[GazM]

Yeah, I'm intrigued by this too. I've always assumed that if that much landscaping is needed then it's a bit hard to justify - that I'd be better offspending time and energy elsewhere - but perhaps I need to change my approach to unearth more new problems!
What did you do Liam? Any before and after photos? And how were you breaking rocks?!

Not sure how shifting masses of rock and changing would tie in with the open access situation in Scotland? I assume that people making mountain bike trails for example do so with landowner permission, but I have no idea.

I think there’s a big difference in between trundling a block or two or a bit of light patioing and major earthworks!

Yeah, agree that up here landowner permission would probably be required (although realistically in many cases I'd bet they'd never know if you didn't ask).

Perhaps this needs a dedicated thread. Incredible feats of landscaping. Or perhaps we don't want to lift the lid on the dirty dark arts of development...

[Fatboyslimfast2]

I had a route stolen(yes Im using that term) couple of years ago, not that hard but when trying to rp it I destroyed my hamstring and didnt go back that year, the next year people had moved on and different cliffs so struggled to get back. The first 2 bolts had the hangers off so they used 2 nuts to loop them and then claimed it, didnt put the hangers back on the bolts and left it. The quarry had taken 2 visits during the winter to cut our way into, then the spring clearing the bottom, the route in question took 3 very sketchy abseils to get into, 3 days of scrubbing (above an old railway tunnel so lots of soot), 2 days of bolting then 2 or 3 days of  attempts. Theres a reason why a lot of these things are not developed because its bloody difficult, expensive and time consuming.
I was royally pissed off when I heard, to be honest if he had asked I might of given it to him if he had paid me for the bolts, as it was it filtered back to him that i was fucked off and got a soft soaped hippy email reply justifying it. 

[stone]

Not sure how shifting masses of rock and changing would tie in with the open access situation in Scotland? I assume that people making mountain bike trails for example do so with landowner permission, but I have no idea.
I think there’s a big difference in between trundling a block or two or a bit of light patioing and major earthworks!

I guess there is a huge dependence on what sort of place it is. A rhododendron or bramble patch or litter strewn semi-urban quarry probably would be fair game in anyone's eyes. An ancient woodland or popular moorland beauty spot could be very delicate.

[stone]

I had a route stolen(yes Im using that term) couple of years ago, not that hard but when trying to rp it I destroyed my hamstring and didnt go back that year, the next year people had moved on and different cliffs so struggled to get back. The first 2 bolts had the hangers off so they used 2 nuts to loop them and then claimed it, didnt put the hangers back on the bolts and left it. The quarry had taken 2 visits during the winter to cut our way into, then the spring clearing the bottom, the route in question took 3 very sketchy abseils to get into, 3 days of scrubbing (above an old railway tunnel so lots of soot), 2 days of bolting then 2 or 3 days of  attempts. Theres a reason why a lot of these things are not developed because its bloody difficult, expensive and time consuming.
I was royally pissed off when I heard, to be honest if he had asked I might of given it to him if he had paid me for the bolts, as it was it filtered back to him that i was fucked off and got a soft soaped hippy email reply justifying it.

If you had got to name the route, been paid for the bolts and people gave you as a developer a lot more kudos than currently would that have changed things much? (I think developers should get much more kudos regardless).
My impression from what you're saying is that it was a closed project for more than two but less than 5years? If it had been over five years, would that have changed this? Ten years?

[Fatboyslimfast2]

No, being polite and asking do you mind was all it needed. I chose to bolt it and clean it and was a touch to hard for me at the time, at least respect my efforts and have some manners.

[andy moles]

Perhaps this needs a dedicated thread. Incredible feats of landscaping. Or perhaps we don't want to lift the lid on the dirty dark arts of development...

I had my wrists gently slapped for making mention of some tasteful landscaping* I did under a boulder on social media - which was fair enough, it's in a National Park, and there's nothing to be gained from drawing attention to that kind of thing.

