The cost of safety

[Tramper Al]

I totally appreciate that every piece of gear comes at a cost, and in competition for our other more important financial obligations.

At some point, though, I wonder about the 'false economy' in repeatedly winter hiking in the Whites without snowshoes. They are not just to make things easier on the trail, mind you. Some of us consider snowshoes as a critical piece of safety gear. Many an experinced winter hiker has found him/herself off the trail, due to some unforseen circumstance, and a pair of snowshoes can save your life (or the companion you need to be able to assist) in this situation. Just in the last couple of years, I think people have been stuck overnight(s) in one of the Lafayette gullies and down the Dry River Wilderness in just such a situation. Hey, I've more than once wished I had not left mine in the car on a given day. I try to make that mistake less and less.

And while the VFTT community may at times be of help in locating that 'packed out' trail for barebooting, they may be of more help in finding good quality gear at relatively low cost, and providing some perspective on safety.

Anyway, I just wonder if avoiding snowshoes might sometimes lead to a higher cost than any money or weight saved. Afterall, each of us owes it to our loved ones at home to practice winter hiking as safely as we can feasibly manage.

 

[Rugger]

I agree. I guess I am kind of the opposite of most in that I prefer snowshoes to barebooting. I just think they are a lot of fun to use so for me it's not a question of do I need them but can I use them.

 

[weatherman]

Yup

If you have 'em, bring 'em. (especially if you are like Tramper Al and have some that only weigh like 6 grams apiece ) I can sort of understand if you forgot them at home, make it to the trailhead, the chance is <5% that you will need them, and you have others in your group, but the risk/benefit ratio is so big, it usually isn't worth it. It's different than crampons, where if you don't have them and you come to a tricky place you can usually just turn around. Though I typically carry more weight than most (SK or Sli74 notwithstanding?) and just accept/ignore it.

 

[sli74]

I always tend to carry more than I need so MOST of the time the snowshoes go with me though earlier this winter and on summit day on Katahdin they didn't . . .

I carry so MUCH extra stuff I am pretty sure I scared and appalled our fearless leader GO during the Baxter trip I think my aled weighed more than 90 pounds . . . OUCH !!!! More than once I caught him looking at me with ALL my extra stuff and trying to not comment Right Garret? I can't help it, I always wonder what if and throw even more stuff on the sled or in my pack . . . each person is different though so to each their own as long as they are ready to turn around if conditions call for it.

sli74

 

[Tramper Al]

If you have 'em, bring 'em. (especially if you are like Tramper Al and have some that only weigh like 6 grams apiece )

Yes, guilty. Still, I bring the 6 pounders on all my 'serious' winter hikes.

 

[MadRiver]

After an ill-fated trip to Mt. Pierce last winter, I now always bring snowshoes, crampons, and an ice axe with me on every winter trip. Even if I'm just going to the grocery store.

 

[Warren]

I do the decide in the lot for snowshoes pretty often. Most of the bring/don't bring I do at home. Once I decide I'm going someplace I usually decide that what style I'll be doing it in: everything and the sink, down to full UL style.

I think in many cases the safety factor cuts both ways. The more stuff you have the slower you move, the more likely you'll have to bivy out. "If you bring the bivy you will use the bivy".

For this weekends trip, yeah I'm bringing snowshoes, but just a megamid as a shelter even though I figure I'll be camping up high. I'm not bringing a full on winter duty headlamp, I'm sharing first aid kits, not toting the down booties, a smaller pot than I normally bring when I have to melt water, but I am bringing the ice axe. I'm slim on layers as I'm counting my sleeping bag as one, if I fall into a stream I'll likely have no choice it'll be walk out then there and do so quickly.

On the other hand w/ less weight I may not break the ice on the stream...

 

[giggy]

agree with warren - its depends on conditions, how light you want to go, willingness to can the trip if the going gets tough, etc..

Part of the trip is assesing conditons, knowledge of route. I have been on the old bridal path, lowes path, tucks, enough times to know that 99% of the time, you don't need them.

For me, I like to go light and fast - less stuff = less weight, less time. That being said - this weekend - I am bringing them due to heavy snow last week and the chances that trails aren't not broken out yet. 3 weeks ago, I wouldn't have even debated it - no need to have them.

it all depends on the person, conditions, etc......

 

[BrentD22]

?

If I'm headed somewhere that is packed out (and I know this from reports) I don't rent/bring snow shoes. If I'm headed somewhere I always inquire about the trails being packed out. If I can't find out what the deal is with the trails I rent and bring them. I don't like to dish out the cash and I don't like hiking in snow shoes. If I can avoid wearing them I do! The only trip I've ever got into a little trouble was when I packed too much gear and my pack was too heavy. I managed to get out OK, but from that trip on I've tried to minimize my gear. If a trail is packed out and bare booting (with or without crampons) is no problem, then I say NO to snow shoes.

Some people don't hike with ice axes, poles, first aid, or other gear to others is essential. In winter I notice a lot of peole bring white gas stoves, butane/propane, or other types of stoves. I for one only bring denatured alcohol because it can't break. The other stoves can. A broken stove in winter is a BIG problem.

