Revolting locals

In the news item concerning Sergeant Crag Slabs (Summit 44) it stated that there is no viable means of descent other than abseil. However it is possible to descend by traversing rightwards (facing in) and descending to a rock ramp leading to a steep grass/scree slope. But if climbers regularly descend here then trees on the ramp will be damaged and the slope severely eroded. As this would mean an unsightly scar and the need for expensive remedial work, Area Meetings have democratically concluded that a discrete abseil station is preferable. However a small number of climbers still believe that the placing of bolts in Cumbrian volcanic rock must never be undertaken regardless of the circumstances, and some even claim crag closure following environmental damage is preferable.

Such matters are usually sorted locally but should this always be the case when decisions have strong implications for other BMC Areas, or where the local views are so strong that consensus is impossible? If the view of the majority is not put into action, is the work of the Area rendered pointless? Why should we bother to support the process of consultation if, when the going gets tough, out-voted members just threaten unilateral action? I worry that unless we can resolve our differences then others may regard us unable to speak on behalf of our members.
- David Staton, BMC Lakes Area, Summit 45