This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
According to the bolting guidelines,
http://www.climbonline.co.uk/yorkshire_bolt_fund.htm , Directissima at Kilnsey should never have been retro-bolted.
As for the current set of excuses to retro-bolt routes:
"No-one ever does it" -The route has always been popular with whatever state and amount of fixed gear there has been in it.
"It's a chop route" - It is adequately protectable by wires since it is possible to clean aid it.
"Everything else around it is bolted" - so?
The bolts will be removed in due course.
This message has been brought to you by someone prepared to stand up and be counted.
Bob
http://www.climbonline.co.uk/yorkshire_bolt_fund.htm , Directissima at Kilnsey should never have been retro-bolted.
As for the current set of excuses to retro-bolt routes:
"No-one ever does it" -The route has always been popular with whatever state and amount of fixed gear there has been in it.
"It's a chop route" - It is adequately protectable by wires since it is possible to clean aid it.
"Everything else around it is bolted" - so?
The bolts will be removed in due course.
This message has been brought to you by someone prepared to stand up and be counted.
Bob
In reply to Bob: once you've debolted it are you going to free climb it or do it as an aid route?
In reply to Bob:
I trust you'l have a pocket full of chockstones and some thin slings?
I trust you'l have a pocket full of chockstones and some thin slings?
In reply to Jon Greengrass:
It will still be valid as a free-climb. No holds will be harmed during the duration of the reinstatement of this route.
Bob
It will still be valid as a free-climb. No holds will be harmed during the duration of the reinstatement of this route.
Bob
In reply to Bob:
But you didn't answer the question: once you've debolted it are you going to free climb it or do it as an aid route?
If you are debolting it because you want to climb it free, and make a point against 'bolting for bolting's sake', then fair enough, I'd say go for it.
If you are debolting it to follow the rules/get on your moral high-horse/spend an afternoon hanging around on abseil rope, why bother? Why not wait until you (or somebody else) is going to make use of your 'cleaning'?
> It will still be valid as a free-climb.
But you didn't answer the question: once you've debolted it are you going to free climb it or do it as an aid route?
If you are debolting it because you want to climb it free, and make a point against 'bolting for bolting's sake', then fair enough, I'd say go for it.
If you are debolting it to follow the rules/get on your moral high-horse/spend an afternoon hanging around on abseil rope, why bother? Why not wait until you (or somebody else) is going to make use of your 'cleaning'?
In reply to Alun:
The route is already "free" - it was free climbed (at a claimed HVS!!) by Ron Fawcett in the 1970's. As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed. This was done "on the quiet" presumably so as not to raise comment.
The original lower-off on the ledge below the main roof will remain in place.
Bob
The route is already "free" - it was free climbed (at a claimed HVS!!) by Ron Fawcett in the 1970's. As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed. This was done "on the quiet" presumably so as not to raise comment.
The original lower-off on the ledge below the main roof will remain in place.
Bob
In reply to Bob:
You should also answer the most important question - 'Will it be a better as a trad route than a sport route?'.
> As for the current set of excuses to retro-bolt routes:
>
> "No-one ever does it" -The route has always been popular with whatever state and amount of fixed gear there has been in it.
>
> "It's a chop route" - It is adequately protectable by wires since it is possible to clean aid it.
>
> "Everything else around it is bolted" - so?
>
>
> "No-one ever does it" -The route has always been popular with whatever state and amount of fixed gear there has been in it.
>
> "It's a chop route" - It is adequately protectable by wires since it is possible to clean aid it.
>
> "Everything else around it is bolted" - so?
>
You should also answer the most important question - 'Will it be a better as a trad route than a sport route?'.
In reply to Bob:
As far as I know it has always had loads of fixed gear and very few wires would ever have been placed - I certainly can't remember placing many when I did years ago before it was bolted.
> (In reply to Alun)
>
> As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed.
>
> As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed.
As far as I know it has always had loads of fixed gear and very few wires would ever have been placed - I certainly can't remember placing many when I did years ago before it was bolted.
In reply to Bob:
Curious to see what the outcome will be if you get round to it, in terms of in/out/in/out. As part of a debolting statement though isn't it part of it for you to give it it's first non-bolt ascent in years, maybe not.
curiously though, this is one message I was left thinking at the end of the bolt meeting, in that it was the opposite of consensus, and everyone was going to go off and do their own thing.
My idea, and when I've thought it through, and something I feel quite strongly about will be to inspect the pegs on Bulk Order and the E2 next to it at crummackdale, and if they're as bad as they looked on first inspection, take them out and bash in some new ones, like for like.
Curious to see what the outcome will be if you get round to it, in terms of in/out/in/out. As part of a debolting statement though isn't it part of it for you to give it it's first non-bolt ascent in years, maybe not.
curiously though, this is one message I was left thinking at the end of the bolt meeting, in that it was the opposite of consensus, and everyone was going to go off and do their own thing.
My idea, and when I've thought it through, and something I feel quite strongly about will be to inspect the pegs on Bulk Order and the E2 next to it at crummackdale, and if they're as bad as they looked on first inspection, take them out and bash in some new ones, like for like.
In reply to Bob:
You're still not answering the question - are *you* going to climb it free when you've chopped the bolts?
You're still not answering the question - are *you* going to climb it free when you've chopped the bolts?
In reply to Bob:
Although I have no direct interest in the area, you have my moral support to debolt the route, as it should not have been retro-bolted in the first place.
Norrie
> This message has been brought to you by someone prepared to stand up and be counted.
>
Dear Bob
>
Although I have no direct interest in the area, you have my moral support to debolt the route, as it should not have been retro-bolted in the first place.
Norrie
In reply to Bob: good for you.
In reply to Bob:
good on you.
also worth pointing out that it'll inevitably get pollished faster (and more severley) as a bolt route than a trad route. This is because as a bolt route its the crag warmup, so it'd end up like sardine at the tor only worse.
good on you.
also worth pointing out that it'll inevitably get pollished faster (and more severley) as a bolt route than a trad route. This is because as a bolt route its the crag warmup, so it'd end up like sardine at the tor only worse.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Likewise, I remember doing it a couple of times before it got bolted and don't remember placing any wires other than in the first, easyish 30-40 ft. The rest was all on huge bunches of shite tat. Presumably these will start to sprout again - what a huge leap forward for ethics........
Bravo.
Likewise, I remember doing it a couple of times before it got bolted and don't remember placing any wires other than in the first, easyish 30-40 ft. The rest was all on huge bunches of shite tat. Presumably these will start to sprout again - what a huge leap forward for ethics........
Bravo.
In reply to andy rob:
Would you care to comment on why someone felt it necessary to bolt a route that is protectable and was obviously climbable in its various previous states, without even consulting anyone is OK and why removal of those same bolts with prior notice is not?
Bob
Would you care to comment on why someone felt it necessary to bolt a route that is protectable and was obviously climbable in its various previous states, without even consulting anyone is OK and why removal of those same bolts with prior notice is not?
Bob
In reply to Bob:
Ask Pete Gommersall, it was he who did the deed, and a very long time ago now. Previously it was still a popular aid climb and the dinosaurs would keep the pegs in good order. Actually it would still make a good aid climb just pulling on the bolts. I understand that the lower off at the top of the second pitch is in a poor state though.
Steve
> Would you care to comment on why someone felt it necessary to bolt a route that is protectable and was obviously climbable in its various previous states, without even consulting anyone...
Ask Pete Gommersall, it was he who did the deed, and a very long time ago now. Previously it was still a popular aid climb and the dinosaurs would keep the pegs in good order. Actually it would still make a good aid climb just pulling on the bolts. I understand that the lower off at the top of the second pitch is in a poor state though.
Steve
In reply to Bob:
Like many others I've climbed this route regularly since the early eighties.
It has always been a clip up!
Please feel free to climb it on wires only, but don't go smashing existing fixed protection out. It only makes a mess.
If you feel the need to make some personal statement about ethics, history, injustice, the wrongs of the modern world etc.etc. please find somewhere different.
dave.
Like many others I've climbed this route regularly since the early eighties.
It has always been a clip up!
Please feel free to climb it on wires only, but don't go smashing existing fixed protection out. It only makes a mess.
If you feel the need to make some personal statement about ethics, history, injustice, the wrongs of the modern world etc.etc. please find somewhere different.
dave.
