Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 104 of total 104 in this topic |
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Sep 19, 2005 - 09:24pm PT
|
Went out to Hair Raiser Buttress this weekend bummed to find the bolts chopped. The buttress looks like a beautiful climb. I walked up and saw the distance between the first and the second bolt, realized that major ground fall potential existed. It was in a matter of minutes that we found the copy of the letter written by the bolt remover, informing us that the route has been "restored" to its original X potential and crediting the Old School Runnout Blah Blah Blah Club for removing the unwanted bolts. "Enjoy the rest of your day" was kindly written at the end of the letter. At least they are a friendly bunch. I just today saw a blurb by Can't Say informing us on ST of the removal of the bolts on the very day that they were removed.
I'm wondering if Clevenger gave the OK for the additional bolts, and ifso what jack ass remved them. Is there any difference between adding without permission and removing without permission. I don't get it.
I'm also wondering if I should have just said screw it and gone for it. Some other party went for it and I'm cracking a a beer now in their honor, but a ground fall potential like that just does not appeal to me.
|
|
426
Sport climber
Obed
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:12pm PT
|
'Tis a pity, I've been out there a couple of times and never got my hair raised, either. I've climbed a few garbage routes in the vicinity.
Funny to think how the average sport climb has more bolts than that 3 pitch route...
|
|
mark_s
climber
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:30pm PT
|
Vern did give permission to add the new bolts. Tough question about removing them. It doesn't really make it "hair raising" with the added bolts. But you will DIE if you botch the first pitch. Better to crack a beer than to crack your head wide open in the end. But a local mammoth climber is going to replace them soon. I won't give his name, but he wrote something at mammoth mountaineering.
|
|
Lambone
Ice climber
Ashland, Or
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 11:27pm PT
|
Right on! chop, chop
|
|
426
Sport climber
Obed
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 11:51pm PT
|
What I really don't understand is why it's usually the case that a 5.11 or harder climber puts up a 5.8 and turns it into a death route.
I go to Tuolumne and the harder I climb, the safer I am (a generalization, certainly).
I've cut my teeth on plenty of old school routes like Sweet Jesus...but let's face it, it's a lot safer to get on a 10+ like Shadow of Doubt.
I realize that a lot of climbers (i.e. me) are narcissitic *es but I don't understand that whole mentality of "I want people to die on my route" or "I'm climbing so below my level I can run it out 60-80 feet".
I applaud guys like Greg Barnes-his "Excellent Smithers" is one of the best routes I've done in the Meadows for the grade...as well as best protected.
And, in this case, if Vern Clevenger says it's okay to add some bolts, then who's say "I'm choppin' it"...isn't it the preference of the FA party that should count most?
*Bolts were added on Dike Route as well, with Gerughty's approval. Does anyone sack up and not clip those? Not that I've seen....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 11:51pm PT
|
Well I just realized that I have 5 bolts on each wheel on my car. I will chop 2 bolts on each wheel and then I will be rad and trad.
What’s with those commie pinko car manufacturers taking the adventure out of diving.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2005 - 11:58pm PT
|
I once had a car that chopped its own bolts. Plenty of adventure there!
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 12:01am PT
|
"Well I just realized that I have 5 bolts on each wheel on my car. I will chop 2 bolts on each wheel and then I will be rad and trad."
Then you will be like Coiler.
Take a look at the Fun Mobile.
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 20, 2005 - 01:05am PT
|
Even when climbing way below my ability I still put gear in to prevent cratering. Are there other climbs that have been lowered to mere mortal status that I'm not aware of that are worthy of mention, and are these likely to be brought back to their previous "rad"ness. I was surprised that the namesake climb of an area gets chopped, somebody is pissed apparently.
|
|
James
Social climber
The Climber's Subconcious
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 01:18am PT
|
Werner,
Classic
426,
The standards for climbing have changed. Crags, once the frontier for the intrepid, are now playgrounds.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:41am PT
|
The other half of the FA party apparently was definitely against the retro bolting according to posts on RC...
|
|
climberweenie
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 04:35am PT
|
What happens if a potentially cool 5.8-5.10 climb is first visited by a 5.13 climbing @sshole who places 2 bolts for 100 feet? Is every 5.8-5.10 climber cursed for eternity to sh#t their pants or just plan not do it?
I think the gnarly-factor of the route (and validity/respect for FA style) should be considered in context of the first ascentionist's climbing ability. But then again, that's just for people who like to talk smack about how run out they were. I know I've felt 100x more hair-balled and focused when I'm 30 feet out "5.9" with an inadequate topo (when I'm not sure if I'm physically able to make the next moves and can't see where to go while I die a slow death starting to get sewing machine leg) than when soloing Royal Arches after 2 roped trips. And there's my smack!
So these other details matter in terms of trying to objectively qualify the experience.
|
|
Wrathchild
Big Wall climber
Lee NH
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 05:50am PT
|
I read in a magazine that climbing is supposed to be a fun and safe activity for the whole family. Me and Granny are going to go do that Bitcher-Yossarian thingy tomorrow.
Hugo Bosch
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 06:19am PT
|
As I posted over on RC once:
Put the bolts too far apart and you're posing; too close and you're pandering - such is the sporting man or women's dilemma. Finding that elusive Goldilockian "just right" that brings out the best in a line while leaving some shred of "sport" in a sport route would seem to be the challenge. In general it's a losing proposition - you can't please everyone short of bolting a line for the lowest common denominator.
Folks can go to Six Flags if they want "safe" entertainment with a low gnarly factor...
|
|
mark_s
climber
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 09:15am PT
|
its a sorry state that climbing has come to. What ever happened to just climb the route. For someone to even ask to add bolts is a joke.
I blame it all on the frick'n gym climbers mentality. I mean really retro bolt....wtf is that. 10 years ago you didn't retro bolt someone elses route. Its you gym climbers who can't even belay with a stitch plate.....need your precious gri-gri. Bolts too far apart...i want to add some to make it safe....well sorry to add some rain to your outdoor rock climbing experience...you will fuk'n DIE climbing. There's no pads, and techno playing while you pull on your red holds. I've seen people outside climbing, asking their partner if a certain hold or crack is "off route" What a joke.
Take all that energy about cry'n about who chopped what, added what and that a routes too dangerous. Take all that energy and climb with it. Climb to Climb, don't climb to clip bolts.
Burn the gyms, chop the bolts.
....my coffee is abit too strong this morning...but really, what ever happened to climbing to climb. Im really sick of this gym climber sh#t....and it only gets worse. The sport has been ruined for along time.
|
|
426
Sport climber
Obed
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 10:36am PT
|
James writes:The standards for climbing have changed.
So....did we end up going with Harding's "do what you will"
...or Robbin's "do what I will"
?
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Straight Outta Squamton
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 10:46am PT
|
Could someone post up a quick synopsis of what led to the retro-bolts being added in the first place?
Whose idea was it––and why? On a formation named Hair Raiser Buttress...
Uhh, hello?
I propose changing the name to Knott So Hair Raising Buttress until we get this all sorted out.
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 20, 2005 - 11:01am PT
|
Mark S - Whoa there big boy get down off your horse my friend, have you ever been out to Hair Raiser? I've done plenty of run out climbs, it seemed a bit more than your average R rating, steeper terrain with certain crater potential if you fell. My point is not that there should be no run out climbs, my point is that the bolts were there why f$#% with it? The rock out there is beautiful why do more damage to the face? If you are such a purist don't clip the second and foourth bolts on the climb, but to rip out bolts from the stone defaces the route once again.
I wasted a bunch of fuel driving out there not to mention the time, so now I'm not sure if I can afford my gym membership and my Saturday belay lesson was missed. I think I might have left my gri gri at the base of the climb, oops. Dude, that red route is definetly 5.9. Stay bitchin, James.
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 20, 2005 - 11:14am PT
|
Hardman K- quote from the Mammoth Area Rock Climbs-Lewis and Moynier. "If Hair Raiser were in TM it would be the best slab climb of its grade. As was the style of the day this was a very bold, runout route. A few more bolts were added on the second ascent. Then in the late 1990's a controversial move, many more bolts were added. The route is still a little sporty, but is far from hair raising{except for the exposed start.} FA Vern Clevenger Tom Higgins, 1975. Retrobolts: Alan Hirahara." Thats all I know.
