Peter_Puget

Forrest – Since the bolting question has been killed would you please provide the definitive answers to my three questions? I must have missed them while the debate raged!

Here’s another question: When does sport climbing become trad climbing? Lets start off with Bachar-Yerian. Now I am guessing that that is not a sport route. But using Cavey’s example Violent Phlegms is considered a sport route.. What’s the critical difference? Is it the distance between bolts? Is it the chance of getting hurt? Is it rap vs. on lead placement of bolts? What would be a set of distinctions I could use to differentiate the two? After I get a clear understanding of the difference my question is:Why are bolts placed on sport routes less sinful than those placed on “trad” routes?

Mystic – Ah you’ve hit the mother lode here. I would ask you to go back and review the various threads in which criticisms were made about bolts and sport climbers. Note in particular my criticism of Dwayner/Donna Two Step’s misrepresentation of facts. You will find they are an ever shifting confused batch of invective designed to insult and intimidate not persuade. Look how they speak in generalities and never specifics. Look how they shift the debate to side issues and personal attacks. 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. So now in a serious and friendly outreach I ask the following questions: 1. Is bolting always bad? 2. Since all human action at the crags results in an impact on the environment how are we to determine what impact is immoral? 3. Are there objective standards that we can use to guide our actions?

I agree with all those suggesting a 60m rope. I prefer dry ropes although I am not sure for simple rock climbing that it makes much difference. Since you are starting out I would suggest a thicker rope. But more importantly ask around for specific recomendations for hard wearing sheaths as different brands have different wear characteristics. This is important because easier trad routes tend to follow less of a plumb line than harder route or sport routes and until you learn how to protect routes you will most certainly create some rope drag messes which will be very hard on ropes. Top ropeing too can be very hard on ropes.

Just to clarify things I am an effete wimp. The only thing big on me is my tummy

"This has degenerated into an attack on people that are not here to defend themselves" If I slandered anyone in this thread I apologize and also ask to be shown where I did so.

Not suure when I tried reading your mind. I am not advocating for or against any set of facts. In fact earlier I even stated that maybe Erik should clarify some points. What I have suggested is a reason for animosity.

Excerpt from threads posted 5/8/01 W: So what's with the vitriol? Cavey: It's the nature of the spray man. Your’e right Cavey; however, most often as you stated in the excerpt pasted above it is not. It almost always is immature and generates bad feelings for this site. Too much of the spray is simply insulting rantings.

Capt. - Reread my posts and you'll see where the anomosity comes from. Rather than defensively reacting step back and think about how posts here can be interpreted esp given how rankled you have become over this series of posts. Spray, Slander, Insults they are all the same!

Capt. - To be clear I am saying nothing about Erik personally but rather addressing the potential/probable/actual rejoinder generated by the posts on this website. BTW seems Viktor remembers things somewhat differently. I think Erik should offer a fuller explanation of his post.

While the details are about this "confrontation" are vague. It is unfortunate that situations like this develop at all. What is surprising is that it comes as a shock to anyone. I would just say look back and review the comments made on this site that were/are directed to any variety of persons who do not actively participate in online discussions. Clearly only a fool would think that there would not be animosity generated from them.

Charlie - I agree with you too! At least in so far as the rating is off a bunch as several were in your list. I have sent info to almost all the guidebook writers in Washington. Some I could tell weren't that interested others went out of their way to thank me. One even said that despites lots of complaints on the internet, I was only the second person to actually send him something.

If you think there is a problem with a rating, posting here is great but writing the guidebook author in a constructive manner might be even better!

Hold on to your hat Retro. I fully agree with your assessment. Also ratings differing only a letter grade or two are not worth arguing about. As far as ratings not being fair to the newbie I think that ratings have in general been over inflated in recent years especially with regard to certain areas. For example take Damnation Crack or Godzilla or Outer Space traverse pitch and compare it to some of the 5.9s at Si/38. The three routes I have mentioned have been rated essentially the same (or lower!) for years and yet I bet concensus would indicate that they are indeed harder than those at Si/38. Grade inflation is in fact playing games on "bright eyed bushy tailed enthusiastic newb[ies]" and could lead them into climbs way over their heads at other areas. For example: at the Meadows or even Tieton.

