Rescue on Mt. Hood, again.

RescueMike,
Just an innocent question here, I'd like to hear you vantage point on this.

I read the account that they all went over the ledge, one by one, down to the last man, including the dog?
From where I sit, and my limited knowledge, is there something I'm missing here?

If it were a group of 10, are we to expect all 10 would go over the edge?

I'm only going by what I read, and realize that the media can be inconsistant and incompelte in their stories, but I find it disturbing they followed each other right off the edge. Isn't there a procedure and protocol in climbing/mountaineering, where they are roped off, and spaced such that they can arrest the situation after the lead person mis-steps?
 
When you put it like that.. It does sound silly!!

But seriously, think about it. Is driving your car dangerous? No, not generally. Can it be dangerous? Sure..

Mountaineering is the same way. Is it dangerous all the time? No.. Can it be dangerous? Sure!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go jump out of a perfectly good airplane!

Yes, you make an excellent point. Its dangerous, but you don't have to be insane to do it. Everything is dangerous. I was just splitting hairs and messin with you.;) Don't take me serious, I'm Cajun.:D

Happy Mardi Gras, BTW.
 
i think that all climbers need to sign a waiver and in case of having to spend thousands of dollars to rescue that the folks who do this stuff should be accountable for the bill. im tired of paying for folks screw ups. just like not wearing a damn motorcycle helmet, if yo uchoose not to wear one ,you sign waiver stating that is your choice and you are responsible !!! im tired of insurance rates and new taxes to pay for idiots.
 
For the rescue teams if it's not to rescue someone, the cash goes to training. So it's not, really, a question of cash...A rescuer told me that. Even them don't want any individual to pay for what they provide.

Varius
 
I don't want to see anyone get hurt. I also don't want some mamby-pamby coming along next year and telling me I can't swim in the river or wander around in the woods.

However, this Mt. Hood-in-Feb. thing kind of reminds me of those a******s who watch their house slide off a cliff every year and can't figure out why no insurance company will cover them. Just my $.02.

Thank goodness they had the sense to carry a locator. I heard something about Oregon making them required on the mountain? That seems like a reasonable compromise to me without really restricting your freedom to go jump off a mountain. Especially if it costs the user $5 like morph said, talk about a no-brainer.

I'm sure there are technical issues, it's not a perfect answer but hey, it saved a lot of time/money in this recent case. Maybe saved a life. Surely, the quicker you're found, the better.
 
It is definately hard to keep silly people from hurting themselves. I guess this is like those "gun nuts/experts" we hear about in the papers, you know, the ones who accidentally shoot themselves or their buddies, "cuz I thought the gun wasn't loaded"...dumb a$$es

Regarding the Mt Hood incident - I'm thinking these people may not have been that experienced. From what I can gather, the group of 10 was descending after spending a stormy night. The white out conditions led to the group of 3 (roped together) falling over a ledge. Due to the conditions of the area, contact with the fallen climbers by the remaining party was not possible and SARS was called.

Now, I'm not sure why the 3 climbers were "rescued" by SARS, if they were ambulatory, experienced and unhurt (as the news story suggests). Might never find out.

I just read an interesting quote on another site in response to the suggestion that mountaineers MUST carry a personal ELT:
"Thousands of people go missing every year, had these been wearing a tracking device they would have been much more easily located.

According to your logic, the police shouldn't go looking for you, or at least you should pay the full cost of the investigation if you were to be kidnapped while not wearing a tracking device.

Some might argue that there's a big difference here between putting yourself in harms way (climbing) and someone else doing so (the kidnapper). However, to some extent you are always responsible for your own situation (why didn't you stay away from that mountain, why didn't you stay at home with your doors locked and a loaded shotgun in your lap?) "

Interesting point of view...

D
 
i think that all climbers need to sign a waiver and in case of having to spend thousands of dollars to rescue that the folks who do this stuff should be accountable for the bill. im tired of paying for folks screw ups. just like not wearing a damn motorcycle helmet, if yo uchoose not to wear one ,you sign waiver stating that is your choice and you are responsible !!! im tired of insurance rates and new taxes to pay for idiots.

