[dave]

Firstly, of course people go looking for dangerous routes and moreover argue to keep them dangerous.

As far as I can see dangerous routes by and large get done despite of the danger not because of it, especially on grit. For example I didn't notice Parthian shot plummet in popularity once it became clear that the flake would hold a fall.

[Houdini]

An evening w/ Ray Kay would be enlightening. 

[Johnny Brown]

This is a tangent; danger is a part of climbing. On grit we've chosen a purist ethic with regards to gear, despite the attendant increased risk, hence danger is a greater component of the grit experience than on other rocks.

[dave]

yes it is a tangent, but my point was that I recon its pretty inaccurate to describe the grit ethic as "pushing the danger factor".

[Johnny Brown]

Semantics; danger may not be the driving force but refusal to compromise elsewhere makes it a defining component.

[Bonjoy]

So, alternatively, I will hopefully over the next week, get out midweek armed with a rope, grigri and an assortment of (non wire) brushes etc to give it a little clean and get it in fine fettle for a potential repeat......

Pick a wet day and bring a floor brush and a bucket of water, works a treat. The bucket of water bit is key, otherwise your brush will clog up in seconds and you'll just end up smearing the green around.

[dave]

Semantics; danger may not be the driving force but refusal to compromise elsewhere makes it a defining component.

I would say the difference between driving force and component (defining or otherwise) crucially significant. Its not just a choice of words meaning the same thing. Its the difference between "I climb grit because its dangerous" and "I climb grit and yes at times it can be potentially dangerous". Lets not pretend the two are the same.

[fatdoc]

I would consider Bonjoy's comments a reasonable stance.. that way we can consider each on case by case basis, whether it be a block, a tree growing in the way ( another thread of interest such as this in times gone by) or whatever...

[Joepicalli]

Semantics; danger may not be the driving force but refusal to compromise elsewhere makes it a defining component.

I would say the difference between driving force and component (defining or otherwise) crucially significant. Its not just a choice of words meaning the same thing. Its the difference between "I climb grit because its dangerous" and "I climb grit and yes at times it can be potentially dangerous". Lets not pretend the two are the same.

We are  here but as a last comment from me: the fact that it is sometimes dangerous, the fact that when it is it enhances the experience for me that I am handling it in a situation where blowing it would kill me is a part of its attraction for me. Knowingly placing my self in arbitrarily dangerous situations is an important component of climbing for me, and many climbers I know.

[Nigel]

On rational analysis I agree with Adam and Bonjoy so no need to rehash the argument. Also, from a purely personal point of view it seems instinctively wrong at that part of "The Queen Of Grit", whereas it felt instinctively fine at Rivelin Quarry.

I would be keen to try this with enough pads, I think this along with a good team spot/shove off the block is the answer.

[Johnny Brown]

Its the difference between "I climb grit because its dangerous" and "I climb grit and yes at times it can be potentially dangerous"

The difference is you are talking about yourself; we are talking about the genre. Regardless, as I said, this is a tangent and adding little to the debate.

Landscaping must be symapathetic to the location.

Long term this would be possible for Careless youth, but I don't think enough would be gained to justify the short-term damage.

[north_country_boy]

On rational analysis I agree with Adam and Bonjoy so no need to rehash the argument. Also, from a purely personal point of view it seems instinctively wrong at that part of "The Queen Of Grit", whereas it felt instinctively fine at Rivelin Quarry.

I think that draws a line under the original point of the thread. The thread was purely aimed at highlighting the issues regarding the moving of one specific block. 

I would be keen to try this with enough pads, I think this along with a good team spot/shove off the block is the answer.

Anyone free later in the week, thursday's forecast looks bon???? I Should be able to gather 6 mats+ and hopefully a few keen individuals...

[cofe]

Anyone free later in the week, thursday's forecast looks bon???? I Should be able to gather 6 mats+ and hopefully a few keen individuals...

i might join you and chuck a pad in, though i doubt i'll try it.

[dobbin]

My week plans are massively evolving at the moment, but I could be free - cant do wednesday I suppose?

[Bonjoy]

I'm free thurs and might be keen.

[Johnny Brown]

I'm keen. I daresay we could recruit Caff and the lancy one.

[north_country_boy]

Right. Provisionally, Varian, Caff, JB, Bonjoy, Cofe all keen.....

Nige? Dobbin? possibly?....

Should shape up to be plenty of willing victims and an abundance of foam! 

[Fiend]

Judging by the reactions to the original question I think the bouldering community pretty much has the right idea about what falls either side of the notional (random, self justifying) line.

And judging by the discussion and posting of this thread, this representation of the bouldering community is a pretty good place to hammer out the idea sensibly.

I think the general conclusion is "case by case" isn't it...

[AndyR]

You've also ignored the quarried/ natural point. Do you not consider that difference important? For me changing what was left by human hand carries less moral anguish than that left by nature.

Totally off-topic, but haven't large stretches of stanage been quarried previously? I seem to recall that it had one of the longest histories of quarrying, having been done from anglo-saxon times (i.e. 5th Century AD).
Not sure it changes your discussion on this particular problem, but just thought I'd point out your 'natural'/quarried distinction may not be watertight......

[dave]

Only a couple of bits. one where microbe is, the bay right of magnetic north. I'm sure some said marble wall possibly is a very old quarry.

[Johnny Brown]

but just thought I'd point out your 'natural'/quarried distinction may not be watertight......

Sure, there are shades of grey here as with everything. I'd say the more recent, the more relevant. Bits have been affected by man over the years, but Stanage generally, and certaily the area under discussion, is overwhelmingly natural geomorphology. I think most of the Stanage Millstones were produced from the boulders under the edge.

[AndyR]

but just thought I'd point out your 'natural'/quarried distinction may not be watertight......

Sure, there are shades of grey here as with everything. I'd say the more recent, the more relevant. Bits have been affected by man over the years, but Stanage generally, and certaily the area under discussion, is overwhelmingly natural geomorphology. I think most of the Stanage Millstones were produced from the boulders under the edge.

Fair enough - it's so long since I was there that I can't remember which bits are quarried and which aren't.

[Adam Lincoln]

Right. Provisionally, Varian, Caff, JB, Bonjoy, Cofe all keen.....

Nige? Dobbin? possibly?....

Should shape up to be plenty of willing victims and an abundance of foam! 

If its Thursday i could call in on my way to Font, and supply some pads. XXL Metolius and a mondo if someone wants to walk one of them up the hill.

[clm]

Semantics; danger may not be the driving force but refusal to compromise elsewhere makes it a defining component.

The landing under TAOWHW sounds like a compromise.

[clm]

If we are only going to use concrete,

Fucking great idea bonjoy but i dont reckon the peak park would allow it. Would cut down on erosion though.