UKC

Just a point of curiosity. It was my first time in the CIC last week and we very much appreciated the relatively new and well built path up the to the hut. Just before we left a thaw set in and most of the snow covering the rivers turned into meltwater. For people leaving to go down it was an interesting discussion of how to cross the river right by the hut. I wound up falling through a snow-bridge up to my calves and getting a soggy boot for the walk down. As you walk back to the NF car park you begin to notice how every single little stream has a set of large and solid stepping stones, which made us ask the question - why did the roaring river not have any? I mean, I'm not offended by the concept of an adventurous river crossing. Wild nature and all that, but why build such a solid path all the way to the hut and then end it at the river? Did we miss something?

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Because it is a 'roaring river'?

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Lol

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

We walked up the hill and crossed the tributaries higher up the hill on thursday, it would have been really rather exciting crossing it even on big stepping stones I reckon!

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Are you trolling, or do you expect everything delivered on a plate?

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

WOW! That's a nice story. I love to cross river by boat. I love to swim in the river. I did it when I was child.

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

The river there would rapidly remove any arrangement of stepping stones. If its bad enough to give difficulties crossing below the hut you just need to go a few hundred metres upstream to where it braids.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Read my post. I wouldn't care at all if there was NO path. I'm just wondering why every TINY stream has sometimes three one-tonne blocks leading across it, which obviously needed considerable effort to put in place and some of which are still very close to the hut, but then when it comes to the biggest river crossing on the whole path there's nothing at all. Not trolling, not a delicate flower that needs help crossing a little river, just curious why the people building the path left out what must be an intentional omission.

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:


Usual response, ask a question on UKC on 9 times out of 10 you'll be berated. Don't worry and move on.

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

To be honest purple, I was project manager on that path reconstruction and Health and Safety weighed up the risks of building a crossing. It was rejected in that in times of spate, people may try to cross and be injured. Duty of care and all that. Sorry that you got a wet foot.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Simple question, simple answer. Thanks!

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Paths are built in the mountains, not to make things easy and convenient, but to decrease erosion. Maybe a stepping stone on tiny burns does this by concentrating everyone onto it rather than jumping destructively from bank to bank all over the place. A big bouldery river is not going to get eroded anyway.