Mountain Project Logo

What happened to the Millbrook, Gunks page

Josh Janes · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2001 · Points: 9,930
donald perry wrote:Call a TR a FA and leave it at that and let's see if we can stop all this unessasary and insane bolting. No?, that's too wacky?
Tradition and access issues are the reasons why there aren't bolted routes all over Millbrook - not because you threw a rope over the cliff once and top-roped your way back out.
m kelley · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2016 · Points: 0
donald perry wrote:Toproping is a style that is environmentally friendly, passive, undetectable, clean, quick, safe, pure, and reasonable for landowners. Thats my point.
Regardless of everything else going on in this thread, this is a good point well stated.
steverett · · Boston, MA · Joined Feb 2012 · Points: 105
m kelley wrote: donald perry wrote: Toproping is a style that is environmentally friendly, passive, undetectable, clean, quick, safe, pure, and reasonable for landowners. Thats my point. Regardless of everything else going on in this thread, this is a good point well stated.
Unfortunately it's not always true. For example, the top of Ragged Mtn in CT is losing trees due to climbers toproping off of them. Bolted anchors would be more environmentally friendly, but are not permitted.
m kelley · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2016 · Points: 0
steverett wrote: Unfortunately it's not always true. For example, the top of Ragged Mtn in CT is losing trees due to climbers toproping off of them. Bolted anchors would be more environmentally friendly, but are not permitted.
Is this because they are not building good anchors and doing things like rapping directly off the trees? Is it something that could be avoided with best practices?
Air Alexy · · Washington, DC · Joined May 2010 · Points: 30

As ridiculous as this thread is, it does actually bring up an interesting question for MP admins. Several questions, actually. At some point, some curation might be necessary.

Marc801 C · · Sandy, Utah · Joined Feb 2014 · Points: 65
donald perry wrote:...but you cannot bolt a 70 meter cliff and call yourself a rock climber....
That's your opinion, which quite frankly is several decades outdated. Sport climbing is hardly new, starting in this country circa 1984 and a bit before that in France. Recall also that at a lot of sport climbing areas there was significant engineering and rope shenanigans just to get to the spot where route anchors could be installed. The majority of routes in these areas are not amenable to top roping (Smith, American Fork, ORG, Maple Canyon immediately come to mind).

Many, many, many climbers [insert list of famous climbers here] will disagree with your position - a lot of them very notable for their climbing accomplishments, many far more difficult than yours.
Jeffrey Dunn · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2007 · Points: 229

I'm genuinely happy that Donald likes heading out to Millbrook and connect with him on that level because it's a great place to spend your precious days on this earth. However, I see limited value to the climbing community in sharing those experiences. I think there is great benefit to out community from documenting routes that have been lead because that's our history. toproping will never establish a meaningful history at our cliffs.

I would rather see the Millbrook page reflective of what a ground up leader would venture out there for as it is more meaningful in many ways. I'm glad it's not my decision to act.

oldfattradguuy kk · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2006 · Points: 170

THIS STUFF IS FUNNEY AS HELL!

Folks have been top roping at Millbrook for years.
What would the bank manager say?

SethG · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 291

No one is opposed to top roping.

Some of us (most of us?) are against claiming and naming and listing routes that have been top roped.

This does not mean we want Millbrook to have bolts on it.

Obviously. We have other choices.

will ar · · Vermont · Joined Jan 2010 · Points: 290
donald perry wrote: In other words what would you think if you woke up on Christmas day and learned that all the X leads and top ropes were bolted?
I skimmed this thread pretty quickly, but I don't recall anyone advocating that bolts go in at millbrook or that your routes need to be done on lead to be an established climb. Everyone here seems to be fine with those routes remaining topropes. Many climbers, myself included, learned to climb at crags that were strictly toprope and there are places like this all over the US. I think the issue is how you have presented the routes. I have a whole bookshelf of guidebooks (you probably have even more) and many of them have toprope routes listed at various single pitch crags. When I look at the TR routes though it doesn't give a route name and FA party. It typically says route #1, 2, etc or TR variation of some other leadable route. Naming TR routes and recording names of the FA party is not common. Recording the existence of a TR route is beneficial so that someone else doesn't come along and think they are touching virgin rock and bolt it.

