Infinite Bliss chopped- true or false?

[marylou]

Hawkeye, it's not about 'hearing the drill motor'. If you've ever heard a drill run when it's drilling into rock you know it barely purrs. It's about making permanent intrusions on a wilderness area.

 

Maybe that's the fine points of it, and maybe it doesn't really matter how the bolts get in there, but we've all agreed, via our lawmakers, that we're not doing it that way. You think it's inconvenient? Hell YES it is. It's even illegal in a designated wilderness to use a goddamned WHEELBARROW, but that's the way it is, and these arbitrary rules will go far to keep our wilderness wild, as well they should be.

[hawkeye69]

healyje,

 

your are wrong.

 

spew deletion...............point remaisn the same

 

if you rapp and bolt it is a different game

DONT CALL IT TRAD.

 

TRADITIONAL=GROUNDUP

 

not that you can stick the latest gadget in a seam or crack.

Edited June 12, 2007 by hawkeye69

[ken4ord]

Then lets go climbing. You can even pick the route

 

I'll bite, IB, in September - on gear only. Kevin, you should get in on this...

 

I'd be into trying it, should be some good heady climbing at times.

[JosephH]

Hawk, I and others in the conversation have been at it longer than that, climb just as hard, and no I am not wrong. I'm as pure a ground-up, onsight trad climber as any and am still putting up reasonably hard trad FA's that way. It's the only way I put up routes and the only reason I climb. Again, if you can't figure out the scenarios and understand trad climbing at that level then, hey, you simply can't - fine. But personally, I'm not prepared to say the Nose isn't a trad climb, or by the exact same logic the route on Prusik.

 

[JosephH]

Ken, I think our trio has an opening...

[ken4ord]

Well I will be back from August 15 to September 3 or 4th, then back for a few days September 11 to September 14. If it works out that would be great.

 

Ken

[mattp]

Joseph, I respect your style but I suggest a sidetrack in this discussion and that is this: in my opinion, leading from the ground and putting in bolts while hanging from hooks - on a crag climb that you expect or intend to ultimately be a "free" route - is generally both silly and misguided. There are are dozens of routes in Washington where there are bolt placements that were installed this way, and the result is that the bolt is next to a good hook placement but usually not in the best place for the subsequent free leader. Not only may bolts end up in "inconvenient" locations this way, but they may also end up next to cracks that were invisible during the first ascent, or end up leading off in a direction subsequently abandoned by our first ascent hardman. If committed to ground up climbing, one may find it easier or think it necessary to hang from a hook and drill a bolt hole, but ground up ethics are focussed on the first ascent experience rather than the subsequent climbers and some of the silliest routes I have seen were established in "ground up" fashion, including some with bolt ladders leading nowhere and etc.

 

Even on "so called" mixed routes where bolts are to be used sparsely to link features naturally protected, I think the result will generally be better if the route is more carefully engineered than is possible in a ground-up effort -- especially a ground up effort undertaken without pre-inspection. Climbing in this style, you cannot see the ledges and features above and are forced to put pro where you need it that day as opposed to where it will ultimately belong.

 

I know you will say that this is a BS argument, or that it doesn't matter if the result is good when the route was "installed" in such a disgusting fashion, or whatever. But I am firmly convinced this is true at least for most of us. Good and bad routes can go up either way, but bolt protected crag climbing routes are a different animal from alpine rock climbs and they should in my opinion be approached differently. We could well argue whether Mount Garfield constitutes "alpine rock," so this is really only a sidetrack in the overall thread but I always think about this when I see folks presenting "ground up" as the only responsible or right way to put up a new route. It certainly is not.

[kevbone]

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

 

 

So are you saying the crew that put up IB did not have the experience to "make the call"?

[high_on_rock]

MattP seems to be merely asserting that the end justifies the means, where as Joseph’s pure ethic is that the means justify the end. Neither is right, neither is wrong.

 

There are some interesting points being brought out.

 

Who has the “experience” to make the call as to when a bolt goes in or not? Is it the bolt that matters, or the way the bolt was put in. When I climb a route and encounter a bolt, I really don’t care if it was hand drilled or power drilled, whether it was placed on first accent or later on, or whether it was on lead or on rap. I merely encounter a bolt and decide whether it was placed well, and whether I want to use it or skip it. If it is near a crack and I have my rack with me I may skip the bolt and place pro. Or I may put a quick draw in the bolt and pull on the draw to help me reach the next hold, or I may hangdog off of it and rest; at no time caring whether it was a powerdrill or not. I guess this makes me an “end justifies the means” type of guy.

