|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 16, 2003, 8:24 PM
Post #1 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
I recently had the pleasure of climbing in the breathtaking McDowell Mountains @ Sven Slab in AZ. I started out on a nice, easy, well bolted rout to tun into the rock. After a very pleasing cruis up a great slab, my girlfriend and I started exploring the other neerby routs on the rock. I ended up scouting out a couple of .10a, .10b climbs. the only problem was the first bolt was 25' off the deck. I didnt have a stick clip so I decided to TR it. Tied in and feeling great I headed up. About 15' off i find a shiny, 3/8" bolt sawed off flush with the rock! A few moves later I find the same thing. Confused and a little disgruntled I worked on past the second chopped bolt to find the rest of the rout is quite nicely bolted, with new 3/8" bolts...but without hangars. What is going on? I would like to find out who set up the route and more importantly who chopped the bolts and why. There were no other opportunities for slingin pro, so on lead, bolts are the only pro. The route to the right had two bolts throughout the 70' slab, the first of which I explained was 25' off the ground. So whats up? Jared
|
|
|
|
|
sonso45
Feb 21, 2003, 8:07 PM
Post #2 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2002
Posts: 997
|
Jared, I haven't been there in a while but can you tell me where the chopped route you were on is located? Where is it in relation to the main slab? I know that just right of the slab are two runout 10s done years ago. I think someone may have retrobolted them. M
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 21, 2003, 10:27 PM
Post #3 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
Ok about the location. In the book I have it shows the two main slabs. The slab on the left being the easier, less inclined slab. The route I was talking about is on the right slab(the steeper of the two). In between the two routes you said were recently re-bolted is the climb Im talking about. It shoots straight up the middle of the slab and its such an excellent route that I wish the bolts were still there. Hope that helps. Jared
|
|
|
|
|
gawd
Feb 21, 2003, 10:36 PM
Post #4 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 193
|
Maybe you should bemore appaled that someone destoyed the rock in an attempt to make the route more to their liking. Sack it up and try the runouts. Crying about bolts is a waste of time, more so on the internet. Do something or keep quiet.
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Feb 21, 2003, 10:53 PM
Post #5 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
THANK GAWD YOU showed Up!!!! Bolt wars is just not the same without GAWD! Not that he has any idea about the ethics of the area...it dosn't matter....He IS GAWD!!!! Signed... Osama Been Choppin...??? :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
climbingpride
Feb 23, 2003, 5:43 PM
Post #6 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2001
Posts: 571
|
I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!!! I had to TR it too! What i think is the reason for the choping was that the bolts were getting old. On Sven Slab if you look at the bolts twards the middle and left side of the face the bolts are looking a wee bit old for me. So I use that 5.7, with the scary 20'+ runout to the anchors, on the VERY right to acces the Eye bolt at the top. The McDowells would be so much better if they could be bolted again. Oh and BTW I'm going to be doing my Eagle scout project there soon, April 5th. I wish it could be bolting but its puting in a gate and some signs, NOT TO KEEP CLIMBERS OUT! I would shoot myself if it did. *wishes they did a better job chopping too.
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 24, 2003, 7:21 PM
Post #7 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
In reply to: Maybe you should bemore appaled that someone destoyed the rock in an attempt to make the route more to their liking. First of all Gawd, What I climbed was not a route until it was bolted. Then the bolts were chopped. Second, I dont have a problem with runin it out unless I am in groundfall range. which you are 80% of the time on that slab. And third, the reason why I am pissed is because the rock was not destroyed until some dumbass came and cut off the bolts. Further more...IF YOU HAVE NEVER CLIMBED IN THE MCDOWWELS, KEEP YOUR TOUGH GUY COMMENTS TO YOURSELF. Jared
|
|
|
|
|
espinosa
Feb 24, 2003, 10:27 PM
Post #8 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 140
|
hehe i took a HUGE whipper there a couple years ago. i was just getting ready to take some rope to clip and i peeled. with rope stretch i hit my belayer and just touched the ground. had i been clipping it would have been worse. that place is scarey as hell, cool, but scarey!!!
|
|
|
|
|
stewbabby
Feb 24, 2003, 10:44 PM
Post #9 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2002
Posts: 802
|
In reply to: First of all Gawd, What I climbed was not a route until it was bolted Just curious about this statement. Sooooo, I guess that with this mentallity we are saying that a TR is not a route. Um......... NO stewart PS I'm not trying to start a fight. Just curious about your logic.
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 25, 2003, 1:12 AM
Post #10 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
How can you have a sport/trad route when there are no bolts or pro placements? Therefore the route did not exist until someone bolted it because pro cannot be used! This slab was not meant for TR. Tito I didn't think what I stated in my earlier post had anything to do with whether there are runout slabs in AZ or any other state in this country, my point was that if your not familiar with the slab, you don't know what im talking about. Further more Tito, when pro can be placed, I dont agree with bolting. Have you ever been to sven slab Tito? If you had you might see what I am talking about. I am not a pussy, and I am not afraid to run it out, but ground falls from 25+ feet break bones.
