[Andy W]

>I would like to point out that BC isn't the proposer of the motion as JCM suggests

I believe I said the LAST motion. Who was it who doesn't read, doesn't listen and doesn't think again?

So is Monster Munch presently bolted, then? Presumably you can tell Jasper whether it's really 8b+, then, right?

I presumed when you said last you meant last. There may be a new motion but as yet not its not in existence.

As for your question Re 'Monster Munch' it would be hard to climb it in 'sport' style if it wasn't bolted! unless I bolted it yesterday! 'better get on down'..... as for the grade I have no idea, the first 20 ft felt quite hard!

[granticus]

  Been following this for a while avoiding responding again but I'm sure I've just read that JCM intends to go sport climbing and has been sport climbing, mind you I've had a few

I don't think we should have put bolts in in the first place, but once my views don't prevail and they're there, what purpose would it serve me not using them?

*note the efficient usage of quote system, I've never read the instructions, I don't have a GCSE in IT and I didn't go to Oxford, maybe I should've as I'm clearly a genius

Yep. That's definitely what I read    Clearly you are a man of loose principles, we all have our vices...  but heh the first step towards change is self awareness.  The uncomfortable truth being that you want to go sport climbing, you enjoy it and you have the desire to utilise some bolted rock (for whatever reason you wish to justify this by, you still intend to do it and I don't think you can convince anyone that you will hate the experience).  It's a difficult place to be in, like laughing at at a joke you should be offended by.   I personally believe if you really, truly, honestly believe in something, you should stand by your principles even if this means struggling against the tide of popular opinion.  So far JCM, you've commenced using chalk because everyone else uses it, admitted to climbing bolted routes and intending to climb bolted routes because the bolts are already there.  Given the strength, passion and commitment to your argument I'm kinda depressed that your actions aren't backing this up.

[jcm]

OK. I did ask that earlier in the thread. I thought it was MM being rebolted in 2005 that caused the last round of meetings etc. So either I was wrong, or it's been debolted a second time. Do you know which? Not that it matters, really; I'm just interested.

Granticus; don't worry, I won't hate the experience, I didn't hate it before and I don't suppose I shall now. If you find me putting new bolts in, you can tell me I'm not standing by my principles. And after all, as a great man said, if you don't like my principles, I have others.

[granticus]

If you find me putting new bolts in, you can tell me I'm not standing by my principles.

I'm telling you now, you're not standing by your principles   If I find you putting new bolts in (does this mean this is a distinct possibility?) then I'll know the scales have completely tipped rather than swaying slightly which they appear to be doing?!  And there'd better be some kind of agreement in place before you start wielding that drill.   

[slackline]

Fundamentally disagree with this – it isn’t my experience of sport climbers at all – especially not in the UK where the vast majority also take part in the other aspects of climbing.

90's France?!

Now lets bear in mind your post previous just above this one where you ask...

Who was it who doesn't read, doesn't listen and doesn't think again?

Hmm, which two key pieces of information did you choose not to read/listen/think about in Nemo's sentence (Hint: I highlighted them in bold for you)?   

[Bonjoy]

I'm actually quite interested in what people think of the Gogarth bolt ladder episode. It seems to me quite a parallel, barring the fact that what the perps wanted to do was not sport climbing but aid climbing. What did you think of choppng that?

Like you said earlier, these things are value judgements rather than black and white, right versus wrong assessments.
The bolting at Parliament House Cave is only very superficially similar to the bolting at CV. The similarity is that they both involve bolting non-limestone sea cliffs in areas where the rest of the climbing is almost exclusively trad.
In order to make the judgement regarding the justification for breaking the usual no-bolts-on-non-limestone-seacliffs rule, a number of factors come into consideration. Most of these boil down to four questions: Who gains? Who loses? What is the net lose/gain, factoring in the size of the group? What is the subjective merit of the end result?
Simplifying the question to exclude non-climbers (justifiable in both cases), these groups roughly lump together as, sport climbers, trad climbers or aid climbers, though obviously the groups are not mutually exclusive.
In the case of the Gogarth aid route only a tiny handful of aid climbers stood to benefit, from a route which to most climbers has very little technical/aesthetic merit (it’s a soulless bolt ladder). On the other hand a large number of trad climbers stood to suffer a moderate loss to their climbing experience due to the proximity of a line of bolts in a location which most trad climbers (not to mention most sport climbers and any right thinking aid climber) would find objectionable. Net gain versus loss therefore very poor = easy decision to remove the bolts.
In the case of CV a moderate number of sport climbers stand to gain and by the looks of the routes plus the lack of other objectives in the area they stand to gain a pretty good thing. Time and behaviour suggest that the loss to trad climbers is small and of a notional rather than practical value. Trad climbers have not shown any interest in freeing these routes, as Nemo pointed out these would arguably be poor as trad routes (in reality most hard trad climbers I know would value these as sport routes, ‘pure’ trad climbers at this grade are rare to non existent). These bolts, unlike the Gogarth example, do not directly impinge on any trad climbers' day at the crag. In short the equation is not as one sided as the Gogarth example and in this case is weighted on the pro-bolt side. The net gain favours the sport climbers, because though there are less of them their gain is large and direct, whereas the loss to an admittedly greater number of trad climbers (even making the unlikely assumption that all trad climbers will disapprove of the bolting), is small and indirect. 

