Pegbolts II

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Tyler 29 Nov 2022

The previous thread (https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/rock_talk/pegbolts-754307) auto archived due to size just as I was about to have my 2p! Anyway, with some trepidation....

It's easy to make academic arguments both for and against these pegbolts and point to cases of hypocrisy on both sides but what they seem to have done 'on the ground' is revitalised some climbs and crags and as a result a few people are going at some trad routes, on-sight when, without them, they might have gone to Pen Trwyn or bouldering. Routes which have not had ascents for years are being enjoyed which may encourage people to get out and clean other routes. At the same time there are still hundreds of routes for the purists to go and do but, apart form the usual suspects (in terms off with routes and climbers), these are being neglected. The same bunch of routes that keen climbers were aspiring to 30 years ago are the same ones being climbed today (often by the same people!). The routes in question could have been left but, in some cases, they'd become nothing but historical artefacts.

Someone previously said "as shown by younger better climbers, these pegs should never have been placed". I'm not doubting that there are lots of younger better climbers but is this really the case? Was Barbarossa getting many GU or on-sight ascents before the peg replacement? The younger better climbers frequently boulder within spitting distance of the best looking single pitch in Wales (Crash Landing (E5 6b)) but it never gets done, does it? As usual in the UK, we fetishise fixed gear, thinking that as long as there's no drill holes trad is in a healthy place regardless of the fact that (from what I can see) the general standard for trad on-sighting is pretty shoddy. Maybe someone like Andy Moles can tell me I'm wrong but it looks as though trad climbing is dying on it's arse with standards stagnating and head points being the non plus ultra of trad climbing (not dismissing headpointng, just I see this as closer to repointing than trad on-sighting).

I'm not saying we should add pegbolts to existing routes where there were non before (in fact, I'm dead against this), just that this issue is being blown out of proportion, I'm sure everyone pictures themselves cruising the routes in question pegless but the truth is very few did. We seem to be preserving a fundamentalist idea of trad climbing but not trad climbing itself.

Post edited at 00:28
10
 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

That's unfair. Fixed gear debates on edge cases are ever present in the UK and sensible end points usually result. The rapid proliferation of these drilled pegs in N Wales, without community approval or any sense of a need for reasoning, is something new. The fact some placements might be sensible simply doesn't justify the ones that are almost certainly not. AddIng drilled pegbolts where there were none before has clearly happened according to the information on UKB.

https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,33285.0.html

We can all pick out examples where route modification suits our ethics but what we really need to do is talk and try to get a concensus (on a case by case basis on important examples)....and somehow stop a new wave of bolt and chop.

I simply don't believe onsight trad is stagnating at any level (and I celebrate the increased focus on bouldering and sport). At least one current active climber has over a hundred E7 onsights to his name and E8 onsights happened for the first time this century and E9 has been tried several times and someone tried to flash E10 last year.

Clinbing is effing brilliant whatever game we chose as long as we are honest in what we do and don't needlessly damage the rock.

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to TobyA

>Dropping three grades doesn't make you any lighter on those potentially dodgy pegs as you ab in though.

Lol. I've never abseiled on any dodgy pegs there given I had a solid backed up belay. Things may have changed recently as I haven't been there for a decade.

>Funnily enough I thought Lighthouse Arete felt very easy for the grade, it was the first time I had been to Gogarth, the abseil down was the most worrying thing about the route. Unless experienced climbers are driving all the way out there, going and seeing the abseil point, then saying "no, I'm not abbing off that" before retiring to the cafe, I can't see how it keeps anyone off the route.

Lighthouse arete might be MVS in isolation but it does have unusual rock and is a little bold; if you only lead VS how do you know you can cope first time down?.... it's pretty inescapable if you can't climb it.... unless you leave abseil ropes in place.

>I don't remember having any concerns about abbing in to do DOTWH because the anchor was obviously solid and we left our own sling up there while on the route so weren't relying on insitu stuff. Although unlike Lighthouse, I found the climbing on Dream completely terrifying!

My first experience on DoWH couldn't be any different. The ascent was incredibly eventful as I've described recently (with a major rockfall across the line due to an incompetent). However, I felt pretty much two thirds of the climbing was totally reversible back to an escape near the start. I expected solid E1, as per the grade then, and got wonderfully exposed VS technical climbing that justified HVS for the positions.

Post edited at 02:43
1
 UKB Shark 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> I simply don't believe onsight trad is stagnating at any level 

Rubbish. Headpointing was scarcely acceptable at E6 in the 90’s. It is common practice below that grade now. 

6
 spenser 29 Nov 2022
In reply to UKB Shark:

What does it matter if people enjoy themselves and don't trash the rock/ crag? (I.e. the route is within their physical capabilities and they want to check gear or practice tricky/ blind moves).

For what it's worth I headpointed Something Better Change at the Roaches, top roped twice over 6 years and a few weeks after doing it the second time I soloed it. No falling off on any occasion, I enjoyed the experience, cleaned the bottom few moves of the route when I went for the solo (they were dirty) and no other parties expressed an interest in doing it on any occasion. What harm did I do to the British trad ethic with these actions? I think it was my third E2, I went on to lead another 5 onsight before an MTB accident curtailed my motivation. So what if the general standard of trad climbing in the UK decreases? If people enjoy themselves, do so safely, cause the least damage possible (noting footpath damage and polish) and mentor new climbers who may go on to climb at a high standard in their own time I would say it doesn't matter one jot.

1
 Mick Ward 29 Nov 2022
In reply to spenser:

> So what if the general standard of trad climbing in the UK decreases?

On the face of it, nothing. My impression is that society is getting more risk adverse and climbers are also. (And I sure am - have had too many run-ins with the grim reaper!)

The two maxims to which I (and most climbers?) would subscribe are:

1. Don't damage the rock.

2. Don't lie about stuff. 

As I've argued recently, armed with cams and wires, by the early 1980s people were leading HVS/E2 who would never have dared to lead protectionless VS in the 1960s and before. What happened? These routes had been sanitised by default - by improved technology. 

The 'norm of boldness' diminished. Now you may well say, 'Is this a bad thing?' No it isn't - but it's something to consider. 

In the 90s I argued that bolts per se weren't the core problem. The core problem was the sanitisation of climbing. Bolts were merely a technology of such sanitisation. 

Now we're three decades on. Is the 'norm of boldness' diminishing with each decade? Leaving aside some very bold individuals indeed, my impression would be that it is. 

If the general standard of trad climbing in the UK decreases (norm of boldness), it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that the groundswell of opinion for sanitising routes becomes ever stronger. 

And this may have a serious effect on 1. Don't damage the rock. 

Mick 

3
OP Tyler 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> I simply don't believe onsight trad is stagnating at any level (and I celebrate the increased focus on bouldering and sport). At least one current active climber has over a hundred E7 onsights to his name and E8 onsights happened for the first time this century and E9 has been tried several times and someone tried to flash E10 last year.

It's not about individuals and obviously Steve McClure, James Pearson and James McHaffie have moved the game on but these are very much outliers (and not that young any more!), what I mean is trad on-sighting among the general population seems in decline. I was in the Pass a fair bit this year and the only time I saw anyone on a route E5 or above was people top roping Pretty Girls Make Graves. I follow lots of keen climbers on social media but very few are regularly out there onsighting trad as hard as they can (I better mention Racheal Pearce as an exception as she posts on here!), maybe I wrong and trad is alive and kicking but if that is the case UKC and sponsors should give as much prominence to on-sights of E7 and E8 as they do HP of E9/10

Post edited at 09:32
1
OP Tyler 29 Nov 2022
In reply to spenser:

> What does it matter if people enjoy themselves and don't trash the rock/ crag?

Obviously it does not, but if you are concerned about preserving trad ethics (which people on this thread obviously are) then I'm just pointing out there is more to this than the odd drilled peg and the odd drilled peg does more to promote that ethic than it does damage. 

Post edited at 09:34
 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to spenser:

He's talking nonsense or has had a senior moment with his decades. I climbed right through the 90s and it was a delight to see routes like Chalkstorm get a genuine onsight rather than the usual variety of grey E4 claims (that grade from '89): I've nothing against headpoints or side runners on such bold routes but honesty about style is important.

David Jones published books in the 80s recommending prepractice on gritstone (he also claimed 95% of British climbers approved of bolts back then!) and made the risks of onsighting unprotected grit extremes very clear and recommended top ropes.

I soloed Something Better Change in exploratory idiot mode (couldn't reverse, so had to continue) but I headpointed (or seconded-before-lead) various grit E1s all through the 90s. Prepractice order was pretty obvious to me, especially on bold slabs that suited my skill set, but I made a conscious decision not to lead any route graded harder than my best onsight grade. I was grade checking by the late 90s and gritstone low extreme no star routes under tree cover often needed a pre-clean to be climbable at anything like the grade and strong climbing partners had some scary onsight experiences well below their best lead grade (one reason I so strongly supported the YMC hollow star idea).

6
 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

What's fashionable comes and goes and the higher performers have more games and more routes to try than back then.

