UKC

Are old men ruining British climbing?

In the 1980s, with the advent of bolted sport climbing, many thought it would be young punks who would be the death of British trad climbing. These warnings however seemed to be overblown with sport and trad settling down into a generally amicable coexistence.

Things however seem to be changing and it’s not the bleeding edge of strong young climbers attempting to batter down the doors in the name of progress. This is no youthquake, rather it’s the late middle aged and early retired. Men who still think they have got it despite climbing at nowhere near the cutting edge.

Old guys in the peak bolting, blinkered barely independent variations on long established trad routes. Retro-bolting by the back door.

Retires in Yorkshire, wholescale retro-bolting trad crags in the name of convenience climbing

Men of a certain age in North Wales retro-bolting the routes of their youth so they can climb them again and pretend they still have it.

British climbing is small and insignificant in the grand scheme of things. As Lito Tejada-Flores suggested in the defining text on climbing The Games Climbers Play, it is only through the use of handicap systems that we can make small and insignificant places great.

Heresy though it may seem to some, Gogarth is small and insignificant on the global stage, and it is only through the strict application of handicaps that it is a world class climbing destination. I cannot imagine that I would have sat round campfires in the desert southwest and been quizzed over “what’s it like to run it out up snappy rock above dubious gear” by people wanting to voyeuristically get a piece of the Gogarth action or exchanged tick lists on a Patagonian glacier with the best in the world without these handicaps.

Without these handicaps Gogarth just fades to a convenient place to climb for local people.

For me, this is more than the desires of a small group of aging local activists who climbed routes like Citadel, Barbarossa, The Cruse, Fifteen Men on a Deadman’s Chest and Horrorshow twenty years ago and want to climb them again despite no-longer having the ability or temperament to cope with the climbing. Its not a coincident that these pegbolts are appearing on this generations test pieces but rather the egos of fifty- to sixty-year-old men.

Younger, stronger climbers have been just getting on with climbing these routes in their, purer, bolder, style. So what if there have been more accents in the year or so since the retro-bolting than there had been in the proceeding decade. Trite as it may be, if we just judged climbs on their popularity, we would chip all the crux moves as well.  

Considering the talent I see in the generations below me the runouts on these E5s and 6s will be trivial in a few years’ time so mortgaging the future of Gogarth for a short term popularity hit seems shortsighted.

Lets leave trad climbing bolder and purer for those that follow after and not just like badly bolted sport routes.

(PS. Who says belays must be bombproof)

You've pretty much nailed what I think about the whole thing.

Totally agree with you.

This👆

There was a time when only the elite were climbing into the extreme grades  but now 40 years later E5s & E6s are for the hobbyists and weekenders.

The climbers in the next 40 years are potentially going to be very disappointed that a bunch of old duffers decided that routes need to be tamed (just like we look back on the odd dodgy bolt or chipped hold on grit).

Personally I think old pegs shouldn't be replaced with anything and style can potentially be improved on. If that takes 100 years then so be it.

I guess they were right, then, just a bit early. The young punks of the 80s must be the same generation that you think is ruining things now.

They’re ruining it twice, the bastards!

Some people are, perhaps, ruining climbing.  There fixed that for you.

I agree with the sentiment but object to the generalisation.

Whilst there may be a degree of generalisation I think the thrust of the generation angle is true.

The retro-bolting of Gogarth has been driven by people of a older generation than mine. My contemporaries and I came to Gogarth with it's decaying fixed gear and improved ourselves to meet the challenge.

I've never been particularly strong or good at climbing but I tried hard! Some routes I got on and succeed, some I got on and failed, some I thought I was going to die. Clipping the joke of a peg on The Dogs of War was a standout moment of my climbing life. I'm genuinely surprised it held the weight of my quickdraw.

Never in all this time did I think, this peg must have been good once, that gives me the right to bolt the route! We just took it in our sted, and yes this meant I climbed fewer Gogarth E5s than I might have done.

Those older seem entitled, seem to think their rose tinted memories of "bomber" pegs give them the right to erase all the improvement in style of my generation and those who follow me.

They have got old and want things to be safe.

Based on my experience, it's less to do with old men's egos and more to do with their obsessive tendencies towards crag husbandry.

Tendencies from which, most of the time, we all benefit.

You may think some recent actions are misjudged - fine, in some cases I'd agree with you.

But if you allow a little benefit of the doubt as to motivations, this looks more like an attempt to find a durable solution to a long-term problem and keeps some good routes in a clean and on-sightable state that provides value to the community.

Again - maybe it's misjudged. But it's clear that not everyone under the age of 50 regards recent actions as 'ruining' some cherished notion of what British climbing is about.

Pretty much everyone agrees that we want an agreed framework for decision making on this stuff. Being a zealot about it really doesn't help.

Yep. Have often thought we should only really be allowing them to climb with the consent of their wife or mother.

Nailed it……

Then they should be ashamed. I'm 75 and been climbing since 64.  I don't know of any of my contemporaries who would agree with this.  You need to define oldies.  I suspect it's the generation that followed mine and could lay claim to introducing "bolting" in the first place.

He did, it's the late middle-aged and early retirees that are to blame. We are the couragous pioneers that are to old and infirm to carry a drill up to make life easier for the "me" generation so they can spray over a latte later

I have missed it. What has been bolted at gogarth? 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bjkz6TIMXeLIAJoCCzLRJMKhYx3Gn1hykb8...

Link to a spreadsheet documenting the use of PBolts.

Positron. The full line plus belays 

I'm with you there. I'm of the generation who believe climbing "ethics" to be simple and can be summarised in two three-word sentences:

• Leave no trace
• Ken was right

Big effort. 

Boom! Great pun.

Anyway, thanks Brown. Without judging the climbers, I agree with everything you said about Gogarth.

Pondering this thread and the pegbolt thread I'm no longer quite as confident in my previous opinion that swapping a rotten peg for a good bolt (epoxy&titanium or some long lasting) is a good choice often as not.

Starting to think that maybe pulling out a rotten peg and replacing with either a new peg (or nothing) may well be the better option a lot more of the time.

I don't have the answers, but definitely reading these threads and their posts, are nudging my opinion away from bolts

Has it?  Weird that none of the comments in the logs from this year mention that this is now a sport route.

I mean a couple of them mention wires and cams, they were probably just backing up the bolts with gear... 

If you are going to call them P-bolts, beware as that means something different to cavers. To cavers it describes something like a standard climbing resin bolt if my memory serves. Correct me if I'm wrong though...

Sounds like pretty much the same thing then 

In the 70's and 80's there was as much emphasis and kudos on freeing routes that had aid points as there was from putting up new routes. The overall thinking was to rely less on fixed gear (since most of the aid points were pegs) and leave the climb in a cleaner state and as a purer experience.

All this pegbolt stuff appears to be heading in the opposite direction. I don't believe that's healthy for climbing in the UK in the long-term.

Wtf is this bit:

What a stupid question. Er no, we just placed the bolt because we thought it looked nice there...

Or, no it was too heavy to carry so we put it in the rock instead...

weird

The original p bolts for many cave systems were i think made by dmm, literally just stainless bent into a p shape. They replaced the older 8mm hangers. 

Some placements are crucial protection, some are more a matter of convenience. It's worth knowing which to understand how these are being used/distributed.

For example, I clipped one on Quickstep. Nice to have, but not dangerous to continue without it as there is quite a bit of natural pro. So it's a sensible question.

