The Chief wrote:

Guyzo wrote:And I do think that, shit like chain anchors, fixed draws is uguly.

You may not Guy, but I can tell ya that many out there that ARE NOT climbers, find them repulsive.

Especially in the established WILDERNESS!

And that my friend needs to be considered by all those that put them up there in the first place.

Consideration and respect for the other folks that frolic in the Wilderness area, should always be part of any FA, IMO!

Agreed, Chief. (maybe please re-read my words)

Although, I don't think "Fake Wilderness" counts for much. Example "the Santa Monica Mt.s wilderness" and The Wliderness that is 100 feet from a road in JT.

Real Wilderness is a function of distance and dificultity ---- not some line drawn by some politico to help his/her's legacy of saving the land.

Before agreeing to #1, I would be curious what he means by "poorly placed."

Could be he means an under drilled hole or some such thing.

Could be he means in the "wrong" place.

The second meaning gets subjective, as has been proved to the detriment of the fabulous Needles face climb Phosphorescent Flow.

And I do think that, shit like chain anchors, fixed draws is uguly

....and so are the various "fixed" signs the National Forest plants in the wilderness! Get a topo wilderness travelers and get a clue National Hypocracy Service!

Guy...

Just making sure!

I distinctly remember you having a different stance last Fall after a certain route was PD'd up in the Wilderness with plenty of shiny bolts and chains to boot.

ksolem wrote:

In my opinion, when something is "ruined" it's no longer usable.

Hmm.

I think a climb is ruined when the experience of doing it has been brought down to dummie level, either by bolting where gear is good or by adding bolts to a previously bolder and cleaner climb.

And frankly I don't see what any of this has to do with hunters culling a herd of Elk. The presence of bolts on climbs effects almost no-one but climbers. We should settle this among climbers. And this is another case where politics are local. For the most part SoCal climbers have done pretty well at getting it.

But what is "dummy level" or "bold" to you might be something entirely different to someone else. So I'll restate my question - who determines at what skill level a climb should be completed, and who makes the distinction between making a climb safer and "ruining" it?

As for the elk hunting, I mentioned it because it brings up the point of different perspectives. I see Teddy Roosevelt NP as a wild place where I can backpack, while others see it as a place for hunters, and the list goes on. The point is that there are a gazillion different views on how nature and the wild should be managed and what uses should be allowed. Just in the same way that climbers are debating how mountains and rocks should be used and managed.

And I totally agree with the point about climbers not being the only ones who should be concerned about bolts, anchors, etc. Just because mountains and rocks have been used by climbers for decades doesn't mean that they somehow own that part of nature or should have sole discretion of how it's used.

The Chief wrote:Guy...

Just making sure!

I distinctly remember you having a different stance last Fall after a certain route was PD'd up in the Wilderness with plenty of shiny bolts and chains to boot.

Nothing has changed regarding my opinion of that climb, I still think it's a fine, good, climb.

I don't recall (off the top of my head) you saying it should be chopped.

Rather your objections were the method by witch the bolts were placed.

And the fact that they inadvertently added to a previously established root.

Please don't get me wrong, if somebody put up a bolted climb with enuf bolts so they could be seen ,from miles around, (like the stuff at the "gong show")

I'd call that "Bogus" and "ugly".

gk

For the most part SoCal climbers have done pretty well at getting it.

Getting what Kris? The last verse to Madonna's 'Like a Virgin'?????

knoback wrote:

aemter wrote:

ksolem wrote:

In my opinion, when something is "ruined" it's no longer usable.

Hmm.

I think a climb is ruined when the experience of doing it has been brought down to dummie level, either by bolting where gear is good or by adding bolts to a previously bolder and cleaner climb.

And frankly I don't see what any of this has to do with hunters culling a herd of Elk. The presence of bolts on climbs effects almost no-one but climbers. We should settle this among climbers. And this is another case where politics are local. For the most part SoCal climbers have done pretty well at getting it.

But what is "dummy level" or "bold" to you might be something entirely different to someone else. So I'll restate my question - who determines at what skill level a climb should be completed, and who makes the distinction between making a climb safer and "ruining" it?

There is alot of gray area, but such a distinction is often possible. Many times a bolt can change a requisite section of static cleverness into a thought-free dyno. That's a shame. I think we do own the routes we climb, thus the need for some respect and stewardship.

