Ho-Hum/North Fork of Robber's Roost

[Wasatch]

Is Shane's NF of RR the same as Ho-Hum?

[stefan]

no it's in the fork next door.

shane's map has the point marked at which ho-hum comes in (if you call the entire branch ho-hum).

on tom's map, shane's and kelsey's NF of RR are the same fork

http://canyoneeringusa.com/utah/roost/hohum00.jpg

[Wasatch]

Thanks.

[Iceaxe]

on tom's map, shane's and kelsey's NF of RR are the same fork


It's a miracle.... :lol8:

FWIW: Tom, myself and just about everyone else who sprays beta, with the notable exception of Kelsey, try hard to coordinate our names for the same routes.

Many have suggested to Kelsey that including an "Also Known As" line in his text would be very helpful. But I don't think it's doing to happen. He doesn't like our "silly names".

:popcorn:

[stefan]

:lol8: :lol8:


as far as including the silly names ... it may happen. although it would be IDEAL for him to include the names within each route description, he currently has the idea of *possibly* placing a table somewhere (i think in the back) which would give the correspondance. i believe the names should be directly connected to the route description.

[Iceaxe]

I agree... and I have been working on MK. Those of you who have his ear might also take a swing at it if you think it's valuable info to have.

I think one simple sentence "AKA: Mindbender" would be ideal.

One small difference in the way many of us do business is MK lists canyons and most of us list routes (which I consider to be two different things). As canyoneering grows I expect more routes in each canyon similar to Tom's new Maybe Mindbender.

:popcorn:

[stefan]

I agree... and I have been working on MK. Those of you who have his ear might also take a swing at it if you think it's valuable info to have.

I think one simple sentence "AKA: Mindbender" would be ideal.


as you say a lot of us are trying. he hears us, but his issue is that he doesn't want to give too much credit to these names (for a plethora of reason). however, the internet is becoming a permantent source of canyoneering beta and its use will only continue to increase ... and naturally these silly names will certainly persist.

amongst the *many* different reasons we all argue with him on to include these names, it seems simple enough to me that folks are going to research beta in multiple places and his book would be an even more valuable and practical resource, if routes can easily be cross-referenced with other sources of beta ... which likely will use these silly names.

but again, he doesn't want to give too much credit to these names or be responsible for their propagation and proliferation.

could be an interesting topic of discussion for some this weekend :nod:

[nosivad_bor]

Perhaps uutah members that own these books can put together a cross reference list of our own that can be downloaded and tucked in the back of the MK book?

Just an idea.

Rob

[hesse15]

on tom's map, shane's and kelsey's NF of RR are the same fork

Many have suggested to Kelsey that including an "Also Known As" line in his text would be very helpful. But I don't think it's doing to happen. He doesn't like our "silly names".

:popcorn:
i tried to explainhim that telling somebody that you did "the right fork of the north end of the east side of.."
it is not as sexy and appealing like tell 'I did alcatraz'
but i do not think he still get it, or mostly , he does not care.

his point is that for search and rescue and in general if you do not change the name is easier to do locate a place from the name, but sometime become really complicated
i really like Shaggy that put the pages and thedifferent names of the
canyons

but still will be nice to have them in the book togheter and not separate.
:popcorn:

[Iceaxe]

it is not as sexy

I'll take a wild guess and say MK doesn't do sexy.... :lol8:

:popcorn:

[Scott P]

FWIW: Tom, myself and just about everyone else who sprays beta, with the notable exception of Kelsey, try hard to coordinate our names for the same routes.

Hmmm, aren't the things the "crowd" is doing the same as MK is doing? I see no difference.

Latest Rave's Frosted Flakes Canyon is _________ __________

Latest Rave's Moe Slot is (published) South Fork Choprock

Tom's "Drama Queen" is Hyde Draw.

Shane's "Exit Canyon" has been known as Sneak Canyon for decades.

I don't buy the "we're just naming routes and not canyons" either, because MK can pull the same thing and say he's naming canyons and not routes and thus not changing anything either.

I see no difference between what MK is doing than what Ram, Tom, Shane, SA, etc. have all done. Usually the motivation behind it is to hide the location, but I still fail to see it as any different.

You are all changing names (but you are all nice guys). Personally, I think the earliest known name should be used if at all possible. If you don't know of a name, that's different, but I see it being done intentionally.

I have also tried to talk MK into not changing the names, but please set a good example.

