Another Lost hiker rescue on Washington

[una_dogger]

Both of them?

I was thinking they need to split the bill ;-)

 

[Jay H]

Big mistake. He needs to choose his hiking partners more carefully.



Both of them?

Well, technically the guy who abandoned the other guy didn't need to get rescued. Now the real question is, when the bill the second guy who they did rescue, can he sue the first guy who abandoned him for gross negligence?

Jay

 

[bandana4me]

hiking etiquette????

I am by no means any expert but......I was taught long ago that you have the slower hiker lead. Then he remains comfortable at his pace and both leave TOGETHER!

 

[hikerbrian]

Now the real question is, when the bill the second guy who they did rescue, can he sue the first guy who abandoned him for gross negligence?

I may be the only one on this entire message board who is thinking this...but...doesn't personal responsibility play a role here somewhere?

If I ask a relative stranger for a ride to the mountains, I plan on being self-sufficient. In fact, even if I hike with a group, I fully expect to be able to take care of myself. I understand that it all depends on perspective - if you're the more experienced hiker, it's good practice to keep an eye out for those who are less so, with the hope that a more experienced hiker would do the same for you if you were in over your head. But as a matter of practice, if I get in over my head, I've made a mistake and I take full responsibility for that. I will never try to blame someone else for my own inexperience and/or stupidity.

p.s. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and I'm not at all offended by disagreement, so feel free to voice your opinion without apology.

 

[erugs]

As Michael J stated earlier, it all depends upon the conversation that's taken place. In this situation we are either assuming the men didn't talk, didn't make plans, or any other didn'ts. My own assumption is that the guy who left is a jerk. I'm not ready to be generous to give him even the slightest benefit of doubt.

 

[Red Oak]

I may be the only one on this entire message board who is thinking this...but...doesn't personal responsibility play a role here somewhere?

If I ask a relative stranger for a ride to the mountains, I plan on being self-sufficient. In fact, even if I hike with a group, I fully expect to be able to take care of myself. I understand that it all depends on perspective - if you're the more experienced hiker, it's good practice to keep an eye out for those who are less so, with the hope that a more experienced hiker would do the same for you if you were in over your head. But as a matter of practice, if I get in over my head, I've made a mistake and I take full responsibility for that. I will never try to blame someone else for my own inexperience and/or stupidity.

p.s. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and I'm not at all offended by disagreement, so feel free to voice your opinion without apology.

I believe because the bro who got lost was a newbie,maybe expecting him to get several hiker "unwritten codes" might be a stretch..However the polite way you phrased your point does bring up good points such as "self reliance,etc". If lost bro was new to new england and led to believe Wash. is just some monument that is bad in winter,then it seems to put more onus on bro#2[very self absorbed].
Maybe it is time to give Pinkham notch the Baxter treatment with rangers asking "hey where you going,you got good gear etc".A polite park ranger asked me that 2 years ago when I did Hamlin solo in october.I believe he saw my gear and was ok with me going for it.Maybe a 5 dollar fee for people to park at P.Notch would cover the cost of such rangers......

 

[Maddy]

As Michael J stated earlier, it all depends upon the conversation that's taken place. In this situation we are either assuming the men didn't talk, didn't make plans, or any other didn'ts. My own assumption is that they guy who left is a jerk. I'm not ready to be generous to give him even the slightest benefit of doubt.

If he collected any gas money at the very least he should give it back.

I don't think as experienced hikers we should be leading those who are inexperienced, clueless, too slow, and "unprepared" into danger. Once you buddy up with someone unless it's strictly for a ride and nothing more, and you have made this very clear from the beginning, I think you do bear some responsibility for your new found friend (s). It would be up to the savvy hiker to have a conversation with the newbie at the very start of the "relationship," but if you choose to allow the lost soul to tag along and say nothing, I think that "hiking your own hike" might need to go on the back burner. After all you did allow them to be part of your group. You are now faced with a real problem, one that could result in injury or death to a newbie, and like it or not, you need to deal with it. This seems to be plain old common sense.

