Yes bolts were added...but who cares?

The time for Henry to have taken action was when the bolt was first placed. Now, after 35 years of ascents, 'history', as well as Henry, have a say in the condition of the route.

so then by your words its a good thing to retro bolt any climbs one deems risky or dangerous?

we'll all forget about Cleveland's much more spectacular unsung first effort (and success).

It was a piece of f'ing rock on public property

One steals to make his lot better at the expense of the group.

One could argue that, even with permission of the FA-ists to alter by retro-bolting, death-wish masochists have been deprived of duplicating the original experience-

And OK, I change my position on the issue,

As for "snapshot or video," a climb is nothing like either. It is a piece of stone, that ought to be left alone as much as possible, in my opinion. And really, is a climb supposed to sprout a bolt at every place someone not up to it has an epic? Is that really the dynamic evolution modern climbers want for their resources?

This too shall pass. I trust not too many of the brethren will suffer thru a sleepless night because of the demise of that lonely bolt.

not really Brian,, only one rule applies. LEAVE established routes as you found them. Its JUST common courtesy...

I think this viewpoint can actually be pernicious

From rgold: So yes, the bolt was an outrage and should have been chopped immediately, in my opinion. And it shouldn't have been Henry who did it, it should have been local climbers who respected the traditions and accomplishments of their own area.

rgold,

you have made a trivial distinction of the essence of all that matters. When you arrive at the top of Superpin having not been temped to clip any bolts you will know it? Is it that the only way trad climbers can measure accomplishment is by physical proof--there were no bolts. Get a brain with some storage registers "for memory".

I don't think that the state of climbing rules is such that we need to invoke the incompleteness theorem but that the process of feeling accomplishment is bound up in the genes of how we perceive. The perceptual outcome is bound to similar genetic makeup differences that researchers have found which distinguish the acquirement of the thoughts of democrats from the fears of republicans.

he said if you were such a soul surfing tradster you should be able to ignore the bolts, send the route and give yourself full credit for the trad send

that yes, some climbers, on some climbs, on some days, are not allowed by nature [?] to ascend the section of rock in question

The entire craft of trad climbing involves the climbers willingness and ability to deal with what nature has offered, without modifying the medium to suit the needs of this or that particular climber's perception of what constitutes "notable risk"

Now let's talk about the path that espouses allowing those who detect "notable risk" to place as many bolts as needed to eliminated that perceived risk

How can climbs be a non-renewable resource if climbers CREATE the routes?

Plenty of climbers, and lots of creativity there.











Of course, if the routes are DISCOVERED, then thats another matter, but it means that a route ISN'T an act of a climbers creation, its an act of discovery, and we need to behave far differently towards them routes in our ethics than we have been.

And it means that whole thing about the FA having control until they die is bullsh#t.

I gotta get me some henchmen.

and no one will judge

Would the existence of the bolt change/tarnish/effect your experience?

Barber has his reasons,
and none of the minor climbers arguing about it are going to
understand, but his ability and achievements warrant our respect
rather than our condemnation.

The Needles has a long tradition of bold routes and that is one of the things that makes it a great area. I would think that local climbers would feel proud of this tradition and see the need to preserve it, but I am willing to defer to their collective judgment.

The
only reason I didn't chop the bolt (again) is that someone would
have forced their will on us and replaced it.

Infinite whining . . . a solid concept.

When i started in 74, i couldnt get enough of the 50/60s era history, as those were the guys that had put up a lot of the routes we were doing.

And afterward, we'll reenact the Civil War.

Furthermore the only guidebook with any decent history has been out of print for over 20 years. I saw one for $177 yesterday on ebay. I would say many people that have started climbing within the last 10 years very often wouldn't know who Robbins, Barber, or all the rest were.

With Athlete's Feat, it is easy enough to go up Country Club Crack
and traverse over to a position above the bolt.... But the mainstream
of climbers simply want that bolt and aren't going to take no
for an answer, to hell and high water with history....

Cool to know. It really has nothing to do with Athlete's Feat for me, I was just curious. Some guy was telling me there was no bolt on Country Club Crack way back when, which just smacked of B.S. to me and it seems your story confirms my hunch. There are now two bolts there, however, so I guess the bolting controversy continues.... I'd hate to see more bolt wars on that particular section, that piece of rock looks bee stung now..

Now comes, apparently, a group of climbers for whom the locked real estate is not an invitation to practice, training, and the perfecting of skills. It is instead an offensive denial of an entitlement. These climbers seem to believe that they are owed they right to climb sections that nature has declared to be run-out, and the solution to this injustice is not to bide their time while perfecting their craft, but rather to put in some bolts so that they can comfortably do the moves right now.

while those substantiating the 34 year passage will be making use of their lesser chicken_shit skills, but probably still having a good time.