SCC Community Forum

Paul, I'm not sure who's who, but I was standing by the door. We're already talking past each other. Right up at the top of my post, in the disclaimer, I said “I do not condone retro bolting. I do not condone bolting cracks.” I'm not debating those things with you and I don't think I've heard anyone else do so. I forgot to add “I do not condone chiseling holds”, but so far you guys haven't accused the SCC of buying everyone chisels, so I didn't know that was under discussion. Bolting any route that isn't a previously established trad route or splitter crack is, in my opinion, grey area. You seemed to just admit that drilling a bolt on Rice Krispies instead of duct taping hooks may make sense. I agree with that. Kenny Hibbits apparently disagreed. He pissed farther than us. Until he got to the top apparently, where there are two bolts. It doesn't change from one org's territory to the next, or even one crag to the next. It changes from every first ascencionist and FA'd route to the next. If you had climbed Rice Krispies first, you may have declared that section unprotectable and placed a bolt. Kenny Hibbits thought differently. Someone else maybe wouldn't have placed a taped hook OR bolted it and just run it the hell out. I don't think any of you would have been right or wrong. And thankfully nobody was shouting at the meeting, but I don't think it's too off base to characterize the last thread as shouting.

I don't think anybody is defending retro bolting – we're not having a conversation about that, so you guys can stop shaking your head. I'm just saying that I don't think there's as much of it as you guys imply. And I say imply because you still have not explicitly told us which routes are retro bolted. Throughout this entire argument, I've only heard 1 single confirmed retro bolt mentioned. ONE. The sky is not falling. Trad climbing is not ruined. The SCC is not plotting to destroy trad climbing. There's always going to be debate and there's always going to be a dickbag that retro bolts a line or chisels a hold. It's not right, but let's not all lose our minds.

Ben, you're right, nobody can respond to your points with any substance because we can't figure out what the hell your point is. You want to “preserve the tradition of the activity”. Well that's crystal clear, I think we can all get behind that, nothing subjective or debatable there. I agree, let's all ride horses to the crag and hammer in pitons for protection, ground up in our mountain boots of course. I've always thought those new fangled spring loaded camming doohickeys and fancy climbing shoes dumbed down the experience. Your posts are barely intelligible, let alone substantive. And who the hell was dancing around the topic in ATL? The SCC answered to the best of its ability to every one of the accusations you guys threw at it, which I thought was pretty nice way for them to spend their free time considering you guys already made it clear that you hate them and everything they stand for. I can only assume you're not SCC members. In response, when you guys were asked directly which Yellow Bluff routes have been retro bolted, nobody knew! Nobody knew!! A single route was named (which was bolted by someone from ATL, not Chatt). All the build up for that meeting and you guys couldn't bother to name more than one retro bolt, despite “50%” of the place being retro bolts? Who was dancing around the topic? You don't want crags to look like YB. Tell us, what does YB look like today? When was the last time you were there? How many routes have been retro bolted? Which ones? How has Castle Rock been dumbed down? Didn't you say you've never been there? Hell, here's an easy one, can you name 5 retro bolts at Sand Rock? If you don't actually have a point, nobody can respond with anything of substance because there's nothing to respond to. You're just bitching. Nobody's asking you to sing Kumbaya, but until you can actually make a concrete point and tell somebody which routes at YB, or anywhere for that matter, are retro bolted, nobody wants to hear you bitch about it.

I largely agree with Stone Brew, but to act like there is no subjectivity in his “simple” list of rules is silly. And then he's upset about, among other things, the “flat out illegal bolting... running rampant in the Southeast”. I clicked on his profile and the first thing I saw was a pic of Laurel Knob. I clicked on Laurel Knob and the description says:

“For many years, Laurel Knob was The Un-named Crag, a secret destination known to the chosen few. Climbing was illegal here, but that didn’t stop the determined climbers who saw the imposing granite dome rising out of Lonesome Valley near Big Green Mountain...”

So is it cool when any trad folks illegally bolt routes, or just the “chosen few”? Because I've heard Paul and Ben going on about that like it's evil and only the SCC and sport climbers are doing that. I'm a bit confused now. Is it OK if I illegally bolt some routes on private property, just to preserve the tradition of the activity? What if I do it ground up? Can I trespass if nobody knows I'm there? It's hard to take anything you guys say seriously with these sorts of double standards and logical inconsistencies.