In reply to Bob: With respect to your stance on the chockstone issue and your previous post I would ask you the same question as you asked of me:
Is Simon Lee deliberately .....?
by - Bob on - 12 Sep 2004
Vote now for one of the following options:
being antagonistic
trolling
making a fool of himself
Assuming you are NOT being one of the above and that the Directissima anomaly is something that has only just occurred to you then I would say go for it if you feel that strongly. However, in its pre-bolted state there was a lot more fixed gear as I recall so I am not sure how you reconcile that. It is a fantastic route and I always thought the lower-off at two thirds height was silly when the climbing above is so good. Its going to put a lot more pressure on the other crag warm-up but so be it.
Is Simon Lee deliberately .....?
by - Bob on - 12 Sep 2004
Vote now for one of the following options:
being antagonistic
trolling
making a fool of himself
Assuming you are NOT being one of the above and that the Directissima anomaly is something that has only just occurred to you then I would say go for it if you feel that strongly. However, in its pre-bolted state there was a lot more fixed gear as I recall so I am not sure how you reconcile that. It is a fantastic route and I always thought the lower-off at two thirds height was silly when the climbing above is so good. Its going to put a lot more pressure on the other crag warm-up but so be it.
In reply to Bob:
That's all very well but this just smacks of stirring for the sake of it. Why have you not taken this stance before, it can't be news to you that it has been bolted? This is actually one route I did do before and after bolting and thought it was better as a bolt route, certainly asthetically given the amount of rotten tat in it previous;y
That's all very well but this just smacks of stirring for the sake of it. Why have you not taken this stance before, it can't be news to you that it has been bolted? This is actually one route I did do before and after bolting and thought it was better as a bolt route, certainly asthetically given the amount of rotten tat in it previous;y
In reply to Bob: So will you be climbing it protected only by gear placed on the lead? Or do you intend to pre-place any threads etc.?
In reply to Bob:
To an outsider, this looks remarkably like "the Big Issue" scenario again ! For what its worth you have my support up until the overwhelming concensus of the climbing community is that it should be bolted.
To an outsider, this looks remarkably like "the Big Issue" scenario again ! For what its worth you have my support up until the overwhelming concensus of the climbing community is that it should be bolted.
In reply to Simon Lee:
Actions of this type have a habit of escalating. I can understand direct action if something bad has just happened but when its an established climb why cant you all leave it alone until you've gained at least an approximation of a consensus.
Actions of this type have a habit of escalating. I can understand direct action if something bad has just happened but when its an established climb why cant you all leave it alone until you've gained at least an approximation of a consensus.
In reply to Bob:
Are you also going to remove the bolts on the roof, after all it was a scary solo for Mike Simpkins doing it as an aid route on pegs when three unzipped and left him hanging halfway across the roof on a butterknife bent over at a 90 degree angle. He lowered off VERY carefully.
Are you also going to remove the bolts on the roof, after all it was a scary solo for Mike Simpkins doing it as an aid route on pegs when three unzipped and left him hanging halfway across the roof on a butterknife bent over at a 90 degree angle. He lowered off VERY carefully.
In reply to Offwidth:
So why is it OK for a small minority to place bolts in an existing route but to remove them I require a consensus? Smacks of double standards to me.
Bob
So why is it OK for a small minority to place bolts in an existing route but to remove them I require a consensus? Smacks of double standards to me.
Bob
In reply to Bob:
Would Dominatrix @ Kilnsey or The Grim Jim @ Trollers Gill also fit into this category? As the 1st accentionist of the Grim Jim, Mike Raine says on the RF database
“I had hoped that someone would have come along and eliminated the pegs and threads to make a better ascent rather than add six bolts and make a worse ascent! I suppose it's becoming a polished horror now. “
Would Dominatrix @ Kilnsey or The Grim Jim @ Trollers Gill also fit into this category? As the 1st accentionist of the Grim Jim, Mike Raine says on the RF database
“I had hoped that someone would have come along and eliminated the pegs and threads to make a better ascent rather than add six bolts and make a worse ascent! I suppose it's becoming a polished horror now. “
In reply to craig h:If Mike has such high ethics maybe he shouldn't have filled it full of pegs and tat. It was done as a sport route, so maybe it should be a sport route.
In reply to Bob:
Dear Mr Wightman
I am writing with regard to your innovative proposal for increasing traffic on some of our South European routes. After some discussion we have concluded that making payments for the full schedule of 'debolt' actions that you have planned would be outside the remit of our Special Projects group. Though we understand that removing opportunity from the target group that you classify as 'gym-spawned pansies' may well increase their propensity to fly overseas, we are concerned that disclosure of our involvement could create unfavourable publicity.
We will however honour our committment with regard to your first action, as per your invoice, reference "Kilnsey_01".
Sincerely,
Dear Mr Wightman
I am writing with regard to your innovative proposal for increasing traffic on some of our South European routes. After some discussion we have concluded that making payments for the full schedule of 'debolt' actions that you have planned would be outside the remit of our Special Projects group. Though we understand that removing opportunity from the target group that you classify as 'gym-spawned pansies' may well increase their propensity to fly overseas, we are concerned that disclosure of our involvement could create unfavourable publicity.
We will however honour our committment with regard to your first action, as per your invoice, reference "Kilnsey_01".
Sincerely,
In reply to Bob:
If the route was previously be climbed by clipping a lot of tat then it seems to make sense that the route has been bolted?
If the route was previously be climbed by clipping a lot of tat then it seems to make sense that the route has been bolted?
In reply to Bob: I am sorry, but this is a ridiculous thing to do. You are 10 years late. I am certainly against retrobolting, but this is not good for climbing what you are suggesting. If you do this then you should at least keep your standards and debolt Dominatrix, the Cave Routes at Goredale, etc etc, but the fact is that Directissima and Dominatrix at least have been accepted as bolt routes for a long time and will not benefit from someone puffing their chest out and making their own personal statement on them.
It seems stupid to me.
It seems stupid to me.
In reply to Bob: I hear what you are saying about this route, but my very limited experience (having just popped up once in a while to watch) this route is used as the easiest way up and hence a warm up for climbers wishing to do other climbs. Surely by removing these bolts you are pissing over more than the people here. I can almost garentee that within days of your removing them, they will be put back (not by me - I can't climb 6c!). Just look at other rows over to bolt or not to bolt. If this turns out to be a controversial route, the only looser will be the rock which will be drilled, redrilled, bolts cropped and holes filled in. What is the point? Its not even like it is the most amazing line on the crag and as you pointed out, everything around it is bolted.
In reply to Jon Dittman:
6c I assume you mean F6c, anyway it's true grade is E3 5c. which probably means that F6b is a more realistic grade for this pile of polished choss.
6c I assume you mean F6c, anyway it's true grade is E3 5c. which probably means that F6b is a more realistic grade for this pile of polished choss.
In reply to Bob:
what puzzles me is why you have come on here posting the statement that you will chop the bolts.
What possible reason could you have for sparking a debate such as this? There was no indication that you wanted a consensus or even a hint of opinion.
So the only reason you posted was to show off that you were going to do it. I wont say whether I support your decision or not, but it does seem to me you are only de-bolting the route to make yourself look like some kind of crag-god. Look at me I've got the balls to act on my thoughts. You lot just sit around twiddling your thumbs.
what puzzles me is why you have come on here posting the statement that you will chop the bolts.
What possible reason could you have for sparking a debate such as this? There was no indication that you wanted a consensus or even a hint of opinion.
So the only reason you posted was to show off that you were going to do it. I wont say whether I support your decision or not, but it does seem to me you are only de-bolting the route to make yourself look like some kind of crag-god. Look at me I've got the balls to act on my thoughts. You lot just sit around twiddling your thumbs.
In reply to Bob:
I see your point, but this route was climbed by everyone 'pre-bolts' on about 80% fixed gear, and this was all in the trickier bits.
It probably shouldn't have been bolted without people's consent, but now it is, that route specifically (I'm not talking about all the other retrobolted routes) should be left as is. Taking the bolts out is very far from making a change for the better.
> (In reply to andy rob)
>
> Would you care to comment on why someone felt it necessary to bolt a route that is protectable and was obviously climbable in its various previous states, without even consulting anyone is OK and why removal of those same bolts with prior notice is not?
