Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tom
Big Wall climber
San Luis Obispo CA
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:25pm PT
|
... don't clip the bolts.
Right.
You don't want to be hanging off of them when you chop them away.
Old topos will be used to figure out what bolts were added after the FA, so they can be removed.
This already happened on the Zodiac a few years ago. Some idiot, way back when, thought it was easier to bring a drill than some wide crack gear.
And if it hasn't been done already, there is a string of bolts up an A2/A3 corner fairly low on Dihedral Wall that need to be removed. Apparently, some moron put them in as free climbing pro. I don't think it was Tommy Caldwell; he freed it later.
There are a couple of bolt belays right next to a perfect crack on Excalibur that are questionable. They were put in after the FA, but nobody else had gear that would work back then. Or now, except for a rare few. So, maybe they ought to remain.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:29pm PT
|
Moderate classics are crowded because they have good/fun climbing on them. Usually they are trad. Retrobolting runout slabs does not really solve the problem, because people wanted to go crack climbing and not slab climbing. I think people facing a line on a classic would be more likely to pick a nearby trad climb with a shorter queue/longer approach/fewer stars. It could be argued that creating overbolted slabs will just populate them with sport climbers. The trad climbers will still face crowded classics and the same preferred options.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:30pm PT
|
Just because your graffiti was there first doesn't mean it has a right to remain.
Sadly, this argument has been already been taken by certain land managers where they have banned all fixed anchors in the areas they manage.
So the graffiti analogy might not be so great.
|
|
atchafalaya
climber
California
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:39pm PT
|
I dont support the "dont clip em" argument. Those who dont like em, should chop em. I mean, thats their vision of how the route should exist. Cheers.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:42pm PT
|
"Deal with it."
Funny, weschrist, that this is the argument you use.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:44pm PT
|
weschrist:
Nobody is talking about "fully bolting" a route with adequate protection.
Actually, your "just skip the bolts" post was in response to, and in fact quoted from, my post about a specific route that as I said, had plenty of traditional protection.
|
|
Hawkeye
climber
State of Mine
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 07:58pm PT
|
so weschrist, i take it that you are arguing that all climbing should be safe?
perhaps what we really need since there are more "idiot" accidents than runout ones is a safety certification program for all climbers.
damn that sounds like the freedom of the hills....
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 10, 2007 - 08:05pm PT
|
I suppose retrobolting would be more likely to occur on, say, a four pitch route with one "r" rated section. It seems like at some point when the FA party is gone to that great Yosemite in the sky and the "bolt wars" long forgotten, someone will say there is no reason you should risk having to break both femurs to climb this otherwise great route, and shwack a bolt in. I am not talking about bolting cracks or grid bolting slabs.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:07pm PT
|
Weschrist is indeed arguing that climbing should become risk-free entertainment for the masses and is basically trying establish a rationale for completing what has been a twenty year process of co-opting 'climbing' by folks who would never have been, nor ever wil be, 'climbers' without bolted routes. I personally still do not consider them climbers.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:18pm PT
|
onthededge... wrote:
> I suppose retrobolting would be more likely to occur on, say, a four pitch route with one "r" rated section.
Can you provide a specific example? South Crack? The 5.7 friction pitch is way runout, but it has not stopped the route from being popular.
Eunuch/Boltway? I don't clip the added bolts. They are kind of a joke.
As others have noted, sometimes added bolts are accepted, or even encouraged by the FA party. Usually the additions are done shortly after the FA. An example would be Snake Dike.
> It seems like at some point when the FA party is gone to that great Yosemite in the sky and the "bolt wars" long forgotten,
:-) Bolt wars are not likely to be forgotten. There is often a difference of opinion on whether a route has too few or too many bolts, where they are positioned, etc. It is just part of having a diversity of climbers. Good thing there are crack climbs where we are free to place as much or little clean pro as we'd like.
> someone will say there is no reason you should risk having to break both femurs to climb this otherwise great route, and shwack a bolt in. I am not talking about bolting cracks or grid bolting slabs.
