Lost hikers on Franconia Ridge

[king tut]

It sounds like many things went wrong on this expedition. I can't fathom not bringing snowshoes for this trip, just doesn't make a lot of sense. I was skiing at Smuggs in VT on sunday and we got hit with about 3-4 inches of really wet snow in about an hour just before noontime. I got really soaked from the wet snow and then the temperature dropped quickly and things froze up on my clothes/body. I got chilled, but thankfully I could go into the lodge to dry off and warm up. I would gather that the same mini storm hit them as well. I wonder if the storm hit them when they were above treeline? Is Greenleaf Hut locked and closed this time of year? I would be curious to see the timeline of events in when they pushed to the summit and when there was no point of return back to the hut area or back down below shelter. It sounds like it was quite an effort by the SAR crew, hats of to them they did an amazing job. The article also does not mention any cell phone signals/calls from them. Not that I approve of cell phones to save people on mountains, but they can help provide locations of stranded persons.

 

[DougPaul]

There is one survivor of this incident. Might be worth suspending our speculation until he recovers and can tell us what happened.

Doug

 

[forestgnome]

We could station a ranger at every trail head, and have them ascertain everyone is fit and prepared to hike that day.

We could be like BSP, and deny people access to the peaks on days when it is deemed too dangerous.

The goverment should have the right to close the forest when it deems it too dangerous for we little dolts?!

I'd like to think that we are still sufficiently adverse to mommy government in NH. I really don't see a need for such hand-holding of the adult general public just because occassionally people do stupid things. It's just a bad road to travel. Who shall decide if I'm allowed into the woods? Creepy!!!

I understand the thought and the good intentions behind it, but the freedom of adult citizens trumps any benefit of such government control.

One of the worst bummers I've encountered on a hike was when a ranger was stationed on Little Haystack at treeline. He was barking at each person who emerged from below treeline to stay on the trail. It temporarliy made me feel like an unwanted intruder in the king's forest, instead of a free person enjoying our forest.

How many people have started hiking at Pinkham Notch to the ravines and walked right past a wealth of info, including current weather forecasts and avalanche danger postings and, despite having what the government would consider adequate gear, hiked right into death or injury?

Let's keep New Hampshire free.

 

[w7xman]

First off, my condolances to the family, and best wishes to the surviving party. RIP fellow hiker!


There is some talk about the suddenness of the winds coming on, and this image really shows that:

MWO Conditions Sunday

It was a well forecast change however; the availability of information for planning hikes in the whites has never been better. And honestly, the WMNF, the AMC, The OBS, and forums like this are doing all that they can. We can't and shouldn't control all aspects of the decision making process, and I certainly value a spirit of adventure. There is risk in all that we do, and accidents will happen even to the most prepared.

With the increasing popularity of winter hiking and peak bagging, I think that the incidence numbers are appreciably low, and many organizations can celebrate that!

 

[rocket21]

The goverment should have the right to close the forest when it deems it too dangerous for we little dolts?!

I'd like to think that we are still sufficiently adverse to mommy government in NH. I really don't see a need for such hand-holding of the adult general public just because occassionally people do stupid things. It's just a bad road to travel. Who shall decide if I'm allowed into the woods? Creepy!!!

I understand the thought and the good intentions behind it, but the freedom of adult citizens trumps any benefit of such government control.
...
Let's keep New Hampshire free.

Great points. Who knows if there's been a study done, but I'd venture a guess that there's more of a risk associated with people driving to (or from) these hikes in bad weather than actually hiking in it.

 

[CaptCaper]

I don't believe they should regulate but should make the victim's pay for the rescue operations and to the rescuers involved just as the Coast Guard is now doing to boaters. The fish and game is overburdened now. My trail master sled buddy is screaming their using the snowmobile money for these operations. Hikers don't contribute to the Fish And Game much at all if any he say's.

 

[king tut]

Great points. Who knows if there's been a study done, but I'd venture a guess that there's more of a risk associated with people driving to (or from) these hikes in bad weather than actually hiking in it.

