Everest and the masses:

[dougd]

Should it be open to every tom dick and harry that can afford to be led up the thing?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/29/travel/nepal-everest-limits-feat/index.html

 

I say no. Some things should stay relatively pure and this is one IMHO.

 

Mr Beckenrich has weighed in on another forum. He's the anything goes cocksucker apparently.

 

d

Edited September 29, 2015 by dougd

[glassgowkiss]

Banning guided parties would solve the problem. The issue at hand is inexperience, which simply is supported by guiding companies. No fixed ropes, no fixed camps, go alpine style, that is it.

[ivan]

not my country, so it's not my call

 

hard to imagine how a poor country would want to kill a golden goose, even if it is shitting on the dock - what % of Nepal's mountain tourism industry would dry up if guided groups were shut down?

 

not that I ever plan to try Everest, but my understanding is that you can get off the beaten path there, if you want...

[glassgowkiss]

not my country, so it's not my call

 

hard to imagine how a poor country would want to kill a golden goose, even if it is shitting on the dock - what % of Nepal's mountain tourism industry would dry up if guided groups were shut down?

 

not that I ever plan to try Everest, but my understanding is that you can get off the beaten path there, if you want...

 

Good question. The issue at hand is, that probably vast amount of this money does not even make it into Nepal.

 

[ivan]

the recent national-geo i read showed damn near everyone in the greater khombu rocking the gawdamn north face puffy, so at least something's making it's way there ...

[Ben Beckerich]

Anything goes

[dougd]

Loss of jobs for rank and file Nepali's will be difficult no doubt. That's my main concern. I don't give two shits about the concessionaires/clients moving out. People will impact the mountain that's just the way it is but to essentially, to just give it to the corporates to cash in on... Man, fuck that... This is about exploitation. The mountain, and the people who do the real work facilitating this bullshit.

 

Anything but that maybe...

 

The guides et al will always find a way to do their thing and more power to them. Go somewhere else.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

The proposed restrictions will do nothing to stem the death rate on Everest or anywhere else in the Himalaya.

 

Climbing 'staff' (guides, sherpas, paid folks) outnumber 'client' fatalities on Everest 2 to 1. In addition, most fatalities occur between 18 and 21K - not at all in the 'death zone' above.

 

Finally, a huge proportion of deaths are from avalanche, not 'inexperience, age, or disability'.

 

Good luck wit dat, Nepal.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/04/mortality-on-mount-everest/360927/

 

This echoes the results of other studies I've read on fatalities stats in the Himalayas.

 

Like most public debates - the options being presented don't and won't address the problem. Not even close.

[ivan]

why not just use nitro to reduce the overall size of the mountain n' get it below the death zone?

[tvashtarkatena]

Global Warming is already on it.

 

Although Everest is actually getting taller as India continues to pile drive Asia from the south.

[dougd]

Maybe, just maybe, it's a start to clearing out what has become one hell of a mess. Tourism will endure there, and people will always be people so I have no expectation of success for this effort.

 

Everybody going high ought to be able to get themselves down (ref K2). No?

[dougd]

Appears there's a middle ground for interested anything goes/preservation crowds.

 

Found Conrad Anker's contributions to discussions with Nepali Ministry officials very interesting.

 

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/06/125-everest-maxed-out/jenkins-text

 

d