TALKING POINT

The State of Scottish Climbing Part2:
Your Comments

Introduced by Kevin Howett

Last issue we introduced a series of revised guidelines drafted by members of the MCofS Sports Development Committee following a previous consultation through the magazine and a debate at the Ice Factor. These guidelines are for climbers to comment on. They update previous guidance on good practice in winter and summer and, probably most controversially, attempt to take a new look at the issue of bolting in light of the actions on the ground and a resurgence of activity since the ‘Bolts Policy’ was agreed in 1990. Leading activist’s views were also put forward to help give an indication of their range of views.

This was never going to be an easy task, with so many disparate opinions, but it was felt that if there was a clear consensus or a compromise that could be reached, then at least a set of principles that had an authority from climbers themselves could help guide the future development of the sport, without leading to acrimony from either ‘side’ of the debate (or a repeat of the ‘bolt war’ of the late 1980’s). This is particularly relevant to the issue of the use of bolts in winter, and this has been brought into stark reality by the placing of bolts on Beinn Udlaidh this winter by Scott Muir to produce winter dry-tooling lines in the lower grades.

ukclimbing and scottishclimbs website forums contain discussions about the debate, and particularly on this latter action by Muir, which many decry. Our own website contains comments specifically on the drafted guidance, an edited selection of which are reproduced below to give a flavour of how the debate is proceeding.

It is intended to attempt to find a solution in light of comments and publish a second draft version in the June issue of Scottish Mountaineer (if that proves possible!). There will also be a further chance to discuss the issues at our AGM at Glenmore Lodge in June.

We would urge all members to make their views known, and if possible to give comments on specific aspects of the guidance – how could it be bettered? And remember, its not legislation and no one can police it except individual climbers themselves, but at least it might help people understand what Scottish climbing is all about for the majority.

The Debate so Far ………………………………….

Hamish Black:
No bolts in the mountains, summer or winter. Where will the on-sight new routes of the future come from if they are all head pointed today? If a snowed-up rock route isn't possible when plastered then maybe that's not really a problem. Why does a route have to be possible? Just changing the rules to make it possible doesn't seem all that sporting. I fully expect any guidelines to be ignored by those that want to!

Donald Morris:
Overall, I'm against the use of bolts in winter in Scotland.I have some sympathy with the view that overall climbing in this country will not progress (whatever that is) to the same extent as on the continent should we choose not to use bolts. What advantages would their use bring to the general climber in Scotland?I do not doubt that use of bolts would produce a rise in standards in purely grade terms but I do doubt whether the effect on Scottish Winter Climbing of this approach is desirable.Why is it important that Scotland has routes of a similar difficulty to France or the USA?Well undoubtedly yes if you make [your] living from sponsorship, but to me it is not important.Does my opinion matter? It is just as important as any other one individual regardless of who they may be or how well they climb.
What is important is the views of the majority of mountaineers. It is the MCofS's task to represent these views. I see no desire in the general climbing public for the use of bolts in winter.Until that opinion changes the MCofS should continue with the status quo. On a more general point, Scotland is fortunate to have many "wild" areas and cliffs.How the bolting of these fits in with the Wild Land Policy I do not know.

Gordon Lennox:
I'm not too sure about "the feel of the crag" defining whether or not it should be bolted. This is far too open to interpretation and essentially gives no guidance at all. I prefer the SMC's [?] bolting policy, which disagrees with bolting simply where traditional gearplacements are available.

I also strongly disagree with the statement that in quarries, anything goes.It is very irresponsible of the MCofS to publish such a statement. Would this apply to the Pass of Ballater, or North Aberdeen sea cliffs which are largely quarried? Some people might take this to mean they can chip holds, bolt crack lines and retro bolt in quarries, which is not acceptable.

A statement should be added to request consultation with local climbers before routes are bolted. Perhaps this could be carried out through the MCofS? I think we have an excellent balance between sport and trad climbing in Scotland, but I agree we do perhaps need guidance to preserve this balance for the future and to guide young climbers who have perhaps only ever climbed indoors.

Tony:
I have been away from the sport since about '92. I cannot believe that we are having this discussion.I believe it is the thin edge of the wedge and it is only a matter of time before the last bastion of real adventure in this country is reduced to the lowest common denominator. Courage is required for winter routes, or rather it used to be.

Kev Shattock:
An excellent article that highlights an issue (sport in its own right) that needs to be discussed. The sport of dry tooling in my opinion is one of the most exciting, thrilling, physically and mentally demanding of the climbing sphere.We NEED to encourage this sport responsibly.It has a right to be practised and discussed openly.Embrace the future.

Andy Cloquet:
My main concern is that these guidelines are not really needed by the majority of climbers who love the sport, respect its history and understand it's limitations and possibilities in the Scottish context. The guidelines are, in effect, intended for those pitiful glory-seekers and wannabes who don't accept their responsibilities as climbers and think they can import other countries ethics, interfere with established & unwritten 'rules' simply to achieve their moment of self-lit stardom: and they're going to be the last people to read and the least bit interested in guidelines, should we ever be able to agree on what we do and don't want to happen.

