The Erik Sloan ethics thread

eli poss wrote: You could have chosen to establish a couple of new routes for this purpose, rather than altering an existing climb. Nobody would have felt violated if you had put up an aid circuit on a fresh piece of stone.

I'm not sure there are that many unclimbed C1-2 pieces of "fresh stone" left that aren't already free climbs. If there are, I'm sure Erik would see no problem in moving his aid circuit. If anyone knows any feel free to post them up.

Also,

Kent Richards wrote: Also, please point us to the data which shows that the vast majority of Yos climbers aspire to [aid] climb Half Dome or El Cap.

That's a little like asking for data that the majority of tourists who visit Cancun want to go to the beach. I think it is a fair assumption that if you are visiting a climbing area known for big wall climbing, that you just might want to get on a big wall.

I said already, I have no dog in this fight. I do think however that Erik has brought up several good points that seem to be falling on deaf ears. I'll agree that it is strange that there is so much preoccupation about BOR than any of the other examples Erik mentioned.

Erik Sloan wrote:HI CSProul(what's your real name, btw)? The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers, want nothing to do with this thread because of your negativity.

ES, your ability to be fully ignorant to what active climbers from YV say to you on the web is really amazing and unique. There are two ST treads which already discussed "The Erik Sloan actions ethics" which only you can interpret as "Sloan's efforts support"

supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0
supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0

Alexey wrote: ES, your ability to be fully ignorant to what active climbers from YV say to you on the web is really amazing and unique. There are two ST treads which already discussed "The Erik Sloan actions ethics" which only you can interpret as "Sloan's efforts support" supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0 supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0

Lol, actual discussion and those threads are not synonymous Alexy. Real discussion does not involve multiple pages of personal attacks. If I was an outsider looking in I'd say Erik is the only adult in the room.

Yo Gang,

I remembered another classic example of someone adding bolts in the middle of an established pitch:

Tommy Caldwell and Kevin Jorgeson on the Dawn Wall. They added bolts to the classic third pitch of Reticent Wall - a route still considered to be the prize of A4 climbing on El Cap(Reticent is climbed about once per year, so quite a bit more often than the Dawn Wall too). The Reticent is very famous for El Cap aid climbers. Andy Kirkpatrick wrote his Psycho Vertical book about soloing it.

Now Tommy and Kevin didn't go online first and ask if it was ok with everyone that they were going to add bolts to the Reticent. They didn't even contact the first ascentionist before they did so. (Scott Stowe, on of the FAists, is a Valley local climbing guide and lives in nearby Groveland).

What gives? Why would they do such a thing?

Folks like me and Scott Stowe just shrug when we hear about that kind of stuff. Progress comes in all forms, all ways, and there are a million grey areas around here if you want to dig into ethical debates. No one every completely agrees.

There has never been close to a majority here. And that's cool - a lot of diverse folks come to the Valley climbing scene and turn us on to all kinds of cool stuff. Embrace diversity y'all!

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Alexey wrote: ES, your ability to be fully ignorant to what active climbers from YV say to you on the web is really amazing and unique. There are two ST treads which already discussed "The Erik Sloan actions ethics" which only you can interpret as "Sloan's efforts support" supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0 supertopo.com/climbing/thre…;tn=0&mr=0

LOL, using SuperTopo to support any argument is a farse.

noun
noun: farce; plural noun: farces

a comic dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations.

I love the ST buffoonery but those old geezers are all keyboard and no action.

Erik Sloan wrote:even though the vast majority of climbers aspire to climb Half Dome or El Cap.

Erik Sloan wrote:The people who support my efforts, the majority of Yosemite climbers,

Erik Sloan wrote: No one every completely agrees. There has never been close to a majority here.

So... there's only a clear majority opinion, in your mind, when it supports your views?

