This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Ok, I know all you rock-rich Northerners etc. will probably not want to miss the opportunity to diss. our much maligned Southern soft stuff, but that, is essentially the problem; it is soft,too soft.
As many of you will know, some of the rock is erroding at an alarming rate; I'm thinking especially of Stone Farm, at which I have seen a notable deterioration even in the space of a year. The main problem is with the rock at the bottom of the butresses etc. i.e. the start of the routes.
Anyway, to get to my main point, I was at Stone Farm yesterday afternoon for a few hours, taking a fairly new climber to S.S. for the first time, when a pretty annoying incident occurred: Firstly we could hear raucous shouting a bit further along the crag, but then a little while later, like a herd of young buffalo, a load of young, helmetted teenage boys came trooping down. My friend was part way up a climb called 'Key Wall', which was, at 5A, quite a test for him. Now, if anyone knows Stone Farm, they'll know that 'Key Wall' is on Stone Farm Pinnacle, which is separate from the main wall and so creates a little passageway behind this pinnacle. This party which was led by two (also helmetted) instructors, who were trying to get them to move through this passageway without touching the ground (i.e. scrabbling over the rock in their trainers).I was at this stage biting my lip, but when they told the first ones through to run to the back of the queue, to wait to do it again I had to vent my spleen: These kids were less than two metres from my ascending friend and were making a huge ammount of noise and disturbance. The amazing thing was that once I had exploded at one of the instructors for it, he couldn't see what my problem was. They moved along anyway, probably because they feared for their own personal saftey, but my main points are;
a) What/who is this local outdoor pursuits/adventure centre that I've seen there before who seem to be completely oblivious to the sensitive state that S.S. is in, especially Stone Farm.
b)Can the B.M.C. do anything about it, given that Stone Farm has some kind of special status with the them.
We see similar types of things at Bowles and it is infuriating. Don't get me wrong, I think it't great to get kids climbing, but S.S. is not the best place for beginners, especially when there are so many indoor walls around. I think most kids would prefer an indoor wall to S.S. anyway,; they'd probably feel they've acheived more. I honestly feel that most S.S. will be unusable within the next twenty years if we don't stop this nonsense.
Those local to nice Gritstone crags etc. please feel free to take the piss; you know you want too!
As many of you will know, some of the rock is erroding at an alarming rate; I'm thinking especially of Stone Farm, at which I have seen a notable deterioration even in the space of a year. The main problem is with the rock at the bottom of the butresses etc. i.e. the start of the routes.
Anyway, to get to my main point, I was at Stone Farm yesterday afternoon for a few hours, taking a fairly new climber to S.S. for the first time, when a pretty annoying incident occurred: Firstly we could hear raucous shouting a bit further along the crag, but then a little while later, like a herd of young buffalo, a load of young, helmetted teenage boys came trooping down. My friend was part way up a climb called 'Key Wall', which was, at 5A, quite a test for him. Now, if anyone knows Stone Farm, they'll know that 'Key Wall' is on Stone Farm Pinnacle, which is separate from the main wall and so creates a little passageway behind this pinnacle. This party which was led by two (also helmetted) instructors, who were trying to get them to move through this passageway without touching the ground (i.e. scrabbling over the rock in their trainers).I was at this stage biting my lip, but when they told the first ones through to run to the back of the queue, to wait to do it again I had to vent my spleen: These kids were less than two metres from my ascending friend and were making a huge ammount of noise and disturbance. The amazing thing was that once I had exploded at one of the instructors for it, he couldn't see what my problem was. They moved along anyway, probably because they feared for their own personal saftey, but my main points are;
a) What/who is this local outdoor pursuits/adventure centre that I've seen there before who seem to be completely oblivious to the sensitive state that S.S. is in, especially Stone Farm.
b)Can the B.M.C. do anything about it, given that Stone Farm has some kind of special status with the them.
We see similar types of things at Bowles and it is infuriating. Don't get me wrong, I think it't great to get kids climbing, but S.S. is not the best place for beginners, especially when there are so many indoor walls around. I think most kids would prefer an indoor wall to S.S. anyway,; they'd probably feel they've acheived more. I honestly feel that most S.S. will be unusable within the next twenty years if we don't stop this nonsense.
Those local to nice Gritstone crags etc. please feel free to take the piss; you know you want too!
In reply to Mark Sheridan: people are destructive
In reply to Mark Sheridan: people are destructive
In reply to i.munro:
I am aware of the broader discussions taking place re.S.S., but I would be interested in feedback on my two main points specifically.
I am aware of the broader discussions taking place re.S.S., but I would be interested in feedback on my two main points specifically.
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
Thought you'd be interested because I started that thread specifically to discuss your point b) I also thought it was interesting how many times phrases like your "Stone Farm, at which I have seen a notable deterioration even in the space of a year." have been appearing on here.
