debate fodder: lots of new climbers

[joe_average]

[j_b]

i don't know about you people but the molly sidetrack does not make the dense reading any easier

[olyclimber]

j_b said:

i don't know about you people but the molly sidetrack does not make the dense reading any easier

You mean there is something besides Miss Ringworm in this thread?

[mattp]

Kassidy -

 

One of your criticism's for those who may inappropriately bolt a climb or chip a hold is that they are altering the rock and making decisions for everybody else and therefore acting as if they own the cliff. Isn't it the same way when you go and remove bolts from a climb? You might try to make a rhetorical distinction that you are "restoring" the cliff rather than altering it, but that would be just plain B.S.: the guy who is out there pulling bolts is actually MORE arrogant in stating to the world that he knows what is best for everybody else. The bolt-puller is directly attacking somebody else's work and his clear statement is "I am the judge of what is acceptable on this cliff." The guy who bolts a new line at may be arrogant in some respects, but nobody sets out to bolt something that they think should not be bolted so we can only conclude that the bolter thinks they are opening up a previously unappreciated bit of stone or, in the case of retrobolting, they are re-opening an underappreciated one. Whether you think modern bolters are misguided or not, they are not trying to combat somebody else the way the bolt-puller is.

 

By the way, I agree with some of what you have said here about the potential for chipping to become acceptable (though I think the potential is more related to the fact that modern climbers learn to climb in an entirely manufactured environment than it is to the fact that bolts have become more acceptable), and I agree with you that the first ascentionist principal is not necessarily a good one (because the first ascentionist may not be objective or show good taste or judgment) , and I have on previous pages said I agree with some of your other ideas -- just what the hell is going on here?

[lummox]

olyclimber said:

wicked facial photo. thanks for sharin.

[pope]

mattp said:

Kassidy -

 

One of your criticism's for those who may inappropriately bolt a climb or chip a hold is that they are altering the rock and making decisions for everybody else and therefore acting as if they own the cliff. Isn't it the same way when you go and remove bolts from a climb? You might try to make a rhetorical distinction that you are "restoring" the cliff rather than altering it, but that would be just plain B.S.: the guy who is out there pulling bolts is actually MORE arrogant in stating to the world that he knows what is best for everybody else. The bolt-puller is directly attacking somebody else's work and his clear statement is "I am the judge of what is acceptable on this cliff." The guy who bolts a new line at may be arrogant in some respects, but nobody sets out to bolt something that they think should not be bolted so we can only conclude that the bolter thinks they are opening up a previously unappreciated bit of stone or, in the case of retrobolting, they are re-opening an underappreciated one. Whether you think modern bolters are misguided or not, they are not trying to combat somebody else the way the bolt-puller is.

 

By the way, I agree with some of what you have said here about the potential for chipping to become acceptable (though I think the potential is more related to the fact that modern climbers learn to climb in an entirely manufactured environment than it is to the fact that bolts have become more acceptable), and I agree with you that the first ascentionist principal is not necessarily a good one (because the first ascentionist may not be objective or show good taste or judgment) , and I have on previous pages said I agree with some of your other ideas -- just what the hell is going on here?

 

I don't think it is an indicator of arrogance when one believes that a cliff should remain somewhat true to its natural state, so that many generations of climbers can experience that feeling of pioneering, of using skill and judgement not only to ascend but also to safeguard their ascent through rigging protection. If we allow one climber to put up a low-adventure, highly bolted sport route.....if we allow that he should have the right to make these alterations, then what do we say to the guy who wants to chop holds? Perhaps a rock hound would like to chop out a few specimen crystsals for his collection, or maybe a developer would like to erect a gondola ride and collect fees from tourists..what grounds do we have protesting these uses of our vertical resource, once we allow bolting and/or chipping?

 

I don't think it's a manifestation of arrogance when climbers feel so passionate about this "wilderness ethic" (even if the cliff in question is a 5-minute walk off of Hwy 2) that they are willing to do something about it. I certainly don't speak for everybody who has pulled a bolt, but I think most of them are not interested in attacking an individual or his work. I think most bolt pullers just don't know what else to do to stop the increase in bolt use. I personally feel that at an area that has a long tradition of bolt-free climbing, chopping a sport route MUST be performed because of the message not chopping sends out to those who would love to develop sport routes.

