|
shockabuku
Oct 12, 2008, 6:24 AM
Post #26 of 60
(4741 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
And it worked.
|
|
|
|
|
geezergecko
Oct 12, 2008, 12:45 PM
Post #27 of 60
(4732 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 729
|
granite_grrl wrote: ninjaclimb wrote: However, being a person who knows the area (I had no trouble finding any of those routes marked on the picture), I'm having difficulty recognizing any route on the picture - and I don't think its a question of picture size or quality. While the aerial photo is very nice, I would personally recommend a picture taken from a climber's angle. Agreed on all these points. I haven't been down to that wall in a little while, but I've climbed a bunch of the routes in the photo and the aerial shot doesn't make the recognizable. I understand the space constraints, but you'll need to add some periodic "from the ground" shots if you want to make the aerial shots usable.
I knew where some of the routes were but I didn't know where they all were and I found the aerial photo extremely useful for filling in the blanks. It was a case of "So that's where that goes." with a number of the routes. Extra "from the ground shots", "crux move shots", "gulley identification shots", etc. can only make it that much better.
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 13, 2008, 12:27 AM
Post #28 of 60
(4719 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
Thanks for the tips. I will do my best to include the most relevant or popular routes with ground photos. The issue becomes finding a balance between quantity of photos and number of pages in the guide. I could add an extra 30 pages of photos but it will increase the price of the guidebook by at least 50%. Once the guide gets large enough I will have to switch to a traditional glue binding - and the quantity of books I would have to have printed would go up significantly.
Our attempts this weekend to photograph a cover page from the air was likely unsuccessful. A combination of poor visibility, fog and sun location has caused us to look at ground based photos for the cover page.
Cheers!
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
buddysnack
Oct 13, 2008, 4:06 AM
Post #29 of 60
(4705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2006
Posts: 17
|
Hi Fastkite,
First off, know that you are my hero. Writing a quality and comprehensive guide to Ontario Limestone is a daunting and enormous task. I think starting with one of the largest, highest quality, and most confusing crags is a great way to embark on this task. It will also set the standard for all other guidebooks to come. A visual guide is also, in my opinion, one of the best ways to communicate with fellow climbers where climbs are, and what variations have been done. I have an unwritten variation I would like to share (to get the ball rolling), and a few thoughts that I think are worth considering when writing a guidebook. Here you go:
1. Get people’s opinions on what makes a killer guidebook and what doesn’t. Personally, I really like Sean Cassidy’s Guide to Rock Climbing in Nova Scotia. It has great stories, history, detailed topos, and route descriptions. I also like how Todd Swain’s guide to the Gunks has a drawing of the base of the crag so that it is easier to find the climbs.
2. Use the Gunks rating for protection on climbs (G, PG, PG-13, R, X). Obviously this is subjective, but it is still worth including.
3. Show variations, give important info (i.e. beware loose rocks, bring extra #2 cams etc.) but DON’T give away where the crux is, how to protect it, or how to do it (i.e. “make a long throw at the end of the crack for the secret victory jug…”). Leave the journey and experience up the climber as much as possible (within reason). If you absolutely have to give more info, do it in riddle (like with old guidebook’s description of Baggers Jig).
4. For Trad routes use + or – signs instead of getting into the a, b, c, d’s of climbing. This is just my personal preference. Trad climbing does not have to be that specific.
I am sure you will get a lot of flak from some of the old boys of climbing for writing this guide (or are you one of them?), but do it anyway. This province needs an enema.
Ok, so here is a variation that I learned several years ago from a guy I met at the crag with a long hair and a crazy grey beard named Steve Crow. I don’t know what it is called, but I call it “Reunion Direct, 5.9+***”. Begin climbing “Reunion 5.7” until you reach a roof ¾ of the way up where it is possible to traverse out left to a ledge. From the ledge, surmount a roof using an obvious crack which continues all the way to the top of the cliff. This is an outstanding variation on some of the cleanest/grippiest limestone on the escarpment.
Good luck on the book and let me know if you are in need of an editor or second opinion along the way.
Colin
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaclimb
Oct 14, 2008, 3:08 PM
Post #30 of 60
(4696 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2006
Posts: 21
|
Some more Nemo route info...
There is a bolted route to the right of Dufte. I have yet to get on it so I don't know anything about it. And I've heard of, but not looked for a bolted route to the left of Dufte.
