Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
ChampionSleeper
Trad climber
Phoenix, AZ
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 02:19am PT
|
Hmm...Does this ever seem to anyone else to mirror the two party system?
Sportos & Traddies and no one from either party will ever convince or come to an agreement with the other party on each party's idealized/rationalized version of what goes on?
The way I see it we have two solutions
1. We argue/fight to the death on what is right, ethical, stylish, and fair. No consensus is reached. Bolt wars erupt and are decided by the greatest will (number of times/people willing to chop / rebolt)
2. We divvy up climbing areas (or a climbing area/walls) based on agreed style.
I think we can all agree that some places are more suited for a sport approach (come on traddies who really even wants to waste time developing some overhanging jug-haul without a crack to be a trad route?) and some places are more suited for a trad approach (come on sportos who even wants to waste time bolting some stupid five pitch friction slab?).
I think we need some sort of auction with both parties allotted the same amount of points to bid on particular areas (ie yosemite, smith rock, etc.; "x wall, area" vs. "y wall, area"). In each case, there should be a method for exceptions. Such as, "someone wants to establish a sport climb in YNP, these are the steps...", or "someone wants to establish a trad climb in Smith Rock, this is what must be done to gain approval to continue".
Now, I fully understand, many will say "f*#k this approach". This requires regulation and approval and committees and bureaucracy and a bunch of other bullshit that I've always hoped climbing could avoid. I agree, but I'm not sure there is another solution, unless #1 is employed...which might be OK by me. Because I think I have a pretty strong will. But I also understand I have a limited reach, and I can't have direct influence right now on routes in areas that matter to me (like YNP). Of course, I also assume the trad climbers have a stronger will than sport climbers and someone in other areas that matter to me will look after the routes/rock there. This, like most assumptions, is probably a bad one.
Alternatively, us trad climbers and sport climbers could concede a "Win All Approach" to gain an " Everybody Wins Some Approach", especially since trad climbers have often realized that we have a lot more to lose than we stand to gain by insisting "our style" is the only way.
So, I ask,
Could solution #2 be realistically employed? For example, could an actual party system be developed where climbers could register as sport, trad, or independent? Reps could be elected (or it could be a popular vote system). Laws, agreements, and treaties could be developed by both parties agreeing to uphold the decisions of the governing body. This might include a tradder rebolting a sport route that has been chopped against the "law" or a sporter chopping a sport route that violates an agreement.
I know we don't agree in terms of idealistic principles and we will never fully change the minds of our opposites, but can we pursue a path that has the greatest potential and least damage for both?
or
Is there a third realistic solution?
I know in 500+ posts, we've all established the problems involved, but has anyone proposed a solution (besides Bachar's YNP proposal, which sport climber may not view as fair and trad climbers may view as bitchin')?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 02:21am PT
|
Yep, locate 15 million people in an area with little climbing locally and you will end up with an ocean of folks all but overruning the nearest good climbing area trad or sport - not really any different than the Gunks in that respect (only it ends up TRing in the Gunks). But then those numbers are driven by the overall demographics in climbing and those are driven by gyms and sport climbing. As I said, a done deal, but about as positive as the spread of fast food as far as I'm concerned.
Edit: Bob, like I said earlier, sport climbing has done for climbing exactly what the far right did for the republican party - coopt it and define a new 'normal' which really can't be questioned.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 02:49am PT
|
If I had to hazard a guess I'd say it sounds like when it comes down to it they don't much care for Riverside or Echo and would rather do the drive to Joshua Tree.
