Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 174 of total 174 in this topic |
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - May 30, 2005 - 12:44pm PT
|
I was messing around on La Cosita the other day, and what should I find when I reach the belay but five or six 1/4" holes (none filled in with epoxy), and the spinning SMC hanger on the last remaining bolt was smashed flat with a hammer.
So I look around a bit, and what do I find around a corner and out of sight but an huge ASCA anchor, nowhere near where the original one was.
I have heard volumes of spray from Mac and Barnes about how ASCA only replaces without adding, but it seems to me that to halfheartedly hack up an existing anchor and then place bolts elsewhere is NOT replacing, it is hacking and adding. It is now impossible (or at least very, very dangerous) to rap off the original anchor for La Cosita, and the whole area where it was is an ugly mess.
I am willing to concede that ASCA might have simply replaced some mank bolts that someone else added around the corner and out of sight, but if these are not the original belay bolts, THIS IS UNNACCEPTABLE. Chris, you gotta tell your little sub-men to find out which belays are the originals and not go replacing added bolts, or they are just as bad as the nincompoops that add them. This is the second or third time I have seen an anchor "moved to a better spot" at the discretion of the mover, and I find it egregious. If you cannot do the route and get down as the FA party did, GO DO SOMETHING ELSE.
Also, and I have seen this more than once, the nut on one of the bolts is not snugged down all the way tight. Should bolts really be placed by people who can't figure out a wrench? How safe is that? And some of the added bolts I've removed were in such baggily-drilled holes that they came out with frighteningly little effort. It has gotten to the point that I give every ASCA bolt a hefty tug to check for spinning and looseness before I commit to weighting it. Chris, if your little fluff boys cannot learn to drill a straight hole, LEAVE US THE OLD MANK; I feel safer with it.
Ben Wah
Anyone else think the ASCA gets out of line now and again?
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 12:54pm PT
|
You didn’t mention the Evil Sloanabolter!
Stay tuned for the release of my sermon in the next week or two…
-Bryan
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 12:56pm PT
|
Evil Sloanabolter!
Who's that?
|
|
ricardo
Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 01:07pm PT
|
.. tee hee .. the ASCA rocks .. i gave them $50 to continue their rampage ..
after all, i did use every fatty bolt they placed on the trip
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 04:54pm PT
|
Could you be more specific? The "standard" anchor for the 5.7 and 5.9 (on a good ledge on the top of the pillar), or the weirdo one back in the chimney above the flake/flare (on the main face of El Cap not on the pillar)? I replaced the "standard" 2-bolt La Cosita anchor on 7/16/99. Supposedly, Tom Rohrer (aka Mr. Rap-route) then proceeded to replace the same anchor a few years ago, but I'm not sure what he did or why, or even if it was the same anchor or the one above the flake/chimney. If he did work there he may have reused the ASCA hangers.
I used two 3/8 x 2.25" ss 5-piece bolts there, so if there was a nut on the bolt, then it must have been Rohrer's bolt (or someone else's).
As far as patching the holes, we do try to patch them all, but sometimes you drop the patch epoxy, or it has dried out and you can't mix it, etc. Minerals has a ton of the good hand-mix epoxy, if you run into him get a tube, use a knife to cut off a 1" section, also cut off a section of the plastic tube it came in, tape it up (the plastic keeps it from getting squished and thereby drying out), and dump it in your chalkbag - if you run into unpatched holes it's easy to clean them up.
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 05:40pm PT
|
If you ask me, you should quit bitching and go do the replacement work yourself. You should e-mail ASCA and ask for specifics privately instead of making a big stink on a public forum before even talking to the supposed perpetrators. If I were Chris, I would disband then whole thing for a couple of years and then everybody would be crying for them to start their work again.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 07:10pm PT
|
elcapfool said: I am just glad I got to experience the thrill of climbing El Cap before all the steel courage was installed.
Although I like those nice big [“bomber bolts?”], I must have to agree with the above statement also.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 30, 2005 - 08:01pm PT
|
I will be more specific for you, Greg.
What you call the "weirdo" one on the main wall, not on the pillar, is I believe the location of the original anchor, since the crack that tops out there was the first of the La Cositas to be climbed. The one you call the standard anchor, at the top of the variation, is probably a later one; when those were put up no one would have bothered to drill an anchor for a rappel so close to the original anchor. So I think you replaced the wrong one. Just because bolts are old does not mean they are original.
The bolt with the loose nut is a two-piece Fixe affair (stamped ASCA) with a little anti-chop ring welded onto the end. Why on earth would Rohrer (who is a bit of a loose nut himself) pull one of your five-pieces to replace it with a two-piece?
For the other guy who griped: I have replaced many bolts at my own expense. I'm all for replacing old mank, but it must be done properly and responsibly. I have emailed Mac personally about things like this, but his replies are banal and generally vague, like when I asked him why ASCA replaced the bolts added to Catchy. So I try to raise awareness of these issues in an open discussion forum. Maybe the ASCA should be disbanded for a while; it is only serving to make our poor overcrowded sport more popular, which it definitely does not need.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 08:14pm PT
|
Ben I did catchy just the other day and it's the same as the past few years.
What's the problem there?
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 08:31pm PT
|
Fair enough, that "standard anchor" could well have been non-original. If I remember correctly, when I replaced the "standard" anchor there was only a single bolt with no rap gear at the one you think is the original.
A welded anti-chop ring? Beats me, never done that.
As for Catchy, I chopped an old two-1/4" bolt anchor at that ledge 30' up, and replaced just the hangers on the first pitch anchor (i.e. unscrewed the 5-pieces and put rap ring hangers on). So the "ASCA bolting" on that one was chopping two 1/4" bolts and switching hangers to get rid of webbing that you could see from the road.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 30, 2005 - 08:47pm PT
|
Werner, and Greg,
I can't be sure (in fact, you should know about this for sure, Werner), but I'm not convinced the nice anchor on the ledge at the top of Catchy is original. If you go just up and left four feet there is a fixed pin and a slung rock constriction which I believe to be the original anchor that Bridwell used on the FA. It would be a matter of asking Bridwell and seeing if he remembers drilling at the top on the FA or whether he set up that other anchor. I do not doubt that you replaced those bolts, Greg, in good faith, but I question whether they belong there at all (that is, whether they were original or added later for toproping convenience). If they were added (no matter when), don't you think they need to go?
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 08:58pm PT
|
Whatever, stay or go, doesn't much matter to me. I don't consider swapping hangers "replacing bolts" since I didn't do any drilling.
But it's kind of strange to really worry about it - probably half the bolted anchors at the Cookie (if not more) were originally piton anchors (or maybe no anchors at all since the FA went to the top).
Seems to me that the issue at places like the Cookie was decided years ago when the first rap anchors were installed, whether they were bolts or pins. Werner surely has a better longer-term view.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 09:12pm PT
|
The original anchors on top of Catchy was put in by Jim Madsen (sp?) back in the day before catchy was freed. By the way it wasn't Bridwell, but Jim Pettigrew lead the first ascent of Catchy.
Common Ben, there's no problem at Catchy.
Ray Olsen aka Frog (which stands for >> From Ray Olsens Garage) replaced most of the anchors with those new bolts you see at the cookie nowadays. He used a Bosh power drill before the big power drill ban was enacted.
And yea, a lot of the anchors at the cookie were really crappy slings and sh-it, much better now!
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 30, 2005 - 09:46pm PT
|
Very well, Werner: I bow to your greater knowledge and experience, while adding that if crappy pins and slings were good enough for the FA, they should be good enough for all subsequent parties. Perhaps the Cookie (and Central Pillar of Frenzy) are lost causes, but I would hate to see this prescedent expand to every route in the park. Just think, every belay on every climb bolted! There are those who would have things that way, and it is a chilling prospect indeed.
And Greg,
It might seem like no big deal to simply change out the hangers on added bolts, but remember that if you so much as clip an added bolt, you are endorsing it and no better than the ignoramus who drilled it. Better to just leave the added stuff alone if you're not going to chop it.
|
|
Lg
Trad climber
NorCaL
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 09:56pm PT
|
Should be retitled, "More ASCA Agression".
"It is now impossible (or at least very, very dangerous) to rap off the . . ."
If you read just about any disclaimer from any guide book or climbing website you'd already know this. Don't blame shift.
"Shows what you know. Some of us resent the homogenization of our sport. It used to take gumption to climb some routes."
Uh huh, here you are in 2005 saying this, well it's a little too late for homogenization and don't blame the ASCA. In case you didn't notice, for decades and decades there has been improvements of how we climb and what we use to climb with. If you can't adjust with these improvements, adapt and overcome, then maybe it's time to get out?
"I've clipped thousands of crappy bolts, and never had one fail.
When it first started, I thought the massive replacement movement was a good idea, but after some personal involvement, My perspective shifted, and I realized it was just dumbing down the whole experience.
I am just glad I got to experience the thrill of climbing El Cap before all the steel courage was installed."
Yes, right, and that's you. And I've heard countless stories of failed bolts, some under body weight only and some pulled out with fingers. Many of the bolts I've replaced come out so easy, it's pitiful. So I guess nothing should be done until after a coroners report?
And I suppose every time you plug in a nice, slick, aluminum camming unit, it totally just ruins it for you too?
"The truth is I just don't find it that much of a thrill feeling totally safe.
And "doing it faster" is just competition, not true adventure."
Time to change your perspective again, or take off the blinders. You know what I wish? That they'd close El Cap for a couple of years and just let the mountain 'be' for a little while without all of us yahoos raping and pillaging for our own little "true adventure". Maybe then, people will realize there's other mountains to climb and we don't always have to climb all over each other. Yea right.
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 10:05pm PT
|
Well said Lg. I just get amused when people get all worked up over these issues. I was on a climb once and saw a couple of bolts that seemed too close and hadn't been on the route when I did it years earlier. I just didn't clip them, ran it out about 50'. Now if I had an ego and a preconceived notion as to how the rock should be climbed, blah, blah, blah, I would have stoppd and chopped the bolts. But, I don't give a sh#t. I just pass up the unneeded stuff.
Lg had a good point, what is the difference between placing a nice new space-age-tech cam and clipping a bolt? Climb in work boots or tennies, not 160 dollar shoes that stick to the rock. Even Mr. Ben Wah has limits to how much risk he wants to take, it just seems he is not happy with other folks having different levels of risk for themselves.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 10:10pm PT
|
Well, sometimes the first ascent does not bring all the goodies for making good permanent anchors because it’s too much stuff to bring. Most of the FA I’ve done were like that. I figured the later ascents would fix all the mank. Doesn’t mean the first ascent anchors are the best nor does it mean that they shouldn’t be moved. A bunch of mank in some corner way back may not be the best place. But to get the hell out of there somebody threw their sh-it leave behind gear there, just like I’ve done so many times. Now would you want to rappel off of werners chockstone that he jammed into the crack with a sling on it, or a nice couple of bolts?
Me I’d take the bolts any day over that psycho Werner mank.
Just some thoughts …………..
|
|
flamer
Trad climber
denver
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 10:18pm PT
|
Ben do you know Greg??
Ever actually discussed his views on Bolt replacement with him?
I'm guessing no. And by the "I thinks" in alot of your post's you seem to be making inflamatory statement's about a guy and an Orgganisation that you know little about.
Having discussed this stuff with Greg, in person, and at length and having been there when he replaced bolts; I can tell you that you will not find anyone who cares more about what gets replaced and what doesn't. He does his research....and in the few case's where he was wrong...he fixed his mistake. He know's more about what a bolt(and all the different variety's!!) will hold than anyone...
Greg is a class act. The ASCA has the best of intention's. Yes sometimes individual's who act (supposedly) on the behalf of the ASCA do things that are questionable.
Alot of what has been done is swirling in the gray area...there had never been a major rebolting effort before the ASCA came along(before someone tells me about the effort on X route at X crag- Let me just say you know what I mean!)...so they are learning as they go. And I can tell you Greg keeps track. He's figureing out what the climbing community as a whole finds acceptable and what they don't...and he's applying it!!
Not everyone will be happy with everything...we've got to find the middle ground.
Personally I'm not for retro bolting. But leaving a bad bolted anchor in place just to add spice to the route is not legit either. Now was that anchor original or not? Should we replace it or chop it?? With that we go straight back to that big Gray area....
I will tell you this...Greg Barnes cares more(and knows more) about this rebolting stuff than any of us....and he looks at all side's.
josh
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 10:56pm PT
|
"I've clipped thousands of crappy bolts, and never had one fail.”
Well I’ve clipped a lot of crappy bolts myself and some have failed. During one of my numerous ascents of Freestone (left side of Geek Towers) I for some strange reason didn’t trust Bridwell’s original rap bolt anymore on the second rappel. I took a long sling and rapped it around a chockstone behind it.
Low and behold the bolt blew when my partner was ¾ of the way down that rappel. Now if I had not backed it up what kind of scenario would we have had?
ASCA has replaced the bad anchors.
Just some more thoughts ..........
|
|
Lg
Trad climber
NorCaL
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - 11:56pm PT
|
"I know Greg, and he is not the problem. The records he keeps stand as a testement to his dedication and integrity.
I have seen all sorts of bolt atrocities, and I'm not blaming ASCA for all of them. Just because the hanger is stamped ASCA, doesn't mean THEY put it in."
Kind of you to make that 'distinction'.
"Lg- you don't seem to make the distinction between technology that allows for clean climbing, and bolting for convienence."
I understand we can make many distinctions and have many discrepancies among those distinctions . . however, my reference to technologies was to present an overall picture of a general timeline.
"Cam hooking through sections that used to be nailed is RAD,"
RIGHT! I see you've adapted quite well to 'this' part of evolution in the history of climbing. Once it was like this, now it's like this- get my point?
Don't worry, some day those shiny bolts and hangars will wither too and become 'just right' and raise just enough doubt in whoever clips it and voila, there will be fear amoung men again.
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:23am PT
|
Thanks Josh, but you're definitely giving me too much credit. I've made many mistakes, and I'm still a "newcomer" on the scene. Plenty of folks replaced a TON of bad bolts before the ASCA ever came along - just look at the list of stuff replaced by Kevin Powell (around 1500 bolts!) or Dan McQuade or Steve Sutton (who came up with "the ASCA" in '95).
Debate is healthy, I don't mind working out the details on anchors that maybe should be removed. And I have to say this: at least we aren't seeing true "retrobolting" in the Valley like what is going on in Red Rocks. Several classic moderate routes that never used to be rappelled and required trad gear at belays now have bolted stations all over the place. It would be comparable to suddenly having 2-bolt stations every pitch on Braille Book or Regular Route on Fairview. Totally changes the character of the climb, lowers the commitment, creates rappel clogging on the route, etc.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:31am PT
|
What does retrobolting mean? Is that when you add stuff that wasn't there originaly? I never followed these terminologies so I'm not quite clear on their true meanings.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 12:34am PT
|
1) Before everybody goes off the deep end and forgets what this is about, let me say that I am all for replacing old and weak bolts-I have replaced many such myself. What I object to is bolts being added and belay spots being changed around for convenience. However careful Greg is in his research, like someone pointed out, he occasionally screws up. When you put yourself in the spotlight with an high profile organisation like ASCA, you must be prepared to endure scrutiny and criticism. You must know that every time you goof up someone's going to point it out.
2) I do not know Greg, but being nice or being careful do not make you always right. Look at Nanook, who is a prince among men; the nicest, kindest guy you'll ever meet-I can say no bad thing about him as a person-but his bolting ethics carry the most nefarious repute.
3) When I see bolts stamped ASCA I will consider ASCA responsible for them (I dunno...it might have been that other guy... simply doesn't cut it). Perhaps it will make them more careful in selecting to whom they dispense gear.
4) Werner: I think that if you rapped off of chossy mank on your FAs then everybody else should too. It's all about style for me, and I realise that very few people understand style. Perhaps my discussions are a vanity and a waste of time; perhaps those people who value safety and their own convenience above all else will win and soon the entire Valley will be gridbolted; but I will cry out against it as long as I have breath.
4) I have no suitable response for someone too stupid to see the difference between a cam and a bolt
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 12:45am PT
|
Wow! The posting is so fast and furious my reply is outdated by the time I type it out.
Werner,
"retrobolting" is what they call adding bolts to an existing climb. It is what Ray Olsen did to Soul Sacrifice to protect the first moves, according to Tucker.
"Rebolting" is what they call pulling out the original bolts and placing new ones, in the same holes, if possible, so that the nature of the climb changes as little as possible.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 12:52am PT
|
Greg,
There is indeed some "Red Rocks Style" retroboltibg going on. I do not know who is responsible for it, but Kor Beck has many bolted anchors, as does Central Pillar of Frenzy, and I hear rumors of belays being bolted on DNB. Then, lets not forget the Salathe wall or fail to mention the Steck Salathe, which now have more bolts in them than the FA parties drilled. Red Rocks ethics may be getting closer than you think
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:57am PT
|
Holy Moly Ben
If I rapped off some chossy mank on the first ascent only means my partner went first with bomber backup. I never put my partners up to that. I was always the last guy on those rappels and prayed I didn’t die.
I wouldn’t want anyone else to have to do that. But then again that is my own personal opinion.
I totally understand the central point of your debate, Ben, as we’ve had many discussions during the past winters and I always have a lot of respect for your particular style. You are a true old school master and have a lot of excellent raw talent.
But I still wouldn’t want someone to rap off some of the crap I have ........
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:02am PT
|
"I do not know who is responsible for it, but Kor Beck has many bolted anchors, as does Central Pillar of Frenzy, and I hear rumors of belays being bolted on DNB."
Come on Ben, I've replaced at least 1 anchor on the first 5 of each of those routes, and you're 20 years too late if you want to make a statement on rapping off the first 5 pitches. Really old 1/4" bolts marked those rap stations, and they're well documented as rap stations in the guide book. If they were added and not acceptable to the climbing community, they should have been chopped before becoming the standard. Royal Arches rap route is the most blatant one to focus on. If someone adds bolts to a Valley classic tomorrow, I'll happily go help you chop and clean them up, and I hope someone does that soon with Ginger Cracks and the others at Red Rocks.