 JimR 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

Quoting Dave Jones as a source for accepted practice in the 80s is just weird. He had his own views which were considerably different from the mainstream. His climbing was predominantly on SE sandstone at that point with his ethic very much a reflection of climbing there. My recollection of that period was headpointing didn’t exist, and the only bolts were the odd rawl plug or quarry remnant here or there. 

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Mick Ward:

I'd agree with much of the sense of that but I dont think new technology sanitised routes, if anyone did that for grades it was editors of the time by not undertaking a mass downgrading of routes that became easier to onsight, with the improvements in pro and shoes. There was a huge intrinsic grade creep between the early 60s and the early 90s, especially for routes that kept their grade but went from bold to safe; many bold routes then remain so now and there is hardly a shortage if that is a preference. Sanitisation to me involves changing the nature of the route or avoiding the challenge..... chips, pegs, aid were all around in the golden ages and prepractice long before that. Average onsight grades in good style have dropped not only because there is more to go at for the best but for some brilliant reasons at the lower grades.... better inclusivity and diversity.

1
 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to JimR:

I know full well David was an outlier in publication terms but what we saw in the film Hard Grit didn't just suddenly happen in '98. As for bolts... they started on aid routes in the 60s and there were bolted trad routes and the first sport routes in the 1980s (with an 8c+ by 1990) and plenty of controversy around them that was hard to miss. Prepractice raised standards elsewhere, Gill climbed 5.12a in 1961 and 5.12c was being done in the early 70s and I'd add Lynn Hill's best trad efforts included 5.12b in 1977 and 5.12d in 1979 (all pre sticky rubber).

Post edited at 10:19
 JimR 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> I know full well David was an outlier in publication terms 

why quote as authoritative source then? 

 Andy Moles 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

> Maybe someone like Andy Moles can tell me I'm wrong but it looks as though trad climbing is dying on it's arse with standards stagnating and head points being the non plus ultra of trad climbing (not dismissing headpointng, just I see this as closer to repointing than trad on-sighting).

I'd more or less decided I was done with this debate for now, but since this aspect has been brought up...

I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. Dying on its arse may be an overstatement, but it's definitely true that hard ground-up/onsight trad is not in fashion. In the 00s you had a generation that was pushing this style of climbing, but even Caff, who's done far more E7+ in that style than anyone else, has much less of an appetite for it these days. Sure you have exceptions in the past few years like Steve Mac on Nightmayer and Pete Whittaker flashing very hard stuff in Norway, but it's definitely not the centre of the bullseye of climbing aspiration that it once was.

You've voiced pretty much the same contention as Neil Foster in support of some of the recent P-bolting. Yes, we can have all the fixed gear out. Real world result = more headpointing, less ground-up. Is this a victory for 'trad'?

1
 Mick Ward 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

I did say 'sanitising by default' (e.g. wires, cams making stuff easy) rather than sanitising by design (e.g. pre-placed threads, pegs, bolts). I don't think we're that far apart?

You're obviously far more au fait with grade change than I am. Perhaps an example is Hargreaves Original. Have always soloed it and it's always been a route to treat with respect. I'm guessing, pre hexes, you wouldn't have got much in. I saw wobbly leaders place even more wobbly big hexes in the top breaks (shudder!) But I'm guessing that these days, you can 'cam it up' as someone I know used to put it. 

Meanwhile the grade's gone from Hard Severe to VS (I think). In reality (as long as you've got a load of cams?) maybe it's gone from very serious VS to Hard Severe. 

In Classic Rock Jim Perrin wrote that, for all its lack of size, this was the route in the book which was most likely to kill you. But that was then...

Mick 

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to JimR:

Shark claimed headpointing at E6 was barely acceptable in the 90s. I climbed obsessively on Peak grit and saw it on lower extremes from the early 90s and it was recommended in that book I owned from the late 80s (that handily described basic information on every significant crag in England and Wales). Old hands told me in the early 90s that some 'cheating' like prepractice and occasionally even probable dishonesty, had always been around in climbing.

I always felt the wonderful onsight trad game was healthy enough to look after itself and didn't need legend making or machismo pronouncements. Watching Ken in action at meetings was great entertainment but the thin end of the wedge seemed a bit hyperbolic. As time progressed trad and sport coexisted without the worst of predictions coming to pass. Yet lines have been crossed at times be it those needless Windgather crag top bolts or some current use of pegbolts on protectable trad E1s. 

 JimR 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

Quoting a known "outlier as you describe it" as an authoritative source and then attempting to justify it  (and also an outlying US boulderer) doesn't help your position.

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Mick Ward:

Hargreaves started as Severe and became VS in the '76 guide. I'd still argue it has prang potential for a VS leader that uses all the hand and fist sized cams too low on the route. In the early days the best climbers were very well practiced on such routes and comparatively more skilled at balance climbing (and offwidths and chimneys) so I'm OK with the earliest grades in almost every single route by route case. In the guidebooks I started with, the big classic grades were mainly OK but sandbagging seemed like a major sport elsewhere. We stated grade checking everything we could to help new climbers realise what the grades should be compared to classic standards (initially for our club). We later published our Offwidth site to enable wider distribution of the information and eventually ended up working on BMC guidebooks. The sandbags have largely gone from modern guidebooks but the site is still useful to check historical grade changes (a few web browsers like Puffin can still show it's flash content, free with Ads)

https://offwidth.uptosummit.com/popular_end_left.html

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to JimR:

I disagree. UK ethics, standards and the heros from the 50s and 60s were rightly lauded but the hardest trad was being climbed in Europe and the US and the fact that wasn't at all obvious when I started being interested in climbing history seemed rather nationalist looking back. 

4
 ExiledScot 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> Lighthouse arete might be MVS in isolation but it does have unusual rock and is a little bold; if you only lead VS how do you know you can cope first time down?.... it's pretty inescapable if you can't climb it.... unless you leave abseil ropes in place.

Don't go onto a sea cliff you are unfamiliar with unless you've a grade or two in hand?  

I'll probably screw it up, but there was some adage about only changing one of the following on an outing: go up a grade, new rock type, new crag or different region. Change too many at once or you might be chancing it. 

 northern yob 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

Trad climbing isn’t dying on its arse, it’s just not in vogue right now! Just like hard grit isn’t, or highballing old cutting edge routes isn’t! It’s all cycles. It’s no longer the 80’s! What’s with the glorification of that time and it’s ethics….? 
 

Maybe more people were on sighting at a higher average than now so what! They were chipping, smashing bolts and pegs into whatever they liked in order to make it climbable. I’d like to think our ethics if not our grade average are much better now. 
 

It shouldn’t be about the numbers, it should be about the spirit in which we approach things. Climbing in the UK is extremely diverse and that’s a good thing, if you want to onsight hard trad there’s loads to go at, if you want to headpoint there are amazing routes of all grades. 
 

Do we really need to be using any argument to justify bolts being on main cliff. Places like Gogarth are a very special thing and quite unique ( although not completely) to the UK. I think they are worth preserving! Not diluting in the name of popularity or even style, leave them as they are, wild places for real adventures. 
 

There’s a discussion to be had in other areas, but MAIN CLIFF….. Are we really saying it’s ok?? 

 JimR 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> I disagree. UK ethics, standards and the heros from the 50s and 60s were rightly lauded but the hardest trad was being climbed in Europe and the US and the fact that wasn't at all obvious when I started being interested in climbing history seemed rather nationalist looking back. 

I’ve lost the point you are trying to argue and rather suspect you have too!

 Fellover 29 Nov 2022
In reply to northern yob:

> Maybe more people were on sighting at a higher average than now so what! They were chipping, smashing bolts and pegs into whatever they liked in order to make it climbable. I’d like to think our ethics if not our grade average are much better now. 

> It shouldn’t be about the numbers, it should be about the spirit in which we approach things. Climbing in the UK is extremely diverse and that’s a good thing, if you want to onsight hard trad there’s loads to go at, if you want to headpoint there are amazing routes of all grades. 

I couldn't agree with this more.

I don't think trad is dying either, maybe there aren't as many people onsighting E6/7 upwards, but I'm not really bothered by that. There are still a lot of people, including young people (the number of people I see younger than me when I go out climbing is starting to get worrying!), out there enjoying trad climbing - I don't care if they're doing that on VDiff or E8.

It would be nice if there was more publicity of hard onsights, or maybe just more people doing hard onsights, but I don't think that trad is dying just because there aren't enough E7 onsights.

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to JimR:

I thought I was clear enough... Gill and Hill might have been outliers but so were the  top British heros. Until the 80s British trad climbers were playing catch-up on world class trad standards. Part of that were differences in attitudes to prepractice and training. There were different games as well: Gill was bouldering V9 in the late 50s, Holloway V12 in 1975.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rock_climbing

The standout post war exception to me in that list was Peter Harding in 1949 but Demon Rib was easier to start then due to a higher ground level and he didn't climb the modern bold arete finish. The route he climbed almost certainly wasn't E3 5c.

