Abandoned Hikers, a new trend?

[Sir Hikesalot]

Many years ago when I first got started peakbagging it was unheard of for a member of a group to go off and leave the others. Occasionally individuals might split up for brief periods for whatever reason, but generally the group stayed within sight of each other, especially above the tree line or in harsh weather.
Lately though, I have noticed a trend towards individuals just taking off and leaving their group behind.
In a trip report I read over at the Rocksontop site, the apparent leader of a Zealand-Bonds Traverse, after already injuring himself abandoned the slower members of the group because it was too cold to wait for them. He went back to Lincoln Woods and waited an hour and a half for them to come out....Another hike in the trip reports here at Views and at Rocksontop mentioned a group leader abandoning his hiking partners on the Caps Ridge Trail to hike with another group.
Maybe I'm just too old fashioned, but it doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something here?..or were these two individuals just being irresponsible towards their fellow hiking companions. What would you do if you felt your hiking partners were too slow?...would you leave them behind?
I guess my greatest concern is what if one of the slower members of the group were to become injured and the faster, more capable members had just left them behind?
I apologize if this sounds like a rant, but it bothers me to read this sort of thing in a trip report.
I hesitate to post links to the 2 reports I mentioned, but here they are anyways.
http://www.rocksontop.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=850
http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11765

 

[dr_wu002]

By responding to this I'm automatically pointing the finger at a member of this site. Lindsay and I were concerned that Mountain Magic had separated from his group which was going slower and pushed on without them knowing what had happened to him. We deliberately hung back a bit to keep an eye on them and kept a look out for them while on Clay. We didn't see them and were unsure what their skill level was and whether or not they might start wandering around looking for Mountain Magic. Also, Mountain Magic sent word with two Jefferson-Bound hikers to let his group know that he was on his way out but in my opinion, this is not very effective because those 2 hikers are not responsible for getting the word out if they don't see the group or decide to go in another direction.

Luckily the group made it out fine and appeared to have a great time. I did express some concern to Mountain Magic about his group but he seemed confident that they'd be ok. However I remained concerned.

We were with a group of 4 and often times, Lindsay and I separated from Jessbee and Anthony -- we even went up Clay when they did not. I don't have any problem with this. I don't even have a problem if we split up and went different routes. Communication though, in my opinion, is key. If Jessbee suddenly took off and didn't tell us where she was headed I might get annoyed and concerned as to where she was. I like to spread out but prefer to stop at junctions or good view points in order to regroup. I generally am aware of the abilities of my hiking partners (I generally hike with the same people and know them fairly well) so I feel comfortable that we can go off on our own but still maintain enough communication to know where we all are. I wouldn't take off without telling my partners and would expect they wouldn't do the same to me.

Now, we don't know what went on with Mountain Magic and his group. They could have had a different understanding that we didn't know about. Regardless, Lindsay and I had every right to be concerned because we didn't know the whole situation.

-Dr. Wu

 

[sleeping bear]

I agree. A leader, or anyone for that matter, shouldn't leave their group, unless there is some sort of emergency and/or the whole group is okay with it. I'm not entirely aware of the details surrounding this weekend's group on Jefferson, but it was my understanding that the rest of the group was not comletely informed of decisions being made. They may have and been fine with it, in which case I'll insert foot in mouth now.

However, when it was noticed that the other group was moving much more slowly, and it was hard to tell where they were and where they were going, I did become slightly concerned. Granted, the weather could not have been better on Saturday, and coming down after dark as they did was no issue at all, but it's the principle of the matter. Maybe the weather played a factor in the decision, or maybe I'm way off course here, but I personally think it's not good ettequite to leave your group. It just sounds like the makings of a story to add to Not Without Peril part 2.

Now I feel the need to justify our group splitting up that same day.
We split up a little later in the hike, but it was agreed upon by all members, and was to some degree due to a minor injury. We all knew where each pair was going, met up later on the trail, split again for a little bit, and then all met again in the parking lot.

 

[sleeping bear]

If Jessbee suddenly took off and didn't tell us where she was headed I might get annoyed and concerned as to where she was.

Honestly, I'd probably be pissed!

 

[sli74]

I cannot comment on the circumstances of the specific trip reports you are speaking of but I will say this:

I am almost always the slowest person in a group. Before I began hiking with VFTT folks, I hiked solo almost exclusively unless I could beg and plead and drum up interest within my group of friends. When I began hiking with folks of the website, I went into the trips with the opinion that I was hiking independently but with a group. I don't know if that makes sense but basically I was prepared like I was solo, but I wasn't solo.

