Lost Hiker on Mt Lafayette - FOUND!

[DougPaul]

so snowshoeing in sorel caribous, which are leather and rubber (and waterproof) and rated to -40 degrees, are not worthy of a winter outing? i think i'd rather be stranded in these than plastics.

These are fine boots for hiking on easyish terrain. The also have a removable liner for easy drying (unlike many shoepac-derived boots).

Plastic or leather double boots will generally have a harder upper and more support, both of which become important when cramponing, carrying a heavy load, or on steep terrain.

Water-proof is a double-edged sword--it also keeps foot moisture inside, guaranteeing that the insulation will be damp by the end of the day. (VBL socks (cheap version: plastic bags) will keep your socks and the insulation dry. See, for instance: http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/vb.txt )

And take manufacturer's temp ratings with a large grain of salt... They are inconsistent and the manufacturer has incentive to estimate them under conditions which give the best-looking value, eg while a warm-footed user is very active on a windless sunny day. Consider them to be marketing, not science.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

anybody ever carry these in their pack for emergencies:

http://www.mountaingear.com/pages/p...&Nty=1&Ntt=low+ranger&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=submit

they're relatively light and compact. they cover a leather boot well. I got them cheap a while ago and now i carry them in my pack for just that emergency purpose. or if my feet get too cold snowshoeing, hiking, standing around, etc.

They are too low to be used without a knee length gaiter. (The description notes this.) Overboots also tend to have slippery soles and generally must be used with a traction aid.

They look like they could help to keep your feet warm.

Another alternative is the super gaiter--a gaiter which goes from just below the knee to the rand of the boot. (They can include an insulating layer.) Not quite as warm as an overboot, but they do leave the boot sole exposed and can be left on the boot all the time.

My insulated super gaiters live attached to my double boots. I have no reason to take them off. Cold feet have never been a problem when wearing these boots and gaiters, even when standing around on windy belay ledges.

Doug

 

[likeitsteep]

They are too low to be used without a knee length gaiter. (The description notes this.) Overboots also tend to have slippery soles and generally must be used with a traction aid.

They look like they could help to keep your feet warm.

Another alternative is the super gaiter--a gaiter which goes from just below the knee to the rand of the boot. (They can include an insulating layer.) Not quite as warm as an overboot, but they do leave the boot sole exposed and can be left on the boot all the time.

My insulated super gaiters live attached to my double boots. I have no reason to take them off. Cold feet have never been a problem when wearing these boots and gaiters, even when standing around on windy belay ledges.

Doug

yeah. you have to use them in conjunction with a gaiter. but that's fine. most have them with them anyway. and you do have to use them with crampons or snowshoes if in transit. but when you're sitting around idle, they make a good insulator.

...and yes. caribous are certainly not technical. i'd never use them for that purpose, but they're quite warm. my feet have never been cold in them. nice boot to drag along if you're pulling a pulk. although, they are weighty.

 

[DougPaul]

A new thread on the topic of winter boots has been started: http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=15643.

Doug

 

[Grumpy]

Boots? Maybe we're focused on the wrong end of the hiker here.

The discussion about boots raises this question: Did the boots he was wearing develop a mind of their own and cause Brian Gagnon to become separated from his companions and lost for two nights?

My own sense of this is that by spending all this verbiage on boots we are focusing on the wrong end of the hiker, if we want to learn much at all about and from this incident.

It seems pretty clear (to me) from what factual accounts we have that once Gagnon realized he was lost, he did a decent job of keeping his cool and keeping himself alive. That certainly contributed substantially to the generally happy outcome. His head appears to have been working pretty well after he went astray. So maybe Gagnon is due an attaboy for that.

As for the boots … . Well, let’s speculate for a bit that the “three season” boots Gagnon was wearing led to frostbitten feet, which in turn hampered his mobility. Arguably, hampered mobility may have contributed to his being located in timely fashion when the weather broke. Maybe those “inadequate” boots helped save his bacon, in an odd sort of way.

But my own serious guess is that if we’re going to discuss gear, the sleeping bag Gagnon was carrying played a far more important role in this story than did the boots he was wearing.

G.

 

[Mike P.]

grouseking,

you can get used plastics typically at IME & I've been told you can find them on Ebay too.

Sorel's (& similar) & insulated day hikers are good snowshoeing boots the sorels fine for camping especially if not a lot of climbing involved. While plenty of people use them in the Presidentials they are not the recommended boot for that kind of trip. Columbia & Merrell type winter day hiking boots do the smae things but are not as good if you have to stop.

Boots & your gear need to be part of decision process, if you are hauling everything, you have more leeway (you may be slower also) if you are going light, you need to turn around sooner as your margin for error is even thinner. (In winter when it's below zero & windy, the margin of safety is already thin regardless of what gear you have)

Your head is your most important piece of gear, discussions on accidents & your knowledge help keep that gear in good working order.

