Forums: Climbing Information: General:
Ethics question
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for General

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All


petsfed


Oct 20, 2009, 4:44 PM
Post #101 of 121 (1414 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599

Re: [TJGoSurf] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Well, how long is an acceptable walkoff for a single pitch? 5 minutes? 10? An hour and a half? Who decides?

Conversely, who decides what's too long for a walkoff?

I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor.

I don't live in an area with a lot of trees at the tops of climbs. I'm also well versed in the art of setting gear anchors. However, I ha e seen what happens when a tree is used too much as an anchor, or improperly so. I can't imagine that killing trees, especially in areas where access is sensitive because of those trees, is good for access.

And sure as the sun rises, if trees are meant to be used as top anchors, they will get used incorrectly. People will just toss their ropes around the tree rather than leaving a sling and a ring. People will girth hitch the tree instead of putting a loop around it.


knieveltech


Oct 20, 2009, 6:45 PM
Post #102 of 121 (1385 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [petsfed] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

petsfed wrote:
I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor. .

Depends on the crag but on the whole that seems pretty accurate to me.


csproul


Oct 20, 2009, 8:07 PM
Post #103 of 121 (1354 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [knieveltech] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
petsfed wrote:
I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor. .

Depends on the crag but on the whole that seems pretty accurate to me.
Well let's see...might be true at Moore's. Ship Rock: not really supposed to walk off so there are plenty of rap bolts to get down. Stone: can rap off of bolts on almost any route and not walk down. Shortoff: not really applicable since you end up at the top where the trail is. Hawksbill: several routes with bolted rap anchors so you don't have to walk down. Table Rock: not super familiar with it, but I have only walked off the top once, so I must have rapped down multiple times. Rumbling Bald: I've never walked off anything there either. Looking Glass: again not real familiar, but I have never walked off the top of that either, so I am pretty sure there were rap bolts. Laurel Knob: can (and must) rap off of bolts for every route. Pilot: plenty of bolts at top of climbs there. Suaratown: closed, but you never had to walk off of anything there either. So no, I'd say that's not really all that accurate at all.


petsfed


Oct 20, 2009, 10:06 PM
Post #104 of 121 (1322 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599

Re: [csproul] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Which is funny considering the spray we've seen in this thread about how unnecessary bolts are, in general.

Or is that all talk?

/hates bolts at the tops of climbs with easy walkoffs
//especially when they're so poorly placed that I can't belay a second up on them


clausti


Oct 21, 2009, 2:35 AM
Post #105 of 121 (1294 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [cracklover] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
I think the most salient point in the whole thread was this one made by Clausti:

In reply to:
the climbing at a given crag is the climbing at a given crag, and if you want to do something different, go climb someplace else.

Unfortunately for her, It doesn't actually support Camhead's rant.

i suppose it would be unfortunate for me if my mission in life was to support camhead's rants. occasionally, though, i have my own opinions.


caughtinside


Oct 21, 2009, 3:20 AM
Post #106 of 121 (1281 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [clausti] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead just wants top anchors because he is a weke toproper.

And jmeizis said a bunch of stuff but he's soft in the head and is brothers with gymburns, so I'm just going to ignore his spew.


forkliftdaddy


Oct 21, 2009, 4:01 AM
Post #107 of 121 (1266 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 408

Re: [j_ung] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Jay, my point is that ethics change and if we don't like it (or dont like how it is being done) we should object.

My point was not to compare the NRG will become Boulder Canyon, though the Meadow might be a different story. Wink


kriso9tails


Oct 21, 2009, 8:57 PM
Post #108 of 121 (1226 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772

Re: [forkliftdaddy] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

forkliftdaddy wrote:
Jay, my point is that ethics change and if we don't like it (or dont like how it is being done) we should object.

I agree on the provision that those objecting have at least invested enough time to have formed a basic understanding of the surrounding issues.


knieveltech


Oct 22, 2009, 6:13 PM
Post #109 of 121 (1180 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [csproul] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
petsfed wrote:
I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor. .

