Mountain Project Logo

Ethics behind retro bolting how far do they go?

Nkane 1 · · East Bay, CA · Joined Jun 2013 · Points: 140
rockvoyager wrote:George you hit the nail on the head. The vast majority of folks that would retro-bolt a climb don't put up new climbs. To me it's a bit like politics: don't bad mouth the president if you don't vote. David. Come out to Nor Cal. You can stay at my place or camp in the Truckee area. We'll do a bunch of climbing and put up several new routes at a place called Bowman lake / The Emeralds. You can find it here on MP. We've been developing there for several years now and it's turning into a pretty cool place. Bring about 250 dollars because that's what it will take if we split the cost of bolts, hangers and chain for 10 climbs. We can stop at the hardware store for wire brushes and scrappers because most climbs will require at least a half hour of cleaning with some needing much, much more. Figure $35 to $40 dollars each trip for gas because the crag is 110 miles and two hours from my house. If you do this and still insist retro-bolting is OK I'll disagree but will at least respect your opinion. Outside of that, if you ever decide to road trip to the Donner Summit / Truckee area I'd be happy to show you and your friends around. Be warned though, I'm 65 years old so drinking and partying are a couple of decades ago for me. Brad
Damn, RockVoyager, I'll take that offer and I won't even argue about ethics. I'm planning on heading up to the Emeralds over Labor Day and would be happy to put in some labor! [zing!]
tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15
rockvoyager wrote:We've been developing there for several years now and it's turning into a pretty cool place. Bring about 250 dollars because that's what it will take if we split the cost of bolts, hangers and chain for 10 climbs. We can stop at the hardware store for wire brushes and scrappers because most climbs will require at least a half hour of cleaning with some needing much, much more. Figure $35 to $40 dollars each trip for gas because the crag is 110 miles and two hours from my house.
Brad, it sounds like you have been establishing routes for some time now (sorry if my assumption is incorrect), if you don't mind me asking, when you are placing fixed protection on these routes you are establishing, what is the driving force behind you doing so and the mindset behind how much protection you fix? I am interested to hear the perspective of someone who is actually putting the time/effort/money into this aspect of climbing.

The reason I ask is that I used to (naively I must admit) think that people would put up routes so that not only they could enjoy that accomplishment, but so that others could enjoy it as well (with a relative amount of safety i.e. you most likely won't die if you fall from any point). I understand that technology played a role in sparse placement as did the movement of the climb among many other factors.

But for you personally, are you placing just enough gear so you don't deck while establishing it, I am assuming you're going ground up? Or do you do it with the thought of others being able to complete safely as well, neither, or a combination of both? To add a disclaimer, I don't really have an opinion on what is preferable since I have never set a route, which is why I am intrigued to hear your perspective.
tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15
George Perkins wrote:I think this assumption on motivation is largely false when applied to most climbs established prior to about 1990. It seems like most older climbs were motivated by (a) adventure, or (b) pushing technical difficulty limits (whether personal or overall), or both, rather than as a contribution to the "community". (Some early exceptions to this might include the classic Urioste Red Rocks routes and climbs such as Crest Jewel, Birds of Fire, and Snake Dike though I imagine adventure was a motivator as well). Many more recent climbs, especially sport climbs, seem to be done in a manner to encourage repeat ascents.
Interesting, I figured that time played a role in the possible change in motivation but it was just an assumption. Do you currently set routes? It would be interesting to speak to someone who has been setting routes since the 90's and see if their motivation has changed or if it has stayed the same. Thanks for the input.
Fat Dad · · Los Angeles, CA · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 60

I'm not sure if you're just using the word "set" informally, or whether you believe everyone establishing a route is actually installing something. Many routes, probably most routes in fact prior to sport climbing, did not involve leaving behind any hardware. To paraphrase Doug Robinson (I think), who wrote that the goal of clean climbing was to leave no more signs of a climber's passage than a cloud's shadow moving across the face. Mug Stump's dream was to establish a sick route, tell no one about it and then have someone later climb the same route and report it as an FA.

This thread is starting to feel suspect. Whether intentional or not, you seem to have a preconceived notion of what climbing is. You seem intelligent and ask appropriate questions, but you also come across as very naive, almost like the stereotypical alien in a movie where the alien is the ingenue questioning why humans do things a certain way, teaching everyone a lesson by the end of the movie.

