This trend is horrible. And needs to stop

F r i t z wrote:

I agree with you, but consider it darkly ironic that the same society condones and even celebrates handing car keys to a sixteen-year-old

That'd be because several generations of glorifying car culture has equated car ownership with freedom, including freedom from personal responsibility. Car accidents can always be blamed on someone else.

Conversely, falling off a slab, you can only blame yourself for trying to climb something outside your skill level (or comfort zone).

That ethos of personal responsibility is one part of what I enjoy about climbing. I also like road cycling, but I could end up a red smear on the pavement through someone else's actions. At least if I get hurt on the wall, it's from something I did or didn't do.

Oh wait, nevermind, I guess now you can blame the route setter for not putting in enough bolts!

phylp phylp wrote:

1/10  This must be a troll post.  Because I can't believe anyone seriously wants to have this discussion again.  As it's been beaten to death in a hundred threads already.

Hate to be the purveyor of the obvious, but...

Dogs

Babies

Bluetooth speakers

etc etc etc.

Can you believe people want to have those discussions again?

Ben G wrote:

Well…that’s exactly what I’m trying to do... without getting hurt

Keep at it.  First disaster is worst disaster is true for some % of climbers.  What % is not quantified.  

My wife and I had no mentors. We nearly got hurt many times.  Early on, speaking to a very strong climber about the last pitch of Easy V in the Gunks  woke me up.  I bailed on that pitch and learned he skipped it too when he wasn’t feeling it.  The MP description includes “Any 5.3 leader attempting this pitch is going to have the ever living bejeezuz scared out of them.”

There are many weird situations on easy graded climbs where the protection factor and grade don’t align. ledges and runouts tend to be the chief risks.  Pulling gear or yoyoing a harder graded climb with excellent pro and no ledges can be a better option.  

Also bolts = sport is the new trend, but is not applicable to old lines.  Trad used to mean ground up and allowed placing bolts on lead.  Sixty feet between bolts is not a sport route regardless of whether the route takes pro. 

Suncup slab at City of Rocks. Pro? What's pro????

Just get yourself a 5.12 rope gun, for those uber "traditional" climbs!

I hafta say, watching as my friend was dragging the rope up this? It was the most entertaining, totally useless belay ever. Watching the other friend feed rope through, lol! But, it's a fun climb! 5.5, 5.4s, with little to no pro whatever, have been some of the most fun outings I've had. Yeah, my strong climber friends have been unlikely to fall....but I personally can't assume that for myself, so, I don't put myself on routes like that, and in fact, would rarely lead, now. Certainly not solo. But that's me, knowing my limitations, which includes arthritic knees that can simply quit (buckle or lock) at any random moment of their choosing.

And yes, there are oodles of kinda badly bolted routes out there.....but I seriously doubt that's how anyone is bolting NOW, so it isn't a "trend that needs to stop", it's our collected history, and simple statement of fact. Reality. Get over it, move on. 

Most of the annoying bolting I live with, is easier routes without runouts, really, just really really would have gone better if they were originally bolted with just one more bolt in total, and different spacing. Kinda lackadaisical, back when very few climbers existed in most places, and, as many have pointed out, this was all totally out of pocket for the very few people "developing" back then.

Best, Helen

F r i t z wrote:

Also, Ben, you're too young to be wasting your time on slab! Take advantage of that early 20's metabolism and go get on some steep limestone, nawmean? Once you become a corpulent trad dad like me and most of the people who have responded, when you have an inverse strength-to-weight ratio, then you can come back to the low-angle dog-paddling.

After all, the only reason we embrace the vertical hagiography of runouts is to assuage our wounded egos because we can no longer climb 5.10c vert, amirite? /s

But in all seriousness, you should take Tal up on his offer, because he is a genuinely nice dude with a vision for cool routes.

LOL Fritz. I have no clue how you got the idea that I’m young. If I was, I wouldn’t care whatsoever. As a matter of fact my very first experience climbing (I was 20 or so), was me and a buddy driving down I-84 out of Portland Oregon, seeing a tall cliff and deciding to have some adventure by exploring it. When we got to the base we thought it looked easy enough so we just started climbing it. Yes...Free solo. I would guess about 70-90ft cliff. Halfway through I got stuck and I literally thought I was gonna die. We didn’t have cell phones back than to call in a rescue. Needless to say I made it , and the experience only made me want to do it more. The next day I went and bought a rope, harness and shoes. Couldn't afford quickdraws yet. I was an absolutely fearless adrenaline junkie. I would intentionally take big whippers, big swings from overhung routes, and even hang one handed off of the edge of a cliff, completely unprotected.

