Charles Vernon wrote:
So what is the problem? Whose "wild experience" is being or will be devalued? What are the "enormous and unpredictable hidden costs" that we have already "witnessed throughout this controversy"? Seriously, I really don't know what you're referring to. What am I missing? The only thing I can think of is Albert's impending implosion. We have many of these large chossy backcountry cliffs with heinous approaches down here in Southern AZ. I've been privileged to have "wild experiences" on a few of them--first ascents, second ascents, and otherwise; some published, some not. They've always been wild experiences and adventures regardless of whether I was able to glean info about them before hand on the internet. And, as you say, they will never be overrun; for most climbers, it's the last thing they want to go do (bearing in mind the adjectives "chossy" and "heinous"). My observation is the one thing that does tend to attract climbers to these cliffs is the presence of bolts; a significant number of them tends to have somewhat of a civilizing effect. Albert- Thanks for your hard work on this route, but you seem to have serious control issues. You keep saying this is about "wild places" and I don't doubt that you cherish them (as do, believe it or not, some of us who publish route info in the internet). But it's obvious from your posts that this is largely about your obsession with this route and your need to hold onto it and control the parameters of repeat ascentionists' experiences, right down to the "exit interview" and micromanaging the number of bolts long after the fact. Let it go. Tooth Rock/VC will remain what they are. Move on with your life and your future wild adventures. Stop insulting people on the internet.