Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

The Irish Solution to The Ben Lomond Problem 6-Oct-2017 At 9:02:03 PM IdratherbeclimbingM9

Message

On 13-Sep-2017 Wendy wrote:
>(snip)
>The tatt all over Ben Lomond is crap. the chain solution is still a ridiculous
>compromise. Just because it is theoretically removable doesn't mean that
>it's not still way more visual than a bolted anchor, it can't be placed
>in the most appropriate place for the job and in effect, it is going to
>just stay there in the same way a bolted anchor would.
>
>(snip)
>I could probably annoy a lot of people with explaining why I don't take
>a lot of English crags and ethics as an example. I don't think the rusty
>star pickets that serve as anchors at Pembroke are any improvement on a
>bolted anchor. They are ugly and crappy. But really, "tradition" has a
>lot of fixed gear and aiding. Have a read of Vanessa's article in VL about
>what "traditional" ascents left all over Ball's Pyramid. And if you are
>so keen on the adventure, doesn't having the escape route of a fixed line
>ruin that? Hell, I would prussic up the last pitch rather than climb that
>weetbix. Is it not visually invasive to have a fixed line running down
>the cliff as well?
>
>Ben Lomond is hardly a last bastion of bolt free rock. Most of the rock
>around the country is in fact bolt free. You can go and have the full experience
>of adventure climbing on all sorts of little or untrafficed rock. Being
>a national park also has no relevance to provision of sensible anchors.
>National parks around the country are full of bolts. Climbing always has
>an impact on the environment and no crag is pristine, especially once information
>about it is in the public domain. You say no one is complaining about
>not having anchors. Well, they are by their actions. That's why the cliff
>is covered in tatt.
>
>I am all for a couple of sensibly located bolt anchors. Slippery slopes
>are logical fallacies. You can use them to argue against anything. In actual
>fact, we set boundaries that prevent slides down slippery slopes all the
>time. Same sex marriage does not lead to child marriage because we can
>acknowledge that child marriage is a different and unacceptable issue.
>These arguments are just fear mongering.
>
I've been following this thread with interest.
I support Gerry inasmuch as I like the idea he is putting forward and the reasons for it, implied or otherwise!

I suspect that you are having a bet both ways Wendy including a little fear mongering as slippery slopes are real(!), and uwhp510 has called you out on it.

As for your Balls Pyramid example, all that I read in VL was; (to quote Vanessa);

On our climb the relics of previous climbers were apparent, with rusting
bolts, friable manila rope reclaimed by vegetation, and the odd disintegrating piton and even a wooden peg. Thankfully technology has improved. We removed what we could and climbed clean.

... This statement epitomises the ideal we should be aiming at, not only for Ben Lomond but also for Australian climbing in general.

I remove tatt when I find it as it's fairly easy to do, and on the few instances that I have ever left it, hope that others have done the same with mine.

I'd sooner go ground up as that method of approach for the cliff also has its own adventure, and then walk off after the climb, rather than lug a long static up there.