Two Bolt Anchors Will Save Paradise Forks Cliff Top

Before you get your adventure climber panties in a bunch hear me out.
Climbed at the Forks for the first time in twenty years in June. I could not believe how degraded the cliff top area is. There is very little vegetation at the tops of the more popular routes. A number of us brainstormed some solutions and this is one I think would mitigate the severe damage we are causing at the top of the cliffs.

When we were there we set up a rappel that we left hanging and used repeatedly. This seems to be common practice. When we topped out on a climb we usually walked back to a tree set up an anchor then went back to the cliff edge to belay. That makes 2 trips over the same barren ground. My partner would follow and when he gets to the top we both walk back from the edge to the anchors. That's 2 more trips. We then hike to the rap line. That is another cliff top vegetation crushing stroll. That is for one route. We did 6-10 routes a day.

If we had been able to clip and lower back to the ground only the access to the rap station would have been trampled. When we rappeled in and when we pulled our rope. Also when If we did decide to come out of the canyon bottom to rest or eat that would add another trip over some section of ground.

If you put anchors at the tops of the 50 most popular climbs and a few easily accessed rap stations it would go a long way toward mitigating the crushing impact we currently put on the vegetation.

I know there are people that are worried that the sport weenies, ME, will go wild if you allow even one bolt there but I think the bigger picture is being missed here.

I know some are concerned with aesthetics but even fifty sets of Fixe Rings anchors would not cover two backpacks worth of bare ground at the top of the Prow.

The problem is too much traffic. Two bolt anchors would solve a lot of that.

Please try to be civil and come up with a better solution because something needs to be done by climbers.

everyone complains about the tree at the top of the prow . the problems is not with tying off to the tree but by trampling all over the tiny capillary roots that grow at the surface that feed the tree. that's what is killing it. a rap station there is just going to erode a nice funnel that will make a great launching pad for rocks. the forks is a trad area right ? so why not build a geared anchor. there's plenty of rocks you can lasso, plenty of cracks for good gear and even holes to thread webbing, i do this a lot when there is not a good tree to tie off to. also, people don't pull their lines after the rap, they leave them there until they are done with that wall . so with rap stations we would have like 5 ropes on one set of bolts. clusterfuck. same holds true with the tree at paradise lost and davidson dihedral . the only real answer here is to build your own geared anchor. no holes in rocks and you can take it with you when you go. leave no trace right? (its bad enough that someone left ticks mark all over the place)if rap stations go in they are going to be chopped.

A lengthy discussion on this topic last year over on rc.com, after two rap bolts were placed and quickly chopped:

rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/fo…

Damned if you do and Damned if you don't! As soon as someone mention's a couple of bolt's all the "Politician Rock Climber's" alway's have to cry....... Maybe some climber's need to go out there and restore those hold's with a file Ha Ha, a couple of Rap Station's make's sense to me but adding bolt's anywhere is alway's going to get someone's panties in a bunch. It's so political when someone mention's anything about adding a few bolt's you would think they were running for election! I'd say it would be a good thing, but it would be a waste of time since they will be chopped anyway and cause controversy that is not needed anyway.

Its too bad Eric, its never gonna happen. The paradise forks crew has spoken! They are not to be swayed..
And i really don't want to get into anything here but I would love to hear some more of the people who are against the bolts.
The lack of impact argument doesn't make any sense to me. Obviously climbers have caused way more damage to vegetation than any top rope anchors would. And the idea that the rock would become worn in some way if top rope anchors were there seems a little dodgy. People climb there a lot. Would that many more people go that don't already visit there if thid was the case?
So really, what is the issue? Why is it that people chop and object?

ct/ny had the same question posed a little while ago. Its amazing how many are more concerned with the addition of bolted anchors than with the destruction of vegetation. One poster actually suggested planting more trees for future generations to tie off. Gear anchors sounds good as does dedicated rap stations. If bolted anchors are needed to preserve the native vegetation then preservation takes precedence. I really don't think anchors are going to attract the hordes.

mountainproject.com/v/easte…

Hey Matt the anchor solution sounds pretty good but you still must work your way back to your rap station or down climb to reach the bottom and the next route. More walking more crushed vegetation. Checked out the thread on rockclimbing.com Brian. They were talking about a few main rap stations. I propose we put anchors at the top of fifty routes or so. This will mean less cliff top traffic. I also read what Paul Davidson wrote on the thread and will call him and get more of his input. He was after all one of the pioneers at the forks and I would like to talk it through with him.

