17 hikers were stranded at 8500 ft when the Mountain Station of the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway closed at 2.00 pm because of gale force winds - seven hours early
http://cys-hiking-adventures.blogspot.c ... et-in.html
http://cys-hiking-adventures.blogspot.com

Ellen's epic trip report on Skyline (Mt San Jacinto)
Epic Skyline Weather Trip Report on Skyline 1/21/12

http://www.mtsanjacinto.info/viewtopic.php?t=3395

Interesting, but, for the record, we have only one side of the story.

It seems a bit brutal, to have to spend the night in a cold shack at 20F when there is a tram station - I'm assuming that that was warmer than the shack, otherwise it wouldn't be of much use of course. As for the ranger station, I don't know how big it was, but I imagine that 17 people would make it very cramped.

However, what I'm really curious about, and the two reports are not completely clear on this to me, is

1 did the hikers know, or should they have known, about the possibility of getting stranded?
2 was this a freak event, or does it happen more often that hikers get stranded up there?

Of course, the answer to the first question primarily relates to the tram company, who, in my opinion, should inform people about the possibility of this happening when they buy a ticket to go up the mountain. However, the hikers themselves are ultimately responsible for their own safety, and should be prepared for what might happen and make an effort to enquire about the weather forecast, or carry everything for an unplanned overnighter. Still, someone who never uses cable cars would not automatically know that bad weather can shut down the service. Which brings me back to the obligation of the tram company to inform their customers.

The answer to the second question is important in gaging what an appropriate response would be by the tram operators as well as the ranger. If it's a freak thing, something that (almost) never happens, I would certainly expect a more friendly response, because then you cannot expect every hiker to envisage this in time, and the ranger and tram company will be almost as surprised as the trapped hikers. So, I would expect them to allow usage of whatever resources are available, including the ranger station and tram building.
However, if this happens more often, I would say that, as long as the public is informed, it´s their decision to go up and risk getting stranded. I wouldn´t want to make it too comfortable, or you would only encourage people to take more risk, in the knowledge that there is always a nice place up there. And I reckon that the ranger appreciates his or her privacy too.



This story reminds me of a time when I was in the Dolomites, up on a mountain with an alpine refuge as well as a cable station on the summit. The cable car wasn´t running, but that was fine by me. Less crowded. I hiked up, expecting to sleep in the refuge, only to find it closed. I was a bit annoyed, it was the 1st of July and it should have been open by then. High on the mountain there was even a sign saying it was. However, it had been my own choice to hike up there without calling first.

The tram building was open. Wide open in fact. That meant I would be dry in case of rain or snow, but cold. Only a little bit of shelter against strong winds. To be honest, I don't recall having enquired about the weather forecast. My main preparation, apart from carrying a big pack, was to ask whether the refuge would be open, and the answer was that it should be. Which is waht I expected anyway. As for the weather, it's the alps, so even on a nice day you always have to be prepared for a thunderstorm developing in the afternoon. A week later I had that pleasure. Within an hour from nice blue skies to a veritable downpoor, with lightning strikes in quick succession. I was pretty high when I saw some dark clouds starting to build up on the other side of the valley, and I went down fast. Just as the first drops started, I lucked out and found a brand new shelter in the middle of nowhere. Don´t know what it was for, but the door was open.

Anyway, on top of the mountain with the closed alpine hut, in case of a real emergency I could have broken into it, but, like you, I really didn't want to do that. Fortunately, the weather was fine, so I had options. I choose to hike down the mountain on the other side, until a few hours later I found lodging at a local farmstay. I knew that, if necessary, I could have continued all the way down to the nearest village in the valley. It would have been after darkness by the time I would have gotten there, but that wouldn´t have been a problem.

I am sure that the hikers knew about the bad weather beforehand. Anyone going up to the peak is supposed to register at the Ranger Station. I dont know if they did but it seems that no one that works there knew about them. I have not heard about emergency closures before this but they warn passengers that this is a possibility in strong winds. The Ranger should have acted more responsibly. Someone at the tramway could be in a lot of trouble. The tram did not run for a couple of days as conditions were very dangerous.
Contact info at the tram
For additional information, high res. images or b-roll, please contact: Lenaz@pstramway.com


CONTACT US
For further information, please call our sales department at
(760) 325-1449 or e-mail pstramway@pstramway.com.

The story recounted by rgg reminded me of a climbing trip to Switzerland years ago. My partner (first time to meet him, connected online) was a drinker. I could smell it on him when we took the tram up the mountain.

Our plans entailed staying in a tent near the tram station and summiting the next day. However, that night, the booze in his system joined forces with the altitude, and he started barfing. The smell--of him and the puke--was horrible, so I abandoned tent.