Ken clipped pegs...

Traces are inevitable.

Always remember the peg on fracticide wall, not sure if it's truely critical, but it felt needed and looked like it had held a few falls! Or scratch arete where there are alternative small placements. 

Is anyone going to chop them?

Yes, Scratch Arete, interesting HVS without the peg for sure...

No one has mentioned Sexual Salami or Hitler's Buttock. Given this discussion started about Tremadog's clean up, they'd be right in the frame for a bolt.

You can place wires and cams at the same height as the peg on Scratch Arete.

The others might be worth looking at, but some of them are still good.

Key is to put a small wire in on the slab as you approach the over lap, then people wouldn't feel so desperate for the peg, yeah you can get another wire and small cam in before going for the step up, I'd say the pegs absence wouldn't change the grade as the cam balances things out. In many instances a modern cam removes the need for the original peg. 

I thought Sexual Salami (E5 6b) and Hitler's Buttock (E5 6b) might get mentioned.

I had been highly motivated to climb these after seeing a photo of Andy Pollitt crimping his way to glory on Hitler's Buttock as an impressionable teenager.

Neither needs bolting. Both are adequately protected and the rock is immaculate. Yes they are "harder" than when climbed originally but they are definitely better in their clean state. We have improved their style and maybe the grade needs to edge up to reflect this.

Like I say, I was keen and tried hard but I was not very good and I got up them. We really don't need to bolt stuff like this to make it accessable to the future generations.

@Brown and @Alex

To be clear, I'm not advocating bolting these! I just thought given their previously pegged gear, they would be candidates for unwanted attention. Nor SA fwiw, it was a while back I was last there.

And yes, pics of Pollitt and Redhead fixed them in my mind too, have not attempted them though. May be on the list then, if you thought the gear was okay.

PS I love the way that Mike Owen onsighted every one of these bold challenges around 1985. Sometimes it seems like if we give it a few more years and we may catch up!

Do you have any photos of the culprits doing this?

Well, I was reading this thread with interest, and generally with sympathy for the OP, but thinking it has very little to do with me as all the routes are well above my pay grade. And then along comes Scratch Arete which I have led many times over perhaps 40 years. The peg has always been there, I've always clipped it, I've always tried to back it up at the overlap, but I've never found anything that I regarded as solid enough to substitute for the peg.  If the peg has now rotted to a dangerous state, I have to say that replacing it would not change the nature of the route which I first climbed in the late 70's, whereas tackling the crux without the peg would IMO be a substantially different proposition. 

PS: I am, of course, an "old man".

Martin

Interesting perspective. You might have a point, to an extent.

However, I think it’s a bit more complex and needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. For example, replacing the peg on Citadel was completely unnecessary because there is good conventional gear available below the crux. Whereas I gather on Barbarossa the peg was rather crucial, so replacing it arguably only restores the route to its original grade.

Edit - especially if it makes an onsight attempt a reasonable proposition, thus improving on the style of the average ascent. 

As for Dogs of War, I’m not sure any fixed gear would be a good idea. The gear shouldn’t be stronger than the rock! One of those glued in peg bolts would just rip half the cliff down 😂

I actually thought it was a reasonably protected route, considering the reputation. My personal highlight was on the top pitch of The Synd - using a sidepull without properly testing it, doing a move off it, then the sidepull falling off when I took my hand off it. You know it’s bad when you need the climber to hold the cliff together! For some strange reason I’ve done this route twice. Actually, it’s ok really…

Brown is right and so is Gordon Stainforth, Ken was always right.

We've been over the peg on Barbarossa before. Back in the day, early 80s, it was poor, stuck out and had to be tied off, nothing like a bolt or secure peg. If it's bomber now it's a very different lead.

As a relative young-un I think that it's much less to do with age, and far more to do with attitude.

People of a certain age may have more of a predisposition to believing they have gathered the experience and knowledge over several decades as part of the climbing community to be able to decide when a route needs some fixed gear, and maybe feel they do not need to take into account the views of others as much as they should - but this is more to do with ego and selfishness rather than age surely. They do, of course, think they are doing the right thing by making said route safer/more accessible/whatever.

I know plenty of folk in their late middle ages who vehemently defend all-natural ethics and really really care for preserving the rock and routes on it as much as possible for future generations, and also lots of folks in university clubs who would happily see every route in the country fully bolted. 

Could anyone catch me up here? Who exactly has been doing what?!

jcm

According to upthread (hope it's a joke), Positron has been 'glued pegged". 

Hitlers Buttock and Sexual Salami are still safe enough with their pegs gone. I imagine a new peg at the roof on sexual salami would revive it for onsights but as it stands there’s a good small wire and a micro cam so the route is still doable.  It’s bold and probably e6. Don’t think hitlers buttock ever had a peg on it did it? The routes at Tremadog are so safe very few rely on crucial fixed gear except the ones mentioned at the very start of the thread. 

Yeah it’s a joke. With some peoples reactions I feel like that’s what people think has happened. Apologies, I guess I was just getting bored of this round and round thing. What are we on, thread 3 day 5 or something…

My own opinion, having climbed some of those glue pegged routes in the eighties and nineties, when the pegs were not in a great condition, is that they should not have replaced pegs, bolts or glue pegs.

If a route becomes bolder as pegs rot away, so be it. Modern protection is much better that it was even in the nineties and many routes can be adequately protected without the original pegs.

We should be upping our game, not reducing the routes to our capability.

Someone mentioned Mike Owen. Mike's (and others) level of boldness and commitment is what we should be aspiring to. Yes, some of the routes Mike did had pegs in better condition, but I suspect Mike would have done them regardless of the condition of any fixed gear.

As for the current generation, there are so many younger climbers who are pushing out hard, bold, intimidating and committing onsights and headpoints it is also inspiring and keeps an older climber psyched.

SD.

I have a lot of sympathy for this on the small scale - as a community we rely a lot on volunteer labour and it's churlish to complain that "it's not how I would have done it" if you're not also out there doing it.

But that's not without limits, right - it isnt carte blanche.

Whilst some of these are perhaps edge cases or grey areas, there are some that seem well into the area where grey becomes indistinguishable from black (I've no personal experience of most of the routes, at least from closer than the ground underneath them, but Citadel sounds like one of the cases where it's most obviously been done for convenience rather than any real necessity?). I'd be happy to feel slightly uncomfortable on the edge cases as a price for benefitting from the less controversial work, but that's not where I am...

There’s an awful lot of downvotes on this thread, are they spineless as well as selfish or is someone going to justify any of these bolts….

A case by case justification would be great, other than the Barbarossa one I don’t recall any being discussed specifically. It would be a reasonable way of getting some consensus as to which if any have any support/legitimacy within the community.

What I find tricky is: I read a guidebook and decide to climb a route based on the description – including any mention of fixed gear. I then have to make a judgement of its quality, based on age of route and location. This means some routes I won’t ever try, that perhaps I would if I had more knowledge about the state of the fixed gear. Placing peg bolts doesn’t solve this dilemma, just kicks it down the road for a few years, if at all, if the only people who know the pegs have been replaced is locals. Unless the action of replacing the peg is to say there will be commitment to maintaining these pieces of fixed gear continually?

I agree.  Far better than lumping all us old men together as one selfish, ignorant group.

