Gary_Yngve Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 bicycle commuting? backcountry skiing? motorcycle riding? staying in a motel in twisp? paragliding? serving in Iraq or Afghanistan? (certainly each activity also has a gradient of risk that one might choose to take) Craig Luebben's recent death made us question that, even with skill/experience/good judgment, not all accidents are preventable, and furthermore, some folks have given up alpine climbing in light of having kids. But are other activities more or less dangerous, or perceived as such? Do folks w/ kids give up those activities? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 "alpine climbing" seems to cover a lot. certainly there is a big difference between 'climbing' say, Sahale via Sahale Arm, climbing the Torment-Forbidden Traverse, or Liberty Ridge. Giving it all up for kids? I don't think so. Giving up some of it, yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Doesn't even compare to serving in war. Get out of here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Doesn't even compare to serving in war. Get out of here! Do you know folks who have died in the service? I know several who have died in the mountains. Every time someone I know dies, I sure do rethink the climbing thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted August 12, 2009 Author Share Posted August 12, 2009 About 1.5M Americans have served in Iraq or Afghanistan. About 5000 have died, making the odds about 1 in 300, which is about the same as the fatality rate for summit attempts on Denali. The fatality rate on Everest is about 1 in 20. The fatality rate on Rainier is about 1 in 10000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 About 1.5M Americans have served in Iraq or Afghanistan. About 5000 have died, making the odds about 1 in 300, which is about the same as the fatality rate for summit attempts on Denali. The fatality rate on Everest is about 1 in 20. The fatality rate on Rainier is about 1 in 10000. for a while the rate on Rainier was about 3-4 in <10000. It's changed the last few years. I think Rainier has not had a death in like 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_H Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Those sports are dnagerous, but alpine/backcountry-motorcycle-paragliding on the way to work is the most dangerous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted August 12, 2009 Author Share Posted August 12, 2009 especially if texting onto Spray at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 How about getting run over by a power boat in a sail boat: http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/justice.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketparrotlet Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Doesn't even compare to serving in war. Get out of here! Do you know folks who have died in the service? I know several who have died in the mountains. Every time someone I know dies, I sure do rethink the climbing thing. My dad climbs, and he also was in the front lines in the Navy in the Gulf War. He seems more scared of climbing than war, but the dangers are not really comparable. -Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMO Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 I truely feel that driving a car is the riskiest thing we do. I started climbing after I already had children, so I have always tried to stack the odds in my favor; watching the weather, staying home if the avy hazard is high, and staying off routes with a high objective hazard (Willis Wall for example). Concequently I don't have a great climbing resume, just alot of fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted August 12, 2009 Author Share Posted August 12, 2009 The annual fatality rate due to auto accidents is about 1 in 5000, though I bet it's much lower if drugs/alcohol are taken out of the mix. Certainly there's a difference between how often people drive and how often people climb a mountain. But if we assume that each person drives 500 times a year, then the per-trip risk is about 1 in 2.5 million. Alternately, if we assume someone drives for 60 years, then the odds of dying in an auto accident is 1 in 84. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t_rutl Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 About 1.5M Americans have served in Iraq or Afghanistan. About 5000 have died, making the odds about 1 in 300, which is about the same as the fatality rate for summit attempts on Denali. The fatality rate on Everest is about 1 in 20. The fatality rate on Rainier is about 1 in 10000. what about if you live in Detroit? but in all seriousness i think OF said it best in the Luebben thread: Yes, the idea that Luck trumps Skill and Experience is unsettling. All those stories we tell ourselves about control and judgment feel a little hollow at this moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CollinWoods Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Every sport is dangerous. Golf can maybe be dangerous if you play in Florida... Should you count in the inexperienced factor? A teen who just got there license compared to someone whos been licensed 20 years? A green baret with combat medals to a fresh out of trianing infantryman? Me compared to Ed Viesturs (ok we might be pretty even there... NOT!)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted August 12, 2009 Author Share Posted August 12, 2009 but in all seriousness i think OF said it best in the Luebben thread: Yes, the idea that Luck trumps Skill and Experience is unsettling. All those stories we tell ourselves about control and judgment feel a little hollow at this moment. I saw that quote too. But it made me wonder if we tell ourselves those same stories regarding other activities too, not just alpine climbing. How risky does something need to be for someone to cut back on it when they get kids? Or how risky does something need to be for someone to want to convince themselves that they are above an accident? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t_rutl Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 but in all seriousness i think OF said it best in the Luebben thread: Yes, the idea that Luck trumps Skill and Experience is unsettling. All those stories we tell ourselves about control and judgment feel a little hollow at this moment. I saw that quote too. But it made me wonder if we tell ourselves those same stories regarding other activities too, not just alpine climbing. How risky does something need to be for someone to cut back on it when they get kids? Or how risky does something need to be for someone to want to convince themselves that they are above an accident? absolutely...we're taught "be a safe driver...dont speed, stop at stop signs and red lights, dont drink and drive...you'll be a safe driver then"...but it is more often not you who get's hit by a speeding drunk driver who just blew through a stop sign...such is life however...we could confine ourselves to padded indestructible houses and never leave only to die of cancer because your family was prone to it...risk is always an inherently subjective choice...i have a friend who's life insurance policy is stricter than a catholic school teacher...he was never a climber but when i invite him for some top roping he cannot...because he is not covered should something happen...how freak it may be...he made this choice for his children...the policy is to ensure his wife and kids have something should anything bad happen to him...that is a personal choice of risk acceptance and sacrifice of certain liberties...on the other spectrum...there is Jon Buchar and Shane McConkey...both fathers...both pushed the absolute limits...both paid the ultimate price for their