|
|
|
|
climb_nc
Dec 11, 2004, 9:06 PM
Post #1 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 9
|
Hey guys, i recently heard through the grapevine that the bolts on BOG man were replaced by a party of two (not mentioning any names at this point). I am curious to find out whether these guys got permission to replace them from the first ascentionists, Tom Howard and Thomas Kelley. It's a crying shame to see the first bolts ever placed on Grandfather replaced in a whim. Those two bolts were not only historic, they were not manky, I've seen them hold falls. I also heard that one of the two bolts that was replaced wasn't removed,thus creating even more of an eye sore than was previously there.
With the recent popularity in the sport we're seeing massave ammounts of climbers in the area. It is the responsibility of each and every one of us to be informed of the local climbing ethics. Here in NC we have and are continueing to keep our rocks as they are in their natural state whenever possible. Replacing bolts is a touchy subject; we've seen great routes loose thier 'flavor' i guess you could say. when someone puts in a new shiny bolt they've also taken away the 'head factor' that goes along with clipping a 20-30 year old bolt.
In North Carolina, before you replace bolts get permission from the first ascentionist.
Lets try and keep ethics in mind at all times so that we keep NC rock as nice as it is for future monkeys like ourselves.
|
|
|
|
|
lazyjammin
Dec 11, 2004, 9:24 PM
Post #2 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 200
|
Replacing those bolts doesnt seem too bad. Though leaving one in is a poor way of replacing them. However getting permission from a F.A. party to replace old bolts seems kind of odd. Bolts need to be replaced, they were new when the route was first climbed and they should stay in top shape. +What happens if the F.A. party is gone or dead. Then after a long while the routes would be gone?
|
|
|
|
|
kman
Dec 11, 2004, 10:05 PM
Post #3 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2001
Posts: 2561
|
In reply to: the bolts on BOG man were replaced by a party of two (not mentioning any names at this point). I am curious to find out whether these guys got permission to replace them
Are you kidding or what? :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
cjstudent
Dec 11, 2004, 10:36 PM
Post #4 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 369
|
In reply to: In reply to: the bolts on BOG man were replaced by a party of two (not mentioning any names at this point). I am curious to find out whether these guys got permission to replace them Are you kidding or what? :roll:
I wasn't going to reply since I didn't do the bolting. But I am a local to the area i suppose.
Those bolts were old. Sure they might have held peoples falls but both were mank. Both were big time spinners, and the top bolt has even pulled from the wall it seems. the hanger is no longer flush with the rock.
I won't complain about the new bolts.
|
|
|
|
|
olejeff
Dec 11, 2004, 10:50 PM
Post #5 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2004
Posts: 99
|
Doesn't sound like a "delimma" to me. IF the FA's placed the bolts and IF the bolts were bad, they should be replaced. The folks replacing the bolts should have removed both the old bolts and patched the holes. Also painted bolt hangers blend in nicely with the rock. As far as the "head games" of clipping an old manky bolt and wondering if it will hold....what's up with that? Ethical situations come into play when parties come along and ADD bolts to a line that went up without them. I've climbed at Ship Rock and agree it's a special place and with all the access issues, everything possible should be done to minimize impact there. I'm coming back to NC in the spring and will definitely be doing a day at Ship.
|
|
|
|
|
climb_nc
Dec 12, 2004, 10:40 AM
Post #6 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 9
|
Hey guys thanks for the feedback. I simply want to state that in NC we try to aks the First Ascentionist(s) before anything is done to a route. We don't want to see sparkling new bolts and hangers throughout the Blue Ridge. I'm afraid if this happend I wouldn't be the only local to express my opinion. Happy climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 12, 2004, 11:16 AM
Post #7 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 16666
|
In reply to: Hey guys thanks for the feedback. I simply want to state that in NC we try to aks the First Ascentionist(s) before anything is done to a route.
Crap.
