when was the last time the North West Ridge Route was climbed?

Neil -



Accusing Tristan of 'indirectly' sponsoring bolts on Yellowwood. Factually incorrect, irrelavant to the via ferrata and an attack on the man, not the issue.

Dark Horse:
Excellent point!
For info: Gavin Peckham is well known in the kingdom of sweat, being an enthusiastic (fanatical?) new router. His routes are moderate to easy grades but well enjoyed by the majority. He has put up more new routes than anyone else in the Berg (including the legends of yore) and, is an avid bolter at his home crag of Wit Umfolozi.

Robert: probably a few weeks ago... (Gavin Raubenheimer). Before that no records as there is no summit book on the Butress. Would be interesting to know though...

C ya,
Bruce

_________________
LCD SCUM

Pierre, I am not attacking the man. Only his attitude. Dark Horse put it very nicely did he not. If the first ascentionist of the existing route was Alard are some other well liked local hero - and some arb, some commercial outfit or even Sanparks came and put up the VF, the story undoubtedly would have been completely different with every adventure climber in the country condemning the process and the act.

No, the act sucks and should be unequivocally condemned by any self respecting climber. And defending it is indefensible. And anyone who defends it is also out of line in my opinion.

Do you forget how I got crucified on this forum for attempting to engineer a nut placement and not actually even doing so on TM some 2 years ago? On a very tricky route that has yet to see a second ascent? And this was not on any one else's line.

TATWOC now stands as one of the test pieces on TM. Almost without exception, people who have attempted the last pitch are terrified by the nut that can be tested before committing to the move. And more than one person has condoned a bolt. But no way should there ever be a bolt. End of story.

Now we are not exactly talking about a couple of tons of cable here and thick metal rods glued in to the rock....

If this VF is defend-able and justifiable then so is one up Arrow final on TM, in fact even more so on Arrow Final seeing as there are monster cables hanging a few metres above it and part of it has been blasted.

I have not defended this VF at all. Read through the many posts and you will see that my only comments have been of ambivalence. If it matters to you, box and chop. Otherwise do nothing. Attacking the man vs attacking the man and his attitude is not worth the semantic argument it could be.

I think development is great but breaking the rules of the landowner is not.

"the story undoubtedly would have been completely different with every adventure climber in the country condemning the process and the act."
Conjecture, not fact.

SNORT I think you need to clarify why you are so vehemently against this VF. First you start off against it as it dumbs down climbing and draws the LCD into the mountain; it is killing adventure; its got a bad history etc. etc. etc.

But then you wrote :

and:

and:


How does this square up to your attack on Tristan? Or are you saying VF's are cool but not this one because it was financed by some hereto unknown commercial interest?

Seems to me in general you have a problem with people having a different opinion than yourself and doing things differently.

As for me I maintain that there is enough berg around to allow this different form of climbing, provided it is properly managed, maintained and permissioned. This specific VF is problematic since it straddles an existing trad line. I will not do VF's myself, but live and let life.

_________________
You may still be here tomorrow, but your dreams may not. Cat Stevens

HenkG.

I have no problem with VF's in general. Been on a trip to do them. Also been to Disneyland a few times with my kids, been guided up Kiliminjaro and guided on White water rafting and also been on some seriously out there on the sharp end of the rope many many times and done more first ascents of routes in South Africa than I can remember.

What I did not know before when expressing some of my opinions earlier on this forum and what has now come to light is this VF has violated an existing trad route! That is the crime! And the guys that did this contacted Gavin P prior to building the route. They disregarded what he had to say and went and knowingly violated his route. At least that is if Gavin is to be believed and there is no reason not too.

That his indefensible. And totally unacceptable. Everything else has become a side issue.

For that reason alone it must be condemned.

Senior climbers that learned to climb the hard way are defending the existence of the VF despite the fact that it has transgressed a trad route.

I personally would stop at nothing at removing any hard ware from a route that I opened. And especially in the Berg where the commitment and risk is generally so much higher than elsewhere.

It is the ultimate insult to a first ascentionist of a route.

So let's debate this, not the quality of the VF or whether there should be one or not.

I said it before: VF's are just fine, but not this one because it has been done with complete disregard to the existing trad route.

It has to go...If it does not it will always polarize the climbing community.

So let's make it simple. This VF has violated an existing trad route. Do you think that it should be chopped or not for that reason alone?

Polarising the climbing community... I've not thought about this before.
So, since I discovered a new toy, I set up a poll. Please vote.
It will give us a good view on how climbers feel about the route (and how polarised we really are), hehe.

I hate to be a pessimist but an "Arb" who isn't a climber or serious outdoorsman, when presented with the amazing view from 100 metres below the culmination of this V.F., is very unlikely to be thinking of much other than how tired he is, how uncomfortable his harness is, how much he'd kill for a beer and how glad he'll be to be sitting in a chair when he twits about the experience for lulz, back home. If he is bitten by the bug, as suggested, it will almost certainly be the climbing-up-a-metal-ladder bug, not the rush-out-and-buy-gear-then-join-the-MCSA-to-start-learning-how-to-climb-without-defacing-nature one.