As Hikerbrian mentioned we need to accept responsibility for ourselves, but if we see someone who is a set up for a real problem, often thru sheer lack of experience and knowledge, we also have a responsibility to try to help them out. If they don't want to heed our recommendations or accept our help, the onus would be on them. You did what you could but you don't welcome them into your group and walk away when they don't meet your expectations.

If I came upon a lost and confused dog, I would stop my hike and take him back to the base and turn him over to someone who could find his owner. What if he was hungry and dehydrated, and perhaps slow from exhaustion. Would I not lend a hand? Hike at his pace or even carry him if I could? I hate to think that there are some who might say "too bad, hope you find your way back home. I do have my goals to meet. Just can't have you holding me up!"

I understand that there are groups that are well acquainted, or hook up with other experienced hikers and have agreed that each person will do their own thing. I am strictly referring to folks who are set ups for problems and now they are part of your brigade.They have come to believe that you are their friend and will help them, as misguided as that thought might be. I can't say it any better than Sgt Saunders.

Fish and Game Sgt. Wayne Saunders (in the Conway Daily Sun) takes it one step further:

There is an important lesson to take from this incident, according to Saunders: Experienced hikers need to look out for partners new to the woods. "You've got to hike slower with them," he said, even if it costs the summit.

And to that I would add "old" to the woods as well.

This is a great reminder about how a part of hiking is indeed caring and watching out for each other in every sense of the word.

 

[Billy]

?...Maybe it is time to give Pinkham notch the Baxter treatment with rangers asking "hey where you going,you got good gear etc".?...Maybe a 5 dollar fee for people to park at P.Notch would cover the cost of such rangers......

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

 

[Little Rickie]

Whether we like it or not the world is filled with people not like us.

 

[Red Oak]

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

Sorry about that billy.
1] could be your diet?
2]saw a dude do that at a skateboard contest when he attempted a huge rip.[he fell and broke something,cant remember what;sorry for thread digression.]

 

[griffin]

As Hikerbrian mentioned we need to accept responsibility for ourselves, but if we see someone who is a set up for a real problem, often thru sheer lack of experience and knowledge, we also have a responsibility to try to help them out. If they don't want to heed our recommendations or accept our help, the onus would be on them. You did what you could but you don't welcome them into your group and walk away when they don't meet your expectations.

This.

These guys made a decision to go hiking together. IMO, while I do think Pokey is responsible for his own preparation (or lack thereof) and his own decisions, Speedy is responsible for his selection of hiking partner, and for deciding to hike with someone in the first place.

I was taught long ago that you have the slower hiker lead. Then he remains comfortable at his pace...

fwiw, speaking as someone who's often the "slower hiker" I usually prefer NOT to lead. It's nice when people offer, but it can be very stressful and I find it often winds up making it harder for me to find my own pace. (what was the quote? "all blanket statements have holes in them" or something? ) That's me, but I think it points to the larger issue, which is that communication is key.

 

[DSettahr]

This seems to be a common trend with informal hiking "meetup" groups... You end up with people with widely differing ability levels hiking together, and no one clearly in charge or bearing the responsibility for the safety of all those involved. Inevitably, without a clearly communicated plan for the hike, or an intent to stay together as a cohesive group, people get separated... and then incidents like this occur!

I'm not sure that it's reasonable to place all of the blame in one spot...

Those who have less experience need to realize that ultimately, they are responsible for their own safety. I can understand the desire, as an inexperienced hiker, to allow someone else to take over the responsibility of leading a hike. But whenever they make that decision to turn over that responsibility to someone else, they need to be very sure that it is a trustworthy person. And that may mean either paying for someone to lead the hike, sticking with organized group outings through organizations like the AMC/ADK, or only hiking with someone you know and trust.