Just re-read your post HJ....you might be surprised to learn how much money is spent doing "rescues" of lost day hikers and campers compared to "rescuing climbers". I believe the costs are in the order of 8 to 1, for hikers/campers versus climbers. I don't have time right now to search the studies (and can't readily recall the location) but I know they are out there. I think the State of Oregon has done some good work in that area.

I guess I should be upset that the majority of my neighbors sit on the couch instead of stay fit, and will probably die of heart disease - maybe I should ask them to pay me personally for having to foot their share of the medical bills?

D
 
Now, I'm not sure why the 3 climbers were "rescued" by SARS, if they were ambulatory, experienced and unhurt (as the news story suggests). Might never find out.

White River Canyon is pretty deep and, like most canyons, pretty rugged. Late last year we had a couple of floods that washed down the canyon and made conditions at the bottom really nasty. The west side of the canyon, where they were, was apparently impassable; the SAR teams had to take them to the east side of the canyon to go out.

It wasn't so much that they were incapable, it was more the fact that they were in an unfamiliar area with degrading weather, couldn't see where they were going, and didn't know how to get out of the canyon.

Given that set of circumstances, there was no way that they were going to be walking out on their own, and they were smart enough to realize that.
 
I have no problem with the cost of Search & Rescue, it's a drop in the bucket.

My point is for them to determine the causes and chain of events that leads to these things, and educate the community, whether it be hikers, climbers, or people taking James Kim's route through the Cascades.

So far, we know a hand full of people and a dog went over an edge, and huddled together waiting to be rescued.

I'm more interested in prevention, the next time. They got rescued, so they did some things right! They found themsleves in a really tough spot, which means they did something not-so-right.

I would see those rescued "give back" by having to volunteer for a weekend or two, and maybe give some talks about how to avoid it.
 
"However, this Mt. Hood-in-Feb. thing kind of reminds me of those a******s who watch their house slide off a cliff every year and can't figure out why no insurance company will cover them. Just my $.02."
Gibsonfan, I don't wanna pick on you - a lot of people have this attitude and I just want to address it.
That said, I am tired of hearing the uneducated public (i.e., those who are non-climbers and non-mountaineers) keep saying things to the effect of "oh serve's 'em right, they shouldn't be on the mountain in winter."
Just to let you know where I'm coming from: I have been on Mt. Hood 3 times this winter via various routes and summited just a month ago. I'm up there and other mountains in the northwest most winters, springs and summers; I've been climbing for ~12 years. It is common knowledge in the climbing community that winter is the safest time to climb some routes. There are many reasons for this: Crevasses are generally covered by stable snow bridges, there's enough ice and snow to place anchors in, and the rocks are (more) securely frozen together. Different times of year and different weather patterns are optimal for different routes depending on topography, geology, etc. Sometimes a casual route in the winter will be a death route in the summer and vis-versa. Part of the adventure of climbing is learning about how the weather relates to these conditions and developing a special knowledge about the mountain.

Climbing is my passion, my inspiration for staying in shape, and a social activity. Climbing has taken me through some of the most intense survival situations I hope to experience but have never needed rescue. ...Now the last thing I want is some bureaucrat who knows nothing about climbing telling me when/where/what I can or can't climb.
 
