While others turned back, Castillo pushed on up the park's iconic feature, making him one of Yosemite National Park's worst nightmares— the increasing number of wilderness neophytes who mistakenly think the government is obligated to save them.



Article from The Associated Press

Edit:
This link actually goes to the story:
http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/half-dome-survivors-wish-they-had-taken-heed/cebd91ea38cf461c808a8a3c109e04f8



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/08/2011 09:44AM by szalkowski.

I have to wonder if the permit situation is making this worse. You have a permit the you struggled somehow to hget, because they are in short supply. It's today and today only, otherwise your next chance is probably a year away.
The first time I tried Half Dome it poured rain. I camped in Little Yosemite Valley and spoke with hikers who had gone to the top. The couldn't see a thing. I came back a year later on a beautiful early October day and got some fantasic pictures, two of which are framed and hang in my livingroom. If I had to try to get another difficult to get permit, I might have made a different choice, not a good choice.

Half Dome will be around for many many more years. He could have tried again another time. It's not worth risking your life or the lives of the rescue personnel. What those people did when the continued climbing when it was wet and dangerous, was selfish, pure and simple.

I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding about wilderness and responsibility.

Quote

"After the fact I realized it's the wilderness and they're not supposed to do anything, but I did go in expecting a little more of a warning," said Castillo, who plans to return.

The day after Castillo called for help, a group of 20 hikers called 911, not understanding that the very rain storm threatening their lives would also endanger a ranger.

Its accessibility makes it an easy goal to set (relative to climbing a mountain or hiking the back country), but that same accessibility makes people feel protected and safe and within the reach of "help."

Quote
itchbay
I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding about wilderness and responsibility.

The permit system may also be putting pressure on people to complete the hike since they won't have another chance.

Unfortunately many today in all areas of life think of it as a "me first" world without thinking ahead. I would like to think all of us would start thinking of being less part of the problem and more part of the solution. Doesn't matter whether it is climbing Half Dome, walking across the street in a big city or taking your young kids to a campground and letting them run wild.

Quote
eeek

Quote
itchbay
I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding about wilderness and responsibility.

The permit system may also be putting pressure on people to complete the hike since they won't have another chance.

People were do or die-ing the Dome long before the permits were in place, and they do it on Whitney, too. That "once in a lifetime" status makes people think ridiculous thoughts about how "necessary" it is to get up there no matter what.

Thanks for this article. There's no shame at all in turning back and trying again some other time. It's not the end of the world. People should enter the wilderness with this type of mentality. Of course, this is usually weighed against "life is short, you may not get another chance," which is understandable. But in these cases, you might be putting other people's lives at risk. Plus the views at the absolute top aren't necessarily much better than at a point just a few dozen feet below.

Prudence and humility IMO.

"After the fact I realized it's the wilderness and they're not supposed to do anything, but I did go in expecting a little more of a warning," said Castillo

Seriously? More of a warning? There are signs everywhere warning about paying attention to the weather. Between that and common sense, you'd think that would be warning enough.

Quote
dqniel

"After the fact I realized it's the wilderness and they're not supposed to do anything, but I did go in expecting a little more of a warning," said Castillo

Seriously? More of a warning? There are signs everywhere warning about paying attention to the weather. Between that and common sense, you'd think that would be warning enough.

I think he was probably referring to the fact that one can't expect to just phone 911 and get rescued if needed.

Maybe the Park Service needs to modify their warning sign about the weather near Half Dome to emphasis that point: you're on your own and don't expect calling 911 will result in your rescue from a predicament of your own doing.

---

Quote
plawrence
Maybe the Park Service needs to modify their warning sign about the weather near Half Dome to emphasis that point: you're on your own and don't expect calling 911 will result in your rescue from a predicament of your own doing.

That would likely stop people from calling 911 when they should.

The Park Service could word it a bit more precise, and honestly state that in bad weather – including lighting storms – that rescue attempts are usually delayed so the rescuers' lives are not put in unneeded risk.

