pope

Great post, Norman. It's encouraging to read such thoughtful commentary. MattP, I'm not going to agree with your analysis of the relative merits of rap vs. lead bolting. I haven't done much of either, although I've done more of the latter. I've been able to drill 3/8" bolts in granite on the lead in as little as 20 minutes, with excellent results. It can be done. It requires careful planning; it requires a willingness to not even start a route if you suspect things won't go. I assume you've done plenty of both types of bolting to know what you're talking about. What makes it more acceptable to me is, as Norman points out, the route has a different meaning when established on the lead. The qualities I mentioned as being absent in the establishment of Vantage sport routes--these are required for lead bolting, and so each bolt then represents a conscious decision, behind which both skill and commitment are necessary. As you've pointed out, the power drill and the rap-drilling approach make it too easy, and this is precisely how eager young climbers can wreck a place in less than a decade. Having said that, I sometimes think you take personally the statements I've made about irresponsible bolting. Maybe I'm wrong, but you don't seem to hesitate to review posts I make on this subject. Based on what I know about you, and what others have said, I'm certain that if I were to climb routes that you've established (on rap?) at Darrington, I'd find them to be thoughtfully equipped: not too run out, not insultingly over-bolted. I'm certain your routes would follow aesthetic lines which could not be protected without bolts, and I doubt you've got a route going every 7-1/2 lateral feet. And if you choose to bolt these routes on rap, I'd say, first of all, too bad that you're cheating yourself out of an adventure. But if the result is excellent, if the use of bolts shows restraint, I would have not one objection. I also agree that the goal should probably be to get a grip on current bolting practices, to try to persuade those establishing routes with bolts to put more thought into it. I know it's ridiculous to expect that climbers are going to establish routes from the bottom at sport cliffs; people just don't have the patience. Nevertheless, maybe it would be possible through dialogue to avoid tragedies like Vantage in the future. Maybe people who frequently climb at a particular cliff could somehow coordinate first ascent activity in such a way that runaway bolting is avoided. I tend to think you're going to have a tough time telling people how they should bolt their sport climbs. I'd rather see energy directed to preserving the traditional nature of crags that haven't yet been molested.

Bronco, you some kind of Bambi killer? If you were a real man, you'd go hunting with a muzzle loader like my brother. In fact, I know a guy who hunts bear with a bow. Now that's manly. Think that guy would clip bolts? Think he gets kiwi in his latte? OK, MattP, we need to go climbing. But in the mean time, I'll be waiting for some fresh perspectives from your end. I've got a tough time making these pub things, but I realy need some beer.

I'm weary of apologizing for my disdain for irresponsible bolting, especially when otherwise intelligent readers won't consider my comments within the context I so carefully constructed. My last post suggests not what MattP reports, rather I'm simply saying that the short climbs at Vantage would be best left as top-rope climbs. People who bolt these climbs on rap do so thoughtlessly, because they don't understand that what they want out of climbing can be achieved on a top-rope, in perfect safety, without the bloody mess. I do think they're dishonest, pretending that clipping these bolts has anything to do with leading. They want the sensation of leading a route (as Chuck mentions), but they don't want any risk associated with it. Fine, then go top-rope the darn thing. Or, if you want a little bit of risk, top-rope it with a bunch of slack. People who rap bolt such routes are beating the dignity out of the rock. Whether or not they disdain the community is not something on which I commented. When top-roping makes so much sense in Vantage, those who would transform such a beautiful place into an amusement part are doing so without regard for any kind of wilderness ethic, without any sense of preserving natural beauty for future generations. I'll stick by my statements. The place looks like hell, and I'm not apologizing for being upset. Again, I didn't wake up this morning with the intent of offending anybody, I was asked. It would be impossible to overstate my feelings for how the bolting trend has degraded a sport I once loved. And please, in the future, don't project my thoughts and comments on the mess at Vantage onto "all climbers who like to clip bolts." Go back to what Chuck said about how the desire for a little thrill in climbing between bolts is more of a consideration than preserving the beauty and dignity of the place. What could possibly motivate such a choice, if not ego?

