1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Mountain climbing - the selfish sport

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by Surfguy, Dec 20, 2006.

Tags:
  1. Surfguy

    Surfguy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    22,934
    Likes Received:
    11,299
    After watching the Mount Hood drama/tragedy unfold over the last few days and also watching the Mount Everest series on Discovery (where mountain climbing has never been better documented on film), I struggle to find purpose in the sport when you weigh it against what most of the climbers leave behind if they don't make it.

    Granted, most climbers don't go to climb a mountain with the intent of dying but even the best can die regardless of experience. All climbers have to know that just by being there...their chances of death are increased greatly because anything can happen. I mean...these climbers on Mount Hood in all likelihood had no clue what they were getting into as far as the weather turning, etc. . Then, when their missing, you hear about their families and how one has two toddlers under five with a wife.

    Plus, look at Mount Everest these days. You have climbers on that mountain who have jack for climbing experience and really have no business being on the mountain. Sure, they have a dream of summiting Everest. Don't we all wish we could? Just having the funds to pursue such an adventure doesn't mean one should.

    The recent Discovery channel series on summiting Everest summed it up nicely when all the inexperienced climbers actually caused a log jam at the infamous "Second Step"...the last great obstacle before reaching the summit. There is only one way up and one way down the "Second Step" where they are attached to newly laid safety ropes by the Shurpas (indigenous people who risk their lives for the rich people who take to the sport). It's difficult to pass people because you have to detach to pass them and reattach to the safety rope to continue on...during which time if you fall...you die. All the inexperienced climbers are so slow at this altitude and point that they block the way up at the Second Step. So, experienced climbers have to wait...all the time wasting valuable oxygen and becoming more prone to frostbite. The waste of time can turn into not being able to summit at all because their waiting on inexperienced climbers to get out of their path. The same log jam can manifest itself on the way up or down...wasting valuable time. So, even experienced climbers are at greater risk each passing year as Everest draws in even more of the inexperienced looking to summit. At the end of this TV series, we saw the consequences. A lot of these climbers ended up with crippling frostbite...which would not have likely occurred had they not been stalled by inexperienced climbers stuck at the difficult parts.

    So, I ask the question...do mountain climbers take the risks seriously enough? Is there a side to these people that is one of being completely selfish without serious contemplation of the results of them dying? I mean...they get the easy way out. They die. Well...it's probably not pleasant dying on a mountain that way but those left to pick up the pieces have it more difficult. What is left is...for the most part...families, children, and wives without their loved ones and parents....all because they wanted to climb a mountain. When their actually dying up there, do they think about how they should have never done this? Why would you want to climb a mountain with a couple of children under the age of five? Your basically saying the sport is greater than the propect of seeing your children grow up.

    I have no problem with them making these decisions. I just think that most climbers...even though they know the risks...never actually "get" the risks until something goes wrong. It's one thing to climb and put yourself at risk. But, your basically telling your family that the mountain means more to them than their own family. I would have less of a problem with it if they were single. Sometimes, you just have to put your family above certain things. Those that don't I consider to be supremely selfish and even foolish...maybe even thinking "the bad stuff will never happen to me because I'm experienced". Well...some may say you can die at any time for any reason just because your time is due. But, mountain climbing is one of not only skill but luck and flirting with death most of the entire time...whether one chooses to acknowledge that or not.

    So, when climbers die, sure I feel bad. But, how bad can I actually feel when they put themselves in these situations? And, how much worse can I actually feel that they left family and toddlers behind just because they wanted to do this dangerous sport? And, then they also put rescuers at risk to top it all off.

    So, in my opinion, mountain climbing is an extremely selfish sport in that regard. One should not expect to be rescued if their in a predicament. While it may happen, it could go either way depending on a lot of factors. Of course, if you are above 20,000 feet in the death zone of Everest, then your sh*t out of luck there if you cannot walk down.

    I'm just conflicted because it always attracts great media attention, it's always interesting to watch these situations unfold, etc. . However, I cannot feel too bad about it because...well...they were aware of the risks. And, just watching the families and children left behind is...well...just terrible that one would put their own family in that position.

    I just had to vent a little as mountain climbing tragedies are a constant every year. It's the one thing you can always count on. I just think some of these climbers are putting themselves in harms way when they should be putting their families first. Or, else, aren't they basically saying FU to everyone else...as in "I'm doing this regardless". Well, best of luck to you I guess. Hope to see you afterwards. Hope your friends, family, and children get to see you again. Your significant other is left with the more difficult part of raising and supporting children...while you cannot even get a proper burial because your stuck on a mountain dead.

