The future of climbing at the Leap

I have a deep respect for the traditions of climbing. For years, I have risked my neck for the purity of the mind altering experience of being run above a few small wires and cams.  I’m not saying we abandon that. I’m here to make an argument for growth. We need to evolve and not lock ourselves in a time capsule. 

I read the thread on "convenience anchors at the Leap" and was disappointed with the anger and the abusive people on forums are subjected to. I think the vast majority of old and new climbers have more in common than what sets us apart. I believe in the brotherhood (and sisterhood) of climbing. More than 95% of the climbers I have met over the years are cool people I would happily invite to my house, loan them gear or a rope, and who have done the same in return. I once ended up at the East Wall with my 11 year old daughter and her without shoes only to have a local run all the way back to his house in Strawberry and back up with a pair for her. It’s things like this (as opposed to raging on a forum) that heal and bring us together.  I explain our tight community to others by saying that every outdoor climber has been humbled and scared over their climbing lives, but has also been awed by the beauty of soaring rock faces and felt the intense rush of success. It's this that enables the 5.12 trad badass to sit around the campfire with the 5.7 leader and share the beauty and the psyche of it all. 

As for the future of climbing? I’m not worried about the climbers. I don't fear the "gym bros" or the family with their kids and friends on a toprope. Honestly, I wish the family and kids had an easier, safer bolted line to put a rope on.  Don't we want to get kids and families outdoors?  Sure, it is apparent that climbers who have barely been outdoors have a poor understanding of the vibe and etiquette at the crag sometimes. That's ok. If they're nearby, I chat them up and share the energy, excitement and beauty of where we are and what they’re climbing. I'm a climbing elder at this point and I feel it's my role to encourage and support new climbers. Help them to understand how things work and how to stay safe outside. I work to not lecture (unless someone is about to get hurt) or talk down and I don't tell them what they need to think and do. It is true that many of the gym population don't know much about outdoor climbing except it's a lot harder and scarier on real rock. I see in all of them the potential to be great stewards of the sport and great climbers with a dedication to continue to preserve what we are all fortunate to be enjoying the hell out of.  I just raised three very strong-willed teenagers and hard-earned experience has taught me that encouragement and understanding will get me a lot further than laying down the law or wagging my finger. 

With respect to the Leap, I don't worry that we are going to bolt the shit out of all the lines on the East Wall. Climbing, at its core, is about courage, facing fears, being methodical and managing systems. Those who transition from the gyms to the East Wall and beyond start to quickly understand that this is different. The skill set is broader; the benefits are far-reaching and frequently spill over into their lives in powerful ways off the rock. I think these lessons are inherent in the outdoor climbing experience. We can share our thoughts but we can’t tell them how to think and what to do. We climbers inhabit an intense world full of passionate, strong-willed individuals, and most of us refuse to feel talked down to. 

I understand and generally agree with most of our unwritten rules on ethics.  

I do not think that climbing needs to be made safe or that we need to bolt everything to the lowest common denominator.

So what about the Leap? A couple of things seem indisputable: 

1) The easy access and the increase in climbers overall mean it's going to get more popular at the Leap. 

2) 90% of the climbers are crowded onto fewer than 10 routes.

I think that adding an occasional anchor here and there, retro bolting old and rarely climbed moderates with FA permission, and establishing new moderates would help unload the legacy routes. New routes like Ham and Cheese and Better With Bacon are good examples. The latter being an excellent way to learn some essential, tiny gear placement skills. Most of the Leap is climbed out, but all of it? I have gazed across the superb face between the Labor of Love and Psychedelic Direct on many occasions.  2 routes exist, and I’ve done them both. Run out and forgettable first pitches.  Could a couple of reasonably bolted 35m moderates go in? Could the first pitch of Where Eagles Dare be turned into a nice moderate route?  Could the Ghwoule Memorial Route, 5.9 R, be changed by adding a couple of bolts and a 35m anchor? Why not have the route get regular traffic, and climbers understand who those good men were who are memorialized by it?  It's a great-looking line, but how many ascents does it get while 20’ over East Crack sees hundreds in a year? What about Bastard Child 5.8, Sudden Death 5.8, and other moderate R routes that rarely get done? Would Rick Sumner be approachable about a retro possibility? And yes, I do think Magnum Force/Main Line would be better with a bolted anchor.  

