This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Down at Llanymynech today. Noticed a number of routes on Foreigner are missing bolts, some routes have been stripped completely. Some bolts could be found caste on the quarry floor. It all appeared somewhat random.
Anybody aware of this?
Anybody aware of this?
In reply to John Postlethwaite: I have heard there may be a problem with access at the moment, but only through a brief conversation on tuesday. Would be interested to know what has caused this issue. Will no doubt be informed soon enough.
In reply to The Bad Cough: a little more info on the access issues are here http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=3597
In reply to John Postlethwaite: We were there yesterday and found the same. What is a disgrace is that whomsoever stripped the bolts hasn't even bothered to tidy up, they were just strewn around the floor. We spent a bit of time tidying up the bolt bits - so if anyone wants some bolts, 2nd hand, hardly used - we've got some!
In reply to John Postlethwaite:
I receieved an e-mail at about 3pm yesterday (April 7th) from Shropshire Wildlife Trust informing me that they would be removing bolts from the new routes at Foreigner Wall. They state that this is as a result of concerns that have arisen due to trampling damage to the ground directly beneath this wall which is nationally important for orchids. Apparently since this wall has been bolted, the bee orchids at this location have been virtually decimated, and they have taken the unilateral decison to remove the bolts here.
I intend to meet with both Shropshire and Montgomery Wildlfie Trusts in the very near future to protect access to the other routes at Llanymynech - this meeting should have been today but was cancelled due to one of the Wildlife Trust officers being ill.
Elfyn Jones
BMC Access & Conservation Officer (Wales)
I receieved an e-mail at about 3pm yesterday (April 7th) from Shropshire Wildlife Trust informing me that they would be removing bolts from the new routes at Foreigner Wall. They state that this is as a result of concerns that have arisen due to trampling damage to the ground directly beneath this wall which is nationally important for orchids. Apparently since this wall has been bolted, the bee orchids at this location have been virtually decimated, and they have taken the unilateral decison to remove the bolts here.
I intend to meet with both Shropshire and Montgomery Wildlfie Trusts in the very near future to protect access to the other routes at Llanymynech - this meeting should have been today but was cancelled due to one of the Wildlife Trust officers being ill.
Elfyn Jones
BMC Access & Conservation Officer (Wales)
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales:
Hopefully it can resolved. The routes on red wall etc are certainly worth protecting at the expense of foreigner wall, which is a bit lame to be fair. Wouldn't be such a loss to strip the whole of foreigner wall really.
It would be shame to lose access to this crag, its only place where you get good long sport routes and has some cracking routes on red wall and grid iron wall.
Hopefully it can resolved. The routes on red wall etc are certainly worth protecting at the expense of foreigner wall, which is a bit lame to be fair. Wouldn't be such a loss to strip the whole of foreigner wall really.
It would be shame to lose access to this crag, its only place where you get good long sport routes and has some cracking routes on red wall and grid iron wall.
In reply:
Do they have to leave them lying around on the floor?
> I receieved an e-mail at about 3pm yesterday (April 7th) from Shropshire Wildlife Trust informing me that they would be removing bolts from the new routes at Foreigner Wall.
Do they have to leave them lying around on the floor?
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales:
How about a fence along the base of the wall and a sign about the fragile grassland rather than stripping the whole crag?
Chris
How about a fence along the base of the wall and a sign about the fragile grassland rather than stripping the whole crag?
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs:
There are various options to look at and consider, a fence might be one consideration, but apparently the grassland at the base of the wall does need some occassionl(winter) grazing to prevent too much competion from other plants and scrub to allow these orchids to thrive, but not too much trampling from people!
I've e-mailed and left messages with the Wildlife Trust this morning expressing concern about the manner which the bolts have been removed and left on the ground, and suggested that they keep them safe and arrnge for them to be returned to the original owner. I've also asked them to place some sort of notice or information at the base of the routes (or on the approach)to warn that bolts have been removed and to explain why.
I will be looking at all option to allow climbing to continue here, even looking at seasonal restrictions to protect the plants, but as other have said the main aim is to protect access to the most important and well developed walls here.
Elfyn Jones
BMC Access & Consevation Officer
There are various options to look at and consider, a fence might be one consideration, but apparently the grassland at the base of the wall does need some occassionl(winter) grazing to prevent too much competion from other plants and scrub to allow these orchids to thrive, but not too much trampling from people!