I think the biggest issue here is how toprope anchors will change the nature of the climbing. Just look at what goes on at Indian Creek. It is now basically a toprope area. A few people/parties hang the ropes up and then the routes get slaughtered by the people who just TR them to death.

Toprope anchors will change the character of the climbing at Paradise.

Toprope anchors won't do much to to change the overall impact, it will simply shift it from the clifftop to the staging areas at the base. The new routine will be to rap into the base with all your crap and hang out down there all day. The base will get hammered, the trails will widen and the soil will compact and erode.

Face it, toprope anchors will act as convenience anchors and make the place more attractive. Currently it's a pretty core area with traditional old-school ethics solidly in place. Sure, you could go there and rig anchors off the trees or rock and run TRs off of them but few people do. Most parties rap in and lead out. That whole scene will change with bolted TR anchors.

I'm glad people are thinking about it...

Mal

A very few anhors could be placed (one for each major area) in areas that would not promote top roping but still allow for easy access to raps. Above Gold pond you could place it on the rock formation to the east of Goldfinger (which isn't above any route). Above the Prow it could be placed to the climbers right of Sail Away even further over but then it would be over a bunch of easier routes. Above Pillow Wall you could place one to the climbers right of Davidsons Dihedral (but it would probably get used to TR Pillow Talk) and then above Davidsons Wall you could place it just to the climbers left of Jane Fondas which could be TR'ed from the anchors but it would get TR'ed maybe once a month.

Would it help the issue. It would take a lot of stress off the trees above Davidsons which most often is led and has reasonable belays on natural gear at the top. It probably will have no effect above Pillow3 Wall since on a given weekend there are probably 50% of the tie-offs are for TR'ing and that would probably continue. As for the Prow area, people would still probably tie off to the tree for a belay after leading any of the routes between the Prow and the 5.9 2 routes to the climbers right of Sail Away (brain burp and forgot the name of the route). As for affecting erosion and tree death in the Gold Wall area, I still think people would tie off to trees after leading many of the routes

Now it doesn't address erosion at the bottom of routes, but that is mainly an issue at the Pillow Wall. At the base of the Davidsons Wall, most climbers hop between the tops of the talus (since its much easier then anything else) so we may make the talus smoother but really have no big affect on erosion there. At the base of the Prow, I'd saw 99% of the people stick to the small trail at teh base of the route instead of wandering through the brush) and the trail is actually on rock so the effect of erosion is minimized. The base of Gold Wall from Gold Finger to the pond is like the base of the Davidsons Wall and isn't really affected. What I'm saying is that a large number of rap bolts would not appreciably benefit the area any more than say 4-5 rap stations.

Eric, I understand your concern and agree that something needs to be done. Unfortunately I haven't heard the right solution yet.

That many fixed anchors will double the amount of traffic the forks sees because of easy top-rope set ups. That increase in traffic could completely counter-balance the environmental benefits of fixed anchors. This would thus lead me to think that a few bolted rap stations would be the solution, but you'd still get the traffic at the cliff edge when climbers top-out.

At some areas, Seneca Rocks for example, trees have heavy duty fixed stations around them. They are typically static rope with a sheath of tubular webbing around them. These are permanent and seem to work well. What about putting a handful of these stations around the most heavily used trees? By keeping them fixed, it may reduce damage to the tree.

I would love to see anchors at the Forks. The trees definitely take a hit by people roping them to TR. I see about half the folks climbing there using topropes. The damage to the top's edge might be minimized if some strategically chosen anchors were placed. One near the prow would go a long ways to saving the tree, mulch might help too. Thnk I'll visit with a bag each time I go. The Davidson wall gets a lot of the traffic and the area looks like it's definitely been hammered. Starting with those two would be good, at least as far as monitoring the comeback of the two spots and the general acceptance of bolted anchors.

