Bad Decision in RMNP
|
Tim Pegg wrote: How difficult? As an example, is 3rd class scrambling sufficiently inconvenient to justify bolting a route which would otherwise be top-roped?I don't know, there are always grey areas but at least this is a basis for discussion. If a 3rd class scramble is involved, say with considerable exposure, at least you have a case for argument using the lowest standard, if it is a walk up, you have no argument. |
|
I would add that somehow the concept of "adventure" should be integral. |
|
Mike Lane wrote:* Bolted on rappell vs. ground up?This cannot possibly still be an issue, it's the 21st century! |
|
Heads of CU Alpine Club = couldn't be scripted better. |
|
Chop the bolts!!! |
|
I'm wondering if there's a silent majority out there who couldn't give a rip about whether or not there's rap bolted sport routes in RMNP. We're not all disciples of Gillet and I fear that an aggressive act such as chopping someone's route (which was in their legal right to put up) could have an unintended repercussions. |
|
slim wrote:yeah, it was superfresh. also, anybody who thinks that all non-climbers think climbing is cool should read the daily camera's online comments whenever there is a climbing accident.Point in case...take a look at this awesome human being's comment on the DC after this weekend's death on Longs. I say climb all you want, but don't expect us to come get your mangled corpse when you fall. Maybe if enough bodies pile up at the bottom, it will break the fall of future climbers and lessen their injuries... and their burden to society. Read more: Dangerous year on Longs Peak - Boulder Daily Camera dailycamera.com/ci_16180062… DailyCamera.com |
|
Will Butler wrote:I'm wondering if there's a silent majority out there who couldn't give a rip about whether or not there's rap bolted sport routes in RMNP. We're not all disciples of Gillet and I fear that an aggressive act such as chopping someone's route (which was in their legal right to put up) could have an unintended repercussions. This could easily escalate into something the Park Service has to deal with if route chopping becomes precedent. Poor form Tim.Are you worried the silent majority will silently protest the chopping of routes they didn't give a rip about? |
|
Will Butler wrote:I'm wondering if there's a silent majority out there who couldn't give a rip about whether or not there's rap bolted sport routes in RMNP. We're not all disciples of Gillet and I fear that an aggressive act such as chopping someone's route (which was in their legal right to put up) could have an unintended repercussions. This could easily escalate into something the Park Service has to deal with if route chopping becomes precedent. Poor form Tim.So I was thinking about this while getting ready for work this morning (yes, it's true). Although I don't support spray bolting, I'm not 100% sure I agree with other parties removing the bolts w/ out the FA permission, ESPECIALLY if they had approval of the park. It's just rather odd to me that everyone has such stout ethics when it comes to "their" climbs, but if someone puts up a climb that you don't agree with or don't like then it's chopping time. What is the basis of that? Skill level or the belief that your ethics are superior? It doesn't count as someone's "vision" anymore?? I don't necessarily agree with the route, but what gives us the right to chop a legal route just because we deem it "wrong". That's a rather self serving and judgemental attitude. |
|
Sometimes the void between perspectives and opinions leads to conflict. I've heard of this before in history. |
|
Scott McMahon wrote: So I was thinking about this while getting ready for work this morning (yes, it's true). Although I don't support spray bolting, I'm not 100% sure I agree with other parties removing the bolts w/ out the FA permission, ESPECIALLY if they had approval of the park. It's just rather odd to me that everyone has such stout ethics when it comes to "their" climbs, but if someone puts up a climb that you don't agree with or don't like then it's chopping time. What is the basis of that? Skill level or the belief that your ethics are superior? It doesn't count as someone's "vision" anymore?? I don't necessarily agree with the route, but what gives us the right to chop a legal route just because we deem it "wrong". That's a rather self serving and judgemental attitude.Well said. And the other downside is it could escalate. Look at cascadeclimbers.com/forum/u… |
|
johnL wrote:So the FA's of this route opened a huge can of worms. The consensus of the community was that the route in fact was inappropriate and should be removed. This really isn't being argued, it's just a simple statement of fact. The problem now lies in precedent and "the line" as in, where do we draw it. The community at large has spoken, a route deemed to be without merit and out of character should be removed regardless of the wishes of the FA. In this isolated case, I wholeheartedly agree that what Tim has done is absolutely called for and in fact would have helped him had I not moved to a salty rock. However, what does this mean for the routes that lie in a greyer area? Does public dislike then allow for the route to be erased? Does a spicy trad lead in a sport area need bolts to satisfy the overall style of a crag? Do the voices of the community, 99% of whom do not do FA's (that's not a bad thing), get to decide the fate of new