Two of us went through quandary direct on 7/9/11. We had planned for knotted rope canyon but ended up in quandary. A combination of poor map reading, laziness after making a wrong turn, and confidence in our excessive amounts of gear lead to a wonderful unexpected adventure. The potholes were dry or filled with knee deep water, and easily escaped with pack tosses, climbing, or hooking existing holes. The natural anchors in place (2 deadman, a few arches, and some boulders) were all pretty solid. Hiking back up the muddy creek required many waist deep river crossings, with occasional long stretches of ankle-knee deep wading. The monsoon season brought some excellent moderate weather with long stretches of cool overcast skies despite the predicted 98 degree high. A great time of year with long days, excellent warm water, and solitude. Quandary was my partners first canyon and I don’t think that it will be her last!
Cheers, K
flutedwalls
“Imay can be done without using the hook holes”? What? (taint?) And what can be said re social canyon styles? (who cares, right)
The gentleman said he made the pack toss, pack was too light and so he moved to another option. You would say I guess he should have had a heavier pack? Or been more artful? Other options existed? I might have offered, Thanks for the report; your effort and spirit conveyed a sense of concern toward the land. The comment on hooking was a very small aside.
I’ve been in Imlay many times and Heaps a few times. Both canyons topped off, there is no need for hooking – in my view. And in dry conditions, when one can stand – in water or dirt, there is most often no need for wall hooking, at least in Imlay. But then the game changes when some of the holes are smimmers, and when the the happy hooker, won’t connect and a pack toss is not an option, then just what angel wings deliver one out? We’ve often used (when necessary), a single small hook and “ladder”. And yes, Kelsey’s eye sore worn pick holes (that had blown out) were evident; but other small holes most often did exist, placed by others, many others. If others, or your experience is different, then fine. But then of course, canyon conditions change?
And I should note, in Heaps, when water levels are low, and smimmers are encountered, I’ve seen the ‘most expert of canyoneer and climber” use nothing but a single drill bit, drill, hammer and hook/ladder to escape a 15 foot walled swimmer…once again, “angel wings” we didn’t have, and a pack toss, not an option. I guess we/he should have tried, something else, more ethical?
Preaching is one thing. Quietly and courteously teaching, when the right moment and situation exists, is quite another. Smacking a fly; use a sledge hammer of course, or throw the whole pot of coffee at the sucker… (I’ll pass on the coffee thank you.)
Personally I’d take an extra hook hole in Imlay/Quandary here or there, over the human use trail and devastation that has happened in the past decade on the the hill “slide” entry into the Mystery Cyn zone. And what of the other ubiquitous user trails and rope cut rock that has sprung up? User trails – use angel wings,and rope cuts, stay in the water course, watch anchor angles and rope pulls. But then how to mangage and control the masses? A picky hook hole here vs. more significant resource changes elsewhere? Progress I guess? One small step forward and one or two bumbling ones back.
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
Pack tosses work very well in Quandary — we send people to Quandary because it is an excellent pack-toss classroom. This is the first I have heard of hooking in Quandary (other than a. Happy Hookering the first big keeper on natural features and b. Mr. K. G-picking a spot for rapping where other people climb or slide) – thus clarification was sought.
Drilling holes is a “taint”, in any canyon. It is sad to bring drilling holes for hooks to Quandary, where this taint has not been present before.
Using drilled holes for hooking out is less of a taint, but still a taint.
Wandering into the wrong canyon is a “taint”. Wandering into the wrong canyon and dealing with it well, as you did, is a very minor taint. Not dealing with it well is a much bigger taint. Having to be rescued is a very big taint.
The nasty hook holes in Imlay are unfortunate… however, many of the “nasty hook holes” in Imlay are Mr. K’s G-pick divots, the ones he says “look natural” and are thus not a taint (I don’t buy it, can you tell?). Imlay can be done without using the hook holes, even when the water is down, and I consider it good style to do so. But I still bring hooks and an etrier when going into Imlay and Heaps.
It is desirable to use the minimum un-natural tools ‘necessary’ for traversing the canyons. Therefore, a scale of taints – “natural tools” are not a taint (pack tosses, partner assists, hooking natural features); using unnatural tools that already exist (hooking unnatural features); and a big step up is creating unnatural features (drilling bolts, drilling hook holes); and then a very big step up is creating unnatural features greater than the minimum ‘necessary’ (G-pick divots, extra drilled holes, bolts where natural(ish) anchors have been used before). Etc. That is not the whole scale, but a good start.
I petition you to adopt my scale of taints, and to canyon in a way that I consider good style, but really it is up to you to decide what standard you will hold yourself to. I petition you to report what you do to a public place (like here), and request you accept critique of what you do as it effects other people (ie, if you DRILL holes or leave crap behind), though what you do that does not effect other people (like using existing drill holes) is between you, your friends and your Gods, and less subject to public comment.
My complaint is to the persons who drilled holes for hooking out of potholes in Quandary (where pack tosses work really well). Shame on you!!!
Your mileage may vary. Your scale may be different than mine. You may or may not care about the things I care about. I declare my acceptance of your style/ethic, whether similar or disparate from my own style/ethic – but I petition you to adopt something close to my own.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan
>
Morgan
I also agree with using this as an ethics forum. Tom, my apologies, I guess through my lurking over the years I have noticed many not-as-experienced canyoneers become mildly offended at the tone of criticism received but I understand that you do mean well. I guess myself and other lurkers out there need to participate more in the discussions and attend more group trips so that we dont feel as criticized by the veteran emperors of the sport.
Morgan
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kent” wrote:
Tom, > I agree with using this forum as a public place for ethics discussion. One of the benefits of this forum, and in sharing TRs, is the opportunity to have our actions publicly scrutinized by the greater canyoneering community, instead of the simply the limited individuals that you directly canyoneer with. By honestly sharing our actions, and thus inciting ethics questions, I think that we are teaching other members in the community the “scale” of canyoneering ethics. > By not qualifying the “packtossing, climbing, or hooking existing holes” statement in my TR I implied that these were equally acceptable methods for exiting potholes, which as you pointed out, they are not. The distinction is an important one that should have been mentioned and I appreciate and agree with the criticism. > Lastly, if Morgan had been on this trip, I would have purposely made the same navigation mistakes to enter quandary
-Kent
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
Yes, I completely agree with you and perhaps the best method to get everyone to adopt the same standards is to call them out. I was not on this trip but I was just sticking up for a friend who I know generally follows sound ethics, I will give him crap though for dropping into an unplanned canyon.
Morgan
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
Pack tosses work very well in Quandary — we send people to Quandary because it is an excellent pack-toss classroom. This is the first I have heard of hooking in Quandary (other than a. Happy Hookering the first big keeper on natural features and b. Mr. K. G-picking a spot for rapping where other people climb or slide) – thus clarification was sought.
Drilling holes is a “taint”, in any canyon. It is sad to bring drilling holes for hooks to Quandary, where this taint has not been present before.
Using drilled holes for hooking out is less of a taint, but still a taint.
Wandering into the wrong canyon is a “taint”. Wandering into the wrong canyon and dealing with it well, as you did, is a very minor taint. Not dealing with it well is a much bigger taint. Having to be rescued is a very big taint.
The nasty hook holes in Imlay are unfortunate… however, many of the “nasty hook holes” in Imlay are Mr. K’s G-pick divots, the ones he says “look natural” and are thus not a taint (I don’t buy it, can you tell?). Imlay can be done without using the hook holes, even when the water is down, and I consider it good style to do so. But I still bring hooks and an etrier when going into Imlay and Heaps.
