Poll - Cochrane Lane Bolt Anchor Ethics

[*Chris*]

Ok…

It seems as if many folks wish to discuss the placement of bolted anchors in Cochrane lane separately from lead protection bolts. That seems reasonable to me. I’d be very curious to gage the prevailing sentiment of the climbing community towards several anchor related ethics that have come into question recently.

I’m very interested in the way people rank their values when it comes to anchors. The values I’ve heard in discussion are:

1) certainty of safety
2) environmental impact on trees/vegetation
3) preserving tradition
4) visual impact
5) environmental impact on the rock itself

Although there may be other values… those are the big 5 that come to my mind. Consequently, I’ve ranked them in the order which I place on each. How about you? Add any you see fit.

To try and gage these values, I’ve created another poll. I’ve tried to be careful in the way the poll asks questions to make sure that fair options are given. If I did a bad job… I’m sorry. I’m not a social scientist. Also, I'm not a web programmer... I practically broke the internet trying to squeeze in 4 questions. Sorry again.

Finally, to be clear... I'm not proposing any action at this time. Just a discussion.

INSTRUCTIONS:
1) Please consider the questions in the context of installing a new anchor on an existing route. New route development anchor placement doesn’t seem as controversial.

2) Please answer the poll. If you don’t feel like commenting given what’s happening in the other thread… I totally understand. The poll is anonymous (I think).

3) Please don’t purposely try and screw up my poll. You get 4 votes and are asked 4 questions. Seems fair right?

[Dom]

Hey good initiative on the poll. It seems time to discuss it concomitantly to the DDT discussion.

I personnaly think bolted anchors should be the norm and using trees/boulders the exception of the rule.I've only been climbing trad for about a year and I climb sport 80% of the time so I might biased towards bolts. I am aware that for time/$ it is much easier to use a tree. The $ argument is true for some (like Fred, Adam, Cory and other developpers who put in a bunch of bolts) but for some of us we climb there for free. So giving 15$-30$ each for an anchor fund would still account to a cheap hobby. PLUS MEC sells bolts+ rap rings, chains, etc. AT COST!! The price for a bolt + hanger is 5$ plus tax. In Europe where cliffs are littered with bolts , the same hilti+ fixe hanger combo is 10Euros!!!(16$)

Now for the distinction between rap hangers vs trees. I think using a tree is actually less convenient. For example, I did Weeping Whisker on Sunday and I got to the top looking for the anchor. Turns out the damn tree is like 20 feet from the last piece on 5.1 terrain....woohoo fun. Then I got to the tree and the damn thing was dead!! woohoo more fun! So i went back on belay and downclimbed to the bolted anchors on Peer Pressure. I understand this is what most people do. Well good thing Greg and Stacey we're coming up after me because cleaning from the anchor of a route 20 feet to the right would've made things quite interesting on the descent.
So what would you guys say about a bolted anchor for WW once you reach the slab? I'll do it if I get the go-ahead
This is at the heart of the debate though: preserving tradition ESPECIALLY on a classic line like this.

I would say convenience is at the top of my priority when it comes to anchors...and bolted anchors are usually more convenient because you can choose where to put them and they are definitely safer than a rotted tree.

Also, rapping off trees do kill them. Some faster than others and we have to remember we are on CFB land here and they probably wouldnt like it if they knew that we were ''killing the trees''. Better for your rope to rap on chains or rap rings too...

As for visual impact...Bolted anchors are awesome because you actually know exactly where the route ends!! It's quite convenient when you get lost trying to follow a bunch of natural features for 100 ft. And as I understand chalk was not used at first in Welsford and now it does... chalk does much more visual impact than stainless steel....

So I'm not suggesting that someone should go and bolt every anchor in Welsford but that if somebody does want to bolt an anchor they should not be stopped by ethics and tradition. Especially when democracy (polls) differs from the traditional approach. If we always stuck to tradition we'd still be living under feudalism...

[jeremy]

i didn't vote because I think your answers were too broad. My opinion, which I think has been the tradition is:
If at 25-30 meters up a route, or to avoid major rope drag make an anchor.

If it is a route you have to rapell to get down:
1. and there is a good tree, tie off slings with rings.
2. If there is no available trees place a bolted anchor with rings.
If you don't have rap down over the route make a gear anchor. If a gear anchor is not possible place bolts with rings.

Slings don't hurt trees, you just have to replace them once and a while. and please remove the old ones. Raping directly off a tree will kill it over time. Hauling chains up a cliff sucks! plus when they rust they look horrible. I hate the term convenience bolts or anchors. If you want convenience go to sunny side. And please don't place 2 fat bolts with rings beside a healthy tree!

[cory]

Crowded Rap Stations? This is Cochrane lane, not the 'Gunks or Yosemite. We have no crowds.

I didn't reply to the last two poll questions. They're related, aren't they? With a very literal reading of the question, I guess they COULD be OK for certain routes, but these cases are rare -I think.

Are we talking at a belay stance midway on a multi pitch climb? In that case, if SRENE gear exists (without a tree), a bolt station for easy retreat it is NOT OK in my opinion. If you have to bail because you're in over your head, or you forgot to bring a second rope for the rappel, pay the piper, leave some gear behind and maybe you'll learn your lesson. Alternatively, maybe you can pull yourself together, come back the next day and send the whole thing without soiling yourself.

If SRENE gear exists at the top anchor (without a tree), there's going to be an awful lot of booty left behind. On second thought climbers are cheap and stupid: The route will not be climbed, or leaders will branch off to finish where there are bolts or a tree that needs killing. In this case a bolted ring/maillon/chain station for easy retreat IS OK (IMO).

If, at the top of a route, SRENE gear exists with a tree as one of the anchor points, then a bolted station IS OK (IMO).

If, midway on a multi-pitch, SRENE gear exists with a small shrub as only one of multiple anchor points (but not enough that you'd like it to take all the load), is likely NOT OK (IMO). We're not talking a stately tree here. If it dies and falls out, there should be gear in the crack. If it's a big, solid tree a bolted station could be OK (IMO).

No matter what this poll results; when considering adding any hardware to an existing route, every effort should be made to contact at least one member of the first ascent party for their consideration (and hopefully, their approval. But, if not, at least their indifference.)

[*Chris*]

@DombackpackerI really don't want this to become a Weeping Whisker thread. I tried very hard to avoid suggesting that anyone run out and change anything. But that's ok... I guess it's an effective example of a possible convenience anchor situation.

@Jeremy... I'm sorry you didn't like my poll questions. Although you complained they were not well structured you seemed to answer in text almost exactly the choices provided in the poll. But that's ok... I'm happy with the questions as I stated them.

@Cory... I was very limited in the space I could use to frame my questions. Perhaps some further explanation is warranted:

Question 1 refers to installing hardware where a presumably bomber tree already exists. I think it's clear. ex. Salt N' Pepper, About a Rope.

Question 2 refers to creating convenience stations on popular climbs which could otherwise easily share anchors. Ex. Waterwalk/Astroboy, Snakepeel/IAWOL.

Question 3 refers to stations which facilitate easy single raps and/or rope pulling. Retreat was perhaps a poor choice of words. I'm not talking about breaking up pitches or even multipitch. Ex. Weeping Whisker anchor suggested above or any number of climbs where the angle/shape of the tree makes rope pulling a PITA or possibly risks getting it stuck

Question 4 refers to replacing otherwise multi-point gear anchors with bolts for ease of use. I can't make that any more clear. Ex. pigeon flowers ledge, waterwalk at top of p1, light fandango p1 perhaps?

I chose those questions since I feel they encompass most if not all recent anchor discussions. Certainly they don't hit on every possible circumstance... pointing out the oddities which don't conform won't get us anywhere though.

Thus far I must say I'm surprised.

[jeremy]

This poll scares me because i feel you are not getting a proper representation of the climbing community. The original ethics were set by maybe 5% of the people who will answer this poll. So of coarse the outcome of the poll will differ from the current standards.
So I guess my question is do you think it is right to change ethical standards just because the majority of climbers who now climb there have different opinions then the previous? I don't.
And if your not trying to change standards than I think this poll is useless, just my opinion, not trying to insult anyone

[Dom]

What is the established traditionnal ethics when it comes down to bolted anchors in Cochrane Lane anyways?

Is there one black on white like the case for bolts on routes ? (don't bolt when natural gear is available)

[*Chris*]

This poll scares me because i feel you are not getting a proper representation of the climbing community.

Don't be scared. It's just a poll. It's a sample... not a census. I know that. Got any better ideas for someone interested in reaching a wide range of climber and ensuring everyone's voice 'counts'.

The original ethics were set by maybe 5% of the people who will answer this poll. So of coarse the outcome of the poll will differ from the current standards.

Yeah. That's precisely my point.

So I guess my question is do you think it is right to change ethical standards just because the majority of climbers who now climb there have different opinions then the previous? I don't.

Yes... I do.

I'm not certain a majority of current climbers feel any differently that those before... hence the poll. I also don't believe in belligerent 'majority rules' decision making. Doesn't work when the minority is large.

And if your not trying to change standards than I think this poll is useless, just my opinion, not trying to insult anyone

That's fine. I'm not insulted. By the current tally it would seem as if at least 16 people see it differently than you do.

[martha]

I am surprised by the current poll results... I am in the minority by far.

I think bolts are fine for anchors where gear does not exist (on multi pitch) and otherwise, trees are fine. I *prefer* bolts, but I don't think they are necessary. Do I use the bolts on Snake Peel and IAWOL... of course I do. were they necessary? no... just convenient. Granted, they have likely saved some erosion around the top of the climb, so I could probably be convinced that they were in fact necessary.

As far as bolt anchors on a route like cheekbone, just for 'ease' ... that is ridiculous in my opinion. And 'ease of retreat'? I'm with Jeremy, leave gear behind if you have to bail... that is how we learn not to get in over our heads. In Welsford it is great because if you do leave gear, there is a good chance you can rap off another route nearby and retrieve it, or hope that the sign in box Gods find the gear for you.

[john]

The poll is not for me, I dont find it clear, but here is what I think:

Ethics are long term and historically developed, so one new generation shouldn't override multiple past ones. I agree with Jeremy.
If adding to, or affecting an existing route, you need first ascentionists permission. Until this poll, I was not even aware anyone would consider adding anything in cochrane lane without doing this. Maybe I am naive? Corey good point
Overcrowding is no issue in Welsford yet.
I don't think bolt anchors and pro bolts are nearly the same issue. Thanks for breaking it out Chris, even if I don't like your poll . My agruement is most of the time (assuming not mid pitch anchors ie hanging belay breaking up a long hard pitch) anchors do not affects someones experience on the pitch itself, only the mechanics of how you go up the next one, or back down.

In ethical principle for me personally:
I think if gear exists use it and walk to another anchor to rap or a tree. How long does it take in welsford worst case? Max 2 min to find a nearby tree or anchor?
I think it is good form to leave slings on a tree to protect it and at heavily frequented areas, fixed slings with rings are great, chains are fine too.
Talk to FA'er if not a new route (eg. case where the only tree dies and a route could use bolts).

Comments:
I don't like convenience being used as justification for anchors or bolts. Safety maybe, but in welsford I cant think of one route that has to have bolt anchors for safety, moving 20ft in most cases at cochrane lane gives numerous options.
Bottom line for me I don't like any bolts, but do see a use for them as pro, and anchors. When it comes to anchors, they tend not to affect experience on route, so in my mind there is far more areas of ethical acceptability.

[Jon Corey]

Chris what is the real reason for this poll? My gut feeling is that there is some other reason behind it other than to just find out what people think.
I will not be taking part in this poll for reasons I won't get into here. I am however interested in face to face discussion with anyone who wants to chew the fat.

1 question you could add to the poll
Do you consider yourself to be a trad climber or sport climber?

Just a crumb for thought
Jonathan Corey

[Nihoa]

it seems to me that often enough the question of a bolted anchor isnt a question of if but when? if heavy use of a tree kills it you end up putting the bolt anchors in anyway. so the ethic is to prolong the placement of a bolt anchor?

