remove via ferrata south peak?

[J Mace]

VF's in Europe do not "require" anything, you are free to use them as you wish. There is often a sign that indicates the danger of not using protection. Those ladders on the chief are the same that are in Europe VF.

A ver popular trail that I am sure Anders would haved shut down cause those arent UIAA pitons


Typical anchor


recently replaced rungs and cable, most are not new like this.


shitty cable descent with no rungs


typical bridge on a face


Same sh*t different place, the rungs are fine, the sign at the base is obvious.

[Hip]

Agreed!

[Anders Ourom]

Interesting. But what is the modern standard in Europe for these contraptions, when built in parks? Your photos seem mostly to be of fairly old constructions - although hopefully not built by Italian or Austrian troops in World War I. The one modern photo appears to be of something built to a considerably higher standard. And there's nothing about whether any were built in parks, where often a higher standard is expected.

Perhaps one of the ironmongery supporters can do the research, and provide references as to what the modern standard is for building these things in parks in Europe. Process, design, geotechnical, engineering, environmental impacts, public and worker safety, and so on. You think the one at Squamish is a good idea. There seems to be consensus that it's built to a low standard. Find some information as to what the proper standard is.

Europe and the EU being what they are, there must certainly be standards, over and above the basic engineering.

[MGarcia]

I guess it is clear that it should not be removed based on a majority decision.

[peas]

I guess it is clear that it should not be removed based on a majority decision.

I'm pretty sure that this issue affects more than the 39 people who voted on this poll. I'm also pretty sure that a pollster would add something like "accurate to within +/- 20%, 19 times out of 20" to this poll.

[peas]

and I hope that I didn't just get trolled or missed some subtle humour.

[Anders Ourom]

Well, 39 have voted, which isn't much of a sample. Almost 3,000 have viewed this thread, although the number of "unique" views isn't stated. Probably much less, maybe a few hundred if that. As there may be a few hundred climbers (loosely defined) living in the Squamish area, and a few thousand living the greater Vancouver area (including Squamish), maybe not very conclusive. And only 20 or so have actually posted, mostly anonymously.

There does appear to be consensus that the thing should be removed, whether because it is far below acceptable standards and should be replaced, or because it is an appalling precedent created without due process, a hazard to the public, and shouldn't be there at all. There also appears to be some consensus that such things shouldn't be built without prior discussion.

So the question may not be so much whether it should be removed, as whether it should then be replaced, if so by what, and how it should be paid for? Bearing in mind that it would have to meet public standards, and the BC Parks is likely to be involved. Looking at it another way, if it is removed, would it not make sense for BC Parks to then step in and say "Hold on. Before you build anything else, let's have some serious discussions."?

[squamish climber]

I posted this discussion on UKclimbing.com. Check out the responses here. I thought it would be interesting to get the perspective where traditional ethics are the bedrock of climbing culture. This post also got more visitors because gripped.com saw the debate here and posted on it on their site. This topic may get more attention when the climbing season starts in a couple of months.

Anders where do you get that there is consensus for removing the vf? - from the comments? The poll is 54 percent in favor of not removing it. And this poll is far, far from being scientific. I think we should keep BC parks out of this.

[Anders Ourom]

Well, a few seem to think it should be left as it is. Somewhat more seem to think it ought to be removed, and replaced with something that meets modern standards for these things - although information is so far lacking as to what those standards are, and what the cost would be. About the same number believe it ought to be removed entirely, and not replaced.

So whether it's removed and replaced, or simply removed, there would be a period when it was not there at all. Somehow I doubt that replacement would be a quick or easy job, if done properly.

Warning: Above numbers are approximate at best.

ps The system is now calling me a "senior" member. Can that be changed so that I'm a "seasoned" member, or something like that? Or maybe a "nOOb" member, just for fun?

[Optimally-Primed]

Wow, Anders. 46% constitutes consensus? Now you're sounding like George Bush.

Posting a poll to the invalidate its results when they don't support your position is disingenuous.

Be a good loser, Anders.

[MGarcia]

I don't think it was ever his plan to leave it as is anyway, but why go through the hassle of putting a poll up then! Chop or file away and thanks for taking so much care of me and my fellow climbers against the BC Parks demon when I DID NOT ASK FOR YOUR HELP.

[MGarcia]

BTW, when he chops away, I'll chip in for the rebar or the epoxy...

[deep]

So I'm not a Squamish local, but I spend a lot of time climbing there so I guess that makes my opinion somewhat valid. I don't have anything against the via ferrata, albeit I haven't actually seen it, and it sounds like it's in an inconspicuous enough spot. What worries me is the precedent it sets, we have to draw the line somewhere. I agree for the most part with Peder that proper via ferrata's are wonderful things, but they should be something installed by the community. Now this forum seems to be in relative agreement that the via ferrata should stay. Should it stay, but be upgraded to a more acceptable standard? Maybe a caveat is needed saying that any future development of this kind should meet with community consensus before it's done?

[Optimally-Primed]

Deep,

1. Community consensus does not exist. People disagree. They always have. That's ok. Life goes on.

2. "The community" is an abstraction. Abstractions don't perform action. People like Barley do. Barley is not an abstraction.

3. Ignorance is still not a point of view, let alone a valid one.

[thebigchin]

Deep,

...3. Ignorance is still not a point of view, let alone a valid one.

Am I misunderstanding your post or are you being unnecessarily cranky to someone who is just putting out their opinion?