Yosemite Helo Rescue 7/10 - Half Dome ?

Routes that are dangerous appeal to some climbers and in most areas, the numbers of these scare-fests are few so in the practical sense keeping them as they are isn't a big problem.  We try and accommodate each other in other ways; it seems fair to leave some poorly protected routes for these people to try. All the rest of it - preferences of the first ascentionist versus what people want now, tradition, local standards, who is/isn't a local and does being a local matter, depriving other people of the pleasure of an ascent, and so on  - I have no idea, really don't.

Fail Fallingwrote:

You must be joking 

Without doing anything obviously ridiculous like signpost plaques, I think you could actually make a real difference by modifying the hangers.

Put a camoflaged, dull grey coated hanger for the bolt on Snake Dance, and a bright, shiny, maybe like gold anodised hanger that twinkles from 50 feet away, on the traverse bolt on Snake Dike.

I really think arrows painted on the rock are the answer.

Bb Cc wrote:

Road reflectors at all the bolts. So Tesla’s self driving cars can enjoy climbing too.

Actually that reminds me.

There's a wilderness slot canyon in Australia (probably the most popular one) that is non-technical, except for that fact that if you miss the non-obvious exit gully on the righthand side, there is no easy way to climb out further downstream for a very, very long way.

Eventually in 2010 a family group missed the exit, got lost downstream and went missing for three days, and a 15 year old boy died while trying to find a way to climb out.

Someone took matters into their own hands after this and graffitied EXIT -> in three foot high letters on the rock. The National Parks service cleaned this off, but did eventually decided to break their usual policies for a classified wilderness area and installed a small road reflector with a black arrow. You can see a photo of it just before the end of this blog post. (That blog post also shows the sort of hikers who are regularly entering this canyon)

Bb Cc wrote:

Road reflectors at all the bolts. So Tesla’s self driving cars can enjoy climbing too.

Here you go 

https://www.theinertia.com/video/leds-light-up-half-dome-safe-climbing-celebrates-snake-dike-route/

Haven't seen this posted yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teKtTcoY7Nc glad she's doing good and joking.

Gumby Kingwrote:

Fuck
--
--
This is why I find the old school ethics of massive runout slab unethical and disturbing (We live in a new climbing age). When I read accidents like this, I curse the old school ethics and wish the "hard men" could reflect on the culture they created and continue to hold on to. I hope one day, some of the leaders in these ethics I disagree with will open to some retro bolting.

They created routes, not culture.  And if they did create culture, it's a hell of a lot better than the diluted, dumbed-down BORING ASS EXISTENCE you're speaking of.  You don't have to climb those, uh, "bad routes" if you don't want to- it is 100% voluntary and I'm sure the world isn't short of "safe" bolted 5.7s so perhaps your time is better spent finding an approach trail to the top of climbs so that you can safely set up top ropes, just be careful and know what you're doing and don't make any BAD DECISIONS while you're doing it. 

I find people's choices to climb them when they are woefully unprepared unethical, seeing as how rescues put other people not climbing in danger in order to save the person that made, wait for it, a BAD DECISION.  Should we retrobolt the entire world based on peoples' inability to make informed decisions?  Should we grid bolt every route including things that go on gear because people can make bad decisions when placing gear?  Perhaps we should just do away with lead climbing altogether, seeing as how people can make bad decisions when leading as well.  Your NANNY STATE PLEASE SAVE ME FROM MY OWN INEPTITUDE line of reasoning is troubling at best, and that's putting it mildly.  If this is really what you believe, then maybe you should consider going back to whatever it was that was so safe and wholesome before you found climbing.  Badminton, shuffleboard, whatever.  Maybe something where you don't have to leave the ground even for a jump, because you could sprain an ankle- so dangerous.  Something a little more up your alley where you don't have to be in any danger, no matter how mild, EVER.  

Stay SAFE dude!  

Jake Joneswrote:

They created routes, not culture.  And if they did create culture, it's a hell of a lot better than the diluted, dumbed-down BORING ASS EXISTENCE you're speaking of.  You don't have to climb those, uh, "bad routes" if you don't want to- it is 100% voluntary and I'm sure the world isn't short of "safe" bolted 5.7s so perhaps your time is better spent finding an approach trail to the top of climbs so that you can safely set up top ropes, just be careful and know what you're doing and don't make any BAD DECISIONS while you're doing it. 

