New grist for the SAR debate from Brown University study

Here ya go, kids. Have at it:

"In a new study based on surveys of hikers in New Hampshire's White Mountain National Forest, Brown University researchers find that many people hit the trails without essential equipment, often because they don't think it's needed for short hikes. Young, inexperienced hikers were most likely to lack essential gear."

White Mountains hikers often underprepared

Seems about right. I headed up to Greenleaf on Saturday to help a friend haul some supplies for her party and on the way down I encountered about 20+ Canadian teenagers on a school trip. It was raining, sleeting, and snowing yet most of them were wearing summer sneakers with little to no extra clothing. And this was a sponsored trip with adult supervision.

$31.50 to purchase the article? No thanks.

I am which trailheads the survey was done at, as some of them certainly attract more unprepared hikers than others. I suspect many people don't bring the 10 essentials if they are going to be walking the Pemi or Lincoln Woods trails. It's not surprising that inexperienced hikers are less prepared. I'm not sure that punishing them is the answer to the problem.

Its not just inexperienced hikers, I run into trail runners frequently with minimal or no gear. More than a few of them are encountered up on the ridges doing the Pemi loop or portions thereof. I expect the rationalization is that they are ultra experienced hikers that dont need the gear. I dont really see how it applies if they pop an ankle or get caught in an unusual weather change but it must make sense for them.

sardog1 said:

Here ya go, kids. Have at it:

"In a new study based on surveys of hikers in New Hampshire's White Mountain National Forest, Brown University researchers find that many people hit the trails without essential equipment, often because they don't think it's needed for short hikes. Young, inexperienced hikers were most likely to lack essential gear."

White Mountains hikers often underprepared

Click to expand...

I have a picture of myself on my first winter hike up Monadnock >30 years ago when I was 16. My chosen attire for that snowy day was NBC (Nothing But Cotton). I had an aluminum canteen full of water and marveled when I got to the top that all but an ounce had frozen solid and my pants were like a board. But I was not upset, just fascinated. Somehow, I survived. Most others will too.

peakbagger said:

Its not just inexperienced hikers, I run into trail runners frequently with minimal or no gear. More than a few of them are encountered up on the ridges doing the Pemi loop or portions thereof. I expect the rationalization is that they are ultra experienced hikers that dont need the gear. I dont really see how it applies if they pop an ankle or get caught in an unusual weather change but it must make sense for them.

Click to expand...

Speaking from my own experience, I suspect most of them don't carry much simply because it's not practical or much fun to carry a whole lot of weight when you are trying to run as much of a 32 mile loop as possible. Running with a heavy pack sucks. Usually these folks are pretty careful about when they time their trips so as not to get caught by adverse weather events that would be beyond the protection limit of what they have with them ( and they might have more than you think), but there will always be a few people who take it too far. I can't say I've ever heard of mountain runners having the same types of rescue scenarios that the run of the mill "inexperienced" folks have frequently, even people WITH gear, so I am not sure it's fair to lump your average Pemi Loop runner with Joe Schmoe the Unprepared Doofus.

Unfortunately where do you draw the line? As far as Joe Schmoe is concerned, he thinks he is over qualified to do any hike in the whites and therefore needs no gear. He sees trail runners crusing on by and decides that they are carrying minimal gear so why should he. Obviously this isnt accurate but making the distinction between experienced and inexperienced is a slippery slope that NHF&G gets in trouble no matter what way they decide. Its a heck of lot easier to draw a line and say, dont have the gear pay for the rescue. I would expect a trail runner factors that in and figures if they are in such a situation that a rescue is needed, its worth the bill.

Realistically given the number of hikers in the WMNF any given weekend, 99.99 percent of hikers make it back down to trailhead so they can regale each other how they "cheated death" no matter what gear they are using.

I've said it before. 50% of the people think I carry too much stuff. 50% think I don't carry enough.

peakbagger said:

Unfortunately where do you draw the line? As far as Joe Schmoe is concerned, he thinks he is over qualified to do any hike in the whites and therefore needs no gear. He sees trail runners crusing on by and decides that they are carrying minimal gear so why should he. Obviously this isnt accurate but making the distinction between experienced and inexperienced is a slippery slope that NHF&G gets in trouble no matter what way they decide. Its a heck of lot easier to draw a line and say, dont have the gear pay for the rescue. I would expect a trail runner factors that in and figures if they are in such a situation that a rescue is needed, its worth the bill.

Click to expand...

The assumption that these trail runners don't have the ten "essentials" ( which they aren't really IMHO) is mistaken. Here's the list:
" map, a compass, extra clothes, rain gear, a fire starter, a flashlight, extra food and water, a knife, a first aid kit, and a whistle."

I generally have most of that in lightweight form almost every time I run. A tiny map and micro-compass, a fresh razor blade, a few band-aids, a lighter, light rain gear, food and water, whistle is a buckle on the pack, and a headlight with backups. It doesn't take up much space or weigh that much. Is it as bulky and heavy as what most folks carry?- probably not.

