New Route Discussion: What is good/valid etc.

[mynameismud]

New thread to discuss the merits of what is a good route, what is worthy of being bolted, what is the value of a stared route.

Link to where this started for a bit more history on the topic.

http://www.mudncrud.com/forums/index.php?topic=2177.new#new

[mungeclimber]

Isn't the question whether a bad route deserves hardware?

The only way to know that in a ground up area is to either pre-inspect (incomplete assessment), OR, to judge it after the fact.

Judging after the fact for a ground up route, where the quality of the line can only be, at best, partly judged from the ground or nearby.

An analogy is Monday morning quarterbacking. Is that kind of assessment valuable when the FA authors have extensive experience otherwise?


Another question, is whether someone that lives in the region, should have a quota max for quantity of routes.  The argument being that quantity over quality is an issue in some manner.

Thus far, the issue has been described as an aesthetic one.  

I'll stop for the moment to let others chime in.

[kylequeener]

I'm going to jump in here as fast as possible and suggest some ground rules as my idea wasn't so much to have a discussion but rather more of an artists statement from everyone putting up routes or interested in putting up routes or people that just have an opinion of how a route should be put up.

So no retorts and no questions.

This is a perspective exercise.

Go!

I'll post mine later, not enough time at the moment.

[mungeclimber]

Welp, I'm out of the running if that's the case. And that would be different than picking up the abstract discussion from the context of the original thread. 

Besides, I'm out. Need to go the hardware store...

cheers guys,
Munge Rob Post Pants

[mynameismud]

I would modify with no retorts,  questions can be good to help to clarify or to continue a discussion.

[clink]

Camouflage hangers. Removable hardware on questionable FA projects.

[schrammel]

Deleted

[F4?]

Come on over Mungie, I have a few hardware pieces....maybe a B-Day present? Or is that beer?

[MUCCI]

I am a bit removed as of now having moved far away from my favorite place to climb.  However, I will chime in with my opinion.

Primarily, I have always sought FA's, everywhere I frequent.  Yosemite, southern yosemite, pinns, sonora, j-tree.  I don't climb many established routes anymore, and always figured I would climb what interested me in order to find my own adventure.

I have never rap bolted, used a power drill to establish a climb, pre-inspected, or cared what anyone thought my motivations were.  This limited my reach in terms of new routes.  

In Pinnacles, there is a long standing, ground up tradition.  This has been vehemently enforced by "locals" dating as far back as bellizzi's POD.  Yes, rap routes have come since then, but without the staunch efforts through discussion, and at times removal of rap bolted routes, the park equalization to a ground up arena would have been lost.  It is better for it IMHO.  Had these efforts not been managed, pinnacles would look like Atomizer said "Castle Rock".

New wave FA's, in the last 10 years that I have been visiting pinnacles is very far from a numbers chase.  It just makes sense that going ground up will inherently limit the "quantity", proven by looking at the number of new routes in the last decade.  Having a sense of adventure by choosing NOT to pre-inspect, drill from stance, run it out, etc is all part of the tradition.  Entitlement is a word I have recently been hearing in regards to the current FA'ist and new routes that are attributed to them.  This word "Entitlement" has been used as of late and I am a bit perplexed.

Entitlement to what I ask?  The "right" to establish new routes?  The right to discern what is acceptable quality, length etc?  Absolutely.  Everyone is "entitled" to do as they wish, keeping in context the rich history in an area void of massive rap bolting onslaughts.  The problem is, those that are vocal, tend to not be interested in the grades of what is being established.

I have done plenty of dangerous FA's in pinnacles, but at the same time, found gems that were overlooked and classic.  "King Lines" as one might say in terms of quality, not numbers (I am not that great of a free climber).  All of them were uncertain from the onset, yet many yielded the adventure, quality and suspense I was looking for.  I have only left 1 project unfinished due to a rock quality I was not into.  That to me is saying something.  If nothing else, that I finished what I started out of respect for the process.  

I challenge those who are not into FA's at pinns to climb some of the newer routes (last 10yrs), that have been cleaned up.  Many might be surprised with the quality, some may not.  Most people don't put quality in the same sentence with pinnacles.  However, doing a SA of a new route, one must appreciate the process of it coming to equalization.  This takes time, but generally works out for the better with traffic.  Royal Flush on Casino rock is one of the best plucks I have ever had.  Those that have climbed it like it.  JOE D even let me pass without calling it "Garbage"! LOL.

