Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Feb 1, 2004 - 02:30pm PT
|
Why do the words 'bolt chopping' have a negative connotation in most climbers' minds?
In the past, some of you have expressed disapproval of bolt chopping activities. Others may have an opinion but have not yet stated it. Let’s hear your ideas on the subject and why you feel the way you do.
|
|
WideCrackJack
Social climber
SLC
|
|
Bolt "chopping" is a poor method to use in the removal of a bolt. "Chopping" implies a hack job. Bolt removal, if done properly, is a wonderful way to clean an area up, make a statement, or inflict your point of view upon others. But, the key is to do it in such a way as to not leave a scare any larger than the original bolt placement. Also, an effort must be made to cover up the hole and any other damage that has been done in the area of the bolt being removed.
WCJ
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Marin Hot Tub Country
|
|
Smashing hangers down with a hammer is lame--but makes quite a statement.
Carefully breaking the offending bolt flush with the rock--and patching with
rock dust to make it invisible--is cool.
Or so I've been told...
Hardman Knott
|
|
Jody
Mountain climber
CA
|
|
Because it gives the impression that the "chopper" is a condescending dude who thinks that "if the route isn't done MY way then it isn't the RIGHT way". I immediately think of an egomaniac who thinks he is on some sort of higher ethical plane than anyone else, worrying about how someone else climbs the route, instead of just shutting up and climbing himself.
|
|
steelmnkey
climber
Phoenix, AZ
|
|
Could be the "placer" was a condescending dude who thought "this thing is dangerous" in spite of hundreds or thousands of previous ascents proving to the contrary. From what I can tell, skill is a helluva thing to have to admit you need for some of these new climbers. I think rather than an egomaniac, in a lot of cases, it's just someone who is sick and tired of climbers who can't be satisfied with a bazillion well-bolted sport routes.
|
|
Dean
climber
|
|
The first time I climbed in Boulder Canyon I ran into a situation that gave me second thoughts about my fairly benign attitude toward chopping.
With less than an hour of light left, we decided to run up the first pitch of a route. Rossiter's topo said the pitch had bolts at the top. When I got to belay stance, I found the bolts had been chopped (rightly so, as there were many bomber anchor points). Yet, by the time I brought my second up, we were left with the choice of bailing on gear or climbing another pitch in the dark without headlamps to hike down. We finished the climb without incident, and it was a good challenge. Still, it was annoying to have bad beta based on someone's call to chop the bolts.
But the incident got me thinking about the struggle between ethics and safety in climbing. Both are crucial. Before you chop a bolt, you ought to consider whether that action will put others in harm's way. Before you place any bolt, you ought to recognize that you are making an ethical call about how a route will be climbed into perpetuity.
We'll never find a balance on this, because everyone brings their own definitions of safety and ethics to climbing. So this is one debate that is worth arguing time and time again.
CDR
|
|
Mick K
climber
Northern Sierra
|
|
"Still, it was annoying to have bad beta based on someone's call to chop the bolts."
Take 100% responsibility for yourself and your partner, each time you leave the ground. Climbing is dangerous! Never assume fixed gear will still be in place when you climb a route (e.g. rock/ice fall, weather, choppers).
Where is the adventure in climbing these days? To much detailed beta is suffocating the soul of the sport.
|
|
Mike Hartley
climber
Colorado Springs
|
|
The arguments against retro-bolting and chopping are often the same:
1. It usually creates conflict and bad feelings.
2. It often creates an ugly mess with the route and the rock suffering.
3. It’s often one person exercising their will against the wishes of many others.
4. Both often ignore the inherent character of the rock (highly featured with lots of stances or smooth, run it out terrain) and instead impose arbitrary bolt placements based on the ego or lack of skill of the bolter/chopper.
5. It’s often energy best used elsewhere.
|
|
Wade Icey
climber
|
|
I would agree that the negative reaction to the words "bolt chopper" is a matter of semantics. Chopping indicates a threat of aggressive action directed at an individual or individuals. Chopping is also usually a reaction to a perceived or genuine ethical or stylistic breach, creating conflict on an individual and factional level.
