Missing climbers

“I think this is just one of the worst things that could happen.


What if....

it could have been one of us out there. I know we all have more sense than that! But what if....”

“This thread could quickly turn fuego....loudmouth outdoor expert Bill O'Reilly popped off that he thinks climbers should be banned from climbing or going up on mountains when weather is or could be bad.

Here's a summary:

One of the three men missing on Oregon's Mt. Hood has been found dead; the others are still not accounted for. The Factor declared that "states should have the authority to tell people that they can't go up in adverse conditions," but two rescuers disagreed. Glenn Kessler, a ranger at Washington's Mt. Rainier, said that winter climbing can not be prohibited. "We do require people to register and come in and talk with us. But we can't physically bar them from going up the mountain." Former rescuer Matthew Weaver opposed the idea that climbing can be banned in bad weather. "I don't think any laws or regulations are going to do the job. You can't build a fence around the mountain and keep people off there." The Factor reiterated that authorities should be able to take action in treacherous conditions. "At most beaches if there's a rip tide or a shark, you can not go swimming. It should be the same thing on a mountain. This puts rescuers at risk."

Or a poorly recorded YouTube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUn7kcKSaMs

It's really weird how someone can have such a strong opinion about something like freedom and yet make comments like this that fly in the face of their broader beliefs. Or is it just fodder for rating$?”

“reports are that James had a camera with him and that the pictures were developed and from what they could tell by viewing the photos, they had minimal gear and that it would be difficult to survive this long in those kind of conditions. The sheriff, however, still is considering this a rescue type operation, but admitted, he is close to changing it to a recovery.”

“I saw that blabber-mouth O'Reilly.

He is really unbalanced.”

“I agree with O'Reilly based on the following:

"At most beaches if there's a rip tide or a shark, you can not go swimming. It should be the same thing on a mountain. This puts rescuers at risk."

To think otherwise is to place self-importance over the safety of others.”

“O'Reilly's complaint (in the video) seemed to be based more on the cost of the rescue than the fact that the rescuers are at risk. That really stood out for me.”

“Uh Bill. Aren't you advocating the govt. deciding for YOU what you can and can't do? Seems like it would go against your ideology there, bub...”

“I think this is just one of the worst things that could happen.


What if....

it could have been one of us out there. I know we all have more sense than that! But what if....”
KrazeJane
2:51:12 PM
12/19/06


Username: KrazeJane
State of residence:
Member since: 12/19/06
Other comments:”

“You guys really need to go to www.cascadeclimbers.com... Routes, then Oregon Cascades, then something about a thread continued.

I've been following that little dysfunctional family -- and its nonclimbing intruders -- for days now.

Jerry "Nikko" Cooke posted on there as Fuggedaboudit. You can see the thread he started to request info ("beta") for a trip for 3 up Mt. Hood the third week in December.

Last night someone posted a link to a trip report, in which Cooke was part of a two-man team, I think last summer?? The guy who wrote the report explained how they practiced rescuing each other before taking off.

Then, the trip teller, fell into a crevass close to camp. His story of being rescued from that crevass was harrowing, but turned out OK. Before it was done, Nikko was aided by two other climbers in getting the guy out.

What struck me -- and I don't know if it was just the silly type, "Oh, how close that was" type talk or if it was really scaredness, or unpreparedness -- is that Cooke talked about the effort of it all as if he barely pulled it off. That it was really tough. That he really had to think it through. And then two others did help complete the rescue.

Of course, I'm looking at it from a whole different viewpoint after what's happened on Mt. Hood. But to me, YES IN RETROSPECT AND JUDGED ON EVENTS THAT HAPPENED SINCE, he seemed somewhat unprepared for rescue and self-rescue when climbing at that point. They had practiced rescues the day before. What would have happened, if they hadn't?? What if they hadn't been so close to camp and other people??

These are discussion points, not a judgment. Things we all need to think about for ourselves and loved ones when we go out. I'm a backpacker who didn't even think to put winter gear in the Jeep till the Kim incident. We can feel comfortable with what we know. We can get complacent. We need to think about the "what ifs."

I still hope they find those two men alive. I read that on some blog a woman who was snowshoeing lower on Hood on Sunday said she had seen a reflection lke a mirror on the south side. The blog person put her in contact with police.
last edited: 12/19/06 2:42:40 PM”

“Katahdin DOES close when conditions are too dangerous. The authorities take the decision OUT of the individuals hands. Why should Mt Hood be different?

Certainly, y'all are not saying that THIS should not be so. Are you?”

“Bill...OREALLY? LOL we had a local talk show host say the "if they go they should be on their own."

