|
phitty
Jan 9, 2003, 1:07 PM
Post #1 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2002
Posts: 98
|
Todays feature on climbxmedia.com poses a question of ethics.
There is a boulder, with what looks like a moderate prblem on it. The main face of the problem was a huge loose flake on it.
The video shows a process where the climbers drilled, bolted and glued the flake back on, and very nicely covered the traces of their work.
Should they not have interfered? Should they have left the problem as it was, despite the possibility of injury?
My answer: I say it was fine. The problem remains how it was in the beginning, and the flake is much more secure. The repair marks are well covered.
|
|
|
|
|
gatorclimber
Jan 9, 2003, 3:06 PM
Post #2 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 83
|
what if when the flake popped it created a whole new problem better than the original?
|
|
|
|
|
micronut
Jan 9, 2003, 3:16 PM
Post #3 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2002
Posts: 1760
|
Scott Franklin pryed a flake off of Scarface to make it harder. Is the flake on route? I'd say let it break.
|
|
|
|
|
phitty
Jan 9, 2003, 3:19 PM
Post #4 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2002
Posts: 98
|
Yup, the flake was on route. In fact one of the principal starting holds I believe.
The video is on climbxmedia.com if you want to know more.
Without that flake the problem would not exist. It is hard to say what would lie beneath but it would change the nature of the problem dramatically.
|
|
|
|
|
gdeveney
Jan 9, 2003, 3:21 PM
Post #5 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 68
|
having seen the video i think that repair job was more of a safety effort than anything else. The piece of rock that was loose was very large and could have fallen on a climber causing some serious injury. In general i believe it is best to leave boulders alone and as they break they will create a new problem but this one was a safety issue and i think what was done was the best decision.
|
|
|
|
|
madscientist
Jan 9, 2003, 3:24 PM
Post #6 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2002
Posts: 159
|
In my opinion, this is equivalent to manufacturing a route. They should have let it be, or not climbed the boulder by way of the flake.
One of the main problems with this sort of behavior is if a land manager finds out that this occurs. It will provide an argument to not allow bouldering on public land.
|
|
|
|
|
jahmin
Jan 9, 2003, 3:24 PM
Post #7 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 75
|
I think it's akin to chipping. Both activities change the nature of the rock. The nature of that rock is that the flake will fall off. Gluing the flake on makes it artificial, like chipping. The next step might as well be bolting plastic holds on. It's all repugnent to me.
|
|
|
|
|
leaverbiner
Jan 9, 2003, 4:05 PM
Post #8 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 482
|
I'm not exactly sure of my final opinion on this one, but I wanted to give a little clarification for those who have not bothered to watch the video or do not know much about the problem . . . first, the job done was top notch, they left no traces of their work, from reputable sources, even knowing the bolt is in there you have to look very hard to find it. Second, it was definitely done as a sdafety issue, the huge flake would not only have pulled off soon, but apparently it would likely ahve cause a fall where the climber would have been sandwiched (maybe crushed) between the newly removed flake and a large ground boulder. third - the problem is a classic v6 and the flake is not only THE starting hold, it is used for a heel hook and as the primary foot for other moves. What does this mean . . . one it was integral to the problem, but two being v6 it probably means that if it broke a harder problem would still have been left in its palce. WHO KNOWS. I think in this isolated instance what these guys did was o.k., but in general I would have to say the practice should not be repeated . . . there is too much room for abuse and we should try to allow the rock to remian unaltered (but that begs the question would the flake ahve ever been loose and come off if it weren't for climbers int he first place?) I think here, there was a genuine safety concern on a classic problem so work was done to ensure the safety and integrity of the boudler.
|
|
|
|
|
madturtle
Jan 9, 2003, 4:39 PM
Post #9 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2002
Posts: 165
|
I think if you start making exceptions to the rule for specific instances you lose out in the long run. If the ethic is to not manufacture routes then that needs to be true across the board. There are dubious flakes on many a route that may someday come off but to go around gluing them will most definitely cheapen the overall experience. While this situation may be a little different than chipping holds I would have to vote nay.