 

I agree with you to some extent. I personally think the outdoor gym environment of Exit 32 is a joke, but it would be arrogant of me or anybody else to walk in there and try to disrupt that circus by pulling bolts. I don't think anybody is doing this. What is happening is that sport climbers are coming to traditionally bolt-free areas and placing bolts (in the form of new sport climbs, retrobolting formerly bold climbs, and bolting clean aid lines to produce free clims).

 

MattP, we agree on a bunch of things. I'm not saying that every bolt is a crime, and I think you agree that bolting excesses exist. The question is what to do about it.

 

 

Molly says, "I'd pay cold cash if Dwayner were allowed to comment in this forum. How long's it been now, two months? I miss that hunk of burnin' love and his sassy bolt talk."

[mattp]

Kassidy-

I agree that IF you think the retro bolters are ruining all of the traditional climbing areas, you may well be acting not only within your rights but responsibly to "do something about it." However, I have questions about what should be done about it and how should you seek to spread your message.

 

I was commenting on attitude because you have complained of the arrogance of the evil rap-bolters while you commend the stewardship of those who remove the offending bolts. To quote somebody quite famous around here, I say "Bulllshit private Pyle." Is the epitomy of arrogance to decide that you are the Rock Police who get to decide whether or not bolts are going to be allowed on Castle Rock or wherever -- and to then go enforce your policy with a crowbar. I approve of some bolt-pulling exploits and not others but, almost by definition, the arrogance and brevado that is required to go on a restoration mission FAR exceeds that associated with putting up a line of bolts. The bolt chopper sees themself a crusader and an enforcer; the bolt driller sees themself more as a pioneer or an engineer.

 

 

 

 

[pope]

mattp said:

Kassidy-

I agree that IF you think the retro bolters are ruining all of the traditional climbing areas, you may well be acting not only within your rights but responsibly to "do something about it." However, I have questions about what should be done about it and how should you seek to spread your message.

 

I was commenting on attitude because you have complained of the arrogance of the evil rap-bolters while you commend the stewardship of those who remove the offending bolts. To quote somebody quite famous around here, I say "Bulllshit private Pyle." Is the epitomy of arrogance to decide that you are the Rock Police who get to decide whether or not bolts are going to be allowed on Castle Rock or wherever -- and to then go enforce your policy with a crowbar. I approve of some bolt-pulling exploits and not others but, almost by definition, the arrogance and brevado that is required to go on a restoration mission FAR exceeds that associated with putting up a line of bolts. The bolt chopper sees themself a crusader and an enforcer; the bolt driller sees themself more as a pioneer or an engineer.

 

 

I can't speak for every bolt puller, as to what motivates them or whether they felt like crusaders or whatever. The only time I was involved in restoration, I felt like an enforcer I suppose, but I felt no pride or arrogance during nor subsequent to the act. I only hoped it would discourage the next party from putting up a bolt trail at Castle Rock. I do feel a responsibility to do my part in preventing the Vantage syndrome from spreading, and I don't think of myself as imposing my belief on everybody else. Again, we're talking about an increasingly limited resource: sunny, granite climbing in Washington which has many classic, nut protected climbs, and where arguably unaesthetic bolt trails have been absent for generations.

 

arlen said:

In any case, it amazes me. Climbable rock is a precious thing in the 'Daks, but if it doesn't take gear, it's not a line (exceptions noted). Whereas out here there's undeveloped potential all over the place, but most don't mind squeezing a line of bolts between 2 crack routes, and half the climbers that see it think it's wrong.

 

I'm willing to risk being called a rock cop in order to preserve what many agree should be preserved but are perhaps unwilling to actually do something about. I wish there were a better way.

[lummox]

i started this thread and you guys hijacked it.

i dont care about your bolt shizzle. when i freesolo my hardon wont fit through the hanger so they offer me no protection.

bolt pull this

 

i better logoff afore i get banned again.

laate

[RuMR]

lummox said:

i started this thread and you guys hijacked it.

i dont care about your bolt shizzle. when i freesolo my hardon wont fit through the hanger so they offer me no protection.

bolt pull this

 

i better logoff afore i get banned again.

laate

 

[pope]

mattp said:

......the arrogance and brevado that is required to go on a restoration mission FAR exceeds that associated with putting up a line of bolts. The bolt chopper sees themself a crusader and an enforcer; the bolt driller sees themself more as a pioneer or an engineer.

