Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Why Toproping?
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 4 of 7.  <<First   <Prev   2  3  4  5  6   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
 
By Fat Dad
From Los Angeles, CA
Dec 12, 2012
camhead wrote:
One thing that has not been mentioned here yet: toproping almost always will cause more environmental impact than bolting a route.

You mean apart from the permanent destruction of the rock from bolting.

To get back to what the OP asked (at least what I think he asked), some routes are/were toproped instead of bolted because based on the belief that bolts permanently damage the rock, so why bolt if it's just as easy to TR? Ethic vary in different places, but in some places that still holds true. In some places, that never was an issue. In other places (Josh is probably a good example of this), an initial reluctance gave way to acceptance and you now see all kinds of stuff bolted that most never wanted to bother with before.

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 12, 2012
It's not that there's a "TR Taliban", (although KN probably fits that bill but he's an extremest) it's that people like me are asking to preserve at least some of this type of climbing and for people to please consider if bolting is really necessary.

If a person thinks TR is lame at these certain crags then I highly suggest leading the routes on gear. For me there's no better satisfaction (which is what the OP is looking for) than figuring out the gear and tactics to lead a dangerous route safely. The process of investing the time into a project and having those "aha!" moments are priceless to me and to shortcut that process by clipping bolts ruins all that. Again, and I feel like I have to keep repeating this, if there is in fact 0% chance that a climb can be TR'd or led on gear then by all means bolt it but if there's any chance it can please leave it alone for future climbers to challenge the mind and body.

As for the comment that this only creates relics that nobody climbs I wholly disagree. Preserving these routes in their natural state provides something for many climbers to aspire to and besides there are many options out there for people climb if they choose not to embark on the experience of a mind-bending lead.

What hasn't come up yet is the argument that people like me can simply skip the bolts. This idea is the go to for the bolting crowd and I'm surprised it hasn't come up yet, thus in interest of moving this along I will go there myself. I thought alot about this and my response is that skipping bolts does two things; First, the entire aesthetics of the climb is changed. The best analogy I can think of is if your favorite MTB single-track has just been paved so that everyone can then enjoy it. It's the same track as before and the same scenery as well but I think we can agree the experience is different and for me the ride would not be as "satisfactory" as before.
Second, it forces the leader to be needlessly reckless. By skipping the bolts the trad leader is put into an ethical quandary. How can I justify to myself not clipping these when it's so easy to do so? Climbing the same route without the bolts places the decision of risk solely into the climbers hands. Using the same analogy of the single-track it would be like offering a ski lift ride over a possible drop off, if a rider where to choose to take the drop-off and crash people would say "What a fucking idiot, why didn't he take the ski lift?". Without the existence of the ski lift the drop off would be a simple inherent risk of riding that route.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
superkick wrote:
top roping is fun... Id garner to say its how 99% of people on this forum started climbing. Aka you thought it was fun too..you probably loved it. Its why you moved on into more advanced forms of climbing. Its cute that now that you climb trad you come back to bash the thing that originally introduced you into climbing. unless im completely wrong and everyone just started leading trad out of the blue one day...


When the thing that you may have loved at one point in time is glaringly causing negative effects on your climbing area and the living things that reside in it it's a little tough to take such a nostalgic view. Not to mention the person that fails to recognize those effects also then becomes part of the problem and not the solution.

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 12, 2012
A note on the "consensus" argument:

How was this consensus obtained? Was there a vote? Likely not, the consensus spoken of is simply the impression people get from talking to other climbers. This is not a consensus and the using it to justify an action is false. Besides, even if there was a fair vote and a true consensus this doesn't make it right. If the majority of people agreed that murder is justifiable would you agree too?

FLAG
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 12, 2012
Whiskey-a-Go-Go
thefish wrote:
See now I have consensus from the community.


No you're right, I don't know what the community consensus is in CT. Thus, the question, as it did seem (only from what I've read so far in the thread) that the consensus was TR if possible in some areas. I'm just curious if by community you mean 'my small group of friends/followers and I' or you mean a large chunk of experienced, local climbers (say, >50%).

FLAG
By Fat Dad
From Los Angeles, CA
Dec 12, 2012
CaptainMo wrote:
When the thing that you may have loved at one point in time is glaringly causing negative effects on your climbing area and the living things that reside in it it's a little tough to take such a nostalgic view. Not to mention the person that fails to recognize those effects also then becomes part of the problem and not the solution.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. This appears to be just an ad hominem attack rather than an attempt to prove your point.