As I said, it's the overall demographics driving the crowding near large metro areas, particularly when there is only one such area in close proximity. That, and LA and NYC being what they are simply concentrate a large number of trad climbers from all over their respective coasts. And all that TRing at the Gunks - that is the sport climbing there. I suspect the really motivated sport climbers from NYC drive to Rumney or other NE sport venues.
|
|
Dogtown Climber
Trad climber
The Idyllwild City dump
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 04:25am PT
|
Lets all face it there is no stopping it. When I started climbing we all policed each other People were ran out of the valley and sent back to France for the sake of ethics.Respect for the rock and each other was the name of the game.And of the sport we all loved.It was and still is are life.Now A bolt a meter on the rap.is the order of the day in some areas.We would never dream of it. My home crag a truly historcial area is eatin up with rap routes.Most are good lines I just think they could of been done in better style.Due the great history of the area.(pitty)
|
|
Bldrjac
Ice climber
Boulder
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 09:40am PT
|
I think you have to look at how the proposed new route affects existing routes. Years ago i put up a route with "Big Al" Bartlett in Eldorado State Prk called, Magic Carpet Ride. Now it's 11c and was put up in a trad fashion but the bolts are close together. Some have considered it a sport route while others haven't. But there are other more traditionally protected routes nearby that existed before MCR went up and noone has complained about their experience being ruined by the closeness.
I think having a panel comprised of local climbers (trads, sportos, etc) that decide which routes have enough merit to be established is a system that can work. It does enter into that realm where the freedom to put up a route in whatever style the person wants is curtailed but what choice is there when many so many climbers practising (potentialy) conflicting styles is concerned?
jack
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 09:54am PT
|
Jhedge wrote:Except, of course, there's even less bolts and sport climbing in the Gunks than in Josh, so there's no way you can logically conclude that gyms, bolts and sport climbing are causing either of them to be overrun.
That your problem...you are looking for logic in Joe's posts....it is filled with emotions and very little facts.
Like this below;
Joe wrote:If I had to hazard a guess I'd say it sounds like when it comes down to it they don't much care for Riverside or Echo and would rather do the drive to Joshua Tree
So all those lazy sport climbers would drive the three hours to a place with a far less sport route ratio then go less than a hour to crag loaded with bolts and safe climbs??
Joe wrote: As I said, it's the overall demographics driving the crowding near large metro areas, particularly when there is only one such area in close proximity. That, and LA and NYC being what they are simply concentrate a large number of trad climbers from all over their respective coasts. And all that TRing at the Gunks - that is the sport climbing there.
Joe all those people at the Gunks carry racks or pads. You are really confused.
The republican party was taken over by people like you ....extreme fanatics.
Like the person who wrote this:
Joe wrote: Ed - I'm guessing you've never swabbed a dot of bacteria in the center of a clean petri dish of culture medium and seen what happens in the way of restraint...
You blame me for being exactly what you are...a one sided fanatic...your posts border on hateful.
You got issues dude!
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 10:26am PT
|
JB said:
"I still want to get a feeling as to why "Gritstone Ethics" and "Saxony Ethics" are still strong."
"Do they have some underlying respect for the first established climbs in their area that makes them adhere to a certain "style" of "ascent" in their particular areas?"
John,
I would attribute this to certain cultural artifacts.
As far as Gritstone goes, I think there is a long-standing history of Brits being consummate risk takers.
And in Saxony, we're talking Eastern Bloc right? They have had stark controls in place, laws which prohibit anything but the traditional model.
In both cases, perhaps the underlying driver is a certain degree of impoverished physical circumstances which drive these “athletes” to do dangerous things in search of fulfillment.
For example, a lot of these Brits traditionally arose from low-end working-class conditions and they were living off the dole and striving big.
Whatever the reasons, the Brits are a sporting bunch and historically they have played for keeps; very competitive and edgy almost to a point of recklessness.
Was it Bridwell who said: "so much to gain and so little to lose" -I'm sure he was referring to a certain class of the Yosemite climbers, but it fits the Brits quite well.
I don't know about Saxony, but from what I've gathered over the years, aside from stiff regulatory mechanisms, I'd say your statement about underlying respect is a big part of their tradition.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 11:17am PT
|
The reason that climbing in Britain and Saxony have retained their traditional flavor is that the collective good has taken precedence over individual expression and needs and that people generally accept the tradeoff and are willing to enforce it. This kind of concensus is purposeful and structured. In the case of Dresden climbing, this concensus goes back to the roots.
In Ascent 1974, Steve Roper noted that:
For many climbers progress in the form of bolted routes ad nauseum is not necessarily acceptable or even desirable.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 11:19am PT
|
B said:
"I still want to get a feeling as to why "Gritstone Ethics" and "Saxony Ethics" are still strong."
