UKC

Unfortunately a little late for entry into the new Scottish Sport Climbs guide but for those interested, here's a topo for 6 nice new sport climbs at Ratho Quarry: http://eicaratho.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/ratho-quarry-sport-wall-topo.html

In reply to buzby78:

For "new" read "retrobolted" in at least two cases!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Yep, Slow Strain and Pettiffers have been retro'ed with the kind permission of the 1st ascensionists, everything else is new as far as I know?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Fixed that.


In reply to buzz:

Good routes and topo, cheers.

In reply to buzby78:

Thanks, that is useful. It's a pity that SS and PW couldn't have been thoroughly cleaned and lower offs installed, rather than fully retroed - I'd rather that was the way to restore neglected routes (Farrletter aside!). But still it's good there are more additions to the quarry.

In reply to buzby78:

Cheers Buz, look forward to having a crack at them.

In reply to Fiend:

Indeed. I went to Ratho today after 30 years of regular visits (the last 10 of which have been in intensive training), finally feeling ready and psyched for my onsight of Pettifer's Wall, only to find that someone had retrobolted it. Gutted.

Pre EICA, Slow Strain used to be one of the more popular routes in the quarry. Had it fallen into disuse?

In reply to Robert Durran: The workings above the quarry had left a large earth cornice above them, meant they were always dirty and wouldn't stay clean.

In reply to JamieSparkes: 'earth cornices' , I don't think I've ever read a more terrifying phrase.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Don't worry Bob, you can now legitimately take the ball-point tick, safe in the knowledge that both were well beyond you.

PS shouldn't you already be abroad in some exotic climbing location for the next 6 weeks?

In reply to Fraser:


I've gambled on a summer in Scotland (because nowhere else in the world comes near it), though I might resort in desperation to forays south of the border if it rains. So that's probably five weeks in Ratho and a week dodging showers in Pembroke then......

In reply to buzby78:

Excellent job and effort, thanks buzby! See there are also a couple of additional routes next to wounded knee. Wally 2(?) Retrobolted? And another route to the left? New or another retro route?

Excellent bolting. kamakazi was particularly good. Sure they will get traffic. Hopefully there will be some more!

In reply to buzby78:

what are the 2 routes bolted on the right hand side of the quarry, i lead the left hand of the 2 (with the big mantle to start)but dont know a name or grade.

In reply to buzby78:

The new route left of Wally 2 is called The Corrieman and goes at about 6c+, a really great route I think! Wally 2 has been bolted and is now a cheeky 6c.

Getting the local farmer with his JCB in next week to help tidy up more of the quarry, lots more new routes to get bolted, watch this space...

In reply to buzby78: Hi Buz,
I really hope it's not the intention to retro-bolt most routes in the quarry ? I'd have serious problems with the Septic Heil/ Gruel Brittania area being touched. I feel even starting on the Wally wall is a bit far, Wally 2 was a great wee bold route.
So what is the plan for the quarry's future,now that folk have realised there's some rock just outside the arena door? Has there been any type of consultation with 1st ascentionists and those who still climb trad in there? I know Ean T was against the retro-bolting of one of his trad lines.
Interested to know.
Cheers Iain

In reply to smally:

It's not the intention to retro-bolt most routes in the quarry, only ones that are neglected and gearless and then after I had spoken to 1st ascentionists. Most of the new bolted routes are new ones and its really helped to get the quarry tidied up a little!

I've spoken to Ian T and he's stated that he doesn't want one of his routes bolted, i'll honour that request. If we left the quarry in the way in was, machete's were going to be needed to access and depart most routes! Having another big tidy up next week, feel free to come along and help! buz

In reply to smally: Agreed. Bolting Pettifer's Wall was the obvious solution. By all means put up new routes in whatever style you want, but it seems more than a little unnecessary to start retrobolting existing routes just because they're bold. How widely are you consulting before you start throwing bolts in?

We don't want one of Edinburgh's few decent local trad venues to be destroyed. However, good work on attempting to keep the brambles down, it has become a bit overgrown up top and could do with another prune.

In reply to JamieSparkes:
Good post.
It would be utterly wrong for this quarry to be indiscriminately retro bolted. I'm utterly dismayed that someone felt it ok to bolt Wally 2.
As for the flora, yes a bit of pruning should be enough to keep it under control.
Let's not see the quarry turning into an extension of the indoor wall.

In reply to buzby78:


>Most of the new bolted routes are new ones and its really helped to get the quarry tidied up a little!

>If we left the quarry in the way in was, machete's were going to be needed to access and depart most routes!


I have to ask, how does bolting tidy up the quarry in a way that pruning can't? Genuinely interested to know the thinking behind this.

Bolting routes to clean them seems like a poor argument and a very slippery slope to start on.

In reply to Removed User: I imagine it's for the convenience of the OP, given that he works for EICA.

whenever I climb here, I take a pair of secateurs as a matter of course and spend a few minutes at the base/top of each route to try to keep them clear, especially the exit path round from the top of Shoskred etc.

In reply to buzby78:

Really good to have some sport routes next door to EICA! Great work.

In reply to buzby78:

If anyone really does object to the work I've been doing out in the quarry recently then please feel free to drop into Ratho sometime and have a chat or else drop me a phone. I'm not really too keen to have any online discussions about this. Cheers, buz

In reply to buzby78:

No, I can see why you don't like the way this is going.
Unfortunately you can't be contacted through this site and you haven't got a real name or posted your phone number. If you want to rectify this then great, I might drive out to Ratho and have a chat with at a time that's convenient for me, you and your employer.

Otherwise, here's my view.
I have no issue with the existing sports climbs on the unprotectable parts of the quarry.
I object to you retro bolting existing lines and ask that you remove any fixed protection from Wally2.
I am concerned that you plan to carry out cleaning of the quarry floor on an industrial scale. The quarry has always been overgrown and I would object to wholescale removal of trees and other vegetation.

Regards,

Eric Christison

In reply to Removed User:

Yes he can - by email.

I hope it was clear that my "outraged" post about four weeks ago (I've been up north living the montain crag dream!) was tongue in cheek and not to be taken seriously. However, one of the first ascentionists of Pettifer's contacted in sympathy and claimed that permission had not been given for the bolting of that route. If that route and Slow Strain are permanently dirty due to a new earth cornice, are bolts going to make any difference (without recleaning every time it rains). Personally I've no problem with a mix of trad and sport in the quarry but agree with othres that there should be a presumption against retro-bolting.

In reply to Robert Durran: I think that in the case of pettifers they will do. It's more a problem of topping out.

I went out with the intention of digging the top of these routes well back but after the effort involved in getting quick pull to a state you could climb it again I honestly couldn't face doing it for the rest, so fixed lower off's below the earthworks did seem to offer a solution.

In reply to Robert Durran: You're right I'm browsing on mobile phone and my first attempt didn't work...
Yes, Petifer's wall looked a bit of a hopeless case the last time I looked which was a while ago. I recall seepage from the top bringing down earth with it. I seem to remember thinking though that given time, enough vegetation would establish itself to limit the amount of debris coming down. And of course you're right that bolts won't keep a route clean any more than they will limit the growth of vegetation.

In reply to Removed User:

neillbusby@edinburghleisure.co.uk

0131 3336321

In reply to buzby78:

I hadn't seen this update to the thread and if I hadn't been emailed about it I'd half think it was a joke.

This is an utter bloody disgrace. Wally 3 is NOT neglected and gearless at all, I lead it a couple of years ago and it has good RPs to protect the crux and a good rest before placing them. Absolutely proper trad that should not be ruined by needless retrobolting.

Further to that I was aspiring to lead Wally 2 when I next was in the quarry outside and do not want that ruined either.

Despite having a climbing wall built in it, Ratho has always had good quarried trad climbing and this must not be ruined. Please remove the bolts ASAP.


If you're not able to defend you actions online (perhaps because they are indefensible), then you shouldn't have taken them in the first place. Make major changes to a crag removing established trad routes and you should be prepared to discuss it openly.

In reply to Fiend: Wally 2 has probably seen more ascents in the couple of weeks since it was bolted than in the last 20 years. To me it makes more sense to have it in a state (bolted) where people actually get on it and get some use out of the rock...rather than just really be a few lines in a guidebook that almost nobody climbs.I think sometimes people can get a bit too precious about retrobolting trad routes that few people are ever likely to climb. This one in particular...it wasn`t some kind of iconic route or anything, just another reasonable line in a dolerite quarry that saw an ascent about once every ten years or so. Now it exists as a pleasant easy-mid grade sport route that will see plenty of ascents.Good!

In reply to Kirriemuir:


That would be true of a great number of trad lines. Should we bolt all of them?

In reply to Fiend:

Agreed, and discuss it BEFORE bolting it!

How one person thinks they have the right to do this is beyond me. I'm sure this is being done purely for commercial reasons. Why else would ANYONE get a tractor in to clear the bottom of a quarry??

In reply to Jamie B: You are, of course, free to bolt whatever you want. I don`t think all the trad lines you refer to should be bolted, and I don`t like the idea of blanket "rules" like no retrobolting either. Much better to consider routes/crags individually. The retro`ed routes at Ratho are a positive step...making routes available to loads more people, what`s bad about that?

In reply to Martin1978:

Because it is miles more efficient than having a team of workers do it, perhaps?

In reply to Kirriemuir: What a stupid argument!

Based on your argument we should tarmac every possible route up a mountain, as that would make tem even more popular and "pleasant".

Not everything in life is a right and should be given to the majority on a plate. Some things need to be earned, including climbing routes. It wasn't impossible before the bolts. If you REALLY wanted it then you'd have worked at it and got it as a trad route. MTFU.

In reply to Kirriemuir: No shit, it was a rhetorical question given the context of my reply.

In reply to Martin1978:

You`re being hysterical now, please stop.

In reply to buzby78:

Good work Buzby!

In reply to robmack:

No it's bloody not. What is good about ruining decent, accessible trad routes? Nothing.

In reply to buzby78:

It's a quarry, Entirely man made. Surely the scope for bolting is endless. However, good routes with frequent ascents and stars should be left alone.

Judging by what's been bolted the bolter/s have taken this into account?

Why is everyone getting so riled up? It's not like Sedge or Oroborus have been/will be getting bolted.


What I would like to see though is Godzilla Cleaned up and bolted for use!

In reply to Kirriemuir:

Absolutely wrong. Number of ascents does not equate to the value of the experience and does not justify ruining an established route. There's a lot of easy shit rubble that gets bolted in Peak quarries and gets lots of ascents because it's convenient and accessible, that does not mean it's worth bolting or worth climbing.

Equally just because retro-bolting a route makes it a lot easier lead and allows more people to do it, that does not mean it should be bolted. If the challenge is too high there are a LOT of easier accessible trad routes around the Central Belt or within an hour's drive.

I noticed you've conveniently left out Wally 3 which has 5 listed leads on UKC in 3 years (and who knows how many else not listed), and further leads of this should not be denied because it gets retrobolted.

In reply to hexcentric:


So?? It's got good, well-established trad climbing in it, that should be left alone.

Millstone, Lawrencefield, Dinorwic Slate, Hodge Close....are all quarries, and all have trad climbing from good to great. Ratho may only have a few great routes (Shear Fear, Gruel Brittania, Wally 1?) but it has a lot of good ones that are well worth leading.

When the "neglected" Pettifar's Wall got bolted, you could say "It's not like Wally 3 will be getting bolted"....except it has.

IF there is neglect in the quarry, the best thing to do would be to tackle that neglect rather than ruin the routes. Clear vegetation, highlight paths, clean top-outs, add lower-offs if necessary, clean or fix loose rock, have clear signposts past the indoor wall for trad climbers, ascend all the trad routes and post up-to-date information online - there is so much positive that can be done whilst leaving the routes intact.