Even if the FA party is long gone, once a route has gotten quite a few ascents, it has a "constituency" (of the people who did it), and is unlikely to have bolts added or subtracted.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:20pm PT
|
Well then .... a long scary run out
If your leader is a psychopath, then you may become a programmed puppet, and you risk being sexually abused by a long fall.
|
|
nick d
Trad climber
nm
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:33pm PT
|
Hey weakwrist, "asinine ideals"! I said this before in another thread, but it bears repeating. When I started climbing all my climbing friends were environmentally oriented. How did that get to be an asinine ideal? The goal was to leave it like you found it, and that shouldn't have changed anywhere along the way. As for the accomplishments of those who came before you, well I'm pretty sure you don't measure up. One of the things that real, bottom up climbing measures is your heart. Most of you grid bolt types just dont get it, but no matter how "hard" the moves are on your latest (lamest) project, at the end you haven't accomplished anything. Climbing is about adventure, and the biggest part of that adventure is to found within yourself, measuring your courage against the challenges found in the natural world. Want a construction project, the gyms are full of em. Want a real accomplishment? I bet you can find it 100' out on 5.7, wondering where you should go, hoping against hope you are making the right decisions. Can't put yourself in that position? Might be a reality check on just how stud you really are, spraylord. By the way, I can't climb 5.12, but I have tasted my own bile plenty of times on far lower grades. Real adventures beckon son.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:34pm PT
|
"It's perfectly reasonable for the FA to decide. It's unreasonable to retrobolt to suit everyone."
and the stzzo sayeth and it was good.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 10, 2007 - 08:39pm PT
|
CC, dunno about a specific example. Agreed that routes get a constituency. I once argued against retrobolting a six pitch climb with crummy gear after I had done it. The climb was (or is?) a local testpiece back home and the FA party was considering adding bolts. I guess it would depend on the potential fall and the grade compared with the rest of the route. Runouts are not necessarily dangerous and a pitch of 5.6 or 5.7 with bad fall potential on a 5.9 or 5.10 climb is probably not going to bother anyone good enough to lead the crux pitches. Some routes have super sketch sections only because the FA party didn't have bolts or the leader was too gripped to stop and drill (I've only bolted on lead and know this to be true!). I don't whether adding bolts to such climbs is a good idea or not, it just seems likely to me that it will happen.
|
|
bachar
Trad climber
Mammoth Lakes, CA
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 08:47pm PT
|
Uh-oh....my routes are toast.
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 09:29pm PT
|
I don't want to get sucked into this vortex...
But, couldn't let this mis-statement go uncorrected:
there is case law supporting the idea that the gov't should start regulating climbing, otherwise it may run the risk of assuming a duty of care it doesn't otherwise have.
Actually, the case law (and logic) stands for the exact opposite in a climbing context. If you don't regulate climbing safety, you then do not assume a duty over it. This is why land managers keep a hands off approach to bolt replacement (even in wilderness areas).
|
|
johnboy
Trad climber
Can't get here from there
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 10:58pm PT
|
" I guess it would depend on the potential fall and the grade compared with the rest of the route. Runouts are not necessarily dangerous and a pitch of 5.6 or 5.7 with bad fall potential on a 5.9 or 5.10 climb is probably not going to bother anyone good enough to lead the crux pitches."
But I only climb 4.9, so I want all those nasty 5.1 and up bolt protected for me. Not right to deny trying those routes to me.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2007 - 11:48pm PT
|
The younger generation is being hatched in the gym and raised on Sport Climbing.
The future of bolting decisions is going to depend on how the values and ideas of "Trad climbing" is communicated to them, and if a significant portion of those climbers adopt them.
Some places it will happen differently than others. Changing ethics and practices regarding sex may be an exampled that's mirrored by climbing in some ways.
Peace
Karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2007 - 01:28am PT
|
Weschrist,
"Myopic" - for dipsh#ts who can't tell the difference - is when the views you espouse have wide-ranging and unintended consequences you fail to see or comprehend. My views preserve routes while yours reduce them to the lowest possible common denominator - entertainment, rather climbing. The difference is I wouldn't call you "myopic" because you are well aware of and desire just those consequences. And, as Dawkins noted when defining the difference between ignorant and stupid, you clearly don't have the luxury of claiming ignorance. Is it a fish and loaves sort of deal relative to the needs of the masses that drives your views or are you just a vertical socialist?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2007 - 01:34am PT
|
"Changing ethics and practices regarding sex may be an example that's mirrored by climbing in some ways."
Well, that explains the putrid smelling slime on some of the newer bolts I've run across lately. You'd think simply clipping them would be enough of a [cheap] thrill all by itself. And I'm personally quitting climbing the first time one vibrates...
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!