Can't Climb? Bolt! The Rape of Cheddar Gorge
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=229571
On the 11 August, 2007, I received an unsolicited, three page letter from Martin Crocker the individual who took it upon himelf (with able assistance from the so-called British Mountaineering Council) to deliberately damage, by drilling and inserting over 1,000 expansion bolts into a site of Special Scientific Interest (a supposedly protected SSSI). Cheddar Gorge, had been climbed on by decades of traditional climbers myself certainly, since 1961. I had written a letter to Cheddar Caves & Gorge (CC&G) asking them why, they had allowed the special area that is Cheddar Gorge, to be deliberately damaged - bolted (it is not yet known if the BMC's new - 'Leading Ladder'(s) are to be installed) against the wishes of the vast majority of British climbers. I did not receive a reply from CC&G to my letter.
Dear Mr Morrod,
I have been asked to reply to your email to Cheddar Caves & Gorge (CC&G) by their Director, Hugh Cornwell.
As you may be aware I organised and ran the Cheddar Climbing Project on behalf of the BMC (the so-called British Mountaineering Council that still, after 55 years, represents just one percent of climbers, hillgoers) and local climbers (as a local climber since 1961, Mr Crocker's actions were not on my behalf). The Project was something I conceived in my own time, because I was dismayed by the state of neglect of the climbs, the imminant risks to public safety because of that, and - moreover - the growing distain shown by climbers towards Cheddar Gorge climbing (by definition, drilling and placing in excess of 1,000 expansion bolts has apparently, not shown distain towards Cheddar Gorge).
Climbing ethics and styles and how they embrace the placing of fix gear, are matters that, it is fair to say, CC&G have left to climbers to debate and decide for themselves. The use of fixed gear would not have crystellized as an issue to CC&G over and above the deeper implications of allowing climbing to take place in the Gorge. In retrospect CC&G would have assumed or trusted that - through the pioneering of new climbs and any re-gearing or equipping campaigns - the style would have been 'applied' in a way that was sympathstic with the state of climbing and presumably the wishes of the consensus of local climbers (as there are very few local climbers one has to guess at the radius; area around the Gorge that was applied) contemporaneously. Though the management of CC&G have an understanding of the differences between sport climbing and (trad) climbing, they are still reliant on climbers and their representative bodies to guide them on any technical and ethical climbing issues. However I would think that if there were any resultant implications or liabilities for CC&G as a landowner; then they would then seek to take control of what was going on e.g. they would not and do not hold any liability for the bolts
And the differences between sport climbing and climbing (trad) are? Apparently, if you cannot climb properly; are not competant enough to climb ethically by longstanding, traditional methods - then bolt! CC&G do not 'hold any liability' of the bolts??
The letter continues: The appropriateness of sport climbing in Britain, and the use of bolts, is something that will no doubt continue to be debated heatedly ad infinitum (er yes now the deliberate damage has been done) and justifiably so, in my opinion, since checks and balances will always be needed to contain the effects of what is an increasingly popular part of climbing (the increasingly demise of the sport of climbing).
To be continued...the whole, pathetic letter will fill this page.
