UKH

Just seen that Lost Earth have been taking clients abseiling and climbing at a soaking wet Stanage, customers in full waterproofs type of wet!!

I get that companies like Lost Earth are in desperate need of income right now but this strikes me as incredibly irresponsible with no knowledge of just how quickly grit can get destroyed when wet.

Maybe I'm being overly zealous! Anyone else have thoughts on this? Companies unwilling to let customers down is the most likely excuse.

Do you mean the pictures on their Facebook page - I think its one of the -ology routes isn't it? 

I don't think doing a vdiff in the rain is going to make that much difference to it. Yeah, bouldering on damp grit isn't a good thing because of the wear on repeatedly used small holds for both hands and feet, but I'd be surprised if grit really "gets destroyed" quickly when wet, consider how much wet gritstone I walk over and ride my mountain bike over. 

I would think shear force would be the most damaging, which is not present in your examples.

Edit: or present to a much lesser degree.

Why do you feel the need to name the company?

All the outdoor businesses I know would be out working in the rain today given the chance. Most would also be as careful as possible regarding their environmental impact. Just as hopefully most other climbers would. 

Whilst running the session the instructor was likely/hopefully aware of wear & tear issues and acting in the best way possible, while still operating a good fun and safe session. Were they in a regular 'top-roping' area for example? And have rope protectors in place?

Most outdoor instructors haven't worked since March and all are taking a significant financial hit. Some of these instructors and businesses may not make it through the coming months. Remember, winter is a slow time for many, so without a reasonable income during the summer months it'll be a 12 month winter.

Surely the question is whether the venue and activity were appropriate rather than any suggestion that they shouldn't have been out at all.

I don't have a strong opinion either way because, although I'm aware of the warnings about climbing on wet grit and don't do it myself, I don't actually know how damaging it is.

Sorry Toby but that is very wrong in my opinion. You can't keep footware clean in the rain and best case that means a good deal of polish. For gritstone in-extremis the surface can go and once the softer matrix is exposed erosion can quickly accelerate, as it has on Burbage south boulders pock-marks through over-brushing, Newstones footholds through climbing when damp, and on Birchen breaks through dogging on weighted cams.  Grit should not be used for inexperienced top roping in the rain.

As for feet and bikes. Some grit paving has cm dips from heavy use on popular peak paths and the feet are not pushing away the edge of a good hold as they would on steep rock, except on the paving edge.  Damage from bikes looks to me easily more than twice as bad at Wharncliffe in my recent trips compared to foot and mouth time.

Which came first, and when: the notion that you shouldn't climb on grit in the wet; or the notion that summer is not the best time to climb on gritstone? They both seem to be fairly recent attitudes.

Two completely different arguments. 

Don't climb on grit when it's wet as it erodes the rock

Not the best rock type in the summer as it's friction reliant.

You need to update your training.

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/uk-summer-how-to-go-climbing-in-the-rain

Considering the rest of your post, I ask “why not?” 

Yeah erosion isn't new but views on conservation have changed. The majority of polish on Stanage lower grade lines pretty much dates from nailed boots aside from the popular top rope areas. The breaks at Birchen and orange patches on popular boulders mean we need to do something soon if we want the rock to last. The BMC is documenting and exploring solutions .... and now clearly saying don't climb on wet grit. Frankly careful pairs cleaning shoes before the start of the route will be doing much less damage than someone flailing in trainers on a TR.

Yes absolutely, and if not appropriate they shouldn't have been there. But we don't know the details of the group, their aspirations and expectations, or what routes they were climbing. So we can't fairly comment on the appropriateness.

We clearly can now the BMC input into Mountain Training is don't climb on wet grit or sandstone. 

I've just been contacted by Lost Earth in response to my comment.

According to them, other outfits and the BMC it is allowed to take clients on easy routes in the rain at Stanage.

They are aware of the BMC statement above but apparently the BMC have said they are allowed to take people out in the rain and even run learn to trad courses.

I wondered that too - it could be that he doesn't think it's fair for 'one company in particular' to be singled out in the OP for (what he sees as) unwarranted criticism?

And at what standard of climbing is the friction aspect so crucial that a summer attempt would be unfeasible ? 