I agree with this line of (thinking) reality. In the winter, it is normal to see one driving fatality per week in your respective state. Survival is all based on statistics and preparation. It appears they were not prepared for the conditions, but we'll wait and see what the survivor has to say. Maybe the facts were not reported correctly by the newspapers, but they probably were.

I am not sure what is worse, the fellow that brought his friend up for a Presi traverse in well sub below 0 temps for him to freeze to death or going up a major peak without snowshoes, etc. I could care less about people doing things that are life threatening to themselves, but when you involve SAR crews to endanger themselves to save ill prepared people, I think that's when you cross the line. I am all for survival of the fittest, I just don't agree with survival of those trying to save the non-fittest. Just like junkies dying to get a high, i don't support the destruction and death of those trying to save the junkies. A life lesson I have lived by is, "never get yourself into something that you can't get out of".

 

[DougPaul]

I don't believe they should regulate but should make the victim's pay for the rescue operations

This is the situation in the European Alps--rescue is usually done by professional guides who tend to view it as part of business and expect to be paid. Membership in many of the national mountaineering organizations includes rescue insurance (as does membership in the American Alpine Club).

Doug

EDIT: changed from "Europe" to the "the European Alps"

 

[una_dogger]

This is such a tragic story. Can't fault them for any thing they did or didn't do--seems such a worthless waste of energy, one has paid with thier life and the other clings delicately to his own--best to derive from this the grave consequences of facing the harshness of winter conditions. I still consider myself a novice in winter, and perhaps I always will. Its the stark reality of the power of winter against as Mavs framed "our human frailty" that keeps me humble to Winter, and consciously chosing *not* push beyond limits that I would in the other seasons.

Reading “Our Mountain Trips”
it was interesting to see that at shelters one could expect to find cooking pots, etc. and usually firewood cut and stacked by the last person, with the idea that if you use it you cut and stack more for the next person. Times change.

I'm reading it now and its full of beautiful ethics, reminds me of why I got into hiking in the first place and some of the traditions that those who gave me my start handed down to me. A must read, so very grounding. Thier lives and their approach to nature bear an authenticity that seems at times, to me, lost in our high tech world. Often I've thought I should have been born 100 years ago, feel that my ethics and my approach to certain aspects of my life and how I chose to live it are more in step with those times.

Godspeed to the spirit that left the body on Little Haystack, prayers to the families and the surviving hiker.

 

[evilhanz]

I can't fathom not bringing snowshoes for this trip, just doesn't make a lot of sense.

Hearing about the lack of snowshoes reminded me of a hike I took this past December up Lafayette after a significant snowfall. We had been following another group who were postholing all the way up the mountain, chewing trail the whole way. It was a pain in the neck to clean up after them on our snowshoes. When we finally caught up with them they lambasted us for "hiking up in our easy chairs". They characterized themselves as "traditionalists" and refused to wear snowshoes or synthetics. It's one thing to leave the snowshoes in the trunk out of simple laziness or carelessness, but it's quite another to adopt a philosophy of being deliberately ill-equipped.

 

[dundare]

Sad to hear this news - I read the story and my heart sank. The first thing I thought of was I hope it was no one from VFTT.

Its a long way from those kind of conditions down here in NC, but I am missing the whites especially at this time of year.

 

[Fisher Cat]

Let's keep New Hampshire free.

Amen to that, people from New Hampshire (and many other mountainous states) have a unique relationship with the land. Its an opportunity everyone has where they live or recreate or protect. Keep it that way!

 

[NewHampshire]

Well, this is turning into an interesting disucssion. Inevitably it turned to an interesting comparison of how the Whites and Baxter handle things. Which is the right way to do things is not an easy answer, and what works for Baxter does not necessarily work for the Whites. I guess Baxter has a luxury in remoteness, smaller size and fewer hiking traisl, so its easier for personell to police the Park and stop anyone from going up. The Whites have a lot of the opposite that would make enforcing a Baxter style set of rules nearly impossible. The Whites are situated closer to larger populations, has an incredily higher number of hiking trails and its spread over many thousands of acres. It would be virtually impossible for the Forest Service to stop or interview every potential hiker heading out for the day....especially not on the current budget the government has set for it. I guess there is little we can do different than we are now. Perhaps kicking up the general education programs like HikeSafe, etc. is one thing. But if you think about it in the end, despite the constant reports of rescues in the Whites its really not that bad. If you look at a typical section of populated land the same relative size as the Whites you would find a vastly higher number of accidents. Lets face it, stupid people are evrywhere, and that includes the woods, and inevitably these people are at a higher possibility of disaster. Then there are the just plain old freak accidents happening. Even though our past time has some rather high potential for disaster the accidents remain surprisingly moderate. I guess what this all means is that the best thing we can do is to keep supporting our SAR folk, educate, and lend a hand whenever we can. And in this we get to keep the rather free use of the land that Baxter does not necessarily have.

