Information vs. responsibility

[rafe]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

[Ktaadn]

A young individual (assuming they have no children) has none of the responsibility that you mention in my opinion.

I do have a wife and a child so yes, I am responsible for returning home safely to provide for them. I don't have the luxury of being reckless with my life.

[JohnHuth]

Rafe -

A couple of thoughts - some that have been articulated many times, some not so much.

1.) Being an Eagle Scout doesn't necessarily make a person skilled in the outdoors. I was teaching orienteering to my son's scout troop some years back. I showed them how to do the first leg on the course, and then handed the map and compass to an Eagle Scout to do the next leg. He confessed that he didn't know how to read a compass. I said "OK, I can do the compass work, you just use the map". He said he didn't know how to read maps. I handed the map and compass to my son, who was quite competent in both, but he never became an Eagle Scout. The difference - some kids just try to check off the boxes and squeeze through, some really want to acquire the skills. That's probably true in the larger domain of life, but thought I'd mention it.

2.) In terms of competence and decision making, there is the common ethical argument that you may be putting others (SAR volunteers) in harms way by doing something rash. The footage of the Androscoggin Valley SAR team search for Kate Matrosova is a case in point. This suggests that it *is* an ethical consideration to seek out information on conditions, etc.

2.a) Subnote on that is the thought that a rescue beacon (SPOT or IPRB) can save you in a bad situation, and people take more risks as a result. The problem, clearly, is how long it takes to get to a location - and if you hit the SPOT panic button, probably things have already gone wrong.

3.) Definitely check the weather forecast - but also become adept at reading the weather on your own. This is particularly true in the summer months.

4.) Advice online....oh my! I do think about the implications. Typically it is "I do this..." and then rationale. In the case of the thread of the young man who just perished, I saw a "Oh, I pack a full kit" versus "I pack a scaled down set" - somewhat conflicting advice. I have an XC skiing trip up in Northern Maine coming up and have to think about this - probably will have enough to survive a night out, but not so much as to slow me down. At that point, people have to make some decisions - and the decisions do depend on weather conditions a lot.

The call on 'responsibility' is something like this "if you don't care about your own life, care about the lives of your loved ones, or people who may come searching"

On a final note, there is an imponderable "will to live" - which I believe the Coast Guard actually quantifies in their SAR techniques. They've added questions to EPRB forms about "are you married?" "do you have children?" all puzzling at first, but probably gives some hints about the 'will to live' for searchers.

[imscotty]

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?



I'll take this one... Probably irresponsible, but that does not mean I think it should never be done.

John Muir in the height of a storm was said to have climbed to the top of a tall Douglas Fir to ride the wind and experience the fury of nature. Who am I to tell Muir that he should not do such a thing? He might have ended up dead that day, but it was his risk to take, and I suppose I am glad he did it. It seems to have inspired him, whose words and deeds have inspired so many others.

To the Bonds incident.... the weather was severe, but not unusual for Winter in the Whites. I am sure there were other hikers above tree line that day. This hiker took risks that I would not advise anyone take (specifically going that deep into the wilderness unprepared to spend the night). We should all do our best to inform ourselves and others about the risks and safe practices. I have no wish to disparage anyone who takes risks and fails. Yes, I would call the hike plan irresponsible, but I argue part of freedom is that people should be free to be irresponsible and take personal risks.

[Leo L.]

A young individual (assuming they have no children) has none of the responsibility that you mention in my opinion...

As long as you won't break down and pull out the phone to call for help in case of an emergency, but stand (or lay down) and dy like a man - its your decision.
As soon as there is a chance that anybody else gets involved (and that might be another hiker finding you by pure luck half-dead who will take a hell of an effort to save you), you should act responsible.

@rafe:
It widely depends on what information is available, if any.
If you have access to weather forecast it would be plein stupid to not use it.
There might be situations where you don't have access - then you need to use your old skills of "weather-feeling".
Same is true for route finding.
Anyway, the situation that we have Internet access in almost all places anytime is pretty new, a few years at most.
Basically, Yes, one is obliged to act responsible and get all information available.

Your last question, while I think that WB is an exceptional place, the Internet in common is full of false or half-true information and one should not trust any so-called fact picked up randomly.

[johnspenn]

A young individual (assuming they have no children) has none of the responsibility that you mention in my opinion.

IMO the individual has a responsibility to his parents, brothers and/or sisters, friends, etc. Most people don't live in a vacuum, but have people around them who love them. They are responsible to those people.

[nsherry61]

. . . To the Bonds incident.... the weather was severe, but not unusual for Winter in the Whites. I am sure there were other hikers above tree line that day. This hiker took risks that I would not advise anyone take (specifically going that deep into the wilderness unprepared to spend the night). . . Yes, I would call the hike plan irresponsible, but I argue part of freedom is that people should be free to be irresponsible and take personal risks.
Thanks for a thoughtful and appreciative response.

That being said, sure the weather sucked, but it wasn't inherently irresponsible to go out in it with appropriate gear and knowledge, which apparently the hiker had in this instance. If I were in physically good enough shape to do that 22 miles, I would not hesitate for a minute to do that same hike. Yeah, it might be cold and miserable, but that is part of the challenge, learning to live in and take joy out of the misery that mother nature is throwing at us.

In the end, the hiker made a bad choice, apparently not to put on warmer cloths sooner. That's all. No lack of appropriate gear. No series of bad decisions or mistakes. No perfect storm of errors and mishaps (that we know of), just one bad choice at one key point to not take the time to get warm before it was too late to manage the cold. One lethal error in judgement, that if he'd grown up on the Pacific NW, he probably wouldn't have made (you know, endless 35*F drizzle all winter long).

There is not evidence of a lack of knowledge, not a lack of preparation, not any irresponsible choices leading up to his mistake until the one he made, or didn't make, that killed him. Sure, you can suggest that appropriate preparation would have been spending time in miserable windy wet conditions closer to home until you have that art perfected, but, maybe he did. He just made one bad decision. It's sad, but, in the end, hopefully many of us can learn some greater fear of above freezing hypothermia.

[Greenlight]

According to several articles I browsed, the young man had the knowledge, experience, and health to return home alive and well. He knew the terrain, the weather, his abilities...everything it would seem. I believe he was an EMT, had been a backcountry guide.

It would appear that he was the victim of the wet snow that fell, and the onset of hypothermia was so quick that he had little time to react. By the time he took life-saving action, his internal temp had already dropped to the point where he wasn't thinking clearly. He tried to get another layer on, but rescuers found he had put it on upside down. Sad.

Was he at fault? Yes, even the most experienced with the best gear and knowledge can still get into situations that go South in a matter of seconds.

Can we learn a (sad) lesson from it? Fortunately, yes. And may his name and situation be spoken of when addressing this very phenomenon. Don't second guess your training. Keep eating. Drink the water now. Get warm now. Push the help button.

This wasn't a newbie. He was part of the elite, and he still died.


There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

[JohnHuth]

This kind of discussion also reminds me of a quote:

Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment.
(Rita Mae Brown)

Yes, I represent that remark.

[pilgrimskywheel]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

1. Yes, 2. Yes, 3. Yes, 4. Yes

37757 I'm confused as to how I'm expected to pack out my butt wipes, however, leaving my 260 lb. corpse behind for someone else to find, pack out, and grieve over is somehow acceptable because I was on an "epic adventure", or Muir once climbed a tree in a storm, or Abbey would have found it a "noble death". As an "experienced" Eagle Scout with "extensive wilderness training" in the "Yukon" this cat should have not only been aware that he was responsible for the information on this trail head sign (as I was), but that he was violating all the basic tenants of first day wilderness survival classes. I'm not going to enumerate them now, but he basically did everything everybody knows not to do, and what happened is why not to do them. There's been a lot of talk about training, experience, and gear - clearly there wasn't enough.

[rafe]

I wonder: if he'd discussed his proposed hike on a relevant blog, eg. VFTT, sought out advice or opinions... or did he just wing it?

Would anyone on VFTT have said, maybe this is a bit ambitious? Would he have listened?

Young people are typically headstrong and not always receptive to advice, so who knows.... ?

[rafe]

If you have access to weather forecast it would be plein stupid to not use it.

A different case -- but I recall well the controversy over Kate Mostrova's death on Mt. Madison. All the weather reports for that weekend had warned of extreme weather throughout New England. And yet she still went up the mountain.

[Engine]

A young individual (assuming they have no children) has none of the responsibility that you mention in my opinion.

I do have a wife and a child so yes, I am responsible for returning home safely to provide for them. I don't have the luxury of being reckless with my life.

Don't we have a responsibility to do what we can to not endanger the lives rescuers unecessarily?

[pilgrimskywheel]

Don't we have a responsibility to do what we can to not endanger the lives rescuers unecessarily?

+1 Thank you. Or, traumatize them. They have find you dead. If I'm reading this correctly, they had to spend the night up there with his body in order to survive themselves. Can you say: counseling?

[trailmercury]

+1 Thank you. Or, traumatize them. They have find you dead. If I'm reading this correctly, they had to spend the night up there with his body in order to survive themselves. Can you say: counseling?
Not only counseling but a lot of PTSD patients take medication as well.

[CELTIC BUCK]

As a Scout of the 1960's and still involved to a limited extent today may I make an observation. Eagle Scouts today are not required to have the same level of experience nor skill as in the past say 1910 thru 1970. Where prior less than 1% of Scouts made Eagle now its closing on 3%.Are the youth better NO the skills & required merit badges have been dumbed down & youth members are allowed to do group projects I've seen cooking merit badge as an example done all inside with MOM helping. instead of all outdoor.My point is unfortunately an Eagle Scout does not mean what it once did.Would tougher rules and skills saved this young Man we will never know but some where decision making & learning failed to connect. But we can all learn all the days of our lives & continue to pass that knowledge on to others.

[peakbagger]

A different case -- but I recall well the controversy over Kate Mostrova's death on Mt. Madison. All the weather reports for that weekend had warned of extreme weather throughout New England. And yet she still went up the mountain.

I posted on VFTT a few days before Kate's demise that is was highly likely that someone would get seriously hurt or die that upcoming holiday week and it predicted it would be someone from outside the area who was going to drive up and decide to hike hoping the conditions would improve. Sadly, Kate fulfilled my prediction.

Unfortunately there is no summit specific long range forecasts for the whites. The Obs has their higher summits forecast which is generally quite good but its only 2 days out at best. Most folks plan their trips early in the week and they rely on forecasts for the region that are oriented to communities around the whites. They weather down in the valleys can be significantly different than the summits. Last week there were three days where the forecast was partly sunny for my town, just north of Mt Washington (the summit is a local phone call), all three days it snowed in the AM and the sun never came out. 10 miles north it was blue sky. The folks looking for a good forecast have already made their plans and want the forecast to confirm it. Frequently once the reservations are made, they are coming to the area, they may look at the Obs higher summits forecast but many elect to start the hike assuming they will have the brains to turn around before the weather gets bad.

[imscotty]

Don't we have a responsibility to do what we can to not endanger the lives rescuers unecessarily?

The thing is all activity involves a certain degree of risk. I suppose the question is, when does that risk become unacceptable? The answer to that is a 'value' judgement and we will each have our own opinions as to where that line lies.

Some people will believe that ANY risk is 'unnecessary'. Perhaps people should NEVER enter the woods, that should keep the SAR folks safe. I don't think there is anyone on WB that would support this idea, but I have talked to enough 'regular' folks to say that some people believe this, at least for themselves.

Some people have had such complete disregard for there own safety and others that their actions are justly condemned.

But in between there are many shades of gray. My line personally may lie on the conservative side, but it would be egotistical of me to believe that my 'risk tolerance' should be everyone else's risk tolerance.

Likewise, the SAR folks chose to volunteer or work in a profession that puts their own lives at risk. I thank them for that, they deserve our appreciation. I am sure they argue among themselves where that line should be drawn between acceptable and unacceptable risk. If they believed in zero risk tolerance, they probably would be in a different profession. Where should the acceptable risk line be drawn? Well I am arguing more towards the side of freedom.

[pilgrimskywheel]

The thing is all activity involves a certain degree of risk. I suppose the question is, when does that risk become unacceptable? The answer to that is a 'value' judgement and we will each have our own opinions as to where that line lies.

Some people will believe that ANY risk is 'unnecessary'. Perhaps people should NEVER enter the woods, that should keep the SAR folks safe. I don't think there is anyone on WB that would support this idea, but I have talked to enough 'regular' folks to say that some people believe this, at least for themselves.

Some people have had such complete disregard for there own safety and others, there actions are justly condemned.

But in between there are many shades of gray. My line may lie on the conservative side, but it would be egotistical to believe that my 'risk tolerance' should be everyone else's risk tolerance. This man took risks and paid a price.

Likewise, the SAR folks chose to volunteer or work in a profession that puts their own lives at risk. I thank them for that, they deserve our appreciation. I am sure they argue among themselves where that line should be drawn between acceptable and unacceptable risk. If they believed in zero risk tolerance, they would be in a different profession. Where should the acceptable risk line be drawn? Well, I guess I am arguing more towards the side of freedom.

37758 Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Ooops. That is LOSE! (I've recently been blinded by science, and a lot of hollow platitudes about freedom.)

[ScareBear]

A different case -- but I recall well the controversy over Kate Mostrova's death on Mt. Madison. All the weather reports for that weekend had warned of extreme weather throughout New England. And yet she still went up the mountain.
She made so many errors. Not being cognizant of the impending weather was the first, or if she was she was foolhardy. But that wasn't what killed her. It all went South from there, though. IMHO, the final (and only)mistake that mattered was not turning around at the Madison Spring Hut when she was so late in arriving there. Nothing good was going to happen after that...and nothing did...remember, it was still daylight when she was blown off the trail descending the summit and activated her SPOT...1530hrs...
She broke the cardinal rule in climbing. It was the same rule that two experienced guides broke in 1996 that led to disaster on Everest. Adhere to your turn-around time. No exceptions.

[rafe]

Don't we have a responsibility to do what we can to not endanger the lives rescuers unecessarily?

As I recall from ski patrol training, one of the primary "rules of engagement" for first aid and rescue personnel is to not allow themselves to become victims. So SAR personnel have to make their own assessment of what's responsible or not, with regard to their own actions. Separate topic, IMO.

[Uriah]

Great thoughts/questions Rafe. Lots to consider, lots to be considerate over.

One thing I'll say about Nature---capital N, the original N word---is that She is a far greater force than man, be he alone or as accounted for collectively as a species. Part of this whole account of the kid's death reeks of, "oh, but I would not have perished," or "I'd have done things differently in such a situation." Our wild heredity loves pondering this, and yet so many of us are altogether too afraid even to attempt what the kid did, which of course is completely understandable. The interesting aspect is that we are so quick to judge so harshly, despite our own unwillingness to face any such risk.

When you've travelled extensively, whether in the mountains in winter, or in the desert in summer, or on the open ocean, or in the ever-expanding urban jungle, there will be a point when other forces override your own. Are we to lock ourselves inside the perceived safety of our own domiciles, to avoid any such risk?

I don't judge this kid in any way, except maybe as a ballsy young man (a disappearing breed in this day and age). As unfortunate as his premature demise may be, he died doing what he loved. He may not have even made any major mistakes! A simple slip can result in loss of conscientiousness or a broken leg. Reports will likely state that he died of "exposure," as they tend to, but exposure to life, to living itself, always results in death. It's a fate none of us will escape. Who cares who lives a long life? It's a full life we should respect and admire, regardless of brevity.

I feel sorriest not for this kid, or even his kin (as they'll likely come to accept this sooner than most here), but for the old person who has nothing to say, nothing to tell us, no wisdom or advice to extend. The man who has avoided all risk and lived safely in his cocoon. A young man should be an adventure! An old man can be the same, though perhaps in ideas alone.

[rafe]

Let me be specific. If someone had asked me about hiking 22 miles solo, on a day hike, in winter, in the Whites, I'd have said, emphatically, "Hell, no!"

(Forgetting, for the moment, that the fellow first had to drive from central MA to the trailhead, at least 3-4 hours of driving.)

Was it irresponsible go without asking about that -- from friends, in person, or online?

[Uriah]

Let me be specific. If someone had asked me about hiking 22 miles solo, on a day hike, in winter, in the Whites, I'd have said, emphatically, "Hell, no!" (Forgetting, for the moment, that the fellow first had to drive from central MA to the trailhead, at least 3-4 hours of driving.) Was it irresponsible go without asking about that -- from friends, in person, or online?

Perhaps. But we're all responsible for the life we live. At least in a free society, we are.

I have volunteered with SAR a number of times in the past. Never are we told to risk our own life to save someone else's. It is implicitly understood that we are responsible for our own lives first.

[egilbe]

Let me be specific. If someone had asked me about hiking 22 miles solo, on a day hike, in winter, in the Whites, I'd have said, emphatically, "Hell, no!"

(Forgetting, for the moment, that the fellow first had to drive from central MA to the trailhead, at least 3-4 hours of driving.)

Was it irresponsible go without asking about that -- from friends, in person, or online?

people have done it, so family and friends, knowing him better than we do, would probably give their blessing, not knowing how difficult it is.

Knowing how difficult it can be, I would caution him against going alone.

But saying it was irresponsible of him because he died smacks of 20/20 hindsight. I wouldnt have done it because I know my limitations.

[Lone Wolf]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

no
no
no
yes

[rafe]

no
no
no
yes

Really? When you tell hikers it's cool to ford the Kennebec, or sleep with their food?

[Greenlight]

"Exposure to life always results in death."

I'm going to use that with attribution. Thanks, U.


Great thoughts/questions Rafe. Lots to consider, lots to be considerate over.

One thing I'll say about Nature---capital N, the original N word---is that She is a far greater force than man, be he alone or as accounted for collectively as a species. Part of this whole account of the kid's death reeks of, "oh, but I would not have perished," or "I'd have done things differently in such a situation." Our wild heredity loves pondering this, and yet so many of us are altogether too afraid even to attempt what the kid did, which of course is completely understandable. The interesting aspect is that we are so quick to judge so harshly, despite our own unwillingness to face any such risk.

When you've travelled extensively, whether in the mountains in winter, or in the desert in summer, or on the open ocean, or in the ever-expanding urban jungle, there will be a point when other forces override your own. Are we to lock ourselves inside the perceived safety of our own domiciles, to avoid any such risk?

I don't judge this kid in any way, except maybe as a ballsy young man (a disappearing breed in this day and age). As unfortunate as his premature demise may be, he died doing what he loved. He may not have even made any major mistakes! A simple slip can result in loss of conscientiousness or a broken leg. Reports will likely state that he died of "exposure," as they tend to, but exposure to life, to living itself, always results in death. It's a fate none of us will escape. Who cares who lives a long life? It's a full life we should respect and admire, regardless of brevity.

I feel sorriest not for this kid, or even his kin (as they'll likely come to accept this sooner than most here), but for the old person who has nothing to say, nothing to tell us, no wisdom or advice to extend. The man who has avoided all risk and lived safely in his cocoon. A young man should be an adventure! An old man can be the same, though perhaps in ideas alone.

[Alligator]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

[Uriah]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

It's a code of principles, not a law. Really, it's just a liability waiver of sorts, so family members (of the deceased) have a harder time of pursuing legal action.

Even if a law were enacted ("one must be prepared for all conditions or refrain from travel"), it'd be similar to a law preventing suicide: unenforceable.

I imagine it's coming, or at least liability waivers and permit$ are, but for now, no. We still have some freedom in approaching our public lands.