"Do they have some underlying respect for the first established climbs in their area that makes them adhere to a certain "style" of "ascent" in their particular areas?"
TB: "John,
I would attribute this to certain cultural artifacts.
As far as Gritstone goes, I think there is a long-standing history of Brits being consummate risk takers.
And in Saxony, we're talking Eastern Bloc right? They have had stark controls in place, laws which prohibit anything but the traditional model.
In both cases, perhaps the underlying driver is a certain degree of impoverished physical circumstances which drive these “athletes” to do dangerous things in search of fulfillment.
For example, a lot of these Brits traditionally arose from low-end working-class conditions and they were living off the dole and striving big."
The war we are in goes back to 1911 and the first debate over pitons and other "artificial aids." Pitons first were used intensively in the Central Alps. A reaction, usually associated with Paul Preuss, denounced the use of such "artificial aids." Preuss basically argued that the only valid forms of ascent were free solos (or un-protected roped climbs). No protection, no rappels, no aid, no belay anchors aside from the rope behind the occasional knob or flake.
Preuss lost that war, and the "moderns" used pitoncraft to open all the hardest routes of the Alps. A few places resisted these developments, but adapted them at least in part. In Saxony, for instance, where the old-guard had been in the anti-modern camp, and where the dominance of the Alpenverein meant that one could police the crags in a top-down fashion, the use of ringbolts was eventually adopted. In the postwar years, the rise of the DDR and the resulting isolation of Saxony, along with the fact that many of the best areas were located in Nature Preserves, allowed (or possibly forced) locals to essentially "freeze" the style of climbing.
Great Britain was different. The Brits looked upon pitoncraft as a Teutonic perversion. They associated pitons with Germans, and Nazis, and working-class riff-raff who knew how to swing a hammer. Between the wars, the Brits fiercely denounced all pitons and bolts. They also sank to the bottom of technical standards. But after the war, pitons started to appear in GB as well. On Grit, the combination of local conservativism, the fact that many of the premiere crags were located in National Park land, and the tiny scale (i.e., most are well under 100'), helped to make Grit a bolt-free zone. On the bigger crags, especially in limestone areas, pitons and later bolts became extremely popular.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 11:22am PT
|
Piton Ron suggested:
"My feeling is that the trads undermine their own high point by so demonizing those who have a different view"
"So my question is this;
is the "trad only" school of thought noble or merely selfish?"
Boulder Jack wrote:
"And I rather like the idea that trad climbing is the more noble of all the styles we have in the platelet before us. However, nobility does suggest higher moral character and also by definition nobility displays higher moral character by displaying benevolence"
Good going Jack.
This is an incisive and penetrating statement.
You're answering to Ron's tact of productive inquiry and likewise contributing some thoughtful analysis to the conflict.
But you're like an earnest chef presenting a delicate appetizer to a bunch of cafeteria kids embroiled in a food fight!
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 11:32am PT
|
And before I corner myself with inaccurate historical reportage concerning the Brits, (and perhaps we will have one here on the forum on this topic soon), my working-class risk taker position is drawn from the modern expression, from Ed Harris, Whillans, Brown, through Moffat. A lot of these guys whether educated, professional, working-class or not, tended towards hard drinking and bold feats.
Going back further through history, climbing was an expression primarily indulged in by the upperclass adventurers on holiday. But boldness was still a big part of the equation, even though there was a time when some or all of them used guides.
Gritstone Headpoint style is clearly about both preservation and boldness.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 11:49am PT
|
Tar-- Yes, sort of, but Whillans and Brown were moderns who were the first generation of Brits to master German-Austrian pitoncraft and apply it in both home crags and abroad. Before them, pegs were anathema, and yes, it was partly due to the snobbery of the AC. But poverty wasn't the driver-- the German and Austrian climbers who pioneered pitons and direct-aid climbing were far poorer, on the whole, than the Brits. And yes, pitons and direct-aid could go hand-in-hand with bold climbing (i.e. Heckmair's Eigerwand).
