UKC

NEWS: BMC Peak Area Meeting - A Quick Sketch

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 UKC News 11 Jun 2009
[Henry Folkard, 3 kb]The Winking Man - Country Pub and Nightclub. The entrance to the car park was guarded by a St.George Cross and Union Jack flags. Was this a British National Party meeting? No, a BMC Peak Area Meeting.

Mick Ryan reports.

Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=47879

 Tom Briggs 11 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News:

"There is concern that several Peak limestone crags are suffering from neglect; they are out of vogue, not in fashion."

It would be nice if Central Buttress was clean, or Nettle Buttress, or even if there was some way of lowering off White Bait or Pirahna at Rubicon? But there is little interest, nor will to climb these routes. And I don't think it's got that much to do with how clean (or not) they are. There were 2 teams climbing on High Tor last Bank Holiday Saturday. The finest sheet of limestone in the Peak District, on a perfect (not too hot) day. A full range of grades, and it doesn't suffer from vegetation. What does that tell you?
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

I drove past Horseshoe a week last Sunday on the way home from having Ramshaw to ourselves all day - at a guess there were 50 cars parked at the quarry. That tells you the same thing!

Chris
 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

I'd like to correct Mick on one point which he raises, but a little too casually, and that is with regard to the replacement of fixed gear. This is an entire subjest in its own right and took up a fair amount of the discussion last night. Although I'm really pleased to see Area Meetings given some limelight, Mick's write up makes light of this particular issue. The consensus last night was simply that those present in the room, some 40 people, would do their best to visit Central Buttress (and other out of vogue crags) before the next meeting on Sept 2nd, and report back with their findings to the UKC logbook for the crag, and this thread on UKBouldering: http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,9392.0.html. No action was to be taken on Central Buttress prior to the next meeting where John Fulwood (John moderates the CB UKC logbook and is active on UKBouldering, and proposed the idea in the first place) will summarise the findings.

If those findings are that some fixed gear may need replacing with bolts, it will be discussed at the meeting. Seemed like a fairly democratic solution I thought.

Tom, in answer to your question 'what does that tell you', one of the subjects that was raised at the meeting was that more publicity about Peak Limestone crags may help raise their profile. After the meeting I even heard talk of persuading Al Lee to produce a film on limestone instead of gritstone for a change! There was plenty more said. I am sure it'll get raised in this thread.

Thanks for raising it Mick.
MattH
 AJM 11 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News:

The comments about grid bolting at cheddar etc - micks opinion added into the report or something mentioned at the meeting? I assume the former since micks only opinion of cheddar is that the regeneration project has been wrong because he thinks some of the routes are grid bolted... I don't know which and whether he means new routes or retroed ones, but it would be a shame if this stopped people from learning from the things projects like these have got right...

AJM
 Chris the Tall 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:
John (Boy) also pointed out that the UKC logbook for the crag told a sorry tale, and he's not wrong

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=154

In fact it looks like he's the only visitor this century !

OK a lot of people operating a that level won't use the logbook system, but nonetheless
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall:

It isn't a bad crag, I climbed quite a lot there way back, the best of the routes are good. But it is north facing, totally neglected and pretty loose in places.


Chris
 Michael Ryan 11 Jun 2009
In reply to AJM:

Various people have raised concern about grid bolting at various UK sport areas.

Grid bolting is where bolt routes are that close together that they lose their independence - you can often, or nearly clip another routes bolts from an adjacent route, sometimes adjacent routes share many holds. Link-ups are then added linking the routes - they are named and credited.

Is this wrong? For some it spoils the aesthetics of a route if one route is right next to another. Some see a wall peppered with bolts and covered in chalk unsightly - this can be a bigger problem where a crag is in public view.

At some popular grid-bolted areas there is a danger that one climber can fall onto another - yes examples have been cited.

The cause of grid-bolting? Virgin rock is a limited resource in the UK. Some climbers are very keen new routers and they want to make their mark in the guidebook - quite often one they are writing themselves.

Mick
 Michael Ryan 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH:
> (In reply to Tom Briggs - Jagged Globe)
>
> I'd like to correct Mick on one point which he raises, but a little too casually, and that is with regard to the replacement of fixed gear.

That's in your opinion Matt. I purposely avoided going into detail.

Some could say that I should have emphasised many of Henry's access announcements....they have far wider implications for more climbers.

Anyway, I'm sure you will go into detail in your Peak Area Newsletter and at the BMC website.

Or perhaps on here.

Mick
 AJM 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

That doesn't answer the questionof whether it was raised in the meeting or not?

A lot of the newer sport routes are not retrobolts. Therefore you can criticize this grid boltingat cheddar if you want but please make it clear it has little to do with the regeneration project itself. As far as I know the man responsible for most of the new routes at cheddar at least is not authoring a guide. As for the retrobolts, does that not imply the fault is with the orignal trad routes...?
 Tom Briggs 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH:

> Tom, in answer to your question 'what does that tell you', one of the subjects that was raised at the meeting was that more publicity about Peak Limestone crags may help raise their profile.

You're not serious? Ever heard of David Simmonite? Or Paul Harrison? Even I've been photographed by Alex climbing some 'classics' at Stoney. Peak Limestone has had more than it's fair share of features in the mags. It's got nowt to do with lack of publicity and more to do with lack of solid rock.

 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

Perhaps I don;t pay enough attention to the mags, but I went out last week to climb Froth at Stoney, a two pitch VS, after seeing a great photo of it in Keith Sharples's calendar. It was a thoroughly enjoyable route, and one that I had managed, somehow, to avoid despite climibng on that wall on numerous occasions over the years. I suspect that if a few people read this here, it may get more ascents still. Publicity doesn't just have to be in the form of magazine articles.

MattH
 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

No criticism intended Mick, but I wanted to make it clear that the issue of replacing fixed gear with bolts was not one that was taken lightly at the meeting.

MattH
 Tom Briggs 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH:

I dunno having not been at the meeting but I cleaned Tequila (Chee Tor) last year and gradually things are getting cleaned up. I fell off Behemoth a few years back (blamed it on the lichenous dust ). There's that route, In Bulk at the same crag and maybe Nettle Buttress and Wilt. Beyond that, other than perhaps the stuff down Dovedale.. what actually needs cleaning? Maybe Black Gold at Chee Tor? I don't want to be construed as negative, I just don't reckon it's much of an issue with the half decent routes in the upper E grades that people might want to do. As for Froth. Was it dirty? If not, then what's your point?!
 Michael Ryan 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

I did Froth and others at Stoney recently: all in good nick. In fact made 3 visits with various partners. Also one team there one day whooping with joy at some of the climbs they did: Dead Banana Crack etc...

M
 sutty 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

QUIET Mick, the routes at Stoney are losing their polish due to neglect. Let people find them a second time but not overrun them.

Perhaps that is what crags need, ten years of neglect to weather again?
 Michael Ryan 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

Another anecdote.

I was climbing on Malham Right Wing recently. Clean rock, good gear, sunny, great routes from HVS to E6.

No one there. Lots of climbers on the Lower Wall.

Earlier that day I was in Gordale: no one there, but there were climbers on the bolted routes of Lower Stony Bank.

Later that day I drove round Kilnsey - a dozen climbers there.

Mick
 Chris the Tall 11 Jun 2009
In reply to sutty:
Not sure waiting for crags to come back into fashion is a viable option. The sort of cleaning you guys did in the 60s would not be legal these days. Unless we get back on these crags and keep them clean, they will be lost for good.
 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

My point was that a decent pic / article can encourage one to go and try a route.

MattH
 Simon Caldwell 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH:
and a shiny new guidebook would do the same.
Whenever I've climbed on peak limestone in decent weather, there have been plenty of people about, all with the Rockfax guide. I bet if and when an updated BMC guide is published, numbers will increase.
Note, I'm only talking punter grades here!
 Tom Briggs 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Toreador:

Limestone North Rockfax is new, so I don't agree really (though I heard Gogarth Main Cliff was busy the first Bank Holiday, presumably cos of the new guidebook).

Climbers have changed their habits. Get outside of the Peak (gritstone) and above HVS and try and find some climbers. It's pretty difficult! This spring on my outings... Running Hill Pits - no-one. High Tor - 1 party. Llyen - no-one. East Wall of Pavey on a glorious Saturday. No-one. Nesscliffe - no-one. Clogwyn yr Eryr (Crafnant) - no-one. Easter Island Gully, Gogarth (Ben and Marion Wintringham FFS!).

I think there are very few people climbing mid-grade trad, full-stop.

A good photo of Central Buttress WCJ isn't going to change the fundamental fact that most people just aren't interested. Those who are will eventually get round to cleaning Behemoth
 redsulike 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH: Matt, I asked Rab specifically if sending out volunteers to see what needed doing to make the crag safer to climb was simply a first step to bolting the crag as it had already been made quite clear that the BMC will not under any circumstances replace pegs with pegs because they are inherently unreliable. My words were, "A back door way of changing the policy of only replacing like for like bolts". Rab made this quite clear that it was not.
Later in the discussion I asked again specifically if after the group had inspected the crag would there be the possibility as I ASSUMED there must be that if it is not practical to replace pegs with pegs and the rock is not sound enough to accept traditional protection in that the implication was that bolting it would be the only other option. Again it was made quite clear by Rab "That is a WRONG ASSUMPTION".
Despite this I still left the meeting with a sense of unease and your take on the meeting only heightens that disquiet.

What you have just said is in direct contradiction to what was said by Rab and others who wanted the project to go ahead.

'If those findings are that some fixed gear may need replacing with bolts, it will be discussed at the meeting. Seemed like a fairly democratic solution I thought.

There was alot of talk about technical issues about pegs and rotten rock etc and Betty (?) asked that the discussion could be brought back to the central issue. Should a group be organised to make an assessment of the crag to determine what action might be taken inthe future to revive the crag (as a test case),and make it safer for the E5 routes to be attempted.?
If this wasn't a discussion about whether crags should be considered on a case by case basis and retro bolted then we spent an hour discussing if a group of volunteers should clean up some routes in need of a bit of gardening.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

Northern Limestone has been out quite a few years now - 5th birthday coming up. The general neglect of trad Peak lime has to be in part a fashion thing - everyone is into grit/sport/bouldering - and I am not sure if it matters that the routes don't get done much nowadays?

Despite that a good guide will always increase the traffic in an area - lots of climbers do need showing the way!


Chris
 DannyC 11 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News:

I've had a really good few months mainly climbing on Peak trad limestone. I have to say that I don't think there's a problem with neglect at anywhere I've been - Staden, High Tor, Wildcat, Aldery (thanks BMC), Dove Dale or Chee Dale. I am very much from the if-it-has-to-be-cleaned-regularly-then-leave-it camp though. I realise there's more a problem with sport routes, and Cowdale did look shtinkin'.

I like the fact very few people climb limestone at the minute (Dove Dale was stuning with no other climbers there) and suppose I think deliberate promotion of crags isn't worth the effort, thoughg it's up to people if they so choose. Things will always fall in and out of fashion, getting cleaner and dirtier accordingly.

I was keen to get along to the meeting at The Winking Man but was working late. Next time hopefully. It's good to have the write-ups on here as well.
 Simon Caldwell 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:
> Limestone North Rockfax is new

New-ish, yes, and excluding bad weather, every time I've been to a crag that's in the book, there have been loads of people there. I've only been to one Peak limestone crag not in that book, so hardly conclusive proof, but it was deserted.
 Chris the Tall 11 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:
There's no great conspiracy going on here

The BMC will provide bolts to replace existing bolts
The BMC will not provide pegs to replace existing pegs

As to whether the BMC should provide bolts to replace pegs, well that's more complicated. I wouldn't say this would never happen, but I believe it would require a change to the principles of the Better Bolts campaign as well as area approval.

But of course we are getting ahead of ourselves here as yet no one has even suggested a) retrobolting the crag b) using BMC bolts

What was suggested, and agreed, was that climbers make a concerted effort to visit the crag before the next meeting to assess the state of the crag and the options. Just because the BMC won't provide pegs (or bolts for that matter) doesn't mean they aren't an option. And of course another option is to do nothing. As yet nothing has been ruled out, and nothing is being crept in through the back door

Oh, and it's Bunny, not Betty
 redsulike 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall: Is this what politicing is like? 'Nothing has been ruled out'. I would say that at the meeting any future assessment of the crag that might suggest that bolting was the best solution HAD been ruled out- by the President of the BMC no-less. I was told twice it had. I did'nt get that impression though which is why I asked twice and was told categorically that my 'assumption was wrong'. I still didn't believe it and I don't now.
The whole point of the discussion and the test case (whether you choose to deny it at this moment in time or not)is to retro-bolt a traditional limestone crag and yet that issue was skirted and the accusation denied consistently, (maybe to avoid the kind of heated debate that took place last year when the issue was raised then).
Just to be clear I have never climbed at the crag and I will never aspire to E5, but should the BMC be advocating retro-bolting traditional crags under the guise of 'making them popular again and more safe', 'on an individual crag by crag basis', I don't agree.

Being new to the meetings I am not familiar with names but the guy who spoke first has already spent 5 hours top roping the route he wants to climb and declared it a game of 'Russian Roulette, despite how bold you may be'. Apparently, the pegs are rotten and there's quite a lot of rotten and loose rock also. He has made an assessment already. If a simple clean up was required then there would not have been a discussion of this nature (and Matt wouldn't have been so nervous). Lets stop prevaricating and call a spade a spade, (gardening pun intended).
 redsulike 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall: Thanks Chris, sorry Bunny.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:

A busy week-end at Stoney back in the day:

http://www.pbase.com/chris_craggs/image/113649773

I doubt we will see that again!


Chris
 DannyC 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:

Well said. The best mid grade sport limestone in the Peak by a long way - Masson Lees - barely gets a tickle, because it's not in Northern Limestone. It's a bit dirty in places, but what's the harm, at least it's not as polished as other grim pits like Horseshoe.
 Martin Haworth 11 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News: I dont see what the great problem is?
I would agree that gritstone is more popular than limestone at the moment, so what?. However some limestone crags do get reasonable traffic such as Stoney and Staden and as the weather warms up more people will move onto limestone.
If the BMC want to organise some crag clean-ups thats great.
But I would strongly object to bolting any natural limestone crags or replacing any pegs with bolts.
Places like Horseshoe have their place in the climbing mix but lets limit bolting to similar grotty quarries.
In reply to UKC News: I've just picked up this thread and I've been enjoying a personal reaquaintance with Peak trad limestone. You know, its better than I remembered. At Chee Tor, Ceramic was perfectly clean where it mattered (and I did a good job of gardening the lower section). Gulle Gulle Groove, meditation, Splintered Perspex and Apocalypse were all perfectly clean. Autobahn was just clean enough, though I cursed the dust at the time. The lower-offs at Chee Tor are all really good too.