In reply to Fiend:
So accessible that no one climbed them? It was overgrown and unloved, now Edinburgh has some clean accessible sport thanks to Buzby's hard work, I'll climb them next time I'm down now, I had no interest in getting on them before.

In reply to Fiend:
But no-one climbs there.
It is almost always empty even on lovely sunny days.
Even Shear Fear has only seen 5 ticks this year.
The newly bolted routes will see more ascents this summer than all the rest of the quarry put together.
You might not like it (I might be at best ambivalent) but folks prefer well bolted middle-grade sport to trad climbing on quarried dolerite.
The EICA own the quarry - it does not have to be a democracy or a commitee decision.

In reply to robmack:

That the routes will get a lot more ascents is not in doubt.

The discussion should be about whether established trad routes which still have appeal to a few should be retro-bolted without a widespread consultation.

Or to put it another way, what is "the greatest good in the greatest number"?

In reply to Jamie B:
Jamie,
*puts on Devil's Advocate hat*
Do they actually need to consult?
They own the quarry.

B

In reply to Hay:

Just because "no-one climbs there" does not mean that lack of bolts is the problem, nor bolting is the solution, nor at all justifiable. AS I said above there are many ways to encourage people onto these climbs without ruining their trad nature. If the quarry was getting "overgrown", the obvious solution is to clear the vegetation (when I was down in England I was involved in clean-ups doing just that, and later on met people climbing trad at the quarry we'd cleaned, just because it had been cleaned). Also, signposting the trad quarry clearly, making it easy for trad climbers to get in there, would be a much better option.

EICA gave reassurances that putting Ratho Wall in Ratho Quarry would not destroy the trad climbing there. Now they are allowing one of their instructors to do just that.

In reply to Jamie B:
The discussion is about a specific quarry who's owners have decided to bolt it. The fact that it is owned by a climbing centre means that it can offer a first step into climbing on real rock for many. In this case I feel that the bolting is justified, do we need another discussion on retro bolting?

In reply to robmack:

So EICA-Ratho have decided to retro-bolt the established trad routes, not just Busby??

In that case, does anyone have a copy of their initial promises that they would not destroy trad climbing in the quarry??

The bolting is completely unjustifiable, and the quarry is not a suitable place to start climbing on real rock. The easier routes at Rosyth, Hawkcraig, or Traprain Law would be more suitable.

Also, this is how to sort out a "neglected" and "overgrown" quarry, and believe me Egerton was a LOT worse than Ratho:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=187635
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=230978

In reply to Fiend:
I wasn't aware that the EICA had elected me as their spokesperson!

There aren't many bolts at Hawkcraig or Rosyth...

In reply to Hay:

Just like Carnmore, Beinn Eighe, even The Dubh loch?

In reply to robmack:

No but you've said that Ratho are doing it as quarry owners, rather than Busby on his own.

No there aren't any bolts at those venues. You don't need bolts as the first step to real rock, from any direction. On the other hand there are bolts at North Berwick and all the Angus quarries.

In reply to Fiend:
No, for those wanting trad as their first steps they have all the crags you mentioned, if they want to climb sport they don't have the same choices.

In reply to robmack:

If they want to climb in the UK, they will accept that trad climbing is prevalent. Climbing is climbing. If people are not able to manage it, they have a choice to not do it.

In reply to robmack:

Absolutely!

Just another thought...

Seeing as it is a man made hole in the ground, Surely it also shouldn't matter if a route is bolted (given it is not a classic) and you can still choose to climb it with trad gear. No one is making you clip the bolts.

In reply to Fiend:

Total rubbish

In reply to Robert Durran:

Let's hear something new then....

In reply to hexcentric:

Oh FFS

In reply to robmack:

No need for anything new. Some people just clearaly need to hear again (or perhaps for the first time) the long established principle that there is an automatic presumption against the retrobolting of existing trad routes, except in exceptional circumstances and ideally with the permission of the first ascentionist.

In reply to hexcentric:

Once again, the man-made hole in the ground argument is just as wrong as the neglect argument and the popularity argument. Master's Edge is in a man-made hole in the ground and has had the same number of recorded new leads as Wally 3. Neither should be retrobolted.

In reply to Robert Durran:

What about landownership?

In reply to robmack:

One would hope the owners of a climbing wall in a climbing quarry in one of the most popular climber's counties in Scotland, having given reassurances to the climbing community about continuing to allow climbing in that quarry, would show some responsibility and respect for the climbing community and not start, or even allow, ruining routes in that quarry.

IF I had turned up at Ratho Quarry and started retro-bolting routes (rather than just adding new sport routes), I would have fully hope and expect that Ratho would step in and stop me doing so, to avoid destroying a good trad venue that they have taken responsibility for.

In reply to robmack:

Except perhaps in a strictly legal sense, I really don't think that is relevant to climbing precedent, traditio or ethics. Legally, I'm sure the EICA could chip convenient holds on all the routes in the quarry. It could be argued that, as a high profile and influential establishment, the EICA should be bending over backwards to uphold precedent, tradition and ethics.

In reply to Fiend:

It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Or opening up rock to more people? Is there not some massive percentage of wall users who never climb on rock? They may view it as their role to open up climbing to more people.

In reply to robmack:

And, if the way to get them on rock is to bolt trad routes and inevitably create a snowballing demand for more, I hope they never do.

In reply to Fiend:


Well put. This forum is a valuable source of the opinions of some of the community. First ascensionists should be asked their opinion regarding retro bolting but I don't think this should be the only opinion concidered for a route, as many other subsequent climbers will climb these routes.

Ratho is an excellent trad venue and should remain as such. That said there is a lack of sport in the area, so some sport routes in the quarry can be a good thing. Wich routes to bolt is however very contentious, as can be seen in the thread. A great job has been done creating these routes but consultation of other climeber in the area is needed.

As said by others over and over again, climbing trad routes without using palced bolts is not a resonable option!!!

I hope further developments in the quarry will be within the wishes of the majority of the community.

In reply to sebrider:

Yes. FWIW I do support the creation of NEW sport routes in the quarry especially on walls unsuitable for trad climbing.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Agreed.

In reply to sebrider:
Hi Seb,
Which community though?
An exit poll at the Centre? Ask the ever-dwindling number of Edinburgh-based club climbers? An online forum?

I am not saying I disagree with you but I don't know if a) there actually is a community and b) if they are poll-able in any useful way.

Bruce

In reply to Robert Durran:

Not as handy for an evening out those three.

For Ratho Quarry to be as empty as it is speaks volumes to me.
Its often desolate on evenings when the wall, Limekilns, Aberdour and Traprain are all busy. Do local clubs ever go?

In reply to Hay:

Ratho is emptier because of the lack of easier routes. Sobeit. Some crags don't have easier routes so they are less popular because less people can climb the routes. That does NOT under mean they should be retro-bolted for that reason.

If the quarry is "desolate", then people should do as I said before:


Before ruining the routes.

In reply to Fiend:


But why should they do that? They have decided to clean it up and bolt it instead. Its theirs so they can do that.

I would suggest that if there actually is a ground-swell of irate local traddies then they should have organised a clean up themselves before now.

In reply to Hay:

Sorry as a semi-local climber (sport trad and bouldering), I was too busy sporadically working my way through actually climbing the trad routes in the quarry to notice it needed much of a clean-up. I haven't been this year so maybe it needed one this year or maybe that is some justification pulled out of thin air to try to pretend this cock-up has some point to it.

See above re: ownership. Yes they own it, and yes they said initially that they would keep the quarry routes and keep access for climbers, not that they would decide to remove the trad routes by retrobolting them.

In reply to Fiend:

Do you suffer from high blood pressure?

In reply to Fiend:

You are totally justified to be agitated about it....I would be miffed too if a route I'd stuck my neck out on was suddenly bolted. It would take something away from my memory of having done it. Not sure why but it would.

However that won't change things - the reality is that more routes will get bolted and retro-bolted at Ratho (and probably elswhere) esp. if they have fallen into disuse. Whichever way you look at it Ratho quarry is in disuse. Even the 'popular' routes see very little traffic.

If trad climbers (and I am one) want to preserve their history, ethics and routes of then more needs to be done to secure that.
Local quarries are a mess. Ratho is overgrown, Cambu Wee Quarry is a jungle, Rosyth is a permanent mess, getting down from Hawkcraig (west) is either time consuming or unjustifiably dangerous.

If we want to hold onto these places then they need to be places where folks want to be and to climb in the style that the routes were put up in. Sometimes that will mean getting organised to do a proper tidy up and for clubs to adopt crags and look after them. Sometimes it will also mean accepting conscessions - ab stations, replaced pags (yuk) even (yikes) a bolt or two.

The choice is that or accept that everntually there will be waaaaay more sport climbers than traddies and more things will get bolted up.

Bruce

In reply to Hay:


4 fully trad routes fully retrobolted as sport climbs is what you mean.

Ratho was nowhere near too overgrown to climb a couple of years ago. The routes that have been retrobolted are on open walls - clean open walls in the case of the Wallys.

Cambus West is nowhere near a jungle, I recced it in spring. IF it was then a bit of tree clearence would be all that was needed - and would ALWAYS be the obvious choice before wrecking the routes with bolts.

In reply to Fiend:
What was the off like on the Wally side? That was always the defining factor for me not climbing much in there, horrible belays and all the sprauchling about in the gorse. Getting down from the other side of the quarry it just horrible. Better belays and ab stations would help a lot.

Wally area was also enough of a damp cowp at the bottom for them to need a tractor. Same could have been done to clear it as a trad area. Did anyone ask? Did any local climbers take ownership of that?

Cambu needs a good clearance with permission from the landowner. It is just about manageable at the moment but much longer and the number of sycamores will mean it is canopied. Yuk. Midgie hell.

You are right, for Traddies spring cleaning would be the best solution before bolting. When was the last time anyone did any.....?

In reply to buzby78:
I was disappointed to turn up at Ratho last week to find a number of perfectly good, established trad routes retro-bolted. I might be in the minority here but feel strongly that all climbers should be given a voice, especially in the central belt where rock is relatively scarce.

I go out to have a bit of an adventure and enjoy bold/less frequented routes. By bolting the existing trad routes in the quarry, you are reducing them to a lower level and sanitising the climbing experience for others. Route like Wally and Pettifer's wall are great examples of this.

I'd much rather climb these in their original state without bolts, accepting and enjoying the risk involved, than climb them as 'just another sport route'. If you want this kind of experience then it's not too far to the EICA...

Please don't bolt any more established trad routes at the quarry or elsewhere in the area without proper discussion with all crag users.

In reply to buzby78:

Why is nobody listening to me???

Do you not realise I'm a climbing god!! Voices tell me all the time, I need to tell everyone else what to climb, grade routes for the mediocre masses and be an all round oracle. Ignore me at your peril as I'm going to carry on my mission whatever obstacles you throw in my path

I'm going to be spreading my message continually through this mass medium of electronic information, so stay posted for more

M

In reply to Hay:

So descend at the east end, then. It adds all of about two minutes compared to the downclimb at the west end. Or you could ab down The Chimney if there's no-one climbing it, which there usually isn't because it's a bit dirty and not particularly interesting; there's even a massive tree-root at the top you can run your ab rope round.

In reply to robmack:

Well, they wouldn't have the same choices, would they? In addition to the sport climbing venues Fiend listed there's also Benny Beg which is absolutely teeming with low grade bolted routes if people insist on having fixed gear for their first outing on real rock. But it really isn't necessary, as I suspect a majority of actively climbing UKC members would be able to attest to.

In reply to Martin W:

The venues Fiend listed are trad venues, like all other climbing round Edinburgh, these bolted routes bring more choice.

In reply to robmack:

...at the cost of destroying trad routes, betraying trad climbers, snubbing the first ascentionists AND all those who have climbed them as trad and want to climb them as trad, and going directly against the general spirit and ethos of British climbing.

Chipping the routes into submission would bring more choice.

Putting bolt-on holds on the routes would bring more choice.

Drilling a via ferata into the rock would bring more choice.

Putting a load of self-belays at the top would bring more choice.

Climbing is not about making the routes as easy as possible so that as many people (not climbers) can do them.

Climbing is about the full spectrum of routes from easy to challenging, and if routes are too challenging, then people have the choice to not climb them, to go elsewhere out of the vast choice of venues with easier routes, and to leave the routes until they are good enough. They do NOT have a choice to ruin good trad climbs.

Climbing is about having a balance between trad and sport and that balance comes from accepting the generally trad nature of UK climbing and working with that, not wrecking trad climbs on a whim.

In reply to Martin W:
Martin,
Would it not just be better to instal an ab piste at the hotel end?
Certainly better than abbing a climb, however grotty.
Faff, pointless danger and grottiness are three of the things that put folks off trad climbing.
If we can limit the amount of non-climbing related faffing about and get folk enjoying more routes then I reckon we'd have more trad climbers.
B

In reply to Fiend:

Needless to say I am only talking about the retrobolting of the good established trad routes.

I support adding more sport climbs to the quarry (the F6b I climbed on the same day as doing Ane Ledge was rather nice), and I support sport-climbing in suitable non-trad venues around the country including the Angus and Arbroath ones, Berwick Law, Benny Beg, etc.

In reply to Fiend:

Thanks for clearing that up, I hear all those developments are part of stage 2!

In reply to Fiend:

I actually agree with this, I'd be interested in taking a look at some of the starred trad lines.

In reply to Fiend:
Would it be worth asking for an open meeting with Centre mgmt to discuss improving the quarry for all climbers and safeguarding the other routes....?

Hi Bruce, by 'community' I just mean those climbing in the area or with an interest with climbing in the quarry.

True getting the opinion of folk not so easy. Think a meeting could be a great idea, it has been done before i.e. for development of aberdeenshire sea cliffs, apparently constructiveWould be a good opportunity to discuss the future of all dolerite quarries if things are going that way :/

This is an issue, leaving routes as harder trad, for a few annual ascents, which is needed, or sport routes that would see much more traffic, a difficult choice that won't please all!

In reply to buzby78: I was never happy with the construction of the Ratho quarry climbing centre....I have never been to visit the place since it was built.
I spent many nice days in that quarry in my early years of climbing. It was probably the best quarry to climb in around Edinburgh, the quarry was full of trees and the routes were really challenging with only a few pegs here and there.....it had a bit of a natural/trad feel to the place.
Retro bolting is not a good practice, yes, it may make the route more popular but I'm sure that would be the case for lots of trad routes.
I don't oppose bolts, I've installed them when doing new routes, but I would never consider retro bolting anything.

In reply to robmack:


Do they? Or do they pander to sport-only climbers who have no intention of choosing anything else?

In reply to Hay


So by retro-bolting routes that are still climbed you make trap more attractive?! Interesting hypothesis...

In reply to Hay:

Actually, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that. However, as I pointed out, it's hardly a major imposition to descend at the east end if you don't fancy the down-climb at the west end (which isn't "grotty", and can only barely be described as pointlessly dangerous - and of course abbing has risks too).

In reply to robmack:

I know Fiend's list was of trad venues. That's why I said that sport climbers don't get the same choice ie they can't climb at those venues because they're trad. As you yourself allow, there are already a number of sport venues which climbers who prefer fixed protection can choose to go to. I'm not sure what your point is?

In reply to Martin W:

Snap! I don't get your point either.

Benny Begg is miles away as are any of the bolted crags & quarries in Angus and Perthshire.

In reply to buzby78: I visited the quarry for the first time recently and enjoyed both the sport and trad lines. I wouldn't want to see any more retro bolting however.

I found the walk off from the trad lines pretty prickly. It would be great if a path could be cleared up here as part of the clean up.

In reply to robmack:


I used to live in Edinburgh. I found that mountain crags were miles away, but this didn't stop me travelling to enjoy them or lead me to demand that one got built in the Central Belt.

In reply to Jamie B:

Good for you, so do I. Would you travel to Edinburgh for some dank quarry from hours away or some pretty shitty sport outside of Crieff from Edinburgh?

In reply to robmack:


I've done so from Kinlochleven, if that answers your question. Not saying I wouldn't welcome some easier-access sport nearer my home, but I accept my geographical constraints and don't try to overcome them by bolting local trad routes.

In reply to Jamie B:

We're in the same boat then. I'm not going to bolt anywhere but I welcome easy access sport locally.

In reply to Jamie B:
Jamie,
Sorry don't think my post was clear - have strayed into territory from the other thread.
Re faff and the 'quality' of the day out: no, bolting up routes is not the answer to that. Bolting up is what has happened here to a bit of rock that the owners thought could be better used.
I would hazard a guess that the Centre would not have taken these actions if....a local club had adopted the crag, local traddies had got organised and mounted a clear-up, traddies we're more open minded about the logistics (ab stations, decent belays, replacement of old pegs).
If we want the indoor climbers to go out into the quarry then decents can't involve jumping fences or 30m free-hanging abs off bits of the building. Balays can't involve gorse roots and ancient scaff bar.
Bruce

In reply to Hay:

So in short, make sport better, make trad better. I think we can all agree on that.

In reply to Jamie B:
Aye.

In reply to Hay:


Once the bolts are out and the current trad routes are safeguarded (not that there ever should have been any danger to them in the first place), then that would be a good idea. I'd happily be present to support improving the quarry.


In reply to lynx3555:


To be fair, until this debacle, the construction of Ratho Wall had not caused many problems to the remainder of the quarry at all. Once the dust had settled most of the good trad routes were just as good as before and well worth doing. I'd done Welcome To The Cruise (quite hard), Ane Ledge (short but great fun), Pete's Wall (pretty good), Oroborous (still don't like this!), Shear Fear (brilliant), Wally 3 (great), and Gruel Brittania (brilliant). Next on the list was Strong Arm, Wally 2, Wally 1 and maybe Alopecia.

And to be fair, the wall itself is truly excellent, despite the cold issue in winter.


In reply to robmack:


So?? Edinburgh doesn't have many sport crags on it's doorstep, SOBEIT. Neither do many places in the country. If you don't have crags / sport crags / mountain crags / sea-cliffs / whatever on your doorstep, you travel to go climbing, it is as simple as that - just as Jamie said.

If you live in Carlisle you don't start bolting Northern Lakes trad just because Chapel Head Scar is miles away. If you live in Leeds you don't start bolting Caley because Yorkshire sport is miles away. If you live in Northumberland you don't start bolting Simonside because there's no sport for hours.

AND IF YOU LIVE IN EDINBURGH YOU DON'T START RETROBOLTING RATHO TRAD.

Especially since Benny Beg is scarcely an hour. There's also Glen Ogle, Dunira, Berwick Law. If people NEED sport that is, and you certainly do NOT need it to progress to climbing outside.


In reply to Hay:


I'm still waiting for confirmation that this was fully organised by the centre, and if so, why they did it - especially as to whether there are any commercial motivations.


We don't want the indoor climbers to go out into the quarry until they are skilled enough to do so. It simply is a quarry for HVS+ climbers, so it's not suitable for starting out outdoor climbing. That's not elitist that is just the way the quarry has formed. By the time any climber is able to climb in the quarry, they would have the skills to deal with the issues you mentioned. There are many other venues for indoor climbers to transfer to trad on.

BUT if there is an issue with the trad being "neglected" then I agree that making the trad more logistically accessible (whilst retaining the proper trad nature it has always had) is a good idea. I personally think the obscurity of access through the centre might put people off climbing the trad there so that's something that could be improved.

In reply to Fiend:
Hi,
See this 'skills' thing is something I don't really get.
Lots of the skills learned at Ratho Quarry are only really useful in other badly maintained and neglected quarries.
Mountian routes and even multi pitch cragging tends to end up on suitable ledges and belays are usually pretty obvious (even if they are manky pegs *boak*). A bit of gear selection, a bit of equalisation and thats all you really need.
Quarry climbs just end at the top and no-one really learns anything by crawling about in gorse bushes. Getting off at Ratho is just farcical.
Far better to have ab pistes, clear paths at the top and proper anchors to learn to equalise.
Justice Wall climbers would path most of the routes out there IF the set up was good enough to get them seconding a heap of routes with a traddie leader. At least then the could concentrate on learning the really important stuff; gear placement, rope management, rock movement etc.

We need more trad climbers and Ratho is too well situated to ingnore. It can't be a mystical and esoteric place where you can only climb if you can thread a rabbit-hole belay and are willing to abb off a dubious weld-mesh fence.

As Jamie said ^^^ pretty sure we're all after the same thing and if this recent bolting spurs that along then great.

Bruce

In reply to Fiend:

Well put, Certainly I second the sentiment that just cos their isnt much sport on your doorstep, you dont have carte blanche to retro existing trad venues.

The old MCofS guidelines to bolting might be relevant here, bolts only being acceptable (on quarried rock) when:
Natural protection is absent or inadequate for the number of falls the route would require.
There is no local anti-bolt ethic.

I would attest that the natural protection on most of the routes in Ratho is adequate for their grade, and that the degree of objection expressed in this thread points to an anti-bolt feeling on the naturally protectable areas of the quarry.

Ratho is a great concentration of harder trad close to Edinburgh, and looses nothing for being a bit overgrown. Its called the outdoors. I have had many formative experiences there and would hate for that to be lost to future generations. I for one would happily contribute to a plan to improve peg safety and belay/ab stakes etc if that would protect the remaining trad lines.

And if centre staff are so keen for accesible routes to start the transition from plastic, why not equip the routes now hidden inside the centre? If I recall that was the original stated plan when it was first built, and hence the ammount of good rock covered by the roof. If we are no longer allowed to come in and trad up Godzilla and Doomed Oasis, bolt them before ruining anything else outside!

For the record, I have little objection to the bolting of the Pettifiers wall area, since the earth cornices have made it impossible to top out there for years. Lower-offs make sense. Just please dont get carried away.

Does anyone know what type of bolts have been used?

In reply to Jamie B:

Hi Mate,

...following some of the logic on here...if it's "neglected" trad, then it's OK to bolt it.....time to get bolting on Craigmore then.....and just about any other trad site in the central belt.....they're all pretty rubbish anyway.....

ANdy

In reply to Hay:


I'd like to stress that I only said the first half of that sentence!

In reply to Andrew Mallinson:


Hi Andrew, not sure if you're being tongue-in-cheek here but there is little doubt in my mind now that the "under-use" argument is going to get used more and more to justify retro-bolting. Welcome to the brave new world...

In reply to Jamie B:
You did, thats true. Don't worry, your not complicit ;0)

In reply to Jamie B:

Hi Jamie,
You're right mate...sadly.....
Brave new world....with bolts the word brave doesn't come into it....
Give me a shout mate when you want to get out on some real routes...summer or winter....preferably without bolts....
ANdy

In reply to Hay: what are you on about the descents? You walk round the top of the quarry and down the fire escape. How could it possibly be any easier than that?

In reply to JamieSparkes:
Does that not still involve jumping over fences?
Last time I climbed there (2011) getting to the fire escape from Crackin Up end was an epic of gorse bashing. Folks either climbed the big fence or abbed off the building.
The fire escape is not without its dangers too....there was a used johnny on one level and a jobby on the next. Sequence was unclear.

