Everest - beyond the limit

[Seattle LawDawg]

Your'e missing my point. Driving, commercial fishing, coal mining etc. (whatever) are necessities in our world and all pose a certain amount of danger. Jumping out of an airplane is stupid, but doesn't endanger others. Chute doesn't open, your dead. But climbing accidents always end up with dangerous and costly rescues, with many people involved. Climbing is a voluntery passtime that is dangerous, not only to the climber but to others. Why don't you guys just ask the families of the victims how they feel about it.

 

 

Ok, so if I have this right, climbing is dangerous because it endangers others. Commercial fishing is dangerous but acceptable because it is a necessity. (I assume that economic value to the commercial fishing company and those that want to spend 50 cents less for their cod at Safeway equates to necessity). Driving endangers others but not rescuers.

 

Now, you say that climbing is a voluntary pastime where accidents always end up with dangerous and costly rescues with many people involved. I'm not sure what your source is but I'll at least add my own anecdotal arguments based on my own experience working with S&R teams in Washington. First of all, a majority of rescues on the mountains are necessary because people simply wear out or have some minor injury. A team of 2-4 people goes up, brings them down. Rarely, do rescues require any more and hardly ever are the rescue teams in any real danger. The majority of rescues of "mountain climbers" are of people that are not necessarily summiting. The majority of rescues of "mountain climbers" occurs from May - September in good weather. Most of the people that I've seen need help should never been on the mountain in the first place. Either they didn't have the proper physical conditioning, didn't do their homework on the mountain, or were just generally unprepared. I don't believe that the three on Mt. Hood fall into that category.

 

The North Bend WA S&R team that I worked with was completely voluntary. The majority of the rescuers involved in the Mt. Hood effort are volunteers. Crag Rats, PMR, etc = all recreational climbers involved in this rescue on a voluntary basis. I was on the mountain Saturday prepared to climb. I knew that the authorities would not allow me to be on a summit team without hitting a peak in the last couple of months but I did expect to climb with the searchers focusing on the lower areas...no such luck. Every person on the mountain has been on the mountain recently. Again, they don't get paid. They climb because of any number of personal reasons. They volunteer for S&R teams because there are no professional organizations more qualified to make these type of rescue attempts. In return, they know that should they ever be in trouble, people would be heading up after them.

 

Now, obviously in this rescue there are national guard and local sheriff personnel as well. They aren't climbing the mountain. They did give the climbers a lift to the top...that was nice...They've also got the PJ teams up there to add assistance from above. The sheriff and national guard are sharing organizational responsibilities from 5000 feet below.

 

If the cost of the military adding helicopter support is disturbing, I have no doubt that the Coast Guard spends much more money in just as dangerous situations performing rescues of boaters and fishermen.

 

I've been on many of NW Cascade peaks at some time in my life including Hood, Adams, Rainier twice, and many smaller peaks. The only unplanned night I ever spent on a mountain was due to weather on Shasta when I was in high school. We were well prepared and never in any danger. To try to get down during the storm would have been dangerous, but preparations ensured that we were warm (well, preparations and a steam vent), well fed and hydrated and out of the elements. (There was no danger of avalanche at that time where we were on the mt).

 

Everyone climbs for their own reasons. Each summit gives me a personal sense of accomplishment. I enjoy putting myself in places where I will see things that relatively few others will ever see. I do a lot of things that are far more dangerous. I view climbing as good for my body and soul

 

I'm hearing several comments like those from whoopazz. People seem ready to condemn the activity without knowing anything about it. Statements like "dangerous to others" get the press's attention despite the facts. The truth usually lacks the same sensation. Climbers can probably evaluate the dangers better than those who have never been out of city and you aren't going to hear many experienced climbers second-guess the decision for these three to climb. An accident happened...they do that. While the family certainly grieves the losses, I doubt that any of the family members now view climbing as inherently dangerous. They may wish that the three didn't make this climb but they won't question their decision to go.