I say, keep new routes in context with the pinns fabulous history, and push each other to climb what makes sense.  Many are going to argue what is worthy, however it is up to the FA party to do the best job as pioneers.  

This is a age old discussion.  Sometimes people get butthurt, sometimes they are jealous, other times they are "entitled" due to how hard they send.  End of the day, those who are putting up routes, will always be in the limelight.  They should be prepared to answer questions if those questions are posed in a thoughtful manner, just as the routes that go up, thoughtfully.

I can assure any naysayers, that the majority of new routes, especially those in recent years, were done thoughtfully.  This I know from experience, having personally climbed with most regulars on this site, and the park over the last decade.

Then again, it is just my opinion.  If you don't like chossy routes, then don't climb early ascents, stick with the milk runs I always say.

Or go and find you're own adventure.

[kylequeener]

I’m going to start off by saying that what I am as route establisher can be compared to being a road builder, except my roads are on the side of rock walls. In general when we build actual real life roads we went them to be nice, potentially scenic and enjoyable. We don’t want them to be bumpy, full of 5mph hairpin turns, etc. We also want them to be safe for others. And as much as we like nice roads I know that not all of us want roads through every pass in the Sierras either. So we practice some moderation in road placement. Road builders also don’t build roads for themselves, even though they may enjoy the process, in reality roads are built for others. And so this becomes a close comparison to my approach of new routes as well.

The largest factor to me is the environmental impact a new route or crag will have on an area. I’m going to reference, and I think I read it in Brad’s book, that the base of the Discovery Wall was once a nice grassy area where as today it’s quite the opposite. I really enjoy the nooks of preserved areas at the Pinnacles and hold them quite valuable so I will ALWAYS think about whether the area I’m thinking about placing a route can withstand the impact of route development and future ascents and also if it has enough potential to be impacted by my own footsteps or by others. This is where the worthiness of a route really gets distilled down more methodically for me. Basically the way I could impact the environment rains king in my decision. But I will also compare Discovery Wall’s worthiness. As much as I’d like to see that area pristine I do find the amount of quality routes there outweighing the environmental impacts.

When I approach the idea of a new route to be built I first look towards its general aesthetics. This of course is typically majority of the reason why I would want to climb something. It either looks pretty or maybe it looks challenging. I’ll assess if there are any other routes near by because I don’t want to squeeze a route in too close. I think that usually about ten feet apart is a minimum distance for a crag, although I’ve seen tighter routes else where, and I’ve yet to ever put two routes side by side anyways. If there are other routes in the area I’ll ask myself if this potential line I’m looking at looks like something else near by that already exists and if so does the area need two similar routes. If there are no routes at all then I will pay attention to the landscape and make a decision on where or not the area could hold up the impact of route development as I previously already stated. At Pinnacles of course I must also consider rock quality as well. Making a route up the pink walls of the balconies seems pointless unless of course I take a snow shovel to it first, but that is out of the question for me. I’ve found in my own experiences that sometimes routes are often dirtier and more chossy than they appear from below and when going group up this could be something you may not find out until after you’ve started the route. So a stronger assessment of quality must be made if the route appears to be borderline worthy and pre inspection could prevent unnecessary damage to the environment. Also checking to see if there are enough holds to make something climbable first is a great idea too, something I've had to assess while establishing 5.12 to 5.14 routes. We could also address difficulty as well, but I’m open to many levels of difficulty. I have a regular Pinnacles climbing partner who is in his 70’s so I definitely appreciate the 5.7 and under routes. Although somewhere in there the difficulty may be too low to justify a route if it doesn’t summit something aesthetic. Be that as it may I have no personal interest in such low difficulty route establishment so that has little bearing on my potential routes.

I’ve always found the history of Pinnacles climbing to be fascinating and very much want to continue the traditions on moderate routes or in the face of difficulty. But I must also think about what my road will become, because in my case I don’t believe the road is mine, but rather belongs to everyone. And I don’t want to build a bad road. I want to build an enjoyable, safe (within reason) and hopefully popular road. I don’t want to establish a meandering rope drag nightmare with R/X ratings. No, I’d much rather not, mostly because that sounds horrifying for me. I would rather make a nice route while upholding the traditions. But if I can’t accomplish the building of nice road in the traditional methods and face building a bad road I think it would be time to really question the worthiness of the line once more. If it’s not worthy to me I guess I’ll chop it or leave it abandoned. But if it is worthy and everything that could be done had been done and there just isn’t any other way of finishing the route I would really have to push myself to find a solution or compromise. I don’t know how yet, maybe dynamite.

So in short, protect the environment, uphold tradition and build a nice road for others. If those prerequisites can’t be met then it’s probably not worthy to me.

And note how in this text I never once use the words first ascentionists, until now of course. So that’s a bit of a statement on my approach as well.

Now again, this is my opinion and the content above is HEAVLY subjective, so keep that in mind. And I hope maybe my subjectivity can be received with an open mind looking to explore perspective as much as I eagerly wait to read your well thought out statements on new route worthiness and how you approach the subject. Even if it is blasphemy!

Respectfully and happily covered in moss and choss,

-Kyle

[waldo]

   British friend and climbing partner Dave Gregory first visited my home in 1995.  Dave began climbing in 1948 (He was once bailed out of a French jail by Don Whillans!) and, though now 80, is still at it.  After he shed the worst of his jet lag, I gleefully took him out to the West Side. He was horrified by all of it and refused to go near Pinnacles – however I tempted him – on any of his subsequent visits.  This is a guy who never turned a hair when he had to dig grass out of cracks with his “brodler” on a Grit first ascent. The place isn’t for everyone.

   It’s a place of unending beauty and adventure for me, as I think it is for all who contribute to this forum.  Does that make us all entitled?  I think so – to the extent that we receive a wondrous, ongoing gift and are responsible for its well-being.  I was enchanted immediately on my first trip up Old Original in February of 1977 and remain so now.

   Limiting the impact of what we climb is important. Holmgren and I spent many great days out at Piedras Bonitas and I confess I was amused by his efforts to mitigate the visibility of our routes.  He spent many hours at home hand-painting (and then baking) various hangers to match the rock on various sections of our routes. I thought (wrongly) that nobody would ever troop out there to climb and (correctly) that if they did they’d have trouble finding the climbs.  Still, he was right. 

   Clink and I put up “Hunting Spiders” in 2003 (I think) and I remember sitting at the belay between bolts and speculating with him about possibilities further to the right. I was among the folks who finally got around to exploring those possibilities. All was done in the best style – stance drilling, no previews and much discussion of where a given line might best proceed. Were we right to climb there? Time will tell.

 

[clink]

 My path of exploration in the last few years has varied, not as much as Lady Gaga's wardrobe, but still entertaining.

 No time tonight to spend on it, but will be looking back and contemplating the experiences I've shared at the Pinns. Thanks Mucci, kyqueener, and Bob for your posts.

[mynameismud]

My personal take on new routes, climbing, the Pins.

I have a few different influences. I want to put up good routes that are quality but also like to put up adventurous routes.  When I started to climb I was influenced by some of the bold climbers.  When I was younger I really wanted to put up routes that had some element of boldness and also sought out existing routes that had a sense of boldness.  I have not always managed to pull off bold routes but the desire was there, just not always the will.  Later I talked and met people that did not really have any desire to put up bold routes, they wanted to put up good routes for other people.  I hadn’t ever really considered other people when putting up my routes so that was a bit of a new concept.  It had crossed my mind, sure, but it was not part of the end game.  I had previously just thought about the route itself.  So my personal criteria for putting up routes has evolved by meeting new people yet is defined by climbers that had put up routes in the past.

Pinnacles has an interesting history for putting up routes.  There are guys that never thought about people repeating their routes.  These folks put up routes strictly for the adventure not thinking of those that came behind them.  I was definitely influenced by this.  But there is also a history of putting up well protected routes that have good quality. I have put up both but I think I am influenced by those that only cared about adventure.  Now that I am older, I want to do both.  Interestingly enough both of these groups had folks that really did not focus much on repeating routes, they were primarily just into putting up routes and mostly putting up routes that were as hard as possible for their time.  Ethics evolved to allow folks to bolt ground up and yet push the limits.  About the only limits that I pushed were my own.  Now there is also a group and this group is growing, that are influenced by Jack Holmgren.  These folks will only put up routes from stance, no hooking or hanging.  Jack many years later has the only stance drilled 5.11.  A few people are heavily influence by Jack but do sling or hook if necessary.

Here are my constraints/guidelines.  I think it was Roper that established the 30 foot rule since he would not report a route that was 30 feet or shorter.  Personally I like this rule and have tried to live by it.  More than one person has mentioned to me the 10 foot rule, as in no routes within 10 feet to the left or the right of an existing route.  I have done fairly well but do have two routes that are within 10 feet of each other.  Myself and the other culprit discussed this but in the end ended up just going for it.  The desire is always to find the classic black streak but more often than not I just end up going with the overall look of the line.   I like the line to have a good look, even though sometimes the rock is questionable.  The good rock versus bad rock for me is a bit fuzzy since I have done some routes with questionable rock that I thought were fun but then I am kind of into that kind of stuff.  I have also done routes with questionable rock that I thought, why does this exist, so once again it comes down to the line.

Impact, Dave Wood was a fairly strong influencer when I started putting up routes and just getting out in general.  He painted some of our hangers we also purchased camo hangers, and at the base of routes would talk about the impact of the area if it became popular ( turns out we did not have to worry about that ).  In one case he talked about abandoning an area because he thought a bird might nest there.  We should all think about impact, we have shown we care when hiking trails get trashed why would we not think about non-hiking areas getting trashed.

Pinnacles does have a strong ground up ethic and I think it is good to preserve this.  All climbing areas are different.  In the past I have stated that I would never rap bolt but who know maybe someday I will go to an area that is a rap bolting area and rap and preview a line then bolt it with a Bosch then lead it.  Not really on my top ten list primarily because I have no idea where I would start.  I am not against areas that do it that way I do think each area is different and should be respected for what it is.  Pinnacles is ground up, by hand.

Entitlement, no one, everyone.  My history with this is coming into the Pinnacles as a fringe player and interacting with those that had it.  At the same time there was a strong overall community, so when a big event did happen "the meeting" occurred and almost everyone who was active in the FA community showed up.  It felt a bit odd to be a part of this and it did seem that some people felt that they should have more voice than others, but really it was fairly democratic.  The issues at hand were resolved by the group.  I thought this was pretty cool and it stuck with me.  Now many years later, many routes climbed, routes put up, hours logged, good things done, bone headed things done.  I am one of those guys that thinks to a certain extent, that I have earned the right for my voice to be heard.  But I also do not think anyone has the right to entitlement, and everyone should have a voice.  Being our own critic, having strong partners, and maintaining an open mind, I think, will be our greatest strength.

[mudworm]

I read the whole post!

Actually read it last night. Then we talked. My view: the word "bold" inherently implies unpleasant consequences when you blow it whatever the bold "it" is. Most people have the capacity to pull off something bold even at their limit and often times, accompanied with some internal or external drama, and it's always a fantastic feeling to have pulled it off -- a very good ego booster and *everybody* has ego (just not everyone care to show it to others).  However, if you blow it, and when it comes to climbing, the consequences usually mean injuries, which usually lead to time off from work and family duties and financial setbacks. Some people can afford these things more than others, but nobody likes them. Climbing routes can be extremely challenging without having to be bold.

I'm not advocating sanitizing climbing routes to remove any boldness from them, and as Mud said, most times, those routes were put up without knowing that they would be perceived to be unsafe/bold by others in the future, but, I very much disapprove putting up a bold route for the sake of making it bold. I also think that the FA's need to have an open and humble mind to listen to loud -- implying consensus -- complaints about their unsafe routes and be willing to allow changes. To be blunt about it, I think any FA's who turn a deaf ear to these loud complaints is controlled by their ego -- they want people to be reminded how bold they were back in the days. the emphasis is in the past tense because even they know they are not who there were any more so they cling on the past image even tighter. There I said it.

 

[schrammel]

Deleted.

[mudworm]

Once you take my view to its extreme by equaling a desire for safe climbing to only wanting grid bolted climbs (I added this) or even worse, gym climbing, the idea does sound ridiculous and should be dismissed right away. I'd dismiss it myself!  Mr. Mud did the same thing and our discussion didn't get very far.

But the truth is there is no black and white in the matter. It's all a spectrum. The pure form of being adventurous is only free soloing unknown territories without topo and guide. That's an extreme, and not many, if any, people do that all the time (Insert: a good video) including those from this forum. And then, there are people who only climb in the gym (like my gym climbing partner who stopped going outside all together and got rid of all her outdoor gear). It's just a matter of choice, and almost all of us here fall somewhere in between, and still, we don't always stick to the same spot on the spectrum all the time.

Sometimes, climbing at Pinnacles is perceived as adventurous climbing (sure, more so than Castle Rock), but there are people who have climbed there for 25, 30 years, or longer, and rarely venture away from established routes on Flumes, the Balconies, or Bear Gulch, etc. And then are new comers who have been all over the place. Who is to give the score?

Not really side tracking from the "bold" discussion, and I get the point -- adventures usually involves an element of boldness, but nobody is the most adventurous or boldest; there are always people out there fully qualified to laugh at our cowardliness if they are so inclined.

