Mountain Project Logo

New bolts at Crow Hill

Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
Reggie Pawle wrote:Ultimately there's nothing traditionalists can do about it except speak up, because chopping is pretty uncool, too. If people want to bolt, they will.
Retrobolting is pretty uncool, too. If people want to chap, they will. And the idea bolts are somehow sacred once placed is ridiculous.
Luc-514 · · Montreal, QC · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 12,506
Healyje wrote: And the idea bolts are somehow sacred once placed is ridiculous.
Last year I counted 8 holes/chopped bolts on Thin Air, I guess the guiding companies aren't getting the message and keep attempting to protect that traverse with bolts...

Edit: or it might be from a route that crosses that long traverse?
BirminghamBen · · Birmingham, AL · Joined Jan 2007 · Points: 1,620
Reggie Pawle wrote:Ultimately there's nothing traditionalists can do about it except speak up, because chopping is pretty uncool, too. If people want to bolt, they will.
See, this is the thing.... I can take bolts out faster than you can put 'em in. And, if one is doing it right, you won't be able to detect the aftermath. Unlike new route development, which is best accomplished in teams, chopping is a process that can be executed solo.

A cordless grinder lasts a lot longer than a drill on a single charge. A tube of JB Weld, mixed with native rock dust, will camoflauge about 100 holes. It's really not a hard thing to master...erasing bolts/routes. You want someone to walk up to the cliff and see....nakedness....as if the route was never there.

Sure, there are cool sport areas. And they should remain that way, maybe. But, it seems evident that the gym-to-crag mentality of today is going to erode the traditionalist approach at many OTHER places. Places where there is history or an established "ethic".

To me, in the USA, nowhere is that more evident than East of the Mississippi. Limited resources, exploding user group, dumbing down for the masses, less public land than out West, GYMS, etc. The masses want "safe", "convenient" climbing. The newly minted convenience-seekers, squeezing the life out the remaining resources, probably can't be blamed too much. It is just that this is the "climbing" they know.

It may be that I am taking this too personally as an outsider. But, I come to MA for business a lot. Crow Hill is a place that I like. It'll be sad if, as a visitor, I see bolts splattered all over. Even at a "small", possibly "non-destination" crag. Hopefully, Crow Hill will remain unmolested.
M Sprague · · New England · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 5,090
UncleBen wrote: It'll be sad if, as a visitor, I see bolts splattered all over. Even at a "small", possibly "non-destination" crag. Hopefully, Crow Hill will remain unmolested.
The thing is, we are talking about a few bolts on a mixed protected line on a 100 foot wall, no?..not "splattered all over". If they were painted up, especially if they were countersunk SS Fixe glue-ins, they would hardly be noticeable, certainly nothing to the degree of the other fixed gear at the crag. We are not even talking about a new route, rather the restoration of a line that was done decades ago. Eric talks about all fixed gear needing upkeep, but a few well done glue-ins are far more discrete and hardy than rotting pins and tat. If this route was restored in this way and the the eyesore gear was replaced with the same, and perhaps a few anchors were placed to alleviate erosion, you would likely end up with a far cleaner and more natural looking crag, with the bonus that the gear would actually be reliable.
Joe M · · MA and NH · Joined Dec 2008 · Points: 11,725

What really seems to be lost here is that the FA WAS done with bolts, which were then chopped and the route was later lead without by someone else. You can argue whether this line should or should not be bolted, but the FA'er, John Mallory, did bolt it, so that argument against these bolts is invalid.

BirminghamBen · · Birmingham, AL · Joined Jan 2007 · Points: 1,620
M Sprague wrote: The thing is, we are talking about a few bolts on a mixed protected line on a 100 foot wall, no?..not "splattered all over".
Understood about the place not already being "splattered". I'm just saying I hope C.H. doesn't morph into something else than it is now.

And, the point is not lost concerning high-tech, glue-in hardware. I suspect glue-in technology is the way we are headed for the bolted routes of the future...and certainly fix jobs.

Tally ho.
Joe M · · MA and NH · Joined Dec 2008 · Points: 11,725

This thread reminded me of Tim K.'s FA of Absolute, which I believe is to the right? of Dune and Cro-Mag?

FA of Absolute. Photo by Tony Veltri.

Broken wire from working Absolute. Photo by Tony Veltri.

Eric Engberg · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2009 · Points: 0
Joe M. wrote:This thread reminded me of Tim K.'s FA of Absolute, which I believe is to the right? of Dune and Cro-Mag?
To the left
Joe M · · MA and NH · Joined Dec 2008 · Points: 11,725

My bad, thanks Eric!

