UKC

Doing a reccy today for the Bob Graham and was very suprised to see two bolts and a peg on Broad Stand. I haven't been up there for a few years.

Don't normally get involved with this sort of discussion but surely these shouldn't be present and aren't necessary anyway?

Cheers
Mark

In reply to Mark Westerman:

aren't they for mountain rescue?

In reply to Neil Kazimierz Sheridan:

I'm sure sharp edge has a bolt to?

In reply to Mark Westerman: News to me. Likewise its a few years since I last went but they weren't there then. They must be quite new, someone would have chopped them otherwise, surely?

In reply to redsulike:

I've never seen them - I heard there was a hidden one on Sharp Edge so I was assuming they have one or two at Broad Stand also. I might be wrong!

In reply to Mark Westerman: There was an in-situ rope back in July 2007, but it certainly wasn't anchored to bolts or pegs.

In reply to Mark Westerman: Where are about are they, do you have a picture? If this is true I think the National Trust need informing of their presence. It is a very sad day if a historically important climb has been spoiled by unilateral action like this.

In reply: have the sergeant crag abseil bolts been replaced yet?

In reply to Mark Westerman:

F 3b?

Did you onsight or redpoint it?

In reply to Bulls Crack:

It went French free at 2c.

Two bolts, one below and one above the awkward corner.

cheers
mark

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Not only climbers that are concerned about this - http://forum.fellrunner.org.uk/showthread.php?t=7801 - a similar mixture of WTF and bemusement.

And from a logbook on here - http://forum.fellrunner.org.uk/showthread.php?t=7801

It is beginning to look like this thread and the one on the FRA site are becoming self-referential

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber: Who is local enough to remove them? I'm not but they need removing urgently.

In reply to MattG:

ACcording to the FRA thread, Steve Reid is on the case.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Interesting; what's the BG they keep referring to?

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:
The Bob Graham round - all the Lakes tops in 24 hours

In reply to Mark Westerman:

They should not be present, and may not be necessary but maybe it is better to leave them now rather than damage the rock removing them?

If removed, the people who put them in may just replace them, which is the worst scenario?

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

BG = Bob Graham Round. A 66 mile circuit (well "round") starting and finishing in Keswick and going over 42 tops. Has to be done within 24hrs to get the tick.

ALC

In reply to Andy Say:


Splutter! That would take a little longer than 24hrs

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:

>Splutter! That would take a little longer than 24hrs


laggard,

In reply to MattG:


Me, but I am not going to as I do not know the reasons behind their placements and I am not of the act before thinking brigade. There was a serious accident at BS last summer, bolts may have been placed by the mrt for ease of rescue. This action is certainly not turning scafell into a sports crag (no lower off, see :-P).

Broad stand is regularly equipped with all sorts of stuff, fixed ropes, small alu ladders, top ropes for walkers and BG'ers. I suggest you just let it lie.

If you do come to west cumbria on a bolt chopping mission, I can refer you to a good physio to treat your jerky knee.

In reply to sutty:


Should definitely go, even if this results in a small amount of damage. If they are "accepted" then more will appear in other mountain locations.

In reply to sutty:

Leaving bolts in place to protect a "bad step" would be the worst possible precedent for the British mountains. In the continent the bolts would have appeared years ago at an obstacle like Broad Stand, and many punters and guides would have gratefully clipped them. The fact that this does not happen in the UK hills is what makes our take on mountaineering special; let's not dilute this.

In reply to sutty:

I think the record for all the tops in the Wainwright books is seven days - Jos Naylor.

ALC

In reply to 3leggeddog:

So what if there was a serious accident. What the fcuk has that got to do will placing bolts on iconic and historical rock?

I cannot see for a second that bolts would have been placed by the MR if they had they would be seriously misguided and stepping way out of their realm of authority.

The bolts need chopping, I'm sure will be.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

From the descriptions of where they are placed, it would seem that they are not in the best place to aid in a rescue. Even if it was WMRT then they are likely to have removed them afterwards rather than leave them in place as Broad Stand is noted on the WMRT website as being one of their "blackspots" so they won't want to be encouraging more people to try their hand at Broad Stand. They would also be more discrete about their placement - expansion sleeve left in rock with hanger removed and maybe a suitable stone to hide the placement, only those in the know would think of moving the stone, that sort of thing.

Yes, BS is regularly equipped with temporary bits of rigmarole (not seen an alu ladder though) but that doesn't excuse this sort of behaviour.

At the moment we still don't know whodunnit, or why. However the oldest recorded rock climb in England (I think) deserves better than this.

ALC

There was - I think - a fatal accident on Broad Stand last year and following on from this, there was a flurry of correspondence in the letters page of the Westmorland Gazette along the lines that a "fixed rope" should be put there to make it "safe" for walkers. This is the type of complete nonsense that perculates into letter pages, mostly written by people who don't have a full understanding of the situation, but perhaps someone's decided to act upon the idea.

Any fatality is obviously a tragedy, but I'm firmly of the view that there's is no place for bolts on natural rock - be that a climber's line or a scramble. They go against the well thought through tradition of self-reliance and the well developed methods of protection that have evolved within the mountaineering community. The bolts should be removed, as should any others that appear elsewhere.

In reply to Removed User:

A single accident doesnt, regular rescues which may put team members in jepordy may justify it. Get real, BS is hardly a route of national importance, merely a bad step that interferes with a nice walk. Read my post BS is frequently festooned with all sorts of aids to climbing perhaps the bolts are the rational, tidy, safe solution. Think and gather information before taking action.

I will find out shortly, to be honest if it speeds up the rescues so they dont become a gory circus for the tourist, like the last one was then the mr have some of my sympathy


pm me and I'll forward my physio's number

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Another vote for chop, as soon as possible. It would be good, I suppose, to find out who put them there, and their reasons, but whatever those reasons were, they were misguided.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

If you put fixed ropes and bolted anchors at every accident spot in the UK hills you will fundamentally alter the nature of British mountaineering. Is this what we want?

In reply to sutty:



You know that is a weak argument. It is possible to remove a bolt without making a mess. We don't want to set a precedent of not being able to remove any innapropriately placed bolts simply because the initial act of vandalism might be compounded slightly.

Lets be clear - the main act of vandalism was committed by the man with the drill and not someone trying to patch up the mess afterwards.

In reply to 3leggeddog:


Which should be, and are, removed.


Speaking as someone who's *actually seen* them, I doubt they were put there for rescues. The peg is poorly placed, there's only single bolt at the top and in any case there are natural anchors available.


Wind your neck in.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Even I nearly managed the BGR
I only just failed due to atrocious weather, it is a genuine 24 hr challenge
http://www.bobgrahamclub.org.uk/
The record is way in front of Joss's record for all the Peaks over 2000ft nowadays, not sure what it is though.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

The issue is one of personal responsibility. If one doesn't feel like going up Broad Stand then foxes tarn path is a decent alternative. If one does have the inclination to tackle broad stand then one can and one can protect oneself in whichever removable, non marking way one likes.

It is tragic there was a fatality there but that does not justify bolts. People have been killed falling off Orion face in winter, by your logic we should put in 2m metal spikes every 40m for secure belays, in fact, taking your point to it's final conclusion we should chip all routes we can't do because we want to do them now, whether we have the skills or not.

In reply to MattG:

Don't be silly, what I am saying is think before you act. Many years ago, a famous himalayan climber smashed some bolts he found at the top of an ice route, a frozen waterfall, a route which only forms once every 5-10 years. Turns out the bolts were placed for groups of kids to ab the route on the 3,640 days when the route is in its usual wet state, can you condone that?

As for the orion face, I have spent a jolly 7hrs nursing an injured friend on there, he fell 200ft onto a single screw, which held. Does this justify a bolt, no, a completly different place frequented only by climbers.

In reply to Al Evans:

Mark Hartell took the record up to 77 tops in 1997.

Steve Birkinshaw had a go just ten days ago on the saturday of the bank holiday weekend - he failed (the weather was pretty poor) but good to see it being challenged again.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

Thing is, the people who tend to fall off Broad Stand don't usually have ropes, kit and the knowledge to use them.

People who *do* carry ropes up there can perfectly well carry a few wires and slings to set up their own anchors.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

We aren't talking about Doug Scott and Cautley Spout (which was actually done this winter, but that's another story).

On Scafell there is a perfectly good walkers path round Foxes tarn if people want to walk and if people don't want to walk they can tackle the graded rock climb of Broad Stand. Once people are attempting Broad Stand they are climbers as they are choosing to attempt a graded rock climb. There is no argument for equipping it other than temporarily for BG round or, I suppose, for an individuals own walk if they wished to carry a ladder up and then back down again.

The issue is one of personal responsibility and this issue is frequently submerged and denied in our culture, witness sue me for everything ads etc, it's always some one elses fault. Actually sometimes it's not someone elses fault and there's no need to pander to people not taking responsibility by equipping a short piece of rock that can adequately be protected by a short rope and a couple of slings.

In reply to a lakeland climber: I, sadly, think it could be a runner, possibly assisted by a climber because the bolts are supposedly well placed. More and more people are getting attracted to the BGR, many with little background in the hills, this is great in many ways but there is a real risk of this sort of thing. Previously people have used caving ladders to overcome Broadstand on a BG round. Takes this piss a bit, it's like pouring tuns of sand on the glyders to make the glyder leg easier underfoot. Any marking of the route by paint, reflective stickers or use of aids, ladders, bolts is wrong IMO and totally against the ethos for me.

In reply to Al Evans:
I think Joss still holds the records for all the 'Wainwright' tops though (has anyone even tried to break it?) - just under 7 days top-to-top.

In reply to Toreador:

Joss did the Wainwrights over 7 days - book on this produced by Ken Ledward

A group of 8 (4 pairs) from the Eden Valley MC did it as a relay over 4 1/4 day - made us realise what an amazing accheivement by Joss


As regards tha bolts - Broad Stand has progressively become more polished over the years how ever it is still possible to protect for the BG round with someone (support team) dropping a rope down with suitable nut placements at the top.

A friend of mine once jumped down the "bad step" - we were doing White Wizard, nearby, and just on the last pitch when a thunderbolt hit the area just above Broad Stand and it was going to rain - we escaped from the route and Steve haired off down Broad Stand jumping down the step - this is not recommended !!!

Coleridge will be turning in his grave !!

It is a dangerous place - but the bolts should not be there

In reply to Mark Westerman:
Steve Birkinshaw has just posted on the FRA forum to say that there are now FIVE bolts!
"On my 24 hour record attempt on 23 May the ropes were already there. Apparently there was a total of 5 bolts and a peg and there were 3 ropes. There was also a wire ladder which my supporters removed (I think)."

In reply to Toreador:
With 5 bolts in its now a legitimate clip-up. Destruction of this new sport route will be the thin end of the wedge with terrible consequences for places like Norber Scar and Portland. Lower-off needed?

In reply to Removed User:


ya Da Ya da up their arse climbers. Malham Cove, absolute wonder of England but climbers "decide" it can be bolted cause they can`t free it ,yet, but then they decide at a notorious blackspot that they`d rather see people die than pop a couple of bolts in.

In reply to J1234:

Your ignorance of history and significance along with policies of the local area are impressive.

How about a bolt on Napes Needle so it can easily rappelled. Ah but that's a climb eh!

How about sparing bolts on all the exposed technical sections on the Cuillin Ridge? Explain how this is an different?

In reply to Removed User:

of climbing and climbers, so they say where bolts are acceptable and not. What if I want to start a new sport that involves a few discreetly placed bolts, who the hell are climbers tell me Malham is Ok but not The Napes or the Cullin.
History and Significance my Arse.

In reply to Mark Westerman: are we allowed to declare that we are no longer at the thin end of the wedge yet?

In reply to J1234: And what new sport is this that you are going to invent pray tell?

In reply to Removed User:
'Sport Scrambling'

In reply to Andy Say: Aye. Well he should stick to climbing walls and well worn paths.

In reply to Removed User: Let me be clear I think there should be no bolts whatsoever on natural rock in England, however if it`s a choice between a lifesaving situation or someone short of something to do poncing about climbing a route I`d take the lifesaving bolts.

New Sport, hmm, how about crucifiying you on Tophet wall with a bolt gun
)

In reply to J1234: Slightly ridiculous logic. When does a 'poncing about' bolt become a life-saving bolt? When you bloody fall on it.
If broad stand is bolting does it the become a 'poncing about' climb. Yes it does.

How can you be so against sport climbing and at the same time condone bolting Broad Stand.

In reply to Mark Westerman: I've ignored this thread so far as I didn't really think it was serious. I am utterly disgusted that this has happened and can't fathom the arrogance of whoever placed the bolts. It is wanton vandalism and the perpetrator should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

In reply to Removed User:
I`m not against sport climbing. It just annoys me that "climbers" decide Malham can be Bolted and stick loads of the buggers in, Wilton cannot and have a fit if it`s suggested even though it`s a man made thing, Broad Stand Cannot even though people have died there just seems hypocritiacal to me.

In reply to MattG:
We are talking about ill informed over reactions

In reply to J1234:
It's not just climbers deciding, it's the landowners too, and given the concerns expressed on the FRA forum it's pretty clear what their views are going to be.

People have died falling off footpaths, should they be tarmacced and a handrail installed?

In reply to J1234:

As I said above... bolts on Broad Stand won't help the people who usually fall off it.

In reply to Toreador: I`m not saying Broad Stand should or for that matter should not be bolted, I`m just saying that a group of people who condone the bolting of Malham have no moral high ground to go chopping bolts on Broad Stand.
Makes me laugh how quickly people on here start trying to imply that people are H&S nutters.

In reply to J1234:


If I disapprove of all bolts am I allowed to take the moral high ground?

Anyway, these bolts clearly have to go, practically no one supports them and if they are accepted here it is difficult to think of any location where they would not be cited as a precedent. I will be in the Lakes in a few weeks and would prefer to spend the time climbing but if no one else does anything, I may have to start my bolt removal career!

In reply to MG:
Certainly.

Who actually owns Broad Stand. If you wish to chop the bolts, ask their permission.

In reply to J1234:

I wouldn't say it's hypocritical, just a bit(!) confusing, especially if you ignore the history of how we got to the current state of affairs. Just look at Welsh slate: Conscience Slab can be bolted but the Dervish slab can't! Yet they are next to one another in the same quarry!

In the case of Broad Stand it would appear that a person or small group have taken it upon themselves to add bolts with no justification being offered for their actions. From postings on here and on the FRA site it seems as if they were placed over the winter as there is a note here http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=7085 about them being there in January.

If the party was having an epic then I doubt that they'd be thinking about putting bolts in - would you carry a bolting kit for emergency use in the UK hills? So it looks as if they have been added deliberately but for what purpose?

ALC

In reply to J1234:

permission.

Fair point. National Trust?

In reply to J1234:

Earlier you said:


And now:


So *you* want to stick bolts wherever you like, but *we* need to ask permission to remove them?

Grow up.

In reply to MG:

Looks like it - if the purple squar with an oak leaf motif is the OS symbol for the NT.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:

"Interesting" post ( #50) on the FRA thread

ALC

In reply to elliptic:
Ah ha it`s I said, you said time.

What if I want to start a new sport that involves a few discreetly placed bolts, who the hell are climbers tell me Malham is Ok but not The Napes or the Cullin.

I think the what if makes the statement hyperthetical.

