pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 rbw1966 said: Why are bolts considered a blight and pin scars considered bold climbing? By whom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 well something to think about is: we are told to leave nature as (or better than) we found it. perhaps kassidy is correct that if we are really climbing to be with nature and respecting nature we will try to limit our impact on nature. it may be a large pill to swallow, but bolting the rock is not "leaving nature as (or better than) you found it. as fun as it is and as strong as it gets you, it still is derogatory for nature. you cannot debate this. you may say that it is relatively small transgression 'compared to bush's policies,' but do you really want to compare yourselves to the worst? i couldn't give two shits about the style or whatever. i just like getting out there. truthfully i feel guilty when i even clip bolts. i have always been taught minimal impact and this has lead me to wonder if mabe every climb need not be climbed. it is just my preference. flame on kids! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 RuMR said: jkassidy said: RuMR said: jkassidy said: JayB said: jkassidy said: Bolts, crowds, crowded campgrounds.....they seem to conspicuously coexist, almost symbiotically. When we take the macho aspect out of climbing, when we make climbing something that becomes about as dangerous and adventurous as playing volleyball without a helmet....of course it will have greater appeal. When leading difficult rock (something that used to require guts, skill and great judgment) is demystified by a trail of bolts, and when we let today's climbers feel as though they're really doing something that is parallel to the old, heroic 5th-class leading, then new climbers will inundate our cliffs in search of that heroic, sharp-end feeling. It's just one, big happy illusion.....and I'm all for Quixotic fantasies, just not when the result is crowding and ugly bolt trails. Back when I was young people who made such statements about the cowardice of others were not afraid to use their real names while doing so. Golden Age indeed. If it weren't for the juvenile language and obscene images of perverted toads one encounters on this site, I could probably post from my workplace using my real name and not feel embarassed about it. So then, how do you feel about incessant Richard Simmons postings, and Sport climbers are gay posting. This is very offensive in a two-fold manner: 1.) you are insinuating that something is wrong w/ being a homosexual, and 2.) you are then using that little "factoid" to then slam sportclimbing You are a hypocrite if you are who i think you are. Your previous postings point to the fact that you can get right down to the level of JayB and others...So don't play that weak card... You are insinuating that I am Dwayner? I am not. Dwayner has not posted here since he was arbitrarily banned. I know this for a fact. I challenge you to find one statement (made by Dwayner) that sport climbers are gay. I don't think you'll find it. No...i'm insinuating that you are Pope... Wrong, Rudy! Trust me, pal: JCassidy is not PoPo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Off_White said: I think the whole cant about how bold the oldies were and how pure and ideal the development of clean climbing was is fundamentalist history revision. Despite impassioned pleas in Chouinard Catalogs, the reason nuts caught on was not because pin scars were so abhorent, but because they were easier, faster, and safer. I could hang from one hand and place a nut, hell, even do it left handed, but dangle and set a pin? Clean climbing brought the sport down to a level that average folks could do more routes. So, the clean climbing revolution had NOTHING to do with a change in the way climbers approached wilderness and the preservation thereof? You're telling me that nuts caught on ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE EASY TO USE AND MADE CLIMBS EASIER FOR JOE AVERAGE? "If it's practical, I'll do it. If it helps me get up the cliff, shoot.....IT'S ALL GOOD!" May I summarize your approach to climbing ethics in the previous pseudo-quote? Is this what really motivates you? Just so long as it makes the climb easy, anything goes? Because, my friend, when you begin to allow for permanent alterations to the rock (bolts) in order to facilitate an easier ascent, and when you're Hell-bent on affirming the latest fad for fear of being accused of living in the past, YOU MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY TELLING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CLIMBERS (WHO WISH TO MAKE THINGS EVEN EASIER BY, SAY, CHIPPING A LINE OF BUCKETS) THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THE NATURAL LIMITATIONS OF THE CLIFF INSTEAD OF MURDERING THE IMPOSSIBLE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Regarding