UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => chuffing => Topic started by: stone on March 25, 2024, 01:40:19 pm
-
For the first time in the over 20years since I've been sport climbing in the Peak, there don't seem to be any obvious long standing and grumbled about closed projects. So this offers a rare opportunity to reflect on closed project etiquette without it all being clouded by acrimony over actual cases.
I also think I'm ideally placed to bring this up since I'm so crap and slow that no one would ever worry that I'd steal a project; I don't do new routing myself and I climb both with prolific new routers and with people who grumble about closed projects (they are irrelevant to my climbing as I've got plenty else left to do). So this can be a pure, in-principle, type reflection.
My view (happy to be educated though), is that a sensible etiquette might be that there should be a time window of no more than a couple of years after which it would be poor form to keep a project closed. Perhaps even more poor form than stealing such a project if the developer didn't agree to open it after a couple of years.
My thinking is that it is wrong to keep a project closed in the hope that it will spur one on to get better at climbing or whatever. We have very limited rock in the UK. I massively appreciate the work and vision that has produced the routes I so enjoy trying in the Peak (thanks!). But, I don't think such gratitude should sway clear thinking on this. If someone has bolted/cleaned etc a line that is beyond them, then, if they are unhappy to have done it for someone else's first ascent, then that is a screw up of their own making IMO.
I think the French convention of the route being named by the equipper would make a good change to perhaps take the edge off such a two year time limit.
-
For the first time in the over 20years since I've been sport climbing in the Peak, there don't seem to be any obvious long standing and grumbled about closed projects. So this offers a rare opportunity to reflect on closed project etiquette without it all being clouded by acrimony over actual cases.
So you are automatically excluding the rest of the country then?
-
Sorry, I guess I didn't think it through properly. I suppose if you join in then people might think it is about a route where you climb etc.
Let's try and put aside specific examples/climbers and instead just think more in the abstract as to what would best serve the climbing community in the future.
-
I thought closed projects were'nt a thing in the UK?
-
I thought closed projects were'nt a thing in the UK?
There are old threads on here with bitter squabbles over whether or not decade-old closed UK projects need to be respected (sport routes).
-
If I was the first ascensionist of a boulder problem by way of closing it to others then the FA would feel very artificial.
I enjoy the satisfaction of doing a FA because it signifies being (1) lucky enough to find it, (2) bothered enough to prepare it, and (3) good enough to climb it before others do! Ticking all three provides the most satisfaction, so personally i'm not keen on nicking projects off others (unless long forgotten), but because of (3) I wouldn't want to prohibit others from nicking mine.
I tend to stack the deck against myself even further by shouting about how good my recent finds are :lol: Best man wins though init.
-
If I was the first ascensionist of a boulder problem by way of closing it to others then the FA would feel very artificial.
I enjoy the satisfaction of doing a FA because it signifies being (1) lucky enough to find it, (2) bothered enough to prepare it, and (3) good enough to climb it before others do! Ticking all three provides the most satisfaction, so personally i'm not keen on nicking projects off others (unless long forgotten), but because of (3) I wouldn't want to prohibit others from nicking mine.
I tend to stack the deck against myself even further by shouting about how good my recent finds are :lol: Best man wins though init.
Broadly agree with this, although I suppose there is a non trivial difference between boulders and routes, given that bolting costs effort and money. It seems sensible that someone going to the effort of drilling bolts should be given some amount of time to get the route ticked, rather than being fearful of others deliberately swooping in and nicking the FA.
Overall, the principle of effort invested to the benefit of others being proportional to time the project stays closed seems broadly fair. If someone spends ages cleaning, bolting, landscaping etc, they probably deserve a bit more time than someone who doesn't have to do any of that.
In that respect, I think you (Liam) would be within your right to ask people not to jump in and nick a first ascent if you've spent a while cleaning the holds and topout, building a landing, etc, when they will clearly benefit from your work. Although obviously if you aren't bothered, then no problem either!