own assessment and acceptance of risk...not criticizing them at all...just two different perceptions...its a paradigm we all have to shape individually…i don’t know that either be right or wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justinp Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Regardless of how “risky” you perceive something to be the question that must be answered is, is it worth dying for? If it is something you truly enjoy and are passionate about than it is what it is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Alpine climbing is as dangerous as you make it. If you take the time to understand the objective hazards and then choose routes that have none of those you are left with the same odds as golf. Taking into account that removing all objective hazards brings the definition of "climbing" under scrutiny, you have to measure by increments of risk factors offset by increments of increased pleasure. The subjectivity of it all weighs heavier or lighter when you consider how often someone gets out on something they know is more exposed to objective hazards offset by their ability to minimize time in the highest risk zones. Clearly, at some point, you get into the realm where objective hazards are constant but vary by degrees. It is then that you have to start calculating the risk factors of the options. Climb the gulley to be fast but risk getting taken out by a rock or avalanche? Or climb the ridge where virtually no rock or avalanche can get you but the climbing is more demanding and you risk getting nailed by a storm. Or whatever the tradeoffs might be. Getting taken out on Torment or in that general vicinity is a risk in the category of "constant objective hazards". When I had kids, I knew that my time would be limited and to do any of my favorite sports safely requires practice. I decided to give up everything except climbing so I could keep some semblance of tuning. Even at that, my time was limited and my climbing suffered which further escalated my safety concerns. I spiralled downward for a few years. Then I realized that I had reached a point where I was just not happy. From there I started building up again. My risk tollerance is still nowhere near where it used to be but I get out in some cool places. My girls go with occaisionally but mostly I go solo or with a few friends selected for their attitude pertaining to risk. I might die in the mountains someday. That "edge" is part of what makes it interesting. But I beleive it is more likely that I will be taken out by the combination of odds from all the other possible risks outside of climbing. Having a nearly dead mother and nearly dead sister-in-law from the ravages of cancer leaves me thinking that death by mountain, at least at some ripe old age, ain't so bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 The predominant difference between rock and alpine (mountain) climbing is the shift in potential dangers from subjective hazards (in your control) to objective ones (not in your control). Objective hazards in rock climbing basically come down to holds breaking and rock fall - pretty much everything else is driven by a decision you make, i.e. they are subjective hazards of your own creation. That shifts drastically in the mountains which exhibit far more dynamism of weather, snow and ice conditions, avalanches, crevasses, rock and ice fall, etc. - i.e., events out of your control and that you did not initiate. How do climbers deal with those potential objective hazards? With knowledge, experience, wisdom? Sure, the same as on rock, but also by using those to make educated guesses - by gambling and attempting to do so 'intelligently', but gambling never the less. For me the high gambling quotient is the reason I and quite a few friends I know don't do alpine. I like my games to be more like chess where luck and external events have very little to do with the outcome, where talent and skill are the primary determinants of outcomes. Don't get me wrong - talent and skill play a huge role in the mountains - but so does gambling well and being lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Piston Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 With every sport there is risk and benefit that need to be assessed. As others have so well stated there are many factors that you can control and many that you can't, and the decisions you make based on your assessment of the risks and consequences of your actions is the main component of the outcome. Luck is pretty random and fickle. I love being in the mountains so much. I have to admit that the challenge of overcoming a steep snow slope or a rock arete to get to the top of a beautiful peak with a good friend gives me a great joy that I weigh against my responsiblity as a husband and father. I try to be as safe in my assessment of risk vs. my skill, weather, route,etc. as I can be. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but alpine climbing seems worth the risk. I figure statistically I have a much higher chance of dying in a car crash or from cancer. I'm with TMO, although I started climbing before wife and kids. I like the Paul Petzold quote about there being old climbers and bold climbers...but no old bold climbers (except maybe Fred Beckey). I also think that it's better to live a full life and enjoy each day as a gift rather than cower in my house trying to stay safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Most of the people that I know who died in the mountains, did it while skiing. Moral: take up snowboarding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Most of the people that I know who died in the mountains, did it while climbing. Most of the people that I know who died climbing, did it in the mountains. I've had one friend die in a car and six of them climbing. None have died skiing. Maybe the moral of the story is don't be friends with skiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Most of the people that I know who died in the mountains, did it while climbing. A couple folks whom I know who died in the mountains were on non-technical hikes/scrambles. It made me question whether simply "scaling back" (from roped climbing to less-technical mountain pursuits) in and of itself really helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchy Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 ^^^ unroped 4th class in boots will always scare me more than roped 5th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lowell_Skoog Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 A few years ago I decided to write down the names of friends who had died in recreational accidents before I forgot them. My definition of "friend" was anybody I had met in person, to distinguish them from the other fatalities I've heard about. Although I suspect that I've forgotten a few people, the list has 25 names on it. Here's a breakdown by sport: 1 - Avalanche (sport unknown) 1 - Bicycling 9 - Climbing 2 - Kayaking 6 - Para/hang-gliding 6 - Skiing Of the climbing accidents, 5 were due to snow/ice or rock fall, 1 was due to a rappel anchor failure, and 3 were due to unknown causes. (All were alpine climbing.) Of the skiing accidents, 3 were due to avalanche, 1 was due to a fall on steep terrain, and 1 was a tree-well suffocation. I think paragliding is the most dangerous sport I've done, based on my own perceptions and on the number of people I know who have been killed or injured. The number of participants is much smaller than climbing and skiing, yet the accident rate is high. I can't think of anybody I've known who has died in an auto accident, so the assertion that driving is the most dangerous thing we do is not borne out by my experience. 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.