Sorry for the snotty answer. I'm learning to be less sarcastic. But the answer (not like I know that much about it) has got to be that a strong climber with poor technique will struggle on 5.12, and an experienced climber with limp wrists will also struggle. Also, there are 5.12 routes that are so steep and powerful, only an extremely fit climber will ever get up. Then again, there are 5.12 slabs so thin and intense, your ability to do a one-arm with 35 pounds around your ankles might not help much. To climb 5.12 solidly, on a variety of rock types, in a variety of situations....would seem to require both superb fitness and a thorough apprenticeship.

quote: Originally posted by coyote: .What's the difference between a 5.10-11 climber and a 5.12 climber. Answer: one is a novice, the other is a bad amateur. It's so been so long since I climbed at such introductory levels, I honestly can't remember the difference. But I think 5.12 is where you might want to tie into a rope.

quote: Originally posted by chucK: I surmise that for many the desire for the slight tint of danger/committment outweighs their concerns with respect to "beating the dignity out of the rock". Chuck Chuck, I think you couldn't be more correct. It's a sign of the times. We never fail to satisfy our whims, to follow selfishly the compulsion of our insatiable egos, common sense, aesthetics, sportsmanship and the good of the community be damned.

Take a typical pitch at Vantage. What does a sport climber want from it? He wants an experience in gymnastic movement, without any worry of injury, and without lots of dangly equipment to get in his way. What does a traditional climber want? An adventure, a challenge, a wilderness experience in which the rock is left more or less the way he found it (save for a little lichen loss). It would appear that, when the pitches are short (like at Vantage, which is essentially practice climbing to begin with), when the top is reasonably easy to access (first requirement for a sport climb, right?), wouldn't everybody win if instead of beating the dignity out of the rock with a bunch of bolts, people just established the routes as top-rope climbs? That's the way it used to work, and it worked well.

Good point, Brother Will, and believe me, I believe you. In a related cam story, I once climbed with a lunatic named James who, one rainy Seattle day, accompanied me to the jam cracks under I5 down below Capitol Hill, back when Cam-O-Lots (or whatever they're so cleverly called) first appeared. To find out whether they'd hold, he climbed up about 15 feet, smacked in a cam, climbed another five feet, then cautioned, "Look out!" and jumped. I couldn't believe it. You talked about slip planes....these cracks are grimy with urban filth, almost greasy! Anyway, I think he's still alive, although ten years ago I never would have predicted it.

This is difficult without a diagram. Imagine looking into a crack at cam. See the cam axle? See the shaft? Imagine a plane perpendiculat to the shaft, running through the cam axle. See where the plane intersects the rock? What do you notice? Right, the cams actually contact the rock at a point lower than where this imaginary plane contacts the rock. Now make a cross sectional picture. Label: "C" is the point at which the cam touches the rock, "A"is the center of the cam axle, and "P" is the point at which the previously described imaginary plane contacts the rock. Now consider the angle CAP: when this angle is small, the cams contact the rock just barely below where our imaginary plane does. In this case, the orthogonal force applied by the cams to the wall is ENORMOUSLY bigger than your body weight, and the cam generates superb holding power. Such a design would be ideal, but I'm told that using a small cam angle results in a unit with a smaller application range (only fits a small range of cracks). A larger cam angle generates lower orthogonal forces, and so the unit can be expected to generate less friction in a given setting, resulting in lower holding power. The advantage is that choosing a design with a large cam angle can result in greater application range. Finally, fat cams really don't hold any better. Friction is a function of materials (rock type, cam metal) and orthogonal force. As mentioned, bigger cams spread our the force, but they don't create more friction. Bigger cams might be stronger, perhaps less likely to deform...but I'm speculating now. I was under the impression that Lowe or Jardine had worked out the cam shape that would allow for a constant camming angle.

