The debate about the death of mountaineering in NZ was mostly entertaining. Everyone had a theory. The most sensible points on the death of elite alpinism came from climbing legends Roland Foster and Pat Deavoll. Both (more or less) made the point that elite climbing (whether it be rock or ice or whatever) is directly related to access and opportunity. And the local climbing talent (other than those few who are especially/exclusively devoted to alpinism) simply gravitate to the areas (and climbing styles) that offer the best access and opportunities for hard climbing – the Darrans and Flock Hill. JC (one of the panellists) is a great example – born 20 years earlier, he would likely have been a regular in the Mt Cook scene. Today he’s climbing big walls, bolted 30s and highballs at Flock Hill.
Mountaineering isn’t dead, just the mountaineers…
Can I use that line in the debate?
Boo-hoo! No one wants to scramble up wheatbix anymore. Is that any wonder, what with all the granite in Fiordland?
The debate about the death of mountaineering in NZ was mostly entertaining. Everyone had a theory. The most sensible points on the death of elite alpinism came from climbing legends Roland Foster and Pat Deavoll. Both (more or less) made the point that elite climbing (whether it be rock or ice or whatever) is directly related to access and opportunity. And the local climbing talent (other than those few who are especially/exclusively devoted to alpinism) simply gravitate to the areas (and climbing styles) that offer the best access and opportunities for hard climbing – the Darrans and Flock Hill. JC (one of the panellists) is a great example – born 20 years earlier, he would likely have been a regular in the Mt Cook scene. Today he’s climbing big walls, bolted 30s and highballs at Flock Hill.
Was a recording of the debate made available? Sounds like it could be an interesting listen on the train to work.