Greg D · · Here · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 883
Slartibartfast wrote: Did he not die after falling while free soloing? Remind me never to play Scrabble with you.
This has no relevance here. Most every route is X when you have no rope. I think he was on a G rated route. Bolts and gear and the style of the FA don't matter when you solo. Focus people, focus.
Greg D · · Here · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 883
David Sahalie wrote:While we are on hypotheticals... If these run out lines of yore are worth perserving, why hasnt the likes of Honnold repeated them? Is it possible that the tradition of ethically preservating run out slabs hasnt turned out to be the golden age to the be sought after? Or, were pre-gym honed, EB wearing, stonedmasters really that much more progressive than Honnold?
Because there is no such thing as a runout when you solo. Hello?
marty funkhouser · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2007 · Points: 20
Fat Dad wrote: This thread is starting to feel suspect. Whether intentional or not, you seem to have a preconceived notion of what climbing is. You seem intelligent and ask appropriate questions, but you also come across as very naive, almost like the stereotypical alien in a movie where the alien is the ingenue questioning why humans do things a certain way, teaching everyone a lesson by the end of the movie.
Yeah, the OP's tone reminds me of a certain passive-aggressive gf I used to have that would try to con me into watching a rom-com with her that she knew I'd hate. "Oh this one looks interesting...it has that new action star you like and I think there's a chase scene in it."

Also, enough with the hypothetical situations already. I'd like everyone to try and imagine a world without hypothetical situations. I know it can't really happen, but just imagine if such a world existed.
tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15

Fat Dad, my apologies on the ambiguous usage of the word "set", I figured readers would know I was referring to sport/mixed routes only. I am indeed aware that many routes are "set" or established using zero fixed gear. This discussion is meant to be about routes that cannot be protected with traditional gear.

In regards to your likening me into an alien in a sci-fi film, while comical, I must rebuttal. The reason I seem naive on the subject of retro-bolting is cause I honestly am, maybe it's not cool to admit that but given that I thought things were one way than found out they are another led me to want to learn more on the subject from those who were better versed.

My intentions behind not stating strong opinions but rather making a point to appreciate arguments from both sides is because I feel I don't have enough experience on this topic to form any strong opinions yet. I also feel that you can learn more from a conversation that is unbiased and open to many points of view. If this leaves you feeling that this whole convo is suspect I apologize for your misunderstanding and hope that clarifies my intentions behind the tone I have been using.

tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15

Now Jeff let's just take it easy with the accusations here, it's fair to say we know very little about one another and so let's maybe bring the personal attacks down a notch (until they are warranted that is).

In regards for you distaste towards hypotheticals, I have stated various times that this whole conversation has been purposefully created using hypothetical situations for reasons stated previously. If this irks you then by all means, pass on by, there are many a conversations out there on actual situations which I'm sure you could be much happier contributing too.

marty funkhouser · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2007 · Points: 20

That flew WAY over your head

tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15

Jeff, indeed it must have. Turns out translating proper tone through an online forum can be troublesome. I wasn't sure if your asking the readers to picture a hypothetical situation instead of hypothetical situations was intentional or just ironic.

But the XGF comment was just a low blow (no pun intended).

Steve Jones · · Fayetteville WV, · Joined Jun 2011 · Points: 105

My opinion, and I know it's not universally shared: The rock is a resource that belongs to the community, not the FA. It should be developed, or left undeveloped, for the benefit of the community (ideally including future generations of climbers, though we can't ask them directly what their wishes are). As a resource, it is not so vast that we can afford to write off chunks of it as, "oh well, I guess there's plenty of other routes." Most of us are geographically constrained on where we can climb except for rare vacations, and within an area only a fraction of routes are "high quality". So if the local climbing community reaches consensus that a route should be retroed, to me that matters more than the FAs opinion. Note that this is very different from, "anyone who decides to retro should be able to." But getting a local community to reach consensus, aye, there's the rub. In some places, an established "Friends of Crag X" group could be considered representative (assuming that it's open for any climber to join who cares to do so). In many communities, "Respect the the FA's wishes" might be the consensus, in which case that should be followed. And in many cases there won't be a consensus, in which case I'd advise to leave it as is unless/until a consensus does emerge otherwise.</quote

If it's public land, the route belongs to the public, the first ascent experience belongs to the first ascentionist. I respect the skill and mental control of anyone putting up a first ascent in bold style, and would ask them before retro-bolting (which I have never done). However, I don't think this means they own the climb.