    It's a tragedy in every sense of the word. I'm sure summiting is a euphoric experience. I'm sure it is life changing and all that. But, what about your family and kids man? If you don't make it, then it can't be worth it...can it? Surely, noone goes saying "if I don't make it...then it was still worth it". You have to go saying "I could easily die...do I want to lose my significant other, my kids, my extended family, etc.?". How anyone can answer that with a "yes" answer is beyond me? Yea...sure...there are risks all around us. But, mountain climbing pushes the risk factor to extreme levels for a pure enjoyment factor. Even if the family is "on board" with the idea...the reality of it can open their eyes in the aftermath. I got the sense from watching these families interviewed that they almost thought their loved ones were invincible up there. I almost believed it...almost.
     
    #1 Surfguy, Dec 20, 2006
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2006
  2. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    I climbed a 21+ k foot peak in India last year as a rank amateur. If I died, then I died - and there were a few times when I slipped and very nearly took a tumble which would have been dire to say the least. That was part of the fun, to tell you the truth. Granted I was 29 and single when I tried it.

    I'm indifferent as to whether or not to do it again. It got really boring, and I did a 19k foot one a few days later and was just miserable, tired, and bored. I climbed a mid-sized peak (16k) in rain forest Borneo a month after and didn't find it that exciting either, particularly because there was a traffic jam of amateurs on the way to the top. A small 2-3k foot climb from the jungle up a limestone hill that I did a few weeks after that was a lot of fun though, but also again a lot of intense work and kind of boring.

    From now on I will probably stick to hiking. BUt anyway, aside from taking dangerous routes or doing peaks you shouldn't do and aren't ready for, I, I'd say that most climbers of 10,000+ foot peaks return unscathed. The overcrowding on Everest (and the guys on Hood who really just had bad luck) are kind of exceptions, IMO.

    PS Death zone is like above 25-25k feet.
     
  3. bnb

    bnb Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    315
    Selfish???

    I dont know any serious mountaineers who are not aware of the risks.

    I know one guy who stopped climbing when he had kids.

    It's a dangerous sport. Anybody in it, knows it. Not sure what you are proposing? Should we all stay home and watch TV??
     
  4. Surfguy

    Surfguy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    22,934
    Likes Received:
    11,299
    I knew a comment like that was coming. Yea...that's what I'm proposing. :rolleyes:
     
  5. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    One other point, as far as the "selfish" element of expecting to be rescued, you can purchase insurance to defray the cost of that (you are usually billed later if they bring out the helicopters, etc and make it out alive in most countries), so I don't find it selfish in that regard.
     
  6. bnb

    bnb Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    315
    Surf...didn't mean to draw out the rolleyes!!

    Just wasn't sure what you were trying to say.

    Are you upset with the cost? I think the rescued often have to pay.

    Are you upset with the coverage on TV? It's a pretty good news story with footage, drama and crying victims.

    Are you suggesting they shouldn't be allowed in certain areas? That's tricky, and wilderness custodians do open and close excessively dangerous places -- recognizing that circumstances change quickly and you just can't make the backcountry 'safe'

    Are you suggesting the climbers don't know what they're doing? My experience is the opposite. Most climbers are very aware of the risks. And have an almost disturbing acceptance of the chance of injury or death. Climbers do "get" the risks. They probably know guys who've died. It's a dangerous sport.

    And we all choose the risks we take. I stopped riding a motorcycle when my kids were born. I still ride a bicycle to work and am planning an extended bike trip. I could get creamed by a truck. Am I selfish?
     
  7. Surfguy

    Surfguy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    22,934
    Likes Received:
    11,299
    How does that defray the costs of putting rescuer lives at risk? Well, I guess they signed up to be the rescuers so they accept those risks. So, yea, I guess that could deflect the "selfish" element.

    Granted, you could boil it all down to just "a guy wanting to climb a mountain" but it's not really that simple. In my post, selfish is relative to putting them climbing the mountain before everything else. IMO, there are people who have no business climbing a mountain...especially if they have toddlers to raise. I personally cannot fathom someone choosing a mountain over the prospect of their children growing up without them and them not being around to raise them. To me, that is being selfish.
     
  8. Surfguy

    Surfguy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    22,934
    Likes Received:
    11,299
    Read my last post. There are things with acceptable risks that we all face. Climbing a mountain takes the risk factor to a completely different level. I am saying exactly what you did with the motorcycle when you had kids. Sometimes, you need to know when not to do something. In that regard, I think a lot of these people don't really "get" the risk factor until their in a pickle of a situation. It's one thing to hear about the risks...it's another to experience or see the results of the risks first hand. It's just like all the inexperienced climbers going to Everest these days. They tend to become blinded by their goals. In that sense, their decisions don't tend to hold up under logic and come off as selfish.