An interesting and useful article, thanks. Not sure how it helps in this case as dry Peak limestone will be too steep for a beginner group (assuming it was beginners) and the tougher volcanic rocks are in short supply in that area. So it's Grit or cancel the trip. It may normally be the case they would have rescheduled, but during such quiet times I think a bit of leeway is in order.

I guess that depends on the climber in general?

For me with very sweaty skin VS is the limit! for someone who doesn't have such sweaty fingers (and probably alot more talent) as hard as they fancy.

The 2 arguments are so far apart thought it's not worth debating.. 

Wet Gritstone is easily damaged, we know this.

Climbing gritstone in the summer is possible just lacks the stickiness of colder conditions.

100% agree that isn't much else in the Peak for easy routes, easy access and easy to set up ropes etc.

But this was bad, the customer was in full waterproofs, hood up. weather was howling. If she was that keen to climb they should've rescheduled.

Yes that's more or less it. I don't know the company or its instructors, and have never worked for them. But it does seem a shame to single them out.

Yeh that does sound like a pretty rough weather day. It may have been the customer only had today as an option, we don't know. Just one customer?

I'm not trying to say this session was ideal or best practice. Simply that many are feeling under additional stress to try and make ends meet. If the customer was happy to continue with the session, it seems reasonable (to me) to continue. I can see this is not a commonly shared view on here. Fair enough.

On grit you can ferret in gritstone clefts and tunnels or abseil off nearby viaducts or go on walks, or organise map reading searches, or look and learn  nature, or orienteereer or go caving... the most popular group routes on grit dry in less than an hour in summer in any case. These days with high resolution rainfall radar it's never been easier to plan group activities.

Grit is really easily eroded, especially when wet, especially with inexperienced climbers who generally have poor footwork and aren't great about cleaning their boots.

We have to be very careful with arguments about economic need:

If we accept the rock shouldn't be cared for because there is economic need then we start to lose arguments for preserving many thing that make the outdoors special: why not 4x4 safaris up Stanage? why not trail bikes and a burger van on top? there is an economic case for this stuff despite it trashing the place and pissing people off that we should resist.  Climbing instructors (and climbers general) are not a special case and we do need to protect the environment as part of our remit to keep our access.

I see no justification for group abseils at Stanage - there's plenty of much better venues.  As for climbing in the wet, much of that comes down to the quality and care of the instructors but if they are choosing Stanage for group abseils then you might question the care they are taking.

Just because something is easy for harder climbers doesn't mean it can't be ruined for others. Just because it isn't specifically ruled out by the BMC doesn't make it a good idea or a good choice of venue. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Very well put,

Thumbs up 

Definitely what I was trying to say not just bash a company.

Exactly the same argument exists for Southern Sandstone where I've seen so called instructors taking groups out in wet conditions long before Covid 19 was with us. Both grit and SS are sandstone and it is, or should, be well known that rain weakens sandstone which can lead to in the worst cases holds actually breaking, or at least increases wear and erosion.

I agree with  duchessofmalfi that whilst the pandemic has been devastating for climbing instructors, and I know it's mighty tough on them but the economic argument on their financial losses should not be used as an excuse for trashing the rock. Instructors should be setting an example. 

So yes, I think the OP naming and shaming the company concerned is entirely justified. since the easing of lockdown, it doesn't, and hasn't been raining every day, so like any other weather dependant business eg farming, hot air ballooning, they should incorporate adverse weather conditions into their business plan, and maybe diversify by offering other related outdoor courses like navigation, mountain leadership etc. There are also venues where abseiling can be carried out without trashing the rock, or go and climb on rock types which are not at risk from the wet?

From the pictures I saw it was one or two people, don't think that really counts as a group abseil. I'm not saying it's a great thing, but I also don't think that one person climbing Sociology (S 4a), or whichever one it is, on a rainy day it really a huge issue. And there was something about the original post, with the name of a certain company, where it seemed like there might be some backstory we aren't privy to. I have no idea who the OP is, just like I had never heard of the named company before. But the OP says he's got nothing against that company, so fair enough, I'm happy to take him at his word.

I'd also add that the above-linked BMC advice will be aimed at existing climbers, who on the whole will be pulling considerably harder than novices and who, more crucially, are far less likely to be on routes they know for certain to have no potentially friable flakes or snappy footholds. I'd say that if a reasonable and appropriate wet-weather grit route was chosen, and clients were instructed well in cleaning their footwear well before starting, I can see little in the way of damage that could be expected over and above what would occur in dry conditions.