Sorry but if you do something stupid at your house and there is a fire...should we decide NOT to rescue. NOPE, that is what those people do, they probably train hard and have exceptional dedication for what they do.”

“Uh, yeah, I guess I am saying that.

"A venturesome minority will always be eager to get off on their own... let them take risks, for Godsake, let them get lost, sunburnt, stranded, drowned, eaten by bears, buried alive under avalanches- that is the right and privilege of any free American."

16 Idaho Law Review 407, 420 - 1980.”

“it is in our very nature to rescue others when they are in harms way.”

“I agree with O'Reilly based on the following:

"At most beaches if there's a rip tide or a shark, you can not go swimming. It should be the same thing on a mountain. This puts rescuers at risk."

To think otherwise is to place self-importance over the safety of others.”
ChinMusic
2:59:25 PM
12/19/06

It seems to me there are distinct differences between these two scenarios. Beaches are open and accessible to anyone without regard to ability, skill or experience. I don't think the same case can be made for the alpine climbs. Obviously inexperienced people have access but it is highly unlikely that anyone inexperienced is going to get as far as these guys got. I don't think the scenarios are the same.”

“Sorry but if you do something stupid at your house and there is a fire...should we decide NOT to rescue

There are MANY regulations as to what you cannot store in your home. Your point fall flat.

And no, rescuers will attempt to rescue no matter how stupid the individual is. THAT is the whole point about regulating. It is for THEIR safety.....NOT yours.”

“Well said EN...and so true!”

“I went on a 3 mile showshoe hike a few weeks ago, and started packing a pack. I thought, "what is something unexpected happened and it got really cold?" So I brought a foam sitting pad and a down parka. Then I thought "what if things go really wrong and I have to spend the night out with someone?" So I brought fire starting material and a stove and small pot. My pack was REDICULOUS for a 4 hour hike on showshoes. The more stupid things you've done and realize your mistake later, or rescues of other people, the more you tend to take extra gear. Of course, once in a while the best of us can still underestimate weather or forget gear. Climbing in winter in the PNW is way riskier than summer, so I don't think I'm strong enough to carry the gear I'd need for such a trip.
last edited: 12/19/06 2:56:14 PM”

“oops, sorry for the dupe.
last edited: 12/19/06 2:56:43 PM”

“Also, don't lose sight of the fact that most of the rescuers are volunteers. They don't have to be there, they are doing it because they want to help and they care.
last edited: 12/19/06 3:04:02 PM”

“I think it is a sliding scale there, Rev, especially with the increase in people into "extreme sports." You do get people without the knowledge in the backcountry more and more. I see it all the time. Five miles from the trailhead, Joe American out with his overweight, out-of-shape family, wearing Converse, no water to be seen, always with the comment, "Is it much further?"

I am not saying this is typical for the moutaineering crowd or of this unfortunate trio, but learning when to bag and how big of an effort to put forward is all about experience. I had to bag out of an ascent on Shasta this past Spring because of a late season storm. We were ascending into the clouds, no discernable landmarks (to us, anyway), snowing heavily. Man, we'd planned that trip for a month but ya know what, I'm glad we came off that mountain. The fire, case of beer, good conversation and more importantly, our safety, more than made up for the feelings of failure we had. There were some who were still ascending...

This wasn't a freak storm on Hood that just blew in. These guys thought they could beat it.”

“Bottom line is we all take risks. Every time I go out solo, I think what if something happens? I tend to prepare for the worst. But, there are things we can't forecast.

Now, whether or not this group made a mistake is irrelevant at this point. One is confirmed dead, the other two might be.

The best case scenario at this point is that we all learn something from this.

"Things that are to be will be, things that are not to be just might happen"”

“I have bagged more than once. And it doesn't bother me in the least. But I don't think regulations or closing the slopes is going to be a practical alternative. Granted it will keep off the people who follow the rules. But I know some SAR people. They are not gonna say "Well the slope was closed, leave them up there." That's not in their makeup. Granted it means the costs are more easily assessed. You shouldn't have been there, you pay. But in a case like this, who are they gonna bill? I just don't think it is practical. I am all in favor of the Park making a decision to close like Katahdan does. Having lived in Main and seen Baxter State park in the middle of winter I can appreciate that. But I think that should be a park decision, not a centralized government decision.”

“When i go into Rocky Mtn NP in a few days to spend two nights and climb a 13'er, I go in knowing the risk and as prepared for it as I can be. If I'm injured on the mountain I might die - so be it - that's my call.

The rescuers are volunteers - thats their call. Its their call to go after me or anyone else and offer help. Its also their call to say the conditions are too bad to try in which case the standed may suffer and die - again, assumption of risk.

