Ethics of replacing ancient fixed pin w/bolt

camhead wrote: the ranger decided to put a bolt on Crack of Doom.

Did you mean: Not put a bolt?

Sounds like Brad is trying to preserve the character of the route, but I agree with you cammy.

camhead wrote:my logic is that, most pitons were bomber for the people who placed them. So, if you're making an argument of "preserving the experience of the FA, it makes more sense to replace aging pitons with bolts, especially on popular routes.

I for one am not arguing for "preserving the FA experience." But if one were to take that position, then it sounds like Lowe hung on in the middle of a V3 boulder problem and placed a pin. Stick-clipping that pin hardly qualifies, even remotely, as preserving the FA experience. That is top-roping something the first ascender led.

What would preserve the FA experience would be placing a nut or cam in the spot where the pin used to be. But you mentioned a "crumbly" placement, which doesn't sound as if it would lend itself to modern gear.

I think the one thing everyone could agree on is that putting a bad pin in the now-deteriorated placement is a terrible idea. Either there should be a bolt or nothing. Neither of these options replicates the FA experience, so some other standard is called for.

Glenn Schuler wrote: Did you mean: Not put a bolt? Sounds like Brad is trying to preserve the character of the route, but I agree with you cammy.

Yes, I fixed it; thanks. That was kind of key to the story, heh.

Here's a good example of what to do......

Over the Hill is an extremely popular route in Eldorado Canyon. The two 5.10 cruxes are protected by fixed pins(lost arrows for those who care). If you were to fall at either one of the cruxes and the pins blew you would be in for a serious fall. The route was put up almost 40 years ago.

Nobody in the Eldorado Canyon climbing community is advocating replacing those pins with bolts.

Eldo is loaded with old pins. I for one hate clipping them and never feel like falling is an option.

Over the hill as mentioned above.
Super slab
Allosaur

to name a few.

Prod.

Like it or not, old fixed pins are an endangered species, as are the hyper-defensive locals that resist new bolts.

People are traveling more, mingling, and homogenizing community standards. This will make the concept of "the local ethic" a relic of yester-year, when climbers coalesced into regionally defined competitive tribes. It's becoming rare for climbers to cut their teeth at one local crag, preferring instead to sample from numerous crags, and thus, communities. This makes it difficult to be indoctrinated into the local zeitgeist, and all of the pride and emotional attachment that comes with it.

Mike Anderson wrote: This will make the concept of "the local ethic" a relic of yester-year

I get what you're saying Mike, but I don't think the local ethic thing will ever go away. Nor should it.

Glenn Schuler wrote: I get what you're saying Mike, but I don't think the local ethic thing will ever go away. Nor should it.

Yeah, I think that perhaps Mike's statement is a bit of hyperbole. It is certainly true that travel and cross-pollination of ideas between climbing areas tends to break down some provincial peculiarities. But a total demise of the local ethic? Not going to happen, or at least not in the next couple of decades.

If anything, travel has heightened my appreciation of the variety offered by the fact that climbing is done differently in different places. I like the fact that I get to climb one way at one crag (fixed draws and kneepads), and in a totally different way at another (RPs and fear). It keeps things interesting. Just because I get to climb one way and see one ethic applied in Rumney doesn't mean that I'm going to try to take that with me to the Adirondacks. Also, the reasons that things are done differently in different places are probably more driven by local conditions than by arbitrary tradition. Climbers at any particular crag do what they do because it makes sense in that context. Climbing is pursued differently at Rifle versus the Black Canyon not because of isolation from each other, but because they are intrinsically very different venues.

Also, inter-crag cross-pollination has been going on for a long time, like in the 90s when traveling Jailhouse climbers introduced the kneebar to Rifle, and everything got downrated. The quick spread of Smith Rock sport ethics throughout the country is another obvious example- and that was almost 30 years ago. If all concept of "local ethic" was going to disappear, wouldn't it have already happened?

Still, though, some peculiarities of local custom will probably break down with time. The use of manky fixed pins, instead of bolts, might be one of the casualties. I guess we can call it "progress".

Actually, a good example of where this has already happened is on desert sandstone, where the use of the drilled baby angle instead of a bolt has (thankfully) fallen out of favor. Did this occur because of ideas and ethics imported from another area? Maybe someone more knowledgeable with that local history can comment.

Whimps! My advice. Don't go climbing. Find a sport that has no risk and be sure to take that "No Fear" bumper sticker off of your vehicle.