James
|
|
can't say
Social climber
Pasadena CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 11:21am PT
|
dodangler, I'm sure the 63 year old creaker who climbed it without so much as a moan, appreciates yours props (the party you mentioned). As do a few of my friends who climbed it w/o the added first pitch bolts. They didn't seem to think it was all that outrageous.
But maybe it's just they're kind of old school climbers. I mean the youngest person out of all 8 of these folks was 47 or 48.
Maybe it's just a matter of sack. If you're not up to the route, don't bring it down to your level, simply because you want to do it. It's a character malady that exists in so many of today's climbers. It's the "all about me" type of relativism.
Respect for the FA needs to be upheld and community enforement is the only recourse available to those who actually care about the soul of climbing.
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 11:30am PT
|
"my point is that the bolts were there why f$#% with it?"
This is a nice justification for retro-bolters to go ahead and retro whatever they want. Gives them the final word.
|
|
426
Sport climber
Obed
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 11:34am PT
|
"Respect for the FA needs to be upheld and community enforement is the only recourse available to those who actually care about the soul of climbing."
Respect the FA's wishes-That's why I think this issue is raised. It appears that the FA gave his approval to add a few bits o' metal, yet, someone else (aka the enforcer) took it into their hands to remove bolts that were okay'ed by the FA party.
Besides this, often the FA's are climbing light years below their ability on a 5.9 FA, which is kind of my point earlier in the thread....go up on some 11 in the meadows (generally) and you'll find bolts every body length, even on "ol' skool"...
Anyone done the Dike Route clipping no bolts, in the FA style? Maybe an "enforcer" should go up there and reinstate it to Gerughty's original line, even though TG gave permission to add bolts later.(?)
....So I guess we ended up going Robbin's school...'tis a pity, I was always more of a Harding man...
|
|
atchafalaya
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 11:55am PT
|
I was with dodangler this weekend at HR Buttress, and my opinion isnt worth 2 cents when it comes to whether HR Buttress should be retro-bolted because I did not do the FA, same as everyone else who chimed in. However, I had thought that the FA party supported the additional bolts, and had reasons to justify their placement other than I am old, bold and badass, and everyon else needs to follow my ethics. If that is not the case, then I understand the controversy.
Beautiful route... incredible feature, incredible line... maybe someday I will have the sack.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Straight Outta Squamton
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 12:05pm PT
|
What about the actual retro-bolting? Whose idea was it? Did Clevenger or Higgins
have 2nd thoughts/regrets after the FA –– or did someone broach the idea and receive "permission"?
Am I inferring correctly that Higgins was against the retro-bolting––while Clevenger consented?
The fact that it was retro'd by someone else leads me to believe that someone
may have whined that it was very, very scary, and that someone could get hoit.
What's the general consensus/feeling of the locals regarding this route?
Let's hear the full scoop!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 01:03pm PT
|
As I said, a bit of a quandry when the FA party is split on the topic and only one gives permission to retro while the other is completely against it. Again, I'd say leave it alone under those circumstances as who wants to get into an FA bitch fest.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Straight Outta Squamton
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 01:13pm PT
|
Reading the RC.com thread linked above, it does look like someone else came up
with the idea, and pushed to have the route retro-bolted, and received "permission".
The bottom line is that Clevenger apparently was not happy with the result.
Here's the relevant post:
----------------------------------
User: rocknroll
Posted: 19 Apr 2005 23:03
Years ago, before Hairraiser was retro bolted, I tried to put up a new route to the left of Hairaiser. I ran it out about 40 feet (groundfall) and drilled a 1/4" bolt. I looked down at the ground and over at hairaiser 15 feet away and thought "this is silly. 40 foot run out right next to a classic line?" (Remember Hairaiser had only 3 bolts on the first pitch and only towards the top, slung chickenheads were the pro). I joined Hairaiser and gave up the route.
Years later Alan Hirahara, famous sushi chef (who never could a get date even though he entertained beautiful woman all the time at work while wearing a japaneese bath robe), asked me what I thought about him retro bolting HairRaiser. I said it was entirely up to the first acensionist Vern Clevenger. The next time I saw Vern he agreed that the route could use a few more bolts. I relayed this info to Al, who promptly retro bolted the route. Vern was not happy. Alan did not follow my instructions and talk to the first ascentionist. He went strictly on my word. I guess Vern felt there were too many bolts.
Years later, I go to do the new and improved Hairraiser and discover he didn't even bolt the ankle breaking move at the bottom. And not only that, he didn't even bolt the first pitch. Since very few sport climbers know much about natural protection, especially how to tie a butterfly knot on a chickenhead, everyone headed for that lone bolt I placed years ago 40 feet up. Alan bolted this line. The actual Hairraiser Buttress climbs up 15 feet and traverses straight right to the center of the buttress where you can sling some chicken heads.
Later I discovered another route of mine on the back side of Granite Mountain, Dick Van Dike had also been retro-bolted. Everytime I came to the Sushi bar I would bemoan the fate of that route to Alan " The nutting was intricate and you had to think...but it was totally safe. Alan, who would ruin such a classic trad route?" Alan would shrug his sholuders and hand me another free poke salad.
On his third or fourth going away party at the retaurant, Alan fessed up. "I bolted it. I thought it hadn't been climbed. Do you want me to chop it?"
"No, no sense in that. People are enjoying it the way it is." As I was getting up to leave, Alan handed me a free bucket full of Poke salad.
----------------------------------
Hmmm. Very interesting, indeed.
|
|
Wrathchild
Big Wall climber
Lee NH
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 01:21pm PT
|
You sold out for salad? I'd have held out for at least some maguro...
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 01:24pm PT
|
Well, it was a poke salad. shoyu seasoned ahi. Very nice!
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 02:01pm PT
|
Just this past weekend, I climbed a route and clipped an old piton. Then I realized that by using cams and nuts at any location on that route that I thought I needed protection, I was bringing the route down to my level. I must be some kind of jerk to get on that route and not use pitons and not place gear except for every thirty feet like the FA did.
So why is it totally okay to bring the route down to my level and protect it the way I want to just because I climb with nuts, cams, and hexes? Why is it so totally wrong for the sport climbes to not have that same benefit.
I'm not proposing that things be grid bolted. I proposing that we try to look at how we act and treat people who climb and maybe cut them a little slack for doing the exact same thing the rest of us do. They want to get on that route but since it's a bolted route, they don't have the same options that trad climbers have, and take, every day. Bummer for them not having a crack nearby or they could bring it down to their level without raising a single eyebrow.
Dave
|
|
Mick K
climber
Northern Sierra
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 02:31pm PT
|
This weekend I went on a climbing trip to belay/second (way out of shape to even think about leading) my buddies on an attempt on Hair Raiser Buttress but, as you know, the route was restored. Sucks for us! I would have like to climb it.
As with all failed attempts, even this one, the route goes into "the closet." It will be a big day when I finally clean this one from the closet, if ever. Even with the use of toprope preview, mega beta, preplaced slings, stick clips, steroids, caffeine, and any other type of trickery I can think of, a lead of this route may never be within my ability. That is ok because there are lots of routes I will never have the ability to climb.
However, at 5.9 I am positive I can climb the moves on this route, it is the potential consequences that nags at me. Granted, I need to get back into climbing shape but my head that really needs work before I think about leading the HRB.
I suspect this climb will torment me until I clean it from the closet. I know it is already tormenting Atachafalaya and Dodangler and probably many others who could do the physical 5.9 moves but not the mental gymnastics required. Besides, no one falls off 5.9 slab-you’d have to jump..
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:01pm PT
|
Alan fessed up. "I bolted it. I thought it hadn't been climbed. Do you want me to chop it?"
Thought it hadn't been climbed? I don't think it matters to him. Out at Clark Canyon when rap-bolting a climb that shares the same start as an older ground-up trad runout route, Alan (and friends) couldn't restrain themselves from adding bolts to the crack start of the trad route (Womb With a View). About 30 feet of protectable crack now sports a line of bolts next to it. They didn't bother to get "permission" from the first ascent party either.