3
 JimR 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> I thought I was clear enough... Gill and Hill might have been outliers but so were the  top British heros. Until the 80s British trad climbers were playing catch-up on world class trad standards. Part of that were differences in attitudes to prepractice and training. There were different games as well: Gill was bouldering V9 in the late 50s, Holloway V12 in 1975.

> The standout post war exception to me in that list was Peter Harding in 1949 but Demon Rib was easier to start then due to a higher ground level and he didn't climb the modern bold arete finish. The route he climbed almost certainly wasn't E3 5c.

And 1) the relevance of that to this thread 2) the relevance of Jones’ book to anything?

1
 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to JimR:

1) Following Shark's comment: pre-practice in the UK has a very long history and was not uncommon in the 1990s well below E6. Prepractice helped trad standards in Saxony and later the US to be highest in the world. The UK didn't re-acheive that position until the 1980s.

2) Jones' book published in the 80's influenced changes for some climbers based on a less macho approach to risk assessment on bold trad. Onsights are an ideal on bold routes, not a trad climbing requirement: it's OK to headpoint as long as you are honest and don't damage the rock.

2
 Fellover 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

Some people replied to me in the old thread, but I didn't get a chance to reply before it was archived. I think my position is fairly clear - don't replace pegs when they get old, accept the upgrade that comes with it, definitely don't place bolts (including PBolts) on trad routes. If anyone wants a reply to anything specific they asked me, that they feel like I'm ignoring I'm happy to respond if you don't mind asking it again in this thread.

 Fellover 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Fellover:

In reply to a post from the old thread:

> When you climb A Sense of Doubt without clipping the pegs (after all, it's very soft at E4 6a, so hardly cutting edge stuff) I will believe that you are sincere in being prepared to accept the boldness that comes with removing pegs. But, I don't think you are sincere. What I think you actually mean is: I'm ok with the abstract idea that no one will get to climb this route that I've no personal investment in climbing.

I think I can perfectly sincerely hold a position which results in routes getting done a lot less, potentially not at all. They're just bits of rock - they don't have to be climbed! There are loads of bits of rock that are unclimbed around the country and that's not a problem. More relevantly, there are loads of routes around the country that I consider too bold/hard for me and won't try, I am ok with adding to that number a small amount.

> Personally, I sincerely doubt we will find a consensus if we take a dogmatic position that effectively rules out people continuing to climb routes in the established way. Effectively, this would mean the climbing community closing and banning routes, as no one is going to accept certain degrees of severity involved in reclimbing technically insignificant routes with no protection. It would be staggering if the climbing community decided not climbing established lines is the best way forward.

Many of these routes that would become bolder if fixed gear was not replaced can be climbed on toprope with a little effort, which is something that I think should be normalised as perfectly acceptable.

2
 Jon Ratcliffe 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

I have a few issues regarding the populist view of peg bolts. Whilst I appreciate your sentiment I feel you are missing some of the depth to this subject although much of my reply is aimed generally and not specifically to you.

1. The making neglected trad routes more popular argument. 
Why should this even be an issue? Why does it matter if a route is neglected for a time?
Loads of trad routes and whole crags come in and out of favour, this is natural and absolutely fine and has happened ever since climbing began. Everywhere cannot be popular all the time. Obviously if you clean a route, make the pegs in it into bolts it's gonna be more popular. People love safe and convenience, but does this alone make it the right decision?  
To fully extrapolate that point; if you bolted up Tremadoc into a mid grade sport venue it would be way more popular than it is now. 
Popular doesn't necessarily equate to the correct decision or ethics. Replace the peg with a peg bolt on The Bells and it'll get ground'uped more but at the same time drastically change the character of the route (the original leg was never very good) and therefore change the experience had on said route. 


2. What about the progression, not the regression, of our unique and beautifully peculiar British trad ethics?
If you look at the progression of our trad ethics through the decades you will see a gradual 'improvement' in style. Surely replacing old pegs of unknown strength with a bomber peg bolt is a regression of our ethics?
Shouldn't we be moving forward; removing pegs, improving our style especially with better protection and training facilities. Is this not the legacy we want for British trad in decades to come?
 
3. Legacy. This all seems very 'for me, for now' with no thought or sight of the future. What statement do we want to leave for future climbers? That we retro protected routes to keep them as they were 20-30 years previously, or that we advanced our ethics and style in the same vein as we have always done? Isn't leaving some routes to be climbed in better style for the next generations part of the game?  At some point the shit peg on The Bells will rot away and at some point some wad from the next generation will onsight it without, representing the progression of our ethics and thank full that we didn't ruin his experience by sticking a bolt there. 

4. Ticking entitlement. It seems to me that there is more than a hint of entitlement in all of this, in that by not replacing a peg or two that means climbers may not be able to climb said route, especially if it's in a certain book.
Again, so what? Are we now entitled to tick climbs? Does it matter if that E2 is now E3 or E4, or that E5 is now E6 or 7? Surely the latter grade is the original challenge, that was brought down to a lower level by the use of a peg or two on the FA?
Why do we not aspire to improve on this instead of changing the routes character with a bolt peg?
Why can't we just be content that we could raise our game or simply look on in awe at the route we're not good enough to climb, happy that our ethics have improved in the past thirty years and impressed at the prospect of somebody else climbing it in good style.

Regarding trad in general, it maybe on a bit of a down slope, but this happens, and when everyone realises just how shit most low to mid grade sport routes are in the UK it will probably have a revival, these things come in waves just like they've always done.

Apologies to all for the slightly ranty tone of my post!


 

Post edited at 13:51
3
 northern yob 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Jon Ratcliffe:

Excellent post! 

 Offwidth 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Jon Ratcliffe:

Good post Jon.

I will say that I think Point 2 needs a balance: there are risks of going too far on trad ultra  idealism, where it can prove to be counter-productive. This seem to have got a bit forgotten by some in the 70s and 80s but seems much better since, especially this century. Pegs had gone in on many trad climbs, for good or ill. I think things like elitist and macho attitudes, paranoia about bolts (bolts have pccasional utility on trad and some very quiet limestone crags with little or no gear were better as sports venues), chalk, and mass sandbagging, tended to damage the roots of trad climbing, making the trad game harder for no good reason for the beginners, bumblies and punters. Tech grades also became daftly wide above UK 6a. If we don't celebrate trad, can't explain it (beyond blind ideology) to ordinary climbers, and participant numbers start to drop, how will it leave a healthy continuing legacy? It's why I argue for consistency in grading, for proper discussion of fixed gear, celebrate performance whilst seeking ethical consistency across grades and help so many new climbers.

1
 UKB Shark 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> Shark claimed headpointing at E6 was barely acceptable in the 90s. I climbed obsessively on Peak grit and saw it on lower extremes from the early 90s 

Widen your horizons - there’s more to uk trad than Peak Grit and Chalkstorm. 


 

 mrjonathanr 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Jon Ratcliffe:

I agree, especially with the entitlement in #4

> Apologies to all for the slightly ranty tone of my post!

If only Fiend were to rewrite this for you…

 Michael Hood 29 Nov 2022
In reply to UKB Shark:

I've never understood why headpointing should be elitist. If it's ok to pre-practice an E8 so that you're confident of success, then it's ok to pre-practice a VD if success on-sight/ground-up/whatever is in doubt but you still want a leading experience on that route.

Post edited at 19:25
2
 UKB Shark 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Michael Hood:

Yeah I get that. Ethics often get shonky at the cutting edge and necessary to achieve new levels then that style and the tactics used filters down. I’m not even a fan of it at top grades even at the time during the hard grit era etc it left me cold. I don’t think headpointing is what I think of as trad climbing as it seeks to take the adventurous element out especially when something is thoroughly and clinically worked. It makes sense in sport climbing but seems to bypass what makes trad climbing special. 

3
 Michael Hood 29 Nov 2022
In reply to UKB Shark:

I don't disagree with that, trying to actually remember when/if I did something that might be called headpointing. Certainly, there's plenty of routes I've seconded and then led at some later stage. Think I'd have been more likely to fail on the lead, top-rope or second it and then successfully lead - not sure I've ever done that in one session though.

Think I'd be much more likely to adopt that approach now if there was a route I definitely wanted to lead but was unsure of success and thought that knowing the moves would make the difference (rather than failure being due to being weak, scared and crap 😁).

 Twiggy Diablo 29 Nov 2022

Having read all these threads with an open mind i’m firmly convinced by the side of not placing (or replacing) pegs/bolts on trad lines

 dr evil 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

Gogarth falls within an SSSI which, according to my Google of the regulations, requires a permit for the installation of ferrous metal. The penalty is a £20k fine.

1
 C Witter 29 Nov 2022
In reply to Fellover:

This is the problem with UKC: you debate with dopes. You said you were "prepared to accept the route getting bolder". I pointed out that actually you're not, you're just prepared not to climb the route. If you can't appreciate the distinction, then I'm not going to be able to make you understand it. But, you won't, you'll just go: "yes, I'm happy with that, why is it a problem?" as though you've scored some logical one upmanship.