I guess I am guilty of it too, at least once intentionally. I usually refer to SA's "Little Gem" as "Gem" beacause I thought the name little was out of place. OK, so I'm guilty too. At least I used half the existing name.

[Iceaxe]

Shane's "Exit Canyon" has been known as Sneak Canyon for decades.

FWIW: Exit Canyon is NOT a canyon name. It's just a place holder in the route description to note where you exit. If you read my route descriptions you will note that about half of them have an "Exit Canyon". So if you are using these as names their are now probably 200 canyons named Exit Canyon. :lol8:

The names I use (and most others) are the names most popular within the canyon community. It doesn't mean it was the canyons first name, just the popular name. Personally I try to set a good example by listing all known AKA's in my beta. I don't list "Sneak" because you are the only person I have heard use that name for the exit route in question and I try not to introduce to many new names.

And I've noticed many of the names used in Ram "stories" (and others) are attempts to hide the canyons true location or name and not the name used when discussing actual beta and routes.

YMMV

[Scott P]

Edited...

(Also I

[Iceaxe]

I've named very few canyons or routes. Most names I use are suggested by others or the name used in beta given to me by others.

As for the Chambers name I have no clue.... it wasn't my name and I was not consulted in it's naming. Same with most names.

You are preaching to the wrong guy... I go with the popular name, mostly because it helps those using a search engine find beta, which bottom line is what I do.

:popcorn:

[Scott P]

You are preaching to the wrong guy... I go with the popular name, mostly because it helps those using a search engine find beta, which bottom line is what I do.

I don't advocate MK changing the names at all. On the other hand I don't buy the MK is guilty, but everyone else is innocent idea either.

I will try to work on/talk to MK and his changing of the names this weekend. I will ask his to use the previously estabished ones whenever possible.

We're doing Gem, Enigma, and Poncho Wash this weekend. I know he wants to change Gem to "Three Forks Canyon." Not sure what he will want to change Enigma to. "The Canyon South of Poncho East Side of Muddy Creek"?

I'll talk to him, but don't know if it will work. If you have any specific canyon names you want me to bring up to him, let me know. I'm leaving in an hour or two.

[Iceaxe]

I don't think anyone is hanging MK. I believe general opinion is it would be nice/helpful if MK included an AKA when known.

MK has access to all my canyon names so adding an AKA line would be pretty easy. My site also lists most known AKA's so that would cut down on a lot of work on his part. Contrary to what MK let's on I know he follows the canyon names currently being used by the canyon community.

:popcorn:

[montanablur]

When I was young and Skiing Bridger Bowl in Montana we would purposely rename routes, chutes, cliffs, etc. The chairs were slow then and wwhen talking with your partner about a max pow strategy for the day it was helpful.


IMO with the internet making information more prevelant and easier to access, the more things are kept secret the better.

[ratagonia]

[quote=Scott Patterson]
True, but the popular name was changed from an existing one (such as Chambers). Personally, I feel that you and others should refer to the canyon as per it

[ratagonia]

[quote]And I've noticed many of the names used in Ram "stories" (and others) are attempts to hide the canyons true location or name and not the name used when discussing actual beta and routes.

True, but what about Tom

[Iceaxe]

True? Uh, how would you know what Ram and my intentions were, unless we told you?

I have no clue about your intentions Tom, but I know Ram's because he told me. :2thumbs:

Other then that I pretty much agree that most names come about so folks can communicate easily using the same reference points. I've always maintained the best way to keep a canyon secret is to not give it a name.

But mostly I'm trying to figure out how this thread evolved into anther "secret" debate. I'm not asking for any secrets. I would like to see published canyon beta have an AKA section to make cross referencing easier. Is that to much to ask for? :ne_nau:

:popcorn:

[ratagonia]

But mostly I'm trying to figure out how this thread evolved into anther "secret" debate. I'm not asking for any secrets. I would like to see published canyon beta have an AKA section to make cross referencing easier. Is that to much to ask for? :ne_nau:

:popcorn:

Nope, not too much at all. I do the same, and try to include all names I have heard used when putting a report together.

Tom

[Scott P]

Scott - your arguing would be stronger if you wouldn't just make stuff up about what "other people" are doing.

Which part did I make up? If something was an assumption rather than fact, I said so.


1. So it's been known as Bull Canyon for decades? - please cite a source. Is this a source that WE should have known about? It is not listed with a name on USGS maps, which is the public, reliable source for place names. It is not in Utah Place Names by Van Cott. Please cite your source.

