UKC

So the climbing community has decided that bolts should only be placed at some areas but does that mean that it has to be like that to other sports like slacklining? who gets to decide? highlining is massively growing sport and needs bolts.

In reply to slackloaf:
Does it need bolts? Can it not just be done places with sufficient trad protection?

I think if bolts start popping up left right and centre they will just get chopped.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Depends if the OP has sufficient pro under his bridge ...

In reply to Wingnut:

He could at least hang around a bit and build up a profile before starting the trolling.

In reply to slackloaf:

it is going to start happening soon it's just a matter of time. But would be interesting to see if climbers felt as strongly about bolting for slacklining as they do for climbing? I mean if they're not slackliners then do they really have a say?

In reply to slackloaf:

Poor

0/10

In reply to slackloaf:

It's got nothing to do with what sport is being practiced - it's whether or not it's acceptable to permanently deface the landscape (I choose my words deliberately) for the sake of recreation (it isn't).

If you can't slackline, climb, bungee jump or whatever else without leaving a trace then you should go somewhere else where you can.

In reply to slackloaf:


Mike Pescod tried that argument when he bolted five finger gully, saying canyoning has different ethics.

Countryside code, what everyone should be following, says leave it like you found it, so no bolting for slack lines. Some foreigners did some highlines off stuff like stoer, I think. They had bolted them, once told of the British ethic, they removed the bolts and apologised, so a non-bolting precedent has been set.

In reply to slackloaf:

Im Sure theres more than enough places for highLining without the need for bolts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc8wIdKlQA0&feature=youtube_gdata_playe...

In reply to jonnie3430:

I think there were some bolts put in for slacklining somewhere near the top of Stone Cold Fever at Cheddar (to the right of it). Some folk were slacklining between two ridges there when we were climbing the route a couple of years ago.

In this particular case, if we accept bolted sport routes in a particular venue is acceptable (and anyone who climbs it is saying that) it would be hypocritical to say discrete bolting for slacklining should not occur above it. This isn't murder of the impossible - we're not talking about preserving climbs in their natural state for when people with the skills to climb them arrive on the scene. A road, a fence post or a vehicle is far more intrusive on the environment than a discrete bolt out of view of anyone except those using it.

In reply to Chris Sansum:
Slackliners pulled one of the top rope bolts completely out of the rock along with a lot of the rock around it at Harrison's a year or two back, luckily the backup bolt held!

In reply to Chris Sansum:

It shouldn't be venues that are sport, but routes. If a route has natural gear why bolt it? Cheddar is a particularly bad example of bolting routes that have trad gear. Taking that into slackling, there will be lines that you can set up with or without bolts. As the default setting for the outdoors in the UK is to leave it as you found it, bolts would be out of place and you should slackline where bolts are not needed.

The OP is a bit special when he declares highlining needs bolts. There will be several sites that don't need bolts. Once you have a flat line over a large drop you are done. The view around the drop doesn't matter. There is only the mental challenge that makes it harder than slacklining between 2 trees in a park.

OP: Good troll by the way.

In reply to slackloaf:

After many years of research some scientists have found the cause of slack-lining and developed a cure. After a few more years of product development and testing they have brought this wonderful cure to the mass market...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stanley-199E-Trim-Knife-Grey/dp/B0001GRVKK/ref=tag_...

In reply to crayefish:

It's a well known fact that slacklining was invented by boulderers.

In reply to Removed User:


Wouldn't surprise me. Boulderers are the snowboarders of the climbing world. lol

In reply to jonnie3430:

>They had bolted them, once told of the British ethic, they promised to remove the bolts and apologised

Fixed that for you, as they say. They were full of words about how they'd remove them - once their sponsor got involved, of course - but I don't think they ever did.

jcm

In reply to Removed User:


That figures. There is certainly something really quite abhorrent about slacklining culture, though it is quite hard to put ones's finger on it. Having said that I feel pretty comfortable settling for blind prejudice.

In reply to slackloaf:

Ok sorry for saying "slacklining needs bolts" maybe that sounded disrespectful.. but for lines longer than about 35m trad gear is not very safe - boulders slung with spansets can be fine but a bunch of cams is not gonna be good idea.
Climbers dont just do one climb and then go home saying i climbed a high rock that was fun ive done climbing now.. they want to climb on another route like. its the same with salcklining around the world folk are doing amazing lines and they are getting longer and longer but in the uk so far slackliners have not placed bolts in trad areas becasue they dont want to upset the climbers. but it is holding the sport back and many people feel its time for a discussion on whether climbing ethics apply to slacklining. To be sure nobody is going to start spraying bolts all over the UK trad scene but a few well placed bolts here and there surely isn't going to hurt anyone?

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Is trad pro sufficient for slacklining? If you think about the angles there's probably a 5- to 6-fold force amplification over the weight of the slackliner going on there.

In reply to slackloaf:

The damage caused to the landscape by a few bolts is insignificant, and virtually invisible unless you are right next to them. Climbers cannot expect to be taken seriously if we pursue this argument while condoning the roads, car parks, climbing huts, campsites and other intrusions which we rely on to practice our sport.

The objection to bolts in trad climbing is based on the ethics and aesthetics of the sport. We cannot expect other sports to share those (we can't even always agree between ourselves). What we can hope for is that other sports respect them, and do their best to ensure that their activities do not impinge on ours. In return we should do the same with theirs.

In reply to Howard J:

>Climbers cannot expect to be taken seriously if we pursue this argument while condoning the roads, car parks ...... which we rely on to practice our sport.

What utter twaddle. Honestly, the things some of you people say.

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:

They are not climbing ethics. They are general outdoor ethics. I would be equally put off as a hillwalker or MTbiker to find bolts in the areas of the uk i would consider natural. It takes away something from the wilderness of the area or situation, almost a taming effect.

In reply to Alex the Alex:


No part of the UK is natural (possibly excepting the most remote corners of Scotland and sea cliffs/stacks).

In reply to planetmarshall:


No. It is only partly (and perhaps superficially) to do with that. The bolting debate in climbing is mostly about the way we climb rather than defacing the landscape. One bolt for slacklining would be of far, far less concern than one bolt on, say, Three Pebble Slab, even if the visual impact were the same. Indeed, it is often possible to make a dangerous (from a climbing point of view) case for bolts on environmental grounds.

