Originally Posted By: Lucander
A synonym for zealot is dogmatist, perhaps I should have used that term instead?

What would be better would be to stop using straw-man arguments and snide ad-hominen references and try to have a rational discussion about the real issues.

Originally Posted By: Lucander
I posted the Indian Creek page to illustrate the difference between New York and Utah.

Seriously? In less than a minute I found the following four anchor ranting threads on MP. If I had the time and interest, I could probably post fifty.





My guess is that there is far more controversy going on in Utah than we'll ever see in New York.

Originally Posted By: cfrac
RG, I haven't climbed here as long as you have but I am quickly approaching my 30th season in the Gunks and during this time it seems that the number of anchors have remained about the same, perhaps there are fewer anchors now.

Chris, we are both operating on the basis impressions that, in addition to being intrinsically unreliable, are affected by our choice of locales, frequency of visits, and other sources of sampling variability. Perhaps you are right, I certainly have no hard evidence for what I'm saying about proliferation.

I agree there has been a decrease in what appear to be bail anchors, perhaps as a result of there being much more information out there and a lot less uncertainty. I don't think anyone puts a rope directly around a tree any more for rappelling. What seems to me to be on the increase is well-constructed anchors, in a few cases even cables, with no apparent thought about the the myriad bad effects of running descent lines straight down ascent lines, and clearly with no acknowledgement of often nearby bolted rappel descents installed by the Preserve.

Seriously, does anyone here think that the convenience of having a rappel route running down an ascent route outweighs the experiential and safety considerations for ascending parties and makes such routes preferable to walking a hundred yards to a Preserve rap line. Anyone? I'd really like to hear a rational argument for that position.

The founding flaw of this thread is what appears to be an intrinsic assumption that all anchors are good and deserve to be upgraded when they deteriorate.