-
I get the impression UK limestone sport routes typically involve plenty of arts-and-craft work, deciding which loose holds to jettison and which to brush off the woodlice from behind and glue back on. People with experience of this told me that in the wrong hands eg Harderobe could have been rubbish instead of the mega-popular instant classic it is.
I guess there isn't so much overlap between the people up for doing that route preparation and the people who might potentially nip in and flash them as soon as the glue had dried (or before). There are examples of routes being "stolen" on the 8mm cleaning bolts and loose holds before being sorted out by the route-preparer. That leaves things in limbo a bit.
-
Personally I think a bolter should be given a "reasonable" amount of time as a closed proj if they want it. What's reasonable is obviously a bit vague, but in this country I think it has to be vague - e.g. a hard two year rule wouldn't make sense for a route at the cornice if it was a bad 2 years and it didn't dry out!
One key thing is if they're actively trying the route too. If someone was 5 years deep on a big proj where they'd spent days cleaning, putting in nice glue-ins, gluing loose holds etc. and that was their all-consuming passion then I'd be less likely to whine about it being closed. If they bashed one 10 mm bolt in and didn't go back for 2 years then it should be open - no baggsying things for the future by popping one or two bolts in.
-
I suppose the archetypal examples have been where people have put quite a lot of work in, have tried it loads for a season or two and then have tried it less and less (or at all) with each passing year for many many years.
The problem with not having any sort of convention is that, in the absence of a convention, whoever calls it as being a lost cause is going to vilified (just look at old threads on here).
Are there great eg Cornice routes that wouldn't have been developed as nicely if there had been such a convention?
-
Luckily in the UK I think it's fairly rare - there are a couple of obvious examples of long-standing closed projects around, but really only one or two I can think of. Generally projects have been given away after a few years or even sooner. Personally beyond 3-5 years I think things should be open, though again it depends a bit on circumstances...
-
so personally i'm not keen on nicking projects off others
you could have fooled me ;)
Overall, the principle of effort invested to the benefit of others being proportional to time the project stays closed seems broadly fair. If someone spends ages cleaning, bolting, landscaping etc, they probably deserve a bit more time than someone who doesn't have to do any of that.
In that respect, I think you (Liam) would be within your right to ask people not to jump in and nick a first ascent if you've spent a while cleaning the holds and topout, building a landing, etc, when they will clearly benefit from your work. Although obviously if you aren't bothered, then no problem either!
+1
I've stumbled across a few boulders that have definitely been cleaned at some point, although I can't find any mention of them anywhere. One of them I found over a year ago and looks untouched since, so I think I might get stuck in now. The other two I only found recently, but they look like they haven't been touched in a couple of years, so I'm undecided whether I should have a bash or wait a bit. Obviously, these might have all been climbed already and I'm just being overly considerate for nothing.
-
so personally i'm not keen on nicking projects off others
you could have fooled me ;)
Fucker :lol:
I did say things that hadn't been abandoned for years! And Jon F built the landing anyway :tease:
But if you want a new project, I've cleaned up around 10 probable 8s in Yorkshire that I haven't gotten around to trying and I'm more than happy to share!
-
so personally i'm not keen on nicking projects off others
you could have fooled me ;)
Fucker :lol:
I did say things that hadn't been abandoned for years months! And Jon F built the landing anyway :tease:
Alas, you weren't aware of either of those things at the time. Anyway, this is precisely what stone was trying to avoid :oops:
I'll DM you about those potential eights as it might solve the mystery of
I've stumbled across a few boulders that have definitely been cleaned at some point, although I can't find any mention of them anywhere. One of them I found over a year ago and looks untouched since, so I think I might get stuck in now. The other two I only found recently, but they look like they haven't been touched in a couple of years, so I'm undecided whether I should have a bash or wait a bit. Obviously, these might have all been climbed already and I'm just being overly considerate for nothing.
-
Of course I was aware it hadn't been tried in years, I spent half a day clearing the top after I found it independently!
But yep, happy to help if I can.
-
Is this Triangulation?
