|
|
Forums:
Climbing Disciplines:
Trad Climbing:
Re: [stymingersfink] Bolting to Preserve the rock.:
Edit Log
|
|
iamthewallress
Nov 15, 2007, 6:21 PM
Views: 2427
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
stymingersfink wrote: What do you mean here? Do you mean for the leader? For the second? I think much of the damage to the corner comes from the leader being lowered from the anchor. There's really no other way to avoid it, as letting the rope run through the crack itself will push one's gear back into the crack. The remainder (perhaps majority, in all probability) of the damage comes from TR'ing the route, or even bringing up a second from the anchors above (that never happens in this case).
Lowering the leader, IMO, is a lazy habit that does a lot of unnecessary dammage in IC. It has its place, but I don't think its place should be on a route with a corner that's getting grooved to hell in a very access-sensitive area. Obvious new fixed anchors (i.e. a directional bolt w/ permenant draw) can be a problem too.
In most places only climbers notice these things, but I don't think this is one of them...especially Way Rambo wall. I was under the impression that there have been specific requests from the Ranch folks to minimize the existance of such things and keep them as camo as possible otherwise. Admittedly, I'm not a local and don't know the details, so I just try to go as delicately as I can and encourage others to do the same since I want to keep visiting.
Beyond lowering the leader, I was envisioning a fair amount of dammage to come from seconds dogging the bottom of the route w/ the rope running tightly around the corner (b/c slings weren't used to pop it out further and spread the rub around). I'd bet a fair number of folks that start up the bottom, don't make it around the roof and end up getting lowered on the rope that is tensioned around the corner. My original comment was getting at the idea that having the rope run out on the face makes for a bigger fall for both the leader and the secondwhen rounding the corner, and probably as such would end up getting ignored by the less conscientious anyway. Same groove...plus a bolt.
With all of the hundreds of full-comfort cragging options right there, it only seems responsible and respectful to me to accept a lower-convience experience if we want to climb routes that are obviously getting dammaged by agressive TRing. IMO, the bolt on the face sort of sends a message that says, "every person should feel entitled to do their thing on every last bit of land here...price of admission is free."
I know my ideas may be unrealistic, but I also feel like restrictions are probably going to end up enforced due to the mega-gym vibe and dammage that comes w/ it that seems to dominate there. I enjoy that vibe a lot of the time, but I also think that there are times when we need to remember that it's part wildnerss part next door to someone else's home (an a little bit part of their home too) and take in upon ourselves to show some restraint on the routes that can't handle so much impact.
(This post was edited by iamthewallress on Nov 15, 2007, 6:32 PM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by iamthewallress
() on Nov 15, 2007, 6:25 PM
|
|
Post edited by iamthewallress
() on Nov 15, 2007, 6:26 PM
|
|
Post edited by iamthewallress
() on Nov 15, 2007, 6:28 PM
|
|
Post edited by iamthewallress
() on Nov 15, 2007, 6:29 PM
|
|
Post edited by iamthewallress
() on Nov 15, 2007, 6:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