>
> Bob
>
> Would you care to comment on why someone felt it necessary to bolt a route that is protectable and was obviously climbable in its various previous states, without even consulting anyone is OK and why removal of those same bolts with prior notice is not?
>
> Bob
I see your point, but this route was climbed by everyone 'pre-bolts' on about 80% fixed gear, and this was all in the trickier bits.
It probably shouldn't have been bolted without people's consent, but now it is, that route specifically (I'm not talking about all the other retrobolted routes) should be left as is. Taking the bolts out is very far from making a change for the better.
In reply to Bob:
The retro-bolters should obviously have sought consensus but the time to chop in protest was at the time, not years afterwards. I just think changing an established and enjoyed route without consensus, even if it should not have been retrobolted, is wrong.
The retro-bolters should obviously have sought consensus but the time to chop in protest was at the time, not years afterwards. I just think changing an established and enjoyed route without consensus, even if it should not have been retrobolted, is wrong.
In reply to Bob:
Just curious, if the bolts are unnecessary then why not ignore them?
> (In reply to Alun)
>
>therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed.
>
Just curious, if the bolts are unnecessary then why not ignore them?
In reply to Morgan Woods:
This is a version of the pro-bolting lobby's "You don't have to clip the bolts if you don't want to" excuse. The thing is that bolts alter the whole "feel" (for want of a better word) of the climb. They are always there as a get-out clause whether you intend to clip them or not. You cannot have a naturally protected routes with bolts present.
Bob
This is a version of the pro-bolting lobby's "You don't have to clip the bolts if you don't want to" excuse. The thing is that bolts alter the whole "feel" (for want of a better word) of the climb. They are always there as a get-out clause whether you intend to clip them or not. You cannot have a naturally protected routes with bolts present.
Bob
In reply to Bob:
Just to clarify, once debolted will it then be immediately equipped with the same level of fixed gear it had before it was bolted?
Cheers, A.
PS I counted, and there's one of you. Same number as there is of me as it happens.
Just to clarify, once debolted will it then be immediately equipped with the same level of fixed gear it had before it was bolted?
Cheers, A.
PS I counted, and there's one of you. Same number as there is of me as it happens.
In reply to Bob:
C'mon Bob - of course you can.....if they're so superfluous then you can just cruise past them....or would you feel tempted?
I'm not advocating wholesale retro-botling i just think there is a balance....one or two bolts could safely be ignored but of course a whole bunch is another story.
How many on this climb?
> (In reply to Morgan Woods)
>
You cannot have a naturally protected routes with bolts present.
>
>
> Bob
> Bob
C'mon Bob - of course you can.....if they're so superfluous then you can just cruise past them....or would you feel tempted?
I'm not advocating wholesale retro-botling i just think there is a balance....one or two bolts could safely be ignored but of course a whole bunch is another story.
How many on this climb?
In reply to Morgan Woods:
A naturally protected route does not have bolts.
Your commenst just go to show that you don't understand the problem that bolts introduce!
Note that I am not anti-bolt, it is just that I see retro-bolting as a creeping means by which existing routes are changed for short term and selfish ends.
Bob
Bob
A naturally protected route does not have bolts.
Your commenst just go to show that you don't understand the problem that bolts introduce!
Note that I am not anti-bolt, it is just that I see retro-bolting as a creeping means by which existing routes are changed for short term and selfish ends.
Bob
Bob
In reply to Morgan Woods:
You might as well argue that chipping is OK, if you don't want to use the chipped holds then just ignore them...
You might as well argue that chipping is OK, if you don't want to use the chipped holds then just ignore them...
In reply to Bob:
Exactly. Get them out.
> (In reply to Offwidth)
>
> So why is it OK for a small minority to place bolts in an existing route but to remove them I require a consensus? Smacks of double standards to me.
>
> Bob
>
> So why is it OK for a small minority to place bolts in an existing route but to remove them I require a consensus? Smacks of double standards to me.
>
> Bob
Exactly. Get them out.
In reply to hang 'em high:
In Bob's case this is certainly untrue.
> (In reply to Bob)
>
>
>
> So the only reason you posted was to show off that you were going to do it. I wont say whether I support your decision or not, but it does seem to me you are only de-bolting the route to make yourself look like some kind of crag-god. Look at me I've got the balls to act on my thoughts. You lot just sit around twiddling your thumbs.
> So the only reason you posted was to show off that you were going to do it. I wont say whether I support your decision or not, but it does seem to me you are only de-bolting the route to make yourself look like some kind of crag-god. Look at me I've got the balls to act on my thoughts. You lot just sit around twiddling your thumbs.
In Bob's case this is certainly untrue.
In reply to Bob:
So the Directissima has never been a naturally protected route (it may in fact now be slightly bolder than before it was re-equipped) - you now believe that it should be turned in to one. Do you also propose that you or other people should also strip all gear from other routes such as Deja Vu, Dominatrix, both Cave routes, the Prow etc.
> (In reply to Morgan Woods)
>
> A naturally protected route does not have bolts.
>
>
> A naturally protected route does not have bolts.
>
So the Directissima has never been a naturally protected route (it may in fact now be slightly bolder than before it was re-equipped) - you now believe that it should be turned in to one. Do you also propose that you or other people should also strip all gear from other routes such as Deja Vu, Dominatrix, both Cave routes, the Prow etc.
In reply to Bob: Bob, don't do it! Otherwise I'll have to bolt Face Value instead of top-roping it from the Directissima belay
In reply to Bob:
It really seems a waste of your time to do this. At the end of the day someone might just put them back in. Personally I enjoy climbing this, and other easy bolted routes at Kilnsey, but I dont think that I will be able to do it without the bolts because I am not good enough to fiddle gear in on this route. At the moment lots of people like me need easy routes to warm up on at a crag like this and even when I am onsighting 8's I would still want a 6 to climb first.
It really seems a waste of your time to do this. At the end of the day someone might just put them back in. Personally I enjoy climbing this, and other easy bolted routes at Kilnsey, but I dont think that I will be able to do it without the bolts because I am not good enough to fiddle gear in on this route. At the moment lots of people like me need easy routes to warm up on at a crag like this and even when I am onsighting 8's I would still want a 6 to climb first.
In reply to Bob:
You are one of the few climbers on here I have alot of respect for. I first climbed it with the old tat back in the 80's and ever since on bolts. It would actually be good to go back and re-live the original experience.
However, I think things could settle down regarding the pro-bolt/ anti bolt argument very soon.
Doing this will not help matters and creating an in/out situation (like Frankie) can only be bad for the rock.
Also, you are in danger of putting yourself in the Simon Lee publicity seeking category.
I have retroed a few things in the past and would be quite happy for no more routes to be retroed in future.
Doing this will just inflame things.
The Ent
You are one of the few climbers on here I have alot of respect for. I first climbed it with the old tat back in the 80's and ever since on bolts. It would actually be good to go back and re-live the original experience.
However, I think things could settle down regarding the pro-bolt/ anti bolt argument very soon.
Doing this will not help matters and creating an in/out situation (like Frankie) can only be bad for the rock.
Also, you are in danger of putting yourself in the Simon Lee publicity seeking category.
I have retroed a few things in the past and would be quite happy for no more routes to be retroed in future.
Doing this will just inflame things.
The Ent
In reply to Bob: I say go for it. The fact that a classic is currently used as a warm-up doesn't mean it's right. And as for saying it's being changed without a concensus,- isn't that what the retro-bolters did already.
In reply to Bob:
Interesting discussion.
Surely de-botling will protect the rock from getting even more polished?
Isn't this a step forward? Climbing the bolted routes which do have natural gear on them without them, even if they have been retrobolted or not? Similar to the day's of freeing aid points.
I would like to think that with today's rack there would be no need for the in situ threads to re-appear.
I for one would very much look forward to doing the this route in proper fashion, seems like there are enough sport climbs in the Dales as it is!
(to respond to the above point on Jim Grin, I lowered the standard of the route to my abilities at the time, i.e I needed to have some pre-placed gear to be able to lead it, that was very much the eighties way, it's a shame that was taken to justify bolting later on, but nothing suprises me in Yorkshire, 'home of cheating' for years!)
Interesting discussion.
Surely de-botling will protect the rock from getting even more polished?