We replaced 6 bolts on the Rostrum in '99 (and removed 7 excess bolts including a 3-bolt belay). Along the third pitch, the Reid book shows two optional belays at two seperate single bolts along the crack (the first of which along the perfect hand crack, the second at the little roof - neither of which is needed at all). At the ASCA's request, Don's removing those optional belays and bolts in the next edition, and Chris OK'd not showing the bolts at all in the Supertopo (you can check it out in the Free climbs book). Once Don gets the new Valley guide out, we'll remove those 2 bolts and the route will be better off for it - and the ASCA rebolting on that route alone will be replacing 6 bolts and removing 9. But we're waiting for the main guides to not show the bolts so someone climbing the Rostrum with a light rack doesn't end up belaying off a single cam.
If you want to chop the non-original rap anchors on routes where everyone has been accustomed to rappelling for decades - such as Royal Arches raps - I personally don't have a problem with it, and a lot of people I know would be all for returning it to the original state (but a lot of my friends are very trad, I'm sure many people would be really pissed). But if you (or anyone) does remove such traditional (but non-original) rap routes, it HAS to be well-publicized, unless you're trying to get YOSAR to work overtime.
I think we're basically on the same page with trad values, and the ASCA does make mistakes. Like I said before, debate is a good thing and if there are some ASCA replaced bolts that ought to be chopped, let's talk about it and if needed remove them. Minerals has done that, I've had to do it, and unfortunately it'll probably have to be done again. We ARE trying to do the best job possible and keep it trad.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:43am PT
|
3) When I see bolts stamped ASCA I will consider ASCA responsible for them (I dunno...it might have been that other guy... simply doesn't cut it). Perhaps it will make them more careful in selecting to whom they dispense gear.
i think you give yourself too much credit
4) Werner: I think that if you rapped off of chossy mank on your FAs then everybody else should too. It's all about style for me, and I realise that very few people understand style. Perhaps my discussions are a vanity and a waste of time; perhaps those people who value safety and their own convenience above all else will win and soon the entire Valley will be gridbolted; but I will cry out against it as long as I have breath.
maybe i have it wrong, but my understanding of the FA ethic is that it just has to be ok w/ the FA to add (or replace?) a bolt, as sometimes happens, even in the valley. maybe your more extreme view is just slightly atypical? (as per werner's thoughts...)
kind of funny to read this after clipping bolts at ORG all weekend...
=)
|
|
kev
climber
CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:41am PT
|
Chop the rap route on the arches...Make them do the gully!
I'm all for that...
Also having been someone who has spent a night or two chatting about such things with Greg, I can only say that he is not a mad bolter/rebolter/ etc. He takes it very seriously. Not that he or any of us hasn't made a mistake, but come one give him a break.
Also although I agree that it is a lame excuse that just because the hangers are ASCA doesn't mean they put them up, it's plausable.....Hmmmm ever wonder where those missing hangers wander off to????
|
|
ricardo
Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 04:14am PT
|
routes evolve ..
.. those who cannot adapt, eventually become extinct ..
i can appreciate ben wah's style and ethic, but its so narrow minded. It makes very little sense to die while rappelling -- or to die because your anchor blew chunks.
.. difference in style .. for sure.
|
|
TradIsGood
Trad climber
Gunks end of country
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 07:03am PT
|
"4) Werner: I think that if you rapped off of chossy mank on your FAs then everybody else should too. It's all about style for me, and I realise that very few people understand style. Perhaps my discussions are a vanity and a waste of time; ..."
Vanity - couldn't agree more, BW. If you really want to do climbs in the FA's style, go find something that hasn't been done yet! It's the only way to do something in the FA style.
Waste of time - only if you are too stubborn to change your mind.
Few people understand style - Actually most people understand style, and most understand more than one. And most know that styles change.
Another thought. Some of these climbs weren't repeated for a year or more. Now many are done several times a day, or if longer routes, may have an average of more than one party per day on them. I guess if you get to the route first, it would be ok to tie it up while you do it in the style of the FA. Let those people behind you wait, right?
Just guessin' that you do not still tie in to a swami? Probably use cams because they don't damage the rock? Is that because you have an open mind, or just because that was how they were doing it when you started?
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 09:18am PT
|
re."4) I have no suitable response for someone too stupid to see the difference between a cam and a bolt"
I guess I'm one of those stupid people he is refering to. Would anyone else care to explain the distinction in regards to the effect on climbing "experience"?
I truly don't understand how clipping crappy anchors preserves the adventure and thrill that climbing ElCap twenty years ago provided while at the same time using modern age gear does not change the experience in the same way that new anchors would. I can't help but find it strange that the people who want rusty 1/4" bolts for anchors don't hesitate to use the safest and most advanced active protection they can get their hands on while on lead.
What am I missing? Why is this a stupid way of looking at it?
btw. I have no doubt that climbing ElCap twenty years ago was a much bolder undertaking than it is today. I don't think anyine would argue that point. However, wasn't the experience about much more than just the style of anchors? Can preserving crappy anchors really bring back an entire era? That notion seems contrived.
|
|
deuce4
Big Wall climber
Pagosa Springs CO
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 10:27am PT
|
Let's talk about "creep".
The old 1/4" Rawl split-drive bolts which were prevalent in Yosemite in the old days require the outward spring tension of the two slices of the bolt to be secure. After about 30 years, "creep" destroys the strength of the bolt when the spring factor disappears, and the bolt becomes virtually as weak as a plain dowel in a hole. In other words most of the bolts in Yosemite from pre-80's would have been pure timebombs in the 90's and 2000's.
If it wasn't for Greg, Chris, and the ASCA, there would probably be a lot of people today pancaked splat-dead on the valley floor from anyone trying to anchor on the original bolts of the 50's, 60's, 70's.
All I can say is hats off to the rebolters, without whom climbing would probably have been shut down by the land managers because of the crisis liability.
Thanks you guys!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 11:14am PT
|
Yes, very nice Duce
The extremists will always want everyone to follow their order forgetting the true principles of life.
So in general this anchoring repair and beefing up does not really come from crazy zealots who lack adventure or fundamental vision in our true path, but in a morally conscious society that discriminates between right and wrong. The foundation for truth has to be firmly understood otherwise we will continue eternally this hypocrisy and quarrel.
Due to our own self righteous and morally illusions consciousness we only see our own selves onto everything outside of us.
Without a solid foundation in truth no anchor by anyone will ever guarantee to hold ........
|
|
bestbefore
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 11:17am PT
|
I am not a valley local, and wouldn't dare to wade into the big picture questions of bolted belay/rap stations, etc. But I do have two very brief observations to make:
1) When it comes to questions of style, leaving manky, terrifying 1/4 split drive bolts in place does not preserve the original "experience". We old timers may have been follish in this regard, but when we placed those bolts we believed they were absolutely bombproof. Objectively, those bolts probably never were bomber, and as Deuce4 points out they sure as hell aren't now, but that is beside the point. In terms of "commitment" and perceived risk, we never thought we were hanging on timebombs. To do so now significantly changes the first ascent "experience".
2) A mind is a terrible thing to waste, but it happens with age...so I can't be certain of details from the fuzzy past...but I'm pretty sure that when I first visited the Valley in 1980 and climbed the La Cositas, there were already two anchors...one sensibly placed on the main ledge and one off to the side...so (if memory serves, for a change) I can't say which is original, but the "ledge" anchor must be "established" for at least 25 years. As i say, my memory may be FOS - someone local will have a more certain grasp of the facts, I'm imagine.
|
|
John F. Kerry
Social climber
Boston, MA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 11:53am PT
|
BenWah, you rant about how it's all about style for you, then diss the guy who mentioned cams. Do you get by on the rock a lot easier than the old guys did because of sticky rubber, cams, and internet beta? If so, by the very simplest reasoning you must admit that you are not staying true to the FA style.
If only you would admit the obvious: you want to be regarded as better or more valuable because you are willing to take greater risks with fixed anchors. At least this would be honest. But it is willful prevarication on your part to complain about adhering to style while indulging in the use of an offset Alien. How many times have you cruised with modern gear past flared Valley cracks that caused Harding/Robbins/et al such gutwrenching peril?
I don't deny the validity of your embrace of a certain style. But you can't crow about rapping off FA mank when you used the latest modern gear to GET to the rap station.
|
|
bestbefore
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:02pm PT
|
JFK,
Such clarity of vision, directness of speech and unambiguous ethics...how could the American people have failed to elect you?
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 12:09pm PT
|
Once again, I think every manky 1/4" bolt should be replaced, if it was placed by the FA. Of course the FA party wanted bomber pro when they placed a bolt, and there should be bomber pro today. But the number of bolts on a route should not be added to. Period.
Ricardo, I know that styles change, and that is what I am bummed about. Instead of changing towards an ever higher standard, the floods of new climbers are trying to change towards an ever lower standard, so they can have instant gratification without having to step up to the plate and climb. The things I like in climbing: boldness, commitment, yes, even occasional danger, are being removed, and if all the climbers in the world think that's good and I'm the only one who doesn't, I will still (stubbornly, yes) adhere to my opinion. Without some measure of commitment, without having to launch off to either summit or leave most of your gear bailing, climbing becomes merely moves, like being in a gym. I for one do not want to see the park become a giant outdoor gym.
Greg, I'm all for removing the excess bolts on the Rostrum (and the ones you pulled on the Good Book) Harding did not have the kind of gear we have today when he placed those. I wish more people were for pulling unnecessary bolts and not for adding bolts wherever they get scared. I think the RA rap route needs to go. "Become Established?" that's preposterous nonsense. Unless the FA established a bolt, I do not consider it established. Maybe no one has chopped it and it's been there twenty years-who cares? if it's not original it needs to go.
Matt, whom do you suggest I consider responsible for a bolt stamped ASCA when I see one? All the ones with loose nuts and baggy holes must be attributable to someone else? You perhaps?
For the other guy who asked: Yes I do still tie into a swami, and sometimes I climb on just hexes and nuts; I find it piquing to see what a route might have felt like in the days of more primitive pro. It can give you a new level of respect for those old timers and for their particular ethic
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 12:17pm PT
|
JFK,
Your posting came up while I was typing my last one.
I do not own any Aliens at all, offset or otherwise. The fact that there is now better gear than the FA had only strengthens my argument that if they made it up w/o bolts, we certainly, with our offset aliens, curve nuts, flex cams et al, should be able to. Use whatever modern gear you wish; I have no problem with this: but do not drill extra holes.
You seem to be saying that if they were unsafe on the pitch it's OK to be unsafe on the rappel. What is wrong with being safe on the pitch and having a sketchy rap? Pointless? perhaps, but climbing itself is pointless. You want to be safe? Go play tiddlywinks. But be sure you wear your goggles
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:40pm PT
|
Ben said: “I for one do not want to see the park become a giant outdoor gym.
And last Octobers events on El Capitan are a testament to the high power that controls that fear.
Walt Shipley added a bolt on half dome on a route where nothing more could be done and at that moment short of a full retreat. Are you now suggesting that a full retreat is now our only alternative instead of placing the bolt?
Now … Ben I have questions.
Why do we want to be safe no matter what?
Why do we [really] want to preserve our life?
Why not we eliminate stop signs, traffic signals, and bridges?
Are we a separate entity from the same society that we depend on, for our sustains (ie) food, clothing, etc?
Are we, (climbers), really the Dingus terminology, ... “Animal Farm” ......?
Or are you really trying to say we are, warriors, the very Kstriyas, that depend on God for the Supreme knowledge that transcends the ordinary mundane knowledge the masses exhibit in their modes of goodness, passion and ignorance on life and death?
I am unclear of your true aim towards the target?
|
|
Murf
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 12:59pm PT
|
> I wish more people were for pulling unnecessary bolts and not for
> adding bolts wherever they get scared. I think the RA rap route
> needs to go.
BW
I'd say I generally feel more like you than not. However, others have convinced me of the necessity of things like the RA rap.
Everyone knows that climbing has exploded in popularity. Given the state of climbing as it exists today, there is a convincing argument that enables the creation/modification of gumby routes. Things that the masses can get up and down w/o putting themselves and everyone else in a jam. Not only do you want to make it more accessible so the epic factor comes down, but you want the route/routes to handle a good amount of traffic ( although I don't believe the RA raps are that great of an example of this seond point ).
Now I know what you are going to say.... F' em if they can't freaking get up and down RA w/o the rap, and if the route is too crowded they can go somewhere else just as classic. I have to say, that down deep I agree with you.
But given the state of the climbing today, what would be the quantitative results of removing the RA raps? How many gulley rescues/deaths/F up's will YOSAR/the NPS deal with before putting up "official raps"? What will happend first, those unprepared for such a reality stop going up RA or the raps being put back in?
Other benefits of the arguement is that you can "sacrifice" some routes/raps to keep most others generally clear. Does just reading it make you a little sick? It does me.
Let me restate that while I've been personally convinced that this type of thing is almost required, it doesn't make me very happy. If climbing could go the way of the latter day jogging/jazzercise/whatever craze, these types of compromises wouldn't be necessary. Also, this doesn't mean that I'm for retrobolting the actual routes. This type of thing is more applicable to descents and anchors. Another thing is when it becomes widespread, like from Crimson Chrysalis to Ginger Cracks, then it needs to be nipped in the bud.
Murf
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:03pm PT
|
What is wrong with being safe on the pitch and having a sketchy rap? Pointless? perhaps, but climbing itself is pointless. You want to be safe? Go play tiddlywinks. But be sure you wear your goggles
no offense pal, but you come off as bright as don quijote when you advocate unsafe raps. tell it to the orphaned kids of some mother that craters while being lowered off...
trees may die or loosen
rock may decay or erode
pin placements may deteriorate
old bolts go bad
i'd agree that all bolting in yosemite should always be a last resort, an option that should be avoided whenever possible, but if the FA had every expectation of returning to the ground alive, and w/out spectacular or heroic effort, then how does the valley itself become diminished if everyone who follows is allowed that same expectation? like it or not, THAT is the standard, in yosemite and elsewhere. people's lives matter more than your freakin windmills, period.
consider a hypothetical where the FA rapped off of a single pin and a marginal shallow nut, because no other options are present. over 20 years of use, the nut placement becomes flared to the point of uselessness, and the pin placement loosens and is replaced a few times, until the placement is junk. your ethic would demand that people keep hammering out the pin placement? should someone drill it out? cement it in? or what if the pin cannot be removed w/out destroying the placement, and the pin itself ages and is obviously not reliable?
not that every climb needs to have bomber bolted anchors, but every climb does need to have a reasonable exit, whether it's walking off the top or rapping off of something that is trustworthy.
it would seem more reasonable (to me) to define a narrow scope of acceptable scenarios, rather than pretend they simply do not ever arise. the slippery slope is a scary thing, and you do have a point, but i am not about to die for it.
and about the ASCA bolts- they seem to keep pretty good records of where those bolts & hangers go. if you have specific concerns, why don't you just ask. i have heard of ASCA bolt hangers being scavenged by some.
EDIT
as for murf's post about the RA raps, i too think that you need to consider the valid trade offs that are in play in that and similar situations. valid concerns over additional government imposed regulations aside, how much impact would the area at the rim see if there were no raps? the walk off itself already changes yearly just due to the traffic it gets as it is. that area in the NDG is highly unstable and it seems unlikely that a quality trail could ever get built or be maintained, and if it were it would be much more offensive (to me) than a dozen bolts no one can see from anywhere. it's easy to forget that yosemite is not just about the rock, "the resource", as the NPS likes to say, experiences a wide range of pressures, and while i would rather walk off than rap, i don't want to see even greater impacts to the unique and spectacular landscape, not just in the NDG area but everywhere in the valley.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 01:13pm PT
|
Werner,
I would rather see a full retreat than an added bolt; however, I see no problem with an emergency bolt placed to save a life (as YOSAR often has to do). But they should be chopped later.
"Why do we want to be safe?"
I don't know. Life itself is such a dangerous prospect; you could be killed crossing the street or die from a bug bite. As far as safety in climbing, there is far more safety in knowledge and common sense than in massive bolts. Look at the lamentable accident at Lazy Bum the other day. The bolts there did nothing to keep that guy safe. It is only by the grace of God that he is even alive.
"Why do we want to preserve our life?"
We're drifting off topic, but sgsin, I don't know. The Bible says, (paraphrased) 'He that would keep his life shall lose it, but he that would give his life for God's sake will keep it.'
"Why not eliminate traffic signals"
I don't know. Since they don't affect climbing and I don't really take a hard line on driving ethics, it doesn't matter a whole lot to me.
"Are we a separate entity?"
Yes. Each person is a unique creation of God, and answerable individually for his own actions. Each must work out his own salvation with fear and trembling.
"Are we as DMT says...?"
Sadly, human nature is very like that. And will continue to be. It is the result of sin, from which salvation can only be gotten by calling on Jesus Christ for forgiveness.
I must rescue my daughter from The Stairs and get some work done. Flame away, all of you, and I will log on again this evening.
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:14pm PT
|
Ben, I totally support you and your message.
Keep the faith.
Speak the word.
Ben, you have a daughter now???
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:33pm PT
|
Everyone knows that climbing has exploded in popularity. Given the state of climbing as it exists today, there is a convincing argument that enables the creation/modification of gumby routes. Things that the masses can get up and down w/o putting themselves and everyone else in a jam. Not only do you want to make it more accessible so the epic factor comes down, but you want the route/routes to handle a good amount of traffic ( although I don't believe the RA raps are that great of an example of this seond point ).
Sounds like you have just described an indoor climbing gym. Great, just keep that crap inside!!!
Some of those ASCA hangers that seem to pop up here and there may not have been placed by ASCA members – I know for one, that Mr. Way has been known to recycle those hangers, as well as some guy that I climb with from time to time…
Do we need to take the chopper on a road trip to Red Rocks or what??? Vroom Vroom!!!!
Support your local bolt-chopping agency!
Support the RBCA – Retro Bolt Choppers of America
-American Chopper
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:40pm PT
|
You will never be able to stop it on your own. It will run its course like the seasons and the sun that rises on its own time. You can argue for eternity but you will still be controlled by the power that we must all submit to.
Birth and death .....
|
|
TradIsGood
Trad climber
Gunks end of country
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:42pm PT
|
Hexes and nuts? That's new stuff to the valley (at one time). That style replaced the old style, thanks to guys like YC. So time to accept that styles change. Be as open-minded as the old guys who were willing to use nuts and hexes where possible, instead of the pitons of their original style. It's ok to use modern climbing shoes and modern protection. If you want more excitement, climb harder climbs. Or don't. But plenty of climbers will still get the same level of excitement as the legends. And those that will get the same level of excitement know, for sure, they would not think of launching onto those routes, even with topos and beta, using the gear of legends.
