Flagstone -- Hydrotube Retrobolt

[jkrueger]

Can anybody substantiate/dismiss the rumor that Hydrotube, the classic line at Flagstone, has been retrobolted?

 

I'm beginning to fear that there really are no ethics in climbing -- especially in Oregon!

[Fejas]

sorry dood cant say yeh or neh... wasn't on it last time i was there, maybe this weekend is a good time to go check it out...

[texplorer]

So your saying they have added bolts to the line!!!!

[jkrueger]

Considering what has been happening at Flagstone over the last few years, I'm thinking that Hydrotube has been turned into an escalator -- actual climbing of the route may now be considered optional.

[bunglehead]

What the hell could they retrobolt? What are they like 5 feet apart now? they were spaced well, I thought. I sure as hell hope nobody "retrobolted" the runout on the second pitch. there was no reason to, it's a walkup.

 

[Sphinx]

Flag is lost anyways, no thanks to the rabid overbolter the Tvedts. They killed the place.

[texplorer]

I jest alot about chopping bolts and stuff but in reality I have placed more bolts than I have chopped. Flagstone however really gets me outraged. I am very tempted to go do something about it.. .

[Fejas]

Tex, I don't think that any one from this area that post on this broard would have a problem with you choppin a few unnesisary bolts up there... ya might want to do it on a day that the cragg doesn't have much use though cause I think others from the area might get a little fussy about it... but shit if they gotts a problem we'll just have ta knock em out...

[davetvedt]

texplorer,

 

Just in case you or anyone else is actually serious about chopping some bolts at Flagstone you might want to consider a few things first:

 

Envision big, shiny glue-in bolts where you have chopped the less visually ugly hanger and bolt. Any bolt you remove from any of our routes will be replaced with Fixe glue-ins. If you dislike the looks of the north side beginner’s slab now, think about what it’ll look like with lots of big shiny glue-ins for replacements.

 

It seems apparent that a number of you on this posting have us (Dee and Dave Tvedt) pigeonholed in your minds with such labels as “rabid overbolter”. It’s obvious you don’t like our closely bolted easy routes on the north side at Flag. First of all, we didn’t bolt them that way for ourselves. We bolted them that way with the clear intent of making a relatively small section of Flagstone more accessible to beginning climbers. This is clearly a beginner area. We listened for years to a lot of climber’s complaints that there was nothing for them to climb at Flagstone. We strongly believe that there is a place for climbs like these. We think they should be a small portion of the overall number of climbs in a geographical area and not be at an area where access is threatened due to non-climbers seeing bolts. We support there being a wide variety of levels of protection on bolted routes so climbers have a choice between closely bolted beginner routes like these to Tuolumne style runouts and even death routes. For any of you who think there should never be any beginner routes like these, you do not have the consensus of the climbing community. A lot of climbers have told us they very much support having a limited number of climbs like this and that they like these climbs. You will have the wrath of a considerable number of climbers if you chop on these routes.

 

As for all our other routes, we have put them in at a number of places and they include closer bolted harder routes to routes with much wider bolt spacing, some runouts and some trad routes. We ourselves climb on a variety of routes and have climbed numerous runout routes. I climb both trad and sport and also do mountaineering. I have also bolted several routes on lead. We never add or chop bolts to other people’s routes just because we don’t like the bolting. The only retro-bolting or bolt adding we’ve ever done was on Toy Box and that was with permission and direct feedback from the first ascent team. I led all 3 pitches in their original condition before retro-bolting it. The first 2 100’ pitches each had 4 bolts on them and had numerous spots where falls meant some ugly ledge smacking, etc. The first ascent team has told us they are very happy with the retro-bolt and that Toy Box is actually being climbed now. Mark Ashworth estimated that the original Toy Box saw a maximum of 10 ascents in 10 years. Toy Box and the other routes in the area are getting a lot of use. Many people who climb them choose to not clip all the bolts, but many also do. We can see that perhaps 2-3 of the bolts in that area aren’t “necessary” even for beginners and could be removed. It isn’t up to you to remove them however. If you chop them without talking with us and getting an agreement on them, we will replace them with very permanent glue-ins. You are welcome however, to meet with us there and tell us which ones you find particularly offensive and maybe we can reach an agreement.

