Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
pope

Boycott "Smith Rock 1986" documentary

Recommended Posts

I've noted this before, but it's not clear how slab-routes fit into P&D's ethical taxonomy. Perhaps one of them would be willing to explain.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you're going to find many rangers interested in adding bolt policing to their list of law enforcement duties

They could put up a sign in the parking lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a low trace poster from the Access Fund on the bulletin board at the Snow Lakes trailhead once, but it was really a rather generic notice and didn't suggest that bolting should not be undertaken in the Enchantments or whatever. The rangers there are among those who have specifically said they don't want to get into the business of regulating bolts unless they have to and they are presently more concerned with erosion caused by climbers trails and with vegetation removal more generally associated with crack climbing than they are with bolts per se.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that P&D's statement is more of a lament than anything that can be acted upon. Most people would agree that the world won't go back to the way it was before sport climbing. I'd like to see some proposals that could actually be acted upon. The proposal to just stop putting up routes is just not going to fly. Actionable proposals are going to be ones that direct and channel bolts to certain areas, not ones that ban bolting altogether, because that just will be ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bolting has gotten out of control? Possibly! It really comes down to your upbringing in the climbing world. Just like being a bad parent leads to a bad child. Same with sporto’s. Learn tradition first. Learn to climb gear first. Learn how our forefathers did it before we came along. Of course with the invention of the power drill, bolting has become so easy. Rap bolted climbs are the norm. Climbers think they have to bolt every possible piece of rock. Wrong! But it’s ludicrous to boycott a film because Pope comes across with the holier than thou attitude. Its quite simple…..don’t go…. Of course Im a fool because it already happened.

 

To all those who bitched about Smith Rock on this thread…….you are never able to go there again. If you do, you will be called out. If you do…..you are a hypocrite.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is hypocritical to complain about the extent of development or even the existence of sport climbing in general and still go to Smith Rock. Some people complain that cars pollute too much yet they still drive, others complain that the suburbs are ugly yet they still live there, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some people complain that cars pollute too much yet they still drive

 

This is hypocritical.

 

If you want to help with bringing down omissions from your car. You could do your part and not drive. Same thing with climbing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypocritical might be to develop a new sport climb or to operate a climbing gym while decrying the existence of sport climbing and gyms, but not necessarily the mere visit to such a place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hypocritical might be to develop a new sport climb or to operate a climbing gym while decrying the existence of sport climbing and gyms, but not necessarily the mere visit to such a place.

 

I suppose it matters "how much we bitch" about the intended. To make passing comments about omissions, or bolted routes is one thing. But to constantly be yelling about them and not do anything to help the situation, it’s a hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True there, but there may be other ways to "help the situation" other than avoiding any visit just as there may be other ways to promote an eventual change from our oil-based or coal-fired transportation and power generation besides refusing to drive or use electricity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but just think if we ALL quit driving, how that would impact the oil companies. I know it wont happen. But just think how cool that would be.

 

PS: love the thread drift!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The rangers there are among those who have specifically said they don't want to get into the business of regulating bolts unless they have to and they are presently more concerned with erosion caused by climbers trails and with vegetation removal more generally associated with crack climbing than they are with bolts per se.

 

Indeed. Land managers typically care about managing ecosystems (for better or for worse, depending on your perspective and the agency in question), public safety, and recreation amenities (and revenue). They don't care about bolts, they care about climbers. Both sport climbers and trad climbers affect cliff ecology similarly**. Bolts are a stylistic and ethical issue, not an environmental one. (The question of the Fixed-Anchor Ban is based on ethical issues (some might even say metaphysical) surrounding what is appropriate in legally defined wilderness, not any sort of effects on plants or animals.)

 

**More or less - I could make the argument that crack climbs in moist or wet areas are more likely to involve heavy gardening, whether before/during the FA or afterwards, and thus have higher environmental impact than face climbs (where lichen is merely scrubbed lichen). But that argument rests on the premise that herbs, shrubs or trees gardened from cracks are more ecologically significant than lichens, which may not be the case if said lichens are threatened, or keystone species or whatever. I don't think most climbers care about this stuff too much, but land managers are more likely to - a lot more than about the presence of bolts, which no one but climbers will see.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that providing reasoned, thoughful discussion about why you dislike bolting (as opposed to photo montages) may actually change someones opinion about the practice. If I understand these guys correctly, its not bolts in and of themselves that they dislike but rather the indiscriminate bolting ethos that has taken over some areas.

 

I don't think its necessarily hypocritical to dislike bolts and climb sport routes.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me that P&D's statement is more of a lament than anything that can be acted upon. Most people would agree that the world won't go back to the way it was before sport climbing. I'd like to see some proposals that could actually be acted upon. The proposal to just stop putting up routes is just not going to fly. Actionable proposals are going to be ones that direct and channel bolts to certain areas, not ones that ban bolting altogether, because that just will be ignored.

 

Hey catbird....a mere lament it is not. You seem to think that the ideal should be ignored because its realistic application seems far-fetched. I think a major attitude shift is required and probably some legal action as has taken place at certain areas. It might all start with education: how many new climbers starting in their gym or sport nurseries are given a clue that bolts are permanent alterations to the landscape and are thus ethically questionable? Probably not very many, because it questions the environmental validity of their very sport.

Anyway, not to even suggest that climbing is of any wide consequence on a vital human scale, but I'm glad there were people "lamenting" slavery, genocide and various dubious war adventures.

 

KEVBONE SAY:

But it’s ludicrous to boycott a film because Pope comes across with the holier than thou attitude. Its quite simple…..don’t go…. Of course Im a fool because it already happened...

