Eldo facelift

I was thinking of opening a discussion..
I've been climbing in eldo past two years.. When I'm not swing the hammer.
Anyway... Most of the fixed gear , I think should be extracted ... Many of those scares , would offer placement for new age gear... Like totem cams and offset whatnot...
Please write what you think... It important to me to understand the basis of the current ethic... I love to climb in eldo no matter what.. I respect the elders

HolySHootDude,
This is a great idea that has been going on since 1989. Before you start anything you need to look in to the Action Committee for Eldorado (www.aceeldo.org), it's history and its Fixed Hardware Review Committee (FHRC) and what it has been doing. A good overview can be found here: aceeldo.org/fhrc/FHRC_Guide…

ACE and the FHRC operate under and MOU outlined in the Eldorado Canyon State Park Climbing Management Plan.

There is a lot going on between Eldo and the local climbing community if you care to get involved.

climb safe,
Mal

I'm trying to think of any routes in Eldo where fixed gear actually inhibits one from getting a critical placement or forces the climber to rely on the fixed gear.
Usually even w/ the fixed gear, there are still placements to be had.

But as Malcolm has pointed out, ACE has done a great job in the canyon and would be the place to start.

Malcolm Daly wrote:HolySHootDude, This is a great idea that has been going on since 1989. Before you start anything you need to look in to the Action Committee for Eldorado (www.aceeldo.org), it's history and its Fixed Hardware Review Committee (FHRC) and what it has been doing. A good overview can be found here: aceeldo.org/fhrc/FHRC_Guide… ACE and the FHRC operate under and MOU outlined in the Eldorado Canyon State Park Climbing Management Plan. There is a lot going on between Eldo and the local climbing community if you care to get involved. climb safe, Mal

I keep trying to remove them by whipping my fat ass onto them. They won't budge.

Which one's would you like to remove.

The issue here is that people who petition FHRC climb hard, so they only replace rusty fixed gear on HARD routes.

The easier routes with ancient gear that is likely to be trusted by a beginner & whipped on are the routes that need the most attention.

The best contribution you could make is climbing easier/moderate terrain and recording all the nasty gear you find. You may then take your list to the committee and petition to replace "like for like."

PalisadePete,

Like for Like replacement doesn't have to be petitioned to the FHRC unless you're going to relocate or move a placement. All you have to do is notify the park about your plans.

The park rangers (Muelhauser mostly) also take in reports and climb routes that are reported to have bad FG or dangerous rockfall potential. They will recommend replacement to the FHCC which then finds a volunteer to do the work. This is how many of the placements on the easier routes get done.

Mal

Like-for-like replacement requires a permit from the park, but not permission from the FHRC.
The ACE board has spent some time on the subject of pin maintenance recently. Like-for-like has been the only response to an aging pin, but the policy of pulling and replacing every piton isn't sustainable in the long term.
Although every case is different and will have to be carefully considered, the board has developed a flow chart to help define the process of evaluating whether a pin should be left alone, replaced, removed and not replaced, - or, in some cases, removed and replaced by a bolt.
The overriding thought process behind this is that the conditions of the first ascent are the gold standard. However, fewer in this generation know how to evaluate the integrity of a pin, and climbers in Eldo do not usually climb with hammers.

Hypothetical cases:
-An otherwise blank section of a climb is protected by a bomber pin on the first ascent. 40 years pass and the pin has been replaced many times. The fit is now poor at best. If the scar provides adequate protection with modern gear, removing it for good is an option. If no gear would fit, a nearby bolt is an option that would best simulate the protection of the FA.
-An easy/moderate pitch has some ancient pins placed in easily protectable cracks. Modern gear has rendered many of these pins unnecessary. The combination of unreliable fixed gear and inexperienced climbers at some point becomes an 'attractive nuisance'. You could say that an inexperienced climber that only clips the pins without backing them up is a fool and is guilty of user error if he falls and dies, but that laissez-faire approach looks different to a land manager.

