[yetix]

No, in the last couple of years I've considered getting membership on a few occasions and decided not to as I felt access just didn't feel close to the level of priority I'd need to value having membership. Jon's appointment as Access & Conservation Officer had filled me with hope, knowing he is a boulderer himself (and given that bouldering access is ultimately what I value) and also having seen his contributions on here and elsewhere to the community.

I had recently been considering if membership was something I should get given I'm looking to get travel insurance in the near future for a longer trip in Sept and to get BMC insurance I'd need to combine membership so it kind of made sense and may have cost me a little more but if access was important to the BMC then it would be worthwhile. But hearing the lack of priority towards access just puts a bad taste in my mouth and make me want to look elsewhere for (cheaper) alternatives (which also don't require this membership). This was what I did in 2019 when feeling somewhat similiar at the time and was travelling to Rocklands...

[Teaboy]

Does this mean we’re not buying Kilnsey?

[Adam Lincoln]

The BMC are a shambles and stopped getting my money years ago.

[shark]

I had recently been considering if membership was something I should get

For all its faults supporting a strong and influential representative body that owns crags and has successfully maintained access at so many crags is a good idea.  We are better off in this respect than most countries. Withholding membership isn’t going to improve matters.

[Will Hunt]

Does this mean we’re not buying Kilnsey?

I think Kilnsey was always a bit steep (excuse the pun). I can only think it was marketed with the intention of getting the BMC to buy. I'm concerned for access if someone else buys it but the BMC owning Kilnsey would be a management nightmare for them. It would end up being a money pit.

[yetix]

Perhaps. But it's a transaction non the less and if the cost of the transaction is set by the body at a price which I don't feel the transaction is close to worthwhile then why would I choose to do it?

I can appreciate that something is better than nothing, but realistically if you're asking me to spend money on that something, it has to reflect enough of my needs otherwise I'll look elsewhere or consider being a free rider in the situation because I don't feel the alternative is good enough.

On a separate note my partner has just said she feels that the advertising is sub optimal for BMC membership, she's worked at 2 walls, had BMC membership herself and still feels she doesn't know what they're doing/how they're benefiting her needs.

[remus]

Perhaps. But it's a transaction non the less and if the cost of the transaction is set by the body at a price which I don't feel the transaction is close to worthwhile then why would I choose to do it?

I can appreciate that something is better than nothing, but realistically if you're asking me to spend money on that something, it has to reflect enough of my needs otherwise I'll look elsewhere or consider being a free rider in the situation because I don't feel the alternative is good enough.

On a separate note my partner has just said she feels that the advertising is sub optimal for BMC membership, she's worked at 2 walls, had BMC membership herself and still feels she doesn't know what they're doing/how they're benefiting her needs.

I really struggle to understand this point of view. BMC membership is what, £40 a year? For all their faults access and UK climbing in general would be hugely worse off without the BMC. It's got to be some of the best value for money I put in to climbing each year

[yetix]

Realistically they're many causes close to my heart not all are directly related to climbing. Climate change, research, child poverty are all examples. They all add up and I don't have vast amounts of wealth (unfortunately), so I have to consider what I'm donating money towards. They say its a membership but for me this is a donation, the benefits aside from what I mentioned above just aren't important to me I just want to donate towards access. If large amounts are going to things like comps then yeah it's not for me and I'll donate elsewhere.

Failing to understand that to many people this is a donation is probably why the BMC is failing to get people like me to be a member.

Edit - grammar

[Wellsy]

I am a member, largely because of access. But I do also like that they put money into supporting comp athletes

[shark]

Things not good from the GB Climbing side either. Carl has clarified his reasons for leaving.
(NB the CCPG is the Climbing Competitions Performance Group which oversees GB Climbing and reports to the Board and the ABC is the Association of British Climbing Walls - effectively a trade body.)

The major drivers behind my decision were based on what has happened SINCE the CCPG review has been delivered to the board i.e.

There is effectively an open letter from 38 parents declaring the plans for the English talent pathway as *pointless*.

There is effectively an open letter from the commercial elite coaches declaring 2023 selection events as *not fit for purpose*.

Several children have incurred injuries at this year’s selection events due to GB Climbing NOT following guidelines.

None of the above are being adequately reported by GB Climbing to CCPG and ultimately to the board.

Cost overruns within GB Climbing due to simple mistakes such as spending £27k on hire cars in Innsbruck despite public transport being free and then expecting to recover such fees from athletes.

Despite the additional funding from SE and UKS GB Climbing have then selected far fewer athletes this year into the team & squads as compared to last year (117 in 2023 down from 163 in 2022).

If you look at the most recent European competition events then GB Climbing is this year fielding on average one athlete per category compared to other major European countries fielding three of four despite the fact that athletes and parents entirely fund themselves.
Until last month the safeguarding documentation was NINE years out of date and still quoted Rob Adie as the contact.

Parents & athletes continue to live in fear of speaking out.

