Devil's Head guidebook poaching

So when I got back from a 5-week road trip to the Sierras, I had a lot of mail to sort out (junk mail, bills, coupons, and climbing mags). When I opened my “recent” Climbing Magazine to find an article on one of my favorite places to climb, the South Platte, I was stoked. The article spoke of the plethora of phenomenal routes in currently unpublished areas like Thunder ridge, Devil’s Head, and other old areas with new routes. Then I asked myself: “Self; where do I go to get beta on such routes?”
Thankfully the author of the article followed his article with area beta by mentioning that the only guide that covers these “new areas” is the new South Platte Climbing book due this fall. This is also the time that I realized that all of the routes located at Devil’s Head mentioned and photographed in this article are already documented in a 200+ page, full color guide book: Rampart Range Rocks which lists over 400 routes and is less than a year old. But this book is not mentioned in this article.
It seems rather convenient that an article published in Climbing plugs the new routs in the Platte and the new book with the beta, but fails to mention already well-documented routes in a fully current existing guidebook and the primary developers. I question why this area needs to be included in a new South Platte book other than to increase said book’s sales. Considering the fact that the revenue generated by sales of guidebooks made from area developers goes back into the area in the form of more new routes, replacing worn anchors/bolts, and trail building/maintenance; I think the practice of guidebook poaching seems rather materialistic and cut-throat. I was curious what the rest of the Front Range (or climbing community) thought about the practice of guidebook poaching.

So if you grab a FA you have rights beyond the route? Should you be allowed to say exclude my route from your / all guidebooks?

The article in Climbing magazine was a joke for a number of reasons, more a clear cut case of advertisement than climbing article but hey this is what I have come to expect from Climbing. 1 the South Platte is not some magical new area. 2 Save Thunder Ridge there are already existing guidebooks. 3 the current DH guide that supports further development of the area.

Jason knew good and well that there is a DH book when he published that article. It makes him a liar, and climbing magazine a joke for not checking sources. The editors of climbing magazine should be ashamed, as a ten second google source would reveal that there are already books for the south platte, shame.

wankel7 wrote:So if you grab a FA you have rights beyond the route? Should you be allowed to say exclude my route from your / all guidebooks?

Sure sounds like that's what's going on here. Forget about making an inclusive guidebook, and worry about who's turf you're on. Gang war!

wankel7 wrote:So if you grab a FA you have rights beyond the route? Should you be allowed to say exclude my route from your / all guidebooks?

That is not what is being said at all. The heart of the matter is plagiarism. Jason essentially has mined the existing guide (Rampart Range Rocks) for information to include in his own guide. It will be interesting to pick out informational errors that transferred from Rampart Range Rocks to the new guide.
It seems something similar to this happened before when Jason's company ,Fixed Pin, released a guide to Arkansas a year after Clay Frisbie published his guide to Arkansas.

Please read this.
coloradomountainjournal.com…

And the text:

Jason Haas, the man behind recent full-color guidebooks to the Flatirons in Boulder and Table Mountain in Golden, is working on a new guide to the seemingly countless granite domes and spires of the South Platte. This much-needed guidebook will include everything south of U.S. 285 and north of U.S. 24—Turkey Rock, Cynical Pinnacle, Big Rock Candy Mountain, the short, fierce climbs of Thunder Ridge, and much more—but it won’t include the Devils Head sport climbs, which are already well-covered in another guide.

Some context for the general public. DH is not like a typical climbing area that was developed over time by many divergent climbers where guidebooks are the assimilation of beta from many sources, current and historical.
Instead, DH is far and away the product of Zilla and his minions; with some contributions from 3rd parties like Paul Heyleger. I personally have been involved in DH off and on from the very start 20 years ago this year, but according to Tod's book I am not a minion; so I have no dog in this fight.
But it has to be said that there is one, and only one, source of sport route beta for this area. And that is Tod's books. There is no interviewing of the locals, or compiling content from old records, registers, articles, etc. The only way to know the crags, routes, ratings, trails about the place is from Tod's book.
I thought there was an agreement in place dividing the sport routes in one and the trad lines down lower in the other. To see the sport routes show up in the SP guide would to me be an dishonorable act.

