/ Bolt on Great Mis Tor, Dartmoor.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
scope on 04 Aug 2017

I discovered a bolt on a Dartmoor tor today, presumably placed by the army. I'm fairly certain it's been put there within the last year, but probably more recently, as on previous visits, I've not seen it, and it is in an obvious position near the summit flagpole. It goes completely against the BMC's fixed gear policy for the South West, so if anyone has the tools to remove it, please do.

https://ibb.co/goRe4v
https://ibb.co/knrCPv
https://ibb.co/bZZABa
Post edited at 22:59
7
freelunchprovider - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:
Oh my God no!!!! A bolt on Dartmoor!!!!!I should bring this matter to the attention of the next Local Area BMC meeting for immediate discussion. Scanadalous behaviour!!!!!!!!
Post edited at 13:50
20
Ron Rees Davies - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:
I'm not entirely sure what the BMC's fixed gear policy has to do with the military placing and clearly labelling an anchor within an established firing range. Whilst bolting for recreational climbing isn't supported in the area, this could easily be an anchor for attaching military targets or equipment to.

In any case, whilst a bolt is an unsightly addition to the natural environment the fact that it's "near the summit flagpole" suggests that there is already a bigger intrusion into the natural environment present.

It would be quite a bold move to remove a bolt placed and safety tagged by the military without politely asking them first!

EDIT: Just checked the map, and it is actually just outside the 'Danger Area'. Not sure how much difference that makes....
Post edited at 14:17
2
Steve Perry - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

They have labelled it as theirs so why don't you contact them and ask why it's there and suggest maybe using different methods in future. If you just cut it, they don't know why and could then place another and the issue has escalated two fold.
FactorXXX - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

Is there actually any climbing there?
1
scope on 05 Aug 2017
A Longleat Boulderer - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

Personally I wouldn't touch it. It's a technically a climbing bolt yes, but it's placed by the military, labelled by the military and in a military firing range.

Not sure what it's got to do with us.
Wainers44 - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to Ron Rees Davies:

> I'm not entirely sure what the BMC's fixed gear policy has to do with the military placing and clearly labelling an anchor within an established firing range. Whilst bolting for recreational climbing isn't supported in the area, this could easily be an anchor for attaching military targets or equipment to.

> In any case, whilst a bolt is an unsightly addition to the natural environment the fact that it's "near the summit flagpole" suggests that there is already a bigger intrusion into the natural environment present.



Attaching a target to? As they say, "you are not from these parts are you".

To be fair I think the Army generally treat the moor with a huge amount of respect and I for one think it will be a sad day if they stop training there.

Not sure why the bolt but last time I camped on the top of Great Mis a bolt would have been handy to attach the tent to!
1
wintertree - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

As a non local, I have to ask; what is that, a ground anchor?

More seriously it doesn't look like it's got much to do with rock climbing. The rock doesn't belong to just one hobby/sport. I hope nobody removes it without talking to the Army first about why they put it there.

Edit: if anyone was going to remove it - please don't; given the tag it's clearly monitored and likely intended for future reuse - remove it and it will just be replaced. Getting into a cycle of removal and replacement will only damage the rock more in the long run.
Post edited at 23:31
scope on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:
I excluded these photos from the OP. It gives a little more context.

https://ibb.co/kOy0cF
https://ibb.co/heu1jv

If you need an artificial anchor that badly, when there is ample natural protection nearby, sling the f*cking flagpole.

If it's ok for the army to bolt on Dartmoor granite for their own purposes, is it ok for climbers to bolt for theirs? Thin end of the wedge.
Post edited at 23:50
15
freelunchprovider - on 05 Aug 2017
In reply to Ron Rees Davies:

Quite right,just taking the Mick. If he's so incensed no need for cutting just keep removing the hanger with a spanner risk prosecution for military sabotage( or some such obscure statute) until the MOD replace it with a great big anchor cemented into the rock.
1
jayjackson - on 06 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:
It's been raised before, whether formally at a BMC area meeting or not I'm not sure but there have been military bolts at Great Mis for 10 years at least.

