Peter_Puget

Dru - I agree with your assesment of Squamish. Back 20+ years ago I always thought the ratings were stiff now they seem much easier. I think consistency is hardest part of ratings. For example Red Nails is way harder than the first pitch of Daily Planet and it's a tiny route. Someone should rerate that guy!

SC - I agree with you as far as the Tuff at Smith goes and your right the climbing is remarkable similar on alot of the routes;however, the ratings seem inconsistant between the gorge and rest of the Park. I was going to post that my vote would go for the Pinnacles in CA which is kinda like Smith.

Seems like ratings are never right. Either too high or too low. People always seem to complain about them. This sad fact got me pondering where the best ratings were. Anyone have any locations to throw in the pot? What areas have the best ratings in a published guidebook?

The answer depends on exactly what kind of outdoor recreation you’re looking for. And what exactly the definition of “College Town” is. In general having lived in the south and having inlaws that force me to New England, I would never consider moving east for the recreation or living in general. Montana is a cool place as is Arizona but California is the place you want to be if ice isn’t tops on your list. So many schools. Lots of them good too! Oceans ,deserts, mountains, skiing, rock climbing - it has everything. Eg Cal Stat Univ @ Sac or UC Davis – Both are near skiing, year round rock climbing, spring skiing on Shasta or just fun hiking in the Sierra. Think of UC Riverside, Chico State, UC Santa Cruz, Humboldt is near lots of rivers if you’re into white water. Not to mention the tons of private schools. Darn it almost makes me wish I was going back to school!

There are two issues here being intertwined. Namely: 1) Access on private property. Property rights should be respected. If not merely in order to conform to the law, but also so as not to give climbers a bad name. This seems clear. 2) Bill Robbins actions. Do they help or hinder “climbers”. (also: are they truly what they purport to be on their face or are they fronts for a more self serving goal?) Taken on their face value his assertions are clearly of (and I am being charitable) indeterminate accuracy. Is the helpless old woman at a high risk of being sued? Who knows? From what I have read it appears as though she is at little risk. He “screams” and yells but provides no supporting documentation. I would ask him to give us examples of lawsuits and increases in premiums. Does she have risk due to hunters? Bikers? Hikers? Have they been using this area? What has she done to mitigate her risk? In short, the issue is complex and BR is spewing bullshit undercover of being a caring person. This is a guy who threatened to go to the DOW and try to stop bolting BECAUSE HIS CHOSSY CRACK ROUTES WEREN’T BEING REPORTED. Now assuming for the moment that he was acting altruistically, did his actions aid or hinder the cause of climbing? By telling this old woman spurious facts regarding her liability and (here is a guess) speaking badly of climbers in general he has helped to pollute the political environment. Think now what her neighbors might think when a “respectable” climber seeks permission to climb on their land. Doesn’t making an end run around the FCC Coalition reduce its stature in front of land owners and land managers? BR’s previous actions have caused LUCKY to stop participating in the FCCC thus his actions have kept people away from the very forum where they would have learned of the property issues. As a side bar I should confess that months ago I too was disgusted by his actions and decided against participating in the FCCC. Look at his postings on Rec.climbing regarding the Smoot guide. While not being a big fan of Washington Rock after reading his vitriolic attacks on Smoot, I compared the ratings of every climb in Smoot’s book to those in other guides. There were only a couple of significant differences. I ask that everyone do a google search read his comments and then do their own ratings comparison. I am sure you will agree that BR has a chip on his shoulder and that his actions do negatively impact our sport.

Thanks. Seems like the color choices available locally are fewer than they use to be.

Silly Question: Did you get much choice of collor?

I think Shot may be in the new Smoot guide topo. Its just not numbered on the topo or described in the text.

I wasn't disagreeing with you at all CC and I do not see where I said anything about LUCKY.

Now where have I heard this before? In the final analysis what the antibolters are saying is simply "I like" or "I want" or "I prefer". These preferences are no different than saying "I like green" or "I hate blue" What is frustrating is when people try to degrade other preferences through their use of words or use them as a means to justify or elevate their simple preference. For example, comments like "bolts enable to climb harder than they would without them." Hmmm such statements are in so self evident as to be meaningless except as a means to put "people in their place" ( BTW the same can be said for ropes) Climbing is a big sport with lots of fascinating parts some of which often appear mutually exclusive! Some only like climbing in the gym. Some like only 3rd/4th class scrambles. Others big wall nailing. People want and enjoy different things about climbing. One aspect is not more inherently noble than any other. Too often those who are "antibolting" loose track of this fact. Too often bolters ignore how their actions impact others. I ME MINE Thats the refrain! When such preferences are elevated to a moral plane, their advocates themselves become immoral.

