This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Any Support/Objections to retro bolting in Berry head quarry? Four of my routes are onsightable in optimum conditions at E5/6. With abseil prep/practice they are E4/5. I'm proposing to minimally bolt these lines to produce E3/4 s.That way they may see more traffic and stay cleaner and being East NE facing might provide shade and non tidal alternatives to to the present climbs in the area. Only two pure sport routes exist in the quarry to date.
14
2
In reply to bruce woodley:
Hi Bruce
In my 25 years climbing (which started whilst at TGBS with a top rope of Big Jim at The Cove with a mate) I've only met a handful of people who've climbed routes at BHQ. I've previously spoken to friends about whether it's worth going there but they have been somewhat underwhelmed by it's aspect, dirtiness and compact rock meaning somewhat (very) bold trad. Also Nick's write up in the guide didn't inspire. No doubt Ken, Pete, Brian etc will say otherwise and views may perhaps change with increased visits for the few sports routes and the new South Devon guide. And Johnny Mac loves that sort of thing!
But I'm not sure hard bold hard trad is that popular down here now and will get popular enough for routes to stay clean. Let's face it, most logbook ascents of Devonshire Cream now have the first bolt pre-clipped; folk don't seem to want to honour the history and Chris Nicholson approach of "perfecting the art of the airborne retreat" [into the thorn bush if you fluff the crux and moves to the first bolt]
I don't think minimalist bolting will increase popularity and keep the routes clean. The routes would retain a reputation of being serious and there don't seem to be many into that sort of thing.
From my own experience, I recall being terrified on Alive and Kicking in the slate last year, thinking a sport F6a would be a nice warm up before Bella etc but finding the three bolts only and an off balance deliberately sporting clip on what felt like an E2 5b on small crimps and a spinning lower off bolt a bit too much.
So if you want to increase popularity and keep the routes clean, I anticipate that's only more likely if you added extra bolts and turned the routes into sport routes. A sorry state of affairs, an indication of the effects of indoor walls, bolts and what younger climbers may now be into that may be.
There was a thread on here a few years ago when someone suggested bolting the quarry to create a lower grade sport venue in south Devon (ie lower grade than Ansteys and Torbryan). But from memory people felt BHQ had a bad aspect, was too esoteric and compact (so unlikely to have many easy routes) and hence was unlikely to be suitable for lower grade sport or become a popular venue.
Overall, no objections from me to you retro bolting your routes down there. But query whether they'll become as popular as you'd like if they're not turned into sports routes.
All the best
C
Hi Bruce
In my 25 years climbing (which started whilst at TGBS with a top rope of Big Jim at The Cove with a mate) I've only met a handful of people who've climbed routes at BHQ. I've previously spoken to friends about whether it's worth going there but they have been somewhat underwhelmed by it's aspect, dirtiness and compact rock meaning somewhat (very) bold trad. Also Nick's write up in the guide didn't inspire. No doubt Ken, Pete, Brian etc will say otherwise and views may perhaps change with increased visits for the few sports routes and the new South Devon guide. And Johnny Mac loves that sort of thing!
But I'm not sure hard bold hard trad is that popular down here now and will get popular enough for routes to stay clean. Let's face it, most logbook ascents of Devonshire Cream now have the first bolt pre-clipped; folk don't seem to want to honour the history and Chris Nicholson approach of "perfecting the art of the airborne retreat" [into the thorn bush if you fluff the crux and moves to the first bolt]
I don't think minimalist bolting will increase popularity and keep the routes clean. The routes would retain a reputation of being serious and there don't seem to be many into that sort of thing.
From my own experience, I recall being terrified on Alive and Kicking in the slate last year, thinking a sport F6a would be a nice warm up before Bella etc but finding the three bolts only and an off balance deliberately sporting clip on what felt like an E2 5b on small crimps and a spinning lower off bolt a bit too much.
So if you want to increase popularity and keep the routes clean, I anticipate that's only more likely if you added extra bolts and turned the routes into sport routes. A sorry state of affairs, an indication of the effects of indoor walls, bolts and what younger climbers may now be into that may be.
There was a thread on here a few years ago when someone suggested bolting the quarry to create a lower grade sport venue in south Devon (ie lower grade than Ansteys and Torbryan). But from memory people felt BHQ had a bad aspect, was too esoteric and compact (so unlikely to have many easy routes) and hence was unlikely to be suitable for lower grade sport or become a popular venue.
Overall, no objections from me to you retro bolting your routes down there. But query whether they'll become as popular as you'd like if they're not turned into sports routes.
All the best
C
19
In reply to bruce woodley:
You need to talk to Pete (Kafoozalem). We have a fairly comprehensive agreed fixed gear policy for Devon and Cornwall. I collated it, using Pete's info for South Devon, off hand, I can't remember what was said forBHQ, I'll look it up. The policy was agreed after a series of BMC SW area meetings, and at the time, everyone was happy with it. Ideally, if retroing doesn't fit in with the policy, t.hen it ought to be agreed at a SW area meeting before starting bolting
You need to talk to Pete (Kafoozalem). We have a fairly comprehensive agreed fixed gear policy for Devon and Cornwall. I collated it, using Pete's info for South Devon, off hand, I can't remember what was said forBHQ, I'll look it up. The policy was agreed after a series of BMC SW area meetings, and at the time, everyone was happy with it. Ideally, if retroing doesn't fit in with the policy, t.hen it ought to be agreed at a SW area meeting before starting bolting
14
In reply to bruce woodley:
For what its worth I think Cusco has hit the nail firmly on the head!
I would imagine if you look at the log book for BHQ you'll probably find the new sport routes are probably the most popular routes there, ignoring the splendid DWS obviously!
I would have absolutely no issue with you adding bolts to your routes especially at belays. Through personal experience on one of the HVS years ago Yellow Rurties? Firstly a large fall on to decaying pegs due to hold breakage, to arrive at the belay to find rusty stubs and little else, a very scary retreat from a small sling over a spike ensued! I think the sling is still there!
The whole place is fairly neglected which is a shame as there is good height to the cliff and as much as I don't really like to admit it bolting it is probably the way forward. However someone will have to put a lot of work into clearing it as the curator/creator of the two sport routes found there is a lot of loose rock on that cliff and I think it was this issue that was the deciding factor the last time this was discussed.