My source is MK. Unless he is telling a fib, then he asked the local ranchers and they told him it had been known for Bull Canyon for decades. Do you have any reason to think he is not telling the truth? It is indeed possible. What do you think?

If I was sorely mistaken about Chambers than I sincerely apologize. I have been told that it had a previous name, but the person who told me that could be wrong. I didn

[Iceaxe]

Shane Burrows said once that you guys were actually not naming canyons, but instead naming routes (Shane, please tune in). There is nothing wrong with that.

My answer to that would be YES and NO.... and I was only specking for myself and not others.

And example of where I name routes is Bluejohn which has half dozen forks and a couple dozen options of how to combine them.

Scott, I see your problem with naming is that you want to package everything in a nice bundle with rules to establish what the names are. I find it doesn't work that easy and names can actually change. For Example, I receive several emails each month asking about Bluejohn and the "Ralston Route". I have begun to call Complete main and out Horseshoe the Ralston Route because that is what he used and it is now a semi-famous (notorious?) route.

YMMV

[Scott P]

Scott, I see your problem with naming is that you want to package everything in a nice bundle with rules to establish what the names are.

That really wasn't the point of my post though. My point was that there are other people other than MK renaming canyons, routes, or whatever, for various reasons.


My answer to that would be YES and NO.... and I was only specking for myself and not others.

Hmmm, guess I mistunderstood then. Our conversation stemmed partially from "Frosted Flakes" (or should I say possibly(?) re-naming to possibly(?) hide the more obvious location name??? Or maybe that's another can of worms that I don't want to open-never mind).


I had a nice long phone conversation with Kelsey last month. One of the things we discussed was the names of canyons. I tried to explain that we were not naming canyons, but were naming routes.

Who is "we" in your post? I just thought it was the canyoneering community in general, rather than anyone specific, but may be way off the mark.


I find it doesn't work that easy and names can actually change.

Yes, I agree 100%. That is what I was saying. MK is guilty of name changing, but isn't the only one whom has ever done so. Personally, I feel that he should use the established names in most instances.

[Iceaxe]

Hmmm, guess I mistunderstood then. Our conversation stemmed partially from "Frosted Flakes" (or should I say possibly(?) re-naming to possibly(?) hide the more obvious location name??? Or maybe that's another can of worms that I don't want to open-never mind).

You are taking a specific conversation and attempting to interpret it in generalities. I have no clue why Tom called it Frosted Flakes.... maybe to hide it or maybe just to be a smartass..... SA called it Big Tony..... so... Frosted Flakes, there greeeeaaattt.... ya got to admire the humor in that. :haha:


Who is "we" in your post?

First we is Mk and I, second we is my friends and I. As I mentioned, it doesn't all fit in a nice neat package like you want.

I think you are beating a dead horse. I don't think anyone is going to change the way they name canyons. Everyone thinks their way is the best. I'm just asking that those who spray beta include an AKA when possible.

:deadhorse:

[Scott P]

You are taking a specific conversation and attempting to interpet it in generalizations.

OK, let's move on. I apologize for that.


I have no clue why Tom called it Frosted Flakes.....maybe to hide it...

I doesn't matter why. I was only pointing out that other's are doing the same. I made the assumption (which sounds incorrect) that it could have been the same case with Chambers. Since renaming of canyons sounds to be an at least somewhat common theme to both the canyons group TR's and Latest Rave, I guess I wrongly assumed that it could have been the same case with Chambers.

I will take Tom's word for it that Chambers was something unintentional or they didn't know of a previous name. I apologize to Tom.

That however, cannot possibly be the same as with other examples such as "Moe Slot", "Frosted Flakes", or "The Beast", as those were indeed known under different names and I doubt that the people tagging the names could not have known that. Frosted Flakes was definately published under a previous name (as you have pointed out). The Beast is labeled on the topo as something else. Moe Slot has definately been known as something else for a long time (years and years ago) and was (non-technical part) published nine years ago under a different name.

I always thought the reasoning behind the above was as to not spray X rated (or possibly X rated at times) to the "general public". I can't say that it's not a good idea either. I was only saying that other's are doing it and for different reasons.


my friends and I

OK, I see. Never mind about that part then.


I think you are beating a dead horse.

Point taken.

[stefan]

i believe i have asked you this before ... but what is wrong with naming the slot itself, rather than the entire canyon?

personally i don't see anything wrong with naming a section of slot ... and that IS often what the names are actually referring to anyhow.

