What would you do? All opinions are welcome

Russell Bangert wrote:

https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2007-084

That's not true.

what part are you struggling with?

a: bolting is not legal in wilderness? you just posted a link saying it is...unless you get a permit
b: that the route is not in federal designated wilderness?....not all of calico (or the canyons for that matter) are wilderness ;)

Not sure about Calico Hills, [it may be "off the reservation"; i.e. BLM control]  but I'm pretty sure that in the rest of RR adding new bolts (eg an anchor) and/or adding a new route with bolts is subject to review by a "climber's review" team who then makes a recommendation to the BLM/RR Superintendent for approval.

Robert Hall wrote: Not sure about Calico Hills, [it may be "off the reservation"; i.e. BLM control]  but I'm pretty sure that in the rest of RR adding new bolts (eg an anchor) and/or adding a new route with bolts is subject to review by a "climber's review" team who then makes a recommendation to the BLM/RR Superintendent for approval.

Totally wrong.

John Hegyes  - If I'm wrong, I'm wrong; but that was pretty much what I was told by some Vegas locals who should know.  Maybe I got some aspect wrong, or maybe the whole thing has changed (it was a couple of yrs ago, maybe 2 or possibly 3).

What's the correct "scoop" ?

Robert Hall wrote: John Hegyes  - If I'm wrong, I'm wrong; but that was pretty much what I was told by some Vegas locals who should know.  Maybe I got some aspect wrong, or maybe the whole thing has changed (it was a couple of yrs ago, maybe 2 or possibly 3).

What's the correct "scoop" ?

The Calico Hills are mostly NOT wilderness areas. This area being discussed here, Riding Hood Wall, is definitely not wilderness.

In Red Rock National Conservation Area, on NON-wilderness land, it is still the wild west - for better or for worse. It is legal to bolt at will. There is no BLM or local climbing organization approval process. 

I'm not saying it's "right" but that is the truth.

John Hegyes wrote:

The Calico Hills are mostly NOT wilderness areas. This area being discussed here, Riding Hood Wall, is definitely not wilderness.

In Red Rock National Conservation Area, on NON-wilderness land, it is still the wild west - for better or for worse. It is legal to bolt at will. There is no BLM or local climbing organization approval process. 

I'm not saying it's "right" but that is the truth.

The thing is, a lot of the routes/crags are indeed within wilderness boundaries. The major exception being the Calico Hills, which includes the crags at the first and second pull-outs and Sandstone Quarry.

Nevada Wilderness Areas:
https://umontana.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=a415bca07f0a4bee9f0e894b0db5c3b6&extent=-12879107.6637,4316753.2039,-12843197.9487,4342279.1004,102113

Zoom as necessary.

Big B wrote:

what part are you struggling with?

a: bolting is not legal in wilderness? you just posted a link saying it is...unless you get a permit
b: that the route is not in federal designated wilderness?....not all of calico (or the canyons for that matter) are wilderness ;)

I'd say you're struggling with using language properly. By your poor logic, things like driving are illegal. That's not how language works. Here's a full list of things that require a permit or license to do legally, would you also describe them all as not legal?

https://lists.wordreference.com/show/things-you-need-a-license-to-do.529/

Marc801 C wrote:

The thing is, a lot of the routes/crags are indeed within wilderness boundaries.

This is a discussion of the merits of a newly bolted route. This IS a legal route, there is zero question about that. People are legally allowed to bolt as much as they want on this crag. In fact, there are many legal, bolted crags situated between Riding Hood Wall and the nearest wilderness. No permit necessary. 

Any discussion regarding wilderness rules is irrelevant to this thread. 

I'd make Kentucky Pete squeal like a pig and see how he liked it after his cousin did that to Burt Reynold's friend.

Then go hit the buffet at Circus Circus.

What's not to like???

:P

Tempest in a Teapot.

John Hegyes wrote:

This is a discussion of the merits of a newly bolted route.

Yes, I know.

 This IS a legal route, there is zero question about that. People are legally allowed to bolt as much as they want on this crag. In fact, there are many legal, bolted crags situated between Riding Hood Wall and the nearest wilderness. No permit necessary. 

