Salt Lake Canyoneering School

[Iceaxe]

Jordan Landing has opened a new sporting goods store called "Sports Chalet"..... so what's the big deal about anther sporting goods store you ask? Sports Chalet offers a canyoneering school.

Looks like the classes will be taught by ATS. I've never been through one the ATS classes but have canyoneered with many of their graduates and have only heard good things from those who have actually attended the schools. About half the canyoneering population of California was schooled by ATS.

More info here

Canyoneering Classes
http://www.sportchalet.com/corp/pdf/Canyoneering.pdf

:popcorn:

[Scott Card]

Anyone know who "Alpine Training Services"are? I am curious as to who the instructors are and if they are "the most qualified and experienced....". :popcorn:

[Iceaxe]

"most qualified and experienced....".

As I recall the ACA maintains a perpetual pissing match with ATS over some of the exact wording the two different organizations use. Interesting to follow if ya like a good old fashion food fight..... Guess is what I'm saying is be careful where you get your dope. :haha:

....but bottom line I know several canyoneers who have been through both systems and both systems have good and bad.... I've never heard anyone who went through either system say it was a waste of time or money.

ATS is SoCal based so has not been high on the Utah radar before now..... if Sports Chalet is going to bring these guys into Utah with them then I expect to see a lot more ATS trained Utah canyoneers. Looks like the big payout is that actual canyoneering classes might now be avaiable to Salt Lake canyoneers.

Here is a little more info on ATS
http://www.alpinets.com

ATS was founded by Darren Jeffrey, here is his Bio:
http://www.alpinets.com/directors.html

:flag:

[hank moon]

Anyone know who "Alpine Training Services"are? I am curious as to who the instructors are and if they are "the most qualified and experienced....". :popcorn:

The essay linked below was written by the technical director (or equivalent) of ATS. After reading it, I think your question will be answered...

http://www.alpinets.com/carabiner.html

[Scott Card]

Thank you. Points taken. Looks good to me. It will be interesting to see how this shapes up and what it does to the costs of the courses from the various programs out there.

[ratagonia]

Anyone know who "Alpine Training Services"are? I am curious as to who the instructors are and if they are "the most qualified and experienced....". :popcorn:

The essay linked below was written by the technical director (or equivalent) of ATS. After reading it, I think your question will be answered...

http://www.alpinets.com/carabiner.html

For those who miss Hank's subtle humor, the article on carabiner's is full of incorrect information that indicates the author has zero engineering knowledge and likes to make things up.

While I rarely agree with Rich these days, I agree with his assessment of ATS's prime as... uh... unworthy.

Any indication that they will be offering classes in Utah?

Tom

[Scott Card]

For those who miss Hank's subtle humor,

Tom

:oops: Ummm that would be me. Thanks for clarifying. Darn you engineers and your subtle humor. I wouldn't know engineering BS from fact. My eyes just glaze over and I nod my head. :haha:

I still wonder if this will really happen and whether it will have an effect on the prices of the various classes. Good ole market competition. However, in this area, highly qualified means more than cost, hence my original question. Maybe they will hire those Payson guys who advertise guided canyons in Zion. :haha:

[adrians]

FWIW. ATS has had a commercial prescence here in So Cal (through the Sports Chalet chain-) for a while. We come upon their classes a lot in Little Santa Anita canyon. The guy who runs it (Darren) is the one (I believe) who bolted the canyon and got into an argument with some of the SoCal Canyoneers over this. ATS runs their own website and forum and keep pretty much to themselves.

[Iceaxe]

I'm still waiting for a post from someone who has actually attended an ATS class..... If we are just going to judge by misleading, incorrect and bullshit information posted by leaders of the various canyoneering classes then I know more then one school is in a world of trouble......

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mfl/lowres/mfln130l.jpg

[Randi]

I'm still waiting for a post from someone who has actually attended an ATS class..... If we are just going to judge by misleading, incorrect and bullshit information posted by leaders of the various canyoneering classes then I know more then one school is in a world of trouble......

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mfl/lowres/mfln130l.jpg

While I

[Canyonbug]

Boy, remind me not to make Randi mad.

[chabidiah]

I meet that Darren guy once at the Maverick. He got pissed off when I took a pic... He told me, "me no bolt canyon!"

[Randi]

Boy, remind me not to make Randi mad.

