South Early Winter Spire Bolt

[goatboy]

I appreciate the thought and experience that went into your post. Thanks for the perspective.

 

 

[lizard_brain]

Blah, blah, blah.

 

Since when does a 5.3 climb need bolts?

 

So the world's best climber did the lesser climbers a favor and made the route easier for them. How patronizing is that?

 

Just leave the route alone!!!!!!!!!!!

 

:mad:

[lizard_brain]

South Early Winter Spire is a CLIMB. NOT a community service project for some "well respected and vastly experienced" climber.

 

Who in the hell do you think you are?

 

Leave the goddam thing in it's NATURAL state. Let people learn without your interference.

 

Up yours.

[ericb]

South Early Winter Spire is a CLIMB. NOT a community service project for some "well respected and vastly experienced" climber.

 

Who in the hell do you think you are?

 

Leave the goddam thing in it's NATURAL state. Let people learn without your interference.

 

Up yours.

 

Thanks Scott very well said. I think the fact that this is a commonly guided climb, coupled with the scenario you describe gives great perspective.

 

LB....you sir are a tool

[TrogdortheBurninator]

Given your perspective, I think the circumstances under which the bolt was placed are important. If the bolt were placed during a climb (under wintry conditions, etc) where it was necessary for a clients safety, it seems like a justifiable decision. However, if it was placed as a means of "preparing" the route for guided clients, that is, in my opinion, less acceptable. Guiding success and corresponding increased revenues are not IMO a valid justification for retrobolting. If a client is not ready for the traverse, that is a sign to turn around and return with more experience. I have no problem with the existence of the discussed bolt, but I question the motives for its placement.

[lizard_brain]

South Early Winter Spire is a CLIMB. NOT a community service project for some "well respected and vastly experienced" climber.

 

Who in the hell do you think you are?

 

Leave the goddam thing in it's NATURAL state. Let people learn without your interference.

 

Up yours.

 

Thanks Scott very well said. I think the fact that this is a commonly guided climb, coupled with the scenario you describe gives great perspective.

 

LB....you sir are a tool

 

Brilliantly put.

[lizard_brain]

I'll add that any so-called 'reason' for this bolt is nothing more than justification. How many people have been injured or killed on this route? How many were turned back by this move? Without solid numbers, the 'reason' for this bolt is nothing more than SPECULATION - purely imaginary. How many years were people climbing this route without this bolt? Is altering this route somehow making this route 'better'? And any answer you give is pure SPECULATION or OPINION.

 

The only fact is that someone has altered the natural state of the route. Thanks for altering the natural state of the route.

[ericb]

I'll add that any so-called 'reason' for this bolt is nothing more than justification. How many people have been injured or killed on this route? How many were turned back by this move? Without solid numbers, the 'reason' for this bolt is nothing more than SPECULATION - purely imaginary. How many years were people climbing this route without this bolt? Is altering this route somehow making this route 'better'? And any answer you give is pure SPECULATION or OPINION.

 

The only fact is that someone has altered the natural state of the route. Thanks for altering the natural state of the route.

 

LB/Trogdor....to Scott's earlier line of reasoning...bolted 5.11 climbs....

 

In your opinion, at what YDS difficulty level would it be acceptable to place a bolt (or bolts) to protect a move (or moves) that are otherwise unprotectible and that would have serious consequences should a fall occur?

[TrogdortheBurninator]

It has nothing to do with difficulty. Bolt replacement is a wonderful service to the climbing community. Retrobolting of established, classic alpine routes in one of the most historic parts of the range should always be approached with great caution. When there is no history of incidents at that location, and the climbing is class 3-4 on a 5th class route, I dont think retroing is called for unless it was placed in a situation where it was necessary for client safety. The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation.

 

Regarding DEB SEWS: I was unable to free the previously discussed DEB of SEWS, but I was actually a bit bummed about the triviality of the bolt ladder. Furthermore, the bolts on sews are placed far closer than any sport climb I have EVER climbed. How many new bolts were added after retroing. IIRC, Kearney's recap of the first ascent mentions a significant amount of drilling.

 

Tooth and Claw hasn't been retroed (AFAIK), and represents a model for difficult climbing at WA Pass.

[lizard_brain]

...The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation....

 

Like I said, justification based on speculation. Nothing to do with reality or statistics or fact. Just opinions. "Let's put a bolt here! What if...!" Entirely based on fantasy.

 

 

[lizard_brain]

Watever happened to minimal impact?

 

[catbirdseat]

...The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation....

 

Like I said, justification based on speculation. Nothing to do with reality or statistics or fact. Just opinions. "Let's put a bolt here! What if...!" Entirely based on fantasy.