As others have said, there are many reasons they could have for bolting (as you have pointed out, it's not much use for climbing) and also many other ways they could have installed a load-bearing anchor. It's probably just easier and smaller than a great big staple etc.

As far as I remember, Great Mis is their rock. So yes, they can bolt it if they choose. As could climbers if they were the landowner, regardless of the "rules" participants in the sport (usually!) adhere to.

Had they chosen to bolt a whole crag-full of trad routes , then certainly a conversation about military climbing coming into conflict with the climbing community could well be worthwhile.

As it is, if members of the climbing community starts tampering with an anchor the MOD have placed, particularly one that doesn't appear to have a climbing purpose, this will certainly not support good relationships regarding access in the future, on Dartmoor or other MOD-owned land. Please don't remove it...
FactorXXX - on 06 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

https://ibb.co/kOy0cF
https://ibb.co/heu1jv

If you need an artificial anchor that badly, when there is ample natural protection nearby, sling the f*cking flagpole.

The first photo suggests, that even though there's some climbing nearby, that the anchor in question isn't actually anything to do with that climbing. i.e. the bolt hasn't been placed for climbing purposes and therefore, the BMC Policy is not relevant.
What also has to be remembered, is that the BMC Policy on Fixed Gear is based purely on ethical grounds and aims to guide climbers as to what is acceptable in a given area. It has no legal status and a landowner can essentially do whatever they want on that land.
Is it really worth rocking the boat over a single bolt?

Kevster - on 06 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

Maybe the army is finding out how bomb proof a bolt really is?
davidbeynon on 07 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

So if I'm reading the thread correctly nobody is overjoyed that it is there, but removing it would be a great mis-take.
1
FactorXXX - on 07 Aug 2017
In reply to davidbeynon:

So if I'm reading the thread correctly nobody is overjoyed that it is there, but removing it would be a great mis-take.

It ceases to be a problem if it isn't actually a climbing anchor.
Phil79 - on 07 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

As others have said, its on land owned either by the MOD or Duke of Cornwall (who allow MOD to use it for training).

Its got nothing all to do with climbing, its MOD infrastructure (just like the various block houses, range flag poles, military roads, etc on the moor). BMC policy on bolts relates only to climbers for recreational purposes, landowner can do what they want.

Looking at the photos, that one could potentially be used as an anchor to raise/lower the flag pole?

Leave well alone.
1
Phil79 - on 07 Aug 2017
In reply to davidbeynon:

> So if I'm reading the thread correctly nobody is overjoyed that it is there, but removing it would be a great mis-take.

Very good ;)
Simon cook - on 17 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

It really is not significant, generally the army treat the moor with a great deal of respect, bolting and climbing ethics have nothing to do with the firing ranges.
bouldery bits - on 17 Aug 2017
In reply to davidbeynon:

> So if I'm reading the thread correctly nobody is overjoyed that it is there, but removing it would be a great mis-take.

Maybe putting the bolt in was a little mis-stake?

davidbeynon on 17 Aug 2017
In reply to bouldery bits:

only if they missed little mis tor.
bouldery bits - on 18 Aug 2017
In reply to davidbeynon:

> So if I'm reading the thread correctly nobody is overjoyed that it is there, but removing it would be a great mis-take.

It's a bolt - not a stake!
David Hillebrandt - on 19 Aug 2017
In reply to scope:

Dear scope,

I suggest you follow this link to get some background on the military presence on Dartmoor

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/422666/9-03-269_Dartmoor_W...

It will show you that Great Mis Tor is in the Merrivale range and appears to be on land also covered by the Commoners Act.

You have full details of the bolt on the tag. Why not simply contact the commanding office of Merrivale or via the Okehampton camp whose office is open during normal Mon to Fri office hours and ask them why the bolt has been placed? Possibly you could then come along to the next BMC area meeting and have the issue discussed? By coincidence the meeting is on the 9th September at the Dartmoor National Park Offices.

This would get some background and save a lot of speculation.

Cheers

David

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.