[imscotty]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

According to this document... "there is no such thing as a day hike" Maybe Tipi had it right after all? :)

Yes, hikers do have responsibilities. New Hampshire is one of the few states that have tried to legislate this. Doing so opens a can of worms in terms of hiker safety. i.e.: Will a hiker someday perish out of reluctance to call SAR and face possible fines? Has this already occurred? But, that discussion is probably beyond what Rafe intended with this thread.

[Alligator]

It's a code of principles, not a law. Really, it's just a liability waiver of sorts, so family members (of the deceased) have a harder time of pursuing legal action.

Even if a law were enacted ("one must be prepared for all conditions or refrain from travel"), it'd be similar to a law preventing suicide: unenforceable.

I imagine it's coming, or at least liability waivers and permit$ are, but for now, no. We still have some freedom in approaching our public lands.It's the set of responsibilities they are going to use to determine negligence and under the law possibly charge you for search and rescue costs. That is provided a hike safe card has not been purchased for the year or have purchased a hunting or fishing license or a few other exemptions. Even with those, one could be charged as being reckless. Cards are available for purchase in 2017 for hikers not having any of the exemptions.

As far as language used to describe the responsibilities and enforcement that's a bit of a separate discussion. There is a law in NH that has an expectation for hikers to act responsibly.

[Alligator]

According to this document... "there is no such thing as a day hike" Maybe Tipi had it right after all? :)

Yes, hikers do have responsibilities. New Hampshire is one of the few states that have tried to legislate this. Doing so opens a can of worms in terms of hiker safety. i.e.: Will a hiker someday perish out of reluctance to call SAR and face possible fines? Has this already occurred? But, that discussion is probably beyond what Rafe intended with this thread.I already checked, no Tipi doesn't. They have a specific set of winter additions and a pad, shelter, and sleeping bag are not included for day hikes.

I would have said so. The hiker in question may not have had an ice ax or goggles. I had that route planned but did not ever get to it so I don't know whether he was above tree line.

[pilgrimskywheel]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

Thank you for this download. I suspected as much but was hesitant to make any assertions which were not supported by facts. Interesting that they echo the BSA motto: "Be prepared!" and assert that hiking safe is "Your responsibility." What a concept!

[Tipi Walter]

As I recall from ski patrol training, one of the primary "rules of engagement" for first aid and rescue personnel is to not allow themselves to become victims. So SAR personnel have to make their own assessment of what's responsible or not, with regard to their own actions. Separate topic, IMO.

There's an old line in Mountaineering: Do Not Let His Epic Become Your Epic. In other words, it's often impossible to save someone's life on "the mountain" without causing your own death.




but exposure to life, to living itself, always results in death. It's a fate none of us will escape. Who cares who lives a long life? It's a full life we should respect and admire, regardless of brevity.



For years I thought about the so-called Survival shows on television and wondered why they accented physical survival above all else. Maybe it's not about physical survival at all? If exposure to life always results in death, and if it's a fate none of us will escape, well . . . maybe bodily survival IS NOT the bottom line. Maybe a wise acceptance of death should be part of true survival?

[Tipi Walter]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

Thanks for this link. It's put out by the White Mt National Forest and the NH Fish and Game. It says in part---

"Hiker Responsibility Code"

"Be Prepared with Knowledge and Gear"

" . . . it is better to carry extra than be carried out."

Amen.

[pilgrimskywheel]

According to this document... "there is no such thing as a day hike" Maybe Tipi had it right after all? :)

Yes, hikers do have responsibilities. New Hampshire is one of the few states that have tried to legislate this. Doing so opens a can of worms in terms of hiker safety. i.e.: Will a hiker someday perish out of reluctance to call SAR and face possible fines? Has this already occurred? But, that discussion is probably beyond what Rafe intended with this thread.

And remember: The ignore button is not only your friend, it is the root word in ignorant! I'm thrilled we have, after about 72 hours, finally set aside the speculation (mostly) and are now presented with some facts that hikers can benefit from. (Some.) Thank you, Alligator and Tipi

[Alligator]

Thanks for this link. It's put out by the White Mt National Forest and the NH Fish and Game. It says in part---

"Hiker Responsibility Code"

"Be Prepared with Knowledge and Gear"

" . . . it is better to carry extra than be carried out."

Amen.Knowledge is understanding how much extra you realistically need. (It's much more than that of course.)

These days, I have a good estimate of my fuel needs, I don't need a gallon of white gas for a weekend. Plus I know it's a wee bit heavy.

[ScareBear]

It's the set of responsibilities they are going to use to determine negligence and under the law possibly charge you for search and rescue costs. That is provided a hike safe card has not been purchased for the year or have purchased a hunting or fishing license or a few other exemptions. Even with those, one could be charged as being reckless. Cards are available for purchase in 2017 for hikers not having any of the exemptions.

As far as language used to describe the responsibilities and enforcement that's a bit of a separate discussion. There is a law in NH that has an expectation for hikers to act responsibly.

You have to pay for rescue in Europe as well. That said, when you call in mountain rescue, you get real, full-time, paid, government subsidized and equipped mountain rescue, in most cases. You simply buy insurance to cover the risk. What will that card get you in New Hampshire? An all-weather chopper with experienced mountain rescue crew on 24 hour standby? No? That's the Coast Guard?

If I am going to be forced to pay for my rescue(a concept with which I am in full agreement, BTW), I want my rescue to be worth it....just sayin....

[rafe]

people have done it, so family and friends, knowing him better than we do, would probably give their blessing, not knowing how difficult it is.

Knowing how difficult it can be, I would caution him against going alone.

But saying it was irresponsible of him because he died smacks of 20/20 hindsight. I wouldnt have done it because I know my limitations.

Interesting points there. Of course it matters who you ask. Different people may give different answers. It hardly makes sense to ask for information or advice from people who don't know the scene. If you ask on a blog, you're likely to get conflicting answers, and then it's your call to accept one or reject the other.

I can't shake the feeling that if Jack had discussed his plans with other knowledgeable hikers, we might not be having this discussion. I don't know that he didn't have such a discussion. Just wondering out loud.

Knowing your limits, aye there's the thing.

[Greenlight]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl0hMfqNQ-g


It's a code of principles, not a law. Really, it's just a liability waiver of sorts, so family members (of the deceased) have a harder time of pursuing legal action.

Even if a law were enacted ("one must be prepared for all conditions or refrain from travel"), it'd be similar to a law preventing suicide: unenforceable.

I imagine it's coming, or at least liability waivers and permit$ are, but for now, no. We still have some freedom in approaching our public lands.

[nsherry61]

. . .this cat should have not only been aware that he was responsible for the information on this trail head sign (as I was), but that he was violating all the basic tenants of first day wilderness survival classes. I'm not going to enumerate them now, but he basically did everything everybody knows not to do, and what happened is why not to do them. . .
Pilgrimskywheel, you're being an arrogant and seemingly ignorant jerk. And yes, it takes one to know one.

The weather over Christmas was rough and unpleasant, but, it wasn't bad enough to be exceptionally and/or irresponsibly dangerous for an experience mountaineer. I've chosen many times to go out in much worse, if for no other reason than to experience the excitement of doing it. And, "this cat", Jack Holden, was apparently prepared, knowledgeable and capable. He then made a lethal mistake.

It is not helpful or educational to condemn Jack's choices for a responsible is somewhat risky adventure.
However, it can be very helpful to accept that an highly experienced and capable person can make a lethal mistake in less than the most extreme circumstances and then learn from that mistake. In this case, it appears that degraded physical and mental capacity from hypothermia came on exceptionally fast, fast enough to take even an experienced mountaineer by surprise and kill him.

Don't condemn him. Use his mistake as a wake-up call to the rest of us that spend time in potentially dangerous while not severe weather.


. . . If I'm reading this correctly, they had to spend the night up there with his body in order to survive themselves. Can you say: counseling?
Geez Pilgrimskywheel, are you really that naive?!! The rescuers were not in danger themselves. They stayed with the body out of respect!! . . . and yes, logistical ease.

Having worked mountain rescue and removed bodies from mountains, frankly, I did it for the adventure and because it was a way to give back, meet other like minded people, and broaden my mountaineering skills. I'd happily risk my life for the potential to save someone else as long as the risk was reasonable. If I chose the take the risk to save someone, and then died myself, so be it. It was my choice to try and be a hero and it was my choice to climb another mountain another day for my own thrill and adventure.

FWIW: mountain rescue personnel see less death in an average decade than an average ambulance driver sees in an average week. I don't think getting worked up about PTSD and the need for counseling because two guys helped find a body on Bondcliff is really very relevant here. At least the bodies in the mountains died doing what they loved instead of having been in the unlucky car on the road in front of a drunk driver or some other such meaningless and empty cause of death.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Pilgrimskywheel, you're being an arrogant and seemingly ignorant jerk. And yes, it takes one to know one.

The weather over Christmas was rough and unpleasant, but, it wasn't bad enough to be exceptionally and/or irresponsibly dangerous for an experience mountaineer. I've chosen many times to go out in much worse, if for no other reason than to experience the excitement of doing it. And, "this cat", Jack Holden, was apparently prepared, knowledgeable and capable. He then made a lethal mistake.

It is not helpful or educational to condemn Jack's choices for a responsible is somewhat risky adventure.
However, it can be very helpful to accept that an highly experienced and capable person can make a lethal mistake in less than the most extreme circumstances and then learn from that mistake. In this case, it appears that degraded physical and mental capacity from hypothermia came on exceptionally fast, fast enough to take even an experienced mountaineer by surprise and kill him.

Don't condemn him. Use his mistake as a wake-up call to the rest of us that spend time in potentially dangerous while not severe weather.


Geez Pilgrimskywheel, are you really that naive?!! The rescuers were not in danger themselves. They stayed with the body out of respect!! . . . and yes, logistical ease.

Having worked mountain rescue and removed bodies from mountains, frankly, I did it for the adventure and because it was a way to give back, meet other like minded people, and broaden my mountaineering skills. I'd happily risk my life for the potential to save someone else as long as the risk was reasonable. If I chose the take the risk to save someone, and then died myself, so be it. It was my choice to try and be a hero and it was my choice to climb another mountain another day for my own thrill and adventure.

FWIW: mountain rescue personnel see less death in an average decade than an average ambulance driver sees in an average week. I don't think getting worked up about PTSD and the need for counseling because two guys helped find a body on Bondcliff is really very relevant here. At least the bodies in the mountains died doing what they loved instead of having been in the unlucky car on the road in front of a drunk driver or some other such meaningless and empty cause of death.

Okay. So, for starters at least I'm not calling anybody names. Thank you for stooping to castings aspersions at a person you know ZERO about. I'd like to point out that you are about 4 days late to this party, and had you arrived earlier you would have actually learned something about not only the person you are blindly disrespecting, but the facts of the case in question. You've missed about 600 posts in 3 different threads. All of which culminate in - well, I don't want to spoil it for you.

I like how you assert that the rescuers who had to go find the dead kid were never in danger themselves. Did they have a forcefield? I'm attaching a sign you and everyone else should read.

I don't condemn him. The White Mountains did. Check your facts, and try thinking the next time before you type. In my book you're not a hero - what I'm thinking rhymes with it though. Ta ta!

37766

[pilgrimskywheel]

In NH hikers have responsibilities by law.

Hey nssherry61 - read this post w/attachment.

Turns out there is a law in the NH Whites against being unprepared, inexperienced, and ill equipped. Probably the best evidence that you are in fact all of these is dying there needlessly, pointlessly, avoidably, and tragically. I would think as a seasoned SAR member who went into the job for kicks and are apparently untroubled by the death of young people, as evidenced by your callous and insulting post, you might be aware of some of the finer points of the rules meant to keep people from inconveniently dying in public playgrounds, and endangering their would-be-rescuers. Be it mentally, physically, or spiritually.

Read the attached thumbnail.

[egilbe]

I read a story of a body recovery off Madison where the volunteers were offered counseling paid for by the Forest Sevice. It was suggested that steaks and beers were a better use of the funds, because they were volunteers.

[Alligator]

You have to pay for rescue in Europe as well. That said, when you call in mountain rescue, you get real, full-time, paid, government subsidized and equipped mountain rescue, in most cases. You simply buy insurance to cover the risk. What will that card get you in New Hampshire? An all-weather chopper with experienced mountain rescue crew on 24 hour standby? No? That's the Coast Guard?

If I am going to be forced to pay for my rescue(a concept with which I am in full agreement, BTW), I want my rescue to be worth it....just sayin....I can't speak for all NH SAR, but I have a real good friend who volunteers for SAR in NH. He lives for winter, backcountry skies, ice and rock climbs, snowshoes, hikes Mt Washington in the winter, stuff like that. Long time resident in the White Mountains, knows the area well, lives right there. Brave too, not foolhardy. Hopefully I won't ever need a rescue but when I am in NH I will make sure he has my itinerary. He would come get me and he would come get you too in the worst conditions.

[rafe]

Turns out there is a law in the NH Whites against being unprepared, inexperienced, and ill equipped.

There's a law against hiking while inexperienced? Who knew?

[pilgrimskywheel]

There's a law against hiking while inexperienced? Who knew?

Oh my bad. Strike that. The attached thumbnail should cover any further questions you may have re: same. I guess I got a little incensed there.

[ScareBear]

I can't speak for all NH SAR, but I have a real good friend who volunteers for SAR in NH. He lives for winter, backcountry skies, ice and rock climbs, snowshoes, hikes Mt Washington in the winter, stuff like that. Long time resident in the White Mountains, knows the area well, lives right there. Brave too, not foolhardy. Hopefully I won't ever need a rescue but when I am in NH I will make sure he has my itinerary. He would come get me and he would come get you too in the worst conditions.
I am betting he would come and get me. I am not dissing people like that, at all. They get my respect and my props. He is a volunteer. He has a job, other than SAR, I assume...

And that is my point. I don't mind paying for my rescue. It is the lack of infrastructure for the rescue in the US that was my point. And, lack of staffing. A quick example should serve well here. In Europe, your mountain air rescue chopper has a 66 percent chance of having a real trauma physician on board. In the US, less than 33 percent chance. Something like 75 percent of mountain rescue in Europe is government-funded. Less than 25 percent in the US. In the US, where we all expect that somehow, someway, the government will save us from ourselves, we are far far far less likely to be saved at all, let alone by anything or anyone provided by the government. In NH the call goes out to dedicated individuals who selflessly give themselves and their time to saving folks and we hope they respond, because they are volunteers. In France, just pick up the phone and either the PGHM or the CRS Montagne will come. Both are departments of the government and both departments of law enforcement/security. That is just France. That's just one nation, one example. Frankly, the rescue services in the mountains in the US is woefully lacking and not befitting a great nation like the USA.

[Dogwood]

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

Not necessarily. Have had great safe hikes during deluges, snowstorms, and in 115* temps.

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

Often, but not always in fine detail.

[Odd Man Out]

...Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

Just the other day there was a video all over the news of a base jumper whose chute got twisted 180 degrees so he slammed into the cliff face, fell a 100 feet, landed on a ledge, and needed a SAR team to get him to the hospital. I don't recall anyone having a discussion about him being irresponsible for taking such a risk. Instead people tend to admire such thrill seekers for "pushing the envelope" even though what they are doing is many times more dangerous than going for a hike. I don't have a good explanation why this should be, but the odd reality is that if a hikers dies in a storm on Mt. Washington he is irresponsible, but if he dies flying a wing suit off of Mt Washington in a storm, he's admired for "living his life on his own terms" or ... well you fill in your favorite platitude.

[nsherry61]

Okay. So, for starters at least I'm not calling anybody names. . .
Yeah, I know. I was feeling petty.


. . . Thank you for stooping to castings aspersions at a person you know ZERO about. . .
Well, zero except for the arrogant, naive and disparaging remarks you have been making about Jack Holden (whom you refer to as a "cat") whom you apparently know zero about even though there was quite a bit of information about him and his situation publicly available from the recovery reports.


. . . I'd like to point out that you are about 4 days late to this party, and had you arrived earlier you would have actually learned something about not only the person you are blindly disrespecting, but the facts of the case in question. You've missed about 600 posts in 3 different threads. All of which culminate in - well, I don't want to spoil it for you. . .
Oh, my wise and well read friend, did you not read the posts and the authors of those posts before you posted yourself?



. . . I like how you assert that the rescuers who had to go find the dead kid were never in danger themselves. Did they have a forcefield? . . .
No. But apparently they were prepared to be able to spend the night if needed in unpleasant but not particularly dangerous conditions. Why do you assume they were in danger? If you think one automatically puts themselves in danger because they are traveling in the mountains in inclement conditions, and then assert your expertise as you delineated it to us in a previous post, I can't help but seriously question the voracity of, not only your opinions, but also your facts about yourself.


. . . I'm attaching a sign you and everyone else should read. . .
Yes, you seem to be quite proud of that image. A sign I've read more than once as I have approached treeline on Mount Washington. As a point of detail, however, Jack Holden was not on Mount Washington or really anywhere near there. Although, I would be willing to bet there were a number of people on Mount Washington at the time Jack was dying, probably in worse weather than Jack was experiencing on Bondcliff 15 miles away and 2000 ft lower in elevation.


. . . Check your facts, and try thinking the next time before you type. . .
Oh, I generally do. I certainly have in this case. . . the facts part that is. Thinking, well, if I were smart I'd probably not be bothering to reply to this message and instead be in bed asleep or planing my three day ski traverse through the White Mountains I'm hoping to do later this month.

At least Tipi won't be able to call me a day skier and condemn me for not having overnight gear. ;-)

[rocketsocks]

I'm from the camp that says when ya go out in the wilderness (I say wilderness, because in winter it's a true wilderness) you take the things you might need to survive, just in case ya have to...seems pretty simple to me. That's what we were all taught way back when, things changed when folks started pushing limits by cutting weight to go further faster...that's not really disputable, though I'm sure someone will. :D

[pilgrimskywheel]

Nsherry61 - Thank you for that incredible display of pedantic pageantry. Norwell used to be a much more exciting place when I ate at Tosca and drank at Stars. Sad to think it has become so dull over time. I refer to everyone I might like or respect as a "cat", dude. Now you know me better than that kid you keep pretending to. You've come up with one good, albeit it not too terribly original, idea in the end: take a hike, and by all means do go as light as is humanly possible. Here's the plan: take skis and stuff and go. See how easy that was? Please, observe all the information as is your responsibility, and don't talk about it - be about it. I look eagerly forward to hearing the reports of your adventure.

Fondly, Pilgrim Ju Soli Skywheel aka: Hell on Skis

[Traveler]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

+3 Excellent thread start and topic(s) as food for thought and discussion. Reading through, with an exception or two, some good contributions resulting.

[4eyedbuzzard]

I can't speak for all NH SAR, but I have a real good friend who volunteers for SAR in NH. He lives for winter, backcountry skies, ice and rock climbs, snowshoes, hikes Mt Washington in the winter, stuff like that. Long time resident in the White Mountains, knows the area well, lives right there. Brave too, not foolhardy. Hopefully I won't ever need a rescue but when I am in NH I will make sure he has my itinerary. He would come get me and he would come get you too in the worst conditions.


I am betting he would come and get me. I am not dissing people like that, at all. They get my respect and my props. He is a volunteer. He has a job, other than SAR, I assume...

