When was the last time you actually climbed at the gunks?

The pins that aren't "needed" are removed by relic hunters and/or are rotting away. The pins that are "needed" are being replaced.

This is a non-issue.

The only way it becomes an issue is if someone doesn't understand the policy. Therefore, the issue is to educate people about the policy.

The pin on Fat City isn't necessary. Why isn't it necessary? Because everyone who climbs it and clips it recognizes that it has little or no protection value with or without a screamer. Yet, that route is climbed, constantly.

And, whether you like it or not, if we are still heavily reliant on these pieces of rotting iron, we have not embraced clean climbing.......

You think this is a non-issue. Others do. I'm not 100 percent sure if it is ... or isn't.

Most important is for people like you and everyone else to voice their opinion.

The pins that aren't "needed" are removed by relic hunters and/or are rotting away. The pins that are "needed" are being replaced.

Pins that are required to retain the same protection rating as the FFA get replaced ... sometimes. It took a looooong time for someone to replace the one on Feast of Fools. And no one has replaced the Fat City pin.

Pins that aren't necessary, yeah, they generally fade away. But the Preserve policy allows them to be replaced. You have noticed that the Roseland traverse pins get replaced from time to time.

The pin on Fat City isn't necessary. Why isn't it necessary? Because everyone who climbs it and clips it recognizes that it has little or no protection value with or without a screamer. Yet, that route is climbed, constantly.

That's a bit ofsophistry ... or odd logic. As long as anyone is willing to free-solo a route, no bit of gear is ever needed.

For many years, the old pin at the crux of Feast of Fools was mankier than the Fat City pin. Lots of people climbed the route. So, according to your logic, that pin was unnecessary. Yet, it was eventually replaced.

The point is not whether people can climb a particular route without the original fixed gear or not ... it's whether the route retains the same approximate protection rating as it was put up.

Surely you wouldn't advocate someone adding bolts or pins to make a route go safer than it was when first climbed. I have trouble understanding your insistence that some routes should be more dangerous than they were when they were first put up.

A pin on something like Fat City is not "necessary" to climb it. That's obvious. I too have climbed the route as it is. A replacement is only necessary to retain the ability of climbers to climb the route in the condition and style it was originally established.

And, whether you like it or not, if we are still heavily reliant on these pieces of rotting iron, we have not embraced clean climbing.......

The fact is, we are not heavily reliant on pins and bolts in the Gunks. Quite the opposite in fact. The Gunks obviously has a strong tradition and ethic regarding clean climbing. It's virtually impossible to climb at the Gunks and rely heavily, if at all, on pins and bolts. But here and there are a few classics that were establishedwith a pin or bolt ... Carbs and Caffeine, Fat City, Arrow, Never Never Land, Pas De Deux, etc. I mean, heck, with the advent of small camming units, the pin on Foops didn't really need to be replaced .... but it was.

Obviously there's not a ton of routes that need the old fixed gear to retain the original level or protection. But there are some. It's not a big issue. But some of us just wonder if there's a more sensible approach to replacing it ... or not.

I guess a hypothetical question for some would be ... if Fat City (or substitute another

The only way it becomes an issue is if someone doesn't understand the policy. Therefore, the issue is to educate people about the policy.

That might be all that's necessary. But there's not a lot to understand about the policy. On Preserve property, anyone can replace any pre-1986 piece. Period.

Personally, I think it would be more beneficial to use the pre-1986 fixed gear policy as a jumping off point to create a broader education. Every year, with the growing crowds, more and more new climbers are visiting the Gunks. How many of them know where this in-situ gear came from ... how many understand the clean climbing/minimal impact ethic? How many rely too much on in-situ gear? How many know how to evaluate an old pin? How many will back these pins up?

We can't make new (or old) climbers climb safer. But it's certainly worth a try to make everyone as aware as possible to the unique and special qualities of the area.

<<A replacement is only necessary to retain the ability of climbers to climb the route in the condition and style it was originally established. >>

If the pin was placed by the first ascentionist, then, by using your logic, the pins should be gone and we should all carry pins and hammers, because that is what the first ascentionist faced, I know, I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to hang out and hammer that f'n pin in when I led it.............Of course, I know many of the hard routes were aid lines so there were probably in-situ gear by the true FA'ers or their repeat ascents.....


<<How many of them know where this in-situ gear came from ... how many understand the clean climbing/minimal impact ethic? How many rely too much on in-situ gear? How many know how to evaluate an old pin? How many will back these pins up? >>

These are all questions that should NOT be answered by a committee of people who judge when and wether a pin should be replaced or not and then do the replacing.

You are in essence asking this committee to take over some of the individual's climber's responsibility in protecting themselves with the resident gear they come upon on the cliff.

The questions you asked are more appropriately addressed by the preserve (better) publicizing its policy on fixed protection and perhaps some very very very general reminders about the dangers implicit in climbing......

Again, I ask the question, when was the last time you climbed at the gunks? I admit to being a resident climber here only over the past 8 years so I don't know what it was like back in the day, but, I know very few people who rely heavily on any of the pins and I know fewer people who carry a hammer, which is necessary to properly evaluate the utility of a pin.

I don't ask this to be inflammatory, but, rather to try to undestand where a difference in ideas is coming from.....

