In reply to G4OWG:
Hmmm, yes. This grouping would certainly increase the quantity available locally, particularly where Marilyns are either none existent or scarce. I can also see the value where this parameter is applied to a range of hills in that the travel distance between summits would be reduced since there are more summits available within a specific area.
73, Gerald
In reply to ALL:
G7KXV wrote: " people will climb the hills if thats what they want to do and will take the trouble to drive another say 20 miles to bag a different one."
thats all… some things happens to be too smart form the beggining and so they keep going well. SOTA (accidentaly?) is one of these things. So let it as it is pleasee… and dont stall it now that it is on its most exciting point of growth and popularity.
To live and plan a life against all the things and practises which make enviromental damage to our globe someone needs vision, someone needs love for the hills and country area, someone needs to learn to travel not to NOT travel!
I dont think that the first we have to do to protect our enviroment is close people in boxes in order to reduse carbon etc.
I believe we ougth to make them spend every bit of their dailly life thinking that long jurney out on country… on mountains, the momment on summit.
To SAVE our planet we SHOULD learn to LOVE and CARE about.
73, Panos, SV1COX
In reply to 2E0HJD:
I find it strange that most of the replies are from occasional
activators! and theres little or no input from any of our more regular
activators , ie the ones who do more miles traveling in their pursuit
of summits, if the topic is to open again i would like their views on
this topic.
Living in an area with a plethora of hills it might seem that I have the ideal location for keeping my mileage down, in fact the opposite is true. To get to the western side of the Cairngorms (Aviemore)I have a round trip in the car of at least 60 miles, I can see the high tops, they just cover such an enormous area with poor road communications for reaching them. Reaching other areas in GM, as other activators up here will testify to, involves incredible mileages - see Robin GM7PKT statistics. However, I hill walk for pleasure (and activate for SOTA for pleasure as well) and see absolutely no benefit in hauling myself up the same hill week on week. I activate Ben Macdhui once a year on average because I enjoy the walk-in but would not enjoy being up there more than once per year - one year summer, another winter is fine. Where I might agree with some contributors is on the subject of 1 pointers in winter - I have only ever activated one 1 pointer and it was a real slog but some of my local ones might make a pleasant winter walk but their difficulty is no less than the 2 pointers round here and it would be nice to receive a bonus for putting on the full winter gear.
Reference the idea of including non-Marilyns: The SOTA scheme is simple and well defined so why muddy the waters, are there not enough hills in the scheme for everybody? (OK, Norfolk excepted) Have all summits been activated? In my case I have set myself a sub-set of hills to achieve - all the summits in the Cairngorms National Park, others have done all the WB in a day. If there are not enough hills for you, try setting a subordinate objective and go for that and, maybe, try activating molehills just for the shear fun of it, life doesn’t always have to be competitive or tangibly rewarded.
If it ain’t broke…
Sorry if this sounds like a rant but I am highly impressed by the simplicity of SOTA and I think this simplicity is what contributes to its success.
73
Barry GM4TOE
In reply to GM4TOE (and all):
I stated earlier that I thought the rules should be left as they are, and I still tend to think thats best…
However, reading through all the comments…
I suppose allowing more than one activation a year could be OK. Either 6 monthly (180 days??) or, and I think this is best, and has allready been suggested, one in ‘Summer’, and one when Winter bonus applies. This would encourage more activations at a quieter time of year.
I think it would be fair enough to allow a 1 point winter bonus on “one pointers” as well, to encourage Winter Activations.
This wouldn’t effect me…I’m a fair weather activator!!
I agree with Barry about Marilyns though. We have a “diffinitive” guide in “The Relative Hills of Britain”. If we were to allow extra hills, of different ‘types’, then administration (and adjudication in disputes) becomes much more difficult. I concede that this is a bit tough on people who live in ‘the flatlands’, but much better to keep things simple.