Fill yer boots...

https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,33285.0.html

Yes, you're right. I've led Meshach a few times too, but not as recently as Scratch Arete. So my memory's a bit hazy.  But I recollect finding the crux traverse very tenuous the first time I did it, but on later occasions found an easier way taking the traverse moves a little lower with feet on a sloping ledge beneath the overlap. This has the advantage of reducing any potential fall onto the last (non-peg) piece of gear. If I'm right, the peg is perhaps not quite as vital as the one on Scratch Arete. Either way, it's good to see some routes for mere mortals entering the discussion.

Martin

You're right, George, Hitler's Buttock never had a peg. I was trying it with Paul W when JR and Perrin came along and saw me failing. JR immediately led it, and Paul and I teamed up with them to second it for its FA.

Sexual Salami's pegs were crap when I did it in Aug 1980, only 3 or 4 months after its FA. That the top one lasted as long as it did is surprising!

You didn't mention Cardiac Arête - which ironically now has more, and better pegs than when I made the FA. I just placed two, one of which was stuck out so far I bent it down and tied it off. From the recent photo of Lewis Williams on it, it appears that my bent down peg is now replaced with two good ones. In my defence, I claim incompetence...

They were there from the start on the other channel (from the link above)....

"Over the last few years the retro-bolting has become less sensible and less balanced imo, as we've moved on from a period when low grade sport crags were scare in north Wales to a time when low grade sport crags are now plentiful but perfectly good and well protected limestone lower grade trad (around E1) is scarce."

Perhaps not all instances are related to the age of the climber. Some of these bolts are probably placed by guides who consider them justifiable on safety grounds and perhaps to facilitate their work. Incidentally I'm a low grade climber so this doesn't directly affect me.

At a completely different level there was a discussion on UKC about a guide leaving a sling on Am Basteir on the bad step on the ridge.

Absolutely. I was only pushing back against the ad hominem tone of Brown's post, which I don't see as helpful.

But this is UKC, I suppose it was always going to get ugly.

I look forward to some of the internet sabre rattling translating to real world action, and suggest that while they're at it they could give some routes a clean as well.

You mention your first ascent of cardiac arete you utilised some pegs.

Do you or did you ever feel like you stole that first ascent from future generations that would have been able to do it without the fixed gear?

If so what changed your opinion?

Really interested to know as that is the nub of the removing all fixed gear argument for me, classic routes that are enjoyed by hundreds of climbers become the sole preserve of the next generation. 

No. It was 1980 and it's significant that they are still there. Well not the originals - they were removed in an ethical fit of pique by a friend of mine, along with a few other pegs on various routes at Tremadog. So more significant then, the fact that they were replaced.

It's not my spreadsheet (think Andy Moles is the owner, could be wrong) so I don't know for sure, but I assume it's  a column trying to record if the PBolt in question either:

Y: The PBolt turns what would be a dangerous bit of climbing into a safe bit of climbing.

N: The PBolt is pretty pointless because it's right next to bomber trad gear.

ish: Somewhere in-between the above.

I'd have thought if the first ones hadn't been placed, its a lot less likely they would have been been replaced. Its possible that who ever replaced didn't know how the first ones were placed or how good or bad they were and just did a better job of placing them because they wanted what they thought would be the same experience you had on the FA.

I'm not sure I follow that ! If someone adds pegs to a route that doesn't have any, then that's rather different. I did spend some time looking for alternative protection but didn't find any - and we had RPs by then. It's maybe also worth mentioning that we're talking protection pegs and not aid pegs. 

Maybe they were better at it, or maybe they had the right pegs for the job and I didn't ?

No surprises here then….. is there anybody out there who’s got anything to say in defence of the bolts on Citadel, Fifteen men, The Cruise or Horrorshow? Is there any need or justification for any of these? I think Barbarossa has been discussed at length, and whilst I’m completely against, I can at least appreciate the arguments for it.

Word from the 33rd Degree of Old Men Who Are Ruining British Climbing is that anyone who has an ethical objection to a P Bolt is welcome to remove it, and you can borrow the necessary kit from the NWBF to do so.

I’d happily take them out…. Seeing as I’m considerably less of a selfish prick than the people putting them in I’d definitely wait until there was some kind of consensus from the masses. It’s not about what I think, it’s about what we all collectively think.

Then they should either not guide on that route if they can't do it safely without modifying it, or quite frankly get a different job. This is not something to be done unilaterally. 

I agree. Though I'm not sure calling people selfish pricks sets a good tone for establishing collective anything. Maybe it shows that we've hit the ceiling for the usefulness of an internet forum in discussing this.

They're not.

No

What should I call them then…. Nice but slightly misguided gentleman who disregard everyone’s thoughts in favour of doing whatever they like? The fact they haven’t really engaged in any of this or tried to justify what they are doing and why doesn’t lead me to the conclusion that they care about what other people think. Why should they care about someone calling them out for what they are? I’m more than happy to discuss why they aren’t selfish or pricks but from the evidence I’ve seen I’m yet to be convinced otherwise. 

I don't know if  a guide should be expected to lead hard climbs on possibly dubious rock with poor protection if he if he fell. That could also leave the client stranded on sea cliff. Again a bombproof runner might be necessary to protect the second. Not necessarily a justification.

Irrelevant to this thread anyway as someone has replied above who knows guides aren't involved.

Not a justification in the slightest, you are correct there.

Thanks. My suggestion was based on a comment in a link on on this or one of the similar current pegbolt threads. Something like: " Why hasn't X been mentioned." I remembered X was a guide/instructor but obviously added 2+2 and made 6. Unfortunately now can't find the link again.

Or perhaps he should choose a different route to guide on.

 But the unexpected does happen. IIRC a client was killed when a British guide fell in the Alps and a few years back a guide was killed due to loose rock on Skye (I don't think client was at risk here).

People. Women climb too.

I'm really not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that routes should be peg bolted to prevent guides dying when they're working?

In view of the turn this thread has taken, I propose that it be renamed “Is British climbing ruining old men?”

No. An additional bombproof runner might be invaluable for protection of a client and/or guide if the unexpected happened even if the guide knew he would normally do the climb safely. That would be a reason for it and not a justification. However I apologize as it is irrelevant to this thread.

I don’t think anyone is guiding the E5+ routes in question. 

Guides don’t guide routes they might reasonably fall off on.

I agree. The unexpected may happen though. I mentioned two instances but they are the only ones that I can think of.

I was generalising. 

For the record, the Skye incident did not involve a guide (as in BMG) or a qualified MIA / MIC.

Yes but we are talking about specific routes here. 

Even if no women are involved in the activities being discussed and that it is only men that are placing the controversial 'Pegbolts'?

In context, I think gentlemen is probably stretching it.  Is there a single example of a woman placing a peg bolt?

Or a bolt, actually.

I know there was discussion about Graham Paterson's qualifications, but he was certainly a guide - eg described as such by Heavy Whalley here:

https://heavywhalley.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/skye-mountain-accident-the-fi...

and he was the go-to Cuillin guide for a lot of the Walkhighlands Munrobagging crowd:

https://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27756

Maybe they're just not on UKC?

https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2014/12/20/skye-death-fall-leader-graham-...

He was a guide in the sense of what he did, but not the qualification he held. 

I fully agree we shouldn't be bolted test-piece classic routes.

On the other hand sports climbing is much more popular with the younger generation and I think we should be bolting many of the not so good (for Trad) parts of crags to make them more accessible.

Yes, given the thread title that's what I assumed was the case. 