Trad climbers -- retire your racks. They won't be of much use someday.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:04pm PT
|
I wonder if this chopping of bolts that have been in since 1990 will lead to more 'ethical cleansing' of routes. It's like a new history game, where we have to track down the original bolt count and go chop offending 17 year old retrobolts. Sweet!
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:09pm PT
|
'ethical cleansing'
Nice! What we need is a good civil war in the climbing community. All the carnage will cut down on crag overuse and once a totalitarian regime is installed, we won't have any more of these time wasting democratic debates.
And while we're at it, lets get rid of all these people posting silly commments on websites.
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 20, 2005 - 03:19pm PT
|
Arete- my point is not that the bolts are there why remove them, my point is if permission was had why remove them. And if your getting rid of your rack, I'm in the market for some new school BD camelots on the cheap. I'm still sporting the old double wire post models. Is that old stool or what?
|
|
Apocalypse Now
climber
Up the river.
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:21pm PT
|
Some day you will return and feel a little bolder, and go for it. And joy will fill your heart. For now...suck it up.
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:24pm PT
|
Sounds like permission was had second hand at best. Next it will be "Well I heard from a guy who knows a guy who overheard a guy say...."
dodangler -- I think I will keep my trad rack for the time being. It still seems to be getting abused on a regular basis. I too have BD's of all vintages and a collection of old junk you wouldn't believe. You wouldn't even want most of it on your rack.
|
|
John Vawter
Social climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 03:34pm PT
|
Reading the above quote from rocknroll on the RC.com thread suggests to me that although Vern was OK with the idea of adding bolts, he was unhappy about not being consulted, and ultimately with the way it was done. That amounts to another "no" vote in addition to Higgins. Higgins had a letter published in Climbing bemoaning the rebolting of this route an issue or three back, so there's no doubt where he stood. I don't need any more to find that _in this case_ removing the added bolts is a good thing. Has Vern said otherwise?
If the job hadn't been botched, and Vern had approved of the retrobolting, I wouldn't be so sure. I think these decisions have to be on a case by case basis, and with maximum deference to the FA party. Otherwise we get bolt wars.
|
|
A Dzzl
Trad climber
Praha, Czech Republic
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 04:15pm PT
|
You guys are all weak sauce. Get with soft protection or die trying. Then your balls will hang around your knees like the knots on my harness. Vy jste jen žarliví Děvkí.
|
|
John Vawter
Social climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 04:40pm PT
|
dodangler said: “Some other party went for it and I'm cracking a beer now in their honor, but a ground fall potential like that just does not appeal to me.”
If it doesn't appeal, you're not ready for this route. And if the new bolts had still been there, this route would have required an asterisk by it on your tick list: * Post-retrobolting :-(
Why isn’t Shipoopi as coveted as Bachar-Yerian? It’s close by, very similar climbing, a little harder even. Obviously it’s because it takes way bigger balls to lead B-Y. If Bachar had stopped to drill 12 bolts on the .11a pitch instead of three, you don’t think it would be known around the world do you?
I did a couple a routes on the West Face of DAFF recently. Chvchichaschtli and Fool’s Gold. I got way more satisfaction from Fool’s Gold than the other much harder one. Chv has a hard move at a bolt near the end of second pitch. NBD. Fool’s Gold has a psychological crux that’s only 5.8, the run out to the second or third bolt above a big patch of polish, that I’ll never forget. It’s not just the ability to make the moves that makes the game so much fun.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Sonora, California
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 05:28pm PT
|
John's response is perfect. Short and to the point. Not every route is for every person. The day when all routes are "dumbed down" (or "safed up") to the same level is the day when climbing has died. I led Hair Raiser back in it's original form, with quarter inch bolts and all. No new bolts should have been added to this desert classic, there's plenty of other routes in the area. John's comments about Bacher Yerian are right on. I might be able to TR Bacher Yerian on a perfect day. I'd never consider leading it. Yet, if someone ever added bolts to that route, it would never be the same. Where would the joy be in leading Bacher Yerian with twice the bolts? Where is the joy in leading Hair Raiser with twice the bolts? Half the pleasure is in emulating the first ascentionist's bold style; in reliving their vision.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 06:18pm PT
|
I remember when Bachar first eyeballed what is now called Bachar-Yerian? Vern Clevenger of all people wanted to rap bolt it because he thought no one will ever be able to lead it from ground up. He’ll probably deny it or so.
Shows what the world is about …….
|
|
F10 Climber F11 Drinker
Trad climber
e350
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 06:46pm PT
|
Well said "mtnyoung".
Ten or so years ago I followed my partner up Hair Raiser with the old quarter inchers, I was impressed by his lead and we were even more impressed by the first ascent. Even thought I didn't lead a pitch, it was nerving watching him as I belayed.
|
|
Robin Goodfellow
Social climber
1531 Oxford English Drive
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2005 - 07:39pm PT
|
426
I've got your sticks,
I know a fellow
brash never mellow
who climbed the dike
without inserting his pike
Where the lightweights like.
hehe
|
|
426
Sport climber
Obed
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2005 - 09:28am PT
|
Ah, so you know Gerughty then, eh? I've not run across anyone who's talked about chopping the added bolts on Dike, yet....or anyone "manly" enough to have sacked up and done Dike in the original FA style...
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2005 - 09:45pm PT
|
Hey John, that's ironic - did you know Fool's Gold is a retrobolt job? Alan Nelson free soloed it on the FA.
No need to retrobolt. Go do new routes if you want "well bolted" ones, don't add bolts to existing routes. It's not like there is a lack of well bolted routes in the Mammoth area, most of the newer crags have many moderate sport routes.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Sonora, California
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2005 - 10:46pm PT
|
Greg's got the point. After all what is a retrobolted Hair Raiser? Just another pretty slab climb. Plenty of those. The fun in this route is it's history; being bold like the first ascentionist's were. It's funny, I've put up dozens of routes, and all the face routes that I can remember are "well" bolted. Yet I love old style routes like Hair Raiser; I seek them out up into the high 5.10s just because of the above thoughts. I'm even good at keeping it together on runouts, and yet I don't run out my own FAs. So what species of chicken does that make me? As time goes by the old style routes will be a smaller and smaller percentage of all exisitng routes. Let's leave them strictly alone. No retrobolting.
|
|
Fluoride
Trad climber
on a rock or mountain out west
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2005 - 11:15pm PT
|
Geez locker, aren't you the same guy who was bragging in another thread about putting a protection bolt on Double Cross? I hope you were only kidding about doing that cause otherwise your post would be kinda hypocritical.
|
|
can't say
Social climber
Pasadena CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2005 - 11:54pm PT
|
hey it's a good bolt. what's wrong with that Jeff?
|
|
Jedi
Trad climber
Upland, CA
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 01:52am PT
|
What the f*#k! I climbed it two years ago with the new bolts in. A great route that needed those bolts. I've heard it was a death fall on the first pitch... find the as#@&%e and chop off his balls!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 01:54am PT
|
Is that why he lowered you off the end of the rope?
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Straight Outta Squamton
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 02:04am PT
|
hahahaha
Is he talking about Double Cross or The Climb Formally Known As Hair Raiser™?
Someone call a Whaaaaambulance!
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 23, 2005 - 10:34am PT
|
It seems as though my original thought that bolt removal in its self is destructive got lost. I don't agree with bringing the climb down to anyones level but the FA's.
