Sponsored By
ROCK
HARDWARE
Chockstone Photography
Australian Landscape Prints |
Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta
Crag & Route Beta
| Area | Location | Sub Location | Crag | Links |
| All NSW | (General) | (General) | (General) |
| Author |
|
|||||
11:05:55 AM |
That's a fair description. | |||||
1:04:02 PM |
So, I think what Adam is getting at is; Don't be a bunch of bellchambers. There are already too many bellchambers at our cliffs. |
|||||
1:09:43 PM |
On 21/04/2011 tnd wrote: >On 21/04/2011 rodw wrote: >>On 21/04/2011 tnd wrote: >>>I'd venture to add that if you are hungover, have had little sleep and >>>are possibly still affected by alcohol then climbing is not an appropriate >>>choice of activity. >> >>WW&S would never climb then. > >Yes, but he's a special case :-) You fellas better not be villifying alchoholics or I might just start being anchorist. Thanks tnd I know I'm special. |
|||||
1:25:21 PM |
On 21/04/2011 cruze wrote: >Of course almost everyone who jumps up and down about toproping off the >fixed gear also rap-cleans all but the most overhanging sports routes don't >they? spot on cruze! 'serious' climbers create plenty of wear that could be avoided but this is never questioned and acted upon by all of the ethical purists. it is easier to blame a few top ropers for buggering the anchors.... Adam, thanks for trying to quantify the impact, but i think the example was maybe a bit wide of the mark... ie i have never seen parties of 4 have two top rope goes each, just aint that sort of place really...they would get chased off by someone waiting to do the route, and, if that case occured, i also would probably suggest that they dont use the anchors. Bundy - yeah I can see how it is frustrating for those that do contribute that others dont, but contributing should be for its own sake without expectation of 'appreciation'... maybe there is some other aspect of life where people like you and the Sheriff dont carry an extra burden, and so someone else has to pick up the slack...?? |
|||||
2:11:28 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Linze wrote: >Bundy - yeah I can see how it is frustrating for those that do contribute >that others dont, but contributing should be for its own sake without expectation >of 'appreciation'... maybe there is some other aspect of life where people >like you and the Sheriff dont carry an extra burden, and so someone else >has to pick up the slack...?? I have never rebolted anything in the Blueys. |
|||||
2:24:03 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Linze wrote: >On 21/04/2011 cruze wrote: >>Of course almost everyone who jumps up and down about toproping off the >>fixed gear also rap-cleans all but the most overhanging sports routes >don't >>they? Please don't get me wrong, Linze, I think that in an ideal world people would not only toprope off their own gear (draws) but also abseil when cleaning where possible. Whilst I never top rope off anchors, I am guilty of lowering off to clean routes except where it damages my rope. Then again I am a pretty selfish guy. Perhaps your clash with the Sherrif is more a reflection on confrontational personal interaction. I remember having a good chat one day at Shipley with the person concerned about micro-rubbish left by climbers (which didn't happen to be me that day) and got the distinct impression that he only means well. |
|||||
2:31:32 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Linze wrote: >Bundy - yeah I can see how it is frustrating for those that do contribute >that others dont, but contributing should be for its own sake without expectation >of 'appreciation'... maybe there is some other aspect of life where people >like you and the Sheriff dont carry an extra burden, and so someone else >has to pick up the slack...?? Let me try a different angle. Some person or group of people have created a resource which they're happy to allow you to use, but they'd really appreciate it if you took some steps to keep the rate of depletion of that resource to the level that they envisioned when they put the hard work in to make it available to you. Now in the case of routes with a 'clip and lower' type anchor, or steep routes which lend themselves to or require cleaning on lower, then the people who volunteered their time and often their own money to create that resource will have recognised that this would be the usage that would occur. I don't think you'll find anyone who begrudges lowering off those routes, or for that matter, anyone who seriously cares about rapping (0.64kJ) versus lowering (23.5kJ) off routes. However when someone who is consuming that donated resource suddenly feels a sense of entitlement that they should be allowed to bump their rate of consumption up to 5 or 10 times that amount, then you surely must be able to understand that the donors of that resource are justified in their concern. You're stealing a disproportionate amount of something that they donated to the broader community. Here's the rub, until you've got the runs on the board for contributing a significant amount, you're really not in a position to understand the effort involved in creating that resource and it's simply an extension of general courtesy to respect the reasonable requests of those people who donated the resource. You can come here and argue that they don't donate their resource proportionately, or the expectations for the manner of consumption of that resource differ between certain classes of climber. But what you're doing is criticising the very very small group of people who do make a significant contribution and in my opinion at least it really isn't fair to do so. How about this, if you're willing to donate $1000 to get it started, I'm happy to work with you on a donation drive to try to match it dollar for dollar to upgrade a whole pile more anchors at shipley/porters/centennial to best practice stainless clip and lower stations, then you go and install them all and we wait until they've worn out (call it ~2014-2016) and then we sit down and discuss how you feel and compare and contrast with your current views. Note, I'm entirely serious, view my "target 1500" fundraising drive on qurank for proof of my credentials. -Adam. |