Where did I flee to? The tram station. Apparently it was SOP to leave it unlocked. Hell, even the automatic doors were working. I went in, enjoyed the heat and the fresh air, and slept on a bench.

The next morning, he was slow but OK, and we reached the top. Happy ending to a stinky story.

There has been a rescue on Skyline
http://rmru.org/missions/2012/2012-003.html

I now carry a Blizzard survival bag whenever I think there is a chance of getting stuck out overnight in cold weather (and by that, I mean less than 35F at night, or warmer with precip). In fact I had one on my only C2C trip, when snow started at 5700' and it was below freezing at the summit, with 20" of snow. It was Ellen's survival story (on San Jacinto) that made me think harder about this. I was amazed how many folks were still heading to the summit of San J as we were coming down. Few of them looked to have much preparation for cold weather; many were in light clothes, wearing trail runners. The deep snow had been packed by then, but was icing up and very slippery. I'm actually amazed there are so few rescues up there.

A general explanation of the Blizzard system in here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIyjBd15KwY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MJsMc5mmzc

NOTE these are NOT the single-layer mylar bags that people buy for $5.

When leading trips, I often take the survival blanket instead, which is more appropriate for injured members (imagine tring to stuff someone with a broken leg or spinal injury into the bag). A "sister" hiking/climbing group had a case recently where a fellow slipped on ice, went 30' over a waterfall, landed in ice water, broke an ankle and fractured two vertebrae. They got him on top of some packs, and all had to put their fleeces on top of him, to keep him from succumbing to shock, while SAR was notified by a "runner" (rough territory, no one really runs there). Then the folks waiting for SAR started to become hypothermic themselves, as the sun lowered behind the mountains, and conditions went from a nice sunny day with sweaty outdoor adventure, to sub-freezing.

I used to take lots of extra clothes, but at 12.5 ounces, the survival bag makes more sense. Make sure you also have at least 20x15" of closed-cell foam (say serving as an extra pad in your bag) to keep from losing so much heat through your butt and back.

I credit the controversial Mattski for publicizing this stuff.

Cy Kaicener wrote:There has been a rescue on Skyline
http://rmru.org/missions/2012/2012-003.html

I'm grateful that SAR folks volunteer their time, but that seemed like a pretty poor SAR. If I read that right, the SAR team (mistakenly, in retrospect) chose to exit down rather than up. They then chose to bivy just before dawn 2 miles from the trailhead because one of the SAR guys was too tired to keep going. Then, in the morning, they took a helicopter ride home, despite having people coming up with supplies for them. Is this sort of thing common?

The problem is that these after-action writeups rarely tell the whole story. I'm not familiar with the area, but choosing to hike down rather than have a weak/tired/dehydrated subject re-ascend 2000' feet makes sense to me. The rest does sound a little weak sauce when summarized the way you did, but think about everything that wasn't written down. How long had they been out of water before deciding to bivvy? What was the condition of the subjects at that point? Was injury likely if they kept going? I've had all-nighters on both personal climbs and searches, and there's a huge difference in how they affect you, because you're better rested/fed/etc. before beginning a personal trip. At that point there's no emergency, and if someone's likely to injure themselves (see again lack of water), it makes more sense to rest up than wind up having to do a litter carryout.

Edit: Removed long-winded explanation because it sounded too much like conjecture about what happened, which wasn't my intent.

Searches are always a giant clusterfsck of moving parts, and coordinating them is difficult. Sometimes unnecessary resources get brought in or inefficient decisions get made in the name of safety, or contingency planning, or due to poor communication. When they get written up, you generally get one person's perspective, with a lot of the subtle factors that go into decision making glossed over - and that person may be totally unaware of other pieces that were in motion and decisions that were getting made.

The choice to hike down seemed sensible to me, too, although the author of the writeup apparently thought better of it afterward. Trying to get two cold, tired people without crampons up 2000' of snow sounds like a bad idea, and the bottom part of Skyline is much easier (and easier to follow) than the top.

My understanding from the write-up was that neither rescuee was injured; they were simply benighted without headlamps in terrible weather. I'm assuming the worst they were suffering was fatigue, dehydration, and maybe a bit of hypothermia (no frostbite, sprains, etc.). Food, rest, warmth, and fluids fix these things. Indeed, after warming up, they were apparently able to hike down with the others under their own power, though I can't tell how fast they were moving. Other personnel were able to hike up to the campsite with water in the morning, alleviating dehydration. It was not the rescuees, but SAR team members with leg cramps and knee trouble, who seemed to most need the chopper.

I agree that a write-up like this can't capture the whole event, but it sure comes across badly.

The stretch between the tram and 2000' down is quite dangerous with snow. There is one section where the trail winds to the N of a section with very steep runout; people have died there. Good call not to go back up in the dark.