Accident in Constrychnine [Archive] - Bogley Outdoor Community

blamkin86

04-15-2013, 02:32 PM

I'm going to lay off the judgments.

I was not on this trip, but a friend was. She sent me a note, saying she'd seen the frayed webbing and wondered if it was safe. She was in the first group. In her opinion, the faller's pack saved his life.

Here's a link to the meetup event: http://www.meetup.com/WesternSlopeAdventurers/events/106269922/

Here's a quote from that website:

One of the anchors we specifically discussed is the one where the webbing was sawed through on Saturday afternoon resulting in Brucer's fall.

However for the safety-conscience among you, after the pool arch incident, we now each individually look at the tails on the water knots and for any frays on the webbing, before we go over. We're also likely going to slow down a little and start adding contingency rigging and backup anchors where appropriate.

In my very very short experience (say 5 technical canyons), most of the time rappelling in a canyon is the time between clipping in and actually hanging on the rope. I don't think these safety ideas would slow us down much at all.

One more note: we've found and replaced bad webbing a couple of times, most recently in the right fork of Blarney. I went over a drop, and the webbing was frayed on the bottom. We've harvested 1/2" webbing and those tiny rapides from the right fork of Leprechaun, and very worn webbing as well.

I consider it our group's responsibility to leave all the webbing in excellent condition. I'd like to see all groups adopt this policy.

I'd like to hear from the more experienced.

hesse15

04-15-2013, 02:59 PM

I'm going to lay off the judgments.
One more note: we've found and replaced bad webbing a couple of times, most recently in the right fork of Blarney. I went over a drop, and the webbing was frayed on the bottom. We've harvested 1/2" webbing, and very worn webbing as well.

I consider it our group's responsibility to leave all the webbing in excellent condition. I'd like to see all groups adopt this policy.

I'd like to hear from the more experienced.
the blarney you replaced i think is in the DC part of the canyon,
so I will not clean that stuff and if I get newbies they usually rap of me also because will be a ugly low start for them.

you decide what is right for your group, i was on the second group in costrichnine inspected the webbing and saw some rubbing but still see all the ridges and stopped from sliding with my weight on and warned my 3 to do not play back and for with it but be careful and light rappeller!!
the groups that come after had the responsibility to check and inspect the stuff their life depend on, i was thinking everybody knew that .

in adobe swale a month ago i rapped 12 people out of me and I rap out of the most crappy webbing ever saw before!!!! took my risks but also i checked that were short drops (30-40 feet) with sandy bottom,and was ready for landing in case and I usually rap light and fast!!!!

never liked multiple newbies overweight and jumpy out of natural anchors, too lengthily to explain that is not Zion!!!!

hesse15

04-15-2013, 03:05 PM

However for the safety-conscience among you, after the pool arch incident, we now each individually look at the tails on the water knots and for any frays on the webbing, before we go over..
do you need people to die to check webbing?
by the way accidents list are :wrong biner block, wrong lenght of rope, wrong canyon, wrong season for the canyon, wrong evaluation of anchor, ipothermia disidratation,been tired, been slow, been out of shape and the most common:poor judgment.
all of those can in certain case will KILL you!!!!
not just a knot in a webbing

Mountaineer

04-15-2013, 04:09 PM

...saying she'd seen the frayed webbing and wondered if it was safe...

It is everyone's (or designated guide/leader - liable party) responsibility to check. Every time. Challenge things if you are unsure. If the group is unsure, you are in the wrong group.

If you are setting up an anchor, and leaving it behind, you should do the very best job you can. However, the next group coming through has the responsibility to check, and fix/replace as needed before their use.

For example, I've heard people recommend digging up dead man anchors, every time. Some back them up with meat, and watch for movement. For me, I always follow the ERNEST principles for every anchor I use.

USofCS

04-15-2013, 07:52 PM

Our group was directly behind Bruce when he fell. We were just waiting for our turn to rappel then heard the fall and help. 65233. This is webbing from the deadman, it snapped right over the edge and at the quick link. The webbing was frayed and felt very soft compared to new webbing.

Mountaineer

04-15-2013, 09:29 PM

Glad he is going to be OK. There was a lot of wind Saturday, awesome rescue got in. Amazing job.

Thanks for the update.

rick t

04-15-2013, 10:14 PM

Accident Report- Constrychnine April 13, 13

Two large meetup groups, Backpackers Anonymous out of SLC and Western Slope Adventurers from Grand Junction, planned a combined canyoneering trip to north wash, with the focus being on doing the canyons out at Poison Springs. The accident victim was Bruce Richardson, who was rapping 7th with a group of 8 people doing Constrychnine. As Bruce was on rappel at the last rap, the 90 footer into the dark chamber, the webbing holding him parted where it rubbed against the top of the rock, between the deadman anchor and the rap ring, about 12 inches from the ring, dropping him approximately 60 feet. Webbing, it should be noted, that was unnecessary and would not have been in play, had he been rapping off the piton and bolt that used to hang on the top of that wall. The elitist, self righteous, and still anonymous fool who took it upon himself to chop that bolt and remove the historical piton, lucked out, with the victim being a hammered and broken tough old bird, instead of the death that it very easily could have been. Another group in the canyon, from Colorado Springs, was hard on the heels of the accident group, and replaced the rigging, got the 8th man down, and sent a runner, Jeff Cooper, ahead to open ground with a Spot to call for help, as the patient, who was still conscious and could talk, was obviously badly injured and would need professional medical assistance and extraction. After sending the signal Jeff caught up with another group from the meetup party as they were having lunch on the ridge at the top of the climb out, who had just finished the same canyon 15 minutes ahead of the accident group, As a member of that group, and unfortunately well versed with the mechanics and personnel involved in a rescue in that area (from being a witness to one last year), I accepted the responsibility to get the word out from that point, and hustled for the car. We did not get service until we were 1 mile out of Hanksville, and pulled on in to the Chevron station as we concluded the 911 call, which among other things, confirmed that both Spot signals that were triggered were received. Duke and Jessica, the couple who own the Chevron and Stans, are both EMTs, and were among the very first responders to last years Boss Hawg accident, being the first to reach and treat that patient, so I knew they would be involved again, and that would be a good place to start. Duke had already gotten a call advising of an distress call, and the local SAR network had been alerted and was gathering, so I was able to provide them with the details, area map (thanks, Shane), and even a GPS coordinate that we had on a new GPS enabled camera, where we had taken pictures at the rappel/accident site. As the call went out through the local network for the local SAR personnel to gather, and it must be said that the Tropic Fire Dept was again well represented- from 3 hours away. A call also went out to Classic, in Page Az, for a chopper. As the Garfield Co Sheriff on scene debated between sending medical help in from the top of the canyon, or down the exit and then up from the bottom, word came that the chopper had set down in the canyon, and had already gotten their medical team, a medic and a flight nurse, in to the patient from the bottom of the canyon. It made one flight up to the trailhead- now command center, and picked up Duke and 2 other rescuers, and took them down to the site. The helicopter took off just before dark, and headed north, surprising the rescue team up top with the apparent speed of the evacuation, but as it turned out, the pilot decided he needed additional fuel, and flew over to the Hanksville airport to refuel. After several hours, and darkness fallen, with no word at all from the rescuers, the sheriff sent a radio team in on the exit route to try and establish communications with either the chopper or the rescue team, which they were able to do, from the lunch spot on the rim, without going down into the canyon. Standing on top of the ridge in the pitch black, with winds gusting 20-30 mph, it was astonishing to see the pilot, in returning, not touch down where we expected, at the broad Poison Springs/Slidenide confluence, rather shocking everyone by flying right up Slidenide Canyon, and touching down just below the Constrychnine junction. It was an incredible display of nerve and skill. Which served the rescuers well, as they were lacking in bodies to effectuate the carry out, and the other 7 in the canyoneering group were detained and conscripted to help in getting the litter and patient out the remaining canyon and to the chopper, which despite the relatively short distance, and the lack of any significant rappels, other than the 20 foot slide to the pool, still proved to be a difficult and time consuming job. The chopper took Bruce to the Grand Junction hospital, departing around 11 pm, and the rescuers and remaining canyoneers hiked out to the trailhead. Once again, the locals, scattered as they may be, rallied and turned out in force, to pull off another rescue, one cannot thank them enough for their efforts, especially as unpaid volunteers.
Bruces cohorts picked him up from the hospital Sunday afternoon and brought him home to Salt Lake, where I visited him at his home today. He is obviously in considerable pain, having suffered a broken ankle and pelvis; the shoulder injury mentioned by the EMTs turned out to apparently be a deep contusion, but nothing else was broken, except maybe the helmet, which took a good whack at impact, according to the members of his group. So beyond that and some serious road rash he is in pretty good shape, and fully cognizant that he is lucky to be alive. He did say that he wanted to thank everyone, both the local SAR team and canyoneers who were involved in his rescue.

rick thompson

Iceaxe

04-15-2013, 10:28 PM

Thanks for the detailed report Rick.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Mountaineer

04-15-2013, 11:06 PM

Thank you Rick. I'm in awe at the quick, selfless, and organized rescue you described.

Scott P

04-16-2013, 06:36 AM

I wish Bruce a quick and full recovery.

jman

04-16-2013, 07:16 AM

Thanks for the details Rick! Bruce was very fortunate! Good luck in your recovery!

peakbaggers

04-16-2013, 07:49 AM

Excellent report, Rick, & very thorough. Thanks for taking the time to do this. It benefits all.

Deathcricket

04-16-2013, 08:09 AM

Wow, excellent report and i see even the failed webbing was posted! Now all we need is a video and this could be the most detailed accident TR ever.

Brian in SLC

04-16-2013, 09:41 AM

Great report Rick. Thanks.

(maybe a paragraph or two and some spacing would make it a tad more readable for some of us)

Wow. Scary stuff.

Taylor

04-16-2013, 12:59 PM

Iceaxe

04-16-2013, 01:38 PM

Dissapointing to read about another avoidable mistake in a canyon. Seems like it should be obvious but how about checking EVERY ANCHOR, EVERY PIECE OF WEBBING, EVERY TIME. Best wishes and speedy recovery to Bruce.

I can see where this one would catch a lot of folks out, including myself.... a dozen canyoneers in front of you just rappeled from the anchor. There is a cue building behind you to rappel from the anchor. Easy to just clip and go with only a simple visual curtesy check.

YMMV :popcorn:

canyoncaver

04-16-2013, 01:41 PM

Let he who has never made an avoidable mistake in a canyon cast the first rope bag...

mcweyen

04-16-2013, 05:28 PM

We did the canyon on March 30th. We moved the webbing back a bit from the edge and used a meat anchor backup. The rappel is at 1:11 into this video from a couple weeks ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66SQ32jxOr8

USofCS

04-16-2013, 09:16 PM

Today at school we tested the remaining piece of webbing to see how much it could hold. As you can see it held only 2000 lbs of force being pulled, I can imagine even less with rubbing against the side of the cliff.

65245

mcweyen

04-16-2013, 10:51 PM

Brand new webbing is speced at 4000lbs. The way I read it elsewhere is that the webbing rubbed along the edge multiple times with multiple groups going over. At some point it was lengthened to lower the load on the anchor, which ended up being the ultimate demise of the webbing.

peakbaggers

04-17-2013, 06:44 AM

Let he who has never made an avoidable mistake in a canyon cast the first rope bag...

