New Sport routes on Duncan's Ridge ?

I have fond memories of climbing at Duncan's Ridge in the '70s and '80s. It was where I went to see rattlesnakes, catch ticks and chiggers and to scratch myself up in the Mountain Mahogany and Oak Scrub. I'd never see any other climbers and the adventure quotient was always high due to bottles, cans and the occasional rock trundle flying down from the top.

Craig and Sylvia Luebben were married there and I'll never forget driving back to Vedauwoo afterwards, Zeppelin blasting into my drunk and stoned head and hearing that Princess Diana had died in a car crash. I thought it was a hallucination.

Like I said, fond memories.

Back to the point, I'm excited that more and more people are climbing outside and have a readily accessible place to do it. Like Eldorado, Yosemite, Joe's Valley, Indian Creek and Red Rocks, the crush of people profoundly changes the soul of an area. These visitors are not attracted by bolts, TR anchors and groomed trails and staging areas. They are there to have fun. No longer can we expect the experiences of adventure, loneliness, silence and wonder that we did BITD.

The only option I have is to choose to have my adventures elsewhere.

That said, I mourn the loss of these "local" adventure areas. I wish that Duncan's Ridge still allowed me the uncertainty of experience, the tenuous placement of a shitty nut and the itch of bug bites. It doesn't. I wish that Boulder Canyon hadn't turned into Bolter Canyon and that Indian Creek hadn't turned into a top-rope playground with "improved" campsites, pit toilets and the crowd of people trying to catch the whiff of a cell signal near Hamburger Rock.

So I choose to climb elsewhere.

Climb safe,
Mal

Malcolm Daly wrote: I mourn the loss of these "local" adventure areas. I wish that Duncan's Ridge still allowed me the uncertainty of experience, the tenuous placement of a shitty nut and the itch of bug bites. It doesn't. I wish that Boulder Canyon hadn't turned into Bolter Canyon and that Indian Creek hadn't turned into a top-rope playground with "improved" campsites, pit toilets and the crowd of people trying to catch the whiff of a cell signal near Hamburger Rock. So I choose to climb elsewhere.

Kind of reminds me of having kids.
I don't get to climb as much as before, but I've done a bunch of stuff I never would have- skiing, canyoneering, caving, even climbing 14ers. All pretty great.

Duncan's may not be the same anymore, but I'll bet you've found plenty of new places that gave you pretty great experiences now, and not just in your memories.

richardd wrote:Just an anecdote about TR anchors in popular public areas...My friends and I took a day trip to Rocks State Park in Maryland and set up a bomber anchor with gear on an excellent climb called Strawberry Jam. We had a lot of fun toproping it, but when we went back to clean it, found someone had stolen all the gear except for one big nut. I still can't believe climbers would have done that... bolt anchors can't be messed with so easily by random jerks walking around clifftop...

OMG, I hope the thieves didn't steal most of your anchor while you were actually climbing!

The only times I climbed at Horsetooth in the early 70's was with Duncan. We would drive up from Boulder and I would follow him around, climbing whatever he did. Nothing had names or grades. We didn't have pads and we didn't use chalk. I assume he was picking things I could climb, but we would do many routes, with him looking down at me over the lip saying it would be ok, even though I was 30' off the ground onsighting. When I would get scared he would give me beta, assuring me that it would be ok, all I had to do was throw for whatever hold he pointed out.It was an adventure and we both lived through it. It seems sad to me to bolt those lines, especially when they can mostly be toproped. There are lots of places to learn to lead. Every little rock doesn't need to be bolted.

Jamie Logan wrote:The only times I climbed at Horsetooth in the early 70's was with Duncan. We would drive up from Boulder and I would follow him around, climbing whatever he did. Nothing had names or grades. We didn't have pads and we didn't use chalk. I assume he was picking things I could climb, but we would do many routes, with him looking down at me over the lip saying it would be ok, even though I was 30' off the ground onsighting. When I would get scared he would give me beta, assuring me that it would be ok, all I had to do was throw for whatever hold he pointed out.It was an adventure and we both lived through it. It seems sad to me to bolt those lines, especially when they can mostly be toproped. There are lots of places to learn to lead. Every little rock doesn't need to be bolted.

Great post Mr. Logan. Well spoken and how true, "every little rock doesn't need to be bolted".
One of the true old guard has spoken. It would be something to here from Duncan on this topic. I do wonder what he would think.

Jamie Logan wrote:The only times I climbed at Horsetooth in the early 70's was with Duncan. We would drive up from Boulder and I would follow him around, climbing whatever he did. Nothing had names or grades. We didn't have pads and we didn't use chalk. I assume he was picking things I could climb, but we would do many routes, with him looking down at me over the lip saying it would be ok, even though I was 30' off the ground onsighting. When I would get scared he would give me beta, assuring me that it would be ok, all I had to do was throw for whatever hold he pointed out.It was an adventure and we both lived through it. It seems sad to me to bolt those lines, especially when they can mostly be toproped. There are lots of places to learn to lead. Every little rock doesn't need to be bolted.

Great post Mr. Logan. Well spoken and how true, "every little rock doesn't need to be bolted".
One of the true old guard has spoken. It would be something to here from Duncan on this topic. I do wonder what he would think.

Just a quick update here.
We have been working hard with everyone to reach a consensus.
Emails have been exchanged, talks over a beer have happened, and we have done our best to reach out to everyone who is upset or concerned.
Some of the hardware will be removed to help reach a compromise across the entire community.

If you want to discuss this further, please message me directly.

NCCC would love to hear more input from people at the trail day as well!
mountainproject.com/v/dunca…

Hope to see you all there!

thanks

Ben Scott
NCCC-president

I'll go ahead and post this because I want it to be a part of the public debate.

It should be obvious that Horsetooth was developed as a bouldering area. It's not only the Gill problems that matter here. He didn't operate in a vacuum. If he didn't have his followers, bouldering might not be the pursuit, in and of its' self, that it is now and might still be considered practice for 'real' climbing as it was before specific holds and moves defined a 'boulder problem'.

It seems that things have changed since I first moved to NoCo, especially in the last few years. I started going to the Hang about 10-11 years ago. I was new to the area then so people [Sam Shannon, Craig Leuben, Alan Nelson, Tom Kelly and others] were quick to point out that I was NOT to do any bolting around Horsetooth, not that I had any plans to do that. One went on to explain why there are no bolts on Bolt Wall. I really feel that people have dropped the ball when it comes to realizing and communicating the importance of local ethics of an area. I think we'll see these conflicts more often as climbing continues to grow with people experiencing it initially through the gyms. Local Ethics are the default set of guidelines developed by climbers, sometimes in conjunction with local land managers. For instance, Ouray and Vail has it's mixed climbing. It's bolting by hand only at Lumpy and in designated Wilderness. The desert has its' bolted rap/TR anchors but NO bolted cracks, which is frowned upon nearly everywhere with only a few exceptions. Some places require a strict bolting permit system. The reason FAs are not recorded on boulder problems is partly because people were placing 1 bolt on boulders to see their names in guide books whether there was an established route or not. There have recently been some articles in climbing mags about the importance of mentoring new climbers on techniques and saftey. Local ethics is also a subject worthwhile passing on to people new to climbing or to the area.

Back in the 90s, they tried to shut down climbing in many places across the nation, that resulted in the creation of the Access Fund. There has been a tremendous amount of work and good will by organisations like the AF, AAC, NCCC, and the old guard in general. We've done a great job in developing a relationships with land manangers to keep climbing open and accessable to every one. **Even though there was approval in this instance to bolt lead lines, caving into the influence, pressure, and demand from masses of new climbers who learned to climb in gyms, I think is a bad idea. Most of them usually don't know that chipping or glueing holds, convenience bolts on cracks and that dry tooling is not allowed in most places especially at DR. Who would tell them, the guy that gave them a 10 minute belay test? It's not their job to cover all that. Should a vote from a crowd including a large number of first time climbers who have been told these are good ideas prevail over relations with land managers that's been built over decades? Who wants candy? It takes little skill to use a drill. Almost anyone can do it if they decide to act on their own.

Top rope anchors are one thing, it makes sense to place a few bolts where cracks are not present, making anchor building impossible or sketchy. The trees are so far back from the edge at DR it takes ridiculous amounts of webbing or rope to build anchors. I don't agree with bolting the faces of boulder problems. It's not a good precident. One of the reasons FAs are not recorded on boulder problems is because people were placing 1 bolt on boulders to see their names in guide books. There is an arguement that you can always decide not to clip the bolts but when they are there and can be a psychological back-up. If you get scared and decided to stand on one to rest, that's not the same experience as having no other option but the rock. The difference is subtle but it does exist. I don't see that climbers need sport routes outdoors here at Duncan's Ridge. They could get more of a variety of lead routes indoors and there's no shortage of easy leads outdoors in established sport climbing crags in Colorado.

