Mt.Whitney lightning casualties
Richard Ottolini
CBS news reports one death and fifteen injuries from lightning strikes
on Mt. Whitney summit on Saturday. Thirteen of the people had crowded into
the metal-roofed stone register hut at the summit.
I've occcasionally run into the problem sudden thunderstorms, but in
remote areas. I wonder what happened here. There is a huge amount of
traffic on Whitney to propagate bad weather news.
Austin Moseley
Last night I watched all the news stations for coverage of the
Lightening Strike on Mt. Whitney and talked to several friends in L.A.
and Bishop. As you may know, Mt. Whitney sees alot of traffic during the
summer - often 50 people hike up the trail and 10 to 15 complete one or
more of the E. Face routes each weekend. I have been up Mt. Whitney six times
by various routes, but only once have I not seen anyone on the summit, and this
was in winter.
Mt. Whitney is very, very popular, both with the experienced and
novice. You can see good climbers with no outdoors experience failing to drink
enough water, who pass out on the summit, and hikers with no climbing
experience, tossing rocks onto the E. Face.
Thunderstorms in the Sierra are rare and are rare in California, and
I mean rare in the sense that Midwesterners mean thunderstorms where you sit
in your house waiting for the Soviet Tank Armies to roll in after the night
long artillery barrage. How many Californians know what to do if they see
a tornado? ( What does a Kansan know to do during an earthquake?) BUT
lightening KILLS. It usually hits the highest objects in a given area; this
is because the distance from the clouds (the potential) to the high object
*usually* represents the path of least energy or resistance. During a storm,
there will be a ground current that follows the storm around, mimicking the
charge above. And unless you are insulated WELL, this current will flow
into you and your surroundings UNTIL it is released by a lightening strike
somewhere close by. A lightening strike is an attempt between the ground and
the storm to equalize their charges, with the intervening air acting as
an insulator. If the electricity from a high tension line, which supplies
power to a million people, can arc at most four feet, imagine the charge
that can arc up to ten miles: this is lightening.
The hut on Whitney was built to shelter astronomers (?). The last
time I saw it, and climbed on top of it, it had a tin roof and a metal
gadget on its East corner, which may have been a spark arrestor for a firepit,
and on its SW side was the register box, this being made out of metal for
the register, which is rather large. In other words, it is the only metal
for miles around, and it is big. ( I forget the toilet, but it isn't as big
as the hut and is all broken down..) And it is higher than the summit.
From what the survivors said, clouds came up and it started to rain.
Ergo, lets run in the hut to stay dry. Far off, they heard thunder....then
*discontinuity* Fifteen people were in the hut, one died. They were able
to maintain CPR on the deceased for *FIVE* hours. (This is incredible and
may be a record in and of itself.) Two speedburners managed to make it down
in 3 hours and the rescue apparatus moved into action. ( For those who don't
know, the SAR in the Sierras is the BEST outside of the French Alps. And below
the East face, on the biggest boulder at Iceberg lake, at least one
orange litter (stretcher) is prepositioned) There were two sorties by an
Army chinook-variant type helicopter. I don't know HOW the press got up there,
but there was some footage of the hut, the body being loaded, several hikers
with full packs getting on, the Whitney summits from Highway 395, the view
from the summit (it was cloudy). A total of nine were airlifted out. But
everyone was able to walk onto the helicopter. People talked of being
frozen in place, unable to move for minutes after the shock, how they did not
hear anything. Everyone had small burns and were very tired., although
some of the people in the footage looked like nothing had happened.
What happened? Obviously, lightening hit the hut and hit it repeatedly
for several seconds. It could not have been a big bolt beacuse the burns were
fairly minor, but pretty interesting to look at: one guy had the bottoms
of his shoes re-vulcanized. What precautions did they take? None, or else
they would have been racing down that trail when the clouds came up.
I wonder if anyone can get some details firsthand? My speculation is
that when it clouded up and the wind began to blow, the poorly dressed hikers
and climbers congregated in the hut to eat and rest, and when it began to rain,
they didn't want to leave. There was not someone present with both the
experience to forsee and the leadership to force everyone outside and down
the mountain. (Have you ever tried to tell anyone to leave a summit?) I wonder
IF anyone who was present even realized the danger or knew the warning signs
of an imminent lightening strike? ( In S. California??)
Yes, its tragic and sad, and the only thing to do is to learn from
others mistakes. I recall reading something in rec.backcountry last week about
how hiking was not dangerous, per se. I hope that individual knows that
injury and death lurk everywhere, and it always comes when you least expect it.
Everyone you know who hikes or climbs should learn about this story and should
be given a copy of "Accidents in North American Mountaineering"; maybe
everyone can relate their close calls during the week over rec.backcountry.
Mt. Whitney is an "easy" summit, but it is dangerous. The rangers will
give bad advice - like "'you don't need an ice axe" and its still May. The
trail into the E. Face has broken legs because it is *STEEP* and loose. But its
all part of the adventure.
My closest call came on Mt. Gorgonio last September when a wind came up
as I made the summit at 9 am after a dawn start. I HAD to make the summit and
all I had was lycra tights and two T-shirts. My gatorade froze to slush in
my fanny pack as I ran to the summit blocks. I could barely move and I was no
longer shivering. If it had not been a clear morning, with a warm sun lower
down, I would not have made it. I missed the way down twice and took a long
slide/fall that cut me up. My legs and arms were stiff like cold fingers
can be. Once I got back down into the trees I was ok, but the summit was the
danger zone, and the summit is a whole different world. When I reached my car
and sat in its warmth, I could touch my goretex parka, bibs and windsuit,
all of which I'd left behind, because the morning had seemed so warm..
-Austin
USENET News
On Saturday afternoon, I was south of Whitney during that storm. The
rain started at about 12:40 and continued most of the afternoon. The peak
intensity was around 3:30 to 5:00. The storms were related to the tropical
storm off Mexico last week and were continuing on Sunday (Sunday seemed worse
than Friday or Saturday). Urban Californians are not exposed to storms like
this as much as midwesterners, but these storms are what the "Flash flood
warnings in the deserts" forcasts mean.
Keith Price
pr...@usc.edu
From: pr...@iris.usc.edu (Keith Price)
Path: iris.usc.edu!price
Gary Craig
An interesting note in the LA Times article concerning the tragedy was that
doctor at the hospital in Lone Pine thought that the hiker who was killed
endured the "worst effect <of any in the hut> because he was wearing
metal-rimmed glasses". This is a new one on me. Should I now be sure to
remove my glasses if I find myself in a thunderstorm? Should I also remove
my metal watchband, and dump any change from my pockets? Anything else that
I should know (other than the standard "Don't stand under tall trees",
"Don't hike on exposed ridges or summits", "Stay low", "Don't walk around
holding a long copper rod", etc.)?
Gary Craig
ga...@skat.usc.edu
dw
killed
>endured the "worst effect <of any in the hut> because he was wearing
>I should know (other than the standard "Don't stand under tall trees",
>"Don't hike on exposed ridges or summits", "Stay low", "Don't walk around
>holding a long copper rod", etc.)?
I won't claim to be an expert, but lightning is known to be attracted to
metal. Many golfers know that if a storm comes up while they are on the
golf course, then they should not only put some distance between themselves
and their golf clubs, but also remove their shoes if they have metal
spikes. Part of this may be because the metal spikes when in contact with
the earth make an easy path to ground, but part may also be simply because
they are metalic.
/Don
---
Don Wegeng weg...@arisia.xerox.com hplabs!arisia!wegeng
Austin Moseley
To continue the discussion on lightening, as most know by now, it
is the ground current, the evil twin of the electric charge in the storm
that gets to you. And it is the path of least resistance that lightening
will follow. Anything that conducts electricity well is a potential conduit
for the electricity; the better the conductor, the more electricity that can
flow. If I wrap you in aluminum and let you sweat a bit then douse you with
water, why you are a living lightening rod. Coins in your pocket, belt buckles,
glasses, climbing hardware, ice axes, metal framed packs, *anything* that
conducts better than you is giving you an unfair advantage over your partners
and any other nearby objects.
