[etjoset]

Has anyone reading this thread visited Eagle Tor since this access issue arose? If so, could you post a summary of your experience? Are there signs up saying 'No climbing'? Does the land owner make regular patrols? If an approach is made from the Cratcliffe side (as is now recommended on the BMC access database) then those keeping a low profile are unlikely to attract any attention.

[fatdoc]

i fully support the views of bonjoy.........

Temporary bans will become permament, history proves this.

Yet Sloper has valid concerns on the state of some bouldering venues. I am of the opinion the BMC is trying damn hard to help, the land erosion works elsewhere in the peak has been very successful. The implementation of such activities and land access agreements is the way forward.

Hopefully bouldering will not be the *new thing * in climbing for much longer - fashion will drag the crowds away....... i know i'm being more than slightly hopeful here, and i seriously doubt the peak in particular will ever regress into a situation where bouldering is a fringe activity done by the very few (it was good fun then though!)

[Rice Boy]

All good points. Having spoken briefly with the landowner I'd consider more dialogue the best move. It would be a shame to go this far but a consideration could be signs informing people of the situation and reiterating simple countryside codes. Seemed to have some success in places like Harrison Rocks down saaf.

[Jim]

do we know what the specific beef is with the landowners and why they want to try and ban climbing here. Also whats wrong with using the big obvious public footpath to access the venue?

[Rice Boy]

Big fat simplification here but I think they want their back garden back for the kids. Could be another more sensitive reason such as, people causing a rukus, litter etc. but that wasn't mentioned.

Hadn't a clue that B. South was an issue. Other than the fact there's always about 100 people climbing there.

[dave]

Places like cratcliffe, the bridies, eagle tor, burbage south boulders are getting completely ruined, a five year lay off with appropriate, skilled remedial work would not only address the damage to the rock but also help ease some of the access 'tensions'.

whilst at the same time it would grossly accelerate the damage to the non-banned crags. for a kickoff all the easy boulderers who would have lost burbage south and cratcliffe top would probably have to decend on the froggatt pinnacle boulders, burbage north or the roaches instead. you can say all you want about peopoe discovering new places, going to esoteric crags all you like, but it woulnd't happen in this case. all your beginners and punters are not going to walk 4 hours up bleaklow to do a few 4b problems on scrittley rock. Hopefully a more well-thought-out solution can be reached!

[Duma]

Hopefully bouldering will not be the *new thing * in climbing for much longer - fashion will drag the crowds away....... i know i'm being more than slightly hopeful here, and i seriously doubt the peak in particular will ever regress into a situation where bouldering is a fringe activity done by the very few (it was good fun then though!)

Whilst it'll never return to the fringe activity level, I do think that fashion is supporting numbers a lot currently, and think that when/if the tide turns to 'the next big thing' we'll see a significant drop off. I know that the peak does lend itself to bouldering, but the fact is that the easier a move is, the more important the setting of that move becomes to how enjoyable it is. Thus <5a routes are (often) better/more satisfying than <5a problems (obviously generalising here). Think what I'm trying to say is that as grades increase, so the ratio of good problems/good routes increases so that at the lower grades (where most operate) routes are a more attractive option.

Think I lost myself there... ???

[Sloper]

Of course if there's a 'collective agreement' not to climb at certain areas people will go elsewhere, however some areas are more prone to damage than others, eg cratcliffe / bridies etc.

x users at cratcliffe in the damp will cause a huge amount more damage than the same number of users at a different area in the damp (can't think of one off the top of my head, its been a long day).

The real question is do we accept that there's a problem with erosion and other problems associated with bouldering or not?  Personally I think you'd have to be a short sighted cyclops to think that bouldering, particularly over the last 10 years, has not had a massive and detrimental affect on grit and in particular certain areas.

If you do accept that there's a problem the next question is what to do about it? 

Rockfax et al need to sell guides and Prana et al need to sell over priced tat to image conscious muppets and given this we need to shift the 'image' of climbing from the media circus that is bouldering at the moment to something that engenders are more 'sustainable' ethos. 

The current 'image' of bouldering is sadly too often all about working (i.e.repeatedly falling off) a problem because it's been in a magazine / has a big number etc (and with it the attendant wire brushing / donkey lines / chipping and use of pof that this sadly often entails) and basically little else.

