Smith Rock Monkey Face swinger takes out climbers

[chrismael]

I think this is definitely a topic worth discussion. Not to dredge up ethics for the sake of spray, but I still don't buy into the logic of the anchor removal.... thus far.

Ian, I figure you have a good if not the best idea of what climbers and land managers of the park are thinking. I really wanna get a better idea of what forces may be acting upon this issue.

 

So far, both here and in ST there appears to be a lot of reflex judgement thrown around.

 

Bottom line. This accident appears to be the result of recklessness, carelessness, disregard/disrespect for safety; (by an individual). Whatever... But the swing can be done safely and it is loads of fun. I'll put it up there with my most enjoyable climbs even though it's not climbing.

 

I suppose if Joel and whomever wanted their bolts out of there, then so be it. It just sucks that the point is more swiss cheese than it used to be,... especially in the most ideal spot for anchors.

 

I'm really struggling with the idea that removal was "proactive". The time-frame screams "reactive" to me.

 

I suppose the most legitimate reason I can find for removal is that it arguably closes out six? other routes when people were on the swing. Someday I would love to throw myself at rising expectations and I would be pissed if every time I hiked over, there were people hogging the swing. But, does my ground up go with a rack of nuts give me the high ground?

chris

 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2011 by chrismael

[dian05]

Kudos Ian and all that understand the epic possibilities the future of the rope swing could have had on climbing at Smith but rather the lives it could have permanently ended and came close to. It was a horrible and sad site to come across especially thru no fault of their own...just so not worth the possibilities.

I understand the notes above from Chris but you just can't depend on others to think about what they might cause...it is unfortunate to have to take something down that has been used responsibly in the past...not the first time it's happened.

[markwebster]

The bad apples always spoil the barrel. I agree that the anchors are best gone. Especially since the swing tied up other routes. People out for a joy ride can go elsewhere.

 

Thanks for pulling them.

[Paul T]

Removing the bolts used for swinging on the Monkey Face under the premise of reducing accidents opens the door to all kinds of arguments that I'm sure we as climbers would not welcome. If I were to react in a similar fashion every time a climber was injured on a route by chopping the bolts on that route to prevent further injuries/fatalities, I'm sure my actions would be met with a healthy amount of resistance. I understand that we can not assume that everyone is acting at full mental capacity and adhering to all the safety precautions necessary to minimize the risks of each activity, but this is not sufficient justification to attempt to safeguard the world through tactics comparable to those used in this situation.

 

I have known Ian for a long time, and understand that his decision was partially in concern for the safety of individuals, partially for sustaining the public image we have to maintain as climbers, and partially for ulterior motives not as transparent as those disclosed. That said, I strongly disagree with the bolt removal as an answer to either of the initial two concerns. This situation was a most unfortunate set of circumstances resulting in a tragic conclusion. Chopping the bolts does not seem like the proper solution, and in my opinion was hasty, non-consensual, and made in a quasi-dictatorial manor.

 

We as climbers should understand that this sport comes with certain inherent risks. Some of these risks are within our own control, and some are not, such as: rock fall, weather, other climber's mistakes, bad bolts, a faulty cam, etc. It is difficult when an accident occurs to not have someone, or something to attack immediately, but in this case poor decisions were the culprit--not bolts. Taking away the ability to set up the rope swing is no different than taking away the ability to climb the Monkey Face. Both would result in the reduction of accidents at the cost of the activity we love. A better solution is raised awareness, which inevitably occurs when this sort of thing occurs.

 

paul tomlinson

[Drederek]

Taking away the ability to set up the rope swing is no different than taking away the ability to climb the Monkey Face.

paul tomlinson

Wrong! Rock climbers not accidentally trying to kill rope swingers

[chrismael]

 

Wrong! Rock climbers not accidentally trying to kill rope swingers

 

Please clarify, I'm struggling with the "accidentally trying" part. Are you claiming that this swinger was up on the springboard just waiting for his turn to take somebody out, then had a change of heart but at the last second fell off.

[Buckaroo]

Drederek is engaging in hyperbole to make a point.

 

Climbers aren't unknowingly jeopardizing other individuals like these rope swingers are.