And that is my point. I don't mind paying for my rescue. It is the lack of infrastructure for the rescue in the US that was my point. And, lack of staffing. A quick example should serve well here. In Europe, your mountain air rescue chopper has a 66 percent chance of having a real trauma physician on board. In the US, less than 33 percent chance. Something like 75 percent of mountain rescue in Europe is government-funded. Less than 25 percent in the US. In the US, where we all expect that somehow, someway, the government will save us from ourselves, we are far far far less likely to be saved at all, let alone by anything or anyone provided by the government. In NH the call goes out to dedicated individuals who selflessly give themselves and their time to saving folks and we hope they respond, because they are volunteers. In France, just pick up the phone and either the PGHM or the CRS Montagne will come. Both are departments of the government and both departments of law enforcement/security. That is just France. That's just one nation, one example. Frankly, the rescue services in the mountains in the US is woefully lacking and not befitting a great nation like the USA.

Just to clarify a point. When the "call goes out" for S & R in New Hampshire, it is almost always handled by NH Fish and Game except in limited areas of WMNF in winter. They have statutory authority over S&R. They coordinate with State Police and Federal Agencies, volunteer S&R groups, Army NG (if they use their helicopter), etc. See this link http://www.nhoutdoorcouncil.org/search_rescue.php

Under the NH Constitution, NH F&G is not funded by general fund tax dollars, but rather by use fees and specific taxes, most of which come from hunting and fishing licenses, boat and off road vehicle registrations, etc. But over half the S&R expenses are spent rescuing hikers, who until recently, paid nothing into the system. That's is why NH passed laws that allow them to assess charges for rescuing hikers deemed to be negligent, and why they introduced the hike-safe program to help fund these rescue expenses. There are arguments both for and against the current system, and whether or not general fund tax appropriations are a better method. But 90% of NH taxpayers live "below the notch" (south of the mountains). They benefit very little from the outdoor tourism industry in the "north country" that provides the opportunity for people getting themselves into situations requiring rescue. Both sides have valid arguments and concerns.

[Traffic Jam]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

Rafe, not having the benefit of being in Boy Scouts, the military, or other traditionally-male activities, my perspective is different. I started hiking as a total outdoor novice who had to teach herself everything...no benefit of hiking friends, no classes, unaware of online hiking communities.

Regardless of how much you read and research, it takes being out there and doing it to learn it. The available information and opinions are overwhelming. I learned by experience and doing it all wrong, as a good friend likes to say. Yet, from my many mistakes, some of which were potentially life-threatening, I've developed into a competent backpacker, able to hike and navigate in wilderness areas and not just blindly follow a white blaze.

While it's the responsible thing to research routes, weather, etc before embarking on a hike, spontaneity in the outdoors can bring us our greatest rewards.

[rafe]

For what it's worth: this isn't the first time we've had this kind of discussion on Whiteblaze.

I usually abstain from these discussions. Usually it's because I feel the victim "had it coming" in one way or another. Not that they deserved to die, but because the cause of death was really not that surprising.

But this case hits close to home in a lot of ways. It makes me think back to my earliest hikes in the White Mountains, when I was about Jack's age, not even all that aware of the risks I was taking.

[4eyedbuzzard]

...While it's the responsible thing to research routes, weather, etc before embarking on a hike, spontaneity in the outdoors can bring us our greatest rewards.To a degree, yes. But spontaneity to the point of not researching routes, weather, gear, assessing ability, acquiring skills, etc is also why we have these signs in NH

37767

There are some places where spontaneity can get you killed. The Whites have claimed the lives of a lot of spontaneous people over the years.

[ScareBear]

Just to clarify a point. When the "call goes out" for S & R in New Hampshire, it is almost always handled by NH Fish and Game except in limited areas of WMNF in winter. They have statutory authority over S&R. They coordinate with State Police and Federal Agencies, volunteer S&R groups, Army NG (if they use their helicopter), etc. See this link http://www.nhoutdoorcouncil.org/search_rescue.php

Under the NH Constitution, NH F&G is not funded by general fund tax dollars, but rather by use fees and specific taxes, most of which come from hunting and fishing licenses, boat and off road vehicle registrations, etc. But over half the S&R expenses are spent rescuing hikers, who until recently, paid nothing into the system. That's is why NH passed laws that allow them to assess charges for rescuing hikers deemed to be negligent, and why they introduced the hike-safe program to help fund these rescue expenses. There are arguments both for and against the current system, and whether or not general fund tax appropriations are a better method. But 90% of NH taxpayers live "below the notch" (south of the mountains). They benefit very little from the outdoor tourism industry in the "north country" that provides the opportunity for people getting themselves into situations requiring rescue. Both sides have valid arguments and concerns.

Again, my point. There isn't any dedicated agency for mountain rescue with their own helo, MD, vehicles, funding, etc...no infrastructure really. Relying on volunteers, borrowed choppers with no med crew, borrowed rescue crews cobbled together from DNR/FG and State and Local police. I don't know any federal agency that's of any assistance to anyone in the mountains, except perhaps dedicated mountain rangers of the NPS/NFS at places like Rainier...and then you have to be in their jurisdiction.

Now, how to fund such an infrastructure? That's a bigger question than WB is set up for. Just sayin...

[Traffic Jam]

To a degree, yes. But spontaneity to the point of not researching routes, weather, gear, assessing ability, acquiring skills, etc is also why we have these signs in NH

37767

There are some places where spontaneity can get you killed. The Whites have claimed the lives of a lot of spontaneous people over the years.

Yes, you are right, but there are many areas where it won't.
And pardon me for responding, I didn't realize this discussion was limited to the Whites. :)

[4eyedbuzzard]

Again, my point. There isn't any dedicated agency for mountain rescue with their own helo, MD, vehicles, funding, etc...no infrastructure really. Relying on volunteers, borrowed choppers with no med crew, borrowed rescue crews cobbled together from DNR/FG and State and Local police. I don't know any federal agency that's of any assistance to anyone in the mountains, except perhaps dedicated mountain rangers of the NPS/NFS at places like Rainier...and then you have to be in their jurisdiction.

Now, how to fund such an infrastructure? That's a bigger question than WB is set up for. Just sayin...Not just fund it. But justify it. Dedicated crews and helos cost millions of dollars per year. And like it or not, the value to society of the lives lost (estimate how many more would be saved vs current system) isn't enough to justify the expenditure. The current system is pretty damn efficient. We save most of them, but realistically, there are those situations where better rescue talent and equipment just wouldn't make a difference. And those are generally the ones we lose anyway. Those same millions invested in other areas related to public safety would save more lives. Hikers aren't a privileged class.

[Traillium]

Geez, I wish I could write computer code for a filter that would strip out vitriol …
There's been considerable worthy commentary and details presented in this thread (and the other newer parallel thread on the same topic).
I'd just like to be able to unsee the snark that too often overshadows the value of opinions.
… think I'll plug some cool jazz into my headphones, cover my ears with a windproof headband, and head out on a day hike to test my alky stove in the snow squalls now hammering us in southern Ontario … Now, let's see — what should I include in my daypack? …

[Leo L.]

Funny, in other parts of the world (High Alps in Swizerland) the copters are hoovering around looking out for seemingly stranded mountaineers, fighting each other for who is first to get the prey.
Obviousely its good money to earn.

We here in the Austrian Alps have a mixed system, mainly volunteers usually doing the bigger part of the work, and a special department of police with a helicopter and some other high level equipment, usually doing the fancy stuff.
Usually its free when you get rescued, but nowadays as every hiker carries a mobile and the personal treshold of calling the emergency number is so low, there are serious considerations that they might ask for money at least from the obviousely lazy and ignorant.

[4eyedbuzzard]

Yes, you are right, but there are many areas where it won't.
And pardon me for responding, I didn't realize this discussion was limited to the Whites. :)Oh. I didn't mean it that way. Sorry, not meant the way you took it. I was just pointing out that there are some places people need to be less spontaneous. Like when it's really obvious, such as when signs warning of less than just hard-knocks educational outcomes (like death) are posted at every trail head. It's just hard to have sympathy for some, regardless of how well meaning, enthusiastic, etc., they are, due to the arrogance factor. The outcomes are quite sad. You just want to shake your head.

[Traffic Jam]

Oh. I didn't mean it that way. Sorry, not meant the way you took it. I was just pointing out that there are some places people need to be less spontaneous. Like when it's really obvious, such as when signs warning of less than just hard-knocks educational outcomes (like death) are posted at every trail head. It's just hard to have sympathy for some, regardless of how well meaning, enthusiastic, etc., they are, due to the arrogance factor. The outcomes are quite sad. You just want to shake your head.

I agree with you. But it is not always arrogance that is the deadly factor but that the person is in a different place on the experience continuum. (I am not referring to any past or recent events in the Whites...just a general comment).

And I was apologizing, not being snarky. My stomping grounds don't include areas like the Whites so I should have kept my mouth shut.

edit...yes, the EGO factor. I get your comment. It gets us into tons of trouble.

[Alligator]

Again, my point. There isn't any dedicated agency for mountain rescue with their own helo, MD, vehicles, funding, etc...no infrastructure really. Relying on volunteers, borrowed choppers with no med crew, borrowed rescue crews cobbled together from DNR/FG and State and Local police. I don't know any federal agency that's of any assistance to anyone in the mountains, except perhaps dedicated mountain rangers of the NPS/NFS at places like Rainier...and then you have to be in their jurisdiction.

Now, how to fund such an infrastructure? That's a bigger question than WB is set up for. Just sayin...I was thinking about this this morning. These types of emergency services are handled more by the states than the federal government. There isn't much need for mountain rescue in Florida or Iowa. Also a matter of priorities in federal spending which is a political topic too generalized to fall within the limits on political topics we allow on the forum.

Your percentages were from the Brugger et al. 2005 survey article? There are some shortcomings you had regarding presentation as well as some issues with their analysis that make it hard to really compare. You did not mention the much higher rate of paramedic staffed flights in the US vs Europe which results in the US only having half the percentage of the European no medical staff at all flights, 9.1 vs 19%. However, comparisons are difficult for a few reasons. First, the geograhic area of each country is provided, but no effort was made to determine the geographic area that is mountainous. The document is focused on mountain rescue. What's the area of the mountains? Second, only the countries in Europe in the International Commission for Alpine Rescue were part of the study as far as Europe, with just the US and Canada rounding out the Commision and representing North America. This left a number of countries out of the sample, like Russia (ok no one wants to include Russia in Europe), Ukraine, Greece, and Portuga to name a few. On top of that, 7 out of 19 of the European countries did not respond, notably France, Sweden, and Norway, which are large by geographic area. That study is a little old too. My apologies if I have the wrong study, you didn't cite it for my reference.

The authors dealt with the missing data by using percentages. Personallly, I felt this distorted the data. For instance half the responding European countries (6 out of 12) have less then 10 helicopters. The US had 503. Those six countries all have 50% or or higher for physician staffed helicopters. Ok some of them are small in area but two of them are large for Europe, Germany and Poland. I'll tie this back in some here to this thread with my last point (and I may need to split this out to a new thread). Europe is a continent that including the European Russia is about the same size as the US. Again excluding European Russia (which Alaska is a little under half the size of BTW), Texas is bigger than any remaining country in Europe and California would be fifth in size rank. Countries iin Europe are pretty much state sized when compared to the US. People don't always realize this. So since we are discussing NH a bit, well, NH is a little bigger than Slovenia (inlcuded in the study), wth 700,00 less people. Slovenia only had 2 helicopters, its ground mountain rescue services are 97.5% non-governmental and not paid by the same percentage. I think that's more apples to apples. It was a good read though and not quite as dire as presented by your post. It doesn't consider efficincy of on-site treatment and the patient's outcome in relation to physicians vs. paramedics. The average flight times also needs more data about what areas might be driving up the US value. Could be Alaska or remote low extraction rate areas, they do mention visitation rates.

[ScareBear]

I was thinking about this this morning. These types of emergency services are handled more by the states than the federal government. There isn't much need for mountain rescue in Florida or Iowa. Also a matter of priorities in federal spending which is a political topic too generalized to fall within the limits on political topics we allow on the forum.

Your percentages were from the Brugger et al. 2005 survey article? There are some shortcomings you had regarding presentation as well as some issues with their analysis that make it hard to really compare. You did not mention the much higher rate of paramedic staffed flights in the US vs Europe which results in the US only having half the percentage of the European no medical staff at all flights, 9.1 vs 19%. However, comparisons are difficult for a few reasons. First, the geograhic area of each country is provided, but no effort was made to determine the geographic area that is mountainous. The document is focused on mountain rescue. What's the area of the mountains? Second, only the countries in Europe in the International Commission for Alpine Rescue were part of the study as far as Europe, with just the US and Canada rounding out the Commision and representing North America. This left a number of countries out of the sample, like Russia (ok no one wants to include Russia in Europe), Ukraine, Greece, and Portuga to name a few. On top of that, 7 out of 19 of the European countries did not respond, notably France, Sweden, and Norway, which are large by geographic area. That study is a little old too. My apologies if I have the wrong study, you didn't cite it for my reference.

The authors dealt with the missing data by using percentages. Personallly, I felt this distorted the data. For instance half the responding European countries (6 out of 12) have less then 10 helicopters. The US had 503. Those six countries all have 50% or or higher for physician staffed helicopters. Ok some of them are small in area but two of them are large for Europe, Germany and Poland. I'll tie this back in some here to this thread with my last point (and I may need to split this out to a new thread). Europe is a continent that including the European Russia is about the same size as the US. Again excluding European Russia (which Alaska is a little under half the size of BTW), Texas is bigger than any remaining country in Europe and California would be fifth in size rank. Countries iin Europe are pretty much state sized when compared to the US. People don't always realize this. So since we are discussing NH a bit, well, NH is a little bigger than Slovenia (inlcuded in the study), wth 700,00 less people. Slovenia only had 2 helicopters, its ground mountain rescue services are 97.5% non-governmental and not paid by the same percentage. I think that's more apples to apples. It was a good read though and not quite as dire as presented by your post. It doesn't consider efficincy of on-site treatment and the patient's outcome in relation to physicians vs. paramedics. The average flight times also needs more data about what areas might be driving up the US value. Could be Alaska or remote low extraction rate areas, they do mention visitation rates.
I believe that was the study I was referring to. AFAIK, there is no other comparable study that is any more recent.

Now, picking Slovenia for anything is like choosing any third-world country for anything. Have you been there? Yikes.

CH is #1 in pro mountain rescue, with many choppers(as Leo L. pointed out), all manned by MD's(equating EMT's/Paramedics to MD's in a life/death medical situation is absurd and any EMT/Paramedic will tell you so. I am an EMT and I'm telling you so! Otherwise, EMT's and Paramedics would be staffing ER's. They aren't, and for damn good reasons.), professional rescue TEAMS on call 24/7 and a national network of inter-Canton assistance, enabling national marshaling of resources.
France is #2. Not one, but two different state departments are charged with mountain rescue. They have HUNDREDS of full-time members, tens of choppers and top-notch pro rescue teams.

Austria has infrastructure in the form of MANY rescue choppers. However, these are collectives or private entities, as are some in CH(I think AirZ is private...). Especially in the Tirol. I saw plenty of rescue choppers and pro-teams at work in the Tirol.

Now, NH may not have many people hiking, but they sure do have many people dying while hiking/climbing and even more needing rescue. I would argue disproportionately to the general population of NH, in fact. Therefore, it would seem even more pertinent that NH develop some sort of real rescue service, instead of cobbling volunteers and multi-tasked LEO's. I'm not saying they don't do a great job, but to argue it couldn't be done better with better infrastructure and key staffing seems absurd. If that was true, then NH would be the world's model for mountain rescue. As it is....not so much...just sayin...

[rafe]

NH has plenty of people hiking, even in winter. On a fine summer weekend day, there will be several hundred hikers or more at each of the major trailheads. Kinda like the Rte. 311 trailhead near McAfee knob in Virginia. In fact, considering all that, the number of rescue incidents probably isn't all that high.

[Lone Wolf]

Really? When you tell hikers it's cool to ford the Kennebec, or sleep with their food?

i don't "tell" or advise hikers to do this. i tell 'em it's what i do

[ScareBear]

You ford the Kennebec and sleep with your food in your tent? Really?

[Lone Wolf]

You ford the Kennebec and sleep with your food in your tent? Really?

and i don't treat/filter water or use hikin' sticks :)

[pilgrimskywheel]

Rafe, not having the benefit of being in Boy Scouts, the military, or other traditionally-male activities, my perspective is different.

This is not a critique of you TJ, more like an observational question.

There has been a good bit of discussion about the Boy Scouts in this and in other related threads. Again, I'm struck by how they slip right in next to the military in the sort of hiker-at-large zeitgeist as comparable. Folks have been pointing out how this young man, sadly lost to the Whites, was an Eagle Scout.

When I was on the team that opened a boot camp for juvenile delinquents (a failed experiment of the 90's no more effective than less expensive treatment models) we leased the land from the BSA who had a large compound adjacent to ours. We participated in shared staff training - life guard quals, CPR, first aid and the like. I was fresh off 4 active duty years as a paratrooper. I was able to observe the scouts and their cadre up close. I've encountered numerous troops on-trail over the years - typically in groups larger than 12 that turn shelter areas into noisy playgrounds. And, I was more than happy to police up their trash after they thankfully herded out again. Once given the thru-hiker rap they were glad to drop off their extra Mountain House meals to shed some weight in exchange for all my chocolate! LOL! True story, thanks Troop 46 from Morgantown! While I recognize they are a wonderful socializing program for young men with many great programs, I haven't seen first hand how they are in the business of producing qualified long distance hikers or, as in this case mountaineers. (I've got some flak lately for perhaps misusing this term so I'll clarify - people who go up and hike, climb, live, and/or survive in the mountains.)

I'd like to hear from some BSA members, or even Eagle Scouts, who might share with us what type of training they've received from the scouts that might qualify them to engage in an above tree line winter hike which becomes a survival event. Like the one which recently claimed the life of this Eagle Scout, who was by all accounts a fine young man - and pillar of his community.

Thank you.

[MuddyWaters]

Now, how to fund such an infrastructure? That's a bigger question than WB is set up for. Just sayin...


Socialism or communism come to mind

The problem is that dedicated resources for SAR would spend most time idle. And when you need them, you need lots, more than you can keep on payroll.

[Traffic Jam]

This is not a critique of you TJ, more like an observational question.

There has been a good bit of discussion about the Boy Scouts in this and in other related threads. Again, I'm struck by how they slip right in next to the military in the sort of hiker-at-large zeitgeist as comparable. Folks have been pointing out how this young man, sadly lost to the Whites, was an Eagle Scout.

When I was on the team that opened a boot camp for juvenile delinquents (a failed experiment of the 90's no more effective than less expensive treatment models) we leased the land from the BSA who had a large compound adjacent to ours. We participated in shared staff training - life guard quals, CPR, first aid and the like. I was fresh off 4 active duty years as a paratrooper. I was able to observe the scouts and their cadre up close. I've encountered numerous troops on-trail over the years - typically in groups larger than 12 that turn shelter areas into noisy playgrounds. And, I was more than happy to police up their trash after they thankfully herded out again. Once given the thru-hiker rap they were glad to drop off their extra Mountain House meals to shed some weight in exchange for all my chocolate! LOL! True story, thanks Troop 46 from Morgantown! While I recognize they are a wonderful socializing program for young men with many great programs, I haven't seen first hand how they are in the business of producing qualified long distance hikers or, as in this case mountaineers. (I've got some flak lately for perhaps misusing this term so I'll clarify - people who go up and hike, climb, live, and/or survive in the mountains.)