routes? So where does this put us? BTW, no way does Gillet have disciples. Minions for sure, five of them to be exact.But what community? The 20 people that have posted on this thread? The thing that makes me pause is that others are calling something "without merit" and stating it has to go. I'm just not sure who made everyone on this site in charge. That't leads up to John's question, where do we draw the line? What if I think your climb sucks...can I chop it?? Would the line stay if Layton Kor put it up instead of some young upstarts from the Alpine Club? I'm sure it was ugly and probably did not need to be there. I'm just more thinking along the lines of who made us the bosses of climbing? The route's gone now which is probably for the best, but I'm not 100% sure I want a bunch of people on the internet making me decisions for me....unless it's what rack to buy!!!!!!! BTW Ken Nicols is a perfect example of someone going around and destroying routes based on HIS ethics. How many people on the web will he require to be a "community"?? This may not be the best route to make an example of, but the bigger question bodes looking at. |
|
Scott McMahon wrote: But what community? The 20 people that have posted on this thread? The thing that makes me pause is that others are calling something "without merit" and stating it has to go. I'm just not sure who made everyone on this site in charge. That't leads up to John's question, where do we draw the line? What if I think your climb sucks...can I chop it?? Would the line stay if Layton Kor put it up instead of some young upstarts from the Alpine Club? I'm sure it was ugly and probably did not need to be there. I'm just more thinking along the lines of who made us the bosses of climbing? The route's gone now which is probably for the best, but I'm not 100% sure I want a bunch of people on the internet making me decisions for me....unless it's what rack to buy!!!!!!! BTW Ken Nicols is a perfect example of someone going around and destroying routes based on HIS ethics. How many people on the web will he require to be a "community"?? This may not be the best route to make an example of, but it needs to be looked at.I understand what you're saying, Scott, but consider this. There was essentially no debate as to whether this route should have been put up among the 'community' of 20 (or however many) posters. The comments were virtually 100% against the route and for the removal of the bolts with the exception of posts from 3 people. One was the guy who bolted the route. The other two came from people who'd just created their MP profiles on the day this debate heated up. Interestingly, there were 3 people in the pic of it being bolted. In most good statistical analysis, biased or tainted responses are removed. I'd say posts from those 3 individuals fall under that description. So, 100% of people polled were against the route. And, a large percentage of those posts were VERY STRONGLY AGAINST it. 20 people may be a small sample of the total community but it's likely that a sentiment held by 100% of the sample community would be held by a strong majority of the larger community. I'm definitely not going to be given my PhD in statistical analysis based on this post but I think you know what I'm saying. It ain't a perfect way to make community decisions. But, in this case, I think the imperfections were negated by the virtual unanimity of the opinions expressed. Thanks, Tim, for removing the bolts. |
|
tim, thanks for the service to the community! |
|
Thank you Tim. |
|
Crag Dweller wrote: I'm definitely not going to be given my PhD in statistical analysis based on this post but I think you know what I'm saying. It ain't a perfect way to make community decisions. But, in this case, I think the imperfections were negated by the virtual unanimity of the opinions expressed. Scott McMahn wrote: I'm just not sure who made everyone on this site in charge. Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert either I think that it's worth considering, of these how many would disagree with the decision or be indifferent to removing the bolts? A: Climbers in CO who don't have computer (probably not many) B: aren't on MP C: are too intimidated to post. Also consider that people who post things on the internet, check sites like MP or even get involved, tend to be vocal and passionate. I think that's what accounts for more of the consensus. So the question is, should a internet forum (where strong opinions have already been made) be the place to decide these kinds of things? |
|
Probably not, but the interwebs provided a forum this time to examine and communicate something that betrays the established spirit of the climbing ethic in the Park. Very good points being made - but at some point taking action and avoiding something that could be largely problematic wins the day in lieu of just sitting around talking about it. Huzzah. I only was in Estes for 4 summers but love the area and return there frequently. I am confident this route's removal reflects the area ethic. |
|
John Maurer wrote: I kind of get the feeling that the routes on Chiefshead will retain their character but will soon (5-7 years) have squeezed lines all over around them.. . . therebye losing their character . . . |
|
Scott McMahon wrote: Point in case...take a look at this awesome human being's comment on the DC ... DailyCamera.comI was partial to this one: DC poontards |
|
Fixed Protection |