Now, I’m about to be 48, I have a fused ankle (from doing a wheelie on a motorcycle at 100mph), my other ankle gets severe arthritis, from putting weird pressure on it all these years because of the other ankle, which in turn gave me bad knees. And now I’m afraid that a wrong 3 foot fall from the bottom of my feet to the cushy pad of the bouldering gym, might put me on the sidelines for weeks. A lot of the times they all leave me alone to do my thing, but sometimes it’s an adventure just to hike to the base of the wall. Why my heart developed this sudden desire to climb again after 25 years, under all these conditions I don’t know. But I’m giving it what it wants   And Im having a hell of a time leading sport 5.7s and 5.8s and trad 5.4s and 5.5s. Im purposefully keeping it super safe. I havent taken a fall yet but will be practicing some in the near future. Yes, like someone here mentioned Im very green but I bet Im having as much fun as them doing 10s and 11s+

One very exiting goal of mine is to climb Snake Dike next year. I mean its a 5.7 right??? Thus the search for slab routes. I read all about the crazy runouts, the bad accidents, so Im trying to prepare myself. Thus the frustration over the lack of safe easy climbs. At my local crag i found just one TR, and when I traveled to Arizona to climb, I also only found one that was TR. It was a 5.4. There were a bunch of bolted 5.6s all around it that were not TR accessible...very runout. One was 40 or so feet with ONE bolt. No Thanks. Do I expect the rocks and the climbing community to morph and adjust to my conditions like some in this thread mentioned? ABSOLUTELY NOT. I definitely understand better how these runout routes came about, but still don't get the resistance to make them safer. Again the super easy ones newbies start learning on.

I will be traveling to Lake Tahoe with my significant other next week for her college group meet up, and low and behold I found the perfect spot for me to practice that stuff. Emigrant Wall. Looks perfect for what I need and Im very excited to try it. 

Ben G wrote:

LOL Fritz. I have no clue how you got the idea that I’m young. If I was, I wouldn’t care whatsoever. As a matter of fact my very first experience climbing (I was 20 or so), was me and a buddy driving down I-84 out of Portland Oregon, seeing a tall cliff and deciding to have some adventure by exploring it. When we got to the base we thought it looked easy enough so we just started climbing it. Yes...Free solo. I would guess about 70-90ft cliff. Halfway through I got stuck and I literally thought I was gonna die. We didn’t have cell phones back than to call in a rescue. Needless to say I made it , and the experience only made me want to do it more. The next day I went and bought a rope, harness and shoes. Couldn't afford quickdraws yet. I was an absolutely fearless adrenaline junkie. I would intentionally take big whippers, big swings from overhung routes, and even hang one handed off of the edge of a cliff, completely unprotected.

Now, I’m about to be 48, I have a fused ankle (from doing a wheelie on a motorcycle at 100mph), my other ankle gets severe arthritis, from putting weird pressure on it all these years because of the other ankle, which in turn gave me bad knees. And now I’m afraid that a wrong 3 foot fall from the bottom of my feet to the cushy pad of the bouldering gym, might put me on the sidelines for weeks. A lot of the times they all leave me alone to do my thing, but sometimes it’s an adventure just to hike to the base of the wall. Why my heart developed this sudden desire to climb again after 25 years, under all these conditions I don’t know. But I’m giving it what it wants   And Im having a hell of a time leading sport 5.7s and 5.8s and trad 5.4s and 5.5s. Im purposefully keeping it super safe. I havent taken a fall yet but will be practicing some in the near future. Yes, like someone here mentioned Im very green but I bet Im having as much fun as them doing 10s and 11s+

One very exiting goal of mine is to climb Snake Dike next year. I mean its a 5.7 right??? Thus the search for slab routes. I read all about the crazy runouts, the bad accidents, so Im trying to prepare myself. Thus the frustration over the lack of safe easy climbs. At my local crag i found just one TR, and when I traveled to Arizona to climb, I also only found one that was TR. It was a 5.4. There were a bunch of bolted 5.6s all around it that were not TR accessible...very runout. One was 40 or so feet with ONE bolt. No Thanks. Do I expect the rocks and the climbing community to morph and adjust to my conditions like some in this thread mentioned? ABSOLUTELY NOT. I definitely understand better how these runout routes came about, but still don't get the resistance to make them safer. Again the super easy ones newbies start learning on.

