Which weather brings people to the hills?
How do rain, gusts, temperature, cloud and the prospect of a view relate to activity? Does that relationship change at weekends, during holidays, between seasons or on different mountains?
Mountain Weather · Public research
A clearer picture of what happens on the hill.
The weather changes. So do our plans. Help us understand who heads out, which paths they choose and when they decide to turn back.
We are bringing together hillwalker experiences, historical weather and visitor records, and developing plans for weather instruments and counters on the same hills. The findings will be freely available to the outdoor community.
Why this matters
Beyond “how busy was the mountain?”
A quieter summit could mean fewer people started, more chose a lower route, or more turned around. Understanding those differences could make weather guidance more useful and help us interpret mountain-rescue callouts.
Do people favour more sheltered paths?
We want to compare use of exposed ridges, alternative approaches and lower routes with wind strength and direction. Cloud, rain and daylight may also influence where people choose to go.
When does a summit stop being the aim?
Counts at successive points, including direction where the instruments support it, could reveal patterns consistent with shorter outings or earlier returns. Voluntary accounts can help explain the decisions behind those patterns.
How does winter change the picture?
We want to examine winter walking and other winter activities separately where the records allow. Snow, ice, daylight and lift operation can change both access and participation, so a winter day needs its own context.
A first step · Glen Lyon
Better rain-and-wind categories were associated with more activity.
We compared 371 screened dates from a four-Munro circuit during parts of 2017 to 2019 with regional ERA5 weather reanalysis. A statistical model allowed for year and month, the day of the week and recorded bank holidays.
| Rain-and-gust category | Recorded activity | Approximate 95% interval |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | 58% higher | 30% to 92% higher |
| Good | 47% higher | 26% to 73% higher |
| Poor | 35% lower | 14% to 52% lower |
These estimates describe a processed counter-derived activity measure on one circuit. A definition discrepancy in the source material is still being clarified, and three Severe dates were too few for a dependable comparison. The intervals describe statistical uncertainty within this model; they do not capture every source of uncertainty.
What can we learn from this comparison?
The combined result remained similar in the sensitivity checks we ran, but the categories did not form a perfect sequence in every individual year. “Excellent” here means at most 0.2 mm daily precipitation and a maximum model-grid gust of 25 mph; “Good” allows up to 1 mm and 35 mph, excluding Excellent days.
The comparison uses reconstructed conditions and broad historical categories. It cannot tell us which forecast people consulted or establish why any individual went out. It also does not test the complete current hill-day score, the Views score, route choice or rescue risk per outing. Those are questions for further work.
Sources: published Glen Lyon dataset and our forecast-method and participation evidence.
The hill monitoring project · Seeking support
Several counters. One hill. A much richer picture.
Our proposed pilot would combine automatic weather observations with several counters across one mountain's path network. Measuring the approach, alternative branches and upper routes could show how use changes across the hill as the weather changes.
A
Approach counterWhen activity begins and ends
BLower or sheltered branchHow use of an alternative changes
CExposed upper pathHow use relates to wind and cloud
D
Summit approach + weather instrumentsUpper-hill activity alongside local conditions
Weather at the places that matter
We would like to measure wind, gusts and temperature on exposed high ground, and explore rainfall and other observations where the equipment can provide useful records. Paired exposed and sheltered sites could help test how wind direction changes local conditions.
Historic ERA5 records would provide longer context. Local instruments would help us check what the summit actually experiences and improve the evidence behind terrain adjustments and forecast guidance.
Patterns of use, with their limits explained
Synchronised counters could compare activity at different elevations and branches through the day. Directional counts may help distinguish outward and returning passages. The aim is aggregate patterns without names, photographs or device tracking.
Counters alone cannot link a person's journey or prove they turned back because of weather. Loops, other exits, repeated passages and missed detections can change the totals. Route mapping, equipment checks and voluntary surveys would help interpret the differences.
What would the first supported pilot deliver?
A documented instrument layout, checked weather and passage records, and an initial report on how participation varies across the path network. We would publish the methods, coverage, missing data and limitations, with seasonal updates as the record grows.
The project is at the planning stage. No new Mountain Weather summit station is installed yet. The first step is to agree a suitable site, permissions and a costed plan, including installation, power, communications, calibration and maintenance through the seasons.
Help fund, equip or host the pilotGet involved
Help turn good questions into useful evidence.
A first field site needs equipment, local knowledge and people willing to help it keep running. There are also useful ways to contribute before any instrument goes onto a hill.
Fund hill monitors
Help fund a path counter, weather instrument, power supply or communications link. Support for installation, calibration and ongoing maintenance is equally valuable.
We can discuss a contribution towards a pilot or sponsorship of an agreed site, with a clear budget and reporting plan before any commitment.
Discuss funding a pilot →Outdoor shops and brands
Share a questionnaire link in your shop, newsletter or community channels. Help us reach walkers with different experience levels, including people who changed plans or stayed at home.
You could also sponsor field equipment, offer suitable equipment or technical help, host a research evening, or discuss funding participation rewards for a future survey.
Explore support from your business →Land managers and local groups
Help identify a suitable path network, introduce the people responsible for permissions, or contribute local knowledge about routes and seasonal access. Existing visitor logs could be particularly useful.
Suggest a site or share a data lead →Instrument and research expertise
Help with weather sensors, counter design, calibration, power, communications or analysis. We also welcome advice on comparing route use and interpreting incomplete field records.
Offer expertise or equipment →Walkers, clubs and guides
Tell us about your own decisions through the questionnaire, share it with your club, or offer to help pilot future questions. Days when you chose a lower route, turned around or did not go are part of the picture.
Share a hill experience →Contribute a professional perspective →Help a field site keep running
Local volunteers could support agreed equipment checks and maintenance visits once a site is established. Help would be arranged around permissions, training and appropriate conditions.
Register interest in practical help →Public findings. Clearly acknowledged support.
With their agreement, supporters would be credited in project updates and reports, with their contribution explained. Mountain Weather would retain control of the questions, analysis and publication. Findings would remain freely available, and sponsorship would not give access to individual questionnaire responses.
No participant reward is currently offered. Any future reward scheme would have terms explained before participation and recognise taking part regardless of the answers given.
Talk to Simon about getting involved →An introduction or an idea is welcome. You do not need a complete proposal.