Aldery Cliff Update

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

Just spent the day at Aldery Cliff. This was my first visit since the tree felling, bolting and subsequent removal of bolts.

Firstly let me state that the idiots who took it upon themselves to chop down and poison all the trees on the crag are just that - idiots. I can't imagine what they thought they were doing. The trees did way more than provide useful belays, they held the ledges together. Now the ledges are crumbling apart and there is a high risk of small-to-medium rock fall on most of the routes as the climber nears the top especially on the loose upper sections which used to be avoidable. 

Now that the bolts have also been removed the situation is almost the worst of both worlds. With the trees there no bolt belays were needed, now they are gone something needs to be done. The main abseil tree above Ash Tree Slab (HS 4a) has been chopped and poisoned and is now hollowing out. It has a few more years but it will rot away relatively quickly. The fixed belay above The Arete (E1 5a) is on a dead root which is also nearing the end of its life. The tree above the Surface Plate (HVS 5a) slab is alive and solid but needs a chain protector since it will soon be the only abseil point so is likely to see a lot more wear. There is a fixed belay on the tree above the right-hand side but it is set way too far back to be viable as an abseil. Walking down at this time of year is not an option just sticking to the climbing and abseiling has left me covered in nettlerash!

What a mess!

Alan

Thread discussing the incident from a couple of years ago -https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/rocktalk/bolts_at_aldery_cliff-660958

 mcdougal 21 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Aldery used to be one of my favourite crags. I haven't visited for two years and I can't bring myself to go back. So sad.

Post edited at 17:52
 duchessofmalfi 21 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Yep I must agree its a bloody mess and for no good reason. 

There are nuts to be had above The Arete but you have to hunt through the nettles. The dead root is is very dead and I doubt will be safe even this year. There was a substantial tree up and left and a decent stump would have worked for a long while but the idiot who did this trimmed the stump to ground level with a nice chamfer to prevent it being used.

A fixed rope / chain from a big tree down to this ledge would be handy until the natural anchors return (especially once nettle season picks up (about now)). There are reasonable and convenient anchors from the "via ferrata" at the top for a lot of routes (although I wish whoever did this had protected the trees when they did it)

It appears the only tree to escape poisoning is the one left of sycamore crack which is a shame because it's an absolute pain in the arse.

No bolts is not the worst of all worlds - there is absolutely no place for bolts on this crag.

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

> There are reasonable and convenient anchors from the "via ferrata" at the top for a lot of routes (although I wish whoever did this had protected the trees when they did it)

Not sure this is still there. We climbed on four sections today to have a look at all the belay and descent options and I never saw a fixed rope.

Alan

 Howard J 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I was there yesterday.  The "via ferrata" is still there, a cable runs alongside the stone wall from just left of Ash Tree Slab towards the left end of the crag (facing in).  It's to protect the walk-off, which is along a narrow and sometimes slippery path which runs very close to the edge in places.  At the left end a knotted rope is in place to get down the steep slope by the fence .   We had no problems walking off, most of my nettle attacks were on the routes themselves, usually around the top belay.

I agree with the rest of Alan's comments, what was once a delightful crag is now a shadow of its former self.  The only benefit has been opening up some of the overgrown upper sections, but that could have been done without trashing the rest of the crag.  Utterly senseless.

 toad 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Was an remedial work undertaken by the BMC or has it just left to its own devices to recover?

 Dave Garnett 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I agree with a lot of what you say, although walking down is always an option and there's a fixed rope down the descent path and a wire across the top from the middle of the crag to the top of the rope (unless it's been removed since last week.)

That said, I agree that some better, tree-friendly, abseil points need to be installed.  I think the via ferrata, if it's to stay, needs to be attached in a better way (not looped around the tree in a way that will inevitably eventually kill it).  

The rock around the poisoned stump on The Spider is particularly bad and we dislodged a house-brick sized block last week that bounced out from the crag and very nearly hit my car.

