To Ban... or not to Ban Bolts!

Mike Preiss wrote:

Yes humans have encroached on wildlife habitat but let's face it most of the reasons we lose (or close to losing) species is humans over hunting or fishing whether it's for food, their pelts, skins, horns, ect... The wild animals have enough trouble surviving predators, harsh winters, starvation, diseases, ect.. to have along come Elmer thud with his bazooka to wait in the hide and blow their head off.  I find no sporting achievement in hunting a deer, bear, moose, ect... Now you give the animal a fair chance at doing the same to the hunter, then you got a sporting achievement.

It depends what species you are talking about but usually habitat loss due to human encroachment is the number one reason species go extinct and over-exploitation second. I would guess a lot of the hunting done in the US is regulated enough that it's only allowed for species not threatened (unfortunately they are usually hunting the biggest healthiest males instead of the old, young, and sick that a natural predator would take). We've removed a lot of the natural apex predators (bears, wolves) so some hunting to replace what they do and keep an eco system healthy is not a bad idea. I hate trophy hunting, it's a sign of a small minded man. And I haven't done any but I can see hunting as a very primal satisfying activity if you are hunting for food. I have guns and deer on my property. I don't shoot them because I don't want to kill these beautiful animals, they are our neighbors. But if there was a natural disaster or something and I needed to shoot some for food I'd do it in a heartbeat.

ADAM GRANT wrote:

Bless your heart!  In this case “ethics” is nothing more then your opinion.

I tell you what grab your trad rack let’s go to maple canyon in Utah. I will bring a stage we will invite all of the locals and MP of course. The great ethical Tradibanned will be leading every classic route on trad gear skipping the bolted anchor and chopping every bolt along the way. Manufactured/reinforced holds will be skipped for ethical reasons.  You can explain how their back yard doesn’t fit your ethics and all of the camp grounds and climbing must be closed down.  So what do you say?  Is your need to troll strong enough to put your life out there or is trolling behind a keyboard as far as you’re willing to go?  

Ethics mean something! Opinions are like Orgasms mine is very important to me and yours I just don’t care that much about. So what is it ethics or opinion for you?

Maple won't "go" without bolts, I simply wouldn't climb there. Not everything needs to be climbed. In fact Maple is a symptom of the bolting disease I'm talking about, there was even a recent thread about it. 

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/119682694/mapmaple-canyon-concerns

No need to shut down the camping, the Maple cliffs can be enjoyed with out having to climb them.

Tradiban wrote:

Not everything needs to be climbed. 

Mike Preiss wrote:

Well I think good points were made in-between the useless ones, and no anger/outrage here, like I said before the "route setters" will keep going and unfortunately there will be no slowing them unless/until the government gets more involved

We're all on a site dedicated to climbing up things that we don't actually have to. Who am I to criticize the way you waste your free time? This responding to trolls thing might be beyond me, but I guess I'm glad as long as it makes you happy.

Tradiban wrote:

Lots of trad has bolts too. The study did not address bolt-less climbing.

Actually, I am already concerned about traffic on non-bolted climbs. Banning bolting will retard the growth of outdoor climbing overall and keep the masses in the gym. Some will still seek out non-bolted climbing but most will reserve themselves to the gym only. 

Besides, the only other way to limit non-bolted climbing is to introduce a quota system, much like you so hastily embraced. I simply cannot stand between the people and thier public lands.

Possible argument: The damage caused by any rock climbing is too great, pristine rock is altered forever by all that gear that gets shoved in the crack, the birds I wanna watch are afraid to nest, I can’t raddle snake hunt since climbers scare them away, I can’t explain geologic time to kids since half the rock has been thrown off, all the old growth trees root systems are being trashed.

Tradiban response: that doesn’t matter because that’s not what I’m talking about

Me: it is relevant since the most similar thing to clipping bolts is plugging gear so to not consider the environmental impact of two similar things is intellectually dishonest.

Tradiban response: Can’t stop people from using  public land

Me: happens all the time, and you are trying to stop people from sport climbing even though you claim that clipping bolts is not the same thing.

Tradiban: it’s not the bolts it’s what the bolts bring

Me: based in data you have a bigger problem than the people who clip bolts

Tradiban: I can’t use your solution because it’s public land for all

Me: but what your doing is limiting the public 

Loop goes on

Princess Puppy Lovr wrote:

Possible argument: The damage caused by any rock climbing is too great, pristine rock is altered forever by all that gear that gets shoved in the crack, the birds I wanna watch are afraid to nest, I can’t raddle snake hunt since climbers scare them away, I can’t explain geologic time to kids since half the rock has been thrown off, all the old growth trees root systems are being trashed.