The agreement as far as I'm aware was that there were absolutely no issues with bolting here so if you are keen have lots of time and the inclination then please proceed, it can certainly only help the popularity of the place and spread the load on other crags!
Good Luck
Macca
For what its worth I think Cusco has hit the nail firmly on the head!
I would imagine if you look at the log book for BHQ you'll probably find the new sport routes are probably the most popular routes there, ignoring the splendid DWS obviously!
I would have absolutely no issue with you adding bolts to your routes especially at belays. Through personal experience on one of the HVS years ago Yellow Rurties? Firstly a large fall on to decaying pegs due to hold breakage, to arrive at the belay to find rusty stubs and little else, a very scary retreat from a small sling over a spike ensued! I think the sling is still there!
The whole place is fairly neglected which is a shame as there is good height to the cliff and as much as I don't really like to admit it bolting it is probably the way forward. However someone will have to put a lot of work into clearing it as the curator/creator of the two sport routes found there is a lot of loose rock on that cliff and I think it was this issue that was the deciding factor the last time this was discussed.
The agreement as far as I'm aware was that there were absolutely no issues with bolting here so if you are keen have lots of time and the inclination then please proceed, it can certainly only help the popularity of the place and spread the load on other crags!
Good Luck
Macca
4
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
Having checked the policy - see http://community.thebmc.co.uk/Event.aspx?id=3221 (you can open a PDF version of the agreement from here), it shouldn't be a problem.
Having checked the policy - see http://community.thebmc.co.uk/Event.aspx?id=3221 (you can open a PDF version of the agreement from here), it shouldn't be a problem.
2
In reply to Mark Kemball:
Cheers Mark,I'd be doing the job with Pete. After discussion with Pat Littlejohn. Thanks for policy link.
Cheers Mark,I'd be doing the job with Pete. After discussion with Pat Littlejohn. Thanks for policy link.
3
In reply to Cusco:
Fair point also made by Dan Middleton BMC. I'd considered the angle myself and may just go ahead to stimulate a modicum of interest.Given upcoming guide.Cheers
Fair point also made by Dan Middleton BMC. I'd considered the angle myself and may just go ahead to stimulate a modicum of interest.Given upcoming guide.Cheers
In reply to bruce woodley:
I seem to remember eons back going to Horseshoe quarry (Stoney) and there were only 2 bolted routes and nobody ever went there....times change!
https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=148
I seem to remember eons back going to Horseshoe quarry (Stoney) and there were only 2 bolted routes and nobody ever went there....times change!
https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=148
Post edited at 20:33
3
In reply to bruce woodley:
Hi Bruce
I'd either do a proper bolting job or leave them as is. Bet Equipoise would make a great sport route.
Simon
Hi Bruce
I'd either do a proper bolting job or leave them as is. Bet Equipoise would make a great sport route.
Simon
4
5
In reply to bruce woodley:
75 Routes here on the data-base and over half have only had one ascent and less than 10 more than 10 ascents.Anything that would kick-start the climbing here would be a positive move.
75 Routes here on the data-base and over half have only had one ascent and less than 10 more than 10 ascents.Anything that would kick-start the climbing here would be a positive move.
2
In reply to bruce woodley:
I don't know the crag or the routes, so my comment is a general one re retro bolting.
It is interesting how it is logical and reasonable to bolt a few crags on the margin with justifications of 'bringing under used rock into use' 'making potentially dangerous routes accessible/safer for more people'
Surely a bolt part way up Great Slab or Downhill Racer would make them safer or more accessible, but that's grit and we don't do that ........ yet.
I'm uncomfortable with any suggestions regarding retro bolting. Thin end of wedge springs to mind.
I don't know the crag or the routes, so my comment is a general one re retro bolting.
It is interesting how it is logical and reasonable to bolt a few crags on the margin with justifications of 'bringing under used rock into use' 'making potentially dangerous routes accessible/safer for more people'
Surely a bolt part way up Great Slab or Downhill Racer would make them safer or more accessible, but that's grit and we don't do that ........ yet.
I'm uncomfortable with any suggestions regarding retro bolting. Thin end of wedge springs to mind.
6
19
In reply to Fruit:
I would suggest a visit before offering a comparison with frogatt's classics. If this is the thin end of the wedge, then that wedge couldn't possibly be examined without the aid of an electron microscope. Obviously, in the end any decisions concerning the quarry should be made with support from local consensus and first ascentionists. I think that generally in this case there is both. We are talking about Devon's Horseshoe here, not a popular, traditionally protected venue with perfect rock.
James
I would suggest a visit before offering a comparison with frogatt's classics. If this is the thin end of the wedge, then that wedge couldn't possibly be examined without the aid of an electron microscope. Obviously, in the end any decisions concerning the quarry should be made with support from local consensus and first ascentionists. I think that generally in this case there is both. We are talking about Devon's Horseshoe here, not a popular, traditionally protected venue with perfect rock.
James
14
In reply to Fruit:
A thicker end of that same wedge happened years back. Its an understandable concern but the specifics of a local situation should be sensibly sortable and if there is an informed debate needed, deal with that through the BMC area meeting.
For what its worth I don't think lack of apparent traffic (esp UKC logbooks) in itself should be an issue (and in my experience too often people say harder bold things haven't been climbed when I know people who have): count the number of logbook ascents on the big classics you know well and compare to the reality on the ground.
A thicker end of that same wedge happened years back. Its an understandable concern but the specifics of a local situation should be sensibly sortable and if there is an informed debate needed, deal with that through the BMC area meeting.
For what its worth I don't think lack of apparent traffic (esp UKC logbooks) in itself should be an issue (and in my experience too often people say harder bold things haven't been climbed when I know people who have): count the number of logbook ascents on the big classics you know well and compare to the reality on the ground.
3
4
In reply to Sean Kelly:
I don't think UKC logbooks are a reliable indicator of crag usage - plenty of active climbers don't log ascents or do so the old fashioned way by ticking their guidebook. Nor should apparent lack of traffic be a reason for retrobolting - The objective of climbing routes isn't about dumbing routes to the level of the masses - nor should encourageing high volumes off traffic seen as a universally desirable objective.