I'd like to hear from some BSA members, or even Eagle Scouts, who might share with us what type of training they've received from the scouts that might qualify them to engage in an above tree line winter hike which becomes a survival event. Like the one which recently claimed the life of this Eagle Scout, who was by all accounts a fine young man - and pillar of his community.

Thank you.

..........

[ScareBear]

Socialism or communism come to mind

The problem is that dedicated resources for SAR would spend most time idle. And when you need them, you need lots, more than you can keep on payroll.
Kinda like a fire department. Each station has over a million bucks of trucks and ten guys who mainly just sit around. Sometimes not even getting out of the station an entire shift...but, when you need them, you need lots, right?

Are we living in a socialist or communist nation? Did I miss something while I was on the trail?

[Alligator]

No way compare NH to CH--Switzerland!? You are really cherry picking now. Switzerland, not quite twice the geographic area with five times the number of people than NH. The NH economy is ranked 39th in the US. by GSP similar to GDP for a country in 2015. Their GSP was $71.6 billion, the GDP of Switzerland is $685.5 billion in 2013, in US dollars, nearly 10x greater. Swiss tourism generated ~$47 billion in 2016 compared to $5 billion in 2015 for NH, about 9X more. Slovenia has a GDP of $42.8 billion in 2015. That's about as close as you are going to get on that table. Switzerland is an order of magnitude larger based on tourism as well as GDP. We are not even discussing taxes really either, as you are framing this as a government responsibility There's no income tax in NH. The state budget in NH was $5 billion for 2017, Switzerland $65 billion for 2014. Best I can do is $21.3 billion for Slovenia 2011. It's a completely distorted comparison to compare NH to Switzerland. The state government of NH has about 1/4 the budget of the Slovenia government. How about recognizing the on the ground reality there. Sure it would be good to have more doctors on the flights and better response times to accidents, but NH has a small budget and that needs to be recognized too.

[ScareBear]

Slovenia has less than 2x the people of NH, yet has a budget 4x higher...how does that happen?

It happens when you ignore the federal government's fiscal contribution to the infrastructure/operations of NH...

So, it's kinda not going to be apples to apples in your scenario, since a huge variable(our Federal government) was omitted from the equation....

[Tipi Walter]

.........My point was not that BSA makes a male an expert outdoorsman. Instead, BSA exposes one to fundamental outdoors skills such as fire making, map reading, pitching a tent, etc. so that most have a rudimentary idea about how it's done. .

Since we're talking about Scouts---I've seen my share in some tough conditions and might as well share a couple pics denoting this fact since we're talking about both scouts and outdoor responsibility---

https://photos.smugmug.com/Backpacking2009/The-Longest-Trip-at-23-Days/i-ttgdf6G/0/XL/TRIP%20102%20%20OCTOBER-NOV%202009%20092-XL.jpg
Here's a blustery October day in 2009 at 5,300 feet in the mountains of North Carolina with some scouts waiting to bail off the mountain in the "surprise" weather. The scout with the Giant Wad over his head is in charge of the . . . wait for it . . . camp tarp. Which of course was encrusted in ice and frozen and could not be rolled or stashed.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Backpacking2009/Trip-89-Backpacking/i-4GdKSWR/0/L/Trip%2089%20029-L.jpg
Here's another set of scouts in very cold conditions with morning temps at 1F---they told me the next morning as I was camped nearby. This was in January 2009. But the little kid was very happy to be out---so there's hope for the future.


i don't "tell" or advise hikers to do this. i tell 'em it's what i do

Exactly right. Just because I burn an open candle in my tent or cook in my tent vestibule or sleep with my food in my tent vestibule does not mean I am telling or advising other hikers to do the same.




There has been a good bit of discussion about the Boy Scouts in this and in other related threads.

I've encountered numerous troops on-trail over the years - typically in groups larger than 12 that turn shelter areas into noisy playgrounds.


You're right---often times Scouting groups get incredibly loud with their nonstop chitchat. Luckily, the worse the weather the quieter they become.

[pilgrimskywheel]

This is not a critique of you TJ, more like an observational question.

There has been a good bit of discussion about the Boy Scouts in this and in other related threads. Again, I'm struck by how they slip right in next to the military in the sort of hiker-at-large zeitgeist as comparable. Folks have been pointing out how this young man, sadly lost to the Whites, was an Eagle Scout.

When I was on the team that opened a boot camp for juvenile delinquents (a failed experiment of the 90's no more effective than less expensive treatment models) we leased the land from the BSA who had a large compound adjacent to ours. We participated in shared staff training - life guard quals, CPR, first aid and the like. I was fresh off 4 active duty years as a paratrooper. I was able to observe the scouts and their cadre up close. I've encountered numerous troops on-trail over the years - typically in groups larger than 12 that turn shelter areas into noisy playgrounds. And, I was more than happy to police up their trash after they thankfully herded out again. Once given the thru-hiker rap they were glad to drop off their extra Mountain House meals to shed some weight in exchange for all my chocolate! LOL! True story, thanks Troop 46 from Morgantown! While I recognize they are a wonderful socializing program for young men with many great programs, I haven't seen first hand how they are in the business of producing qualified long distance hikers or, as in this case mountaineers. (I've got some flak lately for perhaps misusing this term so I'll clarify - people who go up and hike, climb, live, and/or survive in the mountains.)

I'd like to hear from some BSA members, or even Eagle Scouts, who might share with us what type of training they've received from the scouts that might qualify them to engage in an above tree line winter hike which becomes a survival event. Like the one which recently claimed the life of this Eagle Scout, who was by all accounts a fine young man - and pillar of his community.

Thank you.

The reason I ask is because there seems to have been a great leap made in these threads, a wide spread assumption, that to me sounds like: "Oh, well he was an Eagle Scout so he had 'extensive training and experience', therefore something must of 'happened' or 'went wrong' outside of his locus of control."

What does it mean: "He was an Eagle Scout", and how is that applicable to this?

[Leo L.]

Each of the three countries you are mentioning here has ist own, very special history.

I can only speak about Slovenia, who has suffered under Communism for many decades and just managed a narrow escape during the last war some 20 years ago. Not much chance to build up anything that could be compared with the western world.

And Swizerland, who's people are really special. If money hadn't been invented already, the would have done it.
Swiss people, of all people in the world, have the habit to do every thing "perfectly right".
And they did the tourism business "perfectly right", since many decades, and they have a full range of mountains, most of the highest peaks in Europe.
Since centuries mountaineers of the world come to Swizerland. And gobs of mountain tourists.
No wonder that they've developed the most "perfectly right" rescue system in the world.
And if you ever intend to go there, you better get an insurence beforehand. Its also perfectly expensive.

[Dogwood]

I'd like to hear from some BSA members, or even Eagle Scouts, who might share with us what type of training they've received from the scouts that might qualify them to engage in an above tree line winter hike which becomes a survival event.

An Eagle Scout is required to know:

First Aid
How to personally manage their being including body/mind/behavior/emotions
Camping - specific to the question see the requirements for the Camping Merit Badge i.e.; 3, 4a, 5a-d, 6a and 6e, 7a and 7b, 9a and especially 9b(1-6), 10
Election of Swimming, Biking, or Hiking
....with the Hiking track selected(which I chose) specifically 1a and 1b, 2, 3, 4, and 6
Personal Fitness - knowing and also evaluating through testing procedures
Personal Management

http://www.usscouts.org/advance/boyscout/bsrank7.asp

Never attained Eagle Scout status. Finished more than 1/2 the requirements and all the electives but failed to complete. NO excuses but moved around often during those BSA yrs, had long term medical issues, and family was of moderate financial means with 5 children all vying for resources.

Involvement in BSA made me a better person! BSA was one of the key influencers to responsible outdoor activities that I enjoy and contribute to others today!

[pilgrimskywheel]

Again, my point. There isn't any dedicated agency for mountain rescue with their own helo, MD, vehicles, funding, etc...no infrastructure really. Relying on volunteers, borrowed choppers with no med crew, borrowed rescue crews cobbled together from DNR/FG and State and Local police. I don't know any federal agency that's of any assistance to anyone in the mountains, except perhaps dedicated mountain rangers of the NPS/NFS at places like Rainier...and then you have to be in their jurisdiction.

Now, how to fund such an infrastructure? That's a bigger question than WB is set up for. Just sayin...

Perhaps we could enlist the Boy Scouts to do it? Or, the Eagle Scouts? Aren't they all just waiting around to help little old hikers cross the gaps? Sorry, couldn't resist. Okay, I'm not sorry. I'd say we could enlist these cats in the photos above, but they look like they need a rescue - not the other way around. I guess these images, consistent with my experiences on-trail and elsewhere with the BSA, cause me further disquietude with BSA mountaineering training. Or, lack thereof. This looks like a "what's-wrong-with-this-picture-find-it-puzzle" from the back of my US Magazine.

[Alligator]

Slovenia has less than 2x the people of NH, yet has a budget 4x higher...how does that happen?

It happens when you ignore the federal government's fiscal contribution to the infrastructure/operations of NH...

So, it's kinda not going to be apples to apples in your scenario, since a huge variable(our Federal government) was omitted from the equation....Federal aid to NH in 2013, $1.65 billion. By itself not enough to catch Slovenia which is a EU member that receives more euros back than it contributes. I am not going to do the math. They still have a lot more money.

[pilgrimskywheel]

I'd like to hear from some BSA members, or even Eagle Scouts, who might share with us what type of training they've received from the scouts that might qualify them to engage in an above tree line winter hike which becomes a survival event.

An Eagle Scout is required to know:

First Aid
How to personally manage their being including body/mind/behavior/emotions
Camping - specific to the question see the requirements for the Camping Merit Badge i.e.; 3, 4a, 5a-d, 6a and 6e, 7a and 7b, 9a and especially 9b(1-6), 10
Election of Swimming, Biking, or Hiking
....with the Hiking track selected(which I chose) specifically 1a and 1b, 2, 3, 4, and 6
Personal Fitness - knowing and also evaluating through testing procedures
Personal Management

http://www.usscouts.org/advance/boyscout/bsrank7.asp

Never attained Eagle Scout status. Finished more than 1/2 the requirements and all the electives but failed to complete. NO excuses but moved around often during those BSA yrs, had long term medical issues, and family was of moderate financial means with 5 children all vying for resources.

Involvement in BSA made me a better person! BSA was one of the key influencers to responsible outdoor activities that I enjoy and contribute to others today!

Thank you for that insightful feedback! Any thoughts with specific regard to the recent tragedy in question?

[Dogwood]

There's variation in BSA camping hiking trip experiences because, for one very big reason, the unit leaders can be some of the weakest links in teh trips with a a narrow comfort zone and not the best at inspiring or encouraging young men.

You TIPI might be a good trip leader!

OMG, heaven help us, a bunch of Scouts hauling around 100 lb sacks of avocados tossing slippery avocado skins onto the trail and loaves of Ezekiel Bread hanging off the back of packs all hauling Hilleberg tents. :D:p

[Gambit McCrae]

There are a couple of threads here about a recent hiking tragedy in the White Mountains. The victim was young, hiking alone, and a former Eagle Scout. I wonder if he had hiking buddies, or was on any hiking blogs, or sought advice from other hikers, or checked the weather reports.

In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information?

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data?

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day?

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?




In the Information Age, is it a responsibility to seek and consider publicly-available information? Yes

Is it irresponsible not to consult books, journals, blogs, or other publicly-available opinions, anecdotes, or data? Yes

Is it irresponsible to embark on a day hike when severe weather is forecast for that day? No

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety Yes

I don't want to take away from the focus of this thread but "Once an Eagle Scout always an Eagle Scout", Im 28 and an Eagle, always will be - Unless I commit a felony :)

[Tipi Walter]

The reason I ask is because there seems to have been a great leap made in these threads, a wide spread assumption, that to me sounds like: "Oh, well he was an Eagle Scout so he had 'extensive training and experience', therefore something must of 'happened' or 'went wrong' outside of his locus of control."

What does it mean: "He was an Eagle Scout", and how is that applicable to this?

I have one good example of Scouting and the possible lack of expertise even for its leaders. Bear with me---

https://photos.smugmug.com/Backpacking2002-2004/13-Backpacking-Trips-Of-2003/i-TTtMTzk/0/XL/Scan10-0001-XL.jpg
There's a favorite campsite on a mountain bald in North Carolina which sees some winter activity on occasion. I was camped nearby in my tent when I greeted these new arrivals to the mountaintop. Please note carefully the tree they are camped under and the one with a leaning pack.


https://photos.smugmug.com/Backpacking2002-2004/The-64-Bag-Nights-of-2004/i-BFkKtsn/0/XL/39%20%20Boy%20Scout%20Troop%20from%20Atlanta%20in% 20the%20Cold%20Fog%20on%20the%20Bob-XL.jpg
Years later a group of boy scouts came up to the same spot and proceeded to set up camp and their three tents under the leaning tree. I just happened to be camping nearby on that trip and we talked. I mentioned the leaning tree to the scout leader and told him it would probably be good to move their tents out from under the tree and set up elsewhere, despite the tree area being a little more protected from the wind.

What was the reaction? Completely blank faces. They camped underneath what I called the "death tree."

https://photos.smugmug.com/Backpacking2005/A-North-Face-BackMagic-On-Bob/i-ttNSGBq/0/XL/52-9-XL.jpg
Six months later the tree fell exactly where the scouts had their camp---(this pic shows campers coming after the tree fell). Moral of the story? Look up before you camp, never camp by dead snags, be willing to move your tent, and don't allow indifference to cloud the mind.

[pilgrimskywheel]

I don't want to take away from the focus of this thread but "Once an Eagle Scout always an Eagle Scout", Im 28 and an Eagle, always will be - Unless I commit a felony :)

What happens in that case? They break your saber, brand you with a big F, and drum you out of camp?

[MuddyWaters]

Kinda like a fire department. Each station has over a million bucks of trucks and ten guys who mainly just sit around. Sometimes not even getting out of the station an entire shift...but, when you need them, you need lots, right?

Are we living in a socialist or communist nation? Did I miss something while I was on the trail?

No
That is why 69% of firefighters.....are volunteers
Each municipality collects taxes and decides what they want to spend.

If we were communist, centralized planning would dictate it, and bleed people dry to make it so. Regardless of benefit.

[Tipi Walter]

What happens in that case? They break your saber, brand you with a big F, and drum you out of camp?

No but you do have to carry a 100 lb pack full of avocados WITH THE PITS.

[Dogwood]

If a BSA troop is not camping at a CS when a tree falls onto the CS do Scouts know back home?

No stinkin "death tree" is a match for a Hilleberg.

C'mon Tipi you have to do better tree work maintaining the trail.


If I see a sign stapled to a dead tree saying "Don't Sleep Under This Tree" I will not be surprised to see it signed by Tipi or Uncle Fungus. :D

[Dogwood]

Thank you for that insightful feedback! Any thoughts with specific regard to the recent tragedy in question?

You're welcome.

With recent tragedies involving backpacking/hiking, even though I have poked at some behaviors, I wasn't there and I'm leery of media accounts that often leave out vital info or have biased fear mongering intentionally overly provocative perspectives so I will hold personal judgements and Monday morning arm chair quarterbacking self righteous opinions. I will respect the families and friends involved until I know more and as period of offering reflection. :)

[pilgrimskywheel]

Yup - great pics TW! I'm guessing the BSA has never required a pre-hike reading of Jack London's To Build A Fire?

Here's a hot one - speaking of felonies! When I got to a totally empty shelter somewhere below Mountain X-ings back in Jan. 2012. I had timed it just right. The sun went down and after getting settled into the shelter I lit a humongous fire. I was enjoying a hot cocoa and life in general as just then here come ALL of troop 46 up the trail. I heard them first, and it sounded like seagulls who's flock has just discovered a dead dolphin had washed ashore. There was more than 20 of these cats, 4 dads, 2 moms, and 3 or 4 Eagles who looked to be of high school age. Of course, they all dog piled up into the shelter. I moved down and obliged as they over filled it, and constructed a tent city of an impressive number. They built their own fire, and set up a dinner tent off the corner of the shelter completely taking over the picnic table. As things began to settle down to a dull roar - I observed all this a little disconcertedly from the shelter now teeming with kids - the dad's, with the Eagles in tow approached me. I thought: "Nice I'm going to be invited to second supper for my troubles!" Wrongo. The mothers had put them up to kicking me out of the shelter as they did not want strangers who had not undergone a thorough back ground check sleeping in close proximity to the troop and would I be so kind as to pack up and camp someplace down the trail. This is the part in the show where I start laughing, and then deliver my most politic: "Hell no I won't go speech." Which consists of: "Hell no!" Upon discovering I was a vet on an early start thru-hike who had never been convicted of a felony in his life, they had me give a short speech about the Army and long distance hiking to the troopers. All, in all - fart jokes aside - we had a hell of a night! I had spent the last of my cash short of about 6 bucks on chocolate bars back at the lodge, and cleverly parlayed this into an astonishing good trade for all the Mountain House meals I could carry. At dawn, after hearty handshakes and high fives, I watched bemused as troop 46 lumbered off grumbling, cold, soggy, and overloaded into the thick winter fog - miserable and headed home a day early! The End

[Dogwood]

Tipi where do you get these pics? That's textbook example of hazardous trees to sleep under! With a ice or snow load or in a wind or after much rain followed by wind that's a hazardous tree. GREAT TEXTBOOK example of where not to camp!

I still think the Hilleberg would have laughed it off. :D

[Tipi Walter]

The mothers had put them up to kicking me out of the shelter as they did not want strangers who had not undergone a thorough back ground check sleeping in close proximity to the troop and would I be so kind as to pack up and camp someplace down the trail.

At dawn, after hearty handshakes and high fives, I watched bemused as troop 46 lumbered off grumbling, cold, soggy, and overloaded into the thick winter fog - miserable and headed home a day early! The End

Too bad it was just you at the shelter and not you and me and 10 of our closest friends---THEN the scouts and the Mothers would've had to camp someplace down the trail. Sorry 'bout that. "See you down the road" as Steve Austin would say. And being Uncle Fungus I would feel great pride in having Mothers shudder and whisper to kick me out of their "newly-owned" shelter.

But the very worst part of your story is not the Mothers but the miserable crew heading home A DAY EARLY!!!!!!! So much for earning the Trident.

[Tipi Walter]

Tipi where do you get these pics? That's textbook example of hazardous trees to sleep under! With a ice or snow load or in a wind or after much rain followed by wind that's a hazardous tree. GREAT TEXTBOOK example of where not to camp!

I still think the Hilleberg would have laughed it off. :D

If such a tree hits my Hillie, don't pull me out, try to save the tent.

[Furlough]

Pilgrimskywheel, you're being an arrogant and seemingly ignorant jerk. And yes, it takes one to know one.

The weather over Christmas was rough and unpleasant, but, it wasn't bad enough to be exceptionally and/or irresponsibly dangerous for an experience mountaineer. I've chosen many times to go out in much worse, if for no other reason than to experience the excitement of doing it. And, "this cat", Jack Holden, was apparently prepared, knowledgeable and capable. He then made a lethal mistake.

It is not helpful or educational to condemn Jack's choices for a responsible is somewhat risky adventure.
However, it can be very helpful to accept that an highly experienced and capable person can make a lethal mistake in less than the most extreme circumstances and then learn from that mistake. In this case, it appears that degraded physical and mental capacity from hypothermia came on exceptionally fast, fast enough to take even an experienced mountaineer by surprise and kill him.