Isn't this a step forward? Climbing the bolted routes which do have natural gear on them without them, even if they have been retrobolted or not? Similar to the day's of freeing aid points.
I would like to think that with today's rack there would be no need for the in situ threads to re-appear.
I for one would very much look forward to doing the this route in proper fashion, seems like there are enough sport climbs in the Dales as it is!
(to respond to the above point on Jim Grin, I lowered the standard of the route to my abilities at the time, i.e I needed to have some pre-placed gear to be able to lead it, that was very much the eighties way, it's a shame that was taken to justify bolting later on, but nothing suprises me in Yorkshire, 'home of cheating' for years!)
In reply to Bob:
Nuts were comparatively primitive then and no friends were used. I think Kilnsey is a crag that needs to decide one way or other what it is, I think its now a sport crag.
Al
> (In reply to Alun)
>
> The route is already "free" - it was free climbed (at a claimed HVS!!) by Ron Fawcett in the 1970's. As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed. This was done "on the quiet" presumably so as not to raise comment.
>
> The original lower-off on the ledge below the main roof will remain in place.
>
> Bob
Actually I seconded Ron on this 1st ascent, if my opinion is worth anything, my feelings are that bolts are ok. We used all the in situ protection, obviously mostly old pegs, it must be a better route with bolts.
>
> The route is already "free" - it was free climbed (at a claimed HVS!!) by Ron Fawcett in the 1970's. As I mentioned in my original post - the route is protectable by wires and has always been popular, therefore there is no need for the protection bolts to have been placed. This was done "on the quiet" presumably so as not to raise comment.
>
> The original lower-off on the ledge below the main roof will remain in place.
>
> Bob
Nuts were comparatively primitive then and no friends were used. I think Kilnsey is a crag that needs to decide one way or other what it is, I think its now a sport crag.
Al
In reply to Bob:
I think you should concentrate on getting the miles in on the fell Bob rather than stir up a hornets nest
Bill
I think you should concentrate on getting the miles in on the fell Bob rather than stir up a hornets nest
Bill
In reply to Al Evans:
Another guy with whom I have the utmost respect.
However your last post is complete crap (or a troll)
Kilnsey is a perfect example of Classic trad and classic sport routes existing side by side and long may it last.
The Ent
Another guy with whom I have the utmost respect.
However your last post is complete crap (or a troll)
Kilnsey is a perfect example of Classic trad and classic sport routes existing side by side and long may it last.
The Ent
In reply to Ricardo Lopez:
>At the moment lots of people like me need easy routes to warm up on at a crag like this and even when I am onsighting 8's I would still want a 6 to climb first.
Beautiful. Spoken like a true sports climber.
jcm
>At the moment lots of people like me need easy routes to warm up on at a crag like this and even when I am onsighting 8's I would still want a 6 to climb first.
Beautiful. Spoken like a true sports climber.
jcm
In reply to Bob:
Bob, my rambling opinion for what it's worth. The Trad/Sport conflict when taken to extremes only ends up with the crag/rock losing, usually crap bolts get put in which then get pulled , or malletted by an irate Tradmeister, equals more scarring, ultimately compounding the insult to the rock.
If you are going to pull them then do a good job of it, don't screw the rock in the process and fill/camouflage the holes. If anyone out there is thinking of re-retrobolting it in turn then don't - and if you just can't help yourself then do a decent job!
Both arguments; for and against sport/trad are riddled with inconsistancies, and (from what I've read) in the life and times of Rocktalk have yet to be resolved by dialouge, discussion or consensus. I would really like to share the Ent's optimism that the debate may settle - I don't think it will.
Where is my stance, am I prepared to be counted? I lean to the Trad stance. I think most sport climbing in the UK (I limit that to what I can do, which isn't a lot) is crap. I do my clipping indoors or overseas. In the UK I prefer the Trad experience. I think it is sensible to sensitively retrobolt, in certain circumstances and with the first acensionists agreement. A few bolts will not make the world collapse. Grid bolting however is deplorable anywhere.
If you're going to do it, it might be worth thinking about the concequences to the rock, rather than focussing on the ethics. Ultimately the only person who will stop you is yourself. It's down to you and you seem to want to be counted.
Regards,
Steve
Bob, my rambling opinion for what it's worth. The Trad/Sport conflict when taken to extremes only ends up with the crag/rock losing, usually crap bolts get put in which then get pulled , or malletted by an irate Tradmeister, equals more scarring, ultimately compounding the insult to the rock.
If you are going to pull them then do a good job of it, don't screw the rock in the process and fill/camouflage the holes. If anyone out there is thinking of re-retrobolting it in turn then don't - and if you just can't help yourself then do a decent job!
Both arguments; for and against sport/trad are riddled with inconsistancies, and (from what I've read) in the life and times of Rocktalk have yet to be resolved by dialouge, discussion or consensus. I would really like to share the Ent's optimism that the debate may settle - I don't think it will.
Where is my stance, am I prepared to be counted? I lean to the Trad stance. I think most sport climbing in the UK (I limit that to what I can do, which isn't a lot) is crap. I do my clipping indoors or overseas. In the UK I prefer the Trad experience. I think it is sensible to sensitively retrobolt, in certain circumstances and with the first acensionists agreement. A few bolts will not make the world collapse. Grid bolting however is deplorable anywhere.
If you're going to do it, it might be worth thinking about the concequences to the rock, rather than focussing on the ethics. Ultimately the only person who will stop you is yourself. It's down to you and you seem to want to be counted.
Regards,
Steve
In reply to Bob: There used to be 19 pieces of fixed tat. When retroed at least you had to climb above your runners occasionally. To debolt about 12 years after it was retreoed seems perverse although I suppose at least it would not be acting with undue haste. No one can claim it was a "necky" trad route, it was a clip up that was tidied up. Leave it alone.
In reply to Pedro50:
It was a clip up that was retro-bolted. So surely to climb it with out fixed gear, given our current armoury of fancy nuts and cams, would be a step forward. And thinkiing of the rock then again surely to remove the bolts will protect the rock and (re)create a wonderful trad route rather than an anonymous warm up route.
And I'm not a blinkered trad climber (though I do prefer to call it proper climbing!) I actually am quite happy with scruffy little venues being bolted al la Gigg south lower and RObin Procter, of course it's the definition of what is a scruffy little crag that it the problem there, Kilnsey ain't and deserves to have a few proper routes on it that a wider range of people can enjoy.
ANyway if you want to get into the history, many of the current crop of sport climbs at Kilnsey were first climbed without bolts albeit as necky aid routes and I think the history in the guide should reflect that.
We told you in the mid nineteen eighties that the draw back with bolting would be that one day the crags would be full, has that day arrived? Are we into re-cycling climbs now? Some as sport routes (Robin Procter etc) and some as trad (Directissima for eg)??
It was a clip up that was retro-bolted. So surely to climb it with out fixed gear, given our current armoury of fancy nuts and cams, would be a step forward. And thinkiing of the rock then again surely to remove the bolts will protect the rock and (re)create a wonderful trad route rather than an anonymous warm up route.
And I'm not a blinkered trad climber (though I do prefer to call it proper climbing!) I actually am quite happy with scruffy little venues being bolted al la Gigg south lower and RObin Procter, of course it's the definition of what is a scruffy little crag that it the problem there, Kilnsey ain't and deserves to have a few proper routes on it that a wider range of people can enjoy.
ANyway if you want to get into the history, many of the current crop of sport climbs at Kilnsey were first climbed without bolts albeit as necky aid routes and I think the history in the guide should reflect that.
We told you in the mid nineteen eighties that the draw back with bolting would be that one day the crags would be full, has that day arrived? Are we into re-cycling climbs now? Some as sport routes (Robin Procter etc) and some as trad (Directissima for eg)??
In reply to Bob:
I've sat back and watched the re-emergence of the "bolt wars" with some amusement. If bob does de-bolt the directissima I think it will mark the escalation of the bolt wars into something more serious.
Bob - yes, your arguments that the Directissima can be climbed trad are valid. Mark this though - THIS WAS NEVER A TRAD ROUTE. The directissima was a clip-up. It's still a clip-up.