[AJ]

Scott and I both talked to MK on the 4/13 trip to the Swell. Stefan's posts are still spot on. He is still thinking of including a reference with AKA's, however he is still considering it as a back of the book kind of thing. I also gave my opinion that it would be most beneficial at least in part of the route description. He said he didn't want to glorify the other names, so I suggested putting it near the bottom of the description; near his current "Author's Experiences" section. Seems plenty of people have suggested the AKA's, so hopefully he'll agree that it will be a good thing. I think it would add value to his book and make it more useful.

If not, I agree with the person who suggested we create our own cross reference table that we could print out. Shane, that could be a good suggestion for your website. Make a database cross reference; that way, you could look up one name, and get all it's AKA's (regardless of which of the names you looked up. Would be most useful in electronic/database form so people could look up any name, not just the one in the book...)

Personally, I feel that Chambers is a great name for the canyon; it really fits it well. After you descend it, I'm sure you will agree. Much better than Bull canyon...

[Iceaxe]

He said he didn't want to glorify the other names

I think this is really the thorn in MK's side. He seems to be under the impression that if he acknowledges the other names it will somehow diminish his contribution in popularizing the route.

:popcorn:

[ratagonia]

[quote]1. So it's been known as Bull Canyon for decades? - please cite a source. Is this a source that WE should have known about? It is not listed with a name on USGS maps, which is the public, reliable source for place names. It is not in Utah Place Names by Van Cott. Please cite your source.

My source is MK. Unless he is telling a fib, then he asked the local ranchers and they told him it had been known for Bull Canyon for decades. Do you have any reason to think he is not telling the truth? It is indeed possible. What do you think?

If I was sorely mistaken about Chambers than I sincerely apologize. I have been told that it had a previous name, but the person who told me that could be wrong. I didn

[ratagonia]

I doesn't matter why. I was only pointing out that other's are doing the same. I made the assumption (which sounds incorrect) that it could have been the same case with Chambers. Since renaming of canyons sounds to be an at least somewhat common theme to both the canyons group TR's and Latest Rave, I guess I wrongly assumed that it could have been the same case with Chambers.

I will take Tom's word for it that Chambers was something unintentional or they didn't know of a previous name. I apologize to Tom.

You still don't get it Scott. There may have been a previous name for the system, but not for that specific canyon. Or maybe even for that specific canyon, (not likely, but possible), and if a very, very, very few people were using that name, since it is not in print anywhere that I know of, then I do not accept it as a name, for me.

The name Chambers WAS INTENTIONAL. We NAMED the canyon, so we could talk about it. We are the PRIMARY SOURCE on the name Chambers for that specific canyon. We did not rename it, because it did not have a name. I asked you for a citation, and I got "MK told me". Michael Kelsey is not a citable source, he produces books that are citable sources, and may in cases be acceptable as a Reliable Source, but until it exists IN PRINT or on the web, it is not citable. Capiche?

Tom

[Scott P]

since it is not in print anywhere that I know of, then I do not accept it as a name, for me.

(PS, that post of mine was before you sent me the email). That's fine, but I'm always for using the earliest known name, if possible, but this is only my personal preference. You may be right in that it was the sytem instead of the canyon that was named; I don't know save what I was told and will admit that I was wrong on that if it was the system.


We are the PRIMARY SOURCE on the name Chambers for that specific canyon.

Just a question. What makes you the primary source? The Trip Report?

Let's just forget about Chambers. Let's just say you are right on that one. I have edited my post to say that I was wrong and you were right.


until it exists IN PRINT or on the web, it is not citable.

OK if so, change my example to "Frosted Flakes Canyon" instead. You can't possibly tell me that that canyon didn't have another published name. :ne_nau: It was in print and by a "reliable source."

I think you missed my whole point. My only real point was that others hav changed the name of a canyon (forget about Chambers) for various reasons.

[stefan]

OK if so, change my example to "Frosted Flakes Canyon" instead. You can't possibly tell me that that canyon didn't have another published name. :ne_nau: It was in print and by a "reliable source."




scott, can a canyon be given a nickname without its being recognized as a name change?

[Scott P]

scott, can a canyon be given a nickname without its being recognized as a name change?

IMHO, not without stating right out that it is a nickname rather the name of a canyon and by stating that the canyon has a real name. This is just my opinion.