I was suprised at Stoney two nights ago at the lack of lower offs above windy ledge. Had a loose scramble at the top of Dies Irae to find an ab point and had an even worse crawl through brambles at the top of Circe to find an ab point. I'm all in favour of bolt lower-offs. They don't change the character of the climbing, they're better for the wildlife and don't risk dislodging loose rock.

I don't really see the problem with retrobolting a rusty old peg placement and I don't see it as the thin end of the wedge. We've always had loads of trad routes on limestone with the odd bolt in. Then again, if an old pegged E5 becomes a bolder E6 then so be it, as long as the guidebooks accept that and don't try to kid you that its still E5.

I'm all in favour of Matt's initiative to try and encourage people to have a bit of a blitz on a crag so that routes get a bit clean and chalked up, threads replaced etc. I'm already psyched that Tom's chalk might still be on Behemoth. Maybe tuesday evening - anyone keen?

As a final point is everyone aware of how fine the pubs are in Litton and Stoney? I didn't until recently but its going to get me down to the limestone a lot more from now on.

Cheers
Dave
In reply to Tom Briggs:
Hi Tom
You are right, Peak Limes been covered in the past and I am more than willing to do an article on Central Buttress or any other in the peak.

I remember attempting to get a few people there a couple of years ago and unfortunately nobody was interested because it was overgrown. Shame really having climbed three or four good routes there in the past I thought it was great.

In reply to Dave Musgrove Jnr:
Make it another night (busy Tuesday) and I'll start the photography ball rolling if you're keen Dave?
 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

My interpretation of your alarm last night, and Rab's consequent reaction, was that there seemed to be some conspiracy theory afoot, to tweak the BMC bolt fund policy to allow pegs to be replaced with bolts. I can say categorically that there is no such conspiracy, and I am pretty sure that Rab's assertions were along those lines. My take on what Rab said was most certainly not that placing a bolt would not happen. I even said, when trying to sum up the debate, that a list of criteria will most likely emerge for cleaning up the said routes, and that the replacing of fixed gear with a bolt would be at the top or bottom of that list, depending on how one views it.

To be honest I'm not quite sure why we are all getting so worked up about this. The consensus of the meeting last night was that we'd all (or at least some of use) try to get out and climb some of the said routes, and report back. Where's the harm in that?

MattH

 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

Hi again - what's your name?

Nobody suggested a simple clean-up. John, the guy who put the idea to the meeting in the first place, has looked at this one route. He was suggesting assessing the other rotues at the crag too, and using the crag as a test case for any other similarly underused crags.

I didn't mean to come across as nervous. I was simply trying to keep control of what could have easily become a slanging match, and let everybody have their say.

MattH
 MattH 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Dave Musgrove Jnr:

Thanks for the comments Dave.
For the record the initiative was, as I understand it, from John Fulwood who had many conversations about the issue with Steve McClure and Rab Carrington on a journeys to and from Malham recently.

Let me know if you're at Stoney again - I'm only about 3 miles away and dead keen for the place.

MattH
 1234None 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Martin Haworth:
> (In reply to UKC News) I dont see what the great problem is?

> Places like Horseshoe have their place in the climbing mix but lets limit bolting to similar grotty quarries.

It's a bit late for that, when we already have plenty of bolts in nautral buttresses all over the peak - Cheedale? WCJ? Etc...
 redsulike 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH: Hi Matt, my name is Phil, its in my profile, and I didn't mean to imply you were (or came across as) nervous, you didn't. Just that you began the meeting saying that you expected this agenda item to provoke some debate and you ended in saying you were relieved it might not be yourself chairing the next meeting.
 redsulike 11 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH: We must have been at two different meetings. I asked plainly and politely so that there could be no ambiguity if there was a possibility that the crag might be bolted if it was found that it could not be made safe seeing as the replacement of pegs was ruled out. I got a straight no, - twice.
As if the denial had not just happened the conversation then went off into the undergrowth again about the advantages modern protection such as friends and improvements in nuts offer in terms of these difficult routes and maybe there wouldn't be any need for any fixed protection, (which I thought had just been ruled, out making the whole debate academic). Not so, once again the discussion was steered to a group investigating the climbs to see what state they were in with a view to maybe, if there is a concensus, case by case, possibly, if there is no other option, etc. etc. bolting the crag.I never mentioned a conspiracy, no-one did. Why would we have such a debate about a simple crag clean-up to reinvigorate its popularity? The elephant in the room was the fact that this crag is going to be bolted so that the difficult routes can become sport climbs and the BMC is going to sanction and fund it.
Really Matt this needs a straight question and a straight answer. Would the BMC sanction the bolting of this traditional limestone crag? The fact that we can't get one just points to the fact that everyone concerned realises this is a real bone of contention.

If the report comes back saying 'False alarm, its in pretty good nick, a bit of gardening needed that's all, must have been having a bad day.' I'll be utterly gobsmacked. I have a feeling I know what is going to happen. I thought that clearly there were people at the meeting who wanted the BMC to bolt the routes so that they could climb them again and there were others who hold no objections as such to bolting traditional crags whether they are able to climb at that level or not. There's absoloutely no harm in climbing some of the routes. Isn't that what the BMC are all about, encouraging climbing and ensuring access for all? The harm comes in saying it cannot now be climbed without bolts and we would like it bolted please.

Anyone reading this who has a view one way or the other should get themselves along to their local BMC area meetings as stuff is being discussed by perhaps 40 or more people that can have a huge effect on the future shape of climbing in the UK and its crags.
 Simon 11 Jun 2009
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
> (In reply to MattH)
> [...]
>
> That's in your opinion Matt. I purposely avoided going into detail.
>
> Some could say that I should have emphasised many of Henry's access announcements....they have far wider implications for more climbers.
>


This is the issue I tried to interject at the point where things were getting a little muddied with ethics.

Ethics & Access issues can be very different things and although there is the on-going issues about how we go about the climbing on the crags in cheedale - its essental that local BMC access reps are involved.

Henry & Adam et al are doing a fantastic job.

Si
 Tom Briggs 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Dave Musgrove Jnr:
> I'm already psyched that Tom's chalk might still be on Behemoth.

I doubt it, it was about 4 years ago! I can do Wednesday or Thursday next week tho
 MattH 12 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

Hi Phil,
I'm assuming that you were the person sat about 2 or 3 people to my right? If so then I completely misunderstood your question, and I suspect others did too. If it was indeed you then the question, as I recall it went pretty much like this: 'Is this an attempt to change the rules of the BMC bolt fund to allow pegs to be replaced with bolts?' The phrase 'through the backdoor' was also used, I just can't remember the exact wording. That was what drew the reaction from Rab. Nobody stated that pegs would not be replaced with bolts. That's not to say that they will - that's the bone of contention - but nobody stated that they would not. I think you misunderstood.

