History of ethics of lowering and TRing through fixed gear/quickdraws

Yeitti wrote:Oh Dammit! here we go again!!!! It's sport climbing!!! lower of the damn thing to clean! If climbing it more than once, put 2 draws on the anchor, but lower off to clean!!! This rappel ethic is from crusty old climbers too weak to climb, or newbies too weak to climb being taught by crusties! or meet up groups that are raping our crags! Stop the MEET UP GROUPS!! PICK UP YOUR DAMN TP instead of rappeling off that 5.8 pitch you hungdogged and raped with your meet up group! enough, im going back to my van and

Yeitti nailed it.

Ted Pinson wrote:Uh...no. I've never seen lowering being the "ethic." Perhaps this is a west coast thing, but everywhere I've done sport climbing (RRG, Red Rock, Austin, Rumney), the ethic is rappel, not lower, off of fixed hardware unless cleaning a severely overhanging route. Lowering puts more force/wear on the hardware and is generally seen to be in poor taste. I also find it to be incredibly annoying, as you have to direct your belayer when to stop, etc, whereas with a properly backed-up rappel, you can go hands free whenever you need and control your own rate of descent.

What happens at Red River (etc) kiddie crags needs to stay at the klettergardens.

Take a couple of years Ted, actually learn to sport climb and then share an informed opinion.

Eric Engberg wrote:thanks to Spraguey and his ilk nation wide

Yes, many sincere thanks to Sprague and his ilk. Volunteers making the crags better for the rest of us.

Ted Pinson wrote:Uh...no. I've never seen lowering being the "ethic." Perhaps this is a west coast thing, but everywhere I've done sport climbing (RRG, Red Rock, Austin, Rumney), the ethic is rappel, not lower, off of fixed hardware unless cleaning a severely overhanging route. Lowering puts more force/wear on the hardware and is generally seen to be in poor taste. I also find it to be incredibly annoying, as you have to direct your belayer when to stop, etc, whereas with a properly backed-up rappel, you can go hands free whenever you need and control your own rate of descent.

As said above, lowering is becoming the norm. And should be that way on any route that is single pitch.
Your reasons listed for rappeling are so far all personal reasons, using old timers reasons, and even just plain incorrect on some of your comments. So I wouldn't go quoting them as facts the rest of the climbers should listen to.
I don't know a single route developer that doesn't put beefy rings or chains or steel biners on their routes anymore. We expect you to lower, and the steel gear is built for it.

Give Ted a break, he lives in Chicago.

T Roper wrote:Give Ted a break, he lives in Chicago.

Lot of dangerous hormones floating around his house now too.

T Roper wrote:Give Ted a break, he lives in Chicago.

And he's got a kid coming! But seriously, when did "rap only to clean" become a standard practice? When I climbed up and down the east coast ten years ago, it was always widely accepted to clean the route by lowering.

I can't believe how often people argue over this shit.
Different people have different opinions on the practice.
It will always be that way.
Always.
Now shut up.

Oh and I forgot-

Bob Johnson wrote: The European climbers were amused that we were rappelling back down to the ground after cleaning instead of being lowered.

Fuck them, I was amused by how many euros were in Thailand just for the little boys and girls.

Lol. Low blows, guys. ;) How exactly is the Red a "kiddie crag"?? You guys are ridiculous.

Micah Klesick wrote: As said above, lowering is becoming the norm. And should be that way on any route that is single pitch. Your reasons listed for rappeling are so far all personal reasons,

How so? Concern over excess wear on fixed gear is hardly "personal." The OP asked what the "ethic" was for cleaning, so I explained what the ethic has been in the crags I have been to. There is no "ethical" reason to lower; the only stated advantages are personal (ease, safety). Having used both methods, I do prefer to rappel on vertical terrain because I like being able to control my descent, so that part was certainly personal.

using old timers reasons, and even just plain incorrect on some of your comments.
I'll possibly give you old timer, but how are they incorrect? Ken's argument about stainless steel vs aluminum rings does track from a physics standpoint, I will concede that. However, you don't always know what you're going to get (unless you can clearly see the anchors from the ground), so it seems like a bad idea to always assume that lowering is appropriate. I'll say it is definitely still generally frowned upon in the Red, with the exception of Muir Valley that has a few sport clip anchors.

So I wouldn't go quoting them as facts the rest of the climbers should listen to. I don't know a single route developer that doesn't put beefy rings or chains or steel biners on their routes anymore. We expect you to lower, and the steel gear is built for it. Ethics are inherently subjective. The OP asked what the accepted ethic was for cleaning sport climbs, and I described the ethics I have seen at many different sport crags. Whether or not these concerns are valid is irrelevant; if the local ethic is rap to clean and you lower, you might get some indignant glares. There is nowhere on the planet where someone will have a problem with you rappelling to clean an anchor, unless you're retrieving their draws on an overhang. ;) I, personally, wouldn't go speaking for the viewpoints of all route setters in the world based upon my personal experiences.