And for those with more experience, they need to realize that when they make the choice to hike with others, especially with people who have significantly less experience or ability levels, then like it or not, they are going to be placed in a position with additional responsibility. It's something that more experienced hikers need to be aware of whenever they open their hikes to others (particularly people they don't know very well).

Whenever a hike is organized amongst strangers or even casual acquaintances, there needs to be clear communication from all those involved about what is expected, both in conditions that will likely be encountered, and conduct that the participants will adhere to. And this seems to be something that hiking meetup groups are pretty bad about doing...

 

[DSettahr]

I am by no means any expert but......I was taught long ago that you have the slower hiker lead. Then he remains comfortable at his pace and both leave TOGETHER!

In one of my outdoor rec classes at Paul Smiths, we discussed this quite a bit. Having the slowest hikers lead is something that sounds nice in theory but rarely works in practice, especially with informal groups like those organized through online communication. It'd take a small group of close friends who are very respectful of the slowest hikers ability level to apply this successfully.

The problem with putting the slowest hikers in front is that it puts them on the spot... for many, it makes them feel uncomfortable. They're holding the whole group up, and they've got the faster hikers right behind them, nipping at their heels. If you have a wide variety of ability levels, a system of organization like this on a hike can disappear as quickly as 5 minutes from the trailhead. Often, the slow hiker is only too willing to yield the front to the faster hikers, as they are then under a lot less pressure.

A much better system is to allow the fastest hikers go first while also placing some of the responsibility of staying together as a group on their shoulders. Tell them "it's ok if you want to go up in front and go on ahead... however, you must stop every 10 minutes and wait for the rest of the group to catch up. You must also stop at any trail junction and wait. And when the group is caught up, don't take off right away- give everyone a few minutes to catch their breath before you continue down the trail." Assigning that responsibility to those who are faster and likely to take off can do wonders for keeping your group together- no one wants to look irresponsible in front of other people.

Of course, this still requires someone who is clearly in charge to assign that responsibility... something that most informal hiking groups are lacking!

Group dynamics is such an interesting topic... I could probably go on and on about it for hours.

 

[Lost Dad]

A much better system is to allow the fastest hikers go first while also placing some of the responsibility of staying together as a group on their shoulders. Tell them "it's ok if you want to go up in front and go on ahead... however, you must stop every 10 minutes and wait for the rest of the group to catch up. You must also stop at any trail junction and wait. And when the group is caught up, don't take off right away- give everyone a few minutes to catch their breath before you continue down the trail." Assigning that responsibility to those who are faster and likely to take off can do wonders for keeping your group together- no one wants to look irresponsible in front of other people.

This system, with a couple of quick modifications, has worked well for me both in hiking with my family (2 adults, 15 & 17), hiking with my son's Boy Scout Troop and even when we snowmobile together as a family. The Jackrabbits are allowed to go at their pace, with the added instruction to stop and regroup at any obstacle (think stream crossing etc), trail intersection or at a regular interval. This works really well as long as one of the jackrabbits is responsible; here again, you have to know your group members. One other simple idea when hiking with a group is as follows: instead of asking "Is everyone ready to go?" instead ask "is anyone not ready to go?" In a larger group, it is hard to know if all have responded affirmatively to the initial question, yet is is simple to guage the response to the second question. A bit off the OP, but this is our successful solution to the HYOH issue

 

[DSettahr]

One other simple idea when hiking with a group is as follows: instead of asking "Is everyone ready to go?" instead ask "is anyone not ready to go?" In a larger group, it is hard to know if all have responded affirmatively to the initial question, yet is is simple to guage the response to the second question. A bit off the OP, but this is our successful solution to the HYOH issue

Yes, this makes a huge difference!

 

[Maddy]

This.