AMEN!!

peakbaggers

04-17-2013, 06:55 AM

[QUOTE=Iceaxe;532443]I can see where this one would catch a lot of folks out, including myself.... a dozen canyoneers in front of you just rappeled from the anchor. There is a cue building behind you to rappel from the anchor. Easy to just clip and go with only a simple visual curtesy check.

That, I would think, is exactly what happened. People waiting - more coming, so clip & go. Only/best solution? Train each member of your party that each one is responsible for self and for inspecting anchor before going. Another thing I have tried to do with our groups is at each anchor/rappel station, have one person appointed whose specific task is to monitor the anchor while everyone else descends. Seems like the larger the group though, the more distractions from various conversations going on, etc. and the less attention that is paid to what most deserves attention.

hesse15

04-17-2013, 08:41 AM

That, I would think, is exactly what happened. People waiting - more coming, so clip & go. Only/best solution? Train each member of your party that each one is responsible for self and for inspecting anchor before going. Another thing I have tried to do with our groups is at each anchor/rappel station, have one person appointed whose specific task is to monitor the anchor while everyone else descends. Seems like the larger the group though, the more distractions from various conversations going on, etc. and the less attention that is paid to what most deserves attention.

mistake was people forgot they were in a canyon and not in Zion/Disneyland!!!!

2 weeks before I told Bruce straight in his face that if he did not change how was doing canyons he will got killed!!!
Glad he just got some broken bones!!!!

( sandtraps and fiddlestick are WAY more safe than what I witnessed 2 weekends before it)

sail2fast

04-17-2013, 11:21 AM

My sincere wishes to Bruce for a full and speedy recovery.

A note on backups: On my trips we back every anchor up with a "meat anchor"
until the last person goes. This technique is critical for certain anchoring
techniques (think sandtrap), but we do this as a habit, even for very solid
anchors. We would certainly do this for a found deadman. The last man (usually
a small person) has more risk, but they do have a well tested anchor.

I do not agree at all with the attempt to point fingers at the remover of the
piton / bolt. As much as I sympathize with Bruce and the entire group for the
difficult experience they had to go through, the group was responsible for
ensuring that each anchor was sufficient for each member of the group. That is
the nature of canyoneering. Prior knowledge of a canyon and existing anchors
help make canyons more accessible, but canyons are ever changing and anchors are
in a state of decay from the moment they are built. Each group needs to take
full responsibility for negotiating them safely.

be careful out there!

Bo_Beck

04-17-2013, 11:34 AM

mistake was people forgot they were in a canyon and not in Zion/Disneyland!!!!

The way I interpret this: "No need to check anchors in Zion!"
Hope I don't have to "Meet" you in a canyon in Zion ;-)

hesse15

04-17-2013, 01:03 PM

The way I interpret this: "No need to check anchors in Zion!"
Hope I don't have to "Meet" you in a canyon in Zion ;-)

no I hope to meet you again around campfire not in a canyon because you need to carry my sorry ass out !!!!!

my comment that you misinterpret was that : most of the people that do ONLY Zions canyons are used to sturdy bolts so they never bother about been careful rappeller or inspecting anchors!!!!!

Bruce did mostly Zions, and we had a lengthy discussion 2 weeks before that natural anchor are more delicate!!!!

he already had a previous call with an anchor with one of his people flying free down to the ground!!!!

at least in Zion with the permit system there is a limit for the number of people, but in the rest of the colorado plateau is becoming a total craziness!!!!

2065toyota

04-17-2013, 02:23 PM

Mountaineer

04-17-2013, 02:38 PM

Aj84737

04-17-2013, 03:20 PM

I think people put way too much faith in these bolts that are placed in sandstone. I can't tell you how many times we have had the bolts fail when installed into concrete footings. And these are placed in sandstone. Be prudent with anchor choices.
When i first started canyoneering i was blown away that people used natual anchors and i felt so much more safe with bolts. But now after some experience on natural anchors, i would trust a tree and alot of other natural anchors over any bolt. Except that little bush at the end of das boot, that bush creeps me out lol.

Spokey

04-17-2013, 09:41 PM

65298

The rest of the webbing from the accident. This piece was turned over to the Sheriff's Department. They requested it after we showed it to them after we hiked out of the canyon that night.

Iceaxe

04-17-2013, 10:01 PM

Except that little bush at the end of das boot, that bush creeps me out lol.

FWIW: There is a bowling ball chokestone in the watercourse that we use. Makes the route more fun as you have to swim out around a blind corner to complete the canyon. Taking my family through Das Boot last year I looked at that bush and thought "not a chance in hell I'm risking my family on that anchor".

YMMV :popcorn:

Aj84737

04-18-2013, 02:13 AM

FWIW: There is a bowling ball chokestone in the watercourse that we use. Makes the route more fun as you have to swim out around a blind corner to complete the canyon. Taking my family through Das Boot last year I looked at that bush and thought "not a chance in hell I'm risking my family on that anchor".

YMMV :popcorn:

We saw that other way too but I think we were worried about how much rope was in contact with the rock on the pull or something. Or maybe we saw an anchor above that slot and didn't notice that chokestone. Hell idk that's been too many canyons ago. But we decided the bush would be alright. Light and quick rap that's for sure.

Brian in SLC

04-19-2013, 02:28 PM

I think people put way too much faith in these bolts that are placed in sandstone. I can't tell you how many times we have had the bolts fail when installed into concrete footings. And these are placed in sandstone. Be prudent with anchor choices.

But...look at the shear number of bolts in sandstone in Utah, the U.S. sandstone belt (Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, West Virginia), Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada (1000's in Red Rocks) and, around the world (Australia comes to mind) then consider how many rock climbers sport climb on these anchors, every day, over and over again. When was the last time you heard of a bolt failure?

Now, you don't need to review many years of ANAM to see how often "natural" anchors fail at least for climbers, and, they fail fairly regularly (or the rigging from the anchor) in canyons.

I'm not saying just blindly trusty bolts, but, they are pretty reasonable anchor choices. And, had that anchor not been chopped in this canyon...well...its location alone seemed to be a reasonable solution on a number of fronts.

Yeah, be prudent and consider reasonable anchor choices...especially given how anchor location can contribute to degradation of the resource and safety. Regardless of whether fixed anchors, or, "natural" (or those ugly "unnatural" anchors like rock stacks, deadmen, etc).

oldno7

04-19-2013, 02:35 PM

Brian in SLC

04-19-2013, 02:40 PM

Wasn't a bolt, was a piton and whomever installed it didn't drill a deep enough hole.

It stuck above the sandstone and flexed like crazy when loaded.

It was good to pull, a proper replacement would have been nice, since this is trade route.

Had heard it was a bolt and a pin, and, "someone" replaced the bolt with a better bolt, then, "someone" removed the whole anchor after some dust up over replacing the bolt. Er something.

Anyhoo, got to see a bunch of photo's of the location and hear this story from a number of folks earlier this week. Yikes.

2065toyota

04-19-2013, 04:33 PM

Brian in SLC

04-19-2013, 06:15 PM

I'd still choose a tree over a bolt. Have you ever tried to pull a live tree out of the ground. Of course climbers use bolts on shear cliff faces so that's really not a fair comparison. Bits wear out and get replaced all the time. Are you saying that trees wear out by the same percentage

Huh? Yeah, I just went outside and pulled a tree out of the ground in my backyard. By hand. Neat.

We weren't discussing trees in this thread...and...I'm not sure there was a live tree option as a rappel anchor in Constrychnine...but...

Anchors will present themselves in all manners and forms. Live trees, dead trees, rocks, horns, piles of dirt, bags of water (apparently), bags of sand, etc, and the bolted anchor. Being able to judge the relative "goodness" of these anchors is one aspect of this game. But, another is being able to judge which anchor is appropriate for a given situation and solution. Clear as mud sometimes.

I've seen a number of tree anchors over the years die off from over use. There's areas in the country (spots in Shawnee Nat'l Forest in So. Ill for one) that have banned climbing and rappelling from the cliffs due to erosion from fragile topside ecology being damaged from anchoring to trees. Some areas have gone to bolted anchors to save trees. The dogfather of Texas rock climbing (Mr James Crump) says:

We in Texas, and specifically at Enchanted Rock State Natural Area have placed bolts to protect the trees, to dissuade against their use as anchors. In our arid, climatically tough environment, abusing trees with ropes and anchors can cause significant impact, and as a natural area, climbing impact needs to be mitigated. We actively place bolt anchors where inexperienced climbers would use a tree.

We have followed a logic for inexperienced climbers that they would choose as an anchor, a bolt first, a tree second, and lastly a traditionally built anchor. While this might strike against some traditional ethos around bolts vs cracks, we found that killing trees by using them as an anchor regardless if there were cracks available, threatened our access and good relationship with Texas Parks and Wildlife.

Therefore, beginning as early as the mid-80's we placed bolts to protect our trees and have maintained this for almost 3 decades as an accepted, TWPD-supported, traditional practice.

Save the trees.

Just this year, there's been a canyon fatality from a tree anchor...not saying that a bolted anchor would have been safer, but, there seems to be less accidents from them with regard to rigging.

Bits wearing out versus trees as a percentage? Gonna have to cogitate on that one. Not sure what that has to do with the price of tea in China, but...

Here's a nicely situated tree anchor that makes sense (canyon descent on the east side of Kolob Creek south of Trespass Canyon):

65381

Live tree, for some reason growing almost perpendicular to the fall line, over the drop. Free air, no rope rub, fat tree (plenty robust), easy to rig, easy to inspect, easy to get on rappel. Kinda perfect.

Sometimes live trees make sense as rap anchors. In the case of Keyhole in Zion, folks debated this by using the big pine tree, adding an anchor at the drop, chopping the anchor at the drop, adding the anchor back to the drop...

Anyhoo...what were we talking about again? Ha ha...

Cheers and be safe.

Get in the Wild

04-19-2013, 10:01 PM

Thank you very much for the detailed report Rick and for your sentiments about anchors.

Iceaxe

04-19-2013, 11:00 PM

The original anchor was a very poorly placed piton that was an accident waiting to happen. Whomever pulled the piton did the canyoneering community a service.

There was also a sister piton in Arscenic that was removed when the routes were originally betaed.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Get in the Wild

04-19-2013, 11:27 PM

Iceaxe

04-20-2013, 09:06 AM

Canyonbug

04-20-2013, 01:08 PM

Is a set of rules for the Dirty Devil Corridor available anywhere on-line? What are the boundaries of the corridor? I'm normally very up to date on this stuff and I've never heard of this limit on canyoneering before. I talk with most the land managers, including Hanksville BLM, a couple times a year and no one has ever mentioned a 12 person limit or anything other then the standard BLM rules.

Kinda hard for canyoneers to follow rules they don't know exist or if they actually exist.

Shane
I know the rules that he is referring to are in place for guides and permit holders for commercial guiding. These rules were given to me when we applied for and obtained our permits. I may be wrong, but don't believe those rules apply for non-commercial activity in the area.

