This trend is horrible. And needs to stop

Ben Gwrote:

Some parts of the climbing culture still don't make sense to me, but that might come with more knowledge and maturity. 

"Climbing culture" and "ethics" are entirely human-made, contrived, and diverse. The best way to make sense of them is to do it. Like 95% of "climber" I personally know will never try trad climbing, so trad/alpine climbing will never make sense to them. But they still totally enjoy a subset of other forms of climbing. 

I actually appreciate you asking and responding to the questions here coz most people can decide to hate runout slabs (or any style of climbing) after trying and stop there. By asking questions here, at least now you have more informed opinion (bolting restriction in certain places, other options to practice, effort of FA parties, etc.). If you eventually decided these trad/runout slab is not your thing, you can still enjoy gym/bouldering/steep sports climbing/any other hobbies. You have a lot of options. 

Ben Gwrote:

Overall, it doesn't seem like the core climbing community on here (not talking about this thread) is very fond of newcomers. Some do embrace them but some seem to resent them.

Not saying this is acceptable, but it is at least explicable for the following reasons:

1) Climbing has grown exponentially thanks to gyms and the influencer-industrial complex of proselytization (#optoutside). Overpopulation, crowding and access issues have ensued. There is naturally some resentment at having to wait in line at crags that were previously remote, and seeing the environmental desiccation of places being "loved to death."

2) Newcomers who try to remake the outdoors in their own gym-age.

3) Newcomers who refuse to learn best practices, get in over their heads, and endanger SAR by tapping out on their emergency beacons.

And more.

 With all that said, I love newcomers who approach the activity with a sense of awe, humility and respect. In my all-too-short fourteen years of climbing, I have mentored many newcomers, several of whom are now climbing harder and bolder than I am.

I worked as a guide for a program that took at-risk youth on climbing trips, and later started an outdoor climbing club for rural middle schoolers who had graduated from my class.

So while I do cultivate crustiness, especially on MP, it is selective and I have helped a lot of people develop skills and character. I've even developed some routes that are closely-bolted.

Thanks for listening to my Ted Talk.

And if you ever want to talk on the phone about any of this -- dead serious, I enjoy talking to MPers while I'm on the road -- my number is 970-goldcamalot00-346metoliusorange . I had a lot of other suggestions for leading slab but lost them when my browser crashed, and now I need to get into a cap and gown and watch my students graduate, lol.

Don't coddle the noobs. Boot camp them, wheedle out the weak and the whiny.

Ben Gwrote:

I absolutely have. I’ve setup multiple trad anchors in the Throne Rock area and climbed some of those routes. I have Practice Slab down now. I feel very comfortable in building trad anchors (to answer earlier question). I’ve done a lot of exploring on the backside of half dome and am familiar with the ledge there. My next goal is to setup TR on The Today Show. The couple of times I rappelled from that ledge looking for it I missed it.

I saved your earlier post with your suggestions and I will refer to it when I go again. 

My suggestions are generalized and based on climbing and guiding there 30-40 years ago. I suspect there are other options available, and my toproping was mostly limited to guiding instruction.

I still encourage you to take a face climbing course and an anchor building course. Not only will your skill set improve, you will benefit from socializing with more experienced climbers and find people going through the same learning curve.

Wait till OP climbs at the VRG… 

Brandon Ribblettwrote:

Wait till OP climbs at the VRG… 

Brandon Ribblettwrote:

Wait till OP climbs at the VRG… 

Please explain for those of us who haven’t. Thnx. 

Marc801 Cwrote:

Please explain for those of us who haven’t. Thnx. 

It’s scary run out and very hard. And unpleasantly noisy

Marc801 Cwrote:

Please explain for those of us who haven’t. Thnx. 

Incredibly run out on very hard sections. Also not just hard climbing, very sandbagged throughout the grades. Quite possibly the most sandbagged place I’ve been. And yes you can’t hear or see your belayer.

But it’s some of the best stone and movement anywhere. 

Ben Gwrote:

It definitely gave me a much better understanding of how they came to be and why. I also didn't realize how someone's climbing motivation can differ so much from person to person. Some parts of the climbing culture still don't make sense to me, but that might come with more knowledge and maturity. 