"However, this Mt. Hood-in-Feb. thing kind of reminds me of those a******s who watch their house slide off a cliff every year and can't figure out why no insurance company will cover them. Just my $.02."
Gibsonfan, I don't wanna pick on you - a lot of people have this attitude and I just want to address it.
That said, I am tired of hearing the uneducated public (i.e., those who are non-climbers and non-mountaineers) keep saying things to the effect of "oh serve's 'em right, they shouldn't be on the mountain in winter."
Just to let you know where I'm coming from: I have been on Mt. Hood 3 times this winter via various routes and summited just a month ago. I'm up there and other mountains in the northwest most winters, springs and summers; I've been climbing for ~12 years. It is common knowledge in the climbing community that winter is the safest time to climb some routes. There are many reasons for this: Crevasses are generally covered by stable snow bridges, there's enough ice and snow to place anchors in, and the rocks are (more) securely frozen together. Different times of year and different weather patterns are optimal for different routes depending on topography, geology, etc. Sometimes a casual route in the winter will be a death route in the summer and vis-versa. Part of the adventure of climbing is learning about how the weather relates to these conditions and developing a special knowledge about the mountain.

Climbing is my passion, my inspiration for staying in shape, and a social activity. Climbing has taken me through some of the most intense survival situations I hope to experience but have never needed rescue. ...Now the last thing I want is some bureaucrat who knows nothing about climbing telling me when/where/what I can or can't climb.

I guess the difference here is that you haven't needed a rescue?

If these incidents keep occurring, be rest assured, you WILL have those beauracrats telling you when you can climb, and where, and how.

So, my point still stands, it must be about Safety and Prevention. Not "fighting the man" or those who know nothing about climbing, they are the ones you need to be friends with. You don't need to convince SAR, climbers and outdoorsmen, that everything is cool, you need to convince "City hall".

So far I haven't heard anything about WHAT can help prevent these mishaps in the future. As far as I am concerned it's all Spilled Milk by the time we hear about it in the news, it's the next one we should be focussed on preventing.

Maybe it's climbers having to pass a basic safety course?
Then there are permits and liscensing...
The more these stories appear in the public eye, the more pressure there will be for all these things.

Here in WSS you probably have the "best case secenario" as everyone supports the outdoors and recreation. Imagine what the sheeple think?
The tree huggers will want it shut down because they don't believe we should distrub nature t all, the sheeple are simply afraid, the lawyers will worry that by letting people climb it will somehow indicate liability, and the anti-tax nuts will cite the cost of rescue. I'm not saying I agree with them, but, that is what climbers will be faced with, as stories become more common place.

The same little old ladies petitioning for gun control, will be the ones who want it shut down, proving it's dangerous won't be too difficult, the media is doing that for them.

As a gun owner I am critical of the way people mis-use firearms, because it threatens my Constitutional rights.

I am not inferring these folks on Mt. Hood committed a crime, but it is in the climbing communities best interest to look into it, and keep the sheeple happy.

I still haven't heard anything reagarding Root Cause Anlaysis of the mishap.
 
So far I haven't heard anything about WHAT can help prevent these mishaps in the future.
I still haven't heard anything reagarding Root Cause Anlaysis of the mishap.

Skunk, there's a great analysis of this in Deep Survival by Laurence Gonzales, specifically discussing Mount Hood.

Long story short, in May 2002 four climbers roped together are descending Mount Hood (which it seems is the most dangerous part of a climb) when the one in back, the most experienced climber, slips and falls. He drags the other three down despite their attempts to self-arrest with their ice axes. Then they run into two more climbers ascending and drag them down. It's not over, the six now hit four more climbers roped together and ascending, and now there's ten people tangled up and falling. They all piled up in a crevasse, three of them died.

Gonzales goes into a lot of analysis about this, basically they should have been belaying to the mountain instead of trusting rope, crampons and ice axes. But being "experienced", and Mount Hood is considered a beginners mountain, they took the easy way down which turned out to be fatal. The book is a great read about how accidents happen.
 
Just some quick observations without getting to long winded and turning out an Ayn Rand like post...

-People should always be allowed to to hike, hunt and climb all over National Forest and BLM at their own peril, the government is not the citizen's babysitter contrary to what we are lead to believe.

-These people's Lab who was their savior would've had frostbite within another day or two at that point he would have more value as a pillow. (Look at his paws, a Lab is not a deep cold weather dog, for hunting and swimming, great...he needed a vest and some boots or better yet to not be there in the dead of winter)

-When a man tells two women (both inexperienced) to go up a mountain with his dog...he needs alcohol and peanut butter to complete the plan.