So whoever is making the assumption that trail runners don't have this stuff ( and many of the "traditional" hikers i run into DO make that assumption simply because I have less than they do), is WRONG.

On the side - Can anyone point to a single instance of someone doing a long mountain run in the Whites requiring a rescue, ever?

+1, agree with Tim. Many people incorrectly assume a small pack means lack of preparedness. Especially in mid-summer, if you have told someone where you are going, you don't need much more than a space blanket and a headlamp.

On the larger subject, this always goes to the same place - how does SAR decide what proportion of a rescue is the rescuee's fault? As I have said before, they should never have to decide that. Regardless of whether we fully fund SAR with tax money, my opinion is that everyone should get charged the same fixed amount (maybe $100?). The fee should be enough to discourage flat out stupidity and maybe get someone to read the hikesafe guidelines that they might otherwise ignore, but not enough to stop someone from calling for rescue they really need. We will NEVER solve the problem if we spend any time trying to decide what was an "accident" and what was "recklessness" - that's just job security for lawyers.

I once was passed by someone between Guyot and South Twin. He was wearing running shorts, socks, sneakers, and carrying a T-Shirt. I managed to ask what he was doing, and he replied he was running the Pemi Loop. I was tremendously impressed, wondered about his safety gear, and carried on in the opposite direction. I can assure he he did not carry any "essentials". That being said, I don't buy into the "essentials" thing much anywa.

Tim Seaver said:

On the side - Can anyone point to a single instance of someone doing a long mountain run in the Whites requiring a rescue, ever?

Click to expand...

It's unclear how far this person was going:

"In other weekend incidents, an injured trail runner was carried to safety on the East Pond Trail by New Hampshire Fish and Game Conservation Officers and volunteers from the Pemi Valley Search and Rescue Team on Sunday, October 14[.]" – part of a longer report on SAR incidents last fall: Successful Weekend Rescues on Mt. Chocorua and Mt. Passaconoway

I should have been more specific - I meant in the context of this article - having the "10 essentials", i.e.: Was it the lack of one or more of these was what actually precipitated a rescue of a trail runner?
Incidentally, I don't know any trail runners that take off on a substantial trail run without a headlight and a few backups, but there are plenty of examples of newbie hikers and tourists doing just that - just look at the sheer number of "they didn't have lights" rescues - it's probably the #1 cause or close.

It's a compelling issue, isn't it? It's a large, on-going and non-ending negotiation of a social contract between those who feel compelled to head "out there" in the face of risk and those who feel compelled to rescue them. There's an undercurrent here that it's OK to put yourself into a point of peril provided you take reasonable precautions. Given that we all use a car-based transportation system that kills north of 30,000 annually, allowing people to kill themselves creatively in the mountains isn't such a bad thing really. I'm glad it's not outlawed, that's for sure.

The focus on the list is fascinating in its own right. The "stuff" is a stand in for competency. They are different. You can be an incompetent dolt with the right stuff or a hardened guide capable of making everything from scratch in the bush. So, "the list" is a crude metric at best.

Add to this, the "speed is safety" mantra of Chouinard, Messner and the alpinist movement and later the Jardine/ultra light movement. The youngest are fittest and fastest. They can get out of Dodge faster than my 50 year old legs can move me.

Still, stuff matters. So I weigh in on the issue of stuff.

Compass? In NH? For trail hikers? I use a compass regularly for hunting and off-trail backcountry skiing. It's a great skill to have and am glad I'm fairly competent with one. Still. I wonder how many NH rescues have been due to a lack of a compass? How many hikers venture off of maintained trails? I would think that lack of rudimentary map reading skills are more likely to be a problem. IME (very much biased by my very cynical former calculus teaching days) is that if you hand most people a compass, you might as of handed them a neutronic hyper-space fluxuator with an integrated space-shuttle interface. They have zero clue of what to do with it.

Here's another one I don't get...

Tim Seaver said:

I generally have most of that in lightweight form almost every time I run. A tiny map and micro-compass, a fresh razor blade, a few band-aids, a lighter, light rain gear, food and water, whistle is a buckle on the pack, and a headlight with backups.

Click to expand...

Tim, I would love to hear more about what you use a razor blade for.



Here's a question I'd like to hear discussed in this thread....

Setting aside the question of equipment, what sort of scenarios or outcomes do people expect from the lost or injured in the Whites? What sort of "bad events" do we expect people to be able to endure and how long do we expect them to endure the events before the social contract of rescue kicks in?

I would think the following would be at the top of the list in practical terms:
+ Don't get lost while hiking on maintained trails (take a map and know how to use it)
+ Don't become hypothermic in bad weather (take appropriate clothing and know the likely range of weather).
+ Don't become immobilized by bad weather/fitness/food (don't take stupid risks given weather/fitness and carry food)
+ Don't get injured due to stupid risk choices (maybe Huntington in the cold rain wasn't a good choice?)
+ Don't get immobilized by small, easily treated injuries (basic bleeding oriented 1st aid kit)
+ Don't die in the woods without giving people a chance to find you (file a flight plan and carry a whistle)

Are there other scenarios that we expect the average hiker to overcome without rescue?