David Sahalie wrote: I'd like to believe you, but bolts are still not being placed, or even replaced, in the black hills.

I was in the Hills when the top pin fell out of Trojan D mountainproject.com/v/troja… one person thought it should be replaced with another pin but the FA said why bother put a bolt in as close as possible. Not because it would last that much longer but because one was readily available and cheaper.

I haven't been up there for a long time but there was a push to replace bolts back in the mid 90's. Lots of routes got upgraded from 1/4" button heads to 3/8" by 3".

From the looks of things on this site there has been a lot of bolting going on up there. Not in the older traditional area of the Needles but up on the Limestone of Spearfish Canyon. When I first went out there in the late 80's there were no routes up there that I knew of. That started changing as sport climbing became more popular.

It would be a sad day IMO and loss for future climbers I think if the old run out classics of the Needles got retro bolted. I have already noticed on this forum that people eventually look to add variety to their climbing. How many threads are there where someone who's been sport climbing for a while wants to get into trad. And at some point there are always going to be people who will want to play the mental game that is Needles climbing.

Bruce Hildenbrand wrote:Whimps! My advice. Don't go climbing. Find a sport that has no risk and be sure to take that "No Fear" bumper sticker off of your vehicle.

Bruce that's a bit harsh but I hear ya. There are some who would turn climbing into tennis if they could. Surely there will always be some of us who are willing to play the mental game. Hopefully the Needles will always be a place to play that game. Those who don't want to can still find climbs to do there as well as at Rushmore and many other places in the Hills.

Les Malan wrote:OThis weekend, my buddy had a bit of a psychological breakdown just after he clipped the pin and couldn't finish the route (understandably because he's the same guy who got hurt a couple weeks ago on the route).

Les I have witnessed a few meltdowns. Sometimes people will bail sometimes they overcome and finish off. Not saying there is not a good reason to ever replace a pin with a bolt. But not every climber is up for every climb.

Les would it have been possible for your friend or someone else to put this pin to the test safely? Not saying take a hammer to it but some how from a safe spot, or on top rope, give it a full on bounce test. If it holds and your buddy still can't finish off the route, well. If it pops maybe there will be good gear if not then the governing body will have go come up with a proper solution.

Just my .02 and well a little more maybe.

Tim

David Sahalie wrote: why is accessibility and safety a sad day? 30' run out outs on 30 year old pins and 1/4' bolts on cheese grater terrain is just silliness. this isn't 'trad'. in trad you can place gear when you are run out. the closest thing to this retro-insanity is the the gritstone in England. but, at least you can top rope that stuff. these 'classic' climbs are museum pieces. IMO, it is a shame no gets to climb them unless they are ready to die.

As much as I would like to agree with you on this I think you should look at this from a different point of view. There are too many people, too many climbers, and that creates a scarcity of quality rock these days. We need the easy climbs to be more scary not less scary. I don't think I would have to wait 20 minutes for a warm-up if the first bolt was at 30 feet and it was actually a pin. Shit, I might not even climb it.

David Sahalie wrote: this isn't 'trad'. in trad you can place gear when you are run out

You just proved you have no idea what trad is.

David Sahalie wrote: these 'classic' climbs are museum pieces. IMO, it is a shame no gets to climb them unless they are ready to die.

Talk about hyperbole. Almost all the classic Needles climbs have been done over and over again by a host of climbers. True, they aren't for everyone, but that doesn't make them "museum pieces" which no one does either. Quite a few are relatively popular.

The "ready to die" comment is the worst of the hyperbole. Climbers generally prepare for run-out climbs both physically and mentally and do them when they know they are ready. These climbs are about more than just performing the moves, which is the province of sport climbing.

The fact is that far more sport climbers are hurt or killed from miscommunication over lowering than on all the Needles classics together, making it far from clear who most needs to be ready to die.

Moreover, the Needles classic climbs are situated in a region with a vast array of well-protected climbs, both trad and sport. It isn't as if the area is desperate for G-rated routes. What is so offensive about leaving a few classics for those climbers---and there are plenty of them, even if few on these forums seem to care anything about their "rights"---who actually enjoy and aspire to the challenges the classics still offer?

But this isn't what the thread is about. Replacing 1/4 bolts already in place with better bolts is a no-brainer. Removing fixed pins that have deteriorated when there are adequate natural gear placements nearby is also a no-brainer. The only real issue is what to do about deteriorating fixed pins when modern gear can't be substituted.

