013
Me

DrApnea wrote:
A couple other things with the changes that need to be addressed: 1) can't access Washington anymore from the iphone app


I don't have a phone to check this myself, but I just heard that you can now access WA for your phone app.

In this case, the machine fixed itself. We just had to wait...


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 2, 2013

Jon Nelson wrote:
I don't have a phone to check this myself, but I just heard that you can now access WA for your phone app. In this case, the machine fixed itself. We just had to wait...

I can confirm it now works


FLAG
By MorganH
Dec 2, 2013

One little clean-up I've noticed that would be nice is to give the Rosario or Refrigerator wall it's own little area, rather than listing it under Mount Erie & Fidalgo Island Bouldering. It's sport climbing, rather than bouldering, and the wall is separate from the Mt Erie area.


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 2, 2013
Me

Morgan,

I moved it to the Deception Pass area, which had been posted awhile back, but had no routes. Does this sound appropriate?

The lead photo for Deception Pass shows quite a bit of rock coming out of the water. Any routes on the rock in the photo? Which bit of land is that rock on?

You can also add some directions or other info to comments to the Rosario page, and I will work the stuff into the area description. I haven't yet climbed in the Anacortes-Deception Pass area. The area could also use some more photos!


FLAG
By Pete Spri
Dec 2, 2013

Jon Nelson wrote:
Morgan, I moved it to the Deception Pass area, which had been posted awhile back, but had no routes. Does this sound appropriate? The lead photo for Deception Pass shows quite a bit of rock coming out of the water. Any routes on the rock in the photo? Which bit of land is that rock on? You can also add some directions or other info to comments to the Rosario page, and I will work the stuff into the area description. I haven't yet climbed in the Anacortes-Deception Pass area. The area could also use some more photos!

While it's close, I wouldn't put it under Deception Pass. I grew up in anacortes and learned to climb at Mt. Erie, and I think it would be best to leave deception pass as a no-climb-zone, as my understanding is that is what the land managers don't want climbing there, in addition to lots of rockfall and choss.

Maybe just drop the "bouldering" and say "fidalgo island climbing" instead, to cover the rest of fidalgo island. There are a number of other walls on fidalgo island, and considerable potential as well, so the more open you can leave that, the better for future categorization, IMO.


FLAG
By MorganH
Dec 3, 2013

Jon Nelson wrote:
Morgan, I moved it to the Deception Pass area, which had been posted awhile back, but had no routes. Does this sound appropriate? The lead photo for Deception Pass shows quite a bit of rock coming out of the water. Any routes on the rock in the photo? Which bit of land is that rock on? You can also add some directions or other info to comments to the Rosario page, and I will work the stuff into the area description. I haven't yet climbed in the Anacortes-Deception Pass area. The area could also use some more photos!


There is a good set of directions in the comments already. The intro page to the deception pass area says that no climbing is allowed, which might scare people away. Maybe we can edit that to say that climbing is only allowed at the refrigerator wall, and not the other cliffs?

Refrigerator wall is pretty good actually, a fun little sport crag, and recently rebolted.


FLAG
By Pete Spri
Dec 4, 2013

Jon

Just a quick note. Looks like on the main page we already have an addition called the "Tatoosh Range".

This should be located in the SW Cascades.

I wonder if I is possible to lock the min page so people don't just keep adding stuff and we end up with 60 climbing areas again.


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 5, 2013
Me

Thanks Spri!

I didn't check yesterday, and look what happens...

Anyway, new area is now moved to its correct home.

I don't know if anything can be locked, but I think instead that the admins just need to keep checking the additions and changes. As long as I'm checking every day or two, it should not grow to anything like the 70 areas we had before. As I notice new areas, I'll move them.

Also, in case people just happen to read the "Welcome to Washington!" blurb on the WA homepage, I added instructions about adding areas. I know many people (like myself) forget to read before acting, but it might help a little.


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 5, 2013

Spri wrote:
I agree with you on your third point. I'd probably dump the "leavenworth area" and lump that into the regional description: Central Eastern Cascades and Leavenworth/Wenatchee-based climbing (sort of like Jon did for Seattle, e.g.). It would be easier like you are saying to just divide it by climbing areas within the Central Eastern Cascades, ie: Peshastin Pinacles Tumwater Canyon Icicle Creek Stewart Range etc etc.