But certainly, the land owners view should be sought, they may even have bolted it themselves, and if climbers chopped them, would seek to ban climbing on the East Buttress or on other land they own.
Oh yes the world does not revolve around climbing.

In reply to J1234:

You can't have it both ways.

Quite right the NT are made aware (along with other interested parties) but the likelihood this was done with their knowledge is pretty slim, I think.

In reply to a lakeland climber:
It is a curious situation and highly provocative, it`s not like they will not be noticed.
Sounds like someone who likes causing bother to me, and no it`s not me.
When were they first noticed, a lot of people must have passed them, there was a set of lines down a few weeks ago so people must have been going up and down.

In reply to Mark Westerman:

It strikes me that the people most likely to fall off Broad Stand (ie walkers rather than climbers/scramblers) are the least likely to be equipped to make use of bolts. This suggests to me that they may have been misguidedly placed to protect a specific event (perhaps a charity walk) rather than as a general safety measure.

In reply to elliptic:
I have seen pictures that prove otherwise, but it looks painful to me.

In reply to elliptic:

Have emailed the NT. Will report back if I get a response.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

http://www.justgiving.com/ECI_IPT_BGR_2 ?

Technological overkill (and high-quality rigging)? Do their own thing regardless of local customs? Doesn't sound like the army at all...

In reply to J1234:

God you are spouting some shit today. Do you really think it is possible to have access withdrawn to a high mountain crag in the Lake District?

You still haven't told me what this 'new sport' is and how it will be separate from the remit of climbing?

If you are on the wind up give up it tedious.

In reply to flaneur:

According to its website, ECI delivers 'innovative solutions at short notice'...

In reply to Removed User:

Of course you can. A case can easily be made against the environmental impact of climbing, especially around SSSI's, at the moment the NT are quite good with climbers, fell runners get a much harsher deal, only this year they banned a race on their land.

In reply to Removed User:
You exemplify the type of arrogance I am talking about.
Climbers deciding what will be bolted and not, when they don`t even own it in the first place.
The New sport, i`ve not decided yet, but whatever it is it will involve a lot of bolts and Almscliff.

In reply to IainRUK:

Maybe in theory but give me a instance where this has happened or is likely to happen in the Lake District.

Also I would have thought bolting it in the first place would create more of case than other.

In reply to J1234:

WHY do climbers/scramblers decide what is to be bolted????????

Because they are the ones using the cliffs. Therefore as end users THEY have developed a status quo that is quite workable in the main and generally under agreement with other involved parties e.g. landowners, national park authorities etc...

No one else is involved because no one else really has that much interest. In fact no one else generally notices bolts in cliffs as a rule.

Now where are these other end users of the cliffs that should be allowed to have a say in placing bolts? Oh yes, the users of your new imaginary sport that involves cliffs but does not fall under the context of climbing.

Maybe when you have formed your community group for this new imaginary sport you and a a few of your imaginary sportsman you could turn up at a few BMC area meetings explain why have bolted up Almscliff and how you don't to consider your actions in light of climbers because it is not climbing.

Until then pipe the fcuk down because your argument is childish in the extreme.

In reply to J1234: Wasn't the Scafell range and Great Gable bought by the FRCC (Climbers) and donated to the National Trust as a War Memorial to its fallen members?

In reply to Removed User:
I suspect the RSPB may have other views or people with a big thing about Lichens and Ferns or rare butterflies.

In reply to Removed User:
Great Gable for sure, but the Scaefell range, who knows.

In reply to Removed User:
'the rocks buttresses and recesses of Lingmell, Great End, Allen Crags, Green gable, Great gable, Kirkfell and other peaks east and west of Sty Head Pass' was presented to the National Trust by the FRCC as a memorial to its dead members.
Not Scafell.

In reply to Andy Say: I suspected the boundary was close. Who gifted Scafell then?

It was me that Steve Reid contacted. I'm the Secretary of the Bob Graham 24 Hour Club. He thought I might know who placed the bolts, thinking it may have been a BG support party.

The strong view amongst the fell runners is that the bolts should be removed.

Not all BG contenders go over Broad Stand; some use Foxes and a winter round just before Christmas used Lord's Rake. Those that do use BS, in my experience, usually rig a fixed rope to safeguard progress.

Judging by the FRA thread, which I started to try and get information for Steve, the fell running community would not want to use bolts or any other type of aid to negotiate BS when there are plentiful ways of protecting the difficult step that don't require aid.

The suggestion has been made that I put a note onto the BG Club website confirming the view that the Club takes on what is the correct method of dealing with this obstacle. I think that is a sensible suggestion. I am assuming that the Club will concur with the views expressed on the FRA Forum thread.

Steve enquired of me whether if a contender used bolts on BS whether that would disqualify them from membership. My heart says "yes" but we don't have a rule that says "no". We don't have too many rules full stop.

In reply to Removed User:
I think it was Lord Leconfield? That too was intended as a war memorial.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

Look in the mirror.

In reply to BGSec:


The fell running forum thread is much more coherent and level headed than some of the tripe being spouted on this thread. It's clear the bolts should never have been placed, and should be removed as cleanly and as soon as possible.

UKC is proving itself to be a bit of an irrelevance to this issue.

Has nobody taken them out yet?

Birkett called this morning asking about the rumours. He's off to Pabay/Mingulay or else he would have run up there and yanked them out with his bare hands.

Mick

In reply to KeithW (LMC):

"UKC is proving itself to be a bit of an irrelevance to this issue. "

Retract that please Keith.

You mean some of the individuals posting on this thread. There is no UKC consensus or opinion on this as a collective.

Just individual opinions expressed on a forum.

How do you know what everyone who reads this thread but does not post thinks?

Cheers,

Mick

In reply to Mark Westerman: Just because I don't know, what is involved in 'chopping' bolts? A pair of bolt cutters?

In reply to KeithW (LMC): I think most fell runners (and a great majority of fell runners have a climbing background) have seen something like this being on the cards. While it was a great book and did a great service in motivating many people out into the hills 'Feet in the Clouds' romanticised the BGR (it's interesting to now see this also having an impact on the Paddy Buckley Round). The BGR is now 'the' challenge, right up their with the 3000ers, it's attracting people with little history of being in the hills who are unaware of the traditions and see the round as more of a physical challenge rather than the celebration of fell running they should be. The use of caving ladders was just the first step, Broad stand is seen by some as an obstacle to get round rather than part of the route which can be bypassed with relative ease anyhow.

I think it's absolutely horrific someone has denigrated the round in this manner. It would be good to get pictures taken of the bolts and have an article in the fell runner magazine explaining that this is just totally unacceptable and against the ethos of the rounds.

In reply to IainRUK:

But aren't they largely doing it with the support of a club, where people should know better? Or is support from other folk? I'm assuming they're not all doing unsupported winter rounds in 18 hours ?

In reply to Mark Westerman:

I was surprised to see them there on Saturday, only one of the bolts was actually being used with the rope (as far as I remember)the other was just redundant. Not sure whether its related, but there seemed to be a lot of old rope and ab tat that looked as though it had been removed from Broad Stand, chucked down the back of a boulder near the bottom of the route.

In reply to Carolyn:

I think there are some, like the group who did this*, who do rounds outside of the main clubs, some people attempt rounds having never paced other people, spoken much with others, or have the support of a fell running club.


*look at the FRA thread, the likely culprits have been identified as a charity group working to help people in Afghanistan, a good cause, but there was still no need for the bolts.

In reply to sutty:

I think leaving them in is worst case, to permanently alter this challenging link between 2 of England's 3000ers is totally wrong, this isn't some obscure piece of rock. I doubt removing them will lead to that much damage anyway.