Why should they be more accessible? 

Will accessibility lead to an accelerated dumbing down of British climbing? 

Mick 

That may be the case, but crag activists (or whatever you call them) tend to be active in the climbing scene and will probably be told by friends that the subject has come up on UKC. It's the failure to engage, particularly before placing bolts, which frustrates people. 

What's this obsession with making things more accessible? There's more than enough accessible rock for everyone to climb on, nature needs a home too.

Why do crags need to be more popularist or more accessible, this sort of argument is about as sound as chipping holds to make crags more accessible. 

Agreed, insofar as I understand the sheriff's findings (I didn't know Mr Paterson and I've never hired a guide in my life), but he was definitely working as a guide.

Indeed, or putting a tarmac road and carpark into Garbh Coire.

I'm not sure that sport climbing is a young generation thing. Most of the people I know who are mainly into sport climbing are certainly not young, though almost all of them have a lifetime of 'trad' behind them.

Yeah, but it's semantics, play on words, general usage etc... if you are a member of one of the representative bodies as a guide, instructor or leader there are rules on how you represent yourself, 'if' you are also displaying their logos, so folk don't over advertise their remit. If you're instructor then you can't repeatedly talk of guiding people up x and y, the same for leader and instructor, as they imply higher level qualifications (notice i didn't say competency, as a qual only proves competency up to the assessed criteria, many working in the outdoors are more skilled than the quals they hold)

One bonus of membership is that insurance covering your mountain activities whilst responsible for others is reasonably priced. I'd imagine obtaining insurance to properly cover taking two novices along the cuillin ridge is quite hard(if not impossible) to obtain without being appropriately qualified. 

That doesn't take away from that he was extremely knowledgeable in that area, was a nice person and any death in the hills is sad. 

Note. No we shouldn't bolt the ridge! 

In my experience I just don't see this. Its typically the younger crowd trad climbing and the old duffers (I'm ready for the dislikes 🙂) swarming the Stoney valley 5's & 6's.

Yes, again agreed - I wouldn't have quibbled had GP been termed an un/under-qualified guide, it was just the original suggestion that he wasn't really a guide that rankled - to the folk on Walkhighlands etc who hired him he was very much a guide.

Indeed, a sad business all round.

Mike Lates is probably one of the most experienced guides in the Cullin. His only paper qualification last time I spoke to him was a summer ML which I understand he took for fun. He didn’t have any difficulty obtaining insurance. (Note my last visit to Skye was pre pandemic so this information may now be out of date.)

I don't remember this happening, I was still living abroad at that time so probably missed it, but it strikes me the problem here is: is a "guide" in common English usage, and a "Guide" as used by most of us active in mountaineering the same thing? I think the idea that a "Guide" is someone with a UIAGM (or BMG-, or other national guiding organisation's recognised- ) qualification is now really widespread in outdoor circles. So if someone is offering services as a guide in the mountains, most would expect them to be a "Guide"! If you see what I mean.

I have a PhD so am technically a "doctor", but I think people would find it rather dishonest if I started offering people health advice or trying to treat their diseases!

Funnily enough my better half also has a PhD - Japanese linguistics in her case - and one day we were in Sainsbury's and the checkout assistant, seeing "Dr" on her card, said "Oh, I have a sore shoulder, can you help with that?" My better half politely declined to offer any medical advice.

It didn't stop Gillian Mckeith for many years! 

Your must have come here too late to have read Dennis's fun rocktalk contributions on the subject of guide qualifications...tried to find them on a search but nothing came up. Can anyone with a better memory help?

His website has lots of examples:

https://mountainclients.typepad.com/mountain_clients/dennis-morrod.html

I don't think a few stainless steel bolts will have any impact on nature!

No but the passing masses will. 

But that's the same for Trad or for Sport, in fact one could argue Trad is more damaging to the rock constantly placing and removing gear.

And then you are down to saying, I want to be able to climb but don't want others to enjoy the crag. This seems kind of elitist!

Haha, and roads don't burn fossil fuels either.

Who said it wasn't the same? I certainly made no distinction.

You said placing bolts was acceptable if it meant the rock became more accessible.. doesn't matter whether it's a trad, sport or undeveloped cliff.. more accessibility equals more people on the rock equals less room for nature. If we are serious about biodiversity and the environment then we should really be considering where we climb, how much we climb and what effect it has - realistically more people equals more damage and there's no escaping that. If that sounds elitist then so be it, because it's also the pro-environment stance. 

Oh gosh - no I completely remember that chap, and his rants. He was a real, umm, character wasn't he? I just don't remember reading about the accident on Skye. 

And when are you stopping climbing? 

:P 

My point is a qualified BMG or MIA / MIC will not guide a route on which there is anything other than a remote chance that they would fall off. They just won’t. Lots of reasons for that. Guides and instructors can be pretty reluctant to do anything where their clients might reasonably fall off, never mind themselves.

My other point is the E5 routes discussed on this thread will see very, very few guided ascents. Partly for the reason above and partly because there are very few clients who can second E5. In fact there aren’t even all that many guides or instructors who can lead E5.

So suggesting that pegbolts on E5s have anything to do with guiding is just silly. It is true that some were placed by a guide but that was not because he wanted to guide clients up those routes. My understanding is he wanted to restore the routes to something similar to their original state and encourage more traffic. We can have a debate about the pros and cons of that. I can see both arguments and my view is that it needs to be a case by case assessment.

Maybe UKC should change the thread title to 'Are people ruining British climbing' as that should be sufficiently neutral as it doesn't include controversial references to gender and age... 

Ok old chap

And in any case something being elitist doesnt make it de facto bad. Should I say that because I dont understand physics beyond a certain point that physics is elitist and should never be discussed beyond my point of understanding by anyone because I might not understand it???

Also, something being too hard for you doesnt make it elitist. It means you are not up to it at that moment in time. Never mind, what does it matter anyway? 

Careful there you're in danger of approaching a balanced position that is probably one that most climbers would agree with if they actually care that much about such things. I'm sure that can't be allowed on this thread.

This whole "bolting crags causes more people to visit, which causes damage etc" argument is very much like the pro-hunting lot going on about how fox numbers needing controlling.

They're both valid points, and may be true. 

But let's face it, the real reason you and they are making the point is because trad climbing (or in their case fox hunting) is something that you enjoy doing and you want to keep being able to do it.

In both cases I'd have far more respect if people were just honest and said "you know what, I enjoy doing this and I don't want to be stopped from doing it" rather than scratching around for contrived proxy arguments to make the point.

From your logbook you seem to have done a lot of bouldering.  Surely all those boulders would be more biodiverse if we just put a wire fence round them and some "keep out" signs on them?  Don't see you making that argument here.  Funny that.

No.

So from a pro-environmental point of view you are anti-climbing in general? 

I'd actually go with the opposite, those who climb are more likely to appreciate and take care of nature. Many other things such as house-building is much worse for the environment than happening to touch some rocks.

I think once we have posters arguing that building houses is just as bad as bolting Gogarth we probably have to accept that we’re not contributing usefully to the debate here.

jcm

Utter nonsense. It's one point amongst many in a complex argument.

You'll also have noted that the majority of my boulder problems are rarely climbed at best, done only once, largely onsight and never visited again. Unlike many who visit the same problems time and time again, plastering with chalk and brushing and stripping off every last morsel of moss, lichen and life. 