I think the question that needs to be answered here is "Does rapping off of trees damage them?" If so, perhaps bolted anchors would be justified. People TR all the time at the forks anyway, just rap down and have your buddy belay you up on GriGri. I don't see bolted anchors increasing this trend. Bolted anchors probably wouldn't decrease the overall erosion: trading top erosion for bottom, perhaps. But if it saves the trees, I'm for it. Now, does rapping off of trees hurt them, or not?

Bolted anchors do not seem right for the Forks. I suggest we shop-vac or carry away all the smaller rocks near the cliff edge. Those little buggers always worry me when I hear someone rapping in from above.

Levity aside, I do enjoy the honest debate this has prompted. Bolted anchors do increase the convenience factor and sometimes increase visitorship. I say this knowing my hypocrisy as I have placed one or two bolted anchors for convenience.

In NM we have an interesting variant on this scenario. The Playground at White Rock is a traditional area with no bolts that is close to some other areas with bolts and sport climbs. This situation arose when Los Alamos climbers came to a consensus in the 90s on how they wanted their local crags to look. It has worked well in the intervening years; however, the bark beetle killed off most of, if not all, the trees formerly used for anchors at the clifftop. The natural anchors are generally marginal (with some exceptions) and in response someone bolted anchors where the tree deaths lead to bad anchors. Of course they got chopped. I have no solution other than community dialog like this about what kind of experience we want.

The decision is not for any individual.

W.

50 TR anchors is way excessive and like somebody said will just increase the problem and make it even worse at the bottom. The problem isn't just on top. There used to be a huge fir at the base of Mayflower. Why do you think it fell over? Several other trees top and bottom that were there when I first began climbing there (1980)are gone now and the ground is much lower all around. The probelm is just the sheer number of people and 50 bolted anchors are only going to make that worse. That works fine in some areas but lets leave some places alone so that people actually have to learn to build anchors etc. We don't need to make every area like a gym.

You guys seem to think that they will be used as TR anchors which they will. As it is now the trees are the TR anchors. The point is to keep people off the top and to stop using the trees. The reason I suggest anchors at the tops of routes is not about making it easy but to reduce the number of times we traverse the top. If we had been able to clip anchors and lower from the top of the Prow I would have cleaned the gear and he could have lead it too. It also would have meant four less trips per route on top.

A number of you think that it will make the place more popular. Many of the anchors will be in places that can't be reached from the rim either. This may lead people to Rap from trees to get to them so it may not get any more popular.

As far as people using the anchors instead of draws to TR then the locals need to get really serious about creating a new ethic. Tell people why it is important use draws when top-roping and hang around bugging them if they don't use them. Another thing we do down here is not to let friends TR or follow sport routes. With bolts every seven or eight feet you should be leading even if you have to go bolt to bolt or cam to cam. The forks at least until you get into the hardest routes takes more pro than any sport route I have ever put up.

I really don't think a lot more of the bottom will be flattened either but I could be wrong.

I am getting tired and should wait to post this but I will edit it tomorrow. Please excuse the disjointedness.

Here is a thought. Lets try one area and put one rap station in and anchors at the top of the most popular routes and see what happens. In fact someone could do their thesis on this. Does it become more popular and thus more trampled at the top/bottom?

I am heading for the stronghold early tomorrow morning so I will leave you with those thoughts. Thanks for not slashing my tires yet.

Hey Chris (got out of tamo lately?),

You agree with many about (50 being) too many anchors at this classic area. I don't want bolts for the reason that I don't trust that someone wont start hittin the faces and puttin those shiny things in everywhere.
A couple stations might just reduce some wear and tear at the top (opening thrashing at the bottom). Traffic does not seem to be going away.

One thing I've heard come up more than once about erosion:

..DOGS..
(different arguement?)

Travis mentioned that maybe top anchors on trees isnt really the death of them. I would like to see some research on that too. That soldier on top of right deception (elden) still looks good after 20 years to me ( I use the bolts now... hey, someone IS bolting at elden these days too (open flood gates)). No doubt about it, the tree above fools game is on the bottom of the canyon (circa 1993?).

