Security of the belay position

[blueeyes]

PS. You guys drive me nuts with the bickering. Worse than an old married couple! This canyoneering section needs some chocolate, pms pills and a tub of ice cream.

Lighten up ya all... go play outside.

[ratagonia]

Maybe I can shed some light onto why the belay was done. After my explanation maybe or not, you will decide it was the right thing to do even if it was not an effective/safe way to do it.

...

Thanks for the details, Chere.

Hanks point, which I support, was that the "belay" was not actually a belay, but a false belay, and was dangerous both for the false-belayer and for the downclimber. In the event of a slip, many things could have happenned, some of them quite bad.

An effective belay for the first part was available. There was an anchor behind the dude that he could have been clipped into.

While the pseudo-belay may have made you feel safer, it in fact subtracted from your safety. So it was not the right thing to do. I would expect Kurt, an experienced and proficient canyoneer, to recognize this difficulty; instead of recognizing the opportunity to bait me for his own entertainment.

Tom

[ratagonia]

(bickering removed)

[blueeyes]

Tom,

And now you are baiting him with your last sentence. If your intent is to teach, please teach. But do it with the heart of a teacher, why at any point do negative remarks have to be made? You asked a question, instead of waiting for an answer from Kurt, you gave a negative reason, testosterone poisoning. Thread kinda went downhill from there.

So, (<---for Hank) Andy should have clipped himself into the anchor before belaying us. A belay in that situation is only effective for a certain length because once you are out far enough if you fall you will swing back and hurt yourself more than if you just fell to the canyon floor. If the person being belayed would have fallen with Andy standing where he is in the photos and without being anchored, both the climber and belayer would be hurt.

Chere'

[Deathcricket]

Yes. Exactly why you are a proud member of the Z-Team.

Tom

And here I thought you liked being a "bottom man". *shrug*

[ratagonia]

Tom,

And now you are baiting him with your last sentence. If your intent is to teach, please teach. But do it with the heart of a teacher, why at any point do negative remarks have to be made? You asked a question, instead of waiting for an answer from Kurt, you gave a negative reason, testosterone poisoning. Thread kinda went downhill from there.

Chere'

Point taken.

"Testosterone Poisoning" was not meant as a negative, it was meant to be descriptive. Guys in a certain age range think they can do things that they can't. "If she falls, I'll just catch her". Yes, he might, but then again, if she falls when he is not paying attention, maybe not. Maybe he will be pulled off his stance, and fall on top of her. Maybe this, maybe that...

A "belay" is not a "maybe" kind of thing. The whole point of a belay is to provide certainty. In this case, the certainty could be provided by being clipped into an anchor, even a meat anchor of other people further back in the slot, if a more-traditional anchor is not available.

Tom

[oldno7]

To sum this up, real quick:

The ONLY place a belay is effective in this situation IS the initial 8'!!!!!!!!!(preferably climbing straight down, any amount you proceed OUT from the belay, only creates a pendulum-- in that first 8')

It doesn't matter if you sit down and do a meat belay, tie off to an anchor or stand on your head, thems the facts!!!

Once someone is farther out, say 15-50' and the drop is 10' this is a moot point.

You will not drag the belayer with you as you will be hitting the bottom, due to the FACT that you have more rope out than drop.

So anything past 8-10' in THIS instance, is a pseudo belay.

The belayer is not at any additional risk and the belayed has been on their own since 8.25' of this move out into stemming.(I just added the .25 for fun, it could be closer to .178965)

[blueeyes]

Makes sense.

.178965

[hank moon]

Issues of safety are best discussed with a clear mind. I'm gonna let this thread cool down a bit before going further with it. Perhaps we might all might consider what we have posted and make some friendly updates, even if (no, especially if) the ego resists it.

[DesertDuke]

Nice pics Old No 7. You always have good shots. However, I think I can clear this whole thing up. Obviously some members on this thread would feel better about your safety if you would just place a bolt there for his anchor. They are asking you to bolt the place so that they will feel better about the belay anchor next time. Just hang a shiny, new bolt, give us a pic of the new bolt, and all will be happy. Be sure to use stainless so that it sticks out more in the new picture. (OK, not really, I just couldn't help it)

Duke

[oldno7]

Issues of safety are best discussed with a clear mind. I'm gonna let this thread cool down a bit before going further with it. Perhaps we might all might consider what we have posted and make some friendly updates, even if (no, especially if) the ego resists it.

That was with a clear mind and I was never heated up.

You haven't seen how us white,male,gun totin',conservative,native Utahn folks get when we're actually pissed off, but theres time.

As far as this thread--I think everyone who participated did indeed express their opinion, if you want to start a dead horse thread, have at it.

This was a trip report--have you ever posted a trip report hank?

No??probably not--your more the instigator type, who turns and runs in the face of battle.

Then returns after the fact expressing bravado for having been a player.

I can only suggest(again) that you start your own thread, if you want to continue your dog and pony show here, expect the same reactions.

So, continue as you see fit.