I find people's choices to climb them when they are woefully unprepared unethical, seeing as how rescues put other people not climbing in danger in order to save the person that made, wait for it, a BAD DECISION.  Should we retrobolt the entire world based on peoples' inability to make informed decisions?  Should we grid bolt every route including things that go on gear because people can make bad decisions when placing gear?  Perhaps we should just do away with lead climbing altogether, seeing as how people can make bad decisions when leading as well.  Your NANNY STATE PLEASE SAVE ME FROM MY OWN INEPTITUDE line of reasoning is troubling at best, and that's putting it mildly.  If this is really what you believe, then maybe you should consider going back to whatever it was that was so safe and wholesome before you found climbing.  Badminton, shuffleboard, whatever.  Maybe something where you don't have to leave the ground even for a jump, because you could sprain an ankle- so dangerous.  Something a little more up your alley where you don't have to be in any danger, no matter how mild, EVER.  

Stay SAFE dude!  

They need to add a test you must complete before you can climb at any park! Make it just like having to get a lead cert for a climbing gym. /sarcasm

Jake Joneswrote:

They created routes, not culture.  And if they did create culture, it's a hell of a lot better than the diluted, dumbed-down BORING ASS EXISTENCE you're speaking of.  

I thought you were going to say something profound!  In some ways you have an interesting point, the OGs weren't focused on culture but the culture did emerge and still exists today via "tradition".  Though, when Royal Robbins started writing his thoughts on clean climbing and ethics, this is the case I have supporting they were now creating culture.  Robbins was a big advocate for clean climbing and not "scaring" the rock through the placement and removal of pitons (I completely agree with this perspective).  I think this stance has lingered through the decades as some view the bolts are "ruining the rock and nature".  

This takes me back to a previous argument I was making: More climbers in this generation are stoked about climbing and are transitioning to the outdoors. Yes, I would argue that a handful of climbers are unprepared for this transition. However, these might be the warnings we as climbers need to start considering based on my understanding of the Joshua Tree National Park Climbing Management Plan. (rem, this plan can influence what other parks do).

1) Rap bolts can prevent a person from doing a walk-off and damaging the park the mgmt is supposed to protect.

2) It costs money for the park to conduct rescues (note, I do not know the money allocations, processes, etc.,  I realize many SARs are volunteers).  This enters potential budget concerns.  Remember, climbing is inherently selfish.  Where might the park make budget costs?

3) Foot/vehicle-based rescues future impact the environment.  At least it's like, most will stay on the trail.

4) A few bolts potentially make routes a little safer while reducing costs, putting SAR volunteers at less risk, and reducing environmental impacts. 

Image from sfgate article. Half Dome sure has a lot of trees at the base...

Mistakes and accidents happen. We're all human. No judgement required. No new bolts required either. I wish her a successful and speedy recovery.

Todd Berlier wrote:

I THINK Gumby King's point and mine as well is this: i dont WANT Snake Dike to change, its just naive to think at some point it won't. Better to have a seat at the table when that happens.

Exactly!  The squirrel in my brain makes it hard to keep it short and simple.

Fail Fallingwrote:

What's really in its infancy is air travel, 58 years between first flight and first person in orbit. Good lord a lot can change while something is still in its infancy 

See, I would also disagree with this.  The word 'infancy' suggests a lack of development and has little to do with the amount of elapsed time.  The time can be long or short, and by itself, means nothing.  A human infant is, by definition, in its infancy.  It has progressed through relatively few developmental milestones in a short amount of time (relative to the average human lifespan). A 2 year old toddler hasn't existed for very long, either, but is decidedly not an infant, nor in its infancy. There are animals that pass through their entire life cycle in a matter of days, and there are infant galaxies which have existed for millions of years.  Time has little to do with it.

Bb Cc wrote:

Auto industry is just the transportation industry, not dead just changing. Reactors will power much of transportation in 1-2 decades.

