Manufactured routes at Ten Sleep being called out

Its now going on in the Owens River gorge/Malibu State Park and many other areas.

The word "ethics" gets thrown around too much with these discussions, when really it's about "style".

bruno-cx wrote:

Fix it for you...   Albertson Brother's book, the Cock Climber's Training Manual and Guide to Gluing and chipping at Ten Sleep.  Sponsored by Trango and the Brothers and the rest of the front range.

Anderson brothers have nothing to do with this.

I'm not here to take sides, but i do would like to attempt to clear up the arguments that this is a part of sport climbing/limestone/dolomite/etc.

having climbed here, i can attest that the routes in question are literally completely manufactured. as in there were a few holds on some these climbs that were a rock from the ground glued onto the wall like a hold at a gym. i've never seen something like that. there are definitely routes by some of the earlier developers that have a drilled pocket here and there. and I'm not saying that is ok. But these routes being talked about here is is not even close to that. it is setting a route like you are in a gym. a whole wall full of sika and drilled pockets that fit your fingers like a glove.

anyone can take from this what they want and im not really here to join the argument, and i am fully understanding of how this is a ongoing debate in the climbing community with very blurry lines. but i believe if most people saw the differentiation of development tactics here, it would be better understood.

Tim Lutz wrote:

this.  ethics is a moral issue.  The ethics of public shaming is much more of a moral issue than modifying the rock.  The rock doesn't have feelings, people do.

especially in an area is known for comfortizing, the OP calls out others publicaly for comfortizing too much?

There is a very thin line (if one at all) between comfortzing and chipping.  

I'm not convinced by the linked signed treatise written over beers in the hinterlands of Wyoming gives a solid definition of the line.

You clearly havent read very far into it as I sure your tune would be different if you had

Darren Mabe wrote: The word "ethics" gets thrown around too much with these discussions, when really it's about "style".

Isn't this very directly a question of ethics?  

I've always considered style being a question of how one does a climb (ground up/headpointed all that jazz) that then reflects on the individual's climbing accomplishment but otherwise does not impact anyone else, while ethics relates more to concrete impacts (bolting, the cleaning process, and yes manufacturing routes) where there is a direct effect on the rock and land and ability of other climbers to do their thing.  

A land manager has no concern about style in climbing, but definitely has concern about ethics in climbing.  I'd say extensive drilling of pockets and Sika-gluing holds onto a blank face is firmly into the territory of ethics and affecting the rock for others (and potentially endangering access)

In general, the routes that i have climbed in the canyon (prophecy wall) that were 100% manufactured were put up on pieces of rock that did not have holds. These walls would never go free. Too short, chossy, inconsistent, etc... These are not, in my experience, king lines of the future that have been lowered to a more accessible level. So for the argument of "let the next generation have it" or "dont lower it to your level" consider the fact that there is now climbing on a wall that would never have been touched otherwise. Crowd dispersal? Outdoor gym? Defacing a rock?
I do not agree with, or support this style, but hey - I climbed some of the routes and they are fun. Just wanted to share my experience.

Daniel James wrote:

Isn't this very directly a question of ethics?  

I've always considered style being a question of how one does a climb (ground up/headpointed all that jazz) that then reflects on the individual's climbing accomplishment but otherwise does not impact anyone else, while ethics relates more to concrete impacts (bolting, the cleaning process, and yes manufacturing routes) where there is a direct effect on the rock and land and ability of other climbers to do their thing.  

A land manager has no concern about style in climbing, but definitely has concern about ethics in climbing.  I'd say extensive drilling of pockets and Sika-gluing holds onto a blank face is firmly into the territory of ethics and affecting the rock for others (and potentially endangering access)

I can agree it's extremely poor style, but I won't judge it as being immoral

Darren Mabe wrote:

I can agree it's extremely poor style, but I won't judge it as being immoral

I'd say ethics is pretty well established in climbing as a term relating aspects of 'Leave No Trace' and minimizing impacts on natural spaces, and while one can get into a real high level discussion on the meaning of morality, I'm pretty content with that sort of terminology.  Discussions of ethics are varied, and I in no way claim any authority, but it seems to be a common theme when looking through various musings on the matter (such as 1& 2).

Jaren Watson wrote:

If this is the case, it’s fucked up. This isn’t 1985. Who are these people? That’s not a rhetorical question. Seriously, who’s doing this?

Edit to add: Ok, I read up on the issue via the fb link. I started off angry. Now I’m just sad.

Maybe the 90s are back, you know, retro style and what not 

https://www.climbing.com/places/leslie-gulchs-controversial-route-building-laboratory/

Ellis L wrote: In general, the routes that i have climbed in the canyon (prophecy wall) that were 100% manufactured were put up on pieces of rock that did not have holds. These walls would never go free. Too short, chossy, inconsistent, etc... These are not, in my experience, king lines of the future that have been lowered to a more accessible level. So for the argument of "let the next generation have it" or "dont lower it to your level" consider the fact that there is now climbing on a wall that would never have been touched otherwise. Crowd dispersal? Outdoor gym? Defacing a rock?
I do not agree with, or support this style, but hey - I climbed some of the routes and they are fun. Just wanted to share my experience.

