Another Mt Hood Stupid Comment

[Dechristo]

He's a regular On The Spot

[G-spotter]

baa

[ClimbingPanther]

He's a regular Timmay On The Spot

faster than the average Dechristo

[Dechristo]

that's not sayin' much as DeC's are notoriously slow, in all manner

[Dechristo]

another, hopefully, soon-to-be-axed post from the "3 Lost On Mt. Hood" thread:

 

These guys were stupid for going up at the time they did. They definitely don't know jack-squat about impending storms and what weather is all about here in the Pacific Northwest, but what can you expect from a couple Texans and a New Yorker?

 

[Choada_Boy]

I'm sure there are a few Texans that wouldn't mind dragging Luke The Fucking Shithead behind a truck right now.

[rbw1966]

Luke=trask

[ZimZam]

Remind me when I get home to punch yo Momma in da mouf.

[Jens]

It is interesting to note that the closure that was issued this afternoon may have very well been a result of this thread. The climbers have been gone since last weekend right?

It is quite amazing when you think of who reads cc. I often forget that policy makers (NFS, NPS, etc.)keep tabs on our actions via this site.

______

Can you imagine the same scenario on Rainier? Someone needs a resuce, so no one may set foot on the mountain. I hope this does not set a precendent. It is poor policy in my opinion. I am not being selfish.

 

[Mr_Phil]

This rescue is a full blown media circus. Hell, it's been on Larry King and every other 'news' program all week.

 

Whatever happens, happens but I'm sure the guys in charge are just trying to maximize the chance of success.

[Off_White]

You might be right Jens, there's an awful lot of new folks reading the board these last few days. In the past we've definitely confirmed that law enforcement and rangers of all sorts read this board.

 

 

On a different note, people sometimes ask what it takes to get banned. Luke the Drifter provides a fine example, and he won't be posting again.

[Dr_Flush_Amazing]

 

I think Luke's assertion that the guys made a poor decision with regard to the timing of their ascent was a reasonable one that should be considered and discussed. However, bringing it up in such an insensitive way in the accident thread was probably inappropriate.

 

I don't think he should have been banned though.

[sweatinoutliquor]

I think he and whatever other avitars he posts under should totally have their shit banned, and I'm glad you did. I just wish it was a most spectacular, wrath of god style, banning with lightning and thunder and stuff.

[Jens]

This rescue is a full blown media circus. Hell, it's been on Larry King and every other 'news' program all week.

 

Whatever happens, happens but I'm sure the guys in charge are just trying to maximize the chance of success.

 

I'll agree with you for sure on the media circus bit. Friends are coming up to me and asking me about this. As for your second point, I would have to respectfully disagree with the arguement that this new public policy maximizes the rescuers chances of stumbling into a needle in a haystack. More technical climbers enjoying the only "real" alpine peak in the whole state of Oregon

can only mean more eyes. I personally don't agree with the arguments that have been made earlier about how it would make it so hard for the rescuers if anyone else was climbing in the mount hood region. And I'll burn in hell for saying this, (don't read on if you are a sensitive viewer) but sadly with the exception of just a few indivduals, mountain search and rescue types here in the NW are just one small step up the food chain from the mounties and NOLS folks. I know this type of statement does not bring the greater climbing community together but ask around and the concensus will agree. This thread has had some very good dialouge and may indicate how future public policy may take shape when this plays out again in the future. Again sorry if I offended anyone here. I may delete this post. Moderators? should I?

[Dr_Flush_Amazing]

 

 

I don't think he should have been banned though.

 

Based on his (and Olequa's) more recent posts, I take that back.

 

That whole "climbers on hood" thread needs some pruning.

 

 

[skykilo]

Why should anyone stop doing anything because of this situation?

 

Don't get me wrong; I feel for those guys, especially K., who is probably in a snow cave in close proximity to the worst possible place to be stuck high on Mt Hood.

 

But it's amazing how the misfortune of a small number of individuals gets blown out of proportion. In the Washington papers today: at least three individuals died in the most recent wind storm. Should people quit living in the PNW? Why don't we feel the same sharp sympathies as much for these three unfortunate folks who were just minding their business, even being good consumers, not foolishly climbing mountains? (These are rhetorical questions.)

