This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=25972
So I see that some bellend, anonymously as far as I know, has finally retroed this.
Funny, ten years ago I posted a thread lamenting about the placing of the two then recently-placed bolts. I was tempted to chop those then. I was told that they were only replacing the pegs, that everyone knew the route was properly trad and loved it as such, and so forth. No TEOTW, in other words.
Times change, I suppose. Although not unpredictably; I never believed what I was being told then.
So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
Anyway, anyone mind if I go down and chop these bolts?
jcm
So I see that some bellend, anonymously as far as I know, has finally retroed this.
Funny, ten years ago I posted a thread lamenting about the placing of the two then recently-placed bolts. I was tempted to chop those then. I was told that they were only replacing the pegs, that everyone knew the route was properly trad and loved it as such, and so forth. No TEOTW, in other words.
Times change, I suppose. Although not unpredictably; I never believed what I was being told then.
So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
Anyway, anyone mind if I go down and chop these bolts?
jcm
In reply to AJM:
Dunno. No-one asked me, but that's not necessarily required, I do realise.
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> Wasnt this done and debated months ago?
>
> Wasnt this done and debated months ago?
Dunno. No-one asked me, but that's not necessarily required, I do realise.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Think the bell end in question might be Ken Palmer. Anyway, it had two aid points originally, then was freed in 1976, then was bolted to replace the really manky pegs, then had them chopped,then had really, really manky pegs again, then had them replaced again to make a really good, safe route as it was when it was first freed in 1976. I think a lot of people would mind if you chop these bolts. If you enjoy trad limestone protected by manky pegs you're hardly spoilt for choice in Torbay are you? Go and enjoy it. I hope you've enjoyed stirring the storm in a teacup.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
On my phone at the moment but if you search for cocytus in the message text (not title) for "older messages" it's discussed in about the first or second thread that comes up.
On my phone at the moment but if you search for cocytus in the message text (not title) for "older messages" it's discussed in about the first or second thread that comes up.
In reply to mann9076:
I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer, but only two bolts were put in to preserve its hybrid, slightly spicy, character.
According to the UKC logbook, someone has now decided to go the whole hog and make it a total clip-up. This is not making 'a really good, safe route as it was when it was first freed in 1976'. It's converting it into a full-on clip-up.
jcm
I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer, but only two bolts were put in to preserve its hybrid, slightly spicy, character.
According to the UKC logbook, someone has now decided to go the whole hog and make it a total clip-up. This is not making 'a really good, safe route as it was when it was first freed in 1976'. It's converting it into a full-on clip-up.
jcm
In reply to AJM:
OK, thanks. So I've found that. And, as I understand, the bolts were indeed placed anonymously, with no consultation, by a local activist who is 'testing the water'.
Or, in other words, doing exactly what the Lakes Front Against Dry Tooling do, only the other way round.
Well, in my capacity as the water, I shall go and take them out.
jcm
OK, thanks. So I've found that. And, as I understand, the bolts were indeed placed anonymously, with no consultation, by a local activist who is 'testing the water'.
Or, in other words, doing exactly what the Lakes Front Against Dry Tooling do, only the other way round.
Well, in my capacity as the water, I shall go and take them out.
jcm
In reply to AJM:
I'm the same one man as the bolter, I guess. Why, do you think this route needed two new bolts right next to the excellent gear placements?
I'm afraid, reminding myself from that earlier thread, I probably shan't make a very good job of it, since it seems that to remove bolts properly requires a drill, which I don't have and am not about to acquire. I'll just have to do the best I can with a hacksaw, that being all I have.
So if any bolters care to take them out first, that'd be dandy. They won't, though. Has any bolter ever, in the whole history of UK climbing, ever removed one of their own bolts?
Does anyone ever think (irony alert) that we'd all be a lot better off if everyone would just LEAVE THINGS THE WAY THEY BL**DY WELL FOUND THEM?
JCM
I'm the same one man as the bolter, I guess. Why, do you think this route needed two new bolts right next to the excellent gear placements?
I'm afraid, reminding myself from that earlier thread, I probably shan't make a very good job of it, since it seems that to remove bolts properly requires a drill, which I don't have and am not about to acquire. I'll just have to do the best I can with a hacksaw, that being all I have.
So if any bolters care to take them out first, that'd be dandy. They won't, though. Has any bolter ever, in the whole history of UK climbing, ever removed one of their own bolts?
Does anyone ever think (irony alert) that we'd all be a lot better off if everyone would just LEAVE THINGS THE WAY THEY BL**DY WELL FOUND THEM?
JCM
1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: plus 1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
If they have been drilled properly (assuming they are Raumer/Fixe etc expansion-bolts, you should be able to remove the nut and hanger, then knock the threaded rod deeper into the hole until it is flush.
Much neater than sawing/grinding etc.
Chris
>
>
> I'm afraid, reminding myself from that earlier thread, I probably shan't make a very good job of it, since it seems that to remove bolts properly requires a drill, which I don't have and am not about to acquire. I'll just have to do the best I can with a hacksaw, that being all I have.
>
>
> I'm afraid, reminding myself from that earlier thread, I probably shan't make a very good job of it, since it seems that to remove bolts properly requires a drill, which I don't have and am not about to acquire. I'll just have to do the best I can with a hacksaw, that being all I have.
>
If they have been drilled properly (assuming they are Raumer/Fixe etc expansion-bolts, you should be able to remove the nut and hanger, then knock the threaded rod deeper into the hole until it is flush.
Much neater than sawing/grinding etc.
Chris
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I don't have an especially strong opinion to be honest.
It just sounds to me, and your post above confirms this, like you're about to make a cack handed mess trying to fix something that the locals are reasonably unconcerned about (by virtue of the fact that thread was a good 6 months ago and it's not as though damp days on which a hacksaw could be employed have been at a premium), and that a decent chunk of the previous thread seemed reasonably unconcerned about. What will probably happen is that you'll leave the route a less pleasant experience to climb than it currently is because it'll have the butchered remains of a few bolts sticking out of it halfway up.
And that might give you a warm fuzzy feeling inside, and you might convince yourself and others that its all the bolters fault for putting them there in the first place, but if you can't do a good job, and you're not sure they aren't likely to be replaced by a strong local consensus, you should leave the damned things well along because the route will take the beating for it.
The answer to your question, incidentally, is yes of course they have. Bt I'm sure you knew that already.
Anyway, I don't really want to get involved but if you know you're going to do a shit job then stop and think for a minute why you're doing it, because if its going to leave the route worse than you found it I don't think it's for the right reason.
I don't have an especially strong opinion to be honest.
It just sounds to me, and your post above confirms this, like you're about to make a cack handed mess trying to fix something that the locals are reasonably unconcerned about (by virtue of the fact that thread was a good 6 months ago and it's not as though damp days on which a hacksaw could be employed have been at a premium), and that a decent chunk of the previous thread seemed reasonably unconcerned about. What will probably happen is that you'll leave the route a less pleasant experience to climb than it currently is because it'll have the butchered remains of a few bolts sticking out of it halfway up.
And that might give you a warm fuzzy feeling inside, and you might convince yourself and others that its all the bolters fault for putting them there in the first place, but if you can't do a good job, and you're not sure they aren't likely to be replaced by a strong local consensus, you should leave the damned things well along because the route will take the beating for it.
The answer to your question, incidentally, is yes of course they have. Bt I'm sure you knew that already.
Anyway, I don't really want to get involved but if you know you're going to do a shit job then stop and think for a minute why you're doing it, because if its going to leave the route worse than you found it I don't think it's for the right reason.
In reply to AJM:
Considering the facts, does that not strike you as a bit arse about face?
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> You're a one man consensus then?
>
> You're a one man consensus then?
Considering the facts, does that not strike you as a bit arse about face?
In reply to AJM:
Has it occurred to you that John might be trying to persuade the bolter to go and remove them neatly.
Probably not.
Has it occurred to you that John might be trying to persuade the bolter to go and remove them neatly.
Probably not.
In reply to Jonny2vests:
Well, based on the other thread, a decent number of posters who I recognise as being broadly speaking local seemed to be somewhere between understanding and tolerant. And one assumes that the bolter has friends whose opinion was canvassed first.
In reply to Eric9points:
It's possible but from his postings he strikes me as the kind of chap who if he doesn't get the response he desires will go ahead and make a mess anyway...
Well, based on the other thread, a decent number of posters who I recognise as being broadly speaking local seemed to be somewhere between understanding and tolerant. And one assumes that the bolter has friends whose opinion was canvassed first.
In reply to Eric9points:
It's possible but from his postings he strikes me as the kind of chap who if he doesn't get the response he desires will go ahead and make a mess anyway...
In reply to AJM:
Don't worry I'll tell him how to do it properly so you don't need to get any more involved.
> (In reply to Jonny2vests)
>
>
> It's possible but from his postings he strikes me as the kind of chap who if he doesn't get the response he desires will go ahead and make a mess anyway...
>
>
> It's possible but from his postings he strikes me as the kind of chap who if he doesn't get the response he desires will go ahead and make a mess anyway...
Don't worry I'll tell him how to do it properly so you don't need to get any more involved.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Nuff said.
(FWIW, I have no particular axe to grind either way.)
> No-one asked me, but that's not necessarily required, I do realise.
Nuff said.
(FWIW, I have no particular axe to grind either way.)
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Has any bolter ever, in the whole history of UK climbing, ever removed one of their own bolts?
Has any bolter ever, in the whole history of UK climbing, ever removed one of their own bolts?
>
I have removed bolts from my own routes, when there was an access scare at Dali's hole in the slate Quarries...I have no intention to replace them either. In reply to Sl@te Head:
OK, I applaud, but an access scare is something different, isn't it?
I meant simply because the bolts in question turn out to have been placed where they shouldn't have been. Contrary to AJM, I actually can't think of a single occasion which this has happened, but I'd welcome enlightenment.
jcm
OK, I applaud, but an access scare is something different, isn't it?
I meant simply because the bolts in question turn out to have been placed where they shouldn't have been. Contrary to AJM, I actually can't think of a single occasion which this has happened, but I'd welcome enlightenment.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I did it, a good few years ago now, with the two bolts in and quite enjoyed it, as you said it has a certain spice at the start which made it what it was really.
I always saw Ansteys as a harder climbing venue, does it really need another 6c (really!) ? Was Cotycus not a wee classic as it was, I'm with you on this one...a pitty. living the opposite end of the country, I know nothing of the local scene now though.
I always saw Ansteys as a harder climbing venue, does it really need another 6c (really!) ? Was Cotycus not a wee classic as it was, I'm with you on this one...a pitty. living the opposite end of the country, I know nothing of the local scene now though.
In reply to AJM:
I'm not sure about that. None of them seemed very keen to me, with the possible exception of mannsomething or other, who hadn't got the point. And they all seemed to know who the bolter was but not like to say, which doesn't sit very well with me.
jcm
> (In reply to Jonny2vests)
>
> Well, based on the other thread, a decent number of posters who I recognise as being broadly speaking local seemed to be somewhere between understanding and tolerant. And one assumes that the bolter has friends whose opinion was canvassed first.
>
> Well, based on the other thread, a decent number of posters who I recognise as being broadly speaking local seemed to be somewhere between understanding and tolerant. And one assumes that the bolter has friends whose opinion was canvassed first.
I'm not sure about that. None of them seemed very keen to me, with the possible exception of mannsomething or other, who hadn't got the point. And they all seemed to know who the bolter was but not like to say, which doesn't sit very well with me.
jcm
In reply to sebrider:
>does it really need another 6c (really!) ?
I might be wrong, but I suspect that in the opinion of some what it needs is its trad classics retrobolting to act as warm-ups.
jcm
>does it really need another 6c (really!) ?
I might be wrong, but I suspect that in the opinion of some what it needs is its trad classics retrobolting to act as warm-ups.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Hello John
Hmm. Now I too was somewhat surprised when those bolts appeared. I first climbed the route well after the initial furore, in its two-bolted phase. Those bolts as I understand it were placed where the original pegs went, debatably restoring what had become a route with dodgy pegs into a route with a similar level of danger to the original, which had good pegs.
Now I understand the difference between that bolting, which I would argue is far more sustainable than the pegged version (the staples being in good nick many years later), and what has now been done, some time ago I might add.
The route in its current form now has a bolt level with the original first wire placement, and a bolt level with the start of the wide crack at the top, where you would also get gear.
It also has another 2 (IIRC) bolts in the crack-line above, and a 2-bolt lower-off in the wall left of the lower-off for More Steam.
The bolts are resin staples of the type found on most routes at Anstey's, and appeared probably 6 months ago, at which time the subject was discussed at length on here, and since which time it has been discussed by most locals who have noticed.
To clarify, my personal stance is one of mild indifference - it's not a route that I would have chosen to bolt however placing the gear was never the hard part of the route. In my view when climbing it there's very little difference between sticking a rock 3 in the bottom crack and clipping a bolt, by the time you reach the upper bolt it's all over anyway. I agree there's a difference when on-sighting - you have to carry extra gear because you can't necessarily see what's in the upper crack, but that's about it. The route was always much more about technique and footwork than fiddly gear and ropework.
With the extra bolts above it becomes a longer route (I only ever saw one person attempt the old second pitch, and they wouldn't repeat the experience through choice).
Now I don't know you personally but I respect your reputation enough to ask you to carefully consider any action you may decide to take. The fact is that the new bolts are not actually that new at all, they have been there in plain sight for nearly a year now during which time a lot of people, locals and visitors alike, have enjoyed the route in its new shape.
There are two people on this thread who are talking of removing the bolts, neither of you have, I can only assume, actually been to Anstey's during this time.
The other factor to consider is that these are not the only bolts to have sprouted recently. I'll give you a run-down:
-New first bolt at the bottom of Empire of the Sun to protect the moves to the break. If we go back in time you can say the whole route was retroes - originally a cam placement in the break, the third used to be the first, E6 not 7b.
-New bolt to make the link-up Not Just Empire. Great route.
-Two new bolts left of the arete of Devonshire making a safer optional start, original route unaffected.
-One bolt on Sole Fusion as part of a new traverse extension to the last route, which crosses La Creme and finishes up past another new bolt to lower-off of Brian. This also makes viable La Creme Direct (using the new bolt on SF and the bolt on Cream Topping), which is rather good.
-Newly bolted route left of St Gregory the Wonder Worker with a second pitch across the top of Upper Ferocity. Very pleasant and unusual outing.
-Newly bolted easy slab route on the approach to Cocytus area.
-Shadow Beast at LQP retroed
-Up the Styx at LQP retroed
Neither of these likely to have been done for years as reliant on one or two very rotten bolts as I recall but both are now enjoying attention from those with a taste for hard slabs.
-Mustard Custard new route in that area bolted.
I would suggest that if you feel strongly perhaps your first point of call would be one of the regular local BMC meets where such issues are discussed with those involved.
Should you decide to take unilateral action, and I respectfully suggest that you do not, I would state that "the best I can" is not acceptable - if you or any other party is to remove the bolts it needs to be done properly and cleanly, drilled out then resined over. We don't need sharp bits of metal sticking out where the rope runs on a popular route, and removing a staple cleanly once it has been hacked would be significantly more difficult than doing the job properly to start with.
Thanks
Justin Timms
Hello John
Hmm. Now I too was somewhat surprised when those bolts appeared. I first climbed the route well after the initial furore, in its two-bolted phase. Those bolts as I understand it were placed where the original pegs went, debatably restoring what had become a route with dodgy pegs into a route with a similar level of danger to the original, which had good pegs.
Now I understand the difference between that bolting, which I would argue is far more sustainable than the pegged version (the staples being in good nick many years later), and what has now been done, some time ago I might add.
