Mountain Project Logo

Bolts next to cracks in the Wasatch

Original Post
Bobby Hanson · · Spokane, WA · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 1,230

I just want to know how everyone feels about bolting next to cracks. Obviously this issue is spawned from the ...Band Camp debate. Seriously though, how do you feel about other bolted cracks in the Wasatch? Like Cranial Profilactic...

This is intended to be an honest debate. If you want to get your kicks calling Tony names, please use the Bash Tony thread I created. If you want to get your kicks calling me names, create a Bash Bobby thread.

I will start:
I have clipped the bolt on Cranial P, and I have also climbed it without clipping the bolt. I think that the bolt detracts from the aesthetics of the route.

The bolts on ...Band Camp seem reasonable to me, but I could also see climbing the route without at least a couple of them (but not all of them).

If Tyler and company are going to say that the crack in the dihedral left of ...Band Camp is not part of their route, then there is no reason to delete Natural Line from the website, and people should try to separate their feelings about Tony from their feelings about the route.

Hollow Man is a great sport route. But I think Nathan has done the route without most (if not all) of the bolts. Seems reasonable. How was it?

I know that there is the standard "if you don't like it, don't clip it argument," but I find that a bit insulting. It is certainly a bummer to be cruising up a perfectly protectable route to come to a bolt (there are more than a few of these in Tucson, all retro'd).

I know that this is going to fan the flames here, but we need to discuss it: there are people talking of retro-bolting Pentapitch; there is talk of adding bolted anchors to Schoolroom

Lee Gitlin · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2004 · Points: 65

I am totally fine with the idea of bolts next to cracks. That being said, I lack the time/energy/motivation/know-how to be doing any bolting. If someone else wants to do it, great. Climbers could learn crack technique without shelling out the cash for a trad rack.

The idea of aesthetics as a reason to bolt or not puts us on a very slippery slope. One could easily argue that the hammered ground, devoid of vegetation, at the base of any crag detracts from aesthetics. Slings left behind detract from aethetics.

I belayed Nathan when he sent Hollow Man on trad gear. The pro placement is not very obvious and a far cry from a "traditional" trad route. Nathan's also a very strong and creative trad climber. Should we yank the bolts from Hollow Man and call it a 5.10 trad route? One could make that argument, based on aesthetics, but I would disagree.

Bobby Hanson · · Spokane, WA · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 1,230
Steve White wrote: This scares me. Scares me bad.
This is exactly why we should be discussing these things. Lee is not alone in his thinking.
David Shiembob · · slc, ut · Joined Jul 2005 · Points: 140

Aren't Wasatch bolting ethics pretty well established? What needs rehashing? No retro-bolting, respect the FA.

A sport climb you can wiggle some gear into is a lot different than a bolted crack. It was the FA decision to make it a sport route, though I'd hope no FA would bolt an obvious crack line. (I don't think Stiffler's, OTABC, and definitely not hollowman would qualify as obvious crack routes)

The cranial P bolt seems like BS, but it's been there for a long time, no ones seems to have cared enough to remove it, maybe because the route's not that great?

Fixed pins - there's good pro by the Satan's corner pin (plus that pin looks pretty solid as far as old pins go), and that manky pin on the Coffin - it's just there to remind you to be careful on those moves, it's not in the right place to offer much protection anyway. Replacing those with bolts would take some character away from those routes, and is unneccesary.

Bobby Hanson · · Spokane, WA · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 1,230
David Shiembob wrote:The cranial P bolt seems like BS, but it's been there for a long time, no ones seems to have cared enough to remove it,
Actually, it has been chopped at least once.

Hollow Man: I completely agree with you, David. I was just offering an example.

Stiffler's: This route is mostly a crack route (even according to the first ascensionists!) with the occasional bolt where needed.

OTABC: If the crack on the first pitch IS part of OTABC, then why are the bolts there? If, on the other hand, it is NOT part of OTABC, then it seems that it is a seperate route (one that Tony is calling Natural Line). The FAists of OTABC feel the two are distinct lines (as far as I understand).

Another Example:
Barefoot in Barbados has one bolt that is less convenient than the natural pro available at the same height. This is probably well-considered a sport climb so it shouldn't require gear. But a single cam instead of one of the bolts actually makes this climb safer.

David, you also wrote: "Aren't Wasatch bolting ethics pretty well established? What needs rehashing? No retro-bolting, respect the FA."

