"To Bolt Or Not To
Be"
by the UIAA Mountaineering Commission
Most mountaineers and climbers regard
our activity as a freedom sport, in other words it is free
of rules and regulations, we are free to do it where we
like, when we like and with anyone we choose. But this is
not quite correct. We have a code of ethics and behaviour
in mountains involving respect for the natural environment
and consideration for others involved in our sport. Although
strictly speaking these are not rules but concepts that
have been accepted by most of us for many years and largely
they are respected and work well.
Debates between mountaineers and climbers
about the ethics of the use of protection techniques have
been continuous and I am proud that the UIAA Mountaineering
Commission together with the German and Austrian Alpine
Clubs have clarified these concepts on their use. We hope
that this will find a common ground between climbers who
want most climbs bolted to climbers having a more purist
approach discounting any use of bolts.
We are a tolerant society and I hope that
these suggestions offer an acceptable compromise that we
can all use in the future.
Good climbing.
Ian McNaught-Davis, UIAA President
Preface
" You, who are on your road
must have a code
that you can live by
and so become yourself
because the past
is just a goodbye. "
Graham Nash
The message of the popular Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young
song "Teach" could provide a suitable background
for implementing this document. The "Recommendations
for the redevelopment and first ascents of rock climbing
routes in alpine regions" are based on the principle
of voluntary participation. They represent a compromise
between the factions supporting and opposing the use of
bolts and are meant to be future-oriented guidelines for
dealing with the resource "mountain".
The following people cooperated on this project:
Stefan Beulke, German Mountain Guide Association
Alexander Huber, professional climber
Nicholas Mailänder, DAV
Andreas Orgler, climber and mountain guide
Robert Renzler, OeAV
Karl Schrag, DAV
Pit Schubert, DAV-Sicherheitskreis
I would like to thank them for their enthusiasm and perseverance
during the extensive discussions - especially Nicholas Mailänder,
who served as the " spiritus rector " in our work
group. Many thanks also to Michael Olzowy, chairman of the
DAV-section Bayerland, for organising two public discussions
on the topic which brought together leading climbers from
various countries and included such celebrities as Reinhold
Messner.
Robert Renzler, President of the UIAA Mountaineering
Commission, project-coordinator
Recommendations for redevelopment
and first ascents of rock climbing routes in alpine regions
Introduction
This document was produced in response to requests from
national mountaineering associations for advice on the use
of fixed equipment. The views held on this subject are strong
ones (see UIAA Bulletin 3/98 "Mountains in Steel and
Iron"). Some organisations were becoming concerned
that without a clear consensus between climbers and mountaineers,
other institutions would attempt to impose regulations on
our activities. In some alpine regions major disputes arose
between "plaisir " climbers and "purists",
climbers favouring a traditional style of mountaineering
and climbing. The dispute sparked off a vicious circle of
bolt chopping, retrobolting and repeated chopping on certain
routes. At the request of the UIAA Moutaineering Commission,
in 1998 the Austrian and German Alpine Clubs, who were already
discussing the topic, set up a work group to a draft position
paper. A wide range of views were considered by the group.
Also, information was presented at meetings like ENSA in
Chamonix on November 12-13, 1998, about the use of bolts
in the Mont Blanc range. The document was then presented
to the 1999 International Winter Climbing Meet and Seminar
in Aviemore, Scotland. This meeting was attended by over
100 climbers from 28 countries, who unanimously supported
the paper. It called on climbers world-wide to consider
the paper in detail so that a firm consensus based on good
practice could be established and the freedom to pursue
our activities protected.
The document was finally adopted by the UIAA
Council in May 2000, during the meeting in Plas y Brenin,
Wales.
Preamble
Climbing is a popular lifetime sport, characterised
by lasting human relationships, direct contact with nature
and the intensity of the physical activity. Climbing is
a stabilising factor for many people providing a sense of
meaning. From the sociopolitical point of view, climbing
contributes to public health by counteracting the effects
of a lack of physical activity. In addition psychologists
and educationalists have recognized that climbing in the
outdoors promotes positive character traits like reliability,
a sense of responsibility and the ability to work in teams.
Climbing in the mountains provides a chance
- especially for young people - to develop their sense of
responsibility. This aspect is more or less pronounced,
depending on the style of climbing involved. The degree
of responsibility called for during a climb depends on the
amount of protection on route: rock climbing routes with
little protection require an especially high measure of
accountability by the climber for his own safety and that
of his partner.
Coupled with respect for natural surroundings,
free access to the alpine wilderness areas is a fundamental
right. Sufficient possibilities to exercise the sport of
rock climbing can only be guaranteed if this right to freedom
of movement remains intact and is restricted only in isolated,
well-founded cases when agreed as being absolutely necessary.
Like hiking, rock climbing in Europe is a
significant economic factor in the low and high mountain
ranges. Because of the economic nature of many of these
regions, climbers and the family members travelling with
them, are often an essential source of income, both for
the catering trade of the areas visited and the accompanying
retail businesses.
In this document redevelopment measures refer
to the placement of fixed protection on rock climbing routes
according to current technical safety standards.
The redevelopment of rock climbing
routes
In the evolution of climbing in low mountain
ranges as well as in the lower areas of the high ranges,
many climbers have developed a liking for well-protected
sport climbs or fun routes. A large number of alpine climbers
prefer having good bolts on the pitches and on belays on
popular rock climbing routes.
On the other hand, a good number of the climbers
who frequent the mountains are interested in retaining the
original character of rock climbing routes and areas. They
prefer to do without bolts, either partially or entirely.
The extent and quality of the equipment of
a rock climbing route with fixed protection is an effective
instrument for influencing its popularity: well-protected
routes are done more frequently than poorly protected ones.
Thus, in ecologically sensitive areas permanent protection
should be reduced to a minimum. On the other hand, in less
sensitive areas possibilities for the climbing activity
of a greater number can be created by the development of
well protected rock climbing routes. Climbing areas developed
along these guidelines pose no threat to the natural environment.
A pluralism of the various climbing games
is desirable and is welcomed as an expression of the legitimate
individual preferences of climbers. To permit this kind
of pluralism we make the following recommendations:
The redevelopment measures should be limited
to a selection of frequently climbed routes.
Certain alpine areas, mountains, or parts of mountains can
be excluded from these measures in order to retain their
original character.
Rock climbing routes that represent particular milestones
in alpine history (for example, the North Face of the Eiger/Heckmair-route,
Lalidererverschneidung, Marmolata South Spur, Pumprisse,
Grandes Jorasses-Walker Spur, Dru North Face, Traverse of
the Grepon or Meije), must be left in their original state.
This principle also applies to rock climbing routes with
local significance (e.g. Gelbe Mauer Direct on Untersberg,
Battert Crack on the Gehrenspitze).
A basic principle of the redevelopment of rock climbing
routes is that the character of the route remains intact:
The line of the first
ascent is not to be altered.
Routes and single pitches
done "clean" on the first ascent (using only nuts,
friends, threads, etc.) should not be retrobolted.
No bolts will be placed
on sections of routes that may be done clean by climbers
of the grade of that route.
Runouts may not be neutralized
by additional bolts (don't take the edge off a runout).
The difficulty of a
route should not be altered through redevelopment measures.
Aid passages left by first ascensionists should be aidable
after redevelopment. The amount of permanent protection
in a redeveloped route should be less than the original
number of pieces. For example, several regular pitons can
be replaced by a single bolt.
For all redevelopment
measures, only material that fits European and UIAA standards
should be used. The redevelopment is to be to carried out
at recognised standards under the auspices of the responsible
stewardship organisation.
A route should not be
subject to redevelopment against the will of the first ascensionist.
The valid mode of the
redevelopment in a climbing area is defined - on the basis
of these recommendations - by the locally knowledgeable
climbers together with the local climbing groups, if necessary,
in cooperation with the responsible authorities. Decision-making
power on the local level guarantees every area its own independent
character.
The activities of the
local stewardship organizations will be coordinated by a
supraregional committee in order to guarantee the horizontal
and vertical flow of information and to ensure a uniformly
high quality of stewardship. The committee mediates in case
of conflicts.
The first ascent of rock climbing
routes
1- In alpine regions, first ascents are to be done
exclusively on lead (no prefixing from above).
2- In the areas excluded
from redevelopment measures, bolts should be limited to
an absolute minimum, otherwise it is up to every first ascensionist
to set the standard of protection on his/her own route.
3- There should be no detraction
from the independent character of adjacent routes.
4- Particularly in zones
close to the valleys or in other easily accessible parts
of the mountains special sport climbing areas can be established
- insofar as this can be done in an ecologically sound fashion
and without obstructing other existing climbing areas. These
measures need to be approved by the stewardship organisation
responsible for that area.