Why aren’t there bolted rap anchors off prusik?

John Tuttlewrote:

ps. A wad of brightly colored Tat is not "leave no trace". It can easily be demonstrated that properly colored bolts and hangers have less impact.

Yeah obviously you try to leave no trace, or the least trace as possible, but as someone else said above,  bolts are more permanent (holes, then more holes) than webbing and if climbers would take a minute to replace the older runners with 1 or 2 newer ones it would be better.  I just don't see a need to bolt anchors on prusik

Jplotzwrote:

Ok!  So it looks like we can wrap this one up for this year.  See everyone on this here thread next March!   Safe climbing!  

Nice try   

Mike Preisswrote:

Yeah obviously you try to leave no trace, or the least trace as possible, but as someone else said above,  bolts are more permanent (holes, then more holes) than webbing and if climbers would take a minute to replace the older runners with 1 or 2 newer ones it would be better.  I just don't see a need to bolt anchors on prusik

I defy you to even find a bolt hole after it has been professionally patched. The idea that this is some permanent egregious scar is ludicrous.

And the idea that people are leaving behind "camoflaged" tat is ridiculous.

If you want to leave "no trace" then don't climb because I can tell instantly where such routes go just from the wear and tear of climbing shoes scrubbing lichen away. Google Earth can show you routes in popular climbing areas from the "trail" created by climbers shoes.

"No Bolts" is about chest thumping and hypocritical virtue signalling. Not about some kind of purity or true wilderness ethic. If you really felt that way you wouldn't climb. Because to climb is to degrade the resource.

But you go right ahead commuting to the crag in your poison spewing SUV on roads blasted through mountainsides and tell us more about your purity?

You want wilderness? Start with removing the roads and see how you like hiking the extra 20 miles to the start of the approach to your crag. If you aren't doing that you have little to say about the impact of a bolted rap anchor.

For those anti bolt you got any biological surveys comparing bolts to no bolts? Cause science might be what we want to use...

y'all its easy, we just need to have a bolted stations AND tat stations, choose your own adventure!

Parker Kempfwrote:

y'all its easy, we just need to have a bolted stations AND tat stations, choose your own adventure!

Get the fuck outta here Parker

John Tuttlewrote:

I defy you to even find a bolt hole after it has been professionally patched. The idea that this is some permanent egregious scar is ludicrous.

Having patched many a hole you are correct. But that and an egregious scar is not the issue. The issue is what is minimum tool necessary?? Installing a bolt requires drilling a hole which is a permanent alternation. Removing a bolt requires remediation, patching. What is the minimum necessary for placing a sling? just the sling. What is the minimum necessary for removing a sling? a knife.

And the idea that people are leaving behind "camoflaged" tat is ridiculous.

As for the visual impact. Climbers  leaving behind "camoflaged" tat is on par with people installing camoflaged bolts. Both can be done.

"No Bolts" is about chest thumping and hypocritical virtue signalling. Not about some kind of purity or true wilderness ethic.

It is not about no bolts, bolts have their place in wilderness and are allowed when necessary.

The rest of your post is not germane and deflection.

Allen Sandersonwrote:

Having patched many a hole you are correct. But that and an egregious scar is not the issue. The issue is what is minimum tool necessary?? 

You get down without leaving anything? Or you cut tat then leave more tat behind? Cause either way your leaving a trace to get down.

Trevor Taylorwrote:

You get down without leaving anything? Or you cut tat then leave more tat behind? Cause either way your leaving a trace to get down.

Done right one could get off Prusik and absolutely leave no trace. 

You are conflating the issue. Not saying there is an absolute "leave no trace" just I am not saying "no bolts." The issue upping one standards, less convenience, and what is the minimum necessary which might involve leaving minimal trace.

Allen Sandersonwrote:

Done right one could get off Prusik and absolutely leave no trace. 

You are conflating the issue. Not saying there is an absolute "leave no trace" just I am not saying "no bolts." The issue upping one standards, less convenience, and what is the minimum necessary which might involve leaving minimal trace.

I would strongly recommend you edit the mountain project page to leave a minimal trace aka no tat.

B Pwrote:

Get the fuck outta here Parker

What if we just replace all the tat with stainless chain..does that make everyone happy? Or does it make no one happy?

Allen Sandersonwrote:

Bolts are less "leave no trace" than a few well placed camouflaged colors slings. Bolts require holes which are permanent. Slings can be removed and will "leave no trace".

The discussion is not about whether bolts are allowed. They are. The discussion is whether their usage is needed. One of the key parts of Wilderness management is answering the question of what is the minimum tool needed for properly managing the area. The Minimum Requirements or Minimum Tool analysis is a key part of any analysis.  

The discussion is about what best suits climbing and the parade of teams that show up on trade routes. 

The Enchantments have been tramled and are a wilderness in name only. Your first clue should have been the bumper to bumper parking or the conga line of day hikers. 

Dude stop taking yourself and this virtue singnaling wilderness defense so seriously. The Enchantments are so over crowded that they fly our shit in and out with a little bird.

If you're actually are serious about protecting the wilderness then you should see what the rockhounds do.  In fact the Alpine Lakes wilderness has an odd shaped inclusion for a road so a handful of folks can keep mines to dig for semi precious stones.  I could walk you to a place in the wilderness where theres 100 holes open and being dug. For christ sake the usgs has a fuggin single wide parked on the side of a dying glacier by leconte peak. 

The only consideration should be what is the safest and fastest option to facilitate climbing teams. And if that's a couple rap stations then so be it.  

Who the hell else is ever going to see them anyways?!?!?! 

There's a lot of things you could do for this earth that would mean a lot more than not drilling a hole in a rock. 

Smith Rockwrote:

The Enchantments have been tramled and are a wilderness in name only.

So based on your argument we should do whatever cause you think it is wilderness in name only. There in lies part of the problem. You are not willing to step up as you have apparently already given up. Yeah, there is lots of shit all around the Enchantments and other areas. But does not mean there needs to be shit added to the Enchantments.

The discussion is about what best suits climbing and the parade of teams that show up on trade routes.

The discussion is about what best suits climbing given that the area has a wilderness designation. They go together. Further, if climbers like yourself do not want to make that connection, that connection will be made for them. Further, the decision about what to do will be made for them. 

And none of this discussion on my part is virtue signaling. It is the reality I have seen in over 30 years of working with land managers and other groups on access issues.

All of you who want bolts: STFU unless you're about to go do it yourself.

John Tuttlewrote:

If you want to leave "no trace" then don't climb because I can tell instantly where such routes go just from the wear and tear of climbing shoes scrubbing lichen away. Google Earth can show you routes in popular climbing areas from the "trail" created by climbers shoes.

"No Bolts" is about chest thumping and hypocritical virtue signalling. Not about some kind of purity or true wilderness ethic. If you really felt that way you wouldn't climb. Because to climb is to degrade the resource.

But you go right ahead commuting to the crag in your poison spewing SUV on roads blasted through mountainsides and tell us more about your purity?

You want wilderness? Start with removing the roads and see how you like hiking the extra 20 miles to the start of the approach to your crag. If you aren't doing that you have little to say about the impact of a bolted rap anchor.

This kind of approach is one reason this country is on a downward spiral with no end in sight, people attempting to justify action upon action just escalates the problems in reality. Its like the kid who gets in trouble at school and has the excuse that "but Billy did it first!" .

If we replace the tat with chain we:

1) appeases the 'install bolts' crowd, with chain we have reliable and arguably less unsightly and less 'trash producing' anchors

2) appeases the 'tat anchor' crowd because its not drilling any holes in wilderness, its using natural features, and it just so happens to have a longer lifespan than cordalette

Parker Kempfwrote:

What if we just replace all the tat with stainless chain..does that make everyone happy? Or does it make no one happy?

God damn it Parker

B Pwrote:

God damn it Parker

everyone wins and loses! its like, the perfect compromise

M Mwrote:

This kind of approach is one reason this country is on a downward spiral with no end in sight, people attempting to justify action upon action just escalates the problems in reality. Its like the kid who gets in trouble at school and has the excuse that "but Billy did it first!" .

No dude, if anything its because like minded conservationists (like virtually all of us in this thread afaik) spend hours back biting and chest thumping to see who is the purest when real issues like the climate change being accelerated by our cars is out of control.

Environmental degradation on a Planetary Scale is the problem, not thimblefuls of rock dust being removed for bolts to improve safety and reduce visual blight in the Enchantments that a handful of humans will ever see.

Yet many in this thread seem to think its the end of the world as we know it.

REAL ISSUES: CARS, DEFORESTATION, WATER and AIR QUALITY.

Not bolts where they are justifiably reasonable to place to improve safety.

John Tuttlewrote:

REAL ISSUES: CARS, DEFORESTATION, WATER and AIR QUALITY.

In the big scheme of things tat and/or bolts are minor. For many years there has been the saying "Think globally, act locally."  So this is a "local" discussion that could lead to more global discussions as it pertains to preserving climbing in other areas.

Not bolts where they are justifiably reasonable to place to improve safety.

Except in this case they are not improving safety they are about convenience. The convenience of not having to carry additional slings to replace old ones.