Infinite Bliss chopped- true or false?

[kevbone]

So….maybe its time for all to go climb this climb…..it seems like the ones who are against it have not climbed it. IN MY OPINION, when it comes to climbing…..if you are bitching about a climb you have not done/seen…..you’re argument has no ground to stand on.

 

Take this thread on smith rock.co Ian Caldwell placed a bolt in the middle of a second pitch of an existing sport route so you can lower with a 70 m rope. Why is not the point. This caused controversy. It seemed like the same climbers complaining about this bolt…..have and will never climb the route to actually see the bolt they are complaining about. I would have more respect for your point of view if you have actually seen IB and have climbed it. Otherwise you’re just another moralizer from a distance spouting about what you have been told…..and if you have not been told about it…..then you are speculating…..either way……you got no credibility.

 

[JosephH]

IN MY OPINION, when it comes to climbing…..if you are bitching about a climb you have not done/seen…..you’re argument has no ground to stand on.

 

Kevin, you can hold to this mistaken idea all you want - again, there is nothing to learned from climbing the climb that would in any way alter any of the three facts about it I listed above. Again, it could a new Astroman and it would make no difference to my opposition of the route whatsoever.

[kevbone]

Kevin, you can hold to this mistaken idea all you want

 

I will

[richard_noggin]

IN MY OPINION, when it comes to climbing…..if you are bitching about a climb you have not done/seen…..you’re argument has no ground to stand on.

 

Kevin, you can hold to this mistaken idea all you want - again, there is nothing to learned from climbing the climb that would in any way alter any of the three facts about it I listed above. Again, it could a new Astroman and it would make no difference to my opposition of the route whatsoever.

 

 

Is it just me? or does anyone else think this the most annoying MFer to ever spray on this site...

He can talk out his ass even better than dwayner or pope!

Your spray is all mute...the route is established and there to stay!

[kevbone]

I thought JH was Dwayner and pope......wouldn’t that be funny.

[Alex]

We often forget that climbing is just a form of recreation: something we do to have fun, or get a workout, or see some new sights, experience nature, or escape from our daily lives if only for a few hours. Motivations are as diverse as the individuals who participate.

 

We also often lose sight of the fact that climbing draws many of its participants precisely because it's that self-motivated endevour, with no rules outside the laws that govern our general society. No "climbing cops" are there at the base of the crag, asking us to sign a waivers and making sure we are doing everything according to some formula. We can do what we like. Including putting our own lives at risk, at the State's expense in case of rescue. Or climbing "dumbed down" sport routes, if we wish not to put our lives at risk. And as long as that is within the law, and not hurting someone, there is little argument left. Which is why I don't hear people threatening to chop every bolt at Smith, for example.

 

Everyone's ethics in climbing are their own.

 

I've climbed the route. With only the legal argument, I personally agree that the route should never have been established in the first place and should be removed. (I don't think anyone will miss it, when it is finally removed. just my opinion, I guess) Moreover, I think the only reason it hasn't been removed yet is because man, thats alot of work, dude!! and no one has felt strongly enough about it yet to go and actually take on the task. It would be alot of work, and its just not really that important.

 

No other routes like it have been established since then ("rap bolting in the Wilderness").

 

Just one climbers .02.

[billcoe]

(I don't think anyone will miss it, when it is finally removed.)

 

I will. Others will.

 

Isn't that a pic of the new Bosch Annilator in your Avatar pic?

[kevbone]

I will miss it as well.

[olyclimber]

I MISS YOU INFINITE BLISS!

 

 

[JosephH]

Is it just me? or does anyone else think this the most annoying MFer to ever spray on this site...

 

From a guy who uses his noggin like you - hell it's all love, baby, it's all love...

[G-spotter]

I MISS YOU INFINITE BLISS!

 

 

FreeBliss.com

[Bug]

I gave up on page 10. It seemed so much like page 9, 8, 7, 6,....,

Bolting sucks. It is not natural.

Neither are horses in North America.

But it is the horse packers of America who are largely responsible for our wilderness areas being protected.

I do not want to see Infinite Bliss repeated on another wall or proliferated on the existing wall. But it will happen.

Sport climbers are people who get outside and get counted by the government etc.

Some of them even vote.

