Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Bolt removed at Denison Crag on Ben Lomond 26-Jan-2010 At 12:19:52 AM freesolo

Message

right then, i will weigh in again.

regards the impact of a new'ish guidebook: this will lead to more climbers visiting the area, which of course will obviously lead to various tracks being 'established' as newbies stumble to the start of the boulder/scree field for the frews. ( i remember various 'half tracks' from the carpark at the scout hut to the proper boulder field, and then following the cairns to the base of the frews.) i would say, either tell everyone to follow the tourist track up for a ways, then cross back west when you are above the vegetation line, or establish, with cairns, one track from the carpark on a more direct line towards the frews.

now, with regard to the area as a whole: my guess is that at least 50% of new/visiting climbers will climb in the frews area, which means the erosion/track problems will not be as evident elsewhere. i personally found, at the top of the frews, numerous small tracks wandering everywhere. given an increase in climber numbers, this will only get worse. yes, it is possible to stay on rock for 90% of the walk over to the "gully", but, one day, in really bad weather, i just walked where i needed to, not where i should have. (i imagine this was not an isolated incident) I believe 3 rap stations along the top of the frews will, from a long term (20 year) perspective, preserve the beauty and vegetation to the extent that it will vastly outweigh the "no bolt ethic" that the locals in tassy are trying to enforce.

in addition, and more important, the "gully" will not become so eroded over time, such that it will be viewed/seen from a distance, detracting from the area. one may posit that the tourist track is unsightly, which it is, but there is bloody all we can do about that, other than, not duplicate that problem in the frews.

there will always be climber's tracks (anyone who has looked down from the top of tiger wall at araps should be seriously disturbed by the insane number of 'half tracks'), BUT, a small number of camoflauged rap stations will, over TIME, do more to preserve the 'ethic' of ben lomond, than a black or white, no bolt policy.

most climbing areas of the world i have been to have unique 'ethics'. in the US, there have been numerous 'bolt wars' at many crags. i think that a conflict between climbing viewpoints attracts the wrong sort of attention from the authorities, which in some cases in n.america, has resulted in climbing areas being closed because the Park authorities don' t want to get drawn into the 'bolt wars' and just screw all climbers on an equal opportunity basis. one of the reasons that the Rangers in yosemite have historically hated climbers is because climbing 'camps' have refused to solve their own issues.

just to put things in perspective, the ethics at yosemite EVOLVED into clean climbing after a decade plus of nailing. no one is suggesting that pitons be allowed at the ben (i cant think of a single micro moment when i thought of putting in a piton there-there are giga spots for cams/nuts), and 'discussing' natural preservation vs. climbing ethics at the ben will, hopefully, allow the EVOLUTION of a strong, protective (of the rock, the vege, and the ethics) policy that all climbers can endorse and abide by, locals and visitors alike.

i would never suggest or endorse changing a ROUTE that someone established, by bolting, chopping, glueing, chipping, etc......but some moderation, compromise, and long term vision will preserve the climbing AREA of Ben Lomond.