I'm sorry I cant agree with that. Regardless of if they where told to clean their boots there will be residual grit on the sole, the footwork isn't going to be spot on so lots of scrabbling.

In the dry there is a better chance of cleaning the shoes, the hands holds will feel more positive so less scrabbling.

Night and day really. Theres enough people who wear their rock shoes all day at stanage and tread grit all over the not so shagged routes. Should encourage good practice from the start and not climb on fragile rock in the wet.

What right have the BMC to say what is allowed on rock or not? 

I don't agree with climbing vulnerable/classic routes when they are wet. The BMC can give advice and recommendations if they wish, but they do not have jurisdiction over rock. (Unless they own it of course)

Sounds like the only thing you don't agree with is the possibility of cleaning shoes of grit in the wet before starting. In which case we'll have to agree to differ. I know for a fact that, were I to be instructing clients and keen to make sure their shoes were free of grit before starting, they would be free of grit before starting.

Even in the pouring rain? When they're probably wearing walking boots with deep lugs?

My argument is they shouldn't even be considering climbing on the grit in the rain to start with.

I'm left wondering , if millstone grit is so vulnerable to friction damage, why was it the stone of choice to make millstones? 

If they were with me they would be wearing rock shoes, and they would be well cleaned before starting. I'm struggling to see why you would have such preconceived notions as to make that sound unreasonable.

Not that I take clients out on grit nowadays, but I'm completely certain it's possible to do so responsibly.

Of course we as users of these special places should try our best to care for them. We all need to protect the environment, I totally agree. We can do all this and still climb in the rain, with care. We need to choose routes more carefully and ensure footwear is kept as clean as possible.

I have had a look at the fb post o this 'group'. I only saw 1 client, although it makes out there were 2, but hardly a 'group abseil'.

Stanage is on CROW land: Open access land, designated under the Countryside & Rights of Way Act (2000) give area access rather than linear access as provided by public rights of way. It also gives a legal right of access specifically for climbing, as well as walking and other quiet recreation on foot. Not for 4x4 safaris, trail bikes, or burger vans at the top, which is many miles away from top roping on a rainy day!!

Stanage as a venue on a wet day - seems like a poor choice of venue to me as it is so exposed, I'd certainly be aiming to avoid it. The instructor, for whatever reason, may not have had much choice in the matter. It isn't my place to make excuses or justifications, am just seeing it from that side.

Well by the sounds of it you're an exception to the instructing rule.

Majority seem to favor the rain, dirty boots and group abseils.

I'm not debating with your personal group ethics as I've already stated.

I'm struggling to understand why you think it's acceptable to take clients on dripping wet rock which is known to get damaged when wet?

Really?

I'm not an instructor but I thought we'd sacrificed Yarncliffe for this sort of thing. 

Such a pleasant walk in

You tend not to mill grain when the millstones are soaking wet...

Exactly. Straight in the van, heaters on, happy days. 

.. no, and even when dry our grindstones apprently wore too much so that the product wasn't fit for human consumption. I learnt that 3 minutes ago. Another addition to my UKC knowledge file.

People's attitudes about climbing on wet rock don't really worry me. Ultimately if they're overly  concerned about it all they'll give the crag a chance and climb barefoot, as I hinted at in another thread.

Just dont climb on wet gritstone??

Why is that so hard for you to understand? It's a finite resource and if your selfish needs to climb on it when it's in a vulnerable state ruin it for everyone then will you care??

Barefoot/with boots it doesn't matter, go back another day.

I won't be climbing on it any more, wet or dry.

But I don't feel remotely guilty about all the fantastic days I've had climbing on grit in the wet . Make of that what you will.

That sounds like you understand perfectly well why I think it can be acceptable, but that you're choosing to ignore the fact that it can be and is possible - with sufficient care in route choice and client management - in order to adopt a convenient one-size-fits-all rule.

I would have no problem at all in calling out actual bad practice when there is sufficient reason to believe that actual damage is being caused, but calling out folks who may be being very responsible simply because they're in a visually similar position sounds to me like the definition of prejudice.

When I used to live on the western tip of Sheffield I often used to go running around the Burbage valley.  I was amazed at how often groups (usually looking like commercial ones) were out no matter how foul the weather was.

