Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Whiteside Mountain
Wax Mhitfordwrote: I agree with your conclusion and certainly don't want any bolts added to Whiteside, but I think there's a middle ground between the historical/current state of Whiteside and the hilarious machine gun bolt spray at Yonah Lowers. Funny to imagine that level of bolting on Whitesides, though. I wouldn't have enough draws to lead a pitch. RE: spearfinger (which I'll never climb)--i don't see the double standard? Looking at the topo, looks like moderate terrain was climbed with only natural pro (or lack thereof), with bolts placed on lead to protect harder climbing. Seems exactly consistent with the prevailing established style of routes on Whiteside. Cool name too. |
Tom Caldwellwrote: This is an oft overlooked factor when looking at WNC climbing. Here in red rock, the rescue situation has become somewhat crazy, choppers are in and out of the canyons daily, often pulling people off G-rated trad routes that are extremely--even overly--accessible. People getting benighted on Olive Oil,Cat in the Hat, Solar Slab... And calling for rescue. It would be untenable given the context of Whiteside to have the same level of rescue presence there. A certain amount of overqualification and inconvenience is almost necessary to keep some of those cliffs open. Call that gatekeeping I guess. I certainly wouldn't want to start an access fight with Highlands in 2025. |
|
All those rescues you mentioned at RR ( even if, maybe, a bit of hyperbole ) are an interesting/depressing 'sign of the times'.Thirty, or so years ago--probably a bit more, 3 or 4 friends, all very competent and experienced climbers decided to top out on Dark Shadows, misjudged how long it was, and ended up being benighted ( and missing their scheduled flights home). It never occurred to them to call for a rescue, nor were the now current technologies to do so available to them. They just settled down as best they could, spent a cold night (April), got themselves down and out the next day, and got new flights home. Nothing particularly noteworthy, that's just how things were done. I've never climbed Whitesides, unfortunately, and at my age very likely will never do so, but am glad that there are climbs/areas where there are such 'entry requirements'---as long as there are other, better protected routes/areas in the vicinity for us more timid folks. |
Alan Rubinwrote: I wish it was hyperbole. I'm in the canyons 3-4 days a week and see rescues more often than not. It's not all climbers (hikers and exercises make up some of it) but many are, and some are truly embarrassing. it's a dramatic step up from previous few years, for some reason. Definitely a sign of the times and evidence of what happens when convenience lures in the unprepared. |
Tanner Hwrote: why was a bolt chopped on the first pitch and ladders left to stay? did the FA party go back and chop someone else's dirty work/late addition? or did the FA add it and then go back and chop it? hard to tell from conflicting comments from many different people. interested in the route, been on the OR a bunch but never traditions. |
FO FILMwrote: FF, I don’t believe Dylan placed the bolts on Spear finger. My understanding is the hardware was installed by a different party, but they were unable to free it. WS is an incredible, unique place to climb. There are sport crags being developed all over the US. Maybe it’s okay to leave this one as a test piece for the bold? |
|
I did place bolts on spearfinger. The route was started and never finished. Myself and Chad Gardner finished the route together. He started the route 15 years prior. To compare spearfinger and the OR is a night and day difference in terms of difficulty and “danger”. Spearfinger is the most sustained route East of the headwall routes (mainline) and was established in an ethic that can stand up to any other routes on the wall if not surpass in style. There are no holes in the rock that don’t have a bolt in them, there are no bolt ladders, or anything even remotely close to one. The person who started this thread is either a complete troll or knows little to nothing about traditional climbing. He just made this profile to post from the other day. What’s your name boy? Speak up can’t hear you |
Jack Kellywrote: I certainly wouldn't want to start an access fight with Highlands in 2025. these words made my skin crawl |
Casey Fentonwrote: Curious as well. Maybe FFA party chopped some of the bolts from the FA party? Unrelated to that, hopefully nobody here (even the OP) is advocating for making this place completely runout free. The price of entry is part of the alure and the experience. Crags being uncrowded is also very nice and obviously placed like The Red and RR are crowded because the barrier to entry is low (or at least perceived to be). |
Andrew Giniatwrote: The FA of Traditions removed the bolts. |
Tom Caldwellwrote: Why? Did they remove them after the FFA or did they just not want people to climb it or something? Seems a bit silly, especially the first bolt that protects some tricky opening slab |
Wax Mhitfordwrote: Ruined by over crowding? You must not go to either of those places often. You might see one other party on any given day. Usually you'll have them to yourself And you can blame the Army for the Lowers |