It is desirable to use the minimum un-natural tools ‘necessary’ for traversing the canyons. Therefore, a scale of taints – “natural tools” are not a taint (pack tosses, partner assists, hooking natural features); using unnatural tools that already exist (hooking unnatural features); and a big step up is creating unnatural features (drilling bolts, drilling hook holes); and then a very big step up is creating unnatural features greater than the minimum ‘necessary’ (G-pick divots, extra drilled holes, bolts where natural(ish) anchors have been used before). Etc. That is not the whole scale, but a good start.
I petition you to adopt my scale of taints, and to canyon in a way that I consider good style, but really it is up to you to decide what standard you will hold yourself to. I petition you to report what you do to a public place (like here), and request you accept critique of what you do as it effects other people (ie, if you DRILL holes or leave crap behind), though what you do that does not effect other people (like using existing drill holes) is between you, your friends and your Gods, and less subject to public comment.
My complaint is to the persons who drilled holes for hooking out of potholes in Quandary (where pack tosses work really well). Shame on you!!!
Your mileage may vary. Your scale may be different than mine. You may or may not care about the things I care about. I declare my acceptance of your style/ethic, whether similar or disparate from my own style/ethic – but I petition you to adopt something close to my own.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan
kent
Tom, I agree with using this forum as a public place for ethics discussion. One of the benefits of this forum, and in sharing TRs, is the opportunity to have our actions publicly scrutinized by the greater canyoneering community, instead of the simply the limited individuals that you directly canyoneer with. By honestly sharing our actions, and thus inciting ethics questions, I think that we are teaching other members in the community the “scale” of canyoneering ethics. By not qualifying the “packtossing, climbing, or hooking existing holes” statement in my TR I implied that these were equally acceptable methods for exiting potholes, which as you pointed out, they are not. The distinction is an important one that should have been mentioned and I appreciate and agree with the criticism. Lastly, if Morgan had been on this trip, I would have purposely made the same navigation mistakes to enter quandary
-Kent
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
Yes, I completely agree with you and perhaps the best method to get everyone to adopt the same standards is to call them out. I was not on this trip but I was just sticking up for a friend who I know generally follows sound ethics, I will give him crap though for dropping into an unplanned canyon.
Morgan
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
Pack tosses work very well in Quandary — we send people to Quandary because it is an excellent pack-toss classroom. This is the first I have heard of hooking in Quandary (other than a. Happy Hookering the first big keeper on natural features and b. Mr. K. G-picking a spot for rapping where other people climb or slide) – thus clarification was sought.
Drilling holes is a “taint”, in any canyon. It is sad to bring drilling holes for hooks to Quandary, where this taint has not been present before.
Using drilled holes for hooking out is less of a taint, but still a taint.
Wandering into the wrong canyon is a “taint”. Wandering into the wrong canyon and dealing with it well, as you did, is a very minor taint. Not dealing with it well is a much bigger taint. Having to be rescued is a very big taint.
The nasty hook holes in Imlay are unfortunate… however, many of the “nasty hook holes” in Imlay are Mr. K’s G-pick divots, the ones he says “look natural” and are thus not a taint (I don’t buy it, can you tell?). Imlay can be done without using the hook holes, even when the water is down, and I consider it good style to do so. But I still bring hooks and an etrier when going into Imlay and Heaps.
It is desirable to use the minimum un-natural tools ‘necessary’ for traversing the canyons. Therefore, a scale of taints – “natural tools” are not a taint (pack tosses, partner assists, hooking natural features); using unnatural tools that already exist (hooking unnatural features); and a big step up is creating unnatural features (drilling bolts, drilling hook holes); and then a very big step up is creating unnatural features greater than the minimum ‘necessary’ (G-pick divots, extra drilled holes, bolts where natural(ish) anchors have been used before). Etc. That is not the whole scale, but a good start.
I petition you to adopt my scale of taints, and to canyon in a way that I consider good style, but really it is up to you to decide what standard you will hold yourself to. I petition you to report what you do to a public place (like here), and request you accept critique of what you do as it effects other people (ie, if you DRILL holes or leave crap behind), though what you do that does not effect other people (like using existing drill holes) is between you, your friends and your Gods, and less subject to public comment.