Having said all that, there is absolutely no doubt that the best place for bolts is in slackliners' skulls.

In reply to slackloaf:


But surely slacklining is always the same rope? you might set it up in cool places, but you're not actually using the natural feature for your sport? More like taking a turbotrainer into the countryside than mountainbiking, for instance...

In reply to andrewmcleod:

True, I meant to put natural in quotation marks. Its more an illusion of 'natural'. You can ab in to Wen Zawn and feel a hundred miles from civilization even though your not. A nest of bolts at the top would reduce that atmosphere, even if only a smidgen.

In reply to slackloaf:

Slacklining is a sport?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:



No, I think he's spot on. Compared to all the other stuff that humans have done to the landscape, a few small bits of metal plugged into a bit of rock are pretty negligible in terms of pure visual impact. A lot of the time you wouldn't notice they were there unless you were looking for them.

There are very very good reasons to resist the tendency to go around sticking bolts in stuff whenever it's convenient and I'd generally applaud you for fighting the good fight on that issue, but if you're going to try to argue it from an absolute position of "we must leave no trace of our passing (except roads, car parks, paths, gates and stiles, polish, chalk, gardening etc) visible in the pristine natural (apart from grazing, farming, building, quarrying, erosion, reservoirs, forestry etc) landscape" then you're not doing yourself any favours.

In reply to climbwhenready:


Yes trees and larger boulders for starters!

In reply to slackloaf:

So if an activity cannot be done without any imapct on the environment it shouldn't be done? so that's all those walkers making ugly trails across the cliff tops all those climbers who fly to spain or patagonia or drive to the crag or hell practise at an indoor climbing wall in a concrete building marring the landscape! we're talking about 3 or 4 little bolt studs each side hidden somewhere at the top of the cliff..

In reply to Ramblin dave:


Agreed. The bolting debate has got very little to do with the environment.

In reply to andrewmcleod:


Eh? I think you mean wilderness.

In reply to Robert Durran:

so you think the arguments for trad climbing revolve around not wanting to remove the mental aspects to trad climbing that currently exist with the protection we use?

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Absolutely. Almost entirely.

In reply to Ramblin dave:

Oh, for goodness' sake. The fact there are roads doesn't mean we shouldn't drop litter.

jcm

In reply to CurlyStevo:


I'd say mostly.

I think there is also an aesthetic and environmental aspect to it, but that aspect is massively exaggerated in the minds of people who spend a lot of their time looking very intently at bits of rock. If you were to bolt the whole of Avon, say, a lot of climbers would think that it spoilt the appearance of the place as well as the climbing, whereas anyone who doesn't climb would be unlikely to notice it next to the road, bridges, buildings etc.

In reply to Robert Durran:


But "the" bolting debate that you are referring to is about sportsmanship. Placing permanent bolts on a mountain crag in the UK (assuming that this is what we are talking about), on the other hand, has a lot to do with the environment and affects many people outside of the context of trad climbing.

With regards to roads, paths etc the OP is making a strawman argument. Roads etc are necessary for our economy and infrastructure and as far as I am aware none has ever been built for the recreational purposes of a handful of people. It's not the impact that necessitates the "Leave no Trace" philosophy but the legacy of the impact, and the harm done to the many for the benefit of a few. If you want a bombproof anchor to slackline from, use a tree.

Andrew.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Good. Point.

In reply to planetmarshall:

slackliners like spectacular locations in the same way climbers do..and many of these do not have two trees perfectly placed at either side for anchors. climbers decided to bolt some areas because it was the only way they could be climbed with protection rather than soloing.. so why the double standards?

In reply to slackloaf:

Where the bolts on the Old man of Stoer ever removed ?

In reply to slackloaf:


Ask a bolter? As I don't bolt I don't have double standards when I suggest we stick with the countryside code and leave it as we found it.

In reply to Doug:


there was a bolt on the landward side when I was last there about 18 months or so back

In reply to CurlyStevo:


On the tower or on the mainland? I think I remember one on the mainland and pegs on the tower.

In reply to slackloaf:

self self self self self self self.

In reply to jonnie3430:

yes a bolt on the mainland and a collection of rotting tat on the tower.

In reply to Doug:

I doubt it. According to one of the perpetrators placing it was the proudest moment of his life

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=A-wWIX7FXgoC&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&am...

so I think we can judge the sincerity of his apologies and promise to take it out fairly accurately.

In fact, you've reminded me. I may email their sponsors again. Last time the CEO of them (I forget who it was just now) told me he would place his trust in their 'rock solid integrity') to remove it.

Unfortunately I can't easily see from their website who their sponsors are

http://www.yogaslackers.com/about

I can see from their map of their activities that they think Sweden's in round about the Ukraine, though, which probably pretty much sums them up.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

No, but it means we should accept that the stuff we do for fun will inevitably have some impact on the place where we do it - on the appearance and atmosphere of the place, on the ecology, on other recreational users and so on - and that we should talk about it in terms of whether that impact is a price worth paying[1], rather than pretending that we scrupulously obey a fundamental principle that human activity should never defile the pristine natural environment and that's why we shouldn't bolt Ratho quarry.

[1] which in this case it isn't...

In reply to slackloaf:


Well, that's now the sportsmanship debate rather than the environmental one, which I'm not going into. You're right about the double standard. Many climbers, particularly in the UK, feel that if a climb can't be done free then it shouldn't be done at all - this was what Messner meant with his famous "murdering the impossible" quote. Would I reject the chance to climb El Cap even though I could probably only do it aided? I think in that case I'd have to embrace my own hypocrisy.

In reply to Alex the Alex:


Devils advocate here, I am certainly not in favour of the tops of crags being bolted for slacklines. However the above statement is basically rubbish. Look at Malham Cove, one of the most famous, even to non-climbers bit of rock in the country. It is however more or less grid-bolted, now is that because of climbing ethics or outdoor ethics? As climbers we can be pretty guilty of choosing the ethics to suit our purposes.

In reply to daWalt:

sorry you're suggesting that the growing community of slackliners in the UK are being selfish for wanting to do their sport? But the climbers are not... because?? If you don't want to engage then fine we'll just do what we want without talking it through..

In reply to slackloaf:

where do you want to bolt?

In reply to planetmarshall:

Odd word to use, but OK...


Really? Why? I doubt anyone apart from a climber is even going to notice let alone get upset about a bolt on a mountain crag.