Tradiban response: that doesn’t matter because that’s not what I’m talking about

You misread my argument. I'm not saying that bolt-less climbing is non-impact, I'm saying it's much less impact. See my responses to Glowering on the other thread, it's not all black/white, there's varying degrees.

Me: it is relevant since the most similar thing to clipping bolts is plugging gear so to not consider the environmental impact of two similar things is intellectually dishonest.

Tradiban response: Can’t stop people from using  public land

Again, cams don't have near the impact of bolts. And, yes, public land is public land, we can't stop people from going on it but we can stop what they do on it.

Me: happens all the time, and you are trying to stop people from sport climbing even though you claim that clipping bolts is not the same thing.

Tradiban: it’s not the bolts it’s what the bolts bring

Limiting the public does happen in some ways but ethically that shouldn't happen and the ways it does happen are not the same as you are proposing. It's the bolts AND what they bring.

Me: based in data you have a bigger problem than the people who clip bolts

Tradiban: I can’t use your solution because it’s public land for all

Me: but what your doing is limiting the public 

Loop goes on

Your "data" is from dubious sources and their methods are not explained, plus published on a website called "99problems.com", not very credible. 

Yes, what I'm doing IS limiting the public but not directly, the public is limiting themselves. There's a huge difference there.

ADAM GRANT wrote:

Wrong again there is a trad climb or two. You could duck tape hooks to the wall like the gents do across the pond in their strict no bolting crags. It sounds like you need to step up your imagination.  So what will it be? Ethics and we plan a trip to maple canyon or is it just your opinion?

I don’t know what kind of mental gymnastics it took for you to think that thread in any way has anything to do with your no bolting argument.  Let’s break it down. Karen got her feelings poked because someone left a camper. The free camp spots are on private land FYI and public land has a 14 day limit. Sounds like Karen didn’t plan ahead and got bit. Ooops poor Karen! Also Karen is a keyboard jockey. You know the type that will post about things on the internet but won’t say a word in person. Karen is also not from there but feels the need to tell them they are doing it wrong. If the people that live there aren’t upset about it and you don’t live there. Mind your own business! 

Now you're making me nostalgic, I have used a hook or two for trad pro.

"Karen" was concerned about the outdoor gym that Maple has become. It's clear you have no conscious regarding Maple and the impact from bolting on public lands. This attitude will be coming back to bite the bolters soon enough. 

Tradibanned, if you could craft an argument so compelling that it convinced all of the people crowding up the crags right now in the age of COVID and beyond that staying in the gym really is more fun, permanently reducing the number of people climbing outside to 1990 levels but with bolting continuing to happen by that reduced crowd, would you consider that a win?

I guess I'm trying to get to the root of the problem. Bolts drive crowding, that much seems clear to anyone not tying themselves into logical knots. 

If you could separate bolting from crowding (and I'm not sure you can), would that meaningfully reduce the offensiveness of, say, a new slab line somewhere in the Sierra with a mix of gear and bolt pro, or maybe a new roadside sport line, or would those still be just as objectionable?

Tradibanned wrote:

Again, cams don't have near the impact of bolts. And, yes, public land is public land, we can't stop people from going on it but we can stop what they do on it.

Moonlight buttress is getting wider, its totally location specific so it seems crazy to not account for locations in your proposal.

Yes, what I'm doing IS limiting the public but not directly, the public is limiting themselves. There's a huge difference there.

Under this logic you can limit other forms of climbing by banning cams since it indirectly limits the public.

Your "data" is from dubious sources and their methods are not explained, plus published on a website called "99problems.com", not very credible.

The article definitely cites its sources in weird ways but if you listen to the "Runout #37: Male-Dominated No More" almost everything they say in it is consistent with this report.

I still think its easier if we ban all rope climbing and just boulder. People will stay in the gyms more since there are only so many v0s outside.

I propose we just go full elitist and decide that bolting is ethical, but only on routes that are at least 5.12 in difficulty, or is that still too easy? It would nuke the crowds but we'd still get our youtube videos/corporate ads of teenagers onsighting 5.ridiculous to distract us from work.

Dylan Colon wrote:

Tradibanned, if you could craft an argument so compelling that it convinced all of the people crowding up the crags right now in the age of COVID and beyond that staying in the gym really is more fun, permanently reducing the number of people climbing outside to 1990 levels but with bolting continuing to happen by that reduced crowd, would you consider that a win?

No. Bolts are vandalism.

I guess I'm trying to get to the root of the problem. Bolts drive crowding, that much seems clear to anyone not tying themselves into logical knots. 