Wow, so many people talking, but so few have much of the story. Perhaps it's time for people to ask about the other side of this story and see what it is?

I'm sure you all love Todd, but you'll make yourselves and him look bad if you go too far overboard in your statements. Eventually, more information will come to light.

First, are you guys SOOOO sure that there were not many routes in Devil's Head back in the 60's and 70's that, since Todd did not develop, and Todd did not research, and Todd did not publish, that thusly Todd did not write a complete guide to the area? What if there are indeed many documented but unpublished routes back there with pedigree. Think about what all follows from that... Perhaps if the Rampart Range guide WERE comprehensive, there would be no use in additional info.

As for Jason's article in the mag, who here is claiming that the mag didn't ASK him for an article? And what of the 'beta section' at the end- is that Jason's work, or an editorial?

And perhaps there is a reason why Jason doesn't mention Todd in his article. What happened first between them that might have prompted that? (Ohhh, I can hear the assumptions and inductions popping up right now...) Did you get both sides of the story, or is this just a seek and destroy mission? No questions, only orders? Note: I have some of the facts, but not all of them, so I'm asking questions... not just jumping to conclusions.

The matter is going to be debatable regardless of the facts, but each side of the debate can only be credible if it deals with them.
I am fully aware that many people will pick what side you wish to support and then weigh/value the facts supporting them more to make the logical outcome favor them... But no less, one should still start with the facts, and more of them than I am seeing here.

An analogy :

I'm selling PB&J sandwiches on a busy street corner, and I've been making and selling MY sandwiches there for years, and my sandwich cart is a non-proft community co-op that uses free-range local organic grass-fed peanut butter, donating all proceeds to blind orphans. Plus, we were here first!

Does that history grant me some inherent right to stop someone from moving in next door, and selling all kinds of better sandwiches, putting me out of business? Maybe they stole MY PB&J recipe!!! (Or maybe they were able to figure out that beta for themselves and use it in their own product)

I'm not going to waste time speculating about conflicts or exclusive publication rights agreements between the two authors, but I have no problem with one company producing a second and superior version of a preexisting product.

Your premise seems to be that bolting a given route gives you the "rights" to something other than naming it and having the first try at climbing it.

Like all things in the free market, the higher quality product tends to be the determinant.

Guidebook poaching is something that has occurred for as long as guidebooks have been around. I am not even sure that it is frowned upon, as long as it isn't verbatim plagiarism. No need for anyone to call names.

Basically, just look at the two books and decide which one is better and let your money do the talking.

Of course if I wanted to go to Sheep's Nose or Cynical Pinnical, then Jason's book is what I would get.

But for my money, if I were going to climb at DH, Tod's book is clearly the choice. It is a really good guide, detailed and exhaustive. There just would be no possible way that Jason could cover DH like Tod has.

i'll end up with both. i guess i just kind of collect guidebooks. i was kind of surprised that the new platte book would cover devil's head sport routes. there are also a lot of older lines, generally lower down on devil's head, that aren't in tod's book. it will be interesting to see how it turns out.

What bothers me the most though is that they clearly stated they were NOT going to do a guidebook for DH..in writing; and then a few months pass by and it's like they are trying to be sneaky and quietly add DH to their guidebook.

Tod is the #1 proponent in why DH climbing exists. If it weren't for him and a few others, we would not be climbing there. When putting up new trad routes, you rarely need to invest money. Not the same with bolted routes, even more so, safely bolted routes (compare Devil's Head to Thunder ridge and it's like comparing TopRoping to R/X routes; one major reason why the scary routes at Thunder Ridge will never see a surge of climbers, whereas with Tod's new guidebook, DH is growing by leaps and bounds. %99 of climbers like safe routes). This I’m sure is another reason why they want to include DH; more people will buy guidebooks if they have safe sport climbing in them and if the authors only have the Splatte guidebook (without DH) they will not have as many sales.

