Chipping culprit filmed in NY

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 241 - 260 of total 611 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
stevep

Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
Feb 22, 2013 - 06:29pm PT
Yes, I was thought Ivan was a self-promoting tool with his hipster attitude and fashion industtry ads.
This pretty much confirms it, and then some.
deuce4

climber
Hobart, Australia
Feb 22, 2013 - 06:32pm PT
the guy thinks he's Michelangelo?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 22, 2013 - 06:53pm PT
You can't seriously call yourself a climber and NOT think those holds were completely manufactured. COME ON!

Stop the bullsh#t. This is far beyond "cleaning." far far far far far far beyond.
Hardman Knott

Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
Feb 22, 2013 - 06:58pm PT
I was just wondering if anyone had seen the hold and knew for sure the damage before roasting him


For Christ's sake what more do you want?

video screen grab - click for full size
video screen grab - click for full size
Credit: Hardman Knott

video screen grab - click for full size
video screen grab - click for full size
Credit: Hardman Knott

video screen grab - click for full size
video screen grab - click for full size
Credit: Hardman Knott

video screen grab - click for full size
video screen grab - click for full size
Credit: Hardman Knott

video screen grab - click for full size
video screen grab - click for full size
Credit: Hardman Knott


Yes, it sure looks like he was using a chisel to clean a hold, but I'll reserve judgement till all the facts are in.

The facts are in - live and in living color.
S.Leeper

Social climber
somewhere that doesnt have anything over 90'
Feb 22, 2013 - 07:13pm PT
he guy thinks he's Michelangelo?

JM for the win!
bamboo

Trad climber
pike co
Feb 22, 2013 - 07:39pm PT
why do some people try to manufacture middle ground on this BS!?
are some of you so FUGGIN PC that you can abide by this!!the ridge is HUGE!!he can choose between thousands of boulders and crags!!there is no excuse!!NONE!!should he face a fireing squad??NO!!run out of the preserve--you bet!!
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Feb 22, 2013 - 07:44pm PT
Bamboo I don't know jack sh#t about where who he is, where he was or any of the climbing. Nothing. Any outrage on my part would be 100% assumed. Why invest moral outrage in such a meaningless gesture, a great sound and fury?

DMT
atchafalaya

Boulder climber
Feb 22, 2013 - 07:46pm PT
The dude abides.
DanaB

climber
CT
Feb 22, 2013 - 08:15pm PT
Once you start stripping naked in public to get attention.
You're a pretty hopeless case at that point.
bamboo

Trad climber
pike co
Feb 22, 2013 - 08:16pm PT
100% assumed--as you said
GDavis

Social climber
SOL CAL
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 22, 2013 - 08:34pm PT


Start at :40.

Chisler. Don't call him a Chisler.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Feb 23, 2013 - 12:05am PT
Well, I'd have to say I only climbed at the Gunk's, maybe a hand full of times and really enjoyed it.

I thought the grades were quite soft, however, since I on sighted a 13, that probably would have been 12b in JT.

Well, of course the Gunks are renown for their soft grades...

Curt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Feb 23, 2013 - 12:13am PT
I wonder how many climber slamming him would ever even attempt a climb of this difficulty.

Of what difficulty? How do we know he's even finished building it yet?

Curt
Cosmiccragsman

Trad climber
AKA Dwain, from Apple Valley, Ca. and Vegas!
Feb 23, 2013 - 12:19am PT
I hear Ivans next, PROJECT, is to chip a Via Ferrata route up
the side of El Cap.
crunch

Social climber
CO
Feb 23, 2013 - 04:17pm PT
Bill Ramsey:
Because I have actually written in defense of a limited form of chipping, many people have asked me what I think about this video. So here are my thoughts.
One of the main points I tried to make in my earlier essay is this: most climbers think there is a morally significant difference between the removal of loose rock/vegetation to make something climbable, and the removable of solid rock to make something climbable. And my main point was that I don’t see a sound justification for treating these two things as ethically different. There are not different from the standpoint of ecology or environmental concerns. A principled environmentalism would make no distinction between, on the one hand, scrubbing off lichen, weeds, flaky or crumbly rock, prying off a loose block with a crowbar, or removing rocks or bushes or even trees to improve a landing on the one hand, and chipping a hold to make something climbable on the other hand. If anything, a serious environmentalist might frown more on the former because it includes the killing of a living part of nature. So I find it bizarre that many climbers strongly condemn the latter activity and yet often actually praise the former activity, all the while insisting on a strong commitment to environmentalism.

Now since climbing is akin to a sport, climbers can make up whatever ethical rules they want. The can decree that it is unethical to do a FA on a Tuesday, but OK to do one on a Wednesday. They can stipulate that it is wrong to scrub off bat guano, bur acceptable to scrub off pigeon guano. And they can stipulate that it is wrong it chip a hold, but OK to significantly modify the natural terrain in a lot of other ways to make something go. That is up to us. My point was simply that the last case is similar to the former cases in that there does not seem to be a sound reason for making such a normative distinction.

Having said that, I think there are a whole bunch of legitimate reasons to think that what is going on in the video may be quite wrong. For example, if an area has rules put in place by land managers that stipulate rocks, vegetation and other aspects of the natural terrain should not be altered, then those rules should be followed. But notice that adherence to such rules would preclude scrubbing off lichen and loose rock. There was also somewhere the suggestion that some of the chipping involved altering established problems. If something is an established climb, there are a lot of very good reasons to leave it exactly as it is, and not modify it in any way. Also, in my earlier essay I argued that a natural climb is generally far superior to a manufactured climb, and so I restricted my defense of chipping to sections of rock that are literally impossible in their current form (no matter how good future climbers are). Now if what is being chipped in the video is doable (even if doable in the V-19 range) then I think it should be left alone for that future climber.

Suppose that what was in fact being chipped was not possible, ever. Then what may result from the chipping is a (probably) crappy little boulder problem. But there are lots of crappy little boulder problems around the country that people nonetheless get some enjoyment out of doing. What is odd is the following: Suppose the video showed someone doing a lot of the “legitimate” work that often goes into establishing a problem – someone scrubbing lichen, prying off loose blocks with a crowbar, scraping off dirt and flaky rock, excavating underlying boulders to make a better landing and so on. And suppose the video was presented as a tribute to all the hard work that sometimes goes into a making a quality boulder problem. Then people would actually be celebrating the person in the video, thanking him for his diligence in “doing what it takes” to make a great boulder problem others can enjoy. What is interesting is that such a video might actually depict a much greater modification of the natural terrain than what is shown in the DPM video. If it makes sense to treat that acceptable sort of alteration as praiseworthy and wonderful, then it really doesn’t make sense to treat the chipping as absolutely monstrous. It certainly doesn’t make sense to do so on purely environmental grounds, which is what seems to driving a lot of the anger.

No, no, no!

I recall reading Bill Ramsey’s essay in Climbing: Philosophy for Everyone, defending, on much the same grounds, "limited" chipping.

It annoyed me then and it annoys me now to see this cleverly argued opinion (but maybe he's playing devil’s advocate, trolling, if so, you got me pretty good there, Bill!).

What the argument is missing is the motivation of the person wielding a hammer.

1. When a climber is removing lichen or loose flakes on a new route then that climber is trying to get at the “climb” that is there, to reveal it, find it, expose it. By “climb” in this sense I mean the natural challenge of the rock face. A climber “cleaning” is creating a path, a route, up the rock face that will be unencumbered by unpleasant and possibly dangerous hazards and impediments. This is a creative act.

2. An aid climber hammering pitons is doing the same, creating a new (or following an existing) route. Again, this is taking on the natural challenge of the rock face. The style (pitons) may be flawed, but still, damage to the rock is accidental, incidental, much as hiker’s feet cannot help but trample vegetation and soil.

3. Someone “chipping” is deliberately altering the rock face itself. The rock face is there; either climbable, not currently climbable, always cool to see, to admire, the product of eons of erosion, history, a connection with nature. Chipping destroys the challenge of the rock face. It destroys the esthetic value of the rock face. It steals from all of us. The “unclimbable, ever” problem of today might be tomorrow's V17. It’s a destructive act, much like vandalism or graffiti, denying our connection with the natural world.

This is grossly simplified. There's all kinds of shades of gray. There are places where cleaning any vegetation or pounding any pins would be totally inappropriate. There are even places where chipping IS appropriate.

But this ain’t one of them.
OR

Trad climber
Feb 23, 2013 - 06:25pm PT
Bumpity bump for the biggest tool in NY
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Feb 23, 2013 - 06:41pm PT
Bill Ramsey: Having said that, I think there are a whole bunch of legitimate reasons to think that what is going on in the video may be quite wrong. For example, if an area has rules put in place by land managers...

Aside from his essay being just a fundamentally tepid and weak overall defense of chipping, this excerpt is especially troubling. Why? Because this kind of manufacturing and altering of rock has been very much on the rise as the climbing demographic has grown over the years and if climbers can't police themselves, and instead require "rules put in place by land managers", then we are more or less doomed by outliers like Greene and Fairfield who will continue to cause the imposition of more and more rules on the sport over time.

It only takes a few guys like these and incidents like Delicate Arch to cause serious access issues, use constraints, and tighter oversight of the sport. Because of that, I see the recording and widespread condemnation of Ivan's activities as a very good thing indeed.
patrick compton

Trad climber
van
Feb 24, 2013 - 09:31am PT
Crunch,

Your counter points are entirely from a climber's perspective, and therefore don't counter Ramsey's points at all. His points are mainly about the perspective of non-climbers.

Look a the other 'ethical' thread of cleaning massive amounts of greenery off cliffs in Squamish. The OP is pointing out that this is questionable from the non-climbing community perspective. You can look up from your mimi-van at the rock and see the difference from a long way away. Chipped rock under a roof, not so much.

The 'ethics' against chipping are entirely something generated by climbers themselves to police our ranks on the slippery-slope idea to protect ourselves from having our own routes and grades altered after they have been established, protect the future of blank sections for harder ascents, etc. This has nothing to do with a broader concept of environmentalism.
Dingus McGee

Social climber
Laramie
Feb 24, 2013 - 09:44am PT
Dingus McGee

Social climber
Laramie

Feb 24, 2013 - 05:38am PT
There are no ethics in climbing.


Some climbers use the wording Ethical in an attempt to control others by calling their actions unethical.


Ethics is an unresolved topic in philosophy. Yet some climbers are foolish enough to suggest their behavior is ethical.

When will we start saying what we mean? "Removing lichen hurts my feelings because we are destroying life?"
crunch

Social climber
CO
Feb 24, 2013 - 11:39am PT
patrick compton:

“Crunch, Your counter points are entirely from a climber's perspective, and therefore don't counter Ramsey's points at all. His points are mainly about the perspective of non-climbers.”

In the case of the alleged chipping shown in the video and referred to in posts on this thread, few or no non-climbers will notice. Nor, if if the damage is pointed out to them, will they care. The "climbers' perspective" is the only one that is relevant in this particular case.
Messages 241 - 260 of total 611 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews