Spring Cleaning

[aitch]

Hi Bruce,
I hope that you have had a good summer. It's now almost two months since Glenn and I asked you to remove the new bolt on YPLS. The amazing weather in August should have been hot enough to dry up the bizarre mud flow which was apparently preventing you from doing this earlier. Please confirm that the bolt is now history.
You mention someone monkeying up a deciduous tree. I am guessing that you may be referring to YPLS. No way, not us. Someone else, somewhere else.
Thanks, Hamish.

[BK]

Sorry to say no - I haven't made it back yet. The few weeks of dryness were spent elsewhere and now its looking like the season is suffering a premature death. Thats La Nina for you! Anyway, no i havn't forgotten my promise to you and when ever i do get to climb the thing it will be with a hammer and patch kit in hand. Of course if someone is so inclined and wants to beat me to the punch have at her.

also: the only deciduous trees i refferedc to were on clean crack and on Tantalus wall, and that was in reference to the idea of replacing the now extinct slung protection with a bolt, if no other options are available. In these particular situations, being runout directly above the belay and involving cruxy and insecure climbing, I think it is highly advisable. Your thoughts?

[BK]

oops - I meant clean corner, not crack

[aitch]

First of all, let me start by congratulating "Another Matt" for his excellent comments on Jul 23.

Bruce:
You appear to be asking me my opinion of 'run-out' situations. Run-out is a comparatively recent term. Perhaps someone [Anders?] can tell us when and where it originated. In my experience/opinion the concept of being run-out is very much like the concept of beauty. It is largely in the eye of the beholder. Many of today's climbers consider a climb to be run-out if the bolts are more than a single body length apart. Older climbers, perhaps not so much. As a well-known California climber once remarked, "Climbing ain't suburbia".

Let me summarize the situation on YPLS, as I see it.
--you placed a protection bolt without following the accepted protocol of asking the FAists for their opinion/consent.
--you made no attempt to advise either FAist afterwards.
--only after a direct question, you also announced that you had added a new 2 bolt station as well.
--you agreed to remove the single offending bolt, but claimed that the climb was too wet. [I am puzzled how you were able to place the bolt when the climb was wet, but were unable to remove it under similar conditions?]
--after six or more weeks of fine weather, the bolt has still not been removed. you appear to suggest that declining weather conditions will now prevent you from removing it this year, but are quite happy to pass the task on to someone else. in years past I have climbed at Squamish in December, so you still have 3 months to get the job done, if that is indeed your intention.
--it's time to walk the talk!! this year please.

If I am misreading your intentions, than I will be happy to apologize once I hear that the bolt is gone.

For the record, we did not lassoo any chock-stones on the FA. We slung some on the way by, but never resorted to lassooing them! We were too inept for that technique.
Regards, Hamish

[BK]

hamish, I'm sorry things havn't unfolded quite to your liking. I'm not sure how I can reassure you without repeating myself old sport so i guess i'll just have to leave you unsatisfied. All i can say is i'm a bit miffed myself at not even climbing the thing after all that scrubbing and finger painting with mud but there's always next year. As for getting at her in December, well maybe you enjoyed such a prospect but i really hope to be skiing by then.

I think i stated my question about bolts/ runouts about as clear as i'm capable so i won't repeat it but i must say i was hoping to get some more opinion about what the community thought about my original question about tantalus wall (missing stumps, etc). If i ever do get around to chopping your bolt this winter it will be from the top down. At which time, if i had a reasonable concensus on the matter, I would volunteer to place a bolt in lieu of the ex stump as well as a proper bolted belay station at the start to the headwall.

Incidentally, the whole idea of cleaning the Left side was to provide another decent and friendlier start to tantalus wall, which was getting a bit mangy again from little traffic.

Anyway, this reminded me of a recent supertopo topic, titled "route ownership - a sermon" where interestingly enough was a post from an old yosemite Hardcore, Eric Beck. I thought it interesting in light of your own yosemite quote:

While I totally agree that the FA principle has saved us from the emasculation of climbs, it is definitely true that some routes which could be moderate classics are underbolted. Consider Werner's Wiggle, put up by a person who was at the time only a marginal climber with zero bolts and is now popular.
Another example is the Snake Dike where we conserved our modest collection of 12 bolts, constantly expecting the climbing to get much harder. When we finished we realized that we had made a big mistake and asked Roper, doing the 2nd ascent to add more bolts. He did, doubling all the belays and putting in single protection bolts where there were none. I had hoped he would have added more, but consensus seems to be that the route is fine as it now is.

