before u start bitch'n'bout beacon

[ivan]

If you guys can't even simply acknowledge the fact that this is a full on retro 1975 pound up of a line that didn't really exist without a application of a huge quantity of fixed pro then it's pretty damn hard to have an honest conversation around the motivation and rationale for doing it.

 

you're fantasy world lies in that you think it hasn't been "acknowledged" that bolts and pins were required - they're like, on the topo, dude - wtf?

 

your argument that "there was no line" is similiar retarded - i love young warriors, but that's hardly something that you look at from the ground and say, "oh yeah, THERE it is" - wanna do a comparision of fixed gear per meter for that route? it's not heads and shoulders better. young warriors had to be pounded in to, and the free world didn't fall as a result of it, or lead to the eventual covering of all of beacon in bolts.

 

your fear of others doing hte same at beacon is not irrational, however. i think the clear policty of no new bolted routes on the s side stands undisturbed however. as for the n side, sad to say, i pretty much got the only line that's inbounds and doesn't invovle wading through oak for the last 50 meters or running hte risk of being crushed by car-sized blocks.

 

finally, your linking of dz or coethedral to this is erroneous too - i haven't put up a single route at either location.

[JosephH]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

[Jim]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

 

IMO - then different standards might apply. The same standards do not apply to the Gunks, Smith, Index, or Rummy, for instance. I'm not a local, but as usual, I think that history and majority rule is the norm.

[ivan]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

i don't really understand your point

 

i wouldn't consider myself a "local" anywere but beacon, so can't comment on comparing ethics on the n side of beacon (again, it's essentially a seperate crag from the s side) to anywhere else - certainly the n side of beacon looks really nothing like anywhere else i've cragged (and that ain't a compliment - it's pretty much a dirty whore who's hot sister is currently out of the country)

 

seems like the commonsense at ALL crags is, if you can do a route w/o bolting, then do so - if you have to bolt, but there's something else nearby that's better to be doing instead, do that.

 

how is young warriors strikingly different again?

[JosephH]

Beacon has been a training ground for many of the top big wall climbers in the past, but the peregrine closure put the kabosh on that.

No, it didn't.

 

we finally have a multipitch climb that can be done in the off season and people appear to be interested in climbing it, even Jim said he wants to go up it.

If I'm not mistaken this is the same Jim who chopped two bolts on a free climb at DZ last year.

 

More people might start climbing out at Beacon, even wall climbers and aid climbers, lord forbid, an aid renissance so to speak!

In this case a retro-renaissance - no one anywhere else would even think about putting up a route like this.

 

The route might even go free to a strong climber on a dry day someday!! Heck, we might even get organized and get people involved as a group and do something for ourselves and the Park.

Think only for and about 'ourselves' is exactly why you won't get anything done at the Park.

 

Many of the abandoned south side routes might get cleaned up and climbed again.

Well, having redone all the anchors, checked all the fixed pro, and cleaned some out those routes on the south face without seeing any uptake on people volunteering to adopt and clean any of the columns you'll forgive me if it all sounds pretty rah-rah - which route are you going to take responsibility for to really clean it out and keep it clean?

 

People might get enthusiatic about Beacon again, and things start happening there that would improve the climbers lot. so I can see why you might be resistant to it.

The 'climbers lot' will only improve once their heads are out of their collective asses and start thinking about more than about how set upon and victimized they are and focus on more than just what they want.

 

[ Note: Off_White - if this response is 'inappropriate' then you should either remove or move Steve's post as well. ]

[JosephH]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

IMO - then different standards might apply. The same standards do not apply to the Gunks, Smith, Index, or Rummy, for instance. I'm not a local, but as usual, I think that history and majority rule is the norm.

With minor variations - but what they all have in common is this route wouldn't be acceptable at any of them.

[Jim]

Not to belabor the point - but it's a wide range and not "minor variations". For instance the policy at the Gunks is no bolts -period; while a different atmosphere prevails at Smith - all for good reasons.

 

From the small sample I see here - most folks appear to be ok with the line in question given its location.