 

If you want to chop bolts to get us to stop from putting in more “beginner routes”, there is no point. We think there are plenty of beginner routes in this geographical area now and we won’t be putting in any more of them. Our current interest is in putting in trad, mixed and wider spaced relatively safe bolted routes. Our current Flag project you might actually even like. Just right of Toy Box we put in a 2 pitch route. The first pitch is really an access pitch and is around 5.6 with 5 bolts in 100’. The second pitch is around 11a and has 6 bolts in 100’ with additional gear placements. We wouldn’t tolerate anyone adding bolts to this line just as we wouldn’t add bolts to other people’s lines without permission. We actually don’t have any interest in adding bolts to other lines even when we think they are unsafe and would like it if a bolt or two were added. The first ascent people can do that if get enough feedback and decide to do it.

 

As far as chopping other climber’s bolts or routes for whatever reason, we think it’s a bad idea. Almost for sure it will bring on retaliation and hostility. Many routes of all types can end up chopped, crack lines greased, glue-ins added to classic runout routes and all sorts of stupid and negative things can happen that just hurt everyone. Where do you draw the line? If it’s OK for you to chop bolts on a route because you think it’s too closely bolted, another person can just as easily justify chopping or adding bolts because they think a route’s unsafe, squeezed, glued, chipped etc. We strongly disagree with the chipping and pocket drilling that has gone on at Flagstone but we’re not going to chop those routes. Some of the newer routes at Flagstone that we didn’t put in are also way squeezed in our opinion. There are 2 new routes between Raptor and Rapture of the Steep that seem way too close to each other. The new route between the Hydrotube and Acne Problem is also way squeezed and I don’t think it should have been put in. I’ve heard from Mark Ashworth that we are being blamed for putting in this route but we did not. Greg Orton put it in. I’ve talked with him about how squeezed it is and that it shares holds with Acne Problem about 2/3rds up. He brought up that that the bolts on the top part of the route could perhaps be removed and the route just join in with Acne Problem to finish. If you want to do something about this route (which could be part of the Hydrotube retro-bolt “confusion”) just contact Greg about it. Again, I think it’s essential to talk with the person who put in the route and try to get an agreement. Ultimately though, it is their route. If enough climbers don’t like what they’ve done, they’ll hear a lot about it and possibly reconsider. With only a few more unsqueezed potential routes possible at Flagstone now, to me there is a risk that more and more squeezed lines could get added that detract from the other routes there. In my opinion, with all the route potential (trad and sport) still available at other areas in western Oregon, there’s all the more no excuse for squeezed routes at Flag. Mark Ashworth has proposed we work on getting a consensus going for establishing a moratorium on new routes being put in at Flag that would help stop more squeeze jobs from being put in. We support this and would be glad to work with you in establishing this if you also support it.

 

A final note: the Hydrotube was not retro-bolted (as you already know if you’ve checked it out). The first pitch was rebolted several years ago by Mark Ashworth (part of the first ascent team) and he did add one extra bolt at the start with the permission of the others in the first ascent team). Mark told me that these original bolts snapped off with a claw hammer with almost no effort when he was replacing them. These bolts weren’t made for climbing and in most people’s view needed replacing. Last summer, the second pitch of the Hydrotube was rebolted by Alan Kelly with no bolts added to the line. The only thing I did with the Hydrotube was replace the second pitch’s top anchors. Alan Kelly also replaced bad bolts, hangers and anchors on several routes: Paradicy, Harp of Stone, Beguiled and Walt’s Wall. He added no new bolts on any of these. I replaced the badly rusted bolts of Afternoon Desire last summer and also did not add any new bolts. All of these bolt replacements were done with stainless steel bolts good for climbing. This summer I plan on replacing the bolts on The Off Ramp and Morning Desire with stainless steel bolts and again I will not add any new bolts. There are natural gear placements on The Off Ramp that will remain that way.

