Rope soloing and ground anchors: ethics discussion (uh oh)

J Ewrote:

The ‘rules’ which you are saying do not exist are actually ethics, and ethics do exist. The morals/principles that guide someone’s actions. Ricky is right: if we practice this sport without morals or principles, it will adversely affect access. This has already been shown to be true.

Ethics are about moral principals, there are no morals at play regarding a climber disagreement about where bolts can go on a piece of rock. At best you have a “tradition” that says who ever vandalizes the rock first gets to decide. It’s madness.

Any access threatened is about all the bolts and climbers fighting over who “owns” the rock. It’s so dumb.

Tradibanwrote:

Ethics are about moral principals, there are no morals at play regarding a climber disagreement about where bolts can go on a piece of rock. At best you have a “tradition” that says who ever vandalizes the rock first gets to decide. It’s madness.

Any access threatened is about all the bolts and climbers fighting over who “owns” the rock. It’s so dumb.

Uh, no… access is threatened by damage to the ecosystem (functionally and/or aesthetically), inconveniencing or bothering the locals, trespassing. Not because of squabbles over route ownership. Honestly I feel you’re derailing the discussion anyway because this isn’t a discussion about route bolting, but drilling holes at the base of the Crag where everyone (including non-climbers) will see them 

J Ewrote:

Uh, no… access is threatened by damage to the ecosystem (functionally and/or aesthetically), inconveniencing or bothering the locals, trespassing. Not because of squabbles over route ownership. Honestly I feel you’re derailing the discussion anyway because this isn’t a discussion about route bolting, but drilling holes at the base of the Crag where everyone (including non-climbers) will see them 

Yes, all the bolts are what bring the “damage to the ecosystem, inconveniencing or bothering the locals, trespassing”. 

These extra holes in the wall mean nothing considering what sport climbers have already done to the area.

Princess Puppy Lovrwrote:

Maybe you hang out with different peeps than I do. But the older developers I am around would find this hilarious. They wouldn’t even be mad!! 

Secondly people f*** shit up., I went up one of, if not the most famous climbs in Washington yesterday. Here are the the errors I noticed: 3 unpatched holes,wedge bolts with more than 3/4 inch of thread sticking out, wedge bolts not engaged just lock tight keeping the hangers on, low quality steel quick links in a wet streak. For some inconvenable reason the first bolt is shared with another climb, the first bolt is off an awkward ledge, where one climber has to unclip the other climber to start the route. The anchor placement leads you into another route. Reading this some people might think wow, that’s terrible. I am thankful that someone spent the time trying to improve this route for me, maybe they didn’t do it 100% perfect but I’m sure it is better now than it was.

Third it is so hard to know the context here. Maybe the dude was gonna rebolt a bunch of routes on the wall and figured two concrete screws would be helpful. Maybe he was tr soloing to assess the bolt placements. Maybe they were an idiot, but coming at some rando with condemnation rather than compassion on a large Internet forum isn’t gonna change the behavior.

Fourth, there are so many bolt holes in the world. So so so so many people complain and do nothing. I often feel like this forum is bunch of middle aged Karen’s at some save the planet rally screaming about litter for 6 hours rather than spend 5 min picking up trash. If a bolt hole is so easy to patch, patch it!

Yes a lot of routes are screwed. But the dmg we have done to these rocks, cant be taken away. To re-purpose these into something that can be objectified as something as good is wrong.. Yes some have to be re-worked.. 9th pitch NW Buttress middle Cathedral comes to mind. But we cant as climbers in the now, subject to any of that. We've had had what 60yrs of climbers before us that thought they knew what was right? FUG, I'm a proponent of once a route is put up it stays up. I'm also a proponent if u cant set it on lead (Get the F off u fuggen sport climbers). Sorry nervous twitch.

BTW had to edit and come back to say am  I in love with U. lol Yeah like it's fugged on some routes. Over the history of climbing I don't think anyone has said, here is the guide 1 tech book on how to place anchors.. You would think it would be easy and common sense. But through all these yrs it's like still fugged isn't it? We do the best we can at the time. Sure I've placed some bad ones.. And seen bad ones. If only there was that 1 tech book.

Tradibanwrote:

Yes, all the bolts are what bring the “damage to the ecosystem, inconveniencing or bothering the locals, trespassing”. 

These extra holes in the wall mean nothing considering what sport climbers have already done to the area.

You should go to pinnacles some time. You keep on making this artificial distinction between trad and sport. Every route at Pinns is a trad route, and they're almost all bolt protected routes, with quite a few of them having many bolts to the point that they're indistinguishable from a sport climb. 

Again, your separation of trad and sport as having different ethics is ignorant and counter to all history and tradition. "who owns what" is no different from trad to sport and you damn well know it, stop playing. There are squabbles over trad routes just as often as there are over sport routes, this has nothing to do with the bolts. Stop being such a used, second hand lint roller. 

Tradibanwrote:

Yes, all the bolts are what bring the “damage to the ecosystem, inconveniencing or bothering the locals, trespassing”. 

These extra holes in the wall mean nothing considering what sport climbers have already done to the area.

BS.  Sport or trad doesn't matter.  It's not the style of climbing that causes environmental damage.  It's the climber and the act of climbing  that causes all the environmental damage.