“Modern Climbing” like most of the Leisure Industry is frolicking in your personal sense of well being.

The bottom of the Grand Canyon is in its infancy.

The bottom of the Grand Canyon might be in its infancy, but the Grand Canyon is most assuredly not; it is well developed and mature.  

Dave Berlinwrote:

Image from sfgate article. Half Dome sure has a lot of trees at the base...

Mistakes and accidents happen. We're all human. No judgement required. No new bolts required either. I wish her a successful and speedy recovery.

Why do all these articles keep they post so many images of her climbing things that aren't snake dike? I have yet to see a single photo that is of the correct route, at least put notes on the images saying it is her climbing some other random route.

Gumby Kingwrote:

I thought you were going to say something profound!  

Why did you think that?

In some ways you have an interesting point,

 the OGs weren't focused on culture but the culture did emerge and still exists today via "tradition".  Though, when Royal Robbins started writing his thoughts on clean climbing and ethics, this is the case I have supporting they were now creating culture.  Robbins was a big advocate for clean climbing and not "scaring" the rock through the placement and removal of pitons (I completely agree with this perspective).  I think this stance has lingered through the decades as some view the bolts are "ruining the rock and nature".  

I'm not one of those people, and I don't see how this relates to what I said AT ALL.  I'm down with sport routes, I'm even down with over-bolted sport routes or "beginner" or "grid-bolted" routes because I think that largely, with little exception, FA style should be respected. MOST FAs have the vision, gumption, and spend their own money and time to develop routes, and short of contrived runouts on rap-bolted routes, shouldn't be modified.  I love sport routes.  I love single pitch trad routes that have convenience anchors at the top.  It's not out of some misplaced reverence for "tradition", it's so people that have the inclination to alter everything to dumb it down to the safest most watered-down yuppie fitness craze version of climbing possible at will.  Imagine for a moment, if you will, that everyone that got terrified by ripping one piece of gear that they placed poorly wanted to bolt a route that previously went on G-rated gear.  Imagine, if you will, that everyone that took a fall that scared them or that they twisted an ankle on, started yanking bolts out and proclaiming "this route should only be top-roped".  If one logically extrapolates using the "we're going to have to do something about this eventually" mindset, this is where it goes.  Nowhere good. 

I'd love to be proved wrong, but so far no one has been able to do that.  So, I'm not some old crusty that only climbs 5.9 trad routes and has this staunch adherence to "old-school ethics" that are "expired".  I have the opinion that I have because climbing should be bold.  Most humans don't do it.  Most humans can't do it.  Why would you want to change that?  Are you opening a gym?  Have you not ever wandered into a sea of neon-clad gumbies with hammocks and Bluetooth speakers and shit strewn across the trail everywhere?  Why are you so eager to change what makes climbing exclusive (meaning available only to people that have taken the time and put forth the effort to practice and perfect their craft/discipline) when compared to the aforementioned ventures of badminton and shuffleboard?

This takes me back to a previous argument I was making: More climbers in this generation are stoked about climbing and are transitioning to the outdoors. Yes, I would argue that a handful of climbers are unprepared for this transition.

I agree with that as well, where we differ is in the opinion of what to do about it.  Around 35k people die in car crashes every year.  It's as safe as it's going to get.  Sure, there are technological advances that are changing that slowly, but your argument is the equivalent of "let's add more road signs and make driving exponentially more of a pain in the ass by lowering speed limits everywhere for everyone because 17-year-olds looking at social media while driving tend to TBONE people now and again, and because drunks take a few hundred people out in each state every year."  

 However, these might be the warnings we as climbers need to start considering based on my understanding of the Joshua Tree National Park Climbing Management Plan. (rem, this plan can influence what other parks do).