Above Schmaltzy Corner there are one or two more bolted lines other than the Direct Schmaltz finish.
There is a direct finish to Grunge. Instead of exiting to the left on the ledge, climb straight up the headwall passing two pitons. Maybe 5.8.
About 2m to the right of Grunge is another 5.5ish climb going up through cracks and angling left to meet Grunge near the top.
Zona Rosa is now fully bolted, and has no pins.
The climb called Free is awesome. It starts on a very cool cavey ledge. And follows a nice crack line to an undercling roof, and final layback crack. The only bad part about the route is crawling through vegetation for the finish. This great route needs anchors or so kind of variation to avoid the crap at the top.
There's also a bunch more sport lines listed in the sport guide's topo for the area which are not described.
Hope this helps.
Justin
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 15, 2008, 2:00 AM
Post #31 of 60
(4675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
Many Thanks Justin!
I've never found any bolted routes left of Dufte, but there is certainly one just right of Dufte.
I spent a few hours in the Gooseberry / Deadzone area this weekend. I'll have to make another trip looking for the other route.
Cheers.
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaclimb
Oct 16, 2008, 3:29 AM
Post #32 of 60
(4663 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2006
Posts: 21
|
I've never seen the route to the right of Dufte either. I think I read about it on this website...
There are definately some more trad lines to go up in the Dead Zone, and I think that the Monty Piton
roof will go free (if it hasn't already).
Any idea if there is a bolted direct finish to The Big Gulp. I saw some guys working the moves on top rope and were talking about adding the bolts...
Justin
|
|
|
|
|
davidbr
Oct 16, 2008, 6:17 PM
Post #33 of 60
(4653 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 191
|
A couple of questions:
1- What do you have in mind regarding grades? Are you planning to leave the grades as they have historically been?
The reason I ask is that there seems to be a trend to soften grades in newer guidebooks, especially at crags where the climbing can seem stiff by modern standards. Perhaps this is the result of the grades people get used to while climbing at gyms. It would be a shame to see something happen at Nemo such as has recently happend in the new Gunks select guide. While the softer numbers may boost the odd ego, it seems disrespectful toward the history of an area to change what has been part of the crag's character for years.
2- Do you intend to include all routes, or will this be more of a select guide?
|
|
|
|
|
onceahardman
Oct 16, 2008, 6:36 PM
Post #34 of 60
(4651 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2493
|
In reply to: Whatever do you mean? "climb pleasant face past bolts to anchors." isn't a good description?
I remember one from the old rattlesnake guide:
"Climb straight up over the huge overhang"
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
myusername
Oct 16, 2008, 6:47 PM
Post #35 of 60
(4646 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 25
|
I, like Chossmonkey, am under the impression that there is a bolt moratorium at Nemo. I'm all for new routes (where it is prudent) but be sure you are not stepping on the toes of the landowners or 1st acesionists. I believe Big Gulp was done as a FA with the direct finish, unprotected.
Any guidebook written for Ontario should include a bit on ethics, etiquette and stewardship. For better or worse it's an issue in these parts.
Good Luck
|
|
|
|
|
davidbr
Oct 17, 2008, 12:34 AM
Post #36 of 60
(4634 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 191
|
Good points you make.
A lot of people climbing at Nemo seem unaware of the top-rope ban and the regulations against slinging the cedars. It would serve well to let climbers know the local rules.
The OAC has worked long and hard to keep access open along the Escarpment, and, given that a new guide will draw more people to Nemo, it's important that access isn't jeopardised.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaclimb
Oct 17, 2008, 3:58 AM
Post #37 of 60
(4629 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2006
Posts: 21
|
I am quite aware of the bolting ban at Nemo. Halton Conservation, as I have been made to believe, is open to making climbs safer and adding anchors to popular trad climbs to prevent cliff side erosion.
I have not bolted anything anywhere, while I do clip bolts I am much more of a trad climber definitely preferring ground-up onsight ethics.
This does not mean that others are not of the same mindset as us. Routes have been bolted since the ban has been in place, and bolts have been added without the permission of Halton Conservation.
As for Big Gulp - the finish is an unprotected 5.10 traverse to one side (don't remember which as I've never stepped off the ground on it). I talked to Peter Reilly (FA) the other day and the "bolters" did speak with him and get his permission. I doubt they got Halton's. The bolters had already climbed the standard version of the route, and were working moves going straight up. I'm not even sure if they bolted it or not. They were talking about 20-30 foot headwall above the main route to be about 5.12.
