Wow, this a trip report for the books!

[Mitts]

Uh no it is not. We had a wicked cold snap several years back so I dressed up in all the clothes I would normally Winter hike in, put my Gore Tex bivy on the ground, put my z-fold in it, crawled in and laid there for 30 minutes and I was fine. I'm sure after 10-12 hours in an actual overnight scenario I wouldn't be toasty warm but I'm extremely confident I would survive just fine. I have slept overnight in the same set up on my deck in far less severe conditions without issue. For the weather I typically would hike in (which would never be -35 deg F) my set up is more than adequate for the conditions. I don't recall labeling it as "advice" and I don't recall saying it is applicable to all other people. I said it is what "I do" and is not automatically wrong or completely inadequate just because it is not what Brian would do. You can believe whatever you want. Your opinion has no value to my thought process when I hike.

What exactly is "contrived" or "not real world scenarios" in all these posts you mention? Maybe you can message Brian and see if he has more specific things he disagrees with me on? Based on the odd timing of this post I suspect you just have an agenda to further here and not actual details you want to discuss but I'd be happy to clarify any of these wild and inconsistent "theories" I seem to be pedaling....

Thinking that spending 30 minutes in your backyard has any bearing on understanding an unplanned overnight is contrived. Your convoluted and illogical risk model in the "Missing hiker's dog turns up" thread doesn't align with the accepted ways that experienced and knowledgeable backcountry hikers and climbers think about risk. Your dogmatic gear choices fall into the same category. I'm posting this not to change your mind but to caution others who might read your posts. Its also not productive in a discussion about what a person could have done better to endure a night out to have someone offer up that they have a safety system that totally diverges from decades of learning and its proven because of 30 minutes in a backyard testing.

I'm not sure what agenda you're referring to. I don't know any of the posters in this thread or the author of the trip report.

 

[DayTrip]

Thinking that spending 30 minutes in your backyard has any bearing on understanding an unplanned overnight is contrived. Your convoluted and illogical risk model in the "Missing hiker's dog turns up" thread doesn't align with the accepted ways that experienced and knowledgeable backcountry hikers and climbers think about risk. Your dogmatic gear choices fall into the same category. I'm posting this not to change your mind but to caution others who might read your posts. Its also not productive in a discussion about what a person could have done better to endure a night out to have someone offer up that they have a safety system that totally diverges from decades of learning and its proven because of 30 minutes in a backyard testing.

I'm not sure what agenda you're referring to. I don't know any of the posters in this thread or the author of the trip report.

So how did you develop a better model for an unplanned overnight? Do you spontaneously schedule "unplanned overnights" to learn from the experience? That would seem contradictory to surprise yourself on purpose. If you planned for it how would it be an "unplanned event"? This whole thought process makes no sense to me. Where are you deriving your knowledge from - simply by what people like Bryan decree is the only possible correct course of action (sorry Bryan I keep referencing you because of your initial comment but I mean it in a more generic way like "that guy")?

It would seem to me that the only way to gain some level of experience for that scenario is to actually try stuff out and see what works/doesn't work. Of course it won't be exactly the same. And as I indicated this was not the only thing I have ever done, which you can't seem to shake. I go hiking in the pouring rain on purpose for hours, try different layers, socks, jackets and gloves, hiking in the dark, etc all very much on purpose so I'll have some sense of what could happen if I found myself in those conditions for real. And I'm not sure why you take such vehement and comprehensive resentment about my "theories" and "dogmatic gear choices". What the hell is that? Is carrying a Gore Tex bivy shelter, arctic grade down gear and extra water - for a DAY hike - a radical and revolutionary concept? I'm not quite sure what else you expect me, or anyone else, to do to prepare for that moment. Do you want me to break my arm on purpose and throw myself off a bridge abutment so I can get some good old-fashioned learnin' done? I certainly don't think anything I've tried is anything dogmatic or theoretical. It kinda sounds like the "decades of learning" thing you mentioned doesn't it? Apparently that is "decades of learning" for certain people and "theories and dogmatic nonsense" for other people.

I don't recall you ever making a single comment on any post or reply on anything I have ever done here so I'm not quite sure why you're just jumping out of nowhere to criticize apparently every thing I've ever said or done with "convoluted risk models" and "theories" and dogmas. If you're actually reading my posts I have no idea how you'd arrive at that conclusion. Seems like a personal attack for a personal reason.

