Shout Box

Who's Online
1 registered (1 invisible), 14 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 ... 12 13 >
Topic Options
#45045 - 05/27/09 09:05 PM Time for e climbing ethics debate
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
It's been a long time since we argued about actual climbing ethics around here, so let's try to piss some people off, eh? Was out climbing Sunday evening in the Nears, and as we walked underneath Kansas City we could see that it had obviously been fixed for a free ascent. There was gear left in place all the way down to the ground with draws. The presence of draws is what tells me that it was someone trying to free it. There was no one around as we walked in around 4pm, and still no one around as we left at around 7pm. We came back around 10:30 and we were going to do our cliff scavenger thing, but the gear was gone by then.

My question is...do people have the right to fix a route like that with their gear, and leave it for a period of time? Do they have a reasonable right to expect to see their gear still there when they come back? Especially when it was fixed all the way to the ground. I little bouldering about 15' off the ground would have removed a brand new camalot along with a quickdraw. It is my contention that Kansas City is not exactly a cutting edge route, and has been free climbed by hundreds of people since the 1970's. Fixing your own gear on it and leaving it for a later time is extremely selfish and is not acceptable. If you want to fix and come down, and then attempt it then feel free. But what if you leave your gear, and someone else wants to climb it after you leave? Now they have to get your gear out of the way before they can climb the route the way it is meant to be climbed. I can reasonably see fixing something like Spinal Traction, which has not yet been freed. Even though it does get in the way of an aid ascent, the free ascent should take precedence. But Kansas City??? C'mon!

For what it is worth, if we had scored that gear I would have notified the preserve that if anyone came asking about gear they had left on Kansas City to please tell them I had it. But once you leave gear on the cliff, especially here in the Gunks, it is free for the taking! Just my opinion.

RR

Top
#45046 - 05/27/09 09:10 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
Your point is quite valid, RR, but I also like to cut folk a break if possible and give it a day. I always try to think of reasons they may have left it, including injury. Now if my whole weekend had been about aiding up K.C., I'd have been less laid back about it. My rule has always been that if I walk away it is booty gear.

Top
#45047 - 05/27/09 09:14 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
You're just pissed that someone else got the gear / or got the gear back smirk

Top
#45048 - 05/27/09 09:16 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: chip]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Yeah we had asked if there were any accidents before we got there. There weren't any reported. and of course I would have given the gear back if it's rightful owner contacted me through the Preserve. I remember when I first started climbing getting a yellow camalot stuck in the start of Broken Sling. My partner and our buddy and I spent over an hour on TR trying everything we could to get that thing out, but we couldn't. We went over to do something else further down, and when we walked back past broken Sling about an hour later, it was gone. I was kinda pissed because I assumed that someone actually watched us trying to get it, then scavenged it themselves after we left. But, it was also my fault for putting the wrong sized peice in there and not having the expierance to get it out. This was not the case on Kansas City.

RR

Top
#45049 - 05/27/09 09:16 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Damned right I'm pissed. I can't afford to replace my old Camalots!

Top
#45073 - 05/28/09 10:11 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
LarE Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 45
Just out of curiosity, how often do we think KC sees a free ascent these days? Once a weekend? Once a month? Once a season?

As far as the fixed gear thing goes, seems to me KC is a borderline case. You sure wouldn't want to leave fixed gear all over a 10 or 11 you were working on, unless it was EXTREMELY obscure; and you could certainly be forgiven for leaving it on a 12 or 13, especially if it is relatively out of the way (say, Twilight Zone, Project X). In a borderline case, it seems best to be polite: if you're the climber, don't leave your gear all the way down to the ground; if you find the gear, cut the other guy some slack and leave it untouched. But whatever...

Top
#45076 - 05/28/09 01:05 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: LarE]
keith Offline
journeyman

Registered: 03/26/09
Posts: 70
Loc: The beach
if the gear sat longer than a day id call it booty. this is the gunks keep the gear fixing rehearsal stuff to sport areas where there are no ethics

Top
#45078 - 05/28/09 01:09 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: keith]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Right on Keith!!! Except for that whole waiting a day thing. I'm way too impatient for that.

Top
#45086 - 05/28/09 03:17 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
andrew Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/15/99
Posts: 1816
Loc: Denver, CO
Gear was fixed on the 5.easy climbing up to the roof? That makes it a really goofy situation. I can see leaving a couple of pieces fixed in the roof while trying to free it, but not down low on the easy stuff.

Lots of gumbie aid climber epics happen there, so it is possible the gear was there just long enough for someone to drive to rock and snow and ask someone how to jumar.
_________________________
This isn't an office. It's Hell with fluorescent lighting.

Top
#45087 - 05/28/09 03:20 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Dizzy Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 2177
Loc: Berkshires, MA and Ahlington, ...
I'm amused that someone would fix gear between the ground and the roof cuz it's basically a walk up.

Kids these days.

Ta,
Dizz


Edited by Dizzy (05/28/09 03:21 PM)
Edit Reason: Edited to reflect that andrew's post occured while I was writing
_________________________
I can handle reality in small doses, but as a lifestyle it's way too confining
-Lily Tomlin

Top
#45089 - 05/28/09 03:38 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
So hard not to solo up the first 15 of easy tuff to snag that cam with the 2' running on it. Bizarre but everyone loves a half baked mystery.

Top
#45097 - 05/28/09 07:19 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Smike]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
yeah Andrew I would have thought it was a beginner aid climber were it not for the presence of quickdraws on all the pieces. I haven't even seen a beginner make the mistake of using draws on aid gear. The first piece, (camalot) was just to the right of the first slabby move on Outer Space, about 5 or 6' below and to the right of the fixed pin on that route. There were at least 2 more pieces fixed between that and the anchor in the roof.

RR

Top
#45100 - 05/28/09 08:13 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Coppertone Offline
old hand

Registered: 08/17/00
Posts: 1055
Loc: Newtown, CT
Leaving your gear up on a route is simply selfish and should be viewed as booty. I thought that it was bad enough when someone left draws up on Flesh For Lulu(they were working the route) at Rumney overnight and they were shocked to find them gone the next day when the returned to claim "their" route. Expecting to leave gear on a trad climb at a popular public area such as the Gunks and find it still there when you return is simply silly. This is with the caveat that there was not an injury.

Top
#45104 - 05/28/09 10:39 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Ralph Offline
member

Registered: 02/01/07
Posts: 142

Top
#45105 - 05/28/09 11:13 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Ralph]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Well if it's the same gear from this past weekend, then yeah it does. So give the story Ralphy Boy! Why was the gear left?

Top
#45123 - 05/29/09 11:50 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
talus Offline
veteran

Registered: 08/23/04
Posts: 1259
i use to be all about what style, how hard, blah blah blah. i even had buddies say "well there is nothing hard enough to climb at that cliff". who gives a fuck it's just freaking climbing. just have fun and be safe.

btw i would have waited until 2pm the next day before it was booty. someone may have been doing a morning photo shoot.
_________________________
John Okner Photography

Top
#45126 - 05/29/09 01:57 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: talus]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Didn't think about a photo shoot. Okay I officially feel bad. Wait..okay I don't feel bad anymore. Whew! Thank God that didn't last long!

Top
#45127 - 05/29/09 02:06 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: talus]
BobbyS Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 08/28/00
Posts: 367
Loc: None
I think a day is reasonable if it is not a popular route. Can't understand why there would be gear on the first pitch...that seems ridiculous unless it was an injured climber....That's part of the reason I think a day is reasonable...I have seen a lot of people sport lead/work this route.

This always stirred a number of fights in the valley....a certain German team would string up all of el cap with ropes and little tape marks saying #2 camalot next to the crack, etc....

Another time when we were climbing the Salathe there were coiled ropes and gear hanging at each belay station 2/3 of the way up El Cap and an empty tent 1/3 of the way up. Later that day Bubu came up the wall and was pretty pissed because they had previously been setting up fixed ropes to make a film of Free Rider... Why is ok that there are fixed lines all the way to Heart ledges 1/3 of the way up all year, but they couldn't leave lines stringing the next 1/3 for a few days while working/filming the route was his thinking? The fixed lines that were in place didn't really bother us, but at the same time it does detract a bit from the climb.

Top
#45133 - 05/29/09 06:27 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: LarE]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
Originally Posted By: LarE
Just out of curiosity, how often do we think KC sees a free ascent these days? Once a weekend? Once a month? Once a season?

As far as the fixed gear thing goes, seems to me KC is a borderline case. You sure wouldn't want to leave fixed gear all over a 10 or 11 you were working on, unless it was EXTREMELY obscure; and you could certainly be forgiven for leaving it on a 12 or 13, especially if it is relatively out of the way (say, Twilight Zone, Project X). In a borderline case, it seems best to be polite: if you're the climber, don't leave your gear all the way down to the ground; if you find the gear, cut the other guy some slack and leave it untouched. But whatever...


Believe me. Its not cool on 5.12's or 5.13's, even if you are working them. If it takes too much energy to replace the gear on your next burn, you aren't really ready for the grade or atleast that route. The only time I've even considering doing this (and I was only going to leave my biners on the lower off bolts) was on a certain .13 at Indian Creek (and it was only to entice me to go back the following day even though I had pretty bad gobbies from the current days attempts.)

Top
#45135 - 05/29/09 06:56 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: BobbyS]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
I would like to bring in the following cross-post from NEIce...