I may be biased as an instructor, but the photos of this really don't look that bad. Two clients on a damp day is hardly the end of the world. It's clearly stopped raining enough that the waterproofs are off for some of the photos too. 

I don't think this sort of behaviour causes any more damage than someone on a dry day, hang-dogging every placement, on a route thats too hard for them. But that would be acceptable? 

Absolutely companies don't want to let clients down! Unfortunately we can't predict the weather when we take bookings, and if someone really wants to go climbing you can't try and sell them a day of map reading as someone suggested. You make do with what you can do on the day. 

From the Facebook post I saw it sounded like the client had a great time despite the rain, so good on that instructor for facilitating that in less than ideal conditions. 

They / we don't.

I don't work in the Peak, so have never really had to consider the issue in a work sense, but the above statement is a little silly.

You can be sure none of the instructors wanted to be out 'climbing' or abseiling in those conditions.

But when you have a group of 12 young people who have booked a certain day for their activity, almost every company is going to try and make it happen. I don't know if you've ever worked with schools/youth organisations but the logistics and paperwork involved with these things can be vast.

Getting everyone to the right place at the right time, minibus hire, specific risk assessment, correct staffing ratios with staff 'borrowed' from other departments, etc. Like turning an oil tanker around, once 'abseiling day' is booked, it's going to happen (almost) regardless of the weather. 

The fact that the rock is black because it's so wet suggests to me that climbing on it is a bad idea.

At the end of the day it does against BMC advice to protect the rock so regardless of how good a day the client had the instructor was totally in the wrong.

Hang on, you can't use such polarised language regarding a set of guidelines from a voluntary membership organisation. 

I put it to you, that bouldering causes more erosion on peak grit than all the instructed groups combined (wet or dry).

You have that backwards Tom.

Millstones are made soft matrix rock because that rock is so easy to work. The chemistry rebuilds the hard surface layer once shaped.

You mean sensible route choice like the fact Castle Chimney next door will be partly dry  and more sheltered from the weather and on a wet day a Mod will feel like the planned client choice of a VD?

Your right but playing the game of two wrongs doesn't help. The BMC provide conservation advice not a police force.

But yet during lockdown when the BMC said don't go climbing we all listened to their advice??

Any activity on Grit will ultimately shorten its lifespan. Limiting the damage by being sensible (don't climb on it when wet, clean shoes, bla bla) will help protect it for others to enjoy.

My experience of working with gritstone and sandstone is that there is a wide range of structures , as there is with granite, varying from the type you can rub layers off with a gloved thumb to stuff which tales a couple of blows from a mason's hammer before you've even made a mark. 

I'm not sure why millstone grit was chosen to make millstones, but it was not the best choice if the end product was so full of stone that it was only fit for animal feed.

A sweep of hard gritstone slab on which you can place your foot anywhere (and where force is spread over a larger surface area) is under far less strain than, say, a boulder problem or technical rock climb, where each ascent will rely on exerting force on the same couple of square centimetres of rock.

Also, gritstone is not a universally hard or soft rock. Lower Wharfedale and Nidderdale have quite soft grit. The Aire valley's grit is ultra hard.

I would avoid doing anything at all on Nidderdale grit in the wet, but the idea that any significant rock damage is going to be caused on very hard grit by a few groups top roping a wet scramble is hysterical.

Millstones were made from Millstone Grit precisely because the matrix is hard, redeposited silica, unlike other sandstones where the matrix is soft, usually some iron compounds,

Chris

Because they were relatively easy to shape. The reason there are so many abandoned is the shift to white flour made it pretty damn obvious how many bits are in there.

I read on the history and the ease of shaping was very specific from the men that did it. You've always argued here that the grit matrix is harder than it is clearly evidenced to be.

"Take an adventure beyond the beaten path" 

In my experience millstone grit is not easier to shape than most types of sandstone, though there are different grades of each.  If ease of working the stone was my priority I wouldn't go to High Neb as a source when there are so many places in South Yorkshire where you can find softer more  workable sandstone.

I wouldn't solo Sociology in the wet so either I must be shit beyond belief as a climber and editor on scrambles or your statement is the hysterical one. The issue of what exactly gets damaged and by how much is separate from the advice not to do it.

