I think a PG-13 rating for P38 is a little much. Yes there is a healthy runout at the 5.8 move, but if you're leading this, you shouldn't be all that worried about that climbing. It should not be a problem for even the budding 5.10 leader, which I categorize myself as.

RR

grazi, RR.

So.
Julie.
Lemme get this straight.
The locals don't give you info on Lost City. You say it should be documented, a guidebook for it even.
The Trapps has a guidebook. Several, in fact. So, when a question arises about a route in the book you......ask a couple of locals.
O Henry would be proud of you.

You might find something helpful here http://gunks.com/ubbthreads7/ubbthreads.php/topics/38819/1

If someone posts a guidebook online - will hackers "chop it?"

About an increase in use at LC - It's definitely true that the parking lot gets full pretty early on good weekend days. Also keep in mind that parking lot is used for people going to the Split Rock area, and hikers taking the Old Minnewaska Road.

An increase in climbing at Lost City would impact the availability for those people simply because climbers do tend to come early/stay late.

If the preserve doesn't want the impact on Lost City, they could, if the wanted to, limit the number of Day Passes to climbers sold from that location. Of course, this would probably end up being a debate almost as big as the other "big issue" that flares up on this site with regularity - hahahah.

But.... If the preserve wants to limit the impact there - then I think limiting the Day Pass sales(or even limiting the number of Annual Pass climbers allowed on certain days) would be a pretty effective remedy.

Last summer, a couple of people locked their keys in their car at the LC parking area, and were waiting for a locksmith to come. I was talking to them, and pretty surprised to find out it was one of the person's very first times out climbing. The other person, the more experienced one, had gone to LC with a guide, who set up top ropes. That person learned how to set TR's and - since they only knew LC cliff top.... that was where they were climbing and taking their friends.

Perhaps the preserve should also consider the impact that is being sown through allowing guides to bring beginners/beginner groups out to LC?

Meanwhile - the local ethic IS for non-documentation. The preserve request is also for non-documentation. I just don't see how anyone can legitimately argue validity for publishing the information.

Good point Terrie. I could be mistaken, but I think the Preserves intention is to not have guided parties in there. It would be interesting to hear from some of the guides on this. How do YOu feel about taking large, or even small groups of topropers out there as a guide?

RR

Unlikely; I've never met a climber that really smelled like a hacker. Yes there is a distinctive odor.

ped = CTslacker

On a few occasions i have hiked from the lot to the cliffs with guided groups heading to lc for certification, thought it made sense as it practically insured empty routes and decreased distraction. Curious to hear what the preserves stance on this is.

My understanding is that the Preserve allows guides to have a limited presence in the areas, categorized as lower-impact zones, that the Preserve wants to remain undocumented. I have heard the figure one guide and four clients per guide service, but that is second-hand information and may be incorrect.

Although there are certainly people who don't understand this, the Preserve could care less about the original climbers motivations for leaving the area undocumented. But speaking from that perspective, I think guiding in those areas is a very unfortunate development, although I do understand the difficult compromises that come up when a commercial operation wants to use resources that are already crowded.

Julie, I've led P38 so it must be G. I'm not even sure where the PG 5.8 move is. (I was going to send this via PM but you're over your limit.)