mattp

Again, I repeat my argument that it does not follow that if we have this one or even several bolted belays there will next be bolts added along side the cracks for pro and I have asked if anyone has seen where this has happened in the past, and as yet we have no examples - and certainly not any indication that this would be the expected outcome. Further, if a via feratta is not a likely outcome either, why do you keep bringing the possibility of a via feratta up? I agree with the following: This statement, however, applies equally to the construction of trails to reach a crag, maintaining rappel anchors whether bolted or not, fixing pitons, replacing old bolts, cleaning cracks, or clearing off loose rock. The "door has been open" to varying opinions as to which types of improvements are appropriate and where for as long as there have been climbers.

Maybe they are polling and finding out that despite the stanglehold the NRA has on overall politics there are a large number of Americans who think some kind of gun control would be a good idea. Perhaps they just want to be able to say "see: we support SOME gun control measures."

OK. The lesson learned is that all the terrorists should have guns?

Damn right it is. Screw liberty, we want GUNS, erh....

I think his point was that there is plenty of arrogance to go around. I suppose that label could apply to those who pound away on cc.com, thinking their posts may be significant, just as much as it might apply to those who install or remove bolts at a crag.

I think you are on the right track where you are talking about how the real issue here is how we want to see the crag managed, Pope. Apparently that means (among other things) that you do not want to see even existing short pitch anchors maintained. Or was it the highly visible nature of that particular installation that was bothersome? I presume you must mean REALLY short pitch anchors, because there are oodles of anchors at around the 100 - 120 foot level, well short of even a 50 or 60 meter rope length, but maybe even those are not OK in your book? A good question might be who should decide whether it is OK to add, maintain, or remove a bolt anywhere on the cliff, and how should they make that decision. The argument that a bolt anchor will lead to a via feratta and zip line, however, is not your best one. Yes, there are a couple via feratta's in the US now, but I am aware of no place in the world where a trad climb had bolts added and this activity led to the construction of a via feratta. Not only that, but a prior discussion on this board has included the idea that there really is no "logical" connection because the rock climber seeks mastery of difficult moves while the Via Feratta eliminates all of that kind of challenge. I'm not even sure an acceptance of bolted belay anchors at a "trad" climbing area has anywhere led to the proliferation of bolted protection for crack climbing, but perhaps there is an example somewhere. Anybody?

But they do: Diedre

This is the place:

Don't forget to bring something for the grill.

Yes, and I'm bringing an old fashioned slide projector in case anybody wants to use it. I'll have a two burner stove and large pot for making hot drinks.

Yes and no. My usual practice is to take one of the newer looking sewn shoulder length runners from my rack and simply girth hitch it to my harness. Then I put my locker and rappel device on the end of that runner, and the result is that the rappel device is nowhere near any pack belt or shirt tail or anything else I have on my waist. Quite often, it results in one LESS thing to deal with. The damn thing swings around a bit when I'm standing at a ledge pulling and resetting the rappel, though. Now you're making me feel bad. I guess I better check out the Zone Diet thread.

I like this also because it allows you to comfortably keep both hands on the "tail" end of the rappel rope. When rapping on 8.5 mm ropes, I still don't get enough friction out of any belay device I've used, and I employ a leg wrap or something if it is an overhanging rappel, but having both hands below the rap device, even for a lower angle rappel, is comforting. .

Do as you wish, Dru. If I have two bolts, and a piece of sling only long enough to build the death triangle, I'll use both bolts. And given my assumption that webbing does not vary in strength nearly as much as bolts do, I believe it will be safer to do so. (I realize that you can generally tie a "V" anchor with an overhand at the bottom and a single line tied directly to each of your two bolts with only minimally more webbing than it would take to tie the death triangle, and I am quite sure that most here would agree that is preferable - so you need not bring up that counterargument.)

I don't know why photopost doesn't seem to work: The point is, bring some pictures - last year we passed around prints as well - and maybe a story - or just come and shake hands with some of your fellow climbers.

I don't know about you, but I for one do not willingly take "a whipper" onto a single bolt with no other back up. Unless there are other bolts or gear anchors below that one, and a decent belay anchor as well, I'm generally not willing to take the chance. I will rap on a single bolt some times, but I am always keenly aware of the fact that when performing bolt replacement I have found bolt strengths to vary a lot more than appearance would suggest and even a shiny 3/8" bolt could be worthless.

That's kind of my point about bivvy bags. Assuming a party of two, you can bring two full function bivvy bags, at 5 pounds, or go light and maybe they'll total 2 1/2 pounds, but a tent for two weighs as little as 3 pounds and is generally preferable.

... then throw away your calculator. People prefer to rely upon two bolts not because they are "stronger" according to your calculations, but because they are thus relying on two bolts rather than one. All the hand wringing over the "American death triangle" has always seemed a little misplaced to me when we are talking about forces of maybe 500 pounds (body weight plus a rope plus a bounce and your vector analysis), and the slings and bolts in question are expected to hold several times that amount. For a failure, a sling or bolt must fail at vastly lower than its expected strength, and the odds of both slings (those who rely on two bolts rarely rely on just one sling) and both bolts failing vastly below expected strength are way small. Even assuming no friction where the sling passes through the hangers, or between the sling and the rock (did your calculator correct for these?) the additional "force" imparted by the use of the "death triangle" is not that significant.

You didn't ask this question, but I'd skip the sleeping bag cover or bivvy bag. Take a tent for stormy weather or above-timberline camping with a marginal forecast, take a tarp for camping at timberline in marginal or even bad weather, and take neither one if the big High Pressure is on the weather map and you are only going for an overnight or even two. Your 15 degree sleeping bag will be plenty warm for a Labor Day trip to Mount Baker.

Here's a shot of last year:

A little balance here is a good thing, Pope, and I'm glad to see your post. I agree, at least in part, that it always seemed kind of "silly" to me to call that a "pitch." However I don't think this is a case of "fighting the tide" - at least not a clear one. If I am not mistaken there have been anchors there for quite a while and maybe a very long time indeed (I'm not sure they were in the same locatino but see the 1993 Cummins guide and the 1985 Smoot/Cramer guide and while you're at it take a look at Beckey's 1976 Darrington and Index guide - it mentions a bolt that may also have been at the same location). I'm not 100% sure about the date of origin, as maybe the historic bolts were somewhere else, but I think there has been an anchor at THAT location for several years, at least. Either way, from the ground this was certainly one of the closest anchors and therefore I suppose an obvious choice for removal, but it may not have been a case of fighting some new trend in climbing - unless it is chains and not bolts that were found objectionable. Arguments for and against are probably better couched in terms of what do we want to see as "standard" or what do we think should be maintained or something like that.

I don’t think you can leap to conclusions about what “that guy” was thinking, Catbird. Who knows – maybe they can’t even climb the route at all but simply wanted to make a statement. Or maybe not – certainly whatever statement it may have been is not completely clear at this point. Personally, I could go either way on those particular anchors and I’m most persuaded by those who are suggesting restraint. I’d prefer to see more discussion here and at the crag before further actions are undertaken.

"False messiahs and false prophets will appear. They will work miraculous signs and do wonderful things to deceive, if possible, those whom God has chosen." Mark 13:22

Sport climbing areas tend to be more crowded, for sure. But the recognized moderate classics - those highlighted in multiple guidebooks or maybe the climb of the day on cc.com - will be crowded the same way even if they are totally trad. Try taking your novice friends up the Beckey Route (Liberty Bell) or Outer Space (Leavenworth) and you may encounter the pushy soloist or just a dozen other parties ready to climb right over you.

I'll buy you're "its a matter of balance" fall-back. The ideas that imposing new restrictions on firearm ownership necessarily implied "massive new police powers to search private property" or that "ex post facto" restrictions on private property are inherently bad were bunk.