Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Bolt removed at Denison Crag on Ben Lomond


Phil Box

25-Jan-2010
5:09:06 PM

If it is going to be a track then it should be a well defined track and not numerous stumbling around the bush type multiplicity of tracks. I like that the base track from the scree/boulder field at the base of Frews/Robins is becoming well defined. This will preclude people from stumbling around and generally smashing up the rest of the Japanese bonsai garden around the base.

The top can also be accessed via the tourist track and then a walk along mostly rock away from the edge on the glacier scoured plateau. The problem comes when one wishes to access the bottom from the top and it seems that Crazy John has offered a simple fix for this i/e leave a fixed rope for the day.

Want to do one route accessed from the bottom, then it becomes a little more problematic. The descent gully/s have to then be accessed for the walk down. From my experience there seems others have been doing a lot of stumbling around ill defined paths smashing up the vegetation all over that picture perfect bonsai garden.

So even with CJ's fix it still will not stop the uninitiated from causing continuing carnage.


freesolo

26-Jan-2010
12:19:52 AM

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.


Phil Box

26-Jan-2010
6:21:38 PM

Point of order freesolo. You say locals, plural, are behind the no bolt ethic enforcement. Ahem, that should be singular. One person took it upon himself to chop the existing rap station against all others advice. Not wanting to be anal or anything just wanting to keep the historical record straight.


freesolo

26-Jan-2010
10:57:19 PM

yeah, i know. i was trying to be diplomatic in hopes of fostering dialogue instead of tyranny.

kieranl

27-Jan-2010
10:38:00 PM

On 26/01/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>Point of order freesolo. You say locals, plural, are behind the no bolt
>ethic enforcement. Ahem, that should be singular. One person took it upon
>himself to chop the existing rap station against all others advice. Not
>wanting to be anal or anything just wanting to keep the historical record
>straight.
Similar to the Toadwand situation then?


Phil Box

28-Jan-2010
6:45:04 AM

On 27/01/2010 kieranl wrote:
>On 26/01/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>>Point of order freesolo. You say locals, plural, are behind the no bolt
>>ethic enforcement. Ahem, that should be singular. One person took it
>upon
>>himself to chop the existing rap station against all others advice. Not
>>wanting to be anal or anything just wanting to keep the historical record
>>straight.
>Similar to the Toadwand situation then?

Dunno what the Toadwand thing is about.


Phil Box

28-Jan-2010
6:48:57 AM

On 26/01/2010 freesolo wrote:
>yeah, i know. i was trying to be diplomatic in hopes of fostering dialogue
>instead of tyranny.

Even being diplomatic one cannot ever hope to reason with an extremist fanatic. Sorry, I have tried in the past to be diplomatic in the past and I believe that it is better to simply call a spade a shovel. I don't think that is fostering tyranny but rather fighting tyranny. Nice of you to try to be diplomatic though, in the normal course of business this is always the way to go.

kieranl

28-Jan-2010
9:54:22 PM

On 28/01/2010 Phil Box wrote:

>Dunno what the Toadwand thing is about.
Sorry, obscure ancient reference from Thrutch.
I heard that, similar to the Ben, Frog also has a person who chops bolted rap stations

rightarmbad

29-Jan-2010
1:47:06 AM

Well he better get his choppers out cause they're popping up everywhere at Frog just lately.


ajfclark

29-Jan-2010
10:23:51 AM

On 28/01/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>it is better to simply call a spade a shovel.

But spades and shovels are two different things for two different jobs.


Phil Box

29-Jan-2010
5:58:18 PM

On 29/01/2010 ajfclark wrote:
>On 28/01/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>>it is better to simply call a spade a shovel.
>
>But spades and shovels are two different things for two different jobs.

I dunno about that, ya can use them both for digging yerself outta the proverbial.


ajfclark

29-Jan-2010
6:11:42 PM

A shovel is more like a spoon and better for moving loose material. A spade is for digging. So depending on the qualities of the proverbial we're dealing with and the relative depth, a spade or a shovel might be more appropriate for the task.


wallwombat

29-Jan-2010
7:14:22 PM

On 29/01/2010 ajfclark wrote:
>A shovel is more like a spoon and better for moving loose material. A
>spade is for digging. So depending on the qualities of the proverbial
>we're dealing with and the relative depth, a spade or a shovel might be
>more appropriate for the task.

Might I suggest....


Phil Box

30-Jan-2010
7:42:34 AM

On 29/01/2010 wallwombat wrote:
>On 29/01/2010 ajfclark wrote:
>>A shovel is more like a spoon and better for moving loose material.
>A
>>spade is for digging. So depending on the qualities of the proverbial
>>we're dealing with and the relative depth, a spade or a shovel might
>be
>>more appropriate for the task.
>
>Might I suggest....
>
>

Hey hey, no we are talking, that is what I need for the amount of the proverbial I constantly find myself immersed in up to my elbows.

tastybigmac

30-Jan-2010
10:18:42 AM

for the amount of crap on here i suggest something more like this:


Phil Box

30-Jan-2010
5:44:30 PM

On 30/01/2010 tastybigmac wrote:
>for the amount of crap on here i suggest something more like this:
>
>

Bwahahahaha, of course, what was I thinking. Gold trophy for this post.


freesolo

30-Jan-2010
8:01:54 PM

hey wasn't this thing at ben the other day when gerry was chopping that bolt??? seems a bit over the top.

ionlyski

8-Dec-2018
1:52:45 AM

Ah hell I'll resurrect this old dinosaur, from over in theU. States. How ya all doing? Can't wait to visit again, the best trip I ever had in 2008. I have to say Crazy John's post here nails it for me. Having visited crags all over the world, NOTHING made an impression on me like my time spent at Ben Lomond. Do you know there is no other place to compare that has remained bolt free? Why can't we keep just ONE crag area without any hardware?

I do notice this thread is 8 years old now. What has happened since then?

Cheers mates!
Arne

rightarmbad

8-Dec-2018
4:59:26 PM

We have all stopped arguing about bolts and are now putting considerable energy into renaming climbs to prevent physical and mental damage to those that are most vulnerable.......

There are 59 messages in this topic.