[jcm]

Slackline, of course I read it. My post to which Nemo had been replying wasn't limited to the UK. Read my '90's France?!', if you will, as 'well you may be right about the [present-day] UK scene, but that hasn't been true at all times and places, has it?  E.g. 90's France.'

Nemo seems like a bright guy. I thought he'd probably understand that without needing it spelled out.

Mind, I don't know how I let him get away with that stuff about how sport climbers use sika because they climb on chossy cliffs. You don't see a lot of sika at Blackchurch. Henna, Whitestonecliffe or some bits of Swanage, and I refuse to believe that any sport climbing cliffs are as chossy as those.

[jcm]

Bonjoy, thanks for your reply. It's not clear to me that you appreciate that Carn Vellan is a trad cliff with a number of routes on it some of which pre-dated the sport routes, including two three-star routes and a reasonably popular local-classic type of HVS, and that we're talking about bolting a section of the cliff, perhaps one-third?

In any case you're taking a different line from Nemo's strict utilitarian approach, which I would have thought would make the Gogarth bolts fine (I'd be interested to hear for that reason what he thinks about them). I think it's a fine distinction to say that Gogarth should 'obviously' be debolted, even though trad climbers aren't and won't be using the bit of cliff in question, because trad climbers have to look at the bolts from North Stack Wall, and that Cornish cliffs 'obviously' should be bolted as long as they'd make good sport routes, because trad climbers don't have to look at them.  Leaving aside the fact that (as I say) this isn't actually true in this case, the visual impact is a small part of what the locals dislike about the notion of having sport climbing on Penwith sea cliffs.

[slackline]

slack---line, of course I read it. My post to which Nemo had been replying wasn't limited to the UK. Read my '90's France?!', if you will, as 'well you may be right about the [present-day] UK scene, but that hasn't been true at all times and places, has it?  E.g. 90's France.'

Nemo seems like a bright guy. I thought he'd probably understand that without needing it spelled out.

It doesn't take long to be explicit and you're quite verbose when you choose to be.

[Bonjoy]

Bonjoy, thanks for your reply. It's not clear to me that you appreciate that Carn Vellan is a trad cliff with a number of routes on it some of which pre-dated the sport routes, including two three-star routes and a reasonably popular local-classic type of HVS, and that we're talking about bolting a section of the cliff, perhaps one-third?

In any case you're taking a different line from Nemo's strict utilitarian approach, which I would have thought would make the Gogarth bolts fine (I'd be interested to hear for that reason what he thinks about them). I think it's a fine distinction to say that Gogarth should 'obviously' be debolted, even though trad climbers aren't and won't be using the bit of cliff in question, because trad climbers have to look at the bolts from North Stack Wall, and that Cornish cliffs 'obviously' should be bolted as long as they'd make good sport routes, because trad climbers don't have to look at them.  Leaving aside the fact that (as I say) this isn't actually true in this case, the visual impact is a small part of what the locals dislike about the notion of having sport climbing on Penwith sea cliffs.

Fair point, CV being a section of an established trad crag does change the balance. I had thought it was more of a stand along sport or nothing venue. This does make the case against the bolting stronger. How much this changes things depends on stuff like quality and popularity of the trad compared to the sport potential. I guess this is why it has been and remains a vexed question. The pro-bolters’ case still rests on proving their gain outweighs the anti-bolters cost.
I wasn’t limiting the objection of anti-bolters to a visual one only. I was assuming that the very existence of these bolted lines caused moral offence, both at the crag and at other times. It’s obviously an inexact business weighting one group’s fun against another group’s moral indignation. I can’t see a better answer than putting it to a vote at a meeting.
As to the comparison with the aid route at Gogarth, the point still stands that only a tiny number will benefit a moderate amount versus a large number losing a small/moderate amount and that the aid route has little intrinsic value in the eyes of the climbing world compared to the CV sport routes.