 

Joseph makes an even better point. Climbing gear is not made for swinging. There are no set guidelines for the practice either like there is with climbing.

 

Take this joyriding crap somewhere else away from climbing areas. The sport is dangerous enough already even when you play within the guidelines.

 

Take it to a bridge somewhere, but you may find it's illegal and there's probably a reason for that. Just ask Dan Osman, he may be able to tell you why.

 

Kudos to the people that chopped the bolts.

[B Deleted_Beck]

if he was a park ranger, it would have been a legitimate exercise of control. a freaking lame one, but park rangers can chop bolts and be asses and fun spoilers all they want. as it was, it was just some dude assuming authority over the rest of us. i DONT know ian, but i've got a dollar that says his primary motive was self-gratification. the other reasons were just rationalizations.

 

you're not smarter or wiser than the rest of mankind, ian. dont presume to make decisions for us all.

[Kimmo]

We as climbers should understand that this sport comes with certain inherent risks.

 

we can also reasonably assume that we will not be side-swiped by someone on a rope swing as we clamber on a rock climb.

 

this isn't really a hazard anyone is expecting to encounter, especially the gal injured in this unfortunate incident.

 

it seems rather self-evident (especially given the recent accident) that this rope swing is a direct danger to climbers, and in a way that the climbers really have no control over.

 

having said that, i am stating my opinion only on information presented in this thread.

[B Deleted_Beck]

i'd say there's less risk with this rope swing than there is getting hit by someone's line from above. at least you can see the entire wall before you swing- all that's required is that you take two seconds to verify with your own eyeballs that everyone and their gear has been cleared from the wall.

 

this was bad timing, and poor situational awareness. the fact that uncountable people have swung from the swing before this in the several years it's been up is proof enough of the rarity of problems.

[Buckaroo]

Hey, Darwin Award candidate rope swinger.

 

Feel free to join the other Darwin Award winners.

 

Just don't try to drag innocent climbers with you.

 

Please take your rope swinging bolts and GTHO of climbing areas.

[NoahT]

Anyone who feels strong enough that the swing should be there, go put it back in.

 

If not, it's safe to assume you don't feel quite as strongly FOR it, as Ian did (and many others) AGAINST it.

 

Courage to act on your convictions matter. It's the difference between living with the status quo, and affecting the change you'd like to see. --N

 

 

[HerbalTee]

In the end this was self policing by climbers. The person who put in the bolts was in agreement that the bolts should be removed. The bolts were removed.

[chrismael]

Good point. I just began to realize that a lot of folks weighing in still aren't familiar with the logistics of the swing.

 

Perhaps I would say "less likelihood or lower probability" as opposed to "less risk" though. hmmm...

 

As stated here or in ST earlier, the swing is by no means new to the park. It has had a resurgence in popularity the past year, probably getting set up ?4-6 times max? Two of the bolts removed were placed last year, the original bolts were much older and were used kind of as directionals while being backed up by more stuff above. I guess my point is, this isn't new.

Someone earlier stated that Joel was the first one to put it up last year. They are very mistaken. It has been up occasionally over the past ?20+? years.

Edited July 17, 2011 by chrismael

[JosephH]

That said, I strongly disagree with the bolt removal as an answer to either of the initial two concerns. This situation was a most unfortunate set of circumstances resulting in a tragic conclusion.

Inappropriate use of climbing gear for activities like this, in a high profile arena, frequented by large enough demographic of people without the skills to recognize and avoid "unfortunate set of circumstances" is just an accident that hasn't happened yet. In today's demographic where belay drops, lowering miscommunication failures, and uneven rap rope falls are now endemic if not the 'new normal' you can bet your ass those "unfortunate circumstances" are always right around the next corner at a venue like Smith.

 

The rope swing definitely counted as an 'attractive nuisance' at a high traffic place like Smith and it was only a matter of time before this happened. Again, want to jump off shit? Step up to the real deal and learn to base.

[B Deleted_Beck]

Hey, Darwin Award candidate rope swinger.

 

Feel free to join the other Darwin Award winners.

 

Just don't try to drag innocent climbers with you.

 

Please take your rope swinging bolts and GTHO of climbing areas.