Last time I looked, there are still two of the rusty bolts in place on the belay ledge at the top of Hard Labour / Pig in the Middle.  

Post edited at 09:03
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> I agree with a lot of what you say, although walking down is always an option and there's a fixed rope down the descent path and a wire across the top from the middle of the crag to the top of the rope (unless it's been removed since last week.)

Yes we must have missed it. The speed of vegetation growth at this time of year means that things get covered up pretty quickly. It certainly wasn't obvious to us.

We abseiled off the root on Mitre Crack/The Arete area. Has anyone tried getting to the top here recently? It looked possible but didn't look like anyone had climbed it.

Alan

 Dave Garnett 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

> We abseiled off the root on Mitre Crack/The Arete area. Has anyone tried getting to the top here recently? It looked possible but didn't look like anyone had climbed it.

It's doable but moderately terrifying, especially when damp.  The top around Carmen / Carmen Mirander is also disintegrating and will need something to be done.

 Ben_Climber 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan,

Yes you can get to the top, I did it about a month ago.

Wouldn't recommend it though. Loose, no protection and fairly terrifying given the only pro to stop you if you come off is the root your belayer is attached to!

I did have to question why everything had been chopped. An abseil bolt or stump would have been appreciated.

Ben

 Rog Wilko 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I went a few weeks ago after a long break (must be a couple of decades) and was shocked by what was done. I was also unnerved by the top outs which used to be, but are no longer, at least partially protectable. There were several minor to middling rockfalls during the day. 

I think the damage is so irreversible and the likelihood of serious accidents so high that the BMC should place some bolt ab stations in the highest bits of sound rock. Despite there being warning notices about the risks I feel the BMC may be being negligent in some way as it owns the crag and is an organisation which promotes rock climbing. It is an obvious venue for rookie limestone/outdoor climbers, and personally I feel it's only a matter of time before there's a tragic accident.

4
 Dave Garnett 22 May 2019
In reply to duchessofmalfi:

> ... a decent stump would have worked for a long while but the idiot who did this trimmed the stump to ground level with a nice chamfer to prevent it being used.

Yes, it really does seem that way, doesn't it?

My recollection was that at the Peak Area meeting where this was discussed the Buxton MC agreed to figure out a pragmatic solution to the belay situation (ie chains where possible, bolts where there is no other sensible solution). 

Given the time that has now passed, I wonder whether they could perhaps do with a hand from the BMC to get this done and also, please, do something about the cable at the top strangling the tree it is looped around.  Maybe, if we had perhaps three or four strategically placed abseil points, we wouldn't need to have it at all.  

 Fruit 22 May 2019
In reply to Rog Wilko:

Sorry to those of you who want Climbing to be safe. It’s not supposed to be. It’s a pointlessly dangerous pass time. 

I don’t agree with doing damage to crags in any way, killing tree or bolting traditional climbing venues.

old fart? Probably, protecting our tradition of climbing involving both physical and mental challenges.

33
Removed User 22 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I'm not familiar with this crag so forgive me if I'm stating the obvious but has anyone planted any replacement trees or groundcover vegetation to hold the topsoil together?

 Rog Wilko 22 May 2019
In reply to Fruit:

Well, I guess I could compete with you on the old fart stakes!

I think you deliberately overstate what you see as my position on this. You seem to suggest that I'm someone who wants to turn every crag into an outdoor climbing wall, which no-one who knows me would accept. I wonder if you're familiar with the crag?

1
In reply to Removed User:

> I'm not familiar with this crag so forgive me if I'm stating the obvious but has anyone planted any replacement trees or groundcover vegetation to hold the topsoil together?

I don't think ground cover vegetation is going to be a problem but nettles and dandelions don't hold things together. I am sure something will grow back eventually but it will take years before there are substantial trees there again.

Alan

 Dave Garnett 23 May 2019
In reply to Fruit:

> Sorry to those of you who want Climbing to be safe. It’s not supposed to be. It’s a pointlessly dangerous pass time. 