[JosephH]

your argument that "there was no line" is similiar retarded - i love young warriors, but that's hardly something that you look at from the ground and say, "oh yeah, THERE it is" - wanna do a comparision of fixed gear per meter for that route? it's not heads and shoulders better. young warriors had to be pounded in to, and the free world didn't fall as a result of it, or lead to the eventual covering of all of beacon in bolts.

The Corner and YW are classic, wandering 'lines of least resistance', though the first pitch of YW is fabulously overbolted for all the wrong reasons, but that decision was made long ago, not today.

 

Again, you're not the first person to look at that line in earnest - lots of us have both in the past and fairly recently - the difference is none of us were willing to apply that much fixed pro to realize a 'route' up it. In that respect 'Stone Soup' is appropriate as you started with no line and only realized one with a community pooling of fixed gear to force one into existence.

 

your fear of others doing hte same at beacon is not irrational, however. i think the clear policty of no new bolted routes on the s side stands undisturbed however.

Only time will tell. But this is a serious chink in the wall as it makes it that more difficult for the BRSP to justify turning down someone else's request for a high fixed pro count (sport) line anywhere on the rock, i.e. the South Face.

 

finally, your linking of dz or coethedral to this is erroneous too - i haven't put up a single route at either location.

I know, I was referring to the of-late party/group activity/fun-to-do and 'we need a winter place to play' aspect of it all.

[JosephH]

Not to belabor the point - but it's a wide range and not "minor variations". For instance the policy at the Gunks is no bolts -period; while a different atmosphere prevails at Smith - all for good reasons.

The only difference there is the difference between the trad/sport divide and different histories with bolt wars. Within each camp the variations are minor.

 

From the small sample I see here - most folks appear to be ok with the line in question given its location.

The "small sample" is the guys who put it up and other members of the clan - so yeah, they are ok with it.

[Jim]

You're correct. I shouldn't judge the temper of the general opinion of climbers based on the posts here. Not being a local I think I will just STFU. Cheers.

[billcoe]

[ Note: Off_White - Joseph, if this response is 'inappropriate' then you should either remove or move Steve's post as well. ]

 

*this was part of Miker's trip report and moved here in error by a mod and is not able to be deleted*

 

 

Take care brahs, keep it clean, not personal or angry, and try to stay friendly. We're a community. Perhaps a dysfunctional one though.....

[112]

Not now, but before the original post, for sure.

 

Also, is there a differnce between the NW and N side? I thought the 1904 NW route went to the top. At least it did when I climbed it. But maybe it doesn't count as it is on the NW side not the N side.

[Off_White]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

IMO - then different standards might apply. The same standards do not apply to the Gunks, Smith, Index, or Rummy, for instance. I'm not a local, but as usual, I think that history and majority rule is the norm.

With minor variations - but what they all have in common is this route wouldn't be acceptable at any of them.

 

Wherever I May Roam, 5.9 at Smith, has forty some bolts in five short pitches, and its massively accepted. There's no lack of bolts & fixed gear at Index. I'm guessing Jim meant Rumney? That's a total sport area, and the climbs are all short. Yosemite is full of routes with 8 fixed pieces per pitch, aid or free. I've spent little time at the Gunks, but it doesn't much seem like Beacon, there's nothing six pitches long, and fixed pins are not unusual there.

 

I don't see the facts on the ground supporting your statement.

[kevbone]

Good God....what is wrong with this picture. As someone who has more than a dozen routes to his name I know what Ivan is going through. The reality is Ivan got to it first. It's his climb and his bolts and everyone else gets to screw off and not climb it if you dont like it. Period, end of story. Putting up climbs is strictly first come first serve basis.

 

Ivan....I know from firsthand knowledge that you are not going to please everyone. Be proud you found a way up the north side of Beacon. The storm will blow over soon enough......

