Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 not only will the routes that I have developed out there remain bolt free, but all at this area will remain bolt free. I'm not discouraged by your comments because in fact you are embodying my initial intent in starting this thread: Oregonians have no conception of climbing without bolts, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why. Smith Rocks has basically genetically coded into our way of being and something is wrong about that. Trying to spread awareness about the feasibility of Zero-bolt climbing areas doesn't just open the door for future developers to understand that some areas can be developed with no-bolts; I hope that it also makes people take a look at the way in which they are bolting routes. Take Flagstone as an example: people were developing routes there with well-spaced, risk-incurring practices for years and years. But what does the climber encounter today- Grid Bolted Mayhem, and in my mind the hugest black eye to the Oregon climbing scene. I am embarresed(sp.) to take people from out the state there because it makes us all seem like a bunch of wankers. Bolt spacing is purely subjective. To the best of my knowledge there is only two places where these practices are actually regulated:City of Rocks and J-Tree (please someone correct me on this because I would love to know that more intervention is occurring on a national level). Zero-Bolts is not subjective. It means zero-bolts. Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Not trying to pick on your response but you prove my point so well: Who says that "Cragging is inseperable from convenience"? To be honest about said crag in question, it is in the backcountry and at times can seem to border on Alpine status: but in reality its not, its a crag, and I don't think that just because it is a crag it shouldn't be held in the highest ethical regard... I think the problem with this issue is its like the old saying about "sport climbing" being neither a "sport" or "climbing"- climbing ethics is a redundant concept; or maybe I'm just being too pessimistic... Edited April 7, 2009 by Checat Quote
kevbone Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 the highest ethical regard... Please define "highest ethical regard"....... Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 I don't know, I've yet to receive my appointment as National Climbing Czar but I'll take a stab at it: If said area saw no visitors for an extended period of time (months, days, years ?), after that period of time, if a non-climber were to stumble upon the area they would have every reason to believe that they were discovering something new, a wild place that had been previously untouched by human hands... try that one on for size... Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 pins can be removed and leave no trace (subjective, arguable) chalk washes away, trails get overgrown, etc... Bolts don't go anywhere. and the holes they leave behind, no matter how much filler you put in, will leave trace... Quote
kevbone Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 pins can be removed and leave no trace You clearly have never climbed in Yosemite. Quote
powderhound Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Bryan - this thread is about the Lack... and yes we do need to get back out there together, are you back in the great state of Oregon? back in Oregon...just waiting for the weather to keep staying nice. I want to get back out to the Lack as soon as I can, have you gone out and checked the seepage? Time for some moss cleaning. Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) I have. I also have studied up on constructive pin usage, and have shown people that if done right, brass, beaks, peckers, etc... can take the place of a lot of pin usage. I've used pins at the area that this thread is dedicated to but you wouldn't be able to identify where... There is a big difference between modern pin usage and the pin practices of the early days of rock-climbing. I think with the advent of new technology and new techniques and practices it is our obligation as climbers to raise our standards to the rock rather than bringing the rock down to our level(bolting). Edited April 7, 2009 by Checat Quote
luvshaker Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Bolts=Rock climbings attempt at capitalism. Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 See I thought this was going so civil and then you have to go and make a dick assumption like that. A climbers resume isn't based on how much there willing to spray over the internet. If anybody takes anything away from this thread it should be that. Who is to say that 50 years from now the same widely accepted attitudes towards chipping holds won't be applied towards bolting climbs. Maybe we'll all be "base-soloing", barefoot and chalkless like Dean... Quote
froodish Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Bolt spacing is purely subjective. To the best of my knowledge there is only two places where these practices are actually regulated:City of Rocks and J-Tree The rules at JT are kinda complicated as there are different rules for wilderness and non-wilderness areas of the park. Not sure what you mean by bolt spacing (route spacing, or frequency of bolts on a given route). Rules for JT are spelled out here: http://www.nps.gov/archive/jotr/activities/climbing/climbing.html And in the PDF linked from that page: http://www.nps.gov/archive/jotr/activities/climbing/bolts.pdf Bolts don't go anywhere. and the holes they leave behind, no matter how much filler you put in, will leave trace. There are plenty of deftly filled holes in JT and other areas that even up close are very difficult to spot, even with a well-trained eye and frankly, in the right circumstances, some anchor bolts are probably less damaging than a descent trail. Quote