Basiclly like another person said it's a trade off. I have done plenty of winter hiking. If I ask should I bring snow shoes and you answer me that fine, but I didn't ask that. The great part about this forum is that it makes backcountry hiking better for all of us because of the various views from the members (including the ones you might not want to hear), information I can consume (like if trails are packed out), meeting others to hike with, and many other benefits of membership!

Although Tramper AL will be happy to hear that I could not get confirmed info that the trails I may use this weekend are packed out I will be renting snow shoes (or borrowing them). Tramper please take no offense to this post, I thank you for caring enough about a perfect stranger enough to let him know that it might be a good idea to use snow shoes in order to insure he/I will get back to my family safely, thank you!

 

[DeadFred]

In most parts of the High Peaks in the Adirondacks, snowshoes (or ski's-as Bob points out below) are REQUIRED for safety and trailconditions reasons when (if memory serves correctly) there is 8" inches of snow or more. Good policy, I say, even if some argue that regulations shouldn't apply to everyone.

Nothing is worse than a nice winter trail that has been postholed. Not to mention it really is unsafe...I've twisted ankles and knees because of postholes even WITH snowshoes on. Damn postholers!

 

[ALGonquin Bob]

This is very enlightening. I've been assuming that those postholes on the mountain trails (I'm talking Adirondacks) were the aftermath of newbies who didn't know any better. I'm surprised to read that experienced (knowledgable?) hikers choose to hike in winter without proper equipment. In New York's Adirondack Mountains, snowshoes or skis are required. Is there such a rule in the Whites, or in Maine?

 

[bobandgeri]

This is very enlightening. I've been assuming that those postholes on the mountain trails (I'm talking Adirondacks) were the aftermath of newbies who didn't know any better. I'm surprised to read that experienced (knowledgable?) hikers choose to hike in winter without proper equipment. In New York's Adirondack Mountains, snowshoes or skis are required. Is there such a rule in the Whites, or in Maine?

Hmmmm - what is the criteria for someone to be called experienced?

To answer your question - in NH and Maine there are no rules on what you need for equipement.

If after talking to people that have recently done a trail we are planning on hiking we are told that snow shoes are not needed, and our gut agrees, we leave them in the car. If we are not 110% sure we will not need them, we take them along - we look at the extra weight as more exercise.

We take crampons on every Winter hike regarless - just in case.

 

[DeadFred]

Bob (AlG), I owe you a reply to your email of a couple weeks ago. Shame on me! Possibly doing the Trap Dike 3rd weekend in March, just before the end of winter. Interested? (Work's been a bitch...I haven't climbed since Mt Marcy in December!)

 

[sli74]

I'm surprised to read that experienced (knowledgable?) hikers choose to hike in winter without proper equipment.

Here is the catch though, what would you consider "proper equipment"? On a steep glazed ice waterfall, I would consider crampons proper equipement, such as on Fishin' Jimmy on New Year's weekend . . . while snowshoes would be the proper equipment on any trail after a storm with more than a couple of inches accumulation such as any trail after the storm that hit a couple of weeks ago.

When I hiked in the ADKs, I always carried snowshoes and much of the time wore them because I didn't want to be hassled and MANY times, I would've been better with crampons or bareboot. I have in the past slipped and slid my way down a steep icy slope with snowshoes so as to not "break the snowshoe" rule in the ADKs BUT I wouldn't say that I had on the proper equipment in those cases . . . which brings me back to my original point,

What is PROPER equipment? Wouldn't that depend on the condition of the given trail or sections of trail at a given time? Just my $0.02 . . .

sli74

 

[DeadFred]

Seema,

You CAN wear crampons instead of snowshoes in the Adironacks where ice and climbing conditions permit. No NY Ranger in his/her right mind will disagree about with you about that. It's more about maintaining good trail conditions and respecting hikers that follow you into the woods.

 

[ALGonquin Bob]

If barebooting results in frequent postholing, than snowshoes would be "proper equipment".

I, too, have been hasseled (always by skiers) on the Van Hoevenberg "highway" while barebooting in from Heart Lake on a few inches of hard packed snow; and I sometimes bareboot up trails as long as I can until I begin to posthole. I have only completed two winter climbs without needing snowshoes to prevent marring the trail by postholing (I did need crampons); my snowshoes are always with me in winter. I disagree with the NYSDEC that skis or snowshoes must be WORN at all times when a specified amount of snow is on the ground. I agree, however, that carrying snowshoes or skis is the right thing to do.

 

[Mark]

It's very rare that I don't carry snow shoes during winter condition hikes. The extra pack weight doesn't bother me or slow me down. I don't even mind if I leave them strapped to my pack for the whole hike. I carry a lot of emergency gear that I don't routinely use.

The problem as I see it is that you cannot assess the trail conditions for the entire hike based on the conditions at the trail head. If the trail is well packed and you are certain that there has been no new snow on the summits, the risk of leaving the snow shoes behind may be acceptable. Unfortunately, it's usually difficuly to know for certain what the trail conditions will be at higher altitudes. When I hiked Cabot last year, the trail conditions at the trail head were like concrete and there had not been any new snow recently. However, once we got up above 3000 ft., there had been new snow in the past few days and the trail was very drifted over requiring snow shoes. Lesson learned.