+1

"Gong Show" aint Wilderness and the standard that prevails there was in fact set by the locals.

The route that I was referring to not only impeded onto someone elses route, it employed bolting methods counter to the traditional long standing local ethics and an over abundance of bolts. Far more than any other route in that entire area had ever seen.

So, does that not raise the red flag of concern.

" ...But what is "dummy level" or "bold" to you might be something entirely different to someone else. So I'll restate my question - who determines at what skill level a climb should be completed, and who makes the distinction between making a climb safer and "ruining" it? "

I tried to make this point upthread but it's lost now.

One of the great things which climbing gains by having a "respect the style of the area, and the style of each first ascent" is diversity. We get to have sport areas, trad areas, safe easy climbs, safe hard climbs, run out easy climbs and bold hard ones. We get the best of everything, but everything is not for everyone. As soon as people start to try to establish a standard for safety and bolting, based on some idea that a climb should be safe for anyone we'll be heading toward the lowest common denominator in climbing which is sport climbing. Aren't there already areas in CO where bolting on lead is banned?

BTW, I agree that leaving hundreds of bolts, chains, fixed draws etc where it is un-aesthetic is poor form. Of course most of those routes in those grades would not get "sent" any other way. But still, ugly is ugly.

The Chief wrote:"Gong Show" aint Wilderness and the standard that prevails there was in fact set by the locals.

It looks more like Wilderness to me than the, "Wilderness" found at the end of the road (rock creek).

And isn't the "Gong Show" about as Trad as one can get?

Bottom line, when Strassman and crew placed bolts every 3 feet, to develop the other climbs there, the LOCALS didn't run up there and chop em......even though, you can see the bolt lines from a mile away, if your looking for them.

They had opinions about the roots and Mr. Strassman's manhood, but the climbs are still there today.

IMHO... almost all of the climbs there are worthless, poorly thought out abortions, and the bolts and hangers there could be better used elsewhere.

If I were to go and chop those climbs, I would be wrong to do so. It's not my place nor do I think that just because you live nearby is it your place to do this.

The rule works pretty good.... don't mess with other peoples roots.

gk

Guy, before ya go blaming MS for stuff, you may want to find out who really started to place all them bolted routes there and continued to do so.

It wasn't Mike. He just went along with it... that is a fact. The gent that did, was in fact a very staunch and well respected local.

And the gent that initially/originally started placing bolts at the GS area, also played a major role in the initial establishment of the Buttermilks, Little Egypt and Cardnal P.

The Chief wrote:Guy, before ya go blaming MS for stuff, you may want to find out who really started to place all them bolted routes there and continued to do so.

It wasn't Mike. He just went along with it... that is a fact. The gent that did, was in fact a very staunch and well respected local.

And the gent that initially/originally started placing bolts at the GS area, also played a major role in the initial establishment of the Buttermilks, Little Egypt and Cardnal P.

Chief.... all I know is this.... the first name in the book is "Mike Strassman" .....

if others were involved and I don't know of them I don't think one thing is changed at all.

Alan Bartlett was the first to put up climbs on Cardinal, I think, and he did other trad stuff "wild Rose" by south lake ..... no bolts, as of my last visit, at ether spot. ( maybe I am wrong)

I don't think anything is accomplished by not naming names.... are you talking about Doug Robinson????????????? That guy was once a very proud trad, had a big influence on my own climbing ethics. (but I don't think he knows.)

He is somebody I do not wish to be like when I get old..... He rap bolts, offers to sell first accents, and generally has tried to turn climbing into a commercial enterprise..... something he despised just a few short decades ago.

gk

Names are important Guy... they identify the philosophy and ethic of the time.

As you and Kris well know, any area has it's different names and those names laid the foundation for the standards in play today.

Now that you bring up the DR issue, the aspect of "Selling Out" can now come to the forefront.

I can see how many areas have been infected by the concept laid before them by these individuals that "Sold" themselves out and the initial standard.

BTW, DR had the first real route on Cardinal P... "Cucumbers"

Deleted by user.

I was going to use a route as an example but I do not want to draw undo attention to a route which has been around for 10 years, and one of the most amazing routes I've been on (even though it is "scarred" with a couple of bolts).