In reply to slackloaf:

I personally think that bolts on any natural edge is unacceptable and bolting, for whatever activity, is potentially ok in quarries only.

In reply to The Pylon King:

Ok well when the climbing community removes all bolts that aren't in quarries then we can take this suggestion seriously - not trying to be aggro just saying

In reply to slackloaf:

Prana was their sponsor, I remind myself. Wonder if they still are?

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:

As for bolts, it depends a bit as to where you put them. For example a few years ago someone bolted Broad Stand on Scafell. The bolts got removed pretty quickly. If you were to bolt a mountain area the bolts would get removed. If you were to bolt somewhere like say, Huntsmans Leap in Pembroke, the bolts would get removed.

If you were to bolt a quarry that's already bolted? I doubt anyone would care. I have to say however generally, I can't think of many quarries where you'd actually want to slackline (or of many quarries, where you have two cliffs opposite each other).

In reply to slackloaf:

do you climb?

In reply to thermal_t:

I was talking about the whole "leave no trace" ideal behind using the outdoors. But yes, its quite clear that different parts of climbing contradict that. What I was trying to get at was that its not about "well if climbers can bolt so can I". As mentioned, climbers have no more importance than slackliners in that respect. Instead I think there should be a general sense of respect for the UKs wild spaces which should be shared by all who use it. Leave no trace is part of that mentality.

In truth though my reason for not wanting bolts is pure selfishness. When im out I want to feel that sense of adventure/wilderness. Bolts, just as litter or graffiti, would pull me out of that daydream. But it may only be climbers that would feel that way as bolts have more significance to climbers.

In reply to Robert Durran:
"Having said all that, there is absolutely no doubt that the best place for bolts is in slackliners' skulls."

Robert - That's a pretty harsh thing to say. I don't understand your blind hatred for slackliners. Can you perhaps explain? It's a great way to improve balance, core strength, mental focus and most importantly is great fun. The majority of slackliners are climbers and the 2 activities compliment each other very well.

In reply to shantaram:

>2 activities compliment each other very well.

Oh no they don't!

Complement, conceivably.

I should have thought a glance at the yogaslackers website was sufficient to answer your question to Robert.

jcm

In reply to mattrm:

Thanks mattrm.. I get the picture that it depends on the crag as to whether climbers would be accepting of highline bolts or not.. my question on here is really why? Climbers have bolted some areas and not others according to what works best for their sport..not bolting routes = adventure and UK bold tradition, bolting = sport routes.. which is great but why not let other sports decide for themselves also? If climbers want to seek out the discrete highline bolts at the cliff top to tie their dogs to while they fiddle with their micro wires then so be it..and if they're so against bolts why don't they go and gangbang Malham with an angle grinder? no ones proposing sticking a double redundant anchor bolt cluster in the middle of a grit classic..

In reply to slackloaf:

See, the thing is, UK climbers have – very roughly – come to the view that placing bolts in certain areas is not on – call them wilderness, or whatever (spare me the lectures; we know it’s not the Antarctic). Thus sea cliffs, mountain crags, etc (again, by and large; I know there are exceptions). And the reason for that (pace various morons higher up this thread) is – again very roughly - the whole ‘leave nothing behind’ thing.

So, if you start going and sticking bolts in Napes Needle or Huntsman’s Leap, there’s going to be trouble. People are going to think you’re no better than, say, fishermen with their tracked vehicles and so forth. If you go and do it at, say, Malham or High Tor, there isn’t.

In that context, it's a bit confrontational to head your thread with reference to "UK trad crags".

Of course, if you want to say that because we have roads in the UK and climbers drive on them you can do whatever you like (see morons above as before), then there’s no purpose in discussion.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Just to be clear who that particular ad hominem is directed at, could you point out where someone actually says anything remotely comparable to "because we have roads in the UK and climbers drive on them you can do whatever you like"?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

thanks for the reply jcm.
sorry wasn't meaning to be 'confrontational' with "UK trad crags" only that that is really at the heart of the question.. lots of highline bolts already exist in areas where climbing bolts are accepted and nobody has noticed becasue they are lost amoung the thousands of climibg bolts.

'TRAD CLIMBING area' - The climbing community has designated them 'TRAD CLIMBING areas'.. they are not trad BASE jumping venues or trad OIL PAINTING spots.. and they are not TRAD HIGHLINING spots..

so the question is - does one sport get to decide what another sport does with its ethics?

In reply to Ramblin dave:

"Climbers cannot expect to be taken seriously if we pursue this argument while condoning the roads, car parks, climbing huts, campsites and other intrusions which we rely on to practice our sport."

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
And from


you get "do whatever you like"?

In reply to slackloaf:

Keep it to Tintern Quarry and Nobody will give a Shit anyway

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Does being able to view an argument from both sides make someone a moron ?

Why should a non-climber respect climbers traditions when those traditions have so little logic attached to them?

You and I might understand why bolts are accepted at Raven Tor but not Water-cum-Jolly, or on certain bits of Malham but not on others, but you can't claim that is due to our respect for the environment, or a 'leave nothing behind' philosophy. If that were the case they we might have a chance in persuading others to follow our rules. As it is, I suggest being nice is going to work better than threats and name-calling.

In reply to slackloaf:

Well, the 'leave nothing behind' ethic wasn't invented by climbers; it long predates either climbers or slackliners.

You're right, of course, one sport doesn't get to say anything about other sport's ethics. But that's not really the point, to my mind, anyway.

In practical terms there's only one language people understand and that's removing the bolts, which I suspect is what will happen if you decide it'd be fun to highline from the West Buttress of Cloggy over to the top of Indian Face (for example).

jcm

In reply to Chris the Tall:


No, but saying that as long as someone doesn't object to roads they can't say anything about any other form of environmental damage does. That isn't seeing both sides of an argument, it's spouting weak-minded non-sequiturs.

jcm

In reply to Chris the Tall:

>You and I might understand why bolts are accepted at Raven Tor but not Water-cum-Jolly, or on certain bits of Malham but not on others, but you can't claim that is due to our respect for the environment, or a 'leave nothing behind' philosophy

Oh, totally. I don't think there's any point at all in telling slackliners they can place slacklining bolts at the top of Malham but not on the Right Wing, for example.

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:

No.