In reply to IainRUK:

The only thing that counts is whether or not anyone is prepared to go up and chop them. As someone else has pointed out on here, the reaction to the retro-bolting of established routes is somewhat inconsistent and illogical. For instance, the chop routes on the Bella Lugosi slab on Welsh slate have recently been retro-bolted but the first ascentionists - who risked their lives - don't seem to be bothered. In the case of Broad Stand, I think that if I lived in the Lakes I would go up and chop them.

Bit of a walk, though.....

In reply to Pekkie: I think arguments over whether a line in a crag which has other bolted lines is totally different to bolts on a hitherto unbolted mountain crag. But yes your general point is right and I think someone will remove it, hopefully quickly because the worst scenario is someone smashes the hell out of them and does a huge amount of damage.

In reply to IainRUK:

With a bit of finesse and skilled filling in I bet you would never know that they had been there.

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Personally totally in favour of bolts in broad stand.

In reply to idc: You must be pretty happy then.

In reply to idc:

Case rested. Note - need for immediate, determined action.

Thinks (shit, I might have to go up there myself)

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Unfortunately Broad Stand is a nuisance on the direct route between England's two highest summits. It will always attract folk of varying levels of ability to undertake it.

Personally I would be in favour of resining in a few strategic stainless steel rungs to facilitate a safer route.

I don't believe this would detract from the excellence of the crags on each side of it.

After all why should us climbers be allowed to clip into the numerous pegs on the crag to keep us safer but deny this to others who are less skillful in moving over rock.

Perhaps the folk who seem keen to get up there and chop the bolts should also chop the bridges over the streams.

In reply to d8vehinton: Because for many it's a classic scramble and some of the most technical ground a walker would encounter, why take that from them?

You can take your argument right through the grades, from walking, to scrambling to climbing.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


I won't retract but will qualify:

This thread follows a pattern that is depressingly familiar on UKC, meandering widely off the subject, with trolling and facetious comments diluting any attempt at serious discussion.

Of course it doesn't reflect you own opinions Mick, or that of the 'silent majority' you refer to. But it's worth asking why that silent majority haven't felt able to contribute to a thread that's drifted into musings about who really owns the crags anyway, and puerile fantasies about bolting Almscliffe...?

In reply to IainRUK:

The positioning of the two bolts would be of no use to a lead climber, they would have only been of use to for belaying a second or abbing off.

I'm not anti-bolt (I was at Cheedale today dogging and stick clippin as usual), I just don't them there, hopefully along with mosy people.

cheers
mark

In reply to Mark Westerman: I'm not either, I think this is the thin end ofthe wedge (I hate that saying) for runners, what's next via ferrata on the Cuillin. Aid has been creeping into these challenges, GPS tracks, painted rocks, relective stickers, ladders, now bolts..it's just stripping the route down to a physical challenge.

In reply to all:

Can anyone confirm the type of bolt that's been used - it'd be useful info for anyone planning to go up to get rid of them as chopping methods vary.

If they are the hanger variety then I may be on Scafell on Thursday and will be able to remove the hangers at least.

In reply to Pagan:

Hangers - not even that tightly done up - I nearly removed them myself by hand

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Cheers, I'm surprised you didn't.

If I go up, they'll be coming down with me. If anyone knows the best way to deal with the bolts themselves please post up, I'm not sure I'll be able to sort them out myself but it'd be useful info for others.

In reply to Pagan: I once 'removed' a bolt by clamping a pair of Mole grips to it with the grips perpendicular to the rock. Repeated up and down movements then caused fatigue failure of the bolt flush with the rock. There were no bruised knuckles from attempts at hacksawing, and no damage to the rock from hammers and chisels.

In reply to d8vehinton: Doing both hills with a mate I was struck by how quiet Scafell was, as Broad Stand protects it from the hordes. Some simple ropework protected it, which was sensible as it was wet and polished. In the continent it would have fixed gear- but something would be lost.

In reply to d8vehinton:

I hope this was tongue-in-cheek. Broad Stand isn't a "nuisance", it's a significant element on that particular route, and for many people the challenge it offers is part of the experience. There are alternative routes between Scafell and Scafell Pike if it's too difficult for you.

It's not about detracting from the crags on each side, it's about detracting from Broad Stand itself.

In reply to IainRUK:


For some reason I can't access the FRA site. Has this been confirmed, or did they just pick up on my half-serious, half-tongue-in-cheek suggestion higher up this thread?

Description of the original Broad Stand epic from the man himself - very funny. Would you really want to deny people this quality of experience?

In reply to KeithW (LMC):

Couldn't agree more! Although in many areas of climbing there are big differences of opinion, I strongly suspect that on this issue there will be a high degree of consensus amongst people who climb regularly in the UK and know anything about the history and culture of British climbing.

I've been following this thread with great interest but I really can't see what there is to debate, which is why I haven't posted earlier. Obviously, these bolts should be removed and I can't see them being there for very much longer. If I knew how I would gladly help remove them, but I suspect that people who know what they are doing will deal with this fairly swiftly.

IainRUK's very practical suggestion of raising awareness of this issue amongst people who might not understand the relevant traditions seems a vastly more useful contribution to the discussion than debating bolts at Almscliff etc.

In reply to cathsullivan:

Agreed. There is no debate.

Those bolts need taking out.

In reply to flaneur:

I think they are having server troubles - all the sites hosted by their hosting company are currently down and have been since around tea-time yesterday.

ALC

In reply to cathsullivan:

I have already prepared some revised Guidance Notes about BS for those wanting to undertake Bob Graham Round attempts and attain membership of the Club, which highlight relevant issues and refer readers to the Wasdale MRT website if they need guidance. These are (and a new version will be in due course) available on line on the BG Club site.

It may be a short while before these see the light of day.

Over 1460 people have completed the Bob Graham since 1960 and this is the first time I have come across any bolt nonsense.

It would be good to identify those responsible and for them to be informed of the mess they have created.

If the bolts were placed by a party undertaking the BG, I will happily deal with the matter as best I can, perhaps in conjunction with Stephen Reid who raised the issue with me in the first place.

In reply to Mark Westerman:

Against as I am bolts on BS, I can't help feeling chopping them will just result in more being placed. If the BGR becomes another Cuillin traverse (outsiders to the sport see it as a challange, without interest in the sport's history), protecting BS will become an issue that will be addressed by those outside the climbing community. Bolts are recognised by the public as rock climbing protection (Cliffhanger bolt guns anyone?), possibly more so than trad gear. Irritating as it is, I rather feel you could be fighting a losing battle here. Perhaps a compromise, such as the Hawser on the Inn. Pinn. may, reluctantly be considered to prevent repeated drilling if removing these bolts doesn't stem the tide.

In reply to d8vehinton:

A nuisance? What an odd notion. Why bother going into the mountains at all? Personally I don't go walking and climbing to seek convenience - much easier to stay at home for that.

In reply to Toccata:

At the moment it seems that the knowledge of these bolts being there is not widespread so there is unlikely to be a call for them to remain (or even augmented) by walkers or "safety groups".

From what has been described, it would appear that the current bolts aren't much use for general use - there's no fixed line and they would appear to be in the wrong places to be used as pseudo via ferrata style protection.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment here:

Let's assume that the bolts stay and that a steel cable is fixed in place to "assist and secure the negotiation of a known accident black spot" (my phrase). What happens when someone comes along who doesn't know how to correctly use the fixed equipment and suffers a serious or fatal injury? The same people who argued for the fixed gear will probably now argue for something else when it has been shown that their original intentions were flawed

What has really been achieved? The fixed gear is simply encouraging more people to go via Broad Stand and especially those who are not equipped skillwise to do so. There will still be accidents.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:
If a via ferrata were installed on BS (as seems to have been proposed by some in this thread), it would inevitably lead to an increase in the number of accidents, as huge numbers of people would go there who don't currently. Whatever arguments there are for doing this (I expect there must be some), safety isn't one of them.

In reply to Toreador:

Just come across this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/cumbria/7553825.stm

Some people are out of their depth on walking territory.