They are, but people are not respecting them. Resevoir Ridge has also been retro'd. Now many of you might scoff "who cares? It's a crappy 5.4." But it is an established climb, and if someone thinks that 5.4 needs a bolt or two, and we allow it, how do we then justify our anger when they bolt Bushwhack, Green A, The Coffin, Gordon's Hangover, S-Crack, Bongeater, Fallen Arches?
Tea · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2006 · Points: 223

Speaking of lame bolts next to cracks....

when, and by whom, did the bolt on the last pitch of tingey's terror appear?

it's the pitch that goes left up a 5.6 crack, instead of the first 5.7 pitch of the torture variation. It's like 4 inches from a textbook stopper? WTF? anyone else seen this?

I have a hard time understanding why someone would do that...it's needs to go away.

What worries me is not this specific bolt (even though it is WAY stupid)...but is that this appears to be a trend?

Anyone know what that bolted line to the right of Sweet Jane is? Or did it dissapear already? Who is this Dr. Squeeze Jobber?

Gary Olsen · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2005 · Points: 0
Bobby Hanson wrote: there are people talking of retro-bolting Pentapitch; there is talk of adding bolted anchors to Schoolroom
I dont even remember what the pro is like on Pentapitch. I assume that you are talking about the Flashdance variation rated about 11c/d. I will say that I tried to onsite it in Fire Flyers. These were Boreals first version of a sticky rubber approach shoe back in about 1985. I flailed safely. The point is it was safe 20 years ago, whats not safe now? I eventually made it up the thing. But if anyone is considering adding bolts to that thing I would highly suggest that they go talk to Merril Bitter and get his two cents worth. My two cents says if you cant pro that thing then you aint ready to try climbing it.

Schoolroom? Bolted Belays? Whoever thinks these things up should be drug behind my truck from the mouth of the canyon to snowbird, and if they still feel that way then a trip to Moab may straighten em out. Schoolroom should NEVER EVER have anything added to it. I have climbed in about 17 states over the last nearly 30 years and I have yet to find a better route for the aspiring climber to learn multi-pitch stuff, multi-techniques and placing pro. Especially a route that is so fittingly named.

Many were giving Tony a very hard time because they thought he removed the bolts from OTABC (I dont know if he did or didnt). The point is, if anyone adds bolts to an existing route they deserve the same amount of sh&&. I take that back, they deserve MORE sh&&.

This rant is not directed at anyone in particular, but if you cannot openly and freely tell others what you bolted, what you chopped or other things along those lines, then chances are, you should not have done what it is you are afraid to tell others.

There were a number of sport climbs in the Wasatch and some trad ones, that were done with less bolts than there are now. The Ruckmans were the FA team on many of the ones that I know of. They went back and added some bolts knowing for one reason for another. These include Weenie Roast in BCC (done ground up without bolts), the 5.12 thing to the left of Pschychobabble had pins that pulled on some poor dude (Stu placed bolts where the pins once resided) and I think there were a couple more.

The examples being cited here are few and far between for so many routes in the Wasatch. It is pretty simple, if you climb the thing Ground up on the FA, no chance in hell you are gonna place a bolt where you can get other pro. If you are rapp bolting, ask yourself if the guy is really gonna know to bring a hybrid alien with him when there is 13 bolts and one weird placement.

Debating bolts already there will only end up in a raging sh&&fest, like some of the other threads. Is that really necessary?

EDIT: The Schoolroom comment was a bit harsh. If there needs to be bolts for some of the belays to save trees, then I can understand that. This is just an old timers opinion when there were only about three rapp stations on the Gate. I suppose many of the newer ones are saving wear and tear on the slopes.
Lee Jensen · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2004 · Points: 935
Bobby Hanson wrote:... there is talk of adding bolted anchors to Schoolroom
Is this true? Why would you do this? Three of the four belays are slinging solid trees. What could be faster and more convenient then that?
John J. Glime · · Cottonwood Heights, UT · Joined Aug 2002 · Points: 1,160
Bobby Hanson wrote:Resevoir Ridge has also been retro'd.
God damn it!!! That's it, I am getting out the chisel! Son's of bitches! I was cool up till this point... point out the offending party please. Exum? Was it you?

Just busting your balls Bobby.

I think that if some numb nuts start adding bolts to established climbs, the community will take care of it (i.e.. chopped.) If people start putting up new routes and add bolts near cracks, well, then... I guess that is the choice of the first ascensionist, but it is pretty lame. It is the choice of the first ascensionist based on their vision of the route.
Bobby Hanson · · Spokane, WA · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 1,230

Gary,

I was talking about Pentapitch proper (5.8). There have been discussions on these boards about it, and I have also heard people (who I didn't know) talking about it at the base of the climb (I politely disagreed with them).

