|
madflash
Dec 27, 2002, 6:46 PM
Post #1 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 77
|
This message is for the dickheads out there who have been chopping bolts at Chenal Mountain in Little Rock. I have been climbing there for about four years now. Many of those routes are good, fun, and don't need dickheads removing their bolts. Several routes including have had one or more bolts removed, some from the crux sections, making the lead very dangerous. Whoever it is needs to stop. If I see anyone chopping bolts off of established lines they might find themselves being thrown off a mountain. Thanks for your cooperation.
|
|
|
|
|
esoteric1
Dec 27, 2002, 7:00 PM
Post #2 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 705
|
is there a crack nearby?
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Dec 27, 2002, 10:54 PM
Post #3 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Madflash - I want to know all about this!!! Which routes have been chopped, when did it happen, etc. This is unacceptable. I will personally rebolt those climbs.
A.W.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Dec 28, 2002, 2:10 AM
Post #4 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
Here's another question. Can they be toproped?
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Dec 29, 2002, 1:25 AM
Post #5 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
UBG:
Question: What single pitch route can't be toproped?
The point is, sport climbing is just a viable means of ascent as Top Roping if the area ethics and lines lend themselves to sport climbing/bolting. Painted hangers are damn near invisble from the ground, so don't try the age old lame excuse of "visual impacts". PROPER bolt removal can also elimintae nearly 100% of all impact from bolting as well, which negates the "rock damage" excuses as well. The only viable excuse is violation of area ethics.
People who chop bolts w/o contacting the local activists are exactly what the original posters describes them as, dickheads.
You would think by now, people would have the brains to know that sport climbing will not be stopped by random acts of hanger stripping, and thats usually the act. Choppers don't do the right thing if its really an ethical statement, which would be to patch the holes and make the placements minimally impacting. The general action is a crescent wrench the hanger off and leave a nice big scar and hole for everyone to see.
A recommendation to whoever rebolts them. Go to your local hardware store, and go to the adhesion isle. Look for anything with "PC-7" in the title (if not available Liquid Nails Heavy Adhesive Glue works well also). After you rebolt, mix some of it up and then glob the hex bolt 360 around the head. Make it so you would not be able to get a wrench at all around it. SOmetimes I save the last few turns of tightening of the bolt I then place a little epoxy under head, between the hanger, then tighten it totally. This squishes out most of the PC-7, but a small film will seal under the bolt and make it damn near impossible to remove. I then glob the head over with the epoxy. I would not suggestes "sealing" the hole with epoxy in sandstone though as it can trap seaping mosture behind the bolt and may erode the placement. Just use the above technique on the hex head of the bolt.
If someone wants to be a bigger dick and try to steal the hangers again, make them work their ass off for it. PC-7 is very hard, and they will have chisel off the blob 1st, most likely sand the head clean of any extra Pc-7 then use solvent around the head to break the seal, then take the hanger off. Approximate time if the bolt is properly epoxied is greater about 1/2 hour removal per piece at least. Most choppers are lazy pricks anyways and don't have the balls to risk being on the cliff that long in fear of someone showing up and seeing them in the act.
Bottom line: epoxy the hangers or the local lame-ass will walk off with your hangers.
|
|
|
|
|
misha
Dec 29, 2002, 1:47 AM
Post #6 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2002
Posts: 344
|
are the chopped climbs purely face climbs, or how close are the cracks to the bolts.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Dec 29, 2002, 3:56 AM
Post #7 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
Roughster,
there are examples of single pitch routes that cannot be TRed without first using some form of protection to ascend them.
One example is the Monastary in Kolorado. This area contains mainly spires which require hard 5th class to access their tops. Additionally, there are very, very few natural gear placements in this area. I saw no bolts near any gear placements at this area. Here, bolts are neccessary and appropriate for safely ascending these rocks.
However, if you can walk up to the top of a cliff and set a TR, then bolting the line is NOT neccessary for a safe ascent. I would even go so far to say that if there are no opportunities provided by the natural features of the cliff top to set a TR, then it may be appropriate to place a couple of bolts for a TR anchor at the top.