The cracked bong and the short ring piton on P1 of 'Werk Supp' fell into the second category and they were removed by the FHRC. Several pins on moderate climbs will be up for a vote to retire them permanently in the fall.

A couple:
An angle at the top of P2 on The Bulge used to be part of a two-pin anchor before the ASCA added a bolt (the second piece is a good drilled angle). The eye was cracked and barely hanging on - it flexed so easily that I broke it off with my fingers. I have a plan for removing the now headless pin (and a permit). A small cam will go there for someone leading Shades of Gray.

There's an angle near the bottom of the Rover dihedral at the optional belay with a cracked eye. What to do with that one and a few others will go through public review in the fall voting.

Start of Superslab, Yellow Spur pin ladder (and first pitch), first pitch NW Corner, and Dubious Graffiti (i.e. Doub-Griffith Direct) are examples of routes that rely on fixed pins, with no alternative clean gear placements.

Rincon pitch 3, Wendego, Upper Ruper traverse, and Jules Verne pitch 1 are examples of climbs with marginal or suspect fixed pins that are used because there aren't any clean gear options You can't do like-for-like for these because removing and replacing a pin erodes and compromises the placement.

Rover pitch 1, Peanuts, and Original Start to XM are examples of routes with unnecessary pitons with good clean gear nearby. Maybe these should all be removed so inexperienced leaders don't mistakingly rely on them?

Learning to judge fixed gear- pins, slings, bolts, fixed wires, stuck cams, bashies, RURPs- is part of traditional climbing.

There is a lot of gray area when talking about removing fixed pins.

The C'est la Vie pin is still there and still bent. It is very solidly driven, but there is a tiny stress crack in the metal where it meets the rock. Deciding what to do there is going to be particularly difficult. There is no guarantee that it could be successfully removed or replaced or that a Lowe-ball or some such would fit in the scar. There is an inobvious good gear placement below, but that gets back to the character of the FA issue. Many have sentimental attachments to that pin, too. People will have strong opinions on that one, and leaving it alone might win the day if/when a proposal is submitted. Regardless, that's an interesting one to ponder.

PalisadePete wrote:The issue here is that people who petition FHRC climb hard, so they only replace rusty fixed gear on HARD routes. The easier routes with ancient gear that is likely to be trusted by a beginner & whipped on are the routes that need the most attention. The best contribution you could make is climbing easier/moderate terrain and recording all the nasty gear you find. You may then take your list to the committee and petition to replace "like for like."

Mike McKinnon wrote:Is that sketch pin on C'est Le Vie still there. The one before the crux pull onto the face in the dihedral? Just asking because this would be an example of a bad pin that has been left but i have not climbed that route in about 3 years.

Steve Levin wrote:Start of Superslab, Yellow Spur pin ladder (and first pitch), first pitch NW Corner, and Dubious Graffiti (i.e. Doub-Griffith Direct) are examples of routes that rely on fixed pins, with no alternative clean gear placements. Rincon pitch 3, Wendego, Upper Ruper traverse, and Jules Verne pitch 1 are examples of climbs with marginal or suspect fixed pins that are used because there aren't any clean gear options You can't do like-for-like for these because removing and replacing a pin erodes and compromises the placement. Rover pitch 1, Peanuts, and Original Start to XM are examples of routes with unnecessary pitons with good clean gear nearby. Maybe these should all be removed so inexperienced leaders don't mistakingly rely on them? Learning to judge fixed gear- pins, slings, bolts, fixed wires, stuck cams, bashies, RURPs- is part of traditional climbing. There is a lot of gray area when talking about removing fixed pins.

Holyshootdude wrote: No pins in the crux dihedral.. Besides the one down low right after the anchor .

Holyshootdude wrote: No pins in the crux dihedral.. Besides the one down low right after the anchor .

Jim Titt's article is good food for thought regarding fixed pins:
Is there a future for pegs in British climbing?

Gregger Man wrote:Jim Titt's article is good food for thought regarding fixed pins: Is there a future for pegs in British climbing?

Keep in mind that the Pin Evaluation Flow Chart that GreggerMan posted is a DRAFT, not the final version.