UKC

I have always been a bit curious as to how it was ever allowed to bolt on The Gower Peninsula given that Pembroke and Ogmore are strictly bolt free?

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
Surely just the walls with no natural gear ? I do believe in bolting blank rock for us to climb , I don't condone the waiting till we can all climb E15 but if it's feasible/obviously a trad route then no - shouldn't be bolted ?

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Yeah I reckon if you can protect a climb traditionally then there's no need to bolt but then I live in the valleys where sport and trad live happily together !!

In reply to solomonkey:
Never heard of soloing, solomonkey?

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Ogmore isn't bolt free. Witches Point has been bolted for about 20 years. The crags on Gower (not The Gower) have been treated on a case-by-case basis, and some bolting has been more controversial than others. Looking at Shipwreck Cove as the most recent and most popular example, local climbers sought approval from the landowner (National Trust, I think), consulted the local climbing community, and provided the money and hard work to do the bolting.

In reply to switch:

Pretty sure " the Gower peninsula " is correct ?
Locals do say "I live on Gower"

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

agree, im pretty appalled at the new bolting. we don't have a god give right to climb every piece of rock we find. just because its too hard to do as trad doesn't mean it should be bolted. some pieces of rock should just be left alone, there is no shortage of places to climb in this country.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Well said. Bolting policy now seems to be set on a crag by crag basis, with the emphasis on bolt everything up. What happened to 'no bolts on seacliffs' policy.

John

In reply to Webster:

im pretty appalled at the new bolting. we don't have a god give right to climb every piece of rock we find. just because its too hard to do as trad doesn't mean it should be bolted. some pieces of rock should just be left alone, there is no shortage of places to climb in this country.

How about Portland, Malham, Slate, Cheddar and a lot more bolted crags besides?
Some crags are better suited to trad, some are better for sports climbing.
With Gower and Shipwreck Cove in particular, the locals have taken the pragmatic decision to bolt it. With the exception of one route (which hasn't been retroed), there hasn't been any interest in this crag for many years. Considering the likes of Crocker, Gibson, Sharp and indeed Littlejohn were active in the area, don't you think it would have been climbed more using the trad ethic if it had been a viable proposition?
You also have to consider the people that did all the hard work to get it bolted and also the new breed of activists in the area are pretty capable trad climbers with a wealth of experience.
So, combining all this, maybe bolting is actually the correct decision?
Unless of course, you think it should be just left and never climbed on?

In reply to FactorXXX:

Yep, leaving stuff and not climbing it now is a good option - it leaves something for better and bolder climbers in the future after all.

In reply to LakesWinter:

Yep, leaving stuff and not climbing it now is a good option - it leaves something for better and bolder climbers in the future after all.

There's one hell of a lot of routes around the UK that need de-bolting then...

In reply to FactorXXX:

your completely missing my point. im not saying it should be left for someone one day to try and trad it, im saying it should be left full stop! no natural rock should be bolted, as I said we don't have a god given right to climb every inch of rock in the land. specifically the worms head area is a sssi, a national heritage sight and a spectacular beauty spot and should be left that way and not vandalised for convenience climbing.

In reply to Webster:
no natural rock should be bolted, as I said we don't have a god given right to climb every inch of rock in the land. specifically the worms head area is a sssi, a national heritage sight and a spectacular beauty spot and should be left that way and not vandalised for convenience climbing.

I was under the impression, that permission had been given by the relevant bodies about the bolting. So, if they're happy with the 'vandalism', that sort of gives an indicator that the visual impact isn't considered a problem.
No natural rock should be bolted? As per my earlier post, you're going to have to do a lot of de-bolting in the UK if that is the case...

In reply to Webster: How is Sport Climbing 'convenience climbing'. I know people (including myself) who have taken 20+ visits to a crag to complete a project. Hardly 'convenience climbing'.

