UKC

I just went to log my climbs from the Woolpacks today, but noticed that it isn't in the crags list.

Is this because of sensitivity about climbing there, or just because no-one has added it yet? If it's the latter, does it just need a willing volunteer (for example, me) to transcribe the route names etc from the new guide?

In reply to AndyPagett:

Anyone?

Or shall I just try adding it and see what happens? If so, what level of info is normally copied from the guidebook? Route name and grade I guess? What about the short text description?

In reply to AndyPagett:
Use the 'add crag' and offer to be moderator then you can add the climbs. As the names/descriptions only appear in a Rockfax book I am sure you could copy them across.


Chris

In reply to AndyPagett:

They say you're not allowed to copy from textbooks but it's a stupid rule (and I don't know of anyone that's had problems when copying descriptions).

I mean what do they expect us to do? Re-write a description that was good enough to go into a guide? There's only so many ways you can say 'go up the crack and finish direct'. Stupid.

In reply to AndyPagett:


Just because it hadn't been added yet.

Just done - http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=20979

Alan

In reply to Removed User:



We couldn't possibly advise people to copy route descriptions word for word from other guidebooks. Yes, there are only so many ways of saying climb the crack, but the majority of route descriptions are way more than that.

We don't 'expect' you to do anything if you don't want to. We are just grateful to anyone who does. Many of the routes have the Rockfax description fed in anyway so there is no need to write descriptions for these routes.

Additionally, Logbooks isn't meant to be a guidebook hence descriptions aren't really required for every route.

Alan

In reply to AndyPagett:

Thanks Alan - was going to add them when I got home from work, but I see you already have

In reply to AndyPagett:


I have a few back door techniques that make it a fairly quick job for me when I have access to the Rockfax pages in the guidebook document.

There are another few crags which need adding from peak Bouldering as well.

Alan

In reply to Dan Lane:

I agree - The Woolpacks don't document it.

For those that want to log you could have a crag entry explaining this with a single route "climbing at the woolpacks" which they could log and put their own notes in.

There are very few places left to climb without the tyranny of established routes.

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

I believe the 1st cloud at the Roaches sets a precedent for leaving the woolpacks out of the system

In reply to Dan Lane:

I liked climbing at the Woolpacks when living near the Peak- a unique atmosphere and weird rock formations, that need treated with a little care.

But surely it's a bit strong to say the place is completely ruined by the Rockfax guide? It's never going to be massively busy up there - it's too far for most folk - and if you want the sense of adventure, just leave the guide at home. And those who enjoy knowing what problems they're doing can bring the guide. Then everyone's a happy camper(/climber).

In reply to DannyC:
We have been here before but no harm in a repeat as not everyone reads every thread. When I tried problems there it was really difficult to work hard on a problems and not leave ugly scatches when the surface scrittle broke and dragged down the rock. Those marks when made (I've seen quite a few over the decades) stayed for some time, months at least. So I'd go further than Dan Lane and advise people not to bother as the rock simply isnt good enough and it's right next to a major path: there is plenty of other better described and undescribed rock in the general area of Bleaklow and Kinder for those seeking rounded rock and solitude.

I'm convinced the traffic issue is under-stated as plenty climb on the Pagoda and climbers walk the path and Alan even said its an ideal venue to look at (sans mats) when climbing or just being up there. Any damage or chalk overuse etc is likley in the full view of the traffic on the Pennine Way and will especially annoy those who love to photograph the beautiful rounded rock structures.

I argued as best I could not to include detailed problem descriptions in any guidebook and have lost with Rockfax. Others see it as a non-issue or red herring but it won't take long now to tell who was right, my bets are on the rock starting to look pretty over-used on the most vulnerable problems by the end of the summer. I worked on several fully detailed bouldering areas in Over the Moors (and some that didnt get in) that the low grade explorer would have enjoyed way more in Rockfax, on good rock and with no likley annoyance to other land users, top of the list being the delightful Standedge. I and others told Rockfax this, they chose to ignore us.

There are many other examples other than 1st Cloud where crags have been left undescribed for good reasons... the Woolpacks should have stayed this way too but the faeries will sadly have gone now.

In reply to Offwidth:

Fair enough Steve. I suppose I must fall in the red herring camp. I just don't think there'll be enough traffic up there to cause much damage, especially as, in my experience, climbers who go to the effort of travelling to slightly more remote areas are generally considerably more sensitive to their surroundings. I hope I'm not being over-optimistic and you're right, time will tell.

Separately, Standedge does look good. Here's a topo link in case anyone's interested: http://www.kirkleesclimbing.co.uk/standedge