| Author |
Topic |
 Best grilled cheese maker ever
Whitehorse, YUKON
Canada
2149 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2012 : 9:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by LeeL
Whoops FBrook is right. The language wasn't necessary. I'll edit it out.
Although I must say that I've never thought of "douchebag" as anything but a noun modifier and not as an obscenity per se
Edit again - could not find the douchebag reference
Lee,
I took it out, and emailed you to let you know I had made changes to your reply.
Thanks,
darren |
|
|
 | LeeL
Advanced Member
|
 Extreme ski tourin, mountain bikin addict who hikes at least once a year
2507 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2012 : 9:48 PM
|
| No problem darren and thanks for the work and the headsup. I'll look to use other more suitable words - like I said the obscenity was careless and unnecessary |
|
|
Popkum, BC
Canada
5887 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2012 : 10:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by LeeL
No problem darren and thanks for the work and the headsup. I'll look to use other more suitable words - like I said the obscenity was careless and unnecessary
Thanks for your consideration... |
|
|
| Dru
Mountain Grammar Police
|
Sardonic sandbagging scoundrel, Cascade Climbers lobotomized spraymeister, space blanket flyer, new millennium vulgarian betaboy and friend to all squids
Climbing, a mountain
Canada
∞ Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2012 : 10:07 AM
|
| I won't climb with anyone whose mouth is inhibited. |
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Andorra
3796 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2012 : 2:36 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by johngenx
Many people have Everest as their first and only mountaineering experience. It's common for people to be learning how to use crampons and ice axe in base camp.
"Allowed?" Why not? If you're silly enough to head to high altitude after strolling around Toronto, that's up to you.
I can see some desire for people to want to limit access, since while I agree with you, you get the situation of someone training hard and properly, making it up to Everest, and then having to decide whether to abandon their attempt to help out some idiot who shouldn't be there in the first place. (Some people just get into trouble despite best efforts, but some people get intro trouble because they shouldn't be there). |
|
|
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
112 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 1:29 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rachelo
I can see some desire for people to want to limit access, since while I agree with you, you get the situation of someone training hard and properly, making it up to Everest, and then having to decide whether to abandon their attempt to help out some idiot who shouldn't be there in the first place. (Some people just get into trouble despite best efforts, but some people get intro trouble because they shouldn't be there).
Exactly! Its in the best interests of all that some test is applied before a permit is granted for summits over 8000m. Incremental success at lesser altitudes might be a start. |
|
|
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
797 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 3:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Trail Talk
Exactly! Its in the best interests of all that some test is applied before a permit is granted for summits over 8000m. Incremental success at lesser altitudes might be a start.
But that's a bit of a slippery slope (no pun intended). Because once you implement a rule for 8000m peaks...why not 7500m peaks. Why not particularly technical peaks? Where do you draw the line?
People get in trouble on all sorts of mountains (Ben Nevis in Scotland for example). Does that mean you would think it OK if you had to apply for a permit and prove your worth before being allowed to hike up Mt Temple for example?
|
|
|
1078 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 3:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by booewen
quote:
Originally posted by Trail Talk
Exactly! Its in the best interests of all that some test is applied before a permit is granted for summits over 8000m. Incremental success at lesser altitudes might be a start.
But that's a bit of a slippery slope (no pun intended). Because once you implement a rule for 8000m peaks...why not 7500m peaks. Why not particularly technical peaks? Where do you draw the line?
People get in trouble on all sorts of mountains (Ben Nevis in Scotland for example). Does that mean you would think it OK if you had to apply for a permit and prove your worth before being allowed to hike up Mt Temple for example?
In principle that is true...and I'm big on principles, but I think Everest is a special case, as the commercialism attests to. I think many of the novices will lose interest if Everest is not available. Will some set their sights on another Himalayan peak? Perhaps, but other peaks won't have the same social cachet...
So perhaps it would well be worth a try. Certainly they appear to need some kind of regulation, with overcrowding jeopardizing many lives....the alternative would be a random draw of some kind...