I realize this is treasonous talk to some, but I believe we can hold the traditional values of the Leap and create more opportunities to unclog the half dozen routes that one day may need a reservation system to climb. I don't fear change, and I don’t buy the “slippery slope” argument. The climbers are coming so why not try to get them spread out and learn their craft on something other than a half dozen over-congested routes? Let them play. Let them prepare themselves for leading the harder and scarier stuff. Let them hire guides, spend money at Squirrel's place, drink beer, and talk about how amazing the experience of climbing is as a way to challenge ourselves in nature and grow as humans. Encourage and lead by example. 

I will say that new well bolted moderates (ie the line next to the line w/e it's called) are worthy additions.

However, convenience anchors should NEVER be placed on existing routes as this will accelerate their descent into polished grease piles of shit.

Over 50 years of climbing you notice how all the classics are getting slicker and slicker from feet/hands and increasing the rate of climbers a day is just plain wrong. The routes are getting harder and harder (and it's not just because I am fatter and fatter lol). People do need to learn to place trad anchors.

You'll have to get consensus, but the adding of bolts to obscurities is something I have done to my own routes in the hopes that people will climb them again. Get a member of the FA team onboard if you can.

Aidan,

Thanks for your post. Very well articulated. I'm a pretty active bouldering developer off 50 and want to chime in that all the folks I've met doing the hard work of new routing and trail work have all been friendly, supportive and also altruistic in their approach to the climbing community. 

I would bet most people who climb at the Leap have the attitude you speak of: yeah, with FA permission when possible let's make a few routes safer for more folks to enjoy the Leap and climbing in general. When we can't get that permission, is the community really going to rely on a very vocal and combative minority to dictate how this public land is used. 

It seems to me that the sooner you guys achieve some open communication and compromise the better it will be for everyone.

Edit: for Dr. Boondoggle--is polishing really that bad? I climbed Bears Reach 3 years ago and I assume it's one of the busiest routes at the Leap and didn't notice anything that changed the grade or worried me, but I could be blind to it.

Todd Berlierwrote:

Aidan,

Thanks for your post. Very well articulated. I'm a pretty active bouldering developer off 50 and want to chime in that all the folks I've met doing the hard work of new routing and trail work have all been friendly, supportive and also altruistic in their approach to the climbing community. 

I would bet most people who climb at the Leap have the attitude you speak of: yeah, with FA permission when possible let's make a few routes safer for more folks to enjoy the Leap and climbing in general. When we can't get that permission, is the community really going to rely on a very vocal and combative minority to dictate how this public land is used. 

It seems to me that the sooner you guys achieve some open communication and compromise the better it will be for everyone.

Edit: for Dr. Boondoggle--is polishing really that bad? I climbed Bears Reach 3 years ago and I assume it's one of the busiest routes at the Leap and didn't notice anything that changed the grade or worried me, but I could be blind to it.

You only pick up on the changes, I think, if you know what it was like 50 years ago.

However, in the Valley, people recognize right away that routes like After 6/7, the Nutcracker and Commitment etc are becoming noticeably slick. Royal Arches first pitch chimney is much harder than it used to be.

This includes Snake Dike or Great White Book where the friction is noticeably less over time.

Fact of the matter is that natural erosive forces are not keeping up with climbing shoe traffic on the most popular route and every route has a limited number of ascents before it significantly degrades.

Convenience bolted anchors simply accelerate usage and the degradation of rock quality.

John Tuttlewrote:

You only pick up on the changes, I think, if you know what it was like 50 years ago.

However, in the Valley, people recognize right away that routes like After 6/7, the Nutcracker and Commitment etc are becoming noticeably slick. Royal Arches first pitch chimney is much harder than it used to be.

