Mountain Project Logo

How Rap Slings came to the Gunks

MojoMonkey · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2009 · Points: 66
Brian wrote: Oh yeah,,,it is coming back to me...I belay to the left of that on my own built anchor. Don't need the pitons/chains. You can get gear in there if you want to belay from that spot. It would go a long way in reducing top-roping on an already over-loved climb.
Boy I wish that, after cleaning out the crufty anchor, it hadn't been replaced with pins and chain. It was easy to angle to the City Lights bolted station or walk over to it from the top of SoEO for groups wanting to rappel. I wonder how high up the folks toproping it on skinny 70m ropes have to climb before a fall still doesn't stretch back to the ground. I suppose the climber and belayer could pre-tension the rope like crazy, but how fun is the climbing with the rope tugging you along?
Kevin Heckeler · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Jul 2010 · Points: 1,616
MojoMonkey wrote:I wonder how high up the folks toproping it on skinny 70m ropes have to climb before a fall still doesn't stretch back to the ground. I suppose the climber and belayer could pre-tension the rope like crazy, but how fun is the climbing with the rope tugging you along?
About 15 feet* (for a 9.2mm 70m) unless you get some of the stretch out ahead of time as you say.

  • it should be noted that it starts to slow the fall immediately and by time you reach the 'end' of the stretch you're hardly falling, so really it's probably half that where you'll be falling enough you could land awkwardly/twist/bruise something.
Eric G. · · Saratoga Springs, NY · Joined Apr 2012 · Points: 70

On Sunday April 12, I noticed that there is no a longer cable or sling rap anchor on the tree above the second pitch of Baby.

At the same time, I noticed that a party was almost done rapping the second pitch of Baby. They simply slung their rope around the tree, and were pulling it when I showed up.

The Preserve's beneficial intention to preserve the tree led to at least one party taking an action that might kill the tree. I don't know that it was done knowingly (never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence) but in terms of outcome it doesn't matter.

Eric G. · · Saratoga Springs, NY · Joined Apr 2012 · Points: 70
Rob D · · Queens, NY · Joined May 2011 · Points: 30

I know that in the trapps-app discussion the fact that the anchors were shown was brought up as a negative, but this is a clear example of when it would be have been great help for them. There's a bolted rapp station super close and if you look at the topo it's very clear how close the uberfall descent is.

Kind of surprised that people were bothering with the top pitch of baby. It was pouring water on saturday.

Gunkiemike · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jul 2009 · Points: 3,492
Eric G. wrote:On Sunday April 12, I noticed that there is no a longer cable or sling rap anchor on the tree above the second pitch of Baby. At the same time, I noticed that a party was almost done rapping the second pitch of Baby. They simply slung their rope around the tree, and were pulling it when I showed up. The Preserve's beneficial intention to preserve the tree led to at least one party taking an action that might kill the tree. I don't know that it was done knowingly (never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence) but in terms of outcome it doesn't matter.
It's a sad fact that when right-minded individuals* remove longstanding rap slings from trees, folks who are accustomed to rapping from there will continue to do so. Sometimes they don't do it properly, as we see in that photo.

  • I very much doubt that it was the Preserve who cut down the Baby slings.
Morgan Patterson · · NH · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 8,945
rgold wrote: Anyone who doubts this need only look at Skytop, which had no fixed anchors and, as far as I can recall, no environmental problems of any kind, and is now festooned with top-rope/rap anchors established purely for the perceived needs of guiding.
Rgold - So should Skytop wait until the top of the cliff is completely blown out like Main Cliff @ Ragged Mountain before any conservation steps are implemented? Is there no benefit in proactive measures like this?

I read you statement as like a lets sit back and wait until there are all sorts of environmental problems and then bolts would be justified, but only until shit is real messed up can they be justified (ie there's no preventative rational to adding them to what could become a high traffic area.)

Additionally, since its private property and the land owner wants it... whats the problem? Why trash talk their guides over it when it was a company decision?
losbill · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 130

My partner and I were on Baby yesterday afternoon as well. While belaying my partner up the first pitch a young couple rapped down pitch 2 of Baby. I assumed the slings were back. The young couple went back up Easy Baby while my partner led pitch 2 of Baby. She was a bit surprised to find no slings on the tree. She asked the young man who had just led Easy Baby how they had gotten down to the GT Ledge after going up the second pitch of Baby. He indicated that they run the rope around the tree. Apparently my partner remonstrated him regarding rapping with the rope around the tree and that it was counter to the local ethic. Reportedly he took it in a positive manner.