David Sahalie wrote: why is accessibility and safety a sad day? 30' run out outs on 30 year old pins and 1/4' bolts on cheese grater terrain is just silliness. this isn't 'trad'. in trad you can place gear when you are run out. the closest thing to this retro-insanity is the the gritstone in England. but, at least you can top rope that stuff. these 'classic' climbs are museum pieces. IMO, it is a shame no gets to climb them unless they are ready to die.

Have you even been there? Or are you one of the climbers who won't go just because the area has a rep for having a few run outs? Like rgold said there are plenty of safe routes there. And 99% of the time the run out is on much easier ground then the crux. The cruxes usually have good pro.

And 99% of the time these routes are so old they were at the cutting edge when FA'd or the FA was leading at their limit at the crux and still didn't feel the need for more bolts.

I did while I was there encounter several climbers who ability on sport routes way surpassed my own. Their inability to climb a route that was way below their limit with run outs on even easier terrain stopped them from being able to climb some of the routes in the Needles.

A famous Needles climber once said "if you can handle the run outs here you can handle the run outs anywhere" I know a cool head served me well when I ventured out west.

An even more famous Needles climber said "climbing isn't worth die for but some climbs are worth risking dieing for, when you come to the Needles you have to accept that".

Like I said its been a while since I have been there but I find it hard to believe that with all of the people climbing 5.whatever these days that there aren't people who can run it out on 5.7 terrain.

Johny Q wrote: As much as I would like to agree with you on this I think you should look at this from a different point of view. There are too many people, too many climbers, and that creates a scarcity of quality rock these days. We need the easy climbs to be more scary not less scary. I don't think I would have to wait 20 minutes for a warm-up if the first bolt was at 30 feet and it was actually a pin. Shit, I might not even climb it.

Johny Q sort of agreed with me, I think.

That's it folks Hell Just Froze over the world will end soon looks like the Aztec's were right.

s.price wrote:We recently had a situation at a local crag where a noob decked on a poorly bolted(ie runout) 5.8 route. Parents got pissed and threatened legal action against all involved including the Forest Service for allowing the route to be on land administered by them. Quick action by the local community diverted this problem with a rebolting of the route. In this case the original bolting of the route was done by climbers who lead at a much harder level. To them the runout was no big deal. To someone on the edge of their ability it was.

Hmm...sounds like some sort of urban myth---there doesn't seem to be even a remote legal basis for a suit. (Of course, people can threaten anything, but that doesn't mean that the threats will happen.) Nor does it make any sense that repairing the so-called "negligence" after the fact could somehow end the suit, if there ever was one. You got some references for this?

Practically every trad climb I know has sections---often easy relative to the grade---in which a fall could be fatal. Does this mean every trad climb has to be bolted so as to make a fatal fall impossible from every point on the climb? One of the things guides learn quickly (and sometimes tragically) is that a noob can fall anywhere. So, for example, does the Exum Ridge of the Grand need a bolt every ten feet if someone threatens to sue because the NPS is negligent in allowing it to continue in its current "unprotected" state?

s.price wrote:The route can still be done in it's original state by skipping the added bolts. Any route can be made runout, just cause it's there doesn't mean you have to clip it.

Anyone who believes this nonsense will have no problem with chipping giant holds on a route, since they can always be skipped. Similarly, they wouldn't mind if a via ferrata, complete with stanchions steel cables, and steps bolted onto the wall, was installed on the route, since you can choose not to use the steps and clip the cables.

I'm not saying any one particular bolt should or should not be placed, but anyone who thinks the climb is somehow the same after bolts have been added to sections previously climbed without them doesn't understand something fundamental about trad climbing.

Look: risk and its management is an integral part of trad climbing. Not so (at least not nearly so much) in sport climbing. In trad climbing, nature decides where the pro goes, and climbers make a personal decision whether or not to accept the challenges nature provided. In sport climbing, one might argue that it is sociopathic and immoral to bolt a route in a way that allows for ground falls, but that is because the route is a human creation, not a natural presence.

S Price said
"Nowhere does the original OP say this pin cannot be replaced with modern gear.

The route can still be done in it's original state by skipping the added bolts. Any route can be made runout, just cause it's there doesn't mean you have to clip it." end quote

The OP hasn't in any way tried to even test the pin from what I see posted. Seems like someone needs to come up with a plan to safely test the pin if it blows and no gear opens up. Place a bolt any crusty old timers who can't live with that oh well.

