|
compclimber
Jun 30, 2001, 10:01 PM
Post #1 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2001
Posts: 683
|
I was wondering what the consensus opinion is about bolting on this site?
What do you think of chopping bolts that are too close to natural pro,and do you agree with Steve Diekhoff's chopping of the Corner Stone in boulder canyon?
*Edit: linked to Poll by fiend*
[ This Message was edited by: fiend on 2001-11-16 12:41 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 1, 2001, 12:24 AM
Post #2 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
I think I would have to climb it to say for sure, but I think the ethic should be, if it has natural pro, don't bolt it, but if it has been bolted, don't chop them. No one forces you to use the bolts. I, for instance, would have little reservations about bolting a long run-out stretch on an otherwise trad route because there are either no placements, or those that are there are really bad. I would really rather avoid dying.
By the bolt choppers' arguement, if there are no placements, you should simply free solo the route and use natural pro at the top to set the rappel anchor.
What do you all think?
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 1, 2001, 1:34 AM
Post #3 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
MR WANDT IF YOU CANT DO IT WITHOUT ADDING BOLTS GO AND IMPROVE YOUR SKILL SO YOU CAN REPEAT IT IN THE ORIGIONAL STYLE OR BETTER WITHOUT DEGRADING THE ROUTE!!! THE OBJECT IS TO IMPROVE SKILL NOT BRING THE CLIMB DOWN TO A LEVEL YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH PERIOD!!!! ADDING BOLTS TO AN EXISTING ROUTE INSULTS EVERYBODY, THE FIRST ASCENTIONIST, THE OTHER CLIMBERS WHO RECOGNIZE THE REAL CHALLENGE IN CLIMBING, AND MOST OF ALL THE IREPLACEABLE RESOURCE, THE ROCK. DONT SELL OUT FUTURE GENERATIONS OF CLIMBERS JUST TO FUEL YOUR EGO YOU BONEHEAD!!!!!
MABY YOU SHOULD STAY IN THE GYM WHERE YOU CANT GET KILLED? NO WEENIES ALLOWED OUT HERE!!!
By the way its not you that im pissed at its what you said about adding bolts to a route thats been climbed.DONT teach the less experienced climbers to disrespect the rock becaus they feel like it.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-06-30 20:44 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 1, 2001, 7:32 AM
Post #4 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
Skill will not save you from death. If you fall on a suspect placement from a really long runout, you end up dead whether you climb 5.14 or 5.7. Every climb is different, and the rating is subjective. You don't know if you're going to fall until you climb it. With some of the runouts and suspect placements I've seen, it becomes an onsight free-solo, 'cause they won't save you if you plummet.
And what do you think about the other ideas expressed in the post? ie. the first statement.
Also... what if you ARE the first ascentionist? Do you use your own discretion then? Or do you refrain from putting in bolts even if it's game over if you fall?
Or am I just putting up futile arguements and climbing is about who stays alive because of lucky sends, rather than actually enjoying onesself on the rock?
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 1, 2001, 7:36 AM
Post #5 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
By the way, my statement about having no qualms about fixing pro to protect a long runout, is purely hypothetical. I have neither the tools, money to buy tools, money to leave hard-bought bolts in a cliff, nor the experience and knowhow in placing bolts to do that.
And anyways, if I led something and discovered a runout that long and finished it, I'm far too apathetic to go back and work on it. And if I didn't finish it, that would be because I fell after discovering the runout, and am a smear on the landscape.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 1, 2001, 3:38 PM
Post #6 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
maby you schould leave the new route ascents to more experienced climbers.You dont learn anything about climbing in a gym, that experience can only be gotten the hard way.By doing real ROCK climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
compclimber
Jul 1, 2001, 6:56 PM
Post #7 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2001
Posts: 683
|
Thank's for the responce it seems that you share my opinions as well.
If you would like to read the survey results that were posted in boulder canyon go to www.climbingboulder.com
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Jul 1, 2001, 7:16 PM
Post #8 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
I have never added (or chopped) a bolt from any route. When I climb a bolted route that I feel has a long runout I just take some pro, use it and remove it when finished. I'm not going to change someone else's route. I would expect the same consideration if I put up a route. Add any pro you feel you need along the route if it scares you but don't add bolts.
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Jul 1, 2001, 7:48 PM
Post #9 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
Koolkitty, calm down. I said not to add or detract bolts from a route. Add pro if the route has a runout that bothers you and take it out when done. I have climbed routes that had bolts I didn't feel I needed so I passed them by but if I come to an area with no bolt that bothers me I just use a nut, hex or cam and clean it up when finished. Don't change another person's route!
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 1, 2001, 10:43 PM
Post #10 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
Lets stir the pot some more...
First: How does a bolt change the route? It's not like it's a hold. You don't step on it. You merely clip it.
Second: Unless you have some pretty awesome nuts that aren't available around here, I have no idea how you're gonna put in pro on a blank stretch. Not all routes have a continuous crack. That's what I'm talking about with the runout. Cracks, even with poor placements, can be made relatively safe when stuffed with gear, but if you run out of crack and it's a long ways to the next, what's wrong with a bolt?
Third: Mr. Kagunkie, the experience I'm referring to is experience in drilling and placing bolts correctly- not climbing experience.
By the way, even when I was working in a climbing gym, I've always climbed more outside than indoors.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 1, 2001, 11:34 PM
Post #11 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Mr Wandt Im not sure I understand you correctly Im talking about, adding bolts to an already existing route not a first ascent. The rules are a little different with first ascents, sometimes we use bolts to protect a blank stretch but they must be placed on the lead usually only the smallest number possible are used and in this way we are a little more fair to the rock, it has a right to self defense too.Do you understand what Im trying to say? Most of the greatest routes ever climbed were put up this way. GROUND UP ETHIC is what we call it and its been the ethic since before either of us were born.What right do we have to change it? It would be disrespectfull to all the climbers who risked their own lives to put up all the great routes we enjoy climbing today. Personal risk is a part of the climbing game and without it its not the same game anymore. In addition to Mr Wandts last post a bolt does change a route, it takes something away from it. Does anybody know what that is?
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-07-01 17:36 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 1, 2001, 11:59 PM
Post #12 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
If I find bolts ADDED to an existing route I may just remove them myself. The thing that bolts take away from a route is called.... can we all say it together COMMITMENT. Climbing is about alot more than "doing the moves" my friend.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-07-01 17:39 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 2, 2001, 12:10 AM
Post #13 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
all fixed gear schould blend in with its surroundings, bolts, webbing, whatever, its the least we could do to respect the rock and the other people who dont want to see our garbage. That is what it looks like to most non climbers.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-07-01 17:42 ]
|
|
|
|
|
climb512
Jul 2, 2001, 1:04 AM
Post #14 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2001
Posts: 468
|
Leave them.Keep the dickheads off the rock who are bolting old routes as well as the ones chopping them. Leave the climbing to the 99% of us who climb in the spirit climbing was meant to be done in.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 2, 2001, 1:10 AM
Post #15 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
We dont chop bolts that were put up in good style, only those that are bastardizing the route put up in good style. If they werent put in on the first ascent they usually are not needed unless (rarely) its a case where the origional gear placements are for whatever reason non existant or damaged to a point where they cant be used anymore.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-07-01 18:15 ]
|
|
|
|
|
climb512
Jul 2, 2001, 1:13 AM
Post #16 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2001
Posts: 468
|
Don't sweat it gunkie. If the DICKHEADS keep placing bolts on old routes then the park services and the tree huggers will close the cliffs off to climbers and we wont have anymore bolt wars to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 2, 2001, 1:17 AM
Post #17 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
I hope it never comes to that for sure. NOT IF I CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 2, 2001, 4:48 PM
Post #18 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
You dont know what your talking about. The ethics concerning this matter were around long before you or I were born and I dont think anyone has the right to change it now. YOU DONT ADD BOLTS TO AN EXISTING ROUTE PERIOD! Im not against the use of them at all in fact many of the routes Iv put up have them, all drilled on lead and used only where there is no other gear, thats all. Im saying the ground up ethic is a time tested tradition and we should honer and protect it becaus its there for a reason.Do you know what that reason is? A climb is something to aspire to, something, a challenge to witch we raise ourselves up through hard practice and learning of our own strengths and limits to meet. Some people would rather shoot fish in a barrell.Geerweanie do you know what Im saying. Im not a hard man at all. The highest grade Iv ever lead is 5.11 on a very good day and Im nowhere close to that now, but Id rather climb a lower grade and rely on whatever skill and guts I can find within myself to get to the top and not manufacturing a ladder of bolts to eliminate the commitment. There are alot of cliffs that dont really have any natural gear, put up your sport routes there and leave the traditional areas alone.
|
|
|
|
|
learnintoclimb
Jul 3, 2001, 1:14 AM
Post #19 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2000
Posts: 36
|
Chris Alber who had the bolts on the cornerstone he put there removed by Dieckhoff said that he didn't do it for him he did it for the lowest common denominator.
I agree with him. Kagunkie is just trying to make himself look all good(as in not a wuss). People learn to lead with climbs with bolts spaced only a couple feet apart. You've gotta start somewhere. Coach is a moron, IT'S CALLED A RUNOUT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PLACE GEAR, EVEN TRAD.
|
|
|
|
|
learnintoclimb
Jul 3, 2001, 1:15 AM
Post #20 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2000
Posts: 36
|
Chris Alber who had the bolts on the cornerstone he put there removed by Dieckhoff said that he didn't do it for him he did it for the lowest common denominator.
I agree with him. Kagunkie is just trying to make himself look all good(as in not a wuss). People learn to lead with climbs with bolts spaced only a couple feet apart. You've gotta start somewhere. Coach is a moron, IT'S CALLED A RUNOUT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PLACE GEAR, EVEN TRAD.
|
|
|
|
|
climb512
Jul 3, 2001, 3:31 AM
Post #21 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2001
Posts: 468
|
i must agree with kagunkie. do not place bolts on exsisting routes. there is no need or common sense in adding any. if you sport climb then use the sport routes in place. dont add new bolts because you cant afford cams and nuts. if it is an established route and it was bolted in making that route then NO one also has the right to remove it. if they want it harder or more "natural" then just dont use them. kind of like bad tv just change the channel.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 3, 2001, 4:23 PM
Post #22 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Colby find an EXPERIENCED partner (someone with more than two or three years experience) and go climbing (outdoors) and stop reading those magazines for awile then maby you can have an opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Jul 3, 2001, 8:47 PM
Post #23 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
Colby,
Sorry that you think I am a moron. I have climbed sport routes and never used a single bolt, only trad. If I find a long runout that I could not put any pro in at all and felt uneasy about it I would find another route until my skill was up to it but I am not afraid of (or a moron!) about adding pro to any route I wish to climb. When I finish and remove the pro the route is exactly as it was before. My ethic is that I will not change the route in any way from the FA but that does not mean that I will climb it the same way the FA did. I may decide to go off route at some point and that is my choice, not a breach of ethics.
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Jul 3, 2001, 10:04 PM
Post #24 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
Colby,
The correct definition of "runout" is the distance between two pieces of protection (ie; bolts on a bolted route) and a route is generally considered "runout" whenever the distance between protection is considered to be uncomfortable long. This does not necessarily mean that additional protection cannot be added between existing protection.
