Recent Capitol Rescue

[Scott P]

Maybe I'm missing something here and this is only a question, but why was the rescue needed? He makes it sound like he was simply tired rather than injured or cliffed out? The article says that he made it to "the bottom of K2"?

The article doesn't seem clear on this and I was just curious.

[RockiesAdrian]

Maybe I'm missing something here and this is only a question, but why was the rescue needed? He makes it sound like he was simply tired rather than injured or cliffed out? The article says that he made it to "the bottom of K2"?

The article doesn't seem clear on this and I was just curious.

I too wondered about this point. Sounds like a case of "Mount Uber".

[RJ_Greenhorn24]

Maybe I'm missing something here and this is only a question, but why was the rescue needed? He makes it sound like he was simply tired rather than injured or cliffed out? The article says that he made it to "the bottom of K2"?

The article doesn't seem clear on this and I was just curious.

I too wondered about this point. Sounds like a case of "Mount Uber".

I'll be 3rd in the confusion line... he made it to the "bottom of K2" but somehow at the same time realized he was "on Capitol's North face"...

[two lunches]

i must be lacking in a negative experience that would cause me to call for SAR "about an hour from my campsite" ? we've all been just absolutely BUSHED before... but one hour seems too close to call on emergency resources. idk. i wasn't there.

[RyGuy]

This is just wild speculation, but based on the article, he could've benefited from a sign.

I think the better way to say that would be "He could've benefitted from pulling out his printed route description and following it, as well as pay attention to where he was."

Post by AlexeyD » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:15 pm
Wow...that was painful to read. I don't know what to say without sounding like a jerk...let's just say some people should maybe consider a different pastime than climbing mountains.

Yeah. My head hurts from reading this. Hopefully he takes a bit of a break and thinks a bit more about what happened.

I am just glad he didn't become the 6th fatality this year. It sounds like he was dang close.

-Ryan

[Phill the Thrill]

Maybe I'm missing something here and this is only a question, but why was the rescue needed? He makes it sound like he was simply tired rather than injured or cliffed out? The article says that he made it to "the bottom of K2"?

The article doesn't seem clear on this and I was just curious.

From the article it appears that he needed some help to get through a short section (50 to 75 feet), then could have completed the descent on his own.

"It took a while for a rescuer to reach Seeds, and when he did, "he got me out of this little section; I'd say it was fifty or 75 feet at the most. Then we talked for a bit, and he saw that I was fully prepared as far as gear and clothing — and I was about an hour from my campsite. So he initially was going to let me go. But then he communicated with the Black Hawk helicopter" containing other members of the team, "and I'm guessing that because five people have died on this mountain this year, they didn't want to take a chance."

[jfm3]

Disclaimer: I have not done Capitol and my max skill level right now is class 3. But: the article says he made it to roughly 700 feet below K2. Looking at the maps, this appears to be an appreciable distance both below and to the west of K2 (I'm assuming west because he said he saw "the lake" and his campsite in front of him, so that would seem to be Capitol Lake. A near-K2 descent off the east side, toward Pierre Lakes, appears to be a much more....vertical proposition). Based on what everyone has said about the loose choss below the K2-Capitol ridge, 700 vertical feet on that rock/terrain seems like a REALLY long way to descend before realizing something is wrong and stopping. Right??

[BillMiddlebrook]

Maybe I'm missing something here and this is only a question, but why was the rescue needed? He makes it sound like he was simply tired rather than injured or cliffed out? The article says that he made it to "the bottom of K2"?

The article doesn't seem clear on this and I was just curious.

Add me to the list of confused.

[mtree]

A classic case of texting while hiking.

[DArcyS]

Here's what caught my attention on this CBS Channel 4 report:

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/09/11/h ... rous-14er/

In the clip, Jim Benneman says, "He wanted to share his story with Jeff Todd."

And in the article was this statement: "I don't want PR. I lived through it. I don't want to see somebody else die."

About 20 years ago now, there was a rescue on Bierstadt in the middle of winter where a hiker didn't tell people where he was going and he ended up spending the night out after he descended Bierstadt in questionable weather into the valley with Abyss Lake (or Frozen Lake, it's been awhile). Eventually, he was rescued and was shown jumping off the rescue helicopter near Guanella Pass with a big smile on his face and wearing down as if he expected to spend the night in the backcountry. In one of his post-rescue interviews, he gave the advice to stay put if you're lost and wait for the rescuers to come and get you. Well, why would you give that advice if you knew you didn't tell people where you were going to be hiking? This was a little time after Ralston made a name for himself, and I always wondered if this fellow was out for his 15-minutes, so to speak, by spending a few nights in the wilderness in the dead of winter. Create a scenario where you become a hero for withstanding the elements.

For any rescue I read about, the thought passes through my mind if the party intended to get lost on purpose. (I suppose this is a little similar to the volunteer fireman who engage in arson so they can fight a fire.) This includes the Michelle Vanek case for Holy Cross -- create a believable scenario to get lost, and then start a new life in Canada (or wherever). And since her body was never recovered, the possibility exists that this occurred. Nobody knows for sure. And at about this same time, there was a fellow in the service who went AWOL and tried to "get lost" by disappearing in the wilderness. It didn't work out for him, they found him in town.

So, nothing different for me here when I assess a party's conduct after they are rescued. Did they create a scenario to achieve an ulterior motive? This fellow wanted to reach out to the media, and although he says he doesn't want the PR, I question that statement because it sure seems like he wants the PR. And to what ends does somebody go to gain that PR?

Bottom line for me -- don't get lost on purpose to become a hero. Perhaps that occurred here, perhaps it didn't. But I still maintain that my position is good advice.

[druid2112]

I guess I shouldn't second guess or judge or what have you, and don't mean to. Just confused. I mean, with no weather, other people around on the route, how does one get so far off track on a trail they just came up hours before? The 3 of this year's fatalities apparently decided to try a different route back. That's different. Just getting 'confused' on the way back - and not realizing you're on the north face? I just don't understand how that's possible with no weather etc complicating things.

It could happen to anyone, myself included, I guess. Just having been up there a month or so ago myself, just don't understand how you could wander off like that. Especially if you have done all the homework and studied, etc.

Seems odd.

[DArcyS]

Seems odd.

Odds . . . and probabilities. If you acknowledge the uncertainty and that you may never know what really happened, you can still come away with a satisfactory answer. The event A or the event B may have happened. You can't be absolutely certain as to which happened, but you have a reasonable answer despite not knowing the absolute truth. Of course, if you subscribe to the mantra of no speculation, you are confined to absolute certainty, which to me is . . . well, who made that rule up?