Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2011 - 11:10pm PT
|
How many areas are there where ground up bolting is very prevalent. Retro bolting has gone crazy at Mt. Rushmore a sub area of the Needles that is the same rock. Many if not most were retro bolted by the FA party or with their conscent as I understand it. Many are on spires and while they were retro bolted many new routes went in I am assuming with the use of a power drill as there is soooo many new bolts that I know most were not put in by hand. I know they can get a permit to replace anchors but not to put in new ones. There are now routes that are 5.7 that had 4 bolts that now have 16 on one pitch. Interestingly there are new routes highly bolted right next to the retro bolted routes. Some of these you could clip two bolts right next to each other because they converge at the top of spires. I really don't know how I feel about this as I am not a superbold climber but I think this is an example of the slippery slope even with the FA party giving the OK or doing it themselves. All bolted routes are man made as opposed to a crack route and the different levels of commitment seem to be taken too far on both sides of this issue. My guess is that people will not forget how the route was done origionally, even if retro bolted, that knew in the first place, but many people never knew or never cared. I think places like this(ST) and guidebooks are the way people will remember. Sadly the retrobolters will probably win out in the end as the majority in the future will not want the adventure just saftey. I would rather see a modest amount of bolts added than whole sale bolted sport routes made of these by those that only want saftey.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2011 - 11:15pm PT
|
Mike m, That sucks, because Mt. Rushmore is so pristine otherwise.
Just kidding! But I'm glad Gutzon Borglum didn't get his hands on El Cap!
|
|
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2011 - 11:18pm PT
|
I think in the future land managers will get in the buiness of deciding if the amount of fixed gear is appropriate by judging your routes and whether the amount of fixed gear is appropriate. 1984 all over again.
|
|
Matt M
Trad climber
Alamo City
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2011 - 11:47pm PT
|
So to stir the pot a bit...
I agree with the idea that you respect the FAist wishes FOR THE MOST PART.
But what if the FA bolting job is just piss poor? Bolts that will ledge you, slam you in a corner, vary wildly in their correct placement, do not follow the natural line of weakness etc etc?
The flip side of respecting it 100% is that you may be respecting shoddy work...
I've run into this in the past...
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2011 - 11:53pm PT
|
Bolts that will ledge you, slam you in a corner, vary wildly in their correct placement, do not follow the natural line of weakness etc etc? But you just don't have any worries about any of that when the pitch has zero bolts or pro at all, do you?
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 01:43am PT
|
Being new to this site, seems like threads get ignored or the good ones are argued to the point of a scoreless tie. Anyway, I like what cragnshag said. Let the FA's decide for now and forever. Seem like the majority opinion. Doesn't seem like anyone will be too offended whatever RA decides. Having said this, I'd like to ask shipoopi and the kid if we can add bolts to burning down the house........
|
|
Chris Wegener
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 02:18pm PT
|
I think the example of Gritstone or Limestone climbing near Dresden are bad examples. The point there is that there is a scarcity of rock and not maintaining pure standards ruins the climbing for everyone since people will not have any hard routes to challenge themselves.
This is unlikely to happen in TM though I would suggest the routes on Dozer Dome are showing us the way to the future.
We are talking about a 5.9 route with a long (deadly run out (If you slip or a knob breaks near the top the climber is toast. (Not dead, but likely ground meat with multiple broken bones))) third pitch that is 5.7. Two or three bolts will improve this route immensely and open it up to the enjoyment of more climbers.
That is what this is all about. Climbers enjoying themselves. Any other consideration is meaningless. I know, I like others "enjoy" scaring myself s@#$^&s on run out climbs in TM. (Go figure)
Adding a judicious bolt or two to make the climbs safer is not opening the meadows to indiscriminate retro bolting. The community would not stand for it. Rather it is finding the balance to open the joy of climbing to those who have been scarred for life by being introduced to climbing through gyms and sport climbs.
We need to let the new climbers experience the magic that is TM without losing the spice that is the long run out, without having to risk life and limb.
Look at Needle Spoon. The original climb had three bolts. Who did it? Now it is a hard lead that doesn't require the commitment of teenager with nothing to lose.
I say add the bolts.
Regards,
Chris
(I still think 'The Great Pumpkin' needs a bolt on the second pitch. ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist.)
|
|
shipoopoi
Big Wall climber
oakland
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 03:03pm PT
|
wstmrnclmr, no, don't add bolts on burning down the house. hell, the bolts just got replaced so bob jensen can go get scared on it. LOL i'm sure kurt would concur. this route represents the era, has never seen a second(despite multiple attempts), and was a statement climb for kurt and i. in this case, tradition must be respected. the route is there only for those who have trained their mind to be fearless in the presence of extreme danger, which is what we(kurt, coz, burk, bachar, et al) all did every day. steve schneider
|
|
Mangy Peasant
Social climber
Riverside, CA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 03:50pm PT
|
So does anybody ever climb this pitch?