I've e-mailed and left messages with the Wildlife Trust this morning expressing concern about the manner which the bolts have been removed and left on the ground, and suggested that they keep them safe and arrnge for them to be returned to the original owner. I've also asked them to place some sort of notice or information at the base of the routes (or on the approach)to warn that bolts have been removed and to explain why.
I will be looking at all option to allow climbing to continue here, even looking at seasonal restrictions to protect the plants, but as other have said the main aim is to protect access to the most important and well developed walls here.
Elfyn Jones
BMC Access & Consevation Officer
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales:
I haven't been there (very remiss I know) bit was thinking of a single fence along the foot of the wall just to highlight to folks the need to avoid the grassland rather than fencing the whole area off.
Sounds like you guys are already on the case which is great.
Chris
I haven't been there (very remiss I know) bit was thinking of a single fence along the foot of the wall just to highlight to folks the need to avoid the grassland rather than fencing the whole area off.
Sounds like you guys are already on the case which is great.
Chris
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales:
The grassland at the base of the foreigners wall?
The foreigners wall joins the Grid Iron wall as an open book corner, so the grassland covers this entire area. It would be a real shame to loose access to the Grid Iron wall.
The grassland at the base of the foreigners wall?
The foreigners wall joins the Grid Iron wall as an open book corner, so the grassland covers this entire area. It would be a real shame to loose access to the Grid Iron wall.
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales: Elfyn, can you clarify which routes have been debolted and which are still OK. Speculation is growing that it's all routes on Foreigner Wall.
In reply to KA:
I guess Gary Gibson might want the bolts back, his profile is in UKC
> (In reply to John Postlethwaite) "so if anyone wants some bolts, 2nd hand, hardly used - we've got some!"
I guess Gary Gibson might want the bolts back, his profile is in UKC
In reply to Missile:
I understand that it is only routes on Foreigner wall that are being de-bolted, but as this work has started before we had the opportunity to attend a site meeting, I'm not in a position to confirm or otherwise which routes are affected.
I'm optimistic that Grid-iron wall won't be affected as these are well-established routes, and the Wildllife Trust are mainly concerned with new routes that have been established recently, and which they say are in contravention of an Access Agreement mentioned in "West Midlands Rock" dated 1995.
Elfyn Jones
I understand that it is only routes on Foreigner wall that are being de-bolted, but as this work has started before we had the opportunity to attend a site meeting, I'm not in a position to confirm or otherwise which routes are affected.
I'm optimistic that Grid-iron wall won't be affected as these are well-established routes, and the Wildllife Trust are mainly concerned with new routes that have been established recently, and which they say are in contravention of an Access Agreement mentioned in "West Midlands Rock" dated 1995.
Elfyn Jones
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales: A lot of interesting and helpful information.
I must confess I was struck by the apparent disregard of the activity which I now understand to be the work of a conservation body.
As for grass at the bottom of the walls, there seems to be precious little within a couple of metres; I would have thought it was the area behind this which needs protecting. I would have something along the lines suggested by Chris Craggs would suffice.
I must confess I was struck by the apparent disregard of the activity which I now understand to be the work of a conservation body.
As for grass at the bottom of the walls, there seems to be precious little within a couple of metres; I would have thought it was the area behind this which needs protecting. I would have something along the lines suggested by Chris Craggs would suffice.
In reply to snoop6060:
If its a choice between loosing the routes on Foreigner wall and loosing access to the whole quarry - then no contest although it sounds unlikely that this will happen.
Climbing Black wall during the banned months is just selfish. Although from other similar threads some lame excuse about not reading the guide book/first time at the crag/didn't know any better/some one else said it would be okay would probably be used.
If you go to a crag it is your responsibility to find this information out.
rant over
sorry
cheers
mark
If its a choice between loosing the routes on Foreigner wall and loosing access to the whole quarry - then no contest although it sounds unlikely that this will happen.
Climbing Black wall during the banned months is just selfish. Although from other similar threads some lame excuse about not reading the guide book/first time at the crag/didn't know any better/some one else said it would be okay would probably be used.
