Regarding my earlier comments regarding the Sharp report, having now read it, I see nothing to contradict my earlier observations. Indeed it appears to contradict the conclusions drawn by other postees regarding experienced hillwalkers & navigation:-

Quote

Causes of Incidents

• Experienced people are less likely to make navigation and planning errors, but 48% of incidents involving inadequate equipment are experienced.

• Women are proportionately more likely to make navigation and planning errors.

• 11% of all incidents are caused through equipment which is inadequate or missing.
• 11% of incidents are the result of medical/health problems.
• Poor clothing or footwear are rarely contributing factors.
• Women are more likely to be involved where the cause has a medical or fitness basis.

Enquote

"Suppose you were blindfolded, taken to a spot 3 miles due south of a tent in featureless magnetic terrain, in a whiteout with zero visibility. How confident are you that you could find the tent and how long do you think it would take?"

Hell Norman how heavily do you want to stack the odds? I leave BM to respond to this but here's one for you. How about we drop you, under the same conditions,but without map and compass, 300m from the same tent. Hell, lets push the boat out and take your blinfold off (I'm feeling generous today). Do you think you could find the tent and how long would it take?

Regarding my earlier comments regarding the Sharp report, having now read it, I see nothing to contradict my earlier observations. Indeed it appears to contradict the conclusions drawn by other postees regarding experienced hillwalkers & navigation


Gee Norman, do I have to walk you through it?


"11% of all incidents are caused through equipment which is inadequate or missing."

and

"48% of incidents involving inadequate equipment are experienced."

means a significant proportion of all incidents are related to being poorly equipped and that experience makes no difference. About half of equipment related incidents involve experienced people. Specific examples drawn include:forgetting a compass" and "getting benighted without a torch". Ring a bell?


"Experienced people are less likely to make navigation and planning errors"

Indeed. But you are not navigating are you(i.e. you use neither map nor compass)? Your own accounts show that you are frequently unsure of your location. You might be, according to statistics less likely to make navigational mistakes, but you apparently do? Furthermore, you've got GC in tow, you invariably get seperated and it seems, at least from you accounts, that GC is less capable, and hence more likely to get into trouble, than yourself.

I deliberatly omitted the conclusions refering to women since they are not pertinent to this discussion, niether you nor GC (presumably) are women. The most relevant message that Sharp brings to this exchange, quite explicitly, is that experienced people also get killed and that it is frequently down to complaicency and lack of forethought.

I read you account of the red Cuillin and I then read the Sharp report and all alarms go off. I clearly havn't got a hope in hell of getting this point across so I'm going to make this (definately!) my last post.

Just a final remark, also for all of those following this thread at a distance: I applogise for the argumentative character of the thread. It wasn't my intention to pick a fight. I just feel very strongly that we all have a responsibity to ourselves, to our family's and to the hill-walking community, to take a responsible approach to our sport. For me, that means assessing the risk and taking the necessary steps to minimise that risk. What that entails will depend on the terrain and conditions but, in wild country this in turn means, in my opinion, carrying the basic tools required for navigation and being prepared for a forced night out (shelter, food and light). We claim a right to roam freely and we defend, with tooth and claw, our independent free spirit. What could free the spirit more than walking into the wilderness confident that you can deal with all eventualities and that, in as far as is possible, you will not be reliantn on anybody else to get you home safely?

Just to underline your last point, Dave, I was started on my hill walking by people who took pride in not only being totally self reliant, but also in being able to help others who came to grief.

I would feel a total prat if I had to be rescued because I had been careless or, to echo your point, failed to take along some important item of gear. For example, there is a headlamp in the bottom of my sack all the time - I don't have to check, I know it's there.

You've argued your point with conviction and honesty - I think that you can honourably bow out now.

I'm one of those who have followed this debate with interest. If it had been an argument I'd have left it alone. I think the points particularly in favour of map and compass have been made really well, and it's a pity that this thread will be missed by many simply because it's been buried in the Routes forum. It would make a very thought provoking Big Debate for the pages of TGO.

I can't add anything to what's already been said. I carry a map and compass because I'm normally on a schedule and I need and like to know where I am. A map and compass make up a tiny percentage of the weight carried, and seem insignificant (unless carrying all maps for a long backpack).