Bob Johnson wrote:I recently climbed in Railay/Tonsai Beach where I got to witness and discuss different climbing ethics, especially those concerning whether you lower/TR through the fixed anchor or through your own quickdraws. The European climbers were amused that we were rappelling back down to the ground after cleaning instead of being lowered. After realizing that pretty much all the routes were equipped with pretty beefy rings, not the thin rap rings that I'm used to, we started just lowering off the climbs too. This got me thinking about these ethics. I understand it varies from place to place and that there are some areas/routes in the US that are set up for climbers to be lowered. However, it seems that this practice is more common in Europe than in the US. Is the root of this based on the US's conservative approach toward bolting and fixed gear? Even in a designated sport-climbing area where developers have free rein to bolt, it seems that there's no ethical reason why more rugged anchor material couldn't be used. Of course it would be more expensive. Is that the reason or is there more to it?

Can we all start using "customs" in place of "ethics" when referring to things that have little to do with 'ethics'?

Would you call it unethical when French Canadians do not tip at restaurants? Is it unethical for artists to use computers to generate artwork?

Sure, there are 'climbing ethics' but that involves more than lowering vs. rapping. One cannot rappel or lower in style.

This isn't necessarily directed at the OP.. but "ethics" is getting thrown around way too much. If we are going to claim to be concerned about ethics perhaps we should spend more time on actual ethical issues. Climbing ETHIC does not mean that real ethical problems exist within the sport/activity/whatever you call it.

Derek DeBruin wrote: This is not true. There are a few ways to thread for lowering while maintaining a connection to the rope at all times. One example is here: climbcore.files.wordpress.c… If done correctly, at one stage in the process, you'll be attached to the wall at two points on the rope and with a leash of some kind if the stance requires it. As for whether you *should* lower off or rappel, ethically speaking, I will graciously be avoiding a response.

Cool! That actually does make it a bit safer.

Use your noggins. Be adaptable. The only reason quick clips are at the top of a route is to lower off! At areas where it's the norm I'm also a big fan of re-threading a bight and tying off to a locker on the belay loop. That said, know how to do both... it's always funny to see how frazzled some folks get at the top of the few routes at Rumney that don't have quick clips.

And MOST IMPORTANTLY make sure you're on the same page as your belayer. Seriously. Nobody else needs to die from rap/lowering confusion. Make a plan before you leave the ground.

doligo wrote: Calling M Sprague! I'm pretty sure I've seen him advocate to lower off his anchors that he put up in Rumney. I personally find it incredibly annoying when people insist on highly dangerous practice of rappelling to clean the anchors over lowering. There have been two high-profile deaths in the past couple of months of experienced climbers falling while cleaning anchors. Do we really value a piece of metal more than people's lives?

Um..um,..I can't do it tonight. I'll let you, ken, Eric, Yeitti and others take care of it this time :))

Ted, next time at Rumney, have another look.

Who Dat wrote: .. One cannot rappel or lower in style.

Oh, I don't know about that.
By the way, lower, and don't end up like this guy

dailymail.co.uk/news/articl… (and check out Rita Ora while you are at it ;)

Ted Pinson wrote:How exactly is the Red a "kiddie crag"??

The Red is not a crag, it's an area/destination. Ever been to the Madness cave (or any of the other Motherlode crags), Bob Marley, or even Drive-by? Didn't think so.

Heh. There are a few climbs on the East Bluff in Devil's Lake that are a bit over 30M. I did toprope somebody on 2 ropes once, which was a little silly. The obvious answer would be to split it up into 2 pitches, but that's up to the setter unless you want to bring up gear with you. The advantage to lowering would be an attentive belayer could keep an eye on their end of the rope, but a stopper knot would be a must due to the possibility of being lowered off the end of the rope. It might be better psychologically to rappel with an autoblock backup, as you wouldn't know if you were being lowered off your rope until it was too late. For 2 ropes, rappelling is much more common, since you'd tie them together at the anchor. Lowering, you'd have to find a way to pass the knot...

The answer to this age old argument is not so black and white. Like many things in climbing it is situation dependent. Some hardware is ok to lower off of, other hardware isn't (e.g. aluminum rings, warn cold shuts, lap links). Lowering is slightly safer than rapping when the hardware is good. But excessive lowering also turns good hardware to crap.

A rule of thumb i like to follow is that i don't put unnecessary wear on any hardware i am incapable or unwilling to replace myself. If am not carrying around a spare hanger/rapring combo, wrench, cold shut, quick link... etc, then i shouldn't be lowering off of that respective hardware. I tend to carry high quality quicklinks everywhere i go, so i don't feel bad about lowering off of quick links. I've seen alot of worn out cold shuts, but i don't like to fiddle with bolts unless they are loose, so as a rule i never lower off of cold shuts. The same goes for fixe rap ring hanger combos. If everyone had the same ethic, then there wouldn't be any worn out rap rings, and there wouldn't be any contraversy.

The bottom line is that lowering & TRing on fixed hardware wears it out (eventually). Most crags don't charge admission, so if you are putting wear on anchors, you should be willing to replace it yourself.

If I have to untie to get down I normally just rappel. If it is a sport area where there is big clips at the top so I don't have to untie I will lower off of those.

