Author Topic: Re: Southern Yosemite Rebolting - List of Completed and Most Needed Projects  (Read 35472 times)

Dave

  • Guest
I must disagree. Stephen, you have every right to touch up your Mona Lisa. Keep rock porn safe and fun. Unfortunately, with the arrival of a certain guidebook, folks will start beat feeting out to the Ridge. It's apparent that Stephen is concerned that safety is more important than the FA preservation. I say, let the conviction of the FAist prevail.

Stephen M

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Hi John and Dave,

Thank you both for your comments. I don't know if I'll get out there for that project. I have slightly tweaked ankle and I have other better projects that are calling to me much more at the moment. In almost all cases I favor leaving something like it was on the first ascent, but I'm not sure on this one. The first pitch is about 30 feet long with no pro and a 5.6. or 5.7 or 5.8 move? 20 feet off the ground. It was 34 years ago, so I don't remember every move. The second pitch (first in the topo) is either way run out or unprotected and may have only one place to place protection fairly low, but the run out section might be either pretty easy or really easy. I think the next pitch has no pro and my topo shows a 5.7 or 5.8 move 70-80 feet out. The next pitch has a 100' runout on 5.5. I don't know how long or how hard the next pitch (the fourth according to the topo) is, but it might be very easy and has little or no pro. The next pitch goes up a crack and past 2 bolts (5.9) and then goes up and left on face climbing for maybe 70 feet. The note on my topo that past the last bolt was "5.9 long run out" didn't make it into the Spencer guide. So even if I add a bolt at 20 feet up, another at 260' up just before the (5.7 or) 5.8, and maybe a third new protection bolt, it wouldn't become a clip up. Has anyone done that "5.9 long run out" section to let me know if I was accurate on the rating? I'm thinking about the feed back I get, but I don't have a lot of time for climbing and might work on other climbs instead. It is important for new leaders to know what kind of climb it is and that one should be very comfortable on that kind of stuff.

NateD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
Quote
It is important for new leaders to know what kind of climb it is and that one should be very comfortable on that kind of stuff.

This seems paramount in any guidebook these days, IMHO, regardless of what you decide to do with the route.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2013, 06:34:23 pm by NateD »

John

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
I can't imagine any inexperienced leaders accidentally wandering onto a runout climb, better yet accidentally doing 3-4 runout pitches and then freaking out and getting hurt on the 5th. One would quickly know what they are getting into and could usually bail from more reasonable territory, unscathed.

I think when we are thinking about safety in the bolting of a route, we sometimes envision a reckless and idiotic climber that really doesn't exist. Climbs catering to this imaginary type of climber often take something away from the rest of climbers.

As Nate pointed out, most guidebooks are very clear about pointing out climbs or even sections of climbs that may be excessive in the runout department. Like an "R" right next to the rating, which is usually right next to the name, which is almost always your first interaction with a route. If they missed that warning, they might be hopeless.

DaveyTree

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 647
I agree with having some spicey routes. I don't mind run out but I never try to leave a ground fall. Just me, but ifsomeone decked and died on one of my routes because I decided against adding a bolt, it would weigh on me. Just me. Although at the same time the more I climb the more run is OK with me and my life. I just don't want to risk others.

susan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1980
Stephen, Did you name The Big Sleep after the formation or did the formation get named after your route? Very fond of the name. Seems so apt still when we are out there and shocked if no one else is.

susan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1980
I hear ya about not wanting to risk others and generally agree, though I do believe there should be a place for climbs even if they don't cater to a majority but appeal to a minority and even if I'm never gonna lead them. 

Up to Stephen if you ask me. Though I do respect the FA preservation especially for climbs that have stood for so many years as is, and I think of the Super Chicken thread on ST as an admirable resolution to this sort of thing.   
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 04:13:26 pm by susan »

Stephen M

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
We named Voodoo Child after the Jimi Hendrix song. I suppose one could call that formation Hendrix Tower. The name Watchtower has already been used elsewhere. Since the ridge was Shuteye Ridge, we named the route Big Sleep as part of the sleep theme and with the Bogart movie in mind. We didn't name the formation, but people now seem to call the whole formation The Big Sleep.

We named Power Dome after the power project connecting Wishon and Courtright Reservoirs. On Power Dome, we put up Helm's Deep, which is run out in most places, except the most difficult move, a 5.10c mantle, at the bottom and next to a couple of thread throughs on the easy last pitch. In the guidebook's second pitch (our third pitch), there is some 5.9 low on the pitch, which is rated 5.8X because of a 5.8 move way, way out. I have heard there is a variation more straight up where the most runout part is 5.6 and there may be a tri-cam placement. Alternative Energy is run out. Millions of Dead Batteries has two protection bolts per pitch on the first three pitches. I think those first three pitches each have some 5.9 on them and were long, but John Stoddard and I were both feeling really solid that day. I can't remember what happens above there, but it must get easier.
Stephen

DaveyTree

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 647
Thanks for sharing Stephen. I love hearing the history of routes and rocks.

Stephen M

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Thanks.

I'm going to try to get some of my old slides scanned in the next week or two and maybe post some more pictures and I'll try to get them in the correct thread. I probably should have had that stuff about Power dome in the Courtright thread, but people were asking about naming of domes, so I slipped it in here.

NateD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
Neat info Stephen. I look forward to more pics.

Quote
people now seem to call the whole formation The Big Sleep

Mark called it Big Sleep Dome in the guide, presumably because yours was the only known route on the formation. And so it stuck.

John

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
Old slides, now we're talkin'! Looking forward to them Stephen.

Jerry

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Having really "dumbed down" many of the FA's that Sigrid, Lynnea and I did I am really against adding bolts to most exsisting routes. Of course it is the first ascent teams choice to do whatever they want and one of the beauties of SoYo is that "controversies" such as this can remain friendly. I think there can be legit exceptions, we added a bolt to the bottom of a route where the ground had substantially eroded away creating a highball problem to the original first bolt. What are thoughts on this? Am I just justifying my action or keeping the route more in line with the original pro?

For years we were so worried about someone being hurt on one of our climbs that we put in unnecessary bolts, bolt anchors etc. Even then we got accused of creating a death route, by a very good climber, for using knob tie offs. When asked why he didn't tie off the obvious knobs the response was: "what is a knob tie off"? Compared to the garbage we climbed on and with 50 years ago, and I was climbing 50+ years ago, todays routes are quite safe yet people still manage to get hurt or killed so we really worried about the quality of people doing our routes. A classic example was in JT a few years ago when a gym climber about 20 feet up a crack asked us "how do these cam things work"? She was unhurt after decking so we set a tr for them, showed how to use the cams and nuts and suggested they practice placing them on tr. I could mention so many other incidents we have withnessed.

Anyway back to the original point. The first time I went to "Lost Eagle" my attitude changed and now we do new routes for us not out of fearing for others. I will never be accused of being a bold climber and I like the fact there are routes I will never lead even though they are well within my ability! Adding bolts to run out routes so everyone can do them is, to me, like chopping holds on a 5.15 route so everyone can do it. Anyone remember when a well known climber I will leave unnamed wanted to bolt artificial holds all the way up El Cap to create a 5.6 route?

John

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
These are great insights Jerry. Thanks.

John

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
.... we added a bolt to the bottom of a route where the ground had substantially eroded away creating a highball problem to the original first bolt. What are thoughts on this? Am I just justifying my action or keeping the route more in line with the original pro?

I am really curious how much of the base eroded.

If a bunch of rocks got stacked up around the base would you remove a bolt? He he he.