Dave, your posting is outside the scope of this topic, thus unlikely to be read by the people for whom it is intended. Suggest you start a new thread on safety on Hadrian's Hundred.

Thanks Simon and hope to welcome you to our checkpoint at the bothy on Cross Fell. I hope everyone who will be coming to our homeland will take a few moments to read the article in the latest Strider that outlines the hazards of the route that I put in. One thing to note there is a small typo in the article that it should have said "while walking on the South Tyne Trail watch out for cyclists. Take care when crossing the road in Alston".

Regards and hope you enjoy our walking area its beautiful.

Dave Clifton, your work is valued by many of us. The media coverage of a Lakeland 100 a few years back - and an event last year on the North York Moors? - should make it clear that there's actual risk, and perception of risk, and with Jeremy Vine around, both need to be taken seriously. It doesn't take much to go from all smiles to upside-down smiles.

Linked major events like the Dorset Giant / Wye Forest 50 / Wellington Boot (each one recurring every three years) work by the cooperation. The relevant LDWA groups find it much easier to share the work of the checkpoints. To organise a 100 it does not have to be a single LDWA group that forms the organising committee as long as everyone works together. In fact. the 100 committee does not have to be very big, as long as they can identify the key roles, are prepared to stay the distance for a three year "lead in time", can network and call on support when needed. In effect, a 100 committee is a syndicate united in a common worthwhile endeavour. The LDWA is a model grass roots organisation and that is how it should work.

Being the person who undertook the Risk assessment for this years 100 challenge I find some of the post quite upsetting. The whole purpose of the Risk assessment is to give an early heads up of potential risks some more serious than others so the 100 committee can firstly discuss to consider mitigating actions or in our case a change in route. Then we have to submit the Risk assessment to our Safety advisory groups. There are three county council areas on our route. The risk assessment is examined by experienced Health and Safety people who are well versed in events around their patch. The SAGS also pass the risk assessment to other partners including police and Mountain rescue. You may not like the culture of Health and Safety but we do live in a society that the LDWA is not exempt.

What - no faggots!

I'm in the middle of a row with district council officers who are refusing to allow parish council volunteers to litter pick their country lanes because it is "too dangerous". Another department is encouraging people to walk down the same country lane (as do we)because its part of the North Downs Way. How is picking up litter while walking down a country lane so inherently more dangerous than just walking down it that one has to be banned and the other encouraged. Health & Safety is going mad.

Approached proportionately, risk assessment for a walking event should be one of the less onerous tasks for organisers.

I agree with everything that has been said in the last two posts. Risk management in the 21st century is an issue that has to be addressed based on the fact that if an identified risk is not addressed, then individual culpability might occur, particularly if a court were to be involved. The standardised risk assessment was viewed by an external risk assessor and considered to be a good document to guide an organiser on what pitfalls they should avoid. So, rather than seeing it as a bureaucratic document, it should be seen as a document that guides how the event should be organised.

An example is road crossings. On the Valleys 100 in 2014 we had no choice but to take entrants across a dual carriageway with a 70mph speed limit with limited views to the right. On the risk assessment this quite rightly flagged up as ?red?. We mitigated that with volunteer marshals to amber.

Some might argue that is common sense; and I agree. But, if an accident had occurred, the first thing an investigating authority would wish to read would be the event risk assessment. If the risk described above had not been identified, questions would arise in relation to the competence of the organiser. If the risk had been identified and nothing done, then other questions might need to be asked. The point is that risk has to be documented.

I do disagree with regards to the contrast between a 25 mile event and the 100, IF the 100 was held in the same location every year, the same checkpoints were used, the same Walk HQ used and the same food provided, one could compare (to a degree) with a shorter event. But, we come back to the central issue; volunteers. Who would be prepared to organise an event annually?
I've said this before and I'll say it again. The LDWA is at a crossroads. For the last 47 years people volunteered because they wanted to get involved, help be part of an event that they'd previously entered and because they had a sense of duty towards their LDWA friends. They wanted to give something back. I agree that the event has become a beast but it has never had to grow to what it is perceived as now. We as volunteers have grown the event. No-one centrally has ever said that the event must be what it has become.
Checkpoints is a good example. There are more inside checkpoints now as opposed to a pasting table in a layby that many early entrants will remember from the 1970s and 1980s. This isn?t necessarily provided for the entrants but more for the comfort of the marshals who give up their time. It has meant that because better facilities are provided in village halls, so better quality food can be provided. And that is what has happened over many years. The jam sandwiches and biscuits that were the staple provided in the early days have been replaced because facilities have allowed that to happen.

