This trend is horrible. And needs to stop

There is a place for every type of climb and it’s not a "trend" of some sort.  

 I suggest “getting good”, top roping, or putting up some beginner leader routes.    I love a good safely bolted route and I love 30ft slab runouts……Not everything needs to be brought to *anyone's* level.  There is stuff I will never climb due to danger, skill, or both.  Thats OK.

I used to be in a similar spot, with the only “true slab” near me being the South Platte where it was rare to find a pitch below 5.10 with more than 6 bolts regardless of the length. I distinctly recall climbing a 5.7 at Little Half Dome and clipping a bolt about 20ft above my last bolt and my foot and hand disintegrating seconds after clipping.

Lately, well protected slab has become more acceptable. I agree with the others - having bigger bolt spacing on climbing that’s easier relative to the rest of the route is kosher - but nobody is gonna think I’m cool for doing a 3 bolt 5.7 in a land of 3 bolt 5.7s. Don’t get me wrong - super tight bolting isn’t always my thing, and there’s plenty of routes in this area with either consistent or intermittent 15+ft between bolts, but there’s a time and place.

It’s a mixed bag - I’ve gotten messages from some who don’t like the closer bolt spacing, and recently talked to some older guys who were ecstatic about it. They said they’d been climbing since the 60s and now that they’re older, they can’t pull hard enough to get on the tightly bolted harder lines, and don’t want to risk a life altering or ending fall at their age on the easier stuff. So it meant only climbing the same few existing well protected lines - until now where they have a wealth of new routes to experience. That discussion with those guys was really great - I’d happily take getting called a wuss if it means I also get to have more of those.

So if anyone is in the front range and wants to try out some safely bolted slab climbs 5.5-5.12, shoot me a message and I’ll send you the details.

Tal Mwrote:

I used to be in a similar spot, with the only “true slab” near me being the South Platte where it was rare to find a pitch below 5.10 with more than 6 bolts regardless of the length. I distinctly recall climbing a 5.7 at Little Half Dome and clipping a bolt about 20ft above my last bolt and my foot and hand disintegrating seconds after clipping.

Lately, well protected slab has become more acceptable. I agree with the others - having bigger bolt spacing on climbing that’s easier relative to the rest of the route is kosher - but nobody is gonna think I’m cool for doing a 3 bolt 5.7 in a land of 3 bolt 5.7s. Don’t get me wrong - super tight bolting isn’t always my thing, and there’s plenty of routes in this area with either consistent or intermittent 15+ft between bolts, but there’s a time and place.

It’s a mixed bag - I’ve gotten messages from some who don’t like the closer bolt spacing, and recently talked to some older guys who were ecstatic about it. They said they’d been climbing since the 60s and now that they’re older, they can’t pull hard enough to get on the tightly bolted harder lines, and don’t want to risk a life altering or ending fall at their age on the easier stuff. So it meant only climbing the same few existing well protected lines - until now where they have a wealth of new routes to experience. That discussion with those guys was really great - I’d happily take getting called a wuss if it means I also get to have more of those.

So if anyone is in the front range and wants to try out some safely bolted slab climbs 5.5-5.12, shoot me a message and I’ll send you the details.

There is a 'nicely' bolted route in CA ( Chaquito Dome, Shuteye Ridge) appropriately titled 'Too Old to be Bold'.

Eric Craig wrote:

Hi Alan, that route is kinda "PDH". 5.10.

So I wrote earlier that " run outs ARE part of TRADitional climbing ", and an important part it is. But I have nothing against easy/moderate sport climbs. I will even tip my hat to those who put the effort into establishing them....good on ya.

Dumbing down adventurous trad routes with bolts is seriously FU. Two climbs I know of,  both previously kinda "R", but protectable with mildly creative placements, have been converted to semi sport routes. Ruined really. Chockcraft, i.e. placing nuts, IS  part of TRADitional climbing too. So one step in avoiding this is learning to use nuts. They work in places no cam will. 

I agree that 'Too Old...' is a harder route than OP is describing, but do love the name!!!! ( The climb was good as well and, as you mentioned, hard).
In general I agree with you about not 'dumbing down' established routes, especially ones with available gear placements. But I do think that those routes that I discussed in the Meadows ( and possibly similar ones elsewhere) are exceptions. They were solos, so not really traditionally established routes, and were not close to cutting-edge accomplishments ( even as solos) at the time, and were done by climbers who at the time were routinely climbing many grades harder. If those routes had potential for traditional protection, then the fact that the first ascender didn't use any would have no effect on subsequent parties, but on rock where bolts offer the only possibility for protection climbers of lesser ability or boldness are completely out of luck. This wouldn't be a problem at an area with multiple options for routes at the easier grades, but it is a different situation at a wonderful area where such routes are in relatively short supply relative to the demand.

5.6 slab is easy for people who like to free solo 5.6 slabs

Occasionally, it makes a lot of sense (with plenty of consensus) to add a bolt to a sport route.  https://www.mountainproject.com/route/105762684/unfamiliar-strangers is one such example.
I was frankly astonished at the big runout which was admittedly over terrain about 5 number grades easier than the low crux. And I was not alone judging by the volume of comments.
More frequently though, I think it is a matter of moving to the bolt to a better location, not adding more. I am rather short so it is common that I have some difficulty with reach and wish the bolt were placed somewhat lower.

We just returned from a sport area where it is somewhat common to have runouts between B1 and B2 or B2 and B3 with ground fall potential.  But the electronic rakkup guide for the area is rather good about indicating which route is PG, PG-13, or R.  So climber beware!  I did a few of these routes while closely heeding the advice a friend gave us before our trip - "this is not a place to push one's grades".  I would be lying if I do not admit to feeling a higher level of thrill than normal while making my way to the top.  That is one of the reasons we keep doing this silly thing that we do, isn't it?

Ben Gwrote:

I say bolt those routes GENEROUSLY. 

If you want that, I say donate generously to your neighborhood friendly route developer.

 Closely-bolted sport routes can cost $100 in just hardware alone, not to mention equipment cost and opportunity cost of training/projecting/sending time.

Panem et circenses.

One of the most amazing things about climbing is the diversity of experiences you can have. There is enough rock in the world for both spicy testpieces and featherbagged z-clip-ups, and everything in between.

The only horrible trend that needs to stop is the attitude of entitlement that is ruining access for everyone.

I'm surprised I haven't seen this point yet, so I'll add - 

Not everyone is thinking about repeat ascents when they do an FA.  Sometimes people prioritize their own experience over others that will come after them.  And they have every right to.

Don't love it?  Top rope or bolt your own routes like everyone else is saying.

I've gone back and forth over the years with whos experience I'm going to cater to when bolting a route, and I think they both have their place.  

Lastly, if the routes are going ground up, you don't always get to stop and slam in a bolt where you'd like to.  Harden up bud.

Rock climbing is silly.

Andy Shoemakerwrote:

I was really feeling you until this line. The reason you were terrified while TRing 5.6 slab was that the bolts were runout?  

How many bolts would you like to climb by while on toprope to feel secure climbing slab?

I don't think the root of the problem is with the bolting.  I think you are hoping more bolts will make friction moves feel like standing/pulling on an edge.  Before you shout at me- I am a self proclaimed sport-climbing-sissy who wants a bolt every 18".  But I don't blame the developers for my lack of lead head.

LOL bro. That climb is TR only. Zero bolts or pro. I don’t care how many bolts a route has, if it’s also TR accessible. DUHHHHH  . I’m fully aware that you can practice a route on TR till you master it and then lead it if it’s bolted.

So thanks @PWZ for suggesting that I should stay off the wildly runout slabs and do toprope instead. LMAO

And thanks @Wade Banks for letting me know that I can place as much protection as I want in a crack when I’m trying to learn how to slab. Still LMAO

My gripe is that there aren’t many options available for newbies. Easy routes with TR access are very rare and the others are wildly runout. 

Ben Gwrote:

What is with this prevailing trend for long runouts on “easy” routes. Some even dozens of feet  before a clip. Especially slabs. I don’t get it.

Easy for who??? The people that can climb much higher grades? Are they the ones that will take a break from climbing 11s and 12s so they can do a 5.6 or 5.7 route? Or 5.4 - 5.5 route?

Which routes are the total newbies supposed to start on and climb repeatedly? Do you think a 5.6 slab is easy for them? In case you’ve been climbing for so long that you forgot what starting out felt like, I’ll tell you…It’s NOT. And I imagine those 5.5/5.6 routes were bolted for them.

Even though I have climbing experience from back in the days, I never did slabs. And when I did my first one it was a 5.6 and I was TERRIFIED. On top rope LOL. I didn’t think any of the footholds will hold and constantly saw my face and knees cheese grated on the crystalline granite. And my girl who was a fairly new climber didn’t even think it was possible to climb it.

I say bolt those routes GENEROUSLY. Let the newbs have something safe to start and practice on. Once you get into the higher grades, do whatever you want to feed your ego (I’ve seen very advanced climbers in very heated debates on why a 5.7 slab should be left dangerously runout). Again… I don’t get it. 

You want to put in the work of scoping scrubbing cleaning and bolting? You want to pay for the bolts? Let me know and I'll gladly let you venmo me.

Alan Rubinwrote:

So, in my opinion, it is disappointing that back in the 70s/80s, several of the top climbers of the day---operating at the 5.11/12 level, chose to solo several 5.7-8  slabs---and then 'officially' claim them as first ascents, and therefore, according to the established climbing ethics of the time--and now, 'freezing' them in that unprotected status 'for all time'. I consider this to be very selfish behavior ---and I doubt that those routes are frequently, if ever, climbed---and never by parties operating in that grade range, while they likely would have been popular, and filled a 'need' for for climbs at that level, if they had been reasonably bolted. If these had been crack climbs, or otherwise naturally-protectable, this wouldn't be an issue, but on such 'blank' slabs it makes all the difference.

EXACTLY 

And since many people mentioned the cost issue, I don’t believe that’s a problem for my local crag. There is an organization that takes care of all of that (from which you need permission if you want to bolt) that is funded by multiple other organizations including the state parks and wildlife.

Ben Gwrote:

 Some even dozens of feet  before a clip.  

LOL. 

Literally dozens ... 

New climber routes aren’t rare at all in most places, but given your location I imagine your options are limited AF (I grew up in SA..).   

When I do a FA, I put in the pro I feel I need to protect myself. Most often, the route itself dictates where I'm going to drill, based on stances. The risks I'm willing to take are my decision based on my comfort zone. If you want to repeat one of my routes, you'll face the runouts, and get a feel of what I experienced on the FA. If my level of risk is higher than yours, and unacceptable to you, don't climb the route. 

When I was running my construction company, our motto was, "Every project bears the signature of the one who crafts it. Author your work with excellence." If you can't respect another's vision and pursuit of excellence, move along.

One doesn't go into an art museum and add color to the paintings of others.

There are several reasons a route might not have many bolts. Consider that a 5.8 might not have been an easy climb when it was originally done ground up, and putting in bolts while on lead might have been very challenging at someone’s limit. Consider “the nose” on looking glass in NC. A 5.8 put up in hiking boots with only one piton for 4 pitches of slab climbing. It’s been updated with Some fixed anchors but I think most people would agree it’d be a shame to fill it with bolts. On the other hand, harder routes on the same rock (The odyssey 5.11, Glass menagerie 5.12/13) were originally aid lines, so they are bound to have more protection. I know this doesn’t apply much to modern routes, and I appreciate people like Ricky bolting moderates for people to safely enjoy. 

A wise man once said "if it wasnt for the run-outs, slab climbing would be terribly boring"

Ben Gwrote:

EXACTLY 

And since many people mentioned the cost issue, I don’t believe that’s a problem for my local crag. There is an organization that takes care of all of that (from which you need permission if you want to bolt) that is funded by multiple other organizations including the state parks and wildlife.

Actual question, now that we're all drinking coffee instead of Shiner Bock. Your LCO pays for new routes and is funded by the government?

I think you hit upon an important point there. Why people develop a route? do they develop it for their own enjoyment for their own ego or for the enjoyment of the general climbing community.? In Europe and Canada, it's called opening a new route. As in your opening it up for the enjoyment of other people. Whoever puts the bolts in gets the credit for the route, even if they don't get  the  FA.

I don't often develop new rooutes but when I do, I tend to have the bolts fairly closely spaced at the bottom. I usually intend for them to be stick clipped. And the higher up the route I get the further apart the bolts are unless there is a dangerous ledge. oh wait I don't choose those routes.
I' ve always just expected slab climbing to be run out and scary and one of my least favorite forms of climbing. But we need all kinds of climbing that's what keeps it interesting.

Aren't the easy ones the best places to learn? It's like complaining to the teacher for teaching the wrong way.