Don't condemn him. Use his mistake as a wake-up call to the rest of us that spend time in potentially dangerous while not severe weather.


Geez Pilgrimskywheel, are you really that naive?!! The rescuers were not in danger themselves. They stayed with the body out of respect!! . . . and yes, logistical ease.

Having worked mountain rescue and removed bodies from mountains, frankly, I did it for the adventure and because it was a way to give back, meet other like minded people, and broaden my mountaineering skills. I'd happily risk my life for the potential to save someone else as long as the risk was reasonable. If I chose the take the risk to save someone, and then died myself, so be it. It was my choice to try and be a hero and it was my choice to climb another mountain another day for my own thrill and adventure.

FWIW: mountain rescue personnel see less death in an average decade than an average ambulance driver sees in an average week. I don't think getting worked up about PTSD and the need for counseling because two guys helped find a body on Bondcliff is really very relevant here. At least the bodies in the mountains died doing what they loved instead of having been in the unlucky car on the road in front of a drunk driver or some other such meaningless and empty cause of death.

+1 to this. Well said and from an informed rather than speculative and opinionated point of view as well.

Furlough

[ScareBear]

Federal aid to NH in 2013, $1.65 billion. By itself not enough to catch Slovenia which is a EU member that receives more euros back than it contributes. I am not going to do the math. They still have a lot more money.
Slovenia needs more money, trust me...

That said, perhaps NH folks might consider an income tax. It's not like NH is a retirement haven like FL...but...unlikely. Its that "Live Free or Die" thing, I guess...

Out west, its not like the mountain rescue services are all that much better. Even in a place like SLC.

[pilgrimskywheel]

+1 to this. Well said and from an informed rather than speculative and opinionated point of view as well.

Furlough

I think you have some reading left to catch up on.

Perhaps my having not thrown my life away on a clearly terrible series of decisions makes me arrogant. So be it. You have to push the edge and calculate it correctly in order to come back and talk smack. So, here I be - not sorry.

Talk about speculation! Seriously? Said the pot to the kettle.

You want to learn from this? Here you go - DON'37768T DO IT! Read the sign, turn around, go home alive. Know your hiking RESPONSIBILITY, as it turns out there is a NH law to cover this, and follow it. Follow the NH Code of Responsible Hiking and live to hike another day.

You don't have a God given, or American right of your freedoms, as it turns out, to march up into the tops of the White Mountains in a mid-winter storm and predictably die - Eagle Scout or not. To do so in my opinion is the height of actual arrogance combined with a lethal hubris. Why? Because it ruins it for everyone else that these places are set aside for the enjoyment of for starters. The rescuers, your family, the community, and everyone who survives and is touched by your loss.

Seriously, enough. There is a giant sign at every trail head in NH and it might as well say on a snowy winter's day: "Abandon hope all ye who enter!" Duh. I have the same contempt for those who litter, violate LNT, aren't bear responsible, or base jump off Half Dome and splatter biscuit. Then there's always somebody around to say: "Well, they died doing what they loved!" Like that makes it okay.

Still trying to figure out what happened? Here you go: these folks did what the 64,000 other members on here know good and well not to do, and it killed them. Not a whole heck of lot to speculate on here folks.

Definitely learn from this - but that doesn't mean you have to support it. That's why it'll happen again.

[johnnybgood]

Slovenia needs more money, trust me...

That said, perhaps NH folks might consider an income tax. It's not like NH is a retirement haven like FL...but...unlikely. Its that "Live Free or Die" thing, I guess...

Out west, its not like the mountain rescue services are all that much better. Even in a place like SLC.

Perhaps they should, but if you own property in New Hampshire you'll pay an extremely high rate that ranks 2nd highest behind New Jersey.
Two states that share little in common-- aesthetically speaking or demographically either.

[rafe]

"Seriously, enough." Maybe time to heed your own words.

[rafe]

Pilgrim, you don't speak for the rest of Whiteblaze. People can and do hike the White Mountains safely, year-round.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Pilgrim, you don't speak for the rest of Whiteblaze. People can and do hike the White Mountains safely, year-round.

No kidding - that was a rhetorical example of a large population of folks who know what to do, and not to do, in order to safely share the White Mountains. How is it my fault folks want to advocate for doing something completely wrong, and we're supposed to what? Just accept it? Cut it out. "Stupidity should be painful." And it is.

[Furlough]

I think you have some reading left to catch up on.

Perhaps my having not thrown my life away on a clearly terrible series of decisions makes me arrogant. So be it. You have to push the edge and calculate it correctly in order to come back and talk smack. So, here I be - not sorry.

Talk about speculation! Seriously? Said the pot to the kettle.

You want to learn from this? Here you go - DON'37768T DO IT! Read the sign, turn around, go home alive. Know your hiking RESPONSIBILITY, as it turns out there is a NH law to cover this, and follow it. Follow the NH Code of Responsible Hiking and live to hike another day.

You don't have a God given, or American right of your freedoms, as it turns out, to march up into the tops of the White Mountains in a mid-winter storm and predictably die - Eagle Scout or not. To do so in my opinion is the height of actual arrogance combined with a lethal hubris. Why? Because it ruins it for everyone else that these places are set aside for the enjoyment of for starters. The rescuers, your family, the community, and everyone who survives and is touched by your loss.

Seriously, enough. There is a giant sign at every trail head in NH and it might as well say on a snowy winter's day: "Abandon hope all ye who enter!" Duh. I have the same contempt for those who litter, violate LNT, aren't bear responsible, or base jump off Half Dome and splatter biscuit. Then there's always somebody around to say: "Well, they died doing what they loved!" Like that makes it okay.

Still trying to figure out what happened? Here you go: these folks did what the 64,000 other members on here know good and well not to do, and it killed them. Not a whole heck of lot to speculate on here folks.

Definitely learn from this - but that doesn't mean you have to support it. That's why it'll happen again.


Once again another opinionated and speculative post. Do you really presume to believe you know what I have and have not read? Just because I choose not to bloviate ad nauseam on the topic does not mean I have not read the full forum. Also, how can you with any credibility state beyond a shadow of a doubt "64,000 other members on here know good and well not to do", how can you possibly know what 64,000 other people know - did you poll them all? Perhaps you have some reading to do. Seems to me amongst the various threads on this and related topics there have been folks who have said they have participated in scenarios not totally un-like those herein discussed.
Back on my head.

[Lone Wolf]

keep it pithy

[pilgrimskywheel]

Once again another opinionated and speculative post. Do you really presume to believe you know what I have and have not read? Just because I choose not to bloviate ad nauseam on the topic does not mean I have not read the full forum. Also, how can you with any credibility state beyond a shadow of a doubt "64,000 other members on here know good and well not to do", how can you possibly know what 64,000 other people know - did you poll them all? Perhaps you have some reading to do. Seems to me amongst the various threads on this and related topics there have been folks who have said they have participated in scenarios not totally un-like those herein discussed.
Back on my head.

"Go into the back country unprepared and you die." Pilgrim.

I missed where the folks on this and other threads went out hiking unprepared in the face of common sense, the most basic hiking principles, and the most simple tenants of back country survival, and froze to death.

I was merely pointing out that the entire rest of the surviving hiking population at large in fact had the good sense to NOT be hiking in the Whites on the day in question - hence they are alive. Not rocket surgery. Don't like it? There's always reality TV.

[Alligator]

"Go into the back country unprepared and you die." Pilgrim.

I missed where the folks on this and other threads went out hiking unprepared in the face of common sense, the most basic hiking principles, and the most simple tenants of back country survival, and froze to death.

I was merely pointing out that the entire rest of the surviving hiking population at large in fact had the good sense to NOT be hiking in the Whites on the day in question - hence they are alive. Not rocket surgery. Don't like it? There's always reality TV.You need to tone it down. He was not the sole person hiking that day in the Whites. The weather wasn't great but it wasn't freakishly unusual either.

[Furlough]

"Go into the back country unprepared and you die." Pilgrim.

I missed where the folks on this and other threads went out hiking unprepared in the face of common sense, the most basic hiking principles, and the most simple tenants of back country survival, and froze to death.

I was merely pointing out that the entire rest of the surviving hiking population at large in fact had the good sense to NOT be hiking in the Whites on the day in question - hence they are alive. Not rocket surgery. Don't like it? There's always reality TV.
Again - you can 100% factually state that the entire rest of the surviving hiking population at large in fact had the good sense to NOT be hiking in the Whites on the day in question. You know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the young man in question was the only hiker in the entirety of the Whites that day, or is there some other number of hikers in your speculative opinion who did not have good sense, hiked in the Whites that day and also perished - hence they too are dead? To that I say bovine excrement. Additionally, your first paragraph is again wildly speculative and opinionated and offers your take on the preparedness, understanding of basic hiking principals and back country survival as it applies to the young man in question. You honestly do not have any first hand knowledge of this individual and you broad brushstroke your opinion to attempt to paint facts. Also, I do not know anything about rocket surgery, although have read some on rocket science, am not afraid to admit to watching some reality TV, and likewise if you have an issue with a differing take on your opinion, perhaps you too may like reality TV as diversion. At any rate as my old First Sergeant use to say, it's a waste of the training day to argue with folks whose home training was different than yours. So, I'll leave you to your Don Quixote ways and hike on up the trail.

[Lone Wolf]

No kidding - that was a rhetorical example of a large population of folks who know what to do, and not to do, in order to safely share the White Mountains. How is it my fault folks want to advocate for doing something completely wrong, and we're supposed to what? Just accept it? Cut it out. "Stupidity should be painful." And it is.

are you the guy that got beat up in cosby, tn. ?

[pilgrimskywheel]

are you the guy that got beat up in cosby, tn. ?

Yup. Me and your old pal Curtis Owen got roaring drunk at Buddies Bar Room, which is in the back end of a trailer park, doing shots of Jameson and I stayed behind. He'd agreed to take me against Maria's misgivings, but I'd been working at the farm for six weeks and was tired of the erudite hiker set's neediness and inanities. I hit on the wrong girl - who's dad was the owner - and I got the crapped kicked out of me. It was a fine beating, and cleared my head completely. Stupidity should be painful - and it is.

[Lone Wolf]

:cool: fair enuf

[Dogwood]

Yup. Me and your old pal Curtis Owen got roaring drunk at Buddies Bar Room, which is in the back end of a trailer park, doing shots of Jameson and I stayed behind. He'd agreed to take me against Maria's misgivings, but I'd been working at the farm for six weeks and was tired of the erudite hiker set's neediness and inanities. I hit on the wrong girl... and I got the crapped kicked out of me. It was a fine beating, and cleared my head completely. Stupidity should be painful - and it is.

This is entertainment. LOL

I have this sneaky suspicion having the crap kicked out of you involved more than hitting on the wrong girl. :p

"I got the crapped kicked out of me. It was a fine beating, and cleared my head completely. Stupidity should be painful"

Might be about time for another fine beating? :D

Best story I read in awhile. LOL. :cool:

Funny thing is before reading this I thought you and me and a few others in a bar back in the day when I tipped it back we'd be at it. Too many stories like this even though hard earned lessons finally figured out lessons could be learned much easier.

Wish you well. :p

[pilgrimskywheel]

You need to tone it down. He was not the sole person hiking that day in the Whites. The weather wasn't great but it wasn't freakishly unusual either.

Sir, yes sir.

Correct. It is unfair to assume he was the only hiker hiking in the Whites that day. He is, as a point of fact, the only one who died of exposure there however. And, while not the worst weather on record - it was raining. I apologize if I was over-emphatic in attempting to demonstrate my position - which I've made clear.

While it is unfair to somehow blame this poor feller too strenuously for this tragedy, I find it equally unfair - and further perhaps dangerous - to neutralize his decisions as just a regular, and somehow unavoidable - even romantic - aspect of regular hiking.

More and more, younger and more varied folks from all walks of life are coming out to hike. The trend to leave behind critical equipment in favor of dropping weight, combined with ever greater risk taking is having tragic consequences. These consequences affect us all. There is a recent history, and a growing trend, of over-reactionary regulation coupled with permits, registration, quotas, and fees imposed on hikers as a result of an exponential hiker population explosion, coupled with their misbehavior and its consequences on the AT, and elsewhere.

If hikers as a community cannot police themselves in this regard, the solitude and freedoms we enjoy in the back country will be lost to the imposition of regulatory oversight "for our own good" - what ATC Director Andrew "Digger" Downs has referred to fearfully as a system run by "A benevolent dictator."

Thank you, P

[ScareBear]

This is entertainment. LOL

I have this sneaky suspicion having the crap kicked out of you involved more than hitting on the wrong girl. :p

"I got the crapped kicked out of me. It was a fine beating, and cleared my head completely. Stupidity should be painful"

Might be about time for another fine beating? :D

Best story I read in awhile. LOL. :cool:

Funny thing is before reading this I thought you and me and a few others in a bar back in the day when I tipped it back we'd be at it. Too many stories like this even though hard earned lessons finally figured out lessons could be learned much easier.

Wish you well. :p

Well. At least he admitted to it. I'm just wondering how drunk a former gung-ho "paratrooper" had to be before some trailer park gal's father got the better of him and gave him the asswhooping of a life! I'm picturing it......sorry....I can't.....not the drunkenness...that I can see...not the obnoxious drunkenness that would make some girl's father WANT to beat him senseless....that I can see....what I can't see is how some former tough guy "paratrooper" got his clock cleaned by some gal's father, because there aint enough booze in that trailer park for that kinda drunk! Well, unless he was an Air Force parachutist....LMAO!!!!! OMG.....LMAO!!!!

Thank you for the funniest thing I have ever read on WB!

Yes, YOU DO NEED HIKING POLES FOR SAFETY!! DON'T FORGET THEM THE NEXT TIME YOU GO INTO A BAR!!! OMG!!! LOLOLOL!!!!

And here I was thinking there was no way he could be a real live legend...and POOF.....here it is!

[pilgrimskywheel]

Well. At least he admitted to it. I'm just wondering how drunk a former gung-ho "paratrooper" had to be before some trailer park gal's father got the better of him and gave him the asswhooping of a life! I'm picturing it......sorry....I can't.....not the drunkenness...that I can see...not the obnoxious drunkenness that would make some girl's father WANT to beat him senseless....that I can see....what I can't see is how some former tough guy "paratrooper" got his clock cleaned by some gal's father, because there aint enough booze in that trailer park for that kinda drunk! Well, unless he was an Air Force parachutist....LMAO!!!!! OMG.....LMAO!!!!

Thank you for the funniest thing I have ever read on WB!

Yes, YOU DO NEED HIKING POLES FOR SAFETY!! DON'T FORGET THEM THE NEXT TIME YOU GO INTO A BAR!!! OMG!!! LOLOLOL!!!!

And here I was thinking there was no way he could be a real live legend...and POOF.....here it is!

Well, if you knew anything about a fight sonny you'd know that sooner or later there's always someone tougher, or at least more sober than you. If you can't take a beating now and then, then you can't give one out now and then. And if you knew Old Curtis, may he rest in peace, or life at the Bear circa 2012, you'd probably have some idea how drunk a paratrooper has to be to get what he's got coming. Or, just Skip on down to Buddies and ask for Bill. I think you'd quickly discover you're not in the same league as those paratroopers from either branch you seem so comfy disrespecting from the safety of your Hobbit Hole. If it helps you get your jollies I'm not shy about admitting that I've been beat up the world over. Life ain't a movie kid - but I'm still the star in mine. I hope you take this INFORMATION and process it RESPONSIBLY. Enjoy the moment.

[pilgrimskywheel]

This is entertainment. LOL

I have this sneaky suspicion having the crap kicked out of you involved more than hitting on the wrong girl. :p

"I got the crapped kicked out of me. It was a fine beating, and cleared my head completely. Stupidity should be painful"

Might be about time for another fine beating? :D

Best story I read in awhile. LOL. :cool:

Funny thing is before reading this I thought you and me and a few others in a bar back in the day when I tipped it back we'd be at it. Too many stories like this even though hard earned lessons finally figured out lessons could be learned much easier.

Wish you well. :p

Yup. There was a little more to it. Like a Cape Cod Yankee with a Boston brogue trying to charm a southern belle in a trailer park bar room in Cocke Co. TN - the "moonshine capitol of the universe" while her daddy was right there. What could go wrong? Do the words: "Y'all ain't frum roun hea!" sound familiar? And yup, it may be high time I got some more comeuppance - but hey, like Marcus Aurelius said: "The universe is change!"

You don't really know someone until you fight em. Often, our disagreements are the fast track to understanding, compromise, and mutual respect.

I wish you well too! Thanks man, P

[Alligator]

Sir, yes sir.

Correct. It is unfair to assume he was the only hiker hiking in the Whites that day. He is, as a point of fact, the only one who died of exposure there however. And, while not the worst weather on record - it was raining. I apologize if I was over-emphatic in attempting to demonstrate my position - which I've made clear.

While it is unfair to somehow blame this poor feller too strenuously for this tragedy, I find it equally unfair - and further perhaps dangerous - to neutralize his decisions as just a regular, and somehow unavoidable - even romantic - aspect of regular hiking.

More and more, younger and more varied folks from all walks of life are coming out to hike. The trend to leave behind critical equipment in favor of dropping weight, combined with ever greater risk taking is having tragic consequences. These consequences affect us all. There is a recent history, and a growing trend, of over-reactionary regulation coupled with permits, registration, quotas, and fees imposed on hikers as a result of an exponential hiker population explosion, coupled with their misbehavior and its consequences on the AT, and elsewhere.

If hikers as a community cannot police themselves in this regard, the solitude and freedoms we enjoy in the back country will be lost to the imposition of regulatory oversight "for our own good" - what ATC Director Andrew "Digger" Downs has referred to fearfully as a system run by "A benevolent dictator."

Thank you, PIf you are concerned about over-reactionary policies perhaps in general it is best to not be over-reactionary as a policy.

As a general observation, hikers don't like to be policed at all, not by anyone, inside or outside the community. There's a hippy deep down inside each one of the lot, whether they want to admit it or not. Why did the hippy cross the road? Because someone told him not to. Even being reasonable can be difficult they're kind of ornery too. However, it helps to keep your arguments sensible, to give genuine information, and to provide options so they don't feel like they have to.

The trails are extremely empty in the winter in my experience, many hikers don't like hiking then. However, winter is one of the four seasons and they are missing out by skipping it. It's an in-appreciation of nature in my opinion, but folks are entitled to their own opinion. I do think you are taking something away from people if you scare them out of doing something worth experiencing. We haven't gotten enough information to really tell much of anything. No cell records, no gear list, no autopsy, and an incomplete record of his hiking experience and general fitness. That's not to gloss anything over or to romantacize the situation. I think waiting for the facts is a sounder way to provide advice, because I always consider safety when i provide hiking advice.

I think it would be irresponsible to hike into inclement weather you are not physically and mentally prepared for. A person should be capable of what they are attempting.

Be responsible to yourself, your self doesn't want to die, you could take your self to a bridge and then the two of you could make it quick if that's the case. But's it's not. You do have someone to be responsible for other than you, you've got your self. Check the weather, investigate possible hazards, bring a map, consider the terrain, understand your safety margin and the consequences of exceeding your margin.

[pilgrimskywheel]

If you are concerned about over-reactionary policies perhaps in general it is best to not be over-reactionary as a policy.

As a general observation, hikers don't like to be policed at all, not by anyone, inside or outside the community. There's a hippy deep down inside each one of the lot, whether they want to admit it or not. Why did the hippy cross the road? Because someone told him not to. Even being reasonable can be difficult they're kind of ornery too. However, it helps to keep your arguments sensible, to give genuine information, and to provide options so they don't feel like they have to.