I have toyed with the idea that one day I'll go where my whim takes me. Simply looking at the land, and prevailing weather, and letting those elements be the deciding factors. It'll be in an area I don't know too well, and I'll be backpacking with plenty of supplies. Why would I want to do this? Well I suppose for a greater sense of adventure, (which is Norman’s reason for doing what he does). Is it a foolish romantic notion? I hope not. Because I'll be well supplied I should be self sufficient even though effectively lost. The downside is in the unlikely event or injury how will I navigate quickly to help (if I can move), or summon help to my position. For this I should maybe stash a map at the bottom of my pack, but I think in that situation it could be difficult to find yourself on the map.

I’ll emphasise though that for me this would be an occasional experiment, and only if there’s no time limit, and only if I have no-one depending on me. I wouldn’t want to take such a risk (as I see it) with my kids.

I would have thought that 5% of incidents being due to inadequate or missing equipment of the experienced is actually pretty low.

Also suggests that great majority of the incidents due to navigation - order of magnitude higher- are due to overestimation of experienced folk of their ability to navigate, with map & compass, very accurately in bad conditions.

However, I was really mainly referring to my earlier points about the report not taking account of the much greater distances no doubt travelled by experienced hillwalkers, particularly over more difficult & complex terrain.

Indeed no figures are even given for the proportion of hillwalkers who are experienced, or the definition used of such, rendering the whole thing pretty meaningless.

Maybe we should adopt the Spanish system & splash every few feet of rock in the Cuillin with colour coded trails so reducing the chances of Tyros getting lost. Of course any climbs should also be plastered with bolts every few feet to reduce the consequences of a slip.

Jim Perrin - soloer eg. of Coronation Street in Cheddar Gorge - & Catherine D, should probably also be locked up for their own safety & that of their offspring?

If you find a thread tiresome, then I suggest you don't bother following it and contributing even more tiresome comments, which really add nothing to the 'Big Debate'?

By the way, another wrong conclusion jumped to above - I can now confirm that GC is indeed a big girl. However, I will still be taking her along, as despite confirming recently that she has no intention whatsoever of wasting good beer money on a torch, she still has her uses.

Regarding the touche poser, regarding the tent, BM should be able to find it, with a 5km distance to cover. Should only have to cover a 250m X 100m square area, even with nothing to take offset bearings on, n'est pas?

To answer Dave's point of whether I would be able to find the tent, without map or compass?:-

Yes & no. The main point here is I think that it would probably be folly to look for it in the extreme conditions suggested. If BM's method is as foolproof as he appears to believe - in which case no doubt most folk would be using it in the Cuillin, which they surely aren't - then it would take him around 3-5 hours after removing the blindfold.

However, during that time he may well succumb to exhaustion - remember the 3 guys walking down the Cairngorm ski-road back in 1984? On the other hand if he missed the tent this would most probably be the outcome.

This is why the Cairngorm refuges were removed following the deaths of several schoolkids back in a November in the early 70s, when their leaders failed to locate such a refuge on the plateau between Ben MacDui & Cairngorm.

So how could I hope to find it without map or compass...?

How about digging a snowhole then wait 'til the weather clears up - much safer?

In this age of high tech gizmos, what do you guys think of the need to have a GPS and a mobile phone on the hills?

Okay, so I lied, this is my last post ;-)

I think Ian has a good point and that the thread would be better placed in Speak-out. So I'll start a general thread over there. Hopefuly Johns question will be adressed too.

In response to Normans comments:

I would have thought that 5% of incidents being due to inadequate or missing equipment of the experienced is actually pretty low.

These aren't absolutes they are stats. 11% of incidents, i.e. a significant proportion, are about being ill-equiped and experienced hill-goers have an equal chance of falling into that group.

Also suggests that great majority of the incidents due to navigation - order of magnitude higher- are due to overestimation of experienced folk of their ability to navigate, with map & compass, very accurately in bad conditions.

Does it? I don't see the bit about overconfidence in navigation skills stated explicity in the report. Being too ambitious yes but too reliant on a compas? Are you just reading what you want to see?

Indeed no figures are even given for the proportion of hillwalkers who are experienced, or the definition used of such, rendering the whole thing pretty meaningless.

Some are given (e.g. 48% of the incidents involving equipment) but yes, you are right, Sharp himself states that level of experience is subjective, is determined by the MR personnel present and that it's hard to gauge. Does this render the report meaningless? I personally don't think so. There is a message that should be taken seriously and should be heeded. The alternative, to disregard the whole thing as irrelevant, is tantamount to throwing away valuable insights which can help hillgoers to understand how best to minimise risk. Even if your aim is to enhance risk for the thrill then I would again it's a useful source of information?