|||||
2:59:50 PM |
Or, using the numbers that Linze gave us... >... what no one seems to actually be able to clear up is how much >differece does it make??... ...is one person in a party of tewo gonna make much >difference??... ...does anyone have a realistic idea of HOW MUCH diference it >makes?? Ahem. Ah, I think that would be twice as much difference... let's check that... does one climber plus one climber equal two?! Anyone? Can anyone confirm that one plus one equals two? Does anyone have a realistic idea of HOW MUCH diference it makes if one person plus one extra person lowers on the rope, with the rope directly through the anchor?! Oh my goodness. That means the anchor wears at least twice as fast! So, you could halve the life of the anchor! Seem like a big difference? What if we applied that to your pay... you only get paid half as much... not so cool. Or your life... you only get to live half as long... definitely not cool. Wow, maths is amazing! >so is it not better to equip such routes with stuff that can be easily replaced... >just sucking it up and putting a new biner up (a worst case scenario of >every 12 months doesnt actaully seem that bad to me) seems to me to be >be a better option This is a great suggestion. Get busy. All you need is a bunch of stainless mallions, and if you really want to go all out some of those fancy stainless wire gate clippy thingys. You'll probably need two for each bolt on the anchor, so the rope doesn't twist. When you are forking out for the hardware (thanks in advance on behalf of the climbing community), don’t forget to buy a crescent. |
|||||
3:05:53 PM |
On 21/04/2011 RNM wrote: >Or, using the numbers that Linze gave us... > >>... what no one seems to actually be able to clear up is how much >>differece does it make??... ...is one person in a party of tewo gonna >make much >difference??... ...does anyone have a realistic idea of HOW >MUCH diference it >makes?? > >Ahem. Ah, I think that would be twice as much difference... let's check >that... does one climber plus one climber equal two?! Anyone? Can anyone >confirm that one plus one equals two? Does anyone have a realistic idea >of HOW MUCH diference it makes if one person plus one extra person lowers >on the rope, with the rope directly through the anchor?! > >Oh my goodness. That means the anchor wears at least twice as fast! >So, you could halve the life of the anchor! Seem like a big difference? > What if we applied that to your pay... you only get paid half as much... >not so cool. Or your life... you only get to live half as long... definitely >not cool. > >Wow, maths is amazing! Sorry, could you explain that again I couldn't follow your logic/maths. Maybe it would help if you defined a new unit of measurement? |
|||||
3:46:33 PM |
On 21/04/2011 hotgemini wrote: > I couldn't follow your logic/maths. One climber climbs, then lowers off draws. Seconder TRs on draws, then lowers off anchor. One person lowers off anchor. or... One climber climbs then lowers off anchor. Seconder TRs on anchor, then lowers off anchor. Two people lower off anchor. Ergo, twice as much wear. Errrr... not sure I break it down any further. Even better when... One climber climbs. Lowers off draws. Seconder TRs on draws. Abseils off anchor. No person lowers off anchor. But that wasn't a part of Linze's post. |
|||||
4:47:50 PM |
Sorry, should have used a smily face or two, suffice to say my post was firmly tongue-in-cheek. | |||||
5:00:32 PM |
was always gonna be a tough battle this one...should have just put it in trip reports!... oh well, will fight on regardless.. >However when someone who is consuming that donated resource suddenly feels >a sense of entitlement that they should be allowed to bump their rate of >consumption up to 5 or 10 times that amount, then you surely must be able >to understand that the donors of that resource are justified in their concern. > You're stealing a disproportionate amount of something that they donated >to the broader community. i think you kinda missed my original point. i dont promote top roping off the anchor, but seeing as some will do it lots, some will do it sometimes and some will do it never, it is not worth taking anywhere near as seriously as people do. no matter what you do it is always going to happen on this kind of route. So, rather than putting up shackles, which is inevitably going to cause vexation, why not put in a couple of biners, it seems appropiate given the likely use... plus it will also be much easier for the common climber to replace them when they look bad. maybe this is one case where it is just better to recognise that it is a bit of a lost cause and let it slide when it is not a massive problem? the other point was that everyone does things that create more wear than nessesary, and so i am offended by the notion that we blame the bumblies that could do with an extra bit of comfort/one less challenge. why not give me a hard time for lowering when i could rap (or even back jump if we are so committed to anchor preservation)? instead people are happy to harass the poor helmeted folks that are leashed to the nearest tree and cant escape (and who are, probably not feeling a sense of entitlement so much as just trying to survive a day out) - maybe becasue they know that these people wont bite back??? also the 'runs on the board' thing gripes me... i commend those who rebolt a lot, but those that bolt and think it elevates their position or authority can p*&s off, once you leave your steel in the wall you can offer all the advice you want, but have no actual 'right' to say how it is used. |