Edited December 19, 2006 by Seattle LawDawg

[whoopazz]

Ok, so if I have this right, climbing is dangerous because it endangers others. Commercial fishing is dangerous but acceptable because it is a necessity. (I assume that economic value to the commercial fishing company and those that want to spend 50 cents less for their cod at Safeway equates to necessity). Driving endangers others but not rescuers.

 

Now, you say that climbing is a voluntary pastime where accidents always end up with dangerous and costly rescues with many people involved. I'm not sure what your source is but I'll at least add my own anecdotal arguments based on my own experience working with S&R teams in Washington. First of all, a majority of rescues on the mountains are necessary because people simply wear out or have some minor injury. A team of 2-4 people goes up, brings them down. Rarely, do rescues require any more and hardly ever are the rescue teams in any real danger. The majority of rescues of "mountain climbers" are of people that are not necessarily summiting. The majority of rescues of "mountain climbers" occurs from May - September in good weather. Most of the people that I've seen need help should never been on the mountain in the first place. Either they didn't have the proper physical conditioning, didn't do their homework on the mountain, or were just generally unprepared. I don't believe that the three on Mt. Hood fall into that category.

 

The North Bend WA S&R team that I worked with was completely voluntary. The majority of the rescuers involved in the Mt. Hood effort are volunteers. Crag Rats, PMR, etc = all recreational climbers involved in this rescue on a voluntary basis. I was on the mountain Saturday prepared to climb. I knew that the authorities would not allow me to be on a summit team without hitting a peak in the last couple of months but I did expect to climb with the searchers focusing on the lower areas...no such luck. Every person on the mountain has been on the mountain recently. Again, they don't get paid. They climb because of any number of personal reasons. They volunteer for S&R teams because there are no professional organizations more qualified to make these type of rescue attempts. In return, they know that should they ever be in trouble, people would be heading up after them.

 

Now, obviously in this rescue there are national guard and local sheriff personnel as well. They aren't climbing the mountain. They did give the climbers a lift to the top...that was nice...They've also got the PJ teams up there to add assistance from above. The sheriff and national guard are sharing organizational responsibilities from 5000 feet below.

 

If the cost of the military adding helicopter support is disturbing, I have no doubt that the Coast Guard spends much more money in just as dangerous situations performing rescues of boaters and fishermen.

 

I've been on many of NW Cascade peaks at some time in my life including Hood, Adams, Rainier twice, and many smaller peaks. The only unplanned night I ever spent on a mountain was due to weather on Shasta when I was in high school. We were well prepared and never in any danger. To try to get down during the storm would have been dangerous, but preparations ensured that we were warm (well, preparations and a steam vent), well fed and hydrated and out of the elements. (There was no danger of avalanche at that time where we were on the mt).

 

Everyone climbs for their own reasons. Each summit gives me a personal sense of accomplishment. I enjoy putting myself in places where I will see things that relatively few others will ever see. I do a lot of things that are far more dangerous. I view climbing as good for my body and soul

 

I'm hearing several comments like those from whoopazz. People seem ready to condemn the activity without knowing anything about it. Statements like "dangerous to others" get the press's attention despite the facts. The truth usually lacks the same sensation. Climbers can probably evaluate the dangers better than those who have never been out of city and you aren't going to hear many experienced climbers second-guess the decision for these three to climb. An accident happened...they do that. While the family certainly grieves the losses, I doubt that any of the family members now view climbing as inherently dangerous. They may wish that the three didn't make this climb but they won't question their decision to go.

 

 

I had a feeling you were a climber, hence your reaction to my calling it "stupid". You obviously know much more about this than I so I'll let it go. I'll retract the stupid part, but I still think its too dangerous for a family man. Weather looks bad so hopes are fading on Hood. Prayers for the families. And be careful up there.

[twiley]

I do a lot of things that are far more dangerous.

 

Yeah, hanging out with me is pretty dangerous for your liver.

[Seattle LawDawg]

Yeah, hanging out with me is pretty dangerous for your liver.

 

 

Thats a whole other kind of death zone.