Bolting discussion.

[Distel32]

that things like 7c+ right?

 

oh my god I'm so euro.....no more hanging out with bob....

 

where are my ice tools!?

[RuMR]

Stefan...you are exposing yourself...that's PeterCroft...i think he may know a thing or two about placing gear...maybe, maybe not...

 

Bob has hit this on the head...go fucking climb something...and your theory about only toproping some stuff is great in theory and shitty in practice...you've obviously have never climbed on really really steep terrain...its IMPOSSIBLE to toprope....

 

THis is a fucking stupid thread...don't POWER bolt in designated wilderness because its illegal...otherwise, have at it...

[Geek_the_Greek]

...how in the Hell could you possibly be in favor of defacing millions-of-years-old rock faces with bolt-holes?

 

This is what bugs me about the whole bolting debate, labeled under the guise of "environmental impact". The thing about rocks is that they're already dead. So "defacing" them by placing bolts is the equivalent of stirring around a bunch of gravel. It is an aesthetic impact, which may be a potentially worthwile issue, but to call it an environmental impact, on the scale of destroying habitat, killing trees/birds/soil microorganisms etc., or pouring your engine oil into Lake Washington is overstating the case big time.

 

Yes, there are many environmental impacts associated with rock climbing that are well-documented. Gardening cracks around here (whether done on the FA or over the years by subsequent climbers - it doesn't make a difference) ranks pretty high on the list, as does trampling ledges (nesting habitat), scrubbing faces (lichen, moss, often takes hundreds of years for them to establish, more in desert areas), and building approach trails. Simply increasing the number of people in an area, with their noise, piss, and smells, will keep a whole bunch of "wilderness-requiring" organisms well at bay (grizzlies, most weasels, etc.). So as for bolts, they are the symptom not the cause. If bolting a route brings crowds (which it certainly can), then obviously it will have a true environmental (ecological) impact. But if the area is already popular without said bolts, there will be no change whatsoever other than aesthetics (like DDD). You can argue the case on aesthetics alone, but that is only a the smallest part of what environmental impact is all about.

 

A good example of what I'm getting at - Burgers and Fries (Squamish, trad cragging/toproping mecca) and the Substation/Write-off rock (Exit 38, sport cragging/toproping mecca) are basically equivalent in terms of environmental impact from climbers (although there are more trees alive at X38). The fact that there are tons of bolts at X38 and not at B&F doesn't change a thing other than from the point of view of aesthetics.

[scott_harpell]

Stephan... it is not the first crack that I am looking at, but rather the corner crack. If you put a nut in the first crack it'd be pretty good I would wager, but it would only protect your first move... then what are ya gonna do?

 

Plus... look at the crack... if you think you cn even reach it you are dreaming.

Edited September 29, 2004 by scott_harpell

[RuMR]

...how in the Hell could you possibly be in favor of defacing millions-of-years-old rock faces with bolt-holes?

 

This is what bugs me about the whole bolting debate, labeled under the guise of "environmental impact". The thing about rocks is that they're already dead. So "defacing" them by placing bolts is the equivalent of stirring around a bunch of gravel. It is an aesthetic impact, which may be a potentially worthwile issue, but to call it an environmental impact, on the scale of destroying habitat, killing trees/birds/soil microorganisms etc., or pouring your engine oil into Lake Washington is overstating the case big time.

 

Yes, there are many environmental impacts associated with rock climbing that are well-documented. Gardening cracks around here (whether done on the FA or over the years by subsequent climbers - it doesn't make a difference) ranks pretty high on the list, as does trampling ledges (nesting habitat), scrubbing faces (lichen, moss, often takes hundreds of years for them to establish, more in desert areas), and building approach trails. Simply increasing the number of people in an area, with their noise, piss, and smells, will keep a whole bunch of "wilderness-requiring" organisms well at bay (grizzlies, most weasels, etc.). So as for bolts, they are the symptom not the cause. If bolting a route brings crowds (which it certainly can), then obviously it will have a true environmental (ecological) impact. But if the area is already popular without said bolts, there will be no change whatsoever other than aesthetics (like DDD). You can argue the case on aesthetics alone, but that is only a the smallest part of what environmental impact is all about.