Warnings I'm all for.  Like, maybe a warning on Snake Dike in the form of a bright red and white sign, which wouldn't detract from natural beauty AT ALL:  PLEASE DON'T CLIMB PAST PROTECTION OR ANCHORS WITHOUT CLIPPING YOUR ROPE IN.  Great idea. Maybe for those that are more bold, we could grid bolt the RNWF of Half Dome and contract people to spraypaint a huge sign on the face letting people know that if they fall and hit the ground, it's likely that they'll die. It's almost as if people should know that before they start climbing, but you do you.  Let's put up warnings everywhere.  Like... uh... WAIVERS!  Yeah!  Waivers for climbing gyms where most people get their start in climbing should mention something about danger and seeking instruction.  Let's do that!  You know, 'CLIMBING IS INHERENTLY DANGEROUS' or something like that.  Seems like a great idea.  Or, better yet, those little pamphlets that everyone gets with gear, we could put warnings about how dangerous climbing is and how to use the gear properly in those little thingys.  LOL.  Yes, warnings should help to mitigate the small minority of climbers that ignore them and end up getting flown out all banged up and mangled.  You might be onto something here Mr. King.  I'm composing a letter to the AF, AAC TNF, and my Congressperson as I type this!

1) Rap bolts can prevent a person from doing a walk-off and damaging the park the mgmt is supposed to protect.

What do rap bolts have to do with anything?  Yes, to protect the tops of cliffs and the sometimes fragile ecosystems that reside there, I think this is a good idea, but should be considered on a case-by-case basis.  But I'm not against that.  Especially in single-pitch areas, I'm all for having links and rings on the anchors to facilitate lowering.  Oh, but what if people screw that up and crater their partner or themselves because, wait for it, they MADE A BAD DECISION OR WEREN'T TRAINED CORRECTLY?  What might we do to help avoid those situations where, idk, someone does something they shouldn't like uh, climb past anchors or bolts and not clip them?  or tell their belayer to take them off belay, or places bad gear, or back clips quickdraws or doesn't finish their knot or any other VAST number of things that people can do incorrectly as a result of not taking the activity and the inherent danger involved seriously?  Because that's what we're really talking about.  We're talking about a relatively small percentage of people that bite off more than they can chew, misjudge danger or commitment based solely on difficulty grade, or just don't respect the sport and the fact that it has risk built into it.

2) It costs money for the park to conduct rescues (note, I do not know the money allocations, processes, etc.,  I realize many SARs are volunteers).  This enters potential budget concerns.  Remember, climbing is inherently selfish.  Where might the park make budget costs?

I mean, I get what you're saying, but prices are always going to go up.  Inflation does that on its own.  And yes, if the park, any park, state, national, whatever starts to see it as a problem, they'll institute whatever means they feel is necessary to stop the trend they don't like.  But that also won't stop someone from drunk driving, looking at their phone while driving, or thinking that a 5.7 R route is no big deal.  They'll just pay the extra $$ and get mangled anyway.  Or, let's say YNP does as you suggest.  Snake Dike or any other (insert route name here) that's R rated or PG or whatever beyond just trivial we just grid bolt the fuck out of it.  Someone still has to clip those bolts chief.  Someone can still fail to do that.  Pretty sure that happened recently ;-)

3) Foot/vehicle-based rescues future impact the environment.  At least it's like, most will stay on the trail.

We could just close the parks.  That would save people from themselves AND save the environment!  How come that's not on the table?  I mean, with all these people being UNSAFE and no entity available at all places at all times to PROTECT people AND the environment, I would think if those are such venerable goals, that should at least be a discussion.

4) A few bolts potentially make routes a little safer while reducing costs, putting SAR volunteers at less risk, and reducing environmental impacts.

I'll say it again in case you've still missed it by this point.  This whole discussion started because someone climbed PAST viable protection and didn't clip it.  And your solution is to put more permanent fixed protection in. Take a minute and let that sink in. 

Let's just outlaw lead climbing.  It's the only way that our babied, entitled, whiny, frail generations to come can have their cake and eat it too. You can just hire someone, pay tons of money to be dragged up whatever and you have to do nothing yourself, and it'll be exclusive because only a smaller sliver of people will be able to afford it. Guides will love it!  So will the parks! 

As an aside, someone in one of the gyms I frequent from time to time splatted on the mat from 40' up over the weekend.  The climber had a belayer's configuration complete with an ATC with the end of the rope she *should have been* tied into just threaded through an ATC.  The belayer on the other hand, had an ATC that was actually going to belay.  Sadly though, the climber and belayer didn't do any checks, had no idea what the fuck they were doing, and had no business climbing because they weren't skilled or trained enough.  Maybe that gym route needs more bolts.  Safety first.

