While I was not present at this incident, the person involved is known to me and I spent more than a few nights in the hospital with this person during a long and painful recovery, so I feel that I have a good idea of what happened.
First I would state that it was not a cover-up. Choosing not to speak of an incident is not a cover-up, but a respect of personal privacy. It should be the responsibility of those involved to make the details known, if they should so desire, and not by another propagating 3rd or 4th hand (mis?)information, which often leads to speculation and further hurt to those involved. The person most directly involved in this accident could have posted this information, but did not.
It is true that we can learn from accident reports, such as those published in American Alpine Club’s publication “Accidents in North American Mountaineering”. In fact, this incident is mentioned in the most recent edition. These incidents are reviewed by editors before publication to prevent misinformation. Unfortunately, internet forums do not follow these precautions.
It is regrettable that some chose internet forms to express their opinions with insensitivity to those who have already suffered hurt, where as if it was a face to face interaction, they would be more careful about what they say. (I am not saying this about this particular thread, but about internet forums in general.)
To imply that this accident occurred because it happen in a meetup group is just plain wrong. The accident happened because the person involved did not attach the rappel device to the harness properly. Experts have accidents, just like beginners, just like intermediates, no matter who they are with.
Also note that meetup groups are not guide services, nor is there a leader in the sense of a club trip, such as you might find with a Colorado Mountain Club hike. There is an organizer, who proposes a trip. And there are the participants, whose responsibility it is to self select by reading the beta and by asking the proper questions. But the fundamental idea behind a meetup is to bring individuals together with a common objective. This is a new type of gathering for outdoor activities, and the pros and cons are still being debated.
I think it would be worthy to start a new thread (unless it already exists) discussing canyoneering etiquette and safety. For example, in climbing, your partner checks your harness. In canyoneering, there are multiple participants, so who is your partner? (Which leads me to believe that it is the individual’s responsibility to ask whoever is available to check them out before rappel.)
I think that the word “cover-up” was a poor choice, but I do feel that it would be a good for the details of the accident to be made known for educational purposes and to stimulate a new thread as I mention in the previous paragraph. But I also feel that it is up to the participants to make that decision.
So difficult to summarize the many nuances (and pitfalls) of managing groups in the canyons.
Guiding is an ART FORM.
Thinking about getting Parker to take a group of us locals who organize trips thru a local canyon and make the whole day “wall to wall” scenarios:
staging / role-playing everything from jammed rappel devices, participant panic, personality conflicts, injuries, hypothermia, etc.
Most of these things get addressed with the Las Vegas Canyoneering group in evening work-shop format, but it would be cool to stage a what-if canyon day where “everything goes wrong”…
To respond to your query, Malia, I think one approach (though certainly not a solution) is to provide more alternatives to the meetups. We have a number of quasi-public events out there, but really only Freezefest and Zion Rondi have open invites (eg. timing is posted in public forums, rather than a specific distribution list). To a certain extent, colleges provide some of this, although the experience range exists in a more restricted demographic, and again, are often subject to the desires of a single leader. My personal experience has found that the broader venues with multiple levels of experience help provide a range of inputs and canyon choices for newer canyoneers. The biggest drawback, of course, is that many areas just do not have the capacity to absorb a truly well-attended event that may be required to make headway.
When all this started I had originally desired to write a page for my site (BluuGnome.com) that pretty much says what my previous post in this thread says. I lost the emotional steam to carry out that plan.
I am very busy with life and projects at the moment. With that said I would love to see a page like that appear. If someone or (preferably a collection of people) were to write something that distills the basic notion of this thread down to something a noob or would be leader can ingest via a semi quick read, I would be happy to add it to the site.
I could say I will get around to it one day but truth is in the pudding. It has been a year and I have not done it. Part of the reason is pure lack of time. The other part is I am not really sure what needs to be said and exactly how to present it.
I am a firm believer in sharing of information. Some people here may have a better understanding of how strong my views are there. However I do understand information in the wrong way can also be a detriment. I personally feel keeping stuff on the down low isn’t the answer. But that is just my opinion and as Tom mentioned not everyone will always agree with my opinion. With that said adding a page to a beta site that seems to attract noobs and would be leaders would be a good way to reach at least a small percentage of these people. If we could get similar things out in multiple places we will increase the odds of reaching some of these people BEFORE they have an accident. Obviously not everyone will see these messages or even care to read them. But the few that do just might help save themselves and or someone else simply by having safety on the brain.
I am open to getting the word out there. I just lack the time to get it all distilled down into a usable form and weed out the crazy opinionated stuff.
Anyone(s) wanna step up after this thread steels down?
One thing I would add about naming the canyon: it seems to specifically go against the OP’s careful wording to NOT name any particular places or people.
Infiltrating the Meetup groups if nothing else just to plant the “be careful and watch out for each other” type seed.
Part of the issue, I think, is, that rappelling is fairly easy to do. Really. Not much skill, and, very little technique and/or strength. Its something that a beginner can and will do. All the time. Guided (or under guideance) or not. You buy a harness, a rap device, and, really, you find a group to go with and you’re off to the races.
Meetups and other social get togethers with higher risk activity always have fairly funky (and interesting) group dynamics. Its easy to be put into a position of having to manage someone else’s risk, or, to have to acknowledge that you don’t want that on your hands too. Toss in ego, differences in risk tolerance, communication issues, etc, and, it all makes for a pretty interesting soup.
There maybe should be some basic things that folks who go to Meetups, especially canyon type ones, should look for. Either be a mentor, or, plan on finding one. A one-to-one ratio. Buddy up. Even for experienced folk, to double check all safety stuff. Harness doubled back. Rappel rigged correctly. Knots tied proper. Etc. Easy to just either get lost in the crowd, or, mind your very own business.
I think posting the canyon in the first place was a mistake. This group has a leader who has done a lot of canyons and like most, wants to do more he has not done and thus has not done the canyon he is leading. Bad idea on principal, so says I. Moth to the flame. It is a tricky canyon. It feels more to me like a ratio issue. A lot of 3+ to 1 on leadership vs perpetual intermediates/beginners, in large groups and with leadership not being gifted in all aspects. You can’t be everywhere with large numbers and you can’t teach what you fail to see. I also think it a mistake to name the canyon now. Its only listed in one place and now will get more traffic, this dangerous canyon, including those who want to see where the blood dried. Just my take
Let the crusades begin! Sorry, the word ‘reform’ got my attention.
I think what we could do- and I thought this was more under the guise of the Facebook canyoneers, aka CAC, but draw up something sharp which clarifies our voice into a something that helps out others(not just meetup). I know you and others did work in that area, but I dont know what came of it. There was a poster about flash floods(that can be improved IMO because I think an essential part of that is that the group already decide before the trip what happens if it rains during the trip), but I dont know if there was anything towards new canyoneers.
A couple of thoughts as I keep reading this interesting thread.
As I look at myself and try to size up others, I am looking for several things: Training, Experience, and Wisdom. I would rank wisdom sightly above the rest. Wisdom, to me, implies that one is honest with him/herself in their abilities regarding training and experience and I would also add, fitness. Wisdom is the integrity and courage to turn back, bail from, or not start a canyon when things are “not right”. It also seems that wisdom is acquired with training and experience. Wisdom would ask questions when something doesn’t look right. (I could probably write a whole essay on the interplay between these three legs on this canyoneering stool, but alas, no time).
Training, experience and wisdom help a person size up others, including a meetup invite. After so many canyons, courses, and experiences, one can usually (and often quickly) determine when someone is “full of it” around a campfire or online, or lacks wisdom, training or experience based on the plain language of a meetup invite.
The problem comes with a lone but excited noobie who really wants to participate in this sport and falls prey to the smoke and mirrors of those who have inflated opinions of their own training, experience, and wisdom. The antidote to this kind of inflated pride is humility — humility of a noobie to ask questions, admit they don’t know what they are doing and ask A LOT of questions before the meetup trip starts. While on the trip, humility would demand that the noobie ask questions even at the top of every rap, down climb, pot hole, etc. if needed. Humility admits fear, requests a hand line or a meat anchor when others down climb. Humility admits a lack of skill and asks for suggestions. Humility questions an anchor if for no other reason than to learn about it and understand why others consider that piece of fabric slung around a softball sized rock jammed in a crack safe. Ultimately, the noobie, if he/she is not satisfied with the answers or gets that uneasy feeling in the gut he/she had better make other plans or start looking to other people, not necessarily the loudest of the bunch.
Taylor, while I agree in principle with not sharing Canyon names when necessary, I do think it would be necessary in the case of a national annual report. As would names, etc.
I get the “idea” of your statement, but in canyoneering, a good “idea” can turn very bad when you have the wrong people. People must be discussed when we plan a trip. I get that for educational purposes, names may not be necessary. But I assure you that SAR knows names of trip leaders, particularly the repeat offenders.
