The easiest climbing is the most dangerous?

A V wrote:

If you rap or lower instead of downclimbing, then technically, it’s aid climbing (descending?)

I have been downclimbing for years now it is really how I evened out the muscle group in my back. 

I agree with much of this thread. We talk about the descent being the most dangerous component of mountaineering and as climbers we are remiss if we do not consider that easy climbing is the number one contributor to complacency. Placing less protection, thinking less frequently of our safety checks and balances. How many climbers do we see rapping off the end of their rope or getting lowered by their less experienced belayer to their death after setting up a moderate tr, or the climber in red rock who fell and hadn't placed protection for 25 feet below his anchor. The list of simple avoidable mistakes on moderate or easy tasks are innumerable. It is important to consider that climbs are easy because terrain is less stable and more prone to loose or discontinuous rock. My mantra is "I feel comfortable at this grade so I am going to place a piece of protection here." Free soloing will have the same cost attached at any grade- potential for fatal or catastrophic life altering events is increased. Risk management is the enemy of complacency. 

I’ve shared this story before but here it is in paraphrase.

Years ago, I wasn’t really paying much attention and not placing any pro on the first pitch of the Casual Route on the Diamond. I somehow veered off the obvious route, blew it, and fell. All in the space of a few feet. I was very run out and high enough that I probably wouldn’t have decked. Due to ledges and dihedrals, I would have been badly injured.

I barely fell 10 feet, since my rope snagged on a knob of rock. Otherwise it would have been life changing.

And to put that into context, this happened a month AFTER I had free soloed the exact same route.

We’re all indestructible until we’re not.

Nick Goldsmith wrote:

the takeaway is to keep reminding yourself that you can still die on the easy stuff.  I always try to tell myself "it's not over yet. Focus! " it is not over untill you are safe on the ground. 

This is my take as well. I've always felt that a moments inattention was going to be my downfall one day. Whether climbing and skiing steep lines, climbing rock, or just driving. I've tried very hard to instill this lesson in my kids as well. To quote Edward Whymper, "Climb if you will, but remember that courage and strength are nought without prudence, and that a momentary negligence may destroy the happiness of a lifetime. Do nothing in haste; look well to each step; and from the beginning think what may be the end". I gave each of my kids a framed copy of this quote, and I try to live my life by it.

Peter Beal wrote:

Claims are made that not placing bolts preserves "adventure" and keeps the rock undamaged. The purpose of preserving "adventure' on moderate trade routes climbed 10 times a day seems tenuous at best and the damage from adding limited fixed gear is minimal compared to serious injury or fatality. For some people, the danger is at the heart of the sport. Many of those people no longer climb seriously or at all but they do like to preach. I find it harder and harder to justify this attitude as the bodies are broken or pile up in some of these areas. In the end it's just rocks, rocks that will fall down at some point, maybe tomorrow, maybe long after all of us are gone and forgotten. The conflicts about bolts in the the late 20th century will probably strike future generations as peculiar to a time and place, like Prohibition or medieval theology.

Well, that's just your opinion. You seem to think it's more than an opinion, seeming fit to place yourself in a position of either justifying or not justifying it, but it is by no universal standard. Sounds like all you need to do to justify retrobolting a route so it's safe enough for your grandma is label it a "trade route".

It's not just rocks. It's what separates what could legitimately be called a sport with actual consequences (beyond burnt fee fees) as opposed to amusement park ride. Both give most people the sensation of risk, but they aren't the same. Also, there are many who practice what they preach, and they also tend to keep the hell away from this web site. Just because they aren't in your circles doesn't mean they aren't out there, far, far away from this commercial web site.

IIRC the thread this is at risk of morphing into is https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/123362153/retro-bolt-snake-dike

To me this "easiest climbing" thread is more about factors under the climber's own control.

there are plenty of ways to be a bad ass in this sport without celebrating and advocating for poorly bolted climbs.  that being said i do believe this thread is more about staying focused and not fucking up on easy terrain. 

