Retro bolt Snake Dike

remember, whoever adds these new bolts is gonna have to hand drill 'em.  I like it the way it is now.

If you need bolts on 5.7 (more like 5.4 on the runouts actually), you haven't spent enough time TR'ing slab.

Eric Beck is a super amiable guy, with lots of contributions to climbers over the years, Snake Dike is just one of them. The story of the FA, and their bold determination to summit with what gear they had, and a strong dose of commitment, is an inspiring story best told by the route itself, as is.

M Mwrote:

I noticed another "lets berate Anna" post where she was mansplained to pretty hard, Anna thiS and Anna that, LISTEN HERE ANNA!

Oh please, don't add this ridiculous "mansplaining" spin to why people are pushing back hard at Anna.  I'm a woman and I pushed back quite hard.  I pushed back because she stated:.

"For me, the risk of an 80ft fall because there isn't protection shouldn't be a part of climbing in 2023"

An 80 foot fall would be the likely result of falling about 30-35 feet from your last gear placement, with rope stretch.  We are not talking about a roadside rock climb here.  This route has a 3-4 hour approach!  It is an alpine route.  Maquinna, you have been climbing long enough to understand that it can be very routine to have 30-35 ft protection gaps in alpine routes.  There are tens of thousands of routes around the world where this is routine and no one blinks and eye. This kind of mentality needs to be challenged.

People are also pushing back at Anna and others because, as has been stated about 50 times already, adding the 5 requested bolts could easily result in MORE accidents if people believe that the route is now magically safer because of a few more bolts. I believe this to be true and that is why I am opposed to adding the bolts.  Not because I care about the bolts or tradition or what Eric Beck wants but because I'm astounded these days by how ill-prepared and inexperienced so many people are these days who feel the need to climb "easy" highly rated routes.  And I believe adding the bolts will only increase the traffic of this type of climber on this route.

This thread basically is an argument between two philosophical sides - those who think climbs need to be "safe" and those who believe climbing is inherently dangerous and each individual needs to assess danger for each route objective themselves.  There are a huge number of people in the middle who are ambivalent or can see both sides.

Can a modern bolted route be put up to the left ? Like a Fake Snake route. 

Darren Mabewrote:

Can a modern bolted route be put up to the left ? Like a Fake Snake route. 

Fake Dike, 5.7

Crowding Snake dike with a new clip up would be worse than adding 5 bolts to it

phylp phylpwrote:

I pushed back because she stated:.

"For me, the risk of an 80ft fall because there isn't protection shouldn't be a part of climbing in 2023"

I agree.  Unqualified, the statement was extreme.  And it was definitely unqualified. 

Anna is a good friend.  I appreciate phylp phylp stepping in.

Colonel Mustardwrote:

Fake Dike, 5.7

Then we can retro bolt it into 5.1 A0

Wiled Horse wrote: Can a modern bolted route be put up to the left ? Like a Fake Snake route.

OH MAN! That is the route name of the year. Fake Dike. 5 pitches of chipped/glued and grid bolted slab on the dark side of half dome!
No one in the Valley (or on MP) would ever complain about that option. : - ) Oh man, better go lock your front door Wiled Horse, check your front entry for a dude with a piton hammer, this is Northern California after all.

My vote is for putting the clip up route 10' to the left of the Cable Route. Keep all the tourists contained to one area.

phylp phylpwrote:

Oh please, don't add this ridiculous "mansplaining" spin to why people are pushing back hard at Anna.  I'm a woman and I pushed back quite hard.  I pushed back because she stated:.

"For me, the risk of an 80ft fall because there isn't protection shouldn't be a part of climbing in 2023"

An 80 foot fall would be the likely result of falling about 30-35 feet from your last gear placement, with rope stretch.  We are not talking about a roadside rock climb here.  This route has a 3-4 hour approach!  It is an alpine route.  Maquinna, you have been climbing long enough to understand that it can be very routine to have 30-35 ft protection gaps in alpine routes.  There are tens of thousands of routes around the world where this is routine and no one blinks and eye. This kind of mentality needs to be challenged.

People are also pushing back at Anna and others because, as has been stated about 50 times already, adding the 5 requested bolts could easily result in MORE accidents if people believe that the route is now magically safer because of a few more bolts. I believe this to be true and that is why I am opposed to adding the bolts.  Not because I care about the bolts or tradition or what Eric Beck wants but because I'm astounded these days by how ill-prepared and inexperienced so many people are these days who feel the need to climb "easy" highly rated routes.  And I believe adding the bolts will only increase the traffic of this type of climber on this route.