The trails are extremely empty in the winter in my experience, many hikers don't like hiking then. However, winter is one of the four seasons and they are missing out by skipping it. It's an in-appreciation of nature in my opinion, but folks are entitled to their own opinion. I do think you are taking something away from people if you scare them out of doing something worth experiencing. We haven't gotten enough information to really tell much of anything. No cell records, no gear list, no autopsy, and an incomplete record of his hiking experience and general fitness. That's not to gloss anything over or to romantacize the situation. I think waiting for the facts is a sounder way to provide advice, because I always consider safety when i provide hiking advice.

I think it would be irresponsible to hike into inclement weather you are not physically and mentally prepared for. A person should be capable of what they are attempting.

Be responsible to yourself, your self doesn't want to die, you could take your self to a bridge and then the two of you could make it quick if that's the case. But's it's not. You do have someone to be responsible for other than you, you've got your self. Check the weather, investigate possible hazards, bring a map, consider the terrain, understand your safety margin and the consequences of exceeding your margin.

Yes. Thank you. Agreed.

I think that the next five years, like the last five, will be a defining and pivotal time for the big three trails. Especially the AT, but the PCT, and then the CDT in that order will follow suit. It's time to decide what we expect these places to be like when our kids kids discover them. Will they be truly wild like Muir talked about, or wild, safe, and profitable like some absentee bureaucrat might decide they aught to be?

[rafe]

If you are concerned about over-reactionary policies perhaps in general it is best to not be over-reactionary as a policy.

Hear, hear. Frankly, given the popularity of hiking and backpacking, and some of its inherent dangers, it seems to me the relative number of deaths is pretty low. But I have no way of quantifying that or comparing it to other active outdoor recreations.



The trails are extremely empty in the winter in my experience, many hikers don't like hiking then. However, winter is one of the four seasons and they are missing out by skipping it.

The trails are not as empty as you might think. Long distance hiking is rare, but there could well be a few AT southbounders still finishing up. Short section hikes are still happening -- as evidenced over on Blissfull's FB page, or even here on Whiteblaze, eg. Texaco's recent hike of the southern LT.

The famous James Hare AT anthology contains journals of at least one or two wintertime thru-hikes. The Barefoot Sisters Southbound is another. Their most exciting wintertime moments were down in southern Virginia. Early NOBO hikers often encounter snow, eg., Chris Gallaway's film Long Start To The Journey or even Bryson's A Walk In The Woods.

Winter peakbagging is a big thing up in the White Mountains, and has been since forever. This I know from personal experience (see links below.) The popular website ViewsFromTheTop is a good place to follow the White Mountain hiking scene, year round.

http://terrapinphoto.com/wp/galleries-3/hikes/peakbagging/osceola-with-julie-11-20-14/

http://terrapinphoto.com/wp/galleries-3/hikes/peakbagging/canon-mtn-12515-with-julie/

http://terrapinphoto.com/wp/galleries-3/hikes/peakbagging/peakbagging-more/

http://terrapinphoto.com/wp/galleries-3/hikes/white-mtns-way-back/

[Traillium]

Yes. Thank you. Agreed.

I think that the next five years, like the last five, will be a defining and pivotal time for the big three trails. Especially the AT, but the PCT, and then the CDT in that order will follow suit. It's time to decide what we expect these places to be like when our kids kids discover them. Will they be truly wild like Muir talked about, or wild, safe, and profitable like some absentee bureaucrat might decide they aught to be?

Or even in existence — if the Trump card gets played? …

I should probably rephrase that. In what form will these and other 'wilderness' trails and areas be if restrictions are opened and if rights on public lands are sold off to non-conservation-minded 'conservatives'?

(…ducks-&-runs…)

[pilgrimskywheel]

If you are concerned about over-reactionary policies perhaps in general it is best to not be over-reactionary as a policy.

As a general observation, hikers don't like to be policed at all, not by anyone, inside or outside the community.

1. True, however - we're having a dialogue about it now aren't we?

2. True, and that's my point. I don't like to policed at all as I am an at times onerous libertine hiking hippie. (1973) Look at the dominoes falling: GSMNP fees for thru-hikers, followed by registration and quotas at Baxter - Jensen Bissell the park director has even suggested closing the park to thru-hikers all together. No more Katahdin! Then there are the closures of numerous free hostels overwhelmed by the rising numbers of hikers coupled with their wild ways. For example: The Jailhouse in Palmerton - just to name one.

The number of folks attempting a thru-hike has risen, and continues to rise, by something like 15% each year. Acting as though everything will be the same while everything is changing is no way to shift the coming responses in a way that is amenable to us as hikers. Indeed, this wide spread "business as usual" approach is the way to ensure that reactionary policies will be passed down to us - likely from an entity from outside the so-called "hiking community" by a party like Andrew "Digger" Downs "benevolent dictator".

Before we get any further someone is going to ask: "Why is a notorious wild man concerned with logical trail reforms?" I'd like to point out here that the most successful treatment program for the recovery of millions of addicted alcoholics in the history of man wasn't started by Mother Theresa, but by a raging alcoholic and notorious wild man - Bill Wilson. Alcoholic Anonymous (and no, I'm not a member) is a successful reformation program, a phenomenon really, because it was engineered by men and women on the inside of the problem. They understood how the dysfunction worked intimately, and so then therefore how it could be logically resolved WITHOUT outside intervention, but rather with logical, compassionate, empathetic, experienced, and honest communication from within. Just talking. At the time the state was locking these afflicted into sanitariums, strapping them to gurneys, drugs, shock treatment, and so on. I hope you are getting the analogy.

[One Half]

Yup - great pics TW! I'm guessing the BSA has never required a pre-hike reading of Jack London's To Build A Fire?

Here's a hot one - speaking of felonies! When I got to a totally empty shelter somewhere below Mountain X-ings back in Jan. 2012. I had timed it just right. The sun went down and after getting settled into the shelter I lit a humongous fire. I was enjoying a hot cocoa and life in general as just then here come ALL of troop 46 up the trail. I heard them first, and it sounded like seagulls who's flock has just discovered a dead dolphin had washed ashore. There was more than 20 of these cats, 4 dads, 2 moms, and 3 or 4 Eagles who looked to be of high school age. Of course, they all dog piled up into the shelter. I moved down and obliged as they over filled it, and constructed a tent city of an impressive number. They built their own fire, and set up a dinner tent off the corner of the shelter completely taking over the picnic table. As things began to settle down to a dull roar - I observed all this a little disconcertedly from the shelter now teeming with kids - the dad's, with the Eagles in tow approached me. I thought: "Nice I'm going to be invited to second supper for my troubles!" Wrongo. The mothers had put them up to kicking me out of the shelter as they did not want strangers who had not undergone a thorough back ground check sleeping in close proximity to the troop and would I be so kind as to pack up and camp someplace down the trail. This is the part in the show where I start laughing, and then deliver my most politic: "Hell no I won't go speech." Which consists of: "Hell no!" Upon discovering I was a vet on an early start thru-hike who had never been convicted of a felony in his life, they had me give a short speech about the Army and long distance hiking to the troopers. All, in all - fart jokes aside - we had a hell of a night! I had spent the last of my cash short of about 6 bucks on chocolate bars back at the lodge, and cleverly parlayed this into an astonishing good trade for all the Mountain House meals I could carry. At dawn, after hearty handshakes and high fives, I watched bemused as troop 46 lumbered off grumbling, cold, soggy, and overloaded into the thick winter fog - miserable and headed home a day early! The End

Where the heck do troop leaders get the notion that they have the right to ask/expect others to camp elsewhere because THEY showed up?! ***?

[One Half]

Slovenia needs more money, trust me...

That said, perhaps NH folks might consider an income tax. It's not like NH is a retirement haven like FL...but...unlikely. Its that "Live Free or Die" thing, I guess...

Out west, its not like the mountain rescue services are all that much better. Even in a place like SLC.

Hush your mouth!

[One Half]

You don't have a God given, or American right of your freedoms, as it turns out, to march up into the tops of the White Mountains in a mid-winter storm and predictably die - Eagle Scout or not. To do so in my opinion is the height of actual arrogance combined with a lethal hubris. Why? Because it ruins it for everyone else that these places are set aside for the enjoyment of for starters. The rescuers, your family, the community, and everyone who survives and is touched by your loss.

.

Yes we do! Except that I believe that each person should be held responsible for their rescue or attempted rescue so either the person/estate gets billed or people should have insurance. But not mandated insurance. Cause that's not very free! If I needed rescuing I would fully expect a bill or for my estate to be billed if I died. And if I was rescued, I would gladly pay that bill even if it took me many years to do it. But if I had an option to buy a policy, priced based on my experience and the hike I was planning, I would do that in a HEART BEAT when I felt it necessary. And deal with the consequences if I chose poorly.

[rafe]

Limited access at Baxter has been in place since the park's inception. Same for the shelters at GSMNP, although the fees are new.

This thread was intended to address safety in the wilderness, not hostel shutdowns or shelter fees. Start your own thread if that's your peeve.

[rafe]

But if I had an option to buy a policy, priced based on my experience and the hike I was planning, I would do that in a HEART BEAT when I felt it necessary. And deal with the consequences if I chose poorly.

That's exactly how the NH "HikeSafe" program works, except that it's a fixed $25 per year fee, and no, you don't get a discount based on "experience."

[pilgrimskywheel]

Limited access at Baxter has been in place since the park's inception. Same for the shelters at GSMNP, although the fees are new.

This thread was intended to address safety in the wilderness, not hostel shutdowns or shelter fees. Start your own thread if that's your peeve.

I think you missed the connection. There's a lot of material to cover - the quiz is after lunch. Thanks for the tip. I get you don't get it. Study hard and stay in school.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Yes we do! Except that I believe that each person should be held responsible for their rescue or attempted rescue so either the person/estate gets billed or people should have insurance. But not mandated insurance. Cause that's not very free! If I needed rescuing I would fully expect a bill or for my estate to be billed if I died. And if I was rescued, I would gladly pay that bill even if it took me many years to do it. But if I had an option to buy a policy, priced based on my experience and the hike I was planning, I would do that in a HEART BEAT when I felt it necessary. And deal with the consequences if I chose poorly.

Asked and answered like 48 hrs. ago.37777 No you don't.

[One Half]

That's exactly how the NH "HikeSafe" program works, except that it's a fixed $25 per year fee, and no, you don't get a discount based on "experience."


well at that price that's a no brainer. however, as someone who has hiked there for years and lived there for 2, why have I never heard of this insurance? And certainly one would think that it makes sense to charge more to people hiking different areas or times of year where the costs of rescue would go up.

[One Half]

Asked and answered like 48 hrs. ago.37777 No you don't.

You seem to often think that a warning sign makes something a law and that people don't have the right to disregard it. I hope you didn't remove the tag from your mattress! I CAN disregard all these warnings. It is my right. But as I said before, I should be the one held responsible for the consequences of my actions.

[Bronk]

I'll take this one... Probably irresponsible, but that does not mean I think it should never be done.

John Muir in the height of a storm was said to have climbed to the top of a tall Douglas Fir to ride the wind and experience the fury of nature. Who am I to tell Muir that he should not do such a thing? He might have ended up dead that day, but it was his risk to take, and I suppose I am glad he did it. It seems to have inspired him, whose words and deeds have inspired so many others.

I went outside in a hurricane and stood in the middle of a parking lot hanging onto a light pole so I could feel the force of the wind and rain. It was an awesome experience.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Where the heck do troop leaders get the notion that they have the right to ask/expect others to camp elsewhere because THEY showed up?! ***?

Even funnier story! Four Pines Hostel - Joe Mitchell's place in the fall of 2014. (Seriously, one of if not the best hostels out there - Standing Bear, Uncle Johnnie's, 4 Pines) Joe is good enough to let a Girl Scout Troop use the place for free of charge because he's a righteous dude. Me and my girl where there and the only 2 hikers around doing a SOBO section. The mother hen wouldn't let anybody who hadn't had a background check within 50 feet of the troop and she'd run you off if you got in range. Me and Rollergirl stayed up the barn. We were up there being safe when the troop and Mary Poppins come cruisin on in - I run them off as anybody who has had a thorough back ground check can't be within 100 feet of me! Everyone actually got along well and we all kinda took it in stride after that little ice breaker.

[pilgrimskywheel]

"Say something intelligent related to hiking, or the topic of this thread I triple dog dare you."

Don't forget your hiking poles when you go into a bar?


Well, at least it's related to hiking.

[pilgrimskywheel]

I went outside in a hurricane and stood in the middle of a parking lot hanging onto a light pole so I could feel the force of the wind and rain. It was an awesome experience.

Yeah, I'm going out to fly a kite in a thunder storm to rediscover electricity. If it's good enough for Ben Franklin it's good enough for aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[Dogwood]

I don't have that attitude or stereotyping about anyone from the south or with a drawl. And, I spent most of my formative younger yrs in NJ. Albeit I'm somewhat of a NJ bush person/blue collar working class/dirt digger that gained formal education at universities from the Pine Barrens and along the ocean/beach bum. Kinda funny when southerns try placing my accent which can be strong even though I haven't lived in NJ FT for more than 10 yrs.

When I show southerners an inch of respect they often return a mile back. They don't need for me to impose. Empowering relationships are built from a good place in the heart and mind. I try to access that place and walk in it. Traveling and backpacking nationally and internationally has taught me to NOT impose myself on others or prejudge anyone. If I am prejudging I know I'm not open enough and walking in love and understanding. I'm behaving out of my ego and pride. :-?

[MuddyWaters]

When I show southerners an inch of respect they often return a mile back. They don't need for me to impose. Empowering relationships are built from a good place in the heart and mind. I try to access that place and walk in it. Traveling and backpacking nationally and internationally has taught me to NOT impose myself on others or prejudge anyone. If I am prejudging I know I'm not open enough and walking in love and understanding. I'm behaving out of my ego and pride. :-?

Good thing, cause most dont have a high opinion of northerners by default. :rolleyes: Pendulum swings both ways. Biggest thing is people are unfriendly and in a hurry, and like to use car horns to show it.

My wifes family is from NJ, fortunately she got out at 14 before she was permanently damaged.:p she was able to be rehabilitated....mostly.

[rickb]

When you offer advice online, do you consider the implications of your advice, with regard to safety?

To expand that just a bit, I wonder if some of the opinions we share regarding those who get in over their heads, or criticism of the "clueless" folk who call for help on their cell phones rather than committing to self-rescue, might contribute to a culture where some might not reach out for help as soon as they should.

I am am not suggesting that played any role in this case, but I do wonder why some of the people who perish in these kinds of tragedies never even activate their rescue beacons.

[Dogwood]

The entitled imposing highly stressed hectic impatient ignorant obnoxious over demanding self absorbed jerk speed addict attitude doesn't go over well in most places. Add intoxicants or selfish behavioral norms, that can entail the same consequences as illicit drug use or addictions in themselves, and the situation is more problematic.

Adapting, flexibility, and an awareness of others by walking in love, joy, trust, generosity, kindness, and wisdom can be how we aim to always conscientiously walk.

Sorry for the latest thread drift. :)

[rafe]

To expand that just a bit, I wonder if some of the opinions we share regarding those who get in over their heads, or criticism of the "clueless" folk who call for help on their cell phones rather than committing to self-rescue, might contribute to a culture where some might not reach out for help as soon as they should.

I am am not suggesting that played any role in this case, but I do wonder why some of the people who perish in these kinds of tragedies never even activate their rescue beacons.

It's a legitimate concern. Personally I don't think I'd call for rescue unless I was injured and unable to walk. Or seriously lost.

I tend to be not all that adventurous, so (knock wood!) it hasn't come to that, ever.

My other concern about rescue is, of course, that it's gonna take a long time. Several hours, even in the best-case scenario.

[imscotty]

To my mind that is the problem with the NH 'Hike Safe' card. If I did not have said card, and I could still crawl, that is what I would do before I call for help.

[MuddyWaters]

No worries unless you are "negligent"

I.e. unequipped, poorly planned, incompetent, etc. If a well prepared person gets injured they arent charged. Whose negligent...court will decide .

[Uriah]

Since this thread has already gone every which way, I figure why not?

When I die, I hope (and to some degree, plan) to do so somewhere wild, somewhere where authorities in our ever-increasing police state will likely feel the need to haul out my bloated body. (Death doesn't remove us from the rule of the regime!) No tubes or needles or catheters or EKG hook-ups or artificial lighting.

But since I shan't advertise my whereabouts, before or after the fact, I can't imagine they'll kick up too much fuss, and my nutrients will presumably go to good use.

[rafe]

^^^ someone's been reading too much Ed Abbey. ;)

[ScareBear]

No offense, but make sure you do it somewhere that I'm not likely to stumble upon your earthly remains, which will likely not be bloated, but rather....well...nibbled on or mostly carnivorously consumed...

Personally, I'd suggest a spot somewhere near the AT on the Navy's SERE training grounds in Maine. It will take authorities at least two years to find you. And by then, it will be solely by accident...

Just sayin....

[Uriah]

No offense, but make sure you do it somewhere that I'm not likely to stumble upon your earthly remains, which will likely not be bloated, but rather....well...nibbled on or mostly carnivorously consumed...

Personally, I'd suggest a spot somewhere near the AT on the Navy's SERE training grounds in Maine. It will take authorities at least two years to find you. And by then, it will be solely by accident... Just sayin....

Now that's funny!

[nsherry61]

To my mind that is the problem with the NH 'Hike Safe' card. If I did not have said card, and I could still crawl, that is what I would do before I call for help.
I think of the Hike Safe Card more as support for the SAR infrastructure, not a hedge on my needing to pay.


well at that price that's a no brainer. however, as someone who has hiked there for years and lived there for 2, why have I never heard of this insurance? . . .
Because, if I understand correctly, it is a brand new program and didn't exist before.

[4eyedbuzzard]

I think of the Hike Safe Card more as support for the SAR infrastructure, not a hedge on my needing to pay.


Because, if I understand correctly, it is a brand new program and didn't exist before.

It's not absolute insurance. If you are deemed reckless or having intentionally caused a rescue to be necessary (not the same as negligent) by authorities, you can still be charged (civil fine) even if you have purchased the card.


Are there some situations in which hike safe card holders could still be charged for a search and rescue mission?Yes. A person may be liable for response expenses, if such person recklessly or intentionally creates a situation requiring an emergency response.

What is the difference between when someone is deemed to have acted negligently or recklessly?


A person acts negligently when he or she acts in such a way that deviates from the way a reasonable person would act under similar circumstances.
A person acts recklessly when he or she engages in highly unreasonable conduct, involving an extreme departure from ordinary care, in a situation where a high degree of danger is apparent.

- http://hikesafe.com/index.php?page=the-nh-hike-safe-card

[hikehunter]

Just read this thread from start to current......it has it all......good information, opinions, ground axes, and beaten horses. Thanks guys.
One of the best threads in a while.

[Another Kevin]

Now, picking Slovenia for anything is like choosing any third-world country for anything.

I think the important comparison here is size.

The Adirondack Park in New York State has a greater land area than Slovenia, and a few per cent of its population.

One park.

By comparison with anywhere in Europe, the US is sparse. It affects our ability to perform any kind of services that require an infrastructure. A great many of our places simply don't have the population to support the infrastructure.

