Don’t do it! That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted. If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling, please post your view… Dave
j b
—– Original Message —-
From: Mike Dallin mike_dallin@hotmail.com>
As I see it, it is the personal responsibility of the person using the techniques
I agree with this as far as it goes–that is, your safety in the backcountry always depends on you. However, the consequences of others’ poor choices are sometimes felt by all, and I think some identification of the relative merit of different techniques is a responsible thing for a group to do.
I don’t have a very high opinion of the evangelical zeal behind the methods used, the lobbying, the “re-education”, the use of peer pressure and emotionally charged arguments.
I take it you’re not an aspiring politician then? Seriously, though–Mike K.’s books are hardly free of emotionally charged zealotry themselves. It’s just that his talking points don’t always coincide with those of others (e.g. his views on milepost realignment, subway permits, wilderness fruitcakes, etc.). That’s not to say we shouldn’t try to rise above his level of discourse–but the way I read things, there’s certainly little on this forum that’s below it. And this is coming from someone who has also enjoyed his books.
Jeff
Mike Dallin
My position has changed in three and a half years. Write up whatever techniques you want and I’ll support you doing so, even if I don’t agree with your take. I may criticize your writing, but I won’t take it as a personal mission to lobby you to change your mind and change your ways. There are other more enjoyable and positive ways for me to spend my time. You can simply decide to take my criticism or leave it. As I see it, it is the personal responsibility of the person using the techniques to consider them and choose what makes sense for them. Their criteria may be safety first, it may be challenge first, it may be no impact first. I won’t fault YOU if someone else makes a decision I disagree with, influenced in part by your writing. Words and books don’t rappel off of hooks, people do.
Heck, write up a document explaining how to blast a rappel into oblivion using dynamite. I don’t see it as your fault if someone is dumb enough to follow your document.
Take the 5.12 vastly experienced climber. Is it his fault that he thinks the g-pick is a great, safe, low-impact technique, or is it Kelsey’s? Come on, let’s see some personal responsibility here. A vastly experienced 5.12 climber (who owns a gym no less) must have run across the hold chipping debate at some point, or at a minimum the leave no trace ethic, and he should be able to figure out the ramifications of the g-pick technique.
> Take him out, treat him with respect and show him different techniques.
Maybe you did treat him with respect. Good job. Not everyone did.
> You don’t have a very high opinion about how that turned out.
I don’t have a very high opinion of the evangelical zeal behind the methods used, the lobbying, the “re-education”, the use of peer pressure and emotionally charged arguments. I have a mixed opinion on how it turned out, which I may take the time to detail later.
Did you ever publish your class C instruction guide? If not I hope it comes out eventually. More resources is always a good thing.
M
WB
On Sep 4, 2008, at 9:03 AM, Mike Dallin wrote:
>> I don’t agree with his g-pick method (though I can see why he >> evolved that > way), and there are facets of his books I don’t like, but I think > Kelsey is > truly one of the great canyoneers simply because he has such an > independent > streak – a streak that is SORELY missing from a largely cliquish, > conformist > canyoneering community (and one that is found in spades in the > climbing > community, particularly before 1990). Heck, think about the > criticism his > books generate…
But in 2005-05-19 you posted regarding my plans to publish Class C techniques on the web for free eventually:
“If safety of future canyoneers isn’t your paramount motivation, you should reconsider writing it.”
Are Mike Kelsey and myself held to different standards when writing or have your standards changed?
You appear not so concerned about the safety implications of what he writes but seem to think that others (or maybe just me) should be held to different standards. With Mike you celebrate the freedom and independence to choose your path, even ones which may be beyond easy.
Ironically, what you prescribed for me then was pretty much exactly we did with Mike. Take him out, treat him with respect and show him different techniques.
You don’t have a very high opinion about how that turned out.
-Bill
Felicia Bicknell
I must assume that I and the other members of the cliquish, > conformist > sect are doing poorly in stating our arguments. That we > come off has > arrogant. That I come off as “telling others what they > should do!” > When all I want to do, is make my arguments, as effectively > and fairly > as I can, to those on the sidelines who are making up there > minds at > any given time. I must ask for advise on how to present > these ideas > that they don’t come off so offensively. Or is it the > ideas > themselves? I don’t get it. >
I enjoy the debates. If I had something to offer, I would participate. But I am listening, and I’m learning. Each one of your arguments/positions are being heard. Thanks!!!
adkramoo
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Mike Dallin” wrote: > I’ll be the first (and probably only one) to say it, but… Kelsey’s > evolution to using the g-pick and hook rappels was absolutely brilliant.