I agree that the holes left from chopped bolts should be properly patched. One area where bad chop jobs are NOT the norm is the Southeastern US. Several friends and I have removed litter from rock faces in Alabama, Georgia and North Carolina. People would be hard pressed to locate where these bolts used to be (Tradpuppy can bear witness to this).
[ This Message was edited by: uncle_big_green on 2002-12-28 19:57 ]
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Dec 29, 2002, 4:38 AM
Post #8 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
Quote:However, if you can walk up to the top of a cliff and set a TR, then bolting the line is NOT neccessary for a safe ascent.
The key word there is "necessary". It is not "necessary" to climb any rock at all. Should we therefore eliminate ALL climbing all together?
The bottom line is and always has been, the FA'er sets the presedent for the climb. There have been some universally accepted ethics such as not bolting next to gear placements and respecting local tradition, however if the FA'ers want to establish the routes as a sport route with bolts in a previously unestablished area or area where a clear ethic is not evident it is well within their right to do so.
If someone else wants to come along and do a route w/o bolts, they can move over to the next piece of rock that currenty doesnt have a route or find their own crag to develop in any manner they choose.
Chopping bolts RARELY if ever solve any problem. In fact, I can pretty much guarenee that some of those bolts you chopped earlier that you quote in your previous post, unless they were violating local ethics and had the support of the local community, have "magically" sprouted new bolts in the place where they originals where.
And now what? Will they be chopped again? And will they get replaced again? And slowly permanent damage that cannot be erased WILL be formed. Who's right and whos wrong?
Someone who found an unclimbed piece of rock and followed the tradition of what has been considered viable climbing for the area or someone who came along and is trying to push their own values on everyone else despite the FA prescedent already being set?
What I find funny is I bet your bolt chopping days are over aren't they UBG? In Colorado, if you chop at an established "sport area, you will quickly have your ass handed to you and you know it.
Like I said earlier, most choppers are chicken$#!& and wait till nooone around to do the deed because they lack the balls to do it up front.
So tell us UBG, did you contact the "bolter" and tell them when you chopped or did you wait till noone was around.....
Thats what I thought
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Dec 29, 2002, 4:47 AM
Post #9 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
*there are examples of single pitch routes that cannot be TRed without first using some form of protection to ascend them.
One example is the Monastary in Kolorado. This area contains mainly spires which require hard 5th class to access their tops. Additionally, there are very, very few natural gear placements in this area. I saw no bolts near any gear placements at this area. Here, bolts are neccessary and appropriate for safely ascending these rocks.
However, if you can walk up to the top of a cliff and set a TR, then bolting the line is NOT neccessary for a safe ascent.*
So by this logic, only 1 bolt route per formation should be allowed, as that route could be used to access the summit and tr every other route on the formation.
But then, logic is'nt really the point is it. You already know that rocks don't have feelings and that you can't hurt them by drilling holes in them.
You also know that bolt holes are reparable and that proper patch jobs leave no trace, so there is no environmental impact, and that painted hangars are practically invisible from the ground,and that chalk creates more visual impact than the hangers anyway and I don't hear you complaining about the chalk, so visual impact is'nt your problem.
And repeated piton use is far more destructive that a bolt that gets drilled one time, so we know you don't really care about rock damage or you would focus your outrage on that.
So what is your problem? My guess is it's psychological, because you are trying to impose an extreme view on others who do not share it, usually one of the harder-to-miss signs on the road to Nutville. As you sit there and obsess over pencil-sized holes in the rock, please try to remember that ethics are for the people in your life, not the rocks in your life.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Dec 29, 2002, 6:24 AM
Post #10 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
You both raise some valid points. In the grand scheme of things, bolts don't make a huge mess. I happen to think, however, that bolting should be kept to a minimum. It hasn't been and it still is some impact.
