UKC

I just noticed the new looking glue in bolt at the top of Rhoscolyn, as a belay option for the The Sun (E3 5c), Warpath (E5 6a) etc. It might've been there for years but i hadn't seen it before. Can anyone advise who placed it and when? It seems something of an ethical faux pas given the trad ethic and alternatives available.

In reply to Si Witcher:

Shhhhh! 

In reply to Si Witcher:

I'm not sure why this isn't had more said about it, am I missing something or is everyone ok with this?? 

As suggested within the OP, it seems at hugely at odds with such a traditional area. Whilst I'm aware the belay wasn't necessarily the best, it was perfectly adequate with a bit of fiddling - as such I don't really see the justification to place a belay bolt aside from laziness. 

Be good to get some resolution and send it to the BMC local area for further discussion.

Thoughts on the back of a postcard, rants on the back of a book...

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

I am also not OK with this; how long has it been there? Haven't done the route in question...but bolts on Gogarth sea cliffs...?

In reply to spidermonkey09:

I'm not sure, I can ask around, but suspect the answer would be meaningless anyway - the long and the short of it is that it's there.

One thing is for sure is that I'm with you: Gogarth (and by Gogarth I mean North Stack, South Stack, Holyhead Mountain, Rhoscolyn, and The Range) is a bolt-free zone. There is a belay and whilst it is fiddly, if we bolted every fiddly belay out there...well...we'd have a lot of bolted belays!! 

In reply to Si Witcher:

One is tempted to ask where next? Top of Castell Helen?!

No, this doesn't exactly rest easy with me either, as there's always been a means to belay on gear above this route. I'm not aware of any prior local discussion in BMC North Wales meetings, but I may be mistaken. Elfyn is currently on leave so there's no means of my quickly checking with him. 

Is there is an insidious creep towards a 'norm' where belay bolts are now being justified in order to make a belay ''easier/safer''?  Just such a proposal was very recently discussed in the Mid Wales area BMC meeting re. a Southern Snowdonia 'mountain' crag and, unbelievably, it was nodded through with barely any real concern/dissent (the latter basically only came from me.)

In reply to Si Witcher:

Right, just had a chat with A N ONYMOUS and they reckon it's been in for around five years and is North Wales' worst kept secret - so much so that they were surprised I didn't know about it and that I'd let the cat out the bag on the world's most opinionated online forum (hence the great many likes for Dan Arkle's Shhhhh... message).

Apparently it's placed discreetly, out of view, and unlikely to be seen let alone tripped over, and the general feel for it was more cheeky than outraging. That said, it still doesn't sit comfortably with me and in the name of process I would like to put it forward as an agenda item on the next North Wales Area Meeting. I'l message Tim Jepson (Area Chair) in due course, but in the meanwhile feel free to post thoughts + feelings either for or against.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Seems dubious as I don't recall any real issues sorting the belay out when I did it.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

 

It's definitely been there a while, as I remember being a little perplexed about it in August 2015 when I did The Sun, and, at least long enough for it to be mentioned in the Gogarth South guide that came out in September 2015!

In reply to Si Witcher:

This bolt epitomizes discreet (I missed it the first few times I had opportunity to use it) and to my mind is a perfect example of how bolts should be used in British trad venues. In my opinion anyway.

 

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

A simple alternative / solution / compromise would be to 'create' some threads, the rock at the top would suit this well and would negate the need for bolts and would give more options for setting up belays. Anyone who's belayed at the top of 'Plastic Soldier' would have seen and possibly used a man made / drilled thread. 

In reply to bensilvestre:

For what it's worth I've had a whole lot of private messages from people who've used the bolt and like that it's there (and that it's discreet), so you're not alone in this view. I also respect your point of view and the discussion as a whole (I'm not on quite as much of a witch hunt as I appear to be - promise!!).

That said, I can't shake the fact it doesn't feel right. There is a belay, albeit a fiddly one, and the fact it's at Gogarth (well, Rhoscolyn, but you get what I mean) only adds to the strength of that conviction. If it needed to be there I might be on the fence, but as it stands it is something of a unnecessary and unwanted luxury.

In reply to Sl@te Head:

But the ground at the top of the Sun doesn't lend itself at all  to manufacturing a thread placement, which in any case would soon be blighted by tat.  This is a very sensitive area as the belay spot is actually on a popular scenic cost path used by many walkers.  The alternative of using the dry stone wall would also be highly irresponsible and would also impede walkers on the path.  When I haven't been able to find the bolt I've resorted to a multitude of flared cam placements etc, after nipping back top my sack to find suitable gear.  The hidden bolt is by far the best solution in this case

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

"luxury" ?

In reply to GrahamD:

i.e. the luxury of having a simple belay, as opposed to one that takes time and effort to craft

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

so on that basis we can remove all the stakes at Pembroke?

In reply to Sl@te Head:

Why not helicopter up a large local rock with many threads in it? Looks natural, doesn't damage the rock and will probably last forever. Boom!

In reply to kevin stephens:

I think you're arguing a separate point here, so let's not confuse the matter at hand - we're talking about a bolt where there's an otherwise satisfactory belay to be found. Not the stakes at Pembroke, the bolts at Malham, or anything else.

Stakes at Pembroke differ in several ways: firstly in that they're not drilled or glued - they're hammered and can easily be removed; secondly, they are the belays - there's no other alternatives available. 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

This is where I (and possibly others) disagree.  I've climbed around a 100 routes at Gogarth and climbed the Sun 3 times and numerous other routes at Rhoscolyn.  In my opinion the natural belays at the top pf the Sun are less adequate than almost all of the other routes I've done at Gogarth

In reply to kevin stephens:

That's a much better line of enquiry.

For what it's worth, and I think I've outlined somewhere above, it is a faffy belay. I think I used the word 'adequate', which is some way off good, and to that end there is good reason to question whether anything can be done about it. 

As some people have suggested previously the drystone wall isn't ideal (read: bad), threads would be impractical, and I can't see you getting a stake into the quartzite without an even bigger drill than the one it took to place the bolt with! As such, what options are we left with? Continue with status-quo, leaving the bolt as/is, or remove the bolt and find an alternative, if there is indeed an alternative to be found.

It's up for discussion in my eyes, I'm just glad we're having the debate...

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

It's my favourite bolt in Wales that. Makes you feel right naughty when you clip it. 

In reply to snoop6060:

Just to lighten the mood you can have a like for that

In reply to Sl@te Head:

Creating a thread does more damage to the natural rock than placing a bolt.

In reply to John2:

aesthetics vs ethics; the two are often confused and sometimes contradictory 

In reply to kevin stephens:

Many badly protected trad routes could be transformed into virtual clip-ups by a bit of judicious drilling. I have been told of at least one Pembroke E6 where one of the threads is definitely not natural.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

I just dont buy the 'but its at gogarth' thing. I get that its supposed to be a purist venue, but the bolt has literally no effect on the experience of climbing the route, and stops people from belaying from the wall (which is preferable for at least the walkers, and presumably the farmer). If my memory serves me correctly there is a poor belay near the lip on a bad small cam and some fiddly microwires. Which is all well and good for someone like you or I. But if I were to break a hold seconding someone as small as Tess, that poor belay might be tested more than I'm comfortable with. 

In reply to John2:

This isn’t about bolted runners, it’s abou bolted belays which is a key and subtle difference.

 

In reply to Si Witcher:

And for what its worth I'm glad to have the discussion too. British ethics are often based on emotion rather than logic, when there aught to be a balance, and the way we get into a better situation for everyone is by talking about what is acceptable, and then educating people about it.

In reply to bensilvestre:

Well it's more tradition than emotion which is fair enough. Quite similar of course. But I guess you can't really have a sensible compromise so it has to be all or nothing or it just won't work. It's a shame as bolts probably would make more sense in a lot of places (as belays / abs) but it will encourage really stupid shit too. So best to just make a stand and ban them outright in places such as gogarth.

In reply to snoop6060:

Far worse is the unsightly tat at the top of the Strand which is there for convenience only not safety, and as for the mass of pegs on the Castell Helen ab point...….

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

So are there really climbers who can lead a trad E3 but can't sort a 'faffy' belay?

 

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

There's a big difference between sorting a "faffy" belay and relying on a carefully arranged belay which still may not hold in the event of an unexpected shock load

In reply to Chris Craggs:

The sun is well soft tho  

In reply to snoop6060:

Agreed, solid E2, maybe it only got E3 because it lacked a good belay at the top?

In reply to snoop6060:

I think thats the main argument against, I just don't really agree. I think a compromise is possible, its just easier not to. And I'm not convinced that badly placed / unsuitable bolts would start appearing everywhere. Most people who would makw the effort to place a bolt are sensitive enough to the debate. The placement of this bolt is a good example of that

In reply to Si Witcher:

If the bolt is that discreet then I'm glad the cat is out of the bag. Seeing apparently run of the mill ascents that rely on it, and the associated chalk and traffic telltales, leaves a sketch sitiation in my view. Personally I'd rather see it removed, and a note on the poor belay in future guidebooks.