 

[DayTrip]

Your convoluted and illogical risk model in the "Missing hiker's dog turns up".

You may find this article of interest: https://www.project-risk-manager.com/blog/qualitative-and-quantitative-risk-analysis/

It explains the "convoluted and illogical risk" model I subscribe to which happens to be pretty common across a wide variety of industries and organizations. Pretty mainstream stuff. The bibliography in Ty Gagne's books reference several sources detailing this model.

 

[sierra]

I am afraid you are following a logical fallacy. Your "system" (or lack thereof) is completely inadequate; it's just you have never needed to use it. Your reasoning is like someone saying her vehicle does not need seatbelts because she has never been in an accident.

First off, your arrogance is quite stunning. My system is more than adequate for me. Exactly how do you know, what I have been through anyway?

 

[Mike P.]

Having taken a two day WFA Course, certified and run really more for High Adventure Scout outings, the first thing is to assess the scene to make sure it's safe or you could be the next victim. The course is certified by one of the groups that BSA accepts and taught by a DR. and Scout Leader. Granted, it's run as you are providing first aid to others or worst case, walking others through the steps to treat you if you're the victim and conscious. This wasn't a NOLS course.

The best gear is the gear between your ears. The decision to winter solo hiking would be a red X for safe wilderness travel. (Yes, I do it and a bunch of us do it too, we justify it by repeatedly making it back home. Better lucky than good, both is really nice, knowing the area like the back of your hand helps also.)

We've also discussed whether there is any real wilderness in the East, again this is relative, if your off trail in winter & it's cold it certainly feels like wilderness and we all agree that when the weather is bad and in winter, the line between safe and unsafe and how many bad decisions you can get away with becomes thin and few. Alaskan mountaineers would say there is no wilderness here. If you die off trail in NH, no one will begrudge you, "He died in the Wilderness" on your headstone.

A piece of pad is a good idea, besides sitting on it, (you could sit on your pack if needed but we usually don't) it can be part of a DIY splint if you suffer a leg injury you can treat with a splint (Or treat someone you come upon) If you are carrying a large bag for the winter gear that you should have, you probably can get your feet and lower legs into it if it opens up properly up top. (Anyone try doing that in a store when trying out packs? Store, F&^@, I'm old) Having some type of small bag is a good idea, I agree few likely do it, likely more hear as the Choir.

My now 70 year BIL is a member in the PVHC in MA and they are active all year in Western MA. His biggest injury, a compound fx of his ankle, where, at his mailbox out by the road in the winter, had my SIL not been home, he had a difficult crawl or hobble to the house, he didn;t dress for a long period of time out that night. (it's 140-160 ft from the house at the end of cul-de-sac, the neighbor or another car wan't coming by) Injuries can happen anywhere, we justify what we bring when we solo to make ourselves feel better so we can tell loved ones, we will be okay. No, it's risky, it's probably not adequate unless you've hobbled out of the Andean Wilderness with a shattered knee cap. Typical ankle & knee injuries I've hiked on but no torn MCL or ACL, just too many chip fractures and avulsions. BTW, I will keep hiking solo too.

Testing your gear is always a good idea, just like on occasion you'll find a Denali or Rainier hiker getting ready in the Presidentials, People should look at trying stuff out at places that mimic conditions they may find. Monadnock and Cardigan have that above treeline like exposure. Greylock has about 1700 feet of vertical, just a few 100 feet short of Pierce with similar grades, just sort of open on the top. We've seen minus 5-10 in NW NLC in CT every couple of years. While I'm skeptical of DT's -35 For what I looked up on the Internet for officially measured record lows in Woodstock, -12 in Feb 2016 and January's record is -13. I have no idea where that is taken in Woodstock so I could see a valley somewhere being a little colder. It's still cold if you are just sitting doing nothing.

The other thing we were often told in WFA was to call for help also ASAP. If you have cell service, is that Wilderness? Soloists, guilty as charge, ignore the guideline that winter groups should be at least four people so if someone gets hurt, one person stays with the victim, the other two go for help is their is no cell service just in case one of them get hurt.

 

[DayTrip]

While I'm skeptical of DT's -35 For what I looked up on the Internet for officially measured record lows in Woodstock, -12 in Feb 2016 and January's record is -13.