I think most individuals involved in route creation feel they are making a personal artistic statement, albeit for public view/consumption and mostly on public property.
Peripheral support involvement in a few "restoration" projects has taught me that those who are passionate enough to make the effort --Them pigs is even heavier when they's full of bolts and tools and epoxy and such-- do indeed care a great deal about rock destruction, public perception of ethical /stylistic consensus and the original artistic vision of the individuals who created the route.
From my table here at the digital deli it seems like 'chopping' is akin to adding a moustache to the mona lisa (or painting over some other vandals' moustache and adding a wart to her nose). While restoration is akin to restoring her to original condition. Almost everyone would object to vandalism while almost no one would argue against restoration. I consider "Bolt chopping" and "Rebolting" two distinctly different activites. I think we need to be clear about which activity we are endorsing or condemning.
unwashed and somewhat slightly dazed,
Wade
|
|
steelmnkey
climber
Phoenix, AZ
|
|
Just for perspective, here's my one participation in the chopping activity... I'm pretty sure it was anything but ego driven. More like an attempt to carefully remove the moustache from the Mona Lisa.
Few years back, some "vandals" drilled six bolts into the Sedona classic Mace (hands, chimneys and offwidth). The route had been climbed in 1957 (Bob Kamps and Dave Rearick) and innumerable times since. Very popular, mucho traveled route. Four of the bolts appeared to be some weird attempt to establish TWO belay anchors (right next to each other) on a ledge system, about fifteen feet up the third pitch. The second pitch belay has a bomber fixed anchor, as does the third. They had also placed one bolt about halfway up the second pitch, right next to a crack that would take a bomber #4.5 or #5 Camalot (remember this is an OW route, so you had to have this gear along anyway). The last bolt was up on the fourth pitch and right next to a crack that takes a bomber #4 Camalot. We assembled crowbar, epoxy, grabbed rock from the base and headed up. As it turned out, the knuckleheads had actually placed 1.5" bolts in soft sandstone! They all came out with only a few tugs of the crowbar. We patched the holes as carefully as we could and headed for home.
Although we let it know who'd done the removal and dug for info on who placed this garbage, nobody ever stood up to tell us how come they'd mangled a classic route. I guess we could've left the bolts where they were. Someone was certainly going to pull them out soon anyway...probably with just bodyweight.
|
|
Mike
climber
Orange County CA
|
|
The Arrow Chimney Super Topo thread strayed somewhat from its original topic - I'll continue that diversion here.
Rebolting initiatives depend on individuals, and the individual is responsible for the quality of his work. A group may have established protocol for rebolting, but it's the individual that ultimately determines the quality of the job.
"Quality" to me means researching a route's history to determine as closely as possible what holes are original and what hardware was originally placed (or not) in them, what holes have been added in absolute necessity (e.g. a hooking flake breaks off) and what holes are not original (read: should not be replaced and should be removed). "Quality" also means making every effort to re-use existing holes, to remove old, damaged gear with as little scarring as possible and to best cammoflage broken-off bolts and rock scars with epoxy and rock debris. And it means going the extra mile to remove deadheads, heads whose placements won't be rendered useless by removal, poor fixed pins, ratty slings, so on.
A person who cares about the historic significance of routes - and does something to restore or maintain it - and cares about generally-accepted first ascent ethics often gets dubbed a "chopper", which has negative connotations as people have pointed out. People who replace bolts have varied modes of operation and work habits - some are good, some less so.
|
|
atchafalaya
Trad climber
California
|
|
Its not, as steelmonkey's story illustrates. Sad to hear someone would unnecessarily bolt on the mace. I climbed it in 88 and it only had a couple quater inch spinners, one on the traverse and one at the ow crux. Unfortunately, chopping is a necessary chore these days because more climbers are out there, and beginners are not always learning to climb with natural pro. If there are any rules in climbing (I hate the idea) one must be natural pro must always be used when possible. Bolts next to cracks should always be chopped. Bolts added to existing routes, without the consultation of the first ascent party, should also be chopped. Chop away...