As for your point a) this was also discussed recently
& this extract from the SPA was posted:
Candidates must demonstrate competence in the following areas. They should be able to:
2.1 Access
a. understand and observe current access and conservation guidelines.
b. interpret and use effectively the access information given in guidebooks and other sources of information.
c. show an appreciation of and care for all aspects of the climbing environment.
d. show an ability to obtain information on and willingness to comply with locally important crag issues and agreements.
2.2 Conservation
a. demonstrate good practice in the conservation and care of the environment.
b. operate in such a way as to minimise impact on the environment (including the climbing resource).
c. define problems of conservation and the effects of human pressure on the climbing environment.
d. manage groups so that they have minimal impact and leave the crags in an improved condition where possible.
e. demonstrate an awareness of the general environment on UK crags as well as locally important species and the legal situation relating to protected flora/fauna.
f. demonstrate some knowledge of different rock types and crag features.
2.3 Etiquette
a. demonstrate an awareness of responsibilities to the general public, environmental agencies, local residents, landowners and the climbing community.
b. demonstrate an awareness of local rock climbing ethics related to single pitch crags.
c. operate a flexible programme of activities so as to accommodate other site users.
d. be aware of the hazards presented to other site users by the actions of a group and act to minimise these.
e. demonstrate an awareness of the site-specific requirements and agreements relating to different crags, climbing walls and artificial structures.
Clearly whoever these people are they are failing to do this .
Were there any clues ( t-shirts) lettering on van?
Thought you'd be interested because I started that thread specifically to discuss your point b) I also thought it was interesting how many times phrases like your "Stone Farm, at which I have seen a notable deterioration even in the space of a year." have been appearing on here.
As for your point a) this was also discussed recently
& this extract from the SPA was posted:
Candidates must demonstrate competence in the following areas. They should be able to:
2.1 Access
a. understand and observe current access and conservation guidelines.
b. interpret and use effectively the access information given in guidebooks and other sources of information.
c. show an appreciation of and care for all aspects of the climbing environment.
d. show an ability to obtain information on and willingness to comply with locally important crag issues and agreements.
2.2 Conservation
a. demonstrate good practice in the conservation and care of the environment.
b. operate in such a way as to minimise impact on the environment (including the climbing resource).
c. define problems of conservation and the effects of human pressure on the climbing environment.
d. manage groups so that they have minimal impact and leave the crags in an improved condition where possible.
e. demonstrate an awareness of the general environment on UK crags as well as locally important species and the legal situation relating to protected flora/fauna.
f. demonstrate some knowledge of different rock types and crag features.
2.3 Etiquette
a. demonstrate an awareness of responsibilities to the general public, environmental agencies, local residents, landowners and the climbing community.
b. demonstrate an awareness of local rock climbing ethics related to single pitch crags.
c. operate a flexible programme of activities so as to accommodate other site users.
d. be aware of the hazards presented to other site users by the actions of a group and act to minimise these.
e. demonstrate an awareness of the site-specific requirements and agreements relating to different crags, climbing walls and artificial structures.
Clearly whoever these people are they are failing to do this .
Were there any clues ( t-shirts) lettering on van?
In reply to i.munro:
They were all wearing the same white helmets, instructors included. I think their centre or base is somewhere near the fields at the bottom of the hill; I've seen archery targets set up there before. Having not seen this lot arrive and having left before they did, I can't confirm whether or not they came from or went off in that direction, but I have seen similar groups come from over the fields before. I've also seen a couple of these instructors come on their own from there for an hour or two's climbing. A large party of trainer-wearing kids were there on another occasion from somewhere like Islington, with so-called instructors; I tried to politely challenge them on the suitability of taking a party of beginners to such a sensitive site, but they just thought I was mad or a miserable old git.
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
>
> Clearly whoever these people are they are failing to do this .
> Were there any clues ( t-shirts) lettering on van?
>
> Clearly whoever these people are they are failing to do this .
> Were there any clues ( t-shirts) lettering on van?
They were all wearing the same white helmets, instructors included. I think their centre or base is somewhere near the fields at the bottom of the hill; I've seen archery targets set up there before. Having not seen this lot arrive and having left before they did, I can't confirm whether or not they came from or went off in that direction, but I have seen similar groups come from over the fields before. I've also seen a couple of these instructors come on their own from there for an hour or two's climbing. A large party of trainer-wearing kids were there on another occasion from somewhere like Islington, with so-called instructors; I tried to politely challenge them on the suitability of taking a party of beginners to such a sensitive site, but they just thought I was mad or a miserable old git.
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
Hmm not really much to go on I'm afraid.
As for suitability for beginners my feeling is that the issue is really that of cleaning shoes. A lot of people have been calling for trainers to be added to the list of banned footwear. However that works out I strongly feel that whoever is climbing must always clean their feet thoroughly before touching the rock whether it's on a 4a or a 7a.