It was with the wind chill and 2016 sounds right but I'm not sure. I used to keep notes and stuff for a lot of this stuff but I don't anymore. I started Winter hiking in 2013 and it took me a few years to accumulate the gear. My Kestrel meter battery tends to turn off below about -15 deg F if it is exposed to temperatures that low for any length of time so it would be fair to say I could have been off a few degrees. I went off the calculation on the meter. It was the coldest I can remember it here since we moved to the area in 2003. We live on the North side of a roughly 400' elevation hill and we're probably a third of the way up the hill. I doubt there was any kind of inversion thing going like you'd see in a legit valley. I'm in farm country. I suppose I could have my wife find the photo on her Facebook page because she thought I was nuts but I doubt she'll want to take the time to research.

 

[Mitts]

You may find this article of interest: https://www.project-risk-manager.com/blog/qualitative-and-quantitative-risk-analysis/

It explains the "convoluted and illogical risk" model I subscribe to which happens to be pretty common across a wide variety of industries and organizations. Pretty mainstream stuff. The bibliography in Ty Gagne's books reference several sources detailing this model.

In the "Missing hiker's dog turns up" thread you are applying the concepts in that article and the concept of FMEA incorrectly. You take the same logical shortcuts in this thread when it comes to gear. The only thing more dangerous than taking a risk is taking a risk when you think you're not. Again, I have nothing against your personal thoughts or actions I just cant in good conscious be a part of this community and allow your statements to stand unchallenged.

 

[DayTrip]

In the "Missing hiker's dog turns up" thread you are applying the concepts in that article and the concept of FMEA incorrectly. You take the same logical shortcuts in this thread when it comes to gear. The only thing more dangerous than taking a risk is taking a risk when you think you're not. Again, I have nothing against your personal thoughts or actions I just cant in good conscious be a part of this community and allow your statements to stand unchallenged.

Could you please explain that? And I do NOT mean that contentiously but for my understanding purposes. Because the reading I've done on this model (Likelihood x Consequence = Risk #) is what I was trying to convey and it would appear others were confused by my comments so maybe I was not making my point right. I evaluate "risk" as those two pieces: the probability something could happen and the consequences of it happening. This collective assessment is my overall "risk".

As an example, let's say on a hike on a particular trail I have a 90% risk of falling but the consequence of falling is I land in 2 feet of fluffy powder, all my friends get a good belly laugh and I get up unscathed. I took a high risk of falling but the consequences of a fall were inconsequential. So overall, I don't find this risky. Conversely, let's say I'm on the knife edge on Katahdin and have only a 1% chance of falling but if I do fall I die. Compared to my first scenario, my risk of a fall is way lower. But I'd be far less likely to take on that 1% versus the 90% risk of making a snow angel. You have to look at the two pieces independently, and for all the individual variables, to arrive at an overall "risk" assessment. Does that make sense?

I'd appreciate it if you would take the time to break down the logical shortcuts and incorrect assumptions I am making, particularly with the gear. Really. I'm serious. And don't confuse my animated responses as some sort of annoyance at your "challenge". I welcome the argument/discussion/challenge and if it's as exceptional as you allege you should have pointed it out sooner. When you say "you can't let my statements stand unchallenged" you are implying I am doing something far more nefarious than I am, intentionally or otherwise. I am proclaiming nothing. Just attempting to explain my thought process. From my point of view, I'm not explaining myself correctly and it is annoying me that the responses by others reflect that. And if I wind up finding out I'm a total dumb ass then I've learned something.

 

[Mike P.]

So how did you develop a better model for an unplanned overnight? Do you spontaneously schedule "unplanned overnights" to learn from the experience? That would seem contradictory to surprise yourself on purpose. If you planned for it how would it be an "unplanned event"? This whole thought process makes no sense to me.

My least favorite Merit Badge and themed camp out is the "Wilderness Survival" camp out. Take several teens, tell them you forgot tents, sleeping bags or a bear separates you from tents, food and food, whatever, we'll buy fish or plan on extra trail mix and have to make shelters. (BTW, I believe the Henniker Troop does this on top of Pat's Peaks because every year I walk up and there is a stick structure leaning against a boulder near the top) Our last trip I ended up with Lyme. We don't bring fishing poles, even on canoe trips and not sure our scouts could catch fish or have an interest in catching fish

My problem with this is I should be watching the time so I don't come back in the dark. I should have lights so dark doesn't matter, why is my food storage skills so bad, I attract bears, if canoe camping and I capsize the boat, everything should be tied in. They do this at summer camp where a bad day in July in CT likely won't kill you, providing you don't pick a bear den for your shelter. A trip where I plan to not plan seems counter to "be prepared"

 

[jfb]

I evaluate "risk" as those two pieces: the probability something could happen and the consequences of it happening. This collective assessment is my overall "risk".

