Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Araps Rebolting 31-Dec-2005 At 7:04:43 PM Jonesy

Message

On 31/12/2005 tmarsh wrote:

>OK . , so comprehension isn't your strong point.

Oooh now them's fightin words... maybe I didn't pay quite enough attention to your original post, or could it be that I was digesting an article, marking papers and writing a thesis at the same time as banging out a quick reply?

> I never suggested that Araps *was* a sport crag. Nevertheless it does contain *some* > sport routes. In my opening paragraph I asked whether or not Mind Arthritis was
> effectively one of them.

Actually you kind of stated that it was a sport route and challenged someone to correct you. Being in bed with all the blokes who want to grid bolt the crag under the pretext of safety doesn't strengthen your position.

>>Do you know Chris Shepard?
>
>Yes. I even know how to spell his surname. S-H-E-P-H-E-R-D.
>

I've been tempted to correct the odd spelling mistake in some of my replies too. But then I realised I was just nit picking and should actually be rethinking my argument and coming up with some decent points instead of going for the cheap shots. Never had the audacity to actually post it. Your middle name isn't P-E-T-T-Y is it?

>A good example would be some of Julian's routes. Bold, committing climbing,
>on very well-placed ring bolts. The character of the route is influenced
>by the spacing of the bolts, but the placement itself is durable.

Dragging Jules into this isn't gonna help you either. We aren't talking about establishing new routes, we are talking about meddling with old ones.

Care to add comment Jules? Perhaps they'd like directions to Orca so they can go and install 4 rings and a lower-off.

>If the intention of the FA was to create a bold testpiece, then I won't
>take issue with you. If that was Chris' intention in putting up MA, then
>I agree that any 'route maintenance' should retain the original character
>of the route.

Good so we agree then.

>My issue is with the retention of gear on the pretext of
>being a 'hanging museum'. In my view, it's simply not a valid reason
>to leave rusty metal in a cliff.

In the specific example of mind arthritis, an acceptable level of safety could easily have been achieved by replacing all the old bolts with new "modern" bolts, whilst leaving in the pin to retain the character and the sporting nature. Only the illusion of safety would be compromised, in reality a 10 m fall into space is not going to kill you.

Right at the very start of this we were essentially talking about the difference between rebolting and re-equipping. It seems to be general consensus and a quite reasonable proposition that bolts intended as protection should be reliable in nature. However in the case of old/bold routes or former aid routes that have been freed (ie aftermath & procul) this is obviously huge grey area (hence the debate). If you accept that last statement, then a large percentage of routes at Araps should also be considered "grey" and therefore worthy of preservation or at the very least debate prior to re-equipping.

BTW chatting with a bunch of guys who all argee with you isn't debate.

In such a small and cool climbing community as that in Australia it would be nice if we could tackle these difficult issues whilst avoiding the nastiness and politics so evident in other countries a la Mike's post. The whole idea of this post was to try to prevent more of these classic routes from being brought down to a completely homogenized level of safety and to preserve some sense of history, while at the same time encouraging and applauding some of the excellent re-equipping that's taking place.
Perhaps my opinion is tainted by the sinking feeling of going back to a route established ground up, onsight and solo only to see flakes pried off with a crowbar and a line of shiny bolts smack up the middle.

>Fixed gear is a necessary evil and should be limited to that which is necessary.

Again, in the case of mind arthritis, all the equipment "necessary" to climb the route was there. Perhaps it was just that the rebolters were the missing the two neccessary components required to climb it.