Hmm not really much to go on I'm afraid.
As for suitability for beginners my feeling is that the issue is really that of cleaning shoes. A lot of people have been calling for trainers to be added to the list of banned footwear. However that works out I strongly feel that whoever is climbing must always clean their feet thoroughly before touching the rock whether it's on a 4a or a 7a.
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=67292
is this the sort of (I can only use the word vandalism) you mean?
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=67292
is this the sort of (I can only use the word vandalism) you mean?
In reply to i.munro: Mark Sheridan on - 20 Sep 2007
This is interesting;
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=67292
Funny you should mention it!
This is interesting;
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=67292
Funny you should mention it!
In reply to Mark Sheridan: The current BMC guidelines are here http://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmcNews/media/u_content/File/access_conservation/so...
To quote (my emphasis):
"Footwear
1. Wear light soft-soled footwear. If you do not have specialist
rock boots, lightweight gym shoes are best. Clean your shoes
before starting each climb."
To quote (my emphasis):
"Footwear
1. Wear light soft-soled footwear. If you do not have specialist
rock boots, lightweight gym shoes are best. Clean your shoes
before starting each climb."
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
but you were still climbing there yourself?
people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
> As many of you will know, some of the rock is erroding at an alarming rate; I'm thinking especially of Stone Farm, at which I have seen a notable deterioration even in the space of a year.
but you were still climbing there yourself?
people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
In reply to Mark Sheridan: In reply to the OP, there is no hope whatsoever if the SS people do not apply themselves to the top roping ethic. The rock itself is doomed. Years ago when the ethic was established that was the flaw in the system. It always has been but then it didn't matter as much, there were fewer climbers, trashing the rock was years away.
I'm sorry, if you cannot see I can't make you, <lowers eyes in sadness>.
I'm sorry, if you cannot see I can't make you, <lowers eyes in sadness>.
In reply to Undertow:
We've been over this again & again recently. The damage caused by climbing is minimal provided the guidelines are followed. A bunch of kids in sandy trainers or a couple of overstrong thugs showing off in approach shoes probably do more damage in half an hour than a thoughtful climber does in a year
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
>
> [...]
>
> but you were still climbing there yourself?
>
> people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
>
> [...]
>
> but you were still climbing there yourself?
>
> people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
We've been over this again & again recently. The damage caused by climbing is minimal provided the guidelines are followed. A bunch of kids in sandy trainers or a couple of overstrong thugs showing off in approach shoes probably do more damage in half an hour than a thoughtful climber does in a year
In reply to Undertow:
Of course all climbing contributes to erosion, but climbing properly, with well-placed (not scrabbly) clean footwear doesn't cause that mucgh erosion.
As I commented on another thread, I've seem more damage to a climb like Sashord Crack in the past 6-8 months than I did in the previous 9 years of climbing on it.
It's not *just* down to numbers (it's always been a very popular route) but down to people who are virtual novice climbing it in (often uncleaned) trainers. The numbers of such people in groups have mushroomed in the past year or two.
Because they're novices who are on a climb that's too hard for them, they scrabble. Trainers are not as "sticky" as climbing shoes, so even if clean are unlikely to be precisely placed (without sliding) by a novice.
Trainers are harder to clean that climbing shoes, because they have treads, so are likely to contain residual amounts of sand whatever.
It's the scrabbling that does most of the damage. It's scrabbling in dirty shoes that does more damage than anything.
So it's not a question of "I want to climb there but others shouldn't". It's a question of people climbing routes of appropriate difficulty in appropriate style for their experience...and of "instructors" being aware of this.
Only one of the people I saw on Sashcord Crack the other week had anywhere near the level of skill to have had a chance of climbing it clean. The others were just being hauled up, scrabbling like crazy.
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
> > people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
> > people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
Of course all climbing contributes to erosion, but climbing properly, with well-placed (not scrabbly) clean footwear doesn't cause that mucgh erosion.
As I commented on another thread, I've seem more damage to a climb like Sashord Crack in the past 6-8 months than I did in the previous 9 years of climbing on it.
It's not *just* down to numbers (it's always been a very popular route) but down to people who are virtual novice climbing it in (often uncleaned) trainers. The numbers of such people in groups have mushroomed in the past year or two.
Because they're novices who are on a climb that's too hard for them, they scrabble. Trainers are not as "sticky" as climbing shoes, so even if clean are unlikely to be precisely placed (without sliding) by a novice.
Trainers are harder to clean that climbing shoes, because they have treads, so are likely to contain residual amounts of sand whatever.
It's the scrabbling that does most of the damage. It's scrabbling in dirty shoes that does more damage than anything.
So it's not a question of "I want to climb there but others shouldn't". It's a question of people climbing routes of appropriate difficulty in appropriate style for their experience...and of "instructors" being aware of this.