[Another Kevin]

A person acts recklessly when he or she engages in highly unreasonable conduct, involving an extreme departure from ordinary care, in a situation where a high degree of danger is apparent.



I suspect that if you picked a jury off the street down in Manchester or Nashua, they'd think that hiking itself crosses this threshold.

[trailmercury]

No offense, but make sure you do it somewhere that I'm not likely to stumble upon your earthly remains, which will likely not be bloated, but rather....well...nibbled on or mostly carnivorously consumed...

Personally, I'd suggest a spot somewhere near the AT on the Navy's SERE training grounds in Maine. It will take authorities at least two years to find you. And by then, it will be solely by accident...

Just sayin....
Sad post...
Who knows if that's how Geraldine wished she would go...
I doubt it...
JUST SAYIN...

[rafe]

I suspect that if you picked a jury off the street down in Manchester or Nashua, they'd think that hiking itself crosses this threshold.

LOL. Gets back to a comment earlier in the thread... even if you "ask around" (about the wisdom or safety of your hiking plan) you'll get a range of answers depending on who you ask.

To most of my urban, cultured, highly educated friends, I'm a bold adventurer. Among triple-crowners, etc., I'm a dilettante.

[Another Kevin]

As long as you won't break down and pull out the phone to call for help in case of an emergency, but stand (or lay down) and dy like a man - its your decision.
As soon as there is a chance that anybody else gets involved (and that might be another hiker finding you by pure luck half-dead who will take a hell of an effort to save you), you should act responsible.

I happen to believe that if it all goes pear-shaped on the trail, and I'm no longer able to travel, that the responsible thing to do under the circumstances would be to light my PLB. Surely if "lie down and die like a man" were an option, it would be a better one. But it isn't. I know full well that if I don't come home, they're eventually going to come after me. The really dangerous and expensive part of SAR is the search. I don't get the choice of whether they search. The best I can do is to be easier to find.

I don't take risks with a PLB that I didn't take without one, back in the day when they hadn't been invented. But I do carry one, if I'm going off-trail, or in winter, or solo.

For what it's worth, I have traveled off-trail, in deep winter, to above-treeline destinations. Always with a reasonable-sized team (at least four, say, or maybe cutting a corner with three) and prepared to spend the night, even though the hike plan in those conditions is always "get in and out before the weather changes." I've followed a trail in whiteout dense enough that the way to follow it was to strike a compass bearing to the next cairn, stringing the group out so that the leader could see the cairn ahead while the sweep could still see the one behind. I've dug in and waited out a sudden unforecast snowstorm on Moosilauke in June.

I entirely agree that it's necessary to hike with all the information that's readily available. A current weather briefing - including forecast trends in case stuff arrives early. Maps and compass and route card. Cross-check the compass against a known bearing. Make sure that the altimeter reads trailhead elevation. Make sure that the GPS has a current ephemeris. Go through the gear checklist one last time. Go through the I'M SAFE checklist (Illness, Medication, Stress, Alcohol, Fatigue, Emotional condition).

I try to be sensible. I regretfully turned down an invitation for a snowshoe trip in the Adirondacks this coming weekend - because after only a couple of months back on trail after an enforced year of physical inactivity, I'm simply not in the physical condition to do a deep winter 40-mile section hike with no road crossings (not even logging roads) - hitting what may be the remotest spot in the Northeast. I've not done any peakbags yet this winter for the same reason. (and because there isn't yet enough snow down in the valley for me to get in some practice with my gear. The muscle memory has to be drilled.)

When people here ask advice about White Mountains winter travel, I warn them first that they need to be prepared to spend the night in some of the worst weather on the planet, and that they need to be prepared to travel in whatever kind of winter weather that Mother Nature can throw at them. Microspikes, snowshoes, crampons and ice axe are all required. And then I hasten to tell people that having the gear doesn't make you a mountaineer, and say that you can't learn this stuff on your own. They need to seek out a program like http://www.winterschool.org/ or http://amc-nh.org/committee/excursions/index-winterhikingseries.php . You need an instructor - because without one it's too bloody easy to make a fatal mistake.

But then I say, if you have the gear and the skills and the knowledge and the forewarning, I can't bring myself to say that going at all is irresponsible, whatever the USFS sign at the trailhead says. It's beautiful up there in the winter in favorable conditions. Breathakingly so.

Similarly, when the conditions are less deadly (that is, not deep winter in high peaks even with a perfect forecast), I've been known to go solo - on trips where I might not even see another hiker for three days. Yes, it's more hazardous. I didn't do it when my daughter was depending on me for support. Now that she's grown, I have the chance again. I really like the quiet.

When I was at Dartmouth, the DOC's printed materials had words to the effect of, "the alpine region is off limits from mid-October until the trails reopen in late May, and travel there should not be attempted." I learnt later that the translation of this statement was, "if you're even remotely competent to be up there in the winter, we already know you." And the latter statement was pretty much the truth.

One of these times, I might well wipe out Out There, because everyone makes mistakes, and some mistakes Out There are instantly fatal. (Driving is surely no different!) That said, a lot of my family and friends think I take senseless risks - after all, there are bears out there!

So, am I irresponsible? How much latitude should I be allowed to make my own decisions? At what point is it OK for me to say, "I have the training and equipment to do this; I'm going for it!" even though there will be some cost to Society if I've bet wrong?

[Another Kevin]

LOL. Gets back to a comment earlier in the thread... even if you "ask around" (about the wisdom or safety of your hiking plan) you'll get a range of answers depending on who you ask.

To most of my urban, cultured, highly educated friends, I'm a bold adventurer. Among triple-crowners, etc., I'm a dilettante.

Me too. :)

But console yourself with the fact that I've seen your trip reports and photos. You have a variety of hiking experience, whereas a lot of Triple Crowners have the same three days of hiking experience repeated two hundred times. ;) What fraction of them have done a long bushwhack, or camped in deep winter, or done an above-timberline traverse in winter? Or simply gone cross-country to a rock that they saw on Google Maps just to see what the view was like from there? (Or some equivalently silly destination.)

Yeah, I know some have. And a lot haven't.

I know you've done all these things, and more. You've shown me the pictures.

[Dogwood]

Since this thread has already gone every which way, I figure why not?

When I die, I hope (and to some degree, plan) to do so somewhere wild, somewhere where authorities in our ever-increasing police state will likely feel the need to haul out my bloated body. (Death doesn't remove us from the rule of the regime!) No tubes or needles or catheters or EKG hook-ups or artificial lighting.

But since I shan't advertise my whereabouts, before or after the fact, I can't imagine they'll kick up too much fuss, and my nutrients will presumably go to good use.


Sounds like a statement Red(Morgan Freeman) made from Shawshank Redemption. :D

[Traillium]

Me too. :)

But console yourself with the fact that I've seen your trip reports and photos.

Respect, acknowledgment, support — nice comments, AnotherKevin and Rafe!

Add to that, AK's details to serious winter preparation.

I'm sticking with this thread because of gems like this. Thanks!

[ScareBear]

I think the important comparison here is size.

The Adirondack Park in New York State has a greater land area than Slovenia, and a few per cent of its population.

One park.

By comparison with anywhere in Europe, the US is sparse. It affects our ability to perform any kind of services that require an infrastructure. A great many of our places simply don't have the population to support the infrastructure.

You'd think Salt Lake City would be all about mountain rescue...but they aren't...look at the terrain surrounding SLC on 3 sides. Look at the number of off piste skiers, climbers, mountaineers. No dedicated mountain rescue service. No dedicated mountain rescue chopper. Plus, two of the canyons, one with a megaresort(Snowbird), can become virtually impossible to reach or return from by any vehicle other than a snowcat or chopper due to snowfall and avalanche risks on the canyon roads. But is there a full-time mountain rescue service in Little Cottonwood Canyon? Nope. Here's what happens...you are skiing in-bounds but off-piste at Alta. You trigger a slide and get buried. It starts snowing heavy. You get rescued by Alta Ski Patrol, one of the best around. They bring you to the parking lot. But, it has been snowing all day and the road is closed. You then have to wait for a chopper. What kind of chopper. Sigh? Simply a normal hospital medivac chopper, not manned by any type of physician. But...then....it is still snowing...it is night...and...well....I was there when it happened. The chopper takes off, fails to gain the proper altitude, turns, and flies right into the side of the mountain, killing everyone and then forcing a second, futile rescue attempt, in a thunder snow event, in avalanche terrain that had not yet been cleared. That's what happens. No freaking mountain rescue infrastructure. And, all they have to do is put a 1 buck surcharge on every lift ticket sold...but...no...that would be too much government, right? Essentially, SLC relies on, in this order, to save you...1. Nearest ski resort's ski patrol will be asked. They can refuse. None have helos. 2. The Sheriff's Department. They have a good VOLUNTEER team. Yeah, that's right. Volunteer rescue in a city that size that hosted a Winter Olympics seems...silly. No mountain helo.
3. WasatchBackcountryRescue. Another volunteer group, made up of primarily off-duty ski patrol and nurses who climb and ski. Only operate under request from the Sheriff. Who, by the way, is under NO legal obligation to do a damn thing to rescue you!!! No mountain helo.

That's it. For a major metropolitan area with 7 major ski resorts within a half-hour to hour's drive. Then there are the resorts SOUTH and NORTH of SLC, only an hour to hour and half drive away...

No full-time dedicated mountain rescue. No dedicated mountain rescue chopper. Reliance on private corporations' paid employees, both on and off-duty. No physicians on medevac, ever.

So, the small population density argument has been blown to pieces. It is inexcusable for SLC not to have the correct tools to be used in the correct manner. Or, can you alibi SLC as well?
https://utahavalanchecenter.org/backcountry-emergencies

[ScareBear]

Sad post...
Who knows if that's how Geraldine wished she would go...
I doubt it...
JUST SAYIN...

The post had nothing to do with Gerry, personally. Nobody knows what was in her head, and I'm not speculating.

However, the post was intended to be humor. Do I have to explain humor? Sigh....

[Engine]

You'd think Salt Lake City would be all about mountain rescue...but they aren't...look at the terrain surrounding SLC on 3 sides....So, the small population density argument has been blown to pieces. It is inexcusable for SLC not to have the correct tools to be used in the correct manner. Or, can you alibi SLC as well?
https://utahavalanchecenter.org/backcountry-emergencies

It boils down to priorities in the community. If the residents and leaders of SLC wanted a top notch mountain rescue team, they could certainly make it happen. Often teams of this nature are the result of a small passionately dedicated group educating the community regarding both the need as well as what benefits assembling such a team would provide. Once people have been sold on the need for a resource, they don't push back as hard when faced with the cost. As long as the cost/benefit can be demonstrated...

[egilbe]

It boils down to priorities in the community. If the residents and leaders of SLC wanted a top notch mountain rescue team, they could certainly make it happen. Often teams of this nature are the result of a small passionately dedicated group educating the community regarding both the need as well as what benefits assembling such a team would provide. Once people have been sold on the need for a resource, they don't push back as hard when faced with the cost. As long as the cost/benefit can be demonstrated...

Are you suggesting that the good people of NH don't want to spend the resources to rescue massholes who put themselves in that position? :p

[Engine]

Are you suggesting that the good people of NH don't want to spend the resources to rescue massholes who put themselves in that position? :p
Not at all. I honestly don't know enough about the SAR infrastructure in that area to have an educated opinion. I was simply attempting to outline the typical path toward the creation of a top notch community based rescue team.

I used to have a dog in this fight here in Florida. The large rural public safety agency I worked for had a very limited budget for it's size and we simply could not afford specialized teams. This occasionally put our firefighters and medics in a tough spot when they were forced to respond to incidents which stretched their abilities. The best I could hope for was a mutual aid response from a neighboring department which had greater resources, but often this simply wasn't an option.

Given my background as the safety officer and eventually the interim chief, I would cringe when I knew department members were going into harm's way with less than optimal preparation and equipment. I fought for money to solve these issues, but in the end the commissioners made decisions based on community support.

It's very difficult to convince a hard working taxpayer they should fund an expensive specialty team (hazmat, for example) for the 2-3 times a year it might be deployed.

I imagine the same thing applies in regard to SAR teams up in the Northeast.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[MuddyWaters]

When i was a kid, the coasties would come rescue your dumb arse if your boat broke down or ran out of fuel offshore.

That ended a long time ago.

They dont respond now unless your in immediate peril.

Even if your taking on water....expect a commercial entity like seatow or boatus to respond if they are operating in service area. You will be charged accordingly. Which under maritime law, saving a vessel in peril entitles savior to substantial value of the vessel. Salvage. Maybe 50-75% of the value.

The CG will call them for you They will call for good samaritan assistance on 16 as well.

Privatization of rescue services...is nothing new.
Thats precisely what ambulance and air ambulance services are too

If theres a real need, it gets filled by private enterprise in a capitalistic society.

[Traveler]

It boils down to priorities in the community. If the residents and leaders of SLC wanted a top notch mountain rescue team, they could certainly make it happen. Often teams of this nature are the result of a small passionately dedicated group educating the community regarding both the need as well as what benefits assembling such a team would provide. Once people have been sold on the need for a resource, they don't push back as hard when faced with the cost. As long as the cost/benefit can be demonstrated...

A lot of SAR/R personnel are part of other organizations that maybe paid or volunteer like law/game enforcement, fire/EMS services, park services, guides, and people or groups with special talents/equipment. When assembled for this work they provide a fairly robust and professional operation and no full time employees are necessary in most areas. Given the relatively low need per person ratios, there are not many places where a cost/benefit analysis would demonstrate need as opposed to something like a paid fire/EMS operation in an urban area.

[rafe]

I know you've done all these things, and more.

Not quite, but I'll spare you the point-by-point refutation.


You've shown me the pictures.

Speaking of DOC, by the way... 27 years ago, almost exactly... spent New Years weekend at the DOC cabin up by the SkiWay. I did a solo trek part way up Smarts Mountain while my buddies entertained themselves with ice diving in the lake by the cabin. Alas, no photos.

My very first hike ever in the White Mountains, really the first big mountain I ever climbed, was from the DOC lodge up the "carriage road" to the top of Moosilauke. I thought that climb would never end. That would be... about forty years ago.

[4eyedbuzzard]

A lot of SAR/R personnel are part of other organizations that maybe paid or volunteer like law/game enforcement, fire/EMS services, park services, guides, and people or groups with special talents/equipment. When assembled for this work they provide a fairly robust and professional operation and no full time employees are necessary in most areas. Given the relatively low need per person ratios, there are not many places where a cost/benefit analysis would demonstrate need as opposed to something like a paid fire/EMS operation in an urban area.^^^THIS. New Hampshire does a pretty damn good job pulling people off of mountains in every season, in every possible predicament and weather conditions, when required. If NH were to fund a full-time paid mountain rescue group, the people going out on rescues would likely be the same ones that do it now anyway, as they are the most qualified people around both from a technical and local knowledge basis. There aren't enough rescue events to justify maintaining a mountain rescue group on a full-time paid standby basis when you have pretty much the best people on call as volunteers anyway.

[Another Kevin]

Not quite, but I'll spare you the point-by-point refutation.



Speaking of DOC, by the way... 27 years ago, almost exactly... spent New Years weekend at the DOC cabin up by the SkiWay. I did a solo trek part way up Smarts Mountain while my buddies entertained themselves with ice diving in the lake by the cabin. Alas, no photos.

My very first hike ever in the White Mountains, really the first big mountain I ever climbed, was from the DOC lodge up the "carriage road" to the top of Moosilauke. I thought that climb would never end. That would be... about forty years ago.

Heh. Me, too. '73 it was, and rather than the Carriage Road, we went up Gorge Brook. Came back down the Carriage Road as far as the Snapper crossover. I was a New York City kid and had Absolutely No Clue what the White Mountains were like. (I still thought Harriman was tough.) My hiking buddy on that trip, his brother, and two of their best friends died about six weeks later when they flew their plane into Equinox Mountain.

[Another Kevin]

It boils down to priorities in the community. If the residents and leaders of SLC wanted a top notch mountain rescue team, they could certainly make it happen. Often teams of this nature are the result of a small passionately dedicated group educating the community regarding both the need as well as what benefits assembling such a team would provide. Once people have been sold on the need for a resource, they don't push back as hard when faced with the cost. As long as the cost/benefit can be demonstrated...

We live in a time when it seems to be an article of religion that every government service is too great a burden on the taxpayers. "I don't want one penny of our money going to (...)" wins votes, no matter how great a good the proposed service would achieve or how little it costs. If something that the government does benefits some individual disproportionately, the benefit to society at large gets overlooked. Ideas like "I don't have school-age kids, but I want good schools because I don't want to live in a society where all the voters are stupid," "I seldom drive, but I want good roads because my food travels over them," or "I want a functioning fire brigade, because a fire in Joe Uninsured's house can too easily get out of control and spread to mine," are painfully hard to sell.

I suspect that the average Joe and Jane on the street in SLC see mountain rescue as, "our taxes going to those rich playboys who go taking senseless risks." That idea ties into an earlier post where I suspected that a jury chosen from off the street in a city would see hiking as "reckless" if the government sued a victim for rescue costs. All those people vote.

[Alligator]

Folks, you are getting into that broader argument of political priorities which is a never ending can of worms because it can be spun forever. Time to move away from the why for emergency service spending possibly being insufficient. Thanks. I'm having to clean up a lot political posts. Repeat offenders are going to be faced with privilege loses soon.

[Engine]

Folks, you are getting into that broader argument of political priorities which is a never ending can of worms because it can be spun forever. Time to move away from the why for emergency service spending possibly being insufficient. Thanks. I'm having to clean up a lot political posts. Repeat offenders are going to be faced with privilege loses soon.

Frankly, the constant threats of penalizing someone for rationally expressing sound reasoning in a non-confrontational manner are getting tedious. There may have been some contentious posts earlier in the thread related to politics which I missed, but nothing in the last dozen or so posts was related to "political priorities". The last couple of pages have dealt with community priorities and the general feeling of the populace toward spending on specific resources. If I've crossed a line here, I apologize, but in the event I have it was not a clearly defined line...

[rafe]

Extremely timely and apropos:

http://indepthnh.org/2017/01/06/rescue-hiker-who-ignored-advice-likely-to-be-billed/

[MuddyWaters]

Extremely timely and apropos:

http://indepthnh.org/2017/01/06/rescue-hiker-who-ignored-advice-likely-to-be-billed/

Cheap.

Good for him he only made it 2.6 mi.

[Alligator]

Frankly, the constant threats of penalizing someone for rationally expressing sound reasoning in a non-confrontational manner are getting tedious. There may have been some contentious posts earlier in the thread related to politics which I missed, but nothing in the last dozen or so posts was related to "political priorities". The last couple of pages have dealt with community priorities and the general feeling of the populace toward spending on specific resources. If I've crossed a line here, I apologize, but in the event I have it was not a clearly defined line...I've pulled a number of posts elsewhere and in this thread. You think people can act respectfully about but they don't. It's an illusion you get because things get cleaned up. I've also got a couple of people bouncing between threads looking to start crap with one another.

How a community spends on emergency services is a political issue. Even if it is only community volunteers someone starts with, it's not good the government needs to step in and pay for it. Then it starts to go downhill.

Now in the future, don't keep calling the mods out about moderation actions. It ties up the thread. Use PM.

[Engine]

I've pulled a number of posts elsewhere and in this thread. You think people can act respectfully about but they don't. It's an illusion you get because things get cleaned up. I've also got a couple of people bouncing between threads looking to start crap with one another.