[jcm]

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=656

Your views don't seem to be entirely consistent with those recorded here by trad climbers, Toby. Maybe you should try repeating the three-star E5 and E6 and see whether you can confirm the quality?

Bonjoy, I think we're basically agreeing. But as I say that's different from Stu's and Nemo's position.

[jcm]

Well, they're climbing trad routes, I guess.

Mr Ripple calls My Mule 'a great route', Andi Turner calls the E6 'awesome', someone else calls the E3 and E2 'well worth doing', and I don't suppose Fun Curve Factory got three stars because of the chumminess of its FA and the CC, since its FA was Mark Edwards, not always the best friend of the CC and its local guidebook editor Des Hannigan (and IIRC the second ascentionist Ken Palmer confirmed its quality in an article in High accompanied by a front cover picture of him getting soaked on it). In any case this isn't the CC guidebook, of course, although obviously I share your implied view that Rockfax presumably simply copied all the details over.

None of the existing trad routes is on the roof, I'm fairly sure (I think the 'arch' they speak of is a different roof, right?) Although no-one was saying they were, of course.

There's a picture on that page of the cliff, which should help a bit. Does that really look like a suitable sport crag?

[Paul B]

forgive me if I'm wrong but as long as you give "sufficient acknowledgement" I believe you can quote away. That doesn't necessarily guarantee a lack of friction.

[Nemo]

    Finally this thread has taken a turn for the sensible, and people are actually making cases for and against sport climbing specifically at CV.  As I said at the start I have very little to say on this – the thing I was objecting to was the generalised anti – sport climbing rhetoric which I felt didn’t help anyone, led to increasing frustration on all sides and stifled any attempt at looking at the real issues at this particular crag. 

“In any case you're taking a different line from Nemo's strict utilitarian approach” - JCM

Maybe my initial posts were a little too cut and dried – mainly in frustration at some of the things you had said.  I certainly wasn’t intending to take a strict utilitarian approach to anything.  What I tried to do was to explain what in my opinion was the fundamental reason behind the vast majority of the bolting decisions in the UK.  I also pointed out that there were exceptions where local circumstances had led to people deciding that the normal “rule” should be overridden.  In other words it is NOT a blanket prescription which should be applied regardless of the local circumstances, but a way of understanding, for the most part what has actually happened.

I think we would agree that in the case of the CV roof, if you picked it up and moved it somewhere else and took away the history, then the normal “rule” would have applied – ie: it would have been bolted, because it would make a great sport venue and a rubbish trad one.  So the question which should have been asked from the start (and now thankfully is), is what are the particular circumstances at this crag, and do they mean that this really should be one of the exceptions where the normal “rule” should be ignored.

One argument which probably ends up being pro bolting is the one which Bonjoy made about who gains and loses etc.

One argument against, is that this particular coastline is unique, wild and shouldn’t be tarnished by fixed gear of any kind.  The counter to this no doubt is that this is actually an old quarrying area and so isn’t untarnished to begin with.  But then, according to the site linked at the start of the thread, CV is part of a soon to be designated World Heritage Site – perhaps non climbers will have a serious objection to bolts here where in most places they don’t... 

Another argument against is the one you made that the rest of CV is an established trad crag.  As Bonjoy pointed out, the weight of this probably depends on the proximity of the trad routes to the roof, how good and popular they are etc etc.
 
All these arguments seem reasonable to me – and for all I know there may be a variety of others both for and against - I have no idea which are really compelling without going there.  (For example, whilst I completely wrote off the environmental and the drilling is sacrilegious arguments earlier, that was perhaps excessive – I still feel they are non starters against bolting in general, but clearly they hold more weight in some particular areas – maybe this is one of those – I don’t know).

As I said at the start, I’m not arguing for or against – this should be left for people with local knowledge, either on here or probably better at local meetings.  I only hope that people can avoid the usual trap that this thread fell into of going off on generalised ideological rants, as this doesn’t get anyone anywhere.  As the last section of this thread has at times suggested, I suspect that if everyone quits the generalised rhetoric, there is probably a lot more common ground between people than we might otherwise expect.

(At Parliament House Cave, presumably some such debate was had and in the end it was felt that the negatives of bolts here far outweighed the positives – as Bonjoy said, the case for bolts there seems very weak at best.)