However, yes, that's largely my point. There should, and likely will if we are serious about the environment, be a discussion certainly about new development and possibly about the ethics of 'cleaning' for climbing's sake, traffic levels at popular venues and so on. Bouldering, sport, trad.. whatever the discipline.

Who's building houses on Gogarth? This is the first I've heard of it. Absolutely outraged. 

No, I think a balance needs be met. It's quite impossible to go through life without having any impact, anywhere. 

Well that depends which environment you're on about, because house building doesn't strip rare, slow growing lichens and mosses off rocks. Climbers do. One does not excuse the other.

An argument which has been made complex by those making it as they seek new arguments and reasoning to achieve their aim.

It’s really not that complicated, you want to keep doing something in the way that you do it as you enjoy it. And there’s nothing wrong with that…

No I didn’t notice that, I didn’t look that closely. But it seems to me that you’re arguing that one person causing just a small amount of damage to a large amount of habitats is better than causing a greater amount of damage to just one?   Not sure the science backs that up.  What if everyone did the same?

There already is, it’s been done here Ad nauseum.

Quite right.

I'm not arguing anything, as I don't know the answer. I do what I do, other people do what they do. I know I try and limit my damage in that I don't go around actively removing every minute bit of greenery, and I know my common lichens, mosses and plants from my rare ones. What I do know is that if climbing is going to continue increasing in popularity then additional pressures are going to put on what are already fragile ecosystems. That much is undeniable. 

...which brings on me on to this. Yes, it has been done before, but the scene is changing with more and more people coming to the party, so the discussion basis may need to change too. Not too difficult to understand, is it? You're talking like this is this and this is the way it will always be.

Yeah, that all seems pretty fair to me. And your point that the increased popularity of climbing means that these conversations are more pertinent than previously is an excellent point.

I like to think that my old chap is rather more than just ok... 📏

I'd settle for ok. 

In my experience it’s often not the same, many sport crags get a lot more traffic, are more aggressively cleaned and the overall human impact is greater. I’m thinking about Scotland and places like Moy, Cave crag, Yellow Crag, Kirrie Hill and Rob’s Reed. You can see the same elsewhere at Malham, Portland, Scout Scar, Pen Trywn or just visit many popular Spanish Sport crags.

Someone (we) needs to decide. Is a route going to be E7 without the pegs or E5 with bomber pegs.

What is untenable is what we have now. A route that could be both E5 or E7 at the same time because no one knows the state of the pegs.  

Pegs need to be chopped or made safe.  Someone (we) has to decide.

Equally, once popular crags return partly to nature. I simply don't see evidence of rapid growth in outdoor climbing numbers,  just changes in fashionable games and locations. I also think an increasing focus on conservation in climbing is reducing the mass 'devegetations' that were once more common.  Hill and mountain walking HAS massively increased in popularity....often limiting parking for climbing.

Spot on, and this needs to be recorded somewhere so people know, UKC perhaps because paper guidebooks go out of date too quickly

So the route occupies a quantum superposition, but our bones comply with classical physics...nice.

Indeed they don't, my car is electric, with 100% green electric tariff and solar panels (from next week) also. 

If you have a problem with fossil fuel cars you ban fossil fuel cars (2035 I believe).

If you have a problem with climbers damaging nature then we work to improve the way they treat the crags. Interesting it tends not to be the climbers who cause the damage in our local areas it's more fly tippers and local youths.

surely if you climb a route on 30 year old pegs that will push the grade up and change the feeling of the route? 

Yes, of course. But it's not a god given right to climb the route at the same grade as the first ascentionist. 

But what are the roads you drive it on made from ???

Always felt that way on North Wall at Wintours.

So it’s callow and feckless youths ruining British climbing then?

have a read before you self combust with self righteous smugness: 

https://bitroads.com/About-Us/Blog/entryid/33/how-asphalt-is-made

Most here are discussing Gogarth and I'm not going to comment on that. Regarding retrobolting chossy limestone that wasn't getting any traffic in the Dales, I'm all for it. If it's getting to a point where it needs serious cleaning to even attempt then why not bolt it and we can all enjoy it.

Or consider cleaning a route or two up and then all can enjoy it?

Bolting everything won't necessarily keep a route clean, plus it is more effort too because as well as cleaning up the route you then need to go to the effort of bolting it too. We don't need to retro bolt everything just because currently its dirty or unpopular. FFS 

Promote it once its clean, redocument if required etc. It may be that retro bolting is correct but it should not be the first thing you do.

Fiend has recently written a good blog about this after experiencing some of the questionable retro bolting that has been going on in North Wales Limestone which has apparently been in some case using money from the NW bolt fund

http://fiendophobia.blogspot.com/2022/11/thinning-wedge.html?m=1

"Asphalt cement is a dark heavy mixture of hydrocarbons, also called bitumen, that is extracted as a byproduct of gasoline production (crude oil distillation)."

So no fossil fuels burnt then, just placed in a different location than before?

And keep in mind roads are not just for cars.

How is the web server you are posting this comment powered?

And then read about where the Cobalt in the batteries come from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/05/31/the-dark-side-of-congos-cobal...

Of course electric cars are far more sustainable than fossil fuel, but anyone who thinks that they have little or no impact is living is a fantasy land.  They, just as all electrical devices, are packed full of rare earth metals that are extracted by nefarious and damaging means. 

There is certainly a way to go on this one, Tesla is doing their best to clean up the supply chain (and so are many other companies):

https://electrek.co/2022/05/09/tesla-sourcing-lithium-nickel-cobalt-directl...

The fact is you can do very little without any impact, that nice bicycle that seems sustainable was probably made in China with strip mined iron smelted using coal power.

Indeed. 

This is the problem. Many of the solutions are not solutions, just kicking the problem down the road or moving the problem elsewhere.

We might be In trouble....

Fundamentally speaking we need a shrinking population not an ever expanding one. Continuing the reduce everyones standard of living in order to add more and more people isn't sustainable or fair.

In the same way as it's really not your god given right to keep the route in the style it was first climbed either, e.g. replacing pegs with bolts seems reasonable to me. Others of course can disagree, but unless you are land owner it's really just opinions.

Dunno about climbing, but they're ruining the world, see the climate/flying/climbing thread.

Totally agree. But politicians and many of us as individuals are afraid of emphasizing the subject for fear of losing votes, losing friends, upsetting religious groups or simply because we want a large family ourselves. Even the environmental campaigners, Green party etc are pretty silent about this.

Campaigning groups and politicians are silent on this for the simple reason its utter bollox

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/26/panic-overpopulation-...

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/overpopulation-and-environmentalism/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2021/05/25/slowing-populat...

Etc.....

I used the word "emphasize" as I think that the though many realize the importance of overpopulation they also know implying people should have smaller families is unpopular and offensive to a lot of those who might otherwise support them.

Why? Assessing fixed gear is part of the challenge.

As is assessing that nut placement behind a creaking flake, or a marginal cam in a pocket or a crumbling foothold, or a slight loose jug.

As is assessing you ability to climb what is Infront of you without falling off.

As is knowing when to back off.

All crucial parts of a climbers skill and are just as important as the ability to do a 10 second hang on a 10 mm edge or some other bollocks metric.

It's about making decisions to keep yourself alive.

When did trad climbing get so sanitised?

I'm not advocating for pegs here, I don't think anyone should be adding any fixed gear to trad routes. 