But as you can see from this thread there are a lot of passionate climbers with a misguided belief bolts are inherently evil, and it will only be a matter of time before they feel duty bound to do some bolt chopping for the benefit of us all. How charitable of them.

Their probably googling "slack lining venues" already.

I think in a few generations or maybe less the UKs bolting ethic will come into line with that found in most major climbing areas in the world, perhaps an increase in bolts placed for slack lining will help with this.

In reply to Howard J:



Thank you for this post.. seems level.
It's clearly better for everyone if there can be mutual respect and most slackers are decent folk who dont want to upset anyone. But at the same time a developing sport isn't going to be stopped dead in its tracks (in the UK) by infamous UK trad climbing bickering. all that will lead to is a bunch of hacked bolts/replaced bolts/hacked bolts/replaced bolts and a big effing eyesore that nobody wants.

In reply to slackloaf:

This has nothing to do with climbers, slack liners, film crews or anyone else, it's to do with respect for a beautiful landscape and the environment. Placing bolts in mountains is selfish and disrespectful.

In reply to Ramblin dave:



Oh, for God's sake man.

I got that from 'The damage caused to the landscape by a few bolts is insignificant, and virtually invisible unless you are right next to them.' followed by words to the effect 'because no-one complains about roads'. This is, as Planetmarshall could be bothered to explain in detail but I can't, bollocks, fairly satirised in my view as 'because there are roads you can do whatever you like'.

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:


Luckily for us highlining is not a sport, so the question is irrelevant

In reply to slackloaf:

>most slackers are decent folk who dont want to upset anyone.

So far, the only ones I've seen are the ones who think it's OK to go to the Old Man of Hoy, Am Buachaille and the Old Man of Stoer, scatter a few bolts around, retreat to America and publish a DVD and a book about their amazing rad adventure, promise to remove one of their bolts, and then not do it, all while publishing a load of proto-environmental earth-hippy stuff on their website.

Do you think that was OK?

jcm

In reply to GridNorth:


Sorry what? Its a beauty cvontest?
so climbers have ruled that Cheddar is not "beautiful' enough and so yes bolts are fine (def not selfish and disrespectful there).. Stanage is 'beautiful' and so no bolts allowed.. Cornish rock is not boltable because it is 'beautiful'(don't be disrespectful!) but wait except for Anstey's Cove which is obviously not really that beautiful so bolts are a yes.. sorry is this really your arguement?

In reply to slackloaf:



C'mon, your slip's showing. What's your point? Are you going to be respectful, or are you simply telling us you're going to start placing bolts where you like and we can't stop you?

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:


Of course it's a f*cking beauty contest. What's the matter with you?

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:

Gotta say, im Leaning towards slackloafs trolling argument on this :-D

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

well to reassure you jcm.. there's not gonna be a load of bolting up your local trad crag anytime soon.. or if it's being planned they're (wisely) not talking about it.. but lets air this out so when it comes there's been a chance for logical discussion.. If the message is you have to abide by another sports epics without any compromise then climbers will prob have less of a say in what happens than if they present a logical arguement for why another sport should bolt some areas and not others..

In reply to slackloaf:

OK, fair enough. So you're just coming on here to issue rather inarticulate threats. As long as we all know where we stand.

jcm

has it occurred to anyone that maybe we're wasting time here? maybe we should all become computer programmers or receptionists and complain about how much paper we have to staple before 9pm. quite honestly, i'll slack wherever there are anchors, and if there aren't, i'll move on until i find some. this is such as silly argument about who gets what and why he can't do that but i can because nature loves me, why not properly scout out spots first before resorting to setting your own anchors and pissing people off?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


sorry havent threatened anyone? or am I scarier than i thought?
didn't say no bolts would be placed - just that they're not gonna appear all over your local crag.. luckily most trad climbing spots dont have good potential highlines - but some areas like Cornwall are swimming in them.

In reply to slackloaf:

You are my hero http://www.joogleberry.com/sites/default/files/images/DSCF2795.JPG

In reply to Mr Lopez:

If I were to be picky here, that's not a slackline.....

In reply to slackloaf:

Why don't you say where you have in mind so that it can be discussed like adults on a case by case basis. As most of the things said above by people is getting us no where.

as has been said there are already bolts in some trad venues, i think that its unfair of us climbers to not at least hear from you what and where you want to do? The last thing i want as a climber is to see bolts being drilled and then pulled, drilled then pulled. We are all adults and can work together in my opinion. Climbing is my life and passion, but go back a couple of hundred years and it didn't even happen. our world is a changing place!

Jon

In reply to Oceanrower:

If we are to be picky, neither is a piece of webbing that has had the shit cranked out of it with a ratchet or a 6:1 pulley system

In reply to Mr Lopez:


If thats Coming to my local crag, bolt away.

In reply to Choss:


Ladies and gentlemen!

Following Choss' endorsement the greatest show on Earth will be coming to a crag near you very soon!!

We don't say when or where, but we guarantee plenty of clowns and something to do with a tight sling that is slack, or a slack sling that is tight, or something.

Follow us on our EpicTV channel in the meantime to find out just how XXtreme we are.

That is all.

In reply to Howard J:




Well said.

In reply to slackloaf:

What about bolts with no hangers like there are on sport crags with a slightly under the radar access agreement?

In reply to Mr Lopez:




Mate. That Sounds awesome!

Didnt realise my personal Endorsement Carried so much weight. But no clowns, because clowns Scare me.

please say its the Chuckle brothers on the highwire...

Better than the Boring over serious Climbers one often Encounters at crags eh?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Here we go. Let's just have a stab at his grammar. Best to not get personal. Everyone has an opinion no matter how they choose to present it to the reader. The level of articulation does not become a deciding factor when determining which side of the argument is correct.

In reply to Choss:

Most slack liners I've come across are climbers.

In reply to Choss:

Chuckle brothers were unavailable i'm afraid, but Kevin Bacon and the fat guy from goCompare said they'd be up for it. They mentioned something about falling to their deaths being an improvement to their professional careers

In reply to alex_arthur:


Yea, the more fun ones.

In reply to slackloaf:


An attempt at menace, great tactic for someone claiming to be interested in argument.

>If the message is you have to abide by another sports epics without any compromise then climbers will prob have less of a say in what happens than if they present a logical arguement for why another sport should bolt some areas and not others..