Obviously climbing can't be made completely safe and is partly about risk management.  The problem here is that the crag has become pointlessly dangerous as a direct consequence of what has been done to it.  Previously the trees provided convenient belays and stabilised the top, but now they are gone and we're left with no belays and a disintegrating top-out.

There's also the issue of the BMC's liability as landowner and the environmental responsibility of protecting remaining vegetation and habitat at what is still quite a popular crag.

> I don’t agree with doing damage to crags in any way, killing tree or bolting traditional climbing venues.

I hear you and that was exactly my position.  No-one is proposing wholesale bolting of what everyone (I think) accepts is a traditional crag.  Reluctantly, I am now in favour of some carefully considered abseil and belay points, some of which might need to be bolted.  I'm also hoping that this might allow the removal of the cable across the top of the crag and make it look a bit less industrial. 

I'm especially conflicted about the bolting because my suspicion is that the necessity for this is exactly what the perpetrator of the damage was trying to engineer. 

Post edited at 08:53
In reply to Dave Garnett:

I forget what happened now; did the gentleman get (a) named and shamed or (b) prosecuted?

As to the crag itself, leaving it to nature would seem like the best option.

jcm

 Dave Garnett 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

(a) Not publicly, as far as I know.

(b) No, can't imagine he would be.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Surely at the very least he must have been expelled from the BMC and told not to trespass in any BMC crags in the future?

I don’t know why he wouldn’t have been prosecuted. If I hop over the wall of Lord Bollocks’ country estate and do this sort of stuff, wouldn’t I be prosecuted?

I don’t understand not naming people like this either. Why are they so cowardly? This behaviour needs discouraging in the strongest possible way and perpetrators being allowed not to face up to their actions doesn’t do that.

The impression I receive is that this gentleman was an insider of some kind. That might be wrong but that is the impression created.

jcm

1
 Howard J 23 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Prosecuted for what?  I am not a lawyer, but on the face of it this seems to pass the test for criminal damage.  However it would be difficult to show criminal intent - apparently this person was trying to make improvements to the crag - misguided, stupid even, but hardly criminal.

Besides, to prosecute would set a very dangerous precedent.  Climbers garden crags (sometimes including trimming and removing trees) and place bolts all the time.  How often do they obtain the landowner's consent?  This person went further than most, but if the BMC were to prosecute what message would that send to other landowners who might already be concerned about climbers on their land?

At the Area Meeting the impression I gained was that this person was known, and had been spoken to.  I hope he was given a severe bollocking.  However in the circumstances I am not in favour of "naming and shaming", which would only unleash a storm of online bullying.  We have been assured the matter has been dealt with.  Whether or not he is contributing to the remediation costs or work I cannot say.

Aldery Cliff is of some local importance because it is one of the few venues in the Peak which offers low-grade climbing on limestone.  "Leaving it to nature" will take decades, and in the meantime the upper part of the crag is hazardous and makes climbing on the lower section questionable. It is all very well to say that climbing is a dangerous pastime, but the BMC has responsibilities as the landowner.  

Buxton MC volunteered to carry out some preliminary work to safeguard the crag, but it now needs a proper programme of work to stabilise the upper section and provide adequate belays.  Obviously this has to be done sensitively and after proper consultation.  However if this were a newly-discovered crag, offering good-quality climbing but with a dubious upper section, I doubt this would be controversial.

1
 Dave Garnett 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I expect it's complicated.

 TobyA 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

My impression from what various people have said about the cliff is that the guy was very misguided rather than actively malicious in his intentions.

I've climbed there a couple of times since the 'work' was done and once before it was done. I don't remember finishing the routes I've done being particularly difficult. You want to wear long trousers due to the nettles, but I'm surprised Alan said in the first post they didn't find the 'via ferrata' cable by the fence above the cliff. It seemed easy enough to access last summer at about this time when I last went.

In reply to TobyA:

> .., but I'm surprised Alan said in the first post they didn't find the 'via ferrata' cable by the fence above the cliff. It seemed easy enough to access last summer at about this time when I last went.