The fact that Tod has invested millions..I mean, thousands of dollars to provide fun/safe routes should alone deem him the ambassador and/or primary guidebook author. Who else knows the routes better than the one who put it in? I also know that every penny (10-15 of them) that he gains from the guidebook will go directly into the stone in the form of bolts/anchors. That alone makes me think that having two guidebooks for one area is not fair and not right. It’s obvious that they have already purchased Tod’s guidebook and are using it to fill in the blanks in their book. Just reading the climbing magazine article dictates this scenario.

Strange how a guidebook company based in Colorado makes a guidebook for Arkansas.

Black/white. Take DH out of your upcoming guidebook.

Tony B wrote:Wow, so many people talking, but so few have much of the story. Perhaps it's time for people to ask about the other side of this story and see what it is. I'm sure you all love Todd, but you'll make yourselves and him look bad if you go too far overboard in your statements. Eventually, more information will come to light. First, are you guys SOOOO sure that there were not many routes in Devil's Head back in the 60's and 70's that, since Todd did not develop, and Todd did not research, and Todd did not publish, that thusly Todd did not write a complete guide to the area? What if there are indeed many documented but unpublished routes back there with pedegree. Think about what all follows from that... Perhaps if the Rampart Range guide WERE comprehensive, there would be no use in additional info. As for Jason's article in the mag, who here is claiming that the mag didn't ASK him for it? And perhaps there is a reason why Jason doesn't mention Todd in his article. What happened first between them? (ohhh, I can hear the assumptions and inductions popping up right now) Did you get both sides of the story, or is this just a seek and destroy mission? No questions, only orders? Note: I have some of the facts, but not all of them, so I'm asking questions... not just jumping to conclusions. The matter is going to be debatable regardless of the facts, but each side of the debate can only be credible if it deals with them. I am fully aware that many people will pick what side you wish to support and then weigh/value the facts supporting them more to make the logical outcome favor them... But no less, one should still start with the facts, and more of them than I am seeing here.

It seems to me like you are weary to provide your facts. Why? If facts are facts, what is there to hide?
I do not know FixedPin's side of the 'story', but to me, I have never seen either of these guys at DH and I am there quite often. I doubt they have ever done any trailwork there let alone assist with routesetting. This is simply a cash cow for them; the exact opposite for TA.

Chris Cavallaro wrote:What bothers me the most though is that they clearly stated they were NOT going to do a guidebook for DH..in writing; and then a few months pass by and it's like they are trying to be sneaky and quietly add DH to their guidebook.

No, there is no sneaky about it. That course was reversed about year ago. Ask Todd, he knows when the first time that they discussed it. If he has forgotten, then remind him by asking him the first time he threatened the guys at Fixed Pin about it... I am sure that they are keeping records of that sort of behavior.
But, if you ask yourself WHY they were not going to put DH in the book and why they changed their minds, I am sure that you would learn something. Maybe it was something Todd did, did not do, or said, or a combination thereof. Not that his pals would ever cop to that though.
It is my understanding that they were going to make a complete guidebook excluding Devil's Head... until it became crystal clear through their own groundwork that the Devil's Head area was climbed long before Todd got there and that his guide (as noted in some comment above) is NOT complete.
So perhaps with this thing that bothers you most out of the way, we can return to a fact-based debate.

Chris Cavallaro wrote: Tod is the #1 proponent in why DH climbing exists. If it weren't for him and a few others, we would not be climbing there.

You mean except for the routes that were done long before he started climbing there, and the ones done since that he hasn't done or published... right?
I'm not blaming Todd, and I have one of his guidebooks, but this 1-sided attack really should recognize the actual facts of the matter if it is to continue.
There is presently no complete guidebook to the area, and if Todd had done all the work for it, there would be, rendering another guide useless. And yet you continue to paint the FP authors as lazy plagiarists...

Chris Cavallaro wrote:This I’m sure is another reason why they want to include DH; more people will buy guidebooks if they have safe sport climbing in them and if the authors only have the Splatte guidebook (without DH) they will not have as many sales.

