Ethics questions...

[111]

I have a question on altering established routes. So say the first ascentionist has died and I want to add another bolt/piton/fixed gear. How do I go about getting permission to retrobolt/nail if I can't get the FA's permission?

I am not considering doing this at all, it's just a hypothetical question that noone I know has been abe to agree on an answer. What do you think?

[pope]

Swami Gauribala says, "I have contacted the deceased climber with whom you wish to confer, and I can promise you that he would be upset with additional fixed gear on his test piece."

 

[JosephH]

"...and I want to add another bolt/piton/fixed gear."

 

1) Question your motives...

 

2) Go to step #1.

[chirp]

Perfectly acceptable, hes dead, who cares. Bolt and chip/glue as you feel is needed. Seriously.

[tomtom]

Shotcrete the cliff and mold the climbs down to your level.

[lancegranite]

Say that you are the first ascenionist, and you want to add a retro bolt or pin to your route.

Do you have to ask a bunch of ingrates? or do you just do what the good lord intended...

[billcoe]

"...and I want to add another bolt/piton/fixed gear."

 

1) Question your motives...

 

2) Go to step #1.

 

And lastly - discuss it with everybody who climbs there (which you are starting by asking the ? here). Remember that everybody has veto power.

[texplorer]

Amen to "veto power" MMMWWWaahahahahahahahaha

[archenemy]

Shotcrete the cliff and mold the climbs down to your level.

Beautiful.

[flashclimber]

Even with the FA blessing, its always possible someone might come by and chop your bolts...ie Cunning Stunt!

[flashclimber]

Actually I believe that if you made a route so unsafe by placing scary pins, so few bolts, and questionable gear, then its your responsibility to make it safe...This was the case of Snake Dike in Yosemite if u read up on it. Some would say no, but then again why would you want to climb some piece of crap route some guy created just to please his adrenile rush for the week. Its a waste of a route that could have been decent if created properly! Maybe thats why I wont lead 24 hour bucaneer. A 20 year old rusted pin, with 15 foot runout protected afterwards with RP's. Think Ill pass! Even tho the route would have been killer! No pun intended.

[mattp]

Flash -

 

what is the "history" of Snakedike that you refer to? Has it not remained with a bolt every 75 feet whether you need it or not?

[RuMR]

Actually I believe that if you made a route so unsafe by placing scary pins, so few bolts, and questionable gear, then its your responsibility to make it safe...This was the case of Snake Dike in Yosemite if u read up on it. Some would say no, but then again why would you want to climb some piece of crap route some guy created just to please his adrenile rush for the week. Its a waste of a route that could have been decent if created properly! Maybe thats why I wont lead 24 hour bucaneer. A 20 year old rusted pin, with 15 foot runout protected afterwards with RP's. Think Ill pass! Even tho the route would have been killer! No pun intended.

 

why is it someone else's safety the first ascensionist's concern?? That is stupid...if you get scared, can't handle it, then don't try it...

 

what now? You propose suing the first ascensionist???

[RuMR]

Flash -

 

what is the "history" of Snakedike that you refer to? Has it not remained with a bolt every 75 feet whether you need it or not?

 

the bolts on it are modern, if few...not 1/4 ers like what was put in on the fa...

[Terminal_Gravity]

Hey Flash Climber,

 

I don't understand the reference to Snake Dike. You suggest reading up on it. Where?

 

The first time I climbed it I wore EB's. The first climbers probably wore PA's. I have known people that have free soloed it by moon light. The crux was well protected and the anchor's on the run out YDS 5.4 were reasonable. IMHO

 

Has it been grid bolted? I think that any solid 5.9 leader with steath 5 rubber, a clear head and a rope with a lower impact force then goldline could safely lead Snake Dike. (Which BTW is a spectacular and very worth-while, albeit technically easy climb by modern standards; contrary to your implication).

 

I have absolutely no idea why a classic and beautiful climb, in an alpine setting, with a crux of 5.7 needs to have the simple 5.4 section made safe for a leader who has managed to pull off their life time best of a single 5.8 move on plastic in a gym. The whole concept reeks of EGO, domination of nature and the distruction of adventure for the committed by the weak.

 

I don't care about your style. Do what ever YOU like in the mountains...as long as it leaves them the way they were for the next party; so that they can explore and challenge themselves the way they want to.

[fern]

The bolts on Snake Dike now are almost all post FA, they were placed a while (months?) after the FA when the FAist realized that there was potential for a popular moderate, but they had not placed adequate anchors or protection bolts on their FA - they gave permission for some other dudes to go hammer a few more in.

 

this has been written about in a few places. Probably "Camp 4" by Roper, climbing mags etc.