Tradman's Booty Rulz

For the original posting of Tradman's Booty Rulz click the linky

Quote:
What is up with all the fckin crybabies whineing about lost gear this year???? Seems like many of you have forgotten the rules.

#1 If you leave it for any reason other than assisting in a rescue it is booty as soon as you leave the parking lot unless you make it known that you will be back the next day to retrieve it.
#2 if you plan on getting it the next day BE THERE BY 6:00AM! Don't show up at 4:00pm and start crying when you can't find your shwagg.
#3 If it takes full screws and you don't know how to make a thread STFU and stop your whineing
#4 Just because it is late and you are tired is no excuse to start drinking and head home to your computer to beg us to go retrieve you shwag for you.
Hike your lazy ass back up that trail and find you own lost tool or stop whineing and write it off as lost.

Rules for finders.
#1 Stuff you find in the parking lot is Not booty. Its lost and found material.
#2 Any and All gear that is left or misplaced in the course of a rescue including the victims gear is NOT booty and will be collected and returned to rightful owners.
#3 any gear that is abandoned or lost due to incompetence, lack of skill, sack or sheer laziness is booty as soon as the former owners of that gear have left the cliff and given up attempts to retrieve that gear. Exceptions would be when the spanked party announces intention to resume recovery process at first light the following day.
#4 Finders of booty may offer to return said booty. The losing party loses face if they accept the return of their gear.

Rules for the losers
#1 Asking for your gear back is bad form and shows a lack of self respect.
#2 If the finder of your shwag offers to return it you may accept but if you do you will lose face. Buying them a six pack or case will help but in some cases still not completely erase the honor debt. If they offer , you refuse and they offer again and you accept it's much better but you should still buy them a drink and you still lost face just not as much face.
#3 The ONLY way to escape your embarrassing loss of gear without losing face is to not accept its return . A simple " thanks for offering but you guys earned it" should give you a clean slate 99.9% of the time.

Of course there are allways going to be a few exceptions to these rules. For instance if I had rapped Poko to retrieve those Quarks on Gorillas I would have returned them ASAP and still hold the spanked leader in extreemly high regard. Try that same trick on Standard RT and be too lazy to hike around to rap in and retrieve your tools and you would be giving me a new set of Quarks


Obviously this was written regarding ice... but I think it's more than relevant here.

If it's there after dark... it's booty!

In the case which RR cites, if there had been a backpack or rope bag/tarp on the ground the assumption would've been climbers coming back soon... ie, not YET booty.
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
#45136 - 05/29/09 07:06 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dillbag]
Dizzy Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 2177
Loc: Berkshires, MA and Ahlington, ...
I love Tradman.

Ta,
Dizz
_________________________
I can handle reality in small doses, but as a lifestyle it's way too confining
-Lily Tomlin

Top
#45137 - 05/29/09 07:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
So it is written, so may it be done.

Top
#45139 - 05/29/09 08:41 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: chip]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
I said it was not cool, but I didn't give any explaination, and I hate dogma without thought (bolts when lower off bolts could be more beneficial then the act of placing permenetnt gear). My rationale behind that it isn't cool is that it is presumtious that there won't be another party looking to climb the same line and interfering with someone else's experience is a big no-no in my book.

Being presumtious is not good (like the group years ago who through a rope down on my head when I was leading Fritschens Follies before I got my first piece of gear in.... and the excuse was , we assumed that no one was one it since there wasn't a top rope. Presumtious.


Edited by Chas (05/29/09 08:43 PM)

Top
#45140 - 05/29/09 09:09 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Chas...right ethically....bad speller. Presumptuous I believe! Who says scientists are smart, eh?

Top
#45141 - 05/29/09 09:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
I wonder, did Smike and Chas go to the same school? Have they ever been seen together? My spelling is not great but I've not yet gotten that obvious, or so I think.

Top
#45143 - 05/29/09 10:09 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: chip]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
Dude- this site needs to have a spell checker. And english was never my strong suite (and why did I say I left Japan.... because my english was deteriorating and my japanese sucked lso so I as afraid of being a man with no language..... I guess my english just never improved after that.

Top
#45144 - 05/29/09 10:35 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
oenophore Online   confused
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/24/01
Posts: 5978
Loc: 212 land
this site needs to have a spell checker.

Most of us, I guess, have a word processor that includes a spell/grammar checker. I use Word to vet my posts. The problem is that the same bug previously pointed out, namely truncation of text at punctuation marks of text copied and pasted from a webpage, also holds true for text cut and pasted from Word. So hyphens and single & double quotes and some other characters must be gone over, replacing them with keyboard characters.
_________________________

Top
#45145 - 05/29/09 11:54 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: oenophore]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Originally Posted By: oenophore
this site needs to have a spell checker.

Most of us, I guess, have a word processor that includes a spell/grammar checker. I use Word to vet my posts. The problem is that the same bug previously pointed out, namely truncation of text at punctuation marks of text copied and pasted from a webpage, also holds true for text cut and pasted from Word.


You guys do realize that Firefox has a built-in spell checker, don't you? Also, if you install the Google toolbar in either Firefox or IE, you get the Google spell checker as part of it. There are also alternative add-ons for FF.

There's no reason to use Word or any other word processor.
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#45146 - 05/30/09 12:31 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: MarcC]
Rickster Offline
old hand

Registered: 10/16/07
Posts: 851
Loc: Orange Cty, NY
LarE, funny you mention Project X. On the day of the first ascent, the crew arrived early in the morning only to find all their gear had been stripped from the route over night. The gear was found neatly piled at the base of the route. After some expected angry theorizing as to the identity of the perp(s), the guys went to work and eventually finished the route. Purposely leaving gear in place was never a common practice but it happened occasionally. Traditionally, gear left for any reason was considered booty and many regulars have prided themselves on being able to extricate most pieces left in place for whatever the reason, regardless of where it was left or by whom. RC

Top
#45148 - 05/30/09 04:38 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dillbag]
empicard Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/29/01
Posts: 2957
Loc: LI, NY
who gives a SHIT if its a photoshoot?
_________________________
tOOthless

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Top
#45154 - 06/01/09 01:01 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: empicard]
Lucander Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/03/09
Posts: 227
Loc: Stone Ridge, NY
If it helps to clarify, the guys who left the gear on Kansas City were from out of town - New River Gorge by way of Moab.

Gotta give him credit for getting after it while locals were busy gang toproping...

DL

Top
#45155 - 06/01/09 02:02 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Lucander]
pedestrian Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/05/02
Posts: 2244
Loc: a heavily fortified bunker!
Originally Posted By: Lucander
Gotta give him credit for getting after it while locals were busy gang toproping...

DL


Well I guess that settles that debate.

Top
#45161 - 06/01/09 07:31 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: pedestrian]
pizzaman Offline
journeyman

Registered: 05/24/09
Posts: 59
Rob:

Obscure question.

If you need to ask, maybe you actually know the answer.

My personal feeling is, the climber in question was foolish to say the least, but taking the gear would be unethical.

I think I've twice bootied a small amount of gear that in retrospect, I now consider theft and ethically horrenous.

State rangers have, at times, acted with questionable ethics too. Fortunately they haven't tortured or beaten people, at least that I'm aware of.......


Top
#45174 - 06/01/09 08:43 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: pizzaman]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Who's a state Ranger???? Like I said I would have told the Preserve that I had the gear if the owners came looking. Of course I would have returned their gear to them if I knew who it was. But bad on them for leaving it there. This isn't Moab, or the New. If I were traveling around, I certainly would have asked what the local ethic was before littering a route with gear.

RR

Top
#45175 - 06/01/09 08:48 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: pizzaman]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
The funny thing about the party in question is that they are strong enough to lead it ground up evry time. Why would you was time pinkpointing it, missing out on the chance of a true redpoint. Doesn't make sense at all.

Top
#45178 - 06/01/09 11:05 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Before we get our panties too wadded into a bunch, seriously, how many parties were inconvenienced or prevented from doing the route because there was gear on it for less than 24 hrs.?
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#45182 - 06/02/09 12:51 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: MarcC]
Coppertone Offline
old hand

Registered: 08/17/00
Posts: 1055
Loc: Newtown, CT
Originally Posted By: MarcC
Before we get our panties too wadded into a bunch, seriously, how many parties were inconvenienced or prevented from doing the route because there was gear on it for less than 24 hrs.?


I think the OP was using this as an example for what is right and wrong and not necessarily just speaking to this one instance.

Top
#45183 - 06/02/09 12:54 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Dizzy Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 2177
Loc: Berkshires, MA and Ahlington, ...
Originally Posted By: RangerRob
Who's a state Ranger???? Like I said I would have told the Preserve that I had the gear if the owners came looking. Of course I would have returned their gear to them if I knew who it was. But bad on them for leaving it there. This isn't Moab, or the New. If I were traveling around, I certainly would have asked what the local ethic was before littering a route with gear.

RR

Rob,
My guess is that there are very few trad areas where the local ethic includes preplacing gear on a climb that was freed over 25 years ago. I'd be interested in hearing about those areas where this is the norm. It's like driving in another state, you gotta know the laws when you get there.

Ta,
Dizz
_________________________
I can handle reality in small doses, but as a lifestyle it's way too confining
-Lily Tomlin

Top
#45191 - 06/02/09 02:23 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
nobody is prevented in doing the route, but you'd have to rap the route, strip the gear, lead the route, and if you were nice, replace the gear. PITA!!!