In reply to Fiend:

Matt, give it a break, you'll burst a blood vessel at this rate. You don't like the new additions to the quarry. I think we all get the message! Having a UKC hissy-fit like Violet Elizabeth Bott isn't going to persuade others to agree with your opinion. And frankly, that's all it is - an opinion. Spitting the dummy and stamping your feet will get you nowhere. If the routes in questions were so wonderful and precious to you and by your own admission you're a local climber, why hadn't you climbed them? I'll tell you why: the quarry was a pile of mank and rapidly reverting to nature in many parts. Nobody climbed the routes and that's the truth of it.

FWIW, I've climbed at Ratho hundreds of times, both indoors and out in the quarry. I was there today, climbing both inside and outside. I've NEVER seen it busier in the quarry, so take from that what you will. I'm certainly not saying bolt everything willy-nilly - I enjoy trad as much as sport, perhaps even moreso, but I think the judgement and consideration Buzz & the team have shown on the matter has been spot on.

I for one applaud them and I know a lot of other people do too.

In reply to Hay: you can either jump the fence and then open the gat (use a nutkey) or you can walk round the inside of it and step over the bridge barrier. Both are fairly trivial to fix if they are getting a little prickly.

In reply to JamieSparkes:
You are sort of making my points for me.

In reply to Jamie B:

... and ship in some nice natural boulders too

Seriously, as a regular customer I think it's great that Ratho are starting to get some more use out of the quarry. It's an obvious opportunity to further develop the centre's offering.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

As a regular customer (travelling from Glasgow), it is a bloody disgrace. The wall is amazing and the quarry is a good trad venue and that is how it should stay (albeit with the addition of new sport lines). If it's developing what the centre is offering (commercially??), then that is a betrayal of their original promises to keep the quarry climbing intact, as well as going against the general ethos of Scottish (and British) climbing.

In reply to Fraser:
The thing is that the retro-bolts at Ratho affect the ethics of the whole area. What happens here will spill over to other venues in the central belt.

Are we just going to allow other neglected, bold routes to get bolted in this fashion to make them more accessible? Surface tension, for example, would make a great f7a+.

Fiend might be outspoken, but he's right in saying that it's completely against the traditional ethics of British climbing.

How about a proper debate to discuss where this is all going?

In reply to Lh88:

Nobody is suggesting what you fear might happen. I'm sure Buzz isn't and I'm certainly not. It's not the 'thin end of the wedge' argument either. What has happened, in my opinion and that of plenty of others, is considered and appropriate for these particular routes at this particular venue. Buzz has a long history of involvement in the climbing community and I know for a fact didn't lightly undertake the bolting.

I understand the point you're trying to make but 'Surface Tension' gets traffic and isn't overgrown, so it's not a great analogy.

In reply to Fiend:
Without being unnecessarily inflammatory...
Was any promise not made by the previous owners?

In reply to Fraser:

Well worded.agree!!

In reply to Hay:

I don't know the details of the previous owners and haven't got my copy of the old L.O. so I can't check what it said in that. I do remember when Ratho was being built that there was a good deal of concern about access to the quarry for continued trad climbing there, and there were reassurances given out by EICA-Ratho that this would not change - unfortunately it was a while ago and I can't remember where one would find these reassurances, but clearly the recent actions contradict this.


Sean B:

Except, it's wrong. Wally 3 at least got traffic and was nowhere near overgrown (and besides, the obvious and clear solution to overgrown routes is to take the simplest, least damaging course of action - clear away the vegetation). The bolting at Ratho started with new sport routes, then moved on to retro-bolting currently dirty routes (Pettifars), then moved on to retro-bolting clean and climbed routes (Wally 3). I usually dislike the "thin end of the wedge" argument but when it's actually proving to be true....

In reply to buzby78: I've really enjoyed the new sport routes I've done, thanks Buzz! I love both trad and sport, so it's great to have good routes of both types so close to Edinburgh. Hopefully everyone agrees that some routes in the quarry are better as sport climbs (say, Pettifer's Wall area) and others as trad climbs (say, Shear Fear), so it just needs some compromise and consensus to work out the best solution.

In reply to Fiend:

Dress it up how you like, this is fairly shoddy behaviour from EICA and or
one of its employees.

Id be interested to see clarification/justification from EICA?

In reply to Fiend:

Just for clarification; Wally 3 hasn't been bolted, this route is clean, has gear and gets ascents.

It's probably worth taking a look at whats been done before speculating or making assumptions no?

buz

In reply to Vince McNally:

It's not really that shoddy though is it?

They've had more than enough opportunity to bolt whatever they please out there yet held off.

Then after bolting the sport routes and the manky petifiers (with agreement from the only opinion that matters) they decided to bolt something else.

Assuming they chose it because no one is ever on it and the gear was a bit debatable may have been on the grey side of the line but it's done so let’s get over it.

Now that it's all settled, Who's for a cup of tea?

In reply to buzby78:

I was told in an email:

"I visited the quarry last weekend and discovered that Wallys 1 & 2 (the two on the back wall) had been retro bolted"

I replied:

"As for the Wallys, if you mean Wally 2 and Wally 3 (Wally 1 is the E2 in the East Bay), then that is an utter disgrace."

And I did NOT receive any correction that it was just Wally 2 and a new sport route, rather than Wally 3 as well.

I also did not receive any correction on here until today, despite mentioning the route several times. I was posting based on the best information I had, and even the people arguing against me were not contradicting that information.

Based on your correction, I retract any of my comments that referred specifically to Wally 3. I stand by all of my general comments and reasoning about retrobolting in this trad venue (including the denial of a trad route I fully intended to lead), and my concerns how this might develop in the future.

In reply to hexcentric:


Isn't this almost exactly what people mean when they talk about "the thin end of the wedge"?

In reply to buzby78: I visited Ratho Quarry on saturday to climb the newly bolted routes. I have to say it feels a nicer place to climb now. It all fits much better with the general setting of the quarry. I thought Kamikaze was particularly good. Slow Strain and Pettifers wall on the other hand weren't so good, although Pettifers was much better than Slow Strain.
The bolting is quite nice a friendly spaced too.
Call me overly social but I like not being the only person at a crag.

In reply to JamieSparkes: Whose opinion is it that matters? There was most definitely no permission from the FA if that is what you are implying.

Post number three in this thread Jamie.

In reply to All:

Move along please. Nothing to see here...

In reply to Fiend:



This isn't personal, it's a general statement: people aren't obliged to reply to or even acknowledge you. It's up to them. Like I've said before, as have others, you have opinion A, others have opinion B...or even C or D. Please try and get over it.

In reply to hexcentric:

From the now at peace Scottish Climbs

Pettifer's Wall E4 6a **
Top out cleared and climbed 2012. Will definitly need brushed and inspected before another attempt.

From UKC

Got it clean on my 3rd attempt today but did struggle lol. Good route and the wet wall at the bottom forces you left which is good. Soil at the top is a shame but could be removed. Abseil the route before you climb it to brush it and wear helmets. I do not know if it is an E4. (2012)

Now fully bolted (thanks Buzz!) 6c ish. Good climbing, but needs more traffic still very dirty at top. (2013)


I think it would be very useful if the OP where to post the specific criteria by which he made his decision to bolt the 2 star route Pettifer's Wall. This would at least help those who are against the bolting of existing routes in the quarry understand the logic behind the action.

As there has been a fair few ill informed, speculatory comments being bandied around on here over the past few days, I thought I better make a factual statement:

I have bolted 8 routes in Ratho quarry this year, in this order:

9th May: Buzooka 7b+
16th May: Kamikaze: 6c+
25th May: Pettifers Wall: 6c
25th May: Slow Strain: 6b+
28th June: John McCain 6b
28th June: Panzer 6a+
7th July: The Corrieman 6c
7th July: Wally 2

I have also spent a fair few days cleaning and gardening around the quarry.

This has been off my own back, in my own time and for the sole reason of wanting to put something back into a climbing area that I have used for 3 decades. I have not done this for any commercial reasons.

I have tried where possible to speak to 1st ascentionists and also to gauge opinion with as many local climbers as possible.

The reason I decided to retro Slow Strain was because the top 4 meters were dangerously loose, covered in mud and after a discussion with the 1st ascentionist who thought this was appropriate.

The reason I decided to retro Pettifers Wall was because nearly every hold had been covered in mud for at least 2 decades, nobody had cared to clean and the top out impossible.

The reason I decided to retro Wally 2 was because the top was becoming dangerously loose.

I have no intentions of retro-ing any more trad routes unless the 1st ascentionists I have spoken to decide to change their minds on things.

I do plan to bolt a few more routes (again this will be done in my own time and hopefully for the benefit of the local climbing community...)

If people want to debolt any of these routes then please consider what I have mentioned above. If you do de-bolt, then please also give something positive back to this area i.e. some cleaning up etc.

I'm quite happy to discuss this over the phone: 0131 333 6321 as I'd rather not get drawn into any slanging matches on here.

Cheers,

buz

In reply to Vince McNally:

It is not shoddy at all...on the contrary it looks to me like a climber working to improve a venue that he and others would like to climb in. Hats off to him for that.

In reply to buzby78:

It looks like your actions have been considered and rational - time will tell. I'm more concerned by the voices on this thread who seem to think that a convenient local bolted venue is a given right.

In reply to Jamie B:

Quite. It`s outrageous that people should want to have a crag with decent, climbable routes within easy travelling distance of most of the population of the country. How selfish of them.

In reply to Buzby:
Neil,
Obviously I know you so am biased...but good effort with the clean up and with keeping the heid during all this.
I look forward to floundering about on the easiest of the new routes.
Bruce

Buzz.

Do you think it would be possible to stick in bolt belays at the top of the quarry for some routes to save folk having to use the fence/gorse/rabbit holes?

I'd also love it if we could get a team together to remove that disgusting scaffold pole at the top of shear fear.

If so, We could set up some sort of 'Ratho happy belay fund' where folk could throw a few pennies to cover the cost?

In reply to Kirriemuir:

Without doubt it would be handy, even desirable, but it's not a given right and doesn't in itself justify steamrollering trad sensitivities on existing crags. Although that's not neccessarily what's happened here.

In reply to buzby78: I've really no idea of the rights and wrongs of it all, but personally I'm glad you've bolted it. So thanks.

In reply to buzby78:

'ow do?

I don't believe the reason for bolting crags because 'it isn't used enough' or to make it more popular, is a valid reason.

The reason Ratho quarry isn't as popular as other central belt quarries is becasue there are more hard climbs there than easy ones, and very liitle of quality below HVS. This contrasts with the pyramid of climbers abilities with more climbers climbing easier routes and fewer operating in the higher grades. For example, Aberdour is very busy because it has lots of easier routes.

I sincerely hope that no-one will be advancing the arguement that, for example, Shibboleth should be bolted to allow more people to enjoy it.

I have climbed a few times at Ratho quarry, done the routes I can do, and enjoyed them. I don't feel upset or hard done to because some routes are out of my reach - thats the nature of climbing. I would climb them if I was better at climbing. Like Shibboleth....

Cheers,

Lex

It's great that the quarry has been cleared up and that when you go to Ratho these days you usually see multiple teams climbing there. It'd be awesome if EICA put some money and creativity behind developing the quarry area further.

In reply to Hay:
The wall management promised that there would be access to the trad climbing both outside and inside Ratho (the whole point of roofing the quarry instead of building a new venue,) but failed to deliver. After the wall was finished you could sneak in and climb, but would get kicked out by wall staff, the permission was then negotiated that you had to drop your name off at the reception to tell them what you were up to, but I have done that and been told that climbing wasn't allowed, so went back to discrete climbing there.

The state of the top of the routes is because the wall wants to control what's going on there and local activists who normally clean crags over winter don't get involved with the wall because they have too much organisation to make a decision. Having the top fenced and gated off gives them a sense of ownership and doesn't make you feel particularly confident that you are within your rights by jumping over the fence and climbing back over the gate to descend by ab from the point near Shear Fear. In my experience of climbing there, using the fire escape would result in an invitation to leave the quarry.

Based on that, are you surprised that clubs don't go there? Are you surprised that nobody looks after the topouts? My experience of climbing there is that you are not wanted and a distraction from the main event of the BIG climbing wall and the high ropes course over the ceiling.

Ratho has the MASSIVE potential for the indoor climbing introduction world to meet outdoor, normal UK trad climbing world. Indoor climbers should be able to open the doors and walk out and watch the trad climbers, chat to the belayers, lounge on grass, have a sausage off a barbeque, etc... Actually no one comes out. Last time I was there it was pretty over grown, the remains of two dead rats were lying about the place and it felt less friendly than Dumby, Cambusbarron and Rosyth combined. The best solution is for either Ratho climbing wall lets locals tidy up the area, or they tidy it up themselves, until they do so, it will remain the same.

P.S. The MCoS suggest this for retro bolting: http://www.mcofs.org.uk/climbing-code.asp where "Retro-bolting (the addition of bolts to established climbs without them) should only be considered with the permission of the first ascensionist and after wide consultation with interested climbers at local and national level." I hope that as a local climber I would have heard consultation at a local and national level. I don't think I have, disagree with the retrobolting of the routes mentioned as I have ambitions to climb them in the future and would like the bolts removed to allow this. I'd be happy to remove the bolts quickly too as I think a drawn out discussion would lead to more people climbing the routes as sport climbs and wanting them to stay this way. I also see bolting like this setting a dangerous precedent for the future.

In reply to jonnie3430:
Hi Jonnie,
Were the experiences you had historic i.e with th previous, private owners? In the four year I worked there I did not hear of anything like that. Yes it was scruffy and unloved...The top outs and ab were/are horrible but climbing in the quarry was accepted withou question by those working on site.
Bruce

In fact the only person I ever saw get a row was Greg Boswell.
He soloed Ourouborus in the snow in trainers when he was meant to be working. Proper lying on the ledges snow.
The scamp.

In reply to buzby78:

Buz, the new and retro-bolted sport routes are great. Thanks for all your efforts. In my opinion, nothing of importance has been taken away from the quarry and some neglected areas can now be better used. It's fantastic to see the quarry being used by more people.

I am really only interested in trad climbing but I was tempted onto one of the bolted routes today and very much enjoyed it.

It's a reality in life that things are never simply black or white. Some judgement is always necessary and of course it's impossible to please everyone. For my part, I think you've done a good thing.

PK

In reply to jonnie3430:


The original management no longer have any say in the wall. It was sold, as I'm sure you're aware, so your point is somewhat untrue.



I'm sure these days, being barred from climbing on the old trad routes inside the arena is to do with liability and insurance. Society becoming more litigious than it ever was is undoubtedly the main reason for this wariness. How can ECC underwrite climbers potential injuries and subsequent claims on 'self-protected' routes. You can't have a trad route officially "tested and approved as safe", and absolve ECC of any liability.



Sorry, but that just doesn't make sense. I'm sure EICA want as many folk as possible in the doors or in the quarry, thereby increasing the number potential customers of the cafe and shop and other facilities.



I've never had that experience. I walk in past receoption or round the back of the arena and I'm in the base of the quarry. No hassle, ever. After topping out, you negotiate the gate at the top of the fire escape bridge and come down that. Simple. Again, no hassle - ever.



I'd ask the same as Bruce: how long ago did you experience this? I've never had anything like that sort of reception or reaction to my climbing in the quarry, quite the opposite in fact. Any staff encountered have always been very friendly and encouraging.



When I was there at the weekend, people were having picnics on the grass and further along, there were some youngsters getting archery instruction in the sun. Everyone was havbing a great time. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I've never seen the place busier.



I've climbed at Dumby and Cambusbarron a lot and would have to disagree with you there. Again, perhaps you've been very unlucky or I've been very lucky!



It's already much cleaner than it ever was, thanks mostly to the efforts of EICA /staff.


On at least a couple of occasions I'd been asked what I felt about potential, highly selective bolting. Perhaps if you'd been there more you might have been asked too? I'd asked Fiend earlier in the thread why, as a local climber, he hadn't climbed the routes in question if he considered them so wonderful and sacrosanct - why it was only now he decided he wanted to climb them and didn't get a reply. I'd put the same question to you as I'm genuinely interested.


I've made my opinion clear in earlier posts about the retro-bolting of these particular routes. I think what has happened is an entirely appropriate solution to these specific routes at this specific crag. I'd also point out that the quarry is indeed private property and it's not up to you to decide whether or not the bolts stay.

Finally, and just for the record, I have no connection to EICA other than being a regular sport and trad. climber there.

In reply to buzby78:

Even as a trad climber who clips bolts probably only once or twice a year, I like the additions and think they fit well with the overall feel of the quarry. I've only climbed Pettifers, Slow Strain and Kamikazi, but was very impressed. (I can't comment on how the move was agreed, as don't know enough of the background and not even sure what I think the process should be...). It would be a shame if the retrobolting spread much further, but I think we'll begin to see more, much-needed, traffic on the trad routes there too. For me, the mix of bolted and trad routes we have at Ratho now works well, much like at the Llangollen crags or Upper Cave Crag.

Danny

I'm not a local so don't feel I should get involved in the general debate, but this particular point seems a rash one.

Do you really think that the future of climbing venues should be decided by the what's legally permissible for the the owners to do?
If you do then that's rather short sighted.

Ratho is part of the climbing culture in Scotland and if it wants to be a good member of the climbing community it has a duty to consider the views other members of that community.
If in the end the argument comes down to 'we own it we can do what we like', then that hardly sets a good precedent for other venues owned by less sympathetic people.

In reply to Fraser:

I was referring to climbing trad routes outside, in the quarry.
In that case explain the overgrown nature of the cliff top and locked gate to get back in after doing a route?

I've been climbing there since it opened and this are my memories.

I've climbed nearly every VS, HVS and E1/2 in the central belt and am progressing on E3 and hopefully beyond. As I've done most routes at my grade I know the limited number of routes in the central belt and would rather they were still trad in the future when training and experience will hopefully let me get up them in the same manner as the first ascent.
So you are asking me why I haven't tidied up the top and bottom of the crag to make access easier, yet you are telling me that I can't tidy up bolts on it too? Where do you draw the line on the maintenance locals can and can't do?

In reply to jonnie3430:

If you want to do these run out/gearless routes without clipping the bolts you can. The sport traffic will keep these routes in better nick for the time that you are ready to do them. I really enjoyed Pettifers Wall as a sport route, but even with all the recent traffic I spent half the time on the route shoveling dirt out of the holds; I can't imagine what state it would've been in with years of neglect.

In reply to lex:

There is no danger of this happening, anyone that would be capable of bolting a four star mountain route would never do it. Quarries are different, and it's obvious Buz isn't going to bolt something like Shear Fear either.

We should be all thanking him for his efforts.

In reply to gurumed:
But that's a really bad precedent! If you argue that, then routes like surface tension, mascarade, glass direct at auchinstarry, chisel at Cambusbarron which need a brush before a climb should all be bolted as "the sport traffic will keep these routes in better nick..."

In reply to Jamie B:

Well I'm concerned by the people who think having vastly more trad climbing than sport climbing in the UK is their given right. Of course, that's only my opinon, and as I'm not a trad climber my opinon obviously isn't worth much.

In reply to jonnie3430:


Sorry, I'd misunderstood your comment: "...and inside Ratho (the whole point of roofing the quarry instead of building a new venue,) but failed to deliver. After the wall was finished you could sneak in and climb, but would get kicked out by wall staff" From that, I thought you'd meant the (now) indoors trad routes.


Well, I suppose you're entitled to make the claim that the centre wants to control what goes on in the quarry. Personally, I think it's more to do with minimising risk to the public whilst on their property, similar to many other quarries. I woldn't be surprised if Building Contro and/or the relevant Fire & Rescue authority insisted on a fence and secure gate at the top of the quarry. Notwithstanding this, people with the ability to climb a V Diff can surely negotiate a fence or locked gate without too much difficulty.


Fair enough. It's indeed a shame you had those experiences. They're very different to my own.



Fair point, I can't argue with that sentiment.


I didn't ask you that. It was you, in fact, who made the suggestion of locals cleaning it, not me.



I didn't say that either. If you'll check again, what I actually said was: "...it's not up to you whether or not the bolts stay."



I was simply stating a fact. The quarry is essentially 'privately' owned and not free for you to do with it what you wish. That's not to say I agree with the notion that an owner can do whatever they like. What I would say is that what Edinburgh Leisure has done in this particular instance is sensible and with merit. That's just my opinion of course, I know you and others disagree.

In reply to Fraser:

Debatable. You mean like when the owner of the land at Limekilns put up bat boxes on his own property and was swiftly told to remove them? Slightly different case but it shows that being the owner of land in which access has been agreed does not give you the right to do what you want.

In reply to Robert Durran:
Can't you just not clip the bolts..?

In reply to jonnie3430:

I see what you're saying, these routes do need a brush before being climbed. But they are also being climbed and cleaned often enough that they aren't getting buried the same way the routes in Ratho Quarry are.

Are you saying that the excavation of the route is part of the experience for the next person to do a trad lead, and that all the sport use of the route ruins it? Is it really better that the rock sits neglected and benefits nobody for years?

In reply to Milesy:
They weren't told as much as asked through pretty delicate negotiation. I don't imagine telling Lord Elgin or his Factor would really have worked.

In reply to Hay:

Correct, but let's not have facts getting in the way of opinion! This is UKC after all.

In reply to buzby78:
Just back from a day up at ratho, was supposed to be climbing just indoors but after reading about the new bolts took some gear up to give them a try. Thought the routes were great, spent the full day there rather than indoors. If it had not been bolted i wouldn't have even thought about trying them tbh. Cant see why everyone is freaking out if you want to climb it trad you still can. No harm done imo.

In reply to buzby78:
Well reasoned action Buzz. Hats off to you mate, can't wait to get my next trip to Ratho to try them out. We often joke its warmer outside than in so that's sorted now!

In reply to jonnie3430:

OMG people may actually enjoy the routes that were neglected for years?? How dare they! Somebody call the police!

In reply to krasavenko:
Exaclty! That's why we're all climbing in the first place, no point in the face just sittin there not bein used.

In reply to buzby78:

Genuine question:

Instead of retro-bolting routes and presenting them as a fait d'accompli (sp!), why didn't you announce your plans and give an advance warning, so that people who wanted to keep them trad would have the opportunity to clean them or get them regularly climbed, or at least people who wanted to climb them trad would have a chance to do so??

E.g. "I intent to retrobolt routes x,y,z in a year's time, because they are currently neglected and rarely climbed. If you want to clean them or climb them trad, do so within the next year"

???

Obviously higher E grade climbs will be more neglected than S-HVS as that is where the majority of climbers are clustered. Should it be then that all climbs above the average elsewhere should be bolted? How do you define neglected? What constitutes "traffic"? How much and when? Does something need to be climbed every single day or every single week?

I have been climbing at Auchinstarry for years and there are routes at higher grades which I have not climbed or lead and I look forward to being able to lead them when I am good enough to do so. At the moment they are inaccessable to me as I am simply just not good enough a climber, physically or mentally I accept that, but I also accept the challenge for the future. Of course harder routes get less traffic - but that does not mean they should be bolted.

The amazing thing is that at the climbing academy and the glasgow climbing centre I see lots of people with amazing strength and skill that if they took the time to learn they could be climbing really well and climbing safely in trad. I was talking to a old guy at Auchinstarry who was amazed that everyone climbs indoors now when back in the 80s and 90s you couldn't move for people on most of the routes at the quarry.

In reply to Milesy:


But maybe that's not what they want? Maybe they just want to crank moves in near-total safety? Nothing wrong with that. I don't think we should see leading on trad as the default logical final destination for climbers - it's always been a broad church and you can specialise how you will.

That having been said, with more and more climbers taking that option, the demand for convenient venues increases. And if that co-incides with a decrease in usage for more marginal trad venues, we can see what is going to happen.

It's not wrong to want more bolted venues, but this case-history clearly shows that retro-bolting will always be contentious, as there will always be those (thank God) who are prepared to staunchly defend the status quo of even the less lovable trad routes.

In areas like the Central Belt, Lancashire, etc where there is virtually no unclimbed rock but loads of dirty, under-used venues, this scenario is going to repeat itself. I don't think ring-fencing all trad routes for all time is realistic, but there clearly need to be protocols about how the "discussion" is conducted. For one thing, what happens when the FA dies?

In reply to Jamie B:

Of course, but many of them have probably never tried it to experience it. I have taken some people who have only climbed indoors outside before and I would say its an even split between those who really enjoyed it, and those who have looked bored as a dog with no legs waiting on the leader doing his thing, seconded up really quickly and not been massively enthusiastic about lack of actual climbing. But those who have enjoyed it have continued, other have went back to the wall.

I enjoy splitting my time between pushing my own grade and testing myself, and getting new people out on rock and trying it out and feel I have at least some responsibility to at least give the chance to expose it to others to keep it alive.

In reply to Jamie B:

I think when you drill down a bit you'd find that what a lot of indoor climbers want is to climb outside in summer and get some sunshine. That get's translated into a demand to bolt trad routes because people don't consider other options. Actually I've got a feeling that the kind of outdoor artificial climbing structures you see on the continent would be a better solution for sport climbing near cities than quarries - safe climbing at the range of grades people climb indoors but outside with a bit of sun and wind and a view when you get to the top.

In reply to Jamie B:

As the majority of british climbing is trad it is a sensible logical final destination. It takes a bit longer to gain proficiency and the risk is greater but the number of enthusiastic climbers suggests it is worth it.

This is your opinion and should be treated as such. If you could prove it please do, I would like to see some facts brought into the discussion.

My opinion on what you are suggesting is that there would become an group of outdoor climbers only climbing bolted routes and wanting to take the bolting ever further so they can have the multipitch mountain experience gushed about by other climbers. Or they could learn to trad climb and nothing changes.

If you are a dedicated sport climber in the UK you will always have a limited number of crags and routes to climb on, there is just not enough rock to get the variety that you can get with trad climbing. I think it is more important to accept this than try to change the mentality of climbing in the UK to allow bolting of trad routes.

It's not really a trad route is it? It's just rock that someone has found a sequence of moves to be able to climb, there is no other sign that someone has been there, occasionally some chalk or worn gear placements. As soon as you bolt that, it is no longer a piece of rock. It's been turned from something natural to something natural that has a line of bolts up it. I really like the natural look and think we should limit the changes we make so that others in future can experience things the same way as we do. Who are we as individuals to permanently change the nature of a climb for everybody in the future?

Loads? Please share? North face of Dumbarton Rock maybe, it's one of the few places that I've not bothered to force an old route because its minging? Some areas of Craigmore are probably better left to the moss. If somewhere is dirty is sport climbing going to magically clean that? Or will it still be dirty but frequently climbed on?

Please also explain what under-used is? We don't have to flood the crags with new climbers, queuing for the next route in the same way as you do in a climbing wall. There is no quota for routes, they are, after all just a bit of rock.

In reply to jonnie3430:

I didn't think I'd stated an opinion? Just my view of how things are going. It certainly gives me no pleasure to see that all the things which I hold great about climbing are being increasingly rejected by the new wave. But we do have to acknowledge it and work with it.

In reply to jonnie3430:


That's a good argument for mountain crags and sea cliffs but it is pretty thin for old quarries. The rock shape is just what was convenient for the quarrying operation at the point it closed down.

In reply to buzby78:
Well done Buz, look forward to trying the routes before the bolts are chopped.
...and well done for kicking the hornets nest!

In reply to jonnie3430:

along the same line of logic - the majority of British population is obese. Shall we all sporty people start eating up then?..

In reply to krasavenko:

Thats not the same logic

krasavenko = penguin

http://pactiss.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/humor-penguins.jpg

In reply to Vince McNally:

Also not even true. I am fairly sure that 23% is not a majority....

In reply to Milesy:

OK I'll correct that: overweight and obese; which brings the figure to roughly 2/3 of the population.

And in broad sense it is: Johnnie is saying everyone should follow the majority, because being in the majority makes them right

In reply to krasavenko:


No I'm not, I said the majority of climbs in the UK are trad, not the majority of climbers. As I also pointed out; there is no other qualification for a trad climb than for it to be there. If you were to make the majority of climbs in the UK sport, you'd have to drill thousands of holes across the country and leave behind the same number of bolts. I'd rather the crags (and old quarries,) left as they were, in their natural (or semi-natural,) state.

In reply to krasavenko:

Also you may note the word 'sensible' in Jonnies post

clearly this does not apply to yours?

In reply to buzby78:

Can anyone tell me if the retro bolted routes are now clean? If not, can I suggest that they are. It would be a shame if the bolts were chopped and left a mess. It seems that the best way of tidying up the holes would be to mix some epoxy with rock dust. Obviously the bolter is responsible for the mess as they were the one that made it.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Bolts still there yesterday.


The chat I have heard concerning possible chopping is that it would be done responsibly and cleanly. And quite rightly so. No one wants a mess.

In reply to Robert Durran:

A mega plus that I see from this thread is that Ratho is saying that they are happy with climbers looking after the crag. When the greenery dies down we can chop back the jungle at the top and get rid of the banks of earth that were placed on the Pettifers top out when Ratho was built as well. Does anyone have a point of contact for a tidy up in Nov or Dec? It'd be good to get a skip for the bushes.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Sounds a massive operation..... If practicable, happy to help if the bolts have been chopped.

In reply to jonnie3430:

It would be a shame if the bolts were chopped full stop.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

No, the damage was placing them in the first place. They should be removed and the route returned to it's original state. (P.S. If you don't want bolts chopped, don't place them.)

In reply to jonnie3430:

+1 for the bolts to stay

In reply to robmack:

+ 1 for the bolts to go

In reply to robmack:

But the bolts can't stay. There was no justification for them in the first place so to allow them to remain would open the gates for retro bolting anywhere!

In reply to jonnie3430:

Fair enough viewpoint - do you happen to have a few million tonnes of dolerite we can use to fill the quarry back in?

If not, how about leaving the bolts there so people can enjoy the rock for climbing on?

In reply to jonnie3430:

It's not time to chop the bolts. We need a proper meeting on the future of bolting in Scotland before any more action is taken (bolting or chopping).

In reply to robmack: +2 for the bolts to stay. I`ve climbed, or been on, all the newly bolted routes and they are a great addition to the quarry. Nobody would have been near Slow Strain or Pettifer`s Wall if they were not bolted, and Wally 2 would probably have someone top-roping it once every couple of years or so. With the bolts in you get people on them...only downside is about 6 "outraged" trad evangelists have had their sensibilities upset. You can`t keep everyone happy in this kind of situation but there appear to be more people happy with the bolts than not.

In reply to jonnie3430:
I disagree

In reply to colin8ll:

No! The meeting should have been before the bolting, not after. Retro bolts placed before should be chopped, the responsibility is on the bolter to tidy up. Decisions on whether a route should be bolted or not should be taken before the bolts are in place, otherwise we would have bolts all over the place with people (who have probably done the route and couldn't care less,) defending the placement in retrospect.

Please remove the bolts tidily from the retro bolted routes at Ratho.

In reply to robmack:

I don't mind if you agree or not, I would normally say do what you want, but in doing what you want you bolted a route I had in mind for the future. That's permanently changed, so long after you have climbed it and forgotten about it, it will still be bolted. That's what breaks me. Do what you want, but don't spoil it for the rest of us!

In reply to jonnie3430:

I've got no interest in placing bolts. I'm just a customer that buys climbing services from EICA. They improved their offering and I'm happy about that. Threats of chopping have no place in this debate because the bolts were legally installed by the landowner.

In reply to jonnie3430:Poor broken you.How about having a go on the routes as they currently are? I bet you would enjoy them.

In reply to Kirriemuir:

It takes one persons arrogance to place a bolt. It takes one person to tidy up after them.

There is more than enough CONSTANTLY CHANGING bolted routes less than 50m away in the EICA, so why the need was felt to bolt more routes is inexplicable.

If you are pulling out the "everyone happy," argument, then climb in EICA, there are 30m sport routes don't you know! And it is 50m away. Central belt trad is severly limited, leave it for those that want to climb it this way.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Thats not my understanding. I understand that Busby placed them and is employed by EL, but it wasn't with their consent?

In reply to Kirriemuir:

I'd enjoy them more without the bolts. What is a clip up but a number? I'm surprised that Ratho would allow this competition on their front door.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Why not write to Edinburgh Leisure and ask their permission to remove the bolts?

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I'm pretty sure Edinburgh Leisure would not claim any responsibility towards the bolts. If I wrote a letter to them and pointed out that the placing of the bolts was not in the Scottish bolting guidelines and is in competition with the profit they make from the EICA then they would rapidly remove themselves from the situation. I'd rather not do this, nor chop the bolts but ask that Buzby pull them and tidy up afterwards.

In reply to buzby78: I like the idea of loads of moody old men getting all irate in their arm chairs about some bits of metal in a hole in the ground, their fat little faces going all red just thinking about people enjoying themselves. I imagine they also smell faintly of urine, like mutton and have an old sweaty jumper which they wont wash as it reminds them of the good times.

In reply to naffan:

Want to go out for a route this winter? We'll see who smells like a woolly jumper by the end of the day!

In reply to jonnie3430:

I bet you wouldn`t.

You seem really fired up by this tonight...have you been knocking back the Babychams again? Instead of just thinking "me,me,me, what about my shattered dreams", how about sparing a thought for all the happy punters who will get a shot on some nice mid-grade sport climbs (in among the hundreds of trad climbs in Central Scotland).

In reply to jonnie3430: Haha sure

In reply to Kirriemuir:

I actually expected that the last burst of emotion would see the bolts removed. It didn't, so I am starting to think that unless reminding Buzby that he was in the wrong works and he pulls the bolts, then I may need to suggest to some mates that the bolts are removed. I'd rather not do this as they are messy, but you can see the dramas from having wrongly placed bolts in situ for a while, some people feel that they should remain there.

P.S. Awwww, all those climbers that would get out, but nobody has bolted the routes for them... Drop a rope! There is no shortage of belays on top, use them!!!

In reply to jonnie3430: Do you own the quarry? No.
Do Ratho (EL) own the quarry? Yes.
Do you want the bolts? No.
Do Ratho (EL) want the bolts? Yes.

You lose!

In reply to Oceanrower:

In reply to Oceanrower:

Can you show me where I missed the fact that Ratho want the bolts? It would allow free sport climbing in the quarry, giving people an opportunity to avoid the fees for the indoor wall. I can't imagine they would be that stupid. I know Buzby bolted it, and he works for them, but that doesn't mean he consulted them, or did I miss that.

In reply to naffan:

Game on.

In reply to jonnie3430:

Buz made it clear that he did not consult with Ratho, that the bolting was his decision as an individual and has nothing to do with them.

In reply to Vince McNally:

As we have seen in the past, retro-bolting routes without securing some kind of prior consensus leads, even in grubby quarries, only to chopping, mess, wasted effort, aggravation, annoyance, ill-humour: in short, nowhere good.

In reply to jonnie3430:



Absolutely correct as always.

As mentioned numerous times before, in the context of the UK being a primarily trad climbing nation with a strong set of ethical guidelines, the obvious and sensible procedure for "neglected" routes is to try other means of restoring them (cleaning, better access, better information, lower-offs if needed), THEN consultation and discussion about possible bolting THEN some advance warning if bolting is decided on and ONLY THEN actually retro-bolting the routes. This current action goes completely against that spirit of UK climbing.

Also, replying to jonnie with snide/personal remarks only makes the pro-bolting side even less justifiable.


(Fiend - Ratho paying customer yesterday and last Wed, Ratho trad climbing visitor 2 weeks ago)

In reply to Fiend:

The problem with consultation is that it will always end with no bolting, because there will always be someone who doesn't want bolting, however grotty the cliff. Which is why the anti-bolters are so keen on it. The only way is to bolt and see if anyone feels strongly enough to remove the bolts. That moves the goalposts slightly towards the bolters and at least gives them a small chance.

In reply to Andy Nisbet:

I'msorrywhatpardon?

'If we ask people whether we should retrobolt trad routes, they'll say no, so we should do it anyway and see if anybody notices'?

Why should anybody be giving the bolters 'A small chance'?

In reply to victim of mathematics:

Because, despite there being a few folk who don't want any bolts on any rock under any circumstances, sport climbing is enjoyed by many. Note: I am a keen trad climber.

In reply to Andy Nisbet:

That's not an argument for anything. If your goal is to maximise the total amount of enjoyment, then you'd end up grid bolting every bit of rock going, since the potential audience for sport climbing is almost certainly greater than that for trad climbing.

But then we'd live in France, only without the good cheese and croissants. And nobody wants that.

In reply to Andy Nisbet:


So it's ok to bolt, but you can't then complain if they are chopped?

But people do complain and call the chopping "vandalism" and " selfishly spoiling people's fun".

In reply to buzby78: I'd really like it if we could keep the bolts.

If they are going to get cut please give it a few weeks so I've time to climb them before they go.

In reply to victim of mathematics:

No you wouldn't. You'd maximise enjoyment by having a reasonable balance between the two.

I'm new-ish to climbing and do a bit of both sport and trad, but can see there's a large imbalance in favor of trad based pretty much on 'we were here first'.

In reply to Donnie:

OK, fair enough. The end result would be that everything worth doing gets bolted, and only chossy bobbins that nobody goes near would stay for trad. Using words like 'reasonable' is massively unhelpful here. For me the current situation (well, prior to the recent rogue retro-bolting) is reasonable. Others clearly don't agree.


Or, as others might call it 'a strong and proud heritage and tradition of trad climbing'. So what? Nobody's entitled to whatever kind of climbing they want, they just get what they happen to live near. We live in a largely trad area. Deal with it or move somewhere else. Don't go sticking bolts in all over the shop just because you're sore about it.

In reply to victim of mathematics:

... unless they own the crag.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Buzby doesnt own the crag

In reply to Vince McNally:

And even if he did, it would be an extremely bad precendent for climbing if he were to have used that as justification for bolting.

In reply to Donnie:

Remember we are not talking about bolting sport routes here, we are talking about retro bolting of existing trad routes!

In reply to victim of mathematics: > OK, fair enough. The end result would be that everything worth doing gets bolted, and only chossy bobbins that nobody goes near would stay for trad.

I really don't think so. I wouldn't see that as a reasonable balance and I don't think the majority of climbers would. Even those that only enjoy sport climbing.


Okay... I think the current arrangements are closer to what the trad side of the debate want. I think it would be reasonable to have it somewhere closer to the center..... I'm not sure why that's massively unhelpful.


Including those that prefer trad.

In reply to Vince McNally:

Yes, I'm aware of that.

I just don't agree that being here first trumps all other arguments, like what the majority of people would prefer.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

As far as I can tell, nobody but you thinks that this bolting was in any way sanctioned by/approvedby/done with the knowledge of the landowners, irrespective of whether that's really the point anyway.

In reply to Donnie:


Because clearly what is reasonable is many different things to many different people. It's like arguing that the law should say "Do what you like to other people as long as it's reasonable". That would get us nowhere.


Yup. If I moved to Siurana I'd have to deal with the fact that I was living in a sport climbing area. I wouldn't think I was entitled to start ripping the bolts out of existing sport routes just because I prefer trad climbing and there isn't any next to my house.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Why? It is definitely the exception rather than the rule.

In reply to victim of mathematics:

So, trad routes take longer to climb than sports routes. There are more people who would like to climb sports routes than ones who would like to climb trad routes. So a reasonable balance would be to have slightly more sports routes than trad routes, no?

In reply to Donnie:

Spot on.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I'd get angry if someone claimed to own and control the Cuillin or sea cliffs or some other major natural landscape feature, but a quarry is just a man made hole in the ground and to my mind the landowner has every right to define how it is used. In this case it's owned by a climbing centre and it's natural for them to try and get more people using that part of their property.

Ratho is a major international climbing centre and the quarry is an opportunity to take that further. There's lots of centres in Europe with artificial outdoor walls but a crag next door is something else. We should be encouraging them to develop it further and make maximum possible use of it (e.g. for indoor to outdoor courses) rather than carping about rarely climbed routes.

In reply to beychae:

No.

This is such a moronic argument that you have to be trolling. Well done you.

In reply to victim of mathematics:

Which part of my argument did you think was factually incorrect? I note your response addresses my points in detail.

In reply to victim of mathematics:

Yes, and a reasonable balance should be struck at some point across the range of views that people have regarding what's reasonable.


No it's not. This is about balancing different peoples wants - not about doing things to people. But if you do want to discuss it in those terms, putting up bolts is as much doing what you like to other people, as not allowing people to put up bolts is.

Having said that, the law basically does say you can do what's reasonable to people. It just generally considers that doing things to other people that they don't want is unreasonable.


If, in future, a majority or even significant minority of climbers in Siurana wanted a bit more trad, I'd say it would be okay to de-bolt a few sport routes.

In reply to Donnie:


Well you would be wrong then

In reply to beychae:

This

So, trad routes take longer to climb than sports routes.


Where is your evidence for this?


There are more people who would like to climb sports routes than ones who would like to climb trad routes.

In reply to tom_in_ed

In this case it's owned by a climbing centre and it's natural for them to try and get more people using that part of their property.

If this the case, surely the land owners have the first and last say. They are kind enough to sanction us climbers using their hole in the ground. We whether pro or anti bolting have no legtal claims to teh rock climbs there. It is amazing arrogance to think the antis have a legal right to potentially trespass, and vandalise someone elses bolting.

Similiarly it is arrogant to presume that one can walk onto someone elses land and bolt up a hols in the ground.

Now the bolts are in palce, I imagine the sane option would be to consult the land owners, if they give tacit or actual approval to the bolting tehy should stay, if not they go.

It is not for us to decide, we have no legal authority to do so.

In reply to all:

I'm not going to get back into the debate about why I think the bolting on these specific routes at this specific crag was a decent, well-considered move, as I've done so several times already on this thread. What I will do is give a thread-tally so far of those who have expressed an opinion as being for or against the bolting:

- against these bolts: 16
- in favour of them: 23
- indifferent: 7 (of whom 3 seemed to hint at being against, and 1 was in favour)

I think most of us would probably agree that, irrespective of an issue being discussed, objectors generally are more vocal than those who are in favour of <whatever>. The fact that more people have expressly stated their approval of the actions at Ratho speaks volums. I've spoken to many other climbers who have also stated their agreement to the retro-ing but who have not stated an opinion on this thread. Sure, some from the 'anti'-camp will also have remained silent, but I imagine anyone with a strong opinion against them will have already spoken up

Finally, just to clarify for the umpteenth time, these retroed routes weren't bolted at random without any forethought or with the intent to retro thousands of other routes elsewhere in the country. These two routes were pretty much never climbed and were in a terrible mess. People who climbed in the quarry were consulted and their opinions were sought. The past month or two has already shown that people are now climbing these routes again, as well as many others in the quarry, both trad and sport, which is surely a positive result.

In reply to Fraser:

Put me down as an against.

In reply to Grahame N:
and me

In reply to Fraser: not climbed the routes but i'm all for the bolts...time for the minority whinging trad fannies to pipe down. This will not lead to the retro bolting of all trad climbs.
Look what happened at lower lednock....bolts were put up, then chopped because someone climbed it 10 years before and no one had been there since...now it's been rebolted with agreement from all involved.

In reply to AG: PS I climbied trad for 10 years before giving it up ...mainly due to family reasons!.

In reply to Vince McNally:

Why would I be wrong? Why should 'we were here first' trump trying to strike a balance between what different people want?

In reply to Fraser:

...and me as an "in favour".

Trying to apply hard and fast rules (such as "no retro-bolting ever") risks condemning perfectly good pieces of rock to permanent disuse, which seems to me to benefit no-one, except those taking pleasure in demonstrating their ethical superiority over others.

I don't think there's an easy way around examining each case on its merits. I have no wish to see wholesale retroing anywhere, but for routes (or their access/egress) that have changed substantially, have fallen into disuse, are in a man-made setting, and where there is precendent for bolted routes and permission from the first ascentionist, I think there is a pretty good case to be made.

Who got there first *does* matter, but again it should not be a hard and fast rule: there should be some onus on us trad climbers to keep climbing the routes - use it or lose it!

For those advocating prior consensus, can you propose a workable model? Specifically, who gets to decide and what are the rules? As Andy N points out, the "whoever turns up at some random meeting" and "no objectors" model doesn't work.

In reply to buzby78:

Good work. much appreciated, great to get some sports routes locally : )

In reply to Fraser: Another in favour of the bolts.

Anyone thinking of chopping the bolts - please don't even think about chopping the new sport routes (as opposed to the retro-bolted routes). It's not exactly clear which routes are being discussed.

In reply to Mark Bull:


Both clearly have problems, but are they really worse than the "do what you like then tell people afterwards" model?

In reply to AG:

Ok. So once the bolts have been chopped, see if there is agreement from all involved to put them back in. Which is the debate which should have happened in the first place.

In reply to cat22:

I don't think anyone is thinking of doing so.

In reply to Mark Bull:

Not in this case.


Yes in this case, but a chain and a clean would have ben the correct solution here.,3


I really don't think that is releveant.



Not in this case (except for the bolter in the weeks preceding the retro bolting, so that can't really count)



Not in this case with Pettifer's Wall.



Not in this case on those grounds then.



Yes, I think this acts as a wake up call to the very real threat that is out there.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Hi Robert,

"Yes, I think this acts as a wake up call to the very real threat that is out there."

Out of genuine interest, what is this "...very real threat ?"

ANdy

In reply to jazzyjackson:

+1 to that.

In reply to Robert Durran:


You're entitled to your opinion: I disagree.


I think these have been there for some time:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=125932
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=32292

In reply to victim of mathematics:


No, but they're not much better, either. There ought to be a role for the MCofS here, maybe along the lines of the BMC area committees. That would at least provide a forum for would-be bolters to discuss their plans and get feedback in advance, but I have no experience as to how well this works in England.

In reply to Andrew Mallinson:

That some numpty with a Hilti will come along and retro-bolt a load of routes without consulting anybody about it first?

In reply to victim of mathematics:

...and that is a threat because......?
ANdy

After a discussion with the 1st ascentionist of Pettifers Wall today, it was decided that the bolts should be removed.

I'll be de-bolting this route tomorrow afternoon.

buz

In reply to Mark Bull:

Do, the BMC own the quarry? If not then it is the land owner, no one else to decide. It can't be the pro or anti factions. It is not our hole in the ground!

In reply to kipper12:

Erm, that's not how things work.

In reply to kipper12:


If the landowner objects, that should be respected. If the landowner does not object, then there is still a need for debate. Landowners typically have no interest in climbing ethics!

In reply to Mark Bull:

Having done a bit of poking about on the BMC website, it appears that in some cases at least (e.g. South Wales) the BMC area committee is very active in trying to build consensus and develop bolting policy both in general and on a per-crag basis. The S. Wales committee are intending (if it's not already happening) to use a public wiki site for people to post bolting proposals in advance of their being discussed at area meetings.

This thread seems to highlight that we could really do with something similar in Scotland.

In reply to buzby78:
Tr'd a bunch of these routes a week or two ago. Not a local anymore, but here's my 2 cents.
1) The effort spent bolting these routes would have been better spent clearing out the bushes to improve access at the top of the crag.
2) Bolting on the Wally Wall takes away a pair of pretty impressive trad routes and turns them into pretty generic sport routes.
3) Pettifers was still filthy so the rationale for bolting that route doesn't seem to hold up.
4) I'm not a big puritan when it comes to chipping, but the chipped holds a few feet on either side of existing routes?..a bit suspect even in a grotty quarry.

In reply to buzby78:

Is there any chance you could leave it until after this weekend, or even for a month or so?

It'd be nice to give people that want to try it with the bolts a chance while there still there. It'll be not bolted for ever afterwards so people that only want to do it trad wouldn't be too put out.

In reply to Andrew Mallinson:

Some of us value the the limited supply of local cragging in the central belt. It was even more valuable to us in our carless youth and so we fear for the nurturing grounds for the next generation. I've actually been out cragging at one such venue this evening. It was great. It is worth protecting from the bolting wedge.

In reply to kipper12:


Total bollocks! So if I want to bolt Lochnagar, ask the queen for permission and, in her ignorance, she says ok, I should be able to turn Eagle Ridge into a clip up without controversy. For goodness sake.

In reply to buzby78:


Good decision and result which does you credit. Really excellent news. I hope a line has been drawn in the sand as far as getting the first ascentionist's permission for retro-bolting is concerned

In reply to Fraser: put me down as against

In reply to Robert Durran:

Thanks Rob! I'm hoping you'll be 1st in the queue for the 1st trad ascent of the century? I'll be happy to belay...

buz

In reply to buzby78:

Getting psyched already.....
Of course I might get spanked, but that's climbing for you!
Is the chain staying?

In reply to Grahame N:

Me too.

First ascentionist was happy for the chain to stay so no excuses!

In reply to Andy Nisbet:

Come on Andy! You must have a bee in your bonnet about Farreltter !

If you reflect on that for a moment you'll see that you're suggesting a a very dodgy precedent. Hanish Hilti decides he wants to climb a *** route he can't get up at the moment so goes ahead and bolts it and it's up to others to take the bolts out. That doesn't sound like a good course of action.

Re Ratho. No one is talking about cleaning the new sports routes. It's PW and the two Wallys that are being discussed as the first ascensionists weren't approached and no consent was given. The First ascensionists of PW would have definately refused and I understand the Kenny Spence would have been unlikely to give permission either (he couldn't believe anyone would want to bolt something that easy). Rab Anderson was consulted and gave permission to bolt Slow Strain so no one is talking about cleaning it.

Surely that is an entirely reasonable approach?

In reply to buzby78:

Thank you

In reply to Robert Durran:

Hi Robert,
Most erudite description I've seen yet and one I would subscribe to...but...I also consider that with some thought and understanding on all sides there may be opportunities here also....
ANdy

In reply to buzby78:

Forgive me if Im being a little slow, but in one of your first posts you say that Pettifers was bolted "with the kind permission of the first ascentionist", but now its being debolted due to objection by the very same.
Were you just making it up initially, to counter the predictable storm of trad wrath? If so, it doesnt seem like a good example to set with regards to protocol and communication by a bolter.

Glad a workable compromise has been reached. It was the topout that was the main barrier to climbing PW all these years, so a chain is indeed beneficial.
I'll be joining the cue behind you Rob, been wanting to climb that for a long time.

In reply to Dr Toph:

I assume PW is going to be re-graded appropriately for the chains? If the top-out was a significant amount of the risk, it would seem fair to make it a couple of E-grades lower.

In reply to Andrew Mallinson:

Yes, my personal opinion is that bolting of new lines in the central belt quarries should be ok (realistic trad lines are probably pretty much exhausted anyway) as long as they are kept at a respectful unclippable distance from existing trad routes. Retro-bolting should be an absolute non-starter, though an odd chain in exceptional circumstances such as on Pettifer's might be ok.

In reply to beychae:

Perhaps back down to E4 then?

In reply to Mark Bull: what's the legal basis for,you not considering the land owner to have a right to sling bolts on any crag on their land?

And the anti bolters to have a Legal right to resort to chopping said bolts.

It must be down to law in the end, not bluster

In reply to Robert Durran:

Was it not E4 before? I was suggesting E2 or E3 at a push.

In reply to beychae:

No, when it was first done the top out was quite different. When the quarry was ddeveloped for the centre the area above PW was bulldozed flat and left completely devoid of vegetation. That resulted in a lot of mud washing down that wall which left it in an unclimbable state for many years. Now that the vegetation is growing back it may be that it eventually becomes a route with a reasonable top out.

In reply to beychae:

It was E4 originally. I believe it has been consudered pretty much unclimbable recently (E whatever) due to an "earth cornice" which appeared during construction of the climbing centre. Unless the original top-out contributed significantly to the E grade, I imagine it will revert to E4.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Probably like you Robert I am a dyed in the wool trad man through and through, but I do feel we have to recognise there is a significant body of sport climbers out there who have just as much right to their form of this mad game as we do - there is no primacy of activity in my opinion. They are probably not well catered for just now and I don't think we have the right to deny them the positive opportunity to enjoy their sport. Instead of everyone hunkering down in their trench, whichever one it may be, and just entrenching themselves deeper (witness the crap spouted on this thread), it's time in Scotland to develop a situation that works for everyone.
We can't ignore the fact we have a large body of climbers bred on indoor walls that want to get outside - I think we should all find a way to cater for everyone. All this bollocks at Ratho is just diverting attention from this need. I'll stick to my trad thanks, but it's not my place to dictate to others, and nor is the right of anyone else to do so. It's time to cater for the large body of sport climbers in the central belt of Scotland with some quality bolted venues.
ANdy

In reply to Andrew Mallinson:

That sounds lovely. Where exactly do you propose to produce them from? It's not like the central belt is overburdened with an abundance of climbable rock to start with?

In reply to victim of mathematics:

Build them?

Thanks to Buzby too.

In reply to Donnie:


I can't recall any advance warning before the bolts went in, to give people a chance to climb it trad....

But then again it would be pretty mean-spirited (almost in the same poor spirit as dismissing people as "whinging trad fannies" and "having hissy fits") to do that with the debolting as tit-for-tat, so I think it would be okay to wait a week or two for people to sneak the last ascents in in it's temporarily wronged state.

I will be queuing under Wally 2, myself, when that gets fixed.

In reply to Removed User:

I was in a rush and didn't state my case very well. But the way things are going on this thread makes the point better than anything I write. Without the bolting these routes would have continued to be unclimbed and unclimbable. Now that someone has been cheeky and bolted them, it looks like a reasonable compromise will be reached, and the routes will be climbed again, either trad or sport, it doesn't matter. But if there simply has been "consultation", then the anti-bolters would have the say, and the routes would likely have remained unclimbable. My personal thought - if someone makes a trad FA of a poorly protected route in a accetable venue for sport and then lets the route overgrow, then they lose the right to keep it as trad. That just moves the goalposts slightly and prevents large numbers of routes disppearing.

In reply to jonnie3430:

You've just supported my point...the lack of rock venues is why we need to cater for sport climbing as well, at the same crags. Where? Bolt and trad alongside...if the routes are not being trad climbed, bolt 'em. Let everyone have their fun.
ANdy

In reply to Fiend:


Think again Matt: the quarry has been there for decades, if not centuries. You have a guide book. You had the opportunity. You chose not to climb it. Those are the facts.

In reply to Fraser:

There are many routes on many crags that I would like to do. Just because I haven't got round to doing them or have not yet got good enoough to try them is not a justification for someone to bolt them.

Stupid arguement!

In reply to Dangerous Dave:

I think you've misunderstood my point. Read his comment them reread my response.

In reply to Dangerous Dave:

It's a bit of a crazy system when people can shout 'bagsy' and reserve a valuable resource indefinitely at zero cost to themselves on the off chance that they might want to use it some day when there's other folk queuing up to actually use it.

In reply to Fraser:

I think you have missed Fiend's point.

There was no precedent for this kind of retro-bolting, therefore no need tpo prioritise having a go at these routes.

The wake up call has been made; this sort of thing must not be allowed to happen again. Lessons have, I hope, been learnt all round.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I refer you to my response to dangerous dave.

In reply to Fraser:

Does the fact that I have not climbed a route mean I am never going to climb it? If the answer is yes, then logically, nobody will ever have climbed or will climb any route at all.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


That's not the "system". The "system" is that the first ascenionist climbs the route in the style they feel is appropriate, and subsequent ascents respect that style, be it sport or trad. This can be reversed, but only with the consent of the FA.

Of course the balance between sport and trad opportunities is skewed because most of the Central belt venues were developed at a time when trad was the dominant player and bolts were only considered for high-end training. And yes, the result is a whole bunch of routes and even whole venues that very rarely get climbed and are in some cases going back to nature.

With more and more people looking to climb on bolts it's easy to see why these routes are being looked at as opportunities. But who is to say that 100+ ascents of a newly-bolted sport route are more important than the intense journey that one person can still have if they are motivated by the climb in its existing state?

I can't answer that question, and I suspect that nobody can very effectively. But it's clear that it's not just about popularity and numbers. I'm willing to bet that Pain Pillar at the Hawkcraig (a brilliant three-star VS) would get more ascents if it was fully bolted. But that doesn't mean that it should happen.

So who decides that a route has effectively "died" as a trad venture? Mr Busby knows his climbing and made what he thought was a fair decision. Others disagreed. How many (possible) trad suitors should constitute a veto on development? Impossible to answer, which is why Direct Action tends to hold sway.

Direct Action means that if you put bolts in somewhere where there will be general approval, they'll probably stay in, although this is not a given and someone will always object. If you push your luck and try to bolt Pain Pillar, they'll come out instantly and people will threaten you with violence.

Is Direct Action working or could it be improved upon? Looking around Scotland I'd say that we've got the sport/trad balance pretty well, with only Farletter standing out as a complete failure from both sides. But it does seem inevitable that every action will occasion a vast amount of online posturing and air-blowing. Could this knowledge and passion be better-channeled? Is there a need for a retro-bolting committee? The issue isn't going to go away...

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


Well said!

In reply to Robert Durran:

I guess the lesson we've all learned is if you try do so something constructive a bunch of whiney bitches who were never going to do the route will ruin it for everyone else.

If someone wants the bolts out, they should first climb the route without clipping the bolts.

In reply to Jamie B:

Morning Jamie, trust you're well mate!

Correct..the issue isn't going away...and the situation we have at the moment isn't sustainable...I just think it's time we came up with a solution that enables all to enjoy their facet of the sport...
ANdy