|
|
|
|
johnhemlock
Oct 4, 2005, 7:49 PM
Post #26 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2004
Posts: 311
|
In reply to: DMT - Perhaps I wasn't clear, and I don't know that I listed any "guidelines". I think Wolf's Head is a excellent route ( and you thought I didn't have a sense of "whimsy" ). My impression is that the gets more traffic than any other in that vicinity, with the exception of SF of Pingora. It is technically easy, and well travelled. The Winds seem to be one of the last "popular" areas that have a dearth of information and a true sense of adventure. What does a series of bolted anchors bring to the table? Is there a problem waiting to be solved? If you can't get yourself on and off WH w/o a bolted rap line, your climbing possibilities in the range are going to be very limited. Murf
That's the kind of articulate stuff I was looking for when I wrote the original post. Again, I wasn't necessarily advocating to bolt a rap line, just trying to differentiate between a valid reason for not doing so, and dogma.
It doesn't have to be Wolf's Head, it could be any popular alpine climb. Take the Petit Grepon in RMNP - it now sports a series of bolted rap anchors that keep you out of the unpleasant descent gully full of weekend warriors trundling rocks. Have people used that descent gully for years? You bet. And if you can't get yourself off the Petit without a bolted rap line, you've got other problems. But the line is there, on a popular trade route with a crappy descent, so I'm going to use them. Do I feel that not grovelling and downclimbing rubble filled gullies diminishes my accomplishment for the day if there is a rap alternative? Not whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
topher
Oct 4, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #27 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 477
|
this is what i do, i take a nife with me!! and when i get to a rats nest that is full of old crap i cut it put it in my pack and when i get home i chuck um out... if its an apline climb i dont think that bolting is a good idea, unless its a must (you can normaly get a piton in)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 7:57 PM
Post #28 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: Sounds OK to me. Would you stand for them on Cathedral Peak?
NIMBY! LOL.
But when I was up on Cathedral about 6 weeks ago, there wasn't a tangle of slings there. None. Zip. Zilch. And people don't get their ropes stuck either.
In the end it is for each party and local Winds climbers (assuming Skinner's family still lives in Pinedale) to decide, not the likes of me.
But absent a compelling argument, like John Muir doing the first technical rock climb in the Sierra sans rope, an equipped rap anchor isn't bothersome and certainly represents no slippery slope.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
johnhemlock
Oct 4, 2005, 7:57 PM
Post #29 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2004
Posts: 311
|
In reply to: alpine+bolts=pansies.
What about alpine + fixed pins? Or alpine + any in situ rap anchor? Why are bolts evil but stations comprised of fixed pins are merely "retro?"
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Oct 4, 2005, 8:09 PM
Post #30 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
bolts vs. pins? good question. i guess for me pesonally, pins require a bit of skill and they CAN be removed if you want to. FIXED pins are still an eye sore. i guess when i think about this issue i'm not thinking so much of aesthetics. (anyone who knows me though knows i'm a big wilderness advocate). the issue for me is more of claims of "improvement" in our climbing. the next hardest route was done, but, bolts were placed. not too impressive. yeah, they climbed something technically harder than i'll ever be able to touch. but does that make it justifiable? the leaps made by guys like messner, twight, backes, etc were done with a no bolts....period....ethic. i admire that and hope that i can rise to that kind of skill someday. making a specific arguement about RAP bolts vs. bolts on climbs is just a shade of grey. to me it is an all or none issue. i trully wish we could just stop. but we won't. so i do what others try and do, just climb my shit in the best style possible. but it still pisses me off and i love to argue about it. people like to say that a climb never would have been humanly possible with a bolt put somewhere. fine, then we shouldn't be able to do it. that is for the next superhuman to solve. not for us little people.
|
|
|
|
|
yannbuse
Oct 4, 2005, 8:11 PM
Post #31 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2003
Posts: 112
|
Im glad this topic came up, because it has been on my mind for some time now. I can't speak specifically to the area mentioned in the OP, but i can relate to the notion of climbs in the 'wilderness'. Recently one of my climbing partners re-emphasized, that once your in it, it is your responsibility to getting out without any aid and by any means necessary. That said, i've always approached alpine climbs or long routes in the wilderness with the expectations that there isnt going to be any pre placed protection (bolts, stuck cams/nuts, slings, etc), ie i will depend on everything i bring and nothing i can expect.
Preferably, i don't want bolts or gear on a climb im on. However, there are times that i am extremely grateful bolts were placed. For example, this past weekend i was up in Canon, NH on Sam's Swang Song. On the 3rd pitch, we found a bolt 1/4 up the pitch. My partner was moving up the route when the rock under his feet the size of my queen sized bed gave way (never seen something that big, fall so closely to me, wow; by the power of zeus thankfully no one was under us). Somehow he managed to clip the bolt, and as the rock fell he grabbed hold of the biner by one hand. If he hadn't he would have surfed this huge rock onto a factor 2 fall. Thank you mr. bolt. So conclusively, i can say that i am coming to terms with anchors or 'placements' in the mountains - as i prefer no to have any pre positioned for me, but at times am gratefully thankful. Prehaps it changes the way i feel about the climb and my ability, but often i find myself coming off the ridge off L'aiguille du Midi, thinking, everything up here is dead, no one or living thing should be here - switch to survival mode. That said check out a topic i brought up about a climb i attempted in Chamonix, where we were bailing off the poorest mank, extremely marginal anchors combined with a very veyrlight alpine rack. Would have loved a bolt then, as my 'adventure' seemed to have turned into a fight for survival. http://www.rockclimbing.com/...iewtopic.php?t=97873
I look forward to seeing this topic evolve, so that i can leave my mind in peace.
thank you for your time
Yann
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Oct 4, 2005, 8:19 PM
Post #32 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: this is what i do, i take a nife with me!! and when i get to a rats nest that is full of old crap i cut it put it in my pack and when i get home i chuck um out... if its an apline climb i dont think that bolting is a good idea, unless its a must (you can normaly get a piton in)
So you could place a bolt, that should be good for decades. And if, many decades from now, it needs replacing, it could be removed and a deeper hole drilled in the same spot.
Or, you could put in a pin, that will likely start looking manky in a dozen years or so. So future climbers could rap off a [potentially] unsafe pin, or they could remove it and hammer in another (enlarging the pin scar).
A pin is going to be a lot quicker, but I'm curious why anyone would think it would be preferable to a bolt [oh yeah, bolts are the root of all evil]
cheers
|
|
|
|
|
gonzo
Oct 4, 2005, 8:20 PM
Post #33 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2001
Posts: 36
|
I must admit that I prefer seeing no bolts on wilderness routes. For me it is more about a feeling then anything else. Knowing that your are repeating a route that was opened 20 years and seeing some old taterd slings or an old piton is just a tribute to the pioneering spirit of mountaineering. With fancy shmancy gear coming to the market every year it sometimes feels as if we have an unfair advantage over the mountain.
Besides when you place a bolt you permenanly change the mountain. After a number of years either new holes or bigger holes have to be created. With webbing when the taters get to much you can simply cut them off and replace them with new.
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Oct 4, 2005, 8:20 PM
Post #34 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
yannbuse....don't sweat it. survival is survival. when you've hit that point, its war. do what you need to survive. you'll have plenty of time to sit around and feel like shit cuz you may have compromised your ethics. but, at least you are feeling. hehe.
as i just pm'ed the original poster........
i'm surprised no one has made the arguement (or maybe they have and i need to read the other posts more carefully) that you don't have to clip the bolt if you don't want to. my arguement is that the bolt is there. even if i don't choose to clip it.....i knew it was there. there was an element of risk that was taken away from me. in the back of my head i knew that if things got dicey, i had a way out.
and yeah, i probably would have clipped it......and i would have felt like shit for being such a pansy. :wink:
gonzo, i like that.
|
|
|
|
|
agrauch
Oct 4, 2005, 8:25 PM
Post #35 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2001
Posts: 217
|
How are established descent routes, bolted or otherwise, any different than established trails?
While trails make wilderness accessible to any one with will to walk, don't they also serve to concentrate the impact of users into a single area? Any moron with a pair of hiking boots can get into the wilderness whether there is a trail or not. But the trails serve to keep most of the morons in one place.
An established descent route has nothing to do with bringing the mountains down to our own standards. Any moron with a spool of webbing can safely get down a mountain. In doing so he'll leave unwanted tat all over the rock and damage who knows how many years of lichen and tundra growth. Like a trail, an established descent will keep most of the morons in one place.
A climb like Wolf's Head in a place like the Cirque is hardly wilderness these days. Shouldn't the climbing community put some effort into preserving the area rather than compounding the problems of over use?
What does every one think of the new bolts the OS descent on the Grand Teton was sporting this season? Guess the guides decided a few bolts were safer and easier to maintain than the traditional sling anchor.
|
|
|
|
|
couchwarrior
Oct 4, 2005, 8:27 PM
Post #36 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2004
Posts: 190
|
I think this thread is drifting from a specific question about "comfortizing" a descent from a popular alpine climb that sees mucho traffic to a thread about bolting in general.
The elite tend to set the rules in climbing but the accountant from Paducah deserves a good day in the mountains just as much as Twight. Maybe more so. A few fixed anchors on his way down isn't the end of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Oct 4, 2005, 8:32 PM
Post #37 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
andy, good point. for most people this seems to be either an aesthetics or ethics issue.
its kinda funny cuz its kind of an oxymoron (is that how you spell it??). we want to bolt rap routes cuz they are so popular and we want to reduce the impact. BUT, by bolting rap routes we are making them more accessible and hence, increasing traffic. your example of the OS route is a good one. what if there were no bolts or rap slings and people had to downclimb the route (which is pretty easy and very feasible). i doubt the OS would see even half of the ascents that it does. what does that mean? people would have to become better climbers (or at least better adventurers).
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Oct 4, 2005, 9:03 PM
Post #38 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
The trouble with these discussions is that we're really not talking about impact in the right terms. A pile of tat or two innocent little holes is pretty marginal impact when you get real and think about it, especially compared to the kind of impact generated by approaches, camping, catholes, etc...
A bolt is just a bolt, a couple of ounces of metal. The "impact" of placing a bolt in a place where nobody is going to see it unless they're on the route itself is about the same as if I hike out in the middle of some talus field, whack a chunk off some dachshund-sized rock with a hammer, and then fling a buck fifty in dimes out into the ankle-breakers (note that I'm talking about alpine rap anchors, not grid bolting 50' crags with 5 minute approaches). Yeah, I technically "altered" that rock, and I left some metal behind that maybe one person in the next hundred years might find if they weren't looking for it, but this is totally different from talking about situations like trail overuse, erosion, fires, sensitive native plants, etc... Being LNT is one thing, but we're all generating more "impact" sitting here with our computers on arguing about whether some little bit of insignificant human evidence should be plastic or metal.
I think discussions like this should skip the direct impact thing, and go straight to the three real questions: style, consequential impact, and safety. I think everybody here knows how to argue about style, so I'll skip that one other than to say that if you've ever thought "wow, these two 3/8" bolts and camo'd hangers are spoiling my wilderness experience, I sure wish there was a nice thick rainbow pile of dreadlocked tat here," I really would like to know what it's like to be in your head. By consequential impact I mean the increase in impact that the bolts are going to result in. A route with bolted anchors is going to draw more people if it's somewhere reasonably accessible. Is this going to be true in that area? Can the route take more impact, or is it going to turn into a gardenfest? What about the approach? Finally, what about safety? Safety is of course related to both other questions, but it boils down to whether it's worth some insignificant impact to keep people out of trouble and prevent the need for rescue operations. It's just like painting tree blazes or building cairns: it makes the route safer (so long as they're kept up), it reduces the impact caused by bushwhacking and lost parties, and in this case it also diminishes the possibility of a SAR operation, which even when done by the best-trained pros is a pretty high impact activity.
Just some stuff to think about...
|
|
|
|
|
grayhghost
Oct 4, 2005, 9:18 PM
Post #39 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 444
|
I don't think we are making a route like Wolf's Head any more crowded by bolting the rap. It's not like after we add bolts to the rappel you can go do the route with a set of 5 quickdraws. People will still carry the same self-supportive gear that the hardmen of old carried.
The issue here is impact.
|
|
|
|
|
agrauch
Oct 4, 2005, 9:21 PM
Post #40 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2001
Posts: 217
|
In reply to: andy, good point. for most people this seems to be either an aesthetics or ethics issue. its kinda funny cuz its kind of an oxymoron (is that how you spell it??). we want to bolt rap routes cuz they are so popular and we want to reduce the impact. BUT, by bolting rap routes we are making them more accessible and hence, increasing traffic. your example of the OS route is a good one. what if there were no bolts or rap slings and people had to downclimb the route (which is pretty easy and very feasible). i doubt the OS would see even half of the ascents that it does. what does that mean? people would have to become better climbers (or at least better adventurers).
I don't know if bolting an already well established descent on a popular climb will serve to increase the traffic on the route. I think most people, myself included, tend to be drawn to routes because of the nature of the climbing. Things like the approach and getting down are secondary. Easy climbs to spectacular summits are going to extremely popular regardless of the descent, especially in easy to get to areas like RMNP, the Cirque, and the Tetons. In the case of the OS, if the established anchors weren't there, I think we'd see the same thing as on Wolf's Head, unnecessary tat all over the place.
|
|
|
|
|
oldrnotboldr
Oct 4, 2005, 9:25 PM
Post #41 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2005
Posts: 306
|
This discussion has really got me rethinking bolts, access, and the impact humans have in the wilderness. For the record, I am not a big bolt fan. For me they diminish the alpine experience by decreasing the challenges. However, they do have many positives. Their environmental impact, as has been pointed is less than pitons and tats. They do provide that measure of safety, and will certainly remain bomber longer than a well placed piton. But quite possibly bolting routes will bring in more people. The Winds has always been a favorite place of mine. My first trek in there was many years ago, a time you could spend two weeks in there and not see another person. Those days are gone, without the help of routes/belay points being bolted. The true impact comes from the hoards of people in the wilderness- not just climbers but the hikers, horse trains, etc.
The concern for me is not so much the bolt itself, but is the cirque becoming a circus?
|
|
|
|
|
ddriver
Oct 4, 2005, 9:47 PM
Post #42 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 264
|
I've done two different descents off Wolf's Head. I was first shown what I figured to be the standard descent chimneys that go off left onto snow fields (when they're there). I asume that's what started this discussion. My memory is that of mostly slings on natural features and a high probability of getting a rope stuck. Years later I decided to try the descent off the back side of the peak (towards the East Fork) as recommended by Kelsey. He described it as generally a walkoff/scramble. We found the upper terrain to be very exposed and generally rotten, found a couple poor rap stations, and improved them by placing one or two pitons (I don't normally carry a hammer and pins on a route like that but I guess I was suspicious).
My perspective is that I always try to improve rap stations if its in my ability to do so. If you want to take the time to hand drill some better rap stations off that peak you won't see me complaining. I don't think that the area being regulated as "wilderness" has much bearing on being able to reasonably descend, but I do value restraint and discretion in how its done.
|
|
|
|
|
paulj
Oct 4, 2005, 9:52 PM
Post #43 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2001
Posts: 14
|
Perhaps the USFS, NPS, BLM, et al. have changed the proposed rules in the last few years, but as of about 2000 the issue was not bolts, pins, or slings in wilderness areas, but rather one of a "permanent installation". The initial proposed regulation (by the BLM, I believe) treated any and all climbing gear left behind by climbers as a permanent installation. Thus, the sling rappel stations on Wolf's Head (or whatever wilderness route you might be on) would have been viewed as equivalent to a bolt.
Yep, this was considered a bit crazy even by non-climbers, particularly when places like Yosemite Valley change to official NPS wilderness at 600 feet above the floor. The concern that climbers could not legally retreat off El Cap, or any other large formation, was one of the instrumental reasons that the proposal was never approved (and thus not adopted by other DOI agencies or USDA).
As for bolts in Wilderness Areas, the Access Fund makes clear that this is simply not a negotiable issue for land managers: it ain't gonna happen. The aesthetics of ugly tat are incontestable (bolts/chains would be clearly preferable), but the fact remains that bolting in wilderness areas is currently illegal, so don't do it.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 10:36 PM
Post #44 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: but the fact remains that bolting in wilderness areas is currently illegal, so don't do it.
I believe the facts are this:
Only the Forest Service instituted the improper 'no fixed installations' rule. The NPS already had existing rules to cover bolting and the BLM had/has nothing specific.
So if I rap the S Face of Conness and place a bolt in the process, I'm perfectly legal and good to go. Rap the north face (which isn't in Yosemite NP) and place a bolt, I'm breaking a ridiculous law.
Such is the absurdity of existing law, so far as I know.
Here ya go http://www.accessfund.org/advo/wild.php
From the horse's mouth so to speak.
I don't pay attention to those forest service rules anyway. Bush is gonna fire all the left wing radicals and the ones left will sell off what they can, otherwise they don't give a shit about bolts. They wanna drill for oil and gas off shore from Cali and Florida, you can't possibly believe they give a Texan's Damn about a bolt on Wolfs Head.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
paulj
Oct 4, 2005, 10:52 PM
Post #45 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 2, 2001
Posts: 14
|
DMT,
Thanks for the clarification of the current situation.
I agree with you on the absurdity of the regulatory environment. The simplest approach to limiting the number of bolts in wilderness areas is already in place: no power tools. You don't have to drill too many bolts by hand to realize that hand drilling is, for most people, a giant pain. In addition to limiting the number of bolts, this would allow climbers to redress the tat situation on popular climbs in that the aesthetically offended can take things into their own hands, so to speak.
Oh well, we don't get to make the rules.
PMJ
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 11:13 PM
Post #46 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
I see nothing wrong with encouraging folks to do more with less, which you, murf and others have been suggesting. But I am unswayed by some of your arguments, I have to tell you that. I feel rather strongly that many people's objections to bolts are based upon their indocrination and really very little else. For example, not one post in this thread successfully demonstrates why a nasty knot of webbing is better than or preferrable to bolts for a popular climb, perhaps the most popular descent in the range...
I see no harm in encouraging natural rap anchors. I see no harm in equipping a popular descent either. I see no slippery slope between the two.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Oct 4, 2005, 11:14 PM
Post #47 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
Bolt it, and they will come
And when they do, 1 rap line is going to get a litle crowded. So, lets put up another. Domino theory, seen it way to many times.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 11:22 PM
Post #48 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Bolt it, and they will come And when they do, 1 rap line is going to get a litle crowded. So, lets put up another. Domino theory, seen it way to many times.
In wilderness areas? Multiple bolted rap routes? You seen this many times? I sure haven't. Not in the back country. Not even once.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
grayhghost
Oct 4, 2005, 11:31 PM
Post #49 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 444
|
I find it very hard to believe that the Cirque of the Towers, with its 4 hour talus approach will be overrun with a flood of people who will demand another descent route as they wait in line to rap from the Wolfs Head.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Oct 4, 2005, 11:55 PM
Post #50 of 167
(12865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: I find it very hard to believe that the Cirque of the Towers, with its 4 hour talus approach will be overrun with a flood of people who will demand another descent route as they wait in line to rap from the Wolfs Head.
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
