(no subject)
So my friend J told me a little while ago that she and her friends were planning on attempting to summit Mt. Rainier sometime. She told me over aim, and I wasn't there, so we didn't talk about it or anything, but I thought it sounded like a fun plan. I didn't know anything about Mt. Rainier, but I figured that it was probably an easy to medium challenge, and with a proper guide would be a good experience.
I started talking with her today, and found out some rather disturbing news.
First she told me that she was a little worried about the experience level of her team. Apparantly though a couple of them talk a good game, their experience is limited to a single mountaineering class that they had taken.
After a few questions I found out that they would not be employing the services of a guide, the team leader would be one of the guys that had taken the class.
At this stage I pointed out that this was dangerous, but after a lengthy discussion I admitted that experience only really mattered if something went wrong, and while it wasn't a good idea I'd probably go ahead with it if it were me, and thought that if she wanted too, she should too. It was marginally dangerous, but the potential for good times probably outweighed the potential danger.
Then I found out a few more things. The first was that one of the reasons that she didn't want to drop out was because without her and her boyfriend (who was just going because he was concerned about her going) the team wouldn't have enough people to go. When I asked why, she said that they wouldn't have enough people on the rope.
Now this may not mean much of anything to most of you, but in short, what it means is that this is a far more serious affair than I had previously thought. "The rope" refers to a rope that is attached to each member of the team as they ascend a steep slope, so that if one team member falls down they don't slide down the slope and get separated/killed. I have two problems with this, the first is that anytime you need to be roped, it means that you're in danger. Maybe only a little bit, but inexperienced mountaineers really shouldn't be in that position. The second is that if J and her boyfriend were needed to give them the proper numbers, it means that they don't have anywhere near the number of experienced team members that they need. If someone takes a fall, while she's in good shape, J won't have the neccesary experience to be able to anchor properly, and chances are she's going to go over also. Now the team has two members to hold... Not a good situation.
The second thing that I found out was that there are currently a dozen climbers lost with search teams out looking for them. This really perked my ears up. I have a strong basis in search and rescue, and losing a team of 12 that includes a guide on mapped paths in such a way that search teams can't find reqiures quite a bit rougher terrain and weather than I had been thinking.
The third thing that she said was that they couldn't put it off until later, because as the weather got warmer the avalanche threat got higher.
HUH?
Avalanches are serious business, and they need a high level of competency to avoid.
The fourth is that though she planned to go this weekend, she was planning on purchasing her equipment today or tomorrow. That meant no break-in time, and no time to familiarize herself with the equipment. It also meant (and she confirmed) that she hadn't done *any* training at all, and neither had the team. They had NEVER trained together at all. Not to mention that she didn't know how to *USE* any of the equipment.
So I decided to do some research into just how much of a challenge Mt. Rainier was. After little more than a half hour I realized how bad things really were.
16 dead in 2002, high threat of avalanches in the late morning to afternoon, ice storms that blow through with little visible warning. 14,000 feet above sea level, at which point many altitude related illnesses threaten them ranging from innocuous to fatal, with a group who won't be capable of humping out an ill member (not to mention two members who have never been to Very High altitude, and therefore are both susceptible). Hundreds of rescues anually.
Once she came back from lunch, I felt that I had to voice my concerns.
Her questions:
"Would you still do it if you were me"
My response:
"no"
"Would you still do it yourself"
After a bit of hashing it out
"no"
Now, this was bordering on the hypocritical and I think that she knew it. I've done many dangerous things out in the field and on excursions, and J is one of the few people outside of my family who I've known long enough to know that. I've been through hundreds of hours of training, and had thousands of hours in the field in search and rescue, high angle rescue, survival tests. During this time I've denied myself food, water, and sleep for long periods, I've pushed myself on hikes far further than I should have gone, and though conditions that fall far outside of the "safe" range. I've done numerous climbs without ropes, and put myself in a compromised position many times in order to facilitate missions that needed to be accomplished.
There are a few differences however, that I feel kept my activities from being foolhardy/reckless.
1) Everything was gradiated properly. I didn't start out marching all day in the hot sun and full BDU uniform with no food. I started out getting my endurance up, then got myself used to marching in heat, then gradually doing it without food, then without water, etc... I stepped myself up gradually so that I could reliably test the limits of what I could handle, and so I had time to condition my body to handle more than it should have.
2) I had training. Along with stepping my progress in a sensible matter, I had lot's of training. I didn't just walk up to a sheer cliff and start climbing without belay, I started out learning how to climb, then got myself to the point that I never fell, then doing short climbs without belay, then finally doing full climbs.
3) I had a highly trained and very experience team with me at all times.
4) The teams that I worked with had trained extensively with each other and myself, and we had a high level of comfort with each other. This part is probably one of the most important aspects. Training together allowed us to know what each team member was capable of, and how they would react to given situations. I would never feel comfortable doing anything like that without a group that had been training together.
After hearing my concerns she said that she was probably still going to go ahead with it. But I convinced her to call the park rangers and ask them what conditions were like, and what level of experience a team needed to attempt the summit this time of year. I've little doubt about what the Rangers will tell her. Regardless, I have even less doubt about what her decision will be. She's alot like me when it comes to things like this, and just as prone to engage in dangerous activities for the challenge. Honestly, if I didn't have the training and experience that I do, I'd probably jump at a chance to attack a summit with a green crew. It's funny, but often times you need the skills to surmount a challenge before you can recognize the dangers inherent in trying.