Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Doug...you can count in in for this summer...I would love to do the route.
This tread is gotten longer and more civil...why to go for keeping it real. Amazing what can happen when we treat each other with respect.
Ksolem wrote: Are there not enough routes out there for everyone without bringing down the last great one’s? And your predictions of future improvements in climbing tech are a very weak attempt to justify lowering your standards today. My .02.
Well it pretty obvious that there are not other route like this out there.
Coz got what he wanted out of Southern Belle...not everyone needs to follow his lead and it obvious they don't as two ascents in 28 years is not a testimony to a great route. You might to ask the 99.999 per-cent of Yosemite climbers who not even made a effort to repeat it.
|
|
Domingo
Trad climber
El Portal, CA
|
|
Hey Doug and Sean,
This question has been asked in similar forms a few times now and I don't see where it's been answered (what I mean to say is this: sorry if it's been answered; I can't find it).
Doug,
>> Doug, I'm curious why you didn't put it up ground up, then add bolts later.
> For the same reason I'm never going to do the paralled pitches of Southern Belle, much as I would love the climbing: too deadly.
>The choices before us seemed, to us, to be:
> 1. Death Route
> 2. Rap Bolting
> 3. Leave it for the Future
Could you answer his original question? It is a combination of 1 and 2 - maybe you are lumping it in with 2?
I.e. bolt it on lead, then if a particular pitch is too deadly for later parties (elitist in your view), add bolts to it (on rappel). Does this sort of combination seem pointless to you / same as 2?
This is one of my questions too.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
While it's true we're talking the Valley where such things are commonplace but - as free routes go - (and if I have this right) if Growing Up has a sixty foot bolt ladder dividing two wholly distinct gear and bolted major sections, it would seem to me as though it's two very different and separate free routes with an aid connector. As such the first [natural] route really did simply end at the top of the arch and, however good the the second half, the conjoined joined route is strictly an artificial construct whose rationale for existing can pretty much only be interpreted as a strong desire to establish a line that topped out on HD.
Just an observation to note that, at the natural end of the lower route and confronted with a blank headwall, the first call that this route would top out no matter what had to come before the decision was made about the death route status of any upper line. That aid connector together with the fact it it took significant surveying to divine a line through the upper half of HD, pretty well illustrates that however 'good' the route may be, it is in no way a natural line to the top. And I also want to mention I'm saying that with the recognition that on SFHD there simply may not be many 'natural lines' to the top - which to me is another set of both ethical and style questions which appear to come with the territory. You guys clearly made your call in the face of them.
Edit: And again, the same dilemma I may be facing though the upper face in my case is definitely more 'climbable'/protectable.
|
|
wildone
climber
Where you want to be
|
|
I'll take a shot, dom.
1. Assuming you mean ground up on aid: because it is not a bolt ladder. You can't reach the next bolt from the previous. If, on rap, we had bolted it tightly enough to reach the next bolt from the previous, I'd understand the "what's the point?" mentatlity. That could have been done, for sure, and there would be a tenth of the controversy. But who loses? The rock, with 500 unneccessary holes.
2. Assuming you meant ground up, "free": because the nature of this rock, and the almost complete dearth of hands-free stances or anything to (ethically kosher) hook from whilst drilling, there would be maybe one bolt per pitch, an outcome we didn't feel like moving towards.
I'll put up some photos of the lower half. I have none of the upper half.
Clark range from inside the big arch.
Looking up at the arch, from the base.
Zooming in to the crux of the Harding/Rowell route-the bombay. Low-quality photo.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
Ben,
> 1. Assuming you mean ground up on aid: because it is not a bolt ladder. You can't reach the next bolt from the previous. If, on rap, we had bolted it tightly enough to reach the next bolt from the previous, I'd understand the "what's the point?" mentatlity. That could have been done, for sure, and there would be a tenth of the controversy. But who loses? The rock, with 500 unneccessary holes.
Well, not 500 unnecessary holes, since the Harding route has "only" 300, but maybe 50 or 100? I suppose some would say that 10 extra holes is way too many....
> 2. Assuming you meant ground up, "free": because the nature of this rock, and the almost complete dearth of hands-free stances or anything to (ethically kosher) hook from whilst drilling, there would be maybe one bolt per pitch, an outcome we didn't feel like moving towards.
Say one bolt on a lead was all that could be placed. What about then rappeling down that pitch and adding more? That is what Becca, I and others are asking. I have done this on my own first ascents. You can also add them on subsequent leads of the pitch if there are stances to put in more on lead. That is what Eric Gabel did on Dream Easy - he led it first without any bolts, decided it was a worthy route, and went back and reled it, adding bolts on lead. This is also essentially what was done on Snake Dike, although not by the FA party but at their suggestion.
If you want to be fancy and communicate exactly which bolts were placed on lead and which on rappel, you can use different types of hangers for the bolts added after the first lead. I suppose that way if somebody wanted to just clip the originals, they could ID them. Still, they cannot recapture the FA experience because they are not drilling on the repeat ascents.
