UKC

It's been announced on the local Inverness climbing partners Facebook page that an individual has added 12 sport routes to the previously trad only Glenmarksie crag in this lockdown. To me, it seems against mcos guidance of trad crags staying trad, and also guidance that local consultation should take place, instead of bolting the lines under lockdown when some are obeying the rules. 

I'm a bit miffed by all of this, Glenmarksie is my favourite local crag and it seems a shame people can't follow the mcos guidance for bolting and keep needing to push boundaries.

In reply to jonnie3430:

In theory, I don't have a fundamental problem with hybrid venues, or potentially even adding bolted abseil stations or lower-offs to trad routes... 

However, there's a damn good reason we have nationally agreed policies and a tradition of local consultation. Ignoring all that is just an invitation for a re-run of the bolt wars of the past with stuff being repeatedly and pointlessly chopped and replaced

PS crag link which was missing from the OP: Glenmarksie Crag

In reply to jonnie3430:

If I may play devils advocate here for a moment....
The majority of the bolted lines are on the steeper RH wall, which had previously only been broached by a single E7 route, up the obvious line of least resistance, bar Strategic Arms Limitation making its way up to the side. Does this make it 100% OK? No of course not.
There have also been some climbs bolted on a slab down and to the right of the steep wall. I initially dismissed these as being a bit pointless (and still do tbh as they're f3 and f4 or summin), however they'll provide pleasant enough easy climbs for beginners in a fantastic location.

I know its another contentious retro bolting discussion, but Ratho Quarry seems to have done well with the addition of the sport routes, with them being the most climbed routes in the quarry (and definitely not the best!).

I can only applaud the individuals (who will remain nameless) for the amount of work they've put into cleaning up the rest of the crag, as well as all the trimming back of bushes etc. At the end of the day Glenmarksie is a crag that suffers majorly from neglect, and the addition of these sport routes can only be a net positive in that it will increase traffic to the crag (which is probably the best easily accessable  trad crag in the area) and hopefully increase traffic on all the routes as it is "rediscovered" by the local scene.

I know it may appear a bit thin-end of the wedge'ish, but I truly believe these routes being bolted to be a good thing in the grand scheme of things for Inverness climbers. I know a certain J. R. Mackenzie was in favour of some bolts being added, and the overwhelming reaction from the scene up here has been positive. All the trad routes are still there (albeit in a slightly cleaner state than before!) as well if you want go and do those and ignore the bolts round the corner....
 

Let the downvotes commence....

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

Yes, I agree with all that. I'm not against hybrid crags per se, but Glenmarksie didn't leap out at me as an obvious choice. Consultation with others would have been very wise, although admittedly this can be tricky in Scotland as there's no single forum for such discussions to take place - so in my experience it often tends to end up with 'I asked people I know on Facebook and they didn't complain'. 

I only visited Glenmarksie for the first time last year and I'm finding it hard to imagine where you'd add a dozen sport routes.

I thought it was really good wee crag, in a lovely setting. Phobos and Deimos were particularly cool. I'd definitely use it again as a stopping-off point while going to the NW.

Does anyone know where the bolted lines are exactly? Any pictures?

D.

In reply to DannyC:

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/158253610_10164791677445623...

Topo here, yellow sport, red trad.
Theres an ongoing discussion on the Inverness Climbing Partners facebook group

In reply to finc00:

It hasn't been overwhelming positive at all, it has raised the question of why there was no consultation and can we make sure there is consultation! Agreed about the f3s, it seems every space for a bolted route has been bolted and still more they plan to do.

As for neglect, as you say, it's the best way access trad crag in the area, there was always bracken bashing at the start, but is it not okay for it not be perfectly pristine all the time? This is just new justification for bolting, getting more traffic at the crag. There's many other crags near there that do suffer majorly from neglect, Aspen and Scatwell, but they've left and the decent condition glenmarksie bolted to improve conditions!

And why slap it in people's faces as a done thing when we can get out when lockdown finishes? It doesn't seem thin end of the wedge, more ignoring the wedge completely and any history associated with it and just completely doing their own thing.

In reply to finc00:

Mmm.  If it is being received in such overwhelmingly positive light, then presumably it would have got through a consultation process easily enough.  That's sort of what consultation is for.

The points made on the local climbers Facebook page were that the recent (and many past) bolting activities up here have seen no 'wide consultation' before the bolts/lower offs have been placed.

We all have individual opinions and I feel it's important that there is clearer guidance from MS on what 'wide consultation' should look like and a means to facilitate it - such as a poll. 

This should be done and a consensus gained before any bolts are placed. 

This would be a more democratic process for bolting and would benefit everyone. For example, a wider discussion and poll resulting in a pro-bolting vote could mean the development of a well managed and popular bolt fund which would enable better development and maintenance of the new sport lines. Equally, if voted for, a traditional crag could remain traditional, allowing the development of cutting edge trad routes by future generations.

Another point I'd like to make is that many folk are suggesting a reason for bolting crags is that 'no one climbs there' or 'it's neglected'. This may well be a reason to bolt, but not a reason to do so without consulting the local/ wider climbing community first. 

Many folk chose to not use social media and to not log climbs - the overwhelming response of what you have seen on your social media may be positive, but it may not reflect the response of the wider climbing community.

In reply to jonnie3430:

It's hard to say without going there and seeing how the bolts affect the feel of the place, but as long as they don't encroach on existing trad routes I probably don't have a big problem with it. If it means more traffic keeping the bracken down and the crag cleaner then could be a win-win. 

In reply to mike barnard:

It may well be that most people are ok with it and it is retrospectively given the nod, but if a precedent is set of creating mixed trad/sport crags without appropriate discussion/consultation, then it could be a very slippery slope indeed. The existing ones tend, I think, to be historic anomalies such as Upper Cave or special cases such as Ratho quarry. I would hate to think that any blank unused bit of any crag might end up being seen as fair game.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I can understand your concerns. Of course, a few years ago Brin was bolted without consultation (as far as I'm aware) and it seems to have turned out to be a generally positive development. 

In reply to mike barnard:

Doing it without consultation sets a bad precedent, it creates a lack of trust and atmosphere of suspicion about future developments.  Also, a unilateral action invites a unilateral response i.e. chopping. Hopefully we've moved beyond the chopping stage but those who wish to bolt also need to move on, be brave and put it out for consultation rather than presenting it as a fait accompli. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

I have said this before (in relation to Ratho), but I think the problem of lack of consultation will persist until we get appropriate forums (on the lines of the BMC area committees) set up in Scotland. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

I think invoking Ratho as a corroborating 'hybrid' comparison is ill advised. The big thing there was the lack of consultation before the main bolt expansion. While a reasonable compromise was eventually reached, some bolts chopped, others preserved, it was with a lot of wrangling and some bad blood. The subsequenty added bolted routes have followed a very few lines of thin unprotected faces, and in parallel with further trad development of a high level, rather than grid-bolting every unclimbed gap. Its also a quarry, next to a climbing centre, with an Apollo Launcher parked in it.

Ive not visited Glenmarksie, but it seems to fulfil two main Mountaineering Scotland criteria of a. being a mountain crag of wild, remote character ;  and b. being an established trad venue. Both of which should exclude the presence of bolts at that venue except with full local and national consultation. Increasing popularity and convenience are not valid justifications for unilaterally claiming unclimbed lines with bolts.

Nearby sport venues such as Moy are ideally suited for bolting, given their location and geology, but imho a mountain schist trad crag should have potential for future exporation, even if it will be in the high E-grades.

Im not a local, and look forward to hearing more about the consensus up there, if one is reached.
If it were my local crag, though, I would be raging.

In reply to Dr Toph:

It's a lovely spot but I'm not sure I'd call it a 'mountain crag' or 'wild and remote'.

In reply to jonnie3430:

I'm not familiar with lockdown rules in Scotland but I wonder whether bolting a crag is an essential reason for leaving home?

In reply to jonnie3430:

Just turn your gaze south to Yorkshire limestone to see your (potential) future. Take an established trad crag with good routes, add a few bolts (in the unused parts), wait a few years and hey Presto the sport routes are far and away the most popular! Result - better finish the job (as a service to the climbing community) so that all those unpopular trad lines get more traffic. Call me a disillusioned cynic if you like but I'd suggest you Scots get this sorted out soon if the scenario I've described isn't what you want to see unfolding.