 

I climb for fun, for adventure, for exercise, and for camaraderie. Somedays I like to push my fear buttons, other days I want completely safe climbing. Somedays I want easy climbing, somedays I want hard climbing. The only thing I don’t want is some jerk imposing rules on me about how I must climb, which bolts I must clip or cannot clip, telling me their rules of life and expecting me to either care or live by them.

 

How about Joseph climbs by his personal rules (which seem to flex for the moment); and I will climb by my personal rules (which often flex). Freedom and independence. Peace, respect, brotherhood.

 

[hawkeye69]

after a little less chardonnay perhaps i can tone things down some. mattp, you prolly gots a point. personally, having put bolts in on rappel and otherwise, i dont care how it gets in there, few climbers do.

 

but isnt that really the whole freaking point? our game of climbing that we have devoted so much to with its "rules" and such.

 

my point is for a guy like healyje to say one bolt on rappel is fine in the wilderness while others is not must have a sore crotch from riding that fence. i know mine would. the point is REAL TRAD climbing is groundup. it dont matter WHO is doin it, the rules of engagement (ROE) have changed once you are at the top and rapping down.

 

healyje if you dont believe me go to ST.com and ask bachar.

 

 

spew deletion

 

 

the other point here mr healyje is that as soon as you start rapping, i personally feel like you made the game different and the FA team has an obligation to make the route safe. why? because top down is cheating. i am somewhat surprised with all your preaching of TARD ethics that you dont get this point. again ask bachar just what kind of runouts he could have created by starting at the top. dont ask some has been neveah was like me, ask the rock gods at st to straighten this concept out for ya.

 

me, i cheated sometimes, and it did lead to better routes. but cheating should not be allowed to only the elite. us hackers should be able to cheat as well.

 

which leads us to the only thing remaining about IB thats bad in the true sense. a motororized drill. that is the only illegal thing about it really. and what creates more impact on the wilderness harmony? a couple days of moto drilling or a couple weeks of hand drilling? what is best for future generations?

 

sorry folks the only reason i am going off on this is healyje's constant blabbering about how bad IB is on multiple occaisions and how it is such a desecration. meanwhile he thinks he is riding some pure thoroubred horse with wings only to find out its a jackass.

 

actually, many climbers have asked about IB here and otherplaces and been put in their place. i done rode a white horse and a jackass. when my white horse got dirty and tired and all wore out my jackass still wanted to keep going....

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2007 by hawkeye69

[hawkeye69]

MattP seems to be merely asserting that the end justifies the means, where as Joseph’s pure ethic is that the means justify the end. Neither is right, neither is wrong.

 

There are some interesting points being brought out.

 

Who has the “experience” to make the call as to when a bolt goes in or not? Is it the bolt that matters, or the way the bolt was put in. When I climb a route and encounter a bolt, I really don’t care if it was hand drilled or power drilled, whether it was placed on first accent or later on, or whether it was on lead or on rap. I merely encounter a bolt and decide whether it was placed well, and whether I want to use it or skip it. If it is near a crack and I have my rack with me I may skip the bolt and place pro. Or I may put a quick draw in the bolt and pull on the draw to help me reach the next hold, or I may hangdog off of it and rest; at no time caring whether it was a powerdrill or not. I guess this makes me an “end justifies the means” type of guy.

 

I climb for fun, for adventure, for exercise, and for camaraderie. Somedays I like to push my fear buttons, other days I want completely safe climbing. Somedays I want easy climbing, somedays I want hard climbing. The only thing I don’t want is some jerk imposing rules on me about how I must climb, which bolts I must clip or cannot clip, telling me their rules of life and expecting me to either care or live by them.

 

How about Joseph climbs by his personal rules (which seem to flex for the moment); and I will climb by my personal rules (which often flex). Freedom and independence. Peace, respect, brotherhood.

 

dude, you cheated. you said things a hella lot bettah than me in fewer words.

 

 

[billcoe]

 

healyje if you dont believe me go to ST.com and ask bachar.

 

Last I heard, Bachar was asking which brand of power drill he should buy.

 

True dat.

________________________________________________________

 

I haven't looked but I bet Joseph will recommend the one he has: the 36 Volt Hilti more power monster thingy.

_______________________________________________________

 

My question is this: if anyone tries or does to remove the IB bolts, would you who would do that consider a community replacemnt project to do onsite ground up handdrilling to re-establish the route off limits as well?

[RuMR]

 

and what bolts to buy...our very own daryl cramer was advising on which way to go...

[billcoe]

Did you hear that story about me and the bolts?

[Rad]

Is the value of a new route in the experience of its first ascencionist or in those climbers that come afterward?

 

The ground-up trad group seems to fall into the first camp, whereas MattP and I and others fall into the latter camp.

 

In my view, if you make permanent changes to a cliff you should think like Spock: "The needs of the many outweight the needs of the one." You, mr. first ascencionist, are the one. You might stop to think about someone beside yourself.

[Rad]

There are rules and standards at every climbing area and those should be the predominant factor in determining how routes are established in that area.

 

For some areas that means no bolts at all (Traprock CT), for some it is a mix of bolts and natural pro (Index, Vantage), and for others it may be bolts everywhere (Owens River Gorge, X38, and X32).

 

Climbs inconsistent with local standards may get chopped or won't get climbed by subsequent parties. Both outcomes are bad.

 

Attempting to apply the standards of one area to another is like trying to compare one culture to another. People will get upset and nothing good is likely to emerge in the process.

[mattp]

There are rules and standards at every climbing area and those should be the predominant factor in determining how routes are established in that area.

 

This, to me, is as close as it comes to being "the answer." It is far from a perfect rule, however, because like the first ascent principle it tends to mean that whoever got there first is forever "right" even if what they did may have been poor. The "established ethic" may not always be the best end-all of discussion but it is probably as good as any other line we could draw.

 

I did not intend to suggest that nobody should ever establish a route from the ground up or that the style of the first ascent has no value. I DO think the FA team who is installing bolts at a crag* has an obligation to think about those who will follow and that ground up ethics more often than not interfere with the kind of careful consideration I would like to see. As I noted, good or bad routes can result either way.

 

* in my view we have an obligation to think about others when establishing a new route in the mountains, too, but in many mountain settings or in mountain weather safety concerns may well prevent the same kind of careful thought that one has the opportunity to apply at the crag.

Edited June 12, 2007 by mattp

[kevbone]

 

In my view, if you make permanent changes to a cliff you should think like Spock: "The needs of the many outweight the needs of the one." You, mr. first ascencionist, are the one. You might stop to think about someone beside yourself.

 

 

I am soooooooo glad someone else has made this point.....I have always defended my bolting jobs because I believe it is the responsibility of the FFA team to think about who will follow in your foot steps. :tup:

[JosephH]

So are you saying the crew that put up IB did not have the experience to "make the call"?

 

Kevin - no 'call' was made. Period. A call would mean even thinking about it, instead these guys' sole intent was drilling a 22-pitch up Garfield. There is no other story.

[kevbone]

So are you saying the crew that put up IB did not have the experience to "make the call"?

 

Kevin - no 'call' was made.

 

In your opinion.

 

instead these guys' sole intent was drilling a 22-pitch up Garfield.

 

How do you know what there “sole intent” was? Admit it….you are speculating.

 

[kevbone]

I think you need to look at the bigger picture here. I have placed a lot of lead and anchor bolts as you know……before I placed everyone of them…..I “make the call”….WTF is the difference?

[JosephH]

Matt (et al),

 

Again, about the only valid parallel I know is to routes like the Nose - it was freed by the use of a couple of judiciously applied bolts on rap. As I said, it was a sustained push over two years on that final headwall before a couple of bolts went in and if that crew put them in - on lead, on rap, however - trust me, there are only the absolute bare minimum needed, are precisely where required, and are not near pro of any kind. Is it my style - no, it is not - I don't climb at that level so I don't resort to those techniques.

 

And lot of you folks in general seem to want blanket (Communistic) ethics across all climbers and all levels. This is another place we fundamentally disagree. Where you seem to want the same technique or drilling right to apply to a 5.7 line and climber as to a 5.13+ line and climber. I couldn't be more emphatically against the very idea of it.