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 8, 2001, 3:01 AM
Post #25 of 137
(10990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
Beerandblood: Please explain to me the corelation between an outdoor climbing route, which receives a first ascent by someone, rather than is created from scratch by someone, and a painting, which IS created from scratch. When I stare at a rock wall, I don't think "Wow, I could do so much with this blank canvass", I think "I guess I'll grab that hold and step on that one, 'cause they're there." It's really more like a colouring books. The lines are there, and everyone can add their own colours. Moderate bolting is only like choosing between crayons and felt tips. Why not let the colourer choose for themselves. Some folks just aren't comfortable with felt tips, because if you use that, fall on your way long ago felt tip in a poor placement, you're gonna have red marker ALL over the place, and your mom is gonna be mucho pissed about the laundry.
Maybe if you physically build the wall out of sand, compress it into rock, chisel the holds and then determine how many bolts are in it, you may consider it your own masterpiece and have the right to chop bolts. Otherwise, just live and let live/lead and let lead.
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 8, 2001, 8:46 AM
Post #26 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
You still didn't answer my question. What is the corelation between an outdoor climbing route and a painting?
And you missed the point of the whole make-your-own cliff part. I didn't call a sport climb a masterpiece. Maybe if you made your own cliff you would fill it with cracks. It makes no difference! I simply said that unless you create an entire crag on your onw with little or no help from nature, you can't take credit for it's inception, and should not act as if it is yours. Read carefully.
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 8, 2001, 8:48 AM
Post #27 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
Oh yes... and how is chopping bolts looking out for one another?
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 8, 2001, 1:56 PM
Post #28 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Theres a time to drill and a time to refrain from drillllling. The best we can do is try to respect each other and the rock. Drill with honor and not like some backdoor bandit. If we dont observe at least some basic standards everyone is affected negativly, and hopefully someone will undoo the damage thats been done if possible. What happend to that post on ethics READ IT MEMORIZE IT LIVE BY IT.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 9, 2001, 6:20 AM
Post #29 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Ground up first ascent, drill if you have to but remember that if you are not on unclimbed rock it could be BIG TROUBLE!
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 9, 2001, 10:25 AM
Post #30 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
Still no answer and an even more garbled post from you. What's wrong? Is your arguement falling apart when you try to explain the corelation? I don't want to read between any lines. I want you to explain to me what you meant in written words and sentences- not implications or innuendos.
|
|
|
|
|
jsm280
Jul 9, 2001, 5:44 PM
Post #31 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2001
Posts: 77
|
Learining Trad to prevent the need for bolts.
I must agree there are some great bolted routes and several other places I would love to climb which have no place for pro and once bolted they would become a safe place to climb. This is where I have mixed feelings, if I could I would love to free solo these areas in order to prevent bolting. I am not to that level and not sure if I will ever mentaly be able to handle it. I am okay with top-ropeing these routes if possible and would rather top rope over bolting. There are some routes which can not be toproped and there is not any place for pro, I look at these places and dream... Not thinking about destruction of the rock.
I do not agree with chopping unless the bolts are dangerous. Anything man made on a rock which endangers the life of others should be removed period.
Perm rap rings are nice....
lets keep it as clean as possible
.
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 10, 2001, 9:41 AM
Post #32 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
I'd probably "understand ethics" better if you could explain them to me in actual words. How does chopping bolts make a climb better? If the bolt is old, manky and not to be trusted then by all means, but why remove perfectly sound bolts?
|
|
|
|
|
wandt
Jul 10, 2001, 9:50 AM
Post #33 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2000
Posts: 341
|
After all, bolts are placed not as a malicious act or for aesthetic reasons, but to protect a climb. If they are placed on someone else's climb it may be by complete accident, as the crag could very well be a scruffy little used cliff with no evidence of it ever being climbed.
However, chopping bolts is not a favour to the rock. It doesn't change the fact that it has been drilled. Bolts don't emit fumes, pile up at the bottom of climbs, stick to the bottom of your shoes or smell up the area. Chopping them is a purely malicious act directed at the bolter. It doesn;t heal the rock. It only makes the bolter's effort a waste. Why do that to another climber? You're not forced to use the bolts.
|
|
|
|
|
coach
Jul 10, 2001, 7:14 PM
Post #34 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2001
Posts: 3348
|
I agree somewhat with RockBuddha's post however one other aspect of the popularity of sport climbing is the cost. A lot of the younger/newer climbers cannot affort the cost of a full rack and furthermore don't want to make the investment until they are sure of their committment to the sport. A harness, chalk bag, shoes , biner and rope may be more in their price range and hence the popularity of sport climbing. I started that way and moved to trad climbing but still do a lot of sport climbing. As long as the sport is popularized we will see a lot of new and younger climbers joining and most of them will come in as sport climbers so they are concerned about the availability of bolted routes and from what I see at the crags there is no shortage. Most of the popular climbing areas don't need additional bolts added, there are plenty of routes of all rates so work with those within your capabilities, don't add bolts to a route just to bring it down to your level.
Climb On
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Jul 11, 2001, 12:45 AM
Post #35 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
And the battle rages on
Bolters VS Tradies
[ This Message was edited by: fiend on 2001-07-10 17:46 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 8, 2001, 12:55 AM
Post #36 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
'Sounds like this forum may be running out of steam, but I'll add this. I posted it originally in another forum on this website.
Also: I'm still mystified how any climber can merely add trad protection to a run-out sport (bolted) climb when there is no traditional/natural feature avaliable for protection. If features are available then the run-out was possibly intended to be protected with trad pro (a mixed-pro climb, which is sometimes the best way to have a great climb while respecting the rock; it requires committment and still maintains a degree of safety).
A couple of you said that it's okay to add a bolt "only when necessary". Well, who decides that? Don't add bolts without the permission of the first ascentionist, and/or the agreement of any group in recognized authority (group that is recognized by whatever land managers in a given climbing area that has been given some authority to self-govern, consult, advise, etc., with the land managers).
By the same token, don't chop bolts from established climbs. I can speak for a few areas in the country where I've been, and I know that committment is required on bolted climbs. Committment is not restricted to trad climbing. (By the way, "natural" protection would be such as in East Germany, where rope or slings are run through naturally occuring holes, etc. and then a biner is clipped to that, and the rope clipped to that. "Traditional" pro is the removable gear placed in naturally occuring features, such as cracks, pockets, etc. Where I have climbed, bolts occur only where traditional pro is not available, and with one exception (which local climbers put a stop to by consensus), the bolted climbs were quality hard routes that produced the same frustration and the same gratification, depending on the success achieved by the climber.
It's not about getting a name in a guidebook. It's about offering something to ones community, to see if they like it and it adds to the enjoyment, or, if not, it ends up reflecting badly on the climber who offered (authored) it. Where I do most of my climbing, if it's trash, it will be taken down after awhile (if it's bolted) with the knowledge and acquiesence of the climber if he or she can be contacted. Yes, the holes are filled and "restored" to their natural color.
In my local area we have had to deal again recently with this issue. We've had a rogue chopper vandalize private property, and also another group vandalize and threaten campers and climbers at a recognized (by the land managers and local user groups) climbing area where most routes are bolted, and the average level of difficulty is 5.12. There is trad climbing in the vicinity, as well, and in this specific area, but the area is more known as a sport climbing area.
Over a couple of decades, local climbers developed very good and productive relationships with the various land managers (local, state, federal), and part of that was the establishment of climbing as a recognized use of the lands. The climbing group educated the land management personnel about climbing, and about the need, in some situations, for permanent anchors. For example, permanent top anchors have saved the soil from erosion, have helped minimize the overdevelopment of trails and tramped down areas around clifftops as people would have otherwise been setting up long slings, etc., for top anchors, and certainly saved trees from dying prematurely from stress and overuse as anchors.
The best way to go about establishing or questioning a route is to start with the guidebook for the area. It will probably refer you to shops and/or gyms where you can get more info, and meet local climbers. It will probably give you the history of the area and specific routes, and probably outline a protocal for bolting or removing bolts (who to contact FIRST, etc.). Rogue actions can risk the relationships and hard work that made it possible for anyone to climb in a given area.
As climbers have gotten more skilled and stronger, there has been a concurrent need to climb "harder" climbs, and that has taken us out more and more onto the faces, away from cracks and protectable features. I've seen or heard Royal Robbins name invoked by these trad/eco-terrorists, and I find that more revealing of their ignorance than their spirit. Royal Robbins found himself in awe and respect of Harding's bolted route on El Cap that he (Robbins) had intended to chop; Robbins himself bolted, on Half Dome. And, while there are some (relatively few) trad HARD climbs, the huge majority of harder climbing is on the faces, overhangs, and even slabs that lack traditional protection placements.
If a climber doesn't want to clip a bolt, don't. With rare exception, I agree that that the first ascentionist has set the standard for a given climb, but he or she also can choose to allow bolting later (the Black Dike route on the back side of Half Dome, to name just one). Safety is one concern (as with Black Dike). The first ascentionist may also realize, too, that the risk factors that he or she was willing to accept on that particular day may have been extreme and unacceptable afterwards (stupid?). What if the first ascent is a free-solo? Does that mandate that every climber thereafter may only free-solo that route? What if a climber after the first ascent can do the route with one fewer bolt? Or free-solo it? Does that empower him or her to chop any offending bolt?
I suggest that the best thing to do is to get informed about the area you're concerned with; get involved if it's your own backyard. Respect the work and the climbers that came before you (the heritage and history of the area). Lock your ego in the glove compartment of the car before you hike to the climbs. Get a lot of advice before you bolt; get permission from whomever or whatever group you need to contact. Don't chop; contact the right person or group for information and/or to complain.
Hopefully we're moving past the days of grid-bolting, and rogue chopping, as well. I think the egregiously uninformed and the zealots are at the ever-shrinking extreme ends of the climbing spectrum, and that's to all our benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
redpointadventures
Aug 9, 2001, 7:58 PM
Post #37 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2001
Posts: 47
|
Several routes were recently bolted by an unnamed swiss climber at the New using new stainless bolts and hangers that look home made. The routes, I was told, were bolted on lead. Impressive for 5.11 and up. Although the routes were well executed, not over bolted, the climber failed to realize two things: (1) no new bolting is allowed in this area and (2) he bolterd over two classic routes with one climb. Not only does this create a danger to climbers, it shows no common sense in an area were you could'nt possibly climb all the sport routes available. Guides from the area will soon remove the bolts.
[ This Message was edited by: redpointadventures on 2001-08-09 13:03 ]
[ This Message was edited by: redpointadventures on 2001-08-09 16:15 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 10, 2001, 12:31 AM
Post #38 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
If you say that bolts should be added "only when absolutely necessary", please explain what that means exactly. "Absolutley necessary" is a notion subject to the ability, strength, committment -or any other of a number of variables- of the climber who may hold to that belief (i.e. okay to add bolts when absolutely necessary). Would you say it's okay to add bolts to the Bachar-Yerian in Tuolumne because it's runout between the few bolts, and the risk of dangerous falls are part of the route as intended by the first ascentionists? What does that mean: "okay to add bolts only when absolutely necessary"?!!