my identity... Please PUSH ME I still think its wrong if you don't post your identiy...anything you say is completely meaningless w/o a "real" person behind it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Allow me to insinuate jkassidy=pope=eric mohler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 jkassidy said: Off_White said: I think the whole cant about how bold the oldies were and how pure and ideal the development of clean climbing was is fundamentalist history revision. Despite impassioned pleas in Chouinard Catalogs, the reason nuts caught on was not because pin scars were so abhorent, but because they were easier, faster, and safer. I could hang from one hand and place a nut, hell, even do it left handed, but dangle and set a pin? Clean climbing brought the sport down to a level that average folks could do more routes. So, the clean climbing revolution had NOTHING to do with a change in the way climbers approached wilderness and the preservation thereof? You're telling me that nuts caught on ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE EASY TO USE AND MADE CLIMBS EASIER FOR JOE AVERAGE? "If it's practical, I'll do it. If it helps me get up the cliff, shoot.....IT'S ALL GOOD!" May I summarize your approach to climbing ethics in the previous pseudo-quote? Is this what really motivates you? Just so long as it makes the climb easy, anything goes? Because, my friend, when you begin to allow for permanent alterations to the rock (bolts) in order to facilitate an easier ascent, and when you're Hell-bent on affirming the latest fad for fear of being accused of living in the past, YOU MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY TELLING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CLIMBERS (WHO WISH TO MAKE THINGS EVEN EASIER BY, SAY, CHIPPING A LINE OF BUCKETS) THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THE NATURAL LIMITATIONS OF THE CLIFF INSTEAD OF MURDERING THE IMPOSSIBLE. Bolts and chipping? U-N-R-E-L-A-T-E-D! Its a far stretch to say that bolts lead to chipping...a very far stretch... Murdering the impossible?? You can't even climb 90% of limestone w/o fixed gear CUZ THERE AINT EVEN A PLACE FOR A THREAD, much less some piece of gear... Elbsandstein, one of the boldest traditional areas around relies on fixed gear...there are rules about placing them, but they are there nonetheless... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 AlpineK said: Allow me to insinuate jkassidy=pope=eric mohler. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 scott_harpell said: well something to think about is: we are told to leave nature as (or better than) we found it. perhaps kassidy is correct that if we are really climbing to be with nature and respecting nature we will try to limit our impact on nature. it may be a large pill to swallow, but bolting the rock is not "leaving nature as (or better than) you found it. as fun as it is and as strong as it gets you, it still is derogatory for nature. you cannot debate this. you may say that it is relatively small transgression 'compared to bush's policies,' but do you really want to compare yourselves to the worst? i couldn't give two shits about the style or whatever. i just like getting out there. truthfully i feel guilty when i even clip bolts. i have always been taught minimal impact and this has lead me to wonder if mabe every climb need not be climbed. it is just my preference. flame on kids! Now I fully expect RuMr, Erik, Cracked and various and assorted zombies to immediately reply to this post and accuse you, Mr. Harpell, of being just another one of Dwayner's avatars. I mean, let's face it, there's no way in Hell that more than one person can possibly feel like wilderness is worth preserving! (That was sarcasm, for the slower readers among you.) Rock on, my friend! It's been kind of lonely around here, now that Dwayner has been rather arbitrarily banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 (edited) jkassidy...can you point me to where i said you were dwayner?? Never said that...i still maintain that you are pope...deny it, if i'm wrong, but your arguing is closer to pope than dwayner...sorry, that is what i think... and i'm hardly a zombie...i think overbolting is stupid and runs the risks of getting precious climbing areas closed...but bolting as wrong just on prinicple? HA! That's a joke... Edited November 14, 2003 by RuMR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 (edited) additionally, bolting does not cause an environmental impact...period...its inert steel... Now traffic is another issue...yes, there is risk to flora and fauna and trampling etc. BUT, with an increase in #'s of climbers, if routes are not available to them, you will find that easily protected traditional routes will be damn near overrun from overuse...AND then you'll be waitin' in line, for real... you want to keep it scary enough to limit the numbers of climbers entering the sport? Well, that's certainly a valid tactic...but i don't think that'll work either in the long run... Edited November 14, 2003 by RuMR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 RuMR said: AlpineK said: Allow me to insinuate jkassidy=pope=eric mohler. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Well, I'll be hog-tied and dipped in honey. And I thought you'd have to PM our "esteemed and ethical" moderators in order to ascertain my identity, which I so obviously wished would remain private. Kurt, you suggest that Dwayner is a prick. Well you've just demonstrated your capacity for being lower than a snake's butt in a wagon track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 but bolting as wrong just on prinicpal? HA! That's a joke... is it really? perhaps only the unique cultural-trope of being a climber can justify how we can be all earth-friendly yet drill holes into rock and insert metal hoops in it. it seems rather hypocritical for us to lambast others who are not as nature saavy, yet do something that is destructive to the rock. non-climbers see this hypocricy, so why can't we? perhaps it is because we have been grown up to believe that bolts are a necessary part of enjoying the backcountry, like wheelchair shitters at 10,000 ft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Please scott...tell me what the impact of a 3/8 inch stud is on a monolithic chunk of granite...This will be "enlightening"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 additionally, bolting does not cause an environmental impact...period...its inert steel... the hole is rock damage a good argument for keeping bolt counts low by placing gear wherever possible i would like to see someone argue now that a route with 6 bolts bolted drilling by hand on lead, is better than the same route put up on rappel - i haven't seen that argument regurgitated pro and con for a while! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 RuMR said: jkassidy said: Off_White said: I think the whole cant about how bold the oldies were and how pure and ideal the development of clean climbing was is fundamentalist history revision. Despite impassioned pleas in Chouinard Catalogs, the reason nuts caught on was not because pin scars were so abhorent, but because they were easier, faster, and safer. I could hang from one hand and place a nut, hell, even do it left handed, but dangle and set a pin? Clean climbing brought the sport down to a level that average folks could do more routes. So, the clean climbing revolution had NOTHING to do with a change in the way climbers approached wilderness and the preservation thereof? You're telling me that nuts caught on ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE EASY TO USE AND MADE CLIMBS EASIER FOR JOE AVERAGE? "If it's practical, I'll do it. If it helps me get up the cliff, shoot.....IT'S ALL GOOD!" May I summarize your approach to climbing ethics in the previous pseudo-quote? Is this what really motivates you? Just so long as it makes the climb easy, anything goes? Because, my friend, when you begin to allow for permanent alterations to the rock (bolts) in order to facilitate an easier ascent, and when you're Hell-bent on affirming the latest fad for fear of being accused of living in the past, YOU MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY TELLING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CLIMBERS (WHO WISH TO MAKE THINGS EVEN EASIER BY, SAY, CHIPPING A LINE OF BUCKETS) THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THE NATURAL LIMITATIONS OF THE CLIFF INSTEAD OF MURDERING THE IMPOSSIBLE. Bolts and chipping? U-N-R-E-L-A-T-E-D! Its a far stretch to say that bolts lead to chipping...a very far stretch... Murdering the impossible?? You can't even climb 90% of limestone w/o fixed gear CUZ THERE AINT EVEN A PLACE FOR A THREAD, much less some piece of gear... Elbsandstein, one of the boldest traditional areas around relies on fixed gear...there are rules about placing them, but they are there nonetheless... I don't think bolting leads to chipping. I think that they are ethically commensurate. If you can justify one, then you can justify the other. (And I predict, if guys like Offwhite are still around in 10 years, he'll be composing the pro-chip essays. I mean, let's make sure we're looking forward, gentlemen!