Trad gear needed on bolted routes

Care to tell us what route? In addition to the region, the era when the route was put up could be a factor. These days we take the convenience of sport climbs for granted, show up to a cliff with a rack of draws and expect everything to be bolted to our satisfaction. 30 years ago, as sport climbing as we know it was still evolving, it seems the approach was to protect as much as possible with gear and place bolts only where necessary. Reasons included the cost of hardware, sticking to traditional ethics, and preserving boldness. Someone bolting a route in such a manner these days may have slightly different motives. I can sympathize with an entire cliff being all sport routes and having one cam placement on one route as a little weird, but why complain? It's not the FAs job to keep anyone from dying. Rise to the challenge of the route.

The rational is that bolts should be used as the gear of last resort. That has been the norm for 75 plus years in the USA. If one can place other less permanent gear they should.

And if someone just shows up and climbs routes without beta of any sort, that's great, but I would think that person is the type that would constantly evaluate the situation as they climb and not blindly venture into no fall terrain as they pass by a good gear placement. Unless that person was a gym climber expecting everything to be bolted to suit their liking, oh wait...

Man, people really do not take the time to read before posting a reply.

Mike S. is talking about a single pitch cliff of ALL sport climbing. If 9/10 climbs are bolted completely to the top, but 1 climb needs 1 cam to protect the crux what is the point? If you're so poor that you skipped 1 bolt you probably shouldn't be developing anyway. Doesn't make sense to me

There are some personal comments being tossed around in this thread but I'd say someone who can flash 10b in the Gunks probably has their head sorted.

Michael another factor which is an issue where I live is that there are the ethical police who literally chop bolts, destroy routes, remove hangers, etc. if they feel the section could have been led on trad gear. So I am developing a route that may take one small nut in a section. My preference is a bolt because the crack sucks and an incompetent trad leader will probably not make a safe placement. But my route could get chopped if I bolt this. I don't agree with this level of control and self righteousness but I don't want to lose my investment in bolts and hangers and time spent developing/working the route. I have heard mention of honoring the spirit of the crag and the first ones to develop an area but in my opinion the ethical police where I live are rigid self righteous folk who cannot begin to consider the viewpoint of someone else. Personally it does make my skin crawl when I see a bolt in or by a perfectly good crack, but I will not police these routes. There may be other factors that result in a crack or section of crack being bolted such as rock quality or friction of the rock.

I do mixed routes at Poko and Crane Mountain. I enjoy them and would rather clip a bolt or bring some gear than run it out. There's a 5.6 at Poko that's all bolts minus one cam placement at the crux. I love that climb.. One of my favorites!

Barrett Pauer wrote:Placing a bolt next to a bomber crack is just plain lazy, I can not think of a single instance where this should be acceptable

Agreed. Honestly I don't understand why anyone would want to do but with that being said its all all about the ethics of the area. That was said before but doesn't it honestly just come down to what the FA party wanted to do when establishing the line. Also said before.. Bolts cost money and take time to install, if there's a bomber crack that takes a red Camelot then Why not just place a red Camelot...
We would never see any bolts next to cracks in the south.. Especially in North Carolina Barrett. Ha

Michael if it's not your style of climb then choose a different route. If you honestly think it would benefit the community then get in touch with the FAs and ask them if you can place the bolt next to the bomber crack yourself.

Seems apparent it's all single pitch sport

Michael Spiesbach wrote:if there is already a full line of bolts on the climb why can't you just add one more to make it bolt protected

Michael Spiesbach wrote: This ethic makes no sense to me especially when there are other climbs at a cliff that take only draws.

Michael Spiesbach wrote:I'm not talking mixed ... I'm talking fully bolted area...

s.price wrote:Why not establish the route in said fashion? I am currently developing a multi pitch cliff that is predominately bolted routes. The premiere route on the cliff is a mix of bolts and gear.

Michael Spiesbach wrote:See I think this is completely different from what iw as talking about.. Your supplementing a trad line with some bolts to make it not a death route..

IMO it's your responsibility to study the route and/or route beta before you climb it. If you look up and see the missing bolt and you don't have gear with you....don't climb it. Not really a big deal

I'm not complaining because I got into trouble.. and I climb these mixed climbs just fine.. I just think it's dumb.. and was wondering why anyone would think it was a good idea...

So far the answer is ( with some noted exceptions who made good points for why they personally would equip a route in this matter) .. Well don't be a pussy and climb it... Except I did climb it. I can climb trad.. and I dont' really care for sport climbing except for a fun change of pace...

However 1 bolt less when there are over a hundred on a the cliff... is still something I think is piss poor. and if you look online Alex Honnold has an interview where he says the exact same thing.. And we all know how he's super scared of runouts..

If you're going to bolt the shit out of a wall you have already ruined the "integrity" of it and at this point just make it safe.. I don't care who you are.. when you put up a climb you ARE responsible for other people.. Maybe not legally but you are putting something up and defacing the rock so it can be climbed which means you are opening it up to others and you need to think about them too.

Allen Sanderson wrote:The rational is that bolts should be used as the gear of last resort. That has been the norm for 75 plus years in the USA. If one can place other less permanent gear they should.

Less permanent gear? Like a crappy pin?

I don't believe that bolts are or should be last resort, nor is that the norm in the USA that I've seen.

Spiesbach:...do you have a set of cams? Your profile states your favorite climbs are "CRAAAAACKS!" Why don't you just plug the piece and go. If it's too run out for you then just don't do the climb. Plenty of routes out there or here are run out and scary.

Barret: Yes!

1) I understand the OP's beef. You know how to climb trad but would rather not bring a cam up with you and use it at the crux, no less, where your placement skills might matter.
2) Climbers climb for infinite reasons, therefore it is good to have infinite kinds of routes.
3) Diversity at crags preserves history, develops different skills, and pleases a more diverse crowd of climbers.
4) There are gyms and crags and routes for anyone who wants "only bolts" on their routes.
5) Natural placements on a route should be honored for so many reasons...and yet....
6) Although I might be annoyed by bolted cracks at Rumney, I would never advocate chopping them because local ethics should generally be respected, even if flawed, because...
7) The first ascentionists' vision (and time, energy and money) should be respected, and because...
8)I am a first ascentionist who has left behind mixed routes that take only 1-2 pieces of gear at times and
9) I can handle the criticism that comes from the perspective of the OP, so
10) I won't go around chopping your bolts next to cracks, but
11) Don't go adding bolts to my routes!

The rationale, to get back to the OP's question, is that some of us absolutely refuse to bolt a crack because we want to design climbing experiences more diverse than just clipping the next bolt. Everything falls apart once we impose our will on the rock and just bolt all climbable terrain with no regard to the rock itself. Then it might as well be a gym - and we can build more of those! Yet the crags where we live are finite.

I am a pretty big wuss, but have left behind some moderately spicy routes because I chose not to add bolts anywhere near cracks. As I get older I'm sure I eventually won't lead some of my own routes - but that's OK. Someone else will get the same experiences I had.

What is the OP's rationale for this post? To get people like me who haven't posted for years to once again patiently explain why bolting cracks generally is nonsense that needs to be held up to the light of day and dismissed?

Why don't all climbs have permadraws? I really hate having to pack my quickdraws to the cliff. If my bag has anything more than shoes/harness/chalkbag/skin file/nail clippers/snack/water I'm gonna be pissed!

SRB25 wrote:Spiesbach:...do you have a set of cams? Your profile states your favorite climbs are "CRAAAAACKS!" Why don't you just plug the piece and go. If it's too run out for you then just don't do the climb. Plenty of routes out there or here are run out and scary. Barret: Yes!

So you read my profile but not my last post?

Barrett Pauer wrote:Placing a bolt next to a bomber crack is just plain lazy, I can not think of a single instance where this should be acceptable

Never heard anyone call placing a bolt the lazy way out.

Phil Tatti wrote:Mike S. is talking about a single pitch cliff of ALL sport climbing. If 9/10 climbs are bolted completely to the top, but 1 climb needs 1 cam to protect the crux what is the point? If you're so poor that you skipped 1 bolt you probably shouldn't be developing anyway.

Might be that the individual who was establishing the bolted line had their own personal issue with putting a bolt next to a feature that would take traditional protection. So, if a number of individuals are establishing routes at a crag, only one would need to feel that way. I wouldn't guess that its about being cheap or saving money.

As a route developer, its a but of a conundrum. We try not to put bolts next to perfectly protectable cracks but in an area that's nearly 100% sport, its a tough call. What I've done as a compromise, is, change the bolt spread to accommodate both styles.

Route developers have their own style and ethics. And...that's ok. Each person has their own way of bolting a route and its hard to make everyone in the community happy. Most folks are reasonable, though, and, maybe a discussion with the FA person would have them agree that a bolt would be ok?

I like mixed routes...they're usually less crowded and I'll bring a small rack to supplement fixed pro. Win for me.

James Hicks wrote: Never heard anyone call placing a bolt the lazy way out.

no but I have heard its just convenient.

Honnold said it.

The cliffs integrity is ruined already...

Why scar the rock more than you have to? Just because there are already a bunch of bolts doesn't mean you shouldn't preserve it where there's gear.

By climbing that route, you are reaping the fruit of the FA's time, effort, money spent equipping and possibly cleaning the route. Are you really in a position to be complaining because they didn't create a route that meets your satisfactions?

Colonel Mustard wrote: Less permanent gear? Like a crappy pin? I don't believe that bolts are or should be last resort, nor is that the norm in the USA that I've seen.

I mean bolts are generally only used when gear is unavailable. Excluding limestone sport climbing areas where the gear is few and far between but also tricky regardless.
But when a FA party leaves a pin fixed.. It usually gets replaced with a shiny bolt once it becomes oxidized. Don't really see the point of replacing a pin with another pin..