.

This thread is really odd. Why is there any discussion when the situation is so cut and dry? Do not add bolts to existing routes. That is it. If you want to drill new bolts in S. AZ, find a piece a rock and drill up a new route any way you like. The rock resource is common property BUT it should afford opportunities for many different types of climbers and allow for climbs with varying commitment levels. Do not be short sighted. Allow for my old buddy Dave Des Champs to do his thing and other first ascentionists to do theirs. The reason why this is important is because climbers like Dave D are becoming more and more rare. Just because the resource is common property does not mean that the majority has the right to overpower minority stakeholders and ruin their opportunity to experience the resource in their own style.

I am disappointed to see Mike D's comments on adding bolts. This may be his personal rationalization for adding bolts to the one good climb on the Sweet Wall. This has done a disservice to the climbing community by imposing a specific idea of climbing on an established climb on the cliff. There is sooo much undeveloped rock in Southern Arizona and there are already so many climbs that are safe, scary, hard, easy, trad, sport, etc... Why are these conflicts even happening? Jbaker has been around longer than the hills and has come to terms with the new trend of retro-bolting and other shenanigans (although senility may be setting in). It doesn't have to be that way if this type of BS is shut down (especially at the stronghold). I think that is why Dave D is calling attention to this situation. Unfortunately, although Machiavellian, if it takes calling people out on the internet, so be it.

Dave D, good to see you are still kicking. Let's get out for a beer to catch up!

eMurdock wrote:I am disappointed to see Mike D's comments on adding bolts. This may be his personal rationalization for adding bolts to the one good climb on the Sweet Wall. This has done a disservice to the climbing community by imposing a specific idea of climbing on an established climb on the cliff. There is sooo much undeveloped rock in Southern Arizona and there are already so many climbs that are safe, scary, hard, easy, trad, sport, etc... Why are these conflicts even happening? Jbaker has been around longer than the hills and has come to terms with the new trend of retro-bolting and other shenanigans (although senility may be setting in). It doesn't have to be that way if this type of BS is shut down (especially at the stronghold). I think that is why Dave D is calling attention to this situation. Unfortunately, although Machiavellian, if it takes calling people out on the internet, so be it. Dave D, good to see you are still kicking. Let's get out for a beer to catch up!

I have never said adding bolts was ok. I can also admit that I did add bolts to a route on Sweet Rock. We also named the route and layed claim to it. There were 2 bolts on the rock and no finish as far as we could tell. I went round and round about adding bolts to it. My rationalization? I could say the route wasn't finished or finished at the top of the crack. It just looked like someone didn't care. they slammed a coupled bolts in so they could climb it ONE time then never came back. It sat there for 6 years untouched. No one came forward and claimed it even after we established the other routes on the rock (we were hoping someone would). We established the rock as an easy to get to road side crag and it was the one death route (route were the distance between your last piece and you exceeds the distance between your last piece and the ground). I'm not afraid of a BIG fall, I just don't want to hit the ground. When I placed the bolt I did it in such a way as to not interfere with the crux move onto the face. By the time you can clip the bolt it isn't really needed but will keep you from hitting the ground if for some reason you slip or a snake jumps out at you. The move onto the face is still only protected by a questionable nut below your feet and a cam further down. If you come off be ready for a BIG fall. Bad idea? Probably. But I don't want to be blamed for some guy going up there and killing themselves. That is my take as a route setter. If I'm going to lay claim to a route I want the death part of it removed (see definition above). If someone wants to come forward and lay claim to the route and asks me to remove the bolt I will without an argument.

I'm a little confused by the previous two comments as it seems to be a reasonable assumption that the unknown first ascentionist of Cracker Jack probably just continued to follow the crack as it curves to the left. The crack doesn't end. That would make Mike's bolts a (presumably) uncontroversial variation finish, albeit one which almost everyone probably does now.

Charles Vernon wrote:I'm a little confused by the previous two comments as it seems to be a reasonable assumption that the unknown first ascentionist of Cracker Jack probably just continued to follow the crack as it curves to the left. The crack doesn't end. That would make Mike's bolts a (presumably) uncontroversial variation finish, albeit one which almost everyone probably does now.