You are SURE(?), You THINK (?), or you have SPECULATED (?) Which is it really? How sure should you be since you have not spoken to them? Hey, but no time to talk right? We've got a lynching to get ourselves to first... Are you "sure" that they are not simply producing a complete guide to make it complete? Hmmmm....
Because the cost of printing and binding and etc that go up with including more material, if it were completely superfluous, might not be covered by the 'increased sales.'

Chris Cavallaro wrote:The fact that Tod has invested millions..I mean, thousands of dollars to provide fun/safe routes should alone deem him the ambassador and/or primary guidebook author. Who else knows the routes better than the one who put it in? I also know that every penny (10-15 of them) that he gains from the guidebook will go directly into the stone in the form of bolts/anchors. That alone makes me think that having two guidebooks for one area is not fair and not right.

That's an opinion that you are certainly entitled to. Now imagine if Todd had done the leg work and actually published a complete guide to the area, how many people might support your argument there Vs having many who would like to purchase a complete guide. Or if there would even be a second guide to be arguing about if there was already a complete guide to that area?

Chris Cavallaro wrote: Strange how a guidebook company based in Colorado makes a guidebook for Arkansas. Black/white. Take DH out of your upcoming guidebook.

Bullshit. That's a stupid and baseless attack.
The other Arkansas guide was published by Wolverine... based in Silt, Colorado, for the record. The authors of both Arkansas guides were looking for a publisher and BOTH found one here.
So where is Sharp End located? (Boulder CO) What about Wolverine?(Silt, CO) And Falcon Guides? (Guilford, CT) Falcon published books for Bocan, Flatirons, Eldo, etc... from Connecticut.
Perhaps you misunderstand the difference between an author and a publisher. Perhaps because that line is blurred when an author publishes a book of his own. What about a printer and binder? Does it matter where the book is physically printed and bound? Does that have to be in the home state as well? (I'll give you a hint... Get ready to go burn all your guidebooks.)

Are You just looking for anything to pick a fight about now??

Chris Cavallaro wrote: It seems to me like you are weary to provide your facts. Why? If facts are facts, what is there to hide? I do not know FixedPin's side of the 'story', but to me, I have never seen either of these guys at DH and I am there quite often. I doubt they have ever done any trailwork there let alone assist with routesetting. This is simply a cash cow for them; the exact opposite for TA.

Well, since I do not declare to have the whole story, and am not interested in attacking Todd without it, I guess my values demand a different sort of behavior.
However, I have clearly laid out some of the facts which you have not only ignored, but falsely stated the opposite of, and I have just recently highlighted some of those.
Perhaps you should investigate a little more before you take a strong position, instead of demanding that I do so and demand that I stand on equally poor footing.

Tony B wrote: No, there is no sneaky about it. That course was reversed a year ago. But, if you ask yourself WHY they were not going to put DH in the book and why they changed their minds, I am sure that you would learn something. Maybe it was something Todd did, did not do or said. Not that his pals would ever cop to that though. It is my understanding that they were going to make a complete guidebook - Devil's Head... until it became crystal clear through their own groundwork that the Devil's Head area was climbed long before Todd got there and that his guide (as noted in some comment above) is NOT complete. So perhaps with this thing that bothers you most out of the way, we can return to a fact-based debate.

Perhaps you can tell us the nature of the agreement between Jason and Tod as you've heard it. I was under the impression that Jason agreed to only publish a handful of trad routes at DH. I have since seen email verification that they intend to publish all of the routes at DH. It seems Jason went back on his word here. I think it may be time for Jason to tell us all his version of the story.

Tom R wrote: Perhaps you can tell us the nature of the agreement between Jason and Tod as you've heard it. (...) I think it may be time for Jason to tell us all his version of the story.

There are things I know and things I don't know. What I know for sure is that I don't have all the facts from both sides.