But bolting trad crags IS an affront to climber's ethics so you're immediately onto a non starter.


To everyone else: how long before someone says 'you don't have to clip the bolt?'

In reply to Robert Durran:



Pardon? How come?

In reply to Removed User:

I don't understand what your saying?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Napes Needle has already been slacklined and no bolts were needed or placed. Just careful rigging with trad gear.

http://www.mountain-lite.co.uk/index.cfm?action=gallery.thumbnails&set=...

http://www.mountain-lite.co.uk/index.cfm?action=gallery.thumbnails&set=...

In reply to alex_arthur:

The OP's statement of 'when it's coming' smells of threat, my reply was sarcastic.

The OP's next statement which I partially quote from seems to betray their lack of understanding of the trad ethic and why bolting trad crags would be unacceptable to the bulk of trad rockclimbers in the UK.

My final point is a joke. On almost every bolting discussion on here there are always people who argue that a trad experience can be had on a sport crag by choosing not to clip the bolts, which of course is utterly ridiculous.

In reply to August West:




No bolts placed at Huntsman's leap either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4CqoYjj4bE&list=UUt_Uaq4E9fIerHyiBLsUxY...

In reply to shantaram:

I think it is just that like other activities which are basically used as an excuse not to actually go climbing, it has a particularly wanky sub-culture. Just like juggling in the eighties and bouldering nowadays. Arguably skiing too

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Sorry, but I have to join the "morons". The environmental "leave no trace" argument is, relatively, a very minor one where bolts are concerned (if it were, then please explain why bolts at,say, Malham are ok, but not at, say, Millstone). The bolting argument is almost entirely about climbers tortuouly wrestling for a concensus on what style of climbing is acceptable in different places.

In reply to Mr Lopez:


Nor is climbing.

In reply to Choss:


Much as I really, really, really hate to admit it, so am I.....

In reply to Robert Durran:


If it is the worst thing you have to worry about then you are a lucky bunny

In reply to slackloaf: slackloaf has obviously got a pretty good understanding of UK climbing ethics and has put forward some good arguments. Well done that man for predictably rattling some cages.

In reply to shantaram:


Yes, he has certainly (cleverly?) exposed some of the very muddled thinking by some climbers about bolts.

In reply to slackloaf:

some areas like Cornwall are swimming in them.

Speaking as a Cornishman, I'm feeling a bit nervous now. I hope you have in mind some inland quarry where you have a special slacklining arrangement with the landowner. Surely you wouldn't condone placing bolts on Cornish sea cliffs, would you?

In reply to slackloaf:



Bolts are not 'fine' at Cheddar in every case, there are many good trad routes there as well which will not be bolted. Ansteys Cove is in Devon not Cornwall and is completely different rock and ethics. There are no bolted sea cliffs in Cornwall and never will be I hope. If you want to place bolts go to a quarry where it is acceptable. Or use trad gear. Can't think of many trad crags around me without trees on top to start

In reply to slackloaf:

Re Cornwall, there are two V good slackline venues in Holywell Bay, double heavy duty steel rings set into concrete on either side. One is a 50m gap with a 50m drop though, so be prepared to man up. The other is maybe 20m ish.

There's no climbing routes at either site, they have been there for years, set up by the army to play at rope tricks, but open to the public.

In reply to Cheese Monkey:

His point was, and I agree with it, that to someone not associated with climbing, bolt placing on certain cliffs seems to be arbitrary.

As this is the case, it seems to nullify the 'leave no trace' argument for not placing bolts, as climbers leave no trace, expect when they do (and as others have pointed out, what about the trace left by paths, chalk, tat, gardening…?).

Climbers would be pretty annoyed if say horse riders started to use their influence and ban climbing near horse riding places as it was an affront to their internal system of ethics of how the countryside should be used.

So why should climbers get to decide how slackliners practice their past-time?

In reply to BIgYeti86:


Because they change it. If there was no change there would be no issues.

In reply to BIgYeti86:

Very eloquently put and well summarised. Now are any climbers going to go and chop the unsightly ring bolts set up in Holywell Bay, Cornwall?

In reply to jonnie3430:

Yes but climbers change the place all the time (as mentioned, bolts where they think its ok, tat, gardening, polish...).

Can you honestly tell me your climbing has had exactly zero impact on the places you go to?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

The bolts on Stoer are long gone, though it was a climber who chopped them in the end. Weirdly enough, they aren't the only bolts on the Stoer headland.

P.S. I agree with slackloaf (insert sensible caveats here).

In reply to BIgYeti86:



And the point here - the "moronic" one, apparently - isn't that this means that "no trace" is pointless and that we should all ignore it and do whatever suits us, but that it's not the be-all and end-all of what's acceptable. That we all impact on the environment to a greater or lesser degree whenever we leave the house, and what we should be talking about is why some compromises are acceptable and some aren't, rather than just parroting "leave no trace" and "don't modify the landscape" as if that ends the argument.

In reply to Ramblin dave:

100% agree.

In reply to BIgYeti86:


Bolts are placed by very few. More climb sport routes than would ever bolt them.


No, but I try to keep it minimal, picking up rubbish as I go, removing tat, climbing routes in condition, not placing bolts, not toproping hard routes. I think most are the same.

In reply to slackloaf:

Wilton 1 The Prow near Bolton, if you ever put any bolts there, let me know, I always wanted to try that as a 1st highline project

In reply to jonnie3430:

So a couple of bolts placed by a few slackliners, which could be used by many slackliners wouldn't be a problem?


So do I. And I reckon a lot of slackliners also fall into this category.

In reply to BIgYeti86:

I wouldn't class taking a power drill up a mountain, drilling holes and glueing bolts into the rock as minimal.

Every time I go out I leave the environment as I found it. Yes, of course, I have had an impact on that environment but I challenge anyone to actually be able to see or quantify any damage. The adverse affects are a cumlative affect built up over years by individual visitors who like me have minimal impact on their own. Bolting is visible damage cause by one visit. If bolters cannot see this distinction then those of us who love the mountains have lost the argument.

In reply to GridNorth:


Are you happy with Malham being treated differently to the mountains?