 

If you really care that much about all the bolts on the beginners’ area at Flag, there is the option of meeting with us there to talk it over. Our phone # is 541-689-7189. My email is david@dtvedt.com

Dave Tvedt

 

[cracked]

Dave, I understand your argument. You wanted to put up easy bolted routes that would be accessible to beginners. A few routes would be understandable. But there are at least 10 different routes on that slab. All overbolted in the sense that they would be safe with fewer bolts. Sure, the question is where is the line between making it safe and overbolting. I don't have a clear-cut answer to that question, but I must say that I find the number of bolts on that slab excessive. There is no need for a bolt every three to four feet on a 5.6. Go to Smith, the classic "beginner routes", ie bunny face, or the buckets, etc, have a bolt every six feet, if that. There is absolutely no comparison between these routes and the 'beginner' routes at Flag. What about the 5.3 or so slab that tops out after the headwall of Northern Lights. I still cannot believe you bolted that. There is no need for bolts on 30 degree stone.

Another issue: what happens when the beginning climbers that you bolted these routes for decide to venture beyond the confines of Flag? You will not find routes bolted like this in many areas. All that beginners gain from Flag is how to keep from backclipping. Learning to lead is more than learning to clip. Rather, it is more important to learn how to judge your abilities, and develop psychological strength. I also believe that 5.6 climbers on 5.6 routes should be as well protected as 5.10 climbers on 5.10 routes. While usually the harder routes are better protected, the opposite is true at Flag. Once your beginners have climbed all the 5.6s on the Northern Slab, they will still not be able to lead routes like Acne problem.

 

I do appreciate your efforts, and many of your routes are very enjoyable, but I see the lower slab as a blemish. Too many bolts, and they are too obvious. But now I'm curious, how many beginners complained about there not being any routes for them?

 

[cracked]

davetvedt said:

texplorer,

 

Just in case you or anyone else is actually serious about chopping some bolts at Flagstone you might want to consider a few things first:

 

Envision big, shiny glue-in bolts where you have chopped the less visually ugly hanger and bolt. Any bolt you remove from any of our routes will be replaced with Fixe glue-ins. If you dislike the looks of the north side beginner’s slab now, think about what it’ll look like with lots of big shiny glue-ins for replacements.

 

This sounds like a threat. Threats are not the answer. Making the area even more scarred will do nothing but harm the situation.

[davetvedt]

Cracked,

 

As far as the threat issue goes, you forget that I in no way started it. The initial threat came from texplorer talking about chopping bolts. Since you expressed that you think the slab is overbolted it’s understandable you would ignore his threat and focus our “apparent” one. I hear you that you think the bolts on that slab are excessive. As far as scarring on the rock. We certainly favor a less visually obtrusive look for the slab and would not like to see more visible glue-ins there. We will stand up to bolt chopper’s though and follow through with such unpleasantries if pushed. You speak of “Scarred” and also of Smith Rock. The worst scarring at Smith is the climber scarring of the landscape at the base of the climbs. We have an old photo of Smith before the sport craze and it is a different landscape. A much more pristine landscape without the trashing at the bases. Many climbers accept the trashing at the bases of routes as the baseline “norm” that may as well have been the way things always were. We have been helping with the Spring Thing for a number of years and it’s an endless struggle to contain the harm climbers do to the bases of routes there. A lot of climbers get all bent out of shape about bolts but barely give a second thought to the much greater damage we do to the bases of climbs and trails and landscape on the way to the climbs. I think it’s a very hypocritical stance to take. I certainly don’t want lots of bolts everywhere and favor limitations in bolting. The thing is, my opinion about limitations in bolting isn’t totally the same as yours and in actuality, no ones is completly the same.