My speculation: Way back when, through the mists of time, a small but vocal> group got VERY upset at Kelsey’s use of bolts. They decided to lead him> down canyons, using only natural anchors, and attempt to “re-educate” him.> They lobbied him; they wanted him to do things their way. So Kelsey,> looking for an alternative, stumbles upon articles like these: > http://canyoneeringusa.com/mag/issue1/natural.htm
http://www.climb-utah.com/Misc/natural.htm
And trip reports like this one: > http://www.canyoneeringusa.com/rave/mar02/nasty.htm
all written by the leading “experts” who happen to be advocates (of varying> degrees) of the anti-bolt ethic.
But, thinks Kelsey, hook rappels have limited use due to canyon topography,> and isn’t a predictably safe method… what can I do to widen its use, and> add a degree of safety, particularly for my own solo trips? And the g-pick> method was born.
A fair assessment, except he probably didn’t read any of those articles…and if he did, he wouldn’t admit it 😉
> From his perspective, along with pressure to have less impact than bolts, it> makes sense. No bolts left behind. Only one hole drilled, not two. No> webbing left behind. And the hole that is left behind is often not> noticeable unless you are really looking for them (I’ve walked by a few and> been none the wiser. The only ones I’ve noticed were ones I knew were there> before venturing into the canyon).
Good in theory. Question? Is a chipped hole something that is reusable? Or will it degrade and if so, how quickly? Floods, soft rock, pressure from the hooks….how long will one last as a safe hole. The other thing. You have missed a couple of holes. Will you miss holes when there are hundreds of these picks out there? Might be harder to miss them in the future. HOLEy crap!! 😉 WyoDave just called from the road. He is heading to canyon country, the lucky dog! He made an interesting point, I thought. Back in the real misty days, someone came with a new innovation and shared it at Camp 4 in Yosemite. It got tested. Winners became what is accepted today. But in our times….. The book comes out. The idea is OK’d on the Internet and suddenly how many of these things are out there? To what effect? You see the new book? How many pictures of these techniques? He is the proud pappy of a new idea and he is selling it. Your a climber Mikey….kinda like the hold enhancement arguments that community disdains, isn’t it?
> And the anti-bolters, who tirelessly lobbied Kelsey (after vilifying him in> places such as this very egroup) get what they wish for… but with a karmic> twist.
Indeed. Yes, he was lobbied , by folks who had agendas and beliefs. And it had much positive effects. There was no real mention of natural anchors in the past. Two steps forward, one step back
> I don’t agree with his g-pick method (though I can see why he evolved that> way), and there are facets of his books I don’t like, but I think Kelsey is> truly one of the great canyoneers simply because he has such an independent> streak – a streak that is SORELY missing from a largely cliquish, conformist> canyoneering community
Sigh. Double sigh. Cliquish? Conformist? This group can’t agree on anything. There is a core group that talk the most, who advocate certain things. Helmets, natural anchors etc. There are others that disagree with them and say so, perhaps less so. What is the big deal? Mikey, I remember back in the misty past you refer to (3-6 years ago on this forum-check the archives), that you were an advocate, seeing fixed anchors as a preferred method. I think at one time, you had Tom, Stevee, Holley and many others agreeing with you. Others argued the other side. I was new to all of this. I sat back and listened for a long time, as both sides argued, sometimes in the gutter, sometimes eloquently. I assume others, here and now, are in the same seat that I was in back then (hi!). Those that argued for what they saw as less permanent impacts were called elitists, cliquish back then too. As people “trying to tell me what to do.” I respected both sides as being genuine in there motives. I watched folks change their positions, like the names i listed above. I formed mine, with the help of everyone who stated their beliefs. Some, I assume, who decided at the same time as I did, landed on the other side. The forum provided me a service. I hope some feel it does the same for them now.
I must assume that I and the other members of the cliquish, conformist sect are doing poorly in stating our arguments. That we come off has arrogant. That I come off as “telling others what they should do!” When all I want to do, is make my arguments, as effectively and fairly as I can, to those on the sidelines who are making up there minds at any given time. I must ask for advise on how to present these ideas that they don’t come off so offensively. Or is it the ideas themselves? I don’t get it.