Not surprising that self-loathing has crept into this thread.  And I mean “self” as in human kind.

There will always be a non-trivial portion of us who need to live on the edge where human error can lead to death. Making every route “safely bolted” is as selfish as chopping all bolts.

Let’s leave the self-loathing in the trash heap of history and instead seek balance. 

Bill Lawry wrote:

Not surprising that self-loathing has crept into this thread.  And I mean “self” as in human kind.

There will always be a non-trivial portion of us who need to live on the edge where human error can lead to death. Making every route “safely bolted” is as selfish as chopping all bolts.

Let’s leave the self-loathing in the trash heap of history and instead seek balance. 

Balance. Well said. There is room for the weak and the strong, the risk adverse and the risk takers. Variety is the spice of life, after all.

Bill Lawry wrote:

Not surprising that self-loathing has crept into this thread.  And I mean “self” as in human kind.

There will always be a non-trivial portion of us who need to live on the edge where human error can lead to death. Making every route “safely bolted” is as selfish as chopping all bolts.

Let’s leave the self-loathing in the trash heap of history and instead seek balance. 

I can stand behind your words but if you were to change this scenario from climbing to driving it makes one wonder if thats the best philosophy. 

Protection bolts by definition are supposed to protect. when you place  bolts in such a way that they do not protect from ledge fall or ground fall at or near the grade of the pitch you by definition did a poor job of bolting.  Worshiping crappy bolting jobs is mostly a bunch of macho crap.  Bold climbing is admirable, strong smooth in control solos a thing of beauty. crappy bolt jobs not so much. 

Maquinna, I think we can in a way and get similar results.  What somebody does at a track day or on an offroad trail is up to them and is fairly comparable to a lot of risky climbing.  Driving dangerously on public roads would be more akin to monkeying about at the top of a popular sport crag putting others at higher risk(ie rockfall or potentially falling on someone else) despite their decisions to try and lower their risk.  Risk to you is up to you so long as you aren't altering that decision for someone else in the process.

Some people drive on tracks.  Some people just drive down the road to get groceries.  Live and let live, but also be careful because anyone could get hurt doing either.

Thats where the shitty bolting job comes into play.  by bolting a climb, especially an easy climb in a way that makes it unnecessarily dangerous for  anyone who wants to repeat the climb I am forcing other people to play by my bad decisions.  If I leave the drill at home and go soloing I don't impose my  risk tolerance on other people.  If i leave the drill at home and lead a dangerous climb, thats a thing of grace and beauty. If i bring a drill and pee on the rock with my bolts in such a way that anyone who follows me is subject to dangerous falls I am permanently claiming this piece of rock in a fairly shitty way. 

Trad Man wrote:

Well, that's just your opinion. You seem to think it's more than an opinion, seeming fit to place yourself in a position of either justifying or not justifying it, but it is by no universal standard. Sounds like all you need to do to justify retrobolting a route so it's safe enough for your grandma is label it a "trade route".

It's not just rocks. It's what separates what could legitimately be called a sport with actual consequences (beyond burnt fee fees) as opposed to amusement park ride. Both give most people the sensation of risk, but they aren't the same. Also, there are many who practice what they preach, and they also tend to keep the hell away from this web site. Just because they aren't in your circles doesn't mean they aren't out there, far, far away from this commercial web site.

My opinion is my opinion and you can do with it what you will. It’s founded on over 45 years of climbing, watching people, climbing styles and even cliffs come and go. Nothing is permanent and least of all “climbing ethics.” Don’t stop believing “Trad Man” but it all fades away soon enough. Climbing is a beautiful game but searching for something deeper in it is a fool’s errand.

Peter Beal wrote:

My opinion is my opinion and you can do with it what you will. It’s founded on over 45 years of climbing, watching people, climbing styles and even cliffs come and go. Nothing is permanent and least of all “climbing ethics.” Don’t stop believing “Trad Man” but it all fades away soon enough. Climbing is a beautiful game but searching for something deeper in it is a fool’s errand.

Kind of like drugs. You'll never find what you're looking for. Climbing gives back more than it takes, at least. Just a better investment all around.

Nick Goldsmith wrote:

 poorly bolted climbs.  

There you go again

Peter Beal wrote:

Climbing is a beautiful game but searching for something deeper in it is a fool’s errand.

Not that I'm a Zen Buddhist, but according to them you can find deeper meaning in the most menial of tasks.

To consider this more concretely, are you really saying no climb or style or objective is no more or less meaningful than another? 

As for a fool's errand, is it more foolish to seek happiness or meaning? Is it more foolish to limit the experience of climbing to mere physical strength, or to spend the time necessary to develop the skills and nerve to climb Snake Dike as it was done originally?

I can't claim to know what most climbers get out of climbing (to the point I've generally stopped using the term altogether), but if climbing someone's previously established route I want a feel of how he or she did it. Obviously that's not really possible if the bolts are already attached and the route cleared of loose rock, but it's undeniable that retrobolting changes the character of the route. I once climbed in Taquitz while reading Royals autobiography climbing a route after reading the backstory. Usually I consciously limit what I know about a potential route before the climb, but I guess it's just a fool's errand either way.

M M wrote:

I can stand behind your words but if you were to change this scenario from climbing to driving it makes one wonder if thats the best philosophy. 

Sam S’s answer pretty well said it about driving.

Indeed, how we balance varied driving interests is pretty well established.  

Trad Man wrote:

Not that I'm a Zen Buddhist, but according to them you can find deeper meaning in the most menial of tasks.

To consider this more concretely, are you really saying no climb or style or objective is no more or less meaningful than another? 

As for a fool's errand, is it more foolish to seek happiness or meaning? Is it more foolish to limit the experience of climbing to mere physical strength, or to spend the time necessary to develop the skills and nerve to climb Snake Dike as it was done originally?

I can't claim to know what most climbers get out of climbing (to the point I've generally stopped using the term altogether), but if climbing someone's previously established route I want a feel of how he or she did it. Obviously that's not really possible if the bolts are already attached and the route cleared of loose rock, but it's undeniable that retrobolting changes the character of the route. I once climbed in Taquitz while reading Royals autobiography climbing a route after reading the backstory. Usually I consciously limit what I know about a potential route before the climb, but I guess it's just a fool's errand either way.

"according to them you can find deeper meaning in the most menial of tasks"

In Zen, the deeper meaning is truly acknowledging there is no deeper meaning nor is there any actual self to believe in such an illusion as self or deeper meaning. Emptying oneself of illusion is the aim of Zen.

As I said, climbing and testing skills and nerve and all the rest are beautiful games but only a fool believes they hold deeper meanings than that. How can you say with certainty your vision or experience of happiness is even real or somehow worthier than another one?

It's nice that you tried to emulate or understand Royal Robbins on "his" route in Tahquitz but a genuine understanding would be acknowledging that your attempt was futile and the experience or "feel" was closed off and inaccessible. His autobiography was a gesture to others in his last years, knowing he had little time to try to share his thoughts on climbing after a very long and curious silence. I talked to him about before writing a review of the book. You can read the review here: http://www.mountainsandwater.com/2010/03/to-be-brave-by-royal-robbins-review.html

We can try to play games like imagining what a climb was like for someone 50 years ago or one-up each other by elevating risk or difficulty or both. It's certainly fun in the moment and heaven knows humans can use some fun in life but attempts to read (or write) deeper meaning into that are doomed to failure though countless climbers have tried. Mallory's "Because it's there" remains the best (and surprisingly koan-like) summary of the purpose of climbing. Conquistadors of the Useless is another.

Good luck on your quest.

Peter Beal wrote:

We can try to play games like imagining what a climb was like for someone 50 years ago or one-up each other by elevating risk or difficulty or both. It's certainly fun in the moment . . .

Well said, Peter. It's virtually impossible to replicate the social and technical environment of a past age. My favorite quote:

It's difficult to interpret the past accurately when the present is so overwhelming.