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 11:04am PT
|
dodangler: which brings me back to a reply I made earlier. If it becomes commonly accepted to leave the retro bolts there once they are in, this will be used to excuse/justify/allow retro bolting EVERYTHING.
|
|
rico
Trad climber
sf
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 11:18am PT
|
Can someone please help me here....I keep hearing this argument "the FAs didn't need these (extra) bolts, so when I climb this route I want to climb it in the same hard style..." correct me if I'm wrong, in order to climb the route in the "same style" as the FAs, wouldn't one need to schlepp whatever gear was used to bolt the route...and linger (flail), unprotected for a few minutes (probably more) at the stance before clipping into a bolt. Mind you, having never put up a route I am talking out of my ass, but IMHO there is little comparison between the "style" with which the FA climbed the route and anyone who follows.
|
|
Robin Goodfellow
Social climber
1531 Oxford English Drive
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 12:18pm PT
|
4-2-6 Hello
From Robin Goodfellow
He climbed the dike
Better than you would like
Cause he Is never yellow
Now he has a family
There's no need to be "manly"
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 03:12pm PT
|
“What the f*#k! I climbed it two years ago with the new bolts in. A great route that needed those bolts. I've heard it was a death fall on the first pitch... find the as#@&%e and chop off his balls!”
Why, so they will be like you – a eunuch? Is this person for real?
Is there a difference between 'style' and 'ethics'? I think there is.
|
|
arete
Trad climber
Estes Park, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 23, 2005 - 04:08pm PT
|
So much of the whining in threads like this is absurd. There must be twenty billion face climbs (well, that may be a teeny exageration) in the US and there is plenty of room for both well protected ones and run out ones.
If you are a 5.10 climber, do you go lead every 5.2 or 5.12 out there? You generally select the routes you feel comfortable about doing. If you like well protected face climbs, go do some. If you like bold run out climbs, go do some. Quit whining about this or that climb having too few or too many bolts. And quit demanding that everything change to fit into your narrowass vision of what's right.
Thirty years ago in Yo, we (meaning most of the locals at that time) bad-mouthed anyone who put up a route with "too many" bolts and rap drilling was a cardinal sin.
I'm over it.
If someone rap drills a fine quality route with a bolt every 6 feet. Respect it. I've done some that were loads of fun.
If someone puts up a fine quality bold runout route on lead with bolts every 60 feet. Respect it. Had fun there too.
Hell, even a slimy whiny a$$ weasel deserves a little respect.
|
|
LongAgo
Trad climber
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2005 - 07:35pm PT
|
Hair Raiser bolt removal - revisited
In response to posts on bolt removal on Hair Raiser, a few thoughts from the one who first led and protected the pitch in, I think, 1975:
 My letter in the June, 2005 issue of Climbing ("A Woolly Mammoth Pleads") states, "I respectfully request climbers not alter a route where I'm party to the first ascent. Thank you." I also asked, "If a route has changed (missing bolt, significant feature gone), please contact me before adding bolts." My letter was intended as a request and gentle persuasion. I said, " ... a first ascent is not only a topo of features and moves, but an achievement to be appreciated with fixed protection left as originally done." I hoped to head off further "fixes" of my routes and of "traditional" routes generally, as they seem to be gaining in popularity.
I did not ask for the added bolts on Hair Raiser to be removed. My experience with removing bolts suggests it is counterproductive. Long ago, when I removed the bolts from Hand Jive in Tuolumne because they were placed on rappel (at the time, quite an affront to accepted climbing practice), no one was persuaded by my actions; the rock was scarred; the bolts were quickly replaced; and bolt hangers on a route of mine (the Vision) probably were flattened in retribution (I can't be sure - no one fessed up). It seems bolting and erasing wars do no good. Debate, discussion, posts and letters are the better means for trying to keep the long held agreement among climbers not to alter original protection. (For a fuller discussion, see "Rock Climbs of Tuolumne Meadows," Reid and Falkenstein, Chockstone Press, 1983).
Some posts on this subject speculate about the opinion of my partner on the route, Vern Clevenger, on the need for additional bolts after the first ascent. At the moment, I don't know Vern's opinion. However, I believe adding bolts to an existing route should not be done lightly. Every effort should be made to consult with all those responsible for the climb. I have had partners agree and disagree with my bolt placements on first ascents, and visa versa. I have done (and turned back) from climbs where I felt more, less or differently placed bolts would be good. My opinions or those of partners in such cases did not lead to changing bolts, nor should they.
When I first led the Hair Raiser first pitch, I protected some of it with thin slings snugged around chicken heads. Slinging is essential to making many climbs reasonable to lead. One example is Fantasia at Lover's Leap. I hope no one has decided to add a bolt to this climb because they can't or won't sling a critical knob. There are other such examples.
The tricky move at the beginning of Hair Raiser could lead to injury, but probably not death. Slinging makes the climb an "R," not "X." Still, one should feel comfortable leading a good way out on 5.8 before doing the climb. There are many similar "R" climbs where protection skills are important. I hope the trend is not to bolt them all.
Thank you,
Tom Higgins
|
|
Chateau Rico
Trad climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2005 - 08:37pm PT
|
It's an honor to reply to Tom Higgins, original ascensionist. Here is my post on RC.com, on Sept, 20, same subject:
"I visited Hairraiser Buttress on Sept 6, 2005, the last day of a four day road trip. The first pitch was to be my lead, that being the "money" pitch. Background: I am an intermediate climber, and have led similar 5.9 slab, such as Dike Route and Crest Jewel, but I was having head problems having sustained a 25 foot trad fall a couple weeks previous. Nonetheless, the previous days sharpened me and I was (marginally) ready so I roped up, hopped onto the boulder from which you start and spotted that note. It said that bolts were removed to "restore routes to their original glory" or something like that. It said it was an X rated route now and to "have a nice rest of your day!". So I untied and my partner led and I followed. Here's my experience, as the 2nd (imagining I was leading). The 5.9 move is off the deck, and you clip the first bolt after you make it, so the bolt doesn't protect the move at all. The move wasn't bad. Then you climb 5.7 and 5.8 slab for another 40 feet or so (guessing). You do the math: you are decking if you fall for most of the way to that next clip. The climbing stays sustained and committing all the way to the first anchor, about 140 feet up, 3 bolts total. The fourth bolt was removed too, in a hard section. My partner said he felt no fear, but it was the only time I've seen him grab a draw prior to clipping! The next two pitches did not feel particularly runout to us, and there were more bolts and slightly easier climbing. The climbing, great, in a gorgeous setting. The bolt removal was puzzling: I found removed bolts elsewhere, but the one that was really needed to make the route reasonably safe was removed, bolt number 2. I have a thing about decking, having broken my leg and now into my 50's.
So, I kind of wish the Runout Climbing Association would have chosen different bolts to remove SO PEOPLE DON'T DIE BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS (just in case a member of the "Association" is reading...)"
To add a couple points in response to Tom: There are no bolts added on Fantasia, I don't think, and I have slung those chicken heads, and am not particularly bothered on that route. Hairraiser, first pitch, is different. Although I didn't lead it, I chickened out (or "didn't have the sack" as others might say), I was with someone who had done the route and had a guidebook, and we were not prepared to sling chicken heads. I usually think I can trust a brand new guide book and the beta of someone who just did the route. Also, the opening move was a little tricky, but not that dangerous, like you said. What I didn't like was that the next 40 feet was unprotected, and not very easy, and insecure, being slabby face. Again, the chopping made no sense to me, since portions of pitch 2 and 3 had lots of bolts!
So Tom's sensibility of avoiding chopping makes sense in that future climbers can be seriously misled if they get onto an altered route, unexpectedly over their heads. I thank god that the knuckleheads (they inscribed some rastafarian symbology on their breezy note) actually posted that note, since I could've been in serious trouble on that lead, not expecting such runout on the first pitch.
|
|
426
Sport climber
BALCO wall, Obed
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2005 - 09:59pm PT
|
Mr. Higgins-
-Thanks for clarification on the matter. I incorrectly thought it was like Dike where the later party had express permission, as you can see upthread.
...
In any case, it's nice that the 'chop shop' crew left a warning note....
|
|
Lg
Trad climber
NorCaL
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2005 - 07:42pm PT
|
The bolt removal was puzzling: I found removed bolts elsewhere, but the one that was really needed to make the route reasonably safe was removed, bolt number 2. I have a thing about decking, having broken my leg and now into my 50's.
So, I kind of wish the Runout Climbing Association would have chosen different bolts to remove SO PEOPLE DON'T DIE BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS
Sir, what about your actions? What about your responsibilities as a climber? Could you not even view the route visibly yourself? Do you know that rockfall sometimes wipe out bolts too? So then who should we blame? Sir, with all due respect...but it seems you disrespect the f/a (I'm sure w/out intention) because you say in no certain words, that when his route was altered w/out permission, it was just right for you, but when it was restored to original, you are perplexed because 'now' 'you' feel it unsafe? Even after he gives you the beta...you understand for Fantasia and have even done it, but don't seem to understand for HairRaiser? Your story is the classic example of the saying, "Don't bring the route down to your level." You cite your age, a fall, a broken leg, so you have these things in your mind and body and many of us don't have those things in ours. uh, not all yet anyway ;)
You can do it. You've climbed the route. Next time you follow, do it with a foot of slack. Go back with some 6 mil or 5.5 spectra, tie those suckers off and SEND IT! Heck, even preplace the key slings. Or did someone chop those knobs? Then we'll have the knob-chopper....
Just want to say thanks to Tom Higgins for his post and for putting 'adventure' in his routes. The last route I did of yours was on Chiquito Dome, even after a friend warned, "Don't do any Higgins routes!" I've done others...and that day I happened to get on another one and had a 'hair raising' experience. I finished the pitch, brought my partner up and very carefully, rapped off. I decided to go back to continue the climb by preparing to upgrade the original hardware, w/out adding any additional bolts of course, if you don't mind? Some routes are even harder to repeat now, then long ago, when the hardware has aged so. Thanks again.
Lawrence Garcia
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 25, 2005 - 09:30pm PT
|
I appreciate Tom Higgins clarification on the addition and removal of the bolts on Hair Raiser. Once again I'll say it, the route looks incredible and the FA was ballsy. Adding bolts to a climb with out FA's permission is rather lowly and I believe deserves an a$$ kicking or at least radical public humiliation. Tom put into simple words what I could not express clearly.....Chopping is counterproductive.
Thanks for the post, James
|
|
Chateau Rico
Trad climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2005 - 12:19am PT
|
Well, my response had nothing to do with the first ascensionists. The discussion was interesting, as a climbing ethics subject. I wanted to provide my actual experience of the confusion and danger that can happen when bolts are removed, specifically on that route. We headed out there to do a 5 star, 3 pitch 5.9 in a gorgeous, remote setting, and not exactly Tom and Vern's route. (Note, the guidebook does say you can skip certain bolts, to reproduce the original ascent; I believe those were the bolts removed, but I'm not sure.) Luckily the note hadn't blown off the boulder that it was on, and I didn't get the sh** scared out of me or worse on lead on that x portion. Could I do it? Probably, but I won't, as most any other guy with wife and kids, and with the close calls I've had - there are plenty of exciting routes out there without groundfall potential. Could I have slung the knobs? Of course, since I trad climb also. And you are right about my responsibility to scope the route and I did spot the runout from the ground and was backing off. But my partner, who had led it about a month previously, said it wasn't bad. I spent a long time hesitating until I saw the note and untied. We then brought some small gear just in case, and found one alien placement, but no knobs, probably because the altered route, the one my partner knew, did not take him that way (to the right). So my point is: the route was already brought to my level, a sort-of hairraising 5.9 slab that had been retro-bolted, (as many routes have). I never ADVOCATED retro-bolting or even retro bolting that route. I certainly wouldn't be interested in that route in it's original state, or, say, the Dike route in its original state. But, hey, thanks for the encouragement, but in MY older state, I'm set in my ways... :)
|
|
WoodyS
climber
|
|
I was the creaky old guy who led Hair Raiser Buttress last month. I am offended by creaky. Those who know me know that I shoot gun oil into my joints before all climbs. What little creaking left could not be heard by those on the ground. HRB (Granite Basin--on the Moon) deserves a comment or two or three etc. It's a great climb but badly protected. Initially it was put up X. It's X to the first bolt and X squared--very dead--to the second. One should hope to be dead or unconscious; otherwise, you'll be lying in a pile of goo trying to blow flies off protruding ribs. I don't care who the FA party was; they were incompetent or unethical. To deliberately fabricate a route as X when unnecessary is perverse. This route was recently retro-bolted then quickly returned to its X status in the ongoing bolting wars. The children who removed the bolts left an anonymous note gloating at their vandalism. By not identifying themselves, they demonstrated cowardice. If they take pride in their act, why not sign the note they left behind. According to another note, the route will again be retro-bolted. Some routes are X because the leader had no choice, others because of incompetence and others because of immaturity, poor ethics and/or stupidity. These twits(deliberate X) should have their eyelids and lips severed, their spines sliced low and thrown into a large landfill on a hot day. Let the flies have them.. At the least, they should be made to climb said route over and over until Karma takes effect. If someone is to die on such a route, it should be they who are responsible for its lame protection. All this begs a question: why did I lead it? It was a long drive and I was silly. By the way, there's a new route not in the guide which the leader will intercept beginning the second pitch. My partner was bouncing around shaking her pom poms and yelling "Go left", "Go left". Never pay any attention to your belayer under such circumstances; left was a boo boo. You end up at the same dike, but the pitch is much longer, and the final moves 9/10A. You can traverse right to the correct anchors. That's a blessing because the rock above the left anchors could be used to build a sandcastle.
Woody Stark
|
|
dodangler
Trad climber
truckee
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 8, 2005 - 06:30pm PT
|
Nice lead Woody!
|
|
LongAgo
Trad climber
|
|
Tom Higgins responds to recent request for adding bolts to Hair Raiser Buttress (Dec. 1, Tricksters and Traditionalists thread):
I much appreciate the request rather than retro bolting without request, as done not too long ago. Request post claims, "you would certainly die if you fell ... before you got to the second ... and possibly if you fell above the third bolt." Because I have posted my general intent in doing first ascents was not to create X routes (T&T thread), the question logically arises, why won't I agree to adding bolts to remedy the X here? I'm willing to rethink my position, but first would like to know:
Is there confusion about where the route goes? A post by Hardman Knott from 19 April, 2005 indicates he put a bolt in about 40 feet directly up from the beginning of the route where it goes right. Perhaps some climbers are going that way and thinking they are on the original route. Knott's post indicates his variation is hard with "ground fall" potential.
Is it not possible to protect the pitch with slings? I have posted about protecting this pitch with runners on another thread (Hair Raiser bolt removed, September 24). To reiterate the post, once out right onto the main face, I found it possible to snug chicken heads with thin slings (some call the knot a butterfly, but I'm not sure of the correct name). After an early 5.9 move where, I agree, a fall to the boulders would be bad but not killer, the moves seemed 5.8 and less and I don't recall feeling ground fall potential with the protection I used. Has something changed on the pitch to make this protection impossible? Or is it a matter of experience with slinging?
Is it possible the bolt removal which took place (I do not and did not advocate same - see Sept. 24 post) has eliminated any original bolts (I think there were three on the pitch)? Another post (Hair Raiser bolt removal thread, Sept. 24) indicates, "The fourth bolt was removed too, in a hard section ... I found removed bolts elsewhere." It seems possible retro bolting and removal is creating confusion about what were the original bolts. Note the clouding consequence of bolt warring, aside from nasty feelings all around.
Depending on the answers to these questions, I will reconsider my first response - to leave the route alone. I certainly would agree to replacement of original bolts if they are removed. Likewise, if the rock has changed so it is no longer possible to protect it with slings, I would agree to consider one bolt to protect the 5.8X section a poster (Sept. 24) describes as "the one that was really needed to make the route reasonably safe ... is bolt #2." But if the issue is inability or reluctance to sling or to run out 5.7 and 5.8 with the prospect of a long fall, I will stand by my original request to leave the route as it was done. Once I've received information and reconsidered, I will check with my partner Vern Clevenger and post again.
Also, given posts to date, I will alert the relevant guidebook authors to (1) the need to carry slings for protection and (2) the possible 5.8 X nature of the pitch. It seems modern guidebooks reserve R or X for climbing 5.8 or above. Generally, R or X is not given to 5.7 pitches off the ground, on broken faces or traverses out of dihedrals where a fall would have serious consequences. It is up to the guidebook author(s) if and how to add notice, but I will alert them based on concerns raised.