I will be traveling to Lake Tahoe with my significant other next week for her college group meet up, and low and behold I found the perfect spot for me to practice that stuff. Emigrant Wall. Looks perfect for what I need and Im very excited to try it. 

Dunno about everywhere, but, there's plenty of easy climbs that were never bolted with climbers leading at that grade even being a consideration, anyplace old enough, ime with stuff in my neck of the woods.

So. 

Get guidebooks, get a feel for where you are climbing. Check the year it went up. See who put it up. You'll soon know who you are happy to "follow"....and who strikes fear in your heart to this day, lol!

Or just ask, on here, for friendly routes in areas you wanna go to. 

Or, like I said, get kindly 5.12 peeps to run a rope up for you. We've even had, and seen, and been offered, that service by total strangers at places like rollercoaster wall on Bath rock. 

Remember to be that helpful person, when you can make the offer.

Two more words:

Maple Canyon.

Honest to god, only place I ever saw someone z clip is there, it's bolted so close!

Have fun!

Helen

I've noticed a trend of adding a couple bolts here and there, or moving poorly placed bolts, when replacing the hardware on a route. I generally support this line of thinking. Downside is, it make take 30 years before a route gets upgraded

Jay Crew wrote:

I've noticed a trend of adding a couple bolts here and there, or moving poorly placed bolts, when replacing the hardware on a route. I generally support this line of thinking. Downside is, it make take 30 years before a route gets upgraded

Somethings take a relatively long time to change.  Sad but to that, I say "Better Late than Never".
For example, when I started climbing at The Gunks in the early '90's (I know this is decades after some of you), I was puzzled by the 'rule' that ugly tat, even those around trees, which can be seen from the parking lots, are OK but 2 sand colored Metolious rap bots are not. Whatever logic that supported that 'rule' matters very little to me now but it greatly comforts me that there are now rap bolts on Madame G so we no longer need to abuse that unfortunately located tree.

This topic has come up thousands of times on the Internet and around the campfire.

Basically, this goes back to what Royal Robbins called “The First Ascent” principle. The FA decides how to equip the route and in most cases that’s how things stay. If anyone has a better idea than that, I’d like to hear it. If you say other people can change the route it opens up a pandora’s box and there’ll be no limits and no consensus on what you can do. So it's a matter of practicality.

That said there are case by case situations where the majority of a local community agrees it would be okay to add a specific lead protection bolt, move a bolt to a better location, or add an anchor, and those don’t get chopped. But if someone adds bolts just to reduce the risk which really affects the mental challenge those are often quickly chopped.

The ethics we have in place actually work very well most of the time.

maybe consider bring along a drill bits and bolts and hangers nuts and a wrench and put in bolts where u want them

or bring along micro nuts and micro cams and find tiny placements 

or dont climb friction slabs which btw are trad and not sport as most adventure climbs are and are meant to be lead by experienced leaders 

its meant to be scary type two fun 

btw u might have low T if u dont like hard scary things and dont get morningwoood

"Basically, this goes back to what Royal Robbins called “The First Ascent” principle. The FA decides how to equip the route and in most cases that’s how things stay. If anyone has a better idea than that, I’d like to hear it. If you say other people can change the route it opens up a pandora’s box and there’ll be no limits and no consensus on what you can do. So it's a matter of practicality."

The idea that an FA on public land, especially one involving aid climbing, brings with it property rights of some sort, is one of the least helpful ideas coming out of the Golden Age of climbing. As an example of the destructive results of the "First Ascent Principle" in a recent interview Adam Ondra laments that there is definitely potential for more hard free climbing on El Cap's right side but that the claims of aid climbers that they can dictate the placement of bolts are too much of a hassle to deal with. Robbins in the brief time that he was doing FAs in the Valley was working within a very different idea of climbing that wasn't particularly concerned with future climbers' needs, didn't account for changes on the route, and failed to see shifting priorities in style, especially towards free climbing, and ignored other public claims on park land. He and others were also paranoid about bolts except when they suited their purposes.