Andy F

In reply to Webster:

Yaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnnnn
!!!
I'm not an advocate of bolting anything that can be protected traditionally but come on ! Bolting is hardly vandalism. I've never heard a non climber say "what are those metal things sticking out of the rock ?." In fact you have to point them out ! Shipwreck was bolted with the approval of the national trust and I imagine that involved some impact assessment prior to consent being given.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Went to Shipwreck cove today. It is a lovely popular venue with some great climbing. A big thank you to the people that put the time into bolting it.

Given that the decision to bolt has been made in a collaborative manner I struggle to see what threads like this achieve other than going round and round in pointless circles of argument.

In reply to switch:

Loads of stuff to talk about on this thread. Let's start here:


Amen. "The Gower Peninsula", perhaps, but otherwise just "Gower".

Note: many locals get it wrong (say I, a local now departed).

Although at the end of the day, nobody cares.

In reply to John Gresty:


Errm, it never existed?

In reply to Webster:


Plenty of the climbing in Rhossili in quarried. Poking around the old quarry works is an interesting afternoon in itself. Trial Wall, until recently Rhossili's best bit of developed rock, is quarried.

In reply to Webster:

And to my final point. Shipwreck Cove is a lovely location. It is quite unclimbable by trad standards, as you'll see if you go there. For a decade, I dreamt of doing so with an elaborate system of abseil ropes and stakes. And never managed it.


Correct, and the bolting has been carried out with the full agreement of all interested local parties.


Errm... you've seen the quarries a quarter of mile away right? And you know the definition of the word "quarry"?

In reply to Alun:


yep and I have no problem with bolting quarried rock, the damage has been done so it may as well be put to good use

In reply to Webster:

yep and I have no problem with bolting quarried rock, the damage has been done so it may as well be put to good use

So, in your opinion, no unquarried rock should be bolted?

In reply to Webster:

I think your on the wrong Web site , this is ukc , Climbing site !

In reply to Jon Read:

Funny enough no I haven't ? What is it ?
A type of Climbing on your own ?

In reply to Alun:

You must have gone to different meetings to the ones I attended. What is missing these days is a strident anti bolting champion to keep the pro bolting lobby in line.
John

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

If you don't like a crag that's bolted, because it's bolted, don't bother going. Simple. Your loss, you're missing out on some great climbing in fantastic areas. NEXT....

In reply to John Gresty:
I think we a are missing a point from the original post.
Ultimately all rock is a piece of property owned by the landowner. They can do what they want (subject to the usual planning exceptions).
If the Gower (or Gower no 'the'??) is owned by the national trust and they have approved the bolts then that's the end of it. Whilst we all have a right to an opinion and can lobby as much as we can we don't get any rights so getting all high and mighty is pointless.

In reply to dave.mowle:

Not really - that the NT have approved the bolting just means that they don't have any objections to it from an environmental (or any other) point of view. It doesn't mean that they care particularly either way whether it happens or not. They've effectively left that decision to the climbers, to be based on whether or not we think it's an overall good thing in the context of climbing on Gower.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
My impression (sadly I only started climbing after leaving my native homeland of S Wales) is that the local ethic in S Wales is more bolt-friendly than the average UK ethic. Note that bolt-friendly is not bolt-mad! If anyone really wants to have the opinion that no rock anywhere should be bolted ever, that's fine - but they should recognise that there is room for local variations in ethic. Sure, for crags of national importance then the views of the nation should probably take preference, but for crags of local importance than reasonable local variations to the UK ethic should be accepted.

My understanding is that Pembroke is a crag of national importance - and thus the UK ethic will hold more weight than the local one. Anyone heard of Shipwreck Cove before it got bolted? No-one is bolted Three Cliffs Bay after all...

PS If you decry all bolts in the UK on such local crags, then travel abroad and climb on bolts, that might be a little hypocritical...

PPS I would consider Portland as having national significance, but it probably only has that significance _because_ it is bolted, so you can't always use the argument in reverse

In reply to John Gresty:


When did you go to these meetings? Because I reckon the last time there was any possibility for a blanket policy of no bolting on sea cliffs was probably 20 years ago - there have been bolts on tidal seacliffs like Portland, LPT, Brean Down, and so many others for a very long time now.....

