but had to laugh when reading the comment about balls of steal... Good luck with its finish this weekend.
I guess you did not want to invite a girl alone - no balls..
I thought that would lighten up the page ;)
... and one of the most unstable in the lower 48 states."
Really? Seems a bit dramatic to me. I have no doubt this is very hard, but there is alot of scary and dangerous stuff out there if you're willing to look. I guess it's not a bad idea to add the scare at the beginning to scare away the 14er crowd who might think this is a good idea...
PS - Wasn't the rest of the route up here too? Not just the first half. What happened?
Brian, It's been over 3? years since those fateful days. Still, even today, I'd have to agree with most of this statement. Kiefer gave a good representation. Combine the Elks, and San Juans worst rock, put it in a blender and throw it out. I myself thought that statement was for out there but after having traveled the whole traverse, there is nothing quite like it. I think it's also important to add that the traverse is well over 2.5 miles as indicated in the original traverse description I wrote for sp. But it was more like over 4 miles according to a specific measurement on Google Earth. I would no go far to say it's the loosest in CO, still. Dangerous. Run out. Scary. Quite scary. I would like to go back and do it in a massive day. This time 99% without a rope. That way I can see if it really was that bad. I remember being really terrified the whole time. Basically soloing 5.6/7 on bad rock, even with rope.
Gonna have to agree with Noah.
When writing a route description, tis always best to cater it to the LCD of climber. I think it's safer (and wiser) to head into a climb expecting hell and discovering it's not as bad as one was lead to believe than to be caught unawares.
Though...it is a bad, loose route.