I wasn't the first to spot the line. There were signs of it having been cleaned on a rope by others before me. I then trimmed some branches and did half a job digging a flat landing. Was happy to see Liam climb it. I probably wouldn't have got back to try in any time soon.
Likewise with the other one you might be meaning. It's already a noted project online, the landing work wasn't epic and it's too far away and too hard for me to do quickly. I.e. ticks all the boxes for being an open project. Though I didn't go out of my way to advertise it's existence/status for obvious reasons.
As I've said on previous threads, my view is that it's (as the thread title says) a matter of etiquette, there is no rule saying a person who preps a boulder has soul rights to try it. However, the more vision, effort, time and expense has gone into something the more grace should* I think be afforded the developer to have a go. Any longer than a year** seems like a bit of a pisstake to me though, especially if the line is obvious. A few dry days though isn't too much to ask though if it's been an epic effort, or a courtesy message to ask if it's okay.
*That's 'should' in the sense of being decent and considerate. It's like farting in a checkout queue - you aren't breaking any rules or laws but it's a pretty obnoxious thing to do and will rightly earn you some stern looks.
** Caveats may apply where something is devilishly hard to find in condition.
PS - Ben, if you read this, I should have been more gracious about that sitter proj on Sunday. Normally I'd like to think I'd be less proprietary about something like that. Was just frustrated and sick of being weak due to injured fingers.
-
I think the etiquette is different for boulders versus routes. Different again within routes, for sport versus trad. It would be a bit of a nonsense to try to suggest a cover-all etiquette for all of bouldering/sport routes/trad routes (I don't think anyone's trying to do that here, unless you are Stone?).
One of the biggest influences should be 'how many other routes/problems (or potential new routes/problems) exist at location x?'. And how many people are climbing at location x?
This massively influences the impact a closed project has on what a venue has to offer*.
Example A: closed bolted route project on a cliff with 100 other routes (and 100 other potential new routes remaining), where not many people climb.
Example B: closed bolted route project on a cliff with 10 other routes (and no other potential new routes left), where a lot of people climb.
Example C: closed boulder in example A.
Example D: closed boulder in example B.
I suppose a general rule of 1- 2 years makes it simple to understand. But doesn't take any account of circumstances. I think longer than this is definitely reasonable in example A, but probably not in example B.
*A classic case of this was the closed extension to Grand Canyon in Devil's Gorge - a popular venue, with only around 10 other decent routes to go at, and hardly any other new routes to do except Aly's link-ups and extensions (which are great btw).
** Trad: for some reason doesn't seem right to expect any closed projects because trad is supposed be pure and unmuddied by work to prepare it. Even if most of us know this is bullshit.
-
It's common to hear (especially on podcasts) the very best boulderers arguing that everything should be an open project. This strikes me as really not the egalitarian ideal it tends to get justified as. Obviously ~8C climbers would like all lines to be open projects, so they can swan around hoovering up everything in their wake, without ever having to waste training days going out looking and prepping new lines themselves. Why would they not think this is a fantastic idea?
In the long run there is an opportunity cost to spending lots of days looking and prepping, and a benefit to the climbing community. Arguing against the developer having some short grace period to try the project is pretty mercenary I think. It also leads to developers sitting for years on undocumented new venues, rather than sharing early.
I agree Pete re trad projects.
-
Yep totally. In some ways it operates as market of supply and demand. Where the route developers are suppliers and other climbers not involved in route development are the demand.
The incentives for suppliers are that they get to enjoy the reward (mostly in internal satisfaction) of getting an FA and seeing it enjoyed by others. Take away this reward too often and the motivation for developers to develop - as in actually do the donkey work usually required to make a good sport route, not just the climbing which we all know any wad can do easily - goes away. If enough developers think it isn't worth developing stuff that's hard (for them), then the wads would have to do the donkey work every time they wanted something hard to climb. Which most wads are, to put it undiplomatically, shit at and too lazy to do - or more diplomatically because of the opportunity cost of not climbing other cool stuff.
-
Why would they not think this is a fantastic idea?
Especially if they get a brucey bonus from their sponsors for a big number FA.