In reply to mike barnard:

I would, it's on the side of a hill, has a great view down the Conon, is at the end of a single track road and certainly feels remote. It's used enough that it's cleaned at the start of each season and the comment of sport routes being more popular than trad isn't justification, as people do laps on sport for training that they don't do on trad.

But what to do? How would you go about removing bolts from 12 routes? I think there has to be some statement that we follow the mcos guidelines and don't ignore them and do our own thing. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

I certainly wouldn't describe it as a mountain crag - it's not even above the tee line! And remoteness to me is best defined by how far from the road it is. If Glenmarksie is a mountain crag then so is Creag Dubh, possibly even Upper Cave. There is an issue here of course; we have the term "mountain crag" in the MCofS guidelines but no agreed definition (and I'm not even sure a sensible agreed definition is possible).

In reply to Lankyman:

What you're implying here is that rubbish trad routes nobody does somewhat have less intrinsic value than rubbish sport routes loads of people do; have I got that right?

In reply to Lankyman:

Sport routes are always going to be more popular than trad routes because it is just convenience climbing. It doesnt mean they are better. Convenience is not better. The Spice Girls are not better than The Slits.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Let’s be honest;

-It’s neither a mountain crag nor is it remote. It’s a 10min walk.

-Consultation would have been preferable but in the end people will have their own opinions. Vive la difference.

-It was never busy and for the majority of time because of this, high mineral content and lack of regular cleaning, the routes were often overgrown.

-Trad routes/lines have not been bolted.

-The bolters & cleaners live as close to it as to make any insinuation about travel restrictions and essential exercise puerile.

In reply to ianstevens:

No(I think - your phrasing is unclear to me). What I'm describing (not implying) is that excellent trad routes that have fallen from favour have been retro-bolted after a group of climbers have acted unilaterally. It actually is the 'wedge' whose not-so-thin edge appears to have arrived at Glen Marksie.

In reply to The Pylon King:

I'll tell you what I want, what I really, really want .....

In reply to James Gordon:

In character it is both mountain and remote, which is what mcos specify. Would you expect to bump into someone there? Routes have never been overgrown to stop me climbing them, bracken at the bottom is easily bashed on arrival. This is still no excuse. Vive la difference? In my opinion it shouldn't be bolted, so in exactly the same manner as the bolts were placed, they can be removed. Waste of time, emotion and effort, all because someone thought they knew better. This should not be encouraged as it'll happen elsewhere. Diabeg is a prime example. If there's to be a debate, get mcos to change their statement. If not, stick to it, or don't cry when your bolts are chopped and you've more work to do to tidy up the mess you left with the holes.

In reply to jonnie3430:

It really isn't but that's a side issue to the fact that it was bolted without any discussion. Let's not get distracted from the main issue with quibbles about the character of the crag.

In reply to jonnie3430:

I think it’s only fair to agree that in a pastime like climbing that’s entirely self policed that bolts in without 100% agreement might mean bolts out unilaterally. 
 

But come on, Glenmarksie is 20min drive from Dingwall, 10min walk from road head. It’s a lovely quiet spot but unequivocally not mountain/remote cf. eg. Creag Ghlas just up the way. 
 

Agreed 1 mans meat is another’s poison but worth remembering that the original ascentionist and main shaker at the crag has been v supportive of current work.

As an aside I think (v personally) that it was a contrived/contrary decision not to replace unsightly & dangerous tat with a single bolt station at Diabeg under the aegis of MCOS/SMC. I think people are worried about something that hasnt happened. Bolts haven’t proliferated like the doomsayers thought years ago. 100% not on mountain crags. But some undersused/overgrown/unprotected climbs have been opened up.

In reply to jonnie3430:

It quite simply isn't. Not that I think it's non-mountain character means bolting is necessarily ok.

In reply to James Gordon:

I think this thread shows that a reasonable discussion could have been had and some sort of agreement reached. You're right that there wouldn't be 100% agreement but some sort of discussion would have meant less ill feeling, made chopping far less likely and made the future of the routes more secure.

All this post hoc justification is further evidence that some kind of agreement could have been reached but that opportunity has gone. 

I don't object to bolts at that crag on principle, I certainly object to it being bolted without discussion. Both from the stance of protecting trad venues and to ensure the hard work put in to bolting doesn't go to waste.

In reply to DaveHK:

Agreed. Well summarised. 

In reply to Lankyman:

Thanks for clarifying 

In reply to jonnie3430:

+1 for the "definitely shouldn't have been bolted sentiment.

I remember going there years ago though I have to say I thought it was dirty, very over-rated and everything could have done with having at least 1 star knocked off.

In reply to jonnie3430: I visited recently to have a look. For what it's worth (and I know this isn't the point but helps provide a bit of context at least) the trad routes are unaffected; the sport routes lie on adjacent walls. I've always been against this sort of thing BUT we did note that all the trad lines were greasy and lichenous while the new sport routes are on a steep, dry wall which made them the only lines that looked pleasant to climb. I hope it brings more people to the crag because the good trad lines really need regular traffic.

I agree that consultation is how it should be done, but in terms of the outcome I think it's a good thing for the crag and I'm grateful to whoever has done it.

In reply to henwardian:

Definitely. I've been once and really didn't like it. Didn't like the place much, didn't like the climbing, and it was the worst place for sheep ticks I've ever been. 

In reply to James Gordon:

I couldn't disagree with this more. I would say the incredible increase in numbers of sport crags and bolted lines in Scotland is a sad example of the doomsayers being entirely right. One only has to pick up a sport-climbing guide to Scotland and look at the dates routes were first bolted or come to UKC and see how many specific threads there are about trad crags being bolted to see how bolt proliferation has become so commonplace and accepted that people can no longer see the problem because they have forgotten from whence we started.

Yeah, I know, I'm just a grumpy old man, bitter and stuck in the past. Long live our brave new shiny bolted walls, etc. etc.

In reply to finc00:

I don't know what the possibilities for trad gear are like on the bolted lines but from your diagram it does rather look as though the people/person who bolted this stuff just assumed that a load of the harder lines would never get done as trad routes. Was this really a valid assumption? I think you only have to look at somewhere like Binnean Shuas to see how a wide section of seriously difficult wall can yield a wide selection of seriously hard trad lines.

In reply to henwardian:

Thats a topo from Facebook, I cant claim its creation.
Having been for a look around, the only real line of weakness on that wall is the E7 that follows thin cracks, the sport routes dont look like they have much if any potential for gear. Given that the E7 was established by the bolter iirc, I'm sure he would have done his due diligence in looking for gear before they got bolted. I might pop up to the crag again and grab some photos of my own showing the bolted wall in more detail. I really doubt there would be much there in the way of potential gear placements though.
 

In reply to mike barnard and many others:

I'm a bit surprised at peoples definition of "remote" on UKC. I think if you drove the average person to the far NW of Scotland, onto a ferry, off the ferry, 40 miles across a very barren island and then got out of the car and walked 10 minutes to Screaming Geo and asked "is this remote?", the response would be something like "why did you kidnap me? Please don't hurt my children." followed by "ofc it's f***ing remote!!".

Proximity of the nearest road is not some sort of shortcut to define degree of remoteness.

I think that a lot of us who live close enough to easily access fairly remote and/or mountainous areas are prone have our perceptions of such things skewed. The opposite of St John's Head or Carn Mor is not Glenmarksie or Neist Point, it's Auchinstarry or Rosyth.

In reply to finc00:

Would be interesting to see photos, thanks. I probably wouldn't be able to comment on gear from photos alone though, when I'm looking for new lines I often don't know if the gear is going to work out till I actually try and fiddle a piece in.

If the lines were all notionally "harder than E7" my judgement is pretty suspect anyway but there is a big difference between E7 and the sorts of E9/10/11 things that are being put up at the cutting edge, often with very dubious gear being part and parcel of the undertaking.

In reply to henwardian:

Good example of how subjectivity can become sacrosanct. If you’re local it’s not remote. When I lived in Glasgow auchinstarry took me longer to get to. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

My instinct was to be annoyed by this bolting. However, reading through the various posts on the Inverness Climb Partners Facebook Page (https://www.facebook.com/groups/175726239203571), it seems as though bolters felt they had permission from first ascentionists and were acting as part of a collective community effort to maintain their local crag. Others, not part of this "community", took issue with that.

