12 QDs and 1 Cam?

I'll occasionally see comments on routes where people complain about a bolt in a certain location, i.e. "There's a perfect nut placement where the 10th bolt is!", or "There's a crack that runs for the first 10 feet of the climb, why bolt it?"

I'm not asking about bolting in general - that dead horse has been beaten so badly it's not even recognizable. Instead I wonder why people take issue with one or two bolts on a predominantly bolted climb.

I must admit, I've been a sport climber much longer than I've been a trad climber and I tend to think that people who chop bolts are douchy; so I may have a bit of a bias that's preventing me from seeing the reason behind these complaints. That being said - what's the reason for these comments? What's the point of leaving out one or two bolts on a route with 12 bolts? What's the point of having a well-bolted 7 pitch climb where 1 pitch only has 2 bolts? If I'm going to sport climb, I want to sport climb. I don't want to take a rack of draws and 3 pieces of gear. Maybe I just haven't been climbing long enough to understand.

Ohh...and nobody quote Yvon Chouinard. I get it. Rock is finite. We need to protect it.

Think about the first ascentionist and the time it takes to place 1 bolt vs. 1 cam or a nut. If I am going to put up a route I want to use as much trad gear as possible, not only because of the environmental activist ethics shit, but because its cheaper and faster! Just bring a cam and sack up.

Austin Baird wrote: Ohh...and nobody quote Yvon Chouinard. I get it. Rock is finite. We need to protect it.

I have other things to say I guess, but why would I want to engage in conversation with someone that asks for the other point of view and then dictates what it's not allowed to be?
How would I expect a discussion like that to go?

What about 11 QD's and 2 cams?

What would you suggest as a "cutoff" at which point it's no longer acceptable to bolt next to a crack or protectable feature?

People climb at their own risk. If someone climbs a runout climb and gets injured, it is that person's fault.

Also, the rack argument doesn't hold much water. Most climbers don't have wide gear, but you don't see too many people advocating the bolting of all the off-widths. In fact, in most areas, there are only a few big cracks. Why make people drag all that big gear to the crag just for one or two routes? That stuff weighs a lot!

"I'm a trad climber at heart, but whenever I see a partial gear lead at a sport cliff, I go---why didn't they just bolt it? Nobody is going to bring their rack out for this random 5.9 climb so it will either never get climbed, or it will and people will risk their safety because they think its just sporty."

You know John, I come from a trad background, but it was Wendell B. who mentioned the same thing to me. "Leave it mixed and it will seldom get done. Make it so people can climb it with a rack of draws and it will become a classic."

First off: As a developer you park your ego somewhere outside the zone in which you are working and creating.

So I've retro bolted my own routes in a couple places where you could get good gear. It definitely changes the nature of the lead in every case. Felt kinda funny, but other local climbers seem to like it. Maybe it's something about the culture locally. It's extremely unlikely I'd do that anywhere in CA, AZ, Washington or Colorado...But who knows? If more people do the route then I guess it's OK and justifies the extra $4.00/placement.

Case in Point: I found I could get a decent blue TCU at the start of "Belief in Proportion to the Evidence", but my partners convinced me to just make a bolt placement. Higher on the climb you need some small stoppers and a 0.75 or #1 Friend to get protection. That was left for gear. Better bring some, or be prepared to run it out about 20-25 feet.. My rationale: Pitching off above the first placement you could get seriously hurt if it pulled...not everyone has excellent nut craft..a bolt could be justified...Up higher you might not deck. Otherwise gear requirements are spelled out in the guide. Other routes in the area require gear. You're gonna have a moderate rack.

If I do something like 12 QD's and a couple cams, it's probably because the line was done ground up where my ethics are not the same as a top down rap bolted route. With a cordless drill, if you're practiced, on lead, it takes about average 7 minutes to complete a 3/8" x 3.5 placement. 15 minutes by hand if your stance is adequate.

The only time I might bolt next to a protect-able crack is initially to indicate where the route goes if there are multiple crack choices.

I seen examples where poor climbers will leave out bolts...or use cheap hardware. It's up to you to determine if that's a dis-service to the climbing community. I feel it's important to do do the best installing job possible - That's just me.

In an area with predominately bolted climbs I am much more likely to just bolt next to that "perfect gear placement. I admit, it's personally uncomfortable to do so, but more people will climb the route if it's protected in a way they can recognize.

Case in point: Up at Sesame Street(Universal Wall), there was a climb which started with 2 bolts and then led into a corner protected with gear to the bolted anchor - about 5.7. I found people would clip the first two bolts and then traverse right to the adjacent 5.8 climb, ignoring the natural line.