Where I climb nowadays (also an area with very strict trad ethics) the 5.12's (depending on if it is popular or not) will get led between once to maybe 9 times on a weekend, and I deal with having to move peoples raplines because they throw them down on the route I'm doing all the times. You don't know, and its not right to disrupt other peoples experiences.

Top
#45193 - 06/02/09 04:19 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
Julie Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 01/16/00
Posts: 2090
Loc: SoCal
Apply the usual test for gender/number/*-ism: swap the gender/number/*.

So: if someone had left gear all over High E all day just because they were doing a photo shoot or project-ing it, would we even be having this "debate"? I think not.

Ethics aren't different if you're on a 5.12 or a 5.2 ... the only thing different are the egos or lack of humility involved. So yeah, bad on them for leaving it there, no matter who or what.

Top
#45227 - 06/03/09 03:28 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Julie]
GOclimb Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/26/01
Posts: 2361
Loc: Boston
I still want to know what the deal was. Why'd camhead leave the fixed gear?

GO

Top
#45292 - 06/04/09 05:27 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Hey all,

So here's the deal: That was my gear on KC. Personally, I do not think that there is any ethical debate whatsoever, because there was fixed gear the entire way out the roof (four stoppers and one pin). Because of their presence, I opted not to go for a true, traditional ascent, but for a pinkpoint. It would have made absolutely no sense for me to remove the draws off the fixed gear with each ascent, either; we all know that fixed stoppers, with or without draws, still constitute a pinkpoint. Since I was part of a larger group that did not want to congregate at the base of KC all day, I saw no problem with leaving the gear for later burns that I would take.

As for the gear left on the lower 5.4 slab (or what some of you are calling the first pitch), I simply left that out of laziness, I suppose. I lowered off of KC, and was well over 15 feet away from my lower fixed gear, knew I would take later runs, so I left it. Being from Utah, I suppose I have not yet become paranoid about people stealing my gear. In the town where I grew up, it was common practice for everyone to leave keys in their ignitions for months at a time; doors unlocked; and if a climber wanted to leave gear on a route, he or she could be reasonably sure it would not be stolen. Thank-you to everyone who walked under KC, saw the fixed gear, and left it! Fine, upstanding paragons of moral virtue, you are, and I know how tough it must be as New Yorkers and Easterners for you not to steal something.

Here's my personal take: I think that it is funny that so many people on this board are jumping to the soapbox without even knowing that KC has that much fixed gear on it! In the entire climb, I placed ONE cam, a .4 for my first piece. All the rest was fixed. It was a sport climb; I treated it as such. Personally, I enjoy and love many styles of climbing, from siege-projecting overhung sport routes at the Red River Gorge, to ground-up, onsight, chalkless and shoeless crack ascents in the Utah desert. Kansas City fell somewhere in between as far as this goes.

I am totally serious about this, if I ruined ANYONE'S plans on Sunday for a traditional free ascent of Kansas City with my pre-hung draws, I really apologize. Somehow, I doubt that I did, though. Through the entire memorial day weekend, we stuck mostly to climbs that were 5.10 and up, and did not have to wait in line for a single climb. I was not exactly siege projecting High E with a group of 4, or even practice aiding Nosedive, which I understand is not an uncommon practice.

So that's it. Sorry for the lengthy diatribe, but I really do think it is funny that I prompted such strong feelings. To end, I did NOT send Kansas City, even with my compromised sport tactics. So I'll be back with my brand-new annual pass, working it again, with or without the fixed draws, whatever. Feel free to stop by and lecture me on my spiritual crimes, chastize my belayer, cut my rope, or tell me that I am weak.

cheers,
Paul Nelson
Columbus, Ohio

Top
#45293 - 06/04/09 05:37 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Julie]
clausti Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 6
Originally Posted By: Julie

Ethics aren't different if you're on a 5.12 or a 5.2 ... the only thing different are the egos or lack of humility involved. So yeah, bad on them for leaving it there, no matter who or what.


more people want to climb easier routes. that makes it different, because the chances of someone else's ascent being buggered by gear on a 5.12 at the notoriously-'sandbagged' gunks seems a lot less likely than on a 5.6.

that being said, the gear was up for far less than the 24 hour "booty" "rule", more like less than 12 hours. it was still there when the OP was walking out a 7 because we were still climbing at 7, and camhead was gonna take one more run on KC.


Edited by clausti (06/04/09 05:44 PM)
Edit Reason: i can't spell, and i'm a mean person.

Top
#45295 - 06/04/09 05:47 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
GOclimb Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/26/01
Posts: 2361
Loc: Boston
Hey, thanks for clearing that up. Honestly, I'm mostly surprised at the fixed gear on KC that was there *before* you arrived. I don't think I've noticed fixed gear on it before.

GO

Top
#45296 - 06/04/09 05:48 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
clausti Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 6
Originally Posted By: GOclimb
Hey, thanks for clearing that up. Honestly, I'm mostly surprised at the fixed gear on KC that was there *before* you arrived. I don't think I've noticed fixed gear on it before.

GO


i doubt you'd never notice the wires from the ground. i stood under it for a while, including belaying, and the only way i knew they were there is the draws hanging off of them. it's like easter eggs.... like on birdcage. haha.

Top
#45298 - 06/04/09 05:52 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
...the wires aren't always there, they come and go. I'm guessing the next person out there aiding it will scoop them up and the cycle will start anew...
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
#45299 - 06/04/09 05:56 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dillbag]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
for what it is worth, the day before I got on KC I spoke to someone who had recently sent it a week or so earlier (Rock and Snow employee, can't remember his name), ad he informed me that there were ample fixed nuts. So they had been up for at least a week, and at the time I inspected them, they were quite welded in place.

I will be psyched to get on it later for a true trad redpoint, and, unlike a lot of more "brainless" jamming cracks, KC will be truly harder without the fixed gear.

Top
#45301 - 06/04/09 06:16 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Originally Posted By: GOclimb
...I'm mostly surprised at the fixed gear on KC that was there *before* you arrived. I don't think I've noticed fixed gear on it before.

There were a couple of fixed pins and 2 or 3 nuts on it when I did it learning aid....in 1974.

Many climbers who started in the past decade might be very surprised at how small a rack you could get away with in 1980, thanks to the copious fixed gear*. Classic needed only a stopper, a #1 Friend, and 8 QD's BITD, for example.

[*: which was actually reliable and trustworthy, for the most part, at the time!]
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#45303 - 06/04/09 06:39 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
andrew Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/15/99
Posts: 1816
Loc: Denver, CO
It sounds like the real problem is that Eddie doesn't climb anymore - fixed nuts wouldn't last more than a few days if he was still around. I aided KC many times back in the 90s, and I never saw a fixed piece in it. It should still be that way now.
_________________________
This isn't an office. It's Hell with fluorescent lighting.

Top
#45304 - 06/04/09 07:50 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: andrew]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
Hey Camhead, glad you had a good time on your trip out here. Pay no heed to the babble of BS here as this backwater collection of posts can be a far cry from anything that goes on or the opinion of the real climbing community.

Guess I need to go up there clean out the roof so you will not have those silly fixed wires in the way on your next trip.

Top
#45305 - 06/04/09 07:55 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: andrew]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
Thanks for posting up Camhead. RR is well known for the occaisional cranky tirade and it is all good, for it keeps us all honest (most of the time).
My first few climbs at the gunks were with 5QD and 2 hexes and all pitches were less than 120 feet. We thought all those fixed pins were just fine.

Top
#45306 - 06/04/09 08:00 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: chip]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
hey, thanks for the well-wishes, everybody!

I guess that I shouldn't go out and booty those "abandoned" pins at the Co-Ex, crux, right?

Top
#45307 - 06/04/09 08:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
Julie Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 01/16/00
Posts: 2090
Loc: SoCal
Originally Posted By: clausti
Originally Posted By: Julie

Ethics aren't different if you're on a 5.12 or a 5.2 ... the only thing different are the egos or lack of humility involved. So yeah, bad on them for leaving it there, no matter who or what.

more people want to climb easier routes. that makes it different, because the chances of someone else's ascent being buggered by gear on a 5.12 at the notoriously-'sandbagged' gunks seems a lot less likely than on a 5.6.

You're still saying that different rules apply to you because you climb 5.12.

It's the symbolism that carries the insult to the huddled masses, not the gear. That's what ethics are about.

I wish you well too, but that doesn't change my mind about the ethics of it.

Top
#45308 - 06/04/09 08:46 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Julie]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Originally Posted By: Julie

You're still saying that different rules apply to you because you climb 5.12.

It's the symbolism that carries the insult to the huddled masses, not the gear. That's what ethics are about.

I wish you well too, but that doesn't change my mind about the ethics of it.


Sorry Julie, but even at a place like the Gunks, which prides itself as an ethically consistent place (and rightfully so), the ethics and style quite frequently change as the difficulty increases. High E, Foops, and Vandals went up in different styles from one another; ground-up onsight, projected, and hung dog, respectively. You can call it "insulting," or "elitist," or whatever, but the reality is that routes can be climbed in very different ways. I would be very interested to hear how much fixed gear was on Kansas City for the FFA.

Top
#45309 - 06/04/09 09:12 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
Julie Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 01/16/00
Posts: 2090
Loc: SoCal
Isn't it funny how when folks who climb high grades bring new ways to the cliff, it's visionary blazing of a new horizon that no one has the cajones to question ... but when ordinary folks bring new ways to the cliff (ie, more fixed anchors at Skytop, in the other thread) it's disparaged as the degeneration of climbing by the huddled masses?