The rationale for retrobolting should alwways be are they better routes as bolted routes ? if so then the obvious way forward would be through the local area and with suitable ammendments to the current bolting agreement (if required) ?
I don't think UKC logbooks are a reliable indicator of crag usage - plenty of active climbers don't log ascents or do so the old fashioned way by ticking their guidebook. Nor should apparent lack of traffic be a reason for retrobolting - The objective of climbing routes isn't about dumbing routes to the level of the masses - nor should encourageing high volumes off traffic seen as a universally desirable objective.
The rationale for retrobolting should alwways be are they better routes as bolted routes ? if so then the obvious way forward would be through the local area and with suitable ammendments to the current bolting agreement (if required) ?
5
In reply to GrahamD:
Your rationale for retro bolting surely leads to encouraging higher volumes of traffic as they are a better route?
If routes are not seeing much traffic currently (which these certainly aren't) then surely its due to them being, not that good or not that appealing. Either way the bolting of them will certainly improve one if not both of these issues.
There is no need to amend the bolting agreement its all been discussed and agreed the issue is with the quality of the rock and the amount of loose stuff that would need to be removed to make these routes appealing. I wonder why there not seeing much traffic!
Your rationale for retro bolting surely leads to encouraging higher volumes of traffic as they are a better route?
If routes are not seeing much traffic currently (which these certainly aren't) then surely its due to them being, not that good or not that appealing. Either way the bolting of them will certainly improve one if not both of these issues.
There is no need to amend the bolting agreement its all been discussed and agreed the issue is with the quality of the rock and the amount of loose stuff that would need to be removed to make these routes appealing. I wonder why there not seeing much traffic!
1
In reply to Macca_7:
Bolting can (and will) increase traffic without necessarily improving the route just because it makes it easier. Bolts widen the apeal without necessarily improving the quality of the route.
If there is no ambiguity in the existing bolting agreement (I suspect there is on retrobolting, but being local, don't know) then why the perceived need for the OP ?
> Your rationale for retro bolting surely leads to encouraging higher volumes of traffic as they are a better route?If routes are not seeing much traffic currently (which these certainly aren't) then surely its due to them being, not that good or not that appealing. Either way the bolting of them will certainly improve one if not both of these issues.There is no need to amend the bolting agreement its all been discussed and agreed the issue is with the quality of the rock and the amount of loose stuff that would need to be removed to make these routes appealing. I wonder why there not seeing much traffic!
Bolting can (and will) increase traffic without necessarily improving the route just because it makes it easier. Bolts widen the apeal without necessarily improving the quality of the route.
If there is no ambiguity in the existing bolting agreement (I suspect there is on retrobolting, but being local, don't know) then why the perceived need for the OP ?
1
In reply to GrahamD:
I guess if a route has been improved by bolts being placed in it, is and always will be a personal opinion. Does it make it easier or safer or are these the same thing?
If these routes do get more traffic then obviously people will feel the route has been improved by having bolts placed in it, otherwise they would have previously climbed them?
Well bolts are accepted on the cliff, they are the OP's routes so he can go ahead if he so wishes. I think he was just looking for some opinions and peoples thoughts but your probably better asking Bruce?
I guess if a route has been improved by bolts being placed in it, is and always will be a personal opinion. Does it make it easier or safer or are these the same thing?
If these routes do get more traffic then obviously people will feel the route has been improved by having bolts placed in it, otherwise they would have previously climbed them?
Well bolts are accepted on the cliff, they are the OP's routes so he can go ahead if he so wishes. I think he was just looking for some opinions and peoples thoughts but your probably better asking Bruce?
2
1
In reply to Macca_7:
Well to a certain extent. But I think there is a reasonable concensus in general, especially on featurelss limestone.
>Does it make it easier or safer or are these the same thing?
It makes it easier and in doing so it makes it more accesible. The size of the pool of people capable or willing to take on the climb increases.
>If these routes do get more traffic then obviously people will feel the route has been improved by having bolts placed in it, otherwise they would have previously climbed them?
As above, its about accessibility rather than necessarily quality. i think the only real judges of quality are people capable of climbing it either as sparse protected trad or as sport.
>Well bolts are accepted on the cliff, they are the OP's routes so he can go ahead if he so wishes. I think he was just looking for some opinions and peoples thoughts but your probably better asking Bruce?
As I say, I'm not local and wasn't really commenting on this specific case. I was more commenting on the criteria for making a bolting decision.
> I guess if a route has been improved by bolts being placed in it, is and always will be a personal opinion.
Well to a certain extent. But I think there is a reasonable concensus in general, especially on featurelss limestone.
>Does it make it easier or safer or are these the same thing?
It makes it easier and in doing so it makes it more accesible. The size of the pool of people capable or willing to take on the climb increases.
>If these routes do get more traffic then obviously people will feel the route has been improved by having bolts placed in it, otherwise they would have previously climbed them?
As above, its about accessibility rather than necessarily quality. i think the only real judges of quality are people capable of climbing it either as sparse protected trad or as sport.
>Well bolts are accepted on the cliff, they are the OP's routes so he can go ahead if he so wishes. I think he was just looking for some opinions and peoples thoughts but your probably better asking Bruce?
As I say, I'm not local and wasn't really commenting on this specific case. I was more commenting on the criteria for making a bolting decision.
5
3
In reply to PaulTanton:
I was of course milking the humour of such a fine bumper sticker. Old age and fears seem to be combining with my tendencies toward a rather retro liberal compromise position, poised as it were on the crux of Equipoise 34 years on with a distant bit of rust and ledges to boot. Without wishing to be Burning My Bridges , may I quote a mentor of mine,one Pat Little john (who likely did its 2nd ascent) "It was E6 and still would be with 2 bolts.Maintain the integrity of the original route."Well Pete S and i are thinking 3 or 4 blots, thereby creating an E3/4 safeish 'classic'of Berry Heads dark Quarry side.I get to reconnect with my 19 year old self , albeit a tad more safely and get a buzz outa folk perhaps having a go and enjoying the trip and helping it clean up a bit.
> It ain't spurt and it ain't climbin as you once said Mr Woodley.