How many bikes do you get for a car in terms of environmental damage during production, then for every 1000 miles used? How many cars have a working life over 20 years? Unless you walk car barefoot and naked to the forest to forage, then very little we do is truly environmentally friendly, but some choices are clearly far far worse.

What has this got to do with the OP?

I didn't reply to the op, i replied to springfall. 

Maybe old men who are ruined by climbing are allowed to go off topic?

More liberties being taken by old men... 

What has this got to do with the op?

I know replying to tangents, it's dreadful,  whatever next. I trust you'll lead the way in future and only reply precisely on topic, us oldies need a standard setter to follow.

I can't speak to any form of roped climbing because I don't do it

In terms of bouldering, which I do and love both indoors and out (indoors for about 3 years and outdoors for I guess around 1.5/2) I don't think anyone is ruining it although I do find that it seems to be held in a degree of disregard as not proper climbing by some, and those some are largely old men, although most old men who climb don't care or are very encouraging.

In terms of the environment, its obviously very important to protect the rock and the land around it. At the same time though, the best way to do that would be not to climb at all. And I think we'd agree that's not really viable. If we do climb then we have to say that everyone is allowed to have a fair shot, but with certain good ethics as rules.

I think climbing walls could do a bit more on that front. I see a lot of people get inducted at the Works through beginner sessions, which are typically excellent, but perhaps at the start they could say "... and if you do want to go outdoor bouldering, then there are some good ethical rules to follow, we have a poster on the wall over there, so if you do fancy going outdoors please take a look at it or visit the BMC website (or whatever) for details" and that might push people in the right direction. If nobody tells you and your mate to clean chalk off holds/not climb wet rock/etc and you've just gone outside for the first time, how can you know? When I started going out, I didn't know that there were really any rules like that, and how could I? Nobody told me, and I had no reason to know

Fundamentally, the indoor gym membership is the majority pipeline over an outdoor apprenticeship these days. Any discussion of our behaviour and ethics should come from an acceptance of that fact.

Pot, Kettle, Black in your case.

For sure some things are better than others, and it's quite hard to figure out true lifecycle costs.

For example trains in the UK have a higher CO2 footprint per person than an electric car containing two people. Running per mile is pretty bad for energy consumption and shoe wear!

Is that presuming carbon neutral power generation?

Do you have a source for that?

Comparing the CO2 figures on The Train Line vs the average CO2 footprint of a UK run EV.

https://reports.electricinsights.co.uk/q2-2019/how-clean-is-my-electric-car...

Talking about a hatchback electric car.......These electric models typically come with a 30-45 kWh battery, which pushes their lifetime emissions up around 60 g/km.

https://www.lner.co.uk/tickets-savings/the-best-way-to-travel/our-commitmen...

Train = National Rail 0.0715 kgCO2e/pass mile, including full well-to-tank emissions = 71 g/mile = 44 g/km.

vs The EV: 60 g/km / 2 people = 30 g/km

Re ; Population and climate control. >  Campaigning groups and politicians are silent on this for the simple reason its utter bollox <

Thanks for the references. So its more complex than a straight reduce population. The refs point out that environmental impact depends on population, productivity per capita and resources available. I still find it hard to imagine how if the population were, say, half its current value that would not result in less environmental impact. Perhaps better if there were less affluent people so population fall in the wealthier countries might be most desireable in that respect. On the other hand some poorer countries are rapidly becoming more affluent (defined as average wealth per capita I think) so their impact will increase in the future.I dislike the argument that overpopulation theories support racism and right wing elements....I accept that's unfortunately true (and a good reason why the importance of population reduction may be glossed over) but irrelevant as to wether population size is actually an important factor (or not) on environmental impact including climate change. That's my very simplistic viewpoint so far.
On an individual level, as a typical citizen of a wealthier country, I don't understand how having, say, four kids instead of two is going to have no greater impact given that's potentially four footprints compared to two equal ones.
Actually I think some miraculous technological advance is the only way out of the crisis as I can't see all nations pulling together. 

We can only control our own country and not the entire world, but if we pledged to halve the UK population (due to lower birth rates/immigration) then we could have an increased standard of living and a big reduction in our footprint.

Assessing the security of s nut placement or hold is a matter of skill and experience

Assessing the security of a peg on a sea cliff is in most cases a wild guess

The concept of demographic change and economics seems to have passed you by.

Yes I agree, so what do you do? You use your skills and experience to mitigate the risk. You climb extra carefully, you fiddle in extra gear or you back off. I don't think we need to go round bashing out old fixed gear any more than we need to go round bashing, drilling or glueing in new stuff.

In trad climbing we live in a grey world, I don't like the term safe. We reduce risk as best we can within acceptable ethics.

It's part of the history of trad climbing, an ethic from a previous era, that contributes to its rich complexity.

In many places pegs are being replaced with new cemented in pegs, which are effectively the same as a bolt (e.g. Wintours leap). Having climbed some of these routes I'm very glad of a peg that isn't rusted away.

Maybe you should stick to sport climbing then?

To be fair, I'm not really aware of the prevailing or historical ethics in that part of the country.

Stick to sports climbing because I'm pleased a rusted away peg is replaced with a new one, sounds unreasonable to me. Some of these routes are otherwise unprotected and would have to be upgraded without a usable peg.

For example:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crags/wintours_leap-51/zelda-32252

"Some of these routes are otherwise unprotected and would have to be upgraded without a usable peg."

and your point is...?

I'd say that the best ways for climbers to be more environmentally friendly that are specific to climbing outdoors would be to adopt a culture of car pooling as much as possible and probably try to visit local crags more than ones a way away. Ultimately outdoor climbing usually requires a car, for most places, and is not very accessible via public transport. So we should try to mitigate that as much as we can. 

In other unrelated news can anyone give me a lift out to the Peak on Sunday?

As you say it's difficult and I would like to see a comparison done by the same team same methodology ect. 

Generally I think rail and ev compliment each other, and hopefully rail will continue to be more electric bringing the figure down. I don't think we will ever be able to dispense with rail, there'll never be enough ev's at the cost enabling access for all. Rail will still be running so using an ev for a journey you could do be rail is additional co2 that would not have been generated had you got the train. 

Happy to discuss further but maybe on a fresh thread..... I'm 50 soon this thead is freaking me out, not sure whether to ask for a bad ass drill and bolts, or stop climbing altogether! 

That's a bit disingenuous to be fair. The Wintours policy is not cut-and-dry and the route you are referring to (Zelda) has had cemented-in pegs since the 60s I believe. A new PEG has been added to protect a section which was affected by rockfall and Ash dieback, so has lost usable gear. 

From my understanding, the re-gearing policy was decided generally to replace old pegs like-for-like (same as Avon), unless it is not possible to do so, in which case a bolt may be added to 'maintain the character of the route'. Whether there are any instances of a peg actually being replaced with a bolt, I'm not sure. I certainly doubt there are new drilled or glued pegs going in on any routes, as they'd just put a bolt in instead. 

With Wintours, you have to remember that there are already sporadic bolts and full sport-routes on the cliffs, and not just within the confines of Woodcroft. Also that it is, for the most part, a quarry. 

You can't use Wintours in an argument about bolting Gogarth, unless your argument is basically 'there are bolts somewhere in the world, so they must be allowed at Gogarth'.

I'm not surprised you're banging this drum though; previous views expressed have been wanting what suits you, regardless of the prevailing ethic or the democratic view on the matter. 