Retired athletes have spoken out:
https://www.facebook.com/100044639040139/posts/501441251353839/?d=n

Coaches have spoken out:
https://www.climbingcoachingconversations.com/post/climbing-is-not-swimming

Partners are clearly not happy:
https://www.climbscotland.net/move-on-up/competitions/ycs---scottish-talent-squad-eligibility-statement.

The most recent proposals to take CCPG forward now suggest REDUCING the number of members on CCPG to the extent that there would only be one person with real world climbing experience that being the rep from Climb Scotland (Jamie).

The most recent proposals to take CCPG forward also suggest the complete REMOVAL of the ABC rep despite the fact that Freddie is currently leading on the 2024 selection policy in order to overcome some of the recently incurred problems. It would therefore be fair to assume that ABC are not happy.

Much of this is not covered by the CCPG review but the review pretty much predicted the outcome and it is now unravelling.

In summary, it had reached a point where, as a member of the Board sitting on CCPG I was in a position where I could potentially be legally responsible for something that was clearly not being managed properly and NOT being reported to the board and I HAD to resign.

[User deactivated.]

I am a member, largely because of access. But I do also like that they put money into supporting comp athletes

Interesting divide on the comp thing. I share Yetix's view that them supporting comps makes me even less interested in a membership. Comps are just something I couldn't care less about and place no value in.

That's not suggesting i'm right and you're wrong, obviously.

[spidermonkey09]

This is no slight on any of you as individuals but it does make me roll my eyes when I read you aren't members, for all the reasons Shark and Remus listed and more. There is no alternative to the BMC, access would be miles worse without them. Ita letting perfect be the enemy of good for me. To reiterate none of the above is meant personally.

[Wellsy]

I am a member, largely because of access. But I do also like that they put money into supporting comp athletes

Interesting divide on the comp thing. I share Yetix's view that them supporting comps makes me even less interested in a membership. Comps are just something I couldn't care less about and place no value in.

That's not suggesting i'm right and you're wrong, obviously.

I can certainly appreciate that and I didn't used to feel that way, but increasingly I like that there is a way to be a genuine professional athlete as a climber and I like seeing these top end people push the boundaries of the discipline. It would be cool imo to see more young British climbers do well in comps and to do that they need financial support which I think is appropriate from the BMC. Also the BMC being involved in comps and Olympic sports gives their name more weight and I think that helps with access and speaking for punters like me too

Not suggesting I'm right and you're wrong either, for sure!

[northern yob]

Does this mean we’re not buying Kilnsey?

I heard a very interesting rumour about the kilnsey sale recently. If it’s to be believed it’s been sold to an interesting buyer…. Not the bmc!

[Adam Lincoln]

Does this mean we’re not buying Kilnsey?

I heard a very interesting rumour about the kilnsey sale recently. If it’s to be believed it’s been sold to an interesting buyer…. Not the bmc!

Its being turned into Depot yorkshire?

[User deactivated.]

This is no slight on any of you as individuals but it does make me roll my eyes when I read you aren't members, for all the reasons Shark and Remus listed and more. There is no alternative to the BMC, access would be miles worse without them. Ita letting perfect be the enemy of good for me. To reiterate none of the above is meant personally.

There's only so many causes you can spend your money on. Take the example I used earlier of organic food. I'll make the assumption that you care about animal welfare, environmental impacts and/or the ongoing viability of the soil for growing food, perhaps more so than access to crags. But if you're anything like me, then I imagine not every single food item you buy is organic either? I'm not suggesting that I can't afford BMC membership, but there's a lot of things I care about that I can afford and still don't pay for. This is hypocritical behavior, but it's universal too. Eye rolling seems a little naive.

[abarro81]

letting perfect be the enemy of good for me

I strongly agree with this. I don't have BMC membership for the good of others, so unlike Liam and yetix I don't view it as a charitable donation or like buying the fair trade option - I view it as self interest! (But a bit like insurance - it's self interest even if I'm not 100% sure if it will actually benefit me in the near future)

[Dac]

I am a BMC member, and for me their role in lobbying for and being a contact point for negotiations regarding access is my principal reason for remaining so.
I’ve no issue with the BMC spending money on competition climbing, but I often wonder: what proportion of BMC members see themselves as principally indoor/competition climbers? (not a rhetorical question, I genuinely don’t know if this has ever been surveyed).

[spidermonkey09]

This is no slight on any of you as individuals but it does make me roll my eyes when I read you aren't members, for all the reasons Shark and Remus listed and more. There is no alternative to the BMC, access would be miles worse without them. Ita letting perfect be the enemy of good for me. To reiterate none of the above is meant personally.

There's only so many causes you can spend your money on. Take the example I used earlier of organic food. I'll make the assumption that you care about animal welfare, environmental impacts and/or the ongoing viability of the soil for growing food, perhaps more so than access to crags. But if you're anything like me, then I imagine not every single food item you buy is organic either? I'm not suggesting that I can't afford BMC membership, but there's a lot of things I care about that I can afford and still don't pay for. This is hypocritical behavior, but it's universal too. Eye rolling seems a little naive.