When lightening hits it can travel down your skin, or internally-
like down your nerves or along your bones. It can cook you from the inside
out, making recovery a long, uncertain, and painful process.
So, what can the outdoor traveler ( and others) do to avoid hitting
the jackpot and getting their bell rung? First of all, *avoid* storms while
in inspiring places. Get down before the thunderheads build! Do not wait!
Climb at night s o you summit before noon or train harder before your trip.
If you want to summit and don't have a lot of time: wait until the storm
dies down, then climb into the night and descend at night-trust your body
not the storm. And yes, its better to rappel off a cliff than hang out in
a storm. Lightening loves to travel along the surface of vertical structures!
Ok. So you are on Mt. Timponogos (Salt Lake) and that storm you thought
had left:it didn't- it circled the peak (heh, its trying to get you..) and
you are now very inspired-epiphanous maybe..what do you do?
First of all, are you dry, especially your skin? Put on all your rain
gear, including your hat. Second, run, but don't cross open, exposed places
like bare ridges. Imagine you are a McCoy and there is an Hatfield on the
Nearest Peak-you want to increase your distance from him/her, but not expose
yourself unnecesarily. Get down as fast as you can. Get down. Get Down.
Get Down.
What if you can't get down? Then find the lowest spot, but try not
to sit in the middle of a gully or in the middle of a hole. Sit to the side,
but not touching a wall; leave at least six inches. Throw all your metal gear
away somewhere, preferably in a spot where you can get to it :) ! Jettison
coins, buckles, etc. Sit on your pack or rope or your tent; try to increase the
distance between you and the ground. Don't forget that your stove may be in
your pack or your pack may have aluminum stays, in this case, get it away from
you. Stay dry. And enjoy the storm. If there is no metal on you or within a
few feet and your skin is dry, you will not get hit. Use this time to plan how
you'll get out when the storm dies down. Dont forget your crampons!
What if you are on a wall and it starts? If you have no shelter and no
rain gear, you should keep descending until you find shelter. Its more likely
that you will die of hypothermia than lightening. Its ok to abandon rope and
gear for a long rappel; you can come back later. If you have gear, you will
have it on. Find a ledge and get away from your metal gear. Sit on your
ropes, but dont touch a rope hanging down and don't hang from a rope if you
can help it. Now, pray. If lightening comes down the cliff close to you,
you *WILL* get hit. It might help to be anchored.
Signs of an imminent strike are a buzzing in the air, a fuzzy-prickly
feeling on your skin, and a giddy feeling. Your hair can stand up and you
may get goosebumps. If you are out in the open, hit the deck: lie flat and wait
for the strike(s). Once it hits, keep moving down.
*BAM!!* or worse, you wake up after hearing nothing. You may not
be able to move intitially. Look at your partners and try to evaluate
their condition. If someone is unconscious, check for breathing and pulse;
if they are ok, then look for burns and treat accordingly-or evacuate them
asap. If they are not breathing, etc, you will have to perform CPR. You
have a good chance of successful resucitation. Keep it up while someone
goes for help. ( You should send two people for help. One can direct any
guides, rangers, others they may meet back to you while the other goes out.)
THINK about what you have to do. Talk to each other. Be supportive.
Last, help others and provide leadership if you see someone
doing something stupid. Don't be afraid to leave a summit even if your group
doesn't want to leave. Argue with them, then leave. And the other rule is:
don't linger on summits for very long. I spend one hour at most, usually
ten minutes, then descend. I can rest, cook, eat, etc. a thousand feet below.
The air is thicker and a lot of the descent is out of my way. A good rule
of thumb is to summit before noon and be 3 thousand feet down by one pm.
-Austin
Richard Ottolini
> First of all, *avoid* storms while
>in inspiring places. Get down before the thunderheads build! Do not wait!
>Climb at night s o you summit before noon or train harder before your trip.
An in-depth radio interview with one of the female survivors on the local
CBS radio station revealed: Her party started hiking from the 12K base
camp at 10AM when the sky was clear. The did not see any clouds until
"an half hour from the summit" at about 2PM. Then storm came "suddenly".
Now more facts are in, this seems to be another case of what
I call the "Mt. Hood syndrome" named after an unfortunate accident 10 years
ago when dayhikers continued their ascent of Mt. Hood hood after snow flurries
had started because they were "so close to the top" and most of them died.
I posed the original question on this topic because I wondered why people were
still climbing when there had been thunderstorm warnings since Thursday.
(Death on Saturday).
My personal record is not unblemished in this matter, having been caught
in unexpected weather last summer. When I lead peak climbing groups of
inexperienced people, they something think I'm too paranoid about early
afternoon cloud buildups.
Ron Miller
Situations where notifying the authorities that help is needed being
3 hours away is a good argument for some form of personal communication
device. I carry my handheld ham radio on most hikes and especially ones
that go to high altitude on ridges a long way from help.
Turning the radio on and getting help started toward you immediately
can be a lifesaver (2 hrs CPR instead of 5 ???) From someplace like
Whitney you might be able to telephone patch directly to SAR headquarters.
Then again, maybe the radio wouldn't work after a lightning stroke :-(
Try ham radio, it's common, it's effective and has lots of other uses too.
(My radio stays off if things go well.)
Ron Miller
(there will soon be a no-morse-code licens class too!)
Shaw Moldauer
.
.An interesting note in the LA Times article concerning the tragedy was that
.doctor at the hospital in Lone Pine thought that the hiker who was killed
.metal-rimmed glasses". This is a new one on me. Should I now be sure to
Good thing the docter is not designing electronic equipment!
.remove my glasses if I find myself in a thunderstorm? Should I also remove
.my metal watchband, and dump any change from my pockets? Anything else that
.I should know (other than the standard "Don't stand under tall trees",
."Don't hike on exposed ridges or summits", "Stay low", "Don't walk around
.holding a long copper rod", etc.)?
.
. Gary Craig
. ga...@skat.usc.edu
.----------
If you can predict what lightning will do, will you take me
with you Las Vegas next time you go? :-). After enough potential has
built up between the ground and the clouds, a strike can gap miles
of air (a reasonably good insulator). Since the charge in the earth
tends to follow the charged cloud until the strike occurs, I have
heard that the only good place to be in an electrical storm is near a
cliff or steep face of a hill. re:
---------------
|
|
|
| |
| v
----------------------
Also, remember that a cave is one of the worst places to hide
out durring an electrical storm. You tend to gap the void in the
earth (like a sparkplug).
-Shaw
John Schell
I've spent a few nights in the Whitney hut and even (perhaps foolishly)
hidden from lightning storms inside. The roof used to be grounded with a
metal pipe I believe. Lightning storms on Mt. Whitney or anywhere in the
Sierras are NOT rare. Perhaps the building is now in disrepair and no longer
safe during electrical storms. Perhaps if the rangerettes were less concerned
with issuing permits and tickets they might have time to make sure that such
a frequently used emergency "shelter" is in safe condition or locked up. jcs
Jim Schwalbe
>
>.... If I wrap you in aluminum and let you sweat a bit then douse you with
>water, why you are a living lightening rod.
Now there's a great idea. Wrap yourself in Aluminum foil and you've got the
perfect Faraday cage. Great way to make yourself lightning proof :-)
.---------------------------------------------------------------------------.
: Jim Schwalbe .----------------. Mail: {bu-cs,decvax,talcott}:
: Hardware Research Group .--+-------------. | !encore!schwalbe :
: Encore Computer Corp. | | E N C O R E | | Phone: [508] 460-0500 :
: 257 Cedar Hill Street | `-------------+--' :
: Marlborough, MA 01752 `----------------' "But I live in NH!" :
`---------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Austin Moseley
In response to the Faraday cup suggestion, I will, for a fee,
construct Aluminum foil suits to specifications for field trials, which
can lead to a prototype and full-scale production of lightning-proof
suits. Send measurements and 20 $ to me asap for a suit and suggestions
for its use and test.
-Austin :-)
Richard Ottolini
\Situations where notifying the authorities that help is needed being
\3 hours away is a good argument for some form of personal communication
\device. I carry my handheld ham radio on most hikes and especially ones
\that go to high altitude on ridges a long way from help.
