To Bolt is not to be...

To bolt is not to be! Bolts, Bouldering and Consumerism

I have been reading bemusedly the debates and the slagging vis-à-vis bolting for some years now and it is clear that climbing can be compared to religion. Everyone has their personal beliefs regarding the style, ethics and finer details of how climbing routes should be created. There are literally thousands of articles that try to define these parameters.

However if one applies some thought, one realizes that all sport is extremely esoteric if one considers the “hierarchical needs of the human being”. Most sports played in the world have something to with controlling a ball (not always round) according to a certain set of rules that are continually modified. Soccer is the most common sport played. Other sports are “athletic” and are measured by how fast, how far, how difficult and so on. Then there are other categories such as the wheeled sports and flying etc. Then there is sport rock climbing which is still categorized as an “extreme” sport although I consider it to be really “gymnastic”.

So one may ask: “What actually is a climbing route?”

In the broader sense I propose that one can view a sport climbing route as a game. The game entails following a trail up some “challenging,” less than horizontal part of terra firma and several rules apply whereby an individual’s abilities and achievement can be measured and compared. In this sense sport climbing is comparable to other sports except that the accolades and rewards are more mature and clearly defined in sports such as soccer, cycling, skiing and so on. These “accolades” include trophies, world ratings or medals at the various events organized around the world. When it comes to “rewards” – well, cash is still king and every year the media proclaims the highest earners in the various games that are played.

And this is where bolted sport routes and bouldering finds it niche. One can argue that the very essence of climbing a bolted or boulder route is that a fairly objective and comparable scoring system can be applied to the game of climbing so that the members of society can grant “accolades” and “awards” or “rewards” for a given level of excellence and achievement. This is the way that climbing has evolved to “level the playing field” to bring it line with other sports. And the spin off from this is the explosion of commercialism in climbing in general to the point that there are now more indoor climbers in the US than outdoor climbers. One needs only to see the proliferation in the media coverage to appreciate how climbing has evolved over the last 10 years. It is merely a question of time before the rules are clearly defined and climbing and its subgroups such as ice climbing finds it place in the Olympic games.

This evolution has led to the conflict with the traditionalists where virtually every route climbed has its individual character, rules and ethical nuances. Not the least is the level of commitment to danger that many routes require. In fact some 20 years ago a collection of articles was published called “The Games Climbers Play”. This vividly portrayed the individuality and esotericism of climbers. Perhaps one can view a “traditional” climb as a dangerous adventure rather than a game. And the accolades and rewards are more abstract to the point that it can arguably call a “fringe lunatic” activity.

And here lies the problem when traditionalists try and compare their achievements and abilities. Any route that is “created” using fixed pro is by and large contrived to suit the relative style, abilities and ethos of its creator. “Subjecting the climb to our own level of mediocrity” to paraphrase Duncan Elliot. Most, if not all, traditionalists have put in fixed pro at one time or another to bring a particular route to an acceptable level of risk for that individual. (We also, all, use other aids such as chalk and sticky rubber on our shoes and modern gear is much safer than in the past that all alter the seriousness, character and even difficulty of a route).

Furthermore, any metallic attack of the rock, especially the insertion and removal of pitons will change the nature of the climbing. Nary a route on the big stone (El Capitan) would be free climbed today without the thousands of ascents where piton after piton has been smashed into ever widening cracks to the point that fairly large camming devices now fit. And more, the speed ascents would not be possible but for the “manufactured” holds and fixed pro. Give it a few more years and a few more pegs smashed into the thin crack under the great roof on “the Nose” and maybe someone else other than Lynn Hill or Tommy Caldwell may be able to fit their finger tips and free the pitch. Lower down, one of the classic routes in Yosemite, Serenity Crack typifies the kind of route that is directly a product of holds and gear placements that have emerged from the ironmongery performed on it over all these years. But for this I doubt it would actually have been climbed at all even if it was bolted as a modern sport route. But it would be without question a completely different route – perhaps another miserably thin friction eliminate at Yosemite with a hairline crack running up a fairly non-descript piece of rock.

Many of the classic routes have had major modifications and are completely different in character from their first ascents during the “Golden Years”. I find it intriguing, that I have never read an article that truly evaluates the modern achievements of free or speed climbing of these “chipped” routes while putting the evolution of the route into any kind of perspective.

