Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
karodrinker
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Sep 17, 2012 - 02:56pm PT
|
Bolts at Castle Rock State Park, in California
A beautiful, gymnastic climbing area exists on the ridge top above the bucolic wealth hamlet of Saratoga Ca. Sandstone monoliths protrude from the dirt, with cliff bands and waterfalls providing challenges from 5 to over 100 feet. The climbing history is long and important, many of Yosemite's climbing heroes originally learned their climbing craft at Castle Rock.
There are bolted sport climbs at Castle Rock, but hardly anyone does them. This is a shame, as there are many high quality routes on most of the formations. I see mostly bouldering and top roping practiced there now. Frankly, the bolts are mostly rusty and appear unreliable. Even the top rope anchor bolts are sometimes scary, compared to the bolts I see climbing at most other California climbing areas. Even the Pinnacles, an area renowned for it's unreliability, has in general, a much better bolt quality. What makes Castle Rock so scary, is that NO bolt replacement is allowed at the park. All of the bolting in the park was done decades ago before there was an all around closure regarding bolts. It is still legal to use the bolts, just illegal to make sure they are safe.
Why the bolting closure was initiated in the first place is a topic of debate, but the long term result is the eventual rusting, decay and subsequent failure of the bolts in place. There will be injuries and death from the eventual failure of bolts at Castle Rock if climbers are not allowed to at least replace decaying anchors.
Is the State Park service deliberately trying to slowly force roped climbing to die at Castle Rock State Park, and are they willing to allow climbers to die in the process? Is it not time for this to be remedied?
Best regards,
Kalen Glenn
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 03:09pm PT
|
If the Park refuses to allow replacement of existing anchors (but allows them to remain in place), and there is an accident resulting from the failure of these bolts, under well-established California statutory and case law, the Park can (and should) be held liable.
Unfortunately, that leaves two alternatives for the Park:
1. Remove all bolts; or
2. Permit replacement by the climbing community of existing anchors.
|
|
crasic
climber
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 03:18pm PT
|
The bolts at the waterfall seemed relatively new... or are you talking about castle rock proper?
|
|
karodrinker
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 17, 2012 - 03:21pm PT
|
Talking all around, at the many rocks in the park. There are still usable bolts, but they will not remain good forever. Due to the soft nature of the rock and it's proximity to the coast, Glue in Titanium bolts are the best option, an option that wasn't in use decades ago.
|
|
crasic
climber
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 03:28pm PT
|
I see, it is a shame.
But on the other hand, how will rangers know if you pull and replace quietly? Or do you have to re-drill the rock in sandstone? I haven't done any drilling or bolt replacement so sorry if I sound ignorant,
In any case, my personal view on rules is that they exist to be stretched as far as possible.
|
|
karodrinker
Trad climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 17, 2012 - 03:31pm PT
|
It should be public, it's a potential hazard.
|
|
crasic
climber
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 03:32pm PT
|
I think he's hinting at covert rebolting
What do the rules actually say?
If I pull a bolt to inspect it and replace it without a new hole is that against the rules? What if I accidentally forget which pocket I put the old bolt and I coincidentally have a pocket full of new bolts?
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 05:34pm PT
|
hey there say, karodrinker... say, is that the same place where my brother (chappy, for those that may not know) and brian, and ???jack menendez???? (maybe) USED to go to and climb at??
i remember hearing about that place...
think folks really DID enjoy it sooooo long back...
thanks for sharing...
:)
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 05:51pm PT
|
In some ways it's the future of obscure sport climbs - the bolts rust away, and nobody does the climbs, so it doesn't matter.
If you are serious about the bolts being hazardous, one solution is to remove them and patch the holes....
|
|
pc
climber
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 08:15pm PT
|
+1 for Clint.
Maybe for a different reason though...All but one of the bolts at Castle Rock always gave me the shivers. The big barrel "bolt/top rope anchor" on top of the main Castle Rock being the one I trusted.
I clipped a few of the bolted lead climbs but always considered them "do not fall"/"free solos" type ordeals.
Is it the death of the crag if the bolted climbs go away? Naw. The place would thrive as a bouldering only spot.
$.02,
pc
|
|
crasic
climber
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 08:22pm PT
|
There are plenty of popular sport and mixed sport/trad climbs at the waterfall. In the 5.9 to high 5.11 range.
Plenty of people roping up for them, lots of topropes, but the bolts are solid in most places, for the time being...
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 10:27pm PT
|
Death of a crag...any routes by Willy Loman?
|
|
Tfish
Trad climber
La Crescenta, CA
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2012 - 10:33pm PT
|
Same kinda thing at point dume. Rusty bolts at a CA state park.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2012 - 03:51pm PT
|
If the Park refuses to allow replacement of existing anchors (but allows them to remain in place), and there is an accident resulting from the failure of these bolts, under well-established California statutory and case law, the Park can (and should) be held liable.
Unfortunately, that leaves two alternatives for the Park:
1. Remove all bolts; or
2. Permit replacement by the climbing community of existing anchors.
Sad to say, they have one other option --(3) ban climbing. If the result of the current condition is liability for the state, the standard bureaucratic answer is option (3).
John
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 04:35pm PT
|
FYI: The new upgraded edition of Jim Thornburg's Bay Area Rock (2012) now includes many, many pictures of the bolted sport routes located at Castle Rock State Park:
http://www.jimthornburg.com/bay-area-rock.html
The new edition also contains first ascent information for the routes in the Underworld, Western Addition, Waterfall and Indian Rock areas.
The quality of Jim's pictures is bound to lead to a resurgence of leading activity at Castle Rock and further pressure on State Parks to allow bolt replacement and upgrades to avoid the liability issues cited above.
Seeing is believing. Many of the routes depicted look very good indeed. Funny how the passage of time and facts eliminate old prejudices.
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 05:27pm PT
|
There's also a 4th option for routes which are easily accessed for top roping: the park may allow replacement of anchor bolts, but chop (or require that climbers chop) pro bolts.
That's the current situation at Point Dume State Beach (same management agency as CRSP).
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 05:44pm PT
|
If the Park refuses to allow replacement of existing anchors (but allows them to remain in place), and there is an accident resulting from the failure of these bolts, under well-established California statutory and case law, the Park can (and should) be held liable.
Really?
If the park had placed the bolts and been responsible for their use as personal protective equipment that would be one thing. As it is there is no certain knowledge
1. That the bolt in question ever was able to hold a fall like the one in question
2. that replacement of that bolt absent appropriate engineering oversight would have been stronger than the bolt that failed.
If Randy's statement is true then I think the two possibilities are:
1. The State removes all of the bolts
2. The State replaces all the bolts with engineering as needed to defend the state as regards the adequacy of those installations.
I dismiss the third possibility that requires the State to inform all persons using the park that the existing installations were made by persons with unknown qualification and their adequacy is unknown. And advise them that their use involves personal assumption of risk. Why do I dismiss it? Because a plaintiff need only claim they had not been so informed.
While the State took an action ( prevention of replacement) for which it can be held accountable, the climber who trusted protection knowing they were placed by potentially unqualified persons, also took an action.
At least this is how I would look at the question were I a juror. Thus leaving me with my two possible options for the state.
Personal protective equipment is a huge problem.
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 06:22pm PT
|
Only problem with the State removing the bolts at Castle is that the Park sells an official climbing map at the Kiosk in the main Parking Lot for $2 bucks with the location of almost all the bolted lines indicated along with a map showing the climber trails to get to them. According to the 2001 Master Plan, the Castle Rock Ridge area with the bolted lines is specifically designated as a climbing area. State Parks currently has no plans for removing any of the bolted lines at Castle Rock. Think if they removed them, the State would be flirting with liability issues.
The existence of such an official map seems to indicate that the State has given tacit approval to the existence of such routes.
The more salient question of course is when is the State going to build their proposed Walk-in Campground at Patridge Farm near Goat Rock? The 2001 Master Plan specifically sanctioned building it and around 2003 work was begun on the parking lot. Then, all work on the campground mysteriously stopped. What's going on? I think it's because the RAC (Resource Advisory Committee) formed in response to a 2003 law suit by the Friends of Castle Rock under the aegis of the Sierra Club is recommending carrying capacity standards designed to cut down and limit human access to the area. But that's what I suspect based on a couple of addenda to the 2001 Master Plan. Up at Castle, you never know exactly who's in charge of what!
|
|
Reeotch
Trad climber
4 Corners Area
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 06:50pm PT
|
Starting to sound like a bunch of lawers around here . . .
I was always satisfied with Casle Rock as a bouldering area. The current situation sucks, but, it could be worse as noted above. At least you can still climb there.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!