JH...the old "those bolts were put in long time ago" straw man argument does not work here or anywhere. I have always thought it is bullshit that in the 80’s and 90’s climbers could add bolts at Beacon but you would get a shit storm if you bolted and arête in current times. What a crock…….i want to put up several climbs at Beacon that most likely would need bolts. Most of the reason I have not is not my family. It is because of my respect for Jim and his ideas about Beacon. I have replaced one anchor (Jensens ridge) at Beacon. That is the only time I have ever even brought my drill to Beacon. And I only did it because Jim asked me too……

 

JH. I think there is an Infinite bliss thread out there to spread your climbing ideas on. It is the same thing you are pushing here.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

No, Beacon isn't the Valley or Smith - it's closer than both and a very special and unique resource that shouldn't be abused in this way for the sake of anyone's entertainment and amusement - it shouldn't be turned into a locals' Six Flags. I don't care how you guys arrived at the decision, it was a bad one that sets some utterly lousy precedents.

 

If you guys can't even simply acknowledge the fact that this is a full on retro 1975 pound up of a line that didn't really exist without a application of a huge quantity of fixed pro then it's pretty damn hard to have an honest conversation around the motivation and rationale for doing it.

 

And if you were being honest, you'd admit you got into some circular thinking around needing a new group project and wouldn't this be grand entertainment that kept on giving. But hey, there is nothing about this line that moves climbing forward at Beacon or anywhere else. You all seem totally unwilling if not incapable of acknowledging that if this line went up at Smith, Index, the Diamond, the Captain, on Cannon, or at the Leap you'd get an immediate and intense negative reaction. And that's because the day of putting up routes like these is long, long past.

 

You want to do climb lines like these? Enjoy the ones that were put up when this was acceptable and we didn't know better - putting one up today? Weak and there's simply no way around that. The only place it's apparently still acceptable is inside the bubble of the Beacon distortion reality field. Personally, I think you've guys have treated the stone badly for your own entertainment value.

 

Having a good group time together digging out and putting up lines out DZ or Cothedral? Priceless. But that sort of fun shouldn't have then been directed at and applied at Beacon just because it's close and it's winter - sorry, it deserves way more respect than that.

 

It's called disagreeing. Grow up.

[tvashtarkatena]

And the part about if it had been anywhere else?

 

If my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle.

[eldiente]

 

I don't see the facts on the ground supporting your statement.

 

Sorry to hammer on this, but all of the new routes going up at Smith or anywhere for that matter use bolts and pins for protection, not for steeping on. I challenge you to give me a list of modern routes going up at crags that use aid ladders to ascend blank rock. I like to think I'm good a good climber dork when it comes to cragging beta and I can't think of anywhere where new routes are going up using bolts for aid climbing. I like climbing trivia so if someone can list of some modern bolted aid routes, I'd like to hear it.

 

This style of route would be out of ordinary at any crag. I would bet that 1,000s of new routes go up every year, how many of them have bolt ladders on them? Not many, or none(?) Not saying it is bad or good, but a quick glance through a guidebook would confirm this.

 

Bottom line, cutting edge FA done in a style that most folks don't understand. Maybe a new trend is back? I'm going to step it up next year and drill a few pockets to create a moderate free route to the summit, I'm awful at aid so I need a few pockets.

 

-Nate

 

[tvashtarkatena]

So you guys are for a ban on new aid lines.

 

Thank you for playing.

[eldiente]

I'm not for or against anything. I'm just saying folks need to recognize that this an unusual route, aid ladders aren't very common and to my knowledge this style of aid climbing fell out of popularity a long time ago.

 

-Nate

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Less popular but still happening. It's a vital skill for a lot of spectacular routes. Well done local routes are a good thing.

[JosephH]

Wherever I May Roam, 5.9 at Smith, has forty some bolts in five short pitches, and its massively accepted. There's no lack of bolts & fixed gear at Index. I'm guessing Jim meant Rumney? That's a total sport area, and the climbs are all short. Yosemite is full of routes with 8 fixed pieces per pitch, aid or free. I've spent little time at the Gunks, but it doesn't much seem like Beacon, there's nothing six pitches long, and fixed pins are not unusual there.

 

I don't see the facts on the ground supporting your statement.