That post wasn't me mad.
That was merely a "telling it like it is" post.
Sorry if it scared you.

~Randi

[Canyonbug]

Boy, remind me not to make Randi mad.

That post wasn't me mad.
That was merely a "telling it like it is" post.
Sorry if it scared you.

~Randi

Nope, didn't scare me. Just an inference also to the last time I heard you rant it was about me and a post I made on the ACA forums about pop can chock stones.

[Randi]

Boy, remind me not to make Randi mad.

That post wasn't me mad.
That was merely a "telling it like it is" post.
Sorry if it scared you.

~Randi

Nope, didn't scare me. Just an inference also to the last time I heard you rant it was about me and a post I made on the ACA forums about pop can chock stones.

Ohhh that? Well, I guess I can be rather opinionated at times. And I DO use a lot of words over email (that alone scares some people - or bores them to tears). Maybe I should change my name to Ranti?

I'm really am pretty harmless, and I don't mean to throw out a bunch of negativity. It sure seems like people get defensive when I rant and sometimes I can't figure out why. I'm a positive person. Really. I guess I just don't mind confrontation, discussing differences and /or matters of opinion, etc. And telling the truth and calling people on it (not you & pop-can chockstone jokes - I'm referring to the ATS post) when they're dishonest must be a pet peeve of mine I guess.

Note: I have absolutely nothing against guides, guiding, and guidebook authors. In fact many of my friends are guides, and guidebook authors.

[Scott Card]

Randi, Thanks for you input. I sorta started this banter by my question as to who these guys were. I was glad to hear your perspective. :nod:

[Randi]

Randi, Thanks for you input. I sorta started this banter by my question as to who these guys were. I was glad to hear your perspective. :nod:

Well, I'm happy to "input" as everybody knows.... :nod:
Differing perspectives are good.




"most qualified and experienced....".

As I recall the ACA maintains a perpetual pissing match with ATS over some of the exact wording the two different organizations use. Interesting to follow if ya like a good old fashion food fight..... Guess is what I'm saying is be careful where you get your dope. :haha:

My dope (ranting) may be hard digest sometimes, but it's always honest. I've heard it said that the truth will set you free! I don't know if that's true, but it usually clears up the muck a bit. :mrgreen:

~Have a nice day everybody!

~Randi

[rcwild]

I often find myself in very frustrating situations. Frustrating because people have different expectations from me and the ACA than they might have from a canyoneer at large. Should the ACA recommend someone just because they ask us to? I don't think so. I believe people expect us to only recommend guides and guide services that we know (or at least believe) are competent and do not misrepresent their credentials.

Darren claims that he has attempted to build a relationship with the ACA, only to be shut down. The exact opposite is true. I have approached him about working together to teach natural anchor workshops in California (when he was bolting the heck out of the canyons there), I offered him and all of his guides a free day of training so he could get a feel for the kinds of techniques the ACA promotes (which he turned into a full-day bitch session), I drove to Las Vegas to attend one of his slide shows and provided (in a PRIVATE email) critiques of what I saw and suggestions for improvement (to which he basically replied "go F yourself".

I finally gave up and told him I didn't think I could be objective about his application for accreditation or certification. I suggested he start working with Charly Oliver instead and assured him I would abstain from voting. Unfortunately for him, he didn't impress Charly much either.

Over the past year or so, I have heard that his technical skills and the things they are teaching have improved. It is entirely possible that their courses are now of the caliber required to receive a recommendation from the ACA. Maybe. Unfortunately, he continues to misrepresent his credentials on his web site. So, what should the ACA do? Go ahead and post a link to his site anyway just to bring this "pissing match" to an end? Post the link, but add a disclaimer like, "They offer good courses, but misrepresent their credentials." I thought it best to simply exclude them.

He's fond of saying that the only reason the ACA won't recommend them is because Rich has a personal beef with Darren. All I can say is, he started with a blank slate. It's not blank anymore.

Situations like this are especially frustrating to me because they started out in private and should have stayed private. Friends have told me I should just shut up and stay on the "high road" because people will be able to see through the facade. That's hard for me. Example: Not too long ago on this forum, Bo repeated one of Darren's untruths. I wrote to Bo in a private email because I have a lot of respect for Bo, as I know many others do, and didn't want to see him adding credibility to a lie. Should I have instead just bit my tongue?