[oldno7]

Nice pics Old No 7. You always have good shots. However, I think I can clear this whole thing up. Obviously some members on this thread would feel better about your safety if you would just place a bolt there for his anchor. They are asking you to bolt the place so that they will feel better about the belay anchor next time. Just hang a shiny, new bolt, give us a pic of the new bolt, and all will be happy. Be sure to use stainless so that it sticks out more in the new picture. (OK, not really, I just couldn't help it)

Duke

Thanks Duke

I will consider your safety suggestions in the future but it would take many bolts to protect a high stemming section of canyon.

somewhat like a via ferrata.

[Deathcricket]

Thanks Duke

I will consider your safety suggestions in the future but it would take many bolts to protect a high stemming section of canyon.

somewhat like a via ferrata.

If you're thinking of placing bolts I would suggest saving one for Misery canyon, like 2nd to last rap.

Thanks and best wishes from your pal on the Z-team!

[tyro]

Sorry to break the informal peace accord but I've re-reviewed this thread and feel that a response is warranted from the supposed "dangerous" canyoneer.

Hank,

In response to your inquiry as to the safety of my approach in assisting three members of my group at the entry of a specific downclimb in Spry Canyon, I provide the following: There is no effective belay position or anchor at that location that allows for a safe belay through the lateral length of the slot. Therefore, as was discussed between the four of us at the top, I would provide roped support to assist the downclimbers through the entry portion of the slot. It was discussed that a belay extending further out than the jammed log end would initially create a more dangerous pendulum situation than a vertical fall. The downclimbers were advised that the rope should be disconnected as soon as they found a location, beyond the initial entry, where they were comfortable enough to utilize their hands to detach the biner/rope. As you can view from the photos, as Hummingbird was moving out past the log, I was feeding rope out and there was slack in the rope behind her as evidence that any belay or rope support had ended. In the next photo of Cory, you will see that I was pulling up the slack to take up the rope as she disconnected and discontinued any rope support. These three downclimbers did a great job of maneuvering down and across the slot. The two who had not done it previously proved to themselves that they were capable of doing it in the future just as well without the rope. Chere’ provided a very good overview of the situation in her post. You asked if I could have supported each individual’s weight enough to mitigate a fall. The answer is an unequivocal “yes”. Yes, because I have done so in similar past situations and, in this instance, I used the positive results of past experience to make the judgment call. The reasons for this “belay” were multiple and I won’t endeavor to justify any of them as I don’t feel justification is required. Safety in this maneuver was supported by our discussion prior to committing to the downclimb. All parties knew the expectations and fulfilled their roles as discussed. Could something have gone wrong? Certainly. Each and every time we get on rope, downclimb, upclimb, take on keeper potholes, rap from a sand trap, rap from a water trap, rap from a fiddlestick, handline down a sketchy downclimb, scramble up slickrock in the rain, etc…. the unexpected can occur. I use my learned experiences to make judgment calls and don’t subject others to unsafe conditions. Safety is, and will always be, a primary consideration for me and all who travel with me, whether in canyons or elsewhere. You suggested a warning to other canyoneers that this photo shows a potentially dangerous belay and I don’t disagree. If it were intended to be a conventional belay several other warnings would be warranted as well. I believe the original post was intended to be a trip report and has unfortunately been hijacked but am certain Kurt wouldn’t have any objection if you wanted to use it as a training aid.
That all went well, and six of us had an entertaining day in the canyon, did not occur by luck or coincidence. We practiced due diligence and applied prudent technique at whatever level was required. The facts and our successful day bear this out.
If your initial inquiry was prompted in the constructive vein, I appreciate your effort to make a genuine contribution to the canyoneering community. If not, we’ll eventually be at odds. I’ve read some of your informative posts in the past and it seems they have been posted with the intent to educate and inform. I take your inquiry of my approach in this instance as an extension of your endeavor to bring the best practices to canyoneering. I trust this answers your questions insofar as this particular issue as I have no intent to further prolong discussion of this matter.


Tom,

It’s unfortunate that my first post on Bogley has been triggered by speculation and snide comments. I would have much rather simply continued to disregard the petty and self-aggrandizing comments that appear to be your trademark but since you’ve made this personal by categorizing me as a danger to myself and others, I suppose a response is warranted now. Please see my response to Hank for an account of the rope assist provided to three members of our group in Spry Canyon. That is all the detailed response forthcoming from me on that subject. If there is a need for you to further debate my actions, it will be without supplemental comment from me. If you’re involved in additional discussion, please try to make it constructive so members gain some benefit from their time invested.

