UKC

Evening all, 

Apologies if this is in the wrong bit of the forum but just discovered my BMC membership has lapsed and looking to renew. However, thr SMC membership has caught my eye and wondered if there was any practical difference between the two?

Any thoughts welcome!

They're very different things. The SMC is a big club, the BMC is a governing body. Anyone can join the BMC at any time but joining the SMC usually requires being proposed and seconded by existing members and filling out a detailed application form. The Scottish equivalent of the BMC is now called Mountaineering Scotland.

Ah apologies, meant Scottish Mountaineering...(Insert face plant emoji)

Easy mistake.  

I'd say if you live in England or Wales join the BMC. I'm sure it has its faults but they've always seemed much more active and pro active than Mountaineering Scotland.

Pretty simple: if you live in Scotland or want to mostly hear about stuff in Scotland join Mountaineering Scotland, if live in England or want to mostly hear about stuff in England then join the BMC.

The insurance deal for members is the same.

Mountaineering Scotland is smaller and better organised, none of the crazy internal feuding the BMC has been prone to recently.

The BMC also does a lot of stuff in Wales.

Mountaineering Scotland seems to do much less than the BMC around access (partly due to the much more enlightened law up there).

I've never been able to work out what MS actually do. They've always seemed to be pretty pathetic on the access front although to be fair there are fewer issues in Scotland.

The access situation is totally different in Scotland, the BMC need to beg landowners for permission where in Scotland access is a legal right.  It's not pathetic that Mountaineering Scotland don't put as much focus into something which isn't as much of a problem. 

Mountaineering Scotland lobby the Scottish Government to put across the interests of climbers and walkers, they have a magazine, they provide insurance and they run Climb Scotland which runs climbing competitions for kids and the Scottish National Bouldering League (SNBL).

But when there are problems they should be right in about it fighting our corner and my impression is this isn't the case.

Mountaineering Scotland is no longer interested in representing its membership.  

It does very little on access, is completely supine to the Scottish Government (as demonstrated throughout covid restrictions) due to being beholden to its Sports Scotland funding.

 It current dominant focus seams to be a ‘safety mouth piece’,  to be the ‘business development arm’ of the outdoor training industry and to promote more diversity in participation.

Experience hill goers are essentially no longer their core focus, as a organisation they do very little for us.

I don't know. The few issues they've maybe been a bit passive e.g. Wind farms, Covid restrictions, Loch Lomond camping bans are ones which split their membership so you can't expect them to go 100% gung-ho on one side of it.

I think they are doing an OK job, although TBH I'm thinking of cancelling  my membership because they don't actually do anything I need.  I don't think that's their fault it's just I can do everything I want without being a member of an organisation. 

For a long time they were very strongly anti wind farms.

I consider the BMC to be a representative body, not a governing body, for my climbing activities.

Many of the issues over the last few years have come about because some people feel that they are not being represented.

They also provide me with Third party liability.

They also facilitate my clubs via insurance.

The OP, has not said what they want from the BMC or SMC, as it's a first posting, I will reserve my judgement on their motives for posting, but without knowing what the OP wants, it's impossible to advise.

As a walker the Ramblers do a good job for me.

The ramblers recents responses to access issues, both in terms of speed of action, publicity generation and quality of written submissions to consultations  in Scotland that I have read, have been streets ahead of Mountaineering a Scotland.

Dalwhinnie level crossing issue being a good example.

Sorry, op registered a long time, the newbie icon fooled me.

Apologies.

Yes, this ^

The BMC are absolutely not a governing body

And Mountaineering Scotland have over the past two years, and are continuing to behave, like a governing body.  When constitutional they are not.

They absolutely are both in England and Wales. They govern elite competition climbing and the UK national team as well as being a representative body for all mountaineers, climbers and hillwalkers.

Except for competitions where they ARE the NGB.

The BMC is the representative body for all of the activities it deals with and the governing body for areas where there are competitions. 

You could well be right as I don't follow competition climbing. I was just referring to recreational climbing.

Climb Scotland... <quietly chuckles>

Access in Holyrood Park being a prime and very current example. If there is a dialogue then it is going on behind closed doors.

I have had a very rapid reply from the Mountaineering Scotland access rep indicating that they are actively pursuing this matter so I will withdraw any scepticism I have had.

Whether MS has any meaningful teeth to put pressure on the various agencies is perhaps a separate issue.

Apologies, should have been more clear. In the process of signing up for the ML qualification and I discovered that I no longer have a membership of the BMC through my club. To progress my application I have to sign up with either the BMC or MS. They look pretty much identical and wondered if there was any practical difference in what they offer their members.

Re being a newbie, don't think I've posted for about 3 years!

I'd say it was an example of the difference between Scotland and England.  So many fewer people and so much larger wild spaces.  In England you might need consultations and written submissions, in Scotland you can just have a quick look for CCTV then say f*ck it and cross anyway if there's no trains coming.

Same with the Loch Lomond camping ban.  Unless you are in a honeypot spot next to a road nobody is ever going to know. 

It's a pig if you are a touring cyclist.

That's probably true - I wouldn't know not being one!

Although I don't think Mountaineering Scotland claims to represent cyclists, I think they say they represent walkers, climbers and ski-tourers.

All three groups use bikes to access their objectives from time to time so MS should represent them in that.

The rangers definitely checked all round 3 lochs forest drive area  last summer. The camping ban is a none issue as long as you remember that you can camp anywhere outside a permit zone, inside permit zones you have to use the designated sites. 

I'm usually walking on a path which cars couldn't use and I set up camp late, leave early and pitch a small dark green tent far enough off the path it's not easily visible.  I camp when I'm tired enough to stop for the day or it's getting dark and I'm not sweating whether it is inside or outside a permit zone.  I don't like booking sites because half the fun of camping rather than using B&Bs is not having a fixed schedule and not having to get to some particular place.

They represent me - I use a bike to get to the hills.   Tribalism eh!

I've got automatic MS membership through a club, interestingly the club membership fees are less than joining MS on its own would be - that might be the way to go if you're looking for insurance etc.

I wasn't trying to start an argument about whether Mountaineering Scotland should represent cyclists!   I assume there's another organisation with represents cyclists to government and they're intentionally not including cycling in their description of what they do so as not to tread on their toes.

"Mountaineering Scotland is the only recognised representative organisation for hill walkers, climbers, mountaineers and ski-tourers who live in Scotland or who enjoy Scotland’s mountains, and acts to represent, support and promote Scottish mountaineering."

https://www.mountaineering.scot/about-us

That's not especially unique, the BMC do that to an extent as well and some Scots chose to join that as well/ instead. Also various ski and walking organisations, mountain training organisations, clubs and land owning charities. All of whom can work well together when there are mutual threats.

I see that Mountaineering Scotland is continuing with its free of charge business development and advertising for the benefit of outdoor training providers, this time the ‘Camping Leader Qualification’- yes you read that right!

https://mobile.twitter.com/Mountain_Scot/status/1501943156064997379?cxt=HHw...

WTF ….has that got to do with representing climbers and hill walkers!

If you like endless governance arguments, BMC is *the* body for you.