Solo hiking above treeline in winter

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Pig Pen said:
Quite a few contributors state that they use extra caution when hiking alone. I guess the moral is that if you want to ignore the weather and use bad judgement then make sure that you hike with a group.

I'm assuming you're really not serious...but, here's an example just to clarify:

My decision making for one mountain -- two different routes. Solo, a long in and out to avoid high water. With a buddy, a shorter, easier route because I had someone to make sure I didn't slip in and drown at a particularly tough water crossing. Hence the comment about extra caution. It's stuff like that.

I've been fortunate only to have minor accidents so far, but obviously one (slipping in a brook and cracking the back of my head while solo) have change my tune. Others (falling, spraining my knee and breaking my tailbone) have made me rethink how far I want to be from the trailhead by myself.

I solo. A lot. And I choose days that fewer people are out there. Oh, and let's not forget night hiking to boot. On those trips, I make damn certain I'm thinking straight and prepared to take care on myself. And that is NOT to say I don't do the same with group.

My way of looking at it is that it's going to bite, HARD, if I get badly hurt solo. I'd much rather have help. So, there are things I'll do alone and trips I put off until I have company. Personal choice, but what I consider to be reasonable thinking.
 
I'm kind of surprised that nobody has mentioned this before--I just went back an re-read the thread (quickly) to check.

There are several presumptions of rescue/aid/help made here, in the vein of "I would hike solo, but only on a popular trail where I know someone will come along who can help."

My question (comment?) is along the lines of "Isn't that a dangerous presumption?"

If Pig Pen, or Darren, or Tim is hiking solo, and get hurt, and is lying there in danger, is the next person to happen along obligated to help? Morally, perhaps, but legally? I would think good Samaritan laws would protect the helper.

If I do stop to help, am I not now putting myself in greater danger? Wouldn't I be taking a bigger risk to myself now that someone else's life (potentially) depends on me? And if I am now late for a checkin, what about the strain and worry that puts on my family?

Pete_Hickey said:
I will not hike with the expatation that if something happens to me--even if it is not due to stupidity--(EG I get hit by a meteorite) --I can get rescued.

Sn1t happens all the time. If it happens to me, so be it.

Since I agree with this in principle, and I am unwilling to die because of it, I wouldn't put myself in that situation. But at the same time, by simply being out there, even in a group, YOU (YOU=arbitrary solo hiker) might be putting ME in that situation. I.e., I may have to become a solo hiker to go get you help.

Tim
 
bikehikeskifish said:
There are several presumptions of rescue/aid/help made here, in the vein of "I would hike solo, but only on a popular trail where I know someone will come along who can help."
Another issue is how competent is the help... Some helpers are worse than none.

When I presided at an XC skiing accident scene (a knee injury to one of my party), my biggest problems were crowd control and refusing certain offers of help. On the other hand, a soloist was a big help and a pair who carried out an accident report form to a nearby ski patrol. (We had the victim stabilized and most of the way out before the ski patrol appeared.)

BTW, an accident report form (and a pencil) can be very handy things to have if one wants to send a message out for help...

Doug
 
bikehikeskifish said:
I'm kind of surprised that nobody has mentioned this before--I just went back an re-read the thread (quickly) to check.

There are several presumptions of rescue/aid/help made here, in the vein of "I would hike solo, but only on a popular trail where I know someone will come along who can help."
This idea was put to the extreme test a while back on Everest. Many people passed by a dying climber, because they judged that simply to stop and help would endanger their life!

If I was to encounter an injured hiker, I would try to help him/her, but only to the point that it did not endanger my own welfare. If I had to, I would leave and go summon more expert assistance.

I would expect others to try to help me, but again, I do not DEPEND on them being 5 minutes behind me on the trail. But at the same time, things like that do run thru my mind when deciding if I will attempt a certain hike.
 
Tom Rankin said:
Winter Night Solo Above Tree Line Hiking! :eek: :D
...in a blizzard on a Uni-Cycle while reciting Shakespeare...