Perhaps this metal ladder has seen more ascents than the original trad. route - that is not surprising and irrelevant.

I wonder how the average "arb" would react upon discovering a damaged and unsafe section, after climbing two thirds of the way up the route? Will he have a rope and belay device in his pack and the skills to use them to descend, safely? Will he know the emergency numbers to phone should he find himself stuck?

It could well be considered a death trap, luring the untrained. Your average row of bolts, spaced a cool two metres apart, is no such thing because they're inaccessible to the untrained.

Remember this: ascending a V.F. is not climbing to us - it's comparably puerile - but, when the first "arb" falls off the route, you can bet your left nut that the press will rave about the dangers of climbing. Heaven knows, we'll all need climbing licenses or be banned completely.

The disregard for the existing route is dire, indeed, but let us also remember the disregard of the community. This entire debate should have happened BEFORE the first hole was drilled.

@ Snort

Point of order: They contacted Gavin Raubenheimer, not me. It was Gavin R who warned them of the issues involved.
I think that this matter will be dealt with by the relevant authorities in due course and that we need not work ourselves into a frenzy at this stage. The mills of God grind slow, but . . .
I'd like to imagine everybody agrees that VFs have a useful role to play in the outdoor theatre, it's just a question of going about things the right way. Driving a car is fun, but not if you're going the wrong way up a one-way street! Just follow the rules - and chuck in a bit of common decency!

_________________
"I climb as hard as anyone on earth - I just do it on [much] easier routes!" Mad Dog

Sorry Gavin P, they contacted Gavin R not that it matters. And as I said before Gavin P you are very polite. However the relevant authorities probably don't give a damn about the fact that the VF has violated your route. That is a matter of rules and laws.

I do agree:

Violating a trad route, whether by chipping holds or with a VF, is a matter of ethics and principle, not written rules and gazetted laws. And this I feel very strongly about. And does everyone I know.

Now if you bolted it, many would still excrete a multitude of colours of $#it, but al least guys like me would still be able to do it on trad.

Creating a cable barrier across an exisiting trad route... not cool.

To take an analogy from surfing:
dont drop in.
dont steal another's wave, there are plenty going around...

Chopping & carrying = work.

...grinding as an act of sabotage(with safety signage) = heroic

@ SNORT

Violating an existing line = not cool, never have been, never will be. Yes, on that ground alone it should be chopped.

But you keep changing your tune as to why you oppose this VF. Its like you have a vendetta against things done different to your liking. And as if anything short of hard core bottom up trad should be opposed.

_________________
You may still be here tomorrow, but your dreams may not. Cat Stevens

Ja I'm also starting to wonder about snort's true intentions.

...

*slow clap*

_________________
...Chalk is cheap...

So guys it is all OK even if it violates an existing trad route....? The last 50 000 words have not even alluded to that.

The fact that the VF clashes with the existing route is VERY BAD STYLE!! We F@*$%d Up.
I believe it is a few meters on the detailed route description and a few meters on the section of the route description that goes: “scramble to top keeping left”.
As soon as I am back in SA I will make sure that the VF gets shifted to avoid the route and chose a different route for “scramble to the top keeping left”.

Gavin P I am sorry about this! It was not done on purpose!! We did try to avoid your route. You have every right to be pissed off. I know I would be.
Should the VF stay in place I would like to meet with you at Beacon Buttress and climb your route with you so that the VF can be adjusted accordingly.

To answer some other questions:
Witsieshoek did not sponsor anything towards the route.
Support was from private individuals only in the form of time, equipment, materials or petrol cost etc.
No money was donated.
16 mm rebar was used.
It was bent 90 deg by the rebar supplier.
The rebar had an under coat and a top coat except for the section that goes into the hole, that was left untreated.
18 mm holes were drilled
Average hole depth 130 mm
Holes were cleaned with hole brushes from Hilti
Holes were blown out with hole blower pump from Upat/Fischer
2 of the guys that helped install the FV, install Fall arrest lifeline systems for a living.
Upat/Fisher 2 part glue in a tube with Upat/Fischer Glue Gun and nozzles were used to inject glue.
Each cable weighed about 100KG and could be moved around and carried by 5 or 6 people.
The cable is divided into 3 sections on the route.
The top anchor of the upper 2 sections of cable is a 20mm 316 SS threaded bar with 316 SS eye nut.
A 22 mm hole was drilled for that.
Top anchor of the 1st section is a 16mm SS threaded bar with a 4mm thick SS prototype type hanger.
18 mm hole was drilled for that.
The anchors have not been pull tested.
The lower cable is a 13mm galvanized mild steel cable 7x19
The upper cable is 11.5 mm galvanized mild steel cable 7x19
Each cable at the top anchor is finished off with 3 crosby clamps( not the brand Crosby) and a thimble.
At each intermediate the cable is connected to the rebar with one Crosby clamp.
We don’t know who loosed some of the Crosby clamps.
We had one of those battery grinders with us when we were installing the VF. It managed to cut through one piece of rebar and then the battery went pap.
I spoke to Gavin Raubenheimer when the route was about 60% complete.
Alard

Thank you Alard. Apology accepted - provided that the VF is moved several metres away from "my" route and does not cross it at any point. However, that is just a minor personal issue. The overriding issue remains the fact that the correct procedures were not followed wrt Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife with the resulting possible jeopardy to future climbing activities. This is the issue that needs to be addressed. In principle the VFs are a good idea. They give a wider cross section of the population access to a stunning new experience. It is just that the actual implementation of this concept needs to be handled with more finesse.