If you de-bolt it, you're opening up a can of worms, and here's why. Directissima is very similar to most of the early sport routes on yorkshire limestone - they were all climbed on the old aid gear, perhaps with extra pegs or bolts added. Can you tell me what the difference between directissima and dominatrix is? Are we de-bolting all the old bolt routes now? Is this, to use a stolen phrase, the thin end of the wedge?
We often hear complaints that bolted routes are impinging on "trad" territory. This is a valid complaint. People like to climb trad, and it's wrong to remove that opportunity from them. Read that sentence above carefully. Now read this one. People like to climb sport, and it's wrong to remove that opportunity from them.
It's wrong to debolt sport routes, just as it's wrong to bolt trad routes. It's wrong because you are taking something away from a large group of people. Let's not forget - directissima was always a clipup. Many people like it as a clip up. I like it with bolts in (although I'd be happy with any type of fixed gear). I have my reasons and I know you wouldn't agree with any of them. It makes a good warm-up (i.e it's effective AND enjoyable). As such, it adds significant value to my day at Kilnsey.
Here is our dillemma. Two groups of people want to use the same resource for mutually exclusive practises. This wont work unless the two groups can reach an agreement on who gets what. This agreement has largely been to the satisfaction of both parties, over recent years. Lately, the bolters have overstepped their mark. Steps have been taken, a satisfactory compromise will be reached again.
Ripping the bolts out of the directissima will not help this compromise. I am against it for the following reasons:
1) As a point-making exercise it is flawed. The bolting of this route fits the existing guidelines. Fixed gear was replaced with a minimal use of bolts.
2) As a bolted route, the directissima is a valuable asset for kilnsey. There are plenty of similar standard trad routes at the crag already, and only a handful of similarly difficult sport climbs. Therefore, you are a lot from the sport climbers, and giving the trad climbers little. This is a wasteful action.
3) It won't help. It'll just get peoples backs up, and they wont listen to you any more. You have valid arguments against retro-bolting, and people are heeding these. Your planned course won't help your cause.
So, If your open to being swayed by argument, I'd say don't do it. Of course, there's nothing to stop you, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you really want to make your point, go and take the bolts out of that loose thing at Norber that Jack wants to do so much. That is clearly a retroed trad-route, and the right place to make a point. Or is it simply not high-impact enough for you?
I've sat back and watched the re-emergence of the "bolt wars" with some amusement. If bob does de-bolt the directissima I think it will mark the escalation of the bolt wars into something more serious.
Bob - yes, your arguments that the Directissima can be climbed trad are valid. Mark this though - THIS WAS NEVER A TRAD ROUTE. The directissima was a clip-up. It's still a clip-up.
If you de-bolt it, you're opening up a can of worms, and here's why. Directissima is very similar to most of the early sport routes on yorkshire limestone - they were all climbed on the old aid gear, perhaps with extra pegs or bolts added. Can you tell me what the difference between directissima and dominatrix is? Are we de-bolting all the old bolt routes now? Is this, to use a stolen phrase, the thin end of the wedge?
We often hear complaints that bolted routes are impinging on "trad" territory. This is a valid complaint. People like to climb trad, and it's wrong to remove that opportunity from them. Read that sentence above carefully. Now read this one. People like to climb sport, and it's wrong to remove that opportunity from them.
It's wrong to debolt sport routes, just as it's wrong to bolt trad routes. It's wrong because you are taking something away from a large group of people. Let's not forget - directissima was always a clipup. Many people like it as a clip up. I like it with bolts in (although I'd be happy with any type of fixed gear). I have my reasons and I know you wouldn't agree with any of them. It makes a good warm-up (i.e it's effective AND enjoyable). As such, it adds significant value to my day at Kilnsey.
Here is our dillemma. Two groups of people want to use the same resource for mutually exclusive practises. This wont work unless the two groups can reach an agreement on who gets what. This agreement has largely been to the satisfaction of both parties, over recent years. Lately, the bolters have overstepped their mark. Steps have been taken, a satisfactory compromise will be reached again.
Ripping the bolts out of the directissima will not help this compromise. I am against it for the following reasons:
1) As a point-making exercise it is flawed. The bolting of this route fits the existing guidelines. Fixed gear was replaced with a minimal use of bolts.
2) As a bolted route, the directissima is a valuable asset for kilnsey. There are plenty of similar standard trad routes at the crag already, and only a handful of similarly difficult sport climbs. Therefore, you are a lot from the sport climbers, and giving the trad climbers little. This is a wasteful action.
3) It won't help. It'll just get peoples backs up, and they wont listen to you any more. You have valid arguments against retro-bolting, and people are heeding these. Your planned course won't help your cause.
So, If your open to being swayed by argument, I'd say don't do it. Of course, there's nothing to stop you, but that doesn't make it a good idea. If you really want to make your point, go and take the bolts out of that loose thing at Norber that Jack wants to do so much. That is clearly a retroed trad-route, and the right place to make a point. Or is it simply not high-impact enough for you?
In reply to FH:
You'll need a loonnnggg rope for that then!
Steve
> (In reply to Bob)
>
> Polished limestone bobins with a 50m lower off!
>
> Polished limestone bobins with a 50m lower off!
You'll need a loonnnggg rope for that then!
Steve
"your arguments that the Directissima can be climbed trad are valid. Mark this though - THIS WAS NEVER A TRAD ROUTE. The directissima was a clip-up. It's still a clip-up."
SO what? Let's improve on the original stlye of ascent and climb it with out any fixed gear. Let's move forward not back to the eighties.
Pegs and tat are sad reminders of a bygone era they should not in themselves justyfy bolting though I accept that bolts are better, but no fixed gear has to be even better, surely that's obvious?
SO what? Let's improve on the original stlye of ascent and climb it with out any fixed gear. Let's move forward not back to the eighties.
Pegs and tat are sad reminders of a bygone era they should not in themselves justyfy bolting though I accept that bolts are better, but no fixed gear has to be even better, surely that's obvious?
In reply to midgets of the world unite:
was about to post something similar this morning after stewing on it last night. I fully agree with what you've put there.
making a point on this particular route is just plain counter to the wishes of most kilnsey visitors.
one of the recently retro-ed routes would maybe make a better point if it had to be made physically.
was about to post something similar this morning after stewing on it last night. I fully agree with what you've put there.
making a point on this particular route is just plain counter to the wishes of most kilnsey visitors.
one of the recently retro-ed routes would maybe make a better point if it had to be made physically.
In reply to Mike Raine:
This is why these arguments arise, there is an assumption by many that a route without bolts is automatically superior to a route with, that sport routes are just anomilies that are witing to get "proper" ascents in a "proper" style when this isn't necessarily the case. Bolt routes stand on their own merits as routes distinct from trad climbs. They are not there because no one could climb them bolt free, I'm sure there are climbers who could climb Dominatrix or even New Dawn bolt free but choose not to because they recognise that these are sport routes and don't need improving. People should recognise the diversity, it's like going into a Picasso exhibition and saying "If only he could paint as prettyly as Turner, prehaps someone copuld come and improve them so we can see what it is they are meant to show".
The difference is with the Directissima is that it is a relatively low grade sport route that gives punters of average ability the chance to make a statement without recognising that trad routes and spot routes are different for a reason and that reason is not because no one has got around to, or been able to climb them without fixed gear.
> Let's improve on the original stlye of ascent and climb it with out any fixed gear. Let's move forward not back to the eighties
This is why these arguments arise, there is an assumption by many that a route without bolts is automatically superior to a route with, that sport routes are just anomilies that are witing to get "proper" ascents in a "proper" style when this isn't necessarily the case. Bolt routes stand on their own merits as routes distinct from trad climbs. They are not there because no one could climb them bolt free, I'm sure there are climbers who could climb Dominatrix or even New Dawn bolt free but choose not to because they recognise that these are sport routes and don't need improving. People should recognise the diversity, it's like going into a Picasso exhibition and saying "If only he could paint as prettyly as Turner, prehaps someone copuld come and improve them so we can see what it is they are meant to show".
The difference is with the Directissima is that it is a relatively low grade sport route that gives punters of average ability the chance to make a statement without recognising that trad routes and spot routes are different for a reason and that reason is not because no one has got around to, or been able to climb them without fixed gear.
In reply to Tyler: Hi Tyler, excellent point well put thank you.
