Vermont Bolted runnouts WTF?

steitz wrote: I ♥ Clifton. You'll run into the same mixed routes there though, I've seen quite a few people start up what they thought was a sport route, then have a massive run out past perfect cracks where there aren't bolts before they get back onto the bald faces, big crystals, and bolts again. Clifton is a hidden jewel of the north.

If you think Clifton is a hidden jewel of the North, you should check out Welsford. 350 routes on beautiful pink granite located 3 hours East of Clifton. It also offers free camping just like Don Nelligan's Eagle Bluff at Clifton.

Style & Ethics of the Northeast. Try getting on Whitehorse Ledge. Sliding Board- Pitch 3 has 1 bolt on a 100 ft pitch. One of my first leads and it scared the crap out me back when I was like 23. (couldn't find the bolt) Climbing that slab still scares me when I'm back there & it's been almost 20 yrs!

I remember meeting Harvey Carter (RIP) after I rapped off of one his climbs (Twin Cracks in Ind. Pass) He was telling me about the lead. On the first pitch he hammered 1 piton in of which it was used to protect the crux traverse.And here I was placing pro.

My philosphy if it scares you that much don't climb it. If it's been an established route the original first ascent style should be maintained, not made easier so the masses can climb it. Aspire to climb harder/better beyond your limit.

David Sahalie wrote:...By not making it safe for others to follow, you are holding the rock hostage with your own ego...i agree with Lynn Hill, once a bolt is placed, the deed has been done, make it doable...

It's never that clean cut. The problem with this issue every time it comes up is that it's someone saying "I don't like having the FA's vision of this route pushed on me." which is fine when it's not followed by "...but I want to push my vision of this route on everyone else." Any time anyone (yes, including Lynn Hill) tries to push their vision of what climbing should be on everyone else they are "holding the rock hostage with [their] own ego." Variety is the spice of life.

John Husky wrote:...Why not make them safe?

If you want to make it safe you can always try toproping it.

David Sahalie wrote:...and my argument is that this mentality by the FA can hold classic pieces of rock hostage to those seeking a very singular experience.

But you're arguing taking that experience away from one group of people to give a different (and arguably more common type of) experience to a different group of people. That's what the problem is.

D.Mills wrote: no need to bring Derek Hersey into this argument is there?

i realize that Derek fell while soloing.... but, the fact remains, he fell on something "easy" for him.

if someone as able and capable as derek can (and did fall) on something "easy;" it may be a good reason for there to be bolts for the rest of us who are decidedly less able and less capable on the "5.7 stuff..."

ever hear someone say; "it's dead easy..."

"being dead" is "being dead" no matter what the grade.... if you die on a "wet 5.9" or a bone dry 5.11; you're still dead....

iBolt "who enjoys being alive...."

Well put.

eveningsends.com/2012/04/am…

I won't get injured looking at paintings. (?) I hope I never "get it".

Ground-up, mixed routes with scary/dangerous sections are noteworthy.
Rap-bolting in a runout does have a little bit of cheese-dickery to it.
How dick-ish it is depends on the situation, I'm OK with the occasional double-dog dare as long as its safe. But if you run it out solely b/c you are a broke-ass, then sell your drill.

David Sahalie wrote:trad, hard men wanna-bees getting schooled by a Canadian quoting Lynn Hill. Ouch. That has to hurt.

As usual, your logic has failed early and given way to heckling. Glad to see nothing has changed. Moving on...

Dom wrote:So my point was that it's ridiculous for someone to bolt something and leave intentional run-outs (i.e. R rated routes).

I think this is the fundamental point you and I disagree on. In the Northeast, "routes with bolts" and "sport routes" are definitely not the same same thing. Generally speaking, unless the intent is to make a sport crag, FA's are going to put in the fewest number of bolts possible to do the line. Hand drilling sucks - I've done it. You add bolts to make it reasonable - though, there are different interpretations of reasonable. Fortunately, there are also lots of different walls and routes, so if you don't like one particular interpretation of reasonable, toprope or move on.