 

I'll chime in here to agree with EricB that you are a bona fide tool, lizard_brain. You have no ability to view situations from the perspective of others. You only think of yourself.

 

I'll add that when guiding, if the pitch is vertical, the guide can adequately protect the client whether or not he has placed any protection or not. If the client falls, the rope is above.

 

On a traverse the situation is quite different. If there is natural protection, he can place enough gear to keep the client safe from pendulum fall.

 

Here is a situation where there is a traverse with no natural protection at all. The guide can't protect his clients without that bolt.

 

I was interested to hear Scott's method of belaying, which is different from mine. Typically, there is only one person that wants protection on that section, an assuming a party of three or more, what I'll do is lead across, clipping the bolt and then have the less experienced person tie into the middle of the rope and clip through. After that he/she is belayed from the other end.

 

I like your way better, because it works even if you have a party of two.

Edited August 17, 2007 by catbirdseat

[lizard_brain]

...The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation....

 

Like I said, justification based on speculation. Nothing to do with reality or statistics or fact. Just opinions. "Let's put a bolt here! What if...!" Entirely based on fantasy.

 

I'll chime in here to agree with EricB that you are a bona fide tool, lizard_brain. You have no ability to view situations from the perspective of others. You only think of yourself.

 

So... Espousing the philosophy of minimal impact and not altering the natural state of the outdoors qualifies as 'only thinking of myself'? Who is the tool here? You morons - I'm ONLY thinking of others. Christ - add a gondola in the name of improving the route for others, and pat yourself on the back for it. Who is thinking only of themself? You're just feeding your own egos. You're the tools. It's practically a scramble route. Can't you just belay someone across that? Get over yourselves. It's all about your egos - pure and simple.

[ericb]

...The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation....

 

Like I said, justification based on speculation. Nothing to do with reality or statistics or fact. Just opinions. "Let's put a bolt here! What if...!" Entirely based on fantasy.

 

I'll chime in here to agree with EricB that you are a bona fide tool, lizard_brain. You have no ability to view situations from the perspective of others. You only think of yourself.

 

So... Espousing the philosophy of minimal impact and not altering the natural state of the outdoors qualifies as 'only thinking of myself'? Who is the tool here? You morons - I'm ONLY thinking of others. Christ - add a gondola in the name of improving the route for others, and pat yourself on the back for it. Who is thinking only of themself? You're just feeding your own egos. You're the tools. It's practically a scramble route. Can't you just belay someone across that? Get over yourselves. It's all about your egos - pure and simple.

 

What is the YDS grade of a scramble route, in your opinion?

 

[lizard_brain]

...The circumstances for this are rare and would IMO be something like getting caught in a freak storm on the summit and having the safety of that passage greatly compromised for the descent. Regardless, I think a handline would be a suitable option in this rare situation....

 

Like I said, justification based on speculation. Nothing to do with reality or statistics or fact. Just opinions. "Let's put a bolt here! What if...!" Entirely based on fantasy.

 

I'll chime in here to agree with EricB that you are a bona fide tool, lizard_brain. You have no ability to view situations from the perspective of others. You only think of yourself.

 

So... Espousing the philosophy of minimal impact and not altering the natural state of the outdoors qualifies as 'only thinking of myself'? Who is the tool here? You morons - I'm ONLY thinking of others. Christ - add a gondola in the name of improving the route for others, and pat yourself on the back for it. Who is thinking only of themself? You're just feeding your own egos. You're the tools. It's practically a scramble route. Can't you just belay someone across that? Get over yourselves. It's all about your egos - pure and simple.

 

What is the YDS grade of a scramble route, in your opinion?

 

Get lost, troll.

[ericb]

LB - articulate as always - humor me and answer one of my questions, or I'll just assume that you don't have a good answer....hence the name calling.

 

Climbing almost always alters your precious "natural state" - take note of the impact of the climbers trail going up to the spires. These are OK but one invisible bolt is not?

 

If you have a point buried in all your babble, it's something around the difficulty grade of the climb not justifying the introduction of a foreign substance to the rock there...so just what difficulty grade would justify it???

 

At least Trogdor introduces the concept of a retro-bolt put long after the first-ascent and sans any notable accidents....you on the other hand.....

 

 

[Peter_Puget]

Scott - You wrote: "The old 1/4" bolts were replaced and new bolts (some 2 feet apart) added to the second ladder where hooks were used at first."

 

Are you saying that old bolts were replaced and additional new bolts were placed within two feet of the existing bolt placements and that in addition to this other new bolts were placed by this same party?

 

By the way it was not a runout death climb before the retro-bolting which I have never seen. Did you climb the route before it was rebolted? Has it only been rebolted once?