 

 

Arrogance or ignorance, take your pick. What motivates somebody to take a little road-side wilderness (where bolting is mostly absent) and "enhance" it with those tacky, shiny, alien looking devices? It has to be either arrogance or ignorance. There's an assumption that an alpine meadow, a snowy peak or an ancient piece of granite that has been carved by the advance of glaciers....these things are all about as aesthetic as they can be, and they are best appreciated by generation after generation if we keep them in their natural state. They offer unblemished beauty and undiminished challenge. That the way we find 'em, that the way we should leave 'em.

 

Mentioning arrogance, and mentioning "enhancement", it seems that even rap bolters are not completely tolerant of creative expressions that are left behind at our cliffs. Our CC.com Index historians might be able to comment on the correctness of my facts, but I'm pretty sure the first chopping episode at Index resulted in the removal of zero bolts, and I think the chopping was performed by a sport climber who is reported to possess great vision and maintain an open mind. I believe that in response to the creative improvements going on in the early days of Index rap bolting, a couple of boys decided that in addition to a string of bolts enhancing the aesthetics of the cliff, a rotting pig carcass would make a great conversation piece and further improve on what mother nature had so inadequately created in the Sky Valley.

 

The bolts remained, the pig was removed, but not without the comment, "I didn't chop your rap-placed bolts. Why are you removing my lead-placed pig?" I'm pretty sure we could live without both additions.

[bunglehead]

[Al_Pine]

Why do people feel the need to try to end internet discussions? Does it harm you in any practical way? Is it just too tempting to try to read this stuff? You just can't put it down? Are you like a quitting smoker begging your friends to not smoke around you?

 

Or is it just the Dru, "muuuuussssst pooooooost, can't leave thisssss alonnnnnnnnne" disease?

 

Hey Dru!

 

 

And back to one of the real topics here (besides Molly)...a quick pithy statement.

 

I think that the bolt chopper is more arrogant than the bolter. It's close, but the tie is broken by the bolter may not really know for sure that somebody may not like his actions, whereas the bolt chopper definitely knows such folks exist.

 

I would put a bolt-chopper closer to a retro-bolter.

[bunglehead]

Al-Pine, you're right!! I can't stop reading this thread!!

 

But point taken. I may have a disease!

 

And seriously, I feel the same way about people that chop bolts they didn't place.

[mattp]

Asside from the question of who is more arrogant, I think bolt chopping should be viewed with the same criteria that I listed above for thinking about installing bolts.

 

1. Safety. Is the chopping of a line going to created a safety hazard for one who may be expecting the bolts to be there?

 

 

2. Aesthetic Concerns. Can you do a clean job of removing the bolts? If you remove them, will somebody else come along and add them back in - creating more of a mess? Or will somebody drape slings on a bush or flake because you removed the chain rappel station?

 

 

3. Adventure/challenge. Is the removal of the bolts going to promote a sense of adventure or increase the challenge asociated with a particular crag? Will removal of the bolts merely deny climbers a route, or will it encourage them to climb with better style or to push past the missing placement anyway?

 

 

4. Associated Environmental Impacts. Aside from the aesthetic concerns noted above, will the removal of the bolts do anything to reduce crowds, erosion, the destruction of nesting habitat, etc.? Will it result in more aggressive crack cleaning?

 

 

5. Public Relations. Is the removal of a bolt or route going to stir up animosity? Is a potential bolt war going to have any possibility of requiring land managers or other officials' involvment?

 

As with the discussion of installing bolts, any discussion of removing them must recognize that there are a lot of tradeoffs here, and a lot of different climbing styles, and I think ChucK's prior point that the people engaged in these activities need to maintain some measure of humility is a good one. If you appoint yourself as the rock police, a BIG dosage of humility should come into play, in my view.

[scott_harpell]

I think that the bolt chopper is more arrogant than the bolter. It's close, but the tie is broken by the bolter may not really know for sure that somebody may not like his actions, whereas the bolt chopper definitely knows such folks exist.

 

ignorance is no excuse. doesn't work with the law. "mister officer! i didn't know that you aren't allowed to drive on the shoulder in grid-lock traffic!" riiiiight

[scott_harpell]

another way to look at this is that without overbolters, there would be no bolt yankers. true bolt-cops exacerbate the situation, but the situation is created by people with too much bloody money and not enough action.