Ethics, elitism, and money - more intermingled than advertised. So many things, masquerading as "ethics".

Top
#45310 - 06/04/09 09:14 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
Originally Posted By: clausti
Originally Posted By: Julie

Ethics aren't different if you're on a 5.12 or a 5.2 ... the only thing different are the egos or lack of humility involved. So yeah, bad on them for leaving it there, no matter who or what.


more people want to climb easier routes. that makes it different, because the chances of someone else's ascent being buggered by gear on a 5.12 at the notoriously-'sandbagged' gunks seems a lot less likely than on a 5.6.

that being said, the gear was up for far less than the 24 hour "booty" "rule", more like less than 12 hours. it was still there when the OP was walking out a 7 because we were still climbing at 7, and camhead was gonna take one more run on KC.


In reality the Gunks aren't that sandbagged, and you'd be surprised how many people are climbing 5.12 trad, both Gunks resident climbers and those that are travelling. I just say that since it happens to me at my home crag all the time. And when I'm travelling to the Gunks, I'm usually out on business and I usually only have a day and to mess with other peoples gear is a PITA,....

Top
#45311 - 06/04/09 10:42 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Quote:
It's the symbolism that carries the insult to the huddled masses, not the gear. That's what ethics are about.

Ummm....when did ethics become about symbolism?

Top
#45313 - 06/05/09 12:58 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Kent]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Camhead, sorry you didn't send the route. For what it's worth, I can't send it either. Andrew is right, if Eddie were around there would be no fixed wires on the route. My guess is that they have not been fixed all that long. I've aided it a few times, and never had more than one fixed piece on it, not including the pins. My point for the whole thread was that I think the local ethic here is that you don't prefix routes for a pink point, and then leave to give it a burn later. Whether it is 5 hours later, or 3 days later. It should be fully expected that the cliff scavengers will devour up your fixed gear. It's not considered stealing. More like....Manna from heaven. Now, if I had seen you and hid in the boulders waiting for you to leave, then scored your gear....that's stealing and I would deserve a good ass whipping. I didn't you, or anyone for several hours, and made sure it wasn;t the result of an accident. You prevailed though and got your gear before I got back at 10:30 to clean the route, so all is good. Were you and your group hanging out in the overlook parking after you cleaned your gear? My buddy and I pulled up to go in and there was a small crowd. I wondered if it was the KC climbers.

Just to be clear, I would never go to another climbing area and attempt this. I don't know the local ethic there, and it would be wholly presumptuous of me to strip a route before asking. If I wanted to climb it, the gear would be cleaned, and left at the base for the owner. Perhaps a nicer RR would do that here at the Gunks...but I'm poor, and this is how I supplement my rack!!

Top
#45317 - 06/05/09 01:45 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Julie]
clausti Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 6
Originally Posted By: Julie
Originally Posted By: clausti
Originally Posted By: Julie

Ethics aren't different if you're on a 5.12 or a 5.2 ... the only thing different are the egos or lack of humility involved. So yeah, bad on them for leaving it there, no matter who or what.

more people want to climb easier routes. that makes it different, because the chances of someone else's ascent being buggered by gear on a 5.12 at the notoriously-'sandbagged' gunks seems a lot less likely than on a 5.6.

You're still saying that different rules apply to you because you climb 5.12.


nope. i'm saying the same ethics apply- don't inconvenience other people with your shit. on a climb with a line, maybe that means you do a li'l "french free" so that you're not flailing for an hour on second. on a climb where it's unlikely to get more than one party on it that day... who the fuck cares if there is some gear on it for a few hours. and i didn't climb kc- i don't climb 5.12 trad. but there IS a difference between traffic on easy climbs and hard climbs.

Quote:
It's the symbolism that carries the insult to the huddled masses, not the gear. That's what ethics are about.


i really hope that was sarcasm, because it was definitely horse shit.

Quote:
I wish you well too, but that doesn't change my mind about the ethics of it.


i didn't wish you well. (though i don't wish you ill.) there are two of us replying.

edited to add: for what it's worth, i'm in favor of bolt anchors. it saves trees and clifftop environments in general.


Edited by clausti (06/05/09 01:53 AM)

Top
#45318 - 06/05/09 01:50 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
clausti Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 6
hey chas- 'sandbagged' was in quotes for a reason. i actually thought everything up through mid 5.10 felt about on, though i thought 5.11s felt hard.

and rangerrob- that was the kc party, yes, plus some others.

Top
#45347 - 06/06/09 01:19 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
Dizzy Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 2177
Loc: Berkshires, MA and Ahlington, ...
Originally Posted By: camhead
Fine, upstanding paragons of moral virtue, you are, and I know how tough it must be as New Yorkers and Easterners for you not to steal something.


I guess this is the part of this mea culpa that bugs me. It's the unabashed moral superiority of those from somewhere out west. Those of us from the uncouth east who must have a crisis of faith to pass "free gear" don't need this sanctimonious judgement. I have found that too many folks from Boulder and SLC are just insufferable with their condemnations of the "east coast" vibe. Guess what_ not all of us fit your stereotype.

Ta,
Dizz
_________________________
I can handle reality in small doses, but as a lifestyle it's way too confining
-Lily Tomlin

Top
#45352 - 06/06/09 04:20 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
clausti Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 6
Originally Posted By: Dizzy
I guess this is the part of this mea culpa that bugs me. It's the unabashed moral superiority of those from somewhere out west. Those of us from the uncouth east who must have a crisis of faith to pass "free gear" don't need this sanctimonious judgement. I have found that too many folks from Boulder and SLC are just insufferable with their condemnations of the "east coast" vibe. Guess what_ not all of us fit your stereotype.


um, enough people were having a crisis of faith about "free gear" that was up for an afternoon that there was a four or five page thread about whether it should rightfully have been taken before the climber posted up.

and it's not the whole east coast, it's just new england. people in wv, for example, don't consider gear for working a route to be fair game if you walk away for a couple hours.

and speaking of east coast- i'm from south carolina. so while my judgement may be regional, it's not from out west.

Top
#45353 - 06/06/09 05:28 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
New Yorkers can be quite wily in their ways when it comes to redefining your property as theirs.

Top
#45355 - 06/07/09 01:01 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: clausti]
empicard Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/29/01
Posts: 2957
Loc: LI, NY
fixed gear! fixed gear!
lets go steal it!

:0
smile
_________________________
tOOthless

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Top
#45370 - 06/08/09 01:42 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: empicard]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
For any interested, I gave an effort on a 1.5 tricam stuck just off the deck on Belly Roll, after the party gave up on it, and it remains for the taking. I hang my head in embarrassment.

Top
#45372 - 06/08/09 02:04 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Originally Posted By: Dizzy
Originally Posted By: camhead
Fine, upstanding paragons of moral virtue, you are, and I know how tough it must be as New Yorkers and Easterners for you not to steal something.


I guess this is the part of this mea culpa that bugs me. It's the unabashed moral superiority of those from somewhere out west. Those of us from the uncouth east who must have a crisis of faith to pass "free gear" don't need this sanctimonious judgement. I have found that too many folks from Boulder and SLC are just insufferable with their condemnations of the "east coast" vibe. Guess what_ not all of us fit your stereotype.

Ta,
Dizz


Good. I was hoping that comment would get a rise out of somebody! Seriously, though, every time a debate rises on ther climbing websites about what defines "booty," or when it is appropriate to gank fixed gear, Northeasterners are always the most eager to claim it, and the most hostile to the idea of just letting it be.

That said, however, y'all do have some very nice people at the Gunks. Clausti (my wife) and I had been chatting with someone at the crag for only about an hour when they offered us a room to crash in that night!


Edited by camhead (06/08/09 02:16 PM)

Top
#45374 - 06/08/09 02:40 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
TerrieM Online   content
addict

Registered: 05/14/09
Posts: 425
Loc: Gunks in Summer, Southwest in ...
.....I hope you didn't take them up on it! You know, the whole body organ black market thing is pretty tempting for New York/Easterners looking for an opportunity to steal something.

Top
#45382 - 06/08/09 03:53 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Originally Posted By: camhead
Seriously, though, every time a debate rises on ther climbing websites about what defines "booty," or when it is appropriate to gank fixed gear, Northeasterners are always the most eager to claim it, and the most hostile to the idea of just letting it be.

I was born and raised in the Northeast, lived most of my adult life there, and climbed in the Gunks for almost 30 years. So, to this comment about the eagerness to claim booty.....
I agree.
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#45406 - 06/08/09 07:53 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: MarcC]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
I think the point of ther thread initially was to raise the question of what the local ethic in regards to fixing a route with your gear and leaving it for a later send. Whether it actually inconvenienced anyone is irrelevant. I think that fixing gear on a route that is by no means a test piece or an unfinished project is not acceptable here in the Gunks. It may be acceptable in other places, and that's fine, I would respect that. But don't come to my crag and fix a line of gear and then leave. It's not acceptable here. It will be removed!

The question becomes more vague when we are talking about unfinished projects, or something hard enough that it may only have a couple of ascents. Is it right that Spinal Traction be fixed with free gear so that someone can work it for a free ascent? Maybe, but the fact still remains that if someone wanted to go aid it, (and they surely do..it is not an abscure route by any means), then the presence of that gear is fucking up their ascent.