I was of course milking the humour of such a fine bumper sticker. Old age and fears seem to be combining with my tendencies toward a rather retro liberal compromise position, poised as it were on the crux of Equipoise 34 years on with a distant bit of rust and ledges to boot. Without wishing to be Burning My Bridges , may I quote a mentor of mine,one Pat Little john (who likely did its 2nd ascent) "It was E6 and still would be with 2 bolts.Maintain the integrity of the original route."Well Pete S and i are thinking 3 or 4 blots, thereby creating an E3/4 safeish 'classic'of Berry Heads dark Quarry side.I get to reconnect with my 19 year old self , albeit a tad more safely and get a buzz outa folk perhaps having a go and enjoying the trip and helping it clean up a bit.
7
1
In reply to GrahamD:
People like to onsight and i feel a few blots (and optimal weather conditions!) will enhance the quality/accessibility and experience for a few more folk. I guess i'll have had the privilege of the routes both as Trad FA 's ( 20th century) Retro and as 21st century retro minimalism! Crikey I'm even beginning to sound like Nick White or Chris Nicholson. Wooders makes his debut on social media. Thank you all for your input.
People like to onsight and i feel a few blots (and optimal weather conditions!) will enhance the quality/accessibility and experience for a few more folk. I guess i'll have had the privilege of the routes both as Trad FA 's ( 20th century) Retro and as 21st century retro minimalism! Crikey I'm even beginning to sound like Nick White or Chris Nicholson. Wooders makes his debut on social media. Thank you all for your input.
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
Do wanna borrow me drill?
Not quite as poetic as you Sir, but I'm an old sparky who left school without mastering the reading thing
Do wanna borrow me drill?
Not quite as poetic as you Sir, but I'm an old sparky who left school without mastering the reading thing
Post edited at 22:11
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
If you're going to bolt any of the routes at all, then I vote for sparse bolting that maintains some spice.
Given the suspect rock quality I doubt that Berry Head Quarry would make a great sports crag. I also suspect some of the routes would be fairly boring if they were fully retro-ed. (Which is not to say they wouldn't get more ascents - lots of shit sports routes get more ascents than really good trad routes.) By contrast with limited bolting or new pegs I imagine some of the routes would be very good.
Take Equipoise as an example.
I would be keen to lead this as a full trad route. However, in it's current state I would want to inspect it and possibly replace the pegs before going for a lead. Given that I have limited climbing days, I'm not sure if / when I will find time to do so.
If however it had two or three bolts on any crux sections where there was no other gear, then I would go for the onsight and it would probably be really good. (Or even better you could just replace the pegs, in which case let me know and I'll jump on it.)
By contrast if it was fully bolted then I would probably still climb it, but I bet it wouldn't be nearly as good.
I don't understand the argument that if you're going to place any bolts at all, then you should fully retro a route. Hybrid routes can be fantastic - eg Devonshire Cream climbed without the first bolt pre-clipped is a full value experience, whereas if it was fully retro-ed it'd be just another 6c+.
Cheers,
Luke.
If you're going to bolt any of the routes at all, then I vote for sparse bolting that maintains some spice.
Given the suspect rock quality I doubt that Berry Head Quarry would make a great sports crag. I also suspect some of the routes would be fairly boring if they were fully retro-ed. (Which is not to say they wouldn't get more ascents - lots of shit sports routes get more ascents than really good trad routes.) By contrast with limited bolting or new pegs I imagine some of the routes would be very good.
Take Equipoise as an example.
I would be keen to lead this as a full trad route. However, in it's current state I would want to inspect it and possibly replace the pegs before going for a lead. Given that I have limited climbing days, I'm not sure if / when I will find time to do so.
If however it had two or three bolts on any crux sections where there was no other gear, then I would go for the onsight and it would probably be really good. (Or even better you could just replace the pegs, in which case let me know and I'll jump on it.)
By contrast if it was fully bolted then I would probably still climb it, but I bet it wouldn't be nearly as good.
I don't understand the argument that if you're going to place any bolts at all, then you should fully retro a route. Hybrid routes can be fantastic - eg Devonshire Cream climbed without the first bolt pre-clipped is a full value experience, whereas if it was fully retro-ed it'd be just another 6c+.
Cheers,
Luke.
7
In reply to bruce woodley:
Understand your sentiments but doubt that minimal (designer) bolting will attract enough traffic long term to keep the routes clean and onsightable.
Either clean and headpoint or fully bolt would be my approach for whatever that might be worth.
Let me know when you are heading down as could engineer to join you so we can wallow
Understand your sentiments but doubt that minimal (designer) bolting will attract enough traffic long term to keep the routes clean and onsightable.
Either clean and headpoint or fully bolt would be my approach for whatever that might be worth.
Let me know when you are heading down as could engineer to join you so we can wallow
4
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
I don't want to get too bogged down in debate here as I am busy writing the S Devon guidebook.. I have already spent upwards of 10 days dangling off abseil ropes , removing loose rock, cleaning cracks, cutting paths etc. A few observations...
1. It is totally neglected despite having some spectacular lines
2. It has a history of accidents caused by unpredicatably loose rock
3. At over 40m high it will never offer 'convenience' sport climbing and I wonder whether we should be attracting this clientele into this particular environment
4. Whilst blanket, black and white solutions are tempting I think every crag and every route should be given individual consideration.
5. In working on restoring S Devon routes for the coming guide (2018) I have decided to invest a couple of hundred quid of my own money into fixed gear where it can have a good and transformative impact. Four bolts on Burning Bridges would be such a case. It would enable this spectacular route to be tackled safely by trad climbers of intermediate ability at E2/3 5c (or well protected HVS 5a into a 6b+ if you prefer). This solution will cost £20 (rather than £80 to create a non-convenient fully bolted route), leaving £60 to invest elsewhere. I would hope that a stunning action picture for the guide might generate some interest. This wouldn't rule out full bolting in the future if it were deemed necessary.
Nick Biven has taken an interest in Equipoise and plans to conduct a feasibility study for bolting. From my observations from an abseil rope I do not think the pegs are replaceable, natural gear is lacking or completely unreliable and a fully bolted solution might be best.
I don't want to get too bogged down in debate here as I am busy writing the S Devon guidebook.. I have already spent upwards of 10 days dangling off abseil ropes , removing loose rock, cleaning cracks, cutting paths etc. A few observations...
1. It is totally neglected despite having some spectacular lines
2. It has a history of accidents caused by unpredicatably loose rock
3. At over 40m high it will never offer 'convenience' sport climbing and I wonder whether we should be attracting this clientele into this particular environment
4. Whilst blanket, black and white solutions are tempting I think every crag and every route should be given individual consideration.
5. In working on restoring S Devon routes for the coming guide (2018) I have decided to invest a couple of hundred quid of my own money into fixed gear where it can have a good and transformative impact. Four bolts on Burning Bridges would be such a case. It would enable this spectacular route to be tackled safely by trad climbers of intermediate ability at E2/3 5c (or well protected HVS 5a into a 6b+ if you prefer). This solution will cost £20 (rather than £80 to create a non-convenient fully bolted route), leaving £60 to invest elsewhere. I would hope that a stunning action picture for the guide might generate some interest. This wouldn't rule out full bolting in the future if it were deemed necessary.
Nick Biven has taken an interest in Equipoise and plans to conduct a feasibility study for bolting. From my observations from an abseil rope I do not think the pegs are replaceable, natural gear is lacking or completely unreliable and a fully bolted solution might be best.
7
In reply to Kafoozalem:
+1 to this.
> I think every crag and every route should be given individual consideration.
+1 to this.
4
In reply to Kafoozalem:
Give me a shout anytime Pete - I'll make sure I wear a nice bright T-shirt!
> I would hope that a stunning action picture for the guide might generate some interest.
Give me a shout anytime Pete - I'll make sure I wear a nice bright T-shirt!
1
In reply to Kafoozalem:
"From my observations from an abseil rope I do not think the pegs are replaceable, natural gear is lacking or completely unreliable and a fully bolted solution might be best."
This also applies to some of the other Torbay crags Pete. Thinking of the climbs in Telegraph Hole where the old peg placements are quite worn (as are the pegs) and the natural placements are very worn and quite poor. Not surprising that Crinoid is on the verge of being upgraded to E2!
"From my observations from an abseil rope I do not think the pegs are replaceable, natural gear is lacking or completely unreliable and a fully bolted solution might be best."
This also applies to some of the other Torbay crags Pete. Thinking of the climbs in Telegraph Hole where the old peg placements are quite worn (as are the pegs) and the natural placements are very worn and quite poor. Not surprising that Crinoid is on the verge of being upgraded to E2!
1
In reply to Sean Kelly:
Hi Sean. The rock quality is so much better at Telegraph Hole (than BHQ) that sparse protection is far more acceptable. The crux peg on Crinoid has been replaced and the new description will suggest wandering for gear. The E2 upgrade (only 5b though) is mainly due to the voting here at UKc.
Hi Sean. The rock quality is so much better at Telegraph Hole (than BHQ) that sparse protection is far more acceptable. The crux peg on Crinoid has been replaced and the new description will suggest wandering for gear. The E2 upgrade (only 5b though) is mainly due to the voting here at UKc.
In reply to Sean Kelly:
Even the suggestion of bolting Telegraph Hole makes me shudder. It's an outstanding trad crag. And Crinoid is E1 5b.
Even the suggestion of bolting Telegraph Hole makes me shudder. It's an outstanding trad crag. And Crinoid is E1 5b.
Post edited at 22:46
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
Brexit? Trump? Bruce on social media?
what next? Leicester to win the Champions League?
> Wooders makes his debut on social media.
Brexit? Trump? Bruce on social media?
what next? Leicester to win the Champions League?
2
In reply to scope:
The state of the pegs made me shudder! Good work Pete!
> Even the suggestion of bolting Telegraph Hole makes me shudder. It's an outstanding trad crag. And Crinoid is E1 5b.
The state of the pegs made me shudder! Good work Pete!
3
1
2
In reply to Kafoozalem:
Wincing at the word "clientele".
I know nothing about this crag, and so don't deem myself qualified to comment on the applicability of bolts. But, to my mind, the crags and cliffs and landscapes of the UK aren't "attractions" or "resources" to be managed in a "business-like" manner to ensure the safety and enjoyment of "clientele". I find myself asking, why do you want to attract more people, anyway? What's so great about people coming climbing all over the crags and cliffs, turning the wild places into "venues"?
I don't have any answers, of course, to the ambiguities and contradictions of such knotty questions... I buy my guidebooks and take my beta like anyone else, and am yet to find anywhere that matches the idealised "wild"... I just find myself repelled by the way that business wonk has infiltrated all of our secret pastimes and places...
Wincing at the word "clientele".
I know nothing about this crag, and so don't deem myself qualified to comment on the applicability of bolts. But, to my mind, the crags and cliffs and landscapes of the UK aren't "attractions" or "resources" to be managed in a "business-like" manner to ensure the safety and enjoyment of "clientele". I find myself asking, why do you want to attract more people, anyway? What's so great about people coming climbing all over the crags and cliffs, turning the wild places into "venues"?
I don't have any answers, of course, to the ambiguities and contradictions of such knotty questions... I buy my guidebooks and take my beta like anyone else, and am yet to find anywhere that matches the idealised "wild"... I just find myself repelled by the way that business wonk has infiltrated all of our secret pastimes and places...
8
3
In reply to C Witter:
Hi, in this case the crag becomes unclimbable without a reasonable amount of use. So it would be better all round if it had more use; and those of us who have been looking after it would have to spend less time hanging on ropes cleaning it up.
Hi, in this case the crag becomes unclimbable without a reasonable amount of use. So it would be better all round if it had more use; and those of us who have been looking after it would have to spend less time hanging on ropes cleaning it up.
3
In reply to David Coley:
Yes, the image of people hanging on ropes doing thankless work (and writing guides, with lots of work, little thanks and little to no pay) certainly makes me feel grateful. But, seeing the effects of "success" on a crag can be as dispiriting as seeing the moss and clag coating the crag.
I'm certainly not against people taking a little corner of the world (e.g. quarries, cliffs, whatever) and treating it with the sort of care and attentiveness you'd think only a mother could give. Scrape the mud out of those cracks and take pride in it, by all means! Group your club mates together and make your dank quarry a home!
But, trying to make a place attractive to others... it's kind of a different game. You know what I mean? Maybe I'm off the mark. Certainly not trying to criticise - only to open a debate, maybe off topic...!
Yes, the image of people hanging on ropes doing thankless work (and writing guides, with lots of work, little thanks and little to no pay) certainly makes me feel grateful. But, seeing the effects of "success" on a crag can be as dispiriting as seeing the moss and clag coating the crag.
I'm certainly not against people taking a little corner of the world (e.g. quarries, cliffs, whatever) and treating it with the sort of care and attentiveness you'd think only a mother could give. Scrape the mud out of those cracks and take pride in it, by all means! Group your club mates together and make your dank quarry a home!
But, trying to make a place attractive to others... it's kind of a different game. You know what I mean? Maybe I'm off the mark. Certainly not trying to criticise - only to open a debate, maybe off topic...!
In reply to C Witter:
I find myself 'wincing' at your viewpoint somewhat. You might find yourself doing more than wincing whilst climbing anything at the crag without the massive amounts of hard work that various individuals have put in (not me by the way). Guidebook writers do have a clientele; guidebook purchasers and climbers in general. Some crags need no work at all to be perfectly usable, some need lots. I know that this particular guidebook team and other local activists have been working, and continue to work really hard to ensure that the routes included are climbable, have accurate descriptions and honest appraisals of quality and objective danger.
This altruistic approach is not the grip of some kind of commercial, business speak, nanny state, adventure killing machine but the public spirited actions of a an enthusiastic and experienced group of volunteers. It strikes me that if more people took on this kind of approach even for an hour or two picking up litter or cleaning a rarely climbed route local to where they live that our pastime would be just a little richer.
James
I find myself 'wincing' at your viewpoint somewhat. You might find yourself doing more than wincing whilst climbing anything at the crag without the massive amounts of hard work that various individuals have put in (not me by the way). Guidebook writers do have a clientele; guidebook purchasers and climbers in general. Some crags need no work at all to be perfectly usable, some need lots. I know that this particular guidebook team and other local activists have been working, and continue to work really hard to ensure that the routes included are climbable, have accurate descriptions and honest appraisals of quality and objective danger.
This altruistic approach is not the grip of some kind of commercial, business speak, nanny state, adventure killing machine but the public spirited actions of a an enthusiastic and experienced group of volunteers. It strikes me that if more people took on this kind of approach even for an hour or two picking up litter or cleaning a rarely climbed route local to where they live that our pastime would be just a little richer.
James
3
In reply to james mann:
P.s. see my comment of 16.27, which anticipated your points before you stated them, making me wonder why you felt the need for restating them.
P.s. see my comment of 16.27, which anticipated your points before you stated them, making me wonder why you felt the need for restating them.
1
1
In reply to C Witter:
This is a public forum where everyone gets to say whatever they like. I answered your points about clientele and why making a crag if not necessarily attractive, then at least usable and honestly described might be a 'good thing. We are not talking about a green grit crag here, but a large crag with a good deal of loose material, little reliable natural gear and a dearth of visitors. It has been agreed at local area meetings that bolting here is acceptable. Many of the routes here were heavily reliant upon peg protection which is now in a dangerous state. The cleaning and re-equipping currently underway is likely to lead to a greater degree of popularity and thus routes remaining cleaner and climbable, perhaps onsight. I am sorry if you didn't like the fact that I replied to your post but there we are.
James
This is a public forum where everyone gets to say whatever they like. I answered your points about clientele and why making a crag if not necessarily attractive, then at least usable and honestly described might be a 'good thing. We are not talking about a green grit crag here, but a large crag with a good deal of loose material, little reliable natural gear and a dearth of visitors. It has been agreed at local area meetings that bolting here is acceptable. Many of the routes here were heavily reliant upon peg protection which is now in a dangerous state. The cleaning and re-equipping currently underway is likely to lead to a greater degree of popularity and thus routes remaining cleaner and climbable, perhaps onsight. I am sorry if you didn't like the fact that I replied to your post but there we are.
James
5
In reply to james mann:
Actually, I'm happy for a reply; just not a rather banal and moralising reply in which the author defensively reasserts the party line rather than allowing themself to explore the lived ambiguities and contradictions of the situation - i.e. what do we want from climbing and from our landscape? But, anyway - that aside, thanks for taking the time to put down some words.
Actually, I'm happy for a reply; just not a rather banal and moralising reply in which the author defensively reasserts the party line rather than allowing themself to explore the lived ambiguities and contradictions of the situation - i.e. what do we want from climbing and from our landscape? But, anyway - that aside, thanks for taking the time to put down some words.
1
1
In reply to C Witter:
First of all I fully appreciate your post. You know weren't fully consistent in what you said. But that is the way life is. Still better to try and move the debate on.
I'm going to disagree with you but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate what you are trying to say.
I don't climb that much these days but I did do some "Wild" climbs last year. Either first ascents or repeats with no information. We climbed ground up, no glory that hardest was at most HS
But that is unusual. I think most of the routes I have climbed are a man made product. Some more so than others. Peg scared cracks at Millstone would be a prime example. But even Mountain Classics in their current state are human constructs. Part of this is physical. Loose rock and vegetation removed by the first ascentionist or by traffic. Possibly gear added (the peg on Cenotaph Corner). The publishing of the route whilst not a physical act in itself is part of a manufacturing process. Without traffic many routes would not as pleasant to climb or even be climbable at all. So we may not like the language of attracting traffic but it is how climbing works.
To be honest I don't think I fully appreciated this until I had the importance of this explained to me in terms of Mountain Biking. The dream of the riding the ungroomed wilds is in reality horrible
To the OP, as the rules allow you to bolt then you should do so if you want to. I have climbed partially bolted routes and it seemed a bit odd to be in retrospect. So I'd say enough bolts to make it safe.
> I buy my guidebooks and take my beta like anyone else, and am yet to find anywhere that matches the idealised "wild"...
First of all I fully appreciate your post. You know weren't fully consistent in what you said. But that is the way life is. Still better to try and move the debate on.
I'm going to disagree with you but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate what you are trying to say.
I don't climb that much these days but I did do some "Wild" climbs last year. Either first ascents or repeats with no information. We climbed ground up, no glory that hardest was at most HS
But that is unusual. I think most of the routes I have climbed are a man made product. Some more so than others. Peg scared cracks at Millstone would be a prime example. But even Mountain Classics in their current state are human constructs. Part of this is physical. Loose rock and vegetation removed by the first ascentionist or by traffic. Possibly gear added (the peg on Cenotaph Corner). The publishing of the route whilst not a physical act in itself is part of a manufacturing process. Without traffic many routes would not as pleasant to climb or even be climbable at all. So we may not like the language of attracting traffic but it is how climbing works.
To be honest I don't think I fully appreciated this until I had the importance of this explained to me in terms of Mountain Biking. The dream of the riding the ungroomed wilds is in reality horrible
To the OP, as the rules allow you to bolt then you should do so if you want to. I have climbed partially bolted routes and it seemed a bit odd to be in retrospect. So I'd say enough bolts to make it safe.
1
In reply to John Clinch (Ampthill):
Yes, your're right John: I climb in the Lakes and Lancashire, mostly, and when you're climbing there you're kidding yourself if you think of those landscapes as 'natural'. You often end up at the interface of industry, agriculture and nature - which have changed the landscape on such a scale, and so irrevocably, that these changes have been "naturalised". You end up imagining "this is nature", when actually it's a product of, say, 19th century quarrying and monocultural agriculture. In this context, as you say, the tradition, documentation and practice of climbing also inscribes its micrography on the landscape - from the idea that some green cliff is climbable to the erosion of constant visitation; and from the chipped Victorian-era hold, to the well-worn nut placement, to the glued-in bolt.
Of course, climbing is a human production, not a 'natural impulse in the untamed wilds', then. And I approve wholeheartedly of that - as I said above, make your crag your home! When the world is being constantly rewritten by power, capital, industry and consumption, why not cherish these more fragile and esoteric forms of shaping and naming and knowing the landscape? These are spaces where ordinary people are able to author something, to make it their own.
With this in mind, I feel like the crags - as well as the knowledge and tradition of climbing - are conceived of by many as a commons: a set of practices and resources to which all have rights, and which are more-or-less regulated by the tradition of the community. The greeting of another climber at a crag, the sharing of gossip about the routes, and the beady eye out for the litterer or dry tooler - all these are kinds of spontaneous association around and regulation of a resource held in common.
The obvious exception here, of course, is that of crags on private land - often grouse moors or forest owned by the descendants of aristocracy, who violently seized and enclosed (privatised) the commons back in the C18th and C19th. As E. P. Thompson describes it:
"In agriculture the years between 1760 and 1820 are the years of wholesale enclosure in which, in village after village, common rights are lost. [...] Enclosure (when all the sophistications are allowed for) was a plain enough case of class robbery."
So, where we can and can't climb is marked by this dispossession, as well as by more recent struggles against it (e.g. the mass trespass of the 1930s) to re-establish some kind of "common rights".
But, are we still thinking of the crags as a "commons" when we consider turning them into 'attractive venues'? Or is a shift in the air?
On the one hand, maybe they continue as a commons: lots of voluntary (hard and dangerous and sometimes personally expensive) work carried out for the benefit of "the climbing community". But, I wonder if the recent desire to increase that "community", to increase footfall, and to smooth the way for the circulation of people and the consumption of "climbing" is actually akin to the capitalist imperative to constantly up productivity, to grow consumption, to open new markets, and so on. And, I wonder (without having enough experience to determine either way, but just picking up on certain signals) whether the BMC itself is an organisation democratically representing the views of the community, or whether it has, to some extent, become a bit separate of that community as it has grown, staked its current and future success on capitalist business models and, along the way, digested certain ideas and tenets of this kind of pervasive "business-think".
It's important to stress, I don't want to ascribe such views to any individual or anyone in this thread or to the bolting of Berry Head Quarry - because I know sweet f-all about this crag, these individuals and their motivations. But, it was just that the word "clientele" and a recent experience of climbing in a silent valley set off a meandering chain of thought and concern, which - apologies to the OP - is probably tangential to the original thread.
Yes, your're right John: I climb in the Lakes and Lancashire, mostly, and when you're climbing there you're kidding yourself if you think of those landscapes as 'natural'. You often end up at the interface of industry, agriculture and nature - which have changed the landscape on such a scale, and so irrevocably, that these changes have been "naturalised". You end up imagining "this is nature", when actually it's a product of, say, 19th century quarrying and monocultural agriculture. In this context, as you say, the tradition, documentation and practice of climbing also inscribes its micrography on the landscape - from the idea that some green cliff is climbable to the erosion of constant visitation; and from the chipped Victorian-era hold, to the well-worn nut placement, to the glued-in bolt.
Of course, climbing is a human production, not a 'natural impulse in the untamed wilds', then. And I approve wholeheartedly of that - as I said above, make your crag your home! When the world is being constantly rewritten by power, capital, industry and consumption, why not cherish these more fragile and esoteric forms of shaping and naming and knowing the landscape? These are spaces where ordinary people are able to author something, to make it their own.
With this in mind, I feel like the crags - as well as the knowledge and tradition of climbing - are conceived of by many as a commons: a set of practices and resources to which all have rights, and which are more-or-less regulated by the tradition of the community. The greeting of another climber at a crag, the sharing of gossip about the routes, and the beady eye out for the litterer or dry tooler - all these are kinds of spontaneous association around and regulation of a resource held in common.
The obvious exception here, of course, is that of crags on private land - often grouse moors or forest owned by the descendants of aristocracy, who violently seized and enclosed (privatised) the commons back in the C18th and C19th. As E. P. Thompson describes it:
"In agriculture the years between 1760 and 1820 are the years of wholesale enclosure in which, in village after village, common rights are lost. [...] Enclosure (when all the sophistications are allowed for) was a plain enough case of class robbery."
So, where we can and can't climb is marked by this dispossession, as well as by more recent struggles against it (e.g. the mass trespass of the 1930s) to re-establish some kind of "common rights".