If you could separate bolting from crowding (and I'm not sure you can), would that meaningfully reduce the offensiveness of, say, a new slab line somewhere in the Sierra with a mix of gear and bolt pro, or maybe a new roadside sport line, or would those still be just as objectionable?

No. Bolts are vandalism.

Trevor Puppy Lovr wrote:

Yes I can, but again...and again...and again...there are varying degrees of impact here. Banning bolts is the best course of action.

Is this podcast accredited?

Climbed Crest Jewel on Sunday and I definitely used the bolts.

The approach keeps the crowds at bay, but maybe, so does the lack of protection.

Like 'Hoppy's Favorite' on GPA: 

"Named for the brand of milk you could buy at the Village store. 

The upper three pitches of this route are pretty fun. Unfortunately, 

the second pitch is 5.8 and unprotected. As Verne put it, 'to keep the riff raff off'."

Josh Fengel wrote:

Climbed Crest Jewel on Sunday and I definitely used the bolts.

The approach keeps the crowds at bay, but maybe, so does the lack of protection.

Like 'Hoppy's Favorite' on GPA: 

"Named for the brand of milk you could buy at the Village store. 

The upper three pitches of this route are pretty fun. Unfortunately, 

the second pitch is 5.8 and unprotected. As Verne put it, 'to keep the riff raff off'."

Best idea yet. No climbs with approaches less than 1 hour. That’ll thin out the crowds. 

Except I spent this summer putting up bolted and unbolted lines on a crag with a 15 minute approach as long as you had a 4x4 to get most of the way there.  But we were the only ones there so I think that’s an exception  

Tradiban wrote:

No. Bolts are vandalism.

No. Bolts are vandalism.

Account for one location across thousands? The erosion of Moonlight is totally insignificant compared to bolting.

Yes I can, but again...and again...and again...there are varying degrees of impact here. Banning bolts is the best course of action.

Is this podcast accredited?

Ropes are not vandalism. So tell us the difference between chipping and bolting.

Show of hands!

Who's seen Tradibanned clip a bolt.

+1 here

Tradibanned wrote:

No. Bolts are vandalism.

No. Bolts are vandalism.

Account for one location across thousands? The erosion of Moonlight is totally insignificant compared to bolting.

Yes I can, but again...and again...and again...there are varying degrees of impact here. Banning bolts is the best course of action.

Is this podcast accredited?

Ropes are not vandalism. So tell us the difference between chipping and bolting.

OK yeah I'm losing my patience for this now

He's a conversation vandal. He should be banned.

PWZ wrote:

He's a conversation vandal. He should be banned.

I wouldn't go that far. He's just really good at triggering everyone else, and everyone else is really bad at not being triggered. It's an internet forum - why do you care that much?

Daniel Chode Rider wrote:

I wouldn't go that far. He's just really good at triggering everyone else, and everyone else is really bad at not being triggered. It's an internet forum - why do you care that much?

I wouldn't say that. I'd say he's incredibly obtuse. I think this is an interesting topic, and I like to talk about. But when someone is completely incapable of acknowledging anyone else's reasoning and just wants to pontificate about why their ridiculous ideas are correct and when called out on their logical falsehoods just ignores it, then it gets old. 

I've never ignored or flagged anyone on any forum until now. But now I get pleasure out of seeing:

Tradibanned is on your Ignore List. Show It

I've never requested anyone be banned, but if he was banned and came back with a new account that's pretty pathetic. I wouldn't want to be somewhere I was unwanted.

Glowering wrote:

I wouldn't say that. I'd say he's incredibly obtuse. I think this is an interesting topic, and I like to talk about. But when someone is completely incapable of acknowledging anyone else's reasoning and just wants to pontificate about why their ridiculous ideas are correct and when called out on their logical falsehoods just ignores it, then it gets old. 

I've never ignored or flagged anyone on any forum until now. But now I get pleasure out of seeing:

I've never requested anyone be banned, but if he was banned and came back with a new account that's pretty pathetic. I wouldn't want to be somewhere I was unwanted.

I covered that pages ago. Cognitive dissonance. Yet here you all are still chasing your tails. 

You cannot win. No reasoning with a person like this.  Like our President. Worthless battle. Get a clue.

Disclaimer: retired behavioral psychologist. 

By those metrics, roads, signs and buildings are also vandalism? 

Daniel Chode Rider wrote:

I wouldn't go that far. He's just really good at triggering everyone else, and everyone else is really bad at not being triggered. It's an internet forum - why do you care that much?

I think He's one of the few here making the most calm rational statements and arguments for his case(even though I do not quite agree with all of them)