Two Bolt Anchors Will Save Paradise Forks Cliff Top

Both of the areas Chuck Claude mentions as good places for bolts also provide spots for gear anchors, or at least sling/static line anchors. The Forks does not need any bolts. Bolts would simply be a matter of convenience for climbers since there are at least two easy ways to walk in and out of the canyon. If cliff top impact is really the concern, then walk in.

I also find it interesting that this whole thread was started by someone who admittedly had not been to the forks in 20 years. Eric Whitbeck makes a fine point, this website does not make any consensus regarding the climbing community. The locals clearly do not want bolts or there would be hangers on the few bolts that already exist.

Randall,
The fact that Eric had not been there in 20 years is exactly why he started this thread.
He remembers what the cliff top was like 20 years ago and was shocked by how degraded it had become since his last visit.
I had not been to the Forks since the mid 90's and was also shocked at the conditions when Eric and I climbed there this summer.

It's kind of like not seeing a nephew for many years and being surprised at how much he's grown. When you see the nephew every weekend the growth is so much less apparent.

A few rap stations will do nothing to decrease cliff top degradation because everyone who tops out on any route will walk back and sling a tree to belay from anyway.

Rap anchors on virtually every route are exactly what the forks needs to mitigate the erosion on the top of the cliff.

Put them several feet below the rim so they can't be clipped by top ropers reaching down over the edge.

You have two or three set stations to get people down then every one leads and lowers, no top outs. A few should be on easy routes so anyone can climb out at the end the the day.

Of course this whole argument is moot if the local climbing community, and the powers that be, don't feel any urgency about the erosion at the Forks.

If this is the case then by all means top rope, sling trees and trample at will. Let the next generation deal with the problem.

I have no vested interest in this at all, I'm just stating what should be an obvious solution to the cliff top degradation at the Forks.

On another, but related note:

I'm sorry to bust everyone's ego bubble but the Forks is "crag" with super easy access and short climbs that generally protect so well they are as safe or safer than sport climbs.

It ain't the Mooses Tooth, the Valley, or the High Sierra.

It is, however, the perfect area to get your frigging butts on a lead and work your way up through the grades safely and easily.

Maybe spending your time and energy leading a 5.10 might be more beneficial than top roping 5.11's all day.

Cause top roping ain't gonna get you up the Mooses Tooth, Free Blast or the 3rd Pillar of Mt. Dana.

Sorry for the rant, but I do get tired of everyone wanting to climb hard numbers without having to earn it the old fashioned way. The Sharp End!!

maybe its cause ive been drinking but this post is really pissing me off. as a flag local this is my home crag, and very proud to be part of it. ive climbed there almost every weekend since i moved west. yet only three year and i plan on many more, this is why i moved to this type of area. i can say if bolts or anchors do go in they wont be there very long.
the degratation to the top of the cliff will not stop, we all know this, there are many other tourists other than climbers. did anyone see the hundred people fron emt and fire rescue total fucking up the place in last summer? or the atv riders that want a senic view?
natural anchors? is it too much trouble to build geared anchors. is it that hard? theres books out there. theres rocks on top, lasso a frickin rock . stay off the tree when you can, when you cant, use the tree.
as for top ropers, i can lead all day at the forks but i also toprope the shit out of routes when i want milage, so im not faulting you. this is a local decision so jimbo and friends, go back to the valley or the sierras. or just stay at home and clip bolts on mt lemmon, weenie.

Matt said everything I was gonna say, and probably better. I'm with you Matt!

Hey Eric W. I started climbing just after pitons went out so I know a little about placing gear and I still place it. My "panties in a bunch" comment was a sincere hope that people would think about and discuss this as they have been doing. Also it was a bit tongue in cheek as the forks take gear but is not really what I would call adventure climbing. Anyway the goal is to come up with a positive viable solution to a problem. The idea that the forks has never had bolts, and never will "chop, chop, chop" is just a closed mind or someone that has there "panties in a bunch". Bolted anchors may not be the best solution that is why it is a discussion forum. I hope the locals do something before all the trees die or some Govt. Agency closes it down.

I am glad to hear about the downclimb as I will use that in the future. Thanks for all the input. Good luck Flagstaff.

Eric W, Matt and Randall come on down to the Lemmon any time. If you see a problem we have and think you might have a constructive way of solving the problem feel free to post it up.