I sympathise with comments about great hills that don’t qualify… in “my” region, Scottish Borders, we lost two Marilyns, because they were ‘reclassified’ in the 2002 updates of “Relative Hills”. Hedghope Hill used to be SB002, and is a very distinctive (and high) peak in it’s own right, but doesn’t quite have the 150m drop before The Cheviot (SB001). Simonside has a more distinctive “peak” (of sorts!) than Tosson(SB007), which is only half a mile away, but isn’t a Marilyn. It’s a shame they don’t conform , but rules are rules.
73’s all…it’s a great discussion
Rob
In reply to G4OIG:
“I didn’t comment on the subject before because I am on a personal mission to activate different summits and in doing so I see lots of different places, both new and familiar. I can only admire what Tom and Mike do by going up the same hill time and time again - for me it would be worse than getting shack fever.”
I’ve got a lot of sympathy with that viewpoint, Gerald, even tho’ I have been up Walton Hill four times this year! However. In the climbing club I frequent there are people industriously ticking off Munros who will never look at a hill that doesn’t qualify, thus denying themselves some fine mountain experiences, but although I have been up a fair number of Munros I have only ever selected on the basis of how attractive they are - there are too many hills that are just great slag heaps! One aspect of SOTA that I am on my guard against is that one can end up ticking off Marilyns in the same spirit as the Munro-baggers, as a collector rather than a seeker after sublime experiences in the hills. Frankly, some SOTA summits are an exercise in masochism with nothing to recommend them other than a tick on a list and another point or points! On my list of “leave them to others” are tree girt hills with no view, multi-mile bogtrots and that delightful little tump in Cornwall surrounded by china clay tips! On the other hand I fully intend to operate from the top of Bowfell, Mam Tor and Earls Hill via Pontesford Crags, and to heck with the points!
I have read all the contributions and concluded that I don’t particularly want any major changes, tho’ a bit of fine tuning would not spoil things!
73
Brian G8ADD
PS I have carefully avoided comment on the eco-issues, but rather think that I would use as much resources staying at home as going out to the hills and be less healthy for it.
In reply to G1TPO and others:
I think it would be fair enough to allow a 1 point winter bonus on
“one pointers” as well, to encourage Winter Activations.
I live in an area with only one-pointers within a one-day radius, so such a system would effectively double the number of activator points available to me in each year. However, if the winter bonus is to retain some credibility, I don’t believe that allowing extra points for a January activation of a minor summit is beneficial to SOTA. Often the weather during the winter bonus period is idyllic along the South Coast, and there are far less people on the hills too, making it easier to erect HF antennas. Frequently the weather in the depths of winter down here is better than so-called summer weather in northern Scotland! Even in the harshest winter (remember 1961/62?) the summit of Crowborough (G/SE-007) is only a bus ride away - hardly a struggle!
Remember also that SOTA is now truly international. If a winter bonus is permitted for all summits within the UK, then other Associations would be likely to do likewise. The winter bonus would then be available for summits like F/CR-249 - which would surely devalue the concept beyond recognition.
These are purely my personal observations, and are not intended to represent or constrain official MT opinion.
73 de Les, G3VQO
In reply to G3VQO:
Les, you speak from considerable experience of the SE summits and I can see where you are coming from. Perhaps you would hold a rather different viewpoint if you were to activate some of the GW single point summits. I suspect that you’d be pleased to be earning a bonus for turning out to activate these in winter. Many are difficult at any time of year.
The present bonus system has been set up for simplicity, but it is not logical. I for one have been “working the system” and leaving 2 point summits until the winter bonus period to make them into 5 point summits. This way I feel I can get some recompense for the hard slog on the single point summits that I climb in the summer. Maybe the addition of a bonus to single point summits would not change my approach to points earning, but it could help encourage winter activations by those who are normally only out on the summits in summer.
73, Gerald
In reply to G1TPO:
Rob,
I was considering suggesting that JCB “test” some of their large earth moving plant on the col between The Cheviot and Hedgehope, but understand that they may be occupied on Scafell… apparently at the behest of an activator in the NW of England 
With regards to the classification of the summits, the HuMPs classification includes all Marilyns so the system would not be changed, just expanded. Personally I think we have enough to go at… it’s just very unfortunate that the distribution of Marilyns across the England is very irregular creating a more or less total SOTA vacuum in the east.
