Death in Birch Hollow

[dougr]

Attachment 68910

If I end up looking like that, shoot me.

[dougr]

More...

In the post 127 Hours world we did/are experiencing, we are watching a tug of war between saving the incompetent in the present, or preserving a danger level now that will save more lives in the long run by dissuading people who don't belong. I don't want to see people die. I want to see them live, and scaring straight is sadly the best potion. Very old fashioned thinking and certainly not very acceptable in today's society, but that's my thinking.

[TommyBoy]

A very interesting ethical dilemma, and one I'm sure will guarantee pretty close to a 50/50 split love/hate response whatever "solution" is chosen. I'm one of the lucky ones who succesfully survived the "I'm an invincible noob" stage, nor did I kill any of the friends I took with me. The more I learn the more scared I get when I think about some of my earliest trips.

[Slot Machine]

General yes. The culture is such now that in an attempt to reduce risk, we invite laziness and complacency which increase risk.

Specifically with our sport, we'd see more incompetent canyoneers, not the same skill level in less risky canyons. We'd see self-appointed safety czars imposing their view of the safe route, which is inherently more dangerous overall than a well educated and experienced cadre of canyoneers who take it upon themselves to be safe ->out of absolute necessity<-. Nothing replaces the focus that comes from knowing you have to rely on your skill. Which includes beta and the experience of others, don't get me wrong.

An analogy would be the millions of wards of the state who literally cannot take care of themselves out of learned helplessness due to the attempt to remake life/school/work a risk free, angst free, worry free endeavor. It backfires due to human nature, as would the safety of canyoneering if the wrong ethos takes hold.

^^This is a mess of jumbled thoughts.^^ BARELY readable.

Are you saying that canyoneers are endangered by beta writers that publish the safest method to do various routes? Are you saying that people are disabled because beta makes people lazy or complacent?

[Cr8on]

. One last comment: A permit system would not have prevented this since the Park Service doesn't ask nor does it care about experience before issuing a permit. Buyer Beware!

Not true.

[Bootboy]

^^This is a mess of jumbled thoughts.^^ BARELY readable.

Are you saying that canyoneers are endangered by beta writers that publish the safest method to do various routes? Are you saying that people are disabled because beta makes people lazy or complacent?

Not that the beta writers are to blame, but the fact is that canyons with readily available beta do and will get done more frequently. I think that whether or not the beta describes the "safest" route, techniques, etc..., has little to do with the outcomes of those who travel the route by said beta. It's a function of the experience of the participants. Think about the canyons that get done the most often, there is no doubt a correlation between the demand for a canyon, and readily available beta.

[dougr]

^^This is a mess of jumbled thoughts.^^ BARELY readable.

Clarifying...

Ethos 1: let's try to make canyoneering safer for those who will come along that are incompetent.

Ethos 2: let's make those in the canyons better prepped and able to make good decisions.

Brian's gist was no. 1. The proven best is no. 2, in all facets of society.

[TommyBoy]

Are you saying that canyoneers are endangered by beta writers that publish the safest method to do various routes? Are you saying that people are disabled because beta makes people lazy or complacent?

I think that in the wrong hands that beta can make people lazy, I know when I first started out sometimes I would rely more on the beta than in trying to look around and figure out how to get down myself. Of course thats not the beta's fault that was mine, but the more specific you make it the easier it is for newbs to rely on it rather than checking it against reality.

[ratagonia]

Originally Posted by KentC
. One last comment: A permit system would not have prevented this since the Park Service doesn't ask nor does it care about experience before issuing a permit. Buyer Beware!

Not true.

Uh, what part???

I would say that the Park Service CARES, and thus I take exception to Kent's statement. They sometimes ask, and sometimes attempt to dissuade people from a particular canyon, but they are in a "shall-issue" environment, so there is only so much they can do.

It is not the Park Service's job to screen people.

Birch Hollow is BLM land, managed out of Kanab. So if a permit system was implemented, it would be by the Kanab office. They have discussed it previously because of the crowding, and it is Spotted Owl habitat, which they are required by law to manage to not disadvantage the Owls.

Does any land management agency manage any resource for the sake of preventing accidents? I cannot think of any. What I can think of is places that are closed (Nutty Putty), or managed for other reasons.

Tom

[dougr]

Not true.

Really? IME they ask, caution, but do nothing. As it should be.

[Slot Machine]

Clarifying...

Ethos 1: let's try to make canyoneering safer for those who will come along that are incompetent.

Ethos 2: let's make those in the canyons better prepped and able to make good decisions.

Brian's gist was no. 1. The proven best is no. 2, in all facets of society.

Thanks for the clarification.

I'm pretty sure Brian was saying that an ethic should be adopted for that one particular drop in Birch; like everyone avoiding the sand hill at the end of Spry. And yes, that would fall under the above ethic #1.

I like downclimbing LDC. It's simple and fast. I'm not going to do a loose, awkward rap when I don't have to. YMMV.