If you want to feel superior, go ahead. Skip any of the stuff you object to. You may even find some disgruntled old farts to praise your purity. Have a few with them. Relive the glory days. Feel better about yourself. But you don't have to do that at everyone else's expense.
You might be happier though, to just go climb with some young (at heart) people that are having fun and share it with them. Lead some newbies up some of that hard stuff. If it was hard for them, they will really appreciate your abilities. Hopefully it will be hard for you not to enjoy the pleasure that they got.
Psychiatric help - 5 cents. - Lucy Van Pelt
|
|
Murf
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 01:48pm PT
|
>>Everyone knows that climbing has exploded in popularity.
>>Given the state of climbing as it exists today, there is a
>> convincing argument that enables the creation/modification
>> of gumby routes. Things that the masses can get up and down
>> w/o putting themselves and everyone else in a jam. Not only
>> do you want to make it more accessible so the epic factor comes down, but you want the
>>route/routes to handle a good amount of traffic ( although I
>>don't believe the RA raps are that great of an example of this
>>seond point ).
>Sounds like you have just described an indoor gym. Great, just
>keep that crap inside!!!
It would be nice, but shutting Pandora's box might very well be impossible. Those gym climbers are going outside, and the issue of managing the impact is very real. In fact, that is really what this thread is about, isn't it? Only have a few options:
1.) The hard line, chop 'em all
2.) Somewhere in the middle.
3.) Bolt it all
> Do we need to take the chopper on a road trip to Red Rocks or what??? Vroom Vroom!!!!
Minerals, why haven't you chopped the RA raps, seems closer to home for you?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:18pm PT
|
Yea Minerals, common man, be the big man you want to be, start chopping and stop talking.
Let’s also hear your so called diatribe….. And your sermon on the mount.
I'm intrested to hear it ........
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:37pm PT
|
Murf wrote:
Those gym climbers are going outside, and the issue of managing the impact is very real. In fact, that is really what this thread is about, isn't it?
In a lot of ways, yes. But there are other issues as well.
Minerals, why haven't you chopped the RA raps, seems closer to home for you?
Because I think that climbing routes and rap routes are two different things and should be looked at differently, contrary to what Ben may believe. I still support Ben but I don’t know if the majority of Yosemite climbers would agree with his rap route views. There are probably a lot that would – I just don’t know. So if I don’t know what the general consensus is, then I won’t act. This subject (RA raps) is something that should be discussed more before something is done. If it appears that it is best for them to stay, then they should stay; if it appears that they should go, then fine, I’ll be happy to help out.
Werner, I’m not the big man – that’s KB.
I’ll post my diatribe when I’m finished with it.
|
|
Murf
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:45pm PT
|
Because I think that climbing routes and rap routes are two different things and should be looked at differently, contrary to what Ben may believe.
I would just like to point out my own post:
Let me restate that while I've been personally convinced that this type of thing is almost required, it doesn't make me very happy.
Also, this doesn't mean that I'm for retrobolting the actual routes.
So it seems like we agree in theory.
Murf
|
|
climberweenie
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:48pm PT
|
how does one learn to slither, to crawl, etc. through to flying without having some stepping stones that don't involve death and wasting YOSAR time? I support bolted rap stations where natural pro is not readily available. You still have to somehow reach the rap stations.
given that the whole adventure aspect of climbing is a farce to give us something important and dangerous-seeming in our otherwise tame and boring lives, what's the problem with the training wheels of rap stations? if you have a problem with them, don't use them! and if you say "in my day, you had to be a REAL (WO)MAN to do that route" then it looks like you're climbing so everyone else thinks you're cool and badass.
if you did it back in the day, you and the folks whose opinion you probably care about know what you did.
If keeping up that image is important to you, then go do some real remote stuff that requires more commitment for approach and more uncertainty of outcome. Only problem there is that if it's too obscure, not enough people will know about it and you won't get the benefit of people thinking you're a badass.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 02:55pm PT
|
Believe me Mr. Weeni …. Ben does not think he’s badass, although he really is, as I know!
You’re assumptions are just that assumptions!
|
|
climberweenie
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:00pm PT
|
One other thought I just had. What are the ethics of 5.12 climbers doing a 5.9 FA with little/no gear? That means even if it is a '5.9" route you need to basically be a 5.12 climber to merely sh#t your pants rather than die on it.
So is this a selfish waste of a route, bound in antiquated rules of following FA style? Seems that quality 5.9 routes might as well be poured over with concrete as far as folks who climb 5.9 are concerned.
On the other hand, keeping these routes AS IS provides a sort of legend to keep one's dreams alive, a target for "someday when my balls or ovaries grow big enough", a sense that wild places still exist.
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:01pm PT
|
So it seems like we agree in theory.
Maybe on a few things but it’s your paragraph that I originally quoted that gets my blood boiling. Sorry, I didn’t mean to attack you, just the ideas in that paragraph.
|
|
climberweenie
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:11pm PT
|
Werner, whether or not anyone on this list is a badass is pretty irrelevant to what I wrote. My focus was on the motivations of people who have problems with rap stations. One likely motivation seems to be caring what other people think about ourselves (seeking external approval). This condition affects cowards, weenies, and badasses alike. If this is the root cause of one's opinion on rap stations, then one's desire for external approval is in conflict with the health and safety of others (I'd err on side of safety since one merely needs to be introspective to address their own need for external approval).
On the other hand, my immediately preceding post about "maintaining a sense of adventure, a notion that wild places still exist" is the root motivation, it's hard to argue with this. This puts "elevation of one's spirit" in conflict with the health and safety of others. As I write this I'm logically cornering myself into supporting bolted rap stations and the gradual dumbing down of everything, sort of an encroachment of civility on the wildness of climbing. And this doesn't really sit well with me on an emotional or spiritual level.
Maybe a way to deal with this is exactly how countries deal with the conflict between urbanization and the desire to preserve wild places..... declare "climbing wilderness zones" where adventure rules and all visitors should know what to expect when they go there. In one way, every climbing area approached by an overnight backpacking trip already meets this criteria. Perhaps since things are so accessible in Yosemite valley, certain formations or routes can be declared as 'wild' and have more strict ethics enforced, while certain long free trade routes continue to be the learning ground and have nice safe bolted rap stations.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:34pm PT
|
Ben isn’t seeking anyone’s approval he’s merely becoming disgusted at what many others are also seeing as a large scale degradation of pure simple clean values.
What those values are can be debated to hell without the original knowledge of that truth.
Who knows and holds that original knowledge?
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:39pm PT
|
There's a difference between debate and tiresome ranting and fingerpointing.
re."I have heard volumes of spray from Mac and Barnes"
re."Chris, if your little fluff boys cannot learn to drill a straight hole, LEAVE US THE OLD MANK"
What exactly are comments like that supposed to accomplish?
I guess Greg is one of the fluff boy he is refering to. It seems that Greg Barnes constantly goes out of his way to listen to complaints and opinions. It appears that he takes them very seriously. Why not treat him with a little fricking respect?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 03:47pm PT
|
David
Maybe he was a little pissed off in the beginning and started his rant in a typical knee jerk reaction?
We'll see later this evening when he returns ....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 04:24pm PT
|
Nice post Dingus!
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 05:20pm PT
|
Minerals sounds like such the jackass, who the hell do you think you are Mr.bolt-chop-cop??? Chopping more bolts in the Valley and elsewhere is an activity for a loooooser like Minerals and for those that join him chopping just are looking to get their asses kicked. Piss off Minerals and I hope to see your sorry ass at the crags for some fresh blood on my knuckles, you are the real pussy. Oh yeah, about your lame effort on the Zodiac, how long before all the gear is back in place and the climb is more beat-up than before?? Get a life DUMBASS and how did you appoint yourself the keeper of bolting ethic???? Don't have time for another post angryT but I could care less about Mrs.Minerals and if he is a pushover or what. RBCA are a bunch of idiots with nothing going so making a name for themselves chopping retrobolts?? LAME.
There are so many retobolts if one was to chop most of them you will do nothing but piss people off. Besides the routes mentioned, if Minerals had a sack he would go chop the bolts on Nutcracker that weren't there when Royal did the FA. It is a big list of climbs that have anchors and bolts not placed by the first ascent party, are they all going to be removed??? I don't think so. Minerals doesn't have the turf time in the Valley to know what was there to begin with. What ASCA does is positive, what RBCA does is regressive and just plain stupid. Every wall thats had a repeat has been chicken-bolted. Well Mrs.Law you have a lot of work to do and what a waste of time. Again...get a life dumbass.
AMERICAN CHOPPER=JACKASS
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 05:55pm PT
|
Interesting discussion:
I've asked this question before, but since this thread is [mostly] about what is appropriate to replace/add in the name of safety/convenience:
What should be done with all the old, "ticking timebomb" pins that are out there (if there is no clean placement nearby). Replace with a bolt? Replace with another pin (and another, and another, until there is a clean placement)? Leave the ticking timebomb (and let YOSAR clean up the mess)?
For instance, the last pin on Hoodwinked. If you blow the crux, it is either a short, sport fall into space, or, if the pin blows, it is a back first fall onto a slab. East Butress of Middle has an old pin (around pitch 6 or 7) before a hard (for the climb) friction move. If that pin breaks on somebody, it is going to be a 50+' fall.
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 06:35pm PT
|
these hotheads that go around bragging about being choppers just suffer from little-dick syndrome.
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 06:45pm PT
|
Yeah and they also suffer from not enough dick from their ropn' pardner as well.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 31, 2005 - 07:11pm PT
|
I know its not evening yet, but I'm taking a break from the grind for a spell.
Looks like the topic has gone way off course again.
I am all for any bolt, anywhere, so long as it was placed by the first party to climb through that section of rock. I am all for any rap route, anywhere, so long as the bolts are not placed on an existing route. The only bolts of the RA route I would even consider chopping are the first set, just before the final slab pitch, and only because they are on the route, and the FA climbed past without placing any bolts there. Sling the tree to rap from? fine! leave nuts, cams and biners to rap from? fine! Place pins from which to rap? Fine! all these choices are gear that is easily removable and does not leave a drilled hole in the rock (I think pins should be avoided when possible, but find them to be of less impact than bolts. Crazy, I know, but its just how I feel).
As for the anchor that began this whole circus (and believe me this has been fun), I only object to its presence because it is on a route that pre-existed (La Cosita, var.).
The inflamatory comments on the very first post I regret: It is unfortunate that sometimes a response must be stung from someone who may not otherwise answer at all. I have encountered this silence before; I have been brushed aside with vague banalities.
Though I pretty much agree with Minerals on ethics, I do not share his love of chopping. It is not something I glory in, but rather I do it with sorrow, weeping for the disrespect that was done to the route in the adding of a bolt. As for those who think I am trying to get attention, I am. I am trying to draw attention to what I see as the destruction of my favourie activity. When the ethic changed from all nailing to using passive pro, that was a good thing; a step toward a cleaner ethic. Now there are those who would have the ethic be a grid of bolts and all racks be nothing but draws; that is a step backwards from where we were heading when pins began to fall into disuse. Change? I am all for it, but it must be in the right direction or I will cry out against it.
Minerals,
Sure, I have a 14-month-old daughter. She is the sweetest thing. You might see us wandering about the lodge area some balmy evening.
Back to my fiberglass. Ugh.
|
|
HalHammer
Trad climber
CA
|
|
|
May 31, 2005 - 10:40pm PT
|
Ben Wah Wrote:
"I think that if you rapped off of chossy mank on your FAs then everybody else should too."
Ummmm.... That is one of dumbest statements I've read on these forums...So people rap on a FA and leave shitty ass anchors there because climbers tend to not like leaving half their racks behind. These kind of anchors are marginal at best the 1st day they are used, let alone 20 years later; stuff like this shouldn't be in the same sentence as the word anchor. If you get so excited to hang everything off of time bomb anchors why don't you go Aid solo some A3+ routes without a rope. Any sort of "established" anchor better darn well be able to hold a fall or at least be ready to survive a long future of body weight rappels or it shouldn't be considered an anchor to begin with.
Have you ever heard the statment, "90% of Yosemite Valley climbers climb on only 10% of the routes"? We got a sport here with tons of Donny types out there whether we like it or not, just go do Royal Arches or Cathedral Peak on a weekend if you aren't convinced yet (the controversial cathedral peak bolts are a whole nother subject there). These established routes are just that, established! Yosemite climbs on a whole aren't crowded, even El Cap isn't that bad if you take the top 10 popular routes off the list. Go get on Yosemite Point Buttress or the Arrow Chimney and you'll be lucky to see anyone; leave the hordes to the "established" congo lines. If it takes a few extra bolts to help them not epic that's fine with me. IMO, lately more "average" valley climbers than not refuse to do any moderate approaches or descents unless the route is called Snake Dike.
"The number of bolts on a route should not be added to. Period."
Just because the FA did it one way doesn't mean they did it perfect. Is it not established ethics that as long as it is okay with the FA party, adding an additional bolt or 2 in a few spots is alright I.E. Snake Dike. Rap routes and anchors like RA or the Nose are their own "routes" when put in reasonably; call it the 1st Descent eh?. Out of 7 Royal Arches climbs, anytime I've gone down the gully there is always a "group" eager to follow us down. I've heard plenty of "epic" stories of people getting down the next morning, even from those using the rap route. If people are taking 24 plus hours to do Royal Arches with the rap route do you think they are going to fair well doing the NDG in the dark? I'd bet YOSAR doesn't object ot having that route there.
With modern technology. I'm failing to see your point of anyone having to rap off bunk anchors besides pure cheap budget concerns. The debate of wheter or not to add a bolt where before a piton or tree was established is a different discussion, but should we still replace "established" piton anchors with only pitons in 2005?
Minerals Wrote:
"Sounds like you have just described an indoor climbing gym. Great, just keep that crap inside!!!"
Wow pretty high and mighty refering to all indoor climbers as crap their bud. Did you not realize that the majority of modern climbers, even the "pro's" originated from or at least climb part time indoors? Are you calling most of the climbers that travel to Yosemite every summer crap? Better watch your mouth around here next season. We all got to work together, it seems us evil gym climbers are here to stay, the answer you are looking for is a word called "compromise"...
-Hal
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
In the old days (pre-1980), a lot of routes, especially on Middle C., had really sketchy anchors. I did a stack of first ascents and early repeats on Middle and on the DNB, Freewhellin, Quicksilver, Paradise Lost and many others, and I often feared for my life because the belays were so poor, sometimes just one pin or one 1/4 inch bolt backed up with wires. When there was little traffic, perhaps this was okay. But once the masses hit Yosemite, the only viable tactic was to replace the mank lest folks would start auguring in by the dozens. Same goes for many short free climbs that featured a few old pegs threaded with fifty old slings. There's perhaps no perfect way to do any of this, but it's gotta get done somehow.
JL
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 1, 2005 - 12:09am PT
|
Hal,
What a perfect segue your post is for what I will now say:
I do not belive, as you and Matt both seem to do, that the FA party holds perpetual rights over routes they establish. Though many people think this, I believe that a better ethic is that of the best ascent. For instance, when Bachar climbed past Jardine's bolts on Crimson Cringe and then chopped them, he established a better ascent of that route: he raised the bar, and it remained where he set it until someone lowered it just a little by replacing one of Ray's bolts on the undercling. Though I cannot say that replacing that bolt was unethical, I think it was kind of lame, since the route had seen countless ascents without it. The FA party IMHO, should be allowed to alter things on a route for a limited period of time; perhaps until the route gets a second ascent or until they come down and say, "There. We just put up a route, it's called so-and-so" But to say that some guy who first climbed a route ten or twenty years ago can say, "let's bolt it every two feet!" and have that be acceptable is preposterous. Once the route has been established and repeated in good style it is no longer up to the FA. Isn't that a better ethic? Sure if the FA rapped off of a rotten chockstone, and that has deteriorated further or fallen out, then by all means find another anchor. But to add bolts when the anchor is in the condition the FA left it? I say No Way
As for people who take 24hrs to do the RA, maybe they should start on something easier. I do not think that any route deserves to be brought down to the level of the cattle who have never bothered to learn to climb properly, just because they might enjoy it. They will enjoy it more if they have built up to it, done many shorter routes first as practise, perhaps even agonised over it, and then finally gone for it when they were reasonably sure they could get up it in decent style. There would be a lot less epics if people waited until something was within their reach before going up on it. Isn't that a better ethic?
As for gyms, I think they are the single worst thing that has happened to our sport, for they have brought hordes of people to the crags who would not be there otherwise. I by no means advocate that anyone should not be allowed to climb-the very thought of that sort of control is repugnant to me-but I do wish that if the gym climbers find they can't quite step up to the plate they would all have the decency to quit climbing.
Newsflash, Gymmies: Nothing personal, you are probably all very nice people, but you are not wanted. If you stay away from the park I promise I will not come to your gyms. Deal?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Wow!
Are you serious Ben? From reading your posts I believe you are. But ... I’m blown away!
Oh well, it’s your nightmare .... not mine .....
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 1, 2005 - 12:45am PT
|
Largo,
If sketchy pro was OK then, it should be OK now. Just think, with the current available arsenal of offset nuts and cams; with friends now in quarter sizes, with cams almost microscopic, what was once sketchy might now be bomber. Did the FA place a 1/4" bolt? replace it with one that will hold 5500 pounds! But please don't take away the modern climber's chance to do these sketchy routes in the style that they were put up. Maybe you're looking back down the long years of experience and saying, "Man, we did some dumb things!" I'm looking forward still to many years of dumb things, 'cause I've hardly had a chance to get started on them yet. And when I've done all the dumb things I can stand, I want to take my child to Middle Cathedral and say, "Check it out, little one. Here is where your daddy stepped up to the plate." and "Here is where your daddy couldn't step up to the plate and had to reverse a dicey mantle to get back to his pro and bail." And she'll say, "Gimme that rack of flimmity-flams. I wanna do it too." And with a hard rough hand I'll wipe a tear out of my eye.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 1, 2005 - 12:50am PT
|
I'm afraid, Werner, that I am in dead earnest. Part of me wants to say, "Forget the rock. It will be much easier to be nice to everybody." But I cannot do that, for Telling It Like It Is is more important than putting on a thin patina of civility while everything I love the most gets flushed down the toilet of modernization
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Yea I know Ben, not only do you tell it like it is but you also live it too. It just kinda hurts me a little to see you so upset your always in very good spirits normally.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 1, 2005 - 01:14am PT
|
Thanks, DMT, for your gracious opinion of my ethics. But you misunderstand just slightly. I do not think it unethical to climb with pro a route that has been freesoloed: I think it unethical to add bolts to a route that has gone without them. The big issue here is bolts; removable gear like cams and nuts leaves very little, if any, trace, so your climbing a route with those will not affect the experience of subsequent parties. It's simple and beautiful. Climb on, have fun, but leave the drill at home unless you're doing FAs (or replacing responsibly).