 

A) i wouldn't swing on that damn swing if you paid me- so quit personalizing

 

B) what makes climbers more worthy of monkey face than rope-swingers? seems to me there's a BILLION rock routes out there, and only one place to rope swing.

 

God did not put that rock there MORE for climbers than rope swingers.

[JosephH]

God did not put that rock there MORE for climbers than rope swingers.

Certainly not, but the bottom line is land manager perceptions of the activities of skilless thrillseekers and avid youtubians can threaten access to more skilled and disciplined pursuits within the park. Elitist? Sure, but oh f#ckin' well.

[ScaredSilly]

When two pursuits are in conflict it is typically the new less established one that gets eliminated. Especially, when in this case where it has the great potential for mayhem to not only themselves but others. Most people doing swings, free falls, etc. have little to zero knowledge of the dynamics involved. First, it is a few climbers, next thing ya know it is some some kids with their mom's clothes line.

 

I remember one of the first accidents with a bridge swing. The guy and ~4 others were going to swing together then drop into the water and be picked up by boat. He figured that because each weighed less than 200 lbs that 1250 lbs test cable would be good enough. The video shows the cable going ping right after the cable was fully loaded. Broken bodies and IIRC a death occurred. Not too mention a lawsuit.

 

 

 

[d_sowerby]

Hey, Darwin Award candidate rope swinger.

 

Feel free to join the other Darwin Award winners.

 

Just don't try to drag innocent climbers with you.

 

Please take your rope swinging bolts and GTHO of climbing areas.

 

God did not put that rock there!

There, fixed that typo for you.

[billcoe]

i DONT know ian, but i've got a dollar that says his primary motive was self-gratification. the other reasons were just rationalizations.

Pay up. Darnit - only a buck too, wish you'd put more on the bet. His primary motivation was clearly not self-gratification.

 

 

you're not smarter or wiser than the rest of mankind, ian.

Well now this is certainly untrue as well for the Smith Rock area. He is. Seriously. Not for all of mankind, that's too much. Just Smith. He might not even be "The Man" over there, but he's certainly on the committee:-)

 

I'd hope that we can all end the internet s&*t storm before it gets going. Of course it raining hard outside so I suspect it will go on for a while regardless. If anyone wants to discuss it, there is has always been a core group of locals there, just bring it up face to face next trip over to Smith. However, spend some time considering all of the angles and possibilities first. Sometimes things look different after a week or 2 reflection. When the Canadian fella died right by us auguring into the dirt on Tale of 2 Shitties in the 80's, my first (emotional) thought (once the wailing and crying of the guys loved ones died down) was to stick a bolt in right there at the traverse. Upon consideration, bad idea. No one has died there since in the 30 or whatever years, bolt was not needed and the climbing challenge is not denigrated. Whereas the Pioneer route may be the most popular aid climb in the state. People come from other states and countries to Smith, and the Monkey on the tick list for a lot of them. It's often super crowded already with Monkey Space and Pioneer getting clustered so the base is crowded right below, plus the rap location where this accident occurred is used for almost all of the Monkey routes from all sides, and it can be crazy crowded without the rope swing. To say nothing of the other prime routes on the East side wall being pretty much off limits to responsible climbers if folks were jumping first.

 

For myself,there are lots of places and bridges to jump off of if I want to go rig them. (I don't, too lazy). Powderhound has one near his house he's been eyeballing, send him a PM. Furthermore, there are other places that would be great swings where you most likely wouldn't see a soul all day. Head up to the Great Roof at Smith, a worthy climb in and of itself that is rarely done, and take a look see if that might be a spot where a swing could be rigged. Possibly Independence Spire (?) too, don't know if I have the name right but its the overhanging rappel one over near Stander Ridge.

 

I came off while toprope soloing at Cathedral right over the reading room cave one day and thought that the unintentional swing would never end. I think it took 3 days to get my nards back down in the lil sack after that although I will admit to promptly climbing right back up to the best spot and intentionally jumping off a couple more times just....because. Kind of scary/ or a thrill to be totally alone, no cell phone reception anywhere, quite a bit of a hike just to get to the car and in a very remote location. The next trip up to my horror I found that the rope I'd been climbing, falling and screwing around on was core shotted up on top just feet below the anchor most likely from the wind and storms over the week causing it to rub on the only sport it was touching (3 feet below the anchor), couldn't see it from the ground with old and bad eyes and it was cliff side in anyway - close up picture below of the rope...OMG!)

