Taking kids into Tuckerman Ravine in bad weather

[Fisher Cat]

Rats, I'm disappointed. What a great offer was my initial reaction. I thought you were looking for kids to take into Tucks during bad weather, in which case I know a few..........

As for the real intention of the thread: As a parent, we know best our childs abilities and limitations, though at times they surprise even us in what they can, or can't, do. When I only have to account for myself its one story, but as a general rule, especially with younger ones and novice hikers when it comes to weather, if I don't want to risk myself, I certainly won't expose someone else to it.
My childhood would have been a tragedy if my parents didn't allow me the freedom in the mountains and woods commiserate with my ability and maturity. That only applies to the things they know we were doing. Not the other stuff...the stuff that gives your mom a migraine.....when you finally spill it..........after all the years.............at a restaurant, say like, the Green Dragon in Littleton........long time ago.

 

[Maddy]

Give me a break. Conditions were at worst moderate. Glad you weren't my parent .
-Dr. Wu

I don't think the topic here is which one of us should be the others parent!

It appears that there are two schools of thought on that.

1. Let the parents of the children decide on what conditions are dangerous (in their judgment) and what conditions are not dangerous (in their judgment).

2. We can decide for them from the comfort of our armchair, suggesting tragic outcomes based on their supposed stupidity to go out in conditions that we think are unsafe (conditions that we can also magically judge from aforementioned armchair of infinite wisdom). And you get extra points for "Finger Wagging With Authority"

I think the folks posting all have a fair amount of experience with above treeline travel in a variety of conditions.YES, and I am included in that mix. I suspect that most of our "wisdom" might have been acquired from experience and not from our "armchairs".
As usual we have two "finger wagging authorities", those who say "got for it" , and those who say "Stop. Maybe we should use a little more caution today."
We share different points of view and our reasons why.
Ultimately, parents, right of wrong, will usually make the decision for what they consider safe for their children based on their own life experience.
I don't think anyone here is professing to know all the answers. Matti shared his observations and concerns and asked for input on the topic.
We all have a right to express our thoughts, opinions and observations without being insulted.
I love reading the trip reports by Trish and Alex, and others who do incredible hikes with their young ones in the Whites. Safety always seems to be their first concern and I know they would not do anything to knowingly
endanger their children.
I have hiked up to HOJO's on many more than one occasion in awesome winter weather with young teens but saved the headwall for safer conditions. Two of them are now avid mountaineers, extreme skiers, rock and ice climbers. RESPECT YES! WHIMPS NO!

 

[slowmo68]

I have never brought my daughter to ski Tucks but if I did I think the conditions would have to be right (we will do it though . There is no worse feeling than realizing that you have put your child in a bad spot. I once made a mistake at Sunday River when the Whitecap chairlift was closed, we went up another chair (Lock) and hiked up the other side of Whitecap to ski down White Heat. White Heat is a very steep slope(not quite as steep as Tucks) and was fine at first and then sheer ice, that was why the lift was closed. It was too late by the time we proceeded 300 yds down . I knew I made a bad decision and what a terrible feeling I had in my gut. I did get her down but had we fallen we would have slid a long ways at a high rate of speed. I guess these parents need to make the decision and take the consequences if something goes wrong. OK now I'm ready for the bashing.

 

[David Metsky]

<mod hat>Leave personal attacks and insults off this forum</mod hat>

We can pontificate all we want here on this message board. But we (except for Mattl) weren't there, we don't know the kids, and we don't know the parents, so anything we say is a lot of handwaving and assumptions. Some of it may be interesting and educational, but don't make the mistake of assuming we know the facts.

 

[Tim Seaver]

I think the folks posting all have a fair amount of experience with above treeline travel in a variety of conditions.YES, and I am included in that mix. I suspect that most of our "wisdom" might have been acquired from experience and not from our "armchairs".

No argument there - I am not suggesting that any of the Grizzled Veterans of VFTT don't have experience, when I speak of the "armchair", I am talking about people who try to make a judgment about conditions from afar, for other people, who may have different standards as to what constitutes danger.

As usual we have two "finger wagging authorities", those who say "got for it" , and those who say "Stop. Maybe we should use a little more caution today."

Characterizing the idea of granting people freedom to make their own safety decisions in the backcountry as authoritarian is a bit of a stretch, don't you think? On the other hand, saying "stop" is pretty much a definitive act of authority.

We all have a right to express our thoughts, opinions and observations without being insulted.

I referred only to schools of thought. My apologies if you felt that was aimed at you personally. May the discussion continue in a lively yet respectful fashion!

