so sometime late last year the tope-rope problem(written up in craglets) that exists on harlequin buttress between beamans direct and harlequin had bolts added(hangers) to make the route possible as a lead route. basically im looking for some discussion as to what others opinions are about these. i am well keen to get rid of these hanger. of course id return them to the person who put them there. basically i think having big hangers all over a buttress that has been climbed on heaps before lessens the over-all quality of the area. note: the rap bolts above harlequin an now above beamans dont fall in the same catergory. i hope its only our northern friends that cant distinguish between lead bolts and abseil bolts. also i dont think every piece of rock needs to be lead, it was a fine TR problem that does wonders for slab climbing techniques but having it as a lead route doesnt add anything to the area. again big bits of steel dont make that place any better.

with some of the recent developments (light fingered maddison bolts) and now these ones makes me scared as to where that path can lead. i know ive placed as many bolts as the rest of them, but ill always be open to critique if anyone has any.

i'll be heading back that way soon and im keen to get some opinions from everyone as to what what everyone else thinks. i know i speak for many when i say the hangers should be removed. i think we've had enough done for the greater good without discussion so im not going to do anything without consultation.

discuss...

simon young

  • No labels

7 Comments

  1. Jon Nermut

    removing bolts at freycinet can be worse than leaving them in - if it leaves rust stains like a couple of examples

    anyone know who placed them and if its been climbed?

    1. Gerry Narkowicz

      Simon is a hypocritical southerner. He wasn't scared of where the precedent might lead when he placed a bolt on Stacks Bluff. Someone has placed the bolts left of Harlequin obviously to establish a new route. Whats wrong with that? Next time Simon bolts a route on an established cliff it should be chopped because, as he says, it doesn't add anything and lessens the quality of an area thats already been climbed on alot. Not every piece of rock needs to be led after all. Big bits of steel don't make a place any better he says - well if you're going to be consistent then remove the rap stations above Harlequin and all the bolted routes in that area. A bolt is a bolt and permanently defaces the environment, whether its a lead bolt or a rap bolt. In another piece of hypocrisy by southerners, the bolts above Light Fingered Maddison were chopped. A mate of mine installed them for top-roping purposes, thinking he was doing a service to the community. Yet the same choppers lambasted me for doing the same thing on the Flutes. As Simon says, I know I speak for many who approved of my actions to remove the bolts on the Ben. The double standards of our southern friends are astonishing.

  2. snortelpig

    The recent bolts placed at freycinet did not add to the stuning nature of the cliffs.  The existing rap bolts on harlequin service multiple climbs and a wide cross section of the climbing community.  The bolts up the hard faces service few climbers but detract from the beauty of the hard face to those that admire the smooth curves of rock.

    Have established bolt areas like hillwood, the underworld or freahauf where the bolts are usable by all whom venture their and leave the wilderness (like) areas alone- especially where generations of climbers have been going quiet safely and happily.  And please don't be lazy- Light fingered madison can easily be set up as a toprope without the bolts.  The base of white water wall is easily accessed by foot.

    1. Gerry Narkowicz

      I'm happy to use the convenience of the rap bolts above Harlequin, but to be consistent, little snortelpiggy should not be lazy and should climb all the way to the top of Harlequin buttress via the chimney like previous generations of climbers safely and happily did for many years. Freycinet is not a wilderness like area - there are bolts everywhere, so to say you can have some on the Harlequin buttress, but not above Light Fingered Maddison is not consistent. The top-rope bolts on LFM were unnecessary I agree, but if you don't agree with them and want to be logical with your argument, climb the second pitch of Harlequin etc up the chimney and don't use the bolts - there's plenty of natural gear up there. So let our mystery bolter bolt the smooth curves of rock - heaps of others have defaced the joint. Once the precedent has started and the rot has set in, its hard to stop and its illogical and hypocritical to stop others bolting and likewise to chop bolts. Thats why Ben Lomond will remain bolt free - there is no ambiguity.

      1. Simon Young AUTHOR

        like i said, most of us can see the difference between lead and rap bolts. can u still not see the difference between a single pitch walk-off route(easy walk-off) as opposed to a scramble past loose rocks above an often busy area?!?! and for the record, thats NOT a new route on the buttress as i mentioned above. so feel free to chop top-rope problems i retro-bolt. im not after an ethical disscussion on bolting, yet again, because id rather slit my wrists than go thru that again. im asking for opinions on THIS matter in particular.

        anyone have anything constructive to say? thanks for the input snortlepig, I appreciate it.

        as for rust stains nerm, pulling these wont leave them behind. as for some of the other bolts that have left hideous streaks(kodak tart!!!) i may have a friend that can get rust remover stuff for me. a stone-masons products used to pull rust to a surface to be cleaned without damaging the rock! sounds pretty good so def worth investigating!!

        simon

        oh gerry, and everybody else for that matter, feel free to send me abuse, climbing.simonAThotmail.com, here is just not the place to do so. grow up

  3. Andrew Geeves

    As I understand, the discussion relates to retro bolting a top-rope route.

    The climb in question is:

    7. Breakout 35m 22

    This climb originally started up Harlequin, before traversing left after 10m to finish up Beaman's Route. The addition of a bolt now facilitates a direct start from the block left of Harlequin. A top rope problem also exists continuing straight up to the Harlequin belay, but staying left of the aforementioned climb, instead of traversing left.

    The top rope route in question starts halfway up the cliff above a bolted start.  It was not an independent route that was bolt free before the addition of these new bolts. The new bolts don’t compromise the cliff any more than the direct start bolt, which has been in place for some time without any objection.

    If you are arguing that this line should be bolt free, then remove the direct start bolt as well. Then the route ‘Breakout’ can be climbed as it was originally done, utilising natural gear, and the un-named direct line in discussion can be a bolt free top rope route. Otherwise removing two of the three bolts would result in a partly bolted top-rope route, which is a bit bizarre.

    In my opinion, either leave all the bolts on this line or remove all the bolts. If not, I think it is a double standard to say that the bottom half can have a bolt, but not the top half.

  4. Jon Nermut

    Is the route any good?