Strange Pattern to This Winter's Fatalities in the Whites

[WalksWithBlackflies]

John L - Would that thin guy be you? If so, it's nice to meet a fellow human oddity. I'll often winter hike in short sleeve shirts and even shorts if there's no wind Although I do get cold in October/November, I continue to "dress down" and within a couple of weeks I've built up an "immunity". I think genetics (Irish/German descent) and body type (5'7", 200 lbs) helps too.

 

[Mike P.]

John,

Tim would have been wearing shorts & I'd be wishing I had packed a short sleeve shirt!

Point is well taken on how some of the high altitude masters are vertically challenged (short that is, they seem to love vertical places.)

-44 is more of an oddity for weather than 60 MPH wind & snow on Lafayette, those conditions happen probably 1/2 a dozen times a year, maybe some Monday Nights instead of Sunday afternoon.

Holmes was trying to escape but seemed not to know enough about the Twinway to Zelaand to make that choice & instead went the way he knew. The Coxes apparently did not descend Skookumchuck because they did not know how far above treeline it was & could not see the trees. (Are the new maps color coded to show what is in the trees & what is alpine zone?)

Did they fail to bring a map because they knew the trails? I sometimes forget to pack a map on very familiar trails - for me that would include F-Ridge, South Taconics, Holyoke's & a couple of trails up Monadnock. I try & remember them in winter but seldom if ever look at them until I get ready for my next trip & see if I have the right map or not.

 

[RoySwkr]

I frequently arrange group hikes, especially in winter, and have noticed that ultra-fit hikers seem to have a harder time staying warm when stopping for breaks, and often need to start again before the main group is quite ready to go.

I noticed the same thing with a friend who was very fit, and never seemed to sweat like I did. Part of fitness (in summer) is gaining an ability to shed heat more readily. This may not be an advantage when you are not producing heat very fast.

 

[RoySwkr]

Re: small mistakes

The junction is the Skookumchuck. Where the hell is the Skookumchuck? They've never been here before and aren't familiar with these trails.
...
They are not sure where they are but they know they can't stay exposed above treeline for much longer. They decide to build a snow shelter and wait for a break in the weather.

There are about 10 decisions in this scenario. It's possible to second-guess any of them but I don't think that there is one glaring mistake.

I would venture to state that if this hypothetical couple was carrying snowshoes, had they gone down Skookumchuck they would have lived through this scenario. Conditions would have got better very quickly, and even without the energy to hike all the way out it would have been a more sheltered place to camp in the snow. But treeline wasn't very far away on the Garfield Ridge Trail either. I think the decision to stay above treeline counts as a glaring mistake.

Even if the hypothetical couple had a map, it would not have been easy to read it at the junction, unlike the school group from Vermont who went down as far as Hellgate Brook and then back over Lafayette because they didn't know it was easier to continue. But if you have ever seen a map or seen the trailhead parking or even imagine that down to the L is better, it should have been a good choice.

 

[Jack Waldron]

I agree that building a snow shelter above treeline rather than retreating below treeline via either Skookumchuck or Garfield Ridge is a glaring mistake. But, it's a glaring mistake only in the context of knowing how close you are to getting below treeline. If the hypothetical couple has been wandering above treeline for 2 hours, don't know where they are and aren't confident that they can retreat below treeline in a reasonable timeframe then building a snow shelter isn't an irresponsible decision. This begs the question of how they managed to get themselves so lost.

Most situations that require a SAR are the result of an interlocking cascade of events and decisions. Once such a cascade gathers momentum it can be very difficult to extricate yourself. There are two decisions that I would like to understand. The first is the decision at treeline to continue hiking above treeline toward the summit. This decision was made despite the fact that a forecast snowstorm was in progress. Shortly below treeline a second group, also attempting to tag the summit, passed the couple. Did the couple effectively piggyback their decision on the fact that the second group was confident that they could reach the summit in the storm? Did competitive juices flow? Did the behavior of the second group effectively challenge the couple to match them? What influenced the couple's decision to continue above treeline other than a straightforward evaluation of whether their own gear, skills, and experience were sufficient to deal with the risks the storm exposed them to?

The other decision occurs when the hypothetical couple met the second group returning from the summit. The second group told the couple that the weather on the summit was very bad. Despite this information the couple continued toward the summit. This is the type of behavior where the NH Reckless Hiking law could easily be invoked. But the second group also provided the couple with a positive piece of information; the second group had summitted about 10 minutes ago. This introduces the same set of questions. Was the couple's decision to continue toward the summit based on a realistic evaluation of their own capabilities to successfully cope with extreme weather conditions? Or, did competitive emotions and confidence that their physical conditioning could easily cope with another 10 minutes of ascent drive their decision? When the second group was on the summit either the visibility was better, their navigational skills were better, their familiarity with the summit terrain was better or all of the above. Once the couple continued past this point they don't seem to be capable of coping with the weather conditions. Following cairns in a whiteout or digging a snow shelter above treeline are not dumb decisions. Under a different set of circumstances those decisions might have averted a tragedy. But in the context of a whiteout on Franconia Ridge those decisions contributed to a cascade of events that left the couple trapped above treeline and at the mercy of extreme winter weather.

 

[Tim Seaver]

Perception of "Reckless" Behavior

The second group told the couple that the weather on the summit was very bad. Despite this information the couple continued toward the summit. This is the type of behavior where the NH Reckless Hiking law could easily be invoked.

Although I would probably agree that the Cox's should have turned around, it should also be noted that people's perception of what "danger" is varies significantly, frequently in direct proportion to their own level of experience and/or fears.

One afternoon a few winters ago, a friend and I were approaching the summit of Mount Washington, and met a party of two coming down at the point where the trail leaves the auto road and starts descending the cone. We had started around noon, and it was approaching 3 pm.

The people we met, who I would not describe as seasoned winter hikers, told us point blank that "there wasn't time to get to the summit" and that we should turn around now so that we didn't get "caught in the dark, or worse". Visibility was not and issue, and the temperatures and wind were reasonable, given the location.

Being intimately familiar with the distance to the summit and the descent time, we attempted to politely tell them that we appreciated their concern, but were going to tag the summit anyway ( seeing as though we are about 5 minutes away!) Disgusted with our "reckless" attitude, they stormed down the trail in a huff.

About 20 minutes later, we passed them, glissading down the lower summit cone while they clunked down over the rocks and snow with crampons. We tried to soften the blow by joking, suggesting that they leave a bit earlier next time so they don't get "caught out", but for some reason the humor was lost upon them.

Perception, like experience and ability, all vary.

 

[Grumpy]

Re: Perception of "Reckless" Behavior

. . . Perception, like experience and ability, all vary.

Tim, that is an interesting story, closed with an interesting observation. I'd suggest, also, that result or outcome (that can be measured objectively) is perhaps the sternest and most realistic test of whether or not a particular decision/action could or should be regarded as "reckless."

G.

 

[Tim Seaver]

The Adventures of Lawnchair Larry

My favorite story from the "Darwin Awards" website:

.....Larry's boyhood dream was to fly. But fates conspired to keep him from his dream. He joined the Air Force, but his poor eyesight disqualified him from the job of pilot. After he was discharged from the military, he sat in his backyard watching jets fly overhead.

He hatched his weather balloon scheme while sitting outside in his "extremely comfortable" Sears lawnchair. He purchased 45 weather balloons from an Army-Navy surplus store, tied them to his tethered lawnchair dubbed the Inspiration I, and filled the 4' diameter balloons with helium. Then he strapped himself into his lawnchair with some sandwiches, Miller Lite, and a pellet gun. He figured he would pop a few of the many balloons when it was time to descend.

Larry's plan was to sever the anchor and lazily float up to a height of about 30 feet above his back yard, where he would enjoy a few hours of flight before coming back down. But things didn't work out quite as Larry planned.

When his friends cut the cord anchoring the lawnchair to his Jeep, he did not float lazily up to 30 feet. Instead, he streaked into the LA sky as if shot from a cannon, pulled by the lift of 42 helium balloons holding 33 cubic feet of helium each. He didn't level off at 100 feet, nor did he level off at 1000 feet. After climbing and climbing, he leveled off at 16,000 feet.

At that height he felt he couldn't risk shooting any of the balloons, lest he unbalance the load and really find himself in trouble. So he stayed there, drifting cold and frightened with his beer and sandwiches, for more than 14 hours. He crossed the primary approach corridor of LAX, where Trans World Airlines and Delta Airlines pilots radioed in reports of the strange sight.

Eventually he gathered the nerve to shoot a few balloons, and slowly descended. The hanging tethers tangled and caught in a power line, blacking out a Long Beach neighborhood for 20 minutes. Larry climbed to safety, where he was arrested by waiting members of the LAPD. As he was led away in handcuffs, a reporter dispatched to cover the daring rescue asked him why he had done it. Larry replied nonchalantly, "A man can't just sit around."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Larry came out of his adventure without a scratch. Was he reckless, based on the outcome?

 

[Grumpy]

Re: The Adventures of Lawnchair Larry

My favorite story from the "Darwin Awards" website . . .

Larry came out of his adventure without a scratch. Was he reckless, based on the outcome?

Certainly, you are not making a case to the effect that your hero, Larry, was acting prudently in taking his cobbled together homemade flying machine for a ride, are you?

It is true that dunces and reckless fools sometimes survive their adventures. We call such instances "miraculous."

It also is true that prudently cautious folks sometimes find themselves overwhelmed by what is, for lack of any better thing to call it, just "bad luck."

But for the most part, true recklessness eventually seems to beget outcomes that are consistent with the behaviors.

G.

 

[Tim Seaver]

It is true that dunces and reckless fools sometimes survive their adventures. We call such instances "miraculous."

That certainly applies to Larry

I guess I was just trying to make the point that outcome is not necessarily the best measuring stick, given the "dumb luck" that can seemingly reward foolhardy behavior as easily as it can punish those who are seemingly well prepared. But you beat me to it. Coincidence and luck may play a larger role in our life than we are comfortable accepting.

