History of ethics of lowering and TRing through fixed gear/quickdraws

I recently climbed in Railay/Tonsai Beach where I got to witness and discuss different climbing ethics, especially those concerning whether you lower/TR through the fixed anchor or through your own quickdraws. The European climbers were amused that we were rappelling back down to the ground after cleaning instead of being lowered. After realizing that pretty much all the routes were equipped with pretty beefy rings, not the thin rap rings that I'm used to, we started just lowering off the climbs too.

This got me thinking about these ethics. I understand it varies from place to place and that there are some areas/routes in the US that are set up for climbers to be lowered. However, it seems that this practice is more common in Europe than in the US. Is the root of this based on the US's conservative approach toward bolting and fixed gear? Even in a designated sport-climbing area where developers have free rein to bolt, it seems that there's no ethical reason why more rugged anchor material couldn't be used. Of course it would be more expensive. Is that the reason or is there more to it?

caughtinside wrote:It's really a sport climbing ethic to lower off. When in Rome or tonsai...

yep, generally speaking, if it's a sport climbing area, lowering is perfectly acceptable and in most places even encouraged. I think the main issue in the US is that the trad ethic is generally rapping, and we have a lot more trad climbers who push this ethic onto sport climbers in sport climbing areas. It also probably has to do with the fact that sport climbing originated in Europe, so it has taken a bit longer to bring all of the sport climbing traditions and ethics to the US.

Uh...no. I've never seen lowering being the "ethic." Perhaps this is a west coast thing, but everywhere I've done sport climbing (RRG, Red Rock, Austin, Rumney), the ethic is rappel, not lower, off of fixed hardware unless cleaning a severely overhanging route. Lowering puts more force/wear on the hardware and is generally seen to be in poor taste. I also find it to be incredibly annoying, as you have to direct your belayer when to stop, etc, whereas with a properly backed-up rappel, you can go hands free whenever you need and control your own rate of descent.

Ted Pinson wrote:Uh...no. I've never seen lowering being the "ethic." Perhaps this is a west coast thing, but everywhere I've done sport climbing (RRG, Red Rock, Austin, Rumney), the ethic is rappel, not lower, off of fixed hardware unless cleaning a severely overhanging route. Lowering puts more force/wear on the hardware and is generally seen to be in poor taste. I also find it to be incredibly annoying, as you have to direct your belayer when to stop, etc, whereas with a properly backed-up rappel, you can go hands free whenever you need and control your own rate of descent.

Calling M Sprague! I'm pretty sure I've seen him advocate to lower off his anchors that he put up in Rumney.

I personally find it incredibly annoying when people insist on highly dangerous practice of rappelling to clean the anchors over lowering. There have been two high-profile deaths in the past couple of months of experienced climbers falling while cleaning anchors. Do we really value a piece of metal more than people's lives?

Ted Pinson wrote:Lowering puts more force/wear on the hardware and is generally seen to be in poor taste.

Right, it definitely puts more wear on the hardware, but some places have more robust gear that seems to be built for that sort of thing. For example, there are some climbs at Red Rock that have huge thick hooks at the anchor, which seemed to be there so that you can lower off of them (maybe I assumed wrong). But apart from this, all the other places I've sport climbed in the US haven't had adequate hardware to take that kind of abuse for long. So, yeah, my "ethic" is to rap, but I was wondering if there are areas in the US where this tends not to be the case.

Neither of those accidents occurred for rappel-specific reasons; they were "cleaning accidents." When lowering, you still need to go on direct and untie your knot, which was when the accidents occurred. The dangers with rappelling (rapping off ends of rope) and rappelling accidents usually occur on long, multi pitch raps where the climber wasn't able to see the ground/next anchor and verify that the rope was long enough. When cleaning single pitch routes, the safety level is about the same. The only exceptions are gym-style anchors and permanent draws where you can clip in without untieing. For rap rings, though? Just rap.

It's also not as simple as "valuing your life over a piece of metal." As rap rings wear down, they form sharp grooves that can cut or damage the rope, creating a safety concern for future climbers.

Ted Pinson wrote:Neither of those accidents occurred for rappel-specific reasons; they were "cleaning accidents." When lowering, you still need to go on direct and untie your knot, which was when the accidents occurred. The dangers with rappelling (rapping off ends of rope) and rappelling accidents usually occur on long, multi pitch raps where the climber wasn't able to see the ground/next anchor and verify that the rope was long enough. When cleaning single pitch routes, the safety level is about the same. The only exceptions are gym-style anchors and permanent draws where you can clip in without untieing. For rap rings, though? Just rap.

No, they don't. Plenty of people rap off the ends of their ropes on single pitch routes every year. Its simply more inherently dangerous than lowering.

Oh Dammit! here we go again!!!!

It's sport climbing!!! lower off the damn thing to clean!

