I haven't been to Half Dome in 25 years, and feel fortunate to have only seen a dozen other people on the trail when I went. Wow. Time to do what they do at Mt Whitney and have a lottery system for hiking permits.
there is a limited number of permits (http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/hdpermits.htm) - a few friends and myself hiked whitney (got lucky, middle of the week, few applications) then drove to check out half dome but was not as lucky
Himalayan Experience, the company mentioned in the article, publishes a nice newsletter during summit seasons, and delivered to your inbox if you subscribe, spam free. I find it very interesting to follow their weekly-ish reports on all the preparation, acclimatization and summit for Everest and other mountains during the season. This is the newsletter page where you can read and subscribe:
This is what Russ published regarding the event in the article:
"Sorry for the late news, I have been a bit busy these last few days.
On the day of the avalanche we had 19 Sherpas carrying loads to C2. On their descent they established our rescue tent at C1 with oxygen, sleeping bags and other rescue equipment. The fact that they were busy doing this meant that none of our staff were actually in the ice fall at the time of the accident, so all are safe. As each Sherpa has a radio we were very quickly able to ascertain where everyone was. Our Sherpas also all have avalanche transceivers so they were able to do a transceiver search as they descended back to BC, but as very few people actually use transceivers on Everest they never found any signals.
At that time all our members were at Lobuche BC or acclimatising on the slopes of Lobuche, and only now are they returning to Everest BC.
At this stage we do not know if we will be continuing with our expedition or not.
First of all, what's the point of climbing Everest when you're basically being carried to the top?
As someone who is into more 'extreme' endeavours, it's more about the experience than the result. Where's the fun in having someone else do the heavy lifting?
Second, why not climb new mountains? There's plenty of interesting places in the world to explore, climb, and have an adventure. Plenty of peaks to ascend (and descend on skis!), plenty of remote locations to reach, and many peaks where you can bag a first ascent, rather than be the X climber to have been carried up by a Sherpa...
Want to be extreme, and enrich your life experience? Learn how to actually be a mountaineer, learn the ropes (figuratively and literally), and do something on your own. But I guess that's too hard.
About the Sherpas on Everest - they need to decide as a society whether depending on tourist dollars is what they want, or whether they want to actually create something...
My stock answer is to point out that I’m a climber, and that Everest isn’t a climb, but a walk. This usually gets the person at the other end a bit confused and flustered as they check their notes. “Yes” I usually continue “If you have to step over a dead body half way up then it’s classed as walk. On real climbs the bodies fall to the bottom”.
The "only" difficulties with the Everes ascent are with cold and oxygen deprivation, which are solved by technical means and sherpas hard labor. Unlike plenty of climbs in the Alps or the Rockies the only prerequisite for Everest is (very) good physical condition, time and money.
Everyone has different preferences. Personally I have no interest in climbing up Everest, but if I could, reasonably cheaply, get there with absolutely no effort for a not-huge price (say $3k for a helicopter to the top and I could get out for an hour) then I might well be up for doing it.
That price/method example isn't an "I hope this is possible", just what it would take for me to personally want to go, I'd be paying for the view and the experience of being up there, rather than the experience of getting up there (since I'm never going to be able to do it that way, I won't be doing it at all). But that's just me, others like you it's largely about the experience, while some people will be in between, wanting some of the experience, but have it be not too difficult.
Interesting - your parent didn't say anything about bragging rights. That they talked about "an experience" and you read "bragging rights" is probably a major difference between them and you and generally between people who would be happy to take a helicopter somewhere cool and people who wouldn't feel good about it unless they climbed there.
While you're right that I didn't mention them, and indeed isn't why I'd want to go if I could do it easily, it is the case that there can be "bragging rights" on both sides, just that one is bragging about the achievement and the experience, the other just the experience - if that's your goal. (Let's be honest, even if it's not the reason you want to do it, chances are you would brag, at least a bit.)
Agreed with this. There's some amazing adventures to be had in some remote mountains of China. The photos coming out of the crowds alone at Everest basecamp make it unappealing, though probably still the ideal vacation for those who like to talk about themselves, a lot.
I like how Krakauer referred to his own Everest adventure as "I was guided up Everest" in his article.
Well, what do you think is the point, regardless of whether you're carried to the top? I think you'll find that when it comes down to it, for most people the point is the same regardless of the purism you apply to the amount of help you get from others or from equipment.
But this a very old debate, and there may be good reasons for alpine style; though personally I don't think there are very many good reasons to climb the Everest in any style.
Presumably the whole point of large teams with this kind of logistics is to make the climb safer. If you really want to climb Everest why take on unnecessary risk for the sake of purity? It is going to be a massive physical and mental challenge even with the support.
I'm not defending the people who pay to climb, but some simply don't want to train and would rather pay money than training time. That way, you can sneak ahead of the Joneses by saying you climbed Everest.
But what's wrong with tourism as a core part of their economy? That would make it easier to create something in the near future.
There are 7 billion people on earth, and a few hundred do this thing per year, so now it's so mainstream it's not worth doing? Is the point to experience something or to tell people about how you experienced something they haven't? Odds are still that they didn't climb Everest.
