The Erik Sloan ethics thread

Tim Lutz wrote:Erik, In all that writing you forgot something.. WOOT!

That was what was missing... I knew something was off.

To be honest, I hate Erik Sloan and all he does because I'm a lame ass gym climbing, internet wanking working stiff. God does that piss me off.

woot woot!

^^^^ you forgot "Internet missionary" And "internet warrior"

JNE wrote:Well Said, This is not the place to deal with this issue. Like many others before him, Eric Sloan is doing good things for the valley, and if you want to be a purist then don't clip his bolts. If it wasn't for Eric, we would not have the alcove swing we all love. So, where is the place to deal with issues like this? From the accounts given by people who tried to talk to Erik in person about this, it is clear that this conversation was turned into a confrontation either by Erik or by someone "sticking up for Erik" by them treating it as a confrontation as opposed to a conversation. You yourself are guilty of this. It does not appear to me that the guy, nor his supporters, have the ability to take criticism in any way, either in real life or on the internet. So, how would one better handle this? Try leading by example...

Sorry, I will work on my ability to take critism.

Rubin, you are guilty of trying to convey a conversation as a confrontation. In actual reality, the thing taking place before your eyes, thanks to the non-constructive posts of miscreants screaming and yelling and bitching and whining that this is some kind of confrontational witch hunt perpetrated by old cranky has-been evil sith lord internet warrior police missionaries intent on dividing the world, and then taking it over, and then "having" all the women, we are having an annoying and long-winded conversation which we wish we never had a reason to have in the first place.

after following this thread from the start I only have one thing to say. Who the fuck cares?

This post violated Rule #1. It has been removed by Mountain Project.

Steven R wrote: Exactly. Meet the guy and have a conversation, you'd quickly realize his outlook and the real intention behind what he does. As for shooting bullets from your keyboards, shut the fuck up and go climb something; don't be trolls.

I have met him. I agree that he comes across as a super nice guy and is super psyched and genuinely thinks he's doing good things in the Valley. And in many ways, he has. I even gave him the benefit f the doubt when people complained about things I didn't have the experience to comment on; i.e. I didn't really have much to say about things like 10 Days After or the GSR since I had not climbed them. I had not personally witnessed some of the other "transgressions" and they did not affect me personally and they largely involved aid climbs I would probably never even do. People said "just wait until he messes with a free route" and I ignored that too as just more hate.

And then it happened. He added the anchor mid pitch on BOR. Now here was something I had done and could form a direct opinion on and definitely felt that a mid pitch bolt significantly alters the route. And for what? So people could practice lower outs? IMO this crossed a line and he has completely refused to acknowledge this. I'm glad it got chopped.

I've also met several of his "business" partners in the ASCA, Supertopo, and his bigwall guide. I have to wonder why so many of these people also no longer work with him and support him? Actually, I don't have to wonder since I've asked some of them, and not a one of them has been supportive of ES. I've also talked with a few fairly prominent Valley aid climbers and none of them has been supportive either.

Most of his responses have been blatantly dismissive to other people's concerns. At least the last response was genuine and really did address people's concerns and his reasons. I appreciate that he feels the need to have "practice" routes to alleviate the noob congestion on classic aid routes, but not at the expense of altering existing free routes. It's simply not that hard to find places to practice these skills (I have) and to place your own gear to practice things like lower outs if needed. I have had no problem finding routes to practice aid skills, even if it did involve a bit of walking...after all eventually you're going to have to walk that haul bag up an down, so you might as well make that part of your "practice".

John Middendorf(a prominent Yosemite bigwall climber from the 80s and 90s) wrote:

'It's all good....but, Free climbing always trumps aid climbing. Always has, always will'.

That statement is not accurate. El Cap and Half Dome trump any other rocks in Yosemite. By a mile. And of the 2200 - 2500 different people who climbed these mountains this year, I'd be surprised if more than 5-10 freed their route.

So 99% of El Cap and Half Dome climbers are aid climbing. And they are doing this predominantly on a just a few, 'easier' routes.

