.

Jon Ruland wrote: as everyone knows, all women climbers are inferior to all men climbers.

Actually it's because women aren't as stupid as men. You'll never hear a woman say "Hold my beer and watch this"

Mike Diesen wrote: When you tell someone they have to do it your way or go somewhere else that is selfish. But when you invite others to enjoy what you've done and make it possible for them that is unselfish. I'm only answering the question with some common sense.

I disagree. The FA realizes the climb out of a face of rock, they see a line where no one else took the time or imagination to. I really do think it is similar to art. The FA is asking the subsequent ascentionists to see and experience the climb the way he/she envisioned it and experienced first. It is the consummate invitation (and challenge) to share a climbing experience. Some climbers won't like it, like art, others will find it an inspiring catalyst to discover something new in themselves. Changing the style (permanently) of the first ascent is pen-ultimately selfish, it imposes another's limitations and interpretation of the climb upon the vision and accomplishment of the FA.
There may be a certain element of selfishness in the ethic of an FA essentially "owning" a route, but I think the creative process of putting up routes justifies the custom.

Wehling wrote: I usually agree with a lot of what Crag Dweller has to say, but I've always had a problem with the "climb he created" line of thought. As I see it he didn't CREATE anything. He saw a line and put protection on it, the climb was already there and in MY opinion, adding bolts or anything else short of gluing holds or chipping rock is not going to change the CLIMB, just the aesthetics or how you protect it. But I'm pretty sure I'm talking to a brick wall here.

You raise a fair point. The rock was already there. But, I'd have to disagree with the suggestion that bolt placement doesn't affect a climb. It can have a significant effect on the experience one has on a route. It can be the difference between a spicy, exhilarating climb and something that feels like being in the gym.

I love it how all the people saying dont clip it, dont mind it, FA doesnt own the rock etc. dont seem to be the types that have even put up an FA (at least by what they wrote in their profiles). Before you get into a sport you oughta at least get a grasp of the ethics and the ethics EVERYWHERE are you don't just add bolts to established routes.

There is a route here in CCC on a popular wall that I thought could use an extra bolt to protect a run out start. I contacted one of he FA'st (the other was deceased) and he prefered the climb stayed as is. Guess what? No added bolt!! I have more then once mentioned the FA'st desire to others when the thought of a bolt comes up.

Respect the FA! Dont add bolts to climbs!

JLP wrote:Has anyone here actually climbed this route and/or seen the added bolt?

Not sure if this is the route. DDC can confirm, maybe? Sorry for the crappy quality. I was shooting directly into the sun.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on this topic!

"Just don't clip it" just doesn't cut it.

Mike Diesen wrote: obviously the person who asks not to alter the climb is the selfish one. He can still climb it in his style choosing not to clip the extra bolt. But without the extra hardware others may not get to enjoy an excellent climb. The one that adds the bolt is only altering it so he and others can climb it and it does not take away from the FA's ability to climb. When you tell someone they have to do it your way or go somewhere else that is selfish. But when you invite others to enjoy what you've done and make it possible for them that is unselfish. I'm only answering the question with some common sense.

If someone needs additional hardware to do a climb, they can't do the climb.

Climbing requires both physical and mental strength. If someone doesn't have the mental strength required by a climb, the climb is beyond his/her ability. How is adding a bolt to compensate for a lack of mental strength any different than gluing on a hold to compensate for a lack of physical strength? And, I say all that having walked away from my fair share of climbs because of run outs that made me nervous.

I'll add a disclaimer to say that I think bolts should be placed to make a route safe. If bolt placement creates the potential for a dangerous or deadly fall and placing gear isn't an option, I'm all for adding bolts...after putting in effort to contact the FA.

Derek Lawrence wrote:I love it how all the people saying dont clip it, dont mind it, FA doesnt own the rock etc. dont seem to be the types that have even put up an FA (at least by what they wrote in their profiles). Before you get into a sport you oughta at least get a grasp of the ethics and the ethics EVERYWHERE are you don't just add bolts to established routes. There is a route here in CCC on a popular wall that I thought could use an extra bolt to protect a run out start. I contacted one of he FA'st (the other was deceased) and he prefered the climb stayed as is. Guess what? No added bolt!! I have more then once mentioned the FA'st desire to others when the thought of a bolt comes up. Respect the FA! Dont add bolts to climbs!

Watch it! I've established lot's of routes and I skip bolts all the time. sometimes because I don't feel I need it and sometimes because I'm too sketched out to stop and clip. It takes more effort in some instances to clip a bolt or place gear than to climb past it to a better stance. I've also done some free soloing. I just didn't think I needed to post that information on my profile before commenting on a thread.

Crag Dweller wrote: How is adding a bolt to compensate for a lack of mental strength any different than gluing on a hold to compensate for a lack of physical strength?

Good point, never thought of it that way.

What a silly little squeeze job. Just climb up the crack to the right. If you really wanna do the slab, toprope it. Seems like all the bolts on this are unnecessary...

Tparis wrote: I just assumed that it was a girl, because if it had been a guy he would have sacked up and climbed it as it was.

Sorry ladies, I was just trolling a little to see if any of you would bite. :o)

Dave, I am sorry to hear that someone altered the route. It is obvious from this thread (and others) that climbing ethics are changing.

As rickd suggested, Dave Des Champs is one of the more prolific climbing pioneers in the history of this area (with well over 500 days climbing in Cochise Stronghold).

Page 9 of the Kerry guide, "Backcountry Rockclimbing in Southern Arizona" has a scan from the old Summit Hut notebook:

"IF YOU CAN'T DO AN ESTABLISHED ROUTE WITHOUT PLACING A PIN OR A BOLT- THEN DON'T DO IT" (It is far more dignified to "back off" then to do a route in BAD STYLE.)

