Total Eclipse 

The first pitch is nice and makes you think.
The second pitch is fabulous!

A good route that can also be protected trad. Take a rack if you like to place gear. The runouts will be fairly mild.

I sincerely appreciate all the work that went into cleaning this route, but there really isn't a need for bolts on this climb. Bring a light rack and a 60m rope and you can send this in one nice long pitch. Felt like a 5.8/5.9 at Lumpy Ridge. Two 60's for the rap, maybe two 50's would reach not totally sure.

Ron, I'm certainly not a bolt-nazi and I won't be up there chopping or anything like that. I've experienced tragedy due to unsafe climbing in my life and hope it never happens again. I am a 100% advocate of making routes safe and protected. I also know that this is a complete Monday morning Quarterback post, but no one owns the wall so we all are entitled to express our opinions:

Safe and protected can be achieved with natural gear also. For me bolts should only be placed in the absence of quality pro. If you can protect it with cams, nuts, hexes, etc...why not leave the route natural (though I understand there was a lot of cleaning loose shit and plants to get to this point). I feel the same way about anchors, natural is better. I super appreciate the time to place the rap station at the top, but there just seems to be a ton of anchors and mid-way stations, when you could finish most routes in one rope length and have one rap station for a double rope rap - at least for climbs 1-5. Or on some of those routes you could build a natural anchor mid-pitch if required. I'd hate to go to Lumpy Ridge and see bolt lines guiding me up the lines. Bolts are for protection where natural pro can't be found, not for dictating the route line. Unless the climb is so damn hard the clips can only be made from certain spots.

For me it isn't about being "trad" or "sport," but only what type of protection is required and necessary. If it can be good, natural gear it should be. If it is a face with no cracks or features - bolt it. If a climb ends up being a mix - so be it. Just because people are too lazy too bring a small rack up here doesn't mean we should bolt every crack and call it "sport" climbing.

Certainly with a trad rack one could climb several different lines on this route alone. I don't think I would have had a problem onsighting this with gear...and I don't consider myself an absolute expert route finder. I don't think it is a stretch to say most of route didn't need bolts. I'll come back and do it with gear perhaps to officially find out. Had I known there was gear to be had I would have brought my rack. There wasn't only one way to do this route. I don't normally follow the bolt line anyways on a climb. Typically I find the path of least resistance or the most fun. If I've done the route already and want to have fun going 4 feet left or right - sure why not. I find it more fun, creative, and interesting to figure out the line than just follow the bolts. It is also a better way to learn as most alpine/backcountry routes don't have a bolt line to follow. I also don't agree that we should bolt legit trad lines to make them popular.

I find this over and over in Boulder Canyon...lines that could have maybe a bolt or two and have 10 or 12. The canyon certainly has discontinuous cracks and some flakes where you could place gear, but perhaps wouldn't want to. However, IMHO if one can place a good, safe piece - leave the bolts at home. In general I find the typical Eldo-esque discussions such as mulling over the rusted, 50 year old pins and "dude there is a "bomber" #2 RP to protect the 30' runout - we don't need a bolt here" totally insane and unsafe. Also on some of the more classic climbs I find them annoying as I'm not interested in risking serious injury or death for climbing. However, for me Boulder Canyon should be more about mixed routes with gear and bolts and less of a "sport" canyon.

end of rant.

That said: I'm not losing sleep over it. I appreciate all the effort and cleaning that went into the cliff. Not to mention the route info here. The 3 lines we did were really enjoyable. No one wants to go for a relaxing climb after work and pull off a 500 pound block. I would buy you a beer for that alonel. AND I definitely appreciate and applaud the bolting - only where necessary that is.

Paul in your rant/post several times you make reference to what you like.

Paul...go clean, climb and bolt any new routes in any style you like. Pretty simple.

Again, many thanks to everyone who cleaned up and bolted these routes. I never meant disrespect to anyone or ill feelings.

I stand by the idea that the three routes I climbed: Total Eclipse, Sidekick, and to a lesser degree Tag Team could use way fewer bolts and no intermediate stations. I can see having several stations up top for TR use, but I don't think we should be placing stations with chains all over because someone can't bring another rope up a 5 minute walk. Certainly some sections of those routes needed a bolt or several bolts - I'm not disputing that fact.

If you want to bolt cracks and develop routes so they can be popular for "sport" climbers - that is your deal. Just don't except everyone to appreciate or applaud it. This whole "I climb trad" versus "I climb sport" thing is such a divide. We are all climbers and should respect the natural environment. So, ok you had to clean the wall a ton, but that doesn't mean you had to bolt the cracks. If you don't like mixed routes and want routes to be popular for the gym crowd...well what can I say.

I don't climb runout routes, have never solo climbed in my entire life, and don't feel this is a safety issue. My point is that if there is good gear there - don't add a bolt. If it is a face climb or a runout section - add bolts where needed. Just because you add bolts and chains doesn't make a cliff more safe than one with perfectly nice clean cracks. If you are concerned about someone getting halfway up a route and realizing there isn't another bolt for 30'...perhaps they should know how to downclimb or leave a bail biner. If they don't know how to do that maybe they shouldn't be out climbing. Certainly that info would be available on this website. For example...Total Eclipse protection: 160'. gear to 2", 2 fixe bolts with rings at top, two ropes required for rap.