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 10, 2001, 2:40 AM
Post #39 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
First ....Battle..... come back in five or ten years maby then you can have an opinion, and keep your gym climbing mentality in the gym. Also remember everything is simple when your eighteen, as you get older youll find that you know less than you think.
Second....Harold..I curse the son of a bitch who invented the electric drill and hope to GOD you never get your hands on one.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 10, 2001, 3:09 AM
Post #40 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Forgive the harsh reply but its obvious to me that you have absolutly no idea what your talking about, so just go out and learn what climbing is and stop worrying about bolts.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 10, 2001, 3:18 AM
Post #41 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
If anyone "adds" bolts to a route that is already established or in an area that has a no bolt ethic they should be removed. Nothing more nothing less. What part of that dont you understand?
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 10, 2001, 5:25 AM
Post #42 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Kagunkie: I don't know if you're answering my question which was addressed to Harold, for one, who said that he would add bolts "only when absolutely necessary". I've already said that I don't want bolts added, etc., etc.; just read the earlier posting I made on this forum.
Harold (and anyone else who would add bolts): please explain your specific criteria for adding bolts to an established climb, whether bolt-protected or trad-protected. Please justify your unilateral actions. It's important to get a sense of your own ethical stance on this topic, obviously, since it's still such a hot button issue.
If you haven't climbed for long, keep at it, and climb with more varied people. Read the books about the history of climbing. Develop your ethics with a more full awareness of who came before you, and the issues that were around then, and how they were resolved.
Do you really mean to say that you would change an existing climb if YOU felt it was "necessary"?!!!
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 10, 2001, 5:46 AM
Post #43 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Harold: I looked at your profile after I posted; I respect your history and ablility.
I think you probably are fairly close to my own position on adding and chopping bolts. More than one person made the statement about adding when "necessary", and I simply don't want that to go by without asking them to consider exactly what that means. As you said you have allowed it, and I agree that if the author of the route agrees to re- or retrobolting, fine; or if there is a carefully considered consensus and following whatever protocol is observed in a given area. It just is not something that a climber should assume is OK for himself or herself to do. Peace.
By the way: do you have any idea what may have happened to climbingcentral.com. I know the Jackson Falls forum was yanked, but I haven't been able to get to the site at all now.
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-08-09 22:48 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 10, 2001, 12:08 PM
Post #44 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
JDS.... I agree with alot of what you have expressed here and was not addressing you with my loud mouth post, you have said some things that every climber should hear and heed.
This is for scar...Im sure your a great guy and will become an asset to your local climbing community. Im just getting a little tired of hearing two year gym climbers who think they are going to re-write the book on the ethics of climbing in this country. If you dont have the experience necessary to have a valid oppinion on the subject please just do some reading (climbing history is a good start) and go climbing and have fun climbing. Dont worry about changing or creating any routes just go climbing and youll see from the routes already out there (and there are thousands) how its been done since long before you came along. Youv got to climb extensivly in more than one area and for more than one or two years to get a feel for how climbing routes are "created" or protected might be a better term. And dont forget gym climbing teaches you how to do moves and belay to a certain extent but has absolutly no value when it comes to learning the ethics of the outdoor world of climbing. I hope your listening and not just getting pissed becaus someone is telling you something you dont want to hear, that doesnt help anyone!
Harold....I was out of line with my reply to you and say sorry about that, but I dont like to see established routes retro-bolted and it really pisses me off to see bolted routes popping up at an area that has been established as a traditional area especially when its specifically banned or forbidden by those who are charged with the care of that area. So go and make your routes just do it in an area that it is specifically allowed. Im still cursing those damn electric drills, if hand placing was the only option we would all be better off.
Quote:99% die hard "trad" climbers that can't get off the ground on
most of the routes they chop. They are stricken with what I would call pulling envy.
When they see someone climb what they would
never attempt it enrages them to no end.
There envious ego kicks in and out comes the
crow bar. My advice to these people is to
spend more time training, climbing and less time "politicing" and "pouting"This sounds like character slamming to me.I dont think this sweeping statment has two ounces of truth or is going to help anyone. It is designed to incite.
Im not big and burly or a climbing god. Im just a climber who has seen alot of change in climbing and not all of it is good. Climbing and the areas where its done are my babys and Ill defend them to the end. Do you understand?
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-08-10 08:35 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 10, 2001, 3:45 PM
Post #45 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Well said, Keith. Scar: relax and climb, enjoy.
Keith: in the years that you've seen things change, do you get any sense that things are sort of shaking out, where the general perception could be that most people are getting a handle on how to respect and preserve the climbing resources? Where people no longer go out and grid-bolt a blank wall, and then look to develop routes? I personally get a sense that the pendulum has swung towards careful consideration and cooler heads. Other the occassional eco- or trad-terrorist who chops bolts from climbs he knows nothing about, including off of private property, the area where I spend most of my climbing time seems to have "graduated" from the wars of the past decade or two (hopefully). But, I haven't been around the scene for all that long (7+ years), and I can't possibly overstate how enthralled I am to listen to the local climbers of the area who have lived it, developed it, sometimes fought it, and worked out the great relationship with the land managers.
It kind of reminds me of the stories of when Ray Jardine first brought his spring loaded camming device to Yosemite, and most of the climbers there and may elsewhere decried the device as cheating. Of course, over the years, SLCDs have become standard on the rack. Where there is no parallel with SLCDs and bolts is in the permanent nature of the damage done by bolts, and, perhaps more importantly, in the swarming of areas from careless and sloppy over-development. Maybe a wall is grid-bolted, and later found to be of low quality and abandoned; the bolts remain, the damage to the ground and cliff-top, and probably the reputation of climbers as a user group.
But, is this changeing in any postitive way? Have younger or beginning climbers gotten the message about care and respect for the rock and for history a little better over the years?
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-08-10 18:37 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 10, 2001, 3:48 PM
Post #46 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Harold: again, I apologize for mistakenly attributing a statement to you that someone else wrote.
By the way, www.climbingcentral.com seems to be up and running again.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 11, 2001, 5:21 AM
Post #47 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Its personal when your included in the group being talked about. You said 99% bolt choppers that means anyone who has chopped a bolt doesnt it or maby you have to chop ten to qualify. Im not sure. Maby im that one out of a hundred and wasnt the intended victim of your "colorfull statement" I dont know. Anyway I dont want to argue either Id rather engage in a positive exchange. I did say "not two ounces of truth" that leaves one ounce for truth. I appologize again if I offended you.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 11, 2001, 5:38 AM
Post #48 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
AND NOW .....A STORY......
I returned to my home area recently to find my best route retro-bolted, how would you feel? I hammered the hangers over and intend to remove the bolts this fall, and I have every right to do it too.
First.... electric drills are forbidden in that area and these bolts were placed on rappell with an electric drill. The driller should be fined but I dont want that on MY concience. Ill say nothing to any authorities.
Second....that route was climbed over ten years ago and didnt need any bolts then. Why does it need them now?
They will be removed and the holes sealed, and if someone decides to replace them they will be removed again and the new holes sealed. That is a fact.
Maby this post will help explain why Im a jealous ego maniac.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-08-10 22:49 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Aug 11, 2001, 1:30 PM
Post #49 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
"Necessary"= if that route will not (note:will, and not can) be climbed unless it is bolted. Many people think that if a route can be done on pro, then it shouldn't be bolted, which is a rule i accept in general, but some cracks will be bolted, and justifiedly so. Not all crags should be climbed, some have to be left unexposed, so we might as well get the most out of the available routes that we can. That means that some routes (and not a great number) that could be, but never will be, done on trad, should be boltedd in order to have any use.
In the case of Kagunkie, I'd hunt the bolter down and tell him where to stick his drill, but I think that that's an issue of vandalism, and not so much bolting.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Aug 11, 2001, 2:46 PM
Post #50 of 137
(8949 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Iv been in contact with him and we are in agreement. He made a mistake and the bolts will be removed. No hard feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2001, 3:33 AM
Post #51 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Hmmmmm, I spent hours reading through this. And unfortunately, some people just cannot step outside the box and see the bigger picture. They feel that if a route cannot be easily protected, it should be bolted, yet this only applies to leading. "A closed mind cannot think freely." (Bruce Lee)
In Joshua Tree National Park, a great roof climb 'Keep The Train Rolling' had been a Classic Top Rope, untill someone decided that they wanted to lead it, so they placed bolts. Since this climb had traditionaly been done for decades as a TR, now it is has been changed by the selfcenteredness of one individual. This route does not look the same, it now has man made shiney items permanantly attached to it. We cannot smear the rock where these bolts are as once before. What right did he have to do this ??? Wouldn't this be analagous to someone bolting 'Midnight Lightning', the famous boulder problem in Yosemite's Camp 4, so they could lead it ???
Some people just do not get it, and that is sad. Because what suffers is the rock, permanantly. What suffers are the generations of climbers that forever cannot climb a route as it was done by the FA.
It's the balance of Risk and Skill when climbing that gives us the adreneline, and makes us climbers. To homogonize it to the point where less skilled people take no risk and can still ascend routes, is the same as watering down martial arts to cardio-kickboxing. Would you call them a martial artist ??? I think not, they are into the current fad, not the TRADITIONAL art it comes from. Yet they believe they are martial artists, they too do not get it.
rrrADAM
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 5, 2001, 3:48 AM
Post #52 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Adam,
Isn't bolting at Josh essentially closed? Or at least highly regulated? How did this guy get this done?
I agree with you; another example of lack of appreciation and respect for the history and traditions of climbing. So many of these folks seem to think that no one ever 'really' climbed before them, like they have these "visionary" and "original" ideas. Incredible.
|
|
|
|
|
old_school
Nov 5, 2001, 3:58 AM
Post #53 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 259
|
to bolt or not to bolt, that is the question, only if you need to is what i say.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2001, 3:59 AM
Post #54 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
More...
We all should climb in a fashion that is least intrusive to the rock. As climbers, we above all other people, tree huggers included, should have the most respect for the rock. If it can be easily TR'd, we should do that. If it can be protected traditionaly, we should do that. If it's a face or slab climb, that cannot be protected, we should bolt it if it's allowed in the area the climb is.
We now have the technology to 'clean aid' climbs, there's even a scale for it. i.e. C1, C2,... Pounding in pins or bongs permanantly scars the rock. This is why the current ethical trend is to aid clean, so as not to mar the rock.
Ego plays the biggest role in impropper bolting. I cannot think of a single case where a female has retrobolted or placed bolts on a traditional climb. They do not have the egos of men, therefore can care less about conquering the rock. They climb for climbing's sake. We men however are the spraylords, the number chasers, the FA wannabes. We cannot let our egos close our minds to the point where we see such a narrow picture and get in the way of our judgement.
The rock is not a renewable resourse, once we have defaced it, it stays that way, even if we later realize that we were wrong. We need to act prudently.
rrrADAM
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2001, 4:09 AM
Post #55 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Current Bolting Rules at J-Tree are as Follows...
1.NO motorized drills.
2.NO new bolts in the Cottonwood Area(rock sucks there anyway)
3.If you want to bolt, fill out a request you can get from the Ranger Stations. It is then reviewed, by climbers.
4.Existing bolts may be replaced when needed.