[tanya]

Situations like this are especially frustrating to me because they started out in private and should have stayed private. Friends have told me I should just shut up and stay on the "high road" because people will be able to see through the facade. That's hard for me. Example: Not too long ago on this forum, Bo repeated one of Darren's untruths. I wrote to Bo in a private email because I have a lot of respect for Bo, as I know many others do, and didn't want to see him adding credibility to a lie. Should I have instead just bit my tongue?

Yes, as a leader you should bite your tongue in public ALWAYS and if at all possible in private as well. Any organization should be ran without visible emotion. You and the organization and board should ALWAYS appear to be professional, unbiast and fair, otherwise it looks like just a bunch of people putting a group together who should not be there because they do not have the emotional strength to hold it together. We do not want to see emotion from our leaders. We want strength, great knowledge, firm leadership and anything less is embarassing. This goes for any leader of any group and is not an attack on anyone in the canyoneering world.

~This is said with the utmost respect to Rich, who I think is wonderful!~

[Iceaxe]

I have instead just bit my tongue?

I don't have a dog in this particular race..... but since you asked....

The ACA should always take the high road..... When asked about a school the ACA response should be "The schools the ACA approves and recommends are listed on our website".... or even "that school is not currently on our list of approved or recommended".

That should be the end of it, any additional comments like "Over the past year or so, I have heard" are very ametuerish and reflect poorly on the ACA as a professional organization.

If the ACA wants to be treated and respected as a national organization they need to respond like one.

Just my 2 cents....

[Bo_Beck]

Example: Not too long ago on this forum, Bo repeated one of Darren's untruths. I wrote to Bo in a private email because I have a lot of respect for Bo, as I know many others do, and didn't want to see him adding credibility to a lie. Should I have instead just bit my tongue?

Point well taken Rich, and I as you, have total respect for you, and you also have my ear. I am gullible for sure, but until someone proves themselves wrong to me, I just have the tendancy to be a believer.

[rcwild]

Yes, as a leader you should bite your tongue in public ALWAYS and if at all possible in private as well. Any organization should be ran without visible emotion. You and the organization and board should ALWAYS appear to be professional, unbiast and fair, otherwise it looks like just a bunch of people putting a group together who should not be there because they do not have the emotional strength to hold it together. We do not want to see emotion from our leaders. We want strength, great knowledge, firm leadership and anything less is embarassing. This goes for any leader of any group and is not an attack on anyone in the canyoneering world.

~This is said with the utmost respect to Rich, who I think is wonderful!~

I know this is sound advice, Tanya. It just flies in the face of what I was taught as an Army officer candidate and what I taught to candidates when I went on to become an OCS instructor myself

[tanya]

[quote=tanya]Yes, as a leader you should bite your tongue in public ALWAYS and if at all possible in private as well. Any organization should be ran without visible emotion. You and the organization and board should ALWAYS appear to be professional, unbiased and fair, otherwise it looks like just a bunch of people putting a group together who should not be there because they do not have the emotional strength to hold it together. We do not want to see emotion from our leaders. We want strength, great knowledge, firm leadership and anything less is embarrassing. This goes for any leader of any group and is not an attack on anyone in the canyoneering world.

~This is said with the utmost respect to Rich, who I think is wonderful!~

I know this is sound advice, Tanya. It just flies in the face of what I was taught as an Army officer candidate and what I taught to candidates when I went on to become an OCS instructor myself

[rcwild]

It's not the occasional "white lie" that bothers me. Yes, I have told a fib or two (or more) in my life. "No, dear, that dress does not make you look fat."

What bothers me are the pathological liars and posers. In a canyoneering context, someone could get hurt if they put their trust in someone who claims to know more than they really do or have more experience than they really do, etc.

If I know you are about to do a difficult canyon with someone who claims to have X years of canyoneering experience, but I know he just started a couple months ago, do you want me to shut up about it? Yes, you should always check your partners anchors and rigging anyway, so hopefully you will catch his mistakes. But what if something goes wrong and you need help? You were expecting your partner to be there for you, but he is clueless. Or he attempts to help, but only makes matters worse. What will you think of me if you learn later that I knew he misrepresented his skills to you and I said nothing.

When someone with very little experience sets up a guide service or school and attracts beginners with his false credentials, should I shut up? Even if I know he is (or was) teaching inappropriate techniques? If someone gets hurt using those inappropriate techniques, how should I feel knowing that I remained silent? Perhaps I could have helped avoid a serious injury or death if I had spoken up.