If climbing it more than once, put 2 draws on the anchor, but lower off to clean!!! This rappel ethic is from crusty old climbers too weak to climb, or newbies too weak to climb being taught by crusties! or meet up groups that are raping our crags! Stop the MEET UP GROUPS!! PICK UP YOUR DAMN TP instead of rappeling off that 5.8 pitch you hungdogged and raped with your meet up group!

enough, im going back to my van and

The trend - thanks to Spraguey and his ilk nation wide - is to put more effort into equipping routes - anchors especially - for ease of use and longevity - both by the climbing user and the maintainer. Thus lowering is becoming more and more the norm and is more likely to be the practice in main stream popular areas. Whether or not this equates to dumbing down the experience and removing some of the responsibility that traditionally has been on the user - is another question. It IS the trend. Since Europe in general is more evolved in climbing practices it (beefy, replaceable anchors, lowering...) is a more well established practice there.

Lol!

Yeitti wrote:Oh Dammit! here we go again!!!! It's sport climbing!!! lower of the damn thing to clean! If climbing it more than once, put 2 draws on the anchor, but lower off to clean!!! This rappel ethic is from crusty old climbers too weak to climb, or newbies too weak to climb being taught by crusties! or meet up groups that are raping our crags! Stop the MEET UP GROUPS!! PICK UP YOUR DAMN TP instead of rappeling off that 5.8 pitch you hungdogged and raped with your meet up group! enough, im going back to my van and

Where's the like button on this site again?

Ted Pinson wrote:When lowering, you still need to go on direct and untie your knot, which was when the accidents occurred.

What I liked about the gear in Thailand was that most anchors were composed of two thick metal rings equalized via climbing rope to the bolts. The rings had a large enough diameter that you could thread a bight of rope through, tie a figure eight on the bight and then clip that to your belay loop before untying. Then you're never off belay. I guess I was still connecting myself directly to the anchor while setting this up...maybe if you had a good stance you wouldn't even need to do that. Anyway, you can still screw up with this setup too, but it does seem simpler since you're not clipping and unclipping so many things at the anchor.

Lowering is safer. Gear is replaceable. People are not.

Jon Zucco wrote:Lowering is safer. Gear is replaceable. People are not.

There is some of my gear I value much more than I value certain people...

In all seriousness, places like Tonsai have wear problems. Gear is reclacable - the people that die when it fails are not. So... if you wear out the gear, you either end up back in the place with danger to people again, or you replace it.

I doubt the people laughing about lowering off of it are replacing gear or it wouldn't be so funny. Ignorance is bliss.

Hopefully the anchors going in are SS links to rings to make replacement easy and sustainable.

There is a huge difference between "replaceable" and "frequently replaced." Lowering off of worn and grooved rappel rings is more dangerous than rappelling. If you're in an area where lowering is common practice and there are robust inspection/replacement organizations, then go for it, but I wouldn't assume just based on the fact that it's a sport climbing area...

Tony B wrote: I doubt the people laughing about lowering off of it are replacing gear or it wouldn't be so funny. Ignorance is bliss.

I certainly replace gear, and I also certainly advocate lowering off of sport routes. Also, everyone I know who replaces gear also advocates lowering off of sport routes.

Ted Pinson wrote: Lowering off of worn and grooved rappel rings is more dangerous than rappelling.

This is only true if you're talking about rolled aluminum rap rings which you'll never find in a sport climbing area and shouldn't ever be lowered off of even when brand new. A quality stainless steel rap ring will hold way more then you could ever put on it in a single pitch climbing situation even when worn something like 3/4 of the way through.

highly dangerous task of rappelling off the anchors? um no.

pkeds wrote:highly dangerous task of rappelling off the anchors? um no.

Based on what exactly?

Doligo's evidence may be unscientific & anecdotal, but guess what, I have no interest ending up on the short end of scientific evidence. Do I think rappelling is inherently dangerous? Not really. Does that matter to me? Not really. My personally feeling is rappelling is usually happening at the time of the day when you are most likely to fuck up: right after climbing. In the context of sport climbing, I'm probably physically exhausted & may not be thinking straight. So yeah, I'd like to avoid it as much as possible.

Ted Pinson wrote:When lowering, you still need to go on direct and untie your knot, which was when the accidents occurred.

This is not true. There are a few ways to thread for lowering while maintaining a connection to the rope at all times. One example is here:

climbcore.files.wordpress.c…

If done correctly, at one stage in the process, you'll be attached to the wall at two points on the rope and with a leash of some kind if the stance requires it.

As for whether you *should* lower off or rappel, ethically speaking, I will graciously be avoiding a response.

i guess i dont see how rapping is so much more dangerous than blindly lowering through fixed hangars. i feel that ive heard as many stories of belayers screwing up while lowering as ive had of those messing up rapping. ive also seen my fair share of cold shuts that are sharp/have burrs/or are worn many times. if you are regimented and weight your rap device before lowering, i dont see how there is an issue. im also probably biased as the crags where i learned how to climb, rapping was the local ethic.