M Sprague wrote: Oh, I don't know about that. By the way, lower, and don't end up like this guy dailymail.co.uk/news/articl… (and check out Rita Ora while you are at it ;)

Oh, come on...that's a terrible example and completely irrelevant to what we're talking about. That accident was due to anchor failure and the outcome would've been the same if he had been lowered (if this were even possible). I mean, Jesus...one of the anchor points was HIS BELAYER?! I was trying to figure out why the hell he would need to cut the line when he was on top of the cliff...such a tragically preventable accident.

I'd say that guy was definitely a bad choice as an anchor! If he had clipped two draws to his ears and lowered off them instead of having the rope cut into his back he might not have had to cut him loose though.

I’m probably wasting my time here, but I’m also going to jump in and vote for always lower to clean a route. It would be nice if we can just rap to clean a route all the time, but that's not always possible (overhangs, traverses, etc). So it's important to develop a standard procedure of cleaning you can use EVERY TIME, to lessen the chance of messing up. Yes, rapping does place less wear and tear on the anchor, and there’s no inherent danger in rappelling. But the danger comes when you switch back and forth between two different methods (lowering and rappelling), you increase the risk of a miscommunication or human error caused by a momentarily lapse in concentration. A very recent accident kind of highlight this risk:

"The accident occurred when she was cleaning the quickdraws from the anchors atop a sport route in the Ginseng area. She hung from two daisy chains, pulled a few feet of rope up, and clipped the bight to her harness, as is standard to prevent dropping the rope. That knot was reportedly still attached to her on the ground after the accident. Then she untied the rope, also normal practice, from her harness tie-in to thread it through the anchors (instead of the quickdraws, which she would bring down) in preparation for being lowered. In an instance of human error, she apparently did not retie that rope end to her harness, a sad reminder to all to double check everything, every time. No knot was found in the rope end. The rope came down with her.

She had originally been rigging the anchor to rappel, which perhaps caused confusion. She had difficulty threading the rope through the lower rings, so called down asking to be put back on belay. She was on belay when, moments later, she fell. No miscommunication occurred with the belayer."

rockandice.com/lates-news/k…

Now, no one can say for sure if Kayah tried lowering first it would’ve prevented this accident. But I would argue (with no disrespect to Kayah) that if she had ALWAYS lowered to clean the anchor, she would have the procedure for lowering so wired that there’s less chance she would have made the mistake of not tying back in before she unclipped for the anchor.

Also,I teach people to clean anchor in a slightly modified method compare to the way most people were taught (I used to work as a climbing guide).

The standard anchor cleaning method most people were taught:
1. Go in direct to the anchor with some sort of tether (quick draws, slings, PAS, etc).
2. Pull up slack (usually on the belayer side), tie a overhand/figure-8 on a bight, and clip it to the climber's gear loop (some people clip it to the anchor draws), purely to prevent the climber from dropping the rope.
3. Untie from the rope end (at this point the climber is only attached to the anchor by the tether).
4. Thread the end through the fixed hardware and tie back in.
5. Undo the overhand/figure-8 on a bight from the harness/anchor draw.
6. Ask for take, test the tie-in/belayer by weighing the rope (pull on the belayer’s side of the rope until the tether to the anchor is slack, then let go of the rope).
7. Clean the anchor, unclip tether from the anchor, and lower.

The modified method I teach:
1. Go into the anchor direct.
2. Pull up slack on the climber side of the anchoring gear, tie a figure-8 on a bight, and clip it to the climber’s belay loop with a locking biner. (To visualize, if you follow the rope from the climber’s end to the belayer’s end: the rope end is tied to the climber, then there’s a bit of slack, then a figure-8 on a bight clipped to the climber’s belay loop, then the quick draws/anchoring hardware to which the rope is still attached, then the rope goes down to the belayer). This not only prevent the climber from dropping the rope, but it serves as a secondary attachment to the climber, in addition to whatever tether the climber uses to go in direct to the anchor.
3. Untie from the rope end (at this point the climber is attached to the anchor via the tether AND the figure-8 on a bight on the belay loop, with an attentive belayer).

The rest is the same as the standard method. I also teach the belayer to never let go of the brake strand even after they feed out a bunch of slack for the climber to clean the anchor. The difference to the standard method is quite small, but the benefit is that the climber is always on belay throughout the whole cleaning process. And if the climber is cleaning after leading, the rope would still be clipped to all the bolts on the route in addition to the anchoring gear. If the climber somehow become detached from the anchor (or in the rare case, if there’s a complete anchor failure), the climber would be caught by the next bolt below the anchor. If Kayah was cleaning the anchor after she led the climb, this method might have saved her.

Derek DeBruin wrote:There are a few ways to thread for lowering while maintaining a connection to the rope at all times. One example is here: climbcore.files.wordpress.c…

This is a quick and easy method to clean the anchor, and I use it quite a bit. But there are two limitations to this method:
1. it does take up quite a bit of rope, so don't use this method unless you're absolutely sure your rope will reach the ground.
2. On many anchors in the US (small chain links or quicklinks), it's nearly impossible to get a bight of rope though, so you can't use this method.