 

[sierra]

Ive read the thread and have a couple of points.First off, boots, I think its a huge mistake to where boots in the winter that will just barely get you up the mountain. Its imperitive that all gear used on a dayhike be sufficient for the overnight as well, just in case. Secondly, I was on a high peak that very saturday and retreated after going above treeline and deaming the conditions unfavorable at best, you cant leave the margin of error to thin, you have to be proactive in winter conditions to prevent epics before they occur.
Ok one more, I also believe in the idea that SAR people do what they do because they want to, if a rescue needs to be done, no one is twisting anyones arm to go out. That is not at all meant to minamize thier effort, but someone always says " they put the SAR guys at risk" the SAR guys do that themselves when they decide to go.
final thought- Im not going to judge this dude, but imo, he was on the wrong side of the mountain because he went to far in the wrong conditions, period.

As with all of us, he will learn and become a better hiker/person because of it all, we all have made mistakes, let he who has not sinned or screwed up in the mountains cast the first rock.

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

Personally, I can't afford plastic boots. And I dont take overnights, because I work at night. But if you go out at night, its probably best to have them. While I move, my feet are never cold, in fact they sweat. But if I were to stop and temps were cold, chances are the toes would get cold fast. Saying that, I think its up to the person and the conditions. grouseking

I have both very expensive insulated plastic boots (Koflach Extremes, the yellow ones, good for peaks like Denali), but I use Sorels (and now an even cheaper equivalent that I picked up for about $50 through Campmor, NJ) for most of my winter hiking in the Whites. I added a couple of stiff inserts to provide more support in these Sorel-equivalents (I cannot even remember the trade name, but could be Kodiak?). As long as I do not need crampons, these pseudo-Sorels work fine for me on any winter hike in New England except the Presi's, the Franconia loop, and Katahdin. Snowshoes and stabilicers provide all the traction that I need on all of the other NH4s.

I also carry a heavy pair of pile booties in my pack for emergencies, one or both containing water bottles, depending on the length of hike. I do not carry a sleeping bag, although I do carry a small closed cell foam pad and a full-length goretex bivi sack. If I should get forced into an unplanned bivi in the winter, I will be staying awake and standing upright on the doubled over foam pad inside the bivi sack all night if I cannot keep walking. Although I have never faced a forced bivi on winter hikes in the Whites, I have survived many on technical routes around the world without a sleeping bag, and the key was staying awake, talking (to oneself or others), wiggling toes, helicoptering arms, eating, drinking water, etc. I also do not carry a stove, because if I were to carry a sleeping bag, stove, fuel, etc., on a day hike, I would never get up anything because of the weight. Part of the reason I really like winter hiking in the Whites is the ability to move fast and light, especially the past few winters with so little snow. That said, I usually do carry snowshoes (MSRs, so fairly light-weight, although I rarely use them). So, in sum, our sport is really cheap compared to many others, such as snowboarding or dh skiing at resorts, unless the bug really bites you to go attempt big mountains on far away continents.

 

[Neil]

After reading this thread I'll tell you one thing, if I ever get deep into the $hit I won't worry all that much about coming out of it alive. My main worry will be how will they pick me apart on VFTT.

There is nothing wrong with monday morning quarterbacking when you have watched the game.

 

[dave.m]

After reading this thread I'll tell you one thing, if I ever get deep into the $hit I won't worry all that much about coming out of it alive. My main worry will be how will they pick me apart on VFTT.

Yes, but it is really innevitable, isn't it?

There are 2 aspects of the analysis which seem to me to be the shiny and dark side of the same coin. On the shiny side, there is no way for people to learn from the experiences of others without discussing, analyzing and yes, even picking apart the events. The same thing happens on forums all over the world when events like this happen. The recent deaths on Hood spawned long discussions on TelemarkTips, among others. The death of Tinkham on Jefferson and the deaths of 2 skiers in GoS spawned lengthy discussions in rec.backcountry (google searchable). So, VFTT is not any different. While it can seem cruel and insensitive, I see no way for others to learn without some level of discussion. The best we can hope for here is for that discussion to stay civil. See:
http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/civility-1.html

The dark side of this is that there is an element of denial in all of these discussions. Research into the pyschology of risk shows us that people are more willing to accept risk if they feel like they are in control of the situation. For example, most people are less nervous about traffic if they themselves are driving. I take much of what I hear (and truth be told, say) in these discussions as mental tricks designed to convince the writer (or myself) that they (or I) would never ever make such an error in judgement. It's a way of creating the idea of control. I know I do it and suspect that most of do.

I'm very glad this guy survived. It could have easily turned out differently. Let's try to learn what we can and do so in a civil manner.