As long as we follow these rules, all will be well. The jackoff refered to above had his request denied since it was easily protected by TR. He bolted it anyway, but it cannot be proven he did it.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2001, 4:14 AM
Post #56 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
More on egos...
It seems that the egos of some make them feel that TRing is a lesser form of climbing, that it is beneath them. Therefore they will bolt traditionally TR'd climbs to suit their wants, with no respect for the rock or tradition. They just gotta lead it, or it doesn't count. These people have no respect for the rock, they climb for selfish reasons.
rrrADAM
|
|
|
|
|
daisuke
Nov 5, 2001, 6:14 AM
Post #57 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2001
Posts: 904
|
Some of you are saying that if any rock, and I mean ANY rock can take placed pro then it shouldn't be bolted? I find the attitude somewhat selfish on behalf of the trad climbers
just my 2 cents
D
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 5, 2001, 7:01 AM
Post #58 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
I don't understand daisuke, if it can be protected with clean gear, wouldn't bolting it to make it easier be selfcentered.
Trad climbers do not want the rock for themselves, they simple are able to climb the rock with a less intusive technique. To bring the rock down to a level that is easier is selfcentered.
|
|
|
|
|
coach713
Deleted
Nov 5, 2001, 5:14 PM
Post #59 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
This is an interesting subject that I want to put my 2-cents into. I have only been "Real" climbing since June, so I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but here is goes.
I am in total awe of Trad climbers. My boys and I have only done botled routes. Now, there are TONS of bolted routes, and that's great! But, someday, I would like to try and maybe get into Trad climbing, BUT, if the Trad climbs are going to be all bolted now, whats the point??
I would really like to see the established trad climbs or TP climbs left alone so the rest of use, in time, might be able to enjoy that..
I may never get there, but it is so awesome watching someone do that.. I hope my boys can get to that level.
Ron,.
|
|
|
|
|
jbur
Nov 5, 2001, 7:29 PM
Post #60 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2001
Posts: 64
|
Here are my thoughts on this controversy.
If a route can be protected with removable protection (cams, nuts, ect.) it does'nt need bolts, plain and simple. The number of unprotectable faces that qaulify as bolted routes far outnumber the trad lines in many areas. Bolting climbs that take removable pro is convenience bolting. This means that someone thinks they should be able to do a climb, but don't want spend the money or take the time to learn to do it in a traditional way. That's what I call selfish. I climb trad most of the time, but also enjoy bolted climbs as well. The difference is I can distinguish between the two.
[ This Message was edited by: jbur on 2001-11-05 11:33 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 6, 2001, 1:11 AM
Post #61 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
old_school and daisuke: May I suggest that you do a search of the forums under "bolt", "chopping", etc. and take the time to read these forums to get some idea of the debate that still goes on. Most of the forums on this site kind of have a shelf life, and rarely come back into current discussion, but as you can see, while this one was started some time ago, it still generates fresh responses.
As has been asked elsewhere on this topic, "Who decides when a bolt is "needed"?" I have heard and read so many times when people say something along the lines that bolting is okay only when it is "needed", or to make a climb "safe". Does safe mean a bolt every 4 feet, irrespective of the available stance for clipping? Does "needed" mean bolting a crack is okay because some climbers don't have trad gear? Or, should a 5.12 trad route be bolted so that climbers who can't place gear on that hard of a climb can otherwise try and hangdog 'safely'?
Read the forums. These questions keep coming up, and every climber needs to answer them for himself or herself. The answers can't be sound if the debate isn't fully understood.
A properly bolted route does not necessarily mean a 'safer' or easier route. Somewhat similarly to trad routes, the bolted routes should be protected according to the features of the route, taking into account where the stances for clipping most naturally occur within the flow of the route.
I could go on for a long time, and I think I already have on other forums (and probably this one), so, again, I just encourage anyone who hasn't yet done it, to read the forums on this subject. Do a forum search with keywords, and read through them.
Coach713: I don't think all the trad lines are going to be retro-bolted; I personally think that the wider ethic is moving toward more responsible and careful use of bolts for climbing pro, and more respect for the finite resource.
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Nov 11, 2001, 5:30 PM
Post #62 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
I think bolting is "Needed" only if there exist no (sound) options for trad gear placements. Slabs, and other types of climbs that do not avail themselves to any type of pro other than bolting? Bolt them. It's a safety issue, AND bolts allow us to climb certain routes safely that we would not be able to otherwise.
AW
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 11, 2001, 8:09 PM
Post #63 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Everybody keeps using the word "safety", and that the only way to climb "safely" where no trad pro can be set is to bolt. This is not true, this logic applies to people who have to "lead" it. There are many mega classic TRs around the world. These should not be retrobolted just to satisfy someone's egocentric desire to lead the route, that's not fair to the rock. If it can safely be TRd then it should stay that way.
"But I just gotta lead it, TR does not count, that's for pussies." Words of a narrow minded climber.
rrrADAM
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Nov 11, 2001, 8:27 PM
Post #64 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Thanks for the reminder, there. I really didn't take into account TR routes. That's true, if you can do it without bolting, that's the best way.
AW
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 11, 2001, 8:42 PM
Post #65 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
In the words of a scholar among other things...
"A closed mind CANNOT think freely !!!"
Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 11, 2001, 10:37 PM
Post #66 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Austin, I agree with your definition of "safety". I think you'll agree, too, that those climbers who aren't up to leading a hard climb on trad gear, when sound trad gear placements are available, should not define "safety" according to their level of climbing ability, and then bring the route down to their level with bolted pro, so that they can either hangdog it, or clip-n-go. I hope that these climbers would either find a fair and safe way to TR it, or (better) keep it as a focus for their motivation to keep working hard to improve their skills and strength. A hard trad climb is still a trad climb. And, a fun/hard TR climb is still a fun/hard climb.
It's good to hear from you, again, too; it seems like it's been awhile since we heard from you. I can imagine why.
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-11-11 14:38 ]
|
|
|
|
|
woodse
Nov 12, 2001, 4:07 AM
Post #67 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2001
Posts: 625
|
Yeah all I agree w/rrradam. For those of you who do not know what the harm is in adding bolts for "safety" you probably don't realize that you are just trying to climb way above your abilty!!!
Ancient Chinese Proverb:
If you cancnot climb it as it is, then it is too hard for you.
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Nov 12, 2001, 9:32 PM
Post #68 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
Adam: Gee, too think that TR's were for pussies makes me wonder how all of us in this forum got started... surely not all of us started leading from the beggining, I know I didn't. So then you must be saying that everyone who learns how to climb via method of top-roping is a pussy???
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 12, 2001, 10:43 PM
Post #69 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Andy,
Adam was saying that as a quote from a hypothetical narrow-minded climber. Read the rest of what he has posted in this forum and you will see that Adam feels quite exactly the opposite of that sentiment. Surely you'll discern that he is Adam-antly against bolting climbs that can otherwise be TRd, and very definitely against bolting trad-protectable lines. Read carefully and thoroughly; you don't want Adam as an enemy.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Nov 13, 2001, 1:06 AM
Post #70 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Hell, I'll throw myself under the bus for a laugh, so I don't view anybody as an enemy. As 'jds' said, I would rather TR a climb than have it bolted just so someone can lead it. I guess he misunderstood, or did not completely read my post.
I view bolting a classic TR, as has been done around the world, the same as bolting a highball boulder problem. You can't say you did it to make it safe, you did it because you didn't have the confidence in your abilities to climb it, therefore you lowered the 'investment' level of the climb to your ability. This is the same thing people do who bolt trad climbs, lower it to their ability.
There are plenty of 'R' and 'X' rated climbs around the world. And there are plenty of people who have the ability to climb these, I climb 5.9R trad climbs all the time. I don't climb 5.10R trad climbs. Wouldn't it be selfish of me to add bolts to make all climbs 'G' rated so "I" didn't have to 'invest' anything in the climb ???
[ This Message was edited by: rrradam on 2001-11-12 17:13 ]
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Nov 15, 2001, 9:08 AM
Post #71 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
Wow, seems like there's alot of spleen-venting going on here...
One problem that crops up in a discussion of this sort is the question of semantics. What exactly does everybody mean by trad? The early ethics of the climbing game were that any use of artificial devices were unsportsmanlike: read some F. S. Smythe books from the mid-twenties when pitons were frowned upon even for protection! The early trditional climbers didn't have a choice in how they approached longer climbs since it wasn't viable to rappel long routes with bags of bolts and a hand drill so they just started on the ground and began climbing and dealt with any of the difficulties that they found along the way. What did this mean? Standards were much lower than they are today simply due to the fact that they couldn't effectively safeguard there lives with the equipment that they had at the time.
I'll refer to Smythe again: he turned around at 27,000 ft on Everest because he couldn't justify the risk, ie: he didn't want to die! Climbing, for most people, has never been worth dieing for and so the question of safety inevitably comes up when it comes to bolts: they're artificial and contrived. Why are there bolted routes at Squamish with 60' runouts...because that's how far the first ascentionists had to go before they could reach a good stance to hand drill a bolt...it's still a freakin' bolt! It's going to be there as a testament to how brave they were to climb all that way on a greasy, 5.11 slab without falling or maybe it's a statement about how effective LSD can be in harnessing fear or maybe the first ascentionist would much rather have placed the bolt about ten feet after the first bolt but couldn't find a good stance. I'd like to know why, in a 120' pitch you'd bother placing a bolt at 60'...what's the difference if you fall 120' or 240'? Are you going to be hurt half as bad?
We all use protection gear to safeguard our lives whether we're climbing 5.12 sport or 5.9 trad so why wouldn't we bolt responsibly? If it is now possible with modern gear to safely climb routes that were "R" or "X" 20 years ago are we cheating? Are we less traditional than those who went before us because we have better safety gear? I understand perfectly about aesthetics and respecting tradition if the tradition makes sense. In Somalia, women were traditionally given clitorindectomies...bad tradition, huh? Maybe outrageously long runouts in otherwise unprotectable (with gear) territory is a bad tradition, maybe it's time to think about what has been handed down to us and what our responsibilities are for the future. In Britain, the hardest gritstone routes are TR'd until the leader feels that he/she is ready to lead it without falling since a fall on many of the routes means severe injury: why this drive to lead the route if it means that you may get hurt? Tradition.
I certainly don't want to establish a route that is resposible for somebody getting badly hurt or killed, I'd like the tradition for my climbing area to be one of safety & respect for the environment and other climbers. I love climbing, I love traditional style climbing but I also love life so there are alot of routes that I'll never climb because they're not in the least bit safe, for this, I feel a little cheated but, there are still enough climbs out there to keep me busy for several lifetimes...
|
|
|
|
|
dynosi
Nov 15, 2001, 12:40 PM
Post #72 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2001
Posts: 34
|
NO BOLTS - If it wasn't ment to be climbed, don't climb it. You'll not find many bolts here in the UK and that's the way I like it! Natural protection or nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 15, 2001, 8:35 PM
Post #73 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
I believe when we're talking about trad protection, we're talking about the use of removable pro, the use of which does not knowingly damage the rock (pitons may be removable, but we know they damage the rock).