MattH
 MattH 12 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

Hi again Phil, I am sure you have seen it already, but here is a thread which preceded the meeting which will give some context.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=357968

MattH
 Coel Hellier 12 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

> I asked plainly and politely so that there could be no ambiguity if there was a possibility that the
> crag might be bolted if it was found that it could not be made safe seeing as the replacement of pegs
> was ruled out. I got a straight no, - twice.

That's not how I understood your question or the answer. It seemed to me that your question amounted to "Was it inevitable that the working party would recommend replacing pegs with bolts, and was it inevitable that this would be decided as area/BMC policy?". The answer was along the lines of, no, nothing had been decided; the working party, and/or area meetings, might conclude that natural gear was sufficient; or that bolts were undesirable anyway; essentially no decision had been made, and there wasn't a pre-determined agenda for a pro-bolts decision. But that doesn't mean that bolt-for-peg replacement had been ruled out either.
 MattH 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Coel Hellier:

That's what I was trying to say!

MattH
In reply to Coel Hellier: Just to throw another spanner in the works. What do people think about replacing knackered drilled and cemented pegs (ie golos) with bolts. had a conversation yesterday about White Gold which has golos that are apparently goosed.

My pennysworth on golos. They are drilled protection so replace with bolts when knackered.
 ChrisC 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Graeme Alderson:

I'd go with that. There's not real difference between them and bolts anyway, apart from the reliability. As you say they are drilled anyway...

White Gold would be great to clean up, and a good one to assess the fixed gear on, in much the same way as with the CB routes.
 Chris the Tall 12 Jun 2009
In reply to MattH:
> ..... the question, as I recall it went pretty much like this: 'Is this an attempt to change the rules of the BMC bolt fund to allow pegs to be replaced with bolts?' The phrase 'through the backdoor' was also used, I just can't remember the exact wording. That was what drew the reaction from Rab. Nobody stated that pegs would not be replaced with bolts. That's not to say that they will - that's the bone of contention - but nobody stated that they would not. I think you misunderstood.

Yep, that's pretty much how I recall it is well

I'll repeat that the BMC Better Bolts fund does not cover the replacement of pegs with bolts. Thats not to say that this couldn't happen in the future, but I suspect it would require national council approval and would be somewhat controversial. (I'll clarify this weekend)

Furthermore, just because the BMC isn't going to fund any bolts, or pegs for that matter, it doesn't mean the area meeting can't give the go ahead to an individual or group to do it. But as Bunny pointed out, that's getting ahead of ourselves, first thing is for as many people as possible to assess the crag and come to an informed opinion on it.

To Phil/Reds:
Sorry if you were disappointed not to get a Rab to sign a Presidential Edict declaring the crag would remain a trad venue in perpertuity, but that's not how the BMC works. The president is not the sole abiter of BMC policy, and in discussions like this then it does come down to the views of the area meeting, where you, me, Rab and anyone else who attends has an equal right to voice their opinions. And yes, if a particular potential outcome does fill you with concern, then you are right to get as many like minded individuals to attend future meetings.

But please take note that at stage all anyone is doing is trying to create an informed debate
 donie 12 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News:
Im currently an enthusiastic fan of trad peak limestone and have been enjoying its delights for the last 15 or so years .
The condition of the rock on routes varies hugely betwen venues and is easily predicted by their aspect.The sunny crags like high tor/stoney are usually clean while the shady crags such as nettle buttress often have climbs covered in lichenous dust with assorted veg.Cleaning the latter is often a quick job as long as one can access the top to abseil.A large soft brush and nutkey are all thats required.
Much more problematic is the fact that many routes rely on fixed gear which is often in very poor condition.Sometimes this can be backed up with natural pro but due to the compact nature of the rock this is often not feasible.The harder the grade the more this becomes an issue .Central buttress illustrates this perfectly.There are tons of e5/6 that are never climbed because the situ pegs /bolts are rotten.I for one would love to get stuck in.
The choice is either replacement of this situ gear or climb the routes au naturel.Selfishly I would advocate replacement as Im not good enough to onsight these routes without the fixed gear.If the gear is not replaced these routes will become nearly obsolete[the current situation] as there are so very few climbers willing/capable to climb them sans fixed pro.

I believe fixed gear replacement should be like for like .This will preserve the adventurous /sporting nature of the climbs which is one aspect of what sets them apart and makes them different.Full retrobolting is not the way to go.In some cases it will be pragmatic and enviromentally sensible to replace pegs with bolts .Better one bolt than a nest of unsightly decaying ironmongery.I dont buy the thin end of the wedge argument-history has proved this point.Anyway thats my tuppence worth
 Boy Global Crag Moderator 12 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:
> (In reply to Chris the Tall) Is this what politicing is like? 'Nothing has been ruled out'. I would say that at the meeting any future assessment of the crag that might suggest that bolting was the best solution HAD been ruled out- by the President of the BMC no-less. I was told twice it had. I did'nt get that impression though which is why I asked twice and was told categorically that my 'assumption was wrong'. I still didn't believe it and I don't now.
> The whole point of the discussion and the test case (whether you choose to deny it at this moment in time or not)is to retro-bolt a traditional limestone crag and yet that issue was skirted and the accusation denied consistently, (maybe to avoid the kind of heated debate that took place last year when the issue was raised then).
> Just to be clear I have never climbed at the crag and I will never aspire to E5, but should the BMC be advocating retro-bolting traditional crags under the guise of 'making them popular again and more safe', 'on an individual crag by crag basis', I don't agree.
>
> Being new to the meetings I am not familiar with names but the guy who spoke first has already spent 5 hours top roping the route he wants to climb and declared it a game of 'Russian Roulette, despite how bold you may be'. Apparently, the pegs are rotten and there's quite a lot of rotten and loose rock also. He has made an assessment already. If a simple clean up was required then there would not have been a discussion of this nature (and Matt wouldn't have been so nervous). Lets stop prevaricating and call a spade a spade, (gardening pun intended).


I am the person you're refering to, the name is Jon Fullwood. I don't appreciate you misrepresenting my actions to suit your argument.
I cleaned a route on abseil, which is not the same as "spending 5 hours top roping the route he wants to climb". As it happens I looked at the route on a wet day out of pure curiosity, as a means of ascertaining the state of a typical route at the crag and cleaned it to see how feasible it would be to replace pegs like for like, how crucial the pegs were vis-a-vis alternative natural protection and to determine how loose such routes can become. Any interest in climbing the route was incidental. As it was raining and I was wearing trainers and weighed down with pegs, peg hammer, cleaning gear etc i was hardly disposed to 'work' the route as you imply.
The comment about Russion Roulette was not in reference to this route per se, it was about the likelyhood of anyone trying any route in that state ground up (without cleaning by abseil). As in such a circumstance there is a reasonably high chance of a hold breaking without warning and multiple gear failures i stand by the analogy, an analogy indicting unpredictable and unmitigatable risk.

I also listened carefully to your questioning of Rab. I'm afraid that if you were trying to get a categoric assurance as to whether the BMC would ever condone the replacement of a peg with a bolt, you asked the wrong questions and the replies you received did not represent that assurance.