I think there is definitely some room for some erosion control "landscaping" That would solve a lot of the problem. A rope around a tree causes a lot less damage than losing a foot of soil over its roots. I am adamantly opposed to lots of bolted anchors. Climbers should NOT just do this without consent from the NF however or they will freak. What you don't want to do is start a pissing match between climbers and go running to the FS to solve it. They will just shut us down. We must go at it in a positive constructive and open manner.

Whoa Matt, let's keep this civil. No need to throw the w-word around.

How the f..k do you get appointed as a local with veto power over everyone? Many people have been climbing the forks much longer than some ass that just showed up three years ago. The area has been obviously degraded according to those of us that have been here for 20+ years. It needs help. Let's keep this on the mark, how do we help keep the area healthy? Some bolted anchors may be good IMHO.

Que Putada!

Matt,

First, I started climbing when roped stoppers came out and P.A.s were all the rage. How long you been climbing, big tough trad guy???

I'd love for you to come down to Lemmon and lead some of our "weenie" trad climbs... You don't mind if I video tape do you??

Manuel was spot on with his response.

The Mooses Tooth "bit" was aimed directly at guys like you that come from the gym, buy a rack and think the Forks is a heinous trad area that has a super gnarly "aura" that needs to be maintained. Apparently at the cost of the entire cliff top area, just so you can think your a bad ass by plugging 50 feet of gear and belaying off a tree.

Take some valium, read some back issues of Climbing circa 1980's, and calm down.

I rarely see people top rope off gear at the top of climbs at the Forks, they walk back and sling trees or the occasional rock. So your argument about building anchors is not valid, and my argument about this practice further degrading the area still stands.

When your running laps (on TR) at the end of the day on a gear anchor you built, what do you do when you top out?? You walk back and sling a tree to bring your bros up.
Better you can lower to the ground and leave the cliff top above the climb undisturbed. Get it? See how this works??

I just don't see how bolt anchors take anything away from the climbs at the Forks. Will they make it more convenient? Of course. Will it lessen the impact on the cliff top? Of course it will.

Should we get permission from the Forest Service before said anchors are drilled. Yup.

Should we get our "panties in a bunch" when a couple of guys with a combined 54 years of climbing experience see an area getting trashed by climbing traffic make a suggestion to mitigate the problem. Probably not.

Eric, of course I top rope. But I don't, as so many people do these days, "only" top rope if there aren't any bolts to clip on the way up.

The very fact that so many people do show up and sling trees and top rope at the Forks is a big part of the erosion problem out there now!

If there was a consensus in the climbing community that top roping off trees was a very bad thing and everyone had to walk or rap in from a few established anchors, that would help. Then, God forbid, they had to lead a climb to get to the chains or not be able to do it, that would, in fact, reduce the cliff top impact substantially.. See how it's all connected??

Traffic at the Forks would not change from the normal expected increase in years to come because the climbs have anchors on them. You still have to plug your 50 feet of gear.
However the soil and flora degredation on top would be lessened.

Randall Gann wrote:Both of the areas Chuck Claude mentions as good places for bolts also provide spots for gear anchors, or at least sling/static line anchors.....

I know the area well since I climb out there several days a week. The problem is that even though the areas I talk about CAN take natural gear for rappel (I know this since I use gear to protect 80% of the routes I lead out there (and for me I despise TRing )) but the simple fact is that 80-95% of the people will not use gear for a belay, rappel or a TR at the Forks but will instead use trees).

we would then have two options:

a) use peer pressure to "entice" people to fore go using trees

b) use a FEW well placed bolts

or a mixture of the two. Even though I'm a strong believer that you should for-go bolts whenever possible (and try my FA's if you don't believe it- one has a 160ft runout and the other has a 190ft runout) but I'm also realistic about people, most will use a bolt, then use a tree and then last place your own gear for a rap into the canyon.

Chuck, I take your point and I respect your opinion as it seems you truly are local to the forks. Thanks for the non-chest pounding, non-ego driven way you communicate.

What I am getting at is simple. I once heard a saying, "when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail." It seems that the same may be true about a bosch. It's commendable that Eric R. and Jimbo want to "save" the Forks. But the solution of bolted anchors may, in a round about way, ruin what is special about the forks.