 

A good example of what I'm getting at - Burgers and Fries (Squamish, trad cragging/toproping mecca) and the Substation/Write-off rock (Exit 38, sport cragging/toproping mecca) are basically equivalent in terms of environmental impact from climbers (although there are more trees alive at X38). The fact that there are tons of bolts at X38 and not at B&F doesn't change a thing other than from the point of view of aesthetics.

[Stefan]

Stefan...you are exposing yourself...that's PeterCroft...i think he may know a thing or two about placing gear...maybe, maybe not...

 

Bob has hit this on the head...go fucking climb something...and your theory about only toproping some stuff is great in theory and shitty in practice...you've obviously have never climbed on really really steep terrain...its IMPOSSIBLE to toprope....

 

THis is a fucking stupid thread...don't POWER bolt in designated wilderness because its illegal...otherwise, have at it...

 

Peter Croft may know one thing more than me.

 

About toproping: I said, "If" a route was topropable, why bolt it? Obviously you can not toprope Exfoliation Dome, so bolting may be okay.

 

I make the the personal premises to myself that says, "If I cannot climb it under my own abilities, then I should not climb it."

 

I think bolting something that could be toproped is ridiculous, I think bolting next to fine pro placement is ridiculous. However, I am more lenient on places where there is multipitching going on--it is out of sight. The locations of these bolts are way out of sight and do nothing to interfere with "wilderness" feel for the standard user.

[glassgowkiss]

stefan- top roping IS NOT climbing. you have to lead a pitch. always was always will be. like i said, fucking go climbing wankers.

[Peter_Puget]

I make the the personal premises to myself that says, "If I cannot climb it under my own abilities, then I should not climb it."

 

 

Please explain what his means.

 

Cheers

[RuMR]

my personal opinion is that bolts have huge visible impacts only for climbers...non climbers rarely notice bolts...

 

also, if you stick with this mantra "If I cannot climb it under my own abilities, then I should not climb it", you will never ever progress in your abilities...and if you do then it will be at a snail's pace...this may be fine for you but not acceptable for others...

 

Personally, i think its hypocritical and selfish for topnotch climbers to bolt heavily at their limit yet put up routes much under their limit that are sparsely protected and then claim first ascensionist's rights...

 

FWIW i have put up several routes on the east coast in the late 80's that are 5.11 r/x and when contacted by others if it was ok to retro protect them, said ok...basically the routes were drifting into obscurity...

[Stefan]

stefan- top roping IS NOT climbing. you have to lead a pitch. always was always will be. like i said, fucking go climbing wankers.

 

 

Why do you use a rope then? Rope is only there IF you should fall-it is a safety mechanism. If rope is only a safety mechanism then it should not matter if it is above you or below you.

 

Climbing is making the moves on rock. Even if I follow someone who leads, I still make the climb.

[Off_White]

Has anyone else noticed that they climb better, with greater focus, when they are leading than when they are top roping or following? Even on a well protected sport climb, it feels different.

 

 

of course, maybe that's just me...

[Stefan]

I make the the personal premises to myself that says, "If I cannot climb it under my own abilities, then I should not climb it."

 

 

Please explain what his means.

 

Cheers

 

If I can not place a piece of protection that I feel I can live with and/or I could fall on, then I should not be there. I do not rely on anybody else but what is naturally given to me on the route. But I still rely on the mechanics of a Camalot!

 

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9 I gotta earn to be a 5.10 climber and above, that means being confident on 5.9. and sequential grades.

[Bogen]

 

 

Why do you use a rope then? Rope is only there IF you should fall-it is a safety mechanism. If rope is only a safety mechanism then it should not matter if it is above you or below you.

 

Climbing is making the moves on rock. Even if I follow someone who leads, I still make the climb.

 

Are you trying to be incendiary, or do you have a point?

[Stefan]

Has anyone else noticed that they climb better, with greater focus, when they are leading than when they are top roping or following? Even on a well protected sport climb, it feels different.

 

of course, maybe that's just me...

 

I agree with you completely. I feel more focused leading rather than toproping. I just don't agree with the bolting thing if you could toprope a route. I guess if you want a real rush to focus, just make sure there is a lot of slack behind you on a topropable climb.

 

Why not place pro instead of toproping--I have no problem with that.

[Bogen]

 

 

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9

 

if you can't climb 5.9 then you CAN'T climb 5.10! What does mode of protection have to do with it?

[Peter_Puget]

I make the the personal premises to myself that says, "If I cannot climb it under my own abilities, then I should not climb it."

 

 

Please explain what his means.

