Bolting discussion.

[Geek_the_Greek]

"Preserve respect for their heritage" blah blah blah.

 

Why do you climb? I climb because it's fun and a good challenge. I bet most people out there feel similarly. Who cares if they live in the suburbs or can't climb 5.10a?

 

If we pretend to care about the outdoors that we enjoy visiting being kept in good shape, we must build support for its protection. The way to do that is to encourage others (or at least not discourage them) to enjoy the outdoors too, so that recreationists have some clout as a user group. This has happened in many places, and if climbers continue to battle pettily over issues like bolting, before we know it, access will really be threatened by changes in land designation, development, etc. that will make bolts seem like yesterday's joke.

 

The fact is that climbing is no longer a fringe activity practiced by a few outcasts with dirty beards. So what if the suburban hordes climb at exit 38? Maybe there'll be some resistance to quarrying away the rock in another I-90 gravel pit or leveling more land to build condos, like in Issaquah. And exit 38 doesn't threaten anybody - it's a pile of short, ugly cliffs right beside the freeway, about as far from wilderness as you can get and still have some natural landscape features. It never was and never will be anything close to a historic, traditional climbing area.

 

And why would people assume that climbing everywhere is going to be the same? Do the top-ropers who go to Barney's rubble (some who know absolutely NOTHING about building safe anchors, I might add) assume that climbing Rainier is going to be the same? Or the NE buttress of Slesse? Of course not. What's the worst that can happen? They go to some trad area, realize there are no bolts and leave in frustration. More likely, they read a guidebook for someplace like Index and then figure out it's not the place for them. Most people putting bolts out there on sport routes are not rank beginners, they're usually people with a lot of experience who just happen to have different ideas about what they want to climb than purist trad types. The few exceptions are usually quickly put in their place. All the better.

 

I say we cut the crap, accept the fact that outdoor activities are on the rise everywhere, and it's part of an increasingly health and nature-conscious populace (a good thing, IMO). People will have different ideas about what activities they want to do, and some will be content with bi-weekly afternoons in the gym with the odd outing to Exit 38 or Vantage. Others are into riding horses or mountain biking or whatever. Still others are into heavy doses of suffering, alpine style. I'm not seeing loads of people out there bolting the hell out of the Index cracks or the classic alpine routes, so what's all the whining about? Even things like Infinite Bliss (which is, after all, a new route, not a retro) are the exception rather than the rule. And the argument about that one seems to be based on whether or not it was in the wilderness, and therefore constitutes an illegal use of power-tools.

 

The fact is, the only thing that's really going on out there that's pissing you people off is that there are more people climbing out there, many at a low level of proficiency and with little knowledge of the context or history of the sport. And logically, new developments are happening in accordance with the increasing numbers, in a totally predictable manner. Well, unless you're an advocate of increasing regulation (quotas and the like for cragging), you're just going to have to live with it. Frankly, trad types should be happy that these folks are sticking to bolted areas. If they knew how, many of them would quickly venture over into the trad routes, swarming over the crack lines, like a raging rash...

[RuMR]

...clumsily chopped

Perhaps the method of chopping is being criticized?

 

If you want to discuss or critique the way it was done (method) and whether is was "clumsy", feel free to PM me. I was one of the 3 people who chopped it.

 

That said, I think this is a distraction from what we are trying to discuss. I think Bug raises some important issues in his post above. We would benefit more from addressing and discussing those points than rehashing this one specific incident.

ican't believe viktor actually put that in his route description...what a shame. the route was led on gear..i do recall that it had a few pitons, but perhaps it can protect with new widgets.

 

the fact that remains is it was led with gear (preplaced or not, it takes gear).

 

that picture of croft on airstream with bolts near some rp cracks is almost a shame...the crack looks like (to me) not very gear friendly unless you pound a piton.

pitons damage rock like bolts..so there is not difference...that being said perhaps viktor's statement isn't that out of the playing field. the route probably needs a few bolts near wear pitons used to exhist, constituting a mixed lead....

 

omigod...is that the voice of reason!!!!

[Dru]

Dan Lepeska, the FFA, expressed a desire on the original DDD thread that there be one bolt at the start and the rest be gear.

[Anon]

" so what's all the whining about?

 

I believe that deep inside it is about not being able to keep up with the speed of ability development in climbing. And the subsequent desire to hold things up, or eliminate altogether to preserve the cheast-beating status quo. Anomalies are bound to happen and a crack or two will be bolted, it is not a norm. New housing and other development is. That's the real danger. The very real potential of commericialization of "wilderness" is. So who opted for a condo instead of a house in suburbs?