 ChrisC 12 Jun 2009
In reply to donie:

That sums up things from my perspective brilliantly. I have a great interest in climbing as many of these classic Peak trad lime route in the E4/5 grade range as I can. What I have no interest in however, is having a large accident as a result of loose rock and shit decaying fixed gear.

If the routes we are talking about were restored to a condition that resembled that in which they were first done then I have no doubt they would receive ascents, certainly from many of local climbers I know at least. By the sounds of it we are not alone either..
 Tom Briggs 12 Jun 2009
In reply to ChrisC:

> If the routes we are talking about were restored to a condition that resembled that in which they were first done then I have no doubt they would receive ascents, certainly from many of local climbers I know at least. By the sounds of it we are not alone either..

Look, we have this same debate every bl*ody year...

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=310525

It's down to individuals to just get out there and do what makes sense. Rather than discussing it year after year. On Central Buttress, wack some new pegs in if you can. If not, do a Cave Route Right Hand and put one bolt in to substitute a number of pegs. Don't remove the intrinsic trad feel of the route. Don't make a regional classic E5 6b an E7 6b. Peak limestone isn't goog enough rock to bother removing all fixed gear just to make an ethical statement. There are some great (and historical) routes that are essentially trad in feel, but which use some bolts (e.g. Bastille).

 sutty 12 Jun 2009
In reply to ChrisC:

OK, place pegs where they originally were till the placements wear enough to place nuts, as was done on Millstone.

If lots of routes are being abandoned let the aid blokes clean them up and then reduce it till you have good free routes again.
 Tom Briggs 12 Jun 2009
In reply to sutty:
> (In reply to ChrisC)
> If lots of routes are being abandoned let the aid blokes clean them up and then reduce it till you have good free routes again.

I think you need to re-set your Time Machine.
 sutty 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

Sorry Tom, it was a pragmatic suggestion. Why should aid be banned on crags that are overgrown and not being used. Where should people learn aid if not there?

I do want a good answer, or are you just another ethics that suit me person.?
 ChrisC 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

I agree with you there, and ultimately it will come down to individual climbers. Most likely if we are bothered enough we will do as you say. then some people will rant and rave about it declaring it the thin end etc. And then, most likely, that is as far as things will go and the routes will remain in the state that the individuals who could be bothered to do anything with them left them.

However, if that were John's, donie's or my course of action (or anyone elses for that matter) then what's the purpose of the BMC discussion going on at the moment? There is some merit to the discussion surely?

The Scoop Wall discussion referenced is similar, but different in my view, because at the end of the day that's perfectly protectable, safe and clean/climable without any of the fixed gear that may be in it and so pegs don't need replacing with more reliable alternatives.
 Tom Briggs 12 Jun 2009
In reply to ChrisC:
> (In reply to Tom Briggs - Jagged Globe)
> then some people will rant and rave about it declaring it the thin end etc.

I doubt it actually. I really don't think people are that bothered about Peak Limestone.

> However, if that were John's, donie's or my course of action (or anyone elses for that matter) then what's the purpose of the BMC discussion going on at the moment? There is some merit to the discussion surely?

The 'problem' of rotting gear on Peak Limestone has been discussed ad naeseum. It's plainly obvious what needs to be done. When someone like Jon does us all a favour and replaces some gear, then the routes become popular again. He did this last summer at Rubicon and the crag is better for it. Less talk, more action.

 ChrisC 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

> I really don't think people are that bothered about Peak Limestone.

Most of those who rant and rave won't actually have any intention of visiting the cliffs in question, but I suspect if the bolt-for-peg replacement is publicised then there will be some ranting. Those who are actually bothered about or active on Peak Lime will probably be quite happy.

> Less talk, more action.

Agreed.

 Chris the Tall 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs:

> Less talk, more action.

Indeed - there will be a BMC work meet at Stoney on June 27th - more details next week

 donie 12 Jun 2009
In reply to chris/tom
Oh dear maybe i'll have to get off my backside and get a route or 2 re-equipped rather than waiting for others to do it.Agree top effort by jon,christian etc who have actually gone and done the deed
 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News: I get the impression that most/all the participants of the meet were from the peak. I however live about 2hrs away from the peak but it is my closest destination. I love peak limestone trad and have been climbing the E1-E5 routes for the last 3/4yrs.
Recently its been harder to have good days out because ive ticked all the uber-classics and it would be quite contrived for me to get to the peak, clean and replace gear on a route then climb it due to lack of time (on a single given day), money and similarly enthused partners.
I assume i speak for several others in the same situation.

From my point of view, a clean-up meet, for instance, at chee-tor would be the best course of action. If 20-30 people are down there with a bag full of cord and pegs and a bunch of gardening tools, we could clean-up loads of routes. Seeing someone else on an adjacent route would inspire a return visit and inertia sets in. The climbing is very good and the rock largely solid, similar in quality (IMO) to pembroke i.e. loose at the top, it deserves more attention.

So three questions...

Why will the BMC provide bolts but not pegs? (this seems odd for a society built upon British ethics)

Is it feasible to organise weekly/fortnightly meets at the venues in question and sort them out?

Anyone else going to stoney tomorro?

 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to UKC News: Also im fully prepared to re-equip all these places as i have an abundance of time on my hands at the mo, so if anyone wants to gimme some pegs and tat, ill more than gladly clean-up routes?
 Tom Briggs 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:

I have loads of pegs, which I'm more than willing to contribute, but the last thing that I would want to support is a BMC clean up meet at Chee Tor, as it doesn't require that. We're talking about a few select routes/buttresses that need sorting out by a few motivated individuals who know how to replace a peg, what to clean and not what to clean.
 Chris the Tall 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:
>
> Why will the BMC provide bolts but not pegs? (this seems odd for a society built upon British ethics)
>
This was discussed but it's worth repeating here

First of all, read this article https://www.thebmc.co.uk/Feature.aspx?id=2887

Basically a properly placed bolt can be confidently relied upon for a number of years, so the BMC is happy to donate bolts to experienced bolters. The same level of confidence can not be taken with a peg - it might be as solid as a bolt, or it might fall out next week. The very nature of a peg and the way it's it has been placed makes it very difficult to assess it's reliability and perhaps only the person placing it should rely on it. Therefore for the BMC to hand out gear which it knows could give people a false sense of security or lead to accidents would leave it open to litigation
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall:

You could of course let people put the pegs in who know what they are doing. Just like the bolt scenario!


Chris
 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall: Would it be possible for the BMC to donate some money towards the safer use of the crags, to be spent on pegs by an individual? Surely no climber would try and sue the peg placer if it rips on them?!?
 Chris the Tall 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:
> Surely no climber would try and sue the peg placer if it rips on them?!?

A climber's relatives or insurers might sue the BMC for contributory negligence if it handed out equipment which according to it's own website could not be relied upon.

And don't call me shirley
 Mike Stretford 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:
> (In reply to Chris the Tall) Would it be possible for the BMC to donate some money towards the safer use of the crags, to be spent on pegs by an individual?

Many would disagree with that, including me. I don't think purposely getting something stuck in the rock that will corrode relatively quickly is very ethical.