(Another indirect way to get the message across that climbing the cables of Half Dome is highly risky during bad weather would be for the ranger that is checking the permits at the base of the Half Dome to have a clipboard with paper and asked each person who decides to attempt to summit Half Dome in marginal weather for the name and contact information of their next of kin, in case they don't make it back. )

---

Quote
plawrence
(Another indirect way to get the message across that climbing the cables of Half Dome is highly risky during bad weather would be for the ranger that is checking the permits at the base of the Half Dome to have a clipboard with paper and asked each person who decides to attempt to summit Half Dome in marginal weather for the name and contact information of their next of kin, in case they don't make it back. )

That ranger doesn't exactly stick around during bad weather.

Quote
eeek

Quote
plawrence

(Another indirect way to get the message across that climbing the cables of Half Dome is highly risky during bad weather would be for the ranger that is checking the permits at the base of the Half Dome to have a clipboard with paper and asked each person who decides to attempt to summit Half Dome in marginal weather for the name and contact information of their next of kin, in case they don't make it back. )

That ranger doesn't exactly stick around during bad weather.

You're sure?

I haven't heard of any reports about the ranger abandoning their post near Half Dome during inclement weather while the cables are up.

Quote
plawrence
I haven't heard of any reports about the ranger abandoning their post near Half Dome during inclement weather while the cables are up.

I have.

Quote
eeek

Quote
plawrence
I haven't heard of any reports about the ranger abandoning their post near Half Dome during inclement weather while the cables are up.

I have.

Why not? I wouldn't exactly stick around if I thought I might get hit by lightning.

I would presume they would move to lower and safer ground, but still stay near the trail to warn people and give advice to the weather conditions (and of course, to continue to check for the permits).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2011 08:04PM by plawrence.

Maybe cell phones are part of the problem.When the ease of dialing 911 replaces risk assessment,experience and judgement it may add to the danger of venturing outside your normal environment.Even for a salsa dancer.

Quote
grant1
Maybe cell phones are part of the problem.When the ease of dialing 911 replaces risk assessment,experience and judgement it may add to the danger of venturing outside your normal environment.Even for a salsa dancer.

Outside one's normal environment is the key phrase because you seldom see people taking extra risks on top of the Empire State Building, climbing branches to grab that perfectly ripe apple, or doing chores on their own rooftops. There's something about the wilderness, about the beauty of Half Dome (and other features) that affect some people's judgments. You really don't need to take that extra step because the view isn't going to be much better. And if you slip, that could be it. No recourse.

This is not the Highway Patrol--they are not responsible for maintaining the safety of everyone on the trails.

The trails are to allow you to access wilderness. If you don't know what that means, you shouldn't be there.

And asking rangers to stand out in the wilderness in a storm just because some yahoo thinks it might be a good idea to climb Half Dome is a true waste of taxpayer money and that ranger's life.

---

Check our our website: http://www.backpackthesierra.com/
Or just read a good mystery novel set in the Sierra; https://www.amazon.com/Danger-Falling-Rocks-Paul-Wagner/dp/0984884963



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2011 08:51AM by balzaccom.

Quote
balzaccom

This is not the Highway Patrol--they are not responsible for maintaining the safety of everyone on the trails.

The trails are to allow you to access wilderness. If you don't know what that means, you shouldn't be there.

And asking rangers to stand out in the wilderness in a storm just because some yahoo thinks it might be a good idea to climb Half Dome is a true waste of taxpayer money and that ranger's life.

But then who's going to be checking for the Half Dome permits? Or is a Half Dome permit not required to climb Half Dome when the cables are up if the weather is turning bad?

And then why does the Park Service shuts down certain other trails when they deem the trail conditions as unsafe?

I don't understand the consistency of the Park Service logic in permitting people to continue to climb the Half Dome cables in unsafe conditions, while on the other hand, shutting down other trails, like the Four Mile Trail, when they deem the trail to hazardous to traverse. Or eliminating some other trails completely, like the Ledge Trail from Glacier Point.

Before the permits, would they close HD trail in bad weather?

Quote
hotrod4x5
Before the permits, would they close HD trail in bad weather?

Nope

Quote
KenM

Quote
hotrod4x5
Before the permits, would they close HD trail in bad weather?

Nope

So why close Mist or 4 mile? It does seem to be a selective enforcement.

It's in the same realm as why they take the cables down.

The Mist Trail at it's best:

---

Quote
chick-on

The Mist Trail at it's best:

No gloves? Brrrrrrr!


Didn't your hands get numb by touching the snow without wearing gloves?

---

Quote
plawrence

No gloves? Brrrrrrr!
Didn't your hands get numb by touching the snow without wearing gloves?

Wisconsin girl. Anything above -10 is warm weather. And they use ice to warm their hands.

---

Old Dude

Someone mentioned Half Dome's slope. I took this photo from LYV, measuring rise/run in pixels I came up with rise 604 run 787 which comes out to 76.7 percent slope (604/787) and 37.5 degrees (inv tangent 604/787)

Nope[/quote]So why close Mist or 4 mile? It does seem to be a selective enforcement.[/quote]

They close the mist & 4 mile on a seasonal basis, ie they close it from Fall to late Spring rather than on a daily or hourly basis. They actually do the same for Half Dome, when they put up and take down the cables. So there is no selective enforcement it is actually rather consistent.

I'm actually willing to credit the salsa dancer with an after-the-fact 'aha' moment. In my view he now seems to Get It, and in fact wants to return despite everything (unlike some other cases that have come up lately, which fail at the Get It point). He came in with a seemingly nonsensical expectation, and now understands that. Yosemite NPS' problem is something along the lines of 'how to encourage this level of understanding before shit happens', given the failure of numerous signs, common sense, etc., to achieve that result. But I think his end result is, basically, what the goal should be.

They huddled under a rock and waited for the rain to stop. They survived by doing what people have been doing for centuries, got out of the elements as best they could and when it was safe, they proceeded. Should they have been there in the first place? No, but... they survived!

It seems that it is just too easy to get in way over their heads. Someone raised in the city just doesn't understand how isolated they are a few miles into the wilderness. Education seems to me to be the best, even though not perfect, solution. A simple test on the application form would help. Question #1, "What will you do if there is lightening in the area?" Answer, A: Risk my life and hope I don't die. B: Stay away and live to hike another day. Question #2, What equipment clothing and supplies will you need? Etc. Etc. If they answer any wrong, no permit. It won't guarantee people won't do stupid things, but it will put the fault squarely on them where it belongs. Ken

Quote
traildad
It seems that it is just too easy to get in way over their heads. Someone raised in the city just doesn't understand how isolated they are a few miles into the wilderness. Education seems to me to be the best, even though not perfect, solution. A simple test on the application form would help. Question #1, "What will you do if there is lightening in the area?" Answer, A: Risk my life and hope I don't die. B: Stay away and live to hike another day. Question #2, What equipment clothing and supplies will you need? Etc. Etc. If they answer any wrong, no permit. It won't guarantee people won't do stupid things, but it will put the fault squarely on them where it belongs. Ken

Probably that would be helpful to a small degree. However, even experts get into trouble (consider the Mt. Everest/Rainer/Sula Madre stories). When does pushing the limits of safety and skill become a daring adventure and when is it just reckless folly? Only difference it that one was successful and the other wasn't. For every person who gets in trouble in the backcountry and needs rescue, there are many that made similar decisions that, perhaps by luck or slightly different circumstances had a different outcome. On the one hand, we admire those that push the limits and succeed, but disparage those who push the limits and fail or need rescue. It is a pretty fine line between glory and catastrophe at times. Analyzing information, making risk-benefit decisions, or sorting through alternatives is difficult. I don't think much is to be gained by blaming individuals for their decisions as the natural consequences of the back country can be very punishing. We have all made decisions that, in retrospect, placed or could have placed us in peril.

One technical fix, if the permit system is promoting more desperate or frantic attempts to climb Half Dome under marginal conditions, would be to allow those that make it to Subdome but turn back due to weather to have easy access to another future permit (credit or "coupon" ).

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2011 05:57AM by Frank Furter.

Quote
Frank Furter

One technical fix, if the permit system is promoting more desperate or frantic attempts to climb Half Dome under marginal conditions, would be to allow those that make it to Subdome but turn back due to weather to have easy access to another future permit (credit or "coupon" ).

I've been thinking along the same lines. It truly, literally, could be a "rain check".

Pushing the limits of safety and skill is quite different than being clueless. Signs can be overlooked, dismissed, discounted or just ignored. What I am suggesting is trying to pierce the the concept of "domesticated wilderness" that developed National Parks can engender.

I think there are four basic categories of human problems in the wilderness:

1. naive individual lacking knowledge of a situation (or a skilled person who has a brief lapse of judgment or a period of distraction) --- for example: stepping backward during a photo, misjudging the power of water or slipperiness of rocks, etc.

2. defiant individual (usually male) who understands a situation is dangerous but is driven by arrogance, mood alteration, or testosterone poisoning to try to beat the odds

3. an expert who is driven by pride of skill and training to push the limits under the conception that his/her unique skill set will prevail to make an unsafe condition into a safe situation

4. "bolt out of the blue" event where fire, lightning, flood, exposure, landslide, or rockfalls occur unpredictably that overwhelm the reasonably prudent person's ability to prevent


So, it seems to me that efforts need to be tailored to the specific target audience.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

I can't say I really disagree with the concept. Which of those apply to Half Dome? #1 seems to be the majority of problems for the cables and even along the route there. A little interactive education could make a difference.

Quote
traildad
I can't say I really disagree with the concept. Which of those apply to Half Dome? #1 seems to be the majority of problems for the cables and even along the route there. A little interactive education could make a difference.

I think all the categories of error can occur on Half Dome (as well as any other area of the backcountry).
I guess in the perfect world, there would be a recognition of these different scenarios. The approaches would differ depending upon the target scenario. Solutions would involve the high risk population and specific mechanisms or interventions to reduce risky behaviors by that group. For example, in certain situations, different guard rails may be important. In other situations, reminders or a little historical education may be sufficient. Language on signs may be a concern. The suggestion has been made to offer a rain check to Half Dome hikers to reduce desperate climbs. There are audible alarms that can signal approaching electrical storms-- perhaps that could be helpful. The slipperiness of the cable path could be addressed with better warnings or recommendations. Some brainstorming could come up with more suggestions. Cost and resource expense are obvious limitations.

Personally, I think Half Dome passes should be for some interval-- a month or week, rather than a specific day. Also, a general backcountry day use permit process should exist to standardize the information transfer and give visitors a wake up to the risks in the backcountry. That permit could be accomplished via the internet. Perhaps the hardest personality to deal with would be the young defiant adult male--- typically high risk for accidental injury. Pretty much impervious to the standard educational programs.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Maybe I assume that the intent is not to prevent every possible problem. We can't give them a test and tell them to come back when they are grown up. Willful disregard of safety is not easy to prevent in the wilderness. I think we would go a long ways to prevent the kind of problems mentioned in this post simply by penetrating that false sense of security many people wrongly have. The idiots and fools are a much tougher problem!

Quote
Frank Furter
Personally, I think Half Dome passes should be for some interval-- a month or week, rather than a specific day. Also, a general backcountry day use permit process should exist to standardize the information transfer and give visitors a wake up to the risks in the backcountry. That permit could be accomplished via the internet. Perhaps the hardest personality to deal with would be the young defiant adult male--- typically high risk for accidental injury. Pretty much impervious to the standard educational programs.

The problem with that would be that it would still result in the same problem there was before - that the use would be heavily concentrated on weekends and holidays. If instead of 400 permits per day it becomes 2800 permits per week valid once, you'll probably find 2500 of them get used from Fri-Sun.

Quote
y_p_w

Quote
Frank Furter
Personally, I think Half Dome passes should be for some interval-- a month or week, rather than a specific day. Also, a general backcountry day use permit process should exist to standardize the information transfer and give visitors a wake up to the risks in the backcountry. That permit could be accomplished via the internet. Perhaps the hardest personality to deal with would be the young defiant adult male--- typically high risk for accidental injury. Pretty much impervious to the standard educational programs.

The problem with that would be that it would still result in the same problem there was before - that the use would be heavily concentrated on weekends and holidays. If instead of 400 permits per day it becomes 2800 permits per week valid once, you'll probably find 2500 of them get used from Fri-Sun.

Yes, however, the passes could be weekday only or weekend only or restricted further at Happy Isles. There are many options to consider. The whole system seems somewhat experimental as it currently exists. Anything that prevents the historic crush of people on the cables when there were no restrictions should be helpful.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
There are signs everywhere warning about paying attention to the weather. Between that and common sense, you'd think that would be warning enough.

Perfectly said.

The thing that amazes me is that Half Dome is far from the most scenic hike in Yosemite, nor is it usually particularly enjoyable. The vast preponderance of people on the trail are not hikers, have no sense of hiker etiquette and many (not all), are loud, litter and are obnoxious. Mt. Whitney is another hike that is almost absurdly overrated. The view from the summit of Whitney is one of the most indifferent views of any peak in the Sierra.

If people are hiking either Whitney or Half Dome for "bragging rights," they must be crestfallen when they return to work and no one has heard of either hike or just doesn't give a damn.

Anyone who is hiking Half Dome and proceeds up the cables in threatening weather should not expect rescue or expect sympathy if and when they get themselves into a dangerous predictament.

yes I must agree. Quite apart from the issue of what is possibly enjoyable about clinging to metal cables on such scary gradients - why go to a beautiful wilderness to spend the day crowded in with other people when there are so many beautiful places you can go to in the park without the crowds and the noise (and the cellphones)? Isn't that the point of going to a wilderness area - to get away from it all? Not to mention the views that you get of Half Dome that you could never get when on it! I've never wanted to do Half Dome and can't imagine I'll ever try.

I think most people who decide to hike Half Dome don't do it mainly for the views from Half Dome. They simply do it for the challenge of doing it because it's such a difficult and strenuous, and for some people, scary, hike. It's about setting a physically challenging goal and then accomplishing it. And it's about the bragging rights of accomplishing something that's difficult (at least to some) and the pride of achievement that comes with that.

Quote
Echidna
yes I must agree. Quite apart from the issue of what is possibly enjoyable about clinging to metal cables on such scary gradients - why go to a beautiful wilderness to spend the day crowded in with other people when there are so many beautiful places you can go to in the park without the crowds and the noise (and the cellphones)? Isn't that the point of going to a wilderness area - to get away from it all? Not to mention the views that you get of Half Dome that you could never get when on it! I've never wanted to do Half Dome and can't imagine I'll ever try.

I think that Half Dome is so iconic that it has an almost magnetic appeal. True technical rock climbers probably are uninterested in the hike up Half Dome. However, those who do not climb difficult rock are attracted to Half Dome for many reasons-- challenge of a difficult hike, sense of accomplishment of reaching a summit, bragging rights, shared experience, association with Yosemite. Personally, I enjoy the view from the top (keep hoping to see Patterson or Turlock one day). In a sense, it is like visiting New York and not seeing or climbing the Statue of Liberty, without that accomplishment something is lost from the overall personal experience of Yosemite I suppose. Because so many have hiked Half Dome, it becomes a kind of shared experience or "band of brothers/sisters"--- mentioning that you climbed Mt. Shasta or Mt Whitney does not have much significance unless you can commensurate with those who have had those experiences.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
Associated Press
So up the side of the slick, granite monolith he went, 400 vertical feet at nearly a 40 percent grade.

People are going to read this article and think Half Dome is a lot easier than it is with that incorrect "40% grade" number they listed for the cables route. 40% grade is only a 22 degree angle.

Quote
mbear

Quote
Associated Press
So up the side of the slick, granite monolith he went, 400 vertical feet at nearly a 40 percent grade.

People are going to read this article and think Half Dome is a lot easier than it is with that incorrect "40% grade" number they listed for the cables route. 40% grade is only a 22 degree angle.

For those unfamiliar with the terminology/definitions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_(slope)

Frank Furter, just curious. Are you a fan of Rocky Horror Picture Show?