When I got up I was able to point out to him the City Times bolted rap station 50 feet to the climber's right. They came over just as I was preparing to rap and I was able to offer them a ride on our doubles to ground which they accepted.

So there were two take-aways from the encounter for me. First don't hesitate to take the opportunity to speak to someone about behaviors that might negatively impact the resource and the enjoyment of it by others. What do you have to lose? Second when presented with better alternatives most people will usually employ them.

I believe it is a positive that the Trapps App shows the bolted rap lines. The Grey Williams shows the bolted raps lines in the route photos and provides an index of them on page 494. Unfortunately it doesn't show the City Lights line which is easily and safely accessible from climber's left from the top. It is a convenient way down from the top of the third pitch of Maria as well.

How to get down from the top can be very confusing for newcomers to the Gunks and for that matter people who have climbed there before. Despite the photos in the Williams guide finding the raps from the top can be difficult. Similarly finding the walkoffs/downclimbs, Uberfall; Radcliffe, and Silly Chimney; are those I'm aware of and have done is tricky as well. I believe appropriate signage at the top directing people to rap lines and walkoffs would go a very long way to eliminating a number negative issues related to rapping from the top. Don't the trails throughout the Preserve have signage pointing people in the right direction? Why not at the top of the cliff?

I know this may generate some significant negative response about dumbing down the experience, marring the "wilderness" experience, etc. given the thread not too long ago that went on for many pages about signage along the carriage road directing people to different sections of the cliff.

I am somewhat indifferent to the issue of signage directing people to sections of the cliff. But I'm not sure it would be a bad thing. But the lack of such signage doesn't result in ropes and rocks being dropped on people's heads as they are leading and doesn't negatively impact the trees at the top.

Gunkiemike · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jul 2009 · Points: 3,492
Morgan Patterson wrote: Additionally, since its private property and the land owner wants it... whats the problem? Why trash talk their guides over it when it was a company decision?
^ This. Anchors facilitate their guests' climbing. Docks facilitate their guests' swimming and boating. Bridges facilitate their guests' hiking and horseback riding. Etc etc. I don't think anyone is pointing at the unique situation at Skytop as the inevitable - or even likely - path that the Preserve is headed down at Trapps and their other cliffs.

Besides, I seem to recall there's a permanent installation at the top of the Skytop cliff that predates the for-profit climbing there. You can see it from miles away, in fact.
Lisa Andrews · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jul 2012 · Points: 10

Whatever your stance on bolted anchors/slings on trees/etc... Are people really concerned about retaining the "wilderness" experience at the gunks? Does such a concern jive with reality? Yesterday all three parking lots (yes, even lost city) were full not long after 10 AM.

Wilderness is certainly something to be coveted in climbing, but perhaps not at the gunks.

losbill · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 130
JSH wrote:How to get down from the top can be very confusing for newcomers to the Gunks and for that matter people who have climbed there before. This is quite true. For that reason, I've tried to ensure that every route description here has a valid descent option listed. Please do doublecheck me (I don't know everything)!
Hey Julie I know you do. Thanks for doing it and great thanks for doing such a great job as an administrator!

Lisa one woman's playground is another's wilderness experience. I would not deny them that perspective. My wilderness experience is hiking into Matthes Crest or some obscure crag in the back country in the Daks or New Hampshire. Then there are those men and women spending 30 days putting up new climbs on big walls in cold, really isolated places. It is relative. We all have our wildernesses.
Kevin Heckeler · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Jul 2010 · Points: 1,616
Lisa Andrews wrote:Whatever your stance on bolted anchors/slings on trees/etc... Are people really concerned about retaining the "wilderness" experience at the gunks? Does such a concern jive with reality? Yesterday all three parking lots (yes, even lost city) were full not long after 10 AM. Wilderness is certainly something to be coveted in climbing, but perhaps not at the gunks.
And the increasing frequency of music being blasted like we're pulling plastic at the gym. At least it attempts to drown out the drone of cars and motorcycles below.

During the weekdays the Gunks are an entirely different place. Less vehicle traffic from the road = less noise. More open climbs. More climbs open also means more opportunities to link up easier pitches to make some fun rope stretchers where there's normally a line half dozen deep waiting to gang rope.