The route in its current form now has a bolt level with the original first wire placement, and a bolt level with the start of the wide crack at the top, where you would also get gear.
It also has another 2 (IIRC) bolts in the crack-line above, and a 2-bolt lower-off in the wall left of the lower-off for More Steam.
The bolts are resin staples of the type found on most routes at Anstey's, and appeared probably 6 months ago, at which time the subject was discussed at length on here, and since which time it has been discussed by most locals who have noticed.
To clarify, my personal stance is one of mild indifference - it's not a route that I would have chosen to bolt however placing the gear was never the hard part of the route. In my view when climbing it there's very little difference between sticking a rock 3 in the bottom crack and clipping a bolt, by the time you reach the upper bolt it's all over anyway. I agree there's a difference when on-sighting - you have to carry extra gear because you can't necessarily see what's in the upper crack, but that's about it. The route was always much more about technique and footwork than fiddly gear and ropework.
With the extra bolts above it becomes a longer route (I only ever saw one person attempt the old second pitch, and they wouldn't repeat the experience through choice).
Now I don't know you personally but I respect your reputation enough to ask you to carefully consider any action you may decide to take. The fact is that the new bolts are not actually that new at all, they have been there in plain sight for nearly a year now during which time a lot of people, locals and visitors alike, have enjoyed the route in its new shape.
There are two people on this thread who are talking of removing the bolts, neither of you have, I can only assume, actually been to Anstey's during this time.
The other factor to consider is that these are not the only bolts to have sprouted recently. I'll give you a run-down:
-New first bolt at the bottom of Empire of the Sun to protect the moves to the break. If we go back in time you can say the whole route was retroes - originally a cam placement in the break, the third used to be the first, E6 not 7b.
-New bolt to make the link-up Not Just Empire. Great route.
-Two new bolts left of the arete of Devonshire making a safer optional start, original route unaffected.
-One bolt on Sole Fusion as part of a new traverse extension to the last route, which crosses La Creme and finishes up past another new bolt to lower-off of Brian. This also makes viable La Creme Direct (using the new bolt on SF and the bolt on Cream Topping), which is rather good.
-Newly bolted route left of St Gregory the Wonder Worker with a second pitch across the top of Upper Ferocity. Very pleasant and unusual outing.
-Newly bolted easy slab route on the approach to Cocytus area.
-Shadow Beast at LQP retroed
-Up the Styx at LQP retroed
Neither of these likely to have been done for years as reliant on one or two very rotten bolts as I recall but both are now enjoying attention from those with a taste for hard slabs.
-Mustard Custard new route in that area bolted.
I would suggest that if you feel strongly perhaps your first point of call would be one of the regular local BMC meets where such issues are discussed with those involved.
Should you decide to take unilateral action, and I respectfully suggest that you do not, I would state that "the best I can" is not acceptable - if you or any other party is to remove the bolts it needs to be done properly and cleanly, drilled out then resined over. We don't need sharp bits of metal sticking out where the rope runs on a popular route, and removing a staple cleanly once it has been hacked would be significantly more difficult than doing the job properly to start with.
Thanks
Justin Timms
1
In reply to quadmyre:
I know there have been a lot of new bolts placed recently, and I didn't think a great deal of retroing Up the Styx and Shadow Beast (routes I was aspiring to do in their original form and could perfectly well just have been rebolted), but I'm prepared to assume they had the consent of the FA. The rest - I don't see what they have to do with the matter in hand.
However, I can't see the smallest justification for these new bolts on any level, and I despise anonymous bolters, even if they are (as seems to be the case) well known locally.
I might agree with you about BMC meets if I thought that placing these bolts had been discussed at one such or if they complied with a local agreement, but as far as I can see they don't. They're just your standard rogue bolts and no-one needs any authorisation to remove those.
>We don't need sharp bits of metal sticking out where the rope runs on a popular route, and removing a staple cleanly once it has been hacked would be significantly more difficult than doing the job properly to start with.
This is a familiar cry of bolters, of course - ooooh, you can't take our bolts out until you buy a drill. Well, I agree it would be regrettable, but I shan't be coming that way until the summer. If anyone is going to be worried by sharp bits of metal sticking out after that then they're welcome to take the bolts out first in the style they think appropriate.
jcm
I know there have been a lot of new bolts placed recently, and I didn't think a great deal of retroing Up the Styx and Shadow Beast (routes I was aspiring to do in their original form and could perfectly well just have been rebolted), but I'm prepared to assume they had the consent of the FA. The rest - I don't see what they have to do with the matter in hand.
However, I can't see the smallest justification for these new bolts on any level, and I despise anonymous bolters, even if they are (as seems to be the case) well known locally.
I might agree with you about BMC meets if I thought that placing these bolts had been discussed at one such or if they complied with a local agreement, but as far as I can see they don't. They're just your standard rogue bolts and no-one needs any authorisation to remove those.
>We don't need sharp bits of metal sticking out where the rope runs on a popular route, and removing a staple cleanly once it has been hacked would be significantly more difficult than doing the job properly to start with.
This is a familiar cry of bolters, of course - ooooh, you can't take our bolts out until you buy a drill. Well, I agree it would be regrettable, but I shan't be coming that way until the summer. If anyone is going to be worried by sharp bits of metal sticking out after that then they're welcome to take the bolts out first in the style they think appropriate.
jcm
1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I'd agree that the Styx should have been rebolted not retroed as there is another bold E4 which relied on some pegs Odysseus which shares the same finish. I assume this route is now somewhat compromised
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I (cleanly) removed bolts I mistakenly placed on a Nigel Coe route on Portland.
Consider yourself enlightened John!
I might be removing some bolts at Blacknor South too, but I didn't place them.
I (cleanly) removed bolts I mistakenly placed on a Nigel Coe route on Portland.
Consider yourself enlightened John!
I might be removing some bolts at Blacknor South too, but I didn't place them.
In reply to quadmyre:
Good post.
And jcm whether you feel you need to seek consensus or not, that's fairly by the by, but if you have so little respect for the route in the first place that you're happy to leave stubs sticking out because you can't be bothered to do the job properly then it seems to me you've let a desire to make an ethical point become more important than preserving the climb as something people can enjoy. Leave it either a trad climb or a sport climb but please not some butchered mess in between the two!
Good post.
And jcm whether you feel you need to seek consensus or not, that's fairly by the by, but if you have so little respect for the route in the first place that you're happy to leave stubs sticking out because you can't be bothered to do the job properly then it seems to me you've let a desire to make an ethical point become more important than preserving the climb as something people can enjoy. Leave it either a trad climb or a sport climb but please not some butchered mess in between the two!
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Why don't you stick to upholding the ethics of your local crag, and let the locals of this area look after this one. I'm sure they are more than capable of discussing this issue at their next meet and dealing with it themselves.
We could do with less with rogue pillocks who march round the country doing what they want, when they want. Whether it's bolters/ retrobolters/ debolters/ lightning bolters.
Why don't you stick to upholding the ethics of your local crag, and let the locals of this area look after this one. I'm sure they are more than capable of discussing this issue at their next meet and dealing with it themselves.
We could do with less with rogue pillocks who march round the country doing what they want, when they want. Whether it's bolters/ retrobolters/ debolters/ lightning bolters.
In reply to steve taylor:
I applaud that as well, Steve, but again, bolts placed by accident are in a slightly different category. I'm still looking for a bolter who has ever come out and said, yes, I deliberately placed that bolt there knowing what I was doing; I now realise I shouldn't have and I'm going to remove it.
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> I (cleanly) removed bolts I mistakenly placed on a Nigel Coe route on Portland.
>
> I (cleanly) removed bolts I mistakenly placed on a Nigel Coe route on Portland.
I applaud that as well, Steve, but again, bolts placed by accident are in a slightly different category. I'm still looking for a bolter who has ever come out and said, yes, I deliberately placed that bolt there knowing what I was doing; I now realise I shouldn't have and I'm going to remove it.
jcm
In reply to JimmyKay:
Are you? Do you know much about South Devon? I may be wrong, but I don't think they've managed to get a bolt policy together at their no doubt regular BMC meetings.
In any case, I don't agree that the future of national classics should be determined solely by a handful of local climbers with drills who can't be bothered to get the FA's permission (unless someone can tell me differently on that last point).
>We could do with less with rogue pillocks who march round the country doing what they want, when they want.
Indeed we could - that's exactly how I see the anonymous bolter, and my experience suggests that there's only one language these people understand and that's having their bolts taken out.
jcm
> I'm sure they are more than capable of discussing this issue at their next meet
Are you? Do you know much about South Devon? I may be wrong, but I don't think they've managed to get a bolt policy together at their no doubt regular BMC meetings.
In any case, I don't agree that the future of national classics should be determined solely by a handful of local climbers with drills who can't be bothered to get the FA's permission (unless someone can tell me differently on that last point).
>We could do with less with rogue pillocks who march round the country doing what they want, when they want.
Indeed we could - that's exactly how I see the anonymous bolter, and my experience suggests that there's only one language these people understand and that's having their bolts taken out.
jcm
In reply to AJM:
Well, that last is a different point. If I'd had my way I would indeed have left it as a trad climb in 2002, but I was persuaded to leave it as a hybrid, even though I didn't agree with the unilateral semi-retroing that was done then, on the basis that this wasn't a licence to sportify it entirely.
I'd be more than happy to take the whole lot out, but given the two bolts have been there for ten years my intention is to leave those, even though I don't like them.
As to leaving it a mess, I'll do my best but I'm no expert and I don't see any realistic way to give it the practice. If anyone thinks they can do better than me they should go and take these bolts out now or else make a convincing case why they should stay.
jcm
> Leave it either a trad climb or a sport climb but please not some butchered mess in between the two!
Well, that last is a different point. If I'd had my way I would indeed have left it as a trad climb in 2002, but I was persuaded to leave it as a hybrid, even though I didn't agree with the unilateral semi-retroing that was done then, on the basis that this wasn't a licence to sportify it entirely.
I'd be more than happy to take the whole lot out, but given the two bolts have been there for ten years my intention is to leave those, even though I don't like them.
As to leaving it a mess, I'll do my best but I'm no expert and I don't see any realistic way to give it the practice. If anyone thinks they can do better than me they should go and take these bolts out now or else make a convincing case why they should stay.
jcm
1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
By trad I meant in the 2 bolt state it's occupied for the past decade, sorry. Essentially back in that state but neat and tidy was what I meant. I don't have a strong preference between that and it's current state but what I do feel is a retrograde step is some sort of bodge job.
By trad I meant in the 2 bolt state it's occupied for the past decade, sorry. Essentially back in that state but neat and tidy was what I meant. I don't have a strong preference between that and it's current state but what I do feel is a retrograde step is some sort of bodge job.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
John, I believe the latest bolts were added by Ken as well (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). Not that the bolter's identity matters.
I admit I was quite ambivalent about the first bolt on Cocytus and I'm fairly indifferent to whether it stays or not. Among the small section of the Ansteys locals I know, I can't think of anyone who actively objects to the new first Cocytus bolt, though I also haven't heard anyone say the route needed it either.
The rest of the new bolts that Ken placed recently, I think, as Justin said, are generally a good thing, improving the routes in question (including the ones on the rarely climbed section of Cocytus above the 1st belay). Except Shadowbeast/Styx which I've no opinion on as I haven't climbed on them yet.
Not that any of this has any input to your TEOTW argument, because undeniably it is. With the rise in demand for lower grade sport climbing over the last decade it's probably inevitable. I was trying to construct an argument along the lines of "we all know what's right deep down and we'll lynch anyone who puts another bolt in the start of Devonshire Cream" but in 10 years I might be wrong there as well. So all I can say is that the unusual local ethics are being managed locally and there isn't any outrage at what's happened (apart from the one chap in the last thread who strayed from St Gregory onto Sunshine and was so upset he went back and did it again the next day). They might stand more chance of being discussed at area meetings if they were held a little further south west than Bristol more than once every 5 years or so.
Anyway, if you're going to come and take some unilateral action, do a good job and try not to leave a mess...
> (In reply to mann9076)
>
> I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer,
>
> I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer,
John, I believe the latest bolts were added by Ken as well (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). Not that the bolter's identity matters.
I admit I was quite ambivalent about the first bolt on Cocytus and I'm fairly indifferent to whether it stays or not. Among the small section of the Ansteys locals I know, I can't think of anyone who actively objects to the new first Cocytus bolt, though I also haven't heard anyone say the route needed it either.
The rest of the new bolts that Ken placed recently, I think, as Justin said, are generally a good thing, improving the routes in question (including the ones on the rarely climbed section of Cocytus above the 1st belay). Except Shadowbeast/Styx which I've no opinion on as I haven't climbed on them yet.
Not that any of this has any input to your TEOTW argument, because undeniably it is. With the rise in demand for lower grade sport climbing over the last decade it's probably inevitable. I was trying to construct an argument along the lines of "we all know what's right deep down and we'll lynch anyone who puts another bolt in the start of Devonshire Cream" but in 10 years I might be wrong there as well. So all I can say is that the unusual local ethics are being managed locally and there isn't any outrage at what's happened (apart from the one chap in the last thread who strayed from St Gregory onto Sunshine and was so upset he went back and did it again the next day). They might stand more chance of being discussed at area meetings if they were held a little further south west than Bristol more than once every 5 years or so.
Anyway, if you're going to come and take some unilateral action, do a good job and try not to leave a mess...
In reply to quadmyre:
Do they happen? I recall one being advertised in Chudleigh a couple of years ago, otherwise as far as I was aware they're all up in Bristol or Penwith. Not conducive to attracting many South Devon locals.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
> one of the regular local BMC meets
Do they happen? I recall one being advertised in Chudleigh a couple of years ago, otherwise as far as I was aware they're all up in Bristol or Penwith. Not conducive to attracting many South Devon locals.
In reply to chris j:
>Not that the bolter's identity matters.
Oh, but it does. In lots of ways.
So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing? I can't see any reason at all for turning Cocytus into a sport route, *especially* when he knows there was a lot of controversy about placing the two bolts in the first place. This sort of sneaky anonymous action really incenses me.
jcm
>Not that the bolter's identity matters.
Oh, but it does. In lots of ways.
So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing? I can't see any reason at all for turning Cocytus into a sport route, *especially* when he knows there was a lot of controversy about placing the two bolts in the first place. This sort of sneaky anonymous action really incenses me.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Sorry, couldn't make any sort of informed comment.
> (In reply to chris j)
>
> So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing?
>
> So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing?
Sorry, couldn't make any sort of informed comment.
In reply to chris j:
>(including the ones on the rarely climbed section of Cocytus above the 1st belay).
Actually, can you explain this to me? The logbook makes it sound as though these are not retroing the existing finish, but adding a new direct finish by bolting the crack directly above the belay, while leaving the original second pitch untouched. Is that right, do you know?
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
> [...
> [...
>(including the ones on the rarely climbed section of Cocytus above the 1st belay).
Actually, can you explain this to me? The logbook makes it sound as though these are not retroing the existing finish, but adding a new direct finish by bolting the crack directly above the belay, while leaving the original second pitch untouched. Is that right, do you know?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: That's pretty much right, you carry on up the crack into the grotty looking crack/chimney, move up and left onto the ledge then back right to the lower off for More Steam. Reading the Rockfax description for the original Cocytus 2nd pitch, the two come together for the step back right on to the sloping ledge above More Steam. I think the last of the new bolts is just down and right of where the pitches come together.
In reply to chris j:
Thanks. I’m really struggling to visualise this. The way I remember it the More Steam lower off was at about the same height as the Cocytus belay, and pitch two of Cocytus disappeared rightwards up the crag/undergrowth via some scary borehole action to some (not terribly necessary) bolts hidden in the bushes somewhere. I can’t work out how a second pitch would arrive at the More Steam belay without actually being the Cocytus/More Steam connection which already existed.
