UKC

Following the lengthy deliberations on the other thread...

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/rock_talk/the_old_man_and_the_drill-76972...

...not sure how well designed this survey is as it will likely end up splitting the vote for the two main positions (pro-bolt/anti-bolt).  For example: I am quite strongly against the 'ab piste' option but I would be happy with any of the other three.

We can have further rounds of voting eliminating the worse performing option each time Tory party style.

edit: Do nothing = Liz Truss

Could we not have an option to leave as is but organise a crowd funded (or similar) clean up of ab stations a couple times a year and replacement with fresh tat? (Recycled rope)? Cheers

You can't use 50m on the current descent route (unless you like free falls).

Intresting. How was it done when 60m ropes were not typical?

The metal things the tat is attached to are at end of life. I'm guessing you are either option 1 or option 2.

Often people would leave a rope in place on the crux traverse pitch so they could use it to pull across on the way down. I 'rescued' a black 11mm static line that had been left in place there, presumably by a military team, and only recently stopped using it for equipping new routes some 25 years later!

There's something to be said for being able to descend without abbing past, and pulling ropes and other shit down on, other teams on the way up. I'm guessing that increased popularity will be making this more of an issue than it used to be. Installing a big ring or something similar, at key points to facilitate this would be no different to things installed on Froggatt Pinnacle or Rivelin Needle.

I do think it would be far better not to bolt belays though. Climbing up using only your own gear and retrieving it is the way trad should be climbed; abbing down and retrieving your own gear in this situation is effectively impossible.

I understood that was the method. So presumable a 60m takes you past the traverse level and down to the ground negating the need to reverse (with aid) the traverse?

No - knock the thing down = Liz Truss

Agreed, the stack is taking up prime office block real estate

I'm with Liz.

I wonder if there is any chance of finding an alternative abseil descent which does not require bolts or 70m ropes? That ought to satisfy pretty much everyone I would have thought.

Yes, that should be there (at least to see if it can be made to work).  

That sounds like a proper adventure. Take prusiks.

Yes, there is definitely something unauthentic and spoonfed about such things which would feel very much against the trad ethic (quite apart, obviously, from the bolts). On the other hand it does mean the ascent would be entirely free of anything in situ apart from swag. Theoretically.....

Yes, it might be really quite involved with guano ledge shuffling and so on.

Does no-one else find this sadly hilarious? Climbers can't be bothered to take ownership and keep their environment tidy but will pay someone else to tidy up a few times a year. This entire situation would not have come about if enough people actually cared for the crags they climb on. More people need to step up and DO something.

Yes, 60s take you to the ground from the top of pitch 2. With shorter ropes you'd ab the bottom two pitches seperately, leaving a diagonal line in place on pitch 2.

You could go Labour style and have an option on the ballot for 'Dither' 

Then just go with the popular narrative 

to bolt or not to bolt, that is the question.

"> Does no-one else find this sadly hilarious? Climbers can't be bothered to take ownership and keep their environment tidy but will pay someone else to tidy up a few times a year. This entire situation would not have come about if enough people actually cared for the crags they climb on. More people need to step up and DO something."

You've directed this comment straight at me so I'm afraid you're going to get a direct reply.

I am not perfect, nobody is, but my partner and I removed some tat when we climbed the Old Man, I carry a specific Lakes Plastic Collective bag tucked down the bag of my climbing rucksack that I use to carry rubbish out the crag nearly every time I go climbing and I've also brought up the bird ban idea in the other thread r.e better environmental stewardship.

Yes I agree with you there is a need for more collective action and we should all do more but in lieu of that clearly not happening any time soon other ideas are needed.

(I would have suggested a voluntary group but thought that would get shot down for expecting people to give up their time - personally I don't see a problem with a small amount of funding to help a local guide do that for instance, rather than expecting them to do it for free.)

Its funny how whenever criticism is raised people go "well this one time I did something" as you have. I never feel the need. Please dont get me wrong, its an observation, its great, and I'm glad you have done a bit and please do more. However this doesnt need a voluntary group, collective action, a stupid film or paying a guide to carry a knife, it needs individual climbers to respect the crags and the environment and to take ownership and do their bit. Without that, we end up with this and numerous other issues. That being said, I am not delusional, which is why I am pro-bolt.