I don't know about this particular problem but many people might consider it a classic because of the rush they get from using sketchy holds, just like some climbers enjoy R routes. Regardless condoning a good manufacturing job is not the way to preserve the rock or your ethics.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 9, 2003, 5:24 PM
Post #10 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Without knowing where the rock is or the history of the area in question, I can't pass judgement. Situational ethics at its finest.
I don't believe in assigning mythical or human qualities to the rock itself. It's a rock fer christsake! Ya know, the things we crush up to make road beds, slice for floor tiles, blast tunnels through for cars and trains, carve into statues (was Michangelo a chipper???), skip across rivers, carved our initials into when we were kids... rocks! They don't have feelings and aren't "harmed" through the actions of humans. El Cap will one day be sand on a beach. As such, the things we perpetrate against it in the here and now are only temporary at best. We have to concern ourselves with getting along with our mates, not worrying about a rock's feelings.
Nearby is a small but world class sport climbing area. Many if not most of the routes were created by prying loose boulders out of a overhanging wall, boulders that would have killed people had they been left in place. Many consider that chipping, so most of these routes are therefore chipped. The cliff was an unclimbed choss pile prior to this work. Thye people who play there are quite happy with the results.
A bit further up the road is another climbing area, literally world famous for the boldness of its routes, second only to places like Dresden for the strict ethics that have been employed there. Many are happy with that situation as well.
These two areas peacefully coexist (for the most part!). One guy has been a key route developer at BOTH places (and has climbed extensively at Dresden to, for whatever that's worth), keeping in synch with the ethics of each area. Situational ethics at it's finest.
If this boulder were in Tuolumne Meadows, these guys should be drawn and quartered. In, I don't know, Ray Jardine's backyard, who cares?
High on El Cap the Death Block was lashed and slung to a bolt drilled expressly for the purpose of keeping that thing from killing people. Washington Column suffers a similar block. How is that ethically different from glueing a flake back on? It isn't, now is it?
Context. It's all about context and not projecting your values onto others and into situations you know next to nothing about. You aren't a rock god (whoever you ARE) and you're opinion isn't etched in that very stone you wish to assign human qualities to. If 999 out of 1000 active climbers at that area see the "repair" of this rock a good thing, you must accept their wishes and deal with it.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
drector
Jan 9, 2003, 5:37 PM
Post #11 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
Perhaps if it was a safetly issue because the flake would come off soon then they would have better off just prying on it until it fell off when there was nobody below it. In one way it would be ethically the same as the bolting and gluing since both actions modify the rock. But speeding up nature is different than contradicting it.
In a vote, I'd say leave it or break it off taking the most natural course of action but don't bolt it. I would not condemn them for their actions since it seems like an extreme and special case unlike the ethics of bolting near cracks, grid bolting, chipping, etc... which probably happen way more often.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
oldandintheway
Jan 9, 2003, 9:00 PM
Post #12 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 2450
|
Guess I have a hard time understanding why people feel it is necessary to modify nature for the sake of personal pleasure. Do they feel it is their right? Let nature take it's own course. Stay in a gym if you need that kind of consistency.
|
|
|
|
|
tigerbythetail
Jan 9, 2003, 9:08 PM
Post #13 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 514
|
How sad. These guys have to climb this one problem so much they go to ridiculous lengths to do so. Reminds me of the idiots who cut across three lanes of traffic to exit the freeway because they HAVE to exit now and can't possibly do otherwise.
Why can't these fu**ing losers stay in the gym if they want to change holds around etc. ???
[ This Message was edited by: tigerbythetail on 2003-01-09 13:16 ]
|
|
|
|
|
totigers
Jan 9, 2003, 9:31 PM
Post #14 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2002
Posts: 257
|
Just let it go and climb. Some of my favorite climbs have lost their holds over the years including a large flake on one wall. Well, more like half a flake. The rest is still hanging there. I understand the safety issue but I am there to climb and take some chances and everytime I TR, I'm still risking my life, even for a few feet. It is what I am willing to risk.
My opinion is regarless of this peticular problem. It's a general answer to a general question.
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Jan 9, 2003, 9:31 PM
Post #15 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
A little harsh, but I tend to agree with you...