Here's where I think you've misunderstood me in this thread, Wes. I've had some very positive interactions with SCC folk at, and since, the meeting. I've offered my help, and been taken up on it. Lots goin on behind the scenes that I would consider positive. A great deal of it I've agreed to keep confidential and not publicly throw anybody under the bus...and I won't. I think there are some very well meaning and engaged volunteers within the SCC...I also think there's some outdated representation and dead weight to be dealt with internally, and I expect it will be. So...I'm not in here bashing the SCC...that was the other thread.

In here I have tried to get folks to weigh in on where they stand on some things. I've certainly made my position known...unpopular as it may be. I'm not saying sport climbing shouldn't exist. I'm not saying that trad trumps sport. I am, however, saying that protectable routes should not be bolted just because somebody got there with a drill before somebody got there with a rack...no matter what the locals, the community, the consensus, or any other entity has to say about it. That's a position I won't back down from and see no grey area in. Orange Crush, for example, would be a sport route today if Will hadn't grabbed his rack at an SCC trail day to keep it from turning into one...isn't that right? That's the kind of thing I wanna discuss here.

So as not to ever be accused of cheerleading again.....

I've been climbing for about five years, mostly in the southeast. I love both sport and trad climbing, though I find myself enjoying trad climbing the most. It is perhaps because the best climbing in North Carolina is mostly trad.

But there are bolts. And sport routes. I have climbed up gear routes with unprotected features, and whilst searching for gear, spotted that beautiful bolt. That bolt that keeps me from decking on a ledge. That bolt that takes away the R rating. Call me a puss.

But more than anything, when I'm on a climb that I know was bolted ground up, I have a sort of deference towards the individual who, by his own ethical standard, chose to take the risk. At stone mountain NC, when I climbed no alternative, I knew there was a bit of a run out on the second pitch. No worries, easy climbing. But to climb up there and find those pods, and to know someone climbed up that with a hand drill until he had sufficient footholds, and then drilled by hand a bolt, all the while a giant grater waiting for him should he slip, is irrefutably badass. And humbling.

I have not the time to ramble, or to address everything that I would like. But I shall cite an example and everyone may draw their own conclusions. Over the winter I was at stone and said hello to a climbing couple doing the first pitch of block route, up to the first chains. College aged, the male says to me that he climbed the great arch yesterday. I asked him how it was. He said fun, but his look defied him. He proceeded to tell me that him and his girlfriend were from Kentucky, and climbed at the red river gorge a lot, and that a friend had recommended stone, because it was one of the only "sport destinations in NC". The poor lad had only brought three cams with him, and only one would fit. All the way up the arch. Needless to say he was still shook the next day.

Should stone mountain be retro bolted? So the ill prepared don't meet an untimely fate? We all know the answer.

I used to think NC ethics were cruel, and sadistic, but I was a noob. I now appreciate ethics meant to preserve nature, as nature was the reason I began climbing. I admire ground up tactics. I also love the red river gorge, and appreciate the ethic used out there. For when I want to feel really, really safe whilst "projecting at my limit".

I did not attend the scc meeting, and hope it has set the wheels of change in motion for the better, and I do not think cracks should be bolted, for the record.

If I'm cheering for anything, its for people to respect nature, and not to treat climbing lightly, but to use it to more appreciate what we have been given.

Best,
Ari

Wes...
My position is documented and clear.
If you don't understand, read faster.
Let's talk next Friday.
I welcome all questions.

Factually, I and my family have contributed lots of dollars and a couple hundred or more hours to the SCC.
So....mmmnnaw.
Keep your speculations going.
There are other donors who have backed out of late over these issues.

Can you or someone bring a copy of the new DCA to the meeting, please??
I don't have a copy.
We'll discuss YB, with pictures handy, so you can keep up.

And, thanks Ari....
NC is near and dear to me as well.
Good points.

The whole "bolt near protectable features" is such a "rabbit hole" in essence reductio ad absurdum, as I have pointed out. Some ppl need no bolts (ie Petit on 13d limestone)...so "trads" say (?)

It's pretty silly statement when you break it down~ "don't bolt near protectable features". Just think about it. I can post miles of lessons learned here and thoughts having done FA's in all styles~and I will, if necessary, but I'll just let it lie w/ this:

Some years ago out west the idea was floated to have S instead of 5 to designate a sport route...I'd be a lot less concerned with "what passes for trad" nowadays (cough cough) if this system was in place....

wwes wrote:It's hard to take anything you guys say seriously.

You make a number of interesting points.