I think there are broader issues here of community and democracy. Some people - whether they are old skool former wads, members of student mountaineering clubs, or instructors/guides - they are embedded within climbing communities at an interpersonal level. Others are bizarrely eager to attend meetings organised by national representative bodies - organisations they ascribe authority to, even though many climbers are only vaguely aware of them and their processes, or even contemptuous of these. Meanwhile, for some other climbers, their sense of participating in a climbing community is almost entirely mediated by the internet - mostly UKC or FB groups.

How do you create meaningful decision-making processes in this situation? I think as climbers become more numerous and diverse, it's important to rethink what community might mean and how we can facilitate genuinely democratic decisions - at least, that is, if democracy is something we value. Otherwise, people shouldn't be shocked if some are offended by "old boys club" ways of going about decision-making.

 

In reply to jonnie3430:

With regards to some points, the routes were developed with the permission and encouragement of Mr Mackenzie and others who did the first ascents on the crag in the 80's. The new lines are one 7c, a bunch of very much harder 8's which are still being worked, and on a slab(s) which has been unearthed from the mud. The original claim that this was a grid bolting exercise was incorrect and its location does means it can not be claimed to be a mountain cliff. To be clear, the folk who are doing these new routes have spent hours cleaning the trad lines so that they can be climbed and enjoyed as trad routes.

Whilst there needs to be some discussion about how venues may or may not be developed, this is as close to following the local traditions and guidance as I have seen.  As has been mentioned by a few in the threads mixed venues are common up here and amongst those developing both trad and sport routes the boundaries seem to being respected. Of course there will always be some grey areas, but IMO this cliff is not one of those especially since you take into account the contact between the first ascensionists from the 80's and now.

It is also noted that the feedback generally has been supportive but it is a good reminder to all that both traditions are alive and well and should be respected.

It would be nice if some of this great positive energy for our sport was used to clean up the many other venues in and around Inverness and Dingwall which have succumbed to the moss of history.

There is no doubt that the popularity of Moy in particular (love it or hate it) has meant many of these crags are not even known about and a very rarely visited despite the growing numbers of Highland Climbers. It would be great to see the committed local trad climbers get out the statics and brushes and clean up the lines that need attention. When I was a kid climbing up here in the 70's and 80's that is what we did, dig and brush until a crack or line was unearthed, admittedly some of the cliffs are pretty "esoteric" and compared to the joys of Torridon and Diabeag, quite poor, but even the good easy routes at Duntelchaig are in an awful state and some can not even be found so there is a job to be done if folk are motivated. 

The planned development of bolted routes at Glenmarksie came to my attention late last year. As a local climber who's been active in the area for ~10 years I felt uneasy about it. I felt it likely many local climbers would feel similarly so I asked around. I suggested the developer seek a relevant opinion base (in my experience a wide spread of local climbers works) prior to starting. I wasn't surprised when none of 'us' were asked for our opinions and suggested this would blow up by the Spring as the Highland climbing community became aware.

So here we are (again?).

I'm not sure arguing out the 'case' for Glenmarksie is relevant at this point. Admittedly my lack of interest in this specific crag means I'm not actually that fussed about what happens to it. But I do have an interest in community minded development. What frustrated me wasn't the bolts but the lack of consultation.

I am very appreciative of current sport climbing development in the Highlands. For some time a few of us have made efforts to get the ball rolling for a bolt fund (yes, we still don't have one). For transparency and simplicity we proposed this could fund existing crag maintenance. To me It's a future necessity alongside passing the baton to similarly altruistic future developers. The idea is yet to gain the full support of current developers but we'll keep at it. Unfortunately theres a separation between the developers and the users that in my mind has some unintended consequences:

-many users don't appreciate the effort in time, effort and expense the developers put in 

-for those that are aware and want to contribute money, its hard to do so but theres also a little scepticism about where the money would go

I feel it worth adding, becacuse there are similarities between the crags, that an informal consultation regarding potential new bolted routes at Duntelchaig went ahead last year. The local concensus was against it and the person posing the question recieved careful, reasoned responses and thanks for asking. The person in question went on to add some high quality trad climbs to the crag. In my mind a great example of community minded development and a case to be celebrated.

The Highlands has amazing rock climbing on the door step and an ever growing community of participants. I'd suggest this is an opportunity to shine a positive spotlight on whats been developed so far as well to encourage the climbing community to proactively communicate with respect to each other and our shared resources. This doesn't just have to take place on social media/forums either. In practice this could even mean socialising - meeting up with new people, path maintainance, litter picking, cleaning moss, bolt funds and sharing topos. 

Look forward to catching up on the crags this spring/summer!

Pete 

In reply to henwardian:

I think it is a very good starting point in this context.

To define remoteness in terms of distance from centres of population would be completely absurd as far as suitability for bolting is concerned. Do you think bolting The Cobbler would be more acceptable than bolting Foinaven, or bolting Polny Crag more acceptable than bolting Diabaig?

In reply to henwardian:

Yes, I don't think many people are aware just how much "under the radar" bolting of crags has been going on in Scotland. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Agreed there has been a lot. On reflection I was coming from a position of “classic, well known, big, popular & especially mountain” crags. My fault for not clarifying. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

News just in, Ms Sturgeon says that the views of anyone from England are irrelevant, and in fact if the English think there should be 12 bolted routes she wants there to be 13.

...But Alex Salmond recons the bolts should be chopped.

In reply to peter.herd:

And therein is a big part of the problem. Duntelchaig is my closest crag. About 15 minutes away. I climb there quite a lot, less than I did 20 years ago but still multiple times each summer, but your post is the first time I have heard of any proposal to bolt there. I doubt that anyone I climb with has heard of this either. 

Quite how anyone can carry out a consultation other than just asking their friends I don't know. 

In reply to rogerwebb:

Hi Roger,

I understand your point but I disagree with the suggestion that the Duntelchaig example is problematic.

These issues have relevant scale that range from conversation between two people at the crag to national polls. Sensible processes tend to evolve from them based around the MCofS guidelines we all appear agree on, whereby the 'seriousness' of the issues dictates the level of engagement.

I mention above a 'wide spread of local climbers' and remain confident that informally seeking local opinions was sensible and conclusive. To furnish that, in terms of representation  and without mentioning names, the question was posed to climbers from the area  all of whom have climbed extensively at Duntelchaig over past decades as well as more recently. I strongly suspect you know most or all of them and that your 'doubt that anyone I climb with has heard of this either' would be easily resolved .

Perhaps I should be clearer about my use of the word consultation - it suggests a relatively formal procedure. This was informal messaging between people, not a poll.  I think its also very important to note that in this example, there was unanimous agreement against bolting. In this case there appeared little need to consult more widely. Had there been mixed opinion the natural evolution would have been to seek further opinion. I can think of many similar examples, all of which exist on different points of a scale, depending on their 'seriousness' in terms of 'likelihood of bolting'. I accept that process is imperfect, but to me its a considerably more healthy example  than that of Glenmarksie.

Look forward to catching you at Duntelchaig some time,

Pete

In reply to rogerwebb:

Plenty of social media options. I know that won't cover everyone but it broadens the net.

In reply to peter.herd:

I wasn't meaning to be confrontational. It sounds like the Duntelchaig situation was resolved amicably and wisely. I suspect that most I know would have had strong opinions if asked. 

I do think that there are lots of local worlds many of which do not interact through age, social groups or main choice of activity. Consulting within one may not reach the others. Certainly the person I was on the hill with today, who I clmbed with at Duntelchaig last summer had never heard of the proposition either. Given our blithe ignorance if that consultation had gone the other way and bolting at Duntelchaig been accepted then from our point of view it would have looked like someone had just gone ahead and done it without bothering about what others think. We, like many on this thread concerning Glenmarksie would have been a bit hacked off.

Did those who bolted Glenmarksie go through a similar consultation? Perhaps they did, I don't know. 

Maybe before they are hanged they should be asked.

In reply to DaveHK:

Yes I suppose that is inevitable. Having just joined Facebook this year I am aware that I am behind the times. I am so thrilled with social media that I miss the 20th century (maybe the 18th). 