Michael, I think you were sort of answering your own question, to some extent, there at the end of your post. Some people want the added challenge of climbing a route that is still in the condition of the first ascent (i.e. runout, "dangerous"). Other people don't. So, different routes exist to accomodate both. I don't profess to want to climb a route that risks my life and limb merely for the sake of having climbed it, but I also don't want to impose my ethic onto the rest of the climbing community.
Another aspect of the issue of 'semantics' in this discussion always comes down to defining "safe(ty)". As has been raised already, who defines that? Does the first ascentionist make that determination, and the rest of us respect that? Or, does a wiser soul come along and unilaterally add bolts to make the route more accessible, more "enjoyable", and "safer" to more people, who are not as able to climb such a difficult trad or runout route? Perhaps, as has been suggested elsewhere, there can be a consensus amongst the local community, including discussion with the first ascentionist to seek agreement.
Yes, tradition does come into play here, and it can be regional as well as national. Absolutely, the western tradition is strongly against the mutilation of women in Somalia and other countries, but the western tradition is also against, generally, dictatorially imposing our value system on another civilization. A compromise is struck within the value system itself, that suffers with the knowledge that more women will suffer and die while we (the 'more enlightened' civilization) pursue diplomatic, educational, economic, and other political means to the desired end. We in the west, then, suffer the compromise (which is not to make a comparison with the suffering of the women in Somalia). I wouldn't stick my life out like some of the British gritstone climbers are doing, but I wouldn't take it upon myself to bolt the gritstone, either.
I think a better analogy, though equally insufficient, would be to a mastepiece of art. Should we repaint the masterpiece because we have better materials now, so that colors won't fade, paint won't crack, etc.? Should we alter a pre-Renaissance piece because they did not understand the principles of perspective, and we do? Or do we stop at just trying to preserve the works from decay and degradation, for the enjoyment of those whose taste appreciates them?
Neither the route you establish, nor you, are ever responsible for anyone's safety; the climber who attempts it must always be the responsible party. I understand your point, though; I'm really not dogmatic. It sounds like you have a sense of how you want your climbing area and community to be. I think if that's how your community, by consensus, wants it, then it's great, with the caveat that you also respect the wishes of someone who disagrees with retrobolting his/her route.
The question of semantics comes back, again, in the notion of bolting "responsibly". What does "responsibly" really mean? Where does it begin and end? It's a great sentiment, but a really tough call to make. I think 'bolt when you need to, not when you want to" is a good place to start.
And what about the PitonPetes and Reinhold Messners who profess "don't climb it if you have to bolt it"? In my opinion, that's too extreme, and doesn't acknowledge the advancements in ability (and a number of other factors in the changeing times), and the relatively limited availability of trad protected routes and climbing areas. Would we really say, "No climbing at Smith Rocks?"
The larger consensus changed years ago from piton usage to clean pro, and I think the larger consensus is moving in the direction of "responsible" bolting (e.g. no grid bolting, no reducing the climb to enable the climber, no bolting trad protectable routes, etc.). We'll see.
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Nov 16, 2001, 7:10 AM
Post #74 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
OK, so, are bolts still considered trad protection if put up on lead on a ground-up ascent? If so, why is it alright to place a bolt when you feel YOU need it? Are you saying that if a 5.12 (trad) climber puts up a 5.7 trad slab climb it's OK for him/her to bolt it every 20, 30, 50...however many feet? There needs to be a modicum of common sense applied to the whole procedure: either you're like our British friends who don't use bolts at all or you believe that bolts are a necessary part of safeguarding a climb. If you use bolts on 5th class terrain, it is irresposible & merely an ego trip to place them at a distance that is great enough to lead to serious injury in case of a fall.
Bolts are placed in the rock for one of two reasons: either as direct aid placements (unpopular these days) or as protection placements. If they are being placed for protection then they should be placed in accordance with the level of difficulty of the climb. The 5.12 climber placing sparsley spaced bolts on a 5.7 probably wouldn't be so conservative on a climb at or near his/her limit which seems a little hipocritical to me.
Also, you refer to climbs like paintings: bad analogy! We can learn from old masters without touching their work & if we want to make an "improvement" we simply get another blank canvas and make any necessary changes we want (forgeries are quite common, defacements are not); unfortunately, we can't replicate El Cap so we have to deal with what the earlier generations of climbers left us: we can't start fresh with a new canvas & the same materials. They left us a legacy of pin scars, tossed shit-bags, "gardening" climbs (trees & roots removed...), bolt ladders & all sorts of other nasty odds & sods...they also left some incredible free climbs up natural features that take all natural gear placements, so, we respect one legacy and not the other. In neither case can we create a "new" canvas for our post-modernist trip, we have to deal with what's out there and, unlike in the fine arts, we can't progress on already established pieces using the same or newer materials. In the realm of Art you are free to copy the works of old masters or "improve" upon it if you'd like without having to touch their work at all. Unfortunately, rock formations are unique objects so we all have to learn how to share them in a respectful, concientious manner,
later
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Nov 16, 2001, 7:27 PM
Post #75 of 137
(9209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
JDS: So if Adam posts something that I don't agree with I'm supposed to turn my back... get real
Just because I make a statement not agreeing with someone doesn't mean they should hate me... or that I hate them... If I recall Talons and Pianomahn, two of which I've challenged in the forums before... where the first people to greet me to the site. Do you think they hate me too? Man... if everytime I posted something not agreeing with someone and then they hated me, I wouldn't have any friends left!!!
I hope you don't take offense to what I say but if you do maybe you shouldn't post??? And please don't consern yourself with how I live my life...
Anyhow...
Rule #1 Never touch someone elses route... if they used 4 bolts to climb it then don't make it 5 and don't take any out without further asking the FA.
Rule #2 Never... Never.... Never!!!!!! add a bolt to a Trad climb... if it was FA as trad then you should climb it as Trad. For example Boulder Canyon... nice fatty cracks with bolts running beside them... makes me want to peel them off with a crowbar, put them in a box, and send them back to the person who changed the route from TRAD to SPORT.
Rule #3 If you can't safely place a bolt where I or anyone else can not take a safe fall on, then don't even let the thought cross your mind.
The whole Bolt War issue is not my game... I climb both Trad and Sport... have a love for TR, call me lazy...
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Nov 16, 2001, 7:32 PM
Post #76 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
JDS: Well! I notice you climb in So. Illinois... great to see that. Maybe we can run into each other sometime as I climb all the time a J-Falls.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 17, 2001, 1:24 AM
Post #77 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
AndyLemon, I only meant to point out that you attributed a position to Adam that was not his; he was paraphrasing a hypothetical and opposite position to clrify his own. The rest of the post was in humor, directed more toward Adam.
Mike (saltspringer), my analogy to painting was more to consider whether or not we accept a climb (first ascent) as a work of art, to be observed, enjoyed, and experienced in its intended and original state. If we come in later and add bolts to make a runout "safer", then that's not a new blank canvas, it's an altered one. My question is still, how far do we have a "right" to go in making alterations to this admitedly limited resource?
I completely agree that we do, and we should, exercise judgement and sound reasoning in choosing to accept or reject the legacies from earlier times and climbers. If your sense of bolting "safely" is that a 5.12 climb should be bolted accordingly, and a 5.7 climb should be bolted accordingly, I agree completely. If someone wants to retro-bolt a 5.12 climb to make it more accessible, more convenient, and "safer" for a 5.8 or 5.9 climber to try it (and hangdog bolt to bolt, pull up on quickdraws, etc.), then I strongly object to that. It sounds like you, Mike, have a similar notion that I have, that is that a route "tells" us how it should be protected, with its features and available stances. If a 5.12 climber sparsely bolts a 5.7 to "make a statement", then the statement he has made is probably not the one he intended; he's only proven his selfish stupidity.
I also agree, in principle and practice, with the notion of bolting responsibly (of taking responsibility for one's establishing of a bolted line and how it is protected), but I still would say that every individual climber must still accept responsibility for his/her choice to attempt a climb, given knowledge of his/her abilities, and knowledge (or lack thereof) of the climb and the area standards. I would not want to see someone coming back after the fact, trying to accuse, or file a lawsuit against someone, for "poorly" bolting a route.
Let common sense rule. Let there be consensus of standards and practices within areas, and hopefully country- and continent-wide. I'd rather see people using words like "responsible" and "common sense", rather than "safe", because the former have to be more thoroughly thought out, while the later carries with it too much in the form of assumption. You can see that when people try to explain what "safe" means. "Responsible" more likely carries with it a sense of respect for the resource and, hopefully, the history and tradition of the area, and of climbing in general.
I don't think a 'death route' makes sense, either; I just don't want unilateral action taken to change it. Depending on a lot of variables, including its proximity to a popular area, it could more responsible to retro-bolt it, or it could be better eligible for a route left unclimbed.
|
|
|
|
|
larryclimb
Nov 26, 2001, 4:03 AM
Post #78 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2000
Posts: 89
|
I believe bolts are an important part of climbing. In the right places they are vital. In the wrong places (as Adam's mentioned in J-tree its a disgrace). We have a Great sport climbing area in New Hampsire that climbers from all over the world come to called Rumney. There is some trad climbs but like I said it is known for its Great sports routes. In 1986 a F.A. trad route was put up. Since this is a sport area it never got climbed (or hardly ever). This summer this climb was bolted (with permission from the F.A.) It is now a popular route. Was this the right thing to do? In this situation I think it was and so do the F.A.
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Nov 26, 2001, 9:44 AM
Post #79 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
A trad climb bolted to promote more traffic? Nope, that's not right at all...it sets up a scenario of bolting all trad routes simply because placing gear is more difficult than clipping a bolt. If there is ample opportunity for good gear placements on a climb bolts should not be there: period! The route that you're talking about may be popular now but it has lost alot by being bolted: it has lost the ability to encourage people to learn to place gear so that they can climb a variety of routes all over the country: bolted routes exist in areas of traditional climbing where there is no place for pro so why not keep a trad route up in a sport climbing area as an example of something different? After all, isn't climbing largely about diversity? Otherwise, we'd all be setting up convenient routes in the gym...
Good to see that everyone has calmed down a bit on this forum topic at least: let's continue to keep it friendly,
out,
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 26, 2001, 11:09 PM
Post #80 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
One of my consistent tenets has been that, in general, local consensus on standards should be respected. I would never advocate chopping those bolts, but I really agree with Mike on this: that just reduced the resource into submission, down to the level of climbers who won't learn tough trad climbing. I've got the greatest respect for the Rumney climbers, who are advancing hard sport climbing, but I don't agree at all with the decision, even with the agreement of the FA (good move to ask, though), to retro-bolt that route. It was the rock that told you that the route was trad leadable, not the climbers. It's a short step to chipping, now, to make more routes accessible.
|
|
|
|
|
squeeks
Nov 30, 2001, 2:56 AM
Post #81 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2001
Posts: 193
|
my personal opinion is that until you can afford a full rack, stay in the damn gyms or find some routes you can top rope. i personally think that all bolts should come out. if you cant climb it with out leaving shit(bolts) behind then you werent meant to climb it!
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Nov 30, 2001, 4:55 AM
Post #82 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
I like you'r attitude Squeeks.
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Nov 30, 2001, 5:27 AM
Post #83 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
Why is it that those who are violently opposed to bolting of any kind are also those that couldn't climb a hard sport route if their life depended on it?