I am curious about Castle. Years ago we tried one of the main routes Predator, which had a decent runout in the bottom 1/2 from my spotty memory. The protection was a mess of pitons and not great bolts. I remember really wanting some trad gear to back up the next bolt (3rd? it was pretty far off the deck...), which, if failed, would be a catastrophic fall.

It looks like more recently the area has been seeing some safety work and I'm sure those old shankers have been replaced as well as the pitons (have they?) but I'm curious if anyone added some bolts down lower to make it less sporting and more "sport"....

mountainproject.com/v/preda…

It looks like no one has bolted "not near protectable features" and left the runout in. If I am mistaken please correct me here.

& if we are really gonna start talking ethics fellas, well, removable bolts, pre-inspection, sneak rehearsal, "cleaning" on rap and calling it "ground up trad" isn't really going to float my boat. "No Frigg'n"...

taipan jam wrote:Some years ago out west the idea was floated to have S instead of 5 to designate a sport route...I'd be a lot less concerned with "what passes for trad" nowadays (cough cough) if this system was in place....

This is a interesting point and one that could be considered quite applicable here in the South.
What seems to be occurring more recently is that if a cliff is newly opened or, in the case of Castle Rock, sort of has a renaissance, the current 'in' thing to do is go in and bolt virtually everything.
This, to me, comes from a very gym-oriented mentality, but that's another discussion.

Deep Creek is an example.

A system such as yours, if documented correctly in the South, would serve to preserve the history BOTH "sport" and "trad" areas/routes.
Instead of the premise being that an entire area gets designated as one or the other, a well documented list of "S routes" and subsequent monitored development of "S routes", given finite resources, would seem to solve a lot of problems.
If an area is already a "S route" area, that should become well known and established.
If mixed, it would negate "S route creep" as we have observed in Alabama, lately...and at Castle, as I understand.

Rob Robinson's TWall guidebook is sort of laid out like this.

Documented or not, it is this sort of oversight that needs be considered and applied appropriately by the org that claims management.
This is sort of what is happening, as Paul says, "behind the scenes".
I am optimistic.

Since I'm getting hammered with this assertion a lot in this thread myself, let me say this. If you can look at the above photo and find any way at all to justify it...I have a hard time taking anything YOU say seriously.

well the way it is in your neck of the woods is what the following comments are directly about I think , but as for the southern climbing being kept pure, I think that safety and access should be the deciding factor. is the search and rescue system up to the staunch task?

here, these are just a two comments from the Link Paul B, posted

Id# 106574350, 600 x 450px
Comments on Photo Add Comment
By Mark Michaels
From: Draper, UT
May 21, 2012

So, I guess your point is to show that these climbs can be protected naturally, so the bolts are a waste?

Whatever dude.

A lot of budding climbers don't have the rack, the skill, or the knowledge to do so. Having a few bolted routes on a scruffy little chunk of rock like this won't hurt anyone. Some of those placements don't look all that solid to me, given the rock is a little suspect. But regardless, you could have posted a few photos of the ROUTES. If you wanna make a comment about the quality of these routes, then go to the forums. This is a beta page to help climbers FIND routes.

Climb on!

zzxzxzxzxzxzxzzxxzzxzxzxzzxzxzxzxxzzxzzxxzxzzxxzxzxzzxzxxzxzxzzxzzxzxzzxzxzxzxzxzzzxzx
By Bonneville
From: Salt Lake City, Utah
Oct 3, 2014
I agree with Mark. This guy is a tool. Friggin' trad climbers these days...
zzzzzzxzxzxzxzxxzxzxzxzxzxxxzxzxzzxxzxzxzxzxzxzxzxxzzxxzzxxzxzxzzxxzxzxzxzxz..........

Ok then so the old debate may rage on
but it is the Modern era,
sad though it is, the safety of the climbers is not just an individual s right .
Given the numbers of climbers, now demands that some group effort to make things safe to maintain access, that there be some anchors and good safe Fixed BOLTS.

Bolting protectable cracks?
what a shame to loose a climb that would have taught climbers how to climb.
but i see that it is a new thing, happening .

sorry if this is incoherent to you but i come from the same place as Paul B on this and know it is an unmaintainable position...
they have bolted the Gunks and Skytop !!!just saying...

So now the availability of rescue should be considered in the protection of a rock climb? That's a new one. But it is exactly what I've asked for...people's thoughts on the matter and why they feel the way they do. So keep em comin...