In reply to andrewmcleod:

My understanding of it (and I might be wrong) is that the question of whether or not to bolt a given (new) route, in the absence of any strong environmental reason not to, comes down to two things:
i) would it be better as a sport route than a trad route and
ii) even if it'd be better as a sport route, is it better to stick to a simple crag-wide or region-wide policy like "no bolts on Cornish sea cliffs" or "no new fixed gear on Eastern Grit" to avoid the odd exceptional case turning into a bigger grey area which turns into a lot of bad decisions.

I guess ii) is where the "national importance" consideration comes in.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
Once my sly Stallone cliff hanger style bolt gun that I'm working on is finished no rock will be safe muwhahaha(evil laugh)

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism: To answer your question directly:- It was allowed after many local bolt meetings over the preceeding few years. I was at a couple of those and they were very well attended (40+ climbers) with people like Goi Ashmore, Andy Sharp and Roy Thomas in attendance to name but a few. They were very constructive meetings that proved that not everywhere in the UK is as backward on the subject of bolts as UKC would have the world believe.

Pembroke and most of Ogmore are bolt free but that doesn't automatically mean that Gower should be too.


Onto what others have said: In terms of that stuff about leaving it for better and bolder climbers, if Littlejohn and Crocker weren't going to touch e.g. Shipwreck then that "argument" is null and void. In other words, better and bolder climbers dismissed it.

The ethic in Gower is not to "bolt everything" and there's no evidence for that, but it's an enjoytable Daily Mail style headline that gets some people going.

Shipwreck is an excellent venue and I highly recommend it.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=7422

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Heading down next weekend. Can't wait!

In reply to FactorXXX:



correct

In reply to Webster:


Rock is rock, you can climb it or you can't, I really can't see why the fact it's quarried makes any difference? Is this some metaphysical thing that means quarried rock has less feelings than "natural" or is there some sound evidence that suggests bolting natural rock is more environmentally damaging?

In reply to FactorXXX:

>

So you are saying that if an 'authority' gives permission for something then it must be ok?

In reply to sheelba:

It was just a question.

Smoke weed everyday.

In reply to Jackwd:

Smoke weed everyday.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Interesting stuff.

I was genuinely curious how the bolting came about.

As long as its not tradable then I guess it acceptable but personally I think only quarries should ever be bolted.

In reply to Webster:


I'd also like to point out some of the hypocrisy that goes into the shipwreck debate, namely regarding consensus. Having read the recent pegs in Millstone thread where the OP was lambasted for not following the prevailing ethic/consensus of no new fixed gear, suddenly the same rule doesn't apply when the consensus is to bolt a venue? Nearly everyone who's climbed at Shipwreck that I've spoken to has agreed its a great sport venue and praised the good work of the locals in getting the NTs agreement, I also know they work hard to protect the current access agreements across Gower.

Someone mentioned the lack of a strident anti bolting champion? Maybe the good folk of South Wales have weighed up the options and issues and decided in this case it's a good decision? I'd rather that than have someone with a fixed (anti bolt) agenda block everything they can without rhyme or reason personally.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

So you are saying that if an 'authority' gives permission for something then it must be ok?

From the perspective of the non-climbing community yes i.e. they can't see bolting as being a problem and therefore the issue of things like vandalism is pretty much null and void.
Obviously, from a climbers point of view, the ethics might dictate differently and that is what the bolting of certain parts of Gower is all about.

In reply to Webster:

correct

How about all the other bolted crags that are natural. Should they, in your opinion, be de-bolted?

In reply to irish paul:

Maybe the good folk of South Wales have weighed up the options and issues and decided in this case it's a good decision? I'd rather that than have someone with a fixed (anti bolt) agenda block everything they can without rhyme or reason personally.

The bolting debate in Gower & SE Wales has been going on for years and as far as I can tell, is pretty much sorted out.
There have been one or two dis-agreements along the way, including someone rendering staples unusable by cutting through a single leg of the staple...