"Things aren't fun/good/interesting if hundreds do it."
Pardon me if that doesn't sound a bit like the stereotypical hipster excuse not to do something - a fetish for being original. To each their own, but my goodness does that make my jaw drop.
> For the foreign climbers, to go home now will mean forfeiting most or all of the fifty to ninety thousand dollars they have spent to be guided up Everest.
> Among the Sherpas’ demands are that the government […] require the guiding companies to pay Sherpas their salaries, even if they call off the remainder of the 2014 Everest climbing season;
So basically if a guiding company calls an expedition off they don't even have to give a raincheck, but they withhold the Sherpas pay? That seems predatory even if you workers are not dying like flies!
Having worked as a rafting guide a few years back, this seems to be standard practice in outdoor type companies. People don't turn up, you don't work, you don't get paid.
Firstly, I was comparing the way the companies pay staff, not the activities themselves.
Secondly, its not unreasonable at all. Sure the trip you may have done on vacation was an easy float down a class 3, but that's the equivalent of hiking a small hill an hour from your home. There are plenty of rafting expeditions that probably took way more planning and organisation and unknowns than some rich kid paying a million bucks for some company to hold their hand all the way up Everst.
...good thing he didn't do that. There's a big difference between "my rafting experience falls in line with this story, it looks like there's a bigger pattern" and "my rafting experience was like Mount Everest Sherpas".
The way the article was written made it sound like Sherpas are paid for their time. So if the climb is called off and they are used for the rest of the season, then they don't earn pay for the weeks they are no longer employed. If a beach is closed you don't keep paying your lifeguards the rest of the season for work they aren't doing.
Seems fine to me. It's actually worse for them if they were paid the entire season even when a cancelation happens since then there's less reason to call it off.
But the expedition companies don't refund any of the money they collected from the climbers that would have gone to the Sherpas, instead pocketing it for themselves. They should either refund the money to the climbers, or pay the Sherpas what they were planning on paying them. Not just go "oh well, it's our money now!"
I think the $50,000-$90,000 is the 'all inclusive' cost covering a $10,000 Nepali government fee, sherpas, western guides, accommodation at base camps, food, drugs, bottled oxygen, trash removal, travel company profit margin and so on.
I want to add something to what sibling poster said (though I agree wholeheartedly).
Paying workers for their time and not hiring them works well when said worker is very highly skilled and you will not need them for a very long time: a lawyer, a chef for an event… If you plan on hiring someone for a whole season or longer I believe the right thing to do to protect both parties is to agree on a flat rate for the season.
On one hand a contractor can leave you whenever they please, but in practice (and this is the case) the employer will have the upper hand. This is why we need laws to regulate this type of work relations (I know this might get me downvoted here). I know this probably will not happen to the typical HN crowd working as contractors, but think of a housekeeper; I believe it's very important that regulation is in place to prevent this kind of exploitation.
Indeed. And if this is the sentiment of the owners of the Peak Freaks guiding company, what is stopping them from adopting what they would consider a more equitable arrangement with their family?
Peak Freaks is in support of the Sherpa people any which way it goes. They are our family, our brothers and sisters and the muscle on Everest.
Travel and licenses maybe, O2 and equipment would still be good. And even if you were right, then they would not break even if the expedition happened and they had to pay the Sherpas.
Who's going to pay to move and store the O2 canisters until next season? What about the food? I don't know much, but I don't think logistics work there, like they do places more convenient. (I assume we're only using O2 as an example, as I'm sure there's tons more things). Also, there's tons of other work that's been done, like the expense of the rope and the ladders that have already been installed on the mtn for climbing season. I imagine that most of the money is already spent by the time people arrive at basecamp, and that the nominal money they could salvage isn't worth the effort after planning a big expedition.
"Into Thin Air" (1996) from the author of this article is one of the greatest books I've ever read; I highly recommend it for its great storytelling and its description of the Everest microsociety.
"The Climb"[0] is a must if you read this, since "Into Thin Air" has some thin air in places, especially putting blame on the guide from the other team.
I much prefer "Abstieg zum Erfolg", "Bergsüchtig" (Hans Kammerlander) and "Der nackte Berg: Nanga Parbat" (Reinhold Messner). They explain very well what you have to go through and what they did to climb in alpine style. Though, they're in German and I don't think there is an English translation form them. (Looks like Messner has some in English like "All Fourteen 8,000ers")
Krakauer's books "Eiger Dreams" and "Into The Wild" (the latter also a good movie) are worth a read as well. And I've listened several times to his audiobook versions of all three.
More than anyone else I've read, he captures the compulsion and the self-doubt of people compelled to pursue such ventures. My highest "climb" is Mt. Shasta, which is nothing in comparison to anything he's done. But I so understand that urge to go and get into the wilderness. It's a compulsion for some, and he documents it, and the vulnerabilities it implies, so very well.
Why does the author repeatedly refer to the clients climbing Everest as "Westerners?" There are a lot from Japan, China, South Korea, and India. Is the implication that the Westerners are somehow responsible while the Easterners are not? Are Sherpas more likely to recede from danger when their climbing party is from Japan than when it is from Germany?