We need more people involved in climbing to be a force that can stand up with the snowmobile crowds and horse packers etc, and get OUR tax dollars spent on maintaining popular access roads and resources instead of bombing Arabs for wanting their fair shair of oil profits.

When I said there should be "No bolts west of parking lot wall" in Blodgett canyon, I was dissed by many. "Not enough people get up there" I was told. But there are bolts beside cracks and chipped holds and all kinds of blasphemy up there now. Because not enough people called bullshit.

So what the hell am I saying?

Here it is; IB should stand but the debate should continue here and elswhere.

IB is wrong just like the Compressor route in Patagonia.

But people use it and count on it to be there.

Meanwhile the world has shrunk and if you get caught bolting another line beside IB you should be trundled.

Debates like this one keep the differing attitudes nearer the forefront of peoples' minds and tend to moderate the pace of destruction of places like that.

The key is to try to work something out.

It will take a long time for sure. But no matter who you are, your nemisis will always be there.

All out war, or moderation and compromise?

[chris]

Bug is my hero-for-the-day.

[Off_White]

Who invited the adult to the party?

[Stewart]

Nobody should choppy chop, unless its a bolted splitter. Never been on the route so I can't say for sure.

 

Chopping equals Drama!

 

Less Drama More Climbing!

 

Stewart

[hawkeye69]

On the the other hand, JosephH approved of rap bolting on Prusik Peak, one of the most pristine peaks in WA (not a sport climb, but illustrative of my point).

Exactly, I do know one of that crew and no bolt would have gone in on the line if there was any conceivable way of using pro. When they sink a bolt, whether on the Nose or on Prusik you can count on it being pro of absolute last resort on a mixed free trad pitch. As for it being drilled on rappel, I don't think anyone on earth to my knowledge has drilled on lead above 5.12. I suppose I should demand that of them, but I'll pass. They tried every single possible avenue of advancing on pro on that last pitch before resorting to a bolt. That's exactly how I trad climb: gear first and fixed pro as protection of absolute last resort. That is trad climbing - there is nothing whatsoever imperfect about my ethics.

 

And if you're trying to contrast the traditional use of a couple of points of fixed pro in trad climbing on a route that definitely pushes limits of trad with a 22 pitch wholly-bolted sport route - and use the 'elitist' argument to boot - well, you way beyond misguided in your argument. There is nothing gray about either route, one is a stellar trad route with a final mixed pitch, the other is a 22 pitch red flag in the face of land managers of wilderness areas.

 

The only 'imposing' that has gone on in this whole matter went down on Mt. Garfield with a drill in hand.

 

i dont really care about IB one way or the other. i do think it was wrong to use a power drill if it were used in the wilderness. but none of you are bitchin about hearing a powerdrill in the wilderness.

 

there are also some "unwriten" rules concerning rapp bolting in the mountains and i get that and understand the controversy generated by such tactics.

 

mr. healyje, you support of some elite crew rapp bolting on prusik, then spewing all over the net about the "trad" ethic is HYPOCRITICAL in the extreme.

 

it dont matter wheher it is one bolt, as soon as someone starts from the top, it is not TRAD.

 

your agreement with such tactics do not represent trad climbing and appears to say, "hey, those guys are hardcore (whoever they are cuz i dont know ad dont care) and rapp bolting is acceptable.

 

it either is rapp bolting or it aint. the line of ethics and style is very fine, dont find yourself tripping over it....

 

 

[hawkeye69]

IN MY OPINION, when it comes to climbing…..if you are bitching about a climb you have not done/seen…..you’re argument has no ground to stand on.

 

Kevin, you can hold to this mistaken idea all you want - again, there is nothing to learned from climbing the climb that would in any way alter any of the three facts about it I listed above. Again, it could a new Astroman and it would make no difference to my opposition of the route whatsoever.

 

another hypocritical statement....

 

if you aint done it, you aint done it. but you sure have generated some spew about it now havent you?

 

once again, it is unlawful to use powerdrills in the wilds. those sounds disappeared years ago.

 

if you are bitchin about the style or ehtics of the ascent go yank that bolt on Prusik. stop being a hypocrit.