This includes Snake Dike or Great White Book where the friction is noticeably less over time.

Fact of the matter is that natural erosive forces are not keeping up with climbing shoe traffic on the most popular route and every route has a limited number of ascents before it significantly degrades.

Convenience bolted anchors simply accelerate usage and the degradation of rock quality.

Forgive my devil's advocate position, but if its that's hard to pick up on, is it that worth preventing? I mean what year was Bears Reach FAed?

Also, dedicated rappel stations it seems will likely increase traffic on lesser done routes, therefore decreasing traffic on the more popular, no?

I see the growth of climbing, like any adventure sport, has a ceiling and I have no idea where or when that will occur, but suspect we are close. So, at some point increasing capacity will disperse rather than increase crowds...

Sorry to ruin your climb but it was 90% gravity.

https://youtu.be/bLzDEwhwjlo 

Aidan Maguirewrote:

 Don't we want to get kids and families outdoors?

no?

Todd Berlierwrote:

Forgive my devil's advocate position, but if its that's hard to pick up on, is it that worth preventing? I mean what year was Bears Reach FAed?

Also, dedicated rappel stations it seems will likely increase traffic on lesser done routes, therefore decreasing traffic on the more popular, no?

I see the growth of climbing, like any adventure sport, has a ceiling and I have no idea where or when that will occur, but suspect we are close. So, at some point increasing capacity will disperse rather than increase crowds...

Yes, increase convenience on lesser known obscurities.

No, do not increase convenience on established classics.

You have to recognize the concept of "exponential growth" and very soon, it will not be sustainable on classics to maintain reasonably aesthetic climbing. Next time you are in the Valley check out the glass on the Camp 4 boulders etc etc. They are disgusting. 

I am definitely NOT suggesting adding belay or rap anchors to established multi-pitch classics at the Leap

John Tuttlewrote:

Yes, increase convenience on lesser known obscurities.

No, do not increase convenience on established classics.

You have to recognize the concept of "exponential growth" and very soon, it will not be sustainable on classics to maintain reasonably aesthetic climbing. Next time you are in the Valley check out the glass on the Camp 4 boulders etc etc. They are disgusting. 

I do a trip to Yosemite to boulder once or twice a year and haven't been affected by it. The mild changes to midnight lightning seemed trivial to me versus when I first did it in the early 00s. Even Crumbs seemed untouched after a rain. But yeah, i guess I'm not that discerning.

I get more bummed seeing streaks from haul bags on El Cap.

I've also climbed in Rifle where it felt way worse and obvious.

That's just me, tho, I see your point.

I'm not advocating for anything, just asking questions trying to better understand. as a boulderer, sometimes sport or trad climber, I have not much skin in this one.

" Yes, increase convenience on lesser known obscurities. "

I think this is the best option, or at least the best starting point. Leave the established classics as they are, but add some bolts to a few forgotten obscurities to make them more popular. This should help spread out the traffic and take pressure off the classics. 

Well said Aiden. 

I'm not sure that adding more hardware is really a solution to the problem.  People who get drawn to multipitch trad climbing often talk about the desire for "adventure", yet tend to steer towards following where the most chalk and beta lies.  There are plenty of bold routes at the Leap, but there are tons of well protected obscurities sitting there too.  I think the limited info in the supertopo, peoples reliance on MP, and just a general shift in climbing culture is much more a role in what you're describing.  

I think people would much rather wait in line to do a route that everybody knows, they can talk about at their gym, post photos of, and digest heaps of beta before venturing off.  I'm not sure what the solution would be, but I don't really see a need either.  Yeah there are lines on the classics at the leap on a weekend, walk 20 feet left or right and climb something else.  You said you "love adventure". go get some!

Aiden you communicated your points well, and I don't necessarily disagree with the heart of your stances, but these people are perfectly capable of deciding if they want to wait in line or face some of their fear of the unknown.  I don't think these climbers need saving, they just chose the easier safer path, and that's totally fine too.