Kevin Rooney said:
In other words - the impact that an injury or death would have on our family/friends/work is an important, and variable, factor as we age.
If I die in the woods I need a partner to drag my sorry butt out so my wife and kids can collect the insurance. How pi$$ed would my wife be if she thought I just took off with some Hikerett. :eek:

sierra said:
Unless you're willing to risk it all in any endeavor you may choose in life ( not just climbing) your results will equal your level of commitment.
I'm a bit offended at the implication that I can't be as good a hiker or get as much out of hiking if I'm not prepared to die for it, but I understand the point.

Artex said:
Hike your own hike.
Amen
 
Last edited:
Tom Rankin said:
This idea was put to the extreme test a while back on Everest. Many people passed by a dying climber, because they judged that simply to stop and help would endanger their life!
One of the priciples of rescue is not to take foolish risks yourself. (What is worse than one victim? Two victims...)

This is another judgement call. Also that was above 8000 meters--which brings in a whole new set of factors which do not apply to the NE. Any attempt to rescue someone from up there brings significant risk to the rescuer--perhaps a little like trying to rescue someone in 100+ mph freezing rain in the NE with shelter far away.

When one goes above 8000 meters, one has to assume that rescue is unlikely.

Doug
 
Last edited:
DougPaul said:
One of the priciples of rescue is not to take foolish risks yourself. (What is worse than one victim? Two victims...)

This is another judgement call. Also that was above 8000 meters--which brings in a whole new set of factors which do not apply to the NE. Any attempt to rescue someone from up there brings significant risk to the rescuer--perhaps a little like trying to rescue someone in 100+ mph freezing rain in the NE with shelter far away.

When one goes above 8000 meters, one has to assume that rescue is unlikely.

Doug

Remember Lincoln Hall ..............
 
Few people start their hiking career with the goal of hiking solo above tree-linein the winter. Most of us begin as kids or young people and got our 1st summits wearing jeans and sneakers. We didnt know.

With time, we gained experience and an appreciation of our own mortality and our responsibility to others (family,friends,employer etc). But, we werent satisfied with the "safe" route.

As I have morphed from occasional hiker to serious hiker (dont quite have the commitment that sierra does to call myself a professional hiker), I have bought better gear. I have bought more gear. I have associated with people with greater experience and training than I. I have gotten training myself. I even read hiking bulletin boards.

Winter hiking is fairly new to me and I have limited above tree-line experience. But what I have learned while climbing up thru the trees is that when its cold,white and windy I need to bring my "A" game,nothing less.

Danger, on a mountainside in winter, doesnt have little plastic signs like a wet floor in a supermarket. It happens while doing the simple little things.

For instance, while climbing Ammo, I stepped on what appeared to be a small snowdrift. My leg fell thru to a 8' hole between two buried boulders.Luckily, my huge snowshoes caught first or it would have been broken leg time. Or another time climbing Giant when another climber slid down the ice directly into me and went crampon 1st into my inner thigh,puncturing my pants but just missing the femoral artery. These things happen. Its just stuff. Things can go wrong,whether solo or in a group.

As for mathematical equations to determine risk/solo vs. safety/group...get real people,that just doesnt compute. It makes me think of watching the kids down at the terrain parks: I didnt get hurt too bad when I did that double backflip on the half pipe....I'll add a full twist next time!!
 
DougPaul said:
Sorry, as an engineer, I disagree.

Mathematically, risk = probability_of_accident * cost_of_accident.

Soloing can reduce the probability of specific accidents or increase it depending upon the details.

Similarly, soloing can reduce or increase the cost of specific accidents depending upon the details.

Even if we had adequate data to estimate the probabilities and costs, the numbers would be for the average hiker/mountaineer. IMO, many of us deviate significantly from average on both.

No, actually then we agree. You can have all the equations you want, but if you have no data to put into them, then you have no results. You have no data. You have no results. The math is therefore out the window.