Brian in SLC

04-20-2013, 01:15 PM

After talking to local SAR staff in Hanksville and from other sources, it appears that large group size may have played a role in this accident.

How so? I'd be curious how large group size was a part of this.

Iceaxe

04-20-2013, 04:25 PM

Shane
I know the rules that he is referring to are in place for guides and permit holders for commercial guiding. These rules were given to me when we applied for and obtained our permits. I may be wrong, but don't believe those rules apply for non-commercial activity in the area.

Thanks, I knew commercial ventures had additional rules. Just didn't know what they were.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

outsider

04-21-2013, 07:49 PM

Is a set of rules for the Dirty Devil Corridor available anywhere on-line? What are the boundaries of the corridor? I'm normally very up to date on this stuff and I've never heard of this limit on canyoneering before. I talk with most the land managers, including Hanksville BLM, a couple times a year and no one has ever mentioned a 12 person limit or anything other then the standard BLM rules.

Kinda hard for canyoneers to follow rules they don't know exist or if they actually exist.

I am not aware of anything on the BLM website, at least that is easy to find/read, but this kind of info can be found on the American Canyoneers access pages - see http://www.americancanyoneers.org/access-robbers-roost/. The information on that page was put together after talking to Hanksville BLM personnel. Many other popular canyon areas are covered on the AC site as well.

-john

Get in the Wild

04-21-2013, 11:47 PM

Unfortunately, these rules are not currently available online. I've made this suggestion to the BLM because indeed it can be difficult to follow rules if you don't know they exist. The current BLM regulations for a maximum group size of 12 applies to camp areas as well as hiking and canyoneering areas. Essentially, 12 is the maximum size that you can operate with in this corridor regardless of whether you are camping, hiking, backpacking, canyoneering, etc. The reasoning is because the BLM protects solitude in this corridor. The BLM also limits the number of groups that can operate or camp in a specific location. This is the reason for the permit requirement for organized groups. The permit requirement is not just for commercial operations--it is for any organized group such as the Boy Scouts, YMCA, or colleges. In addition to a permit, the BLM requires pre-trip itineraries for organized groups in this area. Again, this is to protect solitude as well as to prevent groups from camping, hiking, backpacking, canyoneering, etc. in the same areas at the same time.

hesse15

04-22-2013, 10:57 AM

After talking to local SAR staff in Hanksville and from other sources, it appears that large group size may have played a role in this accident. For those that are unaware, group size is limited to a maximum of 12 in the Dirty Devil River corridor and permits are required for all organized groups. For additional information contact the BLM Henry Mountains Field Station in Hanksville.
:nono::nono::nono:
sorry you got it totally wrong!!!
were you there?
I was!
dynamic was group of 4 included leadr + separate group of 4 with leader (me)+ group of 6 with leader and group of 8 with 2 leaders (one was bruce)
i will get the cause more on the ages and sex in the group (i think 3 were below 30years old and all males)
i prefer do canyons with girls so much better than young testosterone kids!!!!!!
so you wrong in this assumption was a big group

the leaders were just playing too much with the kids to pay attention to the anchor! that is what happened!
:facepalm1:

hesse15

04-22-2013, 11:29 AM

I am not aware of anything on the BLM website, at least that is easy to find/read, but this kind of info can be found on the American Canyoneers access pages - see http://www.americancanyoneers.org/access-robbers-roost/. The information on that page was put together after talking to Hanksville BLM personnel.

from what i know the site mentioned is a private site started by bunch of people and does not have any government credentials or authorizations!!!
Am I wrong?
I think only when a website links to the BLM or other government entity for laws and regulation will be a little more credible and trusted!!!
but did not see ANY references to actual laws there!!!!

ratagonia

04-22-2013, 01:16 PM

We saw that other way too but I think we were worried about how much rope was in contact with the rock on the pull or something. Or maybe we saw an anchor above that slot and didn't notice that chokestone. Hell idk that's been too many canyons ago. But we decided the bush would be alright. Light and quick rap that's for sure.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

Bushes in general have very shallow roots. Be careful out there.

:moses:

outsider

04-22-2013, 02:33 PM

from what i know the site mentioned is a private site started by bunch of people and does not have any government credentials or authorizations!!!
Am I wrong?
I think only when a website links to the BLM or other government entity for laws and regulation will be a little more credible and trusted!!!
but did not see ANY references to actual laws there!!!!

Like Get in the Wild, I think it would be great if the BLM had this kind of information on an easy to access website, but that does not appear to be the case (yet). If you want to be sure to get accurate information, I would suggest talking to the BLM directly. The page I referenced also has the Hanksville BLM contact info so that you can easily do so.

-john

hesse15

04-22-2013, 03:40 PM

Like Get in the Wild, I think it would be great if the BLM had this kind of information on an easy to access website, but that does not appear to be the case (yet). If you want to be sure to get accurate information, I would suggest talking to the BLM directly. The page I referenced also has the Hanksville BLM contact info so that you can easily do so.

-john
usually government always has laws posted,
my question arised because i never heard before about the 12 people limits and apparently there is not a single reference to back it up anywhere else!!!!

so the problem for accidents are not # of people or regulations but more than people forget often common sense at home!!!

Scott P

04-22-2013, 03:55 PM

I did find the source for the 12 people group limit in the Dirty Devil Corridor, but the way it was written, it sounds like it mostly applies mostly to boaters?

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ut/richfield_fo/recreation.Par.44571.File.dat/DirtyDevilBrochure.pdf

A Special Recreation Permit is required from the
BLM when anyone intends to make recreational
use of the river for business or financial gain or
for educational or scientific purposes. Group
sizes are limited to twelve members. Contact
the Hanksville BLM Field Office for clarification.

Iceaxe

04-22-2013, 04:20 PM

I did find the source for the 12 people group limit in the Dirty Devil Corridor, but the way it was written, it sounds like it mostly applies mostly to boaters?

The way it is written also makes it sound like it only applies to commerical, educational or scientific purposes.

Get in the Wild

04-23-2013, 07:30 AM

:nono::nono::nono:
sorry you got it totally wrong!!!
were you there?
I was!
dynamic was group of 4 included leadr + separate group of 4 with leader (me)+ group of 6 with leader and group of 8 with 2 leaders (one was bruce)
i will get the cause more on the ages and sex in the group (i think 3 were below 30years old and all males)
i prefer do canyons with girls so much better than young testosterone kids!!!!!!
so you wrong in this assumption was a big group

the leaders were just playing too much with the kids to pay attention to the anchor! that is what happened!
:facepalm1:If you notice from my initial post the opinion that I referenced was that of the Hanksville SAR staff that I spoke with as well as others including individuals from the Meetup group. In their opinion, large group numbers "may have played a role".

hesse15

04-23-2013, 08:21 AM

If you notice from my initial post the opinion that I referenced was that of the Hanksville SAR staff that I spoke with as well as others including individuals from the Meetup group. In their opinion, large group numbers "may have played a role".

Sar people just rescue the injured party and saw the other 28 people at the trailhead.

but we distributed in small indipendent groups over 2 differents canyons that share the same trailhead!
plus there was a colorado school group there divided in two groups! so could looks like there were 40people togheter, not the case!

hope he recover soon so we can do canyons again.
again only reason of accident was lack of common sense !!!! :angryfire:
nothing else to speculate!!

hesse15

04-23-2013, 08:26 AM

The way it is written also makes it sound like it only applies to commercial, educational or scientific purposes.

so Ice if i understand correctly it is total inappropriate to quote that rule for PRIVATE CANYONEERING AND HIKING TRIP!!!!
could you second me on this,:roll:
so is the private website mentioned apparently giving WRONG information about REGULATIONS?:crazycobasa::facepalm1:
like the reference to 12 people in canyons.......will be interesting to see WHY they put such wrong information there......are they ever going to admit ?

Iceaxe

04-23-2013, 10:10 AM

I don't know the correct ruling for private adventures wIth regards to the Dirty Devil. I do know commercial trips on BLM land have rules that don't apply to privateers.

My own personal opinion is someone is trying to stretch the 12 person limit to cover a group and area that is was really not meant to cover. I would like to see what section of the DD the rule actually applies too, I have a hunch it's only the river corridor and not the entire drainage (which would be a massive area)

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

hesse15

04-23-2013, 11:44 AM

My own personal opinion is someone is trying to stretch the 12 person limit to cover a group and area that is was really not meant to cover.
Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

I found it more interesting that page is the rule and regulation for the FULL Robber Roost area, and written like that not only they forgot to mention that 12 is ONLY for commercial/education research in RIVER activities IN the dirty devil horshoe corridor ( aka river bed), but some how they invented a canyons limit .
it is nice that BLM is more concerned about yelling and pooping but cannot find any reference "OFFICIAL " to bolts!
those are all REAL BLM regulations for that area:
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ut/richfield_fo/recreation.Par.44571.File.dat/DirtyDevilBrochure.pdf
this is from Blm website <<Several guidebooks describe outstanding opportunities for hiking, backpacking, and canyoneering, and there are opportunities for commercial use. There are challenging canyoneering opportunities in the upper stretch of Larry Canyon. >>>
<<<The river segment is 9.5 miles in length, entirely within public lands administered by BLM. Human use includes dispersed recreational activity including hiking, canyoneering, sightseeing, photography>>>>
<<<<Robbers Roost is the most accessible of all the Dirty Devil side canyons, and is publicized as a destination hike in a number of guidebooks. Canyoneers have come to recognize that the upper ends of each of the Robbers Roost tributaries contain superb opportunities for technical slot canyoneering.>>>>>
<<<The river segment is 33 miles in length

mzamp

04-23-2013, 01:48 PM

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

sounds like an accident waiting to happen.

Bushes in general have very shallow roots. Be careful out there.

:moses:

I too felt the size of the bush to be adequate, especially since it was only a 20ft drop into 6+ feet of water. I don

penmartens

04-24-2013, 08:59 AM

rnelson

04-24-2013, 10:52 AM

Tragic - I hope he heals quick. A terrible reminder to take personal responsibilty to check rap rigging each time we rope up, no matter how many have gone before us... and if you SEE something, SAY something! (one of my new canyoneering mantras - thank you HomelandSecurity)

hesse15

04-24-2013, 12:34 PM

Before this goes away, I would like to express some of my views gleaned from the few statements that I have read. It is obvious that the webbing for the anchor was worn and broke.
It looks to me like contributing causes were:
1) the dynamics of a large group
complacency
party atmosphere
compliance (not wanting to make waves)
diffusion of responsibility
2) the dynamimcs of sub-dividing a large group
all of the above
acquiescence to stronger leadership in forward groups
3) possible hot-dogging on rappel (unsubstaniated)
4) inexperienced rappelling style
skittering webbing across rock while getting on rope
5) penduluming to avoid water causing rubbing of webbing 60 feet higher
6) the 'ugly eye' syndrome
In first aid, if a person has a horrific wound, say an eyeball hanging down on their cheek, people can be more focused on that rather than mortal wounds such as an arterial bleed in the leg. I can't help but wonder if the stories from the night before (see meetup group's comments) about the missing bolt had people so worried about the failure of a pile of rocks that they didn't check the other components in the system.

Some time has been spent talking about what went 'wrong'. It would be very helpful to also talk about what went 'right'. What were the logistics after the accident? How the heck did you successfully get 30 people plus the CO group out of the canyon and back to the TH? Who stayed with the injured? What kind of 1st aid was given? What does SAR expect of people at an accident site? In canyon? At the TH?
What type of things were said at camp that night to help people debrief and move past the accident enough to canyon the next day?
Thanks for any answers given.

Penny
ok let see: the groups were indipendent from each other we moved fast so there was almost 2 hr distance between us and the rest of the groups! we met the CO guy on the trail back to the car.
I already disagree with the choice of the leaders in that group,but was not my trip so i took care of mine after warning the organizer profusely, but that is me always put safety first before the fun!
accident happened last rap so people were able to take food and clothing back to the 7 people that stay with the victim.
people were distributed over 2 forks so we collect everybody else
2 people spend the night on the rim helping SAR to go in and out, Rick made it back to camp at 1:30am after having to go up and down from the exit!
rappelling style: lets see that recently I am witnessing a lot of AUSSIE style or bunjie jumping rappellers?

Rick coordinated ,he went directly to the gas stations and collect the SARs, providing maps, details and do the ground support,he is the person to have around for "holy crap" situation!!!!!! both from life experience and very advance rescue training and practicing!!!!

was just too much fun for them, they just oversight the risks, glad he did not kill himself,but was not a surprise to me and Rick that happened.
Some people also if you tell them in the face they are unsafe and why,usually they just keep doing the same,
like smokers and cancer,you can tell a smoker that is dangerous but usually will not do any change or when finally they listen is usually too late and they will die in 6months anyway!!!!
aftermath: 3 kids were scared because "canyons are dangerous" and refused to do canyons, I went with Rick and we run slineade as i used to!!!!
other did hogs and blarney.
they mostly think was the fault of the webbing!!!!!
we had heavy time until the medic release that was not internal injury and no life at risk!
and the beer in camp start to flow that help!!!!

canyoncaver

04-25-2013, 07:36 AM

ratagonia

04-25-2013, 10:54 AM

they mostly think was the fault of the webbing!!!!!

we had heavy time until the medic release that was not internal injury and no life at risk!

1. of course, webbing has no moral culpability.

2. broken pelvis is a VERY serious injury, always considered life-threatening. People bleed out, and/or the Femoral arteries go right through that area. As in all broken bones, there are varying degrees of 'broken', but certainly an 80 foot ping pong calls for treatment as life-threatening.

Kudos to all that dealt successfully with this incident, under physically difficult conditions.

Tom

hesse15

04-25-2013, 01:30 PM

1. of course, webbing has no moral culpability.

2. broken pelvis is a VERY serious injury, always considered life-threatening. People bleed out, and/or the Femoral arteries go right through that area. As in all broken bones, there are varying degrees of 'broken', but certainly an 80 foot ping pong calls for treatment as life-threatening.

Kudos to all that dealt successfully with this incident, under physically difficult conditions.

Tom
yep but when the medic (people with medical background that assess him in the slot) said he was going to ok we were very happy,when we were on the rim we did not know if he was going to make it for the SAR to evacuate him!
it was kind of stressful situation so when we find out he will be bruised up but ok,we drank and the mood rised a lot!!!!
:beer::guitar::beer::drink::drink::rock:,
i wrote "injury" instead of "bleeding"so the correct is "internal bleeding" SOMETIME.....I do not check exactly the words!!!

penmartens

04-25-2013, 03:41 PM

Possible number 7 to add to penmartens' list?

7) Single strand of webbing over the lip.

I sometimes rig that way too, but it seems like having two strands to burn through might have saved the day on this one.

Here is one way to provide redundancy over a sharp lip with only a single long strand coming from a deadman or cairn.

Photo from Office Canyon:
65523

This is a very good idea for the rappel in question. I bet the majority of people skitter either at the top getting on rope and/or at the bottom avoiding the water. I would like to see this method used in Angel Slpt also. The top 2 raps are particularly nasty hard starts with jagged edges.

mcweyen

04-25-2013, 05:08 PM

jman

04-25-2013, 05:15 PM

Could somebody explain why webbing needs to be ran over the edge? Is it because people don't want their nice rope to go over an edge only or is it because it places less load on the anchor? If it does place less load on the anchor, couldn't the fact that people have to drop more before being on rappel place even more load on the anchor? Double webbing over a ledge seems like a no brainer if it truly needs to go over the edge.

Factors go into with each rappel, such as no or very minimal rope groove and easiness of the rope pull. Extending the webbing anchor usually solves those issues. Many people wonder why a rappel is set up here or there, when a rappelling station looks easier from that location instead. Canyoneers place bolts or anchors usually with the rope pull in mind, and not necessarily with the awkward or scary starts in mind.

Mountaineer

04-25-2013, 06:40 PM

Canyoneers place bolts or anchors usually with the rope pull in mind, and not necessarily with the awkward or scary starts in mind.

Yes, and remember you can add a courtesy rigging, for an easier start, for everyone except the last person down.

Brian in SLC

04-25-2013, 09:48 PM

1. of course, webbing has no moral culpability.

Nope. But, folks who promote certain technques, remove bolted anchors, and, leave minimal single strands of webbing... Do they?

ratagonia

04-25-2013, 10:12 PM

Nope. But, folks who promote certain technques, remove bolted anchors, and, leave minimal single strands of webbing... Do they?

Perhaps in the same theoretical sense that every person who has passed that point and NOT installed a sweet 2-glue-in bolt anchor is similarly culpable.

Even Mr. Cabe has similar culpability. He has been aware that a two-bolt anchor and perhaps a via-ferrata ladder were really needed for public safety at this location and yet, he has done nothing!

Or perhaps Mr. Thompson, who has traveled with various groups through this canyon on many occasions - but did he install redundant bolts and heavy chain going over the edge, plus a platform so people could set up easily? No - he failed in his duty to protect the public.

Even Mr. Toyota, a maker of stairs, while he has not been through this canyon, I hardly think that relieves him of his duty to build sturdy stairs at every downclimb or rappel...

Sure, everyone has SOME culpability, Brian. But the TRUE culpability is held by EACH of us when we go out into the wildlands and go down canyons. The moral culpability is in each person, in the choices they make. More culpability for the leaders of groups, who take beginners who are not in a position to be fully responsible for their own safety.

But really, Brian, the culpability is in the hands of the supposedly-experienced canyoneer who either did not check or did not successfully check the webbing before he swung over on it.

:moses:

Brian in SLC

04-25-2013, 10:39 PM

"But, your honor, he opened the "moral culpability" door."

"Proceed".

Ha ha.

Sure, everyone has SOME culpability, Brian. But the TRUE culpability is held by EACH of us when we go out into the wildlands and go down canyons. The moral culpability is in each person, in the choices they make. More culpability for the leaders of groups, who take beginners who are not in a position to be fully responsible for their own safety.

But really, Brian, the culpability is in the hands of the supposedly-experienced canyoneer who either did not check or did not successfully check the webbing before he swung over on it.

Well, you know, there's degrees of culpability. Cause and effect. I've never done Constrychnine, nor, was I aware of the anchor conditions in there. Only very dimly remember some dust up over the anchors in there, involving...you. Therefore, I don't think any of my actions, or, inactions, would be judged to be reckless, or, disregarding any risk, substantial and/or unjustifiable.

I say if you chopped an anchor, or, promote and/or left a single strand of webbing at that anchor location, then, you're "morally" culpable. If you purposely did these things, knowing that it added additional challenge, forcing a higher level of skill, and, therefore additional risk, then, your level of culpability bumps up a notch.

Reckless endangerment. "Recklessly engaging in conduct which places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury."

Culpability. Its not just in the mind of the beholder...

The prosecution is sleepy and therefore, needs to rest.

oldno7

04-26-2013, 04:52 AM

If personal responsibility goes the way of the dodo bird, canyoneering will die a slow death.

I think if one is to be held up as culpable, there would have to be an intent to harm or injure.

I haven't been witness to anyone in the community with that intent.

arrogance--YES

intent to injure or kill--NO

oldno7

04-26-2013, 04:58 AM

Brian in SLC

04-26-2013, 08:52 AM

I think if one is to be held up as culpable, there would have to be an intent to harm or injure.

One of the degrees of culpability would be your intent to harm or injure. But, there's varying degrees of culpability. Lower on the blame game scale are being reckless and negligent.

As an example, and, Tom might remember this from his climbing and Boulder daze... Paris Girl. A key bolt hanger on that route was sabotaged and had you climbed up to it, clipped it and fell, you'd have died. So, intent to harm and injure? Most likely. They never caught the person who did it, even with a reward offerred.

Are folks that remove bolted anchors in canyons culpable for injury to folks who get hurt/killed if the anchor option they're left to use is "less safe"? Are they culpable if they promote and leave low margin of safety anchors? At some level, I think so.

Sure, personal responsibilty goes a long ways. But, sometimes people follow the Pied Piper over the cliff too...

The canyon community is a big tent. There's a very wide bell curve of risk tolerance in the canyon population. To me, this risk thing isn't centered for the average canyoneer. Its shifted to the side of more risk, and, less margin of safety. And, those chickens will come home to roost...

hesse15

04-26-2013, 09:18 AM

Even Mr. Cabe has similar culpability. He has been aware that a two-bolt anchor and perhaps a via-ferrata ladder were really needed for public safety at this location and yet,
via ferrata are fun!!!!
could somebody put one at the MIA exit in Kolob exit please!!!!!!!:hail2thechief::hail2thechief:
I will PAY for taking a step ladder ferrata up instead of the crappy trail......:nono:
if bolts and hanger were not so expensive and require good skills to place them right I am all over to set the canyons "EURO STYLE"
they are so much fun!!!!!!:rock::rock::rock:

blamkin86

04-26-2013, 12:20 PM

Are folks that remove bolted anchors in canyons culpable for injury to folks who get hurt/killed if the anchor option they're left to use is "less safe"? Are they culpable if they promote and leave low margin of safety anchors? At some level, I think so.

I'm a newbie (say 10 technical canyons) so I have little dog in this fight. However, using your argument, anyone who passed over an unsafe anchor, yet left it sitting there, would be equally culpable. I just don't get how that's reasonable. Many people downclimb what others rap. I do not take responsibility for what someone after does on a rap. Conditions change. Perfect webbing I leave is then bashed by wind, sand, water, rocks, and time. I am not responsible for those changes, that's simply ridiculous.

What's more likely, by far, is that someone found an unsafe anchor and removed it. This group then put up their own unsafe anchor and someone got hurt. I think that sucks, but I'm not convinced that this group isn't the most culpable of anyone. Suggesting someone else is culpable is just continued lack of acceptance of responsibility. No one outside of this group is responsible for the anchor that failed.

Iceaxe

04-26-2013, 12:27 PM

Suggesting someone else is culpable is just continued lack of acceptance of responsibility. No one outside of this group is responsible for the anchor that failed.

^^^THIS^^^

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

Brian in SLC

04-26-2013, 02:26 PM

However, using your argument, anyone who passed over an unsafe anchor, yet left it sitting there, would be equally culpable. I just don't get how that's reasonable.

I'm not arguing "equal" culpability, just that there is "some" culpability. In some cases, it may exceed, equal, or be less than. All up for debate.

Are you your brother's keeper? Or not? You turn a blind eye, look the other way? Maybe ignore an unsafe situation, then, when you hear someone got hurt or killed because of your inaction, your choice to not get involved, you wouldn't feel at least a little tinge of guilt? Especially if you pass on by knowing that you're leaving an unsafe situation for someone else? A timebomb?

Because, I think a "reasonable man" would feel badly for passing by, turning the other cheek.

Don't get me wrong...its hard to interject yourself into other peoples' situations but from a safety standpoint, if I'm out and about, see an unsafe situation like an unsafe anchor, and, I have the time and means to fix it, why wouldn't I?

And, sure, conditions change, and, you might not have much influence in that kinda thing. But...this isn't "stuff happens". When you chop an anchor, we're past talking about wind, water, rockfall, time...

What's more likely, by far, is that someone found an unsafe anchor and removed it.... No one outside of this group is responsible for the anchor that failed.

Well, a number of folks who posted on this thread were there. What say ye, people of the canyon that day? Was the anchor sling that failed in situ, or, was it fresh? My bet is that it was there.

Also, there was an anchor consisting of a crappy piton and a bolt, which, were removed. Culpability.

Edit to add: as a newbie, but, still an active (or inactive for that matter) canyoning person, you got a full on dog in this hunt.

Or, to use a recently overused expression, let's hope you don't get too much skin in this game...ha ha...

blamkin86

04-26-2013, 02:32 PM

Brian, for what it's worth, one of my best canyoneering buds was in the very first group on this hike.

I don't know if it was new webbing or not, but she looked at it, and found it frayed in a very minor way - and rapped on it anyway.

Likely this information did not make it back to the second - or third - or whatever, group.

My point is, removing a bad anchor, and replacing it with the perfect anchor, isn't good enough for a group who raps later. That group should look, and make their own decision. That is where this group failed.

The other point I'm trying to make is, I believe someone did make that canyon safer by removing the piton. This group clearly didn't watch the anchors, and probably would have rapped off the unsafe piton to the same or worse results.

Finally, be sure that while my posts may read as critical, I'm trying not to be. I'm new at this and have made, and certainly will make, more mistakes as I go. I just don't see myself blaming someone else, if I rap off something without looking at it.

blamkin86

04-26-2013, 02:39 PM

Edit to add: as a newbie, but, still an active (or inactive for that matter) canyoning person, you got a full on dog in this hunt.

Or, to use a recently overused expression, let's hope you don't get too much skin in this game...ha ha...

Me too brother.

Since October of last year, I've done Cameltoe, Three canyon, Ramp and Cistern, left fork of Leprechaun, both forks of blarney (one fork twice), Slideanide and I just this Sunday did the south fork of Maidenwater (FANTASTIC!). Probably a couple others I forgot.

Our group has had two accidents - one "hair in pirana" episode that required a second rope and savior, and one "helmet into wall" bad start that included the belay person doing their job perfectly. I've been first and LAMAR, and feel pretty confident with the anchors. I have a terrible fear of heights but watching on video I rap pretty good.

flatiron

04-26-2013, 02:43 PM

Brian in SLC

04-26-2013, 02:54 PM

My point is, removing a bad anchor, and replacing it with the perfect anchor, isn't good enough for a group who raps later. That group should look, and make their own decision. That is where this group failed.

The other point I'm trying to make is, I believe someone did make that canyon safer by removing the piton. This group clearly didn't watch the anchors, and probably would have rapped off the unsafe piton to the same or worse results.

Wasn't just a crappy piton that was removed. I believe the history was that a bolt was placed to back up the piton anchor, then, removed and replaced by a more robust bolt. Then the entire anchor was removed. So, not fair to say that the "unsafe piton" was the only part of that anchor.

When I see folks out climbing, and, they only clip into one anchor on an anchor consisting of multiple points, I'll mention that its just as easy to use both, then, why not clip into both?

And, I'm surely not suggesting that anyone that comes across any anchor in place shouldn't evaluate that anchor. Absolutely.

Moral culpability.

Its an interesting conundrum of sorts. How much to blame is a soloist, say, an Alex Honnald, for promoting high end free soloing on rock climbs? (As an aside..., Alex soloed Moonlight, Monkeyfinger and Shunes in Zion in a day recently...blows my mind). Someone less talented emulates him...falls...fingers are pointed. Sure, personal responsibility is one thing, but, really, you don't think a promoter has any culpability?

When you fully promote techniques and equipment that reduce the margins of safety in a sport like canyoneering, I think you're culpable for the consequences.

Even the Marlboro man got cancer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Man

Slot Machine

04-26-2013, 05:53 PM

Are folks that remove bolted anchors in canyons culpable for injury to folks who get hurt/killed if the anchor option they're left to use is "less safe"? Are they culpable if they promote and leave low margin of safety anchors? At some level, I think so.

In Zion, you would have a point about the bolt removal. But in the North Wash / Roost? No way Mr. Brian. Bolt-free is the name of the game out in those parts. The margin of safety is closely correlated with your skills, tools and attention to details.

Sure, personal responsibility is one thing, but, really, you don't think a promoter has any culpability?

Publishing a fun activity, or an achievement (in the Honnald case) it is not the same as promoting an inherently dangerous activity. So no, they don't even have a light dusting of responsibility. (Love the phrase inherently dangerous BTW, been using it a lot to describe a certain product lately)

If I choose to use a wingsuit, swing from Corona Arch or rap from a Sandtrap, then the results of that action belong to me. If somebody emulates me, they will have to consider what they are doing before they act; so that action belongs to them.

rick t

04-29-2013, 11:44 PM

In Zion, you would have a point about the bolt removal. But in the North Wash / Roost? No way Mr. Brian. Bolt-free is the name of the game out in those parts. The margin of safety is closely correlated with your skills, tools and attention to details.

Publishing a fun activity, or an achievement (in the Honnald case) it is not the same as promoting an inherently dangerous activity. So no, they don't even have a light dusting of responsibility. (Love the phrase inherently dangerous BTW, been using it a lot to describe a certain product lately)

If I choose to use a wingsuit, swing from Corona Arch or rap from a Sandtrap, then the results of that action belong to me. If somebody emulates me, they will have to consider what they are doing before they act; so that action belongs to them.

We have been here before, but I will say again that I agree with Brian, and am calling BS on your "bolt free is the name of the game in those parts" In what parts? And says who?
The fact that you may chose to do a canyon without using bolts in no way gives you the right to tell everyone else that recreates on that federal land that they have to play by your dillusionary "rules". What is the big problem with you doing the canyon the way you want and someone else doing it differently? On what basis does someone- anyone, presume to have the right or authority to tell everyone else that they have to do it "your" way or not at all?
I rapped off of the old piton numerous times, and while my 200 lbs may have caused some flex in it, I found it well placed, solid, and safe. And THEN Tom placed a good bolt next to it, to back it up, giving two solid points, and making the rap that much safer than it was before, and obviously much safer than it is now. And eliminating the webbing factor on the rap, with the rope running through quick links on the face, instead of 10 feet of webbing that ran back and forth on top of the rock wall.
Did the chopper of both the new bolt and the historical piton "cause" Bruces accident? No. The rappeller is responsible for making sure what he is getting on will hold him.
At the same time, and I have no doubt that this will eventually end up in court, likely as a result of a fatality, the overly zealous, and still anonymous (probably for that reason) chopper, or anyone else who chops or advocates the same on federal lands, materially contributed to the accident, and when that time comes I have no doubt will be found to be held at fault for it, cetainly at least for having contributed to it.

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 07:58 AM

We have been here before, but I will say again that I agree with Brian, and am calling BS on your "bolt free is the name of the game in those parts" In what parts? And says who?
The fact that you may chose to do a canyon without using bolts in no way gives you the right to tell everyone else that recreates on that federal land that they have to play by your dillusionary "rules". What is the big problem with you doing the canyon the way you want and someone else doing it differently? On what basis does someone- anyone, presume to have the right or authority to tell everyone else that they have to do it "your" way or not at all?
I rapped off of the old piton numerous times, and while my 200 lbs may have caused some flex in it, I found it well placed, solid, and safe. And THEN Tom placed a good bolt next to it, to back it up, giving two solid points, and making the rap that much safer than it was before, and obviously much safer than it is now. And eliminating the webbing factor on the rap, with the rope running through quick links on the face, instead of 10 feet of webbing that ran back and forth on top of the rock wall.
Did the chopper of both the new bolt and the historical piton "cause" Bruces accident? No. The rappeller is responsible for making sure what he is getting on will hold him.
At the same time, and I have no doubt that this will eventually end up in court, likely as a result of a fatality, the overly zealous, and still anonymous (probably for that reason) chopper, or anyone else who chops or advocates the same on federal lands, materially contributed to the accident, and when that time comes I have no doubt will be found to be held at fault for it, cetainly at least for having contributed to it.

Yikes.

Certainly Rick, I'm not telling you what to do. I was simply pointing out the current ethic in non-Zion areas. :hippy: From what I can tell, the vast majority of the community likes and appreciates this ethic, because it keeps the canyons clean and challenging.

To answer your question about 'one way vs another', I think whatever way you descend a canyon is fine, but I also have the right to remove any trash you leave behind; candy wrappers, webbing, quicklinks or bolts.

Secondly, bolts fall under the ‘leave no trace’ ethic, do they not? Don’t all outdoorsman revere this ethic? (Not rhetorical, honest questions that I hope you answer.)

And lastly, I like your word dillusionary, and think it applies to your hypothetical court argument. Are you implying that once bolts are intalled anywhere, in any canyon on federal land, that it will one day become illegal to remove them?

Bob

unimog

04-30-2013, 08:43 AM

Scott P

04-30-2013, 09:04 AM

Are you implying that once bolts are intalled anywhere, in any canyon on federal land, that it will one day become illegal to remove them?

It seems to be headed the other way, though at a snails pace.

Bolts are already illegal in many areas (for example much of North Wash) and it seems slowly, but surely the areas where they are banned is growing.

From what I can tell, the vast majority of the community likes and appreciates this ethic, because it keeps the canyons clean and challenging.

Most (not all) experienced canyoneers do seem to lean towards natural anchors. Maybe not a "vast majority", but a majority none the less (at least it seems that way to me).

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 09:07 AM

I guess if you consider bolts as "trash", then maybe the "vast majority" of the community might not be in agreement. I hear the argument about whether to put in new bolts, but if you are advocating cutting of existing bolts that add to the safety of me, my family, and friends, I'd say that is closer to vandalism than a moral choice based on community consensus.

I see adding bolts in the first place, in most cases outside of Zion, as vandalisim. You could add stairs too, like in Lower Antelope, but would that improve the canyon's overall quality? Safter, but not better, IMO.

HEY, @Iceaxe (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=36) , @Sombeech (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=6) , @accadacca (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=3) can we get a survey for this thread? Apparently we need to measure the pulse of the canyoneering community...

Do you view bolting in the North Wash, Robbers Roost, The Swell or Cedar Mesa as vandalisim?

A. Always.
B. In most cases.
C. Not usually.
D. Never.

Scott P

04-30-2013, 09:16 AM

HEY, @Iceaxe (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=36) , @Sombeech (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=6) , @accadacca (http://www.bogley.com/forum/member.php?u=3) can we get a survey for this thread? Apparently we need to measure the pulse of the canyoneering community...

I'm betting that the results will be based on how much experience one has.

I'd imagine overall that a majority of experienced canyoneers would lean towards natural anchors, while a majority of people fairly new to the sport would lean towards bolts. Of course there would be many exceptions to that, but I'd guess that it would lean that way.

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 09:25 AM

I'm betting that the results will be based on how much experience one has.

I'd imagine overall that a majority of experienced canyoneers would lean towards natural anchors, while a majority of people fairly new to the sport would lean towards bolts.

Hmmm... you are probably right.

But I'm hopeful. Our first North Wash canyon was West Blarney. We didn't think it needed bolts at the end of the day, even though it kicked our butts. YMMV.

Iceaxe

04-30-2013, 09:54 AM

Please don't vandalize canyons that lie above your skill level. You may want to experience them in their undamaged state someday. They will always be there and you have plenty of time. It's not about ego or risk, it's about humility and respect.

Responsible canyoneers should always come prepared to replace anchors in canyons--preferably with natural anchors. To assume the existence of bolts or other fixed anchors is irresponsible. To curse their replacement by a natural anchor is absurd. Steel fasteners can fail and when they do, it will be suddenly and without warning. If predictability is desired then perhaps a climbing gym would be more appropriate for your recreation instead of a natural and dynamic canyon.

:cool2:

SRG

04-30-2013, 10:54 AM

if you are advocating cutting of existing bolts that add to the safety of me, my family, and friends, I'd say that is closer to vandalism than a moral choice based on community consensus.

If you're taking friends and family down a canyon and you need bolts to be present in that canyon in order to be safe... you should reconsider your choice of canyon.

The way I see it, most bolts are in canyons because it's just more convenient for humans.
If I finished drinking a soda, it would be most convenient for me to drop the can on the ground where I stand rather than find a trash can, it's the same way with bolts.
One could build a natural anchor, it's just easier and requires less personal responsibility to rely on a hole in the wall with some steel in there.

Please take the time and practice and get your skills up rather then making our beautiful canyons pay the price.

ratagonia

04-30-2013, 01:30 PM

I guess if you consider bolts as "trash", then maybe the "vast majority" of the community might not be in agreement. I hear the argument about whether to put in new bolts, but if you are advocating cutting of existing bolts that add to the safety of me, my family, and friends, I'd say that is closer to vandalism than a moral choice based on community consensus.

Thousands of canyoneers enjoy North Wash canyons, Robbers Roost Canyons, etc. (outside Zion) and very very few bother to install bolts. Even the outraged Mr. Thompson does not bolt up every 5 foot downclimb (ala Yankee Doodle) every time he goes there.

De Facto, the ethic is bolt free.

There are a few bolts here and there in the area, but more noted for their novelty than for other attributes.

I fully support your right to install whatever bolts you feel are necessary for the safety of your party. If that amounts to more than zero in THESE areas, then you are, de facto, lacking in the skills necessary to safely canyoneer in this area. Go to Zion. Go hang out with canyoneers that know what they are doing. Take a class from Rick Green. Do something, but don't add bolts to these canyons that have been traversed safely by thousands of people including little girls.

Thank you.

Tom :haha:

unimog

04-30-2013, 01:51 PM

Wow! I never proposed adding any bolts, just not ripping out existing anchors.

Maybe I misunderstood the controversy, iceaxe. The real reason for removing existing bolts is because of how dangerous they are?

Brian in SLC

04-30-2013, 02:17 PM

De Facto, the ethic is bolt free.

De facto ethics. Is that like moral culpability?

Insert your laughing emoticon here...

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 02:25 PM

Wow! I never proposed adding any bolts, just not ripping out existing anchors.

The point is... they shouldn't have been placed at all.

Not all bolts are placed in ridiculous spots, but some are. Sometimes the absurdity in not readily apparent, especially to the untrained eye.

Do ridiculous bolts breed more ridiculous bolts? Perhaps, because it's human nature. It's easy to add a bolt to a bolt garden because there is such little weight on one's conscious. It's like throwing a soda can into a landfill. But scarring the wall of a beautiful and pristine place? It might make you pause and think. Would it not?

Also, another point of view to consider… imagine coming across a bolt in a pristine canyon at an obstacle that is easily defeated. Would you not see it as garbage? Wouldn't you be compelled to restore the canyon to its original state?

:hmm2:

reflection

04-30-2013, 02:55 PM

Bolts - an interesting pandoras box -with views from many angles and dimensions. Zion and zion regions surrounding - who and what said it was OK to bolt many/most of the canyons in zion? And who said it was OK to add or pull bolts in that area in the past decade? Who put bolts in Water Cyn, Oaks, and of recent vintage Birch Hollow? (Commerical guiding outfits for the most part)

What about Glen Canyon? Bolts in that area OK? When they go in there is often an authoritarian statement that they were needed. Capitol Reef, Canyonlands....bolts sometimes appear.

Pick your area folk, and ask what type of visitors appear. Some commerical groups, youth groups, adults/experienced/rookies/moderate experience. What is the terrain in the canyon AND what is the rate of visitation?

A decade ago it was probably reasonable to suggest that many areas/zones be largely bolt free. I still generally feel this way.
The escalating promotion of some of these areas though, the exponential growth in the number of visitors - at times, and then those unique spots where folk "blindly" follow after the one in front and do as they did.

That rap in K-9 where Bruce fell. I probably went off that piton a dozen times. Sketchy but it always held. And then after the piton and bolt went, webbing cross the "floor", sometimes sunk in the mud or dirt and sometimes above (so it can be viewed). In my view, some are living in a time warp. K-9 these days is not like it was a decade ago. Folk of all shapes and sizes go through the canyon, and some commerical groups too. If folk shout from one side they want bolt free corridors, is it also respectful to ask about VERP - visitor experience and resource protection? Once upon a time, some of us had solitude in those canyons - you want to give that back to us? Or maybe that doesn't matter? And how many more accidents occur before public safety and land managers confer and slap limits and permits on areas - SAR/helicopters cost money. I'm concerned though re that drop. Most don't/won't inspect the webbing at the spot, particularly on a busy day. (the day of the accident, others had been ahead of Bruce and went down the same webbing.)

Anyway, who's the culprit in all of this, what are the interests of the parties and how does safety factor into the equasion? Moral high or low ground I'll try to avoid even though I feel I could easily weigh in on the issue of contributory negligence.

Take a breath (or maybe I should, and avoid this rabble); what are the compelling concerns in all of this? In my view, if the canyons are going to be continued to be promoted to death, and that at times, 25 or more travel through a canyon in a day, then heightened safety should be a concern for experienced canyoneers and leaders? Is the spot of the accident an easy one for most any group to stop and re-set a new/old station, new webbing, links and make certain it's viable and safe. If you think so then I guess the status quo remains. In my view I've had too many tours through those canyons; even lots of experienced folk, they see someone ahead of them "go", and they follow....don't want to bothered with a 15-20 minute stop. (I'm talking about normal practice here, and I guess that practice could stop/change). Anyway, I think a two bolts/chain on the wall would fit for that rap, it's such a pretty drop from the wall, and if regularly checked the station could be safe for a good while. And those wishing to set up a long sling and link, maybe they/you could choose that course. Take a poll? Doesn't work for me. The future, that's more important. More accidents put the canyons on planners radar - some folk in Wayne county, GCNRA and at Hans Flat, have had their fill of rescues. So which trumps, bottom line/bolt fee - I dislike that term botom line - or safety, or do we all have a blind eye to a degree and can't see what's happened to some of these very accessible and classy canyons in the past decade?

I think about the prevalence of accidents in N Wash/Poison Spring and the Roost in the past 5 years or so. I've been there a couple of times when Wayne County and a chopper appeared, and once when NPS folk were out (they cussed afterwards about messing their packs and gear up). What happens after the accidents? Canyons get safer? What I see is that the canyons get increased promotion and that's mostly it (with a fair amount of discussion re safe canyon practice by a very small component of the community).

I'm guessing that if the accidents continue, the instinct will be to tighten or focus on limits....and the same came be said when folk mess up their at large camping zone. Too bad really, in the 2000's I spoke with so many BLM folk, they didn't know or care about canyoneering, they were bothered by contentious BLM/ATV travel plans cutting cross forests and deserts. Oh the unintended consequences of our actions. The front country discovered and conquered and the backcountry, some small slivers of it, still semi wild. A broken pelvis, yikes, periolus, I'm happy that folk quickly followed up and that he's alive. More heading down to N Wash area, this week, next week, how attentive to each rap, circumstance and situation? Most folk engaged in safe anchors, (if someone passed by just before them) or looking around, chatting and detached?

bjp

04-30-2013, 03:01 PM

Not all bolts are placed in ridiculous spots, but some are.
Were these?

Brian in SLC

04-30-2013, 03:06 PM

Also, another point of view to consider… imagine coming across a bolt in a pristine canyon at an obstacle that is easily defeated. Would you not see it as garbage? Wouldn't you be compelled to restore the canyon to its original state?

Kinda the beauty of bolts, in a sense. Easy to remove and patch the holes.

Now, how do you fix those rope grooves? How 'bout all the material dispaced, over and over again, to build an unnatural anchor?

Pristine is pristine. 50 feet of webbing from a deadman anchor isn't pristine either. Nor are rock stacks. Nor is transporting sand, digging, constructing...

Any anchor requiring being "built" isn't natural either.

I think for most, I'd guess I'd call them "hardcorp" anti bolt canyon folks, they're more about the anchor solving and building game than they are about not impacting a "pristine" canyon. "Leave no trace"? Doesn't apply to a contructed anchor, even one built from natural materials.

The "leave no trace" ethic might drive the ghosting type techniques, which, I think is a good thing. But, at some point, for canyons that become popular...its hard to force what in some cases is a huge amount of risk onto someone who just wants to safely descend a canyon. Yeah, get some skills. Ok, then what? Post the canyon as off limits to those who lack the skills? That's a tough thing to do.

In this desert sandstone, even repeated down climbing is going to show wear and tear on the canyon. Look at old versus recent photo's of popular trails in canyons, or, even more glaring, look at rock climbs on sandstone that have seen many ascents...

Incredible Hand Crack had no "rub" marks on the wall in the mid 80s:

65654

Now it does:

65655

Even social trails in the desert are hard to restore.

Scott P

04-30-2013, 03:19 PM

I think the most annoying bolts/other anchors are when they are somewhere that is easily downclimbed.

In Keyhole, for example, even the class 2 approach is (or was) bolted. At least some of the drops bolted in Mystery are class 3 at best. I was able to climb at least some of them one handed (with photographs) and I'm not a very good climber. Main Fork Bluejohn is another place where people leave a bunch of (not bolted) anchors and the slot is fairly easy to do by leaving nothing behind.

What about Glen Canyon? Bolts in that area OK?

From a legal standpoint, it is always illegal to place a bolt there.

Capitol Reef, Canyonlands....bolts sometimes appear.