I have no problems with fixing a route to pinkpoint it at all. But don't leave the cliff. Hang out at the base and relax...then send. At the Gunks,once you leave, that gear is free for the taking.

It has nothing to do with eastern climbers being used to living in the ghetto. There's plenty of hoods out west. That's a piece of crap argument. It's about local ethics, pure and simple. Take 10 minutes and ask what the local ethic is before you do something like that.

RR

Top
#45410 - 06/08/09 08:02 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
RR - Don't I hear your cell phone ringing?

Top
#45422 - 06/08/09 08:59 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Smike]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
RR, yes, there are plenty of hoods out west. And gear on a route does get stolen at other crags at which I've climbed; in Utah, Texas, Kentucky, everywhere. The difference is that at all those places, if your gear gets yanked, locals will say "wow, that sucks, those assholes." Not so at the Gunks, as I've gathered.

And, you all may want to educate yourself on the difference between "Style" and "Ethics." This whole thing is more a stylistic than an ethical matter. But that's an entirely different direction.

Oh, and has anyone actually taken time away from the internet and gone up to remove those fixed nuts that have so sullied the purity of Kansas City?

Top
#45434 - 06/08/09 10:24 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
mworking Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 764
Originally Posted By: camhead
Originally Posted By: Dizzy
Originally Posted By: camhead
Fine, upstanding paragons of moral virtue, you are, and I know how tough it must be as New Yorkers and Easterners for you not to steal something.


I guess this is the part of this mea culpa that bugs me. It's the unabashed moral superiority of those from somewhere out west. Those of us from the uncouth east who must have a crisis of faith to pass "free gear" don't need this sanctimonious judgement. I have found that too many folks from Boulder and SLC are just insufferable with their condemnations of the "east coast" vibe. Guess what_ not all of us fit your stereotype.

Ta,
Dizz


Good. I was hoping that comment would get a rise out of somebody! Seriously, though, every time a debate rises on ther climbing websites about what defines "booty," or when it is appropriate to gank fixed gear, Northeasterners are always the most eager to claim it, and the most hostile to the idea of just letting it be.

That said, however, y'all do have some very nice people at the Gunks. Clausti (my wife) and I had been chatting with someone at the crag for only about an hour when they offered us a room to crash in that night!


Well most of us are nice enough. Were just playing by a different set of rules than you seem to expect. I look at it this way: The Gunks are heavily trafficked climbing area. In order to keep all routes open as much as possible, local rules are not to leave gear. Simple as that. Most of us would courteously remove our gear leaving unencumbered access for others when we leave. Courtesy is all that should be necessary. But, since not everyone actually is this courteous motivation is useful. I look at it sort of like a traffic ticket. You can gamble if you like.

Julie is correct. The rule is not grade dependant. There are plenty of people climbing high grades at the Gunks. I think I am a far better driver than many on the road and my car is more capable too. That doesn't get me special parking privileges though.


Edited by mworking (06/08/09 10:30 PM)

Top
#45435 - 06/08/09 10:24 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
when your style affects other peoples style...it becomes an ethical problem. The gear would not have been "stolen". It would have been taken down and held until the owner came to claim it. The Preserve would have been told who had it in case the owners asked. If I had watched the people on it leave, and then took it for myself...that would have been stealing. Cleaning the cliff is not stealing. It cmes back to local ethics. You need to find out what the ethic is for fixing your gear on a route and then leaving. It's pretty simple. In the Gunks, don't do it

Top
#45446 - 06/09/09 12:38 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Lucander Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/03/09
Posts: 227
Loc: Stone Ridge, NY
Strange how we're on an 8-page thread about gear left on a de facto sport climb while hardly anyone notices when topropes commonly get left for hours on the first pitch of classic multipitch lines...now THAT'S one which blurs the line between "style" and "ethics"


Top
#45450 - 06/09/09 01:47 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Originally Posted By: RangerRob
The gear would not have been "stolen". It would have been taken down and held until the owner came to claim it. The Preserve would have been told who had it in case the owners asked.

No, that's only what you would have done. I would not necessarily expect that behavior from the 1000 other wilderness seekers that day.
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#45454 - 06/09/09 02:06 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: MarcC]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
That may sadly be true, even for me. I was watching a beginner futz around with a cam about 20 feet up Horseman, and she couldn't get it out. For a short period of time I considered lurking about until they came down and left, and then gone up and snagged it. My little angel shoulder told me to solo up and retrieve it for them while they were coming down, and I gave it back to them. I could have scored a brand new .75 camalot, but being the lame ass sap I am, I did the right thing.

And Dave...it's only four pages so far..but let's keep it going!! Those topropes will get shoved aside or pulled if no one is actively on it. I don't stand for that. Climb it or get the hell off of it.

Some knuckleheads were tring slammin the salmon (imagine that!) and they were running their tr through the bottom of the chains. When I got to the anchor after seconding Birdland I had to wait for 15 minutes while the dude worked his moves and got to the ledge to get his damned rope out of the rap anchor. Pissed me off! You should not be tring through the chains! That is inconsiderate and lazy in the least, and destructive at most. LAZY!!!!!!

RR

Top
#45462 - 06/09/09 12:44 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Lucander]
mworking Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 764
??? I don't steal gear and have rarely kept legitimate booty (even then I give it away). But pulling a vacated rope? Wouldn't think twice.

Top
#45520 - 06/09/09 05:57 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: mworking]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
camhead: actually I used to live in NYC and climb in the Gunks (only 12yrs tho) but have lived out west for the last 10yrs. I get pissed off if people leave gear on a route. I find it rarely happens for more then a short time, but if it is for a few hours, come'n..... do the route and move on.

There are times when I am working a route, ie: the .13's at Indian Creek, when I may take several burns, but whenever I meet other climbers, I usually ask their intention, letting them know that I'll gladly move my stuff if they want the route (but usually find they just want to see someone whip on the route). The older I get the more I find that routes that are projects for me, may be merely warmup for someone else.

Even though the ethics are first come first serve, I find being considerate of others goes a long way.


Edited by Chas (06/09/09 06:17 PM)

Top
#45525 - 06/09/09 06:06 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
Quote:
first come first serve


True... but it's first come first serve as long as you're still actively climbing.
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
#45527 - 06/09/09 06:19 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dillbag]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
That is the "being considerate" part

Top
#45529 - 06/09/09 06:35 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
Right, but it's also part of the underlying codus of climbing...
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
#45530 - 06/09/09 06:45 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dillbag]
Timbo Offline
addict

Registered: 12/23/99
Posts: 696
Loc: Delaware
Apparently gear thieves are not limited to the Northeast, nor to gear left on routes.

http://www.newriverrendezvous.com/09highlights.html

Scroll down to the bottom.

TS
_________________________

Top
#45542 - 06/09/09 08:47 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Timbo]
Mike Rawdon Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 11/29/99
Posts: 4276
Loc: Poughkeepsie
Originally Posted By: Timbo
Apparently gear thieves are not limited to the Northeast, nor to gear left on routes.

http://www.newriverrendezvous.com/09highlights.html

Scroll down to the bottom.

TS


From the above linked newsletter:
"Stealing is bad enough and stealing from your own tribe is way beyond despicable."

Right...so it's not as bad if you rip off vacationing New Yorkers??!! WTF?

Top
#45546 - 06/09/09 08:51 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Timbo]
Julie Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 01/16/00
Posts: 2090
Loc: SoCal
Huh. I looked up "ethics" in several dictionaries, but never found anything where it said those who considered themselves better than others, could redefine the term at their convenience.

It did say something about treating others as you'd like to be treated. Which, like I said before, has a lot more to do with gestures and how you symbolize your respect for other people.

Which is to say that, leaving gear up on a 5.12 is a SYMBOL to anyone passing by, that you'd leave your gear up on whatever route you damn well please, because you're so awesome and everyone should bow to you, and you couldn't give a crap about what anyone else thinks.

Or am I just being sarcastic? Or, "ironical"? Who knows?

Top
#45563 - 06/09/09 10:11 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Julie]
LarE Offline
newbie

Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 45
Hmm. Seems to me there's two issues going on here: a) When is it appropriate to leave your gear fixed on a gunks route? Answer: almost never, accident/injury barred. b) When is it appropriate to take gear that has been left fixed on a gunks route? Answer: Open to debate, but as for me: do unto others...

There was a ton of fixed gear on Spinal Traction last time I hiked (the long way) down that way. I wonder how that particular project is going? Me, I can't IMAGINE trying to free that route! Good times...

Top
#45567 - 06/09/09 10:47 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: LarE]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
I would consider that a project LarE, and I would not clean it. I'm sure the owners woudn't mind me swinging and ripping on their gear though, right?

Top
#45610 - 06/10/09 03:38 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Originally Posted By: Chas
camhead: actually I used to live in NYC and climb in the Gunks (only 12yrs tho) but have lived out west for the last 10yrs. I get pissed off if people leave gear on a route. I find it rarely happens for more then a short time, but if it is for a few hours, come'n..... do the route and move on.

There are times when I am working a route, ie: the .13's at Indian Creek, when I may take several burns, but whenever I meet other climbers, I usually ask their intention, letting them know that I'll gladly move my stuff if they want the route (but usually find they just want to see someone whip on the route). The older I get the more I find that routes that are projects for me, may be merely warmup for someone else.