In case you missed it, I'm agreeing with you. My point was to address those that said there is no bolting allowed anywhere in RRNCA without getting prior approval. It's indeed legal outside of wilderness areas. However many of the canyon areas are within wilderness boundaries, hence the belief that no bolting is allowed.

Any discussion regarding wilderness rules is irrelevant to this thread. 

Not really.

Gotta love it, dudes from NH and UT debating with locals who may know a thing or two about the "rules" relative to route development and may have even been involved with the LCO of the Access Fund at one point.

Classic.

Stay knowledgeable, Mountain Project.

This thread should have been posted to the Nevada section, not General Climbing, as this is a local issue. The title does say "All opinions welcome", which on MP is pretty risky, but people should at least try to remain on topic.

Talking about wilderness area rules in relation to this route is as useful as what ice tools are recommended for climbing this route or what color the sky is - not helpful.

John Hegyes wrote: This thread should have been posted to the Nevada section, not General Climbing, as this is a local issue. The title does say "All opinions welcome", which on MP is pretty risky, but people should at least try to remain on topic.

Talking about wilderness area rules in relation to this route is as useful as what ice tools are recommended for climbing this route or what color the sky is - not helpful.

Pretty sure RR and areas are the province of any climber in the country. This idea that other opinions are not welcome is Localism Bullshit.

People can make any rules about bolting they want on land they own. We the people own RR and the surrounding BLM land so our opinions matter as much as anyone.

Do not confuse this with support or not for the route in question.

i ToPrOPed THaT LinE FIrSt So I sAY yOu CAn'T BOlt iT

My opinion, for a popular area like the Calico Basin, if you want to keep a particular section of wall on hold, you better add a set of anchors yourself, and then just never bolt It. Now, if someone is nice enough to ask if they can use your anchors to take over and finish the line, then you'll have to face the demand and either say no, finish it yourself, or let it go. Also, TRing, aka Scouting a route, is not staking a claim for a devoper to hold onto, unless they plan on bolting it in the near future, which you should have added an anchor if that was your plan. 

As fun as BBW is, I'd say if a new line doesn't get in the way, the more the better over there. It's a smallish bit of effort to scramble up to the base, so more stuff would be nice to thin out the waiting line on busy days.

Plenty of bolted sport lines in RR.  certainly no grounds there for saying  that the climb is not in the local style so the only thing left is if it is a squeeze job.  If you climb the previous routes and the bolts from the new route do not draw you off route or seem to be closer to  you than the next protection on the climb that you are on then it is not a squeeze job. 

I put up a new route at Table Rock, N.C. It was a steep slab, and we bolted it on lead. The guy I did it with was a local, so I thought it would be O.K. I can't remember for sure, but it might have been his idea. Wrong! (Wrong about it being O.K., that is.) Even though people were standing in line to do it for several months, some locals decided to chop it. Eventually, somebody went back and put them back in. Don't know who. I don't know the status now. I lost interest 2 decades ago. These things seem to fade away after awhile.

K Swissto wrote: My partner and I encountered KP and his bolter in between BBW and PG on Saturday. (First time encountering the group). Visiting from out of town, so I'm not going to comment on the area's bolting ethic re: whether the routes are valid or not. But is it cool to bolt in between two classics on a sunny Saturday morning?

Once we realized there wasn't any intent to protect climbers nearby, we just left and climbed elsewhere because we didn't really feel like having any rock or debris fall down on us. Wasn't worth it to us.

Entitled Tourist is Entitled?

The work gets done at the developer/rebolter's convenience, not yours, particularly during such a wet winter when windows for climbing dry rock were short. Unlikely they were dropping anything significant.

Maybe slip him some cash for his out of pocket expenses.

The bolting job was kind of crappy. The bolt locations were about 6" out of reach from a good stance for me, which is pretty lame for a rap bolted route.

All I want is when did Dan Young become the overlord of all things Calico?  It wasn't that long ago that he was getting in trouble with the BLM for illegally guiding the Meetup groups in Red Rock. The Meetup gumbies bought him a SPI to get around it and now he's a  certified "guide".  I'd rather someone with a little historical relevance in the climbing community have say as to what's acceptable as opposed to the guy the put up the most popular 5.8 in the park.