“Mind, I don't know how I let him get away with that stuff about how sport climbers use sika because they climb on chossy cliffs. You don't see a lot of sika at Blackchurch. Henna, Whitestonecliffe or some bits of Swanage, and I refuse to believe that any sport climbing cliffs are as chossy as those.” – JCM

You’re right - my point needed elaborating on to make any sense.  I.e it is loose rock AND people trying to climb hard, where they have put considerable time, blood, sweat and tears into trying to pull on a particular set of holds which leads to sika.  When someone pulls something off on most trad routes, there is usually a variety of other options – on a lot of sport routes and boulders this isn’t the case.  All I was pointing out was that a quick look at any real quality sport climbing venues such as Malham, would hopefully persuade you that sport climbing itself does not have to lead to either chipping or the use of sika.

[jcm]

>As the last section of this thread has at times suggested, I suspect that if everyone quits the generalised rhetoric, there is probably a lot more common ground between people than we might otherwise expect.

It seems to me that was rather what my initial post proposed also, but hey.

>(At Parliament House Cave, presumably some such debate was had and in the end it was felt that the negatives of bolts here far outweighed the positives – as Bonjoy said, the case for bolts there seems very weak at best.)

I don't think there was much debate, actually. And the aid climbers seemed to be having quite a good time. I suspect there were more ascents of the bolt ladder while it was up than there would be of the CV routes in the same time, though that's rather a cheap shot of course, given it takes most folk a while to get up 8b+. Still, the equivalent Verdon ceiling bolt ladder is pretty popular on wet days.

Agreed about sika; the nature of the sport climbing act lends itself to sika more than anything else. You'd be pushed to find anything you'd just pulled off Breakaway, after all. I still think that the breaking down of inhibitions about altering the rock which is inherent in drilling plays a role, but I concede there are other more important factors. Similarly, Mick R's point in the article I mentioned was that sport routes generally need preparing, and of course you have to be on them on a rope before the FA, so the opportunity to heavy clean/chip/comfortise is there to a greater extent.

[jcm]

On looking at the CC guide I am reminded of some other pertinent facts.

This cliff was first discovered and climbed on in 1971.

There are actually 22 trad routes (excluding Rewind) on the cliff rather than the eight Rockfax list, sixteen of which were given stars (six of them hollow, indicating that they were given by the FA and no repeat ascentionist is known).

One of the sport routes it is proposed to rebolt started from the belay of one of these (the three star Ziggurat, which actually does go up the roof section, albeit not the very steepest bit, up a natural crack in the top part).

The motion as drafted would permit retroing Ziggurat, though perhaps it isn't meant to.

There is an old aid route called The Lid which goes up directly to the finish of Ziggurat and climbs 'the most continuous crackline through the great overhang'. Since it was graded A3, I don't suppose it was a bolt ladder, so presumably it had at least some placements which might be used as natural gear. Rockfax seem to think it would/might be a candidate for being freed (presumably in trad style). I assume this is not also Monster Munch (which I'm pretty sure doesn't finish up Ziggurat), though I stand to be corrected. Either way, the notion that the roof will never go trad doesn't look entirely sound, based on that (especially since presumably it could be worked from the stance of Ziggurat, directly above, if necessary).

Of course the CC guide will have been carefully crafted for propaganda purposes, eh, Toby?

Still, someone who knows the cliff better than me could maybe comment better on the above (Stu?)

[jcm]

I seem to be a bit obsessed by this - I have another question. Do we have any sport routes which are on cliffs which are quite so lashed by the sea as this one? Bits of Swanage maybe? I've never seen seas there like the ones you get in Cornwall, though. The bolt stubs that exist from 1995 look pretty damned rusty. I'm just wondering how frequently it would be necessary to re-drill the cliff if sport routes were established. Or is this nonsense and bolts last perfectly well even if they're covered in waves every winter?

[Bonjoy]

I seem to be a bit obsessed by this - I have another question. Do we have any sport routes which are on cliffs which are quite so lashed by the sea as this one? Bits of Swanage maybe? I've never seen seas there like the ones you get in Cornwall, though. The bolt stubs that exist from 1995 look pretty damned rusty. I'm just wondering how frequently it would be necessary to re-drill the cliff if sport routes were established. Or is this nonsense and bolts last perfectly well even if they're covered in waves every winter?

You can get bolts in marine grade stainless steel, which will last well in this environment. I’d imagine these would be used given the level of consideration lavished on this bolting.

