On 28/02/2013 crazyjohn wrote:
>On 28/02/2013 rolsen1 wrote:
>>Everyone in this thread, as does everyone in life have hidden agendas.
>>Not making money doesn't mean you ethical, and making money doesn't mean
>>your unethical. It is how you conduct yourself that makes you ethical.
>If a guide retrobolts an established trad route to facilitate guiding
>(i.e. make money) but says they did it because of safety or access, it
>is so obviously unethical it does need further explanation.
>>The people arguing against the bolts also have their own agendas, we
>>it all the time on chockstone, trying to put on a show about how hardcore
>>they are. Reputation is their money, reputation is their hidden agenda...
>>well not so hidden, quite obvious actually.
>Yours is a very cynical way of looking at climbing. There is an adventure
>element to all climbing especially trad climbing. There are many 'reputation'
>routes that give the climber a feeling of accomplishment in the face of
>danger. This is an undeniable part of climbing. Literally earning money
>by eliminating the adventure of a route and making it easier to guide is
>so far removed from the "reputation money" one earns by climbing the route
>the way it use to be.
>>The people putting in bolts have agendas as well. Maybe the glory of
>Uhhh, duh? People climb for the glory. Is this bad? I hope not. Having
>an agenda in itself is not wrong. What I am pointing out is that lately
>guides have been adding bolts to trad climbs in the name of safety, etc.
>Andrew Davis'(a paid guide) recent comments show that he does not respect
>traditional climbing. Letting paid guides, who dont respect traditional
>values, install bolts wherever they want is a bad idea. This is the whole
>point about hidden agendas. I just think its curious that in Vic and Tas,
>there have been controversial retro-bolting of trad routes by commercial
>operaters who say they are doing it for safety.
>Andrew is an easy target because his ideas about bolting trad routes are
>contrary to many people. People are taking a stand because they disagree,
>not to be bullys! Which new age self-help group did you just walk out of?
>Finally, your line about using chalk, etc. is total rubbish. Are you really
>arguing against using chalk? I believe you are just annoyingly asserting
>that no one can complain about trad ethics unless they themselves live
>up to some perfect trad ethic (which you completely pulled out of your
>ass). Fixed pro (including bolts) has always been a part of climbing. For
>quite a while, climbers have realized that the cliffs are a finite resource.
>The heavy handed use of bolts can ruin routes forever. Guiding has been
>a part of climbing for a long time. Bolts and guiding are viewed by almost
>every Australian climber as OK. But when a guide places bolts that ruin
>a climb in order to facilitate guiding, this is a problem. If this kind
>of behavior is not checked, then the finite resource of cliffs is ruined.
>This is not a rant for my reputation. I spend most of my time climbing.
>I dont want cliffs ruined by people making money.