As well they should (the SAR bit). Those things will no doubt be spread by word of mouth, even here on the forums. I see no reason to disclose them in an official publication.
Maybe an idea to be brought before the CAC is the publication of an annual report of accidents much like the American Alpine Club does with their journal. Obviously adapted to our sport and with certain details left out. Given the sensitivity of canyon resources, and the “127 Hours Effect” I would submit that the names of the specific canyons where these incidents take place be omitted as well as the names of the involved individuals, particularly the victims to protect privacy. We learn much more from the “how” and the “what” than we do from the “who” and the “where”
Having done the canyon in question, I hope that its name not be shared as part of this revelation. It’s not relevant to the discussion of heuristics, group dynamics, ethics, and safety which is what we are all enjoying and learning from.
I know some don’t share my appreciation or philosophy of discretion in this matter but I feel it’s worth stating.
Responsible people, when taking noobs out, stick to reasonable canyons close to the road; and then bump up the difficulty carefully based on developing people’s skills progressively and carefully (and sticking to canyons close to the road). So the canyon involved is an important piece of information. This accident occurred in a remote canyon off of Ticaboo Mesa that is moderately difficult for the area (but it is a tough neighborhood). Not an appropriate canyon for noobs.
Why not just state that the canyon is remote and difficult? I still don’t see how it’s specific identity adds the the discussion. I’d also say that it’s not so much about the immediate dissemination of that information to the canyoneering community that is as much a concern as it is the third and fourth party stumble-upon enthusiasts who heard about it on the news or in Outside magazine, know next to nothing about canyoneering, and attempt to “test” themselves. Again, see: the “127 Hours effect”.
I would compromise and say that it could be disclosed only if it is already published.
MGCanyon
While I was not present at this incident, the person involved is known to me and I spent more than a few nights in the hospital with this person during a long and painful recovery, so I feel that I have a good idea of what happened.
First I would state that it was not a cover-up. Choosing not to speak of an incident is not a cover-up, but a respect of personal privacy. It should be the responsibility of those involved to make the details known, if they should so desire, and not by another propagating 3rd or 4th hand (mis?)information, which often leads to speculation and further hurt to those involved. The person most directly involved in this accident could have posted this information, but did not.
It is true that we can learn from accident reports, such as those published in American Alpine Club’s publication “Accidents in North American Mountaineering”. In fact, this incident is mentioned in the most recent edition. These incidents are reviewed by editors before publication to prevent misinformation. Unfortunately, internet forums do not follow these precautions.
It is regrettable that some chose internet forms to express their opinions with insensitivity to those who have already suffered hurt, where as if it was a face to face interaction, they would be more careful about what they say. (I am not saying this about this particular thread, but about internet forums in general.)
To imply that this accident occurred because it happen in a meetup group is just plain wrong. The accident happened because the person involved did not attach the rappel device to the harness properly. Experts have accidents, just like beginners, just like intermediates, no matter who they are with.
Also note that meetup groups are not guide services, nor is there a leader in the sense of a club trip, such as you might find with a Colorado Mountain Club hike. There is an organizer, who proposes a trip. And there are the participants, whose responsibility it is to self select by reading the beta and by asking the proper questions. But the fundamental idea behind a meetup is to bring individuals together with a common objective. This is a new type of gathering for outdoor activities, and the pros and cons are still being debated.
I think it would be worthy to start a new thread (unless it already exists) discussing canyoneering etiquette and safety. For example, in climbing, your partner checks your harness. In canyoneering, there are multiple participants, so who is your partner? (Which leads me to believe that it is the individual’s responsibility to ask whoever is available to check them out before rappel.)
I think that the word “cover-up” was a poor choice, but I do feel that it would be a good for the details of the accident to be made known for educational purposes and to stimulate a new thread as I mention in the previous paragraph. But I also feel that it is up to the participants to make that decision.
tom wetherell
Rappel faster! I hear banjos!
Rapterman
Thinking about Luke’s post.
So difficult to summarize the many nuances (and pitfalls) of managing groups in the canyons.
Guiding is an ART FORM.
Thinking about getting Parker to take a group of us locals who organize trips thru a local canyon and make the whole day “wall to wall” scenarios:
staging / role-playing everything from jammed rappel devices, participant panic, personality conflicts, injuries, hypothermia, etc.
