|
 Yesterday
( 29th May) a cheque for £10,000 was handed over by
The North Face to the Nevis Partnership as the first portion
of cash towards repair and development of the track leading
to the CIC Hut on Ben Nevis. Topher Gaylord (TNF European
Marketing Director) came over from Italy and was accompanied
by Phil Ham, also of TNF marketing in Great Britain. The presentation
took place at the start of the track in fairly typical Scottish
weather. Receiving the cheque on behalf of Nevis Partnership
was Neil Clark (Chairman) and other Directors and members.
Neil thanked TNF for this generous cash donation which would
attract matching funding from a variety of other sources.
This handover marks the start of work on the track this coming
summer. Over the next five years TNF have pledged a further
£40,000. In reply to Neil Clark, Topher Gaylord said
that it was very appropriate for TNF to be putting something
back into the mountains in this way and the fact that it was
towards work on the approach to the north face of the most
famous mountain in Britain was even more special. Topher and
Phil were presented with bottles of 'Special Reserve' Ben
Nevis Malt Whisky to mark the occasion.
Nevis Partnership has received written confirmation from
North Face that they will make £50,000 available over
the next five calendar years i.e. in 5 £10,000 tranches.The
first of these cheques is to be presented on Wednesday 28th
May 2003, by The North Face on Ben Nevis. We may even get
a route in!
Contractors Moray Paths & Conservation have been engaged
by Highland Council in a jointly funded exercise with SNH
to produce a detailed path specification, identify local sources
of suitable materials for the repairs and to prepare a costing
schedule for the work so that the Council can assemble a funding
package based on the monies available in any given financial
year. They will be on-site for 11 days to complete this work
and are expected to report back to Highland Council in early
June with costs for each section of path.
Highland Council hope to have £40k available for this
season's work (£20k of which will be secured from match
funding from SNH) to enable a start this summer. The contractor
has a team available and programmed for this work from July
onwards for about 12 weeks.
Lochaber Mountain Access Group will also be donating almost
another £5,000 which has come in from various donors.
Thanks to everyone who has sent in cash donations and offers
of work. LMAG are also pushing to get ongoing maintenance,
either on a voluntary or paid basis for the track once it
has been sorted. The big problem all over the country is that
no funds are made available to maintain the work on paths
and they deteriorate pretty quickly.
 Anyone
who has approached the north face of Ben Nevis from Torlundy
in recent years will appreciate how badly the path is eroding.
This adds to the time and energy taken and reduces the overall
enjoyment of the day. In winter this aspect of climbing on
Ben Nevis is particularly taxing when also confronted by the
added problems of poor weather and short daylight hours. Visiting
climbers from Europe and North America have commented that
the state of the path would not be allowed in their countries.
The Lochaber Mountain Access Group (LMAG) has been campaigning
for a better path on the approach to the North Face and trying
to raise funds for the work. LMAG is a constituted Community
Association who formed in February 2001 as a response to the
Foot and Mouth Outbreak.
The principle aim of the Group is to:
‘Protect & Improve access for all to the mountains,
forests, lochs, rivers and beaches of Lochaber for the purpose
of recreation’.
LMAG has concluded a year-long period of community consultation
in order to identify projects that are important to local
people. The consultation outcome was the publication of ‘Changing
Landscape’. This document proposes a number of strategic
projects that will improve the quality of access in Lochaber
as well as promoting the sustainable development of Lochaber
as a main outdoor venue in Scotland.
 In
the last year LMAG have raised £54,000 towards the Allt
a’Mhuilinn, Ben Nevis north face approach from Torlundy.
The bulk of this cash has been pledged by The North Face,
who climbers will know as a world brand in the manufacture
of mountain tents and outdoor clothing. Smaller pledges of
£1,000 each have been made by Outward Bound Scotland,
West Coast Outdoor Leisure and West Coast Mountain Guides.
Climbers have donated almost £1,000.
LMAG is also a Director on the Nevis Partnership, which is
a collection of organisations with an interest in the Nevis
area, including Scottish Natural Heritage, The John Muir Trust,
Forest Enterprise, Alcan and local community groups. Any cash
raised by LMAG towards the project is being channelled through
the Nevis Partnership in order to achieve matching funding
from a variety of sources including lottery funding.
The work which LMAG wishes to see undertaken is as follows:
- The renovation of Allt a’ Mhuilinn
path from the North face Car Park to the CIC Hut
- The line of the Path needs to be re-evaluated
to provide an improved line of access, which will minimize
damage through the further erosion on the current line and
improve the quality of access for users, reduce land use
conflicts, create a spectacular new low level viewpoint
and improve safety.
- New Signage on the A82 at Torlundy
and at the turn into the Leanachan Forest
- The Forest Road to the new North Face
Car Park needs to be metalled in order to prevent further
erosion of the road surface, and minimize potential damage
to cars.
- The North Face Car Park needs to be
enlarged to include a camping site, rubbish bins and WC
facilities to minimize damage caused by wild camping, overuse
of car park, litter and poor sanitation.
- During exploration of the area where
the path is proposed, LMAG have identified the location
of a possible viewpoint, which also has possibilities as
a climber’s memorial. This last point is also connected
with the wishes of the Nevis Partnership, who are keen to
stop the proliferation of commemorative plaques on the summit
of Ben Nevis. LMAG are in discussion with the Scottish Arts
Council to identify possible methods of funding for this
particular part of the project.
 During
the negotiation process, a block of woodland above the Torlundy
car park was made available to LMAG to purchase and develop.
If this land were in the hands of a sympathetic organization
it would make much of the pathwork building a lot easier to
achieve, especially in relation to creating a more direct
line into the Allt a’Mhuilinn. Anyone who wishes to
obtain more details of the woodland should contact the LMAG
Chairman (Dave Wilson) on 01397 701806 or email Dave Wilson
at limetree.studio@btinternet.com
The woodland runs to around 412 acres and is currently planted
commercially.
Further donations can be made to LMAG and sent to Dave Wrigglesworth,
West Coast Outdoor Leisure, High St, Fort William. Details
of the project are updated regularly and can be seen on this
site
The Lochaber Mountain Access Group (LMAG) which was formed
during last years unfortunate Foot and Mouth outbreak is continuing
to lobby for a better path line into the Allt a'Mhuilinn.
In recent years climbers and walkers have been forced away
from the Golf Course approach and the old Distillery approach
is not being used much either. Many climbers still park on
the A82 trunk road in order to use the more direct approach
across the Golf Course. This route is dangerous due to the
fast blind bends on the road at this point. Also, climbers
may be approached by golfers, annoyed at the climbers walking
over the Golf Course.
Forest Enterprise, local climbers, guides and the Mountaineering
Council of Scotland (MC of S) negotiated for access to the
forest and a new climbers car park (The North Face car park)
was built. At the time the MC of S and the local Highland
Council Rangers said that the line of the new path was not
the most direct and in future we should look towards improving
the line of the track to make it more direct. At present it
is necessary for most people to walk for almost a kilometre
up and down hill before gaining the upward track.