With regards to menus, I agree that food has become (in the past on certain events) complicated. But no-one has ever told the organisers to do that or even that they must replicate what went before. People have inadvertently complicated things because they want to do the best they can for their LDWA colleagues and because they are proud to be organising the event.
The 85 page document that Tony alludes to was created by me. I take limited credit for it. All I did was merge 'Guidelines To Events' and 'Hints To Organise The Hundred'. I did this because as one read ?Hints?, one was constantly being referred to a certain section of ?Guidelines?. I took the decision to merge for ease of reading and in doing so I took the opportunity to modernise it. An example of modernisation was that I removed the suggestion of using motorcycle couriers to transport checkpoint sheets to Walk HQ as we now use electronic recording!!

This document has effectively been in existence for 20 years or more. The content is as valid now as it was when it was first created and if potential organisers read it they'd be guided along a well-trodden route which ought to destroy many myths that surround the organising of the event.

The struggle to identify groups to organise the event mirrors the health of the local groups themselves. Some are very healthy and are actively recruiting and retaining new members. Others are ageing and don't have the influx of newer people. Some of this forms part of the natural cycle that groups will go through. Recruitment can take place from the centre of the LDWA but central recruitment isn't the only thing that drives the health of a local group. If a group is actively involved in the wider walking community in which it sits and actively encourages local people to visit their walks they will recruit more people. I?ve seen this at first hand and I know of one group that is actively involved in walking festivals. Last year an attendee to a walking festival walk led by a LDWA member attracted one person to join the LDWA. They soon became an active member of the local group and is now qualified to walk the 100 in 2020. They just hadn?t heard of the LDWA which brings me on to the Business Plan.

The Business Plan that was unveiled in 2018 recognises many of the issues above and seeks to mitigate against them. Reaching out to a wider walking community to attract new members, providing a toolkit to local groups so that they can use tactics that will improve their chances of recruiting and retaining active volunteers and enthusing people to want to become volunteers for the LDWA are all key parts of the Business Plan. I believe that the LDWA is at a crossroads because it has relied (and had to rely) heavily on the first and second generation of members. Those generations are now ageing and quite rightly are reluctant to want to keep volunteering. How to persuade the third and fourth generation to become more involved, commit time and lead when they are already living full and busy lives is the challenge facing the LDWA.

P.S.
There will be jam sandwiches on Y 100 Sir Fynwy in 2020 and the finish meal will be pasty, beans / mushy peas and oven chips with alternatives for members with required dietary needs. We really are seeking to simplify things and there will be a pile of "application forms to organise the 100" for those who disapprove of the food provided!!!!!

Me too-but only a 55 miler-Dorset Gaint. Same issues! Off back to HQ...

The last two posts neatly encapsulate all that's right and wrong about organising Hundreds now.
I'll say no more - must get on!

John,
You make some very valid points. There is no doubt that organising a Hundred is a considerable bigger exercise now than before - Organising Committee meeting number 13 for the Hadrian Hundred is next week. Alan's recently published draft booklet of guidelines is at 85 pages well on the way to becoming a book. Some of this is self inflicted as organisers who have put three years of their life into the event naturally want it to be memorable so there is a tendency to keep adding bells and whistles. We have consciously tried to simplify the HH this year as we simply don't have enough people or budget for the extravagances. Some of them have crept back in - the map, for instance, but in fairness that is because someone offered to handle it.

I think an equally big factor is the increase in bureaucracy and control demanded by various authorities over the ever increasing number of what they see as mass participation events. Early on in the process I attended a meeting with no less than nine public bodies - 3 County Councils, 2 National Trails, Historic England, NT, a National Park and the North Pennines AONB, all of whom seemed to be looking for a reason to stop us holding the event, or at least holding it in a different time or place!

A third factor is a change in attitude to risk. I recall on one of my early Hundreds setting off across featureless moors in the dark with only a compass bearing as guidance. Now we expect the route description to be a step by step guide with light sticks and markers to point the way in open areas. And woe betide the organiser if there is an error in the GPX file - nobody expects to have to take the map out of the rucksack nowadays.

Risk does need to be managed, and because of the relatively demanding terrain this year we have spent a lot of time (and budget) with Raynet and Mountain Rescue to ensure the safety of participants, but at times it seems that the dreaded Risk Assessment is driving the event.

It isn't all doom and gloom. I doubt if any recent Hundred has been organised exclusively by a single group. Lakeland and Cumbria groups are far too small to consider organising a Hundred but both have representives on the HH committee. The internet and email make it practical to perform many roles from a distance so that specialist skills and experience can be imported. And the fact that groups from the far end of the country help out en masse on the day is one of the most heartening aspects of the event.

So to those of you who have enjoyed taking part in our wonderful event over the years and want to give something back, there is nothing to stop you even if it is not your group on the letterhead.

It is a very relevant point that only the largest groups have the resources and skills available to organise the 100. The commitment required of individuals stepping forward to organise the event should not be underestimated.Unlike a group 25 miler that can be put together with a 12 month lead in, the 100 requires a minimum of 3 years commitment and the organising committee have all to be fully focused and work towards the task in hand. A 100 committee is not a place for passengers, and not many folk will commit to 3 years work.
Many individual groups get by on a day to day basis largely down to the efforts of a small handful of individuals without whom the groups would fold. These people are insufficient in number to organise a 100 solely from their group and need to recruit outside help.
I firmly believe the way forward is the way proposed for 2022. Several committed individuals working towards a common goal.
One of the factors which possibly deters volunteers and this is a personal opinion, is that we may have bred a monster. Each 100 has tried to outdo the previous event with superior food and better checkpoint facilities, offering extra goodies like event maps or free DVDs or foot massaging services. In the early days checkpoints consisted of a card table offering jam sandwiches and cake next to a tent in a field. Whilst not advocating a return to basics, I do feel entrants expectations have been elevated to an unreasonable level. Let us return to a simpler format please

??Hellfire Hills??!!! Intriguing!!!! Sounds good!!!

Alan. Talk to me in Morpeth about Hellfire Hills 2024.

Alan, thanks again for the detailed reply.

Iain

Hi Iain

Thanks for the initial enquiry and subsequent discussion.

As highlighted by David and Michael the association was in a genuine position of not having an event in 2022 which in its 50th year would have been awful. Alas a similar unhealthy scenario to 2016 when events in 2019 and beyond were unknown and no group(s) coming forward.

We had identified a potentially strategy to consider various means of enabling the event to continue and almost immediately Michael came forward with his very well developed idea having already secured help from various individuals across the LDWA regional groups. Unique in the sense no one group or groups were formally organising and hosting the event but a collection of experienced individual members willing and able coming together with a walk in the Heart of England (HoE) area. You are correct in the fact some past events have been a combined effort by a number of formal groups collectively working together.

The HoE group have been offered the opportunity to formally organise and host the event. They wish to let this 'independent committee' aligned to the NEC continue to formally organise the event as a whole. However, they have offered to communicate the need for voluntary assistance (from within HoE area) as and when required.

It's true to say we are in a strong position with events being organised up to 2022 and one pencilled in for 2023 (subject to ratification at the NEC meeting later in April). However, I have no other group(s) showing any interest for 2024 and beyond. Hopefully this will change in the months and years to come.

Once again thank-you for your interest.

regards

Alan Warrington
LDWA 100s Coordinator

Michael, David, thanks for your detailed replies.

Iain

I'm grateful for the exchanges on thus subject that have clarified the position of the organising committee of EBB. Just one point I'd like to pick up on though. The NEC never advocated that an external group WOULD be used to organise a future 100. When I was 100 coordinator I raised the prospect that we needed to consider different strategies should the LDWA fail to identify local groups or members who were willing to take on the organisation of the event. One of the ideas considered, but never explored, was the prospect that external assistance might one day be required should a demand for entering the event be maintained but with no internal voluntary organisation.

Other strategies included using the same route every year as with other challenge events by the same committed organising group. Solid relationships would be built with one school and village hall caretakers and the 'event' dusted off and be ready to go every year as is the case with many other challenge walks that we know and love.

