Right of Tell Tale Heart, this varied and excellent route climbs a steep left facing corner. Certainly one of the best routes on the crag, it is amazing to find this one undocumented here. Strenuous, but "marred" by an excellent rest above a tricky sequence midway. Milk the rest for all it's worth, because the crux is getting to the anchors.
Should this route be chopped? I propose that suggestions like this be made by people who are willing to sign their names as well. There is roughly 1/3 of the climb that is readily protectable with natural gear. The bottom crack, which is probably where Steve D clipped bolts, is mostly blind and/or thin with poor or no placements until after the second crux where the crack system opens up, . Then it's pretty easy up to the last crux where a good crack exists as well. Would it be as popular or as fun without bolts? Anyone interested can check out the crack to the right which gets done very infrequently despite its high quality and good gear. My suggestion to AC--go ahead and climb Eleanor without bolts or without a rope or in flip-flops but otherwise keep the talk about route-chopping to himself, unless he's willing to identify himself.
Ok, easy guys. I'm not asking anyone to chop bolts. I was just curious to see what people think about bolts on top of clean pro. Maybe I used the wrong wording. I just don't think a bolt should be next to good clean pro. You can hate me for that if you wish.
Yes, this is a typical example of doublespeak. On the one hand this is only a gym route (and gym routes are changed with regularity) but on the other there is supposed to be a special honor conferred on somebody who poorly bolts a piece of rock after top-roping it. It's ironic that the "right of the first-ascentionist" is the one traditional right proclaimed, even when they really aren't a first-ascentionist at all but only a misguided routesetter.
Thanks for the doublespeak explanation, Steve. Lets see, another and even better example of doublespeak would be Saturnalia. A route which toproped climbing that had previously been led onsight and then poorly retrobolted that climbing. And lets not forget no lo contendere, which also poorly bolted rock that had been onsight soloed. What knd of special honor should we confer on you?
"Thanks for the doublespeak explanation, Steve. Lets see, another and even better example of doublespeak would be Saturnalia. A route which toproped climbing that had previously been led onsight and then poorly retrobolted that climbing. And lets not forget no lo contendere, which also poorly bolted rock that had been onsight soloed. What knd of special honor should we confer on you?"
Interesting...
Anyway, I've climbed this many times as it is a great warm up, and have never thought of it as a trad line. I generally don't clip the last bolt, and therefore, would not place gear in the short crack at the top. It is a sport route and a good one. I have no problem with it as it is.
By the way, there is a crack that goes in the .11+ range (next to elanor) that was not bolted where gear can be placed. I think that demonstrates a reasonable descretion on the part of those to developed the area.
Steve Dieckhoff has been a constant voice in the climbing community for at least as long as I have been climbing myself (4 May 1980). In this entire period he has expressed a constant opinion, and as near as I can tell he has never relented and has never hidden from his opinion. He makes the point that placing a bolt trumps a trad placement because it becomes a permanent feature of the landscape, and asks the question "does placing a bolt confer a special right to permanently alter the landscape?" He comes up with "no" as an answer. There are least a few critical elements that require consideration in this complex and evolving issue. First, if placing a bolt on unrestricted rock is a "right" of the first ascensionists, then restoring the rock must necessarily be an equivalent "right". Second, climbing has always held room for the climber to express their own creativity, and where this creativity does not infringe upon legal restriction it should be given unrestricted expression. Third, what Steve wants, as best as I can determine, is for the first ascesionists to consider well the interests of the climbing community at large and to exercise respect for a limited resource. There are, of course, a lot of things to consider in weighing these concerns, but surely he must be correct in this demand. As far as Elanor is concerned, the climbing community has, in general, voiced little opposition to the bolts and the route can be climbed without clipping them all. It's a fine route with brilliant climbing and Mark saw it best as a fully bolted line. Is there anything here that we cannot live with?
Richard wrote: Third, what Steve wants, as best as I can determine, is for the first ascesionists to consider well the interests of the climbing community at large and to exercise respect for a limited resource. There are, of course, a lot of things to consider in weighing these concerns, but surely he must be correct in this demand.