Only one of the people I saw on Sashcord Crack the other week had anywhere near the level of skill to have had a chance of climbing it clean. The others were just being hauled up, scrabbling like crazy.
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
The site at the bottom of the hill is called Blackland Farm and is a Girl Guide site. If it was them, I'm sure they would be receptive to comments. I wouldn't have thought it was them as I've met them before and they've been pretty well organised and behaved.
http://www.girlguiding.org.uk/xq/asp/sID.108/qx/centres/article.asp
The site at the bottom of the hill is called Blackland Farm and is a Girl Guide site. If it was them, I'm sure they would be receptive to comments. I wouldn't have thought it was them as I've met them before and they've been pretty well organised and behaved.
http://www.girlguiding.org.uk/xq/asp/sID.108/qx/centres/article.asp
In reply to Rob Naylor:
While I agree with what Rob says I can't see any excuse for even the most skilled not to clean their feet . Why?? It costs nothing & can only enhance the experience.
While I agree with what Rob says I can't see any excuse for even the most skilled not to clean their feet . Why?? It costs nothing & can only enhance the experience.
In reply to Mark Sheridan: groups is the problem. when people do things in groups, it always leads to problems
In reply to Undertow:
Not at all just want others to be considerate eneougth to follow the guidelines published by the BMC as linked above and instructors to undertake the responsabilities that they should know better about if holding a SPA or similar.
Not at all just want others to be considerate eneougth to follow the guidelines published by the BMC as linked above and instructors to undertake the responsabilities that they should know better about if holding a SPA or similar.
In reply to tonanf:
Not realy, it is not groups as a genralisation that is the issue but poorely lead / controled groups with instructors ignorant of the issues of climbing particulart to the rock type and the area.
Not realy, it is not groups as a genralisation that is the issue but poorely lead / controled groups with instructors ignorant of the issues of climbing particulart to the rock type and the area.
In reply to Undertow:
Your obviously trying hard to get the 'most stupid comment of the week' award.
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
>
> [...]
>
> but you were still climbing there yourself?
>
> people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
>
> [...]
>
> but you were still climbing there yourself?
>
> people keep moaning about erosion of SS but carry on climbing there. its like they want no-one else to climb there but themselves, as if them climbing all over it does less damage than anyone else
Your obviously trying hard to get the 'most stupid comment of the week' award.
In reply to Al Evans:
Sorry Al, you can't make me see, primarily because I just can't understand what you're actually saying. What is this 'apply themselves to the top roping ethic' sentance supposed to mean?
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan) In reply to the OP, there is no hope whatsoever if the SS people do not apply themselves to the top roping ethic. The rock itself is doomed. Years ago when the ethic was established that was the flaw in the system. It always has been but then it didn't matter as much, there were fewer climbers, trashing the rock was years away.
> I'm sorry, if you cannot see I can't make you, <lowers eyes in sadness>.
> I'm sorry, if you cannot see I can't make you, <lowers eyes in sadness>.
Sorry Al, you can't make me see, primarily because I just can't understand what you're actually saying. What is this 'apply themselves to the top roping ethic' sentance supposed to mean?
In reply to Anyone: What does the current SS ethic say about lowring off? I assume it is not allowed?
Sam
Sam
In reply to tonanf:
I 'm sorry but that's just self justification.
I agree a leader who is being paid (as, I assume, whoever was in charge of the kids in the pics above is ) has absolutely no excuse for not being aware of the local ethics or for not teaching some respect to his charges & should not be allowed to continue to teach.
However these problems are widespread, or the rate of damage wouldn't be what it is. Can any of us say we coudn't be a bit more careful with foot cleaning & careful setting of ropes?
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan) groups is the problem. when people do things in groups, it always leads to problems
I 'm sorry but that's just self justification.
I agree a leader who is being paid (as, I assume, whoever was in charge of the kids in the pics above is ) has absolutely no excuse for not being aware of the local ethics or for not teaching some respect to his charges & should not be allowed to continue to teach.
However these problems are widespread, or the rate of damage wouldn't be what it is. Can any of us say we coudn't be a bit more careful with foot cleaning & careful setting of ropes?
In reply to Sam L:
Not really.
The idea is that you MUST rig the top rope so that you are able to lower off (in the event of a fall) without the moving rope coming in contact with the rock.
Note that this can mean the Krab lower down than you might like depending on the route (sometimes a lot lower).
You should of course not lower off having completed the route (you just walk down).
> (In reply to Anyone) What does the current SS ethic say about lowring off? I assume it is not allowed?
> Sam
> Sam
Not really.
The idea is that you MUST rig the top rope so that you are able to lower off (in the event of a fall) without the moving rope coming in contact with the rock.
Note that this can mean the Krab lower down than you might like depending on the route (sometimes a lot lower).
You should of course not lower off having completed the route (you just walk down).
In reply to Al Evans:
You're wrong Al because you're fighting the wrong battle.
A soloing only ethic (if adhered to) might well have protected the rock until the recent popularity of bouldering but one half of the current crisis would still be there. Look at
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=265505 or take yourself off to Bleau & look at what's happening there.
Ok the top of the crags would be in a lot better condition but we're now seeing them being destroyed from the bottom up as well & it looks like SS is just the first to go.
The answer's the same in each case. Everyone needs to climb in such a way that the damage they do to the rock is minimised.
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan) In reply to the OP, there is no hope whatsoever if the SS people do not apply themselves to the top roping ethic.
You're wrong Al because you're fighting the wrong battle.
A soloing only ethic (if adhered to) might well have protected the rock until the recent popularity of bouldering but one half of the current crisis would still be there. Look at
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=265505 or take yourself off to Bleau & look at what's happening there.
Ok the top of the crags would be in a lot better condition but we're now seeing them being destroyed from the bottom up as well & it looks like SS is just the first to go.
The answer's the same in each case. Everyone needs to climb in such a way that the damage they do to the rock is minimised.
In reply to i.munro: AND, the battle is taken to the front line on SS, if you guys cannot/will not, see, when the evidence is in front of your eyes what hope have we got for the rest of UK in the next 50 years? TR is bad for the rock (as is all climbing, accepted), but TR magnifies the problem and should be discouraged.
In reply to Al Evans:
So, let me get this straight Al, are you really saying that all anyone should do on SS is solo?
> (In reply to i.munro) AND, the battle is taken to the front line on SS, if you guys cannot/will not, see, when the evidence is in front of your eyes what hope have we got for the rest of UK in the next 50 years? TR is bad for the rock (as is all climbing, accepted), but TR magnifies the problem and should be discouraged.
So, let me get this straight Al, are you really saying that all anyone should do on SS is solo?
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
thats exactly what he is saying if you want to save the rock.
however to really save it you have to stop climbing altogether. which no one wants.
so where to draw the line. do you only climb routes that your easily going to get up. even the best climbers scramble a bit when the going gets tough.
personally a slow destruction caused by careful top roping and cleaning shoes is probably the only solution.
thats exactly what he is saying if you want to save the rock.
however to really save it you have to stop climbing altogether. which no one wants.
so where to draw the line. do you only climb routes that your easily going to get up. even the best climbers scramble a bit when the going gets tough.
personally a slow destruction caused by careful top roping and cleaning shoes is probably the only solution.
In reply to SI A:
You're probably right there. If everyone was to apply the care necessary it could last very much longer, but somehow I can't help thinking...
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
>
>
> personally a slow destruction caused by careful top roping and cleaning shoes is probably the only solution.
>
>
> personally a slow destruction caused by careful top roping and cleaning shoes is probably the only solution.
You're probably right there. If everyone was to apply the care necessary it could last very much longer, but somehow I can't help thinking...
In reply to Al Evans: I'm relatively new to climbing. Your probably going to slate me anyway (or assuming I'm trolling) for this but....
I'm thinking that you must mean by saying top roping (which is bottom roping anyway right?) magnifies the problem that it is not the presence of the rope that is causing damage but the way people climb when they top rope something? Or that top roping allows a certain type of person to climb (be that someone that wouldn't be described as a 'climber' - or whatever you want to call them!) that doesn't care about damage to the rock they might be doing by their behaviour whilst climbing?
Does anyone have any feedback from Sundays SS meeting at The Junction?
I'm thinking that you must mean by saying top roping (which is bottom roping anyway right?) magnifies the problem that it is not the presence of the rope that is causing damage but the way people climb when they top rope something? Or that top roping allows a certain type of person to climb (be that someone that wouldn't be described as a 'climber' - or whatever you want to call them!) that doesn't care about damage to the rock they might be doing by their behaviour whilst climbing?
Does anyone have any feedback from Sundays SS meeting at The Junction?
In reply to tommyzero:
As I understand it what he's saying is that if top/bottom roping weren't allowed on SS there would be far fewer people climbing which would slow the damage a lot.
My argument was that (even in some fantasy world where this ethic was obeyed, as the less restrictive one of leading only, clearly isn't elsewhere) SS would now be a venue for bouldering & traversing leading to pretty much the same problems we currently have.
Look at the threads on here on top-roping in the peak & Bridestones. SS is the canary in the coal mine if we can't get the message out which is 'climb but take care to minimise the damage you do' no bouldering or short leading venue has that much of a future.
As I understand it what he's saying is that if top/bottom roping weren't allowed on SS there would be far fewer people climbing which would slow the damage a lot.
My argument was that (even in some fantasy world where this ethic was obeyed, as the less restrictive one of leading only, clearly isn't elsewhere) SS would now be a venue for bouldering & traversing leading to pretty much the same problems we currently have.