It is bedtime. Good night
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
Ben your posting shows clearly that your just a pompous ass and asses like you are the worst thing that has happend to our sport. For you to declare Yosemite some exclusive climbing area is arrogant to say the least. Should we rename it Benwah Valley??? Because you were born twenty years to late to experience the Valley without the crowded crags full of gym climbers that aren't welcome by your special ass doesn't allow you to blame them for your petty problems. Climbers taking 24hrs on RA is a problem for you??? Your really are a schmuck to put then down. As far as adding bolts to free routes that had them chopped before the Cringe is a good example of were they weren't needed so who cares if one was added? Just pass it and show these gym climbers some sack.
Are the bongloads to much for you or are you sober when you imply failure is somehow unethical? Wake up and take another bongload and explain how failures of yours are just peachy and somehow ethical. Oh you must be one of the special few that never fail and can claim Yosemite your very own so everyone else go away. You and Bryan Law should be held up as icons for the chimp-ass fairy tales written on this thread. It was really news to me that you were the gatekeepers and ethic police of Yosemite, what as#@&%e were you two jerks born out of.
"I do not believe ...... that the first ascent party has perpetual rights over routes they establish."
What you posted above doesn't jibe with that drool??? So with those standards why should you care what ASCA does? Your circular thought brings it all back to leave it the f*ck alone and go climbing, you aren't the one to tell others how, when or where to climb so STFU and allow ASCA to do their thing. If you don't like those big bolts and hangers maybe you should be the tough guy and not clip them.
If you were really as special as you think you are you would just go cordless and STFU but here you are whining and telling people how,when and where to climb?? Just because you consider yourself some kind of ethics "keeper of the flame" I can't pass up the opportunity to tell you what an egotistical jerk you are, it sucks you even climb.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
ben-
for all your posturing and fatalistic cows-are-falling-from-above rhetoric, it's almost as if you think the valley is about to become a sport clip destination. are you noticing that the only discussion anyone else is having with you is about the safety of anchors, and the utility of those that were/are used for rappell, while your comments keep going back toward midpitch protection? stop equating the 2 issues.
it strikes me that when you count the odd beefy anchor bolts that may offend you at this cragg or that are all tallied up, it's gonna total about 3 bolts, simply because the majority of anchor situations are straight-forward and generally don't inspire such controversey. not that 3 bolts are no problem at all, but let's keep some perspective in the conversation.
IMHO, the problem w/ your own "best style" ethics, as you proclaim them here, is that they don't extrapolate very well. the free soloist example posted above is the obvious end point to the discussion, and the fact is that your argument would advocate for the right of peter croft or someone just as rad to chop every bolt they felt was superfluous to their ropeless ascent, doesn't that trouble you? cause that's what you are advocating.
why aren't you griping about the "grid bolting" of trade routes on el cap? what about all those slammer anchors? what are you gonna tell your daughter about that? ("listen honey, no need to step up if you are gonna haul..." ?). it seems like la cosita is small potatoes in comparison. maybe you just expect that no one would even give you a listen if you were to suggest that those el cap trade routes should all have anchors that are "comperable" to those of the FA? start preaching left and right about that and at least you will be consistent.
and who says the FA looses their rights to the line? you? that seems a bit like having your cake and eating it too. maybe you should poll the FA'ists and see what they think of that? (i like an idea of karl's, about creating a data base of the FA's opinions and intentions, since you won't be able to just call these old dads forever!) aside w/ issues of propiety, the main problem i see is this: if you can argue about the style of an FA being too well protected, why can't you argue about a climb being too poorly protected? the fact is, either one is just a subjective judgement by others, after the fact. you are all for it, so long as you happen to agree w/ the judgement, but that may not always be the case, what then? (the best style according to whom?)
their is a reason they call it the "FA ethic", and it alone avoids the slippery slope of subjective discussion by those who follow. if you really do fear the wholesale retrobolting of climbs in the valley and elsewhere, the last thing you should do is to f*#k w/ the FA ethic- if you make it flexible when you see fit, why can't everyone else? they make motorcycle riders wear helmets now, why? because it's safer that way, and it costs the public less. if the protection can be revised w/out the permission of the FA, and that were to become the standard, what would happen if the government someday steps in to regulate climbing in national parks? think they will let you have R or X rated climbs?
pandora's box- at least that is the best argument i have heard in favor of the "FA ethic"
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
re."Newsflash, Gymmies: Nothing personal, you are probably all very nice people, but you are not wanted. If you stay away from the park I promise I will not come to your gyms. Deal? "
Nope! See ya in the Valley.
|
|
wildone
Social climber
the little ditch
|
|
Nice posts, matt and dingus //\
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 1, 2005 - 12:42pm PT
|
Ballaorama, and Matt, too,
Sounds like you're the ones in need of a few bongloads. I am not advocating pushing my ethics by force onto anyone. That I is why I am discussing them in this forum; I wish for people to voluntarily see things my way and agree with me and keep things the way I like them. Is that selfish? sure. But you want things the way you like them, too. Otherwise you wouldn't be all het up and posting imprecations at me.
I am all against the gridbolting of El Cap, now that you mention it. I have moaned about the added bolts to the Salathe wall many many times. I think that every manky 1/4 bolt on every wall should be replaced by a fatty, but if the anchor only had one bolt, then there should only be one bolt there forever. I dislike these twenty-bolt belays.
Though I do not advocate it very strongly, I would not be bummed to see the "best ascent" ethic established, where a freesoloist could chop all bolts and make people step up to the bar he raised. It would keep me off tons of routes, but the sport of climbing would be a prouder thing for it.
At the end of it all, Matt, La Cosita is really small potatoes-but it is one place where the problem occurs, so it's a good place to begin. Besides, while you go on and on about safe anchors, how safe are bolts that do not have the nuts snugged down tight? I will again repeat my two requests to the ASCA:
1) Replace anchors only at the location of the original.
2) make sure you're henchmen know how to place bolts before giving them gear.
For those of you who think I am pompous, pontificating, snobbish, selfish and maybe just a big jerk: I am! I am even a snob at people who aren't snobbish enough for me.
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
If you follow through with any of the jackass ideas of yours, best ascent crap, I promise to hunt you down and kick your little elitist ass, not to mention break your fingers so you will never climb again. Make a note to yourself that if you chop bolts to make others climb at your standard you have crossed a line that you will regret. Once again I can't help but ask why do you think you can tell others how and at what level to climb at??? You need your ass kicked really bad and you are idiot and obviously think you are something special. Also you think you know the history of what you spew about, you don't know jack. Chop more bolts for your silly ego and you will pay dearly you looooser. In the first post of yours you ask if ASCA gets out of line, well you are way out of line and not by any mistake. ASCA may have made some mistakes because we don't live in a perfect world, your mistake is claiming to be on a higher level and if you do what you preach you better look over your shoulder. Snob climbers like you telling others to stay away from the Valley?? Piss-off bitch.
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
re."That I is why I am discussing them in this forum;"
No you're not. Declaring matter of factly who should and should not be allowed to climb in Yosemite and demanding that they follow your self imposed standards is NOT a discussion. In fact, nothing you have written would lead one to believe that you are remotely interested in a discussion.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
So the two side’s dispute there particular views
In the court of law the two sides are presented to the judge/jury. Now who really owns this rock and who really is the judge?
Surely not us ....?????
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
so i guess this ballo-rena guy just likes to pick fights and talk smack? whatever.
ben, i think your heart is in the right place, but again, to accept a given approach you need to explore where that aproach would take us all. no one out there is interested in being kept off of climbs.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
And .... I'm terribly afraid I'm seeing an "elitist attitude" from you Ben.
I thought the elitist sets the example on his actions and respects the rest.
Example; The Crimson Cringe
We did this climb for a while (with those bolts that you referenced Bachar chopping) without belaying there. One day John decides to chop them.
Big fu-cking deal! It didn’t up the ant ante anything whatsoever except remove two pieces of metal.
It’s not the bolts it’s the vision and spirit of the ascent.
Now I free soloed up to those fu-cking bolts and I could have chopped sh#t too.
What the fu-ck would’ve that proved? That’s right, absolutely fu-cking nothing.
|
|
the Fet
Trad climber
Loomis, CA
|
|
I love a good bolting flame war.
The US citizens own the rock. The climbing community establishes what is acceptable, this thread is part of that process.
My 2 cents. Moving an bolted anchor to a location that makes more sense is acceptable if done right.
The first acent style or more specifically the spirit of the first ascent should be repsected and emulated. After all no one is going to siege the Nose over 18 months right?
Adding bolts to the Salathe or Nutcracker(unless it's a variation) is quite lame. Those routes are a testament to RR's style and shouldn't be altered. I would support anyone chopping bolts on those.
But the Nose is a different story. I believe WH had no problems with the rap route, etc. Of course it shouldn't be grid bolted but shiny two bolt rap anchors are in character with that route IMO.
The idea of removing bolts because someone could free solo a climb isn't proud it's ludicrous.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
The US citizens own the rock.
Did they make it create it, You're dreaming man. The U.S. citizens don't own sh-it!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
It is interesting following a Valley bolting thread. You folks have a fairly unique environment, history, and ethics. Most places don't have a descent ethic...
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
Interesting thread......It is not just YOS that has gone through these growing pains. Ben, I support your ethics with the exception of replacing mank, especially on rapp routes. If I am unworthy to do a route, I will stay off of that route. But as far as mank goes let me relate this story to you....
In the early 80's in Indian Creek there was a first ascencionist who snagged all the best lines on all the cliffs (well maybe not all but a large number..). On many routes he left one machine bolt 1/2", hammered into a 3/8" hole for a rapp anchor. When asked why he put one in, it was all he felt was needed and also he was in a hurry. On some of these routes when my partners and I did them, we backed them up...On others, it became the last guys "adventure" to rapp off the single bolt. I had absolutely no problem with backing these up, it was my own ass that was being saved and I did not blame the FAist. It was not his responsibility to make the place safe for all others, in those days the place was still an adventure.
I think it was the late 80's when a really great fellow, with a family died when one of these bolts pulled out as he was getting ready to rapp off of the Cat Wall. The single bolt pulled out of the hole. The guy was very expereinced and had done the FA of one of the Torres Towers. His kids lost their father. Can we put a price on the addition of one more anchor to back that one up? Is it ethically better to risk ones life by not drilling one tiny hole in the rock for the rapp anchor? Think about how your own daughter may respond to this dilemma, and no offense, you may be brave and hold ethics in high regard, but it doesnt matter what the hell you are willing to risk, I doubt your daughter (when she is old enough to decide) would risk her father over such an issue....
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Then, lets not forget the Salathe wall or fail to mention the Steck Salathe', which now have more bolts in them than the FA parties drilled."
The SS is a different route today than that climbed by the FA party. Far different. Yes, bolts were added: to belays, and two bolts placed on the face pitch where the face was previously protected with pins, long since rusted away in place.
Each and every 3/8" bolt I placed on the Steck-Salathe' was discussed and approved by the man who put up the route.
The project was, in fact, suggested by Steck.
Based on what I've read here, Ben, I don't think that will matter one bit to you.
But it certainly matters to me.
Brutus
P.S. Don't go holding the ASCA responsible for Steck-Salathe', either. ASCA was not involved in that project.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Now that post brings up a question for you Brutus - you replaced pins with bolts; why not replace the pins with more of the same on SS? And maybe a few of you might comment in general on bolts vs. pins where pin placements are available; and on swapping out pins for bolts in general. My personal approach is gear, then pins if possible, and bolts as a last resort...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
why not replace the pins with more of the same on SS?
Because the idiots that come to Yosemite see a pin and immediately think “Booty that’s mine now! Let me take it for me”
I was up on El Cap fixing once with Bridwell when some dip – sh-it down below was removing a pin that we had put in to hold the fixed line in place. I yell down at him WTF you doing and he runs away.
Do you guys actually think out things or just want to rant about everything?
|
|
wildone
Social climber
the little ditch
|
|
Classic, werner.
So, how ya doin' on that book?
|
|
John F. Kerry
Social climber
Boston, MA
|
|
...I think it was the late 80's when a really great fellow, with a family died when one of these bolts pulled out as he was getting ready to rapp off of the Cat Wall. The single bolt pulled out of the hole. The guy was very expereinced and had done the FA of one of the Torres Towers...
Good example. According to BenWah's stated ethics, that guy got what he deserved. He shouldn't have been on the route if he wasn't willing to risk death on the descent. Tough tittie for his young daughter, too. I don't agree with this, I'm just noting that by what Ben has been endorsing, there's no logical escape from this conclusion.
Everyone's a hardman until bodies are broken and the bones are sticking out.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Now that post brings up a question for you Brutus - you replaced pins with bolts; why not replace the pins with more of the same on SS?"
I didn't replace the pins in kind, because the pin placements were no longer usable, either for pins or clean pro. Routes change, and the SS has changed more than most over the years.
Bolting in general: I too would much rather place clean pro than pins, and pins than bolts, and try to follow this ethic on FAs and FFAs except where it would interfere with my continued survival.
Nor do I add bolts to existing routes except with the FA permission, with one caveat: On walls I have occasionally found myself facing old, corroded mank bolts at belays, and I did not have the tools to pull them to replace. In these situations, I have occasionally added a bolt, but I do not endorse such actions. Having learned from my own mistakes, I usually carry bolt removal equipment with me on walls these days. When I can get out of my rocking chair long enough to stagger up a wall, that is.
Brutus
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Besides, .... fixed pins loosen and fall out over time.
Anyways Mank with mank = more mank
WTF, .... what a screwed up conversation, people here preach there is no God and no soul and then preach all this bolt nonsense!
I'm outa here ....... ha ha ha ha
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
Two times I stated Ben has no right to tell people when or where or how to climb and for me this is the subject. To portray those that disagree with him as unethical is wrong. Go climb and do whatever but when you start to dictate how others climb you need your head examined. My argument is these chumps shouldn't have any say what you do in life and that includes climbing. So if ben and friends think they are rock cops and tell others not to go to Yosemite it goes beyond a conversation about ethics, it becomes a conversation about idiots that wish to control others. And Matt if you think my threats are empty just stay tuned to look at Bens face and when its severely rearranged you will know I had A visit with the bitch, I know who he is.
|
|
mike hartley
climber
|
|
I'm only going to comment on the "replacing a pin with a bolt" issue and only in regards to freeclimbs. Decades ago I used to think that you should always replace a pin with a pin when possible because it worked with the rock's natural features. I gave that up long ago about the same time I gave up wearing a swami and using goldline. If everyone carried a hammer on freeclimbs then maybe the "pin for a pin" might make sense. But since 99.99% of all trad climbers that I've seen never carry a real hammer that pin is going to get weaker with each passing freeze/thaw cycle. So the 1st "X" number of ascents have good pro and everyone thereafter gets less than. I'd much rather see an "Olevsky" chip job that creates a clean placement or a bolt rather than pro that doesn't match the reality of how climbers actually climb these days. Pins for free pro (not including drilled angles) seem like a relic from another era to me.
|
|
Khun Duen Baad
climber
Retirement
|
|
I think in any bolting debate it is important that everybody recognizes the difference between style and ethics. Style affects only your ascent, ethics affects every ascent that will ever follow. The whole bolting situation (not to mention the systematic regression of standards in general) in Yosemite today is too depressing to talk about in depth, unfortunately
Look at Yosemite today; NOTHING important happens there. NOTHING. What happened to the days when people were running laps on Midnight Lightning barefoot? What about when everybody had done Hangdog Flyer? How about when 10.96 was a neccessary classic?
We've truly entered a dark era when the Raven flies around telling people what to do (doesn't most mythology recognize that as a bad omen) and the last hopes of stopping a yoga-crazed maniac and the renegade band of Drillers from overwhelming all that was created sacred lie in "Minerals", AKA The UniChopper, and a Bible thumping Christian who seems to be the only one willing to defend to soul of what climbing is supposed to be, which is mostly both hard and dangerous. It's rock climbing for God's sake, it's supposed to be difficult!!
Any route was not a route until somebody climbed up it, in any STYLE, and called it X route. After that ascent, any permanent change to the first ascentionist's route is UNETHICAL, because at this point it is an existing route with a specific set of parameters that must be met by any potential ascentionist. You have to get from A to B without adding a C and a D.
The bottom line should be this: IF YOU CAN'T CLIMB IT, DON'T!
|
|
the Fet
Trad climber
Loomis, CA
|
|
How can you bring up the definition of style and ethics and then confuse the two?
e.g. "the soul of what climbing is supposed to be, which is mostly both hard and dangerous. It's rock climbing for God's sake, it's supposed to be difficult!!"
The soul of what climbing is supposed to be is a personal choice of style not ethics.
RR once said something along the lines of "I never did anything out of control or dangerous".
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Any route was not a route until somebody climbed up it, in any STYLE, and called it X route. After that ascent, any permanent change to the first ascentionist's route is UNETHICAL, because at this point it is an existing route with a specific set of parameters that must be met by any potential ascentionist. You have to get from A to B without adding a C and a D."
Bull. Truth is, some routes I've put up are, in their original condition, unsafe. Sometimes I was just plain stupid, but lucky enough to live to tell about it. If, in retrospect I go back and make the route safer for myself and those who follow, who are you to tell me I shouldn't or that I'm being unethical?
Brutus
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
This whole discussion isn’t about keeping people from climbing in Yosemite, no matter where they come from and what there abilities are. It’s about respecting the original routes and the preservation of history. If we are going to arbitrarily add chicken bolts and make everything easier and safer, then what do we have left in the end? What controls the lower limits that these routes may fall to? If we are going to make something easier and safer, how much easier and safer do we get to make it? Who gets to decide? As Matt said earlier, it’s all about The First Ascent Ethic.