 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Papillon: it seems like pro-bolt propaganda, (the test was done by a portland climber).
Ive fallen on several pegs over the last few years, even on sea cliffs, and not one has ripped. It is possible, to a degree, to assess the quality of a peg in my experience, so in the same way we assess our hand-placed gear we can assess the in-situ gear, no?
 Boy Global Crag Moderator 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason: I think it's fair to say you can make an educated guess as to the reliability of a peg. It's also fair to say the degree of reliability of that guess is much lower than one made for a piece of gear you have placed yourself
 Mike Stretford 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:
> (In reply to Papillon) it seems like pro-bolt propaganda, (the test was done by a portland climber).

I believe Jim Titt lives in Germany. The report came after time and expense trying to produce a corrosion resistant piton. This is friendly advice, I ain't trying to get your back up, but I think you should think twice before making statements like that about folk.


> Ive fallen on several pegs over the last few years, even on sea cliffs, and not one has ripped. It is possible, to a degree, to assess the quality of a peg in my experience, so in the same way we assess our hand-placed gear we can assess the in-situ gear, no?

As Boy says you can make a guess and that's up to you. They are not designed as fixed protection, and since you can't see the business end (the rock metal interface) it really is a guess.

As I say I'm against replacing pitons, it often leaves a rotting mess meaning the placement cannot be re-used, and the act of hammering the thing in will damage the rock to some degree (sometimes drastically). I'm not saying the placements should be bolted, that's a separate issue, essentially a decision on whether a route should or should not have fixed protection .



 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Papillon: I was jesting with the portland remark, and not trying to be arguementative, im just trying to keep up with whats happening, questioning with devils advocate. I just wouldnt like to see bolts replacing pegs, as clipping a peg can still be exciting, clipping a bolt isnt so much.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:
> (In reply to Chris the Tall)
>
> You could of course let people put the pegs in who know what they are doing. Just like the bolt scenario!
>
>
> Chris

Actually I have changed my mind, someone usually nicks pegs!

Chris
 Mike Stretford 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Alex Mason:
> I just wouldnt like to see bolts replacing pegs, as clipping a peg can still be exciting, clipping a bolt isnt so much.

and clipping a small cam placed in an old peg scar would really focus the mind
 Alex Mason 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Papillon: this is true, but i guess its not always possible. Is it the intention to assess each route individually, or each area?
 redsulike 12 Jun 2009


> To Phil/Reds:
> Sorry if you were disappointed not to get a Rab to sign a Presidential Edict declaring the crag would remain a trad venue in perpertuity, but that's not how the BMC works. The president is not the sole abiter of BMC policy, and in discussions like this then it does come down to the views of the area meeting, where you, me, Rab and anyone else who attends has an equal right to voice their opinions. And yes, if a particular potential outcome does fill you with concern, then you are right to get as many like minded individuals to attend future meetings.

Why did you post in this way Chris? Last time we clashed you criticised me for not getting involved. I took your point on board and now you seek to ridicule what I have to say. You are just going to have to get used to the fact that we probably will never agree on this particular point.

I didn't ask for an edict, I didn't suggest that Rab as President is more equal than any other BMC member. So why do you suggest I did. And I did suggest that people get along to these meetings but I said whichever side of the debate you support. I am not seeking to fill the meetings with others that feel as I do, simply to fill the meeting and canvas more opinion rather than have the agenda dominated by a smaller (and by implication less representrative) meeting.

Matt, yes,I was sat to your right a couple of places, more or less behind Mike P.

As for the question I asked and the response I received, we had better check the minutes.
 Ropeboy 12 Jun 2009
In reply to :

After attending the meeting on Wednesday I'm fired up and I'm going to try and get out there on Saturday afternoon, if anyone fancies joining in and taking a look at the crag come along.

J
 redsulike 12 Jun 2009
In reply to Boy: Hi John. Firstly sorry if using the term 'top rope' misrepresented. I knew you meant you had used a rope to abseil and clean the route, (which is what I meant also). And that you spent 5 hours doing so and had determined that any attempt to climb it would be 'Russian Roulette' because the the state of the rock in situ pegs could not be relied upon to sustain a leader fall.
I could not imply that you 'worked' the route as I have no idea what that is. This route at E5 is way above anything I could attempt and I climb recreationally and not seriously.
As regards to my question to Rab. Firstly I asked if this was a back door way to enabling BMC policy to be tweaked to allow the placing of bolts to replace pegs. Categorically no. Others have suggested that I was implying a conspiracy theory, I wasn't.
Secondly I asked if that subsequent to the possibility of a future report concluding that the routes were no longer 'safe' due to the state of the rock and the existing pegs, would I be right to assume that it would therefore (logically) follow that bolts would be placed to make the routes climable again? That was a wrong assumption was the reply I received. And in any case (I was told) modern protection has improved to such a degree that following an assessment and clean up of the crag the routes would more than likely be able to be climbed traditionally.
I wanted to add more at this point but could not attract the attention of the chair. Because, if, folowing an assessment of the crag it was determined that modern protection was not sufficient to safeguard the route it would according to the previous response be left as unclimable. This to me sounded ridiculous as we had just spent an hour therefore asking if a team could be sent to decide if a crag can be cleaned or not. That is not what the proposal was. The proposal is about the possibility of retro-bolting traditional crags but none of the proposers were prepared to say that. But clearly this is not what you and others want to hear. I would not stand with a placard at the foot of the route protesting against you bolting it, but I am opposed to it.
 Boy Global Crag Moderator 13 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:
> (In reply to Boy) Hi John. Firstly sorry if using the term 'top rope' misrepresented. I knew you meant you had used a rope to abseil and clean the route, (which is what I meant also). And that you spent 5 hours doing so and had determined that any attempt to climb it would be 'Russian Roulette' because the the state of the rock in situ pegs could not be relied upon to sustain a leader fall.

You're still totally missing the point. The comment re Russian roulette referred to how it would have been to attempt the route ground up ie without first cleaning such a route on abseil.

> I could not imply that you 'worked' the route as I have no idea what that is. This route at E5 is way above anything I could attempt and I climb recreationally and not seriously.

'Worked' means practiced, which is what you'd be doing on a top rope.

> And in any case (I was told) modern protection has improved to such a degree that following an assessment and clean up of the crag the routes would more than likely be able to be climbed traditionally.

Some routes yes, but not often at this crag. Pegs were put in, by trad climber, for a good reason, the reason being a lack of trad placements. The route I abbed had virtually no worthwhile trad placements near the locations of the now useless peg stump. In which case you are left with the option of headpointing an old E5 at E7-ish or finding a way of replacing some of the fixed gear.
 redsulike 13 Jun 2009
In reply to Boy: Thanks again for putting me straight John. No doubt this will all be discussed again at the next meeting.

Unfortunately, your response raises further questions in my mind that I will ask at the next meeting. The main one being, why was this debate raised as a proposal to send a group to look at the possibility of making the route climbable again -all very wishy washy and vague- when you in your opening and again here have made the assessment that it cannot be protected other than with a replecement peg (not an option for the BMC) or a bolt. Thus if it goes ahead the BMC will be retro-bolting a traditional crag.

The proposal has deliberately tried to skirt what will become the ultimate decision to be made once the smokescreen has cleared, in all likleyhood because such a direct proposal would raise greater opposition that just (it seems), my own.