If you go to a crag it is your responsibility to find this information out.
rant over
sorry
cheers
mark
In reply to Mark Westerman:
There`s a similar debate going on about Dinorwic, lets hope that loosing Foreigners wall is the end of it. I`m not a sport climbing fan but Llanymynech is superb especially Black Wall. As Mark points out its your responsibility to check any issues, so please do your homework before visiting.
There`s a similar debate going on about Dinorwic, lets hope that loosing Foreigners wall is the end of it. I`m not a sport climbing fan but Llanymynech is superb especially Black Wall. As Mark points out its your responsibility to check any issues, so please do your homework before visiting.
In reply to Elfyn - A+C Officer For Wales: Elfyn - I'm sure you can express this more tactfully than I can, but if the Wildlife Trust had made some effort to make climbers aware of the issue (via the BMC or by sticking up notices), the alleged damage might have been prevented. Sitting back, letting the damage take place and then taking this action unilaterally seems a bit daft. Those bolts on Foreigners' Wall have been there a while.
In reply to John Postlethwaite: The majority of the bolts on the Foreigner Walls were placed around 3 years ago with a few four years ago.
I have e-mailed the person who has the hangers to try and get them back as they are mine but have had no response.
I would like them back.
As a suggestion why not remove the bolt hangers for 4 or 5 months of the year to allow the Orchids to grow and replace them when gone. It happens on crags in Spain and elsewhere and with careful management could be done here.
If not then I agree that the loss of these walls and the saving of Nomad, Grid Iron, Black and Red Walls would be a fair deal.
I have e-mailed the person who has the hangers to try and get them back as they are mine but have had no response.
I would like them back.
As a suggestion why not remove the bolt hangers for 4 or 5 months of the year to allow the Orchids to grow and replace them when gone. It happens on crags in Spain and elsewhere and with careful management could be done here.
If not then I agree that the loss of these walls and the saving of Nomad, Grid Iron, Black and Red Walls would be a fair deal.
In reply to all:
I am extremely disappointed to hear that the routes on foreigner wall have been taken down. I do not agree with the other posts on here that suggest the wall is a suitable sacrifice to save red, black, nomad, grid etc. The routes on foreigner wall are almost essential for those of us who are less than super human and need some shorter routes. As for the routes themselves I think it's quite rare to have overhangs and noses which are quite easy to climb on, especially when compared to the rest of the quarry. The wall is a good introduction for beginners and yes this probably has made Llanymynech more popular but this is a good thing. The outdoors is for everyone not just a select few.
Is there any evidence that climbers have been destroying these orchids? A correlation between numbers of visitors and the decline of these orchids is not proof of cause and effect. It strikes me that if there's so many climbers in the vicinity of where these orchids grow isn't it better to show us what to look for? Climbers could actually help to catalogue the plants and the bee's that pollinate them. Has nobody thought of this before restricting the enjoyment of others?
Why does everyone assume fencing off the area will work? It isn't just climbers who visit the crags. Far more dog walkers pass through than climbers in my experience. Dogs like chewing plants. Walkers and hikers pass through frequently. Also no one has mentioned the sheep that live on the site. Come nightfall the area is popular with young people as well. What effect do these other groups have on the plants?
I assume some kind of impact study has been done on the quarry, conclusions made and then acted on. I doubt an organisation like the wildlife trust would send a vigilante to go and vandalise the bolts. It would be nice for this information to be made public online if it already hasn't been.
Climbing on Black wall during the ban is a different issue and probably deserves it own thread. It would also be nice if there were more people who climb at the quarry had a say on here, rather than the usual UKC forum suspects spouting the usual guff with no first hand knowledge or facts to back themselves up.
I think climbers need to do more to defend our sport rather than taking one persons actions at face value and making assumptions.
I would also like to say thanks to Gary for putting the routes up in the first place, I've had some good climbs throughout the whole quarry thanks to him.
Thanks for listening...
I am extremely disappointed to hear that the routes on foreigner wall have been taken down. I do not agree with the other posts on here that suggest the wall is a suitable sacrifice to save red, black, nomad, grid etc. The routes on foreigner wall are almost essential for those of us who are less than super human and need some shorter routes. As for the routes themselves I think it's quite rare to have overhangs and noses which are quite easy to climb on, especially when compared to the rest of the quarry. The wall is a good introduction for beginners and yes this probably has made Llanymynech more popular but this is a good thing. The outdoors is for everyone not just a select few.
Is there any evidence that climbers have been destroying these orchids? A correlation between numbers of visitors and the decline of these orchids is not proof of cause and effect. It strikes me that if there's so many climbers in the vicinity of where these orchids grow isn't it better to show us what to look for? Climbers could actually help to catalogue the plants and the bee's that pollinate them. Has nobody thought of this before restricting the enjoyment of others?
Why does everyone assume fencing off the area will work? It isn't just climbers who visit the crags. Far more dog walkers pass through than climbers in my experience. Dogs like chewing plants. Walkers and hikers pass through frequently. Also no one has mentioned the sheep that live on the site. Come nightfall the area is popular with young people as well. What effect do these other groups have on the plants?
I assume some kind of impact study has been done on the quarry, conclusions made and then acted on. I doubt an organisation like the wildlife trust would send a vigilante to go and vandalise the bolts. It would be nice for this information to be made public online if it already hasn't been.
Climbing on Black wall during the ban is a different issue and probably deserves it own thread. It would also be nice if there were more people who climb at the quarry had a say on here, rather than the usual UKC forum suspects spouting the usual guff with no first hand knowledge or facts to back themselves up.
I think climbers need to do more to defend our sport rather than taking one persons actions at face value and making assumptions.
I would also like to say thanks to Gary for putting the routes up in the first place, I've had some good climbs throughout the whole quarry thanks to him.
Thanks for listening...
In reply to permanenttrauma: Thanks very much for your kind words. Your comments are very clear and sensibly thought out and stated. I agree that the intention was to broaden the grade spectrum for the routes here in that all can enjoy
I think a more pragmatic approach between the two organisations would have been more sensible. At a meeting with two of its reps over the winter I suggested that I could act as warden on their behalf and such issues as bolt removal and replacement on this wall when a ban is in place could have been agreed. Assessment of the area with all parties considered i.e. walkers, locals, Wildlife Trust issues and of course climbers could have been the remit.
Of course removing the bolts does not directly create a ban. You can of course still climb the routes but that would be silly. A ban should be formerly agreed and notices posted at the site as had been agreed with Red and Black Walls
I was directly involved with the agrement with a BMC rep in 1990/91 and wrote the guidebook info on the back of that.
Of course I fully understand that the Wildlife Trust have a responsibilty in protectting these plants but there was and is never any intention to destroy them. Identifying what they are and where they are, developing some form of sensible ban and working together on the issue is always best on this.
I have the utmost confidence in Elfyn Jones who is trying to plough his way through this issue, but it seems we may lose this wall for the sake of the others. Its great pity but we should battle on until all avenues are closed.
I would reiterate that Elfyn on behalf of the BMC and climbers will do his best.
I think a more pragmatic approach between the two organisations would have been more sensible. At a meeting with two of its reps over the winter I suggested that I could act as warden on their behalf and such issues as bolt removal and replacement on this wall when a ban is in place could have been agreed. Assessment of the area with all parties considered i.e. walkers, locals, Wildlife Trust issues and of course climbers could have been the remit.
Of course removing the bolts does not directly create a ban. You can of course still climb the routes but that would be silly. A ban should be formerly agreed and notices posted at the site as had been agreed with Red and Black Walls
I was directly involved with the agrement with a BMC rep in 1990/91 and wrote the guidebook info on the back of that.
Of course I fully understand that the Wildlife Trust have a responsibilty in protectting these plants but there was and is never any intention to destroy them. Identifying what they are and where they are, developing some form of sensible ban and working together on the issue is always best on this.
I have the utmost confidence in Elfyn Jones who is trying to plough his way through this issue, but it seems we may lose this wall for the sake of the others. Its great pity but we should battle on until all avenues are closed.
I would reiterate that Elfyn on behalf of the BMC and climbers will do his best.
In reply to Gary Gibson: I would like to publicly thank the person who responded to my e-mail regarding the bolts and thank her agin for tidying them up for us all.
In reply to permanenttrauma:
Probably not because it's not needed. European habitats law does not really require any independent proof before acting and the onus is on the 'transgressor' to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there actions do not have a deleterious effect on the species/habitat etc. - this is partly to allow swift action to protect species etc. However, it is good practice to seek an equable solution and hopefully this will happen...but you might need to compromise about 'essential' though.
> (In reply to all)
>
>
>
> Is there any evidence that climbers have been destroying these orchids? A correlation between numbers of visitors and the decline of these orchids is not proof of cause and effect. It strikes me that if there's so many climbers in the vicinity of where these orchids grow isn't it better to show us what to look for? Climbers could actually help to catalogue the plants and the bee's that pollinate them. Has nobody thought of this before restricting the enjoyment of others?
>
> Is there any evidence that climbers have been destroying these orchids? A correlation between numbers of visitors and the decline of these orchids is not proof of cause and effect. It strikes me that if there's so many climbers in the vicinity of where these orchids grow isn't it better to show us what to look for? Climbers could actually help to catalogue the plants and the bee's that pollinate them. Has nobody thought of this before restricting the enjoyment of others?
>
Probably not because it's not needed. European habitats law does not really require any independent proof before acting and the onus is on the 'transgressor' to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there actions do not have a deleterious effect on the species/habitat etc. - this is partly to allow swift action to protect species etc. However, it is good practice to seek an equable solution and hopefully this will happen...but you might need to compromise about 'essential' though.
In reply to Bulls Crack: Went to llany last night, it appears that the bolt stripping has extended to the LOWER Nomad wall. We headed for Bay Wall area, all around the new fencing were signs saying'CLIMBING STRICTLY FORBIDDEN' encompassing cream wall, blind faith and bay wall. We decided to stay away and climbed on grid iron wall instead. I wasn't aware of any ban on Blind Faith or Bay Wall, these are long standing areas. Cream Wall of course is a newer development so not sure about this one.
As an aside the peregrines appear to now be nesting well away from the currently developed climbing areas (around the top of the tunnel). Maybe a renegotiation of the ban on black and red walls could be an idea as a trade off?
Cheers to Gary and the BMC for their hard work sorting out this issue, it is important to strike a balance between our wishes as climbers and the excellent work that the conservation trusts do in the local area (i have done some volunteer work with them at Llanymynech in the past).
As an aside the peregrines appear to now be nesting well away from the currently developed climbing areas (around the top of the tunnel). Maybe a renegotiation of the ban on black and red walls could be an idea as a trade off?
Cheers to Gary and the BMC for their hard work sorting out this issue, it is important to strike a balance between our wishes as climbers and the excellent work that the conservation trusts do in the local area (i have done some volunteer work with them at Llanymynech in the past).
In reply to tim evans:
A good point Tim, it's been a while since peregrines nested anywhere near black and red wall. The same can be said for the bottom of foreigner wall and the Orchids except to my knowledge they were never any there.
I still don't understand why someone hasn't showed us what's supposed to be growing where. If this person can strip foreigner then make a start on Nomad what says they're going to stop there? All these ideas that various people have come up with to appease the wildlife trust are useless if one person strips the entire quarry with no authorisation but their own.
> As an aside the peregrines appear to now be nesting well away from the currently developed climbing areas (around the top of the tunnel). Maybe a renegotiation of the ban on black and red walls could be an idea as a trade off?
A good point Tim, it's been a while since peregrines nested anywhere near black and red wall. The same can be said for the bottom of foreigner wall and the Orchids except to my knowledge they were never any there.
I still don't understand why someone hasn't showed us what's supposed to be growing where. If this person can strip foreigner then make a start on Nomad what says they're going to stop there? All these ideas that various people have come up with to appease the wildlife trust are useless if one person strips the entire quarry with no authorisation but their own.
In reply to permanenttrauma: This sounds like a horribly complicated situation, but fundementally, who's other authorisation do they need?
We climb by consent in the overwhelming majority of cases. Often it's informal, or a blind eye turned, but fundementally our activities are incidental to the land owner and often cause them extra headaches.
This site is specifically cited by Natural England for its limestone grassland communities. If the frog and fragrant orchids (I'm not sure why bee orchid were mentioned earlier) are judged to be potentially at risk, The SWT are legally obliged to take steps to safeguard them.
We climb by consent in the overwhelming majority of cases. Often it's informal, or a blind eye turned, but fundementally our activities are incidental to the land owner and often cause them extra headaches.