While I do see some need for retro bolting. There are routes in the Needles that were seen as worth the added bolts if the over all difficulty of the route made it a good beginner route. Or when the FA felt that they would have wanted more bolts but was unable to place them at the time. These bolts still need to go in on the lead IMO.

On the other hand just saying you can skip the extra bolts tells me you have no idea what is involved in overcoming fear to finish off on one of these routes. Climbing a crack route with a full rack and running the whole thing out is not free soloing. Having the option to clip anything totally changes everything.

The OP references that there are a lot of fully bolted routes near the one in question. Why can't his buddy just do one of those climbs?

Still not saying there should never be a pin replaced with a bolt just saying not every route is for everyone. Just like I shouldn't as a 5.10 climber alter a harder route to make it work out for my limited ability.

rgold wrote: Anyone who believes this nonsense will have no problem with chipping giant holds on a route, since they can always be skipped.

I always thought it would be funny to tell some 5.12 climber that I was going to retro fit their climbs with 5.10 holds. Chisel, glue, bolt the holds on what ever they can always just skip them right. It's all about accessibility right.

s.price wrote: Years ago I established a sport route called Top Flight aka Black Nasty with an intentional runout high enough off the ground to add spice to the climb but keep it safe. Fall in this section and expect 40+ feet of air. The climbing in this section is relatively easy compared to the rest of the route. This is something I do quite frequently to up the commitment...... We do so for fun and the aforementioned spice.

Really this seems silly to me. Your already on rappel drilling bolts why engineer a run out. I get the silliness of saying its all good as long as your on lead, but at least your leading. Some guys did this at Rushmore and it seemed really silly then when there were plenty of run outs in the Needles already.

Then there were the screwballs who were skipping bolts at Rushmore and then whipping on purpose. "Training for the Needles" they said. Fools training for run outs means not falling at all not taking longer falls.

Rich how hard were you leading when you did this? mountainproject.com/v/needl…
I met one guy who claimed he never led over 5.8 but he led the Eye by your route on the last day of a week of climbing there.

s.price wrote:Tim, you know nothing about my ability to overcome fear. Didn't your mommy teach you not to make assumptions? I sent Bachar-Yerian in 07. Don't talk to me about overcoming fear.

You posted this while I was typing the above comment. I don't think I ever made any assumptions about anyone. My comment was to David S but yes I've met several climbers who just wouldn't risk setting foot in the Needles. My comment was a general one.

As for the B-Y I tip my hat to you sir that's one hell of an accomplishment. I have to think you trained your mind and body pretty well for that one.

Still think it's silly to skip bolts or engineer run outs on rap.

Peace.

Edit to add I don't need to see pics I'll take your word for it.

Tim, I made the first (non-aid) ascent of the Needle's Eye in 1964. I was, in retrospect, starting to lead 5.10's at that point, although we were still calling most of them 5.9. This was well before the onset of clean climbing in the U.S., so pitons were the only form of trad protection (along with bolts drilled by hand on the lead).

The route has a few moves of 5.8 or 5.8+. It is certainly leadable by an experienced and steady 5.8 climber, but it does have a runout on easier ground (hard to say how hard---medium fifth-class) that would result in death if blown.

The route was quickly repeated (by Royal Robbins) and has seen a steady stream of ascents over the years; it is no museum piece. Nowadays, most parties take a 5.10 variation at the start that we glanced at but passed on in '64.

I wrote an account, which I hope folks would find amusing, at supertopo.com/tr/The-First-…. That TR contain a link to the original posting, which turned into a controversy of some relevance to the present discussion, namely whether the single fixed pin I placed before the crux should be replaced with a bolt.

s.price wrote:I did not write those last two posts. My dickhead soon to be ex climbing partner did while i was on a beer run. He doesn't get the whole forum thing and thought it would be funny. It's not. Sorry All. I do feel i understand fear and how to control it but have never done Bachar-Yerian. What a DICK!

Price, Dude! now hat is some funny shit right there.

s.price wrote:Skipping leading to Chipping is absurd. I was just stating a simple fact.

The comparison is drilling to chipping, not leading to chipping, and if the question is whether the ability to skip manufactured additions to a route makes those modifications inconsequential, I think my examples are highly relevant and far from absurd.

As far as simple facts go, the only "simple fact" you stated is that leaders can skip the bolts. That is no more or less simple than skipping chipped holds, so I too have only stated simple facts.

Let me repeat that I am not suggesting some general anti-bolt argument. The one genuine absurdity here, however, is the pretense that adding bolts to sections previously climbed without them is not a permanent alteration of the character of the route.