Project ownership

I'm totally against it. the bolter deserves respect for his vision and the quality of his work, and is often partially refunded by the community either via tips at the local bar or via guidebooks. He should bolt for his/her aestethic pleasure and as a service to others. Bolting a line for the sake of seeing a line of people waiting for that climb. Or, as a professional equipper paid by an institution to do a nice job. The whole "project ownership" concept would give bad motivations to the bolter and thus is, imho, an open window for poor quality lines, silly eliminant claims, hammering "forbidden holds" off, chipping, stupid quarrels, etc etc. Expecially when money is a part of the game. the battle for sponsors should be fought on a safe ground...

grigri wrote: "Lets face it, having FA's in your logbook gains peoples respect and helps in getting sponsors." FA honour in the past came from mountaineering and the race to the top. Project ownership in modern rock climbing deletes the race so in my opinion devalues the modern FA, not to say that someone who puts up a hard line then knocks it over doesn't deserve respect. I place more respect in the dude/dudette who spends the time to find and have the vision to put the line up in the first place. I do believe the bolter does deserve some time to get on the route first as a reward for the work but to deem the route off limits for an extended peroid of time is selfish. How long this bolter deserves I don't know. On a forum in Australia I was taken to quater by some pretty influential members of the local climbing community for my views. I imagine that the same sort of responses will be seen here.

I do not think there is a rule for how long time a projected can be closed. Every situation is unique. To make it less dramatic, I think it is actually more important who equipped the route. I often tell my friend that they can do my projects as long as they do not cliam the first ascent. That means that they can climb it but oficially they say that they actually put some weights on a quickdraw or so. I mean that it is more fun for me if my friends are working on the same route and we learn from each other. However, when it comes to more conservative thinking, I think it is important that the equipper is asked. Then he has to state a time frame and of course he can say five years but then, I guess, the community do not have the bother and they can do it whenever. The equipper has to set a real time frame and for me one year is maximum, unless he is working on the project every week or so.

 I often tell my friend that they can do my projects as long as they do not cliam the first ascent. That means that they can climb it but oficially they say that they actually put some weights on a quickdraw or so. that's quite a cheat dude. Also curious that your anal concern for discovering "truth" when reporting top-level news, is forgotten when u talk about yourself. :P or, is it just a joke?

Wow... really Jens? "I often tell my friend that they can do my projects as long as they do not cliam the first ascent. That means that they can climb it but oficially they say that they actually put some weights on a quickdraw or so." Those statements and actions can potentially undermine the truthfulness and personal accountability that climbing and even its objective grading standards are based on. Please consider these actions carefully from now on, or at least, saying them, because I am disappointed to hear this.

You know, I don't really bolt projects right now, I mostly just set up boulder lines, but I have to say, I have put up at least two or three lines that my friends have done the FA on. I mean, really, I don't think, if your gonna let someone do your project, that they don't get FA rights. That said, if you already have an idea of the grade, they certainly can't go downgrading it, as a polite thing. Still, Project rights are so sketchy, and this want for ownership leads to a lot of chipping and such, which is never good.

I also have been given FA credit when Ive bolted something, someone else has climbed it first and Ive sent soon after. In our small community here it doesnt matter that much and people feel that if youve put in the work of equipping and sent you should get the credit even if someone sneaked in ahead of you. This feels hollow to me though, tainted, simply because its not real. The FA is first up the route period. I have also shared routes and we have gangbanged it into submission, its fun climbing that way sharing beta. But I have to admit Im usually a bit disappointed when the better climbers in the group send something Ive bolted before me, like Ive lost something, the FA! Ive also made harder projects open to anyone as it will take me years to climb them, and given easier routes to novices to open. To qualify my comments one should note that in our country (South Africa) there is no sponsorship for equipment, all routes are put up at the climbers own expense for the love of the sport. Also the weak ZA rand makes putting up routes very expensive. Because of this I guess I feel the desire to occasionally keep a special line, that is the right level for me, to myself. I realise the situation in Europe is very different, but it is helpful to gain opinions from all over to determine what the state of play is and what is fair. Thanks everyone for their input, write more if you like.

Truth and integrity are what climbing is based on, or so I thought...... threads like this just erode those thoughts from me. I found this disappointing reading so far especially Jen's comments around if a friend does 'his' route first. Selfishness, greed, pigheadedness, dishonesty are all words that spring to mind right now.....

Jens you are so full of double moral standards. This is enough- i want to delete my account. I have the right to delete my account. Please tell me how to do it. I bet this gets deleted again........ http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ban-jens-from-8a