[mattp]

I agree that Snake Dike is "safe" as is (or as it was when I climbed it). I thought Flash was implying that it may have been retro'd to add the bolts at 75 feet. If so, I think that was probably a good idea -- certainly few have objected that the route is OVERbolted.

 

There has never been any case of the FA being sued or even much blamed for subsequent accidents as far as I know, but that doesn't mean that we don't hold them in some measure responsible for considering the safety of those who follows. For example, if somebody consinstently puts up death-routes, even more so if they repeatedly establish death-routes below their level of competence just to make some kind of statement, most of us will frown upon that. Similarly, if the guy puts a bolt where it does not protect the crux move or takes you out of the way, most of us will complain that the route was badly bolted. As long as we maintain what we call the "first ascent principal, where the FA has some say in subsequent modificaion of their route, I think they have some responsibility to think about others who will follow.

[matt_m]

Just another note on history and the FAist intent. A lot of icons of the Golden Age on have been interviewed over the years about their various opinions on routes they did etc etc. One theme I almost universally see come up is that they didn't want their routes to be run-out death traps, they simply didn't have the means to bolt them better but wanted to do the climb anyway. Historically, these guys (Bachar excluded) were adventurer's with limited means and limited technology. They could only afford one good kern-mantle rope so the haul rope was hemp etc. Same goes with bolts. I can't remember who or what climb it was (significant one though) The climber said all he could afford to buy was 6 bolts so that's all they used on the ascent. Years later, when asked he said that if he'd had the means he would have certainly put more in. I've read this same account from many an older climber. Point is, a lot of head strong people get up in arms that we're not "bold" like the gritty men of old. Truth is, the gritty men were bold because they were too poor not because they were trying to make an "adventure" statement. I'm not saying climbs should all be retro'ed BUT I am saying that the "preserve the danger and adventure" mantra sprayed about by modern climbers is often an idea they invented, NOT the older guys. Creating artificial danger purely for the sake of adventure and danger is antiquated and mis-guided at best and plain wrong in many cases. I'll still support a bold, ground up slab ascent here and there (how some of those guys drilled on lead is beyond me) - good on you for the style but putting up a seriously run out 5.8 when it's obvious it didn't need to be is reckless and irresponsible. In this day and age, if you're drilling you certainly can afford the proper hardware to equip it properly. Many an old "hard man" wishes they had the means you do now, back in the day...

[catbirdseat]

Nice post, Matt.

[mattp]

MattM, I believe the idea that bolts could take the adventure out of climbing was espoused by Messner in the 1970's, and there is a long-forgotten Chouinard article on that subject from 1961. Some of what you say is true -- not all of the run out "classics" were intended to be scary as a statement of values and many who participate in these arguments distort things or may not even know what they are talking about in the first place, but the argument about how modern climbers are using too many bolts out of cowardice is not new.

[Terminal_Gravity]

-- certainly few have objected that the route is OVERbolted.

 

[matt_m]

Matt, I believe the idea that bolts could take the adventure out of climbing was espoused by Messner in the 1970's, and there is a famous Chouinard article on that subject from 1961. Some of what you say is true -- not all of the run out "classics" were intended to be scary as a statement of values and many who participate in these arguments distort things or may not even know what they are talking about in the first place, but the argument about how modern climbers are using too many bolts out of cowardice is not new.

 

Good points - Certainly those greats of climbing have valid arguments as well. I guess I'll state that I'm a member of both camps. Bolts can and do get placed in spots that make me mad because they're obviously NOT needed. Experience and skill would keep you safe. In those cases - bolting the climb DOWN to your level is inappropriate. For me, I support both because I believe there is room for both in the climbing world. "Modern" climbs put up with a conservative, safety-first style are great and NEED to be available. Putting a bolt on a ridge traverse because one can't safely climb a 5.6 hand traverse is NOT what I mean by this.

Bold climbs that reward the strong headed climber also have their place. I've scared my self silly on the Apron (Bran Flakes anyone? Lower, non 5.12 pitches of Dream On?) and enjoyed (in a sick way) every minute of those climbs as well. I swing both ways! I guess my point is, with rock resources in more crowded climbing areas diminishing, putting up a bold and dangerous route is a waste of the resource. There are plenty of those climbs already in existence. Spread the climbing around. Now, in the more alpine environment, which is where I believe Messner and Chouinard had their gaze set, there is arguably a NEEDED level of competency. Dumbing the climb down is inappropriate. If you can't pull the 5.7 move on a ridge, than maybe you need to get better overall skills first, instead of bolting the resource down to you. Alpine and cragging areas have inherently different "styles" and "ethics" IMOP.

 

The bolting debate will never die - I support tightly bolted lies as well as bold run-out scare fest. They each have their place. It is the short sighted climber who believes in absolutes. My way is the only way is a thought process I deplore.