The ease of shaping need seems to be contradicted by the requirement that the stones should ideally  be hard enough to maintain their cutting and grinding ability from the edges that were dressed into them. 

I've no idea what the relevance of your post is. The discussion here seems to be entirely focused on whether damage is done to the rock. Surely that's why you're also arguing the toss over the geology?

Your post suggests that the BMC's advice is centred around the risk of there being an accident, which isn't what the "what to do on a wet day" article linked above suggests at all.

No it doesn't. I was challenging your dumb labelling of delicate polished severes as scrambles.

This is great- If I book a course with Lost Earth I am going to have a great day out regardless of the weather. Hurrah!!!!!

I am sure that the instructors have considered the route choice and modified it according to the conditions. Great that they have a wet weather plan. Fab.

You leave them to 'weather' and over time the surface chemistry will mean they can be as hard as you want... just like the quarry surfaces. The historical record seems to indicate they didn't need to be so hard. Read up on it, it's interesting.

And yet, I did no such thing. I'm not talking specifically about the example given in the OP - the thread seems to have travelled in the direction of a general discussion. This much is clear in that I referenced the grit quality in different parts of Yorkshire. In fact, I've just searched the thread for "Sociology" and I can't see any confirmation that the people mentioned in the OP were on Sociology, let alone soloing it.

In your quest for outrage you've made some assumptions. Time to step away from the internet for the rest of the morning, I think.

I have been doing. They need to be hard enough to maintain the cutting edges - furrows and scratching- without wearing out too quickly. Softer sandstone types would be easier to shape and easier to dress the furrows into but their softness would mean that more maintenace in the form of redressing would be required.

I've actually just checked. The photo is actually of Physiology (VD), about two foot left and one grade easier than Sociology (S 4a).

Sociology is the only name checked route on the thread but that's irrelevant as the other two 'ologies (VD) are no push over either in the wet and are also not scrambles when dry. In contrast, in certain weather conditions the lower 2/3rds of the mod chimney almost next door is one of the best routes on Stanage for a partly wet day: it is a top end scramble. Stanage is also one of the less good venues on such days.

As I've already said I'm not so concerned myself if climbers are climbing wet routes with good style (the core issue is erosion) but my own reluctance of my ability to do this, knowing the routes very well, means those climbers probably need to be a good bit more skilled than I am. Unsurprisingly, my experience of most outside groups on grit on wet days is sadly not good... climbers on something too hard for them with too little attention to avoid scrabbling about with dirty shoes. Given traffic on grit, once the surface has gone it's not going to recover without treatment (that's been used for a while now on damaged boulder problems).

The BMC provide generic conservation advice not to take groups on wet grit routes, so in my view, especially given they are unlikely to be climbing in good style, the companies involved are fair game for being called out on this.

So just maybe your the one who needs to think on your posts with your unhelpful accusations of hysteria.

That all depends on what they were used for... gritstone was mainly used for milling barley and did wear quickly. It's still a fact that fresh quarried gritstone surfaces are way easier to work than weathered surfaces and any fresh exposed surfaces will begin to reform a harder surface layer (that we eventually climb on in the quarries). 

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

A lot of things recently have made me feel like I'm increasingly detached from the society I live in.

But I think someone complaining about doing outdoor activity in the rain, and getting more likes than dislikes is the final straw for me.

Honestly, being outside in the rain. Whatever will people think of next?

The conservation advice of specific routes on a specific type of rock was never anything to do with not enjoying a wet day out. The issue about poor practice on some wet rock (or dry) isn't theoretical, the damage is already there. Conservation efforts on Southern Sandstone for decades now, still being ignored. Rope grooves formed on popular Roaches TRs. A wonderful F6a problem at Burbage South boulders that became a trashed sandy F4 in just a few years. The state of the Bridestones. The top outs on the main Yarncliffe slab. The cam damage in Birchen breaks. I thought climbers believed in ' respect the rock' and 'leave no trace' ideals, not 'stuff the rock' and everyone who might have enjoyed it in the future.

It's not doing 'outdoor activities in the rain' I'm talking about. 

It's using a fragile rock, that gets more fragile in the rain, and taking customers who have no appreciation for the rock and trashing it.

You've totally missed the whole point of the thread. Maybe you don't care but others do.

If it's raining I'll go for a walk, get on the bike maybe go down a cave. Not get on the grit.