In reply to GridNorth:


No they are more similar than you can see.. one walker doesn't make a massive gash across the hillside that is visable from miles away but 1000 walkers do. The impact on the rock of a 1000 highliners rigging and walking a line using the same three bolts is minimal in comparison. Many bolted climbing routes have been climbed thousnads of times - or is there one rule for climbing and another for other sports? Slackliners don't polish the rock, cover it in chalk, leave slings and bright bits of gear all over the place.. Highliners like the outdoors too. Banning highline bolts is like telling all sport clibers that if they want to clip bolts they should stick to indoors.
Yes bolts are always worse then no bolts and so should be avoided wherever possible but why should the ethics which one sport has developed be forced on another?
If UK climbing had banned all bolts you'd have a good argument cos you could say it's because of their impact on nature. But you haven't. you've decided that its fine in some areas and really bad in others - and the decision has nothing to do with how beautiful the place is or if its a quarry or natural rock.. and the deciding factor is arbitary and to do with first ascents and style which is fine but has nothing to do with another sports right to decide where to bolt.

In reply to mattrm:


Eh? Surely many quarries could have been designed with this specifically in mind!

In reply to GridNorth:


I think a couple of discreetly placed bolts is a lot less visible than say a mountain trail or a climbing hut even if they cannot be attributed to one single event. I also think you can love the mountains and place bolts for use for slacklining, they are not mutally exclusive.

In reply to slackloaf:

You are, I am afraid, absolutely right.

But I still despise you simply for being a slackliner (or an admittedly brilliant troll....)

In reply to Robert Durran:



c'mon hug a slacker? no?

In reply to BIgYeti86:

I'm sure the same was said to justify the first few bolts on climbs. Now we have people saying Malham is grid bolted and climbers use bolts where they see fit.

I am still of the environmental protection/ leave it for our kids to do it in a better style/ develop gear that we don't have, argument. There are loads of places where they don't need to be placed, have they waved his way across all of them?

Half the bolting these days is for training venues as people can't be bothered sticking a top rope up. Is he just trying to make it easier?

In reply to Ramblin dave:


You misunderstand me. The moronic argument is that because se we have roads there’s no purpose in debate about other environmental impact. You’re obviously completely right that before converting any part of the outdoors into a recreational facility a profit and loss analysis is called for.

jcm

In reply to slackloaf:

>and the decision has nothing to do with how beautiful the place is or if its a quarry or natural rock..

Cobblers (and this applies to Robert D and others as well). It's not the only factor, but it's certainly an important factor.

jcm

In reply to climbwhenready:


Most trad pro is rated in excess of 10kN, and slings & QDs double that. An 80kg slackliner weighs less than 1kN, so even with a 6-fold force amplification that looks like at least a two-fold safety factor. Obviously the strength of the anchor depends on the placement as well, but the gear itself I think is well able to take the load you suggest.

OTOH, do slackliners bounce up and down much? That could result in much greater loads on the anchors.

In reply to slackloaf:

Many of you put forward reasonable arguments but I think we need to draw a line somewhere to prevent wholesale bolting like on the continent. My line is that natural mountain crags and sensitive beautiful environments should not be bolted and yes I would include Malham. I'm not making any distinction between activities, bolting is bolting. There are places where that line becomes unclear but national parks and mountains fall firmly on the no bolting side IMO.

In reply to Martin W:

Trad gear is maximum rated for one-time use only and may well be destroyed in the process, the loads on slackines are anyway often much higher so around 20kN is often about the minimum AND that is the working load, not ultimate failure. Highliners not only bounce on lines they fall off sometimes as well.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Well, all factors might be important, but this one about the beauty of the area is relatively unimportant.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't agree. That's the fundamental reason why, in general, we don't like bolts in mountains but we don't mind them in quarries.

jcm

In reply to GridNorth:


I think most climbers would agree o this concensus, but the point is that slackliners are not currently part of that concensus (and why should they be) and so need to be persuaded to join it. Alternatively they could just be disposed of by judicious sabotage of their equipment.

In reply to Martin W:

6 x vertical load sounds like a low setimate to me.
Even accounting for the force onto only one end of the line.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


It does often work out that way, but I don't think there is any doubt that Malham is a nationally important beauty spot and it is well bolted. Loads of quarries are not bolted (even some real shit holes!)

In reply to Robert Durran:

Of course. However, the fundamental reason why we don't like bolts in mountains is aesthetic.

jcm

In reply to Robert Durran:

You also have to factor in the fact that bolting rock that has already been quarried and altered is very different to altering natural rock.

Still natural rock is bolted and some quarries are trad. I think its more to do with the style of climbing that is best suited to the rock than anything else, but in general usually many factors are considered before rock is bolted and then there are cases that could have gone either way. There are no hard and fast rules.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Somehow I doubt that. If you go walking with a bunch of people who have never climbed/slacklined (and therefore aren't looking for bolts), I highly suspect they would not notice 2 or 3 small bolts discreetly placed. I doubt they would even notice the bolted routes if you took them to a bolted crag and didn't point them out.

Bolts are hardly observable compared to say the erosion that is caused on paths by walking.

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Absolutely. And there are no "rules"; just an often fragile concensus.

In reply to CurlyStevo:
Thats a whole load of climbing ethics but what has it got to do with slacklining?

In reply to BIgYeti86:

>Bolts are hardly observable compared to say the erosion that is caused on paths by walking.

Yes, yes. Obviously. There are more senses than sight, and indeed aesthetic reasons go way beyond what is perceived by the senses.

I can't be bothered to argue this with you, to be honest. I get so tired of hearing facile observations like 'oh but what about footpaths'.

jcm

In reply to Martin W:



I have tested loads on highlines using a peak force dynamometer. The biggest peak load I managed was a shade over 10kn with a leash fall near the centre of a 20m line. A safe working load limit therefore needs to be at least 5 times this so 50kn is the minimum SWLL in my opinion, and 75kn is a good SWLL

A similar approach should be adopted for trad gear, if it is rated to 10kn, ideally 2KN should be regarded as SWLL and it should be equalised with enough other pieces of gear to achieve this.

BW

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

So the smell or taste of bolts gets to you too?

So far your main point seems to be 'I don't like it' or 'I'm allowed to use the mountains how I like but noone else who does things different is'.