Arizona thing? Well, if climbers didn't threatened each other with death, nobody would've noticed a thing.

 

It has been my experience that majority (not all!!!) anti-bolters are shitty climbers. And if climbing is all about a personal experience - it is for me - then hell, skip the bolts, solo, spray about it. I haven't seen much of it though, just from very accomplished and renowned climbers, most of them not anti-bolt "nazzi"'s.

 

Flame on

[willstrickland]

I just PM'ed this to Szy, but since Dru brings it up here's what he (one of the FFA party) said (excerpt)

 

As Victor correctly points out, when the first ascent was done there was a fixed pin in place - it was actually there for Damnation Crack, but we did reach over and clip it, and it protected what was otherwise a very dangerous runout.

 

I believe the guiding principle for replacing fixed gear on an existing climb should be to maintain the state of the climb as the first ascentionists found it; for instance, replacing bolts that were reliable but have since become rusty. Or, replacing fixed pins that have fallen out. In the latter case, a bolt may be a better choice since a replaced pin will just fall out again eventually, and the rock gets beat out a little more each time.

 

So, I would say that adding one bolt to DDD, at the same level as the original fixed pin (even with the bulge at the end of the initial crack on Damnation) would be perfectly appropriate. Ideally it should be further out left on the wall, since the original fixed piece was an awkward reach right to clip and would be too close to Damnation Crack, which really doesn’t need a bolt.

 

As for the second bolt... well, I did think that the route was otherwise adequately protected - if just barely - with nuts. The start requires stepping above small, insecure wires until you reach the (missing) fixed pin, but that’s part of the charm of the route. I remember stepping up and down a bunch of times working out moves, too scared to fall on the tiny wires below me; as a sport route it would be a completely different experience.

 

To the folks who chopped the bolts, I do appreciate your efforts to maintain traditional cragging values at what has always been a trad crag. And, you filled the scars with epoxy and rock chips, right?

 

But I do think the addition of one bolt to replace the missing fixed pin would be perfectly reasonable.

[scott_harpell]

Calling people who have differnt views as you weak and generalizing that they are weak climbers is a pretty crappy method to get your point accross... If you can't debate this on teh merits of bolting, then mabe you should take it to spray in another thread.

[dberdinka]

I believe that deep inside it is about not being able to keep up with the speed of ability development in climbing. And the subsequent desire to hold things up, or eliminate altogether to preserve the cheast-beating status quo.

 

That's a poor arguement. 5.14's have firmly been established for what 20 years now? We all got left behind a long time ago!

 

Very few climbers are strictly against all bolting. I think a lot of us believe sport climbing, the focus on technical skill via the use of bolts to reduce and practically eliminate objective risk, has it place. I wish I could climb 5.13 sport and am impressed by people who do.

 

I think many of us find a distaste in what I tend to call "comfortized" routes. Climbs put up not in the pursuit of technical difficulty or of self-reliance and adventure but rather to offer a "safe" "polished" "guarenteed_success" experience. They tend to be overbolted, overscrubbed, overequiped and generally controversial among climbers, land managers and other user groups.

 

Infinite Hubris, Condormorophine, the retrobolting of Quine Conehead Memorial Route etc are good examples of what I'm talking about.

 

Route like this suck. They do nothing to advance the sport, they do not challenge, they do not force us to improve, they do not force us to understand our abilities and take responsibility for our actions. They are ackin to wackin off.

 

The following quote from the 1972 Chouninard Catalog best illustrates the problem many of us find with modern route development.

 

We believe the only way to ensure the climbing experience for ourselves and future generations is to preserve (1) the vertical wilderness, and (2) the adventure inherent in the experience. Really, the only insurance to guarantee this adventure and the safest insurance to maintain it is exercise of moral restraint and individual responsibility.

[Bogen]

Sport-climbing is a very different thing from making "your own safety on a route." The feeling here seems to be that it is inherently wrong, or bad somehow.

Even amongst those of us that are pro-sport-climbing, there is agreement that over-bolting is a danger, particularly in wilderness areas as previously discussed. That shouldn't deter us from respecting the desire of people who want to practice some form of climbing, albeit in a safer, more accessable form.

So let the wankers top rope you say, no different than leading on bolts. It feels different to most of us. Who the fuck are you to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't feel?

Let's break it down.

1) retrobolting? Touchy subject, but it seems that most agree that a local consensus, including the FA'ist, on a bolt by bolt addition or replacement is the way to go.

2) Wilderness bolting? Most of us, as per Lambone's "poll" would take some action to prevent it (amongst those that wouldn't rat, most would have taken other action)

3) Environmental damage. Popular trad areas do just as much damage as popular sport areas. The rock is NOT alive, 'cept for coral and we can all agree never to bolt that.

4) Aesthetic damage. I'm sorry you don't think its pretty. Subjective arguements don't carry much weight without a substantive majority, which the anti-bolters definitely do not have.

5) Grid-bolting/sport-climbing. Wildly popular, slowly encroaching on many popular trad areas. Probably in need of some mitigating action.

 

I agree with the idea that the ethic taken to the rock by people whose sole exposure is sport-climbing leads to rampant hilti-abuse. We need to try to contain this over-bolting, but not by claiming that there should be NO sport-climbing areas (I am making the assumption that sport-climbing areas equal and should equal grid-bolted areas) It is obvious where a line that respects people's different preferences should lie.

The anti-bolting thing smacks too much of an ego-trip. For instance, calling sport-climbing routes bolt-ladders is an obvious hyperbole intended to exaggerate the lack of courage or confidence of the person leading the thing. Maybe this is an underhanded personal jab at the bolting mentality, but I think it says more than that about the real issue in the heart of the anti-bolter. The anti-bolter is, at heart, insecure and desparate to appear better than the rest of us. This is probably why they began climbing in the first place, to rise above the multitude. Suddenly, through technical innovation, hordes of people calling themselves climbers are scurrying about every semi-vertical surface within spitting distance of a road. "NOOO those aren't climbers, they're just cowardly, bolt-ladder crawling worms. I am the real climber, me, only meeee....."

 

 

gosh, that was fun.

[Bogen]

Calling people who have differnt views as you weak and generalizing that they are weak climbers is a pretty crappy method to get your point accross... If you can't debate this on teh merits of bolting, then mabe you should take it to spray in another thread.

 

calling sport-climbing routes bolt-ladders is an obvious hyperbole intended to exaggerate the lack of courage or confidence of the person leading the thing. Play it like you call it.

[Bogen]

 

They do nothing to advance the sport, they do not challenge, they do not force us to improve, they do not force us to understand our abilities and take responsibility for our actions. They are akin to wackin off.

 

Some people think it's FUN!

[scott_harpell]

Calling people who have differnt views as you weak and generalizing that they are weak climbers is a pretty crappy method to get your point accross... If you can't debate this on teh merits of bolting, then mabe you should take it to spray in another thread.

 

calling sport-climbing routes bolt-ladders is an obvious hyperbole intended to exaggerate the lack of courage or confidence of the person leading the thing. Play it like you call it.

 

It isn't... I have aided up sport climbs at ex. 38 just using the bolts. THAT is a bolt ladder and is not hyperbole, but honest to God fact. I never said all of them are. Did you not read where I said that I enjoy many bolted routes?

[dberdinka]

They do nothing to advance the sport, they do not challenge, they do not force us to improve, they do not force us to understand our abilities and take responsibility for our actions. They are akin to wackin off.

 

Some people think it's FUN!

 

SAVE IT FOR THE SHOWER! RATHER THAN FUCKING UP THE MOUNTAINS

[Bogen]

They do nothing to advance the sport, they do not challenge, they do not force us to improve, they do not force us to understand our abilities and take responsibility for our actions. They are akin to wackin off.

 

Some people think it's FUN!

 

SAVE IT FOR THE SHOWER! RATHER THAN FUCKING UP THE MOUNTAINS

 

 

GIVE ME A GOOD REASON WHY I SHOULD! seriously.

[cappellini]

still whining about that dreadfull disrespect for dan...perhaps some history is in order.......the first ascent was done by Dan Davis and Pat Callis in 1963, 20 pitons and 3 bolts (no hangers)..hence the name..oddly enough it was first free climbed by a guy named dan, that of course is irrelevant...replace the original three bolts and leave the route for those bold enough to try it...i have always wanted to try it, and someday i will...when i am mentally and physically prepared on a day i happen to be there...the faggotty retro-bolts were an abomination, and an insult to climbing...modern gear protects most anything these days, and if it doesn't use the nuts in youur pants(or uterus if you have one)or try something else .....

 

as far as power drills in the wilderness, its poor fucking style...its like trying to justify a dirtbike in the wilderness...again an insult to our sport, get real...

 

same goes for rap bolting big faces in the mountains, too lazy to aid climb and drill your bolt ladder on lead hugh?....pathetic...these discussions are ridiculous, a bunch of lame people trying to justify lame actions....why can't people have a little self respect and do things with good style....fucking supersize everything attitude sucks...