Let's do it


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 6, 2013
Me

Spri wrote:
I agree with you on your third point. I'd probably dump the "leavenworth area" and lump that into the regional description: Central Eastern Cascades and Leavenworth/Wenatchee-based climbing (sort of like Jon did for Seattle, e.g.). It would be easier like you are saying to just divide it by climbing areas within the Central Eastern Cascades, ie: Peshastin Pinacles Tumwater Canyon Icicle Creek Stewart Range etc etc.



Changes made.
But we still have "Leavenworth Area Bouldering".
I still need to move some things from the Icicle Creek to the Stuart Range, but I think we have a better organization now. Of course, much fine-tuning remains to be done...

Thanks for the suggestion. I still need to fix up the Deception Pass stuff mentioned above.


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 6, 2013

thanks for cleaning things up a bit.

The Leavenworth Area Bouldering contains Tumwater bouldering and Icicle Creek bouldering, both of which now have a natural place to put them in their respective regions in the Central East Cascades section. Only leaving mountain home boulders


FLAG
By Micah Klesick
From Vancouver, WA
Dec 6, 2013

I know I'm a little late to the game here, but I just saw this update, and anyway, as I've been actively doing some development in the SW WA area, I had a couple thoughts that might make the page easier to use.
I think the SW Cascades (SW-C) area should actually start below Mt Rainier, and the CW-C should include down to the north Lewis County border. We have so much climbing down here below Mt St Helens, and the Mt Rainier and Fossil Rock, Spire Rock, Tatoosh areas really doesn't fit in with the SW WA area... and also there's much more down here that isn't included in the MP that I am working on getting permission from developers to add.
If you guys think that the Mt rainier and Mt St Helens areas belong together, I would suggest a Lower Columbia Gorge area (WA), as there are dozens of sport, trad and bouldering areas in this area, and it really is an area in its own. From Vancouver to the Dallas would be a good area in my opinion, basically including Horsethief Butte to Ozone, and going up to about the North Clark county line, to include Jimmies Cliff, Rock Creek Cliff, Larch Mountain boulders, Chimney Rocks etc.
Any thoughts?


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 6, 2013

My vote is to keep that region as it is. It may be a diverse climbing area, but as it stands, there are only 178 climbs listed for that entire region. Splitting it up would move back towards how things were before with areas that have essentially 10 climbs listed. I think until the areas are represented more on MP there isn't really a need to split the south cascades up more. Maybe I'm wrong though.


FLAG
By Pete Spri
Dec 6, 2013

Hey Micah! Thanks for the input! I know a lot of washington as I grew up in the Anacortes/Bellingham/N.Cascades area and went to school 6 years in the Seattle area, and currently have lived in Spokane for 2.5 years.

I know very little about climbing in the Gorge, other than Beacon Rock.

I could see subdividing it out maybe from Tricities to the mouth of the Columbia, but I'm going to agree with DrApnea on this one that there arent enough climbs posted yet.

I we had some avid Cascade Climbers posting up alpine stuff for Rainier, Helens, and Adams, and everything in between it might be a different story, but Washington is not well represented on MP or documented on MP at this point.

Just my thoughts. Get those guys to give you posting rights! Load it up and then we should talk about splitting the columbia river gorge area out! Or St. Helens or Adams south or however we do it.


FLAG
By Micah Klesick
From Vancouver, WA
Dec 7, 2013

I'm working on the quantity of routes. I've added a couple areas in the gorge already, and have plans for multiple more areas. I haven't been adding that many routes as of yet, as I'd like to get more of the areas out so that people can see the potential, while I'm working on getting routes in. There is really no climbing from St Helens north to Rainer, so its clumping a lot of stuff together that isn't near each other.
also, Bridge of the Gods is in the wrong area, its in the SW-C area, and id like to move that over. I've got two areas that are in the same area that I'll be adding this week.


FLAG
By Pete Spri
Dec 8, 2013

Hey Micah-

Just start posting the areas (assuming permission) even if there aren't any routes detailed. That would at least help. Maybe you could do a sub-division and say "Columbia River Gorge Area" within SE-C and then add your areas inside of that.