ALC

In reply to Bulls Crack:

Scafell is an amazing place and one in which I've never tired of experiencing.

However as a climber I do have a problem accepting that it's ok for me to clip into pegs to enhance my safety on numerous climbs on the crags at Scafell but others are not given the same assistance towards maintaining their safety on this small rock step that unfortunately has resulted in numerous fatal accidents.

I would hate to see a big ugly ladder up it or have it covered in slings and dangling ropes but I don't think a few discrete fixings would not detract from the overall scafell experience.

These high mountain environments like other lower environments need good and sensitive management to assist those who are experiencing them without removing all the challenge and adventure. Thats why ever case is unique and needs to be considered on its own merits and the solutions should equally be unique.

I'm very grateful to the people who have stabilized dodgy footpaths in precarious places, built bridges over streams that can be difficult or sometimes dangerous. Again I can't see the real difference.

In reply to d8vehinton:
'Discrete fixings' will be of no use to anyone without a rope. And anyone with a rope can also take a couple of nuts.
To be of any use as a safety aid, you'll have to go for the 'big ugly ladder' I'm afraid.

In reply to Toreador:
>...To be of any use as a safety aid, you'll have to go for the 'big ugly ladder' I'm afraid.

And then only if somebody actually takes the time to maintain it and ensure that it stays safe.

In reply to d8vehinton:

I quite agree but pegs and bolts are part of climbing and you know how to use them/assess their need/worth. As the poster above says you'd need a ladder as you couldn't expect many walkers/scramblers to have a rope and be able to use it safely.

Perhaps the decision should be not to do the route in the first place?

In reply to Bulls Crack: I can't believe people are even discussing equipping BS at all, in Snowdonia Crib Goch kills far more people each year yet there's never calls to via ferrata it.

In reply to Bulls Crack:
>Perhaps the decision should be not to do the route in the first place?


I know of a number of BG contenders who, believing they don't have the skills, ability or desire to navigate BS, have gone round.

That is the right approach in my view.

If for whatever reason you can't do BS safely, find another way. Don't bolt it.

In reply to IainRUK:

I can, sadly! I feel bad that I let myself get sucked in as well. Must try harder to resist.

In reply to BGSec:

A few BG contenders get support to rig ropes on Broad Stand, these can then be left in place for weeks, I've removed such ropes and will continue to do so.

Maybe the BG guidlines should state the rigging of Broad Stand is not acceptable, after all its only about 5 mins slower going via the alternatives.

If five minutes is that crucial to a contender getting round they shuld spend some more time getting fitter.

As for the bolts they will not be staying in place no matter what the trolls on here think

In reply to baggins:

Thats good news at least.

In reply to Neil Kazimierz Sheridan: aren't they for mountain rescue? you ask. I can't see how they would help in a rescue. For any likely accident on BS the casualty/body is likely to be found at the bottom of the gully below the Bad Step.

In reply to baggins:

Bill, I've prepared some additions to the Guidelines. I need to get the words considered by the other BG Club committee members.

These will stress that if gear is placed, it should be removed and not left in place.

I might send you a copy of the draft so you can comment.

Can you PM me at the email address that is on the BG Club site Contacts page and I will send you a copy.

Cheers.

M

In reply to Rog Wilko:

As part of the 'silent majority' I find it incomprehensible that anyone on here could be arguing in favour of these bolts, or any protection on Broad Stand, given its history and the prevailing ethics of Lakes (or indeed UK) mountain crags. Even on a practical level, they will be no use to scramblers or mountain rescue. Have some people lost their minds?

In reply to Wibble Wibble:

hear, hear!!

another of the silent majority

In reply to Anonymous:

I'm normally quiet on the bolting debate too, but having scrambled Broad Stand as a teenager, well before my climbing years, I can't see any need or justification for it to be bolted. Sure, it's got a couple of tricky moves for a scramble, but it's not like there aren't options for hikers to get around it. Once this gets seen by the multitudes of walkers that pass over Scafell Pike, how long will it be before similar actions are taken on Striding Edge, Crib Goch, Sharp Edge and Tryfan? As for suggestion that bolts would aid rescues in this location, presumably the MRT are sufficiently well-versed in extractions from around Broad Stand to know exactly what solid trad gear will anchor a rescue rope using placements further back up the slope above the step, and carry said gear (slings, nice solid hexes?) when called out to that location?

Are the Pepsi Max generation of hill users so incompetent/lazy/unprepared that they can't or won't take a decision to seek an alternative route to the summit if they don't like the look of Broad Stand?

In reply to d8vehinton:

I agree.

Like you I don't want bolts etc all over the hills but what happens is that a few particular routes become popularised and they attract people less well prepared and more accidents happen. I think each local situation needs to be considered with this in mind and people with the backing of official bodies should take whatever action is agreed, without ridicule of the opinions of individuals who simply don't want to see people unnecessarily injured or killed.

Huff and puff all you like folks but entrenched over-generalised positions suck. By nature I'm pretty laissee faire but the predictability of some incidents eg somebody each winter will slip off Clogwyn because they had no idea you need crampons and ice axe - they walk down the railway tracks and a sign might prevent accidents?...Yet to propose such a thing makes me a HSE clone to some people.

Even the French have put a fence on the Aiguille du Midi exit, with a gate and a sign warning of danger...their attitude to health and safety is hardly anal...I guess they just got fed up of picking up bodies.

In reply to Nigel Modern:

The French may have put a fence up on the Aiguille du Midi, but you may have noticed the fecking huge cable car station/restaurant and gift shop they put there first...

In reply to flaneur:

I emailed "Afghan Appeal" asking if they knew anything about these bolts and received the following reply from Col Steve Whitlock:

"Rob

I can confirm that we did run on the 15/16 May but unfortunately didn’t get as far as Broad Stand. We did however put a flexible ladder in place using the peg that has been on Broad stand for as long as I can remember. At that stage there were a number of ropes already in situ fixed in a number of ways.
My ladder did get left behind and was due to be removed the next day. Unfortunately somebody had already removed it.
I’ll be in the lakes on the 20th Jun and would be happy to remove all rope from and equipment if you need me too?
Hope this helps?
Regards
Steve"

So not them, then!

In reply to Rob Naylor: Recieved the following holding reply after contacting the National Trust to see what their position is

"Thank you very much for your recent enquiry concerning Broad Stand.



I have forwarded your letter to the Western Valleys Property Manager who will ensure that your comments are read and that you receive a full response.



Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance.

Regards"

In reply to Nigel Modern:

Thing is that slipping place looks quite innocuous, so signs have some merit, broad stand is a big bloody piece of rock.


Comparing chalk and cheese here..

In reply to Mark Westerman:

I wasn't sure I had anything to add to the outrage others have expressed. But it occurs to me that maybe there is something to learn from the FRA forum discussions. Fell-runners are much less open to the possibility of bolting BS than we are on here. If they haven't the confidence to solo it or (and many are dubious about this practice) the backup to rig it without long-term damage to the rock and visual blight, they will run round it.

There seems to be a simple principle here which we climbers might heed: the mountains aren't there for our convenience. What pleasure we get from them will never be a mastery of them; we delude both ourselves and other hillgoers if we imagine that it could be.

<Gets off pompous high horse>

In reply to Toccata:


Dont think so; this isnt some minor roadside crag that may or may not have a better future as a sport venue, the arguments against this one are unequivocal. There will be many more people prepared to chop these bolts than to replace them.

What is harder to believe than that some person unknown thought that bolts might be a good idea, is the number of people on here who are exibiting a willingness to allow them to become permanent?! We clearly have a hidden column of participants who furtively feel that mountaineering is all a little too inconvenient for them and secretly lust for European-style user-friendliness.