Posters should know they are not alone in their disappointment at turning back from nice walls like HB because the protection/mix is problematic. I certainly have passed on great looking climbs due to a protection/difficulty balance beyond me. See my previous posts about turning back from certain climbs, for example a long sought prize - Super Pin in SD. Closer to home, I was disappointed at turning back from the Bachar Yerian and You Asked For It (sidebar: attempting them with a solo self belay system was stupid). The point is, depending on our abilities and the protection, all of us face climbs too difficult or dangerous for the day. I never thought to ask Bachar to add bolts to insure my safety. Being humbled is part of the game, especially early on when pushing and hungry. Overall, I believe the best response is to alter our own behavior (get sane or better) not the climbs.
Some posts also express quandary at why I kept the number of bolts to a minimum on HB, or certain other first ascents. My motive was not to create death defying or "manly" routes (a poster asks, "You want a bold route that other climbers will aspire to do in the same manly style you did?" See T&T post, Dec. 1). Under clean climbing standards and ground up rules I grew up with (see previous T&T post about strong role of my mentor), bolts were the last resort. Minimizing their number was not to create mind games for others but leave the rock marked with as few bolts as possible. I realize my attitude may seem quaint in the era of sport routes, but we are products of our times and mentors, and that was the attitude instilled in me.
Should bolts be added to routes created under the minimalist bolting ethic so more climbers can enjoy them? After all, couldn't bolts be added, guidebooks still note the original style of the ascent and give credit accordingly, as a poster suggests? Of course there is pleasure being named in a guidebook or history. But to think getting into publications is such a central prize in climbing underestimates the complexity of the game. Preserving original protection is not to insure climbers get scared or first ascent parties get into history as bold. Preservation insures climbers preferring to do the climb in its original style get to do so. Some climbers prefer more risk and complication than many sport routes provide. They deserve their opportunities just as much as sportsters deserve theirs. But the picture is bigger than preferred risk profiles. Not altering routes insures they remain tributes to the time and mentality around their creation. An important joy of the climbing game comes not just from doing climbs, but viewing, pondering, absorbing (as per this very web site) the full well of experiences, the moving stage of heroes, fools and follies, high and low tales, grand and vain acts. In the drama, the features of routes and associated protection are the underlying choreography, the hand and foot sequences set in stone and passing on through time. Once protection is changed, the original choreography of moves, runs, hardware (and sling) frustrations, resulting pumps and rests, the curses and hoots - the entire emotional passage - is altered. And lost is an assessment of how nuts or noble were the makers, our second guessing of all they felt. In short, there is no tribute to the past, no way to tap the well. It is for all these reasons, barring unusual circumstances, routes should be left to stand as they were first done.
In sum, for now I will ask for climbers to leave HB as it stands. I am open to receiving more information on the questions I've raised, consider further and post. I also will consult with my partner for the climb. I hope all this seems reasonable. Ultimately, today's climbers will have to decide what to preserve and not, as the wonder and fragility of the game is each new generation gets to determine how to play it.
Thank you,
Tom Higgins
LongAgo
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
Thank you Tom, that is perhaps the best explanation of traditional bolting ethics that I've ever read.
Greg
PS Hardman Knott wasn't the one who did the left start years ago, it was Mike Strassman, and I think he said that the retrobolts were on his left start not the original route.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
"Not altering routes insures they remain tributes to the time and mentality around their creation."
Amen
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
Woody--perhaps you forgot to take your medication? Wow, tell us how you really feel.
Climbing is a voluntary activity. If you head up on a route knowing it to be poorly protected (or failed to use natural pro where available --slinged knobs) it is a voluntary act.
If that route does not provide the "experience" you desire, don't do it. It IS that simple.
Routes have R & X ratings for a reason (so you don't inadvertantly end up with more "adventure" than you bargained for). But, judging from the type of routes you have lead in recent history at Josh, you can't deny that you actively seek out this type of climbing. Please, don't complain about it later.
|
|
scuffy b
climber
S Cruz
|
|
Tom,
Thanks for posting your thoughts.
Your recent posts have been quite
stimulating.
"To ascend! To ascend! To ravage the
walls, ascent on ascent!"
Best Wishes,
Steve Moyles
|
|
WoodyS
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
Yes, It's quite true that I lead marginal routes now and then; but I don't seek them out just to test my mortality. Karen Bohl and I drove out to HB to do the route in question. Getting there, the anticipation of a good climb etc. led me to go ahead and do it even with reservations. I knew that if I didn't I'd be frustrated and irritable for the rest of the day. Also, I'm quite competent at the rated level and wasn't anticipating dying.
Upon reading the BS note left by the idiots that screwed the route up for their own silly egos, I got teed off and was determined not to let them spoil my day.
Now to the real issue: no route should be put up X if it need not be. To do it deliberately is unethical. I won't repeat my argument; you can read it in my post above. Too many climbers approach climbing as though it's a religion with absurd attitudes
verging on the fanatical. I'm surprised we don't have our own Inquisition; actually, we do. There must be rules; but, when we have a bunch of creepy little priests running about taking it upon themselves to police this or that, it's gone too far. Common sense says fix the route so it's not X. That way people can go out--way out--there and enjoy their day.
If you're going to respond to this be sure to read my post above first. It is more comprehensive in explaining my position.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Years later, I go to do the new and improved Hairraiser and discover he didn't even bolt the ankle breaking move at the bottom. And not only that, he didn't even bolt the first pitch. Since very few sport climbers know much about natural protection, especially how to tie a butterfly knot on a chickenhead, everyone headed for that lone bolt I placed years ago 40 feet up. Alan bolted this line."
So the original Hair Raiser Buttress wasn't retro bolted, and wasn't chopped. So what the F do the Hair Raiser Buttress FA's opinions on this matter have to do with the price of eggs in China??
Hardy -- perhaps the debacle should be named "Knott their line".
"Though you are high up on pot, he can fly and you cannot."
Brutus
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
So Woody, this is all about you having an "irritable day" because the climb you wanted to do was beyond your ability to send? And this is a problem caused by the first ascent team??
Higgins said that it wasn't put up as an X climb: "once out right onto the main face, I found it possible to snug chicken heads with thin slings"... if the chicken heads are gone or no longer slingable, then the climb is different. If the chicken heads are there and you aren't competent to use them for protection, well, that is another story.
It would be easy to have a tantrum because a desirable climb is somehow altered enough not to be climbable, but gee, isn't that what we individually bring to a climb on a particular day? You are pissed off that someone felt strongly enough to chop the extra bolts, but you didn't feel strong enough to put new bolts in... you climbed it anyway, after reading the warning. I don't get it. You climbed it against your better judgement? that sounds really stupid if true.
And as for the fatality statistics, I think that is relatively low, please correct me if my guess of 0 deaths on this route is wrong.
We all take responsibility for being on a route, and we all choose the level of risk we are willing to take. We all suffer the consequences rather directly for misjudgment. I don't think blaming the FA is at all legitimate, after all, you know something they did not when they started up the route.
They made their choice, and you made yours.
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2005 - 01:04am PT
|
Why do people feel compelled to go out and add bolts to old death routes anyway? Why not put up your own safe route with 10 plus bolts and have your own good time instead of sh_tting on other people's accomplishments? Come on! There's plenty of rock left out there to play on. Eastern Nevada out by Cactus Pete's is loaded with new sport lines to rap if that's what gets you off. No one is compelled to mess with what's already there when they can walk a hundred yards to the left or right and start drilling away. "Sure looks scary to me. Let's not do that one!" "OK! No problem."
|
|
Lars Ensign
Trad climber
Zephyr Cove, NV
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2005 - 08:04am PT
|
Tom,
Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply to my request. I appreciate you looking into the mater and talking to Vern. I will respect your request to leave the route alone, though I'm saddened to see such an enjoyable bit of climbing tied up with an x-rated route. I don't think that it significantly detracts from the climbing experience to have enough bolts to keep you from a high morbidity/mortality ground/ledge fall. The person leading the route can choose whether to use them or climb the route in the historical way, but it doesn't work the other way around.