The route I used as an example, A Sense of Doubt, will never be climbed sans bolts in an "improved style". It will just be complete death on a stick tech 6a with no gear and no one will climb it, or possibly one or two nutters who can hardly be applauded for soloing a route that any old punter can do with the existing pegs. And some people think that is "purity" or "progress", but they're just talking nonsense out of their sofas. With all the gear we have now, how can anyone suggest we are progressing or climbing with an improved style? Bunk. But all the gear in the world won't be any use on some routes, so they just won't get done without fixed gear... or TRed, yes... but TRing isn't climbing.

Anyway, I'd rather no bolts than indiscriminate bolting, and these threads do demonstrate people's inability to cope with nuance, so...

22
 Andy Reeve 29 Nov 2022
In reply to dr evil:

> Gogarth falls within an SSSI which, according to my Google of the regulations, requires a permit for the installation of ferrous metal. The penalty is a £20k fine.

I'm not trying to defend any p-bolts here, but given that plenty of sport crags are bolted without landowner knowledge, and are in SSSI's, I don't think that this is a line of thought that it is wise for climbers to go down. Lest we shoot ourselves in our collective foot, elsewhere in the country.

2
 Offwidth 30 Nov 2022
In reply to UKB Shark:

>Widen your horizons - there’s more to uk trad than Peak Grit and Chalkstorm

It's a valid point about 90's ascents given your daft claim and it applied to quite a few popular easier headpoint routes from E1 to E5; and the Peak is where I climbed most then. I personally don’t headpoint much: 99.9 % of my first leads that I hadn't previously seconded were onsight. I'm guessing 80% of my first leads of any routes were onsight. I'll still defend headpoints and top rope ascents in good style for those who enjoy it.

How about concentrating on what's best for the future of trad climbing?

5
 Michael Gordon 30 Nov 2022
In reply to C Witter:

> This is the problem with UKC: you debate with dopes. You said you were "prepared to accept the route getting bolder". I pointed out that actually you're not, you're just prepared not to climb the route. 

> all the gear in the world won't be any use on some routes, so they just won't get done without fixed gear... 

Obviously adopting the stance "prepared to accept the route getting bolder" means that some routes you'd have previously considered may no longer be a (sensible) option. And others may still be viable targets. And a few may no longer get climbed at all by anyone. You may disagree with it but I don't see why it's an unreasonable stance. 

1
 dr evil 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Andy Reeve: Agreed. But I think it’s worth flagging up that permanently installing metalwork in a designated conservation area due to it being an SSSI, AONB, or whatever, could potentially result in access problems for climbers. There are already restrictions due to birds. There might be other regulations/laws that apply in the case of Gogarth.

Post edited at 11:02
 Offwidth 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Michael Gordon:

It may be reasonable as a theoretical ideal but in practice I think it's unrealistic. If the pegs are removed, and someone then replaces them (or bolts) we risk remove/chop, replace again, repeat.

I don't agree with C Witters blanket disparaging comments on TR, nor would I ever regard headpointed solos of routes like A Sense of Doubt as crazy (it's just another climbing game), but I do agree the 'trad pedestal' looks a bit shaky in terms of 'improved style' when you see the damage done to some routes through lack of respect for the rock. I'd add that if you read the logbook comments for A Sense of Doubt, the route is clearly headpointed by some, apparently due to reducing chances of falls onto pegs of uncertain quality, (I'd add guidebook descriptions of peg quality being good and pegged routes being practically sport routes is unwise.... bolts shouldn't fail but pegs can and do).

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crags/trowbarrow-467/a_sense_of_doubt-21...

Post edited at 11:44
1
 Fellover 30 Nov 2022
In reply to C Witter:

> This is the problem with UKC: you debate with dopes.

Haha, I know the feeling

> You said you were "prepared to accept the route getting bolder". I pointed out that actually you're not, you're just prepared not to climb the route. If you can't appreciate the distinction, then I'm not going to be able to make you understand it. But, you won't, you'll just go: "yes, I'm happy with that, why is it a problem?" as though you've scored some logical one upmanship.

To me, accepting that a route has got bolder is to accept the route as it is in it's new state. That may well mean that it's now too bold for me when it wasn't before, maybe it's still ok for my bolder/stronger/better mate and maybe it was already too hard for my other less bold mate, so no change for them.

I can appreciate that it is somewhat sad that routes which get bolder will get fewer leads, but I also currently find it somewhat sad that there are rusty pegs sticking out of crags across the country. The latter makes me more sad than the former.

I'm afraid I don't really appreciate the distinction, sorry, seems like we may be at an impasse. I'm not trying to score any logical oneupmanship, I genuinely feel that I'd rather routes didn't have fixed pegs in, even if that means they get done less (even not at all) because they're bolder.

> The route I used as an example, A Sense of Doubt, will never be climbed sans bolts in an "improved style". It will just be complete death on a stick tech 6a with no gear and no one will climb it, or possibly one or two nutters who can hardly be applauded for soloing a route that any old punter can do with the existing pegs. And some people think that is "purity" or "progress", but they're just talking nonsense out of their sofas.

Haha, tbf I do mostly post on UKC from some form of chair, find it easier than doing it on lead. How many routes do I have to climb per year to qualify for a non sofa opinion?

R.e. A Sense of Doubt, I can see why you'd be sad that a relatively safe E4 route that is relatively popular could be turned into an E6/7ish chop route which would be unpopular. If I had my way, that is what would ultimately happen when the pegs had deteriorated to the point of no longer safe. The idea of that happening makes me a bit sad too, but it is for me less sad than replacing the pegs, either with new pegs or with PBolts.

> With all the gear we have now, how can anyone suggest we are progressing or climbing with an improved style? Bunk.

I don't really understand this point. I think that climbing a route with a big rack of modern gear is better style than climbing it with a small rack of pegs that get hammered in. I know that modern nuts and cams do still damage the rock, so they're not perfect, but they cause an order of magnitude less damage than pegs. Not to say that ascents bitd with tiny racks weren't impressive.

> But all the gear in the world won't be any use on some routes, so they just won't get done without fixed gear... or TRed, yes... but TRing isn't climbing.

I think saying top roping isn't climbing is a bit ridiculous.

> Anyway, I'd rather no bolts than indiscriminate bolting,

At least we can agree on that

> and these threads do demonstrate people's inability to cope with nuance, so...

I think the problem is that every grey area (area in which to apply nuance) will get pushed to it's limit. Which is why we now have bolts on Gogarth.

2
 Fellover 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> It may be reasonable as a theoretical ideal but in practice I think it's unrealistic. If the pegs are removed, and someone then replaces them (or bolts) we risk remove/chop, replace again, repeat.

Assume you're talking about the idea of accepting routes getting bolder here? I agree that accepting routes getting bolder doesn't work if someone replaces the pegs, but that's not really the point.

I'm not trying to advocate for going round removing pegs (though in principle if the problems of removing pegs without damaging the rock and not kicking off a repeg/bolt/remove cycle could be solved I probably would be), just advocating for not replacing them.

For clarity I'm against the whole chop, rebolt/peg cycle, as it seems almost everyone is.

Post edited at 12:05
 Will Rupp 30 Nov 2022
In reply to C Witter:

Although I don't fully agree with you, I understand where your coming from. I do feel that some of the new pegs on Barbarossa for example (Gogarth) have turned the route from something that people were not prepared to climb (and didn't really), to something that's now a great ground up target. This is obviously the case by looking at the logbook dates... Most people aren't prepared to take a ground full from the crux of an E6. In this case, think the peg bolt is a great addition.

3
 Rory Shaw 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Jon Ratcliffe:

I agree with all of this. Top post Jon

1
 Graeme Hammond 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Fellover:

> I can appreciate that it is somewhat sad that routes which get bolder will get fewer leads, but I also currently find it somewhat sad that there are rusty pegs sticking out of crags across the country. The latter makes me more sad than the former.

How will you explain this view to younger climbers who want to do these routes that have been climbed for years by older generations previously who on the other had often seem to be the driver in the bolting up shitty quarries and flying off to climb in Spain in the winter to clip bolts. Many will  struggle to understand the distinction between why bolts are ok on many crags but replacing of fixed gear isn't.

5
 kevin stephens 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Will Rupp: The counter argument is “so what”. Reducing the accessibility of a very small number of hard routes in exchange for clarifying and purifying the ethical status of Gogarth seems a very good deal. It’s not as if there’s a shortage of E5/6 routes at Gogarth and elsewhere that can’t be climbed ground up with leader placed (as opposed to quickly clipping the eye of a piton or bolt in passing) protection.

Post edited at 12:44
5
 Offwidth 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Fellover:

It seems to me to be very much the point since a large amount of unilateral action with peg bolting has led us to this discussion.

