Runout Ridge 

The first pitch scared the shit out of me!

No shit, the first pitch is an X rating all the way, not R!!!
It may be moderate climbing but the sandstone here is far from bomber.
I have to be honest, I was a little pissed after this climb. I understand that this is a run-out area and came here for some adventure but I had avoided the X rated climbs on purpose and still found myself in a situation where a broken hold(very likely in this friable sandstone) would mean a 90 foot ground fall onto rock.

It's just the way the area is and is rated. Ratings have always been completely subjective and are particular to every area and the people developing there. It is everyones personal responsibility to not be in situations they don't want to be in.
I did a First Ascent with Paul and Layne down there called Freeze Not which Paul suggested an R rating of a pitch that I led. A fall at the insecure top crux of the pitch would have resulted in a 150 foot fall onto a slab. I was pretty gripped and would have given it an X rating, but to keep it consistent with similar routes in the area we gave it an R rating. It's all subjective.
If you want better protection climbing on the Reef, you may be interested in some of the steeper routes that we have put up. They are still pretty spicy, but the protection is much more reasonable.
I understand your frustration, but don't be pissed at anybody but yourself because ultimately every individual is responsible for whatever situation they put themselves in.
Anyway, the name Runout Ridge should have been warning enough. And in the description he only mentions one bolt at 100 feet, then another 40 feet to the belay. What do you expect?
Also, I know I probably sound like a total asshole which I can be sometimes. I don't mean to be here, just merely stating that ratings are subjective and safety is a personal responsibility.

So whats the take on adding some pro to the unprotectable cruxes? An example would be adding "one" bolt at the crux bulge 20' below the first 100' bolt? Keeping it spicy but not a death route. The main ERS page says carry a bolt kit. Is this saying that the first router gives blessing? IMO cool area with great potential if we can keep things safe. I have no problems with long runouts but would like to not take a ground fall on a 5.6 move because the rock is questionable. If a foothold broke the hands would not hold!

All I said was the first pitch scared the shit out me. Nothing wrong with that! Hell I enjoyed the route. I climbed at the Garden for many years and understand how one can learn and feel comfortable with the rock with time.( as Ed Webster said about the Garden the key was"speaking the language"). I remember many a fine friend from Boulder coming down to the Garden and getting scared shitless on the finger face ramp. (5.7) Ratings do become very subjective as locals become more comfortable with the area. With that said it's bedtime.

To Brian,
please remember that this route and many others have been put up onsight by someone who's old enough to be my dad, with a rack and a power drill on his back. I think its really sad that so called climbers today have to go online and moan about route safety. Also carrying a bolt kit obviously is nice if you have to back up a belay or replace an old bolt.
If your not in to this type of climbing, have a wife and kid, mortgage, puppys etc etc then stick to the bolt happy areas of Rifle and Shelf Rd.

To Allen,
good for you to go down there and get shit scared. There is nothing like getting the old heart going once in awhile no?. I hope you go back as it is a magical(unspoilt)place, there is not many places left that you can still say that about!.

To Ben,
keep up the good work with Lance. I hope I can get my head and fitness together to try your routes sometime.

Nooky, I've had a picture of Paul hanging off one hand somewhere in the Lake District in my various work areas for years.( I think Jim D. gave it to me.) Paul's the man and I'm honored to do his terrifying routes. Keep it going man. The reef is great.

Hello Nooky,
You have no leg to stand on. From your comment you have never climbed these routes. keep your comments to yourself. Come climb these and then lets see what you have to say. I am not looking for grid routes or would have never came to ERS.

Brian, that's quite the assumption, but you're wrong.

Hey there is no reason for anyone to get worked up, what’s wrong with me throwing a honest warning out to others? If you read my comment you will see that I just said I was pissed, which I was, but not at anyone in particular (most of it was at myself). I understand everyone’s point, and they’re all valid. I just posted the comment because that is how I felt and I still think it's a solid point. I just don’t want to see anyone get killed due to lack of beta. I understand the subjectivity of ratings, and that will forever be the center of climbing debates, but there‘s a point beyond the gray area (this is one of them) where it really can’t be seriously argued. R and X are about what happens if one falls and X means a good chance of death (ability, difficulty, level of personal comfort with the climb, etc.. should not be taken into consideration). I mean a 90 foot drop into a rock crevasse, or what was someone else saying a 150 ft drop onto to a rock slab, give me a brake, are you guys just arguing for the sake of argument itself or what? It’s really sounding like elitism or machoism to me at that point, or maybe I’m wrong and like someone said people just tend to loose subjectivity after climbing an area a lot (if this was the case with me, I would want someone to point it out)? I don’t know, but what I do know that people shouldn’t be telling others where they should go climb.
By the way, a big thanks to everyone who takes the time and effort to put up new routes.