We wouldnt have had this scenario/debate ten years ago. It grieves me to say it but that thin end of wedge argument that Uncle Ken advanced way back when seems bang on the money now. Gloom.

In reply to Mark Westerman:
I'll go up there tomorrow evening and remove them unless anybody else has.

Cheers,

George.

In reply to Nigel Modern:

No. You are wrong. These bolts have no protective function for the scrambler and there are other routes up the hill. It is simply outrageous that you should consider a route down climbed by Coleridge in 1802 suitable for this treatment. Any protection or equipping would probably encourage more people to attempt it and potentially come to grief.

What on earth had happened to personal responsiblity?

Please tell me this is a wind-up.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:


Agreed & very well put.


Judging by this thread, I share the gloom. I expect the internet experts to keep agitating on this until we have a VF all the way up.

After all, that's what they have in Switzerland, innit?

In reply to Wibble Wibble:

Just what is the point of the bolts? If you're bringing a rope surely you'll be bringing pro anyway.

In reply to KeithW (LMC): I agree and such people who feel mountaineering a little too inconvenient and advance whatever spurious argument for bolting and equipping should really take up another sport. Mountaineering is inconvenient, it is not trendy. If you want trendy and convenient go wake boarding or whatever. Please can someone confirm that the bolts are removed. If I had an idea how I'd go from sheffield and do it myself. It is an utter disgrace that they are in and that there are retards supporting their placement. Shame.

In reply to Neil Kazimierz Sheridan:

The sharpest comment so far. It's fantastically easy to rig anchors there with natural gear.

Let's just call a spade a spade, or rather: sheer vandalism is sheer vandalism.

I share Keith's gloom.

In reply to georgenorth: Please confirm you have done this so we all know that this gross act of vandalism has been repealed.

In reply to Solaris:

Solaris, you are right. The FRA Forum view is universally against the bolts.

I know quite a few BG contenders who take the view that the stress they will feel for most of 40 miles going clockwise induced by the prospect of doing something they will find disturbing, isn't worth it. So they go round.

I supported a (successful) winter BG on 19/20 December last year. The decision was made pre-attempt to go round (Lord's Rake actually which was nicely banked out with snow and quick). No fuss, no indecision, no time wasting on the day.

Just people who knew what they were doing.

In reply to Rob Naylor:

A "peg that has been on Broad stand for as long as I can remember" Ehh? Since when? Maybe in the last couple of years since I was last that way, but BS has been free of any fixed gear for a long time, no mention in any guides, climbing or walking, of fixed gear. Nor is any fixed gear mentioned on the Wasdale MRT pages - http://www.wasdalemrt.org.uk/training~how%20to%20ascend%20broad%20stand%20-...

As for not getting as far as Broad Stand - this is from the just giving link: "10.45pm: THEY'RE BACK! 6 of the team completed the distance between them in 23hrs 43mins. Due to awful weather conditions and injured team members they incurred long delays on the first leg, and so decided to split to enable them to cover the distance. One team covered about 64 miles in total. WELL DONE GUYS! and thanks to the support team who kept them going. We are very proud of you."

Perhaps he meant his part of the relay team didn't get that far.

Regardless of who placed the bolts (and peg) and why, they should be sympathetically removed ASAP.

And despite the naysayers, this is not the thin end of the wedge, we are in to the middle part with this.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber: I supported a successful BGR last june and should add that the (poor) peg was there then and, from its appearance, had been for some time, although I couldn't remember seeing it on previous visits.

I'm not at all convinced that it's worth tackling BS unless you see it as an integral part of the challenge, due to the potential complications it can add if support is required, esp in poor conditions ( http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=349837&v=1#x5126456 ). As suggested above, it's probably better to concentrate on optimising fitness and local knowledge beforehand thereby allowing time to use one of the alternative options.

As far as bolts are concerned, anyone intending to use them would presumably be carrying rope,runners (of the non 'fell' variety),harnesses etc. A few extra wires and hexes will hardly make a difference, esp as the wire placements adjacent the bad step are very good.

Finally, I would urge anyone intent on unilaterally removing these to contact Stephen Reid at Needle Sports first on 01768 772227 or [email protected] to ensure that the task is done properly without causing further damage in the process.

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Hmm, some other viewpoints

http://www.atmagazine.co.uk/content/view/218/95/

The above is in response to this: http://www.grough.co.uk/view/2008/02/19/experts-say-no-to-mountain-safety-m...

http://www.goxplore.net/archive/index.php?t-1245.html

ALC

It's worth pointing out the historical significance of Broad Stand.

Coleridge - along with the other Lakeland based Romantic Poets - was a keen mountain walker, who went into the hills for enjoyment and personal inspiration rather than scientific or economic gain. His descent of Broad Stand in 1803 arguably marks the birth of mountaineering/climbing as a sport. He undertook it through a sense of personal exploration and in pursuit of excitement/enjoyment (and OK he was probably lost as well).

That he wrote about it in such an emotive way - most climbers will recognise the adrenaline rush and sense of satisfaction he experienced - also marks him down as the first mountaineering author.

Coleridge's experience and motivtion was distinct from the first ascent (and other early alpine ascents) of Mont Blanc by Balmat and Paccard in 1786. Their climb was done under the banner of scientific research and exploration - for years afterwards it was considered de-rigeur for any party to carry scientific instruments (mostly a boiling point thermometer) on an alpine ascent. There's no doubt that the early alpinists were adventurous individuals, but the attitudes of their time prohibited them from admiiting a sense of adventure or enjoyment in climbing a summit. Mountaineering wasn't yet a sport.

It wasn't really until the 1850s (The Golden Age of Alpine Mountaineering)and 50 years after Coleridge's adventure on Broad Stand that it really became socially acceptable to admit to climbing an alpine summit out of enjoyment. Alpinism had only then become a sport, rather than a pseudo-scientific expedition, as we'd recognise our sport today.

Haskett-Smith ascent of Napes Needle in 1886 - which is often seen as the birth of Rock Climbing - is mostly significant because it marked the watershed between the early view of British alpinists, seeing our mountains as a training ground for the Alps, from seeing them (and the rock they held) as a worthy objective in their own right. By the time he climbed the needle, mountaineering was well established as a sport.

On this basis Broad Stand can lay greater claim to being "birthplace of the sport of mountaineering" than any other mountain or mountain feature on the planet. Coleridge's account of his adventure on Broad Stand can also lay a strong claim to being the first piece of mountaineering writing.

These point are perhaps worth emphasising and are good reasons (amongst many) why Broad Stand should remain bolt free.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead: My post here does not indicate a desire to keep the bolts merely to point out an alternative view. When I originally did the route, I did not expect to find insitu protection.

Jamie, your post is also humorous

But, by removing the bolts, would one want to let some unfortunate person have the alternative quality of experience associated with falling off Broad Stand and possibly dying?

Do those people now considering removing the bolt feel liable should someone die or get injured once it is removed when they could have used that protection?

Cheers All
TelB

In reply to TerryB:


It's already been pointed out, several times, that to use the bolts you would need to take a rope, some krabs, belay device and/or quickdraws. In which case you might as well take a few wires too, and fix your own pro.

Have you considered that leaving the bolts there might encourage an inexperienced party to try & use them inappropriately, fall and die?

In reply to TerryB:
....
....

So, how, exactly, will these bolts stop somebody from falling? The impression I'm getting from those who have actually seen them is that the bolts on their own offer no additional safety. Why are people not grasping this?

The point has been made, over and over again (above), that these bolts a)would only offer protection if you were carrying some equipment that would allow you to usefully use them (quickdraws, rope, presumably) and b) don't offer any greater protection than using traditional gear to protect the route in the normal way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should be providing any fixed protection on BS. But the argument that these bolts should stay because they improve safety seems to be totally without basis. So, even if you do think we should do something to permanently equip BS (which I would be very much against, as I've already said above) then these bolts are not the way to do it.

