3 peaks again

Well it's not original, but it terms of abuse - a small pebble surely?
Certainly compared to the hundreds who walk every weekend.... Or are you
concerned about the abuse of roads and vehicles they will have to used to
get to the peaks?

Cheers,
Graham

"Mark Mitchell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

3 peaks again:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4483077.stm
It may be for a good cause? but their must be better and more original way

to raise funds for charity?

Quoted message said:

can we persuade them not to do this and can we come up with any batter

ways that also give something back to the areas they are using (or abusing?)

Quoted message said:

Mark

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

3 peaks again:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4483077.stm
It may be for a good cause? but their must be better and more original way to raise funds for charity?

I suppose since I'm not a local in any of the affected areas I
should keep out of this - but here goes anyway... Is it
really such a problem? Consider the number of people per year
who do this challenge, compared with the number who trot along
Striding Edge to Helvellyn or bound up Snowdon on night hikes
to see the sunrise from the top. Should we all keep away from
everywhere on the grounds that wherever we put our feet we
will erode something? Should peak-baggers stop bagging peaks?
Should we all avoid the 'popular' paths? Sorry, I know I said
I should probably keep out of it because I know not of what I
speak - but I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people here
saying what a bad idea the challenge is when all along I
suspect that quite a few of the detractors have probably done
it themselves at least once, or if not then something similar.
--
"Some witty person in rec.arts.sf.composition (I forget who)
called them feral apostrophes. Untamed, unregulated, they roam
the wastes of the English language and pop up where lea'st
expected."

Fran said:

I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people here
saying what a bad idea the challenge is when all along I
suspect that quite a few of the detractors have probably done
it themselves at least once, or if not then something similar.

I believe that the main objections are to do with busloads of
people turning up in Borrowdale at 3am to do Scafell Pike, which
is undoubtedly anti-social.

I did the 3PC in 1991 and thoroughly enjoyed the experience but
I can understand fully why some people frown upon it.

Chris

The message <[email hidden]>
from Fran <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It may be for a good cause? but their must be better and more
original way to raise funds for charity?

Of course there is. Stay at home and give the charity the money that
would otherwise have been wasted on the trip. Apart from all the other
objections I list below it is morally reprehensible in the extreme to
blackmail friends and acquaintances into supporting an exercise in
unnecessary conspicuous consumption. We all waste the finite resources
of this Earth but most of us do it in ways we like and I can't work out
which is worse: the idiot who undertakes the National 3 Peaks on the
mistaken assumption that they are doing good or the cynical con artist
who ventures further afield getting a cheap walking holiday at the
expense of family and friends and in doing so being a nice little earner
for the professional fund raiser who organised the trip.

Quoted message said:

I suppose since I'm not a local in any of the affected areas I
should keep out of this - but here goes anyway... Is it
really such a problem? Consider the number of people per year
who do this challenge, compared with the number who trot along
Striding Edge to Helvellyn or bound up Snowdon on night hikes
to see the sunrise from the top. Should we all keep away from
everywhere on the grounds that wherever we put our feet we
will erode something? Should peak-baggers stop bagging peaks?
Should we all avoid the 'popular' paths? Sorry, I know I said
I should probably keep out of it because I know not of what I
speak - but I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people here
saying what a bad idea the challenge is when all along I
suspect that quite a few of the detractors have probably done
it themselves at least once, or if not then something similar.

My other objections are:

1. Most (perhaps all) who undertake the challenge these days cheat.
They neither start at the start nor go on to finish at the finish (feet
in the sea in both cases) and some don't even bother with the 24 hour
rule.

2. The challenge as originally devised was as much about fast cars and
driving as fell running and modern advances in both motor vehicles and
roads has devalued it to such an extent that it now doable as a coach
excursion by the average walker.

3. Almost all who attempt the challenge do so over a very brief period.
They descend in hordes on the limited parking spaces and (in the Lake
District particularly) clog the inadequate roads with convoys of
minibuses numbered in dozens if not in hundreds.

4. To the extent that most participants aren't actually out to enjoy
themselves they do cause unnecessary erosion of some of the most popular
paths in the country while curtailing the enjoyment of those who are
there for pleasure.

5. Finally (and perhaps most importantly) they make the lives of the
locals absolute hell with all their round the clock noise, litter and
obstruction.

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 34 summits
New - 15 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 19 (Marilyns 5, Sweats 10, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

Roger said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from Fran <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It may be for a good cause? but their must be better and more
original way to raise funds for charity?

Of course there is. Stay at home and give the charity the money that
would otherwise have been wasted on the trip. Apart from all the other
objections I list below it is morally reprehensible in the extreme to
blackmail friends and acquaintances into supporting an exercise in
unnecessary conspicuous consumption. We all waste the finite resources
of this Earth but most of us do it in ways we like and I can't work out
which is worse: the idiot who undertakes the National 3 Peaks on the
mistaken assumption that they are doing good or the cynical con artist
who ventures further afield getting a cheap walking holiday at the
expense of family and friends and in doing so being a nice little earner
for the professional fund raiser who organised the trip.

Quoted message said:

I suppose since I'm not a local in any of the affected areas I
should keep out of this - but here goes anyway... Is it
really such a problem? Consider the number of people per year
who do this challenge, compared with the number who trot along
Striding Edge to Helvellyn or bound up Snowdon on night hikes
to see the sunrise from the top. Should we all keep away from
everywhere on the grounds that wherever we put our feet we
will erode something? Should peak-baggers stop bagging peaks?
Should we all avoid the 'popular' paths? Sorry, I know I said
I should probably keep out of it because I know not of what I
speak - but I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people here
saying what a bad idea the challenge is when all along I
suspect that quite a few of the detractors have probably done
it themselves at least once, or if not then something similar.

My other objections are:

1. Most (perhaps all) who undertake the challenge these days cheat.
They neither start at the start nor go on to finish at the finish (feet
in the sea in both cases) and some don't even bother with the 24 hour
rule.

2. The challenge as originally devised was as much about fast cars and
driving as fell running and modern advances in both motor vehicles and
roads has devalued it to such an extent that it now doable as a coach
excursion by the average walker.

3. Almost all who attempt the challenge do so over a very brief period.
They descend in hordes on the limited parking spaces and (in the Lake
District particularly) clog the inadequate roads with convoys of
minibuses numbered in dozens if not in hundreds.

4. To the extent that most participants aren't actually out to enjoy
themselves they do cause unnecessary erosion of some of the most popular
paths in the country while curtailing the enjoyment of those who are
there for pleasure.

5. Finally (and perhaps most importantly) they make the lives of the
locals absolute hell with all their round the clock noise, litter and
obstruction.

I would like to add:
6. Most who the challenge are reasonably inexperienced in hill walking, coupled with the fact they are in a rush, and in the case the lakes, in the dark. accidents are not uncommon, which put a strain on local volunteer rescue teams who have better thinks to do.

7. Lastly and, I think most importantly, when we go to these places, we put something back to these local communities economies. in the form of paying for B&B or camping facilities, using local shops and cafés etc. This is not the case of the 3 peaks people.

--
______________________________________________________________
A.R.E. Limited T: 01252 711777
East Street F: 01252 723918
Farnham E: [email hidden]
Surrey GU9 7XU W: http://www.are.ltd.uk

Distributors of Quality Automotive Parts and Accessories

The views expressed herein are those of the author of this document and do not necessarily represent the views of this company. This transmission may be confidential, if you are not the intended recipient you should notify us.

Quoted message said:

Roger Chapman so far this year 34 summits
New - 15 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 19 (Marilyns 5, Sweats 10, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells
0)

So you have no impact on the many peaks you Bag?

How many peaks have you covered in you walking career? What damage could
have been done?

What about all other 'peak baggers'. They have an ultimate aim which
inevitably will involve going somewhere were you will be imposing your visit
on others.

What about the uk.rec exped over Helvellyn recently when it was reported
there was a queue to get over the final rocky section. Who should go on the
hills then, a chosen few? Everyone? ... or no one?

We all have our own ideas about what is best for the environment and the
hills. If all ideas were carried forward, it would be a very sorry world!

--
sandy saunders @ www.thewalkzone.co.uk
email: saunders.sandy at ntlworld.com

'Mountains or Mole Hills ... summiting still
brings the same excitement'

The message <[email hidden]>
from "sandy saunders" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Roger Chapman so far this year 34 summits
New - 15 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 19 (Marilyns 5, Sweats 10, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells
0)

Quoted message said:

So you have no impact on the many peaks you Bag?

Don't be so obtuse.

Quoted message said:

How many peaks have you covered in you walking career? What damage could
have been done?

Probably many more than you but as most of my walking has been either on
little used paths or off path altogether you would have to look very
hard indeed to find any trace of my passing.

Quoted message said:

What about all other 'peak baggers'. They have an ultimate aim which
inevitably will involve going somewhere were you will be imposing your
visit
on others.

I didn't appreciate before that you were in the GOMLs pocket.

Quoted message said:

What about the uk.rec exped over Helvellyn recently when it was reported
there was a queue to get over the final rocky section. Who should go on the
hills then, a chosen few? Everyone? ... or no one?

There was a queue all the way along but WTF has that got to do with the
price of eggs. AFAIK none of them were there reluctantly as unwitting
contributors to some fund raising sharks lavish lifestyle and they sure
as hell wouldn't have spent the early morning making the locals life
unbearable.

Quoted message said:

We all have our own ideas about what is best for the environment and the
hills. If all ideas were carried forward, it would be a very sorry world!

It already is a very sorry world with too large a population rapidly
reducing some very finite resources.

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 34 summits
New - 15 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 19 (Marilyns 5, Sweats 10, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

sandy saunders said:

Who should go on the
hills then, a chosen few? Everyone? ... or no one?

I've just read Roger's post again, and I can't find the bit where he
says that the problem is the number of people on the hill.

--
Stop ID cards and the Database State
http://www.no2id.net/

In article <[email hidden]>, Simon Caldwell
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

sandy saunders said:

Who should go on the
hills then, a chosen few? Everyone? ... or no one?

I've just read Roger's post again, and I can't find the bit where he
says that the problem is the number of people on the hill.

Not wishing to enter into the fray proper, I would just add that the
erosion by foot is very evident on the "Motorway" from Pont ar Daf to
Pen-y-Fan and there are no 3 peaks challengers there - just hoards of
real walkers and joking ones!
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

Fran said:

I'm getting a bit tired of seeing people here
saying what a bad idea the challenge is when all along I
suspect that quite a few of the detractors have probably done
it themselves at least once, or if not then something similar.

I believe that the main objections are to do with busloads of
people turning up in Borrowdale at 3am to do Scafell Pike, which
is undoubtedly anti-social.

If there are people living by the usual parking spot, would it
be an idea for buses to be advised to park elsewhere - perhaps
a designated place, out of the earshot of people trying to
sleep?

--
"Some witty person in rec.arts.sf.composition (I forget who)
called them
feral apostrophes. Untamed, unregulated, they roam the wastes
of the
English language and pop up where lea'st expected."

In article <[email hidden]>, Fran
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

If there are people living by the usual parking spot, would it
be an idea for buses to be advised to park elsewhere - perhaps
a designated place, out of the earshot of people trying to
sleep?

I was camping at the Cwellyn site last year and a 3 peaks group arrived
late and left early. They were up and about creating one hell of a
racket at about 4.30am - totally unconcerned about any one else on the
camp site.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk