Beta-ETHICS and Spin

— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “beadysee” wrote: > But, every canyon that has these “unnatural” > anchors being built, rebuilt, complete with miles of left over > webbing, buried deadmen, rocks and sticks hauled in from afar, rope > grooves, etc etc, might well benefit from some judicious use of > bolted anchors. I think this “unnatural” anchoring is trashing these types of > canyons. Especially if you’re > bringing tools to facilitate said anchor construction (shovels, etc).

Now Brian is an uber talented fella. He has done a slew of Alaska grade 3 stuff, multiple first ascents rock climbing and is incredibly knowledgable. He is also the most frieghtening fella to find one’s self on the opposite side of an argument, in canyon cyberspace. I have watched him make mincemeat out of a long line of folks, present company included, so I don’t take lightly contesting him on any subject. But in the case above, in an area where we vie for the minds of the community, I must risk it.

Now these comments he made above were well into a long discussion with Scott and others and the heat in the kitchen had been turned up a bit. And watching a practitioner such as Brian work is a pleasure. But I must call SPIN! Spin a White House council would nod in admiration of. Not to say there aren’t many good points, just hyperbole is mixed in slanting the view IMHO. Here goes.

Rope grooves are a byproduct of anchors not being extended far enough. They occur no more or less with fixed or natural, or if you like unnatural anchors. I won’t argue that natural anchors are easier to adjust and prevent this from happening than fixed one, for I wish not to spin myself. ;-)

Shovels? Tools? Implements of destruction? When? Where? who? tsk tsk. For shame!

Now I have helped build every type of anchor Brian’s effectively slams above. And one could build a great argument for how these methods do have more than minimal impact. Rocks out of potholes change an ecosystem? Rocks moved and stacked about natural? Long swaths of webbing, but, but but what is implied is that these are predominant methods used, instead of the rarely used techniques that come out of the tool kit in challenging locations only. And don’t let Brian fool you into thinking he goes about slamming bolts everywhere he goes. I descended Hammerhead Canyon last week. A modern pioneered route by our hero, Mr. Cabe. Six raps and EVERY ONE of them a simple sling, tied around a chockstone. Brian uses that 9/16 black tape. near invisable. One dead log with 4 feet additional webbing. Nice, neat, low impact. Brian the Natural!! My point? Oh yeah! 95% of all natural anchors are simple in this same fashion. Very few require these more intrusive methods that Brian would have the community believe are the standard fare. For shame, Meister Spin!! ;-)

> Not sure you could win the low impact, wilderness argument with > bolted versus non bolted anchors. For very popular, high traffic > canyon routes, requiring some means of anchoring for rappelling, > bolts are the lowest visual impact.

Which brings us back to the geist of the last two bolt discussions. How to handle routes with big raps, with impactful natural anchors, as these routes become trade routes. The Mindbenders, Zion routes, a few others. Here is where Brian’s arguments shine brightest. I just wanted to try to make sure that his awesome persuasive talents, in the heat of battle, don’t cast unfair light on what is mostly, by far, low impact methods. The big round and round. This is old tired stuff, but I was away when this thread played and I felt the need to say the piece. Apologies…and ducking and spinning for cover ;-) Ram