Depends on the crag but on the whole that seems pretty accurate to me.
Well let's see...might be true at Moore's. Ship Rock: not really supposed to walk off so there are plenty of rap bolts to get down. Stone: can rap off of bolts on almost any route and not walk down. Shortoff: not really applicable since you end up at the top where the trail is. Hawksbill: several routes with bolted rap anchors so you don't have to walk down. Table Rock: not super familiar with it, but I have only walked off the top once, so I must have rapped down multiple times. Rumbling Bald: I've never walked off anything there either. Looking Glass: again not real familiar, but I have never walked off the top of that either, so I am pretty sure there were rap bolts. Laurel Knob: can (and must) rap off of bolts for every route. Pilot: plenty of bolts at top of climbs there. Suaratown: closed, but you never had to walk off of anything there either. So no, I'd say that's not really all that accurate at all.

It's too bad the CCC's website is down currently or I'd post links to some of the flame-fests about bolting in NC that I've seen on there. My personal favorite: someone chopped some guy's 5.4 bolt job (which just might have been an FA) because one of the bolts was within ten feet of a micro-cam placement (no other protection available). Don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.


(This post was edited by knieveltech on Oct 22, 2009, 6:14 PM)


JasonsDrivingForce


Oct 22, 2009, 6:17 PM
Post #110 of 121 (1176 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [knieveltech] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
It's too bad the CCC's website is down currently or I'd post links to some of the flame-fests about bolting in NC that I've seen on there. My personal favorite: someone chopped some guy's 5.4 bolt job (which just might have been an FA) because one of the bolts was within ten feet of a micro-cam placement (no other protection available). Don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.

It seems like it is up now? I just got an email about the update to the site. Looks really good.

http://www.carolinaclimbers.org/


(This post was edited by JasonsDrivingForce on Oct 22, 2009, 6:31 PM)


csproul


Oct 22, 2009, 6:32 PM
Post #111 of 121 (1166 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [knieveltech] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
csproul wrote:
knieveltech wrote:
petsfed wrote:
I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor. .

Depends on the crag but on the whole that seems pretty accurate to me.
Well let's see...might be true at Moore's. Ship Rock: not really supposed to walk off so there are plenty of rap bolts to get down. Stone: can rap off of bolts on almost any route and not walk down. Shortoff: not really applicable since you end up at the top where the trail is. Hawksbill: several routes with bolted rap anchors so you don't have to walk down. Table Rock: not super familiar with it, but I have only walked off the top once, so I must have rapped down multiple times. Rumbling Bald: I've never walked off anything there either. Looking Glass: again not real familiar, but I have never walked off the top of that either, so I am pretty sure there were rap bolts. Laurel Knob: can (and must) rap off of bolts for every route. Pilot: plenty of bolts at top of climbs there. Suaratown: closed, but you never had to walk off of anything there either. So no, I'd say that's not really all that accurate at all.

It's too bad the CCC's website is down currently or I'd post links to some of the flame-fests about bolting in NC that I've seen on there. My personal favorite: someone chopped some guy's 5.4 bolt job (which just might have been an FA) because one of the bolts was within ten feet of a micro-cam placement (no other protection available). Don't piss in my pocket and tell me it's raining.
And yet , I can provide you with example after example of NC routes with protection bolts and/or rap bolts (what this thread was about). I'm not just talking about routes at super-hard grades either, but routes that are easy enough that even I can do them.


Partner j_ung


Oct 22, 2009, 7:02 PM
Post #112 of 121 (1150 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [forkliftdaddy] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

forkliftdaddy wrote:
My point was not to compare the NRG will become Boulder Canyon, though the Meadow might be a different story. Wink

Not all of it! Have I got some things to show you.


Gmburns2000


Oct 22, 2009, 7:16 PM
Post #113 of 121 (1145 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266

Re: [caughtinside] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
camhead just wants top anchors because he is a weke toproper.

And jmeizis said a bunch of stuff but he's soft in the head and is brothers with gymburns, so I'm just going to ignore his spew.

I wish I had a comeback for this. Unfortunately, I'm too impatient to wait until it comes to me at one in the morning.


knieveltech


Oct 23, 2009, 4:34 AM
Post #114 of 121 (1109 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431

Re: [csproul] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
And yet , I can provide you with example after example of NC routes with protection bolts and/or rap bolts (what this thread was about). I'm not just talking about routes at super-hard grades either, but routes that are easy enough that even I can do them.