 

As far as the issue of the northern slab beginner routes being overbolted, a number of climbers think so too and a number also don’t. One of the problems with bolts on slab climbs is that they visually appear closer together than they really are. You state that bolts are 3-4 feet apart on a 5.6. There have been other postings elsewhere that have made similar statements about the bolt spacing on these routes. Most are farther apart than this but only appear this close from the ground. I did some some general measuring on these routes a while back and most of the bolts were 5-7 feet apart. Certainly very close for routes of this level but not that unheard of for harder routes. The number of closer bolted beginner routes on this slab counting Toy Box is 6 (7 if you count the 3rd pitch “Out of the Box”) Five of these are multi-pitch and 4 are harder on their top pitch and are less beginner routes. The second pitch of Toy Box is also more “sportily” bolted and less a beginner route. A number of climbers including myself consider some of the beginner routes at Smith a “joke” in that they are not very well suited to beginning lead climbers. Bunny Face and Five Gallon Buckets have bolts quite well spaced and well over 6’ apart. If you fall on Bunny Face or Jete or Dancer for example, the bolt spacing can easily yield hamburger flesh and perhaps worse injuries. I know of one beginning climber who had a very ugly fall on one of the bogus beginner routes at Smith. If I recall correctly it was “Easy Reader” where the hardest move is before the first bolt. For at least a few years after this they haven’t lead climbed again. That may be their problem but it also an issue of some climbers gaining the confidence in themselves with “safe” climbs before they move on to the “real world”. The “5.3” you refer to I would guess is “Out of the Box”, an alternative 3rd pitch to Toy Box. I refered to it as a combination of 4th and 5th class climbing. It is around 5.6 near the top and is sparsely bolted. The thought with this route is encouraging confidence on wider spaced bolting on terrain that is even less difficult. Certainly an unusual route that doesn’t need replicas. This brings up the issue of gaining psychological confidence while leading. I think these closer bolted beginner routes at Flag can give some climbers the confidence to move on to harder routes and routes with wider bolt spacing… out there in the real climbing world. There are very few spots on these routes where back clipping is much of a risk. I think the progression to climbing Acne Problem after getting comfortable with ones abilities on these closer bolted routes is very likely for a number of climbers. Other beginning climbers may decide that they don’t want to lead climb anymore and don’t move on. So what? As far as the number of climbers who complained about there not being any routes for them, I didn’t keep records (would you?) but it was quite a number over a number of years. We’ve heard it at the Columns, at Flagstone itself and at the gym. Another aspect of this to consider is the number of climbers who climb them and clip all the bolts. At Flagstone there are several easier runout routes that belie your statement that the harder routes at Flag are less protected than the easier routes. Have you climbing Apache Acid? A superb 160’ runout route with questionable bolts that rates at 5.8. Acne Problem and the other routes in that area along with Pygmy Twylyte are other examples of routes that don’t fit this.

Dave Tvedt

 

[cracked]

I have indeed climbed one of the routes to the left of Acne Problem, I forget which one. Those are on the other end of the extreme.

 

I agree that the largest impact on Smith comes from travel to the routes. We should try to minimize impact whether hiking or climbing. However, ignoring bolting issues isn't going to happen, either.

 

Yes, I agree that falling off of Dancer, Jete, Bunny Face, or some of the other easier routes at Smith is a bad idea. BUT falling off of routes like Barbeque the Pope, or other older, harder routes is a bad idea as well. I'd say it's more of a problem with Smith slabs rather than bolt placement.

 

Yes, bolts look closer from the ground due to foreshortening. But I have climbed most of the Northern Slab routes, and find that often relatively easy sections of routes have bolts spaced at the same intervals as on the cruxes. This is not necessary.

"Flag can give some climbers the confidence to move on to harder routes and routes with wider bolt spacing… out there in the real climbing world. " IMHO, this is what the gym is for. This is similar to the argument for chipping steep, hard routes, for use as a "training route".

 

As for the counterexamples that you mention, those routes exemplefy the ethics of the initial developers of the area. Shouldn't we respect those ethics, too? And I didn't say that all harder routes are not as well protected as all the easier routes; I said that the typical Northern Slab easy route is FAR better protected than most of the 5.10s and 5.11s.