In reply to John2:

Oh, I don’t know, this one has been quite helpful.

In reply to Gerry Gradewell:

Can you see there ever being a new edition of gogarth south given the complications with the first edition?

Edit: plus the lack of scope for enough new routes to warrant a new guide

In reply to Si Witcher:

Disclaimer to my involvement in this thread: I don't care half as much as it might seem I do. Bolt or no bolt the sun is still the same route. I'm just in Berlin airport after a 3 week work shift waiting for an easyjet flight which has been delayed by 6 hours til 2:30am, and I feel like grumbling

In reply to bensilvestre:

I agree with you 100% but my point was that it won't work as there is always one who feels strong enough and will just chop em. So what's the point. Though the belay at  the top of the sun or the ab at castle Helen arent the best examples as they are fine without them. 

 

In reply to Gerry Gradewell:

Run of the mill ascents?  Do you think finding an unexpectedly straightforward belay at the top somehow devalued the lead?  Did more people do it, even though they didn’t know there was a bolt belay?

Anyway, I was very happy not to know it was there. I can think of a few more places a discreet bolt where no one can see it until they are actually on the stance would be much safer than a crap belay that, by luck, hasn’t actually killed anyone yet.

This is in no way an excuse for wholesale bolt belays, especially where they encourage group top roping, but a bit of creative inconsistency is traditional.  I plead the Walt Whitman defence.

 

In reply to snoop6060:

Oh I see. Yes sadly that's true.

Another point which hasn't been raised is that small, fiddly gear placements such as the ones in the Sun belay are more liable to wear out in a way which will lead to them failing (unlike perfect medium or large nut placements which just tend to get more bomber/ nut shaped). 

In reply to bensilvestre:

New guides can take an age to come about, but yeah I think it's a safe bet there will

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Yeah of course. The route including the belay is in and of itself.

Possibly yeah. Anyway, there's a bit of a transparency issue here. If we want there to be a bolt, we should be happy with that being public. Otherwise the situation becomes a compete mess.

Crap belays are part of (trad) climbing.

 

 

In reply to bensilvestre:

I thought the prevailing ethic was fixed gear was OK as long as it was rubbish, maybe someone can of and saw the eye so it does work as a proper bolt but we can still hook a wire over it, or better still just stop anyone using it until it becomes so rusted its 50:50 whether it holds.

In reply to Gerry Gradewell:

What would be gained by removing this bolt?

As Rob pointed out, Dan Arkle's post and the 'likes' it attracted say all that needs to be said about this (and in an amusing, subtle way).

There are scores of places in UK trad areas where a well-judged bolt would be an asset, having only a positive impact on the experiences of climbers. It amuses me that people view this in terms of the "principle" at stake, and of the "thin end of the wedge" - as if, unless a consistent policy is agreed and enforced, then something about trad climbing in the UK will actually change.

The reality is that there's hardly anyone out there on the UK's trad crags that has either the intention or the wherewithal to place any bolts. In this case, it's been there for years and the only impact it's had is that people climbing The Sun have spent a bit less time setting up a belay - I've climbed the route both before it was there and after, and I can testify that the only difference it made was a little chuckle (probably not quite a chuckle, just a momentarily raised eyebrow and a couple of words exchanged). Same goes for anywhere where a well-judged bolt would just be handy for belaying/abseiling. Should such bolts be "tolerated", absolutely nothing about UK trad climbing will change, because there simply isn't an army of drill-toting belay-bolters poised ready to pollute the purist traditions of UK trad climbing.

Sergeant Crags Slabs is a great example - bolts on mountain rock in the Lakes sanctioned by the BMC, remember that end of the world? Cut to sepia nostalgic reminiscence of real trad climbing in the Lakes...how the tears well in my eyes.

In reply to Gerry Gradewell:so how would you prevent people attempting to belay off the dry stone wall, damaging it in the process and roping off a popular tourist path?  Have you done the route?

 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Where do you suggest? Abseil point st the top of left wall, abseil point at the top of Castell Helen?

Interesting that you think like this as its not that long ago that this sort of talk would have you metaphorically strung up and let's face it it's only a couple of years since the Deva Vu bolt debacle

In reply to Tyler:

There are loads of places I can think of. Thank your lucky stars that I can't be arsed to get involved! Especially since I might do it incompetently, DIY has never been my strongest suit.

As for those examples, I can't remember any hassle abbing off those places, so if I was to join up to the army of drill-toting belay-bolters, then they'd be well down the hit list.

Different issue, bolts at Kilnsey - how sport and trad coexist on a crag.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Go on then, I'm not spoiling for a fight but genuinely interested

 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Dan's reply is amusing, but probably mostly his being mischievous

The principle at stake is that when I go trad climbing, I don't want to climb on bolts. It's quite straightforward. Others, like yourself clearly, must feel differently.

Absolutely nothing changes, except for there being bolt(s). Hopefully you can see the contradiction here.

 

In reply to bensilvestre:

 

The key word here is 'most. The problem most dyed in the wool trad ethics merchants have is that this is a one way street: it's very hard to go back.  This isn't about the specific of the Sun. It's about trying to preserve some level of trad ethics in one of the few accessible totally trad crags around.  It's not about safety it's about making our crags more 'convenience '

 

In reply to Tyler:

If I say publicly, then if some bolts suddenly start appearing...

There's a really shit ab point on a crag fairly near me that could do with one. A big fat ring one. 

There's a route on a popular mountain crag that ends in the middle of nowhere and you have to scramble all the way up to the top of the crag and then down to the bottom of the route, it takes ages and the route is just one really good pitch.

There's a load more places where a permanent thread (chain) would be better than the continual replacement of tat...

In reply to kevin stephens:

Good question... With a good flaming for anyone that does trash dry stone walls or impact access as a backup option

Nope, Warpath is/was on my to do list

 

In reply to Gerry Gradewell:

When I go trad climbing, I don't really have an eye for the detail of there being a peg here, or some tat there, or a bolt at a belay...if it's trad climbing, it's trad climbing. It's not a matter of principle, it's a matter of experience.

No, I can't. I'm saying that if I go trad climbing, then if one the bits of gear that forms one of several belays that day is a bolt, then that doesn't register as being a change. It's not significant enough, it doesn't have sufficient impact. It's like if the thread that was there last time isn't in situ today. If it doesn't change the experience, it's not worth regarding as a change.

In reply to Jon Stewart:but the point is that at the top of the Sun there is no place to put a piece of tat. All of your examples refer to means of escaping from the finish of a climb, that otherwise has an effective belay, in some places to reduce erosion. The Sun tops out onto an easy and popular walkers path . Just without an adequate belay. The Sun starts by stepping off a ledge above a void to start an almost always wet crack. A second falling at this point could pull his belayer off the top and a serious fall for the belayer. The crag is not like Red Wall where both members of the party Implicitly commit to a much more serious proposition 

 

In reply to GrahamD:

Your concern makes sense in the parallel universe in which the army of dill-toting belay-bolters exists.

Edit: I don't think they'll get very far toting *dill*

In reply to kevin stephens:

I don't get your point. The SCS example is a special case because the argument for the bolts was about erosion. The other examples, including The Sun are about convenience. 

I agree with the principle that putting fixed gear all over the crags for the sake of convenience would change the trad climbing experience, for the worse in my view. I'm just pointing out that the bolt at The Sun has been left for years without anyone placing more bolts along the crag, or indeed anything changing at all about the trad climbing experience at Rhoscolyn.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

You said "Dan Arkle's post and the 'likes' it attracted say all that needs to be said about this" as if this was now a cut and dried topic but when asked where the new lines of demarcation are you come over all coy. So maybe there is more to be said?

In reply to Jon Stewart:

No, the argument about the Sun is safety nothing to do with convenience

In reply to Tyler:

I just meant that it summed up very nicely what people who know about the subject, but can't be arsed debating the issue, or don't have some axe to grind, think.

But I'm not proposing any lines of demarcation - I'm saying that it doesn't need to be debated as a matter of principle. If someone places a bolt somewhere where it's just sensible and useful, then the likelihood is that it'll stay there (unless someone advertises its presence on UKC, so that someone who thinks that they're defending the integrity of British climbing can spend their time removing it...in that case, would they do it quietly or brag about it...perhaps time will tell?).

 

In reply to kevin stephens:

Is it? Oh. Before the bolt was there, I did the route and thought the belay was faffy but safe. Whatever.

In reply to Si Witcher:

Gogarth is not a bolt free zone, The Cad has a bolt, or at least it did last time I climbed it which was a few years ago now. 

The bolt at Rhoscolyn has been there for at least 14 years. 