All I will SAy on this subject is that adding a bolt to this route was an ayeror. In fact this whole thing is a comedy of ayerors. That is trademarked by the way. It isn't like bolting this thing in a spicy manner deprived less bold climbers from climbing any of 300 other climbs bolted in just the opposite manner, a number of which are mine. I have done this boulder then finished on another persons route. Lets just SAy I thought this was the start of the less bold persons route. I can't SAy for sure he added a bolt to Daves route but that third bolt looks a lot like the bolts on the rest of the safely bolted route. And I can SAy for certain that this other person has been known to chop, move, and generally f*%# with others routes.

There is a lot to be said for walking away from a climb if you don't have the mental ability to keep it together, or the willingness to risk injury. I love climbs like that. I like that there are folks out there that can do what I am not brave enough to do. I would SAy the person that added the bolt should be brave enough to own his/her actions. Just SAying.

Mike Diesen wrote: obviously the person who asks not to alter the climb is the selfish one. He can still climb it in his style choosing not to clip the extra bolt. But without the extra hardware others may not get to enjoy an excellent climb. The one that adds the bolt is only altering it so he and others can climb it and it does not take away from the FA's ability to climb. When you tell someone they have to do it your way or go somewhere else that is selfish. But when you invite others to enjoy what you've done and make it possible for them that is unselfish. I'm only answering the question with some common sense.

If every route in the stronghold was done this way and there were no climbs that everyone could safely do then it would be selfish. That is not the case. Not very many folks have enjoyed the Bachar/Yerian perhaps we should bolt that down to our level Mike. What do you think Mike? Should we really bolt every climb on earth so that everyone can climb it safely? Just a question Mike?

Word.

Eric Rhicard wrote:All I will SAy on this subject is that adding a bolt to this route was an ayeror. In fact this whole thing is a comedy of ayerors. That is trademarked by the way. It isn't like bolting this thing in a spicy manner deprived less bold climbers from climbing any of 300 other climbs bolted in just the opposite manner, a number of which are mine. I have done this boulder then finished on another persons route. Lets just SAy I thought this was the start of the less bold persons route. I can't SAy for sure he added a bolt to Daves route but that third bolt looks a lot like the bolts on the rest of the safely bolted route. And I can SAy for certain that this other person has been known to chop, move, and generally f*%# with others routes. There is a lot to be said for walking away from a climb if you don't have the mental ability to keep it together, or the willingness to risk injury. I love climbs like that. I like that there are folks out there that can do what I am not brave enough to do. I would SAy the person that added the bolt should be brave enough to own his/her actions. Just SAying.

Classic!! HAHAHAHA!!!!

Folks-

As far as I can tell the ethic in southern AZ is not to add fixed hardware to other people's routes without permission. That said, I think the OP is justified in being angry about this.

There are hundreds of routes to choose from in the Stronghold. Pick one that fits you, don't change the routes so suit your desires.

JLP wrote:Haha - Another thing - the whole "drilling ground up" mentality is cool and all, but let's face it - the FA had a fricken drill in their hand with the option to slam in a bolt wherever. How brave is that compared to the guy who can't? Once you get a feel for how bold the FA was, the rest of the route immediately becomes a lot easier mentally. Having a drill in hand is mentally comparable to knowing the moves ahead of time, IMO. The FA with a drill will never find themselves runout with no options.

And neither will you as you will have your guidebook telling you how hard it is, and that it is run out, and that you should bring 12 not 13 draws, and that if you survive the terrifying 8 foot run to bolt four the rest of them will be no more than 6 feet apart unless you are above a ledge, then they will be 3 feet apart until it is safe to put them every 6 feet.

Just the fact that there are bolts will tell you that it can be climbed two things the chicken shit with the drill didn't have.

Sorry, gotta respond to a troll now and then.

I did.

Crag Dweller wrote: How is adding a bolt to compensate for a lack of mental strength any different than gluing on a hold to compensate for a lack of physical strength? And, I say all that having walked away from my fair share of climbs because of run outs that made me nervous. I'll add a disclaimer to say that I think bolts should be placed to make a route safe. If bolt placement creates the potential for a dangerous or deadly fall and placing gear isn't an option, I'm all for adding bolts...after putting in effort to contact the FA.

Does this seem like a huge contradiction to anyone else?

Dudemanguybro wrote:It's called RESPECT. You don't go placing bolts on rock faces you don't own and then act like it is now under your control and you have the only say in how this piece of the planet will be handled for all eternity. What gave him the right to put any bolts there in the first place? What was the concensus about putting up another 2 bolt turd of a route when there are thousands of other climbs to do? What kind of values were behind the creation of this route to begin with and why does he think this is now his property.

Exactly. possibly he wasnt the only "talented" climber out there eyeballing this piece of rock that we all own.

Move on, get over it.

Geir Hundal wrote: Classic!! HAHAHAHA!!!! Folks- As far as I can tell the ethic in southern AZ is not to add fixed hardware to other people's routes without permission. That said, I think the OP is justified in being angry about this. There are hundreds of routes to choose from in the Stronghold. Pick one that fits you, don't change the routes so suit your desires.

Classic huh? Yet another internet witch hunt down in AZ if you ask me. Why dont you guys work this stuff out man to man? Its a small town and finding the guy couldnt be too hard. I'll help, you wont find him sitting around on his computer spraying, you'll find him out climbing in one of two places.

"Pick one that fits you, don't change the routes so suit your desires"
Does that include placing bolts into the rock? Wouldnt that fit right in to changing the route/rock??? Listen to yourselves, my god.