Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

markhorrell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#41

Post by bluebarbet »

riffraff wrote: post #36
_vertigo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rock climbing ethics is more complicated and dramatic than that. Applying this logic about easements doesn’t really capture the whole picture, because you’re considering people only, not considering the mountain. I think some people who support chopping those bolts would argue that this is like restoring the Mona Lisa after some random guy painted their own painting over it. Yes, removing that guy’s crappy painting i…

I think the point is they had no authority to do that. Michaelangelo's Last Judgment had exposed genitals that were covered with draperies by Daniele da Volterra later. Then at some point they were removed again to restore the original, but some remain. It would not be reasonable for _me_ to step up and erase the remaining ones, even if it would be a restoration.

To which the obvious rejoinder is that Maestri had no authority to put them there in the first place.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#42

Post by kodt »

cjonas wrote: post #35
NoboruWataya wrote: post #33

Curious to know the basis on which they were arrested. I guess it's something in the realm of criminal damage to public property. But that would imply that Maestri's bolts had become part of the public property that is the mountain. I assume Maestri was not arrested for inserting the bolts. Not being a mountain climber at all I don't really have an opinion on this, but I do naturally sympathise with the anti-bolt guy…

They didn't remove the bolts for "leave no trace" reasons. They removed them because the style they were put up was considered "poor climbing ethics". They felt it could go "free" and on gear. This would have made the summit unobtainable to all but the strongest climbers in the world... Which would have upset many people who had traveled far and spent a lot of money to attempt the summit. Alex Honnolds "climbing gold…

I think the question here is: what is the specific criminal charge or law that was broken to be arrested?

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#43

Post by modo_ »

_vertigo wrote: post #28
rcpt wrote: post #4

Those two guys removed an established easement. Sure one can argue that it should never have been installed in the first place, but it was and apparently it became widely used. They had no business taking it down.

Rock climbing ethics is more complicated and dramatic than that. Applying this logic about easements doesn’t really capture the whole picture, because you’re considering people only, not considering the mountain. I think some people who support chopping those bolts would argue that this is like restoring the Mona Lisa after some random guy painted their own painting over it. Yes, removing that guy’s crappy painting i…

Exactly right. Climbers care a lot about the ethics of an ascent. It’s interesting how much those ethics have changed over the history of the sport.

One of the core ideas is that later climbers should respect or improve upon the style of the first ascensionist. e.g. if a climb was first done using siege tactics, then doing it in a single day is celebrated. But making a climb easier or safer after the fact is much more controversial, because it can feel like changing the nature of the route itself.

Snake Dike is a good example that’s flared up recently in the climbing world. It’s a classic, relatively easy route up Half Dome, and many climbers free solo it. But because it’s a face climb, protection mostly comes from bolts drilled into the rock. The first ascensionist placed very few bolts, which left long runouts and real consequences if you fall.

To many old school climbers, adding bolts to Snake Dike is disrespectful because the risk is part of the route’s character. Their view is basically: don’t bring the mountain down to your level. The new generation of climbers don’t seem to feel that way at all - they think you shouldn’t have to take unnecessary risk to climb a classic route.

https://gripped.com/news/first-ascentionist-pushes-back-on-h...

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#44

Post by dfxm12 »

kodt wrote: post #42
cjonas wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't remove the bolts for "leave no trace" reasons. They removed them because the style they were put up was considered "poor climbing ethics". They felt it could go "free" and on gear. This would have made the summit unobtainable to all but the strongest climbers in the world... Which would have upset many people who had traveled far and spent a lot of money to attempt the summit. Alex Honnolds "climbing gold…

I think the question here is: what is the specific criminal charge or law that was broken to be arrested?

You don't have to be charged with anything to be arrested. Kennedy's wikipedia page suggests they were released from jail, implying LEO decided they actually committed no crime (and certainly weren't charged). If you're really curious, maybe the jurisdiction has public arrest records, but this assumes that the cops were doing everything by the book, which is not always an apt assumption.