I've been quite impressed at what my wrist-slapper can accomplish in short time with a 16lb hammer though 

* <200kg

[stone]

No, being polite and asking do you mind was all it needed. I chose to bolt it and clean it and was a touch to hard for me at the time, at least respect my efforts and have some manners.

There is an old thread on here where people have enquired about a presumed closed project, been told by the developer that yes it was a very much closed >5year old project and people have then stridently denounced would-be-stealers. Do you think all of that is how things ought to be?

[Fiend]

I had my wrists gently slapped for making mention of some tasteful landscaping* I did under a boulder on social media - which was fair enough, it's in a National Park, and there's nothing to be gained from drawing attention to that kind of thing.

I've been quite impressed at what my wrist-slapper can accomplish in short time with a 16lb hammer though 

* <200kg

I'm quite a fan of North Wales Bouldering bantz where the intro to bouldering behaviour says "No Patioing" and the very first problem in the book has a very obvious patio in the topo picture 

Still, if you're not moving hundreds of tonnes, are you even developing?? 

[spidermonkey09]

No, being polite and asking do you mind was all it needed. I chose to bolt it and clean it and was a touch to hard for me at the time, at least respect my efforts and have some manners.

There is an old thread on here where people have enquired about a presumed closed project, been told by the developer that yes it was a very much closed >5year old project and people have then stridently denounced would-be-stealers. Do you think all of that is how things ought to be?

Stone, you appear to be stirring somewhat. That was an acknowledged edge case where it's widely accepted that it dragged on too long. It wasn't on to allow it to drag on that long. It also isn't on to just roll in and climb projects without asking permission. This isn't complicated and doesn't need "rules" or "kudos". It just needs people to have some manners and ask, to communicate like normal humans instead of incels and more often than not people will be fine with it.

Nez and Lincoln asked Innes Deans for permission to do his old project down at Yew Cogar a few years back. He'd been trying it for a while, can't remember details but certainly a few years. He declined, because he said he was training and intended to get back on it. That didn't transpire and the next year they asked again. This time he agreed and even told them what size the studs were so they didn't waste a trip down that hill taking the wrong size hangers. They despatched it and gave it the name Innes chose. No reason it couldn't all be more like that.

[Ross Barker]

I'm quite a fan of North Wales Bouldering bantz where the intro to bouldering behaviour says "No Patioing" and the very first problem in the book has a very obvious patio in the topo picture 

I always assumed that was there to stop the average layman from trying to build patios under every boulder they arrive at, particularly to stop them from tearing down an ancient drystone wall for it!

An experienced developer should hopefully understand when it is or isn't appropriate to be modifying a landing, and how it should be done.

[petejh]

I'm quite a fan of North Wales Bouldering bantz where the intro to bouldering behaviour says "No Patioing" and the very first problem in the book has a very obvious patio in the topo picture 

Still, if you're not moving hundreds of tonnes, are you even developing?? 

 

Bro do you even lift?

The climbing scene is full hypocritical bullshit like this.

The routes/boulders we all climb on rely for their existence on some fundamental realities, which many climbers going about their day enjoying their pastime are completely oblivious to: #1 rule is don't get caught doing something someone 'official' might object to. The #2 rule is don't ask. #3 is don't tell.

Then threads like this appear and the metaphorical rock is lifted to partly reveal the skeletons underneath. And people (Stone) suggest seemingly completely reasonable and rational-sounding black&white rules, but which don't work in a messy reality of unique context and human emotions.

Etiquette and manners is all it takes to make the imperfect system work, as many have already said.

[stone]

Stone, you appear to be stirring somewhat. That was an acknowledged edge case where it's widely accepted that it dragged on too long. It wasn't on to allow it to drag on that long. It also isn't on to just roll in and climb projects without asking permission. This isn't complicated and doesn't need "rules" or "kudos". It just needs people to have some manners and ask, to communicate like normal humans instead of incels and more often than not people will be fine with it.