- darren
 
IMHO all the statistics in the world make little difference if you are the one freezing to death on the Rockpile. You will be the statistic!
To some it is worth the risk. This is not a bad thing. We all do what we are called to do.
AS I read all these posts, I thought of the day I mentioned to my physical therapist, who is an outdoor type and at one time lived in Alaska, that Doug Coombs had died in terrible mountaineering accident. He replied "that's a shame but it was inevitable . He took a lot of risk." End of conversation. Oh well.
Doug obviously thought it was worth it even though my PT was not impressed. So do all the big wall climbers . Why not the MT. W. winter soloists?
"Life on the edge" is exhilirating providing of course that you don't go "over the edge", but many are up to the challenge.
Personally I would rather not be memorialized on the death board in the Observatory. As I age my desire for fame is waning and I think that might be a good thing.
It's a real education to see all the different thoughts on this subject. Hopefully it will be helpful to the newbies.
 
Tom Rankin said:
This idea was put to the extreme test a while back on Everest. Many people passed by a dying climber, because they judged that simply to stop and help would endanger their life!
Actually, that's not really true. When most people past by him either they didn't see him or thought he was the body of a climber who had died years earlier (he was essentially on top of the body). In the following morning when people realized what had happened folks who were capable of operating up there spent hours with him trying to help. Lincoln Hall and Beck Weathers were exceptions, but important ones. With a large, organized team of experienced, fresh climbers, reasonable weather, a strong will to live, and amazing luck, just about anything is possible.

I solo hike, but rarely in winter. I'm not comfortable with the smaller margin of error. In particular, I've gotten hypothermic and had others in my group spot it. They got me to eat, drink, and put on layers when I wasn't thinking all that clearly. It's can be a subtle transition into hypothermia and without outside intervention hard to spot yourself.

-dave-
 
I get the feeling there are a bunch of extroverts telling introverts what their safety standards are. We generally see the world differently. While extroverts may find strength and safety in a group, and could find hiking alone boring. Many introverts draw strength from within, and like the solitude of hiking alone. It doesn’t mean introverts and extroverts can not get strength or feel safety the same or both ways, it just seems I am seeing a pattern here.

I do think winter hiking is more dangerous, and all that extra gear you have to carry blows too. (But buying gear is always fun.) The views totally rock in the winter though.

Going above tree line for an extended period is definitely more dangerous, as wind chill and white outs could cause havoc. The last time I climbed Washington & Monroe in winter, it was probably in 30 degree weather, perfectly clear, and I really couldn’t feel a wind at all. To some this may have been reckless above tree line hiking. To me these were trails I have done before under clear skies and no wind. I do pick and choose the days when I go above tree line for the best days possible.

I kind of liken this situation to bushwhacking. To some going off the trail in the first place is risky, and not in a group even riskier. To me an early start, knowing as much as you can (weather, topography, blah blah blah.), and confidence in your ability and knowledge, will give me a day of new and interesting hiking. If I break my leg, well then it will be more interesting in the crappy way. If I make it out I’ve got a story and a limp, and if I don’t make it out Post’r Boy will find me eventually. Hell he found one on my Spongebob's on Vose Spur and something else on Kangamangus.

I will continue to hike mostly by myself as safely and with much wisdom as I can. (Which by my SAT scores, will mean I will be eaten by Canadian Jays soon.)
 
Last edited:
David Metsky said:
Lincoln Hall and Beck Weathers were exceptions, but important ones. With a large, organized team of experienced, fresh climbers, reasonable weather, a strong will to live, and amazing luck, just about anything is possible.
-dave-

Well put and thanks for summing it up.
 
David Metsky said:
... It's can be a subtle transition into hypothermia and without outside intervention hard to spot yourself.
This a good point and can't be emphasized enough. It's difficult to spot symptons of hypothermia in yourself without being extra vigilant. In the early stages it's said that people get the 'Umbles' - Stumble, Mumble, Grumble, etc. If you're solo hiking it's unlikely you're aware of mumbling or grumbling (unless you do lots of talking to yourself) but if you're vigilant - you will be aware of stumbling. So - if you find yourself stumbling more than usual on a solo hike - don't blow it off. Stop immediately - put on more clothes, drink something warm, eat some sugar - and get the hell off the mountain.

Another point - young people in their teens sometimes accompany parents, older siblings/friends into the mountains in winter - keep an extra sharp eye on them. Their bodies are still growing and heat regulation mechanisms are not mature yet. This was brought home to me a few years ago when a father and son accompanied me and some friends on a Tom/Field/Willey hike in late December of 2002. It was a miserable day - cold, windy, overcast, spitting snow - and as we were slogging along the slight ridge between Tom and Field we were aware of the wind. When we made Field one of the group noticed that the young man (who had left his coat partially open as he was hot slogging the last 1/2 mile) had become hypothermic and was beginning to stagger. We took the father aside, made him aware of the problem, did our best not to alarm him, and then headed down as rapidly as we could for about 1/2 mile to a sheltered spot. Within a short period of time of eating and drinking the young fellow as fine - kids can go sour in a hurry but then bounce back just a quickly - and we all breathed a huge sigh of relief. Everyone learned alot that day -
 
solo hiking

By Kevin Rooney
So - if you find yourself stumbling more than usual on a solo hike - don't blow it off. Stop immediately - put on more clothes, drink something warm, eat some sugar - and get the hell off the mountain.

Excellent advice, thanks... its why reading those treads are so useful ... theres always (well, almost always) good informations amongst the different points of views...
 
Rainier accident

Another hypothermia story. Last spring, two climbers were going up Rainier-not particularly technical, from what I read. They had all the right gear, but one was inexperienced. The weather closed in on them after leaving one of the lower huts. They got lost in a whiteout and were found next to their packs with some of their gear out. Unfortunately, they were both dead from exposure. They were about 15-20 minutes from shelter, but the prevailing theory is that they didn't realize until it was too late that they were getting hypothermic and didn't get their foul weather gear on in time.

Here's a pretty detailed news account-
Rescue workers used a helicopter yesterday to recover the bodies of two hikers who possibly became lost and later died in a severe snowstorm on Mount Rainier over the weekend.

The bodies of Tim Stark, 57, of Lakewood and Greg Stark, 27, of Issaquah were discovered Monday afternoon at about 8,000 feet during an afternoon helicopter flyover to search for them. The men had been reported missing that morning after they hadn't returned from a weekend hike.

The powerful storm dumped 2 feet of snow on the mountain in five hours Saturday afternoon and evening and then continued off and on through Sunday.

"It was as bad as it gets," said Mike Gauthier, head climbing ranger at Mount Rainier National Park, who hiked down with a group to the Paradise Ranger Station from Camp Muir during the blizzard. "It was epic conditions. I had to pay attention every step of the way."

Tim Stark was a retired United Airlines 777 pilot. Greg, who was Tim's nephew, worked as a Web-computing specialist for the Northwest Center for Public Health Practice at the University of Washington. They were the first two deaths on the 14,411-foot mountain this year. Five climbers died on Rainier in 2004.

The men had set out at noon Saturday, apparently intending to hike up the Paradise Glacier to Camp Muir for an overnight stay, according to preliminary accident information. The storm hit about 4 p.m.

Gauthier said he saw the pair at 4:15 on their way up to the high mountain camp. "They were prepared for an overnight stay," he said. "They followed us up for a portion of the hike. We were walking into the storm."

Gauthier said he noticed that the men both wore cotton pants -- Greg's were knee-length shorts. Outdoors experts generally advise climbers and hikers to shun cotton clothing, which quickly loses warmth when wet. The pair didn't match the pace of Gauthier's group.