The forks is cragging, on that I think we can all agree. But it's a special kind of cragging. For me at least, the beauty of the forks is that you rap into this amazing canyon and climb out . . . you actually get to climb out, a summit as it were. How many crags allow that opportunity? No, Jimbo, it isn't the third pillar, or Moose's tooth, etc., but it also isn't Jack's Canyon or even the Creek for that matter. While I remain unconvinced that anchors at the tops of climbs would significantly reduce the traffic at the clifftop, I can say for sure that they would take away that special aspect that sets the forks apart as a crag. So in your rush to save it, make sure you don't spoil it at the same time. Are bolts really the only answer? I can't believe that.

That said, if you and your posse are deadset on placing bolt anchors, please consider that those of us who peruse this website are a small number compared to the whole community of climbers who frequent the forks. Before one bolt is placed there should be a true consensus, and as far as I remember, the first ascentionists should also be consulted. IF it is done, it should be done right so that we don't end up with a jacked clifftop AND ugly chopped bolt scars at the top of some kick-ass climbs. It's already tough enough to deal with the ATV crowd that has grown significantly over the past five years, but the real shame would be if the Forks became just another crag.

Let's see which of us has the most years climbing experince and years climbing at the Forks and let him/her make the decision.

I have been climbing for 33 years.

I first climbed at the Forks in the summer of 1980.

OK, seriously I don't see adding permanent anchors on 50+ climbs as a way to "save" the forks. What we are really talking about here are erosion and dying trees. Adding a bunch of bolts just adds to that blight and will not stop the problem. It will turn it into a more popular spot for the less gear savvy climbing masses.

The Forks is a trad area with a long and consistent no bolts ethic. That should be respected. If you want to toprope maybe the Forks isn't the place for that. If you want to turn trad lines into consumer-no-topout-pseudo-sport-climbs do it in an area without a no bolt ethic/history. But don't pretend that adding bolts will "save" the Forks. There are several less permanent less unsightly and less controversial ways to deal with erosion there.

Just for the record neither I or anyone I know is about to start bolting. I have just laid out a solution a number of us toyed with while sitting around at the end of the day. Lets, for the sake of argument and for getting at what really is bothering some of you anti-anchor people, say that bolted anchors would save the cliff top and the bottom would only be sightly more damaged would you agree to whatever number of anchors it would take to accomplish that goal. I believe that if you say no, you have a different (not necessarily wrong) aesthetic than I do. I would rather see 100 two bolt anchors at the forks than the cliff top looking the way it does. Well whatever happens or not up there at the Forks it is on the climbers to be good stewards of the land. I think someone should do a study. Perhaps the Access fund has already done one. I know that the Park Service did one in JTree. Perhaps you locals should look in to that and see what you can do.

Better watch you back up here Eric. Might be some stray arrows headed your way next time you rap off a tree. He he.

Let me reiterate what Eric Rhicard said. We have no intention of showing up in the middle of the night and bolting the top of a bunch of climbs. 2 bolts + 2 ring hangers = over $9.00. 9 X 50 is $450.00. That's a lot of money and a lot of time.
I think the Forks locals can rest easy knowing anchors will not appear magically at the Forks.
Even though it isn't my local crag I would come up and help with labor or bolts or whatever, when, and if, a decision is made concerning this issue.
The Forks is a great place to climb, I would hate to see ruined further.
I would caution against maintaining an ethic at all costs. It made sense when a few hundred climbers a year visited the Forks, but like it or not it ain't the Forks it used to be, and change is inevitable and often for the better.

I still don't get why topping out on a 50 foot crack is so much more aesthetic than clipping an lowering. It's not a tower in Sedona or Monument Valley??? Maybe someone can explain this to me??

I also think well camouflaged anchors would hardly be an eye soar. How many times have we all been on a sport route looking for the next camouflaged bolt that's right in front of our face??

Dean Hoffman wrote:Holy Shitballs and hell fire, who are all you guys? Not to sound like a local elitist, but who are all these posters with opinions of such forceful nature? I've been climbing at the forks since 00 when I started climbing, I've been an off an on member of the NACC (Northern Arizona Climbers Coalition for those of you who are not familiar), I guide part time for VR,

Wow! Climbing since '00? and a guide too! You get my vote.
Phil

Flaccid, That right there is funny.

So far I'm still the most "experienced" (ancient) climber to post on this thread. Come on boys give me some competition. HA!

I'm new to climbing too, and I see names on here that are Forks climbers for over 20 years and have their names in guidebooks. '00 seems very recent to me jumping in on such an important issue as sport bolting a traddie crag.
Phil

Hey, I did the first ascent of probably the shortest and dumbest climb at the forks way back in the early 80's. Fogdish. Does that give me some clout in this decision?