M Sprague · · New England · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 5,090
Joe M. wrote:What really seems to be lost here is that the FA WAS done with bolts, which were then chopped and the route was later lead without by someone else. You can argue whether this line should or should not be bolted, but the FA'er, John Mallery, did bolt it, so that argument against these bolts is invalid.
..unless the original bolting ignored a previous and over riding "rule", so the key question is whether there is such an overriding and valid rule. I think those latter two assumptions can be questioned seeing that bolts and other fixed gear from other previous ascents at the crag have been accepted de facto and largely remain. There is not enough clarity there to justify the vandalism of John's route IMO.
Eric Engberg · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2009 · Points: 0
Joe M. wrote:What really seems to be lost here is that the FA WAS done with bolts, which were then chopped and the route was later lead without by someone else. You can argue whether this line should or should not be bolted, but the FA'er, John Mallery, did bolt it, so that argument against these bolts is invalid.
Generally the style of the FA is held sacred - typically when arguing the other way - against retrobolting. But sometimes the style of the first ascent is so out of line with the traditions of the area that it ends up not being respected. Various chip/glue/bolt-on incidents. Squeezed in directissimas ("Drop of Water on Cannon"). So it's not a 100% trump card and you could also argue that Mallory's bolts detracted from the ability of folks to do it in the a5 style that it had previously been done in (an issue that has come up with some of the free routes on El Cap).

The fact that this route has had repeats done sans bolts and that harder routes like Absolute have been done sans bolts indicates that they aren't really necessary.

Lets talk about "The Path" at Lake Louise.
M Sprague · · New England · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 5,090

Isn't it for the most part (but not for some super classic aid lines or if the free asentionist so chooses) accepted that free trumps aid when it comes to adding protection?

I am not sure that someone headpointing a line as an r/x really equates to bolts not being "needed", Eric, though I will give you that the context has some bearing. The example of Tim D soloing or using a few pieces of shitty gear on some routes at Rumney comes to mind. Bolts not needed on Aquarius or Orangahang???

I'm actually not clear; was John's ascent pure sport or mixed bolts and gear? It had already been chopped when I got on it

Joe M · · MA and NH · Joined Dec 2008 · Points: 11,725

I wasn't arguing for or against the bolts, just noticed a few commenters referencing respecting the FA.

My feeling, whether you like it or not, is that these types of issues are going to become a big issue/agenda for the land managers and the Access Fund. At some areas, retrobolting or adding bolts is going to be the best option for managing/spreading out the numbers of climbers at smaller crags simply because more "climbable" routes will help mitigate the effects of more climbers. Preserving historical death-routes that are rarely climbed is all well and good, but at some point, they may need to be made safe(r) so as to accommodate more climbers. I'm not saying I agree with it, but at some areas I think it will come to pass...

Same goes with bolted anchors over trees or other "natural" anchors on popular routes. At some point, convenience/less impact will gain a higher priority than preserving history....

Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
M Sprague wrote:I'm actually not clear; was John's ascent pure sport or mixed bolts and gear?
Certainly a relevant question, particularly if the FA is ok with a couple of bolts on it. That it has been freed without them is somewhat beside the point. It also makes a difference if it was actually freed or was it headpointed after relentless TRing. If it was headpointed and the bolts chopped because of that I'd typically be ok with them going back in, particularly if the FA is ok with it (reservations about some FAs who, now older, are ok with gridbolting shit aside).
Ming · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2010 · Points: 1,955

Ok throwing my 2 cents here. I've heard, and yes, it's hearsay, that Mallery didn't want the bolts chopped but let it go, and I just read to that effect by Dana Seaton's entry. I think it would be sensible if the bolts are retro'd 1:1, just like what the Gunks is doing right now, 1:1 replacement of the old manky pros. What's the harm in that? I'm pretty sure those few bolts will not change the character of Crow Hill - it is and will always be an old foggie climber paradise. We know all the cool kids just skips it and go straight to Farley ;)

eric parham · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2012 · Points: 30
UncleBen wrote: But, it seems evident that the gym-to-crag mentality of today is going to erode the traditionalist approach
See, this is the thing.... blaming new climbers coming from the gym for the above, or for shoddy development is not a new thing. People have been complaining about it for decades. There is some pretty lame route development at every crag in the NE and its not the new gym to crag climbers. Local ethics at NoCo are a little screwy... Its climbers complaining about stupid stuff.
Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
old ben wrote: But, it seems evident that the gym-to-crag mentality of today is going to erode the traditionalist approach
eric parham wrote:See, this is the thing.... blaming new climbers coming from the gym for the above, or for shoddy development is not a new thing. People have been complaining about it for decades. There is some pretty lame route development at every crag in the NE and its not the new gym to crag climbers. Local ethics at NoCo are a little screwy... Its climbers complaining about stupid stuff.
It may not be a new thing, but it's still the driving thing...

J Q · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 50

Yea fuck that new crowd, they make me feel old and week, like I am.

Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 422
J Q wrote:Yea fuck that new crowd, they make me feel old and week, like I am.
I'll be the first to bow out when that happens. As it is, most of the new crowd [that even trad climbs] won't go up on serious trad routes.
Jonathan Haggerty · · West Acton, MA · Joined Mar 2014 · Points: 195

Clearly we are missing something bigger than this single debate can figure out. There is no community consensus. There aren't people maintaining the fixed gear. We are isolated between boston proper and wmcc.

Should CH fall under the wmcc umbrella? Should we be talking about our own eastern ma cc?

Mountain project is not a forum for a positive outcome.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Northeastern States
Post a Reply to "New bolts at Crow Hill"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.