In reply to TerryB:


Not remotely. Any more than I feel responsible for people hurting themselves when climbing on any crag or natural feature that does not have, or has not traditionally had, any in situ protection. I trust that you wouldn't hold the person who places bolts responsible for the reliability of the bolt or the safety of people using them?

In reply to TerryB:


My God, what a crock! I can't believe anyone who loves and goes into the hills could say this, let alone believe it.

In reply to cathsullivan: The bolts are arranged so that someone can attach a fixed line from the top of fat mans agony to the top of the bad step and therefore "handrail" up the tricky exposed parts. This is what i saw on 25th may. A black rope acting as a handrail, as well as two other ropes hanging down the corner. The only equipment in this case needed is a rope. The bolt have to go. They have no place there.

I think it's been said before but the one bolt i saw has been there a while.

In reply to Neil Kazimierz Sheridan:

That's what makes me think this isn't done for the benefit of fell runners - if you're going to go to the trouble of having a support team in-situ with a rope and harnesses, it's hardly a issue to place a couple of nuts.

I did hear some years ago someone claiming that there were a couple of bolts there, but that they were so well hidden that no one would ever spot them. Has anyone on here actually seen the bolts ?

As to the person who suggested that if we'd all backed Ken Wilson 10 or 15 years ago this would never have happened - get real. The issue has no connection to places like Harpur Hill but is to do with the fact that more people travel abroad, see how things are done elsewhere and start to think about doing it here

In reply to Chris the Tall: This has been pre-rigged, the rope left in place, so quite possible for a BG attempt or for a group doing the lakes 3000's. Yes, i've seen the one.

In reply to bobert:

So, just out of interest, how was the black rope attached to the bolts?


But, more importantly, yes!

In reply to KeithW (LMC): Hiya Keith,
Yes, I had considered that. I expected pros and cons.

For me, this is a complex issue as well as an ethical and moral dilemma. I merely made a point that I thought was an important consideration to those people who want to remove the bolt.

Cheers
TelB

In reply to Chris the Tall:


I saw one bolt and the old peg, both on the exit to easy ground above the hard corner & both pretty obvious. (That was on Saturday).

I was told there was another bolt lower but didn't spot it myself.

In reply to TerryB:


www.google.com "self-reliance"

In reply to elliptic:

Exactly. There is no moral dilemma at all.

Let's remind ourselves what Coleridge actually said about it in 1802. His attitude was to 'wander on, and where it is first possible to descend, there I go - relying upon fortune for how far down this possibility will continue.'

On his descent towards Broad Stand he found himself above the huge crag of Scafell ('the frightfullest Cove that might ever be seen') - but nevertheless he was resolved: 'I must now drop down, how I may into Eskdale'.

He got stuck, but remained calm and 'blessed God aloud for the powers of Reason & the Will, which remaining, no Danger can overpower us! O God, I exclaimed aloud - how calm, how blessed am I now: I know not how to proceed, how to return; but I am calm & fearless & confident.'

What he understood, which the vandalisers have forgotten, is that what matters most in serious situations in the mountains is the climber's self-reliance.

In reply to KeithW (LMC): The bolts seem to have had ropes attached for quite some time. The bolts might encourage people to replace the ropes from time to time thus people ascending Broad Stand would be taking a risk using the in-situ ropes but would not necessarily need their own gear.
One of the ropes had loops in which clearly were designed to enable someone to ascend like a ladder.
Cheers
TelB

In reply to bobert:
OK, seen you comment about the handrail now, makes a bit more sense now. Though if your prepared to leave a rope in situ I can't see why leaving a couple of nuts would be a problem.

As much as I oppose these bolts, I can see the problem non-climbers would have over the ethical rules which allows bolts on some crags, pegs on others. Not to mention the Gimmer chain !

Lets face it, even a cairn is an alteration to the original state done to benefit convienience

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: I am glad that you see no moral dilemma and that the issue is simply resolved.

For me, it is a more complex issue. Again, for me, there clearly are multiple issues here such as;
H&S, ethics, moral dimension, that need proper consideration before someone just goes out without really thinking about it to remove the bolt.

We are all made differently with different nature / nurture etc. Perhaps its that I did philospohy that I might eb a bit sensitive about these things. I am not sure that I would not feel somehow responsible if I removed the bolt and something happened. I would spend the rest of my days wondering. The view that I have put forward does not necessarily mean that I disagree with the postings about self-reliance.

It is good that this forum allows expression of those alternative views.

Cheers All
TelB

In reply to TerryB:


Yes; because though the people who placed the bolts were intending to make it safe for their immediate use, the long-term effect could be to make it less safe, by creating a false sense of security.

And also if you leave them there, there's the question of who is responsible when years later, a bolt fails while someone is relying on it? It's not like bolting routes at a crag where there are local activists & the BMC prepared to maintain them; we don't know who has done this or what their long-term plans were.

In reply to cathsullivan:

With a knot that would never be used by a climber, direct through the hanger. I'm guessing it was attached like that at the top, but didn't take a close look at that one.

In reply to bobert:


So likely to be worn & unsafe now.

This backs up my point, that what has been set up here is actually less safe than before. As it is, seeing a rope there could encourage those who would have gone via Foxes Tarn to go up Broad Stand instead, hauling on a rope of unknown quality.

In reply to TerryB:


It so happens that I 'did' Philosophy - and still do. The fact remains that - outside of commercial guiding enterprises - no one has any responsibility for any adult's safety on a potentially dangerous mountain feature. The only people who should have a moral conscience about it are those who have tampered with the natural feature in such a way that may actually endanger people in the future, as Keith has pointed out.

In reply to TerryB:

I hear where you are coming from, but how much consideration was done before the bolts were placed

If they were placed by MRT or the landowners (NT) then if would be very high handed to remove them without consultation. This would even apply they were placed with the consent of representative bodies of another sport - i.e. fell running.

However if no one has admitted and justified the action, then the bolts must be removed before they become an accepted feature. If next month's Trail mag has an article "The Bob Graham Round for beginners" in which it states that Broad Stand has a convienient hand rail, then the removal becomes a more dangerous action.

In reply to Mark Westerman:

I can't help still thinking that as climbers we are being too elitist.

Just because that for us BS doesn't offer too much of a challenge or difficulty we are happy for others less skillful at moving over rock to either take the risk or avoid it.

However when we are climbing and we get faced with potential nasty falls out comes the peg hammer.

A number of famous big names have said they wouldn't like to see any change to BS but have frequently on other hills used and left all sorts of ironmongery and tat. Double standards?

Scafell is and will always be a honey pot environment and yes everyone who uses it won't always be totally confident and many will be ignorant of safe practices. I still believe a few large stainless steel staples positioned well would not detract from the overall experience and may help to reduce the number of times the Wasdale team have to tidy up the mess. The West Cumbria police have to contact the relatives etc. etc.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

As stated several times on this thread it is unlikely, nay very unlikely, that MRT would have placed these bolts. The description of how the rope was attached would confirm that.

The NT? Again unlikely, they are conservative (with a small 'c') and would have consulted with various bodies (including MRT) before doing something like this.

One possible scenario:

A group organising a "charity event" asks the NT if they can temporarily fix a safety line on Broad Stand.

NT reply stating that this is OK providing that the material is removed afterwards.

The group head up to Broad Stand but don't have the skills to use what is available and one of their number says that they know how to place bolts which will solve their problem. They neglect to notify NT of this change thinking they still have permission to fix a safety line with all that entails.

Doesn't make it right. No-one with a love for the outdoors or a sense of the history of Broad Stand would do such a thing.

Hmm, BGR for beginners Looking at the figures nearly twice as many people have summited Everest as have done the BG. If such an article did appear, the majority of Trail readers would get to Broad Stand so knackered that they would see no handrail in place, thing **** it! and stagger down to the valley (the wrong valley!).