Jake Joneswrote:

Why did you think that?

I'm not one of those people, and I don't see how this relates to what I said AT ALL.  I'm down with sport routes, I'm even down with over-bolted sport routes or "beginner" or "grid-bolted" routes because I think that largely, with little exception, FA style should be respected. MOST FAs have the vision, gumption, and spend their own money and time to develop routes, and short of contrived runouts on rap-bolted routes, shouldn't be modified.  I love sport routes.  I love single pitch trad routes that have convenience anchors at the top.  It's not out of some misplaced reverence for "tradition", it's so people that have the inclination to alter everything to dumb it down to the safest most watered-down yuppie fitness craze version of climbing possible at will.  Imagine for a moment, if you will, that everyone that got terrified by ripping one piece of gear that they placed poorly wanted to bolt a route that previously went on G-rated gear.  Imagine, if you will, that everyone that took a fall that scared them or that they twisted an ankle on, started yanking bolts out and proclaiming "this route should only be top-roped".  If one logically extrapolates using the "we're going to have to do something about this eventually" mindset, this is where it goes.  Nowhere good. 

I'd love to be proved wrong, but so far no one has been able to do that.  So, I'm not some old crusty that only climbs 5.9 trad routes and has this staunch adherence to "old-school ethics" that are "expired".  I have the opinion that I have because climbing should be bold.  Most humans don't do it.  Most humans can't do it.  Why would you want to change that?  Are you opening a gym?  Have you not ever wandered into a sea of neon-clad gumbies with hammocks and Bluetooth speakers and shit strewn across the trail everywhere?  Why are you so eager to change what makes climbing exclusive (meaning available only to people that have taken the time and put forth the effort to practice and perfect their craft/discipline) when compared to the aforementioned ventures of badminton and shuffleboard?

I agree with that as well, where we differ is in the opinion of what to do about it.  Around 35k people die in car crashes every year.  It's as safe as it's going to get.  Sure, there are technological advances that are changing that slowly, but your argument is the equivalent of "let's add more road signs and make driving exponentially more of a pain in the ass by lowering speed limits everywhere for everyone because 17-year-olds looking at social media while driving tend to TBONE people now and again, and because drunks take a few hundred people out in each state every year."  

Warnings I'm all for.  Like, maybe a warning on Snake Dike in the form of a bright red and white sign, which wouldn't detract from natural beauty AT ALL:  PLEASE DON'T CLIMB PAST PROTECTION OR ANCHORS WITHOUT CLIPPING YOUR ROPE IN.  Great idea. Maybe for those that are more bold, we could grid bolt the RNWF of Half Dome and contract people to spraypaint a huge sign on the face letting people know that if they fall and hit the ground, it's likely that they'll die. It's almost as if people should know that before they start climbing, but you do you.  Let's put up warnings everywhere.  Like... uh... WAIVERS!  Yeah!  Waivers for climbing gyms where most people get their start in climbing should mention something about danger and seeking instruction.  Let's do that!  You know, 'CLIMBING IS INHERENTLY DANGEROUS' or something like that.  Seems like a great idea.  Or, better yet, those little pamphlets that everyone gets with gear, we could put warnings about how dangerous climbing is and how to use the gear properly in those little thingys.  LOL.  Yes, warnings should help to mitigate the small minority of climbers that ignore them and end up getting flown out all banged up and mangled.  You might be onto something here Mr. King.  I'm composing a letter to the AF, AAC TNF, and my Congressperson as I type this!

