Feature
THE FALLACY OF WAYMARKING
By Keith Miller
(MCofS Member & Executive Committee Member)
Ben Nevis is not only the highest mountain in Britain but is indisputably also one of the most magnificent. Unfortunately, over many years it has been disfigured by a wide variety of activities and artefacts placed for an almost equal variety of reasons.
Mountains in Britain, and Ben Nevis is no exception, are not inherently dangerous – it is people who may put themselves at risk in the mountains. This may be actively chosen by experienced climbers but by many people is inadvertent, through lack of awareness, knowledge, experience, etc. As mountaineers we are aware of the many aspects that come into play when venturing into the mountains – these include weather (past, present & future), terrain & underfoot conditions, distance & amount of ascent, clothing & equipment needed on the day, personal ability and fitness at the time. Most of these apply to any countryside walks.
The countryside cannot be made risk-free and it is essential that people take responsibility for their own actions – this is explicitly incorporated in the proposed Scottish Outdoor Access Code. Self-reliance in the mountains is fundamental.
Clearly many people who ascend Ben Nevis are ill-equipped and this is a factor implicated in many of the incidents recorded there. However, way-marking will not improve this aspect; in fact it is likely to compound the problem.
Cairns, together with the associated publicity if they are proactively emplaced, are very likely to give some people a false sense of security so that they rely on the cairns being there. People may then act irrespective of conditions and experience because they know or expect cairns to help them. The knowledge that specific cairns are present may well encourage less experienced people to continue on towards the summit when weather conditions, tiredness, common sense or other factors would have indicated otherwise. It is human nature for people to rely on the presence of facilities; unfortunately there are many examples where this has been a major contributory factor to subsequent problems (a poignant example is the Cairngorms tragedy of 1971). The ability to decide to turn back is a key element of sense and self-reliance.
Moreover cairns tend to be modified, built and destroyed (“cairns beget cairns” just as “litter begets litter”) so there is a strong likelihood that the situation will change over time and become more confusing. Ben Nevis is a classic example of this behaviour. If the decision is taken to emplace any cairns specifically who is responsible for their maintenance and who is responsible if/when people are encouraged inappropriately onwards because the cairns are placed?
A wider argument also pertains: to accept that permanent aids are appropriate on Ben Neviswould bevery much the thin end of a potentially very large wedge that would be seriously damaging to the essence of mountains and hill walking / mountaineering in Scotland.
Altering mountains so that they appear to be easier, less demanding or safer to ascend is not an answer. I believe that the emplacement of cairns will lead to more problems not fewer. The key to this subject is education: increased safety should be pursued through increased awareness, knowledge and skills.