Look at the threads on here on top-roping in the peak & Bridestones. SS is the canary in the coal mine if we can't get the message out which is 'climb but take care to minimise the damage you do' no bouldering or short leading venue has that much of a future.
In reply to tommyzero:
The SVG meeting went ahead as planned.
We discussed forthcoming works being planned for Bull's Hollow (to be done by Croydon MC), Stone Farm and Harrison's (about 3 weekends worth of trimming, drainage work and path rehabilitation there) plus some pruning at High Rocks.
The increasing wear and the threads on here were discussed. Resin work is outside SVG's remit, but the urgency of gettig work done in some areas was highlighted and will be brought up at the HRMG meeting next week.
We discussed the idea of attaching laminated tags to some of the bolts at Harrison's and Stone Farm showing the right and wrong way to set up a belay, but again this is a matter for HRMG (Harrison's Rocks Management Group) to take forward. Some HRMG members were present on sunday, so it will be discussed.
Additional signage in some places like the Bow Window area at Harrison's, emphasising correct procdeures, were discussed but most people were against proliferating signs too widely (and also concerned at how quickly a couple of signs placed previously at Harrison's and Stone Farm had been destroyed).
SVG discussions mainly centre on maintenance work to be carried out, excluding the actual state of the rock, but discussing it (and minuting it) does mean that HRMG will take it on board at their meeting next week.
> > Does anyone have any feedback from Sundays SS meeting at The Junction?
The SVG meeting went ahead as planned.
We discussed forthcoming works being planned for Bull's Hollow (to be done by Croydon MC), Stone Farm and Harrison's (about 3 weekends worth of trimming, drainage work and path rehabilitation there) plus some pruning at High Rocks.
The increasing wear and the threads on here were discussed. Resin work is outside SVG's remit, but the urgency of gettig work done in some areas was highlighted and will be brought up at the HRMG meeting next week.
We discussed the idea of attaching laminated tags to some of the bolts at Harrison's and Stone Farm showing the right and wrong way to set up a belay, but again this is a matter for HRMG (Harrison's Rocks Management Group) to take forward. Some HRMG members were present on sunday, so it will be discussed.
Additional signage in some places like the Bow Window area at Harrison's, emphasising correct procdeures, were discussed but most people were against proliferating signs too widely (and also concerned at how quickly a couple of signs placed previously at Harrison's and Stone Farm had been destroyed).
SVG discussions mainly centre on maintenance work to be carried out, excluding the actual state of the rock, but discussing it (and minuting it) does mean that HRMG will take it on board at their meeting next week.
In reply to tommyzero: its not got anything to do with the 'type of person' top roping attracts, its the wearing out of the rock from the rope friction.
In reply to Mark Sheridan: once all the sandstone is worn away and usless for climbing on, the people local to it will have the perfect motivation, motive, excuse, to move house to somewhere there is stone that isnt quite so perishable.
In reply to Rob Naylor:
Thanks Rob. Interesting to know. I signed up with Graham to put my name on the list to volunteer and come and help with the work. I hope to make the time once he releases details/dates. Would have liked to have made the meeting.
Thanks Rob. Interesting to know. I signed up with Graham to put my name on the list to volunteer and come and help with the work. I hope to make the time once he releases details/dates. Would have liked to have made the meeting.
In reply to i.munro: Thanks Ian. I read the Bridestones thread.
I guess signs are going to vandalised whether this is done by climbers or non climbers. Tags on the bolts sounds good. How will this be funded?
I thought of another idea. Cant we ask all London walls, local groups and so on to put up notices or something? Would the BMC produce 'crisis' material in addition to the existing guidelines? If London climbers (and over the summer I see so many faces I recognise!) make up a large portion then advertising something at their walls would be something?
I guess signs are going to vandalised whether this is done by climbers or non climbers. Tags on the bolts sounds good. How will this be funded?
I thought of another idea. Cant we ask all London walls, local groups and so on to put up notices or something? Would the BMC produce 'crisis' material in addition to the existing guidelines? If London climbers (and over the summer I see so many faces I recognise!) make up a large portion then advertising something at their walls would be something?
In reply to tommyzero:
Both ideas sound good to me. I have a contact at one of the London walls I'll ask if this is possible.
Should they agree, does anybody know who to contact to get an agreed text?
Both ideas sound good to me. I have a contact at one of the London walls I'll ask if this is possible.
Should they agree, does anybody know who to contact to get an agreed text?
In reply to Mark Sheridan: Another idea.
Maybe 'we' could set up a website. We put the ethics and ideas on a website, it can be updated with news and problem areas etc....
Instead of 'How am I driving' how about 'How are you climbing?' T -Shirt or sign? The T-Shirt, worn down the crags by the 'we', advertises the website? And points people to the website...? Maybe it could be an 'Ask me about climbing here?' So 'we' act as delegated points if info for climbers?
There is nothing like getting pro-active. Why are we leaving it in other people's hands?
The 'we' would be anyone that cares about preserving the rocks. A climbers collective?
Maybe 'we' could set up a website. We put the ethics and ideas on a website, it can be updated with news and problem areas etc....
Instead of 'How am I driving' how about 'How are you climbing?' T -Shirt or sign? The T-Shirt, worn down the crags by the 'we', advertises the website? And points people to the website...? Maybe it could be an 'Ask me about climbing here?' So 'we' act as delegated points if info for climbers?
There is nothing like getting pro-active. Why are we leaving it in other people's hands?
The 'we' would be anyone that cares about preserving the rocks. A climbers collective?
In reply to tommyzero: thats a good idea. i would love to have a t-shirt with 'Designated Sandstone advsier' written on it. Wicked!!!
Even if no one else wants to, shall we get some and wear them around. Could be justified as an experiment, market research type thing.
Even if no one else wants to, shall we get some and wear them around. Could be justified as an experiment, market research type thing.
In reply to Mark Sheridan: p.s. i know a couple of people who would probably PAY to be allowed to wear one.
In reply to tommyzero: pps, im not joking either (about getting the shirts and wearing them). But am joking about people paying to wear them, i think??
In reply to Mark Sheridan: the t shirts should direct web users to One or more of the established ss web sites, uk climbing, Grahams site and theres another I think. They all have sections on how to climb ss there.
People may be going to the crags, completly oblivious to any damage, wet climbing, distrbance agenda.
People may be going to the crags, completly oblivious to any damage, wet climbing, distrbance agenda.
In reply to Mark Sheridan:
Hmm. I should maybe think a bit more about posting before I post something. Or re read it......
Sarcasm huh.
We should link up with an existing website then.
If these are bad ideas then we should start the ball rolling with proactive ideas that we implement
Hmm. I should maybe think a bit more about posting before I post something. Or re read it......
Sarcasm huh.
We should link up with an existing website then.
If these are bad ideas then we should start the ball rolling with proactive ideas that we implement
In reply to tonanf: Your asking for trouble now with that.
In reply to tommyzero: im not being sarcastic. if you will wear one i will too.
In reply to Mark Sheridan: im off to work on designs.
T
T
In reply to tonanf:
I have raised this point before, but it kind of fits in with the t-shirt thing.
If the white-hats had some way of identifying each other then it would be possible to get some numbers together before having a word (or several) wuth the worst offenders.
I at least would find this quite encouraging especially when there's a big group of them & only one of me.
I have raised this point before, but it kind of fits in with the t-shirt thing.
If the white-hats had some way of identifying each other then it would be possible to get some numbers together before having a word (or several) wuth the worst offenders.
I at least would find this quite encouraging especially when there's a big group of them & only one of me.
In reply to i.munro:
Vandalism or a great day out of the city for some kids? I know which I think it is.
jk
> http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=67292
> is this the sort of (I can only use the word vandalism) you mean?
> is this the sort of (I can only use the word vandalism) you mean?
Vandalism or a great day out of the city for some kids? I know which I think it is.
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Why do you think a great day out for some kids involves doing damage like this?
It's important that we all show respect for the rock if our sport is to have a future & those being brought into the sport need to be taught that from the beginning. If those who are making a living out of that sport can't be bothered to teach that then they shouldn't be allowed to teach anything else.
Are you going to claim these kids are so deprived that they can't clean their shoes then B%^*ks they seem to be able to manage helmets & any carpet shop gives samples away free.
Why do you think a great day out for some kids involves doing damage like this?
It's important that we all show respect for the rock if our sport is to have a future & those being brought into the sport need to be taught that from the beginning. If those who are making a living out of that sport can't be bothered to teach that then they shouldn't be allowed to teach anything else.
Are you going to claim these kids are so deprived that they can't clean their shoes then B%^*ks they seem to be able to manage helmets & any carpet shop gives samples away free.
In reply to i.munro: I would hope you don't get carried too carried away with the enforcement idea. I am all for any protections that can be extended to SS, but I clean my shoes on my trousers or bouldering mat. If a group were to approach me in some t-shirts telling me that the only way to clean your shoes is to use a piece of carpet I would have little option but to have choice words.
In reply to jkarran:
And while I'm having a bonkers rant, what makes this group of kids so special? What about the kids next decade or next year who might want to have that day out but can't because whoever was in charge of this lot couldn't be bothered to instruct them to take a little care.
And while I'm having a bonkers rant, what makes this group of kids so special? What about the kids next decade or next year who might want to have that day out but can't because whoever was in charge of this lot couldn't be bothered to instruct them to take a little care.