This site is specifically cited by Natural England for its limestone grassland communities. If the frog and fragrant orchids (I'm not sure why bee orchid were mentioned earlier) are judged to be potentially at risk, The SWT are legally obliged to take steps to safeguard them.
In reply to permanenttrauma:
Whilst I appreciate the efforts made by Gary to make the quarries more accesible and explore new areas and am aware I may be labelled as elitist and slated as such:
I think if it appeases the wildlife guys, we (climbers) should be prepared to sacrifice walls such as foreigners, blind faith etc.. to save other walls containing high quality, long established routes (my opinion entirely) such as Red, Nomad, Black and Grid Iron.
Yes, they are harder walls and less people can climb on them, but how many venues in this part of the country have 35m face routes of a high quality? And what are, I believe, to be better quality than the foreigner wall routes.
As opposed to relativly nearby where there is a huge amount of easier limestone routes in the form of trevor rocks etc.. On what is generally better rock (all in my own opinion of course). That have also been developed by extensive efforts from Gary and others.
And in reference to whether it it is likely that climbers are the ones causing the damage, or whether dogs, hikers and kids are the ones killing orchids (which I have no idea personally what they look like), I think it should be quite clear that climbers are in the majority responsible - If we are talking about the area immediatly under the wall. Walkers etc.. tend to keep to the massively obvious path in my observations.
Rich
Whilst I appreciate the efforts made by Gary to make the quarries more accesible and explore new areas and am aware I may be labelled as elitist and slated as such:
I think if it appeases the wildlife guys, we (climbers) should be prepared to sacrifice walls such as foreigners, blind faith etc.. to save other walls containing high quality, long established routes (my opinion entirely) such as Red, Nomad, Black and Grid Iron.
Yes, they are harder walls and less people can climb on them, but how many venues in this part of the country have 35m face routes of a high quality? And what are, I believe, to be better quality than the foreigner wall routes.
As opposed to relativly nearby where there is a huge amount of easier limestone routes in the form of trevor rocks etc.. On what is generally better rock (all in my own opinion of course). That have also been developed by extensive efforts from Gary and others.
And in reference to whether it it is likely that climbers are the ones causing the damage, or whether dogs, hikers and kids are the ones killing orchids (which I have no idea personally what they look like), I think it should be quite clear that climbers are in the majority responsible - If we are talking about the area immediatly under the wall. Walkers etc.. tend to keep to the massively obvious path in my observations.
Rich
In reply to tim evans:
My understanding is that the fencing off has been carried out by the Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust (as this part of the quarry is in Wales) due to concerns re. the structural integrity of the cliff in this area. There have apparently been some recent rockfalls, perhaps as a result of the hard winter. This is obviously not without precedent eg Craig Pant Ifan, Tremadog.
I first climbed Blind Faith in 1978, (and have done it several times since, as well as a number of the other neighbouring routes on the butress) and personally I'm a bit surprised that the whole lot hasn't detatched itself from the golf course well before now.....
Before Llanymynech was developed into a major sport climbing venue and the Cul-de-sac area became a group venue, the crag was virtually off the radar and you could regularly climb there on a weekend or on a summer's evening (as I did) and never ever see any other climbers. Now that it's become a lot more popular, in addition to the continuing development of new sport routes on previously unclimbed areas, a conflict between climbers and landowners was always going to be a case of 'when' rather than 'if'.
This is well worth a read and is relevant to the situation here:
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmcNews/media/u_content/File/access_conservation/ac...
> (In reply to Bulls Crack) Went to llany last night, it appears that the bolt stripping has extended to the LOWER Nomad wall. We headed for Bay Wall area, all around the new fencing were signs saying'CLIMBING STRICTLY FORBIDDEN' encompassing cream wall, blind faith and bay wall. We decided to stay away and climbed on grid iron wall instead. I wasn't aware of any ban on Blind Faith or Bay Wall, these are long standing areas. Cream Wall of course is a newer development so not sure about this one.
>
>
My understanding is that the fencing off has been carried out by the Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust (as this part of the quarry is in Wales) due to concerns re. the structural integrity of the cliff in this area. There have apparently been some recent rockfalls, perhaps as a result of the hard winter. This is obviously not without precedent eg Craig Pant Ifan, Tremadog.
I first climbed Blind Faith in 1978, (and have done it several times since, as well as a number of the other neighbouring routes on the butress) and personally I'm a bit surprised that the whole lot hasn't detatched itself from the golf course well before now.....
Before Llanymynech was developed into a major sport climbing venue and the Cul-de-sac area became a group venue, the crag was virtually off the radar and you could regularly climb there on a weekend or on a summer's evening (as I did) and never ever see any other climbers. Now that it's become a lot more popular, in addition to the continuing development of new sport routes on previously unclimbed areas, a conflict between climbers and landowners was always going to be a case of 'when' rather than 'if'.
This is well worth a read and is relevant to the situation here:
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/bmcNews/media/u_content/File/access_conservation/ac...
In reply to John Postlethwaite: This isn't about orchids, it's a spiteful gesture to the climbers who were having too much fun. It's about time the spotlight was turned on the 'Trust'. Who are they, why are they in charge, where does their money come from and why is the quarry such a mess? What I mean by a 'mess' is ugly fencing, nasty conifers (how do they help orchids) and junk signs and sculptures.
The routes on Foreigners were fun and I don't believe they harmed a single endangered species, the problem was that they were too popular. I guess the reason they left the bolts on the quarry floor was so they couldn't be accused of theft. It must be a blow for Gary Gibson who has worked so hard and provided so much for the climbers at Llanymynech.
The routes on Foreigners were fun and I don't believe they harmed a single endangered species, the problem was that they were too popular. I guess the reason they left the bolts on the quarry floor was so they couldn't be accused of theft. It must be a blow for Gary Gibson who has worked so hard and provided so much for the climbers at Llanymynech.
In reply to caradoc:
I think you're spot on. I've had a read of the SWT site and all the relevant links. The actions that have been carried out do not relate to any of their statements or goals.
First thing I noticed was the clematis issue, seems SWT spend a lot of time trying to remove this plant. According to their website they have even introduced the sheep I mentioned earlier to try and curb its growth. So I find it odd how someone mentioned a clematis earlier in the thread that has been pulled down as a black mark against climbers. Odd when it seems SWT are more likely to have pulled it down than climbers.
Secondly SWT are trying to open up more areas to glades as the orchids thrive in areas of short grass. I would've thought increased human traffic, as well as the grazing sheep would help them achieve their goals. Llanymynech was overgrown several years ago. How ironic it would be if the site has only just become suitable for orchids because of traffic from climbers.
They also mention several times how they want to get more people to enjoy the outdoors. The easy climbs get people to Llanymynech who otherwise wouldn't go there (people who aren't climbers in the traditional sense).
Caradoc is right, the place is a mess as is this situation. I'm not fully convinced SWT is behind the bolt chopping, if they are I would like to know how much money they're paying this person and what good reason they have for not asking Gary who would do it for free and make a better job of it.
Smallerrich is incorrect in his assesment of the situation. The big difference between Trevor and Llanymynech is accessibility. Trevor is a in a location where only climbers and the occasional hiker frequent. Llanymynech is open to everyone so saying there's other climbs at the lower grades around really doesn't cut it.
Also have you not seen the area below the climbs in the late evening? Where do you think all the rubbish, broken glass etc comes from. *hint* It's not from climbers.
I understand that SWT has a legal obligation to protect rare species but in this instance they are either behaving madly, or completely unaware as to what's happening. I'm sure they won't be very happy if someone has been carrying out actions in their name without their authority, using rare orchids as cover for their own malicious motivations.
I think you're spot on. I've had a read of the SWT site and all the relevant links. The actions that have been carried out do not relate to any of their statements or goals.
First thing I noticed was the clematis issue, seems SWT spend a lot of time trying to remove this plant. According to their website they have even introduced the sheep I mentioned earlier to try and curb its growth. So I find it odd how someone mentioned a clematis earlier in the thread that has been pulled down as a black mark against climbers. Odd when it seems SWT are more likely to have pulled it down than climbers.
Secondly SWT are trying to open up more areas to glades as the orchids thrive in areas of short grass. I would've thought increased human traffic, as well as the grazing sheep would help them achieve their goals. Llanymynech was overgrown several years ago. How ironic it would be if the site has only just become suitable for orchids because of traffic from climbers.
They also mention several times how they want to get more people to enjoy the outdoors. The easy climbs get people to Llanymynech who otherwise wouldn't go there (people who aren't climbers in the traditional sense).
Caradoc is right, the place is a mess as is this situation. I'm not fully convinced SWT is behind the bolt chopping, if they are I would like to know how much money they're paying this person and what good reason they have for not asking Gary who would do it for free and make a better job of it.
Smallerrich is incorrect in his assesment of the situation. The big difference between Trevor and Llanymynech is accessibility. Trevor is a in a location where only climbers and the occasional hiker frequent. Llanymynech is open to everyone so saying there's other climbs at the lower grades around really doesn't cut it.
Also have you not seen the area below the climbs in the late evening? Where do you think all the rubbish, broken glass etc comes from. *hint* It's not from climbers.
I understand that SWT has a legal obligation to protect rare species but in this instance they are either behaving madly, or completely unaware as to what's happening. I'm sure they won't be very happy if someone has been carrying out actions in their name without their authority, using rare orchids as cover for their own malicious motivations.
I think as always as a "climber" in an area that allows climbing the first sight of damage then it must of been them, it's all there fault, and the fact that usual responsible climbers are the ones who do tidy up some of the broken glass because they don't want it damaging there kit. I have climbed, and was going to climb at Llanymynech tomorrow (Not now) had have in the past brought bags of rubish home just because, I hate to think someone is going to spoil it for everyone, and look they have this will be all down to a few irresponsible people (possably not even climbers). So the fact of life is no matter how many people go the and respet the bird ban's and clear up a bit of clutter and try to help the situation. Some selfish rude individual will just do what they want. However lets hope not a Llanymynech as it has had some good work by Gary and am sure it is appriciated by anyone that climbs there I certainly do.
In reply to permanenttrauma:
Well if we're talking in terms of it being accessible to climbers, then the fact that Trevor is a place where only climbers and hikers frequent, then surely youve just answered your own point?...
And I believe you are incorrect in that point, Trevor is in every way just as accessible as Llanymynech, as there are regular dog walkers, mountain bikers and groups (climbers or otherwise) at Trevor that I have seen, just as there are at Llanymynech. But this moves away from the original point.
I agree entirely with many of Caradoc's and your own points, but am at a loss as to what you are trying to get accross in terms of my opinion; that if Foreigners wall has to be left to preserve the other (in my opinion) better walls, then it should be done so. Could you clarify?
In terms of people leaving rubbish, glass etc.. at the bottoms of the crag, it is clearly not climbers, and more likely local kids looking for somewhere to hang out, which I believe is the SWT's job to sort out if they are managing the area.
But I still beleive that in terms of general passage of feet at the bottom of the cliffs, which may be what SWT are on about when they talk of damaging orchids (again, no idea what one is so this may be wrong), then climbers clearly have a large impact, as the majority of people I see there doing anything but climbing, stick to the large track away from the crag.
So possibly, as Gary mentioned, the bolts were to be removed for part of the year? This entirely depends on the co-operation of SWT of course.
Rich
Well if we're talking in terms of it being accessible to climbers, then the fact that Trevor is a place where only climbers and hikers frequent, then surely youve just answered your own point?...
And I believe you are incorrect in that point, Trevor is in every way just as accessible as Llanymynech, as there are regular dog walkers, mountain bikers and groups (climbers or otherwise) at Trevor that I have seen, just as there are at Llanymynech. But this moves away from the original point.
I agree entirely with many of Caradoc's and your own points, but am at a loss as to what you are trying to get accross in terms of my opinion; that if Foreigners wall has to be left to preserve the other (in my opinion) better walls, then it should be done so. Could you clarify?
In terms of people leaving rubbish, glass etc.. at the bottoms of the crag, it is clearly not climbers, and more likely local kids looking for somewhere to hang out, which I believe is the SWT's job to sort out if they are managing the area.
But I still beleive that in terms of general passage of feet at the bottom of the cliffs, which may be what SWT are on about when they talk of damaging orchids (again, no idea what one is so this may be wrong), then climbers clearly have a large impact, as the majority of people I see there doing anything but climbing, stick to the large track away from the crag.
So possibly, as Gary mentioned, the bolts were to be removed for part of the year? This entirely depends on the co-operation of SWT of course.
Rich
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...