pope

Fine....but what can be done about those sport climbers?

Just think of this as part of your rehab. You're not quite 100% until your liver is back in shape. But seriously, whatever you do take it easy and enjoy the opportunity to wake up to see a new day.

Anybody see Chic Scott's show in Squamish, January 2006?

What? Never been to Vantage? I seem to recall names like Yoder, Pogue, Windham, Massey, Kerns, Collum, etc associated with the bolted lines out there. Don't think these folks fall into the category we're discussing here. Two of the guys you mentioned have either retro-bolted traditional lines or squeezed in sport routes between classic climbs at Castle Rock of all places. I believe those routes remain erased. Didn't that Windham guy put up a controversial alpine sport climb in a wilderness area? Is that your idea of a role model? I had lunch with a guy who is responsible for rap bolting mixed climbs locally, and according to him, one of the guys in your list has found a "secret crag" where he has bolted perfectly protectable, splitter finger cracks....just because he can. One of the guys you mention used to be my steady partner (climbing partner). He was drilling bolts when he was still learning his knots.

And yet chopping often gets done without ceremony and parade. Often we never learn who did the deed. If it were ego motivating choppers, it seems natural that they would want some recognition for their deeds. It could be that choppers see bolting as: (1) removing an important component of the challenges climbing traditionally offered. Bolts take the sport out of climbing (one of life's little ironies). (2) alien to the "rock-scape" and therefore an unwelcome compromise to the visual aesthetics of climbing rock walls. (3) applied with little or no restraint, increasingly on old, bold leads and increasingly next to cracks.

What? Never been to Vantage?

You never know when an alpine celebrity might show up to take a few plops on our "pad". Last year's contributions to the stain collage forced our old mattress into retirement.

"Take!" For Alpine K B_LT's

Nice going. Way to push on through the muck. I was at a birthday party in Fircrest, thinking about all the fun you old-timers must be having. I did make it out to Banner for a quick ride with Dwayner on Monday. Out on the Oakland trail we came to a point where a bunch of bones are nailed to a tree....and there was a strange, woodsy fellow walking down an adjacent trail. Creepy. Mentioning "woodsy" fellows, Dwayner got all hot and bothered when an athletic female trail runner came bounding past.

Still talking about dicks.

Yeah, if you're out there reading this, and if you're the one who chopped it, I say identify yourself. I've got some ice-cold beers with your name on them.

Damn! Makes me want to jump in the car right now!

Not sure I'd call him a "hatemonger". I never liked his approach, but among other things he did promote family values. I suppose those of you who value unrestrained boofing in bath houses felt like your toes were stepped on. In reality you should be thanking the man. He gave you tatoo-sportin', salad-sandwich-chompin', annoying little hippies something to bitch about. I think you'll miss him.

Getting divorced is something that some incredibly honest, caring, disciplined people have to go through. One can't always keep a marriage together by the strength of his/her own moral character. It takes two. I've never been divorced, but I resent your "typical loser stuff" comment. A little off topic, aren't we?

Awesome! Way to own that bitch kitty of a hill. This photo is an instant classic:

Matt, don't be too flattered, but I generally ignore what Richard Noggin and Mr. E have to say (whole bunch of nothin') and go right to your generally thoughtful essays. I don't understand the nature of their objections. I can only infer that folks who see no value in this discussion but simultaneously find time to chime in with sophomoric drivel...these must be among the most bored and small-minded people on the planet.

Dude, put on your thinking cap, or at least let me know when you're kidding around. Everybody knows that routes like that were cleaned, either as a consequence of deliberate cleaning or as a result of steady traffic, or both. But if you're going to call this "engineering", you're definitely stretching the definition of the word. Even among those who object to scrubbing moss off a route, few would consider climbing clean rock to be an experience that out of the ordinary. Few would say that clean rock is an intrusion on the cliff's natural aesthetics in quite the same way that a line of bolts is. And I don't think you believe this either. Furthermore, what is the intent of your statement? Are you suggesting that once a mossy climb is scrubbed, it should no longer be considered natural, and that in that case we should have no reservations about the placement of highly visible, shiny bolts? Are you suggesting further that because Japanese Gardens has been scrubbed, there is no basis for appealing to the "most natural state" ideal when objecting to bolts placed next to a crack? And if this is the case (Lord help us if you're really that far gone), on what grounds would you/could you object to bolting the entire pitch? I think this last question is the most important. I don't think it is unreasonable to think that there are climbers who would advocate bolting the wide 5.10 crack above the belay in question. We're already seen this happening at NW crags. The justification is always convenience. I'm seriously interested to hear how you'd go about objecting in this case. Maybe you wouldn't. Thank goodness that isn't the most clever thing you've contributed in the last few years.