I definitely agree that a guidebook for Ontario or any area should outline the local rules and ethics. But the main role of the guidebook author is to educate on the routes whether we agree with them or not.
Justin
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 17, 2008, 1:27 PM
Post #38 of 60
(4613 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
As for route grading.
I am troubled with the concept of route grading at Nemo. If we ignore sport routes for a moment and focus on Trad.
The grades for gear protected routes at Nemo in the 5.6 to 5.10 range are 1 to 3 grades harder than most other places I’ve been.
That said, I believe trad on escarpment limestone is inherently more difficult due to the extra time and care needed when placing gear. This as I understand is not supposed to be taken into account in the Yosemite Decimal System.
As for sport routes, I believe the grades are still out of step however, probably only by 1 or maybe 2 grades.
I am far from an expert at grading climbs, but would be happy to take feedback from the climbing community and set the values at something more in tune with the rest of the world.
As of yet, I have left the route grades unchanged and I’ve graded new routes by comparing them to other routes at Nemo.
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 17, 2008, 1:30 PM
Post #39 of 60
(4611 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
The alternate mixed finish for The Big Gulp is currently considered to be 5.12b. I have not located the bolts on the topo as they are quite difficult to see from the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 17, 2008, 1:36 PM
Post #40 of 60
(4610 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
I have been in discussions with OAC. We have jointed drafted a full page on access to climbing in Ontario, Nemo and Rules & Ethics.
I personally believe educating climbers on correct ethics and access rules is extremely important. I am personally quite concerned that ignorance will result in further climbing closures around the province.
I also have also offered the OAC the option to include a free 1 page ad or graphic which I hope will help encourage more support from the climbing community. Hopefully it will also encourage more access for all of us.
|
|
|
|
|
hoppinbig
Oct 17, 2008, 2:07 PM
Post #41 of 60
(4598 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 409
|
So to clarify - this will be a guide just for Nemo? As much as I think we need a new guidebook for all of Southern Ontario (Lionshead on the North to Nemo on the south) I'm just not convinced that I or any of my climbing friends would buy a new book just for Nemo. By limiting your book to one crag I think you're shooting yourself in the foot. I don't mean to be a hater - I think we are truly in need of a new all-encompassing book that covers all the new route development up at Lion's Head.
I wish you lots of luck but in reality I wouldn't consider buying a book unless there was a substantial amount of new route development in the area - I (and most regulars I'm sure) know the routes at Nemo and rarely even have to take a guidebook to the crag.
Another issue is it seems that you are focusing largely on trad - now I'm no trad hater, infact anyone that knows me knows that I prefer plugging gear - but the reality is that climbing on gear at Nemo (with the exception of maybe 3 routes) is junk... I'd say 95% of climbers at Nemo clip bolts (and rightfully so) so unless you have a ton of mileage on most of the sport routes there... what value are you possibly adding to motivate people to buy your guide?
Again I don't want to pee in your soup - just playing devil's advocate here and say if you're doing a new guide why not do it right to maximize your chances of success? Buy the current guide to the RRG look at the beautiful pics, the great descriptions of both the areas and the climbs and use that as your template.
Bon chance.
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 17, 2008, 3:51 PM
Post #42 of 60
(4582 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
I agree that a larger guidebook for other areas in Ontario is required.
I am not the right person to document all of these areas, however I believe there are a few people working on this as we speak.
I am not motivated by profits in this project. In fact, I expect the aviation costs alone to be much higher than any profits I could ever realize. The numbers look worse if you add on cameras, lenses, publishing software licenses not to mention time.
That said, the correct season for photographing Lion's Head from the air will soon be at hand. I am hopeful that Janet and I will be making the flight up to Lion's Head in late November to collect the photos in hopes that I can find help assembling it into a guide.
If this comes through, you may well be able to enjoy an updated Lions Head guidebook as well.
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
davidbr
Oct 17, 2008, 9:18 PM
Post #43 of 60
(4568 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 191
|
Sounds like you're taking a well-thought out approach to this project. It's nice to hear that you're working with the OAC.