(and one that is found in spades in the climbing > community, particularly before 1990). Heck, think about the criticism his > books generate…
Emphasizes g-pick > Emphasizes bolts > Criticizes environmentalists > Criticizes “f’in ATVers” (though I suppose many on this group aren’t > bothered by this) > Not enough helmets in his fotos > Won’t use the fake secret names others give canyons
What like Leprechaun, Sandthrax, Mindbender etc? Secret?
> Publishes too many hard canyons > Publishes secret or untrammeled areas > Rating system lobbying > Timings are bad > The list goes on
Everyone who makes themselves a public figure, is opening themselves to criticism. Comes with the territory. How you deal with it is important. It matters…to me anyway.
> Personally I think it is sad (though ironically hilarious) how the “experts”> of the community feel they must lobby and re-educate Kelsey so that he will> support their agenda.
“There you go again” Ronald Reagan We offered up ideas. Several were accepted. Others weren’t. I feel we helped advance our beliefs. Look at and compare the introductions of the 1st and 2nd editions and tell me you see no movement. Is there much I deplore? Well, yeah! What will I do now?…. build on the relationship I have with him and advocate some more. If I look sad and pathetic for doing so, I guess, I’ll hitch up my belt and carry on and accept your view of my efforts.
And the hilarious part is that he is independent > enough that the lobbying has unintended consequences.
A rule of nature, or so it seems 😉
And what is really > funny is many of those “experts” appear in fotos in his book. Brilliant!
My man Bucky (and Steve) on page 99 of the 1st edition. Thanx guys for your efforts. It made a difference Ram >
Mike Dallin
> What’s wrong with some innovation? … >I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the canyoneering community >seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just referring to this topic, >but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing X-rated/high stemming >slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as people are aware of the >risks, I have no problem with any of it.
I’ll be the first (and probably only one) to say it, but… Kelsey’s evolution to using the g-pick and hook rappels was absolutely brilliant.
My speculation: Way back when, through the mists of time, a small but vocal group got VERY upset at Kelsey’s use of bolts. They decided to lead him down canyons, using only natural anchors, and attempt to “re-educate” him. They lobbied him; they wanted him to do things their way. So Kelsey, looking for an alternative, stumbles upon articles like these:
http://canyoneeringusa.com/mag/issue1/natural.htm http://www.climb-utah.com/Misc/natural.htm
And trip reports like this one:
http://www.canyoneeringusa.com/rave/mar02/nasty.htm
all written by the leading “experts” who happen to be advocates (of varying degrees) of the anti-bolt ethic.
But, thinks Kelsey, hook rappels have limited use due to canyon topography, and isn’t a predictably safe method… what can I do to widen its use, and add a degree of safety, particularly for my own solo trips? And the g-pick method was born.
From his perspective, along with pressure to have less impact than bolts, it makes sense. No bolts left behind. Only one hole drilled, not two. No webbing left behind. And the hole that is left behind is often not noticeable unless you are really looking for them (I’ve walked by a few and been none the wiser. The only ones I’ve noticed were ones I knew were there before venturing into the canyon).
And the anti-bolters, who tirelessly lobbied Kelsey (after vilifying him in places such as this very egroup) get what they wish for… but with a karmic twist.
I don’t agree with his g-pick method (though I can see why he evolved that way), and there are facets of his books I don’t like, but I think Kelsey is truly one of the great canyoneers simply because he has such an independent streak – a streak that is SORELY missing from a largely cliquish, conformist canyoneering community (and one that is found in spades in the climbing community, particularly before 1990). Heck, think about the criticism his books generate…
Emphasizes g-pick Emphasizes bolts Criticizes environmentalists Criticizes “f’in ATVers” (though I suppose many on this group aren’t bothered by this) Not enough helmets in his fotos Won’t use the fake secret names others give canyons Publishes too many hard canyons Publishes secret or untrammeled areas Rating system lobbying Timings are bad The list goes on
Personally I think it is sad (though ironically hilarious) how the “experts” of the community feel they must lobby and re-educate Kelsey so that he will support their agenda. And the hilarious part is that he is independent enough that the lobbying has unintended consequences. And what is really funny is many of those “experts” appear in fotos in his book. Brilliant!
