Sponsored By
ROCK
HARDWARE
Chockstone Photography
Australian Landscape Prints |
Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta
Crag & Route Beta
| Area | Location | Sub Location | Crag | Links |
| VIC Grampians | Halls Gap | The Watchtower | (General) | [ Watchtower Guide | Images ] |
| Author |
|
|||||
10:30:56 PM |
On 5/03/2014 Big G wrote: >On 5/03/2014 Duang Daunk wrote >> >just suggesting that maybe they're silent because they don't care or don't >care enough to post on our little climbing forum. Maybe. Or, like the majority of users of most climbing forums, they never actually post anything and certainly never want to get involved in the endless argy-bargy of forum slanging matches. It doesn't mean they don't care, they just have to make a choice and (at least by the stats of a few years ago) when it comes to it they choose not to post. Their dislike of (in this case) excessive bolting very much exists, it just isn't publicly registered. You can blame them for not acting, with some justification, but that still doesn't make the excessive bolting OK. Unfortunately, this seeming lack of opposition can encourage proliferation and ultimately, as noted above, it ends up in the hands of non-climbing bureaucrats and out of the hands of climbers. A little dated, and UK, but indicative nonetheless: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=153813&v=1#x2180583 |
|||||
10:38:55 PM |
On 5/03/2014 kieranl wrote: >Actually I just said that if you're going to remove bolts don't further >damage the rock while doing so. How complex is that? It isn't complex Kieran, just a bit stupid. The rock is already damaged, I don't see significant difference between 12mm holes and 16mm holes. If you pull the bolt and patch the hole, at least the visual impact is minimised (and you might slip it past land managers). On the other hand, the benefit of leaving chopped off stubs is that it really says "don't bolt here" to the next clown who comes along with a drill and a dream. Your idea that anyone who goes to pull the bolts must do it without knocking a single extra sand grain off, or else be "just as bad as the bolter" is a pile of shit. I reckon you added it in solely to try to tangle people up in an imaginary ethical conundrum. |
|||||
9:09:56 AM |
On 5/03/2014 One Day Hero wrote: >I don't see significant difference between 12mm holes and 16mm holes. It appears that we disagree. |
|||||
9:55:08 AM |
There are way to many new bolts appearing on routes that don't warrant them. Instead of making it easy for people to climb the grades they climb indoors we should be encouraging them to enjoy outdoor climbing as they find it. And accepting one standard in one place then complaining when the same standard is applied somewhere else is pure hypocrisy. I think counter action is justified. If there was no broad consultation when a bolt went in then why should there be any consultation for the same bolt to come out. But as Keiran pointed out, please don't make an even bigger mess in the process. |
|||||
10:04:42 AM |
On 2/03/2014 Groveller wrote: >Hi , does anyone know what the line is called and the grade that is about >5 meters down from Jaguar pulse? It has 7 or more rings about 2 meters >apart and starts off with a overhang. Are they really 2 metres apart all the way or just for the first few bolts? Can you clip the first bolt from the ground as per the retrobolt of Spaceman Spiff at Mount Buffalo? I saw that little effort for the first time on the weekend, a genuine low point in Victorian climbing. |
|||||
1:37:58 PM |
On 6/03/2014 shiltz wrote: >I think counter action is justified. If there was no broad consultation when a bolt went in then why should there be any consultation for the same bolt to come out. >But as Keiran pointed out, please don't make an even bigger mess in the process. & then wrote; >Can you clip the first bolt from the ground as per the retrobolt of Spaceman >Spiff at Mount Buffalo? I saw that little effort for the first time on >the weekend, a genuine low point in Victorian climbing. Given you recognise that, what are you going to do about it? ~> Dangerouser Cliffs 'organisation', at least as I understand it, is looking for recruits... Hmm. This being a kieranl original route... What are your thoughts on the proliferation of retro-bolting kieranl? |
|||||
2:10:07 PM |
Keirans Thoughts "*post-edit* As I said in the restricted thread, I'm not worried about the retro-bolting - there's so little enjoyable rock at Buffalo that it was a waste that we didn't bolt these in the first place. " As to the other retrobolting at Buffalo some of it is has been done by the FAs, some is OK, some is poor, some is unacceptable in my view. Having spoken to a number of the significant developers there was an odd style of bolting which developed in part due to the hand drilling where bolts were placed out of reach at obvious stances and were placed to be clipped with ganged wires so the bolts were as high as possible or occasionally just placed in the wrong locations unintentionally (or intentionally). The harder routes were often TRd into submission prior to leading. In reality it is a bit of a shamozzle up there and the revisionist historians try to make it out to have been all done in the finest style with exceptional boldness, blah, blah, blah. Shame, as some fine climbing has been ruined as a result. There are some good examples of well though out, though adequately bold routes, such as Cows with Guns and They Might Be Giants (among a number). With regards to the Watchtower if there is adeqaute gear to protect the routes then by all means remove the bolts as the style of that crag is a mixed crag where bolts should not be placed where gear will suffuce. |
|||||
2:12:50 PM |
Developing a bolt removal technique M9. I wouldn't say the cliffs were dangerouser prior to bolting. If you don't want to lead then what is wrong with top roping? Do people feel more like "real climbers" clipping bolts every couple of metres that they do on top rope? Retrobolting, bolting easy lines which can be just as easily toproped, over cautious bolting, bolting next to good gear placements to save having to carry any gear on your precious red-point attempt, it all essentially amounts to the same thing. There are so many good routes out there that can be climbed on gear or already have bolts. So guys, why not save your time and money for that special line that really does need bolt protection. And do your research before you pull out the power drill to save others having to clean up after you. |
|||||
2:28:15 PM |
On 6/03/2014 shiltz wrote: >Developing a bolt removal technique M9. > Not for Spaceman Spiff I should say. I've seen the comments on the other thread. I was still stunned when I actually saw them. btw: Its been 10 years since I did Injustice. Has it sprouted a new bolt as well? I recall being more reliant on slings back then. |
|||||
2:48:34 PM |
On 6/03/2014 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote: >This being a kieranl original route... >What are your thoughts on the proliferation of retro-bolting kieranl? Complex. The "no problem" remark was in the context that I did not have a problem that required that the bolts be removed. People can go back and look at the earlier thread if they want more. |
|||||
3:40:46 PM |
On 6/03/2014 The good Dr wrote: >Keirans Thoughts > >"*post-edit* As I said in the restricted thread, I'm not worried about >the retro-bolting - there's so little enjoyable rock at Buffalo that it >was a waste that we didn't bolt these in the first place. " An interesting comment/quote. Is this in the same vein as Parrot On A Stick (Graded 16 in 1992, but more like Gd 12!!), where two bolts would have sufficed instead of three? > >As to the other retrobolting at Buffalo some of it is has been done by >the FAs, some is OK, some is poor, some is unacceptable in my view. > >Having spoken to a number of the significant developers there was an odd >style of bolting which developed in part due to the hand drilling where >bolts were placed out of reach at obvious stances and were placed to be >clipped with ganged wires so the bolts were as high as possible or occasionally >just placed in the wrong locations unintentionally (or intentionally). >The harder routes were often TRd into submission prior to leading. In reality >it is a bit of a shamozzle up there and the revisionist historians try >to make it out to have been all done in the finest style with exceptional >boldness, blah, blah, blah. Shame, as some fine climbing has been ruined >as a result. There are some good examples of well though out, though adequately >bold routes, such as Cows with Guns and They Might Be Giants (among a number). > I am interested in your further elaboration of your above statement, particularly in what constitutes shamozzle, and also what has been ruined... Regarding "odd style of bolting". I am confused a bit by that statement, in that if the bolts were placed on lead, then they would automatically be clippable by subsequent ascentionists, yes? CWG & TMBG ... Both routes put up by people who understand the 'old ethic' of bolt spacing that is based on reliable protection likely to be found on trad protected routes, ie adequate to the task/grade. >With regards to the Watchtower if there is adeqaute gear to protect the >routes then by all means remove the bolts as the style of that crag is >a mixed crag where bolts should not be placed where gear will suffuce. +1. |
|||||
4:30:55 PM |
On 6/03/2014 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote: >On 6/03/2014 The good Dr wrote: >>Keirans Thoughts >> >>"*post-edit* As I said in the restricted thread, I'm not worried about >>the retro-bolting - there's so little enjoyable rock at Buffalo that >it >>was a waste that we didn't bolt these in the first place. " > >An interesting comment/quote. >Is this in the same vein as Parrot On A Stick (Graded 16 in 1992, but >more like Gd 12!!), where two bolts would have sufficed instead of three? I'm crap at grading slabs. There would also have been a bit of grittiness about it that might have made it feel more insecure on the first rather than later ascents. I must have thought the bolts were necessary at the time because they were hand-drilled - probably took me 45 mins to an hour per bolt. I certainly didn't think that it was a significant climb, nothing like the main climbs on Dreamworld. |
|||||
5:01:32 PM |
On 6/03/2014 kieranl wrote: >On 6/03/2014 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote: >>On 6/03/2014 The good Dr wrote: >>>Keirans Thoughts >>> >>>"*post-edit* As I said in the restricted thread, I'm not worried about >>>the retro-bolting - there's so little enjoyable rock at Buffalo that >>it >>>was a waste that we didn't bolt these in the first place. " >> >>An interesting comment/quote. >>Is this in the same vein as Parrot On A Stick (Graded 16 in 1992, but >>more like Gd 12!!), where two bolts would have sufficed instead of three? >I'm crap at grading slabs. There would also have been a bit of grittiness >about it that might have made it feel more insecure on the first rather >than later ascents. >I must have thought the bolts were necessary at the time because they >were hand-drilled - probably took me 45 mins to an hour per bolt. I certainly >didn't think that it was a significant climb, nothing like the main climbs >on Dreamworld. Whilst Parrot (which I'm yet to climb) may not be as significant as TINOL or Strathbogie, judging from it's popularity the two times I've been down there, I think it's climbed more than any of the others at dreamworld. Significance is something I can't put an objective value to. |
|||||
5:22:40 PM |
On 5/03/2014 Duang Daunk wrote: > > >Get real. ODH might not be everyones flavour, but up till now, he is the >voice of a silent majority. > > If the majority of climbers don't want bolts, why is there always a complaint of the "oncoming masses" whenever someone bolts something. Maybe we should bolt everything to keep the "silent majority" away. Stop them from trampling everything and ruining the environment. |
|||||
5:52:06 PM |
On 5/03/2014 Damo666 wrote: >Maybe. Or, like the majority of users of most climbing forums, they never >actually post anything and certainly never want to get involved in the >endless argy-bargy of forum slanging matches. It doesn't mean they don't >care, they just have to make a choice and (at least by the stats of a few >years ago) when it comes to it they choose not to post. > >Their dislike of (in this case) excessive bolting very much exists, Sorry, but your UK-based statistics and the inference to the Australian population are logical fallacies. 'argument from ignorance'. Proof of non-responsiveness is clearly not proof of support of a particular ideology. Bolters could as well claim that the 80,000+ non-respondents per week in the UK climbing forums support bolting wholeheartedly (let's not even talk population skew - I think many of us, myself included, privately applaud UK for its love of gritstone and boltless tactics, suicidal as it can be at times). Equally, it could be concluded that 80,000+ potential respondents are just reading the forums while taking a crap and are unable to exercise fine motor skills so are therefore unable to respond. Referring to later posts and not related to your particular post, I am concerned at the concept of a 'silent majority'. This is a term that has sprung from the condemnation of abhorrent practices that were, at the time, considered acceptable. A silent majority opposed slavery. A silent majority opposed various wars. A silent majority opposed the inability of women and Indigenous people to vote. I don't believe climbers comprise a silent anything - we are vocal about our various peccadilloes, whatever they may be. |
|||||
6:06:15 PM |
On 6/03/2014 davidn wrote: > >>Their dislike of (in this case) excessive bolting very much exists, > >Sorry, but your UK-based statistics and the inference to the Australian >population are logical fallacies. > >'argument from ignorance'. Proof of non-responsiveness is clearly not >proof of support of a particular ideology. Bolters could as well claim >that the 80,000+ non-respondents per week in the UK climbing forums support >bolting wholeheartedly (let's not even talk population skew - I think many >of us, myself included, privately applaud UK for its love of gritstone >and boltless tactics, suicidal as it can be at times). > You're correct that my original 2nd paragraph was a logical fallacy in that I implied that ALL of that silent majority was opposed to bolting. As you point out, we don't know what they think. But that was really the main point, of my first paragraph. The point being that many people are interested enough to read the forum but not sufficiently motivated to post anything. That discrepancy was my point, not necessarily their view on any given thing. > I don't believe climbers comprise a silent anything >- we are vocal about our various peccadilloes, whatever they may be. Who is 'we'? As above, the majority of climbers do not post on forums, do not write letters, do not write blogs or magazine articles. There might be a range of different voices and opinions, but numerically they are a minority. I find it odd that climbers, as a general population, would in most cases adhere to the increasingly accepted and popular guidelines of 'leave no trace' and 'minimal impact' for outdoor activities - except when it comes to bolting. Bolts, except when replacing mounds of tat, are MORE impact than trad pro and leave a visible, artificial trace of passage. I'm not intrinsically against bolts and I'm all for a few in some places, but the degree of proliferation is highlighting this hypocrisy within the climbing community. |
|||||
6:34:01 PM |
On 6/03/2014 Damo666 wrote: >Who is 'we'? As above, the majority of climbers do not post on forums, >do not write letters, do not write blogs or magazine articles. There might >be a range of different voices and opinions, but numerically they are a >minority. Damien You - and I - and various others are potentially always going to be in the firing lines. We have views. Many of the views of the most vocal conflict. I think we agree in general. Climbing remains a very small sport - if people want to continue to have access to their preferred areas, in their preferred style (sport, trad, boulder, solo, run a lot of kms and solo a mountain Crazy John style) they will have to be more vocal. If you don't speak and you can't climb in your style due to access changes... well, ... That said, bolts are undoubtedly going to become more common, not less. It's not the biggest dichotomy mankind has ever encountered (by a very long shot) but - realistically - rock climbers will have to in future decide whether they are happy to climb beside bolts without clipping them to create a sense of adventure. The choppers aren't going to win in the long term. Sorry guys ;) |
|||||
7:09:50 PM |
On 6/03/2014 kieranl wrote: >On 5/03/2014 One Day Hero wrote: >>I don't see significant difference between 12mm holes and 16mm holes. >It appears that we disagree. Yes I'm with you Kieran (you are consistently the voice of reason and logic on this forum btw). 16mm holes are approximately 1.777777778 times as damaging as 12mm holes, a massive 77.8% increase (I know.... amazing right, how someone could even consider doing 77.8% more vandalism to a cliff). The good news though is that 6mm holes are only 25% as bad as 12mm holes. And get this! 3mm holes are only 6.25% as bad as 12mm holes. The real question we should be asking is why aren't we bolting things with 3mm bolts to save the environment? Admittedly 3mm bolts are not as strong as 12mm, but we could have up to 16 times as many of them, meaning that those 1m run-outs would be reduced to a mere 6 or 7 cm, which would surely reduce the impact of a fall such that the bolts would be fine. Its surely only a matter of time before Hilti develops a suitable "bolting laser" so we can start using carbon nano-tubes for bolting, to really save damage to the rock. |
|||||
9:15:30 PM |
On 6/03/2014 Damo666 wrote: > >I find it odd that climbers, as a general population, would in most cases >adhere to the increasingly accepted and popular guidelines of 'leave no >trace' and 'minimal impact' for outdoor activities - except when it comes >to bolting. Bolts, except when replacing mounds of tat, are MORE impact >than trad pro and leave a visible, artificial trace of passage. I'm not >intrinsically against bolts and I'm all for a few in some places, but the >degree of proliferation is highlighting this hypocrisy within the climbing >community. What about cleaning? The majority of cracks in the blue mountains had to be cleaned before they were climbed. Hardly leave no trace vs a bolt on face rock |
|||||
11:03:22 PM |
Well said uwp. Personally I find it kinda weird that self proclaimed intelligent people can cling to the idea that the scar of a chopped bolt causes a fracture in the cosmos WAY more troubling than sticking the fking ring or hanger in the first place. |
| There are 85 messages in this topic. |
Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Landscape Photos Australia
Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.
Australian Panoramic |
Australian Coast |
Australian Mountains |
Australian Countryside |
Australian Waterfalls |
Australian Lakes |
Australian Cities |
Australian Macro |
Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo |
Landscape Photography |
Landscape Photography Australia |
Fine Art Photography |
Wilderness Photography |
Nature Photo |
Australian Landscape Photo |
Stock Photography Australia |
Landscape Photos |
Panoramic Photos |
Panoramic Photography Australia |
Australian Landscape Photography |
High Country Mountain Huts |
Mothers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Mothers Day |
Mothers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Mothers Day |
Wedding Gift Ideas |
Christmas Gift Ideas |
Fathers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Fathers Day |
Fathers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Fathers Day |
Landscape Prints |
Landscape Poster |
Limited Edition Prints |
Panoramic Photo |
Buy Posters |
Poster Prints