At pinnacles there are so many small formations that have existing one or two bolt routes on them. Is it really necessary to bolt additional routes on these formations when it is possible to just top rope them? Personally for me this is an eyesore and is self serving.
The folks who say top-ropes aren't official climbs are just acting out for their egos. Anyone who won't accept a TR as a real climb is just trying to get their name in the book and pad their climb count. Those people feel their hard work at bolting a new route is devalued by the folks who claim TR FAs. There are so many frickin rules that others impose on us that it sickens me. It's so childish and silly. For me it's about the climbing and could care less about other climbers and what they think are THE RULES. In my mind the top-rope climber is more humble and prefers the rock to be left as is.
I'm not going to say any one practice is more valid then another, but I hate it when people insist it should be one way.
I'm not in favor of the amount of bolting going on at Pinnacles at the moment. The active 1st ascensionists this year have a voracious appetite for putting up new routes that they may be losing site of why routes should be bolted at all. Part of the problem with bolting these short routes is that it allows you to put up mediocre lines quickly. When the decision is made to bolt a longer line and put many days of effort into it the thought process is different. Look at it like photography, when people use film they craft their images very carefully because it takes time and resources to get an end product. Where with digital imaging you can take as many photos as you want with very little expense and less consideration. Hell you don't even need to know how to expose anymore. I feel like these short routes are the same as digital. If you can put up some 2-3 bolt thing and be done with it half a day, you might not think about it in a very holistic manner, where starting up a 4 pitch route you better have thought about what kind of craft you are creating and whether it is worth it. Personally I like to weigh the negative impacts of a new route against the benefits. How many people are really going to climb these new routes anyway? And how much veg loss will there be.
I would like to ask a few questions to those that feel leading is the only legit way to make routes.
1) Why do you feel the need to bolt new routes?
2) What do you get out of the experience of bolting new routes?
3) Who do you expect to do your routes.
4) Does the negative environmental impact justify your actions?
5) If you found an amazing line would you be able to restrain yourself from bolting it?
Personally I don't have a problem with TR climbing. Sometimes you just need to feel the movement of climbing without the restraints of fear. It can become more of a dance. But that said, there is nothing like the whole challenge of leading.
