UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => news => Topic started by: Nigel on May 18, 2004, 08:36:08 pm
-
I have just met the Chief Warden for the National Trust down at Woodwell car park. The National Trust are the owner of both Woodwells and have decided to deny access to Woodwell O'ert Road with immediate (well, backdated!) effect. This is due to to various factors which were explained to me, however myself and Greg will be meeting the top dog in a couple of days to try and negotiate access back.
So if you are reading and were planning to go, DON'T, please. Also please pass this information on to anyone it may concern.
-
ruddy hell, thats a bit shit!
-
You're not wrong! Almost certainly will never be the same again, lets just hope that we can sort something out, rather than nothing. :byebye: :crying:
-
Is the ban due to the activities of boulderers?
-
U might just have to throw your pride out the window and get on one knee and beg :wink: :blowjob:
-
Well partly Bubba, yes. The reasons I was given were many, but it goes like this;
The BMC (Les Ainsworth) have recently approached the NT to enquire about access (not sure why?). They were refused by the Chief Warden. Helpfully ( :? ) they mentioned that people already climbed there and had featured in a magazine article (Angel Deelite thing, latest OTE). This prompted the main man to go down there and have a look about, talk to neighbouring residents/farmers etc. All this bit seemed fine (I have talked to the old lady who lives nearby and she was OK with it after a bit of discussion, farmer doesn't mind), except that he was concerned about the obvious destruction of plant life on one buttress of rock beyond the main area. I was obliged to point out to him that it was Dave Cronshaw (Ainsworth's right hand man) who did this, I saw him with my own eyes on an ab rope hacking away with gay abandon. What kind of example is this to younger climbers! And before you think that we deserve it because we're dirty trespassers, Greg DID secure access years ago with the NT prior to releasing ANY material (initially topos) publically. Unfortunately this seems to have been on a blase basis as far as the NT were concerned, no consultation taking place.
In summary, the NT are worried that the lack of boundaries between the crag and neighbouring properties, plus the destructive abilities of boulderers on wildlife will become a serious problem for them soon, due to the perceived threat of vastly increased numbers of visitors caused by magazine publicity. The easiest way for them to deal with it is to deny access. Thankfully the Big Kahuna is willing to try and find a compromise although it seems like this will certainly involve some kind of restrictions. Hopefully we can sort something out.
-
Hmmm....tricky one.
I guess in retrospect the mag article wasn't a great idea. I've never been to the place, but I get the impression it's quite a small venue? Is it the sort of place that will ever get overrun with boulderers - perhaps the NT are overreacting with a blanket ban?
It sounds like the landowner is cool with it so that's half the battle won, perhaps some sort of agreement can be made with the NT regarding the maximum number of people present at a time and that no more vegetation is removed, or something along those lines? Are the BMC going to negotiate further or are they writing it off as a lost cause?
-
I bet its really cos they notice Cofe broke a hold.
Hope it all gets cleard up.
-
Well, maybe the BMC can help, but they've been quite a successful hindrance so far so we'll leave it to a last resort! It is quite a small place but it would never become overrun simply because it is too out of the way. I've been there loads and have only ever met one other party there. However the magazine article is only going to increase numbers so yes in retrospect it was a bad idea.
You're right about the restricted numbers idea, this is something we will propose. If needs be I'll volunteer for the NT and undertake any work they would require to keep it open!
-
Maybe they didn't appreciate the throng that gatherered on Saturday, accompanied by the soothing sounds of the hunting horn... :wink:
-
good job we didn't take the crag blaster n'all!
this is shit though.
-
More to the point, just as well we did'nt take Barson.
-
More to the point, just as well we did'nt take Barson.
no his day was spent offending ramblers on pavey.
-
I bet its really cos they notice Cofe broke a hold.
Hope it all gets cleard up.
Thats cos hes a fat chuffer.
-
More to the point, just as well we did'nt take Barson.
no his day was spent offending ramblers on pavey.
probably sounded something like:
"i'm going to fucking bum you" - not what ramblers want to here really, or anyone for that matter,
mind your bums......blah blah
-
bumfucking? is si o connor involved?
-
this is most definatly SHIT. but i must admit that we just got back from there (hadnt seen this), there was quite a few people there.
-
I feel I must point out that I DID sort access originally, by speaking to the farmer (who runs the land) and the NT (who own the land). I was basically told that as long as no walls, paths or vegitation was damaged and the farmer had no reservations (which he didn't) with it then there would be no problems.
I therefore think everyone banging there drum about perhaps the mag articles should not have appeared is complete shite, its not like we thought there was anything to worry about or we were doing something that could be perseved as "sneaky". What the fuck more could I have done, access wise!! :?
Just had a similar thing with some boulders in Kentmere. I had asked the farmer - mainly out of courtesy, as the boulders are not on his land - who agreed begrugingly and has since retracted his views. To be honest I'm getting the point were I'm not going to bother asking anyone in future, and as for the BMC... waste of space!
-
I therefore think everyone banging there drum about perhaps the mag articles should not have appeared is complete shite
No offense meant Greg, I was just thinking aloud and was just going on what the warden had said.
-
I think what Bubba meant was that with hindsight it was a bad idea, although obviously before it came out we were psyched for more people to go there!
-
You're right Nigel, I wasn't trying to say the article shouldn't have been done in the first place - none of us have a crystal ball to see these problems coming.
I've had the same problem on this site with Bathford. Access was ok initially but then suddenly the landowner got cold feet and asked the article on here to be withdrawn, etc, etc.
-
The BMC are a bunch of gay boys!! if the locals are happy with us there then there shouldn't be a prob cos there isn't even and vegatation under the problems anyway! You will have to beg if thats what it takes nigal cos next time i go there i will definatly bag hybrid moments!