Hey ho. No doubt it will all become clear when I’m there. I’m rather looking forward to it now. Someone has just offered me the use of a ‘diamond-bladed angle grinder’. I’ve no idea what that is, but it sounds cool.
In fact while I’m at it, if I’m right in my belief that the thing can actually be perfectly well protected with RPs without any bolts at all, I can see myself getting tempted to remove the whole lot. Perhaps it will depend how easy it turns out to be.
jcm
Thanks. I’m really struggling to visualise this. The way I remember it the More Steam lower off was at about the same height as the Cocytus belay, and pitch two of Cocytus disappeared rightwards up the crag/undergrowth via some scary borehole action to some (not terribly necessary) bolts hidden in the bushes somewhere. I can’t work out how a second pitch would arrive at the More Steam belay without actually being the Cocytus/More Steam connection which already existed.
Hey ho. No doubt it will all become clear when I’m there. I’m rather looking forward to it now. Someone has just offered me the use of a ‘diamond-bladed angle grinder’. I’ve no idea what that is, but it sounds cool.
In fact while I’m at it, if I’m right in my belief that the thing can actually be perfectly well protected with RPs without any bolts at all, I can see myself getting tempted to remove the whole lot. Perhaps it will depend how easy it turns out to be.
jcm
1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
go for it!
go for it!
Someone has just offered me the use of a ‘diamond-bladed angle grinder’. I’ve no idea what that is, but it sounds cool.
It would be cool if it cut off your hands to stop you typing such a load of inflammatory rubbish.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: The More Steam Connection, you break right across the slab only a few feet below the first Cocytus belay, then swing up the overhang and graunch over on to the sloping ledge. The new connection you go straight up and end up stepping onto the sloping ledge from the left. It all stops just before the undergrowth grovelling starts. There's probably not more than 10 feet of new climbing between leaving Cocytus original pitch 1 and joining pitch 2. As a caveat I am describing this from a boat 100 miles off Angola so it's entirely possible I could be wrong on pitch lengths etc.
Let us know if you're down with the angle grinder, if I'm in country I'll come and hold your ropes for the RP protected ascent in return for a belay on the Lynch...
PS I presume the RP ascent will be made with the bolts taped to show it's feasible before you start with the grinder?
Let us know if you're down with the angle grinder, if I'm in country I'll come and hold your ropes for the RP protected ascent in return for a belay on the Lynch...
PS I presume the RP ascent will be made with the bolts taped to show it's feasible before you start with the grinder?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I meant simply because the bolts in question turn out to have been placed where they shouldn't have been. Contrary to AJM, I actually can't think of a single occasion which this has happened, but I'd welcome enlightenment.
Gary Gibson went and repeated a lot of his bolted routes in Pembroke without the bolts and perhaps on Lundy too.
I meant simply because the bolts in question turn out to have been placed where they shouldn't have been. Contrary to AJM, I actually can't think of a single occasion which this has happened, but I'd welcome enlightenment.
Gary Gibson went and repeated a lot of his bolted routes in Pembroke without the bolts and perhaps on Lundy too.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
Not sure if the policy is different for this area, but isn't it considered correct and ethical to seek permission from the First Ascensionist (FFA Littlejohn?) before placing retro bolts?
So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
Not sure if the policy is different for this area, but isn't it considered correct and ethical to seek permission from the First Ascensionist (FFA Littlejohn?) before placing retro bolts?
In reply to MJ:
Indeed. That was my point.
As to GG repeating his Lundy routes without bolts, don't tempt me! Again, though, claiming repeats of your own at a higher level is somehow different. I'm after people who have just, for example, deliberately retroed an existing trad route, accepted they made a mistake and taken the bolts out.
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
>
> Not sure if the policy is different for this area, but isn't it considered correct and ethical to seek permission from the First Ascensionist (FFA Littlejohn?) before placing retro bolts?
>
> So presumably the FA gave his consent to this, did he?
>
> Not sure if the policy is different for this area, but isn't it considered correct and ethical to seek permission from the First Ascensionist (FFA Littlejohn?) before placing retro bolts?
Indeed. That was my point.
As to GG repeating his Lundy routes without bolts, don't tempt me! Again, though, claiming repeats of your own at a higher level is somehow different. I'm after people who have just, for example, deliberately retroed an existing trad route, accepted they made a mistake and taken the bolts out.
jcm
In reply to chris j:
>Let us know if you're down with the angle grinder, if I'm in country I'll come and hold your ropes for the RP protected ascent in return for a belay on the Lynch...
It's a deal. You'd better not ask this mann fellow, though. He doesn't sound like the type to have around heavy machinery.
>PS I presume the RP ascent will be made with the bolts taped to show it's feasible before you start with the grinder?
I'm not sure about that! I'm a family man, you know.
jcm
>Let us know if you're down with the angle grinder, if I'm in country I'll come and hold your ropes for the RP protected ascent in return for a belay on the Lynch...
It's a deal. You'd better not ask this mann fellow, though. He doesn't sound like the type to have around heavy machinery.
>PS I presume the RP ascent will be made with the bolts taped to show it's feasible before you start with the grinder?
I'm not sure about that! I'm a family man, you know.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Indeed. That was my point.
Precisely and I totally agree with you.
At this stage, it's probably best to see what the First Ascensionist says. If he doesn't mind and the local ethics agree, then so be it.
However, if he doesn't agree, then that opens a whole different discussion...
Indeed. That was my point.
Precisely and I totally agree with you.
At this stage, it's probably best to see what the First Ascensionist says. If he doesn't mind and the local ethics agree, then so be it.
However, if he doesn't agree, then that opens a whole different discussion...
In reply to MJ:
Well, as you say the FA was Pat Littlejohn. I'd be surprised if he thought retrobolting his routes was a good idea. But I suppose I could ask him, if I could get his email address. Although one might think rather that it was for the retrobolter to show he'd got consent.
jcm
Well, as you say the FA was Pat Littlejohn. I'd be surprised if he thought retrobolting his routes was a good idea. But I suppose I could ask him, if I could get his email address. Although one might think rather that it was for the retrobolter to show he'd got consent.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Doesn't he run the 'International School of Mountaineering'?
If so, he might be contactable through there.
Doesn't he run the 'International School of Mountaineering'?
If so, he might be contactable through there.
In reply to MJ:
Yes, probably.
I just googled him and the top hit was 'Pat Littlejohn on Craig Dorys - on Vimeo'.
Now that's 2013 for you. A Friday Night Vid in the making?
jcm
Yes, probably.
I just googled him and the top hit was 'Pat Littlejohn on Craig Dorys - on Vimeo'.
Now that's 2013 for you. A Friday Night Vid in the making?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Just read the whole thread , what an awful fuss about nothing.
In the routes former state with just the two bolts it was perfectly safe.
Apart from the initial run out where you could easily place the wire which took little or no "trad climbing" skills to sort out it was just just a clip up.
You would not hit the deck on the climbing between the next bolts and then after that it was a simple job to place a couple of cams in a hands off rest position which are bomb proof then a small mantle out left and you are all done.
Either get rid of them all and make it a proper trad route or leave them all in as it was pretty much reduced to a sport route the first time it was done by pegging it anyway.
If it required some skill to climb as a trad route IE. gear placement skills and rope work i would of probably put up much more of an argument for taking the bolts out but if you can climb English 6a you could lead it as your first trad route without any problems with the two bolts (or original pegs) in place.
Anyway good luck with lugging the generator the half mile to the crag.
Just read the whole thread , what an awful fuss about nothing.
In the routes former state with just the two bolts it was perfectly safe.
Apart from the initial run out where you could easily place the wire which took little or no "trad climbing" skills to sort out it was just just a clip up.
You would not hit the deck on the climbing between the next bolts and then after that it was a simple job to place a couple of cams in a hands off rest position which are bomb proof then a small mantle out left and you are all done.
Either get rid of them all and make it a proper trad route or leave them all in as it was pretty much reduced to a sport route the first time it was done by pegging it anyway.
If it required some skill to climb as a trad route IE. gear placement skills and rope work i would of probably put up much more of an argument for taking the bolts out but if you can climb English 6a you could lead it as your first trad route without any problems with the two bolts (or original pegs) in place.
Anyway good luck with lugging the generator the half mile to the crag.
In reply to quadmyre: Great post Justin. I don't totally agree with all of that: I feel a little more uneasy about rather indiscriminate bolting. More if i am honest about bolting areas of flaky choss to create accessible sport routes which end of detracting from crags as a whole. You don't want the mighty cove becoming like horseshoe or something, where there are dozens of F5s composed of tottering fridges, regularly wholly or partially hurled earthwards by enthusiastic climbers with little experience of climbing areas of deeply suspect rock. I still don't think even this merits packing a hacksaw down to go and chop them all without talking to locals, however.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I'll bite. The number of really good F6s in this country is tiny. The number of good E3s is huge. Anstey's is mostly bolted. Having a really good and unusual F6b+ that is properly bolted is a good thing if you like sport climbing... I know two climbers who climb about that level and are both dead keen to get back on Cocytus as it's one of the only genuinely decent F6s they've been on.
The reason a lot of sport climbers seem indifferent might be due to self-selection: if you are a sport climber in this country, to climb nice routes you really have to have put in the hours to be climbing F7s. Extra bolts on Cocytus won't make much difference to them as it's just another warmup that they're never going to fall off anyway (I personally thinking of it as 'just another warmup' is a massive shame, I really enjoy doing good routes even when they're well within my capability and bolted).
If the route in question was 8b+ instead of 6b+, far fewer people would have done it (and they'd all have headpointed it or done it on preplaced gear) and you probably wouldn't be considering chopping the bolts. What's the difference?
The reason a lot of sport climbers seem indifferent might be due to self-selection: if you are a sport climber in this country, to climb nice routes you really have to have put in the hours to be climbing F7s. Extra bolts on Cocytus won't make much difference to them as it's just another warmup that they're never going to fall off anyway (I personally thinking of it as 'just another warmup' is a massive shame, I really enjoy doing good routes even when they're well within my capability and bolted).
If the route in question was 8b+ instead of 6b+, far fewer people would have done it (and they'd all have headpointed it or done it on preplaced gear) and you probably wouldn't be considering chopping the bolts. What's the difference?
In reply to Toby Dunn: Having a select few good routes between 5+ and 6c hasn't make Anstey's anything like Horseshoe!
(oh, apart from End of an Era which would be a much better candidate for chopping!)
(oh, apart from End of an Era which would be a much better candidate for chopping!)
In reply to i_a_coops:
Well, most E3 classics would make nice sport routes. I don’t see that as a good reason to retro them. Anyway, there’s millions of 6b+ses at Portland. How far away is that? They’re all shite, of course, as you say, but that’s because easy sport climbing is shite.
>I know two climbers who climb about that level and are both dead keen to get back on Cocytus as it's one of the only genuinely decent F6s they've been on.
They've got six weeks. After that they'll have to buy some wires.
I agree that if these bolts stay it will become 'just another warm-up', and indeed my impression from some blogs and logbooks is that it already has.
I don’t follow this. There is no difference. If it was 8b+ then it would be a (even more) nationally celebrated trad route of E10 or so, probably put up by the very person who’s now (if rumour is correct) retroed the actual route, and no-one would be contemplating retroing it. In such a scenario the only thing stopping me chopping the bolts would be the fact that I wouldn’t have time to get down there before it had been done.
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously) I'll bite. The number of really good F6s in this country is tiny. The number of good E3s is huge. Anstey's is mostly bolted. Having a really good and unusual F6b+ that is properly bolted is a good thing if you like sport climbing...
Well, most E3 classics would make nice sport routes. I don’t see that as a good reason to retro them. Anyway, there’s millions of 6b+ses at Portland. How far away is that? They’re all shite, of course, as you say, but that’s because easy sport climbing is shite.
>I know two climbers who climb about that level and are both dead keen to get back on Cocytus as it's one of the only genuinely decent F6s they've been on.
They've got six weeks. After that they'll have to buy some wires.
> Extra bolts on Cocytus won't make much difference to them as it's just another warmup that they're never going to fall off anyway.
I agree that if these bolts stay it will become 'just another warm-up', and indeed my impression from some blogs and logbooks is that it already has.
> If the route in question was 8b+ instead of 6b+, far fewer people would have done it (and they'd all have headpointed it or done it on preplaced gear) and you probably wouldn't be considering chopping the bolts. What's the difference?
I don’t follow this. There is no difference. If it was 8b+ then it would be a (even more) nationally celebrated trad route of E10 or so, probably put up by the very person who’s now (if rumour is correct) retroed the actual route, and no-one would be contemplating retroing it. In such a scenario the only thing stopping me chopping the bolts would be the fact that I wouldn’t have time to get down there before it had been done.
jcm
In reply to i_a_coops:
I think this exactly the problem. A classic thin end of the wedge if I ever heard one. There are loads of good limestone E3s but only trad climbers can do them. This hardly seems fair given the paucity of good easy sport routes, and given that Anstey's Cove (insert any other crag where bolting has gradually crept in) is now basically bolted anyway, it seems inconsiderate not to bolt the remaining trad routes...
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously) I'll bite. The number of really good F6s in this country is tiny. The number of good E3s is huge. Anstey's is mostly bolted.
I think this exactly the problem. A classic thin end of the wedge if I ever heard one. There are loads of good limestone E3s but only trad climbers can do them. This hardly seems fair given the paucity of good easy sport routes, and given that Anstey's Cove (insert any other crag where bolting has gradually crept in) is now basically bolted anyway, it seems inconsiderate not to bolt the remaining trad routes...
1
In reply to thedevonshirepiemuncher:
>Just read the whole thread , what an awful fuss about nothing.
I sort of agree; as I said I didn't like the bolts in the first place and if I find my impression is confirmed that there’s perfectly adequate protection without any fixed gear I’ll be very tempted to take the whole lot out, especially in view of what I consider the slightly bad faith shown by retroing the route in stages like this.
>Anyway good luck with lugging the generator the half mile to the crag.
I'm pretty sure my friend's device comes with a battery, to judge from various online videos showing it being applied to speed cameras. Any of those need doing while I'm down there?!
jcm
>Just read the whole thread , what an awful fuss about nothing.
I sort of agree; as I said I didn't like the bolts in the first place and if I find my impression is confirmed that there’s perfectly adequate protection without any fixed gear I’ll be very tempted to take the whole lot out, especially in view of what I consider the slightly bad faith shown by retroing the route in stages like this.
>Anyway good luck with lugging the generator the half mile to the crag.
I'm pretty sure my friend's device comes with a battery, to judge from various online videos showing it being applied to speed cameras. Any of those need doing while I'm down there?!
jcm
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Yes, I sense a perversion of our ethos creeping in here. Surely the point of climbing is to get from the bottom to the top of a piece of rock using as little artificial aid as possible. Solo is purest, followed by on sight leading etc and if protection is unavailable by any means then bolting is used as a last resort. I don't see sport climbing as a different type of climbing merely another point along the continoum [sp].
The fact that there are very few low grade sports routes in the UK is a good thing because that means that they can be climbed without permanently altering rock, unlike Europe where large areas are covered with lots of unprotectable limestone leaving no alternative but to resort to the Hilti.
> (In reply to i_a_coops)
> [...]
>
> I think this exactly the problem. A classic thin end of the wedge if I ever heard one. There are loads of good limestone E3s but only trad climbers can do them. This hardly seems fair given the paucity of good easy sport routes, and given that Anstey's Cove (insert any other crag where bolting has gradually crept in) is now basically bolted anyway, it seems inconsiderate not to bolt the remaining trad routes...
> [...]
>
> I think this exactly the problem. A classic thin end of the wedge if I ever heard one. There are loads of good limestone E3s but only trad climbers can do them. This hardly seems fair given the paucity of good easy sport routes, and given that Anstey's Cove (insert any other crag where bolting has gradually crept in) is now basically bolted anyway, it seems inconsiderate not to bolt the remaining trad routes...
Yes, I sense a perversion of our ethos creeping in here. Surely the point of climbing is to get from the bottom to the top of a piece of rock using as little artificial aid as possible. Solo is purest, followed by on sight leading etc and if protection is unavailable by any means then bolting is used as a last resort. I don't see sport climbing as a different type of climbing merely another point along the continoum [sp].
The fact that there are very few low grade sports routes in the UK is a good thing because that means that they can be climbed without permanently altering rock, unlike Europe where large areas are covered with lots of unprotectable limestone leaving no alternative but to resort to the Hilti.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
If you really are keen on showcasing your trad credentials, then you'd eschew the offer of aid, in the form of a diamond-bladed angle grinder, and insist on performing the job with a hacksaw instead.
If you really are keen on showcasing your trad credentials, then you'd eschew the offer of aid, in the form of a diamond-bladed angle grinder, and insist on performing the job with a hacksaw instead.
In reply to Removed User: An alternative viewpoint:
<generalisations>
The fact that there are very few low grade sports routes in the UK is a bad thing as it means that most UK climbers associate sport climbing with elitist number-obsessed wankery, and bimbling up easy routes while carrying a large amount of shiny gear as 'Extreme'. Result: UK climbers suck at climbing. Also, ever noticed how many more girls you see at crags on the continent?
</generalisations>
<generalisations>
The fact that there are very few low grade sports routes in the UK is a bad thing as it means that most UK climbers associate sport climbing with elitist number-obsessed wankery, and bimbling up easy routes while carrying a large amount of shiny gear as 'Extreme'. Result: UK climbers suck at climbing. Also, ever noticed how many more girls you see at crags on the continent?
</generalisations>
In reply to i_a_coops:
Oh I don't know.
British climbers are pretty good at putting up hard trad routes, not sure where they stand regards bouldering. I quite accept that they aren't as good at sports climbing as many of our European cousins who have no alternative but to climb bolted limestone every time they go out but so what? Further, I don't necessarily agree that the majority of Euro climbers are climbing impressively hard sports routes. Inm my experience you see the same kind of distribution of abilities in Europe as you do in the UK. 95% of climbers pottering around on 5s and low 6s (VS/HVS in UK)and rapidly declining proportion climbing 7s and then 8s.
..and finally, the best climber is the climber having the most fun. Who cares what grade other people climb? The challenge is a personal one.
Oh I don't know.
British climbers are pretty good at putting up hard trad routes, not sure where they stand regards bouldering. I quite accept that they aren't as good at sports climbing as many of our European cousins who have no alternative but to climb bolted limestone every time they go out but so what? Further, I don't necessarily agree that the majority of Euro climbers are climbing impressively hard sports routes. Inm my experience you see the same kind of distribution of abilities in Europe as you do in the UK. 95% of climbers pottering around on 5s and low 6s (VS/HVS in UK)and rapidly declining proportion climbing 7s and then 8s.
..and finally, the best climber is the climber having the most fun. Who cares what grade other people climb? The challenge is a personal one.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Assuming the bolts concerned are staples, a diamond tipped angle grinder would give you the options of either angling the cutting disc into the rock, creating a sizeable hollow in the rock around the bolt, or leaving sharp stubs sticking out of the rock which could cut anyone who fell past them.
The best way to remove staple bolts is to drill out as much of the adhesive surrounding the legs, then lever the staple itself out. The resulting holes should then be filled with a mixture of epoxy resin and rock dust.
The best way to remove staple bolts is to drill out as much of the adhesive surrounding the legs, then lever the staple itself out. The resulting holes should then be filled with a mixture of epoxy resin and rock dust.
In reply to Removed User: Are we that good at putting up hard trad routes? I would say Alex Honnold and Kevin Jorgeson showed us up pretty hard when they visited. Some of the 'highball' problems in the States would probably be E14 if they were in the Peak.
Also, getting better at climbing rocks by going sport climbing allows you to climb a much wider variety of awesome trad routes.
The best quote I've ever heard on the subject of ethics:
'Rocks. People build houses out of them'.
Also, getting better at climbing rocks by going sport climbing allows you to climb a much wider variety of awesome trad routes.
The best quote I've ever heard on the subject of ethics:
'Rocks. People build houses out of them'.
Jon Coixote
In reply to shark:
Actually, The Windmills would be a great name for a trad route somewhere like Portland.
jcm
Actually, The Windmills would be a great name for a trad route somewhere like Portland.
jcm
In reply to John2:
I'm sure you're right, John, but I don't have a drill. Nor indeed any epoxy resin or rock dust (where on earth does one get rock dust, anyway?).
All the more reason for bolters to clear up their own messes, of course. Whiiiich, as I was saying, unfortunately they never do.
jcm
I'm sure you're right, John, but I don't have a drill. Nor indeed any epoxy resin or rock dust (where on earth does one get rock dust, anyway?).
All the more reason for bolters to clear up their own messes, of course. Whiiiich, as I was saying, unfortunately they never do.
jcm
In reply to Removed User:
I suspect that's a perspective thing depending on which crags you visit. I remember when I first visited Portland for example my impression was that the majority of climbers are climbing 5s and 6s and there are a few rarefied gods pulling onto 7s. If you'd visited Anstey's last weekend you'd have got a somewhat different impression when seeing pretty much every route on Ferocity had someone on it. A F5 climber isn't going to go to Anstey's however, and an 8b climber isn't going to be found on the F5s at the Cuttings, so there's always an element of self-selection.
Is that true though? I've found my enjoyment of climbing has deepened proportinately with my albeit punterish progression. In hindsight easy climbing was fun, but the harder routes get the more volume of great climbing in great situations they tend to have, and the more you have to put in to get up them, mentally and physically, the more you get out of the experience.
> In my experience you see the same kind of distribution of abilities in Europe as you do in the UK. 95% of climbers pottering around on 5s and low 6s (VS/HVS in UK)and rapidly declining proportion climbing 7s and then 8s.
I suspect that's a perspective thing depending on which crags you visit. I remember when I first visited Portland for example my impression was that the majority of climbers are climbing 5s and 6s and there are a few rarefied gods pulling onto 7s. If you'd visited Anstey's last weekend you'd have got a somewhat different impression when seeing pretty much every route on Ferocity had someone on it. A F5 climber isn't going to go to Anstey's however, and an 8b climber isn't going to be found on the F5s at the Cuttings, so there's always an element of self-selection.
> ..and finally, the best climber is the climber having the most fun.
Is that true though? I've found my enjoyment of climbing has deepened proportinately with my albeit punterish progression. In hindsight easy climbing was fun, but the harder routes get the more volume of great climbing in great situations they tend to have, and the more you have to put in to get up them, mentally and physically, the more you get out of the experience.
In reply to quadmyre:
so if getting better means you have more fun then the best climber will be having the most fun.
Not the intention of the original message but it works.
so if getting better means you have more fun then the best climber will be having the most fun.
Not the intention of the original message but it works.
In reply to quadmyre:
Indeed. Or on the continent, go to Santa Linya in winter and half the climbers there will be on an 8c or harder, go to Arboli in the sun and they wont.
Indeed. Or on the continent, go to Santa Linya in winter and half the climbers there will be on an 8c or harder, go to Arboli in the sun and they wont.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Ask the nice man at B&Q.
Err... under the crag?
You seem to need a lot of hand-holding with this. Good luck with the angle grinder and try not to chop your own rope.
> I don't have ... any epoxy resin
Ask the nice man at B&Q.
> or rock dust (where on earth does one get rock dust, anyway?)
Err... under the crag?
You seem to need a lot of hand-holding with this. Good luck with the angle grinder and try not to chop your own rope.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
If you care about the route that much, would you not rather that someone with experience did the job properly and left it in the best state possible?
If there's a chance you might bodge it (which it sounds like there is seeing as you've never done it before), why not find a like minded person who has got experience in that sort of thing? It might not get done for a while but there's no urgency really is there?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what you're doing, and it sounds like you're going to do it regardless of what other people think. But it would be a shame to leave the route marred by a bad job, if it were possible to do it nicely.
If you care about the route that much, would you not rather that someone with experience did the job properly and left it in the best state possible?
If there's a chance you might bodge it (which it sounds like there is seeing as you've never done it before), why not find a like minded person who has got experience in that sort of thing? It might not get done for a while but there's no urgency really is there?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what you're doing, and it sounds like you're going to do it regardless of what other people think. But it would be a shame to leave the route marred by a bad job, if it were possible to do it nicely.
In reply to Ed Brighteldman:
Much rather. I'm open to offers.
>I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what you're doing, and it sounds like you're going to do it regardless of what other people think.
I don't know why you'd say that - if that was my position why would I post at all?
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> If you care about the route that much, would you not rather that someone with experience did the job properly and left it in the best state possible?
>
> If you care about the route that much, would you not rather that someone with experience did the job properly and left it in the best state possible?
Much rather. I'm open to offers.
>I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what you're doing, and it sounds like you're going to do it regardless of what other people think.
I don't know why you'd say that - if that was my position why would I post at all?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
OK I'll retract that bit, it wasn't important.
If I were you I would just hold off for a few months, see if you can find a consensus amongst people you respect (preferably the local scene) and if you still plan on going ahead with it, try and persuade someone with more experience to do it for you.
If the whole process takes a year or two, that's better than taking something away from the route by doing it badly, or risking having someone re-bolt it and creating more mess. In the grand scheme of how long that bit of rock has been there (or even how long the route has been there), it's not going to make a very big difference.
OK I'll retract that bit, it wasn't important.
If I were you I would just hold off for a few months, see if you can find a consensus amongst people you respect (preferably the local scene) and if you still plan on going ahead with it, try and persuade someone with more experience to do it for you.
If the whole process takes a year or two, that's better than taking something away from the route by doing it badly, or risking having someone re-bolt it and creating more mess. In the grand scheme of how long that bit of rock has been there (or even how long the route has been there), it's not going to make a very big difference.
In reply to Ed Brighteldman:
Up to a point, yes. But these things legitimise themselves over time - oooh, look how many people have done it with the lovely new bolts and enjoyed it; no-one's complained before, and so forth.
Moreover, I have other things to do in life. As far as I can see it's pretty simple; these bolts have been placed where they shouldn't have been retroing a popular trad classic without the consent of the FA, and they've got to go. I'm open to being persuaded otherwise (as I was in 2002), but I'm not minded to undertake extensive consultation; sure there are grey areas where bolting is concerned but this isn't one of them.
The trouble with people who own drills and have experience of bolting and removing bolts is that by and large they're pro-bolters who have even less inclination than I do to spend their time cleaning up other people's mess.
Still, maybe I should go and practice a bit at Portland or Dancing Ledge. Nobody'd miss one of those poxy 5+ warm-ups at DL, surely?
jcm
Up to a point, yes. But these things legitimise themselves over time - oooh, look how many people have done it with the lovely new bolts and enjoyed it; no-one's complained before, and so forth.
Moreover, I have other things to do in life. As far as I can see it's pretty simple; these bolts have been placed where they shouldn't have been retroing a popular trad classic without the consent of the FA, and they've got to go. I'm open to being persuaded otherwise (as I was in 2002), but I'm not minded to undertake extensive consultation; sure there are grey areas where bolting is concerned but this isn't one of them.
The trouble with people who own drills and have experience of bolting and removing bolts is that by and large they're pro-bolters who have even less inclination than I do to spend their time cleaning up other people's mess.
Still, maybe I should go and practice a bit at Portland or Dancing Ledge. Nobody'd miss one of those poxy 5+ warm-ups at DL, surely?
jcm
1
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Yes, but isn't that the entire point of getting a consensus - you might not see it the same as everyone else?
Anyway, that's all I've got to say. Personally, I wouldn't do it unless I could guarantee that I would leave the route in a good condition. For me, an unfortunately bolted route is better than an unfortunately damaged one. But I'm not the one with the diamond edge angle grinder...
> As far as I can see it's pretty simple;
Yes, but isn't that the entire point of getting a consensus - you might not see it the same as everyone else?
Anyway, that's all I've got to say. Personally, I wouldn't do it unless I could guarantee that I would leave the route in a good condition. For me, an unfortunately bolted route is better than an unfortunately damaged one. But I'm not the one with the diamond edge angle grinder...
In reply to Ed Brighteldman:
Sure. My idea of how to get a consensus is to post on here and see what people say.
As far as I can see at the moment, the local view is 'well, we were a bit surprised when they appeared as well, but we don't care too much either way', and the non-local view is in favour of removal, with one dissenting voice.
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> [...]
>
> Yes, but isn't that the entire point of getting a consensus - you might not see it the same as everyone else?
>
> [...]
>
> Yes, but isn't that the entire point of getting a consensus - you might not see it the same as everyone else?
Sure. My idea of how to get a consensus is to post on here and see what people say.
As far as I can see at the moment, the local view is 'well, we were a bit surprised when they appeared as well, but we don't care too much either way', and the non-local view is in favour of removal, with one dissenting voice.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Like troll/being antagonist in other ukc threads? How many plates have you got spinning right now. Must be arguing on at least 3 threads...
> (In reply to Ed Feldman)
>
>
>
> Moreover, I have other things to do in life.
> Moreover, I have other things to do in life.
Like troll/being antagonist in other ukc threads? How many plates have you got spinning right now. Must be arguing on at least 3 threads...
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Looks to me like you're backtracking... there's certainly less "I'm gonna..." happening today.
You say you're not minded to undertake extensive consultation, is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left? Or do you just want to be right? There's plenty of people with drills and the ability to use them that don't approve of bolts, I'm one of them. Who made me god tho?
I've read some pretty mental stuff on here the last couple of days, what with the Everest thing going on but this tops the lot - I was inclined to think you spoke some sense at times but letting your mouth run away with itself has done your argument no favours. That's a shame.
You say you're not minded to undertake extensive consultation, is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left? Or do you just want to be right? There's plenty of people with drills and the ability to use them that don't approve of bolts, I'm one of them. Who made me god tho?
I've read some pretty mental stuff on here the last couple of days, what with the Everest thing going on but this tops the lot - I was inclined to think you spoke some sense at times but letting your mouth run away with itself has done your argument no favours. That's a shame.
In reply to mrchewy:
>You say you're not minded to undertake extensive consultation, is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left?
No, it's because I can't be arsed, or at least I can't be arsed to do what Ed F seems to be proposing, which is a year-long process culminating in some magical consensus and possibly involving BMC meetings and so forth - all the stuff the bolter didn't do, in fact. The situation doesn't justify that; we're talking about one route where AFAICS the bolter has clearly overstepped the mark. I don't think that justifies any more than announcing my intention as I have and asking for any objections.
jcm
>You say you're not minded to undertake extensive consultation, is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left?
No, it's because I can't be arsed, or at least I can't be arsed to do what Ed F seems to be proposing, which is a year-long process culminating in some magical consensus and possibly involving BMC meetings and so forth - all the stuff the bolter didn't do, in fact. The situation doesn't justify that; we're talking about one route where AFAICS the bolter has clearly overstepped the mark. I don't think that justifies any more than announcing my intention as I have and asking for any objections.
jcm
In reply to mrchewy:
is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left?
It doesn't really matter what the majority think.
If the local ethic is to respect the First Ascensionists wishes and that person doesn't want it bolted, then it should be de-bolted.
