Canyoneering Book

[rcwild]

I have been too focused on a little writing project to do more than scan the articles about the Yosemite accident.

[moab mark]

Less duty to me when you claim to be speaking to everyone with words of warning? Errors on what? Nothing that you've pointed out in the book is "dangerous" or "life-threatening" as you just posted in the above quote, upping the ante even more. Nothing that you've pointed out refers to anchors or any practical technical canyoneering technique... simply quibbling on the definition of a term.

To be fair, you label more than just this book as "dangerous" if you don't agree with it. You have things posted on your website "DANGEROUS THINGS KELSEY SAYS" and the like. In my opinion, you aren't trying to help people, you're trying to de-fame people and get them to listen to you instead of anyone else. Again, this is just my opinion, based on your posts. You and RCWild a very similar in this respect. Of course, this is just my opinion. Obviously both of you have contributed a lot to the "field" of canyoneering, but clearly you both have your soap-boxes that you like to broadcast your thoughts from.

But that's my opinion based on multiple posts that I've seen from you; people can obviously make their own decision to listen to you when you cry wolf or not. Obviously I'm not the only one calling you out on this one.


I use a metolius All Around... double 10kn belay loops at 20Kn total according to Metolius. Could this break below this point? Possibly, but likely not. It would take some crazy forces to break out just one part of the waist or leg loops alone, which would be pretty nuts to try and isolate one out from the other.

Have you read the book?

[ratagonia]

telling someone that the book is "dangerous" is a little bit extreme, to say the least.

Just to be clear, since this has escalated into an argument, I did not use the word "dangerous". You did.

Tom

[rcwild]

Seems like there are a few people that are opposed to the "WCCM" guide-service... they all seem to be native utahns that like to think that they started it all and know everything about canyoning/canyoneering.

I think this is just one more example of different people in different camps defending there own "turf".

Aside from the "margin" terminology, how was the core information? Was the anchor information right? Because that's what the OP originally said the book was 90% of. Someone can make an accusation to throw it all out because the rope that they sell wasn't posted in it, or that some terminology isn't correct, but really, if most of the book is about anchors, telling someone that the book is "dangerous" is a little bit extreme, to say the least.

ps- my harness is rated way over 15kn, btw.

I logged in today because I was told there was a thread here about my book. Mistakenly thought this was it.

There certainly are ego issues within the canyoneering community, especially with those native Utahns. Glad I'm not one of them either. Canyoneering for 32 years, but have lived in Utah for only the past 8.

Has it occurred to you that there is a risk in discounting people's opinions because you think they are just defending their own turf? If I tell you there are serious problems with the book, will you ignore me and accept the book as fact because I offer courses that compete with ATS? Or because I am working on a book that will compete with this one? Or just because I'm an a**hole?

Just in case you are willing to listen on the off-chance that I might have an objective opinion ...

Tom is right; the book is very poorly written. Typos, spelling errors, poor grammar, incorrect terminology, poor grasp of technical concepts, etc. It is titled "Canyoneering Anchors and Basic Rope Systems". Don't count on finding any basic rope systems. It does have a lot of material about anchors; much of that material attempting to defend bolting. Quite a bit of the material was gleaned from the ACA's forums and from anchor workshops I taught in LA (e.g. the bits about knot chocks). Unfortunately, in attempting their own explanations they missed some of the nuance.

I don't feel there is anything in the book so glaringly bad that someone might get hurt from it. But if you go about the canyoneering community quoting portions of it or using their explanations and terminology, be prepared to be met with some puzzled looks.

[ratagonia]

I use a metolius All Around... double 10kn belay loops at 20Kn total according to Metolius. Could this break below this point? Possibly, but likely not. It would take some crazy forces to break out just one part of the waist or leg loops alone, which would be pretty nuts to try and isolate one out from the other.

It's not.

Here's what Metolius has to say: http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/harnesses.html

They make no strength rating claim for the overall harness other than that it is CE/UIAA Certified, so the certified strength of your harness is 15 kN.

What they HAVE done is think of lots of ways people can mess up, and engineered a backup system. Their 10 kN gear loops may have saved a life or two, hard to say.