Is individual climbers respecting the crags not collective action? (You seem to have contradicted yourself unless I have misunderstood collective action, in which case apologies.)

I'd be interested in what your proposals are to achieve what you have said. Of course I agree with you in principle however organised charitable work has been the bedrock of conservation work in the UK for decades and I feel it could have a positive role here.

I consider it the difference between everyone doing a bit on their disparate visits, which is what should happen, or someone having to organise a big effort to do something all at once, which is what is happening. I dont know how to acheive that other than leading by example

Can I make a movie of all this?

It would be riveting. 

In reply to Hanson1986:

In that case let's crowdfund for some bolt on big jugs for those pesky crux moves

No. Ethics or Aesthetics, that is the question. A mass of rotting tat despoiling a wild and wonderful place or unobtrusive bolts. Those who argue that it’s possible to have neither whilst still allowing the Old Man to be climbed are deluded

That’s how we did it.  

No. Ethical considerations must always come prior to aesthetic ones. It is the difference between littering and vandalism, between mere untidiness and permanent damage. Superfluous, rotting tat can always be removed in a matter of seconds with a Stanley knife. But drilling holes simply for greater ‘convenience’ (and, let’s be honest about it, commercial convenience) is, as Mick Fowler, one of our greatest rock-climbers and mountaineers, has said in another thread (The Old Man and the drill) ill thought out. Let him have the final word:

"The British bolt-free ethic on trad climbs is what makes them special and respected throughout the world. If people can't abseil off the Old Man without bolted and chained abseil points they shouldn't be there. I have no problem with the old tat being replaced but filming it being replaced with bolts and chains is both unpalatable and runs the risk of setting a terrible precedent…. If this sanitisation of our most iconic sea stack goes ahead it will be a very sad day for British trad climbing."

You have to apply some analysis to the survey results - it's not first past the post is automatically is the winner.

Yes, options 1 + 2 are no additional drilling and options 3 + 4 are additional drilling.

So we can see (currently) 58% in favour of NEW bolts being part of the solution and 42% in favour of no replacement of current bolts. This clearly isn't an overwhelming support for new bolts and certainly not approaching the 90% mark achieved by the MS survey.

80% are in favour of chopping the old bolts (and tat clean-up), though it has to be say most of them would expect new bolts to replace them.

From a purely rock climbing perspective maybe, but the Old Man of Hoy and similar places have much greater significance and importance than just a rock climbers’ playgrounds. The interests of wildlife and other people that appreciate the wild places that we play on should also be taken into account. If climbers were in the habit of always carrying sharp knives and take away old tat when placing new tat this wouldn’t be such a problem but history shows that won’t happen because it would be “inconvenient”

i voted for do nothing, but this is what I would’ve chosen had it been an option

What's your plan for when the bolts have fallen off and there is nothing to tie the new tat to?

I just read the full article. I had no idea there were bolts. This changes my opinion somewhat.

(Probably not helpful giving my uninformed opinion. Although I do intend to climb it at some point before too long)

Aye well, you'll not have been the first to not know what they were voting for.

Rivets better than bolts?

If this is supposed to improve on the original survey, it's failed quite dramatically.

It's just a straw poll to gauge opinion.

I did think it distilled all chat down to a few fundamental options.

Option 1 - Carry on as we have been.

Option 2 - Clean up without resorting to bolts.

Option 3 - Clean up with minimal bolting.

Option 4 - Clean up and provide fully bolted, low maintenance abseil solution. 

Is that a pun on 'bolting'? If so well done 

Why? It's far better. You actually know what you're voting for.

Whether its' more or less representative is another matter.

PROS

Path of least resistance.

Maintains the myth OMH doesn't rely on fixed gear.

CONS

Unsustainable in view of deteriorating metal work.

Very unsightly... unfortunately those RSPB twitchers have binoculars.

Continuing use of bolted belays on the route compromises trad ethics.

Safety compromised.

PROS

In keeping with trad ethics.

No bolted belays on the route would be an improvement in style.

Should help minimise further tat build-up.

Should be safer.

CONS

Static rope at threads would need regular maintenance.