Ricky Harlinewrote:

You should go to pinnacles some time. You keep on making this artificial distinction between trad and sport. Every route at Pinns is a trad route, and they're almost all bolt protected routes, with quite a few of them having many bolts to the point that they're indistinguishable from a sport climb. 

Again, your separation of trad and sport as having different ethics is ignorant and counter to all history and tradition. "who owns what" is no different from trad to sport and you damn well know it, stop playing. There are squabbles over trad routes just as often as there are over sport routes, this has nothing to do with the bolts. Stop being such a used, second hand lint roller. 

Several people, including you I believe, have stated they bolt to open climbing to more people. More people equals more enviromental impact, plain and simple.

Using more traditional methods of development greatly diminishes bolting and narrows the access.

If people want to “climb” but can’t or won’t accept traditional style climbs they should remain in the gym.

Tradibanwrote:

Several people, including you I believe, have stated they bolt to open climbing to more people. More people equals more enviromental impact, plain and simple.

Using more traditional methods of development greatly diminishes bolting and narrows the access.

If people want to “climb” but can’t or won’t accept traditional style climbs they should remain in the gym.

But bolting predates using moveable protection so that is the traditional method.

J Ewrote:

If there’s a way to capture it all in one image sure, I’m not going to sit here all day stitching together screenshots and blocking out names/pictures just so you and puppy lover can have context which I’ve accurately described and has been corroborated by multiple different users now

I haven’t backpedaled on anything, I would still describe it as a LNT mindset. I think getting hung up in terminology is pointless. Nothing we do is truly without trace; yes, sport climbing leaves a big trace, but I will repeat for the millionth time a point you all seem to be ignoring: bolts and permanent anchors have a utility and serve a purpose for any climber. Holes drilled and left in the wall benefit no one except for the guy that drilled them.

J E wrote:

"I’m interested in what the Climbing  community at large thinks".

I'm kinda thinking you didn't really come here for other climbers opinions unless they match your own.

Jim Tittwrote:

But bolting predates using moveable protection so that is the traditional method.

That doesn’t make it right, and your use of specious rhetoric defies logic. And besides, natural features, threads, slings, removable chockstones, pitons predate bolts.  Not all of the old soft-iron pitons were left in situ, and those were often removed when no longer solid. 

Brad Jwrote:

J E wrote:

"I’m interested in what the Climbing  community at large thinks".

I'm kinda thinking you didn't really come here for other climbers opinions unless they match your own.

I'm kinda thinking you're just here to argue anonymously.  

Drilling holes to make an anchor near they ground where other methods could be used is lame, but like many bolting discussion the reason it's lame is not as simple as some people think. It's not inherently wrong to drill a hole in a rock or place a bolt. A big reason bolts are minimized in trad is to preserve difficulty (could be mental difficulty of risk). Sport climbing usually doesn't have this component. It should be protected to make it relatively safe to climb. And there's often a dozen bolts on a climb. So leave no trace is already kind of out the window. But having bolts near ground level where other users groups see them even more is an impact to them, and could jeopardize access. Not knowing all the particulars, I'd prefer the soloist figured out a way to protect it without adding holes (although the impact is probably very low might as well avoid it if possible). But if he couldn't protect it another way leaving a couple holes there is pretty low impact. And I'd prefer he left the holes open so they could be used again instead of filling them up so he/no one else could use them again. 

A 3/8" hole in a rock isn't inherently bad. It's the impact of those holes on different user groups you need to think about. I doubt the holes would cause any ecological impact and the rock is an inanimate object.

Tradibanwrote:

Ethics are about moral principals,...

No, ethics are about how your actions affect others.

George Bracksieckwrote:

That doesn’t make it right, and your use of specious rhetoric defies logic. And besides, natural features, slings, removable chockstones, pitons predate bolts.  Not all of the old soft-iron pitons were left in situ, and those were often removed when no longer solid. 

Nothing to do with my comment.

Marc801 Cwrote:

No, ethics are about how your actions affect others.

I think ethics also extend to the alteration, management, and use of shared, public natural resources. 

Here, another hypothetical to ponder:

2 drilled empty holes near the ground at every route for RBs for LRS... but the crag is Tensleep.

Discuss lol

Ricky Harlinewrote:

I think ethics also extend to the alteration, management, and use of shared, public natural resources. 

"Shared resources" for me but not for you, I think I get it now. Its like all the anti abortion /pro lifers who support the death penalty, it makes sense to them.

M Mwrote:

"Shared resources" for me but not for you, I think I get it now. Its like all the anti abortion /pro lifers who support the death penalty, it makes sense to them.

A blatantly obvious attempt but I'll still give you a T3.  

M Mwrote:

"Shared resources" for me but not for you, I think I get it now. Its like all the anti abortion /pro lifers who support the death penalty, it makes sense to them.

There have to be some ground rules to prevent abuse of our shared resources. Again, this ground anchor is completely redundant and unnecessary. Are you in favor of anyone getting to alter our shared natural resources for any reason even if it's of little or no benefit?

Brad Jwrote:

J E wrote:

"I’m interested in what the Climbing  community at large thinks".

I'm kinda thinking you didn't really come here for other climbers opinions unless they match your own.

I can be interested in what you have to say and still think you’re wrong and make an argument why.

if I didn’t find the topic interesting, I wouldn’t still be here replying