@Aiden, essentially you are proposing to add bolts to routes on East Wall which get very little traffic, hopefully with FA permission so they are less likely to be chopped.

You expect this would "unclog the half dozen ... over-congested routes."

I don't think it will really have this effect.  Partly for the reasons @almostrad listed - people have their set goals to climb the best/popular routes.  So I believe the 6 routes with lines, like of course "The Line" will still have people climbing them all day.

What it would do is to give people an option to climb a nearby route, if all their goal routes are occupied.  But would they choose this option?  People might still choose to wait in line for one of the goal routes.  If they do some nearby one pitch route with a rap anchor instead, they would then still have to start at the end of a possibly longer line for a goal route.

I agree with others that having fixed rap anchors  or a rap route at the East Wall would not help with crowding.  Currently when a party is walking off from the top, that consumes time.  If they rappelled instead, this time would be spent waiting in line and making the line longer.

Adding protection bolts to existing rarely done runout East Wall routes might increase traffic on them a little.  It would make them accessible to some people who want to do as many Leap routes as possible, but did not want to do the runouts.  But I doubt traffic on these altered routes would change much.  People who want to do more Leap routes already have a large number of choices, with some of them already partly bolted.  And there is a high similarity of face climbing / dike hiking routes at the East Wall, so the appeal of doing more routes there is somewhat limited.  People who want to do full sport routes would still go to other areas like Donner Summit.

A better solution to over-congested routes is good information on all the different really good routes, at different areas.  Or even at crags within the same area like Lover's Leap.  Mountainproject does a very good job at this, so this solution is already in place.  I don't think much more can be done to reduce lines at really great climbs like Corrugation Corner or The Line.  Many people will still want to do those.  Usually they will have to do them midweek, or very early or late in the day on a weekend, if they don't want to wait in a line.

Yes it is a shame that the discourse is so poor. In the other thread I was called corrupt, a hypocrite, and someone wished me dead.  And why? Because I like the inconvenience of trad climbing.  Why does the Leap need to be like every other crag? There are so many accessible moderates. 

Much is made of the fact that a lot of people do the same routes. I've been climbing at the Leap for 25 years, and it has always been like that, and the crowds today do not seem worse than they did in 2002.  People climb those routes because they want to climb safe, clean, five star routes, that their friends have all done.  If you don't want to wait in line, rather than change the experience, why not change yourself: seek out the routes with no line. The routes with no stars. The routes no one you know has done.  That's what I did, it changed me as a climber and it was hugely rewarding.  I get that it's not for everyone and that's cool, but that doesnt' mean those routes need to be altered. Leave some fun funk for the rest of us. Raise yourself to the challenge. or top rope it. Or follow another climber who can lead what you want to climb.  Or go climbing on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, the place is dead. 

I'd propose an alternative to adding bolts to existing routes: There are moderate routes at the Leap with no bolts that are very dirty.  Go give Hornblower or Paramour a scrub.  I've thought about it. Hornblower not R, middle of the East wall, 5.8.  I cleaned out the Left Wallbanger a couple seasons ago and it is great! voila. No bolts needed, awesome 5.8 climbing.  And yet no one does it because its not a 5 star guidebook route their friends have heard of.

Finally - the slippery slope.  It is very real. You've got a well intentioned proposal. And these things bring the more bolts crowd out.  Last thread, Brandon proposed a couple convenience anchors. And everyone else jumped it with other bolts they want to see - Mike wanted a lead bolt on a route he's redpointed, Max wanted all bolted anchors on the East wall so parties could climb it faster and more conviently, another guy who thinks retrobolting snake dike is dumb wanted rap anchors on the east wall because the 10 minute walk off is inconvenient, last year someone wanted to add a rap route to the main wall so they wouldn't have to walk off travelers, etc.  So everyone has lots of ideas on what needs to get bolted. My take is that none of that improves climbing at the Leap, rather it takes away from the things I like most about the Leap.  The East Wall is truly an amazing piece of rock, that there is so much amazing climbing with so few bolts.  