Motorola and other competitors have plans to blanket the world with portable
phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
Everywhere. :-(
Joe Turk
>
>feeling on your skin, and a giddy feeling. Your hair can stand up and you
>may get goosebumps. If you are out in the open, hit the deck: lie flat and wait
>for the strike(s). Once it hits, keep moving down.
On top of Mt Holy Cross (14,005') last summer, while admiring nice
conical-shaped graupel particles, a friend & I got the buzzing noises under
our jacket hoods. The odd thing I remember was looking down at my gray
wool gloves and seeing orange "sparks" or the like on the tips of my
fingers. We ran down the mountain fast. Has anyone ever noticed other
odd phenomenon such as this? I've heard others mention "singing" noises
coming from carabiners.
--joe
Austin Moseley
>Motorola and other competitors have plans to blanket the world with portable
>phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
>I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
>Everywhere. :-(
And then there will be the time when you MUST take the phones
or be denied access. Imagine nearby campers talking on their phones
and the damn things buzzing and ringing. Makes you wish for a non-nuclear
source for an electro-magnetic pulse. I doubt that we will see any
White Wilderness soon, but the thought of those phones all over the Sierra
or in the Cascades may give a little more impetus to the idea of zones
where no maps are allowed, no motorized means of travel are allowed, where
the whole experience is one of self-reliance and utter solitude. Of course,
no phones either.
-Austin
Bobbie Morrison
bel...@mips.com (Gardner Cohen) writes:
>I am sick of hearing about these 'sudden storms'.
.. alot deleted...
>I wonder how long clouds had been building before the flurries started
>falling.
..alot more deleted....
This makes me think of an incident that happened a couple of weeks ago...
Ron Gould and I were climbing on Lembert Dome Tuolumne with the intent of
doing Truck n Drive. I was at the first belay station belaying Ron and I
noticed some heavy clouds to the south over the mountains. Ron and I were
aware of them as he climbed and knew that we would need to make a decision
whether or not to continue when he got up. I had decided yeah, we can make
it up before it gets here, but by the time Ron got up the climb and I had
started to rack up for the lead it started raining. (!). So some people
might call this a "sudden" storm, but obviously it really wasn't, it was
a FAST storm. It got to us so fast it boggled my mind. Actually, I'm glad
it started raining before I was halfway up the friction pitch ;-). So we
rappeled off quickly.
ok, so I live and learn. Now I know, if there are anywhere in the sky then
I probably won't take the chance (all depends on the circumstances and my
judgement). But I wonder how many people call a 'fast' storm a 'sudden'
storm. Sudden to me means no sign anywhere in the sky of a storm.
--Bobbie Morrison
Hewlett-Packard
Cupertino, CA
"When I see the clouds form
A black summer wind storm
That uproots the harvest
And hurls it away
In the midst of such anger
Destruction and danger
The storm's even beautiful
In its own way. " -- Dolly Parton and Willie Nelson
Blake Philip Wood
>3 hours away is a good argument for some form of personal communication
>device. I carry my handheld ham radio on most hikes and especially ones
>that go to high altitude on ridges a long way from help
The news report I saw said that one of the party DID have a handheld
aviation frequency nav/com, and managed to contact a passing airliner
about the same time that some of the party made it out to the portal.
Blake P. Wood - bw...@janus.Berkeley.EDU
Plasmas and Non-Linear Dynamics, U.C. Berkeley, EECS
JUDD STEPHEN L
>Everyone you know who hikes or climbs should learn about this story and should
>be given a copy of "Accidents in North American Mountaineering"; maybe
>everyone can relate their close calls during the week over rec.backcountry.
Okay. Well, I don't think it was a 'close call,' but...
I was on a three day hike in the Pecos Wilderness two weeks ago
(leave Friday, come back Sunday). On Saturday afternoon, I took a drink of
water and Whack! I felt like I had a bad case of heartburn. By that
evening, deep breaths became painful (and necessary). I couldn't do things
like turn my head or bend down. But, I figured it was no huge deal. That
night, I had to lie perfectly still on my back, because it was too painful
to breathe laying on my side or stomach. In fact, even lifting my head was too
painful. That night was kinda a bummer. Anyway, I figured I was either
going to die or it would be significantly better in the morning. And lo and
behold: by morning, I felt much better. The problem was gone in a couple
more days. The pain was above the heart, a little below the top of the
breastbone. I could also feel it in my back and near the glands in my neck
(oooh, what IS the name of that gland??? :-). Pressing my hand on that area
produced pain as well. I might also mention that the pain was fairly sharp,
possibly bruise-like.
So, would anybody like to theorize my problem? Did I swallow something
wrong? When I got home somebody suggested it might have been a (drum roll,
please) Pulminary Embolism, meaning I popped a blood vessel in my lung. Would
anybody like to elaborate? I'm very curious, because I've never had something
like that happen to me before.
-Steve
As long as I'm posting, I would love stories/reviews/opinions on BACKPACKS!
Yes! I've been using my dad's Kelty, which is >25 years old, and one of
the first frame packs made. I like it a lot. At the local store here
(in Los Alamos) they have a Kelty and a JanSport, and each is about $100
(each holds ~3700 cu in.). I can, of course, go elsewhere to buy a pack.
ju...@max.lanl.gov "With language like that, how didst thou
sgt-york.lanl.gov become an Avatar?" - Lord British
tramp.colorado.edu // Only
snoopy.colorado.edu \X/ Amiga!
>
> -Austin
>
Gardner Cohen
An in-depth radio interview with one of the female survivors on the
local CBS radio station revealed: Her party started hiking from the
12K base camp at 10AM when the sky was clear. The did not see any
clouds until "an half hour from the summit" at about 2PM. Then
storm came "suddenly".
I am sick of hearing about these 'sudden storms'.
I was on the Markleeville death ride (bicycle tour) on Saturday, south
of Lake Tahoe. There had been flooding due to thunderstorms in the
area on Friday, and the forecast was for more thunderstorms on
Saturday. There's a trip report from someone on the ride in
rec.bicycles who rode up Carson pass in the rain, while lightning was
striking within 100 yards of the roadway. He described it as a
'sudden storm', and tells of making the decision to keep on going up
since he was already wet and so near the top. This 'sudden storm' had
been forming since at least 11 am (visible for the last half of the
climb back up monitor pass), and could not have been a surprise to
anyone (thundering since noon). The ride organizers showed poor
judgment in not cancelling as soon as it started thundering. I wonder
what their insurance agent would think of this. I wonder who the
Whitney people are going to sue (the builders of the hut?
Manufacturers of the roof? USFS? NWS?)
I've talked to other people about this and the Whitney accident, and
most say that thunderstorms are so unusual around here that no one
takes them seriously. That's hard for me (grew up in Atlanta, went to
college and worked in Houston) to understand. I've been to Half Dome
(past all the signs that say to go back if storms are visible) and
watched people (including my friends) continue up the cables in the
rain, with thunder on the other side of the valley. It's amazing to
me that otherwise intelligent people insisted on continuing despite my
warnings (and example of turning back). They later turned back
because the rain was too cold (and mentioned that one person reported
having her hair stand on end).
Now more facts are in, this seems to be another case of what I call
the "Mt. Hood syndrome" named after an unfortunate accident 10
years ago when dayhikers continued their ascent of Mt. Hood hood
after snow flurries had started because they were "so close to the
top" and most of them died.
I wonder how long clouds had been building before the flurries started
falling.
Not to mention the church group on Hood that managed to do almost
everything wrong in 1986(7?). This was also described by the media as
a 'sudden storm,' which I find difficult to believe, considering how
long it lasted (2-3 days), and reports on the net from people who had
planned to climb Hood that weekend but turned back due to the weather.
Sudden or not, mountain weather should always be considered hostile.
Hiking to 14,000 feet without enough clothing to handle reasonably
possible weather is insane.
Am I preaching to the choir? Do alpine style winter ascents of
undescendable routes like the Denali ones in the appendix of "-148
Degrees" bother you? These receive lots of press, and evoke feelings
of awe in some, but to me they seem to be encouraging people to try
even more risky stunts, occasionally requiring heroic rescue effors.
At what point can we decide not to rescue?
My personal record is not unblemished in this matter, having been
caught in unexpected weather last summer. When I lead peak
climbing groups of inexperienced people, they something think I'm
too paranoid about early afternoon cloud buildups.
I wish I knew what do to about this. I understand that stories of
doom are supposed to be ineffective on young people ("here's what your
lungs look like after smoking for ten years" "this is your brain on
drugs" etc.), since they can't conceive of anything bad happening to
them.
The media doesn't help by repeating the self-serving descriptions of
'sudden storms', which make these accidents appear to be unavoidable
acts of god, rather than the lack of judgment they really are.
However, it's too easy to sit back and play 'blame the victim,' much
like the test pilots in "The Right Stuff" who needed to find a way to
blame the pilot for a crash, rather than admit that the job was
inherently dangerous.
--
Gardner Cohen bel...@mips.com {ames,decwrl,...}!mips!beldar (408) 524-8267
Scott Thurston
Another *every* golfer knows is that if he or she is caught in a
lightning storm to hold a one-iron straight up above them... because
even GOD can't hit a one-iron!
P.S. Sorry about the length of the included article. I can't figure out
how to delete lines with the newfangle X new reader! (sure is nice
otherwise =8^)
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
| Scott Thurston ...!uunet!sequent!scottie |
| Sequent Computer Systems, Inc |
| Beaverton, OR Disclaimer: I used to be sane, but I got better. |
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
| SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! ... No one expects the Spamish Repetition! |
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
Claus GILOI
>>...doctor at the hospital in Lone Pine thought that the hiker who was
>> killed
>>endured the "worst effect <of any in the hut> because he was wearing
>>metal-rimmed glasses"...
>
Actually I think that "metal attracts lightning" is largely a myth.
The primary danger from metal objects is a result of "induced currents",
presumably resulting from large magnetic fields accompanying a strike.
This only applies to large metal objects such as ice axes (not belt
buckles, etc.)
There is an excellent discussion of this in "Mountaineering: The Freedom
of the Hills"
This is an terrific book that I would recommend to climbers and hikers
alike. I bought the book even though I had little climbing interest at
the time. It covers in detail subjects such as snow cycles, mountain
geology and weather, etc. It would also be an excellent reference for
anyone interested in learning climbing terminology (as opposed to jargon,
which I think should be avoided here). The book presents a very complete
body of information about mountain travel, and really sparked my personal
interest in climbing as an extension of hiking techniques.
~500 pages, $20, widely available.
Claus Giloi
Timo Kiravuo
>Motorola and other competitors have plans to blanket the world with portable
>phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
There was an article in one of the local technical magazines
about this and cellular phones in general. According to them, the
current limit to the size of the phone is the size of the
battery. The electronics can be made quite small, but current
battery technologies have their limits.
Battery technology is improving, and in the future we are going
to see smaller and smaller phones.
But this reminds me of a story told by a friend. Interrupt me if
I have told this before. He was in Lappland teaching an UNIX
course, which in itself is another story. Anyway one day the
whole course took a snowmobile trip to the local hills. There
they saw some Lapps sitting at a fire and drinking coffee.
Now the Lapp people used to be seminomadic, but not any more.
These two guys did not travel by reindeer any more, but had
snowmobiles instead. (In Lappland everybody has a snowmobile.)
Despite of this, they looked like they used to some centuries
ago. Both were old, small, wrinkled and dressed in reindeer fur
coats.
Our group joined them at the fire and started a discussion. So
here they were, sitting on tundra, in winter, by a fire, drinking
coffee and talking with these two real Lapps. My friend felt like
being transferred backwards in time.
Until he heard a beeping from somewhere. And one of the Lapps
opened his old fur coat, took out his cellular phone and began to
discuss his reindeer business on it...
- - -
Let's not start a flame war on phones and radios in backcountry.
I think that most of us agree that those things are OK when used
as a safety measure, and that's it. Otherwise we do not prefer to
communicate with the outside world. (Now if I could take this
laptop and a NMT modem, that would be something different... ;-)
--
Timo Kiravuo
Helsinki University of Technology, Computer Center, Finland
kir...@hut.fi sorvi::kiravuo kiravuo%hut...@uunet.uu.net
Ted Dunning
In article <beldar.648343676@max> bel...@mips.com (Gardner Cohen) writes:
...
At what point can we decide not to rescue?
...
the standard answer to this is that we should decide not to rescue
when the rescue would require risk to the rescuer. of course, this
isn't always the way it works, but that is what the orthodoxy says.
--
Offer void except where prohibited by law.
charles he hemstreet
.....
conical-shaped graupel particles, a friend & I got the buzzing noises under
our jacket hoods. The odd thing I remember was looking down at my gray
wool gloves and seeing orange "sparks" or the like on the tips of my
fingers. We ran down the mountain fast. Has anyone ever noticed other
odd phenomenon such as this? I've heard others mention "singing" noises
coming from carabiners.
--joe
I have a friend who climbed Longs Peak (14,256ft) many falls ago. He
told me that when he got to the key-hole (12,000ft aprx), a snow storm
hit. Upon looking at his ice-axe, he noticed that it was glowing with
a blue tint, with blue sparks coming off of it.
Charles
--
!===========================================================================!
! Charles H. Hemstreet IV !internet: hems...@handel.cs.Colostate.Edu !
! Colorado State University ! "stay out of trouble!" -RoboCop !
!===========================================================================!
Austin Moseley
>metal pipe I believe. Lightning storms on Mt. Whitney or anywhere in the
>Sierras are NOT rare. Perhaps the building is now in disrepair and no longer
>safe during electrical storms. Perhaps if the rangerettes were less concerned
>with issuing permits and tickets they might have time to make sure that such
>a frequently used emergency "shelter" is in safe condition or locked up. jcs
The hut on Mt. Whitney IS *NOT* an emergencey shelter. It was built
to shelter astronomers and workers in the 1930's. If there were an eemrgency
shelter on Mt. Whitney, it would be at the pass S. of the peak, out of the way
of lightning and not a temptation for people to loiter on or make towards the
summit. When I was last on Whitney, the hut had not been unlocked, but
*broken* into-the door was splintered in places and the chain with lock was
still hanging on it. This was last year.
An excellent example of a well placed "emergency" shelter is the Sierra
Club Hut on Mt. Shasta. It is in the fall line of the routes off Casaval,
Avalanche gulch, Sergent's ridge, and Green Butte, and if you read the
registers carefully, many have thankfully used the hut to escape storms after
floudering about below looking for Bunny Flats or the road.
The Hut on Whitney should be moved or destroyed ( by the Air Force ?)
and the rocks scattered by dropping them onto the N Side. It serves no purpose
and violates the no-structures Ethic in the Sierras.
The Sierras are relatively quiet compared to the Colorado
Rockies or the Wind River Range; you can observe this in the locals' reaction
to puffy, growing clouds. Just watch the people pour off Long's or the Grand
when the Thunderheads build, but in California people will climb into
storms in the Sierras and on Mt. Shasta, or try to sit it out. A guide
told me that every year someone freezes to death on the summit of
Mt Shasta during a summer storm.
Its also been mentioned that the Rangers on Whitney rarely give good
advice, having sent many hikers up the trail in May, telling them they didn't
need even a ski pole; the Rangers' job is more akin to selling hotcakes as any
summer morning at the Ranger Station is always a near riot as people compete
for entry permits.
Chris Schmandt
>There was an article in one of the local technical magazines
>about this and cellular phones in general. According to them, the
>current limit to the size of the phone is the size of the
>battery. The electronics can be made quite small, but current
>battery technologies have their limits.
I have a Motorola PT. I carry it around in my pocket. The battery
is about 4.5 inches x 2.25 inches by 3/8 inch, and weighs about
4 oz. I could easily carry it into backcountry.
Would I? Probably not. Though immersed in a high-tech world, I
go out there to escape alot of that. In some ways, the possibility
of rescue (at my expese, of course) might embolden me to do some solo
trips that I would hesistate to do without it, but that would also
detract from some of the wonderful quality of solo trips.
Then I think, well, what if I'm driving around, say, SE Utah on some
of those long, marginal (at least to rental car) roads and break down
60 miles from no where? But being able to get help out there would
change precisely what is wonderful about those places, their remoteness,
the feeling that you really do have to rely on your own wits.
But I'm not sure whether, personally, this is a vain opinion. And I
also think about hiking in those places with my kid. When we were out
in Canyonlands this spring she fell on a rock and got surface lacerations
of the scalp. No big deal, but she bled a lot for a little while and it
was a bit scary. Accidents to your kid are different than to yourself.
The problem would be, to be able to have some sort of hand held communications
device and be able to use it only in a dire emergency. So that you really
relied on it in situations where you would seriously lose, as in risk
death by not using it. Perhaps charging a lot of money for its use
(doesn't work for public utility like telecom though), so you use it
only in a situation where money really did not matter.
There's actually some real issues buried beneath the techno-glitz
of this topic.
chris
charles he hemstreet
I am sick of hearing about these 'sudden storms'.
Hiking to 14,000 feet without enough clothing to handle reasonably
possible weather is insane.
The media doesn't help by repeating the self-serving descriptions of
'sudden storms', which make these accidents appear to be unavoidable
acts of god, rather than the lack of judgment they really are.
Commenting on sudden storms. Back in 86' I organized a climb of Longs
Peak here in Colorado. If I knew then what I know now! We started up
fairly early in the morning (3am). Small puffy clouds were all
around, but didn't seem threatening because they would go away for a
while and then come back. (Maybe they had a meeting with God or
something :-) About a half hour away from the summit, the small puffy
clouds "Suddenly" became one BIG cloud, and snow started to come. I
have lived in Colorado all my life, and watched the weather with great
intensity, but I had never experienced a storm organizing so quickly.
Now, BIG MISTAKE... we decided to finish the climb... the snow was
corn snow, so it didn't seem too threatening. Upon reaching the
summit, all hell broke loose! Wind, rain, corn snow, misery, cold,
etc, etc. We spent the next two hours on an exposed face (trough),
not being able to move because of the snow and ice already there and
from the present storm. Four of us come back with frostbite on our
fingers and toes, and I managed to get a nice case of hypothermia (very
unpleasant).
What did I learn?
1. Colorado weather is VERY unpredictable. It can be sunny
and pleasant one minute, and the next, stormy and freezing!
2. When clouds are forming, take heed.
3. When snow is flowing, don't climb the summit anyway (unless
you are ready for an expedition climb of McKinley in dead winter)
4. Frostbite and hypothermia are dangerous! Bring the right
kind of gear for the right season. Cotton mittens, and lack of hat
are stupid if there is even the slightest chance it will snow.
Have I become an experienced climber/packer? Nope, still learning.
Will I make the same mistake twice? Hope not.
Chuck Smythe
about now. I've heard that no Americans were in the base camp that was
wiped out. Can anyone confirm, so I can stop worrying?
Chuck Smythe
Ted Dunning
In article <6...@cohesive.UUCP> sch...@cohesive.UUCP (John Schell) writes:
I've spent a few nights in the Whitney hut and even
(perhaps foolishly)
hidden from lightning storms inside.
probably foolish if the hut has a metal roof and is right on the
summit. but it is a hard choice.
The roof used to be grounded with a metal pipe I believe.
this would hardly make it safe. even without any direct contact with
the stroke (which would be pretty hard to define), induced currents,
explosive effects and burns could be very severe no matter whether the
roof is grounded or not. besides, how effective do you the ground
actually is on top of a large fairly dry pile of rocks.
Perhaps the building is now in disrepair and no longer safe during
electrical storms.
it never was safe.
Perhaps if the rangerettes were less concerned with issuing permits
and tickets they might have time to make sure that such a
frequently used emergency "shelter" is in safe condition or locked
up.
?? how would you recommend that they make it safe? tear it down?
the only safe course of action is to get off the peak (without falling
on the suddenly rain-slickened rocks), and avoid ground current
situations.
Richard Ottolini
>The problem would be, to be able to have some sort of hand held communications
>device and be able to use it only in a dire emergency. So that you really
>relied on it in situations where you would seriously lose, as in risk
>death by not using it. Perhaps charging a lot of money for its use
>(doesn't work for public utility like telecom though), so you use it
>only in a situation where money really did not matter.
>
>There's actually some real issues buried beneath the techno-glitz
>of this topic.
With every new technology evolves a social protocol.
Remember the chiming watches in theaters ten years ago; M.D. pagers today.
As people have pointed out, the rescue benefits, and legal reasons may
encourage most people to take wristwatch sized phones.
But most people will learn to be considerate and turn off incoming calls,
except for the most uptight business types.
Another technology on the horizon are self-locators, i.e. minaturized
Global Positioning Satellite receviers. In the last couple years, they've
basically eliminated conventional uses of surveying, since you can just
click a button and read out your position to a meter or less.
All commerical shipping vehicles will install these devices shortly.
As these devices fall into the sub-pound range, they may complement topo
maps on backpack trips. Sigh
Dan Dunphy
possible without putting your hands on the ground. If you lie
flat the ground wave can kill you.
Greg Vernon
We decided it would be a great way to call in sick, while you're in the
middle of some hike ;)
Cheers!
Greg
Kate M. Gregory
>>There was an article in one of the local technical magazines
>>about this and cellular phones in general. According to them, the
>>current limit to the size of the phone is the size of the
>>battery. The electronics can be made quite small, but current
>>battery technologies have their limits.
>
>I have a Motorola PT. I carry it around in my pocket. The battery
>is about 4.5 inches x 2.25 inches by 3/8 inch, and weighs about
>4 oz. I could easily carry it into backcountry.
>
>device and be able to use it only in a dire emergency.
I spent a part of my childhood in Waterloo County, Ontario, and so I'm
familiar with the Mennonites who came up from Pennsylvania. The "modern"
Mennonites look just like you and me (well, me anyway) but the Old Order
are very different. They shun electricity, machinery, and the like, drive
horse drawn buggies, the works. In between these extremes are those who
drive cars, but only black ones with no chrome.
Mennonites take their responsibilities to their animals very seriously and
a number of the "middle" (I forget the proper name) people we knew had
a phone IN THE BARN. It was for placing calls to doctors or, more likely,
vets. Not for receiving calls, not for pleasure calls, not to save a trip
but to save a life. These people obviously needed the physical distance
to help with the temptation. I think of that when I think of taking
a phone into the wilderness.
Kate
George Tucker
> like the test pilots in "The Right Stuff" who needed to find a way to
> blame the pilot for a crash, rather than admit that the job was
> inherently dangerous.
mostly at the same time of year. Once in a while they are bound to conflict.
Maybe we should close all mountains to people so no one will be hit by lightning
there. Maybe the Europeans should have closed the continent to visitors because of
potential conflict with the natives. Lousy analogy.
I was on top of Mt. Humphreys last weekend and the only thunder of the day occurred
before we rapped down in the sleet. Nobody got fried. We would have got off if
a significant storm was coming, but lightning was probably more likely down by the
lakes anyway. Hypothermia, traffic accidents, and rockfall are far greater
mountaineering (or Whitney hiking) dangers than lightning. So forget
about telling people how they don't pay enough attention to the danger.
We already get too much slop about the dangers of nature; it is far safer for
adult males to be in the mountains in a storm than in sight of any L.A. cop.
They had a right to expect a metal-roofed bldg on Whitney to be grounded well enough
to get the current well down from the bldg. Considering the idiotic pretenses
that can be used for liability suits in this country, the Army and Forest Service
would be liable for gigabucks if they were private. Heck, if someone can
collect from the Forest Service it might save some trees by reducing the funds
left to subsidize clearcuts. Headline: "Lawsuit saves trees.
Lawyers benefit society!!!
Rational judge found!!!!!!!!!
BTW, a Faraday cage won't help if it vaporizes. That is what will happen to
aluminum foil if lightning strikes it. Also, it will not shield a juicey
salty conductor touching all the walls.
scott eby
>
> >Motorola and other competitors have plans to blanket the world with portable
> >phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
> >I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
> >Everywhere. :-(
>
source for an electro-magnetic pulse.
How about a battery powered Tesla Coil. 8-)
Ron Miller
>
> >Motorola and other competitors have plans to blanket the world with portable
> >phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
> >I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
> >Everywhere. :-(
>
Maybe then the "wilderness lobby" will have to demand that those phone
services be dial-out only.
Wouldn't it piss you right off to be working some difficult ledge and
have the phone ring? And it's some asshole trying to sell you a
magazine subscription! :-)
Or maybe after small cellular phones come the StarTrek pin-on device.....
Ron
Darren S. Bush
>have the phone ring? And it's some asshole trying to sell you a
>magazine subscription! :-)
Yes. It pisses me off now. Especially the people who are selling 25 year
lightbulbs. "We're not asking for charity, we're just going to sell you
something horrendously overpriced...".
Kill a yuppie hiker. Keep phones out of the backcountry. :-)
Darren S. Bush "What's that metal thing on your lifevest?"
U. Rahchesta (until 8/15) "I dunno. Must be important because
Disclaimer: Yeah, sure. everybody has one."
Darren:George::Karl:Groucho - overheard on the Ocoee River
Tom Harper
lifted them into a more vertical position, the
buzzing would get louder. Impressed with
my new discovery, I quickly lifted them
into a completely vertical psition. Real
dumb idea. I got zapped. We moved to a lower
elevation without wasting much time.
Tom Harper t...@hpda.hp.com
Michelle Lassagne
The afternoon brought thundershowers, but fortunately our trip was led by
an experienced leader. Before the first raindrops fell, she made sure
everyone in the group knew that the packs were to come off, that they would
be covered by a tarp that was easily accessible in the top of her pack and
that we would huddle (6 of us) a certain distance from the packs under another
easily accessible tarp. Sure enough, several minutes later we did just that,
and everything went smoothly. The lightning got pretty close and lasted for
at least 30 minutes, but we were fine.
Michelle Lassagne
Renee Reed
I was told by several people, last night at a barbeque for the
Soviet Mountaineering Team, here in Seattle for the Goodwill
Peace Climb of Raineer, that *no* Americans are known to have
been casualties. I too have a friend who was expected arrive
at the base camp the day following the accident.(Tom Hardin)
We all hope that he did not arrive early and that all is well with
him. He is probably involved with the rescue/recovery at this time.
Booker bense
>
>In article <beldar.648343676@max> bel...@mips.com (Gardner Cohen) writes:
>> ...
> At what point can we decide not to rescue?
> ...
>>
>the standard answer to this is that we should decide not to rescue
>when the rescue would require risk to the rescuer. of course, this
>isn't always the way it works, but that is what the orthodoxy says.
>
This misses the point entirely, traveling in the mountains
ALWAYS involves some measure of risk. The decision is between
acceptable/unacceptable levels of risk, people involved in rescues
raise this level because "someone's life is at stake". The history of
mountain rescues is full of stories of people dying because they made
bad decisions attempting a rescue. My gut reaction is to say that we
should NEVER rescue, but that's not realistic. Perhaps, we need to
emulate Britain, where if my understanding is correct , you are liable
for all the costs of your rescue , which generally is $$$$$!. Most
backcountry types have rescue insurance. If someone from GB could
explain this I think it would be useful, I'm only postulating from
adverts in British climbing Magazines.
Even if we all had First Alert wristbands and dozen's of
helicopter rescue squads at our call, people would die in the
mountains. Helicopter ambulances are probably the most risky way to
travel. In my opinion carrying a mobile phone only INCREASES your
risk in the mountains, it would only encourage the "Mt. Hood syndrome".
-Booker C. Bense
/* ben...@grumpy.sdsc.edu */
John Byrnes
>
> If you can predict what lightning will do, will you take me
> with you Las Vegas next time you go? :-). After enough potential has
> built up between the ground and the clouds, a strike can gap miles
> of air (a reasonably good insulator)...
>
Actually Shaw is being quite sarcastic here. A mile of air is a
*DAMN GOOD* insulator, even if it's saturated with water. I don't
believe that the human race has figured out how to create an arc
across even a fraction of that distance, or even generate that much
power in the timeframe of a lightning strike (excluding atom bombs).
Forget about the aluminum suits too. If you could carry it, it would
most likely vaporize.
John
Eugene N. Miya
It surprises me that this was not flamed considering the other
flamefests we seem to have. Most outdoor organizations forbid
radios (even simple receivers) on their trips. There are some
exceptions most bound to the seriousness of the venture: i.e.,
the requirement for radios on McKinley (can be written away by special
"permission").
Private individuals is another story. We've talked about music
recorded music, of radios of big walls, etc. Does the 2-way emergency
radio become the 11th essential? Where does it stop? If individuals
like life so much, what are they doing on Mt. Whitney in the middle of a
thunderstorm? Don't people have enough sense to try and turn back or is
the lure of the summit "strong?" Contrary to one posting thunderstorms
in the Sierra do occur with some frequency. I support evolution in
action, leave the one body up there as a reminder. I came very close to
passing Walter Starr, Jr.'s recently. It might sober you up.
One goes into the backcountry, one had better accept the risks.
Lacking radios might be one. Remember, you are counting on it working.
Lightning might be another. The alternative, if you want to be safe,
prove the public with work, etc. Let's pave the Sierra over right now.
Level every peak, fill in every valley, you'd get rid of all these
"problems." Or you learn to take the backcountry's problems on it's terms.
--e. nobuo miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eug...@orville.nas.nasa.gov
{uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Richard Ottolini
equipment necessary to enjoy and be save in the backcountry.
A few weeks ago I went on one of the Sierra Club local branch's weekend
trips with the aim of climbing as many ridges and peaks as possible.
We would not set up a base camp, but continually be on the go.
We would have to keep out packs to 10-15 pounds.
It worked. Perfect weather helped so people did not bring a lot of cold
or rain gear. Most people brought a large day pack, sleeping pack, bivy sack
or tarp, a warm jacket and light food.
We exchange "legends" about mountain people who'd think this wasy too much.
Stories about people who just brought a Sierra cup, slept under pine needles,
etc. I've heard the final Outward Bound exercise does this.
George Chen
a suitable newsgroup (is there a rec.weather?)
I've never seen or heard about lightning striking any large
body of water. Does this ever happen? I can imagine a boat's
mast being hit by lighting, but does the strike ever actually
hit the water? Do we get instant broiled fish?
george t chen
gtc...@speech.sri.com
john reece
> > However, it's too easy to sit back and play 'blame the victim,' much
> > like the test pilots in "The Right Stuff" who needed to find a way to
> > blame the pilot for a crash, rather than admit that the job was
> > inherently dangerous.
As luck would have it, there is a relevant article in today's San Jose
Mercury-News about a pair of Half Dome lightning deaths that happened 5
years ago.
I will just quote from the first part:
HIKER STRUCK BY LIGHTENING MAKES PEACE WITH TRAGEDY
Five years ago this week, Adrian Esteban sat amid the monoliths
of Yosemite National Park and made a vow to himself. He and four
friends had been struck by lightning while atop Half Dome, one of the
park's fabled granite monoliths. Two had died. Two others were
seriously injured.
Esteban, spared the brunt of the bolt, was understandably shaken.
But he made a determined promise two days after the incident:
"Half Dome is my spiritual place. And I must go back there."
True to his word, Esteban, 32, has gone back several times since the
incident. And the Sunnyvale resident said he is a better person for
the strike, which park officials said was one of the worst in
Yosemite's history.
The July day had started innocently enough... Trouble began when five
of the campers decided to attempta grueling six-hour hike through
a rainstorm to the summit of Half Dome... Esteban admitted the
group ignored at least three posted warnings not to approach the
summit when lightning strikes are possible.
"It was the thrill of being in a life-and-death situation. It was like
playing Russian roulette," Esteban said. "There was such a rush as we
were going up and saw those dark clouds. The adrenaline was flowing.
There was an intense feeling that you could die at any moment."
When the group reached the top in time for a lightning show, Thomas
Rice, a 28-year-old computer engineer, did a dance while Robert
Frith, a 24-year-old engineer from Mountain View, dangled his legs
over the edge.
"Tom couldn't stop dancing. We thought we were the luckiest people
on Earth, and that the gods would never stop smiling on us."
Minutes later, while sitting in a small cleft, Rice, Esteban, Frith
and two fellow hikers -- Bruce Weiner and Brian Jordan -- were struck by
lightning. A second bolt hit them 15 minutes later.
Brian was killed instantly. Rice and Weiner, both paralyzed from the
waist down, screamed with pain. And Frith, struck between the eyes
by the bolt, began going into convulsions and vomiting. Slowly, Frith
began rolling to the cliff's edge. A dazed Esteban moved to grab him.
As Frith approached the edge, Esteban grabbed onto his sweater. He
eventually lost his grip and Frith dropped 1,800 feet down the
northwest face to his death...
The survivors were evacuated 3 hours later.
John Reece
Not an Intel spokesman
jre...@yoyodyne.intel.com
Steve LaSala
>In article <6...@cohesive.UUCP> sch...@cohesive.UUCP (John Schell) writes:
>>Perhaps if the rangerettes were less concerned
>>with issuing permits and tickets they might have time to make sure that such
>>a frequently used emergency "shelter" is in safe condition or locked up. jcs
>
> The hut on Mt. Whitney IS *NOT* an emergencey shelter. It was built
>to shelter astronomers and workers in the 1930's. If there were an eemrgency
>shelter on Mt. Whitney, it would be at the pass S. of the peak, out of the way
>of lightning and not a temptation for people to loiter on or make towards the
>summit. When I was last on Whitney, the hut had not been unlocked, but
> *broken* into-the door was splintered in places and the chain with lock was
>still hanging on it. This was last year.
A related example is the small quonset-hut style emergency shelter that
used to exist in Edmunds Col, between Mounts Jefferson and Madison in NH.
The Forest Service removed it in the late 70's after it became evident that
many people were using the structure not for emergencies, but as a planned
bivy site to enable winter (or even summer) traverses of the range.
In the same area are several alpine huts, open to the public but
owned and maintained by the Appalachian Mountain Club. In at least one case,
an underprepared hiker broke into a (seasonally closed) hut to escape a spring
storm, was charged with either vandalism or B&E (don't remember which), and
had to pay for the repairs.
Kate M. Gregory
were ordered out of the water in that tone of voice reserved for seriously
dangerous situations. I never argued or questioned, but does anyone
really know?
Kate
Beth Crespo
conical shaped peak of Mt. Edwards. John was carrying both our
iceaxes and the buzzing was quite noticeable from ~5 feet away.
As I approached him to investigate the source of the noise,
he recognized it and we split up fast, he also tossed the
pack which seemed to be acting as a lightening rod. We crouched
down and I saw a distinct flash over the peak with simultaneous
thunder. Then we RAN to a near gully where we unstraped both
axes and glissaded down. I was amazed that I could move so fast
at 13000 feet when seconds earlier I was struggling along.
My Story,
Beth (glad to be alive) Crespo
P.S. Mt Edwards is an uncrowded alternate route to Grays & Torreys.
Beth Crespo
>I was backpacking at Yosemite on a day that started out beautiful and clear.
>The afternoon brought thundershowers, but fortunately our trip was led by
>an experienced leader. Before the first raindrops fell, she made sure
>everyone in the group knew that the packs were to come off, that they would
>be covered by a tarp that was easily accessible in the top of her pack and
>that we would huddle (6 of us) a certain distance from the packs under another
to separate to avoid being zapped all at once. Then somebody might
live to perform CPR on the lightning victims. Also, I believe that
the packs would be better off underneath you to act as insulation.
>easily accessible tarp. Sure enough, several minutes later we did just that,
>and everything went smoothly. The lightning got pretty close and lasted for
>at least 30 minutes, but we were fine.
You were lucky.
I've been lucky too but I don't claim it is the result of experience.
It does help build experience :-) and maybe judgement.
My Opinion,
Beth Crespo
Jeremy Sommer
ago with a friend (still my friend), and we got to the summit
ridge, his ice-axe point happened to pass close to me as he
turned, and I got a bad shock from it (involuntary muscle
contraction etc). Plus the "singing rocks" phenomenon, where as
you approach boulders each one buzzes when you get close.
The storm had been building for at least two hours, we had our
chance to turn back at 12K. Area of greatest strike intensity was
about a mile away, but this of course can change rapidly.
Jeremy Sommer
Ted Kell
BUT when I was a kid in NJ, I remember my grandparents house being armed
with lightning rods and a THICK cable to ground. It seems to me that it
was normal for houses to be so protected. Other than the comment of
nothing on top of Mt. Whitney, why wouldn't this work there? Not like
I'll ever get a chance to see it, but i was just wondering.
Dominick whats-his-name
Lightning when striking water will _not_ go to ground but
skitter along the surface. It is similar to the "skin effect"
that RF and microwaves exhibit on a good conductor. This means
that the lightning will shoot along in a sheet of current
along the surface of the water/air interface and stike a whole mess of
bathers rather than a few in a localized area.
The fast pulse of electricity will eventually die out along
the surface. In fact I believe (warning warning conjecture
:-)) that if you dive a few feet under the water, you
shouldn't feel too much of a thunderbolt. I wouldn't want to
try that unless I KNEW I was doomed!
--
11011010011010100110100111011011001101010101001101001101001
These are not my opinions, they are my evil twin's!
domi...@ziggy.cmd.usf.edu
Booker bense
YES,YES,YES!!!! I've seen lighting strikes on freshwater lakes
(Winnipesauke, damn I lived there for twenty years and I still can't
spell it !). I don't think it has much effect on the fish since it
travels on top of the water.
David Grieve
]]I've never seen or heard about lightning striking any large
]]body of water. Does this ever happen? I can imagine a boat's
]]mast being hit by lighting, but does the strike ever actually
]]hit the water? Do we get instant broiled fish?
]]
]When I was at camp we were NOT allowed to swim during thunderstorms. We
]were ordered out of the water in that tone of voice reserved for seriously
]dangerous situations. I never argued or questioned, but does anyone
]really know?
Water (H(2)0) is not a good conductor itself, as I understand it. It is all
of the dissolved minerals in the water that make it conductive. So, I imagine
you'd get a worse zap in a pool with chlorinated water than in a lake.
I also think that there is probably a greater "potential" potential with all
of those ions floating around in the water. Seems like they'd tend to
congregate under the charged thunder head. A bolt of lightening would
disapate the charge and disperse the ions, and you'd get zinged.
Fish research types use the same technique to stun fish. They stick
electrodes in the water, zap the fish, the fish are stuned and float
to the top where they can be counted.
Personally I won't shower or use the phone in an electrical storm.
--
gri...@cos.com OR {uunet, decuac, sun!sundc, hadron, hqda-ai}!cos!grieve
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the
Corporation for Open Systems, its members, or any standards body.
Typos are intellectual property of the author.
Eugene N. Miya
A book on meteorology can tell you more static charge build up
and how to deal with than a short net post.
There is a group devoted to atmospheric phenomena (sci.geo.fluids) but
discussion tends to be on a larger scale (planetary and regional).
No, lakes aren't particularly safe.
Robert Kinne
>BUT when I was a kid in NJ, I remember my grandparents house being armed
>with lightning rods and a THICK cable to ground. It seems to me that it
>was normal for houses to be so protected. Other than the comment of
>nothing on top of Mt. Whitney, why wouldn't this work there? Not like
The lightning rod and cable to ground seemed like a good idea, but
there is little evidence that it did much good, or worked as intended.
Lightning strikes are more probable at the highest local point, but
it is not a 100% vs 0% probability. It is also true that the current
in a severe strike is enough to explode the typical lightning rod
and cable, scattering hot metal in all directions. A rod sticking
a few feet above the house has a marginal chance of being the focus
of the lightning, but might divert a strike from a nearby tree to
the house, rather than protecting the house. The occurances of
strikes on houses with or without rods seems to be pretty much the
same, and the insurance companies have long ago stopped giving
reduced rates to homeowners with lightning rods.