So yes, Jason should address his side of it, not me. Similarly, Todd should speak for himself when it comes to the 'facts' and then other people can input their opinions about that. Before I take a strong stance, I would ask Todd what the agreement was from his perspective and if indeed he broke the terms of it. That would sure be a lot better than what is going on here.

But don't expect a school teacher to take a day off to do it at this exact moment. I doubt if he even knows he's been attacked yet.

In the end, we all get to vote with our $$$ anyway. And if Todd can prove plagiarism, then he'll have his day in court and the court can over-rule the votes for the big book (at least financially) if the courts side with him.
For my own part, I would have preferred 2 separate, but complete guides so as not to have a dictionary to carry around, but that was not an available option. So I guess I end up owning both books, one potentially obsolete/incomplete by the time the other is available (which will be some time from now). It may end up on the shelf next to my Rolofson and Hubbel books, or I may use it. But here's the thing... I don't go on trips to sport climb, so I'm unlikely to use it beyond the one time I was there after my knee surgury.

Mr. TB.

I do not know the FP authors so sure..I only have one side of the story. To me, it was black and white that I read that article stating that they were not going to include DH, and a few weeks ago I was on their website and did not see a mention of DH on the guidebook cover. Recently, now DH is noted on the cover. That is my fact-based debate. You seem to have a lot more artilery than I, but that is what I know. If they publicly state one thing, then do another, isn't that deceitful?

Tod was not the first person ever to touch DH rock. But, he was the first to write a comprehensive guidebook. These days, more and more people are sport climbing and to me, Tod is the pioneer of DH sport climbing. So, I can state again, if it weren't for Tod and a few others, we would not be climbing SPORT routes at DH. Sure, Layton Kor may have done some epic climbs there, but DH is essentially a sport climbing area now.
I don't understand your comment 'there is presently no complete guidebook to the area'. Which area? DH? South Platte? Southern Colorado?
Should there be one guidebook for all of the Flatirons, Eldorado Canyon, and boulder canyon; as well as one guidebok for all of Table mountain and CCC together? Tod did provide a complete Sport climbing guidebook for the area he chose to contribute information too.

I never said the FP authors were lazy, I meant to say that how else would they have all of the information for DH sport climbs if they are never there? I'm there very often and I have never seen them, but ok, I may be wrong and they are climbing all of these routes and documenting them as they do. That will certainly take a while if they are to provide a complete/comprehensive book.

I'm not lynching anyone. I read that article and I'm calling it out. I see your point TB; maybe they are trying to provide one comprehensive guidebook that will include all Splatte areas, so my statement that they are including DH for better sales may be wrong.

FP authors. I will stay honest and say i know nothing about the Arkansas guidebook debacle, so I retract my statement. I will say that there are many many thoughts being thrown around in the climbing world on this, and the ideas I heard fed this statement.

TB; you should be in politics man. You obviously love this argumentative battling stuff.

I think that it should be noted that there are quite a few trad routes included in RRR, although the area in general is dominated by it's sport routes. I don't know of any trad routes in the areas I climbed/developed that aren't in the book.

I'm not sure what would obsolete RRR, but for my money it is better to get the information straight from the source, in this case those who developed the routes.

As for a day in court. Any of you who have been involved in court proceedings must realize that it would take a lot of book sales to make up the cost of attorney fees, and this disagreement is probably best handled outside of that realm. I don't think the issue for those who frequent/develop develop Devil's Head is financial, rather it seems to me to be an ethical one.

Perhaps this thread will remain as an indicator to those who will decide which guide to purchase based on ethics, and I think that both sides should take that into consideration before they stake their claims here.

cheers.
-chris

We (Climbing mag) made a mistake not including Tod's excellent guidebook in our coverage of the South Platte, and shortly after the article was printed, I contacted Tod and apologized.....an apology he very graciously accepted. The guidebook reference will be added to our story when we publish it at Climbing.com.

Dougald MacDonald
Editor in Chief
Climbing

Chris Cavallaro wrote:Mr. TB. I do not know the FP authors so sure..I only have one side of the story. To me, it was black and white that I read that article stating that they were not going to include DH, and a few weeks ago I was on their website and did not see a mention of DH on the guidebook cover. Recently, now DH is noted on the cover. That is my fact-based debate.

