/ The Douglas Boulder

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
aln - on 08 Mar 2014
Is it a boulder?
Harry Holmes - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln: Im going to say no. I guess it will be some sort of fault like feature but it doesn't show up on geological maps, or the ones I have looked at anyway.
It does however appear that these is a small amount of Old Red Sandstone up there,sort of at the top of Cearn Dearg.

aln - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to naffan:

OK. If it's detached completely from the main face I'll take it as a boulder. Is it?
aln - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

Why is it a boulder and who's Douglas?
Le Chevalier Mal Fet - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

There's a big gully between it and the main part of tower ridge, but I wouldn't say it was detached. Also it's bigger than most crags in England.
aln - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to ChrisMurray:

Yeah I know but I'm being geologically pedantic. Is the Douglas Boulder a piece of rock detached from the main face?
Kevin Woods - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

Gullies undermine it, but it's otherwise firmly attached to Tower Ridge. It shares the same rock as the rest of Ben Nevis so not strictly a boulder.
peebles boy - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

> Why is it a boulder and who's Douglas?

The SMC was founded in 1889. One of its founders, Joseph Gibson Stott, argued for the presence of a Club Journal, in which information about the Scottish hills could be conveniently recorded and circulated. It seems amazing now, in its 111th year, that Stott had a hard time convincing a pilot meeting of its viability and even desirability.

The arguments against were mainly that Scotland was too small to be able to provide more than a few numbers of the Journal, while Stott maintained (for the first time he believed) that there were at least 300 mountains in Scotland whose height exceeded 3,000 feet. Luckily for us, Stott won the day and became its first Editor, the first of 12 to date, counting the current incumbent.

Of interest to readers may be the fact that in those far-off days before word processing on fast computers, the Journal was published three times a year, in January, May and September. This continued until 1918, when the harsh economies of the First World War imposed a reduction to two issues per year. From 1942 onwards, the Journal was published annually.

Stott emigrated to New Zealand, having published seven numbers, the task being taken over by William Douglas in 1892. A lover of the hills, and equally sympathetic to walkers and mountaineers, Douglas (after whom the Douglas Boulder on Ben Nevis is named) continued as Editor for nearly 18 years, producing 53 issues. It was during his reign that the Axes and Rope logo of the Club first appeared on the cover of the Journal, in January 1898.

(from http://www.smc.org.uk/journal/history )

So now you know who Douglas was!!

Is it a boulder? No. If it is, the routes are decidedly highball no matter how many crash mats you use....
IanMcC - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to peebles boy:
If you want to read early SMC journals, they're online here:

http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/smcj/
Michael Gordon - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

It's attached, both to the lower part of Tower Ridge (below the Douglas Gap) and to the earth beneath it. If it was completely separate from Tower Ridge it would still be a pinnacle, not a boulder (so yes, the 'Douglas Pinnacle' might be a more accurate but less unique title!).
alan moore - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

A proper boulder is a lump of rock. Douglas's Boulder is a heap of rubble.
alan moore - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to IanMcC:
Thanks! These are remarkable...had no idea they were available on-line.
Nath93 - on 08 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

Does anyone know what height the top of the Boulder sits at ?
cookieman - on 09 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

Try climbing gutless or cutlass to appreciate this stunning rock
Morgan Woods - on 09 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

What is the best beanie and crash pad combo to scale it then?
Kevin Woods - on 09 Mar 2014
In reply to Nath93:

970-ish m, it's big enough to see on the OS 1:25 000
Nath93 - on 09 Mar 2014
In reply to Kevin Woods:

Cheers Kev, was just being too lazy to check it myself really.
Le Chevalier Mal Fet - on 11 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

No
ads.ukclimbing.com
aln - on 11 Mar 2014
In reply to aln:

Thanks for the replies. Some interesting historical background.

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