All you have to do is look around to see that the future of climbing is retrobolting. The majority want more bolts. Echo, Pie shop, etc.  Most places have a bolted top convenience anchor even if you really dont' need it.  Hell Silver Eagle got a convenience bridge installed because Bobby took a tumble? That thing is gross.  If you guys really want more moderates for the masses, that's cool, put Silver Eagle on mountain project.  I have no doubt it would be hugely popular immediately, because that is the kind of stuff people like.  Easy routes, close to the road, lots of bolts. 

So, no. No bolts to existing Leap routes please. 

My personal thoughts on the variety of topics ...

1. Don't add bolts to runout routes. All the moderate runout climbing at the Leap is incredible fun and very unique (not from each other, but from granite trad climbing generally). With a bit of practice, just about anyone who wants to can get cozy on 5.8 Leap dike hikes to the point that the danger is minimal. It's a remarkably secure climbing style.
2. I like anchors on single pitch routes, even if I know how to build anchors. I built an anchor to TR Black Opal, Voodoo, Black Magic etc like two weeks ago. I don't care enough to campaign for 'em, but walking off a 70' foot pitch doesn't add anything to the climbing experience. 
3. The key to getting people to climb non-trade routes is detailed, accurate information, nice pictures, and multiple ratings. People are scared of routes with three votes and two ticks over the last 20 years. I upload pictures and add comments all the time for this reason. Which brings me to my final, somewhat contradictory point ...
4. It's GOOD that most people only climb The Line/Bear's/Haystack etc. Waiting in line is dumb. I would 100% rather climb a single star mungefest than sit at the base of any classic with my thumb in my ass. The vast majority will never break away from those pitches regardless of any actions taken, and that's great! I see posting beta as a little encouragement, a little shove to not be part of the 95% and get out there for some adventure ... a little encouragement the vast majority will disregard.

I appreciate your belief that climbing culture is stronger than we sometimes give it credit for...that we can welcome new climbers, adapt where it makes sense, and still hold on to the things that make climbing special. It's something I struggle with, and I appreciate that you approach it from optimism rather than fear.

I agree there is room for thoughtful, limited changes that improve safety and encourage climbers to spread out beyond the handful of crowded classics at the Leap. I still worry about over bolting and losing some of the adventure and character that draws many of us to places like the Leap and to trad climbing in the first place.

God's Gift to Tradwrote:

Yes it is a shame that the discourse is so poor. In the other thread I was called corrupt, a hypocrite, and someone wished me dead.  And why? Because I like the inconvenience of trad climbing.  Why does the Leap need to be like every other crag? There are so many accessible moderates. 

Much is made of the fact that a lot of people do the same routes. I've been climbing at the Leap for 25 years, and it has always been like that, and the crowds today do not seem worse than they did in 2002.  People climb those routes because they want to climb safe, clean, five star routes, that their friends have all done.  If you don't want to wait in line, rather than change the experience, why not change yourself: seek out the routes with no line. The routes with no stars. The routes no one you know has done.  That's what I did, it changed me as a climber and it was hugely rewarding.  I get that it's not for everyone and that's cool, but that doesnt' mean those routes need to be altered. Leave some fun funk for the rest of us. Raise yourself to the challenge. or top rope it. Or follow another climber who can lead what you want to climb.  Or go climbing on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, the place is dead. 

I'd propose an alternative to adding bolts to existing routes: There are moderate routes at the Leap with no bolts that are very dirty.  Go give Hornblower or Paramour a scrub.  I've thought about it. Hornblower not R, middle of the East wall, 5.8.  I cleaned out the Left Wallbanger a couple seasons ago and it is great! voila. No bolts needed, awesome 5.8 climbing.  And yet no one does it because its not a 5 star guidebook route their friends have heard of.