No matter if I hike solo or with a group I remain independent enough to be fully responsible for myself and my own safety. I expect and really want others to keep their pace, what they are comfortable with so that I can hike the pace I am comfortable with. IF everyone in a group waited up for me, I would feel like I was imposing my slow pace on them and wouldn't be likely to hike with others.

At this stage, everyone I hike with knows I am slow and I encourage them to hike on ahead. The difference between solo hikes and this more loosely put together "group" is that there are people who know where I am and are expecting a phone call, an email or some other confirmation of my safety (something my family worried about when I went solo).

I think a group that is officially hiking together might have different expectations versus a group of like minded well equipped hikers who are more or less hiking alone but together.

I know I might be rambling at this point but I hope my thoughts are making some sense. I am happy to have all these great folks to "hike with" while still being able to hike my own hike.

Anyway, there is my 2 cents or maybe that was more like only 1 cent worth

sli74

 

[dr_wu002]

The other (RoT) report involves Sherpa John who is already controversial enough on this site that it is doubtful to me that any discussion about him could remain civil. He is also not here to defend or explain any of his motives so I think it'll be difficult to determine exactly what happened on his hike unless someone else could come forward to explain.

These are only 2 specific examples and in my opinion it's hard to establish that this has become a common trend. I make it a point to communicate to my hiking partners what I'm doing and I know they'll do the same for me but that's all I can say... I'm not militant about keeping the group together and prefer to spread apart just as long as everyone has a good idea where everyone else is.

-Dr. Wu

 

[dr_wu002]

Now I feel the need to justify our group splitting up that same day.
We split up a little later in the hike, but it was agreed upon by all members, and was to some degree due to a minor injury. We all knew where each pair was going, met up later on the trail, split again for a little bit, and then all met again in the parking lot.

There was no issue. We met at the junction and decided to split up. Jessbee & Anthony down Gulfside, Lindsay and I up Clay. End of story. We could have gone down Six Husbands for what it's worth just as long as we told them what we intended to do so that they weren't stuck waiting for us at the parking lot.

-Dr. Wu

 

[paul ron]

I see everyone is more concerned about the group making it out safely, how about the individual that ran off? Suposing he got hurt and the group turned back? Suposing the individual got lost above tree line in a white out?

So my question is, was it smart for the individual to leave the group? Now they are hanging around wondering about his/her safety jepodising their own as a result?... maybe not turning around in fast changing weather. Perhaps the inexperianced group may venture out to find this person and put themselves at harm as a result. How long should the group wait for the individual or at the point the individual leaves, that person is no longer their problem and the individual is expected to fend for himself?

It seem to me this is exactly how headlines are made.... because someone is too irresponsable or imature enough to be part of the team effort, just plain selfish.

 

[Nessmuk]

Maybe I'm just too old fashioned, but it doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something here?..or were these two individuals just being irresponsible towards their fellow hiking companions. What would you do if you felt your hiking partners were too slow?...would you leave them behind?

A true trip "leader", a guide, would not do this. The hike itself would be organized for people with similar abilities so there would not be anyone excessively slow for the expectations of the others on the trip. That takes some planning and pre-trip knowledge by the leader of people going, and communication by the leader of what the trip entails. I've lead many trips when I wish I could be traveling faster or taking more agressive routes, but as the leader it was my job to ensure safety and enjoyment of the whole group. I knew that in advance. On novice hiker trips I play more the role of instructor as well as trip organizer and guide, while the more advanced ability trips wait their turn for another time.

There are exceptions to any rule. Groups of experienced peers may want to break off and do something different, but that should be understood as a planned option before the trip begins. There are enjoyable hiking opportunities for all ability levels, but it is pretty difficult to happily mix all levels on the same trip.

 

[jessbee]

If Jessbee suddenly took off and didn't tell us where she was headed I might get annoyed and concerned as to where she was.

Honestly, I'd probably be pissed!

Agreed. I tried to keep communications open and I hope you didn't get the impression that I was "taking off" somewhere. It's really hard to keep the exact pace as other group members all the time, especially when there are comfort/pain/temperature issues involved. So I tried to stop at various key places to continue to update the group. Before heading down from Jefferson we let you know that we were going and we also waited along the Gulfside and (not consciously, but it worked out) Jewell. We didn't stray from the original plan and go some other random way. I think the four of us were communicating well on Saturday and the decisions made to split up towards the end were safe and adequately discussed.

