Ethical Question

Add the bolts, climb it, have fun, don't worry about the FFA.

drmartindell wrote:It needed two more bolts before we were ready to try and lead it... One of them racked up and started leading the route. He managed to protect the sections we were going to add the last two bolts by slinging this shitty sharp horn of rock and plugging a cam into a flaring horrible crack.

sounds to me those "two more bolts" aren't necessary ;)

Have the two parties made any attempt to contact each other and work it out? That seems like the obvious thing to do.

CJC wrote: No. Do not add bolts to an existing route without consulting the first ascensionist. Thought everyone knew that???

Normally I would agree with you but in this case the FAer was a jerk who should have left the route alone until finished, or at least commu nicated with the original bolters. The main problem now is that you have a route with questionable gear at the bottom and bolts at the top. Makes more sense to me to add the bolts.

I say bolt the living shit out of it, its still your project

MJMobes wrote:I say bolt the living shit out of it, its still your project

Haha I agree just because it's such a small group of climbers and it would be an interesting study of a climbing ethics micro-environment.

CJC wrote: how was he a jerk? seems to me like the butthurt guys who slept on completing the route were the jerks. anyway the fact remains that the route has been completed without the bolts and if we start going around and adding bolts to routes we think need them it will be total anarchy man! would-be FA doesn't own the route, he installed some bolts and failed to finish equipping the route according to his own standards. fair game for someone else to climb it according to their own standards. would this discussion be different if the actual FA added his own bolts? i think there would still be self-righteous outrage, just about that instead. Sounds to me like the whiners are trying to hide behind this issue of safety when in fact its just butthurtitude.

Your points are all valid but I still think that in this case it makes sense to add the bolts rather than leave a route with crappy trad gear mixed with bolts.

So, it seems that the real problem is an in-pure society eh?

CJC wrote: if we start going around and adding bolts to routes we think need them it will be total anarchy man! e.

Exactly, down with free speech and differing opinions, the fascist way is the only way. Shit, my way is the only way. If you don't agree you will be labeled a mongrel, a traitor, a sissy, and an enemy of the fascist climbers of noobia.

But seriously,

If you can't handle conflict and the varying desires of other people you should move to Russia or Eastern Europe, I head they do traditionalism real well.

You found it so you can bolt it and complete your project or you can give up and take one in the hole.

Let us know how it goes.

Choices choices choices.

drmartindell wrote:A friend of mine was working on a route for a couple of years....

Couple of years...hmmm...

Sounds like a low enough traffic area that the additional bolts wouldn't be a deal, but, I guess I'd suggest to start and finish another route in a more timely fashion.

Probably not that strange of a circumstance that a route mostly finished but left unfinished for several years got led, especially if it yielded features the made it reasonable to lead.

Finish what ya start is the moral of the story here, mostly, methinks. Next time maybe find a way to finish the route, sans bolts even (pre place gear, hang slings or a long rope down with loops, whatever). Then, at least you got the FA, as contrived as it is. Then when you go back and add bolts, there's no controversy (or minimal at least).

Brian in SLC wrote: Couple of years...hmmm... Sounds like a low enough traffic area that the additional bolts wouldn't be a deal, but, I guess I'd suggest to start and finish another route in a more timely fashion. Probably not that strange of a circumstance that a route mostly finished but left unfinished for several years got led, especially if it yielded features the made it reasonable to lead. Finish what ya start is the moral of the story here, mostly, methinks. Next time maybe find a way to finish the route, sans bolts even (pre place gear, hang slings or a long rope down with loops, whatever). Then, at least you got the FA, as contrived as it is. Then when you go back and add bolts, there's no controversy (or minimal at least).

Would it would be "fair" to claim an FA if you lead the route clipping into a loop of rope hanging down from above for pro instead of using the Protection the route offers?

I put fair in quotations because I realize fairness can be quite subjective.

Shelton Hatfield wrote: Would it would be "fair" to claim an FA if you lead the route clipping into a loop of rope hanging down from above for pro instead of using the Protection the route offers? I put fair in quotations because I realize fairness can be quite subjective.

I think "ethics" need quotes too and from now on I'll do so.

Tonto wrote: Yes, the people who clean, bolt, and equip routes are a bunch of Jerks when they don't do it quick enough for my liking. Fuck em, they should all be in prison. Struction of the vironment and all.

they are not "ethical" enough for many on Mountain"Ethics".com

"Ethics are bit a like an erection, no matter how well intended they are prone
to sudden deflation"

Dougal Haston

How bizarre... I was actually involved in a similar incident from the other side. A friend and I climbed a partially bolted route that some other friends had 'put in' but it turned out they hadn't actually finished it. They hadn't put some bolts in the middle and assumed no one else would climb it without them. Didn't red tag anything down lower either... anyway it was awkward when they thought we had stolen their route! Turned out OK 'cause we didn't care to claim an FA...

In your situation bolt the rest of it and see what happens. In the future beware of leaving half finished projects...

Shelton Hatfield wrote: Would it would be "fair" to claim an FA if you lead the route clipping into a loop of rope hanging down from above for pro instead of using the Protection the route offers? I put fair in quotations because I realize fairness can be quite subjective.

Well, if you're rappelling down the route, cleaning it and installing bolts...

Interesting question, though.

I guess its kind of a slippery way to claim an FA lead and still have an out for going back later and adding the bolts you intended to add.

If the route isn't offerring adequate/reasonable protection, then, maybe its a way around that?

I've put up routes that were way to spicy to leave for the general population to stumble upon in their unprotected state. I've gone back and added additional bolts to these routes that I'd already led and got the FA on. I think that's ok. Never reported the route as done or undone to begin with, but, I knew I could get it in the bank because I'd already led it (knowledge through pre-inspection, sometimes pre-placed pro, etc).

Best policy is to just try to not leave the job unfinished. Next best is leading it even if it is unfinished.

New routing can be time consuming, and, exhausting. And, if you put a ton of effort into a route, cleaning, placing protection, susssing out how it oughta be, then, it does seem pretty unfair that someone strolls up and takes advantage of your hard efforts and snags the FA. Its best just to avoid that situation if possible.

You can't expect a route to lay fallow for years while you get around to finish it either. I guess if I had a work in progress (and...in a few places I do), then, I just couldn't be too bummed that someone finished the route off with an FA, especially one in what I'd consider good style, and, maybe even better style. If you're in it for the long haul, learn a few lessons, take your lumps, and carry on. Hopefully folks will recognize your contribution anyhow.