[hawkeye69]

Raindawg et al,

 

If you are truly concerned about preserving the natural state of the rock then you must consider several ways climbing can have an environmental impact:

 

1 - Bolts leave manmade materials behind and permanently alter a small section of rock (about one square inch per bolt, or only a few square milimeters if the bolt is removed and the hole is filled). This impact does not depend on whether bolts are placed on rappel or on lead or drilled by hand or with a powertool.

 

2 - Pitons have same impact as bolts, although the damage they inflict on cracks cannot be reversed and is more variable than bolts. If you think pitons have no permanent impact on cracks go climb in Yosemite, where some routes are climbed primarily via jams in pin scars.

 

3 - Anchors usually leave more manmade material behind than bolts or pins. They may involve chains and/or large quantities of nylon slings. When trees are used as anchors on high-use routes, they are often severely damaged. This is why many support the use of bolt anchors on popular routes.

 

4 - Many routes require cleaning before they are safe for mass consumption. The amount of cleaning will vary, but often involves removing vegetation and loose rock. Even areas that seem to require little cleaning are impacted by traffic. Case in point: finding most climbs in Leavenworth is simply a matter of finding the lichen-free stripes running up the cliffs. These are seen from a great distance, from which bolts are invisible.

 

5 - Trails, and all of their features, whether built through concerted effort or simply worn in by human traffic, can have a large impact on the landscape.

 

In my limited experience as a fledgling route-setter working at an area where bolts are already the standard, I can tell you that the relative impact of the items mentioned above is 5 > 4 >> 3 > 1. From the wilderness and alpine routes I've climbed, I would say that their relative impact is 5 > 4 >> 3 > 2 = 1.

 

Thus, with regard to environmental impact, your obsession with bolts seems to be misplaced and is perhaps driven by your view that sport climbing has unacceptably reduced the risks of climbing. If you could separate the environmental impact issues from your views on sport climbing style you might assemble and articulate a more compelling argument. Good luck with that.

 

Cheers,

Rad

 

rad,

 

while i agree with your statements you need clarification on one minor point.

 

routesetting is in the freaking GYM.

 

the rock usualy dictates the route, right? so you didnt set anything, you decided where bolts went. the route was there for many years waiting eher for someone to sack up and do it ground up, or rapp and drill.

 

it is called climbing and if you are rapping and drilling all you should be doing is trying to link the features with optimal bolt placements. if you place a few holds on those routes, then call yourself a routesetter then he crucification will begin.

 

Edited June 12, 2007 by hawkeye69

[pink]

don't chop the bolts, blow up the road that takes you there.

 

 

[Rad]

Ok, so we were 'developing' routes, attempting to clean and protect natural lines, as you suggest, not setting them as in a gym.

 

To suggest that bolts draw crowds that create all the other impacts I mentioned is oversimplistic. Trad routes can draw crowds and have environmental impacts as well. Witness pin scars, fixed nuts and other gear, chopped vegetation, and trash on popular crack climbs, not to mention scads of people and trail erosion on classics like Outer Space. If you've been to popular sandstone crags you have probably seen grooves from extensive rappelling and toproping.

 

Another impact I forgot to mention: trash and human waste.

 

If you want to get a bee in your bonnet for a good cause how about getting a port-o-potty for Index town wall?

[hawkeye69]

spew deletion.....sorry

Edited June 12, 2007 by hawkeye69

[TrogdortheBurninator]

On the the other hand, JosephH approved of rap bolting on Prusik Peak, one of the most pristine peaks in WA (not a sport climb, but illustrative of my point).

 

Exactly, I do know one of that crew and no bolt would have gone in on the line if there was any conceivable way of using pro. When they sink a bolt, whether on the Nose or on Prusik you can count on it being pro of absolute last resort on a mixed free trad pitch.

 

Once you have approved of rap bolting, how do you discern whether a placement was absolutely necessary? Couldnt the authors of infinite bliss argue that they felt every bolt was absolutely necessary to maintain the level of safety that they desired (much as those on Prusik did).

 

As for it being drilled on rappel, I don't think anyone on earth to my knowledge has drilled on lead above 5.12. I suppose I should demand that of them, but I'll pass. They tried every single possible avenue of advancing on pro on that last pitch before resorting to a bolt. That's exactly how I trad climb: gear first and fixed pro as protection of absolute last resort. That is trad climbing - there is nothing whatsoever imperfect about my ethics.