2 years later, I ended up "obliterating' that gear route and establishing " The Count Becomes Difficult" @ 5.8+ which is well protected (bolted), has nicer moves IMO and is frequently done.

In the end IMO it's about how the route made you feel as you clip the anchors...ecstatic, terrified, pumped, worked or just bored...maybe somewhere in between.

I started climbing in the late 80's during the "Great Transition" from the "Golden Age" of free climbing to "Modern" sport climbing. I am in the habit of always carrying a small rack of medium nuts, a few small to med. cams and a few tricams to "sport" crags or destinations. Why? Because most areas have a few classic runout early sport climbs as well as a few gear climbs. And every once in awhile even a modern bolted climb has a gear placement that provides added safety or peace of mind. The added weight in minimal and mixed climbing is fun, so why not.

Bolting gear placements pulls everything down to the lowest common dominator as does a bolt/meter. All climbs for all people all the time. This approach lulls us into a false sense of safety. Anybody here ever find themselves halfway up a climb short on draws because they were nonchalant about the easy bolted warm up and too busy talking to count bolts? I have, and I've never encountered that same problem on a mixed or gear route because the very nature of attempting such climbs demands my full attention immediately.

Don't like the climb or the way the climb was established?
Go climb another one.
No climbs to suit your tastes?
Get to work and find some undone lines and put up a route you like.

My $.02-Placing a bolt anywhere near a natural placement is lame, no matter the situation,

@Thomas - that was exactly the answer I was looking for. You explained the thought process of a route developer and offered a reasoned explanation to my question. Thanks.

@David and Dustin - some of us didn't start climbing during the "Great Transition". Some of us taught ourselves how to climb and never even knew trad existed or how to get into it until recently. For people like us, offering facile and cliched responses like "bolting brings the climb down to the lowest common denominator" isn't particularly helpful. I'm not trying to be insulting, it's just that this particular response is offered every time this debate is brought up. Is the poor college student from flatland Texas who's just getting into climbing and can barely afford a used set of draws the lowest denominator? If so, what do we tell him? "Sorry man, it's not climbing unless it's trad. Come back when you have more experience and a full rack?" If you disagree with Thomas' explanation of why he bolts near placements, I'd enjoy your reasons. Otherwise, proffering "it's lame" doesn't help me understand you very much.

Austin Baird wrote: Is the poor college student from flatland Texas who's just getting into climbing and can barely afford a used set of draws the lowest denominator? If so, what do we tell him?

Having been in that position a year or so ago I can definitely address that. I'm a poor college student and have been climbing for 6 years. 5 of those have been outdoors and 1 year has been trad.

If you've ever been to Western NC, you know that the sport climbing opportunities are rather limited. Especially when I only had Rumbling Bald and Looking glass (0 bolted routes) as viable options most of the time.

Even so, I respected the ethics of the area for 3 years and just did what sport climbs I could, sometimes stumbling upon a mixed route and having to run it out. Not once did I complain that "damn, I wish someone would come along and bolt more of this Granite so that I can climb it". No, I waited until last summer when I had enough extra cash to get a rack together and joined the majority of local climbers and climbed the rock here with the ethics of the region.

It all depends on the ethics of the region. If local ethics allow for bolting next to cracks, go right ahead! But if they don't, don't preach about the poor college student. Having been there (am still there), I can definitively say that the college student should quit whining and respect local ethic. If he/she can't climb because they can't afford a rack, then they need to wait until they can save up.

My $.02

Yup, in most cases, "come back when you have more experience and the proper equipment" is prudent. I am not of the mindset that everything should be safe and convenient for everybody. What ever happened to self reliance in the mountains. I don't feel bad for someone who sees some bolts and just goes trucking up the climb not knowing for sure whether it will be bolted all the way up to the anchor and then gets into a bad spot. If people do some sketchy traverse or something to get to a bolt on the route next door when there is good gear right near them, thats on them to make a safe decision about whether to go down or accept some risk.

I ain't saying you can't establish a route in any way that you see fit. Wanna bolt next to that crack? Have at it. People can do as they wish. Thomas freely admits that he has placed bolts next to cracks. His reasons are well thought out and he's honest about what he does and he seems comfortable with it. He understands local ethics and practices and makes a judgement call. I whole heartedly believe that more people are climbing and having fun on the route now that its easy and safe and you have to carry less gear up the hill. Good on him. I disagree with it, but I'm not saying he don't have the "right" to do so. I disagree with bolting next to cracks for convenience.