|
|
|
|
|
stewbabby
Feb 25, 2003, 2:05 AM
Post #11 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2002
Posts: 802
|
In reply to: Therefore the route did not exist until someone bolted it because pro cannot be used! This slab was not meant for TR Agian, I am not trying to start a fight here, but I really am not following you. http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/photos/jump.cgi?Detailed=1546 I am assuming that this is the area that you are talking about. If so then I must be missing something. It looks as though this could be easily top roped, and you even stated that you top roped the route. I did a route this weekend at a local crag that to my knowledge has never been done before. The area doesnt allow bolting and the line wouldnt take gear... so I TRed the line and sent it. Now, if im following your logic then the route that I did doesnt exist. I find that quite amusing. All I am trying to say here is that just because there is an area that will not take gear doesnt mean that you have to have bolts to enjoy the rock. And I really dont understand your statement about the slab not being meant for TR. Did God decide when the rock was being formed what its intention was? Now, I dont care to debate the validity of the route being chopped or not. I dont really care about that. I just wanted to point out your fuzzy logic. Its not all about trad or sport. Its about moving over stone. Have fun and climb. And TR is climbing. stewart
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 25, 2003, 2:18 AM
Post #12 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
Ok Stewart, That pic is of the AREA, but not the same slab. The slab which I am talking about is to the right of this pic. And the only reason I was able to TR the route was because I bouldered over a 20' chasm, set up some pro which I tied into and proceeded to downclimb to get to the anchor on top. my logic is not fuzzy, your reading comprehension is fuzzy.
|
|
|
|
|
stewbabby
Feb 25, 2003, 2:29 AM
Post #13 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2002
Posts: 802
|
In reply to: my logic is not fuzzy, your reading comprehension is fuzzy. How is my reading comprehension fuzzy? You wrote that you set the route up as a TR. So I went with that. Also.... i have a few questions for you. Do you think that the FA party set the bolts on lead? Or do you think that he did the route on TR first and then set the bolts? I would be willing to bet my next paycheck that the route was done on TR before the bolts were set. If so.... Did the route "not exist" when it was TRed? By the way, learn to debate without getting personal. stewart :D
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 25, 2003, 2:54 AM
Post #14 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
In reply to: I just wanted to point out your fuzzy logic. That sounds pretty personal to me. There are other ways to get to the top of the rock, The big a** crack on the right side of the slab being one of them. My guess is thats the way the FA party got topside... but again you wouldn't know that because you have never been there.
|
|
|
|
|
stewbabby
Feb 25, 2003, 3:10 AM
Post #15 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2002
Posts: 802
|
In reply to: I didn’t have a stick clip so I decided to TR it. In reply to: What I climbed was not a route until it was bolted The second statement implies that a TR route is not a route, and yet the first statement said that you TRed the route. That is pretty fuzzy to me. But anyway, back to the bolt or not to bolt or why or when or what or who or how debate.......... stewart
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Feb 25, 2003, 3:19 AM
Post #16 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
AH -- makes sense after you clarified which part of Sven's you're refering to. The photo is of Quaker Oats (5.5, but it sometimes feels like 5.7). All of those climbs are top-ropeable from the huge, honkin' eye bolt at the top of the route. Typically most people lead up the well protected Quaker Oats and TR everything to the left. All of those to the left are way run out and the bolts that are there sure could stand to be replaced. I've only seen one person lead any of those routes--those are ballsy leads and a testament the cahones and style of those who originally put them. I'd sure like to see more bolts on some of those routes, but I'm not the one who established the climbs. As for the section in question -- the routes on far west formation are very tough. Using the large crack (offwidth called Peaches & Cream - 5.7) as a point of orientation: the only established route to the left of P&C is a three bolt 5.10c called Dark Passages. Is this one of the routes that had chopped bolts? If so, the first three off the deck were the original bolts and need to be replaced. It's more likely you're refering to the two climbs to the right of P&C -- Changes in Latitude (5.10b) and Nit Nat (5.10a). "Changes" has thre bolts at the beginning of the route and then is protectable with small stoppers. It looks like the first bolt is a ways off the deck, but the rest of it looks well protected. Nit Nat is about 20 feet right of Changes is about the same -- three bolts and medium stoppers, and a little run out at the start. So, with that information, where are you refering to? Does it sound like one of these established routes? Or maybe someone tried to squeeze a new route in between the two and it got chopped? Or??? Heck, I'm dyin to find out. I'll probably head up there myself this weekend and report back. Ed
|
|
|
|
|
baywolf
Feb 25, 2003, 3:43 AM
Post #17 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 88
|
Ya... I am not quite sure on that Ed. My book is not very discriptive at times and doesn't list all of the routes in an area. So I hope you do go up there and tell me what I saw. Thanks Jared.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Feb 25, 2003, 4:58 AM
Post #18 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
The routes in question are still unclear. I'll take a look and report back. From his description, it may be that a new line was put up between two established climbs and was then chopped. That would not be cool. Nor would it be OK if someone did more than replace old bolts on established lines, but instead added bolts. We'll see. Ed
|
|
|
|
|
climblouisiana
Feb 25, 2003, 2:45 PM
Post #19 of 19
(7330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 3, 2002
Posts: 506
|
The route in question was squeezed between Nit Nat and Changes in Latitude. The route in question was a top rope since those routes were established. I have visited the McDowells extensively for many years. I have led all the routes at Sven Slab area with the exception of one 5.11a. Some of the routes may need to have bolts replaced because of their age (i have no problem with them). None of the routes need to have bolts added to them. A six bolt route squeezed between two bold test pieces is unnecessary in this area. This area has always been about boldness with the exception of Quaker Oats which was retrobolted soon after the first ascent by the FA party. I feel that the bolt anchors placed at the top of Dark Passage and The TR route are unnecessary. No one has needed them in the 25 through 30 years previously. One local's opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|