The numerous other comments are also quite interesting with lots of ideas from both sides of the coin

[Lurch]

Just wanted to add that my comments before were about Clean Corner as well, not YPLS.

I would still enjoy seeing some discussion on this issue and would invite the "No bolts on Clean Corner" crowd to expand on that sentiment.

Mike

[BK]

ha ha.... I just found another supertopo thread for you hamish!

http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum ... e-the-Bolt

[BK]

holy cow - another one

I love the thread title on this one:

http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum ... not-enough

[BK]

yet another! whats up with these old yosemite radsters going all soft? Must be all the dope.

http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum ... hird-pitch

[jipstyle]

So were you lying when you said that you'd respect the wishes of the first ascentionists and remove the bolt?

I don't understand the point of being antagonistic. Squamish ethics are fairly straight-forward: where possible, we respect the wishes of the FA party. You've said that you would do so.

Now that you've been asked to do so, why are you being petulant? Serious question.

[BK]

petulant? hmmm. I'm not being petulant. I'm just ribbing him. Its called humor.

under the circumstances (i.e. I am being accused either directly or indirectly of behaving dishonorably) I think its a reasonable effort to tone things down a bit. If any of you think i'm being the dishonorable one i suggest you reexamine the words written and the language used. for the record (that is, if it hasn't been stated already in plain english more than once) I intend to honor the promise i made if that what you're driving at. take a valium my good man.

[jipstyle]

If you really believe that your last few posts indicate a humourous approach to toning things down, all I can say is that our understanding of humour is quite different. *shrug*

[BK]

could be. but look at it this way - I could also respond to such accusations with more antagonisms but we all know where that goes. I'm sure Hamish is capable of a good laugh at it all and with a bit of luck he'll throw it right back at me and the next thing you know we'll be drinking in the bar arguing about rusty pitons. maybe you too .

[J Mace]

I was under the impression that a tree that was there for the FA and offered protection as you moved into the chimney was rotten and removed. In lieu a bolt was placed.

Glenn said that he is ok with that, why is this still a problem?

Seems to me that the feeling of the original climb is still preserved?

[aitch]

Bruce
It's hard to know where to start, you've been such a busy poster. I was not suggesting that you wait until December before removing the bolt. I was merely pointing out that you have another 2 or 3 months of acceptable weather to get it done. The original ascent was made during a dreary w/e in either late Sept or early Oct. Weather does not appear to be an obstacle.

I was interested in, but confused by, your choice of ST topics. Your example of Snake Dike is a perfect illustration of how reto-bolting should be carried out. The FA party conserved their limited bolt supply [and energy, as they hand-drilled] to ensure a successful outcome to their climb. They immediately asked the SA party to add more bolts, which was done within a matter of days. The bolt we are discussing here was added without consent, 46 years, or almost half a century, later. Two significant differences.

I am certainly not opposed to bolt protection, and being the proud possessor of a Bosch drill, have rap-bolted dozens of new routes in the last few years, and placed hundreds of bolts. 10 days ago my friend MS and I added a new 2 pitch gear climb at one of the Arrow Lake crags, which we named Tarzan. The second pitch is a marvellous hand traverse under a massive roof, with a tricky finish. We have tentatively graded it as 10+R. The last 12-15 feet of the traverse have few holds and no gear placements. If you fall off the traverse [which we both did] you have to prussik back up the rope to regain the line. Since this is rather tedious we are considering adding a bolt to this section to avoid the hassle of prussiking. This may not in fact be practical, due to the traversing nature of the climb, and the size of the roof. In the meantime we are hoping that others will repeat the route as it stands, and give us some feedback on the grade, and on the need [or not] for a bolt. At that point we will make our decision. In my opinion this, and your example of Snake Dike, is how retro-bolting should be carried out.
Cheers, Hamish.