UKC

I was just looking at the famous photo of Emily Pat Kelly on Scoop Face at Castle Naze after a visit yesterday and noticed something odd: https://images.app.goo.gl/6tqNJYcrwr7KAH2w5

The ground level (visible on the bottom right) seems so high compared to today! It seems as though you could reach straight into the scoop from the ground. Can anyone shed any particular light in the dramatic change in ground height over the last... 100 years? Or... do you think the photo is just misleading?

In reply to C Witter: I don't have an answer, but you can follow features on both photo's and it looks like there's been a lot of material removed from the corner to the R.  Maybe 2 metres?

In reply to C Witter:

The picture seems to be angled upwards on the right-hand side, at least compared to the topo pic in my BMC Roaches guidebook where the base of the scoop looks horizontal.

I wonder if what appears to be the ground in the bottom right of the Kelly pic is actually the rock at the base of the corner to the right of the scoop - where Footstool Left starts.

In reply to C Witter:

I just looked at the photo of Stanley Jeffcoat climbing it (barefoot) in the 1918 Rucksack Journal and it is very similar to the Kelly photo.   The ground level under Scoop face looks the same, but the rocks under Scoop Wall appear to be covered under a bank of soil ramping up towards footstool left.

In reply to C Witter:

I have added a copy of the photo to my gallery.

In reply to C Witter:

I just had a look at a couple of old guidebooks and found the Paul Nunn Guide crag picture and two from the Kinder Area gb from 1974?. Good picture of Geoff Millburn on Scoop Face but no floor included. Then the description which refers to the receding floor.
For what its worth I recall that in the early 70s there was often a small pile of stones at the start to enable shorter people to get onto it.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Thanks Keith! That's helpful and interesting!

In reply to C Witter:

A few years ago we did some filming there including reproducing the set up picture of Hereford, Jeffcoat etc circa 1915. (See linked image) It was immediately apparent in aligning the shot and the photo that the erosion was about 12". I can only assume is a combination of use reducing vegetation and water erosion of exposed subsoil. 

In reply to C Witter:

Coincidentally I was there on Tuesday. I thought my partner would waltz up Scoop Face, as it's the top 50 route on the crag and it was Tony's first visit. He is a very strong climber and accomplished boulderer and was just back from a week in Font, but we didn't have a mat with us. We both had a look at the start of SF, and of the Direct Start, but neither of us fancied try either particularly without a mat. The holds are just so smooth and polished!

The obvious bigger hold on the original route was out of reach for me at a smidge under 5'10" - how tall do you need to be to reach up from the big 'starting foot ledge'?!

Did you do it?

In reply to simondgee:

Brilliant picture!

In reply to CurlyStevo:

That's a nasty looking landing under the normal start. Never been to Castle Naze, one of the reasons being, all the photos seem to have horrible looking pointy blocks in the foreground....

In reply to alan moore:

It's really not that bad and well worth a visit.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Thanks. Actually, I think this photo illustrates well how much ground has gone! And the soil and grass under Scoop Wall has also mostly gone now. Which is a good thing, I think.

In reply to TobyA:

I've seconded Scoop Face quite a few years ago as a novice and remember feeling quite excited on it. This time I did SF Direct. It's puzzling to start with but all there and enjoyable once you've worked it out. Also, contrary to what people say, there is a little gear slot within one of the jugs to protect the rockover. I'm quite tall (a smidge under 6ft?) but wasn't at full stretch by any means. I think shorties can start half a step further right to avoid feeling disadvantaged. Worthwhile! Unfortunately my partner wasn't feeling well so we left after that. Lovely crag though!

In reply to C Witter:

I think from the picture it’s possible it was a steep bank to the right of the old picture and the actual ground level not shown to the left could well be at a similar level to what it is today (give or take a foot or so). The newer picture I linked shows what could be the steep bank eroded back some what.

In reply to C Witter:

Chris, is the gear placement you mention on the original start or the direct? I know it's blatant cheaty beta but if it's on the original I should probably give it a go!

In reply to TobyA:

It's on the Direct - but still worth a go!

In reply to C Witter:

Cheers! so on the original no gear until you are up on the scoop? Or even across it to the crack on the right end?

In reply to TobyA:

I dunno, tbh, sorry. From the photos it looks like people manage to get runners to the left in the VS or in the scoop, but dunno if they're any good or fiddly and marginal. If you have a nervous second, it might be best to lead on two ropes so you can belay more directly above them on the trickier first moves.

In reply to TobyA:

There's a smallish cam (friend 1 or 1.5 I think but it's been a while) on the left when you get into the scoop. You've got to do unprotected 5a moves to get there though. 

It's a very good route and well worth the trip. SF and No Zag and The Crack would make for a quality evening session. Especially if you watch the sun set and then go for a pint in the beehive

In reply to Alex@home:

Cheers. Actually I've done No Zag and the Crack previously. Also did Pilgrim's Progress when there last week - a great little route, very intimidating looking for the grade, but as soon as you put a handjam and a chunky cam in you realise you can't fall off and it wouldn't matter if you did! 😀

In reply to TobyA:

You can actually get a decent cam in one the original start. I seconded it more recently and was somewhat perplexed as to how I’d missed it on my lead. Probably due to not wanting to hang around on those glassy holds…