Trad people, you will never climb 5.14 on gear. You will stay on your 5.9s and the more adventurous among you will head up to the 5.11s but none of you will ever touch the hard 5.12s which sport climbers will walk. There are a few trad people who pull down the big numbers..Ron Kauk for one, but he climbs sport as well. He may be a good for nothing bolt monkey, but do you think maybe that's why he was able to pull off Magic Line, 5.14b?
If you can't climb at this level then why talk about ground up bolting of these climbs? What's the big deal between rap bolting a featureless wall and bolting it on lead? Other than testosterone fueled ego.
Some of you have complained about bolts destroying the rock. How many of you drive gas gussling trucks, vans or SUVs?
Raise your hand if you are a complete anti-bolter.
Now keep your hand up if you've never clipped a bolt before. (rap/belay stations count as well)
Now if there is anyone left then keep your hand up if you climb harder than 5.10
Anyone have their hand up?
You guys are like meat eating vegetarians.
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Nov 30, 2001, 5:32 AM
Post #84 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Once again...
Fiend = win
|
|
|
|
|
squeeks
Nov 30, 2001, 5:40 AM
Post #85 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2001
Posts: 193
|
tell you what. when i do climb a 5.14, if im not able to use any pro, ill free it. you know what i dont know why so many of you get offended at our opinions. maybe you are just insecure about your climbing abilities since you cant hang with traditional climbers. just a thought. dont take it personal.
|
|
|
|
|
squeeks
Nov 30, 2001, 5:44 AM
Post #86 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2001
Posts: 193
|
fiend hasnt won yet cause ive only gotten started! nice try though, really.
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Nov 30, 2001, 5:49 AM
Post #87 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
I get offended by the Trad is the Way opinion.
I have nothing against trad climbing, I don't attack it and don't consider it to be a lesser form of climbing. I respect it and admire those that push its limits.
But I hate those that will constantly trash sport climbing as being an activity for the weak and cowardly. Trad is one form of climbing, some people need to be more open minded and not be so quick to jump on the band wagon against progression.
|
|
|
|
|
squeeks
Nov 30, 2001, 6:05 AM
Post #88 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2001
Posts: 193
|
by all means i am not saying trad is the way. i dont hate nor dislike sport climbers. i have the same respect for all climbers of all abilities. the only thing i really dislike is that everytime i climb, i see new shit, most of which appears to serve no purpose. i know that bolts will never be completely removed from all routes. i just hate to see more go in. there is plenty out there already.
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Nov 30, 2001, 6:07 AM
Post #89 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Ignorance only breeds more ignorance.
I see no hope for sqeeks offering anything to this thread.
[edited because of a typo]
[ This Message was edited by: pianomahnn on 2001-11-29 23:23 ]
|
|
|
|
|
squeeks
Nov 30, 2001, 6:16 AM
Post #90 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2001
Posts: 193
|
one day you will see the light my friend. until then we can all continue to be opinionated as we are now. never the less, climb on.
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Nov 30, 2001, 7:06 AM
Post #91 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Nah, I don't think so.
I'll definately climb on; some freshly bolted sport routes.
|
|
|
|
|
naturalhigh
Nov 30, 2001, 9:31 AM
Post #92 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2001
Posts: 131
|
While I climb mostly trad, I think that bolted sport routes are great, especially for pushing your technical skills higher and higher.
Imagine what the hardest rock climb in the US would be right now if we had abstained from rap bolting? You think that those 5.14s were bolted on lead? As sport routes push climbing to a new level, trad follows close behind. Just look at the new free alpine route that Bubu just completed. I think he may have used a bolt or two, but all in all it went free onsight at 5.13b I believe. Astonishing. Think he's never sport climbed?
To sum up my opinion: Trad is the ultimate in climbing (personal opinion); clean, self reliant and both mentally and physically challenging. Sport climbing, however, should be equally recognized for the contributions it has made to the sport overall, especially when it comes to opening it up to new members and to helping us tradies push our limits, allowing us to go back and do even harder trad routes .
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Nov 30, 2001, 5:31 PM
Post #93 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
I like naturalhigh. You've got your head on straight.
|
|
|
|
|
fusion
Nov 30, 2001, 5:54 PM
Post #94 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 29, 2001
Posts: 44
|
If the route is already bolted.. don't change it. Come back to it later when you have the experience you need to climb it like it was origionally climbed. Or add pro if you must..
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Dec 1, 2001, 3:44 AM
Post #95 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Where is my post from yesterday? Did someone delete it?
Its not allowed to delete posts without messaging the poster you know?
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-12-01 10:58 ]
|
|
|
|
|
cragstar
Aug 8, 2002, 4:25 PM
Post #96 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 69
|
I have nothing against clipping bolts off of a route IF... you made the first ascent with trad gear and someone came after and bolted it. but if someone wanted to create a sport route on a crack why take that away from someone who doesn't climb trad?
[ This Message was edited by: cragstar on 2002-08-08 09:25 ]
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Aug 8, 2002, 4:32 PM
Post #97 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
AAAAH! A BOLTING WARS THREAD BOLTING WARS THREAD! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
That is all.
|
|
|
|
|
cragstar
Aug 8, 2002, 4:36 PM
Post #98 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 69
|
sorry just a local situation forced me into ressurecting this topic
|
|
|
|
|
fishypete
Aug 8, 2002, 4:54 PM
Post #99 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2002
Posts: 200
|
Please let this die.
That is all.
There is nothing more to add.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Aug 8, 2002, 7:46 PM
Post #100 of 137
(9118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
'sawl good, cragstar, I wasn't yelling at you, just shrieking that the bolting/trad-sport debates in general make me dry heave
now, as fishy said, no mas!
THAT IS ALL!
|
|
|
|
|
bolder
Aug 9, 2002, 2:56 PM
Post #101 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 28, 2002
Posts: 203
|
This is a waste of time. This won't solve anything. It is just a chance for people to get out their angry aggressions. Why do people feel obligated to say things in a forum that they would never say to someone's face?
|
|
|
|
|
detourdave
Aug 9, 2002, 7:16 PM
Post #102 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2002
Posts: 29
|
I am sick of reading about this first ascensionist style crap. The first ascensionist don't OWN the rock. Just because the first person to climb the route was a maniac that free soloed the first pitch, does that mean from then on, only reckless, suicidal climbers are allowed to do that route? If a few bolts are placed to protect dangerous runouts, that is a good thing. If you don't like it, don't clip it - there, you are doing it in the original style. I am a trad climber and I have been the first ascensionist on a route. If someone added a bolt to that route because there was an R or X run out I left in because I was having a good day, I wouldn't mind. If someone sewed it up like a bolt a ladder, I would chop. There needs to be moderation and balance on this issue.
Sure makes for a livily thread though eh
|
|
|
|
|
mtnjohn
Aug 9, 2002, 8:26 PM
Post #103 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 230
|
No one owns the rock. I have the right to establish routes with bolts AND the right to take "abandoned" bolts. If you intentionally leave a bolt somewhere, then you've decided that you no longer wish to own it. If I feel like taking it home, it's up to me. You don't leave things at picnic grounds and expect them to be there forever until they rust into oblivion, do you?
And yes I have numerous first ascent bolted routes. I'd be pissed if some one chopped them. That doesn't mean they can't. Think big picture. Climbers don't own the rock. We have acces to use it. So do skiers if they want to. Nobody sets rules for any section of accessible stone! Private property is a completely different story.
|
|
|
|
|
sparky
Aug 10, 2002, 3:07 AM
Post #104 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2002
Posts: 438
|
If they are there leave them. Only put in new bolts for belay anchors or super runout sections.
|
|
|
|
|
xtacy57
Aug 10, 2002, 3:58 AM
Post #105 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2002
Posts: 8
|
First of all...I am not old school, and I am not a badass climber (unless 5.8 trad is badass), but if you're not the first ascentionist, you have no right to add or remove bolts on a climb. If you say adding bolts doesn't change a climb, think about a place like Stone Mountain, NC...if it was bolted every 10 feet the climbs would be VERY different. The phychological and danger aspects are part of routes like those at Stone Mountain. If you think a route is too dangerous because it's runout, DON'T CLIMB IT! On the flipside, it's not right to go to the New and remove bolts because you think a route is overbolted. On top of that, if you're putting up a FA, make sure you do it within the ethics of the area. Now go climb, and have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
cragstar
Aug 10, 2002, 9:42 PM
Post #106 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 69
|
Im so sorry I brought this post back to life Im actually very sick of this topic myself
|
|
|
|
|
apollodorus
Aug 11, 2002, 7:27 AM
Post #107 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2002
Posts: 2157
|
I saw a trip report:
http://www.devilstowerlodge.com/climbing/tales8.html
Midway through, the author talks about the crack being too wide for pro, and "Paul, send up the drill . . ."
DRILL? Right next to a perfect crack????
The only reason was because huge cams weren't available then.
In the olden days, before bongs were invented, people would bolt next to 3 and 4 inch cracks. Warren Harding used the Stoveleg pitons to get around having to bolt all the way up the Stoveleg cracks (I am not making this up). Today, this mentality would be lunacy: why not slam a couple of #4 Friends?
A smooth face is one thing, but to place bolts next to a big crack is another. There is NO reason to bolt next to a big crack.
Charlie Porter didn't have to bolt the Excalibur on El Capitan; he used aluminum shim blocks against bongs. This was at least six years before Jardine invented his cams.
Today? Just shim your #5 Camalots with pieces of 2x4 duct-taped to the cams.
Drilling next to big cracks is stupid.
[ This Message was edited by: apollodorus on 2002-08-12 18:28 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Aug 11, 2002, 7:37 AM
Post #108 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Ah! "To bolt, or not to bolt. That is the question." I say, only when necessary. Than I'm all good with it.
Steve
[ This Message was edited by: wildtrail on 2002-08-11 01:24 ]
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 12, 2002, 4:30 AM
Post #109 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Although this is something that constantly gets beat to death, living here in Tuolumne has lead me to be privvy to some intellectual discussions as to the use of bolts.
Let me preface my statement by saying that:
a) Tuolumne is known for its runouts
b) I started out as a sport climber and have no problem with bolted routes within reason.
A couple of weeks ago a bunch of us climbers got to discussing the bolting situation from an NPS perspective and Naomi, the Tuolumne climbing ranger (and an excellent one at that), pointed out that climbers were the only ones priveledged to alter the wilderness. That being the case, we should respect it.
Then, conversation turned to a well known classic: The SouthEast face of Cathedral Peak. On the top, there were bolts for rapping off the blocks and descending. These bolts have been chopped and mandate a 5.4 downclimb.
Two schools of thought on this were: If you can climb Cathedral, you should be able to downclimb it and not have the bolts. If you climb Cathedral, the downclimb is dangerous and someone has already put up the bolts, so yay - let's use them.
I'd never done the climb until yesterday and the bolts had, indeed, been chopped. Both my partner and I were bummed. I mean, the rock was already marred because I could see the hangerless head of the bolt sticking out there, teasing me. I also hate downclimbing. Especially unprotected downclimbing. My partner was desirous of protection so I put him on belay while he downclimbed. I had to do it with a rope tied to me and full rack.