[Stacey]

it seems to me that often enough the question of a bolted anchor isnt a question of if but when? if heavy use of a tree kills it you end up putting the bolt anchors in anyway. so the ethic is to prolong the placement of a bolt anchor?

That is where my opinion comes from - eventually the tree is going to die - as a sentinel for the environment, I personally think that just putting the bolted anchor in, when the climb is developed makes the most since (unless natural gear is available).

Stacey

[*Chris*]

Jon... the ethic which I hold most true is that on a public piece of land, the standards should be subject to change as the views of those who use that land change. I'm aware that many people disagree and hold paramount the will of the FA and the tradition of the area. That's their right and I respect it, but don't agree with it. I ranked it 3rd on my list of the big 5 values I hold.

Bolt anchors seemed like a decent topic to illustrate that there are likely differences developing in the attitudes of people who climb now, to those who have climbed before. Steve A. did a great job summarizing this in his post on the DDT thread and it got me thinking. I thought it might be interesting to put some numbers to the discussion. That's all. I have no plans to add any bolts anywhere.

You of all people should know that I wouldn't say anything here that I wouldn't say to someone in person. The internet has it's flaws but it also has it's strengths. One of the strengths is the ability to quickly reach a lot of people. Another strength is that people can't kick me in the pants for stuff I suggest here... well... not immediately anyway.

[coryhal]

dont people enjoy toping out, tying off, and bring up ur partnen...taking in the views at the same time? insted of just lowering off. convient bolts, climbing is anything but convient, we fly half way aroung the world to sit in a tent in the rain for a week. bolted anchores on multi pitch trad routes, imo is wrong and takes away from the character of the climb, especially if theres not a protection bolt on the hole 20 pitches. climbers now seem to have money, so if u want to put bolt anchours on your new route go for it, i dont care, but if theres a safe anchour tree on my route im saving my money for plane tickets!

[Andrew]

At the risk of sounding silly...

If you are doing a 5, 10 or 20 pitch sized trad route with no bolts and no trees along the way... when you rap down... do you loose trad gear every time you rap down a pitch? Serious question. Maybe the answer is that you are supposed to climb with a parachute and base-jump off... or possibly there just happens to be a convenient trail to hike down the back of the mountain.

I await the ridicule.



Andrew

dont people enjoy toping out, tying off, and bring up ur partnen...taking in the views at the same time? insted of just lowering off. convient bolts, climbing is anything but convient, we fly half way aroung the world to sit in a tent in the rain for a week. bolted anchores on multi pitch trad routes, imo is wrong and takes away from the character of the climb, especially if theres not a protection bolt on the hole 20 pitches. climbers now seem to have money, so if u want to put bolt anchours on your new route go for it, i dont care, but if theres a safe anchour tree on my route im saving my money for plane tickets!

[martha]

Most routes like that Andrew would have a 'walk off'. Cheek Bone Corner is a good example. A lot of the big route in Vegas, you walk off the top in an hour hike or so. If there is no walk off option, then there would be rap stations along the way ... every 60 m so that you would be doing 2 rope rappels.

Cheers.

[Andrew]

Cara,

Thanks for the serious answer/clarification. Most appreciated.

Most routes like that Andrew would have a 'walk off'. Cheek Bone Corner is a good example. A lot of the big route in Vegas, you walk off the top in an hour hike or so. If there is no walk off option, then there would be rap stations along the way ... every 60 m so that you would be doing 2 rope rappels.

Cheers.

[david]

I am surprised no one brought up the anchor on Leviathan on this thread. It is a super-classic and from what I understand from the guidebook the sport anchor was added for convenience and it looks bad. Not that I personally care, I love it... I would have never gotten on that climb if it wasn't for the anchor. But if an anchor was added on the first third of that route (if I understand correctly the original route was the link-up to reindeer land), I don't see why people would object to setting up bolt anchors near a tree at the top of a climb if it doesn't change the whole experience.

I just thought I would bring this up

David

[martha]

I am surprised no one brought up the anchor on Leviathan on this thread. It is a super-classic and from what I understand from the guidebook the sport anchor was added for convenience and it looks bad. Not that I personally care, I love it... I would have never gotten on that climb if it wasn't for the anchor. But if an anchor was added on the first third of that route (if I understand correctly the original route was the link-up to reindeer land), I don't see why people would object to setting up bolt anchors near a tree at the top of a climb if it doesn't change the whole experience.

I just thought I would bring this up

David

incidentally, Leviathan has a bolt where there is gear at the bottom too....

[Adam]

I am surprised no one brought up the anchor on Leviathan on this thread. It is a super-classic and from what I understand from the guidebook the sport anchor was added for convenience and it looks bad. Not that I personally care, I love it... I would have never gotten on that climb if it wasn't for the anchor. But if an anchor was added on the first third of that route (if I understand correctly the original route was the link-up to reindeer land), I don't see why people would object to setting up bolt anchors near a tree at the top of a climb if it doesn't change the whole experience.

I just thought I would bring this up

David

incidentally, Leviathan has a bolt where there is gear at the bottom too....

chop it.

[STeveA]

There are obviously several different reasons why people climb. These differences seem to be reflecting the different opinions about anchors. If you are a pure sport climber then anchors at the top of every climb allow you to get back to the ground sooner to start the next route. This is one of the great things about Rumney, New Hampshire; you can get a lot of climbs in in a day. If you are a more traditional climber, part of the climbing experience is also interacting with nature. Taking time at the top of the route to enjoy the view, bring up your partner, and then walk back down the trail to another climb.

Some parts of Welsford lend themselves to sport climbing ethics, Sunnyside is obvious, but this could also be applied to Pete and Steve's Most Excellent Sport Climbing Area (AKA Upper Tier), and possible Joe's Garage area. Other parts, such as Weeping Whisker, Cheekbone Corner, should be fully enjoyed. Climb the route with your partner, enjoy the view, then hike down, or slightly over to a rap station.

This is in keeping with tradition and still respects the area. As long as people keep an open discussion going we should be able to accommodate and respect everyone.

History lesson:

Leviathan is actually an off shoot of Bloody Hand Traverse. After climbing the hand traverse for a number of years the idea to climb the face came up. Initially there were only 3 bolts. The piton was placed by Julien before I could put a bolt in so it stayed. The route was completed to the top without the need for anymore bolts, but no one bothered with the top of the route since the lower part was so much fun. A second bolt was added at the top of the face since it was getting a lot of traffic. These bolts were later replaced by the anchors that are there now. The piton was finally replaced because we thought it might be getting rusty and a bolt replacement was logical given the nature of the route. It has been suggested that the route could be climbed using only natural pro, and I would take my hat off to anyone who does this. However, I do not believe that would justify removing any bolts from the route.

[martha]

I wasn't suggesting that the bolts should be removed...only simply that you *could* climb it without.

[Adam]

I wasn't suggesting that the bolts should be removed...only simply that you *could* climb it without.

and nor was i. more playing devils advocate. you'd prob be better off just pulling the move and clipping the second bolt than placing a piece there anyway.

don't chop it!

[Nihoa]

sorry steve but thats a strange generalisation of sport climbers. it makes sport climbers out to be this extreme sport bunch of hooligans who care about nothing but the adrenaline and the next fix of it? whether the anchor is natural like a tree or a bolted anchor doesnt preclude anyone from enjoying the view at the top. you would expect then that trad climbers would be the least likely to: complain about the peregrines, bleach the lichen from the cliff, clear trees from the base, etc? i cant imagine thats what you meant but its how it sounded.

There are obviously several different reasons why people climb. These differences seem to be reflecting the different opinions about anchors. If you are a pure sport climber then anchors at the top of every climb allow you to get back to the ground sooner to start the next route. This is one of the great things about Rumney, New Hampshire; you can get a lot of climbs in in a day. If you are a more traditional climber, part of the climbing experience is also interacting with nature. Taking time at the top of the route to enjoy the view, bring up your partner, and then walk back down the trail to another climb.

[STeveA]

My definitions apply to the extreme of the types. I have met a few individuals that fit these extremes, but most people are a combination. Some more towards the sport end and some to the trad.

[*Chris*]

Thanks to all those who responded... whether you participated in the survey or not.