Walking on forest tracks: should motorised access be allowed or encouraged?

Is it cheating to drive off the metalled road to get to the start of your Scottish hillbagging trip? Or should the whole journey be powered by muscle alone?

It’s a question that the Mountaineering Council of Scotland has taken seriously for many years, to the extent that it formalised its position at its 1994 annual meeting, saying that remote land – more than an hour’s walk from the nearest road – should remain so and access by vehicle should be restricted.

In fact, the MCofS position statement issued 15 years ago even discourages the mere mention that a key to locked gates on mountain tracks might exist. The policy is firm: “The MCofS supports the protection of remote land by the use of the long walk in. This is an effective and proven conservation measure for mountainous areas.”

But hang on: how about Strathfarrar? Here, the MCofS is unequivocal. It has on its site full details of when the 27km (17-mile) private road is open and even has an arrangement to winter climbers to ring its office to find out the gate’s lock combination.

The question has been thrown into focus again by Hebe Carus, the MCofS access and conservation officer who has been approached for the council’s view on Government-owned tracks. Ms Carus says the tracks in question are that leading to the failed Torridon munro candidate Beinn Dearg and five others in the Galloway region. The MCofS is asking its members for their views on whether it should maintain its opposition to the drive in, rather than the long walk in.

The first response on the MCofS pitch-in web page comes from Kevin Howett and contains the confession that Mr Howett is, himself, guilty of the odd drive-in mountain sortie – the Grey Corries, Beinn Fhada and, of course, the Glen Strathfarrar hydro road, saving probably half a day’s walk in along a tedious ribbon of asphalt.

But then he asks: “Can the MCofS – which, remember is not a judge eternal, but merely the sum total of its members – properly and honestly maintain the position statement, but hold, for issue to members, or even a sub-set of members, such as ‘ice climbers, but not ordinary walkers’, the combination which will allow them to open a locked gate to give motorised access further in to this or that hill or climbing face?

“There appears to be at least one instance where ‘controlled’ motorised access may be acceded to, for all, or part of the year for some, up hard quality engineered tracks.

“Does the above position statement need amending? Or does it already allow individual, one-off shortenings of the long walk in? Or do we stick to the view that the LWI starts on a black Tarmac public highway, and that anyone who goes further ‘in’ to shorten his LWI is somehow cheating and should not be supported by MCofS?”

Stephen Reid, writing in the same forum expresses what may be a common view: “Until the other day, I had no idea that the MCofS had a ‘policy statement’ on how long a walk in should be and whether use of a vehicle on an unmetalled track when approaching a crag constituted cheating in some way.

“The whole idea immediately brought to mind an image of a Monty Pythonesque group of characters all asking themselves repeatedly ‘What have Land Rover tracks ever done for us?’ and discounting out-of-hand every positive thing they can think of.

“I only found out about it because it seems that in my own area of expertise, the Galloway Hills, there is the faint possibility that vehicular access for the public to the Backhill of Bush Bothy may at last be allowed and I had enquired about getting a letter of support for the notion.”

Mr Reid sings the praises of the crags and winter-climbing routes in the area while pondering whether the paucity of different names adorning the first ascent lists means these climbers and mountaineers are ‘tougher and hardier than all the other climbers living within easy reach of the M74? Keen on mountain biking with huge rucksacks or immune to midges perhaps?’ Apparently not.

“Without revealing any trade secrets I can say that in each party at least one of the climbers had – legitimately – acquired a set of forestry gate keys,” he says. “Without such vehicle access, all the crags mentioned above would take around three hours to walk to, which would no doubt have dampened their enthusiasm considerably. And though admittedly this can be cut down to two hours by use of a bike, we’re members of the MCofS, not the Scottish Cycling Union.”

The lack of climbers on the Galloway routes is threatening the viability of some of them, says Mr Reid.

There is also a difficulty with the perceived preferential treatment of some climbers – instructors and their clients in particular – who get a head start on others by driving further than hoi polloi are allowed.

Mr Reid, a Scottish Mountaineering Club guidebook author, is clearly in favour of a change of heart – and policy – from the MCofS. He says: “Let’s have some pragmatism, taking each scenario as it comes and not trying to formulate one set of rules to apply to everything from Dumbarton to Knoydart or Clifton to Foinaven.

“And let’s have some fairness. The idea that a particular track should only be only usable by instructors or ice-climbers or, as in the case of the Galloway Hills, anglers, is ridiculous.”

Hebe Carus says in her appeal: “So what do you think the MCofS position statement should say? The MCofS needs to know your views in order to represent them, especially if you are the silent majority.”

If the silent majority thinks like Stephen Reid, the 15-year-old policy could be in for a review.

MCofS members can ‘pitch-in’ on the council’s website or email Hebe Carus before 15 December.