Did you let this voice of Steve's guide you when you put bolts beside cracks that can protect with natural gear?
I don't think that all of the new routes that you have done, you place the bolts with Steve's voice in the back of your head telling you "how and where" to place them.
I think it is more important to let the ethics of the area guide you and what the majority of climbers in that area feel is a good route.
What works well at Shelf Road may not be so good in Eldorado.
The voice of the few on each end of spectrum do not support the voice of the majority of climbers in between.
Interesting thoughts, Richard. I'm still a little unclear as to how Saturnalia and No Lo fit in wth Steve's constant and unrelenting position. It seems like his unrelenting position, relents when there's a route he wants to do. But he certainly appears to revel in telling the rest of the climbing community how they should act. Glass houses are still as fragile as ever.
Bob - No argument there. We're all learning, I suppose. In trying to grapple with where S.D. is coming from, it was not hard to see his side of things. I guess, what I'd like to be able to do is to keep this broader view of things in mind all the time, and you're right I have not always done so. I'm also putting away a lot of very inflammatory things attributed to him. But part of my point in trying to balance the many things that come up when we put up new routes is that we all enjoy the "right" to express ourselves, however we choose, so long as we stay within legal limits. There is a kind of anarchy to climbing as you well know, perhaps even more when put up new routes, and I think we need to hold on to that even if we don't staisify Steve or anyone else. But I can live with a little Steve gremlin perched on one shoulder asking whether that permanent bolt is indeed what we want to leave.
After forgetting this site for a pleasantly long time I see that not much has changed..... but I'd like to say that I appreciate Richard Wright's thoughtful comments and open-minded attitude.
If there's anything that gives a moment's pause to impulse-bolting then it's all for the good - because what's the big hurry? I think a good climb is more than just a series of moves and that over-bolting stunts the imagination and makes it all prosaic and pedestrian. I've said time and time again that I'm not opposed to bolts per se and I can give you examples of sport routes that I like but I doubt that would appease those who delight in simple-minded reductionism.
Regarding No Lo Contendre you can read my route description for the history and for Saturnalia I'd remind you that I didn't toprope it before leading it - I did some cleaning on rappel, I pre-placed a couple of RPs with long slings on them, and I worked it out from the bottom up. Then I got approval to place bolts where the RPs were clipped. Find fault with that all you want.
I've been somewhat surprised, over the past years, to hear from so many people who share my feeling that Boulder Canyon has become a disgrace. The good & great routes are diminished by the too-close profusion of pointless grid-bolted flotsam and jetsam. The sole purpose of too many routes seems to lie in "getting a workout" which, really, is available on any pull-up bar. A frenetically careless attitude leads to avoidable accidents and new climbers learn bad habits and not good ones.
Maybe some day I'll come back here to read all the pithy insights and vapid humor but for now I have better things to do.
I'm usually in favor of removing bolts if they are placed next to a handcrack, but I don't think this is the case with this route. I've only done this route 3 or 4 times, but is seemed that while there were a few bomber gear placements, others wouldn't be so bomber and the gear would be difficult to place, probably resulting in an "s" rating -- depending on which bolts were left. Sure, Steve D., myself and others would have put this route up differently, but we didn't.
As for Greaser and AC: Why is it when somebody like Steve brings up an issue with a route like this, you guys have to stick your fingers back in his face and give him grief about a different route he put up at a different crag, with permission from the FHRC? It gets us nowhere, but in his defense, Saturnalia is well bolted and a great route (in my opinion). NO LO is a pile. It's not the same line that was soloed. The bolts are in bad spots and it gets one star at best. Steve knows he is not perfect and is open to the idea of having the bolts removed if someone feels so inclined to apply to do so. I wish other first ascentionists felt this way.
By Rob Kepley From: Westminster,CO Aug 21, 2006 rating: 5.11d
Great climb with continuous moves. Save a little something for the finish because the "pump-o-meter" is nearing redline.
Easter Rock
RSS Feed