[jcm]

Yes, Ziggurat's an Edwards route, since freed (whether by someone else or them I'm not sure). It's the 'original' route only in the sense of being the first way up the disputed section. I don't know whether it relies on pegs or not; it certainly has a load of rusting old gear in it. Not sure the Edwardses' have been making any recommendations; it's Andy W's proposal at the moment.

Yes, well, I did ask earlier, was debolting the Big Issue 'massively selfish'? You can see why people tend to think this sort of thing might be the proverbial TEOFW, can't you?

[petejh]

I seem to be a bit obsessed by this - I have another question. Do we have any sport routes which are on cliffs which are quite so lashed by the sea as this one? Bits of Swanage maybe? I've never seen seas there like the ones you get in Cornwall, though. The bolt stubs that exist from 1995 look pretty damned rusty. I'm just wondering how frequently it would be necessary to re-drill the cliff if sport routes were established. Or is this nonsense and bolts last perfectly well even if they're covered in waves every winter?

I'm responsible for much of the re-bolting work on the Great and Little Ormes in the past couple of years - the standard of bolts has moved on a lot from what I'm guessing you are probably familiar with. At Lower Pen Trwyn and The Diamond I used marine grade one piece glue-in bolts made by Jim Titt of Bolt Products: http://bolt-products.com/SeaWaterSeries_000.htm
Both of these cliffs get lashed by the sea twice a day and indeed some of the first bolts at LPT and The Diamond are underwater at high tide.

The two problems in the past with bolts on sea cliffs are - the use of non-marine grade (ANSI 316) steel and the use of 'expansion bolts (or more correctly 'through bolts').

Expansion bolts are fine for most cliffs, even cliffs near to the sea but not tidal. But when they are placed on tidal cliffs even marine grade expansion bolts will corrode. The trouble is they are made from 4 components - the bolt, hanger, nut and washer. this allows for corrosion to develop between components even with marine grade steel. The solution is for a one piece bolt with no welds (welds will never be exactly the same material as that being welded so will succumb to galvanic corrosion (http://www.engineersedge.com/galvanic_capatability.htm).
Fixe do a marine-grade one piece glue-in bolt with a weld on the eye and we placed some on UPT, and it's been found that the weld has started to corrode with two years due to the electrochemical difference between weld and bolt. The 'Titt bolts' on the other hand don't have a weld (they are a one-piece twisted rod ) and haven't corroded at all and won't corrode in our lifetimes, or the next generations.
I've also recently been placing an even smaller version (twisted 6mm rod instead of twisted 8mm rod) of the LPT/Diamond 'Titt bolts' at Pigeon's Cave on the Orme. These glue-in bolts are tiny and virtually unnoticeable from the ground.

IF Carn Vellan were bolted the people placing the bolts must do it in the most professional way possible using bolts which won't need replacing. This would mean using the Titt bolts, and taking a cutting wheel to cut the old bolts flush.
There ends my commercial for Bolt Products.

[Stu Littlefair]

Sorry,

I've been slow to reply to this thread; busy days at work. jcm's summary of where the routes are at CV is fair. The trad routes are very close to the proposed sport routes. I've only visited on wet 'n' wild days, so can't comment on their quality, but the trad routes look very worthwhile. I can understand the proximity of the trad routes causing some people problems, but the situation is no different to, say, Kilnsey where trad routes and sport routes are adjacent to each other. Kilnsey is an interesting comparison, tbh, since sport routes there have certainly spread to lower grades and re-bolting existing trad lines but there does seem to be an equilibrium of sorts establishing. Hopefully, nothing similar would occur at Carn Vellan, and I certainly wouldn't want to see Ziggurat bolted.

Since we're veering down this tangent anyway, debolting the big issue was a great thing to do, but climbing it on in-situ nuts and pegs with long slings attached wasn't exactly the perfect solution either, and could be considered selfish. If a route is going to be trad, I'd rather it didn't have any pegs in, especially on sea cliffs.

[petejh]

This also raises in my mind the issue of old bolts not being removed when new bolts are placed. JCM I'm sure if you were to visit Lower Pen Trwyn you'd be appalled at the mess of old bolts left in place next to new. I am, and I did all of the recent re-bolting. (the mess goes back years to the first round of re-bolting with glue-in bolts and not removing the original bolts, I've removed a few but I'd be still be there now if it was just down to me to do it. I had hoped other climbers would do that bit for me but it appears they really can't be arsed to bring a hammer and a 17mm spanner to remove one or two old bolts each).