I didn't know it was there, and didn't look for it, and the veg is pretty high and fresh up there at the moment so any paths along the top are vague at best. The other two guys at the crag also assumed abseiling was the way down since it always used to be. We did that, and it was fine, and I probably would have done it anyway since I hate walking down in tight rock shoes!

Alan

 danm 23 May 2019
In reply to Howard J:

The next BMC Peak area meeting is in a few weeks time (12 June) at the Maynard, Grindleford. It sounds like the ideal thing to do would be to bring this onto the agenda.

Alan - get any photos which show the current dangerous top outs?

In reply to danm:

> Alan - get any photos which show the current dangerous top outs?

Fraid not. Bit stupid really since I could have done a really good job with the flying camera I was using!

I'll see if I can get some before the next BMC meet.

Alan

 danm 23 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Yeah I figured you'd be flying that damn thing

 Rog Wilko 23 May 2019
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> I'm especially conflicted about the bolting because my suspicion is that the necessity for this is exactly what the perpetrator of the damage was trying to engineer. 

Now there's a cynical mind at work!

1
In reply to Rog Wilko:

> Now there's a cynical mind at work!

Not really. I think the same guy did put in all the bolts that were subsequently removed!

I couldn't help feeling at the time that removing them all was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction.

Alan

Post edited at 14:09
2
 John Gresty 23 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Abseiling wasn't 'always the way it used to be' Forty years ago it certainly wasn't, and it was a popular crag then. 

In some peoples timescale it's a recent development.

John

In reply to Howard J:

Criminal damage, obviously. I don’t know what you mean about criminal intent. It’s no defence to a charge of criminal damage to say that you thought the place looked nicer after what you’d done.

Possibly also various wildlife offences - I don’t know.

In a sense, and assuming the guy was a BMC member, anonymity is a side issue - obviously he needs to be thrown out and barred from BMC crags, and that can’t be done secretly. 

I actually can’t believe that even the BMC haven’t done this (assuming they haven’t). 

jcm

2
In reply to everyone:

Hi All,

Just a quick message to say that this will be on the agenda for the next BMC Peak Area Meeting, which takes place on 12th June, and will be followed by a very interesting talk by Tim Birch from Derbyshire Wildlife Trust, on the topic of Rewilding: a new approach for uplands.

In the meanwhile I've sent a message to Buxton Mountaineering Club for an update on where they're up to, and a similar message to the Rob Dyer (the BMC's Access Officier), which will mean that by the time of the meeting we'll have a full picture of what's been done so far and what further work is planned.

In the meanwhile please make any thoughts known on this thread, as we'll try and take all feedback on board during the discussion.

Post edited at 14:30
 Howard J 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

As I said, I'm not a lawyer.  I am under the impression that in order to prove a crime it is necessary to show some criminal intent, but I may be wrong.  In this case it appears that the perpetrator thought he was improving things, rather than believing it would cause harm. 

I gather (from the Area meeting when it was discussed) that he has been spoken to and understands he made a mistake and agreed to stop, and I find it difficult to see what would be achieved by taking legal action.  Furthermore, my point stands that we are on very dangerous ground if we start prosecuting climbers for their actions on and around crags.  For the BMC in particular to do this would send entirely the wrong message to other landowners.

1
 Howard J 23 May 2019
In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

As well as finding out what remedial works are planned, I would be interested to know whether the perpetrator will be contributing to this, either financially or with work (under close supervision I hope!).  Whilst I don't agree that he should be subjected to legal action, or indentified so he can defenestrated on social media, I would like to think he hasn't got away scot-free.

1
 danm 23 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

The report, which I wrote, explains why it was necessary to remove the bolts. It's attached within the BMC statement given at the time: https://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmc-position-statement-aldery-cliff

Howard J's  point regarding the message which taking action against the tree chopper would send out is exactly the one the land management group decided took precedence -  the bigger picture must be considered here.