My complaint is to the persons who drilled holes for hooking out of potholes in Quandary (where pack tosses work really well). Shame on you!!!
Your mileage may vary. Your scale may be different than mine. You may or may not care about the things I care about. I declare my acceptance of your style/ethic, whether similar or disparate from my own style/ethic – but I petition you to adopt something close to my own.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan
Morgan
Yes, I completely agree with you and perhaps the best method to get everyone to adopt the same standards is to call them out. I was not on this trip but I was just sticking up for a friend who I know generally follows sound ethics, I will give him crap though for dropping into an unplanned canyon.
Morgan
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
Pack tosses work very well in Quandary — we send people to Quandary because it is an excellent pack-toss classroom. This is the first I have heard of hooking in Quandary (other than a. Happy Hookering the first big keeper on natural features and b. Mr. K. G-picking a spot for rapping where other people climb or slide) – thus clarification was sought.
Drilling holes is a “taint”, in any canyon. It is sad to bring drilling holes for hooks to Quandary, where this taint has not been present before.
Using drilled holes for hooking out is less of a taint, but still a taint.
Wandering into the wrong canyon is a “taint”. Wandering into the wrong canyon and dealing with it well, as you did, is a very minor taint. Not dealing with it well is a much bigger taint. Having to be rescued is a very big taint.
The nasty hook holes in Imlay are unfortunate… however, many of the “nasty hook holes” in Imlay are Mr. K’s G-pick divots, the ones he says “look natural” and are thus not a taint (I don’t buy it, can you tell?). Imlay can be done without using the hook holes, even when the water is down, and I consider it good style to do so. But I still bring hooks and an etrier when going into Imlay and Heaps.
It is desirable to use the minimum un-natural tools ‘necessary’ for traversing the canyons. Therefore, a scale of taints – “natural tools” are not a taint (pack tosses, partner assists, hooking natural features); using unnatural tools that already exist (hooking unnatural features); and a big step up is creating unnatural features (drilling bolts, drilling hook holes); and then a very big step up is creating unnatural features greater than the minimum ‘necessary’ (G-pick divots, extra drilled holes, bolts where natural(ish) anchors have been used before). Etc. That is not the whole scale, but a good start.
I petition you to adopt my scale of taints, and to canyon in a way that I consider good style, but really it is up to you to decide what standard you will hold yourself to. I petition you to report what you do to a public place (like here), and request you accept critique of what you do as it effects other people (ie, if you DRILL holes or leave crap behind), though what you do that does not effect other people (like using existing drill holes) is between you, your friends and your Gods, and less subject to public comment.
My complaint is to the persons who drilled holes for hooking out of potholes in Quandary (where pack tosses work really well). Shame on you!!!
Your mileage may vary. Your scale may be different than mine. You may or may not care about the things I care about. I declare my acceptance of your style/ethic, whether similar or disparate from my own style/ethic – but I petition you to adopt something close to my own.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan
>
TomJones
Pack tosses work very well in Quandary — we send people to Quandary because it is an excellent pack-toss classroom. This is the first I have heard of hooking in Quandary (other than a. Happy Hookering the first big keeper on natural features and b. Mr. K. G-picking a spot for rapping where other people climb or slide) – thus clarification was sought.
Drilling holes is a “taint”, in any canyon. It is sad to bring drilling holes for hooks to Quandary, where this taint has not been present before.
Using drilled holes for hooking out is less of a taint, but still a taint.
Wandering into the wrong canyon is a “taint”. Wandering into the wrong canyon and dealing with it well, as you did, is a very minor taint. Not dealing with it well is a much bigger taint. Having to be rescued is a very big taint.
The nasty hook holes in Imlay are unfortunate… however, many of the “nasty hook holes” in Imlay are Mr. K’s G-pick divots, the ones he says “look natural” and are thus not a taint (I don’t buy it, can you tell?). Imlay can be done without using the hook holes, even when the water is down, and I consider it good style to do so. But I still bring hooks and an etrier when going into Imlay and Heaps.