In any case, I think there would be time to arrest on that slope. |
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Andorra
3796 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 6:45 PM
|
I think the concern is that Nepal can use every dollar of permits it can sell, so there's not a lot of motivation for them to do anything to limit access. I imagine it would be fairly tough on Nepal to lose all the money that they make from newbies on Everest, even if they realistically shouldn't be there.
|
|
|
1073 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 8:44 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rachelo
I think the concern is that Nepal can use every dollar of permits it can sell, so there's not a lot of motivation for them to do anything to limit access. I imagine it would be fairly tough on Nepal to lose all the money that they make from newbies on Everest, even if they realistically shouldn't be there.
A lot of money pours into Nepal from avenues other than permit revenue. Bad press for the Everest racket is few and far between as far as main stream media goes, so it's unknown what a few years of sustained bad news could bring. However, it's not unimaginable that enough bad press and questioning over Nepal's permitting practices could have a detrimental effect on said non-mountaineering revenue streams. |
|
|
Kamloops, B.C.
Canada
158 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2012 : 10:52 PM
|
| lining up for access at 8000m would seem to push the limits of sensibility.How then would access be granted? Sounds like another situation where money not experience or skill would rule the day. Do we really need to protect people from themselves and are the costs(search and rescue,medical aid) just the costs of a societal obligation? If we want a healthy active population are these not just the costs associated with outdoor living? Its how I justify the risk level involved in my mostly solo mountain adventures, get out and live or die of a heart attack safe on the couch. The choice to risk or not is mine and must always be so. Give me liberty or the next best ski you have! |
|
|
Finally stopping that crazy suffering that is ice, climbing to concentrate on great ski tours!
3509 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2012 : 06:35 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Trail Talk
Exactly! Its in the best interests of all that some test is applied before a permit is granted for summits over 8000m. Incremental success at lesser altitudes might be a start.
You worship at the altar of altitude as a measure of difficulty. So, someone that climbs the Emperor Face of Robson or the North Face of Twins Tower wouldn't be eligible to climb Everest, but someone that trudged up Cho Oyu would? I get that altitude is a part of the deal of climbing 8000M peaks, but what about trying a technical route on a high peak?
I completely agree with Ewan. Where does it stop? Climbing is not about a set of rules and regulations and certificates. It's about personal choices. Oh, and blah/blah/blah about rescues and so on, but so what? |
|
|
2421 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 07:44 AM
|
Falling 100 metres kills you just as surely as falling 1000 metres - altitude isn't the problem.
The problem here is the thousands of neophytes who head for Everest because they've heard of it as the highest mountain in the world and have little or no mountaineering experience.
I was recently talking with a woman who got all her friends together to help her make the trip to Everest Base Camp. She had some money of her own, but they all chipped in, buying T-shirts and sponsorships. For her it was a personal goal only because of what it represented to her in other areas of her life, and had no relationship to mountaineering at all.
She got to buy all kinds of really fancy equipment, and spent months planning. She sent SPOT messages en route tracking her progress to the Himalayas, and emailed photos back.
Success rates for Everest Base Camp run 90-95%, depending on how long you take to acclimatize. By being helped by some very tough Sherpas (she weighs close to 300 lbs) she made it to Base Camp, only to be immediately flown out by air ambulance. Not because of HAPE or anything related to the altitude, but because she was just having problems from being so out of shape. As I said, she is quite overweight and her previous experience was limited to walking in the hills near Las Vegas! I wouldn't take her hiking on posted Parks Canada trails in the Rockies without dumbing it down a bit for her, let alone send her up a serious mountain.
But one thing she said when she got flown out was that, while other people might have perceived her trip as a failure, it was her dream, not theirs. If she was satisfied with her effort, no one else's opinion mattered. And if she sees it as a lifelong dream, not a climbing expedition, you're not going to stop her by putting reality in her way! |
|
|
|
Kootenay Bud
2695 Posts |
|
Finally stopping that crazy suffering that is ice, climbing to concentrate on great ski tours!