My guess is that towns and leo get, let's say, passionate, when a big tourism draw gets defaced, or when something can get more dangerous, but cooler heads eventually prevailed.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#45

Post by chabes »

ofrzeta wrote: post #9
chabes wrote: post #7

The mountain should have never been bolted in the first place. The debate that it is an established route and thus should be left up comes from a place of entitlement. If you can’t climb the mountain, what are you even doing there? There are plenty of mountains in the area that can be climbed instead. Same can be said about the Dawn Wall of El Cap. Harding should have never bolted it. Removing his bolt ladder was the…

What kind of ethics is it to decide that these walls must be free climbed? If you want to do that, fine, go ahead and ignore the bolts.

I am of the belief that we should leave a place better than we find it.

When litter is in my path, I remove it. To do otherwise would go against this fundamental principle.

Natural places should be protected from the widespread exploitation by humans. We are destroying the entire planet. Why can’t we protect the places we have long agreed should be protected? Enough with the anthropocentric BS already. We are a part of the world, not separate.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#46

Post by chabes »

ofrzeta wrote: post #14
dwd wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the "Leave No Trace" principle where you do not leave anything behind. This is why you see in trad climbing the lead will place cams and nuts, while the last in the group on that pitch retrieves them.

Sure there's this principle but this just moves the need for justification. Humans leave their traces everywhere so why this principle for mountains? There are many traces that should be removed such as hydroelectric power stations, river straightening and so on. Is this whataboutism? I just think a few bolts in a mountain don't do much harm and as a casual observer of these mountains you won't even notice. Also I am…

> Humans leave their traces everywhere so why this principle for mountains?

It’s called conservation. It is why we have these places to climb in the first place. These are protected wild places.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#47

Post by ofrzeta »

chabes wrote: post #46
ofrzeta wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure there's this principle but this just moves the need for justification. Humans leave their traces everywhere so why this principle for mountains? There are many traces that should be removed such as hydroelectric power stations, river straightening and so on. Is this whataboutism? I just think a few bolts in a mountain don't do much harm and as a casual observer of these mountains you won't even notice. Also I am…

> Humans leave their traces everywhere so why this principle for mountains? It’s called conservation. It is why we have these places to climb in the first place. These are protected wild places.

I am all for free climbing. But I don't really like this perspective from a high horse. So it's fine for comparatively rich people to fly there by plane to free climb Cerro Torre?

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#48

Post by margalabargala »

bluebarbet wrote: post #41
riffraff wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is they had no authority to do that. Michaelangelo's Last Judgment had exposed genitals that were covered with draperies by Daniele da Volterra later. Then at some point they were removed again to restore the original, but some remain. It would not be reasonable for _me_ to step up and erase the remaining ones, even if it would be a restoration.

To which the obvious rejoinder is that Maestri had no authority to put them there in the first place.

To which the obvious rejoinder is that two wrongs do not make a right.

At the end of the day, it's sort of a "might makes right" situation. If someone with the means and inclination to add bolts exists, it is hard to stop them. If someone with the means and inclination to remove bolts exists, it is hard to stop them.

At the end of the day, climb your own climb. If you take actions that affect how others climb, what you're calling ethics is in fact ego.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#49

Post by bluebarbet »

margalabargala wrote: post #48
bluebarbet wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To which the obvious rejoinder is that Maestri had no authority to put them there in the first place.

To which the obvious rejoinder is that two wrongs do not make a right. At the end of the day, it's sort of a "might makes right" situation. If someone with the means and inclination to add bolts exists, it is hard to stop them. If someone with the means and inclination to remove bolts exists, it is hard to stop them. At the end of the day, climb your own climb. If you take actions that affect how others climb, what y…

>what you're calling ethics

I wasn't calling anything anything. I was just putting the obvious counter-argument on the table. You make a fair point.

Re: A short history of Cerro Torre, the most controversial mountain (2012)

#50

Post by butlike »

liversage wrote: post #29

Maestri's claimed first ascent and his compressor route made the history of Cerro Torre controversial, and the later removal of the bolts added to this controversy. However, the unfortunately now deceased climbing prodigy David Lama also had his own scandal on the compressor route while sponsored by Red Bull. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lama#Cerro_Torre

It reads like the scandal was only from the first attempt at the free climb, where a bunch of belays and bolts were left behind. He since went back and on attempt 3 was able to free climb the compressor side completely. This was after they removed the 120 bolts.
Post reply on HN