Sure. There's a bolt on Zoo View. Some of the routes on Table Rock are festooned with bolts. They're even talking about moving one of the rap anchors on a route at Looking Glass to a more convenient location (wouldn't be the first time that's happened in the last year).

OTOH I doubt anyone who's climbed at Shortoff hasn't secretly wished for a rap lane or two after their 2nd or 3rd trip down the gully for the day. I expect the same goes with the Amphitheater at Linville. Care to place a wager on how long a set of rap anchors would last out there? Think someone wouldn't be spraying about the chop hours after it happened? Think they wouldn't get chopped specifically so someone could spray about it? Maybe. *shrug* I'm not convinced.


billcoe_


Oct 23, 2009, 5:21 AM
Post #115 of 121 (1101 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694

Re: [TJGoSurf] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

TJGoSurf wrote:
So here it is, I am in NC. And people have such a problem with fixed gear. Now I don't really care for retro bolting but what about some rap rings at the top? There are a few routes where the only choice is leave some gear or rap off a 1" tree. Neither are too appealing.

So older climbers, whats your problem? And don't say that's how its always done because people used to climb without any gear, are you doing that?

If us older dudes can walk around then sack up and walk. Leave the routes alone unless you have a consensus of local climbers, not internet hacks like us. It's none of our damn business. It's for ALL of the NC climbers to decide. So man up and ask THEM.


csproul


Oct 23, 2009, 1:40 PM
Post #116 of 121 (1086 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [knieveltech] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

knieveltech wrote:
csproul wrote:
And yet , I can provide you with example after example of NC routes with protection bolts and/or rap bolts (what this thread was about). I'm not just talking about routes at super-hard grades either, but routes that are easy enough that even I can do them.

Sure. There's a bolt on Zoo View. Some of the routes on Table Rock are festooned with bolts. They're even talking about moving one of the rap anchors on a route at Looking Glass to a more convenient location (wouldn't be the first time that's happened in the last year).

OTOH I doubt anyone who's climbed at Shortoff hasn't secretly wished for a rap lane or two after their 2nd or 3rd trip down the gully for the day. I expect the same goes with the Amphitheater at Linville. Care to place a wager on how long a set of rap anchors would last out there? Think someone wouldn't be spraying about the chop hours after it happened? Think they wouldn't get chopped specifically so someone could spray about it? Maybe. *shrug* I'm not convinced.
I really think you like to complain for complaining sake! Why on earth would you need rap anchors at Shortoff. It is a fast,easy walk down, and I'd bet you can most likely get down the gully faster than you can rap. Even if that is not true, I've left rap anchors on routes near straight and narrow/construction job and made that the last climb out at the end of the day. As far as the amphitheater, where exactly do you suggest to put rap anchors? NC's bolting/chopping practices are not that different than many other places around the US, and if you'd get out more (no, NRG doesn't count), you'd realize this. Maybe NC's climbing areas are not as convenient as T-wall/NRG/RRG, but that is one of the things that make the climbing here appealing to many climbers.

p.s. I will concede that I don't really understand some of the fixed gear/cables as opposed to rap bolts, but hey, they're plenty safe and I'm not going to be the one to change that practice .


(This post was edited by csproul on Oct 23, 2009, 1:43 PM)


forkliftdaddy


Oct 23, 2009, 4:07 PM
Post #117 of 121 (1059 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 408

Re: [knieveltech] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I saw that route. IMO the right choice was made. That gear placement looked very much like it had been cleaned out previously. And I'm not sure it was a micro-cam. Anyway the distance off the bolters arbitrary line is not prohibitive. The FAist had a responsibility to bolt with consideration for natural gear.

Best to ask around before putting in a bolt at the Bald. Just cause "your" line isn't in the guidebook, don't assume it isn't already an established line.


petsfed


Oct 26, 2009, 2:53 PM
Post #118 of 121 (992 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599

Re: [csproul] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

To be honest, the further west you go, the more likely you'll find rap anchors in lieu of descent gullies. I won't claim a definitive explanation why that is the case, but it has been my experience that there's just more vertical rock out here, and walkoff gullies aren't as common. Furthermore, the development of a great many crags in the west simply did not coincide with the rise of clean climbing. Either it was before Robbin's stridently anti-bolt rhetoric, or so long after that it was largely forgotten. Most simply put, the "strong" ethics strongholds of the east coast are artifacts of the peculiar time period in which they saw most of their development. They are not AT ALL representative of the crags across the country.