After seeing the condition of the rope I'd been swinging on multiple times, the nards disappeared back up there and refused to come down till weeks later when I was home hugging my Teddy Bear for comfort. That would be a kick assed spot as well and there are maybe 3 places you could rig it in the general vicinity with no people around for miles. As noted, take extra care where you place the anchors, use big assed bolts and pad where needed, it's ruff rock. http://www.mountainproject.com/v/coethedral/106865073 There is a pretty big cave up on a hill you can see when you park that has no routes where this kind of thing would be Afrigganstounding I'd bet.

 

Regards to all!

[stevetimetravlr]

We as climbers should understand that this sport comes with certain inherent risks. Some of these risks are within our own control, and some are not, such as: rock fall, weather, other climber's mistakes, bad bolts, a faulty cam, etc.

paul tomlinson

I guess, We as climbers, never realized that objective dangers included some asshat on a rope swing, but sounds like you want it added to the list?"

Not ok.

[corvallisclimb]

Just realize that there is someone still laying in a hospital bed as a result of this, whos life may likely never be the same. Think about it.

[Raindawg]

Climbers aren't unknowingly jeopardizing other individuals like these rope swingers are.

 

The swingers ARE climbers. It takes climbing skills to get up Monkey Face and rig the anchors, and the swingers seem to have a method for descending the rope after their stunt. So it ain't like it's "those other people" causing climbers trouble.

[TRoth]

It's a risky act. Risking the limits of rock gear for a rush... I bet it was great, but without precaution. Smith rock echoes greatly. I yelled at koala rock on thin air when I climbed it trad, and I heard it echo back from the buckets. Never once did I hear an "on rope, swinging towards monkey face, anyone on route?"... Same as on/off rapell, or ROPE!! . It's exceptionally dangerous, but not all who do it are responsible. Im torn on anchor removal

[Paul T]

We as climbers should understand that this sport comes with certain inherent risks.

 

we can also reasonably assume that we will not be side-swiped by someone on a rope swing as we clamber on a rock climb.

 

this isn't really a hazard anyone is expecting to encounter, especially the gal injured in this unfortunate incident.

 

it seems rather self-evident (especially given the recent accident) that this rope swing is a direct danger to climbers, and in a way that the climbers really have no control over.

 

having said that, i am stating my opinion only on information presented in this thread.

 

You would be correct in "reasonably" assuming that you would not be "side-swiped" while climbing. Just as a hiker would "reasonably assume" that he will not be peppered by rocks, or clocked by a rack of stoppers that some climber bumbles during a lead above him/her. These things are not the norm, nor do they characterize the mean (average) experience.

 

I agree that this is not a hazard anyone is expecting, but rather an anomaly. To characterize this most unfortunate occurrence as anything but a freak accident caused by a negligent enthusiast seems like a convenient way to assert precedence of one arbitrary activity over another (climbing rocks over swinging on ropes). It seems to me that this has surfaced as the real issue on this thread.

 

I would be quite upset if due to the actions of one negligent climber injuring a hiker, a hiker decided to remove/chop bolts and anchors at Smith.

 

Almost any activity can be performed in a negligent manner, which can result in injury or worse to another. Whether climbing, driving, flying a passenger plane, etc, accidents happen that should not have--had the activity been done responsibly. These anomalies do not seem like sufficient support to discontinue access to these activities.

 

As an avid climber I inevitably favor rock climbing over the other activities performed at Smith, but I do not believe that this passion of mine deserves dominance over any other. All of our trivial pursuits have their place, and it seems dubious to abruptly end one activity by destroying the means/equipment that make it possible.

 

I do not mean to come off as callous or insensitive to the unfortunate plight that the woman has found herself in, due to circumstances out of her control. It does seem important though to engage in pragmatic dialogue concerning the details and implications of bolt chopping as a result to such incidents. I believe that this is in large part why most of us are here.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2011 by Paul T