Ethics questions...

[Dru]

Countdown till snaffle post 0!

[Geek_the_Greek]

I have but one problem with the purist mentality: it assumes that to climb without placing fixed pro (without altering the rock) is considered clean climbing, and for this reason alone is far superior to methods that involve fixed protection. To me, this is the biggest myth of all.

 

There is a very fine boundary that describes clean (i.e. essentially no aesthetic or environmental impact) climbing, and it DOES NOT INVOLVE FIRST ASCENTS. I'm sorry, but once you do an FA and publish it in a guidebook (and it's a route that for certain reasons will get climbed again - often a matter of a nice line, a reasonable approach, the potential for aesthetic moves, etc.), you have PERMANENTLY (by definition, according to a human lifespan time scale) altered the environment. You tell me you care about the aesthetics of bolts on the rock and chipped rock? That's fine, but humans are the only ones who are impacted (and only aesthetically, unless someone is otherwise injured by the existence, or (more likely) lack thereof of bolts or pins). As an ecologist, I will tell you that I care about cliff vegetation, about lichen and moss communities that take a century or more to develop, about the hardy trees that get gardened out of cracks in the name of a first ascent. Am I weeping every time I see the cleaned line of a climb? Of course not - there's a tradeoff, and as a climber I'm happy others have worked so that I may have fun on the rock. But from the environmental perspective, bolts are the big so what, and cliffside trampling is a big fucking deal, especially in desert areas. The land managers at Smith Rock, for instance, have written off the most popular areas (Shiprock to Asterix Pass), and don't really care about new bolted lines as long as no one gets hurt. But they do care about someone trying to dig out new routes from the Monument area, because - guess what? - there is actually still native grass at the base of the cliffs, and birds and plants living in the cliff.

 

So sure, a new grid bolted cliff developed out of what merely used to be choss is harsh on the environment, but a ground-up development of the same cliff is just as harsh, if it ends up being popular. There is no shortage of trad craggers. Thus, for me the bolt/no bolt issue is missing the point entirely of the very real environmental impact debate. Did I care that Dan's Dreadful Direct was retro'd? Not a whit - the area was already blasted (does a flat treeless area called Logger's Ledge actually strike anyone as the symptoms of 'clean climbing'?), so it might as well have been a line that would see some more ascents.

 

So that's fine if you don't agree with my blase attitude towards bolts, but don't pretend that your no-bolt development represents clean climbing.

[Geek_the_Greek]

One more thing: the real way to do clean first ascents is to avoid cleaning a route, avoid flagging the approach, and avoid telling anyone about it (ie no posting on cc.com, no guidebook writeup). Oh yeah, and no bolts or pins either. Those are the things (especially the writeup) that bring 'unclean' impacts. For obvious reasons, few are interested in this approach.

[mattp]

Right on, Geek. Bolting is the most divisive thing in climbing today, and those who focus solely on this one issue or cluster of issues often distract us from many many other concerns that are at least equally important when it comes down to ecological, aesthetic, athletic, and even adventure values. Bolting and climbing styles are very important – but so are some other things:

 

vegetation impact

erosion

wildlife impact

parking

safety

public image

police problems

etc.

 

It is relatively rare that we have any serious discussions about "ethics" in relationship to these other issues even though they are in general higher on most non-climbers' list of concerns and have long lasting and significant affects on climbing and crags. I don't think they were even mentioned in the recent "ethics issue" of Rock and Ice.

[JayB]

Cross post:

 

http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/threadz/s...2677#Post494499

[bobbyperu]

i think geek makes a great point here...

[JayB]

I agree with Geek about the broader environmental impact, but my hunch is that the principal environment that JosephH/Gosolo are focused on is the rock itself - which is fine if you believe what you are really concerned with is the preservation of a certain kind of route. As long as we are talking about environmental impact, though, it might be worth revisiting one of the points that's been made over and over, which is in the grand scheme of things, whether we are talking about species preservation, deforestation, etc, etc, - the impact of climbing relative to other forces is virtually nil, and is probably a net positive when one considers the conservation value of people who actually care about preserving cliffs, mountains, etc - as a result participating in the activity.

 

And as long as we are on the subject of JosephH and gosolo here, I have a question for you guys. Is it that you just dislike sport climbing and the tendencies of the climbers who participate in the activity - or do you really believe that the mere existence of sport climbing and sport climbers somehow threaten your ability to climb dangerous lines in particular, and non-bolted lines in general? The only way I could see the latter being true was if there were actually people out there systematically bolting trad lines, especially bold ones, into oblivion - but if one confines one's ruminations on this matter to what has actually happened with respect to the addition of new bolts to existing lines, then it's hard to imagine how anyone could really object to the existence of sport routes or climbers on the grounds that they are going to lead to the elimination of adventure, risk, etc, etc, etc in climbing.