On the other hand, if you are in a cragging situation, there really is no reason not to set a rap anchor for the day, then retrieve it after your final climb for the day. Assuming the other climbers at the cliff don't get in your face for "bringing the rock down to your level".


Myxomatosis


Oct 26, 2009, 2:59 PM
Post #119 of 121 (987 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 1063

Re: [petsfed] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

petsfed wrote:
Well, how long is an acceptable walkoff for a single pitch? 5 minutes? 10? An hour and a half? Who decides?

Conversely, who decides what's too long for a walkoff?

I've always gotten the impression that, at least as it pertains to NC climbing, if the walkoff does not require harder climbing than the climb up (or if the pitch is harder than 5.10), then ANY bolt is necessarily a convenience anchor.

I don't live in an area with a lot of trees at the tops of climbs. I'm also well versed in the art of setting gear anchors. However, I ha e seen what happens when a tree is used too much as an anchor, or improperly so. I can't imagine that killing trees, especially in areas where access is sensitive because of those trees, is good for access.

And sure as the sun rises, if trees are meant to be used as top anchors, they will get used incorrectly. People will just toss their ropes around the tree rather than leaving a sling and a ring. People will girth hitch the tree instead of putting a loop around it.

Ethics in NZ generally are no increased traffic on the top of the cliff. This can cause erosion (tree anchours for example and knocking loose blocks/dirt down onto people)

Most climbs are bolted with two anchors at the top of the route, still on the face, so there is hardly any walk off's on single pitch climbs.


csproul


Oct 26, 2009, 3:16 PM
Post #120 of 121 (978 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [petsfed] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

petsfed wrote:
To be honest, the further west you go, the more likely you'll find rap anchors in lieu of descent gullies. I won't claim a definitive explanation why that is the case, but it has been my experience that there's just more vertical rock out here, and walk-off gullies aren't as common. Furthermore, the development of a great many crags in the west simply did not coincide with the rise of clean climbing. Either it was before Robbin's stridently anti-bolt rhetoric, or so long after that it was largely forgotten. Most simply put, the "strong" ethics strongholds of the east coast are artifacts of the peculiar time period in which they saw most of their development. They are not AT ALL representative of the crags across the country.

On the other hand, if you are in a cragging situation, there really is no reason not to set a rap anchor for the day, then retrieve it after your final climb for the day. Assuming the other climbers at the cliff don't get in your face for "bringing the rock down to your level".
I also think this is somewhat governed by the nature of the rock formations and how easily they lend themselves to walk-off vs. rap stations. It's been a while since I climbed out west and things may have changed, but I remember walking off a lot of routes at Eldo, Yosemite, Joshua Tree, Needles (CA), Red-Rocks, and Tahquitz.Of course, there are also many bolted rap stations at these areas where walk-offs are difficult, and at areas where walk-offs are not really possible, there are more bolted rap stations (Devil's Tower comes to mind). I have climbed a fair amount in the west and in the southeast, and there really isn't that much difference in the frequency of bolted rap anchors at established trad crags. One look at T-wall or NRG's trad areas will confirm that. Even old established trad crags like Seneca and the Gunks have lots of bolted rap stations. There are a couple hold out areas in NC that may have fixed gear more often than bolts, or sketchy walk-offs, but these are the exception and not the rule.

Of course, there is the possibility that I am just oblivious and take whatever decent option comes to me without giving it a second thought or complaining about it.


(This post was edited by csproul on Oct 26, 2009, 3:21 PM)


rockandlice


Oct 26, 2009, 3:54 PM
Post #121 of 121 (958 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2008
Posts: 622

Re: [csproul] Ethics question [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:

Of course, there is the possibility that I am just oblivious and take whatever decent option comes to me without giving it a second thought or complaining about it.

The single best comment on this entire thread. This alone could have been the first response sparing the brain numbing 5 pages of responses that followed.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : General

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook