Rescue on Little Haystack-NHF&G insists that hiking solo is a "serious error".

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
So I'd argue that a rescue is more possible with a group, but I think the chances of injury are higher.

I'm not sure this is easily knowable. I know that many times that group I am with, while simultaneously being slowed down by my uphill pace, also typically limits that amount we bite off, but sometimes the group is up for anything and no one wants to say no. I can also imagine scenarios where the group has a wide range of abilities, so some members of the group are being pushed, while others are being restrained. I would think that the chances of injury increase with the difficulty of the trip, independent of group size. Whether the group influences the agenda is a much messier item to discern. Maybe some SAR vets can offer a good anecdote.
 
Last edited:
Is that true, safer solo on moderate ice? What's moderate? requiring rope or almost? Would an ice choked North Tri Slide be considered Moderate? Or are we talking steep enough that most would want protection and belay? I'm asking actually, I'm not a technical climber, Could be my one thing learned today....:D

When someone says that soloing moderate ice is safer than climbing with belays, it usually is because the area is subject to rock or icefall and should be crossed as quickly as possible. In that context, "moderate" means that the team would normally use belays, but the risk of getting hit by something is thought to be greater than the risk of falling.

Edit: some may be confused because the terms "solo" and "unroped" should not mean the same thing, but are often used interchangeably.
 
Last edited:
When in a group, you start as a group, and finish as a group...
IMO, it depends...

If a group decides to split up with all members present at the decision and agreeing to the split, it can be OK. This also assumes that each of the new groups is sufficiently competent to carry out its plans.


What happens all too often is that the faster hikers simply run off leaving the slower hikers behind. Decisions are made without any input from the slowpokes sometimes forcing the slowpokes into bad situations. The slowpokes also tend to feel pressured to push faster than is comfortable and often skip rests, skip food and water stops, etc and may become exhausted. Thus the slowpokes are more likely to have problems and the speed daemons are not around to help. And sometimes the speed daemons get back to their cars and simply leave without bothering to see if the slowpokes get out...

Additional common inconsiderate behaviors exhibited by speed daemons are to wait for the slowpokes and taking off when they merely come into sight (not necessarily within shouting range) or wait until the tired slowpokes catch up and then taking off immediately. In neither case are the slowpokes given a chance to eat, drink, tend to blisters, rest, take part in the decisions, etc...

To prevent this, a group leader may sit at the tail (sweep) to keep an eye on the slowpokes and have a trusted assistant/coleader at the head of the party (point) to keep the speed daemons from running off. One good method for keeping the party together is for the point to stay within contact distance of the sweep with everyone else in between them. Generally the point stops at all junctions and allows the sweep to catch up to make sure everyone goes the same way. A pause for everyone to eat, drink, etc might be nice too...

Doug
 
Last edited:
Is that true, safer solo on moderate ice? What's moderate? requiring rope or almost? Would an ice choked North Tri Slide be considered Moderate? Or are we talking steep enough that most would want protection and belay? I'm asking actually, I'm not a technical climber, Could be my one thing learned today....:D
* Technical climbing involves constant evaluation of the risks and trade-offs of one risk vs another.
* Difficulty is dependent on many factors, including the skills of the climber.
* Soloing is also part of the sport.

And for the context of this thread:
* Accessing climbs often requires one to go off trail.

Doug
 
So I'd argue that a rescue is more possible with a group, but I think the chances of injury are higher.
Groups make some aspects safer and some other aspects more dangerous. And, of course, it depends highly on the individual group members.

There is a good bit of literature on group dynamics and safety in steep backcountry skiing. (ie avalanche terrain). See such magazines as "Backcountry" and "Coulior".

Doug
 
I'm not sure this is easily knowable. I know that many times that group I am with, while simultaneously being slowed down by my uphill pace, also typically limits that amount we bite off, but sometimes the group is up for anything and no one wants to say no. I can also imagine scenarios where the group has a wide range of abilities, so some members of the group are being pushed, while others are being restrained. I would think that the chances of injury increase with the difficulty of the trip, independent of group size. Weather the group influences the agenda is a much messier item to discern. Maybe some SAR vets can offer a good anecdote.

Yes, what TJ said. (the very short version)

Now for the long:

Define group? You could pull three or four people from here (probably 15 or 20 groups of 3 or 4) that would consider a winter Presi-traverse to be a fun day. Different people push (or don't) push themselves and some push or don't push weather. Defining bad weather may be harder than defining a group. (Are meet-up's a group?) If you start as a group of 30 - remembering some novice groups have not learned about group size (or choose to ignore it - possibly some meet ups) should you expect all 30 to stay together or will they create a fast, moderate & slow group based on their speed, out of neccesity? You may or may not have the experience of the group evenly divided that way.

One of the things I like to know when I've interviewed either leaders or people to hike with is to learn about a couple of trips where they failed to reach the summit or goal and why. I'm convinced you learn more on trips you'd consider a failure (talking local generally, not an 6, 7 or 8K peak. Starting at 10:00 AM for a presi-traverse and bailing at Washington is different than doing the same thing due to weather.

You should be comfortable with the pace, the weather, gear decisions and destination. Your first trip with the leader shouldn't be a winter traverse, Presi, Bonds, or Pemi. (If Franconia, need to be comfortable with the weather.) Once upon a time winter AMC trips required Sorel type boots or plastics. Probably are still a few hold overs. Knowing when the leader will turn a group around is important too. (Some have a summit or die mentality, some bale soon after the clouds start to form and there is a wide range between these too extremes)

Is there a leader? Several years ago, I organized some hikes with other people from VFTT. I considered myself the planner, not the leader & I made that clear. Most of the people were pretty strong & in most cases knowledgable too. (or vicea versa) Don't remember having anyone turn back, I was one of the slowest of the group, sometimes someone would stay at a hut & skip a summit spur. I think everyone was strong enough that if they were unhappy with the group decision, they were comfortable heading back on their own.

(We often started as a group other than Chomp as he liked sleeping in some and was the fastest of the group, especially around the time of his AT trip. He was able to make up roughly an hour & catch us before we got to treeline. I did get to the Tecumseh summit before he caught me once when we did a loop including the two Osceolas, on the others, he caught me before the top.)

Seasons do make a difference. It's hard to make enough bad decisions in the summer to put your life in dire jeopardy. (Okay descending Huntington or 6H or other headwall trails in the dark without lights & with novices or T-Storms with metal poles & standing on Laf, Lincoln or another high peak...) In the winter, a late start & leaving the face mask & goggles in your ski bag on a very cold day may be enough to start the process of losing a piece of your nose or having vision issues that make you have to stop.
 
Last edited:
>> When in a group, you start as a group, and finish as a group...

I would like to point out that you are making an assumption that is not true for all groups, so if the start-hike-finish as a group is critical to you, be sure to get that assurance from the leader before you join the group.

In at least one instance, NH F&G proved that splitting the group was good... (Description below from memory, somebody else can look up :)

A group planned to do Franconia Ridge in winter, but the weather was terrible so the less equipped/experienced turned back while the stronger members continued. The continuing members finished the loop OK, but those who turned back needed to be rescued and received a bill which those who went on did not. So if you see that weaker members of your party are struggling, F&G says to leave them behind while you still can :)

Let's just say that the Appalachia Accidents editor of the time was livid.
 
Not splitting up a group is an overrated philosophy. So long as the people that split up can function as a qualified group there is no issue. I have split off from other climbers out west who could not acclimate, thus could not summit. I would tell them to just stay on route and I would meet up with them on the descent. An exception to this, would be if a climber could not safely descend on their own, then I would not separate from them just for the summit.
 
Top