Marhofn 255.14 - May 2012

Previous | Contents | Next

In defence of list ticking by relative height

Jonathan de Ferranti

I guess there will always be those who deride or pity summit list tickers, and even among supporters, there will be those who deride the concept of relative height and reject anything that fails to attain a specific height above sea level. Well, each to their own, but ticking and counting summits is what gets me onto my feet and out into the wilderness, and stops me descending into vice. And, for me, it is relative height that makes a summit, regardless of height above sea level. It has been pointed out that the height of Mount Washington above sea level is 1918 metres. Ditto a parking lot in downtown Colorado Springs. I feel just as uplifted on a Fife Marilyn, or on the highest point of a island, as I do on a Munro.
And good for anyone reading this who has climbed more relative hills than I have, who has climbed more relative hills in a day or year than I have, or who would leave me way behind in any hill race. I will tick my lists in my time and admire, but not attempt to compete with, others who tick lists in their time. I may not have been blessed with a bubbly, fun loving and party going nature; indeed, I prefer to accept and search for the benefits of Asperger's syndrome than to attempt to cure it, as if it were a disease. However, I am fortunate that my circumstances allow me to do what I do best instead of being tied to organised employment, and to believe in what I believe, rather than commit myself to any form of organised religion. I hope to complete the Marilyns, all of them, and to continue to create digital elevation models, panoramic maps and lists of relative hills, and make my work freely available to the world at www.viewfinderpanoramas.org for many years to come.

Someone in Manchester understands (photo: Martin Richardson)

Someone in Manchester understands (photo: Martin Richardson)

Previous | Contents | Next