Even though the ethics are first come first serve, I find being considerate of others goes a long way.


hey Chas,

I agree with you whole-heartedly. I would not leave fixed gear on any trad route which I was working, especially not at a popular and well-traveled crag. However, like I said (and as many of the armchair ethicists here are ignoring), the fixed stoppers were not mine. As mentioned before, I saw no difference between leaving my draws on KC and leaving them on a sport route; the style was/ will be identical until the stoppers are removed!

That said, right on for living in Flagstaff; that is the nicest town for climbing that I've come across. We should meet up at the Forks next time I'm out!

Top
#45643 - 06/10/09 06:59 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
Chas Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/22/01
Posts: 1754
Loc: Flagstaff
next time you are out my way. Look me up. Also you should check out this down in Sedona http://www.summitpost.org/images/original/463191.jpg. Some of the best climbing I've done. Rivals anything at IC and is coming close to Moonlight Buttress free.

Top
#45658 - 06/10/09 11:03 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Chas]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
For what it's worth, I went up Kansas City today to try to clean those fixed nuts out of the roof. I only succeeded in cleaning the first one. The next two are buried deep enough that I couldn't even see the head. The last should theoretically come out, but it defied my my 20 minute struggle. I even brought a hammer up with me.

RR

Top
#45770 - 06/12/09 04:30 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
granite_grrl Offline
stranger

Registered: 05/09/07
Posts: 4
Loc: St. Catharines, Ontario
I swa a blue sling on something up there last night when I went for a walk. It's odd 'cause I wan't really ecpecting to see anything because the fixed wires are difficult to spy from the ground. But there was certainly something blue up there.

It seemed pretty low on the meat of the route, it wasn't there the weekend that camhead was working the route. New gear?

I'll probobly take another walk out that way tonight. I'm curious what I'll see.

Top
#45777 - 06/12/09 05:54 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: granite_grrl]
TerrieM Online   content
addict

Registered: 05/14/09
Posts: 425
Loc: Gunks in Summer, Southwest in ...
OH DEAR! - Has Ranger Rob been outed for leaving trash in situ from his cleaning attempt!!!??? (har har)

Top
#45818 - 06/14/09 03:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: TerrieM]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
No I did that on another cliff yesterday. Don't worry, if you can find it before I get back there, it's yours

Top
#48696 - 10/15/09 09:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Hey Gunkies! I thought I would revive this thread and poke the pissed off lion in the cage a bit more. Anyway, we came back to the Gunks for another busy weekend this past C-day. I got on Kansas City once again; it was the end of the day, and I was planning to hang my draws on one go, and then leave them over night so I could come back the next morning. Unfortunately, I could not do this, because I sent it fairly quickly.

I do think that Rangerrob and all the other armchair ethicists have been slacking, however, because all that fixed gear was still on the route. Some selfish litterbug aid climber deprived me of a true trad ascent, and I cried the real tears all night.

I'm still unsure whether this is a trad pinkpoint, or a sport redpoint. Although, there are at least two videos on youtube dating back over a decade of the route, and both show the in-situ gear.

Anyway, that's all, back to your regular programing; the Gunks are awesome, and I can't wait to get back!

Top
#48697 - 10/15/09 09:30 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Well Camhead, I did my part. Shortly after I started this thread I went up and cleaned most of the fixed gear off. I added 3 nuts to my booty rack. It is sad that it gets littered so fast. You're right, it does ruin peoples chances of onsighting a classic line. I don't think people should aid things like that unless they can be reasonably certain that they can do it clean. Props for the ascent by the way!

RR

Top
#48725 - 10/16/09 07:54 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
jstan Offline
stranger

Registered: 12/17/06
Posts: 22
"I would be very interested to hear how much fixed gear was on Kansas City for the FFA."

I did it a couple weeks after Bragg. I don't remember there being much. The aid routes were never left as clipups.

Ask John.

Someone suggested bootying pins from climbs like Coex.
We had a person killed because of someone doing that kind of thing.

I will say nothing more.

Top
#48744 - 10/16/09 09:54 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: jstan]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Armchair ethicist? That implies I don't practice what I preach! I had to leave a bail anchor on an outlying cliff after getting in over my head earlier this year, and I made damn sure I went back within a couple of days and rapped in to clean it. It ate me up that I left 2 pieces of gear, 3 biners, and a cord. I may be an armchair figure skater...armchair physicist, armchair boulderer, but I am not an armchair ethicist.

Top
#48752 - 10/17/09 04:39 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: jstan]
Jannette Offline

Cliffmama
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 10/03/00
Posts: 2225
Loc: Gardiner, NY
Originally Posted By: jstan

Someone suggested bootying pins from climbs like Coex.
We had a person killed because of someone doing that kind of thing.


Hi John,
Funny how one can read your statement both ways. Did you hire a hit man to kill the person who took the pins? Or did a climber die because those pins weren't there as expected? :-)

Jannette

Top
#48757 - 10/17/09 01:44 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Jannette]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Be careful, as the answer may ignite an FBI investigation! Sounds like the makings of a good novel

Top
#48762 - 10/17/09 02:34 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
Ken N. ended up in court for taking bolts but gettng capped for taking a pin just goes to show how hard core those earlier gunkers really were smile

Top
#48763 - 10/17/09 02:56 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: chip]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
ok, ok, I'm going to reply again.

First off, Jstan, thanks for your comments on the early ascents of KC; I really was curious to know how much fixed gear left over from aid ascents was on it, since, obviously many other established free climbs were put up using aid-era pins. My comment about removing the pins from Co-ex was meant to be utterly tongue-in-cheek for that reason, since so many people here will complain about fixed gear, but then clip a piton. I suppose that is just the line that we have all drawn in this game.

Furthermore, I am standing by the "armchair ethicists" comment. This entire thread was originally made up of people complaining about a "pinkpoint" ascent of KC, who had NO idea that there were fixed stoppers on the route. Nobody had thought to go look at it until I chimed in. Hence, "armchair ethicists." Maybe I should have changed it to "5.8 ethicists," I dunno.

It is really cool that Johns Bragg and Stannard did the roof placing gear on lead. If I had had more time I would have loved to do so as well, avoiding the stoppers and the pin at the lip, and it would have definitely made the route MUCH more challenging and committing.

However, I do think that it is interesting that no recent ascents I know of have placed their own gear. As I said, two videos on youtube, several photos on mountainproject, and my own conversations with one other person who sent it; all of them were essentially sport redpoints. The stoppers are still there, and a few looked VERY old.

end of rant.

Top
#48764 - 10/17/09 03:11 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Originally Posted By: camhead
First off, Jstan, thanks for your comments on the early ascents of KC; I really was curious to know how much fixed gear left over from aid ascents was on it, since, obviously many other established free climbs were put up using aid-era pins....However, I do think that it is interesting that no recent ascents I know of have placed their own gear.

My partner and I did it on aid a few years after Bragg freed it. IIRC, there were 2 fixed pins and at least one stopper in the roof, but all were well before the lip. In fact, because of the way the rock instantly cuts back, getting over the lip was the aid crux.
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#48768 - 10/17/09 05:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: MarcC]
TrappDyke Offline
journeyman

Registered: 06/10/09
Posts: 80
Camhead. Good work on KC. Your suspicions are correct. No one places all their own gear on KC for two reasons. One is,as you know, it makes it way harder, the other is visiting climbers who actually do the route have no incentive to skip the fixed gear.It would be cool to clean the fixed wires after your done. Someday someone should pull the crummy pins at the lip too.


Edited by TrappDyke (10/17/09 05:23 PM)

Top
#48770 - 10/18/09 01:24 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: TrappDyke]
jstan Offline
stranger

Registered: 12/17/06
Posts: 22
Jannette:
I have found hit men are actually getting cheaper these days.

But seriously we went through a time when ego was getting involved with climbing and people were pulling pins. A person died as a result.

After one has climbed awhile the point becomes one of trying not to set the risks that others feel they have to take. The down side is just too large. Furthermore doing this flies directly in the face of what climbing is.

We do have a responsibility for each other.

Someday we may reach a point where people come to agreement as to how to manage protection.

When that agreement has been fashioned I can see coming a time when carefully chosen routes can be restored to their original condition.

It will be a very exciting rebirth.

But only after the consensus has been solidly put in place.


Edited by jstan (10/18/09 01:29 AM)

Top
#48775 - 10/18/09 04:38 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: jstan]
rg@ofmc Online   content
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/25/99
Posts: 2472
Loc: Poughkeepsie, NY
Originally Posted By: jstan

But seriously we went through a time when ego was getting involved with climbing and people were pulling pins. A person died as a result.

After one has climbed awhile the point becomes one of trying not to set the risks that others feel they have to take. The down side is just too large. Furthermore doing this flies directly in the face of what climbing is.

We do have a responsibility for each other.

Someday we may reach a point where people come to agreement as to how to manage protection.

When that agreement has been fashioned I can see coming a time when carefully chosen routes can be restored to their original condition.

It will be a very exciting rebirth.

But only after the consensus has been solidly put in place.


John, I don't remember the incident you are speaking of. Care to refresh a failing memory?

In any case, I think some of what you are saying refers to a historical situation at the beginning of "clean climbing," when nuts were just coming into use and were simply not up to the task of protecting many situations. Perhaps the push to "climb clean" in those days did influence people to advance into difficult ground with some very blunt tools. But technology has marched on, and the contemporary climber, armed with a rack many times the size of the original stopper and hexentric collections, now enjoys protection possibilities that would have been utterly unimaginable to any previous generation.

