iain Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 For those who are concerned about the "locater beacon" issue, you should be aware of House Bill 2509. It has been assigned to the Government Accountability and Information Technology Committee. There will be an initial public hearing on Feb 20th at 1:00 pm (That's tomorrow). Hearing Room E, Capitol, Salem. In 2005 Oregon Department of Emergency Management reported that 3.4 percent of all SAR missions were for climbers. 3 percent were for mushroom hunters. I am astounded the media has not picked up on these gripping mushroom hunter searches that also seem to be dominating OEM's time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 In 2005 Oregon Department of Emergency Management reported that 3.4 percent of all SAR missions were for climbers. 3 percent were for mushroom hunters. I am astounded the media has not picked up on these gripping mushroom hunter searches that also seem to be dominating OEM's time. Hmmmmmmmmm, Iain: that leaves,........maybe 90 percent of the SAR missions for what....political retreats? The Kims of course were the othere 3.6 percent I suspect. _______________________________________________________________ BTW, CUINOZ - I've done my share of wandering around in the strangest of damn places in the shittest of conditions looking for idiots/friends and various other folks. Maybe you have as well. I'm not reveling in Sh*t here. Normally don't even post on these kinds of threads. Be aware: I'm happy for 2 things: 1st) That some of our brothers care enough to commit to being so available to run where ever they are requested to be to help our other brothers out (even brother dogs). 2) Specifically that these folks are OK. So what? _______________________________________________________________ Tomorrow it may be me (there but for the grace of God go I) It in no way changes my opinion. Nor should it ...eh? At all. Maybe it hardens it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
einzelgaenger80 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I'm sure most already use this resource, but maybe there are new people who do not: http://www.nwac.us/~nwac/products/SABNW One of the best resources. BTW: Anyone else notice that they have not posted weather reports/predictions or avi dangers in the climber sign-in area on the SS of Hood ever since the Dec. incident? I've been there a few times since then, never seen it. Maybe I am just missing it? I climbed right before the Dec incident, and it was there. Liability issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I believe this is due more to USFS staffing than anything. There is no climbing ranger position in winter, so updates are less frequent. I have to wonder how many climbers take the time and effort to drive to Timberline only to see that printout and bag it. It is good to hear the nwac report is being used. I can pass this on. The climber's registration area will be redone in the near future. Possibly featuring unmanned drone vending machines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryland_moore Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 The climber's registration area will be redone in the near future. Possibly featuring unmanned drone vending machines. Will MLU's be available? Maybe the State can try the "honor system" like the City of Portland did with it's yellow bicycles idea. They just put out about 20 yellow bikes for anyone to ride arlound on and had certain bike racks you could return the bikes to on an honor system. Within a week, all bikes were gone. You'd see a homeless man riding one every so often.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Why doesn't he steal some spray paint? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmuja Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Anyway, Next time I climb Hood - after they pass the stupid person locator device law - Im going to go up in a wind breaker and tennie shoes with a marginal WX forecast because Im ..well...an "optimist", and then when I get a little cold Im going to activate my stupid person locator device, and I better get a fuckin rescue!! In fact, I better get a chopper ride off that mountain or else Im GOING TO CALL EVERY FUCKING LAWYER I KNOW AND SUE THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF THE STATE OF OREGON AND MAKE YOU ALL PAY! There, I feel better now... PS - Thanks to Cluck and Iain once again.. To the dude I called an idiot, you prolly didn't deserve that, sorry, Im just more paranoid than usual and the voices in my head are GETTING LOUDER! To the rescued climbers, Im glad your safe, now GO FIND ANOTHER HOBBY BECAUSE YOU AND YOUR GROUP ARE FUCKING IDIOTS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmncwrtr Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Clueless climbing newbie here, but it seems like what's needed is a way of educating the public about MLUs capabilities rather than have everything us non-climbers learn about them happen during high-profile SAR operations or during the aftermath. Just how big an issue is this madated MLU for people here? Not sure if it's been done already since I don't get the Oregonian, but has the climber view about MLUs ever been addressed in an article there? Something similar to the pros and cons that Cluck posted about here. If not, has anyone considered chipping in money and writing your own response to the law and having it published in the local paper with signatures to back it up? And is anyone planning to attend the public hearing that Iain posted about and let their feelings be known about this? Maybe it's already being done, but a little grass-root activism from the climbing community might really help if people feel so strongly about not wanting this to become a law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