LMAG have identified what they consider is a new more logical
and direct approach to the Allt a'Mhuilinn and are consulting
with land-owners in the area. Please can you contact LMAG
through Alan Kimber alan@westcoast-mountainguides.co.uk with
your views on the access and state of the paths in the Allt
a'Mhuilinn? We would like to get as many views as possible
in order to push this idea forward. Do you feel that the current
path could be improved, straightened or changed, or maybe
you are happy with the present situation? Also, do you feel
that the current poor state of the path to the CIC Hut, which
is badly eroded is acceptable? All ideas are welcome, even
if they do not match our own thinking. Democracy you know!
LMAG have a number of other plans, but feel that this is
an achievable goal for the short-term.
I am sure there must be a better line!
Given the amount of money climbers bring into the area I would
also think that investment is justified which should bring
benefits all round - environment, local golfers and local
economy as well as hillgoers.
Hope to be there on the 8th.
All the best,
Graham (Cumbria)
Thanks for showing me your proposed route to the CIC and
the North Face of
the Ben. It is a much more positive approach to the routes
as it begins it's
ascent from the word go. You feel you are actually getting
somewhere which
adds immeasurably to the total days enjoyment. Similarly you
can see your
destination on the return mentally shortening the descent
at the end of a
long day. The problem with the approach around the top of
the golf course is
that it is totally illogical and taking into account the immense
wealth that
pours into Fort William from winter climbing it is not really
up to the job.
The new route is also a far more enjoyable and as it offers
very good views
of the Ben Nevis corries and its great ridges it would be
a worthwhile ramble
or family walk. So the new proposal should be considered as
an added amenity
of the area and could be easily linked into other paths to
be one of Fort
William's very best walks. Seen in this way I don't think
it would be at all
difficult to raise sponsorship from the outdoor industry to
finance it and
thereby added a further visitor attraction at no cost to Fort
William. If you
need help with raising sponsorship keep me in mind, please.
Tim Pettifer (Scotland
Hi Alan,
Just a some thoughts regarding the state of the track from
the North Face
car park to the CIC hut.
As someone from Australia who has climbed and hiked all over
the world I
find it incredible that the main designated access route for
climbers to
Scotland's highest and (probably) most popular mountain could
be left in
such a state of disrepair. As anyone who has walked this track
could attest
to, this track is a quagmire from start to finish.
I have only been in Scotland for about 16 months, but during
the winter
climbing season I spend nearly every weekend on the Ben. Since
the start of
last season to the present I have seen a serious deterioration
in the condition
of the track. As it is so boggy at so many points along its
length, more and more
people are straying onto the neighbouring vegetation to avoid
the mud. This practice
is causing visible damage to the landscape and I can only
see it getting worse.
The damage is particularly noticeable during the initial
steeper 'forest'
section of the track where several paths, not just one, scar
the hillside
and signs of erosion are becoming more and more evident.
I come from the Blue Mountains of Australia and this sort
of damage to the
landscape just would not be tolerated. The National Parks
Service, Local
Government, interest groups and indeed the community in general
would
demand that a decent path be constructed to protect the environment
for
future generations.
Not only is there an environmental (as if that isn't enough)
aspect to
consider, there are also serious safety concerns regarding
the current state
of the path. My climbing partner and I have often commented
that you are far
more likely to sustain an injury walking back to the car park
than you are
while climbing. I am sure that anyone attempting to safely
negotiate this
deathtrap at night (and during Dec - Feb it is almost impossible
to do a
long route on the Ben without returning in the dark) would
wholeheartedly
agree.
If we are thinking long term, we should also be considering
the descent/
return route used by the majority of climbers. Red Burn for
obvious reasons
is the single most popular descent route used by parties who
know about it
as it offers a quicker and far easier descent to the halfway
Lochain. From
there, most parties will strike out across the heather and
make their way
cross country back to the stream and the locked gate before
joining the
established path for the treacherous descent through the forest.
Although
the signs may be small at the moment - this route too is becoming
worn and
therefore very boggy in many place - a significant and noticeable
difference
from last year when it really was a walk through the heather.
Some thought
should be given as to the future of this part of the mountain
also as I can
see this situation worsening to the same level as the current
track - and
everything possible should be done to avoid that!
But what to do?????
Ben Nevis is not the only place in the world to experience
high levels of
human interest. It is not the only place that needs to sustain
large volumes
of walkers/ climbers.
The path to the highest mountain in Australia (Mt. Kosciusko)
has a 5 mile
raised steel mesh walkway erected especially to protect the
landscape from
the volume of walkers making the trip up. In other areas they
use special
matting in problem zones to prevent erosion. Paths in North
America are
given particular attention due to the excessive numbers of
visitors they
experience in popular spots.
Steep sections should be stepped - wooden, steel, stone,
it doesn't matter
what it is, it just has to be protected from further erosion.
Problem boggy areas need to be addressed by constructing
a suitable raised
walkway - steel, wooden - even railway sleepers would help
immeasurably.
Who should pay for it???
If one good thing came from last years Foot and Mouth epidemic,
it was to
highlight just how vital walkers and climbers are to local
communities such
as Fort William. I firmly believe that Lochaber residents
and businesses
benefit directly from the presence of outdoor recreationalists.
Therefore I
believe that the local council/ businesses should play their
part in
addressing the situation. Further, I think that any such project
should be
sponsored in particular by businesses that identify with climbers
and walker
- eg. Nevis Sport, Ellis Brigham - various guiding outfits
and outdoor
activities companies.
However, I also believe that the user, the person who most
directly affects
the environment, the walker, the climber, should play a part
also. I think
if a fund or trust was set up dedicated to the improvement
of access to the
Ben, you would be surprised how many people would donate money.
Collection points
could be set up in local stores, bunkhouses, pubs, and even
in the north face car park.
I can't imagine that a combination of these methods could
fail to achieve
the desired goals - much more difficult and complex issues
have been solved
in the past - it just requires foresight and dedication by
enthusiastic
individuals.
Although not a Lochaber local (yet), I would also be happy
to help in any
way I can.
Please let me know of any further developments.
Yours sincerely
Lindsay
Alan
It must be getting on for 15 years since I first made the
trek through the
mud of the Allt a'Mhuilinn to go and climb on the north face
in winter. I
must admit that I am a bit flabbergasted that here we are
now facing exactly
the same problems. The route isn't going to get any quieter
and the weather,
alas, isn't going to improve.
If you have a budgeted solution to the problem and require
any assistance
then I'll certainly try and whip up some interest through
the businesses,
particularly The Grog & Gruel. The contribution is unlikely
to be
significant but it may help a bit.
Regards
Ed
Clachaig Inn, Glencoe
Tel 01855 811252 Fax 01855 811679
Web site: www.clachaig.com
Hi Alan
Finally a letter with so much common sense.
I agree with Lindsay whole heartedly. What is it about us
that allows
matters like this to become so protracted and complicated?