Makes me think about your earlier comment about fast and light at 8000m. The mountaineers who do this are also assessing risk and acting accordingly to minimise it. Just being at those altitudes is deadly and leads to deterioration of physical and mental capabilty ( i.e the ability to make rational decisions and to act upon them) so the lesser of two evils is to take an apporach that limits the time spent in the death zone. Going lightweight in lochaber is one thing but strip away too much and you're basically increasing risk for the hell of it.


Maybe we should adopt the Spanish system & splash every few feet of rock in the Cuillin with colour coded trails so reducing the chances of Tyros getting lost. Of course any climbs should also be plastered with bolts every few feet to reduce the consequences of a slip.

Please do not put these words into my mouth. I do not advocate sanitising the mountains. Far from it. Waymarking and fixed routes in my view only magnify the problem by giving the impression that the mountains aren't truely wild, unpredictable, unforgiving places. Infrasturcture, be it on the hill or on the rockface is counterproductive and goes against my ethic of minimising human intervention in our remaining wilderness. My point has only ever been about accepting and appreciating the nature of the hills and being equiped to enjoy them for what they are and in relative safety.


So how could I hope to find it without map or compass...? How about digging a snowhole then wait 'til the weather clears up - much safer?

We finaly agree on something Norman! I'm genuinly cheered by this. You are very right. There are times when staying put is the best/only course of action. Knowing when to make that call is possibly the most critical skill of all. Ín this respect I've never been put to the test and hope I never will be. I have turned back on numerous occasions though and I would say thats an equaly important decision making process. However, where we might diverge again is that I see a forced bivvy as a last resort. Lets take you're constructed situation again (still in my oppinion an extreme case since it implies being truely lost in truely zero visibility and precludes any run-up to the situation in which the subject has monitored conditions, has remained in contact with the map and is aware of what the nature of the surrounding terrain) if I was just 300m from a refuge I would be inclined to find it. Perhaps impossible without map and compass and knowldege of your location but possible with. Depending on the going 5km might be a stretch indeed.

Of course a forced bivvy also requires foresight. Surviving a night out, again lets take your examples and make it on the CG plateau in winter, requires the means to do so, insluation, shelter, food and preferably a burner. The notion that you can create a meaningfull snow shelter in compacted snow without the tools to do so is also folly i.m.h.o. I hope I never find myself in such a situation but rest assured if I do I'll have swung the odds in my favour by carrying an extra couple of kg. I would hope that you walk with more than a sweater and a chocolate bar in winter?


This is why the Cairngorm refuges were removed following the deaths of several schoolkids back in a November in the early 70s, when their leaders failed to locate such a refuge on the plateau between Ben MacDui & Cairngorm.


I'm not sure I agree with your assertion on this point. I've read around this incident in the past, and correct me if I'm wrong (somebody please do), I thought the pervading logic was to remove the shelters so as to discourage people from being up there in the first place. I thought it wasn't so much the inability to find the things as the false sense of security that they created that was deemed to be the issue. The controversy around the 1971 tragedy was about group being there in the first place right? That they should have heeded the weather warnings and not set-off or at least have turned around. I thought the idea was that they were less likely to have gone if there was no prospect of a cosy hut? Present day discussions about way-marking and the shelter on the Ben are of a similar vein.

Quote [me] :- Indeed no figures are even given for the proportion of hillwalkers who are experienced, or the definition used of such, rendering the whole thing pretty meaningless.

Quote [Dave] :- Some are given (e.g. 48% of the incidents involving equipment).

What percentage of all hillwalkers are considered to be experienced in the Sharp report, whatever subjective, undisclosed definition is being used? Could be 2% or 98% for all we know...

Also 'equipment', would need to be broken down into type - what proportion of the 5% [experienced], are actually concerned with a compass. Given the potential number of items of equipment which some folk insist on carrying - my TA pal wouldn't be seen dead without a 4-season sleeping bag in his rucksack - this could well be below 1%.

Regarding provisions, drink is much more important than food, which is why I always carry plenty of juice, particularly if planning a long ridge walk, especially in summer. As for food, Chris Bonington & Doug Scott spent over a week in snowholes at great altitude, whilst both severely injured & ill coming down the Ogre, without any.

I don't think my hypothetical example was that extreme, clearly you aren't really lost if you know you are 3 miles due south of your tent. The blindfold was just a bit of superfluous melodrama.

Agree with you about the importance of knowing when to turn back, although can only recall having done so on 6 occasions in best part of 1000 ascents. Strangely 2 of those were with a guy who on one occasion was for going on and the other for turning back. Both times there was the same 3rd member who cast the deciding vote for retreat.