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
Choppin' should be done with the consensus of the climbing community, not the ego/bitterness of one/two individuals. How that's done is up to you, the members of the community. If our standards are going to be, go choppin if it pisses you off, so be it. I'd suggest that the fighting will continue whereever the choppers don't have community consensus.
Factors for consensus chopping:
Next to a protectable crack;
Well established route with history;
Poor placement of bolt;
"Art";
Factors irrelevant:
The first ascensionist is a dick;
The second (or third etc . . .) ascensionist is a better climber;
Others?
|
|
Dean
climber
|
|
Thanks Mick K for your inspired words. I will be better prepared in the future now. You may have saved my life!
Although I think you belittle climbing by calling it a "sport." Where is the adventure in climbing these days when people climb solely for sport?
CDR
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
"There are only three sports, bullfighting, car racing and mountain climbing. The rest are just games".
Ernest Hemingway.
|
|
funkness
Boulder climber
Ca.
|
|
Beyond the questions of whether the chopping is justified or whatever. The bottom line should be that if you chop. you better do a real good job or you are just as bad as the offending bolter. Respect the rock.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Marin Hot Tub Country
|
|
dufas wrote:
Factors for consensus chopping:
Next to a protectable crack;
Well established route with history;
Poor placement of bolt;
{snip}
...Putting squeeze-jobs so close to established routes that it is hard to tell
what bolt is for what route; putting squeeze-jobs so close to established
test-pieces that an X route becomes an over-bolted sport-route;
(Tapestry in Sugarloaf being a prime example--gee, I WONDER who did that?)
putting convenience rap-stations atop routes that have been walked-off
for decades; putting convenience bail-stations on multi-pitch routes--
often next to bomber gear; putting a two-bolt rap-station 3 feet from a crack that takes
plently of gear from 1/2" to 2"--in order to RAP EXPLORE a face down below
for later rap-bolting--in a place that has a traditional ground-up ethic; (Lover's Leap)
ect. The list goes on and on. People show up out of the blue and declare
their own ethics by their actions, which basically say "screw what anyone thinks".
These self-absorbed idiots must be neutralized, and with extreme prejudice.
Hardman Knott
|
|
Satan
Social climber
South Central LA ( HELL )
|
|
The word " chopping " is so harsh - this isn't lunch meat. Why not refer to this activity as " Un - necessary artificial anchor removal " - has a nice " mom and apple pie " ring to it, eh?
|
|
Ben Wah
Trad climber
On the move
|
|
I think "choppers" have received a negative image becuse so many of them gloat over the bolts they have chopped or will chop (Way; Coiler). If instead, they chop,or gently remove, if you prefer--few people chop with the intent to further damage the rock--with sorrow for the debauchery and compassion for the misguided idiot who placed them in the fist place, perhaps the image will improve, and if you are not aggro and comfrontational, folks will be more likely to listen to your reasons for the unwanted gear removal.
I have chopped several bolts, and I have never done it with joy or gloating-I've done it with regret that someone would be so selfish as to force that course of action on the climbers. It might also be a good idea to return the bolt hangers to the person who placed them, so as not to be labelled a hanger thief.
Ben Wah
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Marin Hot Tub Country
|
|
Ben Wah wrote:
If instead, they chop,or gently remove, if you prefer--few people chop with the intent to further damage the rock--with sorrow for the debauchery and compassion for the misguided idiot who placed them in the fist place, perhaps the image will improve, and if you are not aggro and comfrontational, folks will be more likely to listen to your reasons for the unwanted gear removal.
Does this signal the era of a kinder, gentler bolt chopper?
I hereby propose a new non-profit group: S.N.A.C.S.
(Sensitive, New-Age Chopping Society)
Hardman Knott
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!