Why Toproping?

@ Jon Moen

Yea, I see your point but I don't agree, "ego" fits what I am talking about. I also see how this can go both ways, ala Ken Nichols.

My point is that bolting is an intrusive process and should be avoided if possible. There's nothing wrong with TR'ing, it's still climbing, and to add bolts to something that can be easily TR'd just to create a little more "satisfaction" for the climber seems pointless considering the impact on the enviroment and the aesthetics of the natural world.

Overall I think if we all where to go somewhere and evaluate climbs to bolt or not to bolt we would agree 99% of the time. Unfortunately on the internet a higher understanding of a persons meaning when they write is lost. If you were to climb at DL regularly I think the TR/Headpoint ethic would become quite clear and you would become pretty stoked about the community and the climbing because it's a fairly unique experience.

+1 what Red Tagger said:

"My point is that bolting is an intrusive process and should be avoided if possible. There's nothing wrong with TR'ing, it's still climbing, and to add bolts to something that can be easily TR'd just to create a little more "satisfaction" for the climber seems pointless considering the impact on the enviroment and the aesthetics of the natural world."

I believe humans have reached the glutony (glutany? Not sure how to spell it properly but hopefully you deduce what I'm talking about if I've spelled it wrong) stage with bolts already. Climbing is not needed for life; food, shelter and water are so if we can't plug some bolts in our existence/experience does not end. It'll all be alright!

We also need to acknowledge that toproping was crucial in ALL of the dangerous leads with hooks done in CT that I witnessed.

Its not like these leads were done ground up first try with hooks.

They were toproped for DAYS sometimes. Then the hooks were placed on lead and the route down climbed to tie them down.

So in some cases toproping was the ONLY way these climbs would ever get lead.

I know many of you on here are very experienced and know this already... this post is for those that don't know how these supposed "ethical" climbers conduct operations.

thefish wrote:We also need to acknowledge that toproping was crucial in ALL of the dangerous leads with hooks done in CT that I witnessed. Its not like these leads were done ground up first try with hooks. They were toproped for DAYS sometimes. Then the hooks were placed on lead and the route down climbed to tie them down. So in some cases toproping was the ONLY way these climbs would ever get lead. I know many of you on here are very experienced and know this already... this post is for those that don't know how these supposed "ethical" climbers conduct operations.

Multiple ropes and belayers at times too - quite the circus for sure. But when the dust has settled the rock was (mostly) unmarred. Worth it? worthy effort? the answer is not so black and white. A lot of similar tactics are used on the Grit in the UK and it seems more acceptable there.

chufftard wrote:The TR tradiban is turning these areas like CT, the Needles and basically as of GB into museum pieces where no one climbs. Just because you can climb a classic line on a single piece of gear, doesn't mean you should be able to hold it hostage forever. You guys are like the Tea Party of climbing.

there is no TR taliban, its one egotistical extremist holding an entire state hostage in the case of CT.

I challenge anyone on here to name a CT climber who has chopped an entire route other than KN.

thefish wrote: there is no TR taliban, its one egotistical extremist holding an entire state hostage in the case of CT.

he has plenty of minions dont fool yourself

Eric Engberg wrote: Multiple ropes and belayers at times too - quite the circus for sure. But when the dust has settled the rock was (mostly) unmarred. Worth it? worthy effort? the answer is not so black and white. A lot of similar tactics are used on the Grit in the UK and it seems more acceptable there.

I have no problem with the tactics however it does not give someone the right to dictate what other first ascensionists do with their routes. And it certainly doesn't give someone the right to go chop areas in other states.

As I said before, I and several other climbers will now do as we please knowing full well the consequences. We WILL bolt routes that are our first ascents and other routes that we get permission to do so.

TRmasta wrote: he has plenty of minions dont fool yourself

OK name them.

no offense to you sir but you can't because he doesn't, and especially none that have the balls to go out chopping.

thefish wrote: As I said before, I and several other climbers will now do as we please knowing full well the consequences. We WILL bolt routes that are our first ascents and other routes that we get permission to do so.

Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?

Tom Mulholland wrote: Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?

do you know what the community consensus is in CT?

I've been climbing here for 20 plus years and I'd say that the community would like to have some sport climbs that coexist with trad climbs.

We will bolt our first ascents and other climbs that we are given permission to do so.

Tom Mulholland wrote: Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?

I think what he means is there is consensus within the smaller community he climbs in and stated that consensus.

I also have a very tough time buying a lot of the scaring the rock arguments above. There are numerous quarries around CT and I haven't heard of a single protest yet from the climbing community. If you care about a 3/8" hole shouldn't you care about entire cliffs being blow apart elsewhere in the state?

Second, a 3/8" bolt hole can easily be filled with glue and patched to the extent that you'd have to know that it's there to ever find it (when done right) AND you'd have to be a climber on the rope staring at rock 6" from your face. Scaring the rock yes... can it be repaired yes. So in regards to RedTagger it's intrusive to a point but in the end the damage isn't exactly as scaring or intrusive as one would think.

thefish wrote: I've been climbing here for 20 plus years and I'd say that the community would like to have some sport climbs that coexist with trad climbs. We will bolt our first ascents and other climbs that we are given permission to do so.

Bam x2!

top roping is fun...

Id garner to say its how 99% of people on this forum started climbing.

Aka you thought it was fun too..you probably loved it. Its why you moved on into more advanced forms of climbing.

Its cute that now that you climb trad you come back to bash the thing that originally introduced you into climbing.

unless im completely wrong and everyone just started leading trad out of the blue one day...

CaptainMo wrote: Bam x2!

See now I have consensus from the community.

camhead wrote:One thing that has not been mentioned here yet: toproping almost always will cause more environmental impact than bolting a route.

You mean apart from the permanent destruction of the rock from bolting.

To get back to what the OP asked (at least what I think he asked), some routes are/were toproped instead of bolted because based on the belief that bolts permanently damage the rock, so why bolt if it's just as easy to TR? Ethic vary in different places, but in some places that still holds true. In some places, that never was an issue. In other places (Josh is probably a good example of this), an initial reluctance gave way to acceptance and you now see all kinds of stuff bolted that most never wanted to bother with before.

It's not that there's a "TR Taliban", (although KN probably fits that bill but he's an extremest) it's that people like me are asking to preserve at least some of this type of climbing and for people to please consider if bolting is really necessary.

If a person thinks TR is lame at these certain crags then I highly suggest leading the routes on gear. For me there's no better satisfaction (which is what the OP is looking for) than figuring out the gear and tactics to lead a dangerous route safely. The process of investing the time into a project and having those "aha!" moments are priceless to me and to shortcut that process by clipping bolts ruins all that. Again, and I feel like I have to keep repeating this, if there is in fact 0% chance that a climb can be TR'd or led on gear then by all means bolt it but if there's any chance it can please leave it alone for future climbers to challenge the mind and body.

As for the comment that this only creates relics that nobody climbs I wholly disagree. Preserving these routes in their natural state provides something for many climbers to aspire to and besides there are many options out there for people climb if they choose not to embark on the experience of a mind-bending lead.

What hasn't come up yet is the argument that people like me can simply skip the bolts. This idea is the go to for the bolting crowd and I'm surprised it hasn't come up yet, thus in interest of moving this along I will go there myself. I thought alot about this and my response is that skipping bolts does two things; First, the entire aesthetics of the climb is changed. The best analogy I can think of is if your favorite MTB single-track has just been paved so that everyone can then enjoy it. It's the same track as before and the same scenery as well but I think we can agree the experience is different and for me the ride would not be as "satisfactory" as before.
Second, it forces the leader to be needlessly reckless. By skipping the bolts the trad leader is put into an ethical quandary. How can I justify to myself not clipping these when it's so easy to do so? Climbing the same route without the bolts places the decision of risk solely into the climbers hands. Using the same analogy of the single-track it would be like offering a ski lift ride over a possible drop off, if a rider where to choose to take the drop-off and crash people would say "What a fucking idiot, why didn't he take the ski lift?". Without the existence of the ski lift the drop off would be a simple inherent risk of riding that route.

superkick wrote:top roping is fun... Id garner to say its how 99% of people on this forum started climbing. Aka you thought it was fun too..you probably loved it. Its why you moved on into more advanced forms of climbing. Its cute that now that you climb trad you come back to bash the thing that originally introduced you into climbing. unless im completely wrong and everyone just started leading trad out of the blue one day...

When the thing that you may have loved at one point in time is glaringly causing negative effects on your climbing area and the living things that reside in it it's a little tough to take such a nostalgic view. Not to mention the person that fails to recognize those effects also then becomes part of the problem and not the solution.

A note on the "consensus" argument:

How was this consensus obtained? Was there a vote? Likely not, the consensus spoken of is simply the impression people get from talking to other climbers. This is not a consensus and the using it to justify an action is false. Besides, even if there was a fair vote and a true consensus this doesn't make it right. If the majority of people agreed that murder is justifiable would you agree too?

thefish wrote: See now I have consensus from the community.

No you're right, I don't know what the community consensus is in CT. Thus, the question, as it did seem (only from what I've read so far in the thread) that the consensus was TR if possible in some areas. I'm just curious if by community you mean 'my small group of friends/followers and I' or you mean a large chunk of experienced, local climbers (say, >50%).