I will try to answer one of the questions you asked about HRB.
I didn't see any knobs/flakes amenable for using tie-offs on the first pitch. I'm pretty familiar with the technique having used slung holds at Phantom Spires, Lovers Leap, and other alpine climbs. However, since I only ever climbed the retro-bolted version of the route, it sounds like I might have been too far to the left to have ever seen them. I'll go back and look, but as I recall from a few weeks ago, all I saw off to the right was a really old rusty quarter-incher 50-60 feet away. I think I recall reading somewhere that the knob tie-offs used to be on the 3rd pitch?
As for the question whether or not only the retro bolts had been removed, I can't help with that one. There are 3 bolts on the first pitch, the first about 10 feet up, the second at about 30-45 feet of 5.8 terrain above that, approximately 25 feet to the 3rd, then off to the anchors. It's that section between the first and second bolt that I am advocating for additional protection.
Thanks again,
Lars Ensign
|
|
LongAgo
Trad climber
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2006 - 03:24pm PT
|
Hair Raiser Wrap Up from Tom Higgins
Background
Posts here have discussed removal of retro-bolts on the first pitch of Hair Raiser Buttress and the desire of some to see them replaced. See Hair Raiser Bolt Removal thread, beginning around September, 2005 and Tricksters and Traditionalists thread, December 1, 2005. Also on the subject is a letter of mine in Climbing Magazine, "A Woolly Mammoth Pleads," June, 2005. In my last post on the subject, I said, "... I certainly would agree to replacement of original bolts if they are removed. Likewise, if the rock has changed so it is no longer possible to protect it with slings, I would agree to consider one bolt to protect the 5.8X section a poster (Sept. 24) describes as 'the one that was really needed to make the route reasonably safe ... is bolt #2." I also said, "Once I've received information and reconsidered, I will check with my partner Vern Clevenger and post again." I got Vern's perspective, considered information posted on Supertopo and RockClimbing sites and here is the wrap up:
Relevant Information
While there is conflicting information about the potential for slinging knobs on the first pitch where some wish to add bolts, no posts indicate the rock has changed and other posts suggest climbers may be getting off route onto harder climbing than on the actual climb. One Supertopo post ("Chateau Rico," Sep 24, 2005) contends slings on HB are not possible; yet, a post on Rockclimbing.com (See "Rocknroll" posts April and Sep 2005, Retro Bolts Chopped at HB Buttress thread) indicates slings can be used. The same poster suggests climbers may be starting the route improperly by heading 40 feet straight up to an off route bolt (instead of going right). No posts I could find on Supertopo or Rockclimbing indicate evidence of broken knobs making slings impossible.
First Ascent Party Position
I have contacted Vern Clevenger as promised, relayed to him all posting information I could find and asked his perspectives. His sense is if the route is back to its original state (no original bolts removed), then it should stand as is. Based on the information above, I am of the same mind. I have detailed in my last Supertopo post on the HB thread a rationale for leaving first ascents as is. Given the pitch difficulty and possibility of natural protection on the first ascent line (up and right after first hard move, not straight up), it seems reasonable now to leave the original protection stand. However, Vern and I agreed it's important to spread the word and alert relevant guidebook authors to (1) the need to carry slings (thin preferred) for possible protection on knobs and (2) the possible 5.8 X nature of the pitch. One or both of us will contact the guidebook authors.
Thank you,
Tom Higgins
LongAgo
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2006 - 04:32pm PT
|
Thanks Tom!
Slinging knobs is not only a lost art for most, it seems to be a lost concept. I've seen people in really dangerous situations because they didn't sling obvious HUGE incut knobs/flakes.
Knob wrapping is easier than ever with the new ultra-thin full-strength runners (Mammut 8mm), you can sling narrow knobs, edges, and plates very easily. I don't know if you need double-length runners to properly sling the knobs on HRB; if so, this might be a good additional piece of info for the guidebook.
My friend did a nice new multipitch route on Sierra granite a couple years ago, and the crux is protected by tossing the rope over a knob. Just thought you might want to know that knobs are still in use as pro on new routes (at least by some folks...).
Thanks again for letting all of us know what you & Vern think about your route! Greg
|
|
Rhodo-Router
Trad climber
Otto, NC
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2006 - 12:55pm PT
|
Thanks, Tom. That should eliminate whiny BS like "we were not prepared to sling chicken heads".
It seems so simple: not prepared? too scared? Irritable Entitlement Syndrome? then stay off it.
|
|
GiftofMadness
climber
mammoth lakes, ca
|
|
I went to Granite Basin with my wife yesterday, May 5, to do some climbing. I had read the warning last fall in the Mammoth Mountaineering Supply and really was not considering Hair Raiser as a route to do. But when we arrived, took a look at the route and thought the bolts were no farther apart than similar routes in Taquitz, suicide and the El Trono Blanco area. I decided to give it a go. I have to say it was exciting and well worth the risk. I will grant you that there were places that you would not want to fall, becuase the ground was your likely stopping spot. yet, with the risk comes the reward and I would not change the route. If you decide to do this route, keep your head calm on the first pitch and enjoy the rest.
Brent Cooley
|
|
chossman
climber
lone pine, ca
|
|
I take some of the blame for the retro bolts. Alan Hirahara asked me if I thought it should be retro bolted. I said that was up to the first ascentionist, Vern Clevenger. I spoke to Vern who said, yeah, a few more could be added to make it safer. (Like right off the ground!?!). I relayed this info to Alan and admonished him to talk to Vern first. He did it with my blessing, but never did talk to Vern. The next time I saw Vern he had that hulking countenance. He was not happy. Too many bolts.
As it is, on the first pitch, Alan actually retro bolted a line I had worked on that had one bolt about fifty feet off the ground, left of the actual Hairaiser. The actual route Hairaiser Buttress traverses out to the center of the face to take advantage of some slung chickenheads. So they actually chopped a different route for the first pitch.
Chopping bolts is never justified unless it is done by or with the approval of the first ascensionist. Was it?
In its retro-bolted state, Hairaiser was hardly a sport climb. There were still 20 -30 foot run-outs and that scary opening move. It still was a hairariser any way you look at it.
I think you must weigh the bold achievements of a few against the greater good. It is a beautiful stretch of rock that is moderate in difficulty and has provided thousands with pure enjoyment in its retro bolted state. I am not for a bolt ladder on Hairraiser, but a relatively safe route (R not X) should be on that face to provide enjoyment for the masses.
But believe me, I think we should respect the history of the past. I am not for retro bolting the Bachar-Yerrian, but only because Medlicott has plenty of safe routes near that one. So if it was the only line up the face...would it be a candidate for retro bolting? You know what John and Dave's answer would be...NO!
If you want run-out, try Spuds Gurgling C*#k Holster on the dome left of Hairaiser. It was John Sherman's first ground up route with a Bosch. Better talk to Verm if you are thinking of retroing that one! (He's already told me No).
No retro unless the F.A says so;
And Stop! don't chop to be a cop
Don't have hostility,
Communication is the key
for climber harmony.
Chopping bolts. Pretty silly when you think about it..
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
LA, Ca
|
|
"I think you must weigh the bold achievements of a few against the greater good."
This is not my fight as I am not a local in your area, but where I do most of my climbing the bold achievements of a few set the standards for the rest. What is the greater good?
|
|
webthor
Mountain climber
STL, MO
|
|
"What is the greater good?"
Mystery and the unknown,
And there is "ONE" more .....
|
|
chossman
climber
lone pine, ca
|
|
The greater good...what is best for the climbing community as a whole. A consensus of opinion. Make it safe or preserve history? The first ascentionist is the best expert and influencer of that opinion since he/she can view the other issues that relate - how much traffic does it get, is it really that dangerous, do the retro-bolts make it a better route, etc. Would love to hear from Vern on this one...
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
Is it being bold to deliberately bolt a new route to render it X?
I say "No"; it's an ego trip and irresponsible. When I led this route last year, I was concentrating to such a degree between the first two bolts that I didn't see the chickenhead. That's my fault. Is the CH still there? I was able to slot a micro at one point that might have stopped a fall.