These guys made a decision to go hiking together. IMO, while I do think Pokey is responsible for his own preparation (or lack thereof) and his own decisions, Speedy is responsible for his selection of hiking partner, and for deciding to hike with someone in the first place.



fwiw, speaking as someone who's often the "slower hiker" I usually prefer NOT to lead. It's nice when people offer, but it can be very stressful and I find it often winds up making it harder for me to find my own pace. (what was the quote? "all blanket statements have holes in them" or something? ) That's me, but I think it points to the larger issue, which is that communication is key.

And I think sometimes "Pokey" does not have a clue that h/she is ill prepared. Looking back at my beginnings, I certainly was most clueless. I learned over time from other hikers who were willing to share with me, and from experience.
I think too often newbies cannot make good decisions because they do not have good info and are not aware that they are missing vital equipment. You think you are good to go until something happens, or someone points you in the right direction.

Sometimes we laugh at the rangers in Baxter but they seem to care enough to check. For some that might be what is needed to avoid a rescue situation. Long ago a ranger in the MWO set me straight and I have always been grateful to him. Of course the fact that I had just finished reading the death board when I spoke to him probably helped considerably. HE certainly had my undivided attention.

Being a slow hiker I feel the same way. Don't like to be in the lead but do appreciate the folks who will hike up and wait or stop at junctions.

DSettahr -Whenever a hike is organized amongst strangers or even casual acquaintances, there needs to be clear communication from all those involved about what is expected, both in conditions that will likely be encountered, and conduct that the participants will adhere to. And this seems to be something that hiking meetup groups are pretty bad about doing...

It does seem that way. Not sure why. Perhaps people fear treading on other people's toes, or don't feel comfortable setting limits and explaining the conduct that participants will adhere to. Maybe they think they will be regarded as being too judgmental.
Gear check is a great idea to if newbies are involved.

 

[DougPaul]

Many (most?) fast hikers treat slow hikers horribly...

The problem with putting the slowest hikers in front is that it puts them on the spot... for many, it makes them feel uncomfortable. They're holding the whole group up, and they've got the faster hikers right behind them, nipping at their heels. If you have a wide variety of ability levels, a system of organization like this on a hike can disappear as quickly as 5 minutes from the trailhead. Often, the slow hiker is only too willing to yield the front to the faster hikers, as they are then under a lot less pressure.

A much better system is to allow the fastest hikers go first while also placing some of the responsibility of staying together as a group on their shoulders. Tell them "it's ok if you want to go up in front and go on ahead... however, you must stop every 10 minutes and wait for the rest of the group to catch up. You must also stop at any trail junction and wait.

I use a different system. The person on point (at the front of the group) slows his pace so that he never gets out of contact (ie shouting range) of the sweep (person at the back). This way the slowest person in the group (usually the person just in front of the sweep) sets the pace (often without realizing it) without feeling pressured and if there is a problem all party members can help. (This technique is easiest to use in organized groups with at least two leader-class members--one for point, one for sweep. The leader often takes sweep or circulates within the party so that he can keep an eye on the weaker or weakest members of the party.)

In one extreme case of 1 slow beginner in a small group of faster experienced hikers, I put myself directly in front of the beginner and set a steady pace for him. (The group had been doing the classic run ahead and wait while the beginner catches up and catches his breath routine.) I listened to the beginner's breathing to determine how hard he could work and noted my effort level. I then stayed at or below that level and continued listening to his breathing as we continued. This got the beginner up to the summit and down without exhausting him. (At some point the beginner realized what I was doing and thanked me after we got back...)

And when the group is caught up, don't take off right away- give everyone a few minutes to catch their breath before you continue down the trail.".

This is very important, but rarely done...

The last to arrive are often tired, out of breath, and in need of food and drink or may need to take care of something else and need time some time. When one is behind, there is an implicit pressure to ignore these issues and keep pushing. In contrast, those who have been waiting are rested, fed, and impatient...


Note to slowpokes that have been left behind: if you need to eat, drink, catch your breath, or fix/head-off a blister etc--just stop and do it. Don't waste time, but you have been abandoned and have to take over responsibility for your own well-being. Like it or not, you are now soloing...