As an example, let's say on a hike on a particular trail I have a 90% risk of falling

One thing I notice is that you sometimes use the word risk in place of probability. It can be confusing to those who don't.

 

[DayTrip]

One thing I notice is that you sometimes use the word risk in place of probability. It can be confusing to those who don't.

Now that's what I'm talking about. Thanks. I should be saying "probability" and "consequences" = "risk". I don't do well in written form. I get too wordy. These conversations are much more fun over a fine beverage in real time.

 

[DayTrip]

My least favorite Merit Badge and themed camp out is the "Wilderness Survival" camp out. Take several teens, tell them you forgot tents, sleeping bags or a bear separates you from tents, food and food, whatever, we'll buy fish or plan on extra trail mix and have to make shelters. (BTW, I believe the Henniker Troop does this on top of Pat's Peaks because every year I walk up and there is a stick structure leaning against a boulder near the top) Our last trip I ended up with Lyme. We don't bring fishing poles, even on canoe trips and not sure our scouts could catch fish or have an interest in catching fish

My problem with this is I should be watching the time so I don't come back in the dark. I should have lights so dark doesn't matter, why is my food storage skills so bad, I attract bears, if canoe camping and I capsize the boat, everything should be tied in. They do this at summer camp where a bad day in July in CT likely won't kill you, providing you don't pick a bear den for your shelter. A trip where I plan to not plan seems counter to "be prepared"

My memory isn't as good as it used to be but I'd have a hard time fooling myself in an exercise like this as a solo hiker. I get what you're saying though. That is much closer to an unplanned incident than I am capable of rehearsing so I try to intentionally go out in horrible conditions on purpose (as you know) to develop experience I hope I can draw on if it happened "for real". Nothing is ever quite like the real thing. Just trying to increase my odds of a favorable outcome where it is possible.

 

[sierra]

Could you please explain that? And I do NOT mean that contentiously but for my understanding purposes. Because the reading I've done on this model (Likelihood x Consequence = Risk #) is what I was trying to convey and it would appear others were confused by my comments so maybe I was not making my point right. I evaluate "risk" as those two pieces: the probability something could happen and the consequences of it happening. This collective assessment is my overall "risk".

As an example, let's say on a hike on a particular trail I have a 90% risk of falling but the consequence of falling is I land in 2 feet of fluffy powder, all my friends get a good belly laugh and I get up unscathed. I took a high risk of falling but the consequences of a fall were inconsequential. So overall, I don't find this risky. Conversely, let's say I'm on the knife edge on Katahdin and have only a 1% chance of falling but if I do fall I die. Compared to my first scenario, my risk of a fall is way lower. But I'd be far less likely to take on that 1% versus the 90% risk of making a snow angel. You have to look at the two pieces independently, and for all the individual variables, to arrive at an overall "risk" assessment. Does that make sense?

I'd appreciate it if you would take the time to break down the logical shortcuts and incorrect assumptions I am making, particularly with the gear. Really. I'm serious. And don't confuse my animated responses as some sort of annoyance at your "challenge". I welcome the argument/discussion/challenge and if it's as exceptional as you allege you should have pointed it out sooner. When you say "you can't let my statements stand unchallenged" you are implying I am doing something far more nefarious than I am, intentionally or otherwise. I am proclaiming nothing. Just attempting to explain my thought process. From my point of view, I'm not explaining myself correctly and it is annoying me that the responses by others reflect that. And if I wind up finding out I'm a total dumb ass then I've learned something.

One of the shortcomings of VFTT is the abundance of arrogance, that some it's members possess. It's not enough that they are great hikers, they have to point out the shortcomings of others at will. They know what the right way is, period. Fortunately for me, I could care less, I'm extremely confidant in my skillset. Just my 2 cents, carry on.

 

[Mike P.]

In the "Missing hiker's dog turns up" thread you are applying the concepts in that article and the concept of FMEA incorrectly. You take the same logical shortcuts in this thread when it comes to gear. The only thing more dangerous than taking a risk is taking a risk when you think you're not. Again, I have nothing against your personal thoughts or actions I just cant in good conscious be a part of this community and allow your statements to stand unchallenged.