 

[erik]

hey dave

 

did you rap bolt it??

did you get the land managers permission the destroy the rock???

 

you type too much for something that should require no words.

 

 

[davetvedt]

I certainly don’t support ignoring bolting issues, I just think that it’s important to put them in some perspective relative to the other impacts and damage we do to the environment as climbers.

 

I agree that normally it makes sense to space bolts to vary with the difficulty of the climbing (and also tie that in with other risk factors such as ledges to hit, etc.). We do this with most of our routes. On these beginner routes we standardized the spacing much more as a way of giving a psychological sense of safety that can be an issue for beginning climbers. Wider bolt spacings can be very intimidating to beginner climbers even in easier terrain. Again, we agree it is “unnecessary” in most instances and are aware that quite a number of climbers think it is unnessary on this slab also. As far as I know, there is no climbing gym that can simulate good friction slab climbing. Some people take to this type of climbing very easily and quite a few take a while to build up their confidence and sense of safety climbing runout slabs. Considering how important this ability is (to confidently climb friction slab runouts) at many climbing areas, I don’t think gyms cut it for training for them. We’ve seen numerous “gym” climbers who can climb well at the gym flounder on Flagstone friction.

 

hey erik,

yes we did rap bolt them. It was a way more efficient way of doing it. Only a few of the routes at Flag were put up on lead. I’ve soloed all around this slab and I don’t think bolting on lead in this case would have been a superior method. Yes, the Forest Service knows about Flagstone and has seen the bolts and the trails and are fine with them. They seem pleased that we haven't "trashed" the place with garbage, etc. like a lot of other unauthorized recreation areas that they have to deal with. One Forest Service employee even suggested an outhouse might be in order at some point. Considering that several times we’ve come across wads of toilet paper and human waste on the trails there, it’s an idea to consider. In my opinion, discussing bolting issues, etc. does require words. We can’t read your mind or each others and we obviously can have different views on the subject.

 

Dave Tvedt

 

 

[cj001f]

Dave-

Who is the "we"? You seem to have made alot of assumptions as to how the rest of the world wants to climb, and are willing to back them up with the climbing version of nuclear war, so where'd the high horse come from?

Carl

[davetvedt]

On one additional point- you state: “As for the counterexamples that you mention, those routes exemplefy the ethics of the initial developers of the area. Shouldn't we respect those ethics, too?”

 

I think we are respecting the initial developers of Flagstone in several ways. The main initial developers of Flagstone: Walt Corvington, Larry Modrell, Mark Ashworth and Alan Amos are supportive of there being routes at Flagstone with closer bolting than those runout originals. As mentioned earlier, the first ascent team of Toy Box: Walt, Larry and Diane, all support and like the beginner routes there and gave explicit permission for retrobolting Toy Box. Walt told me that a big reason that they bolted sparsely on some of their routes was due to the expense of bolts and not due to a runout ethic. Mark has told me he thinks there are a few too many bolts on the slab but that he otherwise sees the routes as legit. I don’t recall talking directly with Alan about these routes but he has expressed liking closer bolting than he used to and has OK’d Mark adding a few bolts to certain routes they did together. I don’t see a clearcut ethic here that established Flagstone as having solely a runout ethic. Any area that clearly has this ethic established we would definitely hold to.

 

Carl,

The “we” I’m referring to is Dee Tvedt and myself. I’m not including anyone else in this we and there is no high horse. I referred to her at the beginning of my first post and I guess you missed that. I don’t assume much at all about how the rest of the world wants to climb. I’m not at all demanding that other climbers climb like us (quite diverse actually). I think you have it backwards on this issue. There are a number of climbers who don’t respect the diversity of the climbing community and want all other climbers to climb only the type of climbs they respect (commonly runout routes). I think a title of “Climbernazi’s” could be apt for some of these climbers. I’m not telling anyone else what type of routes they should climb. I’m just standing up to these

"high horse" climber's demands that only the routes they approve of should exist.

 

Dave Tvedt

 

[erik]

dave

 

why choose what others want?