I'm prepared to accept consensus that disagrees with my personal views on what has always been a grey scale, given our history of pegs (and some aid bolts). If you are serious about reducing the chances of that damaging bolt-chop-repeat cycle please tell me how we achieve that, other than talking and trying to agree where we can? We certainly can't wish it away. To me that means some climbers reluctantly accepting some replacement, given the route specifics, just as much as others reluctantly accepting a little extra boldness given the route specifics. In rare cases a bolt will be the consensus solution. Where the grade barely changes my ideal has always been leave the pegs to rust.

 fred99 30 Nov 2022
In reply to :

Climbing at Wintours Leap over the years has led me to be less and less trusting of the (rather old) pegs, and indeed many have been replaced (like for like). ( For info, I'm nearly 67, and climbed there as a teenager).

However, when I first climbed there, virtually the only runners were pegs or slings round (occasional) trees. The horizontal breaks were too small for any nut you could trust, and the vertical or off vertical were not much better. This was not quite before cams, but certainly before they were either readily available or even trusted.

Nowadays however the small cams are quite effective, indeed some of the breaks that were previously no use whatsoever can now used for protection if you slot in a size 0 (which fits absolutely perfectly) - and I'd trust them far more than a peg of unknown vintage or condition. There are other items as well, which were also not invented when pegs were used fairly freely in this country.

If we refrain from re-pegging (or is that re-bolting ?), then the new protection kit that can be placed in much smaller cracks can be used. These will have the distinct advantage that they will not have gone rusty and rotten where you can't see them, and won't require some generous (with both time and money) soul to re-gear crags.

1
 Fellover 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Graeme Hammond:

> How will you explain this view to younger climbers who want to do these routes that have been climbed for years by older generations previously who on the other had often seem to be the driver in the bolting up shitty quarries and flying off to climb in Spain in the winter to clip bolts. Many will  struggle to understand the distinction between why bolts are ok on many crags but replacing of fixed gear isn't.

Well I suppose in the same way I'm explaining it now! I'm currently (relatively speaking, 28yo) part of the group 'younger climbers' and I have to deal with now dodgy pegs put there by previous generations. I wish they hadn't put them there.

If my view that pegs shouldn't be replaced, ends up being the prevailing one I will be affected by that for the rest of my climbing life, so at least I will be able to say to the younger generation that I suffered the consequences alongside them.

4
 Fellover 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

> It seems to me to be very much the point since a large amount of unilateral action with peg bolting has led us to this discussion.

Yes it has. That's the problem really isn't it. People who hold my view - that pegs shouldn't be replaced with PBolts can't blockade all potential replacements all the time, whereas someone with the opposite view can go and drill out the old pegs and replace them with PBolts (though I'm sure it takes them a decent amount of effort). There's no way then for me to undo that which doesn't have a strong possibility of leading to an endless chopping-rebolting cycle. The PBolters hold all the cards.

As far as I know none of these PBolts have been chopped?

> I'm prepared to accept consensus that disagrees with my personal views on what has always been a grey scale, given our history of pegs (and some aid bolts).

Yeah, I'm not going to argue with a consensus that seems to be to be decided in a fair way. E.g. if a BMC local area meeting decides they want to bolt Gogarth/Stanage/Scafell I'm not going to chop the bolts, but I will protest in some ultimately futile way, probably ranting on UKC.

> If you are serious about reducing the chances of that damaging bolt-chop-repeat cycle please tell me how we achieve that, other than taking and trying to agree where we can?

I think that is the best way forward. That's what I'm trying to do here, put forward my view and the reasons behind it. If in the end my view is not the consensus (however we measure that) then I'll be sad, but will accept it.

> We certainly can't wish it away. To me that means some climbers reluctantly accepting some replacement, given the route specifics, just as much as others reluctantly accepting a little extra boldness given the route specifics. In rare cases a bolt will be the consensus solution.

I think the above is what will happen for a while. Then, over time, the needle will move further and further towards the bolting everything end of the scale.

> Where the grade barely changes my ideal has always been leave the pegs to rust.

Yes, I'll happily agree with that Hopefully I haven't said or implied otherwise in my previous posts.

1
 Offwidth 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Fellover:

Fair enough...we don't seem so far apart.

When I first went to BMC meetings, nearly three decades back, and first heard Ken preach the imminent bolt apocalypse, despite a keen interest in maintaining our UK traditional ethics, I soon became distrustful of such an extreme position, mainly as it seemed incompatible with the ethics of nearly everyone I encountered on the crag or in a meeting or pub (a sermon incidently ignoring some of the time bomb issues with pegs... that I knew about, having done some metallurgy). As I expected, it didn't happen and I welcome the modern mix we have with trad in rude health but alongside a fair amount of sport (where that is appropriate). I also massively appreciated the careful BMC debate over the years on borderline cases and the incredible hard work of local volunteers (including work on fixed gear).

So maybe I'm just more optimistic for the future and see this peg bolt episode as an unfortunate blip that will be resolved, in a line of such blips (like Windgather). Certainly back then the idea most prospective trad climbers needed to be frightened away, ritually humiliated, ignored until they were leading edge, and face numerous distasteful 'isms', seemed a bigger risk to the future of trad to me; as did the demonising of the likes of Alan and Mick. It's a massive plus for me that such opinions seem rare these days in climbing. The increasing diversity and inclusivity is also a big plus for me, something that being in a Uni club was there for me from the start of my obsession with trad, and contrasted hugely with the local climbing club I soon realised II'd been foolish in trying to join.

 Brass Nipples 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Michael Hood:

> I've never understood why headpointing should be elitist. If it's ok to pre-practice an E8 so that you're confident of success, then it's ok to pre-practice a VD if success on-sight/ground-up/whatever is in doubt but you still want a leading experience on that route.

When I did my first Severe lead (which was at the Gower), I seconded it with a friend who led HVS. After I’d seconded it, he asked if I wanted to lead it.  I did, and I did with the knowledge of what gear he’d placed and where. I’m sure I’m not the only one to have have progressed my early leading in this way.

 raussmf 30 Nov 2022
In reply to Tyler:

Ive been reading and thinking about this for a few days while I should be working. I keep coming back to the fact that if indian face had a bolt at the crux (which it did....) the interest, emotion and excitement around it wouldn't exist and uk climbing would be duller and less inspiring. Bolt the whole things and it what, a fairly average 7b+ sport route as far as the worlds concerned?

2
 rgold 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Tyler:

I'm writing from a US perspective and know nothing about the climbs mentioned.  I should add that I've spent many years trying to slow the use of bolts on trad climbs in the US, so I'm most definitely not in the pro bolt camp and have argued for years that there should be a bright line between sport and trad climbing.

The first thing to get out of the way is that a pegbolt is a bolt.  It's drilled and cemented, so how can anyone pretend otherwise?  The only reason I can see that it deserves co-billing with pegs is that the head looks like a piton head rather than a bolt hanger.  Fine, but it's still a bolt.

With that out of the way, the question seems to be about replacing fixed pitons with bolts.  Let's narrow that down a bit: if a fixed piton can be removed and if there is still reasonable protection (of course the definition could be a sticking point) in the form of nuts and/or cams, then by all means get rid of the fixed pin.  So the question is, or should be, about fixed pitons whose removal, or whose doubtful security, would drastically alter the level of protection on the climb.

The phrase "doubtful security" is significant.  The first ascent party who placed the pitons had a very good idea about how much they could be trusted.  Subsequent parties have almost no idea.  Years of cleaning old hardware have made it clear to me that you just can't tell how good it is by looking at it.  And a reasonable proportion of old gear is really bad.  So the idea that preserving a climb's trad character requires leaving in and using historic fixed pitons which are deteriorating year by year sounds peculiar to me.  The climb is becoming increasingly dangerous, perhaps in time much more dangerous than it was on the first ascent.  Nothing is being "preserved," the climb is increasingly a conglomeration of booby traps if critical fixed gear can't be backed up or replaced by modern trad gear.  Personally, clipping a bunch of fixed mank whose holding power is a complete mystery doesn't correspond to my understanding of trad climbing, which embraces various forms of calculated risk.  Here it's just rolling the dice, and that to me blurs the line between boldness and stupidity.

The obvious solution is to remove the old critical pitons and replace them with new pitons.  But that may not be possible because of deterioration of the cracks or the fact that broken-off old pitons block further placements.  It also just resets the cycle of deteriorating fixed protection.  (Of course, bolts deteriorate too, but probably have longer lifespans.)

I hate to say it, but this situation admits a coherent argument for getting rid of as many fixed pitons as possible and replacing the few critical ones with bolts (which could be pegbolts if hangers offend sensibilities less).  Mind you, I don't for a second buy the argument that every climb has to be made "safe" for every climber, but I do think the level of safety enjoyed by the first ascent party is an appropriate reference point for thinking about what to do about fixed pro. 

On the other hand, we could say that climbs, like everything else in life, can change. For example, holds break, and then the climbs are harder, or in a few cases easier, but in any case changed.  Climbs with critical fixed protection that deteriorates over time become a much bigger gamble than they were on the first ascent.  We could certainly say this is the new reality, but i don't think we can also claim to be preserving traditional "ethics."

1
 Brown 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

Your perspective is interesting and it's always good to get a wider perspective. It is in part my experience of living and climbing in America for several years that has driven my opinions.