For what its worth, Lynn Hill was talking about putting in good bolts, not shitty rivets that will become hidden death traps later on. Notice at the end she says "Who want to die from a bolt that pulled out?" and NOT "Who wants to die from a runout?".

I'm not sure which specific Vermont routes the OP is referring too, but if s/he would care to name them, I'd be happy to comment on the style in which they were established. Many Vermont routes were established ground up. While they may have bolts, they were never intended as sport routes.

That said, there are few run out routes at the 82 if one is competent at the grade and brings a light rack. All of the main face (as opposed to the steep wall) routes were intended as mixed gear and bolt routes and are reasonably protected with the possible exception of a single pitch of 5.8 that is almost never climbed in any case.

As mentioned above, the new guidebook (due out in a few weeks) will clarify which routes are pure clip-ups and which require a rack. In the meantime, if one can't see bolts all the way to the top, I suggest one bring gear or choose another route, in Vermont or anyplace else for that matter.

Cheers,

Derek

cjdrover wrote: I think this is the fundamental point you and I disagree on. In the Northeast, "routes with bolts" and "sport routes" are definitely not the same same thing. Generally speaking, unless the intent is to make a sport crag, FA's are going to put in the fewest number of bolts possible to do the line. Hand drilling sucks - I've done it. You add bolts to make it reasonable - though, there are different interpretations of reasonable. Fortunately, there are also lots of different walls and routes, so if you don't like one particular interpretation of reasonable, toprope or move on. For what its worth, Lynn Hill was talking about putting in good bolts, not shitty rivets that will become hidden death traps later on. Notice at the end she says "Who want to die from a bolt that pulled out?" and NOT "Who wants to die from a runout?".

I agree that we disagree. I still find the nicest routes are pure trad lines. That being said, I hate when people will add bolts but not make the routes safe. Why bother putting bolts then? Like you said ''There are also lots of different walls and routes'' so if the Faist really wanted to keep a line as pure as possible, he should not have bashed in bolts (creating something artifical). He should've either moved on, make something safe and enjoyable for all or lead it ground up with gear. My opinion is that if you really have to put in bolts, then please make a route safe and not something R rated.- Sport climbs, Mix climbs, trad climbs with 1 or 2 bolts, etc.

A route naturally unsafe is pure and something that should be looked up to.
A route artifically unsafe is an arbitrary decision by someone to make a route a little safer but not safe enough. Like I've been told, if something is worth doing, it's worth doing well. Why create something half-ass?

That is my view on the subject and some may disagree but I too live and climb in the Northeast.

Dom wrote: If you think Clifton is a hidden jewel of the North, you should check out Welsford. 350 routes on beautiful pink granite located 3 hours East of Clifton. It also offers free camping just like Don Nelligan's Eagle Bluff at Clifton.

Thread jack: if this is a "jewel", I'm glad I don't live out east.

Dom wrote: Mix climbs, trad climbs with 1 or 2 bolts, etc. .... if something is worth doing, it's worth doing well. Why create something half-ass?

There are so many routes that fit into that category, to cry that they should ALL be "safe" is ridiculous. There is nothing half ass about a spicy mixed route.

Are we all in agreement then? New bolts for the Bachar-Yerian this summer.

I accept that there are routes I'll never lead - either find a rope gun or move on to something else. If you want to bring it to your level - put up a FA. I don't see all the gray here. I'm a newbish leader and am far from bold, but I love that there is shit out there to aspire to (or even just campfire talk and never do).

Brian Scoggins wrote: Thread jack: if this is a "jewel", I'm glad I don't live out east.

Really? Nice try to get in a pissing contest. Go troll elsewhere please.

David Sahalie wrote: there is a big difference between spicy and certain death or serious injury.

Snake Dike is certain death or serious injury if you blow the runout parts. I take it we are all in favor of a retro?

Safe depends on who you are talking with. If you are not confident enough to know your climbing and where the fall potential for your skill set is on a route than you should not do it. If you bolted every route to have no commitment to the climbing what fun would climbing be?

Leaving a risk factor is a great approach to keeping traffic out of alot of places as well.

Dom wrote: I too live and climb in the Northeast.

no, you live in Southern Canada.