[Crackbolter]

I started reading Range of Glaciers recently. I read another called King of Fish and have also read many, many others related to the environmental impact of the Pacific Northwest. Rock climbers, mountaineers, skiers, backpackers and other foot and hand powered adventure seekers seem to have a common ground; environmentalism.

 

Rant and rave but first realize the history of the decline of habitiat in the PNW. A bolt is a grain of sand in the ocean of impact that has been bestowed onto our resources.

 

Go chop your bolts and kick over cairns and whatever else satisfies your needs but you are wasting energy in the grand scheme of what is really needed here.

 

How many of you waste mass amounts of money every year caught in the consumerism of buying the latest and greatest climbing or skiing gizmo when you could be selflessly giving that money to a private fund contributing to the protection of our public lands?

 

I'd guess everyone reading this post.

 

I just wish I wasn't so much part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

[bwrts]

Not to be nit-pickey but Geek the Greek is wrong about the "treeless" loggers ledge on castle.

 

However, I do agree about the overcleaning of routes and boulders being rediculous. One can climb a route without removing ALL the vegetation.

I don't have many years of backing experience (~14years now) but, I do believe the "sport-era" sped up the overall impacts that Geek and MattP mentions. I mean, back in the day, most the stuff in the Icicle was considered worthless choss and unsignificant... so why bother. Also reclaiming old forgotten routes is the sortof the same thing; if the routes were good then why didn't they get climbed thru the years. Even though they may be right next to some classic. Obviously, the route is not that good so it was not repeated often. And I am not referring solely to Index....

[Dru]

How much of the impact of the eroded path to Condor Butress can be directly linked to Condormorphine Addiction, the sport-bolted route?

[AlpineK]

Just how is Geek wrong about loggers ledge. Your landlord and a couple others cut some big trees off loggers ledge. They had to stop traffic on hwy 2 when they did it.

 

In terms of overall impact to the environment cutting the trees on the ledge is many magnitudes worse than placing bolts on DDD.

 

Not that I'm against cutting trees or for the bolts placed on DDD.

[bwrts]

There is a tree (maybe two) and tall bushes there...so, the ledge is no longer "treeless"...

 

Must have been quite the sight... Fred with a saw and large trees falling down lower castle.

[gosolo]

 

And as long as we are on the subject of JosephH and gosolo here, I have a question for you guys. Is it that you just dislike sport climbing and the tendencies of the climbers who participate in the activity - or do you really believe that the mere existence of sport climbing and sport climbers somehow threaten your ability to climb dangerous lines in particular, and non-bolted lines in general? The only way I could see the latter being true was if there were actually people out there systematically bolting trad lines, especially bold ones, into oblivion - but if one confines one's ruminations on this matter to what has actually happened with respect to the addition of new bolts to existing lines, then it's hard to imagine how anyone could really object to the existence of sport routes or climbers on the grounds that they are going to lead to the elimination of adventure, risk, etc, etc, etc in climbing.

 

JayB, I do not have a problem with sport climibing. I have put up about 30 sport rotues in Utah, Arkansas and Missouri. I also, do not feel that there is any wholesale retrobolting thing going on.

 

This thread started by someone asking the question about adding bolts to an existing route. One caan only surmise that someone asking such questions is either new to the sport, or trolling. I assumed they were new to the sport. To me, ground up rock climbing is an art that is being lost. My comments are here mainly to support the preservation of runout or difficult to protect routes. This question of retrobolting goes on all the time all over the country. There does appear to be more climbers that say safety is paramount even to the point of saying that a route is like a trail, why not perform some trail maintenance? Anyway, I like JH's first response the best, "ask yourself why you want to add bolts to a route." I only really feel the need to try and let new climbers know that the history of the spoort once suported ground up ascents. To me, if all crag routes are made safe, then I really feel that Climbing will have evolved to a sanitized sport for the massses and the real heart of climbing as it was when I started in the 70's will have been lost.

 

Hell, I like cliping bolts too. But Nothing can replace being on the sharp end on a FA or even on a route like Superpin in the Needles. Each of us have our goals and ideals. Preserving rotues done in a bold manner helps preserve one of my ideals. I respect those routes and am merely expressing that here to the guy who was asking about adding bolts to a route.

 

Have fun anad be safe and dont add bolts to an existing route

[DCramer]

I went climbing last weekend with someone who has put up about 30 ground-up ascents this year alone. (Rock routes in Washington) I do not think that ground-up ascents are a thing of the past. By the way when did the extra bolt get added to the Superpin route? Wasn't it a long time ago?

[Hanger]

If you want to preserve the route…and the environment…do away with guidebooks. No names…no ratings…

 

Let each climber find and enjoy the adventure for himself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(With that said…feel free to PM me with the beta…I pledge to respect the FA’s style)

[DCramer]

Also reclaiming old forgotten routes is the sortof the same thing; if the routes were good then why didn't they get climbed thru the years. Even though they may be right next to some classic. Obviously, the route is not that good so it was not repeated often. And I am not referring solely to Index....