In terms of politics terms this proposal is being, squeezed under the fence. Historically, (and in cyberspace) it is a Trojan Horse,and once your computer is infected you are stuffed!

'The route I abbed had virtually no worthwhile trad placements near the locations of the now useless peg stump.'

I also have to wonder why various people at the meeting were so keen to point out that in all likleyhood this and other routes could be protected with modern friends and nuts not available when they were first climbed, an option you feel is not a realistic possibility.

'In which case you are left with the option of headpointing an old E5 at E7-ish or finding a way of replacing some of the fixed gear.'

The third possibility is do nothing and in future guidebooks advise that the loss of a crucial peg has made the route E7.

Its a beautiful weekend and hoppefully some of those at the meeting on Wednesday will be out at the crag assessing its condition and climbing a few routes. You should never pre-judge things but I would be very surprised if anyone sat in your corner of the room comes back with an assessment that differs much from your own.



 Alex Mason 13 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

The third possibility is do nothing and in future guidebooks advise that the loss of a crucial peg has made the route E7.

But thats not an option of ascent which boy meant.


Did people get out to central buttress today? any report on do-able routes?

I abbed and cleaned jam sandwich at stoney today because i was waiting for a mate and it was looking sorry for itself, so someone should give it an ascent, the climbing looks good, but squeezed in.
 Rory Shaw 14 Jun 2009
I've not climbed on Peak limestone so obviously my comments are from a climber who may not fully appreciate the local ethics. Reading this thread it seams that there is a trend for more and more people to want designer crags - free from all vegetation, loose rock, old pegs etc. Lets not forget that trad climbing is an adventurous activity. When we climb we use our experience and knowledge to keep ourselfs safe. If we encounter loose rock on route we make the decision whether to carry on or head down... if it looks really dodgy then ab down it and give it a bit of a clean up.

As for fixed gear replacement then I dont think bolting where pegs used to be is the answer - I climb regularly at gogarth and the thought of this happening here doesn't bear thinking about. If you cant make it safe enogh for yourself on trad gear then get on a different route.

As for crag clean ups - a good idea but lets not get too worried about places not being popular anymore - it just means that those who want to escape the crowds can!
 Simon 14 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:
> (In reply to Boy)

>The proposal has deliberately tried to skirt what will become the ultimate decision to be made once the smokescreen has cleared, in all likleyhood because such a direct proposal would raise greater opposition that just (it seems), my own.
>


Sorry, but this is unfair.

Boy could have gone to the crag, checked it out & decided it was knarly & placed the bolt & worked the route. No one would know or battered an eyelid (do you know central buttess?) I don't apart from walking past it...

Instead Boy decided that he would take a consensus of opinion, which I thought was very healthy at the meeting (I was sat to the left of you) and from what I heard you were misconstruing the proposed plan to check the crag out before any action.

You seemed to want to put Rab on the spot about the bolt/peg replacement debate - which is ok - but I'm not sure why the discourse that took place warranted such mistrust.

>>>> In terms of politics terms this proposal is being, squeezed under the fence. Historically, (and in cyberspace) it is a Trojan Horse,and once your computer is infected you are stuffed!

I don't get any of this sorry!

Si

 Chris the Tall 15 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

>
> Why did you post in this way Chris? Last time we clashed you criticised me for not getting involved. I took your point on board and now you seek to ridicule what I have to say. You are just going to have to get used to the fact that we probably will never agree on this particular point.
>

I'm sorry if I am coming across as antagonistic. You absolutely right to say that having encouraged you to come along to the meeting I should be a bit more welcoming. Actually if you'd have come and had a chat me with after the meeting I'd have been interested to talk to you. I'm not sure how obvious it was who I was, but I'm afraid I had no idea who you were!

Unfortunately both your questions at the meeting and your posts on here are themselves antagonistic, and that's what I'm reacting to. When you use terms like "backdoor" and "smokescreen" you do suggest that something underhand and conspiratorial is going on. There isn't. What there is is a genuine attempt to look at a problem with an open mind. Or rather get people to go to the crag and assess it first, before any proposals are even discussed.
brian cropper 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Tom Briggs: more interested in clipping bolts
 Adam Long 15 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

Well on saturday I headed down to Central buttress. I hadn't managed to get a partner, but I was convinced following the meeting there'd be others there. Shame on you all, my climbing day consisted of an aborted attempt to lead solo the calssic E2...

Anyway, my impressions in light of this debate:

1. This is a really lovely crag, I will be returning as soon as I can find a partner. Great open aspect, totally dry in contrast to Chee tor, shady til about 2pm with, for the moment at least, a lovely quiet atmosphere.

2. The neglect of the crag has been overstated. Its pretty clear that this is a crag which keeps itself unusually clean by Cheedale standards. No dust, little vegetation, generally good clean rock. However the path along the base of the crag is clear evidence that this is in part due to climbing and not all the crags own work. In short, we need have no concerns about this crag becoming 'lost' through neglect.

3. The rock is in places loose. This is the kind of exfoliating shattered rock most of us are familiar with from parts of Windy buttress etc. I'd agree with Neil F's assertion at the meeting that its not the kind of looseness that will either improve significantly with traffic or get worse with neglect. Its just part of the character of the rock at the crag.

4. There are a few pegs visible here and there (I took binos...), which vary from the ancient to the recent looking. Whilst the easier (sub E4) routes generally take natural lines and look to take plenty of natural gear, some of the harder (E5+) routes look to take on blank areas and I can see pegs would be, as Boy says, 'crucial' for these routes to remain at the current grade. I should add the classic of the crag, Behemoth, does not look to fall into this category being mainly a crack climb.

So why is the crag unpopular? Firstly, I think comparing it to High tor, Chee tor and Stoney is unfair. These are the three best limestone crags in the Peak, CB is firmly in the next tier down. As such I don't think its any less popular than should be expected currently, and certainly not a 'problem' that requires 'something should be done'. As I've said above, the crag is ticking over quite nicely.

So all that remains a question is three or four E5s and E6s that may not be possible at that grade with the current gear. This isn't a problem peculiar to CB, its common throughout the Peak and the crux of the debate we had last year. I've stated my position previously and it remains the same - I'd rather see the routes get bolder and (even) less popular than be bolted, even sparingly. There are very few hard trad routes on peak limestone and adding bolts to them all smacks of elitism - ie the odd bolt is okay for hard men but not for you E2 punters. Even if completely retroed I don't see these routes ever being popular. However I will admit there is already the odd bolt in CB, as Boy has said, and adding a couple more to a couple of routes will not change the character significantly. I'd be interested to know exactly which route Boy was talking about.

Redsulike, have you read the pre-meeting thread in full? I think one of the reasons the debate was fairly subdued was that the key points had already been thrashed out online. I'd agree with previous posts that wholesale retrobolting has never been proposed for this crag. I think if Gary Gibson is in opposition youcan regard the crag as fairly safe from retrobolting.