Cheers,

Nick

 

 

In reply to Nick BullockNick Bullock:

Ha. I missed it the first time I did the route then - at least I'm getting better at something over time...

In reply to Si Witcher:

The bolt is pretty discrete and I expect a lot of people doing the routes in that area don't even spot the bolt and just use natural placements to belay. I can't see a problem if it's removed so might as well remove it if it's a problem to some people. There are plenty of good gear placements to belay from, they just take a bit of finding and fiddling.

In reply to Tyler:

The first stance on John Peel in Dovedale comes to mind.

In reply to Si Witcher:

Im gonna stick my neck out and say a bolt at the top of left wall would be better than the rubbish that is currently there. Certainly far more sightly. Not sure I'd be brave enough to drill it though!

In reply to Dave Garnett:

OK, I'll play.

Top of Chreon (E2 5b).

In reply to Si Witcher:

Why does everyone care so much

No one knew it was there, I knew it was there and couldn't find the damn thing. Plus the belay was bomber.

Storm in a teacup as usual.

There is a glued bolt at rivelin! Who cares?

In reply to bensilvestre:

But nobody is forcing you to do the route if you're not comfortable with the belay.

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

How many people check out a belay before deciding whether to do a route?  As Nick says this bolt has bee there for 14 years, it has NOT lead to a proliferation of "special case" bolts elsewhere on Holy Island.  When I first climbed at the crag, long before protection gear was as good as it is now we threaded ropes through the dry stone wall to placements in a little outcrop in the field way behind it.  The route belays on or right next to the tourist path, are you really happy that people belaying on or through the dry stone wall (and they will!) in effect blocking the path to walkers to protect an obscure (in this case) of climbing ethics? On Red Wall and Yellow wall we accept the poor quality of belays between pitches as part of the climbing experience and commitment.  This doesn't apply to top out belays.  On all other sea cliff nasty top out belays it is possible (and usually recommended by the guidebook) to set up a pre placed belay rope with anchors well back.  This is not practicable for the Sun area

In reply to kevin stephens:

Maybe not, but as this thread shows, there are people out there in favour of making special cases elsewhere. Some of us are uneasy about this.

By the way, I've clipped that bolt a few times and not personally felt particularly outraged. I just like the principle of bolt free trad climbing.

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Anyone outraged by the bolt should do a bit of sea level traversing on the northern parts of the range... That'll be an eye opener...

In reply to kevin stephens:

I’ve climbed there a lot and never seen anyone belay on or through the drystone wall, why would you? There are plenty of decent gear placements you just need to look. I don’t think there is a reasonable argument that the bolt is necessary for climber safety.

The bolt has never been a problem until it was mentioned on this forum. However, if the extra publicity  means it’s now a problem then I don’t think it will be missed. Lots of people belaying there never even saw the bolt anyway and managed ok.

In reply to Nick BullockNick Bullock:

And there's actually more than those examples, but 99% of climbers won't notice they're clipping glued, stainless, fixed gear (aka bolts).

Rob. The two alternatives to the bolt at Rhoscolyn are: 

1. use the wall thus running ropes over the popular coastal path (and damaging the wall). Access issues have resulted from this in the past.

2. use a natural belay that's difficult to find and set-up, and comprises mediocre placements (if you're carrying the right pieces..).

Of those two alternatives I don't think it controversial to say the majority of climbers will choose #1, with the resulting access issues that we've already been through.

 

Also.. You're arguing about the principle behind fixed gear in 'trad zones', with your focus being on the one corrosion-resistant piece of fixed gear at Gogarth (actually more, but find it yourself..) in a veritable ocean of rusting unsightly fixed gear - pegs - within this 'trad zone'. Try directing your principle of 'no fixed gear (bolts) at Gogarth' towards all the other fixed gear on Gogarth - belays, ab points and runners on pitches.

How about you use your position to write an article examining the ethical and stylistic faux-pas that was hammering in steel fixed gear for runners and belays, that *everyone* knew would rust within a few years and be unsafe to future generations? Too risky for upsetting your peers and heroes?

I'd argue that the best step forward in ethics and style that could happen for UK trad, would be to chop all peg runners and belays on sea cliffs. 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

 

It doesn't need any army if you are as prolific as a Gary Gibson or a Pete Oxley.  It is only because there is (correctly) constant push back that Gogarth and Pembroke aren't strewn with bolts.  The reason that bolting has to be challenged always is that it tends to be a one way street - bolts don't generally disappear once they are there (except in a few very high profile 'test cases').

That doesn't mean bolts don't have their place, obviously, but when that place is somewhere as precious as Gogarth or Pembroke or Sernnen their presence really should be challenged and challenged hard.

 

In reply to Nick BullockNick Bullock:

It's worth mentioning that the 'bolt' on The Cad is decayed beyond the point of use, barely recognisable as a bolt, and has also had it's eye chopped - a Petzl glue-in it is not.

Either way, I see that as separate to the matter at hand - it's more about whether or not people feel the belay at hand is adequate with or without the bolt, and if not whether it necessitates/justifies its placement.

I've seen some good arguments both for and against, and maybe it's all rather a moot point if it's been there for as many years as it has without a single word said about it, but I'd be happier knowing there's some sort of a consensus either way - whichever way that falls.

In reply to Alex Riley:

Why?

In reply to Logs06:

I think you (and others) have got to the crux of the matter: belaying off the wall isn't good both for the wall, for walkers, for access, or potential even for your second, and belaying from the existing placements is potentially a cul-de-sac as they're marginal and likely to wear. That seems like a pretty strong argument in favour and certainly one I'd have trouble countering (and in all honesty, I'm not sure I'd wish to).

Regarding pegs, I'm keen to stick to the matter at hand - not least because I need to get some actual work done - but I think you have a completely valid point: pegs really are crap... Take Huntsman's Leap for example, a crag with countless amazing E6s - almost all of which are f**ked because of the fact the in-situ gear has rotted away. They're basically there for the first ascent, then anyone quick enough to bag a second or third ascent, but within the space of 5-10 years are inevitably in a pretty poor state which can often render the route unclimbable (or unjustifiable).

With that in mind I don't necessarily think they need to be chopped (in time they'll rot anyway), but I do think that anyone thinking of placing one should question long and hard as to whether it is actually necessary. What makes the matter all the more confusing is that there's inconsistencies abound. Replacing one on Souls for instance would feel wrong, whereas replacing them on Roc Ness Monster would seem ok.

Basically, it's a massively grey area riddled with inconsistency. As someone said above, it's more about emotion than it is to do with logic...

In reply to GrahamD:

You're conflating the issue of bolted routes, which no one is arguing for, with bolts at belays because the gear is naff, which is the topic here. 

... Err, counter-evidence: someone placed a bolt at the top of the sun, and there were absolutely no consequences! It took 14 years for UKC to notice! That's not what I call "constant push back"! 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Except that you seem to be in favour or belay bolts in quite a few other places. The "constant push back" is quite possibly preventing that happening - if people just shrugged at any such bolt, I'm sure there would soon be more.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Quite.

 

Your last sentence says a lot about the typical attitude found among British climbers towards pegs on sea cliffs and eleswhere: ''Basically, it's a massively grey area riddled with inconsistency. As someone said above, it's more about emotion than it is to do with logic...''

 

That same mindset can equally be applied, by sensible people, to bolts.

 

ps. I thought Roc-Nest needed the pegs removing. It's a clip-up. With a fixed lower-off at the top built out of rusty fixed gear and tat.

In reply to Robert Durran:

But people have just shrugged for 14 years about this one. Why? Because it's useful and doesn't change the nature of the route. People might also just shrug at bolts being placed in the places I could suggest, because the impact would be the same. Trad climbers would clip them and think "hmmm, handy". The reason I'm not going to place them is that I'm not going to

- go out and buy the kit,

- learn how to use it

- keep a diary of every unsatisfactory belay (these are rare anyway, but numerous enough that I could list some)

- return to those routes when I could otherwise be doing something else, and place bolts.

It would be a good idea, in that it would improve trad climbers' experience of a handful of routes in the country, but I can't be arsed.

The counter argument seems to be that if I did, there would be some sort of copy-cat bolting that *would* alter the nature of trad climbing for the worse. But who's going to go to this effort, and why?

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Maybe because it is so unobvious that lots of people were unaware of it. I wonder whether people would have shrugged at an obvious pair of shiny bolts three metres back from the edge.

But if abseil bolts were to be placed tomorrow on every crag in the country where they would be "handy", would there be a collective shrug? No, I think there is currently a consensus against that happening and any such bolts are going to be at least questioned.

No, I don't think that is the case. I think we can all see the distinction between belay and abseil or belay bolts and protection bolts can argue for or against all three types as separate issues.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Pegs are shit, I totally agree.  I view the replacement of old pegs with new ones as completely unjustifiable, as I think came up on a separate thread about Dalriada a few weeks back. In my view (admittedly somewhat absolutist) I would leave them all to rot, with the subsequent grade change/ decrease in ascents this would result in.

