I suppose we all need a rule of thumb. Mine is 15 miles in a day when I’m planning. I almost feel I’ve failed if I haven’t done 15 miles. How totally stupid!!! If I’m going up any significant hills then 10-12 miles is more likely. Not only that, but it means I try to artificially force walks into a pattern. I really liked John Hee’s idea of picking some nice places to camp and linking them, ignoring the distances between them. I also notice that Geoff has quite varied distances each day and generally selects interesting places to camp.
Memo to self: next time choose good places to camp and link them. Don’t worry about distance. Enjoy yourself and forget the goal setting. 
Well said. It is the quality that counts not the quantity. Fenlander wrote once about four miles. Brilliant four miles as he took time to enjoy them. That is what makes a good walk – did you enjoy the miles that made up its length.
By: Martin Rye on 27 June 2009
at 5:43 pm
Some miles are more than others!.
On single-day walks in the Peak District years ago with little ascent, we wouldn’t get the car out for less than 18 miles, it was usually 20-odd. In the mountains 6 to 8 miles can be a full hearty day especially if a lot of pathless terrain is involved.
These days we take our time a lot more, getting the most out of the landscape, and in any case it’s very relaxing to have plenty of time and not to feel rushed.
By: GeoffC on 27 June 2009
at 6:20 pm
Mileage is inevitable as long as you keep placing one foot in front of the other – Lord Elpus once told me that he saw his day as a chap strolling along against the motion of a moving pavement – as long as he kept his legs moving the scenery kept coming towards him – or as he sometimes says “those scenery shifters keep changing the backdrops!”
I never expect a daily mileage – I look at a map and reckon – “I’ll get there, then – that looks a nice spot…” Mostly works!
By: alan.sloman on 27 June 2009
at 8:03 pm
Its the journey that counts, not the distance that is travelled.
My walks link places of interest, and include a suitable length of time spent enjoying the movement onwards.
If that happens to be 2 miles or 20 its all the same to me these days.
All too easy to get hung up on targets and mile munching and miss the enjoyment factor
By: john hee on 28 June 2009
at 10:51 am
John, I thnk that’s the right way to do it. I think I have been too “goal” oriented. I’m going to take a more relaxed attitude in future. I really like the idea of visiting tarns.
By: blogpackinglight on 28 June 2009
at 10:56 am
Thats the ticket
Tarns are the easy way into this. Solves the nice spot/water supply question
For me, mindfull of the distance/time to get to the Lakes, I’ve been spending more time on Dartmoor. That needs a change of approach, possibly towards archeological features (e.g. stone circles; tinner huts; leats) and stream/woodland spots rather than expanses of standing water. And then there’s the Tor tops, easier to ascend than Lakeland peaks and many more to chose from/link together.
All it needs its a slight change in attitude, and a sideways shift when thinking about what gives you the most enjoyment when out
(There’s a whole book in this somewhere! lol)treatise
By: john hee on 28 June 2009
at 11:12 am
treatise?
How did that slip in?
By: john hee on 28 June 2009
at 11:14 am