Barefoot in Barbados is an excellent example of a route that is mostly bolts, but one cam makes it better than the bolt that is there. If I remember correctly, this is a Ruckman route (and a wonderful one at that). The cam placement is not a hybrid alien (a very specialized piece), but is instead a 0.4 or 0.5 camalot (a standard piece). I am in NO way advocating the removal of this bolt, I am only offering this as an example of a very good route that is both better ("flow") and safer with a cam instead of the bolt.

Regarding everything else you said, I'm right there with you.

John, I generally feel exactly the same way.

Bobby Hanson · · Spokane, WA · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 1,230
Lee Jensen wrote: Is this true? Why would you do this?
I am not.
Tea · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2006 · Points: 223

Bolts on Pentapitch? Where? in the location of the old pins? WTF? NO WAY!

Anyone that thinks this is a good idea...keep talking I'm reloading.

Lee Gitlin · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2004 · Points: 65
Steve White wrote: I think you are mistaking "aesthetics" with "ethics"
I think I have it right, Steve. Aesthetics refers to 'The study and philosophy of the quality and nature of sensory responses related to, but not limited by, the concept of beauty.' Thus, to say that bolts ruin aesthetics (the quality and nature of your sensory experience) is a slippery slope, because surely hammered ground, exposed roots, wrappers, cigarette butts, and everything else that a popular crag brings detracts from aesthetics.

Now ethics, on the other hand, refers to 'motivation based on ideas of right and wrong.' The Wasatch climbing community ethics were clearly articulated earlier in the thread. Bobby asked for input. My input may not be in keeping with local ethics, but then again I have no intentions of adding bolts to routes, yanking bolts, etc.

Carry on.
Nathan Fisher · · St George · Joined Apr 2001 · Points: 7,680

Steve,
Lee is a good man (I have climbed with him on many occasions), and he stated he has no intention of bolting anything. He just doesn't see eye to eye with the ethics of the Wasatch. I love to climb with him, no matter how diametrically (sp) opposed we are to each other in ethics. Some of my purer ascents have come with Lee: Hollow man sans bolts, Riptide when I had no gear to protect the expanse between bolt 1 and 2. I still need to get him on some of the classic slabs now that fall is here. How is your foot Lee?

tenesmus · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2004 · Points: 3,023
Bobby Hanson wrote:Barefoot in Barbados is an excellent example of a route that is mostly bolts, but one cam makes it better than the bolt that is there.
Same can be said for Rebel Yell. Glad to hear Gary mention Eye in the Sky at the Psychobabble Wall - its one of my favorite climbs. Those bolts up high make it way more do-able and sending that crux on some manky pin would suck. Also, I don't know the history, but the first of the two bolts up high has a chopped bolt next to it. Maybe it was a bad re-bolting job or maybe it was moved to make it a hell of a lot easier to clip. Who knows what's happened in the years since it was established. I doubt it gets led a lot though.
Glen Kaplan · · Salt Lake City, UT · Joined Jun 2006 · Points: 729

Mostly, I am very open to what I am reading in this thread. It seems reasonable and, agreeably, necessary due to the recent fiasco around Stiffler's. I am not aware of who chopped those either but...I do get irate since I don't think they infringed upon 'Natural Line' at all. I don't like that they just got chopped w/o proper input from the FAs and community.

I follow and believe these guidelines:

1. Respect the FA
(Natural Line is definitely different than OTABC--which is only a variation pitch!!!) And I don't really consider that flake/chimney/ow/dark/vegetated thing to the left of OTABC a crack. I've climbed both lines. The flake/chimney/ow/dark/vegetated thing (aka Natural Line) is fun and takes fine gear and its not even THAT dirty. The face/flake of OTABC is really fun and takes draws. They are close to each other but not the same (even if they do cross somewhere eventually).
2. Do not bolt cracks just to turn a crack into a sport climb!
I too will eventually get violent if this happens. However, I do think there is room for the occasional bolt next to a gear placement (even next to a crack as in BIBarbados) if the line is obviously a sport line and not a crack line. This isn't necessarily black and white, I understand, but if the difference between a crack climb and a sport climb is too hard for you to discern, then don't put the bolt in until you have gotten an opinion from the community, just wait.

