|
maculated
Nov 2, 2004, 1:12 AM
Post #51 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Pt, or is it?
Some hardcored "ethics" climbers would argue that if you can't find a way down without bolting, there shouldn't be a line.
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Nov 2, 2004, 4:34 AM
Post #54 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
Peter Croft wrote in a 1999 Rock and Ice Road Trip issue about the ORG:
"A climber who had ventured onto the Roof [the Eldorado Roof, locale of most of the Gorge's harder bolted cracks] assured us that the bolts were unnecessary. This, in spite of the unsually bubbly patina that lines the cracks and pops under cam pressure."
Also, "Many of the routes wrestle massive, semi-detached flakes that hold body weight just fine. But should some brainless hero think to pop cams behind one of the flakes and then fall, I'm certain it'd swoop down like a 10 ton manta ray and bury him."
Usually there is no patina inside the cracks, it's just dirt which would not hold pro - this is the main reason the cracks are bolted in the Gorge.
Ethics are the way they are today because 20 years ago the best climbers, Croft among them, decided that the "rules" don't apply the same to all areas. It's funny to watch people who weren't around then trying to revive the debate today, as if the debate had never taken place.
|
|
|
|
|
holdstrong
Nov 2, 2004, 5:17 AM
Post #55 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 33
|
The funny thing is... not only are those bolts placed right next to perfectly protectable features (bad enough)..... they seem to be placed every 5 feet.
Why not just bolt a ladder up there? I think most people agree a line has to be drawn somewhere... if those pictures are not an example of a line being crossed... I dont know what is.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Nov 2, 2004, 5:45 AM
Post #56 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
One in a hundred climbers that go into the gorge brings a rack. (that is being generous) The majority of them are 5.9 wannabe crack climbers. The gorge is the last place those kind of climbers should be going.
The last serious crack climbers to regularly visit the gorge did so in a sense of adventure in the late 70's and early 80's. (?)
During the first 5 to 8 years of sport climbing in the gorge, there were a number of mixed routes. (who would go to the gorge to climb cracks with the valley right there?) Over the years many(all?) of these placements were replaced with bolts. (several after accidents)
Now they are doing the cracks. Can't say that I am surprised. A bolted crack in the gorge probably sees more ascents in a season than it otherwise would have in ten years.
Just about anywhere else I would be adamantly against bolting established trad lines.
ps. If you do not like this route, don't go to shelf road, potrero chico, maple, AF, queen creek, etc... Let alone around boulder/denver or any limestone crag.
|
|
|
|
|
boltdude
Nov 2, 2004, 7:00 AM
Post #57 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 685
|
Wow! Lots of spray, lots of it inaccurate. alpnclmbr1, I have a ton of respect for you, but in this case you're guilty as charged.
Tons of cracks at Owens have perfectly good pro. Many have not so good pro and require some trickery. A few have nasty "grotty" or bubbly patina inside the crack which crumbles and makes for very poor placements.
Existing trad lines, and there are plenty, range from 5.7 to 5.12d. More people than you'd guess climb in the Gorge with trad gear. A number of the old-school face climbs still require trad gear. Except for a couple routes from 1984 and 1986, all the trad routes went up at the same time as the sport routes ('89 on), and trad routes still go up in the Gorge.
No one's been going around and retrobolting old crack lines. New crack routes get put up with natural pro, and some first ascent folks bolt SOME of them. Some of the bolts are because the pro is poor. Some are simply for convenience, and placed in the spirit of making the route available for more people to climb. The latter bolts are controversial. The picture that started the thread is of a climb that I've never been on, but based on my experience at Owens (at least 50 trad routes 5.7 to 5.11a including half a dozen trad FAs to 10c), that crack could well have poor pro and/or pro that would dislodge blocks if you fell. I don't know, I haven't climbed it. Those of you who think you "know" the crack has good pro haven't climbed lots of trad at Owens.
Presumably, everyone here is arguing over convenience bolts, and yet not one person seems to know if the bolts in contention are convenience bolts or because the pro is poor or behind loose blocks.
Pretty much all the local route developers are also Valley & Tuolumne & High Sierra climbers. Pretty much everyone also has mixed feelings about bolting cracks at Owens - including the folks that actually bolt the cracks. Those that bolt the cracks get plenty of criticism within the local community. I wouldn't worry about the "trend" spreading to other areas.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 2, 2004, 3:59 PM
Post #58 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: There are bolts next to cracks all over Yosemite. I don't hear anyone crying about those. Especially when they conveniently rap from them. Nope, no traddies complaining about those bolts next to those cracks. So sir, not us. DMT I don't see how a fixed anchor applies to this situation. Are all trad climbers supposed to leave gear behind to rap? Totally different situation.
That's the attitude I am talking about. You are more than willing to pass judgement on the convenience anchors of others, but refuse to even acknowledge that the same judgements can be passed ON ANY BOLT EVER PLACED AS A CLIMinb ANCHOR, REGARDLESS OF PURPOSE.
All bolts are convenience anchors. The safety argument is a straw something or other.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 2, 2004, 4:03 PM
Post #59 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Presumably, everyone here is arguing over convenience bolts, and yet not one person seems to know if the bolts in contention are convenience bolts or because the pro is poor or behind loose blocks.
I'm not arguing your point, but all bolts are convenience anchors.
Every last one of them.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Nov 2, 2004, 4:27 PM
Post #60 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: I believe the issue at hand is not about one group claiming superiority over another. It’s about choice, and the preservation of choice. Lets say I chose to climb route for its mental difficulty and I chose to climb it in committing style. If the route has bolts all over it, the route loses it’s commitment and I am deprived of my choice. For those of you who would argue to simply “not clip the bolts”, miss the point of what commitment is. In climbing commitment is the abandonment of choice. I chose to climb in a wilderness area, abandoning the choice of rescue. I chose to place my own natural anchors, abandoning the choice of not having to leave my own gear if I have to bail. I chose to free solo, abandoning the choice of survival if I fail. If, as a climbing community, we chose to place bolts next to cracks and are apathetic enough to let it slide when others do it. We deprive our selves of a style of climbing and our sports becomes a hollower, empty shadow of its former self. The journey is not about the destination. The journey is how you chose to reach that destination.
I am not sure I understand this arguement. If you plan on climbing the crack in true, committed style, you are not planning on using the bolts. So, then, why does the bolts make the climb less committing. If you are 30 feet off the deck and you refuse to clip a bolt, sounds just as committing to me. guess I dont understand. I dont understand why you dont simply pick another crack.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Nov 2, 2004, 6:00 PM
Post #61 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Hey Greg. I have lots of respect for you as well and appreciate the good work you do with the asca.
In reply to: Except for a couple routes from 1984 and 1986, all the trad routes went up at the same time as the sport routes ('89 on), and trad routes still go up in the Gorge.
I started climbing in the gorge before the first guidebook came out. The word then was that odd people had been visiting the gorge for a long time. It has been a long time, but I seem to recall seeing old tatty slings and weird old aid bolts??
I don't care as much about gear routes in the gorge because I don't like them personally, so that is not a fight I would choose to fight.
As far as the controversial bolts, chop em as far as I am concerned. My biggest complaint about them is the fact that the trend is spreading. On the eastside and elsewhere.
ps. What is the story with the dead end anchor on blown away?
|
|
|
|
|
dynobelay
Nov 2, 2004, 7:15 PM
Post #62 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 73
|
I have also climbed at the Gorge since its 1st guidebook. And I've climbed a lot of the crack trad routes there. All of the ones I did were easily protectable and the rock quality was not questionable at all. There is no excuse for bolting most crack/trad routes at the Gorge.
I believe this is happening because sport climbers want to "decree" the Gorge as a total sport cliff. And so they don't have to be "bothered" bringing anything but quick draws. This is a trend that is spreading. Lately the New River Gorge has retrobolted some old mixed routes to make them pure clip and go (because they weren't "popular" as mixed gear and bolt routes).