I only read the Greenpeace one. To be fair it doesn't really refute that a reduction in global population would lead to a reduction in emissions and so on, it argues that such a focus is unfair and would be less effective than targeting well off individuals and industry in the developed world. So more to it than 'bollox'. 

World population has more or less doubled in my lifetime. Most of the environmental issues we face are matters of consumption and waste. How can the two not be linked?

It's all theoretical though because as a species we seem incapable of any joined up, long term, altruistic action on anything.

Doomed!

I think the policy is sensible and should be considered elsewhere, e.g. replace old worn out pegs with new pegs or equivalent bolt (I see little difference between the two). This keeps the route intact and usable.

There's a lot of "punching down" posts on this thread - against the old and/or not so good climbers. I bet the culprits can't wait to get their shirts off at the wall!

So you would end up turning a classic HS enjoyed by many climbers into some lethal runout, nobody climbing at a high enough level to want to lead such a route would really be that interested in climbing a 4a! 

Except simple observation will reveal most cars are single occupant. Plus the EV pollution is on top of the train pollution, not instead.

They are not linked as consumption is not particularly well related to population. Ok theres clearly some relationship but the individuals in the countries with the largest population growth have absolutely tiny levels of consumption and related carbon footprints compared to western countries where population is static or even falling. So the fact there is substantial population growth in sub saharan africa doesn't really equate to a much bigger carbon footprint. If you actually read into this (which I note you admit you didn't) theres plenty of articles that explain it better.

The reason I get annoyed about it is if we are do actually do anything about the climite crises we need to be asking the right questions, doing the right research and using this to inform policy. In this context worrying about population increases in sub saharan Africa or wherever is bollox. 

It's a consumption problem not a population problem.

I suspect most trips done in an EV couldn't be done on a train.

For me personally if I'm travelling long distances (which is where the train comes in), it's usually with a friend (climbing) or family. I do use the EV for work trips where taking the train is too unreliable/slow.

Not sure this is true - less train passengers means less trains/less train cars.

As Zelda was first climbed in about '61 (as per logbook at least) then the FA (and a whole slew of other early climbers) would have had only the most basic of gear. None of the benefit of modern nuts, cams, ropes and all the other ancilliaries. In this respect is it actually the same grade now compared to back when? While there may be runouts on the route there will be other gear that was genuinely not available before and so your HS may effectively have actually become largely a severe.  

Climbing prior to modern gear was a different world (leader must not fall etc). Back then I can only imagine how scary some of these routes would have been and this was reflected in how the grades were named, with an HS really meaning that rather than a pleasant bimbly route. Take the peg out of Zelda and it will return to something more akin to it's original nature I suspect.

While I don't think we want to go back to LMNF I think accepting that routes change, ethics change and grades will likely do so too is probably healthy. I haven't climbed the route but I've served my time tying off comedy/chocolate pegs so am not unfamiliar with finding myself in the poo. I knew they were pegged routes and it was possible and frankly, I chose to be there and accepted the risk.  If that's not ok then there's plenty of rock out there an plenty of other HS's too*

*Edit. This is obviously just my opinion, as is yours. I'm totally fine with going to area meetings and the like and am accepting of the majority decision. If most people want a cemented peg then I'll disagree but otherwise accept it. I am however, unconditionally against unilateral action by anyone, particularly where de facto bolting is concerned.

The discussion seems to boil down to a choice between compromising the history, grade and nature of a climb to preserve the ethos, character and environment (purely from a climber’s narrow perspective) of the crag, or preserving the history, grade and nature of a climb at the expense of the ethos, character and environment of the crag. I prefer the first option

Nicely put sir. 

My grandma would never be able to ascend mount Snowdon if there were no choo choo train to help her up. We old folks need a bit of help. There's plenty of other routes for young tigers to fall off.

This is one of the cruxes of the issue. You might see little difference between pegs and bolts, but I see a massive difference 

There is a load of difference between a peg placed in a crack which will take a peg, and which is not necessarily perfectly positioned to protect the moves, and a bolt (or even two, or five) placed elsewhere on the route, in rock without features for trad gear or pegs, which is perfectly placed to protect the moves. But I'm not sure I see the difference between an old peg which has rusted in a way that compromises the once good peg placement so that a safe replacement peg cannot be placed, and a bolt placed close by to replace it and return the route to it's earlier state.  They are, after all, both just bits of metal.

I think there's a case for assessing each route on its merits and arriving at a consensus for each route (eg at an Area Committee). I would vote for retaining classic routes like Zelda and Scratch Arete approximately in the state in which I have enjoyed them (many times each over 40+ years) so that others of my ability can enjoy them in the future. If that means occasionally replacing long-standing, now dangerous, pegs with an adjacent bolt when there is no alternative peg placement or comparably reliable trad gear in the same location, then on balance I'd vote for that.

Martin

The main problem I'd have with drilled replacement pegs is that it seems that some/all are being placed in blank rock, albeit suitably close to a defunct peg placement. To me, that gives entirely the wrong message about suitability of fixed gear on trad routes. The whole point of the peg at the time was that it was placed IN the crack. If a drilled replacement cannot be placed IN the crack, either in the exact same position or immediately adjacent, such that it practically and aesthetically replaces the original, I'd be hugely more wary about accepting such a development.
There may well be arguments about suitability or longevity on in-crack pegbolts, but I'd say the fact that the fixed gear is in the crack and not somewhere nearby is very much more important. If a peg can't be replaced sustainably in the same crack, it probably should not be replaced at all.

True, the 2 mile trip to the shops couldn’t be done by train.

I was surprised that a few experienced trad climbers seemed to regard them as more like pegs for these sort of reasons and I tried to see things from that point of view. Pete Harrison (a local activist and guidebook writer) was able to put me back on track and I think is worth re-quoting:

“It isn't 'more peg like than bolt-like' to place a resin bolt in an old peg placement - it's a resin bolt in a peg placement. Call it what it is. 

What you're saying is ridiculous when you stop to think it through: 

Example:
1. Old rusty peg at Gogarth. I drill it out using a 12mm drill bit (or drill next to it). Clean out the 12mm drilled hole, inject resin, insert a custom-made 12mm diameter stainless steel piece of fixed gear that looks, works and is placed exactly like a bolt (because it is a bolt..), but which I've decided to name eco pegand the local BMC write it up in a bolting policy as eco peg. Resin sets, job done.
2. Old rusty peg at Gogarth. I drill it out using a 12mm drill bit (or drill next to it). Clean out the drilled 12mm hole, inject rein, insert a popular brand of 12mm stainless bolt made by for e.g. Petzl, Bolt Products, Fixe, Titan. Resin sets, job done.
 
End result = exactly the same, 2 bolts replacing 2 old pegs.

Spot the difference? Nope, because there is no difference! We're discussing placing bolts at Gogarth and elsewhere. How many times does it need saying until it's clear. The level of self-deceit around acknowledging that these are bolts amazes me”

https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,33285.msg670312.html#msg6703...