-Legislation on idiot proofing the wild bodes badly as it flies directly in the face of mother nature's prohibition on being stupid without scars, where the wild things are.
 
I still haven't heard anything reagarding Root Cause Anlaysis of the mishap.

I'd wager a guess that what happened was, a group of people attempted a route that was beyond their limits, or beyond the limits of the majority. Then when the "fit hit the shan" - they were unable to assist. So, the root cause could be considered inexperience - and the chain of events, driven by that inexperience precipated a "rescue".

I would have hoped that if I was climbing with a large group, equipped with gear - that I would have seen at least two of the group to arrive to help with the potential injuries. I was not there and so cannot comment on the slope stability, group dynamics or weather conditions....and sometimes those govern what the rest of the team can accomplish.

Still wondering why the group of 3 didn't self-rescue. As for the dog saving their lives, well - I won't rule it out, but I'm positive that it made good news print.

As mentioned earlier, the use of the technique "short-roping" where the leader is connected to the followers by a short piece of rope - is sometimes a contention technique. A lot "depends" - experience of group, fatigue level, experience of leader, route conditions, technical ability of group, etc. So, to accurately determine the cause and effect would require much more data than will be available through the media.

As an aside, this is one of the more enjoyable posts I've read in a looong time on BF.
D
 
Skunk, there's a great analysis of this in Deep Survival by Laurence Gonzales, specifically discussing Mount Hood.

Long story short, in May 2002 four climbers roped together are descending Mount Hood (which it seems is the most dangerous part of a climb) when the one in back, the most experienced climber, slips and falls. He drags the other three down despite their attempts to self-arrest with their ice axes. Then they run into two more climbers ascending and drag them down. It's not over, the six now hit four more climbers roped together and ascending, and now there's ten people tangled up and falling. They all piled up in a crevasse, three of them died.

Gonzales goes into a lot of analysis about this, basically they should have been belaying to the mountain instead of trusting rope, crampons and ice axes. But being "experienced", and Mount Hood is considered a beginners mountain, they took the easy way down which turned out to be fatal. The book is a great read about how accidents happen.

In that 2002 accident, they also lost an HH-60 Pavehawk from the 304th Rescue Wing..

That was actually kinda cool to see a helocopter tumbling down a mtn.. Glad none of the crew were killed.
 
"However, this Mt. Hood-in-Feb. thing kind of reminds me of those a******s who watch their house slide off a cliff every year and can't figure out why no insurance company will cover them. Just my $.02."
Gibsonfan, I don't wanna pick on you - a lot of people have this attitude and I just want to address it.

Your post is thoughtful, interesting, and shows class. I am not offended.

My a******s comment was a generalization and an exaggeration at that, as such comments often are. Hence, "kind of reminds me" and "just my $.02."

I am 100% uneducated on the topic of climbing anything taller than a barstool, so I'll take your word for it. But it seems to me, for an inexperienced climber (or ten or whatever) to go up there after what happened only a few weeks ago, is not very damn bright. Should they have been left there to die? Of course not. But at some point I just have to shake my head when people knowingly walk into hell wearing a gasoline suit and expect not to get burned.
 
But at some point I just have to shake my head when people knowingly walk into hell wearing a gasoline suit and expect not to get burned.

I know what you mean, Kinda like living in tornado alley, and wondering why :p

Unfortunatly alot of the time people get into the situations, and dont understand. No matter how good you are, the are going to be times when your ego comes in and wants to take a seat. Some just dont know when to turn back.
I remember back in Nova Scotia, People allways thought nothing could happen, its was too small of a community and they'd be fine. There was someone every few years who got that idea and died. Thats how it is plain and simple, Dont get in over you head, know when to stop your self and face that fact that its too dangerous.
I've gone on a few hikes where I wanted to keep going, or just go that extra few km, But you just gotta know when to stop.
 
Back
Top