[TR] Vantage- Sunshine Wall Various Routes 3/26/2006

[catbirdseat]

Up until this point, I have not been aware of any bolted cracks at Vantage. There are numerous mixed routes, but in general bolts were never placed where there was adequate natural protection. In some cases, the protection came in the form of fixed pins.

 

This represents a change in ethics for the area and should not stand. It may be one route, but it matters because of the precedent it would set.

 

I should add that, per the guidebook, Jim and Marlene are the first ascensionists 1996), but that doesn't give them license to bolt cracks.

Edited November 7, 2007 by catbirdseat

[LUCKY]

My opinion, not that it is jack …ethics opinions are like asshole, everyone has one and they all stink, the FA changed the route, if you don’t like it, put up your own route and we will have more routes to climb, if it has more bolts than gear…well …the call is iffy

The people you are spray’n about on the internet have put up hundreds of routes , Can some of you sprayers that are sooo critical dooo some work ,hang your ass off a cliff risk your ass instead of jack’n your jaws(or your fingers) Tequlia is my weekness and the reason I open up...good or bad???

afterthought...as I get that agro hair up my ass...they put up 2 new routes last weekend for us to enjoy, WTF did the rest of you you do? YO old climbers don't like to get hurt...we are still out there crank'n.... I can count on seeing them till WE can't walk to the crag....get it!!!!

 

 

Edited November 7, 2007 by LUCKY

[Marty]

I'm going to pipe in with LuCKY here. My stance is the same as it was a couple years ago during a bolt chopping debate, and it is this:

 

WHO THE FUCK IS MARTIN CASH?

 

and

 

Who endowed him with such divine ethical standards?

 

Bottom line: Yoder, creator of routes at the cliffs that you all climb on.

 

Martin Cash, bottom feeder, critic. Contribution to climbing in WA state; zero.

 

 

 

 

 

[catbirdseat]

Who the heck is Marty Bland? And why does he have a beef with Martin? Martin's my buddy. Just because he doesn't bolt up sport routes doesn't make him any less capable of forming ethics opinions than any of us.

 

Cracks were put there by nature and she ain't making new ones very fast, unless another column falls over that is. Ha ha.

[MCash]

Who endowed him with such divine ethical standards?

 

My standards are hardly divine. I am simply against the precedent of placing bolts next to protectable cracks. Nothing more.

 

Bottom line: Yoder, creator of routes at the cliffs that you all climb on.

 

Absolutlely. I love everything he's done. I contacted him directly regarding this issue. Let's see wht he has to say.

 

Martin Cash, bottom feeder, critic. Contribution to climbing in WA state; zero.

 

Not true. I've done crag cleanup efforts, trail maintenance, helped with route development, rescrubbed routes, helped teach classes, and provided tons of beta and photos on climbing.

 

Let's keep to the topic at hand - Go Cat Go at Vantage.

[Marty]

Hanging off a rope, cleaning bird crap and loose, dirty, basalt out of cracks is not fun. It's really not that fun to clean the loose rock off the faces or put bolts in either. Yoder has probably been doing it longer than Martin has been climbing. Has Yoder messed upon this route maybe? Should Martin Cash give the guy some leeway and keep his mouth shut? For sure.

 

Martin, it is my understanding that your climbing resume would benefit if you spent more time training to climb, and climbing rather than worrying about some mixed climb at Vantage.

[mattp]

Hanging off a rope, cleaning bird crap and loose, dirty, basalt out of cracks is not fun. It's really not that fun to clean the loose rock off the faces or put bolts in either.

 

I've done a fair amount of work replacing bolts and I've put up a few routes and talked with lots of folks out there who do this. I'd have to say that, while it IS a lot of work and it often seems unfair or may be unpleasant to read the criticism's of someone like Martin, we do it mostly for the fact that it is somehow personally rewarding and I don't think Martin "owes" it to anybody to refrain from comment just because they happen to do a lot of hard work.

