In the case of the Joke. IT WAS NEVER SAFE BECAUSE IT HAD PITONS. John Turner fell in the lake and broke his leg using pitons. Since then dozens of people climbed it without the bolts and realizing that the pins were dubious. The bolted belays and the bolt that speaks for the trees weren`t necessary to make the route climbable for the bolters. The silver bullets that killed the Joke are the two runout killing bolts where piton scars were supposedly seen, but since the pitons didn`t hold Turner, we can assume that even if there were pitons there, (which no one who climbed it in the last two decades can remember), they didn`t make it safe. Also, clean climbing racks offer lots more opportunities for pro than a 1961 pin rack ever did. The history and traditions of the escarpment climbing are much different than that of the Joke. Pitons on the escarpment that were placed before bolts were put in mainly on aid or rappel or were later used as a faster method of fixing sport routes. SOme of these pitons defintely need replacing with bolts. Sad eyed lady of the lowlands, which I have done many times could easily have bolts placed where the two pins at the bottom were, but becuase of the long, scary and clean protected upper section, it still wouldn`t be safe. Now its polished and most people seem happy just to top rope it. But even on the escarpment, locals have taken care to preserve traditional climbing where it exists and they will continue to do so, as happened on Resplendance, a retrobolted 5.9 trad route at Old Baldy now returned to its original form. The issue with the Joke is that the OAC has done exactly what you say you would not accept on Iguanadon and compromised the two runouts that gave the climb its character.  Climbing the Joke “bolt free“ has been done already dozens of times. You owe dozens of beers!

First off, access comittee types should stay completely clear of bolting issues as they tend to have nothing to do with access and incur liability. Secondly, I’ve never heard of the joke. It seems as though people generally feel pissed about the bolts.Fixed pro is fixed pro. If someone replaced manky pins with bolts ok, but if they replaced an acceptable runout with bolts then no way.    

davezuly– good comments.  This is a good debate and no insane nurse in sight. 

Many of those redrocks routes that were retrobolted were retroed by the FA.  On many of them, the retroing replaced manky old quarter-inchers and worse (old shitty pins etc). 

EG Levitation 29– they (Jorge Urioste and company) went back and replaced bolts and added a few, the rationale being that on many of the pitches where there is no gear anyway and the climbing is full-on sport clipping up, why f*ck around with long runouts?  When the route was freed (1980?), drilling was done by hand, and when you are bolting 10 long pitches you get tired and you minimise bolts.  Half of me likes this– ahh, 12 quickdraw only rack– and the trad climber half doesn’t…but then, even on the pitches with gear, on that route, it is maybe one piece per pitch.

On Epinephrine, bolts (2 I recall) were added to the final chimney pitch because the original pro was horrible pins slammed into manky sand horizontals plus the odd cam.  The route is still pretty heady…you can thrash up the full-on bodywidth at the back past many, many pieces of irretreivably jammed (and oddly unreachable, even for a skinny tall guy liek me) fear gear, or you can step out to where there are 200m of air under your ass and between your feet and move delicately up past 2 bolts and the ocasional cam– still pretty heady.

Tough debate.  Don Serl has told me that on some of his crazy friction routes in Squamish (eg Dancing in the Light, 5.11c) they would have put a few more bolts in if they hadn’t been hand-drilling (imagine falling 15-20 times per bolt cos you are hooking on crystals in moss and trying to get 2 free hands to pound a bit).  He also however said that he likes his route the way it is…

My view: if you can get gear in and the pins are relics of pre cam-and -nut days, no bolts.  If the bolts replace pins which are the only pro, replace away.  Realistically, the style is a part of the grade.  If you are new to 5.9, stay off the R routes; most people understand that technical skill alone doesn’t get you up a route.

this is about the final successful attempt on the Joke and found in Chic Scott’s Pushing the Limits, the Story of Canadian Mountaineering:

[Turner's] only protection during the crux was a single blade piton [in the whole pitch] that is reported to have popped out when his partner pulled on it. These two Turner creations [The Joke and Sweet Dreams, the latter, incidentally, also retrobolted by the same folks] became the pinnacle of skill and daring for a decade.

I think that preserving the gear on a route is different than preserving the experience. I started climbing a little after The Joke, with pins, swami belt, etc., and in addition to new gear the whole psychology and sociology of climbing haven’t stood still. To put it mildly.

Ideally a route should be left as originally climbed. Failing that, the original experience of the FA should be left available as near as possible to later climbers. Chance of broken leg and all. Failing that, it may be necessary to retreat to the hills where adventure is more of a given than an option.

Here is a view from a guy who did the FFA of a runout route in Washington state:

http://cascadeclimbers.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Main/637/Number/6438#Post6438