Page 3 of 7

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 4:32 pm
by peter303
ultrarunningkid wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard of more people dying on Capitol than driving to its trailhead.
I mean, statistically i am sure it is more dangerous to simply be driving on the highway than to be hiking. I don't think its meant to downplay the dangers of hiking, but if you are an experienced hiker, it is definitly more dangerous to simply be on the highway than to be bagging most 14ers.
I suggest hiking 14ers is still more dangerous.
The automobile fatality rate is 1.25 per 100 million passenger miles a year, well-quoted NHSTA statistic. If people averaged 150 miles drive per 14er trip, this would would be around a fatality per 500,000 trips.
There are 5-10 14er fatalities a year. CFI estimates about 244,000 climbs a year. So we are talking about one per 25,000 to 50,000 outings. That is an order of magnitude greater. Trying various ways of adjusting the numbers, I cant think of getting the two that close.
(What if there are pit bull passengers in the car? :-)

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 7:54 pm
by XPLSV
peter303 wrote:
ultrarunningkid wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard of more people dying on Capitol than driving to its trailhead.
I mean, statistically i am sure it is more dangerous to simply be driving on the highway than to be hiking. I don't think its meant to downplay the dangers of hiking, but if you are an experienced hiker, it is definitly more dangerous to simply be on the highway than to be bagging most 14ers.
I suggest hiking 14ers is still more dangerous.
The automobile fatality rate is 1.25 per 100 million passenger miles a year, well-quoted NHSTA statistic. If people averaged 150 miles drive per 14er trip, this would would be around a fatality per 500,000 trips.
There are 5-10 14er fatalities a year. CFI estimates about 244,000 climbs a year. So we are talking about one per 25,000 to 50,000 outings. That is an order of magnitude greater. Trying various ways of adjusting the numbers, I cant think of getting the two that close.
(What if there are pit bull passengers in the car? :-)
Pancreatic cancer has a five year survival rate of 7.2%; the one year survival rate being roughly around 20%. The lifetime risk of pancreatic cancer for men is about 1 in 63; for women, 1 in 65. So, roughly, about 1 in 64 for the general population. I'm not sure what the percentage of the population that might even attempt a single 14er ascent during the course of their lifetime, but I would roughly guess it to be much less than 1 in 10,000, so pancreatic cancer is certainly much more dangerous, than, um...uh...

wait a minute, were we talking about unleashed dogs on 14ers???

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 9:36 pm
by DArcyS
peter303 wrote:
ultrarunningkid wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard of more people dying on Capitol than driving to its trailhead.
I mean, statistically i am sure it is more dangerous to simply be driving on the highway than to be hiking. I don't think its meant to downplay the dangers of hiking, but if you are an experienced hiker, it is definitly more dangerous to simply be on the highway than to be bagging most 14ers.
I suggest hiking 14ers is still more dangerous.
The automobile fatality rate is 1.25 per 100 million passenger miles a year, well-quoted NHSTA statistic. If people averaged 150 miles drive per 14er trip, this would would be around a fatality per 500,000 trips.
There are 5-10 14er fatalities a year. CFI estimates about 244,000 climbs a year. So we are talking about one per 25,000 to 50,000 outings. That is an order of magnitude greater. Trying various ways of adjusting the numbers, I cant think of getting the two that close.
(What if there are pit bull passengers in the car? :-)
You need to distinguish between hiking class 1 and 2 peaks and climbing class 3 and class 4 peaks. As I stated above, it is pretty tough to do yourself in on Mt. Elbert. When you start to get to real climbing, that's where the issues begin. And that demarcation seems rather obvious, because rarely do we hear of deaths on peaks like Grays and Bierstadt and Quandary (although a lightning bolt almost took out a group of people several years ago).

An interesting aspect to this exchange was the number of people who have climbed mostly class 2 peaks but none of the harder peaks. Now, is this because it's just a harder drive to the trailhead or is it because that deep down inside, there's a feeling of survival telling people, "Hey, that's dangerous, you could really hurt yourself."

And if that's not convincing enough, on your way to work tomorrow, take a look at 100 drivers and ask how many of them would fall if they were to attempt a climb of North Maroon. It wouldn't be pretty, but I dare say all of them will probably make it to work okay.

No need for statistics when common sense will do. And if people don't wish to acknowledge common sense, go find a class 4 route and then tell me how relevant those stats are.

But in case you do want more stats, of the 30 or so people who have climbed all 637 of the 13ers, I know of four finishers who nearly died in the mountains, one who did die in the mountains, and that's just from my incomplete knowledge. When you get beyond hiking, it can be dangerous. Don't kid yourself with what is essentially a fool's message. Be safe.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2018 10:08 am
by John635
Interesting discussion

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:50 pm
by transistor
.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:52 pm
by stephakett
transistor wrote:I hiked Handies the other day and two groups of people had their pit bulls off leash at the peak and they got in a pretty bad fight. I can't stand people who allow their dogs to be off leash, especially violent breeds like pit bulls.
i can't stand people who allow their kids to be off leash, especially ones who misbehave.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:59 pm
by transistor
.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:06 pm
by stephakett
transistor wrote:ok
neat

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:18 pm
by stephakett
my pit mix was attacked by an on-leash german shepherd, who dragged the owner and my dog down the side of green mountain. $200 in vet bills later...

is there any reason for me to be angry with the dog? absolutely not.
is there any reason for me to be angry with the owner? you bet your buns.

if your dog is aggressive, it needs a $10 muzzle.
if you can't control it on-leash you probably shouldn't own a dog in the first place, and you absolutely shouldn't have it in public.

how about we quit with breed-specific hate? it's no less ignorant than people-racism.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:22 pm
by transistor
.

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:24 pm
by Phill the Thrill
stephakett wrote: i can't stand people who allow their kids to be off leash, especially ones who misbehave.
Seriously? Are you in junior high or something?

Re: Pit bull on Mt Massive

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:26 pm
by yaktoleft13
stephakett wrote:my pit mix was attacked by an on-leash german shepherd, who dragged the owner and my dog down the side of green mountain. $200 in vet bills later...

is there any reason for me to be angry with the dog? absolutely not.
is there any reason for me to be angry with the owner? you bet your buns.

if your dog is aggressive, it needs a $10 muzzle.
if you can't control it on-leash you probably shouldn't own a dog in the first place, and you absolutely shouldn't have it in public.

how about we quit with breed-specific hate? it's no less ignorant than people-racism.
Amen. It's not the breed; it's the owner. The breed is stronger, pound for pound, than many other dogs. Thus, if you get a poorly raised pit that does have behavioral issues, the consequences can be more severe. Raise it properly and you have a sweet, loyal dog adept at the activities this site exists to support.