After about 90 minutes at Muir, Gauthier began to take his group back down the mountain. Visibility was so limited that they used a Global Positioning System device to help guide them. On the way down, they ran into a group of hikers lost in the storm. "We got them back on track and continued down," he said.


They didn't see the Starks.

On Monday, rangers spotted the men's bodies about 100 yards apart on the Paradise Glacier east of the Muir Snowfield, about 200 yards from one of the most popular trails in the park. They were found face up in the same clothes they wore Saturday.

Their headlamps remained on.

Gauthier speculated that the men never made it all the way to Muir, more than 10,000 feet up. They probably got lost, he said, and wandered around in the snow as hypothermia set in when the temperature dipped into the low 20s.

Climbing rangers said it appeared that the pair might have tried to set up their tent because rangers found it packed inside a backpack but laced with snow. The rest of the items in their packs, such as sleeping bags, extra clothes and a stove, were dry.

"The wind was howling, so they might have tried to set up the tent and gave up," Gauthier said. "At about 10 p.m., I got a call from a ranger at the Camp Muir cabin who said the wind was blowing so hard that snow was coming through cracks in the walls."

The men, he said, probably wandered around until they "ran out of gas and sat down."

They weren't the only hikers lost on the mountain that night. A pair of hikers caught in the same storm at 6,000 feet managed to safely bivouac overnight.

By yesterday morning, family members had arrived at the Paradise Ranger Station. They declined to speak with reporters. Greg's co-workers at the university were sent home early yesterday, a school spokeswoman said.

The younger Stark was born in Royal City in Grant County -- a fact that he was proud of and where his parents remained -- and he graduated from Central Washington University, said a close friend, Bryan Chee.

"He was an avid outdoorsman, mostly a fly fisherman," said Chee, 35, who worked with Greg for five years. "It's devastating. I'm telling you, this guy had no enemies. Everyone liked him."

Chee said he was surprised that Greg was on Rainier. "I never knew him to do any mountaineering. But he loved the outdoors."

Family members told Gauthier that Tim Stark had camped overnight at Muir five or six times before.

"It's just sad," Gauthier said. "It can be a rough place when the weather turns south."
 
Last edited:
darren said:
No, actually then we agree. You can have all the equations you want, but if you have no data to put into them, then you have no results. You have no data. You have no results. The math is therefore out the window.
You are welcome to your opinion, but I do not share it. The equation risk = probability_of_accident * cost_of_accident gives one relationships that can be used qualitatively, even without exact numbers.

For instance, the following reduce ones risk because:
* A first-aid kit can reduce the cost of an accident.
* Detouring around an avalanche path reduces the probability of an accident
* Extra insulation can both lower the probability and cost of a thermal accident.
* Skiers generally ski avalanche chutes one at a time, so that only one will get caught if the chute avalanches, a reduction in cost.
* Technical climbers use a rope and protection, not to reduce the probability of a fall, but to reduce the cost. (5th class climbing.)

Sure, accurate data would be nice, but one can still reach useful conclusions with qualtative data and qualtative results. The math is consistent with lower risk practice.

FWIW, the insurance industry estimates (or guesses) the probabilities as best they can, places dollar values on the costs (ie their payouts) and uses the computed risk (plus some profit, of course) to set your insurance premiums. They also have the luxury of averaging over a large number of participants, unlike the individual customers for whom the accident is an all-or-nothing event.

Doug
 
A couple of things that this story from Rainer bring to my mind. I am not trying to jump to any conclusions about these poor men on Rainer. It is just that this story makes me think about a few things with respect to being above tree line in the Presidentials. The hike from Paradise to Muir is largely above treeline so it is easy to get lost in poor conditions just like in the presi's above the treeline. A map and compass/gps and the skill to use them is critical. Recognizing the signs of hypothermia in yourself and in your partners is also very important. The right gear is also important. As shown in this news story: Cotton Kills.

The one last thing I do, although I think this has more to do with leading on rock and ice is to make sure my wife pays the insurance premiums. :eek:
 
Top