UKC

NEWS: Changed Access at Craig Y Forwyn

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
New information has come to light and the access situation at Craig y Forwyn has changed.

The owner of Plas Newydd has stressed to the BMC that he is not prepared to allow climbing on the section of crag shown on his deeds and site plan.

Read More: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=01&year=2009#n45547
 Ian McNeill 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

BMC why not offer to buy the whole crag ?

access problem solved ?

 Dan Lane 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

Or the caravan site owner could just be reasonable. What harm does it do to him if we climb there??

Dan
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 08 Jan 2009
In reply to dan lane:

> Or the caravan site owner could just be reasonable. What harm does it do to him if we climb there??
>
> Dan

A little history lesson might be in order now!

Chris
 JimmAwelon 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

Sorry Jack this isn't really directed to you but for Guy or anyone else at the BMC.

I thought this was too good to be true. As in my post of 11th Dec where I mentioned the Peregrines and my experiences of the owner Mr D W (just so Guy knows that I do know who the owner is). Was this driven from Manchester or from the local Area? I would be surprised to hear that it was Area driven for 1) because that was the fist I had heard of it and 2) I'd be surprised that local climbers didn't know who the real owner of the most important part of the crag was. It is mistakes like this make me think I ought to get involved with my local BMC more.

I have not been to climb since the 'opening' was announced but can anyone tell me how much trespassing occurred on Mr D W's land? How is he? Will this mean that he will say no to me in the future?
James Jackson 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:

Please carry on!
 JimmAwelon 08 Jan 2009
In reply to JimmAwelon: I see those hacks at the Daily Post got in on the act too. David Powell is 2nd only to Eryl Crump for over egging anything but if it is a slow news day then they still have to fill and sell newspapers. Is any of what they say anything like near the truth?
 Al Evans 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC: I feel patience has been exhausted, a few good old Kinder mass trespasses coming on the Caravan site.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
> (In reply to dan lane)
>
> [...]
>
> A little history lesson might be in order now!
>
> Chris

Chris,

Could you please enlighten me..... I don't like all this secret squirrell crap .. I am totally naive about this situation ... Therefore ..what's the bottom line please...?? we had been discussing going to Forwyn this weekend.... what's the opinion..??
 simes303 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Al Evans:
> (In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC) I feel patience has been exhausted, a few good old Kinder mass trespasses coming on the Caravan site.

I was just thinking that. Would an organized mass gathering at Forwyn be any different from the trespassing on Kinder? I always get the impression that people now think the Kinder trespassing was for the good, and righted a wrong etc, whilst at the same time hearing that we must respect crag access agreements and stay away from places where access is dodgy or banned. These two views have never seemed to be consistent to me. Am I missing something?
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Grinning Donkey:

It might not do the Caravan Site owner any harm if we climb there - BUT he kept the place closed for 20 years because of folks unreasonable (as he saw it) behaviour in the past. We need a softly softly approach and to do exactly what is asked of us if we want to keep access.

Chris
 JimmAwelon 08 Jan 2009
In reply to simes303: The Kinder trespass would not need to happen now because the Kinder plateaux fits into mountain, moor, heath, down or regustered common land. Forwyn is in woodland which despite efforts of the BMC and representative bodies for other informal outdoor recreation interests is not included as access land in the CRoW Act. It's a sad fact I know but that is the law as it stands and we have no rights to the crag - The owner however does have right - it's pretty much his back garden.
 woolsack 08 Jan 2009
In reply to simes303: A mass trespass should ensure it stays shut for another 20 years
 simes303 08 Jan 2009
In reply to woolsack:
> (In reply to simes303) A mass trespass should ensure it stays shut for another 20 years

Not if you go and trespass again.

Im not trying to rally the troops to go and piss the landowner off. I just don't understand how trespassing on Kinder was good, but now, going to Craig Y Forwyn, or Rowtor Rocks, or Craig David etc etc blah blah blah... is bad.

Whats the difference? ...is my question.

 simes303 08 Jan 2009
In reply to JimmAwelon:
> (In reply to simes303) The Kinder trespass would not need to happen now because the Kinder plateaux fits into mountain, moor, heath, down or regustered common land. Forwyn is in woodland which despite efforts of the BMC and representative bodies for other informal outdoor recreation interests is not included as access land in the CRoW Act. It's a sad fact I know but that is the law as it stands and we have no rights to the crag - The owner however does have right - it's pretty much his back garden.

That the Kinder trespass wouldn't be necessary now isn't really relevant is it?

"We have no rights to the crag (Forwyn)"? Wasn't the whole point of TRESPASSING on Kinder that people didn't have the right to go onto those moorlands and wanted to be able to do so?
 JimmAwelon 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs: Softly Softly - quite right. With hindsight I should have put 2 and 2 together and worked out that the new parking area is so far away from Plas Newydd that this so called access agreement was hardly likely to be with the right person.

Proper terms of use and/or a code of conduct should have been drawn up. I only met the owner in 2006 and he said 'no' to climbing once because (he said) the peregrines were nesting but the time he let us climb he said to be carefull and wear helmets because very few people had climbed there for 20 years and there was lots of vegetation and loose rock. Even if access had completely opened up the place climbers cannot just go in there and garden the hell out of the place - not after that amount of time. It's hardly like organising some gardening at Tremadog for a few climbs that have fallen by the wayside.

As for the SSSI status - that is usually given for certain features and Mynydd Marian (I think that is what it is called but there may be another named SSSI right next to it too) has it for the grassland at the top of the crag (which supports silver studded blue butterflies), the semi ancient woodland at the base and the bat habitat of the cliff. We ought to be able to demonstrate that our activities have no impact on these. I think the police were concerned with the gardening destroying bat habitat - bats could be living between such vegatation and the cliff.

I hope the issue can be resolved and that it hasn't put us back 20 years.
Alphin 08 Jan 2009
In reply to simes303:

I think if I had people shitting, pissing, getting changed in view of my property, dropping litter, swearing and shouting, parking cars poorly and getting verbally abused when approaching them on my land, I may think twice about letting them climb.

I don't know too much about the situation at Craig Y Forwyn as climbing was banned not too long after I started climbing, but have seen this behaviour at other crags and would be pissed off myself if I owned the land.
 JimmAwelon 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Grinning Donkey: No secrets - This weekend as per the BMC website please keep off the central section.

I am looking at my Climbers Club guidebook now and it calls this the Main Cliff and that should be a clue, it holds most of the mid-E grade gems of the crag, much of it 3 star stuff including plenty of 'famous' routes such as Great Wall and High Plains Drifter. It includes about 66 routes from Staircase Gully to Purple Haze so that leaves you with about 44 climbs to the left (southeast) and around 32 climbs to the right (north) plus the 20 or so climbs on two tier butress I think. Get a look at the guide from the CC website. For any lower grade climber this should not worry you since the left hand section is 40-50 feet high and holds some enjoyable single pitches.

Also use the new parking, watch out for loose rock, dont get gardening too much, no shouting, no swearing, no ghetto blasters or pooing in the woods -many of these were the problems that got us to this situation in the 80's. Dayglo tights also probably got us in trouble then but I doubt that will happen again!
 woolsack 08 Jan 2009
In reply to Alphin:
> (In reply to simes303)
>
> I think if I had people shitting, pissing, getting changed in view of my property, dropping litter, swearing and shouting, parking cars poorly and getting verbally abused when approaching them on my land, I may think twice about letting them climb.
>

Especially if you are trying to run Centre Parks just across the road
 woolsack 08 Jan 2009
In reply to JimmAwelon:
> Dayglo tights also probably got us in trouble then but I doubt that will happen again!

That's what they said about flares!
 Brown 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

He only ownes the ground below the middle section of the crag so absail in and take hanging belays to avoid tresspass.
 Simon 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Brown:
> (In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC)
>
> He only ownes the ground below the middle section of the crag so absail in and take hanging belays to avoid tresspass.