In the thread you started about guidebook photos, you consistently refused to engage in the conversation about retro-bolting, insisting that the thread "stay on (your preferred) topic". Now in this thread, specifically about the ethics of your bolting activities, which you requested be started:

Erik Sloan wrote:As always, I"m happy to talk ethics with you guys, on a separate thread.

and then refused to participate in for weeks, now you seem much more supportive of changing the subject:

Erik Sloan wrote:Let's keep this dialogue going, but let's shift it toward more proactive things that we can all be doing.

Erik Sloan wrote:That is why I'd love to see the thread shift toward stewardship issues that we can be more proactive in at least talking about -

Don't mind me, I just love copy-pasting hypocrisy. Carry on.

Erik Sloan wrote:because the bolting issues have turned people off.

That is a true story.

Erik Sloan wrote:Yo Gang, I remembered another classic example of someone adding bolts in the middle of an established pitch: Tommy Caldwell and Kevin Jorgeson on the Dawn Wall. They added bolts to the classic third pitch of Reticent Wall - a route still considered to be the prize of A4 climbing on El Cap(Reticent is climbed about once per year, so quite a bit more often than the Dawn Wall too). The Reticent is very famous for El Cap aid climbers. Andy Kirkpatrick wrote his Psycho Vertical book about soloing it. Now Tommy and Kevin didn't go online first and ask if it was ok with everyone that they were going to add bolts to the Reticent. They didn't even contact the first ascentionist before they did so. (Scott Stowe, on of the FAists, is a Valley local climbing guide and lives in nearby Groveland). What gives? Why would they do such a thing? Folks like me and Scott Stowe just shrug when we hear about that kind of stuff. Progress comes in all forms, all ways, and there are a million grey areas around here if you want to dig into ethical debates. No one every completely agrees. There has never been close to a majority here. And that's cool - a lot of diverse folks come to the Valley climbing scene and turn us on to all kinds of cool stuff. Embrace diversity y'all! Woot Woot! Erik Yosemitebigwall.com

So you use an example of another bad situation to justify yours? It is a bit of a contradiction that you don't agree with Middendorf when he said that free climbing trumps aid, but then go on to use an example where you support a retro-bolt because it was used to free an established aid pitch.

So this route is aided by a handful of parties a year and freed by essentially zero? That bolt has removed some of the commitment that was required to aid that C3 pitch. It has made it easier to aid that pitch, robbing future aid climbers of the challenge that they expected on that route. You may shrug it off, but I'd wager that people who have genuine aspirations of testing themselves on the Reticent do not. I wonder what KP thinks about it? Unlike BOR (which I have climbed), I'll probably never climb the RW, so it's hard to get too worked up about it.

Some more fuel for the fire:

Now don't tell Steve Grossman about this one, definitely don't tell Stevey about this:

The new free route being put up on El Cap this year, 39 pitch 5.13d, climbs right up Steve's 'supposed' route that he wanted to call Turning Point. The route has shiny bolts every 10 feet now. I say 'supposed' route because Steve refused to release a topo to his route Turning Point, so it doesn't really exist. A couple proud American climbers crushed that shit. I think they're gonna call it the Platinum Wall.

Did these latest free El Cap bigwall climbers contact Steve Grossman and Charles Cole(founder of 5.10) before they set off up their route, asking permission to add bolts where they needed them? Did they come on this or other online forums and ask permission from the general climbing public to do so?

The majority I talk about agreeing with me that progress comes in all forms, and we need to be fighting over who is going to buy the land to build the Yosemite Climbers Ranch and not about some silly bolts in the wall, that majority is of climbers who climb in Yosemite each year. Sure, if you take into account, like these online forums do, that folks who haven't climbed in Yosemite for decades still feel some sort of attachment to talking about being involved with the processes here, then yeah, maybe we are perfectly divided.

re: 'we are divided' 'I believe the majority agrees with me'
When I say that we are a divided lot but that I believe the majority agrees with me about being laid back about grey areas in climbing ethics, and that the most important thing is to share with our fellow climbers our experiences - for sure I'm saying that is just my opinion, and someone else who maybe only reads these online forums and never climbs in Yosemite might think that the there is a different majority. Let's make this thread about finding common ground!

