Andi Turnet adds new Churner E7 (Read 66613 times)

Adam Lincoln · September 12, 2008, 09:32:10 pm

Keith on Cornilius

Fiend · September 12, 2008, 10:15:24 pm

Nice photo, Adam Lincoln Photography.

Unc really does bust out some good threads when needed...

Jim · September 12, 2008, 11:01:28 pm

this is definately a route not a highball IMHO

a dense loner · September 13, 2008, 12:53:40 am

it's ok jim anyone with eyeballs can see that

highball v7, maybe it is but what thats got to do with anything i don't know

Bonjoy · September 13, 2008, 10:41:44 am

Great highball spoilled by the remains of a dead tree? You know what I'd do

robertostallioni · September 13, 2008, 10:55:10 am

Cut the stump out, insert a beautiful hand formed sika replacement and then have an internet debate?

mini · September 13, 2008, 11:02:13 am

Quote from: Bonjoy on September 13, 2008, 10:41:44 am

Great highball spoilled by the remains of a dead tree? You know what I'd do

The tree aint completely dead. When me and Andi were cleaning and working the line we had the discussion as to what to do about it, and decided that with pads and spotters it shouldn't be too much of an issue.

I am yet to see what 'pruning' Rob did before his asent, but there's life in the old stump still!

Jim · September 13, 2008, 11:22:09 am

no theres not. removing it can only be a good thing

Johnny Brown · September 13, 2008, 11:33:42 am

Keith and I did discuss this, having been there initially we were in favour of removal - though it'd be a big job - 18" thick trunk would require a chainsaw and a lot of digging it out to do properly.

However having read this thread it seems the FA and the locals would prefer to keep the tree. In the light of that I felt removing it would be likely to rather muddy the nature of any ethical/style statement made by ground-upping the line.

Having said that the tree has been chopped down to a stump already, if climbers did this it strikes me as a job done badly rather than an attempt to give it a fighting chance.

From the same thread:

Quote from: AndiT

The route to the right up the centre of the wall is Thumbelina (crux on a thumb sprag and at Ina's), Cornelius was Thumbelina's bit on the side ;o)

Where was the thumb sprag Andi?

Jim · September 13, 2008, 01:50:49 pm

It wouldn't need a lot of work, just a sharp chainsaw accross the bottom to level it. Its already been chopped once for some reason rather badly so why not trim it a little more?
Doing this will cause 2 things: the route will be very slightly less scary and your less likely to do yourself a very serious injury falling off above it.

highball E8's, whatever next

Adam Lincoln · September 13, 2008, 06:45:44 pm

Ned flashing Thumbalina

AndiT · September 13, 2008, 07:41:33 pm

The tree is alive, it was there on the first ascent, it stays. Flat landings are for climbing walls. Bring ten pads along instead by all means, but don't bring it down to your level any other way. Let's not go down this path again

andy popp · September 13, 2008, 07:56:26 pm

Quote from: Adam Lincoln on September 13, 2008, 06:45:44 pm

Ned flashing Thumbalina

That's a fucking great shot Adam. Doesn't look like the Ina's I remember but love it anyway.

AndiT · September 13, 2008, 09:41:35 pm

that's a mint picture.

Johnny Brown · September 13, 2008, 11:54:36 pm

Quote

The tree is alive, it was there on the first ascent, it stays. Flat landings are for climbing walls. Bring ten pads along instead by all means, but don't bring it down to your level any other way. Let's not go down this path again

So who chopped it originally? And who did the massive pruning job for Mirf's ascent? Why?

mini · September 14, 2008, 09:04:34 am

To quote Mirf's post on UKC

"The tree stump did get a trim, But I was very careful to only take off the rotten part that seemed to be falling apart anyway .I showed my friends and asked a couple of gardening experts their opinion, they thought the tree would probably stand more chance of survival without the rotten bit on top as this meant that the new growth could go straight up in place of the old stump. I hope the tree keeps going it's now about 14 inches high and still alive."

AndiT · September 14, 2008, 09:09:49 am

Don't know, don't know, don't know.

I'd take it personally if someone removed the stump. The predominant reason Martin Dearden and myself didn't make the first ascents of this line were because of that stump, as you've already stated it's be a pretty mixed ethical statement to pull up a tree to make a ground up ascent.

It would be easier without the stump, but I remember hearing once from an experienced trad climber that "climbing is about challenges", right?

However, I also believe that this is just a bit of UKB baiting.

Johnny Brown · September 14, 2008, 10:41:54 am

I find Mirf's statement on UKC absolutely baffling. Having visited last year, and seen a small tree, and then this year and seen a 2ft high stump, its very hard to square Mirf's supposed caring approach with the reality. Andi, have you been up since Mirf's ascent?

The facts are, a few years ago there was a sizable tree here. Someone cut it down to a 3-4ft high stump, it then recovered for a few years, growing the branches visible in my photo of Andi. Since then someone, presumably Mirf, lopped all the new growth and more of the trunk off to leave a very small stump. I think its likely climbers were responsible for both, and likely locals.

I can't believe this was done in a spirit of helping the tree recover as Mirf states. What I can't understand is why someone who is prepared to chop a tree like this wasn't prepared to go the whole hog. Laziness possibly, or having a straw to grasp at when accused of killing a tree?

There is no baiting going on here Andi, unless its you trying to paint us as the outsiders coming in to trash your venues as we like. Remember none of us have done any chopping, and when it was suggested we've sought more info and local opinions, which is more than previous climbers here did.

My personal feeling is that had there been the original tree there or even the tree as it was last year, I wouldn't dream of touching it. However seeing the pathetic stump that remains it seems the decision has already been taken, and 99% executed. The fact the stump still shows signs of life is a miracle to be honest.

Houdini · September 14, 2008, 10:47:30 am

This and the Mecca thread are absolute howlers.

AndiT · September 14, 2008, 03:34:45 pm

Cheers Adam, it makes me feel happier hearing your response.

In response to your question, no I've not been up since the first ascent, not been able to face it really! It does point out that the stump/tree/thing has a sizeable affect on the route, it shouldn't, it should be taken as part of it in my opinion.

Completely agree that it would be a more enjoyable experience without the stump, but that doesn't mean it should go.

Anyway, it's still a great route and that should be the focus of anyones visit to the venue

Johnny Brown · September 14, 2008, 04:50:42 pm

It might be worth taking Reg and Pixie out that way one evening... I think you'll be suprised how far the 'trim' has extended! I agree with you in principle, but the deed is pretty much done.

Houdini · September 14, 2008, 06:30:24 pm

Fuck the stump.

AndiT · September 14, 2008, 06:34:20 pm

Quote from: Houdini on September 14, 2008, 06:30:24 pm

Fuck the stump.

You could do if you fell on it.

Adam, I will do, I'm intrigued now...

Jim · September 14, 2008, 06:56:13 pm

That stump is part of an ex-tree. it never will be a tree again.

AndiT · September 14, 2008, 07:57:28 pm

I don't want this to be another Patio thread, I think it's maybe going that way. The route is probably E8 at the moment, with lots of pads, spotters and no tree, it's maybe not, maybe is. The only reason for removing the tree is to make the route easier, which avoids part of the challenge and once it's gone, it's gone.

Last time I saw it, it would be a tree again, this could have now changed. That would be a shame.