Pemi Flood Alert (10/25/09)

[Maddy]

Reckless does seem like a harsh word for this event. I retract that word from my first post.
If there were no flood warnings prior to them leaving on their hike, that changes everything but from reading some of the posts it sounds like the weather was a bit of a challenge from the start of the weekend.
When I took my safety course with the AMC , they taught us how to cross rivers with ropes and recommended that we carry 25 feet of rope with us when conditions are questionable.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Clearly there is a continuum which progresses from safe to negligent to reckless to death wish. I think this could fall into safe end of the negligent continuum. I would not call it reckless.

We are all struggling with where the lines are on this continuum.

Warnings or not, I would not personally go to Owl's Head when any substantial rain was in the forecast. That falls too far outside my comfort zone.

Tim

 

[una_dogger]

Maybe a bit self misquided?? (don't know those involved or thier thought process but could see myself perhaps in the same situation )...Owlie is a "rainy day hike" but there are limits to that reasoning. I recall doing it when the Pemi was running high and watching the USGS guaging station go down hour by hour the day before we went out. The Black Pond Bushwack made all the difference for us that day.

Glad all involved made it out OK, that's the main thing!.

 

[MichaelJ]

If there were no flood warnings prior to them leaving on their hike, that changes everything but from reading some of the posts it sounds like the weather was a bit of a challenge from the start of the weekend.

For what it's worth, I'd heard several days before the weekend that Saturday's weather would include several inches of rainfall.

I'd categorize this one, as an attempted day hike, as "foolish" or "unnecessary." Even with the Black Pond bushwhack, there's still a Lincoln Brook crossing as well as Liberty Brook, both of which could well be dangerous or impassable in these types of rain conditions.

Does that make it reckless or negligent? If they didn't check the forecast or read about the trail and its crossings having issues at high water, then I'd put that at the mild end of negligence. Really, any hiker in the Whites should be aware of the weather, and if the forecast includes rain said hikers should be aware of the trail description and the implications for crossings. If these folk did check the forecast but went anyway, well, some of us would call it reckless and others probably would call it a fun challenge.

Regardless, they didn't call for the rescue themselves, and that leads off into an entirely different aspect of these discussions ... how to build a safe level of "buffer" into the itinerary that you leave with family or friends before they call in that you're missing. Too long a time and if you're in real trouble it could mean the difference of life or death. Too short a time and unnecessary searches go out. Should they have left word that they might be out late or overnight due to the rain? Should the lack of saying that be seen as being inadequately prepared for the possible conditions?

 

[TCD]

Remember that in addition to cost, SAR folks put themselves at risk when they go out. Maybe this discussion belongs on the other thread?

http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=32912

People should plan, and they should communicate. A simple "hey, if the water's too high, we'll camp out, don't send SAR" addresses this. It doesn't have to be "never call SAR for me." That's a straw man.

Parties going out should have an understanding with someone at home about when they want SAR to be called, and when they don't. It's really easy to discuss this in advance; not discussing it in advance may be the only thing that could be considered negligent here.

I only go alone in the summer, when I'm confident that I will survive a night out with the clothes on my back and a space blanket. I leave my route with my wife; we agree that she is not to call SAR unless I don't show up in the morning. (In the summer in the adks, the Rangers don't generally start a search at night anyway, because there's no point in risking injury to night searchers when a missing person will almost certainly survive until daylight.)

TCD

 

[dug]

I have to vote yes because there were flood warnings and rain.
They took a chance and got in "over their heads" quite literally. They needed a rescue. If Scott is fined, so should these two unfortunate people.
I would vote for negligent if warnings were posted prior to their hike.

Posted where? Is there a spot where we are all supposed to check for warnings? Here? Weather.com?

 

[Mike P.]

Remember that in addition to cost, SAR folks put themselves at risk when they go out. Maybe this discussion belongs on the other thread?

http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=32912
TCD

True, SAR put themselves at risk (In some winter cases they will try & not risk their lives in horrific weather - but still do risk a lot to rescue people & some have failed tro come back) in this case, those risk were minimal, SAR personal know the bushwhacks & I imagine would have carried rope if stream crossings had remained high.

The other thread refers to people calling SAR themselves with a high priced safety device for water & is more in line with the couple a few years ago who kept calling for directions on a Tripyramid hike. If I remember that correctly they had GPS but no map & no idea of where they wanted to go, but they knew where they were.