Well, I just got off the phone with Jim Bridwell. What a super-cool guy. I asked if it was ok to quote him on some of the things that we discussed and he said that it was ok with him. Here is just a little bit of what he said (and I’m not making this up).
To start off, I mentioned what I was calling about and said that I knew that he was upset about what happened to the Aquarian Wall. He immediately stopped me and said that he wasn’t upset, he was PISSED, and there is a difference between being upset and being pissed. (We have discussed these issues before.) I then asked him what he thought about all of the bolt additions to Yosemite wall routes. He continued on about the Sea of Dreams and how we need to preserve the history and legacy of routes. “Climbing isn’t for the masses”, he said. “Americans don’t have any courage.”
He told me about the time when he was guiding Dihedral Wall back in the 70’s and how he was able to clean out 33 pins (on lead) because “the person before wasn’t good enough to get them out.” According to Bridwell, that’s how you build up your pin rack.
Bridwell also stated that he favors clean up missions like what we did on Zodiac much more than what the ASCA is currently doing to Yosemite wall routes. And for those of you who are still skeptical about what we did, go talk to any of the locals in the Valley or any of the guides that work for YMS. I have had nothing but support for the Zodiac clean up from the local Yosemite climbing community (aside from the proprietor of this site and his accomplice).
When I mentioned gym climbers and their feelings towards being able to climb in Yosemite, Bridwell said that gym climbers should stay in gyms and if they want to climb in Yosemite, then they have to step up and climb the routes in the manner in which they were put up, without adding bolts or bringing the routes down to their level. He went off about safety and how climbing isn’t supposed to be safe – never was and never should be.
Dingus, I mentioned your call to him, which he didn’t exactly remember and I brought up the route Absolutely Free Center, which he did remember. I think that your portrayal of him is not quite accurate. He remembers quite a lot and does care (VERY MUCH) about the addition of bolts – most definitely. As far as rap bolts are concerned, he doesn’t view them as he does protection bolts on lead but if there is a tree to rap from or a horn to sling (Geek Towers…) then that is much better than placing bolts.
I’ll have more to say on this subject in my ‘diatribe’ when it's finished…
ps – if you don’t see the slightest bit of humor in the American Chopper name (stolen from the Discovery Channel TV show…) then maybe you are missing something. One of my bros from this site even sent me an American Chopper hat for the fun of it – pretty cool looking. I’m not high and mighty nor am I some sort of bolt chopping hero. I am also not a bolting or bolt chopping authority nor a rock cop. I am just very passionate (sometimes to the point where my emotions get the better of me) about the preservation of Yosemite wall routes and respecting the FAist’s style and vision. Bridwell is the real hero.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"As far as rap bolts are concerned, he doesn’t view them as he does protection bolts on lead but if there is a tree to rap from or a horn to sling (Geek Towers…) then that is much better than placing bolts."
And if the bolts keep the tree from being girdled or killed?
Brutus
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
All of you are absolutely stupid for getting that worked up about a few pieces of metal in the rock. What a bunch of fools.
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
re."When I mentioned gym climbers and their feelings towards being able to climb in Yosemite, Bridwell said that gym climbers should stay in gyms and if they want to climb in Yosemite, then they have to step up and climb the routes in the manner in which they were put up, without adding bolts or bringing the routes down to their level."
Excuse me Minerals, but what the hell are yout talking about? What exactly is a "gym climber" and how do you know what their "feelings" are? For that matter, how many so called "gym climbers" do you know that are adding or chopping bolts?
You usually make some good points but this nonsense about "gym climbers" is just ridiculous. I know plenty of amazing climbers who have climbed in Yosemite for much longer than you and I see them in a climbing gym all the time. What exactly is this notion of segregating climbers as "gym climbers" or "non-gym climbers" supposed to accomplish?
btw. You clearly have a bief with Nanook. He won't go near a climbing gym. Is he a "gym-climber"? I learned to climb outside on real rock about 15 years ago but this past year or so with a new baby in the family I've definitely spent much more time pulling down on plastic than real rock. I guess that makes me a "gym climber" right? Who the hell cares! When I get the chance I'll climb in Yosemite on whatever route I can scrape my way up and I don't give a sh#t if I don't measure up in Bridwell's eyes. The day I'm climbing to preserve a legacy instead of climbing for myself is the day I'm done with this silly little game.
|
|
Loom
climber
the bathroom
|
|
Ball Aroma said:
"Piss off Minerals and I hope to see your sorry ass at the crags for some fresh blood on my knuckles,"
"I promise to hunt you down and kick your little elitist ass, not to mention break your fingers so you will never climb again"
"if you think my threats are empty just stay tuned to look at Bens face and when its severely rearranged you will know I had A visit with the bitch,"
"I know who he is"
Most of us know who Minerals is and who Ben is; who the hell are you BallAroma, or are you too ball-less to say. You just going to talk smack and make threats? Maybe you'd like to sneak up on Ben or Bryan from behind this summer?
Arguing passionately is one thing, but when you start making physical threats you're going too far.
Scott Lennox
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
Brutus, seems like it would depend on the situation – if it makes sense, yes; if not, no. You’ll have to ask him about his particular views on trees; that’s something that I didn’t ask.
David, I guess I used the term “gym climber” a little too loosely. Yes, you are right, there are many very good and experienced gym climbers, some of whom I know. I actually have a couple or three hundred plastic holds but don’t have a place for a wall right now. I’ve also helped to design and build two free-standing backyard climbing walls. “Gym climber” was just the term that Bridwell and I used to discuss the issue of inexperienced climbers or climbers who are used to the indoor environment and lack outdoor experience. I apologize if I offended you by the misuse of that term – because you climb indoors or in a gym doesn’t mean that you are a gumby or a “gym climber.” My mistake. I used that term incorrectly and stand corrected. Thanks.
I do not have issues with Nanook; I have issues with what he does.
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
No worries...guess that was my diatribe.
You didn't offend me. I'm very secure in my mediocre climber status/ability level. However, I meet wide eyed gumby climbers in the gym all the time who are preparing to hit Yosemite, JoshuaTree or RedRocks for the first time. You can't stop them. They're coming whether you like it or not. I think it's better to encourage them to be responsible and respectful than it is to just dimiss them as Ben has done in this thread. That's a recipe for the very problems you're describing.
|
|
mike hartley
climber
|
|
Blindly bowing to the “1st ascent is sacred” rule is nice and clean, shows respect to the FA, and is bonehead simple to understand - but its incredibly simple minded also, at least when it comes to public land. It gives complete power to the FA with absolutely no responsibilities what so ever!. The guy can use junk hardware of the lowest grade, place bolts that avoid all of the natural stances, contrive runouts like placing one bolt on a 150’ face pitch (but it isn’t freesoloing because he trailed a rope), and do an all around crap job and everyone forever more has to live with it. To rigidly hold to the line that every new route is an inviolable work of art is utterly ludicrous. It lacks balance and logic. There has to be some minimal quality standard that the FA has to adhere to if they are to forever “own” a piece of public land – like say for instance rap anchors that will hold more than body weight :-)
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
Mike, you are a wise man.
Was anybody else impressed that minerals got Bridwell to stroke him?
|
|
Loom
climber
the bathroom
|
|
Yah dude,
The way Mike got you to stroke him?
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Was anybody else impressed that minerals got Bridwell to stroke him?"
Not really.
Nor do I put Bridwell up on any pedistal as the Final Authority on Yosemite.
Last time I spoke with him, he was still advocating tossing sh*t bags from the walls rather than using a pipe bomb or burrito bag.
OK gang -- I know this has been kicked around before, but ...
Cookie Monster? Comments?
Brutus
|
|
chainsaw
Trad climber
CA
|
|
Amazing how people go on and on about first ascent rights. You do not own the mountain and dont you dare tell me how to climb it. I find that the cavalier attitude of people who get bent that climbing is becoming safer reflects something disconcerting: you are climbing bumbs with nothing to loose. Dont ask people who have families, responsibilities and a life outside of climbing to die on behalf of your looser ego trip. Some people like to brag about how dangerously they climb. Unfortunately many of them are no longer with us. You cowboy hot-doggers may get away with alot of dangerous stuff. Most all but the greatest of climbers with this attitude simply dont know what they are doing. Reckless foolhardy climbers may get alot of props for having big balls but in truth they simply dont realize the true nature of the force: You mess with the dark side and you may get killed.
Too many of our friends have discovered this the hard way and their voices will never be heard on this topic or anything else for that matter. Dont get me wrong, I am totally against bolting trad routes that dont need additional gear. But replacing old bolts is absolutely necessary. Especially in this new era when many inexperienced novices are out leading and trusting those bolts. We may not like that they really dont know what they are doing. But to let them fall to the deck as a lesson in "I told you so" is cold hearted, indifferent and selfish. If you want to scare yourself to death, go FA the thousand or so untried lines in the Tuolumne river canyon. Meanwhile, our kids' safety comes first.
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
"Yah dude,
The way Mike got you to stroke him?"
LOL! Not really the same thing. I don't know Mike, nor have I ever conversed with him, he just made a very intelligent post.
BTW, I just got off the phone with Royal Robbins and he said all these people bickering about FA rights and bolting have their head up their asses, including Bridwell. He said that he has seen the light about his militant actions in the past and realizes he was wrong. He thinks that things should not be made so safe that they are sterile routes but that ridiculously unsafe sh#t should be fixed.
|
|
HalHammer
Trad climber
CA
|
|
It comes down to anchors. IMO , no route should have an anchor on any pitch that isn't capable of holding a fall. You can make the gnarliest run outs or sketch face climbs, but the anchor shouldn't fail when you do take that 50 footer. That is the minimum standard. If you want to do a route on shitty anchors to theoretically make a "time bomb" line for people to risk it all I say you've waived your sacred FA privlidges in this particular regard due to your poor judgment or otherwise lack of equipment. Others should be allowed to upgrade anchors to the minimum standard that any rap anchor will hold more than body weight and any needed fixed anchors on the route will hold a lead fall.
Otherwise you might as well free solo or simul climb, it's safer than belaying off sh#t anchors. That is an unacceptable objective hazard, the only thing lamer would be to place bunk rivets or bolts intentionally. If you are going to drill or fix gear, better damn well do it right or don't do it at all. That means 2 bolts = an anchor on a blank face. If you need to take such extreme risks in climbing then get into hardcore alpinism or start climbing routes on choss piles like the stuff above camp 4.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
mr. minerals-
interesting comments (though not unexpected) from the bird. my only complaint is the same on i had for ben earlier, no one in this conversation was ever discussing adding protection bolts to any climb, so i fail to see any argument there. take even mr. greg barnes, whose efforts you guys have kinda singled out, didn't he chop the bolts where good book takes a #4 cam? (maybe i have that wrong?)
anyway, there is plenty of smoke to be fanned if you start talking about adding mid-pitch protection bolts, and then you can start calling out the "gym climbers" and blame "them" for the crowding of the craggs and the degredation of ethics, and even the high price of gass if you like, but now the water is all muddied and no one has decided anything or swayed anyone.
to that end, i want to highlight one line from your post:
As far as rap bolts are concerned, he [bridwell] doesn’t view them as he does protection bolts on lead but if there is a tree to rap from or a horn to sling (Geek Towers…) then that is much better than placing bolts.
it seems as if he is basically in agreement w/ werner:
Well, sometimes the first ascent does not bring all the goodies for making good permanent anchors because it’s too much stuff to bring. Most of the FA I’ve done were like that. I figured the later ascents would fix all the mank.
it seems to me that all of that specifically conflicts w/ what ben wrote:
What is wrong with being safe on the pitch and having a sketchy rap? Pointless? perhaps, but climbing itself is pointless. You want to be safe? Go play tiddlywinks. But be sure you wear your goggles
that attitude is the only problem i have w/ anything, and i don't think every route needs a rap route, nor a way to bail from anywhere on the climb w/out leaving gear behind. however, in those instances where the way back down is just that, there needs to be a reliable way to accomplish that, and in realtive safety, even when the climbing itself is dangerous (i am picturing danO being lowered off of cave rock after that solo in the masters of stone video).
there is nothing bold or courageous or "old school" about rapping off of junk that may or may not hold you, it's just plain stupid. you may just as well smoke cigarettes...
=)
|
|
Link
Trad climber
Yosemite, CA
|
|
This is like someone stuck an M80 in the can of worms…
Here’s another worm:
When deciding whether or not to rebolt (or retro-bolt) a route, we all seem to agree that the first ascent party’s intentions should be considered. Some say basic safety should be a concern as well. Others throw convenience into the mix. What about the impact we’re having on the place itself?
If an anchor tree is being trashed, are bolts better? If a rap route means people won’t erode a hillside walking down the descent, is that better? How about moving bolts so that more than one route can share a mutual rap anchor? Are bolted rap anchors with chains “lower impact” than horns and trees slung with colorful webbing?
Cheers,
-Link
PS: Someone mentioned that the NPS should remove bolts placed on rescues. Just for the record, I agree, and I plan to remove a few such bolts this summer (as the person who placed them). Obviously there are some locations where such bolts should be left in place to facilitate future rescues, but beyond that the NPS aught to practice its preaching. I’m on it.
PPS: I can’t believe no one has mentioned the bolts on the last pitch of Arches (and I’m not talking about the rap anchor). It’s been at least six months since the last time we debated those…
|
|
Loom
climber
the bathroom
|
|
The fact is the crags are getting more and more crowded. I don't like it, but I accept it. We can go to more and more remote areas to escape, but that isn't always practical. Besides, the crowds will soon be following us there. There are many great routes that get very crowded because they are easy, well-known, easy to approach, classic lines or a combination of those things. Many of them I write off as unclimbable because they are almost always too crowded. So I go do other quality routes, but eventually the same will happen to them.
Parallelling this trend is the trend to dumb everything down and protect everyone from themselves. The reasoning goes like this, "How can you tell someone to not climb something if they're not willing to take the risk, when many of these poor bastards don't even know what the risks are." And the conclusion is, "well, I guess we'd better make it as safe and idiot proof as we can."
If everything operated the way Minerals and Ben are proposing then of course it would effect the climbing experience for all of us. But likewise what is happening through the current Disneyfication of climbing has just as profound an effect on everyone's climbing experience.
Some think that Ben, Bryan and others are all about wanting to tell or force others to climb their way; unsafely or not at all, thereby infringing on everyone elses ability to climb what they want, when they want, how they want, and how safely they want. But when people go beyond just replacing old FA bolts, they are making a decision to be a part of the force that is changing the very nature of what climbing means. (Chainsaw, check your Joseph Campbell, going over to the dark side is all about letting yourself be incorporated by the system.) It starts out well-meaning, but it is a subtle, all-consuming and IMO very negative change.
This is a slippery slope, and slippery slopes need someone in charge or a set of rules or laws that most abide by. There was more of a consensus in the past which was enough. But as the numbers of climbers grows, and especially those many (most of whom learned in the gyms) for whom climbing ethics and style are just whispered hints of a rumor, consensus continues to atomize.
The message is going out that climbing is getting safer; everyone just needs to pitch in and make it even safer; soon it will be safe enough for anyone to climb anything they want. Eventually the park service may regulate it in Yos. Maybe routes in other areas will eventually have to pass safety inspections like other amusement parks.
I'll see you in the valley this summer, but I'll be spending more of my time on the trails and peaks. Yes, I dislike the increasing numbers, but much, much more than that I feel frustrated by the apologists and those who abet the accomodation of the hordes. The salesmen and the saviours are changing the very essence of climbing. One look at a SuperTopo tells me where Climbing is headed: precisely measured quantities. That was never what climbing or adventure meant to me; that seems more like the world of bowling, cruise ships, and gated communities.
Scott Lennox
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
My experience is that folks rise to the level of adventure that they are willing to tackle, and it has very little to do with anchors. When I look back at my adventures, they had very little to do with anchors and everything to do with everything else.
Since many folks hold to an ethic that takes the First Ascent party into consideration, I developed a proposal to collect information about First Ascender's ascents and attitudes about their creations. You can review this proposal, that's on the back burner, here
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=371902#371902
Some folks do their first ascents as public service, installing all the needed anchors in the process, looking to the future.
Some folks go have their adventure the fastest, funnest, scariest way possible. To go onsite something in a day, you can't take the time to place bolts where you can sling a tree instead. Many don't care if others later rig their handiwork for future crowds, others might.
After all, the first ascent party didn't have to worry about two parties rapping back through on the way down.
It's also true that it's easy, way easy, to find adventurous routes, free from crowds in Yosemite. Trying to nitpick the anchors on the trade routes is too Taliban for me.
Re: Bolts for pins. Pins place way faster than bolts and if I were doing an FA in a day, I'd slam in pins or use cams if I could. They are a poor long term solution in super popular areas, and make little difference to anyone. The first pitch of Central Pillar used to be anchored with pins. I never stressed about em when they were there, and didn't miss em when the bolts arrived. The real experience of climbing is so much more. When I want it to be more adventurous, I place less pro.
Ok, I have had a few anchor and bolt adventures:
Did the second ascent of Galactic Hitchhiker. Didn't bring a hammers. Between the second and third ascent of that route, I cleaned every single fixed angle (maybe 5-6) with my fingers. Sure glad I didn't rap on em, cause some were at anchors.
Years ago, I took a 35 footer, upside down and backwards off Freewheelin on Middle. I knocked out a front tooth, so we bailed. Was held by a rusty 1/4 bolt. I fell on some ball bearings on a runout after some 5.10 moves high on the route.
Years later, I went back for revenge and to tick that pitch and finish the route. I got to the run-out where I fell last time, but I couldn't find the bolt that held me. Finally I found a rusty stump! It had broken. I bailed again. Frankly, there was plenty of adventure without bolts that could have killed me (but were probably fine years ago when the FA guys did it)
Did I have less adventure than the FA guys? I bet I had more, since I suck so much worse at climbing!
Anyway, believe me when I say, folks are still having plenty of adventure climbing stuff like the Royal Arches. Many are afraid of the raps, others afraid of the gully. Let folks choose how much adventure they want to bite off. They will anyway. Climbing is more popular, it saves wear and tear on the gully. I've downclimbed Royal Arches in well under an hour. Is that the new standard?