My argument was never that a belay anchor will necessarily lead to bolted cracks or even a via feratta. I simply stated that this particular anchor is not appropriate. The anchor in question soils one of the best crack pitches in Washington. The anchor in question does not define the logical conclusion of any pitch....unless climbing the moves above at a 5.11 standard is not logical. Most of the arguments I've read supporting the anchor fall on the side of utility. Apparently a number of climbers who do not climb 5.11 are provided with a pitch of moderate climbing thereby. Apparently this benefit is worth the price of a pair of bolts not far off the ground, just below where this excellent pitch gets serious. I brought up bolted cracks, chipped holds and the via feratta because they are logically consistent with the arguments presented in favor of this anchor. If we think that the access and convenience provided by a mid-pitch anchor are worth the sacrifice of soiling Japanese Gardens, one must at least speculate about what other "improvements" might be logically justified in the name of access and convenience. There are many examples of bolting cracks in the name of access, convenience and creating traffic that have been discussed in this forum. The arguments offered are remarkably similar to those found in this thread supporting the anchor on Japanese Gardens. That's a pathetic equation. Cleaning cracks and clearing a little loose rock do not impose the degree of engineering and the obvious evidence of human impact that bolts do. Bolts are not only ugly and alien to the natural experience, they also offer an incredibly cheap and lazy solution to finding security. They offer a nearly perfect security that can be achieved with almost no requirement of skill or craft. I provided an example of a climber who thinks these very bolts offer protection (not a belay) that is more convenient than carrying a large cam. There's your example.

I never argued that "a bolt anchor will lead to a via feratta and zip line", but that in a high-use climbing area, more generations of climbers will derive more enjoyment by making every reasonable attempt to preserve rock climbs in their most natural state. My argument was that once fixed anchors are employed, the rock is then vulnerable to a variety of interpretations about which "improvements" are appropriate. Once it is acceptable to place bolts in the middle of a crack pitch, this opens the door for those who might advocate other "improvements". Intermediate anchors, bolting RP-cracks, bolting wide cracks, bolting the whole damn pitch! Or chipping a couple of jugs through the crux (which could be avoided by "purists"). I only brought up the possibility of the via feratta to emphasize the idea that many interpretations exist about how to "improve" the climbing experience once we find it reasonable to impose our "improvements" on the rock and all participants in this game. Well, Matt, here's a guy you know who thinks clipping those bolts for protection is better than carrying one fat cam: There you have it.

I've always wanted to see a tornado...this video makes you feel like you're there (minus all the danger and tragedy). Thanks for posting.

"What we're doing, this little fuck up over here, it's OK because, you see, there's a bigger problem over there." BFD. I soloed Brass Balls. Back to the potty language. Listen, pal, I didn't pull those bolts. Right now I'm probably too out of shape to do the full pitch, so if I were a convenience-oriented, selfish little prick I'd probably promote that anchor, so I'd have a nice little 5.7 climb on the LTW. But guess what? The fact remains that regardless of what atrocities exist elsewhere, regardless of whether there are enough mellow climbs at the LTW, and your juvenile taunts notwithstanding, the fact remains that one of the very best crack climbs in the State of Frickin' Washington is soiled with a completely ridiculous anchor less than 50 feet up. Stupid.

I remember when it was not. Not in its current location and configuration. It can't be much more than 35 feet. Maybe 45 feet? That whole pitch is way short of 50 meters. And I don't agree with your comparison since the GNS anchor you mention coincides with what most people would consider the natural end of the spectacular climbing on that slab. It is also the terminus for at least three routes. The anchor a few feet up Japanese Gardens is similar to what you'd have if you put a two-bolt anchor below the bulge on Thin Fingers, in order to provide a moderate pitch for climbers who wanted to avoid the bulge. Index is what we make it. We're talking about the way things should be, and yet nobody can seem to avoid the "logical" mistake of justifying the existence of the anchor because it exists and because it has existed for X years. Many contributors to this discussion are essentially saying, "This is the way we've always done it." This is parallel to saying, "We're not comfortable with change." It's OK if you think this way, just come out and say it. And regarding respecting people's rights to recreate on their own terms: in a high-use area on a limited resource which is open to the public, all users have a right to voice an opinion. Opinions are always going to differ, but when considering questions about fixed anchors, we should remember that the solution which leaves the cliff in its most natural state is often the best solution. Otherwise the cliff is subject to the whims of currnet popular opinion. One group wants an anchor, next year they want bolts next the crack, maybe some future group wants a via ferrata up to an observation deck and perhaps a zip line back to the parking lot. More generations will derive more pleasure from rock climbing when they avoid excessive convenience bolting and meet the rock on its own terms, leaving it pretty close to the way they found it.

Yes it does. I expect to climb a crack route without having to be constantly reminded of how pathetic this sport has become.

That climb gave me zero trouble. And I'm climbing this weekend. Shows what you know. BTW, we're all impressed that you managed to write a paragraph without dropping the F-bomb.