In this case, I don't know the answer to either...
is this because you're worried that the majority would rather the bolts were left?
It doesn't really matter what the majority think.
If the local ethic is to respect the First Ascensionists wishes and that person doesn't want it bolted, then it should be de-bolted.
In this case, I don't know the answer to either...
In reply to MJ: If the majority were found to approve of the bolting, then some other person may well see that as a license to bolt. The mess then gets messier.
In reply to mrchewy:
It's not often I'd say this right at the moment, but I think John's got a point here.
A "bolt first ask questions later" approach is something that I find quite scary, and discouraging that approach is arguably more important than the individual route.
It's not often I'd say this right at the moment, but I think John's got a point here.
A "bolt first ask questions later" approach is something that I find quite scary, and discouraging that approach is arguably more important than the individual route.
In reply to mrchewy:
If the majority were found to approve of the bolting, then some other person may well see that as a license to bolt. The mess then gets messier.
As I said earlier, it doesn't necessarily matter what the majority think. Ethics are there to be respected and it that means things are left un-bolted so be it.
If the majority were found to approve of the bolting, then some other person may well see that as a license to bolt. The mess then gets messier.
As I said earlier, it doesn't necessarily matter what the majority think. Ethics are there to be respected and it that means things are left un-bolted so be it.
In reply to Ramblin dave:
To put it another way, if people lean against taking bolts out once they're in "to avoid making more mess" then it encourages people to bolt marginal routes before seeking a consensus. If people lean towards summarily chopping them, then it encourages people to seek consensus before bolting.
To put it another way, if people lean against taking bolts out once they're in "to avoid making more mess" then it encourages people to bolt marginal routes before seeking a consensus. If people lean towards summarily chopping them, then it encourages people to seek consensus before bolting.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
I agree - amazing.
E
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> Masterly thread management throughout!
>
> Masterly thread management throughout!
I agree - amazing.
E
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
As one of the people responsible for dissuading you from chopping the first set of bolts, I'd like to say I fully support the removal of the new bolts from cocytus. In fact, I'm probably in favour of seeing them all come out at this point - it would be a good idea to push the wedge in the opposite direction for a change.
We have a pretty good balance between trad and sport in this country at the moment, but the pressure for low grade sport climbing is increasing and actions like removing the cocytus bolts will be important in maintaining the status quo.
Do a decent job though. If you're going to borrow an angle grinder, why not borrow a drill instead? I'll mail order you some epoxy resin, if you send me your address. Rock dust can be found underneath the cider soak in ample quantities. Simples.
As one of the people responsible for dissuading you from chopping the first set of bolts, I'd like to say I fully support the removal of the new bolts from cocytus. In fact, I'm probably in favour of seeing them all come out at this point - it would be a good idea to push the wedge in the opposite direction for a change.
We have a pretty good balance between trad and sport in this country at the moment, but the pressure for low grade sport climbing is increasing and actions like removing the cocytus bolts will be important in maintaining the status quo.
Do a decent job though. If you're going to borrow an angle grinder, why not borrow a drill instead? I'll mail order you some epoxy resin, if you send me your address. Rock dust can be found underneath the cider soak in ample quantities. Simples.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Not only that; the picture I have of the drooling and sweating going on at keyboards composing responses makes me smile.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> Masterly thread management throughout!
>
> Masterly thread management throughout!
Not only that; the picture I have of the drooling and sweating going on at keyboards composing responses makes me smile.
In reply to midgets of the world unite:
There be a lot of bolt pulling to do in the Peak and more so on Yorkshire Limestone, the home of the retro-bolted route.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> As one of the people responsible for dissuading you from chopping the first set of bolts, I'd like to say I fully support the removal of the new bolts from cocytus. In fact, I'm probably in favour of seeing them all come out at this point - it would be a good idea to push the wedge in the opposite direction for a change.
>
> As one of the people responsible for dissuading you from chopping the first set of bolts, I'd like to say I fully support the removal of the new bolts from cocytus. In fact, I'm probably in favour of seeing them all come out at this point - it would be a good idea to push the wedge in the opposite direction for a change.
There be a lot of bolt pulling to do in the Peak and more so on Yorkshire Limestone, the home of the retro-bolted route.
In reply to Ed Brighteldman:
Getting a consensus of climbers who agree with you is easy - there again, how many is a consensus actually....3, 5, 7, 12?
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> OK I'll retract that bit, it wasn't important.
>
> If I were you I would just hold off for a few months, see if you can find a consensus amongst people you respect (preferably the local scene)
>
> OK I'll retract that bit, it wasn't important.
>
> If I were you I would just hold off for a few months, see if you can find a consensus amongst people you respect (preferably the local scene)
Getting a consensus of climbers who agree with you is easy - there again, how many is a consensus actually....3, 5, 7, 12?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Why don't we all meet up down at anstey's and have a go at the route with the bolts taped and see what the consensus is.
I would bet that we would all have a good wobble or two even if we have climbed it before.(e4 anyone?)
Why is it so important to respect the first ascenders wishes when it was pegged into a safe state in the first place.(assuming the original pegs were sound)
Either chop the lot and place it back into it's natural state or let it stand and enjoy it for what it is which is a slightly pokey bridging corner,after all it's not like it's the best route in the world,or even at anstey's is it?
Why don't we all meet up down at anstey's and have a go at the route with the bolts taped and see what the consensus is.
I would bet that we would all have a good wobble or two even if we have climbed it before.(e4 anyone?)
Why is it so important to respect the first ascenders wishes when it was pegged into a safe state in the first place.(assuming the original pegs were sound)
Either chop the lot and place it back into it's natural state or let it stand and enjoy it for what it is which is a slightly pokey bridging corner,after all it's not like it's the best route in the world,or even at anstey's is it?
In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:
Can anyone remind me what the position is on this, or at least the BMC position? I'm hopelessly out of touch, obviously, but back in the mists of time I seem to recall that we agreed we weren't going to do this sort of thing. Or maybe I have that all wrong and what we actually agreed was that it was OK to bolt previously trad routes if that was more in keeping with the local feeling.
> (In reply to midgets of the world unite)
> [...]
>
> There be a lot of bolt pulling to do in the Peak and more so on Yorkshire Limestone, the home of the retro-bolted route.
> [...]
>
> There be a lot of bolt pulling to do in the Peak and more so on Yorkshire Limestone, the home of the retro-bolted route.
Can anyone remind me what the position is on this, or at least the BMC position? I'm hopelessly out of touch, obviously, but back in the mists of time I seem to recall that we agreed we weren't going to do this sort of thing. Or maybe I have that all wrong and what we actually agreed was that it was OK to bolt previously trad routes if that was more in keeping with the local feeling.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
The current position (formulated in 1999?) as outlined on the BMC website is:
"It is the policy of the BMC that the use of bolts and other drilled equipment is only legitimate on certain agreed quarried crags and agreed sections of certain limestone crags. Lists of agreed locations will be maintained by the local area committees.
The BMC is firmly opposed to retrospective bolting (i.e. changing the character of a route by placing fixed equipment where none was previously used). Climbs should only be re-equipped on a basis of common consent established at open forums."
A new drilled equipment position statement is currently being discussed through the BMC National Council and the BMC area meetings
The current position (formulated in 1999?) as outlined on the BMC website is:
"It is the policy of the BMC that the use of bolts and other drilled equipment is only legitimate on certain agreed quarried crags and agreed sections of certain limestone crags. Lists of agreed locations will be maintained by the local area committees.
The BMC is firmly opposed to retrospective bolting (i.e. changing the character of a route by placing fixed equipment where none was previously used). Climbs should only be re-equipped on a basis of common consent established at open forums."
A new drilled equipment position statement is currently being discussed through the BMC National Council and the BMC area meetings
In reply to Andy Say:
Tell a lie.....1992.
Tell a lie.....1992.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Before anyone does any chopping they need to a) find out what the local bolting rules are, and b) speak to the first ascentionist and c) speak to Ken Palmer. Only once all the information is in place should anything be done about it. To act without good info is very bad - for all we know Ken may have spoken to Pat and been told to do it!
In reply to Dave Garnett:
The BMC have a position, a BMC area committee may have a position, but that doesn't mean - it never has - that individual climbers have to abide by these guidelines.
In fact they don't, but who is going to police crags and routes: very few.
We are how we are through peer pressure and the actions or inactivity of individual climbers.
So Cocytus gets bolts added to it by an individual climber, then these bolts are pulled (or not) by an individual climber. That's how it works.
The retro bolts, both trad routes now bolted and extra bolts added to routes, in the Peak and Yorkshire, are still there and have been for a while. Does that mean that there is a consensus to allow retro-bolting of trad routes in Yorkshire and the Peak? Some could read it that way.
The BMC have a position, a BMC area committee may have a position, but that doesn't mean - it never has - that individual climbers have to abide by these guidelines.
In fact they don't, but who is going to police crags and routes: very few.
We are how we are through peer pressure and the actions or inactivity of individual climbers.
So Cocytus gets bolts added to it by an individual climber, then these bolts are pulled (or not) by an individual climber. That's how it works.
The retro bolts, both trad routes now bolted and extra bolts added to routes, in the Peak and Yorkshire, are still there and have been for a while. Does that mean that there is a consensus to allow retro-bolting of trad routes in Yorkshire and the Peak? Some could read it that way.
In reply to Toerag:
Well, I can help you with (a) – there aren’t any. Contacting Pat L was dealt with higher up the thread. It seems pretty unlikely to me he’s given his consent for two reasons – first of all it doesn’t seem like him, and secondly in the earlier thread a number of posters who appear to be locals said that the anonymous bolter was ‘testing the water’, which doesn’t sound like someone who’s obtained the FA’s consent. Still, I agree; in fact I’ve told PL what I intend and if he doesn’t like it no doubt he can tell me. I’m not so sure about talking to Ken P since I don’t actually know they’re his bolts; if people prefer to work anonymously then in a way that might suggest they don’t want to get to drawn into discussion.
In reply to various people; OK, ‘rock dust’ seems to be a posh word for what I would call ‘gravel’. I had something more specialised in mind.
In reply to devonshirepiemuncher: I don’t mind meeting up though I don’t know that a consensus of people there on a given day has much value. As for the first ascensionist’s wishes being respected, I think most people feel first ascensionists contribute a lot to climbing and it’s cool in return to give them a say. Especially when they’re arguably the greatest local pioneer and certainly the greatest ever sea-cliff pioneer.
Meanwhile, just for fun, here’s a link to an article in Climber about Torbay trad climbing.
http://www.climber.co.uk/categories/articleitem.asp?cate=1&topic=16&...
jcm
Well, I can help you with (a) – there aren’t any. Contacting Pat L was dealt with higher up the thread. It seems pretty unlikely to me he’s given his consent for two reasons – first of all it doesn’t seem like him, and secondly in the earlier thread a number of posters who appear to be locals said that the anonymous bolter was ‘testing the water’, which doesn’t sound like someone who’s obtained the FA’s consent. Still, I agree; in fact I’ve told PL what I intend and if he doesn’t like it no doubt he can tell me. I’m not so sure about talking to Ken P since I don’t actually know they’re his bolts; if people prefer to work anonymously then in a way that might suggest they don’t want to get to drawn into discussion.
In reply to various people; OK, ‘rock dust’ seems to be a posh word for what I would call ‘gravel’. I had something more specialised in mind.
In reply to devonshirepiemuncher: I don’t mind meeting up though I don’t know that a consensus of people there on a given day has much value. As for the first ascensionist’s wishes being respected, I think most people feel first ascensionists contribute a lot to climbing and it’s cool in return to give them a say. Especially when they’re arguably the greatest local pioneer and certainly the greatest ever sea-cliff pioneer.
Meanwhile, just for fun, here’s a link to an article in Climber about Torbay trad climbing.
http://www.climber.co.uk/categories/articleitem.asp?cate=1&topic=16&...
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I'm in favour of leaving the new bolts in.
While it's not particularly relevant to the issue, I did the route (including the unpleasant original top pitch)when it had the pegs for protection and also when there were two bolts. I also did it last Sunday and it seemed a much better balanced route, with a steep and exciting finish which contrasts nicely with the lower groove but is broadly similar in difficulty. The interest in the original main pitch fizzles out two thirds of the way up the groove.
But my main reason is that the retro-bolting didn't seem a shocking and inappropriate act for this route on this crag. I'm generally against the proliferation of bolts but it's too easy to trot out the "thin edge of the wedge" argument. It may be a bit nebulous, but I think most active climbers in an area have a strong sense of what is or isn't acceptable and for me this falls on the acceptable side of the line.
Weren't Mayday and Thread Flintstone at Torbryan originally climbed with threads and wires for protection? If so,you could argue that the bolts on those routes should be chopped. After all,if something is wrong, it doesn't necessarily become acceptable purely because of the passage of time(ask Stuart Hall). But I don't think there would be much support for chopping the bolts on those routes.
I'm in favour of leaving the new bolts in.
While it's not particularly relevant to the issue, I did the route (including the unpleasant original top pitch)when it had the pegs for protection and also when there were two bolts. I also did it last Sunday and it seemed a much better balanced route, with a steep and exciting finish which contrasts nicely with the lower groove but is broadly similar in difficulty. The interest in the original main pitch fizzles out two thirds of the way up the groove.
But my main reason is that the retro-bolting didn't seem a shocking and inappropriate act for this route on this crag. I'm generally against the proliferation of bolts but it's too easy to trot out the "thin edge of the wedge" argument. It may be a bit nebulous, but I think most active climbers in an area have a strong sense of what is or isn't acceptable and for me this falls on the acceptable side of the line.
Weren't Mayday and Thread Flintstone at Torbryan originally climbed with threads and wires for protection? If so,you could argue that the bolts on those routes should be chopped. After all,if something is wrong, it doesn't necessarily become acceptable purely because of the passage of time(ask Stuart Hall). But I don't think there would be much support for chopping the bolts on those routes.
In reply to Brian H:
>Well, as to Mayday and FF, I don’t know, but I’ve always imagined the retroing had the FA’s consent. And they weren’t famous trad classics put up 37 years ago by climbers of enormous repute well-known for never placing bolts.
It would be interesting to know if the FFA even placed the pegs. They may well have been there from the aided ascent.
As to TEOTW, no-one is saying this is the TEOTW. If anything, it’s the thick part. But rumour has it the bolter himself described this as ‘testing the waters’. It's hard not to wonder what he has in mind next, if so. Call to Arms, anybody?
jcm
>Well, as to Mayday and FF, I don’t know, but I’ve always imagined the retroing had the FA’s consent. And they weren’t famous trad classics put up 37 years ago by climbers of enormous repute well-known for never placing bolts.
It would be interesting to know if the FFA even placed the pegs. They may well have been there from the aided ascent.
As to TEOTW, no-one is saying this is the TEOTW. If anything, it’s the thick part. But rumour has it the bolter himself described this as ‘testing the waters’. It's hard not to wonder what he has in mind next, if so. Call to Arms, anybody?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Yes, it would be interesting to know the full history of Mayday and Thread and I'm sure there are UKCers who can tell us.
When I say this whole issue is a bit nebulous I can think of two similar instances at Anstey's which fall either side of the line of acceptability, ie the new bolt at the start of Empire (acceptable in my book) and the prospect of placing a new bolt to protect the start of Devonshire Cream (definitely unacceptable IMO). The bolt in Empire is still there but I would be willing to bet that if a bolt were added to DC there would be a queue of people lining up to chop it immediately. History and respect for the original or established way of climbing routes do come into it, as it would be logical for someone coming fresh to the scene without any background knowledge to consider both routes should be treated in the same way.