Brian

 

[sardog1]

This is the situation in Europe--rescue is usually done by professional guides who tend to view it as part of business and expect to be paid. Membership in many of the national mountaineering organizations includes rescue insurance (as does membership in the American Alpine Club).

Doug

This is the situation in parts of Europe (and there are many skilled volunteers involved there as well as the paid guides.) Britain and Scandinavia operate on a model very similar to the U.S. -- law enforcement calls the shots, highly trained volunteers do most of the heavy lifting (the pun is intended), and the military chips in with the choppers.

 

[rocket21]

This is the situation in Europe--rescue is usually done by professional guides who tend to view it as part of business and expect to be paid. Membership in many of the national mountaineering organizations includes rescue insurance (as does membership in the American Alpine Club).

Doug

We're also seeing lost skiers having to pay for their rescue expenses when they ski out of bounds - it'll probably only be a matter of time until this becomes the norm for hikers too. If there's a cost involved, one can make a strong argument for the victim paying for it.

 

[Grandaddy]

If there's a cost involved, one can make a strong argument for the victim paying for it.

This should be true unless there is strong evidence showing that an accident was not caused negligence (no headlamps, lack of gear, failure to heed weather report, etc.) True accidents occur to those who are well prepared.

Unconditionally requiring payment for services may actually cause people to take desperate measures to avoid calling for help. I imagine a pretty penny could be charged for use of a Blackhawk!

IMO, when one ventures into the woods, your on your own! One cannot expect there to be a safety net in case trouble arises. It should be the responsibility of the hiker to use readily available weather information to help make the best decisions. With all of that said, it seems that SAR has been highly successful at making saves in the high country, and should be commended for there efforts. If a hiker does not use good judgement, these fine people can take on alot of risk...this needs to be factored in to that final decision on wether to go on or turn around.

 

[DougPaul]

This is the situation in parts of Europe (and there are many skilled volunteers involved there as well as the paid guides.) Britain and Scandinavia operate on a model very similar to the U.S. -- law enforcement calls the shots, highly trained volunteers do most of the heavy lifting (the pun is intended), and the military chips in with the choppers.

Thanks for the correction. I was thinking of the Alps--I should have been more specific.


Just to add fuel to the fire, you don't pay for the fire department if your house catches on fire or for the police if you need their services. Both models are in use.

Doug

 

[Lawn Sale]

As to the reimbursement, I think it's a moot point. I know if I were rescued, I'd certainly be glad to pay. If not, then that is on the conscience of the survivor, who I also think has been through enough. I cannot imagine his pain when he awakens, and I hope he seeks help.

My first thought is a harsh one, that Darwinism is alive and well. But, having compassion I am saddened by the needless loss of another hiker. I cannot help but wonder, with current mindsets, if the "someone will be there to bail me out" mantra had a play in the aforementioned tragedy. I know firsthand how quickly the weather can change on that ridge, and how glad that I was well prepared.

Yes, it's easy to speculate on what happened, but the facts as they are tell quite a story.

 

[Lawn Sale]

Just to add fuel to the fire, you don't pay for the fire department if your house catches on fire or for the police if you need their services. Both models are in use.

Doug

No, but they are paid for through our taxes. Are you suggesting S&R should be paid for through taxes? If so, whose?

 

[DougPaul]

No, but they are paid for through our taxes. Are you suggesting S&R should be paid for through taxes? If so, whose?

I'm not advocating either approach. I'm just noting that some other (non-mountaineering) emergency services use a public funding model.

Doug