(Just know that I'm really biting my tongue on that one because I DID ask for the input)

Come on now, there is no rescue! The Bubbhas i have met on squads in the south are scary mostly in leather shoes!
the main thing is keep the disagreement between styles low key, don't let this derail development,

You may have a point when it comes to Marion County, but I think the Hamilton County Rescue Service Cave/Cliff unit is pretty much on top of their game.

I have just never even considered that when it comes to deciding how to protect a rock climb. And I don't think it is justification for things like the photo above.

Michael Schneider wrote: the main thing is keep the disagreement between styles low key, don't let this derail development,

The attitude of the "development" is the problem. We don't need more dumbed down climbing areas so more people can flock to the cliff with their hammocks.

We need to keep the price of admission to the game high... that is the only way to ensure that new people learn the necessary skills required to play without creating the shit shows that endanger access. Just because you bought a three month gym membership doesn't entitle you to demand that the majority of outdoor routes be bolted in a style that caters to your skill levels.

The fact that most Chattanooga/Atlanta bolters seem to be operating with this crowd in mind is lowering the standard of our sport, and while the SCC may not approve, they certainly seem to have condoned and enabled it.

I will be keeping my money. If the SCC enacts a policy that condemns the current "bolt the world" attitude, the bolting of routes that could be safely led on gear, shuns the folks who are known for doing it, and institutes some type of program aimed at reforming the attitude of the masses coming from the gyms, I will gladly send them a large check. It won't actually be for a lot of money... the check itself will just be really fucking big.

I believe that Stone Brews points and the statement by Paul that "somewhere between the CCC and nothing is a spot that most all of us can get behind" represent almost all of my climbing partners points of view.

P.S. Thanks to Paul and Ben for keeping at this. There are a lot of people around who feel the same way but don't want to be on line.

edited:

Paul Barnes wrote:You may have a point when it comes to Marion County, but I think the Hamilton County Rescue Service Cave/Cliff unit is pretty much on top of their game. I have just never even considered that when it comes to deciding how to protect a rock climb. And I don't think it is justification for things like the photo above.

Two points to this:
1. You shouldn't have to consider this. If you want to play, you should be willing to accept that you are responsible for your own actions and whatever consequences might arise from them. If not, stay indoors.
2. Hamilton County is great because the have people like Dr Wells and Kirk Brode (amongst others) who are supremely capable rock climbers, and according to what they said publicly in the other forum and at the meeting, are also very concerned about the path things are taking. You are responsible for yourself and if they volunteer to help you out it's because they are upstanding folks, not because it was owed to you.

Ben, even your post to me isn't clear. Especially since you keep editing it. So I should read faster? Like read faster so I can read all of this thread and the last one? Does it matter if I read fast or will I still understand if I read slowly? You said you welcome all questions, but I just asked you about nine of them and you didn't answer a single one. Neither did anyone else. Nobody could answer my question at the last meeting either. I don't know what else to do but assume you don't have any answers. I stand corrected about your participation in the SCC. Please feel free to be as disrespectful as you please. I don't know exactly what “verbal tactics sport/trad” means, but I will agree with you that this shouldn't be sport vs trad. I also agree that it's all gonna be OK. That's exactly my point actually. Mountain Project says there are 52 routes at Yellow Bluff and I'm sure there are more. You've named 1 retro bolt so far. Please do bring a guidebook to the next meeting so you can be a little more specific than you have been so far. Next time, maybe you could do that at the first meeting instead of the third. Or better yet, right here where everybody can see and discuss and where you've been asked directly, especially considering how much we've had to hear you guys say “transparency”. I'm sorry if I ain't making sense to you. Read faster.

Paul, I agree you've calmed down in this thread, and I appreciate that. But the SCC Community Forum that this thread is named after was, in my understanding, called because a bunch of people were pissed off and had some pretty strong words for the SCC. You were one of the louder voices. The last thread didn't cease to exist. I don't see why you should need to be understood differently in different forum posts. I agree with about 98% of what you're saying and I don't think that your position is as unpopular as you want to make it out to be. Has anybody in either of these threads said that they think retro bolting is cool? I know a ton of sport climbers, and not a single one of them is going around looking to retro bolt trad routes. They get that's not cool and are fine with that. Some of them even go climb those trad routes on occasion. Gym kids aren't showing up to the crags with power drills every day. They're showing up with 6 quickdraws and a rope and climbing whatever the hell that will get them up. They don't have anyone to show them how to trad climb and they sure as hell haven't bought a trad rack yet. Let's show them that retro bolting trad lines isn't cool without first belittling them for being a bunch of idiot wusses and I'll bet they'll all listen and none of them will ever go on to bolt a trad line. Yes, Orange Crush would have been bolted if Will hadn't been there. Luckily, Will was there to set a good example. He also set a good example in the last thread by trying to understand what you guys had a problem with and by talking to you in a calm and respectful manner. He mostly just got shit on for his trouble, despite the fact he also agrees with 98% of what you're saying. If you want your opinions to be heard, calm down and articulate them better. If you guys had put together a list of retro bolts at Yellow Bluff and said “Hey SCC and climbing community, we found all these retro bolts and we'd like to work with you guys to address that”, I bet that plenty of people would get behind you. But if you guys start the conversation with one verifiable retro bolt, a vague "50%" assertion, and the position that sport climbers are generally lazy wusses and they all just want to bolt every 5.9 turd pile in the South, people aren't going to listen to you because you sound ridiculous and hysterical. Be honest – when there was one case of ebola reported in the US, you guys immediately freaked out, blamed Obama for destroying our country, and bought as many guns and gas masks as you could, didn't you?

All I wanted to say is that if you guys are going to push the SCC to develop some sort of bolt policy, then great, but at least work to make sure it's clear, reasonable, and enforceable. Something like “no retro bolting established trad routes” sounds reasonable to me, and probably would to most others. That's something that can often be confirmed in a clear way. But if you push for the policy to be something a little more vague, like “no bolting new lines near protectable features”, it will forever and always be a miserable and boring debate. It will never end. The fact that we were even having a conversation about duct taking hooks to a slab seems like pretty clear evidence that these things often involve debatable minutiae. Not always, but often. My personal opinion here is irrelevant – I just mean that if the SCC as an organization is going to adopt a policy, it probably shouldn't adopt one that's going to invite endless debate. And you guys are apparently still pissed about rap bolting? I've never bolted a line, but if you're putting in a sport line on a 60 foot cliff (that isn't already a trad line, isn't protectable with gear, etc.) and you're not rap bolting, you're probably doing it wrong. I would think you trad guys would be OK with this at least since it means the FA is actually putting thought into where the bolts should and shouldn't go. And believe it or not, most 5.13b sport routes don't have good stances for hand drilling on lead.

According to the Mountain Project page, Castle Rock has one 5.8 and one 5.9+ with “most of the routes falling between 11a and 12d”. I've only climbed a couple routes there, but it didn't seem too dumbed down to me. It sure as shit doesn't cater to kids that just bought a 3 month gym membership. And I haven't heard any of them demanding anything, let alone that the majority of outdoor routes cater to them, at Castle Rock or elsewhere. Most of them are dropping top ropes on whatever they can scramble up the back of. Who is bolting the world? How has Castle Rock been dumbed down? Oh, that's right, Paul and Ben found a picture of the place and now know everything about it. I believe Ben and Paul said they have never actually been to Castle Rock. I'm guessing that's because there aren't enough 5.9s there. Maybe one day someone can dumb it down for them so they can actually go there.

But it's becoming pretty clear that guys like Ben aren't too interested in better explaining their complaints by answering direct questions or in trying to understand people that don't already think exactly like they do anyhow. Y'all have fun with your bitchfest.

I just figured out what "TAG" means!

I don't believe in a utilitarian approach when it comes to equipping routes. New climbers will always out number those that are proficient. Preserving the rock should be paramount, and bolts simply don't do that when they aren't necessary. Raise yourself up to the standards instead of bringing them down. It shouldn't be mandatory that a 5.9 climber can get on every 5.12. It seems like this kind of projecting of one's self has been lost to the convenience of bolts.

As far as some of the granite cliff's in NC that were mentioned earlier, nobody is hand-drilling out there anymore. Very few areas are wilderness that require hand-drilling. The best explanation I've heard about climbing at places like Big Green, Stone, and Laurel is that it is like being bored and terrified at the same time. Take away the terrified part and your just left with bored. This attitude I would say is more prominent at the feature-less Stone than Laurel, but you get the point.

Take the danger out of climbing, and you are left with every other sport.

I think retro-bolting is cool!

Now that that is out of the way...
Many routes that I was on the first accent of have received bolts after the fact, put in by others.
The bolts do change the character, and level of skill/commitment needed to do the climb.
That is only a bad thing for the nostalgic. Nothing in life is really constant and as the ability to drill became easy people picked up power drills and this is the result.

you guys are on it wow I can not keep up
I want to finish the great and well reasoned post
but stopped to point out that the - bolt and re bolt - is the thing to avoid,( I left out Chop ) if they go in , Leave them. If it was your FA well that gives you so much more reason to be sad and angry at the "bumbing down" of an activity that comes from roots that followed the advance of technology.
I believe that NO ONE is pure. Climbs get opened on aid the points of aid are reduced until it is freed. That was the old way, now that going "climbing" in the gym is what counts as learning to climb,the new climbers should find ways and places to practice, the same thing that they have trained for inside, outside. - right?
I know and read that many do not agree.
I think it was a good point that some-one made that the Price of admission if kept high , in dollars and time,will reduce the crowding and the "Sh!t show" will be less.
That is a good point, climbing is for those who pursue nothing else. - right?
I am the first to morn the loss of the old ways and hardcore dirtbag ethic but it is 2012, . . .
uhh no wait. . .
I must'a been in a coma, It is 2015 and 5.15 is a real thing. The march of progress should be directed but the most modern use of the gadgetry available is what the game has always been about .

here is a silly example , i remember when nut picks did not exist and everything from taped butter knives to car antennas pulled off cars in the parking lot were tried.The Knives sucked and damaged the nuts but the car antennas worked, Book shelve supports were the best nut picks.BITD.
The point is that the sport grew in popularity, people and gear advanced , as the $$ came in and made it possible for a small number of folks to break even, dollar wise , and climb for free, until say around 1979/80 when the whole bolting issue returned( it never went away) with all the same stuff that W.Harding and R. Robbins did battle over. The bolt wars in say the gunks were sporadic and some bolts were even allowed to stay while others got chopped. Fast forward to today and it was all for nothing the Bolts went in and every one who wants to can use them or not .I choose to remain Nostalgic and happy to climb at a lower # grade in areas with out any bolted anchors.
I have returned to the Gunks only a few times since the bolted anchors went in and the changes
are easily seen. Some are terrible (slicked out ,polished holds, gang top roping and sniveling from one anchor to another to top rope what are great 'Learn to Climb' leads) Some though are not that bad a lot of climbing gets done and people are not falling out of the sky on gear they just bought and tried but failed to place right. although all the teaching is changed for the worse not much else is bad about the anchors. I still do not like them and wish for restraint in bolting , I think it goes in cycles.

THANK YOU!!!

At least you're willing to come right out and say it. And even though I vehemently disagree with you, I'm happy that you put it out there as evidence that this type of thinking actually does exist. And, given that, it is far from alarmist for me to point out that it does...and that those who share your mindset here in the southeast are responsible for stuff like the Castle Rock photo.

And speaking of Castle Rock and my experience with it, Wes, since you asked...I got turned on to it by Chesnutt and Kent Ballew...back before Apes on Acid went in. So you do the math. I promise you it did not look like it does in that photo. Why do you think that is? Do you think that Gruenberg, Chesnutt, Roberts, et al just didn't have as keen an eye for a line as those who came after? Serious question.

HO man that was a way of making a point !
what happens to the rock does matter to me!
I am neither pro or anti bolt, wishy washy - yes so don't crawl in bed with me (that is a 'figure of speech oh literal one), I am of the opinion that climbing - all types are fun, I think that ,you agree it is !

and I climbed with 'Jersey Jeff ' His leads are very hard core to this day no one leads them the way he did.

Jeff's eye for a line? ha ha ! He would walk up to cliffs jump up a hundred feet on two pieces of gear and turn roofs with no idea if it went that way or any way!

BITD, the smallest spingy thing was the 1one friend then came a few smaller prototypes, a titanium 1/2 size and filed down nuts and tri-cams. . . but he would waste them early on a route and one would eventually be like' 'wtf, this man is nuts '
the souths hold on him was telling in his fierce defense of the ground up, 'run it out' tradition.

yes they had the eye for what they could see but, Jeff, in the early '80s? he was a mad man. . . under control, but yikes, he and 'Jack hammer Jack,' sent on tiny wires that were aid gear, and they fell on those 'dinggots' over and over some times snapping the wires and taking the big ride.
It was a sick thing to be a part of.

sorry got go life ya' know?

"now that going "climbing" in the gym is what counts as learning to climb,the new climbers should find ways and places to practice, the same thing that they have trained for inside, outside. - right?"

This was the part I took literally and the part I disagree with. I don't condone the creation of outdoor gym climbs. We've had at least one 5.12 gym kid DIE fallin out of a 5.8 corner crack down here. We do NOT need to make the gym generation feel like climbing outside is a safe as the gym.