Issues I have been wrestling with.

[Iceaxe]

It just flies in the face of what I was taught as an Army officer candidate

Does the military also not teach that it is best to lead by example?

:cool2:

[ratagonia]

I often find myself in very frustrating situations. Frustrating because people have different expectations from me and the ACA than they might have from a canyoneer at large. Should the ACA recommend someone just because they ask us to? I don't think so. I believe people expect us to only recommend guides and guide services that we know (or at least believe) are competent and do not misrepresent their credentials.


Actually, I expect the ACA to have written, published, objective standards (and processes for meeting those standards) for when its recommendations are provided for guides, services and instructors. Which would have zip (nada, zero) to do with how Rich "feels" about X, Y or Z. The ACA is pretty close to achieving this.

Tom

[rcwild]

Actually, I expect the ACA to have written, published, objective standards (and processes for meeting those standards) for when its recommendations are provided for guides, services and instructors. Which would have zip (nada, zero) to do with how Rich "feels" about X, Y or Z. The ACA is pretty close to achieving this.

The process of developing these objective standards would go much faster if members of the pro division would take some initiative and provide their input. I've asked several times if integrity should be a criteria for accreditation and/or certification.

I'm curious to hear from the canyoneering community at large. How would people feel if the ACA certified a guide or accredited a guide service, even if we knew that guide or guide service was misrepresenting its other credentials in their marketing material?

[tanya]

I'm curious to hear from the canyoneering community at large. How would people feel if the ACA certified a guide or accredited a guide service, even if we knew that guide or guide service was misrepresenting its other credentials in their marketing material?

The problem with 'integrity' is who is to judge? Marketing ... is marketing. A business usually pays someone to write 'stuff' and it has little to do with total reality -- in fact much of it is exaggerations or an emphasis on a certain detail they happen to want to push --- but it is how marketing works. Marketing is simply fluff to get people interested in things.

In Zion there is lots of it by the outfitters and not just advertising but sells technique. Do park visitors really need all that fancy stuff that is rented by the outfitters - to make a buck - just to hike the narrows? Should they be sent down Clear Creek when the Narrows is closed just so things can be rented? It may not be the best morals, but business is business. So should the ACA support them just because they probably took classes there? (I have no idea if they did or not)

And --- what if an instructor is not qualified to teach 'canyoneering technique' should he or the company get support by the ACA? And if that is the case...

How is that judged?

As a Judo and Dance instructor I judge my teaching skills by the accomplishments of my students. If they get hurt during practice or competition that is because I have not taught them correctly!

In the Canyoneering World --- I bet students from all places of instruction get hurt, get lost, bivy due to bad judgment and some might even get killed. So what if this happens when the teacher is considered 'good' by ACA standards? I have no idea what the stats would be of the ACA VS (sorry I don't even know what this other place is) If someone dies canyoneering --- who was taught by the ACA is that organization no longer credible?

[rcwild]

The problem with 'integrity' is who is to judge? Marketing ... is marketing. A business usually pays someone to write 'stuff' and it has little to do with total reality -- in fact much of it is exaggerations or an emphasis on a certain detail they happen to want to push --- but it is how marketing works. Marketing is simply fluff to get people interested in things.

Marketing hyperbole is one thing. Anyone can say they are the best, the most qualified, the most experienced, the most handsome, etc. All subjective statements. When objective information (e.g. years of experience, contractual relationships) is falsified, that goes beyond hyperbole.


In Zion there is lots of it by the outfitters and not just advertising but sells technique. Do park visitors really need all that fancy stuff that is rented by the outfitters - to make a buck - just to hike the narrows? Should they be sent down Clear Creek when the Narrows is closed just so things can be rented? It may not be the best morals, but business is business. So should the ACA support them just because they probably took classes there? (I have no idea if they did or not)

And --- what if an instructor is not qualified to teach 'canyoneering technique' should he or the company get support by the ACA? And if that is the case...

How is that judged?

All things the ACA has been wrestling with. We started the Pro Division to expand our perspective regarding what is appropriate and to encourage members to share ideas, information and opinions.


As a Judo and Dance instructor I judge my teaching skills by the accomplishments of my students. If they get hurt during practice or competition that is because I have not taught them correctly!

Really? That's a lot of weight to carry on your shoulders. Accidents do happen that are beyond control