I don't think there is a big queue intending to chop the bolts on Cocytus, just you, with a few supporters so far. Mind you, my views may be totally unrepresentative of the majority and I can't say that I would have a very strong objection to neat removal of the bolts.
Yes, it would be interesting to know the full history of Mayday and Thread and I'm sure there are UKCers who can tell us.
When I say this whole issue is a bit nebulous I can think of two similar instances at Anstey's which fall either side of the line of acceptability, ie the new bolt at the start of Empire (acceptable in my book) and the prospect of placing a new bolt to protect the start of Devonshire Cream (definitely unacceptable IMO). The bolt in Empire is still there but I would be willing to bet that if a bolt were added to DC there would be a queue of people lining up to chop it immediately. History and respect for the original or established way of climbing routes do come into it, as it would be logical for someone coming fresh to the scene without any background knowledge to consider both routes should be treated in the same way.
I don't think there is a big queue intending to chop the bolts on Cocytus, just you, with a few supporters so far. Mind you, my views may be totally unrepresentative of the majority and I can't say that I would have a very strong objection to neat removal of the bolts.
In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:
I thought the Yorkshire stuff was discussed at their area meeting? Peak stuff certainly is (when away from agreed locations or straying too close to trad lines).
I agree with others that whoever removes the bolts should do the job propely (drill, lever and re-fill).
I thought the Yorkshire stuff was discussed at their area meeting? Peak stuff certainly is (when away from agreed locations or straying too close to trad lines).
I agree with others that whoever removes the bolts should do the job propely (drill, lever and re-fill).
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Seeing as you appear to be canvassing opinion, you can add a +1 to 'I'm not that fussed, do what the locals think' but what I'd be right pissed off about is if we end up with the intentional creation of a sharp hazard for ropes/people in order to make a point, which is the ultimatum you appear to be delivering.
> Sure. My idea of how to get a consensus is to post on here and see what people say.
> As far as I can see at the moment, the local view is 'well, we were a bit surprised when they appeared as well, but we don't care too much either way', and the non-local view is in favour of removal, with one dissenting voice.
Seeing as you appear to be canvassing opinion, you can add a +1 to 'I'm not that fussed, do what the locals think' but what I'd be right pissed off about is if we end up with the intentional creation of a sharp hazard for ropes/people in order to make a point, which is the ultimatum you appear to be delivering.
In reply to Offwidth:
I've never seen it in the minutes. Or on these forums for that matter - if a meeting approved the wide scale retro-bolting of a crag, I'd expect at least one thread on the subject.
> I thought the Yorkshire stuff was discussed at their area meeting?
I've never seen it in the minutes. Or on these forums for that matter - if a meeting approved the wide scale retro-bolting of a crag, I'd expect at least one thread on the subject.
In reply to Toreador:
Interesting reading comments regarding the state of retro-bolting trad routes in the Dales (sorry for further deviating from John's original topic). I've been contacted regarding this concerning some of my own FA's at Langcliffe Skyline and stated that I'm against. Unfortunately (in my view), they have already placed some bolts which can be clipped from at least one of these. Once this happens then the slippery slope for going the whole hog and 'finishing the job' cannot be too far away. I am beginning to subscribe to the 'thin end of the wedge' theory. It has happened at Giggleswick where some worthwhile trad routes are now redundant (City Limits is one). I respect and admire what the bolters have done in many places and enjoyed the results of their hard work and dedication (I'm no rabid anti-bolter by any stretch). However, I do think that some of them need to step back and think a bit more carefully about where this is all going? It may be nothing at all to do with lower grade sport climbing but places like Twisleton and Attermire are virtual ghost towns these days when sport venues are popular.
> (In reply to Offwidth)
> [...]
>
> I've never seen it in the minutes. Or on these forums for that matter - if a meeting approved the wide scale retro-bolting of a crag, I'd expect at least one thread on the subject.
> [...]
>
> I've never seen it in the minutes. Or on these forums for that matter - if a meeting approved the wide scale retro-bolting of a crag, I'd expect at least one thread on the subject.
Interesting reading comments regarding the state of retro-bolting trad routes in the Dales (sorry for further deviating from John's original topic). I've been contacted regarding this concerning some of my own FA's at Langcliffe Skyline and stated that I'm against. Unfortunately (in my view), they have already placed some bolts which can be clipped from at least one of these. Once this happens then the slippery slope for going the whole hog and 'finishing the job' cannot be too far away. I am beginning to subscribe to the 'thin end of the wedge' theory. It has happened at Giggleswick where some worthwhile trad routes are now redundant (City Limits is one). I respect and admire what the bolters have done in many places and enjoyed the results of their hard work and dedication (I'm no rabid anti-bolter by any stretch). However, I do think that some of them need to step back and think a bit more carefully about where this is all going? It may be nothing at all to do with lower grade sport climbing but places like Twisleton and Attermire are virtual ghost towns these days when sport venues are popular.
In reply to Toreador:
What happened to Toreador's law??
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=107568&v=1#x1489103
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=102050&v=1#x1398052
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=100074&v=1#x1370902
etc...
What happened to Toreador's law??
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=107568&v=1#x1489103
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=102050&v=1#x1398052
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=100074&v=1#x1370902
etc...
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Actually, I used the term but that was in response to a blatantly TEOTW argument being proposed in favour of bolting E3s because there weren't enough easy sport routes generally.
> (In reply to Brian H)
>
> As to TEOTW, no-one is saying this is the TEOTW.
>
> As to TEOTW, no-one is saying this is the TEOTW.
Actually, I used the term but that was in response to a blatantly TEOTW argument being proposed in favour of bolting E3s because there weren't enough easy sport routes generally.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
As this thread has lasted such a long time I guess as a south Devon chap I should throw my pennys worth in.....
I find it sad to see routes loose their character, added bolts on Cocytus is an example of this, as is Empire, and would be on American express or Devonshire cream if they were ever done. A great deal of the experience of the routes is managing the runouts and bold bits, they are all sport routes - with a little bit more, not unlike the more extreme example of the Slate as it once was. It's interesting to hear that there would be more of an outcry if Devonshire cream had a bolt or two added, why? what's the difference? Can anyone explain?
Another point; would the tone of this thread be any different if the bolter was known to be a random punter that perhaps no one on here had ever heard of?
With reference to bolt removal..... I'm not personally advocating anything either way, the bolts are in now, so I guess would just shrug and get on with climbing. However if you are going to remove staples, stainless is very difficult to work with a grinder much harder with a drill unless you attack the rock around which will be very messy. I work with Epoxy resins in my day to day work, I would always use heat for clean up or separating joints. If you were to use a blowtorch on the end of the staple away from the rock, the staple would conduct the heat down its shaft and break down the epoxy bond, you would the be able with a long lever through the bolt to twist it and pull out perhaps with a small lever bar or claw hammer. With this method you would be left with just the original hole to fill (10mm?) and some undamaged bolts (possible tempered damage, check that out) which you could use again to bolt, say, Call to arms perhaps..... A blowtorch is obviously unattractive on the end of a nylon rope so be careful, a couple of metres of chain?
I've spent my time writing all this not because I'm desperate for bolts to be removed, rather it wasn't done in a way that will not detract from the route and the rock any more than need be.
Jb.
Ps. I guess its also a call to us all to get on all those fantastic trad routes down here, give them some life and fend off that wedge that keeps popping up.
As this thread has lasted such a long time I guess as a south Devon chap I should throw my pennys worth in.....
I find it sad to see routes loose their character, added bolts on Cocytus is an example of this, as is Empire, and would be on American express or Devonshire cream if they were ever done. A great deal of the experience of the routes is managing the runouts and bold bits, they are all sport routes - with a little bit more, not unlike the more extreme example of the Slate as it once was. It's interesting to hear that there would be more of an outcry if Devonshire cream had a bolt or two added, why? what's the difference? Can anyone explain?
Another point; would the tone of this thread be any different if the bolter was known to be a random punter that perhaps no one on here had ever heard of?
With reference to bolt removal..... I'm not personally advocating anything either way, the bolts are in now, so I guess would just shrug and get on with climbing. However if you are going to remove staples, stainless is very difficult to work with a grinder much harder with a drill unless you attack the rock around which will be very messy. I work with Epoxy resins in my day to day work, I would always use heat for clean up or separating joints. If you were to use a blowtorch on the end of the staple away from the rock, the staple would conduct the heat down its shaft and break down the epoxy bond, you would the be able with a long lever through the bolt to twist it and pull out perhaps with a small lever bar or claw hammer. With this method you would be left with just the original hole to fill (10mm?) and some undamaged bolts (possible tempered damage, check that out) which you could use again to bolt, say, Call to arms perhaps..... A blowtorch is obviously unattractive on the end of a nylon rope so be careful, a couple of metres of chain?
I've spent my time writing all this not because I'm desperate for bolts to be removed, rather it wasn't done in a way that will not detract from the route and the rock any more than need be.
Jb.
Ps. I guess its also a call to us all to get on all those fantastic trad routes down here, give them some life and fend off that wedge that keeps popping up.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Or stop caring. It's not worth the effort. If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing. Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless. Especially in such a hilarious manner as topic creator tends to hand wring. If they started bolting the entirety of say Pembroke then fair does have a whinge, this route looks like an esoteric route that isn't that great trad but could make a good sport route. The hard edged traditionalists who don't climb any more need to stop being luddites as much as "modern" climbers need to stop dry tooling bare rock.
Or stop caring. It's not worth the effort. If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing. Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless. Especially in such a hilarious manner as topic creator tends to hand wring. If they started bolting the entirety of say Pembroke then fair does have a whinge, this route looks like an esoteric route that isn't that great trad but could make a good sport route. The hard edged traditionalists who don't climb any more need to stop being luddites as much as "modern" climbers need to stop dry tooling bare rock.
In reply to Kid Spatula:
Oh dear.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> Or stop caring. It's not worth the effort. If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing. Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless.
>
> Or stop caring. It's not worth the effort. If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing. Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless.
Oh dear.
In reply to Kid Spatula:
>If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing
It didn't. Anyway, you're talking rubbish. Poetry Pink, for example.
>If they started bolting the entirety of say Pembroke then fair does have a whinge,
You realise of course that at one time 'they' (well OK then, Gary Gibson) were indeed on course to bolt a fair bit of Pembroke, and were stopped only because a group of climbers started taking out all his bolts?
>this route looks like an esoteric route that isn't that great trad but could make a good sport route.
Why say this sort of thing when you've no idea? It's a good trad route which has had lots of ascents in that style for the last forty years. I'm sure it's also a good sport route; it's just a good route. Left Wall would be a good sport route, I dare say.
jcm
>If a route had two bolts in originally then bolting it means nothing
It didn't. Anyway, you're talking rubbish. Poetry Pink, for example.
>If they started bolting the entirety of say Pembroke then fair does have a whinge,
You realise of course that at one time 'they' (well OK then, Gary Gibson) were indeed on course to bolt a fair bit of Pembroke, and were stopped only because a group of climbers started taking out all his bolts?
>this route looks like an esoteric route that isn't that great trad but could make a good sport route.
Why say this sort of thing when you've no idea? It's a good trad route which has had lots of ascents in that style for the last forty years. I'm sure it's also a good sport route; it's just a good route. Left Wall would be a good sport route, I dare say.
jcm
In reply to Kid Spatula:
Well, JCM is proposing to do rather more than wring his hands about it.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless.
>
> Hand wringing over bolts is utterly pointless.
Well, JCM is proposing to do rather more than wring his hands about it.
In reply to Dave Garnett: Indeed. He's prepared to leave a couple of sharp pieces of steel sticking out from the rock, which might well cut a falling climber.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Yes it is widely known that Ken bolted Cocytus Direct and whilst I was not involved in the decision making I happened to be there at the completion of the job.
Having reviewed the thread a few things become apparent. It is generally agreed that Ken has generally been a force for good at Anstey's and that includes some of the recent bolts which enable new routes and link ups to be done. Thanks to Justin (Quadmyre) and Chris J for detailing this.
Anstey's is a finite resource and any new additions in the lower and middle grades have been enthusiastically received (eg. 50 logbook entries for Sunshine). Making best use of the available rock has been the guiding principle. Seeking consensus on such projects will simply ensure that nothing gets done. The Anstey's that today's climbers know and love is the product of individuals putting their necks on the line and doing things which may or may not meet with public approval. It is always noticeable that the loudest voices are the dissenters but for every one of those there are dozens of people who have quietly enjoyed the bolted routes. These have certainly not been ego driven projects (John). They have been hard work and done largely at personal expense. Obviously Pat Littlejohn can speak for himself but in conversation with Ken and myself he is surprisingly supportive about low grade bolting at Anstey's. His consent was not specifically sought for Cocytus but he did state retrospectively that he had no strong feelings about the latest bolts -”the battle having been lost long ago”.
The “popular trad classic” John so fondly recalls from yesteryear has always had a touch of the clip up feel to it. If he is looking to take a stance against bolting of a classic trad route then Cocytus seems an odd choice of battlefield. A comparison with Poetry Pink does not stand up to scrutiny. It has two bolts right where the leader is under pressure and two bolted belays (the top one badly positioned diagonally across a grass slope).The pegs were bomber in 73 and the original bolts restored the route to this state. The wire on the way to the bolts can be dispensed with – I certainly have on several occasions. The second pitch is rarely done despite having some good moves because of the poorly positioned belay. If it was a trad classic hardly anyone was treating it as such , instead they were lowering off at the first belay. In it's new state Cocytus has it's own lower off, a new 3 metres of sustained climbing which was sidestepped by the original route and it incorporates the good climbing of the second pitch. The motivation for the new bolts was to incorporate new climbing, reinstate the second pitch and add a sensibly positioned new lower off. The most contentious issue was placing the lowermost bolt. Had this not been done we would end up with more Anstey's silliness of a sport route with one trad gear placement. I think it is a better route fully bolted than the hybrid clip up it was. It will be more popular, that is for sure. It is open to debate whether this makes the best route possible here but few would argue that a badly executed hack job on the bolts will be an improvement. Certainly you will struggle to find much local support for such action.
Perhaps John should come down and climb Cocytus in all it's forms i.e. hybrid both pitches (he will need a second to clean it as he will be ignoring the new convenient lower off) and the new direct sport route. Of course he won't find a trad route to climb unless he tapes over all the bolts. Has John seriously laid down the gauntlet with the suggestion of a wire and cam only protected trad route of his own creation? I guess he can name it too! I'm sure he'll be thanked the length of the country by the hundreds of climbers adding it to their wishlists.
Yes it is widely known that Ken bolted Cocytus Direct and whilst I was not involved in the decision making I happened to be there at the completion of the job.
Having reviewed the thread a few things become apparent. It is generally agreed that Ken has generally been a force for good at Anstey's and that includes some of the recent bolts which enable new routes and link ups to be done. Thanks to Justin (Quadmyre) and Chris J for detailing this.
Anstey's is a finite resource and any new additions in the lower and middle grades have been enthusiastically received (eg. 50 logbook entries for Sunshine). Making best use of the available rock has been the guiding principle. Seeking consensus on such projects will simply ensure that nothing gets done. The Anstey's that today's climbers know and love is the product of individuals putting their necks on the line and doing things which may or may not meet with public approval. It is always noticeable that the loudest voices are the dissenters but for every one of those there are dozens of people who have quietly enjoyed the bolted routes. These have certainly not been ego driven projects (John). They have been hard work and done largely at personal expense. Obviously Pat Littlejohn can speak for himself but in conversation with Ken and myself he is surprisingly supportive about low grade bolting at Anstey's. His consent was not specifically sought for Cocytus but he did state retrospectively that he had no strong feelings about the latest bolts -”the battle having been lost long ago”.
