/ NEWS: Munro List Drops to 282

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
steelbru - on 06 Sep 2012
And then there were only 282

Beinn a’Chlaidheimh has been demoted from Munro to Corbett today by the SMC, following the measurements that took place last year.

Somehow "The Fisherfield 5" doesn't have the same ring to it.......

Saw the news on www.grough.co.uk, but don't actually see anything on the SMC site yet.





Ed: Read more here: http://www.ukhillwalking.com/news/item.php?id=67414
Allan Young on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru:

It was always going to happen.

It's just a shame that it's taken a year for the SMC to do a sum and even then it looks like they were prompted by a query by Harveys to issue the statement rather than acknowledge that the figures merited a reclassification.

If the Ordnance Survey can act quickly, why not the SMC?

I wonder what the "implications" of reclassification were that it took so long to consider.
Alan Taylor - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young: Need to do a reprint of the latest tables?
Allan Young on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Alan Taylor:

Perhaps, but they didn't take so long to confirm the demotion of Sgurr nan Ceannaichean.
MG - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru: Only 24 left now then. They seem to be getting easier!
Simon Caldwell - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young:
I suspect they want to avoid having to make a new change or two each year as hills are re-measured. There are some people out there with far too much time on their hands!
Allan Young on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Toreador:
> (In reply to Allan Young)
> I suspect they want to avoid having to make a new change or two each year as hills are re-measured. There are some people out there with far too much time on their hands!

Maybe the SMC could collaborate with the Munro Society to sort out the debateable/marginal heights - at least we could be sure of what's above and below the significant contour.

BTW - I'm not a member of either organisation, I just like data to be accurate, just like Munro himself!
dunirie - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru: why not build a bigger cairn on top, then no need to change anything ;0
Eric9Points - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young:
> (In reply to steelbru)
>
>
> If the Ordnance Survey can act quickly, why not the SMC?
>
> I wonder what the "implications" of reclassification were that it took so long to consider.

Maybe they just realised that the Munro thing is not something to be taken too seriously. After all it's a completely arbitrary classification.

On the other hand maybe they waiting to see if someone would put a big stone on the summit which brought it back up to Munro status.

Whatever, I'm sure it's still a very nice hill.
abcdefg - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young:

> Maybe the SMC could collaborate with the Munro Society ...

The 'Munro Society' appears to be a set of complete bores with far too much time on their hands.
Alfrede - on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru: Why do the SMC not react as quickly as the Ordinance Survey? Dont know for sure as I am not a member, but maybe it could be a consideration that the OS get paid and the folk who do the business for the SMC have lives and jobs of their own and dont? If you are frustrated at the delay you could always join the SMC and volunteer some time to help yourself.
drmarten on 06 Sep 2012
In reply to alfredito:
> (In reply to steelbru) If you are frustrated at the delay you could always join the SMC and volunteer some time to help yourself.

Excellent idea, plus you get the benefit of booking the CIC easily.
prog99 on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to drmarten:
Its still the fisherfield 6 and a great day out. I wonder if a bypass path will start emerging?

Theres actually a wee bit of scrambling on Beinn a’Chlaidheimh if you take the direct route up.

(As for joining the SMC - from what I've heard it sounds like they've never really moved on from the 19th century)
Andy Nisbet - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young:
> It's just a shame that it's taken a year for the SMC to do a sum and even then it looks like they were prompted by a query by Harveys to issue the statement rather than acknowledge that the figures merited a reclassification.
>
> If the Ordnance Survey can act quickly, why not the SMC?
>
> I wonder what the "implications" of reclassification were that it took so long to consider.

The SMC accepted it immediately the OS did (Ages ago). Just because they didn't call a press conference, don't slag them for nothing.

malky_c - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Mike_Watson_99:

> Theres actually a wee bit of scrambling on Beinn a’Chlaidheimh if you take the direct route up.

Did this in winter conditions - made for a great day out with a bit of a mountaineering feel to it (despite being dead easy).

Judging by a couple of posts I've seen on the matter before, there will be a tiny minority of OCD types who will have to re-ascend it as a Corbett, even though they have done it as a Munro. The mind boggles!
Allan Young on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Andy Nisbet:
> (In reply to Allan Young)
> [...]
>
> The SMC accepted it immediately the OS did (Ages ago). Just because they didn't call a press conference, don't slag them for nothing.

They accepted the height but took a year to reclassify, leaving more than a few Munroists wondering exactly what the status of the mountain was.

They didn't need to call a press conference, just issue a statement saying whether they considered it a Munro or a Corbett, which could have been done within a few days, or knowing how climbing clubs work, after their next committee meeting (or two!).
MG - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Allan Young:
> (In reply to Andy Nisbet)
> [...]
>
> They accepted the height but took a year to reclassify, leaving more than a few Munroists wondering exactly what the status of the mountain was.
>

Poor dears. What a terrible situation to be in. Any more of that and people might start to decide themselves and then where would we be!



