UKC

Just a Thought re Ruthven....

Being a local i spend a lot of time up at Ruthven,being Midged and generally disappointed by the weather. These moments between the showers and waiting for holds to dry encourage discourse on various topics. One suggestion that has been made occasionally is-
" Why Dont we do wee paint marks like they do in Font so folk know what problem they are climbing"

Some confusion can exist as to what problem is what up at Ruthven{Even with a decent Guidebook} so you can see where the thought comes from.

I can see the Pros and Cons for this suggestion so i guess im asking what other people think.

Any thoughts folks?

In reply to scragrock:

Absolutely not. We don't do it on any other boulder in the UK, and Ruthven is a nice bit of rock. Painting it would be vandalism.

If the problems are so contrived that it isn't clear what's in and what's not, then they are hardly classic problems, more like personal eliminates for fun - in which case they don't need waymarked. Make up your own! I've never had any such problem with the good stuff there.

In reply to Andy Moles:


+1

In reply to Andy Moles:

Thanks for the input Andy-

I get your reasoning absolutely and i agree it is Not done in the UK and personally i don't think it needs it However......

im not sure the French see putting a wee colored spot at the bottom of a boulder Vandalism.

I also agree that many of the Ruthven classics are very clear.

Just interested to see what people think.

Cheers

In reply to scragrock:

Recognising the routes from the guide at Ruthven is easy! Why even suggest it?

In reply to scragrock:

While I agree a wee coloured spot is not the greatest visual offence in the world, I think if you were going to contravene the generally agreed ethos of not permanently marking the rock, you'd need a pretty good reason.

I do also struggle to think why you'd need it at Ruthven. Maybe it just needs a better topo or descriptions for some problems, that would be the obvious solution.

In reply to scragrock:
A definitive Ruthven photo topo is what is needed. I believe the stone country descriptions have led to a lot of confusion, hopefully this will be addressed in the 2nd edition.

(Edit: Kind of like what i've just found in your gallery - good work)

In reply to scragrock:
Please no! It's really not necessary. On top of the excessive tickmarks I seem to find whenever I go there these days, paint would be a step too far!

I think Stone Country has caused confusion down the years by people thinking it is utterly correct and definitive, rather than a really good first attempt to document all the good bouldering in a whole country. Lines on topos are approximate and descriptions might be 2nd hand or written from memory, but even so, with a guide and a bit of common sense it's pretty easy to work it all out. In general the 'line' is dictated by the steep lower section (eg. the Big Lebowski rail or the line of obvious holds on Outstanding) and then you just weave to the top whichever way you want.

I can see what you mean in that Ruthven doesn't really have distinct lines and a lot of the 'classics' are essentially eliminates or variations (eg. Outstanding, Lebowski, Dude, Dude Direct, White Russian all share the same first few moves), begging the question of their classic status. But they're pretty obvious really, and I've just learnt them from being there and talking to other locals.

Which problems are causing confusion? I might be able to help.
Edit: Is Scragrock Rob? You must know that place like the back of your hand by now! Judging by the topos in your gallery you seem to have it sussed.

In reply to gaz.marshall:

Personally i've always had trouble working out where nefertiti and pinch punch start, then go?

Also barry manilow - is it a sit or a hang start? How close to those jugs do you go? More confusion was brought about by a variation called Barry Manilower which sounds like a sit start, which takes the nose a bit more direct?

In reply to gaz.marshall:

Yes Gaz...it's Rob

Let's be clear i am NOT suggesting we follow the French into the paint spotting/Numbering game.....I agree i dont think Ruthven needs it and as you say i have updated the Ruthven Topo in hopes it makes things clearer.

It was a subject that has been raised by a few folk{Mostly Travelling Boulder peeps} and i thought i would put it out there.

If like me you are interested in the development of our sport/pastime then the ease and inclusiveness of our opportunities and locations should take priority for up and coming climbers of any age, Not just at there local wall.....

I think this should be looked at/talked about more

On another Subject-
The path up to Ruthven is getting really bad and needs sorted.....any ideas?

Thanks for the input Gaz

In reply to scragrock:

Yo Rob, in relation to the path, this (as is the boulder) is on RSPB's Loch Ruthven Reserve so I'd advise against direct intervention before contacting the RSPB. I work for them but don't have anything to to with the reserve, but can put you in contact with the manager. They've got no beef with us, but a while ago I did hear some muttering about a hen harrier that had tried to nest in the area and the feeling was that boulderers had put it off (not on purpose). They probably wouldn't be too chuffed if the same people then dug a load of DIY drainage ditches, which could potentially jeopardise access.

However, since it's a popular venue perhaps we should talk to RSPB to strike up a relationship and talk about access?

In reply to gaz.marshall:

No No.....i would definitely seek permission before even thinking about path improvement.

Yeah it would be great to get a contact re access issues and future plans.

How about starting up a Friends of Ruthven Group{or is there something similar that already exists?}...maybe this could include Duntelchaig/Brin/Dunlichity/Barry Valley/The Lump{which has access problems}.

Thoughts?

In reply to gaz.marshall:

Cheers Gaz, that's pretty much what I thought.

Bouldering in Scotland is taken as gospel because a lot of these venues have no real guide / topo, so rather than a summary guide of the best problems at lots of venues (the original intent of the guide) it has become the Scottish bouldering bible!

I believe John Watson is planning a series of mini-guides to the different areas in Scotland which will serve as a more detailed set of guides.

In reply to scragrock:

I'm quite surprised there hasn't been more response to this!

I've not taken much of a look at the guide book but my ability to work out any bouldering guide is quite poor so I am sure there is always room for development in this area.

However, going with someone who knows the area well and has climbed there before tends to prove the most accurate and interesting way to learn problems (and variations which would probably never be included in a guide). This is though, clearly no help if you don't know any locals.

In order to make the boulder more accessible to those traveling in the area, who don't find the guide book they have to be useful, i'd suggest some good documentation of any problems you, or others, wish to share, perhaps via the internet?

I personally would be quite passionate that climbing also be a sport which encouraged the preservation of the natural word and it's beauty, helps develop a healthy respect and appreciation of it and encourages those spending time in it to leave it as they found it, and leave as little trace as possible.

A big part of climbing for me is enjoying the natural world and I wouldn't wish to see it edited when it is not a complete necessity.

Those are my thoughts!