Selfishness is an important consideration. Suppose a 5.13 climber puts up a 5.9X route on public land that no one climbs, as a result the climb becomes covered in lichen and moss. Should that climb be left in that condition forever? Suppose climber X asks permission of the first ascentionist to add a few bolts to make it 5.9 PG, is denied but there is a consensus in the local climbing community to add the few bolts. Then climber X adds the bolts so that a competent 5.9 leader can climb it with some degree of safety. Who is acting selfishly?

Nick Stayner · · Wymont Kingdom · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 2,315
Steve Jones wrote:My opinion, and I know it's not universally shared: The rock is a resource that belongs to the community, not the FA.
Such an odd, postmodern (can you imagine Yose or Eldo forefathers discussing such a thing?!) stance, so often heard from folks who have never had a hand in any kind of route development. I'm just curious where, for you, that idea comes from.
eli poss · · Durango, CO · Joined May 2014 · Points: 525

I can't answer for Steve jones, however I do share his opinion that the rock at a crag should be "governed" by the consensus of the local climbing community. And yes I do have experience, although limited, with route developement. The reason I have these veiws is that i heard, first hand, of the bad reputations climbers have to the rest of the world because of our arrogance, inflated egos, and alpha douchebaggery. This is reinforced by climbing in an area know for its "traditional values" and the lengths that these "defenders of traditional values" go to defending their overly sensitive ego is just baffling. People really need to grow some thicker skin and quit feeding their egos. People flip their shit over single bolts being added, despite having the FA approval that they so strongly defend

doligo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2008 · Points: 264

I have to agree with Steve on this one. If you have a small crag with limited resources, you either develop it to the consensus standards so it can be enjoyed by many (not necessarily everyone) or leave it alone. I'm not talking about a testpiece bold line, I'm talking about a moderate (by the given area standard, it could be 12s in say Rifle or 9s or 10s at some backwater crag).

Just went back today to give a new route a go as a cooldown at the end of the day. First of all, it looks like the FA took a ruler to it and evenly spaced bolts (the clipping stances are the worst). Secondly, while climbing is moderate and even easy in many places, all the ticking bombs sitting around made me feel like not only I may hurt myself but also my belayer. Only the FA knows which holds are "approved", so yeah while climbing is easy it's not necessarily safe. If you are not willing to put in more time to clean the route, at least sink more bolts so the route cleans up with traffic. Needless to say, I won't be rushing to get back on it, which is a shame because it does have some good movement and probably only .11ish.

Brad J · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2012 · Points: 471
Steve Jones wrote: Suppose a 5.13 climber puts up a 5.9X route on public land that no one climbs, as a result the climb becomes covered in lichen and moss. Should that climb be left in that condition forever? Suppose climber X asks permission of the first ascentionist to add a few bolts to make it 5.9 PG, is denied but there is a consensus in the local climbing community to add the few bolts. Then climber X adds the bolts so that a competent 5.9 leader can climb it with some degree of safety. Who is acting selfishly?
I've been reading this "hypothetical" throughout this thread. I don't know anyone that puts up 5.9x climbs today. Nobody! In my opinion it's irresponsible and dangerous for stronger, more experienced climbers to sandbag the less experienced. We spend an inordinate amount of time working out bolt placement. I like some spice and my buddy John prefers a bolt at his ankles. We argue all the time but eventually compromise. On our climbs if you're a 9/10 climber you can expect to be pushed a bit but you shouldn't be in sheer terror. If you're an 11/12 climber you'll be pushed a bit more. But nobody is gonna deck or break a bone. Occasionally I get in the mood to stretch the limits of smart. When I do it's noted in the guide with a warning.

In the context of this conversation. I know how much time, work and money it takes to open a new area. To put up climbs, build trails, create steps, clear out poison oak, put in cairns, do a quide, etc. I would NEVER disrespect the FA by retro bolting their climb without consent. On the rare occasion that I've felt a climb needed help, the FA's and the community were consulted. Had anyone been opposed I wouldn't have added the bolt.

A few people have suggested "who cares, it's only rock climbing". Maybe for them but for me it's much more than that. It's about my tribe, the places we go, the experiences we have. The sheer joy, the fear, and the quiet moments where you're connected to something much bigger than yourself. If you don't get that out of climbing find out where you do because it's an amazing experience to be part of.

Sometimes a climb calls to you. I believe the key is to not bring it down to your level but to gain the strength and experience to attempt it at its level. So to paraphrase someone up-thread "pull on your big boy pants" and sack up.