 

Cheers

 

If I can not place a piece of protection that I feel I can live with and/or I could fall on, then I should not be there. I do not rely on anybody else but what is naturally given to me on the route. But I still rely on the mechanics of a Camalot!

 

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9 I gotta earn to be a 5.10 climber and above, that means being confident on 5.9. and sequential grades.

 

 

Sorry Stefan -

 

You're talking jibberish.

 

Cheers,

[Stefan]

 

 

Why do you use a rope then? Rope is only there IF you should fall-it is a safety mechanism. If rope is only a safety mechanism then it should not matter if it is above you or below you.

 

Climbing is making the moves on rock. Even if I follow someone who leads, I still make the climb.

 

Are you trying to be incendiary, or do you have a point?

 

Of course I have a point. The rope is only for safety reasons. AND just becuase you are not leading does not mean you are not climbing.

[scott_harpell]

 

 

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9

 

if you can't climb 5.9 then you CAN'T climb 5.10! What does mode of protection have to do with it?

 

If you have to bolt the shit out of it and hang doggggg up the thing... That is the issue...

[RuMR]

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9 I gotta earn to be a 5.10 climber and above, that means being confident on 5.9. and sequential grades.

 

again your logic is totally flawed...

 

Here's an example...let's say that you want to learn to climb steep, overhanging and roofed rock...and i'm not talking about the "roofed" routes we have in the PNW, but sustained more than 2 body length roof climbing that you can't just reach over and mantle through....well, i've got news for you, the routes usually don't start until about 5.11...so you can stay in 5.9suck land forever and totally dial that down, then you can go and dial down 5.10 tech face and you're still gonna get shut down completely on steep rock...simply cuz you don't know what the fuck you are doing...

 

We can extrapolate that to something like, oh i don't know, a nice slick flaring offwidth...guess what, you can cheat your ass off on most 5.9 and under offwidth and not learn how to climb them...the reason why is because an offwidth at 5.9 and under generally has enough crap inside it and on the neighboring face that you really aren't climbing it in true "offwidth" style...so you're gonna get shut down and flail and hangdog or you are never going to progress...sorry this is the real world and if you don't train specifically, it aint gonna happen...

 

you think 5.14 climbers didn't bump their grades by working their asses off, training, hangdogging routes, working stuff into the ground AND onsighting all at the same time? Guess again...

[RobBob]

The thing about rocks is that they're already dead. So "defacing" them by placing bolts is the equivalent of stirring around a bunch of gravel.

 

my personal opinion is that bolts have huge visible impacts only for climbers...non climbers rarely notice bolts...

 

Then it's okay if I go spray-paint "j_b is a wad" on rocks where it's unlikely that many people will see it very often?

[skykilo]

RuMR:

 

What if he just doesn't give a rat's ass about 5.14 climbing? That may be an option...

[RuMR]

The thing about rocks is that they're already dead. So "defacing" them by placing bolts is the equivalent of stirring around a bunch of gravel.

 

my personal opinion is that bolts have huge visible impacts only for climbers...non climbers rarely notice bolts...

 

Then it's okay if I go spray-paint "j_b is a wad" on rocks where it's unlikely that many people will see it very often?

 

its cool only if you leave your mom's phone #!

[RuMR]

RuMR:

 

What if he just doesn't give a rat's ass about 5.14 climbing? That may be an option...

 

that's why i said "if" you want to stay where you are at and are ok w/ a snail's pace of development...personally, that's not ok for me...

[Bogen]

 

If you have to bolt the shit out of it and hang doggggg up the thing... That is the issue...

 

So on bolts it's hang-dogging, but on gear it's OK? But isn't that aid climbing? No, wait, aid climbing has bolts...

 

Probably there is the odd person that bolts a line just to "hangdog" up it, but this is hardly a strong enough point to form an entire ethos. I sense this is not about mode of protection, but rather a form of the same old self-righteous anti-sport-climbing nonsense.

[RuMR]

 

If you have to bolt the shit out of it and hang doggggg up the thing... That is the issue...

 

So on bolts it's hang-dogging, but on gear it's OK? But isn't that aid climbing? No, wait, aid climbing has bolts...

 

Probably there is the odd person that bolts a line just to "hangdog" up it, but this is hardly a strong enough point to form an entire ethos. I sense this is not about mode of protection, but rather a form of the same old self-righteous anti-sport-climbing nonsense.