[chris]

I don't think Snake Dike is a good example for this thread - or it might be an excellent example of how a route should be retrobolted. Here's the history according to Steve Roper from Chris McNamara's Yosemite Ultra-Classics:

 

“Climbers who made the long trek up to the base of the massive southweest face of Half Dome before 1965 went there for one reason only: to do the classic Salathe-Nelson route. This demanding aid line wandered up unconnected crack systems, but it was the only way to the top: everyone knew that the rest of the face was crackles – obviously impossible. When Camp 4 inhabitants heard, in July 1965, that a second route had been put up nearby, the sense of disbelief was audible. When the first ascensionists – Eric Beck, Jim Bridwell and Chris Fredericks – bragged that their route was trivial, disbelief turned to disdain. When they claimed that they placed only two pitons and about six hurried bolts, disdain evolved into thoughts that the three men should be committed. A far easier route than Salathe’s? But it was true. Beck had been the instigator of the route soon named Snake Dike; he had spotted a potential route on a reconnaissance and had talked the two others into making the horrendous approach. To their great surprise they put up the new route in a day from Camp 4 back to Camp 4.

 

“Years later, Beck reminisced about their climb. ‘We were expecting a much harder route and only had twelve bolts, so we did our best to conserve them where the climbing was easy. What I really imagined happening was that we would get up a few pitches, fix the ropes, and return with a few more bolts. Also, our original line was to follow a dike leading up and right, on pitch three. This was Bridwell’s lead and he climbed up about 20 feet, got in a bolt, but didn’t like it. This caused more uncertainty about route finding and wasting our bolts. I then gained the lead and had a look to the left. This proved to be the best way.’

 

“Two years later I grabbed a stranger named John Gibbons and we set off at dawn from a campsite in Little Yosemite, armed with a hefty bolt kit. Ordinarily, taking a bolt kit for an easy second ascent would have made me a laughingstock. But Beck, Bridwell, and Fredericks, feeling that they had created a potential death route for beginners, had given me permission to replace their bad bolts and stick in new ones where I deemed necessary. This was the first time in Valley history that the first ascensionists had given someone permission to add bolts to their route.

 

“At the end of two pitches Gibbons and I realized that the Dike was truly a splendid route, and I made sure my bolts were bombproof and properly spaced. That is, I did this for a while. My fingers and arms soon began to throb from all the hand drilling. Morning turned to afternoon. I inspected my dulled drill bits. I listened as Gibbons called up anxiously, ‘You finished?’ Soon I simply ran out the pitches and relied on the sporadic and wretched first ascent bolts. We rappelled the route and staggered back down through the brush to our camp below, arriving just as the owls began to hoot.

 

“Snake Dike hadn’t been totally retrofitted, but it had been a good day and a good start. We spread the word and within a few years many bolts were added, and Snake Dike became the most popular climbers’ route to the top of the most spectacular hunk of granite in North America.

- Steve Roper”

 

In another case, a mentor of mine advocated adding bolts when 1) the style of climbing is being changed and 2) when the potential fall is life-threatening. The example is an aid climb that we have been trying to free this summer. On one pitch, the FA aid team hooked and rurped up to twenty+ feet at a time before installing a bolt or rivet. In some places, taking that 40+ footer will leave a free climber dead, so we added a bolt in those spots to keep from killing ourselves. There are still plenty of spots where 20+ foot falls are likely, so it still keeps you on your toes.

We also attempted to figure out who the FA team was (the route's not documented anywhere) with no luck - the area has a history of not documenting ascents, and there is a bit of a renassaince (sic) happening right now as old routes are being re-bolted and aid lines freed.

[thelawgoddess]

Hey Flash Climber,

 

I don't understand the reference to Snake Dike. You suggest reading up on it. Where?

 

The first time I climbed it I wore EB's. The first climbers probably wore PA's. I have known people that have free soloed it by moon light. The crux was well protected and the anchor's on the run out YDS 5.4 were reasonable. IMHO

 

Has it been grid bolted? I think that any solid 5.9 leader with steath 5 rubber, a clear head and a rope with a lower impact force then goldline could safely lead Snake Dike. (Which BTW is a spectacular and very worth-while, albeit technically easy climb by modern standards; contrary to your implication).

 

i agree. snake dike is certainly not a "piece of crap route." i felt it would be a good candidate for freesoloing. i skipped some of the upper bolts to alleviate rope drag before i finally decided it was time to unrope. if those upper bolts were added later ... they probably didn't need to be added. aren't all slab climbs run out?

[lancegranite]

Flash climber got my refrence to Cunning Stunt.

 

I repeated the route on my vacation and found it exciting to pull the crux.

The fall would not be that bad, but it was not that appealing either.

Greg's retro job brings up good questions, when is your route not yours anymore?