Kalcario,
how am I trying to IMPOSE my views on anyone? I don't recall advocating the initiation of force to achieve my goals. What I am doing is trying to convince people not to place bolts everywhere. There's a difference here. Maybe I only want to bitch about bolts and not much else. I don't bitch about pitons (as much) since they aren't being banged in and out nearly as much they used to be. I'd bitch about FICA, but people are even less interested in that than this topic.
Roughster,
You thought incorrectly. I chopped on a SATURDAY and started around 10 am. I didn't contact the bolter since he moved out of state, but we did have someone else contact and warn him beforehand. Really, it didn't matter since the line had already been done on gear by someone else (the FA, thanked me). I don't need to justify my actions to you, but I'd like to set the record straight.
I'm sure that if I went chopping at some places around here that its likely that more than one person would get violent with me. What I have been doing lately is not using bolts that are next to gear. Maybe I should start beating people's asses who bolt next to gear, right? Speaking of which, I am glad that you think that bolts don't belong next to gear. You're also right in saying that not everything, if anything at all, needs to be climbed (my apologies for spelling "necessary" incorrectly). Still, I'd rather see something left as a TR if possible than to get bolted, but I haven't said never place bolts.
More thoughts on the original topic. In my first post, I should have also asked if the climbs were originally TRs. It may have interested you guys more. The original poster said that he had been going there for about 4 yrs. Something similar happened at Currahee Mtn. in NW Georgia. In that area, the climbs were originally done as TRs and the bolts lasted for about a year. Maybe the choppers were slower to get to the ones here.
[ This Message was edited by: uncle_big_green on 2002-12-28 22:46 ]
sleep deprived typos.
PS - both of your points would be better taken if you didn't resort to personal attacks and stuck to the issues being discussed.
[ This Message was edited by: uncle_big_green on 2002-12-29 07:46 ]
|
|
|
|
|
beyond_gravity
Dec 29, 2002, 6:28 AM
Post #11 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2002
Posts: 5078
|
Don't worry.
As long as he chopped the bolts on lead it's ok.
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Dec 29, 2002, 4:16 PM
Post #12 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
UBG:
Actually I will apologize for my personal attack, as fate would have it, there was a hanger stripping at a local area that I had a hand in developing that has me very pissed about ths whole issue. As mentioned in my post, the THIEF used a crescent pulled off the hangers, leaving the holes in all their glory for all to see.
I developed the area, and everyone in this region (SoCal) pretty much knows it. I have a valid email address thats easy to get ahold of as well, that is very well known.
The wall was not previously developed, they were face climbs, there were not protectable cracks nearby, i.e. there was no "ethical" reason to chop, yet some prick took the time to strip 5 routes which ironically enough the 5 routes at the crag that I didn't epoxy down the hangers. To further their chickcrap actions, they stripped the anchors if they could reach them from the lip, but left the Anchors on one climb that were not, but still stripped the face bolts. So now there is no way to even TR the completely stripped routes, and no way to get to the anchors on the route they left anchors on. What a load of crap! In addition, one of the routes was established on lead with a hand drill, was fairly runout and commiting! WTF reason is there to chop that?
If anything, it has sent me a clear message. Gone are the days when you could trust other climbers to recognize the effort of a small minority of people who invest their own time and $$ into devloping a crag, and leave fixed gear alone. How sad is it that someone basically obliterated 5 routes that local climbers could enjoy, for what?
Will they reuse the hangers on a different route? (Most likely not). Even if they do, does that increase the SoCal route total at all? Nope.
I am starting to ask around to try and get to the bottom of it. I have my list of "suspects". They better be praying noone points the finger is all I can say. It can, and will turn ugly for those responsible.
If given the opportunity to defend the climbs, I would have been waiting their bright and early with clenched fists ready to knock out some teeth when the choppers arrived.