I'm sure there will be a useful exchange of opinions on what to do about the crag at the next meeting.

In reply to Howard J:

I don’t know what you’re trying to say about intent. Obviously you don’t have to intend to commit a crime to be guilty of committing one.

The logic of not prosecuting people who criminally damage the BMC’s property seems to be that it might encourage other people to prosecute climbers who commit crimes and that that would be a bad thing. I’m not convinced that’s how our national body ought to be reasoning.

Rob, is this fellow a member, and if so, has he been thrown out? And if not, why not? Also, is it possible for the BMC to bar individuals from climbing on its crags, and if so, why hasn’t this been done?

jcm

4
 Howard J 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> I don’t know what you’re trying to say about intent. Obviously you don’t have to intend to commit a crime to be guilty of committing one.

I'm not sure that is entirely correct.  I've a feeling that a "guilty mind" as well as a "guilty act" is required to constitute a crime, but I repeat I'm not a lawyer.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_in_English_law

Here's an example: in the news recently it was reported that a model railway display had been smashed up. by vandals. The people who did it probably intended to break everything, so that would probably be criminal damage.  However if a visitor to the exhibition had decided to demonstrate his dance moves and had fallen over and smashed a display the result would be the same, but there would be no intent, so it would probably not be criminal.  At Aldery his intentions were, it seems, to improve the crag for climbers, rather than to damage it.  Misguided, but arguably not criminal.

> The logic of not prosecuting people who criminally damage the BMC’s property seems to be that it might encourage other people to prosecute climbers who commit crimes and that that would be a bad thing. I’m not convinced that’s how our national body ought to be reasoning.

Are you sure about that?  Is there really any material difference, except perhaps in terms of scale, between what this chap did at Aldery and "gardening" a route or placing bolts, which happens all the time.  How often do climbers obtain the landowner's consent before doing this?  If the BMC, of all organisations, were to stand up and say publicly that it thinks that this sort of action is criminal, other landowners with no sympathy for climbers would be justified in thinking the same, and acting accordingly.

1
 slab_happy 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> The logic of not prosecuting people who criminally damage the BMC’s property seems to be that it might encourage other people to prosecute climbers who commit crimes and that that would be a bad thing. I’m not convinced that’s how our national body ought to be reasoning.

I think the point is that it would be a rather bad idea to establish as a general principle (and as an official BMC stance) that removing vegetation or placing bolts anywhere without prior permission of the legal landowner constitutes criminal damage. 

 slab_happy 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

>  In a sense, and assuming the guy was a BMC member, anonymity is a side issue - obviously he needs to be thrown out and barred from BMC crags

I completely agree that this person's behaved appallingly, but establishing a precedent that particular individuals can be barred from "BMC crags" doesn't seem like the best idea.

Not to mention being impossible to enforce, unless all BMC crags are to be provided with 24-hour security guards who'll check everyone's identity before allowing them to climb.

Which, again, doesn't seem like the best idea.

3
 john arran 23 May 2019
In reply to Howard J:

A guilty mind might be necessary to establish that some criminal damage may have been caused intentionally rather than accidentally, but intention isn't itself required to establish criminality. A drunk driver who mows down a pedestrian on a crossing is almost certainly not intending to do so, but his/her actions may nonetheless be criminal.

In reply to slab_happy:

Why ever not? If the BMC chooses to ban morons with chainsaws, pots of poison, and dangerously unsuitable bolts from its crags, it strikes me as an excellent idea.

Juat because something can’t be enforced to the letter doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea.

jcm

3
In reply to Howard J:

FFS. You have to intend to commit damage. It doesn’t matter whether you think that is or ought to be legal, or whether you think the result improves things. This was obviously criminal damage and could have been prosecuted as such.

The BMC’s reasons for not prosecuting the fellow don’t impress me for a number of reasons. Number one is that climbers who cut down other people’s trees bloody well ought to be prosecuted and I don’t see the slightest problem with establishing such a precedent. Number two is that there’s a big difference between smashing up a crag which you know the owner maintains specifically for its members to climb on according to its notions, and removing vegetation on crags the owner has no use for. But at least these reasons make some kind of sense.