There are some key difference in our climbing culture that undermine your acceptance of "replacing crucial fixed gear with bolts" conclusion.

British climbing has long celebrated unjustifiable danger. There are plenty of routes with little or no gear which are justifiably celebrated and climbed. This may have been driven by our quirky grading system or something weird within us driven by our national psyche but it differs from the US.

In the context of this celebration of bold, the idea that we should throw away the bolt free status of somewhere like Gogarth in a reactionary attempt to turn back time to an imagined halcyon time when all pegs were solid is very different to somewhere like peg replacement at Red Rocks or Shawgunks.

Post edited at 08:01
3
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

The difference a lot of people seem to be overlooking is that, while a pegbolt - technically - is just a sport climbing bolt by another name, there nevertheless remain enormous differences in when and where such things should be permissible.

I'm of the opinion that, if a rotting peg that's deemed to be critical to the nature of the route cannot be replaced with a new peg or a pegbolt in exactly the same position or immediately adjacent but still within the same crack, then adding a bolt somewhere nearby should not be an option. There should be no gear fixed into blank rock, as that would very much suggest that drilling blank rock for fixed gear is in some way acceptable. The reason that pegs have been used over the years is that they have been placed in cracks, in the overwhelming majority of cases at least. Replacing a peg with something not placed in the crack is not in any way restoring it to its former state (even if the utility is similar.) And if placing a pegbolt in the crack itself were to be deemed notably less effective, secure or long-lasting (maybe due to fractured rock or persistant local seepage), perhaps the gear should not be replaced at all, it being an inappropriate location for fixed gear.

 C Witter 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

What you've outlined is exactly my position. But, the high priests have decided they need to burn some witches to improve the purity of our dear nation and have been congratulating each other's zealotry ever since.

16
 Brown 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

I'm supprised to see you advocating for taking a drill to Gogarth and drilling gear placements. I struggle to reconcile the routes you climbed twenty years ago with this position.

Would you have drilled gear on the Longhope Route, the routes you climbed on the Old Man or Foula? I certainly never dreamed of taking a drill up St Johns Head to drill out the old pegs placed by Mick Fowler in order to replace them with bolts. You were following Ed's old aid line so there certainly would have been crucial gear there once for you to "replace".

And why now? Why when it's the classic E5 & E6 of your younger years and not before. 

Bolting trad routes because once in the past someone managed to bang in a peg seems like a very flimsy reason that opens up the whole range of issues we are currently seeing.

I think we may only differ slightly but I feel that chipping gear placements and drilling gear placements has no place on our more adventurous cliffs regardless of what went before.

I like to think that you would once have agreed with me.

Post edited at 10:09
7
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

I rather think you've missed much of my point. I don't see a huge difference between hammering in a peg (which inevitably causes some rock damage) and drilling out that same peg to fit a pegbolt. I have always been very reluctant to place pegs on new routes, and I can only remember a couple of instances of having done so, but that's really beside the point.

To use language like "Bolting trad routes because once in the past someone managed to bang in a peg" is to absurdly misrepresent reality, to the point of having more in common with political sloganeering than with constructive dialogue. All that seems to be being proposed, and even then in precious few cases, is the making good of hammered fixed gear by replacing it with the most like-for-like possibility that will last far longer than the original.

3
 Jon Ratcliffe 01 Dec 2022
In reply to C Witter:

Very troll like. 

1
 Brown 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

I think your reply encapsulates our difference of opinion clearly.

You don't see a difference between placing a piton and taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill bolt placements.

What happened to taking the challenge of the route as dictated by the rock? That the rock had once accepted a peg doesn't change the fact that now it doesn't. Would you have looked at a snapped peg twenty years ago at Gogarth and thought it ok to drill a hole and place a bolt?

(Also note that the peg-bolt placing guidelines specifically recommend not placing them in the same place as the original piton due to the risk of metal contamination accelerated corrosion)

6
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> I think your reply encapsulates our difference of opinion clearly.

> You don't see a difference between placing a piton and taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill bolt placements.

Again, your detrermined oversimplification does your point no favours. I see a huge difference between "taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill bolt placements" and taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill out rotting ironwork such that what used to be a crucial and effective fixed piece can be restored in a more lasting way.

5
 Andy Moles 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> What happened to taking the challenge of the route as dictated by the rock? 

People started hammering bits of metal into it? And clipping the bits of metal that other people had hammered, thus taking the challenge as dictated by the rock and modified by somebody else?

Aaaaand back around, like a bad trip on the ferris wheel.

 Brown 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

I see a huge difference between "taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill bolt placements" and taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill out rotting ironwork such that what used to be a crucial and effective fixed piece can be restored in a more lasting way by gluing in a bolt.

Your age gives you the memory of these pegs as being natural placements and allows you to justify the use of bolting to return the route to what it once was. I just see people failing to climb the rock as it comes and bringing it down to their level. The fact that we are talking about E5 & E6 is doubly galling. As has been pointed out by another, these are well within the ability of the keen weekend warrior even without their pegs.

8
 Offwidth 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

I think I read what you said clearly (and I do think Brown overlooked a "not" in that) but drilling a hole in a crack for a peg bolt is significantly altering the rock, and even banging in a peg alters the rock a bit. Part of the argument on the other channel is what exactly constitutes a crack, as pegbolts are said to have gone into some 'cracks' that most wouldn't define as anything like that.

I think there is a case to be made for a bolt in some circumstances, such as say a very important route that always relied on fixed gear and would effectively be lost without it... even if I would be against a more general use in that way for lesser routes or where grades don't shift much. Our ethics on conservation and not damaging the rock have been found so wanting in so many cases that the odd bolt on a rare case-by-case basis seems trivial in an ethical comparison.

I've also seen the creep of bolting on trad at Red Rocks NV, where some 'horror show' examples have occurred, so I see the risks.

 dr evil 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown: These are just differing personal opinions about where to draw the line. If the consensus agreement is to draw the line at no bolts on Gogarth under any circumstances then that is a clear line. However if the consensus turns out to be that they are permissible under certain circumstances then the six categorical arguments for what those circumstances are comes into play to guide action. FWIW my personal opinion is that there should be no bolts on Gogarth but they are already there and I would rather any further bolting was guided by an agreed ethical framework.

Removed User 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

How about some criteria to be agreed upon before considering a peg bolt replacement:

1) Grade without the fixed gear changes up by more than 2 adjectival grades and ends up >E3

2) Routes considered for pegbolt replacement must have at least 2 stars.

3) There is a crack type feature available for the pegbolt (no drilling blank rock)

4) Routes under E3 (after fixed gear removal) are not contenders for pegbolting (to reiterate point 1)

Only then is a discussion opened up about possible replacement of existing fixed gear with a pegbolt - ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

Post edited at 13:30
4
 tehmarks 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

> On the other hand, we could say that climbs, like everything else in life, can change. For example, holds break, and then the climbs are harder, or in a few cases easier, but in any case changed.  Climbs with critical fixed protection that deteriorates over time become a much bigger gamble than they were on the first ascent.  We could certainly say this is the new reality, but i don't think we can also claim to be preserving traditional "ethics."

I've refrained from commenting because this entire discussion is above my pay grade (critical pegs at grit VS aren't a thing) and I'm regularly accused of seeing only in black and white, but...it doesn't appear to be acceptable now to tap in pitons on first ascents of virgin rock, so why do we think that a route should be 'fixed' at the grade and experience at which it was first climbed rather than being climbed by the ethics of our current time when the original fixed gear does eventually rot away? Surely we should embrace the challenge as presented by the rock, in its natural state at this moment in time, rather than trying to fix the original experience by sticking bolts in things to replace pegs that would no longer be ethically acceptable to place if the route were being climbed for the first time in 2022?

And let's stop with this 'pegbolt' business, as you rightly say, and call them by what they are. Bolts.

2
 Michael Gordon 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Removed User:

Why E3?

 jimtitt 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Michael Gordon:

Arbitrary elitism? There's someone else thinks E5/6 as it's punter grade.

 Fellover 01 Dec 2022
In reply to tehmarks:

I think you've just expressed my position on the matter much better than I've been doing myself.

 Crest Jewel 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Offwidth:

Crack-A-Go-Go, 5.11c*** Ron Fawcett, Pete Livesey (1974) Yosemite Valley 

In conversation with Ron Skelton (16/11/22) the Valley locals were too frightened to do the first ascent of this route. 

Moratorium, The, 5.11b*** Pete Livesey, Trevor Jones (1975) Yosemite Valley 

 Offwidth 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Crest Jewel:

You will know 5.11c was climbed in '73 ( Butterballs) and the first 5.12 there in '76 (Hotline). Ron and Pete had certainly learnt the importance of training and prepractice and closed the UK to US gap to a whisker on Yosemite cracks.

 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> I see a huge difference between "taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill bolt placements" and taking a hammer drill to the crag to drill out rotting ironwork such that what used to be a crucial and effective fixed piece can be restored in a more lasting way by gluing in a bolt.