The twin 10 kN belay loops are interesting. There is a test standard for the belay loops for CE certification, but I don't remember what the required strength is, for sure. The test is to pull on the harness (on the dummy) with any point shown for attachment of the rappel device; so it is a test of the belay loop against the harness, which is more severe than pulling the belay loop between pins. As I remember, the required strength is 12 kN. Black Diamond belay loops, pulled between pins, were typically 5000 lbs or 22 kN.

Tom

[ratagonia]

ps- my harness is rated way over 15kn, btw.

And just to be clear, because THIS is a technical discussion, you THINKING that your harness is good for WAY OVER 15 kN, and it being "RATED" for way over 15 kN are two entirely different things. Yes, when I look at the Metolius Climb Safe, I am also under the impression that it would barely even notice 15 kN, and would probably go up to 20 kN or more, before the test dummy exploded. But Metolius makes no such claim, and they are the people to state a rating for the harness.

Tom

[rcwild]

Because some sport climbers only use a Gri-gri, and this type of setup adds a pretty simple way of dealing with it.

My comment was in reference to canyoneering, not sport climbing.

[oval]

Just to be clear, since this has escalated into an argument, I did not use the word "dangerous". You did.

Tom

If the book is filled with flagrant errors, then I believe I have a duty to tell my friend Mark that the book is "dangerous". If you do not respect my opinion, that is your choice. But Mark is my friend (you know, in the real world, not just on Bogley), has a wonderful family and friends, and deserves to live. I have less of a duty to you, Mr. Oval, but you got in on the conversation anyway.

You're implications don't imply danger or life-threatening ramifications? Interesting how you look at things.

[oval]

My comment was in reference to canyoneering, not sport climbing.

Yeah, but the reason it's in their catalogue is to demonstrate single line rapping with a gri gri. I don't know if they recommend it for canyoneering or not, but climbing is what I've seen Petzl demonstrate it for.

[rcwild]

Yeah, but the reason it's in their catalogue is to demonstrate single line rapping with a gri gri. I don't know if they recommend it for canyoneering or not, but climbing is what I've seen Petzl demonstrate it for.

It is/was in their canyoneering documents. That is the only place I have ever seen it. Felt comfortable inferring a canyoneering context here in the canyoneering forum.

[Randi]

Anybody seen this book yet? http://tinyurl.com/l9n6ee Just curious.

Mike C.

I haven't seen it, but it sure seems to be stirring up a lot of debate!
I wonder why it's priced higher than most books of this genre; Steve Allen's (cept the out of print books), Dave Blacks, Tom Jone's books are all priced considerably lower than the $30 they're asking...

Have you read it Mike? What did you think?

[oval]

Has it occurred to you that there is a risk in discounting people's opinions because you think they are just defending their own turf? If I tell you there are serious problems with the book, will you ignore me and accept the book as fact because I offer courses that compete with ATS? Or because I am working on a book that will compete with this one? Or just because I'm an a**hole?

Still waiting to hear said allegations of "Serious problems" from anyone; Tom, you, or anyone else. Please, by all means enlighten the community.

I have problems with anyone that is pushing their own agenda, mostly because there is biased info as a result. I've heard many good things about your courses, so kudos to you on the information that you've collected and formulated. On the other hand, there are several things that I think are dangerous or negative to the community that you have done that I wouldn't buy into for any amount of money. These are my opinions. These are just my opinions however, and others may feel differently; totally up to people to judge for themself.

I don't feel there is anything in the book so glaringly bad that someone might get hurt from it. But if you go about the canyoneering community quoting portions of it or using their explanations and terminology, be prepared to be met with some puzzled looks.

So you don't think it's dangerous then. Not a well written book, but not dangerous/life-threatening.

[Iceaxe]

Very interesting.....

Yesterday this was the system posted on the Petzl website under Canyoning Techniques




Today they have new files up promoting the new system below and the old technique is no longer noted.




And for fun and games.... here is what the ACA teach's for a block.

[rcwild]

On the other hand, there are several things that I think are dangerous or negative to the community that you have done that I wouldn't buy into for any amount of money.

Please enlighten me.

These are my opinions. These are just my opinions however, and others may feel differently; totally up to people to judge for themself.

So isn't that what these forums are all about. You give your opinion. I give mine. Others give theirs. Then everyone draws their own conclusions. So why do you get so upset when Tom or I share our opinions?

So you don't think it's dangerous then. Not a well written book, but not dangerous/life-threatening.