Having recently walked up the Allt a Mhuilinn in all this
wet weather there
is no doubt that the path (if that is what it can be called)
is getting far
worse.
I too would give what support I could to a local initiative.
It needs to
start now with real purpose.
Tony
Hello Alan,
Many thanks for your recent e-mails and info.
Yes, I would like to be kept informed of the most relevant
items of interest
regarding access onto the hills of Lochaber. Although resident
150 miles
away, we still feel a close attachment to Lochaber and are
frequent visitors
to friends and colleagues there, so updates are always of
interest.
The letter from your Australian friend was most interesting
a very
appropriate. The track to the CIC has been a bog for much
of the way for as
long as I can remember, so I'd be surprised if it's changed
much. No doubt
the considerable amount of rain that we have had over the
last 6-9 months is
bound to make it seem a lot worse.
However, the point he makes about the need to do something
about it is very
true. Businesses in Lochaber are very keen and quick to take
money off
visitors, and it wouldn't do any harm for them to give something
back by
improving some of the more popular routes. It certainly would
not cost an
arm and a leg to have some kind of matting placed across the
boggiest parts
of the level section of the route to the CIC.
Indeed, since moving south, we have become a regular visitor
to the Cuillin
Forest and Torridon regions of the North West, and I have
to say that the
work that has been done there on the paths is truly amazing
and makes
walking them a pleasure even in the wettest of conditions.
Surely if an area
such as that can arrange and fund path improvements, then
it becomes more
appropriate for the paths up our highest mountain to be of
a similar
standard.
Regrettably, Alan, it seems that we, as a country, are seriously
guilty of
being short-sighted when it comes to investment and repairs.
The state of
the Ben paths reflects the rest of the country, including
the NHS, Public
Transport, etc., etc., etc.. We do nothing for years and years
.. and then
we have to spend a fortune putting things right.
Anyway, less of my chuntering on. You have my full support
for any
improvement which benefits the lives of the local people and
adds to the
enjoyment of climbers and walkers. If I've got any photographic
material
which might prove useful, then you're very welcome to use
it. Next time I go
up any of the Ben paths, I'll make sure to take some appropriate
photography
to highlight these issues.
Kind regards and Best Wishes,
Ian
How about this?
Tarmac the track up to the dam and remove the locks from the
gates
Expand the car park Regularly plough the track so no one gets
stuck This would remove any bad feeling between the have and
have nots (keys that is) and make the walk in a whole load
easier. It certainly has an economic value to the Fort William
area although I'm unsure about the environmental effects and
the pain in the arse it will be when the Ben becomes as busy
as the northern corries
Ian
How about this?
Could the track up to the dam not be made available to all
instead of a few 'in the know' locals. This would mean no
more erosion on the climb through the forest and a shorter
walk for all.
It would however mean an end to to the Torlundy carpark.
Great news that some work is being done. Is this connected
to the survey
which was going around in February? A more logical approach
from the North
Face car park would be to zig-zag uphill to meet the forest
road near the
top car park. Obviously this will involve a lot of work!
The All a'Mhuilinn path does need some remedial work higher
up. Maybe
duckboards are the way forward over the worst short sections.
Sections of
the path are in very good nick and look like they don't need
any additional
effort. The problem is where moraine debris gives way to peat
bog. This is a
fragile environment and just won't stand the volume of traffic.
As usual
it's a question of sustainability. I will gladly make a contribution.
Andy
Dear Alan Kimber
I saw a note on the McofS website regarding this. The access
to our biggest hill and leading alpine attraction has always
puzzled me. Considering both the large numbers of winter visitors
to the mountain and the economic impact they have on the area,
you would think that the local council would do more. I went
to Cogne a couple of years ago, and they actively encourage
ice climbers, with special signed paths and a very helpful
tourist office. I believe this is also the case in a number
of the French villages with a lot of icefall climbing, to
the extent of running festivals and so on. PYB and others
seem to pay to use the forestry commission track to where
it terminates, and this would seem the obvious place to put
a carpark. I also wonderered about the distillery road on
the oposite bank, would it be possible to use this for access?
Cheers, Jason
Hi Alan,
I would be willing to do occasional weekend voluntary work
on the path. I've worked a couple of summers on the paths
( even did a Footpath Trust training course ) so know what
I'm doing. Could you forward me an e-mail address or phone
no. for Dave Wrigglesworth please?
Agree the path is in a terrible state just now and has to
be sorted out ASAP. Hope they can raise the funds ( I'm very
skint just now so can't really help in that respect!).
Cheers,
Dave
Dear Alan,
I was wondering if the SMC or yourself had ever thought of
mounting a Web Cam on top of the CIC Hut. After looking at
climbing forums, the mountaineering public are obsessed with
knowing the exact conditions before they leave for a trip,
and also seem to check web cams for some of this information.
I was at CIC at the weekend with a few pals from the Dundee
University Rucksack Club and this is something that came up
in conversation and we thought would be an informative and
interesting idea.
And a final note to say how impressed we all were with the
hut. It made for a fantastic weekend (even if there wasn't
as much ice as desired!).
Richard
Alan,
Is it possible to show a map of the proposed new path in
relation to the
Torlundy car park and the stile at the start/end of the Allt
a'Mhuilinn
proper. I agree totally with previous letter writers in that
the current
path up through the forest is appalling - and deteriorating
rapidly.
Although a tarmac surface, removal of the gates and a nice
car park at the
dam is appealing I think it would only be a matter of time
before this too
would be inadequate - leading to congestion and possible traffic
accidents
in poor weather. I also believe the aura of a big route on
"The Ben" would
be diminished and devalued, and being able to drive halfway
up to the CIC
hut could create many more problems actually on the hill due
to people with
inadequate fitness going for routes that would otherwise have
been beyond
them. I am not in anyway a traditionalist but I believe that
"progress" in
this case may well be a well constructed, direct access path
from the North
face car park and upgrading the Allt a'Mhuilinn path where
required. I
appreciate there will be many views on what is the best solution
but
everyone would agree that something has to be done, keep up
the good
work.......
Douglas
Dear Alan
As a regular user of the North Face car park and Allt a 'Mhuilinn
path I welcome any sensible effort to improve the line of
the path in its lower section (prior to the meeting with the
Allt). The erosion of vegetation and soil arising from the
new path line is unacceptable. Similar damage has been caused
higher up the path, where it traverses boggy sections of the
moor. I have posted a small cheque for the fund and will encourage
friends to do likewise
Surely, the management of this access corridor should also
include a toilet facility at the car park and something at
the CIC hut . The area around both sites is often a health
hazard. A conventional flush toilet could be provided at the
car park but at the CIC some lateral thinking is required.
A managed latrine of some sort is necessary if human pollution
of the upper Allt a 'Mhuilinn is to be controlled
Thanks very much for the much needed effort
Best wishes
Pete, Manchester
Hi Alan:
It gives me a real charge to feel all the enthusiasm to get
on and do things in Lochaber. You're absolutely right that
it appears that obstacles can always be found to put in the
way of path management (as with most other things) - the long
sorry saga of trying to repair and maintain the Tourist Path
on the Ben shows just how bad that can be.