As usually with any bolting related question the answer is most unequivocally “it depends.” In general I will concurr with Will's first item which can should often be applied to new routing in general - if the route is not a trivial or easily top roped variation, I would say that a bolt is not out of line. Some comments here suggesting that bolts are difficult to place vastly overstate the difficulty of placing bolts. It is remarkable easy to place bolts correctly. This may be the cause of too many bolts. The majority of bolt failures, not associated with degradation from aging that I have personally been aware of were most likely the result of defects in the manufacturing of the bolts themselves. I can think specifically of an anchor that failed on me and the recent failures I have heard of on Town Crier. The clear exception to this is with 1/4” stainless. These guys are very easily damaged while placing. Of course I would suggest that if you are replacing a pin with a bolt the very smallest size you should consider is 3/8”. I would also note that hooks have a very real possibility of damaging the rock. I have personally witnessed a fall caused by rock breaking when a cam hook was used on the first pitch of Dana’s Arch at Index. Maybe one bolt can replace two fixed pins thus actually reducing the visible impact of fixed gear on the route.

Don - I want you to answers all my questions. Great response. I have always wanted to climb this guy - I am printing off your comments in case I ever do!

I agree with the sentiment that the rock is generally quite bad esp. when compared to Peshastin. That said I must admit to having gone there several times to climb and several times for a hike with the family. The routes are generally small with a propensity for looseness esp. - pebbles prone to popping. Sometimes the routes cross layers that seem like unconsolidated riverbeds. There are two approaches. One as Whopper described, where you descend into a valley. The other starts much closer to the highway. It might be possible at some points to see some of the crags from the road. The landscape can be quite pretty and the mix of trees even includes some true Firs and Larch. If you approach from the Upper side, the Sphinx has a couple of good climbs. At least I think it’s the Sphinx and there is a good TR (Steep groove, 5.10) to the right of the main route. Further up the trail are a few more worthwhile routes although they are quite short. If approaching from the Lower side there is a 5.10 (a?) in the guidebook that is fun and right to its left a new 5.10. Uphill from those climbs is a 5.10d route in the guidebook that is very intimidating just to look and when the rock quality is considered it’s even more amazing. A 35’ route is a big wall here! Capt. – The rock here is nothing like the desert sandstone.

Retro you're always in the room! My reply to Dru was clearly an aside speaking to his statement: "Slings around trees don't kill trees" I agree with that threats have no place here. If you are suggesting I threatened anyone let me know when. As for editing I have edited twice I believe (just went to do a search) Honestly can 't remember why the first one was doen the second because I felt I wrote too fast and when I went back at the end of the day decided to rephrase something. In a highly charged enviroment surely you can't view such a thing as a purposeful strategy? But then again maybe you can. [This message has been edited by Peter Puget (edited 09-23-2001).]

The same issue was brought up on this thread: http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000950.html

Are the nuts still on the bolts? Would it be possible to get on a route and find yourself in a dangerous situation due to missing hangers suddenly being encountered by surprise?