It's too late to use the abilities of the elite in the sport to set the standard, and the elites mostly don't even want that. (not that I'm even close, it's easy to up the ante when you're climbing way below your max)
Peace
karl
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
I just got off the phone with Warren harding, he says you all suck and the more bolts the better.
|
|
WC
Trad climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
This dialog is a good and necessary one.
A few points that I think most of us can agree on:
1. We don't like erosion caused by poor descent trails.
2. We don't like multi-colored webbing decorations around trees and bushes that can easily be seen from the ground.
3. We don't like damage to said trees and bushes that can result from being rappelled off of.
4. We don't like bolts for convience sake.
5. We don't like bolts in places where clean gear can be used instead.
6. Most of us don't want to die while climbing. In other words, we would like to live to climb another day and time. (Because it is fun.)
So, if we (mostly) agree on so much, then where is the problem?
Well, it seems as though everyone's judgement on what is appropriate is different. There in lies the problem.
Peter Mayfield expressed his dissapointment in the multiple bolt anchors found on El Cap like this. He said that building a safe, intricate, belay anchor out of the gear you had on your harness was part of the fun and adventure of climbing El Cap. Now, that component is mostly gone.
I have never met Coiler or Minerals, however I believe that this is their point. (and that they are trying to keep routes from becoming junkyards) Part of climbing El Cap is creating a safe belay station that you can haul off of, sleep on, or where you can have a little private time with the poop tube. I believe that they are trying to prevent is a disney land type effect. (and I applaud them for this, of course they would probably rather that I just sent them beer and stopped typing now...)
I have never met Chris or Greg, but I believe that their initial intention behind supertopo was to provide up to date information on big wall routes in the valley. People (not everyone...) were still taking nailing equipment on routes that had gone clean and using said nailing equipment where they thought necessary. Chris (and his crew) did what I believe was a nice service for the climbing community by providing up to date information on specific rack for different routes. His topos also gave an amazing amount of pitch specific beta that made climbing these routes more efficient for the average joe, like me. Was it too much? Did they provide too much information? I am certainly not in a position to make that sort of accusation because I successfully used their information to attain certain climbing goals. Did El Cap suddenly get mobbed because of these topos? I don't have any factual data on this one, but I doubt that it made any measurable affect on climbing traffic. If anything, I think that their topos spread out the El Cap and valley climbing traffic, which is good.
It used to be that if you wanted beta on an El Cap route all you needed to do was cruise around camp 4 at night, or sit at the deli pretending to read and listen to the locals hype this route or that. (or watch them perform head jams on the girders that hold up the roof, now that was entertainment worth paying for...)
For the record, I have clipped every bolt I have ever climbed past. I have rapped from "convience stations" and from necessary ones. I have enjoyed the creative process involved in making a belay station out of what I happen to have left on my harness. I have pulled bad bolts and replaced them with new.
If you read all of this, you definitly deserve a prize.
Keep up the debate, it can only lead to a better standard.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
I just got off the phone with Warren harding, he says you all suck and the more bolts the better.
That’s right!!!
Now who’s that mofu-cker who pulled those bolts on the first pitch of the Gripper? Now that poor tree is dying. WTF, gad dang it, fu-cking screwball modern rock nuts!
Hypocrites that’s what all this sh-it is all about! Nothing but a bunch of Fu-cking Hypocrites! Save a fu-cking tree here and fu-ck up another one over there.
Save the fu-cking rock and fu-ck up everthing else!
Now who are you Ballaroama? The master magician threw down the hat and out popped Ballaroama.
He must be from the real old old school like it or not. It was not uncommon to see and hear that kind of talk. Justice was served at times on a plate of knuckle sandwich, yesiree.
Now we’ve evolved into a much kinder gentler types? The lawyers most likely had their hands in it. On the corner of Compton and Slauson you stare the wrong guy cross eyed you may find a bullet through your mind.
Now without Bridwell ever on the scene we’d never would of witnessed that wild side, the side where the fine line between crazy and sane were masterfully crafted.
Just kidding? Great thread, keep the dialog open ……….
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
I just got of the phone with Yvon Chouinard, he said if you don't make your own stuff and climb with it you suck and shouldn't be f*#king up the walls in Yosemite.
|
|
Loom
climber
the bathroom
|
|
AK,
I just got off the phone with your mom. She wants you to move back home because she thinks you can't take care of yourself anymore.)
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
I just got off the phone with the doctor who delivered loom, he said they did all that they could but loom pulled through and survived anyway.
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
Yeh, I see that you were born in a bathroom.
back to the subject at hand, I just got off a conferencecall with Galen Rowell, Dennis Hennek, and Doug Robinson, they all said that if you can't do it with nuts then don't do it. Said it worked for them on Half Dome in 1973.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I believe that SuperTopo has effected the numbers of people doing "SuperTopo routes". When the Tuolumne ST came out there were crowds of people doing Needle Spoon and Zee-Tree, but no one on Dike Route. This was because of the horrifying description of the Dike Route in the initial ST release. Before ST the only people going up Zee-Tree were soloers...
With over 2500 climbs in Yosemite Valley I'd be surprised if much more then 10% of them are climbed. It is such an amazing place for climbing, people coming in from far away with limited time want to do the "quality" routes, this limits the traffic to the "select" few appearing in various guides, ST among those. People come to do the "5 star" routes because they don't have the time to spend risking an adventure.
I agree with Karl that there is plenty of adventure out there, and many quality climbs which don't appear on any select list. I was out at the Little Wing area last saturday with Steve. It opened his eyes. "Wow, this must of been like the old days", well it was that day! rotten rock, loose, fractured, and incomplete information on the topos. A bit of a hike out there. No bolts at the tops of the climbs (at least the ones we did). We had a good adventure all by ourselves with no parking problem and no crowds. He was still wiping lichen out of his eyes on our drive out. There are lots of places like that, and even places yet to have routes put up on them; in the Valley. And you generally don't even have to hike very far to find them.
The popular routes do require some maintenance, Chris and Greg and others have done a real service in this regard through the ASCA. I believe they act in good faith and do not alter routes to "homogenize" the climbing experience. My guess is that if all you are seeing is the "ASCA" stamp on all the bolts you clip you have already chosen to homogenize your own experience by doing only the select climbs. High traffic routes have a higher probability of equipment failure actually being a serious problem. People have died because of equipment failure.
Maintaining the popular routes is not the same as totally reequiping a climb, like God's Creation over on Manure Pile, which now sports a whole lot more bolts then indicated on the Meyers' topo. Limiting yourself to the original clips would be a real pants filler.... the FA had some idea of what they wanted to do. Never done that climb? Gee, it doesn't show up in most lists of "climbs to do" unless you have the old yellow topo guide.
On the other hand, a climb like Just Do Do It, which has a recently reported accident in this forum, has a series of thin slick moves to get to the first bolt and a really bad fall potential with an uneven, rocky landing. Should that be reequiped to reduce the risk of injury? I don't think so.
For me a large part of climbing is connecting with the FA in some way. I like the history and I like the ideas that lead to creating the routes. It is an important part of the experience for me. So I like the climbs to be left as close to the original creation as possible. That isn't always possible, traffic alters the routes, things fall or are pushed off, things fall on the routes and alter them; routes age. Many people couldn't care less about these things, they just want to climb and not have to worry about dying, I can understand that.
There is plenty of room in the Valley for it all.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
Yo-
I can't say about chopping or adding bolts to existing routes--that's a dicey call and I doubt one-ethic-will-ever-fit-all. I did an early ascent of the Cringe with Lynn H. when the arch had a bolt and we clipped it. I also did the 1st free of Free Blast and we (Mike G.) removed bolts on the slab bit--meaning you either ran the 5.10 out off a bashie or you couldn't do the Salathea at all. Not our best moment, but it seemed funny at the time.
I do, however, have a strong feeling about many of the old and very bunk anchors we used to belay off. I don't consider haging off several very marginal wires behind an expando flake during the 2nd ascent of Freewheeling to be "stepping up to the plate," as was mentioned earlier on this thread. Same with belaying with one baby angle beat behind a wafer 1,200 feet up the DNB, or doing basically the same on Paradise Lost, Sachar Fredricks, and many others. I hated it then and only did so because we were so broke we couldn't afford to sink bolts at will, but had to "save" them for when we really needed them. That was just plain stupid. I knew it then and even moreso now. Not that you have to set chain anchors everywhere--far from it. Modern gear can allow for solid anchors where in years past you'd surely perish with anything but bolts. But going with mank on belays just to be "bold" seems absurd.
Now long runouts are a different matter. And yet, for the record, many of the previously bold runouts on Middle and other Valley formations have been totally brought down to scale with sticky rubber. On the first ascent of Stoner's Highway, I wore case-hardened, red PAs, and those runouts felt pretty harrowing. Later, I repeated the route in 1st generation Fires and found a totally, and I mean totally different climb. So the fact is, the "bold" of old (at least on Valley face routes) was in large part owing to vastly inferior shoes. And who's interested in going back to EBs? The thought is preposterous.
JL
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
akclimber,
I got Hermann Buhl on the blower right now. He says the next time you climb with anything stronger than your Mom's clothesline, he's sending his "friend" from Nanga Parbat to kick your booty.
|
|
bulgingpuke
Trad climber
cayucos california
|
|
My personal favorite:
if i do this route again in the future and this bolts not here im going to be pissed!
~TY~
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Speaking of wild ones on Middle Cath.
Meyers leading, forget which route on middle, Kevin Worrall belaying….Kevin’s mom is in the meadow watching him climb for the first time, when low and behold the anchors mysteriously blow.
Kevin instinctively grabs the lead line proceeds to slide down the rope to the end, all while poor George is hanging on a flake some so many feet out from his last pro.
No, they didn’t die, but it was close. Kevin’s hands were so fu-cked up after that.
Those were the days ...........????
|
|
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
if i do this route again in the future and this bolts not here im going to be pissed!
Hey Ty, I bet if one were to hammer on a bolt that is sticking out, such as the one displayed in your picture, the bolt would sink back into the hole, making the hanger flush to the rock again. This bolt is definitely a candidate for replacement, provided the proper bolt-type is used to replace ‘what was.’ Ed Leeper would be proud of you, and then he’d ask for his hanger back…
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
I personally seperate fixed pro for belay and rap anchors from fixed protection for climbing. In no case, though, do I fix pro next to [non-living] protectable features for protection or anchors.
I've placed pins and bolts for anchors; and I've placed pins for protection, but to-date have not placed any bolts for [climbing] protection. The distinction may be slight to some, but permanent fixed pins do use natural features. That said, I've not climbed but a couple of days in the Valley and Werner's explanation of pin theives and freeze/thaw cycles makes perfect sense to me, but doesn't really happen around here; bomber fixed pins tend to stay bomber fixed pins for a long, long time. Given the circumstances there around using pins vs. bolts - bolts replacing pins sounds perfectly logical.
Dingus and others know I'm pretty solidly in the no-bolts-next-to-protectable-features camp; but I have no experience with this type of anchor/descent ethics discussion beyond having seen tops of cliffs ravaged of all [ancient Cedar] trees for 75' back from the edge due to a lack of top anchors. Given that experience I'm all for bolted anchors to spare trees. From my perspective, if permanent anchors were or are going to be established at all than they should be reliable anchors. I would say any existing anchor old or new that isn't up to a baselevel of holding a rap or a fall reliably is fair game for a [well done] retro.
When it comes down to it, I like my subjective risks associated with actually climbing served straight up with the least impact on the rock. Objective risks I have no "as-you-go" or "skill" control over such as a rapping off anchors I prefer done right if they are to be permanent fixtures. But again, I haven't done any walls [yet] and get the impression that given the scope of the climbs and the role anchors play in a multi-day experience there in the Valley that a very real descent/anchor ethics does exist in the context of this discussion - it's certainly new and eye opening for me and I suspect a few other foreigners as well.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
So Minerals back in early 1970 something year, on the Washington Column Prow, big lightning storm and big cloudburst blow in while leading third pitch. Finish the pitch and watch my partner immediately rap off and run away. I clean on rappel and work my way down to the top of the first pitch. Ready now to rappel to the ground when out of nowhere lightning traveled down the wall to the bolt. Whamo, I get knocked on my ass and the bolt pops out of the hole. My hand is mysteriously black, wtf is this I say to myself as I pound that little bugger back in the same hole, just like you told the puke here to do, and then rappel and run away too!
Was that a good idea? What happened to that bolt afterwards? Is it still good after a scenario like that?
Also Bridwell used to at times drill those long ¼ inch split shank rawl bolts just deep enough so that only the expansion shank was in the hole. You’d have those spinners and not flush like you say. No matter how hard you hit that spinner it will not go deeper….eh! Breedlove can easily confirm those (spinners).
That is but one example of what I meant by the fine line between crazy and sane.
And where the hell is Breedlove?
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 2, 2005 - 03:19am PT
|
The hour grows late, and it is only after a struggle that I decide to post again. A lot was said while I was out shopping with my wife, but I will try to respond to the main points.
1) Ballorama wishes to beat me up. I do not wish to fight you or anybody, Ball, about climbing. What will it prove? that you are perhaps bigger than me? Will it make my ethic wrong or yours right? Violence will solve nothing. If it will make you feel better, though, have at me-you will find yourself strangely unsatisfied at your smallness. Oh, and, isn't the threat of violence you trying to impose your ethic on me?
Enough with you.
2) To the guy with the story of the Indian Creek death:
It is regrettable; it is sad; I am truly sorry to hear of anyone dying while climbing. I am not saying people should go do stupid things; I am saying they should stay on the safe things unless they are prepared to accept the consequences of climbing more dangerous things. I have a family, a wife and young daughter, responsibilities. There were many climbs I did not dare to to before. Now there are even less. Should I demand safety at all times because I must, at any cost to the rock or to history or to the activity of climbing, climb X route? No, If I cannot do a dangerous route, or if an anchor is too questionalble for me (I do not trust any anchor in sandstone: I do not climb on sandstone at all any more), then I go to climbs, and there are plenty, that are perfectly safe. Do people think I am trying to limit them with my ethic? I am limiting myself most of all.
3) Climbing is dangerous. No matter how much experience or how rad you are, it is a dangerous activity. I do not like adventures; I do not like danger; I try to stay on routes that I am confident I can do without terrible danger or adventure. Again, that means many climbs are closed to me until such time as I am solid enough to do them. Which means forever, probably. But I feel it is unethical to ruin the experience of someone who is solid enough to do them by adding gobs of bolts all over them.
4) Which brings me to ethics. There is no right or wrong in climbing; there is no morality in any ethics; God doesn't care about bolts. Climbing is a game we play, and many of us want a different set of rules than others. When I post my views and opinions, it is to try to get people to come to my point of view, so the concensus will remain with me. If the concensus shifts away from me I will still yell and moan and preach from my soapbox. Anybody is welcome to any opinion, and I reserve the right to think of them what I will, and they are in their right to call me whatever they want. The same thing that gives people the right to add bolts gives others the right to chop them. The several camps will never agree; they teeter perpetually over the brink of horrible bolting wars. Each blames the other (you think choppers are jerks? you should see what they think of adders!), and there will never be resolution, only discussion. My tirades on ethics are only my opinions, declaimed in hopes of making folks agree with me.
I think we will all agree that this thread has gotten to long. (What are the ethics of thread length?) Someone please start a new one if they wish to discuss this further-call it Ben is a Jerk if you wish, but my slooooow dial-up connection can hardly load this page any longer.
Until Tomorrow,
Ben Wah
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA
|
|
Just a couple of points:
-the reason we used 1/4" bolts back in the day (60's, 70's, 80's) was because that was the best stuff available at the time. We (well, at least me) wasn't looking for an extra measure of adventure, the 1/4" bolt was the standard and we thought they were good enough. New climbing anchors, like 3/8" bolts, are better and when I put up routes these days, and drill on lead, I use 3/8" bolts. So, I see no problem replacing the "industry standard of the old days" with the new industry standard.
-bolts weaken over time. So, that 1/4" bolt I drilled back in the 70's may not be as good 35 years later. That means that the "safety factor" of that anchor has potentially deteriorated to the point that current ascents are experiencing a climb at a less-safe level than the first ascent party. That's not good in my book.
-yes, climbing is dangerous but there are at least two kinds of danger to me. There is "real" danger such as big rounouts or loose rock. Then there is "artificial" danger such as poorly placed or inadequate anchors. I think we should preserve "real" danger but I think we should fix "artificial" danger. To me, that means replacing existing bad anchors with good anchors.
But, there is even some hair-splitting here. On the first ascent of Sunshine on Drug Dome, Harrington and Oakshott used only a single 1/4" bolt for each belay. Is that OK? Hmmm. Maybe there should be some criteria for bolted belays. If you are going to have bolt-only belays then there should be at least two bolts. Could be a slippery slope.
Bruce
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Both? .... are you sure?
Only one person died and it wasn't the belay bolt!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
I thought it was the hanger design in the Anchors Away incident...
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
What Bruce said!
most young people these days probably won't believe it, but a quarter inch button head was considered bomber back in the day. A one bolt anchor seemed infinitely more secure then some of the wierd anchor arrangements. John in a previous post indicated that people would belay off really dangerous anchors.
Why?
Because the nature of calculating risk is that if a bad thing doesn't happen the activity is safe. It is difficult to calculate how close to a bad thing you got. Now as more and more climbs were being made, people actually started to have bad things happen to them. And since that is undesirable, a considerable effort went into figuring out how to properly set up anchors. John's books are the first comprehensive description of anchor systems, the result of much research. These books are RECENTLY published. There were no such elaborate descriptions AND, more importantly, no unifying system of anchor placement.
If there had been such a system people would have used it back in the day. As it was, people were developing the system which we now have come to recognize as one insuring the greatest safety. Not that we can apply it in every situation, but that is climbing, the adaptation to the environment.
There are always people who feel that new knowledge seriously degrades the human condition. Why take antibacterial drugs to fight infection? shouldn't we truely experience what generations of humans did when they were not available? is our life today morally corrupt because we don't have to experience those particular hardships? I don't think so...
...whether or not you use modern anchor systems is your call, being aggressively ignorant has consequences greatest for the participant, but there is also the collateral consequences to family and friends and to the larger climbing community. While some of the anchors from the past are now mank, they were not at the time they were placed. No one every anchored or rapped of something they were convinced would kill them any more then they would jump off the route hoping to survive (Tobin excepted). Werner pushed the bolt back in and rapped it... it worked. Willfully using mank today because it was the original equipment left by the FA is stupid, no FA team would demand it.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Anchors Away ......