His books aren’t perfect, but Kelsey has given me many memorable days by providing me with decent beta to otherwise unpublished secret canyons. For that alone I will always be grateful, and if I ever get the chance to meet up with him, dinner is on me. I look forward to 3rd, 4th, 5th and beyond editions of his book.
M
A.J.
While I don’t condone the use of hooks for everyone; I still find them a great tool in the bag of tricks. If you are familiar / knoledgeable enough to recognize the places where they make sense to be used, then they should be used. I’ve gone off them several times and don’t mind them. However, I don’t think it’s a tool to be handed out to the beginner, as there are obvious considerations that folks have brought up (especially rock composition, and the need to be a smooth rappeler.)
I don’t condone making holes in the rock to use them, but I’ve found spots on several occasions where there was a natural feature conducive to using a hook; and that’s what I used…
Take care, A.J.
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “tom” wrote:
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “nat_smale” wrote:
> What’s wrong with some innovation?
I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the > canyoneering community
seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just > referring to this topic,
but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing > X-rated/high stemming
slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as > people are aware of the
risks, I have no problem with any of it.
Well said Nat. My sentiments exactly!
tom(w) >
adkramoo
Hi Nat…I’ll at least gum back, if not bite. 😉 Good points on the innovation front. I like it. I think the conservative bent comes from the fact that canyoneering is so much easier than climbing. It has to be so, if I can do it. It is also structured to where one can find one’s way down and not be able to get back up or out. Kind of like a seductress. Climbers can always just rap off and difficult stuff tends to be an effective barrier to those lacking the necessary skills. Only a percentage of the canyoneers have climbing backgrounds too.
A climbing background is helpful on making judgments on safety issues, innovative or not, so if a large amount of the community doesn’t have that background., the curve to using these techniques could be riskier. Or at least I’m guessing it might.
As far as the X rated canyons are concerned, I was a vocal in expressing concerns about their publication. Let me explain why. First of all, there were almost none betaed and now there are many. You and a few others have been doing this type of canyon for quite some time. Now a huge amount of info is out there to a huge collection of folks who have never done the like. It might prove treacherous for some doing the incremental steps safely. That fella who did E4 with his girlfriend comes to mind.
Second, the experience of high stemming is quite different than many climbing type experiences. You know this well. My partner in May is a big wall climber in Zion. Gapers significantly smaller than a silo were not in the cards for him. Kind of surprising to see it once again. This type of climbing is unique. Other partners have brought along the 5.12 climbers, assured that they would eat the stemming up. And many of them did OK. But essentially all of them turn out to move at about 1/2 the speed of experienced folks, due to lack of seasoning on the route finding. I’m sure you remember Jason in Big Tony. Prime example. Its not easily evident, the planning of the next 25 feet. Not at all. Other skill sets don’t always translate well.
Third, I have commented on the “way” the stemming is presented, in the only place this type of canyon is listed for the public. I am not saying I could do a better job of presenting the “how to.” I wouldn’t sleep well if I tried anyway. I just think that MK went from personally being novice, to pretty good and now he presents the “how to” from his more skilled perspective. Not taking a pack, food water….these are “go light and fast” approaches that have validity. For the seasoned. But to present them to novices? Folks who may take considerably longer to get through?
So I don’t necessarily disagree with Nat, just think that it is important to often express these potential land mines. The numbers of folks who have done high stemming is a very small number indeed. Not for long. May they do so safely and with style R
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “nat_smale” wrote:
> OK, I’ll bite. Do it!
There may well be times when rapping off of a hook is the most sensible thing to do. I’ve > rapped off of hooks perhaps a dozen times. None of them were “absolutely necessary”. > Almost all of them were quite safe (from my perspective). Sure, hooks weren’t designed > for rapping off of. So what? People find all kinds of uses for things for which they weren’t > designed. Rapid links weren’t designed to rap off of. Machine nuts weren’t designed to use > for climbing protection. Tent poles weren’t designed to make happy hookers out of. > What’s wrong with some innovation?
I have done at least 3 raps off of hooks where the alternatives would have been silly: > spend at least half an hour digging out a hole from very hard dirt, then leave a potshot as > a deadman (this would have the advantage of giving Tom some more business ), and > some webbing. Instead, a simple rap of 20ft off of a very big flat (actually a bit in cut) > edge, followed by a simple retrieval. I think many of us can make an informed judgement > of whether a hook placement is safe to rap off of.