If it's the glue you're objecting to, presumably you're equally against the idea of gluing crucial holds back on if they've snapped and the grade or nature of the route has massively changed as a result?

> Your age gives you ...

Please refrain from trying to personalise the debate. Valid points are valid points regardless of who makes them.

5
 NaCl 01 Dec 2022
In reply to tehmarks:

Well said. I've been sitting thinking largely this through both these threads now but as not a local and never having been to GG haven't felt like I should say much in spite of having an opinion.  If holds break or placements change I'm of the opinion that regrading is the way (and this is normal no?) I fail to see the difference between this and a peg rotting out really.  If a block came off taking critical placements with it I wouldn't expect someone to get up there and chase out a new placement. 

Caveat. I obviously  clip pegs when I come across them, or rather tie them off as a matter of course as I never trust the buggers completely. I think any normal sensible person would too. A bolt does not engender the same level of wariness that a peg or even a reasonable wire provides and so changes the route substantially. If something is needing replacing tbh I'd rather see another peg banged in if at all possible rather than a bolt. A bolt might last 50 years but between now and the next time a peg needs replacing things may have moved on enough that there will be a better option than bolting. 

 Brown 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

It's not the glue. I struggle to see how turning up with electric hammer drill to manufacture gear placements fits in your trad ethic. 

I'd also question your comparison. Drilling gear placements to provide bomber, long lasting bolt placements isn't equivalent to gluing a hold back on. It's the equivilent of announcing the original hold lost and reaming out a resting jug or drilling sinker hand pockets.

On the limestone this may be fair play, but nobody chipped a huge jug on Parthion Shot after the flake came off or placed a bolt to replace the historical and crucial gear that was lost. In time someone just stepped up and led it as it now is.

I'm not trying to be personally critical, other than to suggest your memory and lived experience of "bomber fixed gear" at Gogarth is not one I or anyone below a certain age recognises or remembers. In my climbing life all fixed gear at Gogarth has been seen as untrustworthy ticking time bombs, useful for route finding only. Climbing these routes with less and less fixed gear is analogous to the aid point elimination of the 1960s and 70s. A slow process of improving style.

I did not appreciate that the true danger posed by the decaying fixed gear was that it would provide cover for people to take a hilti to Gogarth.

Post edited at 17:21
7
 kevin stephens 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

I agree that Gogarth Main Cliff etc should be peg free in keeping with it’s adventure ethos. What about Red Wall? I haven’t climbed so much on there but can appreciate pegs may be more indispensable especially for some belays? I can accept historical pegs at Tremadog on Meshach, Cardiac Arete etc. 

Post edited at 17:34
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> It's not the glue. I struggle to see how turning up with electric hammer drill to manufacture gear placements fits in your trad ethic. 

You seem never to tire of making that point, using the same unhelpfully divisive language.

> I'd also question your comparison. Drilling gear placements to provide bomber, long lasting bolt placements isn't equivalent to gluing a hold back on. It's the equivilent of announcing the original hold lost and reaming out a resting jug or drilling sinker hand pockets.

I'd argue that it's a far better comparison than you're trying to make out. The result is functionally equivalent and visually very similar, certainly as similar as you're likely to get from simply repacing the peg, were that to be an option.

> On the limestone this may be fair play, but nobody chipped a huge jug on Parthion Shot after the flake came off or placed a bolt to replace the historical and crucial gear that was lost. In time someone just stepped up and led it as it now is.

Again, nobody is suggesting that every peg gets replaced, so your example is misleading. It turns out that the loss of the PS flake made seems to have changed the nature and grade of the route by only a relatively small amount. A similar grade change from loss of a peg would be unlikely to see a clamour for its reinstatement.

> I'm not trying to be personally critical, other than to suggest your memory and lived experience of "bomber fixed gear" at Gogarth is not one I or anyone below a certain age recognises or remembers. In my climbing life all fixed gear at Gogarth has been seen as untrustworthy ticking time bombs, useful for route finding only. Climbing these routes with less and less fixed gear is analogous to the aid point elimination of the 1960s and 70s. A slow process of improving style.

The flaw in that argument is the existence of routes that have seen far less traffic and far less interest since they lost the ficed gear. Barbarella is a good example. While you might arguably gain a purer ethic; you lose much of the quality of a route that, without the peg, would be unpleasantly cruxy and dangerous. 

> I did not appreciate that the true danger posed by the decaying fixed gear was that it would provide cover for people to take a hilti to Gogarth.

You seem never to tire of making that point, using the same unhelpfully divisive language.

10
 mrjonathanr 01 Dec 2022
In reply to tehmarks:

> why do we think that a route should be 'fixed' at the grade and experience at which it was first climbed rather than being climbed by the ethics of our current time when the original fixed gear does eventually rot away? Surely we should embrace the challenge as presented by the rock, in its natural state at this moment in time, rather than trying to fix the original experience by sticking bolts in things to replace pegs that would no longer be ethically acceptable to place if the route were being climbed for the first time in 2022?

Nicely put.

 mrjonathanr 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

> You seem never to tire of making that point, using the same unhelpfully divisive language.

> You seem never to tire of making that point, using the same unhelpfully divisive language.

What’s a bit of repetition between friends?

I’m glad he keeps making this point because it’s a good one. Without a black and white solution the shades of grey will proliferate.

There’s rotting fixed gear on grit too, especially at Millstone, where it’s condition offers a decidedly less secure experience to contemporary ascensionists. Should we drill and bolt in the manner proposed here, or stick to the blanket ban of bolts on grit? Which works better do you think?

And as others have said, should we be looking to recreate the experiences of the past, or looking to improve on them for the future.

I think the blanket ‘no bolts on grit’ works best. What do you think John, honestly?

 dr evil 01 Dec 2022
In reply to mrjonathanr:

> 'Without a black and white solution the shades of grey will proliferate.'

Absolutely!

> 'Why do we think that a route should be 'fixed' at the grade and experience at which it was first climbed.'

I don't agree with the historical argument either, and an important point is that pegs are of varying degrees of reliability depending on the placement that the rock allows. Yes, they deteriorate over time but they were not 100% in the first place, and in a lot of cases they were marginal. Replacing a marginal peg, that probably wouldn't hold a fall even for the first ascentionist, with a bolt changes the original character of the route in a big way. You are not returning it to its original state - you are making it a lot safer than it was to begin with. This is not just a step backward in the evolution of trad climbing it's a roadblock and diversion to an entirely different destination.

Is that where we want to go?

Post edited at 18:52
2
 Martin Haworth 01 Dec 2022
In reply to kevin stephens:

> I agree that Gogarth Main Cliff etc should be peg free in keeping with it’s adventure ethos. What about Red Wall? I haven’t climbed so much on there but can appreciate pegs may be more indispensable especially for some belays

I’m not sure I would trust any of the pegs on Red Walls or Yellow Walls, think of them more as way markers. I’ve done a fair bit on those cliffs but only up to E3, there are a lot of pegs, I clip them all but trust none. Never done a route where they are essential.

Removed User 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Michael Gordon:

I don't think there are many 2/3 star classics below E3 that are chop routes without an essential piece of fixed gear.

I'm sure examples could be found of course... Maybe on grit, but I don't think anyone is proposing pegbolts there? Not yet anyway...

Post edited at 19:08
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to mrjonathanr:

> I think the blanket ‘no bolts on grit’ works best. What do you think John, honestly?

I completely agree. But I'm still not in favour of ruining Green Death by removing the (allegedly) drilled and cemented peg. The wilful failure to distinguish between a bolt in a place where no protection is/was possible, and the more permanent replacement of a peg placed in a natural placement, is a defining characteristic of this thread.

4
 TobyA 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

Are we (you?) certain that every pegbolt has had its placement drilled before being placed? I don't think I've ever seen one of these things, so could some of them be placed by hammering alone into a crack where glue has already been injected? Or do they only work in a drilled hole?

 kevin stephens 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran: What about the belay/lower off staple on top of the Valkyrie pinnacle at Froggat? 

 Graeme Hammond 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Removed User:

> I don't think there are many 2/3 star classics below E3 that are chop routes without an essential piece of fixed gear.

> I'm sure examples could be found of course... Maybe on grit, but I don't think anyone is proposing pegbolts there? Not yet anyway...

There are quite a few routes in Lancashire that new bolts have appeared on relatively recently.

Flick of the Wrist (E2 6a) has at least 1 new Petzl bolt that supplements old bolts. The slab to the left also has a bolt.

The Shivers Arete (E1 5b) peg apparently has been replaced with a bolt as a new peg wasn't viable apparently.

Mein Kampf (E3 5c) had some new bolts placed in bad locations when I did it but I can't remember the whole story on that. 

Various seem to been added unnecessarily to Egerton Quarry and  Winewall Quarry details about on the Lancashire Facebook group, some have now been removed.