In reply to rogerwebb:

Sure thing. These are important issues and I respect your opinion. 

I can only reiterate what ive written as far as breadth of users was concerned. They did indeed span age and social groups and I'm sorry you were not asked.  Communicating with a community is a challenge but its worth a go. I do have my finger on the pulse as far Highland rock climbing goes and try to help where I can but I agree its tricky to connect disparate groups.  In this instance what I believe happened was that a friend spoke on your behalf, making an assumption about how you would have felt. 

I understand your point regarding the concept of bolting at Duntelchaig but I remain confident that should that have gone any further there would have been a larger scale consultation as Ive described above, so In this instance I dont see need to extend the 'ifs'. 

Regarding the story of Glenmarksie, the info is all out there and it's not speculative. Im sure you will know who to call to find out the finer details if interested. The main distinction with it compared to my Duntelchaig example was that the small number of people consulted had mixed opinions. This should triggered the process to swtich to a larger scale consultation but instead the bolts went in. Its profoundly different - the 'seriousness' was of a different scale.

In reply to peter.herd:

I kinda wish I didn't know and only found out when I rocked up to the crag in the summer. It just saddens me, nothing left to look at and wonder, no questioning in the mind about is there enough gear, just a line of chalked up holds and shiney bolts, routes never remembered, just grades for training on. I haven't done some of the retrobolted routes either, which is a shame. 

Re: we have the first routers permission; I care more about the permission of the next generation, no chance for them to look up at the crag and wonder if they could fill a gap, no testing themselves on bold leads, no learning a wavy line as it's been "straightened up," and to say it hasn't been Grid bolted when the post said "Meanwhile ****** ***** has been filling in the blanker areas with some new sport routes and a few of the poorer quality, poorly protected, less popular trad routes have been bolted and straightened out, if possible, to improve the line. None of the other trad routes have been bolted, so the crag now has something for everyone; trad from v diff to E7 and sport from F3 to F8."

Blame the pandemic for lack of use last year, not lack of keen climbers. This isn't supporting the next generation of trad climbers, just last generations who are bored of Moy sport.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Totally understand that.

We need to engage in processes that involve those who care. 

In reply to peter.herd:

The friend who spoke for me contacted me this evening. He got it right. I must be easy to read. So I am incorrect. I was consulted but unknowingly. So no worries on that matter. 

I see your point about the difference between the two situations. I would like to hear the defence though.

In reply to henwardian:

I do take your point but in this case I think the "remoteness" of Glenmarksie is largely defined by the fact that it's close enough to a city for residents to pop out for a half day. It's a quick drive and a quick walk; it's after-workable i.e. not very remote.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I think you have misunderstood me. I did not state that distance from population centres was the sole measure (or even _a_ measure) of the remoteness of a crag. I was giving examples which I hoped would shine a light on the inappropriateness of "distance from nearest road" as a measure. If there is a meaningful way of measuring "remoteness", I doubt it is as simple as either the nearest road or the nearest town.

I'll assume you don't actually expect an answer to this question but on the offchance that you do: None of them are acceptable for bolting imo, also, I challenge the premise that something can actually be more or less acceptable, I believe something is either acceptable or not acceptable.

In reply to rogerwebb:

This neatly proves the point about different circles of online communities that use different platforms and may never intersect. Because I used to be on Facebook a lot but now only have 1 friend that I communicate with via Facebook messenger and I have logged onto facebook itself perhaps 3 times in the last 3 years.

I'd only see a consultation if it was on UKC or if someone asked me or messaged me about it.

In reply to Robert Durran:

There are already bolts at Myopic's Buttress and of course at Upper Cave. So there is a wee bit of precedent around Polney. But it would need to be a new undiscovered bit of buttress   No-one is arguing for retro-bolting.  

In reply to henwardian:

Maybe remoteness could be described by how long you'd need for it to be worth visiting that crag.

I.e. suitable for summer after work climbing - definitely not remote.

Needs a whole day to be worth visiting - remote

Needs a half day to be worth visiting - probably not remote

Of course I'm sure someone will have managed to get to a remote crag after work, but this would be an exception, the idea would be what would generally be seen as worthwhile.

In reply to rogerwebb:

By asking the landowner?  I assume that’s all been sorted?

In reply to Michael Hood:

A bit problematic. It's possible to get into quite a few mountain crags for a quick route after work if you live near enough.

In reply to mike barnard:

Maybe I did not give very good examples. My point was that if you took the same bit of rock and moved it further from centres of population but the same time/distance from the road then it should not be considered more remote as far as its suitability for bolting is concerned.

In reply to jonnie3430:

I have no knowledge on the specifics of Glenmarksie but as a sport/trad climber in Scotland I do think this thread raises a valid question about what counts as ' local consultation' in this context?

There's clearly a spectrum from 'asking some of your mates' through various online forums, UKC forum threads etc. to some kind of formalised consultation/voting organised by a National body which would seem to be stretching the definition of local a wee bit.

Also what counts as a consensus? A majority? 75% in favour? 100% in favour? (as some have IMHO unrealistically argued in this thread)

There's clearly a danger in thinking that the ease of gathering input online is somehow a substitute for doing the hard work of gathering genuine feedback from local active climbers at the crag in question, so it's not as simple as 'let's do a Facebook poll' either.

I can understand that folk don't want to 'turn over the stone' on this issue, due to historical baggage but as this thread illustrates, bolting is being considered/happening so would it not be better to have a nationally agreed framework for how this type of consultation should be conducted so that it's easier to 'do the right thing' and seek consultation first?

Folk are more likely to abide by the result either way if they believe the process was fair.

At the moment the lack of guidance on consultation could be argued to encourage 'rogue' bolting which I imagine most folk don't believe is a good way forward.

In reply to Michael Hood:

So basically distance (or maybe time) from road then.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Here's a question, what do Mountaineering Scotland do in all this? What could or should they be doing that they aren't?

If we're talking about how to have meaningful discussion/consultation surely they are the organisation to facilitate that?

I'm not stirring with that, I really don't know.

In reply to henwardian:

No, but whereas I think distance from nearest town is completely irrelevant in this context, I think distance from road is an obvious starting point.

In reply to DaveHK:

That was my point too Dave. 

If there was a framework for how you SHOULD go about this kind of consultation then we could perhaps avoid some of the more extreme behaviour.

In reply to Robert Durran:

It's certainly under my radar Robert.

Are you able to give some specific examples?

Thanks

In reply to drconline:

Yes, I think our posts crossed in the ether!

In reply to Robert Durran:

I would expect a crag that is X minutes from the road (possibly minor) that is 60 minutes from the nearest significant population to be more remote than a crag that is also X minutes from the road (possibly major) but only 20 minutes from a city.

Of course somebody might be living near where you park to get to the first crag above so it wouldn't be remote for them but I think remoteness is some kind of distance from civilization, not just distance from the road.

Maybe X needs to be above some kind of minimum walk in time.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Ok. We disagree on this then. So what you are saying is that there should be a greater presumption against bolting the further away from centres of population. I actually wonder whether the reverse is happening in practice since locals operating away from wider scrutiny might be more likely to be putting bolts in "under the radar".

In reply to drconline:

Here are a couple of examples of the sort of thing I am thinking of:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crags/black_rock_arisaig-21122#maps

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crags/glutton_crag-20419#maps

Obviously not under the "local" radar in these areas away from the main centres of population but I'm not sure that the wider climbing public has been brought on board with these sorts of developments (Should they be? Does it matter?). I think it actually brings us back to the point you and Dave are making that there is no agreement or framework for what a consultation should look like. 

In reply to DaveHK:

I think the representative bodies should be the ones to facilitate this. An obvious process would be that if you want to bolt in a new location you write to MS/BMC. Access officer checks it and then they put up a notice on a dedicated "bolting proposals" page, perhaps do us the favour of tweeting it out. No doubt someone on here will share the details. People have a month to respond. Someone at the MS/BMC collates the responses and communicates them to the bolters with a "suggestion" that bolting should/shouldn't go ahead. If there's an active local rep body group, then have a chance to chat it through. Links to bolt funds and calls for help can be added to the proposals, making it less work/less expensive for those who are doing this.