|||||
5:17:37 PM |
On 20/04/2011 Linze wrote: >Later in the day I noticed that the sheriff was trying to ruin someone >else’s day by barking the same orders. I have been climbing on and off for 20 years and was under the impression that it was O.K. to lower off shackles, but not directly through ring bolts. I now understand my error. The message last Sunday could have been delivered in a better way, but we can't all be diplomats. |
|||||
5:33:24 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Linze wrote: >was always gonna be a tough battle this one...should have just put it in >trip reports!... oh well, will fight on regardless.. > > >>However when someone who is consuming that donated resource suddenly >feels >>a sense of entitlement that they should be allowed to bump their rate >of >>consumption up to 5 or 10 times that amount, then you surely must be >able >>to understand that the donors of that resource are justified in their >concern. >> You're stealing a disproportionate amount of something that they donated >>to the broader community. > > >i think you kinda missed my original point. i dont promote top roping >off the anchor, but seeing as some will do it lots, some will do it sometimes >and some will do it never, it is not worth taking anywhere near as seriously >as people do. no matter what you do it is always going to happen on this >kind of route. So, rather than putting up shackles, which is inevitably >going to cause vexation, why not put in a couple of biners, it seems appropiate >given the likely use... plus it will also be much easier for the common >climber to replace them when they look bad. maybe this is one case where >it is just better to recognise that it is a bit of a lost cause and let >it slide when it is not a massive problem? > >the other point was that everyone does things that create more wear than >nessesary, and so i am offended by the notion that we blame the bumblies >that could do with an extra bit of comfort/one less challenge. why not >give me a hard time for lowering when i could rap (or even back jump if >we are so committed to anchor preservation)? instead people are happy to >harass the poor helmeted folks that are leashed to the nearest tree and >cant escape (and who are, probably not feeling a sense of entitlement so >much as just trying to survive a day out) - maybe becasue they know that >these people wont bite back??? > >also the 'runs on the board' thing gripes me... i commend those who rebolt >a lot, but those that bolt and think it elevates their position or authority >can p*&s off, once you leave your steel in the wall you can offer all the >advice you want, but have no actual 'right' to say how it is used. 1) Shackles *ARE* easily replaceable wearing components, adding carabiners doesn't change the issue. 2) Non-captive carabiners go missing off anchors with disappointing regularity, so that's just seeking to even further increase the workload on the noble few who make significant contributions. 3) Nobody is blaming the bumblies. Anyone who has spoken to Mitch knows that he would be every bit as forward and direct regardless of the climb/grade/personality involved, IMHO you're trying to hide behind a strawman argument here. It is not about grade/ability/experience. 4) It's not a question of authority, nobody can stop you from destroying the resource that has been donated if it so pleases you. It's a question of respect, reciprocity and common decency. It reminds me of the street where my grandmother lived until 3 or 4 years ago (and my father grew up) in the suburb of Enoggera in Brisbane, next door to her (and on the corner of the street) the older gentleman neighbour had a number of fruit trees (mostly citrus) which he tended to and he allowed people to pick some fruit on the understanding that they only took a reasonable amount for personal consumption (and in parallel with the anchor situation I note that larger families took more fruit, my grandmother took only a little, the injustice!!). This situation existed without incident for over a quarter of a century. However as is want to happen, the folks in the street got older and eventually passed on, some of newcomers to the street (dinki couple) started taking advantage of the arrangement, they would pick every single piece of vaguely ripe fruit off the trees/vines and take it home with them. My grandmother's neighbour on several occaisions tried asking politely and when that failed he was as firm as a man in his early 80s can be when trying to reprimand someone half a century his junior can be. Eventually the selfish neighbours annoyed my neighbour enough that he fenced off his block and nobody was able to have any fruit, he was in fact so disheartened that he removed the bulk of those trees. So, I'll repeat my offer. If you're willing to put your money where your mouth is and donate $1000 towards anchor upgrades at the blackheath crags, I'll donate my time and we can work together to double that money and we put it into play. -Adam. |
|||||