We are certainly for challenging and different points of view. Welcome. When things get too technical for me, I still fall back to Doug Paul. Dogs for the most part are better at finding their way then people and they can't even read map or a GPS or hold it except in their mouths. (I didn't read the dog thread and am not planning on it)

 

[DayTrip]

One of the shortcomings of VFTT is the abundance of arrogance, that some it's members possess. It's not enough that they are great hikers, they have to point out the shortcomings of others at will. They know what the right way is, period. Fortunately for me, I could care less, I'm extremely confidant in my skillset. Just my 2 cents, carry on.

The only reason I joined this forum was to learn stuff. I've never been afraid to ask a stupid question, never really cared what people think about me (provided they are accurately portraying what I am saying - which I feel like is not happening in this thread and what I am really objecting to) and don't really care about the level of fondness anyone has for themselves. As a result, I have learned a ton of valuable information from numerous individuals who looked past that nonsense. If someone calls me a total $$$hole and proceeds to outline in detail why I am an $$$hole and I learn something from it - mission accomplished.

“If someone is able to show me that what I think or do is not right, I will happily change, for I seek the truth, by which no one was ever truly harmed. It is the person who continues in his self-deception and ignorance who is harmed.”
― Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

"You can't learn what you think you already know" - Epictetus

 

[Mike P.]

My memory isn't as good as it used to be but I'd have a hard time fooling myself in an exercise like this as a solo hiker. I get what you're saying though. That is much closer to an unplanned incident than I am capable of rehearsing so I try to intentionally go out in horrible conditions on purpose (as you know) to develop experience I hope I can draw on if it happened "for real". Nothing is ever quite like the real thing. Just trying to increase my odds of a favorable outcome where it is possible.

I'm done hiking in tropical storms in TN, once was enough. It was that, or having my elderly in-laws, my wife and five and two year old children spend that day in Dollywood. It was that or staying in the rental home all day, that really wasn't an option I finished my solo 48 in a raw June rain on the Tri's just seeing a ranger. I'm looking at avoiding those days on anything taller or longer than Willard.

 

[jfb]

One of the shortcomings of VFTT is the abundance of arrogance, that some it's members possess. It's not enough that they are great hikers, they have to point out the shortcomings of others at will. They know what the right way is, period. Fortunately for me, I could care less, I'm extremely confidant in my skillset. Just my 2 cents, carry on.

Did you participate in the AMC Bulletin Boards before they were abandoned? This thread seems to be similar to some of theirs. When I started following the AMC site, I noticed that many of the opinions did not seem to be based on people's actual experiences but more on what was in the AMC lesson plan for the course.

 

[jfb]

I started Winter hiking in 2013 and it took me a few years to accumulate the gear.

If you look back to some of your early posts when you were trying to figure out what gear to buy, I'll bet you find something I wrote that recommended buying a warm down parka and insulated pants and carrying them instead of a sleeping bag.

 

[DayTrip]

If you look back to some of your early posts when you were trying to figure out what gear to buy, I'll bet you find something I wrote that recommended buying a warm down parka and insulated pants and carrying them instead of a sleeping bag.

That is entirely possible. I remember liking the idea of being able to move in the stuff I brought versus having to stop and get in something. I think there is a lot of value in being able to stay moving, especially in Winter, if injury and/or really rough circumstances do not prevent it.

 

[Mike P.]

One of the shortcomings of VFTT is the abundance of arrogance, that some it's members possess. It's not enough that they are great hikers, they have to point out the shortcomings of others at will. They know what the right way is, period. Fortunately for me, I could care less, I'm extremely confidant in my skillset. Just my 2 cents, carry on.

I'd say one could say it's a bunch of us and at times that's me too. We don't try, but all these hours in the woods and elements do tend to shape our personalities. If you are enjoying your hikes and you feel you are not risking your life excessively, that should make you a great hiker. Your list, his list, her list, their list, doesn't really matter except to the one keeping it.

For some, being a great hiker might be 40 mile 8-10 peak traverses, for some it's a stroll with a view on a great day, for some, it's bringing the love of the outdoors to others or conversely greeting away and seeing no one, and for others pushing the elements.

The majority of the non-hiking crowd thinks we're all idiots if we are out in the snow and ice when it's cold. Healthy debate on rescues should be encouraged. Heck we second guess pro quarterbacks and pro athletes and maybe there is one or two VFTT'er who might be okay actually doing that.