 

Life is fatal.

[Weekend_Climberz]

I would have to respectfully disagree with the arguement that this new public policy maximizes the rescuers chances of stumbling into a needle in a haystack.

 

This is basically my point in starting this thread. What kind of precedent does this set for policies of the agencies involved? The first glaciated peak I ever climbed was Mt Baker when I was 15 years old, via the C-D route. When we got to base camp a man had a heart attack and had to be flown off the mountain. Unfortunately, he died on the way to the hospital. Now, while it's no week long SAR event, it didn't stop anyone else that day from continuing on. Actually, made me a bit more determined.

[Dr_Flush_Amazing]

with the exception of just a few indivduals, mountain search and rescue types here in the NW are just one small step up the food chain from the mounties and NOLS folks.

 

I agree with you. Folks who like organizations/clubs/heirarchy/ego-trips/etc are attracted to S&R, and most of them are mediocre (if that) climbers. As you said, there are a few really good climbers in S&R, but they are a minority.

 

However, that high level of organization and command heirarchy are ESSENTIAL when undertaking a complicated and large operation such as a search of the upper 1/2 of Mt. Hood. A high degree of climbing proficiency is hardly required for searching the palmer snowfield for snowcaves, but an understanding of search techniques and being in communication with the incident commander is very important. I don't believe that a bunch of WI5-leading, 5.12-sending, no-organization-belonging-to, rambo yahoos would be able to mount a very effective search and/or rescue in this case.

 

The real shame is that the PNW doesn't have a professional mountain rescue team like they have in Banff or Chamonix (for example).

 

I may delete this post. Moderators? should I?

No

Edited December 16, 2006 by Dr_Flush_Amazing

[cj001f]

However, that high level of organization and command heirarchy are ESSENTIAL when undertaking a complicated and large operation such as a search of the upper 1/2 of Mt. Hood. A high degree of climbing proficiency is hardly required for searching the palmer snowfield for snowcaves, but an understanding of search techniques and being in communication with the incident commander is very important. I don't believe that a bunch of WI5-leading, 5.12-sending, no-organization-belonging-to, rambo yahoos would be able to mount a very effective search and/or rescue in this case.

 

Very true. It might be wonderful for them to have those skills, but the appropriate temperament is more useful, and most climber with the skills don't have the temperament or have moved on to bigger pastures.

[Dr_Flush_Amazing]

 

Oops. Got all serious and stuff there. What I meant to say was...

 

 

POOP!

[ymir]

you bet, champ. i'll get right on that.

[ClimbingPanther]

POOP!

 

Yeah buddy!!!

[Off_White]

No Jens, I don't think you should delete the post, and this is a much more appropriate thread for such a discussion. My objection of Luke et. al.'s posts are most strenuously about the thread they're in and the friends, family, and media people who would read it and not have enough climbing experience to make their own assessment with regard to the validity of his claims.

 

I do think the mountain closure is a bad thing, one that was quite likely influenced by the discussions here. Sure, most eyes are on the main Hood incident thread in the Oregon forum, but much of this sort of stuff will be widely read too. It's a good time to consider what one is saying.

 

Sky, thanks for that observation, it's been rattling around in my head too.

[ymir]

respectfully, skykilo, i think that actually _you're_ blowing my comments out of proportion. i was surprised that people might want to do recreational climbing at a time and place on a smallish peak where they'd likely come damned close to climbers in dire distress, and that seems inconsiderate when they could hamper SAR efforts and are in summmit-mode rather than search mode...i thought it might be considerate to let SAR have the mountain for this one weekend and give them and the guys up there the best chance. i didn't say they should shut the mountain, in fact i said i opposed a formal shutting down. it just seems pretty straightforward to let SAR work unencumbered this weekend in the summit area of this one mountain. three guys are in trouble up there -- or, hopefully, just riding it out in a cave. either way it seems like a better idea to leave the area alone this weekend. that's a long way from saying people ought to move out of the PNW due to the weather, or become couch-mush. as a climber for 20 years i'm not the likeliest advocate of that position.

[catbirdseat]

Someone early in the thread brought up almost the same sort of statement as Luke and it was addressed and debunked. Obviously, he didn't bother to read the whole thread from the start.