|
skywalker
Feb 11, 2003, 6:30 AM
Post #1 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2002
Posts: 52
|
This is in reference to a few recent threads concerning 'restoring' or cleaning up annoying bolts. I have had this discussion before and my opinion is that cracks can only accept a limited # of pin placements. With respect to El Cap, many routes will be done thousands of times and many are. I think bolts have their place particularly at belays. If we expect to find the same 'natural' anchors found by the first ascent party we are fooling ourselves. While clean gear will become available at most placements what can be said about the rest? I think belays are a good example. I think that bolts at belays have their merit and if it adds to the bolt count so be it. I can't imagine what belays would look like on trade routes on the Captain without them. What do y'all think?
|
|
|
|
|
tanner
Feb 11, 2003, 6:36 AM
Post #2 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
I agree, Bolts ahve there place for belays
Besides bolts are tiny and do little damage
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Feb 11, 2003, 7:07 PM
Post #3 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
I am passionately anti-bolt. I made a [former free-climbing] career out of clean first ascents. Check out some of my climbs in Ontario - you won't find any bolts, mate.
If you wonder how passionately I feel, you can click here to read my RANT when my trad line got retrobolted. As far as I know, the bolts were removed and the holes filled with a mixture of epoxy and rock dust.
So in principle, I am opposed to bolts. They are permanent and scar the rock permanently. I believe that the indiscriminate use of bolts can be indicative of cowardice and cheating. [Correlation does not necessarily imply causality]
If a climb can be done cleanly, it should be. Especially if that makes it harder. Some routes require balls to climb.
However I have been known to beef up belays with an extra bolt or rivet for no other reason than the convenience of hanging my portaledge.
This could make me somewhat hypocritical. This is called "situational ethics," and you can read about this in a new column I'm writing, coming soon to a magazine near you. [HINT]
I completely disagree with this statement:
Quote:"If we expect to find the same 'natural' anchors found by the first ascent party we are fooling ourselves."
Of course you will find the same natural placements, at least on a belay.
On the lead is another story. Aid routes evolve - they become easier with time. Look at The Shield and The Nose as examples. The Nose goes completely clean now, if you discount fixed bolt ladders.
The Shield is getting there. Former RURP cracks now accept hand-placed sawed-offs and cams. Eventually The Shield will get as beat-out as The Nose and go completely clean.
But the belay bolts will remain.
And as far as belay bolts are concerned, when I see a nice wide spread of the things, I'm smilin'.
I am Dr. Piton,
and although I am opposed to capital punishment, I might very well be standing in the town square to watch the hanging
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Feb 11, 2003, 9:07 PM
Post #4 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
This particular instance is a free-climbing one, but it fits in this context somewhat...
What do y'all think about a FAist adding bolts to their own line after it has been climbed for years without the bolts?
We believe that this was the case on two routes that we climbed last weekend on the Royal Arches slabs. They went from being safe, but a little hair raising to have bolts every few feet. Both routes have been there since before the old Reid guide was published as well. It was the first time that I'd been there, so I was ignorant, but my parnter were really bummed that the old experience that the FAist had originally created was also all but erased by them.
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Feb 11, 2003, 10:29 PM
Post #5 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
Some people's balls shrink over time.
This may or may not be the case, since correlation does not imply causality.
|
|
|
|
|
twrock
Feb 12, 2003, 1:14 PM
Post #6 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2002
Posts: 223
|
Quote:I completely disagree with this statement:
Quote:
"If we expect to find the same 'natural' anchors found by the first ascent party we are fooling ourselves."
Of course you will find the same natural placements, at least on a belay.
On the lead is another story. Aid routes evolve - they become easier with time.
I think you two must be using different definitions of words, or Pete's response doesn't make any sense to me. If the "lead" evolves, then why not the belay? Wouldn't the same process of evolution happen there?
If every time a party got to a non-bolted belay and slammed in their own pins, wouldn't those cracks change just as much as the cracks on lead? The belay would evolve just as much as the lead. Bolted belays stop the "evolution" process. At least that is how I read what skywalker was trying to say. Maybe he can clarify.
[ This Message was edited by: twrock on 2003-02-12 05:15 ]
|
|
|
|
|
apollodorus
Feb 12, 2003, 1:23 PM
Post #7 of 7
(1628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2002
Posts: 2157
|
PTPP and I discussed chopping bolts next to the big OW P9 on Excalibur. We both agreed that one or two bolts wasn't going to change the rating of the pitch. Or how impossible it would be to free it (5.12b).
So, we just passed by. I clipped them, but they didn't really serve as pro, and they sure didn't help getting up the crack.
I think they stand as an example of post-FA bolts that should be there. They don't detract from the route, nor do they add much. They're just . . . there. The first one was worthless, except as a directional to keep you off the belayer if you peeled. The second was so high up, it was meaningless. If you need it as pro, you've already run-out almost 100 feet of OW, and might as well go for the record.
|
|
|
|
|
|
