After seeing another thread about persons adding bolts to previously established routes, it reminded me of a question I have had for awhile.

When is it okay to add a bolt/bolts/dangle to a belay? (please note: this is a southern desert topic)

The 'old' me used to say that I needed to suck it up and accept the anchors as is, or else go climb a different route. The 'new' me is starting to ask why not make our belays as safe as possible. I know, I am turning into a wussy.

Just curious.

My take would be boldness ON the route is one thing, but the belay stations are a matter of engineering. Some people aren't as adept as others for whatever reason, no reason to increase risk because of that.

I have no problems at all with beefing up desert anchors. An awful lot of the anchors up there were placed by people in a hurry who probably didn't think their routes would ever be repeated(ie Hong 1 bolt ancors, etc).

The exception are the handful of mandatory downclimbs out there like Lighthouse Tower. I wouldn't mind if there was an anchor there myself, but it'll get chopped in a heartbeat if one goes in so no reason to bother.

I try to replace, not add, though sometimes you don't have the option of being able to remove one of the old relics. (The rock is sometimes so damaged that the old bolt is best left there and allowed to weaken a bit more with time.
My personal standard now is a 1/2 bolt to replace the worst of whatever is at the anchor, often a 1/4 with a leeper hanger or an angle.
I see no sense in sticking it out with a bad anchor... if its a bolted anchor, the intention of the first ascentionist was to have a bomber anchor. This often deterioriates over time, or the standard of what was bomber then is no longer considered so. If the anchor was intended to be good, it should be good... then and now.
Or not.

I agree with the others. Anchors should be safe and replacement is better than addition.

Brad

I'm one to install a solid anchor; but I'm a runout junkie while on a pitch.

In the same camp as the rest: Leave the route as it is, but if the anchor is subpar, it certainly warrents fixing.

I've only come across one American Death Triagle, which was shortly removed and replaced with equalized webbing.

Anchors should be nuke-proof. I have no issues with adding to anchors...not routes.

eh... you guys are wussys. Nukeproof, bombproof, bla, bla... I thought climbing in the desert was supposed to be like climbing ice. You think your anchor will hold, but you don't want to test it out.

but you are making me feel better the next time I wuss out and decide I should add to/or replace an anchor... thanks for the feedback and thoughts.

Not saying I haven't set cams and triple back up for an anchor, bounce tested the anchor, sent my mate down with all backup gear in place and all our spare gear, then pulled out all backup gear and rapped on the original, hoping that it would be fine for me. But I'm not willing to risk my mates life, just mine for gear, and even then, I tested it to a point that I held as safe for what I was doing.

Just busting your balls... most sane people would like to have an anchor that they believe in. In fact, climbing just isn't fun to me when I am thinking that my partner and I could fall to our deaths at any moment.

I know. And many a times my mates have got pissed that I didn't leave back-up in place for myself, with them offering to replace the "fixed" gear. Mind you, if I was faced with rapping off a rap ring with only 1/10" or so left in it, I'd certainly leave gear, But I have no problem trusting a sling around a horn.

That said, I know many people that don't, and I'm more than happy to pirate their gear (ah, booty), or return it if I know the owners when I come upon "fixed" gear.

I'll give a quarter to anyone who can tell me a true story of pulling a bolt out under body weight simply because it was tied off with the so-called 'American Death Triangle'

(which most will recall was simply known as the American Triangle until hyper-weenie gear geeks who think climbing is 'safe' started spending more time on the Interweb than climbing and the new term came into being)

full stop.

I can tell you true stories of bolts pulling out with body weight, without the use of the death triangle... I can tell you stories of bolts pulling out with finger weight too.

Granted, the bulk of this happened in the Fishers.

Rob, I think the angles are more an issue than not. Why not just use a sliding X with limited extension?

I bet I could dig something up in ANAM that could reinforce this safety concern. This isn't just a p.c. issue.

Maybe we, Americans, retaliated when the anchor config was labeled ADT, we said, ok let's give em the EDK. I definitely don't think the terms for ADT and EDK are comparable; the EDK, the flat overhand, actually works really well. (Sorry, a tangent post, but probably related)

Charles - my bro & I were up in Jackson when a climber attempted to rap off a horn on Disappointment. The sling popped off.

I heard the EDK term well before the A[D]T one ever came up.

Anyhow, if you can pull a bolt out sideways with a bodyweight load, the sling configuration is not the source of the problem.

Wankingly,
Rob

i'm with everyone else here - beefing up an anchor - OK - route - bad -

but my real thought is that the people who would object to beefing up the anchor probably aren't on an internet forum talking about climbing. they are probably out suffering on some cold route, digging old ketchup packets out of trash bins, or some other "core" activity....

(note sarcasm)

anyways - the type of people responding to this post (me and everyone else reading this) are much more like the type to find all the avialable beta, photos, etc. - and be in the know for proper/improper technique, american death anchor building, etc. - so..... i don't think you're going to find the opposing viewpoint here.

or - maybe i'm wrong, and no one really can objectively argue not having a beefy anchor.

SOme quick notes/thoughts:
I think the Death Triangle is probably more likely to break the webbing than the bolt. You gotta think about the webbing through the bolt hanger. It all depends on the rock quality, the age of the bolt, the age of the webbing, etc... but most of them I see, thats my first concern. However, in the end, it just comes down to which is more weathered: a quarter buttonhead with a leaper, or 4 year old webbing.
Oh, and I have seen more American Death Triangles in Spain than I have in the US.
I have pulled a lot of bolts out while replacing with my fingers. Usually the rock breaks apart
all around them.
Dogs make better pets than cats.
Buffalo Trace is exceptionally good bourbon (as this posting can attest).
Sam

If your hankering to replace bolts the two on the second belay of pistol whipped both come out with light finger weight. They are at a angle so you can use them but make sure you back them up. By the way I now understand why they call it pistol whipped.

I've seen more of this: the two fixed pro points, independent webbing from each point that is joined together with rap rings or other hardware -- maybe not the perfect equalization of the sliding X, but still uses angles & redundancy to limit force on the fixed pro when you load it straight down much like the cordalette.

It's better than the ADT in respects of force applied to the fixed pro & offers redundancy.

Though, here's a thought, the sport anchors with ringed hangers have no angle - wouldn't force applied be similar as the ADT; I mean all that's happening is the webbing is substituted with the climbing rope; it's just that the former button heads are now larger & more modern bolts?