Hi. I live in Cockermouth near the Lake District and have been looking at SOTA as an incentive to try to get out, get some exercise and get fit. However when looking at the list of summits in the database for the Lake District it seems that a lot of the fells listed by A Wainwright in his guides are not in it. Many popular, frequently visited and well known fells are left out, while some obscure ones are included. Why is this?
In reply to G4ILO:
SOTA summits in GB and NI include only Marilyns as published in Alan Dawson’s book ( http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/marilyns/ ). These require a prominence of 150m. Quite a few excellent Lake district hills fail to meet this standard.
Some of us hope, perhaps forlornly, that at a future date a 100m prominence will be adopted.
Roger G4OWG
In reply to G4ILO:
Hi Julian
SOTA in the UK uses a specific list of hills. The details of how the list was arrived at is here:
http://bubl.ac.uk/org/tacit/marilyns/
The rationale is related to the concept of prominence:
http://www.peaklist.org/theory/theory.html
Hope that helps.
73
Richard
G3CWI
Thanks for the explanation. Personally I feel that the decision as to what is or is not a summit is more an arbitrary one than a rule-based one. I think Wainwright is more widely known round here than Marilyn (whom I had never heard of.)
It seems odd to me to see many well-known fells missing from the list. But if they don’t fit the criteria that have been laid down I guess that’s the end of it.
In reply to G4ILO:
No reason not to stroll up them, taking some radio kit.
There’s a number of Worked All Britian chasers who would happily work you for the area those Wainwright fells are in.
73 Graham G4FUJ
In reply to G4ILO:
Why not lobby your friendly association manager (M0ZZO) for a reduction in prominence to 100m to bring us in line with the DM association plus others. This would add many worthy hills to the lists, Bow Fell and Crinkle Craggs are just two that spring to mind.
73.
There are far more enthusiastic climbers on this reflector than I, but my understanding was that the ‘Marilyn’ was a play on words to pair with the Scottish Munros. What a thigh-slapper 
Mr Marilyn, in this case, does not exist. See here http://www.grough.co.uk/view/2008/09/28/marilyns-munros-and-how-to-make-a-mountain-out-of-a-moel-hill/
Cheers
Alan M0DDC/G8AQO
In reply to M1EYP:
There seems to be increasing interest in portable activating for WAB
lately. I wonder if this is because of the decision to do away with
the increasingly unmanagable county/UA divisions within squares?
Well, credit to the WAB MT if they have actually reinvigorated interest in WAB by removing the county/UA part of the reference. Personally I have always felt that the sub-division of the 10K squares was what made the whole thing interesting! I was an early participant in WAB (my first book number is 894) and have collected with varying degrees of interest right up until the end of 2008. However, the removal of the county/UA element has meant that my interest has now ceased.
I always carried a crib sheet of WAB areas on my SOTA travels, but had never been asked. This year I no longer carry the information, but have been asked twice - typical!
Happy chasing to those who still keep the faith.
73 de Les, G3VQO
In reply to G4ILO:
Many of us sympathise with you and would like to see the inclusion of more of the fine lower prominence summits included in the scheme. I have very fond memories of the walk over Catbells, in my opinion, one of the Lake Districts finest, yet it is not included in the SOTA Awards Scheme.
The time is fast approaching where we will get the chance to readdress the issue of reducing prominence to 100m in the UK, bringing us into line with other EU associations and as a responsible group, we should consider it if only on the green issues alone, ie travelling great distances at present to find unique summits, not to mention the increased time and fuel costs to the activators. I feel that some participants are against P100 for the wrong reasons, ie they have almost completed activating all of the Marilyns in a country, so don’t want a change implemented. Everyone will soon get the chance to voice their opinion to James M0ZZO again, don’t waste that opportunity this time, whichever way you think. My personal opinion is that only the activators should decide, because they are the ones who incur the cost, time and effort. Should the decision to change to P100 in England go ahead, you will see many of the fine summits you speak of being included in the scheme.
Mike
GW0DSP
In reply to GW0DSP:
I remember a wonderful walk taking in Cat Bells in my youth… one of my first in The Lakes. However, even as a Hump, Cat Bells would not qualify as it is parented by High Spy.
… but you’re right Mike that it’s a lovely walk along the ridge from High Spy to Cat Bells and down into Keswick.
73 Marc G0AZS
In reply to G3VQO:
Les,
County/UA boundaries are still valid for the pre-18000 book series. As the government is not changing any boundaries until 1st April the fifth series books still contain all valid areas. It’s only after April 1st (what a good date to start changing such things!) that SOME boundaries will change - you may still claim unchanged areas after that date.
Besides, there are a good number of chasers who feel as you do: the boundaries add something to WAB, and who still wish to know what side of a boundary you happen to be. From my point, it gave a number of walk-in only areas (not necessarily on hills/summits) - though the last one I did (with Peter, G0FIM) the farmer’s father-in-law let us drive along one of the farm tracks to put us virtually into the area!
Don’t give up on Counties/UAs yet - they are not dead. While I have one new series book (10k grid squares only) it does not hold the same interest any more - the vhf/uhf claim is filling nicely with all the 2m SOTA ops though!
73 Graham G4FUJ
Edit: Tom, the new 18000, 10k grid squares awards start from 1/1/09. However, there is the Millenium Award, started in 1996, which is 10k grid only based, so any of your contacts from then would be valid for that award.
In reply to M1EYP:
You can download the database of British hills from http://www.biber.fsnet.co.uk/downloads.html in various formats including Excel and Access. As this is maintained by Chris Crocker with input from John Barnard and Graham Jackson it should always be up to date. You can also find news of the latest addition to the Marilyns - Sail Chalmadale - will we be adding this to the SOTA tables?
jim g0cqk
In reply to G0CQK:
Sail Chalmadale - will we be adding this to the SOTA tables?
Yes, when the official RHB list announcement is made which is once a year I believe. If it’s been officially announced then prod me again and I’ll get the GM list updated.
Andy MM0FMF
GM Association Manager
In reply to GW0DSP:
In reply to G4ILO:
Many of us sympathise with you and would like to see the inclusion of
more of the fine lower prominence summits included in the scheme.
Hi Mike,
I think you may be generalising with this statement. If I stated ’ Many of us would like to see the existing system remain unchanged’ I think you would agree, that I was offering an opinion based on wishful thinking, rather than fact.
Your other observation, that only activators should vote would present a difficulty in defining ‘activator’. If one drives to the summit of a local sota hill, walk a few yards and activate said hill, and it alone, does one then become an ‘activator’
I take the view, that any ‘dumbing down’ of an existing, well conceived and managed scheme would be a mistake. Each to his own, I suppose!
73,
Frank
In reply to G3RMD:
Hi Frank
I based my comment on the numbers who had shown an opinion on the Sotaforum regarding P100.
I accept your point re the drive on a single summit, and it alone, fair comment. Maybe activators with 100 points or more then, just to state a figure.
I take the view, that any ‘dumbing down’ of an existing, well conceived and managed scheme would be a >mistake. Each to his own, I suppose!
I don’t see it as a dumbing down Frank, more of a revitalisation of a scheme currently in decline judging by recent activation figures.
As you say, each to his own.
73
Mike
Whilst recent figures show a slight decrease in the number of activations in England (G), they also show an increase in the number of activations carried out by English amateurs, including travels to other associations (such as GW). World figures continue to rise rapidly.
Therefore, I dispute your judgement that SOTA is “currently in decline” and/or in need of “revitalisation”. Efforts with publicity and promotion continue, with a magazine feature on the way, and the International SOTA weekend event to look forward to, to maintain the profile and interest, but we’re not exactly at crisis point!
I fully agree with your comments Frank.
Tom M1EYP
In reply to M1EYP:
Maybe you could explain where you are getting your data from and which year do you refer to? I am talking of 2009, since the almost demise of SOTA Germany.
Mike GW0DSP
This is the year-on-year data 2002 to 2008, and taken from the SOTA Database. The effects of the changes in DM and DL will be known in a year and are bound to be significant. However, let’s not call it a “demise”. Activity continues, and is able to thanks to the sterling work of AMs Andy and Dzianis, and many RMs. In any case, I was mainly referring to the data for G, in the context of this thread.
Of course, a change in the prominence value for G would not be an appropriate measure to attempt to replace SOTA activity “lost” due to the DM/DL changes anyway.
Tom M1EYP
In reply to M1EYP:
This is the year-on-year data 2002 to 2008, and taken from the SOTA
Database.In any case, Iwas mainly referring to the data for G, in the >context of this thread.
The dates you refer to are history now. Check the January/February 2009 figures against the same period for 2008. Is SOTA not international? So why refer to G only?
Of course, a change in the prominence value for G would not be an
appropriate measure to attempt to replace SOTA activity
“lost” due to the DM/DL changes anyway.
Who said it would be? However, it would most certainly increase the level of UK activity considerably.
Mike
PS I meant decline and not demise.
“So why refer to G only?”…
I take the view, that any ‘dumbing down’ of an existing, well conceived and managed scheme would be a mistake. Each to his own, I suppose!
I don’t see it as a dumbing down Frank, more of a revitalisation of a scheme currently in decline judging by recent activation figures.
…'cos that’s what you were talking about.
73, Tom M1EYP