There are some very dangerous things in the book. But I have faith that anyone with average intelligence will recognize them for what they are. Very odd how some of the things are presented, however. For example, in a book titled "Canyoneering Anchors and Basic Rope Systems" there is a chapter (15) titled "Anchors That will Kill You (Maybe)" They state that it is for entertainment purposes only, then go on to say:

"The Greasy Granny is a great system ... this has been an ace in the hole for us ... all things considered this is the strongest and most durable design ... I have personally used this device successfully on a wide range of drops ... "

I guess I don't understand why techniques "for entertainment purposes only" are lauded as great systems. Sounds like they are trying to encourage people to use them. Or just trying to dazzle the reader ??

I'm interested in hearing from anyone who has actually used the greasy granny. It seams to be an over-complicated variation of the old piton block:

http://canyoneering.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1349

The piton block, while dicey, has a specific purpose ... getting down on a single strand of rope and still getting your rope back.

The Greasy Granny is described as useful for situations where you have to tie ropes together, but two strands have to reach the ground for it to work. I understand not passing the rope through the rappel ring if there are knots on both sides. But why not use something more secure like a macrame?

Do I think the technique is dangerous? Yes. Do I think it was irresponsible for them to include it? Yes. Do I think anyone with a lick of sense with actually try it? God, I hope not.

[rcwild]

And for fun and games ... here is what the ACA teach's for a block.

In the collection where you found that photo are several others. All for illustration purposes. The way I currently teach blocks ...

[Ryebrye]

In the collection where you found that photo are several others. All for illustration purposes. The way I currently teach blocks ...

I tried that kind of block once, but damn it was hard to pull. I had to exert around 20 kN of force just to pull my rope! On the plus side, we were able to ghost that anchor ;)

(and yes, I'm just being a smart ass, I know you'd unhook it as the last one down)

[rcwild]

... I know you'd unhook it as the last one down)

Unhook it? NO. We teach students to leave the entire rig behind. I sell more ropes and canyon quickdraws teaching it that way.

[ratagonia]

You're implications don't imply danger or life-threatening ramifications? Interesting how you look at things.

(can't seem to quote your entire post, including the quotes, with the new system)...

You quote me out of context, Oval. I only used the word "dangerous" AFTER you did, in rebuttal (essentially). My criticisms did not imply danger or life-threatening ramifications; they did imply that learning anything from this book, filled with simple errors as it is, is probably not a good thing for Mark, who is fairly well-versed in canyoneering technique, but not what I would call a technique-nazi, like me. The examples I presented did not touch on important points, but were instead meant to show that the authors are not well-versed in the topic, or, more specifically, well-versed in WRITING about the topic, and therefore their WRITING about the topic should be considered suspect.

I have not delved into the book looking for significant and dangerous errors of fact. My suspicion is that I will find few to none. Darren and Travis know what they are doing. Yeah, they do a couple of odd things that I would not do - but then again I do a couple of odd things that hardly anyone else does too. I respect them as canyoneers and instructors, but the topic at hand is this book. Not so good.

Tom

[ratagonia]

I haven't seen it, but it sure seems to be stirring up a lot of debate!

I wonder why it's priced higher than most books of this genre; Steve Allen's (cept the out of print books), Dave Blacks, Tom Jone's books are all priced considerably lower than the $30 they're asking...

Have you read it Mike? What did you think?

I fully support higher prices for canyoneering-related books!!

And I hope Rich will do a good job of setting the standard high in this matter, as I fully expect Rich's book to be not only really big, but also really good. $40.00 Rich, I expect no less!

Tom

[Don]

In the collection where you found that photo are several others. All for illustration purposes. The way I currently teach blocks ...

Typically, when using a biner block we (we = my partners and I) will clip the rope to the anchor for all but the last guy down the rope. The last guy will then either clip the rope to the rope as shown above or if that might hamper the rope pull he could just unclip it. Neither option alters the block. Of course the last guy down has to remember to do this or someone is going back up.
This adds redundancy to the system which would have prevented the recent death in CA and would prevent an accident resulting from someone clipping into the wrong side of a blocked rope (to prevent this we also keep the unblocked side of the rope on top until the last guy tosses it or brings it down with him). Of course the priority, job one, should be knowing how to set up and safely use the block in the first place.