I'm not sure how dangerous this is. Its an aid assisted climb, so ropes are on, and taut the whole time. Climber uses the gear to get up. Assuming an adult is checking the gear all the way up it shouldn't be that crazy. It just takes a long time and is strenuous.
The closest thing might be Child Endangerment (or similar depending on jurisdiction) but I'd argue with the safety gear she had on it wouldn't pass the "reasonable person" test. Which is to say a reasonable person wouldn't find it unsafe to climb El Capitan with full safety gear, an experienced adult climber, and experience climbing smaller peaks herself.
This is a lot of training and committed parents. I'm doing a lot of aid climbing myself and anyone could be good at aid climbing if enough training and commitment is put inside it.
It's an impressive feat, but this article fails to mention that she wasn't "climbing" in the sense that most people use the term. She was jumaring, where you use devices to climb up a fixed rope. It's exhausting and not without skill, but it's not at all like free climbing by holding onto the rock. (See, for example, https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/10-year-old-girl-climbs-y...)
(Free climbers use ropes, but only to arrest falls, not to climb up. Free soloers like Alex Honnold don't even use that protection, though that's very rare and incredibly dangerous. This is "aid climbing" with ascenders. It does have dangers of its own: protection points can fail, and she's wearing a helmet because rocks do fall.)
Aid climbing is not jumaring though. It means you use tools to get up. Most of the time the face is blank and you still need to get up painfully and add all the protections to go up little by little (aid climbing leading). Sometimes for higher grades of aid climbing (C3,A4,A5) this is very scary as there is almost nothing to hold on and you are literally pulling on very small hooks that barely rest on the side of the rock.
In this specific case I'm pretty sure that the two adults took the leads and the girl followed jumaring behind.
Are these people all putting those bolts to hold ropes into the face of the rock? It's getting pretty stupid when fathers are taking their ten year old daughters up the climb. If it's dangerous it should be unlawful, if it's not then what's the point?
They restrict driving on mountains to stop erosion. These climbers are driving metal bolts into a beautiful mountain face. That's got to be doing some harm as well as not looking very nice.
Bolting is an ethical issue that is discussed at length in the climbing community.
The ethics are very strong in Yosemite and therefore there are almost no bolts and all the climbs are done using removable gear. (also called trad gear).
I'm also baffled that you compared a couple micro pieces of metal to the disruption that a road provides to the environment. Or even compared to skiing resorts, mountain bike trails etc. In my experience climbers are some of the most ecologically respectful people out there.
I'm also baffled that you compared a couple micro pieces of metal to ...
It's more because it's El Capitan. It's a special place.
I get why climbers feel attracted to it but it's more important that it be protected than people, in ever increasing numbers, get the pleasure of climbing it. Look at what's happening at Everest. The feat's been accomplished, no need for everyone else to do it too.
They climbed The Nose, which seems to be a mix of trad (traditional, no fixed holds) and aid (placing temporary protection, then using gear to climb up to the protection, then placing protection, etc.) climbing - more on the different types of climbing here: http://www.alpineinstitute.com/articles/expert-tips/rock-cli....
Thanks for the information and i agree with your last point about freedom. But an adult shouldn't have the freedom to endanger a ten year old's life. On the other hand, if El Capitan has been tamed to the extent that the climbing of it has become safe and routine then I think there's an argument for putting the climbing of it to bed and instead preserving it in as pristine a state as possible.
For those interested, the Alpinist article from a week ago has much more detail (and some history).[0]
It looks like she led the first pitch of 5.7 free climbing and an A0 (easy aid climbing) bolt ladder. She otherwise followed and cleaned/removed gear for her father and a family friend in the party, who appear to be experienced. They planned for 4 days, but completed in 5. My understanding is this is a standard pace for amateurs and they were even outpacing other parties. The primary difficulties for a kid, besides the technical climbing, are maintaining focus for 5 days on the wall 1000s of feet up and sleeping on a small ledge, and carrying a large amount of heavy gear, relative to bodyweight.
I'm here to watch all the comments about "child endangerment" which are coming straight from American helicopter parent culture.
I'm really shocked at how most parents want the safest environment possible for their child so they don't even get any challenge in their everyday life. I saw children with helmets walking in the street. I got snarky comments from people when I said I was hiking in the woods with my kids. ("This is irresponsible: what would happen if you got lost with your kids").
I want my kids to try things even if they might be dangerous from time to time. There is nothing great about living an ultra safe dull life.
> I'm here to watch all the comments about "child endangerment" which are coming straight from American helicopter parent culture.
At the time of replying (21 minutes after this post) there have been absolutely none of those on here. Literally zero. The one post asking if there's a minimum age doesn't even do that.
I don't think it is particularly constructive to assume people will post a certain way then brag that you "[came] here to watch [it]." Further it isn't constructive to preemptively stereotype anyone who would make such a post ("American helicopter parent").
I'd politely suggest you review the "In Comments" guidelines:
31 comments
[ 26.6 ms ] story [ 66.9 ms ] threadThe closest thing might be Child Endangerment (or similar depending on jurisdiction) but I'd argue with the safety gear she had on it wouldn't pass the "reasonable person" test. Which is to say a reasonable person wouldn't find it unsafe to climb El Capitan with full safety gear, an experienced adult climber, and experience climbing smaller peaks herself.
Some people seem a different (superior) species.
This is a lot of training and committed parents. I'm doing a lot of aid climbing myself and anyone could be good at aid climbing if enough training and commitment is put inside it.
(Free climbers use ropes, but only to arrest falls, not to climb up. Free soloers like Alex Honnold don't even use that protection, though that's very rare and incredibly dangerous. This is "aid climbing" with ascenders. It does have dangers of its own: protection points can fail, and she's wearing a helmet because rocks do fall.)
*edit - should have written jumaring
In this specific case I'm pretty sure that the two adults took the leads and the girl followed jumaring behind.
I'm still impressed, even with ascending devices. For being 10 years old, that shows a lot of patience and deliberation.
And it is legal to have a 10 year old as a passenger in a car which is what happened in this case on the climb.
It's more because it's El Capitan. It's a special place. I get why climbers feel attracted to it but it's more important that it be protected than people, in ever increasing numbers, get the pleasure of climbing it. Look at what's happening at Everest. The feat's been accomplished, no need for everyone else to do it too.
The majority of the routes are not bolted (see the breakdown of climb by type on this page): https://www.mountainproject.com/area/105833388/yosemite-vall...
They climbed The Nose, which seems to be a mix of trad (traditional, no fixed holds) and aid (placing temporary protection, then using gear to climb up to the protection, then placing protection, etc.) climbing - more on the different types of climbing here: http://www.alpineinstitute.com/articles/expert-tips/rock-cli....
More on The Nose route: https://www.mountainproject.com/route/105924807/the-nose
More detailed look: http://www.supertopo.com/topos/yosemite/thenose.pdf
You can see in the map of the route that some belay stations are bolted, and in fact the original ascent did use bolts - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nose_(El_Capitan).
> If it's dangerous it should be unlawful
The mountains, the oceans, and the deserts seem to be the last refuges of freedom. I hope that doesn't change.
It looks like she led the first pitch of 5.7 free climbing and an A0 (easy aid climbing) bolt ladder. She otherwise followed and cleaned/removed gear for her father and a family friend in the party, who appear to be experienced. They planned for 4 days, but completed in 5. My understanding is this is a standard pace for amateurs and they were even outpacing other parties. The primary difficulties for a kid, besides the technical climbing, are maintaining focus for 5 days on the wall 1000s of feet up and sleeping on a small ledge, and carrying a large amount of heavy gear, relative to bodyweight.
[0] http://www.alpinist.com/doc/web19s/newswire-10-year-old-sela...
I'm really shocked at how most parents want the safest environment possible for their child so they don't even get any challenge in their everyday life. I saw children with helmets walking in the street. I got snarky comments from people when I said I was hiking in the woods with my kids. ("This is irresponsible: what would happen if you got lost with your kids").
I want my kids to try things even if they might be dangerous from time to time. There is nothing great about living an ultra safe dull life.
At the time of replying (21 minutes after this post) there have been absolutely none of those on here. Literally zero. The one post asking if there's a minimum age doesn't even do that.
I don't think it is particularly constructive to assume people will post a certain way then brag that you "[came] here to watch [it]." Further it isn't constructive to preemptively stereotype anyone who would make such a post ("American helicopter parent").
I'd politely suggest you review the "In Comments" guidelines:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The first line applies here.
On a more philosophical level, Nietzsche made the argument that the inevitable background suffering of life did not justify a humdrum existence.