From a legal standpoint, it is illegal to place new bolted stations, but legal to replace existing ones when in poor condition.

================================================== ===========================

Beyond that, I won't say much about the bolt debate other than everyone should make an effort to tread as lightly as possible and if you must leave something behind, make an effort to leave behind things that are easily removed.

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 03:33 PM

Were these?

Sure appears that way. Looking at photos on bluugnome.com it appears that anybody with the ability to tie an overhand knot should be able to rig it. See photos #14 and #17.

http://www.bluugnome.com/bluugnome_gallery/index.html?openfolder=Canyoneering/Poison_Springs_Utah/Constrychnine_Canyon/Constrychnine_Canyon_11-14-10

Shoot, I'd bet it's ghost-able, with a little thought.

Scott Card

04-30-2013, 03:37 PM

Yearly BOLT WAR!!!!!! :rifle::bash::kicknuts::2gun::facepalm::wallbash:: amazon::assault::duel::flamer::2guns::deadhorse::v ader: I think that about covers it. :haha:

ratagonia

04-30-2013, 04:04 PM

Were these?

You mean, "it". If you are referring to Constrychnine.

"It" was a drilled baby angle. For quite a few years, not sure when it was placed. I'd say before 2004 which is about when the area was publicized by Shane and Ryan (or so). It flexed, a lot.

A couple years ago, in November, I decided I would no longer rap off that flexing pin. After some consideration, I placed a 1/2" x 3-3/4" Powerbolt next to the pin, and removed the pin and filled the hole. Discussion ensued. It made it the first bolt IN a canyon in the area. Sometime over that winter, someone came in and removed the bolt and built a deadman for that rappel. Some variation on that deadman has been the anchor for a couple of years.

The geometry there is kinda weird, with or without a bolt for an anchor. Kinda why this conversation has been really ridiculous. The webbing from the pin, then from the bolt, also went up and over this rough diagonal buttress, and the way each rappeller starts the rappel slides the webbing across the rough rock. And if they dance to avoid the water at the bottom, it slides the webbing again. So in any case, the webbing would need to be replaced fairly often. Thus, it requires the canyoneer to have a couple-a neurons firing and do their job and inspect the webbing EVERY TIME.

"Not all bolts are placed in ridiculous spots, but some are."

There are no good places to place bolts for this rappel, that can be accessed reasonably for drilling. There is a shortage of good natural-anchor building material in the area, but that just makes it a little more difficult, not ridiculously difficult. The difficulty of building an anchor from natural materials is on a par with other anchors in the area. From that point of view, it is a ridiculous spot to put a drilled anchor.

It is actually a rappel - so it is not ridiculous from that point of view.

Tom

Iceaxe

04-30-2013, 04:23 PM

Maybe I misunderstood the controversy, iceaxe. The real reason for removing existing bolts is because of how dangerous they are?

The piton in Constrychnine was removed for two reasons. Number one being it was dangerous. A flexing piton in NOT a good thing and will eventually break out.

The second reason is "bolts bread more bolts", I think they must be related to rabbits. It's strange that an area can go bolt free for 10 years and someone will place a bolt, and the next thing you know there are 10 new shiney bolts.

I think it's well understood the area is bolt free, so if bolts are placed it's not unreasonable to expect they will be removed.

:cool2:

ratagonia

04-30-2013, 04:56 PM

In Keyhole, for example, even the class 2 approach is (or was) bolted. At least some of the drops bolted in Mystery are class 3 at best.

These instances were done with the Park's approval to solve specific impact problems in these high-use canyons.

Tom

SRG

04-30-2013, 05:58 PM

Brian,
Good point about the rope grooves.
In certain very popular frontcountry canyons with terrible rope grooves(Leprechaun comes to mind), it's a tough sell that a well placed bolt is more of an impact than all those gnarly grooves.

The rub marks on that particular climb are pretty ugly, as are social trails around the head of a canyon, which seems like a good comparison.
Regarding the impact of bolts... I think a good comparison would be if someone wasn't comfortable climbing Incredible Hand Crack on gear, so that person installed bolts and turned it into a sport route. This would not be be okay and those bolts would be gone immediately.
Sam

Spartacus

04-30-2013, 06:10 PM

:popcorn:

Absolute Gravity

04-30-2013, 06:23 PM

Scott P

04-30-2013, 06:31 PM

These instances were done with the Park's approval to solve specific impact problems in these high-use canyons.

I'm somewhat confused by this. What impact problems did bolting the class 2 approach to Keyhole resolve? Or the bolting of some of the easy downclimbs in Mystery (which are already in the watercourse)? :ne_nau:

JennyMae

04-30-2013, 06:46 PM

Let me fix this for you, Shane. :nod:

“Please don't vandalize canyons that lie above your skill level. You may want to experience them in their undamaged state someday. They will always be there and you have plenty of time. It's not about ego or risk, it's about humility and respect.”
Stevee B., 2007, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canyons/message/36972

“Responsible canyoneers should always come prepared to replace anchors in canyons--preferably with natural anchors. To assume the existence of bolts or other fixed anchors is irresponsible. To curse their replacement by a natural anchor is absurd. Steel fasteners can fail and when they do, it will be suddenly and without warning. If predictability is desired then perhaps a climbing gym would be more appropriate for your recreation instead of a natural and dynamic canyon.”
Brendan Busch, 2011,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canyons/message/59694

Jenny West

Slot Machine

04-30-2013, 07:20 PM

Pristine is pristine.

Oh man, you are so right. What was I thinking?

So all things not pristine are equal? No shades of grey, eh?

A bolted ladder would is so equal to that horrible rub mark on the wall. :haha::lol8::haha::lol8::haha:

65661

Absolute Gravity

04-30-2013, 07:30 PM

Oh man, you are so right. What was I thinking?

A bolted ladder would be so equal to that horrible rub mark on the wall. :haha::lol8::haha::lol8::haha:

65661

Now my friends and family can feel safe ascending that wall without having to acquire the skills to properly climb the crack. Plus no more rub marks?! Sounds like a win-win.

Edit: Wow that crack looks super fun!

ratagonia

04-30-2013, 08:18 PM

I'm somewhat confused by this. What impact problems did bolting the class 2 approach to Keyhole resolve? Or the bolting of some of the easy downclimbs in Mystery (which are already in the watercourse)? :ne_nau:

The approach slab in Keyhole was bolted to give a conspicuous anchor to all those parties that go off and put slings around a tree to rappel into Keyhole. I have removed 3 sets of slings that people had rapped in in that area. The bolt, if used, puts the wear and tear on the same place as most people downclimb, and keeps them from wandering off in the woods.

The downclimbs in Mystery were bolted to lead people to the downclimbs, so they would not create trails through the woods for each of these little obstacles. Previously we had blocked off the trails, but this did not prove effective.

Tom

Brian in SLC

04-30-2013, 08:53 PM

Now my friends and family can feel safe ascending that wall without having to acquire the skills to properly climb the crack. Plus no more rub marks?! Sounds like a win-win.

Edit: Wow that crack looks super fun!

That's right! And, when you get to the top, you can continue with your lack of skills by doing the very activity that is the essence of canyoneering: rappelling!

Ha ha.

Yeah, the crack is fun. Haven't climbed it since the late 80's and have heard it's actually gotten a tad wider at the crux, which, used to be tight hands for most fellers, perfect for most chickas. Purportedly easier.

Ahhh...the good ol' bolt debate. All is well with the world...

Brian in SLC

04-30-2013, 09:06 PM

Regarding the impact of bolts... I think a good comparison would be if someone wasn't comfortable climbing Incredible Hand Crack on gear, so that person installed bolts and turned it into a sport route. This would not be be okay and those bolts would be gone immediately.

Yep. Pretty good comparison. I know folks who prefer cams for cracks to sports climbs. At Indian Creek, you can keep essentially a top rope above you by pushing an overhead cam with the rope clipped to it. To some, they have control of that situation better than if someone predetermines pre set protection for them. Its funny but that's a good comparison to canyons too. Probably more the issue than anything. Folks prefer to figure it out, rather than clip and go, or, the essense of that feeling versus the "dumbing down" aspect of existing fixed anchors. Depends what you get your kicks doing, I suppose.

Bolted cracks in Europe, especially in some areas in Italy, are going through similar growing pains. In much poorer areas, where the average person/climber can't afford cams/gear, the issue is justified that tradition climbing gear is expensive (some China climbing comes to mind, etc).

Coming soon to a canyon near you? Hopefully not:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci9pRUYxR_g

JennyMae

04-30-2013, 09:10 PM

I am editing this post. I'm asked "Reason for Editing:' Answer: No good will come of it.

reflection

05-01-2013, 01:33 PM

Playing with safety and tossing history (somewhat aside). The rudimentary partisan will pause and toss the term "bolt war" jargon "at" an issue, that deserves to be parsed as it reveals so much about the players current dilemma.

Zion National Park - long ago - a bolt free, and then mostly bolt free and then walla (rabbits?) a ubiquitous bolt haven. First time we did Left Fork/Subway in Zion, there were NO bolts in that corridor, and for a couple of years we even stayed over nite in that watery canyon (legal). And then two bolts showed up on the "final" sloped handline into the formal Subway, and then a single and then a double bolt at Keyhole falls. And then for years, thousands through that corridor, using handlines and then last year, two more bolts atop the boulder and another bolt on the N side of the near final Subway corridor. And once upon a time there were no bolts in Orderville, Spry or even Pine Creek. Myself and others did them all with no bolts. And that was the mantra that park officials espoused...keep it mostly bolt free. But then on the corners of Zion, commercial guiding crept in and bolts went in, more visitors and more bolts and then guide books, internet sites and a near explosion of iron. Did it matter that many said solidly, leave it bolt free. And just who and what christened Zion as an OK to bolt canyoneering park? The lord of the rap rings I suppose.

The Lords have this all figured out & wish to control the dimension of practice in this or that arena? National Parks are one corridor, BLM, National Recreation Areas, Forest Service, private land, another. Irony; one isolated bolt, here, there, is that an explosion? If it were disclosed, the public would know about bolts in many corridors, where some scream, this is a bolt free zone.

North Wash, Robbers Roost. Been in so many of those canyons so many times, and often with experienced climbers. Their practice, style and manner at rap statiions is most often stated in "redundancy" and often they would ask for or set up at least two sets of rigged webbing systems (if possible) with one quick link or ring. Others though would come along, cut their system up and announce that one single looped tubular piece of webbing would suffice. The Lords and their control. Didn't matter that some of these chaps or ladies had been climbing for decades or more, their practice was "ignorant and out of line" with canyoneering.

So to you wise odes of North Wash and Poison Springs. At the last rap in K-9 I propose there never be more than a single looped strand of one inch tubular webbing that spills over that drop. And the minute anyone adds another strand, cut it out and take it out as booty. And if by chance the webbing wears - after 100 or 200 visitors over a couple of weeks - and someone stumbles and tumbles to their peril, I guess the easy answer is that the webbing merely be reset and replaced again. No need for parsing.(and pass on the SAR too) And I wonder how long until a good body stumbles into N Fork (Zion) on a quiet day and pulls the bolts from that corridor so that it can breath free and be replaced by "natural links." And the rest of the "bothersome rabbit snares" in the park, someone I suppose should go after those too?

