Should Extreme Unction in Ferguson Canyon have a bolt/pin added to protect the crux?

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

What I mean is that is not normal. we can all have opinions that don't really mean jack shit. It would be interesting to have a detailed investigation of all 4 accidents and see if they all had a common vector. If the gear ripping was one common factor then were there any other common factors and what were they. My worthless opinion is that ether #1 all 4 accidents were noobs who did not have enough gear experience to do the climb. Solution. large font warning in the guide that YGD if you don't have your feces wired tight on this climb. #2 the gear ripped because it simply is not as good as people think it is. Solution. Drill baby drill ;)

Nick, the OP notes that they have been climbing for three years, the other person nine years. They both note their gear zippering. In reading tyray13's description they made a mistake in that they did not place any gear above the roof before attempting the crux section. So they basically relied on two pieces of gear 35+ feet off the deck.

I have been there and seen falls on gear that had no bearing on where the pin was located. So really hard to draw a conclusion. One can speculate all they want but I am not sure what that adds given the amount of traffic this route has had over nearly 40 years without incidents in the first 35 years. I will say that there are ways to approach this climb for a 5.10 climber that makes it a very solid but safe 5.10 climb with a maybe four move crux (been a while since I did the climb).

That said I am going to request that the following be added to the route description.

Recently (as of 2021) several climbers have taken serious ground falls as a result of their gear pulling. There is adequate protection on this route that can be utilized, but may not be as straightforward as one may think. Doubling up on gear at the first roof is a common practice as is placing gear above the roof, coming back down for a rest before attempting the crux moves.

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

actually no.  there are thousands of trade routes within  day trip distance of large metro areas and most of them don't have 4 serious accidents with the same  method of failure on the same section of the climb. 

Post limits suck! totally interrupts a conversation.

 What I mean is that is not normal. we can all have opinions that don't really mean jack shit. It would be interesting to have a detailed investigation of all 4 accidents and see if they all had a common vector. If the gear ripping was one common factor then  were there any other common factors and what were they.   My worthless opinion is that ether #1 all 4 accidents were noobs  who did not have enough gear experience to do the climb. Solution. large font warning in the guide that YGD if you don't have your feces wired tight on this climb. #2 the gear ripped because it simply is not as good as people think it is. Solution. Drill baby drill ;)

It's just a fluke. 

The leader must not fall (sometimes).

And...if you wanted to clip bolts prior to launching into Extreme Unction...you could always start on Fish Lips to the right...like Ben did:

That was in June 2008.  Note he didn't clip the pin but got that bomber gear out right.  Didn't bother with pro below the second roof.

By June 2010, the pin was gone.  Matt gettin' 'er done with a blue TCU instead of the pin, properly slinged long, and a cam or two at his waist at the second roof:

A bolt where the pin was still doesn't negate the runout at the bottom, nor the top.

Extreme trail work in Ferguson in 2009:

Good times...

Regardless of the cause, incidents like this are going to be viewed unfavorably by land management which may in turn have unforeseen consequences for climbing access not only for this specific area but surrounding areas as well.

Bolt it as the FA said..

Tom Zwrote:

Regardless of the cause, incidents like this are going to be viewed unfavorably by land management which may in turn have unforeseen consequences for climbing access

Why do you think that? Alta is on forest service land, and I am sure has way more accidents each year than climbers in Ferguson Canyon do, yet can operate every season.  

Double Jwrote:

Why do you think that? Alta is on forest service land, and I am sure has way more accidents each year than climbers in Ferguson Canyon do, yet can operate every season.  

Alta brings in money, baby. They have a lot more clout than climbers in Fergy.

I’m normally pro-bolt, but I led EU last summer and I also felt that the gear was sufficient. That said, I didn’t fall and I wouldn’t have been willing to take a practice whip. Personally, I think the bolt is unnecessary, but I wouldn’t chop it.

This thread brings up an interesting point. Climbers often act like the FAist gets the final word on changes to a route. However, I’ve now seen a few instances (Double Cross comes to mind) where the FAist wanted to add hardware and part of the community ignored him. Is the FAist the final word or does community input matter?

For me, the most important outcome is that we don’t subject the rock to a bunch of bolt war bullshit. If we’re gonna add a bolt, fine. I hope everyone can live with that. If we aren’t going to add a bolt, that’s fine too. Let’s make sure this route has a more serious reputation. 

"There is adequate protection on this route that can be utilized, but may not be as straightforward as one may think."

Doesn't this apply to any trad climb?   It goes without saying, gear climbing follows no rules; the route/features dictate the terms.  This is getting ridiculous if we need to start putting disclaimers on every trad pitch.  It's fucking dangerous.  If you don't like it, don't do it.   

russ when you get 4 serious accidents in the same spot on one pitch it's fckinrediclous to not try and figuer out why and not try to mitigate it. 

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

russ when you get 4 serious accidents in the same spot on one pitch it's fckinrediclous to not try and figuer out why and not try to mitigate it. 

