To Ban... or not to Ban Bolts!

Hi, new to Mountain Project.  It's interesting to see climbers argue with climbers.  LOL.

Preeti Pwrote:

Hi, new to Mountain Project.  It's interesting to see climbers argue with climbers.  LOL.

Welcome. You happened to have come across a thread started by the all time argumentative poster ever. 

Marc801 Cwrote:

Welcome. You happened to have come across a thread started by the all time argumentative poster ever. 

Prove it.

Dylan Colonwrote:

Nature doesn't intend anything, "intent" is a human invention. The rock just is. We decide what to do with it.

Call it whatever you like, we are guests of nature, nothing more.

The second ethos, without any input from the first, can lead to some kind of gross stuff, like overbolting. Similarly a pure first ethos would mean El Cap never got climbed (no pitons, bolts, anything allowed? would have never happened). I'd hope we can agree that would be a shame.

I have no problem with El Cap never being climbed. Man's ego must be limited for the greater good of the earth.

The goal is to find a good balance of both, and different areas (an alpine wilderness vs an urban choss quarry) will have different appropriate balances.

I don't believe there can be balance with bolting because it is wrong. "Wrong" can never be "right", that's ethically impossible!

Claudine Longetwrote:

That's your evidence? One sentence in a goverment report, paid and administered by the government? Why not just quote Wikipedia?

Tradibanwrote:

That's your evidence? One sentence in a goverment report, paid and administered by the government? Why not just quote Wikipedia?

Actually there is one dude who trolls Wikipedia in order to keep the information accurate and up to date, it’s quite impressive.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/meet-the-man-behind-a-third-of-whats-on-wikipedia/

Jay Keche wrote:

Ethics are conditional. "Wrong" can be "right" under certain circumstances.

Yes. What are your conditions and how do you justify them?

Blake Morris wrote:

Why must everything be climbed? If it has to be bolted to be climbed, it shouldn't be climbed.

Interesting. How so?

Jay Keche wrote:

Why not?

The environment.

You're right, except

1. Tradibanned's original account Tradiban was banned, and that account had plenty of ticks/photos/etc.

2. Nothing that happened here violates the first amendment at all, which protects your speech from the government.

I argued with him somewhere about measurable impact and his response was some impact is more than no impact. The main issue is he simply does not want to argue with any empathy or sympathy and sees all these arguments in a vacuum. I do think the conservatives should vote him in place of Amy Comey Barrett.

jaron solomon wrote:

this discussion is ridiculous. points have been made over and over in a stupid roundabout. very few good points, but points nonetheless i suppose. the fact that half the routes in rifle now have unlisted names because they weren't politically correct enough for this website, while a user with no photos, no route contributions, no approach or area beta, no positive interactions in the forums, not even any ticks or to-dos, someone with literally no contributions to this entire website besides harassing users and spitting vitriol like a 13-year-old hasn't been banned says more than enough about the state of the forums. crazy lol. i'm all for freedom of speech, but there also comes a point when i think a private company should act and remove users like Tradibanned when it's obvious their only intention is to be a dick without bringing anything else to the table. and before anyone cries censorship, this is a privately owned site with a privately owned server, and just like you can't walk into a business and start harassing employees and calling them slurs without getting kicked out (even if it "technically" affects your 1st amendment right), the same should be applied here. 

please let this comment be a bookend and stop giving this dude attention - i certainly won't be responding to anything myself, so save your breath. this is not only unproductive, but regressive in that people are only going to continue to get angrier as this continues. it's clear there's two camps (one maybe more of a minority than the other) and agreement/common ground certainly isn't going to be found here.

that said, to everyone, even including Tradibanned, i hope the rest of your week is good, and you're able to get in some climbing. it seems like most of the people participating in this discussion could use a relaxing day out or two.

This is very ad-hominen! And highlights the cancel culture on MP.

