Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Retrobolts on Zig Zag, Mt. Erie
Blake Woldwrote: I have a hunch that the person who did this has been climbing at Erie for long enough to know better. Perhaps an individual responsible for the relatively new squeeze jobs at powerline and other walls. Anyone know who that is? |
T Grumpwrote: A few names come to mind actually |
T Grumpwrote: New guidebooks and even resume building have often encouraged squeeze jobs and other bad things as well. (eg chipping) But Mountain Project is really not so different and despite some of the good things, it also has has a pernicious side as well. One example of this is it has actively advocated squeeze jobs in the PNW. :( |
|
ugh darryl not again |
|
It would be nice if these Erie bolting bandits would go off the beaten path a little and go develop other things in Skagit. Places like Calender Butte have so much untapped potential. |
|
My hope remains that the equipper(s) do the right thing here and return this climb to its former state. Interestingly enough, when I brought this up originally, people said connect with the community on Facebook. Earlier this week, the Mt. Erie community page made a post about an upcoming/updated guidebook. One person asked about the bolts on Zig Zag. I made a comment as well. As someone here pointed out, the post and entire comment thread got removed from the page shortly thereafter. My (now deleted) comment to the Mt. Erie facebook community page is below (had drafted it on computer before posting). I added more commentary here in brackets and formatting to some of the UIAA's language. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ We don’t need to squeeze in a “new sport line” on the piece of rock that makes up Zig Zag’s second pitch. I’d ask that the equipper(s) read the UIAA Mountaineering Commission's report "To Bolt Or Not To Be" regarding the addition of bolts to existing routes. The bolts added to Zig Zag fail at least five of these principles. [they arguably fail all seven] “A basic principle of the redevelopment of rock climbing routes is that the character of the route remains intact: [the traditional character of the route is unmistakably altered by bolts here] 1. The line of the first ascent is not to be altered. [These bolts alter the line of the FA by directing folks towards a specific sequence.] 2. Routes and single pitches done “clean” on the first ascent (using only nuts, friends, threads, etc.) should not be retrobolted. [Before August/September 2021, there were no bolts and the route was always climbed "clean"] 3. No bolts will be placed on sections of routes that may be done clean by climbers of the grade of that route. [The first pitch is 5.6/5.7 and the second pitch is 5.0-5.6 depending on how one climbs it. The final pitch is 5.7. So climbers of the grade are up climbing to the 2nd pitch. Someone has got to stick up for climbers working their way up through the trad grades.] 4. Runouts may not be neutralized by additional bolts (don’t take the edge off a runout). [The second pitch can feel a tad runout. My suspicion is this is why bolts were added.] 5. The difficulty of a route should not be altered through redevelopment measures. Aid passages left by first ascensionists should be aidable after redevelopment. The amount of permanent protection in a redeveloped route should be less than the original number of pieces. For example, several regular pitons can be replaced by a single bolt. [There is now more permanent protection than there used to be, so it fails this test. Bolts arguably make it mentally easier as well.] 6. For all redevelopment measures, only material that fits European and UIAA standards should be used. The redevelopment is to be to carried out at recognised standards under the auspices of the responsible stewardship organisation. [The equippers did use nice, 1/2 inch stainless hardware and technically did a good job with installing the bolts. I'm not sure it was done under the auspices of a "responsible stewardship organization."] 7. A route should not be subject to redevelopment against the will of the first ascensionist." [I never got to meet Dallas Kloke, but he certainly did not need lead protection bolts to do this climb in 1963 or at night in 2010] ////////////// Link to UIAA report/declaration on bolting: theuiaa.org/documents/decla… FAist Dallas climbing Zig Zag at night in fun TR from 2010: cascadeclimbers.com/forum/t… |