My concern is just to make best use of the rock resources we have available. I would propose overhanging compact rock rock be fair for sport climbing (e.g lots of Kilnsey) and scruffy little crags (Robin Procter) that no one bothers trad climbing at can be turned into worthwhile venues with bolts and fullfil the need for low/mid grade sport climbing. But in general if a line is climable without recourse to fixed gear then surely that's the way to do it, give the crag a chance.
THose pushing sport climbing in the Dales have to realise that there is little future in it as rock is a finite resource in this county. I heed you back to my point about recylcling routes above, this is the new way, some routes are being recycled as sport routes some could be recycled as trad routes.
My concern is just to make best use of the rock resources we have available. I would propose overhanging compact rock rock be fair for sport climbing (e.g lots of Kilnsey) and scruffy little crags (Robin Procter) that no one bothers trad climbing at can be turned into worthwhile venues with bolts and fullfil the need for low/mid grade sport climbing. But in general if a line is climable without recourse to fixed gear then surely that's the way to do it, give the crag a chance.
THose pushing sport climbing in the Dales have to realise that there is little future in it as rock is a finite resource in this county. I heed you back to my point about recylcling routes above, this is the new way, some routes are being recycled as sport routes some could be recycled as trad routes.
In reply to Tyler:
Wrong! Contrary to what most may think - I am not anti-bolt. What I am against is the use of the bolt as the first resort for protection rather than the last.
I view routes as routes, each route has its own merits or not as the case - there are good bolted routes and there are poor bolted routes. As a case in point - two routes at Norber/Robin Proctors: Wheels on Fire is a good route, probably the best there; The Flying Horseman is a poor route - and would be even if it were naturally protected
Directissima is a good case in point as the times that I did it (in the late 1980's) there were very few fixed points in the route, probably three, the majority of the gear was leader placed with some very close to the fixed points as they weren't in good condition - the grade was standard E3. Needless to say there were plenty of others climbing the route in this condition. So the route is climbable without resort to fixed gear with very little, if any, increase in grade.
The only reason (read excuse) for placing bolts on the route is convenience. Rather than thinking of simply cleaning the route of the old pegs and tat, a good thing, it was then decided that it wasn't justifiable without fixed gear so the means of last resort was used. With no consultation, the bolting went ahead. This was a retro-grade step and very short term in outlook.
Bob
Wrong! Contrary to what most may think - I am not anti-bolt. What I am against is the use of the bolt as the first resort for protection rather than the last.
I view routes as routes, each route has its own merits or not as the case - there are good bolted routes and there are poor bolted routes. As a case in point - two routes at Norber/Robin Proctors: Wheels on Fire is a good route, probably the best there; The Flying Horseman is a poor route - and would be even if it were naturally protected
Directissima is a good case in point as the times that I did it (in the late 1980's) there were very few fixed points in the route, probably three, the majority of the gear was leader placed with some very close to the fixed points as they weren't in good condition - the grade was standard E3. Needless to say there were plenty of others climbing the route in this condition. So the route is climbable without resort to fixed gear with very little, if any, increase in grade.
The only reason (read excuse) for placing bolts on the route is convenience. Rather than thinking of simply cleaning the route of the old pegs and tat, a good thing, it was then decided that it wasn't justifiable without fixed gear so the means of last resort was used. With no consultation, the bolting went ahead. This was a retro-grade step and very short term in outlook.
Bob
In reply to Mike Raine: I'm not sure about this one, remember before we did it it was an all out aid route, not a classic free climb like Central Wall or Diedre, I wouldnt dream of suggesting those should be bolted, or indeed Birdman and the other thingy up there (I havent got a guide here and memory is fading) but wont debolting Directissima f***k up Mandela????
In reply to Al Evans:
That is the trouble with routes like Directissima and CRRH. The aid climbers would keep renewing the pegs by filling up all the available hand holds with more and more pegs!
What we need is some common sense and some guidelines (which we already have) and then stick to them.
Steve Crowe
> I remember before we did it it was an all out aid route, not a classic free climb...
That is the trouble with routes like Directissima and CRRH. The aid climbers would keep renewing the pegs by filling up all the available hand holds with more and more pegs!
What we need is some common sense and some guidelines (which we already have) and then stick to them.
Steve Crowe
In reply to Bob: I'd leave them in Bob to be honest. At the moment I'm not going to remove any bolts, if you are definitely going to chop some then I'd get them out of the 2 starred E5's at Dib Scar that got retro'd this year. Crying shame that was, it was an awesome crag, Dib.
I really just don't want to see the bolt hokey cokey (sp?) ruining routes. That is why the argument that retro bolts aren't forever just doesn't wash with me.
I'd be tempted to put 2 more bolts in Directissima in the first 30ft! (I always shit it on those polished glued bits!)
I'm putting together a website that will have information on trad route conditions on YL. I'll have it online before next spring, could you spend your time helping on a project like that instead of chopping?
I've been out this year (not much because of personal circumstance) and re-equipped and cleaned some trad routes. If we all did this maybe it would discourage retro bolting and not aggrevate anyone.
Anyway, I'll email you to discuss variuos points.
Interesting thread though.
Jack 'thumb twiddler' Geldard aka Crippin
I really just don't want to see the bolt hokey cokey (sp?) ruining routes. That is why the argument that retro bolts aren't forever just doesn't wash with me.
I'd be tempted to put 2 more bolts in Directissima in the first 30ft! (I always shit it on those polished glued bits!)
I'm putting together a website that will have information on trad route conditions on YL. I'll have it online before next spring, could you spend your time helping on a project like that instead of chopping?
I've been out this year (not much because of personal circumstance) and re-equipped and cleaned some trad routes. If we all did this maybe it would discourage retro bolting and not aggrevate anyone.
Anyway, I'll email you to discuss variuos points.
Interesting thread though.
Jack 'thumb twiddler' Geldard aka Crippin
In reply to Bob:
Does posting such a strong intention to do this mean that there's no point anyone trying to change your mind? That sounds a bit fundamentalist, so hopefully not?
Cheers, A.
PS Death to fundamentalists!
Does posting such a strong intention to do this mean that there's no point anyone trying to change your mind? That sounds a bit fundamentalist, so hopefully not?
Cheers, A.
PS Death to fundamentalists!
In reply to Bob: I applaud your stance on this, as I feel that routes ought to remain as the first ascensionists left them, and any changes should be with their say-so only. However, I fear that the growing popularity of sport routes is bound to lead to more and more retro-bolting, and the bolting of new routes which are adequately protectable with wires or cams.
I think the day will come when the establishment of really bold, deck-out potential routes will be very rare, as first ascensionists, wall-trained and sport-minded, will think "No gear there, better put a bolt in!", rather than developing the mind-set needed to put themselves in danger of death if they fall. Sad.
How long before Death Wish gets retro-bolted? The Bells The Bells? A generation perhaps? Because what becomes the norm on limestone will, I suspect, spread to other, previously sacrosanct rock. Give it 50 years and Stanage will have bolts I reckon.
Anyway Bob, I like the cut of your jib. You ever met Duncan Drake? He usedto do this sort of thing.
I think the day will come when the establishment of really bold, deck-out potential routes will be very rare, as first ascensionists, wall-trained and sport-minded, will think "No gear there, better put a bolt in!", rather than developing the mind-set needed to put themselves in danger of death if they fall. Sad.
How long before Death Wish gets retro-bolted? The Bells The Bells? A generation perhaps? Because what becomes the norm on limestone will, I suspect, spread to other, previously sacrosanct rock. Give it 50 years and Stanage will have bolts I reckon.
Anyway Bob, I like the cut of your jib. You ever met Duncan Drake? He usedto do this sort of thing.
In reply to BrianT:
That shouldn't be so Brian. Although it may sound courtous to ask the first ascensionists permission once they have done their work, as a general rule, the route should stand as is despite any pleas from them to bolt it up.
> (In reply to Bob) I applaud your stance on this, as I feel that routes ought to remain as the first ascensionists left them, and any changes should be with their say-so only.
That shouldn't be so Brian. Although it may sound courtous to ask the first ascensionists permission once they have done their work, as a general rule, the route should stand as is despite any pleas from them to bolt it up.
In reply to Bob:
I blame the climbing wall culture for the proliferation of retrobolting.
Many climbers are now introduced to the sport with little or no experience of the outdoors, and whilst they may be competent rock gymnasts, have not had a basic grounding in exposure or run out easier routes, and are too proud to lower their grades and spend time gaining the experience.
It's the modern way -- Instant results and gratification.
I'm not against sport climbing, having enjoyed a bit of sunny Spanish bolt clipping, but retrobolting a previously free trad route is a big NO NO, irrespective of how bold it is.
IMHO the only possible justification for bolts on a previously unbolted route is to provide safe belays (not runners) or lower offs, where no satisfactory anchors are available and where they prevent erosion to the cliff top or sensitive vegetation. This should only be done with the agreement of the first ascensionist (if he / she is still around), or the blessing of the local climbing community.
If you cant do a route in it's original style (or better) without additional bolts, you probably shouldnt be there in the first place. Much of the skill is knowing when to push on, and when to back off -- you only get one chance at getting it wrong.
If people insist on sport climbing, there are plenty of cheap flights available to places where so much of it is available. British rock is a pretty scarce resource, and cutting edge climbing has always been the preserve of the talented and bold. It shouldn't be brought down to just gymnastic exercises devoid of risk.
I blame the climbing wall culture for the proliferation of retrobolting.
Many climbers are now introduced to the sport with little or no experience of the outdoors, and whilst they may be competent rock gymnasts, have not had a basic grounding in exposure or run out easier routes, and are too proud to lower their grades and spend time gaining the experience.
It's the modern way -- Instant results and gratification.
I'm not against sport climbing, having enjoyed a bit of sunny Spanish bolt clipping, but retrobolting a previously free trad route is a big NO NO, irrespective of how bold it is.
IMHO the only possible justification for bolts on a previously unbolted route is to provide safe belays (not runners) or lower offs, where no satisfactory anchors are available and where they prevent erosion to the cliff top or sensitive vegetation. This should only be done with the agreement of the first ascensionist (if he / she is still around), or the blessing of the local climbing community.
If you cant do a route in it's original style (or better) without additional bolts, you probably shouldnt be there in the first place. Much of the skill is knowing when to push on, and when to back off -- you only get one chance at getting it wrong.
If people insist on sport climbing, there are plenty of cheap flights available to places where so much of it is available. British rock is a pretty scarce resource, and cutting edge climbing has always been the preserve of the talented and bold. It shouldn't be brought down to just gymnastic exercises devoid of risk.
In reply to Alan Stark:"Many climbers are now introduced to the sport with little or no experience of the outdoors, and whilst they may be competent rock gymnasts, have not had a basic grounding in exposure or run out easier routes, and are too proud to lower their grades and spend time gaining the experience."
That doesn't sound like Musgrove, Clarke et al.
That doesn't sound like Musgrove, Clarke et al.
In reply to Alan Stark:
And the first ascensionist does not own the rock.
Cheers
Enty
> (In reply to Bob)
>
> > IMHO the only possible justification for bolts on a previously unbolted route is to provide safe belays (not runners) or lower offs, where no satisfactory anchors are available and where they prevent erosion to the cliff top or sensitive vegetation. This should only be done with the agreement of the first ascensionist (if he / she is still around), or the blessing of the local climbing community.
>
>
A good point about clifftop erosion Alan but you need to explain to me the difference between making a route safer by adding the odd bolt and adding a bolt belay.
>
> > IMHO the only possible justification for bolts on a previously unbolted route is to provide safe belays (not runners) or lower offs, where no satisfactory anchors are available and where they prevent erosion to the cliff top or sensitive vegetation. This should only be done with the agreement of the first ascensionist (if he / she is still around), or the blessing of the local climbing community.
>
>
And the first ascensionist does not own the rock.
Cheers
Enty
In reply to Enty:
exactly it's the majority of climbers that should be consulted not the first ascentionist.
exactly it's the majority of climbers that should be consulted not the first ascentionist.
In reply to Enty:
My interpretation is
Adding the odd bolt to a route would be to provide bombproof protection where none exists, thus reducing the seriousness of the climb.
Placing a bolt at the top of the route or pitch for a safe belay, where the original belays have deteriorated and are marginal or loose, whilst making the route safer does not detract from the overall seriousness of the climbing. I've done a number of routes, praying that the leader did not fall, as there was no way the belays would have taken a heavy loading.
Agreed about the original ascensionist not owning the rock, but their opinion should be sought where possible. Surely it should be everyones aspiration to equal or improve the style / manner of the ascent rather than bring it down to their own level. If climbers stop aspiring to climb in the best style, where would it lead - Pegs, Bolts, Chipped Holds?
To Serpico -- I was not commenting about the ability of Messrs Musgrove & Clarke - their ability and experience is way beyond mine, I was just having a grumpy old man moment about some modern climbers attitudes.
Cheers
Alan
> (In reply to Alan Stark)
> [...]
> A good point about clifftop erosion Alan but you need to explain to me the difference between making a route safer by adding the odd bolt and adding a bolt belay.
> And the first ascensionist does not own the rock.
>
> Cheers
>
> Enty
> [...]
> A good point about clifftop erosion Alan but you need to explain to me the difference between making a route safer by adding the odd bolt and adding a bolt belay.
> And the first ascensionist does not own the rock.
>
> Cheers
>
> Enty
My interpretation is
Adding the odd bolt to a route would be to provide bombproof protection where none exists, thus reducing the seriousness of the climb.
Placing a bolt at the top of the route or pitch for a safe belay, where the original belays have deteriorated and are marginal or loose, whilst making the route safer does not detract from the overall seriousness of the climbing. I've done a number of routes, praying that the leader did not fall, as there was no way the belays would have taken a heavy loading.
Agreed about the original ascensionist not owning the rock, but their opinion should be sought where possible. Surely it should be everyones aspiration to equal or improve the style / manner of the ascent rather than bring it down to their own level. If climbers stop aspiring to climb in the best style, where would it lead - Pegs, Bolts, Chipped Holds?
To Serpico -- I was not commenting about the ability of Messrs Musgrove & Clarke - their ability and experience is way beyond mine, I was just having a grumpy old man moment about some modern climbers attitudes.
Cheers
Alan
In reply to Enty: If a pitch is done with a 70 ft runout to the first gear, on the 1st ascent, then that's how it should be done by everyone. To then make it safer and easier by putting a bolt in is as bad as chipping a new hold, imho.
A climb like Death Wish (Blue Scar), whilst not cutting edge, is very very serious indeed, and could easily have a couple of bolts added to make it accessible to many. However, climbing's as much in the head as in the body, and if you bolt a route where it wasn't bolted before, you are denying that fact.
A climb like Death Wish (Blue Scar), whilst not cutting edge, is very very serious indeed, and could easily have a couple of bolts added to make it accessible to many. However, climbing's as much in the head as in the body, and if you bolt a route where it wasn't bolted before, you are denying that fact.
In reply to Woker:
There is nothing to worry about as long as the 'majority' of climbers espouse high ethical standards.
It's when the majority of climbers consulted over bolting decide to condone lower standards in the name of accessibility for many that a problem is likely to arise.
Sure -- as an old bumbly I'd love to find a few more lower grade sports routes for a spot of harmless fun, but certainly not if it involves adding bolts to existing trad lines.
Newer generations of climbers may lose sight of the great legacy left by pioneers of the past, in their headlong rush to acquire a few more bragging numbers.
> (In reply to Enty)
> exactly it's the majority of climbers that should be consulted not the first ascentionist.
> exactly it's the majority of climbers that should be consulted not the first ascentionist.
There is nothing to worry about as long as the 'majority' of climbers espouse high ethical standards.
It's when the majority of climbers consulted over bolting decide to condone lower standards in the name of accessibility for many that a problem is likely to arise.
Sure -- as an old bumbly I'd love to find a few more lower grade sports routes for a spot of harmless fun, but certainly not if it involves adding bolts to existing trad lines.
Newer generations of climbers may lose sight of the great legacy left by pioneers of the past, in their headlong rush to acquire a few more bragging numbers.
In reply to Alan Stark:
There is supposedly a "need" (quotation marks intended) for lower grade bolted routes. However in another thread someone asked for decent E1's to do in the Skipton area. Given that E1 equates to F6a it is perhaps illuminating that the combined minds of RT could not come up with more than 1 such route on Yorkshire limestone! So even if there is a "need" there just aren't the routes there to bolt.
Bob
There is supposedly a "need" (quotation marks intended) for lower grade bolted routes. However in another thread someone asked for decent E1's to do in the Skipton area. Given that E1 equates to F6a it is perhaps illuminating that the combined minds of RT could not come up with more than 1 such route on Yorkshire limestone! So even if there is a "need" there just aren't the routes there to bolt.
Bob
In reply to BrianT:
Enty
> (In reply to Enty) If a pitch is done with a 70 ft runout to the first gear, on the 1st ascent, then that's how it should be done by everyone. To then make it safer and easier by putting a bolt in is as bad as chipping a new hold, imho.
>
Do you know any routes where the first ascensionist onsighted to the first gear at 70ft?
>
Enty
In reply to Alan Stark:
Shit belays on multi-pitch stuff adds to the experience and the overall fear factor.
Belays and runners are exactly the same thing I reckon Alan.
Enty
> (In reply to Enty)
> [...]
>
> My interpretation is
>
> Adding the odd bolt to a route would be to provide bombproof protection where none exists, thus reducing the seriousness of the climb.
>
> Placing a bolt at the top of the route or pitch for a safe belay, where the original belays have deteriorated and are marginal or loose, whilst making the route safer does not detract from the overall seriousness of the climbing. I've done a number of routes, praying that the leader did not fall, as there was no way the belays would have taken a heavy loading.
>
>
What about adding a bolt on a route where a piece of fixed gear has rotten away and nothing else can be placed.
> [...]
>
> My interpretation is
>
> Adding the odd bolt to a route would be to provide bombproof protection where none exists, thus reducing the seriousness of the climb.
>
> Placing a bolt at the top of the route or pitch for a safe belay, where the original belays have deteriorated and are marginal or loose, whilst making the route safer does not detract from the overall seriousness of the climbing. I've done a number of routes, praying that the leader did not fall, as there was no way the belays would have taken a heavy loading.
>
>
Shit belays on multi-pitch stuff adds to the experience and the overall fear factor.
Belays and runners are exactly the same thing I reckon Alan.
Enty
In reply to Bob:
Oh shut up
Oh shut up
In reply to Bob:
I don't know if anyone as asked, but how do you intend debolting the route?.
Are you going to :-
1) Lead to the roof (its only E35c) placing your own gear and not touching the said culprits.Placing your own lower off and removing the fixed lower off bolts, then rapping to remove them.
2) Rapping down from the fields above and swinging in to the belay and not grabbing any fixed gear in the process.
3)Or doing the route as a pure aid route over the roof as it was originally done and debolting Mandella as well.
I would like to be there when you do this 'heroic' deed. So I hope you will post a date when everyone can witness your lone stand against progress.
I don't know if anyone as asked, but how do you intend debolting the route?.
Are you going to :-
1) Lead to the roof (its only E35c) placing your own gear and not touching the said culprits.Placing your own lower off and removing the fixed lower off bolts, then rapping to remove them.
2) Rapping down from the fields above and swinging in to the belay and not grabbing any fixed gear in the process.
3)Or doing the route as a pure aid route over the roof as it was originally done and debolting Mandella as well.
I would like to be there when you do this 'heroic' deed. So I hope you will post a date when everyone can witness your lone stand against progress.
In reply to Seymore Butt: Can I have two tickets please . And for the record Duncan came to his senses and became an excellent sport climber ...... altogether now oooooooh the retro cokey oooooooh...............
In reply to Enty:
Depends on how the original piece of fixed gear was placed.
My view is if it was originally placed as part of an old aid route, then the route was subsequently freed, but using the fixed gear for pro, then if feasible the rotten gear should be replaced with something of the same type. It may only be replaced by a bolt when all other alternatives have failed, and there is a consensus for its replacement -- it should not be done lightly.
Agree about sh!t belays, and their adding to the experience, although wouldn't recommend them very often. Again their replacement with bolts would need approval.
I think there is often a difference between a belay point and a runner. -- very often a poor runner is a single point, which most people would not wish to belay from. It's very rare to have to rely on a single crap point for a belay. 2 or 3 crap points feel much better than just one point, even though the feeling may be psychological. I can think of a couple of routes where a sound belay would make a superb and serious route into a classic, instead of just a potential chopper that scares many people off it, even it's within their range of capability.
Cheers
Alan
> (In reply to Alan Stark)
> [...]
> What about adding a bolt on a route where a piece of fixed gear has rotten away and nothing else can be placed.
> Shit belays on multi-pitch stuff adds to the experience and the overall fear factor.
> Belays and runners are exactly the same thing I reckon Alan.
>
> Enty
> [...]
> What about adding a bolt on a route where a piece of fixed gear has rotten away and nothing else can be placed.
> Shit belays on multi-pitch stuff adds to the experience and the overall fear factor.
> Belays and runners are exactly the same thing I reckon Alan.
>
> Enty
Depends on how the original piece of fixed gear was placed.
My view is if it was originally placed as part of an old aid route, then the route was subsequently freed, but using the fixed gear for pro, then if feasible the rotten gear should be replaced with something of the same type. It may only be replaced by a bolt when all other alternatives have failed, and there is a consensus for its replacement -- it should not be done lightly.
Agree about sh!t belays, and their adding to the experience, although wouldn't recommend them very often. Again their replacement with bolts would need approval.
I think there is often a difference between a belay point and a runner. -- very often a poor runner is a single point, which most people would not wish to belay from. It's very rare to have to rely on a single crap point for a belay. 2 or 3 crap points feel much better than just one point, even though the feeling may be psychological. I can think of a couple of routes where a sound belay would make a superb and serious route into a classic, instead of just a potential chopper that scares many people off it, even it's within their range of capability.
Cheers
Alan
In reply to Alan Stark:
Enty
> (In reply to Enty)
> [...]
>
>
> I can think of a couple of routes where a sound belay would make a superb and serious route into a classic, instead of just a potential chopper that scares many people off it, even it's within their range of capability.
>
>
I can think of hundreds of routes where the odd bolt would make classics out of seldom done classics. But that is what this thread is all about at the end of the day and we just end up going round in circles.
> [...]
>
>
> I can think of a couple of routes where a sound belay would make a superb and serious route into a classic, instead of just a potential chopper that scares many people off it, even it's within their range of capability.
>
>
Enty
In reply to Bob:The route is more polished than most. Being used as a warm up doesn't make it any better. Perhaps as a trad route its demise will be slower.
In reply to Al Evans:
good for you Al, now Bob,are you going to follow the 1st fee ascentious wishes or follow your own and why all of a sudden are you looking at this public spirited gesture...whats your game plan bob ?????
I'd like to watch you lead it without bolts in. Your swan song year was along time ago bob.
The bolts should have been taken out a long time ago , the route is now an accepted bolted route so why reverse the decison taken a long time ago. What we musn't do is allow any retro bolting to happen again.
good for you Al, now Bob,are you going to follow the 1st fee ascentious wishes or follow your own and why all of a sudden are you looking at this public spirited gesture...whats your game plan bob ?????
I'd like to watch you lead it without bolts in. Your swan song year was along time ago bob.
The bolts should have been taken out a long time ago , the route is now an accepted bolted route so why reverse the decison taken a long time ago. What we musn't do is allow any retro bolting to happen again.
In reply to Enty:
It may be semantics, but in my book there's quite a difference between creating a sound belay, which essentially still leaves the crux of a route in its natural state, and 'the odd bolt' to protect a cucial but otherwise unprotectable move which has been done before without.
Its a personal view. Lets just hope that common sense prevails, and that it's not as uncommon as feared.
Alan
> (In reply to Alan Stark)
> [...]
> I can think of hundreds of routes where the odd bolt would make classics out of seldom done classics. But that is what this thread is all about at the end of the day and we just end up going round in circles.
>
> Enty
> [...]
> I can think of hundreds of routes where the odd bolt would make classics out of seldom done classics. But that is what this thread is all about at the end of the day and we just end up going round in circles.
>
> Enty
It may be semantics, but in my book there's quite a difference between creating a sound belay, which essentially still leaves the crux of a route in its natural state, and 'the odd bolt' to protect a cucial but otherwise unprotectable move which has been done before without.
Its a personal view. Lets just hope that common sense prevails, and that it's not as uncommon as feared.
Alan
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...