Overall, it doesn't seem like the core climbing community on here (not talking about this thread) is very fond of newcomers. Some do embrace them but some seem to resent them.

We resent newbies coming in and trying to change what we value to conform to their preferences of comfort. Work your way through the grades, do a few trail days, learn and respect the history. Trying to make these climbs "safer and more comfortable" and expect the pitchfork mob. 

Ben Gwrote:

It definitely gave me a much better understanding of how they came to be and why. I also didn't realize how someone's climbing motivation can differ so much from person to person. Some parts of the climbing culture still don't make sense to me, but that might come with more knowledge and maturity. 

Overall, it doesn't seem like the core climbing community on here (not talking about this thread) is very fond of newcomers. Some do embrace them but some seem to resent them.

When someone has an open mind and learns to appreciate why things are the way they are (even if they don’t agree) I welcome them. I don’t have a lot of respect for either the person who thinks all climbs should be “safe” and sport bolted or the person that doesn’t think any sport climbs should exist. As you mention people have different motivations. If someone wants to only sport climb because they don’t want high risk or they just want to climb the hardest physical climbing routes great. If someone only wants the challenge nature presents with the mental challenge of using only natural placements for pro great. But I think you should understand that other people have different desires and that’s okay.

I like newcomers and have gotten a lot of people interested in climbing either directly or indirectly because I love it and want others to enjoy it also. But I also see what’s happened over the last 35 years I’ve been climbing with overcrowding, more people who don’t practice low impact ways. So I’m a little conflicted  

I participate in threads like this a lot even though it’s been discussed many time because as I said before I think most new climbers don’t inherently understand why things are the way they are (especially in terms of not retrobolting) and it’s encouraging when people do get it. It’s up to each generation to pass on these ideas because I think they do make sense and it would be easy for them to be lost and we’d lose a big part of why people climb and the history behind it. 

Ben Gwrote:

null

1. (Yellow line) - 5.5 Trad - 0 bolts. Im not even sure if theres pro at the arrow. Might be even higher.

2. 5.6 Sport - 4 bolts

3. 5.8+ Sport - 7 bolts

1. There's pro around that arrow. The yellow line actually has several gear placements. If you start at the base as in the diagram, there are two placements along the way to the top of that large boulder. I sometimes do that as a mini-pitch so I can bring a shorter rope and walk off. After that, it's true that there is no pro for about 50' or so, and that first pro isn't great. But there are some bomber placements. Overall, you can get at least 6 decent placements on that pitch, which isn't great, but it's why that pitch will probably never get bolts.

2. Yup, that pitch is why when I do a lead course at Reimers or the Greenbelt, I tell clients not to go to E-Rock until they're solid leading 5.8-5.9 at the sport crags. I specifically describe that pitch to them, and they're usually sufficiently scared. Once, I led that pitch with a headlamp in order to get ropes up for clients. In the dark, I missed one of the bolts, which made the pitch even more unsettling. But that's E-Rock for you.

3. That pitch is 5.6, and it or the first pitch of Kracken (sic) is the most closely bolted on the Backside. The routes at Turkey Peak are more like Reimers bolting if that's what you want. The second pitch is the 5.8+. Two bolts protect the crux, but there's a hard move getting to the first bolt, and blowing means a fall on a ledge and the anchors.

I know the bolting is intimidating there, and I've stated there are routes I no longer care to lead. There are also some I'll never lead, period. For instance, the Prok Wall has a 90' 5.8 that has one bolt. I will never lead it even though I've never fallen on 5.8 slab. Aside from the FA and his partner, I don't know of anyone who has led that route. But the bolting isn't going to change anytime soon, so you either have to live with it, find the places where you can set topropes, or climb somewhere else.

You're welcome to PM me for suggestions for out there. If it were early spring or late fall, I'd offer to go out there with you, but at this time of the year, I don't want to leave my house at 4:30 and drive two hours each way to take advantage of the reasonable hours of the day.

F r i t zwrote:

Not saying this is acceptable, but it is at least explicable for the following reasons:

1) Climbing has grown exponentially thanks to gyms and the influencer-industrial complex of proselytization (#optoutside). Overpopulation, crowding and access issues have ensued. There is naturally some resentment at having to wait in line at crags that were previously remote, and seeing the environmental desiccation of places being "loved to death."