I was ignorant about it being widely accepted that it had dragged on for too long in that case. I'm not sure the precedent from that case apparently being considered too long has really filtered through as widely as you're saying (my ignorance being an example).

You're saying this doesn't need rules. But at some point that case evidently tipped over from everyone being on the side of the developer keeping the project closed to it being deemed unreasonable.

I don't think this "polite communication is all it needs" notion is true. Lack of communication is clearly bad. But there are cases where there is communication and what is communicated is that the developer insists on perpetual closure.

[andy moles]

I'm quite a fan of North Wales Bouldering bantz where the intro to bouldering behaviour says "No Patioing" and the very first problem in the book has a very obvious patio in the topo picture 

And then there's the retro-bolting, drilled pegs, glued pegs and conventional hammered pegs, so route climbers can have the bantz too. North Wales leading the way

[spidermonkey09]

What are the closed projects that have riled people up in the past few years, the apparent absence of which this year which prompted you to start the thread? Are they all Peak based ?

I'm arguing the idea it needs a precedent it all is flawed. There is no one size fits all answer. I don't think putting arbitrary time limits on things works for all the reasons that Barrows and Pete have already pointed out. Some years the cornice/north buttress doesn't dry at all.

There's little point continually referencing the case from devil's gorge when it's an outlier. The vast majority of projects get cleared up either by the original bolter or by someone keen who asks if they can get involved; if they're any good that is. If they're actually shit, and that's why they never got finished, then it's no loss. If anything, the fact you're saying there is no aggro over projects currently is indicative if the current, informal system working just fine, no?

[petejh]

I don't think this "polite communication is all it needs" notion is true.

...and what's your suggested alternative for this 'closed project' situation? A facet of climbing which you openly admit you have no involvement in on either side - either as developer or as climber wanting to do closed projects.

[spidermonkey09]

So, as a community, we indulge a very small minority of developers with decades-old closed projects by way of "payment" to developers at large, most of whom don't close projects for unreasonably long periods anyway.

Indeed. I don't see a problem with this.

[stone]

To me it's good to have this out in the open and talked about.

Discussions such as this will help avoid anyone blundering into developing a project with the intention of keeping it closed for many years as a futuristic training goal.

I also think discussions such as this are good for making people aware of how much gratitude we owe to developers. And I do think naming and guide book entries etc should favour developers much more. For anything but cutting edge routes, the developer and not the first ascentionist gets credit in my eyes anyway.

[stone]

I don't think this "polite communication is all it needs" notion is true.

...and what's your suggested alternative for this 'closed project' situation? A facet of climbing which you openly admit you have no involvement in on either side - either as developer or as climber wanting to do closed projects.

My suggested alternative is that next time there is a situation like the devils gorge one, more people do as you did and remonstrate with the developer rather than denouncing would-be-route-stealers. Perhaps if that had been the case, it might have been realised by him that everyone was massively appreciative of all his development work but would be more stoked for him sending it as the 200th ascent rather than as the 1st.

[petejh]

It was 10 yrs before it got to that point. And I'm unsure if anything I expressed had any effect - I think the bolter just lost motivation in the end. (and rumours emerged of people climbing it anyway)

Sometimes people do just fart in Bonjoy's check-out queue. You need check-outs, queues will form, and people will always need to fart. Sometimes the three will combine whatever an internet-based rule-o-phobe wishes.

I also think discussions such as this are good for making people aware of how much gratitude we owe to developers. And I do think naming and guide book entries etc should favour developers much more. For anything but cutting edge routes, the developer and not the first ascentionist gets credit in my eyes anyway.

As a developer I agree with this (rule..) in principal. And UKB needs more controversy to feed the forum chatter-  this precedent and the endless cases of transgressions by first ascentionists insisting on their own names (at least in the early years of FAnamexit) would provide endless entertainement.