 

That said, there DOES seem to be something a little out of whack about attacking Jim and Marlene on cc.com. Some will say that this is the only forum we have, but these threads do not seem to be really helping much no matter what your perspective on the issues may be and I'd be quite surprised to see Jim and Marlene show up for Kangaroo Court. I call it this because I can't remember the last time somebody came on here to say "I am the guy who put that bolt next to a crack that you are complaining about and here's why..." and the reason is obvious: on cc.com that could only lead to an obnoxious flame war or worse and there is nothing in it for that poor schmoe.

 

I'm happier to see where Martin says he's sent a private message or e-mail and looks forward to receiving a response. Who knows, maybe we could have an informative discussion of the decision-making that went into this particular effort.

 

 

[Marty]

When someone gets on the forum and starts saying that they are going to chop this and that they can expect grief. And please lets put this into perspective. It's another 10b mixed (now bolted) route at Vantage. While Im not going to wait out at the cliff for Martin and his crowbar, I will take 2minutes to tell him what I think.

 

If I was Yoder I wouldn't even give Martin a response. If It wasn't for Yoder, Martin and friends wouldn't even be climbing out there period. Martin and friends have never taken the initiative to scout out cliffs and put the labor, time, and money into development like Yoder. Guy's like Martin are armchair quarterbacks picking at the guys that created the game.

[MCash]

I won't touch the route until I hear back from Jim.

[hawkeye69]

whatever happened to the old days, when these things were resolved man to man instead of through some f&&&ed up thread that got sidetracked.

[Git-er-dun]

With some reservation, I feel I need to provide some real information for this debate.........

 

I'm the FA and creator of Go Cat Go not my husband Jim Yoder. I spent four entire days cleaning the route, placing the bolts then FAing it with supplement gear. I have led it several times since that first day and believe Go Cat Go is a great climb. Other climbers have mentioned to me that the crack is mank. We did it again recently and noticed that the crack has never cleaned-up and there was hardly any chalk on it, which might explain why I have never seen anyone climb it. I decided to add more bolts and an anchor hoping others would now want to lead this awesome climb. Jim was against my decision, but agreed to help. I selected locations for the bolts that made sense to me.

 

For those of you who have never climbed it, I can give you an idea - after the roof you get a great finger jam to a jug below the crack that is filled with cemented rock that I could never clean. After a section of cemented rock you can place one piece of gear before you move into what is best described as a hole - big as a basket ball. From the hole you move into a crack with fractured blocks, but not really loose ones.

 

If your opinion and ego motivates you to chop the route - I have a few requests. Please lead the route first and let me belay you. When you complete the lead, look me in the eye and tell me that you are still motivated to chop my route (assuming you still feel this way which I hope you won’t). Then I will remove the bolts. I know the kind of bolts we placed and the depth of the holes drilled. I will remove the bolts the best I can since I love this climb and don’t want it to be scarred like the other six chopped routes at the Coulee. If you think I do not have ethics based on my decision to change Go Cat Go that is your right. But I would ask that you not extend this opinion to JY because it would be a mistake. Just go lead the route to the right of Go Cat Go, Shot from the Sky, and tell me that it is over-protected with bolts. If you do lead it, you might be the second person ever to do so.

 

Lucky, thanks for sticking up for us. Creating new routes is a lot of work and a lot of money. Publishing the guidebook is a lot of work and money too. We hope to have it out by March 2008 and are busy putting in new routes (sport and crack) and some more strategically located anchors.

 

Thanks,

Marlene Ford

 

[TrogdortheBurninator]

Thanks for the explanation Marlene. A few springs ago I attempted go cat go, but was unwilling to commit to the moves below the roof where the only pro I could find were some small (but good I think) nuts. I had been hoping for sometime to go back and climb the route in it's entirety. I am sure it is a very fun sport climb, but vantage has enough sport climbs and perhaps not enough high quality moderate mixed gear routes with challenging but adequate pro. I was upset to see the bolts, knowing I would never have the chance again to climb the route in its prior state.