I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the canyoneering community > seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just referring to this topic, > but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing X-rated/high stemming > slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as people are aware of the > risks, I have no problem with any of it.
Nat
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
Don’t do it!
That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used
as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the
rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are
notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not
the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is
available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That
is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted.
If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling,
please post your view…
Dave
>
tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “nat_smale” wrote:
> What’s wrong with some innovation? > I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the canyoneering community > seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just referring to this topic, > but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing X-rated/high stemming > slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as people are aware of the > risks, I have no problem with any of it.
Well said Nat. My sentiments exactly!
tom(w)
Kenneth Huls
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “nat_smale” wrote: >Courageous of you, Nat. And for those big flat edges, if you MUST do it, I’d say the spoonbill is best. distributes at least a little force.
Ken
OK, I’ll bite. Do it!
There may well be times when rapping off of a hook is the most sensible thing to do. I’ve > rapped off of hooks perhaps a dozen times. None of them were “absolutely necessary”. > Almost all of them were quite safe (from my perspective). Sure, hooks weren’t designed > for rapping off of. So what? People find all kinds of uses for things for which they weren’t > designed. Rapid links weren’t designed to rap off of. Machine nuts weren’t designed to use > for climbing protection. Tent poles weren’t designed to make happy hookers out of. > What’s wrong with some innovation?
I have done at least 3 raps off of hooks where the alternatives would have been silly: > spend at least half an hour digging out a hole from very hard dirt, then leave a potshot as > a deadman (this would have the advantage of giving Tom some more business ), and > some webbing. Instead, a simple rap of 20ft off of a very big flat (actually a bit in cut) > edge, followed by a simple retrieval. I think many of us can make an informed judgement > of whether a hook placement is safe to rap off of.
I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the canyoneering community > seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just referring to this topic, > but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing X- rated/high stemming > slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as people are aware of the > risks, I have no problem with any of it.
Nat
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
Don’t do it!
That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used
as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the
rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are
notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not
the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is
available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That
is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted.
If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling,
please post your view…
Dave
>
Kenneth Huls
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Charly Oliver” wrote:
But Tom, you put a nice big ibis on the end of your wonderful Happy
Hooker!
I believe the Happy Hooker was designed to be used as a pot hole escape > tool, not a rappel anchor.
Unless is is absolutely your only choice, rappelling off a hook is not > a good idea.
Charly > Charly, Thank you for clarifying that my happy hooker is to be used for pot hole escape. Personally, I have used it while stranded in the bottom of a pothole to try to gaff birds flying overhead in attempt to stave off starvation. Seriously, you thought I might not know that? My comment was for Tom, who said he did not find hooks generally that useful, so it was a lighthearted comment back that they do have some wonderful uses – such as on his hooker (to escape pot holes). And on an octopus. I think most of us agree that rapping off of hooks is to be avoided, which I thought I made clear as well, though I see that Nat has weighed in courageously. though you may not have intended to be less than courteous, and I allow that it is in fact possible that my post misled, this is a possible example of why some become lurkers (to follow up on a recent post/thread). But again, thanks, and I am smiling as I write this.
Ken
nat_smale
OK, I’ll bite. Do it!
There may well be times when rapping off of a hook is the most sensible thing to do. I’ve rapped off of hooks perhaps a dozen times. None of them were “absolutely necessary”. Almost all of them were quite safe (from my perspective). Sure, hooks weren’t designed for rapping off of. So what? People find all kinds of uses for things for which they weren’t designed. Rapid links weren’t designed to rap off of. Machine nuts weren’t designed to use for climbing protection. Tent poles weren’t designed to make happy hookers out of. What’s wrong with some innovation?
I have done at least 3 raps off of hooks where the alternatives would have been silly: spend at least half an hour digging out a hole from very hard dirt, then leave a potshot as a deadman (this would have the advantage of giving Tom some more business ), and some webbing. Instead, a simple rap of 20ft off of a very big flat (actually a bit in cut) edge, followed by a simple retrieval. I think many of us can make an informed judgement of whether a hook placement is safe to rap off of.
I have to say, that I am a bit perplexed by how conservative the canyoneering community seems to be, compared to say, the climbing community. I’m not just referring to this topic, but also the great reticence I have observed about publicizing X-rated/high stemming slots. Of course all of these things carry some risk. As long as people are aware of the risks, I have no problem with any of it.
