Bolting "ethics"

Can anyone tell me why KN placed a bolt 5' off the ground on Creation of the World?

The Coop wrote:Can anyone tell me why KN placed a bolt 5' off the ground on Creation of the World?

Dunno but here is Jim Lawyer's page on the climb... notice the title of the window when you load the page... might be some insight.

jimlawyer.com/Adirondacks/w…

The conversation here would be a lot simpler if folks would simply drop the pretense top anchors are anything but a proxy for the real topic at hand. The honest truth of the matter is a lot of folks wanted and still want to throw the gates open to drilling and sport climbing.

Assertions to the contrary are specious and less than honest. Get past that and you can have an honest conversation.

Healyje wrote:The conversation here would be a lot simpler if folks would simply drop the pretense top anchors are anything but a proxy for the real topic at hand. The honest truth of the matter is a lot of folks wanted and still want to throw the gates open to drilling and sport climbing. Assertions to the contrary are specious and less than honest. Get past that and you can have an honest conversation.

You don't live in state and you've said the same thing over and over and over and over and it still doesn't make it the case. There are areas that people want to place bolts for sport routes and there are areas that people want TR anchors. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't make it not true. There are examples in the state right now where Trad lines have bolted anchors, there are examples of bolted sport lines, there are even quite a few mixed routes... all stand in opposition to your assertion. Thanks for your comment... you and Jason should chat it up about how you feel a situation thousand or so miles away may or may not be.

No, I don't live there now, but that doesn't mean I won't be back to climb there again.

Just be honest, it's a complete smoke screen for the real issue at hand.

Healyje wrote:No, I don't live there now, but that doesn't mean I won't be back to climb there again. Just be honest, it's a complete smoke screen for the real issue at hand.

Honestly it's not and if I felt it were, I would be man enough to admit it, thanks Healy.

Maybe there are some folks that do but most folks here are being completely honest and dealing with all of the issues not just coating it over with broad generalizations born from deeply rooted personal causes. Over and over and over and over and over and over...

I'm sure, just as I'm sure the bolts which have gone in recently have all been for top anchors, right?

Healyje wrote:I'm sure, just as I'm sure the bolts which have gone in recently have all been for top anchors, right?

No they're not, but NO ONE is on here claiming they are! Stop making up stuff for you to moan about... no one cares. Land owners (including a State Forest Warden, and a local town) have given permission to some folks to bolt sport routes. That's the facts jack.

Maybe you should go replace some more bolted anchors in your own state - you seem to be fine with them there or did I just misread your comments?

ZOMBIE THREAD!

CaptainMo wrote: No they're not, but NO ONE is on here claiming they are! Stop making up stuff for you to moan about... no one cares. Land owners (including a State Forest Warden, and a local town) have given permission to some folks to bolt sport routes.

A local town that wasn't given anything like the whole picture or both sides of the story. That, jack, is the story.

CaptainMo wrote:Maybe you should go replace some more bolted anchors in your own state - you seem to be fine with them there or did I just misread your comments?

Already replaced the seventy four most used anchor sets, a local tradition. If it were up to me personally I'd have been removing them, not replacing them.

Healyje wrote: A local town that wasn't given anything like the whole picture or both sides of the story. That, jack, is the story. Already replaced the seventy four most used anchor sets, a local tradition. If it were up to me personally I'd have been removing them, not replacing them.

From my understanding the C3 group asked the town for permission to place bolts and received said permission, what's the other side of the story? Where were you at the time and why were you not involved if you had an issue with their request? Oh right...

Convenient of you to side step the fact that you are making up stuff when you're called on it. You're obviously a divisive person on here more willing to make accusations and inflammatory statements then actually identifying and dealing with the issues like some of us. Thanks for taking the time to enrich our lives. And you should just be honest with yourself Healy about your anchor replacement. Who would spend countless hours replacing gear they thought (as ardently as you do) should be removed from the cliff? Or is that comment just to make me worship your unworldly generosity?

If you come up with some con-struc-tive comments I would be glad to discuss and debate them with you but your current comments are nothing more then inflammatory and imaginative.

CaptainMo wrote:And you should just be honest with yourself Healy about your anchor replacement. Who would spend countless hours replacing gear they thought (as ardently as you do) should be removed from the cliff?

I would, it needed to be done. Fifty eight of those anchors were bad with both bolts spinners and several were complete death traps. I replaced them at my own time and expense. My personal opinion as to whether those anchors should or should not be there simply did not enter into it. Ditto the Peregrine closure, my personal opinions are irrelevant to both the policy and the fact I've put in hundreds of hours monitoring the nesting to help establish the opening date each year.

CaptainMo wrote:From my understanding the C3 group asked the town for permission to place bolts and received said permission, what's the other side of the story? Where were you at the time and why were you not involved if you had an issue with their request? Oh right...

And I needed to be there to know the requestors gave at least a brief rundown on the history of climbing in CT and the ongoing debate about said bolting? The fact you try to portray that request as somehow innocent and see no other side to the story in that incident pretty much says it all. Glad to see nothing has changed. See ya.

Healyje wrote:No, I don't live there now, but that doesn't mean I won't be back to climb there again. Just be honest, it's a complete smoke screen for the real issue at hand.

I haven't smoke screened anything, I will bolt as I see fit. end of story.

if you don't like it you are free to remove the bolts

ah this little exchange speaks volumes about Mr. Healy...

By James Markett
May 22, 2012

The first free ascent of this route was done by McGowan and Wright, not by Healy. Healy tried to claim first free ascent many years after the fact saying that he climbed it before the first ascentionists so that he could try to justify his retro bolting of the climb.
By Healyje
May 22, 2012

Excuse me? And who are you? The climb as not been retrobolted - it was rebolted (and you're welcome).

"Kenny Allen------------------------------------
I feel it should be noted that joe healy is NOT an official spokesperson for climbing at beacon rock... i do not want to seem defamatory toward him in any way, but he speaks only for himself and frequently acts without consulting any of the regulars who climb at beacon on a daily basis during the busiest climbing months.
-----------------------------------------------"

thank you for moving away from CT please do not come back.

Have you noticed how Kenny Nichols and his insanity becomes more "admirable" and his apologists more vocal the farther away from Connecticut (and the rest of New England) they are?

A quick look at this and the other recent "bolt ct" thread show it's climbers from far away Oregon, California, and that epi-center of climbing, Wisconsin who continue to think Nichols' approach to climbing is "the way."

Not surprisingly, the climbers from New England, who've dealt with him for years and years and years, see it a little differently...

One of the long distance supporters (who's personal exposure to Nichols was 2 years worth of climbing with him, many decades ago....) wants to make sure that "the whole picture or both sides of the story," is told.

Here's the "whole picture:" Nichols unilaterally decided for everyone in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and anywhere else he could drive to in a day, what climbing should be....

Kenny was definitely a "whole picture" sort of guy... The "whole picture" was "do it my way, or I'll chop." Keep in mind the "chopping" wasn't just removing the offending bolts and returning the rock to it's natural state. In Massachusetts, it almost always involved swinging a heavy hammer and smashing things.

Nichols' "side of the story" is that he didn't give a rat's behind about "the other side of the story."

Some may say "I agree with his philosophy but not his actions." Which is all very nice, except after all these years, his "actions" have become his "philosophy..." It isn't about bolting, but more about "Do it my way or I will punish you...."

From the other side of the country, it may be hard to see that; but, from right next door, it's pretty obvious.

Those of us, who haven't had the luxury of distance from Nichols and his wackiness over the years, are tired of him and his bs. We'd just like to move on...

It's 2012: sport climbing is not a crime. A few bolts on some scrappy cliffs in suburban Connecticut won't be the end of Western Civilization.

Really...

respectfully,

Ed E

ps. A quick question for the guy from Wisconsin, who lead the 5.11x on "tied down hooks:" How'd that go? Was it everything you imagined it would be? Think it will catch on, maybe be the "future of free climbing?" How many times did you tr that route before trying it on hooks?

you are 100% spot on with that post Ed.

Thank you

CaptainMo wrote: Dunno but here is Jim Lawyer's page on the climb... notice the title of the window when you load the page... might be some insight.

I know this is off topic (and refers to a comment on page 12), but I thought I would clarify for CaptianMo regarding the title of the referenced web page -- it is in error. The title ("Shitty Choss Pile from Hell") refers to the route "Weekend Warrior" at the Upper Washbowl (Adirondacks), the upper pitches of which are...well...shitty.

The route "Creation of the World" is quite to the contrary -- stellar. As I understand, one of KN's criteria for placing bolts is that they be placed on lead from natural stances (i.e., not from aid). He did just this on Creation of the World, the natural stance being the ground. Incidentally, this is the only bolt he placed in the Adirondacks. (Doesn't quite make up for the hundreds he chopped.)