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.