_________________
"I climb as hard as anyone on earth - I just do it on [much] easier routes!" Mad Dog

Hey Peckham,

Going back a post or two;

What the hell is a rabid atheist like you thinking; that the "mills of God" will role on your behalf?
It was probably the "mills of God" that led to a VF being constructed over your route.

Hello Marshall1
Aaaah, now THAT explains the VF over “my” route. It probably also explains why you can climb about a 100 grades harder than me – you have divine assistance!

_________________
"I climb as hard as anyone on earth - I just do it on [much] easier routes!" Mad Dog

Thanks Alard for a straight and honest post that adds meaningful information to the debate.

However I think you are posting in the wrong thread. The thread rules here require at least 3 of the following: be proud of the drama queen within you, post first think later (listening and understaning has no role in a debate - a real debate is about simply restating your point in as many ways as possible after all), playing the man not the ball, grasp at every straw to ridicule and scorn, announce that you are at least three times holier than though or tell the world that your style of climbing is the only style of climbing and the rest of the world should conform to you if it knows what is good for it.

At least some of the guys posting here have no aspiration to belong to the same class as the posters in this thread that seem to follow these rules at every enter and click.

@DeanVDM

Ah heck, Snort and Tristan, I wish you had left me out of this. I don't have the stomach (nor thick skin) for this stuff. I have very strong leanings to what James Pitman and Dean van der Merwe had to say.

Tristan there are many errors amongst your facts. I can set you straight some time. Since you have completely misunderstood my message I'm going to try it on you one more time. We'll see if that works:

Bolted routes are great. Trad routes are great. Alpine routes are great. Etc, etc. What is important is the context - and not bolting per se. Liquid Sky and Automatic For The People are brilliant multi-pitch sport routes. They are totally appropriate for the venue. Bolts on Private Universe are appropriate for the venue.

What the Germans and the Austrians did at Yellowwood was totally inappropriate for the venue and damned disrespectful. Their bolt-ladders, bolts on old routes and bolted stances on ledges make my blood boil. I'm going to chop every last bolt of their's if I can. They are our version of Cesare Maestri.

So Tristan - my message: some places are great historic trad venues and should not be bolted. These places include Yellowwood, Table Mountain, Wolfberg, Tafelberg, Krakadouw, Castle Rocks, and a couple of others. It's about the context and appropriateness. And for me, that is the real issue about the Via Ferrata. There are definitely several important issues at play but taking a 500-year view the question must surely be: 'Is this area worthy of preservation in as natural a state as possible, or is it appropriate to develop it as a man-made playground?'

Regarding bolts at Yellowwood Bad Things Happen When Good Men Do Nothing
Article - Your Mother His Face new route at Yellowwood (relates to the visiting climbers who placed bolts at YW)

_________________
Climb ZA - Administrator

...

Okay,

Cool, Nice to see Alard out and about again. Okay, seems like most 'procedures' were followed in chemical installation. Clears things up a little. Thanks for that. One more question, How was the cable transported from the Car park to the final location.

Again, my argument is is just the way this was done, that it was not done correctly with regards permissions etc etc. At the end of the day this is similar to what the Chap did when installing the anchors at the top pitch of arrow final. Yes could be or was a great Idea, But, BUT it was not done the correct way and again it seems like the people have the thinking of "Its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission".

Simple, I feel it should be removed completely. Then if a VF is to be installed again hopefully all involved with obtain the relevant permission. My main issue is that it is and probably has hindered a VERY long and good relationship for the MCSA and climbing in general in the berg.

At the end of the day I hope and trust the guys involved will do the correct thing and maybe just maybe one day when a chap wishes to go climb the VF it has mysteriously disappeared.

keep it tidy

DeanVDM...Funny stuff, haha

I just wonder, is there anything being said here that will make any difference. Why not just wait for the Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife to decide what they want to do about this whole issue!
If this keep going everyone will be angry and nothing will be decided...

But thats just my opinion

thanks
Deon

I've was told how they got the cable up there, but anyone care to hazard a guess?


And this is something that they will have to think long and hard about... do they make an example out of these VF installers and remove the VF only to install another at a later point at a huge cost (I'm guessing this sort of installation would have cost around R500'000?) Probably money the park does not have.


Does anyone remember when the Bastille was bolted by a foreign climber? Slightly different circumstances, but out of interest here is the thread (from 2005, back then you did not need to register on the forum!
What's our stand?

_________________
Climb ZA - Administrator