Also, I realize that there may not be much rock in between Rainier and Helens, but the Beckey climbing books have enough alpine climbs that I don't want to assume there won't be anything there.

At least those were my thoughts on it. It's great to have a local climber down there posting stuff up. I've always thought that the gorge should have more rock. Somehow the Oregonians took it!


FLAG
By Micah Klesick
From Vancouver, WA
Dec 9, 2013

Thanks for the comments. I've added areas over the past couple days, and there are now 11 areas in the gorge that have been added. I also added a page with a list of gorge climbs and links to the respective cliffs. There are about 5 more cliffs in the area, but since I haven't personally been to them, I'm waiting to add them.
and as far as good climbing goes, WA has far more areas than OR, so its kinda funny they they decided to put Beacon in OR... Oh well.


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 9, 2013
Me

Nice work Micah.

I'm looking forward to seeing a few photos of these areas - the Hamilton Boulders in SW-Cascades in particular sound intriguing.

For OH8, it would help to have a brief written directions for getting there. I suppose you were going to add it later, but just in case...

The Google Maps links are a nice addition.


FLAG
By Micah Klesick
From Vancouver, WA
Dec 9, 2013

I added the written directions to OH8.
Also added some pictures and a 18 min video to the Hamilton boulders of some sending by the developers. Check them out! Planning to add more as I get pictures.


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 26, 2013

DrApnea wrote:
thanks for cleaning things up a bit. The Leavenworth Area Bouldering contains Tumwater bouldering and Icicle Creek bouldering, both of which now have a natural place to put them in their respective regions in the Central East Cascades section. Only leaving mountain home boulders


bump:
any chance of moving the bouldering into their regions for central east cascades region as noted above?


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 26, 2013
Me

Thanks for the bump DrApnea.

I moved Icicle Creek & Tumwater bouldering to their specific areas. But to make the bouldering stand out as not just being another climbing area, I put "**" in front of their titles so they appear at the top of the list. If you have any better idea, let me know. I did the same for the "Bouldering at Index" sub-area.


FLAG
By DrApnea
From Salt Lake City, UT
Dec 27, 2013

Thanks for moving the bouldering into their locations and all the other organizational work you have done. I think the ** at the front of bouldering is unnecessary as anyone looking for bouldering can just scroll to "Bouldering: Tumwater", "Bouldering: Icicle Creek" or something like that. But that is just my opinion. If this were a site wide change to more easily identify bouldering I would be all for it, but I don't think it is necessary if only changing it for only a few bouldering locations as looking through the dozen subareas for one called bouldering seems sufficient.

Also the Mountain Home section is alone in its own section called Mountain Home (Leavenworth) Area.

One thing on the names: you have made a few really long names that end up pushing them onto a second line, sometimes only for the parenthesis/# of climbs. Not anything that really needs to be addressed, but from an aesthetic standpoint could be fixed by shortening the names, or considering name length on future name changes.
Examples:
Under the main Central Washington Eastside section: "Mountain Home (Leavenworth) Area (9)"
This one only has the "(9)" on a second line (at least in my browser and persists even when resizing the screen). Calling it Bouldering: Leavenworth, Mountain Home, East Leavenworth, or something like that would make it more aesthetically pleasing by pushing the (9) back onto the line it belongs to.
Same thing on "** Bouldering in Tumwater Canyon (45)"

Sorry for all the suggestions. Ignore them if you want.


FLAG
By Jon Nelson
Administrator
Dec 30, 2013
Me

You're right, the second line for names ruins the flow. Maybe we can use an acronym, or add an acronym finish, with an explanation at the start of the description.

I think the full name should be stated, so am not in favor of simply truncating the name. I'll might play around, see what looks OK.

And I'll check out the other suggestions soon. Thanks!


FLAG
By Matthias Holladay
From Durango, Colorado
Dec 30, 2013
Find these and enjoy some new routes!

I have said before that if someone takes over Charnie's post of Julia's Outcrop (this is what I named it) AKA Gov. Lister Cliff, under B'ham Area, and then removes my post, I would have no problem with it . . . The redundancy is pointless; her last visit was 2010, so I don't think she's monitoring her page...


FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 2 of 3.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3   Next>   Last>>