I've always assumed that but have never known for sure. Following the crack left and up would be the logical way a trad climber probably would have gone. The other reason I think that is the way the lower part is bolted. It is very well protected with bolts protecting super short "runouts" (and one could question if it couldn't be protected with gear). If the SAME person had gone strait up they would have placed bolts protecting the face moves up. But like I say no one has come forward to correct me so ...

Thou shall follow Commandment 11!

it was sure fun to catch up on this thread after camping all week.

a couple of thoughts, in no particular order:

1) mark- i'll bet marcy would be happy to provide you with a "geir on drugs" t shirt. marcy, like many people who know me well, love to give me a hard time. feel free to join the club. :)

2) mike- it always seemed to me that your addition of the bolt to cracker jack was well thought out. from what i know you made an effort to try to locate/contact the FA, and stated that if the FA came forward and asked you to remove the bolt, you'd do it. also you've been very up-front about it from the start. it doesn't sound like something anyone would find fault in.

3) dan- it looks to me like everything you "know" about efr came from scott. i suggest you get to know him and make a sound judgment of who he is. it's curious that your new account was created concurrently with this thread; it appears to me that someone talked you into posting up. to be frank, i initially had doubts that scott placed that bolt until i started reading your posts. i am curious as to why you (or any of scott's friends) didn't simply post something to the effect of "hey, i talked with scott, he had nothing to do with this." instead you chose to attack characters ... seems a bit fishy to me. BTW i'm working on my new flip flop avatar, i designed it in my head while climbing this week at Tahquitz!

4) erik - i think you hit the nail on the head. why all this talk? don't add bolts to other people's routes without asking them. from what i know that's been a basic rule around here for decades.

5) efr- "5 of the last 9 days, we multitask well" - hilarious!!!

climb safe, all-
geir

This has to be the third "hey someone added a bolt to my line" forum I have seen on Mountainproject.com Questions I remember being good are: Can the line be well protected without the bolt (or any bolts for that matter)? Where might this cereal bolter strike next? How do you educate and tame the wild west? If a climb is an X without a new bolt should we spare opening it up to safe climbing so one may re-climb it mint? Is the bolter a liberator or a fascist? When hangers get old, rusty, and dance around the bolt like a saigon stripper is it the responsibility of the original bolt gunner to replace those bolts? Is the crag then littered and vandalized with salted cod?

Organizing and creating standards for bolting may solve many of these problems. Bolting is banned in many areas that could have stellar new hard lines while the park administrations see bolting in general as "physical graffiti." If you are organized, you may have a better chance of expanding opportunities, and perhaps preventing "premature boltilation."

I haven't read any of what's going on in this thread (except the title), but the cat pics are cool!

Whine

whining

That 1/2 drowned cat picture just above irritates me- unfinished business. It reminds me of all the projects I've ever started in my life and never completed.

steve grossman interview on bolting in southern AZ

Well, I just spent too much time reading all the posts on this thread...but, I do have to say this;

1) EFR: your first post was, I though, very clever-I laughed until I cried!!!

2) Geir, you soft-brained flip-flopper you....! Geir on drugs... now, we need to make T-shirts because your send this week at Tahquitz was certainly G.O.D. (GOD?).

gosh, six pages of personality wars... daved: sorry that someone did this to your line. It's easy folks, as already mentioned, don't place bolts on routes that you didn't equip unless the FA agrees... what is so difficult about that?

As always---my concern with these types of threads is access.

I wonder, however, if we might make something good out of an otherwise dark thread.

The leading exponents of several styles of climbing have posted. To name a few:
Eric--who needs no introduction;
JBAK--very steep sport climbing;
Geir---guide, 1st ascents;
Murdock---PhD studying climbing patterns in JT;
Ricky D---trad master;
Jeff M---trad master;
Dave D---trad master, keeping Bachar's spirit alive.

Among these guys we have a couple of hundred years of climbing experience and a lot of climbing wisdom.

How about a new thread---SOUTHERN ARIZONA CLIMBING EDIQUTETTE?
I know "etiquette" sounds like what your mother told you about table manners, but it is probably as good as we can do.