    I'm not really trying to propose anything...I just can't figure out some of these people and why they take the risks they do. There has to be a certain degree of selfishness to be a mountain climber...to put that venture up against the rest of your life and how they will be affected should you not come down. I'm sure it's a decision each mountain climber struggles with every time they set out to climb.
     
  9. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,272
    Likes Received:
    8,069
    They weren't unlucky... they were careless idiots. They didn't respect the weather forecasts and tried this stupid extreme thing called "rapid ascent" where you climb with as little gear and supplies as possible. (Climbing is not quite dangerous enough... hey, let's make it more so by carrying nothing with us... next time, we'll go up in shorts and a t-shirt and just eat snow for our liquids.)

    If they were unaware of the forecasts, they had no business on the mountain and if they were trying to beat the storm, it was the equivalent of weaving through the barriers to beat the freight train. Idiots either way. You don't do something like that based on a plan that nothing bad is going to happen. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

     
  10. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    That's basically what Reinhold Meissner did - the latter I mean. Still Mount Hood is a baby mountain - these guys were apparently good enough to make it, they just didn't.
     
  11. Rule0001

    Rule0001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,801
    Likes Received:
    1
    My lifelong dream is to climb Mount Everest. I will one day.
     
  12. Ubiquitin

    Ubiquitin Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2001
    Messages:
    17,300
    Likes Received:
    11,764
    My lifelong dream is to dunk a basketball. I will one day.
     
  13. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,272
    Likes Received:
    8,069
    No, "they just didn't." They put themselves in a position where if anything went wrong, they could die. And they did. It was a choice, not fate.
     
  14. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    Surfguy;

    I can understand what you're saying but we as humans are inherently selfish and at the same time many of us are just hardwired with taking risks. Mountain climbing is incredibly dangerous but so are many other things we do. Its just in the nature of us to risk life and limb even knowing the risks. I don't know if you're saying we should ban or restrict mountain climbing but such a ban will never hold. There will always be people who will want to do it and a ban will be seen as just another obstacle to overcome.

    As Sam mentioned the only reasonable solution to me seems like getting insurance beyond that someone attempting an incredibly dangerous undertaking it should be with the understanding that this is at their own risks and they are responsible for their own rescue. I believe that back country skiers who get lost are liable for the costs of their own rescue. I think if that applied to mountain climbing and other risky ventures that would discourage all but the most hard core.
     
  15. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    I think Surfguy is overestimating the risk to a degree as well. Here's a few stats that indicate that the rate of injury (granted it does not measure the severity of the injury - I've never heard of a fatal bowling accident) for mountain climbing is substantially lower than other sports:

    http://www.iii.org/media/facts/statsbyissue/recreation/?table_sort_739028=5

    I'd be willing to bet that swimming in the ocean takes a lot more lives on a yearly basis.
     
  16. Surfguy

    Surfguy Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 1999
    Messages:
    22,934
    Likes Received:
    11,299
    Well, given one of the primary locations I was discussing was Mt. Everest, that is probably true. I was primarily refering to locations where there is a history of climber deaths...indicating an enhanced risk factor.
     
  17. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    Probably true based on the number of people doing it. I think part of the problem with things like moutain climbing, back country skiing, and sailing in small boats across the ocean is the amount of cost and danger to rescuers. Consider how much money resources have spent to try rescue three men on mount Hood, not saying that they shouldn't be trying, as compared to a life guard at beach pulling someone drowning.
     
  18. Xenochimera

    Xenochimera Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    1,929
    Likes Received:
    25
    oh man did you guys catch the finale? they passed a guy one the way down, half passed out. didnt help him much, and left him for dead :( :( russle brice, the expedition leader, stated that it was too high to send any type of aid, but i did some research, and his own climbers back in 2001 were rescued from higher altitudes....this is so sad.
     
  19. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,732
    Likes Received:
    36,182
    Yeah but a couple of points.

    1. like you said - you pay for a lot of the rescue -
    2. park rangers, etc like lifeguards are going to be around anyway
    3. In a lot of ultra-hazardous environments like the himalaya such elaborate rescues are kind of impossible anyway. Sure other climbers will go searching for them - but that's more out of a collective code and am not sure if that's anything to be displeased with
    4. Most climbers would climb whether or not there would be a search and rescue effort. Nobody asks for it. When I climbed mountains I didn't count on the cavalry coming in to save me if something went wrong.
     
  20. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,710
    Likes Received:
    2,969
    I was dying, no pun intended, to start this thread. but I don't know enough about mountain climbing or rescue mission costs and who pays them.

    I have to ask this though, is it really not stupid to be climbing a mountain in the winter in oregon?
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now