I started the previous thread on another channel. After trying a route last year , I came again for the first time this year only to find the same fixed setup had been almost completely removed. There had a been a fixed static up the back of the crag up the line of the HS (this was chopped half way - I couldn’t understand why the person who took everything out had not removed it completely?)
On the day this meant I didn’t have enough time/the correct equipment to rig the route in order to be able to try it. I suppose it was presumptuous of me to assume it would be in situ but I was a bit annoyed after the wasted journey.
I can see plenty of people take the ethical view of wanting to keep things pure and adventurous.
I also agree it is important to respect access agreements. It’s difficult to complain when I have never made effort to be involved in the access involved, but it would be good if it was more pragmatic.
I personally enjoyed the convenience of it all but am happy to admit that was from a purely selfishly motivated perspective. I was also grateful for the convenience of all the roads carved through nice fields which I drove along to get there, the nice path I walked along and the helpful bridge I used to cross the stream.
I haven’t been back since . I can’t make my mind up if the route is personally worth the faff involved to be able to rig it up to be able to work it first from above. The belays on top are pretty shit and the e1 we did to get to the top was shit and quite dodgy rock.
Out of interest, do the BMC area meetings get a good turnout to discuss matters like this?
In response to the initial questions:
Is this simply too much to ask of an prospective H7 or H9 leader? For me personally, yes, the alternative routes to the top are crap and the belays are shit and dangerous in my opinion and would probably out weigh the worth of the routes for me.
Do such climbers think their convenience is more important than jeopardising access relations here? No, I think access agreements are important. It would be good to be part of the debates for the access to get a more pragmatic approach. (There are sports climbs very close, and even other bolts on the same bit of wall)
Does climbing hard entitle you to ignore access agreements? Not sure what level is defined as hard climbing , but anyway, I don’t think ability should necessarily provide any entitlement.
Recent Posts