-
It's still rewarding to develop a project and not get the FA! I've been psyched to let others get FA's on things I've spent time and money developing. It's good to feel that my time and effort produced something that benefitted the local climbing community (more so than the actual FA in my mind).
-
Definitely agree. I get loads of satisfaction from this aspect. I'm involved in new routing not putting up new problems, so the details of development differ a bit, but yeah the the feeling of satisfaction of having created something of value that others enjoy is a big part of the attraction for me. I might be into double digits for the number of new routes I've bolted but suggested someone else (often Bobbins in the past) should do as it would either take me too long or I just wasn't that bothered.
However.. context matters. For me there are details which go into a mental melting pot to come up with an outlook on whether or not it seems reasonable to claim something 'closed' and for how long - such as: how hard something is relative to ability, how good it is, how much effort, time, money you've spent creating something, how popular the venue is, what else at the crag is there to climb or develop, who else is around.
-
I know someone who put a lot of effort into cleaning and bolting a thin and sustained limestone slab ( :sick: etc). Long by local standards, ~15+m, with stainless glue ins. Must have been a couple of days hard work to prep, and many more trying it. I think there may have been a finger injury and the clock ticked towards the 2 year grace period before someone else swept in who "felt it was about time someone actually climbed the thing".
Funny thing is, I doubt the guy would have ever even gone to that crag if my friend, and some others, hadn't re-bolted all the routes there.
He was pretty gutted and never went back to the crag as far as I know.
-
I'm getting the sense that people generally are saying for bolted routes a 2year grace period is a bit tight. Perhaps it would be more suitable to say that a developer ought to start thinking about opening a project after 2years and perhaps "society" ought not to vilify "route-stealers" after 5years?
I agree with Pete's point about the nuisance value of closed projects being greatly influenced by the number of other potential routes and existing routes already at a crag or nearby crags. I think though codes of etiquette only really work if they are relatively consistent so people remember them.
Pete's example of a closed project was a situation that I guess arose because the existing etiquette is that the bolter has a perpetual right to keep a sport project closed. That bumped up against the reality of the best route being left undone for a generation at a venue that was the local crag for lots of people and had few routes. Perhaps a 5year rule would have avoided that? Perhaps an ethos that it's best not to bolt stuff you don't envisage doing (or handing on) in a couple of years might have dissuaded the developer of that project from bolting it in the first place and that might have been best all round?
-
I'd say the time you spend preparing it X2 should be proper.
There's this guy around who's been up some lines in the mountain, had to aid some sections and claims it as a closed project because he want to free it. But hasn't done any effort in the last 2-3 years to return to the place (50 minutes drive). I don't think you can claim trad multipitch even if you brush some.
-
The keyword in the thread title is "etiquette."
As a developer and someone who enjoys resurrecting abandoned projects, the key is communication.
If someone wants to climb on my routes, I generally have a rule that they should climb on it with me. It helps both of us get the thing done. There have been multiple times when I've spent several seasons on something and haven't done it. During the process, the route was de facto closed. Afterward, it is softly 'open.' If some crusher wants to climb the route "because no one owns the rock" then the project is definitely closed. If you call and talk to me and enquire about it I will give you all the beta and blessings.
I take the same approach to abandoned routes at crags I frequent. Talk to the developer, see what was done on it, and see what work needs to be done. Ask if you can do work on the route if it is needed.
There is a certain amount of respect to be conveyed on both sides of the developing/climbing coin. I understand that there are people on both sides who are not amiable and are a PITA to deal with. I still will shoot them a text and let them know i plan to fix up/climb on their routes if it is ok. Sometimes it isnt, and thats ok too.
-
rjtrials, I think you have perfectly summed up what I also understood current UK sport route development etiquette to be. First off -massive thanks to you and all route developers -we wouldn't have sport routes without you!
I suppose the point I was trying to make was that there have been cases where I really don't think current etiquette has served the climbing community well at all. I was hoping that, if it was widely agreed that it wasn't fit-for-purpose, then a different etiquette might instead be adopted (as I described). My impression is that you consider the current etiquette is how things ought to be -that's a valid (and perhaps majority) opinion.