I am very interested to see how may people on this thread show up for the Duncan's Ridge Trail day this Saturday. Especially the ones who voice such strong opinions on the ethics of Duncan's Ridge. Our climbing community requires engagement and involvement not isolated trolling on Mountain Project.

Ben Scott wrote:I personally feel that Ryan went a bit overboard but only with the very best intentions... If the majority of our community feels NCCC made a mistake I will submit my resignation and step-down as President immediately.

Did we ever find out "if the majority of our community feels NCCC made a mistake" installing these new bolts at Duncan's Ridge? I don't want to see Ben Scott "submit [his] resignation and step-down as President immediately" all because Mr. Nelson, emboldened by his NCCC badge, went rogue with a hammerdrill. Especially when Mr. Scott "personally feel[s] that Ryan went a bit overboard".

I do however ask that the NCCC respond more gracefully to criticism from the community they've chosen to represent.

Shelton Hatfield wrote: Did we ever find out "if the majority of our community feels NCCC made a mistake" installing these new bolts at Duncan's Ridge? I don't want to see Ben Scott "submit [his] resignation and step-down as President immediately" all because Mr. Nelson, emboldened by his NCCC badge, went rogue with a hammerdrill. Especially when Mr. Scott "personally feel[s] that Ryan went a bit overboard". I do however ask that the NCCC respond more gracefully to criticism from the community they've chosen to represent.

I sure don't see any reason for Ben to step down.

Ken Duncan wrote: I sure don't see any reason for Ben to step down.

Neither do I. It's obvious that he has done a lot for the community and has our best interests in mind. Which is why I found his comment perplexing.

Jason Tarry wrote:I am very interested to see how may people on this thread show up for the Duncan's Ridge Trail day this Saturday. Especially the ones who voice such strong opinions on the ethics of Duncan's Ridge. Our climbing community requires engagement and involvement not isolated trolling on Mountain Project.

Jason are you implying that volunteering at a trail day is a necessary prerequisite for having a strong (or perhaps valid or credible) opinion regarding the ethics of an area?

I'm curious to hear what exactly in the previous 6 pages of discussion, in your mind constitutes "isolated trolling" on MP.com?

Just askin'...

I'm assuming he is implying that some people simply like to bitch but don't actually care enough about what they're bitching about to get off their asses and do anything about it. Hopefully not true in this case but unfortunately many folks fall into this category.

I've heard that the bolts have been chopped. I was going to head up there later this evening.

If they were in fact snipped, I hope there can be a civil discussion this time on whether or not to re-bolt the area. I have no strong opinion on the matter, but a discussion would be rad.

Were the top-rope bolts chopped as well? I'm planning on going this evening, as well, and wondering if I need to bring my rack.

Ryan-Nelson wrote:The bolts were not chopped, but the hangers were removed.

Time to practice my bolt-looping nut technique! :D

I'm kind of glad, the rock is the one that suffers in bolt wars, pulling hangers is a much more rock-friendly way to say "whoa there let's talk about this"

Ryan-Nelson wrote: We are still going to be discussing this at the trail day on saturday, and will still being taking a community vote on whether the lead routes should stay.

Incredible. Are you serious Ryan?

"What you mean 'we,' kemosabe?"

Is this the royal "we" or do you mean the NCCC? Please clarify.

*sigh*

This whole surreal situation reminds me of controversy from 2013 when Chris Weidner retro-bolted a bold 12c trad line in Dream Canyon, Archangel without seeking the first ascentionist permission. Pop some popcorn, read the thread, it’s a good one….

mountainproject.com/v/archa…

While there are some interesting ethical parallels between the Archangel and Duncans Ridge, its not lost on me that the discussion is different, as it relates to Weidner bolting a 2 pitch trad line versus Ryan bolting boulder problems.

Recalling an interesting comment from Cunning Linguist almost a year-a-go to the day (June 30, 2014)comment in the route thread. I couldn’t say it any better myself, so I’m quoting it here.