But - and I would say this wouldn't I - it isn't just that
easy. It isn't that easy to raise the money (and good path
work does cost) - the British Upland Footpath Trust has been
trying for 10 years to get retailers and gear manufacturers
to put their hands in their pockets. Contrast that with the
US and Canada where the big equipment co-ops like REI &
MEC pump money into trails and conservation work.
It isn't that easy - especially in Scottish conditions -
to get the right path techniques that will work in summer
and winter, and look right in the landscape. Lindsay Yule
may be keen on the grid walkway at Kosciuszko but I think
it looks dire, and it certainly isn't a solution that would
work in Scottish winter conditions (and he's actually a bit
gung-ho about the state of paths in Aus, there are plenty
of dire messes in Tasmania where conditions are very like
Scotland). And it isn't that easy to get a maintenance programme
in place to keep paths in decent order.
Why not take the public money at 75% grant rate if it's going
? Jim Maison started off trying to fix Clachnaben off his
own bat, raising sponsorship from Aberdeen oil companies etc,
but eventually even he decided it was worth hopping through
the hoops if it made his money go four times further. By all
means kick-start this initiative as a voluntary one, but kick
Highland Council and SNH as well; you might be surprised to
get a positive reaction.
I hardly have any direct involvement in path work these days
but I'll certainly mention your concern to make something
happen on the Ben at the next meeting of the Upland Paths
Advisory Group, which is the nearest thing we've got to a
national paths action committee.
Cheers
Bob
..............................................
2002 - INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF MOUNTAINS
Get involved ! -
see www.iym.org.uk for the Scottish Project -
www.mountains2002.org for international action
..............................................
Today's quote for IYM in Scotland -
"In the mountains we find the last relic of the primeval
in an otherwise ordered landscape, and this is their greatest
attraction."
Jock Nimlin, "Mountain Howffs", SMC Journal 1948
..............................................
Hi Dave,
I noticed you are in the process of raising funds for repair
of the above path, a worthy cause indeed. I cannot help financially
just now, but would be very willing to offer voluntary help
some weekends through the summer. I have a couple of years
experience working on the paths and can build waterbars, crossdrains
etc.
Realise that this might be a long-term project, raising that
kind of money will not be easy.
Best of luck,
Dave McG
Dear Alan,
I am responding to the request in Climber magazine for opinions
on the
current and future access to Ben Nevis.
It would be nice to have a more direct route from the North
Face car
park to the dam but in truth the current access arrangements
are quite
satisfactory. It isn't really much further than it was from
the layby on
the A82 over the golf course and I always found it easier
to navigate
off the summit in a whiteout than to find the start of the
path in the
dark.
Paul
Paisley
Dear Alan,
I am writing to you in two capacities!
Firstly as a representative of Outward Bound I am trying
to co-ordinate
eco-service project for students this summer. In total nine
days in July and
August. We like to have projects for the students where they
can 'give
something back to the environment or local community'. Therefore,
if by
these dates, you have any skilled path builders needing 'labour'
on the CIC
path we would be delighted to help. Perhaps there are other
areas you can
think of. The students are usually 16/17 yrs old, can be on
site from 1000
until 1600, will have basic kit - waterproofs, boots, lunch,
gardening type
gloves and goggles and be accompanied by an Instructor.
Hope to hear back from you on this matter
Secondly on a personal level I'd liked to comment about access
to the North
Face of the Ben. I agree to having better access from Torlundy
- in fact I would welcome a decent car park at the dam which
everyone could use. I don't see why special arrangements and
payments should be made for access to this area. If we could
encourage a circular path say Ben Track Dam to CIC hut to
Halfway lochan - and either to Achintee or back to the Dam
- then I think more assistance might be available from Footpath
Trusts, Highland Council etc..
Prior to encouraging more people on the CIC path toilet facilities
should be
considered - either get rid of that horrible wind vane - which
has been
doing nothing for 2 years - or make a loo to help the site
get clear of all
the human waste. Even better get rid of the CIC hut - again
special booking arrangements needed for access - and build
a really super, well facilitated mountain hut for all to use
at half way lochan. There aren't many places in the world
where popular mountain routes have no facilities for it's
users.
There are several clean ups this summer and groups keen to
improve the Ben- John Muir Trust, Lochaber Athletics Club.
Perhaps a big co coordinated
approach would be good.
Well done Alan for getting things started - You have also
done well getting
plenty of 'press' coverage. Please let me know of dates for
the next LMAG meeting as I'd be keen to come along.
From Emma
I think that the aim of this campaign is admirable. As a
climber and former mountain rescue team member, I am in full
support of it, and would urge the Scottish Executive to look
again at the adequacy of existing support. I note that all
funding will be channelled through the Nevis Partnership and
this is good.
Please let me know what I can do to help or give me a ring
sometime
Fergus Ewing MSP
Alan,
I live in Caol and am a regular user of the various paths
leading to the
Allt a' Mhuillin. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to make
a financial
contribution, much as I would like too and feel that I should.
However, should any voluntary work be undertaken to maintain/improve
the
state of these paths then I'll gladly contribute my time and
sweat! The
hills of the Ben Nevis range have provided me with numerous
enjoyable days
(and nights!), a debt which I will cheerfully repay should
the opportunity
become available.
If this happens, please do contact me either by email or
either of the phone
numbers below.
Regards
Andy Ross
I'm keen to see improvements made. I've had many many good
days on the Ben & I feel it is appropriate to give something
back. Please advise how best to make a donation.
Mike
West Yorks
Alan
For what they are worth, a few more thoughts on the Ben Nevis
track debate:
1. The existing track from Torlundy is tortuous and would
benefit from
being made more direct to the dam. The climb through the deciduous
woods
from the railway path to the dam is in a poor state of repair.
It would be
preferable to provide a more direct route through the conifers
(which many
would regard to have less visual value - and are presumably
scheduled for
harvest in due course?) further East, possibly using earth-filled,
timber
framed steps where required.
2. Without wishing to be in any way elitist (I don't have
access to a
key!), the addition of a couple of kilometres of steep climbing
from the NF
carpark helps restrict pedestrian traffic along the Allt a'Mhuillin.
If
public access is made available to the upper carpark at the
dam then we can
expect huge increases in numbers on this side of the Ben -
akin to the
Tourist track at present. Just because an area has outstanding
natural
beauty does not mean that it should be sacrificed to allow
anyone and
everyone to see it. The level of fitness required to walk
in from Torlundy,
although certainly not extreme, self regulates - to a degree
- the numbers
of people reaching the CIC hut and beyond. Reducing the approach
could
result in more people getting in trouble on the Ben through
inadequate kit,
clothing, fitness etc.
3. Toilet facilities at the car park probably make good sense
-
although these may become a ready pitched bivvy!