Have you seen a 5.14+/5.15 up close? Not a Flatanger cave one, a steep limestone one? It doesn't take much in terms of holds to be climbable. I've seen crushers use features I wouldn't even want to smear on as hand holds. Whether or not you believe in the next generation story, keep in mind that what you call a blank holdless wall is, like, your opinion man...

Boissal . wrote:

Have you seen a 5.14+/5.15 up close? Not a Flatanger cave one, a steep limestone one? It doesn't take much in terms of holds to be climbable. I've seen crushers use features I wouldn't even want to smear on as hand holds. Whether or not you believe in the next generation story, keep in mind that what you call a blank holdless wall is, like, your opinion man...

Hey, good point! In a way I lowered the rock to my level just calling it blank! Gonna go shove my fingers in a nice comfy hole now.

Tim Lutz wrote:

You're sure huh?  Climbed at Rifle?  Then you have climbed on glue and chipped holds.  

Enjoy the sausage.

I haven't and likely never will. It seems like a shitshow nightmare and is the antithesis of what Im after. Im not naive about what goes into development but this is entirely different.  But hey....thanks for being honest about not minding such blatant and heavy handed modification.

Darren Mabe wrote: The word "ethics" gets thrown around too much with these discussions, when really it's about "style".

Man you are way off when you start doing shit that effects the resources or the community ( as in stealing from the future) you are dealing with an ethics question

Boissal . wrote:

Have you seen a 5.14+/5.15 up close? Not a Flatanger cave one, a steep limestone one? It doesn't take much in terms of holds to be climbable. I've seen crushers use features I wouldn't even want to smear on as hand holds. Whether or not you believe in the next generation story, keep in mind that what you call a blank holdless wall is, like, your opinion man...

Think dry wall type of sections. Slavery has some of the oldest routes at Ten Sleep, some of which are pretty hard, but nobody has touched this section in over a decade. Now, a half a dozen moderates popped up in less than a year. The routes, though fun, are a bit of an abomination, but even 5.15 climbers need holds. 

the schmuck wrote:

Think dry wall type of sections. Slavery has some of the oldest routes at Ten Sleep, some of which are pretty hard, but nobody has touched this section in over a decade. Now, a half a dozen moderates popped up in less than a year. The routes, though fun, are a bit of an abomination, but even 5.15 climbers need holds. 

I haven't been to 10sleep in a long time and have no recollection of that particular wall. I remember looking at some of the 14s in the Secteur D'or et Bleu and thinking there was no way people could take it a full number grade harder considering there are basically no holds on these walls... But then you see Ondra and Megos on Canadian limestone and you start wondering if you should reconsider your definition of a hold. Obviously they aren't going to span through a 10' piece of featureless dry wall though. Yet... 

Guess we'll never know at this point unless the bolts get pulled, the pockets get filled with glue, and the collective memory fades. I guess some people can't tolerate a blank section between climbable walls? That's a weird form of OCD that could probably be dealt with by walking a bit further, I doubt the canyon is completely tapped out by now...

bruno-cx wrote:

Their book "RCTM"  is a really poor training program for people who work 9-5 and only climb at commercial facility. I suspect that the book is only popular because it's "new".  Hell even the old Performance Rock Climbing  has better training information and it's over 20 years old.  Bechtel and others provide far more comprehensive, modern, and achievable plans.  The "training brothers anderson" need to get a little shit now and then.

Clearly related to the topic at hand. You should start a Anderson Bros hate thread. I'm sure they'll give a shit since they both used the training program they published to get into the high 5.14 range AND they make money off the book and hangboard. 

bruno-cx wrote:

Careful big boy, calling me dumbass might get you banned by Nick.  Oh wait I see you are an admin, carry on being an elitist dick.

crybaby...

Fehim Hasecic wrote: So some chipping and manufacturing at higher level grades is OK but it’s not if the routes are 5.11 and lower. Double standards!
Some rock is just not meant to be climbed by anyone and if the original developers didn’t file holds to manufacture accessible routes then maybe none of this would be happening now.

Can you really not see the difference between some filing of a razor sharp edge or using a bit of epoxy to reinforce a fragile flake and the wholesale manufacturing of entire routes? Because it's the latter that is at issue, not the former. And this has nothing to do with grades.

bruno-cx wrote:

Their book "RCTM"  is a really poor training program for people who work 9-5 and only climb at commercial facility. I suspect that the book is only popular because it's "new".  Hell even the old Performance Rock Climbing  has better training information and it's over 20 years old.  Bechtel and others provide far more comprehensive, modern, and achievable plans.  The "training brothers anderson" need to get a little shit now and then.

What does it have to do with the topic at hand? Read the link in the OP. The person being called out for Ten Sleep manufactured routes only shares the last name with Mark and Mike, he has a different first name. 

We can debate the pros and cons of training programs separately from a topic of hold manufacturing by someone else entirely