/ Cul De Chien - disappointing
I was disappointed to see the following posted in the photo area (the date says 9th May 2012)
Just thought I'd post a timely reminder to avoid climbing on it.
Really suprised there was any kind of sign by the bloc itself when we were there a few weeks ago. Given the international popularity of the venue I doubt a high percentage of people look at bleau.info with any regularity.
> Given the international popularity of the venue I doubt a high percentage of people look at bleau.info with any regularity.
Surely, it states that it's banned in the climbing guides? I oculd be wrong, but I thought that block has been banned for years. Pretty sure it has been since I took my first trip to font in 2001.
I've been going to font off and on for 7(?) years now and I genuinely had no idea climbing on the dog was banned. I've not climbed on it myself, but there's always been people on it when I've been there.
This is the first year I've bothered to buy my own guide though, so perhaps that explains it..
Are people supposed to know not to climb on it by telepathy? If people were that bothered there would be a sign.
I have frequently climbed stuff in Font without consulting a guidebook, especially if it's a good, easy line like the one on this boulder...
I only heard about this this year.
Sort of reminds me of the The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy...
What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven's sake, mankind, it's only four light years away, you know. I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that's your own lookout. Energize the demolition beam. I don't know, apathetic bloody planet, I've no sympathy at all.
> I was disappointed to see the following posted in the photo area (the date says 9th May 2012)
What a Toit. ; )
> Are people supposed to know not to climb on it by telepathy? If people were that bothered there would be a sign.
> I have frequently climbed stuff in Font without consulting a guidebook, especially if it's a good, easy line like the one on this boulder...
I agree. I have climbed on it several times in recent years and until I read this thread had absolutely no idea that climbing on it was banned. It's no good saying that there is advice to this effect in the guide books, because there must be many like myself with 20 + year old guide books!
If a climbing ban is to have any effect it needs a sign next to it, preferably in French, English, Dutch and Belgium - but that probably won't stop Slovaks climbing on it!
Don't know about the others - will check tonight.
> If a climbing ban is to have any effect it needs a sign next to it, preferably in French, English, Dutch and Belgium
Annoying but probably true.
It'd be nice if everyone read the guidebook properly or checked bleau.info or whatever, but they clearly aren't doing if they're continuing to climb on something large and heavy that is liable to fall over on top of them.
Or a picture of someone climbing with a big red cross through it?
I've always known climbing on it was discouraged bit I can't for the life of me remember how I found out. The crack seemed quite obvious last time I was there.
I have the Fontainebleau Climbs guide ( http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41JYE8D4X8L._SL500_AA300_.jpg ) and there is no mention of a ban or restriction at all on the Cul-De-Chien, it's the 2001 version and I wouldn't have dreamt of looking at an updated version or any other www for info.
Happen people should consider this fact before having-a-go.
> Really suprised there was any kind of sign by the bloc itself when we were there a few weeks ago. Given the international popularity of the venue I doubt a high percentage of people look at bleau.info with any regularity.
fisrt, sorry for my poor english,
I'm not surprised and we asked further times to the forest administration to install a small advertising on the boulder.
If they really want to protect the boulder (and all people who have a look on it) they might to do it.
But i also think that when you go in a country you dosen't know, you have to take informations about the rulles. You can find it on our blog a lot of it about climbing attitude, but also about place to sleep, etc.
It's very difficult to us to inform each climbing communauty so, please help us, translate our message and share it.
> I have the Fontainebleau Climbs guide ( http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41JYE8D4X8L._SL500_AA300_.jpg ) and there is no mention of a ban or restriction at all on the Cul-De-Chien, >
Beat me to it :-).
I've been 3 times to Font and each time climbed at Cul de Chien and never had a clue the boulder was out of bounds. But now I know, I will spread the word.
I'm surprised people need to be told not to climb on this rock, it always seems to me that it's a miracle it's still standing just looking at it.
While on the subject, and in case people really need to be told everything, there have been children killed when they burrowed under boulders in the sand, - something that kids do quite naturally, but the boulders have been known to move and crush the imprudent sprogs. Their parents might think it worthwhile preventing them doing so... unless they have a car that is too full for the return journey, or something like that.
There you go people - the Cul de Chien will not snap if people climb on it. The reports that it is getting dangerous to climb on must be nefarious.
Chappy has spoken
Me and a friend politely told 2 people who were climbing on it repeatedly that it was banned and dangerous to climb on it. Their response was.. "Yeah we know, but..." and shrugged their shoulders. Even if you do think there is minimal chance of it toppling over, why would you even risk it, and why piss off others and give us brits a bad reputation when there is so much more and better climbing nearby.
I completely agree there should be a sing nearby.
> Don't know about the others - will check tonight.
Font climbs and Font Magique do not say anything.
In neither of the guide books we used did it state that you could not climb on this rock and there was no sign to indicate this. It would be impossible to research every boulder in the area to discover if certain ones are out of bounds.
If the local community want certain boulders avoided they need to have this clearly indicated so that all visitors are aware. Emough condemnation of a young person who was unaware of the rule. He will know in future.
> I completely agree there should be a sing nearby.
I agree! I good bit of Kum-bai-ya to cheer everyone up :)
Do you need a sign post to tell you not to shit in the middle of a car park or at the start of a climb? Or not to light a fire in a tinder dry forest? Or not start drilling holes to bolt on Stanage? There are no signs saying you shouldn't.
It's one boulder in the middle of a forest where people go specifically to climb on boulders. I'd say it's not a particularly mad assumption that you can climb on a given boulder in the forest given that people can and do climb on 99.99% of them.
Also, people evidently do climb on it. Just getting VERY INDIGNANT about the fact that people should somehow realise that they shouldn't climb on it without being told doesn't change the fact that they don't.
Have you seen it? It's not exactly interesting and looks wonky enough for all but the brain dead not to leave it alone :-)
But, above all, when you visit an area don't you think you should at least inform yourself about such things as this, chalk use, wire brushing, placing pitons are all mentioned, and prohibited on the ONF notice boards at all the car parks but many don't heed them either. It's all down to a lack of respect... I see it, I want it, I do it, and sod what anyone else thinks. Brave new world.
> Have you seen it? It's not exactly interesting and looks wonky enough for all but the brain dead not to leave it alone :-)
Oh I see, that'll be why noone climbs on it and we can all stop worrying, then?
> Have you seen it? It's not exactly interesting and looks wonky enough for all but the brain dead not to leave it alone :-)
There's plenty of more suspect looking rock that most of us climb on regularly.
I must be brain dead as it looked solid enough on my last visit in September, so much that I thought the restriction may be a troll of sorts.
And yes, I have seen it. We've taken the obligatory group photo in front of it. We would have taken the group photo with someone on top of it except that about two out of the six people in the group weren't 'brain dead', or rather, had happened to talk to people on a previous trip who'd known that (despite the fact that neither of our guidebooks mentioned this) you aren't allowed to climb on the thing.
Apparently they do, hence this thread! It's not the first one either so hopefully it will have an educative effect... It's only a tiny one for goodness sakes, right next to loads of better ones.
Well there's no answer to that! Carry on and the problem will be solved in a year or two...like the nice tree that was nearby we used to picnic under until some w*nkers burnt it down...
PS. Guide books are just that, they describe the climbing, they don't set out to instill common sense into people...maybe they should nowadays?
While we're being pissy about small things, can we jump on the band wagon with complaints about broken glass, used condoms, needles, litter, innapropriate fires and toilet sites?
These are all things that marr many peoples experience of the forest and are an issue at all of the parking spots I have visited since 2005.
Surly these are more pressing issues or am i getting old/missing the point?
Climb it, Love it, Protect it eh.
I've not seen or heard of a boulder anywhere else in the world that looks more like an animal then this one does... IMO I think it's unique and amazing and therefore yes it is a more important thing to get worked up about then condoms in the car park that are coming from prostitutes, not people on this forum (I hope...)
I didn't the first time I went, and so I had a go. I've been since I heard about the restriction, and left it. If there is a serious risk of it toppling there should be a sign in the carpark, by the gate or something.
There are signs in all the car parks saying not to use chalk... do you use it?
There's no sign at gritstone edges saying "Do not bolt" and I doubt it is mentioned in guide books, but same question, would you even think of bolting at Stanage?
Whatever now you know.
> While on the subject, and in case people really need to be told everything, there have been children killed when they burrowed under boulders in the sand, - something that kids do quite naturally, but the boulders have been known to move and crush the imprudent sprogs. Their parents might think it worthwhile preventing them doing so... unless they have a car that is too full for the return journey, or something like that.
I think you provided the solution there Bruce. Whenever there are dangerous trees about etc they get chopped down so they no longer pose a danger. So obviously you should just knock it over to save the kids. Of course then you won't be able to come on here to berate people to make yourself feel important.
So anyone who posts information does it to feel important? You have a funny view on life... a bit like all those who appear to require notices all over the place to tell them the obvious.
Does typing posts that add absolutely nothing to the discussion but just make a silly little personal attack make you feel important? It shouldn't really, it's a bit nutty.
You didn't answer about the chalk :-)
Signs don't seem to stop people... I'm not sure if there wasn't one a while ago even.
Another example is the old camping site near the Cuvier. For years people used it without respecting the rules, number of tents, rubbish, using the woods as a toilet etc, so the ONF put up a notice, in French, English and German pointing out what the consequences would be if this continued... You can guess the rest and now there is a fence round the area and no one can camp there anymore.
With internet and so on it should be possible to get the message across, for climbers to self regulate a bit, although it seems to me that some on this thread don't want to know.... this is certainly the case for chalk use.
> Does typing posts that add absolutely nothing to the discussion but just make a silly little personal attack make you feel important? It shouldn't really, it's a bit nutty.
No. I think people need to stand up to you because you're the biggest bully going.
I struggle to see how you expect everybody to know by "common sense" that you shouldnt climb on le tete de chien. Especially when in "Fontainebleau climbs", probably the most popular guide for a newcomer to font, shows a photograph of someone hanging from the lip of it.
Do you think it's constructive to call anybody that gets on it "brain dead"? Seeing as so many people do climb on it, I think further measures should be made to make people aware of the situation.
Maybe we should add extra graffiti to it saying "do not climb on me because of this crack " in several languages.
I've got an old guide book that shows people climbing in vibrams... does that mean it's ok, or anyone who thinks a bit will do the same today? Back then there were many fewer climbing there, few foreigners and the rock was rock coloured not grey and white. Now there are simply too many people but one would hope that people were also a bit more aware of environmental issues.
If you can look at this rock - of little climbing interests but absolutely unique to look at, both by its form, fantastic fragility and situation and not twig that it's probably best to leave it alone then sorry, but your brain doesn't work that well - you put a minor selfish satisfaction before anything much else. Clearly your book - English apparently was not written by someone who thought much either, or is very old as in Fontainebleau circles it has been on a leave it alone basis for many years. Anyway, the OP's post has given you all the info you need, why do you keep on contesting it?
As for using pof, I hope you use it sparingly, wrapped in a cloth as otherwise it's nearly as bad as chalk... you don't really need either, which is the COSIROC advice, simple because so many people climb there now.
> No. I think people need to stand up to you because you're the biggest bully going.
So standing up to someone implies calling them anti-semitic for no other reason than nastiness? I'd like you to show me an example of my "bullying", or insulting people gratuitously on a thread in which I didn't participate... just popping in to slag them off? You'll have a job to find an example of me doing it, but not much trouble the other way round.
I'm sure you're not, as reading a block of text by somebody doesn't necessarily represent their personality, but you're comments on this thread make you sound like quite a nasty insulting person. People are suggesting making it more clear to climbers that le tete de chien is off limits and you're just saying that people should know instinctively or they're "brainless".
Ok, we'll not post any notifications anywhere and just hope that no more people with no brains ( such as my self apparently) get anywhere near le chien.
You don't read, do you? Start by reading the OP.
Then where I gave several examples of notices at Font that most of you plain ignore - like not using chalk, for example - I gave others.
Then where I said there was a plaque that disappeared.
Then I pointed out that there are no notices saying don't bolt Stanage, but none of you would dream of doing it.
Then when I, and others, pointed out how fragile it was - visibly.
You've been given plenty of reasoned arguments, you choose to ignore them, so what is there left to do except draw the obvious conclusions?
PS. The real name is the "Bilboquet", a child's game called 'cup and ball' in English. A ball with a hole is tied to a wooden spike which is used to throw it in the air and catch it as it comes down. It does look like a dog's head, but the nearby Cul de Chien is the source of confusion, but this is another, and opposite part of a dog's anatomy.
Thanks a lot to your defense.
Lots of guidebook of Font are done by strangers and they dont ask us what is forbidden... More, French climbers when they write their topos dosen't think it's necessary to inscribe that climbing on Bilboquet is quite dangerous...
So, i put to links :
We have edit new flyer...
I don't feel that it is as immediately obvious that it is unstable as prior posters would make out though (certainly anyone who implies that you'd have to be braindead to climb it is being foolish) I will be discouraging others from getting on it in future out of respect for the areas rules.
(.. though I do use chalk in Font so perhaps I'm just a hypocrite).
The Baton Wicks guide has a picture of someone climbing on it. So presumably that's because Jo Montchaussé is braindead and doesn't know the area properly...
This is shown quite eloquently with the new welsh slate guidebook. It was continually delayed due to a resurgence of routing. Even then, when it was launched it was immediately outdated when compared to the slate wiki.
Guidebooks are a good source but are not necessarily the right ones for when things change. After all, when looking for accommodation, you wouldn't necessarily use a guidebook to book a hotel that may no longer be in existence.
It would be a good idea for new guidebooks for font to include the advisory note about the chien but there are far better resources such as the internet for people to find out eg, UKC, UKB, Bleau.info, latribunelibredebleau.blogspot.fr
Should these be removed?
The problem we have here is that most people don't decide which area that they are visiting often until each morning over coffee and croissants.. In bouldering areas such as Font which have many different locations; familiarising oneself with all banned boulders in advance doesn't seem feasible. Once there -armed only with the guidebook- people can make mistakes.
I'm glad that you brought it up on here as I and many others now know and will -hopefully- spread the word. I just think that we need to afford a little understanding to the under-informed.
No, I'm only taking issue with the idea that it's obvious at a glance that it's about to topple over and that anyone who would think of climbing on it must be "braindead".
The basic point is that if people evidently aren't aware that it's unstable, then we can rant and rave about how obviously unstable it is and how people must be braindead if they climb on it as much as we want, but it doesn't change the fact they aren't aware and they do climb on it.
Alternatively, we can accept that fact and talk constructively about how to actually change it.
And I would suggest that it is about being aware rather than not caring, because even the most selfish, chalk using, rubbish leaving climber is going to care quit a lot about the possibility of several tons of rock falling on them.
Having been in Font the other week it's also worth mentioning that the crack is far from obvious - I looked for it in light of this thread and while I don't doubt it exists I couldn't find it.
So, guidebooks show people climbing this boulder, the damage is fairly invisible and there is no signage (in an area where they're happy to paint on the rocks - saw multiple instances of 'bees nest' and 'snake' marked on boulders, not to mention the route markings themselves).
As access violation mistakes go it's fairly understandable.
I've got old guide books of Fontainebleau which show people climbing in vibrams on the boulders, and if you look carefully you will find old rusty pitons on some of the bigger blocks... Times change, if you visit an area which is quite obviously very over-climbed - just look at the polish - then you should try and keep up to date with the dos and don'ts. You all do it at home so why does it seem so shocking abroad?
For the person who couldn't see the crack it's the ginormous one on the left of the base next to the blue shirt in first photo (and the third but no blue shirt) here:
Not that hard to see really... new glasses? :-)
Awareness by linking is a good thing. Thank you.
From what they say on their blog and the consolidation work they are trying they are afraid of it tipping to the right (in the photo) - they did some test drilling to see if it was part of a much larger rock under the sand. Unfortunately it isn't so they put down some large blocks on the right and covered them up with sand and are now "monitoring the crack", which I took to mean to see if this wide crack was getting any wider if the block was leaning further.
Here's a link to a more recent article. The small photo shows clearly the crack that is concerning them and explains their concerns, and those of the ONF, that it is getting larger, confirming my impression from the first article.
i just write a new article on this you can read here :
Does anyone on UKC fancy translating this and submitting it as a news item or article for UKC or even UKB to raise awareness?
If you instal google toolbar it has a translation button that works fairly well. Here's what it gives for the first few paragraphs:
"The block of Bilboquet is probably one of the most famous Fontainebleau and therefore one of the most photographed. It was he who inspired the logo of LTL ² B!
We have discussed many times in this blog because this emblem of Bleau is a fragile colossus with feet of clay ...
Indeed, the image of Epinale that is the sandy beach of Ass and his famous dog-like stone lion's head would certainly lose its force if the rock came to rock! Improbable? Not so much!
Erosion is a natural phenomenon that man contributes to speed. There are a few decades, some climbers were concerned about the presence of numerous small cracks between the "ball" and the base of the ornament, but also the presence of a very large crack in the back of the base. The decision was taken not to encourage the escalation of this symbol of the Three Gables. The ways of Bilboquet are no longer marked and listed in the guidebooks."
Not too bad, "Ass" comes from "Cul" in a literal translation, and "Three Gables" is "Trois Pignons", badly translated, as pignon can be the end wall of a house, or, as in this case, "peaks" but you wouldn't want to translate names anyway.
I suppose I should offer to do it :-) I'll see if I can, but I find that the google thingy enables me to at least understand pages in German or Spanish which otherwise I wouldn't be able to, despite learning them at school.
The boulder of Bibloquet is without doubt one of the most well-known of font and as such one of the most photographed. It’s also the one that inspired the logo for LTL2B (this blog). In this blog we’ve often talked about this emblem of font that is nothing but a fragile colossus with feet of clay..
In effect the image of epinale which is the beach of sand that is cul du chien and it’s well known stony alluring head of the lion certainly could give into it’s own weight if the rock were to topple. Impossible? Not quite
Erosion is a natural phenomenon which man is helping to accelerate. It’s been many 10’s of years that some climbers were worried about the existence of many small cracks between the ‘boule’ and the plinth of the curio (boulder?) but also, of the presence of a large crack at the back of the plinth. The decision was taken to not encourage the climbing of this symbol of trois pignons. The routes of the Bibloquet are therefore no longer given in the topo’s.
Despite this many climbers (including bleausards of a high standard) are continuing to climb and to photograph themselves on it providing a bad example.
Elsewhere on the site
The usual suspects and dark horses have been in play across Scotland over the rock season of 2014. One of the main... Read more
The Lakpa Rita and Kriti Tech jackets are a pair of shell products from the Sherpa Adventure Gear brand – the... Read more
Urban climber James Kingston will be on stage at all UK screenings to answer questions about his remarkable film... Read more
So, just what is the Petzl RocTrip? Every year French climbing manufacturer pick a sport climbing area that has potential... Read more
Save £20 when you buy a Petzl Elios Helmet!! The Petzl Elios helmet (2013 Version) is tough & durable,... Read more