 

BTW, thanks for all the hard work you guys put in out there.

[jimbabwe]

"Saw a whole bunch of friends there: trogdortheburninator and beautiful wife Sam with their friend Aaron, James and Alexa, Gyselink, Jimbabwe and Rob, Mike Boyer and his group, Roboboy and AMS."

 

Jimbabwe?

Thanks for vicarious fun

 

[ClimbingPanther]

With some reservation, I feel I need to provide some real information for this debate.........

 

...

 

Thanks,

Marlene Ford

 

Wow, that was a really respectable thing to do, coming out & explaining what you did in detail. Let's respect her level of politeness & reason in the tone of discussion, eh?

 

My 2 cents is that the desire to see others enjoy your route is admirable, but to me it is ineligible for bolting by virtue of it's crack-ness, and even more so since you climbed it repeatedly with gear proving it's feasable. The fact it doesn't meet the comfort level of lesser climbers should not be a factor in the decision.

This is an important issue because it's a slippery slope. Like CBS said, it sets a bad precedent. Ethical decisions affect all of us the farther down the slope we go, so this is not just an issue for the experienced trad hardman who climbs your route and looks you in the eye and says he still wants the bolts gone.

 

But hey, life goes on, and seriously, thanks for the work you & Jim do at vantage and especially on the up and coming guidebook! I am a beneficiary and I appreciate it. There's a lot of anxious customers-to-be out here.

 

oh, and this needs to be resolved one way or the other before the guidebook comes out... "But the book says there's supposed to be bolts and an anchor! That was my favorite quickdraw!!!"

Edited November 15, 2007 by ClimbingPanther

[Crack]

"I was upset to see the bolts, knowing I would never have the chance again to climb the route in its prior state."

 

it's still there waiting for you; ignore the bolts.

 

[mattp]

I’ve never laid eyes on Go Cat Go so you can take or leave my comments but it is my impression that at least some folks here are trying to suggest there is some objective standard in play when really there may not be.

 

Folks complain about this “sad trend toward bolting cracks” when they read the reports here on cc.com, but many will gladly use or even call for anchor bolts next to a perfectly good crack or a pro bolt next to a hollow flake or a bolt instead of a tie-off horn that would have been considered perfectly good pro 25 years ago. Others might accept a bolt next to a 8” crack somewhere because they don’t carry a big bro. I don't think I've seen it in this thread but quite often the strongest objections are raised by some who never expect to climb the route under discussion. One guy has written “it is a wrongly bolted crack” while on one of my routes he has suggested I add additional bolts next to cracks where the pro was not secure enough for him even though the climb has seen dozens of ascents in its present state - over the last five years.

 

Is this a bad example of someone’s descent onto the slippery slope of "lets bolt all the cracks at Vantage?" Is that really where you think we're headed if you don't raise an objection to this particular bolted crack? I don’t know but what really is the nature of this crack that takes perfectly good pro and what is the reality here. Trogdor may not have the opportunity to lead the climb in its former state, but I know the guy and I suspect the fact that he backed off it before means it is NOT a secure lead without at least some additional bolts. However, the fact that some here have led the climb without the additional bolts is cited as “proof” that they are not needed. Either way, we’re back to the subjective standard again. Does that matter?

 

Thumbs up to those interested in the discussion but lets see if we can take it to the next level and discuss our own relationship to this climb how that affects our position here. This is more interesting that simply suggesting there is some black and white line without even discussing the nuances of where that line is drawn.

 

[Peter_Puget]

lets see if we can take it to the next level and discuss our own relationship to this climb how that affects our position here.

 

Huh?

