borutb wrote:Did you notice that you misquoted me? The first quote is yatsek's. Nevermind.
Concerning the second quote (which is mine), what is meant is: hikers versus alpinists.
Most visitors are hikers, and most fatal accidents are among hikers. Is it due simply to statistics? Is it because alpinists are taught (in schools) how to protect themselves and others?
Both I guess.
BK

Sorry about the misquote. I just meant that statistics must me interpreted with care (however I do believe that into the percentage, more Tatras accidents occur, Poland and surrounding countries like CZ/HU being more flat than Slovenia)

Alpinist is in my opinion not a very accurate term (passing the historical definition of "Alpinism" being the activity of visiting the Alps, like Hymalayism, Andinism, Pyreneism and so on). Not each rock-climber is an alpinist, and not each alpinist is a rock-climber. However all alpinists are mountaineers, but not all mountaineers are alpinists.
I don't define myself as a real alpinist. I haven't taken any real climbing lesson and my knowledge of assecurating is not proved enough on the terrain. I once occasionally had an avalanche course but it's not enough and I'm sure of it concerning myself.
But, again, all is question of appreciation. Everyone can go to mountains, the question is to be able to recognize the categry in which we belong to and what are the limits. This is an individual approach and there is no way to regulate it, apart from sensibilization campaigns for the mountain visitors.

A little bit OT, but I think that the single most hated rule in TPN is the complete ban of this member... Annoys me to no end...

Proterra wrote:A little bit OT, but I think that the single most hated rule in TPN is the complete ban of this member... Annoys me to no end...

Zone were dogs are permitted or not should be defined, instead of the current arbitrary rule. There are zones were dogs do disturb but not all of the mountain.

A little correction: if I would to classify myself according into one of the categories Eric has outlined, I would put myself into the hiker group, with the intention and some, but not sufficient experience to jump to the next level (beyond which I do not intend to go).

Hiking and gear-carrying aka technical climbing can get on well and go up hand in hand. If you can't believe it, have a look at what this strange guy says in a few words on his profile page.

Talking of the guides, here's some news.

peterbud wrote:A little correction: if I would to classify myself according into one of the categories Eric has outlined, I would put myself into the hiker group, with the intention and some, but not sufficient experience to jump to the next level (beyond which I do not intend to go).

Im my opinion people who ventured in the Rodnei like you described in your last TR are slightly into the category III

borutb wrote:In the Eastern countries (you know what is meant) it is a very accurate term. It is a title one gets after having been schooled for several years (for free or little money), and having passed an examination (based on theory, practice - up to improvised rescue, f.i.-, and experience). Sounds stiff but one learns a lot.
Eric, check out your local clubs for Alpinistichne Shole, not every club includes such a section.

Well everywhere not only Slovenia, people has to pass degrees to get skills in these fields. Don't forget Borut that I was a CAF member and there used to be a time I planned to do these trainings, I only lacked time for it, so I'm not so numb on the topic.
But you still haven't given a proper definition of the term "Alpinist". I'm giving a try: I would define the modern term of Alpinist as someone who is able to deal safely into the high mountain environment. Understand, one who masters all techniques of assecurating into hostile environment and has a proved experience of them on the terrain, rescuing experience & basic aid, winter experience about diagnosing the safety snowy layer, trained in avalanche finding, etc etc. Based on my classification the Alpinist covers "more or less" the fourth category. "More or less" because a rock-climber is not always someone who has all these skills, and in the opposite direction few alpinists might not define themselves as pure rock-climbers, despite having proved assecurating skills on wild terrain.
One can also have mountaineering skills, ahead of the hiking level (understand, able to evoluate on unmarked terrain), without being an alpinist. This is why, in my opinion, classifying someone who is not an alpinist directly as a hiker is too simple. I insist on it because most of my home Pyrenees is a terrain for the III.
However, for the very case of the Tatras the possibilities for category III are very thin, given the nature of the Tatras, as soon as you go off-route it means in 90% of the cases you go into terrain where alpinism techniques are needed, and also why in Poland and SK going to a mountaineering club means you'll do only rock-climbing (well, that was my constatation in Wroclaw - never heard there of winter courses neither orientation !).
These characteristics so specific to the Tatras are perhaps the reason why the topic about the Tatras regulations is so recurrent.

borutb wrote:I'm not even trying to offer a definition, my definition.
I'm just saying that in certain countries it is a title.
The national alpine association defines very precisely what should be knowledgeable in order to recieve the official title "alpinist".
Again, it might sound stiff.
It has the advantage of being able to climb with someone unknown in advance. You have been to the same school so you know exactly what to expect. That is just one of the advantages of these allmost free schools.
I also learned about flowers and the nuisance of shortcuts, and about the sandwich for the colleague.

We are far from kamil's concerns. And Clint's dog prob.
Well, dogs take exams as well.

Interesting story about the slovene title. We do have degrees here but it's not as global as "alpinist". what is the precise word in your language for this title ?
It's not so off topic concerning Kamil's post if you read this :
http://www.tanap.org/national-park-rules/
section "Conditions for carrying out climbing and rock-climbing in designated areas"
As for dogs, I would say what a dog's life for those willing to go offtrails

visentin wrote:As for dogs, I would say what a dog's life for those willing to go offtrails

I wasn't talking about (what you call) exposed class III or class IV terrain in TPN, but the fact that the whole of TPN is off limits to our canine friends. Even when on a leash...
Besides that, I would never be so stupid to take my dog anywhere where she might get hurt, but even a hike to the lakes in TPN (your class I to II) would get me the possibility of a z?500 fine...

But at least in Poland, if you belong to the two-legged variety of SP members, you get to summit everything...

yatsek wrote:Hiking and gear-carrying aka technical climbing can get on well and go up hand in hand. If you can't believe it, have a look at what this strange guy says in a few words on his profile page.

Cos it's all so vague
While in summer I may be in Eric's 4th category, I'm no more than 3rd in winter.

The Polish or more precisely Polish Tatran equivalent of an alpinist is 'taternik' - literally it would be a 'taternist'. I'm not up to date with the current system but there used to be 'karta taternika' (Tatran climber's ID) awarded when you completed the Tatran summer climbing course which allowed you to climb in the Tatras (I still have it stashed somewhere). Otherwise you could only use marked trails.

Proterra wrote:But at least in Poland, if you belong to the two-legged variety of SP members, you get to summit everything...

Hmm, not so sure, see above. Dunno what it's like now, is it 'karta taternika' or climbing club membership that allows you to climb in the Polish Tatras...

kamil wrote:

Proterra wrote:But at least in Poland, if you belong to the two-legged variety of SP members, you get to summit everything...

Hmm, not so sure, see above. Dunno what it's like now, is it 'karta taternika' or climbing club membership that allows you to climb in the Polish Tatras...

Jck (and some others) says now you don't need a KT any more to legally climb routes harder than UIAA II+ or maybe III.

When it comes to what actually got this thread started, probably none of us knows whether the guys who died on Gerlach were just hikers or certified alpinists, but they died in a similar way Rahel Maria Liu, who without doubt had all the necessary skills, passed away.

yatsek wrote:When it comes to what actually got this thread started, probably none of us knows whether the guys who died on Gerlach were just hikers or certified alpinists, but they died in a similar way Rahel Maria Liu, who without doubt had all the necessary skills, passed away.

I don't feel comfortable digging into pages of people who left us, but this, especially the anecdote he put as introduction, might answer your question concerning Edward. I fear that he pictured Gerlach like the British mountains he managed to climb in winter conditions. As for Rahel or Cyrill, they were undoubtedly very skilled mountaineers.