[Scott P]

Does any land management agency manage any resource for the sake of preventing accidents? I cannot think of any.

I'm confused at to what you mean here (maybe I'm misunderstanding).

No land agency's sole purpose is to prevent accidents, but aren't some resources managed to prevent accidents? For example, isn't the end of lower Echo closed for safety reasons? Many places on public lands are off limits due solely to safety reasons.

I'm just curious as to what you mean rather than disagreeing.

[Iceaxe]

I think that in the wrong hands that beta can......

And if we outlaw ropes, only outlaws will have ropes.... err... something like that...

If you really want to stop accidents in Birch just pass a rule "no climbing aids allowed". Lot's of places already have that rule in place for various reasons. One of the major hurdles to getting Goblin's Lair open to the public was Goblin Valley had such a rule in place that we had to get waved.

Something to consider about beta... it is protected under the first amendment, it is a right and not a privilege. Even crappy beta is protected.

But yeah... I get what you are saying, but you are blaming the tool, and not the fool using the tool.

Deja Vu... tell me I haven't heard these arguments somewhere before...

The only thing that will stop a dumbass with crappy beta is a trained canyoneer with good beta.....

[dougr]

like everyone avoiding the sand hill at the end of Spry. And yes, that would fall under the above ethic #1.

I think the Spry exit is for reasons of beauty, correct me if I'm wrong. Arguably safer to go the sand than the watercourse. I'm all for putting the landscape above safety, personally in my descents, if reasonable.

[ratagonia]

I'm confused at to what you mean here (maybe I'm misunderstanding).

No land agency's sole purpose is to prevent accidents, but aren't some resources managed to prevent accidents? For example, isn't the end of lower Echo closed for safety reasons? Many places on public lands are off limits due solely to safety reasons.

I'm just curious as to what you mean rather than disagreeing.

That is for the safety of OTHERS, not to prevent accidents to the perpetrator (if you grok the distinction).

Maybe I am defining accident here as "people hurting themselves".

In general, in America, it is illegal to do things that endanger other people. As a society, we draw a distinction between doing things that are a danger to ourselves, and endangering other people.

If you create a rescue situation in Zion because you are a total idiot, you CAN be cited for "creating a hazardous situation", ie, endangering the rescue personnel.

Tom

[TommyBoy]

And if we outlaw ropes, only outlaws will have ropes.... err... something like that...

If you really want to stop accidents in Birch just pass a rule "no climbing aids allowed". Lot's of places already have that rule in place for various reasons. One of the major hurdles to getting Goblin's Lair open to the public was Goblin Valley had such a rule in place that we had to get waved.

Something to consider about beta... it is protected under the first amendment, it is a right and not a privilege. Even crappy beta is protected.

But yeah... I get what you are saying, but you are blaming the tool, and not the fool using the tool.

Deja Vu... tell me I haven't heard these arguments somewhere before...

The only thing that will stop a dumbass with crappy beta is a trained canyoneer with good beta.....

I wasn't trying to say no to beta, I love your beta shane, I use it all the time. I just meant that there is a point where providing too much data only panders to the careless and helps them get in over their heads and into trouble since they are reading a page and not looking around them. Fools will be fools, but if they run out of info on the page then maybe, just maybe a few of them will look around and try to think for themselves. Stranger things have happened.

[Iceaxe]

I wasn't trying to say no to beta,

I understood what you were saying... my point was you can't fix stupid and when you attempt to pass rules to stop some dumbass from hurting themself or others you usually catch the innocent in any wide net you cast.



Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[BriSimple]

So sad to hear this happened for sure. I'm sure everyone feels bad about this, especially at such a wonderful canyon. This is truly one of my favorites for many reasons. It has always been one of my backup canyon if I didn't get a permit I wanted. Everyone knows how difficult it is to get permits to the canyons we all want and I do think it's because there are too few permits issued for many of the popular sites. Granted, nobody wants a 2 hour delay in Mystery because 20 people are trying to get through but it would be nice if perhaps they doubled the permits on those that are a bit faster and loosely schedule departure times. Just a thought.

Birch doesn't have a permit requirement and personally, I think this is great. I've never waited long and I've actually really enjoyed meeting people in the canyon. Birch has gone from my backup canyon to my primary canyon on a lot of trips.

I'm going to measure the first rappel at the rocky ledge sometime. I've always thought it to be around 100 feet max. I like doing this rappel but I admit, I've seen some good chunks come down next to me (fortunately not on top of me). I require everyone to have a helmet but I doubt the helmet is going to win in any case but a little pebble.

Such a great canyon. I hope nobody else gets hurt but I also hope that lots of people get to enjoy it in the future without permits. I'm not a fan of the low daily permit limits but I also strongly feel people should have sufficient experience before being allowed to take a toll on our Search and Rescue resources. I frequently take new climbers to Birch because I don't want to get up at 1am and be sixth in line for a permit to the same Zion canyon.

Happy Canyoneering...

Brian