Bolting discussion.

[sexual_chocolate]

...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.

 

Well said, although there are a couple of points I'd have to comment on:

 

1. Your comment on rocks being "dead" is highly speculative, since we as humanoids have hardly come to understand what constitutes "death", much less "life"; remember that just a few years ago, the earth was flat, humanoids couldn't fly, computers weighed...2....t..o...n...s.........

 

2. And Secondly!, considerations regarding bolting do not axiate simply on aesthetics; there are great differences in one's (my) approach to a climb that one (I) will be leading with minimal gear. If all of rock climbing was reduced to clipping bolts every four feet, my enjoyment of the climbing experience would be altered drastically (difficulty isn't the only thing I personally strive for).

 

 

 

I wonder what some of you think of the gritstone ethic; don't you think it's pretty cool that there are places preserved for an approach such as this?

[RuMR]

hmmmm...cocoa puff...

 

gotta agree that some places should be left as trad climbing...i'm just saying that its assinine to remove all sportclimbing and bolts, just like its assinine to bolt everything in sight...to me that is just one more flavor to sample...

[sexual_chocolate]

ok, point taken.

 

Next comes the hard part: deciding which places remain bolt-free!

 

Any suggestions?

[Stefan]

 

 

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?

 

Ummm. Forgive me for speaking generally but traditionally, the harder routes requires more competence to place protection becuase those routes have less places to place pro. Mode of protection means those more competent can place pro in the more difficult places. Those less competent rely on bolts.

[Stefan]

 

 

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...

 

Sorry, I don't hang dogggg. Why? I don't have the time to improve. You could become more proficient at still toproping a 5.12 climb, and hang dogggg to do the moves over and over to improve.

[scott_harpell]

exactly... that is what i am talking about.

[Stefan]

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...

 

True. I can see overhangs as a serious problem to the toproping issue and trying to avoid bolting.

 

But you can still try to toprope if you can do "dial" in the route. But usually if you are "hangdogging" to "dial" into the grade, aren't you usually less than 50 meters off the ground?

 

What grade is "To Bolt or Not to Bolt?" Is this overhanging? (I seriously have no idea.)

 

 

[Stefan]

RuMR:

 

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

 

I would like to climb 5.14......but I don't want to spend the time to get there....hence I know I will never get there....

[sexual_chocolate]

exactly... that is what i am talking about.

 

 

What are you talking about?

[scott_harpell]

I think the issue is this RUMR... if you can avoid bolting (either through natural protection or TRing) you should do it. You gave examples where this is not possible and that is fine, but I think when putting up a route... thinking less is better than more is a good idea and avoiding bolts if possible si the best solution.

[sexual_chocolate]

I think the issue is this RUMR... if you can avoid bolting (either through natural protection or TRing) you should do it. You gave examples where this is not possible and that is fine, but I think when putting up a route... thinking less is better than more is a good idea and avoiding bolts if possible si the best solution.

 

Yeah whatever. I'm glad you've figgered out the "best" solution. Congrats.

 

Any reasonable voices ou there? How 'bout designating certain areas bolt-free? Any ideas?

[Bogen]

Are you saying that there should be NO bolted sport climbing routes where a top rope is possible?

[scott_harpell]

Are you saying that there should be NO bolted sport climbing routes where a top rope is possible?

 

Yes

[Bogen]

Are you saying that there should be NO bolted sport climbing routes where a top rope is possible?

 

Yes

 

That is a helluva big "should." Can you justify it intelligently?

[scott_harpell]

Why put in bolts that are not necessary? I don't see any reason to do this. So someone can get machismo jollies off the fact taht they weren't a pussy and led up a bolt ladder instead of TRing it?

[Bogen]

Is trad leading more than "machismo jollies?"

[willstrickland]

I think the issue is this RUMR... if you can avoid bolting (either through natural protection or TRing) you should do it. You gave examples where this is not possible and that is fine, but I think when putting up a route... thinking less is better than more is a good idea and avoiding bolts if possible si the best solution.

 

Yeah whatever. I'm glad you've figgered out the "best" solution. Congrats.

 

Any reasonable voices ou there? How 'bout designating certain areas bolt-free? Any ideas?

 

That's pretty arrogant to dismiss his idea out of hand. There are a lot of people who agree with his stance. I am one of them. I'd love to hear your arguments related to what is gained (other than convenience) by "leading" a sport-bolted line that could be TR'ed instead?

 

We know what the impacts are, so what are the advantages?

 

I don't argue that overhanging routes are a special case. And most routes at Smith are obviously not TR-able. I don't out-of-hand reject sport climbing areas. But I do find it suspect that you are calling him "unreasonable". It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, and it sounds like you cannot address the message so you attack the messenger. IMO. FWIW. ETC.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Why put in bolts that are not necessary? I don't see any reason to do this. So someone can get machismo jollies off the fact taht they weren't a pussy and led up a bolt ladder instead of TRing it?