Conditions change things, they were unharmed & likely have learned a lesson on the difference between a average rainy day hike (no views but crossings okay) & a flooding rain hike (pick a trail with no river crossings like C-Path to Pierce, Martha or a day in town playing tourist). Had a sharp cold front come in or it kept raining another 12-24 hours, IMO we would be a bit more punitive on whether they were negligent. I'm thinking cost on this one would have been a few hundred bucks, no chopper, no group of 100+ checking all trails in & out of the Pemi, etc.

 

[hikerbrian]

True, SAR put themselves at risk ... & some have failed tro come back

Is this true? Has any rescuer in New England ever died while trying to conduct a SAR? I can't recall ever hearing of that myself, but I'm sure someone here can set me straight.

 

[--M.]

Is this true? Has any rescuer in New England ever died while trying to conduct a SAR? I can't recall ever hearing of that myself, but I'm sure someone here can set me straight.

Yes, at least one, and I can't remember the name, but it was on Mount Washington (east side) and the rescued party was brought out, but at the expense of one fatality amongst the SAR teams. Others will chime in with specifics. I believe it's covered in Nicholas Howe's "Not Without Peril." There's a plaque up there for him, if I remember correctly. Ah, "Albert Dow," I think.

 

[Maddy]

Posted where? Is there a spot where we are all supposed to check for warnings? Here? Weather.com?

I believe it's the National Weather Service site and I also like the Mt Washington Observatory weather site. I am not fond of weather.com.

Post title should be 10/25/09 but no way to edit....

The heavy rain of yesterday appears to be over but south of here the Pemi is still working to disgorge it all. The "Wilderness's" Pemi will still be high if not in flood stage.

NWS Alert:

Issued by The National Weather Service
Portland, ME
3:51 am EDT, Sun., Oct. 25, 2009

... FLOOD WARNING EXTENDED UNTIL THIS AFTERNOON... THE FLOOD WARNING CONTINUES FOR THE PEMIGEWASSET RIVER AT PLYMOUTH. * FROM THIS MORNING UNTIL THIS AFTERNOON. * AT 3 AM SUNDAY THE STAGE WAS 10.4 FEET. * FLOOD STAGE IS 13.0 FEET. * FORECAST TO RISE ABOVE FLOOD STAGE BY THIS MORNING AND CONTINUE TO RISE TO NEAR 13.3 FEET LATER THIS MORNING. THE RIVER WILL FALL BELOW FLOOD STAGE BY THIS AFTERNOON.

More Information
... THE FLOOD WARNING IS CANCELLED FOR THE FOLLOWING RIVERS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE... PEMIGEWASSET RIVER AT WOODSTOCK AFFECTING GRAFTON COUNTY

... THE FLOOD WARNING CONTINUES FOR THE FOLLOWING RIVERS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE PEMIGEWASSET RIVER AT PLYMOUTH AFFECTING GRAFTON COUNTY

 

[Tuco]

Yes, at least one, and I can't remember the name, but it was on Mount Washington (east side) and the rescued party was brought out, but at the expense of one fatality amongst the SAR teams. Others will chime in with specifics. I believe it's covered in Nicholas Howe's "Not Without Peril." There's a plaque up there for him, if I remember correctly. Ah, "Albert Dow," I think.

NAME: Albert Dow

AGE: 28

RESIDENCE: Tuftonboro, NH

DATE: January 25, 1982

CAUSE OF DEATH: Avalanche

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Albert Dow, a member of the volunteer Mountain Rescue Service, participated as a member of the search party that set out to locate two missing climbers, Hugh Herr and Jeff Batzer. On January 23, Herr and Batzer had left Harvard Hut to climb Odell Gully in Huntington Ravine. When they failed to return that evening, the caretaker of the Hut notified the authorities that the two were missing. Cold and windy conditions prevailed: temperatures on the summit on the 23rd registered 1 degree F, with winds of 56 to 69 mph. Blowing snow limited visibility severely. On the 24th and 25th the weather deteriorated with colder temperatures and higher winds, hampering search efforts. Avalanche warnings had been posted by the U.S. Forest Service for many areas around Mount Washington. Despite the inhospitable conditions, the searchers persisted in hopes of locating the lost climbers alive. On the 25th, Dow and another MRS team member, Mike Hartrick, carefully threaded their way down near the Lion Head Trail, striving to avoid avalanche prone slopes, after finding no trace of the climbers. Well below treeline, an avalanche swept over them. Hartrick managed to clear an air hole and radio for help. Dow was found two hours later under three feet of snow. He had not survived.