Getting "permission" to replace a worn, unsafe, or manky bolt is not necessary to maintain the ethic of the FA.
Placing a bolt that wasn't there before is a different story altogether.
But if the FA'er placed the bolt on the FA, and that bolt is now unsafe, what right does the FA'er have to say "I don't want it replaced... climb on unsafe bolts or don't climb..."??
By that logic, ASCA wouldn't ever do anything... many old mank bolts changed by the ASCA are quarter-inch bolts from the 60's. There is newer technology that doesn't change the ethic available, so use it.
|
|
|
|
|
boltdude
Dec 12, 2004, 4:59 PM
Post #8 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 29, 2002
Posts: 685
|
Actually we (the ASCA) do try to contact FAs, simply to confirm whether bolts are original or not, but also to get the replacement OK for certain well-known old-school routes (eg You Asked For It in Tuolumne, Stoner's Highway in the Valley). This is especially important on older routes, since a lot of folks in the '60s and '70s carried (and used) bolt kits on existing routes. A good example is the three old, rusted 1/4" bolts with Leeper hangers on Braille Book in the Valley. Even though they look ancient, they were added at least 6 years after the FA.
I do have to say that after talking to dozens of FA folks, many of them very well known, once we've confirmed that the bolts are original, pretty much everyone is psyched to have them replaced. Often it's "I can't believe no one's replaced them yet!"
For those folks who want to "maintain the feel" of old manky bolts, I'd suggest that you pick your battles carefully. How are you going to convince newer climbers that the FA ethic must be respected when you're so "off the wall" that you don't want people to replace old rusty bolts? It's such a strange and extreme position that all you will do is give support to people who call for retrobolting. One of the reasons I replace old bad bolts on super runout routes in Tuolumne is to prevent people from retrobolting. If people see a couple ancient bolts on some cool looking route, they might feel justified to retrobolt it since "no one ever climbs it." If you replace the bolts with new ones, then people know that current climbers consider the route worth preserving.
|
|
|
|
|
nrvna963
Dec 12, 2004, 9:00 PM
Post #9 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 156
|
Ok, FIRST OF ALL, the second bolt WAS a time bomb waiting to happen. Second, you do not have to contact the FA to REPLACE old nasty bolts. Third I asked lots of people that live and climb in NC if they though they should be replaced, every one of them said yes. Fourth we are not done, someone has put epoxy in the really old nasty rusty piece of mank to "lengthen its life," so it is going to have to be broken or sawed off. We did not have the tools for doing that, that DAY, but we do now, and we are going to fix it ASAP. We also are going to clean up that area where the old bolts were really well, so you wont notice it. Next, one of the bolts HAD ALREADY BEEN REPLACED, SO IT WASNT ORIGIONAL, and definitely not HISTORIC. Also the person that replaced it DIDNT use stainless steel, and it was already rusted. We replaced both bolts with stainless, and that should last a very long time. Also the bolt was in a dumb spot, and by lowering it 6 inches its much easier and safer to clip. Don’t get me wrong, I have climbed that route dozens of times with those old bolts, and without a second thought, but its a lot safer like this. Whom did you hear this from anyways? I take your post personally; a lot of time, energy, and some money go into replacing bolts to make climbing safer. Oh and we are going to camouflage the bolts so the wont be "sparkling." Although sparkling bolts are prob a lot less noticeable than old rusted black ones, esp at Ship. I also know of the bolting issue that is going on at Ship, but I promise you, they are much less noticeable now.
|
|
|
|
|
nrvna963
Dec 13, 2004, 12:15 PM
Post #10 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 156
|
In reply to: It's a crying shame to see the first bolts ever placed on Grandfather replaced in a whim.
Oh, and nice title for the thread... not
In reply to: With the recent popularity in the sport we're seeing massave ammounts of climbers in the area.
In reply to: when someone puts in a new shiny bolt they've also taken away the 'head factor' that goes along with clipping a 20-30 year old bolt.
In reply to: Lets try and keep ethics in mind at all times so that we keep NC rock as nice as it is for future monkeys like ourselves.
In reply to: I simply want to state that in NC we try to aks the First Ascentionist(s) before anything is done to a route.
In reply to: We don't want to see sparkling new bolts and hangers throughout the Blue Ridge. |
|
|
|
|
climb_nc
Dec 13, 2004, 2:10 PM
Post #11 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 9
|
Yo nrvna963,
Thanks for filling in your details, that's why I posted this topic. Dont take any of this too personaly man. I'm just a climber voicing my local opinion.
When you said:
"Since when have you become the expert on changing routes, and what gives you the right to say that???"
Sorry bro, I am no expert on changing routes, actually i've never changed one. And to your question about why I have the right to say this: I was raised climbing in North Carolina, learned how to climb here, have spent the majority of the years of my life climbing in these woods and on these rocks. I have the right to say whatever i please man, I speak from past experiences, and of what i have learned from friends, some of who put up the routes that we enjoy today here in NC.
So thanks for camoflauging your bolts, I wish you the best of luck in hiding the holes and hope that you're satisfied with the final result.
take it easy
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Dec 13, 2004, 2:33 PM
Post #12 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 16666
|
In reply to: Actually we (the ASCA) do try to contact FAs, simply to confirm whether bolts are original or not, but also to get the replacement OK for certain well-known old-school routes (eg You Asked For It in Tuolumne, Stoner's Highway in the Valley).
Interesting. The first part, confirming if bolts are original, I'm curious about. Does it matter if the mank bolts are original, or if they were placed by the SA (Second Ascentionist)? Or the TA?
IMHO, no. The bolts are there. And they're mank. Thus, they need to be replaced with safe, new bolts. This is far different, as you know, than adding more bolts (retro-bolting.) If the FA placed three bolts, and the second climber placed three bolts, now we have 6. Our issue is not "Was the Second Climber justified in placing the three new bolts?" Our issue should be "Do the current bolts meet safety standards?" They're already there, so let's do what we can to make it safe, adhering to the idea that "we're not adding bolts, we're exchanging them."
I applaud and support the ASCA's actions, even though I (generally) don't like bolted lines. If a line is going to be bolted, then we, as a climbing community, have the onus of making sure those bolts are safe.
|
|
|
|
|
nrvna963
Dec 13, 2004, 2:36 PM
Post #13 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 156
|
I guess i somewhat took your post the wrong way, sorry for freaking as much as i did.
|
|
|
|
|
nrvna963
Dec 15, 2004, 7:18 PM
Post #14 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 156
|
Well the bolt is gone. Also, it had apparently been sawed halfway though!! I don’t see why someone would do that, but when I took off the hanger and looked at it, yea, stupid to leave a bolt in that condition. So it is definitely best that it is gone, all more of a reason to check bolts before you say they are good.
And for the other bolt, the person who placed it failed to drill the bolt hole far enough in, a very stupid mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
ab_love
Dec 21, 2004, 8:05 AM
Post #15 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2004
Posts: 9
|
Hi,
My two cents is that the National Park Service who manages this land has made it very clear that they do not want to see ANY new bolts. They are in the process of creating a management plan for this area. They have asked for our cooperation. Despite safety concerns, the addition of ANY NEW FIXED HARDWARE jeopardizes access for everyone. When the management plan is finished, there will be options for replacing equipment and adding equipment. Until then, the addition, or replacement of fixed hardware is prohibited. Just so you know.
Anthony Love
Boone Climbers Coalition
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Dec 21, 2004, 9:03 AM
Post #16 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 15781
|
Anthony, is there a timeframe for these discussions with the NPS? I ask because I've been hearing rumors about them for a couple of years now. I know the nature of government interaction is lengthy, to say the least. Have you an update?