Quote from Retro: "Does anybody really buy this bullshit? Do you know how fast trees growing from cracks on SnowCreek Wall do not grow." Rejoinder: Now to be clear Retro, I never said or impled that I was speaking of a tree on Snow Creek Wall. (Here is the whole post relative to trees:"My guess is that a bunch of slings around a tree could kill it. If the tree grew! Earlier this year I returned to an area I hadn't been for ten years or so and was shocked when I saw how embedded into the tree the slings were that I had left on my last visit. Noticable groves were left in the trunk!")I was directing a comment to Dru regarding the possibilty of a tree being killed by slings. Mattp's points do make sense; however, there posting here should have been a needless and unneccesary restatement of the obvious. It is truely sad that it wasn't. ChuckK - Quote -"It certainly is condescending, and perhaps smarmy." DEF:Condescending - showing or implying a gracious or patronizing descent from dignity or superiority. (Random House Dictionary) DEF:Smarmy - excessively or untuously flattering, ingratiating, serville affectionate,etc. (Random House Dictionary) Chuck, I do not think I am being either condescending or smarmy. My position is that these guys are not behaving in a proper manner. Smashing hangers is not acceptable behavior. Their insults are designed to stifle debate and cow anyone with a slightly differing view. As with any person/groups not meeting the most basic behavioral norms demanded by any society/group in any culture on earth they can be told to get lost and its not condescending. I'll let you figure out why smarmy doesn't fit. Maybe there is a reason that you "..find most of the pro-bolt missives to be simplistic and ignorant. " Further quote - "Hey Peter, Isn't that: 1. Contemptuous insults, 2. An attempt to stop any real discussion?" Well since I do find their behavior contemptuous and in a broad sense it is an insult I'll agree with you. I would like to say however that it is an opinion borne out of direct contact and many attempts at trying to improve the level of discourse over this issue. It is not an attempt to stop any real discussion in fact it is something quite the opposite. Imagine a room in which two sides are debating an issue and a small number of them predominatley of one side are screaming obscenities at every opportunity. Their screaming and yelling prevents any real discussion. If everyone else in the room ( on both sides of the argument) forced them to leave, then the real discussion could start! Again, I say review the threads regarding bolting. I am neither pro or anti bolting. And have often suggested areas of shared ground between bolters and anti bolters. Several times I have asked the anti-bolters questions and they have been ignored or answered incompletely. I have always responded to any serious query. Retro's response quoted above does more to clarify his anger and lack of logic than to answer any of my arguments. I wonder if you felt his reply was as "simplistic and ignorant" My point is that removing the bolts will guarantee the placement of slings. Thus Retro is in fact advocating sling relacement. In my view, his viewpoint by not seeing that is simplistic and ignorant. His sense of duty in removing old slings is grand but I'll wager a dollar he did not remove all the slings on the route the last time he climbed it. But ChucK my criticisms go beyond Retro he is merely an easy and convenient target who is active in this thread. The anti bolting side has a pervasive element in it that is exactly as I described. This element is not one but many individuals.

If I remember correctly the initial pitches (first 2) of the direct start were the most difficult. They were a series of short corners between slabs and ledges. Rope drag potentially a problem here. The protection was bad in that if you fell getting out of a corner you would definitely hit the slab/ledge below. The corners (august) were also a bit wet and muddy adding to the fun. Not sure if I would say 5.10, but definitely the crux of the route in terms of difficult moves. Not the most fun climbing on the route. I climbed it years ago and at that time the Magic Carpet pitch was kinda fun. I can imagine with all the traffic that it quite possibly has changed quite a bit. After that pitch the rock improved and there was several hundred feet of very easy (mostly 3rd some 4rth) but fun climbing until a broken and vegetated section was reached. I think this is where the bypass joins. I had a blast on this section. All in all I’d agree, if you don’t climb the bottom section you aren’t missing much.

Since Retro has been so open and critical of others I think it is more that acceptable to ask anything in an open forum.

Damn I can't stop posting to this thread but... Dru - My guess is that a bunch of slings around a tree could kill it. If the tree grew! Earlier this year I returned to an area I hadn't been for ten years or so and was shocked when I saw how embedded into the tree the slings were that I had left on my last visit. Noticable groves were left in the trunk! Retro - Certainly a weathered bolt is less of an eyesore than slings! Esp. since sling replacment which you advocated usually results in shiny new slings! Think please!

Cavey - I think your Idea of a segregated area for these issues is good after this one dies. Here is beta for Psychopath: at the crux reach up left for the top of a semi knob and don't try to place gear too often there are good placements available just not alway where you want them. In many earlier posts I pleaded for civil discussion between groups and many responded that sometimes you have to be "uncivil" to these rascally bolters/sport climbers to get your point across. I think it's clear that the self-righteous uncaring face Retro has shown is the true face of those vociferously posting here. (There are others of the same ilk who are merely better mannered and thus remain somewhat hidden but their contempt for others shows thru with equal if more diffuse brightness.) We should in a civil manner but direct manner tell these jokers to get lost and that they are not only behaving poorly but shamefully. In fact we have the obligation. To repeat: just imagine the effect smashed bolts have on land managers. To repeat: People have been hurt. The bolting debate is real and honest people exist on both sides. Smarmy condescending comments should be seen for what they are: 1. Contemptuous insults 2. An attempt to stop any real discussion. I invite any interested parties to review the bolting issue threads and see how the main anit bolt posters have have continuously used lies, half truths, and insults (usually sexual)to cow any differing opinions.