Ian McCabe:
Summer: The previous guidelines seemed a perfectly reasonable compromise. In the interim, there has been development of a number of crags as sports venues which breach them. Point 3, relating to climbs of "a high order of difficulty" appears to have been particularly redundant. Sports crags have, through consumer demand, moved into the lower grades.The widespread disregard for the previous guidelines seems to have prompted the proposed changes.While none of the recent developments gives serious cause for concern, I am worried that the new guideline definitions of "Character" and "Overall impression" of crags seem very woolly, and open to abuse.
Winter: I am saddened that the guidelines seem to imply that bolt protection on winter routes could now be acceptable.Scotland's winter climbing heritage is unique in its unpredictability, and purity of its ground-up, onsight ethic, and is internationally recognised.Just as in the summer arena, there will be increased pressures (both commercial and through consumer demand) to bring the bolts "down the grades" and "up the mountains".

Ian Appleton:
The MCofS is just promoting a forum where the readers can pitch in their views. Correct me if I am wrong? Personally I think Dry Tooling 'Rocks' - no pun intended! And congratulate Scott on a top article! Not to sure whether or not there is one out there already but would a dry tooling guide book be worthwhile, at least it would show new-comers such as myself areas which are safe and known as dry-tooling crags. Keep the minority of those people off the popular low-level crags already developed for climbing. If anyone knows of one could you let the readers know?

Dave McGimpsey:
I feel MCofS are starting to adopt a very soft attitude towards the placing of bolts in winter, and I don't like it one bit (sorry!). There's a huge difference between saying that "the overwhelming majority of climbers are opposed to bolts in winter" and saying..."Under most circumstances the placing of bolts is inappropriate on mountain cliffs and sea cliffs where there is normally a spirit of adventure inherent in the location. This is as relevant in winter as it is in summer. This means that the most suitable venues will be low-lying inland crags but there may be exceptions based on the above criteria."

All this"may be exception" and similar get out clauses, amounts to a major climb down on the winter bolts issue. If that's what the Scottish climbing public really want, then fair enough, I will live with it and accept it,but are you so sure that you have properly canvassed the public's opinion on this yet?

Seems to me that we have a small band shouting very loudly that we have to go down the bolt path to "progress", and because they are so vocal and receiving so much publicity, they effectively drown out what the quiet majority are thinking.

I would really prefer it if you would reinstate the point about winter bolts into the code of goodpracticeuntil you receive evidence that the majority are in favour. To omit this from your new draft seems a bit presumptuous. Has the overwhelming majority suddenly changed their mind in the space of two/three years?

Es Tresidder:
Scotts comment that winter only lines cannot offer the very hardest challenge for the future generation is wrong in my opinion.They may not be the sort of lines that Scott is interested in climbing, but there is no doubt that there are some mega hard winter only lines out there.I can think of several walls in Scotland that are big, winter only (unless you are a complete pervert), and have lines that are likely to be harder than anything that has been climbed anywhere in the world ground up without bolts.This may not be Scott's idea of the future, but there is no doubt in my mind that the difficulties are out there without resorting to winter ascents of harder and harder summer rock routes.

Erik Brunskill:
I fear for the future of Scottish winter climbing when I read the comments from high profile climbers like Scott Muir. I respect Scott for his passion and enthusiasm, but surely the way forward is to apply the skills, techniques and strength gained on the hardest M routes, to climb, in a traditional ethical manner, the long and desperate Scottish winter climbs of the future?
Fortunately, with activists like Guy Robertson, Es Tressider and Pete Benson, I think the future of Scottish winter climbing is exceptionally bright. Witness their application of skills gained on the committing winter climbs in Scotland, to the frozen big walls of the greater ranges. This is exciting proof of Scotland’s current and future place in world mountaineering. I am wholeheartedly against bolting Scottish winter climbs.

Grant Farquhar:
The previous MCofS bolting policy was pretty much ignored by those who wanted to establish more bolted venues in Scotland including the mountains and the seacliffs. I fear that any future policy will be similarly useless as long as individual climbers are prepared to bolt up new venues unilaterally and without prior consultation.
Any attempt to draw up vague guidelines is doomed to failure and looks simply like an attempt to draw a line under the existing list of bolting allowed "exceptions" which will again be ignored.
In my opinion there should at least be no bolts in the mountains in Scotland and that includes the existing bolts in Creag A Bhancair.

Robin Whitworth:
There should be no bolting of mountain crags or naturally wild places, in summer or winter.Every effort should be made not to erode the well-respected spirit of Scottish mountaineering.This spirit is clearly based around a non-bolting ethic. Similarly a ground-up style should be encouraged, and pre-placed protection frowned upon, especially in winter. 'Progress' in the upper grades is not worth the loss of what Scottish climbing means to the majority who operate at the lower grades.
At low-level venues, the style of the crag is very important, and prospective developers should consider carefully whether it would in fact be a good 'traditional style' crag before bolting any routes.Regards retro-bolting, this should be frowned upon.It should not be up to the first ascenionist alone to decide to retro-bolt.The first ascenionist does not own the rock, and once a route is climbed and published it becomes part of the public domain and part of that area's traditions.

Gavin Macfie:
The draft proposals would undoubtedly lead to the increased use of bolts. I believe this is a step back. I do not see any reason why we should permanently damage our cliffs and erode our ethics just to pander to the new generation of risk-averse, climbing wall-schooled youths.
The UK in general and Scotland in particular has a unique style of climbing that is the envy of thinking climbers the world over. There is more than enough sport climbing in the rest of the world. What the world is short of is traditional climbing. I recently met a group of Norwegians, one of whom had spent a year living in York purely so he could enjoy the pleasures of boltless cragging. What we have should be preserved.
Climbing to me is about making a vertical journey through the wilderness, relying on my own resources to get from the ground to the top and ideally leaving the ground in between in as pristine a condition as I found it.

Jenny Lingenhult:
I am not Scottish but I live here and feel very strongly for what this 'wee' country has to offer. I moved from Sweden and the mountains have been a major factor in my deciding to stay. I very much appreciate the small scale wildness of Scotland, something I can easily access every weekend if I choose to. If I wanted something else I would move, not try to change it.
I am not a hard climber. I will push myself as far as I see suitable, and take the risks I am willing to take. I am not saying that doing bolted routes is a push-over but it is a way of making Tom, Dick and Harry able to ascend routes which, in my view, they should not attempt. If the line they are tempted offers risks they do not wish to take then that is when they should back away. This society is in every area trying to take away the risks in people's lives. Please let at least the mountains remain free from further safety nets. Give people information and let them take informed decisions as to what risks they wish to take or avoid.
The way the MCofS is going it will soon have people putting up bolts wherever they want to make it 'safe'.

Alan McDonald:
The development of summer sports climbs is certainly increasing but not at a wildfire rate. I think people are now more wary to use a gung-ho approach and will more likely consult before grabbing the HILTI! I feel that the developer first has to find out if there are any other users and respect any lines they may have claimed, although these may not be common knowledge. Then comes the task of getting the "feel" of the crag. This presents some problems. Firstly is the clarity of such a statement. The crag may be on a hillside but looking down on an industrial wasteland or the access is grim but the wall offers no traditional protection. It is suggested that if the later is the case then the crag should stay untouched until a better climber comes along and claims it at E-silly. Where if anywhere do we draw the line. I feel that there will always be exceptions to the rule and the only way of keeping friends is through deep consultation with other users, landowners and local ethics on an individual case-by-case basis.

Colin Miln:
I give my opinions in order for there to be a meaningful set of guidelines. Otherwise it ends up like the last set of guidelines i.e. a statement from the anti-bolting side.
The MCofS process seems to lack transparency. How are people's comments going to be turned into guidelines? Looking at the posted comments on the MCofS website it looks way hard to write up a consensus opinion.
Personally, I think Kev Howitt's past words and actions preclude him from being regarded as a neutral observer. I think there needs to be someone else in charge who is less compromised or for Kev Howitt to be balanced by someone with a known history of pro-bolting. It's not quite Dracula in charge of the blood bank but not too far off.
If there is to be a set of best practice guidelines then they should really cover the development of ALL new crags/routes (inc bouldering and trad), e.g. check with landowner prior to development (e.g. Limekilns?), check with local people who may be impacted by climbers etc. Then, you could add on 1 or more suggested guidelines specifically for sport routes.
As it stands it just looks like another attempt to draw a line around the existing sport climbs and say "no more are allowed". There needs to be a GENUINE embrace of sport climbing. If you issue the guidelines they need to be accompanied by a statement which encourages and recognises sport climbs and sport climbers.
I'd rather just let people look at each sport crag/route one at a time - leave it up to the landowners, the local people, the local climbers etc to sort things out. This is the way it's been since at least 1992 and it's worked in my opinion. Climbing's not about a set of guidelines.
In general I'd say no to bolts on established mountains (e.g. Dubh Loch, Shelterstone) and no to retro-ing trad. But then again I love the bolts in Glencoe and the retro'd routes on Dunkeld. Another reason to leave it to each individual case. For all the scare tactics overbolting hasn't happened in the ~20 years that drills have been around in the UK.

In reply to Colin Miln:
'Kevin Howett has vast experience of both forms of climbing from as long ago as the late 1970’s and enjoys both trad and sport styles. In his time working for MCofS as our National Officer he has had to deal, on a regular basis, with both pro and anti bolting lobbies. He negotiated the retention of access to several newly bolted venues such as Glen Ogle, the Arbroath quarries, The Camel, Dumbarton Rock and Glen Coe when landowners sought to stop it for fear of litigation. At the Forum held at the Ice Factor on future ethics he held a medium stance that allowed both factions their say. The elected Office Bearers of the MCofS feel that Kevin shows professionalism in his work and a sense of fair play to take an unbiased viewpoint and as the "editor" of the magazine is quite capable of taking a reasonable and informed stance acting as both collator of material and observer.'

John Mackenzie, President, MCofS

Send in your Comments
An update will be printed in the June issue of Scottish Mountaineer