This is a tough topic!

Steve

I helped steve byrne knock down a huge pine everyone was using for a TR in the late 80s. The two of us just pushed back and forth, it easily fell over. It was located above Paradise Lost and took years to deteriorate. Now, the whole area is stressed by the drought and we are only hurting it by loving it as we do. Just look at our impact on the trees alone any you know we need an alternative to strangling the trees and tromping their roots.

While I don't live there, I have as much vested interest in keeping it a healthy area as anybody else that climbs there. I like the idea of using a fixed static rap line around a tree as mentioned in a previous post. And a couple of bolted anchors, especially in areas that I indicated earlier. Unfortunately, there are some with a bunker mentality that may not let that happen.

Maybe using removable bolts? That could remove the visual impact and it would be a compromise with the hardliner bolt choppers.

you wouldn't need 50 bolted stations, 2-4 would do it (one at each of the major areas that get the most traffic, Gold Wall, the Prow, Pillow Wall and Davidsons Wall, and maybe Sine Wall (but White Wall doesn't see the traffic so the damage is minimized) . Place them in areas that are accessable from the top, but not over major climbs (so people rapping don't interfer with people leading out).

Would it minimize the damage. Only if the locals (which include myself) would pressure people to stop TR'ing (or anchoring) off of trees and use only natural gear, but I doubt that would ever happen)

First, a side note: The forks is a designated wilderness area. I spoke with a ranger about rap anchors, who indicated that the wilderness boundary is the cliff face. Technically, then, any anchors which are on the vertical face would have to be hand drilled. If you put a rap anchor on horizontal terrain, that could be power drilled.

I have visited the Forks over a ten year period. From what I've seen there, I am skeptical of the argument that bolted anchors on the top of routes would reduce erosion. Main reasons:

1. You will still have a lot of foot traffic on top -- people will still leave their packs and such, versus drag them down into the canyon.

2. On my recent trips, top ropers have made up about half of the climber population at the forks. It is still easier -- and safer -- for them to tie off to a tree than reach down to a TR anchor at the cliff's edge.

3. The suggestion to "not to let friends TR" seems unlikely to catch on. Beginners just learning crack technique aren't going to take a rack of cams and lead the three yogis. I can't lead the prow, but toprope sessions this year have helped build my thin hands technique. My forks visits are a 50/50 split between leading and toproping. Additionally, given the difficulties of rescue here, I think it is irresponsible to advocate the forks as a place to push your limits.

Separately, I also don't find either safety or convenience arguments compelling reasons to install TR anchors. That said, I am more open to having a handful of rap anchors. I think these have the potential to be useful.

Finally, I don't know if it really helps the trees, but I have brought mulch out to various crags, including the forks. I bring extra water to the forks as well, and donate part of my water supply to the trees at the cliff's edge. So, the big pine at the Pillow Wall and I have a good relationship :) NACC did a mulching project some time ago, and a repeat effort might be a good place to start.

I'm not advocating pressuring people not to TR but not to TR off of tree's.

As to placement of bolts, a few placements are possible that are accessed above the top of the rim (such as just above Jane Fonda's there is a rock formation to the left of it, and above and to the East of Goldfinger there is also a rock formation above the rim).

I am also not advocating that everyone push their limits there but as Paul Davidson said, they worked their way up through the grade there (even though as an area for pushing your grades, I actually find it to be an ideal spot since the majority of the routes are very safe to push yourself on)

If you want to see some sad TR (or top anchoring) from tree action, go to Illinios. Check out the top of the crag at Makanda: its completely denuded of foliage. And, other cliff top areas are closed to climbing because of it. Here's a place that had climbers been more sensitive to fragile cliff top ecology, and placed a few bolted anchors, then perhaps access could have been maintained.

Not sure if that's the case a P Forks, but, I've always thought if you want to save the trees, add a fixed anchor.

Should climbers really do nothing? What about some type of hardened trail work?

Being proactive about trying to mitigate erosion and tree damage has to be in the climber's best interest, I'd think.

I've never been. Hate to see the area get closed as a reaction, instead of folks being proactive and doing something (anything?).

Cheers and good luck.