In reply to: Well the bolt is gone. Also, it had apparently been sawed halfway though!! I don’t see why someone would do that, but when I took off the hanger and looked at it, yea, stupid to leave a bolt in that condition.
IMO, if the bolts were that bad and nobody know it until now, then good riddance to them. A deadly accident would have harmed future access worse.
PS: I find it ironic that the BOG Man bolts, which were controversial when they originally went in, are once again the subject of debate, this time for their removal.
|
|
|
|
|
ab_love
Dec 21, 2004, 10:33 AM
Post #17 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2004
Posts: 9
|
True that the timeframe has been in the works for years now. Nonetheless, I would have figured if these bolts were that dangerous, they would have been replaced years ago when all the new ring anchors went in. Opinions vary I guess. With regards to an update, the survey for the corridor which has also been pending two years has been completed as of 11/04. The data and results should be made available no later than 2/04. While I realize this process has taken some time, we still must respect the facts that: they let us climb there in the first place and that theyare willing to work with us at all. Until the process is finished, it would be of benefit to ALL who climb at Ship to please not bolt or replace bolts. My piece has been said. Thanks,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
gunksgoer
Dec 21, 2004, 11:21 AM
Post #18 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 1290
|
ab_love, dude
replacing old bolts is completely different from adding new bolts. Sure, the hardwear might be new, but its not the same as placing a new bolt, especially if the old hole is reused. Many areas (take the gunks for example) have a ban on placing new bolts, but old ones are readily replaced, since there is no use in having a worthless old bolt.
Old bolts not only scar the rock in the immediate area they are placed in, but they arnt usable. if the destruction is already done, a new bolt just makes sense, assuming there isnt other natural pro located closeby. I think that the guys who replaced the bolts did the climbing community a favor, and shouldnt be taking crap for what they did.
|
|
|
|
|
nrvna963
Dec 21, 2004, 1:26 PM
Post #19 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 156
|
In reply to: Nonetheless, I would have figured if these bolts were that dangerous, they would have been replaced years ago when all the new ring anchors went in. Opinions vary I guess.
How much weight do you think a rusted very old bolt that has been sawed halfway through can hold? Could it be enough to keep someone off the ground if they fell right at the beginning of the overhang? I know you can get gear before that, but I have seen many people not place any there. The bolt had been sawed up from the bottom, so that is not as bad as it being sawed from the top, but still. Also there probably was a millimeter of rust on the outside of the bolt, which is more than it should be.
This route is also much less traveled than most routes at ship, so the people who replaced the bolts probably didn’t pay much attention to the bolts on BOG man. If they did look at it, then maybe they just were not the right people for the job.
I would much rather have seen that old bolt chopped and not replaced than for it to stay, so if you want to take the new bolt out and wait for the whole thing with the NPS to pass over to put it back in, then go for it. For all I care you can take them both out, I don’t need either one of them, ill free solo the route. I just didn’t want to see somebody trusting that bolt with their life. If someone had been hurt on that route then I would feel that it was partially my responsibility because I am a local and I knew that it was bad. I just couldn’t live with that.
|
|
|
|
|
bumblie
Dec 22, 2004, 6:37 AM
Post #20 of 20
(3639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7627
|
nrvna963,
Your intentions seem to be noble and decent.
In the future, please keep in mind that factors, other than the safety of one particular route, play into the situation. Local ethics and traditions, as well as legal aspects, are involved in this particular situation.
The access issues have been a concern at Ship Rock ever since someone fell (and died) while soloing at a nearby cliff, back in the eighties. There was a time back in the 90s when (I think) it was closed and a fee based permit was considered.
IMO, NC has some pretty strict ethics and access can be a real touchy subject. Best rule of thumb for rebolting in NC is to check with the Access Fund or a local climbers coalition before doing anything.
BTW I seriously doubt you'll find much resistance to replacing rusty bolts. By checking beforehand you can avoid this kind of backlash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