"So, today's been a year since Weidner claimed he was going to make this right and respect the first ascentionist's wishes. Just a meditation on integrity, my bet is Weidner hit it and quit it and will never go back to keep his word. There are a lot of different kinds of people who climb rocks. Some of them have different understandings of the words honor, respect, and accountability"

Ryan if you’re telegraphing that you planning on holding a vote at the trail day to determine if you keep the bolts, then you’ve told me everything I need to know about your understandings of those words from the Cunning Linguist

It hasn’t been relevant to share until now, but in the interest of transparency, I’d thought I’d share the behind the scenes discussions up until this point since Ryan is still attempting trialing this in the court of public opinion : Ryan Nelson met up separately with Ken Duncan & Mark Wilford at Duncans, as well as Jeff Giddings and myself and over beers respectively. We all had a good conversation and reached what we all felt was a reluctant consensus, both sides had a little give and take summarized by:

• Ryan would personally remove all but two sport lines (with the caveat that someone might chop them eventually-Ryan shared that he wouldn’t replace them if they got chopped)
• Most top rope anchors stay, however anchors get pulled where safe, viable natural, multi-point gear anchors in the rock exist.

Everything that Ryan communicated during those conversations and confirmed with a gentleman’s handshake and reiterated via email was that Ryan would get to work right away on removing bolts. There are some technical challenges in regards to removing the greenlees properly and we've all been working together trying to make sure that ryan has the necessary equipment, but it looks like he’s now reneged or backtracked and is trying to generate support at the trail day despite the voices that he heard from face to face and in this thread. That was 3 weeks ago.....

***sanctimonious soap box alert***

Words like honor, respect, trust, integrity are more than just trite platitudes. These words carry real weight in our community... a tribe where we have to take others at their word when they say that they have you on belay, have your spot, claimed that they climbed a route, or perhaps say that they are going to right their wrongs.

I don’t care how many straw polls or votes that you have a trail day; That does not make for a consensus. It simply does not capture the past, current, and most importantly future stakeholder’s input. Of those three constituent groups, I consider the former and the latter to be the two most important. We must honor the ethics and tradition of past generations and current climbers must not rob future generations that might wish to have a pristine, bolt free experience at Duncan’s Ridge, one that has existed for the previous 50 years of climbing at the crag. Bolting boulder problems deprives future generations from the spirit of adventure that I (and I hope others too) hold sacred in climbing.

This isn’t a new issue, and Reed Woodford (another good dude BTW), former president of the NCCC at the time attempted to gain consensus on this issue five years ago back in 2010(and Cam Cross before that). It was shut down then as an open and shut case at the time and lay dormant until Ryan fired up his drill unilaterally.
mountainproject.com/v/new-b…

To answer an earlier question that was posed: No one is remotely suggesting that Ben Scott resign from the board. In fact, I recall that Ben voluntarily offered to resign his post. By all accounts, Ben has done a terrific job at the helm of NCCC. He’s a super good dude, and I hope he continues to lead.

However, a question offered in the form of an open letter for the NCCC board:

Do you continue to plan to endorse Ryan’s actions and support Ryan Nelson as a credible mouthpiece and representative for your board?

Let me recap:
A sitting board member of the NCCC, without attempting to seek consensus on the front end, unilaterally decided to make a wholesale conversion of historically relevant boulder problems into sport routes.

Actions of which, the NCCC President described as “was a bit overboard”

Ryan then gets called out overwhelmingly in this thread…. to his credit, meets with some of the most historically relevant(I do not personally include myself in this group) climbers in the community, agrees to pull the bolts and is now attempting to back track by holding a straw poll at the trail day to determine if the NCCC should keep the bolts?

Despite the NCCC badge as his profile picture, does Ryan represent the values (stewardship, history, tradition, respect, and trust) that the climbing community trusts the NCCC to uphold? If the NCCC's answer is yes, then it makes me publicly question the relevance, credibility, and viability of NCCC as an organization that promotes access, ethics, conservation, and stewardship for the Northern Colorado Climbing Community.

If this indeed the case, then I suggest that we create a competing community climbing organization by the name of NCCTGASAEATAH, short for Northern Colorado Climbers That Give A Shit About Ethics, Tradition, and History.

Despite the categorization of some of the older climbers as keyboard warriors, who somehow don't care enough to get off their ass and enact the labor at a trail day to earn the necessary currency to have a voice in the discussion, I plan to come out from underneath my bridge, emerge from the shadows of the Internet and plan to be at the trail day helping along aside anyone else that shows up to lend a hand… I’ll be the one with a Red Sox baseball hat on. I’d invite anyone interested in open dialogue to come introduce themselves. As much as I talk a big game on the internet, my tongue and wit is often sharper when in person and I always welcome a lively and respectful discussion. For all I know, I might be the lone voice from my side of the debate at the trail day, but I rather enjoy having the odds stacked against me...