Bolts. They can be good. Don't chop them if they are just because you think you're a badass soloist and everyone should be, too.
|
|
|
|
|
wonder1978
Aug 12, 2002, 5:02 AM
Post #110 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 250
|
All I wanna say is bolt or don't bolt but make up your mind for cryin out loud
I went to a small crag on a sunny afternoon, I saw a beautiful line of bolts on a face and couldn't resist. I start climbing, then what happens? After the 4th bolt...nothing, blank, void,...no bolts anymore Why? Because there was a small horizontal crack where there should have been a bolt. The 5th bolt was a deadly run out two trad pros higher. After I got down from the 4th bolt, pissed as hell, a climber showed me the topo which said: MIX. What in the f---in' hell is that all about. Am I going to carry the whole god damn rack with me for two lousy pros on a FACE climb? Now the only way I can climb something hard securely at that crag is A)by asking a local exactly what gear I need to bring B)rappeling down the route and preplacing the pro C)not bother with that non-sense and go climb at Rumney. This is bullshit if you ask me: Bolt or don't bolt Mix, this is just annoying
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
compclimber
Aug 12, 2002, 10:34 PM
Post #111 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2001
Posts: 683
|
Woah... If I remember right this was probably my first post here at the site. At least one of the first five I made. Cool to see it back up again... especially considering there was probably about 15 core users of this site when I started it.
|
|
|
|
|
bellster
Aug 13, 2002, 1:18 AM
Post #112 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2002
Posts: 1
|
I don't believe that bolts should ever be added to a route unless the person who made the first ascent goes back and adds them for whatever reason. There is more to a route than just the moves that are made to get to the top...a rock climbing route is an experience. A runout may be part of the experience that the climber who first climbed the route envisioned when creating the route. If an artist created a painting that used a red that was bright and gave you a headache when you looked at it...you wouldn't go and add some blue to the color to tone it down so that you could enjoy it more. A rock route is the same...it's a beautiful creation. None of us are so important that we should alter a route so that we can climb it. If a route is not protected how you would like...then don't climb the route. Find a different route that has protection more to your liking.
|
|
|
|
|
the_elk
Aug 13, 2002, 1:44 AM
Post #113 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2002
Posts: 200
|
Why not throw in another post on this topic?
A "friend" of mine rang me the other day to tell me he had done the FFA of a climb at a climbing area a couple of hours east of Melbourne. In order to climb it he had to bolt it. Personally I had a go at him, not because he bolted it, because I have seen the climb, I've done the climb on top rope, and know that it had no natural gear, and was to either be solo'd or bolted. My problem was that he did not do adequate research into it. He didn't talk to anyone who had set up climbs in that area, he didn't approach the proper people involved. He just had a look in a guide book, checked out whether it had been listed as a climb and assumed that it had never been done before.
If I was the first ascentionist of that climb, I'd be choppin' the bolts! His ethics, as far as I'm concerned are wrong. He happily goes out and bolts if he thinks he should. His theory being that if it is too far between gear there should be protecion, so he'll go bolt it. So far he hasn't done too much, and hasn't apparently stepped on any toes... but it's only a matter of time. And I will happily watch him get put back in his place by a first ascentionist. If he doesn't get permission from the right people after being told by at least 5 of us the proper way to go about it, then he deserves it.
cheers
Elk
|
|
|
|
|
mhr2000
Aug 13, 2002, 6:39 AM
Post #114 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 290
|
I have just now begun to get interested in climbing and it's pretty simple to see how bolting every route is just wrong. I've been debating as to exactly how I want to start my climbing career. Considering my options bouldering seems to be a great place to start because it's all natural without bolts and minimal risk for a newbie like myself. Great for building technique and endurance both physically and mentally. I've done some free climbing on 30/40 footers but they weren't anything very risky. My point being is there has to be something to graduate to. While bolts have their place, I'd much rather be challenged by nature and overcome it (isn't that the whole point). I understand the commitment factor that many are talking about. If you bolt every 10 feet then where is the mental challenge and commitment. I also understand bolts can be ignored and not used, but just seeing the bolts is kind of like finding out your girlfriend lied about being a virgin. Every man who came around was able to have her. Knowing the route your climbing has been ascended by every person who came upon it is just somewhat disappointing to me. I feel there has to be some sort of "rite of passage". If, as a rookie, I could climb the toughest route available because it's bolted, then what was the point? As I progress I want to know that bigger and better challenges await and only those who have reached higher skill levels are capable of beating them. This is the "rite of passage". A common thing among all sports and activities.
Well, this is just my 2 cents. I'll get off my soap box now. Hope I didn't offend anyone as this was not my intention. I plan on sticking around and learning as much as I can from what appears to be a great bunch of experienced climbers.
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
metoliusmunchkin
Aug 13, 2002, 8:50 PM
Post #115 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2001
Posts: 1410
|
Again I am discouraged at the finding of such heated debate birthed through such matters of opinion. Most debates worth while are the opinions derived from fact, a true statement. Such statements made within this forum are solely the opinions of others. Why continue such meaningless quarrel?
Bolting a route is based on the matter of opinion. If the distinct climber wishes to bolt a particular undiscovered climb, it is that particular climber's prerogative. However, I am very much against the bolting of classic trad routes.
Trad routes belong to the use of trad gear, used by trad climbers. Sport routes (bolted routes) can be used by any climber willing to utilize the bolts upon the climb. The two should not be interlocked. It is here where the heated debate should lie.
If an inexperienced sport climber finds a particular trad route too difficult, and thus bolts the route to better suit his needs, the bolts should be chopped along with the questioned climber's hands. This is the highest form of disrespect I can personally think of whilst considering the many faults of rude climbers - rude to the community, and rude to his fellowship.
That is all.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 14, 2002, 2:10 PM
Post #116 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
The longer this thread goes, the less likely it will be that the people who are posting have actually read what others have already said, including in the other forum threads linked.
"Wonder"boy: if you want a completly convenient climbing experience, go indoors. Mixed-pro routes are in many ways at the heart of this very discussion. Mixed-pro routes indicate that the author of the route did indeed demonstrate respect for the rock. Your attitude is what those of us who care about access are too often battling against, when we talk to land managers, private land owners, etc. Land managers and owners have encountered the grid bolting of cliff walls and faces, which is damage done by lazy-ass whiney arrogant shit-for-brains morons who want a quick cheap thrill, and then back to their SUV for a ride to the nearest Starbucks. It's a very short step from this attitude to justifying chipping and "comfortizing" holds and routes. So, if it's a little too offensive to your tough manly persona to carry in some trad gear for a day of climbing, then stay home, or go to that really tough, but convenient gym.
Read these threads, and do a little research in the vast climbing history literature out there, before you make such an ass out of yourself. You're not the first to express such laziness and selfish arrogance, and, unfortunately, you probably won't be the last. But, show a little respect to the thousands of climbers that have come before you, and appreciate the decades of climbing that precede your efforts, by learning more. And: say less.
|
|
|
|
|
wonder1978
Aug 15, 2002, 2:08 AM
Post #117 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 250
|
Well jds, nice try, very aggressive indeed but my opinion still stands. The fact is that thecrag I am referring to and that you know nothing whatsoever about is essentially sport apart from these few very dangerous routes.
For what it's worth, I do climb trad and appreciate it very much. I am informed and have read the other posts. I am also very respectful of all styles of climbers, even those with elitist attitudes such as you seem to have.
I can climb up to 5.9 trad and up to 5.11+ sport. I will not bring my rack on a 5.11 as it would be dangerous for me at this level. I choose not to do those routes and respect (and admire) those who do climb them. I do not always carry a guide book with me. I believe that a guide book is not a prerequisite for climbing. When I see a line of bolts and I am climbing at a crag that is considered 'sport', I am justified in thinking that this route will therefore be 'sport'. When I realize that it is not, halfway up, in a precarious position, risking a dreadfully long fall, I am justified in being pissed and so would you. I do not carry my full rack when I expect to climb a route that is supposedly 'sport'. Do you?
Big difference:
Mix: placing a bolt on a trad route to avoid a potentially deadly run out. Yes, thank you, well done
Mix: Refraining to place a bolt on an otherwise bolted sport route because of a tiny spot for an rp. Hell no, you are endangering my life as well as other climber's
Anecdote: A few years back at this very crag a guy comes up and sees a line of bolts that looks inviting. The first bolt is high, way high. The guy choses to respect the first ascender's idea and do it in a clean style, no stick clip, no t-r, no rappeling down. Ground up as they say. After all, if the f-a chose to do it this way, who is he to question his godlike wisdom. And he's a pretty solid climber all things considered. He goes for it, reaches the first bolt, clips the quickdraw. At the very moment that he grabs the rope his belayerslips and pulls the rope very slightly. The guy loses balance and plummets down. He's in a wheelchair to this day but he did respect the f-a to the end. True story.
Turns out that the f-a could solo .12+ and didn't give a sh it about anyone else. The locals would ask him to protect the ground fall a bit more reasonably on his routes but hey, they're way too respectful of his majesty to even ask. Instead they just don't climb his routes, but they keep them clean in case Peter Croft might stumble by.
Waste of rock if you ask me.
Very respectfully,
Steve.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 15, 2002, 4:03 PM
Post #118 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Steve, your complaints about the particular route you mentioned are not much different than if you had gotten onto a route that you had no idea about, and found it beyond your capabilities that day. You seemed to primarily be bitching about the inconvenience of a mixed-pro route, and assert that a portion of a route that is trad-protectable should be bolted for the convenience of those who did not bring a rack that day. And, as far as "climbing securely" at that crag or any other, you may need to define your sense of "securely". Maybe you unintentionally sound as though risk is not part of your climbing experience. Risk is part of climbing, period. And, that's not elitist; that's the nature of the activity.
It also sounds as though it wouldn't have taken too much effort to find out a little more about this particular crag's development, or this particular route, if another climber who is right there has a topo.
I do climb most frequently at a crag that is primarily a sport climbing destination. There are also some trad routes, and some mixed pro routes (not "mixed" routes, which is a different definition), but I have taken the time to get to know what's there, and I do take a rack if I plan on getting on the mixed-pro routes. I take the gear that I need for those routes, not the full rack. I'm also prepared to back down if I encounter an unknown or unexpected element.
This sport crag has become very popular, and my partners and I have noticed an increase in climbers who seem to think -to assume- that everything is or should be laid out for them to just pull up in the car, rap down a fixed line that they have no idea about it's history (how old, who put it there, are the anchors safe, etc. etc.), hop on any and every bolted route that isn't overhanging, and treat it like an outdoor gym. These are the same people who bitch endlessly that a new edition of a guidebook hasn't been published, as if they have a right to demand someone else's efforts in the form of a comprehnesive guidebook, and they have the right to complain and insult the author for taking "so long". These are the people who put in no effort to clean up areas, make no effort to help with access issues by improving relations with managers and other user groups, and act like they're God's gift to climbing when they hangdog a 5.11b.
As far as your anecdote, it is a rotten situation for that climber to end up paralyzed. But, the unfortunate truth is also that he made the choice to attempt the route, and it's also true that his belayer screwed up at a crucial moment. This has little or nothing to do with the nature of the pro of the route that the climber had chosen to attempt. (By the way, the anecdote has nothing to do with your complaint of being "annoyed" by a mixed-pro route. Your complaint is about the inconvenience of carrying some trad gear.)