The force that cams put on the rock can be divided into two component vectors, one orthogonal to the rock (straight in), one tangential to the rock (down). Each of the four cams has these two force components, and the tangential force that each cam applies to the rock is about 1/4 of your body weight. The orthogonal force each cam applies to the wall is always some multiple of the tangential force, and it depends on the cam angle (which supposedly stays constant throughout the range of the unit). Sound complicated? Here's a simple thing to remember: when a heavier climber steps on a cam, both the tangential force and the orthogonal force increase proportionally. The frictional force the rock puts back on the cam (upward, keeping the climber from winging off) is a function of that orthogonal force, and so a cam should hold equally well for a heavier climber. A cam behind a loose flake....well, the heavier climber puts more orthogonal force on the rock, which might result in a greater chance of prying the flake out.

Alpine, You nailed it, my friend. A place like Vantage epitomizes how crag climbing requires very little of what used to be required in rock work (courage, skill, honesty, restraint, experience, reverence, self-preservation instinct). Anybody strong enough to do a pull-up and smart enough to clip a bolt can climb the cutting edge routes there. I think that approach to climbing has its place, on really steep, super chossy cliffs on another continent. My concern is not that sport cliffs exist, nor do I want everybody to climb the way I do. I am concerned about the way bolts seem to proliferate, as though they throw out into the wind little spores which can't help but to infect our finest traditional crags.

I'm way out of my element here, but I'm aware of a number of extremely talented young climbers who spend enormous amounts of time bouldering in Leavenworth; they should know the area well. I'm thinking V8 is child's play for these guys (one guy was in my class ten years ago and could do a 1-finger pull-up back then!) Contact Bruce at Stone Gardens..he'll steer you in the right direction.

1. The Big Ben 2. Jonathan Hemlock/Karl Freitag 3. Madame Montagne's Twin Towers

There's a 5.12 move up there on Colchuck Balanced Rock...I ain't never done it, but I hear it's out of character with the rest of the route. I's probably ain'ts gonna go on up there and climb that there hill just "free-hand" or whatever they call that there lunartic practice whereby you hang your skinny little workin' class ass off of da side of a big ol' hill without using none of them there safety lines and shit like that, Roger Dodger.

Jay I think you've answered most of your own questions. If bolting were commonly confined to longer routes, on pitches where adequate crack protection does not exist, if bolts were used sparingly and avoided except in special cases....I wouldn't be nearly as upset. It is not the occasional, thoughtfully placed bolt to which I object; I never said, "All bolts are evil." I said the just the opposite (and for any amateur logicians lurking, the opposite of that statement is not "All bolts are not evil." You mentioned that those bolts are placed on the lead....to me, that makes the route far more legitimate, even if the end result is the same (although lead-bolted routes always seem to be more sporty to repeat than rap-drilled bolt trails). The bolts are still ugly, and I think the mountains lose their wilderness appeal with each bolt that gets drilled. Nevertheless, the bolting practices that you describe, regardless of what lurking amateur historians might say, are considered by "traditional" climbers to be less objectionable and a purer form of mountaineering than rap bolting. It's basic: start from the bottom and you're climbing. Start from the top....well, that's something else. Isn't it? Whether these practices are really "traditional", whether or not they can be considered part of a "Yosemite-school" approach, if (wishful thinking here) NW climbers adopted this ground-up approach, here would be a few consequences I think we could expect: 1. The rate at which new, bolted routes go in would be greatly retarded, as lead bolting requires greater skill and time investment. 2. Those establishing new routes would most likely put in routes that have more character and offer more adventure. 3. As lead-bolted routes often provide fewer places to fall/rest/hang/rehearse, climbers would climb more honestly, within their limits and with less aid. In short, climbers would have to redefine what "free" climbing is. 4. Repeating these lead-bolted routes would require a more controlled approach with less reliance on bolts/aid, and crag climbers would be better prepared for alpine rock. While accidents might initially occur with greater frequency at the crags, mountain routes would see a decrease in accidents. 5. Young climbers would begin to see the hills as much more than just a place to recreate (hunt, drive a Jeep, ride a snow machine, sport climb, and other destructive practices). Instead, perhaps they would decide that moutains are worth preserving so that every generation can experience the sense of adventure you get when climbing rock w/o fixed gear, just like a pioneer. Sure I'm full of crap. No, it's never going to happen. Sure, I get tired of talking about it. But maybe some kid will read it and say, "Hey, that makes a lot of sense." Besides, you asked.

Now I don't know this Erik so well, but we've met. I can't evaluate his climbing abilities, but I can attest to the fact that he's an "effortlessly capable" drinker (he can't hold his liquor, but he'll drink you under the table!) And anybody OK by Dwayner is OK by me (except some of Dwayner's partners...not to be confused with his climbing partners). So, here's to Brother Erik, Brother Erik, Brother Erik. Erik, he all that. He got climb.

RUMOR...RUMOR....RUMOR....RUMOR.......I heard that photos from the top-secret Cirque Expedition were leaked, and that one or more of these classified photographs might appear on this site. Stay logged for the latest developments.....as they develop.

Some of those butt shots....they ain't butt shots. They's just some butt-ugly head shots, folks climbing feet first. Feet first. It's the latest rage. Folks is bored of the sit-start thing, bored of speed ascents, bored of comps, bored of pad-totin', crimper-scrubbin', meat-doobie-inhalin' boulder hoppers. Feet first. It's hip. All the kids are talkin' 'bout it. BTW, let me echo the praises for our hard-workin' moderators. Commence with a round of BJ's for brother Jon.

Bravo! My favorites from this collection: 1. The Dru from Envers Hut2. Mike Schaefer on Damnation Crack3. Kautz Glacier (by Marek Wencel) Very inspirational. Makes we want leave work sick this morning (wink, wink).

Even better than saving my life, those old woolies have helped to fill up my social calendar (I attract sheep whenever I wear them).

JayB, I know what you're trying to do here....trying to get me to engage in some of the petty squabling I've just condemned, trying to get me to degrade myself by trading insults with you in some kind of emotional bolting row. But I won't do it......YOU PIECE OF SHIT! Just kiddding. Good night.

I used to climb at the crags in the same manner I would on a long mountain route: the faster the better. Going fast meant running it out; it also meant doing routine things (like putting on a harness or rigging a belay) perfunctorily, almost thoughtlessly. Things have changed. I've developed a few habbits that, while they might require a little extra time, might just guarantee another 18 years of climbing. Here are a few....please add to the list if you wish (or just tell me I'm old and paranoid). Put your chalk bag on a 1-inch webbing belt, tied with a reasonably secure knot (like a bowline, which is also easily adjusted). Then, when you tie into your harness, also tie through the chalk bag strap. Could save your butt if you forget to double back through your harness buckle (as some excellent climbers have). When you run it out on easy ground twenty feet and are then faced with difficult moves, get a really, really, really bomber piece. Better yet, place a couple of pieces. Think about the consequences of placing just one piece that fails when you fall.... Always tie to the end of the rope when you rap from more than one pitch up. Again, excellent climbers have "abseiled" right off the end of their rope. Always extend cam placements with a long quick draw or better. You can't rely on the most carefully placed cams if they're going to wiggle and walk around as a result of rope drag.

Dear Rowdy Roddy Rodchester, and Mr. Dru (from the inferior country to my immediate north), It would appear that you gentlemen need a little Oprah in your lives. Is there any limit to the pollution that you have found necessary to present in this public forum? This evening I was bored, so I logged in for useful information on ice conditions and lofty ethical discussions, only to read what amounts to electronic hair pulling and eyeball scratching. Maybe you guys should swap insults through PM's, or maybe you should show up at pub-club for a mud wrestle (be sure to wear you thong). I was bored; now I'm irritated. Not sure my condition has improved. I agree that some of the insulting language and insinuations found in the Boskoff thread is an embarassment to the more dignified and sophisticated element on this bulletin board. The authors of this trash will have no shortage of regrets someday, assuming (and hoping) their maturation is currently incomplete. Rather than conspiring to help each other grow up, I think we degrade ourselves with such conduct.