Plus I hate postholing. In the late afternoon, if the snow softens up from warmer temperatures, a descent without snow shoes can be painful and can really mess up the trail for everyone else.

 

[cushetunk]

Snowshoes: Not just for safety

I'm going to go out on a limb here:

I want to argue that hiking on packed trails without carrying snowshoes is NOT winter hiking. Now, of course, you're hiking in winter and facing so many of the challenges that make the season so rewarding. You're still cold, you still get your winter peakbagging patch, and you still have to negotiate tricky conditions and maybe use crampons. This is a valuable and worthwhile and difficult undertaking. I don't care about semantics; I'm not offended if you still consider yourself an experienced winter hiker. You probably are one.

What I see, however, is that many winter hikers apparently strive to avoid snowshoeing, or even carrying snowshoes. And let's not even talk about breaking out a trail, or bushwhacking untrodden slopes. This seems so opposite to the spirit of winter hiking. Winter hiking is about declaring our independence in winter, cherishing our ability not only to survive but also to enjoy the mountains in their most demanding season.

Without snowshoes you are confined to a rut that is one foot wide by however many continuous miles have been packed out. Anywhere outside that zone you are helpless, and barely able to survive, let alone enjoy. Why, after taking all the time and effort to aquaint ourselves with all the other aspects of winter mountains, would we not make the final step and gain confidence to explore anywhere?

So, I just don't get it. Snowshoes (or skis) simply make sense. The mountains are calling for them.

And finally, yes, conditions still do dictate my choices. Sometimes, carrying snowshoes seems downright silly, like walking to Tucks, or on Mount Pierce after several weeks without snow. Other times I might carry them but never put them on. So I'm guilty as charged of not always bushwhacking up the snowiest path to a peak. When the time comes along, though, I am ready to strap on a big pair of snowshoes and walk where I will, knowing that I am fully ready for whatever winter has to offer.

 

[DougPaul]

What is PROPER equipment? Wouldn't that depend on the condition of the given trail or sections of trail at a given time? Just my $0.02 . . .

"Proper equipment" is frequently a judgment call and therefore cannot be uniquely defined under all conditions. "Adequately skilled/experienced" can similarly be impossible to define uniquely. Inflexible rules such as you must use such-and-such tool (eg snowshoes) under such-and-such conditions (eg: if there is over n inches of snow) don't do it either. Winter conditions are too variable to encapsulate "proper equipment" in a few rules. They also do not take skill into account. (For instance, Rheinhold Messner, the first human to ascend all 8000m peaks--some solo, would not be allowed to solo in BSP. And yes, he has done many difficult first ascents solo around the world.)

This equipment, of course, costs money and brings risks in the form of weight and its effects.

That said, over the past 30 or so years I have observed many instances of what I (and others) consider to be poor judgment, improper or inadequate gear, or misuse of said gear (including not using it when it is indicated). I watched a guy break his ankle because he wouldn't put on crampons until it was too late.

<rant on>
To take snowshoes as an example, we have seen recent deaths and rescues because people did not bring any. Just because trails are frequently packed does not justify the assumtion that they will remain adequately packed. (Trails may be hard in the morning and soft by afternoon stranding the hikers. Or it may snow while the hikers are out. Or the hikers may lose the trail.) If the only people who were affected were the non-carriers, then it would be fine (recreational Darwinism). Unfortunately, the non-snowshoers damage trails (postholes), cause risk to others and SAR teams, and cause inflexible rules to be imposed on all. And sorry, the argument that "I don't have any", doesn't cut it--if you don't have appropriate gear and skills you shouldn't be there.

I have also seen a negative correlation between skill and snowshoe use: for instance an individual who insisted that you don't need snowshoes until you are postholing over your boots also had very poor snowshoeing skills. In actuallity, snowshoes can reduce expended energy and increase hiking speed in as little as 2 in of snow over a hard base.

The zeal with which some people avoid bringing snow shoes, decent crampons, an ice axe, etc, eludes me...

Not trying to suggest that people should carry snowshoes in the summer (in the NE), just that thresholds for bringing appropriate gear are often amiss (bad judgment).
<rant off>

Hike safely, or at least keep the risk and damages to yourself.

Doug (ducking while the snowballs fly )

 

[DougPaul]

If barebooting results in frequent postholing, than snowshoes would be "proper equipment".

I, too, have been hasseled (always by skiers) on the Van Hoevenberg "highway" while barebootng in from Heart Lake on a few inches of hard packed snow; and I sometimes bareboot up trails as long as I can until I begin to posthole.

The skiers are particularly sensitive to postholes because they can catch an edge in a posthole or catch a tip in a posthole and break the tip, and/or take a header. Even without crashing, postholes can make skiing far more difficult than snowshoe tracks.

Some of them might even be over sensitive.

Doug
who has skied over many posthoes and snowshoe tracks...