UKC

We have added a feature for crag moderators to the UKC Logbook to allow them to mark routes as 'Banned' or 'No longer Climbable'. Moderators can now choose this option when editing a route.

It is intended for routes which are banned, and routes that have fallen down or become unclimbable for some other reason. It just puts a no entry sign next to the route name in the listings.

A banned route - The Diagonal (VD)
A (version of) a fallen down route - Terrier's Tooth (pre-2014) (HS 4a)

It isn't expected that this needs to be added to routes during nesting seasons. Maybe one day we will be able to automate that.

You can still tick routes that have this added for historical tick purposes.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

That will make a challenging ticklist

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Could you add a column in crag directories that lists number of pitches next to grade? So frustrating sometimes trying to find a climb and having to click every single one at your grade just to find a multipitch.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

It would be interesting/helpful to know the reasons why specific routes or areas of crags are banned (eg. environmental/species protection or ownership/access, etc.). Is this a possibility?

In reply to RichMoss:


Sounds like something that should be in the access notes for the crag. It's rare for a crag to have more than a handful of different access restrictions so shouldn't be too onerous to maintain.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Closed sport project too?

In reply to 3leggeddog:


I have a pair of Terry Pratchett quotes for you.

“Some humans would do anything to see if it was possible to do it. If you put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying 'End-of-the-World Switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH', the paint wouldn't even have time to dry.”

“It's not worth doing something unless someone, somewhere, would much rather you weren't doing it.”

In reply to marsbar:

Exactly my point, put a list together like that and somebody, somewhere...

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


This would be good, as they are often yearly. So mods could fill out a field on crag properties on restriction time (and then either tick effected buttresses or the whole crag).

This info could also be simple shown on the crag public page as well. Perhaps an additional field, with the reason for restriction should be shown (nesting, access problem, what else?).

In reply to remus:

I thought it would be in the crag description/access notes too - I did look before posting my coment and it wasn't obvious to me (well, I missed it anyway). For the example given, Diagonal (VD) at Rivelin - in the access notes, there is a link to the BMC Regional Access Database which explains the sensitivity of access to some routes there.

In reply to marsbar:

Excellent quotes, a banned ticklist would be awesome.

Headtorches at 3am, reminds me of doing those Go Ape things in the dark.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan, I went to add this to Caravanserai (HVS 5a) but cannot see how to do this. I see you've edited it today. Is it different for routes in the Rockfax database?

In reply to Mark Kemball:


Curious, since I haven't edited that today. Paul is looking into it.

The button should be just above though, in the strip of buttons for verifying the route.

Alan

In reply to Mark Kemball:


Ok, it says I contributed it to the database. The edit time is yours. Perhaps could be clearer.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

The verified strip of buttons is not available for Caravanserai when I try to edit it. It is however available for the adjacent route, Second Comings. I suspect that this is because the first is in the Rockfax database and the second is not. Checking other Rockfax routes on the crags I moderate seems to confirm this.

In reply to Mark Kemball:

we are just sorting this

Alan

In reply to Mark Kemball:
Hi Mark, that's sorted now. You should be able to switch between Yes/No longer climbable for the Rockfax linked routes.

PS. I also moved the Contributor and Last Edit date to separate lines to avoid confusion.

In reply to Paul Phillips - UKC and UKH:

Thanks, seems to be working well now. I suspect that it is a feature which will see a lot of use on the Culm crags!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

what about crags below , are whole crags going to be band and we give up the fight for access by self labelling them as banned.

Eastwood Rocks

Staden Quarry

Vixen Tor

In reply to Graeme Hammond:


No more so than when we include them in guidebooks, with all routes listed, and a general comment "these are for historical record only and in case the situation changes in the future". What's the alternative? Remove the information from public display? Or leave it there but without telling people they'll potentially be wasting their time if they visit?

Anyway, how many people use the logbooks as a guidebook, as opposed to somewhere to record things they've already done?

In reply to remus:


The access notes for Rivelin state:
"The landowner (a tree surgeon with a vision of how this woodland should be managed), protested strongly to the BMC about damage to trees and erosion to footpaths around the crag. Climbers should avoid the area to the right of Altar Crack and respect its integrity as a conservation area. Any further damage to trees will result in the loss of all access for climbing."
Which seems reasonable. i would go along with that. However, there should be a brief explanation as to why the route(s) are banned. If the reasons given are unreasonable (eg whim of owner) then that is different. If there had been an entry for Kinder Scout in the thirties it would have simply said 'access banned', would it not?

In reply to Pekkie:

There seems little point to me in duplicating what the BMC say, so I think something like "access issues" with a link to the RAD is sufficient. Otherwise if the situation changes then unless someone notices and updates UKC then the information will be incorrect.
The BMC are generally pretty good about indicating where restrictions are reasonable, where negotiations are ongoing (so obey the ban for now in case you make things worse), and where the landowner refuses to talk (so you're not going to cause further problems if you climb anyway).
And of course there are some crags where climbing is officially banned, but people climb there anyway, usually without challenge. It's generally not a good idea to publicise these so I won't name names.