1st pitch TR on multi-pitch routes (Gunks)

Gunks Apps wrote: Classic multi-pitch routes are surprisingly scarce when you start to look at how few there really are. Can't we agree to put these routes in a separate category?

I am not trying to convince people not to top-rope, I'm trying to convince them not to top-rope the first pitch of multi-pitch routes.

So maybe for that 30% of routes that belong in a different category, make the category explicit in one or more ways.  A "do not top rope first pitch" icon on the topo, and/or a sentence in the verbal description saying something like, "classic route to the top---do not top-rope first pitch."

Such devices are very succinct and, unlike any other approach mentioned so far, have the considerable advantage of repetition, not in general, but specifically in the locations that matter.

Your longer write-up then occurs in the context of explaining the icons or opening route comments.

Russ Keane wrote: We need to differentiate between Toproping after someone leads the pitch, vs. Pure Toproping which is walking to the anchor and dropping a rope. 

I'm not sure it matters (HOW they got the rope up there) to the ready-to-lead climber who walks up to find a party running laps on the first pitch of their intended route.

Russ Keane wrote: We need to differentiate between Toproping after someone leads the pitch, vs. Pure Toproping which is walking to the anchor and dropping a rope. 

I also get that people need to start somewhere, and unfortunately, even if every experienced climber mentored a newcomer, there still would not be enough mentors.  So people then go out in groups where there is one leader and multiple topropers. New climbers see this and think it is the norm.

Newer climbers are also not likely to look at the app or even know about it. Maybe the rangers need to take a larger role in education (or start a volunteer ranger program if one doesn't already exist).

It seems to me that it is more about the ratio of leaders to followers that is the problem.  What difference does it really make if the leader puts up a rope, lowers, and the follower cleans, or if the leader brings up the second and they both rap?  I would think they have the same right to do that and then walk away as a team that wants to do the upper pitches.  It's when you have multiple people toproping after one leader puts up a rope that is the issue.
Edit: I don't think it takes all that much more time for one leader and one follower to climb and clean the first pitch of a multi pitch than it would for them to continue on to the upper pitches.  I actually would prefer to wait a little longer and climb without anyone above me.

In some ways, it's better that those groups stay on the 1st pitch only.   I'd rather have them hog the bottom than go higher and get screwed up at hanging belay intersections (think Baby area).  

Russ Keane wrote: In some ways, it's better that those groups stay on the 1st pitch only.   I'd rather have them hog the bottom than go higher and get screwed up at hanging belay intersections (think Baby area).  

Agreed.  Too many people move slowly, and if something goes wrong, they don't know how to aid their way out of it or know self rescue.

Edit: I would rather be behind a team having difficulties or moving slowly on the first pitch (I am waiting on the ground and can go climb elsewhere or wait comfortably) rather than have to wait for them to get untangled when I am behind them several pitches up. It isn't always possible to pass them or descend and do something else. This is assuming one leader and one follower.

Gunks Apps wrote:

personally I don't think it's too nannyish for routes in high traffic areas. We have already started to do this to some extent. For example it says in the description that the bolted rappel station is NOT a toprope anchor for Raubenheimer. I'm not sure anything we do in the print book or the app is going to change anything but I'm not going to stop trying.

What is the practical argument here?  Don’t top rope a one pitch 5.7 (Raubenheimer) so that people can rappel instead of walking one minute to the Uber Fall and one minute back. (Much faster than two rappels). That anchor is midway up Betty a very accessible g rated 5.3 with a level shady base.  The traffic on Betty is about as intense as it gets.

Yes there is plenty of good rock to build a midway anchor on Betty. Yes, a 70 mm gets one to the top of Betty  in a single pitch. Yes the rappel anchor is in the wrong place to belay the first pitch of Betty.  None of that stops or deters  people from anchoring on the chains for Betty, which actually creates the traffic.  I have seen two parties at that anchor waiting for a third party to clear pitch two of Betty while a fourth party makes its way to the top of pitch one.  No one should be rappelling into that traffic.

Top roping Raubenheimer is a side note there with little affect on the traffic congestion.

What you are doing on this thread is hard and important. Thank you! But rules made by you and argued by ten users on MP will not reduce the number of people climbing Betty.  

Published guidance is important, essential even.  Guidance has to fit with practicality.  Why not add to your Betty descent description: “The Uber Fall is the fastest way to descend?”