And if you somehow think I'm just stating what I "like" - perhaps read the posts about the Sport Park or the endless jabbering over routes in Eldo. I have stated well known and well loved ideas.

Once again: I'm not losing sleep over it and no hard feelings. But I'd like to express my opinion so that routes might get developed in a manner many (not only me I assure you) feel more appropriate. It is public land after all.

Let me quote Theodore Roosevelt:

The Man In The Arena

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

Well said! I can't argue with Teddy! I humbly admit defeat! :)

All my comments were said in a discussion tone of voice and I will enjoy my next visit to Tonnere Tower.

Ron, absolutely perfect quote. Nothing more need be said.

Ron, your quote from TR is ironic, because you are not conceding that you erred or failed. You are using it to stay that critics should be ignored, which is not what he meant. He was just saying that someone working hard may be more important than a critic. Sometimes you can learn from critics, though. If we take your interpretation to an extreme, then anyone doing anything is "The Man", and people who object to what they are doing are irrelevant. So by this metric, the hijackers of 9/11 are "The Man", and you would applaud their hard work and sacrifices. I kinda doubt TR would like that.

In my view, I don't call someone who bolts next to a crack with bomber pro a "Man". Probably your bolted cracks will be popular with people who don't own any cams, and those who don't bother looking for route info on the web. Maybe we should paint lines up the rock to show those folks which way to go, or color code the hangers so they don't stray from one route onto another.. It would probably make those routes even more popular, right?

I actually agree with many of the things you are trying to do, like cleaning off the vegetation/loose rock to make it climbable, finding enjoyable climbing, and providing information on the routes to others. I think the essential problem you are trying to solve with the bolts next to cracks is that the route does not follow a continuous crack, and you are concerned that people will not know the route is possible if they simply show up at the crag and do not have a good topo or overlay photo from this site with them. In my view, you should give people a little more credit. You have a great website here and if some people can't figure out how to use it, those people are not worth bothering with. Let them be stuck with the routes on blank faces with only bolts for pro.

I know there will always be judgment calls, where the crack pro is somewhat unsafe (like an insecure nut) or the pro is very unusual (like Perry's Lieback on the Grand Wall, a 4-5" lieback crack that is bolted so that people won't have to carry several large cams up the many lower pitches). But if it's a bomber standard cam or nut, I would not bolt that if I was doing the first ascent. It's one of the few hard rules that I use. You are free to make up your own rules - that is part of the fun of doing new routes. But in many places, bolts next to cracks would get chopped.

It's clear that your primary goal in developing new routes is to make them as popular as possible (defined as the most people doing the routes). You achieve this by making them accessible to the most people (by providing bolts and choosing face climbing over chimney/offwidth climbing, for example). An alternative approach to make "popular" routes could be to make the routes as enjoyable as possible (for some median climber), which might mean fewer people would do them, but those people would enjoy them more. It's the old story of quality vs. quantity. Clearly there are some people like Tony and Paul who would have enjoyed Total Eclipse more if the bolts next to cracks were left out. Maybe they should count a bit more when determining what is "popular".

Ron,

> Have you climbed the route, Clint? Or is this just an armchair opinion from afar?
Completely armchair and from afar. But that doesn't prevent me from understanding Tony's and Paul's comments, and from viewing the bolted cracks in the photos you provided. That's why the site works even if didn't do the route.

> And I find your references to 9/11 gratuitous and insulting.
I'd be glad to provide a less insulting example if you'd like. But I maintain that some criticisms are worth listening to. Clearly you care to some extent to read the comments or you wouldn't respond here, right?

> I made a conscious decision to make this a sport climb, and I stand by it.
That's good. It's definitely your choice and I am not advocating that you change the route this late in the game.

> Trad purists are totally welcome to bring a rack and play the game "how many clips can I skip?" (following the bolts to find the line, of course).
To me, it's not about possibly narrowly defined labels like "trad" and "sport", but about what you see and do when you go up the climb as it stands now. Yes, if I was doing it I would bring my rack and skip the bolts next to cracks. And I'd prefer to use the overlay photo to find the route, but I couldn't avoid seeing the bolts at this point. I suppose I might vary the line a bit if I saw something I liked that wasn't right on the bolted line.

> Sorry if you find my approach ethically impure.
I don't care about ethical purity here in terms of how the route was established; your approach for cleaning the route and bolting it is totally fine by me - totally your call on however you want to do that. It's about the results - bolts next to the cracks in particular.

> You are totally free to develop routes in the style you prefer; so am I.
Agreed. And you are free to comment on what you like and dislike about my routes, too.

> If Bruno and I hadn't devoted many weeks, and much expense, to creating these routes, there would be NOTHING to climb here.
Indisputable.

> Sorry if you don't approve of my creations, but the smiles I see on the faces of most people at Tonnere more than make up for it.
That's good. Definitely better than creating only death routes that nobody dares to try. There have been a lot of those in the past.