If this one climber who put up routes with poor or inconsiderate pro is such a pariah, by consensus, I certainly believe that the climbing community is ehtically able to correct bad bolting. I've posted a lot on this website about the ethics of bolting, and about the ethics of respecting FAs, etc. I am no idealogue about these matters. I believe that actions about retro-bolting and correcting bad bolting should be taken as a result of community consideration, by group consensus. If this climber is so unilateral and selfish in his thinking and actions, then, if the community at large agrees, I think the routes are subject to correction. But, it's a slippery slope to start down. (By the way, if commuinity consensus was that these mixed-pro routes should be bolted, then I would support that decision. I would disagree with the ethics of it, but I would support that it's the right of the community to have a different ethic than mine, and act in the community's interests in managing a community resource.)
My ethic, and that of the general community of climbers here, is that we would not bolt a trad-protectable route or section. The concepts of when a bolt "should" be placed, of "safe" bolting, "waste of rock", etc., is individualy too subjective, and that's why community consensus is so important.
Respecting the rock, the resource, nature, is hardly an elitist attitude. Rather, I think that it is the height of arrogance to assume that climbing should be made more convenient -less "annoying"- for one climber.
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2002-08-15 09:14 ]
|
|
|
|
|
fieldmouse
Aug 15, 2002, 5:06 PM
Post #119 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 404
|
the only bad thing steve diekoff did was to not return the hangers to their owner.
|
|
|
|
|
kerouac
Aug 15, 2002, 5:17 PM
Post #120 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2001
Posts: 90
|
Would someone please lock this Topic. It has been talked about forever and no end in site.
|
|
|
|
|
spank_spank
Aug 15, 2002, 5:38 PM
Post #121 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 480
|
Bolt the World
|
|
|
|
|
wonder1978
Aug 15, 2002, 7:54 PM
Post #122 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2002
Posts: 250
|
jds, we seem to be approaching some sort of agreement here. My arguments may seem harsh at times but this is mainly for the purpose of making a livelier conversation. I'm not a bad person all in all.
some precisions: I do climb mixed-pro routes when I expect to be climbing such a route.
The route in question was not beyond my abilities but the run out certainly was. Of course their wouldn't have been a run out had I brought gear. I would have brought gear if I had known it was needed. I would have known if I had had a guidebook. I did not have a guide book therefore I had no way to know. And most importantly the route was completely bolted save for that ridiculous placement.
Once again there is a big difference between placing a bolt on a trad route to protect a run out and not placing a bolt on an otherwise bolted sport route for the sake of one small placement.
Bringing gear on a route doesn't annoy me in the least, I assure you.
In fact my main argument was mostly, as you have mentionned, against bad bolting. I might not have made that clear enough.
Regards,
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 15, 2002, 11:53 PM
Post #123 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Steve, I agree; we're probably pretty close to being on the same page on this.
Good climbing out there.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
mkadlec
Aug 17, 2002, 1:21 PM
Post #124 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2001
Posts: 25
|
I am all for bolting, and I love to climb trad. For the life of me I can't understand people opposed to bolting, if you don't want to use a particular bolt - don't use it!
There have been many times where I have questioned bolts that are 3 feet apart or right next to a nice natural placement, but I have chosen to use them or not to use them, it was a simple decision.
Do the bolt choppers look at bouldering problems and try to knock out holds around the bouldering problem for fear they may be tempted to use them?
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
collegekid
Aug 18, 2002, 4:16 AM
Post #125 of 137
(9571 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2002
Posts: 1852
|
I think it's a little different then that...sometimes (as*holes) chop new holds into old bouldering problems, or deepen current holds so that their weak hands can hang on....I think that is more like what over-bolting is. It's tough to not use carved holds, especially if the formerly small holds were enlarged.
The rock should be altered as little as possible (ie chopping holds, bolting, etc). If you can't handle the small holds, or the lack of bolts, get off the rock and go somewhere else, PREFERABLY A GYM. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
marks
Aug 18, 2002, 7:31 AM
Post #126 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2002
Posts: 376
|
like a few people have said ,if you cant climb a hard runout section tuff luck try something easier and work your way up.i had to.danger is what climbing is about,if you want saftey stay in the gym.climbing is elitist.when you are good enough to climb a hard route you would be mortified to find that it had being bolted so any muppet could try it.
|
|
|
|
|
mitchal
Aug 19, 2002, 12:37 AM
Post #127 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2002
Posts: 672
|
I agree with spank_spank
Bolt the WORLD,and the sidewalk leading to it!
Bolt Happy
Mitch
|
|
|
|
|
climb512
Aug 20, 2002, 1:18 PM
Post #128 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2001
Posts: 468
|
I agree with marks on this. Well said!!
|
|
|
|
|
marcel
Aug 20, 2002, 3:03 PM
Post #129 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 523
|
One of our local crags has over the years had several degrees of difficulty routes put up its 80 foot face. It’s a great place to top rope or lead climb. The easiest route about a 5.3 friction slab when dry had 3 bolts placed up its length. This was fine for must people, but the crag since it’s so close to the road was attracting lots of beginner climbers. My fear was if anyone was to fall while approaching the next bolt they would bottom out. So to test my theory I down climbed after clipping each bolt and asked my belayer to not take in any slack. Sure enough I came within 5 feet of bottoming out. This meant if there was any slack in the rope the climber was going to crater. So I placed bolts half way in between the original bolts. Well the guy that put up the route got a bit pissed and chopped the bolts I had put in saying they were not necessary. Well since it was his route I didn’t protest very much. Well about a year later a newbie did crater, but fortunately was not hurt badly. Shortly after that another group of climbers went back and replaced my chopped bolts. The guy who originally put up the route has left town, so please don’t tell him or he just might came back and chop them again.
I sure can’t comment on each and ever route that’s out there, but in the case I just wrote about, it is my thought if you don’t want to use the intermediate bolts well just climb past them without clipping. Don’t chop them.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 20, 2002, 10:07 PM
Post #130 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Quote:"For the life of me I can't understand people opposed to bolting..."
It can easily become an "Access Issue". The main reason Hueco Tanks was closed, is due to irresponsible bolting practices. Even John Shermin regrets sneaking in at night to bolt routes.
If we, as climbers, cannot regulate ourselves, then the government will regulate for us. To have the idea that "everything should be bolted", is not showing that we can act responsibly, and regulate ourselves.
Again I will use this analogy...
If a 35' "High Ball" boulder problem were to be bolted to make it safe, that would not be OK, right ??? It's a boulder broblem. If one does not have the stones to boulder it, do not lower the problem to one's "comfort level". Same argument applies to bolting Trad lines.
|
|
|
|
|
josher
Aug 22, 2002, 12:41 AM
Post #131 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2002
Posts: 295
|
in Climbing Mag, they have a little blerb about Adam Stack climbing a bolted line in Rumey (sorry, I'm drawing a blank on the routes name) using trad gear ONLY.
|
|
|
|
|
needtolearnhowtoclimb
Aug 22, 2002, 4:00 AM
Post #132 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2002
Posts: 216
|
Dont chop the bolts down, the some of us less talented climbers use them. If i knew how to place and use trad equipment, and could afford it, i would use that, but right now i have to stick to sports routes, and have been losing some bolts at the local crag. If any of you on here want to give me some trad gear for free ill be glad to take it. yeah.
THE SAVIOR
|
|
|
|
|
monkeyface1982
Aug 22, 2002, 4:51 AM
Post #133 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 34
|
ok I've read most of the debate about placeing and removal of bolts.
now my Question is what do you all say about adding a first bolt down low on an old route if irrosion has caused the ground below to slip away?
at my local crag most of the climbs were put up 15 odd yrs ago, over time, rain has irroded the ground down approx 2-3 mt
meaning the original first bolt is 15 odd feet off the ground.
now the question is do you add a lower placed bolt for the added safty?
most of the starts are really hard now cause they wernt appart of the original climb
personally i belive that bolts are that bad a thing on certain climbs
anything that is a classic Trad route should be left as such
but if a group of ppl make aeven decision on "yes" it could help to have bomber safty
well then i think it is ok
i dont belive 1 person should make this decision.
bolts are there to save lives, there is no other reason other than that
thats all there put in to do
it comes back to personal ethic if you clip a bolt or do it all natural
so i hope you all understand my point of view and i hope this open your eyes to others view
we all have our own look on thing
i dont expect every one to agree
but all i say is understand that ppl there own veiw on things and respect there comments but dont take it all to heart
keep climbing so you enjoy it
thats what were all here to do enjoy it
dont bring too much politics in to it
youll kill the sport
|
|
|
|
|
adey007
Aug 22, 2002, 12:21 PM
Post #134 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2002
Posts: 21
|
Being an English climber, the bolt debate has been running a long long time here, its hard to find sport stuff in England. With such a trad climbing tradition bolting amongst the climbing community is generally really frowned upon.
My thoughts, I'd never myself or want anyone to bolt an already trad route. Thats just wrong. It was made trad, can be climbed trad, should be left trad.
Having spent the past 4 summers in california I got quite into the sport scene. Im not soo sure on how bad the problem is in the states with people bolting trad routes and what are the general rules on bolting a route.
The good thing is the climbing community worldwide is generally a very honest and environment/wilderness friendly bunch of people. From what I believe any rogue people who unnecessarily bolt routes are few and far between.
About two years ago I went to climb at Cave rock in Tahoe, to my dismay when we arrived the bottom 2-3 bolts had been chopped from the cave area, presumably by rangers. Determined to climb but not stupid enough to free solo 20-30ft of 5.12, we head to the lower cave rock area by the lake. All the bolts here had been chopped on all the routes!! How common is this problem? Has the area been rebolted?
Is friction over access and particularly bolting a common problem in the states between land owners and climbers?
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
verticallaw
Aug 22, 2002, 4:54 PM
Post #135 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 21, 2002
Posts: 552
|
Hmmmmmmm It seems that I have been here before I know the debate and did not give a dam!!!!!!!!!!!! I know of a slab route neer me that I have just helped put up....... ahhhh just under vertical reaching the upper end of 5.13 (5.12 with aid). I used bolts and I am dam proud of it!!!! I would like to invite any "hardcore" trad guru to come and send it on gear..... oh maybe I should mention that some of the best in the area tried and FAILED!!!! until a brave few of us summated and COMPLEATED the first assent. Beutifull rock ...... oh by the way maybe I should mention the hardest part of the route is about 3000 ft off the deck and well there is no pro!!!(save for the #4 camalot that you used 4 pitches ago and is now being very usefull on your rack )
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Both trad and sport exist in there own relms. They are both needed to propell the sport to the next levels. A place for everyone and everyone in a place
GET OVER IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ This Message was edited by: verticallaw on 2002-08-22 09:55 ]
|
|
|
|
|
littlefish2423
Aug 23, 2002, 9:30 PM
Post #136 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2002
Posts: 1
|
Both trad and sport DO exist within their own relms. The realm of trad is the rock wall. The realm of sport is in a gym.
|
|
|
|
|
collegekid
Aug 25, 2002, 5:54 AM
Post #137 of 137
(8990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2002
Posts: 1852
|
...and on a boulder...which is why i boulder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