[ This Message was edited by: roughster on 2002-12-29 08:43 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Dec 29, 2002, 5:43 PM
Post #13 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
*how am I trying to IMPOSE my views on anyone? I don't recall advocating the initiation of force to achieve my goals.*
Chopping bolts is forcefully imposing your views on others. However if you are doing it on already established previously boltless routes you are within your rights, especially if you did the FA. But in my view FA'ers should not put up death routes that force others to either not climb it or play russian roulette. I have climbed tons in Tuolumne and fully understand and appreciate the concept of run-out slab climbing but I also believe in being a nice guy and leaving reasonably protected routes that are not ego statements and contribute to everyone's enjoyment, not just a few death wish elitists. Ropes, harnesses and belayers ae pointless if you still hit the ground when you fall off. Bolting responsibly should strike a balance between too many bolts and too few.
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Dec 30, 2002, 12:58 AM
Post #14 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
I think we can all be friends now.
Roughster, what was done to your climbs sounds very uncool and if it had happened to me, I'd probably be a little pissed.
|
|
|
|
|
wonderbread
Dec 30, 2002, 2:13 AM
Post #15 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2002
Posts: 197
|
UBG-Did you use to be a geographer???
I think I climbed with you once. In one day of climbing I got to hear all about your ethics and this and that, blah blah blah about trad climbing. Damn annoying. Lighten up pipe swinger.
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Dec 30, 2002, 3:06 AM
Post #16 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Some of you seem to feel that if a route can be top-roped, then it shouldn't be bolted.
While I agree that toproping is a perfectly viable means of ascent, I disagree that this is grounds for removing bolts from an otherwise non-leadable route. Lead climbing offers an entirely different experience compared to TR.
Now, I don't know the climbing history of every poster here, but I do see that Uncle-Big-Green and Roughster, who both share this opinion, currently reside in Colorado and California -- states with plenty of lead routes, and areas to spare.
Here in Arkansas, there is only one established area where routes can't be toproped, though it can be tricky at many others. Should this mean that there is only one area where sportclimbing can occur? (This is not even taking into account that the one area, Red Rock Point, is privately owned and going through access issues.) If it cannot be traditionally led, then it is fair ethic to place bolts.
Furthermore, Chenal Mtn. is surrounded by urban sprawl from Little Rock. (It's less than 10 minutes away!) Powerlines crisscross all around. What reason could the choppers have had? To return this place to a natural state? I think not. Removing bolts just makes this place even more of a trash heap.
Bolting ethics vary and adapt depending on the location of the rock. In this case, whomever removed the bolts from certain routes did so without checking with any of the locals, and ruined several exciting leads until they can be rebolted (if they can be rebolted.) I invite your comments on my opinion.
A.W.
|
|
|
|
|
roughster
Dec 30, 2002, 3:18 AM
Post #17 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2002
Posts: 4003
|
Wooooo Nelly!!!!!
I do NOT share that line of thinking with UBG. I think that Leading is ALWAYS prefered to tell you the truth and would go so far as to say a climb has not been established at all till it has been led/solo'd.
I think you might have mis-read my posts Trust me, many people would die laughing if I was to say such a thing as I would be called the biggest hypocrite around! I am all for bolting.
|
|
|
|
|
xanx
Dec 30, 2002, 4:22 AM
Post #18 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2002
Posts: 1002
|
so, summarily, then: bolting is OK if there is no gear nearby (i.e. cracks) and if it is OK from an access point of view (i.e. land owner's regulations, state regulations blah blah - i think there is no bolting in the Gunks). while technically every single pitch route can be TRed if an easier climb can be led up to put up the anchors, this isn't always possible (for instance, what if the easiest way up to the top/anchor point is a 5.11a and u want to TR that nice 5.11b next to it but don't feel confident leading the 5.11a to get to it?). plust TR and lead are different.
l8er
mike
|
|
|
|
|
uncle_big_green
Dec 30, 2002, 4:22 AM
Post #19 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2002
Posts: 261
|
That sounds like me, Jason. It must have been a long time ago in the SE. Now I'm curious, so remind me. Did I put a rock in your pack at the New? Anyway, if you were so annoyed, then you should have told me (and mentioned where I was wrong). I'll bet that you probably otherwise had fun and did some good climbs.
For the other poster, I think you got where Roughster and I agree confused. I think he agrees with me that bolts shouldn't be placed next to gear placements (if I read his other posts correctly). I'd like to see more stuff left as TRs. That's the where we don't quite see eye to eye.