My wooly knickers saved my life. I got into some trouble on a ropeless ascent of the waterfall that's 5 minutes up the trail to Chair Peak. In a snow storm, at the exit, a large piece of ice that I had kicked with my right boot crumbled, and I realized that the ice at the crest had crept out from the rock about 12 inches....it seemed I could not reverse the moves, that the easiest way was up and out. But that wasn't so easy either, as deep, fresh powder made the exit very insecure. My tools couldn't find ice, and every time I'd dig down, spin-drift would fill up the trench. My tools wouldn't work in a self-belay position either, as the snow was too soft. About the only secure thing I could get at the mantle was my knee, which covered in wool, stuck into the snow pretty well. To this day, I'm certain that had I been wearing rain pants, I'd be dead. I'll never abandon those old woolies. They're the reason I'm still here.

An excellent thread, with volumes of speculation on “WHY WON’T THE COOL GUYS PAL AROUND WITH US?”. (Chapter 8?) Now that you’ve cluttered your limited intellects with what amounts to amateurish opinion, you may wish to know the truth…or you may just want to think about it first, since what follows is the only LOGICAL answer to this question. OK, here’s the answer: SPONSORS. That’s right, you heard right. When you knock out some impressive climbs, when your name first gets spread around, the phone starts to ring. Everybody wants to put their patch on your parka and fly you around for photo ops. You go from “nobody” status to big shot over night. But there is a catch, you see. Sponsors know that you will more effectively help them sell the crap they’re trying to peddle only if you can transcend your “accomplished-climber” image and achieve “legend” status. What’s the difference? It’s simple: to become a legend, you must shut your mouth, go into hiding, and let your climbing speak for itself. To become a legend, there must be a fantasy/super-hero element to your image; you must be presented to the climbing public only where super-star climbers appear: in glossy magazines, at trade shows, in slide presentations. When you become too accessible, half of what makes you special (your mystique) disappears. Think about it: if you had lunch with Superman every day, would you still buy his comics? I think you would not. Sponsors know this, and when you agree to put a Power Bar patch on your parka, you agree to avoid rubbing shoulders with the masses of asses. It’s in the contract. NO CHATTING ON CLIMBING BULLETING BOARDS. In fact, you can’t make public statements whatsoever without first running them buy your agent. On the one hand, big-shot climbers grow weary of being in the public eye. No matter how hip you are, people are going to slam you, just to get a little attention. Look what happened to John Lennon? He didn’t even know the guy who snuffed him. Part of why sponsors demand aloofness from their benefactors is to protect them from unwarranted ridicule, and so this condition of sponsorship works in their favor. But if you don’t think the NW legends are lurking in the CC.com shadows, watching how much fun we’re having, you’re kidding yourself. A decade ago, when my own climbing abilities evolved from excellent to extraordinary, when my phone started ringing off the hook, I saw the writing on the wall. Yes, the attention, the free gear, the girls, the private jet…..OK, it was quite tempting, but what I really enjoy is sitting around the campfire or chatting on a bulletin board with inferior climbers…chatting about anything and everything, from lofty bolting/ethics discussions to learning who soiled their knickers and where. And so, if today you’re wishing to rub shoulders electronically with a big-name, NW climber, may I assure you that they’re wishing to rub shoulders with you. YOU, my fellow CC.com chat-monkey, are having all the fun. YOU are the action. YOU are the one with your finger on the pulse of NW mountain climbing. Besides, Dick Cilley has been seen on the site….and that ain’t all bad.