How a community spends on emergency services is a political issue. Even if it is only community volunteers someone starts with, it's not good the government needs to step in and pay for it. Then it starts to go downhill.

Now in the future, don't keep calling the mods out about moderation actions. It ties up the thread. Use PM.

Understood, thanks for the thoughtful response.

[pilgrimskywheel]

Extremely timely and apropos:

http://indepthnh.org/2017/01/06/rescue-hiker-who-ignored-advice-likely-to-be-billed/

Okay, wow. Thanks for this very timely and apropos information. It is indeed an interesting fact that a hiker can in fact be held RESPONSIBLE for ignoring INFORMATION and be billed. I'm not deliberately trying to ask an indelicate question, but I seriously want to know: since these services do cost money, and incur inherent risks, who is liable for billing when a rescue becomes a recovery? For example: in the event I were to be killed in such a situation is my estate, insurance provider, or my surviving heirs financially responsible? If so, that means when I do go out alone - as I do - I am assuming a FAR greater risk then I was aware. In effect, I'd be leaving behind the cost of almost two funerals on top of everything else!

Seriously good to consider.

[4eyedbuzzard]

Cheap.

Good for him he only made it 2.6 mi.So, he made it to the Liberty Springs tentsite from Lafayette Campground down in the notch on I-93. Kind of humorous, but maybe he holed up in the privy while awaiting rescue? It would be better than being exposed to the elements. Glad that he is okay though.

[rafe]

Cheap.

Good for him he only made it 2.6 mi.

Good god, if he only made it to Liberty Springs campsite before calling for rescue, he had absolutely no business attempting a 35 mile hike. He got off cheap.

[imscotty]

Good god, if he only made it to Liberty Springs campsite before calling for rescue, he had absolutely no business attempting a 35 mile hike. He got off cheap.

Yes, I was rather stunned too. And it does not sound like he was injured or in serious trouble, I guess he thought he could call up the concierge service to be helped out. He did not know how to set up his tent? Don't people actually try that out in their back yard before they attempt Winter in the Whites? I get that he was getting cold and worried, but he was 'well equipped' and uninjured. He could not walk 2.6 miles downhill to save himself?

I guess this is the person the NH billing rules were made for. He is lucky it was a cheap 'rescue.'

[MuddyWaters]

Since SAR usually makes you walk out with them if uninjured, not sure what some hope to gain. Maybe companionship. Chances are they get scared and freak out. They dont want to hike out in dark alone, and dont want to stay

Happened to a scout troop a couple yrs ago.

[imscotty]

For example: in the event I were to be killed in such a situation is my estate, insurance provider, or my surviving heirs financially responsible?


To answer your question, I have never heard of a single instance where NH billed anyone for the rescue or recovery of someone who died. I suppose they figure the price paid was already high enough. If they ever have to haul out your body, I expect it will be a freebie.

[ScareBear]

^^^THIS. New Hampshire does a pretty damn good job pulling people off of mountains in every season, in every possible predicament and weather conditions, when required. If NH were to fund a full-time paid mountain rescue group, the people going out on rescues would likely be the same ones that do it now anyway, as they are the most qualified people around both from a technical and local knowledge basis. There aren't enough rescue events to justify maintaining a mountain rescue group on a full-time paid standby basis when you have pretty much the best people on call as volunteers anyway.
I suppose it boils down to why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free...at least in NH, SLC, etc...

[4eyedbuzzard]

To answer your question, I have never heard of a single instance where NH billed anyone for the rescue or recovery of someone who died. I suppose they figure the price paid was already high enough. If they ever have to haul out your body, I expect it will be a freebie.I'm NOT a lawyer, but typically, yes, your estate is usually subject to virtually any and all expenses (including civil fines and criminal penalties) you incurred while alive. Non-hiking example: you are rushed to the hospital in an ambulance and later die. Your estate is going to get both an ambulance bill and medical bills. And if your body was carried off the mountain by S&R and you were deemed reckless, then yeah, a bill might well be coming. You can also often be held accountable financially for non-criminal expenses incurred (including civil fines) of your spouse and/or dependents (typically occurs with minors/children depending upon their age). Parents have gotten billed for S&R for their children. The laws regarding such stuff vary by states - community property vs common law when it comes to marriage, and sometimes even 16 year olds can be held personally responsible financially aside from their parents in some states like NH. There is a lot of discretion involved with law enforcement and courts. An S&R bill for a dead spouse probably isn't something most people would plan ahead for though. The odds of it happening are pretty slim.

[MuddyWaters]

I'm NOT a lawyer, but typically, yes, your estate is usually subject to virtually any and all expenses (including civil fines and criminal penalties) you incurred while alive. Non-hiking example: you are rushed to the hospital in an ambulance and later die. Your estate is going to get both an ambulance bill and medical bills. And if your body was carried off the mountain by S&R and you were deemed reckless, then yeah, a bill might well be coming. You can also often be held accountable financially for non-criminal expenses incurred (including civil fines) of your spouse and/or dependents (typically occurs with minors/children depending upon their age). Parents have gotten billed for S&R for their children. The laws regarding such stuff vary by states - community property vs common law when it comes to marriage, and sometimes even 16 year olds can be held personally responsible financially aside from their parents in some states like NH. There is a lot of discretion involved with law enforcement and courts. An S&R bill for a dead spouse probably isn't something most people would plan ahead for though. The odds of it happening are pretty slim.


My sister-in-law had a stroke and was medivac to a major Hospital and she died my brother received a bill for $500,000for the air ambulance he called them up and said I don't have $500,000 they said did the patient died he said yes they said okaywe will write it off bye.

Oops wasn't a stroke, ruptured aneurysm

[ScareBear]

Sorry about your sister-in-law, Muddy. In the rural areas around here, you can buy into a medevac coop that will reduce your fees dramatically. $65 bucks a year, unlimited flights, EMS can call them without prior physician consult...AirEvacLifeTeam...

[4eyedbuzzard]

My sister-in-law had a stroke and was medivac to a major Hospital and she died my brother received a bill for $500,000for the air ambulance he called them up and said I don't have $500,000 they said did the patient died he said yes they said okaywe will write it off bye.

Oops wasn't a stroke, ruptured aneurysmYeah, there's a LOT of discretion. And even sympathy. Plus there's no use in trying to collect on a bill that will never get paid. But the legal mechanisms for billing and collecting do exist and are sometimes used.

[MuddyWaters]

Sorry about your sister-in-law, Muddy. In the rural areas around here, you can buy into a medevac coop that will reduce your fees dramatically. $65 bucks a year, unlimited flights, EMS can call them without prior physician consult...AirEvacLifeTeam...

possibly medivac isnt right term. It was helicopter transport for several hundred miles from local hospital to a leading neurological hospital to try to save her.

[MuddyWaters]

Yeah, there's a LOT of discretion. And even sympathy. Plus there's no use in trying to collect on a bill that will never get paid. But the legal mechanisms for billing and collecting do exist and are sometimes used.

heres a tip

never probate a will until providers write off the unpaid bills

takes 2 years

you dont have to pay squat out of someones estate if you are careful and can avoid probating will

my father died owing over $ 1 million in medical.

Paid an elder care lawyer $10,000 for that bit of advice. You get it free.:)

Other tip..providers will send bill to heirs....you have no obligation to pay any bill whatesoever for a deceased person from your own money. They are unscrupulous and attempt to have unknowledgeable people pay them that arent legally liable.

[ScareBear]

possibly medivac isnt right term. It was helicopter transport for several hundred miles from local hospital to a leading neurological hospital to try to save her.

That is specifically included in the membership...hospital to hospital. That's how it's done in the sticks. The local volunteer EMS ground transports you to nearest hospital, unless you have to go right from the scene, things get worse at the rural clinic/hospital or they don't have the right surgeon to save life or limb, and poof. Medevac. Air Ambulance.

[pilgrimskywheel]

To answer your question, I have never heard of a single instance where NH billed anyone for the rescue or recovery of someone who died. I suppose they figure the price paid was already high enough. If they ever have to haul out your body, I expect it will be a freebie.

Thank you. It will no doubt also be the cause of wide spread celebration. :banana

[trailmercury]

I believe in Colorado that if you purchase a hunting or fishing license and you need to be rescued via helicopter you will have no bill...do other states have this?

[MuddyWaters]

I believe in Colorado that if you purchase a hunting or fishing license and you need to be rescued via helicopter you will have no bill...do other states have this?

In most places you will not be billed for rescue. Rescue is by goverment agencies and local law enforcement and volunteers.

Air ambulance is another story. Private for profit business.

In rural areas like Sierra, people can buy air med insurance with individual companies based on where they hike or live, and you wont be charged by that company if they respond. In some areas where no private air med operates, such as grand canyon, government helicopters might evacuate you at no charge. If you are seriously injured, the best available will be summoned.

If you have good medical insurance it typically pays. IF its warranted. There is requirement that if its not an immediate life threatening emergency, the chopper drops you at nearest trailhead, and ground ambulance takes you. If you violate this...and it has happened ..they wont pay and you can bill billed tens of thousands of $.

Getting rescued might be free. Getting your life saved is not always.

People with bad or no insurance...have gotten seriously f'd and had to declare bankruptcy, owing $20,000-50,000.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/06/business/rescued-by-an-air-ambulance-but-stunned-at-the-sky-high-bill.html?_r=0

[Mags]

I believe in Colorado that if you purchase a hunting or fishing license and you need to be rescued via helicopter you will have no bil

That's a commonly held belief that is incorrect.


This card put out by the state of Colorado, (http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/CORSARCardFactSheet.pdf) helps defray costs for the search and rescue organizations, the training of personnel and the purchasing of equipment for these volunteer-based agencies. Many of agencies that happen to perform many of the SARs also happen to be in counties that have a lower tax base.

The purchase of this card is essentially a charitable donation to help out the dedicated volunteers and the organizations.

What the card is NOT? It is NOT insurance. The SAR groups in Colorado will not charge for the search and rescue. (http://www.coloradosarboard.org/ChargingForSAR.shtml) What may be charged is any medical evacuation: ambulance, helicopters, etc. that are done by a third-party group.

Depending on the situation, the evac may not be charged for as well. A friend of mine suffered from altitude sickness on a backcountry hut trip a decade or so ago. He had to be evacuated.

The evac unit needed so many training hours, so the evac team did not charge my friend. The evac itself was able to be counted for the training hours this group needed.
I suspect it helped that my friend had to evacuated through no fault or negligence of his own!

So purchase a CORSAR card (http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/CORSARCardFactSheet.pdf). Help out the Colorado SAR groups.

But please note, despite popular misconception, the CORSAR card is NOT an insurance card.

To quote the Colorado.gov (http://www.coloradosarboard.org/csrb-documents/CORSARCardFactSheet.pdf) website:
The CORSAR Card Is Not Insurance
The card is not insurance and does not reimburse individuals nor does it pay for medical transport. It reimburses sheriffs for eligible costs involved in the discharge of a SAR mission.

The CORSAR card is a good thing to purchase. The SAR groups always need funds. And your purchase of the CORSAR (https://dola.colorado.gov/sar/orderInstructions.jsf) cards gives a hand to the many hardworking SAR groups that help to make Colorado a safe place.

[bgillomega]

This is a very sad event. However, the bottom line is it doesn't matter how much experience or proper gear you have. A solo hike in the white mountains in the winter or border seasons is foolish...period. Accidents happen and the weather can turn in an instant. Once you hit a certain level of hypothermia you cannot rescue yourself. Just don't do it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[rafe]

This is a very sad event. However, the bottom line is it doesn't matter how much experience or proper gear you have. A solo hike in the white mountains in the winter or border seasons is foolish...period. Accidents happen and the weather can turn in an instant. Once you hit a certain level of hypothermia you cannot rescue yourself. Just don't do it.

+1. Hiking in winter in the White Mtns. is a risky business. Going solo greatly increases the chances of a bad outcome if something goes wrong. But even if you have a partner or a group, all members of that group need to be vigilant and committed to looking after the other(s). It does no good if, say, two hikers are "partnering" a quarter mile apart, oblivious to one another.

[Engine]

+1. Hiking in winter in the White Mtns. is a risky business. Going solo greatly increases the chances of a bad outcome if something goes wrong. But even if you have a partner or a group, all members of that group need to be vigilant and committed to looking after the other(s). It does no good if, say, two hikers are "partnering" a quarter mile apart, oblivious to one another.

Good point. I recently read a journal entry regarding a winter hike in that area that floored me. It involved two hikers who were going to meet at the trailhead, but one was running late. The first arriving hiker (who wrote the journal entry) decied to head on to the campsite many miles up the trail and get camp set up, since he had the tent and cooking gear and poor weather was supposed to set in. He contacted the other hiker and advised him of his intentions before setting out.

Due to degrading weather conditions, the second hiker arrived a few hours later than expected and the journal indicated hiker #1 was "very concerned" about his friend, but had no cell service and decided the weather was too rough to leave camp for a search. Thankfully, it turned out okay, but when reading the narrative of this event, I couldn't help but think how utterly stupid some of the decisions were.

1. They chose to hike during a known winter weather event in an unforgiving area.

2. The were depending on shared gear for some important items.

3. They knowingly allowed themselves to be split up, before they even started.

4. They had no way to contact each other, or outside assistance, once they were in the backcountry.

All of the links for an accident chain were there, they just got lucky things didn't line up that way.

[Slo-go'en]

Okay, here's a recent example:

"Rescued hiker who ignored advice is likely to be billed" The Berlin daily Sun, Jan 7, 2016


A 17 year old Canadian apparently ignored advice given to him by both the AMC and the NH fish and game not to attempt a 35 miles, 4 day Presidential traverse, starting at Franconia Notch. Guess what? 2.6 miles in on the first night, he calls for rescue. He was wet, tired and couldn't set up his tent or operate his stove. Let see, that was last Thursday and I think that was a bad weather day.

Anyway, he had proper gear, but not the knowledge of how to use it. The cost of the rescue was $1300 for which he will likely be billed for.

[ScareBear]

And, it seems it was a good thing he didn't know how to set up his tent...probably saved his life. Seriously....

[nsherry61]

This is a very sad event. However, the bottom line is it doesn't matter how much experience or proper gear you have. A solo hike in the white mountains in the winter or border seasons is foolish...period. . .
I will take issue with that!

Please, do not take my informed choices about risk as foolish just because they are different than yours!

There are many things people, yourself included, do every day that are risky and done anyway (like driving), often without as much appreciation for the risk involved as an experienced winter traveler will have for his or her risks in choosing to go solo in the White Mountains in the winter. And I'm sorry, the White Mountains are NOT particularly dangerous as evidenced by the thousands of people that traipse around them all winter long and the relatively few that actually get in trouble and die.

Frankly, I prefer traveling in winter with a partner in many cases because I don't have to be quite as careful and I can go places and do things that require a partner to be reasonably safe. But give me a break, just traveling through the Whites in winter for an experience winter outdoors person is not especially risky unless you choose to go places or do things that are especially risky.

And, what Jack Holden did was NOT particularly risky. In his case, he made a fatal mistake, not unlike a person driving along and running a red light. Just because a driver gets killed because he or she didn't see a red light, doesn't make driving foolish does it?

[rafe]

And, what Jack Holden did was NOT particularly risky. In his case, he made a fatal mistake, not unlike a person driving along and running a red light. Just because a driver gets killed because he or she didn't see a red light, doesn't make driving foolish does it?

Driving isn't necessarily "foolish" but yes, it has inherent risks. Traffic accidents account for > 1% of US mortality and more than two million injuries per year. That is not insignificant.

In my opinion, Jack made more than one fatal mistake.

In any case, I'd still strongly recommend hiking with a partner in winter in the White Mountains.

For sure, I've not always followed my own advice on this matter, and yeah, I survived. I always try to find a partner for my winter hikes.

[MuddyWaters]

Only "foolish" if dont have gear or skills.
Many can pull it off just fine.

Winter conditions are simply far more demanding, with less margin for error, but not impossible. Some like the challenge.

However, based on high risk to any rescuers, people should charged heavily if they require rescue in some conditions imo. Even if well prepared. There needs to be consequences to certain deliberate actions and decisions that affect others safety, or cause need to violate wilderness with machines to rescue someone.

[nsherry61]

. . . In any case, I'd still strongly recommend hiking with a partner in winter in the White Mountains. . .
This, I can completely get behind. And, I'd even go further by suggesting that it's not just the White Mountains, but anywhere in the back-country, and for some people, any time of year.

But, suggesting that by choosing not to take someones strong recommendation, I am therefore foolish, is what gets my hackles up.

I would suggest that foolish is making an uninformed decision with potentially dire consequences which is not the same as making a well informed choice that has a well understood potential for dire consequences.

And, as for risking the lives of SAR personnel by choosing to do risky things . . . Be prepared for what you are doing and do something really cool and you will have the support of SAR personnel. It's doing stupid things and being unprepared that are particularly annoying to SAR personnel. And, responsible SAR personnel put their own safety first. If you are unprepared and do something stupid that requires SAR to seriously endanger themselves to help you, you are likely not to get help in a timely manner. A dead or injured rescuer is no help to a victim no matter how dumb, stupid, or unprepared the victim is.

[rafe]

IMO -- if a trail is very well-traveled, it may be safe to hike alone in winter. And vice versa, of course.

So, for example, the Franconia ridge loop, in the White Mountains, is very popular, year round. Same for the "Tuckermans Highway" from the AMC complex on Rte. 16.

Once above treeline, safety is always an issue. Wind chill is always a factor. Losing a glove, hat, face mask or eye protection can have dire consequences.

Even on a well-traveled trail, things can easily go awry. Slip and fall into the woods in a steep section, for example, or break through the ice on a stream crossing, or an equipment failure, eg. broken crampon strap or snowshoe binding.

[Another Kevin]

However, based on high risk to any rescuers, people should charged heavily if they require rescue in some conditions imo. Even if well prepared. There needs to be consequences to certain deliberate actions and decisions that affect others safety, or cause need to violate wilderness with machines to rescue someone.

That's where you part company with me, and with many SAR workers. Most SAR workers would rather get the call early, because conditions that require rescue only deteriorate over time. The chief effect of heavy charges for rescue is that subjects postpone the call for fear of the charges, and turn a simple mission into a complex and dangerous one. (Moreover, there have even been incidents of subjects getting in fistfights with SAR workers, trying NOT to be rescued so as to avoid the cost.)

A high charge for rescue doesn't make people any less stupid. They were undeterred by the risks to their own lives; what makes you think that the threat of a huge expense will be any more of a deterrent? Instead, it offers a strong incentive for people who are already in a hole to dig themselves in deeper. Including people who've had bad luck, plain and simple. Even the best-prepared can do everything right and have a medical emergency that needs evacuation.

My guess is that such an emergency (heart attack, stroke, attack of pneumonia, ...) Out There would be the most likely reason for me to need rescue. (The other chief risks would be falls and drowning.) Your argument, when made to the general public, would be interpreted as saying that it was my own fault for being foolish enough to go Out There when I'm past sixty and of an age where such things are prone to happen. Remember that Joe Big City Dweller thinks we're all reckless playboys.

[egilbe]

People who enjoy an outdoor lifestyle tend to be healthier overall than people who avoid the stresses physical activity causes. Im going to hazard a guess that most people who hike frequently are in way better shape than the general population, although, I will admit, that bar is set pretty low.

Medical emergencies in hikers seem to be specific to the hikers who go out once a month, or maybe only during a yearly vacation. I guess Im more fortunate than most to live an hour away from some pretty substantial mountains.