Lankyman - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru: before anyone strikes this off The List consider this photograph: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/466293
Now, if you click on the accompanying OS map you will get a larger scale version open in another small window. Use the slider on this to increase the scale and see what appears just north of the summit cairn location - a 915m spot height! This is supported by what the photographer says: 'it looks higher in this photo and felt higher in real life'. Better do it anyway ....... ?
Gerry_Doncaster - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru:


>
> Somehow "The Fisherfield 5" doesn't have the same ring to it.......
>

Why not? Beinn a’Chlaidheimh is still exactly the same, Munro or no Munro. Surely a hill should be rated purely by the ammount of enjoyment to be had on it and not by some completely arbitary and meaningless classification like "Munro status".
In reply to Gerry_Doncaster: I couldn't agree more. And the SMC say the same:

'We need hardly add that anyone who walks the mountains and hills of Scotland out of a love for their ambience, will continue to appreciate this fine mountain regardless of the category [in which] the mountain finds itself placed.'
steelbru - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Gerry_Doncaster:
> (In reply to steelbru)
>
>
> [...]
>
> Why not? Beinn a’Chlaidheimh is still exactly the same, Munro or no Munro. Surely a hill should be rated purely by the ammount of enjoyment to be had on it and not by some completely arbitary and meaningless classification like "Munro status".

I never said you shouldn't continue to climb it and enjoy it.

Lots of people talk about going into Sheneval to "do the Fisherfield 6", all I was implying was that the name used for this magnificent walk may change in the future.

If you're starting at Sheneval then you more or less have to climb it anyway to do the round, as it's the natural way to go. Loved it both times I did the round, and would not hesitate to do it again the next time I go.

Flinticus - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to malky_c:
They're mental. Why (not that I expect you to know the answer!), will they have to wear there special corbett hat as opposed to their munro one? Maybe their summit ritual differs?

As someone who's done it (winter too) and is walking both corbetts & munros, it's makes no difference to me. I'll probably do it again whenever I get round to the Fisherfield circuit.
malky_c - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Flinticus:
> (In reply to malky_c)
> They're mental. Why (not that I expect you to know the answer!), will they have to wear there special corbett hat as opposed to their munro one? Maybe their summit ritual differs?

No idea, but I reckon this guy could answer the question:
http://www.scottishhills.com/html/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=9551

I fancy doing it again too, along with countless other hills. Not for the 'official' Corbett tick though!
In reply to steelbru: I think you're right, surely most people doing the round are still likely to include it. As they should. Anyway there's no obvious way round from Shenavall - unless a flanking path develops along the eastern side to the col at Am Briseadh?

If people keep climbing it they'll surely still have to consider it one of the 'Six' - it is the biggest single effort of the day and actually a more distinct peak than most of the Munros, drop-wise.
Robert Durran - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:
> If people keep climbing it they'll surely still have to consider it one of the 'Six' - it is the biggest single effort of the day.

Not if you go anti-clockwise (or does that book of eroded routes that everyone has nowadays prescribe a clockwise direction?).
In reply to Robert Durran: Oh yeah, I genuinely didn't think of that. It is Friday.

Which book?
Robert Durran - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:
> Which book?

That one that baggers almost universally seem to use nowadays (peer into cars parked at any of the prescribed parking spots!). It has lots of pictures and prescriptive routes. I quite like it because if you make the effort to go up a different way there is often hardly any sign of a path and you usually don't see anyone else until you get to the top - they sometimes look at you in surprise as if to wonder where on earth you have come from.

Actually, I genuinely think such books are a shame - I wonder how many people now just look at a map (perhaps in conjunction with the SMC district guide) and plan their own route.



rogerwebb - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Mike_Watson_99:

>
> (As for joining the SMC - from what I've heard it sounds like they've never really moved on from the 19th century)

Aye right
drmarten on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Robert Durran:
That reads as if you were sneering as you typed it. Do the 'baggers' cause you much harm?
Robert Durran - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to drmarten:
> (In reply to Robert Durran)
> That reads as if you were sneering as you typed it. Do the 'baggers' cause you much harm?

Not sneering (I'm a life long bagger myself) and no harm done except the increased erosion of prescribed routes. I just think it's a shame that such books seem to have made bagging so much more prescriptive for many (though obviously bagging by its nature has a prescriptive element!).

ads.ukclimbing.com
Eric9Points - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Robert Durran:
> (In reply to drmarten)
> [...]
>
> Not sneering (I'm a life long bagger myself) and no harm done except the increased erosion of prescribed routes. I just think it's a shame that such books seem to have made bagging so much more prescriptive for many (though obviously bagging by its nature has a prescriptive element!).