Obviously, this is just a sketch, but it shouldn't be beyond the scope of possibility and goes a bit further than "Well, I phoned up Jimmy, and he said he didn't give a damn either way; Stuart said it was fine too, so I guess that's alright."

In reply to jonnie3430:

I'm horrified to hear that Glenmarksie Crag has been bolted. Although not local I've climbed there quite a number of times over the last 40 years. Surely such a controversial step should have been thoroughly debated and agreed beforehand.  From the MS website -  "Mountaineering Scotland will offer assistance (through awareness / distribution of information / debate / mediation) to aid consultation when required."    

In reply to Robert Durran:

Black Rock isn't "under the radar". It's been a well utilised crag for locals for many years now and for a long time was the only bit of rock in Lochaber which had bolts in it that suited mid grade climbers. It's also been on UKC and the Rockfax app for years so it's out in the open to be used by anyone visiting the area. I don't think there is any need for local developments like you have pointed out to warrant a national consensus when many of those people are unlikely to ever go there (much like the Staffin Slips argument). 

It certainly would still be a deathly hole without the bolts placed and even worse if other locals hadn't replaced the hardware a few years back, the routes are little more than 15m high and there is no gear. It's hardly the place future generations are going to be inspired to climb or be thankful it was left alone. 

There is an accepted ethic among many Lochaber climbers that the crags in that area can have bolted and trad lines co-existing. Does that mean someone is going to go along and bolt some of the bold slab climbs at Glen Shian? Of course not, because putting bolts in places where they are applicable doesn't mean that they are going to become commonplace where they are not. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Hi, the question of remoteness and feel regarding a crag or cliff I think is quite key and I think which ever way you look at it Marksie is a local crag, not a mountain cliff as you have suggested. But that does not really then answer the question of where the boundary lies. Someone has suggested that a 60min approach would be a line, but that would place you at the bottom of the routes of hundreds of mountain cliffs where bolts would be totally unacceptable, so this I am afraid can not be defined other than exploring the "nature" of a cliff or crag and that is pretty hard to do. Eg, Supercrag is pretty remote, and has a longish approach but is an accepted sport crag and is a mixed venue, but Wave buttress is closer and less remote and is a firmly established trad crag. I think most of us understand where that line lies. Therefore to define this lies in local perception, history, and use of similar local venues, and that will be "flexible" depending on the community of climbers operating. When all of this was being discussed 36 years ago MCofS (as it was then was) offered an altitude ceiling of 1500' or 450M above sea level, this to me at least seems like a reasonable(ish)  starting point  and any exceptions would then need to then be definitely described as roadside or be of a definite sport nature, ie short approach under 30mins to be eligible, Tunnel Wall is definitely on the boundary of all criteria with the base sitting right on the 450m mark I think.  The Camel for instance is at about 330m with a tiny approach, upper Brin 400m with a 25min thrash. I am not sure I can think of any higher local sport crags. So maybe a good starting point is to look at Creag a' Bhancair and say that is the limit for all combined criteria. A starting point ?  

In reply to Duncan McCallum:

Yes, definitely not a mountain crag.

I agree that remoteness is key but is hard to pin down and will certainly depend significantly on distance/time/effort to reach it, but I just don't think that distance from centres of population should be relevant here. 

I'm not sure about that. I'd look on it as very much a historical anomaly rather than any sort of benchmark.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

Yes, and I think that is what I am getting at. It seems that this potentially quite contentious ethic has been developed locally without any real national debate and perhaps full consideration of whether it fits with MCofS guidelines. In that sense it is "under the radar". It seems to be that similar things are happening in the NW and on the Aberdeen coast - local climbers are doing their own thing and the result, for better or worse, is significant proliferation of bolted rock in Scotland. Maybe this is ok, and maybe the way it is coming about is ok, but I do wonder, as others are, whether nationally a more formal and less organic process is needed to guard against things getting out of hand.

In reply to Grahame N:

I do not support this bolting. I am no longer local to the crag, but like Grahame N have climbed there over the years. As he says, MS does offer assistance to help consultation. but no effective consultation has taken place. This thread alone has generated 3961 views and 79 responses in less than 48 hours. As Emma Atkinson says above, not all climbers are on the local facebook group (or in my case, any group) but I and others are reachable through UKC and MS.

David

In reply to Robert Durran:

It is difficult to balance local movements and any "national" consultancy as it not necessarily reflective of either view. MS membership is not at all large if compared to memberships of bouldering walls etc. In addition the much younger climbers who live in the bouldering centres and gyms on the whole tend not to trad climb, so an all capturing forum may well see a huge tip towards pro bolting that may reach higher or deeper into the mountains and we who share a more "traditional" apprenticeship would find this very troubling.  

In reply to Nathan Adam:

So a system of local ethics for local crags for local people? Ok..........

The refurbished Staffin Slip shouldn't in any case be in this category! It should, like Indian Creek, become a mecca for visiting climbers (and it probably needs to be to keep the routes clean........ )

In reply to Duncan McCallum:

Very good point. There are no easy answers.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

Surely there is no room for a level of parochialism in a country this small?

Who is a local? The highly mobile, mainly middle class climbing community is likely to move on to pastures new, taking their views and ethics with them but leaving their actions behind.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't see what the issue is here really. The bolting going on, in the majority of scenarios, is in places which are almost universally not suited to trad climbing. It's a modern approach which is thankfully opening up more and more climbing for people to enjoy and whilst it happens on outcrops then why does it matter? There isn't really an argument that in 20 years time you are going to find bolted multi pitch mountain routes because there was some bolts added to a wee crag near Dingwall or at the top of Staffin Slips. 

There is still plenty of rock to be discovered (and rediscovered) in Scotland, some of it will be suited to traditional climbing and some to sport but I can't ever see the bolted routes "getting out of hand" as you put it. The traditional ethics are in no danger of being lost due to the placing of a few bolted routes on an outcrop cliff. What really is the worry here? That these bolted crags are going to lead to the justification of bolts in high places? Hopefully I didn't just name a future guidebook... 

I agree there should be some more input from MS as to what the rules are, but if local climbers can come to a consensus then I don't see a need for much else. After all it's usually them who put in the hard work of cleaning and equipping routes and who climb on them most often.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

I hope you are right.

Would there be any objection to bolting up suitably qualified scraps of rock in, say, Glencoe or Glen Torridon in the same way as has been done around Glenfinnan?

In reply to jonnie3430:

Hi Jonnie, I am not sure if this helps with context but on page 10 of the Scottish Mountaineering Club - Sport Climbing Guide which  am sure you have, there are some guidelines which cover mixed developments, bolting, retro bolting "less used crags" etc. It suggests IMO that the Marksie developments do follow the SMC's published guidance. Although I was not involved in writing this, many respected Trad and Sport types were and presumably this was referring to the much older MCofS guidance. Although the SMC/SMT  MS, are not directly linked, the much older SMC normally are the holders/custodians of the long traditions within the sport in Scotland. Point 1 covers retro bolting, Point 3 covers remoteness. My reading of "consensus" as it covers the above points regarding mixed venues  is much harder thing do decide on, Is this everyone, from gym users, boulderers, everyone who climbs in Scotland or had visited the crag or local activists. I know opinions differ on this point, but as the first ascent parties (original) routes were asked, those who are still about, have given their consent I am pretty sure they have done as much as was expected. I am sure we may continue to disagree in this case but much of the guidance was written before social media and the ease of community integration. I do think however this debate will help folk be much more aware of the guidelines going forward. A good thing.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

I wish I could share your skepticism about the spread of bolting. Here's my brief view of how things 'progressed' down here on Dales lime. Early to mid-eighties and the first sport bolts were almost exclusively in high grade stuff at places like Malham on rock that was virtually unprotectable any other way. Once the initial furore had subsided that was no longer controversial. Into the nineties and a small number of bolters start to clean and equip smaller venues at mostly much more modest grades. Moving into the new century this continued. A few lines in the sand began to be increasingly crossed - trad routes were retro-bolted or neutered by proximity to bolted lines. Now, here is the factor which, probably, combined with the above, is starting to accelerate the ongoing spread of bolts: climbing walls and wall-trained indoor climbers. They move to the outdoors and look for something familiar and safe. They head for the sport crags clutching their downloaded guide. Last year I saw this. On one walk I saw cars lining the road under Moughton Nab while just over the hill Crummackdale was deserted. The bolts have spoonfed a large number of people who are voting with their quickdraws. Whole trad crags are being ignored and I think it may only be a matter of time before the bolts arrive. If not the current retro-bolters then their successors will do this.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't see why not, if there's a suitable bit of rock for it. There has been a line of bolts put in at The Bendy in Glen Coe already to give a 7b sport route, placed by a local climber.

Glenfinnan and Lochailort/Arisaig are backwaters as far as climbing is concerned and not many people would travel far to go there, much like Glenmarskie I imagine but they serve the purpose well enough. 

In reply to Nathan Adam:

Under the road and under the radar?

So was Reiff once. 

So is there one rule for "backwaters" and another for places on peoples' radar? Do you really think locals could get away now with a Glenfinnan approach to Glencoe or Glen Torridon? 

In reply to EmmaAtkinson:

Hi Emma, Going forward, I know of at least another 3-4 low lying crags which do have some fine very hard sport lines next to, or on the same cliff as trad lines. Given that going public before doing new routes can (used to) get them nicked by others (bitter experience)  where do you think the lines of consensus should be. In the past all new routing was a secretive business as there was competition for routes and has been since the 1870's. Wide consensus also can/maybe quite  a bad thing for trad, as new generations coming to the outdoors from gyms and bouldering centres may only want to climb on bolts and in a few years may see no reason not to bolt mountain crags. Traditionally within the sport climbing community people when they are working on very hard projects are in some cases people mark "closed projects" and publish this so that they get a fair chance to have a go, often over years and this is very much respected. This often when trad routes are involved is a much uglier process or used to be. Also forums and social media is not often representative of a local community and many people actively do not engage. EG the local Inverness Page has over 500 members but only 10ish got involved and I reckon there are over 2000 local(ish) highland climbers of one sort or the other. So there lies the issue, is this consultation limited to hard core active climbers operating within the inner circle, anyone with a loud enough voice or the entire spectrum of climbers and is this age limited like elections. The point is wider consultation is highly likely to just be a fight and those with the most hard core opnions in either camp will hate what ever happens. So we are back to square one, where we have long standing tradition of new routers trad and sport developing venues and hopefully doing this within the general limits of guidance. The SMC - sport guide has a very clear set of parameters which do allow some slack either way and at extremes. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

And Reiff will never be bolted either.

Backwaters was just the term I used, not that they have special treatment because of that. But there isn't the history associated with the crags in Glenfinnan as much as there is in Glen Coe or Torridon and that has much to do with their preservation I would think. 

Less popular areas being bolted will obviously fly under the radar as not many people climb there, I still don't think that is followed by a justification for more bolting elsewhere. Whether or not there should be a greater consensus is a matter of personal opinion. 

In reply to Duncan McCallum:

I agree that firstly it comes down to the 'feel' of the crag, something not easily defined but which should be possible to come to a consensus on when examples do crop up. Diabaig is not remote or mountain but very few would support the placing of bolts there (for climbing, at least). I still don't think they should've been put in.

Secondly, assuming the general 'feel' is judged OK, it comes down to whether the bolts make sense. Is the wall more naturally suited to trad or sport? Where bolts are placed they shouldn't generally be judged to encroach on existing trad routes or affect the feel of the trad lines. A line of bolts between two trad routes won't often cut the mustard. 

A lot of the time it's going to be a case by case basis. I sympathised with bolts at Farrletter as the crag in general seemed better suited to sport, but the trad argument seems to have won out there.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

Of course not, but it does show that today's backwaters can become, with changing fashion, tomorrow's nationally important venue.

So you take back your "don't see why not" on account of their history; it wouldn't be accepted?

I wonder whether a future generation, attracted to the honeypot of Glenfinnan by the convenience of bolts might find it daft that they have to drive past loads of neglected rock in the backwater of Glencoe to get there. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Except the majority of the crags in Glenfinnan are still mostly traditional and likely to remain that way.

My “don’t see why not” comment was directed at bits of rock that hadn’t previously been developed rather than anything already established. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Boulderers already go right by Glen Coe for Glen Nevis and Arisaig.

Lochaber doesn't seem a great comparison when it's actually far less 'affected' by bolting than many areas. The crags that are, don't seem particularly out of place to me.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

That was what I was thinking of - would bolting undeveloped bits of rock suited to sport in Glencoe be acceptable?

In reply to kwoods:

Fair enough. I am simply wondering whether there are effectively geographical constraints on developing sport crags due to visibility in the traditionally visited areas and the reception they would get. The same question would apply to other areas.

In reply to Duncan McCallum:

Duncan I could quote from the Bible, it doesn't matter, the body is the mcos, nobody else. Just out of curiosity, and maybe understanding why you are so prominent in the defence; 12+ routes would be expensive to equip, were they paid for from the bolt fund you advertised on the Inverness climbing partners Facebook page? 

In reply to Dave Garnett:

So, I’m guessing not then.  Or don’t you have landowners up there?

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Someone can perhaps supply a more accurate explanation, but in Scotland the access legislation means that people aren't precluded from enjoying the outdoors, despite the large scale system of land being divided up amongst estates. It's a much better situation than in Englandshire. 

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I don't think that extends to bolting!

In reply to jonnie3430:

'Lo did Satan lead the Lord unto a high place and tempted him sorely. If thou wilt only place several lines of bolts in yonder place, verily will the people follow thee. But there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the apostles nor unto the temples of social media. Surely thou wouldst perform a desecration upon the Rock of Ages they cried. And Jesus wept.'

In reply to jonnie3430:

Dear All

Having put up the majority of trad routes at Glenmarksie since 1980 and having cleaned many if not all of these routes every year as far as I can and having hardly seen anyone there  climbing or helping me clean, I am not against some of the blanker areas being bolted as only one of the trad routes has been affected, a totally neglected line. If this      bolting helps young hot shots do the very hard blank lines that have been bolted, they might ‘warm up’ on some of the trad routes first and thus keep the routes clean. As for breaking lockdown, that is a ludicrous suggestion. As far as I know the bolters live locally and legally we have most of the Highlands to move around. Neither is it a mountain crag, being 10 to 15 minutes from the road end. Provided that the trad routes are respected and the bolting kept to blank areas in a limited way I personally cannot see the harm for a fine wee crag that faces south, a rarity in itself, to have a few bolted lines. Perhaps someone would actually like to help me keep the bracken down and do some cleaning of the trad routes as I’m not getting any younger!

In reply to John Mackenzie:

Morning John,

I think the stushie is less about the outcome than the process. It appears that many are aggrieved at an apparent fait acompli. They would have liked a say as to whether bolted lines were appropriate for the crag. The worry might be that if it is acceptable just to go ahead without asking at Glenmarksie then the same would apply for anywhere else. 

Possibly the bolters consulted with as many people as they could, I don't know, but there is at least a widely held perception that they didn't .

How one goes about such a thing I don't know but the general framework set out by Peter Herd upthread seems like a good place to begin.

Life used to be a lot simpler (perhaps not, just remembered the chalk controversies)

On the whole I think I agree with your analysis. 

I think there are two separate conversations here and I'm finding it hard to work out if they are likely to align in a constructive way. I'll echo Roger's reply, especially regarding process focus.

I do think this, as the spotlights on and its on people minds, this 'event' could be an opportunity for positive change.

My initial suggestion is a dedicated web presence for Highland sport climbing. It would take a team some effort to get off the ground but could work as a neutral focal point rather than relying on social media pages and ukc forums. It could include:

-topo updates/news

-bolting proposals including polling (new lines could be funded rather than come out individuals pockets, provided they were had community approval) 

-means to donate or raise money (worth noting there is currently an SMC fund for re-equipping)

Maybe the SMC could blend it in to their present site, maybe it would need to be separate and maybe the MCofS could help out. It would require some thinking.

I dont mind connecting folk via whatsapp if its a popular idea. Just a thought.

Cheers,

Pete

In reply to John Mackenzie:

If it was just a few hard lines that had been bolted I could understand if they were really good routes, instead there's 12 routes, apparently more to come including two f3 and a bunch of other lower grade routes (the original post with topo has been removed now.) It's not a few routes.