And:

“1. JB remember I have actually hung on the rope, at Gogarth, with Chris, drilling holes and placing these things. I know how they're installed - i.e. they're most definitely not placed in the same way as pegs, and definitely are drilled glue-in bolts. Some may well be hand placed, but most aren't.
2. A glued peg that goes in without needing drilling is a glued peg (stainless or otherwise).
3. This isn't about any one person. Everyone who knows Chris knows he's a great guy. Appeals to authority should fall on deaf ears. Nobody is questioning anyone's credentials, and credentials aren't relevant to the topic here - the topic is bolts have been placed but they aren't being openly called bolts. I feel I need to keep saying that I'm not blanket for or against any particular placement. The point is about transparency, which is severely lacking here.
4. The twisted semantics around these bolts tells its own story. You don't have this kind of obfuscation and deliberately-veiled language such as 'battery operated hammer-action chisel with a rotary option' or 'eco peg' if there's nothing to hide. A drill is a drill, not a 'battery operated hammer-action chisel with a rotary option'. Drilling is drilling, not 'enhancing depth'. This is the language of bullshit. 
5. What's the incentive not to openly call these bolts even though they are? Who benefits? 
I'd suggest one incentive is to keep as many people as possible in the dark about the reality of how these bolts are installed and therefore keep as many people as possible in Alex's 'group 2' from his earlier post:

The benefit is to people who enjoy going out doing what they perceive as a version of climbing they know as 'trad' and don't want to have to think too hard about their romanticised game known as 'trad' being sullied by drilled gear - something that doesn't normally belong in their version of the trad game on Gogarth. 
Keeping these bolts veiled in the nebulous language of being 'eco pegs' means people can go out climbing without cognitive dissonance of clipping bolts on Gogarth. Safe in the knowledge that what they're doing is clipping a peg and thus they can kid themselves that they're playing the romanticised game in keeping with the stories they've told themselves which don't involve drilling fixed gear on trad routes.

The important part to me is not kidding yourself or others. I couldn't give a monkey's about making up fairytales to make the experience fit in with some set of rules.  

That's it really, you're kidding yourselves if you think these aren't bolts. They're just bolts drilled into cracks.”

https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,33285.msg670371.html#msg6703...

In reply to Uncle Derek:

He’s commenting on what I said which I do think is ridiculous now I’ve stopped to think about it.

But Positron had good gear...

You seem to be saying that there is in fact a relationship between population and consumption but it is only important in affluent countries. Repeating myself but surely if I, living in an affluent country, would have liked a family with four kids  but chose to have two then that would certainly be worthwhile on environmental grounds (2 lifetime environmental footprints rather than four).

Obviously any effect of limiting family size in affluent countries on climate change would take a long time, but we need to think long term to try and limit the approaching disaster since the current agreements between nations about controlling consumption are, and likely will be, insufficient. Also many developing nations will increase in affluence and thus consumption will increase and then their population size will have a greater effect.

It's been three or four years since I did it but I seem to remember some decent micro wire placements in the break under the overhang a foot or so higher than the peg. I clipped the peg but I don't remember it feeling essential. Saying that, maybe if it hadn't been there I'd feel differently 😉.

It seems like an odd example to choose since it's a soft touch at the grade anyway.

A route by route debate would take forever, and good luck achieving a consensus that everyone would accept. A crag by crag approach may be easier and simpler.

Tremadog is an easily accessible crag where many historic classic routes at all grades rely on peg runners. existing pegs to be retained and replaced when necessary. The nature of the rock and environment means that pegs last a long time and placements more so. No new peg placements

Gogarth main cliff is THE full on adventure crag requiring experience and commitment to get to many of the routes : Pegs corrode quickly and unpredictably and placements are more easily trashed.  Not many (any?) significant routes rely on them. No replacement of existing pegs when they deteriorate, consider removing some early.

Gogarth Red Wall: Leader placed pegs can be replaced in current or adjacent natural placements.

Pennine limestone. Crags are either trad or sport, and trad mans exclusively leader placed protection. Hybrids don’t make sense. A peg protected clip up is not trad; it is a sport route so bolt it

The issue with increasing population in developing countries is the amount of emissions when those countries become affluent and have similar consumption per capita as the already developed countries.

But the long term global population predictions are that it'll start to fall towards the end of this century which will produce its own problems.

So:

• Short-term (up to 20 years): consumption issue largely for developed countries 
• Medium-term (20 to 50 years): population issue (because if we haven't sorted the consumption/capita by then we are truly screwed)
• Long-term (beyond 2075): either we will have had (human) global catastrophe by then (my money's on this), or we'll have screwed up to the extent that (human) global catastrophe is inevitable (my backup bet), or we have a chance of managing the decreasing population and we have enough control of emissions to end up with a sustainable planetary ecology/climate (not risking anything on this).

By global catastrophe I mean where globally, civilization breaks down and we get wars, mass starvation leading to severe population decrease, etc, even if there are countries/areas that manage to remain stable.

And of course I'm not really betting 😁, far too old to see all except the short-term results, which of course we are already in the middle of.

Apologies for continuing the thread within a thread hijack.

With respect to the original subject, I don't have a strong opinion either way except concern about "thin end of the wedge", partly because most of the routes affected have always been above my pay grade.

But there is no doubt that these Gogarth items are BOLTS and should be called as such.

You replied to me, but I think you were replying to the thread generally. I've not been involved in the debate re "peg-bolts" or "eco-pegs" but I'm inclined to agree with you and others - these are bolts by any other name. But there are two important distinctions to my mind, and this isn't one of them.

The first distinction is between gear that you place by hand and your second removes by hand, without damaging the rock, and gear that is hammered, drilled, or otherwise forced into the rock, and not removed afterwards. Bolts, pegs, peg-bolts or eco-bolts all fall together into the latter category.

The second important distinction is between trad and sport climbing. It's the style, approach required, and level of commitment that makes a climb trad, not whether it happens or not to have one or two pieces of fixed protection.

No-one, surely, is going to argue that Scratch Arete is, or has ever been, anything other than a trad climb. If the single peg is now unsafe, or becomes so in the future, replacing it in the same position with a single alternative piece of fixed gear is not going to turn it into anything other that the superb trad climb it has always been. Yes, it may be "easy HVS", but for me any HVS has always been a challenge - E1 has generally been my top grade. I've always had to entertain the possibility that I might fluff the move over the overlap, and the peg has made the move justifyable for me. There may be alternative placements good enough to reassure someone of greater ability, but I'd like to think that in the future, classic climbs like this will remain sensible propositions for climbers like myself. Stronger climbers can always find bigger challenges on harder routes.

I choose Scratch Arete as just one example, which happened to be mentioned by another poster, and which I have greatly enjoyed on numerous occasions. There are, of course, other classic climbs in N Wales and elsewhere which have traditionally employed one or two protection pegs to keep otherwise excessively bold crux moves within the overall grade of the climb. In my view, they are better climbs for it.

Martin 

So are you suggesting that should the peg on Scratch Arête become rotten and impossible to replace we should place a bolt as a replacement?

Clearly, because there is absolutely no difference between a peg and a bolt in his ‘important distinctions’. 🙃

OK, there clearly is a distinction between a peg and a bolt when both are sitting in your toolbag. One has the potential to be placed in any piece of sound rock while the other can only be placed in a crack. But once the peg has been placed, and come to be accepted over time as part of the route, I don't see that it makes any difference to the quality or nature of the route if it is replaced with a peg or a bolt in the same position. And if a replacement peg is now impossible to place, on balance I would accept a bolt as the preferred option, preferable, that is, to changing the nature of the route, and in my view compromising the quality, by leaving the crux moves less adequately protected.

Martin

How about we let people replace rotten pegs with bolts, but only if they can hand-drill them on lead without mechanical assistance? Seems fair!