Here are the basic implications of bolting (discontinuous) cracks, as I see it, borrowing several points you made in comments here:

- more people can do the route (i.e. those without crack gear)

- people can find the route without first getting a topo/photo from the website

- some (more experienced) people will not like it, because they don't get to exercise their skills in using crack gear, and in route finding from a topo or photo overlay (or from "reading" the rock from below)

- people who prefer a "lower impact" route will not like it, although one wonders what they think about the cleaning in the first place? (Personally, I like to see fewer bolts, and I don't mind the cleaning on granite).

- people who don't have crack gear might delay their learning crack gear skills further if they have an abundance of sport routes to do. Or maybe it is the other way around in this case - they could use the route to practice placing gear, and clip the bolts at the same time for backup? Hey, it could be a good training tool? Although folks learning gear skills might also get the mistaken impression that the gear placements near the bolts are untrustworthy.

It's not easy deciding whether to bolt, is it? There are so many different choices and implications about what is safe and good.

When Joel Ager and I did the FA of Perfect Vision (in Yosemite, 1990), we didn't agree about whether there should be a couple of more bolts on pitch 6. Wired nuts and TCUs can be placed every 3 feet or so, but they are a little more difficult to place when you are freeing the moves on the arete there. Joel's argument was that it would be hard to find that pro onsight; I could find it on redpoint because I had previously aided it and I knew the small cracks were there. My argument was that the crux pitch 3 below would mean anyone who got that high would have plenty of skill to onsight it, or even run it out past the optional crack pro and just clip the bolts that were in place. We ended up not adding more bolts, but I know Joel was bummed and it was unfortunate that he did not feel as happy with the route as it turned out.

It makes me feel that there can be almost too many choices when it comes to bolting a route. The perfectionism that often serves us so well in other parts of climbing and life can sometimes get out of hand as we try to balance all the different implications of if/where to place bolts. Then the bolting decisions are there for all to view and think about whether they would have done it the same way.

Ron,

Thanks - you summed up my concern perfectly (and so much easier to read than my long-winded comment!).

I will try to add some more useful content - good idea.

Bob,

I'm sorry that my statement about "how the route was established" was unclear. What I meant was that I don't care what methods people use to clean the route and place bolts (two of the common choices are on rappel and on lead). I do care about where the bolts end up.

Last week I met Ron at this crag, and I must say it was a pleasure. He was incredibly nice and offered detailed info on his new routes.

Regardless of your stance on "ethics" of climbing and what gear you choose to use when you climb, Ron deserves thanks for putting up these routes. He was covered in dirt the day we met and his shins looked pretty destroyed from all his work. I can't say that many climbers I've met in Boulder would work so hard.

I've now climbed a lot of the routes here and they're great. Save your ethics and politicking for next year's election. Thanks, Ron.

I think bolts by protectable cracks are really lame. Ron, I think you're a really great guy and this is not personal at all, but you don't have the vision that the great first ascentionists that shaped the golden years of our sport had. I'm thankful to all those who put in the work to create new routes for us all to climb, but I'm utterly unimpressed when they plead that they're out there suffering (...getting dirty and sweaty and heading straight to the poorhouse because they're spending their hard-earned cash on bolts) for the enrichment of future climbers. First ascentionists obviously get tremendous satisfaction doing what they are doing (and surely that satisfaction is still worth the price of having a few critics)....

A first ascentionist certainly has a "right" to do whatever they want -- and yes, generally they're the ones who are out there leading the way and the critics are the ones following behind. It's just too bad that some don't aim a little higher: that they don't try to make a thing of beauty instead of slapping it together so that it can be done quickly and many others will climb it. I take way more satisfaction out of climbing a route that is hard fought, and IF I did FAs, which I don't, the same would be true for the creation of routes. Slapping on a bunch of bolts (whether that's because the climb wasn't cleaned or because you want to encourage safe/frequent future traffic or whatever the reason), is, in my opinion, a wasteful, disrespectful, shameful, and half-assed way of doing things.

I haven't read the whole thread on this route, but when I look at the "before" and "after" pictures above, I can't help but notice the total destruction of this cliff ecosystem. I'm sure it's a great route, but was the damage really worth it?

Why have the "excavation" photos and Ron Olsen's comments describing -- in detail -- his "cleaning" efforts been removed from the site?

Elmidd,

See my comment from the Tonnere Tower thread last night. I think that answers your queston.

Allen, I know he can remove anything he has posted. My question is why?

"Totally clips" -- a Robbins caliber pun. Yes, it can be climbed with gear. It's also a pleasant sport climb. Does it really matter?

Maybe worth a read:
http://www.alpinist.com/doc/web08s/newswire-china-doll-segal

For what it's worth, Hunnicutt's comments were made thoughtfully, respectfully, without any attitude. Not sure some of the responses rose to that level. Thanks for being chill, Paul.

Thanks to the first ascensionists for the hard work and good routes up at Tonnere. Obviously a bunch of time, effort, and dough spent up there.

Thanks to everyone for all the hard work and $$$ for equipping the routes. I had a blast climbing up there and will be back soon. Peace.