 

[Johnnycakes]

"There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots."

 

[JohnL]

G,

While I certainly do not disagree with your premise on recklessness, I have always been amazed by those people who, for one reason or another, have an inordinate amount of bad luck or those others who seem to defy their reckless behavior to keep doing what they are doing. Examples that come to mind are Joe Simpson (he’s survived more debacles than the Touching The Void incident), Evil Knievel, snake handlers who are bitten numerous times by poisonous snakes, the forest ranger who has been hit by lightning four times, Len Bias dies and Keith Richards lives, a daredevil goes over Niagara Falls and lives and Dr Atkins falls on an urban sidewalk and dies, and on and on.

What is it that appears to create an immunity around some people and not others? Are some people more predisposed to succumbing to the same event than others? Do some people’s souls have more of a survival instinct than others? Do some people have more luck than others?

A recent Spanish movie called "Intacto" with Max von Sydow and subtitles tackles this curiosity with the premise that you can steal other people's luck by challenging and beating them in various types of dangerous contests and that you can also increase your own luck by surviving these pursuits.

JohnL

 

[David Metsky]

Followup to Larry's story:

Larry's efforts won him a $1,500 FAA fine, a prize from the Bonehead Club of Dallas, the altitude record for gas-filled clustered balloons, and a Darwin Awards Honorable Mention. He gave his aluminum lawnchair to admiring neighborhood children, abandoned his truck-driving job, and went on the lecture circuit. He enjoyed intermittent demand as a motivational speaker, but said he never made much money from his innovative flight. He never married and had no children. Larry hiked into the forest and shot himself in the heart on October 6, 1993. He died at the age of 44.

-dave-

 

[JohnL]

Whaddaya mean, no old bold pilots?

Original Mercury Astronauts

Scott Carpenter, 78 years old

L. Gordon Cooper, Jr., 76 years old

John H. Glenn, Jr., 82 years old

Virgil I. "Gus" Grissom, died in a NASA accident at age 41

Walter M. Schirra, Jr., 81 years old

Alan B. Shepard, Jr., died at the age of 74

Donald K. "Deke" Slayton. died of cancer at age 69


JohnL

 

[Johnnycakes]

They aren't bold pilots now.

 

[WalksWithBlackflies]

I have always been amazed by those people who, for one reason or another, have an inordinate amount of bad luck or those others who seem to defy their reckless behavior to keep doing what they are doing

Perhaps this explains much in regard to why some people make it and others don't

You guys gotta watch the movie "Unbreakable" with Bruce Willis and Samuel L Jackson: www.areyouunbreakable.com

 

[mushroomman]

Time to admit, we are mortal

Ive been following this thread, and hope ive figured out what mistakes were made!
"They went to the mountains in very iffy weather and died!"
They made no real mistakes, it was fate! ( their time)! No different than getting in your car and getting killed on the way to the supermarket.
We can discuss these incidents forever, and its not gonna change anything or anyone. For a short time some will be very carful about the weather reports, but that wont last. Some will carry extra ..stuff.. for awhile, but that wont last either!
What most of us do, even in the middle of the summer, climbing down the most minimal rock face, is put ourselfs at risk!! And hope we will be ok.
Look at Pedex, just minding his own business, in his own house and a life changing thing happened.
Enjoy what you do and know that your putting your ass on the line eveytime you get out of bed! Lets not beat this thing forever.
Its not gonna save you when your time comes!!
Mushroomman

 

[afka_bob]

Since many people die in their beds, it would seem that you put your, uh, ass on the line every time you get into bed, too.

I've never been on a winter or summer trip where I didn't take a glance at the weather, and I generally carry a thing or two along, even on sunny days.

If I do get run over by a bus downtown, it might very well be in part because I was cautious enough to not die in the mountains the weekend before. Meanwhile, I'll look both ways before crossing the street and put out my cigarette before pumping gas.

People do stupid things and die all the time, and there is often a link -- sometimes a whole chain. Learning from my mistakes and from others' beats the heck out of a fatalistic "oh, well." And being stupid in the mountains almost always risks more lives than your own.

But other than that, I agree with almost everthing you said ;-)

 

[mushroomman]

Hope you saw my point

Afka_bob
My point was (i think) that we can prepare and be carful and so on, but... Things go wrong, and we can only be ready for just so much.
As i sit at this computer, i can hear the wind picking up. There is no way to know if this severe thunderstorm warning wont turn into something more after i go to bed and a branch crashes through the window and gets me, Thats fate!! As many have said prepare for tomorro, but dont get lost in worrying if its gonna be!
(Stinking Bruins!!!)
Mushroomman

 

[afka_bob]

Re: Hope you saw my point

My point was (i think) that we can prepare and be carful and so on, but... Things go wrong, and we can only be ready for just so much.

...and (my point) in winter and early spring, especially in the higher peaks of the White Mountains, preparing for cold -- even extreme cold, is not an outrageously over-cautious over-preparation.

Looking like a good year for the Flyers so far.