[RuMR]

Scott...you are being an idiot...Do you even know any of the bolters in this area? Too much money? You haven't really a clue, do you???

 

...and not enough action??? WHATDAFUCK? You sit here and spray on your computer 24-7 like the rest of us punters, while the folks out there developing areas are busting their asses...Most of these guys literally climb 3 number grades harder than the routes they put up...often times they've already climbed the line via natural gear...THEN they go back and clean it up and protect it for the average climber...

 

You ought to maybe meet the people you are slamming before you slam them...Quit shit-talking about people you don't know and haven't met, it makes you look uninformed...

 

Edited November 17, 2003 by RuMR

[mattp]

Scott has also lost tract of the fact that there is no law against bolts and that the bolt-choppers will sometimes chop bolts that have the approval of many if not most other climbers. Further, my guess is that the majority of Washington climbers would NOT approve the appointment of most of these anti-bolt rock cops -- they are if anything much more the "outlaws" (vigilante's, actually) in this situation. I was trying to be fair about it in listing the criteria I set forth above, but when faced with rhetoric like Scott's, I sometimes wonder if it is a good idea to show the antibolt warriors any respect at all.

 

[erik]

pope

 

what gives you the authotity to be the savior of clean climbing? for all i know you have done exactly what you claim to be bad....

 

what of your squeeze job on secret dome? or the bolted cracks up by carnival? both of those go against your dumb rant. i am sure i could find more of your trangessions, as once an offender always an offender.....

 

 

 

 

 

[lummox]

mattp said:

there no law against bolts

nope. you wrong. some land management agents will ticket bolters for littering. struth. and dont try to place a fixed anchor in a wilderness area.

 

thread wont die today

nor never cuz its sick dude.

like frankenstein was.

[mattp]

Erik - he can post his own defense, I'm sure, but I'm not sure one need have completely clean hands in order to have an opinion on these matters. All of us make mistakes sometimes. Maybe he has just "seen the light."

[mattp]

Actually, I believe YOU are wrong, Mr. Mox. As far as I know, the fixed anchor ban for wilderness areas was thrown out by a judge. Further, the bolt chopping that I am aware of in Washington has taken place exclusively in non-wilderness areas. Even so, I am confident that the Leavenworth Ranger District has not deputized those who are chopping bolts over there, nor has the State of Washington deputized those who have chopped bolts at Vantage or Index or ....

[scott_harpell]

Further, my guess is that the majority of Washington climbers would NOT approve the appointment of most of these anti-bolt rock cops

is this the litmus test? i think we should hold ourselves to a higher standard than to the average climbers opinion whose rationality is tainted by their selfish need to climb something no matter what the cost. or perhaps it is their need to see their names in print. and rudy... i dont give a shit what they climb. if i can climb 5.15 can i carve my name in the rock and 'tag' the base? because this is exactly what we are doing when we put up routes for self glorification. no matter what, we are glorifying ourselves by altering the rock rather than glorifying nature which is the reason i like to climb, hike, etc. Mabe i am making this stand alone(probably) but i dont like the idea of bolted climbs period. i also dont think how well a person climbs should decide whether they have the authority to dictate my experience in the outdoors. we all have a say whether you climb 5.15 or 5.5 or even if you dont clmib at all because other people use these areas for other purposes too. mabe i just have a different understanding of the outdoors. i also feel that the muir hut (and especially the RMI hut) should be taken out. later kids.

[scott_harpell]

mattp said:

Scott has also lost tract of the fact that there is no law against bolts and that the bolt-choppers will sometimes chop bolts that have the approval of many if not most other climbers. Further, my guess is that the majority of Washington climbers would NOT approve the appointment of most of these anti-bolt rock cops -- they are if anything much more the "outlaws" (vigilante's, actually) in this situation. I was trying to be fair about it in listing the criteria I set forth above, but when faced with rhetoric like Scott's, I sometimes wonder if it is a good idea to show the antibolt warriors any respect at all.

 

bu there is also no law against yanking bolts. so are the bolters not just as much of outlaws as the anti-bolters? so what makes the bolters in the right and the anti-bolters the wrong? public opinion? the opinions of those pulling down 5.15's?