But the very use of pitons (later bolts) was the bright line separating "traditional" and "modern" approaches to climbing. Only poverty or some essentially arbitrary sense of proportion could dictate the number or type of pitons for any particular climb. Comici and the Dimai bors. FA of the Cima Grande was the period case in point.... jillions of pins.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 12:03pm PT
|
Here is the punchline: Saxony and Grit have very, very little to offer us as models for Yosemite. Saxony and Grit emerged under unique historical circumstances that do not even vaguely resemble anything in the States. Climbing clubs have never dominated American climbing as they have in Europe and even GB. We did not have a club organized along a Fuehrer-principle, the way the German-Austrian Alpenverein was, that could drive the Jews and Socialists out of the high country or regulate crag style. Saxony and Grit emerged in opposition to modern pitoncraft.
Yosemite was born modern: Hammered into a climbing area by folks who had adopted the most modern and un-traditional of the European climbing schools. And once you've picked up a hammer and crossed that nice bright line, it becomes essentially impossible to police modes of climbing outside of a tightly regulated environment. And the most successful examples (Saxony, Grit, Gunks) frequently involved the sometimes very un-gentle engagement of larger regulatory agencies like private land managers or park systems.
Instituting an apparently simple "ground-up" only rule will not do it. Yes, some of you want to say that "ground-up" is what distinguishes trad from bad. But we can shatter that dream with two route names: HD Cables and Wings of Steel. So yes, we could say "ground-up" only, but that won't guarantee us good routes, let alone minimal-impact routes. We could bolt-ladder and then retro chop, a la Scirocco, but most of the traddies won't like that either. There is no bright clean line for defining "boldness" or "elegance." If you want it, then you will have to define it in highly precise and fairly arbitrary ways, and then establish some sort of regulatory agency with real power to enforce the criteria.
What Jstan and others were hoping for was a sort of informal, collaborative coalition that could reach something like a basic consensus without that sort of structure. But I don't see any possible way for that to work in Yosemite. I can see it in lots of other places, especially places that didn't emerge as the birthplace of American pitoncraft, and especially places that are comparatively small in scale, where top-roping and soloing could be acceptable LNT approaches to climbing (i.e., the Gunks again). But I'm less optimistic in the case of Yosemite.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 12:19pm PT
|
KLK wrote:
"There is no bright clean line for defining "boldness" or "elegance." If you want it, then you will have to define it in highly precise and fairly arbitrary ways, and then establish some sort of regulatory agency with real power to enforce the criteria."
Yes I agree; it is very difficult to construct and institute objective criteria for these very subjective constructs and activities.
Thanks for your post.
Along with Jack and a few others here, we get some food for thought and engage in a little constructive inquiry.
-Roy
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 12:52pm PT
|
Jhedge wrote:Again, it's the sport crags, not Josh, that are in close proximity. And again, if sport climbing and gyms were driving the overall demographic, as you said, the sport crags would be packed and Josh deserted. Instead the reverse is true.
I tried to point that out in my other post on Joe's logic....or lack of of. His post make little to no sense and are fill with speculation and not facts.
|
|
atchafalaya
climber
Babylon
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 12:55pm PT
|
DSM IV, Axis I and II diagnosis, 297.1.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 01:01pm PT
|
We've got two things happening on this thread and two thrusts.
One is a continued clash over styles, their values and impacts.
Another is an open-ended inquiry into coexistence, compromise, and ways to achieve that end.
The first is characterized by strong belief in positions; nothing wrong with that because it's where we start.
The second is more abstract and clearly any solution is daunting, but I believe it is worth some effort.
I haven't been part of the Yosemite scene for many years. By way of making a few inquiries, I am going to enlarge my understanding of the current status of some of this stuff. For instance: I'm going to ask James how interested his young friends are in stance bolting.
I e-mailed a friend about these topics this morning, a longtime resident of the Yosemite area. Rather than involving this person directly, I will for now leave his comments and reportage anonymous, as I did not ask him for his permission to post these words, so here's what he said:
...
“i dont think that there is that is that much bolting activity in the
valley whether it be ground up or rappel. just the stupid rehash of
chopping and replacement.”