I don’t have the free time these days to pull the bolts myself, however if I did, I’d proudly claim it, so, "good on" whoever pulled the hangers. If the bolts stay, I guarantee that it won't be the last time the hangers, and likely next time the bolts disappear.

Bolt wars suck… but Ryan fired the first shots (50 or more to be specific) and has singlehandly brought one to our community. I hope in my bones, that when this all shakes out, I don't learn that it was with the tacit endorsement or support of the NCCC.

Finally, in the interest of sharing knowledge and creating a learning community related to the skills of bolt replacement and removal, Boulder local Greg German (Gregger man) has a bunch of great videos teaching how to pull bolts (and replace).

youtube.com/watch?v=rCrwaSI…
youtube.com/watch?v=ItUJk9M…

FCJohn wrote: Ryan Nelson met up separately with Ken Duncan & Mark Wilford at Duncans, as well as Jeff Giddings and myself and over beers respectively. We all had a good conversation and reached what we all felt was a reluctant consensus, both sides had a little give and take summarized by: *Ryan would personally remove all but two sport lines (with the caveat that someone might chop them eventually-Ryan shared that he wouldn’t replace them if they got chopped) *Most top rope anchors stay, however anchors get pulled where safe, viable natural, multi-point gear anchors in the rock exist. Everything that Ryan communicated during those conversations and confirmed with a gentleman’s handshake and Ben reiterated was that Ryan would get to work right away on removing bolts.

FCJohn wrote: I don’t care how many straw polls or votes that you have a trail day; That does not make for a consensus. It simply does not capture the past, current, and most importantly future stakeholder’s input.

I'm still not sure how I feel about the bolted lines (I've been climbing up there since they were installed). But now I'm not even sure what consensus means. 5 guys are a consensus, but a vote at a trail day isn't? Whatever Duncan's Ridge once was or was not, it's now a local crag for the community to enjoy. I think the community should have had a say before it got bolted, should it not have a say before it is unbolted? I'd say that we should respect the wishes of each FA of each route, but it doesn't seem like anyone knows who the FA for any of those routes really is. FCJohn, are you, Ken Duncan, Mark Wilford and Jeff Giddings (none of whom I know personally), assuming the role of a 'group FA' for the area?

Mathias - That is a great, thoughtful question; One that I very much appreciate you asking. I'll buy you a beer at snowbank...

Let me attempt to clarify since everyone (myself included) here is attempting to co-opt "consensus".....Perhaps a better word for me to have used above is compromise..... Ryan met with those guys and the reached a " reluctant compromise"

I don't think that Wilford, Duncan, Giddings, myself, or any of the other cast of characters (Brink, Bohn, Heyliger, Austin, Guy, etc, etc, etc.) are claiming a group FA. The FA's documentation might be lost to history, but I hope that the established tradition and ethic haven't been lost as well.

Many of those guys have already weighted in on the thread. Those guys aren't the end all be all, but what I do know to be true is this.

I personally think (and I hope and pray that the NCCC and Ryan do as well) consider those guys as a group of tribal elders, ones that have more than 100+ years of climbing between 3 of them, who were in scene when the FA's were done and knew those climbers of the day personally.

I think they MORE than have the necessary the credentials to be a credible, collective historical, moral and ethical compass for the area. Next to the FA's being here in person, their voices carry LOTS of weight in this non-debate, debate....

If we as a collective, we can't accept this to be true, that some voices simply matter and carry more weight than others, then I guess I don't know anything to be true anymore.

The calculus doesn't have a neat and clean "exchange ratio"
Does 1 Duncan Ferguson = 1,000 votes?
But 1 Mark Wilford = 500 votes
and Ken Duncan only equals 250 (sorry ken)

What I do know is this, those guys HAVE weighed in (both in person and online) and had some very strong opinions on this issue and those opinions should carry a metric, ass ton of weight.

As a community, we should not be a surprised when boulder problems that are bolted without an attempt to obtain prior consensus, are resultingly chopped without consensus.

I've found myself asking this question a ton over the past month.....WWCLD?

"What would Craig Lubben Do?