 

Exposé time: me 'n pope came up with this topic as a way to throw a bone out for discussion. Neither or us intended to go to that film as we didn't have the time plus it was geographically unfeasible. But had the film been showing right down the street, we wouldn't have gone to it on principle and we have every right to suggest to others to ignore it. "Holier-than-thou" because we apparently have an ethic we hold higher than drilling the snot out of the climbing environment? - call it what you will.

 

This particular discussion is actually quite remarkable by cc.com standards as it usually degenerates into wholesale and gratuitous CRAP after a mere handful of posts. Although, the not uncommon "hypocrite" toss-out once again makes its irrelevant appearance:

 

To all those who bitched about Smith Rock on this thread…….you are never able to go there again. If you do, you will be called out. If you do…..you are a hypocrite.

 

Again, this is not a hypocricy debate. Hypocricy has NOTHING to do with the core issue. It's a weak attempt to diminish the credibility of the messengers, rather than address the issues themselves. See you at Smith Rocks, where you can "call me out", whatever that means.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be fair though, dwayner, you haven't pulled out the richard simmons or clown pics either...

 

respect goes both ways...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Land managers typically...don't care about bolts

I've been to areas managed under the Oregon BLM and seen signs specifically asking climbers to not place bolts. This was in a very arid area where vegetation on rock didn't appear to be an issue (yeah I know, it's there, just not visible). So some agencies might care and others don't. It may also depend on the area itself and whether it's perceived as a possible problem based on the specifics of that area. So it's open for anyone to pursue but it may involve only a warning sign from an agency and climber peer pressure. There may not be any other way to actually "enforce" it in a lot of places anyway.

 

So wouldn't it make sense to post a sign at Castle Rock ? Even if not everyone agrees in no new bolts there, if any are placed they are always going to be chopped at that location. A sign might be informative and save more unnecesary drilling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geek the Greek say:

Bolts are a stylistic and ethical issue, not an environmental one.

 

Not so. Adding permanent artificial alterations to the landscape AND the degradation of the landscape are BOTH environmental/ethical issues.

The stylistic bits (e.g. siege climbing) are secondary, except that the sport-climbing style is utterly bolt-dependent and therefore relates to the environmental aspects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to be fair though, dwayner, you haven't pulled out the richard simmons or clown pics either...

 

respect goes both ways...

 

Is there some relevance to your point here???

Something to contribute other than "don't call me sparky"? If you miss the richard simmons and clown pics that are applicable to the topic, but not in a civil, serious discussion, I can happily provide some for you in a spray-forum. Otherwise, do you have something substantive to contribute?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't take the time to sift through this whole thread but when and who is bringing this to film Seattle? I want to see it bad.

---------------

In Europe this summer, most of the guys I climbed with and or talked to had only ever heard of two rock climbing areas in north america SMITH and yosemite. Squamish-no, rifle-no etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think poop and dwanus care about the envelope...they'd prefer that the envelope stay stationary to having the experience and mini environment around the crag degraded...they have some merits to their argument, but they go too far, in my very humble opinion...

 

Yes and no. Sport climbing and the mess it leaves has NEVER been demonstrated to be necessary for advancing standards. I don't want to hold anybody back, and I'm certainly inspired by skilled climbers who move rapidly over difficult terrain in good style. I just don't think sport climbing is the ONLY way to improve climbing skill and fitness.

 

Nobody can make the case that without sport climbing, standards wouldn't have advanced. Prior to sport climbing, more and more difficult climbs were getting done and many of the "ultimate" climbs in Yosemite were getting climbed in record time. The trend toward competence had been going on for decades prior to sport climbing. Climbers devoted to the sport were training on finger boards, lifting weights, bouldering, doing circuits in the Camp IV "gym". These guys found a way to get incredibly strong without making a mess. Suddenly in the 1980s, gratuitous bolting was promoted as a necessary evil for increasing standards. Who is to say that without sport climbing, this push toward difficulty and mastery would have ceased? I'm not buying that argument.

 

The only attempt at making this argument amounted to dropping a couple of names of accomplished climbers who happened to endorse sport climbing. I have no doubt that sport climbing helped them gain climbing skill and fitness, but to say they couldn't have done it any other way is pure speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...If your max is gear 5.11+ when the hardest climbs are gear 5.12, you're not far from the best. But if your max stays gear 5.11+ when the testpieces of the day are gear 5.14 and sport 5.15, you're just another has-been.

 

Are you qualified to make such summaries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

point taken pope. one that i fully appreciate as i always thought shooting for a higher number grade was only a part of the puzzle. in my mind there are "few" 5.12 climbers. to me redpointing a 5.12 dont make you a 5.12 climber. rather, a well rounded individual who is comfortable at the grade rates that. when you factor this into the equation, standards may not have climbed much over the years. sure there is the oddball extremely talented individual out there, but comprehensive climbing skills have not gained much ground.

 

but standards have risen faster, so long as you look at just the number grade. furthermore, most of the choss heaps called "sport climbing areas" would not have been around. you may say, no great loss and i can appreciate that. the difference in our opinions is whether it is really a valid argument these days. besides, i sometimes love the fun of clipping bolts only...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree that advancement would have happened, at a slower pace. But that philosophy disallows change, and resists new ways of thinking.

 

The traditional has always been resistant to change, in more ways than just climbing.

 

It is the growing pains of acceptance that you both resist that is the most disturbing to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually misterE, i dont resist them.

 

i do like it when climbers are well informed and not stuck in a sport vs trad thing. i have no problems with smith or its evolution. and in my own small way i brought sport climbing to a couple of crags anyway. despite that, climbing means to ascend, and that to me means strting on the bottom going up. everything else is for the fun of it or training, and different than why i started (but still fun all the same). which is why i disagree with a jihad on sport climbs.

 

 

whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×