Climb Eastern Canada

by **john** » Thu May 19, 2005 2:50 pm

The media contacted me a few weeks ago with reagrds to the welsford access issue. At that time I asked themn to hold off publishing an artical until I recieved the Bases officail stance. Today I was again contacted. They want to publish and artical asap. Rather than risk an uninformed opinion being published I gave all the information to them. The author is a climber based out of Saint John and and a former UNB Rock and Ice member. He assured me the artical would be a very positive one which should only help our situation. Although it was not my choice to publish this artical without having the military letter or proposal response in my hands I have no choice. That being said, I am thankful the paper seems keen to help in a positive way with the situation. I thought I should let everyone know, so that you can get a copy of the paper. Check tommorow or the next day Saint John Telegraph Journal.

john bowles

by **Chris** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:05 am

John, I read the article this morning. Very positive and neither side looks like the bad guy in this situation. Thanks again for being our spokesperson on this issue. Your efforts are very appreciated.

Chris

by **Chris** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:09 am

http://www.canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050520/TSEBRIEF/305200153/-1/FRONTPAGE

Above is a link to the article if anyone wants to check it out.

by **martha** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:28 am

I agree, it is a good article.

Good work John, and thanks Sean McCarroll for the concern and interest.

Cara

by **Fred** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:59 am

that article must come out in the SJ afternoon paper eh? Paul Martin is on page A1 this morning.

by **Chris** » Fri May 20, 2005 9:43 am

we don't have an afternoon paper anymore.....it's somewheres in the morning paper. :-)

by **Fred** » Fri May 20, 2005 10:03 am

I found it on page A4. The article online says "as published page A1".

by **martha** » Fri May 20, 2005 11:23 am

You guys may wish to listen to 'Maritime Noon' today on CBC.

by **mitchleblanc** » Fri May 20, 2005 11:47 am

Typical shithouse reporting. I liked the ominous line "He has yet to receive a reply." .. oooh! No wait. It wasn't just an ominous line, it was an entire ominous paragraph.. Plus it's wrong. He goes on later to actually use a QUOTE from a gagetown spokesman!? He does in fact put a negative spin on the whole article, insinuating that gagetown is in the wrong. It's not neutral, though he maybe tries to be, and I suppose we should in fact thank him for that.

The routes "Joe's Garage" and "Minkey Wall" must be nice lines, they have nice sounding names anyway.

Oh wait, what else. Mr. Bowles sure comes across as a real hero, at least that was good. How him being ranked first in Canada has anything to do with the situation is beyond me.

I love the part too about "the chat on the forum". hahaha. what a joke. Did he put that in there just to convince US that this is the reason you haven't been posting any information about the process on the forum! Because some tiny NB article was going to be posted, rife with errors?

Gimme a break, and give everyone else a break. You (Mr. Bowles) and everyone else involved in the process haven't honestly been open about everything that's been going on. You haven't posted anything in the forum except "please wait while we do our work, and don't discuss it". How about telling the people what you did? Being .. you know. Open. Oh, we're not allowed to discuss it in the forum because of fears of some reporter publishing an article, then suddenly we're told that YOU authorized a little article because you were *assured* it would be a good one? Hmm... whenever it's convenient for you. It's like dealing with the Bush administration.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you HAVE to post anything.. I'm saying you're lying when you say "you'll post information when you have it", because that also would involve telling everyone what you're doing, preferrably BEFORE you do it.

Actually, you know what? Don't even bother. I'm sure this post will get deleted by Big Brother, so no one will read it.

The article couldn't possibly do any harm, and neither would forum discussion.

by **mitchleblanc** » Fri May 20, 2005 12:00 pm

Just heard a bit of your interview on CBC buddy, nicely done! Well spoken.

by **martha** » Fri May 20, 2005 12:03 pm

Job Well done John.

Excellent interview.

Thank you for representing us in such a positive and great way.

Cheers.

Cara

by **Fred** » Fri May 20, 2005 12:09 pm

Mitch,

why are you always so angry? Jon is doing fine work over this matter and will likely be the reason for us regaining access.

big brother

by **Fred** » Fri May 20, 2005 12:18 pm

I thought the TJ article was great and I also found John did an exceptional job with his CBC interview on Maritime Noon. Nice work John. I honestly don't think anyone could be doing it better. Very mature and very diplomatic. I'm glad you are representing us.

cheers

by **kate** » Fri May 20, 2005 7:34 pm

I hadn't heard that "Competition Climbing Canada's current ranking has Mr. Bowles first in the nation for bouldering". I guess Jon must have come first place at Coyote's..?

by **zig** » Fri May 20, 2005 8:42 pm

the ranking is outdated. after coyote's regionals, Simon Villeneuve would be in 1st. For the CEC rankings, you just need to enter 3 locals, 1 regionals and you have a very good chance to be in the "top 10 in canada" if you place in the top 5 or so. The nationals is usually where rankings are determined seeing it's worth way more points. 3x more than 1 regional! local = 20pts, regional= 50pts, national championship= 150pts (for 1st place). there's a good video by Dr.Topo of Coyote's regionals comp. worth watching (drtopo.com). some people are going to dover this sunday, give me a shout
zig

by **kate** » Sat May 21, 2005 4:13 pm

merci ghislain.
as-tu des photos de tes voyages en France que tu partageras avec nous..?

kate

by **mitchleblanc** » Sun May 22, 2005 5:04 am

Fred wrote:Mitch,

why are you always so angry? Jon is doing fine work over this matter and will likely be the reason for us regaining access.

big brother

a) I'm not angry at all. I'm just being the one who voices his displeasure over certain issues. It's not even MY displeasure, I'm just raising the issues.

b) I never said Jon (John?) wasn't doing a good job. (My "Mr. Bowles" comments did make it seem that way, but actually I was just making fun of the horrible writing in the article.) I have no doubt that he is! I heard his interview, and it was wicked. He is the man. (To say that he alone is responsible for getting us access is silly though.)

c) You're not big brother. As someone told me (my source of most welsford access related info), they were asked my "the committee" to erase all forum comments. If you were in charge of the "censorship operation", then maybe you are... but Big Brother is "those who are in charge of the issue, and don't want the people thinking for themselves".

by **Matt Peck** » Sun May 22, 2005 8:02 am

A la the good old 1984.

Climb Eastern Canada

Welsford Article

Welsford Article

Who is online