Checat Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 Now your talking. And as you know Lee, I used to work in a gear shop so I saw this first-hand. Probably the root of the imbalance towards bolting is at the heart of the capitalistic interests of the rock-climbing industry. You think they'd be selling all that flashy garb and bull bells and whistles to some dirty hippie like me. Hell no, sport-climbing lines the pockets of the powers that be and that is where the heart and soul of rock-climbing is lost... Quote
powderhound Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 time to walk the hobbit trail if you ask me Quote
crimper Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I think the further a crag is from a road, the less likely it is to be climbed at. If the Lack (right?) has a burly approach, even if it's close to a city, then it's less and less likely to get bolted. As for your idealism, again, right on. And there are plenty of people in Oregon that don't see every new crag through a Smith Rock lens. just as one example, mark d commented earlier - and i'll take this moment to spray for him (and he'll hate it) - he has over 100 FAs throughout central oregon behind him in just the past 5-6 years, and i'd bet over half were groundup and boltless. together we put up over 15-20 new pitches (or what we thought was new - which is part of your point,as there were no bolts there to tell us otherwise) at Cougar, outside Bend, almost all groundup and not one with a bolt for lead protection. (there are bolted anchors) this isn't meant as spray - the routes are not exactly cutting edge or unprotected scarefests - but only to say that none of those routes at cougar or elsewhere have had bolts added to them. mark, correct me if i'm wrong. anyway, i'll say it again: if a crag is convenient to access, people will want convenient anchors to lower off, and that usually means bolts. can you see the difference between lead bolts and anchor bolts that way? or is there no compromise? Quote
powderhound Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I think the further a crag is from a road, the less likely it is to be climbed at. If the Lack (right?) has a burly approach, even if it's close to a city, then it's less and less likely to get bolted. Short approach = Hobbit Trail Not close to much except oak ridge There are anchors, trees work great. Quote
crimper Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 41 miles from eugene (oakridge's location) is WAY different than 41 miles from portland. put ozone in oakridge at the end of your hobbit trail and you'd have a tenth or a hundredth of the traffic, and your anchorless routes would probably stay that way a long time. location, location, location. Quote
powderhound Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 your anchorless routes would probably stay that way a long time. location, location, location. good Quote
kevbone Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I hope this thread does not die.....bolting threads are so much fun. Quote
Checat Posted April 8, 2009 Author Posted April 8, 2009 Your cracking my shit up with this hobbit trail business. Are you taking cracks at my height? I've certainly been made fun of for being short, just never over the web... Quote
mattp Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 I learned to climb in the 1970's at a crag that was bolt free (or "nearly so" even if you think that doesn't count) and I believe it remains that way to this day. There was once a bolt ladder there, but I don't remember anybody paying much attention to it and I bet it is long gone. Grand Ledge, Michigan Quote
billcoe Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 If said area saw no visitors for an extended period of time (months, days, years ?), after that period of time, if a non-climber were to stumble upon the area they would have every reason to believe that they were discovering something new, a wild place that had been previously untouched by human hands... try that one on for size... Ahhhha! Now thats a very special special thing. Got ya. Quote
powderhound Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 Your cracking my shit up with this hobbit trail business. Are you taking cracks at my height? I've certainly been made fun of for being short, just never over the web... the tree walk that starts at the talus field and takes you to the trail. I call it the hobbit trail Quote
el jefe Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 is this another one of those "bolts aren't natural" spiels? like cams and stoppers aren't manmade artifacts just like bolts, every bit as much a product of the capitalistic interests of the rock climbing industry? like said capitalists aren't probably more interested in selling all of us multiple sets of expensive camming devices rather than a mere 10 quickdraws each? the rediscovery of trad climbing has been a good thing for the bottom line of the capitalists because now they get to sell more toys. no bolts would be good for the capitalistic climbing industry. Quote
JosephH Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 ...the rediscovery of trad climbing has been a good thing... Bill, did I miss something? Why do I suddenly feel like Geronimo on Columbus Day... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.