Mark O'Nealwrote: Yup, it is obvious that the NAME "Lowers" is the only vestige of Yonah's oral tradition . |
|
Why do people go out of their way to a specific destination with a very specific style and then bitch about it? So many destinations in this country that have exactly what you're looking for. Yet you want to road trip crusade for making established places "more accessible" to your taste? Sounds like clip ups are your style and there's PLENTY within a half day drive of that specific out of the way destination. You're criticism has newbie from a mega gym written all over it. Your critique of Dylan putting bolts on a big route show your lack of experience. "Mixed routes are dumb" is a sentiment from people who primarily sport climb and have never even conceived of a ground up ascent. Especially when you're just repeating what someone else did in that style while getting beta from a guide book or here. Sit down or sack up. |
Tom Caldwellwrote: The protection on the original Traditions did not fit with the style at Whiteside. I believe Mark received criticism by locals and other FA's of the cliff (Doc and company). The route's protection was too much of a shift to be widely accepted. This isn't the only route at Whiteside that has had this done by the FA party. Catholic School Girls is another one. It looks like the bolt was original used on the FA to aid it or free it, but then removed by Stegg afterwards. Then there is the wildness of Arno's routes that were originally aided, but now repeats are all free. So many of the bolts are in the wrong locations because they were never moved after the free ascents. The Dollywood pitch comes to mind. The worse part is that the bolts were replaced, but in the same locations instead of massaging them into better locations for free ascents (1 for 1) and with carbon steel (facepalm). |
|
Steggs removed bolt makes perfect sense having climbed the route. |
Tom Caldwellwrote: Thanks for the info Tom |
Armand La Douceurwrote: I had to look at my mountainproject comment from that route from years ago. It was a head scratcher when I saw the bolt hole and so I posted about it. I bet since you are climbing 5.13, 5.11- will feel nonchalant and you would come to conclusion that it made sense. Personally, it seems odd when the FA gives themself some sort of advantage by having protection where nobody else will. If it was just an aid piece, why use a bolt? There are plenty of other tactics that are less damaging to the rock. |
|
When I climbed it I was barely climbing 5.11, I do agree that giving an advantage on the fa and then removing that advantage makes sense, however if I remember correctly there was a .75 that you could take up on and then reach a jug and be back in 5.9 terrain, which I believe is the reason the bolt was removed. Just more natural A0 |
Tom Caldwellwrote: That’s not quite correct. Mark did endure a fairly virulent hate letter campaign from some long time WNC locals in the Boone/Asheville axis, but certainly not from Doc. I was climbing a lot with both of them at the time on Whitesides and most, probably all, of the crags you can see from the overlook on 64. (among other things I was the ‘and belayer’ when Doc did the FFA of Traditions—I couldn’t free the crux that day). At the time the attitude was hostile towards doing anything new on the big face unless it clearly upped the ante. So no one was even trying. Mark was renting a place off 64 and chipping away at the route as a side project. So he would leave a rope hanging and go back there to push it higher when he had the chance. This kind of expeditionary approach was the only way it ‘did not fit’ with the perceived WS style, It was otherwise established on lead and drilled by hand, which is the NC ethic. The WNC people are good people but were reacting poorly to second and third hand information ‘about a mad bolter’, and as our crowd was more GA/SC (and we were putting up a lot of routes in the Cashiers/Highlands area) there was also a sense there this was some sort of outsider invasion. And there are more bolts on it than the OR, New Diversions, and New Perversions, which were the only comparisons at the time. Kind of like RR and the Wall of the Early Morning Light, I heard later that a crew from Asheville came down to repeat the route and possibly chop it. Once they were on it they quickly decided that wasn’t necessary and it was a pretty darn good route. Even so, Mark reacted to the criticism (which got nasty for awhile) and removed three bolts that I’m aware of: the first bolt (the start can be a little insecure, he was looking at decking from 20’ so he drilled. Then he climbed higher until he was in ground fall range and drilled again. That left two bolts in the first 40’, and that was a sign of ’overbolting’). I believe he removed a bolt on P4 that he had put in as a directional, and then a bolt that was above the crux bolt ladder because Mark later claimed to find a cam placement (which I have f***ing never been able to find.) I‘m still a pretty militant NC ethic old school guy, but was against taking out the first bolt and definitely the bolt on the crux pitch. I don’t intend to lead that pitch ever again, but then, I’m also 66. And all those were Mark’s decisions to make—not mine and certainly not the peanut gallery’s.
|