If not, this produces a much smaller set of essentials. Note, that I've left off things like "Make a fire" or "make a shelter". Lucky that kid who dropped off the back side of Sugarloaf this year watched enough TV to know how to make a shelter, but I digress.

I dig essentials and carry them. Also, my judgement is infinitely harsher for people leading group hikes.

My list of gear:
http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/essentials-list.txt

(Replying to Tim about lights.)
Right! That's another item that is worth discussing. I didn't want to muddy my earlier post with that topic. If we ARE adamant that we want to somehow determine a measure of blame for a rescue, about the only really clear criterion that could be used is the "did not bring a working light, and required rescue specifically because of being overtaken by darkness" criterion. It's very specific, it's very "provable" (no BS arguments about the adequacy of footwear or anything), and it happens a lot. If that one specific cause had a $200 surcharge over and above the fixed $100 fee, it would make enough headlines to get at least a few people to start carrying lights.

(It might also make a few people think, in the summer, before calling for an unneeded rescue. You are NOT going to die overnight; just sit there and wait for morning and then walk out. An inexperienced hiker friend just did that recently. They were a party of three (parents and a 5 year old), about a mile from the trailhead when it got dark; no lights. Rather than calling for rescue, they just bundled up and waited, and walked out in the morning, a little chilly but none the worse for wear. Good learning experience!)

Replying to dave.m
See above! Of all the "list items, I vote for:
>Don't get stuck because you did not bring a light, and it got dark. (Darkness is quite predictable.)
>Don't call for rescue when you obviously do not need it ("I'm tired." "I'm bored and don't want to wait for morning." "I'm going to be late for work." etc.)
>Agree with "file a flight plan." Would add: make sure your air traffic controller knows when to call, and when NOT to call. Way too many rescues from worried family member calling when the party is just delayed, and they had done a poor job of communicating criteria to the family prior to the trip.

TCD,

I need to think more about the light issue.

Frankly, I'm getting to the point of thinking that there should be an expectation of a person surviving at least one night in the woods before rescue goes out (for 3 season stuff, anyway).

Benighted? Sit your butt down on a rock and wait.

dave.m said:

Tim, I would love to hear more about what you use a razor blade for.

Click to expand...

So glad you asked! In my experience, a very sharp single edge razor blade (even a tiny one) is sufficient for most mini-emergencies, and sometimes better than a pocketknife. A habit from my former climbing days, carried in case I needed to cut a sling QUICK.

My most famous and awesome use of my razor blade was to free Mats Roing of his prototype Kahtoola snowshoes, in an awkward place on a precipitous descent of the Flume Slide. I had to cut the neoprene binding completely off, which would have been a tough task for a dull pocketknife.

About 10 seconds of slicing and he was free. The dramatic tale, in all it's glory.

Although, I got nothing on this guy:

"In the middle of the night in a tent in the 17,200-foot camp on McKinley, Schnell used a razor blade to perform an emergency tracheotomy credited with saving the life of a climber unable to breathe."


Next question?

EDIT: These products are along the lines of the usage I generally need in the woods, an "Emergency Cutting Tool", although an open blade is certainly nice at times.

dave.m said:

Compass? In NH? For trail hikers? I use a compass regularly for hunting and off-trail backcountry skiing. It's a great skill to have and am glad I'm fairly competent with one. Still. I wonder how many NH rescues have been due to a lack of a compass? How many hikers venture off of maintained trails? I would think that lack of rudimentary map reading skills are more likely to be a problem.

Click to expand...

I will agree that map skills are essential and often lacking. But a compass can help people recognize something as simple as the fact they're making a wrong turn at a trail junction. These are often the same folks who subsequently try to find their way back by continuing to move on the trails or, worse, bushwhacking. I've been on a number of searches where the ability to pick the right direction at the outset would have enabled me to stay home and sleep until dawn's early light instead.

"Compass? In NH? For trail hikers? I use a compass regularly for hunting and off-trail backcountry skiing. It's a great skill to have and am glad I'm fairly competent with one. Still. I wonder how many NH rescues have been due to a lack of a compass?"

You might want to ask mountain 49 (Julie) who was fined $7,000 for not having a compass, among other issues.

Tim Seaver said:

So glad you asked! In my experience, a very sharp single edge razor blade (even a tiny one) is sufficient for most mini-emergencies, and sometimes better than a pocketknife. A habit from my former climbing days, carried in case I needed to cut a sling QUICK.

My most famous and awesome use of my razor blade was to free Mats Roing of his prototype Kahtoola snowshoes, in an awkward place on a precipitous descent of the Flume Slide. I had to cut the neoprene binding completely off, which would have been a tough task for a dull pocketknife.

Click to expand...

Who in their right (or left) mind would carry a dull pocket knife? Sharpening is super easy. Easier than cleaning klister and even easier than changing the rear tube of a bike. I generally keep mine sharp enough to shave the hair on my arm. Even the lightest of them like a Victorinox Classic or Leatherman Micra will handle far tougher cutting jobs than a razor blade. But, to each their own in the game of ounces.