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
Why relive a FA experience when you can just do a FA? Someone with the talent to repeat routes like SB, Kharma, and a GU bolted on lead would probably just pick a new line... as has been happening. Hence there are a handful of routes on the wall with few if any repeats. Just my 2 cents :D
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
As such the first [natural] route really did simply end at the top of the arch and, however good the the second half, the conjoined joined route is strictly an artificial construct whose rationale for existing can pretty much only be interpreted as a strong desire to establish a line that topped out on HD.
The idea of 2 different routes is interesting. I can see that.
However I'd venture the strong desire was more to climb what looked like amazing stone more than establish a line that topped out. Royal has said it's the quality of the climbing that justifies bolting not the quality of the line. Edit: in your earlier post I see you recognize the desire to climb 'a stellar face' I'm sure that came into play for them too.
As for trundling from rap, I'm kinda joking but maybe... you could do it at night. The headlight will only illuminate so much. Take a quick peak looking for loose stuff but THATS IT. Preserve the onsight!
|
|
wildone
climber
Where you want to be
|
|
I don't see what the point would be, Clint. Just a bunch of weird unneccessary stuff to satisfy armchair critics seems like a contrivance to me. Assuming we had done it that way, what would people be arguing about then?
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
> Why relive a FA experience when you can just do a FA?
Because "reliving" a FA experience and doing a FA are quite different, when getting the bolts in is very difficult.
There are also people who are not interested in doing FAs because they do not want to do any drilling; they do not want to feel responsible for that impact. However, they are happy to clip bolts and make suggestions to people who are doing new routes (I may be oversimplifying their reasons).
You do have a good point that when repeating a route is rather risky, you might as well do your own FA, to at least get the "glory" that goes with doing a new route. This assumes there is a possible new route with a similiar difficulty still available.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
Ben,
> I don't see what the point would be, Clint. Just a bunch of weird unneccessary stuff to satisfy armchair critics seems like a contrivance to me.
OK, thanks for answering. There is a reason for doing it that way beyond "satisfying armchair critics":
 it allows you to have the ground up adventure, while still satisfying your interest in creating a "safe/popular" route
> Assuming we had done it that way, what would people be arguing about then?
I don't understand this question. Are you saying that you wanted people to argue about the route?
[Edit to add: see Ben's clarification below. And I agree with Ben and Bob that people would still criticize it. It shouldn't matter too much, though as long as you are happy with your decisions.]
|
|
Gene
climber
|
|
Out of curiosity - my question may have been addressed upstream - how many bolts were placed getting to the blank 60 feet? How many bolts are there in the upper 1,000 feet?
Thanks,
GM
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
it allows you to have the ground up adventure, while still satisfying your interest in creating a "safe/popular" route
Why is it important to other people what kind of adventure they have?
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
"Because "reliving" a FA experience and doing a FA are quite different, when getting the bolts in is very difficult.
There are also people who are not interested in doing FAs because they do not want to do any drilling; they do not want to feel responsible for that impact. "
I've heard horrorstories about how hard that stone is... I can only imagine trying to slam a quick bolt in. Poor schultz... lol
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Gdavis...'ve heard horrorstories about how hard that stone is... I can only imagine trying to slam a quick bolt in. Poor schultz... lol
As one who has placed bolts on routes up to 5.12 from stances I can tell that all you are worrying about is getting a hole started and then put in the quickest bolt...quarter inch by one and half inch and f*#k (quality) to anyone else later... as you are safe for the moment.
I also used a skyhook (attached to my harness) over the drill bit once it was in a half inch or so to take some relief (aid) off my feet and arms.
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
{sigh} Too bad you didn't make choice #3.
I echo Ksolem's sentiments, and repeat his [unanswered] questions as asked on the previous page.
|
|
wildone
climber
Where you want to be
|
|
Clint, I realize now how what I wrote could be mis-interpreted. My point was not that I WANTED people to argue, just that, assuming we did just what you implied, people would be criticizing us for making too many holes and being heavy-handed with the drill, etc.
It is my postulation that certain people may never be satisfied and relish the role of the critic.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Wilddone wrote: It is my postulation that certain people may never be satisfied and relish the role of the critic.
Everybody can do it better once the FA is over. They would placed less bolts, more bolts, cleaned more, cleaned less, used a hook, not use a hook, use stainless over carbon bolts, ring anchors over links, run it more, run it out less, leave the dirt in, take the dirt out, removed the loose hold, leave the loose hold, use eb's, wear a swami, solo it and so forth.
The reality of it is that maybe one per-cent of the climbing population does put the effort in doing new routes and other 99-per-cent are critics.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
I believe this right is granted in the Constitution.
Edit
After a tiny bit of research I am reminded our First Amendment is just a broader
interpretation of the English Bill of Rights(ca 1689). I bring it up only because
people, including some in high places, seem to be forgetting our Constitution. That
document is the only thing standing between us and civil war, something Osama
never dreamed he might be able to cause.
W.
Of course I remember you! You, myself, and Bob picked up a lot of good trash that day.
I would be so bold as to make a comment generally on this thread. I think the
discussion is constructive because the participants are recognizing a central fact.
The only thing any of us will get from climbing ultimately, is an appreciation for the
interesting and extremely able characters we have met.
Given that, resolving questions of all sorts, becomes possible.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!