I suppose in my own mind, I view people who "steal" overly protracted closed projects more favourably than I do people who don't open them freely after they are several years old. But no one ought to mind what I think.
-
A consequence of some wad rocking up and dispatching a project quickly, abandoned or not is they often have very little interests in what happens afterwards. There are numerous examples of routes left in a poor and filthy state with loose or missing holds, rusty cleaning bolts and even missing hangers/bolts. If I were to give a project away it would ideally go to someone willing to take ownership and pride in what they are going to leave when done.
I struggle to think of many worthy candidates to share my secret projects with.
-
I suppose in my own mind, I view people who "steal" overly protracted closed projects more favourably than I do people who don't open them freely after they are several years old. But no one ought to mind what I think.
As mentioned above, the "stealer" often doesn't leave the route in an optimal state for repeaters.
As a direct response, how do you know if a project is defacto open or closed without directly talking to the person responsible for developing the climb ?
Are you relying on hearsay?
As an example, I was partly responsible for resurrecting a crag that had lain dormant since 2015. Most of the routes had anchors that needed attention, and the name plaques had all faded etc etc.
I reached out to one of the developers, he sent a pic of his hand drawn topo. I started a Google doc and invited the other two main developers to add the info they had. We put chains on some classics, I added / moves bolts etc etc .
It became a hopping zone this fall and not only were the people new to the zone psyched , the OG's were excited we were fulfilling the vision and making the crag better than they had left it.
Of course there were a couple undone routes and I was encouraged to finish them.
A wad was visiting one day, not falling on anything, and enquired if the projects were open or closed.
I told him I had talked to the bolters and had specific permission to do what needed to be done (I added anchors bolts, belay bolt, chains etc) and if he wanted to climb on the other projects he should do the same. Crestfallen he waited until I sent and then casually flashed the second ascent.
But seriously, how hard is it to just text someone and ask about a line? How lazy are you that you will whine about a 'closed' project yet won't pick up the phone let alone the drill, hammer , brushes etc.
Seriously you can GTFO with that attitude. I've had this conversation in person many times and I just tell the wads to bolt their own projects, tell them a half dozen options, then mention how being a repeater of routes add nothing to the community.
-
Seriously you can GTFO with that attitude. I've had this conversation in person many times and I just tell the wads to bolt their own projects, tell them a half dozen options, then mention how being a repeater of routes add nothing to the community.
Bloody hell.
Wads are welcome on the projects that I've opened and have been trying. I'd be psyched to see them done!
-
Have you bolted many lines Liam?
-
Have you bolted many lines Liam?
No, but if you're using that as a measure of time, work and expense put into developing rock then it's a poor one, so I fail to see the relevance.
-
I’m pretty sure Liam has spent more time developing that massive roof (see weeks) in hawkcliffe than most developers would do bolting 5 20m sport routes and yet he has been more than happy to give it away for others to do.
-
But seriously, how hard is it to just text someone and ask about a line? How lazy are you that you will whine about a 'closed' project yet won't pick up the phone let alone the drill, hammer , brushes etc.
Seriously you can GTFO with that attitude. I've had this conversation in person many times and I just tell the wads to bolt their own projects, tell them a half dozen options, then mention how being a repeater of routes add nothing to the community.
There is zero chance of me being a route stealer myself. I'm about as far from being a wad as is conceivable, and am comically slow at working through the plethora of suitable existing routes close to where I live. As such, I thought I was just the person to bring up the subject on behalf of the wider community because many people aren't in that circumstance.
In the UK, there have been a few cases where prime routes have been kept closed for decades by developers who weren't able to climb them. People who asked if they could be opened were told no. The developers hoped to improve their climbing ability and so in the future be able to climb them. That's the behaviour I was questioning.
-
I’m pretty sure Liam has spent more time developing that massive roof (see weeks) in hawkcliffe than most developers would do bolting 5 20m sport routes and yet he has been more than happy to give it away for others to do.