5:36:35 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Cranky wrote: >I have been climbing on and off for 20 years and was under the impression >that it was O.K. to lower off shackles, but not directly through ring bolts. >I now understand my error. Just to be perfectly clear on this one ## LOWERING THE FINAL CLIMBER DIRECTLY THROUGH THE REPLACEABLE FIXED HARDWARE (eg. maillons, twist shakles etc) IS FINE ## Although as discussed, abseiling off where practical is preferable. What Mitch was chastising Linze for was for the climber top-roping directly through the hardware. Eg. The first climber up the climb then fed the rope directly through the fixed hardware and the subsequent climbers top-roped directly through it. |
|||||
5:55:44 PM |
On 21/04/2011 hotgemini wrote: >On 21/04/2011 Cranky wrote: > >>I have been climbing on and off for 20 years and was under the impression >>that it was O.K. to lower off shackles, but not directly through ring >bolts. >>I now understand my error. > >Just to be perfectly clear on this one > >## LOWERING THE FINAL CLIMBER DIRECTLY THROUGH THE REPLACEABLE FIXED HARDWARE >(eg. maillons, twist shakles etc) IS FINE ## > >Although as discussed, abseiling off where practical is preferable. > >What Mitch was chastising Linze for was for the climber top-roping directly >through the hardware. Eg. The first climber up the climb then fed the >rope directly through the fixed hardware and the subsequent climbers top-roped >directly through it. I had led the route and threaded the shackles, then lowered off and belayed the second, and then the second lowered off. Wrong, now I know. |
|||||
6:01:14 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Cranky wrote: >I had led the route and threaded the shackles, then lowered off and belayed >the second, and then the second lowered off. Wrong, now I know. Yep, thats the situation we're discussing and its excellent that this thread has had a positive impact. Fantastic that you can recognise, understand and correct the error in your behavior. I personally thank you for doing so. :) -Adam. |
|||||
6:04:10 PM |
On 21/04/2011 Cranky wrote: > >I had led the route and threaded the shackles, then lowered off and belayed >the second, and then the second lowered off. Wrong, now I know. But, if you'd added your own 'draws, lowered off from them and top-roped/lowered your second using them, wouldn't you then have had to climb the route again (not a real problem I suppose) then lower off through the shackles OR would you have left the 'draws behind as a contribution to the climbing community? [ Maybe this was your point? ;-) ] |
|||||
6:17:53 PM |
> why not put in a couple of biners, it seems appropriate given the likely use... Because they are made of aluminum and will wear SO fast it will amaze you. Because unless they look like death on a stick (and quite likely even if they do), some little dipshit will steal them. Unless you tighten the screwgate so it can never be undone... and then you are back to square one. >we blame the bumblies that could do with an extra bit of comfort/one less challenge. Because, as a bumbly, you need to learn. You are demonstrating your ignorance. >those that bolt and think it elevates their position or authority >can p*&s off, once you leave your steel in the wall you can offer all the >advice you want, but have no actual 'right' to say how it is used. I have no idea who the Sheriff is, but I agree that his approach, in this instance, was somewhat lacking. Specifically, it was lacking a mallet. I would like to send him a mallet, for future use on his rounds. Perhaps you already have a significant head injury (there are certain indications this may be the case), but if not, I would hope he can inflict one on you. If we are lucky, it might even be severe enough to prevent you from posting. If he has to deal with people like you on a regular basis I am truly amazed he has not; a) killed someone, b) gone insane, c) given up all together. Seriously though, you should get in touch with Adam. Bolting etc can be fun, and it sounds like you have a lot of passion and energy to give... ;) |
|||||
6:26:56 PM |
Hi Kuu The point is that people should be taught how to re thread the rope and either lower off, or abseil, once the party have finished climbing on that anchor. If the second person doesn't know how to do so, and is keen to learn, teach them (preferably well, with a dry run on the ground, etc etc). If the second person is not comfortable doing this (eg; you are runnig a top rope for someone), then you should climb back up and re thread the rope yourself. No need to leave biners behind when you have finished. |
| There are 104 messages in this topic. |
Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Landscape Photos Australia
Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.
Australian Panoramic |
Australian Coast |
Australian Mountains |
Australian Countryside |
Australian Waterfalls |
Australian Lakes |
Australian Cities |
Australian Macro |
Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo |
Landscape Photography |
Landscape Photography Australia |
Fine Art Photography |
Wilderness Photography |
Nature Photo |
Australian Landscape Photo |
Stock Photography Australia |
Landscape Photos |
Panoramic Photos |
Panoramic Photography Australia |
Australian Landscape Photography |
High Country Mountain Huts |
Mothers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Mothers Day |
Mothers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Mothers Day |
Wedding Gift Ideas |
Christmas Gift Ideas |
Fathers Day Gifts |
Gifts for Fathers Day |
Fathers Day Gift Ideas |
Ideas for Fathers Day |
Landscape Prints |
Landscape Poster |
Limited Edition Prints |
Panoramic Photo |
Buy Posters |
Poster Prints