A.W.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 9, 2003, 10:00 PM
Post #16 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
"Guess I have a hard time understanding why people feel it is necessary to modify nature for the sake of personal pleasure."
Allow me to help you put this in perspective then!
Do you have a hard time with humanity in general then, perhaps even with your own personal standard of living?
Do you mean like extracting minerals and metals out of mother earth with giant cranes to make computers so as to post thoughts to the internet about rock climbing? Or perhaps by taking a chisel to marble and creating a statue? A pyramid? A house? Is that the sort of modification and pleasure you had in mind? Or is that different? Do you drive a car? Burn fossil fuel? Own any precious stones, perhaps a gold wedding band? Are there any windows in your house? Did someone modify sand simply so you could see through a solid wall that was, ahem, made from other modified things? How pray tell is any of that different? Or do you put rock climbing and climbers on a pedestal, somehow above it all and held to a different standard? What are your biners made from again? Does your clothing come from outer space?
I guess I have a hard time understanding the purity of this point when it is expressed in the context of our modern world. It's like a computer message urging people to reject technology! If perhaps you were naked and lived with zero impact upon the world around you and only free soloed you might have a point. But until then, we're talking (via the interent of all things) about gluing one rock to another. We're not talking about strip mining western Kentucky or the end of the world as we know it.
Nope. It's all about local ethics. If we remember and strive to respect local ethics, issues like this are relatively simple to gauge.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
boulderingmadman
Jan 9, 2003, 10:31 PM
Post #17 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2002
Posts: 448
|
dingus...youre really trying to compare the industrializationf of human society with the preservation of minimalist climbing ethics?? damn, you may bery well be a dingus...
face it bro, regardless of whether we mine minerals, build houses and roadways, construct mass building complexes, blablablablabla...the ethics should still be present in wilderness and un-altered pieces of nature to preserve that wild-ness, and to NOT alter it, destroy it, hinder it, or prevent it in any way...
mother nature deserves to take her course, whether you assign local ethics, or spiritual qualities to the rock or not. if we are truly going to profess a LEAVE NO TRACE ethic and a DO NOT ALTER THE ROCK ethic in the climbing community, we MUST not "make exceptions to the rule"...
even though the intentions in this particular situation seem to be altruistic and well-intentioned, it is still npothing more than selfishness and alteration...comfortizing if you will.
there is NO DIFFERENCE between anchoring a loose piece of rock and putting a new one on. why not just run around and glue-on holds (instead of chipping them out...)? why not put bolt ladders across every piece of rock...climbable or not? why not go to youre favorite climbing area and glue sand to those slopers so you can finally stick them??
some of you are treading on thin ice over rough waters. youre honestly willing to sacrifice your ethics for a "one time situation"? thats scary. and it will only lead to more and more exceptions...
and YES, there is a HUGE difference between bolting and gluing on a flake to a boulder and drilling a bolt and running a sling around a microwave oven sized block...
[ This Message was edited by: boulderingmadman on 2003-01-09 14:35 ]
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
Jan 9, 2003, 10:33 PM
Post #18 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
|
|
|
|
|
ridgerunner
Jan 9, 2003, 10:45 PM
Post #19 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 18, 2002
Posts: 72
|
I faced the same thing last weekend, If I glued the loose stuff I would be able to do the problem. Instead I pulled it off (by hand) Now I can't climb it, but I bet a hundred others can.
Only problem I see is that it left an ugly spot on the rock where the hold was.
|
|
|
|
|
oldandintheway
Jan 9, 2003, 10:45 PM
Post #20 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 2450
|
Mr. Milktoast seems to have taken me to task for my OPINION.