Myself and Boy, despite holding opposite views as you can see from the other thread, are friends and had discussed it further whilst driving to the meeting. So apologies for us not saving our agression for the meeting and spilling out into the carpark, as I believe is de rigeur at that particular pub.
 Chris the Tall 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Adam L:
Did you take any good pics of the crag ?
 Adam Long 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall:

A couple, though they're neither action shots or suitable for topos.
 MattH 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Adam L:

Good on you Adam. Am keen to get down there and check it out - in fact I hatched a plan to do just that in a week or two's time with a friend. On Saturday I was busy running a birthday party for my lad and about 25 of his little mates! Next time you're short a partner for a soiree down there drop me a line as I am keen. I like to know a bit about the things we discuss at the meetings!

MattH
 Boy Global Crag Moderator 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Adam L: The route I had a look at was That’ll do Nicely. It’s the next line right of Behemoth. It seemed an obvious one to look at as it’s given three stars yet is highly reliant on pegs. ‘Obvious’ in the sense of addressing the questions; how serious have such routes become, how crucial are the pegs, is there alternative pro, can the worst pegs be removed and replaced like for like?

I agree with some but not all of your crag assessment. In general your drawing a set of conclusions based on lead soloing part of one of the crags most popular, least peg dependent and most solid routes, is no better than me drawing conclusions from abseiling down one of the crags least popular, most peg dependent and loosest routes. Neither is very representative of a crag with a pretty diverse range of routes in terms of gear, solidity and traffic. We could perhaps both do with a re-visit to get a broader picture.

The new pegs you spotted probably include the two new ones I managed to place on TdN. Regarding the totally number of pegs at CB, it’s worth bearing in mind that the 1993 Wye Valley guide reported a fair number as having disappeared, either dropped out, stolen or broken off, who knows. Sixteen years later it’s safe to assume a few more will have departed. The guide does detail many (but not all) of the pegs and gives a better indication of how many pegs the crag used to sport.

As for whether the crag ‘needs’ attention, cleaning up, popularising or whatever. No crag ‘needs’ anything per se, the question should be, are there things which can be done that will be sufficiently beneficial to local climbers for them to justify the effort? I do think there’s merit in a concerted effort to clean up this crag for a few reasons. Firstly it will answer questions relating to the reasons for crags being unpopular. If say ten routes get cleaned and this results in no noticeable increase in traffic, then it rather suggest that the effort was wasted and the exercise is not worth repeating elsewhere. If on the other hand these routes develop some new interest it suggests that these routes are of value to climbers and such action do influence crag behaviour. Secondly I think cleaning disused, decent, limestone routes is on balance a good thing generally and worth encouraging on various crags in the peak. A bit like everyone taking home what litter they find at a crag, lots of people doing a little bit is better than lots of people relying on a few people to make a big effort. As someone who takes the time to clean and re-equip old routes, it’s always nice to benefit from other people’s efforts. Thirdly I think people involved in cleaning routes would get some insight into the limitations of pegs vis-à-vis current condition, like for like replaceability, availability of alternative trad pro, removability of clearly useless examples. It often seems people (I’m not including you here) involved in debating the pros and cons of old pegs don’t fully understand all the details. Informed debate is always better than debate based on incorrect assumptions.
 redsulike 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall: Hi Chris. fairly easy you being Chris the Tall and all. I had to shoot off fairly quickly so didn't stop to chat to anyone but I will make a point of introducing myself properly next time.

I used 'backdoor' on purpose and smokescreen because...
There is real opposition to what is being proposed, not just from me,(and I feel much less qualified to speak than others who can actually climb at E4 and /or put up the routes back in the day). It seems to me at least that 'you' know this and so rather than asking straight out the proposal has been made to 'look' at the options. At the end of the day a decision will be made and it just seems to me that a decision like ...(here goes)

'The group concensus is that to climb the route (central buttress) now, with a reasonable margin of safety, would indeed , all other avenues having turned out to dead ends, require the replacing of a peg with a bolt but we are not going to allow you to do it, (or at least not fund it).

This would seem to me to be a particularly cruel and bizarre decision. The decision should in fact be made not to explore any options as the crag is not going to be bolted as a matter of principle. I am not suggesting a conspiracy by this. However a softly softly approach is a common enough and deliberate tactic and as such is more likely to achieve the result John and others want.

So if I was blunt (or antagonistic) it is because I want it out in the open so people know what they are actually deciding upon. Which I believe is a major change of policy and against the safeguards put in place not so long ago when the bolt fund was agreed upon.

ShortfatbaldingpersecutioncomplexPhil. (You can't miss me)
 redsulike 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Adam L: Cheers, Adam. And thanks for the heads up I haven't read the pre-meeting thread. I have no axe to grind with John or anyone who would vote 'for'. The majority of them are better climbers than me and decent types all round. I (like you it seems) disagree on this issue with them but of course I wouldn't hold them as the 'spawn of satan' for it, (have I come across as such?).
If there is to be a fight I bags to hold the coats
 redsulike 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Simon: I just tried to use an analogy. The Trojans were defeated because they took the horse into the city; 'Its only a horse, what harm can it do?'
The Trojan virus infects and destroys your computer; 'All I did was open an e-mail!'
'Its only one route on one crag in one small area of the Peak, what harm can it do?'
Its a bit flowery... I know.
 Coel Hellier 15 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:

Hi Phil, I think you'd be better off arguing your cause as a simple "I'm against bolting this crag, even if the routes are not otherwise protectable", rather than accusations of backdoor tactics etc (for example Boy has been perfectly open in his opinion from the start).

And I don't think it is right to assume that your position would not prevail; afterall it is the accepted ethic on the majority of the UK's crags. But it seems reasonable if people can at least discuss the issue.
 Chris the Tall 15 Jun 2009
In reply to redsulike:
>
> I used 'backdoor' on purpose and smokescreen because...
> There is real opposition to what is being proposed,

Why would anyone object to a concerted effort to encourage people to visit a fine but neglected crag, because that is all that has been proposed so far.

Obviously there is a good chance that some of those visitors might say "lets bolt it", but it's quite clear that others will say "keep it trad". And the same applies to those who won't visit it but will still want to have a say

What I can confirm, having checked it this weekend, is that the BMC bolt fund can not be used to fund any replacement of pegs with either bolts or pegs. Not that anyone has suggested that.

Personally I wouldn't object if someone did want to bolt the crag - other natural limestone crags in the area are bolted and I have no instrinsic problems with bolting limestone. But I think it's great that people want to have an informed debate first, and unless I actually manage to get my arse to the crag I won't be voicing any opinion either way.

I would however be opposed to any change in the BMC bolt fund policy
 ChrisC 15 Jun 2009
In reply to Chris the Tall:

> there is a good chance that some of those visitors might say "lets bolt it", but it's quite clear that others will say "keep it trad".

These two options are not mutually exclusive either...

There are already plenty of examples of trad routes sporting the odd bolt in the UK. The Orme, Clwyd and closer to home Mid Summer Nights Dream on Chee Tor. Would Mid Summer's get (m)any ascents without its bolt?
In reply to ChrisC:

It may come back that with a bit of gardening a bit of cleaning 4 routes could be done with new pegs put in. Although the BMC cannot fund pegs place them, by bringing it up and deciding it in a meeting a group of 'like minded' individuals could organise to cobble together some money to buy some. Someone with skills may also be at the meeting and be willing to have a crack at placing them. I have never placed a peg in my life and (no offence) know of no one my age who has done it on a crag route.

The BMC meeting cannot re-peg routes but may be the catalyst to get it done

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