FLAG
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 12, 2012
Whiskey-a-Go-Go
CaptainMo wrote:
When the thing that you may have loved at one point in time is glaringly causing negative effects on your climbing area and the living things that reside in it it's a little tough to take such a nostalgic view. Not to mention the person that fails to recognize those effects also then becomes part of the problem and not the solution.


Hold up, I thought the thread had generally agreed that TR is more protective of the environment in many cases. Can you please give more detail about the 'glaringly negative effects?'

FLAG
By Miike
From MA/CT border
Dec 12, 2012
my foot
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Hold up, I thought the thread had generally agreed that TR is more protective of the environment in many cases. Can you please give more detail about the 'glaringly negative effects?'


mountainproject.com/v/10777342...

see any spots with little or no topsoil and growth?

notice the color of the rock in the most worn out areas

FLAG
 
By JohnWesely
From Red River Gorge
Dec 12, 2012
Gunking
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Hold up, I thought the thread had generally agreed that TR is more protective of the environment in many cases. Can you please give more detail about the 'glaringly negative effects?'


That is the exact opposite of the impression I got.

FLAG
By camhead
From Vandalia, Appalachia
Dec 12, 2012
You stay away from mah pig!
Fat Dad wrote:
You mean apart from the permanent destruction of the rock from bolting.


Do bolts kill trees?

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Red Tagger wrote:
A note on the "consensus" argument: How was this consensus obtained? Was there a vote? Likely not, the consensus spoken of is simply the impression people get from talking to other climbers. This is not a consensus and the using it to justify an action is false. Besides, even if there was a fair vote and a true consensus this doesn't make it right. If the majority of people agreed that murder is justifiable would you agree too?


We do it's called the death penalty... and a vote? right... and how would u be sure you're not just getting one segement? I think speaking with climbers at all the various areas is a great way to gain consensus. If I were to climb at a cliff everyday for a year or two and spoke to everyone almost everone I saw and > 50% agree, would you consider that a consensus? Honestly, I think the concept of a consensus is flawed kind of like race... it's a gradient rather then a black and white.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Hold up, I thought the thread had generally agreed that TR is more protective of the environment in many cases. Can you please give more detail about the 'glaringly negative effects?'


The tread has been mostly in consensus of the exact opposite really... Take a look at one of the prime TR cliffs.
Note: There a very popular hiking trail on the top that contributes to the degradation but this effect can be seen at all the popular TR crags in CT.

FLAG
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 12, 2012
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
Theres what over 100 routes at ragged?

Id say something like 30 or so have great options for gear anchors at the top.

Not to mention the rock is constantly breaking off etc.

Persoanlly bolting sport routes on ragged would be terrifying due to the nature of the rock there.

staples at the top soley for anchor purposes on the other hand...

FLAG
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 12, 2012
Whiskey-a-Go-Go
JohnWesely wrote:
That is the exact opposite of the impression I got.


Guess that was just me.

CaptainMo wrote:
Take a look at one of the prime TR cliffs.


Yeah, that's nasty. You should do something about that.

FLAG
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 12, 2012
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
Isnt KN banned from Ragged Anyways.. how do his opinions even matter still if hes not even allowed on the property?

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Red Tagger wrote:
it's that people like me are asking to preserve at least some of this type of climbing and for people to please consider if bolting is really necessary.


This would be the preservation of TR lines correct?

If the trees and ground above these routes beings to become trampled, die, and turns into a dirt patch that eventually erodes off the cliff would you be against TR anchors? how about TR anchors and bolts in the unprotectable sections of the line to keep more people off the top of the cliff? Or would you advocate for closing the cliff all together and banning climbing while the cliff regenerates?

FLAG
 
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
superkick wrote:
Isnt KN banned from Ragged Anyways.. how do his opinions even matter still if hes not even allowed on the property?


The restraining order was not re-newed by the new RMF board. I was told they want bygones to be bygones and the current board does not have an issue with Ken and therefore would not like to continue with the status quo.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
superkick wrote:
Theres what over 100 routes at ragged? Id say something like 30 or so have great options for gear anchors at the top. Not to mention the rock is constantly breaking off etc. Persoanlly bolting sport routes on ragged would be terrifying due to the nature of the rock there. staples at the top soley for anchor purposes on the other hand...


