One of the best threads ever

[powderhound]

sorry mods.....came across this and I have to say that every climber should read coz's reply to a request for a story of the FFA southern belle.

[111]

link?

[JosephH]

http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Hey-Coz-Sure-would-like-to-hear-the-story-of-Southern-Belle/t271n.html

[obwan]

Goes to show you - climbers are the same everywhere.

[markwebster]

That was some awesome reading! The interplay between Coz and Doug Robinson was eloquent. Several of the worlds best climbers debating their route ethics, with kindness and consideration. I've rarely read such a lucid description of "getting in the zone".

 

But just to make a point, let's say that someone had led bunny face at Smith rock with 2 bolts, instead of the 8 or so that it has. Legions of beginner climbers would not be able to climb that buttress. It would stand as a "proud" testament to the balls of whoever led it in such "fine" style. And no one could add bolts, because it would be desecrating their grand accomplishment.

 

Wouldn't that be a bit ridiculous? And selfish? With a limited amount of rock available, there has to be a balance between simply stroking your ego, and "developing" a cliff for future generations.

 

I've put up run out routes, and I left them that way, due to public consensus. But I've learned from the error of my ways, and any new routes I put up will be safe at the grade. If I want to be remembered, I will paint a beautiful landscape painting, or write a book, not destroy a public cliff with an ego statement.

[turn_one]

Wouldn't that be a bit ridiculous? And selfish? With a limited amount of rock available, there has to be a balance between simply stroking your ego, and "developing" a cliff for future generations.

 

I wouldn't say, in comparison, there's a 'limited amount of rock' on the south face, you've seen it I'm sure. Smith and Yosemite = apples and oranges.

 

This route should stand as is.

[keenwesh]

pulling 5.12 100 feet out. thats balllllzy...

[JosephH]

I've put up run out routes, and I left them that way, due to public consensus. But I've learned from the error of my ways, and any new routes I put up will be safe at the grade. If I want to be remembered, I will paint a beautiful landscape painting, or write a book, not destroy a public cliff with an ego statement.

Depending on your perspective, painting 'safe' routes [at the grade] across a 'public' cliff can be just as much an act of destroying or vandalizing the aesthetics a line as leaving it dicey. Who picks what level of lowest common denominator represents 'safe'? The broader the 'public' you address (serve), the lower that common 'safety' denominator will be by necessity and definition. Who decides that 'safe' trumps other aesthetics or aspects inherent in climbing? And isn't putting up routes for the 'public' or 'community' an ego statement by definition?

[summitchaserCJB]

Joe-

I appreciate your perspective. But really you have brought up way more questions than you have answered. I guess the best answer I can come up with is to climb and establish in the manor you want to see out there. I think putting up unsafe routes is kinda irresponsible, by definition. But people do it so what can you do?

[JosephH]

When did it become such an imperative to wring risk out of climbing? And what does that say about what 'climbing' has become?

[summitchaserCJB]

I think you're putting words in my mouth. But I'll play along. (strawman detected). I guess for my I just don't want to die. when I think I'm going to die it is no longer fun. It's kinda that simple. Cheers!

[summitchaserCJB]

I just think it's funny when you claim this subjectivity in route ethics then you basically claim that you set the standard by claiming that routes are too "safe". Make up your mind!

[summitchaserCJB]

sorry to keep posting but you're making me think.

You do bring up a good point about risk in climbing. I think there is a point where you degrade what climbing is to the point where it is something altogether different. Of course there is a spectrum and any given activity within climbing falls somewhere on the spectrum.

I personally don't care as much about how you define "climbing". I'm more interested in how that translates into route devolopment. Of course, certain ethics lead to unfortunate practices at the crag.

[RuMR]

Joe-

I appreciate your perspective. But really you have brought up way more questions than you have answered. I guess the best answer I can come up with is to climb and establish in the manor you want to see out there. I think putting up unsafe routes is kinda irresponsible, by definition. But people do it so what can you do?

not everything needs to be sanitized, why is that "irresponsible"????? WTF??

 

The one thing that does chap my hide though, is putting up a ballsy route AFTER toproping it...that's weak sauce and a second ascent is on uneven footing as the FA...if you are too weak to lead ground up, then make it safe...OTW GO FOR IT!

[Off_White]

I just don't want to die. when I think I'm going to die it is no longer fun.

 

I'd have to agree with this sentiment.

[RJRiha]

But just to make a point, let's say that someone had led bunny face at Smith rock with 2 bolts, instead of the 8 or so that it has. Legions of beginner climbers would not be able to climb that buttress. It would stand as a "proud" testament to the balls of whoever led it in such "fine" style. And no one could add bolts, because it would be desecrating their grand accomplishment.

 

Wouldn't that be a bit ridiculous? And selfish? With a limited amount of rock available, there has to be a balance between simply stroking your ego, and "developing" a cliff for future generations.

 

I've put up run out routes, and I left them that way, due to public consensus. But I've learned from the error of my ways, and any new routes I put up will be safe at the grade. If I want to be remembered, I will paint a beautiful landscape painting, or write a book, not destroy a public cliff with an ego statement.