You are being somewhat presumptuous and I'd say unfair in claiming the customers have no appreciation for the rock. If they are out there on a damp day they probably love being outdoors in the first place. 

It's certainly not a client's fault. In fact sometimes just the opposite...when I've called out poor instruction in situ I've ended up with support from clients on a few occasions. The most annoying example was someone leading an award assessment, who I tried to take quietly aside for a word, but he was such an arse he insisted on having it out in front of his trainees. He had allowed a simulated rescue to be set on The Scoop on Castle Naze... a historical classic getting bashed by a metal stretcher and with the occasional lump of scree knocked down from the loose top. He said he had to let people make and learn from the consequences of their mistakes. I begged to differ as did quite a few of those he was instructing. Most instruction I see is good or excellent so it's a real shame when people let the qualifications down.

I've no problem with people abseiling in the rain, but why not take them somewhere a little less loved? I don't think it matters if they're abseiling from Stanage or Stannington Ruffs, but one of those will certainly invoke less ire from other outdoor users. Or at least abseil down a dirty line and give them a brush and nutkey to clean it up with

There are lots of other places people can abseil in the Peak other than on grit routes. It's amazing how so many 'favoured sites' end up as steep slabs with classics Extremes to an extent reliant on pebbles. Again I've been involved with 'discussions' with a group of students on Telli and my partner with an army group on the Barriers in Time slab. 

Because for millstones you want stone that is vulnerable to friction damage. 

To mill well you need good contact between the two milling surfaces.  The only way of creating that (in those days) was to grind the two surfaces against each other.  If you do that, they will wear so that the surfaces in contact will have near-perfect spherical profiles, and thus be in contact at all points.   (This was the same way that glass mirrors for telescopes were made.)

But that only works if the rock is soft enough to wear. If you tried making the millstones out of limestone, it would not wear, and the milling surfaces would just skate over 3 points of contact, and the grain would not be milled.

I thought there should be no actual contact between the milling surfaces.

And if your point is correct, why not use a softer sandstone which is freely available?

You want a thin, even layer of flour between the surfaces. But that will only be the case if the surfaces are exactly the same shape, and the way to achieve that is to grind them against each other.

I guess there are other considerations also, so you might go for a medium-soft rock rather than a soft-soft rock.

If you grind them against each other you will undo all the work put in by the mason who dressed the stone with its pattern of furrows, lands and scratchings. Unlike a mirror, a smooth polished surface is the last thing you want in a millstone.

I can see sense in grinding them together initially to get an even fit but after that you would have to dismantle the rig and have them dressed properly before starting production. Once production is underway the last thing you want is contact between the runner and the bedstone., I would have thought,

That’s interesting. What’s the exact process of the surface rehardening? (I couldn’t find it in the link)

Details pertinent to gritstones tend to be not easily found on open areas of the internet. Hence I ended up discussing this with some chemistry academics after my first UKC argument with Chris (when he appeared to deny the significance of a hard surface to gritstone, with a softer matrix beneath, counter to the masses of obvious physical evidence). They kindly sent me some geochemistry papers that since leaving work I've stupidly lost access to. Some related links you can see...

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

https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article-abstract/10/10/520/187...

Thanks! That’s really interesting. 
 

I suppose speed of the process (and whether it happens at all) will depend on the rock and environmental conditions, but do you have any ball-park figures for the timescale of case hardening on sedimentary rock, like grit? A life time? A century? A millennium?! 

I've never seen any data relating to gritstone but the rock seems to grey in decades and you can look when various quarries stopped.

not sure why this gets 3 likes- sounds like fake news to me. citation?

It's certainly not the way I've heard of stones being dressed. I can't find a reference to it either. 

You'd have to do it in situ in the mill, would that not be a risk of sparks?

 

maybe he meant this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quern-stone

That's the only thing I could think of. For the record I've just learned that there's a wealth of information on millstone dressing techniques on the internet. Much of it actually quite interesting...

I don't know about the initial dressing but stones were definitely redressed in the mill, sometimes by the miller and sometimes by itinerant masons.