I think the intention is to deliniate between 'western' and 'eastern' standards of living - in that context, Japan, South Korea and to an extent China are quite 'western'. This is as opposed to the Nepalese, who as the article says live on an annual income of ~USD$600.
This opens up another can of worms in implying that 'eastern' civilisations are poorer than western ones. I agree it is not a good use of the term but it's arguably better than 'first world' and 'third world' and I cannot think of a better equivalent.
This is exactly right. "Westerners" has less to do with the exact geography and more with economic indicators including standards living/income. I was traveling with Singaporeans who kept being referred to as "westerners"; it was odd initially, but to the locals it was about the group's purchasing power, expectations of luxury/comfort, and nothing else. It was their way of identifying big spenders from the rest.
This event had a similar death toll (11x), a similar pysical situation (ice sercac avalanche accross main summit route), and overall was in a place made people similarly nervous for many years.
I found the book "Surviving K2" by Wilco Van Rooijen a good read about this. It's obvious that English is his second language, but if you can get past that then it is pretty captivating. He has quite a negative view of people who rely too much on porters / oxygen IIRC.
You reminded me of the "Black Summer" of 1986 on K2, but I'm trying to find a decent article on it. IIRC at least two dozen climbers were killed during the period.
The story of Alison Hargreaves' life and death is especially chilling. She was blown off the peak by a hurricane force wind in 1995.
Her body has never been found, but her fellow climbers mentioned seeing her jacket, harness and boots in the snow. This reminds me of a certain aspect of plane crash investigations. When a plane explodes at high altitude and the occupants are thrown out, the force exerted by the atmosphere due to falling can be sufficient to rip off clothes, so sometimes the victims bodies can be found on the ground naked.
I don't think these two events are similar. Most of the fatalities on K2 in 2008 where due to poor planning or preparation of the climbers themselves. While recent tragedy on Everest was simply an ice-fall and avalanche.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zkC9IMQmYA is a very good video of Chris Warner talking to Google employees about leadership. He has climbed K2 in 2007 and gives his opinion on the events in 2008.
Also The Summit [0] is a nice film about this tragedy.
I hate to speak ill of those that lost their lives, but they made very poor choices that directly resulted in their deaths.
Poor coordination with other teams, leaving 3 hours later than intended, missing or forgetting gear, and dangerous decisions in very dangerous situations.
This has brewing for so long. One example is the incident with Ueli Steck last year [0]. Regardless of what you think of what happened, it really highlights how much tension there is between the Sherpas and the 'western' guides.
> Nevertheless, on April 20th, after holding several emotional, contentious meetings at Everest base camp, the climbing Sherpas announced that they would go on strike unless the Nepali government agreed to meet thirteen demands within a week.
In last 10 years the business have changed a lot. Nowadays even pop-starts were "carried to the top" by Sherpas, for whom it is just a job.
I meet one of such Sherpa guides, who already had 5 ascendings, in Periche village on 31 March. He told me that the number of tourists is increasing each year, that supply chain is robust enough so that tourists could have ordered a spaghetti or noodles or even pizza at the Camp2, etc. (30kg. gas cylinders and food supplies were carried to the Camp2 by Nepalese potters).
Actually it is ugly, greedy, very arrogant and selfish world of those rich "tourists" who brought their "safe" trip to the top. One just have see them for a few minutes or how potters are carrying innumerable boxes and bags with tourist's stuff. Just business.
Everest is kinda getting ridiculous. If you do any reading or watching on treks up the mountain you know the only way 90+% of these "mountaineers" get up to the summit is because of the hard work and ascents of sherpas. I'm happy to hear about the strike and hope it turns away the popularization of something I think isn't as novel as we make it out to be. Why not explore space instead? My $0.02...
Is it possible to go to Everest and climb the mountain without the use of Sherpas? How often are expeditions mounted where the members rely only on themselves to accomplish all the required tasks: gear ferrying, rope and ladder fixing, acclimatization etc? Do such expeditions ever encounter resistance from the companies or Sherpa collective?
> Is it possible to go to Everest and climb the mountain without the use of Sherpas?
Perhaps, but in modern times it's more complicated than that. People who arrange their own expeditions often come into conflict with established tours and organizations. You often hear stories of someone who doesn't belong on the mountain for one reason or another, who can't keep up with the traffic flow -- in certain places on the route a weak or unprepared climber can produce a bottleneck that prevents people from completing their summit, on one of the few days of the year when that's even possible.
It's not as though Everest is a big cone with dozens of available routes where people can choose to walk up to the summit any way they want. There are serious traffic and coordination problems, and the more independent agents, the more ways things can go wrong.
The Discovery Channel series "Everest: Beyond The Limit" covers a few of Himalayan Experience's seasons, including the infamous incident with David Sharp. It's on Netflix, and I would definitely recommend it if you're interested in the politics and logistics of modern day Everest expeditions.
Its funny, in these countries communist parties are strong, the Maoists in Nepal have been staging armed uprisings for many years and there is still such strong labor exploitation.
If interested in the topic I can recommend Alan Arnette's blog http://www.alanarnette.com/ I've found it one of the best sources of what's happening on Everest.