When putting up a new route, it is the responsibility of the leader to bolt in a manner that will, if possible, not result in an X rating. If a route is put up X by choice, I have no problem with someone retro-bolting.
|
|
PDHMAN
Trad climber
Eastside N of Bishop just S of 395
|
|
Chossman wrote:The greater good...what is best for the climbing community as a whole. A consensus of opinion. Make it safe or preserve history? The first ascentionist is the best expert and influencer of that opinion since he/she can view the other issues that relate - how much traffic does it get, is it really that dangerous, do the retro-bolts make it a better route, etc. Would love to hear from Vern on this one
Ran into Vern at the Mammoth Post Office parking lot after the most recent chop job. His comment to me regarding HRB was, "I Fu*king wish I had nothing to ever do with that Fu*cking route!!!!!! I am so fu*king tired of all the bullsh*t it has created!!"
I smiled and replied back, "Imagine that?"
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
Who are these self appointed: Guardians of the Greater Good?
What are the standards and who decides?
Is it lowest common denominator?
What happens when expectations change in 20 -40 years? [should more bolts be added or a few taken away?]
The whole idea sounds kinda fishy to me...
but, it would make a great route name.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"If a route is put up X by choice, I have no problem with someone retro-bolting."
Bachar-Yerian in the Meadows.
Perilous Journey and Krystal Klyr in Eldo.
Thimble in the Dakota Needles.
The Edge, and Turbo-Flange at Tahquitz.
Some routes are monuments to the improbably, incredibly possible. Retro-bolting these routes is akin to melting down the Statue of Liberty to make copper wire to plug in your television for some evening entertainment.
"Is it being bold to deliberately bolt a route to render it X?"
Depends. Depends, among other things, on the style of the FA. Bold to rap bolt a sport route to render it X? No. Just plain stupid.
Drilling by hand, on sight, on lead from stances and/or in the middle of 5.9 or 5.10 moves? Whole different enchilada. Pass the salsa, please.
Brutus, who does have a problem with it, depending on input of the FA, because those who advocate bolting routes like the ones mentioned above generally have no idea of the history of the sport, or anything slightly removed from indoor (and outdoor) gyms.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
I couldn't say it better than Brutus. Do we really want all bolted routes retro-bolted down to the lowest common denominator? And who gets to decide what that is? Retrobolters can go climb something else. Leave alone the routes based on past ethics and tradition. To the extent they are "ego trips", it is equally an ego trip to think that such routes should be bolted down so they are "safe," so that the retro-bolter has access to all rock climbing routes.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
As ususual, Brutus nails it.
Maintenence, not replacement.
Not bold enough? There is always the top rope, lacking of the original experience, but better than changing the route.
"Retrobolters can go climb something else." how true, the problem is, that's not their goal or they would be first ascensionists; their goal is to be editors.
|
|
atchafalaya
Trad climber
California
|
|
all this talk about ego (i.e., bolts, bolt removal, style, balls or sacklessness). So, I wanted to post to talk about something else... Hairraiser Buttess, the formation. WOW, what a line! What a formation, in an incredible setting! Its too good to be true... I have climbed in a number of states over a number of years, and have never seen such a perfect multi-pitch climb that stands out like HR buttress. You could search a lifetime and there is only one...
Sorry to intrude on the bolt discussion, just thought I would add something different. Please resume...
btw-- really excellent discussion about the bolt controversy re: HRB. And {edit} i got the 100th post!
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
This is a weird coincidence: since I posted yesterday, Locker and I put up a 10c/d X today in JT. There was no choice other than jumping off the face and hoping the small wires below me would hold, so I ran it out. When listing it a few minutes ago, I gave permission for anyone wanting to to place a bolt to eliminate the X; I may do it myself.
To deliberately establish a route X when unnecessary is childish, ego-driven nonsense.
Further, retrobolting an X does not have to mean reducing the route to the lowest common denominator; that's simplistic.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"I gave permission for anyone wanting to to place a bolt to eliminate the X; I may do it myself."
Cool!
How would you feel about someone retrobolting The Edge on Tahquitz? Or some of the other routes I mentioned?
Appropriate?
Hair Raiser is a great line. I tried it once, after the (off route) bolts had been placed. Funny thing. I wandered way to the right to sling a knob I spotted over there, then wandered back to the (shiny fat) bolted line.
Eventually I retreated because I don't like leading face like that in gusty 50mph winds.
|
|
Mick Ryan
Trad climber
Saratoga Springs, NY
|
|
"No retro unless the F.A says so; "
No disrespect Mike. I think that's bollox.
No retro-bolts period. Leave routes as they were first climbed so that we can see how we where and where we came from.
Mick
|
|
Mick Ryan
Trad climber
Saratoga Springs, NY
|
|
and yes like Brutus said....just replace the old with new, like for like....not adding extras.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
actually, i once thought, as we matured, we'd be thinning them out.
i was then such a romantic fool...
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2006 - 04:20pm PT
|
I feel compelled to resurrect this thread, my wife, a friend and I having just done the route last week. The friendly note and the "restored" conditions prevailed -- though it would seem that the route wasn't really fully restored to original status.
First off, except for possibly slinging a knob/plate to the left of the 1st bolt, I did not note any knobs that could be effectively slung (even though I brought a few thin spectra type slings). In fact the 1st pitch doesn't have knobs. The face is littered with shallow "hueco" features and decent holdsand occasional small protuberences -- which weren't worth slinging.
The climbing on the first pitch is sustained and enjoyable. Just don't pop off. It has 3 bolts -- not always positioned in the logical spot (you have to wonder whether locations were moved during the retro bolting? -- see below). I noted one bolt sleeve -- a remant of the removed additional bolts -- as the only evidence of removal. No bolt scars or obvious holes.
The Second pitch seems to have 2 non-original bolts (total of 5). The 1st, 2nd and 3rd seem to be the near the original locales (though the original 1st bolt on the 2nd pitch -- broken hanger and all -- is still in situ and about 10 feet left of the new 1st bolt). However, there were 2 additional bolts above the 3rd, which seemed to my wife -- who lead this pitch-- somewhat superfluous).
The 3rd pitch (4 bolts) was only run out (5.9-) to the 1st bolt. It seemed strange -- given the run outs on the 1st and 2nd pitches -- that the last 3 bolts are so closely spaced. Nice Josh friction top out.
So, it seems that whoever "restored" the route did an incomplete job. Two extra (and arguably unecessary) bolts remained at the top of the 2nd pitch and I wonder whether one of the bolts on the last pitch was original??
A fun time was had by all (but a little on the warm side). If the route had more bolts, it would have still been fun, but certainly far less memorable. It is a good route. I would call the 1st pitch "X" rated due to the certain grounder if you blew it getting to the 2nd bolt.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2006 - 09:45pm PT
|
Take micros along. If you pay close attention, there is a spot on the first pitch that takes one (can't remember the size).
|
|
mack
Trad climber
vermont
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2006 - 09:48pm PT
|
I generally avoid x rated routes for the same reason I don't free solo. But there are certainly climbers out there doing both. I believe retro bolting is unethical or at least very rude behavior and should be strongly discouraged. Let the route stand as the FA's intended it to be - they "own" it.
Mack
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2006 - 09:53pm PT
|
I'm with Mack - take retro'd routes back!
|
|
john hansen
climber
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2006 - 12:00am PT
|
If a bolt went in on the Bacher Yerian It would be like throwing acid on the Mona Lisa.
Let it be
|
|
Todd Gordon
Trad climber
Joshua Tree, Cal
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2007 - 09:25pm PT
|
Same crag, different routes.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2007 - 10:09pm PT
|
resurrection of the confrontation.
subtle, distinct, nicely done.
:)
|
|
east side underground
Trad climber
crowley ca
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2007 - 11:35pm PT
|
I talked to Vern, seems he gave the ok to Alan to add the bolts to the route. If he says it's fine,why chop the bolts? Go put up your own route, any style you want. I put up a few shitty routes in the area, the buttress is by far the best thing out there, why deface the rock? So you can be the rock police in some backwater area? Get a life!!!Koooks
|
|
| Messages 1 - 104 of total 104 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!