Personally I've given up on places like cratcliffe because it's all too hard, ahem totally trashed and I've no wish to climb there, but when you're 16 and don't know any different and are only concerned about ticking T crack or Jerry's traverse once the place is already fucked your motivation to behave ethically is inevitably going to be seriously diminished.

OK temporary bans are the thin end of the wedge, but give it another 10 years and some areas will be lost forever, not due to a bolshy landowner but because the rock is too fucked to be worth climbing on.  Anyone remember the little arete at cratcliffe upper boulders (used to be about font 6b+)?

[Jim]

sorry but I'm 28 and I'm still concerned with ticking t-crack.

[Pantontino]

It seems very unlikely that bouldering is going to fall out of fashion any time soon. A more likely scenario is that it will become even more popular. And there is little point in trying to apportion blame for its current popularity to a single publisher or clothing manufacturer. The list of people, companies and organisations implicated in this situation is long and varied (and yes, my name is on that list).

I think we all have a responsibility to minimise our own impact and to spread the good word about sustainable ways of climbing. This is a given, regardless of whether we accept that we would make it onto the aforementioned list or not.

As for the presence of bouldering in the media - I don't think it is over- represented at all. Pick up an average magazine and it is predominantly routes orientated. How many articles on UKC are about bouldering? Not many. Look at the film festivals, despite the ubiquity of homemade DIY bouldering films and the odd modern classic like Winter Sessions, the dominant themes are roped climbing, mountaineering and adventure. I'm not saying that it is not trendy these days, it certainly is compared to, say, the early 90s, but let's have some perspective.

I'm sceptical about the idea of discouraging people from trying hard problems (or problems that they find hard) as this is such a big part of what bouldering is. There is a view, bogus in my opinion, that seiging a problem is automatically associated with trashing the place. I think there are some real misconceptions about what actually causes erosion. For example I believe it is often the spotter stood just off the pad that is causing the damage. Or how about somebody wandering around doing a circuit (apparently 'treading lightly'), but not cleaning their feet properly before they step onto a problem.

We need more resin stabilisation of eroding holds where the patina has gone (and this only carried out by someone who knows what they are doing), and we need more protective work carried out on eroding landings. And I still think that temporary bans are only relevant if they are linked to some sort of repair work.

But most of all, we need more education, education, education...

[fatdoc]

thats the best post we have had on here so far this year.....

reasoned and open minded, with a true desire to keep our sport open and free...


thanks.

[Jacqusie]

I think that there are many issues that are facing the peak bouldering scene at the moment and as the BMC Peak rep I am finding them challenging as the lines are getting blurred between erosion - chipping - damage - access etc etc.

We have in our own minds action that needs to take place with these issues - (as per the stanage plantation project - )  and the access negotiations - which slowly we are addressing  - but there seems to be an overwhleming opinion that these issues & others are needing action soon.

Just to say that the BMC are very proactive in all the issues that have been raised on here  - but I'm but just one bloke in the east Peak - trying to work with the access team /  officers and although I have often wanted to quit after 2 years  - I'm fully passionate in trying to help the areas that are turning into ratshit  - see UKC for my thread about new chipping at cratcliffe...

What I propose maybe is that we have a few people that meet as a group  a la the US acces forum and along with the BMC start to try to address the issues - become a focus for people to send in issues of concerns / ideas to try to help  work with the full time access officers at the BMC and of course Henry Folkard - there maybe funding availible for any work needed and we can work towards solutions.

Its just an idea  - what do people think?

Cheers

Si

[dave]

amen to what pantwad said. most of the "damage" to problems at places like cratcliffe is centered round the easy "circuit" problems, (for example theres no damage to t-crack and jerry's, despite getting a tremendous amount of traffic, so all you 16 year olds can go nuts on them), and especially on holds that were once chipped. Virtually all the natural holds used on problems are fine. the natural rock at cratcliife will actually pollish with wear rather than crumble away if left to nature and non-chipping climbers. The cause of the erosion is that these holds were chipped in the first place, whever that was, many moons ago. They were thus destined to get ruined eventually, and need dealing with sooner or later. it doesn't matter when. Ok there are probably exceptions to this that i've not thought of, but it seesm the places that seem to get bandied around these discussions, like the kebs, cratcliffe/RHS and burbage south are also the crags which have a lot of unnatural holds. you can't blame this on the late 90s-00s bouldering culture or whatever, chris sharma didn't chip those holds, alan james didn't shoot .303 rounds at burbage boulders during the war. OK they may have increased the wear on them, but that seems academic to me, it only means we have got to deal with it now instead of our kids kids.