Some additional thoughts:
Do not confuse re-bolting with retro-bolting.
Re-bolting meaning replacing old/scary original hardware with new/safe hardware--the route remains the exact same as the FAs wishes, just renewed.
Retro-bolting meaning placing bolts on a climb that didn't have them or you didn't like where they were. This would create an entirely different route than the FAs (i.e. a sport route out of a crack route!). If you respect the FA then retro-bolting can never happen.

I don't think Cranial Prophylactic is that good either so the bolt can stay or go, I'll keep doing it every once in awhile either way.

Glen Kaplan · · Salt Lake City, UT · Joined Jun 2006 · Points: 729

If the FAs of Cranial Prophylatic don't want a bolt on their line, it'll disappear one way or another...it is a shame about the permanent hole that only climbers on the route can see though. Pure shame.

Glen Kaplan · · Salt Lake City, UT · Joined Jun 2006 · Points: 729

I like gear

and

I like bolts.

Sometimes I even mix the two for an even better high!

Guess some might call me a swinger!

Stephen Colbert · · utah · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 10

To put an end to this thread. I'm a sport fag. 95 percent of my climbing is done with bolts. I think trad climbing is an interesting off day diversion. Bolted cracks suck.

Craig Childre · · Lubbock, TX · Joined Aug 2006 · Points: 4,860

Bolting a crack to learn crack climbing techniques without having to buy gear is obsurd. There are some decent crack routes that can be setup as a top rope. Learn them that way. Never the less, your going to learn cracks, go throw down some green for a rack. The time and cash spent on bolting a crack would easily get you a decent rack.

I am in the school where if it can be protected with gear, no bolts. I don't think bolts need to be added to make a climb safer. The FA is the final authority, and for all practial purposes controls things. If they were bold, did some gnarly run out that makes you balloon knot pucker with out bolts, then go find another route. There are plenty out there. Your not entitled to be safe. Bold routes with PG13, R, and X ratings hold a different stigma than those without. I take more pride in climbing one. Just like high balls when your bouldering.

That said. I do like bolted anchors, but I would not go out putting them in on someone elses route. As for Schoolroom, I could see moving to bolts to save the wear and tear on the trees themselves, but not for convience sake.

Mark Michaels · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2006 · Points: 435

Well, finally, a discussion!

Certainly the tradition in Little Cottonwood is clear: bolting near reasonable crack protection is to be avoided. Adding bolts to other's routes without permission is certainly frowned upon....and RARELY IF EVER warranted.

That being said, in addition to LCC's beautiful, all natural crack climbs, there are numerous crack climbs that have TRADITIONALLY (over the years) featured some fixed gear (mostly pins, bongs, slings...but some bolts) where the crack wasn't sufficient to protect the climb. In some cases, but not all, modern gear can protect these routes.

Satan's could be climbed without the pin (and the mess of slings on the '1st belay' horn)...but these are tolerated because they are TRADITION on this fine climb, and may have been used by the FA party. However, in 1994, Noah Duys was killed rappelling off a fixed pin on Satan's. He was foolish to trust it as his only anchor, but I had clipped this as pro only days before....while my fall would probably not been fatal, it could have caused serious injury. So from my perspective, I am strongly in favor of removing nearly all fixed pins from the canyons. There is OFTEN good protection nearby in this age of SLCDs. So why leave suspect pins in? They may lure someone else to make the same foolish mistake. And if there is not SOLID protection where the pin resided, I favor placing a bolt. This does not alter the character of the climb, in my opinion, since when ORIGINALLY placed, the pins were probably bomber. Other routes where I am in favor of removing pins, to name a few: Coffin Crack, High Dive (second pitch), Perhaps....there are many more.

As for Retrobolting (adding bolts to routes)...again, I think there are very few cases where this is warranted. But in instances where a 5.11+ climber makes the first ascent of a 5.8 or 5.9 route, and claims that no fixed gear (or very little) is needed seems rediculous to me. I'm not saying every 5.9 climb should be a sport climb. I'm proud to have sent routes like S-Direct and Undone Book while they still had 1/4 inchers. But in my opinion, adding just 1 or 2 bolts to these routes would make them safer, yet still exciting for 5.9 - 5.10 leaders.

I really hope folks will just mellow out and go climbing, and not let a "bolt war" develop like Boulder in the 1980s.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Northern Utah & Idaho
Post a Reply to "Bolts next to cracks in the Wasatch"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.