  

My general etiquette rule of thumb is to 1 leader/follower per party on popular/starred routes on the weekend, whether climbing a single pitch climb, 1-and-done on a multipitch, or climbing a multipitch. Whether you're TR'ing MF for 2 hours or bringing a party of 3 cluster**** up CCK, you're hogging the experience in comparison to a single leader/follower and preventing other parties from passing through.

Maybe a more concise statement along those lines would be easier for mass consumption and creating a shared ethos/etiquette. Along the lines of the unified push at Rumney and elsewhere to encourage lowering from the rings on single pitch sport routes, the gunks could use a push to create a coherent, compact set of courtesy guidelines.

I think we're starting to see the phenomenon of the perfect becoming the enemy of the good.  If Chris can make a dent in top-roping monopolization with a bit of text in the app, its an improvement over nothing.

Gunks Apps wrote:

No, not at all. As others have pointed out above, I need to get to the point sooner and maybe my message is lost because people are not reading all of it. I don't think there should be exceptions for any user group. I am absolutely not making an argument against gang top-roping.

To restate my argument: Don't setup top-ropes on the first pitch of a multi-pitch climb.

Multi-pitch lines that go to the top (not including pitches that later join a route) account for less than 1/3 of the routes in the Trapps. I did not include climbs that are no longer climbed to the top (ie. Mac Wall routes). For single pitch climbing: that leaves about 70% of the Trapps, all of Peter's Kill, all of Thacher Park, and most of the Powerlinez. Classic multi-pitch routes are surprisingly scarce when you start to look at how few there really are. Can't we agree to put these routes in a separate category?

I am not trying to convince people not to top-rope, I'm trying to convince them not to top-rope the first pitch of multi-pitch routes.

Yes we can agree.  Perhaps moving from universal to specific is more practical.  Does it make sense to add a request in specific descriptions in your GunksApp that people not top rope on those scarce classic multi-pitch routes?  Using your estimate, 30% of the Trapps routes in your app is 180 routes.  I bet the actual number of routes you would like to guide people away from top roping is much lower.  And, I bet there are also a material number of routes you could identify specifically as good for top roping: routes which don't strain traffic, rap anchors or other resources. (edit: what rgold said)

Also, I suspect there is very little overlap between Preserve members and Gunks top ropers, but asking paid up members to drive down the road and pay to climb at Peter's Kill or Thatcher seems like a lot to ask.

Live Perched wrote:

What is the practical argument here?  Don’t top rope a one pitch 5.7 (Raubenheimer) so that people can rappel instead of walking one minute to the Uber Fall and one minute back. (Much faster than two rappels). That anchor is midway up Betty a very accessible g rated 5.3 with a level shady base.  The traffic on Betty is about as intense as it gets.

Yes there is plenty of good rock to build a midway anchor on Betty. Yes, a 70 mm gets one to the top of Betty  in a single pitch. Yes the rappel anchor is in the wrong place to belay the first pitch of Betty.  None of that stops or deters  people from anchoring on the chains for Betty, which actually creates the traffic.  I have seen two parties at that anchor waiting for a third party to clear pitch two of Betty while a fourth party makes its way to the top of pitch one.  No one should be rappelling into that traffic.

Top roping Raubenheimer is a side note there with little affect on the traffic congestion.

What you are doing on this thread is hard and important. Thank you! But rules made by you and argued by ten users on MP will not reduce the number of people climbing Betty.  

Published guidance is important, essential even.  Guidance has to fit with practicality.  Why not add to your Betty descent description: “The Uber Fall is the fastest way to descend?”

  

I don't think we can do anything to reduce the number of parties on Betty, though I do believe in the future there will be climbing permits issued to cap the numbers, at least on weekends the same way Minnewaska does it at Peter's Kill. 

Regarding Betty, the erosion gully that formed at the top of Betty has been closed for slope restoration since 2015.

Live Perched wrote:

Yes we can agree.  Perhaps moving from universal to specific is more practical.  Does it make sense to add a request in specific descriptions in your GunksApp that people not top rope on those scarce classic multi-pitch routes?  Using your estimate, 30% of the Trapps routes in your app is 180 routes.  I bet the actual number of routes you would like to guide people away from top roping is much lower.  And, I bet there are also a material number of routes you could identify specifically as good for top roping: routes which don't strain traffic, rap anchors or other resources. (edit: what rgold said)

Also, I suspect there is very little overlap between Preserve members and Gunks top ropers, but asking paid up members to drive down the road and pay to climb at Peter's Kill or Thatcher seems like a lot to ask.