 

in the past few years i have seen more pathetic bolting than ever in lworth, i climb past bolts and place bomber gear right next to them far to frequently, not the case a few years ago....even viktor and gordon had enough self respect not to do that shit in years past, now they push it beyond reason because there is a consortium of sissys who justify it because they never actually learned to climb but still want to be climbers...dude i send 5.10, that's all they want is a number...

 

a matter of fact i find this shit on routes i onsited in the dirt years ago..i've never chopped a bolt in my life but if i had nothing better to do i'd chop that shit in a heartbeat...luckily for the guilty (which includes the clippers not just the drillers) i have better things to do than clean up after some self-sodomizing pathetic weasle that is unwilling to climb in good style and stick to what they can handle....but if it gets any worse i just might go and chop all that crap, and i 'll chop it again if i have to...i'll chopchopchop till their all gone...i'll chop everything they ever bolted and there would be nothing to stop me....why? because i am a self riteous prick who focuses on climbing in good style...go ahead chop the half dozen bolts i've placed, if you can get to them....in my world its all about style, not numbers, not nameinabook, just good style...go ahead start a war..you'll loose...just cuz you think you were "first" doesn't mean you have the right to wreck it.....

 

i should mention that i do enjoy face climbing bolt protected lines, those done in good style...someone mentioned robbins earlier...that primadona drilled just as many bolt ladders as harding, i've climbed a few, his bolts are farther apart than hardings, but he is like a foot taller than warren...duhhh...robbins just whinned about the ones harding got to first...there is nothing wrong with a bolt ladder anyway, no other pro and done on lead...to the summit old man i say!!!!someone will free it someday...or clip past that insignificant little section of an otherwise stellar line

[scott_harpell]

[Szyjakowski]

holy shit cappellini. you have almost made 100posts!

as always...you are spot on!

the entire robbins/harding pageant is old boring news.

[willstrickland]

4) Aesthetic damage. I'm sorry you don't think its pretty. Subjective arguements don't carry much weight without a substantive majority, which the anti-bolters definitely do not have.

 

I gotta call you out on this one. First, the only person you will find that does not agree with the aesthetic damage argument are the clippers! Subjective? Hardly. Any other land user is going to call those what they are...an eyesore. A random bolt here and there, probably never noticed by most, but line after line of shiny steel...yes they are going to notice.

 

What makes you think that CLIMBERS are the majority? A big part of my entire argument is that sport bolting and the attendant aesthetic damage will eventually endanger our access. All of us, sport, trad, boulderers, mixed climbers.

 

I couldn't care less about some roadside choss like Ex38. It sets a precedent among those introduced to the sport at such areas, but beyond that I don't care. But when there are multi-use areas where hikers, fisherman, photographers, or whoever recreate, a shiny line of steel is going to cause them to have a poor perception of our "community". I think land managers who are not climbers will feel the same way. "Bolts are an eyesore and permanent, snowmobiles are loud and temporary." That is a very real perception of many land managers.

 

Having some areas set aside for sport climbing, in the outdoor climbing gym fashion...I have no issue with that assuming it is in the "right" place...such as 38. However, we run a serious risk of endangering our continued access or ability to place ANY bolts whether for rap anchors or belays or to pro the runout slabs, if we don't limit these types of routes to certain areas.

[Dru]

Not entirely true Will. There are places like Back of the Lake at Lake Louise where the hikers apparently love to see the shiny lines of bolts just as much as they like to see the dangling climbers dogging out the moves on DEWLine.

[willstrickland]

Fair enough. I could cite plenty of counter examples where backpackers and fisherman have complained about bolts to me. I've run into plenty of recreationalists who enjoy seeing the climbers "in action" but never any who liked seeing the bolts.

[Bogen]

You make a good point - I had only included climbers in my assessment, and hadn't given a thought to "multi-use." However, I've never heard a non-climber complain about a bolt or line of bolts. I wonder if fishermen have these debates about piers and breakwaters and such.

[Peter_Puget]

Precedence may be in issue but might we already be beyond that point? Limited resources will be allocated to users in some manner. Climbers having staked out certain areas might be given those areas for keeps! I have no truck with the psycho-babble of advancing climbing or saving the challenge for a future generation who is more up to the task but I do think tht the future of climbing is wide open with new great routes (bolt protected and otherwise) awaiting discovery. It seems like extensive development might be the equivalent of putting all the eggs in an inferior basket.