Doug
Who has often been the slowpoke.

 

[mtnpa]

Many (most?) fast hikers treat slow hikers horribly...The last to arrive are often tired, out of breath, and in need of food and drink or may need to take care of something else and need time some time. When one is behind, there is an implicit pressure to ignore these issues and keep pushing. In contrast, those who have been waiting are rested, fed, and impatient...

The classic F-U break

 

[Mike P.]

I can't even make my own blanket statement because based on the group, the destination the weather, the circumstance changes.

Two people meet up from a social media site (which aren't really as social as you would be with a real friend) and drive up sharing gas. I'm thinking if you couldn't get out of the pairing (I'm hiking 6 peaks starting at 3:00 AM works well on newbies) then consider the trip more about helping a new hiker know what to do. The experienced hiker had a long car ride to get to know his partners strengths, Washington was a poor choice probably. (We usually see the, hey my __ th reunion is coming up & I want to climb Mt. Washington with my old beer buddies who still do nothing but drink beer... That's an obvious dumb @$$ thing to do, this was very subtle but an experienced hiker had to ask probing questions)

What's experienced? If one guy has 15 hikes under his belt & trail runs on the local town trails, while he has an obvious advantage over a I've been to the Blue Hills & Wachusetts guy, I'm not thinking he's a leader.

I like the idea of asking who's not ready to go question, OTOH, bring a bunch of 10-13 year olds & you'll be lucky to get a mile all day. (that's a bunch, not your kid or mine who eat trails up). As a slower hiker, I hike as best I can & keep water on my waist belt & drink when I need it so when I get to the group break & they ask 30 seconds later if I'm ready, I am, not thrilled but ready. In the winter keeping closer is key as if they are waiting & waiting, they maybe getting cold.

Not sure how the large meet up keep track of everyone, but small groups or a group of two should be kinder than this to each other. When I lead a few of the old VFTT groups, I asked lot's of questions to invitees. It's not just speed, it's experience & willingness to turnaround. If you're a summit or die hiker, you won't hike far with a person who turns around at the first cloud or first rain drop. (far extremes but you need to pretty well matched) Don't tell me what you've done, tell me what you failed to summit & why, IMO, you learn more that way.

There's also been new hikers who turned back & had to call SAR when the "experienced" person went up in poor conditions & got lost or became injured.

I wasn't a new hiker in 1998 (just a few years) but did join a NH Chapter hike of South Carter one winter. I came down with the flu the day before. I started withthem but by the 19M & Carter Dome jct, I was getting slower & going over one low tree, my leg cramped. I told the leader I was turning around & he wasn't sure I should based on seperating the group. Getting back wasn't an issue, had I gone up though, they probably would have dragged me out.

As far as any demographics or country of origins go, I've alwasy economics is more of a key on who's hiking. if you're a flatlander going to the whites, you need free time, a ride (usaully a car) money for gas, some gear, food, maybe money for lodging, while it can be done cheaply locally, it's not cheap to travel. These two had enough money to get there....

 

[Raven]

Interesting thread. On reading all the comments, some things strike me...all opinion mind you.

In terms of responsibility, when push comes to shove, I believe we must be responsible for ourselves...for pragmatic reasons as well as noble ones. The responsibilty for the lost hiker ultimately lies with the lost hiker.

Reasoning: I don't think any of us here (as far as I know) would ever leave a slower, newer hiker behind to fend alone. We know better. We know it's not the right thing to do. Most people would. Therein lies the problem though. Most is not all. So on commiting to going on a hike (or other endeavor) with a relative stranger, it only makes sense to be responsible for yourself. Why? Although most of the time, it won't matter, there are these rare occasions when you are tied to someone evil or incompetent out there that doesn't do the right thing.......and then it is up to you....alone. Ultimately, IMO being personally responsible is self-preservation.

if I can wax a bit poetic that is....