On a sunny YOsemite note: a group of us is headed down to Parkline Slab right now. This is the last map to make for my new Yosemite Free Climbs book. The designer is mocking up the cover, and the layout is coming along. So stoked! We had an awesome campfire at Camp 4 last night, the coyotes were howling (wink).

Hope each of you gets outside today and has fun! That's what it's all about!

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Simply not true ES. I and many others that post our opposition may certainly not be "real Valley locals
", but we do regularly climb in Yosemite. So to say that only has-beens and non-Yosemite climbers opposed the retro-bolting is just completely false. Sure, I'll admit that a lot of your most vocal opposition come from people who haven't climbed a wall in decades and/or people who don't climb in the Valley anymore, but there are a number of people, like myself, who are just average Yosemite weekenders who feel the same way. And what about prominent active Valley climbers? Ammon? Roger? Braun? Just to name a few...that have flat out told you that the BOR anchors were BS.

You are correct that nobody asks permission to bolt routes, just like nobody asked your permission to chop the BOR anchors. Have you put them back in yet? Unfortunately, in most cases the balance usually ends up on the "more bolts" side. Sometimes/places this is appropriate, but sometimes it's not.

ES is like a manchurian candidate from the Koch brothers.
Stewardship...laughing.

Yo Gang!

CSProul, I don't really know what to say to you. I can provide example after example that shows that I am not the leader of some retro-bolting movement here in Yosemite. I'm into stewardship, but, that as a regular climber I sometimes do things that are in the grey area of climbing ethics, like adding bolts, etc.

Let's talk about what stewardship projects we are interested in for 2016? I know the Yosemite Climbers Ranch is a big goal, so let's talk about some more mundane projects and goals that we can be a part of, or hope to be a part of in 2016.

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Erik, up front let me say it's good of you to actually engage here rather than just blow occasional happy smoke.

Erik Sloan wrote:Progress comes in all forms, all ways, and there are a million grey areas around here if you want to dig into ethical debates. No one every completely agrees.

I agree, 'progress' comes in all forms. The issue at hand here is what constitutes 'progress' and how we collectively define it. Tommy and Kevin on the Dawn Wall? You aren't likely to find many people who don't understand why that constitutes 'progress'. You bolt laddering around an aid crux or retrobolting hard aid pitches? Doubtful anyone considers your retrobolting activities as 'progress' in terms of advancing climbing.

To me it would seem you are quite prone to confusing the difficulties involved with true progress with the easy shortcuts involved in manufactured access. And put simply, there is no definition of 'progress' where comfortizing routes for access is anything but vandalism.

Also, as someone who has done a fair amount of rebolting, I have to say there is nothing grey about the demarc between rebolting and retrobolting - it's exquisitely clear - if there wasn't a bolt when you got there, there isn't a bolt when you leave. It's not any shade of grey, it's not rocket science, it's an exceptionally easy call after which there is simply no way to claim: "oops, don't understand how that happened". Your's is a classic - "oops, I did it again" - example and the very definition of a 'slippery slope' where in your case you've only picked up momentum with every passing year instead of [self-] arresting the downward slide.

P.S.

Erik Sloan wrote:I say 'supposed' route because Steve refused to release a topo to his route Turning Point, so it doesn't really exist.

That routes don't get reported to yours or anyone else's guidebook doesn't mean they didn't happen or don't exist - some of us actual find the very idea of guidebooks somewhat dubious at best and a crutch which prevents people from developing their own 'eye' for routes and lines.

The bolts added on the Nose and Salathe, the Knobby Wall, and Cookie Monster, and more recently on Paradise Lost on Middle Cathedral(not to mention the Dawn Wall, the Free Heart Route from this year, and now the Platinum Wall on El Cap), are all cases of retro-bolting, no? There were no bolts on those climbs, both mid-pitch and at belays, and now there are bolts. Do you have a different definition of retro-bolting than the rest of us? That stuff has been going on for ever.