The Pandora's Box has always been open and the best way to combat the peculiar sense of ownership that "first ascensionists" keep insisting on is to change the value system. A great first step is to eliminate info such as climber names in particular from guidebooks, websites, etc. The argument is made that nobody will want to put up new routes as a result but the sheer quantity of anonymous sport routes across the country points in a different direction. Unpopular take I know, but aid climbing on an FA should barely count as climbing the route by this point and should certainly not dictate what fixed protection might be allowed on a given route. Claiming FAs by soloing easy but protectionless walls or slabs and saying bolts are not allowed as a result should not have the force of law.

The fact is that consensus is reached all the time in most locales regarding the installation of fixed protection. Either an LCO mediates the process or informal conversations among route developers and active climbers determine the suitability of adding bolts, but often with the potential of detrimental state attention to the process as happened in Ten Sleep. The advantage of the LCO approach is that everyone knows the rules and it quickly shuts down rogue bolt adders and choppers since the LCO has land management policy and local or federal law behind it.

Glowering wrote:

This topic has come up thousands of times on the Internet and around the campfire.

Basically, this goes back to what Royal Robbins called “The First Ascent” principle. The FA decides how to equip the route and in most cases that’s how things stay. If anyone has a better idea than that, I’d like to hear it. If you say other people can change the route it opens up a pandora’s box and there’ll be no limits and no consensus on what you can do. So it's a matter of practicality.

That said there are case by case situations where the majority of a local community agrees it would be okay to add a specific lead protection bolt, move a bolt to a better location, or add an anchor, and those don’t get chopped. But if someone adds bolts just to reduce the risk which really affects the mental challenge those are often quickly chopped.

The ethics we have in place actually work very well most of the time.

The FA principle seems to only stand, when its what the hard core, chest pounding, "I want my 5.7 climb to be really spicy and I dont want to skip bolts to achieve that" part of the community wants. Case in point: Snake Dike. FA actually asked people to add bolts, but that part of the community is still vehemently against it. There were multiple people that said they would chop the bolts if they were added. Mind Blowing on all levels. And very hypocritical 

Ben G wrote:

The FA principle seems to only stand, when its what the hard core, chest pounding, "I want my 5.7 climb to be really spicy and I dont want to skip bolts to achieve that" part of the community wants. Case in point: Snake Dike. FA actually asked people to add bolts, but that part of the community is still vehemently against it. There were multiple people that said they would chop the bolts if they were added. Mind Blowing on all levels. And very hypocritical 

You're running into an edge case problem here, though. In the trad ethic we want to leave routes be so that others can experience the route as those before them have. And Snake Dike isn't just any route, it's one of the most famous climbs in one of the most famous climbing areas in the world, so the preservation of that experience matters even more. However yes, Beck has argued for several decades now that Snake Dike should be retrobolted, but this is an unusual case where the trad ethic is in a way fighting itself-- according to the trad ethic the route should be preserved and not modified, but also according to the trad ethic the FA's wishes should be respected. 

This isn't a case of hypocrisy, it's just an edge case where there's no clear guidance based on the trad climbing rules and norms on how this situation should be handled. 

Eric Craig wrote:

I will agree with the last sentence just above. But most of the other claims are about 180 degrees from my take on the "Golden Era" of Yosemite climbing. I wonder how much time you spent in the "Valley " in the 1970's ?, and if you ever even met Royal Robbins. Clearly things are different now, more than a half century has passed. Seems to me you are twisting history to suit?????????? I could guess,  but I don't want to speak for you 

I met and spoken with Royal on a couple of occasions, after his autobiography came out. He was mostly done with big FAs after Tis-A-Sack on Half Dome in 1969. The history speaks for itself, culminating in the Dawn Wall story.

In the 70s the bias against hard free climbing was manifest in numerous ways, most notoriously in the responses to Ray Jardine and Tony Yaniro and later in the 80s against Alan Watts and Todd Skinner. This was the point when American free climbing levels began to sink compared to those of Europe. A large part of that was a strange prejudice against bolts and rehearsal of moves. As an example of how things would change, consider John Gill's solo of the 5.11 Robbins route, The Final Exam and of course the Thimble in the 60s. These were bold but elsewhere Gill had no problem using a toprope as he saw fit. It should have been obvious that hard free climbing was the future but it would be more than 20 years before 5.13 became a thing and 5.14 was imported from France.

Ben G wrote:

The FA principle seems to only stand, when its what the hard core, chest pounding, "I want my 5.7 climb to be really spicy and I dont want to skip bolts to achieve that" part of the community wants. Case in point: Snake Dike. FA actually asked people to add bolts, but that part of the community is still vehemently against it. There were multiple people that said they would chop the bolts if they were added. Mind Blowing on all levels. And very hypocritical 

Maybe you can find something else to climb in the valley?  It's a pretty big place.

Eric Craig wrote:

Hey Ben, I am curious were your information comes from? If I remember,  Snake Dike is a Bridwell/Schmitz/Beck route? I new Bridwell some what, and met Eric Beck and Kim Schmitz each a couple times.  I don't doubt they would be fine with a few more bolts. I wonder who is vehemently against it? Especially now,  2024?

From a very passionately debated thread from 2022. I will post at the bottom.

@Ricky Harline

NOBODY will have the same experience as the FA. Because nobody else will hold on to whatever holds or stand on whatever ledge drilling holes and pounding bolts. More so, the FAs are much higher skilled climbers than most people coming after them. Especially on "easy" runout slabs. Yes for them it was so easy they didn't need a bolt for 70ft for the people that actually go on those 5.6-5.7 its hard and scary (weather bolted safely or not). And exactly what audience is gonna attract those grades?

Yes, Snake Dike is famous on a most famous wall. The more reason it should be accessible to ALL. Yet the chest pounding hard cores want to keep that 5.7 climb for themselves (as read in the below thread). Against the FAs wishes

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/123362153/retro-bolt-snake-dike

Eric D wrote:

Maybe you can find something else to climb in the valley?  It's a pretty big place.

And so can you.

All the bolts in the world didn't seem to help the party of 8 on the prime rib route on GOAT wall near Mazama WA last week. Sure it was squalling snow, but they were in over their heads -in short clmbing is just not democratic. 

Ben G wrote:

From a very passionately debated thread from 2022. I will post at the bottom.

@Ricky Harline

NOBODY will have the same experience as the FA. Because nobody else will hold on to whatever holds or stand on whatever ledge drilling holes and pounding bolts. More so, the FAs are much higher skilled climbers than most people coming after them. Especially on "easy" runout slabs. Yes for them it was so easy they didn't need a bolt for 70ft for the people that actually go on those 5.6-5.7 its hard and scary (weather bolted safely or not). And exactly what audience is gonna attract those grades?

Yes, Snake Dike is famous on a most famous wall. The more reason it should be accessible to ALL. Yet the chest pounding hard cores want to keep that 5.7 climb for themselves (as read in the below thread). Against the FAs wishes

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/123362153/retro-bolt-snake-dike

We're definitely getting into tired arguments here but perhaps you haven't heard them before. 

I'm not arguing that people should have the same experience as the FAs; that's not possible as it's already been retrobolted once. The point is tens of thousands of people have had a certain experience on it and it's known for that experience and you're depriving others of that experience if you retrobolt it. For me it was a very mental test piece as a moderate leader. I think it's that way for many who climb it and for many that's the whole point of the route. 

Why do people who want a tightly bolted snake dike trump the people who want a runout one? Why does your view get prioritized over the great many who disagree with it?

And tbh the route kinda sucks. The climbing just isn't that good. If you put bolts every 12' there will be little interesting about the route. 

And lastly, there is a lot of opportunity for new routes adjacent to snake dike. If you want a tightly bolted route going up that face of half dome why not leave snake dike unmolested and put up a new route with bolts every 10'? Everyone wins with that solution IMO. 

Ben G wrote:

From a very passionately debated thread from 2022. I will post at the bottom.

@Ricky Harline

NOBODY will have the same experience as the FA. Because nobody else will hold on to whatever holds or stand on whatever ledge drilling holes and pounding bolts. More so, the FAs are much higher skilled climbers than most people coming after them. Especially on "easy" runout slabs. Yes for them it was so easy they didn't need a bolt for 70ft for the people that actually go on those 5.6-5.7 its hard and scary (weather bolted safely or not). And exactly what audience is gonna attract those grades?

Yes, Snake Dike is famous on a most famous wall. The more reason it should be accessible to ALL. Yet the chest pounding hard cores want to keep that 5.7 climb for themselves (as read in the below thread). Against the FAs wishes

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/123362153/retro-bolt-snake-dike

Ben G - if you want to go hand drill 100 bolts on a new route next to Snake Dike, I don't think anyone is going to tell you not to. What's cringy is your entitlement that someone else should cater to your needs, while you sit in the comfort of your home and criticize those who have toiled. If you don't like the free food you are being served by someone else's labor, shut up about it or go home.