I don't expect a rescue team to come after me in bad conditions, and thus I know i might die out there.

Not the Park Service, the gov't, nor anyone else should be able to keep me from going into the wilderness when and where I choose to.

There will always be people who simply lack good judgement and make very poor decsions though - unfortunately, the burden of those falls to the rest of us in our society. That price we pay is ok with me if it allows me to have the freedom to venture out when and where I choose.

I bet if you'd asked them before they headed out - those three would have said the same.

peace
last edited: 12/19/06 3:17:45 PM”

“"I am all in favor of the Park making a decision to close like Katahdin does. Having lived in Maine and seen Baxter State park in the middle of winter I can appreciate that. But I think that should be a park decision, not a centralized government decision"

Park decisions are fine. The point is, at some point it is prudent for authorities to be able to say, "Not today boys".

Will some violate those directives? Sure.

There are no laws/regulations that have ever been made that have not been broken. That does not mean the law/regulation is bad.”

“Lizs makes a very good point. Before jumping to judgment you should spend some time reading the cascadeclimbers forum. I've been following it for over a week now. There are newbies there who have posed the questions about whether or not people should be allowed to climb Hood in the winter as well as who the heck is going to pay for the rescue. The people for and the people against allowing winter climbing seem pretty much divided between climbers (knowledgable) and non-climbers (less knowledgable).

For us non-climbers to make a judgment about whether or not someone else should be allowed to winter climb seems a bit like a non-backpacker telling me that I shouldn't go backpacking when the temps drop below 40 deg. They mean well, but they just don't know what they are talking about.”

“This happens all the time, doesn't it? I mean, this is a high-profile story for the media but people do get killed and injured doing stuff all day long. So maybe we should prohibit driving cars when it rains? Should we not allow people to go to parks when there are high winds because a branch might break off and strike them? I mean, the list is endless...

Also, I thought the USFS had enacted a "you play, you pay" policy on rescues?”

“photos showed that all three made the summit of Hood.”

“I don't recall the specifics, but some of the searchers or people associated with SAR had addressed who is paying for this particular resuce on the other forum.”

“The best case scenario at this point is that we all learn something from this.

"Things that are to be will be, things that are not to be just might happen"”
chili


I have to agree with Chili on this one.”

“ "So maybe we should prohibit driving cars when it rains?"

Roads are closed all the time when conditions are too dangerous. Are you really thinking out your arguments before you post?”

“Calm down ChinMusic”

“I'm sorry if I'm making too much sense.....”

“Let me sum it up for clarity sake: I do not think people should be regulated, based on weather conditions, as to if they can go into the backcountry or not. That is part of the appeal of heading out. Pretty soon, they may decide that it is too muddy and people are slipping in the mud and breaking their legs. Whoops, too muddy. You can't go today.”

“To give you some perspective on the SAR people, I used to be in a Mountain Rescue Group in Washington, with our primary search area being Mt. Adams, a mountain roughly equivalent to Hood. We were a backup resource for manpower on Rainier. We did that kind of thing because we could identify with the victims, but also partly because we enjoyed getting out in the outdoors under about any pretense. When we were hiking around the woods looking for someone, we'd always have to pass the reminder to not act happy when we approached the base camp, because although we were concerned for the victim, we were also enjoying hiking through the woods. We didn't want the relatives of the victims to think we were having too much fun when they were so stressed. I used my vacation days to do that, and had to quit because the interrupted sleep patterns gave me migraines. A rescue like that on Hood would be scary and dangerous because of the weather and avalanche danger, but the rescuers are doing it because they like doing stuff like that.

On the cost of the helicopters: we got our chopper support from a nearby military base, and those guys are required to fly so many hours a month to keep current, so I don't know that it costs anything above the normal budget for military aircraft. At that time the helicopters we had access to would only fly to 10,000, so we always had to carry victims down from the summit to the LZ. Plus they wouldn't participate unless the injury was life threatening. When that rule came in almost all of our injuries became life threatening. And even if they would pick up the victim, they would not carry the rescuers, so we climbed from the trailhead to the summit, and all the way down also. Those rules on how high they fly, and when they will participate change based on politics I think.

The local sheriff always coordinated our efforts, but he was on salary, so I don't know that it cost the county anything extra, really. Other volunteers groups were SAR (we were high angle mountain rescue, SAR was anything else), searchers on horses, searchers with dogs, and divers, all of them volunteers.”

“"...seems a bit like a non-backpacker telling me that I shouldn't go backpacking when the temps drop below 40 deg. They mean well, but they just don't know what they are talking about."

Ruby - Are you fine with the regulations at Katahdin? These are folks telling you when you can and cannot hike.”

“In CO, you can purchase an "insurance card" (for lack of a better term) for 3 bucks ( i think) it'll cover the cost of any rescue UNLESS you are shown to have been clearly negligent (i.e. climbing unroped or camping in zero degree weather with a carcamp sleepy bag, etc).

I think most areas now have a similar policy.

Plus, if I feel like I'm prepared for conditions and the Park service tells me the area is closed, I'll just change plans and go into the wilderness outside the park boundary.

You can't close the mountains people - seriously.
last edited: 12/19/06 4:05:33 PM”

“"Plus, if I feel like I'm prepared for conditions and the Park service tells me the area is closed, I'll just change plans and go into the wilderness outside the park boundary."

This is the exact type of thinking that puts self-interest ahead of the interest of others. Because they WILL come to rescue you should something untoward happen.”

“My point is that non-climbers perhaps don't have the base knowledge needed to make the judgment call. From all that I have read at cascadeclimber, I don't recall any climber or searcher making the judgment that the missing climbers shouldn't have been climbing in the manner that they did or in the season that they chose to. In fact, it's just the opposite. I'm just saying until we have walked in their shoes, maybe we shouldn't judge.”

“"I'm just saying until we have walked in their shoes, maybe we shouldn't judge.”

Lord knows I've pulled a boner in the woods a few times and am glad I wasn't judged harshly for it.

I took a buddy of mine backpacking who is not a backpacker and we got "turned around" within the first 20 minutes. I spent the rest of the weekend being asked, "You know where we're at, right?", and "You sure you know where we're at?". Drive me nuts!”

“I'm not judging anyone and I think it shouldn't be up to the Forest Service to do so either. I'm all about applying the BK philosophy to the backcountry: have it your way.”

“Ruby - I am not making a judgment in this case. I AM making a judgment that authorities should have the power to close an area should it, in their judgment, be called for.

I have read too many posts basically stating, "I'll climb if I damn well feel like it". It is this sentiment that gets OTHERS killed, and does not just put THEM at risk.

I am a libertarian. I am all for freedom. But once my actions directly affect others, freedoms become privileges.”

“Ruby, I know what you was trying to say and I agree.”

“Then Chin, you are making it the LIABILITY of the state and they sure don't want that. Your personal liability, regardless of whatever other dimwit are out there. It's like all facets of life, you can TRY to avoid the idiots...”

“Rescue people go when they are called, even for INS missions. No SAR person I know thinks the mountains should be closed or access restricted. We have actually fought against it.

Lassen Park tried to close when avalanche conditions were bad. Most of the Rangers and all the SAR people were against it.

The reason....simple

If you tell someone that the area is closed due to avalanche hazard you are implying that when it is open, there is no risk...because it's "safe", you opened it, right?

I've rescued a lot of stupid people, but I will do it again tomorrow if needed. I've been known to be a bit stupid myself, truth be told. Can hardly blame someone else for having a stupid moment.

The only thing guaranteed in life is you are going to die.
last edited: 12/19/06 4:50:12 PM”

“Exactemundo, Steve.”

“I view tax payer supported SAR in the same light as universal healthcare.”

“"Then Chin, you are making it the LIABILITY of the state and they sure don't want that..."

I see NO case for liability whatsoever.

Example: They sometimes close beaches because of sharks. Does that mean THEY are liable for shark attacks at other times? No, of course not.

The liability argument falls flat.”

“Does that mean THEY are liable for shark attacks at other times?

I would not be surprised for one moment if a county has been sued because of a shark attack while a beach was closed.

Also, this is a poor comparison. A beach is a narrow strip of barren land, easily patroled. Try that with thousands of square miles of difficult to discern terrain. Not a chance. So why even do it? What, mount a station at every trailhead? Even then, if a hiker/climber wants to skip, it's not very hard to.

Waste of time and effort, in my book. Advisories are fine but telling someone they CAN'T go, is hardly enforceable and as has already been pointed out, merely evokes the opposite response.”

“is it possible that this thread could focus on the missing hikers and another separate thread to discuss when and when not to climb/mountaineer due to adverse conditions?

I just think we're getting off subject here and this is getting heated.”

“Waste of time and effort, in my book. Advisories are fine but telling someone they CAN'T go, is hardly enforceable and as has already been pointed out, merely evokes the opposite response.

So, now you oppose laws/regulations if they are difficult to enforce???

Please tell me you don't want to go down THAT road.

Closing an area would NOT stop SOME from climbing/entering, but it would stop some. If someone cares so little about their fellow man, no law/regulation will stop them.”