Newbies vs hardcore hikers

[timmus]

Sorry for those who cannot take another thread about emergency rescues, but I noticed, after reading about the Gothics incident (details) that a lot of emergency rescues are not for newbies without the right skills and gear for winter hiking, but for the very experimented hikers that just takes much more risks.


Is there any statistics on that ?

 

[Chip]

"In the "Back seat driver, Monday evening quarterback" thread Tim Seaver posted this link to a 2 year study on rescues in NH. The largest percentage of people rescued were men aged 30 to 40 from NH & MA (which only represents higher usage, it wasn't weighted). But I joked that living in CT made it safer for me to hike in NH. HOWEVER, if it WAS weighted I wonder if there would be more rescues of people more familiar with the area (backyard mentality) vs infrequent visitors (expedition mentality). I don't know."

I posted this in the "Rescued ?" survey thread. It is in reference to what you ask. This study only reflects usage, it's not weighted for experience. So if more men aged 30-40 from NH and MA hike in the Whites, then that group will have a higher % of rescues. Logically I would guess that "accidents happen" across the breadth of experience. A new hiker might have more accidents/injuries but compensates (down) with less challenging hikes. An experienced hiker might have fewer accidents/injuries but compensates (up)with more challenging hikes/climbs. Drownings and deaths from heart failure are included which facter into rescues but aren't exactly what we're talking about here.

Since "Experience" and "Ability" are subjective it would be nearly impossible to identify these in post-rescue fact finding for a statistically weighted survey. (That was a mouthful this early on a friday !)

"Do-Do Occurs". Getting groceries or taking a shower is still more dangerous.

 

[mavs00]

I think Chip makes some good points. I would (purely conjecture) think that there is a mix of both into the frey. Depends alot on definition I guess. What's a Newbie consist of. I would consider myself "borderline newb" after 10 years, given the frequency I hike (between 130-150 hrs a year), certainly compaired to a crew like this. Others would consider someone a newbie with alot less experience.

Whatever the definition, when it comes to volume of incidents, you might have a higher percentage of "Newbie", or less experienced folks getting themselves into minor situation that may cause a broken limb of other minor incident that has little lasting impression. When it comes to SERIOUS incidents, like those involving loss of life. I would agree, it certainly seems that some more experienced people (less likely considered newbie) seem to be involved more frequently, certainly in winter anyway.

Probably has something to do with the fact that thier greater experience may put them into situations where the margin of error is pretty thin, putting them at greater risk, such as hiking in extreme conditions (like a zillion degrees below zero). Less experience people are probably less likely to engage in those high-risk activities, but perhaps more likely to slip and fall on a trail. Who knows, I'm just thinking out loud.

 

[Neil]

For some people it's like drug habituation. They need to go further and further out on the brink in order to get high. How about a Gothics North face traverse - at night? Or a bushwhack into the Basin Amp (whoops, pay no mind Monsieur Dubois ) Others are content to stay well within what the average person would consider normal safety margins.

So yeah, a bit of both with a sub-group within the hardcore group of people who don't do anything halfway, including getting into trouble.

On a personal note, I like to do bigger and bigger hikes but with as little danger as possible.

 

[blacknblue]

Probably has something to do with the fact that thier greater experience may put them into situations where the margin of error is pretty thin, putting them at greater risk, such as hiking in extreme conditions (like a zillion degrees below zero). Less experience people are probably less likely to engage in those high-risk activities, but perhaps more likely to slip and fall on a trail. Who knows, I'm just thinking out loud.

I think this is definitely on the right track. If I may borrow from my skiing experience....

As a beginner skier, you fall a lot, but you are usually going slowly and on easy trails. Therefore, the falls are not dangerous (usually).
As an advanced skier, I'm not falling unless the terrain and/or conditions are pretty dicey. Therefore, when I do fall, it's generally fairly spectacular. Obviously, being an advanced skier allows one to ski (and encourages one to ski) much more difficult and dangerous terrain., thereby increasing the chances that a big crash or big rescue need take place. Beginner skiers aren't blowing up in steep, rocky terrain b/c they aren't skiing there.

With backpacking / hiking / climbing... When I'm just goofing around w/o really any winter equipment, I know I'm not going far. The better experience and equipment and know-how, the more one is likely to be up in the higher mountains and dangerous terrain. Therefore, the more dramatic the rescues. Inexperienced/beginner hikers aren't getting carried out from Huntington Ravine as often b/c, for the most part, they aren't getting that far anyway.

(Of course, we are speaking in generalities and I'm sure we can all think of counter-examples.)

 

[Pete_Hickey]

Somewhat related to hiking, is backcountry skiers amd mountaineers. In these groups, experienced people make up the mojority of avalanche deaths.

Newbies are too scared.

 

[sweeper]

Sound like the more you hike the more likely you will EVENUALLY need to be resuced.

Newbies- make your own call, been too long since I've been there and the ones I do take with me I keep a close watch on them.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Sound like the more you hike the more likely you will EVENUALLY need to be resuced.

And sometimes worse. Didn't Greg Dana die when a serac fell on him? Or was that the founder/CEO of Outdoor Research a couple of years ago?