I noticed you named one of your routes "NRON QSR 50 200 6 50 100 60 200 = 666." Not exactly something that rolls of the tongue. You're entitled to name a FA whatever you want, but let's look at this from a practical standpoint. I wouldn't expect everyone else to use that name in casual conversation. If that route ever become popular people are just going to come up with their own name and your original name will be completely forgotten.
will ar · · Vermont · Joined Jan 2010 · Points: 290
donald perry wrote: FFA name the leader and the second.
This practice has actually become much less common. On single pitch climbs that can be lowered off of often only the person who initial leads it gets the FA credit. Multipitch routes are another story.
Fehim Hasecic · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jun 2013 · Points: 215

Bump for the awesome thread

donald perry · · New Jersey · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 783

1. Did Tommy Caldwell and Kevin Jorgeson make the first free ascent on The Dawn Wall? According to the the logic of the people that post here they did not because they took turns leading. Half the pitches were done by each of them on TopRope. This means according to these confused MP guys that only Adam Ondra did the first ascent. Furthermore this means that many of the first ascents in Yosemite and Millbrook are not ascents at all because some crux pitches were done on toprope and some not. Maybe they should go out and re-write the history books? The fact is if you climb it without falling you have made a first ascent, how good you look doing it depends on if you lead every pitch or second every pitch but that has nothing to do with FA.

2. FFA name the leader and the second. The second is on toprope. His name has been rightly attached to the climb if he does not fall. He is named independently on his own merits, not because he was a belayer. I am merely asserting the same as a FA-TR. If my FA-TR's count for nothing then secondary FA climbers have no business being named in the FA either. They should only be named if they had likewise lead the climb. But that's not the case. So, you guys are being inconsistent, I have these FA-TR fair and square. I was there first in the beginning with Romano in the ethic wars and I was there last, and now I am there trying to incorporate the 70's Dick Williams ethics, I freed my few climbs all the way up to the tip-pity top of them without falling, and now these are all my climbs, you get nothing. Get over it. This is something you guys need to come to grips with, and I lie not these are 5 star blank sustained rock. The rest of the blank rock, with perhaps a few exceptions will only yield boulder problems here and there.

3. The Dick Williams and every other Gunks Guide defines (The Gunks has had the history of defining climbing ethics) a TR as a FA.

ex 1

ex 2

ex 3

2008-1

2008

Todd Swain Gunks Guide

swain

Gunks Apps FA TR Zoomulator 5.12a TR Hidden in plain sight, the Zoomulator yields a frustratingly elusive crux followed by a mildly dirty roof and no real option for an anchor until well above the level of the Retribution/Nosedive anchor. Despite the detractors it does have a unique crux. FA: 1993 (toprope) Jordan Mills

This means that on short cliffs of blank rock bolts or soloing is obsolete to make a FA. If you can find some pro then you can add your FA to mine as a headpoint FA. But if want to do a FA that removes my record of a FA you can't, you lost that opportunity when I did my FA. You lose.

Now I proved my point beyond a reasonable doubt where if I post anything else I would be beating a dead horse.

BTW I do not believe you can chop bolts that are not on your climbs, you have to talk to the climbing community about it instead, you can not take matters into your own hands. If the climbing community agrees then they will remove the bolts. Otherwise you are wasting your time. But before we talk about bolts this issue needs to be resolved about FA, because you hillbillies don't knows what a Gunks FA is even though it's spelled out in black and white clear as crystal in every single one of our guides!

The 2004 Version
youtu.be/0AXAWdaC2hQ

Today's Version
youtu.be/4UDnTJcjPhY

4. "Doing the route on TR has always been considered inferior to ground up climbing." Entirely Illogical especially on a 70 meter cliff. This thinking is logical only if every First Ascent and following true Ascent thereafter ground up carries the same bolt drill on their harness with them and goes through the same bolt drilling process while on lead without the use of any kind of aid, no hooks. Repelling off a tree at the top of the cliff and then claiming that the bolts were always part of the cliff is the same as *the emperor with no clothes*. The bolts were not part of the cliff when you showed up, and when you left them behind they cannot be a part of a true second ascent. Only in your mind can you pretend you are doing a Second Ascent while leading. Your leader is a fictional character that never existed! The difference is that for someone who TR's the route is that they are in fact dealing with a purer form dealing with the environment as-is because they are leaving behind for a second ascent what makes for a possible *true* ascent to follow. If the wall is overhanging or access to the top is entirely impossible (extremly unlikely) then it makes sense to bolt, but never to do so and claim that the style is superior! The superior style is to do it without the aid of artificially drilled bolts. The need for a bolt is no differant then the need for chipped holds. The less bolts, the less chipped holds or none at all where you solo the route as-is or toprope, means you did it in the better style from the guy who brings the problem down to his leavel and not the other way around.

5. TR's are not being submitted here by yours truly on the basis that a TR at Millbrook is an accomplishment!, if that was the case you would all be correct. The toprope climbs I add here are not the same as the ones you may add thereafter and shall remain. Why? Because I have spent 30 years going over the cliff on and off identifying where the good sustained rock is THAT HAS NO PRO, now today I put them in for toprope or solo if you prefer. In other words I am very familiar with that cliff and qualify as someone who knows where to put a toprope that demand repeated ascents. So they need to be in a guide for that reason, its only logical and common sense. Redirectionalism or Nuclear Waste is an example of the kind of work I am referring to, other possibilities were sacrificed and only the best were noted for second ascents.

6. If it is true that they need a solo then Seth should stop posting immediately and volunteer himself, *put his money where his mouth is* and solo the routes so we can toprope them legitimately ... according to him. Why do I need to do his dirty work? But again!, I am not posting these routes on the basis of accomplishment, rather I am posting them in relation to guide-worthyness. This is where the good rock is go to it. It is not the same thing.

7. Consider these many climbs in the Gunks, such as 110 Degree Wall, White Corner, Supper Crack, No Exit, Birdland, Birdcage, Transcontinental Nailway, Roseland, Son of Easy O. Here the leader always has the rope over his head. There is virtually no difference in the actual rockclimbing itself nor in the risk. They are one in the same. Traditionally when these climbs were put up by John Brag and others a fall meant that you started over on top rope from the ground or a ledge where you could rest. And when you climbed you climbed to push the toprope higher. Who made the first ascent depend on whether you could make the moves. A FA did not depend on if you placed all the necessary gear and there was no unnecessary runouts skipping pro. A FA did not depend on if the climbing was of a nature that you placed all the gear on your last try of the FA. If anything having to do with a TR does not make for a FA then on these climbs this would mean logically that you need to solo these climbs to make for a first ascent. Due to the advances in climbing gear they are not by nature ground up, they are in fact top down! Climbing is centered around climbing not on gear. A particular style can be used to recognize a more difficult means of first ascent, but they are all first ascents.

8. Who gets to the top first does not justify who made the better ascent necessarily. If the person on lead uses aid or weights the rope and the second free climbs the pitch the second on TR has done a FFA while the leader has not. Here the Second will have his name first as the First Free Ascent and the leader gets named second in the guide. And it matters not if the climb is G, R, or X.

9. In NRG in the first attempts at The Greatest Show On Earth, Tim Toula would remove all the gear over his head after taking a fall so he was not TR-ing anything. NRG Rock Climbs pg 32. I would argue that he was correct to do so to eliminate a TR, nevertheless the exercise has nothing to do with climbing. Back in the 70's I adopted the standard of Jim Ericson, who would not consider a FA if you took any falls, for that would mean that you used the aid of a TR!, so I down climbed Open Cockpit to claim I did an ascent of it with a new fear of falling. Not pulling the pro or the rope is the standard by which the FA were done by Mark Robinson, Bragg, and I assume Barber, I watched them do it, they never pulled their rope or removed gear before each try. Other members of the party took advantage of a TR all the way through the crux and claimed FA! Later I came to understand that this was indeed a logical conclusion.

I would agree if someone is in the very process of doing a FA Lead and someone comes along and TR's it, in that case we should erase it from the history books, as would be the case if I bolted my TR climbs. Yes they would be FA, but we would not want to encourage that kind of behavior.

splitclimber · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2007 · Points: 18

No one is giving Bob Gaines shit for posting top rope FA's in Joshua Tree. ;)

Another example is kenr's entries for crags he is developing around June Lake, CA. The difference is he is opening the route for anyone to get a lead FA on them, but makes no mention about his thoughts on adding bolts to his TR FA's.

I think top rope FA's have legitimacy at specific area with that tradition.

I admire the restraint to pull out the bolt kit and to make every single ascent possibility a lead climb.

This thread got away from how Donald added these climbs to the database to the merits of top roping and legitimacy of claiming a TR first ascent.

I think MP is a good way to document these kind of climbs, but Donald's entries could use some editing and cleanup IMO.

Josh Janes · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2001 · Points: 9,930

Exactly.

I think that there would be no problem whatsoever if donald perry had just gone about posting these climbs in a slightly different manner.

For example:

  • If he named the routes "Open Project" or at the very least added the phrase "Working Name" or "Working Title" to his given names.
  • If he left the FA info blank and clearly stated, front and center, that he has only top-roped these lines.
  • If he left off the R/X ratings but had indicated helpful beta for possible lead suitors regarding his OPINIONS on protection (possible gear, R/X situations, etc).
  • If he posted the climbs with thoughtful, descriptive introductions and clear directions.
  • If he used proper punctuation, grammar, spelling, and complete sentences.
  • If he kept his opinions about bolts and ethics out of route descriptions and saved them for a forum discussion (though I personally differ in my opinions about bolts, I, and I think most of us, certainly appreciate and share his desire to not grid bolt Millbrook).

If this more tactful approach were used, I suspect that many - or most - of us would very much welcome and appreciate these additions to the database... and they might even get us excited to go out there and repeat them: either on TR, or with an eye towards leading them.
Steven Kovalenko · · Calgary · Joined May 2014 · Points: 25

We have lots of unprotectable, amazing bullet proof limestone that requires a 100m rope where I live. We bolt it and call it hard sport climbing. You guys are crazy.

You don't get an FA here until it's redpointed (sport), or climbed for the first time by any means necessary ie. aid or free (alpine), although aid's not great style anyway based on standards these days and someone can claim the FFA afterwards. No one is bold enough to TR a cliff here and call it an FA. You would get laughed at and no one would enter it in any guidebook.

Betaclimber · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2016 · Points: 5

Happy thanksgiving all
Sorry I couldn't respond to anything, I was band for a couple days for being to new.
Well the cats out of the bag I'm Donald's son.

I noticed two names on that top rope first accent picture my father posted sooo. Could I get my names on that FA as well?
I did work on atleast one of these to get it go.

The way I see it is my father is blazing the trail for us and it's because of that he gets to name the trail.

As you can see by my profile picture I have been climbing
In the gunks for a long time. I always thought climbers climbed under a secret pirates code so to speak. Such as: We are to have a pack it in pack it out mentality so as to leave the area pristine. Growing up when I went to the gunks I was under the illusion I was deep in the woods. Maybe I'm just older but I feel like I'm in the city I can find beer cans ect. Well what my point? The point is something has changed the new generation has forgot the code(maybe call it ethics).

These bolts to me may as well be some ones left over garbage they didn't pick up.
I scream, JUST TOP ROPE IT! When ever I see routes covered in useless bolts.
If u really need some excitement just have your belayer give you a heathy amount of slack and yell OFF BELAY! When you get to the crux. My father pulls that on me all the time.

You have to have a big ego to have to bolt something you can top rope. Or maybe it's because top ropes have a bad rap and you cant get FA on them? When I think about it all bolted routes can never be seen as FA becuse u totaly altered the rock from the top down.( lowering down on a rope with a drill)

WE NEED TO START A REVOLUTION! Grab your pitch forks men we need to go chop some bolts!(kidding) I know I'm the minority on this.

M Mobley · · Bar Harbor, ME · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 911

Top rope FAs are like riding a moped....

Tradgic Yogurt · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2016 · Points: 55

I'm kinda intrigued here, as I've never before seen people argue that FA is lead-only instead of "first to huck their neck meat up that route". Yes, traditions evolve, but in the documented history of climbing in Colorado and Yosemite over the last what, 60-80 years, this rule certainly hasn't applied everywhere in the US.

SethG · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 291

I'm just going to try this again.

There is no bolt war to be fought at Millbrook. No one plans to bolt this cliff, or any cliff at the Gunks. No talk of "these kids today" or beer cans will change that fact. There is a ban on bolting and no one is breaking it.

As I said up thread, there are some isolated project lines at the Gunks that have never been led, which have names and are listed. This is not the same thing as systematically marching down the cliff and dropping rope after rope and then claiming all of these routes.

The choice is not between top roping and bolting. It is between traditional climbing, from the ground up, or something less stylistically pure. Doing the route on TR has (in our world of artificial rules) always been considered inferior to ground up climbing. This is why there is a bias against listing such routes.

You are free to top rope all you want. And you are free to consider yourself a messianic visionary for doing that instead of placing an illegal bolt. But I don't think, traditionally, that you get to claim all of these routes as ascents and I don't think they should be cluttering up the database here.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "What happened to the Millbrook, Gunks page"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

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

Get Started.