einzelgaenger80 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 A big kudos to who ever does the NWAC reporting -- who ever it is is obviously a mountain goer in some fashion -- and the detail of the reports show it (as does the occasional mountain humor). It is almost always dead on, and a lot of people would stay out these bad situations if they read that report before they went up. Thanks again to all the PMR people. They are great. They are always helpful and take time out to give advice -- whether at the base and give some route reports, or any where else on the mountain (or if you are tucking tail and coming down hogback because of HORRIBLE weather and you run into a couple of them -- they offer to lead to the summit, you follow and end up on some 200 ft crazy ice variation in the gates with no tools and ropes, ZERO vis in a freezing rain storm... leading to one of the most amazing summits of my life ... and on HOOD, no less!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btowle Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 dmuja...you beat me to it. The next time I climb Mt. Doom after the MLU law passes, I am going to push the button and see if I can get Cluck to carry my pack down for me because I "might" have "kind of twisted" my ankle. Maybe I could get a ride in one of those cool sleds. Cluck...you wouldn't roll one of those sleds and give a guy a nose burn if you thought he might be faking it would you??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matopis Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 There have been a number of references to bad weather in this thread. Thanks to those that posted links to weather forcasts. I disagree a bit with people who state you shouldn't go into the mountains in bad weather. I have found that getting hammered by storms is some of the best training you can do! The vital skills that you learn while on the lower summits help shape you as a mountaineer. If you just wait for perfect weather to climb you won't know how to deal with the challenges that the mountain sends you unexpectadly. Instead of relying on backcountry skills we start relying on gadgets. I'm not saying we should be summiting regardless of weather, but I don't think we should chastise people for at least getting up there and seeing what the conditions are like. Maybe this party needed more winter travel practice in the lower Cascades? How about being smart enough to not go up with bad weather coming in? Gee ,,, theres an idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I wasn't suggesting people not go up in bad weather, I was suggesting people be informed of what weather they will encounter, and be prepared to manage the attending reality that goes along with it. If they aren't and still want to learn the ropes they need to head up with someone who is experienced and competent in the expected conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmuja Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 If you go up or stay up in bad weather and end up unable to get yourself down you should not have been there, period. These people needed a rescue and they put themselves in that predicament because they could not deal with the weather. What they learned is that if they cry for help, someone will come and get them....DUMB! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matopis Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I agree with both of you guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryland_moore Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I think this is an awesome idea. I spoke on the radio tonight voicing my opinion against any legislation but cannot make it down to Salem for public comment. Anyone in Salem on this board that can go over there to give the climbers a voice? I wrote to my State Representative, but she has not replied. Everyone on this thread needs to do this. This Bill is nothing more than a knee jerk reaction that is unenforceable, takes precious dollars away from an already strapped State budget, and will do very little to reduce SAR rescues and costs. I wonder if it will even save any additional lives that could be saved by using sound judgement and other means out of the ten essentials. It may even put more people in harms way and give people a false sense of security that if I go into the mountains and carry one of these, I will be rescued anyway so I will push it. It creates a false safety net that the State cannot provide, staff, or fund. I would like to see the proposed budget, what it will cost and then what is the benefit and how many people will benefit from this in the climbing community. Becasue that is all it will affect when dealing with the 10,000 ft. elevation issue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 ... I don't respect anyone's decision to