But, are we still thinking of the crags as a "commons" when we consider turning them into 'attractive venues'? Or is a shift in the air?
On the one hand, maybe they continue as a commons: lots of voluntary (hard and dangerous and sometimes personally expensive) work carried out for the benefit of "the climbing community". But, I wonder if the recent desire to increase that "community", to increase footfall, and to smooth the way for the circulation of people and the consumption of "climbing" is actually akin to the capitalist imperative to constantly up productivity, to grow consumption, to open new markets, and so on. And, I wonder (without having enough experience to determine either way, but just picking up on certain signals) whether the BMC itself is an organisation democratically representing the views of the community, or whether it has, to some extent, become a bit separate of that community as it has grown, staked its current and future success on capitalist business models and, along the way, digested certain ideas and tenets of this kind of pervasive "business-think".
It's important to stress, I don't want to ascribe such views to any individual or anyone in this thread or to the bolting of Berry Head Quarry - because I know sweet f-all about this crag, these individuals and their motivations. But, it was just that the word "clientele" and a recent experience of climbing in a silent valley set off a meandering chain of thought and concern, which - apologies to the OP - is probably tangential to the original thread.
4
1
In reply to bruce woodley:
Hello, as a local who occasionally comes out from under his rock to climb things I'll throw my pennies worth in.
I have little to add to the discussion but would like to say that my personal views align closely with those of Luke and I belive that there is still an appetite for maintained pegged/partially bolted routes. As an apprentice of the 90's based in Bristol there were many such routes and much less sport routes to distract us, so we got on them and learnt to love what they gave us, it would be sad for me to see an all or nothing approach to routes.....
That said, that is me thinking of my own climbing.
The truth is that I have little time to climb and almost none to give to the work required to keep routes in good order, write guidebooks, clean crags, negotiate access, equip routes for others to enjoy. There are a small number of people who put in an enormous effort in Devon doing all these jobs and in my mind they do so with respect and consideration, the fact that this thread exists is tribute to that. The point I am trying to make is that the people trying to make these decisions are the ones who have selflessly given so much to Devon climbing and the accessibility for visitors, they have a balanced background of trad and sport climbing and want to do the right thing. If there actions don't align with my perfect ideals, that's not really a problem, they've earned the right for leeway in judgement.
In answer to John Clinch: Surely as a community of climbers we have always shared our experiences and knowledge of places so that we, in return also know where to find good routes, clean boulders or even simply where the crag is. There must be very few who will climb with no guidebook at all. There's no business mind at work here just enthusiastic climbers, and as far as I know this all has very little if anything to do with the BMC.
Jb.
Hello, as a local who occasionally comes out from under his rock to climb things I'll throw my pennies worth in.
I have little to add to the discussion but would like to say that my personal views align closely with those of Luke and I belive that there is still an appetite for maintained pegged/partially bolted routes. As an apprentice of the 90's based in Bristol there were many such routes and much less sport routes to distract us, so we got on them and learnt to love what they gave us, it would be sad for me to see an all or nothing approach to routes.....
That said, that is me thinking of my own climbing.
The truth is that I have little time to climb and almost none to give to the work required to keep routes in good order, write guidebooks, clean crags, negotiate access, equip routes for others to enjoy. There are a small number of people who put in an enormous effort in Devon doing all these jobs and in my mind they do so with respect and consideration, the fact that this thread exists is tribute to that. The point I am trying to make is that the people trying to make these decisions are the ones who have selflessly given so much to Devon climbing and the accessibility for visitors, they have a balanced background of trad and sport climbing and want to do the right thing. If there actions don't align with my perfect ideals, that's not really a problem, they've earned the right for leeway in judgement.
In answer to John Clinch: Surely as a community of climbers we have always shared our experiences and knowledge of places so that we, in return also know where to find good routes, clean boulders or even simply where the crag is. There must be very few who will climb with no guidebook at all. There's no business mind at work here just enthusiastic climbers, and as far as I know this all has very little if anything to do with the BMC.
Jb.
10
1
In reply to John Mcshea:
Totally agree.
Mick
> There are a small number of people who put in an enormous effort in Devon doing all these jobs and in my mind they do so with respect and consideration, the fact that this thread exists is tribute to that. The point I am trying to make is that the people trying to make these decisions are the ones who have selflessly given so much to Devon climbing and the accessibility for visitors, they have a balanced background of trad and sport climbing and want to do the right thing. If there actions don't align with my perfect ideals, that's not really a problem, they've earned the right for leeway in judgement.
Totally agree.
Mick
4
In reply to John Mcshea:
I have seen how much work these climbers do, and have been grateful to climb some local routes that they have brought back into use, I agree that they have earned the right to be the best judge of the way forward. Good luck to them.
Phil
> . The point I am trying to make is that the people trying to make these decisions are the ones who have selflessly given so much to Devon climbing and the accessibility for visitors, they have a balanced background of trad and sport climbing and want to do the right thing. If there actions don't align with my perfect ideals, that's not really a problem, they've earned the right for leeway in judgement."
I have seen how much work these climbers do, and have been grateful to climb some local routes that they have brought back into use, I agree that they have earned the right to be the best judge of the way forward. Good luck to them.
Phil
1
In reply to John Mcshea:
>In answer to John Clinch: Surely as a community of climbers we have always shared our experiences and knowledge of places so that we, in return also know where to find good routes, clean boulders or even simply where the crag is. There must be very few who will climb with no guidebook at all. There's no business mind at work here just enthusiastic climbers, and as far as I know this all has very little if anything to do with the BMC.
I think we agree. I was specifically replying to C witter who was implying that some how climbing was about a "natural world". I was making the point that in many ways climbs were man made. I'm not saying this is bad thing, just a reality
>In answer to John Clinch: Surely as a community of climbers we have always shared our experiences and knowledge of places so that we, in return also know where to find good routes, clean boulders or even simply where the crag is. There must be very few who will climb with no guidebook at all. There's no business mind at work here just enthusiastic climbers, and as far as I know this all has very little if anything to do with the BMC.
I think we agree. I was specifically replying to C witter who was implying that some how climbing was about a "natural world". I was making the point that in many ways climbs were man made. I'm not saying this is bad thing, just a reality
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...