4. The track to the carpark is deteriorating and if left
unrepaired
will begin to pose risks to heavily laden, standard clearance
saloon cars;
5. The carpark can become over full and would benefit from
extension. A
commercial style wheelie bin would be beneficial;
6. Improvements to the track through the boggy sections are
required to
prevent further irreparable damage. Duck boards, raised platforms
or similar
are very unsightly. Laid paths from local rock material (such
as in Glencoe)
are far less offensive visually but very unpleasant on the
soles of weary
feet - particularly under heavy packs and in heavy mountain
boots. They are
also dangerous when covered in verglas. So while necessary,
the form of
improvement will need very careful thought.
7. Toilets at the CIC hut are becoming essential - but probably
only
for hut inmates. The principal problem must be from faeces
rather than urine
and most others will have access to suitable facilities in
the valley. This
then becomes an issue for the SMC only, I suggest, and I understand
this is
being addressed - albeit slowly. The waste from the relatively
small number
of campers at the top of the Allt a'Mhuillin can probably
be accommodated as
at present - although greater encouragement to toilet far
from streams, bury
and even carry out waste would be warranted (awareness campaign
by MCS,
perhaps?). A carry out policy is the norm, as I understand
it, in other
similarly fragile environments elsewhere.
8. Let's remember the Ben is a mountain - not an urban playground
nor a
roadside crag: we must not promote the disfigurements allowed
on Snowdon on
or around Ben Nevis. A relatively small amount of sensitive
"reinforcement"
coupled with a suitable awareness campaign would go a long
way to improve
the present situation.
9. Finally - is a £5 "season" ticket for
climbers visiting the Ben (or
similar) really so unreasonable? Or perhaps even £1
for every
tourist/walker/climber visitor, to cover the cost of improvements.
Or would
that be seen as the thin edge of a wedge??? It's done elsewhere
and I
wouldn't object to paying a small charge.....
Regards
Andrew
Hi All
Writing from the perspective of a former employee of a central
belt local
authority, a tax payer and the current Hon. Sec. of the MC
of S with fairly
widespread experience of what is done elsewhere in Europe.
[I should
emphasise not in the name of or on behalf of the MC of S]
My understanding is that money is allocated within the central
government
grant to local authorities for the upkeep of paths [usually
taken to be
rights of way] and foot access generally within the roads
budget. This
budget is not singularly for dealing with roads and provision
for wheeled
vehicles, but also for pavements and cycle tracks et al, and
could be
reasonable seen as the primary budget for the development
of provision for
pedestrian access. It is used for the development and maintenance
of
pedestrian access around towns. In using this money to accomodate
cars and
roadside problems it also has an on cost in terms of addressing
the need for
the facilities for the people who want to drive to and park
in an area.
Planning departments are in existence to do. There is allocated
to the
upkeep and maintenance of paths in the budget of planning
departments, who
are funded to record & preserve rights of way and other
public paths and
maintain them as a local amenity.
This money is supplemented by finance raised from Council
Tax and local
business rates. Councils have the powers to allocate this
funding to the
budget areas which they consider most important.
THE PUBLIC ALREADY PAYS. THERE IS ALREADY A REVENUE FLOW.
The public as a whole already pay for the upkeep of paths
and means of
communication. In this framework of thought the commercial
and recreational
use of public roads, has no particular precedence over the
provision of
public assets for other commercial and recreational purposes.
The current arrangments and priorities are essentially 'historical
practice'
and dictated by political decisions, local and national. The
primary
perspective being that the 'countryside' is somehow a free
resources which
can be exploited without investment for the benefit of the
tourist industry.
UPLAND PATHS ARE NOT A SPECIAL CASE, NOR SHOULD THE MAINTENANCE
OF THEM
DEPEND ON CHARITABLE FUNDING. THIS HAS BECOME NECESSARY BECAUSE
LOCAL
AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT SEEN THEM AS WORTHY OF INVESTMENT. THE
PRECEDENT OF
FUNDING THE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF UPLAND PATHS BY VOLUNTARY
EFFORT AND
SPECIAL FUND RAISNG INITIATIVES IS UNFORTUNATE. UPLAND PATHS
ARE AN
ECONOMICALLY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE
OF TOURISM,
SIMILAR TO CANALS, ROADS, RAIL AND OTHER PROVISION FOR INDUSTRY.
The new access legislation make the local authority responsible
for there
maintenance and development.
The key factor is that not enough of the already collected
public funds are
allocated to the creation, maintenance and development of
important economic
assets for countryside recreation. Efforts should be focussed
on addressing
this rather than pursuing policies which further selectively
tax the outdoor
recreational public, by charging them for the development
and maintenance of
a public good, from which many other people in the local and
national
economy profit, who never use them but profit from the expenditure
of those
who do. [This is a form of local supplementary taxation, which
has been
declared as not possible when more general 'vistor taxes'
have been
suggested.]
Of course walkers create paths which with heavy use become
landscape scars,
but so do land managers using quad bikes, so do stalkers using
argo cats to
recover carcasses, so do quarries and forestry plantations.
These are often
part funded from the public purse through grants for estate
development etc.
These grant are made in the name of economic development of
benefit to a
wider community than the individual in receipt of the grant
in aid, and the
person who makes immediate use of the asset. A similar argument
applies to
the public investment in the creation of hotels. They provide
work and
employment - so also does the construction, repair and maintence
of the
local paths network.
UPLAND PATHS ARE OF BENEFIT TO A WIDER COMMUNITY THAN THOSE
WHO ACTUALLY USE
THEM.
Every reassertion of the obvious point that recreational
land users are
responsible for the use they make of the land, and the degradation
which
ensues, enables other people to assert that recreational land
users are the
'problem'. They are not. They are a key economic asset in
their own right
and through their already high economic contribution the foundation
upon
which the solution depends. Otherwise why encourage tourism.
[If walkers
are just an expensive nuisance perhaps they should be discouraged
to prevent
damage to the countryside, then no investment in infrastrucure
would be
necessary.] There is a central contradiction, which can be
highlighted by
'Lets encourage people to come to the country so that they
can contribute to
the rural economy but then blame them for the damage that
arises and
penalise them selectively for being tourists'. The mutually
exclusive
nature of ideologies of encouraging tourism but discouraging
access and not
investing in the infrastructure tourists come to use is obvious.
This
contradiction needs to exposed and erradicated. It is from
this incoherency
that the current proposals derive.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN EUROPE HAS ADOPTED A POLICY OF CHARGING
PEOPLE FOR THE
USE OF RECREATIONAL FOOTPATHS AT THE POINT OF USE. THESE COUNTRIES
EXPERIENCE MORE CONCENTRATED AND CONTINUOUS USE THAN SCOTLAND.
MANY
EUROPEANS VISIT SCOTLAND TO ESCAPE FROM THE OVERCROWDING ELSEWHERE.
The concentrated exploitation of an area for tourism, to
encourage a
sufficient mass of people to visit a local area to fill hotel
complexes as a
'panacea' for rural economic underdevelopment is the 'problem'.
This has
been demonstrated by the history of the Aviemore Centre and
the subsequent
urbanisation of the Glenmore corridor. [The decay of the Aviemore
centre is
obvious for all to see.] It is the same 'process' which results
in areas
surrounding ski resorts in the Alps being degraded into unsatisfactory
tired
looking summer resorts. This sort of exploitation based on
ideologies of
pre & post war mass tourism exemplified by resorts on
the Mediteranean
coastline, and the Alpine ski industry is now outmoded, and
discredited
particulaly from an environmental conservation perspective.
The people are
not the problem but how recreation is provided for and how
it is managed is
the problem
The consequences for the coasts of the mediteranean and formerly
magnificent
French alpine valleys are all too obvious. Scotland does not
want to
replicate these mistakes, whatever temporary benefit may accrue
to the urban
centres of the highlands, and to international hotel chains.
Enormous amounts of public funds have been used for the creation
of lowland
pathwork in the Glenmore corridor to develop facilities to
rehabilitate
Aviemore as an all round year resort. Nobody has suggested
charging for
access to this network even on a voluntary basis. The question
arises as to
why upland paths are a special case for with holding of public
funds and
expecting users and charities to pay for upkeep.
NEED FOR POLITICAL ACTION, RATHER THAN CAPITULATION.
As LMAG is doing, all efforts should be devoted to raising
political
awareness of the need to develop and maintain high quality
low cost
recreational facilities throughout the area for which a Council
is
responsible, as an essential aspect of developing the rural
economy.
However, enthusiasm for such developments should not be allowed
to 'push'
daftys into developments which degrade the quality of the
environment on
which the recreational environment depends. Over concentration
of facilities
in one area is always likely to be destructive, especially
if it is driven
by the economic needs of proximal urban concentration. The
countryside can
not be taken for granted, and crude inappropriate facilities
do more to
damage the quality of visitor experience than probably anything
else. [NB
comments about paths which are uncomfortable to use.] Developments
in
Leanachan Forest have yet to demonstrate their quality, longevity
and value
for recreators and the local economy.
OVER CENTRALISED CONTROLS.
The outstanding quality of the Scottish countryside is now
being 'exploited'
in the last great land grab to syphon as much money out of
the economy and
into the pockets of the state & international tourism
service providers as
possible.
This pressure and over centralised Scottish Executive controls
and direction
are leading to a uniformity of provision, urbanisation of
the countryside
and its thoughtless short sighted exploitation. Mountaineers
should not be
coopted into colluding in this process. I believe we should
preserve the
assets we value, and see that the sort of infrastructure we
value is created
and maintained on an equal footing with those who want swimming
pools and
sports stadia and watch and play football.
THERE ARE SOME LESSONS WHICH MIGHT BE EMULATED TAKEN FROM
OTHER SMALL
MOUNTAINOUS COUNTRIES, WITH A LONG HISTORY OR RURAL DEPOPULATION,
POVERTY
AND SMALL SCALE AGRICULTURE.
Swiss ideologies enabled a backward, unindustrialised, federation
of poverty
stricken highland remnants of France, Germany Austria &
Italy, smaller than
Scotland, to become in a single lifetime a prosperous exemplar
of how raw
scenic quality can be converted into a major economic asset.
This was done
with exagerated care for the preservation of the distinct
culture of each
area, its vernacular architecture and pattern of land use.
It also secured
employment in the rural society throughout the federation.
We in Scotland
should have regard to the Swiss example. Similar examples
may be found in
the Austrian and Italian Tyrol.
I believe a 'visitor bed' tax and strict local control of
developments as
adopted by some Swiss communities has some merits. The Swiss
visitor tax
draws on, in an undifferentiated fashion, all visito. The
payment of a local
visitor tax could be used as the basis for gaining access
to a range of
recreational facilities of every kind at a reduced cost -
bike hire, leisure
centres, funicular/gondola tickets etc, libraries, public
transport and
local museums. [Locals to get a ticket as a part of the benefits
from paying
council tax, thereby emphasising the connection between such
taxation and
accessible high quality local services.]
OTHER FUNDING, THE USE OF WHICH HAS TO BE MADE TO DELIVER
MORE.
In terms of central Government finance. SNH is already funded
to conserve
and enhance the the natural heritage. Visit Scotland is already
financed to
promote and enhance tourism facilites in Scotland. Scottish
Enterprise is
already financed to promote economic development. Sport Scotland
is already
financed to develop both competitive and recreational activity
in Scotland
[and gives massive grants to industrial undertakings like
professional
football and rugby]. HIE has already invested heavily in some
questionable
very capital intensive developments. The Sports Lottery has
such
restrictive rules for the disbursement of supplementary finance,
again
collected from voluntary contributions, that grants for path
development and
maintenance is excluded. The issue for the rural councils,
the rural
population generally and the people who use rural countryside
for recreation
is how existing funds are spent and on what.
THE RECREATIONAL PUBLIC ALREADY PAY MASSIVELY FOR THE PRIVILEGE
OF VISITING
AND USING THEIR HERITAGE. THE ISSUE IS HOW THIS TAXATION IS
USED AND WHERE
IT IS SPENT.
The public pays massively to maintain and support extended
bureaucracies,
who are so busy, communicating with each other, agreeing policies
in 'cabals
in cupbords', setting standards for every body but themselves
and auditing
the performance of business, that they have no time or resources
to devote
to investments in public infrastructure. [They see themselves
as such
infrastructure.] The concern and advice of volunteers and
local people is
commonly disregarded, while the improvement of economic infrastructure
is
devolved to the volunteer and slave society [who are only
funded or
supported if they work to implement policies of the Executive,
as
interpretted by quango's which have singularly failed to 'deliver'
themselves.] This quasi colonial structure of Government has
to be
questioned.
One of the issue for the rural'community of interest' is to
get more of the
resources locked in big office blocks in the urban centres,
and paid to
employees residents in the urban centres transferred to projects
which give
high quality well remunerated employment to the rural areas,
and actually
serve the needs of visitors. [Setting up grading schemes and
telling
accommodation providers that they have the wrong personality
and have
decorated their premises inappropriately, exemplifies how
money is being
wasted. As the Swiss have discovered the vernacular style
is the thing
which is valued, and the local culture is the 'subject' of
tourism]
People paying at the point of access for the use, development
and upkeep of
upland paths is a distraction from the essential 'political'
task of holding
the Executive responsible for the the implementation of effective
policies
for the development of the rural economy through the creation
of high
quality recreational infrastructure, and employment related
to its
maintenance.
The development of the rural economy can not be headed up
by people who are
culturally and physically based in the Edinburgh, Glasgow
& Inverness - who
think they know best what is good for the countryside. This
is the cultural
imperialism of the town, which seems endlessly to impose on
the countryside
rather than serve it. They are inclined to introduce facilities,
architecture and the culture of the urban situation to the
countryside as an
'improvement'. What effect previous improvements, originating
from the
thinking of similar urban government, had on the Highlands
does not need to
be rehearsed, but depopulation continues.