These are fine but my 5 year cousin can put across a more mature point of debate.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Indeed. My climbing specific aesthetics would be hugely offended if I knew there was a bolt on, say, the Shelter Stone Crag, even if it was hidden away on an E7 and I was never going to get close enough to actually see it. But I think the point is that for the non-climbing public, it would be neither here nor there aesthetically.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't think that's true. It would annoy me even if I were not a climber.

jcm

In reply to BIgYeti86:



I agree that as climbers we're wrong to treat our own view - that bolting a clean piece of natural rock is an aesthetic abomination comparable to the destruction of the Bamiyam Buddhas - as if it was universal, rather than as something that's somewhat magnified in our eyes due to our fairly intense focus on the rock.

But that doesn't mean that our view is irrelevant - particularly when we're going to be the ones doing the bolting and/or chopping. Or that non-climbers don't notice bolts or care about them at all.

JCM: fair enough. I'm not convinced that that was what people were saying but I'll let them speak for themselves if they want to rather than getting into a prolonged he-said she-said argument.

In reply to slackloaf:



No, Stanage is a highball bouldering venue and doesn't need bolts ;-_

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:



+1 from me, however how do we convey this message and appreciation of aesthetics without looking like NIMBY precious prima donnas in the face of the 'roads/footpaths/cars' argument?
This thread has kinda exposed what we need to address.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:


As far as footpaths go, compare an area visited by the same number of people without a footpath to one with a footpath. The path cuts back on erosion. Roads aren't commonly constructed for climbers and we add no more to their impact by using them. Cars? The argument for better public transport is decades old.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:


Steady on old chap. Stanage, like all gritstone, is, actually high enough for Practicing for real climbing.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Not true the only reason there are bolts in quarries is because its easier to argue a case to have them there because its "man made".

Please don't call me a moron or be as rude as you have to others in this thread. You come across as obnoxious and people like to disagree with you purely for that reason at times.

Macca

In reply to Macca_7:


Call me obnoxious, sweetie, and I'll call you whatever I like, if I can be bothered, which I'm afraid at the moment I can't.

I do suspect though that you're right and that some of the people espousing the we-have-roads(and paths)-therefore-you-can't-complain-about-bolts doctrine are simply doing it to annoy; they can't really be that thick. Or perhaps they can and we really should introduce compulsory philosophy classes in schools.

jcm

In reply to Macca_7:

>Not true the only reason there are bolts in quarries is because its easier to argue a case to have them there because its "man made".

Oh, and this is bollocks, obviously. Few things have an 'only' reason for them in life.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Is anyone actually saying that? I interpret it as putting the environmental impact of bolts in perspective, rather than forming any sort of pro-bolt 'doctrine'.

In reply to slackloaf:

Some climbers seem to think that we are the only people who are entitled to use the crag and mountain environment. The fact is there are a host of activities, some of them fairly new, who also want to use it and we are powerless to prevent them. These activities have their own priorities and are probably unaware, and would probably fail to understand, our own particular obsessions and attitudes to bolting.

It seems to me that it is particularly difficult for the climbing community to object to the placing of bolts. The climbing community, taken as a whole , is very happy to place bolts in locations it finds acceptable (of course, individual climbers may have different views), so to try to claim that bolts are a blot on the landscape and are unacceptable really doesn't carry any weight. Besides, the visual intrusion of a bolt is insignificant. They can be bloody hard to spot when you're actually looking for them. To claim that a tiny piece of metal can damage a landscape that usually contains far bigger and more obtrusive man-made elements is frankly ridiculous.

The criteria that climbing uses to decide where bolts are acceptable have very little to do with protecting the landscape and are almost entirely based upon the effect they have on the climbing experience. We can't expect other activities to share our ethical sensibilities. What we can do is explain our point of view and ask them to respect it; in return we have to accept that we may have to accommodate their point of view.

Where we share space with other activities then we have to work out a way of protecting both sides' interests. We have no innate right to impose our particular way of thinking on them, although where climbing is already established we are entitled to argue that our claims should take priority over newcomers, simply because we were there first.

If slackliners, or another activity, want to place bolts climbers can certainly try to persuade them not to, or we can agree a location for the bolts which will be acceptable, or not too unacceptable, so that both activities can take place with minimal impact on each other. The alternative is likely to be a bolt-chopping and replacement war which is more than likely to end in access being forbidden for both activities.

In reply to Howard J:

There you go. Being sensible again......

However, being a sport climber and a (sometimes) slackliner, I agree with all of that.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


I actually think that the reason we don't like bolts in the mountains (and on sea cliffs) is less to do with beauty than because not having bolts in these places is more in jeeping with the other adventurous aspects of climbing in these places.

In reply to Howard J:

This is the sort of clear headed response we was hoping for.. Highline bolts should only be placed if there is no other anchors available and should be as few and discreet as possible (for minimal visual imapact and to avoid being chopped) They should also not be placed in the middle of trad routes but only at the tops (and ideally not at the top of a trad route either to stop climbers accidentally ruining their E9 experience by belaying off them. ha) usually there are more bolting options for highlines then climbing routes so this should be possible to stay well away from classics and that.. having said all that if some climbers think that any bolt wherever located on certain crags needs to be chopped (even if it is well away from the climbing) then there needs to be a coherent arguement as to why.. otherwise a bolt/chop/re-bolt/chop/re-bolt is inevitable and everyone will lose.

In reply to Howard J:
Carrying that argument forward do trad climbers have any right to impose there views over sport climbers? There does seem to be a growing number of climbers that don't do trad in the UK.

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Hence the reason that many traditional mountain (and less accessible valley) crags are returning to their natural vegetated state.

In reply to slackloaf:

1) Slacklining isn't a sport
2) Highlining is just Pepsi Max sanitised rubbish - it belongs in the ten pin bowling alley, next to Mc Donalds
3) yeah extreme
4) sick, should I say dude at that point too?

In reply to LakesWinter:

Oof, bitter.

Try slacking dude, it's a sick way to chillax.

In reply to slackloaf:

You should also take in any existing bolting/access agreements. Some climbing spots have fragile relations with the land owners/locals and any further bolting could jeopardize access for everyone.

In reply to dapoy:

Yeah true sorry forgot to add that.. and play ball with anything obviously sensible like nesting restrictions.

In reply to LakesWinter:







The old man tilted his head to the light

and then looked down at his own feet

somewhere in the distance a dog barked

In reply to slackloaf:

I think you've got a decent case, as long as you don't go overboard e.g. it might be fine to slackline on the summit of Tryfan, it would not be ok to bolt it.
But have you considered the opposite problem, of your brand new bolts being in constant use by climbers? If you bolted above a tidal sea cliff you, then you may well turn up to find ab ropes in place. For multi pitch climbing these could easily be in place for hours, and you can't safely remove the ropes

In reply to slackloaf:
I'm pretty sure if slackliners started placing a lot of bolts willy nilly in places like the Peak it wouldn't be long before the Park Authority (and other similar organisations) banned it.

In reply to LakesWinter:

Rad post bro.

And astute.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

They have compulsory philosophy classes in French schools but I've still seen very obtrusive slacklining bolts placed on top of a popular climbing boulder in the middle of a mature forest in France!

However that's not what the OP is suggesting at all. S/he obviously knows a lot about UK climbing ethics and is trying to engage the climbing community in a constructive discussion to work out a set off guidelines that everyone can live with. I don't get why people think it's a troll - they are making a very reasoned and thoughtful argument. I personally think that slacklining (even with bolt anchors) is a lot less damaging to the environment than climbing, both aesthetically and ecologically.

Anyway, the only place where I can really see a conflict of interest is on sea stacks or similar features where it could be argued that bolts change the experience for climbers by providing them with a bomb-proof abseil anchor. I'm not a slack-liner but I would argue that we can give them this. Well-placed bolts are more environmentally friendly and less visually obtrusive than peg/tat anchors and, in my opinion, the experience of high-lining to the top of a sea stack must beat hands down that of abseiling off a crap anchor. In addition the skill-set (both physical and mental) required is much higher. In any case for climbers the challenge of getting to the foot of the route and protecting the ascent is much greater than that of inspecting/reinforcing the abseil anchor, so as long as that aspect of the experience is conserved I think we can compromise on the descent.

Seems to me that those in need of a philosophy lesson are the knee-jerk, blinkered, self-important brigade that think they have the monopoly on deciding how our countryside should be used (and like to think of themselves as mysterious!).

Neil

In reply to Howard J:

Don't you know you cant say shite like that on this forum. You will have a witch hunt on you. If its rock its belongs to trad-climbers. Unwritten rule number 8.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9TXhlowyAOA/TVsiAb9Lo3I/AAAAAAAAFeY/_n-s2LQWXow/s...

http://www.dreaminvertical.com/2013/10/re-bolting-manifest-for-2013/comment...
The world is big enough for everyone just not us!

In reply to ClanAdventures:


Yes, plenty room for an American approach to bolting in America. Just not here please.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Afterall we are British right Robert

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Until September anyway.....

In reply to nb:


Why does it always have to be 'brigades'? Are we not imaginative enough to have some new clichés, please?

In reply to planetmarshall:


I think the point about clichés is that they have to be used over and over again before they become ...er clichés. An imaginative cliché is a nice concept but I can't see how it's gonna work.

In any case I'm not sure an 'imaginative cliché' would have made my point any clearer. Maybe you should check out ukpoetry.com. Sorry for being boring.

In reply to slackloaf:

As a climber, my instinctive reaction to this is that the rules climbers have come up with to protect crags are (vaguely) sensible and have evolved over years of debate, and that slackliners should consider that carefully before making changes to rock that can't be undone (i.e. even a chopped bolt leaves a hole which once was rock, and, as I understand it, on grit damage to the tough crust can damage the softer rock underneath).

A second thought is that why should slackliners care? Depends how much they think that rock is worth 'preserving' - which is often the argument used against bolting, particularly preserving a challenge for future climbers though. But then if they don't respect the natural environment, why would they feel so strongly that they want to slackline in it that they can be bothered to go to the effort of placing bolts.

I've slacklined a bit with climbing mates and have to say I've hardly ever seen other people doing it.

So at the other end of this, how big a deal is this really going to be? I'd have thought that highlining, due to the very nature of it, will never be a mass participation thing. It's not like bungee jumping, you can't just get on and do it, you need to build the skill. Then you need to have the guts and desire to do it over a big drop. Then you have to have the desire to do it at a crag rather than in an urban setting etc etc. To my mind, that's always going to be a niche pursuit.

So really, we're talking about a very few bolts on a very few crags for the use of a very few people. I guess the slackers could, if they feel so passionate about placing a bolt, just go ahead and do it. But just like sport bolters, they'll run the risk that if someone feels passionately anti where they've put their bolt, it'll get chopped.

So to avoid this, the sensible thing would be to bolt in a discreet way, which is unlikely to come into conflict with climbers anyway.

In reply to CurlyStevo:


That's 'cos they are weak pussies

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I didn't call you obnoxious I said you come across as obnoxious.

Prehaps only was not the correct term but fundamentally I think it is easier to argue the case for bolts as it is man made.

Macca

In reply to slackloaf:

This sort of discussion has no prospect of any kind of useful outcome if it remains "us and them". It's similar to the recent confrontational rhetoric between climbers and dry toolers. There is a huge depth of experience in dealing with issues of this sort in the BMC. I would suggest using that as a useful resource, and try not to get too hung up about it being run by climbers. Why not raise this at your local BMC meeting, and put your case for certain sites to be approved slacklining sites, with bolts installed if necessary? You may say "why should I?", but thinking more strategically, it's probably the best way to get what you want.

In reply to slackloaf:

Oh and by the way, your OP started with "So". Apparently there's a special UKC police force to deal with that sort of crime. Just saying ….

In reply to CurlyStevo:


Or sports climbers over trad climbers, for that matter?

The point is that no one can impose their views on anyone. The only person with the power to do that is the landowner, or someone who the landowner has granted rights to. We're talking about a situation where neither activity has actual rights they can enforce over the other, they have to persuade other activities who share the same space to respect their needs, which means first explaining them and second respecting the other activity in return.

Trad v sport is different in that it is a debate within climbing. Both sides of the debate have a much greater understanding of the other side's point of view than someone from a completely different sport. On the whole we've worked this out between us fairly well and there does seem to be a broad consensus, even if it can be difficult to apply in indvidual situations. The disputes which flare up from time to time are imo far less to do with misunderstanding or ignorance of the consensus than a selfish disregard of it - which might be a sport climber deciding to bolt a trad venue or a trad climber chopping them at a sport venue he disapproves of.

In reply to bpmclimb:


I think the same UKC police force also arrests people that end their posts with 'Just saying...' !

Just... er... pointing that out.