Smith is a sport climbing area and has been equipped as such. Beacon isn't and I do what I can to try and keep it that way. The Valley dos have all sorts of routes as you describe, but put up awhile ago. Are you trying to claim that if you tried to put up a route with a topo like that today at Smith (say on PLW), Index, the Valley, the Diamond, Eldo, or Cannon it wouldn't be met with howls of derision. Really?

[JosephH]

Less popular but still happening. It's a vital skill for a lot of spectacular routes. Well done local routes are a good thing.

No, it's not - please do tell me where it's still happening. Aiding is a vital skill for a lot of spectacular routes, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with the need to establish this route and in this manner. You'd have to be living in a 'back to the future' world to believe this is what climbing is about today or even in the recent past.

[pink]

Good God....what is wrong with this picture. As someone who has more than a dozen routes to his name I know what Ivan is going through. The reality is Ivan got to it first. It's his climb and his bolts and everyone else gets to screw off and not climb it if you dont like it. Period, end of story. Putting up climbs is strictly first come first serve basis.

 

Ivan....I know from firsthand knowledge that you are not going to please everyone. Be proud you found a way up the north side of Beacon. The storm will blow over soon enough......

JH...the old "those bolts were put in long time ago" straw man argument does not work here or anywhere. I have always thought it is bullshit that in the 80’s and 90’s climbers could add bolts at Beacon but you would get a shit storm if you bolted and arête in current times. What a crock…….i want to put up several climbs at Beacon that most likely would need bolts. Most of the reason I have not is not my family. It is because of my respect for Jim and his ideas about Beacon. I have replaced one anchor (Jensens ridge) at Beacon. That is the only time I have ever even brought my drill to Beacon. And I only did it because Jim asked me too……

 

JH. I think there is an Infinite bliss thread out there to spread your climbing ideas on. It is the same thing you are pushing here.

 

 

 

there was no vision here kevin, the first pitch is an established TR. the second and third pitches have been done other than ivan putting his twist on them. that leaves 3 pitches of whatever you want to call what ivan did. you were bagging on ivan at the beginning of this thread, i guess ur post is worth another 3 pages though

 

 

[pink]

Wherever I May Roam, 5.9 at Smith, has forty some bolts in five short pitches, and its massively accepted. There's no lack of bolts & fixed gear at Index. I'm guessing Jim meant Rumney? That's a total sport area, and the climbs are all short. Yosemite is full of routes with 8 fixed pieces per pitch, aid or free. I've spent little time at the Gunks, but it doesn't much seem like Beacon, there's nothing six pitches long, and fixed pins are not unusual there.

 

I don't see the facts on the ground supporting your statement.

Smith is a sport climbing area and has been equipped as such. Beacon isn't and I do what I can to try and keep it that way. The Valley dos have all sorts of routes as you describe, but put up awhile ago. Are you trying to claim that if you tried to put up a route with a topo like that today at Smith (say on PLW), Index, the Valley, the Diamond, Eldo, or Cannon it wouldn't be met with howls of derision. Really?

 

totally, and i heard you can get the hardware at feathered friends

[JosephH]

The reality is Ivan got to it first.

He didn't "get to it first", it's been looked at lots of times, but of course most folks were looking at it for free lines, or lines with an absolute minimum of aid, not a retro-aid job.

 

Be proud you found a way up the north side of Beacon.

He didn't "find a way", the way was clear - forcing an aid line up it wasn't rocket science, it just took perseverance and hard work.

 

I have always thought it is bullshit that in the 80’s and 90’s climbers could add bolts at Beacon but you would get a shit storm if you bolted and arête in current times....i want to put up several climbs at Beacon that most likely would need bolts.

I'm fully aware you've been chomping at the bit to establish safe sport lines on the South Face, no news there, nor that I and others are totally against that.

 

I think there is an Infinite bliss thread out there to spread your climbing ideas on. It is the same thing you are pushing here.

Absolutely, that and this are exactly the sort of thing I don't want to see happening at Beacon exactly because the open the door a little wider to sport bolting on the South Face with guys like you at the front of the line.