The most bizarre aspect of the bolting furor is that the loudest critics of both camps are also the ones putting in the time, money and energy in one form or the other while the majority of climbers/users are merely “on the take”. Most sport climbers have contributed little if anything to climbing itself; most have never done a first ascent of a route, assisted with maintaining a walking trail or placed or replaced a fixed piece of gear. They probably laugh at the worker bees and gleefully clip another bolt that cost R20 each and a lot of time and effort to place.

So what claim of “ownership” does a first ascentionist have on a route?

I think a pragmatic view is that the first ascensionist can, at best, claim a long term “lease” of a route if he/she has climbed it ground up free without any fixed protection and preferably without any aid that damages or marks the rock – and this would include chalk. If the first ascentionist has “manufactured” the route in any way, “ownership” can only last as long as he or she maintains the character of the route and ensures that the quality of the fixed pro is as good as on the first ascent. As we all know, this is rarely done. Having said this, why make every climb accessible to every yob. It certainly can’t be altruism. If it’s so important to climb it, then top rope it and move on. Only one’s ego can drive the process of bolting or retro-bolting every route and this act undeniably changes a route’s character for ever. But then there is the argument that there is nothing stopping a trad climber from using removable gear on a bolted route, if they so choose.

Routes that are oft repeated (“consumer routes”) accumulate chalk on the holds and this has a far greater visual impact than the bolts. Chalk also marks the holds and critically alters the technical difficulty of most routes. This problem, at least in South Africa, is rare on trad routes but pervasive on bolted routes.

Finally, anybody that cannot see the link of bolted routes to consumerism should undergo a reality check. Bolted routes allow for climbs to be concentrated, accessible, faster, cheaper, less complicated and safer than “trad” lines. Unfortunately “consumerism” is engulfing climbing. There is an explosion of sport climbing around the world. Many of the Thailand beaches are over-run with climbers. The sewage can’t keep up and every visitor to Tonsai Beach will get sick sooner or later. I have been twice and will not return. The crags in Spain and France are a mess. And here lies the problem with bolting, it does unquestionably promote consumerism. There are probably hundreds of thousands of good routes all around the world that nobody could climb in ten life times. And yet, “more is better”. Does it really matter that there is fine line to climb that is not bolted. Go top rope it.

The climbing commercial market has also grown exponentially since bolting proliferated with listed companies sponsoring individuals and events throughout the world. Apparel companies are flourishing and there are even fashion trends that initially started with shiny “loud” lycra but has now evolved to a more grungy, very expensive, gothic look (which is by and large very impractical in our sunny weather). Climbers are invading areas in hordes where before only a few die-hard trad climbers would have bothered to go in the past. In tandem with this, bouldering has also proliferated and chalk-marked boulders litter many a roadside around the world.

It is mandatory to control “consumerist” bolting in ecological sensitive areas which in my view does not include most of the Cape Peninsula including Paarl rock area seeing as there are roads and trails and picnic spots everywhere not to mention the hundreds of wine farms. The Cape Peninsula is fast becoming a world class tourist area and climbing could be one of its main attractions. With it must come the controls that should probably directly include the commercial “for profit” businesses that would benefit from tourists. Areas such as the Magaliesberg and our internationally famous “Rocklands” is another matter altogether and very careful management of these areas is necessary, both in the proliferation of bolted routes and boulder problems. There really are enough less sensitive places to climb around the world.

So in conclusion, the debate on bolting should not be driven by sentiment if we accept how esoteric climbing really is. There is no right or wrong. However individuals should be prevailed on to display some humility and curtail their personal gratification and aggrandizement and enrichment and respect the style of existing trad routes. There is always the option of top-roping a route, or pre-placing gear if you really feel you have to climb it. At this stage I think it is imperative to leave those routes alone. All things being relative there are few left. Go and find your own lines to climb if you cannot get enough satisfaction from the existing routes. South Africa has limitless potential and it merely takes a bit of time and effort to explore new places and open new routes. There is more than enough for the sport climbers to play on without changing the character of the older routes. A route without character is just a blur and a number and a tick; soon to be forgotten.