As for setting risks others feel obliged to take, that certainly sounds like a bad thing, but I think the realities may be both more subtle and more complicated.

First, although all climbing involves voluntarily encountering risks, there is no agreement on what constitutes acceptable risk. What risks, then, are those we should not be "setting?" If we agree that such and such a situation has an acceptable level of risk and someone gets killed there, have we failed in our responsibility to that person?

An experienced climber was recently killed in a ground fall from the first pitch of Three Pines. I wouldn't be surprised if there might have been a low fixed piton at some point back in the day, now removed. Does that removal now constitute a failure of responsibility?

Or consider this: there is a fixed pin over ceiling on the second pitch of MF. It is in a crack that will take a perfect cam placement. People clip that pin without backing it up and then fall on it. They have no idea how good that pin is. Wouldn't the responsible thing be to remove that pin---it certainly isn't necessary there---so that leaders would have to place good verifiable protection instead of blindly clipping something they cannot judge?

The problem is that all climbing involves the voluntary renunciation of some of the means at our disposal. It is now possible to put a bolt every ten feet on every climb. There will, over time, be many fatalities that could have been avoided if we had only done this. Are we thus responsible for all these tragedies?

I find the idea that some group of people is responsible for some other group's safety highly problematic. It seems to me to come from, and make perfect sense in, a sport-climbing context, where the creator of the route has a responsibility to bolt it so that it is safe. But in traditional climbing we are dealing with The Creator rather than a creator. Nature has already made the safety decisions by providing or denying opportunities for traditional protection, and no one is "entitled" to any specific level of risk reduction. For example, a poorly protected 5.7 climb may not be doable by climbers whose leading limit is 5.7. Are such leaders "entitled" to more protection? Is it a failure of communal repsonsibility to provide it for them?

A year or so ago, Dick and I removed an extremely dangerous piton from the upper part of the first pitch of Pas de Deux. This pin was regularly clipped, without backup, by almost everyone I ever saw go up there. I can flat out guarantee it wouldn't have held even a short fall. The people clipping that pin were climbing under a dangerous illusion.

We didn't replace the pin. The crack seemed to channel water and we guessed another rusted time bomb would be the result. Moreover, you could get a small cam in there. And furthermore, there was a solid placement for a medium-sized cam a few feet up and left. We thought the combination of opportunities was in keeping with the nature of traditional climbing and was, in reality, a far safer option than the pin had been.

Well, there were a few (not very many) complaints. Some people said they didn't normally carry a cam that small. Others apparently never looked around when the terrible pin was there to see if there might be alternate placements, and still didn't look around after the pin was gone. And so they said the route had been made more dangerous, an astonishing claim really considering how dangerous it had been with the rotten pin.

I have to say these attitudes really took me by surprise. If someone gets to a place where feel they need protection, and they don't have the piece needed for that spot, then either they back off (not at all hard to do at this spot on Pas de Deux), they look around for alternate placements (in this case available), or they decide to make the next part of the climb an exercise in their skill and control with full realization that they have chosen to take this particular risk.

Is someone forcing them to go on? Are they laboring under some kind of unholy social pressure? Are Dick and I responsible if they take a giant whipper, responsible for their decision not to retreat when they didn't have an appropriate piece, responsible when they failed to look for other placements, responsible when they misjudged the difficulties ahead and their own abilities and forged on unprotected? Do climbers have any of their own responsibilities for their choices? Are their mistakes and human failures somehow a consequence of my or Dick's egotism?

I recently had the privilege of climbing with one of our local masters. We were on unknown ground on a new route. He made a bunch of 5.9 and 5.10 moves and got to a spot where he needed a piece he didn't have with him. So he reversed all those moves (without weighting the rope), came back to the ground, got the piece he needed, went back up, placed the piece, made the hardest moves on the route, and continued to the top.

Perhaps a deeper question has to do with what trad climbing is or isn't. Is the current restriction on placing new fixed protection simply a Mohonk Preserve rule, or is there some sense that traditional climbing, as opposed to sport climbing, is about dealing with what nature has provided, rather than modifying nature for our own amusement and edification? Is trad climbing now defined as sport climbing on gear?

Even more to the point, consider the case of fixed protection that cannot be replaced by today's modern gear. Does the current existence of that fixed protection confer some "right," in perpetuity, on future climbers to enjoy the protection that was historically present, or should the climb be allowed to revert to its natural state, waiting until future gear innovations perhaps make it once again "protectable?" Why exactly are we "entitled" to some level of risk reduction just because it was available in the past, especially in view of the fact that the risks in question are utterly voluntary?

Don't get me wrong---I'm not arguing that fixed gear should be removed, nor am I arguing that failing fixed gear should never be replaced. But I am asking whether the assumptions of entitlement that accompany these discussions are inviolable articles of faith in the climbing community, or whether, as I think, they are open to question and interpretation.



Top
#48782 - 10/18/09 06:45 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Camhead how do you that no recent ascents have placed their own gear? Do you have trailcam on the route watching people? Just because someone hasn't posted here about it doesn't mean it hasn't been done.

I've been on the route many times before you tried it. I haven't tried it free yet, but you can be assured that when I do I will try to place my own gear. Will I clip the pins? Yes.

Top
#48784 - 10/18/09 07:07 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Sorry, got cut off there.

Anyway, it's cool that you nabbed your ascent of Kansas City. You do it any way you feel is good for you, and I don't judge how anyone else climbs. The point of the thread was knowing the local ethic. If I went to The Red and was able to leave draws in place for a send of a route, maybe I would. But, I would certainly ask someone there first if that was cool to do.

I like how you had to throw a number in there to replace the word armchair, as if 5.8 isn't worthy enough to warrant having an opinion. Very classy.

Top
#48787 - 10/18/09 07:58 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
jstan Offline
stranger

Registered: 12/17/06
Posts: 22
Richard:
All good points in a very difficult area. But there was some pin removal going on part way through the change and I think it would be worrisome if it were to become a problem now.

You and I were both there for the carry out. It was not forgettable.

Afterwards I went up on that climb and found all the fixed protection was gone.

I don't have any answers to the question of whether there is a better way of doing things. But that experience defintitely sensitized me to what can happen when someone decides to act generally and unilaterally.

As for pins rusting I would not counsel using cadmium plated pins such as I made. Rain is sufficiently acidic to remove traces of the cadmium and leave it on the rock. There are probably not many of mine left at this late date.


Edited by jstan (10/18/09 09:22 PM)

Top
#48789 - 10/18/09 09:41 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: jstan]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2677
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
Rich, you once again beautifully summarize the debate and possible ramifications of trends. It seems to me that almost all of us began climbing ignorant to varying degrees of many aspects of the game. Unfortunately or not, the excellent detail of Dick's guides does convey some sense of what to expect on a given climb. We may debate the grade or level of protection but I am assured that a G rated climb is unlikely to force me into a do or die situation unless I climb off route or don't pay enough attention to pro. That puts the responsibility on me, where I like it.
As I see it, a day of sport at any grade is infinitely less memorable and satisfying than any trad route I have ever experienced, because of the adventure. there have been many books written on the subject, but I know that I reqire some level of adventure/risk and might have quit climbing long ago otherwise.

Top
#48816 - 10/19/09 08:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
GOclimb Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 03/26/01
Posts: 2361
Loc: Boston
First of all, congrats on the send. What a cool roof, you must've been psyched!

Second:
Quote:
I do think that Rangerrob and all the other armchair ethicists have been slacking, however, because all that fixed gear was still on the route. Some selfish litterbug aid climber deprived me of a true trad ascent, and I cried the real tears all night.


What gear do you mean? I've only been on the route once - I aided it, oh, around five or six years ago. I can say pretty confidently that every nut, cam, and ballnut I clipped were ones that I placed, and I removed. None were fixed. As for pins, I don't recall what there was in situ, but if they were there, they were very few, and didn't do much either to get me out the roof, or over the lip (the aid crux).

GO

Top
#48883 - 10/21/09 10:35 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
andrew Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/15/99
Posts: 1816
Loc: Denver, CO
Somebody get Eddie away from the bar and tell him there is free gear on Kansas City. Free gear should be the magic words to get him out of retirement.
_________________________
This isn't an office. It's Hell with fluorescent lighting.

Top
#48897 - 10/22/09 02:39 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: GOclimb]
camhead Offline
stranger

Registered: 06/04/09
Posts: 10
Originally Posted By: GOclimb
First of all, congrats on the send. What a cool roof, you must've been psyched!

Second:
Quote:
I do think that Rangerrob and all the other armchair ethicists have been slacking, however, because all that fixed gear was still on the route. Some selfish litterbug aid climber deprived me of a true trad ascent, and I cried the real tears all night.


What gear do you mean? I've only been on the route once - I aided it, oh, around five or six years ago. I can say pretty confidently that every nut, cam, and ballnut I clipped were ones that I placed, and I removed. None were fixed. As for pins, I don't recall what there was in situ, but if they were there, they were very few, and didn't do much either to get me out the roof, or over the lip (the aid crux).

GO


Hey Gabe,

Here are the details of the gear from both times that I was on the route (Memorial Day, and Columbus Day). From the fixed pin anchor at the back of the roof, there is/was a stopper that is clippable from the stance, barely. There is another stopper about four feet from that, and another about a foot above that (right in the meat of the undercling to sloper crux). From there, there is a fixed pin about four feet farther in a horizontal crack (right next to a bomber red or gold camalot placement).

