Author Topic: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???  (Read 926 times)

DLottmann

  • Guest
Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« on: May 06, 2005, 06:41:20 PM »
Here's a can of worms for you all.

Last week after climbing Bombardment I looked at the same tree Al mentions in this weeks report.  There is a lot of erosion around the base of it, and while still stout it most likely won't be so forever.  I'm willing to guess the closer dead tree used to be used for the belay/rap station.  Using the same rational that someone, I think I know who, must have used to put a double-bolt rap anchor at the top of Child's Play, presumedly to protect the rotten stump people were using, would it be a wise choice to add a double bolt anchor at the top of Bombardment.  This, in my eyes, is different from some of the other proposed bolted stations since they have cracks near them that afford good anchors.  Comments?  Slams?

Offline T_Moon

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2005, 05:08:20 AM »
Bolted anchors at cliff tops to protect trees or fragile cliff top plants (like at Echo Crag) make sense to me.  I think a bolted anchor at the top of Bombardment would be fine.  It is a busy route and constant use as an anchors puts a lot of stress on the tree(s).
If you want to get to the peak, you ought to climb without giving it too much thought.

--Nietzsche

Offline dogboy

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • What?
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2005, 06:54:47 AM »
This was proposed 2 years ago, and got some resistance, but not a lot.  I think it makes sense...the top of bombardment is a total erosion mess.
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2005, 08:24:59 AM »
I don't think it would increase the "down" traffic on the route either, since people still walk down to there to rap off the tree as it is, often having to make 1 more short rap from the Pleasent St tree.  There is a small shelf just left of the top out that may be the best spot for an anchor.  From there you could still be able to see your second, and you may even be able to reach the ground with 1 60m rap.

Offline Erik_N

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 82
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2005, 09:17:17 AM »
 Isn't there a crack near the tree that you can build an anchor? If you need to rap head over to the Ego Trip anchor.  

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2005, 12:31:57 PM »
Quote
Isn't there a crack near the tree that you can build an anchor? If you need to rap head over to the Ego Trip anchor.  


I'll have to take a closer look... I don't remember it, but the main motive to install an anchor there would be to protect the current rap tree from further damage.

Offline Fatass

  • NEClimbs Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • Paranoia is sometimes the problem
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2005, 01:51:52 PM »
The life of a tree is more important than a couple of half inch holes bored into granite. If the unsightlly look of an anchor station upsets some climbers than imagine how the cliff looks to non-climbers, such as chalk stains. Human ants stringing ropes like spiders weaving webs all over the cliff. Plus there are a lot of people who climb out of their abilty, a bolted anchor could save someone's life.

                anybody pissed off about this?

Offline tradmanclimbz

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • Nick Goldsmith
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2005, 04:00:57 PM »
It should NOT be about makeing it easier or helping the people who get in over their heads. It should be a comon sense  decision involving the health and safty of the tree and the lack of other natural anchors. people can still get in over their heads even with bolts :P the first tree that Al talks about in his report could maby be saved by cutting all the tat off of it and Not installing an anchor there. I am pretty sure that you can get to a tree at the top with even a 50m rope. I know that I have never used that first tree as a belay though I have seen it done.

Offline Erik_N

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 82
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2005, 04:05:49 PM »
As a community we have agreed through several meetings that our mission is to "preserve the original integrity of a route".  So the question is, does adding a bolt anchor on Bombardment change the character of the climb? Would a bolt anchor encourage more use on an all ready frequented climb?  Are there other options?
 Saving the tree would be my last concern unless it helped control erosion.  

Offline T_Moon

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2005, 04:20:12 PM »
Clearly, saving the tree will help prevent further erosion.  Once the vegation holding the soil together is gone you get erosion.  Adding a bolted anchor is not going to change the climb in any significant way -- folks will just be belaying/rapping from a fixed anchor instead of a fixed tree.

I agree with D-Man that a bolted anchor will not increase down traffic and I can't imagine that it would encourage anyone to climb the route who wouldn't other otherwise.  
« Last Edit: May 07, 2005, 04:30:43 PM by T_Moon »
If you want to get to the peak, you ought to climb without giving it too much thought.

--Nietzsche

Offline dogboy

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • What?
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2005, 04:36:39 PM »
I really can't see how it would affect the character of the route...slinging a tree is just as easy as clipping 2 bolts.  That climb already gets a ton of traffic anyway...and again, anyone who can clip bolts can sling a tree.