In reply to Eric the Red:
I worked as an instructor for blacklands farm for a few summers, I would be quite suprised if the group aforementioned was from this centre. The centre run a variety of activities (i.e. indoor climbing, kayaking, archery etc. etc.) and 'outdoor climbing' (i.e. at stone farm rocks) is included on the rota. However, there tend to be very very few sessions of this type run, partly due to lack of instructors with SPA, perhaps also partly due to lack of demand. I've never seen more than one session in a week, and any I've been to have been responsibly run.
Basically, I'm simply saying that this group may have been from Blacklands but I'd consider it unlikely, I think there are other centres who run sessions at stone farm.
> (In reply to Mark Sheridan)
>
> The site at the bottom of the hill is called Blackland Farm and is a Girl Guide site. If it was them, I'm sure they would be receptive to comments. I wouldn't have thought it was them as I've met them before and they've been pretty well organised and behaved.
>
> http://www.girlguiding.org.uk/xq/asp/sID.108/qx/centres/article.asp
>
> The site at the bottom of the hill is called Blackland Farm and is a Girl Guide site. If it was them, I'm sure they would be receptive to comments. I wouldn't have thought it was them as I've met them before and they've been pretty well organised and behaved.
>
> http://www.girlguiding.org.uk/xq/asp/sID.108/qx/centres/article.asp
I worked as an instructor for blacklands farm for a few summers, I would be quite suprised if the group aforementioned was from this centre. The centre run a variety of activities (i.e. indoor climbing, kayaking, archery etc. etc.) and 'outdoor climbing' (i.e. at stone farm rocks) is included on the rota. However, there tend to be very very few sessions of this type run, partly due to lack of instructors with SPA, perhaps also partly due to lack of demand. I've never seen more than one session in a week, and any I've been to have been responsibly run.
Basically, I'm simply saying that this group may have been from Blacklands but I'd consider it unlikely, I think there are other centres who run sessions at stone farm.
In reply to i.munro:
You see vandalism, I doubt they do, I susupect they see a fun new experience not available in the city, playing about on rocks much the same as most of us enjoy. Good honest outdoors fun.
And it's important that we all respect the rights of others too. My bet is they're not being 'brought into the sport', they're having some kind of outward bound experience through a youth group or school. You'd deny them that to save the rock for you and your mates? Your right of course, it'd be much better if they were hanging around outside their local corner shop or throwing stones at phone boxes. You try getting a bunch of excited kids to brush their feet every time they step off the floor and only make slow deliberate movements. My bet is you wouldn't stand a chance, that's not to say the instructors shouldn't try.
No, that would be daft.
jk
> Why do you think a great day out for some kids involves doing damage like this?
You see vandalism, I doubt they do, I susupect they see a fun new experience not available in the city, playing about on rocks much the same as most of us enjoy. Good honest outdoors fun.
> It's important that we all show respect for the rock if our sport is to have a future & those being brought into the sport need to be taught that from the beginning. If those who are making a living out of that sport can't be bothered to teach that then they shouldn't be allowed to teach anything else.
And it's important that we all respect the rights of others too. My bet is they're not being 'brought into the sport', they're having some kind of outward bound experience through a youth group or school. You'd deny them that to save the rock for you and your mates? Your right of course, it'd be much better if they were hanging around outside their local corner shop or throwing stones at phone boxes. You try getting a bunch of excited kids to brush their feet every time they step off the floor and only make slow deliberate movements. My bet is you wouldn't stand a chance, that's not to say the instructors shouldn't try.
> Are you going to claim these kids are so deprived that they can't clean their shoes...
No, that would be daft.
jk
In reply to i.munro:
What makes any of us so special? Nothing.
jk
> And while I'm having a bonkers rant, what makes this group of kids so special? What about the kids next decade or next year who might want to have that day out but can't because whoever was in charge of this lot couldn't be bothered to instruct them to take a little care.
What makes any of us so special? Nothing.
jk
In reply to i.munro:
Oi, watch it!
BD
> (In reply to jkarran)
>
> And while I'm having a bonkers rant...
>
> And while I'm having a bonkers rant...
Oi, watch it!
BD
In reply to jkarran:
You try getting a bunch of excited kids to brush their feet every time they step off the floor and only make slow deliberate movements. My bet is you wouldn't stand a chance, that's not to say the instructors shouldn't try.
That's why this picture makes me so mad. It's clearly posed.
The instructor not only wasn't trying (assuming they were taking the picture) but actively encouraging them not to bother & then compounding that by putting it on the net for others to see.
You try getting a bunch of excited kids to brush their feet every time they step off the floor and only make slow deliberate movements. My bet is you wouldn't stand a chance, that's not to say the instructors shouldn't try.
>
That's why this picture makes me so mad. It's clearly posed.
The instructor not only wasn't trying (assuming they were taking the picture) but actively encouraging them not to bother & then compounding that by putting it on the net for others to see.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...