Author |
Rings on Return of the Toe Cutter Gang - Mt York |
|
|
31-Jul-2012 6:22:18 PM
|
Was out at Mt york Today and noticed that "Return of the toe cutter gang" has been retro bolted with rings, plus lower offs at the top.
I'm not fussed by the retro bolting as the original carrots were rather poor, but why with rings and more so why have a lower off when there are big trees to use at the top to belay from??
Zipper the route to the left has also been retro bolted as like a few other routes in that area with carrots.
|
31-Jul-2012 7:53:41 PM
|
Because rings are the best fixed anchor option.
Using trees is not sustainable. Two rings and a healthy tree or no rings and no tree?
|
31-Jul-2012 9:55:45 PM
|
I remember belaying off one of the two massive trees above lishenback one Saturday arvo, was back there again at 9a.m on the Sunday only to find the belay tree fallen over! the bugger was easily a two person ring in diameter.
|
1-Aug-2012 7:51:08 AM
|
So was it retro bolted or rebolted. I can understand it being rebolted with rings as is the best practice at the moment.
Classic route.
|
1-Aug-2012 8:55:33 AM
|
On 1/08/2012 benjenga wrote:
>So was it retro bolted or rebolted. I can understand it being rebolted
>with rings as is the best practice at the moment.
>Classic route.
Yup, indeed. Im keen for another lap of this classic now...
|
1-Aug-2012 9:00:40 AM
|
On 31/07/2012 Marto wrote:
>but why with rings
because carrots are crap
>and why have a lower off when there are big trees to use at the top to belay from??
so you keep the big trees alive
|
1-Aug-2012 9:39:46 AM
|
I don't understand how belaying from a tree would kill it............maybe if you rapped off it a lot, the rope pulling would ringbark the thing. There's a tree at the top of Interstate 31 which has probably been used as an anchor 10 000 times, no sign of ringbarking on that sucker.
To the moron who is scared of 1.5m wide trees as belay anchors (because one fell over once)..........it doesn't actually matter whether you're belaying off the thing or not, if it decides to fall over while you're sitting there (attached to those shiny new rings), you're probably fuched anyway. Seriously, are you such a pussy that you can't feel safe toprope belaying off a single giant gumtree? Maybe climbing isn't for you? Really, I mean that.
|
1-Aug-2012 9:55:23 AM
|
Mt York is a bit busier than cosmic so your example is a bit dumb....and its not just the rope around the tree anyway...it is the travelling over the ground setting up belay walking off etc that adds to erosion which kills vegetation....I'm assuming the rings are actually lowers offs and not just belay rings at the top?....anyway the lower offs certainly do not stop someone topping out anyway and belaying off said tree if they wish.
|
1-Aug-2012 10:05:25 AM
|
I agree with the rings if its to prevent further damage to the environment at the top of the route, it's up to the community as a whole to get over the way things were done back in the old days and adopt environmentaly sustainable methods now so as to protect the future of climbing in these high volume and environmentaly sensitive natural resources.
|
1-Aug-2012 11:33:51 AM
|
I applaud those people with power tools on replacing old fixed crappola with the newer stronger versions (can they do me?)
I just want to say that with a crag where you walk down, from the top to the base, the automatic addition of lower offs should be questioned.
At Shipley lower offs are a great way to limit damage to the cliff top heath and vegetation. At Mt York the joy of toping out on a route where a top anchor is easy to arrange and the surface (rock) is not sensitive to traffic it is nice to achieve, the Leader can actually sit looking out at the view and bring up a second!! (Old school style). If your out with Grandma and she can't crank any more you can fix the rope and rap down to clean or extend a top anchor rope to rap and remove it on the walk back to the car. A new/old perspective preserving variety in our experience :)
|
1-Aug-2012 11:57:38 AM
|
If you want to top out "old school "style why dont you just skip the lower offs and top out. Obviously not valid at shipley due to conservation issues but mt york is a different proposition.
|
1-Aug-2012 12:02:26 PM
|
On 1/08/2012 muki wrote:
>.............get over
>the way things were done back in the old days and adopt environmentaly
>sustainable methods now so as to protect the future of climbing in these
>high volume and environmentaly sensitive natural resources.
Ah yes, environment + safety = Model A climbing for every crag everywhere (bottom belay, ring bolts, loweroff)
|
1-Aug-2012 12:03:32 PM
|
@ oldtraddad, totally agree with what your saying about areas that have stable (rock) at the top out and where no damage occurs to the environment.
My comments are focused on areas that this is not the case, frog buttress is a good example, rubber padded chains were added to the belay trees to lessen the damage, and encourage a rap decent rather than foot traffic along the loose scree at the top, good move, untill the tree dies, then somthing more sustainable needs to be implemented.
My comments are just my opinion but a new version of custodianship needs to be seen or we may lose areas like the Americans have once damage is seen to be occuring in an environmentaly sensitive area, look at how Hueco Tanks is now managed as an insight.
|
1-Aug-2012 12:23:47 PM
|
On 1/08/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
>On 1/08/2012 muki wrote:
>>.............get over
>>the way things were done back in the old days and adopt environmentally
>>sustainable methods now so as to protect the future of climbing in these
>>high volume and environmentally sensitive natural resources.
>
>Ah yes, environment + safety = Model A climbing for every crag everywhere
>(bottom belay, ring bolts, lower off)
don't get me wrong here I hate the creep of the "safety" as a reason for dumbing shit down just as much as you (and for the same reasons reading your other recent post!)
I just want to try and nip any future arguments of environmental damage in the bud before they are true, and we start losing access to our climbing, imagine how crowded our remaining grags will be when they are filled to the brim like shipley, turds, litter, numptys, etc, you get the picture.
|
1-Aug-2012 12:32:17 PM
|
On 31/7/12 Marto wrote
>>and why have a lower off when there are big trees to use at the top to
>belay from??
on 1/8/2012 mikl wrote
>so you keep the big trees alive
I would have thought that by putting in rings it would increase the numbers on the route, thus increasing traffic at the base at a busy enough crag. Increase in numbers I feel would have a more significant impact at the base of the cliff rather than at the top, causing further erosion and damage. Its not just the trees at the top.
The top of the route has actually had a small amount of cementing/pathing done years ago to reduce the erosion when accessing and getting off rottcg and pepper corner, leading me to think it may be better suited to a top out.
I can certainly understand peoples thoughts on damage created by belaying/rapping off trees but see that by putting in rings and lower offs to save a tree will cause further damage to the tree's at the base of the route.
One day there will be rings and lower offs on very climb, but someone needs to play devils advocate in this generation of climbers. Generation ring perhaps???
|
1-Aug-2012 12:57:47 PM
|
It will require a careful balance of judgement and foresight, not just bolt the lot.
As Australians we are lucky that we have such freedom, look at europe, most of it has been grid bolted, and most yanks don't mind if it's bolted just as long as it's convenient,
and look what happened over there, multiple close outs other areas are only still running cos they're national park or the climbers got together and bought it. the only crag I can think of that this has happened to here is Bare rock "fingal"
|
1-Aug-2012 1:02:24 PM
|
On 1/08/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
> It's that I might have to share cool crags like York and Cosmic
>and Point Perp with the faggots who pollute Thompson's and Shipley :)
I've gotta ask..when was the last time you bothered to climb at York?...with your long held tirade against shitty non 5 star crags, average crags...Id find it funny if you have been to York in the last decade or so?
This isn't a comment on whether your views are valid or not...I'm just interested to see even more of the ODH hard man I don't waste my time at lesser crags myth, crumble a bit more after the notorious hat video.
|
1-Aug-2012 1:03:25 PM
|
The reality is that lower-off's are 90% about convenience, 5% safety and 5% environmental. People now 'expect' to be able to lower-off a route rather than belaying at the top. I'm not saying that's a good thing - just the reality of climbing in the Bluies in 2012.
|
1-Aug-2012 1:16:29 PM
|
On 1/08/2012 rodw wrote:
>I've gotta ask..when was the last time you bothered to climb at York?...with
>your long held tirade against shitty non 5 star crags, average crags...Id
>find it funny if you have been to York in the last decade or so?
>
April or May this year. York has one really good day of climbing in the teens to low 20's, I go and do that day roughly once a year.
It's a pretty nice spot, great views while you sit up the top belaying the second............oh sorry, no one bothers with that anymore.
|
1-Aug-2012 3:10:39 PM
|
On 1/08/2012 nmonteith wrote:
>People now 'expect' to be able to lower-off a route rather
>than belaying at the top. I'm not saying that's a good thing - just the
>reality of climbing in the Bluies in 2012.
Well, maybe 80% of people up there have that expectation. But there's no reason why anyone with a drill ought to pander to it.
If you're putting up good routes, they'll get repeats regardless of how they're set up. Sure, if you develop utter choss like Rodw does, the only way to attract traffic is to ringbolt the shit out of it and give it a fantasy grade, but his routes are a special case.........even amongst developers of crappy rock, Rod has the reputation of "the guy who'll bolt shit which ought to be left alone"
|