In reply to FactorXXX:




Good stuff.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
having been to some of the meetings regarding shipwreck the NTs preferred option was bolts as they don't want people topping out on the crag. it was a win win situation. Flora and fauna was protected on top of the crag, people can climb at a fantastic venue, and more visitors pass through the Gower adding to the local economy.
It was a well thought out venture, the land owner was consulted, no traditional climbs were effected, and the local community came together to make it happen. It gets a big thumbs up from me.

In reply to Webster:


Why?

jk

In reply to Anoetic:

Good stuff.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

I've climbed trad routes on the Gower poeninsular on and of for the last 15 years or so. The impression I got from our last visit (August BH 2013) was that nobody is interested in trad climbing there any more. We met 1 other party over 3 sunny days, and once-classic routes at Paviland are now verging on unclimbable due to vegetation. I assume the locals go bolt clipping now instead.

In reply to Simon Caldwell:

Sign of the times.

In reply to jkarran:

Just because. do you think we should concrete over every inch of land beacuse we can? why do we need a reason to let nature be?

In reply to FactorXXX:



no, damage has been done now so that would achieve nothing other than to piss people off. they should never have been bolted in the first place, especially the likes of malham which again is an SSSI and unique beauty spot.

In reply to solomonkey:



No 6a+ is going to be E15

In reply to irish paul:

where is the hypocracy? the consensus at milstone was very vocally ant-pegging yet i argued that in principle i had no objection to the pegs, the consensus at shipwreck was pro-bolting yet i am adamantly against it. my ethics are pretty consistant and irrespective of this magical 'consensus'.

In reply to irish paul:


yes, your drilling a fecking hole in it! that is the damage. a quarry is already a giant hole, the damage has already been done so drilling a few more holes is irrelevant.

In reply to Webster:


There are sound technical reasons for not concreting over our land. Anyway, it's not analogous to bolting a few seaside cliffs, that's perhaps more analogous improving a section of a footpath so it's pushchair accessible or deters people from trampling the fragile ground beside the path.

jk

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

South Wales bolt policy:

http://swmc.org.uk/bolting-policy/

Note that the assumption in the Gower for newly discovered crags is not to bolt. This doesn't mean they can't be bolted, just that it cannot be assumed that bolting is OK, whereas newly-discovered quarried crags can be bolted without consultation (as I read it?).

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

No E15 is going to be 6a+ either

In reply to Anoetic:



I don't consider myself completely in favour of either approach but this seems sensible in this case.

In reply to solomonkey:


That was my point. You implied that a wall with no gear would be E15. Maybe I misread.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Nope you were right ,
No 6a+ is going to be E15.

In reply to solomonkey:

Just a bit of exaggeration for effect, I suppose, that I shouldn't have bothered responding to. Sometimes I can't help myself...

In reply to Simon Caldwell:

The routes at Paviland have been overgrown for years. Think it must be down to the nature of the rock and/or conditions that make that area particularly prone to quick vegetation growth.
Haven't climbed in South Wales for a few years, but when I did, the locals pretty much climbed trad or sports depending on conditions, tides or how they felt.

In reply to Webster:

How about abseil stakes that festoon the tops of some crags. They're by far more of an eyesore than bolts. Should they be removed as well?

In reply to FactorXXX:


Not to mention the car parks! Big swathes of virgin countryside covered with asphalt just because modern "convenience climbers" are too lazy to get the bus or walk...

In reply to Webster:


You are missing most of the essence of the bolting debate; it is mostly about climbing ethics, not about whether or not a hole is drilled in the rock. Why should it be relevant how the rock face got there in the first place?

In reply to Robert Durran:


im deliberately missing the whole debate on climbing ethics because that debate is self centred and hypocritical. i have a very clear and concise standpoint. again climbers dont have a god given right to all the rock in the country, so in debates like these we should think beyond the scope of this very inward looking circle

In reply to Webster:

Beyond the scope of this very inward looking circle, most people don't give two hoots about bolts. In the environmental context of a landscape that's grazed by sheep, planted with crops, built over with shops and houses and criss-crossed with roads, paths and fences, some tiny bits of metal that most people wouldn't notice unless they were pointed out are utterly irrelevant.