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Dru said: additionally, bolting does not cause an environmental impact...period...its inert steel... the hole is rock damage a good argument for keeping bolt counts low by placing gear wherever possible i would like to see someone argue now that a route with 6 bolts bolted drilling by hand on lead, is better than the same route put up on rappel - i haven't seen that argument regurgitated pro and con for a while! Yeah...that 3/8 + 1/16 hole...catastrophic damage, yup...earthending annihilation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 jkassidy said: RuMR said: jkassidy said: Off_White said: I think the whole cant about how bold the oldies were and how pure and ideal the development of clean climbing was is fundamentalist history revision. Despite impassioned pleas in Chouinard Catalogs, the reason nuts caught on was not because pin scars were so abhorent, but because they were easier, faster, and safer. I could hang from one hand and place a nut, hell, even do it left handed, but dangle and set a pin? Clean climbing brought the sport down to a level that average folks could do more routes. So, the clean climbing revolution had NOTHING to do with a change in the way climbers approached wilderness and the preservation thereof? You're telling me that nuts caught on ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE EASY TO USE AND MADE CLIMBS EASIER FOR JOE AVERAGE? "If it's practical, I'll do it. If it helps me get up the cliff, shoot.....IT'S ALL GOOD!" May I summarize your approach to climbing ethics in the previous pseudo-quote? Is this what really motivates you? Just so long as it makes the climb easy, anything goes? Because, my friend, when you begin to allow for permanent alterations to the rock (bolts) in order to facilitate an easier ascent, and when you're Hell-bent on affirming the latest fad for fear of being accused of living in the past, YOU MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY TELLING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CLIMBERS (WHO WISH TO MAKE THINGS EVEN EASIER BY, SAY, CHIPPING A LINE OF BUCKETS) THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THE NATURAL LIMITATIONS OF THE CLIFF INSTEAD OF MURDERING THE IMPOSSIBLE. Bolts and chipping? U-N-R-E-L-A-T-E-D! Its a far stretch to say that bolts lead to chipping...a very far stretch... Murdering the impossible?? You can't even climb 90% of limestone w/o fixed gear CUZ THERE AINT EVEN A PLACE FOR A THREAD, much less some piece of gear... Elbsandstein, one of the boldest traditional areas around relies on fixed gear...there are rules about placing them, but they are there nonetheless... I don't think bolting leads to chipping. I think that they are ethically commensurate. If you can justify one, then you can justify the other. (And I predict, if guys like Offwhite are still around in 10 years, he'll be composing the pro-chip essays. I mean, let's make sure we're looking forward, gentlemen!) the only flaw in your argument is that chipping makes routes easier. The current marketing slick ad promotion game doesn't really want easier....they want HARDER lines to promote on their flashy mags...so the trend will always be towards more difficulty, not less...your argument about being able to swallow bolting will allow chipping to be kosher is nil... For years, the top sport climbers would absolutely come unhinged if a route got chipped easier...and they still do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 RuMR said: Please scott...tell me what the impact of a 3/8 inch stud is on a monolithic chunk of granite...This will be "enlightening"... it is unatractive, unnatural and it is a hole in the rock! i got into climbing as a teenager as an extension of backpacking that i have done since i was 5. I would have been pissed then to see a bolt in a rock. how self-centered to think that "we" the climbers of the rock are the only ones that have a say in how that rock is treated? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Dru said: additionally, bolting does not cause an environmental impact...period...its inert steel... the hole is rock damage a good argument for keeping bolt counts low by placing gear wherever possible i would like to see someone argue now that a route with 6 bolts bolted drilling by hand on lead, is better than the same route put up on rappel - i haven't seen that argument regurgitated pro and con for a while! Well, it goes like this: Given that any pussy can drill on rappel, those 6 bolt holes get multiplied by the scores of jokers who think that bolting on rap creates a lead. Now instead, if we agree that "leads" must be established on lead, and that bolts must be drilled by hand, just how often are those six holes going to appear? Answer me this, oh clever boy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 you said they didnt cause ANY environmental impact i pointed out that a small hole is not "nothing", it is a very very small "something" but the main impact is visual, and even that is not so much the bolt itself (on granite slab they can be hard to see from 10 feet away) as it is fixed draws on sport routes and lines of chalked holds, and cracks get chalked just as bad but on the wider ones the chalk is hidden inside.... I don't think either pope or RumR has said anything new yet today and i wonder who thinks they are convincing who??? maybe mattp can make another 15-paragraph long post and put everyone to sleep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 scott_harpell said: RuMR said: Please scott...tell me what the impact of a 3/8 inch stud is on a monolithic chunk of granite...This will be "enlightening"... it is unatractive, unnatural and it is a hole in the rock! i got into climbing as a teenager as an extension of backpacking that i have done since i was 5. I would have been pissed then to see a bolt in a rock. how self-centered to think that "we" the climbers of the rock are the only ones that have a say in how that rock is treated? But scott...everything you pointed out is an aesthetic issue...its not an environmental one in the sense that its altering the environment... Europe...its accepted to see bolts on crags...different aesthetic value... I'm not arguing with your aesthetic point of view...those are personal...just don't tell me its causing a true impact... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 scott_harpell said: well something to think about is: we are told to leave nature as (or better than) we found it. perhaps kassidy is correct that if we are really climbing to be with nature and respecting nature we will try to limit our impact on nature. it may be a large pill to swallow, but bolting the rock is not "leaving nature as (or better than) you found it. as fun as it is and as strong as it gets you, it still is derogatory for nature. you cannot debate this. you may say that it is relatively small transgression 'compared to bush's policies,' but do you really want to compare yourselves to the worst? i couldn't give two shits about the style or whatever. i just like getting out there. truthfully i feel guilty when i even clip bolts. i have always been taught minimal impact and this has lead me to wonder if mabe every climb need not be climbed. it is just my preference. flame on kids! The funny thing is bolt placing may have the least impact of all the things that climbers do. You can barley see bolts from a distance, but you can see trails and erosion. Climbers rip out lots of habitat when they clean climbs, especially cracks, for FAs. Climbers drive vehicles to the mountains/crags causing more CO2 and other pollutants to enter the atmosphere. Climbers leave chalk deposits that never seem to go away, and we leave colorful webbing around flakes when we can't rap off bolts. I view the whole rap bolt debate as a stupid macho thing. Folks like Pope and Dwayner think you should only place a bolt if you do it on lead after a lot of thinking. If they actually worked at setting routes for a living they would figure out the best way to place the most secure and well placed bolts. In my line of work we try to work smart not hard and thus if I were to translate that to bolting a route I would say that Rap bolting is the smart way to bolt a route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 Dru said: you said they didnt cause ANY environmental impact i pointed out that a small hole is not "nothing", it is a very very small "something" but the main impact is visual, and even that is not so much the bolt itself (on granite slab they can be hard to see from 10 feet away) as it is fixed draws on sport routes and lines of chalked holds, and cracks get chalked just as bad but on the wider ones the chalk is hidden inside.... I don't think either pope or RumR has said anything new yet today and i wonder who thinks they are convincing who??? maybe mattp can make another 15-paragraph long post and put everyone to sleep I still maintain that a hole is NOT an environmental impact, period... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted November 14, 2003 Share Posted November 14, 2003 jkassidy said: Dru said: additionally, bolting does not cause an environmental impact...period...its inert steel... the hole is rock damage a good argument for keeping bolt counts low by placing gear wherever possible i would like to see someone argue now that a route with 6 bolts bolted drilling by hand on lead, is better than the same route put up on rappel - i haven't seen that argument regurgitated pro and con for a while! Well, it goes like this: Given that any pussy can drill on rappel, those 6 bolt holes get multiplied by the scores of jokers who think that bolting on rap creates a lead. Now instead, if we agree that "leads" must be established on lead, and that bolts must be drilled by hand, just how often are those six holes going to appear? Answer me this, oh clever boy! not the question i was asking - two six bolt routes - bolts in same places - one drilled on lead one drilled on rap - argue merits of one over the other. it is just as easy to rap bolt a runout if you are a cheap bastard like me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.