If no one ever climbs it, then what exactly is the debate about?
Or is the debate about the reason that nobody ever climbs it?
|
|
rockrodent
Trad climber
SLC, UT
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 03:56pm PT
|
PLEASE: don't dumb down the route. Give other's the opportunity to experience it as you once did.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 04:14pm PT
|
Let me tell you.
I'm probably the shittiest face climber on the planet.
If I could on-sight free solo Super Chicken then it can't be that hard.
I've wanted to do some routes in Toulomne and knew I was a worthless leader on those harder face pitches.
So I went with the OP of this thread so he would lead them.
So easy to do.
Find a partner who can lead the pitches you can't on the routes you would like to do if one thinks they can't do them.
Either that or you don't do em.
Ya can't do everything ......
|
|
Fluoride
Trad climber
West Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 04:28pm PT
|
If the FA'ist says yes then do it.
I did this route about 4 years ago. The first pitch was a giant piece of crap, I hated it. But the second (crack) pitch is one of the finest pitches I'd done up there in awhile. We only went as high as the second pitch, didn't think about the third but it was late in the day and getting dark.
Second pitch of Super Chicken is amazing.
|
|
orsemaj
Gym climber
SD
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 05:08pm PT
|
It is up to the FA party, but I've led it as a 5.9 climber ( I like slabs). I think it should stay the same. There are lots of other climbs around.
|
|
mike m
Trad climber
black hills
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 05:54pm PT
|
Never been to TM, but looks like lots of climbable rock. Would it not be possible to put a new pitch in 10-20 feet left or right of the origional 3rd pitch that would have better protection. You could call it the Super Fearless variation.
|
|
yosemite 5.9
climber
santa cruz
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 06:09pm PT
|
I agree that since you did the FA, it's your call. I started climbing it TM in 1986 and have seen a lot of improvements on routes for intermediate climbers. I appreciate the better protected variety that exists now. This sounds like a great idea.
|
|
Off White
climber
Tenino, WA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 06:26pm PT
|
Werner, you're at risk of becoming a blithering idiot, that last post was well nigh incomprehensible. Do you think that Rick adding a couple bolts to the third pitch you can scarcely remember soloing a bazillion years ago will tarnish your towering reputation? Do you think everyone should risk 300' falls on 5.7 ground? Do you think the FA party has no input on their route when they've completed it the first time? Honestly, I can't interpret what you think from what you post.
Your unmet friend
Off White
|
|
razmonster
climber
Mammoth Lakes, CA
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 08:53pm PT
|
I've just read most of the replies to the original post...lots of thought provoking points on both sides. I climbed the route for the first time 4 days ago and thought that the crack was fantastic for moderate climbers. I, like most climbers, didn't bother with the third pitch. I wasn't sure what to make of the dotted line on the topo that went at 5.7. Was it sandbagged 5.7? Would I miss the anchor and climb past it? Did the original route wander a bit or was it a straight shot through a sea of knobs? For a lot of moderate climbers like myself who've climbed plenty of runout routes in Tuolumne, adding a few bolts would make this route a classic. I've always thought that a great and lasting compliment to those who put up a route is when the route becomes a 'must do' if you're climbing in the area. At this point, without any pro on the third pitch, I think the route is undervalued. But again, previous posters have made very persuasive points on why it should be kept as is. My $.02 worth...add a few, keep it spicey, and give it the potential to be a classic on that wall.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 10:53pm PT
|
Fine, don't add bolts.
It will wait for the high grade climbers who have the head for that kind of thing, or
the third pitch will drift into further obscurity.
Moderate climbers will not go there.
If that's what you want, so be it.
It could still cost someone their life.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 11:08pm PT
|
will tarnish your towering reputation?
LOL towering reputation? What reputation?
There isn't any, dude, except the one you invented in your head.
Do you think everyone should risk 300' falls on 5.7 ground?
Everyone?
Nobody is going to do that unless they choose to do so.
Do you think the FA party has no input on their route when they've completed it the first time?
I never mention not to bolt it or bolt it. You made that up.
|
|
B-Bunny
climber
Sparks, NV
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2011 - 11:13pm PT
|
I feel that it's kind of snotty for people who climb hard to say "it's just a 5.7...I want to make it dicey" because for them it's simply not dicey at all. The people it's terrifying and potentially deadly for are those who have the adventurous spirit to be up there, leading their first pitch of sketchy, Tuolumne 5.7.
Those people are the ones that will benefit from both the exhilaration of a Tuolumne runout, and the hard-earned relief of making it to that first of two 50 ft spaced bolts.
There's a huge difference between a climb that has potential for a big fall, and one that people have just not properly bolted because it was so far below they're level that they impudently decided that no one who can't climb it straight through deserves to be on it.
PS - I'm not trying to imply that was the route-setters thinking on this, but adding a couple bolts that would make it "just" a possible 100 ft fall down a slab is perfectly reasonable.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!