Now Tim Harrison had a bad habit of being a little paranoid about climbing protection. He would always try to back up every piece he placed on the lead. The bolt he placed on anchors away was placed so deep that there was just enough thread exposed to get the nut flush with the top of the bolt. Now it is not clear if he forgot to tighten the nut enough or if it came loose on its own. But that bolt remained minus the hanger and nut when that tragic accident occcured. That bolt by the way was not the anchor bolt, but a lead bolt. He was returning to his high point from a pervious attempt. I believe he was jumaring, could be wrong about that but I think that was what he was ascending with to his previous high point.
His illogical thinking was placing the bolts as deep as theoretically possible due to a slight paranoia helped create his accident.
This was Bens beef about the nuts on the bolts not being tightened ……..
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Almost nobody, if not nobody, set out to make single bolt anchors.
It was common enough though to either run out of bolts, break your bits, or have weather threaten, and those factors could lead to corner cutting rather than some "bold statement" that some folks seem to assume was behind every crappy anchor. Poverty comes into play now and then too.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Ballaroama
Trad climber
so.cal
|
|
Ben you seem to think "ethics" covers quite a wide spectrum for example, your drool about climbing with stoppers and hexes and tying in with a swami.
"It can give you a new level of respect for those old timers and for their particular ethic."
You refer to this an "ethic"?? This has nothing to do with ethics just freedom of choice. You also seen to assume that others including ballaroama aren't up to some ethics standards you have created for yourself. Fine, but as far as I can tell you don't know jack about ethics and really thats not what this thread is about , it's about your cheap shot at ASCA, from your first post:
LEAVE US THE OLD MANK; I feel safer with it.
Yeah more carnage from anchor failure is cool.
This guy Roger is in the Valley doing great public service replacing bolts very responsibly, it's really to bad you have a problem with this.
And elcapfool said "It used to take gumption to climb some routes." Yeah whatever.
This notion that people disagreeing with Ben are somehow for placing bolts at every anchor station is absurd.
I've clipped thousands of crappy bolts, and never had one fail.” elcapfool, you got the fool part right. That is some stupid blind faith that one shouldn't force on others.
"You want to be safe? Go play tiddlywinks. But be sure you wear your goggles"
Ben you sound like a little bitch that must have been molested by daddy. Pull your dick out of your ass and it might give your brain some room to think.
"All of you are absolutely stupid for getting that worked up about a few pieces of metal in the rock. What a bunch of fools." akclimber
Ben you read this a few times and think about it. Who the f*ck are you to dictate what others do if its climbing or whatever.
This isn't about ethics Ben no matter how much you spin the thread around, again its about idiots like you that have a problem with anchor replacement. Sure ASCA makes mistakes, last time I checked it still isn't a perfect world. None of us want to see bolts added to existing climbs and don't imply with your drooling posts that anyone that disagree with you encourages that. Again, you will regret chopping bolts on routes you solo and force others to step up to your lame plate, my threats are not empty. Your just a raging hypocrite because I would imagine you have clipped plenty of anchor bolts in the Valley. Get over it Ben and quit trying to play rock god or whatever, STFU and go climbing and leave the bolts alone.
And by the way Bruce on the first ascent of Sunshine there were no single bolt belays.
edit-Ben, I still think your pushing it with the best ascent theory, but since I made an attempt at a truce with Rob I will apologize to you for the threats and slander and just hope you don't follow through with that theory. I didn't think I misunderstood you about your idea of solo then remove gear. All I can say is I think it's kinda regressive and not realistic for the crowds here.
|
|
deuce4
Big Wall climber
Pagosa Springs CO
|
|
I belayed on quite a few one bolt anchors. Mostly on obscure FA's, but not always. Sometimes I was just too damn tired to place a second bolt for a belay. Then there were times like on Deuceldike where we wanted to climb faster and we placed single bolt anchors. Then there's times when the route seemed so trivial that it didn't deserve the dignity of two bolts, like on Simulcrime. On all of those, I'd be happy if some subseqent ascent put in a second bolt. There's no glory in manky bolted belays (though there is some glory in all-natural ones).
Anyway, it seems this whole discussion got started because maybe the ASCA didn't know all the past history of La Cosita, and maybe made a mistake. Big friggin' deal even if that's true--nobody's perfect. Fixed gear is time dependent and has to be replaced, like a roof on a house, after about 30 years. Glad someone is doing it.
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 2, 2005 - 03:45pm PT
|
Ballorama,
You complete mistake my drift. I have never nor will I ever chop bolts placed by the FA, unless it is to replace them with better, botls, preferably in the same hole. What Bachar did, though a bold statement, was the act of a jerk: I would not have removed Ray's bolts off of the Cringe. Again, I would not fuss if that became the established ethic, but I am certainly not gung-ho about it-it leaves too much room for vigilanteism-and so I espouse the First Ascent ethic. Why do you insist on misunderstanding me? Is it because you are enjoying your anonymous belligerence? I think a belay on a single 1/4 is way dicey; in those spots where the FA from cheapness or lazyness or broken-bitness only placed one, I wouldn't mind seeing a 1/2" bolt in the same hole-even a three-quarter.
Deuce, Yes the La Cosita thing is trivial, but it is one place where awareness of what some of us see as a potential problem can be taught. What if we waited until the ethic of moving anchors for convenience bcame more widespread? It would be that much harder to unseat. I perceive a problem (I mentioned this same problem in a thread about the Pharaoh's beard), and I try to talk to people about it; sadly, most do not want to listen, only flame and slander. O well.
|
|
David
Trad climber
San Rafael, CA
|
|
re. "and I try to talk to people about it; sadly, most do not want to listen, only flame and slander. O well. "
Are you fricking kidding me? Your original post that started this entire chain was nothing but flame and slander. Take another look. Lot's of people have wieghed in and contributed insightful comments that avoid flaming and slander. You just weren't one of them.
Where else do you get John Long, John Middendorf, Werner Braun and many other long time Yosemite climbers to contribute their thoughts on this subject? I'd say that it turned in to a very nice thread that had a lot of people listening.
|
|
spidey
Trad climber
Berkeley/El Cerrito
|
|
Here is a good example of a bolt being added and a belay moved, by the first ascentionist, 10 years after the first ascent. Yes, the experience was changed. For the better. The total lead bolt count went up by one, a 2 bolt belay and an ant tree belay were eliminated, another 2 bolt belay added, and the line was straightened and made more continuous. I climbed the route both before and after it was modified. Did this ruin or decrease the quality of the experience? absolutely not. Did the route change character slightly? yes. Change is not always a bad thing. It made for a better, more continuous, and more aesthetic climb. It also may have prevented a death from the tree belay failing. It definitely prevented the needless death by squashing of countless biting ants, and may have saved the life of the tree.
Cochise Stronghold, Absinthe of Mallet. A 9 pitch 5.9+ traditional route with some bolted face climbing. The route was put up in 1988, and about 10 years later the first ascentionist decided to clean the route up a bit as follows: replace some poor/aging bolts, eliminate the 2 bolt belay at the end of the 2nd pitch, and add a lead bolt so you could continue straight up and link the 2nd and 3rd pitches instead of traversing right to the anchors and then traversing back left to do pitch 3. I believe he also added a 2 bolt belay at the end of pitch 3, both to facilitate running pitches 2 and 3 together, and so you would not have to belay in a small tree with thousands of fierce biting ants.
I think this was a responsible public service, and a well-thought out positive change to an existing route. Would anyone argue that these changes should not have been made? If so, why?
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA
|
|
Ballaroama wrote:
"And by the way Bruce on the first ascent of Sunshine there were no single bolt belays."
Pat Timson and I did the 3rd or 4th ascent of the route and there were, indeed, only single bolt belays on top of pitch 2 and 5. There were two 1/4" bolts on top of pitch 4 and I asked Bob Harrington why there were two and he replied, "we didn't place the second one, Verne Clevenger freaked out on the 2nd ascent and placed it."
Bruce
ps - the single bolt on top of pitch 2 was particularily distressing as you are on a 20 degree slab with no way to get any other purchase so you must rely soley on that single bolt. And there is a 5.10- mantel right off the belay with no protection and I suck at mantels! Actually, it is a double mantel which just made the whole situation even more well, um, uh, um, interesting.
pps - on pitch 5 I think I had one piece of gear in for the whole 150+ foot pitch. I was out about 100 ft. looking all over the face for the belay bolt and must have been traversing all over the place for about 15-20 minutes before I found it. Luckily the pitch is only 5.9.
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
As far as I can tell, the wisest thing ever said about anchors is that they must not fail. Wasn't that said by John Long in some of his books?
Someone also said keep two pieces between you and the ground.
If you believe in these aphorisms of climbing, then surely one bolt is not enough at a belay.
|
|
Brutus of Wyde
climber
Old Climbers' Home, Oakland CA
|
|
"Almost nobody, if not nobody, set out to make single bolt anchors."
I can think of a climb where at least two of the belays each had a single bolt, intentionally placed... The first hanging belay consisted of two #4 Big Bros set in an 8" crack, the rock the consistency of kitty litter held together with dried egg.
I set a 1/4" bolt a short distance away, in better rock.
The next belay was on a ledge, but it was apparent that the crux (first 50 feet off the ledge) would require all out small gear... Placed a bolt there, and used the first piece as our second anchor piece.
Regge Pole, East Face Dihedrals
OTOH, That route will likely never see a second ascent, if anyone has any common sense.
And on the third hand, this doesn't really contradict Karlee's statement, since I am, indeed, nobody.
Brutus
|
|
Ben Wah
Social climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 3, 2005 - 12:04am PT
|
Touche, Dave (sorry, I don't know how to make an accent over the e). I did start this thread out rather harshly; as I explained many, many posts ago, sometimes a sting is necessary to get a response. However, I believe the discussion has been beneficial; several Valley heavies have weighed in, and I for one have seen more different opinions than I could have thought existed. I think its important for the people replacing bolts to think long and hard about what exactly they do, and to realise that preservation of history is very important to some of us (This may hit some as a surprise, but most of my circle of climbing acquaintances feels exactly as I do-they just don't see the point in telling people about it). My comment about gym climbers was unnecessary to this thread-I really, really wish there were no gyms or the crowds they've brought, but this thread was really about an appeal to the ASCA to be careful in how they replace anchors and to make sure that their 'safe' bolts really are safe. This is not the first time I've run across loose nuts on bolts that would otherwise be bomber.
Adios
Ben Wah
Oh, Cochise guy: I cannot comment on Cochise ethics, since I have invested no time there and know nothing of the history, FAs, or even what the rock looks like. Sorry
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
Just got off the phone with John Salathe. He said that until you repeat his climb on the Hand at Pinnacles NM using the protection that he used back then, none of you have any balls and none of you have any right to even be discussing these issues.
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
IMHO, I would say that the ASCA does a good job in replacing mank with good stuff. I would also like to say that the old rapp stations that we used to leave with slings are much worse visually than some chains, or steel rapp anchors. I was in the desert of Utah recently where I used to leave some of that stuff and it kind of disturbed me to see the unsightly stuff. At the Park I visited, climbing is not so popular with the authorities and it appeared that almost all of the rapp stations had unsightly slings hanging. I could not help but think that the authorities would be more amenable to climbing if these stations were cleaned up with less visually intrusive rapp stations. Next time I am there I will take some chains to replace the bright but faded webbing with something better...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
I'm just a dirtbig cheap bastard so I don't spend money on excess bolts and can't really afford a cell phone either. The cell service in Wawona is terrible anyway.
But apparently, since I've been festering in my hillbilly ignorance, there have been tremendous advances in phone technology. I don't know where ya'll even got those dead guys phone numbers! I know roaming costs extra but...?
So I find the tourist with the biggest telescope in El Cap meadow and borrow his cell phone. I called George Anderson, the FA soloist of Half Dome.
He says the bolts ya'll are using are way too small. You can't even fit your toe into the hanger's eye!
;^0
Karl
|
|
bobh
climber
Bishop, California
|
|
"And by the way Bruce on the first ascent of Sunshine there were no single bolt belays."
Kinda true and kinda not. There were belays with a single bolt, but there was also other gear. The one that generated a bunch of complaint was the last one, which has some peach-sized feldspar knobs nearby that you can tie off. Consensus was that this wasn't a very good anchor so it's now doubled, which apparently the FA'ers don't care about.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
Trad climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
Hey, Werner, here the hell I am, I am. (I spent Memorial Day weekend outside and then got on a plane to work in Germany for a few weeks. It is a lazy Saturday in my hotel.)
I read Ben's opening post when he put it up and wondered what would come of it. I care very much about the 'ethics' of Yosemite climbing, but I do not think that there is only one right answer. I do believe that debating it is very important, because there is no other way to preserve our sport. I am coming late to this thread: I don’t mean this as the last word.
When Royal and Yvon were sticking their necks out and telling young guy like me how to climb, it was hard to take—‘who the hell are you guys to tell the rest of us how to climb’. But the logic of preserving the rock and of preserving the adventure and challenge of climbing was compelling. I aggressively switched to clean climbing. (I still have several pins that I owned then that have never been driven.) Everyone else pretty much switched to clean climbing, partly because it was easier to clean.
(Jim tells a story about guiding for Royal's RockCraft. I think the story goes: Royal set the belays with pins and protection with nuts and slings when he did the route in question with students. Jim took the next step and set the all the belays and protection with nuts. Royal thought Jim was irresponsible and dangerous. So even in the beginning, we were trying to sort out what made sense. Pratt was also a little slow to adopt nuts only. His telling statement was naming his route next to Royal’s “Nutcraker Suite” the “CS Concerto.” By the time that I worked for RockCraft, along with Chuck, we taught only with nuts, slings, and bolts—no pins.)
We also all debated, and some of us accepted, the need to use bolts in place of pins since they did less damage to the rocks. However, in my opinion, the way we balanced all of these competing concerns was to push the limits on boldness. All the tools were acceptable if the overall ascent upheld the best style. In a historical perspective, we came to accept bolts belays and bolts instead of pins to protect the rock if the climbing was stellar and bold. This is why some old guys get exercised about new guys adding bolts to our old leads but don't object to replacing belays with double bolts or adding rap stations. Said another way, we took the effort of finding a balance of ethics and style and pushed ourselves to achieve results that met the ideal norms of our peers. No one was perfect and we all blundered some of the time. But, when someone comes along and wants to add bolts to an existing lead to make it accessible to less talented or committed climbers, it is easy to take it personally. Nevertheless, I think it is natural to move on and let younger generations sort it out for themselves.
None of this really applies to aid routes and certainly not to hard aid routes. I have never been able to come up with a comfortable feeling with the pin scarring that occurs on hard aid; I also have no suggestions. It is arguable that many ascent parties can still get the feeling of the first ascent on naturally protected free climbs—the DNB comes to mind. But, I am guessing that by definition, the feelings of early ascents on thin aid are quickly lost. (I never did hard aid--actually all aid I did was hard for me--anything other than A0 scared the crap out of me. I was always more comfortable hanging on directly than worrying that the gremlins living in cracks were about to push my stuff out and send me to my death.)
Minerals quotes Jim about 'climbing is dangerous' in a discussion of bolting and gym climbers. I think that careful distinctions need to be made. Climbing is dangerous at some level and loses its 'climbingness' if it becomes too safe. I am sure that Jim's hard aid routes are/were dangerous because the placements were naturally bad and Jim was a master of figuring out how far to push it—he rarely fell.
But I can also say from personal experience, that Jim (with only few well known exceptions) climbed what the rock offered and within that constraint, Jim was very safety conscious. Jim also led the ethical style of the best climbers of the time, a style that said that the first ascent team had an obligation to think of the next climbers to do the route. A first ascent is a gift--it is taken only once--don't blow it off because it is easy climbing or screw it up becuase it is hard to figure out. All of us bailed on new stuff all the time that we couldn’t do in our best style. All these routes have all been done by better prepared climbers at a later date. So, on first ascents with Jim, a lot of thought went into what would make the best line. And he always climbed with a safe, but bold, attitude. On the other hand, while climbing on established routes, watch out: you might find yourself roped together free soloing on exposed rock. Rights of passage.
My personal list goes something like this:
Free climbing is a better style than aid. (Please remember that this is personal list, I am not dissing anyone.)
Ground up climbing with no previewing is better style than yo-yoing. (I have changed my mind about this given the benefits.)
Natural and clean protection is better than pins.
Pins should be fixed to avoid pin scarring.
Bolts are 'clean' compared to pins.
Belays should be bomb proof. John's comments about "Freewheeling" don't gibe with my memory...but dueling memories is a fool's game. Also, if a leader was running out the pitches, he had an obligation to protect his belayer--don't take leader falls on the anchors. I tried to make it a point of asking my belayer if they minded if I took risks on my leads--they had to try to catch me if I switched to flying lessons. Some did.
Run outs are part of climbing and should be maintained as part of the first ascent party’s statement. (Over time, as climbers change this changes also. At some point it does not matter. When that occurs is open to debate.)
Bolts should be replaced by better technology when they are worn out.
Although regrettable, rap routes are part of managing the increase in the number of people climbing (like the trails that are maintained by the NPS).
Ben has the right idea, in my opinion, to question bolt replacements that may have gone awry. He has never sounded out of line, even if he has been forceful.
Dingus has told his story about Jim stating that he didn't care about bolts on Absolutely Free before. Minerals said that he does. What this says more than anything is that asking the first ascent party about a route that they did 30+ years ago results in confusion. First ascent parties have interesting and some times insightful things to say, but eventually we all die off, and some of us get forgetful, high and mighty, uninterested, or cranky long before. (Tom Higgins--one of the best and boldest of the old school--recently told everyone that they should call him if they wanted to modify his routes. He was always cranky. Hey Tom, join in. Or at least publish your phone number.)
Last thought: When talking about climbing style or ethics, it is always the intent and the whole picture that matters. It doesn't mean anything in isolation. Debates about style and bolts should be civil. Pissing people off about matters of personal choice will never bring anyone with a heart around. Anyway, there are great, respected climbers along the different points of view. Except grid bolting on established free routes--these people will come back as donkeys when they die, even if they live a long fruitful life. (I have received several phone calls confirming that this is the case. Hey, if I can work overseas and understand English spoken every possible way, I can understand what those donkeys are trying to say. Boy, are they ever sorry.)
