[SA Chris]

Only if you have signed consent from the local wildlife too. Right down to woodlice (midges have waivered rights).

[Eddies]

You say fair enough, then you question it in relation to your own special exemption that you sound like you feel entitled to?

If you have found some hidden cave somewhere on your friends land, and you want to stash pads there... probably best not to tell other people about it because they may feel inclined to think 'if its OK for him its OK for me'

In my own experience, Its always battered old pads with split sides and exposed foam that I've seen 'dumped' at crags like Badger Cove and the Churnet, with no regard for it's impact on the wildlife.

[scragrock]

You say fair enough, then you question it in relation to your own special exemption that you sound like you feel entitled to?

If you have found some hidden cave somewhere on your friends land, and you want to stash pads there... probably best not to tell other people about it because they may feel inclined to think 'if its OK for him its OK for me'

In my own experience, Its always battered old pads with split sides and exposed foam that I've seen 'dumped' at crags like Badger Cove and the Churnet, with no regard for it's impact on the wildlife.

I think we may have to agree to disagree on this, its way too long a topic for me to try and explain online{ im not good at it }
and would rather discuss it over a beer face to face

One question though, have you ever bouldered in the Highlands of Scotland?



 

[sherlock]

[quote author=scragrock link=topic=333

Yup,that does sound fair enough indeed but if that is case I would certainly be wary of publicising the boulders in any guidebook as once the great unwashed are aware of the place.......well we've seen what happens.Or should we keep these places as our own private playground  ?
Back around.

[jwi]

Me, I didn’t even know that expedition bouldering was a thing. Are people stashing water, food, stoves and gas too? Because I find that pretty handy for my expedition sport climbing in Céüse.

[highrepute]

I posted this the last time pad stashing was discussed.

Badger cove doesn't fall into the catagory of unlikely to be discovered pad stash location

Although, I'm not against pad stashing at Badger and other places in the peak. Ive never seen any wildlife getting involved in the pads and generally they are removed if too worn out. Probably the peak being a busy area is good for this.

I think a mobile number on the pad is a good idea. If you really think it's ok to leave the pad there/it'll never be discovered then why not?

[Wellsy]

Quite honestly if someone discreetly stashed a couple of properly hidden and not mouldering pads at some desolate windswept vukojebina of a locale because they were doing some development and the walk in is massive, then that's fine imo and I don't really see that it's worth getting worked up about it. If you have permission with the landowner, same, even more so, and if they're only there for a few days or whatever, etc etc etc

If its an area where the public will see it, or if they're stashed all the time i.e in situ, or if they're horrible stinking piles of insects and fungus, that's not really on, because it makes the outdoors shitty for other people. But if it isn't and one is reasonable, discreet and considerate, then I personally do not care at all, although not as little as I care about pegbolts, admittedly.

[NaoB]

I'm going to bite the bullet and get involved in this debate! Personally, I have never stashed a pad at a crag. However, I have gratefully made use of pad stashes on several occasions. There are some definite situations where they seem logical and sensible. For example, an out of the way cave off a deserted beach with a fair trek to the road, where the climbing involves long, meandering problems which would require 6 or 7+ pads to make safe (you would not want to snap an ankle out there....), the mats are wrapped in tarpaulins and tucked right at the back. I can think of lots of instances where stashed pads are so carefully hidden that even those who know where to look struggle to locate them, certainly not left as an eyesore for passing tourists. More importantly, in these scenarios, they can mean the difference between boulders being developed or not.

It was really interesting to read comments about their environmental impact on flora and fauna. I had not thought about it from that perspective before, and I can certainly see why older, knackered pads being chewed by rodents could cause issues. Also, stashing pads where the access is easy, they will be in people's way and cause an eyesore is clearly nonsense. But if you have a black and white rule blanket banning stashing, that would hinder future ascents of a significant number of boulder problems.

I also disagree with the 'dropping litter' analogy - litter serves no positive purpose, it only has negative impacts. Pad stashing, if undertaken judiciously within certain parameters, can be beneficial and have minimal impact.

I'm not saying we should tell all climbers that it's fine to go ahead and do it, because of course some people's interpretation of what is acceptable will be way off the radar. But it would be really rubbish if all pad stashes we're banned and the 'culprits' were vilified on an online forum....

[Wicamoi]

I can't help thinking that we've been here before recently. This seems to be how it goes:

1. Bouldering can be dangerous and it's hard to carry sufficient protection to make some problems safe - especially new problems with long approaches. Therefore stashing pads is ok in some circumstances.

2. Stashed pads deteriorate over time, resulting in dubious cushioning properties and eventually rotting to complete uselessness, leaving an unsightly residue, and frequently needing replaced. Environmental disaster!

3. So instead of repeating this damaging cycle ad infinitum, let's be sensible grown-ups and fit semi-permanent 'eco-pads' underneath these specific, potentially dangerous problems.



It is the nature of moral pragmatism that it always seems fine, until it doesn't. I may be posting this on the wrong thread, but it seems to me that the better place to stop the damaging cycle is at step 1 rather than step 3. 

[Fiend]

Very good lol.

[Fultonius]

I can't help thinking that we've been here before recently. This seems to be how it goes:

1. Bouldering can be dangerous and it's hard to carry sufficient protection to make some problems safe - especially new problems with long approaches. Therefore stashing pads is ok in some circumstances.

2. Stashed pads deteriorate over time, resulting in dubious cushioning properties and eventually rotting to complete uselessness, leaving an unsightly residue, and frequently needing replaced. Environmental disaster!

3. So instead of repeating this damaging cycle ad infinitum, let's be sensible grown-ups and fit semi-permanent 'eco-pads' underneath these specific, potentially dangerous problems.



It is the nature of moral pragmatism that it always seems fine, until it doesn't. I may be posting this on the wrong thread, but it seems to me that the better place to stop the damaging cycle is at step 1 rather than step 3.

The problem is, you can take everything to extreme logical conclusions and they all end up in the same place. One must shoot oneself to save the planet.

Everyone we do causes some level of harm, it's drawings the lines and revisiting them periodically that keeps things in check. I think the bolt-peg-P-bolt argument is a false equivalence here. Amusing as it was...

[Bonjoy]

It's more analogues to the permadraw question (if they could be effectively disguised/hidden between use).