 

[sapblatt]

The dark side of this is that there is an element of denial in all of these discussions. Research into the pyschology of risk shows us that people are more willing to accept risk if they feel like they are in control of the situation. For example, most people are less nervous about traffic if they themselves are driving. I take much of what I hear (and truth be told, say) in these discussions as mental tricks designed to convince the writer (or myself) that they (or I) would never ever make such an error in judgement. It's a way of creating the idea of control. I know I do it and suspect that most of do.

Well stated - Dave you hit it exactly right. We all want to believe we could never have done anything stupid. While typing here you convince yourself that you never could have hiked off the ridge into the Pemi, or anything else. Of course, any of us could make the same mistakes. Write, read, think, learn.
No need to get nasty - I am here to learn what to do and what not to do, and occasionally my minimal experience can help others as well.

 

[Skyclimber]

Let's try to learn what we can and do so in a civil manner.

I disagree. This shouldn't be a learning experience on someone else's expense.

"The best learning experiences are our own experiences."

 

[JohnL]

I disagree. This shouldn't be a learning experience on someone else's expense.

"The best learning experiences are our own experiences."

So are you suggesting that the next time we hear a weather report for sub-zero temperatures combined with hurricane force winds (and whiteout conditions we hope!), we should all grab our 3 season boots and 30 below sleeping bag, head up to the Franconia Ridge, get lost and see what we learn?

JohnL

 

[sli74]

So are you suggesting that the next time we hear a weather report for sub-zero temperatures combined with hurricane force winds (and whiteout conditions we hope!), we should all grab our 3 season boots and 30 below sleeping bag, head up to the Franconia Ridge, get lost and see what we learn?

JohnL

You always say best what I am thinking.

sli74

 

[David Metsky]

I disagree. This shouldn't be a learning experience on someone else's expense.

"The best learning experiences are our own experiences."

I'm with JohnL and some others here; I don't understand what you are saying, or if I do understand I don't understand why you are saying it.

Everything can be a learning experience, and it isn't at the expense of those involved. We can and should learn from the experiences, both good and bad, of those around us. If we limit ourselves to our own experiences then we miss out on the vast store of knowledge that has been collected over the years.

-dave-

 

[dave.m]

I disagree. This shouldn't be a learning experience on someone else's expense.

Discussing the relative merits of the victims decisions need not be done at the victim's expense. There is a fine, but important, distinction between the worth of a person and virtues of his or her decisions in a given situation.

Please note, I'm not disagreeing that these discussions can become uncivil and that when it happens, it is bad. But it seems to me that stopping these discussions to avoid any chance of offending the victim is tossing out the baby (of learning) out with the bath water (of not offending the victim).

"The best learning experiences are our own experiences."

Doesn't this undercut almost all of the value of discussion forums like VFTT? Why bother even logging on if the only legitimate learning experiences are in the woods?

 

[giggy]

discussion is good - but I guess just I don't see what is to be learned here. I see this is a personal risk threshold and sometimes you gamble and lose the bet.

Some people will always believe its an acceptable risk to be in the "extreme" - that can be mt everest, soloing grade 5 ice climbs, or heading up exposed peaks in horrible condtitions. And thats fine, to each their own.

All I know is that everyone I knew changed their plans on this day to not be above treeline. You really had a live in a cave not to know that weather was going to be horrible. Some people like to hike in this stuff and thats cool - I would even bet that someone was on washington that day.

So - for the average hiker or climber here? - what did you really learn that you didn't already know from this event?

was it - don't hike in 100mph+ winds on an exposed ridge?
was it - carry a winter bag if plan on camping in -20 temps
was it- its basically impossible to read a map or follow a compass bearing in hurricane force winds?
was it don't wear 3 season boots on a cold winter day?

sorry to sound sarcastic but - this happens every year and and it will happen again when someone wants to be in those condtitions. Most of the time, it goes w/o incident - sometimes this happens.

My guess is the folks who would go out in this - won't change their plans in the future (nor should they) and I know I won't be changing my pack contents, what I carry or don't carry on hike or climb, etc..

I guess I just think simple - the dude took a chance and paid for the risk.

 

[Neil]

Great post Giggy. I didn't know how to say all that but it was bouncing around in my brain.

If anything, tales of outdoors mishaps serve as reminders that $hit happens and there's no such thing as immunity.

 

[Skyclimber]

discussion is good - but I guess just I don't see what is to be learned here. I see this is a personal risk threshold and sometimes you gamble and lose the bet.

Well Put.
There isn't anything that anyone can benefit and learn from his unfortunate mishap. It's the individual hikers themselves, who learned from this experience.

 

[David Metsky]

There isn't anything that anyone can benefit and learn from his unfortunate mishap.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.

I find discussions like this often give me interesting ideas (such as how to carry my compass and maps) that I haven't thought about in the past. So, I did get some tangible benefit from the discussion.

For people without much winter hiking experience it gave useful suggestions about keeping a group together, proper gear to carry, how to recognize when you're in over your head, etc. There's always something that can be learned, IMO.