In the Peak the spanner was repaired and replaced on Spanner Wall (E2 5c)

luckily elsewhere in the Peak there is very little fixed gear. The worst bit of fixed gear I think I have used is the downward facing hook on Plague (E4 6b)

Post edited at 19:40
Removed User 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Graeme Hammond:

Of those I've only done Shivers and you cannot tell me the peg is essential can you? It would make a ballsy E2/3 5b without it, you are not going to hit the deck even without the peg assuming the belayer is competent. I would have thought it would be a better route without the peg, although certainly less popular (I myself would have probably not got on it but hey ho)

The spanner on spanner wall was replaced with the original spanner as a unique feature,  although the stump could still have been slung I think. How much harder would it have been without? A little, maybe a grade?

Post edited at 19:45
 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to kevin stephens:

> What about the belay/lower off staple on top of the Valkyrie pinnacle at Froggat? 

I remember being disappointed to see that when I first encountered it in the 80s. I think it's sad that such aids are deemed to be necessary, but in that case I can understand why it may be deemed to be so.

Edit: This really highlights the problems with trying to enforce a blanket black-and-white solution in a complex environment.

Post edited at 19:42
 rgold 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> There are some key difference in our climbing culture that undermine your acceptance of "replacing crucial fixed gear with bolts" conclusion.

> British climbing has long celebrated unjustifiable danger. There are plenty of routes with little or no gear which are justifiably celebrated and climbed. This may have been driven by our quirky grading system or something weird within us driven by our national psyche but it differs from the US.

> In the context of this celebration of bold, the idea that we should throw away the bolt free status of somewhere like Gogarth in a reactionary attempt to turn back time to an imagined halcyon time when all pegs were solid is very different to somewhere like peg replacement at Red Rocks or Shawgunks.

You are certainly right about the differences in national perspectives.  Americans embraced bolts at least 50 years ago and have been arguing about them ever since.  Part of that is driven by the vast amount of crackless granite we have.  There are bold trad routes entirely protected by bolts, hand-drilled and done ground up on the lead with no pre-inspection.  I actually think there is almost nothing "tradder" than starting up a steep slabby route with no cracks, armed with nothing more than a hammer and drill in your back pocket, with no clear sense of whether it will ever be possible to get hands-free and drill.  But this is a digression...

Another US tradition is that the style of the first ascent should be respected.  I think this was intended to mean that one should use more bolts than the FA party, but it has the consequence that an ascent with a lot of fixed pro also determines the style of the route.  Robbins got himself caught in an "ethical" dilemma over the Dawn Wall and had to invent the concept of "outrages" to justify his intention to chop Harding's bolts.

The intention of chromemolly pitons introduced by Chouinard in the early 1960's was that pitons should be removed and the route left it's "pristine" state for future parties. (He did not anticipate the destruction of cracks caused by repeated placements and removals, in part because he didn't see the wave of climbing popularity coming.) The result, in the US, is that there have been few if any new routes done in the past half-century that have any more than an occasional fixed pin; most were removed by the FA party.  I get the impression from the discussion that crags like Gogarth have routes with large numbers of fixed pins.  I don't think we have anything really comparable.  The relatively small number of fixed pins that remain can in many cases be replaced by modern removable gear.  In a small number of remaining cases, the pitons are replaced.  That leaves an even smaller number of instances in which there is even the possibility of arguing that the pitons should be replaced by bolts, but it does happen and there is a case in point now in the Gunks.  There is also a kerfluffle in Yosemite over claims, bolstered by members of the FA party, that bolts should be added to Snake Dike. (This after a horrendous accident whose tragic outcome would not have been changed by adding more bolts to the route.)

In the US, more and more trad routes are getting bolted belay and rappel anchors.  This is convenient, of course, and makes life a lot easier for guides,  but also creates annoying and sometimes dangerous two-way traffic and encourages ascents of just portions of the route rather than the whole thing.  With the added demographics, this ends up considerably degrading the entire experience.  And beyond belay/rappel anchors, I think the pressure to make run-out routes more "accessible" is ever-increasing. With all our technical advances, I think nothing has changed climbing more than the battery-powered drill, and the future can only bring lighter and more portable ones.  How long before we have drills the size an weight of handguns, easily carried on the harness by everyone?

One thing that is clear to me from the decline of trad in the US is that bolts engender more bolts.  The ones you might have thought made some sense are followed by others you'd never have supported.  It's happened over and over during my many years as a climber.  So I have to wonder whether the better path forward might be to lose some climbs, even if they are considered classics, rather than remodel them according to someone's concept of what the "community" needs.  This certainly comports with the trad concept that the climber deals with what is, as determined by nature.

 mrjonathanr 01 Dec 2022
In reply to john arran:

Thanks for your answer. A complicating factor is the distinction between different cases. The bolt replacement of a peg isn't like-for-like though, because by definition it replaces something you can place with a hammer with something you have to place with a drill. If it didn't people could just whack in a peg nearby.

GD would be a good comparator if the peg snapped. What to do then?

And what to do when key slots crumble and wear so the crucial nut is no longer reliable? I think as time wears on consensus solutions need to be found to a few deteriorated gear scenarios.

 mrjonathanr 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

Eloquent. There's a lot of folk here with the same ideas.

 Brass Nipples 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Brown:

> What happened to taking the challenge of the route as dictated by the rock?

That is called soloing , no gear no ropes accept the challenge the rock presents.

 john arran 01 Dec 2022
In reply to mrjonathanr:

> Thanks for your answer. A complicating factor is the distinction between different cases. The bolt replacement of a peg isn't like-for-like though, because by definition it replaces something you can place with a hammer with something you have to place with a drill. If it didn't people could just whack in a peg nearby.

There's the nub of the issue. There is no exact like-for-like solution. So we need to decide - most usefully on a case by case basis - whether it's the fact that the route is protectable that's most important, or whether it's that the route has only hammered and not pre-drilled gear.

Expecting the same solution to apply to all placements nationwide is naïve at best, however often the same mantra is repeated in its justification. But I do agree that we should be prioritising certain crags and areas for particular preservation, such that only an extremely limited number of cases of managed fixed gear are sanctioned, and these only on routes that both need and merit such exception status.

 Martin Haworth 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

> One thing that is clear to me from the decline of trad in the US is that bolts engender more bolts.  The ones you might have thought made some sense are followed by others you'd never have supported.  It's happened over and over during my many years as a climber.  So I have to wonder whether the better path forward might be to lose some climbs, even if they are considered classics, rather than remodel them according to someone's concept of what the "community" needs.  This certainly comports with the trad concept that the climber deals with what is, as determined by nature.

This I think is the the key point, and it was also made by Dr Evil on one of the threads. My initial view was that an agreed position could be taken on a climb by climb basis…but it will never work…over time one well intentioned bolt will become justification for another. I don’t think we will ever stop the proliferation of bolts and bolted climbing in the UK, but red lines need to be drawn and crags like Gogarth need to have no bolting(I’m not opposed to all bolting, bolts have their place, just not on grit, gogarth, mountain routes, Cornwall….)

As an aside, the problem on some routes in Verdon is the polar opposite. The trend now is to de-bolt some of the traditional protectable routes, to restore the challenge to somewhere nearer what it was when they were first done.

Post edited at 20:41
 Crest Jewel 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

The tragic fall on Snake Dike 5.7*** (Eric Beck, Jim Bridwell, Chris Frederick's 1965) this year has not led to date of installing additional bolts despite the only first ascentionist (Chris Fredericks) alive today wishing for more bolts to be added. 

 Mick Ward 01 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

> One thing that is clear to me from the decline of trad in the US is that bolts engender more bolts.  The ones you might have thought made some sense are followed by others you'd never have supported.  

I suspect that's the fear of many following this thread, that we slide past a tipping point and the game is lost forever. 

Mick 

 rgold 01 Dec 2022
In reply to Crest Jewel:

> The tragic fall on Snake Dike 5.7*** (Eric Beck, Jim Bridwell, Chris Frederick's 1965) this year has not led to date of installing additional bolts despite the only first ascentionist (Chris Fredericks) alive today wishing for more bolts to be added. 

It's Eric Beck who proposed more bolts, see https://www.climbing.com/news/snake-dike-half-dome-yosemite-add-bolts/ .  Bridwell is deceased but I'm not sure anyone knows about Chris Fredricks.  The "Rebolt Snake Dike" thread on Mountain Project is up to 12 pages. https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/123362153/retro-bolt-snake-dike , and that's just a sampling of the debate.

As you say, no one has taken any action yet.

Post edited at 22:30
 Offwidth 02 Dec 2022
In reply to rgold:

Thanks again for your input.  Installing a convenience bolt belay for a sport route on the crux of an old trad route at Red Rocks made me sad,  alongside various other new bolts there. I'm still more hopeful about the UK, but the excesses of this peg bolt episode need reversing fast. Bolting Snake Dike on the 5.4 pitches between belays would be criminal (ruining a rare perfect VS: from VS 5a to VS 3c) and probably do nothing for safety, if you undestand the message that John Dill was presenting: 

http://www.bluebison.net/yosar/alive.htm

1

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...