Risk, Commerce and Mountain Sports

Firstly, I just want to say how sorry I feel about the tragedy that has transpired on K2 over the last days, and how my thoughts go out to all involved as well as their family and friends. This seems to have become the single biggest mountaineering disaster after 1996 on Everest. It saddens me to think that 11 lives can be wiped out just like that, and although it is to be expected in a sport with such inherrent risk, I wonder if this would have happened at such a scale 30, 40 or 50 years ago?

I am a keen armchair mountaineering fan, not an expert by any stretch of the imagination. I adore reading about all the triumphs, and feel humbled by some of the sacrifices and acts of selflessness seen throughout the history of the sport. However mountaineering in the Himalaya has become more dangerous over time, with higher fatality rates, whilst equipment , forecasting, rescue and communication get better. There has to be a reason for this. It seems that the money introduced into this kind of sport has done anything but improve it, rich businessmen and woman with little or no training can pay upwards of 75k to be guided up these mountains, when something happens, be it bad weather, and ice fall or an avalanche, then these expeditions turn to chaos and quickly it becomes every man for himself. Allthough the exact details of this tradegy are not fully understood, it is clear from the conflicting stories of what led to 8 deaths on Everest in 1996, that something is fundamentally damaged in this sport. Should 25 climbers, working in different languages with different interests all be at or around a place named the "bottleneck" at the same time?

I do not mean to bring this up as a subject to worsen any pain felt by the mountaineering community, I know or suspect many of you guys climb or know climbers. However this is becoming all too common in the Himalaya: issues such as permits, inexperience, money, number of people on the summit at once surely have to be addressed sooner rather than later. If the governments of Nepal, Pakistan and Tibet are not prepared to regulate this industry, should the mountaineering community themselves not do so?

I hope I have not caused any grief by this post, I just think its something that needs to be discussed.


p.s. did not really know where to post this, so forgive me if its innapropriate.

Tino

Commercial climbing providing the inexperienced the means to climb the most dangerous mountains int he world should be dissolved. How many professionals have tried and failed to scale these peaks? Which leads you to the question why the hell they climbing? Good points Tino

I believe this thread should be locked, little is achieved by uninformed speculation and comment Anyone interested in the actual incident should read summitpost or alpinist newswire for updates.

With all due respect, I believe I stated that things from this time around are unclear. I tried to base the point of the post around the tragedy on Everest in '96 rather than speculate on the incident on K2. The K2 situation has only made me post about something I have been thinking about posting for some time.

However if popular consensus believes we should lock it for the time being, then I can respect that also, but it is a discussion I would like to know other peoples feelings on at some point.

ise wrote:.....little is achieved by uninformed speculation and comment

I dont know, I think tino made some very good points, and certainly wasnt being disrespectful by making them. I agree that the tragedy on K2 has highlighted the need for some form of safety regulation....if for nothing else, but to prevent another tragedy like this! And as tino pointed out, he was mainly discussing the Everest tragedy in '96...

The points made weren't terribly well informed. Particularly the background and skills of commercial clients on peaks like K2 or Everest and reasons why several teams found themselves exposed to the potential danger area where the serac collapse occurred.

Regulation and safety concerns are obviously matters for people actually involved in mountaineering rather than spectators.

I appreciate that most people haven't lost friends in the mountains or had friends experience serious injury so can't judge this but uninformed comment is inappropriate and can be offensive without meaning to.

Risk in mountains is an interesting topic in it's own right and lay view is interesting but current events with fatalities call for informed comment. If anyone is genuinely interested in the nature of risk I can recommend as a starting point the book "The Adventure Alternative" by Colin Mortlock ISBN 9781852840129.

I too am uneasy with a discussion of specific recent events here; it is far too early to know or understand the complexities of the K2 tragedy and I think we should respect those involved and keep our discussions to the issues that affect us directly as a community.

I've changed the title of the thread and would ask that we move our discussion onto skiing-related risks.