It's slightly different though, developing a bloc from which you do some, but not all, the first ascents (I assume - apologies to Liam if not) and developing a sport route that someone else does. I also think you are underestimating the time (and expense) it would take to develop 5 20m sport routes in many places in the UK. Personally I've cleaned up a few blocks (3 days in a boiler suit scrubbing the lower half of Sheep Buttress springs to mind) that I never considered having any closed projects on, but I would be narked if I equipped, glued, and cleaned a sport route in the Peak that someone nicked.
I do think context is very relevant though. Whacking a few bolts in a last great problem type route on perfect rock then bagsying it for several years is very different to cleaning and fixing up some slightly chossy, overgrown and ignored limestone route. Also bear in mind the degree of care some people take to make the routes good. KC in particular has converted some previously grim bits of rock into gems.
Then there's the practical aspect - many (most?) sport routes in the UK would probably not have been equipped if there was a real risk that the equipper wouldn't get to do the FA.
-
I also suppose it might be easier to figure out who's put bolts in the wall than to figure who brushes the boulder, as there's been so many crowds in the last 30 year. Or even to be sure that it was brushed at all. A lot of older groups had the attitude to not tell about ascents either..
-
What would Jibé or Patrick do? (from 4'01")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqdN4BeyATs&t=465s
I miss the skullduggery of climbing in the 80s! Mind you, I might think differently had I been on the receiving end. I had trad. routes I'd inspected/cleaned and envisioned with no fixed gear being climbed by others after adding pegs or bolts to take the sting out of them but that's a separate discussion.
-
It's slightly different though, developing a bloc from which you do some, but not all, the first ascents (I assume - apologies to Liam if not) and developing a sport route that someone else does. I also think you are underestimating the time (and expense) it would take to develop 5 20m sport routes in many places in the UK. Personally I've cleaned up a few blocks (3 days in a boiler suit scrubbing the lower half of Sheep Buttress springs to mind) that I never considered having any closed projects on, but I would be narked if I equipped, glued, and cleaned a sport route in the Peak that someone nicked.
I do think context is very relevant though. Whacking a few bolts in a last great problem type route on perfect rock then bagsying it for several years is very different to cleaning and fixing up some slightly chossy, overgrown and ignored limestone route. Also bear in mind the degree of care some people take to make the routes good. KC in particular has converted some previously grim bits of rock into gems.
Then there's the practical aspect - many (most?) sport routes in the UK would probably not have been equipped if there was a real risk that the equipper wouldn't get to do the FA.
On the boulder I'm most proud of opening, I managed to get 1 FA, but it wasn't the first line on the block and I advertised it to everyone before anything had been climbed. I just thought it would be more fun climbing on it with other strong climbers?
I don't think it's fair to say that either sport or bouldering development requires more or less work and expense. It obviously depends. Imagine a completely hypothetical scenario where to avoid doing anything illegal, local climbers seek and acquire the permission of a landowner to develop the best bouldering area possible. You could not only brush a few blocks, but break and shift hundreds of tonnes of rock that is blocking boulders with potential, craft perfect landings on steep hillsides, clear as much vegetation as needed, glue and stabilise holds, etc. of course, I would not recommend doing this without permission.
-
To take Smith Rock as an example, from the recent interview with Alan Watts on the Written in Stone podcast, Alan mentions that it took him 7 days of work to bolt and prepare To Bolt or Not to Be before ot was ready to be climbed. Jibe Tribout asked Alan permission to try it and this was given then Jibe sent it in 1986.
Alan was working on another 5.14 called Bad Man which was a mess and required a similar amount of cleaning of friable holds, gluing and bolting, hard manual labour. He had a specific conversation with Jibe about this and asked him to stay off it as he had fallen off the last move and wanted to get the FA as it meant a lot to him (his fingers were injured and he could only climb a few days per week). Jibe flew in and snagged the FA without consulting Alan which local climbers informed him about, saying it was a low act.