My new bigwall book has hundreds of previous unpublished topos, so conceivably we should be able to spread out more and not be so clustered that a lack of aid climbing ability would not affect other folks' ascents. But unfortunately the classics are the classics for a reason: they're incredible, and usually worth climbing first.

So the bottom line is the Nose and Salathe on El Cap, and Regular Route on Half Dome are not getting any less popular. Having an effective practice aid circuit can go a long way toward helping folks shine on the big stones.

There thousands of one pitch climbs in Yosemite. Book of Revelations is a one-star route right by the road and bathrooms, which just happens to also be right next to the place that everyone goes to practice aid climbing. It's not some huge concession to have a mid-pitch anchor for aid climbing practice. As I've pointed out on other threads, there are tons of mid-pitch anchors on other routes, for no reason other than you can stop climbing the pitch early, and no one seems to be all tweaked about them.

In John Middendorf's time in Yosemite there were way less climbers, so we just learned on the wall as we went up. That is the way a lot of old timers still view a practice aid circuit - with a kind of 'well we've gotten by until now, so why is it needed?' kind of attitude.

The crowds on the Nose and the Regular Route are getting close to needing regulation. An effective practice aid circuit is not a panacea, but it along with one-rope rap routes from Sickle, Dolt, and the Robbins Traverse might go along way toward keeping folks safe, and helping them have an awesome adventure up there without clustering those routes up so bad that the NPS decides to start regulating bigwall ascents.

What I don't hear much of in this discussion is what kinds of stewardship projects you guys are interested in? Honestly there is so much to do here - heck the NPS almost just closed all the parking on the El Cap meadow side of the straightaway by the El Cap bridge. Involvement of all kinds is needed!

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

^^^^^^^

For you to talk about "stewardship" and at the same time downplay all the criticism is ridiculous.
Genuine stewardship involves protecting our values and ideals, and ushering them into the future. Certain actions, like your anchor on Book of Revelations, totally fly in the face of our traditions; traditions that, although not perfect, do work to serve the community and continue our status as a largely self policing user group.

You're right that the anchor at Church Bowl didnt NEED to be such a big deal. If you had just pulled the bolts, said you get it, then we could all just shake our heads and move on. Instead you insist on obscuring the real issues.

We should expect more from people in the position you have taken on. And certainly from anyone playing the "stewardship" card.

Alex Bury wrote:You're right that the anchor at Church Bowl didnt NEED to be such a big deal. If you had just pulled the bolts, said you get it, then we could all just shake our heads and move on. Instead you insist on obscuring the real issues.

In fact the anchor in the middle of the Book of Revelations is[was] a BIG DEAL. Especially for climbers who climbed this route free along with another classic route Church Bowl Tree. Those routes are not a place to practice aid and occupy by one aid party from morning to sunset. When Sloan downgrade quality of the routes saying on this tread that they are one star routes - this is not true. Both routes in Reid book marked as two star routes out of the 3 possible and in fact both is very good and MP rated them as average 3 stars out of 4
mountainproject.com/v/book-…
mountainproject.com/v/churc…
This anchor in the middle of BOR was chopped pretty quickly and will be chopped again if Sloan persist. Actually this Sloan action and his mental disability to accept that he is really pissing people off made him well known in negative way.

Yo Gang,

Thanks for your comments.

Again, it seems like people are pretty quick to make a big deal about a mid-pitch anchor on BOR, even though I've pointed out several other instances where there are similar situations and no one cares.

When I point out, for example, that someone(I don't know who put the route up, and there has been no cry online here for the author to come forward) established a new route right into the middle of an established 10a route on Middle Cathedral, Paradise Lost. Drilled bolts right in the middle of the pitch AND put an anchor in the middle of that pitch. No one even checks if that is accurate, or looks into it.

But when I say that I researched all the practice aid climbing options, climbed most of the routes in the so called 'practice aid circuit' lists, and came up with a plan to make a real practice aid circuit that would address real issues of folks being unprepared here in Yosemite for bigwall climbs. And I went and talked to several experienced community members who also teach practice aid climbing, and they agreed that this was a worthy project. When I describe doing all of that, you guys just say 'he doesn't get it - we don't agree with him'.

I'll say again. In no time in Yosemite climbing history has the whole community agreed on anything. We are as divided now as ever. The bolts on Knobby wall were chopped 4 times, but are now back on there. For how long? The bolts on Cookie Monster have been chopped at least 2 times, but are back on there. These are added bolts on established climbs. Plain and simple. This new route on Middle Cathedral has been around for a while it looks like. It adds bolts and mid-pitch anchors to established climbs. The Nose on El Cap has several mid-pitch belays which have now been replaced, and are alternate belays that allow the tons of parties who are climbing up there to climb more smoothly.

I appreciate all your comments. In the end, a real Erik Sloan ethics thread would be about coming together to improve climbing access/safety in YOsemite. There are so many things to work on here - forming action committee's within the YCA to address sensitive climbing related issues(like losing the parking at El Cap), trails, multi-lingual information signs for Camp 4 - and brochures for visiting climbers, replacing old bolts, etc.

That's what I'm about - connecting with other Yosemite people to share in this mountain majesty. We had an awesome night last night around the four foot 'campfire' at the mountain room bar - sharing stories and Yosemite cheer. Let's keep this dialogue going, but let's shift it toward more proactive things that we can all be doing.

Because I don't do my projects alone. I do them with other Yosemite community members. People who are psyched to be a part of taking care of this place. Get involved. Share your stoke!

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Anchors in the middle of established are a big deal. They are essentially protection bolts in the middle of a pitch. They completely detract from the climbing in a place where you would have had to make the moves and protect mid climb. They completely lower the skill level and commitment need to finish the pitch, especially since you just easily bail off that pitch. I would feel the same about any of the other examples that you bring up.

Again, I really do appreciate much of the work you've done. But retro-bolting established free lines crosses a line. And given all the other projects you yourself have said need to be done it, seems like a line that doesn't need to be crossed! I think it's a pretty small concession to be made on your part to continue on the projects that you and other Yosemite climbers deem important.

As far as the Yosemite community members that work with you and support you...let's hear from them. I have yet to hear any of them speak up for you. I'm guessing that most anyone who supports your aid circuit are people who have a financial stake in training aid climbers...ie guides who want a place to conveniently teach these skills.

HI CSProul(what's your real name, btw)?

There are thousands of climbs in Yosemite. Estimates range from 3,000 - 5,000. I explained that I didn't add bolts in the middle of the pitch on BOR to make it easier, I did so to encourage a practice aid circuit. There are no practice aid circuits at this time. So 3,000 - 5,000 climbs and none completely dedicated to practicing aid climbing - even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap. That is unreasonable.

The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers, want nothing to do with this thread because of your negativity. That is why I'd love to see the thread shift toward stewardship issues that we can be more proactive in at least talking about - because the bolting issues have turned people off.

Folks generally believe that you, and other older climbers, go online as some last ditch effort to scream against the inevitable changes that are occurring.

Here's the difference - I want you to be part of the Yosemite climbing community. That is why I'm on here connecting with you guys.

Keep it comin!
Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Erik Sloan wrote:HI CSProul(what's your real name, btw)? There are thousands of climbs in Yosemite. Estimates range from 3,000 - 5,000. I explained that I didn't add bolts in the middle of the pitch on BOR to make it easier, I did so to encourage a practice aid circuit. There are no practice aid circuits at this time. So 3,000 - 5,000 climbs and none completely dedicated to practicing aid climbing - even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap. That is unreasonable. The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers, want nothing to do with this thread because of your negativity. That is why I'd love to see the thread shift toward stewardship issues that we can be more proactive in at least talking about - because the bolting issues have turned people off.

How were the majority of Yosemite climbers surveyed? Where are these survey results viewable?

The only opinions I've been able to find are in posts online and in conversations with friends. These opinions are mostly against modifications of existing routes without due process.