 

[nietzschescat]

I've only hiked up Mt.Washington once. I was 18. I wore sneakers and jeans and a cotton sweatshirt. It was Memorial Day weekend and it was beautiful weather, but there was snow up top and people were skiing. My three distinct memories were of people wearing ski boots and carrying skis up the mountain, the sign memorializing people who had died in a summer time snow storm, and meeting a man who was in his 70's near the summit which seemed ancient to me at the time.

My experience hiking with my children has been that they will tell me very quickly when they are uncomfortable and it no longer becomes fun for anyone. My hike today with my 25 year old daughter ended because of heavy rain that she just couldn't tolerate, so we turned around.

 

[bcskier]

Been there, done that, survived

My first experiences skiing the ravine started at 10 years old. Not sure why my dad wanted me to try it. The first time up I wasn't really enjoying myself having never before tried to ski anything that steep, but looking back on it, I'm grateful he did.

I agree with those who say it's the parents' call. Let's be slow to judge those who may not limit themselves to the boundaries of another person's level of comfort.

 

[The Hikers]

My Kids scared the ------ out of me when we hiked high mountains. Always running to the cliff edge, etc. Come to think of it, the dog scared me , too: I always thought she might chase that squirrel or bird right off the cliff.
But the kids , and the dog, were quite comfortable with their evaluation of their safety, which they seemed to know best .
Yes, on one windy day the kids refused to summit Cocorua, which I honored.

I guess as adults it is hard for us to evaluate the comfort zone of kids.

 

[TrishandAlex]

I've enjoyed reading this thread, for the most part. Found myself cheering at some posts and wincing at others.

My general feelings -- unless you have been raising the individual kid, you (general you) are incapable of judging what said kid is capable of.

Also, no one can use their own kid as a measure of what other kids the same age can or cannot do. Kids are individuals.

I do think that the vast majority of kids are much tougher than we give them credit for...IF they haven't been raised on TV/video games and taught to sit passively for hours on end...

 

[Dave Bear]

It seems pretty obvious that we can't blanket individuals of society with what we believe are the "correct" standards. This applies to people of any age,physical or mental ability. The original intent of this thread is to solicit opinion and seems founded on care and concern for a more dependent portion of society that relies on adults for guidance. The problem with forming broad and general opinions or begging the question is that eventually we may come to realize more restriction from these perceptions. I don't believe any of us want to see signs in the future saying Tucks is for people between these X and Y ages, between X and Y weights, of a certain height, or fitting all the criteria for a wild roller coaster ride. Hard to imagine such limits but given time and a strong enough perception completely plausible.

My children range from near twenty to early teens of varying abilities and stamina. Any activity with them is an evolution of changing variables dependent on observation and communication without controlling anyones enjoyment. If your kids aren't honest with you about how they are doing or feel then no they probably shouldn't be in fierce weather conditions with you. If they are comfortable and understand the gravity of what they are doing they are very likely enjoying it. Gradual tastes of natures fury with guidance are part of growing to love the outdoors and not retreating to the confines. Its about fun and appreciation and can strengthen bonds between family and children with nature.

I grew up working in the woods and "hiking" from tree to tree in some unforgivable conditions but easily came to love all of it. Not everyones cup of tea but better to enjoy what you do and share, then critique all and not allow for the individual! Bet a nice pot of cider or hot chocolate would have been well received on the shelter porch by those children and their parents!

 

[mavs00]

It appears that there are two schools of thought on that.

1. Let the parents of the children decide on what conditions are dangerous (in their judgment) and what conditions are not dangerous (in their judgment).

2. We can decide for them from the comfort of our armchair, suggesting tragic outcomes based on their supposed stupidity to go out in conditions that we think are unsafe (conditions that we can also magically judge from aforementioned armchair of infinite wisdom). And you get extra points for "Finger Wagging With Authority"

What he said.

Consider me a #1, and am actually surprised at how much of the sentiment in this thread amounts to #2

Oh yeah.......... Since we're in NH............. LIVE FREE OR DIE.

 

[smitty77]

Gradual tastes of natures fury with guidance are part of growing to love the outdoors and not retreating to the confines. Its about fun and appreciation and can strengthen bonds between family and children with nature.

Even my wife still looks at me funny when I go hiking in the rain. If I waited for perfect days to partake in outdoor enjoyment, I'd be doing a lot less of it. This is a philosophy I'm trying to instill in my own children: Fun can be had in almost any weather if you are prepared for the conditions and listen to your body.