What do rap bolts have to do with anything?  Yes, to protect the tops of cliffs and the sometimes fragile ecosystems that reside there, I think this is a good idea, but should be considered on a case-by-case basis.  But I'm not against that.  Especially in single-pitch areas, I'm all for having links and rings on the anchors to facilitate lowering.  Oh, but what if people screw that up and crater their partner or themselves because, wait for it, they MADE A BAD DECISION OR WEREN'T TRAINED CORRECTLY?  What might we do to help avoid those situations where, idk, someone does something they shouldn't like uh, climb past anchors or bolts and not clip them?  or tell their belayer to take them off belay, or places bad gear, or back clips quickdraws or doesn't finish their knot or any other VAST number of things that people can do incorrectly as a result of not taking the activity and the inherent danger involved seriously?  Because that's what we're really talking about.  We're talking about a relatively small percentage of people that bite off more than they can chew, misjudge danger or commitment based solely on difficulty grade, or just don't respect the sport and the fact that it has risk built into it.

I mean, I get what you're saying, but prices are always going to go up.  Inflation does that on its own.  And yes, if the park, any park, state, national, whatever starts to see it as a problem, they'll institute whatever means they feel is necessary to stop the trend they don't like.  But that also won't stop someone from drunk driving, looking at their phone while driving, or thinking that a 5.7 R route is no big deal.  They'll just pay the extra $$ and get mangled anyway.  Or, let's say YNP does as you suggest.  Snake Dike or any other (insert route name here) that's R rated or PG or whatever beyond just trivial we just grid bolt the fuck out of it.  Someone still has to clip those bolts chief.  Someone can still fail to do that.  Pretty sure that happened recently ;-)

We could just close the parks.  That would save people from themselves AND save the environment!  How come that's not on the table?  I mean, with all these people being UNSAFE and no entity available at all places at all times to PROTECT people AND the environment, I would think if those are such venerable goals, that should at least be a discussion.

I'll say it again in case you've still missed it by this point.  This whole discussion started because someone climbed PAST viable protection and didn't clip it.  And your solution is to put more permanent fixed protection in. Take a minute and let that sink in. 

Let's just outlaw lead climbing.  It's the only way that our babied, entitled, whiny, frail generations to come can have their cake and eat it too. You can just hire someone, pay tons of money to be dragged up whatever and you have to do nothing yourself, and it'll be exclusive because only a smaller sliver of people will be able to afford it. Guides will love it!  So will the parks! 

As an aside, someone in one of the gyms I frequent from time to time splatted on the mat from 40' up over the weekend.  The climber had a belayer's configuration complete with an ATC with the end of the rope she *should have been* tied into just threaded through an ATC.  The belayer on the other hand, had an ATC that was actually going to belay.  Sadly though, the climber and belayer didn't do any checks, had no idea what the fuck they were doing, and had no business climbing because they weren't skilled or trained enough.  Maybe that gym route needs more bolts.  Safety first.

Calm down, sparky, ain’t nobody gonna read that steaming wall o text.

A terrible tragedy. Anna’s life was changed forever.

I feel this tragedy happens when people think a 5.7 is EZ and not having a real understanding of what the R part signifies.

I have seen 5.12 gym climbers melt down on The Golfers route 5.7 R and The left Water Crack 5.7 R.
The answer is not adding bolts but rather understand just what 5.7 R is. Its a serious grade, one that lures folks who don’t really understand the YDS into sketchy situations.

I pray for Anna’s complete recovery. 

Colonel Mustardwrote:

Calm down, sparky, ain’t nobody gonna read that steaming wall o text.

I read every word and I loved it. 

Most humans don't do it.  Most humans can't do it. 

God no, climbing is easy. What is difficult is maintaining the constant level of self-mythologizing and self-congratulation climbers do. Climbers are conformist and conventional, and it has been a mainstream activity since the mid to late '60s.  

Way too much heady blah-blah-blah in this thread that has zero to do with the accident or victim.  She isn’t asking anyone for more bolts.  +1 - nobody is reading these walls of self absorbed text either.

She confirmed in one of the above links she smashed into a ledge.  Therefore a significant piece missing from the discussion here is where this ledge is located and if a better belay could have prevented her from hitting it.

SFgate

"I was 15 meters above the bolt, so that’s 30 meters that I fell, and then I hit a ledge, and I had lots of pain, and I remember looking at my ankle and thinking, 'Oh my goodness,' as it was in pieces."

I’m assuming - like with pretty much all lead falls - that the distances are highly inflated guesstimates.