- This topic has 18 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
When I was rapping left of Fear No Evil at the gap last year, I noticed a bolted line that branched off left from a lower section on FNE and continued up the headwall above. It is bolted with GIMPs and looks like an amazing and hard route.
Does anyone know anything about this route/project?
This is a “no bolting zone”, as per DEC regulations, agreed between CAWA-CALM and Albany climbers some 12 yrs ago.
Yeah, but the bolts are definitely there and i’m still curious.
If someone is worried about copping it, consider sharing your beta under and anon name? I reckon that a route like that shouldn’t be kept secret.
sigh… only in WA would our most concentrated area of quality climbing be limited like this. sorry to ask, but does anyone really care about a 15 year old ‘agreement’?
So where are all there “No Bolt” zones?
rossclimbing.typepad.com/1997SCUM.pdf
http://www.climberswa.asn.au/Community/Messageboard/default.asp?view=message&id=550
The unsettled consensus seems to be that an adventurous ethic should be observed in the ACZ area, but there is no outright ban on bolting as there was at the time of the agreement in the early 90s.
Crew don’t seem to consider themselves restricted by something as vague and amorphous as the ACZ. The content and status of the ACZ is unclear, and there would almost certainly be no adverse consequences for contravention.
ACZ aside, I don’t think there is any ethical compulsion to observe a bolt ban in this area. There was never a no-bolt ethic before the ACZ agreement, and the ACZ has not modified the position in a practical sense (this is based on community views, and the fact that bolts have appeared and no one complains).
What do crew reckon?
Oooo Oooo can I be a part of ‘the crew’? This being a little hobby horse of mine, I would love to input, though Im sure Owen you know what Im about to say.
I would agree with Mike and Owen’s sentiments. Quite possibly all the ACZ does is gives Albany climbers more terrain to sneak in their own little projects…
The original fear with the ACZ’s implementation (yep about 15 years ago) was that punk Perth climbers would jet down to Albany and grid-bolt the cliffs.
Considering there are roughly 4 parties of punks in Perth who own drills and bolt thoughtfully, I think the fear is unfounded.
In fact the argument could be made that a ban on bolting makes places like Peak Head more dangerous because people keep climbing the bolted routes on bolts that were shocking when they were first installed….
Bolt thoughtfully and with care and there could be 300% more routes for all grades, none of which would be in sight of a touron.
cant really see how thoughtfully placed anchors could detract from a tourists experience, in fact most tourists find watching climbers interesting.. bolts and hangers can be camoflaged if necessary
it does look like there is a lot of good new route potential down there
Buckley’s chance of tourists seeing bolts on pretty much any sth coast rock (unless someone put in staples at the natural bridge area)
And if any tourons do see bolts, it’s a quick answer to the question ‘how’d you get the ropes up there?’
i think this one gets done over every two years or so.
conslusion is always the same.
i wouldn’t know anything about unreported bolted routes on the south coast…. *cough* except emil’s grade 15 sport route up the south face of peak head. but everyone knows about that….
hey neil thats a grade 8 M0 bolt ladder, not 15 and it was meant to be a secret!
So is it a closed project? I didn’t see any red tape 😉
sounds like neil poached my project if he’s grading it 15. the pink flagging tape must have fallen off…
there was rumoured to be a classic bolted line put up by one of the younger climbers from the metro area in 1997. Perhaps if you ask some of the hard men of the time ,they may know. Regarding the ACZ, the conservation authorities still regard it as valid. While I would agree with a lot of the views expressed above I do know that bolting around The Gap is a particularly bad idea. DEC are scared stiff of some gawper falling over a cliff while watching climbers and have wanted to restrict climbing in the past for this reason. The original ACZ agreement was to have been flexible and subject to review and amendment however when changes have been proposed they have been politely stonewalled by the then authority. My own opinion is that the ACZ is outdated and should be revisited . While the Gap area is quite obviously the area most suited to sport climbing in Albany I doubt that it will ever happen. When the ACZ was being formulated I championed the above view and was surprised at the strength of opinion against the idea. The original dispute over bolting could be boiled down to a few parties of differing views and similar egos acting unilaterally without regard to the other . A softly softly approach may have led to a better agreement?
Jim.
sorry emil.
i just assumed with sooooo many bolts and all those glued on bits it was already climbed.
i kind of agree with jim.
prob best to leave the gap so we don’t annoy DEC. then we can probably do more or less what we want at other less touron frequented locations. i don’t think DEC’s concern is the bolts exactly. more the tourons taking a terrified tumble whilst watching owen.
I think the thing to remember as well is that bolts do no equal sport climbs. Lines would open up with only a couple of judiciously placed bolts and lower-off are not always necessary.
As for the Gap, leave it for the punters. There is so much more rock in the ACZ (sheesh it stretches for some 30km of coastline) that you could climb a route elsewhere and never see a soul.
wow ‘ tourists might take a tumble watching climbers’ thats a pretty amazing reason for not bolting an area…
sure is a wierd wierd world
Hi Jim,long time…
I had a look at some of the relevant Management Plans on Naturebase and see no mention of ACZ or bolting there. Do you know of any place where this is actually officially documented? Maybe you could text me your email on 0422 927962.