Back to the matter at hand; Nick, the bolt on the Cad is not a precedent for this. Despite having never climbed the route I'm fully aware from reading about it that the 'bolt' was a product of its time, is now f*cked and bears no resemblance to a shiny glue in. 

The fact no one has complained about the bolt for a time period of between 5 and 16 years, depending on who has it right, is not due to tacit acceptance, its because a large percentage of people never knew it was there. I remain somewhat discomfited by the fact that those who did know, including a significant population of locals who I would have thought are invested in the traditional ethic of the area, didn't think it worthwhile to mention it.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Good question - I think that obvious shiny bolts placed right as you top out *would* slightly alter the climbing experience. I wouldn't have shrugged in the same way. This is a great example to demonstrate that if a bolt is placed sensitively, with good judgement, it can be an asset. 14 years of silence ("shhh!) and no more bolts placed was the impact. It's a satisfying refutation of "thin end of the wedge".

You're illustrating my point by retreating to an extreme abstract thought experiment, when I'm asking you to think about how bolts actually have to be placed by people at their effort and expense. This is what stops abseil bolts being placed at every crag in the country. And if bolts are placed insensitively I would expect them to be removed.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Which don't exist.

For which nobody has ever seen a need. 

And which have never been suggested, by anybody. Even in jest.

The bolt was placed with tact by someone who knows the layout of the crag and where a placement would best serve the purpose of providing a solid belay in an area with specific combination of circumstances  - which don't often come together in trad areas; while remaining discrete. I think the period of time since shows they did a sympathetic job regards the trad aesthetic.

 

These fictitious nationwide crag abseil bolts also do not exist.

Nor has there ever been a serious suggestion that abseil bolts should be placed on every crag in the country.

 

What are the merits of arguments against:

1. something that doesn't exist. 

2. something that has never been suggested.

3. something for which there exists no enthusiasm for.

I think that qualifies as building a weak case and then demolishing it (straw man).

It's not really accurate to say that there is a consensus *against* - there can't be a consensus against a policy or movement that doesn't exist (except in the minds of certain people) and has never been suggested.  It's a bit like saying there's a suggestion that everyone in the UK be renamed Dave, but that the consensus is against it. 

Back to the matter at hand; Nick, the bolt on the Cad is not a precedent for this. Despite having never climbed the route I'm fully aware from reading about it that the 'bolt' was a product of its time, is now f*cked and bears no resemblance to a shiny glue in. In reply to spidermonkey09:"

Hi Jim.

I last climbed The Cad in 2006, the bolt as Rob said is chopped in a fashion, and rusty, but, in my opinion, the bolt is not 'f*cked*, (that is my opinion and open to speculation!) and it was always known that you can put a wire over it, slide the nut up to tighten the wire, and you have a very good piece of protection. Like I say, that was 2006, so it may have deteriorated a lot now.  

As for the bolt on The Cad not a precedent, well, I was just putting this fact out there to prove that Gogarth is not quite as Rob said, a bolt free zone, and possibly make something of a point, (small p) that we as climbers, on occasion, like to get hot under the harness about some things, while ignoring others. On this occasion it may be because to climb the excellent Cad, by putting a wire around the bolt stub, reduces the run-out slightly, and in doing so the stress. If we are going to get upset by one bolt, lets get upset by all bolts and have them all out, and while we are getting upset, lets get upset about truths and facts, not hearsay and rumour and speculation. 

Cheers

Nick

 

 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

But what is the point of this "sensitive" bolting if most people don't know it's there? I suspect the point was so that the bolter would get away with it!

And you are misquoting me by omission - you left out the word "handy" (whatever you meant by that - how much convenience does it mean?)

I disagree. I think it is because people know that they are widely considered unacceptable. In some countries they are the accepted norm and so are placed.

 

In reply to Logs06:

Well yes, that was my point - there is no enthusiasm for it which is why it doesn't exist.

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

You're implying that most people who climb the route miss it? No basis to think so. I hope that most people who don't climb the route don't see the bolt - that means it's having no visual impact.

I never suggested placing bolts everywhere that they could be considered "handy". We're just talking past each other.

If the climbing culture was different, there would be more fixed gear. What I'm saying is that you can have the same climbing culture, but instead of unsatisfactory belays you can sensibly use bolts to improve the trad climbing experience with no impact on anything other than making a decent, quick belay in a small number of places where the alternative is problematic or unsatisfactory.

The argument against what I'm saying is "thin end of the wedge", and the Sun bolt provides satisfying refutation.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Sorry, I thought you were saying you could think of places where people would find them "handy" but couldn't be bothered to place them yourself.

Of course!

Yes, but where I think we disagree is whether that really would be the same culture and, if I undertsand you correctly, whether it would be acceptable to most climbers.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

I think those few words on a climbing forum make me feel more queasy  than any bolt I've ever seen

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

There are a small number of cases where a bolt would be the best solution to the problem of a crap belay. Because the number is small, they would have no impact on the culture. The Sun bolt shows that a bolt placed sensitively in a trad area can be accepted by most climbers.

My real beef is with rotting tat at threads used for abseil...

In reply to Jon Stewart:

We'll have to agree to disasgree - to me, a consensus that crap belays (even if the number is small) can be replaced with bolts would be a culture change. And who decides how crap or awkward/fiddly a belay has to be to qualify?

Yes, all that is needed is another small culture change that people carry a knife and some tat.

 

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

The answer to that is obvious: the person who puts in the effort to place some fixed gear. If it's done sensibly (e.g. The Sun) it doesn't get removed. I suppose if there's controversy (e.g. SCS) then after one person chops them there can be a BMC meeting... 

This is what I do, but I've seen a better solution put in place on  numerous crags round here.

In reply to bensilvestre:

It's been there for years, but it's really hard to find sometimes! still the other day I couldn't find it. But I agree with Rob, there's adequate gear belay. 

In reply to Nick BullockNick Bullock:

If we're avoiding rumour and speculation I also think we should avoid sensationalism and exaggeration. I don't think anyone here is suggesting we remove all bolts from British soil, Jim is just suggesting that this particular bolt is out of place.

You've spoken out about such things in the past - Llanymynech and Craig Arthur - so I can't quite believe that you think it's such an all or nothing, black and white state of affairs. Granted there are blurry lines, for instance both you and I are trad climbers and sport climbers, so how can we object to bolts here and there? In short, because we can all be a great many things, but certain styles and certain places do have a certain ethical consistency - Gogarth is one of them.

In reply to Nick BullockNick Bullock:

I wasn't around in '66, nor in '78 when it was free'd, but imagine it was 2018 and this happened Television Route (E4 5c).  And there's Pagan (E4 5c) too. Go to Chicama (E9 6c) or The Treacherous Underfoot (E7 6b), and there's about as many pegs as natural runners (and yes, I'm guilty, and felt as such, of having removed and replaced one of those pegs after Caff snapped it). 

It seems we're fluctuating at a level of minutiae around the mean of a well established ethic, that I'd argue is adventurous, accepting of tradition, but more generally sensible and balanced, than it's ever been.  I've seen the person that's ok with a bolt at the top of Left Wall eye's after they did Helmet Boiler (E5 5c).  They're not after sanitising the experience of adventure, but balancing other factors at play.

Of course, people don't all share the same view on this, a black and white argument is easy to argue, but more much difficult to implement in practice.  It's always been a grey area, and we've always been somewhere on the wedge.  If anything, we're at the better end of the wedge than we've ever been with respect to Gogarth.

The thin end of the wedge argument also does a disservice to that fact that the climbing community is generally sensible and good at ethically self-regulating itself (with the help of the BMC and others at times), and sometimes the community's sentiments change through action, new facts on the ground and debate.   It's about balancing all the different aspects; environment, access, conservation, adventure and tradition.  Each edge case (pun intended), like the Rhoscolyn belay, and the Strand lower off, or Castell Helen need to be dealt with on a case by case basis, accepting the general ethical consistency Rob mentions, and particularly where there's a likelihood of renegade action.

On the basis that I bet 100s of people have used that bolt (many of whom will have strong views about it) have left it be, (probably immediately after having pondered how to build a good belay there, and deciding it's not acceptable to use the wall and cut off the path), it's probably a marker of where the ground lies in this single case.  Everyone that's done the route since 2005 seems to know about it, and it's mentioned in the guide.  I don't think a bolt at the top of Left Wall would last as long, the ones at Castell Helen didn't (look closely).  The reality is, the discussion ideally needs to happen beforehand if possible (which I think it might have done to an extent here), and not as a result of renegade action.  Get it on the Local Area agenda Rob, though I have a vague memory from discussions at Rhoscolyn when I saw that bolt that it's been on it before.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Fair enough, so it's sort of self regulating - I suppose you could call it the wedge getting filed down before it gets too thick.

What's that?

 

In reply to JR:

To quote Wiley: 'I think those few words on a climbing forum make me feel more queasy than any bolt I've ever seen'.

Talking about area meets - should it be Rob's place to get issues on the agenda of a N.wales area meet, seeing as he lives in the Peak (and yes climbs everywhere, like all of us do). Would the Yorkshire area meet take kindly to someone from N.Wales getting issues ref Malham/Kilnsey on their agenda?

Genuine question, I don't go to meets anymore (see above) so I'm not familiar with the etiquette.

Perhaps it should be your responsibility JR seeing as you're local to the area, if you feel strongly enough. Area meets don't represent the views of the whole community. They represent the views of whoever can be bothered to go to area meets. Which isn't most climbers.

 

In reply to Logs06:

As a Yorkshire area meet regular I would have no problem debating something brought up by a visitor from Wales or anywhere else. Sometimes something becomes normalised when you see it frequently and a fresh perspective is very helpful.

In reply to Logs06:

I'm not local to the area (I'm NW), but I am a VP of the BMC, and if Rob (Peak Chair) emails Tim Jepson (N Wales Chair), I'm sure Tim will say yes or no, and rationalise it either way.  It's a suggestion for consideration, rather than a definitive "it will go on the agenda!".

I've already raised a different issue in N wales today, in discussion with Rob, and Elfyn.  I would have done that regardless of whether I was VP or a member in the NW, because it's an important access issue.

To not be able to get in touch to the local area concerned to raise an issue would be non-sensical.  It would definitely leave climbers in London very un-empowered!

And indeed, area meets don't represent the whole community, which is partly why we suggested in the BMC ORG about having independent member reps for National Council, a programme of generally increasing engagement, and ensuring the BMC is making representative decisions. That's another can of worms for another thread, another discussion, and a whole work-stream of work.

In reply to spidermonkey09:

Same here in the Peak, just because someone comes from outside the area doesn't mean they can't contribute (although there may be a slight caveat to that when there's an official vote required). 

John has just highlighted the benefit to such universal feedback, as it's invaluable when it comes to access work, where having the eyes and ears of climbers and hillwalkers around the country is of great value to us all.

In terms of a response, Tim Jepson - the North Wales Area Chair - has already given the green light and it's on the agenda. I'm just awaiting word back on dates, but if I can make it I will. There's been some great feedback here and I've no doubt that the debate will be a good one, and the conclusion made the right one (whatever that is).

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Hey Rob,

Nice one, I love your passion and that climbing stimulates this kind of passion. I certainly wasn't suggesting rip out all bolts, I've clipped a lot of them in my time, love em I wasn't even meaning rip them all out of Gogarth, I was just attempting, but obviously failing, (sorry) to try and make a bit of a point on how at times things get a little out of hand when not all of the facts are out there. You're right and so is John, talk, discuss, debate, and come to a collective opinion about things (that can be classed as contentious) is certainly the way. 

Cheers

Nick 

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

True. But there are still worthwhile exceptions. The bolt on midsummers makes it a great route, and still a deeply committing one. Im sure you were glad for it... although I admire your ethics by skipping the upper peg ;-P 

In reply to Robert Durran:

 

Are you actually that cynical? 

 

In reply to JR:

 

I wasn't totally serious about the left wall bolt but it's a good example of a popular ab station which is an eyesore, and may eventually become dangerous. 

I'd bolt helmet boiler but they would just fall out of the mud...

 

 

In reply to bensilvestre:

Didn't you fall out of the mud?

In reply to bensilvestre:

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:To answer the point you are trying to condense this discussion to; I'd say there are adequate belay placements without using the bolt or the wall. I've climbed there a number of times and walked past a fair few times and never seen anyone use the wall. I struggle to believe anyone would try and use the wall. There are enough bomber placements if you look around. The bolt isn't even used by a lot of belayers because they don't see it. 

I have no problem with this bolt, but if you are trying to construct an argument that it is necessary I'd have to disagree.

id like to add, that of all the bolts I've come across this one has to be the least likely "thin end of the wedge".

In reply to Si Witcher:

Not sure if i have much to add here but for me, although I wouldn’t want to see bolts everywhere and I have often failed to find this bolt and built a (to my mind) perfectly good belay. I am slightly more for this bolt than against it. 

For me, I think what swings it is that it’s a single bolt that is hard to find. Therefore it is used as part of a belay and you have to hunt it out. To my mind this maximises safety whilst minimising the dumbing down if trad climbing. 

I could quite happily see it go but I don’t think the clipping of one bolt as part of a belay is all that terrible. Thinking of all the gross tat at the top of routes that I have clipped, it’s even less terrible. 

Good to have these discussions though! 

P.S plus the fact that you’ve never found it Rob means it must require some serious cunning to detect it! Trad masters only!  

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

Thanks all, a good discussion. Thanks too to Rob G in particular for getting this on to the Area Meeting agenda.

It remains unclear who put the bolt in and what their actual motivation was, although i think the various possibilities have been aired here. I have some sympathy for the possible aim of discouraging leaders from belaying on the wall and thereby annoying the landowner and passing walkers. There are probably better ways of achieving that aim than placing a hidden bolt though.

I've never had a problem building a safe belay there without using the stone wall or the bolt. It's always been part of the challenge.

Simon

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

I find this an absurdly contrived way of preserving a supposed element of trad ethic. What if someone died because they didn't look hard enough for a "sportingly" hidden bolt? No, if there is a good enough case for a bolt belay (and I don't think there is) then it should be bomproof and obvious. The only good reason I can think of for hiding a bolt is if, well, if you've got something to hide.

In reply to Robert Durran: I think part of the case for hiding the bolt is that it is right by a very busy path. A very obvious bolt would be an eyesore. I’d agree it’s not super necessary but it is quite nice to have. Bolt in or bolt out matter little to me as I can make a decent belay and have done all the good routes at Llawder! 

 

In reply to spidermonkey09:

The minor hypocrisies of 'local scenes' and 'those in the know' knowing things and not sharing them is as much a constant in UK climbing as the bolt wars. I've seen worse in other countries though.

In reply to Logs06:.

+1000

I'm personally ambivalent about discreet belay bolts and haven't done the route in question, however, it really gets on my wick if people complaining about a bolt then seem happy with pegs. Usually, for the person who places it, a peg is just as solid as a bolt in the context of a trad ascent, and only disadvantages future ascentionists. It also leaves an unsightly mess on the rock, even efter removal due to the rust. I actually think this is more ''permanant" than a stainless bolt, which can be removed almost untraceably if done carefully.

I'd like to see a policy of removing old pegs once they are clearly unreliable and not replacing them, throughout the UK (peak limestone is a major culprit: it's not just sea cliffs). If you think that ruins the character of a route, then a bolt is a much better solution than a peg. If it doesn't, then it would have been better without the peg in the first place.

Edit: I've less of a problem with fixed rope in natural threads if they are awkward to sling and are discreet. It shouldn't be acceptable for us to let mountains of obvious tat build up though.

I realise this off-topic.

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

Does anyone believe that the bolt would have been placed in plain sight if there were no path? Or is the path really just an excuse to place a sneaky hidden one?

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

 

It doesn't affect the difficulty of the route in any way so it's just makes it more convenient and quicker to set up the belay. Is that a bad thing?

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

There is of course the historic precedent of Joe Brown climbing Vember, placing his two pegs, then deliberately pulling the grass sods back over them to hide them so that the second ascensionists didn't find it too easy

In reply to stp:

Of course it’s not a bad thing, but this is the UK, so you can take your common sense, logic and reason and f*** off*

*I hope the sarcasm shines through this.

In reply to Sl@te Head:

 

Some routes used to have drilled threads rather than bolts but I think consensus is that bolts are better. In most cases these threads have been replaced with bolts. The drilled threads would have fixed bits of, usually fairly thin, rope. This meant they weren't as strong and would need replacing regularly to be safe. One big advantage is that they cost a lot less though.

But if some people are dead set against any bolts at all, yes perhaps threads would be a good way to compromise.

 

In reply to sfletch:

Yeah it does. Made me laugh and makes a good point.

In reply to Si Witcher:

I think sooner or later, there needs to be a far more pragmatic, and less emotive conversation regarding bolts on UK trad crags.

At the moment, it seems very polerised between those in favour of the odd one on a case by case basis, and others who immediately become Father Ted, shouting "down with this kind of thing".

There is of course a wonderful hypocrisy and inconsistency to the bolt ethic on trad crags.

We happily (and gratefully) accept the bolt stubs on MSND on Cloggy, and The Cad at Gogarth. We equally accept the bolted routes on the Tunnel Wall of Creag A'Bhancair, despite this being a trad mountain crag.

These are just some of the most well-known examples.

There are crags which have trad and sport routes side by side - surely a Pandora's Box?

We have trad crags which have been retro bolted?

Surely a trad crag is a trad crag, irrespective of whether it's at the side of the road, or halfway up a mountain?

Peg or bolt?

New trad routes are still being put up using the odd peg, why not a more permanent bolt instead?

Some people on here have also commented on this belay bolt on The Sun being hidden because it could be an eyesore?

Really?

So a small piece of metal you usually can't see till you get within six feet of it, is an eyesore, but rusting pegs, rotting multi-colored tat and chalk plastered everywhere isn't? 

I'm playing devil's advocate here. 

But I think instead of knee jerk reactions, possibly a more objective and sophisticated approach to the use of bolts on trad crags, would be better than the default 'black or white' emotional response.

I am of course expecting to get spectacularly shot down here

In reply to Si Witcher:

A very emotive topic this, but personally I am with the group of people who prefer no bolts at Gogarth. The excuse for this bolt is that it makes the belay easier. Simple as that, it is there for ease not for safety as you can make a safe belay there, it just takes more time and a little thought.

Trad climbing isn't about ease, it is for me at least a complete test of my climbing skills from leading, placing gear and finally making safe belays through a variety of techniques.

I have heard similair arguments that the belay at castle helen should be bolted for 'ease of use', the fact remains that there you can make a perfectly adequate belay from your own gear if you don't trust the old pegs, which by the way I do not. I therefore apply my climbing skills of making a belay to get round this issue.

We should not adjust climbing venues to the lowest common denominator, but instead rise up to the challenges it presents us.

In reply to Goucho:

Ah well see you've misunderstood there, Goucho. Bad bolts = good bolts. As long as they can no longer be trusted, they're fine.

In reply to Goucho:

I completely agree with everything you say. A pragmatic and common sense approach to bolts on some trad crags would be great, but it isn't going to happen in the UK for decades. I've climbed world class trad routes in the US, Scandinavia and Europe and the experience wasn't diminished for one second by the presence of bolted belays. Having a safe belay doesn't destroy the trad experience and it doesn't remove the adventure. I know people like to claim that they enjoy setting up shitty belays with RPs but we all know that's not true.

In reply to Mark Reeves:

Is the abseil bolt still in place on top of the Valkyrie pinnacle at Froggat?

Surely this is a much more visible and convenience bolt than that above the Sun?

It has been in plain site for a long time, not hidden.

Of course chopping it would be less popular, it is possible to belay without it and to scramble or jump down without it

In reply to jon:

 

In reply to kevin stephens:

I promised myself I wouldn't get drawn into this but...

I think your response is probably the attitude that makes some people oppose all bolts on trad cliffs, even if they are discrete such as the one at Lawder. In a few years when someone bolts the ab point at Castel Helen they will cite the bolt at Lawder as a precedent, and so on.

I don't know when the ab bolt at Froggatt was put in but it's hardly modern and has become an established piece of gear.

In reply to Si Witcher: been there years Si and used to be covered with a piece of ‘living’ turf grass. Last saw it climbing with Vun and as I came off and dangled free was glad to know I’d pointed it out to her beforehand! Could it have been placed by Coastguards/cliff rescue?

 

 

In reply to Mark Reeves:

The bolt is there for ease AND for safety. And you're conveniently ignoring the fact that every rusting peg belay or peg abseil point at Gogarth was placed there for ease and for safety. Arguably for the far more selfish ease and safety of the first ascentionist.

 

See above. What you say sounds lovely but you're in la la land by ignoring the fixed gear placed before you which you, like everyone else, undoubtedly use if you climb enough routes - especially on sea cliffs.

Climbing venues and routes *have* been reduced to - in your words - a 'lower common denominator' by the placing of in-situ gear, whether peg or bolt. The heart of the issue is the style in which first ascents were done back in the day (and in some cases still today) using in-situ gear, not 'bolt versus peg'.

 

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Anyone who enjoys shitty belays should spend a day at Cilan Head

And anyone who thinks bolt belays ruin trad routes, needs to go and do Motorhead at Eldorado, one of the finest trad routes in the world.

In reply to Goucho: Not done Motorhead, but Cilan Head is a great location and the belays enhance the adventure!

 

In reply to Martin Haworth:

You're obviously made of sterner stuff than me

I did Vulture back in the late 70's - never again. I've seen better belays on a coal slag heap in Doncaster.

In reply to 

I've seen better rock quality on a coal slag heap in Doncaster!

 

In reply to Martin Haworth:

In reply to

Crikey, what a lot of hot air. All the talk about bmc meetings, debate and reaching a consensus. The consensus has already been reached, the bolt has been there for 14 years without any bother, leave it be. 

Personally I don't think it was a great idea to bring it up on here, too many extreme opinions, and people who could be wound up to do something daft. 

 

In reply to Goucho:

If they were properly accepted they would be replaced - they are only accepted as historic relics, not as examples of what is acceptable now.

It is an accepted sport wall on an otherwise trad crag. I think that bolts on primarily trad routes is a separate issue.

It seems to have worked out OK at Upper Cave and at Ratho Quarry even if the settled status quo is not to everyone's taste.

A peg is fundamentally different to a bolt in that it requires a natural weakness in the the rock. They are separate issues. There are strong but separate cases against both.

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Really? Such as?

 

In reply to Presley Whippet:

It's a valid point of view but I think it's also worth acknowledging that there's a big difference between something that's been widely known and accepted versus something that's been largely hidden. Even some of the people who climbed the route seem to have not spotted the bolt. (Which raises other questions. If the belay is actually so dangerous that it justifies a bolt, is hiding it that well a responsible thing to do?)

On the whole, I think the discussion has been quite measured and nuanced. I haven't seen anybody sounding particularly wound up, nor have I seen many strident or thoughtless posts. Even people who come down strongly on one side or the other have generally acknowledged the complexity of the debate.

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Does the context in which they are accepted make a difference?

Under the 'no bolts' on mountain crag ethics, they should have been fully chopped, not just the hangers.

Whichever way you look at this, it's a contradiction to the existing ethic. It's a trad mountain crag, and under the supposed ethics, should not have been bolted. The argument in favour is nothing more than contrived, and further underlines the need for a more logical and pragmatic approach to bolts on trad crags across the board.

You can't really criticise the placing of one belay bolt at Rhoscolyn, and then in the same breath support the bolts on Tunnel Wall, or put the bolts on MSND and the Cad down to historical artifact.

Agreed.

 

The exception that proves the rule.....

 

would a great at big metal stake driven into the rock (drilled if necessary) like the multitude at Pembroke be more acceptable ? I think not in this particular location. The bolt is not on the route, arguably it is  not on the crag but on a tourist path

 

In reply to Luke90:

 

Enough of this 'hidden' rubbish. It isn't hidden - it's stated explicitly in the guidebook description that there's a belay bolt at the top of 'The Sun/Warpath'! The guidebook that's been out since 2015. And the bolt's been there for many years before that. What could be more transparent than describing the bolt's existence in the definitive guidebook? 

Just because somebody from outside the area who may not own or may not have read the definitive guidebook - preferring instead some selective - is unaware of the bolt until they read about it on UKC in no way means it was 'hidden'. Ignorance is no defence

In reply to Luke90:

The bolt is mentioned in the guide book and is clearly well known, no more hidden than a hidden pocket or hidden nut placement mentioned in a route description. 

Patience, just wait... 

In reply to Logs06:

My bad, I completely missed the fact that it was mentioned in the guidebook.

In reply to Goucho:

 

No, without arguing for or against any of the three, I think all three can be treated separately. The first is a slight dumbing down of an existing trad route. The second is the designation of an area of rock for sport which does not affect trad routes on the crag. The third is a historic "sin" being allowed to rot but with no appetite for replacement. There are reasonable arguments both ways on all three.

 

In reply to Luke90:

To be fair Luke, it's very hard to miss. Logs06 failed to mention that it isn't actually mentioned within the route description, it's just given a brief mention within the crag intro and is actually quite hard to find (so much so that when I went looking for it I failed to find it, despite it being specifically what I was looking for - much like the bolt!).

I completely agree with the sentiments within your other post too, particularly surrounding the quality of the debate, which has - on the whole - been both balanced and constructive. Some have suggested that UKC isn't the place to have it, but where is - a BMC meeting? Even then there's been people openly yawning, complaining that too few people attend, what are we left with after that? It seems that naysayers simply don't want to have the debate, but if we don't debate from time to time we don't get solutions to problems (if it is indeed a problem). In my opinion we're far better having the discussion somewhere where lots of people will see it, as that way we can at least strive for some sort of consensus.

In reply to Logs06:

As I said earlier in the post, I've done Warpath 4 times, I've clipped the bolt twice, the other two time I knew the bolt was there but couldn't find it for the life of me and made a gear belay. So it is not that obvious as you say. And do have the comprehensive guidebook. 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

I would argue that having been in place for so long now, without challenge and clearly mentioned in the guidebook is consensus.

I get the feeling that some posters are upset because they weren't individually consulted over placing the bolt. We could always hold a referendum to decide, because they always give the best possible decision, without any waste of time or money, dont they? 

In reply to Presley Whippet:

I think the existence of this post alone demonstrates there isn't consensus, and that a great many people were unaware, and whilst I do share your cynical sentiments regarding referendums I don't think that should make us live in fear of having a debate.

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Not sure about that Rob, I think the body of evidence points towards a consensus. 14? years ago, there were no posts on here about it, no angry letters to the magazines (remember them?) and there has been no chop, replace, chop replace pantomime. Further debate/bmc consent is like a retrospective planning application, procedurally correct but not always the best use of resources. 

People will always oppose decisions which do not go their way (and we are back to that referendum again ????) 

In reply to Presley Whippet:

To flip your argument on its head, I think the body of evidence suggests that Gogarth is a very much a bolt-free area, barring the very occasional examples that have been cited above.

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

...and the bolted sport routes in Breakwater Quarry

In reply to Sl@te Head:

exactly

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

....and Red Wall and Parliment House Cave...

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

The broad case is just that Rob, a bolt free Gogarth. 

The specific however is a historic acceptance of an anomoly and a number of others. 

In reply to Sl@te Head:

These are all outlined above Ian, hence 'barring the very occasional examples that have been cited above' within my previous post

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

It's a long thread, I lost interest after a while

In reply to Sl@te Head:

you and me both

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Here's a sweeping summary of the so called 'accepted' anomalies:

The Cad: even at the time this was considered to be wrong, with Pete Whillance' second chopping the first bolt and the other having its eye chopped some years later.

Television Route: described in the guide as 'a sacrificial lamb to the world of broadcasting' it is a relic of a route, with all fixed gear now rotted well beyond the point of recognition, let alone use.

Parliament House Cave: the placement of bolts here created such furore that they were removed by locals (Mark Reeves and Andy Newton I believe) within days of their placement.

So I ask you: where is the acceptance? Not only were each of the instances above acknowledged as wrong at the time, but most were removed and none - dare I say it - will be replaced.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Yes but I think that relates to climbing on the cliffs. When it comes to belaying at the top it's an entirely different matter since the climbing is effectively over. Climbers generally have no qualms about what they belay to at the top: iron stakes hammered into the ground or metal railings concreted and bolted in place have never been an ethical issue. I think that's because when they're on the top of the cliff they're no longer part of the climb.

I think the whole debate revolves around people's weird and seemingly quasi-religious beliefs about bolting. If the local council had decided to bolt railings into the top of the cliff rather than other climbers placing the odd belay bolt no one would have had any issue with it all and everyone would have happily enjoyed the convenience of a simple and reliable belay.

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Those actions were taken with some immediacy, not 14 years after the event. Actions were taken by people very much "within the loop", the equivalent of those who have known about, tolerated and used the sun bolt for all those years. If there had been great ethical concerns before this thread, the bolt would have been removed long ago. This is hardly a rarely trodden route on an esoteric crag we are talking about. 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Rob and Ramon. I was replying to a narrative being put forward on this thread that there's been an attempt to 'hide' the existence of this bolt - that clearly isn't true. You don't attempt to hide the existence of something by writing it into the definitive guidebook! Whether *you* noticed or not doesn't really matter - it's clearly stated in the introduction to Llawder, not tucked away in the historical section.

I think some people  are conflating their lack of knowledge of the bolt's existence, with there being an attempt to hide its existence. 

 

Rob. The existence of a post on UKC containing different viewpoints only proves that there are people who use UKC who don't all agree with the same thing. News to anybody? No. If a vast majority of posters on UKC and UKB and the local area meet were against the placement then you might have a point that *there is a problem*. But there clearly isn't that majority, and there's been a long time for people who climb on Llawder to think about it.

I'd say in this case you've gone looking for a problem, found there isn't really one in most people's minds but it still troubles you, and are now using the fact that not 100% of people on a UKC thread agree as justification for calling it 'a problem'.      

And you can have naysayers in either direction it doesn't depend on them not agreeing with your point of view.

 

Ramon if you've clipped it twice and subsequently can't find it then I'd lay off the weed!

In reply to Logs06:

I don't think I've suggested that it's been hidden in a metaphorical sense (although it is apparently very well hidden in a physical sense), just that a great number of people never knew about it. 

I'll sign out there, as I've got other things to be getting on with, but will be raising it at the next North Wales Area meeting alongside all the feedback outlined above (albeit in a condensed form, as there's a lot of it). If it stays, it stays; if it goes, it goes, but I'll definitely feel happy knowing some sort of consensus has been reached.

Thanks to everyone that's contributed, even those who I've not necessarily agreed with!

In reply to Presley Whippet:

There has been no acceptance of bolts at Gogarth in the same way that there's no acceptance of murder in the UK just because some people have got away with it in the past. I'm not dead against bolts in all instances, even at Gogarth, but the sighting of precedents, which were widely decried at the time, from 40 years ago is one of the reasons why the rules have to be so stupidly prescriptive. 

General point: the bolt debate has never been about atheistics so saying this is ok because it's hidden from most is nonsense. How many people would see a bolt at the start  the runout on Skinhead Moonstomp, for example.

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

Disappointed. You forgot the Pagan belay bolt

In reply to Logs06:

I've got a hunch that it was you that placed the bolts at Rhoscolyn?

I find it quite bizzare that you contacted me yesterday saying that you'd removed 2 bolts from one of my multi pitch routes in Twll Mawr.

Don't worry I won't reveal your true identity

Just a bit of opportunistic banter

In reply to Tyler:

Haha, you're quite right, although I think there's a different between 'repressed the memory of' and 'forgot' - that belay really is the thing of nightmares (and what even is that thing?!).

Anyhow, I was supposed to be signing out wasn't I - oops...

In reply to Sl@te Head:

It most definitely wasn't me who placed it Ian. If it was me I'd say it was me. So lets not conjecture on UKC hey. It isn't hard to imagine who did actually place it, if you know the small crowd of local Gogarth devotees.

And me removing two of your bolts in Twll Mawr because they were clippable from Hamaryad - as we discovered on Saturday - has nothing at all to do with the belay bolt at Llawder. It only highlights once more the unique case-by-case approach required with fixed gear on routes, not a blanket black or white approach. 

In reply to Logs06:

Apologies

In reply to Sl@te Head:

I don't think most people would consider the quarry as Gogarth really, would they?

In reply to Logs06: The bolt has been placed in a discrete location and is "hidden" from view. This makes sense from an aesthetic point of view and also may account for many people not knowing it exists, even people who have climbed the Sun. It's mention in Gogarth South will have made more people aware but not that many people buy the Gogarth guidebooks( brilliant though they are). Also people reading the guidebook may take its acknowledgement in the guide to mean it is a locally accepted bolt placement. 

So whilst I agree the bolt is not a big issue, and I see no reason to remove it, I can't agree with your views that it is not hidden and that is widely know about and has therefore been historically accepted.

This forum has possibly done more to publicise the bolt than the guidebook? Let's hope everyone gets bored of discussing it, Rob doesn't raise it at the BMC local meet, we can all get back to climbing at Lawder, the bolt can carry on with its discrete existence, and no one uses it as a precedent to place any future bolts on Gogarth cliffs.

In reply to Tyler:

Yeah I agree with that. But that raises the question as what exactly it is about whether anyone actually knows.

I sometimes wonder if it's some kind primitive, male, territorial dispute that we feel compelled to fight over whenever the opportunity arises. It's not really about bolting or climbing or necessarily anything else. Perhaps it's far more simple. It's really just about winning.

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

I'd say judging by the overwhelming number of likes to dislikes of Dan's 'Shhh' comment the consensus reached is surely to not take it any further.

 

In reply to Martin Haworth:

Nowhere in my posts have I said it's widely known about - I refuted Robert Durran's claim that the bolt placement was attempted to have been kept secret. 

Again, the great and good of UKC being unaware of something does not mean it isn't known about by many climbers. This is one example of a thousand things which go on in the background of climbing that posters on UKC might debate about at work if they knew.

In reply to Logs06:

You are correct, I apologise, I mixed your post up with someone else’s!

 

In reply to stp:

I think the fact that you (and others) can miss the point so monumentally has quite a bit to do with why some people get quite worked up about bolts.

In reply to Robert Durran: “the point” or “your point”? There’s almost as many points as posters on this thread. There’s no fundamental primacy of one point over another. This thread has been interesting to see how different people have different ethical creeds and how they apply them to this dilemma 

 

In reply to kevin stephens:

The overarching point that the whole bolting debate is about how we as climbers choose to climb. 

 

In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:

 

 I may be going slightly off topic but I just wanted to say I have climbed many memorable routes at Gogarth and for me Television Route was one of the highlights.