Most of these things get addressed with the Las Vegas Canyoneering group in evening work-shop format, but it would be cool to stage a what-if canyon day where “everything goes wrong”…
Cause eventually something does.
gajslk
If you’re planning a “Deliverance” scenario I’m NOT going to be the fat guy … LOL
Gordon
Chris Hood
To respond to your query, Malia, I think one approach (though certainly not a solution) is to provide more alternatives to the meetups. We have a number of quasi-public events out there, but really only Freezefest and Zion Rondi have open invites (eg. timing is posted in public forums, rather than a specific distribution list). To a certain extent, colleges provide some of this, although the experience range exists in a more restricted demographic, and again, are often subject to the desires of a single leader. My personal experience has found that the broader venues with multiple levels of experience help provide a range of inputs and canyon choices for newer canyoneers. The biggest drawback, of course, is that many areas just do not have the capacity to absorb a truly well-attended event that may be required to make headway.
Bluu
When all this started I had originally desired to write a page for my site (BluuGnome.com) that pretty much says what my previous post in this thread says. I lost the emotional steam to carry out that plan.
I am very busy with life and projects at the moment. With that said I would love to see a page like that appear. If someone or (preferably a collection of people) were to write something that distills the basic notion of this thread down to something a noob or would be leader can ingest via a semi quick read, I would be happy to add it to the site.
I could say I will get around to it one day but truth is in the pudding. It has been a year and I have not done it. Part of the reason is pure lack of time. The other part is I am not really sure what needs to be said and exactly how to present it.
I am a firm believer in sharing of information. Some people here may have a better understanding of how strong my views are there. However I do understand information in the wrong way can also be a detriment. I personally feel keeping stuff on the down low isn’t the answer. But that is just my opinion and as Tom mentioned not everyone will always agree with my opinion. With that said adding a page to a beta site that seems to attract noobs and would be leaders would be a good way to reach at least a small percentage of these people. If we could get similar things out in multiple places we will increase the odds of reaching some of these people BEFORE they have an accident. Obviously not everyone will see these messages or even care to read them. But the few that do just might help save themselves and or someone else simply by having safety on the brain.
I am open to getting the word out there. I just lack the time to get it all distilled down into a usable form and weed out the crazy opinionated stuff.
Anyone(s) wanna step up after this thread steels down?
Luke
Deagol
One thing I would add about naming the canyon: it seems to specifically go against the OP’s careful wording to NOT name any particular places or people.
Brian in SLC
Infiltrating the Meetup groups if nothing else just to plant the “be careful and watch out for each other” type seed.
Part of the issue, I think, is, that rappelling is fairly easy to do. Really. Not much skill, and, very little technique and/or strength. Its something that a beginner can and will do. All the time. Guided (or under guideance) or not. You buy a harness, a rap device, and, really, you find a group to go with and you’re off to the races.
Meetups and other social get togethers with higher risk activity always have fairly funky (and interesting) group dynamics. Its easy to be put into a position of having to manage someone else’s risk, or, to have to acknowledge that you don’t want that on your hands too. Toss in ego, differences in risk tolerance, communication issues, etc, and, it all makes for a pretty interesting soup.
There maybe should be some basic things that folks who go to Meetups, especially canyon type ones, should look for. Either be a mentor, or, plan on finding one. A one-to-one ratio. Buddy up. Even for experienced folk, to double check all safety stuff. Harness doubled back. Rappel rigged correctly. Knots tied proper. Etc. Easy to just either get lost in the crowd, or, mind your very own business.
Great thread, Malia!
Ram
I think posting the canyon in the first place was a mistake. This group has a leader who has done a lot of canyons and like most, wants to do more he has not done and thus has not done the canyon he is leading. Bad idea on principal, so says I. Moth to the flame. It is a tricky canyon. It feels more to me like a ratio issue. A lot of 3+ to 1 on leadership vs perpetual intermediates/beginners, in large groups and with leadership not being gifted in all aspects. You can’t be everywhere with large numbers and you can’t teach what you fail to see. I also think it a mistake to name the canyon now. Its only listed in one place and now will get more traffic, this dangerous canyon, including those who want to see where the blood dried. Just my take
AW~
Let the crusades begin! Sorry, the word ‘reform’ got my attention.
I think what we could do- and I thought this was more under the guise of the Facebook canyoneers, aka CAC, but draw up something sharp which clarifies our voice into a something that helps out others(not just meetup). I know you and others did work in that area, but I dont know what came of it. There was a poster about flash floods(that can be improved IMO because I think an essential part of that is that the group already decide before the trip what happens if it rains during the trip), but I dont know if there was anything towards new canyoneers.