Allowing someone who is clearly a dangerous vandal to remain a member is another matter - if this fellow is a member. If I go and smash up my club hut, I imagine they’ll throw me out. Same should apply here.

jcm

Post edited at 20:37
6
 Dave Garnett 23 May 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> If I go and smash up my club hut, I imagine they’ll throw me out.

Maybe not if you mistakenly believe it's to be redeveloped.

 Rog Wilko 24 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I clearly wasn't au fait with the background! 

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Before I begin it's worth highlighting that these views are very much my own. Whilst I am indeed the Chair of the BMC Peak Area, I'm not the CEO; however, as with all BMC matters that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion and - as a member - a say. Whether or not I should voice these or remain impartial is another thing altogether, but here we go...

Firstly, I find it truly astounding that you are actively advocating that the BMC - the representative body for climbing, mountaineering, and hillwalking - should be the ones to lead the way in endorsing legal action against climbers for cleaning crags. Yes, Aldery is a mess, and it should have never, ever happened, but you'd be naive to think that this is by any means the greatest ecological crime that has been committed on British rock. I'm pretty sure that other landowners such as the National Trust, the RSPB, the Wildlife Trust, and Natural England would all have grounds for legal action if they went looking for it, but thankfully don't. Were the BMC to spearhead such a campaign, maybe they'd think twice? Thankfully this sort of toxic culture hasn't yet infiltrated our representative body, or the other charities, organisations and landowners throughout the British Isles. The day it does will be a very dark day indeed...

Secondly, as far as I'm aware the individual has been dealt with (and done so in no uncertain terms) by Rob Dyer, the BMC's Access Officer. It's understandable that people are angry, because I am too (as well as maddeningly confused about what on earth went through their mind?!), yet it confuses me that some people won't be satisfied unless they see a transcript of the conversation or a livestream of the individual in question walking naked through the streets of Stoney Middleton, whilst Dave Turnbull shouts 'shame' over and over again. I don't like what's happened, but I don't think any further retribution is going to help. 

Finally, as per my previous message, I've asked for an update from the Buxton Mountaineering Club (of whom I have the utmost faith and respect) and Rob Dyer (an individual whom I hold in high regard). At the meeting we will no doubt get a better picture of what's been done, what's planned, and where we go from here. 

Whilst I'm not suggesting we dismiss the past, I do think we should be constructive and move on.

 Luke90 24 May 2019
In reply to john arran:

> intention isn't itself required to establish criminality

I'm not a lawyer, and couldn't comment specifically on how relevant this guy's belief that he was improving the crag would be in a criminal damage case, but intent very often is relevant in criminal cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

People have argued both extremes in this thread. That legally only the actions/consequences ever matter and conversely that intent always matters. The truth, as far as I'm aware, is that the significance of intent varies from law to law.

 alam_kouh 25 May 2019
In reply to John Gresty:

Did all the guidebook routes then, and a few more. Nobody abseiled down, what’s the issue with walking back down?

 Darron 25 May 2019
In reply to alam_kouh:

Yes, can I also put in a plea for walking down in the, time honoured, errrrr...trad, way. As per climbers for donkey’s years.

 neilh 26 May 2019
In reply to alam_kouh:

A part of the top path has collapsed and it is now protected by steel cables which you clip into. 

Without the steel cables it would be well dodgy.  But not impossible. No doubt as climbers we would find another way  

Apart from that it’s just an unpleasant walk off. But in all honesty no different from alot of Peak trad limestone crags.

if I was a beginner it would be terrifying.  

1
 Offwidth 26 May 2019
In reply to neilh:

Beginners currently have no place at all at Aldery in my view and pretty much any climber needs to be careful there now. It was always a dubious as a beginners venue... one factor a lot of people seem to have forgotten (but is in Dan's BMC report) is some of the tree root systems were peeling off surface layers of limestone near the top of some climbs. In other areas root generated looseness was more blocky. Quite a few volunteers did a lot of work there in the years before the publication of Limestone North, with BMC permission, to keep the latest, new, loose rock clear. They and others kept the routes clear of vegetation that greatly enjoys south facing cracked slab.

As crag co-author I always felt the attitude presented by some ultra traditionalists on UKC, that all routes should be topped out, was plain daft and sometimes dangerous. It was a choice some made and that was OK for them (but I'd have loved to see them try that on the route left of the cave). Like the 'ultras' I have climbed all the other top outs (at least once). The routes, as we described them on publication of the BMC guide, were a bit adventurous at times but mostly lovely; but I never saw why most climbers would then want to spoil their day by climbing the vegetated choss necessary to top-out on most routes, risking their second if anything loose came off in the process. On some central routes there is a tottering block tower that could have appalling consequencies if it collapsed with in situ-climbers. Where such top-outs were horrible, BMC volunteers replaced the usual collections of abseil tat, often manky, with new black static rope for lower offs, that the ultra traditionalists got rid of within months.

This sad tale is what can happen when a small number of climbers on both sides of a bitter argument seem to be incapable of the sensible compromise, that as discussed at the Area Meeting, and that the vast majority of climbers who enjoyed the crag, seemed to want.

1
 Rog Wilko 26 May 2019
In reply to alam_kouh:

The problem isn't walking down - it's getting to the top where the decent rock gives way to dangerous rubbish.

 Fruit 27 May 2019
In reply to Rog Wilko:

Yes I am very familiar with the crag.

 John Gresty 28 May 2019
In reply to Offwidth:

Steve.

I did enjoy being called an 'ultra traditionalist', made my day that has, but it's not basically correct. I just dislike people making sweeping statements of fact that are only correct within the timescale of their own personal experience. 

I will confess that the last time I climbed at Aldery I did use all the lower offs but basically because I was with my wife who does climb but is an efficient belayer, thereby enabling me to lead on trad gear and then be lowered off to strip the gear.

John Gresty

 Offwidth 28 May 2019
In reply to John Gresty:

I wasn't referring to you at all. I'm fully aware the crag has changed a lot in 40 years as I climbed there with climbers who were active then and earlier. The trees created a lot of that change (ie choss). If you think it was OK to lower off in the condition the crag was in when the new guide was published, at the top of what most users regard as the climb, and not have to climb a second pitch of choss to gain the top (and the walk-off) you are simply not an 'ultra'. I'd be very saddened if you were the person who removed the brand new black static abseil tat we placed with BMC permission (or if you support such behaviour).

In reply to Alam_koth

I'd be interested to hear how you climbed Sword and Stone. The newly described different  finish allows an escape down to the right to an abseil (or a less lethal upward exit than the old version of the climb left the leader with). We used static rope dropped from above to form a hanging belay... the give from all the vegetation when weighted led to an exciting drop for the climber and quite a bit of loose rock followed.... I won't be doing that again.

Post edited at 15:36
 John Gresty 28 May 2019
In reply to Offwidth:

Steve

Not me, I've never interfered with any fixed lower offs on any crag. Sometime used them, often ignored them, but removed, never. In it's current state Alderly probably needs some form of lower offs but at a lot crags they seem to me to added for convenience only. 

One problem with this crag is that there has always seemed to be 'folks' modifying the landscape. Remember the tree at the bottom of Broken Toe, someone felled it but left a nice stump in impale oneself upon if you slid off the bottom of the slab, later the stump was removed, but should the tree have been chopped down in the first place.

John

 Offwidth 28 May 2019
In reply to John Gresty:

Good for you John (as I expected).

I don't know the history of the bottom tree but leaving stumps isn't a good idea (but it wasn't the first time... I remember the stump under The Brush Off). Some of the upper trees were the ones doing the key damage at Aldery and sad though that was I supported the BMC action in removing those. 


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...