No please don't absail - or even abseil in to the central section of the crag.

avoid as per the RAD.

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=2913



si

PS: Brown: your not helpfull
petejh 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:
Goddamit, I had a project on the go as well!

If it turns out Mr Webb owns up to the base but not the face I wonder if it'd be possible to ab in to a hanging stance a foot off the deck and do the routes. Good practice for gogarth.

I'm one of a group of maybe four or five who've been cleaning the routes and I've gotta say it made me cringe when someone who just didn't get the concept of keeping their voice down turned up to climb . It'd piss me off too, to live in that house and hear loud chit chat and climbing calls every day.

Anyway what a can of worms, goes to show that whatever someone else (bmc) says, do your own research.

I don't know what I'm going to do with myself. Anyone want the ivy removing on their house?

 Simon 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Brown:


1. We still have an agreement with the cliff top landowner that we can climb on the sections of crag either side of the central section (i.e. either side of the section between Staircase Gully and Purple Haze). The routes to the right (facing the crag) of Purple Haze can be accessed by descending from the crag top, through woodland next to a wire boundary fence - check the BMC Regional Access Database (RAD) for the full description - this avoids passing through the central section.

2. The owner of Plas Newydd Farm is not prepared to allow climbing on the central section of the crag and at present there is no access agreement in place to permit climbing in this area.

Until the ownership situation is resolved the BMC advises climbers to stick to the above arrangement and respect the position of the owner of Plas Newydd Farm. Thank you for your co-operation.
 Al Evans 09 Jan 2009
In reply to JimmAwelon:
> (In reply to simes303) The Kinder trespass would not need to happen now because the Kinder plateaux fits into mountain, moor, heath, down or regustered common land.

And what do you think was a catalyst that led us to where we are now?
 Al Evans 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Simon:
Until the ownership situation is resolved the BMC advises climbers to stick to the above arrangement and respect the position of the owner of Plas Newydd Farm.

And so they should, has to be the BMC's stance, not everybody has to agree to it though, I'm not talking about action because it may threaten what has already been won, but we don't have to 'respect' the position of the owner of Plas Newydd Farm. It's bigoted and petty. Should we still be 'respecting' the moorland landowners that were equally not prevented from using there land (to slaughter birds) as he is not from going about his daily business unimpeeded by climbers climbing on the crag.
 Al Evans 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Al Evans: Aaaaaarrrggghhh! I hate people who put 'there' when they mean 'their', and I've just done it.
 JimmAwelon 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Al Evans: Kinder and Forwyn are totally different kettles of fish. Kinder is in the uplands and Forwyn is lowland woodland in a populated valley. No local resident sat in their kitchen will hear your climbing calls on a crag like Crowden Clough.
In reply to JimmAwelon:
> (In reply to Grinning Donkey) No secrets - This weekend as per the BMC website please keep off the central section.
>
> I am looking at my Climbers Club guidebook now and it calls this the Main Cliff and that should be a clue, it holds most of the mid-E grade gems of the crag, much of it 3 star stuff including plenty of 'famous' routes such as Great Wall and High Plains Drifter.

Ah. I'd missed this rather important point in all the euphoria when the original announcement was made. So basically all the great routes that made Forwyn worth visiting (some of which I'd still rather like to do) are still banned.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Dave Garnett:

I despair really. I folks have been in there ripping the place apart after all its history, then we don't deserve access to this cliff - or any other.

Was the news released by the BMC half-cocked? Where were the warnings?

Bloody hopeless.


Chris
 andyr 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Al Evans:

There is no comparison between the two. The loss of access at Forwyn was completely down to the actions of climbers. During my last couple of visits shortly before the ban I remember the following: Stupid ,lazy parking which narrowed the road to barely the width of a car by climbers unwilling to walk a few hundred metres from much better parking areas. Outright refusals to move cars despite polite requests. Climbers stripping, changing clothes and defecating in full view of residences. Absolutely foul language echoing down from the crag all day long. The discarded litter thrown down the slopes below the crag. When access signs were put up ( I think by the BMC) I remember seing one being torn down and thrown down the hill by a well known climber...and been told to 'f*ck off' when I remonstrated with him.

