Old Folks: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bolt

He would not compromise. And that is fatal in a civilization where life is a never-ending compromise between the things we would like to do and the obligations imposed by the social and economic organization of which we are a part.

Hell, I've learned more in 2 years of raising a child than in 25 years of going up and down stoopid rocks.

And so what did you learn relative to climbing?

And so what did you learn relative to climbing?

Actually, at 59 I've got a daughter about to crank out her senior year at UW/Seattle. And "death and dismemberment" while climbing has never been "romantic" for me so, young or old, I've always taken risk management seriously and that means sometimes I back off of things, sometimes I'm on R or even (rarely) X rated FA territory depending on what I'm trying to accomplish, but always with a keen eye on the dial, a clear understanding of what I'm doing, the risks I'm assuming, and why. When I'm no longer prepared to manage such things, I'll back off of that level of risks, but I don't anticipate my climbing changing otherwise.

I started climbing in the Red River Gorge in the mid-70's. There was one bolt in the whole place, protecting the "crux" 5.2 move in the wide chimney that was the easiest route on Tower Rock. That was the first bolt that I encountered. I remember sometime in the late 70's - early 80's making the comment to my climbing partner that "if we rappelled down some of these cool overhanging pocketed faces and placed some bolts like the one on Tower Rock, we could lead them and it would be really cool. Of course the idea was then considered blasphemous (and obviously still is to some folks). When Porter Jarrard came up to KY from NC, he saw the same potential, but decided to act on it - and the rest is history. I'm 52 and never had a problem with bolts, and decided to start bolting routes at City of Rocks in the late 80's when the top-flight climbers began putting up 5.8's with bolts 30 ft. apart or more. If you can't add bolts to an existing route, and I believe you shouldn't without permission, that effectively removes these fine lines from consideration by recreational climbers - who don't have either the time or desire to develop the confidence required to climb them. I was whining about how the style of the FA basically robbed these lines from the vast majority of climbers, when someone told me something like "quit whining and put up your own routes in your own style" - and the rest is history. My first route at the City saw more ascents in it's first year than those run-outs see in 10. There are many different yardsticks for measuring the success or quality of a route. One is what it says about the "balls" of the first ascentionists, but another is how often it is climbed. The old style routes at the city are still there in their original condition should anyone desire to "flex their head". People climb for many different reasons. For some folks, clipping a bolt every 6-8 feet is as much risk as they desire. Climb, and let climb, I say. Over the years, the negative comments from the elitists about my "over-bolted gumby routes" has been drowned out by a flood of appreciation by recreational climbers. The older I get, the easier it is to just tune out the elitists. I've also found that as I've gotten older, fatter, weaker, and accumulated more responsibilities, I have even more appreciation for those "over-bolted gumby routes" and more than once I've had an aging hard-man tell me how they can now really appreciate my routes.

Most get out of shape and inevitably somewhat lazy as they age. It take a ton or work and lots of pain to stay at the top of your game and most quit playing at some point. I don't think there is anything wrong but it kind of bothers me to see so many give up like that. Once that happens then they start to reconcile other changes to accomodate their new reality. Who am I to say that it is wrong, all I know is that I don't want to go that way!

Cragnshag: I've learned more from fatherhood than I have from climbing.
Joe: Like what?
Ian: Focus and perspective are worth climbing but not dying for...
Joe: You mean your climbing should be safe or all climbing should be safe?

I've always thought that neatly summed up why the bolts on 5.7 "sport" routes can (and in my opinion should) be spaced the same (or even closer) as they are on the 5.12's...

One recent route which I've repeated twice has once pitch with a crux consisting of a structure of three interconnected loose flakes where you have to 'set' the two flakes on the right to lock or anchor the one on the left into place and then use it exclusively to pull the crux. The pro below it is ok, but it's an overhanging section above a slab and so it has an R rating for both the potential for pulling the three flakes down on yourself and for the possibility of a slab fall if you and you belayer aren't paying real good attention to the slack situation.

The FA I've currently been working on has a p3 that traverses a [rare] band of Smith-like tuft, but in the form of blocks about the size of cars several of which are loose. That 70' lower section of the pitch takes you to the base of a large roof which is of more normal, good stone, but is comprised of very technical moves and sports poor protection until you are established under the roof. It also trends far to the right over the void such that getting back to the belay can be quite challenging. It's rated R for that combination of reasons.

Is the decision either way a case of convenience, adapt-or-die, obdurate clinging to the past, selfishness, trying to stay popular with the kids, unwillingness to tarnish one's own past, unwillingness to accept one's limitations, bending with time, or being wanting things to remain within reach as we age?

Then they will be in the guidebook with some other name...and possibly grade as well:-)