 I climbed Television Route in 2015 and the bolts were still there then. This is what I wrote in my logbook at the time “Brilliant climbing. Slow thoughtful and careful movement. Over thirty runners. Slings on bolt studs etc.”

(I made sure I took a lot of QD’s and slings after reading other UKC logbook entries.)

 

In reply to stp:

I'm liking this turn from debate to meta-debate. Good move.

 

In reply to Robert Durran:

But the debate on this thread is not about how we choose to climb.  When we're on top of the cliff then the climbing has ended. We are no longer in the vertical world we are back in the horizontal one. We walk around rather than hang by our fingertips. It's a given that the final belay should always be safe. That is there are no routes where the grade goes up because the final belay is poor or time consuming to place. In some cases people even arrange an extra rope tied off to a distant anchor at the top before climbing if needed.

From comments above it seems like some people see moral superiority in having a final belay that is difficult  and time consuming to arrange. To me that makes no sense because at the point you're not even climbing any more. The route is in the bag and no one is going claim you didn't do it based one what you used for the final anchor.

This debate is very different to placing bolts on actual routes. The argument there is easy to understand. Extra bolt/s will typically lead to a dramatic change to both the character and challenge of the climbing. This seems more about creating inconvenience because, erm... well that's the bit that's lost me.

In reply to stp:

Ive always felt a big part of the enjoyment of trad was the sense of self reliance you get. I also think most of that is an illusion as you follow the same track as hundreds of others before you and rarely step outside the bounds and safety of guidebook descriptions. But if there’s one thing that breaks that spell its bolts. It takes away from the illusion as the bolt has been purposefully placed there by another person rather than yourself to help you in some way, either for safety or for convenience (also think it breaks that illusion of wilderness too). I don’t agree with the idea that the experience or climb ends when you reach the belay; the sense of self-reliance for me includes belaying. Someone mentioned above about if bollards were placed along the path people would be happy using them, again I think that’s because they aren’t there for our purpose, and by using them you are using your own initiative, plus there is a nice subversive element .

So much of climbing is full of daft rules and silly hypocrisy’s, its part of the games climbers play. So its hard to explain why people feel so strongly about for instance bolts compared to stakes or pegs. But heres my attempt and the reason I wouldn’t agree with the bolt here or on any other belays... Ive sat on lots of belays and some of the most memorable have terrified me at the time. The hanging stance and sandy breaks above the cave on berry head for one, with one of eds cam exploding out on weighting it, but it crystallised the memory of the route all the more and I wouldnt want that to change, there or at the top of a route.

In reply to stp:

I'd question your statement that "It's a given that the final belay should always be safe."

Why?

In reply to Si Witcher:

I learned to trad climb after I'd moved to Stockholm, a lot of the popular crags around here have bolted belays. It's convenient, but needless to say my belay building skills are not up to scratch and have hindered recent multipitch exploits. From my experience its clear that a reliance on bolts is a poor substitute for learning to climb self sufficiently    

In reply to Brown:

I think it would be fairer to say 'it's a given that ethical standards are less strict on final belays'.  No one* has problems with rigging ropes, side runners, stakes, occasionally carefully parking cars and attaching to the tow loop when it comes to top belays and yet you'd probably avoid all of them on the route itself. There's no guarantee that final belays will be safe but we're overwhelmingly more open to manipulating the environment one the cliff top than we are on routes.

 

*This is the internet so obviously someone will.

In reply to Logs06:

hey pete I wasn't laying on weed of any kind, it was just my incidental experience with the now celebrity-status bolt. I know nothing about local ethics  I couldn't care less whether bolt stays or goes, I just log in here for amusement, i found this thread rather hilarious. Good luck fellas

In reply to Alex the Alex:

Thanks for the shout-out to my poor belay building.

I think someone higher up questioned who was climbing E3 but couldn't build a decent anchor. *ahem*

There are some interesting perspectives on here. One that I'm not sure has been mentioned is the principle of following the style of the first ascent (which admittedly is sometimes superseded by / replaced with the 'crag's style'). For me this does not end at the top of the route and includes the belay.

Personal view - I don't care as long as they don't appear everywhere. If its there and I haven't already built an adequate anchor, I'm gonna clip it. But then I've had gear fail on belays more than once (but never had an anchor fail altogether!)

In reply to Lemony:

I'd agree. I think your stated position is correct. This is a world away from final belays must be safe.

The kind of absolute thinking resulting from final belays must be safe would lead to all kind of negatives. 

In reply to Lemony:

If there was a car on my route I'd definitely clip it

In reply to Si Witcher:

A bit off topic maybe, but for some reason whilst reading this thread it brought to mind an old UKC article by Pat Littlejohn describing a route called Hornblower at Cilan Head. The route is graded XS and regarding the belay he said:

"There is no belay, but if you head up and leftwards you eventually reach some rabbit holes which can be threaded."

Now surely we can all agree that would be an integral part of the experience, and probably one of the first things you would recount to friends in the pub that evening!

In reply to Brown:

If it's unsafe then you not only risk the second's life but you're own too. In such a case it would actually be safer to not belay at all and let the second solo out since at least then if they fell only they would die, which is better than dragging you over the edge too.

But in the real world that never happens. Even in rare cases, like Pembroke, climbers hammer stakes in to the ground to make sure you can belay safely. You can always pull up one rope which will allow you to find something to belay to up to a distance of 50m (or however long your rope is). And failing that you could dig out a stance, or find a rock to brace yourself against a fall, belaying well back from the edge of the cliff.

So it should never be a question of safety. Doing any of the above is really more just a pain in the butt. It wastes time that I would think most people would prefer to spend climbing.

However for those who prefer to spend time setting up a complicated belay then of course the presence of a bolt doesn't prevent them doing so. They're free to ignore it and belay off of whatever else they can find if that's what makes them happy.

In reply to stp:

Perhaps I should have said "how we choose the whole climbing experience".

As a matter of interest, do you feel the same way about belays on multipitch routes?

 

In reply to stp:

I'm not sure I agree that ALL top belays should be safe/ easy... the cilan example is a good one... but on a crag and especially a route which is characterised by its abundance of great gear it certainly makes sense in this case. Its also the sort of classic where people like to ab and strip the route so their second can preserve their own adventure on it at a later date. Which is arguably more adventurous than being forced to 2nd because of a barely adequate belay. 

In reply to stp:

You can often bring up a second safely without being tied to anything.  Your arse is quite a solid anchor !

In reply to GrahamD:

I've always given a really tight rope in such situations as well to avoid any shock loading of me.

There was a route in North Pembroke where I totally failed to find any gear/stakes/rabbit holes to belay from but was happy to belay braced with my bum in a hole braced against a rock.

In reply to GrahamD:

How big is your arse, it must be f***ing massive?

Maybe there's a gap in the market for a belayers mono-point arse-crampon.

In reply to GrahamD:

Absolutely. I never bother with belays these days. Waste of time and effort.

In reply to danm:

yep.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Seriously, people are making it sound as though a seconding fall equates to a direct fall onto the belay whereas a) it really shouldn't be much of fall at all and b) most of the energy of the fall is transmitted through the belayer.

In reply to danm:

If the ground is sloping away from the edge then sitting a few feet back with no belay is going to be perfectly safe (you're not going to be pulled upwards).

Of course this will compromise communication but a bit of pre-warning "there no f***ing belay, I'm going to sit out of earshot..." etc should sort it.

Ground sloping towards the edge, think I'd like one of those arse crampons please

In reply to Michael Hood:

I've had to belay without a "belay" probably more than a dozen times over the years. Most of the time the ground hasn't been so accommodating! The worst was when I asked my second to start climbing so we could move together and I could reach what looked like a good spike. The spike turned out to be loose, so I put a sling on it and sat with my back against it to hold it in place. I closed my eyes as I belayed, with the lyrics to Pink Floyds "The Trial" echoing eerily through my head.

I've clipped the cheeky bolt at Llawder, and would prefer it to stay but appreciate others might not agree.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Good question and no I don't. If you're belayed halfway up something then you're still on the route. If it's a trad route and belays are poor then that's part of the challenge - and you need to pick a good partner too. Such routes aren't that common but there's definitely a few of them around. Mick Fowler used to define XS as a route where the leader could die if he/she fell off. The grade of HXS, or hard extremely severe, he reserved only for routes with death potential for all members of the party.

I actually did an early repeat of one of his multi pitch routes many years ago. He'd graded it XS 5c and the guidebook author naively translated that into E3 5c (I think it was more like E5 6b). That had poor belays, not good enough to ab off safely. Not that you'd have wanted to since you were directly above the sea. But interestingly and related was the fact that this route entailed setting up a rope at the top first, not just to belay to but to yard up when the rock ran out. So that implies when the rock ends the route is over, even if you have a bit further to reach solid ground.