Agreed, I will start adding that info into the app.

I don't think it's a lot to ask. I didn't say people have to leave the Gunks, I was presenting options. Those options include at least 350 routes to choose from in the Trapps.

I am not about more regulation, but I would love to see a Preserve policy with something like: top-roping by more than two in a party on a weekend is prohibited accept between the beginning of the cliff and Rhododendron and between Northern Pillar and Raunchy. The reason for the party of more than two, is if two climbers wanted to climb something like Credibility Gap and if it is open drop a rope in on Welcome to the Gunks or Fall to Grace, they are most likely not going to gang rope it all day. Give it a burn and if you cannot do it and another party is waiting, pull the rope. Reclimb Credibility Gap and clean the anchor, or ask the party that wants to do it to clean it for you.
These leaves only Uber Falls (more or less) and The Guides Wall covered in top ropes. Of course with the closure, that causes other issues.

RichBeBe wrote: I am not about more regulation, but I would love to see a Preserve policy with something like: top-roping by more than two in a party on a weekend is prohibited accept between the beginning of the cliff and Rhododendron 

Should probably extend that northern limit to the Radcliffe descent. I don't think it a big concern if a group is camping on Squiggles, Ken's Crack, Boston, or the other 40' routes.

As if that were a workable policy - the Preserve staff is barely able  to enforce their unleashed dogs policy as it is.

Marc801 C wrote: Should probably extend that northern limit to the Radcliffe descent. I don't think it a big concern if a group is camping on Squiggles, Ken's Crack, Boston, or the other 40' routes.

As if that were a workable policy - the Preserve staff is barely able  to enforce their unleashed dogs policy as it is.

I debated that, but why not.
Easier to talk to a group of 30 gang-roping Strictly from a gym's day trip than a dog imo.

I've climbed hundreds of Gunks routes up to 12d in a single 60m pitch, why are you all still climbing them as multi-pitch? Seems silly.and antiquated. If you want to be that" traditional" then stick with a 70's computer and 60's car and 50's hairstyle to be consistent!

Eli Helmuth wrote: I've climbed hundreds of Gunks routes up to 12d in a single 60m pitch, why are you all still climbing them as multi-pitch? Seems silly.and antiquated. If you want to be that" traditional" then stick with a 70's computer and 60's car and 50's hairstyle to be consistent!

It really depends on the route. Some reasons:

rope drag
communication
visual contact
low crux (rope stretch allowing follower to hit the ground - helped carry out a broken ankle injury on Drunkard's for precisely this reason)

Off the top of my silly antiquated head, but typed on a very modern computer with an up to date car in the driveway.  My hair is in a ponytail, which would be 50's except I'm not a girl.  Marc beat me to most of this; we were typing at the same time.

1. It doesn't really make sense to climb past a nice ledge 30m up with good anchoring possibilities.
2. Stretching the rope out all the way makes for significantly poorer communication between party members, which is a substantial concern when multiple parties are in the same general region.  
3. If the route wanders, as Gunks routes are prone to do, then doing it all in a single pitch will produce significant rope drag.
4. Some leaders might prefer climbing with a smaller lighter rack rather than joining the cool set storming up to the top in one go.
5. Gunks weather patterns being what they are, going all the way to the top can leave the leader belaying in a gale while the second climbs those antiquated multipitches in sequence.
6. Full 60m leads can imperil a second doing crux moves near the ground or a ledge because of the substantial rope stretch.

Hmm...just realized Eli's posting is an April 1 item...

RG nails it again . Not just ground fall but ledge fall on  the many ledges  @ the gunks. nothing wrong with doing short pitches. 60 and 70m pitches have their places on Alpine and  ice  but even then breaking the pitches up keeps everyone warmer and usually safer...  Many people if not most don't realize how serious it is to 2nd  a pitch when the leader has run out a full rope.  You pull out of the cave on the Prom and your leader climbed a 60m pitch, you are following on a single strand of 7.8mm half rope, if you fall you are looking at a genuine 30footer..... 

You're 7 year old doesn't need to be top roping "Something Interesting" on 4th of July weekend. Go back to Canada.

Rapid anchor building and change overs at efficient locations are useful alpine skills too.