When on an exposed mountain, the hikers are more often hurt by ground
currents than direct strikes. There are lots of good rules to observe,
all have been posted here. But like traffic accidents, observing the
rules will improve your chances of avoiding injury, but will not
reduce risk to zero. Sometimes people just have the bad luck to be
in the wrong place at the wrong time, and get hit despite precautions.
And some disregard safety, and are never harmed. Life isn't supposed
to be fair.
Beth Crespo
>It surprises me that this was not flamed considering the other flamefests
Me too, I wonder whether folks value the ethic of self-rescue.
(Or maybe, like me, we're just too busy to respond?)
I think developing an attitude of self-reliance is part of the fun
of going into the backcountry. Going places under my own power with
my own resources is an excellent feeling. Risk assessment is part
of the deal. If the risk is too high (subjective decision) then
carrying a radio to make it "safer" is a foolish notion, IMHO.
It doesn't reduce the risk one iota but may lead to overstepping
your personal limits. What good is a radio? You can only use
it to call for help AFTER you are in trouble, staying out of trouble
is a much safer practice. I think assuming NO ONE will look
for you, until you are likely to be dead, leads to more caution.
(That should bring out a few flames :-)
[stuff deleted]
>Where does it stop? If individuals
>like life so much, what are they doing on Mt. Whitney in the middle of a
>thunderstorm? Don't people have enough sense to try and turn back or is
>the lure of the summit "strong?"
The lure of the summit is VERY STRONG and carrying false security
will not help you make the best decision. The best decision is one
that you can live with! Waiting out a storm, turning back to try again
another day, living with questions of "perhaps I didn't need to turn around"
or "maybe I could have made that move", are individual decisions as valid
as stretching your personal limits and overcoming private fears.
Just don't expect help from anyone but yourself.
>Contrary to one posting thunderstorms
>in the Sierra do occur with some frequency.
Do all high mountains generate storms? I know the Rockies most surely do,
afternoon thunderstorms are so common that starting before dawn is very
common. The goal is to be on the way down from the peak before noon.
>I support evolution in
>action, leave the one body up there as a reminder. I came very close to
>passing Walter Starr, Jr.'s recently. It might sober you up.
I agree. Why risk living people to carry out dead bodies?
A question in a CMC seminar was when do you rescue folks? At what point
will rendering assistance reduce the chance for your party to survive?
I took a rather unpopular opinion in a case-study: The scenario was
of a party which seemed rather weak to begin with encountering two
fellows who where not yet in a deadly situation but who had an unexpected
bivouac the previous night. To help or not to help? The descent
involved a rappel through a loose-rock gully. I was opposed to allowing
these fellows to join the CMC party. CMC parties are typically not very
strong due to the mixed skill level of the group and the description
mentioned they had had a late start and were moving very slowly.
If it had been real life, would I still refuse? I don't know,
decisions made in a classroom are easier than real-life! Also,
significant details are provided by a face-to-face encounter that
can't be supplied by a few paragraphs describing the situation.
However, to say you should *always* help doesn't seem wise to me.
Another situation: In my Red Cross CPR class they taught to continue
CPR until another qualified person takes over or you become exhausted.
Well in the high country continuing until exhaustion seems like it
could risk the life of the rescuer. Opinions? I'm planning to bring
up the question when I take a Mountain-Oriented First Aid class, the
regular CPR instructor was clue-less.
>One goes into the backcountry, one had better accept the risks.
[stuff deleted]
>Or you learn to take the backcountry's problems on it's terms.
There is really no other choice, only people who think so.
Nature is indifferent to your passage.
My Opinion,
Beth Crespo
Definitions, for non-climbers :-)
CMC == Colorado Mountain Club
bivouac == camp out with minimal or no gear usually high on a mountain
or even tied to a rock face. A bivy-sack is often used
for a planned bivy.
rappel == descending using a climbing rope, the only situation where
(non-aid) climbers fully rely on the equipment. If done
incorrectly death is possible and injury probable.
Hal Lillywhite
>Me too, I wonder whether folks value the ethic of self-rescue.
Some do, some don't. Tim Setnika's book _Wilderness Search and
Rescue_ describes a couple of contrasting incidents which occured in
the same general area.
Incident 1: 2 climbers got in over their heads and "had to be
rescued." There was a rappel nearby which they later admitted they
knew about and could have used to get themselves off. However they
had previously lost a rope on that rappel and so were unwilling to
use it. All it cost to save them the chance of loosing a rope
(value probably about $100-$150) was a few thousand dollars of
taxpayers money and the time and money of the volunteers involved.
Incident 2: A climber was injuried fairly severly although I don't
remember the exact injury. With help from his partner he lowered
himself off the climb, made it to the trailhead and the hospital.
When a nurse asked why he didn't wait for rescue he replied, "I got
myself up there, I figured it was up to me to get myself down."
These cases represent 2 extremes. I think we all have more respect
for the second climbers than the first. With the caution that you
should not attempt self rescue if there is likelyhood of spinal
injury, self rescue if possible is usually preferable. For one
thing, in most areas rescue by organized SAR units is uncertain at
best and almost certainly will be a long time comming. Nothing at
all happens until someone notifies the sheriff (or other responsible
agency) of a possible problem. Then the sheriff has to check it out
to see if it is real. Rescuers have to be called, leave work or get
out of bed, get ready and drive to the incident headquarters.
Unless the precise location of the victum is known (seldom) they
then have to find him or her and reach the site. Only then can an
actual rescue begin. It is quite common for a victum to be rescued
24 hours or more after they got into trouble. Unfortunately, it is
also fairly common for a body to be found instead of a live victum
because of the time required to find and reach the site. Even in
cases of possible spinal injury it may be advisable to attempt
self-rescue if delay would bring on other life-threatening problems
(eg. avalanche, rockfall, severe hypothermia).
Moral: SAR groups should be the 3rd and seldom used line of safety
after avoiding accidents and helping yourself if you have one.
Avoidance of accidents is definitly the prefered way to go.
David Coker
next month. I'm primarily interested in Prince Edward Island and
New Foundland. If anyone has any hints or suggestions please
mail them to my email address below.
Thank You in Advance
Ron Miller
Eugene and I have had some email discussion about the subject of radios
and wilderness values. We agree that there is an invisible dividing
line somewhere between moleskin and startrek-style rescue transporters :-)
I thought those who object to radios might be interested (or disappointed?)
to learn that I've had at least 5 inquiries from others asking for
more information about how to get them, how to use them etc.
I think I understand a little of the thinking about how having a radio along
might tempt one to take chances they might not otherwise take but
is this really a *valid* complaint? Is that how you regard helmets on
bicyclists? Or motorcyclists? Evolution would operate better in those
areas too and the experience of motorcycling would be far more "pure"
but some folks think helmets are sensible. Overextending ones limits
seems to be a generic description of troubles people encounter, no
matter what endeavor is under discussion. (I've had "learning
experiences" in soaring too!)
I regard staying out of trouble as a primary concern. Getting out of
it, if you have not successfully avoided it (or happen across
someone else who didn't avoid it), can be greatly aided by radios
and the access to the real helpers.
Obviously you can't know the contents of my pack at any given time so
if we meet in the backcountry, just say hello and go on.
Unless you need help. Then we'll have to get into a philosophical
discussion. :-)
Beth, could you elaborate some more about CMC's philosophy on such gear?
Shoot, and here I thought I'd graduated to the "big time" when I stopped
wearing neon jams, a muscle T shirt, my walkman, my hightops with
the laces untied and left my Big Gulp at home........ oh well!
Ron
PS- My area of interest is pretty much confined to dayhiking the 14ers
and other scenic hikes.... if that makes any difference.
blinking...@gmail.com
phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
Everywhere. :-("
Like now. People just can't stay off of Facebook. :)
blinking...@gmail.com
phones and satellites by the year 2000. The weight will fall to ounces.
I fear the time when people will feel obligated to take their phones
Everywhere. :-("