The rock at Ragged is fine for bolting - this is a total misconception. The easement will not allow it and no one that I know of except myself has an FA that they would want to bold anyway.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Guess that was just me. Yeah, that's nasty. You should do something about that.


Hahahaha... awesome! You made my afternoon Tom! Trust me I'm an ardent and vocal supporter of doing something but there's a lot of legal things that need to happen and old minds to change.

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 12, 2012
CaptainMo wrote:
We do it's called the death penalty... and a vote? right... and how would u be sure you're not just getting one segement? I think speaking with climbers at all the various areas is a great way to gain consensus. If I were to climb at a cliff everyday for a year or two and spoke to everyone almost everone I saw and > 50% agree, would you consider that a consensus? Honestly, I think the concept of a consensus is flawed kind of like race... it's a gradient rather then a black and white.


I can tell you that the "consensus" spoken of previously in this thread isn't scientific and without a real vote or something like it the idea of the consensus can be easily construed to serve one person's personal purposes. Where's the proof that most people would like to see a cliff bolted?

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Red Tagger wrote:
I can tell you that the "consensus" spoken of previously in this thread isn't scientific and without a real vote or something like it the idea of the consensus can be easily construed to serve one person's personal purposes. Where's the proof that most people would like to see a cliff bolted?



I would contend that's the problem with the concept of consensus. . . there is not proof and there is little empirically that one could do to prove that they do or don't. I think consensus in CT runs among age groups in a generalization and I would say 99% of the people I've ever met or spoken to at the crags throughout CT don't really have any issues with someone placing a bolt on their FA with land owner permission.

There is I would say a consensus against bolting previous lead trad climbs. I think there is likely a wider array of minds with regards to bolting lines lead on tied hooks (a lot are now TR lines). From my experience all of the developers I've met, and I know most of them in the state, don't have a problem on this.

FLAG
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 12, 2012
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
cant we just have a general open invite climbing forum hear both sides and take a vote.


go with the concensus?

pretty sure we all know which side will win...

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 12, 2012
CaptainMo wrote:
This would be the preservation of TR lines correct? If the trees and ground above these routes beings to become trampled, die, and turns into a dirt patch that eventually erodes off the cliff would you be against TR anchors? how about TR anchors and bolts in the unprotectable sections of the line to keep more people off the top of the cliff? Or would you advocate for closing the cliff all together and banning climbing while the cliff regenerates?


No, the preservation to climb a cliff free of man made devices is what I seek. I find the addition of metal to the cliff more intrusive than the erosion on top. Erosion happens everywhere and it's simply a judgement call what erosion is ok and what is not. There's still erosion at the bottom of the cliff and on the trail in no? So what makes that erosion ok and the erosion on the top not? In the case of Devils Lake there is some erosion on top (there's also a paved path for tourists) but I would rather see that then the whole thing littered with metal. In a way erosion is natural, bolting is not.

So, YES if you really care about erosion then ban climbing on the cliff entirely. If you only care about erosion on top then ban top-roping but bolting the routes doesn't save the cliff from man-made impact it only moves the impact from one spot to another.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Topo - Cliffs in Green
Red Tagger wrote:
No, the preservation to climb a cliff free of man made devices is what I seek. I find the addition of metal to the cliff more intrusive than the erosion on top. Erosion happens everywhere and it's simply a judgement call what erosion is ok and what is not. There's still erosion at the bottom of the cliff and on the trail in no? So what makes that erosion ok and the erosion on the top not? In the case of Devils Lake there is some erosion on top (there's also a paved path for tourists) but I would rather see that then the whole thing littered with metal. In a way erosion is natural, bolting is not. So, YES if you really care about erosion then ban climbing on the cliff entirely. If you only care about erosion on top then ban top-roping but bolting the routes doesn't save the cliff from man-made impact it only moves the impact from one spot to another.


;-) Well stated and that I completely agree understand and that's rare in these discussions. Probably the best articulated anti bolt (with regard to this discussion) statement yet.

FLAG
 
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 12, 2012
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
its moves it from a living to a non-living thing.


one of those is more important... ya thing?

and we arent talking about bolting every route under the sun. A few smartly placed anchor on poorly protectable sections, and TR anchors on the more popular climbs.

FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 4 of 7.  <<First   <Prev   2  3  4  5  6   Next>   Last>>