On 6/07/2009 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 2/07/2009 robertsonja wrote:
>>A previous generation who used pitions and other antiquated methods should
>not set precedent.
>
>&
>On 6/07/2009 robertsonja wrote:
>>In my foolishness and naivety I have confused clipping a piton eye with
>>a bolt eye and a piton scar with a rusty stub.
>>
>>I have climbed Ozy, and yes it is "littered". Another climb that has
>been
>>"drilled into submission". Just buy yourself some etriers, and follow
>the
>>bolt ladders, blown piton scars and rust stains to the top.
>>
>
>Precedent?
>Hmm.
>It appears to me that your two statements are at odds with each other.
Just two different statements.
>You climbed a line that was already done, (by aid originally)!
> ~> You aided Ozy yes?
>What a novel idea.
I climbed Ozy as my first aid route, not a novel idea. My point exactly, the route difficulty has been lowered so much that a first timer can clip and go.
>Aside from the bolting ethic, I would suggest that vision to climb (by
>whatever means) any given line = a precedent of sorts.
>Guide books would have nothing to report if not for precedent?
If you leave the rock as you found it, climb by whatever style you like.
>Could it be possible in the future that you look back to the nasty old
>clean climbing days of now, that includes modern methods like placing bolts
>(where needed?), and dare I say it, clean-aid, in the same light for 'precedent
>ascents' such as you look back on the nasty old piton days of yore?
I do look back on the nasty old piton days, but I probably won't look back on the "nasty old clean climbing" days as my cams will be antiquated and retired but the rock will there for others to push boldness and hardness and new precedents for guide books.
>As an aside; there are not too many rust stains (I assume you mean from
>bolts), at Buffalo. The far greater crime there is the galvanic leaching
>from the tourist guard-rails that have killed off the natural lichen below
>most lookouts ...
> |