A figure of eight route might be used so that fewer volunteers might be required and in order to provide some variety, one loop might be the first to be walked one year and / or routes reversed.

Lots to consider and we should all be grateful for the volunteers who organise the event for those of us who enter it. Is it in a strong and solid position? I'd argue not and I'd urge local groups to consiser stepping forward and showcasing their areas. Standardisation has assisted in reducing some workloads and the recently upgraded 'How To Organise The Hundred' document is a really good way of understanding what's required. I do think we have over complicated things and ultimately it's a walk, but a walk of 100 miles as opposed to 25. Keep it simple and things will quickly fall into place!

Iain - apologies for any confusion. We are independent of any local group in that we're not all members of the same local committee (in fact most of us not members of any), and that no group approved our application to host the event before it was submitted to the NEC - but not independent of the LDWA as a whole. Any queries regarding the event should be directed to the event committee, not to the Heart of England group.

For the record, I understand that at a time when they were struggling to find a local group willing to host a Hundred, the NEC did consider bringing in external organisers to do the job instead, but since these are professional outfits, using them would have necessitated a significant increase in the entry fee.

If there are not enough single groups with the resources to put on a Hundred by themselves, perhaps our structure could be used as a model for future events - a core of 4-5 people based in the area where it is planned to take place (whether or not they are members of the local committee for that area) supplemented by others from elsewhere.

Michael

Michael, thanks very much for your clarification, that the 2022 Hundred will be managed by a committee formed of members from various local groups. The phrase "independent group" appeared to suggest the bringing in of an outside events organiser such as those who run charity walks - nothing wrong with them, the one I knew most about did a fine job - but it would have represented a major change in Hundreds policy. Maybe "joint group" would be a better phrase.

Iain

Hi Iain,

I cannot comment on the organisation of previous Hundreds since I was not involved in them, but as the chief organiser for 2022 I hope I can answer any questions you have specific to that event.

Being familiar with the Coventry/Warwickshire/Birmingham area, I thought it offered routes potentially suitable for a Hundred, but unfortunately the Heart of England committee felt that they did not have sufficient resources to organise one. I discussed the matter with Alan and David Morgan, who agreed with me that, while a Hundred requires a group of people willing to organise it, there is no reason why this group must necessarily correspond to an existing local committee - particularly since roles such as entries secretary and webmaster are done primarily online, rendering it irrelevant whether or not the post holder lives in the area where the event is to take place.

I therefore sought to assemble such a group, and having done so, submitted our proposal for the event to the NEC, making it clear that the organising group was independent of the HoE committee. One member of the group is in fact a HoE committee member, but chose to get involved as an individual separately from his existing role; four others are HoE members but not on the committee; while four are based outside the area.

I was invited to present details of the event to the HoE AGM in December, where the members (not the committee) chose to give it their support in principle; it remains to be determined what this will amount to in practice.

I can assure you that, despite the unusual organisational set-up, planning is progressing well - we have all but one checkpoint booked and have already gained some of the necessary permissions from landowners. I'm aware that Alan is away at the moment but I'm sure he'll be able to answer any queries on Hundred organisation in general when he gets back; in the meantime I'll be happy to take any further questions regarding 2022 specifically.

Best wishes
Michael Jones (Chief Organiser, Elephant, Bear and Bull 100)

I believe the Heart of Scotland Hundred was a joint effort by members of several groups - there was no local group in the area at the time. This year is principally organised by Northumbria, but there are members of Cumbria and Lakeland on the organising committee.
The complexity of current Hundreds means that only the largest groups have the resources to go it alone.

Wasn't the Games 100 organised by an ad-hoc mixture of members of several different LDWA groups supported by nearby groups, London, Kent etc? Is there any difference 10 years on?

To Alan Warrington (I think you might be the best person to answer):

Amongst the pieces on coming Hundreds in the new Strider, included in '2022 100 set for Shakespeare Country' is the following:

"The event [the EBB, or Elephant, Bull and Bear] will be run by an independent group headed by Michael Jones, and is being supported by Heart of England LDWA." (Strider 143 April 2019 p11).

Could you please elaborate on what *appears* to be the first time a Hundred will have been managed not, or not entirely, by an LDWA local group, but an "independent group" ?

Iain