3509 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 10:13 AM
|
| Great find Sandy. Will nails it. |
|
|
Squamish, British Columbia
Canada
1009 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 12:15 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sandy
Only slightly off topic:
http://explore-mag.com/5784/adventure/adventures-without-a-cause
Well it's a case of the end justifying the means. Sure some athlete is getting to do what he loves, and sure some narrow sighted fans are giving money to their hero rather than directly to a charity, or some bloated corporations are looking to raise their public image and sales by throwing money at this athletes endeavor. But in the end a charity gets money they wouldn't have gotten otherwise.
Yes it's selfish and BS, but it's win win. Athlete benefits, get's to bag another route or peak, Westerners get to assuage their burden of guilt for a moment by throwing a few shillings at his charity, and corporations get to increase their exposure to the public by sponsoring him.
I think the author really just wants the athletes to own their bs rather than for the whole industry of sport for charity to be shut down. |
|
|
2421 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 12:51 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by leimrod
I think the author really just wants the athletes to own their bs rather than for the whole industry of sport for charity to be shut down.
Will Gadd has been getting a lot more bitter and cynical in his past few blogs. Did anyone read his article about all the people he knows who've died mountaineering?
To fund his own trips, he's had to sell out to his corporate sponsors just like everyone else. |
|
|
Finally stopping that crazy suffering that is ice, climbing to concentrate on great ski tours!
3509 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 2:20 PM
|
True, but Will's never begged asked regular folks for money so he can go climbing. I have had a few folks take on those charity trips, and I never contribute. On a couple of occasions, I agreed with the cause, and sent them a cheque directly.
My Mom died of cancer, and so a number of years ago, I ran the Run for the Cure. Oh, sorry, the CIBC Run for the Cure. The whole time I felt I was in a commercial, not a real event to raise money for a worthy cause. Now, I just go for a run on my own and write a cheque.
Okay, I did contribute once to a climbing charity trip, but that person did not use one cent of the raised dough to support the trip. They used the trip to create awareness and asked people to donate directly. I thought that was pretty cool.
What REALLY irks me? Yuppie begging. I live in a pretty high-income area in a suburb, and I can't believe that some guy will coast along in his Escalade (or Cayenne, very popular around here...) while his kid comes to my door begging for money so he can play hockey. Are you f-ing kidding me? My daughter has a vocal coach, a piano teacher, a climbing coach, a cross-fit trainer, and loves to ski. All that stuff costs a bloody fortune and I don't go door-to-door begging for money for it. If you're driving a $150K SUV, uh, I bet you can write the cheque so your punk-ass kid can play hockey. |
|
|
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
797 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 2:30 PM
|
I was absolutely shocked to go on the website of someone who organised a summit trip to Everest this year and see that they were plastering stuff about doing it in the name of charity and asking for donations etc and they had a big banner announcing that 5% of every dollar raised would go the charity. FIVE percent.
So basically if they raised the $50,000 (minimum) that they needed for the trip....they would get a free trip and $2500 of other people's money would go to charity. What a joke!
To really be charitable you have to pay your own way 100% and give the money you raise to charity. Anything less is just you trying to get a cheap holiday. |
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Andorra
3796 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2012 : 4:48 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by peter1955
quote:
Originally posted by leimrod
I think the author really just wants the athletes to own their bs rather than for the whole industry of sport for charity to be shut down.
Will Gadd has been getting a lot more bitter and cynical in his past few blogs. Did anyone read his article about all the people he knows who've died mountaineering?
To fund his own trips, he's had to sell out to his corporate sponsors just like everyone else.
I didn't hear him taking issue with corporate sponsors which are a cut and dry "you give me money, you get advertising" deal. The complaint was when it's claimed for charity.
Relevant post. I enjoyed the article as well. He made the same points that have come to my mind, and I think it's justified. I don't have a problem with sponsorship, but if you want to do something, don't try to tell me it's for any reason other than you want to do it.
I'm with John. If someone solicits and I think the cause is good, I may donate right to the cause. But I don't donate anything to 'charity' trips. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
A framework for discussing mountaineering risk