I remain pretty convinced that if you're a keen climber at any level it is shooting yourself in the foot not to be a BMC member. As Barrows says its a self interest thing as much as anything else. I do not see it as a donation. Organic food is a poor comparison for me. This is a climbing forum and many of those posting on it are complete obsessives about climbing. Seems incredibly counterintuitive not to be a member of the body that ensures access to crags even if you have issues with their governance and operations.

[cheque]

I don't have BMC membership for the good of others, so unlike Liam and yetix I don't view it as a charitable donation or like buying the fair trade option - I view it as self interest!

  I’ve never seen it as anything else. Depends if you see the BMC as “us” or “them” really I suppose. If it’s “them” then fuck knows what the other 99.9% of the world that isn’t to do with climbing is.

Like others I don’t care at all about comps though and I’m surprised to learn how expensive all that is given that I only only ever hear about how little financial support comp climbers get. I’m amazed to learn that money would be diverted from access (the absolute prime purpose of the BMC as far as I’m concerned) to cover comp climbing’s shortfall.

[teestub]

Things not good from the GB Climbing side either. Carl has clarified his reasons for leaving.
(NB the CCPG is the Climbing Competitions Performance Group which oversees GB Climbing and reports to the Board and the ABC is the Association of British Climbing Walls - effectively a trade body.)

Cost overruns within GB Climbing due to simple mistakes such as spending £27k on hire cars in Innsbruck despite public transport being free and then expecting to recover such fees from athletes.

How long were they in Innsbruck to spend £27k on hire cars 

Yetix, if it was a US situation where there was an Access Fund with comps separate, would you be happier to throw some cash in their direction then?

[duncan]

BMC member for 20+ years, largely due to the access work it does. Look at the access situations in the USA and Australia for comparison.  For much of this time I effectively paid twice through an individual and a club membership though I have stopped this donation as money is tighter than it was five years ago.

I am a BMC member, and for me their role in lobbying for and being a contact point for negotiations regarding access is my principal reason for remaining so.
I’ve no issue with the BMC spending money on competition climbing, but I often wonder: what proportion of BMC members see themselves as principally indoor/competition climbers? (not a rhetorical question, I genuinely don’t know if this has ever been surveyed).

This is surveyed but I can't remember the date of the last one. As far as I remember, access has always been the BMC's most important role as far as its members are concerned. Competitions have been one of the least important.

The cut in access funding and increase in funding of competitions appears to be going directly against the views of the membership.   This may or may not be related to a new-ish CEO who is from a competitive sport administration background, doesn't climb, and appears invisible to members like me.   

[yetix]

Things not good from the GB Climbing side either. Carl has clarified his reasons for leaving.
(NB the CCPG is the Climbing Competitions Performance Group which oversees GB Climbing and reports to the Board and the ABC is the Association of British Climbing Walls - effectively a trade body.)

Cost overruns within GB Climbing due to simple mistakes such as spending £27k on hire cars in Innsbruck despite public transport being free and then expecting to recover such fees from athletes.

How long were they in Innsbruck to spend £27k on hire cars 

Yetix, if it was a US situation where there was an Access Fund with comps separate, would you be happier to throw some cash in their direction then?

Yes

[abarro81]

I’m amazed to learn that money would be diverted from access (the absolute prime purpose of the BMC as far as I’m concerned) to cover comp climbing’s shortfall.

Can anyone confirm that this is definitely what's happened? It seemed a bit vague from the earlier posts. It's hard to say without seeing figure on spending, revenue, what members you'd be likely to lose by ditching comps etc, but it may raise the question of if this is the point at which the bodies need to part ways, at least to become financially independent organizations of some kind even if strong links are maintained.

[tk421a]

This is no slight on any of you as individuals but it does make me roll my eyes when I read you aren't members, for all the reasons Shark and Remus listed and more. There is no alternative to the BMC, access would be miles worse without them. Ita letting perfect be the enemy of good for me. To reiterate none of the above is meant personally.

There's only so many causes you can spend your money on. Take the example I used earlier of organic food. I'll make the assumption that you care about animal welfare, environmental impacts and/or the ongoing viability of the soil for growing food, perhaps more so than access to crags. But if you're anything like me, then I imagine not every single food item you buy is organic either? I'm not suggesting that I can't afford BMC membership, but there's a lot of things I care about that I can afford and still don't pay for. This is hypocritical behavior, but it's universal too. Eye rolling seems a little naive.

I remain pretty convinced that if you're a keen climber at any level it is shooting yourself in the foot not to be a BMC member. As Barrows says its a self interest thing as much as anything else. I do not see it as a donation. Organic food is a poor comparison for me. This is a climbing forum and many of those posting on it are complete obsessives about climbing. Seems incredibly counterintuitive not to be a member of the body that ensures access to crags even if you have issues with their governance and operations.

I'd agree in general if your definition is "outdoor UK climber" rather than any climber. BMC has no relevance for adult indoor climbers (unless you're one of the 120 who competed at BBCs). Also if you climb in the Alps I think you're more likely to be an Austrian Alpine Club member than BMC.

I'd split any indoor climbing involvement out of the BMC to the ABC and let walls run indoor climbing and the BMC run outdoor climbing....