Brad
Brad J · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2012 · Points: 471
nkane wrote: Damn, RockVoyager, I'll take that offer and I won't even argue about ethics. I'm planning on heading up to the Emeralds over Labor Day and would be happy to put in some labor! [zing!]
nkane.

Don't know where we will be. Might be in the eastern Sierra's. PM me, I'll give you my number. If we're gonna be at Emeralds/Bowman would be happy to give you the tour or put you to work:-)
Steve Jones · · Fayetteville WV, · Joined Jun 2011 · Points: 105
Nick Stayner wrote: Such an odd, postmodern (can you imagine Yose or Eldo forefathers discussing such a thing?!) stance, so often heard from folks who have never had a hand in any kind of route development. I'm just curious where, for you, that idea comes from.
Actually, the first paragraph of my post was a quote from someone else. Somehow the initial quotes didn't display. Anyway, the climb I described is a real climb (not in the postmodern sense). The rest of the story is hypothetical, but the point applies.

I've put up my share of routes and hope to do many more. My concern is for the younger climbers and generations of climbers to come. Since rock is a finite resource, it seems they could, and maybe should, have some sense of stewardship of routes put up long ago.

I think most climbers, including me, respect bold first ascents. However, respect doesn't seem to be the same thing as granting the first acentionist absolute authority for all time over a route. In other words, I think the issue is about an elitist mentality of who "owns" the route.

Some folks respect people who have worked hard and become wealthy. That doesn't require granting the wealthy absolute authority over decisions that affect our "tribe".
Nick Stayner · · Wymont Kingdom · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 2,315

I guess I still don't see why you seem to think "the community" has a mandate to climb any and all rock in the area. I'd have to agree with CJC when answering your original question, that the ones acting selfishly are the ones who would dumb a route down without consent of the FA.

I still don't buy that living in an area with limited rock (a la Dolgio & Steve) gives more weight to the idea of rock as community resource. Please remember that you chose to live where you do. If the local climbing doesn't suit your preferences, I could list dozens of places you could choose to live where you definitely wouldn't encounter this problem.

tsaint · · Unknown Hometown · Joined May 2014 · Points: 15
rockvoyager wrote: I've been reading this "hypothetical" throughout this thread. I don't know anyone that puts up 5.9x climbs today. Nobody! In my opinion it's irresponsible and dangerous for stronger, more experienced climbers to sandbag the less experienced. We spend an inordinate amount of time working out bolt placement. I like some spice and my buddy John prefers a bolt at his ankles. We argue all the time but eventually compromise. On our climbs if you're a 9/10 climber you can expect to be pushed a bit but you shouldn't be in sheer terror. If you're an 11/12 climber you'll be pushed a bit more. But nobody is gonna deck or break a bone. Occasionally I get in the mood to stretch the limits of smart. When I do it's noted in the guide with a warning. In the context of this conversation. I know how much time, work and money it takes to open a new area. To put up climbs, build trails, create steps, clear out poison oak, put in cairns, do a quide, etc. I would NEVER disrespect the FA by retro bolting their climb without consent. On the rare occasion that I've felt a climb needed help the FA's and the community were consulted. Had anyone been opposed I wouldn't have added the bolt. A few people have suggested "who cares, it's only rock climbing". Maybe for them but for me it's much more than that. It's about my tribe, the places we go, the experiences we have. The sheer joy, the fear, and the quiet moments where you're connected to something much bigger than yourself. If you don't get that out of climbing find out where you do because it's an amazing experience to be part of. Sometimes a climb calls to you. I believe the key is to not bring it down to your level but to gain the strength and experience to attempt it at it's level. So to paraphrase someone up-thread "pull on your big boy pants" and sack up. Brad
Brad, thank you!!! This is exactly the type of insight I was looking for, meaning someone who has experience route/area development, all that goes into it and then carefully explaining why they have the perspective and opinion they do. Awesome response.

I think that you present two important perspectives; first that you mention that people route setting in our current day really aren't putting up 9x's (that you're aware of) and that if they were too "it's irresponsible and dangerous for stronger, more experienced climbers to sandbag the less experienced"; second, stating from your personal experience why you respect others FA wishes so strongly, which totally makes sense seeing it from your perspective.

I have to imagine the work that goes into developing a route and area has to be enormous, physically/financially and probably emotionally at times as well. And I liked how you brought up that even the buddy, that you mentioned you develop these areas with, disagree at times on bolt placement but then eventually come to a compromise.

Really enjoyed reading your response, thanks for posting!
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "Ethics behind retro bolting how far do they go?"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.