bring a dog up there. WTF? That dog isn't trained to climb. That dog can't guage a ledge. That dog didn't make a choice to go up a mountain in these conditions. I'm an animal lover and freak out in the az summer when dog owners don't see fit to supply their overly panting dogs water when walking them in 100 degree weather. I pray, more than anything, that dog makes it off the mountain. I pray that his owners do too, but if the dog don't, well so much for my sympathies for its owner. I agree, they shouldn't have taken a dog up there. I mean, WTF? If they cut the dog open they can get, what, maybe their feet inside it for warmth? What good is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 ... I don't respect anyone's decision to bring a dog up there. WTF? That dog isn't trained to climb. That dog can't guage a ledge. That dog didn't make a choice to go up a mountain in these conditions. I'm an animal lover and freak out in the az summer when dog owners don't see fit to supply their overly panting dogs water when walking them in 100 degree weather. I pray, more than anything, that dog makes it off the mountain. I pray that his owners do too, but if the dog don't, well so much for my sympathies for its owner. I agree, they shouldn't have taken a dog up there. I mean, WTF? If they cut the dog open they can get, what, maybe their feet inside it for warmth? What good is that? Holy cow…..this is the speculation thread. I know the owner and the dog. Matty would not put Velvet in harms way. Velvet is experienced in climbing. Matty is also experienced in climbing. Sounds like it was an “accident”. I am just glad everybody walked away from this. Just remember we were not there. We are only going of hearsay. Just because you would not bring a dog on the mountain doesn’t mean shit. Velvet was named because Matty found him in Black Velvet Canyon wandering around. Brought him back to camp. We had a dog on the road trip from then on. Velvet has a heart of gold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Larceny Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 How does one guy with two women in a snow cave get cold? Was he gay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motomagik Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I know the owner and the dog. Matty would not put Velvet in harms way. Ummm, you don't think bringing the dog up Hood in February when a major storm system was coming in wasn't putting the dog in danger? An accident it may have been, but falling 150' (or however far they determined it to be) down a cliff and getting stranded in a blizzard isn't putting the dog in danger? I'm sure the dog has a heart of gold. They all do. Doesn't change the fact that unfortunately the dog doesn't make it's own decisions, it relies on it's owners to keep it safe. I think the dog would have very gladly sat this one out. Especially if it had broken it's leg in that fall and had to be put down. Maybe the owners should think about that next time they want to take the dog "climbing". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Shit happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 From CNN.com: "We've been up on the mountain for many years," Liston said. "With the group we were going up with this time, we just wanted another extra level of security, just in case something happened, especially with winter conditions." Should have read: "I'm so confident in my skills, I'm gonna bring my dog, but these dumb fucks I'm going with will probably be the death of me. Who knows? They just might tip over sideway, standing still in a whiteout, and fall over a cliff or something. I better get laid ..." The Verdict: Guilty by Association Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Guero Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 It wasn't just two women, don't forget the dog. And speaking of the dog, did she have her own sleeping bag?? If not, it should be a requirement for all canine climbers. How does one guy with two women in a snow cave get cold? Was he gay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Been spotty on CC.com the last couple weeks, so not sure if this has been brought up, but I find it interesting that 6 snowmobilers died in avvys last weekend (many with beacons), and yet I don't see a whole lot of news chatter about regulations to protect slednecks....or really any press at all. Most of these guys started the avvys that killed them, but I don't see a lot of speculation about their judgement....going out in high avalanche danger, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weekend_Climberz Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Been spotty on CC.com the last couple weeks, so not sure if this has been brought up, but I find it interesting that 6 snowmobilers died in avvys last weekend (many with beacons), and yet I don't see a whole lot of news chatter about regulations to protect slednecks....or really any press at all. Most of these guys started the avvys that killed them, but I don't see a lot of speculation about their judgement....going out in high avalanche danger, etc. That's because nobody really likes slednecks, they are just in denial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 good point...we climbers are a magnetic bunch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.