[ This Message was edited by: uncle_big_green on 2002-12-29 20:26 ]
|
|
|
|
|
rideandclimbkid
Dec 30, 2002, 5:33 AM
Post #20 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 4, 2002
Posts: 139
|
There will ALWAYS be people who say bolting SHOULD be done, and there will ALWAYS be people who say bolting SHOULDNT be done. some people will put bolts in, and other people will yank those bolts out. bolters and strippers as groups, when looked at at the basic root of both principals, are like two little kids with one toy and no parent. They both want it, but theres two kids, and one toy. child A will take the toy from child B, and child B will take it back.
Now i agree with all the other "better ways". dont bolt a climb with pro-options right there, disguise your bolts, if you yank the bolt then patch the hole, and let the FA'er set the trend. BUT COME ON PEOPLE! cant you all see? There is NO answer to this war on climbing. So just stop arguing on here about bolting! Argue at the crags, where it COUNTS. instead of grabbing that toy, SHARE it. compromise. mix your trad and sport routes. And please..."Save the bull$#!& for the rodeo."
Go ahead...flame me. Make my day.
|
|
|
|
|
gawd
Dec 30, 2002, 5:45 AM
Post #21 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 193
|
i applaused the bolt choppers and for several reasons.
1st bolting is only good in limited amounts and at the rate in which bolts are showing up now days, i say chop them all.
2nd grid bolting is the evidence of a person whom is looking for cheast beating and a stroke of the ego. it certainly does feel good to establish a new route, but when does that move into the realm of attempting to make oneself know through the excessive damage to our public land?
3rd bolts are scary. how many people have placed them or replaced them? i have retrod many a qaulity route and am abhored at the quality of the bolting.
top roping and climbing are both climbing and therefore valid. only to the person whom is looking for the ago stroke and needs to state that they lead such and such route claims that leading is more valid then a top rope. especially when it comes to a face climb. a ground up lead on gear is the only more valid ascent, as the climber assess their own fate and determines wether they are up for the route. a sport climber suffers no consequences.
chop them all!!!
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Dec 30, 2002, 6:10 AM
Post #22 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
*top roping and climbing are both climbing and therefore valid.*
But if every climber hiked to the top of the cliff to set up top ropes every time, they would create far more impact and damage to the top of the cliff, in the form of trails and erosion, than any number of pencil sized holes in the rock. The way it is now the top of the cliff never gets touched once the bolts are in. Also the bolts can be pulled and the holes filled in leaving no trace, there is no "damage to our public lands". If you are worried about hurting the rocks maybe you shouldn't go climbing.
And guess what: There is no such thing as ethics in sport climbing. Accept it, get over it and move on.
[ This Message was edited by: kalcario on 2002-12-29 22:35 ]
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Dec 30, 2002, 5:05 PM
Post #23 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
That's a good point about the impact of walkdowns...
"2nd grid bolting is the evidence of a person whom is looking for cheast beating and a stroke of the ego."
Gawd - I think you should look at the area this is referring to. Read my earlier post for a little beta on it. There is no grid bolting taking place. The removed bolts are far more unsightly than the hangers that were there before.
Roughster - Sorry for the confusion. I was just going off of your posts to this thread.
A.W.
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Dec 30, 2002, 5:15 PM
Post #24 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
Thank Gawd your Back!!!
Kill the Infidels..!!! I mean "Chop them All"
Signed,
Osama Been Choppin
|
|
|
|
|
totigers
Dec 30, 2002, 5:49 PM
Post #25 of 48
(5947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2002
Posts: 257
|
Bolts have also been cut at Mt. Roubidux in Riverside Ca. I use to climb there often but have been away for two years and went back this last weekend and noticed alot of bolts that have been cut. I was still able to protect the TR but the bolts are necesary when the Natural stuff isn't available.
Some of the bolts that were cut were new ones so I know that some climbers were changing out the old for the new but this was uncalled for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