A different situation arises when there is a larger, less cohesive group of people who may not be all that familiar with one another, i.e. a random group of VFTTr's gathered for the first time. This type of group needs strong communication among the members and good leadership skills (I believe a lengthy "leadership" thread was posted recently that addresses much of this.) When getting into a group hiking situation one should expect to be concerned about the needs and abilities of others as well. Especially in the wintertime, when dangerous situations are more likely to occur, people should keep an eye on each other and be responsible when hiking in groups. Otherwise, why not just hike alone from the start?

I have no idea whether this is a new trend or not since I've only recently gotten myself addicted to hiking. I'm sure many of the old farts will chime in here

 

[timmus]

If the leader of a unexperimented group takes off, that's bad. If there's no leader, everybody knows the itinerary and stuff, I don't think it's wrong. It's not like if we were taking a walk in East New York at night. Then I would stick with my partners.

Depends on the individuals.

 

[dr_wu002]

There are exceptions to any rule. Groups of experienced peers may want to break off and do something different, but that should be understood as a planned option before the trip begins. There are enjoyable hiking opportunities for all ability levels, but it is pretty difficult to happily mix all levels on the same trip.

Exactly!

Agreed. I tried to keep communications open and I hope you didn't get the impression that I was "taking off" somewhere. It's really hard to keep the exact pace as other group members all the time, especially when there are comfort/pain/temperature issues involved. So I tried to stop at various key places to continue to update the group. Before heading down from Jefferson we let you know that we were going and we also waited along the Gulfside and (not consciously, but it worked out) Jewell. We didn't stray from the original plan and go some other random way. I think the four of us were communicating well on Saturday and the decisions made to split up towards the end were safe and adequately discussed.

I generally know my hiking partners fairly well and am comfortable splitting up -- even returning to different trailheads just as long as there is communication.

There wasn't any issue with Jessbee and Anthony splitting up from Lindsay and I despite the fact that Anthony's knee was bothering him. I trust my hiking partners abilities and I expect the same regard for mine. If Anthony's knee was hanging by a string and dragging along on the ground obviously it would be a different situation and Lindsay and I wouldn't have been heading over to Clay to do some sight-seeing!

-Dr. Wu

 

[sleeping bear]

okay, so I was pretty candid in my first response, as I don't wish to make any enemies.

Early on in the hike I did overhear part of a conversation between MTN Magic and another member of the group in which the other member appeared to not be thrilled about MTN taking off. This sentiment has not yet been conveyed in any of the other trip reports or posts I have read, but it kind of set the tone for me.

When Dr. Wu and I were trying to spot the other group, I considered, in my head, the option of going back and hiking with them. As Frank mentioned, we were unsure of their experience level, however they seemed to be having some difficulty getting up the caps, we had not gotten the earliest of starts, and they had dropped a fair amount of time behind us.

It has been since discovered that they had a great time and made it down fine. However, I would have felt somewhat responsible had something happened, because Frank and I saw the seperation of the group, and other than talking to MTN Magic, chose to do nothing about it. Now you can say all you want to about it not being our responsiblity bla bla bla, but the reality of it is, that I would have felt responsible, and I think Frank would have too.

Now MTN Magic stuck with our group, so I wasn't worried about his safety so much. He was also the one who made the decision to go out away from the group. They, as far as I can tell, were not included in that decision.

So, I think they key here, and many have said it, is communication. I think we all understand that these, for the most part, are very informal hiking groups and there isn't generally a set "leader". I think if you organize the trip though, that puts some degree of responsiblity on you.

 

[Double Bow]

When I'm out with a group, I always make sure that everyone knows where everyone is. You don't necessarily need to be walking in lock step but, people shouldn't just take off. That's not being responcible and it's unfair to your hiking partners who may (or may not) worry about you. This is especially critical in winter.

On a recent trip, we had one member of our group who was having problems and was going much slower than the rest of the group. Some people were getting cold waiting for him so, we split up. Some went on ahead faster to warm up and others stayed with him. We communicated a sheltered meeting point and then changed who was doing what. This way we all knew what was going on, where people were, and were able to stay warm and safe.

Basically, some seperation is fine as long as it's communicated. Just taking off is rude and dangerous.

 

[sli74]

A different situation arises when there is a larger, less cohesive group of people . . . This type of group needs strong communication among the members

Communication is definitely KEY !!! And each group's decisions might be based on early communications . . . for instance, if a group knows that 1 or more individuals will be arriving later, etc. These concerns are greater when the hike is a loop hike and not a "there and back" trip.

Otherwise, why not just hike alone from the start?

Because it is nice to not always be hiking alone . . .
And because if the hike involves an overnight stay, it is nice to have others at camp to enjoy the evening with . . .
It is a great way to meet like minded folks with whom you can develop a friendship even if your paces are varied.



sli74

 

[DougPaul]

Many years ago when I first got started peakbagging it was unheard of for a member of a group to go off and leave the others. Occasionally individuals might split up for brief periods for whatever reason, but generally the group stayed within sight of each other, especially above the tree line or in harsh weather.
Lately though, I have noticed a trend towards individuals just taking off and leaving their group behind.

Maybe I'm just too old fashioned, but it doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something here?..or were these two individuals just being irresponsible towards their fellow hiking companions. What would you do if you felt your hiking partners were too slow?...would you leave them behind?
I guess my greatest concern is what if one of the slower members of the group were to become injured and the faster, more capable members had just left them behind?
I apologize if this sounds like a rant, but it bothers me to read this sort of thing in a trip report.

Groups separating on the mountain is a fairly frequent occurrence. And a contributing factor to many accidents and emergencies.

When a group meets at the trailhead, there is an implicit "contract" beween members. (In the case of formally lead hikes there is a leader and perhaps a co-leader and an explicit "contract".) These BBS organized hikes frequently have no explicit leader, no agreed upon "contract" of responsibility, and no common hiking culture. So each individual can go up the mountain with different expectations.

I personally agree with you that an individual should not separate from the group without group notification and, depending on the circumstances, consultation. But that is just my opinion.

Unless I know how the group operates, I go with the assumtion that I may have to solo...

This topic has been addressed before in the thread "hiking with a partner".
My somewhat long-winded opinion is in http://www.vftt.org/forums/showpost.php?p=58678&postcount=23 (I used to be a leader in an organization.) The entire thread is also worth a read: http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=5360

Doug

 

[Kevin Rooney]

The other (RoT) report involves Sherpa John who is already controversial enough on this site that it is doubtful to me that any discussion about him could remain civil. He is also not here to defend or explain any of his motives so I think it'll be difficult to determine exactly what happened on his hike unless someone else could come forward to explain. -Dr. Wu

I'd agree with this, Dr. Wu. I wasn't on the particular hike in question, but often hike with Al, Lou and Marjorie (participants in the Bond/Zealand traverse) and have recently hiked a few times with Drew. Have never hiked with SJ although have met him on the trail a few times.

Also - not that this has any bearing on this tread - I believe the hike in question was arranged by Al. SJ wrote the TR.

 

[RoySwkr]

Unfortunately this is not a new trend

One of the more famous cases is described in "The Breach" where a climber left his immobile injured partner on the side of Kilimanjaro taking his gear as well as the injured person's camera. He informed authorities of the injured man's location and went back to the US for a lecture tour. The injured guy did recover and says he should have known it would happen with that guy.

In the White Mtns, a winter group split at the summit of Mt Lafayette with the stronger hikers going down Falling Waters. The weaker ones got lost trying to retrace their steps to the hut and spent the night out in the ravine to be rescued the next day by fish & game. They were fined for reckless hiking and the Appalachia accident analysis complained that the stronger ones who left them should have been too.

As to implicit contracts among group members, I feel that strangers should make the terms of their hike together explicit at the start, if they agree that slow hikers can be left behind that is fine if everybody knows before they start.

 

[Stan]

I don't hike very often in groups that haven't communicated around these issues and I'm reluctant to just "meet up at the trailhead" because whenever I hike with others I feel there is a strong mutual responsibility that others may not share.

If I organize a group, formal or informal, I don't expect we'd all hike at the same pace but I would expect no one would disappear beyond the next milestone, intersection or landmark, or perhaps the end of a broken trail in snow, until the rest of the group catches up.

Likewise, I would expect the slowest hiker to offer a plan B should a goal become unattainable but I wouldn't expect the others to proceed to the goal until they were confident in the safety of that person.

Whatever the expectations, its wise to lay them out in advance whether it's a more regimented approach or if it's a "let's meet at Truants Tavern at 6 PM" approach.

 

[DougPaul]

As to implicit contracts among group members, I feel that strangers should make the terms of their hike together explicit at the start, if they agree that slow hikers can be left behind that is fine if everybody knows before they start.

Agreed. But somehow, I suspect that it doesn't happen very often (the agreement part, that is).

Doug