There is another climb in Aggro Gully called 'Scene of the Crime' which received a similar treatment by Jibe. Apparently his justification was that it would have been OK in France. Alan mentions that he was OK with Jibe doing Just Do It, which he had bolted in 89 and gave permission for Jibe to try.
The podcast is well worth a listen!
-
I don't think it's fair to say that either sport or bouldering development requires more or less work and expense.
Nah, this doesn't hold water. Developing is hard and time consuming work. Developing sport routes is always going to be, on average, more work than boulders. Yes there are plenty of routes where the crag is easy access and you can walk to the top drop a rope, and the rock's immaculate, and vertical or less than, and the bolts go in quickly because you can access the rock not be swinging 6 feet away from the rock, and the moves are obvious. But this is maybe 1% of the time. And yeah there are boulders miles from anywhere which are massive and have to have huge cleaning efforts and elaborate patios, but again in a minority.
To illustrate why routes are harder to develop than boulders you only need to look at why boulders traverses are easier to work the moves on than sport routes. The difference in effort and logistics of working out moves, which dictates where bolts need to go, should be obvious.
And something you can pop a ladder against or drop a 5m bit of rope down is in a completely different league of workload/time to a 20m long and overhanging new route - which just to access the face to touch the holds, let alone get purchase to create opposing force to be able to drill bolts into rock - requires you to aid bolt/aid on gear your way up or down the cliff. Then you have to work the moves on a rope and realise you've misplaced the bolts for clipping onsight. Total ballache but strangely addictive.
Showing a lack of experience of developing routes there sorry Liam.
-
Just to add, obviously, the dust from the drilling and the fumes from the glue are real killers too :tease:
-
W.a.C. :)
-
Exactly what Pete said. For context a short spot route with 8 bolts and a lower off might cost about £70 and that is with bolt fund discount so £100+ is not unusual. That's if you're using quality bolts of course.
-
Sorry Pete, but your lack of experience in moving hundreds of tonnes of rock is showing.
But I'll modify my position. Developing sport climbs usually takes more effort than developing boulders, but there are instances where this isn't true. My reasoning for posting in this thread was to argue that there isn't an agreed rule on the matter of closed projects. Some people put in a lot of work and close projects, others put in a lot of work and leave them open for everyone (this is my preference as a developer).
I saw 5 years mentioned somewhere in the thread. Surely that is a joke?
Edit - I misread. They thought 5 years was too long (thank god).
-
Of course there are instances, but as the saying goes, the exception proves the rule.
-
Good effort on all that work Liam, sounds like a mission!
-
One take home to me is that we really ought to big-up route/boulder developers a lot more. As Ru said, kc and a couple of others have crafted many gems and unearthed whole crags, not to mention the amazing rebolting/stabilisation work on pre-existing routes. I'm not sure whether many people climbing at the Tor now realise that pretty much all of the glue-ins were placed by kc. His glueing job on the jug at the start of Mecca was a nationally significant infrastructure project.
The thing is that many route developers don't seek "payment" for their efforts by way of permanently closing forlorn projects (eg I don't think eg kc ever has). Without even having the French convention of the developer naming a route, there is no other give-back from the community to developers. 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.
-
moving hundreds of tonnes of rock
Literally? :blink:
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?!
-
I saw 5 years mentioned somewhere in the thread. Surely that is a joke?
Edit - I misread. They thought 5 years was too long (thank god).
No I don't think everyone was saying 5 years was too long.
My impression was that I had lost this argument as in my plea for some (any) time limit seemed to have been counter to the still-prevailing view. I'd take a 5 year time limit as a sea-change in convention that would solve the issue that this thread was intended to address.
-
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, 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...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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 :ninja:
* <200kg
-
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?
-
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 :ninja:
* <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 :2thumbsup:
Still, if you're not moving hundreds of tonnes, are you even developing?? :-\
-
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.
-
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 :2thumbsup:
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.
-
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 :2thumbsup:
Still, if you're not moving hundreds of tonnes, are you even developing?? :-\
:lol:
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, 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.
-
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 :2thumbsup:
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 :whistle:
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.