The “popular trad classic” John so fondly recalls from yesteryear has always had a touch of the clip up feel to it. If he is looking to take a stance against bolting of a classic trad route then Cocytus seems an odd choice of battlefield. A comparison with Poetry Pink does not stand up to scrutiny. It has two bolts right where the leader is under pressure and two bolted belays (the top one badly positioned diagonally across a grass slope).The pegs were bomber in 73 and the original bolts restored the route to this state. The wire on the way to the bolts can be dispensed with – I certainly have on several occasions. The second pitch is rarely done despite having some good moves because of the poorly positioned belay. If it was a trad classic hardly anyone was treating it as such , instead they were lowering off at the first belay. In it's new state Cocytus has it's own lower off, a new 3 metres of sustained climbing which was sidestepped by the original route and it incorporates the good climbing of the second pitch. The motivation for the new bolts was to incorporate new climbing, reinstate the second pitch and add a sensibly positioned new lower off. The most contentious issue was placing the lowermost bolt. Had this not been done we would end up with more Anstey's silliness of a sport route with one trad gear placement. I think it is a better route fully bolted than the hybrid clip up it was. It will be more popular, that is for sure. It is open to debate whether this makes the best route possible here but few would argue that a badly executed hack job on the bolts will be an improvement. Certainly you will struggle to find much local support for such action.
Perhaps John should come down and climb Cocytus in all it's forms i.e. hybrid both pitches (he will need a second to clean it as he will be ignoring the new convenient lower off) and the new direct sport route. Of course he won't find a trad route to climb unless he tapes over all the bolts. Has John seriously laid down the gauntlet with the suggestion of a wire and cam only protected trad route of his own creation? I guess he can name it too! I'm sure he'll be thanked the length of the country by the hundreds of climbers adding it to their wishlists.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
He's not actually going to do anything though is he? As per usual he'll get overly angry to hilarious levels and then find something else to whine and throw out insults about. It's white noise.
He's not actually going to do anything though is he? As per usual he'll get overly angry to hilarious levels and then find something else to whine and throw out insults about. It's white noise.
In reply to Kafoozalem:
Pretty clearly if Littlejohn had been asked then all this discussion would have been moot. Seems a bit odd (at least to non-locals), but you are probably right that this seems less controversial locally.
I have to say that you've put the most reasonable and persuasive argument so far in favour of full retrobolting, but I do still have a problem with the relentless pressure in this direction. It tends to entrench opinion on both sides if agreements are not kept to. Maybe it's true that crags are either sport or trad and that the mixed format doesn't, ultimately, really work. I'd be very sorry to see this spread along to the bold slab routes on Long Quarry Point though.
You're about to tell me it already has, aren't you?!
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
Obviously Pat Littlejohn can speak for himself but in conversation with Ken and myself he is surprisingly supportive about low grade bolting at Anstey's. His consent was not specifically sought for Cocytus but he did state retrospectively that he had no strong feelings about the latest bolts -”the battle having been lost long ago”.>
>
Pretty clearly if Littlejohn had been asked then all this discussion would have been moot. Seems a bit odd (at least to non-locals), but you are probably right that this seems less controversial locally.
I have to say that you've put the most reasonable and persuasive argument so far in favour of full retrobolting, but I do still have a problem with the relentless pressure in this direction. It tends to entrench opinion on both sides if agreements are not kept to. Maybe it's true that crags are either sport or trad and that the mixed format doesn't, ultimately, really work. I'd be very sorry to see this spread along to the bold slab routes on Long Quarry Point though.
You're about to tell me it already has, aren't you?!
In reply to Offwidth:
To save me looking, does any of those mention an agreement to retrobolt the trad routes at Giggleswick South? I'd guess not, since the deed's been done relatively recently, not as far back as 2004.
I doubt that the stealth retro-bolting of High Stoney Bank is mentioned either.
To save me looking, does any of those mention an agreement to retrobolt the trad routes at Giggleswick South? I'd guess not, since the deed's been done relatively recently, not as far back as 2004.
I doubt that the stealth retro-bolting of High Stoney Bank is mentioned either.
In reply to Toreador:
In reply to Toreador:
They've what? Not the upper crag surely?
In reply to Toreador:
> (In reply to Offwidth)
> To save me looking, does any of those mention an agreement to retrobolt the trad routes at Giggleswick South? I'd guess not, since the deed's been done relatively recently, not as far back as 2004.
> To save me looking, does any of those mention an agreement to retrobolt the trad routes at Giggleswick South? I'd guess not, since the deed's been done relatively recently, not as far back as 2004.
They've what? Not the upper crag surely?
In reply to Andy Say:
Not last time I was there, but that was a year ago so who knows, it's just a question of time. One of the HVSs seemed to have some bolts very close by.
Not last time I was there, but that was a year ago so who knows, it's just a question of time. One of the HVSs seemed to have some bolts very close by.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
It has. Up the Styx and Shadow Beast were retroed recently.
jcm
> You're about to tell me it already has, aren't you?!
It has. Up the Styx and Shadow Beast were retroed recently.
jcm
In reply to Kafoozalem:
Pete, thanks for posting.
It never occurred to me this could be Ken's work, partly because I thought (and still think) it was so crass it couldn't be the work of someone of his status, and partly because I assumed that if he wanted to make Cocytus a sport route he would have done it on one of the last two occasions he put bolts into it. If it had occurred to me then I'd have adopted a different tone.
I hear what you say about consensus, but by the same token if you don't consult anyone you can't really complain if someone debolts what you've done without consulting anyone.
Having said that, I still can't understand why this has been done at all. I don't quite understand the problem with the second pitch; when I did it I led this pitch and thought nothing of it, and so did my mate when he and his girlfriend did it. I'm sure lots of people lower off, but that's because the American Express lower-off is right there and it saves having to walk round. I don't believe for a moment the location of the top belay is a big factor. Even if you take the view there's some kind of problem, it's certainly not necessary to put the first or fourth bolts in and it doesn't sound as though it's necessary to put bolts by the top crack either. That's just commoditising the thing so that people don't need to bother bringing racks.
I get rather tired of people pretending routes can't be trad with one or two bolts in, but call it hybrid if you will. I don't agree that that's 'Anstey's silliness'. No-one thinks Devonshire Cream is Anstey's silliness.
My impression is that there was no gear in it in 2000 when I did it and that there must have been some reasonable protection. But it may be my recollection is wrong. I certainly intend to check that before doing anything and I shan't remove the 2001 bolts unles my impression is correct.
I didn't compare it to Poetry Pink; that was just the first route I thought of to refute Kid Spatula's nonsense. I said why I feel strongly about Cocytus - it's the only route I've personally driven 200 miles to do and arrived to find retroed, and it's the only route I've ever thought seriously about debolting before and been dissuaded by assurances (not given by KP, to be fair) which now turn out to have been false.
So, suppose, this water-testing goes well, did KP tell you anything about his next plans? I have a feeling I know the answer to this already, but - Blonde Bombshell? Lumpy Universe? Moonshot? The Mitre? Where does it stop, if anywhere?
jcm
Pete, thanks for posting.
It never occurred to me this could be Ken's work, partly because I thought (and still think) it was so crass it couldn't be the work of someone of his status, and partly because I assumed that if he wanted to make Cocytus a sport route he would have done it on one of the last two occasions he put bolts into it. If it had occurred to me then I'd have adopted a different tone.
I hear what you say about consensus, but by the same token if you don't consult anyone you can't really complain if someone debolts what you've done without consulting anyone.
Having said that, I still can't understand why this has been done at all. I don't quite understand the problem with the second pitch; when I did it I led this pitch and thought nothing of it, and so did my mate when he and his girlfriend did it. I'm sure lots of people lower off, but that's because the American Express lower-off is right there and it saves having to walk round. I don't believe for a moment the location of the top belay is a big factor. Even if you take the view there's some kind of problem, it's certainly not necessary to put the first or fourth bolts in and it doesn't sound as though it's necessary to put bolts by the top crack either. That's just commoditising the thing so that people don't need to bother bringing racks.
I get rather tired of people pretending routes can't be trad with one or two bolts in, but call it hybrid if you will. I don't agree that that's 'Anstey's silliness'. No-one thinks Devonshire Cream is Anstey's silliness.
My impression is that there was no gear in it in 2000 when I did it and that there must have been some reasonable protection. But it may be my recollection is wrong. I certainly intend to check that before doing anything and I shan't remove the 2001 bolts unles my impression is correct.
I didn't compare it to Poetry Pink; that was just the first route I thought of to refute Kid Spatula's nonsense. I said why I feel strongly about Cocytus - it's the only route I've personally driven 200 miles to do and arrived to find retroed, and it's the only route I've ever thought seriously about debolting before and been dissuaded by assurances (not given by KP, to be fair) which now turn out to have been false.
So, suppose, this water-testing goes well, did KP tell you anything about his next plans? I have a feeling I know the answer to this already, but - Blonde Bombshell? Lumpy Universe? Moonshot? The Mitre? Where does it stop, if anywhere?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
John
I see your UKC profile opens with "Acid-tongued traditionalist bigot". Quite apt given the awful tone of your posts on this thread. You've done yourself a diservice. Perhaps it's a London thing.
Anyway, in relation to Cocytus, when I first started climbing (at Ansteys) in 1993 (Big Jim, Tiny Tim, Little John and the like), there were either the two original pegs or the two Petzls that replaced them in basically the same place (I can't recall now). Someone later hacked the Petzls leaving the bolt stubs dangerously sticking out and the first pitch without the two fixed gear placements it had for decades. Two appalling pegs were later placed in the basically the same place as the previous pegs/Petzls before those were finally replaced with the staples that have been there ever since (presumably at the time when most of the Ansteys Petzls were replaced with staples?). So it's always had two bits of fixed gear on the first pitch in basically the same place.
I climbed the route as an E2-6a four years ago fulfilling a dream hatched in the school library in 1993. It was one of those amazing Ansteys mornings - sunny, blue sky but a fresh easterly making the fricton in the usually soapy groove unusually brilliant. A great experience for a total punter like me.
So when the additional bolts went in, I felt sad because I felt it had taken and would take away some of the character of the route.
But since then, I've become somewhat ambivalent about the new bolts. The first and fourth are right next to the previous bomber first and fourth gear placements (shock horror - bolts next to good gear placements - TEOTW) and the second and third are the same staples that have been there for years. There are no new bolts in between the previous gear placements/bolts.
On reflection, my head finds it hard to say that the first pitch is, in reality, any different to when I led it as a trad route, despite what my heart wants to say. The Rock 3 and cam were just as bomber as the bolts and vice versa.
The two or three new bolts above the fourth lead into the top part of the old second pitch but sensibly reach a double-bolt lower-off just below the top, thereby avoidng the need to thrash through the jungle above in search of the mythical top belay.
In all my years climbing at Ansteys, I've only ever seen one person climbing the old second pitch - some poor sod from the Peak who, having whimpered up the first pitch with frequent wails of "This isn't E2 - it's solid, bold E5-6a climbing", then had a coronary on the second pitch (first a hold broke off, then he topped-out into the jungle, spent 5 fruitless minutes trying to find the belay before climbing back over the edge and lowering-off the single bolt and crappy chockstone thread at the top of More Steam...). Most people just did the first pitch and lowered off from the double-bolt belay of Amex/Torbay(which was definitely there in 1993 because I tried to set up a top rope on Cocytus by wibbling across Aornis).
In fact, when I say most people, that makes it sound like the route is popular. It wasn't, isn't and never will be in the same way that Empire, Just Revenge, Might and Main and Cider Soak are popular. It's rare to see parties walk down the hill to that bit of the crag. Cocytus is most people's stuff of nightmares - with or without any additional bolts. Technical finger-tip laybacking whilst smearing on soapy, polished rock with spicy run outs between the gear (whether that's trad or bolts). The new first and fourth bolts do nothing to alleviate the run outs because they're next to the old first and fourth placements.
It'll become a 6c warm-up, you cry. Not a hope in hell for the reasons outlined in the last paragraph. It hasn't yet become that after the year or two of the new bolts and never will be. The average wall-bred climber doesn't seem to get far beyond the now second bolt - if they can make it that far. They don't teach you this sort of stuff at walls. It reminds me of the God-foresaken Evening Mistress at The Cuttings. As a warm-up, it's even worse than Mayday at Torbryan (which is saying something - how many have got spanked by the flash pump on that crux when warming-up?!).
Apparently, according to the guide, Might and Main is the Ansteys 6c warm-up. Ha! I've lost count of the number of furrineerz (to use a Nick Whiteism) I've seen who have royally pooped themselves on that particular number. It seems to have got so bad that someone chopped the tree that used to await a fluffed-up clip on the first... and the second... and the third... oh and also the fourth bolts!
The only warm ups at Ansteys are End of and Era (please - don't make me laugh - who can seriously derive pleasure from glued-on choss?), Empire when it's dry (incredibly (for weaklings like me), that's what the majority seem to warm-up on these days, as reflected in the growing sheen) and Ken's fairly recent Blue Sky - an absolute horror-show of a lower grade sports route that I predict will catch an indoorsy-droogy right unawares quite soon.
So, you want to come down to chop the bolts at a crag which is hours away from where you live in relation to which you appear to have no discernible connection. If you still decide to do this:
1) Please leave the current second the third staples that have been there for years.
2) Please read and seek expert guidance about how to properly and safely chop the bolts. Otherwise, you're going to do a bad job and create a visual and dangerous mess far worse than the bolts that have offended you so much (it appears from reading the route description on UKC). No one wants another Carn Vellan de-bolting mess or a repeat of what happened when the Petzls were chopped.
3) Please leave the double-lower off on the first ledge of Amex/Torbay. As mentioned above, that's been there for decades and is the way down off those routes.
4) Please leave the new double-lower off at the top of Cocytus Direct. The two big staples are an infintiely-better lower-off for More Steam than the horrific, very sorry looking single staple and terrible chockstone thread that most people currently lower off from.
Kafoozalem - many thanks for another typically considered and understated reply. I wondered when you were going to post a counter-balancing thread.
Finally, as an antedote to the grimness of this thread, let's celebrate the route with this great piccy from last Saturday (the smoothest, calmest ascent I've ever seen - well done Tom - and a great piccy J). Hardly, what most would call a clip-up!
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=218706
John
I see your UKC profile opens with "Acid-tongued traditionalist bigot". Quite apt given the awful tone of your posts on this thread. You've done yourself a diservice. Perhaps it's a London thing.
Anyway, in relation to Cocytus, when I first started climbing (at Ansteys) in 1993 (Big Jim, Tiny Tim, Little John and the like), there were either the two original pegs or the two Petzls that replaced them in basically the same place (I can't recall now). Someone later hacked the Petzls leaving the bolt stubs dangerously sticking out and the first pitch without the two fixed gear placements it had for decades. Two appalling pegs were later placed in the basically the same place as the previous pegs/Petzls before those were finally replaced with the staples that have been there ever since (presumably at the time when most of the Ansteys Petzls were replaced with staples?). So it's always had two bits of fixed gear on the first pitch in basically the same place.
I climbed the route as an E2-6a four years ago fulfilling a dream hatched in the school library in 1993. It was one of those amazing Ansteys mornings - sunny, blue sky but a fresh easterly making the fricton in the usually soapy groove unusually brilliant. A great experience for a total punter like me.
So when the additional bolts went in, I felt sad because I felt it had taken and would take away some of the character of the route.
But since then, I've become somewhat ambivalent about the new bolts. The first and fourth are right next to the previous bomber first and fourth gear placements (shock horror - bolts next to good gear placements - TEOTW) and the second and third are the same staples that have been there for years. There are no new bolts in between the previous gear placements/bolts.