All the best, Roger
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
Just got off the phone with John Bachar. If you use ropes and protection, he said you all are pansies.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
Trad climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
Hey akc...Did you ask John if he was talking about climbing or something else?
|
|
yo
climber
NOT Fresno
|
|
Hey, great post, Dr. Breedlove. I'm off in three days to nail the sh#t out of a couple of routes. Hopefully those crack gremlins were just a '70s thing, huh?
Two things: I absolutely hate stupid anchors and rapping off tat and I absolutely love what Ben and B-Law are arguing for. I'm not even sure I see a contradiction.
Another thing about the FA ethic. I'm working part-time in an outdoorsy shop near Zion and the other day a little known FAist of a little known wall route in the area called looking for some of his old buddies. I started pimping him for beta on this route, which features a first pitch of natural hooking to a bolt, then drilled hooks with one more bolt to the anchor. Maybe 120' of quality sandstone hooking with bad deck potential in many spots. He started in with, Yeah, I was young and lazy, I should've put more bolts in, etc. He told me I could put more bolts in to protect that pitch and in fact invited me to do so. I guess what I'm saying about the FA ethic is this: I will never put bolts on that pitch. I don't think it's even his right, as the author of a ten-year-old route, to suggest that I do so. If he wanted to go back up there and retro it, I guess I can't stop him, but I wouldn't respect the decision. I respect the route he made, how demanding it is, and how few times it's been repeated. I wouldn't aspire to that route if it got retroed. Hooking up that pitch would mean something. Clipping up it would be worthless.
Another two centavos for the fund.
Ryan
|
|
Roger Breedlove
Trad climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
Hey Ryan:
I think that gremlins are really long lived little suckers. They probably still exist. I have heard that they are reincarnations of free solo climbers.
I have also heard that one way to protect yourself is to bang the pins in and knock them out several times. That way the gremlins have time to come check out what you are doing. If they don't like it and start pushing, you can bang back. For safety's sake, I suggest driving and banging out the pins enough times to be able to move up to the next size. Also the grooves that you leave in the crack make a nice little trail for the next party--like negative cairns. Just thoughtful advice.
Gremlins don't push on nuts; they just watch and laugh when they walk out on their own. I don't know what they think about cams.
Love, Roger
Note to self: Call gremlins to waste Yo on next ascent.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
Trad climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
Good plan t*r. I'm flattered. I'm in Germany next week. Can I invite my wife and kids? How about the gremlins?
(Actually they come on their own. Cannot control the sucks--just make gentle suggestions and keep your distance. Like dealing with Ryan.)
Also, if I am following along okay, you have about 6 million suitors all vying for you affections. Are they dangerous?
Love and kisses, Roger
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Thanks for your great input Roger.
I was busy as hell today, anyways good to hear your views.
Werner
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
I have also talked to first ascensionists who wished they, or I, would add bolts to their old routes. Sometimes they feel bad having created death traps, or taken quality section of stone that could have been enjoyed by many, but are instead collecting cobwebs and rotting anchors.
Sometimes they just didn't get around to finishing their route. (For example, in the middle of Galactic Hitchhiker there are a couple spicier pitches that the FA meant to add bolts to but didn't. The rest of the route above Goodrich is well protected)
I think that it's interesting that some folks like the FA ethic as long as they didn't think the route was overbolted to start with, and as long as the FA doesn't want to go add bolts years later. Yet, they haven't climbed the route themselves (and in the vast majority of cases, they never do) They say that they hope to aspire to the route someday, but, if they ever get good enough, their interest has passed to cranking 5.13 sport routes or freeing walls.
I rapped Space Babble once, coming off Kor Beck, TRing pitches, quite a few years ago. Fantastic route,one of the best in the valley. I could rip the 1 inch webbing on the anchors in half with my bare hands. Talked to Kauk, he said OK to add bolts. I never did cause I didn't want to be in the center of a shitstorm, plus I'm lazy and cheap. He said he'd think about doing it himself, but he's probably not into looking back. He just had gone up and sent the route without thinking about it's future.
So it seems to me that folks are making up fairy tales about the intentions of the first ascent party, and glorifying their deeds, but it's often not real, and then they don't step up and do the routes that they're protecting.
Since I just "Don't get" where that serious moral attitude about bolts and death routes comes from, it's easy to see that those folks don't "get" my view either. I hope we both just agree to disagree and let the general consensus of the community inform our actions. I'm all about preserving the stone, and will stick my neck out to climb clean, but I get the feeling that, for some, it's fine to hammer away at the stone, as long as you're risking your neck. They want to preserve "boldness."
I'm not advocating anything here, just communicating. I agree with Werner's remark in another thread that there is no answer, climber just don't have a common foundation. So things will probably continue to go on as they always have been. The best we can do is improve dialog and debate so that we work things out around the campfire and on the Internet, rather than with hammers.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Roger Breedlove
Trad climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
Hi Karl:
I agree completely with what I think is your view on hammering, if you mean pins instead of clean. After reading your post, I felt compelled to re-read the entire thread--yea, yea, I don't have a life (it is a very slow Sunday in Neurtingen).
I think that on free routes bolts should replace pins and, on rappels, bush or tree anchors. As I stated earlier, I debated this with guys like Royal, TM, Galen, Jim Erickson, Kamps, Higgins, Couch, Robinson…and concluded that pin scaring was not consistent with ‘leave no trace behind.’ For sure, over using bolts can destroy the one element of climbing. But bolts can be controlled: they can be removed and the holes filled; pin scarring cannot.
Earlier in the thread someone raised the issue of the 5/8 baby angle that I placed 33 years ago on Hoodwink on the first ascent--at least I have been told it is the same one. I left all my protection pins fixed in those days, on the basis that the pins would not be removed for booty. This took a heavy toll on my rack. I would leave it to someone like Greg to decide, but I certainly have no objection to it being replaced with a bolt, since it will be an ugly mess if the one there breaks. Worse yet, if the flake breaks off, the climb will be much harder without any good reason. I don't think that my being part of the first ascent is the reason to do it; I think that preserving the rock, and the climb, is a good enough reason.
I am not sure what you are proposing in your comments about old routes that have limited protection. Personally I do not think that any protection bolts should be added to any of the routes on Middle--mine, Ron's, John's, Ray's, Georges's...anyone's. I do think that all protection bolts should be replaced. (NB: added belay bolts and rap stations are a different topic.)
I have only heard of Space Babble; I have not done it or studied it. Without regard to Ron's comments to you, it is a lasting testament to Ron's style and skill at that time. In my opinion, there will be a time when a Valley climbers will say let's go do all the 'old school' routes on Middle. In the early 70’s everyone pretty much did. The climbing was great, the routes were long, the route finding was tricky, the all clean standard was tricky and ever one loved it. When this happens again, climbers will want to find Space Babble as it was conceived.
I get the point that Ron may have second thoughts about the long-term effects of his leads on Space Babble. I think that most of us do not feel like we have the right to limit the accessibility of a climb because of the way we did it. Personally, I have asked Greg to tell me if bolts should be added to the first pitch lead on a short and not-test-piece on Fairview dome that I did. Apparently no one does the route because it looks like it has unprotected 5.9 climbing. It is a nice route that should be accessible to wide range of climbers; in my opinion it is not a climb for the history books. And I would have no objection to someone fixing the first pitch if indeed it has unprotected 5.9. (Greg didn't mind considering replacing the bolts that were there, but was pretty firm that he wasn't interested in adding bolts.)
Nevertheless, whether Ron likes it or not, he made a statement with Space Babble that should be preserved. I looked at that section of rock on Middle and stated publicly that a route should be put there--but I didn't have the gumption to do it. Ron did. And he did it in the style of a very long history of Middle free climbing. He cannot take it back, and neither should anyone else.
Ron's climb should be rebolted, with solid belays, and publicized. If there really are 'ground mission' falls (to quote Werner, I think), then they should be noted. (However, I have read here on ST that there are no ground falls.) If the climbing is as good as you say it should have lots of ascents--who, with any sense of history and a claim to skills--would not be proud to give it a go.
All the best, Roger
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Thanks for your excellent remarks Roger.
I'm not proposing anything for Cathedral and I won't bolt Space Babble. I wouldn't object if someone did.
Now the fact is that you haven't done the route and nobody else has in the past 20 years (post up if you have) I think it's dubious to think that a route like that should sit idle for the safe of hypothetical climbers in some future generation when it would get ascents every week if it were only as scary as Stoners. When are these future climbers going to be born? Why should you be able to suggest that your route on Fairview get a new bolt or two, but Ron can't suggest the same for his route? How will the future know that there is a historical difference between these routes? Is it really so bold and remarkable that somebody like Ron Kauk could walk up and climb 5.9/10a- without any pro?
The future will decide the future.
This thread is getting hard to load. If I've opened up a whole can of worms with my recent remark, we should start a new thread about it, but perhaps it's better to let it go. It won't lead to anything that anybody wants to grapple with in these times
peace
karl
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
I've done Space Babble and the anchors back then, 80's, were terrible. What to speak of now. If those anchor bolts haven't been replaced yet they should. Knowing Kauk as well as I do he would definitely would want them replaced.
And Karl; Time to sign up for DSL, or is that service not available to you in your area?
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
I just got off the phone with John Gill. He said that unless you have a guardrail under you to stop your fall, you are not much of a climber anyway so the where/when/how many bolt question is irrelevant.
|
|
HalHammer
Trad climber
CA
|
|
Ak climber that was old the first time yah did it..
If anyone has a right to rebolt a climb with additional bolts it should be the first ascent. If they originally intended to have it one way or another I don't see the harm in them fixing things. This could be carried to extremes either way. Have to ask sometimes what good do rated X moderate routes do for anyone? Making some rated X classics rated R classics wouldn't be the end of the world in my book either.
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
In the 1984 guide book to the Wasatch (SLC) the authors wrote something like:
"Who can judge the boldness of future climbers?" Karl, I respect your opinions but who are we to judge what people will be doing in 30 years. The old arguments that we heard about sport climbing was that the resource would be used up at a much faster rate with sport climbing (dont get me wrong I like sport climbing). I think that is true. Are we so selfish that we should make things available to us now? Why can't we leave some adventures for future generations?
About 15 years ago I made it to the Needles of South Dakota. I had read for years about the poorly protected routes and it took a lot of gumption for me but I did Superpin about 5.10 R/X. There was a summit register and all Summer long the route had been done only 4 times. Should it be opened to the masses? I am so glad that those challenges are still out there. To me, opening things like this up to the masses by bolting is a similar thing to making more roads through the wilderness so that more people can enjoy it (different scale but same idea). IMHO I do not think that mankind should use all of its technological advances to make things safe. I aspire to do certain climbs and some of those aspirations are all fantasy. I doubt I will ever have the requisite skill for the Bachar-Yerian. But I am damn glad that there is something like that there to aspire to....
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
You talk like these run-out testpieces are rare and well protected moderates are the norm, but, at least in Yosemite, that's far from the case. There are many, many multi-pitch face routes under 5.11 in Yosemite. I have done a many, many of them. They are almost all R or X rated. The only ones that get regular traffic at all are Crest Jewel, Stoners, and the DNB. (and those last two will get your blood going!)
I sent my friend, who's freed El Cap and climbed over 100 5.13s, up one of the better protected ones (the Rambler, pre-rebolting) and he backed off!
My hat is off to the pioneers of climbing that founded so many environmental organizations, founded socially and environmentally responsible companies, and made the switch to clean protection from pins.
But they were human too and I'm afraid many are guilty of snagging most of the moderate face climbing potential in the valley with little or no regard for future generations of climbers. They were in a macho, one-upmanship contest to climb all the lines as boldly as possible with no consideration for the poor smucks whos limit was 5.9-10c.
Many of them regret it now, and would actually rue the day when cranking x rated slab routes became some kind of popular activity, eventually putting some loser in an iron lung in his attempt to measure up to the big boys. Few people who have grown up want to see folks permanently injured on their routes.
I don't think we owe these future bold climbers much, as they always have the option to solo. It's the average climber who has been shortchanged by the elite in Yosemite, which now has lots of closely bolted routes in the 5.12+ league but none at 5.9.
I've actually climbed Lucifer's to the Oasis twice now, once free/rope solo. It's only 5.9 but there are whole pitches with zero pro and one angle pin for an anchor. Is it really so much to ask that one or two of these routes be made only slightly insane for the other 5.9 climbers who can only handle 25 foot leadouts instead of 120 if the FA party thinks it's a good idea?
I understand that retro-bolting is out of line according to today's standard. I know it's a slipperly slope, like using embreyos that are going to be thrown away for stem cell research. But I'm tired of hearing the same canned excuses from those who don't actually do these routes, about why they must remain testaments to the egos and balls of the studs of yesteryear. Do they ALL have to remain testaments?
I actually do those routes and so I don't "need" them bolted down to size so that I can do them, and it's good for me that I never have to worry about others being on them. I just think it's important to put in a word for the 85% of the regular climbers that come to Yosemite and wait for long periods for the limited Supertopo routes where a crack made it impossible for the pioneers to create an X rated route.
Tons of you climb way harder than 5.10c (sometimes easier) Why are you so busy defending these routes but not climbing them? I understand that I'm bucking the popular climbing culture by discussing this. We certainly have to keep some kind of lid on rampant change. To me, the opinion of the guys who put up the routes, even 20 years ago, is a good place to place serious weight. It just kinda rubs me the wrong way when folks are willing to discount the older, wiser, opinions of those FA parties who don't wish to stand by their reckless actions in the past, but are alway willing to assume that the FA style was a bold enduring statement rather than a consequence of limited time, money, or common sense.
I apologize for bringing up the subject of retro-bolting, even by the first ascent party on their own route, on this thread, since it clouds the easier, clearer discussion of rebolting anchors by the ASCA. It really should be discussed (or not discussed) on another thread so better clarity can be acheived on the subject of anchors.
and to be clear, I'm never going to retro-bolt anything. (as much as anyone can ever say never)
Peace
karl
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
Hey Hal, I wasn't the first. Minerals was.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Well Karl some bad ass routes must remain that way unless you can climb them. It’s quite simple if you can’t do it then you will have to back off. I have had to back off some leads that were to dangerous for me. So what! That’s a good thing. I have no problem with that. Some routes I will not lead. I’ll either find a partner who can or top rope or just not go there. That is also very good.
I can’t be thinking that “I” will make it safer for me!
That’s stupid and selfish.
And reckless actions? Now I’ve climbed many routes with both Kauk and Bachar, believe it or not they were very conservative actually. They trained like psychos just so they could do some of those routes in the style they did. These became the higher standards and not by force or recklessness but by natural level headed climbing styles.
Even in the world there are high class men/women and everything in between to the low class. Not that everyone can be high class or everyone is materialistically rich and no poor man/woman.
Not everyone can dive to the deepest to retrieve the finest pearls.
It must be earned ……..
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
Karl,
yes the thread has diverged and yes, it probably should be discussed. I believe that the slippery slope is deciding what should be retrobolted, who is going to do it, and how close the bolts are together. A tradition of following in the steps of the FA is straightforward and easy to live by. Deciding what should be retroed and how it is to be done is something else altogether.
I cannot have any useful thing to say about the Valley routes but this topic is happening at many climbing areas throghout the country. Back at my old stomping grounds someone wants to add a bolt on a 5.10 that has a groundfall. IMHO the route should stay since it has been done probably a thousand times. The one arguing about it says that the FAist took away the guys right to climb the route safely and therefore the route should be retroed to make it safe. To me, I see this as a decline in the sport. There are plenty of routes that are safe and doable.
The Yosemite climbers of the early 80's (ie: Bachar) had a huge influence on my climbing at the time. FYI in the early 80's I on-site soloed a couple new routes that went at 5.10. These routes were later retrobolted because another party didnt know they were routes. I did not make an issue out of it for many of the same reasons that you mentioned. I knew nobody would do them the way I did. Denote a forked tongue? I think sometimes it is easier for the FAist to give in than it is for them to just say no...
The problem as I see it is that people do not want to accept risk. I can climb 5.10 in the GYM why is this runout 5.9 shutting me down. Some climbers then take this to the extreme and say it is their right to make it safe. But to some people safe means bolts every 8 feet. The problem of retrobolting some of those routes is where would it stop? I have no doubt that there are climbers who could retro some of those routes and do it in a good way. But suppose I am up there and the route has been retroed and I am still scared becasue of a 20 runout? What "rule" could be imposed to protect the climb? If someone retroed this route then why can't I retro it to make me happy? It is a slippery slope for sure and it should be discussed. Personally, I would rather have the routes stay the way they are, painting the story of a bold climb as opposed to making climbing safe. There aint much rock left, bolting it down for the masses is like paving the rocky trail...I didnt think climbing was supposed to be easy nor risk free.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Actually, I think things are as OK as they're ever going to get right now. We have a general level of consensus with folks at either extreme a bit unhappy, but with no knock down drag out wars since awhile. We tend to work things out and that's good enough.
If circumstances change in the future, and the consensus shifts, we'll be right where we are, where most folks are OK with things and both extremes wishing for more of their own way.
I'm fine with that. I think that's as good as it gets. While the discussion about "What ifs' is stimulating, it also pisses folks off and just makes my peaceful life harder. Since I don't alter any routes one way or another, I'm bowing out of this conversation now with regards and respect to folks who feel either way.
Peace
karl
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
Sorry Karl, I was not directing this at you. Just seems like this topic is ripe at many areas....Seemed like a good place and time to state my case.
Peace,
Gary
|
|
MAD BOLTER
Trad climber
CARLSBAD,NM
|
|
I think I am being accused of some poor bolt work-I don't remember ever pulling out 5 piece bolts! Why does ASCA speciry that anchors be set up with 2 bolts placed at the same level and not connected? Someone removed my original rappel anchors between grey bands and Dolt tower, replacing them with the 2 bolt same level and not connected: these were for rappel stations and not for belaying.
Concerning the 5 piece anchors- I checked some that were supposidly stainless and the nut end was not SS. Check with a magnet. SS doesn't pull toward a magnet. see you this Aug-Sept.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
Cool, Tom - it will be good to see you n the Valley this summer!
|
|
| Messages 1 - 174 of total 174 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!