But I would have thought that it was such a bind having to do it by disassembling the wheel mechanism that they would  want to keep the frequency of the process down to a minimum. If the stones were made of sandstone with too soft a compound they'd be doing it far too often so gritstone was chosen over softer sandstones because it lasted longer between dressings  and kept its edge better in the furrows and scratchings which did the actual milling of the grain.

yes, this thread also inspired me to look up millstone dressing youtube.com/watch?v=othUyF4f3Ww&

Are you perhaps speaking from the privileged position of living within a short drive of the rock? "Coming back another day" is not so easy if you live 4 hours away. Yes, I have climbed on wet rock on our scheduled club beginners weekends, and occasionally on other weekends when we've got the forecast wrong. Given a sheltered crag on a warm day it can even be enjoyable. I clean my shoes and take care not to scuff the rock. I'm willing to be proved wrong, but as others have said I don't think I'm causing more damage to the rock than those repeatedly falling onto gear placements, which I very seldom do, but which seems to be accepted practice.

Martin

1) the stone don't touch,

2) in a busy mill the stones would be refaced once a month - and presumably not be left out for the surface to reharden.

Chris

Having watched read quite a lot (corporate values training this afternoon...) I can't find any reference to millstones being ground to shape. Feels like it would be a pretty risky way of doing it and you'd still have to cut it by hand afterwards so I definitely think the Fake News (olds?) assessment was right.

Why do you think they shouldn't name them?

I think a bit along those lines when i read about someone"working" a route or problem for days on end: the cumulative amount of wear for the ultimate achievement of one single recorded ascent is out of proportion.

I'd certainly prefer not to live 4 hours away from my hobby, but there were other important life considerations - work, family etc.

Or are you suggesting I should get another hobby?

As it happens I think some of us who have to travel long distances to climb place a higher value on it when we do get away.

Martin

Because the OP is calling the named company / their instructor 'irresponsible'.

'this strikes me as incredibly irresponsible with no knowledge of just how quickly grit can get destroyed when wet.'

Climbing in the rain per se is not necessarily irresponsible and this has been discussed plenty already. But naming them as irresponsible seems poor form.

I don't see it as 'poor form.' Irrespective of any claimed rights or wrongs, it would be pointless (and indeed both cowardly and cryptic) to post about 'somebody' doing something ostensibly wrong, without also actually naming the party involved, if the party had indeed been identified. This is an open and public forum - any claims can be dealt with; anybody can defend themselves; any libellous claims can be sorted out in the courts if it comes to that.

You seem to have an agenda.

Well we'll just have to disagree, as I do see it as poor form.

Look at it another way. You're going about your daily work, whatever that may be, and a random person gives you / your company a slating on a public forum. How does that feel?

Certainly no agenda from me. Although I work in the same field so am seeing their side of it. Believe me I have nothing to gain from defending any of these actions. There is no reason for me to make a defence, so that's it from me.

Of course there are other considerations in choosing where to live.

My point was that “I drove a long way to be here” is a very poor argument for doing something which may be destructive but it’s one that climbers use a lot. In the county there is no doubt that even on low grade routes huge damage can be done by climbing them in the wet and you’d have had to come even further to get here.

Climbers use it as a justification for all sorts of behaviours that fly in the face of prevailing ethics (drytooling, bouldering on damp days in font etc.) and I think it’s pretty poor. 

Well I'd like to know they were talking about me, for starters.

I could then respond to them, or change my practice.

Exactly. So why not make direct contact with them so they have a chance to respond. Not everyone looks at ukc forums

I thought you'd gone but, since you're still here, I'll answer your question. If a random person gives either me or my company a slating on a public forum, then either:

1. If the comments are incorrect or libellous, I'd take action - and at the very least would expect a retraction.
2. If the comments are correct and reflect a mistake or malpractice on my part, I'd take the hit.

Either way, the bottom line is whether or not my own behaviour is correct or not.

What is the difference between naming an outdoor activities company which is trashing the environment, and naming any other company, in any other line of work, that does the same ?

Do you feel the same about naming a company if their oil well goes rogue due to lack of maintenance and destroys the ecosystem ?

In any such case, naming and shaming gives us - the consumers, who in the end actually pay the wages of these people - to chance to choose which companies are worth supporting, and which most definitely are not.

And another thing, why should those companies which ARE sensible and environmentally friendly be tarred with the same brush. If the culprits are not named, then people might wrongly believe that another company, which operates in the same location, may be guilty. This could lead to an innocent party losing out through no fault of their own.