...
On this alone, it is my suspicion that proponents of both sides of this argument have a shared interest in solving or in attempting to solve these problems. I submit that is common ground.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 01:16pm PT
|
Joe wrote: Degaine, that is what I was talking about, that the large majority of today's climbers are entirely bolt dependent.
So why are places like Eldo, Lumpy Ridge, RMNP, the Gunks and Yosemite packed with climbers almost every weekend?
The world according to Joe...
Joe wrote: Yes, as early as '75 I could see the writing on the wall clear as hell. In places like Eldo and the Gunks you could see about 40-50% of the folks leading were very nervous about it and basically less than competent and confident with gear. Many folks simply stopped leading or quit climbing altogether if they couldn't deal with placing pro.
Again...why are places like Eldo, Lumpy Ridge, RMNP, the Gunks and Yosemite packed with climbers almost every weekend?
Why is the Black Canyon and the north rim campground...one of the notorious trad-areas in the US filled with climbers on any given weekend in the spring and early fall.
Again Joe...no logic to your statement. You made a statement that 85-per-cent of the climbers are gym and risk free...how do account for the ever increasing popularity of these trad-base areas.
You have your head on backwards.
I said this a number of times... which seems to fly right over your head...these are CLIMBING ISSUES...not just sport-climbing issues...they should be a concern of all climbers and all climbers should work together to maintain access and a good working relationship with all land managers and private land owners.
Your finger pointing is childish and really sad coming from someone of your background.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 01:18pm PT
|
Jhedge wrote: So if they're not "using artificial aids", how were/are they getting the bolts in? Isn't the guy in Bachar's picture upthread "using artificial aids"?
No..they are natural soy based bolts, hammers and perlon.
Tar wrote: “i dont think that there is that is that much bolting activity in the
valley whether it be ground up or rappel. just the stupid rehash of
chopping and replacement.”
hitting the nail on the head....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 14, 2008 - 01:21pm PT
|
Not at all, again, just the demographic concentration of trad climbers in both LA and NYC alone easily accounts for the crowds at JT and the Gunks. The level of TRing in the Gunks is the sport climbing and I would suspect in JT as well. Haven't been to Riverside or Echo to say what is going on there. But go to any metro area with both types of venues available such and folks are stacking up the sport areas.
Anyone who thinks that the annual tidal flow of gyms isn't serving as a commercial engine propping up the demographics is delusional. And sport routes are what allow the majority of those folks to identify themselves as 'climbers' anytime they leave the gym. No one has accurate numbers - but why don't you boys take a stab at what percentage of folks who put on a rock climbing harness this year will only clip bolts inside or out. My guess? 80-85% of the total current demographic is wholly sustained by bolted lines. That is a staggering change in the demographics of climbing in the US over a relatively short time frame. And the care and feeding of that majority demographic is driven by drills and bolts. The results of that twenty five years on may be all great and fine with you - it isn't with me.
Now, I've always been willing to concede sport climbing has a place within climbing on certain rock types and lines. However, the problem has always been, and remains, a complete lack of judiciousness, moderation, and thoughtfulness in its application. Instead, the drilling has been, and is, rapacious. In places the not under private ownership or effective land management the drilling is ongoing, unchecked, and unabated. Eldo and the Gunks are perfect examples of exactly what measures are ultimately required to 'manage' the bolting in the face of a lack of restraint on the part of it's advocates.
The demographics are undeniable as are the measures in effect in Eldo and the Gunks; they are not a matter of my imagination and unless sport climbers learn to show a voluntary shred of restraint these issues are never going to be resolved.
Edit: Bob, gyms and sport combine to serve as that growth engine propelling the overall population stats. Just like there is an overall tidal flow through gyms, there is likewise, albeit much smaller, an annual flow from gym / sport to trad driving that side of the demographic. The combination of gyms, bolted routes, and the general inculcation of climbing into pop culture, commerce, and media have driven the overall numbers. The US population has increased by roughly a third since 1970 - climbing's demographics in the same period have soared at a far higher rate driven exactly as I've laid out.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!