 

Shit, why pound pins or trundle loose rock to get to good pro or stain big walls with piss from long ascents when you could just TR them with 6000' static lines anchored to organic, sustainably harvested, tree-farmed birch hexes placed lovingly in Mother Nature's own secret granite slots?

 

i.e. shut up and climb, nitpicker.

[scott_harpell]

Why put in bolts that are not necessary? I don't see any reason to do this. So someone can get machismo jollies off the fact taht they weren't a pussy and led up a bolt ladder instead of TRing it?

 

Shit, why pound pins or trundle loose rock to get to good pro or stain big walls with piss from long ascents when you could just TR them with 6000' static lines anchored to organic, sustainably harvested, tree-farmed birch hexes placed lovingly in Mother Nature's own secret granite slots?

 

i.e. shut up and climb, nitpicker.

 

Your hyperbole doesn't address my implied question: What does it matter if you are leading a bolt ladder vs. TRing something? Machismo? Bragging rights?

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

The threat of logging air time in exchange for sequence-botching adds to the experience, for starters. i.e. preservation of an integral part of the original (pre-sport) climbing experience.

 

While we're addressing hyperbole, maybe you could drop the silly and condescending reference to bolted sport routes as "bolt ladders." After all, DFA was barely able to get the draws up on his last proj with a long stick -- some of the bolts on the "ladders" are far apart!

Edited September 29, 2004 by Dr_Flash_Amazing

[scott_harpell]

So... it isn't about actually climbing a certain route or for training purposes... as RUMR stated... it is about the experience involved... Make it "scary" by leading? Is that the rationale for bolting TRable climbs?

 

If you are just looking for a penalty for fucking up a route... why not just add some penalty slack? Or are you implying that clipping bolts is part of the climbing experience? I thought that bouldering and free soloing were the most 'pure' ascents because you don't have to stop and place gear. Wouldn't that make TRing preferable to Leading? You can concentrate only on the moves and technique involved rather then on clipping a bolt?

[scott_harpell]

Is trad leading more than "machismo jollies?"

 

No, it is necessity so you don't splat if you fuck up.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

So... it isn't about actually climbing a certain route or for training purposes... as RUMR stated... it is about the experience involved... Make it "scary" by leading? Is that the rationale for bolting TRable climbs?

 

If you are just looking for a penalty for fucking up a route... why not just add some penalty slack? Or are you implying that clipping bolts is part of the climbing experience? I thought that bouldering and free soloing were the most 'pure' ascents because you don't have to stop and place gear. Wouldn't that make TRing preferable to Leading? You can concentrate only on the moves and technique involved rather then on clipping a bolt?

 

You are way off route assuming that there is but one reason for bolting routes or climbing sport routes. Just as trad climbing isn't just about placing nuts or torquing your fingers into jams, bolted route climbing is about many things ... experiencing the unique movement of climbing; pushing your physical and mental limit in an arena that allows you to fuck up without splat-risk while still employing the traditional ascent mode of climbing, i.e. leading, and to gain the attendant satisfaction afforded by success in that mode. You're equally off-route assuming that this is based in machismo (seen many machismo-motivated women climbers out there, wiseass?).

 

You're free to TR any line you want; you're probably not going to bump into any of the bolts as you climb. Those of us who enjoy the sport gestalt will do so as well. Sport climbing has evolved into what it has evolved into and is enjoyed by many because it is fun and rewarding and safe and a lot of other things to different people. The fact that it came into being and continues to be so widely enjoyed is testament to the fact that it is far more than the smattering of idiotic and insulting facets that you insist on reducing it to for the sake of this argument. You're obviously not interested in actually hearing what makes bolted routes appealing; you're interested in beating people over the head with your smugly superior opinion. Why even pretend to be discussing the issue? If you wanna beat people over the head, cut to the chase and call them morons, insult their chosen means of recreation, and threaten to chop their bolts like all the other holier-than-thou bolt-haters littering the history of sport climbing like so many turds in the yard.

Edited September 29, 2004 by Dr_Flash_Amazing

[scott_harpell]

...but DFA, I don't like placing pro. I would rather just climb... I place gear when I am afraid of splatting. I don't think of placing gear or clipping bolts as a part of climbing, but rather as a necessary evil to ward off gravity. The less I have to do it, the happier I am.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

Whereas DFA, and probably some other folks out there, finds climbing somewhat scary, and is comforted by the availability of bomber gear at regular intervals, facilitating what would be, for this Doctor, nigh on impossible without the help of Rawl, Fixe, Metolius, Petzl, Hilti, Bosch, et. al.