LESSONS TO BE LEARNED: Avalanches are not a hazard unique to the world's highest peaks: they occur on Mount Washington as well. Steep slopes of the mountain's ravines collect vast quantities of snow which falls during the winter months and into the early spring. Additional snow blows into the ravines from the wind swept areas above timberline. Unstable loads of snow increase as new storms pound the region. Warming and refreezing of snow can occur during mild spells, augmenting the potential for an avalanche as new layers of snow slide off the slick refrozen surfaces of older layers. Hikers, climbers and skiers must be alert to the snow conditions on the Presidential Range. Signs warning of avalanche danger should always be heeded. Often it is the victims themselves who trigger the avalanche that swallows them. Avalanches are not limited to the winter months, and the potential for one lasts as long as the snow does. Knowledge of how to handle avalanche situations ranks paramount, as a buried victim's chances for survival decrease by 50% after the first half hour.

Many people donate their time to assist in search and rescue efforts in the Presidential Range. These people are willing to put their own lives at risk in order to aid those who have become lost or hurt in the mountains. In not properly preparing for your adventure, you risk not only putting your own life and the lives of those with you in danger, but you also put at risk the lives of those who would attempt to help you. Please prepare carefully and thoroughly before you go out to seek your mountain adventure.

 

[dug]

I believe it's the National Weather Service site and I also like the Mt Washington Observatory weather site. I am not fond of weather.com.

OK, so, in an effort to avoid being charged, one must have a computer, internet access, and know the link to go to a private website (NWO) to see the conditions? How does one know that? Where is it publicized? Does this apply for all trails?

 

[Maddy]

OK, so, in an effort to avoid being charged, one must have a computer, internet access, and know the link to go to a private website (NWO) to see the conditions? How does one know that? Where is it publicized? Does this apply for all trails?

If you are not pulling my leg, here is my reply.
However you choose to check the weather prior to your great adventure is your personal responsibility. I think its highly recommended if you want to stay out of trouble.

Ex. Baxter...I would call the rangers. If I could not reach them I would leave a message so they could call me back.
If I had no phone, I would borrow one.
Whites...I would call Pinkham
and there are 800 weather numbers you could try.

I hiked for years prior to owning a computer and always managed to know the weather predictions prior to setting out. It wasn't that difficult to do, even in the dark ages. I am a dinosaur.

Hope this helps.

EDIT: You can call directory info and obtain the number for the NWS for any state you want and you will hear a recorded updated weather forecast. Unfortunately most of them appear to be toll calls but our lives are worth more than a few cents.

 

[dug]

If you are not pulling my leg, here is my reply.
However you choose to check the weather prior to your great adventure is your personal responsibility. I think its highly recommended if you want to stay out of trouble.

Ex. Baxter...I would call the rangers. If I could not reach them I would leave a message so they could call me back.
If I had no phone, I would borrow one.
Whites...I would call Pinkham
and there are 800 weather numbers you could try.

I hiked for years prior to owning a computer and always managed to know the weather predictions prior to setting out. It wasn't that difficult to do, even in the dark ages. I am a dinosaur.

Hope this helps.

EDIT: You can call directory info and obtain the number for the NWS for any state you want and you will hear a recorded updated weather forecast. Unfortunately most of them appear to be toll calls but our lives are worth more than a few cents.

Nope, just taking a contrarian position. I personally wouldn't have gone anywhere near that area with the forecasted conditions.

However, if we are going to say that one must follow the forecasted conditions as a stipulation for recklessness and/or negligence, then those forecasted conditions should be posted, provided, for one to see. Weather conditions vary from site to site. If I go to WMUR.com, and they say 20% chance of showers, and I get dumped on...did I go to the wrong site? Which sites are approved? By calling an 800 number, does it give me trail conditions, rain conditions, run-off conditions...melt conditions? Is the trail broken out?

We often hear how the weather changes so quickly, so if I were to go on a three-day hike, and the weather was forecasted to be nice, but instead a storm crops up and dumps 2' of rain...am I held liable because I couldn't get a wireless signal on the Lincoln Brook trail? Believe it or not, I've had this exact situation arise. A storm cropped up and I had absolutely no idea it was coming. I was stuck on the wrong side of the Peabody river and had to wade across. It wasn't pretty.

How did we manage to hike before the internet? And phones?

