Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Fixed gear guidelines in the Grampians 14-May-2018 At 10:20:45 AM armstp

Message

I have the opposite of PV paranoia as I would guess that in reality they are not going to do anything. They are not going to ban climbing and they are not going to deal with inappropriate bolting as they can’t tell it apart from any other kind of bolting.

I know that in the past the most complaints they got about bolts and climbing was in relation to Sandinista Wall. It is directly above a popular walking track, it is covered in bolts and chalk and hiking groups have complained about the eyesore of this stuff in a spectacular natural environment. Despite a number of complaints as far as I know PV never did a thing.

After the 2006 fires I worked with a Ranger assessing a few fire damaged cliffs. Her only concern in relation to bolts was whether they had been damaged by the fires and should be replaced to make them safer.

I suppose what I am saying is that you may as well leave PV out of the equation in terms of controlling climber behaviour. It might work as a threat for some people I suppose, just so long as they never call your bluff. If you do report these climbers what is PV going to do? From a Rangers point of view as a compliance officer what makes these new anchors at Camels Hump any different from all the other anchors at Camels Hump other than that the climb was first done without them. I don't see the basis for legal action as it is a climbing ethical issue not an environmental one. You can't legitimately fine someone for retro bolting a route when there are numerous similar bolted routes around. Legally all the bolted routes are wrong or none of them are. Retro bolting is not against the law, only against climbing ethics.