 

I think this logic is not supportable by reality. Examples:

 

Index

 

Keith’s Crack 5.11c

Super crack climb. Was cleaned and then lost popularity and Cal thought he found a new route when he retrocleaned it. It’s a bit scruffy now. Definitely one of the better crack routes in the state.

 

Top Pitches of JG 5.11c

When cleaned these help make one of the best multi-pitch crag routes in WA. Now they are pretty dirty. I cannot think of any crag routes in WA that are clearly better.

 

Leavenworth

 

Apesville 5.11b

Fun roof crack. Never seems to get done. Why? Who knows but it’s fun as hell.

 

Monkey Lip 5.11

Mostly protected by old fixed KBs/Bugaboos. A good scrubbing and gear upgrade would bring this back to popularity. Ben, I would think that you would want people to climb existing routes at Castle rather than move out to other areas.

[bwrts]

I do not care where people climb...

 

Castle is a favorite crag of mine and other people, too. The views of the river and other crags is hard to beat...the road sucks tho. As for the two castle routes you mention, well...it sucks they don't climbed often, I guess. They are hard for most climbers and really look silly, IMHO. I do hope to try them sometime and a few others on L-C. All the routes right of the fault, I have done and all are fun but they also do not get climbed often. Most people, climb Mr Clean, SMUT (since 1/4 bolt replaced), The Fault and sometimes Clean Love. The Flying Frog route to the far right is cool just dirty as hell but then that was cool too! Reminds me of being on a FA, just deal and go.

 

As for the two resurrected routes at Index...that is cool that they were found and lost and found and apparently (upper JG) lost again to moss and lichen. Perhaps they should just be left for the dirt....and climbers who are willing to deal with the dirt. In all actuality, don't you think if a hard route gets more traffic, the grease from multiple ascents will make it "unfun?"

My issues with retrocleaning are only really with "inacan"s choice in deciding he should clean a "forgotten classic" in the middle of the summer when most people have random work schedules or aftenoons available to go climbing. He should have done his work in the off-season. As for adding bolts to make the rockcimbing safer, I think everyone who reads this bickery knows my stance... if there is gear-potential the dont drill the hole...

[DCramer]

climb...

 

All the routes right of the fault, I have done and all are fun but they also do not get climbed often.

 

How's Squeak of the Humiliated? Details please I always wanted to try it.

[bwrts]

Squeak of Humiliated (skinner's freeclimb of the aidroof) is not right of the Fault, Darryl. It is above the Fault and to the left a bit. The Fault, specifically, is the 5.6 chimney...

however, the route does continue thru the dirty ledgey bushy rock to the big roofed ledge where squeak, croft and yoder's way to do squek, idiots delight, bird nest overhang, and other? routes start... The Fualt does continue to Logger's Ledge via cool traversing crack never really harder than 5.6.

[DCramer]

Your thinking of Shriek of the Mutilated aren't you? I am thinking of what's between JJ Overhang and Gorilla Desparado? Is there no route?

[bwrts]

No shriek is down by Brass Balls. Squeak is by Gorilla Desparado....

I heard croft and yoder did this squeak route but using a flake of some-sort, which skinner avoided using. Consequently, contriving a harder way to climb the aidroof and then renamed the climb.

So, there is a route. And this is really swaying from the intention of this so-called ethics thread. IS ethics DEAD?!?!?!

Where is the PETEY PUGET intervention?

[DCramer]

Squeak is by Gorilla Desparado....

 

So Squeak is to the right of the Fault?

[lancegranite]

I quit caring 17 posts ago.

[mattp]

Just as whether or not he was posting anonymously five pages ago, the question whether two tree ledge has a couple of bushes on it or whether brts has in fact climbed ALL the routes to the right of The Fault is a bit of a distraction here. We were talking about ETHICS, including questions like:

 

Whether you love 'em or hate 'em, are bolts the only issue that matters in rock climbing or the most important issue or one of several issues that we should be concerned about?

 

or

 

Is ground-up exploration and establlishment of new routes the only valid means or the best means or one way to do it?

 

or

 

Is the idea of developing or managing a crag for other climbers inherenly wrong or is crag development like every thing else something that can be done well or poorly?

 

or

 

Are there any circnumstances under which it would be valid to add a bolt to an existing climb or is the creation of the FA sacrosanct and, if so, does this apply in reverse so that bolts installed by the FA should not be removed?

[DCramer]

I went climbing last weekend with someone who has put up about 30 ground-up ascents this year alone. (Rock routes in Washington) I do not think that ground-up ascents are a thing of the past. By the way when did the extra bolt get added to the Superpin route? Wasn't it a long time ago?

 

From Piana's guide:

 

Superpin went without a second ascent for ten years. Unfortunately, on the fourth ascent, a bolt was placed. After a long heated debate, it was decided that the offending bolt should remain in place because no bolt wars are desired. Nevertheless, the climbs on Superpin are among the most frightening leads in the Needles; they are not climbs to fall off.

 

Looks like the bolt was added before sport climbing!