 

why bolt? at all??

 

why not just sack it up and send??

 

why coddle beginners???

 

i am sure people can chop your shit faster then you can place them. and chopping a weakmo bolt is free!!!!

 

i hope you never come to washington with your drill.

 

 

[sk]

erik said:

dave

 

why choose what others want?

 

why bolt? at all??

 

why not just sack it up and send??

 

why coddle beginners???

 

i am sure people can chop your shit faster then you can place them. and chopping a weakmo bolt is free!!!!

 

i hope you never come to washington with your drill.

 

WERD ERIK

[davetvedt]

 

erik,

any time any climber puts in a bolted route they are deciding what other climbers want for protection. Thats one of the reasons I like trad a lot. No other human is deciding for me and it's just me and whats naturally there.

 

No worries about bringing the drill up to your state. I do plan to get back to climb some more of the superb routes

in the Stuart Range in your state though! Beautiful granite and wilderness up there. Theres a lot of choss and clearcuts along all of our mountaineering routes down here.

Dave

[wdietsch]

davetvedt said:any time any climber puts in a bolted route they are deciding what other climbers want for protection

 

should this not read more like "any time any climber puts in a bolted route they are deciding what other climbers GET for protection"

[cracked]

Eric, it's a SPORT CRAG. I support bolting there, but I do not support rabid overbolting. Saying we should solo everything is stupid. However, I believe that we shouldn't make everything accessible to the mass population. If you bolt for the lowest common denominator you'd better be bolting for overweight drunks, toddlers, etc. Beginners who want to learn to lead should get used to what routes are REALLY like, so they don't get hurt when they move away from the outdoor gym called Flag.

 

Dave: I've talked to Mark, and as far as I can tell, his position is: if you don't like the bolt, don't clip it. This argument is flawed. I'll go quarry half the crag, if you don't like it, don't look at it. I'll go clear-cut the enchantments, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. I'm going to drill buckets up every route that is too hard for me, if you don't like it, don't use em. The issue is not so simple.

[mattp]

I'm curious what we are talking about here. Is this Flag place in a post industrial wasteland like Exit 38 or is it in some beautiful mountain valley where the deer and the antelope play? It sounds like even Dave Tvedt agrees that there has been some over-bolting there, but how extensive is it? Is the Flag a new climbing area or one that has had a history of ground-up ascents protected only by gear? Is he correct when he says that the initial speculation about Hydrotube being retrobolted was just plain wrong? Are the offensively over-bolted beginner's routes confined to one small crag that is out of the way? I'm not impressed with his debate style where he says "if you pull my bolts I'm going to go back and install glue-in's all over the place," but what has really happened at Flag?

[cracked]

Matt, Flagstone is one large hunk of ryolite (?). One crag alone. It isn't an industrial junk yard, just turning into it. No previous quarrying, etc. There are some old clear-cuts in the area, but it's pretty pristine anyhow. The crag has several different areas, one is a huge slab (nothern slab) that's low-angled, is about two or three pitches high, and has about 30 (?) pitches on it. Many are about five to ten feet apart. On the slab proper the hardest route is maybe 5.8. After the first pitch there is a mini-headwall that is somewhat steeper and harder.

 

It was first discovered and developed in the very early 90s. Many moderate, poorly-protected routes were put up, as Dave said, due to a lack of bolts. So there is no real overriding ethic. Uphill from the slab there is a overhanging wall that has a few 12s and 13s. Two or three of the 5 or 6 routes are glued and chipped, and it is common knowledge who did that.

 

The problem is that flag is one piece of stone, and is rather small. The Northern Slab comprises perhaps 30% of the routes at Flag by now. I might be off on my numbers, I've never counted, but that's pretty much what Flag is like. Oh, and there is very little to no pro to be found. Bolts are essentially required for any routes that are not going to be X-rated.

[bunglehead]

What I want to know is isn't bolting a route very time consuming and expensive? What would motivate an individual to spend that much effort to put up routes that are too easy for them? Hmmm.... I just don't know.