73, Gerald
In reply to G4OIG:
I sympathise with your view of some of the smaller Welsh summits, of which I have no experience. Perhaps there is just no “one size fits all” option that will work for everybody and every summit. After all, if everybody is encouraged to activate their summits for the winter bonus, there will soon be a lack of summer activations!
One further thought has occurred to me. It is probably reasonable to assume that the vast majority of activators who tackle the higher summits are reasonably “savvy” with the safety issues relevant to winter weather, being either experienced hill-walkers or residents of upland areas. An extension of the winter bonus to lower hills could encourage inexperienced activators elsewhere to attempt “easy” summits in inclement weather without suitable clothing or equipment just to gain an extra point - perhaps unlikely, but a risk nonetheless. You might not be able to get completely lost on the South Downs, but hypothermia is still a possibility!
73 de Les, G3VQO
In reply to G4OIG:
A JCB wouldn’t be enough…you’d have to get “Big Geordie” !!!
Roger (OWG), thats a very interesting point you make about who is responsible for the hills we use in the programme …
Anyway, this is a very interesting thread and has now moved from activating the same hill to a discussion about winter bonus points for 1 pointers. Well, I am dumbfounded that there are activators out there who wish to cheapen the points system. We can all name hills which are a breeze, and they are not all 1 pointers, (take Burnhope Seat and many others). Similarly we can name small hills where you really earn your points (Low Fell springs to mind). The points are awarded on a finite height system ASL, they are not based on how difficult each hill is to climb, so lets just live with it.
If you wish to fiddle with the Winter Bonus, I propose we remove it from the 2 pointers (go and stroll up Shining Torr in Winter for 5 points, what a gift!!), and maybe consider removing the Winter bonus for 4 pointers. Lets not cheapen the system any more with talk of Winter bonus for 1 pointers.
If you wish to increase the number of activations, then do the obvious and increase the number of hills.
My experience of SOTA activating makes my hill-walking a little more contrived than it used to be. I used to ridge-walk and maybe climb 6 summits in an average day. SOTA Activating see’s me climb one hill, descend to my vehicle and drive to the next hill and climb to that summit … and so on! I am not complaining about this, but just explaining what I do now.
Adding more summits to the programme would see activators walking more circular routes and ridge walking to the next summit with less ups and downs, after all once you are on the ridge, the walking is less demanding. This would reward activators and chasers with more points and more summits. However there will always be a downside to this, I would expect times on summits to be significantly reduced and consequently less bands to be operated.
In summary, lets not cheapen the programme, if we do anything we should strengthen the programme. Else we should do nowt and ‘Let it be …’
73 Ian G7KXV
Another thought - shoot me down in flames!!!
Would there be any support for the addition of HuMPs to the system just in those counties where there are no Marilyns? I know this would need to be translated in some form within other Associations, but each country is likely to have some form of regional division. It might be one way of spreading interest where there is currently little or none.
As I said, just a thought… well, it is Friday afternoon!
73, Gerald
In reply to G3VQO:
In reply to G4OIG:
I sympathise with your view of some of the smaller Welsh summits, of
which I have no experience. Perhaps there is just no “one size
fits all” option that will work for everybody and every summit.
After all, if everybody is encouraged to activate their summits for
the winter bonus, there will soon be a lack of summer activations!One further thought has occurred to me. It is probably reasonable to
assume that the vast majority of activators who tackle the higher
summits are reasonably “savvy” with the safety issues
relevant to winter weather, being either experienced hill-walkers or
residents of upland areas. An extension of the winter bonus to lower
hills could encourage inexperienced activators elsewhere to attempt
“easy” summits in inclement weather without suitable
clothing or equipment just to gain an extra point - perhaps unlikely,
but a risk nonetheless. You might not be able to get completely lost
on the South Downs, but hypothermia is still a possibility!73 de Les, G3VQO
Hi Les
To think that just the other day that you were biting your tongue…
What a down right insulting and arrogant statement.
You might as well just remove all the 1 pointers from sota or at least make a winter safety course mandatory to the new activator, according to that statement.
Thank God it is just your personal opinion and not your official opinion as an undemocratically elected member of the MT
The 1 pointers are very worthy of a measly single bonus point in winter.
Come and try a few GW or GM 1 pointers, they don’t have underground heating you know.
Mike GW0DSP
In reply to GW0DSP: Gentlemen - please
In reply to G7KXV:
Well, I am dumbfounded that there are activators out there who wish to cheapen the points system.
I don’t think that this is the case Ian. It was put forward as an idea for increasing the level of activity and has a rightful place in the discussion along with increasing the number of summits, allowing 2 activations per year (summer/winter) and the other ideas that have been put forward. These other proposals could be regarded as cheapening the system in a similar manner.
Personally I am happy with the number of summits currently available in the programme since I accept that because where I live, I have to be willing to travel considerable distances to carry out activations. However, I am concerned that the topography of the UK, and England in particular, is such that there are large areas where there is little, if any, opportunity for those not disposed to drive long distances to participate in the activation aspect of SOTA.
< If you wish to increase the number of activations, then do the obvious and increase the number of hills.
No doubt some will say this is not the answer, but it could address some of the issues that have been raised.
I would expect times on summits to be significantly reduced and consequently less bands to be operated.
Not necessarily so - walk time would replace drive time and so reduce the polution aspect of the activity.
73, Gerald
In reply to G6DDQ:
I was not being ungentlemanly, merely telling the truth and offering my opinion on a topic concerning me.
Mike
In reply to 2E0HJD:
Hi Mick,
I’m sorry I have not made myself clear. I agree with you, adding summits does not cheapen the programme, however I feel that giving a winter bonus point to 1 pointers will cheapen the system.
… the steak is off!! 
In reply to G4OIG:
“Not necessarily so - walk time would replace drive time and so reduce the polution aspect of the activity”
I can think of many walks where I could visit 6 summits in a horseshoe. Now I am usually on a summit for an hour (sometimes more)and if I manage 6 summits in a day then I couldn’t afford 6 hours activating on the summits, I would run out of daylight. As many of you know, I have done several activations in the dark but usually only when I know the ground well. As such I would limit my time activating to ensure I could complete the walk safely. That is why I think that activation times on each summit may be reduced. However I may be wrong …
In reply to G4OWG:
There is a recent set of hills called ‘HUMPS’ there are even some in
NorfolkThey would all have to be 1 pointers - but what the heck !
Just to clarify that you refer to the HuMPs in Norfolk as being single point summits. Of course elsewhere, there are HuMPs that are higher than 500m. Pity the East Anglia map is not yet ready for display on the website.
73, Gerald
In reply to G7KXV:
Now I am usually on a summit for an hour (sometimes
more) and if I manage 6 summits in a day then I couldn’t afford 6 hours
activating on the summits…
I entirely agree Ian, but some pretty nifty activations can be done in a 40 - 45 minute period. I did a run of 5 summits at the beginning of last month. I found the limiting factor to be the time I could activate the first summit to qualify it on 2m… the Breakfast Club generally only rise once the sun is above the horizon.
On a summit I usually stay an hour and sometimes longer, but there are activators that move on in short order. This will always be the case. How many practical “runs” of six are there anyway - I suspect not that many if a parameter such as that for HuMPs is used.
73, Gerald
by the way… it is definitely the Fish that is off, not the Steak. I can smell it from here!
In reply to G4OIG:
“How many practical “runs” of six are there anyway - I suspect not that many if a parameter such as that for HuMPs is used.”
HuMPs are new to me, Gerald, what are the parameters?
I can think of some lovely runs of six or more straight off, though I don’t know if they qualify - the Five Sisters of Kintail but starting (or finishing) on Saileag, whilst across the valley the South Glen Shiel Ridge links seven Munros. Then there’s the Strathfarrar Six, the Blackmount, and so on. Great expeditions aspired to by all serious hillwalkers! The trouble is that perceptions of such walks are distorted by distractions such as how many Munros, Marilyns or “HuMPs” they include. Personally I could not enviseage activating Snowdon and Llewedd without starting on Crib Goch, but that’s just me!
73
Brian G8ADD