And someone please, in the background, start that "often played" tune...don't go into a canyon beyond your ability, and leave it free to for others to enjoy (with natural anchors). Oops, this discordant music didn't/doesn't play too well in Zion, and oops, what happens when the legions of scouts, youth groups, Canyoneering 101 clubs and families invade the not so wild corridors of North Wash and Poison Springs? We guess, they be led into natural anchor and one line of webbing land? And the Lords of the Rap Rings took them by the hand (with good intentions of course). And the soft line hand of the "Lord(s)" spoke and it was so.

Scott P

05-01-2013, 01:43 PM

I am editing this post. I'm asked "Reason for Editing:' Answer: No good will come of it.

I actually enjoyed your post.

Brian in SLC

05-01-2013, 02:11 PM

I am editing this post. I'm asked "Reason for Editing:' Answer: No good will come of it.

Ha ha. How's that, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

Shane's a plagerizer! Was hoping he'd respond...

Good to "see" Stevee B on here, even if it was a not attributed quote...

Absolute Gravity

05-01-2013, 02:57 PM

...And the Lords of the Rap Rings..

Uh, there can be only one, no?

*Sorry, couldn't resist the low hanging fruit.

Iceaxe

05-01-2013, 03:15 PM

Shane's a plagerizer! Was hoping he'd respond...

"The problem with internet news, quotes and statistics is that often times, they're wrongfully believed to be real." - Abraham Lincoln

If this forum was a "Dexter" episode, I'm pretty certain I'd end up on a table, wrapped in plastic.

:popcorn:

Slot Machine

05-01-2013, 03:39 PM

Been in so many of those canyons so many times, and often with experienced climbers. Their practice, style and manner at rap statiions is most often stated in "redundancy" and often they would ask for or set up at least two sets of rigged webbing systems (if possible) with one quick link or ring.

Steve,

Great posts! I particularly enjoyed your observations from canyoneering in Zion over the years. Thanks for sharing.

I think that the above solution is a 'clean' and intelligent compromise for Constrychnine. Two long pieces of webbing, from one natural anchor, draped over the edge. No bolts and minimal risk. Seems like there is a photo floating around of the drop in question, rigged this way. From one of Tom's outings? I can't recall....

Bob

Absolute Gravity

05-01-2013, 04:27 PM

I'm pretty certain I'd end up on a table, wrapped in plastic.

I'm pretty certain it wouldn't be your first time :naughty:

JennyMae

05-02-2013, 06:57 PM

Ha ha. How's that, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

Shane's a plagerizer! Was hoping he'd respond...

Good to "see" Stevee B on here, even if it was a not attributed quote...

See my post #119. I fixed it for Shane. It frightened me to think of him on a table wrapped in plastic. It took me a while but it's all good. :2thumbs:Thanks Brian and thank you, Scott P. for your kindness.

'Going back under now. You all play fair and be safe, OK?

Jenny West

hank moon

05-04-2013, 10:24 AM

nothing else was broken, except maybe the helmet, which took a good whack at impact, according to the members of his group.

If the helmet is cracked, took a good whack! Might be fun to add the tale to this:

http://www.petzl.com/us/outdoor/verticality/helmets-0/helmet-stories-edge

hesse15

05-06-2013, 11:14 AM

From a legal standpoint, it is always illegal to place a bolt there.
From a legal standpoint, it is illegal to place new bolted stations, but legal to replace existing ones when in poor condition.
.

Could you please posted the link to validate your point?:cool2::nod:or you are just made that up?

probably if people start to travel a little more will learn how canyons are done in the rest of the world!
agree that a piece of stainless steel is more natural than piles of webbing and resulting permanent grooves!!!

and as climbing if you want to skip the bolts just do it,

by the way nobody seems to care about Powell that people are constantly trans passing Indian territory to do canyons without asking the rightful owner for permission?
by the way those are the same private individuals that want to put:scared: rules for the rest of us

Scott P

05-06-2013, 11:39 AM

http://www.bogley.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Scott P http://www.bogley.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?p=533877#post533877)
From a legal standpoint, it is always illegal to place a bolt there.
From a legal standpoint, it is illegal to place new bolted stations, but legal to replace existing ones when in poor condition.
.

Could you please posted the link to validate your point?:cool2::nod:or you are just made that up?

Sure. Here are the exact wordings with all the links directly from the National Park websites:

Capitol Reef National Park:

RESTRICTIONS AND CONCERNS
Capitol Reef National Park is a clean climbing area. Minimum impact techniques that don't destroy the rock or leave a visual trail are encouraged. The use of white chalk is prohibited. Climbers using chalk must use chalk which closely matches the color of the surrounding rock. The use of power drills is also prohibited. Bolts may only be used to replace existing unsafe bolts. Where it is necessary to leave or replace existing webbing, the webbing should closely match the color of the surrounding rock. Ropes may not be left in place unattended for more than 24 hours, and these ropes must be out of reach from the ground or other points accessible without technical climbing.

http://www.nps.gov/care/planyourvisit/rockclimbing.htm

Arches National Park:

No new permanent climbing hardware may be installed in any fixed location. If an existing bolt or other hardware item is unsafe, it may be replaced. This will limit all climbing to existing routes or new routes not requiring placement of fixed anchors.

http://www.nps.gov/arch/planyourvisit/climbing.htm

Canyonlands National Park:

No new climbing hardware may be left in a fixed location; however, if a hardware item is unsafe, it may be replaced.

http://www.nps.gov/cany/planyourvisit/climbing.htm

Glen Canyon National Recreation Area:

Leaving gear and equipment used in connection with climbing activities unattended. The gear and equipment shall be removed by the participants before departing the area. This includes but is not limited to pitons, bolts, and all other climbing aids.

Apparently, there is an exception for the Orange Cliffs Unit since it is managed by Canyonlands even though part of the GCNRA. In that case you can replace an existing bolt, but not add a new ones. In all the rest of the Glen Canyon National Recreation area, no bolts are allowed, old or new.

(PDF only; click on link)

http://www.nps.gov/glca/parkmgmt/upload/2013-FINAL-Compendium.pdf

Of course I didn't make the rules, but just eluded to them earlier because someone asked.

hesse15

05-06-2013, 12:48 PM

Sure. Here are the exact wordings with all the links directly from the National Park websites:

Capitol Reef National Park:

. Bolts may only be used to replace existing unsafe bolts.
http://www.nps.gov/care/planyourvisit/rockclimbing.htm
Arches National Park:
No new permanent climbing hardware may be installed in any fixed location. If an existing bolt or other hardware item is unsafe, it may be replaced.
http://www.nps.gov/arch/planyourvisit/climbing.htm
Canyonlands National Park:
No new climbing hardware may be left in a fixed location; however, if a hardware item is unsafe, it may be replaced.
http://www.nps.gov/cany/planyourvisit/climbing.htm
Glen Canyon National Recreation Area:
Leaving gear and equipment used in connection with climbing activities unattended. The gear and equipment shall be removed by the participants before departing the area. This includes but is not limited to pitons, bolts, and all other climbing aids.
Apparently, there is an exception for the Orange Cliffs Unit since it is managed by Canyonlands even though part of the GCNRA. In that case you can replace an existing bolt, but not add a new ones. In all the rest of the Glen Canyon National Recreation area, no bolts are allowed, old or new.
http://www.nps.gov/glca/parkmgmt/upload/2013-FINAL-Compendium.pdf

Scott thank you,
but sounds like ONLY int the BOUNDARIES of the national parks
so any BLM area is not regulated!!!
including North wash, swell robber roost and surrounding capitol reef including pandora!!!!
if glue in bolts were not that expensive those are much harder to be removed!!!:mrgreen:
AM I correct?

Scott P

05-06-2013, 01:09 PM

but sounds like ONLY int the BOUNDARIES of the national parks

Those were the areas that were asked about and that I was referring to. The BLM areas also have rules, but it depends on which area you are in.

so any BLM area is not regulated!!!

Some BLM areas are, but many are not. It isn't allowed in many Special Recreation Areas or in any Wilderness Study Areas, for example:

Rock climbing and caving are allowed as long as these activities meet the non-impairment criteria. The placement of permanent fixed anchors (e.g., bolts) or artificial holds is not allowed unless it meets one of the exceptions to the non-impairment standard, e.g. for emergencies, such as search and rescue operations.

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Information_Resources_Management/policy/blm_manual.Par.31915.File.dat/6330.pdfThe monuments managed by the BLM mention canyoneering specifically as well, but old bolts placed before 1976 are allowed to remain (though I don't know how many 37+ year old bolts should be trusted!):

[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Verdana][I]The majority of areas suitable for climbing and canyoneering in the Monument are located within Wilderness Study Areas. Since wilderness preservation is part of BLM

hesse15

05-06-2013, 01:43 PM

Tnuments managed by the BLM mention canyoneering specifically as well, but old bolts placed before 1976 are allowed to remain (though I don't know how many 37+ year old bolts should be trusted!):
.
mhh so better to bolt everything in any unregulated area before they change idea so they will be " grandfather in"?

:naughty::naughty:

reflection

05-07-2013, 12:31 PM

That Bruce rebounds and heals. That is the (present) most compelling concern from this corner. Those that promote & lead the "lemmings" into these canyons (I'm guilty to some small degree) can pick and choose their guidance and direction - be it laudatory or indifferent. The active players, engaged or detached in the process, what shall they do? If I lead a youth crew through there, I trust I (& others) have the respect for the resource (and beauty) of the place and put safety as a paramount concern. Those that are passive in their future approaches may be rolling the dice - again and again.

And the side show of these dauting escapades - the drama, the veiled curtains, the nuance and context never talked about, probed or poked. A bolt here, here, but not there. And then the partisan views, when one or another is so right and correct and has a seeming cold steady contempt for even a mimimum threshold of tolerance and mutual respect. A message I suppose re how some carry about in "civil society" (no, universe, that's which we each abide in). Wild corridors, keeping them natural, yes hallelujah. Busy trade canyons promoted to the hilt with all shapes, sizes and ages of travelers. Is it reasonable to tender a "possible" alternative to the present, which recently failed? We pick our grave concerns in life. And some active in the "engineering" side of canyoneering offer a bountiful display of marvelous tools so we can travel in canyons. Thank you to those that invent and "produce.

And speaking of Humpty Dumpty, Bruce is not the only one that had a recent tumble and "fall". Bruce cracked his helmet and pelivs. Another in our group (last week) had his chest cracked open, a 90 percent blockage in one ventricle, and then open heart surgery. This person lodged a most detailed report re Bruce's accident, and now he is lying in cardiac critical care.

Let's see, be happy, be safe, be kind.....how many ways can those words be bent and stretched? How to say thank you, or please, how to listen intently as well as to civily speak. The sign of a great person - one that makes others feel great? None of this has anything to do with canyoneering, or life, or maybe it does. Young kids in canyons - the lesson - that they return safely home. Adults in canyons - the lesson - I'm sometimes lost in the dark. Once upon a time, the Wow factor of pristine canyons...and then modern times, a good day then maybe not such a good day in the canyons. "When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long back at you."