[Jacqusie]

thats all good Quincy - but what to do & how??

[dave]

have a whip round, buy a hundred weight of cement? fuck knows, I'm just thinking out loud. running it up the flagpole and seeing how many cliches spoil the broth.

[Jacqusie]

Glad you feel passionate about it all  - but its easy to say that something needs to be done about it - who does it at the end of the day??

I wish it was that simple that we all say things need to happen and someone else do it  - but its our problem and we need to come together some how and start to act - there is no Paul Daniels at Robin Hoods stride waving his wand  - although that would be entertaining with debbie in tow!?

 

[Bonjoy]

 That's true to a large extent dave but normal unchipped footholds do also wear down into scoops which look like worn out chipped holds. Take it from me, i've got an obssesive's photographic memory and have been bouldering in the peak for time. For example what was once a small natural foothold on the tricky slab left of Pockman at B South has eroded to a fair sized scoop and the small foothold I that was eroding away on Brad's Wall, neither were ever chipped or wire brushed.
 As for what to do about it. I agree with Simon's suggestion on UKC of filling in stuff like the chipping damage at Cratcliff top boulders. Also continued stabilisation of vulnerable looking holds. I think we can safely say now that substance X does a good job of holding smallish vulnerable holds together, doesn't have much visual impact and lasts a long time. Perhaps we should share the knowledge on it in a low key word of mouth way to people with their heads screwed on.
 BTW the slopey pocket on T-Crack is getting worn from people using it as a foothold to top out, everybody - PLEASE DON'T!!

[Jim]

what next? for starters:
fence off the really bad erosion around burbage bridge where people walk between north and west. there is a good road there that can be used instead. There seems to have been a lot of money wasted on new gates there which have done nothing to improve the area, infact have made it look worse with that metal monstrosity.
Put some hardcore down at burbage west.
Form a sort of hold/rock repair erosion committee

I would gladly help out with all of the above when I am over in the peak

[Idol eyes]

Its a very sorry situation, but one that has been on the horizion for a long time. Rowtor, the Druids own this area and have the right to restrict access to climbers, it is in its self a pub garden, and the previous land lord was keen to restrict climbers and climbing on the grounds that noise pollution and erosion were causing concerns, however it was the fact that the famous rocking stone was toppled by some kids that raised the issue. We are all responsible for our own actions, and must respect the wishes of the people that live in this area. It will resolve in time, given the fact we are only visitors, confronation must be avioded.

[fatdoc]

Yep.

well said.

[Jacqusie]

The Druid Inn owns Rowtor? Thats news to us - but if true then they don't really approve of climbers buying a pint - the barmaid had to ask the manager if she could serve us! (the red lion was shut!)

Seriously - if this is the case and people are being told to stay away - if there is more info - please forward it on!

Any feedback on the Peak bouldering group - as I & Bonjoy said - there maybe needs to be a small group that can work together with the BMC in sorting some of this mess out?!

Cheers

Si

[Idol eyes]

Yep, pretty sure this is the case, more to the point, the restriced access you have mentioned is upon the Cratcliffe entrance, this is rented by a friend of mine called Sarah. she is a rep for the National Trust and has rare breed cattle (two bulls) in the field, i named them Romulus & Remus, it must be her and her partners concerns that have raised the access issue. will tune info as it develops...
Any one aware that the correct name for this area is goats head moor, or something. eagle tor is down the road...

[Bonjoy]

 Goat Head Moor??? According to my research it's called Bradley Rocks by the villagers and before that was known as Bramber Mountain.

[Idol eyes]

look at the OS map,. think you are supporting the fact it is not Eagle tor though thong boy...

[Bonjoy]

Yeah. Like you say Eagle Tor is the rocks behind the house on the left turn to Birchover if approaching from the north.