There's definitely a 'wild' ness to the Gunks despite all its shortcomings. There's a lot of birds, reptiles, and other critters. Lots of trees, flowers, and interesting rock formations. It's worth preserving, and if that means we have to stick small pieces of metal into the rock then so be it. I'd trade some personal ethics for saving a few trees anyday. And it does sound like that's ultimately the kind of decisions being made now. Better now than when the trees are already dead.
M Mobley · · Bar Harbor, ME · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 911

Live trees on cliff tops are a beautiful thing.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526
Lisa Andrews wrote:Whatever your stance on bolted anchors/slings on trees/etc... Are people really concerned about retaining the "wilderness" experience at the gunks? Does such a concern jive with reality? Yesterday all three parking lots (yes, even lost city) were full not long after 10 AM. Wilderness is certainly something to be coveted in climbing, but perhaps not at the gunks.
Lisa, you may be right, but I find this viewpoint depressing, defeatist, and to some extent misdirected. It is, however, a fairly common refrain from those who want ever more conveniences. The argument boils down to the Gunks is ruined anyway, so who cares if we ruin it a little more.

I don't see it that way, but perhaps I am a combination of hopeless romantic and prehistoric beast who has somehow survived from a land before time and now cries for a world that is lost forever. Certainly plenty of folks try to paint me into that picture, and I am a card-carrying dinosaur at this point, so perhaps they are right.

At any rate, the Gunks hasn't been a wilderness area since the eighteenth century, so the wilderness concept is neither relevant nor appropriate as a standard. I think a more compelling and realistic question is the extent to which the Gunks can afford a climber the experience of the natural world in the context of climbing.

My view is such experiences are, in principle, available in quite small mini-environments, even when those environments are situated close to the hurly-burly of modern life. Indeed the value of these natural respites is precisely their proximity to our hectic everyday world, not their isolation from it. The ideal is to catch a whiff of the back-country without having to mount a major expedition to get there, and the genius of the Smiley's has been to preserve, from the rapacious clutches of "progress," a land where the scents, sounds, and sights of nature are still abundantly in evidence, if you have a clue where to look.

Granted, half way up the Trapps on a nice Spring or Fall Sunday is not high on the list of places to look. But even there, the breezes rustle the pines and the turkey vultures soar on the thermals, and a party on the rock can be part of a simpler more elemental moment.

What intrudes in all of this is not so much the overpopulation of humans as their seemingly insatiable need to leave all kinds of crap behind, crap whose only real purpose is to get them as quickly as possible out of the realm they have entered and back to their packs, cell phones, and tied-up dogs. Yes, some of the crap has become necessary, because the sheer number of users demands it now. But I think we should all be thinking about how to have less visible permanent impact, on these fragile retreats, not more.

And yes, the weekend crowds of climbers are becoming a problem, especially in places like Lost City that the Preserve hoped would be a lower-impact area. I think it inevitable that the Preserve will eventually have to control the crowds in some way, because even if climbers turn out not to give a damn about the natural scene, the Preserve does. I don't know if it is five years away or fifty years away, but prohibited, limited, or scheduled access will eventually have to become the reality.
Nick Goldsmith · · Pomfret VT · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 440

Rich. This is a really great line!

"perhaps I am a combination of hopeless romantic and prehistoric beast who has somehow survived from a land before time and now cries for a world that is lost forever."

You should write a book of climbing stories/ adventures.