[mattp]

Folks often say "there is an objective line and this climb is over that line," but they rarely say, as Troggy might say were we to take it to "the next level," that "I had a particular experience with this climb and I am responding to that experience as much as I am following or urging an objective standard." I'm putting words in his mouth, and he might say something entirely different, but my point is that all of our positions on this "ethics" question are colored by our own experiences with the particular climb or with climbing in general yet most of the time we try to suggest that there is some objective and hence unassailable "standard" that should be upheld.

 

If we've led a climb and felt OK about it - maybe even proud of our lead - we tend to say "the new bolts are not necessary." If we've backed off afraid or led it while freaking out, we tend to say "it is unsafe" (here, though, Trog doesnt say that but instead he suggests he somehow established a successful lead of this climb as a personal goal). If we think the first ascensionist is not going to come back and add bolts, many who don't like bolts will say "only the first ascensionist has the right to add bolts." If they do so, some will say "the fact that they established the route doesn't give them the right to change it now." In all these cases, we are at least in significant part talking about our own emotional response to this situation yet most of the time we present it as some kind of objective standard that has nothing to do with us but is somehow "right" almost as if our own position is endorsed by god or something.

[Peter_Puget]

So what you're are really saying is that people often are hiding their true reasoning/motivations under the veil of ethics! We agree there.

 

Peter's Principle:If you let a debate on cc.com to influence you, you shouldn’t be putting up routes.

 

[mattp]

So what you're are really saying is that people often are hiding their true reasoning/motivations under the veil of ethics! We agree there.

 

That's only one part of what I posted. Yes, I think we often hide our "true reasoning/motivations," but we also often present only part of the picture in order to make a point, or when we are undertaking the intellectual exercise of composing a post we may neglect the emotional subtext. Also, in an Internet forum like this one where bait and bash is the norm there is little motivation to discuss anything in a personal manner where some other schmoe is going to be able to take a hart-hitting shot at us so we tend to avoid introspection. That, and sometimes we can even fool ourselves.

 

So: no. That is not what I said at all. We only hit the surface on a discussion of "go cat go," and we don't discuss the personal issues, but it is not necessarily because people are deliberately "hiding" their motivations. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Go cats go.

[catbirdseat]

Here's how I understand the situation. The route is not a straightforward crack. You cannot just plug gear pretty much anyplace you feel like it. As Marlene said, it has portions that are broken, etc. You have to be selective where you place gear on the route. This makes it a more serious route than the rating would suggest.

 

Having led it in its former state, I would say that I was glad to have the five bolts that were there, but that I didn't feel it needed more. I felt that a 5.11 leader could have led it with the five bolts only and no gear, or using gear only and not the bolts. I certain could not. In fact, I hung from one of the bolts when I pumped out. I've yet to redpoint the route in two attempts.

 

 

 

 

[Peter_Puget]

CBS -

 

I prepared a short summary of your posts on this thread.

 

[chucK]

I've never climbed Go Cat Go.

 

What I don't get is how some people are saying that it's a bolted crack, where others are claiming to have backed off (before the bolting in question) because of the lack of gear. If there really is a crack there, why didn't these people just plug in a cam?

[catbirdseat]

Well, Petey, you have way more time than I do these days. Smells like an ad hominem attack to me!

 

I don't recall who it was, but someone I met at Vantage told me that the route was first led without any bolts.

 

I wasn't the first one to suggest that it was Jim who added bolts, was I?

 

Can you recall the exact number of bolts on a mixed route that you climbed more than a year ago? The exact number of original bolts is totally irrelevant to the issue, is it not?

Edited November 17, 2007 by catbirdseat

[catbirdseat]

I've never climbed Go Cat Go.

 

What I don't get is how some people are saying that it's a bolted crack, where others are claiming to have backed off (before the bolting in question) because of the lack of gear. If there really is a crack there, why didn't these people just plug in a cam?

There are places to plug gear but the quality of the rock is suspect. You can place gear, but can you trust it? That's the crux of the issue. Some would look at it and say it's just fine and others wouldn't trust any of it. This is not a simple case.