Bolts are an entirely different story. And, practically speaking, there is even much less of a threat of random people chopping and re-bolting then there is of repinning being done.....Have you ever placed a bolt with a hand drill? oy vey, that's alot of work. Can you afford a HILTI, know many climber's that can????

These are all questions that should NOT be answered by a committee of people who judge when and wether a pin should be replaced or not and then do the replacing.

You are in essence asking this committee to take over some of the individual's climber's responsibility in protecting themselves with the resident gear they come upon on the cliff.


What committee are you talking about? Education about issues affecting the climbers in the Gunks is an ongoing effort by the GCC. But that's it. Toward the specific issue of fixed gear, I have mentioned the possibility of guidelines for replacement. Guidelines that would add more specificity to the Preserve open replacement policy. These guidelines would have no impact on the personal responsibility of climbers.

The only specific approach I have even tried to formulate is one of a review policy ... whereby a climber in the community brings up the possibility of replacing an old piece of fixed gear. Under current Preserve policy such a climber has nothing to prevent him from replacing the piece at will. But if a few basic guidelines were set up, that climber would have to meet some basic criteria before going off and replacing the piece of gear. Honestly, I don't know if even this minimalist approach would work.

I have stressed several times that the GCC is currently very busy with many fundamental programs to make itself viable as a local advocacy group for the climbing community. At this point it does not have the ability nor the time, and more importantly, it does not have the authority to manage a fixed gear committee. If the GCC were to ever get involved in this, first it would have to find out if there was a broad concensus from the local community.

Personally, I do think any climber impact on the cliff is a GCC concern. But I don't have any definitive answers as to how the GCC could best help implement a responsible, productive fixed gear management policy.

And you know what? Even if tomorrow, the Preserve and the GCC created a fixed gear management committee and supervised the replacement of fixed gear, this would not take over one iota of individual climber responsibility. It doesn't matter if a climber comes upon an old manky pin, or a brand-spanking new pin ... each climber is responsible for evaluating that point of protection no matter what it's apparent condition.

But such a committee as you mention is not in the works and I doubt it ever will be.

Again, I ask the question, when was the last time you climbed at the gunks? I admit to being a resident climber here only over the past 8 years so I don't know what it was like back in the day, but, I know very few people who rely heavily on any of the pins and I know fewer people who carry a hammer, which is necessary to properly evaluate the utility of a pin.


The last time I climbed in the Gunks was about when you started climbing in the Gunks. I would hardly call that "back in the day."

Yeah, the best way to truly evaluate a pin is to have a hammer with you, but even without one, it's possible to get a pretty good idea on how solid a pin is. A good rap with a carabiner usually will let you know if there is a solid "ring" to the pin. That and some visual inspection can give you a basic idea if the pin is generally okay or utter crap.

If the pin was placed by the first ascentionist, then, by using your logic, the pins should be gone and we should all carry pins and hammers, because that is what the first ascentionist faced, I know, I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to hang out and hammer that f'n pin in when I led it...

That's not by my logic. Because I could never defend that argument. That sort of thinking would require all of us to carrying a bolting kit and rebolt ever bolt we come across ... even if it's on a sport route.

No one climbing a route after the FFA will ever put in the same effort that the first ascensionist did. The ethic on climbing established routes does not require you put in exactly the same effort the first ascensionist did (re-pinning and re-bolting), but that you do not attempt to alter the route from the manner in which it was established. Or use any types of assistance that did not occur on the FFA (hangdogging, pre-inspection, as pertains).

Of course, I know many of the hard routes were aid lines so there were probably in-situ gear by the true FA'ers or their repeat ascents.....

Which, in the Gunks, encompasses much of the fixed gear found on many of the routes we have been discussing.

Bolts are an entirely different story.

In what way are they entirely different?

And, practically speaking, there is even much less of a threat of random people chopping and re-bolting then there is of repinning being done.....

Given the hardness of Gunks conglomerate, you would think this was true. But looking back at the bolts war of the 80s, people were far more apt to put time and effort into bolting, chopping and re-bolting than replacing pins.

Can you afford a HILTI, know many climber's that can????

I can afford a HILTI. A lot of climbers out here in the west own them. But I don't think that's part of the issue. There are few bolts in the Gunks. But those few (like on Arrow, Never Never Land, and C&C) seem to get replaced with more regularity than the pins.

I don't know what it was like back in the day, but, I know very few people who rely heavily on any of the pins ...

I don't know if there ever was a time when Gunks climbers relied heavily on pins. Except maybe the era when many of these climbs were created with aid. Or maybe the era in the 60s when many aid lines were being freed with the original aid pins still in place. Even then, I doubt people like RG, McCarthy, Williams and crew were really *relying* on these pins. They had to make individual choices and decisions just like all of us have to. If they didn't like the original fixed gear they found, they made a decision to either live with it or back it up. (As RG has recently mentioned about his FFA of Coex.) After the arrival of Stannard, clean climbing was here to stay.

If I have said anything that has given the impression that I am advocating any policy, committee or plan that attempts to remove personal responsibility from individual climbers, than I apologize. I do not, nor will ever advocate any system, plan, policy or guideline that attempts to do that.