Retro bolt Snake Dike

Why hasn't this been posted yet? (Has it?)

https://www.climbing.com/news/snake-dike-half-dome-yosemite-add-bolts/

FA Eric Beck thinks should have more bolts. John Long, Peter Croft agree ?

EDIT for link: 

https://www.climbing.com/people/retro-bolt-easy-moderate-rock-climbs-peter-croft-snake-dike-half-dome-debate/

But, what does MP think? 

more people on it, just what it needs!

Protect the climbers, not the climb.

Adding protection bolts is a no brainer. I’m happy to pay for them. 

MP: Respect the wishes of the FA party!

FA: Add more bolts! If we had more bolts we would have added them! This is not supposed to be a test piece!

MP: NOT LIKE THAT!

Kevin DeWeese wrote:

Protect the climb that doesn't have a choice, not the climbers that have a choice.

Chopping retrobolts is a no brainer. I'm happy to pay for the chisel. 

You have a strange set of morals, given my IRL interactions with you and your posts on here. Not hating, just intrigued is all.

I am sure this will be a reasonable and mature conversation that won't just devolve into the same debate happening endlessly and restarting every two or three pages with a slightly different cast of characters sanctimoniously defending their positions while being completely unwilling to hear the other side. 

Bolt it. Or don't. Am I the only one here who doesn't really give a shit? It's one climb, and a mediocre one at that. I genuinely don't understand why everyone acts like Snake Dike is sacred. Desecrate it for all I care. Or don't. 

Too many here give too much of a shit about this thing. It's a bit of rock. Let it go.  

A No-vote here to retro bolting.

Enough time has passed, enough parties have climbed it … FA-belated thoughts matter not.

Generally, FAs are a fingerprint in time. Alter them and the essence of the FA are lost. Alter them to accommodate the masses and we’re all just gym climbing with a view.

I have no skin in the game here, but the article makes me wonder...does it make sense for the first ascenscionist to have lifelong power over what state a route is in? What if Eric actually decides that he wants less bolts on the route? Lots of sport climbs are "comfortized" on the FA...can the FAist just go back years later to make more changes? 

Pugnacious Slab wrote:

can the FAist just go back years later to make more changes? 

Yes. Not that uncommon. 

I think while at it how about more bolts at the top of el cap to make toproping routes like freerider more accessible to the average gym climber?

Im really tired of the pussy-footing around the issue at hand. The reason folks oppose adding bolts to a route where someone has suffered a tragic fate is that it could become precedence. Every time someone takes the big whip, snaps their ankles and ruins their future there's gonna be a bolt ladder put in place. 

If a route's too hard, scary or dangerous save up and send when you're ready. There are plenty of routes I have, and aspire to, climb that have potential for serious injury and death but that's part of the game. There is value in bold routes; something special about living on the thin edge between life and death. 

If you don't wanna play the game, don't want to become competent to realize what's in your wheelhouse and what's better saved for later, then I suggest climbing well protected routes.

Regards,

Russia's Greatest Love Machine

• South Crack
• only 5.8
• runout is only 5.7
• Not a test piece...

This slope is slippery... someone add some bolts

;)

If the FAist is good with adding bolts, I'd prolly be good with it, too. They should be involved with the decision of where/how many to be placed, as well.

That said, it sure seems like some of the original, core principles of climbing have become distant memories over the years: that of minimum impact, and stepping up one's game instead of dragging the objective down to one's level.

If the FA wants bolts the FA should head on up there and place them. 

Surrogates are not accetable. The FA cannot bestow retrobolting to a 3rd party.

Cherokee Nunes wrote:

If the FA wants bolts the FA should head on up there and place them. 

Surrogates are not accetable. The FA cannot bestow retrobolting to a 3rd party.

Literally exactly that has already happened on Snake Dike. It's tradition now!

climbs sometimes wrote:

really bill? do you know who eric beck is?

I thought my post was clear enough that “who eric beck is” matters Not to me. But, there now, I was explicit. 

Ricky Harline wrote:

Literally exactly that has already happened on Snake Dike. It's tradition now!

I want to be able to clip each end of my quickdraw into a bolt or it is too run out for me

The recent terrible accident was due to a leader off-route right? Not due to lack of bolts? 

I'm very sympathetic to the view that more bolts will mean more beginner climbers, which will mean more accidents. Pretty much the only thing that is keeping the throngs of recently gym-certified leaders off of Snake Dike is the reputation for run-outs. If it ends up being sport bolted the crowding will be even worse and there will be more attempts on it in adverse weather conditions, resulting in more fatal accidents when under-prepared people try to bail or people who top out the "route" take a fatal slip on wet 3rd/4th class slabs higher up in a storm.

This all being said, if there is some particular spot that there have been multiple accidents that could be protected by a single additional bolt, I'm not going up to chop it :P 

There is room out there for every style of climbing.  Trad, sport, spicy, or just letting each generation experience a work of art without dumbing it down.  Would you paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa?  If you want gym bolted routes go put them up.  Snake Dike does not need more bolts.  I would contribute to a chop fund! :)

Literally exactly

Chop chop!

Ben Horowitz wrote:

The recent terrible accident was due to a leader off-route right? Not due to lack of bolts? 

I'm very sympathetic to the view that more bolts will mean more beginner climbers, which will mean more accidents. Pretty much the only thing that is keeping the throngs of recently gym-certified leaders off of Snake Dike is the reputation for run-outs. If it ends up being sport bolted the crowding will be even worse and there will be more attempts on it in adverse weather conditions, resulting in more fatal accidents when under-prepared people try to bail or people who top out the "route" take a fatal slip on wet 3rd/4th class slabs higher up in a storm.

This all being said, if there is some particular spot that there have been multiple accidents that could be protected by a single additional bolt, I'm not going up to chop it :P 

Ben's first sentence captures everything wrong with the "bolt it" arguments. I'll be honest, I'd have zero problem going up there and drilling 2-4 extra bolts for EB, under his direction... I really would do it. My problem is all the yahoos who say "but it wouldn't have happened if there were more bolts!" Umm, 4 more bolts spread throughout the route wouldn't have prevented what was a massive human error. It's an insincere and/or deceptive argument, and I have very little respect for that. Bolts every 10ft? that might have prevented it, as would stenciled arrows spray painted on the optimal line for the route. 

EB, if you're reading this, I'm happy to help you add 1-4 to the route, but I'd only ask that you make a public statement acknowledging that the climber in question made a massive error, one so difficult to make that only bolts every 5-10ft would have prevented. This predominant argument that a couple of bolts would have prevented the fall is so nonsensical that it's insulting, to everyone.