Finally - the slippery slope.  It is very real. You've got a well intentioned proposal. And these things bring the more bolts crowd out.  Last thread, Brandon proposed a couple convenience anchors. And everyone else jumped it with other bolts they want to see - Mike wanted a lead bolt on a route he's redpointed, 

*With permission from the FA, thank you very much. My questions and qualms were around an unreachable FA and "route rights" and who gets bequeathed with it in the circumstance, to be able to have that discussion. Context is cool.

Max wanted all bolted anchors on the East wall so parties could climb it faster and more conviently, another guy who thinks retrobolting snake dike is dumb wanted rap anchors on the east wall because the 10 minute walk off is inconvenient, last year someone wanted to add a rap route to the main wall so they wouldn't have to walk off travelers, etc.  So everyone has lots of ideas on what needs to get bolted. My take is that none of that improves climbing at the Leap, rather it takes away from the things I like most about the Leap.  The East Wall is truly an amazing piece of rock, that there is so much amazing climbing with so few bolts.  

All you have to do is look around to see that the future of climbing is retrobolting. The majority want more bolts. Echo, Pie shop, etc.  Most places have a bolted top convenience anchor even if you really dont' need it.  Hell Silver Eagle got a convenience bridge installed because Bobby took a tumble? That thing is gross.

Its not there, it was removed ages ago. And is not where he tumbled, it was MUCH worse. Why would you have not reached out and talked with him, or me?

Edit: Your attitude towards a major accident is gross, Dave. Tumble? He fell over 100' and got heli'd out.....Also showing how rumors start, considering you are parroting false information that you believe to be true. You still have dodged most of my direct questions over multiple threads on this topic and have resulted in lots of whataboutism from you.

  If you guys really want more moderates for the masses, that's cool, put Silver Eagle on mountain project.  I have no doubt it would be hugely popular immediately, because that is the kind of stuff people like.  Easy routes, close to the road, lots of bolts. 

www.superta.co it has gotten quite popular. Spread your wings little bird!
Lots of new goodness in some sick zones that even the hardened strawbillies would enjoy. Holler at a neighbor, come climb some dope rock. I don't bite.

So, no. No bolts to existing Leap routes please. 

(*)see above

I can just see this talktalk evolving into some little committee that judges what's to be bolted and what isn't.  I wonder who is going to be on it and what their parameters are going to be. Am I being weird that I see some people realize their desire to be little kings and queens?  I don't know...it just crossed my mind at four in the morning which is always a scary weird time.  

Another concern is what is the USFS going to think about all this bolting?  After the storm out here in TenSleep over bolting, and the tendency of government to want to control things, say someone bolts an anchor in or puts bolts in a runout climb and somebody else doesn't like it and chops it and everybody starts screaming at each other and the USFS finds out...the same thing that happened in TenSleep will transpire and the good ol' USFS could close down all climbing at the Leap till it gets sorted out. 

Admittedly I don't want to see this level of bolting activity at the Leap. Period. And, after watching the mess that transpired in TenSleep, I would urge not opening that can of worms.  

Hi Bob 

I thought the retrobolting, cleaning and re opening back up of the entire Gutenberg Wall at Cosumnes with your permission went well. I had long looked over at that wall and never climbed it. Dirty, run out on manky old bolts. Turns out to be a Great Wall and in one of the most beautiful setting around and now gets somewhat regular use.

I think what you were part of at Cosumnes is somewhat of a model for how climbers can collaborate successfully without authorities getting in the mix.  

Aidan

I agree with you that the rebolting thing can go well.  But the Cosumnes thing was a small venue with a very limited number of people, I think just you, me and
Bobby Hutton.  And it worked out very well, being needed to be done and making it a lot more doable and safer.  I mean, three 1/4" bolts going on 30 years old in a the 50m pitch of Grandpappy was damned spooky. 

When it comes to the Leap though, there are so many more people involved and so many routes.  Just seeing all the posts and divergent opinions on what needs to be done it looks like the potential for a lot of conflict is high. I don't see it as a simple solution like Cosumnes where all three of us were of the same mind.  

Anyway, I have fond feelings for the Leap...spend many fine days there and I hate to see things devolved into a bad show like it did in TenSleep.