Yikes go on a trip come back and nothing has changed. Same bullshit N & S makes a positive post regarding people/groups stepping up and contributing to their local area(s) and immediately the BS posts start coming and the thread diverted. Last time I posted Forrest claimed (incorrectly) that I inserted this issue at every opportunity. Glad to be able now to show him corroborative evidence showing his error. The first reply by TG was just a smart ass interjection of the bolting issue. Rafael replies ok then list them specifically asking that Vantage be left out. Will “shove a bolt up your ass” Strickland then spews unrelated BS. (Note his moniker comes from his previous well elucidated response regarding how to place a bolt.) After several rational posts ScottP wins the prize by coming up with the first real one for the list. Here’s a toast to Scott. Cavey’s additon comes next. Maybe it’s good maybe it’s not. Rafael seemed to be asking for routes actually climbed without fixed gear. Has this one? (Aside to CC: What do you think of the bolted lieback variation pitch on Grand Wall? And where does it look like a bolt might get cut on GMD?) Tex then adds another BS post to this thread. Next comes a series of clarifications and then Retro gets “permission” to add his list of Vantage routes. Cavey then adds the weird bolting at Little Si. Then come a couple of posts about the ASCA. So here’s a recap: Ignoring the Vantage area we have a grand total of four routes: Little Si (About 100 routes) R & A You Get What You Deserve Index (About 500 routes) Gorilla My Dreams Leavenworth (500 routes?) Arete Route SUPER RECAP = 4 routes out of 1,100. So if we ignore Si and Vantage and concentrate only on the “traditional” areas it’s only 2 out of 1,000 routes? Doesn’t seem like it is a out of control situation at these areas at all. Issues regarding replacements of specific bolts aside, I think that in general we should all encourage the replacement of old bolts/fixed gear.

I agree with you that bolting debate gets tedious. Mostly its tedious because its not an honest one. I think if you looked thru my posts you will see that I usually am responding to the issue once it has been brought up not the instigator. I also agree with you that there are hidden motivations on the part of many of the anti bolters. In fact I have not really been arguing the bolt issue so much as arguing that there is really no debate merely insult. It isnt just age that create "trads" however since I have been climbing more years than many of the posters here have been alive. Climbing is resplendent in its divergence. Instead of saying something is "boring" engage in a discussion - I think your implication was non existent but it would have been a welcome additon to the discussion had it been stated.

Forrest - The initial post in the thread was about sport climbers being “dissed.” The next two posts slammed bolting. I suggested in my post that the bolting thing is a cover for something else. (Snippet from my post: “In earlier posts I have suggested that in fact the bolting debate is often the cover for some deeper motivation. Look at the personal nature of the replies to your post. I’ll let you decide for yourself.”) You suggested two other non-bolt related factors as the motivating factor - in essence concurring with my statement. I asked my three questions with the certain knowledge that I would receive few if any replies. This issue is far from dead. Bringing up bolting was certainly not tangential to this issue. I though before I defined myself as either a “trad” or “sport” climber I ought to know what exactly I am talking about.

Dru - I think the idea of no consequences is a tough ideal to reach. I once heard a climber exclaim that a fall was "no problem." The very next fall he broke his leg. I think climbing is inherently dangerous. But I do agree that one of the goals of sport climbing is to limit danger.

Dru - I think the idea of

I am inclined to agree with you with a reservation - not sure what safely means? I do know someone who took a huge fall on the Bachar Yerian and was unhurt? And I have heard othe rothers doing the same yet I am not convinced it is a sport route. I know two people who have been hurt on the same route at Smith yet I am convinced it is a sport route! I think route finding is a critical issue. Usually I think of route finding being a non issue on sport routes. Thats why I consider Swim basically a sport route. I have been on many a Meadows route only to find myself 20' or 30' off to the side of a bolt. On those routes route finding is important despite fixed pro.

I must say I am a bit let down wrote that elevator ride to Starbucks back to the puter and I only hooked two fish! But I did get a hook rare Canadian!

Just seems like sport climbers here get called all sorts of names. Bolters get slammed and yet nobody has any clear idea of what they are talking about. And most responses are logically inane and contradictory. I would like just one person slamming sport climbing or bolting to write their reasoning in an honest attempt at being cogent and logical. Retro won't even respond to my questions shown above. and yet takes it upon himself to be a rock policeman. Its all a show. I have done Swim and except for the one pitch needing pro I'd say yep it be a sport route. This year I have also removed about ten bolts from the rock that I felt were inappropriately placed. I didn't smash hangers, insult clases of peoples or brag online but I did talk to the guys who placed them.

Nope just trying to figure out what you guys really think.

Bonco - What if the bolt protected section was continuous and located at either the begining or end of the climb? Would it still be proper (using logic that is) to use your definition?

Bronco - Thanks for the help! So do you think that any route that uses only bolts for pro is a sport climb?

Well I guess not because one pitch isnt fixed. But assunming it was fixed would you say it was a sport route? What about the other bolted lines on the Upper Wall.

Not sure where I heard that. If I can remember I'll let you know. I have always been just driving thru Canmore area so never climbed the long sport routes myself but have bouldered and scoped out lots of stuff by that lake.

That area just amazes me! It has so much rock. BTW germane to this thread didn't a pair of climbers fall to the ground off of one of those long "sport" routes?

Dru - Haven't been to Canmore area for 5/6 years. Do you go there much?