It seems like it has been at least two decades since we sorted this thing out the last time. The Internet did not even exist.

I hope these guys will contribute. We need their insights and experience. We need their diverse points of view---especially Dave, Ricky, and Jeff. [Steve G. and John S.---if you guys are out there, then I would really, appreciate your insights.]

We also need the next generation to contribute. You guys are the ones who will be most impacted by our behaviors.

Can sketch out an Internet consensus about:

1.) What we stand for;

2.) What we would like to see; and,

3.) What we can live with?

I fear that if we do not---then the land managers will.

How about I start a thread, for example, SACE, Part I---Adding fixed anchors to established climbs. Each week I add a new installment: SACE, Part II---The Tucson Tradition, SACE, Part III---Minority stakeholders and etc?

I really like history and so maybe we can get some of these guys to include stories, so they will not be lost.

Scott

Scott M. McNamara wrote:As always---my concern with these types of threads is access. I wonder, however, if we might make something good out of an otherwise dark thread. The leading exponents of several styles of climbing have posted. To name a few: Eric--who needs no introduction; JBAK--very steep sport climbing; Geir---guide, 1st ascents; Murdock---PhD studying climbing patterns in JT; Ricky D---trad master; Jeff M---trad master; Dave D---trad master, keeping Bachar's spirit alive. Among these guys we have a couple of hundred years of climbing experience and a lot of climbing wisdom. How about a new thread---SOUTHERN ARIZONA CLIMBING EDIQUTETTE? I know "etiquette" sounds like what your mother told you about table manners, but it is probably as good as we can do. It seems like it has been at least two decades since we sorted this thing out the last time. The Internet did not even exist. I hope these guys will contribute. We need their insights and experience. We need their diverse points of view---especially Dave, Ricky, and Jeff. [Steve G. and John S.---if you guys are out there, then I would really, appreciate your insights.] We also need the next generation to contribute. You guys are the ones who will be most impacted by our behaviors. Can sketch out an Internet consensus about: 1.) What we stand for; 2.) What we would like to see; and, 3.) What we can live with? I fear that if we do not---then the land managers will. How about I start a thread, for example, SACE, Part I---Adding fixed anchors to established climbs. Each week I add a new installment: SACE, Part II---The Tucson Tradition, SACE, Part III---Minority stakeholders and etc? I really like history and so maybe we can get some of these guys to include stories, so they will not be lost. Scott

Scott M, I think this is a terrific idea. Start the thread (if you haven't already). I think it would be a good additional plus if you moderate the thread, too.

Regards,
Geir

David Arthur Sampson wrote:2) Geir, you soft-brained flip-flopper you....! Geir on drugs... now, we need to make T-shirts because your send this week at Tahquitz was certainly G.O.D. (GOD?).

hahahaha!!! geir on drugs t shirts ... we should print those for sure. but let's not equate me with God! "Geir on drugs" will be perfect. Mark Nelson requested such a T shirt and I think it would be good to send him one for the idea.

BTW folks, the best cat picture ever taken was taken by Mark, I hope it's still in his profile. See if you can find it, it is hilarious.

regards,
geir

David Arthur Sampson wrote: Geir, you soft-brained flip-flopper you....! Geir on drugs... now, we need to make T-shirts because your send this week at Tahquitz was certainly G.O.D. (GOD?).

geir is quite the badass on the rock. for those of you who are still having trouble understanding what we're talking about, allow me to present this venn diagram:



hope that helps.

hahahahahaha!!!! jon you kill me man. that's great!!! thanks.

Jon Ruland wrote: geir is quite the badass on the rock. for those of you who are still having trouble understanding what we're talking about, allow me to present this venn diagram: hope that helps.

Awesome.

Scott M. McNamara wrote: Can sketch out an Internet consensus about: 1.) What we stand for; 2.) What we would like to see; and, 3.) What we can live with? I fear that if we do not---then the land managers will.

If people would quit griping about things on the internet and making a public spectacle about their discontent and petty squabbles land managers wouldn't have a clue and there would be far fewer issues with access, etc.