Smitty

 

[Stan]

Consider me a #1, and am actually surprised at how much of the sentiment in this thread amounts to #2

I vote for # 1, too.

I'll be damned if weather, blackflies or the like cause me to retreat to a hermetically sealed existence and I think it's a big mistake that a generation, or more, is being raised to retreat.

It is the willingness to stick your neck out, and the judgement to know how far, that has brought about all the discovery, innovation and change known to man, whether on land, sea, space or in a lab. The attitude that there is a a low threshold of tolerable risk and that such a threshold is to be defined by someone else is an absurdity which can only lead to subservience and stagnation.

There is, I believe, a connection between this broader philosophical credence and how people raise their children ... and consequently, how they apply their judgement on bringing children to Tuckerman's Ravine.

 

[Tim Seaver]

!

It is the willingness to stick your neck out, and the judgement to know how far, that has brought about all the discovery, innovation and change known to man, whether on land, sea, space or in a lab. The attitude that there is a a low threshold of tolerable risk and that such a threshold is to be defined by someone else is an absurdity which can only lead to subservience and stagnation.

Words to live by.

Nicely put, Stan.

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

It is not so much the weather that worries me but rather the falling ice in the ravines during spring time. Many years ago, I was leading a group of college students into Tucks as part of a May term geology course. I was hanging back with a couple of the slower students on the Little Headwall and told the faster students to wait for me at the rescue cache. Of course, two of them did not stop at the cache and continued up onto the ravine floor. Just as I left the others in an attempt to catch up with the two up above to chew them out, a huge car-size block of ice came down from the right side of the headwall, which of course immediately triggered the infamous "I-CCCCCC-E" hollering from the lunch rock crowd. Unfortunately, one of my two students did not know how to react, stood frozen in his tracks and was nearly decapitated by one of the dozens of smaller head-size blocks of ice created by the impact. He was visibly shaken, having "heard the ice whiz by his ear." It would have been tough to explain his death to his parents, and probably would have been the end of my academic career. So, I do not take students into Tucks in the spring any longer, although one of my more competent students completed a senior thesis project analysizing snow pit stratigraphy in Tucks during the winter of 2007-08; given that he has skied some of the gnarliest and steepest chutes in the world, I figured that he could take care of himself.

 

[sierra]

Without being there and seeing it firsthand its hard to second guess the situation.Maybe these kids will learn to be in the mountains and how to travel the mountains safely, I mean how better to learn then being there and doing it. To be frank, one of my least favorite aspects of this board and many others is the quickness of posters to assume they know whats right and wrong about many situations they hear about or see for that matter. I promise you if I described my approach to mountaineering, my rules and creed,there would be 5 pages of people slamming how I climb. That being said, this is america people have a right to live thier way, you might be more protective then someone else, but will your kids be stronger in the end?

 

[Mac]

Kids in Ravine

A number of years ago, I took my nine year old son into the ravine. That being said, I had a pretty good idea of his capabilities and of mine, but bear in mind that this was a one to one ratio of adult supervising child. I'm not sure I would be comfortable with supervising more than one child at that age level in the ravine.

 

[Mike P.]

Dr. D. hit my thought exactly. Falling ice would be more of a concern for me.

Kids don't run that fast & proably more likely to freeze upon seeing a car size piece of ice careening down the hill in their general direction. (yes, you'd hope the parent was real close by but not many 11 year olds like their hands held my mommy & daddy)

 

[TrishandAlex]

As hikers, I think we should be able to debate whether or not we feel something is appropriate or not and to list our reasons why we believe as we do.

There are two sides to every story.This is not about trying to judge others or convince them that our way is the only way.

Maddy, I created an indentation in your above statement, to emphasize a point.

The problem is, debating what is best for someone else's kid, without knowing experience, maturity level, etc. of the kids and the parents, is useless. It leads all too quickly to the second paragraph in the above quote. People do indeed get judged, and often times quite unfairly.

I am not saying YOU personally are prone to doing this. I write respectfully. However, I see no use in speculating on whether or not children should be in a particular area under x,y or z conditions.

One simply cannot make a blanket statement about what ALL kids should or shouldn't be doing, period.

If there's an avalanche issue, then of course NO ONE should be out there in a high risk situation, regardless of age.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

...If there's an avalanche issue, then of course NO ONE should be out there in a high risk situation, regardless of age.

Or for that matter, when conditions are posted as Moderate or even Low.

As has been pointed out before - if there was a sign posted on your supermarket that said "Moderate Risk of Being Shot to Death Today" would anyone enter that store? Why do some people climb into moderate risk situations?

But I digress.