And I suppose that the 'traditionalists' will be prepared to put their hands in their wallets to pay towards the upkeep of long distance trails? I think not. I'll probably never use this system but I'm all for encouraging responsible peeps to 'get out there' and enjoy a challenge.

Oh the sweet smell of hypocracy! Journalist and broadcaster Cameron McNeish is quoted as saying of Trailblaze: " Many backpackers and hikers, like myself, dislike the blatant commercialism behind the scheme." And how exactly does Mr McNeish make his money? By writing and selling guide books for the National Trails and making after dinner speaches about his experiences on them!
I wonder how much of his profit contributes to their upkeep?

I'll probably never use Trailblaze either, but I certainly don't object to them doing this - ultra trail running is a fantastic way to move through the countryside and causes minimal damage compared to other users.
And as for Cameron McNeish - I agree wholeheartedly with Charlotte Barker. Cameron has done much to promote the great outdoors, but he doesn't have the moral high ground on this particular argument.

Isn't there a difference between somebody who writes about, or photographs, the landscape (and makes a living by doing so) and a company that changes that landscape by installing permanent metal boxes advertising their website?

If McNeish's books and broadcasts don't appeal to you, you don't have to read or listen. But people walking the National Trails now have no alternative to seeing the garish white boxes with red flame logos on them.

No offence, Charlotte, but your spelling of hypocrisy and speeches suggests that you won't have written many books. But I can't see why the Trails have been hurt by the fact that McNeish has.

The boxes are attached to signposts on built trails are they not?

I really don't think that white boxes, even 'garish' ones at that, have that much additional visual impact when compared to the trails they are on.

I have no problem with the boxes at all if they encourage people to get out running and enjoying the countryside. However, the video is bizarre.

McNeish "doesn't have the moral high ground on this particular argument"? Why? Because he objects to the commercialism of putting prominent adverts on long distance paths? Because he suspects that these obtrusive and brightly coloured boxes have only been permitted because Natural England benefit financially?

I don't really care whether people waste their money on Trailblaze, but like McNeish (who is pretty consistent in objecting to man-made intrusions in relatively wild areas) I don't want to come across these unnecessary, ugly, artificial boxes which belong in an urban environment if they belong anywhere.

Natural England? Or Artificial England? I thought they had a duty to care for the natural, wild qualities of our country. There is a reason the "National Trails" don't generally run through our cities.

Brightly coloured? Like a backpack?
Artificial? Like a polyester fleece?
Fixed to posts in obvious places? Like a waymark?

Consider - that these installations may be far less an intrusion on a national path than anyone using the path, or the signage inherent in marking the path.

The argument against them is entirely applicable to a case against waymarking national trails with clear signage.

Hence, if one wishes to state their case against these new arrivals as a devoted user of national trails, one could consider the instability of the ground on which they're setting their stall.

But that's the thing - every interaction has an effect. This scheme should be judged on the merits of whether that effect is largely beneficial, or largely detrimental - regardless of how "intrusive" any goretex-clad individual might consider a small white box every 5 miles.

If one prefers a wild, unspoilt landscape, there are thousands of square miles to choose from, far from the view of National Paths, which lest we forget, are intended to be recreational assets, for the enjoyment of all.

Valerie is right: Trail users wear and carry lots of manmade objects. But after they pass by, all that is left is their footsteps: the manmade objects go home with them.

Waymarking is indeed both permanent and obvious, but it is there to help everybody, whether walking or running, to follow the route. Without it, many people (myself included) would hesitate to embark on long-distance walking solo.

With the benefit of more experience, I am now happy to go into unmarked wild places relying on map and compass, but everybody has to start somewhere. The fact that National Trails are waymarked doesn't mean they need to be spoiled by further intrusive gadgets to suit a tiny minority of endurance athletes who are unable to use a wristwatch and/or unwilling to trust competing athletes to use theirs.

Valerie, you can also avoid most of the brightly coloured clothing and rucksacks by choosing quiet times (and bad weather perhaps!). These "small white boxes" are semi-permanent. The amount of "wild, unspoilt landscape" is shrinking rapidly, with industrialisation (mainly wind turbines) and new bulldozed tracks etc.

And yes, people, particularly if garishly clothed, do also detract from "wild, unspoilt landscape". Is that really an argument in favour of more "trail litter", in which I include waymarking and cairns, particularly if they're more prominent than necessary.

Stuck on signposts - visual manmade intrusion?

Yes it is another way of monetising a free to use resource, but it is strictly opt in. Bit like" inventing" Sutherland and getting a TV plug etc...

What is the matter with the wildinistas? Are runners the new cyclists? Why do folk find others who are younger and fitter than themselves offensive - ( I find them "annoying" but in a nice sort of way)

I tell you what wildie extremists - I will swap your orienteering type controls for our wind turbines. Get a sense of proportion and stop making fools of yourselves complaining about trivia. That plays into the hands of the real enemy.

It's sad to see the last word going to R Webb who is fond of knocking straw men stone cold. Not one of the above comments (on either side) finds any offence in younger, fitter people enjoying our National Trails. I'm not even annoyed by them in a good way, I admire them. I'm not an extremist; the boxes are not trivia; and nor is this debate about wind turbines, which are anyway not the alternative to Trailblaze.

What I'm opposing is the permanent installation of intrusive boxes advertising the website of a company promoting a very clunky low-tech solution to a problem that simply does not exist. Timing and transmission of location can be done by small portable devices such as wristwatches and GPS-savvy devices which can easily be carried by runners themselves (and often are already). "Cheating" or tampering is possible if people are so minded, but if it comes to that there's nothing to stop Trailblaze "runners" using a bike or car between checkpoints.

I think we have to look at this in context. Our countryside is shrinking due to the construction of large wind power stations, new hydro plants and more. In contrast the Trailblaze boxes are a tiny intrusion. However, they're no less welcome and, like plastic bags of dog shoite, discarded banana skins, empty Lucozade bottles other litter, they have no place in the hills. Trail managers need to rethink their policy, and fast.

It sounds to me like a lot of the anti comments above could have been at least slightly defused by using a more discreet box in black or green. I don't object to the general principle, but a more discreet approach would have been helpful.

if there aren't people using our upland areas then there will be no argument against windfarms etc. Trailblaze boxes may not be pretty but they sound to me like an imaginative way of broadening participation and increasing the sustainability of national parks.

Sorry, but a "more discreet box" completely misses the point. Why should the tiny, tiny minority of trail users who are endurance runners inflict these frightful boxes onto everybody else?

Look at the numbers on the Trailblaze website and you will see that, excluding the launch event, barely 5 runners per trail have signed up for this since Easter. 20% of nearly nothing is even less: the income to the National Trails is a false promise.

www.strava.com demonstrates that you can do all the leaderboard stuff without any permanent installations on any trails. Many endurance runners already own GPS, iPhones and so forth, so let them use strava and keep these vulgar, battery-backed metal boxes off our National Trails.

We don't need these boxes whatever colour. I would destroy them If I came across them. The countryside is for peace. If every walker thinks like me trailblaze will not exist...good riddance