Aside from the above, there are a few points that warrant response:
1. You made the comment to Kurt: “As Hank was pointing out, you SHOULD chastise Andy's action, because it was and could be in the future a danger to himself and others.” Tom, you have no information to support that accusation inasmuch as you don’t know what communication occurred or what strategy was determined between members of the group. You’ve based that comment on still photos of an event in which you did not participate. Suppose I begin advising others that you are a danger to the canyoneering community because you broke your arm after disregarding warnings from fellow experienced canyoneers while you were using an unsuitable “water trap” as an anchor. I don’t voice that opinion because it’s not my place to speculate on the particulars of an episode in which I don’t know the detailed interaction of the participants or the conditions under which your decision was made. If you feel the need to direct others in chastisement of me for what I feel were perfectly appropriate actions, then what should we say to you, for what in that instance, “appeared” to be your obvious stupidity? And, following that same protocol, maybe all the paying customers who have received instruction from you at ZAC should be retrained because “your action was, and could be in the future, a danger to yourself and others.” Think of all the new canyoneers they’ll pass your dangerous teachings to. Wow…… this is pretty easy to call someone else dangerous, and even stupid, when I don’t have to be responsible for gathering facts before running my mouth. See the correlation, Tom? Perhaps the Bogley forum and new canyoneers could be better served by informing them that, “depending on the circumstances, this action could be unsafe if proper precautions are not taken by both the downclimber and the rope handler.” Using your ignorance as a springboard to disparage others has no merit whatsoever. It would seem you’d have realized that by now.
2. Another comment: “In Spry, there is usually a sling around that jammed stump - thus, an actual anchored belay WAS available - why was it not used? (answer: testosterone poisoning.)” I can’t say for certain whether there was a sling on the stump or not but it is totally irrelevant as the climbers were starting from above the log and that is where the support rope was provided. If the anchor or “belay” was below them we would easily create an increased fall factor. Are you suggesting I should have increased their exposure?

So, now we come to the subject of “testosterone poisoning” and your reference to males in the age category of 15 – 45, as though they have defective thought processes compared to yours. Well, perhaps I missed out on my chance to exude testosterone during my years from 15 – 45 or, perhaps I did display an abundance of testosterone but can’t remember it now that I’m 61 years old. I can remember most occurrences within a few weeks’ time though and I can assure you that you’re barking up the wrong tree if you think my judgment was recently clouded by excess testosterone. At this point in life, a little testosterone serves my needs completely.

3. You may not remember but a few years back I had you on “belay” when we, along with Courtney, were going to rap from the pour off in refrigerator canyon just below the foot bridge on the way to Angel’s Landing. You and I downclimbed the boulders, then I climbed back up and threw you a line so you could safely explore closer to the edge. I was not attached to an anchor but was in a standing position so that I could view and mitigate a fall by you, should one occur. You were then perfectly fine with that scenario. Now, would you consider that to have been a pseudo belay? Were we both endangered because you wanted a bit of psychological support? Were you intentionally putting me at risk that day? Have you been putting fellow canyoneers at risk for years now? Or did we both make a judgment call that served the situation perfectly well? Think about it!

4. Here’s a quote from you that, had you made it your focal point, would have made this entire post much more beneficial to the community at large especially since you had no insight to the interaction of our group. “The canyoneering part of your question is not really answerable. Each situation is different; each geometry must be considered on its own merit.” A constructive conversation could then have ensued highlighting the pros and cons for handling the subject situation.

So, Tom, why is it that the vast majority of derisiveness in this forum originates with your comments? Have you not yet seen your shortcomings in this regard? Can you not see that you hijack many threads with inane and unwarranted comments? Such a shame that you either can’t, or won’t, tame your childlike impulsiveness and follow the spirit of the thread, realizing that it’s not all about you. Unfortunately, it seems you have a proven propensity for tossing belittling comments at others with no basis in fact. Hopefully this is not due to ego or pomposity on your part because that would make you a very little man and this sport needs better role models than that. Many give you a pass and chalk your inconsiderations up to “Tom’s foolishness” but you and I know that acceptance of that behavior will only perpetuate more of the same, so, you get no pass from me. Perhaps you’ll eventually find a way to soften your approach with common sense and courtesy so as to help unite this community rather than divide it. For the record, I welcome common sense discussions or critiques consequent to any actions I perform or suggest in the canyoneering world; after all, you’ll notice that I post under the name “tyro” which is from medieval latin, meaning: beginner, learner, or apprentice. I only ask that the comments be responsibly derived and delivered.

I have been a Bogley member for about three years now and have refrained from posting due to my disdain for run-on asinine, and/or unsupported speculations that have been posted from time to time. It’s my hope that this response will put speculation of this particular “belay” to rest and future critiques will be more constructive. My apologies to all for having dipped my feet into the muddied waters of Bogley controversy.

[Iceaxe]

I used my massive moderator skillz and split this off into it's own thread best I could. Because once you get past the food fight there is some useful information.

Original thread is here: http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?64414

[Iceaxe]

And I agree--A belay in a high stemming section is of little value, other than psychological.

FWIW: When I encounter a high stemming situation with my kids I normally climb just in front of them. With my kids this gives them the same comfort level as a "fake belay", it also allows me to assits with a foot hold or hand hold if the need arises.

[oldno7]

FWIW: When I encounter a high stemming situation with my kids I normally climb just in front of them. With my kids this gives them the same comfort level as a "fake belay", it also allows me to assits with a foot hold or hand hold if the need arises.

Excellent point!

This is what I did with Spencer.

[tyro]

And I would have done the same with one person but couldn't with three.

[oldno7]

And I would have done the same with one person but couldn't with three.

Exactly!

Now quit posting so much--you've doubled your post count in just a few hours

[Iceaxe]

Sorry to break the informal peace accord

Welcome to Bogley.