The obsession with bolts being a glaring affront to a pristine natural landscape is something that we get precisely because we're climbers and have had our perspective narrowed down to just the bit of rock in front of us.

In reply to Webster:


I don't know why you keep repeating this line, no one has said we do. Access agreements tend to be well observed by climbers and it's rare for banned crags and boulders to get climbed on. I understand negotiations with other interested bodies are mostly amiable.

In reply to Mike Stretford:


But nobody should 'own' land in the first place!!!

but conservation is important and I am regularly suprised that bolting unquarried rock is allowed.

In reply to Ramblin dave:

Absolutely. As an environmental issue, bolts are a complete non-issue. Except in a secondary manner, perhaps when lower-offs protect crag tops and descents from erosion or popularise a crag resulting in path erosion. Bolts are primarily all about how we climb; a climbing issue.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:


Yes, the idea that an individual can own a portion of the earth's surface is absolutely bizarre - the more so the more one thinks about it.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:
I don't completely disagree with you but I know limestone used to be called bastard rock as nobody was strong enough to climb it , , , are you suggesting routes like overshadow and raindogs (to name just 2 !) Should be E15 that nobody will ever climb, or suggesting they should not exist ?¿

In reply to solomonkey:


In my world of ethics, yes.

In reply to Jackwd:

OR

Putting forward the counter argument:
If you don't like a crag because its not bolted, don't bother going there and bolting. your loss etc. etc.

Al

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

What a sad world you live in.

In reply to Jackwd: PKAC generally seems like a happy, if opinionated poster.

In reply to Jackwd:


At least it's not Lincoln. That really is sad for a climber. You have my commiserations.

In reply to Jackwd:

What a sad world you live in.

Have you seen the crags he moderates?
There's no way he lives in a sad world with that lot to keep him occupied!!!

In reply to Jackwd:


Well, not really. There isn't an infinite amount of rock on this small island. Don't get me started on how much more accessible Avon would be, which puts me teetering between both points of view occasionally, but I can't ignore the fact that there's not much rock here. That means it's an objective stance, not subjective. I reckon anyway.

In reply to nick ingram:


Hasn't the retrobolting of Avon started already?

In reply to humptydumpty:

If, like me, you consider a peg to be basically a crap bolt, then a long time ago...

In reply to humptydumpty:

Not really. Pegs cannot be replaced with bolts, unless it fits with someone's cosmology. I'm not complaining.

In reply to Ramblin dave:

Compared to placing your own runners, I dare say turning up with a rack of quick draws and a rope and belay device is more convenient, and that that's implicitly understood in how climbers who climb both sport and trad say that sports climbing allows one to push the limits physically without having to think about things like protection.

So while you take the mickey, it's 'is' convenience climbing.

In reply to Simon Caldwell:

Trad climbing on Gower is as popular as it ever was, if not more so. I see numerous parties trad climbing there almost every week, either whilst climbing myself or when running along the coastal paths. One quiet bank holiday weekend is hardly cause for concern. Besides, there are lots of great trad venues on Gower. I doubt you where at all of them on all 3 days of your trip.
If 'the locals' choose to spread our time between bolt-clipping and trad climbing, what of it? Surely this just means that popular trad venues will be quieter as people - or rather, the locals - spread themsleves out due to the greater choice of venues available. I love rocking up to a venue like Fall Bay, or Juniper Wall and having it all to myself while everyone else is sport climbing. On the opposite hand, I went to Shipwreck Cove recently and had it all to mylsef, then at the end of the day went for a walk around the coast to Fall Bay. Lo and behold, 'trad climbers everywhere!

If you have a crag to yourself, don't take issue with it, make the most of it.

Happy climbing, in whatever form you choose.

In reply to Jackwd:

Get Rekt M8

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Well I think I'll leave you to your ethics , I can't imagine your world of no bolts , have you ever read the story in the first rockfax lakes book about 3 brothers ?

In reply to Kyle Warlow:

It was an observation, not a complaint

In reply to nick ingram:

I was thinking more of things like Brutal Dub (6c+) etc.

In reply to LakesWinter:

Have you been to gower?

In reply to Kyle Warlow:

Well said Kyle

In reply to Webster:


Large bits of British sea cliffs fall down all the time when big waves hit them/it freezes/it rains very hard etc. Do you believe that it's OK for the sea to make big holes in cliffs but not ok for climbers to make little holes in them?

In reply to TobyA:


Of course it is. There's no agenda with the sea!

In reply to solomonkey:


No I havent. I dont buy Rockfax guides.

In reply to Timmd:


It's not really the convenience of sport that means you can really push yourself; it's a combination of the relatively steep, featureless and therefore safe to fall off rock we bolt, the relative security of the bolts and the widespread acceptance of the pre-practice/redpoint ethic at every level, not just at elite grades.

jk

In reply to TobyA:


err yes, that completley natural. what a stupid comment.

In reply to solomonkey:


Not sure it is quite as relevant these days but here you go. Classic Mick Ryan from the intro to the Lakes Rockfax (1994).

Once upon a time there was an old man who lived in a small cottage in a far off land. He had a happy and simple life with his wife and three sons. They worked in the fields by day and in the evening sat around the open fire telling stories. On their coming of age the old man gave each son a gift.

To his first son he gave a set of micro nuts and Flexible Friends. This son began climbing on the gritstone edges and mountains and slowly worked his way through the grades until he was a competent E-grade leader. Soon he had climbed most of the routes that he was mentally capable of and after a few heart stopping moments he found that he was losing motivation. The stress of pushing the boat out each weekend was too much and besides that, he had met the woman of his dreams. He settled down to a family life, gained a little weight and drank warm beer on Sundays whilst watching cricket but still kept in touch with climbing, occasionally going down to the climbing wall. He joined the local guidebook committee and spent long hours in meetings debating whether to use metres or feet in the next edition of the guidebook. After the meetings he drank with his old friends, reminiscing about the good old days and ranting about the ethical decline of younger climbers.

To his second son the old man gave some quick-draws and a petrol driven drill. This son began climbing on bolt routes at an unattractive quarry. He rapidly gained the ability to reach the belays of numerous polished E5’s but then he discovered training. This effectively put an end to his climbing career and he soon disappeared into a cellar. There he developed a rare skin complaint caused by damp atmospheres and lack of light and sadly died.

To his third son he gave some micro nuts and some quick-draws. The third son found that he had a wide choice of routes open to him. He began leading easy routes but found that he could push himself to improve his grade on the better protected bolt climbs. He became a brilliant climber at both on-sight climbing up to E6 and 7c and also red-pointing routes of 8a on his second try. He was also handsome and charming and had several rewarding relationships with independent free thinking sex-kittens he had met at the many exciting social occasions he attended. After travelling widely and enjoying the rich tapestry of experience that life had to offer, he started his own business and created his own financial independence by the age of 35. He later married an independent free thinking woman, bought a beautiful house in the Lake District and had three children. Their lives were full of adventure, romance and enchantment. On their coming of age he gave them all flash cars and they all lived happily ever after.

In reply to Timmd:



But the point is that for most hill users (and most environmentalists), a car park and the attendant cars are a much worse imposition on an "unspoiled" landscape than a bunch of bolts.

But as far as I can tell, the people who get huffy about how people should climb somewhere else if they can't get up a crag without despoiling it with bolts don't seem similarly principled about only climbing in places where they can get the bus and walk rather than taking a car.

In reply to solomonkey:

I must point out though that I am not anti bolts at all, I just think they have to be used appropriately.

Also my views are constantly changing the more I learn, from conversations on here and talking to other activists, and although I may believe something I am aware that I could be totally wrong!

In reply to nick ingram:


I've generally got some sympathy for the "leave it for someone better and bolder" argument, but at an easily accessible crag in a popular trad climbing area with a lot of routes in the fives and low sixes, the fact that there are only two recorded trad routes suggests that better and bolder climbers have had a look and decided not to bother.

In reply to Webster:
You are the one that started with the sixth form consquentialism. Let's keep our premises consistent.



A sea cliff is a giant scar where the ocean has eroded the land. A few bolts are irrelevant to anyone beyond this very inward looking circle. The surfers can't see them, they're probably a lot more bothered by the turds and tampons floating in the water. The sun bathers don't notice them, they are probably far more bothered by the scummy tourists who leave their disposable barbeques or beer cans lying on the beach. And the sea definitely doesn't care - as Pylon King pointed out - it doesn't have an agenda, it will probably knock down chunks of Shipwreck cove sooner or later. So really, beyond other climbers, no one cares. You might as well try and build your counter argument on that basis, just like Robert suggested.

In reply to Ramblin dave:


That is because they are two distinct types of issue; the first is one of climbing ethics, the second is environmental. They are not similar, so you don't need to be similarly principled to get huffy about one but not the other.

In reply to Robert Durran:


Sorry, that was specifically referring to people (including some in this thread) who argue against bolting on the grounds that it's an environmental issue and not just an issue of climbing ethics.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:


I'm with you , and emotionally I'm pretty anti the idea of bolting natural sea cliffs (and said so when bolting Shipwreck was first proposed). However, there was a pretty thorough consultation and (crucially as far as I was concerned) the landowner (NT) agreed. There didn't seem to be a strong environmental objection, so I guess I'm OK with it. Probably.

I may even go and give it a try, as long as no-one I know sees me doing it.

In reply to Ramblin dave:

I was only defending the views shown in the original post, which have merit and I didn't think they deserved an assassination (not that your contributions have in any way). A view is a view and a discussion is a discussion. In this case he's pointed out the mixed regional ethics and expressed curiosity. I've climbed with him and he's a lovely bloke, he does loads of thankless work for the greater good and he deserves to offer his view. Personally I've tired of old pegs as fixed pro, but that's another story.

In reply to nick ingram:

I was however only defending the views shown in the original post, which have merit and I didn't think they deserved an assassination (not that your contributions have in any way). A view is a view and a discussion is a discussion.

I thought in the whole, the discussion was very good and friendly. Pylon asked some genuine questions and I believe the rationale behind some of the bolting decisions was explained in some depth and detail.
OK, there was a slight hiccup along the way, but I think everyone was a bit miffed with that and not just the OP.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:


You said you'd rather routes at Malham shouldn't exist ? I'm sure most of the routes there are appropriate for bolts !

In reply to solomonkey:


I am not comfortable with the idea of bolting magnificent natural rock formations just for our pleasure and egos. Personally I am not convinced places like Malham should be bolted. Horseshoe quarry is what I would call an appropriate place to bolt. But that's my view and has nothing to do with what I was asking in the original post about bolted route on the Gower Peninsula. I was curious as to how the policy was so different to Pembroke. No troll.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

I can't believe so many people have wasted so much of their time posting on this tedious trolling thread...
Now I have just joined them... groan

In reply to sheppy:

Its not a trolling thread.

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Its not a trolling thread.

Agreed. It's actually been one of the better threads about climbing for quite a while...

In reply to FactorXXX: I agree. With bolts being mentioned I expecetd the usual UKC histrionics but it's been mostly very informative and progressive so who knew that would happen?

Remember the Gower Festival is this September 11-13th where the locals will show everyone a good time.

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Remember the Gower Festival is this September 11-13th where the locals will show everyone a good time.

I wasn't intending on going, but if the locals are showing everyone a good time, then I might have to change my mind...

In reply to Pylon King Against Capit@lism:

Having just been to the Rhossli area I wish it had all been bolted ages ago, what a great area!
Nice to see it bolted for all levels of ability, not the elitist style of bolting applied recently to some areas such as Bram crag quarry...