Should the bolter not actually want to use the routes they've bolted? Bolting for common good has only ever been done on sport only crags as it just means every gap gets bolted, something we don't want on trad crags.

As for it being ludicrous that they've broken lockdown, the law is pretty plain, it's stay at home, essential exercise only. Whether on not we should still be in lockdown is another question, but we are.

If folks wanted to develop a crag for sport in the area I would have sent them to Aspen crag, I've tried it for trad found it very poor and buried in vegetation, not glenmarksie, the best trad crag in the area.

In reply to peter.herd:

How would you get trad climbers feedback on bolting proposals on a sport climbing webpage?

In reply to jonnie3430:

I imagine a lot of climbers dabble in a variety of disciplines.
Rather than thinking of it as a sport climbers website perhaps think of it as a space for highland climbers to discuss the merits of bolting particular sections of rock.
The more informed opinions involved the more  it would be a robust tool for evaluating potential actions and mean that the website would not just become a sport climbers echo chamber.

In reply to PLM:

But surely the provision of such a 'discussion space' is one of the most important functions of a national body? In England the BMC and regional meetings (should) cover this and it's desperately important that they do in an inclusive and proactive way that keeps everyone onboard.

None of the 'governing bodies' have any inherent authority to mandate anything. Lots of other sports have seen splits where they've failed to live by a single consensual opinion: Rugby split over games on a Sunday, cycling over mass road racing, bowls over wearing white trousers in industrial towns, etc.  A very real possibility that always exists is for the establishment of the British Association of Wall and Sports Climbers as a separate governing body.  The voting at their members' meeting in favour of bolting where they like, would be as authoritative as a BMC vote against.

The assumption that the current 'agreements' in place are going to safely survive into the future I think is naively optimistic. The democratic mandate not to bolt mountain crags etc, is only valid until a show of hands in a meeting reveals that majority view is no more. Then what?

If traditional climbing in the UK something worth preserving then the processes to guarantee that need to be far more robust.

In reply to Jim Lancs:

They aren't surviving now, this bolting is outside of current agreements and a lot of people up here seem happy to let it slide because it's already happened. That just means it's a ticking clock until someone else gets it into their head to bolt whatever they like.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Do you think it is outside current agreements other than due to the unsatisfactory consultation process?

In reply to DaveHK:

Yes.  I know this may seem a bit tedious, but bolting without the landowner's permission can cause all sorts of problems for access.  If we leave no permanent trace, then there's little the landowner can do even if they object to what is technically trespassing.  I don't know how this works north of the border but I'd be surprised if there's no concept of criminal  damage however ridiculous that may seem in the context of a few bolts that are causing no inconvenience to anyone.

There's also the question of who is responsible if there's an accident.  It's the sort of thing that makes landowners nervous even if they are otherwise sympathetic.   

In reply to Jim Lancs:

I was thinking about exactly that the other day - maybe what is needed is mediation rather than more dictation/enforcement etc... I wouldn't put it all on MS to sort out either - maybe existing developed guidence combined with some sort of approved mediation accreditation for MIA/MCI?

In reply to Naechi:

There does indeed need to be a 'process', but before that there needs to be a universal (not just a majority) acceptance of the value of trad climbing in the UK.

Conversely there also needs to be an acceptance that sport climbing is probably here to stay and an every increasing number of climbers think it only fair that their sport in the middle grades should be possible in places other than on all the chossy crags that are not wanted by trad climbers.

In reply to Jim Lancs:

What's your definition of middle grades?

In reply to Robert Durran:

"Established (documented) ‘traditional’ and sport venues would be expected to remain in their documented style." 

From mcos website.

In reply to S Andrew:

They're probably 'lower grades' in the overall scheme of things, but I think of 5c / 6a / 6b sport or Vs / HVS in trad as being where a lot of middling climbers like to be.

In reply to jonnie3430:

But it goes on to say: 

"If a change in style is to be considered in the future....... then generally: Retro-bolting (the addition of bolts to established climbs without them) would only be considered with the agreement of the first ascensionist and after wide consultation with interested climbers at local and national level."

So it doesn't say that the style of a venue is set in stone - bolting of a trad venue can take place with proper consultation. Admittedly your quote and my quote do seem somewhat contradictory.

However, setting aside the consultation issue, what I find interesting about the Glenmarksie case is the creation of a mixed trad and sport venue. The MCofS doesn't seem to have anything to say on this issue. It is this precedent which worrries me a bit. Are mixed venues to become more common rather than exceptions, and, if so, should only well defined suitable areas of crags have bolts (as I think is the case here) or could it be on a line by line basis? 

In reply to Dave Garnett:

That's not true. It isn't "trespassing". Unless you happen to be right next to someone's house, unlikely if on a crag. 

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Trespassing can happen ways off from housing, e.g. in a quarry, farmland, sand pit, Orchard and so on. Most are not valid for climbing crags though. 

In reply to jonnie3430:

Do people who climb in lower grades not deserve to sport climb?

Personally I think its a good thing this crag has had some sports routes added gives a bit of variety to moy and also brings some traffic to an otherwise neglected trad crag

Seems most of the people shouting the loudest just like the sound of their own voice 

In reply to Gav_92:

Couldn't agree more, how about folk stop thrashing the keyboards and go climbing. This crag is local to me and it's great the way it has been developed for more people to get on it and reduce the amount of Lichen that takes over.

I think this is a pretty sad thread to be honest. Its almost like the Brexit/Remain factions in its “I’m right-you’re wrong” attitudes  

Sport crags, trad crags, boulders.... Why is it these sub sections of our glorious sport cannot live together in peace? 

Why is ‘trad’ so bloody untouchable? Why do we ‘Brits’ think our ethos is so god-damn perfect and those pesky euro style routes are so bad? Why is our way better then theirs?????

I let the Diabeg thing go without comment, yet found the idea of bolt anchors to save the tat covered trees a really good one and disagreed strongly with their removal. Similar with Lednock a few years ago.....why not? The mess created by the removal was worse than the bolts themselves. 

Tradition and history are great, but sometimes things change, we move on, we develop. Recent events have shown how important getting outside is, surely we should be making the most of our outdoor spaces, not restricting them in some outdated protectionist way. Should the good old fashioned way we do things here be sacrosanct!?! And I’ve climbed predominantly trad since the mid 80’s so I can see both sides of this debate. 

I see no problem in a happy co-existence between sport and trad. There are many trad crags with blank faces saved for future generations that will simply never be developed, yet with some thoughtful sport style thinking, a whole new life could be given to many crags.  

There is no fear of bolt proliferation, the trad style will not die or be consumed by bolts, it just won’t happen. There’s just a lot of people stuck in the old ways, too narrow minded to see another way.  

I hate reading all this guff, “thou shalt not bolt my chossy trad crag”. Come on, let it go, enjoy climbing in all its varieties.

 

In reply to mike reed:

That’s a lot of rhetoric Mike . The reason trad needs a stout defence and that sport development should be questioned so thoroughly is because its largely a one way process of erosion of one set of values for another. I think Jonnies questioning here is warranted, and that the answers so far have been pretty reasonable (Did ask around, did talk to the FA’s, maybe didn’t ask as widely as should have considering the crag)...

But as soon as a bolt is placed on a crag it changes the character, aesthetic and nature of the crag and opens the door for more bolts. Its hard to put a finger on what that change is and is largely subjective, but essentially it can turn a crag from a place of adventure and curiosity into a place of convenience, of mostly physical challenge. Not always, but most of the time. A lot of trad is based on an illusion of adventure and self-reliance, and if the route 5m away is bolted, or even just the the belay, that breaks that illusion and erodes that sense of self-reliance. In most cases it’s a one way shift so should be a very careful decision.

Some crags are very obvious candidates for making that shift. Moy and the conglomerate crags for instance, with good potential for routes but no sound protection to be seen. Though even there Ashie Fort proves that’s not always the case. But it seems like bolting at established trad crags needs more thought and discussion than what was given here. I dont think “official routes of enquiry” will be the solution. Developing and developers generally don’t work that way. And there should be a degree of weighted local say. But clearly there needs to be a message that placing bolts needs to be well thought out and discussed and there’ll be a kickback if you don’t. Its far too easy now to buy a drill, bolts and resin and get going on a wall with your BMC pdf guide to bolting in hand. The concern is that with so many folks fresh from the wall, new to climbing outdoors, that a few individuals take it upon themselves and have at it on that seemingly neglected old trad crag nearby with the utilitarian belief that they are serving the majority and without maybe a full appreciation of the whole picture. Its already pretty wild west up here for bolting and I think that’s only going to get more so.