It may not be obvious, but I am actually not advocating safe climbing, or anything. I just don't hold strong opinions on things. Not my style. I believe people can choose to walk away from things they do not consider safe, and there is nothing wrong with that. But if someone makes a conscious decision not to install a bolt even knowing that there is a good possibility people can get badly hurt, I can only interpret it as ego at play. That's why over the years when briefly witnessing some bolting/chopping wars (not necessarily on this forum), I scratch my head having a hard time fully understanding either camp. I turn off my computer.

P.S. I'm really turning off my computer. We are heading out to So Yo.

[schrammel]

Deleted.

[Gavin]

It’s great to read people’s thoughts, musings, and feelings about climbing and route-setting at Pinnacles. A big shout-out to Kyle for the idea and for Mr Mud for posting the thread. In spite of the varied personal histories, subjective experience, and opinions that shape the beliefs and values held by most of those posting so far, it is inspiring to see a consistent and collective love for Pinnacles voiced so clearly.

I think my own thoughts on climbing and route-setting at Pinnacles definitely echo many of the ideas and thoughts already raised. I’ve been climbing at Pinnacles for 15 years, and working at the park as a wildlife biologist for over 12 years… To be honest, I usually consider my time and experience at the park rather brief compared to a lot of local folks! I think that is a testament to how passionate long-time climbers and visitors can be about the park, its history, its unique geology and wildness.

I’ve done some route-setting at Pinnacles, but didn’t really start at all until I had been climbing at the park for 10 years. I suppose I strive to climb and set occasional routes at Pinnacles in the same way that I try to work as a park biologist: with a strong emphasis on responsible stewardship, balancing my own needs and desires with the intrinsic value and beauty of the park, its cliffs, and its residents. I do respect the ground-up ethics that are emphasized at Pinnacles, partly for their historical significance, and partly because those ethics make route-setting at Pinnacles a thoughtful process and a challenging prospect. It takes time and effort to establish new lines at the park, and I try my best to approach that process with care. As Kyle and others have said, I would prefer to work on setting up a few safe lines that inspire me rather than a lot that feel dangerous or that severely impact the resources at the park. I also greatly appreciate the aesthetics of safe and well-camouflaged bolts / hangers. I understand the feeling some folks have against “previewing,” but have previewed (i.e. rappelled down from natural anchors to inspect) a few lines myself without regrets, and have ended up rejecting them because of safety, aesthetic, or impact issues.

That said, I think the notion of “good” lines and “bold” lines can be a bit hard to define, especially given the rock quality at Pinnacles. I would rather set lines that are safe, with well-spaced bolts… But in setting certain lines I’ve had to push well beyond my comfort zone to get to stances where I can drill, so there is often an inherent “boldness” in exploring one’s way up a path of rock the first time, even if the finished result appears more safe and tame. I would also imagine that many lines we now consider “classics” were once much more loose and wild… As Mucci mentioned, it takes time for a lot of lines at the park to “equalize.” As much as possible though, I try to stifle my ego and abandon lines if they don’t strike me as really contributing to the history and beauty of both climbing and resources at the park.

Ultimately I enjoy setting routes for others, and hope that my efforts will lead to accessible and challenging opportunities for other climbers. However, I do understand the notion of pushing a line upwards for the sake of personal adventure, and I certainly appreciate the comradery and friendship that come with working with other inspired folks on different lines. I have a lot of respect for members of the Pinnacles climbing community that have invested time and energy to protect the park and the resources, and our collective capacity to accept feedback and criticism.

At times I wish there was a bit more transparency about route-setting projects that folks are currently working on. I understand the concern about “poaching” but see great opportunities to work on new lines more broadly with a larger slice of the climbing community, especially younger folks that may have interest in learning and being exposed to the possibilities. Maybe I’m just being naïve about the “poaching” issue, but I see a lot more to gain from being open about the projects that people are working on. I know I would love to share the route-setting experience with more people. Perhaps a simple, collective declaration welcoming people to ask and get involved would suffice.

At any rate, I feel fortunate to call many Pinnacles climbers my friends, and am grateful for the concern and care with which many in the climbing community tread carefully at the park. As a climber, a park biologist, and a friend: thank you for your thoughtful stewardship at the Pinns!

[schrammel]

Gavin kills it with eloquence.  I agree.

Charles

[mudworm]

Gavin kills it with eloquence.  I agree.

Charles

Agree 100%!