Daniel Montgomery wrote:

however, i really can't help myself here and will give my two-cents specifically in regards to this comment. 

as an environmental scientist, i have a really difficult time exactly understanding what you're trying to say here, care to clarify? from my knowledge:

• cliff abiotic ecoystems are hardly affected by 3/8in bolts, so you couldn't be talking about those, as there's absolutely no data to even begin to suggest that weathering rates are in any regard impacted by either the bolts themselves or stainless steel they're made of, nor is there any evidence whatsoever that the act of installing bolts affects the integrity of surrounding rock, given that you're not bolting a choss pile.
• if you're referring to biotic crag ecosystems, i still don't follow. raptor nesting isn't going to be more or less affected by you either plugging gear or clipping bolts, your presence alone is what determines the effect. microbiota and simple organisms like lichen and mosses are still going to get trampled so long as you're climbing on the rock in the first place, and arguably, in regards to microbiota, trad is actually higher impact. after all you're jamming your hands, feet, and gear into cracks that insects shelter in, honeybees/wasps build nests in, and depending on the crack size, scorpions, snakes, and even small birds like swifts may call home.

so now that we've established that in terms of climbing impact, bolts vs gear is a negligible difference, i'm left to scratch my head in terms of what you mean. my best guess is one of two things:

• if you're arguing from an aesthetic standpoint, although bolts aren't pretty, they don't actually affect the environment itself. that's a different argument and not one i want any involvement in.
• if you're arguing from a use/traffic standpoint, i somewhat understand where you may be coming from, but still don't follow. eldorado canyon over this summer saw more max occupancy days than i've maybe seen in my entire life living in colorado, including long before i was climbing, and although some of the traffic certainly was due to day-hikers, the vast majority that i saw were trad climbers. i know indian creek was getting slammed last season and i suspect this year will be no different, and from what i understand joshua tree pre-covid was also seeing an influx too. on the other end of the spectrum, a sport crag i frequent in colorado, which i visited more weeks than not over this summer and last, generally had two other parties max. to add on to that, the crag itself is in a well known area, adjacent to likely one of the most popular moderate sport crags in the state, and although i won't name it since i'd rather not see it become overused, is no secret by any stretch, nor difficult to approach to - in fact, it's nearly roadside.
  • why did i bring up those examples? the fact of the matter is that there will always be a vastly more limited number of naturally protectable routes than ones that can be protected with bolts, and contrary to what i think a lot of the geezerly trad-dads on here think, a lot of young dudes around my age that i know are getting stoked on trad. it's not the 80's anymore, cams are as safe as they're ever going to be and more routes than not can be mostly sewn up with the massive variety of modern pro available. the headgame required for trad isn't exactly that far from what's already required of a sport climber at an area with old school ethics and sporting runouts like smith at this point. so what i'm mostly trying to say is that if we start chopping bolts and closing sport areas, i think it's an absolutely farfetched claim to think that at least a decent population won't just learn to plug gear (it doesn't exactly take a rocket scientist). then what? the far more limited routes and areas that can be climbed exclusively with gear get absolutely trampled to hell? more people start having climbing accidents because stupid people will still go out and try to lead on gear with no prior experience, the media makes a shitshow out of how "dangerous" climbing is, and those few remaining purist areas either close or become so heavily trafficked that they're unrecognizable, leaving only "local only" spots with a hostile hypermasculine culture in good shape? that hardly sounds like a solid argument to me.

the fact of the matter is that from an environmental perspective, we're long past a point of an oversimplified bolt vs gear argument. unless you want to ban modern cams and force people to start protecting themselves with nothing but passive pro, ban modern harnesses for good measure, and ban modern ropes, i think climbing volume is going to steadily increase regardless of anything. chopping bolts will only help get the sport banned on local/state levels faster, if the via feratta incident at smith that resulted in a bolting moratoria and threatened overall access isn't already a good indicator. there are so many easier ways to reduce ecological footprint, bar none.

TLDR but from a quick skim...bolts bring the people and my proposal is to end ALL bolting sport and trad. The bolts themselves are invasive to our environment and out of step with the rules we place on other user groups. The main idea is to reverse some of climber's destructive behavior and send the message that we care about the environment.

Tradibanwrote:

The bolts themselves are invasive to our environment and out of step with the rules we place on other user groups. 

See, I don't really think this is true in most areas, in the US at least. Hikers have trails that can often been seen on a hillside from very far off, backpackers get cleared and flattened designated camp sites, riders get hitching posts, boaters get docks, and this is stuff that's considered acceptable in designated wilderness areas. Leave the wilderness, and skiers get huge clearcut runs with lifts above them, mountain bikers get carefully manicured trails with jumps and ramps on them, you get the idea.

The difference is that it is pretty heavily controlled who can install these kinds of structures, while climbers can usually put in their own bolts. The solution to that could be some regulation of installation of fixed anchors, but banning bolts entirely would be like banning hiking trails in response to people cutting switchbacks.

Jay Keche wrote:

That's not what he said. You should read his post. He actually makes some really good and well articulated points.

No thanks. "jaron" began his posts with a long-winded personal attack on myself, even claiming he will not return to the thread, then returned to the thread with long-winded obfuscation. I have no interest in such trolls. However, if "jaron" would apologise for his first post I would consider taking a look at his second post.

How are they different from other types of outdoor infrastructure?

Other types of outdoor infrastructure are supervised and largely installed by the authority with jurisdiction. 

How so?

Are other recreational user groups allowed to blaze trail and install permanent hardware at their will? Nope.

This is possible without banning bolts.

What would you do to polish the climber image and slow the environmental impact?

Dylan Colon wrote:

Banning bolts is an important PR move for climbers to show we are a responsible user group to preserve future access.

After this many pages and effort, I’m almost starting to believe Tradiban is serious 

jaron solomon wrote:

this discussion is ridiculous. points have been made over and over in a stupid roundabout. very few good points, but points nonetheless i suppose. the fact that half the routes in rifle now have unlisted names because they weren't politically correct enough for this website, while a user with no photos, no route contributions, no approach or area beta, no positive interactions in the forums, not even any ticks or to-dos, someone with literally no contributions to this entire website besides harassing users and spitting vitriol like a 13-year-old hasn't been banned says more than enough about the state of the forums. crazy lol. i'm all for freedom of speech, but there also comes a point when i think a private company should act and remove users like Tradibanned when it's obvious their only intention is to be a dick without bringing anything else to the table. and before anyone cries censorship, this is a privately owned site with a privately owned server, and just like you can't walk into a business and start harassing employees and calling them slurs without getting kicked out (even if it "technically" affects your 1st amendment right), the same should be applied here. 

please let this comment be a bookend and stop giving this dude attention - i certainly won't be responding to anything myself, so save your breath. this is not only unproductive, but regressive in that people are only going to continue to get angrier as this continues. it's clear there's two camps (one maybe more of a minority than the other) and agreement/common ground certainly isn't going to be found here.

that said, to everyone, even including Tradibanned, i hope the rest of your week is good, and you're able to get in some climbing. it seems like most of the people participating in this discussion could use a relaxing day out or two.

Your the only one that seems angry and sooo annoyed at this ridiculous thread.

Mike Preisswrote:

Your the only one that seems angry and sooo annoyed at this ridiculous thread.

Right?! I think that guy needs a session with Parachute Adams. 

So, if we all just start saying 'fuck off' to Tradiban, what will be the next iteration of this thread when he closes it? Taking bets for 'Methods of Chopping' or 'How to Overthrow the Fascist Forest Service.'

Mark Pilatewrote:

After this many pages and effort, I’m almost starting to believe Tradiban is serious 

I actually do believe in a bolting ban. Bolting has done a few nice things for climbing but overall bolts have perverted climbing into an outdoor millennial "what I want, at any cost" entitlement recreation.

Tradibanwrote:

I actually do believe in a bolting ban. Bolting has done a few nice things for climbing but overall bolts have perverted climbing into an outdoor millennial "what I want, at any cost" entitlement recreation.

Look at the positives.  Climbing and bolts have sucked all the millennial attention.   The eddys servicing waves are nearly empty of millennials, the trad lines mostly uncrowded, absolutely no divers in the caves or wrecks kicking up silt, the plane manifests are free- no millennials looking to jump, etc etc.   Sure the resale value of my motorcycle sucks, and there’s long term economic impacts looming for these industries, but for now, aside from maybe mtn biking, enjoy the extra freedom in the “youth free” outdoor adventure arena that has higher monetary and training cost barriers.   They tend to prefer social groups so that necessarily means (in general) easier to access, less technical venues.  

Works for me.  Leaves the places I want to go wide open.  

I used to be more adamant about things like bolting myself.   But I soon realized the real threat is the more typical use of the term “development”.   Not bolts, but Walmart’s and condos.  The rest is almost trivial in comparison.