My feelings too. How many walkers, for example, ascend Beinn Eighe by the shortest route to the summit and then go back the way they've came and in doing so miss 90% of what the hill has to offer?
drmarten on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Robert Durran:
Okay, apologies for suggesting it. I tend to think if people want to stick to the trade routes then as you say other routes should be quieter for those who wish to take advantage of that. I think it was in one of McNeish's books (the one that popped up in bargain bins a few years back) he was lamenting the very thing you describe which was perhaps commendable to a point but then proceeded to detail the trade route up Schiehallion. My book isn't handy at the moment to check this but I don't think he was being ironic.
studgek - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Mike_Watson_99:
>
> (As for joining the SMC - from what I've heard it sounds like they've never really moved on from the 19th century)

Time you made your own enquiries and decisionsrather than gobble up and spew out such nonsense from people who clearly know little about what goes on in Scottish climbing. Never seen a modern SMC guidebook?
Fat Bumbly2 - on 07 Sep 2012
In reply to Robert Durran: Absolutely true - there is a whole world out there away from the red line routes, and you do get funny looks if you turn up from an unorthodox direction at the cairn. Better still get told you are going the wrong way when you descend by a different route from the ridge to the next munro.

The hill is still there - none of this really matters.
Mark Bull - on 08 Sep 2012
In reply to Karl Lunt:

The Munro Society survey showed that the centre top (with the 915m spot) is 0.7m lower than the south one - the full techy details are here: www.themunrosociety.com/pdf/fisherfieldreport.pdf

Mark Bull - on 08 Sep 2012
In reply to Mike_Watson_99:

> Its still the fisherfield 6 and a great day out. I wonder if a bypass path will start emerging?

For those only going to do the 5, then the Loch a' Bhraoin approach might become a more popular route, especially as there is now a track most of the way?

Lankyman - on 08 Sep 2012
In reply to Mark Bull: Thanks for the link, Mark. It makes for interesting reading and they seem to have done a pretty thorough job. In their appendix photo 'The Summit of Beinn a’Chlaidheimh looking North' the middle top still looks higher! The measurements don't lie - just one more example of a fairly common optical illusion I suppose.
Siward on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com: I remember not doing it because I was too tired, and dropping down to the glen after Sgurr Ban to doss in the outhouse at Achneige (didn't even make Shenavall). This was many years ago. Meant to ascend it bright and early the next morning but still totally tired out, so left with intentions to do it some other day.

And, you know, although I no longer 'need' it for my Munro count, I'm still going to return and do it anyway. Maybe this October in fact...

I've heard that the East side of Sgurr Ban gives a good route of ascent, anyone care to confirm?
petestack - on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru:
> Lots of people talk about going into Sheneval to "do the Fisherfield 6", all I was implying was that the name used for this magnificent walk may change in the future.

So how many of the Five Sisters of Kintail are Munros (or even Tops)? And what's Sgurr na Mòraich?
drmarten on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to petestack:
In reply to petestack:
> (In reply to steelbru)
> [...]
>
> So how many of the Five Sisters of Kintail are Munros (or even Tops)? And what's Sgurr na Mòraich?

Sgurr na Ciste Duibhe, Sgurr na Carnach and Sgurr Fhuaran are the 3 Munros, Sgurr na Moraich is too low to be a Munro and doesn't have enough reascent to be a Corbett, I'm sure it is regarded as one of the 5 Sisters and I think Sgurr nan Saighead is the 5th sister?
petestack - on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to drmarten:
> Sgurr na Ciste Duibhe, Sgurr na Carnach and Sgurr Fhuaran are the 3 Munros, Sgurr na Moraich is too low to be a Munro and doesn't have enough reascent to be a Corbett, I'm sure it is regarded as one of the 5 Sisters and I think Sgurr nan Saighead is the 5th sister?

Precisely! Sgurr nan Spainteach is wrongly listed by Wikipedia (amongst others) instead of Sgurr na Mòraich as the fifth, but nobody talks about the Three Sisters because only three are Munros (or Two Sisters because only two were originally classified as such)...

Jim Braid - on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to Siward:
> (>
> I've heard that the East side of Sgurr Ban gives a good route of ascent, anyone care to confirm?

Can recommend going up Sgurr Ban from Loch an Nid to experience the slabs and rock scenery. This would link in to Beinn a' Chlaidheimh easily enough.
Toccata on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to steelbru:

Anyone wanting more science regarding Munro bagging should check the classic publications on the matter.

http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/tac/tac20/cumulati.htm
drmarten on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to Jim Braid:
I've gone up Mullach Coire Mhic Fhearchair over rock slabs from the Loch a'Bhraoin direction and would recommend that as well. The area does benefit from repeated visits coming from different directions (I've gone in from Coire Hallie, Loch a'Bhraoin, Kinlochewe and Poolewe) although the challenge of the 6 did make me go for a return visit.
IainMunro on 09 Sep 2012
In reply to Toccata:

> Anyone wanting more science regarding Munro bagging should check the classic publications on the matter.
>
> http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/tac/tac20/cumulati.htm

Enjoyed that!
Simon Caldwell - on 10 Sep 2012
In reply to petestack:
It's easy to tell which of the 5 Sisters aren't Munros by the traversing paths that miss out the summits. Likewise on pretty much any classic ridge.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.