In reply to Gav_92:

That may be so, I may agree with you, but this is a debate that should perhaps have been had before rather than after the event. If it had been some might still not agree but I doubt they would be so upset. 

In reply to mike reed:

Unless you're on holiday of course.

In reply to mike reed:

It will, because of wall-bred climbers with a different mindset to that of trad climbers. As wall-bred climbers become the dominant proportion of climbers the climbing of trad will fall by the wayside as trad climbers struggle to find trad partners, or simply don't have the time for trad.  I bet the trad routes at the crag won't see any extra traffic whatsoever.

In reply to Toerag:

You're hitting the big nail squarely on its big head. This has been happening in reality in the Dales for twenty years or so. Not so much when very hard sport sits next to popular well-known trad - Malham is the epitome of this. But take a lesser trad crag that sees less traffic and once the bolts appear, the trad routes days are numbered. Of course, if you're a new climber, fresh from indoors then you're probably far less bothered about the fate of a few 'scruffy' lines that aren't at all popular. History? Tradition? Who cares if we're clipping safely on scoured rock?

In reply to mike reed:

Really? I actually think it is one of the less shouty and more reasonable and constructive bolting discussions.

If mixed trad/sport crags are to become generally accepted rather than just a few anomalies, then this would be, I think, a fairly radical new trend and I would have thought that this is the real issue brought up by the Glenmarksie case. How is it going to be decided which blank faces are suitable for sport development rather than being left as last great trad problems for the future? If this trend had started 30 years ago, I wonder how many of today's trad testpieces might have been bolted. I'm not saying that no such developments should happen, but just that there should be very careful consideration on a case by case basis that goes beyond the desire of locals for some convenient sport.

In reply to mike reed:

Have you read the thread or just what you think the thread is about ? because most of it is not bolts versus no bolts.  Its about due process and building consensus.

In reply to Toerag:

Totally disagree with you there. From a purely Scottish point of view, I think trad will always be around, I just think it can easily live alongside shared sport venues, where that is the best course of action. In fact even in that ‘damned EU’, people do trad climb, and in alpine style is hugely popular so it will always have a place, and it would seem in the UK that that is beyond question!!

Graham, yes I read the whole thread, and I understand that its about communication, consultation, and some form of governance, or lack thereof. I did though, read it as an Aberdeen/Scotland local, as per Glenmarksie, rather than a UK wide/England thing. 

Perhaps some form of debate is needed as to wether the current rules (in Scotland) need to be updated in light of public demand and more modern thinking re sport v trad. 

Just to be clear, I’m not advocating a ‘retro bolting free for all’, just a more open minded attitude to crag sharing and to where bolts are ‘allowed’ to be placed. I love both styles and wish them a peaceful coexistence  

In reply to Alex the Alex:

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  Climbing is a contrived game, which we play by a bunch of rules that are often wrapped up as "ethics".  Your issue isn't with the bolts per se as they're out of reach of your route, it's just that you don't want people playing our contrived game by a different set of rules at the same crag.

This is evidenced by the way some trad climbers are aghast at the thought of a bolt being placed at a tucked away place at the belay, invisible to all apart from those who are looking for it, whereas having a whole bunch of dayglo coloured tat blowing in the wind?  No problem!

Why is this?  Well because the tat is just the remnants of people playing the game by our rules...  The bolt?  Gah!!!  They broke the rules!!!! I mean ethics....

I'd say it's even easier to buy a hammer and chisel and start chopping bolts! 

I'd suggest that instances of inexperienced "wall bred" (god I hate that phrase!) climbers taking it on themselves to go and bolt a crag without being part of the local climbing community and aware of all the various wants, desires, history are quite rare, and that's certainly not what happened here so I wouldn't lose too much sleep over the BMC's pdf!

Now I'm not advocating for bolting, but the status quo isn't sustainable long term.  Clearly the amount of sport routes in the UK doesn't meet the demand and that demand is only going to increase as more and more "wall bred" climbers venture outside.  

As somebody mentioned upthread, the BMC's has no authority in these matters and it's entirely possible that another association of sport climbers could spring up and outnumber it in 20 years.  

I don't think any of us want that.

In reply to Iamgregp:

 "wall bred" (god I hate that phrase!)

then don't use it; it's just condescending and frankly rude.

In reply to daWalt:

Apologies if I offended you, it certainly wasn’t my intention. 

I just thought it would be simpler to use terms that are already in use in this debate.

In my defence, I am exactly the type of person who I’m talking about.  Started out indoors, didn’t even climb outdoors for first couple of years.  

I wish it was just “climbers”, as I implied I’m not really one for divisions and schisms in the climbing community

In reply to Iamgregp:

didn't we all, unless your over the age of about... 50?

In reply to daWalt:

God knows!

Certainly down here in London that seems to be the case, but I guess some people start out outdoors if they happen to line in Cumbria or the Peak or somewhere like that?

However I’m 39 and most of the people I know started indoors so you could be right that there’s a generational divide?

In reply to Lankyman:

When you refer to the Lord are referring to the good Mr Mackenzie?

In reply to Rich W Parker:

All characters are fictitious and any resemblance to actual events is purely coincidental. That's what my lawyer says ....

In reply to jonnie3430:

Somebody was talking upthread about under-the-radar bolting, maybe Robert?

Seems Glencroe has sprouted some bolts too although for anchors rather than protection:

https://www.facebook.com/MountaineeringScotland/posts/4143936525631247

In reply to DaveHK:

This seems insane for a crag covered in stakes at the top (Glen Coe middle crag) 

In reply to Lankyman:

Does that mean they were right and it was the thin end of the wedge all along!  And it looks like it's getting much wider, judging by some of the comments here.

I think there needs to be a redress of British climbing (which won't happen,) as at present people seem to be saying that they learn inside, so they can sport climb and the next step is sport climbing outside, instead of trad climbing. It would be nicer to see clubs playing a bigger part in the transition from indoors to trad outdoors (where the real adventure happens,) but we've mucked that up with professional qualifications instead of amateur ones supported and insured by BMC/ mcos membership. A very big shame and an opportunity for the national organisations if they choose to take it on.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

Well said.  And the SMC contributed to the re bolting with AN fully on board at the time I understand

In reply to Davy Gunn:

I was climbing at Marksie yesterday and it was busy! 2 groups including me and my partner! Never seen another soul there before haha.

I was sceptical about combining bolted routes at a trad crag.. But it was great, warmed up on a few easy sport routes then did some trad. Small sample size, but the other group of relative beginners top-roped a trad route then did a couple of sport routes too.

The crag has great routes on it but is filthy, partly due to lack of use, partly the angle/orientation I imagine with lots of moss. The relatively popular HVS I did was dirty at the top.

It's made me think that actually I will go there and clean a trad line there that I want to climb, so it's positive in this sense having the mix of sport and trad to encourage folk to the venue to actually use it. 

The amount of work it must have taken to prepare the sports routes is very noticable and I say - thank you. The first 4 routes from the right (looking at the crag) wouldn't be trad routes.

Interestingly whilst there the area rescue helicopter spent a good 5-10 minutes reviewing us and the crag at close range so I can only imagine they have heard about the bolts too!

In reply to Simonfarfaraway:

Perhaps because it’s March and it’s been soaking for months?

In reply to S Andrew:

Not really, it's always like this due to lack of use and orientation etc. It's been dry here for ages. Hopefully with a little more footfall and if a few folk clean the existing lines that are rarely climbed it will improve matters.

In reply to Simonfarfaraway:

Now that I check, it was March (a while back) that we were there.

I thought it was really nice. Always meant to go back but it’s not particularly handy for W Lothian!

I do my share of (lower grade) sport climbing but I’m unconvinced by the arguments in its favour on crags like this.

In reply to :

Did anyone manage to get a copy of the topo for this before it got taken down? If so I'd appreciate it if you could send me it.

Ta.