Anyone who says there is no grey area in climber ethics is just being silly. Some friends of mine were grumbling about the bolts on Cookie Monster a couple months ago. 'It's a crack climb,' they said.

Seriously though, you guys are trying to talk a tough game about things I did. What are you guys interested in doing, stewardship-wise, here in Yosemite.

Mike Ousley - I love the constant reference to the rope swing - there were a half dozen folks up there yesterday, haha. Havin the time of their lives!

LIve it up guys!

Woot Woot!
Erik
Yosemitebigwall.com

Eric...tell you what...just to show that I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, if you'll just publicly admit that the BOR anchors were a bad idea, I'll come to the Valley and help help you rebolt any route of your choosing. No retro's, no additional hole count, hole-for-hole. I'll even concede that I'm ok with ugprades i.e., bolts for rivets, 1/4's up to modern standard etc...

Full disclosure, I have very limited bolt removal and replacement experience. No more than a handful of days, so it'll be a learning experience for me.

Csproul, great response. This whole thing is such a mess. I think what you just did was an amazing approach. So many disagree with Eric on certain things but all seem to appreciate the certain upgrades he's made. I think befriending him and helping out with replacing old bolts is perfect. Helps everyone out and also could help Eric realize how unwanted some of his actions are. You'll perhaps be able to get him to understand why not to do something in a better way by actually being there with him. Bombard, in a way, Eric everyday with a new partner that has opposing views and maybe we can train each other in a way that helps solve these issues.
This is a long shot, I know, but I think Csproul is on to something.

Bill C. wrote: I think it is a fair assumption that if you are visiting a climbing area known for big wall climbing, that you just might want to get on a big wall.

This confuses "might" with "do". Yeah, most (perhaps all) climbers in Yos might want to climb a wall one day, but that doesn't automatically mean that they currently or ever will want to climb a wall. Without data, putting any concrete number on the percentage of climbers who actually want to do a wall someday is just a guess, and guesses aren't sufficient basis for controversial policy decisions.

Bill C. wrote: That's a little like asking for data that the majority of tourists who visit Cancun want to go to the beach.

No, the comparison doesn't fit...

I was asking for data to back a conclusion that the majority of Yos climbers aspire to do a wall, and your response is arguing that since Yos is well-known for wall climbing it's obvious that the majority of climbers are there for the wall climbing.

Yos is well-known for non-wall climbing as much as it is wall climbing, and one could make the same conclusion for any of the other types of climbing it's well-known for: "because it's well-known for long free routes with great views, probably most climbers go there for the long free routes with great views".

Yos is also the closest high-concentration of long free routes to a couple of major metropolitan areas. Because of the nearby metropolitan areas, I'd guess that the majority of climber-days in Yos are by climbers who don't want to do a wall. Yeah, some of them might eventually decide they want to do a wall in the same way that some hikers, RV campers, or other subset of the 4M+ visitors / year might decide that they want to do a wall, but until they actually decide that, they aren't aspiring wall climbers.

Bill C. wrote: I said already, I have no dog in this fight.

I'd argue that this is a discussion about procedures / policies on protection of climbing resources, Yos is a high-profile climbing area, and communal dynamics in Yos will set examples for many to see, so every U.S. outdoor climber has a dog in this fight.

PosiDave wrote:My good friend Richie introduced me to Erik in the winter of 2010. He (like Richie) was one of the nicest climbers I have ever met. I have heard nothing but very good things from everyone else I know that has met him. Sounds like a bunch of haters if you ask me. Keep up the good work Erik!

PosiDave wrote:He put up numerous big walls with my buddy and he always said Erik ruffled alot of peoples feathers for certain things, but much of it was due to people who didn't like him before for other unrelated reasons. everyone I know that doesn't like the guy it is based on "I heard".

