DOWNLOAD A TOPO
"Genesis" (10a) on the right and "Adam & Evening" (double cracks, 10b) on the left. "Genesis" originally encompassed both of these climbs as variants. Having added a direct start to the former and a more direct finish to both, they are now almost entirely independent lines, warranting a name for each (in my opinion).
"Cain & Able" (5.8) follows the wide corner (bolt-protected there). The bolting was intended to make this a 5.8 climb for a 5.8 leader. See the photos in the next post to see just how vegetated this area was. "Original Thin" follows the angling ramp.
"Original Thin" (5.10c) on the FA (yesterday). Note. The first bolt is not yet in. It's not too bad to get to the second bolt... I'll place it soon.
The setting... See photos in the next post for contrast.
I did place a bolt there. I share your sentiment. With a nut in the crummy rock, if you fell from the crux, you'd still hit a ledge. I hope people find it to be in good taste.do i see a new bolt above the flake on the 10a version of genesis. i went to climb that and imo could use it. the only gear is low in a low rock quality flake and a cam in a horizontal that would surely rip if loaded.
Good question. I'm honestly stumped about what to do there... I could...wondering why you placed pins instead of a bolt in lower portions though?
1. leave the pins in
2. remove them and not replace them
3. remove them and replace them with bolts
It's not obvious to me what to do. Are they really necessary? I'm not sure either way.
So I was hoping that I would get suggestions that lean generally toward 1 of the 3 options, making my choice easier. Your thoughts?
Both pins are long, soft pitons. Neither are driven to the hilt. But both are totally solid. There's a lot of iron stuck in the crack.
With regards to "It would be pretty runout and scary without any protection there." I think that it mostly looks like it would be runout and scary without any pro there. But it's pretty ok. Try it and see what you think. Perceptions do matter though...
It may have been better had there been some discussion prior to your placing these bolts.
I disagree. Do other, well-established climbs have moss covering every hold (see my photos earlier in the post)? Last time I checked, they do not. A fairer categorization of Genesis is "a climb that was once nice but no one cared enough about it to keep it climbable". From what some of the more seasoned climbers tell me, no one had climbed it in 15 years prior to me showing up. So let's ease off on the historical finger-pointing.Genesis is a well-established climb
Two comments. First, you are implying that there was no discussion prior to me placing these bolts. On that point, you are wrong. I discussed the matter at length with individuals whom I find reasonable and thoughtful.It may have been better had there been some discussion prior to your placing these bolts.
In contrast, I did not place bolts where the pins are currently because we didn't feel clear enough on that. What to do about those pins? On that, I ask for direction from the community.
Second, discussion on this forum about whether to bolt or not bolt an old overgrown route draws out plenty of opinions, both for and against. Any decision in route development is going to be controversial. ANY decision. Check out my Right Wing post as an example...
In the end, we do not currently have a forum for having the kind of discussion that Anders suggests. If such a framework existed, I would happily seek their advice.
Here's the bigger issue... Many folks have different standards for cleaning a new route than they do for tinkering with an old one. But when a route becomes overgrown (perhaps *because* of its reputation for inadequate protection, which may have been the case on Genesis), which category does it fall into? I believe it falls into the former... keep the old name, judge it afresh. If anyone is upset about my actions, I would ask them why they have not bothered to climb the route or fix it up over the past decade and a half.
One final correction.
I'm not so sure about that. Go try it. An attentive belay at the crux should keep the climber off the ledge below. The bolt is about knee height when you can place the next piece. Maybe it'd be better to go try it first, then criticize it.a bolt there probably does little to reduce the chance of hitting the foothold
I don't recall it requiring bolts or feeling dangerously runout then, but it has been a while. It was pretty easy climbing on the bottom steps, 5.8 with a couple of good small nuts until you get up to the crux crack, where once it gets harder there was as much gear as you could possibly want?
One can place a nut in crummy rock below the seam. But, if it held, it wouldn't protect against a ledge fall. If it didn't, you might just hit the ground (or come close).
"Adam & Evening" has a double-crack crux. There was a pin there that I removed. Modern, thin gear protects that crux well, obviating the need for a pin.
I recall NTB off the start and then RP protected moves at the crux, then bomber gear.
Was likely 10a R, but never really thought that it needed bolts or pins to be safe. The crux moves are nice hand ledges off the larger ledge at 1/3 height.
I personally think that a bolt is not needed for the Rhand side (Genesis), but then again, it doesn't get done and the pro might play a factor (sure does on the pet wall routes that have been rebolted from once being gear routes (Pheasant, Food Frenzy etc). Not much help I know...
Jer, thank you for taking the time to clean up this crag, much appreciated.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests