Discretionary Ethics at Cathedral

Tradibanwrote:

Traditional ethics will only be held by force. Most “climbers” now are simple sport climbers and will continuously seek to erode the past for their convenience.

No amount of discussion will change their minds and the only hope will be to show them in person why more bolts aren’t necessary. Even then, people’s understanding of how difficulty equals rewards has been eroded by their entitlement.

Please hold the line at Cathedral and never, never, never give up.

For the record, it isn't "sport climbers" who are advocating for this bolted anchor. The routes there eat gear and a bolt anchor wouldn't change the character of the route itself, which tops out on a ledge. It would simply enable people to be quicker to rappel/lower/,set up top ropes. There are plenty of bolt anchors on the cliff in places where a gear anchor isn't feasible, it's not a hard rule that no bolts aren't allowed. It's just that in this specific case a bolt anchor is unnecessary, which is why people are opposed to it.

Ira OMCwrote:

For the record, it isn't "sport climbers" who are advocating for this bolted anchor. The routes there eat gear and a bolt anchor wouldn't change the character of the route itself, which tops out on a ledge. It would simply enable people to be quicker to rappel/lower/,set up top ropes. There are plenty of bolt anchors on the cliff in places where a gear anchor isn't feasible, it's not a hard rule that no bolts aren't allowed. It's just that in this specific case a bolt anchor is unnecessary, which is why people are opposed to it.

A sport climber is any person who climbs for “sport”, it’s not just bolt clipping, draw yanking, protein measuring yahoos.

When one climbs for sport anything that slows down their narrow pursuit is deemed inconvenient and thus needs to be “modernized”. I pity these fools.

Jaren Watson wrote:

Locals should have more say than non locals. Locals with long experience should have more say than newer locals.

But if people really want a larger conversation, I’ll weigh in.

I mostly sport climb. I enjoy the safety and convenience. Over the past fifteen years I worked with a buddy to develop a few dozen (mostly unimpressive) routes and all but two are bolt-protected sport routes.

My opinion—leave the route as is. Respect the hard won consensus of last year’s meeting. Don’t misrepresent what took place there by pretending it was just a handful of cronies in some back room. My reading of the document is that it was a good faith effort to hear from as many concerned climbers as possible, and consensus was reached after a vigorous exchange.

“It’s just one route” is an arrow that points both ways. If you think it’s a valid argument justifying adding bolts, don’t forget it’s also an argument for leaving the route as the FA intended. Don’t like this route? No problem. It’s just one route. You’re free to climb 25,000 other routes in this country that are equipped to your liking. Don’t like any of those? No problem. Put in the effort to establish new routes and equip them however you want.

One point those who favor retro bolting cannot escape is that existing traditional routes are a finite resource. There is simply no way to alter these routes to be “more accommodating.” More accommodating to whom? Robbing someone of their effort and giving to another merely because they demand it is not equity. 

As for the name calling above (and below, unsurprisingly): that’s what children do when they’re unable to muster a cogent argument. Do better if you want your views to be taken seriously.

No one is entitled to climb this or any other route. If you’re up for the challenge, go for it. If not, move along. That’s the whole point of climbing, and every climber knows it.

The challenge is the sauce.

What’s my opinion worth? Not much. I’m a sport climber who lives 2,000 miles from this cliff. But apparently, a larger conversation is in order. So be it.

If I’ve climbed at cathedral for 35 years ,although it’s not my primary climbing area, does that make me a local? Or do I have to live in North Conway?

Jaren Watson wrote:

Anything you have to say on the subject is worth more than about 25 opinions like mine.

I'm not a local but I've been climbing there for 50 years.  Do I get 50 opinions?  Won't help because they are all different and there are about 25 on either side of the fence.

Jaren Watson wrote:

It’s possible you’ll find the tenor of the discussion to be somewhat less hostile if you retire the name calling and replace it with a substantive argument.

Then again, it’s an online discussion about traditional ethics, so no guarantees. Still, it’s worth a shot!

Really trying here! I got steamrolled for sharing a perspective and argument in defense of exploring anchor alternatives (since this crag has always had fixed gear of some sort at the top), so it's a bit overwhelming since I am being construed/name-called as a bolt-happy climber of convenience when that couldn't be farther from my reality. I agree fighting fire with fire is a silly pursuit, and I can do better in the future to not let those comments get provoke me like they did. 

I will back off and retreat as this banter isn't constructive anymore, and according to the feedback I've received, my thoughts aren't constructive or wanted either. I still welcome anyone who would like to kindly continue the conversation over some pitches or coffee. I love Cathedral and want to protect the crag as much as anyone and I think that can look a lot of different ways.

Amy Bwrote:

Really trying here! I got steamrolled for sharing a perspective and argument in defense of exploring anchor alternatives (since this crag has always had fixed gear of some sort at the top), so it's a bit overwhelming since I am being construed/name-called as a bolt-happy climber of convenience when that couldn't be farther from my reality. I agree fighting fire with fire is a silly pursuit, and I can do better in the future to not let those comments get provoke me like they did. 

I will back off and retreat as this banter isn't constructive anymore, and according to the feedback I've received, my thoughts aren't constructive or wanted either. I still welcome anyone who would like to kindly continue the conversation over some pitches or coffee. I love Cathedral and want to protect the crag as much as anyone and I think that can look a lot of different ways.

All of this.  Thank you, Amy, for continuing to constructively push the envelop and encourage forward thinking.  We have a widely-varied community in our neck of the woods, so to have a spokesperson like you is only beneficial, especially once the Western Maine Climbers’ Coalition begins in earnest. 

Chris Ducawrote:

All of this.  Thank you, Amy, for continuing to constructively push the envelop and encourage forward thinking.  We have a widely-varied community in our neck of the woods, so to have a spokesperson like you is only beneficial, especially once the Western Maine Climbers’ Coalition begins in earnest. 

Chris/Amy,

Would a rap anchor on the ledge that is not directly over any of the climbs make sense? I think the idea of a dedicated descent route is a more logical one and it would eliminate the need for rapping off trees on other climbs nearby. I don’t necessarily support this, but to me it has a more “conservation” approach and could free up multiple routes quicker. I think this combined with a conversation about addressing cliff base erosion better serves the community.

I’d say the north end is similar to the Ken’s Crack area at the Gunks. (Beginner trad friendly TR’s , 4th class approach, etc). That area has no bolted anchors and shares a similar traditional ethic. I think the idea of gym climbers scrambling up to a two bolt anchor is hazardous and gear anchors eliminates part of that “crowd” and it doesn’t kill the whole “cathedral/Whitehorse” experience. 

There are plenty of other crags in the area that get little traffic and have bolted anchors (Attitash, Jackson, Eagle Mtn, Lost Horizon, etc).Which better serve beginners and don’t have the same history.

________________

Personally, I think there are other climbs that deserve anchors and have better justifications like dying/dead trees (Beginners P1) or ugly fixed gear vs new SS anchors (Crack in the Woods).

I think I have the solution. Bandit, a 5.9 crack climb, has bolted anchors at the top. No need to argue about They Died Anymore. It’s just a short drive down to Conway. It’s 20 feet longer compared to They Died and sees a fraction of the traffic. Win-win! 

Spencer Ralstonwrote:

I think I have the solution. Bandit, a 5.9 crack climb, has bolted anchors at the top. No need to argue about They Died Anymore. It’s just a short drive down to Conway. It’s 20 feet longer compared to They Died and sees a fraction of the traffic. Win-win! 

I'm interested, Spencer, why did you choose this as an example--or, alternate, to adding a bolt anchor to They Died? I ask, because I was part of the Bandit FA, 50 years ago. There was no bolt anchor on that climb--we surely didn't place one. We topped out and walked down, which was just how we did things then, and very easy to do at Band M. Same thing when I repeated it a few years later. Would be perfectly happy if it remained that way. On the other hand, I'm not devastated to learn that the route now has a bolted anchor, nor do I feel that that addition is a sign of the doom of traditional climbing in New Hampshire. I don't think it should be chopped.  As Eric E. said up thread, it is possible to have multiple opinions in this topic, often in conflict with each other. Just curious though, why you feel that a subsequently added bolt anchor is OK at the relatively remote and ( I presume) not heavily used Band M, but not at the very popular and accessible North End craglet?

Alan Rubinwrote:

I'm interested, Spencer, why did you choose this as an example--or, alternate, to adding a bolt anchor to They Died? I ask, because I was part of the Bandit FA, 50 years ago. There was no bolt anchor on that climb--we surely didn't place one. We topped out and walked down, which was just how we did things then, and very easy to do at Band M. Same thing when I repeated it a few years later. Would be perfectly happy if it remained that way. On the other hand, I'm not devastated to learn that the route now has a bolted anchor, nor do I feel that that addition is a sign of the doom of traditional climbing in New Hampshire. As Eric E. said up thread, it is possible to have multiple opinions in this topic, often in conflict with each other. Just curious though, why you feel that a bolt anchor is OK at the relatively remote and ( I presume) not heavily used Band M, but not at the very popular and accessible North End craglet?

I am not sure of who put the bolt anchor on top of Bandit. It seemed people are caught up on They Died needing a bolted anchor. To do some internet trolling I suggested a 5.9 crack that has a bolted anchor. If people opened the guide book and did some searching around they can find mega classics at any grade and style (trad, run out, modern bolted etc etc) all over North Conway. Why climb at a place that bothers you when down the street or a crag with a 15 minute extra walk has exactly what your looking for. 

 I'll troll some too though I have climbed They Died a couple times. These days I live by a popular cliff with about 50 routes on it and only maybe five of those lines have anchors(mainly for the trees), the rest are somewhat easy to set up with gear. This crag(Otter Cliff) can be a major shit show in the summer with 20-30 different lines set up at once. I would bet that if every route had anchors, there would easily be twice as many people there at once which would be absolute insanity and kind of dangerous. 

Gatekeeping isn't always a bad thing, especially in well used and environmentally fragile areas.

The sentiment around cathedral is about preserving a resource rather than providing a consumer experience. If you don't want to build a gear anchor on a trad route, drive a literal mile down the road, either direction.

Edited to add that Spencer nailed it.

To get back to the original intention of my first post over two months ago—I plainly just didn’t understand why the bong in the corner atop “They Died…” was removed.  It seemed discretionary and, as such, I posited (with a layer of sarcasm) that if the pendulum could swing in that direction, why couldn’t it swing back in the opposite direction with a couple of bolts.

There are quite a few bongs on the Thin Air Face (first pitch of Thin Air is the prime example) that probably don’t belong, and could easily be removed.  After all, discretionary actions are individual by nature, no? 

Chris Ducawrote:

It seemed discretionary

With respect towards your moderate routes bolted at western Maine  sport crags, it also seems unnecessary

PWZwrote:

With respect towards your moderate routes bolted at western Maine  sport crags, it also seems unnecessary

Moderate sport routes are unnecessary?  

Chris Ducawrote:

Moderate sport routes are unnecessary?  

Not at all. Bolted anchors to encourage more efficient toproping on a climb that is probably already overloved put up 50 years ago  likely is, though

Alan Rubinwrote:

Just curious though, why you feel that a subsequently added bolt anchor is OK at the relatively remote and ( I presume) not heavily used Band M, but not at the very popular and accessible North End craglet?

I’m not sure what Spencer’s take is on this, but if I were to make a cursory guess, I’d say it’s a decision driven somewhat by the local guides so as to not lose business.  Again, just a peripheral hypothesis.

Chris Ducawrote:

I’m not sure what Spencer’s take is on this, but if I were to make a cursory guess, I’d say it’s a decision driven somewhat by the local guides so as to not lose business.  Again, just a peripheral hypothesis.

Can you explain this hypothesis? How do you suggest bolts affect guides' business interest?

Nick Awrote:

Can you explain this hypothesis? How do you suggest bolts affect guides' business interest?

Understandably, I am assuming Chris is taking a breather from this thread.

I interpret this hypothesis as suggesting it might be a better business move to not have easily accessible anchors because then more folks can independently build a 2-bolt anchor whether it’s draws/quad/whatever. But, they will likely explore hiring a guide when those things are not available at a destination they are traveling to. So, more business for local guides.

That said, I think we’re in the weeds and hypothesizing reasons for fixed gear decisions at Cathedral because it’s hard to find consistency which is how this whole thread started to begin with. 

Truth is, if you really want bolt anchors on something in this town you ought to just put them in today and expect they disappear tomorrow. At least you got to use them once.