Since Richie can't speak for himself, it's probably not fair to use him as an endorsement. I assure you that Richie didn't agree with everything Erik has done in the Valley. He was very much against retrobolting on existing routes. He also came to dislike the alcove swing, very much. After watching some pretty sketchy techniques going on at the swing, he asked me to take it down, since it was his rope and gear. He would have done it himself but had to go back to work. After following through with my promise of taking it down, I got an email from Erik. He wasn't very happy, at all, that I took the swing down. I simply told him that I was doing a favor for Richie, upon his request.

Not everyone who is against some of Erik's actions is out for blood, or is a hater. In fact, I consider Erik a friend. But, friends don't always have to agree with each other and in a lot of cases, I disagree heavily with what he thinks is no big deal.

More than a decade and a half ago a bunch of Yosemite locals gathered together to address Erik's bolting tactics. Erik was present, as were a handful of some big names, heavy hitters and well-respected climbers. Chris Mac, Bryan Law, Eric Kohl and I were among a few (Mike Ousley might have been there, as well). We wanted Erik to stop drilling new bolts on existing routes. The conversation got pretty heated at times, but we were doing exactly what a lot of you guys are suggesting. Talk to each other in a reasonable manner and come up with a solution that's best for us and future Yosemite climbers. We walked away from that meeting knowing one thing: Erik was going to do whatever he wanted... and that was that.

Unfortunately this is not a new situation or debate. BOR and TDA are just the latest examples of his handiwork. Yes, Erik has done a ton of good work, replacing crappy bolts. But, he will also put a bolt in anywhere he sees fit, without thinking twice about it.

Again, I am not jumping on the hate train. I (we) just want him to stop adding bolts that weren't put in the same location, by the first ascent team. History is very important to most Yosemite locals and Erik is slowly erasing a lot of proud and bold ascents.

Erik, a bolt for a bolt. That's all we are asking of you... PLEASE!

ElCapPirate wrote:
We wanted Erik to stop drilling new bolts on existing routes.
......

We walked away from that meeting knowing one thing: Erik was going to do whatever he wanted... and that was that.
......;;
Erik, a bolt for a bolt. That's all we are asking of you... PLEASE!


So ElCapPirate, are there any reasons to ask Erik to stop if 10 years ago it was clear for you and other that he will continue to do whatever he wanted.
The only reason to continue this tread is to convince people who still support Erik- to drop his support.
Not take him as a aid climbing mentor, not climb with him, not buy his books and chop his bolts he added [retro-bolted] to the routes without FA party consent.

Although I applaud Erik's steadfast approach...
Man, this stuff is really getting out of hand.
2015 has been a disgusting year in rock climbing.
From Yosemite to the Southeast.
Chop. Chop! CHOP!

Ammon...make Rhett carry the kit!

So in the space of this post I would like to summarize the state of this argument since Erik responded, without inserting my own opinion on bolting.

It seems to me that,

1) Erik has effectively argued that in Yosemite, a strict ethic of no-new-bolts-on-existing-routes-ever does not actually exist. (Nobody has started a witch hunt for any of the other bolts added to existing routes he mentioned by people Tommy Caldwell etc.)

2) But, this doesn't mean there is no ethic against it at all. Clearly, people are still upset. (And have mostly ignored #1 rather than trying to construct a different statement of ethic, which is what probably needs to happen to stop the fighting..)

3) If I was going to summarize most of the remaining anti-anchors-on-BOR sentiment in a statement of ethic it would be: new bolts are only to be added to existing routes where people generally feel it is "worth it." (People seem okay with it in order for the Dawn Wall to go free, but not for practice aid climbing (see #1))

4) So the question is: when exactly is it okay to add bolts to existing routes, and who gets to decide? (Clearly, it sometimes is generally accepted, for the examples Erik has pointed out above, that no one has contradicted him on. The question is when?