Dylan, That was a very good comment.

I agree with Ben, Dylan's comment was great because it helped me realize that although difficulty ratings are subjective (due to climber's ability, comfort level, rock type, area, etc.), a route description such as R, S or X should be a more objective measure. I need to re-evaluate my own perceptions of routes, try to account for my ego, and consider the consequences of my actions.
On another note, I think that the reason a bolt kit was recommended was because many of the anchor stations have only one bolt and the FA party hasn't been able to repeat some of the routes to equip them with a "safe backup".

Brian,
If I may make a comment about protecting "unprotectable" cruxes. The cruxes are almost always protected.

To answer your question about adding bolts. No, that is not okay. Would Paul give his blessing? Well maybe to you because you are a rock legend. However, if you wait awhile, he'll eventually die of old age... maybe. Then he probably won't care what you do to his routes.

I know some people who have climbed on the reef and simply don't enjoy the type of climbing that you mentioned. Rather than asking to change it, they simply said that they don't want to climb there anymore. However, the beautiful thing about the reef is that if YOU want to put up routes to your comfort, there is plenty of rock to accommodate you.

Keep on rockin!

Hello All,
The funny thing is all the comments except from the guys who put up the route. It is good to make people think!

I know Paul pretty well, and I have climbed a lot of these routes. The only bolts added should be to single bolt rappel/belay anchors. I am sure that Paul would not be happy about bolts ending up all over his routes, to protect every little move of friction. It is definitely a place to get used to the rock and the climbing. I will also say that Lance and I on the routes we established do not want any extra bolts added. All of our belays are 2 or 3, four inch bolts and are bomber. Except for one route that we did down there, all the bolts were placed from free stances (no hooks) whenever we could get them. They took a lot of effort to equip, and some good falls were taken on most routes during the establishment phase. The pro on the steeper routes that we have established is totally reasonable.

Hello Ben,
So your speaking for Paul.

Brian, I am not speaking for Paul, but I have spoken with him about this issue recently. If you read his comments (on Mercury, I believe) you will clearly see that he doesn't want extra bolts added to his routes. Those routes were established as adventure routes. If you don't want that type of commitment or exposure to danger, I doubt there is anybody forcing you to climb them. There is no need to keep things "safe" as you say. There are plenty of climbing areas with "safe" routes to climb. There are also plenty of climbs in this world that have death fall potential. I don't hear the masses of climbers saying we should go make them safe for everybody. Boldness has always been a part of climbing and if you look at the history of any major non-sport climbing area, you will see that. Yosemite, Red Rocks, City of Rocks, anywhere on the Colorado Plateau, Eldo, Looking Glass, and on and on, there are many R and X routes and hopefully they will remain to be R and X routes.

I couldn't refrain.

Brian you are a true source of entertainment. First you tell the FA's son he has no leg to stand on cause he hasn't climbed there. Then you continually miss the obvious points (and Pauls posts) of why there shouldn't be bastard bolts added. Thanks for making me laugh!

Geez, this even made UK climbing news...

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=4&year=2008#>>>>>

Too funny.

Hello all first routers. I would gladly buy you folks some materials as to not ruin an area of such greatness. If you all have a flirting addiction with disaster thats fine. Try not bolting at all and you will not leave any trace of where you have been. Thus not attracting the common folk to your death routes. Let me know where to send funds or hardware!

Hello all,
First let me say there must have been a chord struck. Paul actually responded! I have chosen not to contact the first routers directly as to keep this in the public forum. It is good to have debate especially with such an awsome area. Regaurding the last post let me say if you need anchors to get down do not post the routes as this attracts the common folk who may not desire the possibilities. Why attract people to passible disaster. You say it is my requirement to remove the R and X grades. I disagree strongly! General public safety is involved here in a public enviorment. Regaurding your comments on gas money this is all yours. You choose to drive to public lands and put up routes that I can say most people will not desire to put then selves at risk. This area could be the next great thing and the few who desire to make it unsafe for most of the general public is a shame. Grid bolting is not the issue here as you make it sound. Putting up routes with 50',100',150',200'...falls is in my opinion ruining what could be some truely great climbing. According to your comments money is an issue. Let people contact first routers and work with them to add additional protection. Over time this area could become a destination trip. Or better yet do a more safe job in the first place.

Brian as I thought you are just a tad full of hot air. You do not need any special skills or extra bolts to climb adventure routes in the Swell you just need to be a traditional rock climber and not a sports/gym "play" climber.I guess its not good for the ego of any climber who claims he climbs 5.11 (sport) or higher to get his arse kicked on a 5.6/7. This of course due to the increased popularity of climbing and that most people in the last few years now start on a indoor climbing wall or sport route and consequently there is a growing reluctance not to move more than 5 feet from solid protection,this also applies to trad/sport areas like Indian Creek. Perhaps you Brian and other "play" climbers would be advised to take up golf (even that might be a bit too risky)as on sight trad rock climbing is defiantly not the game for you.

Paul,
Your true colors shine through! You do not know didly squat about me!

Hey Beach Boy Brian,

First of all, you have no idea of the context of climbing in which you are talking about. You obviously don't know anything about traditional climbing, climbing history, rock climbing in general, or rock climbing ethics. Reading the stuff you are writing just makes me cringe. If I were you I would consider taking Paul's suggestions seriously, because obviously rock climbing is not the thing for you.
This area lends itself to adventure climbing, not fat bolts every five feet or so. If that is what you are looking for, go to your local sport climbing area and have a great time, there is nothing wrong with that. In the Swell, this is the real outdoors, not Disneyland.
Brian, your true colors have really shone through, you should find another, tame activity to occupy your time.

"Death routes" and "common folk" don't mix. That should be obvious.

Ben,
Ditto to you. You do not know me. This is an ethics issue. Why do you guys attack character?

Brian wrote:
"Putting up routes with 50',100',150',200'...falls is in my opinion ruining what could be some truely great climbing."

Climbers like Paul, Ben, and others (like myself) strive to climb for themselves not to create routes for others. If I were mentally strong enough I would try to do all new FA's without any bolt holes. I'll gladly pound a pin vs drill a hole. It aids in mind conditioning to do routes where one should not fall whether runout, bad pro, bad rock or all three. As for sport climbs, I cannot get into going from bolt to bolt as a goal- climbing looses all meaning (I also must add that electric drills also kill my experience and HATE dragging them along). It is obvious that routes with "paul ross" as a first ascentionist are not for you- go find something else.

I don't know how I "attacked" your character at all. I did not say anything about your character, I am only stating that You are totally out of touch with this area and with adventure style of climbing. Why don't you tell John Bacher to retrofit the Bacher-Yerian so it will be safe for all? That way every aspiring 5.11 climber can give it a safe attempt. (And that route just got led without ANY bolts protecting the leader!!) That way it can be more of a destination for everybody and we can all wait in line at the base, spraying to each other about our latest flashes and pink points. We should probably drill bolt ladders up every hard hooking pitch in Zion too. Maybe we should outlaw alpine climbing all together since there isn't a way to make that activity completely safe.
Brian, I apologize if you feel that your character has been attacked by me, but I think you are really just doing it to yourself.

***TROLL ALERT***
brian wilson could not possibly be real because he would already be dead of embarassment!

Given the small possibility that brian wilson could be real I would suggest that he/she should submit one of the routes that they have established so that we may better understand their ethics and thoughts on protection placement.

Or... has Paul Ross and a secret British sect climbed all the rock in the desert!!!! Bloody Bastards!!!!

LUKED

Whats a troll?

You can't be real Brian. No one needs to attack your character when they can attack your ethics so easily instead. There are exactly 1,348.7 shitloads of rock in the san rafael swell you can bolt the hell out of if you feel so inclined. I'm sure Ben and Paul would appreciate the hangers.