I can't agree that the trad grades at Nemo are much stiffer than is typical of historical trad areas in eastern North America. The grades are more or less on a par with, say, Seneca or the Gunks. But, as you point out, it's a little tougher to push grades here due to the gear issues.
Best of luck with your work,
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Oct 17, 2008, 10:53 PM
Post #44 of 60
(4562 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
If you compare trad routes at Nemo vs Squamish the grades do not match up.
However, I agree that Gunks, Seneca, and even Bon Echo have close gradings. I have not climbed trad in many other limestone destinations, so I cannot really compare it to anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
geezergecko
Oct 17, 2008, 11:17 PM
Post #45 of 60
(4559 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 729
|
Hard or soft, isn't the point to have consistent gradings within the crag? Reunion, Harlequin, and Camel are all graded at 5.7 but they sure don't feel the same. I for one would welcome an "honest" grade for some of these classic sandbags.
|
|
|
|
|
davidbr
Oct 18, 2008, 12:31 AM
Post #46 of 60
(4547 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 191
|
That's exactly my point. Squamish grades don't compare to Nemo's, but most older trad crags in the East do compare. As Geezergecko points out, there is some discrepancy even within the crag, but that's true of almost anywhere. If it is any more true on the Escarpment, it could be due to the changeable nature of the rock here, from year to year.
It seems some guidebook writers satisfy both the tradition of the area, and this intracrag discrepancy with notes such as 'hard for the grade', 'not for the budding 5.7 leader', etc.
It would be a shame if we were to start aligning grades here with those of Squamish or Skaha. We'd lose a bit of Ontario's climbing tradition for what amounts to an ego-boost.
|
|
|
|
|
myusername
Oct 18, 2008, 1:00 AM
Post #47 of 60
(4546 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 25
|
I agree, number are just numbers, keep with the tradition. Historically, one would assume, that there already has been a consensus on grades but most of us weren't climbing when it happened. I don't even find that the grades are inconsistent, everything seems to fall into shades of easy, medium, difficult. It seems to be true for every climbing area I have ever been to. It's always the grade plus/minus one.
 How about doing away with numbers and cut to the chase... like "two chossy blocks harder than Camel" or "one ancient cedar easier than The Graduate"
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaclimb
Oct 18, 2008, 12:23 PM
Post #48 of 60
(4522 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2006
Posts: 21
|
I think that the general concensus is that the grades should stay the same. I think a lot of us have been coddled by gym grades or lightweight areas. Just because one 5.7 feels drastically different than another doesn't mean its necessarily harder. I have the unfortunate business of rating gym climbs, and the more people I ask the more varied the grades I get. When the grade goes up there's still lots of complaining - too hard too soft blah blah. Who do we rate for? Tall or short people? Flexible or strong people? People with impecible technique in all situations or newbs?
At first climbing on the Escarpment, I thought wow these grades are crazy. Now that I've done 100s of climbs of all levels, I can say that the grading is mostly consistant and each grade level is clearly harder than the last.
My vote would be for grades to stay the same - except for the small number of really out-of-whack ones. Monty Piton roof A3? Maybe A2+.
Justin
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaclimb
Oct 18, 2008, 12:41 PM
Post #49 of 60
(4521 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 5, 2006
Posts: 21
|
A new guidebook for the whole escarpment, hell Ontario as a whole, would be amazing. Starting at Nemo is a great idea - there has been lots of changes at Nemo since the last guide and being such a large area it is very daunting for climbers new to the area. It sounds like this is fastkite and other's first step for the area. Whether or not fastkite gets tired of being a guidebook author and passes the reins onto someone else - I'm certain the whole area's guide will get a big facelift. Thanks for fastkite for getting the ball rolling.
Focusing largely on trad? Maybe because there is 4 trad routes for every sport climb at Nemo. There is way more than 3 good trad routes at nemo - in my opinion there are a few bad ones, but when you actually get out a climb a "junk" route you find some real gems.
Any guide should make people excited to climb in an area or excited to go find and climb a certain route. When I look at the RRG guide I drool over specific lines, and while Nemo has a lot fewer world class lines as the Red there are still some worthwhile climbs and we need to put these in a good light so that locals and visitors can appreciate how good we actually have it.
Justin
|
|
|
|
|
fastkite
Feb 28, 2010, 5:24 PM
Post #50 of 60
(4044 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 29
|
The guidebook is ready and available at www.verticalaim.com.
Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