Are you advocating a mass trespass to re-establish our 'right' to continue such crass activities?
 Ian McNeill 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:

Agreed ... with your comments


better left alone ...

must pay a visit soon before they ban it again....
petejh 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:
> (In reply to Dave Garnett)
> 'I despair really. I folks have been in there ripping the place apart after all its history, then we don't deserve access to this cliff - or any other.'

What is that statement supposed to mean? Who's been 'ripping the place apart' and what, in your opinion, is 'ripping apart' and how is it different from acceptable route cleaning.

Have you been to Craig Y Forwyn since the ban was lifted? Or are you just talking shit?

How do you suggest the ivy is removed from 95% of the routes, gentle coaxing?

Do I also need point out you're being bloody hypocritical. Your guidebooks wouldn't sell for shit if the climbs contained in them hadn't been gardened.

One point I agree on though is that the BMC should learn some lessons from this. I think the popularity of craig y forwyn took them by surpise and they didn't anticipate the enthusiasm that resulted from its opening. Perhaps if it was still the 70's and half the routes in north wales were still waiting to be done there wouldn't have been such a rush; but it's '09 and there's hardly any new ground left, loads more climbers then last time this cliff was open, and this crazy instant information system which reduces us to all think and do alike.






 Al Evans 09 Jan 2009
In reply to andyr:
> (In reply to Al Evans)
Are you advocating a mass trespass to re-establish our 'right' to continue such crass activities?

I'm not advocating anything, the years when I could take advantage of a crag like Forwyn have long passed, the years I could have enjoyed it have been spent in it senslessly being banned, fortunately I got routes like Mojo and Great Wall in before it was, even climbed there with Pete Boardman once. I just think it seems in danger of history repeating itself if something isn't done, if it's only one of a portion of the landowners stopping access then it might be possible to give him a short sharp shock, if that had to go as far as a mass 'climb in' then it would be sad, but what is the point in not tresspassing if the other result is going to be that climbers are banned for another 20+ years.
 Simon 09 Jan 2009
In reply to simes303:
>
>
> Im not trying to rally the troops to go and piss the landowner off. I just don't understand how trespassing on Kinder was good, but now, going to Craig Y Forwyn, or Rowtor Rocks, or Craig David etc etc blah blah blah... is bad.
>
> Whats the difference? ...is my question.


There are too many to go into detail here - however I would just ask people to let the BMC carry on with negotiations & await further information - any actions outside current proposals could lead to compromising access.

BTW you can climb at Rowtor Rocks - just stick to the access paths and you should be fine.

Si
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 09 Jan 2009
In reply to petejh:

No I haven't been there since the ban - I was responding to the news on here.

Hypocritical because of my guides - I don't really see the link.

It sounds like the crag has been mobbed, masses of ivy has been removed and the place may be banned again. If so that's very sad, and I still think it could have been handled (a lot) better.


Chris
 Mike Raine 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Chris the new access difficulty isn't to do with the gardening. That's a technical glitch, ie people have gardened in line with verbal instructions but we technically need written instructions, that is being sought now.

This change is not due to the behaviour of climbers or the actions of climbers it is due to contested land ownership. Basically both the guy on top and the guy at the bottom think they own the central area. The BMC acted in good faith when they anounced the crag open.

Yes the crag was banned in the 80's due to poor behaviour by climbers, it could be argued that the ban has stayed in place due to poor behaviour by one of the possible land owners. Guy Keating is working very hard on the situation, let's give him a chance to see what's what rather than stir up the rumour mill on here.
 Mike Raine 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:


And of course we now do have access to Craig y Forwyn, if not all of it. And we do have somewhere to park. And lots have climbers have worked really hard to open up this access and have begun to manage the vegetation. So yes, some frustration, but overall a pretty good result, so far.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Mike Raine:

Thanks for explaining that.


Chris
 Michael Ryan 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Mike Raine:
> (In reply to Chris Craggs)

>The BMC acted in good faith when they anounced the crag open.

Could you explain what that means Mike? The 'good faith' bit.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

A wild guess says they'd obtained approval to use the whole crag from a bloke who thought he owned all of it, so they told everyone it was OK, then another bloke came along and actually he owned a bit of it, so now they've told everyone only a bit of it is OK.

jcm
 Simon 09 Jan 2009
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
> (In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com)
>
, then another bloke came along and actually he owned a bit of it



Or he thinks he does...
 Michael Ryan 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Simon:

So good faith didn't work in this case.

I presume no one at the BMC actually checked who owned the land then?
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

No, Mick, not all land is registered. North Wales hasn't had compulsory registration for that long, and if these two farmers have had the land in their family for even ten years (I think; would need to check the exact date) then neither bit of land will be registered and the BMC couldn't have known by searching the Land Registry who owned it. Judging from the references to 'deeds' this was the position; you don't need title deeds if the property is registered. And I think the fly in the ointment's still the same chap who's always been opposed, though I could be wrong. if so presumably he's had his land since 1989 or whenever, so it definitely won't be registered.

It's not even true that a decent solicitor looking at the first farmer's deeds could have necessarily told you whether they truly demonstrated title to all the land, even if the BMC felt in a position to ask him. That's how boundary disputes happen and help make chaps like me a living.

Having said that, if the now-objector is the same objector as closed the crag 25 years ago (perhaps unrightfully, does it now appear?) then it might have been a good idea to contact him and say some other chap says he owns this crag after all, what do you say? But there might have been good reasons not to do that.

You're definitely right that the BMC would do well to have a tame solicitor on hand who understands land law for these sorts of situation, but then I dare say they do.

jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Sorry, was replying to Mick's unamended post; now my post reads a bit odd. But the point stands about title investigation.

jcm
 Mike Raine 09 Jan 2009
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Yea , thanks for that John. We saw two maps that showed the guy on top owned the crag, now the guy at the bottom is saying he does. As John indicates its complex, so if the BMC advise that there isn't an acess agreement to the middle bit that's why. Good faith being we saw the top owners map and a CCW map. Yep with hindsight more research could have been done etc etc but hey two maps and it looks good doesn't it, hey ho.
 timjones 09 Jan 2009
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> You're definitely right that the BMC would do well to have a tame solicitor on hand who understands land law for these sorts of situation, but then I dare say they do.

Speaking as someone who is currently involved in transfering title after the death of my parents we'd better off without the bloody solicitors involved at all
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 09 Jan 2009
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


Something is odd though - surely everyone knew it was the guy with the caravan park that kept the crag closed? I assumed either he had moved/died or changed his mind - but it looks like it wasn't him they were actually talking to. Odd.

Chris

 Mike Raine 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Chris Craggs:

Hi Chris,
we got no where with the caravan site owner. But if you remember there are some styles on the crag so the idea was to find out if the caravan site owner owned the crag either side of these as he had implied. Turned out the guy on top thought he owned the whole crag, that's now being contested by the caravan site man. Though, I understand he isn't contesting ownership of the 'wings' however I don't know everything at the current time, hopefully Guy Keating will have a fuller briefing for us in a week or two.
 Chris Craggs Global Crag Moderator  UKC Supporter 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Mike Raine:


......and thanks again, for the full story.


Chris
In reply to Mike Raine:

Just so I am clear. Do we or do we not have permission to climb on the Great Wall area?
petejh 09 Jan 2009
In reply to Dave Garnett: No access to the Great Wall area unfortunately. Left of Staircase Gully and right of Purple Haze only (looking in).
 Michael Ryan 09 Jan 2009


Cheers John Cox and Mike Raine.

That clears it up for me.

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