I did place one cam at the lip, after I had thrown my foot over my head: a purple or green camalot just to protect the final mantle.

Here is a video of a guy doing it barefoot with entirely fixed gear as far as I can tell. He is using pre-placed draws, and there is probably a mob of angry trad climbers led by rangerrob waiting at the base to club him to death with their hexes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myb6didvFKM

Here is a video of D.D. DuLac at the Petzl Rocktrip a few years ago doing it (skip past about five minutes of bad techno and Euros bouldering to get to the good stuff). The video quality is not great, but it looks like he may be placing a cam near the final pin. He also is not doing it on fixed draws, but that's because he is a cheese-eating surrender frog who warms up on 13+. I don't know if he drilled a couple monos to avoid the handjams, though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-NuZIvObBA

Anyway, hope that clears some stuff up.

Top
#48908 - 10/22/09 07:50 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: camhead]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Dude, you have this vision of me that I think is hysterical. Hexes? I think you need to come off your high horse a little man. It's Kansas City, not exactly groundbreaking. I wasn't angry actually, I was psyched to go up and score a bunch of gear that someone left on a route. I was angry when I got back and it was all gone. Grrr!

Top
#67377 - 02/07/13 04:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Doug Offline
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
Old thread bump!

This thread was linked in another forum and I just wanted to comment on something that I didn't see mentioned. It's dead in here anyway smile

Reviewing the posts above it sounds like Ranger Rob, ready to dole out justice for failing to meet the area's standard and lured by free gear, headed back to the overlook parking lot around 10:30PM to scavenge. It is unclear to me if he actually parked there, or parked elsewhere to avoid talking to the suspected owners of the gear.

How long would it take to clean the route, plus the walk in and out? Longer than the parking time limit for the overlook?

And doesn't the preserve officially close after dark? Not often (ever?) enforced I think, but still their rule?

And it sounds like this "cliff scavenger thing" is somewhat regular?

Maybe I've mucked up the details Rob, but it sounds like you are regularly willing to break laws and/or property owner rules to enforce a non-binding "area ethic"? Doesn't sound like an ethical high ground to me.

I'd probably have asked the folks in the lot if it was their gear - seems like a good chance to educate them on what I felt was the area ethic if that was the main concern.

Top
#67380 - 02/08/13 02:44 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Dizzy]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
Once, while people were trying to free Twilight Zone I went to the trouble to repel down only to check out the chipped off hold. Later I was been accused of robbing all the gear off the climb more than once. I guess it was a lot gear and trouble to get it all on there. Someone else must have got on it right after I did and took a small rack of gear, and maybe even noiced me on it. I becase their scapegoat.

One time I heard a story of man in a very old and small town who lost an expensive watch. After some time he finally remembered that he had taken it off at a drinking fountain the day before. Reluctantly passing by again he went to ask an old man sitting by the fountain if he had seen it. The old man was watching it to make sure no one took it, it was still there.
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#67381 - 02/08/13 02:48 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: donald perry]
TrappDyke Offline
journeyman

Registered: 06/10/09
Posts: 80
Doug, I'm not seeing how you came to that conclusion.

Top
#67383 - 02/08/13 03:15 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: TrappDyke]
Doug Offline
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
Which conclusion? All I was saying was that Rob was going on about upholding the area ethics, but it sounded like he was willing to bend or break laws and/or property owner rules to do so. And that it is a semi-regular activity.

Second, not talking to the people at the lot that he suspected the gear belonged to made it seem he was really more interested in scoring free gear than educating them on their ethical shortcomings.

How I arrived at my first, maybe incorrect, conclusion:
- It sounded like Rob planned to park at the overlook to go in and scavenge the gear around 10:30PM.
- I think the overlook parking has a 30 minute time limit.
- I think the preserve is closed at dark.
- I think it could take him more than 30 minutes to strip the route (he mentioned nuts he did get out later took some work - he gave up on one after 20 minutes effort)

To my second point, Rob mentioned that he'd "deserve a good ass whipping" if he saw them and hid in the boulders until they left to get the gear. Right after that he talks about coming back to scavenge and said he saw a group and wondered if it was their gear. Why not ask? He'd prefer to spend the effort in the dark cleaning up for them only to hand it back to them the next day when they ask a ranger about it?

The whole rant just didn't seem to line up to me.

Maybe I'm just missing something everyone else gets, or am misunderstanding something. It wouldn't be a first.

Top
#67384 - 02/08/13 04:57 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Doug]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Hey Doug. You seem to be pointing out a bunch of things that don't really address the purpose of the original thread. You're also talking about parking rules and ethics in the current context, instead of when it was originally posted. Which was 2009, and when it was still very acceptable to park there for 30 minutes to an hour. As far as the Mohonk Preserve closing at sunset, sure it says that on their brochures and at their kiosks, but if you tell me that you've never been on the property after sunset or before sunrise you then you probably have not been climbing here very long. It widely accepted that people use the preserve outside of those hours. WIDELY accepted. I appreciate the points you bring up, but it seems like you may have another reason behind bringing these points, besides the letter of the law. Do you agree or disagree?

Top
#67385 - 02/08/13 06:06 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Doug Offline
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
I'm not sure what reason you are hinting at, but I guess I disagree that I have it. If you are insinuating that I may personally dislike you or something - I don't really know you but you've seemed alright online (even if prone to ranting).

I thought the thread was about ethics of the situation and I didn't see your plan of action to be ethically superior to the actions of the folks leaving gear. The whole premise of the thread seemed overblown. Your posturing as someone out to enforce the ethics of the area while sneaking back later and possibly breaking some rules (widely disregarded or otherwise) did not line up in my head.

If you were really up for returning gear to its owners, why not ask the group you suspected might have been the owners?

It all just sort of rubbed me the wrong way, so why not discuss it in the forum? Risk of bumping one of the other active threads out of sight? wink Wasn't this thread to stir debate and piss people off?

And about those rules - I said I wasn't positive on them.

I knew there was a switch on parking enforcement but wasn't sure when. I'm pretty certain I had friends getting parking notices (if not actual tickets) about the 30 minute limit in Spring 2009. A quick search shows a thread here only a few days after your original post complaining about ticketing at the overlook lot. I even found a post in 2006 saying that parking in the overlook lot all day was annoying Gardiner residents.

And yes, I knew that if there was a rule about closing at dark it was clearly not strictly enforced. I've even been on the property after sunset. On these occasions I was finishing up my day though, not heading in to teach someone else about other "consensus" rules.

Top
#67387 - 02/08/13 07:45 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Doug]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Actually I appreciate you posting on this thread. I've since re-read the whole thing and I found it really entertaining. I still stand by the initial intent of the thread, and by the style and ethics opinions I offered. I think I could have refined how obstinate I was only 4 short years ago. I find now that being a little nicer helps smile

I did actually read a little motive in your post that seemed like it went beyond the seemingly innocuous rules I may have violated. If you didn't have a different opinion of the ethics and style debate than I apoligize. If you are implying I may possibly be a little hypocritical because of offenses, then I respect that too. I personally don't see the correlation between parking in the lot 45 minutes versus 30 minutes, and local climbing ethics.

If I remember correctly back to that evening, the group hanging out in the pull off was pretty generic looking, and nothing about them suggested that there was a high probablity that they were climbers, and even more...the climbers in question. It was merely a wondering thought in my head. "Wouldn't it be ironic/funny/coincidence if we walked out with gear hanging off our harness that belonged to the people standing there and none of us realized it"

I love ethical debates and I could go back and forth forever with them. It's always interesting to see how peoples brains work, and how they draw conclusions for themselves. Of course...mine are always the best smile

Top
#67388 - 02/08/13 11:21 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
Ralph Offline
member

Registered: 02/01/07
Posts: 142
Rob,

Here's an explanation of brain workings How Our Brains Work (Yeah, I click on stuff on the right side of the page that has nothing to do with what I'm watching)

Top
#67390 - 02/11/13 06:59 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Ralph]
Doug Offline
member

Registered: 12/29/06
Posts: 176
Thanks for the reply Rob. Looks like the scenario I was picturing at the Overlook parking lot wasn't what you meant to describe.

And yes, I suppose I get peeved by some rule violations. I haven't done the self reflection to completely bound when/why, but I do get irked when everyone is OK with just a little infraction for themselves that is minor in isolation, but becomes an issue when everybody acts that way. A good example would be cutting trails and erosion issues it causes.


Edited by Doug (02/11/13 07:46 PM)

Top
#67405 - 02/13/13 01:47 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: Doug]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3765
Loc: Ulster County, NY
I'm with you on the cutting trail corners thing. I don't thnk many people realize the impact they they themselves cause.

Top
#67416 - 02/17/13 05:11 AM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: RangerRob]
johnnyontherocks Offline
old hand

Registered: 10/06/00
Posts: 792
Loc: Bethlehem Pa
It's hard to have a conversation on ethics when the world is ever increasing with me,me,me's and I,I,I's. Hi everyone. Hope you are all well
_________________________
Johnny on the Rocks
Cosmic Hero

Top
#67446 - 02/21/13 01:57 PM Re: Time for e climbing ethics debate [Re: TrappDyke]
talus Offline
veteran

Registered: 08/23/04
Posts: 1259
Originally Posted By: TrappDyke
No one places all their own gear on KC


umm yes they do
_________________________
John Okner Photography

Top
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 ... 12 13 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored