New Yosemite Free Climbs Select Guidebook Almost Done - Call for Photos!

Wow. Just read through this thread and the Supertopo counterpart.

What a freaking mess.

Don't add bolts to routes without the permission of the FA. It's a simple rule that's been around for a long time. Most climbers honor it. It pisses people off when one person decides not to and then comes up with lame justifications.

When the same person goes on to publish a book with his modifications it's bound to make things worse.

Erik, I think it's better if you fix these problems before you publish your book.
Otherwise people will continue to take matters into their own hands and fix them on their own.

Geir wrote:Wow. Just read through this thread and the Supertopo counterpart. What a freaking mess. Don't add bolts to routes without the permission of the FA. It's a simple rule that's been around for a long time. Most climbers honor it. It pisses people off when one person decides not to and then comes up with lame justifications. When the same person goes on to publish a book with his modifications it's bound to make things worse. Erik, I think it's better if you fix these problems before you publish your book. Otherwise people will continue to take matters into their own hands and fix them on their own.

The only mess is here on the internet and in a few peoples twisted vision of right and wrong.

There isn't another Wings of Steel happening on the ground in Yosemite.

I have seen and used a whole bunch of junk metal on climbs. I have no problem with someone putting in the big effort to correct and modernize that shit.

I don't believe in route ownership. I do have respect for others, love history and believe in change.

K Weber wrote:There isn't another Wings of Steel happening on the ground in Yosemite.

There is nothing about the ES situation that remotely parallels WoS. In that case they were accused of doing stuff they didn't do which has since been verified. In this case people are being vocal about actions ES not only admits, but promotes.

K Weber wrote: I don't believe in route ownership.

K Weber wrote:I do have respect for others, love history...

K Weber wrote:...and believe in change.

Well, by claiming the former and the latter, it make it abundantly clear you don't have respect for others or history. Pretty hard to respect folks and love history when you're in favor of retrobolting and paving over FA intentions.

Healyje wrote: Well, by claiming the former and the latter, it make it abundantly clear you don't have respect for others or history. Pretty hard to respect folks and love history when you're in favor of retrobolting and paving over FA intentions.

Our founding fathers were in favor of owning slaves, there are still a bunch of hicks that believe we dissed them and have paved over their intentions.

just sayin...

edit- some good reading on how Texass rewrites history- nytimes.com/2015/10/06/us/p…

T Roper wrote: Our founding fathers were in favor of owning slaves, there are still a bunch of hicks that believe we dissed them and have paved over their intentions. just sayin...

Somehow I find the comparison of ending slavery with unbridled retrobolting somehow ironic. Let's free all those routes from the excruciating bondage of actual risk-taking so they can better serve their masters.

K Weber wrote: The only mess is here on the internet and in a few peoples twisted vision of right and wrong. There isn't another Wings of Steel happening on the ground in Yosemite. I have seen and used a whole bunch of junk metal on climbs. I have no problem with someone putting in the big effort to correct and modernize that shit. I don't believe in route ownership. I do have respect for others, love history and believe in change.

I don't think people are arguing that 1:1 replacement of aged, bad bolts is the problem. I know Erik has done a lot of this, and that should be applauded.

However, the idea that fixed hardware should not be added to established lines is long-standing. Unilaterally ignoring this pisses a lot people off. It's better to talk this kind of thing through with everyone who will be impacted BEFORE just going and doing it.

Erik Sloan wrote:Hi Gang, (the idea that the current guidebook authors haven't posted on this thread because there busy doesn't work, the 'new Yosemite Guidebook' thread on Supertopo has been going for years, and no of them have ever posted on it).

Right, and nobody believes it, nor was it intended to be serious.
But being the moron you are, you posted yet another reply to my parody of you posting all the damn time in here for stuff, but never addressing the 'ethics' point that everyone is asking you about.

Which proves my point. Thanks for doing so.

Geir wrote: I don't think people are arguing that 1:1 replacement of aged, bad bolts is the problem. I know Erik has done a lot of this, and that should be applauded. However, the idea that fixed hardware should not be added to established lines is long-standing. Unilaterally ignoring this pisses a lot people off. It's better to talk this kind of thing through with everyone who will be impacted BEFORE just going and doing it.

Unilaterally ignoring this pisses A FEW people off. LOTS of climbers don't care.

I don't mind updating and modernizing climbs.

20 years ago I had a 50 m rope and now I have nothing but 70m. For all you Underground Dojo Keyboard Fighters...that is not an all inclusive list of changes in climbing.

Just because someone got to that piece of rock first doesn't mean they did the best work establishing a climb.

Healyje wrote: There is nothing about the ES situation that remotely parallels WoS. In that case they were accused of doing stuff they didn't do which has since been verified.

It took 30 years to be vindicated. Lame that the hardcore locals were dicks for so long.

Healyje wrote:In this case people are being vocal about actions ES not only admits, but promotes. Well, by claiming the former and the latter, it make it abundantly clear you don't have respect for others or history. Pretty hard to respect folks and love history when you're in favor of retrobolting and paving over FA intentions.

So to respect someones efforts I have to agree with everything they have done? I don't think so.

A lot of climbs are 50 years old. Things have changes. From perceptions to gear.

K Weber wrote: A lot of climbs are 50 years old. Things have changes.

Last I checked, for the most part most of those climbs haven't changed at all. What has changed is climbers and nothing about the climbs should change to accommodate 'modern' climbers. It's pretty simple: don't fuck climbs up just to bring them down to 'modern' standards.

Again, people are talking about the FA teams and historical value.
Let's not forget that the rock is a piece of heritage that should not be modified so that future generations can climb it the way it has been done in the past if they want to, butterflies and all.
Updating existing anchors and agreed on raps generally has no push-back from the community at large.
Anyway, I know my opinion doesn't count for much but I know I share it with many many climbers I know.

I love you Guys!

K Weber wrote: I have seen and used a whole bunch of junk metal on climbs. I have no problem with someone putting in the big effort to correct and modernize that shit.

Nor does anyone else. And Erik should be applauded for the effort. But what many people have a problem with is Erik trimming trees, bolting around cruxes(two whole pitches on The Great Slab Route), adding mid-pitch anchors and guiding in the park for "donations".

Luc wrote:...and agreed on raps generally has no push-back from the community at large.

Adding new rap anchors and changing the location of existing FA anchors does in fact generate a bunch of push back.

K Weber wrote:Just because someone got to that piece of rock first doesn't mean they did the best work establishing a climb.

Climbs are retrobolted when the local community agrees that the FA party didn't do the best job. Retrobolting is okay in this case because there is a consensus among the community that actually uses the rock. This is not that case because the local consensus is NOT in favor of retrobolting. Because the rock is a finite resource, we must, as a community, be responsible and sustainable.

Every time we add a bolt, even if it gets chopped, we are scarring the rock permanently. Because the damage is irreversible, shouldn't we place bolts that will last (not get chopped), to attempt to reduce future scarring?

aho wrote: Maybe, maybe not, we won't be able to compare until both guidebooks come out. But Alexy's statement is not without basis. Here are some observations: Now, I respect Mr Sloan as a big wall aid climber as he spent a lot of time monkeying on the walls, but according to his own words just last year: I'm just genuinely curious how one can write a good quality *free climbing* guidebook for Yosemite Valley when he isn't even much of a free climber. Of course, things can change in 22 months - maybe Mr Sloan is climbing 5.12 nowadays. Maybe Mr Sloan has friends to rope gun him up hard climbs. Maybe he has an army of friends to scout out routes for him. Who knows. On the other hand, Clint, Ed and Eric G are the *real deals*. Between the three of them, they put up over one hundred routes in the valley (precisely 101 as of 2011 according to this.) Not only that, Clint keeps meticulous records of all climbs in the valley as evidenced by his website. They also spent tremendous amount of effort scouting out routes and updating topos, obscure or not (I know because I had the pleasure to be on one of these trips.) So if you ask me to guess which guidebook is going to be better? I think I have an answer.

Finally, an actual conversation. Ed's book will no doubt contains more routes, and history of Yosemite. Their book will be a treasure for most climbers. And I'll pre-order the book as soon as it's ready. But I'm certain it'll contain errors and mistakes.

Here is the thing, until Ed's book is published or at least have a target release date (or year or decade :)). Erik's book (assuming it gets released next year) will be a better book.

eli poss wrote:Because the damage is irreversible, shouldn't we place bolts that will last (not get chopped), to attempt to reduce future scarring?

Or simply refrain from comfort retrobolting regardless of the 'consensus' because the next generation that comes along might not be such pussies.

dinamite, believe me- you do not need Sloan book to climb Sacherer cracker [ your TODO climb] when you occasionally come from New York to Yosemite.
I just look on the topos pages Sloan posted on this tread and two of the areas he posted I know relatively well. I can tell that all new routes he posted {except that the old routes he compile from previous guidebooks or MP ] have some problems with length, gear, names or rating.

Healyje wrote: Or simply refrain from comfort retrobolting regardless of the 'consensus' because the next generation that comes along might not be such pussies.

Nice.

Healyje wrote: Last I checked, for the most part most of those climbs haven't changed at all. What has changed is climbers and nothing about the climbs should change to accommodate 'modern' climbers. It's pretty simple: don't fuck climbs up just to bring them down to 'modern' standards.

Could you give me the original bolt count on Salathe Wall? How about that bolt count today? How about your opinion of the Muir Wall, Kurt & Scott?

Should we play this game anymore? It just gets ugly.

I am confused about your hard on for Eric. There have been so many that have USED Yosemite. Just because Eric isn't a Huber brother, Dean Potter, gets in magazines or sponsored doesn't mean he should get all the hate.