 

This is such a hard question, and I don't think the community will ever come to a consensus. Nobody wants every route bolted every 5 feet feet, but then again, MOST don't want routes with 1 bolt per pitch. But, there is the gray area in between, and most (slab) routes out there are in this gray area. If every route put up had no runouts at all, the next generation wouldn't be mentally trained to climb all these great routes.

 

For every great test piece out there (Southern Belle, Bachar-Yerian) that gets a load of press, I wonder how many run-out death routes immediately fall to obscurity after the FA. I've always wondered why it shouldn't be ok for a later climber to add bolts to ground-up climbs if done in the same style (hand drill on lead). I would say if it's popular, no way, or if it is 'special' (SB/BY/etc), leave it as is.

[markwebster]

Well said! That whole "fall into obscurity" thing translates into me walking along a beautiful cliff looking up at an old, obscure route, put up 30 years ago by some super climber who only placed 3 bolts in 120 feet. I'm supposed to worship him because he had huge balls, but in reality, I'm just sad that he ruined a great cliff. He probably doesn't even climb anymore...most people who climb at that level burn out in 10 years. But his obscure route lives on in obscurity.

 

I think the only solution is for this ridiculous, pompous generation of idiots to retire into nursing homes. The new generation of climbers will hopefully have more common sense and address some of these issues.

[JosephH]

So am I to take that as a commanding vote for wringing risk out of climbing?

[counterfeitfake]

The thought of comparing Cocaine Connection to Southern Belle should have your blood running cold.

[RJRiha]

Well said! That whole "fall into obscurity" thing translates into me walking along a beautiful cliff looking up at an old, obscure route, put up 30 years ago by some super climber who only placed 3 bolts in 120 feet. I'm supposed to worship him because he had huge balls, but in reality, I'm just sad that he ruined a great cliff. He probably doesn't even climb anymore...most people who climb at that level burn out in 10 years. But his obscure route lives on in obscurity.

 

I think the only solution is for this ridiculous, pompous generation of idiots to retire into nursing homes. The new generation of climbers will hopefully have more common sense and address some of these issues.

 

I wouldn't take the case of Southern Belle as ruining a cliff face. The route in question seems to be an expression of what can be done on rock in ground up style, considering there were sections where the climbing was reported as too hard to stop and drill. Read about Hall of Mirrors on Supertopo if you want to see what happens when slab just gets too hard to do ground up (they reported to stand on bolt hangers to drill the next bolt).

 

That being said, I'd bet most slab routes aren't put up to make a point, or even craft a climb for others. The FA probably just wants to climb on unclimbed stone because he likes adventure and pushing into the unknown. Putting in more bolts takes time, and if you're comfortable at the grade, why not just run it out? I'd bet on most of these run-out climbs, the FA doesn't even care, or would support addition of bolts if a bunch of people wanted to climb his route.

 

I'm not advocating rebolting every climb for every climber. Having a variety is ideal. I personally don't want to be strung out in the death zone when I go climbing, but that doesn't mean I want an uber-G rated bolt ladder either.

[DPS]

When did it become such an imperative to wring risk out of climbing? And what does that say about what 'climbing' has become?

 

Seems to me that climbing is inherently risky. Why make it more so by establishing inadequately protected routes? I realize that back in the day routes where often run out because it was difficult to hand drill from stances but in this day and age if you are going to the trouble of placing bolts then why not place enough to make the route reasonably safe? Isn't that the whole purpose of placing bolts? If the element of risk is of prime importance to you then why not free solo everything?

[JosephH]

...inadequately protected routes...

Who decides? You're immediately back to the lowest common denominator problem. Your perception of 'adequate' may not be shared by the next person who still considers your notion inadequate. What about the person who wants a clip every body length?

[RJRiha]

...inadequately protected routes...

Who decides? You're immediately back to the lowest common denominator problem. Your perception of 'adequate' may not be shared by the next person who still considers your notion inadequate. What about the person who wants a clip every body length?

 

Adequate should be defined as that which will not be expected to result in death or serious bodily harm should a fall occur. Should every climb be bolted like that? No. Variety is good. If you want skull and crossbones routes, well, lucky you (they exist all over the place). If you want moderately bolted routes, climb moderately bolted routes. If you want every body length, go climb Endless Bliss.

[JosephH]

Adequate should be defined as that which will not be expected to result in death or serious bodily harm should a fall occur.

Well, that's one opinion; who's to say that opinion should rule the day versus this one:

 

Adequate should be defined as that which will not be expected to result in bodily harm should a fall occur.

[RJRiha]

Adequate should be defined as that which will not be expected to result in death or serious bodily harm should a fall occur.

Well, that's one opinion; who's to say that opinion should rule the day versus this one:

 

Adequate should be defined as that which will not be expected to result in bodily harm should a fall occur.

 

Since I haven't changed my opinion on what *I* believe adequate bolting is, you can chalk that one up to me being more specific on one post (death or serious bodily harm). Bodily harm is too broad, and I realize that (since it could mean a little road rash, bruises, etc). That's my opinion and I'm doing nothing but voicing it.

 

I'm not against the existence of death routes. Nor am I necessarily against over-bolted comfort routes. What I am against is a mentality that one or the other is correct.