I don't feel when I'm establishing a route that I'm a public servant who needs to sterilize it for everyone who follows or to make a route that the maximum number of peope will enjoy. I try to create a route that conveys what the rock has to offer, be it a line of holds up an unprotectable face or a crack that accepts natural protection, or a bit of both. Even if it's annoying to carry and place one cam on an otherwise bolted route, I personally feel better about it and will continue to establish routes in this manner.

I don't think sport climbing isn't climbing or valid. I respect people who go through the work to put climbs in. I've toiled a bunch on my share of routes, both fully rap bolted and ground up bolt less, and many things in the grey area in the middle.

Oh yeah, as for "its lame". That was just my $.02. I stated that and it aint' worth much more. It's not the american standard or the absolute right stance, just a drop in a sea of opinions.

This is coming from another "poor college student". If I'm climbing anything trad, it's on someone else's rack. I don't know enough about climbing to debate the ethics, but I have climbed some fun mixed trad/sport routes. I liked how they allowed me to practice placements on a real climb, either next to a bolt or between bolts, without having to depend entirely on my placement. I'd like to see more lines like this, as long as the local ethics allow.

Austin Baird wrote:What's the point of leaving out one or two bolts on a route with 12 bolts? What's the point of having a well-bolted 7 pitch climb where 1 pitch only has 2 bolts? If I'm going to sport climb, I want to sport climb. I don't want to take a rack of draws and 3 pieces of gear.

Hey Austin, like many climbers I initially got into climbing by sport climbing because gear is expensive, I primarily climb trad now but still on occasion climb some sport routes.

When I was first learning to place gear I would often times seek out a climb with bolts and natural placements for gear so I could learn and get used to placing (i.e. fumbling) gear with the added safety of the bolts and to gradually build up a rack.

That said my personal feeling on adding a bolt near a natural placement is poor style, on that note many climbers out there do not share the same point of view as me and that is why I think it is important to respect the local ethics when it comes to bolting.

There are a few interesting points in here. I would like to address the "poor student" argument first. Although I was not a student when I started, I was poor. I met older more experienced climbers and picked their brains and followed them everywhere. By being respectful and gracious I was lent gear and taken out on "scarier" missions always working my way up into a place in the community. I am older now and I am passing this tradition along by lending gear (even my car) giving away crash pads to "poor" guys in their twenties and trying to show them an even approach to climbing. Maybe you need a mentor?
On bolted cracks. There is a classic 12a here at Cochiti Mesa called "gunning for the bhuda" that had a gear placement up high before a thin crux. For many of us old dudes this was a mile stone and we would share our story of "hanging it out there". It really was not dangerous but we were pussies. Now it is bolted and it is just another 12 amongst many at said crag. I mean, who cares if you do it or not. I think it is a shame to "dumb" everything down. I think much of climbing should stay scary or serious. It is supposed to be. If the route does not meet your requirements then move on to something else. It has always been this way.
We, as climbers, have all at one time or another had to leave something undone. It is why we keep trying.

Where I learned to climb, there are a number of 'mixed' routes. I agree with earlier poster that it allowed me to experience trusting gear but without having to place it on the whole climb. It also forced me to evaluate a route before I sent off on it. It helped me learn route-finding.

The mindset of the bolter is the reason there are 'mixed' climbs. From what I hear, bolting with a hand drill on lead is hard. Bolting costs money, time, work, etc. Perhaps you should switch your thinking - bolts only become necessary (for protected climbing) where normal protection is impossible. Remember that for many, especially those of old, the norm (and easier option) is clean protection, not bolts.

But also, I see it as an advantage that fewer people are able to climb a route, if it is because of experience/know how/guts. It gives another level to the climbing experience. 'Mixed' routes have their place.

That is funny John that you bring up the 5.8 at Magic Bus. My wife and I climbed that last winter along with a couple other friends and although scary, what a great experience! You get to the top of a route like that and no matter the grade you have cause to celebrate. With that said, there is no way in hell my wife would ever lead it! But my feeling is, it is perfect in its current state. We have so many well bolted routes (especially at places like Red Rocks) that are fun and make it easy to have a good time out on the rocks. Lets try and keep the ones that stand out. The ones that make you "pull out your back of tricks". I mean, isn't that what makes places like Toulumne so special and rewarding.
PS: I spent some time at the Gunks years back and always marveled at the experience of easy scary climbing. It made it my favorite "Sport Crag" ever. It climbs like "sport" but because you are on gear, there is always an importance to your focus and ability. It is nice every once in a while to have to regard your actions more seriously.