DEPLOYMENT OF RESOURCES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE
OF THE
RECREATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE HIGHLAND COUNTRYSIDE IS
A POLITICAL
ISSUE, AND SHORTAGE OF RESOURCES ARISES FROM POLITICAL DECISIONS.
CHARGING
PEOPLE IN ANY WAY FOR ACCESS TO THEIR HERITAGE IS REGRETABLE,
BUT IN THE
CASE OF THE COUNTRYSIDE IT IS ALSO IMPRACTICAL AND UNFAIR.
TIME DOVOTED TO DISCUSSION OF THIS MATTER IS A DISTRACTION
AND LIKELY TO
DRAW ATTENTION AWAY FROM POLICIES AND PRACTICES WHICH ESSENTIALLY
DEFRAUD
THE RURAL & HIGHLAND SOCIETY FROM A PROPER SHARE OF INVESTMENT.
Nicholas Halls.
Generally angry of Ardentinny - but not reactionary.
Not all journeys from where you are represent progress to
where one would
like to be. I think while we may know where we are at the
moment and want
to move on, there are directions in which we should not be
going.
Is this another exemplification of mountaineers inability
to navigate
adequately in poor visibility ? I always know where I am but
this does not
imply I know where to go next.
Alan,
Thank you for sending me a copy of the correspodence initiated
by Andrew Elphinston along with the submission made by Nick
Halls. Although I am no longer a resident of Lochaber, I still
regard the area as my second home, and it remains of great
interest to me. On the wider issue, my work as a specialist
photographer naturally means that I frequently visit - and
scrutinise very closely - all the mountaineous regions of
our country.
As the saying goes " there's no such thing as a free
lunch " - there is a price to be paid for everything
- nobody should be misguided enough to think otherwise. The
freedom to roam has its price. With freedom comes responsibility,
and if we want to continue to be able to enjoy our countryside,
then we must be prepared to take the responsibility for its
development and maintenance, along with the costs that are
inevitably involved.
I would be astonished if any reasonable, understanding, sensible
and responsible walker or climber would argue against the
case that they should be prepared to make some contribution
towards the upkeep of our mountain paths and associated facilities
that we are so happy to make use of.
However !!!! How we make that contribution, how much we pay,
whom we pay it to, and how much of a say do we have about
how and where the money is spent opens as big a 'can of worms'
as the recent access debate. The individual who can come up
with a system that is fair and acceptable to all will be a
genius - and an excellent diplomat too.
So what options have we got for the collection and distribution
of any finance ?
Through central government taxation? I think not! As a nation
we are taxed enough already - and a tidy sum ends up in the
pockets of unscrupulous landowners and farmers and other so-called
guardians of the countryside by way of grants and subsidies.
More money goes to other 'national' bodies and associations,
government departments and other qwangos - the list is as
long as your arm. How much say do we really have about where
these billions of pounds end up ??
Through local government finance? No way! How much did your
Council Tax go up this year? How effective and efficient do
you believe your local council to be? How much do you really
feel that your vote influences how councils spend their money?
Through a local bed/visitor tax as used abroad? How confident
are you that the funds would be dedicated to the purpose for
which they were collected? Wasn't something called "Road
Fund Licence" introduced for a similar purpose many years
ago? What happens to the money from that now? Not on our roads
- that's for sure! How popular would a tax such as this would
be greeted by local businesses and hoteliers who are always
complaining that "numbers are down this year"? Might
this only lead to larger overheads and more bureaucracy for
small businesses in rural areas?
Through a tax or levvy made on outdoor clothing by the outdoor
gear manufacturers? Really? As an ex-revenue officer I challenge
the person behind that idea to come up with an efficient and
reliable method for collecting such funds. Which particular
revenue collection department would you have in mind to collect
it? Most businesses employ accountants to think of ways to
reduce their tax burden and overheads - and that's just how
such a levvy would be regarded - as an overhead to be reduced
or avoided.
Through local tolls/footpath taxes/entrance fees? Now that
would be like giving local landowners a licence to print money!
We've already heard the rumblings of a scheme by the National
Trust for Scotland to place "ticket/donation" machines
in Glencoe, and a local councillor has commented that the
"principle is fine". But once again, what guarantee
is there that monies raised would be properly spent on the
purpose for which they are collected? The temptation here
is for the responsible bodies to charge what they like, without
consulting the people involved. Indeed a example has recently
been exhibited by the Lake District National Park authority
who have raised daily car parking charges at Glenridding from
£2.10 to £5 for what they call "environmental
benefits". Is that responsible charging? Is that fair
to walkers and climbers?
Through lottery funding? Well, that's a bit hit and miss?
Do you know where most of the money goes to? I don't! And
our mountains deserve something more permanent and reliable
so that long term strategies can be planned and accomplished.
So what's the alternative, I hear you say? Well, to be honest
I'm not sure. However, there is one positive proposal I can
make.
I already happy and willing to commit a regular but small
donation to five different charities every month - from Cancer
Research to the Scottish Society for the Protection of Animals.
And I would be happy to donate a further £15 per month
to help improve and maintain our mountain paths and associated
facilities.
But there's a condition ...
I'm only prepared to give that money to an independent, democratically
controlled, non-profit making organisation which is dedicated
to the maintenance of our upland footpaths - a kind of National
Footpath Trust. This might be made up of a number of local
groups of volunteers, administered and monitored from the
centre. I see a similarity with the local mountain rescue
teams - local groups could raise their own money locally but
also draw from the central fund. The one difference I see
- unlike mountain rescue - is that local workers should be
paid for their time and efforts.
I hope that the outdoor community will work together - as
it has before during periods of crisis and difficulty. We've
all got to make a contribution, and let's do it generously
and without compulsion. I for one would be the first to throw
my hat ring and help out if someone comes up with an idea
that is open, honest, fair to all, meets broad approval -
and will work !
Kind Regards,
Ian Evans
Alan
Seems this has stirred up something of a hornets nest!
Generally Angry of Ardentinny (with me or with the situation
in general?)
made some extremely interesting observations and highlighted
a number of
aspects of funding in his e-mail which I confess I had not
considered. His
2000 word reply to my 25 word (naive?) suggestion indicates
this is a matter
close to his heart! I wholeheartedly agree that all avenues
of funding
should be explored. I also agree that local councils should
accept their
responsibility for providing and maintaining the infrastructure
necessary to
support the tourists/visitors they rely on for income.
This must include footpaths for climbers - otherwise the council
are, as
Angry says, exploiting the countryside for the benefit of
the tourist
industry without investment.
I can also say that I would rather give my £5 to the
MCS to help them obtain
public funding from appropriate sources than to a one-off
fund to pay for a
one-off repair. On this subject, I regret to note my personal
subscription
to the MCS has lapsed this year.
It is interesting that only the final point of my original
e-mail has
generated any debate. An area where climbers surely do have
full
responsibility is toilet facilities around the CIC hut. The
solution may
well be to carry it out, unpleasant as that may be - but that
remains the
responsibility of the individual climber. It would be ironic
if climbers find
themselves in future opposing a council plan to site toilets
in this area
for the benefit of their climbing visitors!!