Four accidents per how many ascents?

If we determine a percentage rate of accident and we can decide what percentage is acceptable then we can set a threshold, if then reached the climb can be bolted.

Nick how about Nutcracker at Cathedral?   There have been nasty falls there.  Or what about the beginning move of Recluse?    Plenty of gear leads are bold.....The leader needs to be capable of handling it.

Tradibanwrote:

Four accidents per how many ascents?

If we determine a percentage rate of accident and we can decide what percentage is acceptable then we can set a threshold, if then reached the climb can be bolted.

The route sees multiple ascents every day of the week. It probably had someone on it more often than not.

It doesn't need a bolt, gang.

It's been climbed many of times. The percentage is low.. Let's not get into a habit of dumbing down the route by adding cushions for a broader range of climbers abilities. (There is plenty of routes to choose from) The route climbs within a safe range of local ethics.

I've climbed it recently and can say, it's the  climbers fault when an accident occurs!

Unfortunately they will happen Let's all step our game up and stay safe..

Happy climbing..

https://www.mountainproject.com/route/105740081/cranial-prophylactic

Another SLC climb that didn't have a bolt, got a bolt and was chopped, then a glue-in added that may or may not really need it. 

"russ when you get 4 serious accidents in the same spot on one pitch it's fckinrediclous to not try and figuer out why and not try to mitigate it" 

Nick, I don't usually reply on this stuff but when I lived back your way Black Lung had at least that many in the time I was there(6-7 years), Retaliation too. I would put Extreme Unction in the same pay grade as Missing Link as far as headiness and pro.

OP, if you feel strongly about it, you are fortunate to have gotten permission from the FA to add a bolt, so if it needs to be done, learn how, and go do that dirty work.  I think a chop under those circumstances would be poor form. 

It seems like it would be a reasonable compromise to replace the pin. Alternatively, a PG13 would keep the climb as is and also seems a reasonable compromise, in spite of the arguments against.

Seeing you back on the sharp end though, which is super rad, let’s face it, the real move here is bagging that red point when you are ready to send! Since somehow no one has pointed this out yet, based on your ticklist and tick comments, you did not have enough experience to be leading this hard traditional route safely. Take this to heart and build out the strong pyramids.

   I am not telling anyone to bolt it. I am saying that brushing it off as  part of the game is stupid.  4 people deck in the same spot is worth a serious investigation and some sort of recommendation be a warning in the guide or a bolt.   the funny part is the FA has suggested placing a bolt and then all the internet tough guys show up.... 

 Retaliation is a  scary bitch. It has a warning in the guidebook (at least the Webster addition)  Black lung I remember one wreck there but not if it was serious. sprained ankles and stitches don't really count.  It is awkward up there but I don't remember it being run out?  certainly worth mentioning that people get hurt here pay attention.  Childrens Crusade on the other hand is stupidly bolted and a bunch of folks have been hurt on that mantle.  that I would fix in a second if it was my home crag and my route.  Placeing bolts where they don't actually protect the climber on the crux is simply poor craftsmanship.    Sams  SS on Cannon has had a bunch of serious accidents. Its a great route but a heap and YGD if you climb it. says as much in the book. Moby on the other hand has been pumped up as an easy trade route the result of which is more accidents including a recent fatality.  Finally one of the  local guides wrote a short piece on how Moby is a serious step up from WG in commitment and difficulties. that should make it into the book INMOP.  

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

   Placeing bolts where they don't actually protect the climber on the crux is simply poor craftsmanship. 

Nick, with all due respect. If you haven't climbed EU, your opinion does not have much weight.
I haven't led it because it is heady and I don't feel ready for it. Do I want a bolt up there to make me feel better? Absolutely not.

A bolt will give people a false sense of security and they still gonna get hurt.

Please let's not dumb down routes to accommodate our egos.

This route right next to EU sees very few leads(maybe even less than EU?) because it's just as 'hard to protect' and you will hit the ground if any of your gear pops.

Could we get a note added to the route description so people are more aware? I realize there are comments for the route describing some of the ground falls, but putting a note in the actual route description could help inform potential leaders of the need to be extra careful with gear placements at the roof.

The route description still says the pin is still there. It should probably include that it may be the greasiest and most TRed 10a in the Wasatch. Still classic though.

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

russ when you get 4 serious accidents in the same spot on one pitch it's fckinrediclous to not try and figuer out why and not try to mitigate it. 

Are you just ignoring all of the comments in this thread that say it is protectable?  Or the thousands of uneventful ascents this route has seen over the years. This isnt a day trip from a major city, its a 10 minute walk from a major city.  It seems pretty clear that this situation is caused by scenario 1 in your earlier post- ie, leaders not placing good gear to protect the route.  

I agree with those that have suggested more strongly worded warnings in the description.  

The comment from Les is interesting and means a great deal in my mind.  "I have no problem with a bolt" is also very different from "I think a bolt should be added."