SCard
A couple of thoughts as I keep reading this interesting thread.
As I look at myself and try to size up others, I am looking for several things: Training, Experience, and Wisdom. I would rank wisdom sightly above the rest. Wisdom, to me, implies that one is honest with him/herself in their abilities regarding training and experience and I would also add, fitness. Wisdom is the integrity and courage to turn back, bail from, or not start a canyon when things are “not right”. It also seems that wisdom is acquired with training and experience. Wisdom would ask questions when something doesn’t look right. (I could probably write a whole essay on the interplay between these three legs on this canyoneering stool, but alas, no time).
Training, experience and wisdom help a person size up others, including a meetup invite. After so many canyons, courses, and experiences, one can usually (and often quickly) determine when someone is “full of it” around a campfire or online, or lacks wisdom, training or experience based on the plain language of a meetup invite.
The problem comes with a lone but excited noobie who really wants to participate in this sport and falls prey to the smoke and mirrors of those who have inflated opinions of their own training, experience, and wisdom. The antidote to this kind of inflated pride is humility — humility of a noobie to ask questions, admit they don’t know what they are doing and ask A LOT of questions before the meetup trip starts. While on the trip, humility would demand that the noobie ask questions even at the top of every rap, down climb, pot hole, etc. if needed. Humility admits fear, requests a hand line or a meat anchor when others down climb. Humility admits a lack of skill and asks for suggestions. Humility questions an anchor if for no other reason than to learn about it and understand why others consider that piece of fabric slung around a softball sized rock jammed in a crack safe. Ultimately, the noobie, if he/she is not satisfied with the answers or gets that uneasy feeling in the gut he/she had better make other plans or start looking to other people, not necessarily the loudest of the bunch.
hank moon
Taylor, while I agree in principle with not sharing Canyon names when necessary, I do think it would be necessary in the case of a national annual report. As would names, etc.
Keeping it abstract makes it too…abstract.
Thoughts?
Bootboy
Who and where in my mind equates to little more than gossip. What and how equates more the discussion of ideas.
“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”
SCard
I get the “idea” of your statement, but in canyoneering, a good “idea” can turn very bad when you have the wrong people. People must be discussed when we plan a trip. I get that for educational purposes, names may not be necessary. But I assure you that SAR knows names of trip leaders, particularly the repeat offenders.
Bootboy
As well they should (the SAR bit). Those things will no doubt be spread by word of mouth, even here on the forums. I see no reason to disclose them in an official publication.
Bootboy
Maybe an idea to be brought before the CAC is the publication of an annual report of accidents much like the American Alpine Club does with their journal. Obviously adapted to our sport and with certain details left out. Given the sensitivity of canyon resources, and the “127 Hours Effect” I would submit that the names of the specific canyons where these incidents take place be omitted as well as the names of the involved individuals, particularly the victims to protect privacy. We learn much more from the “how” and the “what” than we do from the “who” and the “where”
Having done the canyon in question, I hope that its name not be shared as part of this revelation. It’s not relevant to the discussion of heuristics, group dynamics, ethics, and safety which is what we are all enjoying and learning from.
I know some don’t share my appreciation or philosophy of discretion in this matter but I feel it’s worth stating.
ratagonia
Responsible people, when taking noobs out, stick to reasonable canyons close to the road; and then bump up the difficulty carefully based on developing people’s skills progressively and carefully (and sticking to canyons close to the road). So the canyon involved is an important piece of information. This accident occurred in a remote canyon off of Ticaboo Mesa that is moderately difficult for the area (but it is a tough neighborhood). Not an appropriate canyon for noobs.
http://www.bluugnome.com/cyn_route/ticaboo_montezuma/ticaboo_montezuma.aspx
Tom
Bootboy
Facepalm…
Why not just state that the canyon is remote and difficult? I still don’t see how it’s specific identity adds the the discussion. I’d also say that it’s not so much about the immediate dissemination of that information to the canyoneering community that is as much a concern as it is the third and fourth party stumble-upon enthusiasts who heard about it on the news or in Outside magazine, know next to nothing about canyoneering, and attempt to “test” themselves. Again, see: the “127 Hours effect”.
I would compromise and say that it could be disclosed only if it is already published.
ratagonia
You expressed your opinion. Thank you. I do not always agree with your opinion.
Tom