On reflection, my head finds it hard to say that the first pitch is, in reality, any different to when I led it as a trad route, despite what my heart wants to say. The Rock 3 and cam were just as bomber as the bolts and vice versa.
The two or three new bolts above the fourth lead into the top part of the old second pitch but sensibly reach a double-bolt lower-off just below the top, thereby avoidng the need to thrash through the jungle above in search of the mythical top belay.
In all my years climbing at Ansteys, I've only ever seen one person climbing the old second pitch - some poor sod from the Peak who, having whimpered up the first pitch with frequent wails of "This isn't E2 - it's solid, bold E5-6a climbing", then had a coronary on the second pitch (first a hold broke off, then he topped-out into the jungle, spent 5 fruitless minutes trying to find the belay before climbing back over the edge and lowering-off the single bolt and crappy chockstone thread at the top of More Steam...). Most people just did the first pitch and lowered off from the double-bolt belay of Amex/Torbay(which was definitely there in 1993 because I tried to set up a top rope on Cocytus by wibbling across Aornis).
In fact, when I say most people, that makes it sound like the route is popular. It wasn't, isn't and never will be in the same way that Empire, Just Revenge, Might and Main and Cider Soak are popular. It's rare to see parties walk down the hill to that bit of the crag. Cocytus is most people's stuff of nightmares - with or without any additional bolts. Technical finger-tip laybacking whilst smearing on soapy, polished rock with spicy run outs between the gear (whether that's trad or bolts). The new first and fourth bolts do nothing to alleviate the run outs because they're next to the old first and fourth placements.
It'll become a 6c warm-up, you cry. Not a hope in hell for the reasons outlined in the last paragraph. It hasn't yet become that after the year or two of the new bolts and never will be. The average wall-bred climber doesn't seem to get far beyond the now second bolt - if they can make it that far. They don't teach you this sort of stuff at walls. It reminds me of the God-foresaken Evening Mistress at The Cuttings. As a warm-up, it's even worse than Mayday at Torbryan (which is saying something - how many have got spanked by the flash pump on that crux when warming-up?!).
Apparently, according to the guide, Might and Main is the Ansteys 6c warm-up. Ha! I've lost count of the number of furrineerz (to use a Nick Whiteism) I've seen who have royally pooped themselves on that particular number. It seems to have got so bad that someone chopped the tree that used to await a fluffed-up clip on the first... and the second... and the third... oh and also the fourth bolts!
The only warm ups at Ansteys are End of and Era (please - don't make me laugh - who can seriously derive pleasure from glued-on choss?), Empire when it's dry (incredibly (for weaklings like me), that's what the majority seem to warm-up on these days, as reflected in the growing sheen) and Ken's fairly recent Blue Sky - an absolute horror-show of a lower grade sports route that I predict will catch an indoorsy-droogy right unawares quite soon.
So, you want to come down to chop the bolts at a crag which is hours away from where you live in relation to which you appear to have no discernible connection. If you still decide to do this:
1) Please leave the current second the third staples that have been there for years.
2) Please read and seek expert guidance about how to properly and safely chop the bolts. Otherwise, you're going to do a bad job and create a visual and dangerous mess far worse than the bolts that have offended you so much (it appears from reading the route description on UKC). No one wants another Carn Vellan de-bolting mess or a repeat of what happened when the Petzls were chopped.
3) Please leave the double-lower off on the first ledge of Amex/Torbay. As mentioned above, that's been there for decades and is the way down off those routes.
4) Please leave the new double-lower off at the top of Cocytus Direct. The two big staples are an infintiely-better lower-off for More Steam than the horrific, very sorry looking single staple and terrible chockstone thread that most people currently lower off from.
Kafoozalem - many thanks for another typically considered and understated reply. I wondered when you were going to post a counter-balancing thread.
Finally, as an antedote to the grimness of this thread, let's celebrate the route with this great piccy from last Saturday (the smoothest, calmest ascent I've ever seen - well done Tom - and a great piccy J). Hardly, what most would call a clip-up!
http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=218706
In reply to Cusco:
>You've done yourself a diservice.
Oh, nonsense. Don't be so pompous.
>Perhaps it's a London thing.
Not at all, I assure you.
You're probably right about the warm-up thing.
1) Please leave the current second the third staples that have been there for years.
I probably shall; it looks as though I was wrong to recall there was decent gear without them. I must have been satisfied with what you call the 'appalling' pegs.
2) Please read and seek expert guidance about how to properly and safely chop the bolts. Otherwise, you're going to do a bad job and create a visual and dangerous mess far worse than the bolts that have offended you so much.
The best way to avoid this is for people not to go in for controversial retrobolting. I've already said; I'll do my best. It isn't something you can practise.
3) Please leave the double-lower off on the first ledge of Amex/Torbay. As mentioned above, that's been there for decades and is the way down off those routes.
Yes, of course. I never suggested taking that out.
4) Please leave the new double-lower off at the top of Cocytus Direct. The two big staples are an infintiely-better lower-off for More Steam than the horrific, very sorry looking single staple and terrible chockstone thread that most people currently lower off from.
I agree; I never suggested taking that out either.
jcm
>You've done yourself a diservice.
Oh, nonsense. Don't be so pompous.
>Perhaps it's a London thing.
Not at all, I assure you.
You're probably right about the warm-up thing.
1) Please leave the current second the third staples that have been there for years.
I probably shall; it looks as though I was wrong to recall there was decent gear without them. I must have been satisfied with what you call the 'appalling' pegs.
2) Please read and seek expert guidance about how to properly and safely chop the bolts. Otherwise, you're going to do a bad job and create a visual and dangerous mess far worse than the bolts that have offended you so much.
The best way to avoid this is for people not to go in for controversial retrobolting. I've already said; I'll do my best. It isn't something you can practise.
3) Please leave the double-lower off on the first ledge of Amex/Torbay. As mentioned above, that's been there for decades and is the way down off those routes.
Yes, of course. I never suggested taking that out.
4) Please leave the new double-lower off at the top of Cocytus Direct. The two big staples are an infintiely-better lower-off for More Steam than the horrific, very sorry looking single staple and terrible chockstone thread that most people currently lower off from.
I agree; I never suggested taking that out either.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
John - in your suddenly measured reply to Kafoozalem you say:
"It never occurred to me this could be Ken's work... If it had occurred to me then I'd have adopted a different tone."
A number of posters (including Chris J) had pointed out that they thought it was Ken. Chris J had said "Not that the bolter's identity matters" to which you said:
"Oh, but it does. In lots of ways... So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing?"
I'm not sure how you reconcile that with your statement that you would have adopted a different tone throughout had you known it was Ken.
You did yourself a disservice by ranting after reading a route description on UKC from far away without actually seeing what was actually there, by being ignorant of the route's history of the two fixed placements (despite having apparently climbed it) and before canvassing local opinion.
Most locals who frequently climb at Ansteys are aware of who's put in which new bolts in the last few years (not all of them are Ken's - although the eco-staples left of Devonshire are nowt to do with me).
You have mentioned the controversy when the original two pegs were replaced by Petzls. I cannot recall any such controversy. Presuambly that was the same controversy that must have erupted when Devonshire's original two pegs were replaced with Petzls in much the same place, Empire was Petzled to replace the pegs and the Friend 3 placement, most of Torbryan was Petzled to replace the pegs, threads and natural gear etc etc?
Speaking of Devonshire, it's true that most locals would be incensed if a new first bolt were ever added and it probably wouldn't last 12 hours. But a new bolt isn't needed anyway. 18ft clip-sticks mean the first can be pre-clipped and this now seems to be the only way the route is climbed these days -as a relatively popular, pre-clipped 7a (in consequence of which the bottom is becoming increasingly polished).
Finally, thank you for the confirmations about which of the bolts on Cocytus you intend to chop and which you intend to leave.
Time to pack to go to Peru. Hopefully, Empire will be bone dry on my return.
John - in your suddenly measured reply to Kafoozalem you say:
"It never occurred to me this could be Ken's work... If it had occurred to me then I'd have adopted a different tone."
A number of posters (including Chris J) had pointed out that they thought it was Ken. Chris J had said "Not that the bolter's identity matters" to which you said:
"Oh, but it does. In lots of ways... So do you have any idea what the hell Ken P thinks he's doing?"
I'm not sure how you reconcile that with your statement that you would have adopted a different tone throughout had you known it was Ken.
You did yourself a disservice by ranting after reading a route description on UKC from far away without actually seeing what was actually there, by being ignorant of the route's history of the two fixed placements (despite having apparently climbed it) and before canvassing local opinion.
Most locals who frequently climb at Ansteys are aware of who's put in which new bolts in the last few years (not all of them are Ken's - although the eco-staples left of Devonshire are nowt to do with me).
You have mentioned the controversy when the original two pegs were replaced by Petzls. I cannot recall any such controversy. Presuambly that was the same controversy that must have erupted when Devonshire's original two pegs were replaced with Petzls in much the same place, Empire was Petzled to replace the pegs and the Friend 3 placement, most of Torbryan was Petzled to replace the pegs, threads and natural gear etc etc?
Speaking of Devonshire, it's true that most locals would be incensed if a new first bolt were ever added and it probably wouldn't last 12 hours. But a new bolt isn't needed anyway. 18ft clip-sticks mean the first can be pre-clipped and this now seems to be the only way the route is climbed these days -as a relatively popular, pre-clipped 7a (in consequence of which the bottom is becoming increasingly polished).
Finally, thank you for the confirmations about which of the bolts on Cocytus you intend to chop and which you intend to leave.
Time to pack to go to Peru. Hopefully, Empire will be bone dry on my return.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Hi John,
Thank you for your measured response.
"I hear what you say about consensus, but by the same token if you don't consult anyone you can't really complain if someone debolts what you've done without consulting anyone." Agreed. Ken knew he was sailing a bit close to the wind with this one and said exactly this at the time.
"it's certainly not necessary to put the first or fourth bolts in and it doesn't sound as though it's necessary to put bolts by the top crack either. That's just commoditising the thing so that people don't need to bother bringing racks". Yes to a degree that is true - certainly of the first bolt. The 4th bolt is there to protect the new gnarly section of crack I believe and probably wouldn't be clipped if you were stepping on to the Amex belay. I'd have to go and take a look to be absolutely sure of my facts here.
"Water testing" was probably not the best term to use (guilty). Ken thinks all the routes you listed are in their best incarnation. There are absolutely no plans to alter Blonde Bombshell, Lumpy Universe, Moonshot, Mitre or Devonshire Cream for that matter.
Hi John,
Thank you for your measured response.
"I hear what you say about consensus, but by the same token if you don't consult anyone you can't really complain if someone debolts what you've done without consulting anyone." Agreed. Ken knew he was sailing a bit close to the wind with this one and said exactly this at the time.
"it's certainly not necessary to put the first or fourth bolts in and it doesn't sound as though it's necessary to put bolts by the top crack either. That's just commoditising the thing so that people don't need to bother bringing racks". Yes to a degree that is true - certainly of the first bolt. The 4th bolt is there to protect the new gnarly section of crack I believe and probably wouldn't be clipped if you were stepping on to the Amex belay. I'd have to go and take a look to be absolutely sure of my facts here.
"Water testing" was probably not the best term to use (guilty). Ken thinks all the routes you listed are in their best incarnation. There are absolutely no plans to alter Blonde Bombshell, Lumpy Universe, Moonshot, Mitre or Devonshire Cream for that matter.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
If it turns out in the end that you really only take issue with the first bolt it seems rather a long drive to come and make that very minor change. Bolt 4 is technically on Cocytus Direct?
If it turns out in the end that you really only take issue with the first bolt it seems rather a long drive to come and make that very minor change. Bolt 4 is technically on Cocytus Direct?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Well, well. It does seem that the information provided to you right at the start of your evangelical nonsense was correct in the first place doesn't it. Now I'm not normally one to gloat (not really true) but your tone and dogged determination to antagonise make it difficult not to. I assume by your silence that you have either popped down to B and Q to purchase the vital equipment needed to carry out your botched bolt removal job and are currently speeding toward Torbay or you have decided that one of the world's other trouble spots requires your intervention.
James
By the way Pete. Many thanks for your patience and carefully worded responses.
> (In reply to mann9076)
>
> I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer, but only two bolts were put in to preserve its hybrid, slightly spicy, character.
>
> According to the UKC logbook, someone has now decided to go the whole hog and make it a total clip-up. This is not making 'a really good, safe route as it was when it was first freed in 1976'. It's converting it into a full-on clip-up.
>
> I think you're missing the point. It was retroed in 2001 or so, which was indeed Ken Palmer, but only two bolts were put in to preserve its hybrid, slightly spicy, character.
>
> According to the UKC logbook, someone has now decided to go the whole hog and make it a total clip-up. This is not making 'a really good, safe route as it was when it was first freed in 1976'. It's converting it into a full-on clip-up.
Well, well. It does seem that the information provided to you right at the start of your evangelical nonsense was correct in the first place doesn't it. Now I'm not normally one to gloat (not really true) but your tone and dogged determination to antagonise make it difficult not to. I assume by your silence that you have either popped down to B and Q to purchase the vital equipment needed to carry out your botched bolt removal job and are currently speeding toward Torbay or you have decided that one of the world's other trouble spots requires your intervention.
James
By the way Pete. Many thanks for your patience and carefully worded responses.
>
> jcm
> jcm
In reply to Cusco:
What are you talking about? Of course I know the route has 'always' had two fixed pieces of gear, except perhaps for the period after the first lot of bolts were chopped and before the second lot were put in, when I've said several times I can't remember whether someone had replaced the pegs or not.
As for not being able to recall the controversy when the first bolts were put in, surely you can at least recall that the bolts were chopped?! That sounds like a certain amount of controversy, no? According to midgets there were letters in the mags, which sounds quite likely, though I don't know.
As to my tone; if I had known it was Ken I would still have wondered aloud what the hell he thought he was doing. I wouldn't have called the bolter a bellend.
jcnm
What are you talking about? Of course I know the route has 'always' had two fixed pieces of gear, except perhaps for the period after the first lot of bolts were chopped and before the second lot were put in, when I've said several times I can't remember whether someone had replaced the pegs or not.
As for not being able to recall the controversy when the first bolts were put in, surely you can at least recall that the bolts were chopped?! That sounds like a certain amount of controversy, no? According to midgets there were letters in the mags, which sounds quite likely, though I don't know.
As to my tone; if I had known it was Ken I would still have wondered aloud what the hell he thought he was doing. I wouldn't have called the bolter a bellend.
jcnm
In reply to Kafoozalem:
Well I'll already have driven down to look, won't I? Besides, a weekend's climbing in Torbay is hardly a penance.
As to the 4th bolt being on Cocytus Direct, I don't agree that bolting direct finishes to existing trad routes is acceptable either. What was the problem with leaving the route as it was, putting in a new lower-off on More Steam and climbing up to it via this crack using gear in it?
jcm
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> If it turns out in the end that you really only take issue with the first bolt it seems rather a long drive to come and make that very minor change. Bolt 4 is technically on Cocytus Direct?
>
> If it turns out in the end that you really only take issue with the first bolt it seems rather a long drive to come and make that very minor change. Bolt 4 is technically on Cocytus Direct?
Well I'll already have driven down to look, won't I? Besides, a weekend's climbing in Torbay is hardly a penance.
As to the 4th bolt being on Cocytus Direct, I don't agree that bolting direct finishes to existing trad routes is acceptable either. What was the problem with leaving the route as it was, putting in a new lower-off on More Steam and climbing up to it via this crack using gear in it?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
This may be of interest...
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=548990
This may be of interest...
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=548990
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...