The ongoing debate promises to be fascinating (and a complete
eye opener to
me)- but at the bottom of it all I confess to an underlying
gut feeling that
I ought to be prepared to pay for something I enjoy. I don't
want to
undermine the good work of the MCS in ensuring public funds
allocated for
such causes do actually reach the right need - and regret
my innocent few
words being used as they have if this is the net result. On
the other hand,
I do not want to be selfish to the extent that I expect others
- quite
likely less able to pay anyway - to subsidise my interests
by increasing
their council tax, for example. If necessary, I am prepared
to pay something
to maintain what I enjoy.
I have no objection to the idea of a tourist tax - but it
does seem to
contradict some of the earlier comments about expecting tourist
facilities
to be funded largely out of the local economy. Indeed, if
we assume all
other tourist facilities are already satisfactorily funded
(from whatever
source), then it would seem to be taxing all tourists to pay
for facilities
that only climbers will enjoy.....
As for the Sunday Post - what can I say?! Journalism as she
is reported.
Although I think actually we both agree with the majority
of comments made
by every other climber so far reported, thanks for your support
in your
e-mails. A stimulating debate for a while yet, I'm sure.
Kind regards
Andrew
Dear Alan,
Just read your article about the posts on Ben Nevis, I cannot
understand why there is even a debate! if it aids navigation
and potentially
saves lives then surely there can be no argument against,
unless you just
prevent people from walking to the summit at all. I gained
an interest in
this subject because of a planned visit to Scotland in July
when I had
intended to climb (walk the tourist trail) Ben Nevis with
my familly however
I have second thoughts now that I have read about the dangers
involved in
the final stretch, particularly as I am not skilled with compass
or map,
although I am sure that the majority of people who walk it
are not either.
I have just returned from Borneo having climbed Mt Kinabalu
(4100m)
which was a great experience and tremendously well organised.
On the final
reaches of Kinabalu they have a very large fixed rope strung
all the way to
the summit and tensioned just enough that it can be held but
not pulled of
line, this takes all the guess work out of navigation on the
final
approaches and makes the whole experience extremely safe.
It is a very cheap
and simple way of avoiding accidents, and I didn't hear a
single climber
complain that it spoiled the look of the mountain and it didn't,
you didn't
even notice it when you looked back down from the summit.
What a small price
to pay to safe guard peoples lives and create a safe enjoyable
experience.
Best Regards,
Ralph.
Hi there.
As you may know, I was one of the protagonists during the
debate on the
poles in the 90's. Although I now live in the Alps, I return
to
Scotland every winter to guide on the Ben and other Scottish
mountains.
My strong opposition to manmade navigation aids has not changed
in the
intervening years.
Placing any kind of markers will engender a false sense of
security in
people, especially those who have little or no experience
of what the
Ben can be like. Alan Kimber proposes cairns at 50m intervals.
What
happens if the visibility is less than that, or the snow covers
them?
Mal Duff once joked that the only solution would be a continous
cable 10
feet off the ground painted orange. Please note, he was joking.....
A summit cairn and a trig point are acceptable, but all other
man made
structures on the Ben should be removed, including the CIC.
The way to prevent accidents is through training and education,
for
example: Alan Kimber could run navigation courses.
The GPS track could be made available to download off the
net, or at the
tourist office in the Fort. The maps and summit bearings could
me more widely publicised among
incident prone groups
Reducing accidents in the mountains is about managing the
people who go
there, not the environment itself.
Regards,
ANDY PERKINS
IFMGA Guide
I generally don’t much like waymarkers and cairns
in the mountains; the
problem is that there are just too many leading to confusion
and a false
sense of security. But I think Ben Nevis is a special case,
particularly
in view of the large number of adventurous but poorly equipped
tourists who
make the ascent of our highest peak. And why shouldn’t
they? I think it
elitist consider the Ben as the sole domain of the bona fide
mountaineer,
whatever that is? As for climbers, who has not breathed a
huge sigh of
relief on finding the observatory shelter or number 4 gully
marker post in
whiteout? Who would recognise it with absolute certainty without
the
marker?
I would propose something like this:
1. Informative signs at the start of all walking ascent routes
giving
sound “noddy” advice about the potential dangers,
weather…etc.
2. Installation of a line of “sensitive” markers
from summit observatory
to top of zigzags.
3. The historically interesting observatory tidied up and
retained together with the shelter.
4. Number four gully marker/ abseil post retained and possibly
a similar
post installed for number three gully.
5. Removal of Coire Leis abseil posts and shelter but retain
CMD Coire Leis descent marker. Remove Carn Dearg shelter.
6. Remove everything else.
Russell
"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing"
(Homer Simpson, 1998)
Alan,
I have just read your mountaineering matters section on Navigational
Aids on the summit plateau, and thought you may be interested
in a tale.
Early Janruary, mid 80's, myself and climbing partner topped
out of zero gully at 6:30 pm, having had a total epic from
about the third pitch onwards, heavy wet snow avalanches,
spindrift etc (you know what it can be like at time of year).
Well on the summit plateau, visibility about 10 ft, wind
at a guess 100mph+, we couldnt stand up, every time we tried
we were just blown over again. Having been up there 50-60
times, we believed we could find 4 gully, by traversing (actually
crawling) around the rim and counting off gullies. To cut
a long story short, we ended up a long way left of where we
should be and ended up in 5 finger (although we hadnt twigged
where we were) and finally bivvied just above the big icefall
at about 2:00am . The following morning, we descended 5 finger,
by cutting across to a seperated gully line on the true right
bank of 5 finger, and got down that. I ended up in Belford
with frostbitten toes and nipped fingers, my partner was ok
just totally shattered. A luck escape!
We ere not novices but very experianced mountaineers, 10-15
Alpine seasons and a similar number in Scotland each. Scottish
V - VI, E3-4-5, and Alpine TD-ED's. Very used to mountains,
mountain navigation and wild conditions.
So if we could get such a mess, just think of the problems
those hordes who trek up there "because its the biggest"
could get into, even on a "summers day".
I fully support all your comments on navigational aids, across
the plateau, down towards the cmd, and markers at the top
of No 4 and prob No 3 gullies.
If you pass this on to the Lochaber Mountain Rescue, please
say thanks, I know they were looking on the wrong side of
the mountain, (assumed we had be avalanched out of the gully),
but still grateful to them for coming out.
Carry on the good works
Alan Moss
Hi Alan, I would just like to say that I support the markers
on Ben Nevis. Whilst I don't have any
difficulty finding my way around up there, we've got to accept
that that Ben is a special case and is always going to attract
individuals who really shouldn't be there. I'm on the Ben
every week in the
winter and I see them myself. And have had to get involved
in rescuing them.
So here is one mountaineer and instructor who is absolutely
in favour of markers on Ben Nevis.
As aye, Clive Roberts, MIC.
Back to top
|