Best course of action: the bolts are removed immediately. Once everything is tidied up and the studs are no longer visible then articles and news items should be in all the outdoor magazines and websites condemming the placing of the bolts. Ideally the perpetrators will come forward and admit their mistake but it's no big deal if they don't

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:
Agree with you entirely

I wasn't saying that either MRT or NT did place the bolts, or would be likely to do so, but only that if a body of that stature did it would then be high handed of climbers to rush to remove them.

Your scenario is entirely plausible

In reply to anyone:

Has anyone asked the relevant MRT whether they had any involvement in placing these bolts?

In reply to d8vehinton:


Because the prevailing mountaineering ethic in the UK - whatever may happen on the sidelines - is that if you don't have the ability to get up something you don't go and bolt it to bring the mountain down to your level. Why on earth should non-climbers be exempt from that ethic?

Anyhow, as has been stated again and again and again, a few bolts doesn't magically make BS safe. You still need other equipment and knowledge. If you've acquired that you probably know how to use traditional protection and would have no need for bolts.

>I still believe a few large stainless steel staples positioned well would not detract from the overall experience

I think you're in a minority there.

Like many others, I can't believe this is even a matter for debate. If I don't have the ability to do a route/scramble/mountain/whatever I'll just avoid it - or learn and practise what I need to before I attempt it.

Chop them.

In reply to d8vehinton:

How are a few staples going to help if there's no rope? Or are you suggesting ladder-rung type staples, as a kind of via ferrata on Broad Stand?

In reply to d8vehinton:

You carry a peg hammer!!! When was the last time you smacked in a peg in extremis. (For me it was on Willersley, in the rain, in 1969 - I subsequently removed the peg)

In reply to TerryB:

>

What an utterly depressing post. Can I suggest you take up golf or something. If attitudes like yours take hold in climbing I may have to buy a ocean-going yacht or something, and they are expensive!

In reply to MG: FRA forum is back up now.

Seem to recall Tilman doing much the same thing!

Someone must know who put these bolts in? Will no one claim responsibility or is it that they know their actions are unjustifiable?

In reply to d8vehinton:


Not at all. I've gone round via the Tarn several times, when the weather was poor or I simply didn't fancy it. And I wasn't too proud to accept the offer of a rope to ab down from 2 climbers one day.


I'm happy for others to make their own decisions. Are you happy to have an unknown (and unaccountable) third party decide for them?


And how about some rubber matting underneath?


What does Wasdale MRT say? I suggest that they will find themselves busier, as more people are drawn to attempt the steep ground.

In reply to tony: I have checked with Wasdale MRT and it most definitely was not them.

In reply to tony:


As I said earlier, this is the direction this utterly dispiriting thread seems to be going in.

Fortunately, there are some locals who, while the UKC experts pontificate (OK, me included...), will do something about it. And the sooner the better.

In reply to KeithW (LMC):
No, I think you're (we're?) ok. There have been a very few vociferous individuals either arguing for the sake of it, or who have come in from elsewhere (I am extremely intrigued by the peg hammer references, for example) but I'm happy after reviewing the thread that the overwhelming majority of posters have been unambiguously in favour of removal.

In reply to toad: have they been removed yet. And what does it matter what people think? It is wrong they are in, they must come out. Are they out yet? I can't get there for a couple of weeks but they are certainly coming out then if they aren't done before.

In reply to d8vehinton:

It seems that the thick end of the wedge has arrived...

In reply to toad:
(I am extremely intrigued by the peg hammer references, for example)

As am I. Does he know how bolts are put in; does he regularly protect routes with pegs; does he climb? Especially when one considers that the same posters contribution to the news that Craig y Forwen access was sorted was ' Excellent news lets start getting some shiny bolts in it ' .

In reply to Andy Say:

Gimme a T
Gimme an R ......

In reply to georgenorth:
Hi all,

I am reliably informed that the bolts are being (carefully) removed tomorrow. I'll have to find somewhere else to use that hacksaw now...

George.

In reply to Mark Westerman:

I was there over the weekend and spotted the bolt(Disgrace). The rope had been removed and left on a ledge lower down. A women asked whether i would mind fixing the rope through the bolt and the chockstone that is about 10 ft away. I plainly refused. Did another route and descended broad stand and the rope with loops in was around the chockstone. wen't back on the Sunday and it was removed from the chock and placed directly into the hanger. Hopefully it will be removed asap!

In reply to georgenorth:


That abomination of a via ferrata on Fleetwith Pike perchance.....??

In reply to IainRUK: Hi Iain,

Wasn't saying anything about this specific case...my comments were more aimed at some people's response to any suggestions which 'spoil the essential natural environment' but which might actually save lives.

In reply to Mark Westerman: 200th comment, wher who

In reply to Nigel Modern:

>... but which might actually save lives.

That old chestnut. How many people currently die on Broadstand ? and out of those people, how many were actually carrying equipment that would allow them to safely use the bolts ?

On the other hand, if broadstand became popular with unequipped (or unprepared) climbers/walkers relying on old in situ ropes - how many MORE lives are at risk ?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Looked at that photo. Clocked the flares, the pudding basin fibre glass helmet and the Troll waist belt just like the one I had and thought, hmmmmm....early 70's.
Then saw the caption!

In reply to Andy Say:

Not to mention the old red suede & black canvas Galibier PA's.

I got a secondhand pair as my first 'proper' rock boots. The uppers eventually fell apart, but the soles and rands were so hard, it was almost impossible to wear them out -- then I progressed to EB's.

In reply to MG: if YOU start chopping bolt's as YOU see fit ,then ANYONE who feel's like it can place bolt's as THEY see fit ! ? NO ? Try reading the history section in the "selected peak sport climbs" Before you go off on one ! You could start a bolt war/make a right mess ! ! i.e YOU take them out then THEY'll- have to/ want to replace them !, you'll take them out again they put them back in so on and so on !!! I'M NOT for bolts turning up everywhere but they do have ther place ! and I'M sure A world without bolt's would be a very sad one indeed , and if all bolt's were banned i'm sure it would be 1 more step toward's banning ALL climbing ! that's right, after all JUST climbing damage's the rock !!! , driving your car damage's the ozone , walking on grass kill's tiny insect's !!

In reply to col-0ut-there: lol

In reply to col-0ut-there: .........and relax

In reply to Mark Westerman:

A bolt war!?

Blimey.

In reply to col-0ut-there:
WOW, I thought this was dead and buried, don't trip over your spade now!!

In reply to col-0ut-there: Have you just awoken from a coma of something? check the newspaper date, this thread is weeks old.

In reply to col-0ut-there:
Bet the person taking them out wins the war you describe. It'll be a war of attrition and bolts anit free :P

In reply to col-0ut-there:

The first act of aggression in this war is always the placeing of a bolt.

In reply to col-0ut-there:

Are you Vicky Pollard?

In reply to Dr Sidehead:

Possibly; these debates are never complete without some snotty teenager mouthing off in bad english about how us anti-bolt grand-dads are just not hip to the new wave and are a bunch of elitist anti-freedom reactionaries. Or something.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

Or nothing.

In reply to col-0ut-there:

after all JUST climbing damage's the rock !!! , driving your car damage's the ozone , walking on grass kill's tiny insect's !!


And all of this is (or as you would say, i's) as nothing compared to the havoc you're wreaking on the English language.

In reply to Mark Westerman: These should be removed. If you go down this European road it will not end, they'll be ladders on the Indian Face and so on. This has claims to the first rock climb and it really is like trampling on history. Poor old Coleridge in his opium stupor... would turning in his grave.

In reply to col-0ut-there:

Thanks for this informed comment. I haven't got a copy to hand. Could you please enlighten us as to what this esteemed tome has to say on the retro-bolting of historic Lakeland mountain scrambles.