Erik Sloan wrote: Again, it seems like people are pretty quick to make a big deal about a mid-pitch anchor on BOR, even though I've pointed out several other instances where there are similar situations and no one cares. When I point out, for example, that someone(I don't know who put the route up, and there has been no cry online here for the author to come forward) established a new route right into the middle of an established 10a route on Middle Cathedral, Paradise Lost. Drilled bolts right in the middle of the pitch AND put an anchor in the middle of that pitch. No one even checks if that is accurate, or looks into it.

I care about those case as well. I'm opposed to modification of existing routes without due process (such as consulting the FA & the community).

Seems to me that the real issue in all this discussion is process: the process by which the decision about BOR was made.

Improving the aid training circuit is indeed a worthy project.

However, if the only user survey about the actual BOR anchor was with local aid instructors, it neglected a large part of the community that you keep saying we're all a part of. It should be obvious that there are a lot of community members who are opposed to the modifications.

Stewardship can't happen without a process that adequately represents the various stakeholders.

This discussion is very much about stewardship, because it's about protection of climbing resources by preventing local ethics violations on retrobolting.

So, let's get on with this stewardship discussion about how such decisions are made and about the apparent majority opposition to the mid-pitch BOR anchor...

Erik Sloan wrote:HI CSProul(what's your real name, btw)? There are thousands of climbs in Yosemite. Estimates range from 3,000 - 5,000. I explained that I didn't add bolts in the middle of the pitch on BOR to make it easier, I did so to encourage a practice aid circuit. There are no practice aid circuits at this time. So 3,000 - 5,000 climbs and none completely dedicated to practicing aid climbing - even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap. That is unreasonable. The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers, want nothing to do with this thread because of your negativity. That is why I'd love to see the thread shift toward stewardship issues that we can be more proactive in at least talking about - because the bolting issues have turned people off. Folks generally believe that you, and other older climbers, go online as some last ditch effort to scream against the inevitable changes that are occurring. Here's the difference - I want you to be part of the Yosemite climbing community. That is why I'm on here connecting with you guys. Keep it comin! Woot Woot! Erik Yosemitebigwall.com

I think I've kept my conversation pretty positive and have tried to have a real dialog here...I've really tried not to stoop to "negativity". Can you show me where I have?

Older climber? I'm not sure I'm much older than you are.

I appreciate the efforts and the only thing I have ever objected to was the addition of retro-protections bolts. I don't think that's such an extreme stance. Hell, even Roger asked what you were thinking with that one! It should not be all that difficult to come up with a practice aid circuit without retro-bolting existing lines.

Haha!

You're all out!

Sloan is in!

Deal with it!

Erik Sloan wrote:There are thousands of climbs in Yosemite. Estimates range from 3,000 - 5,000. I explained that I didn't add bolts in the middle of the pitch on BOR to make it easier, I did so to encourage a practice aid circuit. There are no practice aid circuits at this time. So 3,000 - 5,000 climbs and none completely dedicated to practicing aid climbing - even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap. That is unreasonable.

Chris Mac taught himself to aid climb in a tree. I don't climbers NEED a dedicated aid circuit to practice on. All you need is a protectable feature, preferably one that isn't super popular so you don't hold up the lines of people wanting to free it.

Let's compromise, though, and say that maybe Yosemite climbers need an aid circuit to practice on. You could have chosen to establish a couple of new routes for this purpose, rather than altering an existing climb. Nobody would have felt violated if you had put up an aid circuit on a fresh piece of stone.

Erik Sloan wrote: even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap. That is unreasonable.

Also, please point us to the data which shows that the vast majority of Yos climbers aspire to [aid] climb Half Dome or El Cap.

Adam Burch wrote:Haha! You're all out! Sloan is in! Deal with it!

Haha! And.......... DONE!

Erik Sloan wrote: The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers, want nothing to do with this thread because of your negativity.

And in 7th grade, I remember this one kid from the trailer park who said he had a girlfriend from Canada. Man, the kinky stuff she used to do with him!
To this day, I still wonder how some of it was even physically possible...
We never got to meet her though, as he said she wasn't into meeting other dudes. I guess we were not mature enough for her, who knows?

Imaginary friends are just reclusive like that sometimes.
On the bright side, it means you get to speak for them without contradiction.