 

Couldnt the pitch have been advanced on aid or the bolt could have been drilled from hooks. Clearly this would be a purer ethic and anything else would be a compromise.

 

And if you're trying to contrast the traditional use of a couple of points of fixed pro in trad climbing on a route that definitely pushes limits of trad with a 22 pitch wholly-bolted sport route - and use the 'elitist' argument to boot - well, you way beyond misguided in your argument. There is nothing gray about either route, one is a stellar trad route with a final mixed pitch, the other is a 22 pitch red flag in the face of land managers of wilderness areas.

 

hawkeye just addressed this, but I'll elaborate. Consider that the route on prusik is one of maybe a dozen routes and variations on the S. Face, while the route on garfield is only the 2nd route on it's massive face. Which line is more pure? Which line represents more of a variation? How do you decide how many bolts is too many? Routes in tuolomne are solely bolt protected, so you can lose the argument about linking protectable features. And you have already conceded that rap bolting is trad when standards are being pushed on an alpine face (a claim that even a sport climber like me knows is complete bullsh*t). What is the magic rap placed bolt spacing that must be maintained to gain your approval? If said bolts are placed on lead, how does that change your criteria? Funny thing is I don't doubt one bit that you walk the walk (your stories about leading on tensioned hooks and other "free pro :)" are absolutely classic and inspiring), but your talk is so hypocritical it is hard to take seriously.

 

[pink]

maybe we should have a poll.

[catbirdseat]

well rad,

 

i am an old timer with about a hundred new routes in sevaral states but here in the great pnw i am a newbie, so i enjoy those trails to get me where i am going.

 

you said you were a route setter on natl rock. that to me speaks of gymbiness. the natural rock is either climbable or not climbable (without alteration) and i simply wanted to set you straight as all, no more.

Hawkeye69, you misread what he said. He said "natural lines", not "natural rock". There is a big difference.

[JosephH]

Boys, the line on Prusik is an independent .13+ free line put up by a crew of people who have endless respect for rock, have the experience to make the call, and no shortage of trad history and cred to back it up. Now I don't any details about how the bolt or bolts were put in - by hand or power - if they went in under power that would definitely be a big thumbs down from me everytime, but my understanding is they went in by hand. I similarly don't know whether the bolts could have been put in on hooks without jeapordizing the free climb.

 

When trad FFA's enter the 13+ range and run into a mixed pitch no bolts are going in on free lead, putting them in on hooks might very well jeopardize the very holds necessary to do the free ascent. I have no problem with experienced climbers making the call on a free climb above .12s. That's how the Nose was freed and that's how routes in the .13 and above range with mixed pitches go free. I do know that the route took three trips over three years and the second and third years saw sustained effort to push the final headwall without the bolts.

 

There is no hypocrisy whatsoever between my opinions on these two routes and no comparing them at all. Again, one is 13+ stellar trad route with a couple bolts on the last mixed pitch, the other is 22 pitches of bolts where no such attempt to utilize pro was ever made or even contemplated - the IB team went up there specifically and with the sole intent of drilling a provocative 22-pitch sport route up Garfield and succeeded - there was and is no justification for it at all.

 

So Trog and Hawk, if you can't figure out the difference between the two scenarios then all I can conclude is neither of you have a clue about either trad and sport climbing. And if you think having put in the decades earning the cred to make tough calls on trad climbing at that level is 'elitist', then you hold an entirley different value system than I and there is nothing further to discuss in the matter.

 

As for the endless spewing about "you have to climb it..." - bullshit - complete and utter bullshit. That would be the case if I were trying to ascertain something - anything - qualitative about the route, but for about the fourth time my oppostion to the route has ZERO, NADA, NOTHING to do with any qualitative attribute of the climb. My opposition is based solely on these three facts - refute them and I'll change my oppostion - otherwise, your argument is completely baseless:

• It was an incredibly unnecessary and bonehead, red-flag move in the first place.
   
  
• Regardless of the uncertainty, they knew they were dancing right on the edge of a wilderness area one way or the other.
   
  
• The plan from day one was to create 22-pitches of sport climbing that 'blissfully' required no pro.