 

A large part of my gneral opposition to chalk, dogging, and sport climbs has to do with precisely this issue. If chalk were used when it was only necessary - like 5% of the time max; or folks only dogged/worked routes in the 12 > up range; or if bolted lines had stayed in the 12+ range on climbs worth the trade-offs - then, hell, I'd have no real problem with them as I personally recognize those as legitimate uses. But the next thing you know old Jed's a millionaire and folks are dumping bags of chalk on the 5.7 they're dogging up in the ultimate monkey, see monkey do and every other rock in America looks like an outdoor climbing gym.

 

And so I eschew the techniques used to free both the Nose and Prusik for exactly that reason, because the next thing you know some gumby is rap bolting his prize 5.8 and instead of a just couple of discreet bolts he's bolting all f#cking 22-pitches.

 

But, when the desire is to free something like the Nose or the last pitch on that line on Prusik - then even I am forced to recognize there is no option - it's either sink a couple of bolts or walk away from the line. But what isn't going to happen is bolting on lead. And as for bolting for the community - the line on Prusik is - if you are part of the community who can climb spartan 13+ and do the trad climbing as well - then it's all there for you.

[JosephH]

How do you know what there “sole intent” was? Admit it….you are speculating.

 

Kevin, I'm going to assume this is a joke. Either that or dude - man, put down that fatty - I consider your lines in the PRG-O to be ethically mighty by comparison to IB. The difference my friend, is you thought about every bolt you placed - they thought about every bolt as well, but only as they were putting together the order for 22 pitches worth of them.

[RuMR]

Matt (et al),

 

Again, about the only valid parallel I know is to routes like the Nose - it was freed by the use of a couple of judiciously applied bolts on rap. As I said, it was a sustained push over two years on that final headwall before a couple of bolts went in and if that crew put them in - on lead, on rap, however - trust me, there are only the absolute bare minimum needed, are precisely where required, and are not near pro of any kind. Is it my style - no, it is not - I don't climb at that level so I don't resort to those techniques.

 

And lot of you folks in general seem to want blanket (Communistic) ethics across all climbers and all levels. This is another place we fundamentally disagree. Where you seem to want the same technique or drilling right to apply to a 5.7 line and climber as to a 5.13+ line and climber. I couldn't be more emphatically against the very idea of it.

 

A large part of my gneral opposition to chalk, dogging, and sport climbs has to do with precisely this issue. If chalk were used when it was only necessary - like 5% of the time max; or folks only dogged/worked routes in the 12 > up range; or if bolted lines had stayed in the 12+ range on climbs worth the trade-offs - then, hell, I'd have no real problem with them as I personally recognize those as legitimate uses. But the next thing you know old Jed's a millionaire and folks are dumping bags of chalk on the 5.7 they're dogging up in the ultimate monkey, see monkey do and every other rock in America looks like an outdoor climbing gym.

 

And so I eschew the techniques used to free both the Nose and Prusik for exactly that reason, because the next thing you know some gumby is rap bolting his prize 5.8 and instead of a just couple of discreet bolts he's bolting all f#cking 22-pitches.

 

But, when the desire is to free something like the Nose or the last pitch on that line on Prusik - then even I am forced to recognize there is no option - it's either sink a couple of bolts or walk away from the line. But what isn't going to happen is bolting on lead. And as for bolting for the community - the line on Prusik is - if you are part of the community who can climb spartan 13+ and do the trad climbing as well - then it's all there for you.

 

ding dong...40 years ago, 5.11 would be where your 5.13+ is now...so, you can't make this argument...

 

perhaps you are too frickin' old to realize that in some places 5.14 is pretty common??

 

the ratings are irrelevant to the ethics and vice a versa...at least professor don and poopStain are about as consistent as they come...you are a vascillating old lady in comparison...

 

You should be Paris's lawyer, what with your different "standards" and all...

Edited June 12, 2007 by RuMR

[mattp]

Joseph, I find it truly astounding that you would argue that certain techniques or equipment should only be available to climbers who can climb 5.12+ and I truly wonder just what the "moral" basis for this position really is. It certainly sounds rather elitist to me. I wonder, too: has there been a free ascent of The Nose that didn't follow the (chipped) Jardine Traverse?

 

As I have said: I have great respect for what you have done at Beacon, and for your dedication to a ground up ethic. But shouldn't such high standards apply, if anything, MORE tightly to those who are highly trained and at least in some cases professional athletes? I tend to agree that one should have a few years of experience, and hopefully experience with different climbing styles as well, before they start drilling holes in a public crag. But it seems to me that we should expect more of the stronger and more talented climbers, not less (assuming you think bolting on lead is "more" better).