 

[Maddy]

I think you are absolutely right. We have to try to get the best weather predictions we can, by whatever means are available, and always be ready to deal with the unexpected.
Good old New England brings lots of surprises.
I honestly think that if we do the best we can, and did not proceed with plans if weather was predicted to be scary,but rather got caught or stranded in dangerous unpredicted weather, you would not be considered negligent and fined.

 

[MichaelJ]

However, if we are going to say that one must follow the forecasted conditions as a stipulation for recklessness and/or negligence, then those forecasted conditions should be posted, provided, for one to see.

In the particular case being discussed here, is not the Mt Washington Obs weather forecast posted at the ranger station at the Lincoln Woods trailhead? Plenty of opportunity there to be aware of the day's forecast. Of course this would not apply to most trailheads.

But really, personal responsibility has to kick in at some point. One cannot expect to have the forecast handed to them simply because being aware of it may be a stipulation to not being "negligent." If you're going up into the mountains, you should know the weather forecast. Period. Internet, phone, newspaper, there are plenty of options. However the means, and regardless of rescues/fines/etc., you should know the weather.

 

[dug]

While on the surface, I agree with you, you are further proving my point.

In the particular case being discussed here, is not the Mt Washington Obs weather forecast posted at the ranger station at the Lincoln Woods trailhead? Plenty of opportunity there to be aware of the day's forecast. Of course this would not apply to most trailheads.

So, if I miss a trail head, say the Wild River Trailhead, I could be in a world of hurt. Are we required to walk over the the ranger station? I think I've been in there once. If this is/should be a requirement, shouldn't it be vocalized somewhere? Why aren't there more of these at all trailheads then?

But really, personal responsibility has to kick in at some point. One cannot expect to have the forecast handed to them simply because being aware of it may be a stipulation to not being "negligent." If you're going up into the mountains, you should know the weather forecast. Period. Internet, phone, newspaper, there are plenty of options. However the means, and regardless of rescues/fines/etc., you should know the weather.

What about the situation where the weather changes? I have hiked in on a Thursday evening in late October to 50 degree, clear skies. Friday was pretty nice. Saturday was forecasted to be a 30% chance of rain. Instead, we awoke on the top of Stairs to 6" of snow, and it slushed all damn day on our trip to Isolation and back. None of that was forecasted. Forecasts change. So, if my negligence is dependant on a forecast, then someone needs to tell me what forecasting source is the 'right one', how I can access it, and what it's shelf life is. Good luck with that.

 

[TCD]

And I think this discussion supports my point on the other thread:

It's a waste of time trying to agree on what's a screw up and what's an accident. Those positions will never reconcile. Despite the obvious cases that make the news on either end of the spectrum, the bulk of real cases are somewhere in the middle.

And this one is an example. Even within the narrow population on this board we are going back and forth over whether this should have somehow been anticipated, or whether this should be called an accident. You'll never get agreement.

That's why I say we should charge everyone. (Or, if we want to pay for this with our taxes, charge nothing, or charge a fixed percentage.) In this case, from the sound of it, the SAR probably cost a few hundred dollars. In the Grand Canyon case, with the night vision chopper, it probably cost several thousand.

 

[MichaelJ]

I'm saying that it is nobody's responsibility but one's own to be aware of the weather forecast and to find a way to know what that forecast is. It is not and should not be handed to you on a platter.

The fact that the forecast happens to be posted at Lincoln Woods simply means that someone going in from that trailhead would not have *any* excuse for not knowing the day's forecast. Even going in too early in the morning, you'd have "tomorrow's" forecast from yesterday still posted. That doesn't mean it should be posted everywhere. It just means it's there for your convenience.

If the forecast turns out wrong, so be it, not your fault.
If the forecast changes while you're driving to the trailhead, so be it, not your fault.

But if you don't even try to find out the forecast, if you, for example, claimed you didn't know Saturday was going to have heavy rains, then I would put forth that's an excellent example of what it means to be negligent.

So in the case of the two hikers in question, I am not arguing about whether or not they're negligent. I'm making a general statement saying that ignorance of the weather is no excuse.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

FWIW, my one time visiting Owl's Head was deferred twice because of rain and the river levels. The Pemi, East Branch, dropped from 700 cfps to 500 cfps (6.5 feet +/- .25 feet) during that day and Liberty brook was at the at the challenging end of my comfort level, w/o looking for an alternative way across.

Also, let me take this opportunity to remind everyone to unbuckle your pack straps when taking on sketchy stream crossings.

I have often thought it would make a nice addition to the trail conditions to post the gauge readings for challenging crossings (or impossible ones.)

Tim