This thread basically is an argument between two philosophical sides - those who think climbs need to be "safe" and those who believe climbing is inherently dangerous and each individual needs to assess danger for each route objective themselves.  There are a huge number of people in the middle who are ambivalent or can see both sides.

hey I'm on your side of the argument, I just call the mansplaining as I see it (Allen's post) . The idea of adding bolts to this climb is ridiculous enough as it is, people should be laughing at the idea instead of getting too serious IMO.

what would be really cool is if someone got approval to drill a sport route up half dome nearby. via ferrata up el cap would be sweet too. maybe Sloan and Snyder could team up?

And really she has a point in her quote, modern lines should be a bit safer, just not historical lines with thousands of repeats.

Maquinna M wrote:

what would be really cool is if someone got approval to drill a sport route up half dome nearby. via ferrata up el cap would be sweet too. maybe Sloan and Snyder could team up?

You don't need approval to bolt in Yosemite. 

Maquinna M wrote:
what would be really cool is if someone got approval to drill a sport route up half dome nearby. via ferrata up el cap would be sweet too. maybe Sloan and Snyder could team up?

And really she has a point in her quote, modern lines should be a bit safer, just not historical lines with thousands of repeats.

I think what you meant to say was that modern rap bolted lines should be safer, ground up bolting on slab will almost always be runout

Kevin DeWeesewrote:

You don't need approval to bolt in Yosemite. 

I think what you meant to say was that modern rap bolted lines should be safer, ground up bolting on slab will almost always be runout

It's simple really, a competent climber makes a "dangerous" route safe. An incompetent climber makes a "safe" route dangerous. 

Tradibanwrote:

It's simple really, a competent climber makes a "dangerous" route safe. An incompetent climber makes a "safe" route dangerous. 

^^^^ This.

Even today, I suspect there are individuals into putting up R / X routes.

For Snake Dike, here are the current star-quality counts:

• FOUR:  849
• THREE: 303
• TWO: 63
• ONE: 8
• BOMB: 5

Total: 1,228 (8 less than the count for star rating shown today on the MP Snake Dike page; haven't looked into why)

It seems reasonable to assume that individuals with two or more stars were fine with Roper's retro-bolting, meaning:

1. Literally 99% think protection is fine.
2. Very very few regretted climbing the route.

Of course - many who gave a rating were following. And there could be bias a la those who liked it may tend to rate more than those who didn’t. 

PhylpPhylp is correct, as usual!!!!

Kevin DeWeesewrote:

You don't need approval to bolt in Yosemite. 

I think what you meant to say was that modern rap bolted lines should be safer, ground up bolting on slab will almost always be runout

thanks for the lessons but i do believe a via ferrata up el cap would need approval and an 8-10 pitch sport climb up half dome would too. that is unless you think you could drill that many holes by hand in a reasonable amount of time before retirement?

Maybe all the Annas and other pro retro folks could join up some day and create something great with hand drills!

"But every climb is not for every climber; the ultimate climbs are not democratic.  The fortunate climbs protect themselves by being unprotectable and remain a challenge that can be solved only by boldness and commitment backed solidly by technique.  Climbs that are forced clean by the application of boldness should be similarly respected, lest a climber be guilty of destroying a line for the future's capable climbers to satisfy his impatient ego in the present--by waiting he might become one of the future capables.  Waiting is also necessary; every climb has it's time, which need not be today."  

Bu Doug Robinson, from the old Chouinard catalog on clean climbing.

Some people get hurt climbing.  You can die doing it too.  Leave this check off your list until you're ready.

M Mwrote:

hey I'm on your side of the argument, I just call the mansplaining as I see it (Allen's post) . 

I put emphasis on that post simply because they had repeated Beck's request three times without any substantive reason as to why they should be added other than Beck asked. Through out this thread folks have been noting that in all likelihood the five bolts EB wants added would not have changed the outcome of the recent accident. So IMHO there was no point in repeating the request. Thus my reply, perhaps poorly. But I'll own it.

Kevin DeWeese wrote:

In discussing why the community should not trust Mr. Beck, this is because despite how things have been reduced over time, the first ascenist does not have control over how the route is to be climbed in perpetuity. Granted we are all over the map on this concept and there's no settled law for this except for "preserving the experience." I follow the idea that after a route is put up, the ownership of the experience of the route is owned by the community using the experience of the first ascensionist as the guideline for the floor for changes made by that ownership.

I think the community can trust Eric Beck as IMHO his request is sincere and worthy of consideration. However, as you note there is not always a consensus within the community. The Snake Dike issue, is what I would call a corner case. A problem or situation that occurs only when two or more operating parameters are at extreme values, or when two or more unusual operating circumstances happen to coincide. The parameters at the extreme are

1. (Inter) Nationally known climb

2. Popularity

3. Grade

4. Add projection

5. FAs are still around.

6. Recent accident

Thus the lengthy discussion.