If you can't afford a rack and don't have the gear for some route, top rope it.

+1 Jonathan

Yeah John, I know that Magic Bus route.

Fun to see people come out to hash the same old stuff. IMO it's important to do so cause there is no absolute answer. The sport (some would say life style) is evolving and we all climbers should participate. It's important because in some ways it goes to the heart of why we climb.

Couple points I'd like to make. First, with one exception I can remember, I DON'T BOLT NEAR CRACKS. That one bolt was installed later on the insistence of my co-developer. I DON'T CONDONE OR ENCOURAGE BOLTING NEAR GEAR PLACEMENTS.

That said, I have bolted near a gear placement on the insistence of my co-developers. Those situations typically occur in limestone. I am never comfortable with it. I feel in every case, it does "dumb down" the route. The issue almost always comes up in a rap bolt scenario. Something like" if you gonna go to the trouble of rap bolting it why not make it safe?"

We had this issue a few years back on a limestone crag. The route was 5.9 and about 110 ft long. Rap bolted. It was 25 ft to the first clip (not too hard) and then you moved onto a bulge where you needed to hang off one arm while placing a red tricam or a stopper in a hole. Match hands in the pod and pull up to the next fissure where you hung while placing a blue metolius 3 cam unit or a green alien. The feet were adequate. Clip that with a draw, flag left to roll and reach for a thin crimp at your reach extent. Start the pull and match on the crimp. Get your feet high and on some edges, Stand up. Thin hands. That was the first crux. about 9-. Safe enough if the gear was good. I thought the moves were cool. Hanging out to place called on several skills: finding a way to get a rest stance. Relaxing so you didn't pump out and finding and setting the pieces...

My co- developers complained every time we went there. "That's the only gear on the entire route. If you spend a lot of time there you pump out on the next two crux sections. Then you are blown 75 ft. higher at the roof moves near the top. Why not just bolt it?"

Finally we added one bolt to that section of the moves. You know what? That route is easier to lead.

I've remarked before how Red Rocks seems bolt friendly...some would say over friendly. Go somewhere else and you will not find near as many bolted anchors and "clip and go" routes in my experience.

When to place during development is personal or group decision and can be different in every scenario, but when and where to bolt on a new route determines how other climbers will react to it. If that doesn't matter to you then you will act accordingly and be judged.

I find that each new route brings these issues forward to be reckoned with again.

Ever been on something you thought was over-bolted? How about getting on a generally well protected sport route and seeing that the bolt you are clipping will allow you to crater on the ledge below if you blow the next sequence? Routes like that exist at Red Rocks. I consider them stupid constructions.

Conversely, ever been to a route where it's hard right off the ground and the first clip is beyond where you can reach with your 16 ft stick clip? How about getting on a face route where you can deck if you blow the clip at the second or third bolt?

I would argue those routes have a legitimate place in climbing.

But to return to the original topic, yes, occasionally you will find mixed routes with just a couple placements. If you develop something like that, when you post route information, let people know they need to bring an appropriate rack.

This is the best I can offer for an elegant answer:

There are already full sport routes and full trad lines. Is it enough justification to say that some people want the in-betweens to be in-betweens and it isn't all about what someone lacking the gear wants?

That's the end of the short answer.

For my own part, I don't give a shake about someone putting a single bolt on a route that might as well have a single placement, but I don't like seeing routes with 40' of protect-able territory like a handcrack bolted.

In my own experience, people that 'almost' fully bolt lines that can take gear usually put a bolt a bit before and a bit after the placement so that they can't get accused of putting a bolt next to t perfect stopper placement, but also so that if you didn't bring it, you are not screwed.

Lastly, some folks bolt on lead by hand. Placing a bolt is hard work and reduces, by fatigue, your odds of a flash FA. Why should they have to place one right by a good gear placement? Obviously it's within their ability to lead without it, so people can.

So, as the guy who wrote the online description here for "Zipperhead", yeah, I'm familiar with that route at Magic Bus. I liked it just fine as it was. It was a mellow route which I was comfortable climbing and the fun of it, part of which was tinkering in gear.

Hey Austin,

Head to Vegas, climb Prince of Darkness, then get on Rock Warrior. Feel the difference. Read the comments, how many call Rock Warrior "6 pitches of the same thing"?

Both are awesome climbs in my book, the climbing is almost the exact same, the experience is hugely different.

Prod.