Little broad there aren't you Dingus? Keeping the question in context to bouldering I stand by comments. You did have a valid point I did not factor in and that was if the rock in question was on private property. If it was and presuming the those individuals that modified had permission or ownership then I concede they had a right to crush it into sand if they so desired. If not, and said boulder was on public land then I'd apply the principles of Law of the Commons in a heartbeat. Local ethics or not.
|
|
|
|
|
crack_head
Jan 9, 2003, 10:48 PM
Post #21 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2002
Posts: 210
|
i watched the video, at first i was pissed when they said they were going to bolt it back on, but after watching the video i realized how good of a job they did covering it up, it nearly invisible my only conscern is that people will watch this video and then go out and try to do it themselves not in every instance can this technique be used. in the video i think it was more of a safty conscern that keeping the problem.
my advice, dont try this at home
|
|
|
|
|
copperhead
Jan 9, 2003, 11:33 PM
Post #22 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 668
|
Jahmin:
Quote:
there are safety issues on trad and sport routes every day, but it would not be acceptable to start bolting on chunks of rock to keep climbers safe. If people want a safe, manipulated climbing environment, I do believe gyms offer just that. If something scares you outside and that's not your bag, find another way up or don't climb it.
Oldandintheway:
Quote:
Guess I have a hard time understanding why people feel it is necessary to modify nature for the sake of personal pleasure. Do they feel it is their right? Let nature take it's own course. Stay in a gym if you need that kind of consistency.
Well said.
If you don’t like it, find another boulder.
Loose rock is meant to be trundled; trundling is fun.
DMT- The NPS has put cables on the north side of Half Dome for hikers to easily access the summit, yet climbers are able to climb the monolith without such ‘technology’. Yes, this comment is irrelevant, as are yours.
Dingus:
Quote:
High on El Cap the Death Block was lashed and slung to a bolt drilled expressly for the purpose of keeping that thing from killing people. Washington Column suffers a similar block. How is that ethically different from glueing a flake back on? It isn't, now is it?
That’s ridiculous! Just trundle it. No one ever said the base of El Cap is a safe place.
My personal view is that the 'said boulder problem' should be rated V6A because it is artificial. Sounds like aid climbing to me.
|
|
|
|
|
thrillseeker05
Jan 10, 2003, 12:04 AM
Post #23 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 612
|
Shame on all of you who favor this form of chipping! So they did a good job you say? As climbers you all should know that the very nature of this sport is to find rock and climb it in its natural state. By altering the rock you are merely making a climbing gym. How about if I go to that same rock and decide that I don’t like that route? How about if I neatly do a great job of gluing yet another slab on it? how about every one that has read this go and do the same? When does it end? If they can do it why can’t I? What if I feel that I can do a better job?
The attempt of justifying this because of safety reasons is quite pathetic. No one was making these guys climb this. If they want to risk it then so be it. are they going to glue everything that they don’t like?
These guys should be hung, not justified.
Even if they own the land, as climbers they should know it was against the very nature of outdoor climbing. If they want to alter the rock they should just build a gym.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 10, 2003, 12:06 AM
Post #24 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Well now, a couple of you seem to have difficulty grasping the concept that your ethics are not the universal law. Well, they are not. There is no universal set of climbing ethics, never has been and never will.
Leave no trace? Ever bouldered at the Happys, Mammoth Lakes man? And you preach to me about leaving no trace??? What a joke! You can't even support that argument in your own back yard! Oh, but that isn't wilderness, now is it? Leave no trace? Owens Gorge? No trace of man there, ut uh.
If you don't like my comparison to our modern society, don't make such broad based statements in the context of an ethics discussion! When someone says they can't understand why others would alter nature for pleasure, and makes that statement through a computer, I'm happy to point out they do the same in their daily life. Oh, but boulders are different for them? Cool. I totally respect that. Why can't you respect that others might not agree?
I am not defending the glueing on of this particular flake. I do not agree with the more authotarian among you that you have the unequivocal right to project your ethics on to everyone else. Law of the commons??? That is what we call local ethics.
It isn't as black and white as these limited statements make it appear. When you decry glueing or chipping, at least try to use some supportable arguments.
I leave you with this thought... Lynn Hill freed the Nose via blantantly chipped holds. I don't hear much debate about the ligitimacy of that ascent.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
flying_dutchman
Jan 10, 2003, 12:19 AM
Post #25 of 127
(8007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 708
|
Don't film yourself 'customizing the rock' but instead do it on your on or whatever and do a good enough job cleaning up after that no one will find out about the chipping and get pissed off. At least noone will be offended.
or just let nature take its course. Rock naturally breaks off cliffs and piles up at the bottom, hence all the boulders at the bottom of big walls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
