Type: Trad, 210 ft, 2 pitches
FA: John Markwell/John Christian (1971)
Page Views: 324 total · 8/month
Shared By: Brian Malone on Jun 7, 2015
Admins: Ladd, Shawn Heath, Vicki Schwantes, Jake Jones

You & This Route

1 Opinions

Your To-Do List:

Add To-Do · View List

Your Star Rating:

     Clear Rating

Your Difficulty Rating:

-none- Change

Your Ticks:

Add New Tick


To start, scramble up to a ledge on the buttress that lies to the left of the Great Chimney route.
#1. Climb the narrow north face to a ledge near the top. (140 ft.)
#2. Climb up and to the left.


To start, scramble up to a ledge on the buttress that lies to the left of the Great Chimney route on the Southern Pillar.


General rack.


- No Photos -
Andy Weinmann
Silver Spring, MD
Andy Weinmann   Silver Spring, MD
Perhaps in 1971 this was a clean climb and decent. I wouldn't recommend the first pitch to my worst enemy. Climb Great Chimney or hike up the east side of the SoPill to the ledge beneath P2 instead. Second pitch looks doable. Walk-off at the top. Aug 3, 2015
Andy Weinmann
Silver Spring, MD
Andy Weinmann   Silver Spring, MD

Sorry if anything I've posted makes you feel like it's a personal attack...that was not my intention. Hate? No. God-complex? I certainly hope not.

You've put some routes on here that have helped fill out the database. Good. Thanks. That needs to happen and I'm sure people will appreciate it...I certainly do. But in my opinion you've rated those climbs (such as Initiation) highly, when really they are things that should be on here for posterity's sake (For example, you rate Initiation 3 stars. Take a look on here at other 3-star routes). Many of them probably shouldn't be climbed by anyone because they are either covered in trees, moss, loose rocks, etc and/or are downright dangerous. When routes like this are in the "easy" category my concern is that they will attract newer trad leaders who will quickly get in over their head. Now you could say that it's their responsibility for their own safety, etc. That's true. But then, what's the point of using MP as a resource for information? In my mind, people come here looking for people's opinions and ratings.

As I recall, there were a number of other routes you entered on here that showed up in quick succession and may have read like they were copied from one of the older guidebooks; some entries had been superseded by new information. Bottom line is that I took issue with it, but I admit to that being a bit petty and I apologize. While I've put a lot of work into the Seneca site, it's a community resource...I'm not an admin and I certainly don't own it.

Certainly you have your own opinions. And maybe you have really great memories of climbing some of these routes when they weren't in the shape they are now. I would hope that people would take "with a grain of salt" any entry on here with only one "tick" (be it a one-star or four-star). Now, if you go and climb it and clean it anew - that's a different story. I know for certain there are several routes that would probably rate at least a 2-star if they were cleaned and climbed more.

MP's quality is only as good as what we put into it. Which, in my opinion, means that if you post a route, description, etc you owe it to the community to put some critical thought and consideration into what you post. It's fine to put stuff on here "for posterity", but then you ought to state that...in my opinion. Just something to think about.

Again, apologies if anything I've said came off "hateful" or otherwise condescending. It was not my intention at all. And if you'd like to join some of the climbing community members in showing Seneca some love, join us on trail work day. We usually do them 2X a year. Next one is 09/10 April.


-Andy Mar 16, 2016