It is desirable to use the minimum un-natural tools ‘necessary’ for traversing the canyons. Therefore, a scale of taints – “natural tools” are not a taint (pack tosses, partner assists, hooking natural features); using unnatural tools that already exist (hooking unnatural features); and a big step up is creating unnatural features (drilling bolts, drilling hook holes); and then a very big step up is creating unnatural features greater than the minimum ‘necessary’ (G-pick divots, extra drilled holes, bolts where natural(ish) anchors have been used before). Etc. That is not the whole scale, but a good start.
I petition you to adopt my scale of taints, and to canyon in a way that I consider good style, but really it is up to you to decide what standard you will hold yourself to. I petition you to report what you do to a public place (like here), and request you accept critique of what you do as it effects other people (ie, if you DRILL holes or leave crap behind), though what you do that does not effect other people (like using existing drill holes) is between you, your friends and your Gods, and less subject to public comment.
My complaint is to the persons who drilled holes for hooking out of potholes in Quandary (where pack tosses work really well). Shame on you!!!
Your mileage may vary. Your scale may be different than mine. You may or may not care about the things I care about. I declare my acceptance of your style/ethic, whether similar or disparate from my own style/ethic – but I petition you to adopt something close to my own.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Morgan” wrote:
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan >
Morgan
It seems to me that there are a lot more canyons out there in addition to Quandary where hooking is still a chosen method despite other methods such as pack tossing and partner assisting that can work just as well. How about all of the nasty hook marks in Imlay? I understand the point about the ethics but is it really necessary to scrutinize each TR? Sometimes situations require non ideal methods.
Morgan
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kent” wrote:
We were in the direct, as we descend every pothole, except the last two easy potholes which we bypassed on the right with some climbing. > I definitely hooked a single drilled hole in an upper pothole, after rapping a deadman to get into it. A pack toss would work, but my light pack wasn’t catching, so I went with the quickest option. It was upcanyon from the single drilled angle rap into a big keeper. The other hook i used was behind a very hard patina layer at the top of a pothole, natural, not necessary for escape, but useful for bringing my partner up. Down lower, there were not any drilled holes and yes pack tosses or climbing work very easily.
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kriemondy” wrote:
The potholes were dry or filled with knee deep water, and easily
> escaped with pack tosses, climbing, or hooking existing holes.
Hooking existing holes?
So sad, if you mean hooking existing drilled holes?
I have not heard of pothole escapes in there that require hooking. Seems like tosses work so well in there, it would be a shame to use destructive techniques.
Tom
>
kent
We were in the direct, as we descend every pothole, except the last two easy potholes which we bypassed on the right with some climbing. I definitely hooked a single drilled hole in an upper pothole, after rapping a deadman to get into it. A pack toss would work, but my light pack wasn’t catching, so I went with the quickest option. It was upcanyon from the single drilled angle rap into a big keeper. The other hook i used was behind a very hard patina layer at the top of a pothole, natural, not necessary for escape, but useful for bringing my partner up. Down lower, there were not any drilled holes and yes pack tosses or climbing work very easily.
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “TomJones” wrote:
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kriemondy” wrote:
The potholes were dry or filled with knee deep water, and easily
escaped with pack tosses, climbing, or hooking existing holes.
Hooking existing holes?
So sad, if you mean hooking existing drilled holes?
I have not heard of pothole escapes in there that require hooking. Seems like tosses work so well in there, it would be a shame to use destructive techniques.
Tom >
TomJones
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kriemondy” wrote:
The potholes were dry or filled with knee deep water, and easily > escaped with pack tosses, climbing, or hooking existing holes.
Hooking existing holes?
So sad, if you mean hooking existing drilled holes?
I have not heard of pothole escapes in there that require hooking. Seems like tosses work so well in there, it would be a shame to use destructive techniques.
Tom
John Varn
Do you know if you took the bypass or not? Cheers and glad everyone was safe. -JV