 

[sierra]

Sound like the more you hike the more likely you will EVENUALLY need to be resuced.

Newbies- make your own call, been too long since I've been there and the ones I do take with me I keep a close watch on them.

I respectfully completely dissagree.

 

[Skyclimber]

Sound like the more you hike the more likely you will EVENUALLY need to be resuced.

.

I totally disagree with this statement as well.
The one time, I came near, "A Rescue," I was a complete novice Winter Hiker. I believe the more you hike, the wiser you get, learning from our mistakes and bad experiences.

 

[Grumpy]

. . . I believe the more you hike, the wiser you get, learning from our mistakes and bad experiences.

I'd like to think that was true. But I have very serious doubts it is anything close to a universal "rule."

Truth is, hubris can be a real killer: Just about the time you think you have all the answers, to your own amazement and horror you discover that you don't.

Experience seasoned with humility (an astonishingly rare commodity) yields the real wisdom that will help keep you safe.

G.

P.S.: I really dislike the term "newbie," which I think is demeaning.

 

[Artex]

For some people it's like drug habituation. They need to go further and further out on the brink in order to get high. How about a Gothics North face traverse - at night? Or a bushwhack into the Basin Amp (whoops, pay no mind Monsieur Dubois ) Others are content to stay well within what the average person would consider normal safety margins.

So yeah, a bit of both with a sub-group within the hardcore group of people who don't do anything halfway, including getting into trouble.

Ditto. I've had an "experienced" hiker hint that I was reckless and several times claimed I didn't know what I was doing, and this person rarely ventured above treeline. Ha!

It's a matter of knowing your own limits and taking precautions while still realizing something could go wrong and hope that it doesn't.

 

[sleeping bear]

I'd like to think that was true. But I have very serious doubts it is anything close to a universal "rule."

Truth is, hubris can be a real killer: Just about the time you think you have all the answers, to your own amazement and horror you discover that you don't.

Experience seasoned with humility (an astonishingly rare commodity) yields the real wisdom that will help keep you safe.

G.

P.S.: I really dislike the term "newbie," which I think is demeaning.

I can't agree enough about that word! Just sight of it makes me cringe!

If you climb Everest enough, eventually something will happen to you, unless you're Ed Veisturs. He has that expereince seasoned with humility. But, what are the chances something will happen to him?

My guess is more happens when people push their limits, which probably happens more with expereinced people. Not that everyone who pushes their limits is going to wind up needing a rescue, but it inceases the risk. Risk is part of why we do things. It wouldn't be as much fun without some risk involved. Outdoor sports are inherently dangerous. Winter hiking/climbing is inherently dangerous. Are you willing to accept that?

In Into Thin Air, it's the most expereinced people on Everest that wound up in trouble. There were a lot of other factors, but basically they pushed themselves and their teams too far. Interstingly enough as they had been discussing how they thought the least expereinced team(s) on the mountain would wind up in trouble.

Perhaps it's more about the individual people. Do they have a history of making bad decisions?

 

[Skyclimber]

P.S.: I really dislike the term "newbie," which I think is demeaning.

And the word "peakbagging!"

"Newbie" everyone has to start somewhere in order to gain experience. How about the word "less experienced" instead?

 

[timmus]

And the word "peakbagging!"

"Newbie" everyone has to start somewhere in order to gain experience. How about the word "less experienced" instead?

Less experimented is two words, and it would had make a long and a bad title for the thread.

Hardcore hiker is also a term that sounds stupid, IMO. Like ''newbie'' it is just an image, I don't think it should be taken ''au pied de la lettre''. Nobody I know would seriously say ''Hi, I'm an hardcore hiker'', let's go bushwack in vinyl suits.

 

[mavs00]

I don't have real issues with the words themselves. My problem is with definition. What the hell is a "newbie" hiker anyway. Am I one? .......... I sure feel like one sometimes. Other times I feel like a"hardcore hiker" (whatever that is), usually with my kids or someone else that foolishly thinks I know what I'm doing out there.

If there was some specific defining moment when one "crosses over" from newbie to hardcore hiker, then I'd be all set. Hey, perhaps they could give out a PATCH......

 

[Skyclimber]

I don't have real issues with the words themselves. My problem is with definition. What the hell is a "newbie" hiker anyway. Am I one? .......... I sure feel like one sometimes. Other times I feel like a"hardcore hiker" (whatever that is), usually with my kids or someone else that foolishly thinks I know what I'm doing out there.

......

My definition would be a "newbie" is a beginner or the less experienced hiker.

A hardcore hiker, is one who will do just about anything to get to the top of a summit, no matter what the weather or trail conditions, so happen to be. They also have gained more experience.
Also to include being on the trails at every opportunity they possibily can be.

 

[Pete_Hickey]

...newbie...

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'

Nobody I know would seriously say ''Hi, I'm an hardcore hiker'', let's go bushwack in vinyl suits.

Hey. I'm hardcore....down to my tonails...Dunno about the hiker part, but I do have the vinyl suit.. or maybe it's laytex... Whatever...