70m ropes required to comfortably reach between anchors.

Potentially an increase risk of stuck ropes.

PROS

Largely maintains current arrangements i.e. 60m ropes ok.

Should help minimise further tat build-up.

Will be safer.

CONS

Continuing use of bolted belays on the route compromises trad ethics.

Static rope at threads would need regular maintenance.

PROS

Low maintenance.

No bolted belays on the route would be an improvement in style (at least on ascent).

Should eliminate tat build-up.

60m ropes ok.

Will be safer.

CONS

A noticeable departure from traditional ethics.

Could be used as a precedent for elsewhere.

Bump… for the last of your unscientific survey votes.

Thanks all that have voted.

I think the voting largely speaks for itself. A not overwhelming majority in favour of bolts being the solution or at least part of the solution. A very significant minority does not want any new drilling.

Are these findings any more or less flawed than the MS survey?

And that excludes the very large number of non-climbers that have a stake in this.. 

Only around 300+ votes so not that comprehensive.

I think 300 votes is a fair reach for a wee poll on a random dude’s thread on UKC when the national governing body poll got 1000 or so responses. While I wouldn’t claim the results as being anything like definitive, I’m pretty sure they are a significant pointer to the true mood of the crowd and probably worth bearing in mind if you are intending to to put bolts in one of best known routes in the country.

Very large numbers? Really?

Anyway, whatever the numbers, if climbers had just kept this as an obscure internal debate which wouldn't affect anybody else rather than, for whatever reason, feeling the need to make a wider issue of it than is really there and involve anyone else, then I doubt anyone else would have ever felt the need or obligation to take any sort of stake in it and the waters might not have been unnecessarily muddied.

60's get you down from the top of pitch two 

For those voting without any knowlege of the stack (very british apparently).. currently you dont need 70m ropes to get off and do not need to use any of the currently in bolts.  a 70m would see you from the summit to the top of p2, and then to the ground. but 60s is all you need with an intermittent abb, it's fine.

So it is absolutely not a case of bolt an abb pist or bring 70m ropes.. use our skill, experiance and avaiabe ropes (50,60 ,or 70m - all work with various adaptions) and climb the thing as intended. It'll collapse sometime soon* anyway then all/most routes and decents will be void.

So are you saying it is fine getting down with 60's without using the anchor with the old bolts. If so,  then obviously there is no case at all for any new bolts, but, unless I have completely misunderstood things, this is not what everyone else is saying.

There was a suggestion that one of the two intermediate ab points was a thread around a block backed up with a jammed nut head which bears on to the same block. The argument goes the integrity of the block is questionable and therefore it can’t now be considered a reliable anchor.

I thought it might be the block pictured (below) but I’m not sure.

It’s a shame there isn’t an up to date photographic condition survey of each of the anchors that could be annotated with text from the proposed plan.

i think the issue is - it's doable on 60 but only just on rope stretch and an accident waiting to happen (ab off end of rope)

Plus, by doing that long ab, there is possibly an increased risk of a stuck rope.

That photo is of the thread belay after the crux pitch.

Noted.

We abbed off in two pitches on 60m ropes using just an insitu 'tat' abseil station.  We couldn't have done it on 50m ropes, but certainly didn't need 70m.

Of course, what's possible and what's a good solution are not necessarily the same thing. For example, I'm sure you could ab, say, half-way down the top pitch, fix an absolutely bomber hanging stance from nuts/cams, then get comfortably down in the next ab to the top of pitch 2. The suggestion that there isn't reliable trad gear anywhere in the top three pitches of climbing seems difficult to believe. 

Why is that? 

That's maybe less the issue, more that with the next ab only being reached on rope stretch, if the rope doesn't pull you've quickly lost the other end and it's all got pretty dodgy...

Sorry, what needs reaching on rope stretch ?

The end of the rope if you let go of it!

When we did the abseil, we did it comfortably without any recourse to rope stretch in two pitches with 60m ropes.  What's changed in the last15 years or so ?

Which suggests you relied one of the two intermediate anchors. So either an allegedly dubious block or tat attached to rotting metalwork.

I guess the condition of the block and/or the condition of the rotting metalwork.

I'm going by what Andy Moles said about doing the top three pitches in one ab, which seemed eminently believable. It wouldn't have occurred to me to try it as I'd have assumed 60s wouldn't be long enough. Maybe your 60s are long 60s?

Don't recall them being long, or us being even close to the end on the first ab.  The second ab to the ground didn't have much spare from memory.

No idea.  I did it the old school way on much shorter ropes, a very long time ago.

Jeez never seen so much debate about two bloody bolts where they are the obvious solution for everybody. I mean they are at Castle Hellen ab point and everyone is happy. I did the old man of stoer and it had the newish static and I can see that not lasting very long.

Actually, obviously not (see all the debate).

And one reason it is not is that it might be the thin end of the wedge.

I agree re thin end of the wedge. At one time piles of rotting tat were the exception. But the lack of awareness of their environmental harm back then has allowed them to proliferate unchecked to the sorry state we see today, all for the sake of convenience.

What's the thick edge of the wedge then? A fully bolted Old Man making the Original route a french 5a? Come on...

Well you mentioned the Old Man Of Stoer yourself. It might well go on from there, with a growing presumption for bolts when abseils are a bit dodgy or inconvenient or wherever tat builds up. Next stop dodgy belays? 

The UK climbing world has proven completely happy to see permanent anchors where abseil descent is effectively unavoidable, and for good reason. The OMOH is just one example. Some are simple drilled gear - like the top of Rivelin Needle - and some are collections of assorted abandoned gear. The wedge is as thick as it's ever going to get, to the point at which this particular OMOH wedge is seen to be a right clusterufck of semi-permanent rotting metalwork and nylon. 

I completely take your point about not installing convenience abs where a perfectly safe (albeit less convenient) descent is possible without them, but that's not the OMOH situation. The choice is between installing reassuringly safe (and safe-looking even to terrified climbers!) anchors to do the job of getting people down safely without them feeling the need to add to the clusterufck, and accepting that the clusterufcks are there to stay and to be added to ad infinitum.

I strongly suspect that options that achieve the former are going to be pretty thin on the ground, considering how ready climbers seem to be to leave tat at the slightest concern. Even strops are far from ideal in this regard, seeing as this thread already has posts doubting their reliability and seeing how easy it would be to put tat around whatever the strop was already attached to (thereby starting a tat-reaction of doubt.)

It's hard to see how a single heavy-duty stainless/titanium ring that's reassuringly bombproof and metallurgically appropriate, sufficiently far from from any cracks that might tempt people to leave bits of their rack behind, would be anything other than an improvement on the current situation in every respect.

Without going over all the arguments again, in the end it depends whether bolts are seen as the traditionally respected red line not to be crossed and worth the clusterf*cks, rotting gear and so on, or not. 

At one time (decades ago) there used to be an unspoken tradition on alpine routes of cutting away old tat, leaving several slings that looked more or less OK, and then adding a new sling of one's own.

These abseils have been in place for 50 years and have not lead to a proliferation of pegs and in-situ threads everywhere. Maybe people will just treat things on a case by case basis and yes that might mean more bolted abseils. Not because they are part of some wedge but because, in some cases, they make logical sense.

I think the key point here is that, unlike other old pegs, even bolts or whatever, the bolting proposed would not be the act some renegade but rather approved by MS and actually against their own guidelines. This is why it might reasonably be seen as an important precedent. Is it worth the risk?

When 'thin end of the wedge' arguments are brought up, folk often point out that bolts haven't suddenly appeared everywhere and anywhere. But it's more likely to be a slow insidious process. Each venue which gets the odd bolt added here and there is making it easier for more elsewhere. And if somewhere as adventurous as the Old Man of Hoy is acceptable, where isn't?

Well I don't know, but perhaps somewhere adventurous where it's possible to get down again safely without leaving anything behind - either a shiny titanium bolt or a collection of gently mouldering bits of trad gear and a heap of rotting plastic tat.

I'm of the opinion of, if you haven't got the balls to ab off a dodgy flake, don't do it, go to a bolt invested limestone crag somewhere. 

I do have a possible solution to this 'tat' dilemma though ... remove all the existing crap, then any future ascentionists carry a few new hemp slings, chucking any insitu in the briney.