One sided, not fact-based. Ask Todd or Jason what the agreement was on who would cover what and what the conditions were and then ask who violated the agreement first. Are you SOOOO sure Todd didn't violate the agreement?
The fact is that the situation changed. Your presumptions cover everything else you've said.

Chris Cavallaro wrote:If they publicly state one thing, then do another, isn't that deceitful?

Why yes, it is. So I guess time will tell who the initial fault lies with. If it is established that Todd violated a contract, resulting in this change will you go attack him instead? And I mean both personally and his business?

Chris Cavallaro wrote: Tod was not the first person ever to touch DH rock. But, he was the first to write a comprehensive guidebook.

YThe first assertion is true, the latter false. Is his guide in your opinion indeed "comprehensive?" And if so, why doesn't cover all of the routes?
(com·pre·hen·siveAdjective/ˌkämpriˈhensiv/: 1. Complete; including all or nearly all elements or aspects of something: "a comprehensive list of sources".)

Chris Cavallaro wrote: So, I can state again, if it weren't for Tod and a few others, we would not be climbing SPORT routes at DH.

I can accept THAT statement, at least as largely true.

Chris Cavallaro wrote: Sure, Layton Kor may have done some epic climbs there, but DH is essentially a sport climbing area now. I don't understand your comment 'there is presently no complete guidebook to the area'. Which area? DH? South Platte? Southern Colorado? Should there be one guidebook for all of the Flatirons, Eldorado Canyon, and boulder canyon; as well as one guidebok for all of Table mountain and CCC together? Tod did provide a complete Sport climbing guidebook for the area he chose to contribute information too.

I was referring to DH and I think you know that.
Putting out a guide with just sport and not the obvious cracks between and putting out a book with the cracks and not the sport in between are equally non-comprehensive. Trad climbers probably want a book with both.

Chris Cavallaro wrote: I'm there very often and I have never seen them, but ok, I may be wrong and they are climbing all of these routes and documenting them as they do.

You are in fact wrong. I know that they have climbed every route that they are publishing, and have corrected many many of the bolt-count and other errors in Anderson's guide for their own book. I do know that. Now that we have established that is your own misinformation, can you re-examine the rest of your presumptions to see what else you might be missing out on?

Chris Cavallaro wrote: That will certainly take a while if they are to provide a complete/comprehensive book.

Yeah, I mean, it might even delay their book by a year... Oh, wait a minute... (slaps forehead) Isn't their book a year or so late?

Chris Cavallaro wrote: I'm not lynching anyone. I read that article and I'm calling it out.

You aren't? You were calling names, making personality assertions, etc... And you admit that you don't know the facts and haven't bothered to seek them out either. That's really really low.
You might have also noted Climbing Magazine's note that THEY omitted Anderson's book from the article, and their appology to Todd. Now either you didn't even ask Todd about this or Todd is deliberately NOT giving you the info you need to make a fair assessment of the situation. Maybe you should reconsider your attacks.
And yes I do consider the words: "If there is any doubt on whether or not Jason/Ben are liars..please read this." to be an attack.

Chris Cavallaro wrote: TB; you should be in politics man. You obviously love this argumentative battling stuff.

Hmmm. obviously a public defender then... because what I see here, looking inward, isn't that I love the debate. What I see here is that I hate it when people use bullshit and assumptions to attack people that they haven't even tried to contact to hear out the facts.
And that is precisely what is going on here.
Trust be told, it looks liek you are building the same sort of assumptions about my motivations as you built about Jason and Ben's. You told me what I did or did not like to do, and you got it wrong as well. I don't love this argument. I hate it, and it shouldn't be happening at all. But I didn't start this slanderous thread.

For the record, I called Jason on his lunch hour. He had no idea that this was going on. Perhaps after reading it he'll take the time to respond. Until then, I suggest that people avoid making fools of themselves.