The top of Bombardment is one of the worst eroded areas of the cliff...I think that if any top-out deserves a 2 bolt anchor, this would be it.  I don't really see any downside...and, having scrabbled around up there to get to the tree, etc, etc, I can certainly see the upside.
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die.

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2005, 05:37:55 PM »
Quote
So the question is, does adding a bolt anchor on Bombardment change the character of the climb? Would a bolt anchor encourage more use on an all ready frequented climb?  Are there other options?
 Saving the tree would be my last concern unless it helped control erosion.  


I'm kind of surpised saving the tree would be your last concern.  I don't think adding a bolted rap station at the top of Bombardment would change the character of the climb.  I don't think it would "encourage" more use.  It is no more convienent than rapping off a fixed tree, just more enviromentally sound.  Other options?  If you cut the rap station there someone will put it back.  If the bolts are there they won't.  Also, if 1 60m will reach the ground from a bolted rap there, people will stop wrapping their rope around the Pleasent Street tree to reach the ground with their one rope (I know they should bring two and use the Ego Trip anchor but many don't).
« Last Edit: May 07, 2005, 05:40:28 PM by DLottmann »

Offline rustyrat

  • NEClimbs Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2005, 06:20:47 AM »
Over the past 18 years I've climbed at Cathedral, I've been saddened to see the slow destruction of the delicate enviroment on the ledge all the way from the top of Bombardment across to Funhouse. At one time rappable trees exsisted close to the top of all these climbs, as did a solid covering of turf.
As we know that's far from the case these days. Many trees particularly young trees have disappeared from here as climbers have, pulled, stepped, broken and rapped on them. Same with the turf, I've witnessed more than one climber pulling out roots, sods etc in the hope of getting a better hold or placement.
The destruction of this very delicate enviroment is completly due to us - climbers, no other user group has any effect on this ledge what so ever. Altering routes in any way is a strong no, no, however protecting a fragile enviroment  at the top of a climb is a serious responsibility, I hope we can rise to the occassion. On this particular area of Cathedral all we've done as climbers is destroy for our own pleasure - feeling guilty yet?
:'(
« Last Edit: May 08, 2005, 06:22:05 AM by rustyrat »

Offline punxnotdead

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Posts: 422
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2005, 06:34:55 PM »
I totally agree with a bolted anchor being placed at the top (slab) of Bombardment.  The tree and ledge is in very poor condition, an anchor would help alot.  

Using that anchor as a rap station (even the tree)?  Not such a good idea anyways.  Hiking over to it is very slippery and if designitated as a "rap" station it may lead to someone sliding off the cliff.  
someone dropped a steamer in the gene pool

"climbing with a deep knowledge of what we are doing is what we all want to climb high and safe" Champoing

Offline slobmonster

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
  • Eschew obfuscatory polysyllabicati on
Re: Kill a tree or add a bolted anchor???
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2005, 11:35:29 PM »
Quote
 Using the same rational that someone, I think I know who, must have used to put a double-bolt rap anchor at the top of Child's Play, presumedly to protect the rotten stump people were using, would it be a wise choice to add a double bolt anchor at the top of Bombardment.

Dave, your take on the "rationale" used is off-base.
There was no stump anywhere near the top of Child's Play when the anchor in question to was placed.  Folks were building an anchor in the blocks on the small ledge left of the Kiddy Crack tree... and, truth be told, since the erosion back East has quickened to a Kentucky Derby pace, these blocks had become loose. It was also not uncommon for parties to hog the Kiddy Crack tree for the whole lot.  In addition, the darkened history of the North End already included retroactive anchors, notably atop They Died and Bird's Nest.  In discussion with "the community," it was *quite obvious* that the addition of this anchor rankled many, but that its addition could perhaps be not unjustifiable.

It's too bad the Bombardment tree is so worked over.  This stance does indeed get hammered by foot traffic, which obviously had much to do with killing the tree nearer the cliff edge.  But you are indeed correct in that chopping rap slings from this tree will only guarantee their immediate replacement.  I don't know if I totally dig a drilled anchor here... to do any good (for the tree, mind you) these bolts will need to be *below* the tree's location; several of us had discussed the grey slab at your left as you top-out the route.

The "original character" statement was a compromise at best, although indeed something everyone could agree on.  The problem was (and is) that "character" to one person will greatly offend another.  

I guess one has to imagine Cathedral completely denuded, bare and treeless, during the era of many of these FAs.  Do you think there would be permanent anchors at many belay ledges currently served by faithful vegetation?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2005, 11:37:05 PM by slobmonster »
__________________________
Resist climate change: BE COOL