2) Newcomers who try to remake the outdoors in their own gym-age.

3) Newcomers who refuse to learn best practices, get in over their heads, and endanger SAR by tapping out on their emergency beacons.

Perfectly put. This is why I curse whenever a trad or TR route around here gets retrobolted so the community can "grow."

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. 

Retro bolt . Maybe they won’t be chopped. Start with suicide rock and j tree. 

Ricky Harlinewrote:

It would be cool if the FAs saw that what they intended as warmup routes were actually becoming challenging onsights for most people and decided to retrobolt their routes, but it is of critical importance that this isn't done without FA permission. 

Therefore that leaves two potential solutions: talk to the FA (or the core community if the FA is dead or unknown) or just put up new lines. I like the latter. 

Not if the rock and route are on public land-property. Then no one owns it and it can be bolted. Of course sociopath narcissists may chop. Once dead or unfound the FA doesn’t pass all rights to heirs . This isn’t inheritance law. They don’t own the cliff. This is a negative shared with surfing. Surfers think they own waves. Climbers think they own the rock. Neither is true. 

Diego Climberwrote:

Retro bolt . Maybe they won’t be chopped. Start with suicide rock and j tree. 

Or maybe they will...

Dean Rosnauwrote:

By your naive posts, I'm assuming you are a young man. You need to do some studying on the history of our sport. As a first ascentionist, I look for a natural line. Then I choose to climb that line in the cleanest way possible, placing only enough pro to avoid a ground fall, and enough to make me, the leader, feel safe. How close together that pro ends up is MY choice as the one who had the vision for the route. 

If you're uncomfortable with runouts, then follow the route. Then you can work your way up to growing a pair.

Dean you speak like an entitled squatter stealing shared resources. The history was 200 years to decades ago the ropes broke, the only gear was soft pitons that pulled out and bent, there were no strong bolts, shoes -boots were awful. Tied rope around waist because there were no harnesses. There were no power drills .  It took thirty -60 min per bolt. And people didn’t want to spend more money. 

So people put in less bolts . That’s vastly different than having modern equipment and tech.
The style (ethics) had nothing to do with wanting to run it out. They were forced to.
And 300 , 200, 100 years ago, 50 years ago and today the FAs did not own the public mountains. So they have no claim. Your argument fails. Stick to crack climbing. 

Diego Climberwrote:

Not if the rock and route are on public land-property. Then no one owns it and it can be bolted. Of course sociopath narcissists may chop. Once dead or unfound the FA doesn’t pass all rights to heirs . This isn’t inheritance law. They don’t own the cliff. This is a negative shared with surfing. Surfers think they own waves. Climbers think they own the rock. Neither is true. 

And by your "logic", anyone can glue on plastic holds, chip holds, paint the rock, or drill in iron ladders wherever they want on public land. These areas aren't bolted to everyone's preference, but they do minimize the alteration of nature while still making it possible to climb on. Don't start an unwanted and unnecessary bolt war. 

I think there is a misunderstanding of what is allowed on public land. In essence we all own it and none of us own it at the same time. There are stakeholders that can be assumed to speak for what should happen. In our case that is the climbing community.

Generally speaking, what the majority of the climbing community wants should prevail. But this does not mean that minority views should be disrespected. Proportionality should prevail.

If 70+% want runout slab to be retro bolted, then really the majority should be. But also a minority of routes should be maintained to address the needs of the less than 30% who think otherwise. That way we all get to share in the resource we've developed.

Now, is that a fair outcome?

Kevin Pattersonwrote:

I think there is a misunderstanding of what is allowed on public land. In essence we all own it and none of us own it at the same time. There are stakeholders that can be assumed to speak for what should happen. In our case that is the climbing community.

Generally speaking, what the majority of the climbing community wants should prevail. But this does not mean that minority views should be disrespected. Proportionality should prevail.

If 70+% want runout slab to be retro bolted, then really the majority should be. But also a minority of routes should be maintained to address the needs of the less than 30% who think otherwise. That way we all get to share in the resource we've developed.

Now, is that a fair outcome?

What are the proportions now? Would we chop them if the proportions change in the future? 

Does sound fair to me.