Edited August 17, 2007 by Peter_Puget

[lizard_brain]

LB - articulate as always - humor me and answer one of my questions, or I'll just assume that you don't have a good answer....hence the name calling.

 

Climbing almost always alters your precious "natural state" - take note of the impact of the climbers trail going up to the spires. These are OK but one invisible bolt is not?

 

If you have a point buried in all your babble, it's something around the difficulty grade of the climb not justifying the introduction of a foreign substance to the rock there...so just what difficulty grade would justify it???

 

At least Trogdor introduces the concept of a retro-bolt put long after the first-ascent and sans any notable accidents....you on the other hand.....

 

 

Assume what you want.

 

I'm not saying that any grade justifies it. It wouldn't make sense to say that "Every route or move above x.x shoud be bolted." What I'm saying is I appreciate that area, and the less permanent alteration there is done to it the better. You miss the point altogether.

 

That's all I have to say.

 

I realize this is going to get me nowhere, and I'm wasting my time.

 

Thanks for listening.

[spotly]

The issue of this particular bolt aside, I don't think weather or not it's a guide/client team should have any bearing on when a new bolt (not so new in this case) is justified on an established route. If a guide can't safely get their client through a route in the same style as everyone else then they should choose a different route. I'm not saying this bolt is or isn't justified just that a guide's financial liabilities shouldn't be a factor.

 

[ADDED] Hmmm. I didn't mean to imply that the guide's sole concern was liability. I'm sure the biggest concern is the safetly of their clients.

Edited August 18, 2007 by spotly

[scott_johnston]

Peter;

 

I may have misspoken here. I have climbed the route about 4 times and not in the last 2 years so my recollection might be a bit off. It is clear that some if not all of the original aid bolts on the first pitch bolt ladder had been replaced with more modern bolts. As I recall this is done in such a way that maybe every other bolt has a the funky original 1/4" (could be wrong here) and aluminum hanger and the others are bigger bolts(Those old 1/4' bolts are generally easy to pry out and then a nice starter hole is in place for the new bolt which saves a bunch of effort). This way a person who needed to French free it had all the bolts but someone freeing it would have decent pro to limit fals to say 10-20' (at least that was my interpretion from what I saw). I am always too busy trying no to fall off those moves to pay a lot of attention to the bolts in detail.

 

I believe that the second 5.11 pitch is a different story. From my understanding the FA used hooks for a few moves on that steep bulge with the finger pockets. There are at least 2 bolts now in that section that are very close together. Maybe 2' apart is an exageration but they are very close so perhaps 3-4' is more accurate. My guess is that the rebolter (whom I applaud by the way) felt that since he was making the route French free-able and most folks don't head on to free climbs with aiders and hooks he would stick a couple more bolts in and make them close enough together so one could yard on them if need be.

 

I had not climbed it before it was rebolted but looking at the remaining rusted bent 1/4' bolts in the area it is easy to see why some of the old bolts have been replaced. As far as I know this rebolting was done only once.

 

When you say it was not a "death run out" are you meaning on aid or free? Probably all the old bolts would hold body weight. However, a free climbing leader fall on to one of the those 1/4 rusted bolts cold easily have resulted in a ground fall on the fist pitch. Recall that bolt ladder starts right off the ledge. On the second aid pitch the area requiring hooks and the hard pocket free moves are also done right off the belay ledge. There is no alternative for protection there to prevent a ground fall. So maybe not "death" but certainly broken legs and shattered pelvis are are distinct possibilites in both those spots.

 

Rereading my earlier post IO can see hwhy it was not clear, sorry.

 

Scott

[ashw_justin]

Try guiding that section in a safe manner when it is covered in verglas or snow.

Perhaps a little late to comment on this, but conditions shouldn't really be an excuse. Climbing (and guiding) in a safe manner includes knowing when to turn around, right? Furthermore, the implicit business concern of getting clients to the top has to be the least acceptable of the excuses for this bolt.

 

I'm not sure just how to debate the logic that for newbs, walking across a narrow section of horizontal rock is like 5.11 face climbing for the rest of us.

 

Isn't the point of taking new people climbing that they will gain the skills and judgment that we have as climbers? What is the point of sheltering them by bringing climbs down to the level of a complete beginner? How will they learn what alpine climbing is about? (That being predominantly easy, yet underprotected climbing.) If they want 'complete safety,' aren't there plenty of peaks that they can just hike to the top of?

[shaoleung]

Let's face it: climbers will never agree on where bolts should be... but if a bolt gets you so riled up you have to beat it with a rock until it is not only still there, but now completely useless, you have some more serious issues at hand. You probably need to work on your anger management and check that your insurance can cover the therapy you no doubt need.