Why do we now have a rush to turn all climbing into McDonalds style of clip and go's? Viva la differance!!! If it takes gear, use gear. If its a blank wall use a bolt.
|
|
|
|
|
pt
Nov 3, 2004, 3:04 PM
Post #63 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 400
|
BooHoo! I feel so bad for the climbers who have to carry all those cams around just to climb a crack. Maybe someone can wipe their arses for them too so they don't have to reach all the way back there and deal with it themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Nov 3, 2004, 5:27 PM
Post #64 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
In reply to: BooHoo! I feel so bad for the climbers who have to carry all those cams around just to climb a crack. Maybe someone can wipe their arses for them too so they don't have to reach all the way back there and deal with it themselves.
Is it me, or is this completely counterintuitive?
Wouldn't the cammers be the ones NOT having their asses wiped for them? Or was the metaphor completely superficial (just calling them babies?)
Or is pt an exclusive soloist?
hmmmmmmm....
leinosaur
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 3, 2004, 5:34 PM
Post #65 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I believe this is happening because sport climbers want to "decree" the Gorge as a total sport cliff. And so they don't have to be "bothered" bringing anything but quick draws. (snip) Why do we now have a rush to turn all climbing into McDonalds style of clip and go's? Viva la differance!!! If it takes gear, use gear. If its a blank wall use a bolt.
There is no rush to turn *all* climbing areas into McDonalds style clip and go's. The sky IS NOT falling either.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
pt
Nov 3, 2004, 7:09 PM
Post #66 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2003
Posts: 400
|
[quote="leinosaur
Wouldn't the cammers be the ones NOT having their asses wiped for them? Or was the metaphor completely superficial (just calling them babies?)
Or is pt an exclusive soloist?
hmmmmmmm....
leinosaur
No; the people who want bolts next to the crack so they don't need to carry cams around are the ones who may need help with, ahem, other activities.
I'm way too much of a chicken to solo anything. Heck, I'm too chicken to sport climb because I can't plug a cam anywhere I want! To be honest, I think sport climbing can be just as scary or more scary than trad climbing(depending on the route of course). My only argument with bolts is that they should be used when you can't place other gear, otherwise, I'm all for them.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Nov 3, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #67 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
In reply to: [quote="leinosaur Wouldn't the cammers be the ones NOT having their asses wiped for them? Or was the metaphor completely superficial (just calling them babies?) Or is pt an exclusive soloist? hmmmmmmm.... leinosaur
No; the people who want bolts next to the crack so they don't need to carry cams around are the ones who may need help with, ahem, other activities.
I'm way too much of a chicken to solo anything. Heck, I'm too chicken to sport climb because I can't plug a cam anywhere I want! To be honest, I think sport climbing can be just as scary or more scary than trad climbing(depending on the route of course). My only argument with bolts is that they should be used when you can't place other gear, otherwise, I'm all for them.
OK, I didn't get that at all. Hear, hear, for placing gear!
leinosaur
|
|
|
|
|
drkayak
Nov 4, 2004, 5:53 PM
Post #68 of 68
(6482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2002
Posts: 136
|
In reply to: Wow! Lots of spray, lots of it inaccurate..... that crack could well have poor pro and/or pro that would dislodge blocks if you fell. I don't know, I haven't climbed it. Those of you who think you "know" the crack has good pro haven't climbed lots of trad at Owens. Presumably, everyone here is arguing over convenience bolts, and yet not one person seems to know if the bolts in contention are convenience bolts or because the pro is poor or behind loose blocks.
Five pages of posts and not a single person has done this climb? The picture is of the second pitch of “Slip ‘N Slide” a 3 star 5.9 at Lower Elbow Room area. I have lead it twice. The crack is very shallow and flaring. Sure, a experienced climber with the right rack could get in a few good pieces or just solo it for that matter.
From my experience on this climb I think the bolts are necessary for a typical 5.9 leader at a “sport crag”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