Nat
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
Don’t do it! > That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used > as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the > rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are > notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not > the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is > available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That > is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted. > If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling, > please post your view… > Dave >
Charly Oliver
But Tom, you put a nice big ibis on the end of your wonderful Happy > Hooker!
I believe the Happy Hooker was designed to be used as a pot hole escape tool, not a rappel anchor.
Unless is is absolutely your only choice, rappelling off a hook is not a good idea.
Charly
Kenneth Huls
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Tom Jones” wrote:
Hooks put all the weight on just a tiny piece of rock. The > sandstone around here is not so good. I have had handholds and > footholds explode into dust.
On occasion there are good hook placements available for BIG hooks, > but in general I have not found it a useful tool to carry.
Tom
But Tom, you put a nice big ibis on the end of your wonderful Happy Hooker! – which I love in the right canyons. I carry an ibis and a spoonbill in all canyons. Only rapped off of one once, and would have been better served to build a deadman, but all went well and it was one of the placements which you could get the ibis fitted around so the weight was not forced into the point. That being said, I have not repeated it. I carry them mostly for use on an octopus, which comes in handy now and then. In fact, used just such a device Sunday to pull a log over to me in Sundance (AZ). Nothing else would have done much good and without it I would have been forced into an unappetizing downclimb. Especially when soloing I believe in carrying a big and varied bag of tricks.
Ken
please post your view…
Dave
>
Kenneth Huls
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Tom Jones” wrote:
Hooks put all the weight on just a tiny piece of rock. The > sandstone around here is not so good. I have had handholds and > footholds explode into dust.
On occasion there are good hook placements available for BIG hooks, > but in general I have not found it a useful tool to carry.
Tom
But Tom, you put a nice big ibis on the end of your wonderful Happy Hooker! – which I love in the right canyons. I carry an ibis and a spoonbill in all canyons. Only rapped off of one once, and would have been better served to build a deadman, but all went well and it was one of the placements which you could get the ibis fitted around so the weight was not forced into the point. That being said, I have not repeated it. I carry them mostly for use on an octopus, which comes in handy now and then. In fact, used just such a device Sunday to pull a log over to me in Sundance (AZ). Nothing else would have done much good and without it I would have been forced into an unappetizing downclimb. Especially when soloing I believe in carrying a big and varied bag of tricks.
Ken
please post your view…
Dave
>
desertres
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
> No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That > is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind. >
> Dave >
They gots these out there….;-)
http://cgi.ebay.com/COLLAPISBLE-GRAPPLING- HOOK_W0QQitemZ270271563375QQihZ017QQcategoryZ50816QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ 1QQcmdZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/US-ARMY-special-forces-GRAPPLING- HOOK_W0QQitemZ290256851063QQihZ019QQcategoryZ135QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1Q QcmdZViewItem
“Overall Rating:1650 lbs”…not bad….
davewyo1
Aw sheesh! I nearly re-threaded my dinner through my nasal passages on that one! I admit that there are times that a hook can be used for rappelling. No question, your video clearly illustrates that… Dave — In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Robert Cobb” wrote:
Rappelling on hook video.
http://xrl.us/opeji
> Rob
Robert Cobb
Rappelling on hook video.
http://xrl.us/opeji
Rob
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
Don’t do it! > That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used > as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the > rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are > notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not > the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is > available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That > is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted. > If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling, > please post your view… > Dave >
Tom Jones
Hooks put all the weight on just a tiny piece of rock. The sandstone around here is not so good. I have had handholds and footholds explode into dust.
On occasion there are good hook placements available for BIG hooks, but in general I have not found it a useful tool to carry.
Tom
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “davewyo1” wrote:
Don’t do it! > That is the best council that you are going to find out there.
A hook is not meant to be rappelled on. They are designed to be used > as a piece of Aid Gear and you are supposed to place the hook on the > rock, with etrier attached, and gently step up onto it. They are > notoriously unstable when used in the intended manner. They are not > the first choice of aid climbers; they are used when nothing else is > available.
No one has designed a hook that is intended to be rappelled on. That > is just NOT what they are for. Keep that in mind.
A hook has a tendency to skitter across the rock when weighted. > If anyone has other reasons to use or not use a hook for rappelling, > please post your view… > Dave >