UKC

Sorry, I know that the definition of QMDs for Mountain Leader is often debated. But I'd really appreciate some guidance on what constitutes "navigation skills are required" - particularly since some online resources seem to add the comment "away from marked paths". I've got about 30 years of hillwalking experience, mostly in Scotland - I live in the Highlands. However, looking back at what I've done that might count as a "QMD" the most common stumbling block I'm finding is that I'm rarely doing any of the walk entirely off any sort of path. Am I right to exclude any day where I didn't do a significant proportion of the walk "off path"? That would, for example, exclude essentially all of the 40 or so munros I've done - while many don't have paths up them marked on the OS maps, there's almost always a path apparent either on open source mapping or in a guidebook, and there's pretty much invariably one on the ground. Does that mean none of these walks would count? While I could plan some walks which include significant path-free sections it will be a bit token - I'm afraid even the Highlands are well walked enough that if its worth walking to there will often be at least some sort of path on the ground leading there. And that's before I even begin to look at some more popular walking areas such as the Lakes. Am I missing something here?

In reply to Patrick1:

I don't have a definitive answer for you, but to me a "marked path" has waymarkers, e.g. West Highland Way.

In reply to Patrick1:

Don't overthink it.  Paths are OK, tourist tracks less so.

The official QMD  definition has recently been updated and the new definition doesn't mention marked paths:
https://www.mountain-training.org/latest-news/quality-day-definitions-updat...

To me, the description 'navigation skills are required' indicates that you would be unable to complete the route without a map and/or compass.

In reply to Summit Else:

An interesting but immaterial discussion point isn’t it ? If you are familiar enough with most hills not to need map and compass what counts? I probably would not be alone in being able to do all the classic Fisherfield, Torridon, Fannichs, Assynt, knoydart, cairngorm and Shiel outings without a map and compass in anything but the worst conditions. Needing them for white out, or for night. For clag to ground level without snow if Id reviewed the map the night before I would be fine. If you wanted me to find that re-entrant off the classic route, then yes I’d need a map.

Not that I would go without, normally having map print out, spare map print out for if the first blows away, full sheet and full offline digital maps as well.

Of course that’s what assessment for to wheedle out those that know the hills and can amble along, but are rusty on the micro. Thankfully I have no desire to feed the ML commercial machine.

You're probably right I'm overthinking it. I just had visions of turning up for my training course and someone saying "Nope, none of these QMDs count, they're all on paths"... 

As for "feeding the ML commercial machine", I get where you're coming from. But I'm lucky enough that I can afford it, I found doing "Coastal Skipper" - the sailing equivalent - some years ago both lots of fun and useful in challenging various bad habits I'd got into, and I think doing ML will probably be similarly fun and challenging to my approach to walking - even if I don't end up agreeing with all of it! 

In reply to Patrick1:

Even on Munros with a well established path there will be times where the map/ compass was still needed to check you're going the correct way. E.g. heading down the right ridge when there's several to choose from, when the mist comes down etc, when there's more paths than marked on the map etc etc

In reply to ScraggyGoat:

The updated definition for QMD also includes "An unfamiliar locality is explored."

In reply to Patrick1:

When I was doing mine, the instructor encouraged us to log pretty much all vaguely mountainous routes, even if they weren't QMDs, to show a body of experience. Then I highlighted the ones I thought were QMDs. 
This shows the assessors your wealth of experience, and if there's a particular day they don't think meets the criteria then there's plenty of others to demonstrate (hopefully) that you have the chops anyway. And if you've not done the training yet, it's something your instructor would probably suggest you focus on if they didn't think you were doing full-on QMDs after all, or seemed to lack accuracy in navigating away from paths.

If you're only doing it for your own benefit and not going for final assessment, it doesn't really matter anyway

In reply to nufkin:

That same approach worked for me at training - plenty of days there so no quibbling. Clearly I hadn't done it all by staggering from waymarker to waymarker. Instructor bought off on it no problem. 

Can't say for assessment, not sure if I'll bother. I got less out of the training process than I maybe expected. Goodish calibration I suppose. 

Y

In reply to Patrick1:

I can think of many walks where I was following paths and my map and compass were needed to make sure I was following the right paths, especially so in poor visibility. Put them in your log book.

In reply to Summit Else:

I notice that the new definition includes the new criteria: 'Judgement and decision making is required'. That's quite broad and could include whether I choose to add onion to my cheese sandwich or not. 

It's interesting that this criteria, in the old definition, was removed: 'attention is paid to safety'. I'd always considered this an important factor. 

Good luck OP, it seems the new definition should make things clearer for you in respect of the use of unmarked paths.