Kevin Heckeler · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Jul 2010 · Points: 1,616
rgold wrote: Lisa, you may be right, but I find this viewpoint depressing, defeatist, and to some extent misdirected. It is, however, a fairly common refrain from those who want ever more conveniences. The argument boils down to the Gunks is ruined anyway, so who cares if we ruin it a little more. I don't see it that way, but perhaps I am a combination of hopeless romantic and prehistoric beast who has somehow survived from a land before time and now cries for a world that is lost forever. Certainly plenty of folks try to paint me into that picture, and I am a card-carrying dinosaur at this point, so perhaps they are right. At any rate, the Gunks hasn't been a wilderness area since the eighteenth century, so the wilderness concept is neither relevant nor appropriate as a standard. I think a more compelling and realistic question is the extent to which the Gunks can afford a climber the experience of the natural world in the context of climbing. My view is such experiences are, in principle, available in quite small mini-environments, even when those environments are situated close to the hurly-burly of modern life. Indeed the value of these natural respites is precisely their proximity to our hectic everyday world, not their isolation from it. The ideal is to catch a whiff of the back-country without having to mount a major expedition to get there, and the genius of the Smiley's has been to preserve, from the rapacious clutches of "progress," a land where the scents, sounds, and sights of nature are still abundantly in evidence, if you have a clue where to look. Granted, half way up the Trapps on a nice Spring or Fall Sunday is not high on the list of places to look. But even there, the breezes rustle the pines and the turkey vultures soar on the thermals, and a party on the rock can be part of a simpler more elemental moment. What intrudes in all of this is not so much the overpopulation of humans as their seemingly insatiable need to leave all kinds of crap behind, crap whose only real purpose is to get them as quickly as possible out of the realm they have entered and back to their packs, cell phones, and tied-up dogs. Yes, some of the crap has become necessary, because the sheer number of users demands it now. But I think we should all be thinking about how to have less visible permanent impact, on these fragile retreats, not more. And yes, the weekend crowds of climbers are becoming a problem, especially in places like Lost City that the Preserve hoped would be a lower-impact area. I think it inevitable that the Preserve will eventually have to control the crowds in some way, because even if climbers turn out not to give a damn about the natural scene, the Preserve does. I don't know if it is five years away or fifty years away, but prohibited, limited, or scheduled access will eventually have to become the reality.
And I get derided for pontificating? lol
Christian Fracchia · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2010 · Points: 80

Someone late last season must have walked the top of the cliff and chopped many anchors. Many of the guides reported this season of multiple occasions of people rapping directly off trees. I confronted a party just 2 weeks ago just as they were about to rap. I was really shocked to see it.

Most of the anchors have already been replaced, though some of them are just a single sling with one rap ring.

We are making an effort in the Trapps App to make finding the bolted anchors easier. The Shockley's Tree is a great example because it's only about a 100 ft walk to the left to reach the Arch/Ribs bolted rappels, but I think most people see the tree and just use it because they don't know how close it is to the bolted rappels. Some of the anchors are difficult to locate even when you know where they are. We were just discussing how we could use GPS to help find the bolted stations.

MojoMonkey · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2009 · Points: 66
Christian Fracchia wrote:Someone late last season must have walked the top of the cliff and chopped many anchors. Many of the guides reported this season of multiple occasions of people rapping directly off trees. I confronted a party just 2 weeks ago just as they were about to rap. I was really shocked to see it. Most of the anchors have already been replaced, though some of them are just a single sling with one rap ring. We are making an effort in the Trapps App to make finding the bolted anchors easier. The Shockley's Tree is a great example because it's only about a 100 ft walk to the left to reach the Arch/Ribs bolted rappels, but I think most people see the tree and just use it because they don't know how close it is to the bolted rappels. Some of the anchors are difficult to locate even when you know where they are. We were just discussing how we could use GPS to help find the bolted stations.
I see people rapping off of trees even when the place has rap anchors added all over the place. Some seem inexperienced and understand why it is bad after an explanation. Others don't seem to care and feel like they should be able to wrap their rope around whatever is nearest their topout.
Christian Fracchia · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2010 · Points: 80
MojoMonkey wrote: I see people rapping off of trees even when the place has rap anchors added all over the place. Some seem inexperienced and understand why it is bad after an explanation. Others don't seem to care and feel like they should be able to wrap their rope around whatever is nearest their topout.
The GCC is planning to make an educational video about not directly rappelling off of trees and using directionals so that the follower/leaders rope doesn't run directly over branches and bark. I guess I'm just surprised that this isn't self evident. Haven't most people gotten a rope burn at some point in their life, and if so I would think that the idea of friction causing damage would be apparent. Like you said though, it may be that they just don't care.
Marc801 C · · Sandy, Utah · Joined Feb 2014 · Points: 65
Christian Fracchia wrote: The GCC is planning to make an educational video about not directly rappelling off of trees and using directionals so that the follower/leaders rope doesn't run directly over branches and bark. I guess I'm just surprised that this isn't self evident. Haven't most people gotten a rope burn at some point in their life, and if so I would think that the idea of friction causing damage would be apparent. Like you said though, it may be that they just don't care.
Recently someone in another thread was asking if it was safe to extend a quick draw with a second draw. If they can't understand the most basic of climbing physics, how do you expect them to figure out the more esoteric difficulties of not damaging trees?
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Northeastern States
Post a Reply to "How Rap Slings came to the Gunks"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.