Hi guys,

I am currently working with a high-end online marketing start-up and we are trying to solve active problems in a few industries. I have chosen to investigate mountaineering as its a passion of mine (obviously).

Im trying to find out what the biggest problems are for you: The climber.

I understand that this may come off as a bit spammy, but that is not my intention! I have been a member for over a year now and I really do want to find solutions for common problems we all have.

Thanks for your time.

The biggest problem is finding enough time to climb all that you want to. The 2nd biggest problem (for me) is trying to keep in shape enough to do the climbing that I wish to do while at the same time working a desk job.

Biggest problem for me = money. Some say it shouldn't be a problem but it is. Permit fees / rt flight, transportation, hotels, food & mountain specific gear are all very expensive. Some people also hire guides which is an arm and a leg depending where you're going.

Loss of access to climbing venues for a variety of reasons including: closures in observance of Native American religious significance, protection of archeological resources (e.g. petroglyphs), flora and habitat protection, wildlife protection (e.g. nesting raptors), and liability concerns.

Prohibition and removal of fixed anchors and bans on replacing aging fixed anchors. One such incident lead to the death of a climber on Forbidden Peak recently.

Loss of access due to decommissioned roads and bridges. In the PNW we have had multiple bridges and roads wash out that have not been repaired due to lack of budget resources, influence by wilderness clubs, and other reasons. Also, the Forest Service is intentionally decommissioning roads due to budget cuts.

Increased cost and proliferation of user access fees. In the PNW I have to purchase 10 different passes in order to access all of the climbing/hiking/skiing areas I typically use.

Increasing demand for limited resources. Popular climbing areas 'sell out' of permits due to ever increasing number of climbers who want to access these areas and the need to limit the number of overnight visitors to protect the delicate alpine areas.

Global climate change. In the 25 years I have been climbing I have watched some glaciers in the PNW shrink to half their size. Routes were an easy glacier walk 12 years ago whereas this year required climbing steep, crappy, newly exposed rock because the glacier had receded 50 vertical feet. Routes like Liberty Ridge are becoming more dangerous as climbers are forced to climb early in the season to ensure enough snow coverage which exposes them to more unpredictable and worse weather.

I think I deserve an 'A' for my answer.

Time, Money and the Mind Problem...

"A form of obsession that fights against one's doubts."
Jean-Christophe Lafaille on the definition of mountaineering

Wait..Speaking of the A grade..wasn't it The Seventh Grade?

Poop and posers. The biggest issue for me is seeing so many dingalings who think they have any business in the mountains simply because they have an REI rewards card. The 2nd is people pooping all over the place. The two probably go hand in hand.

I think the "problems in mountaineering" are on the individual and you can't help much here but you could look at things like, travel, logistics, gear or many other areas that contribute to being outdoors.

drManhattan wrote:Im trying to find out what the biggest problems are for you: The climber.

On the other hand...
The Thermodynamic Dilemma
Hmm...Should I get the zero or the negative twenty down bag?

The commercialisation of climbing and the commodification of summits as trophies has led to a mismatch of desire and realities on many of the world's popular mountains. Trips are marketed to the main demographic (particularly wealthy US, some EU citizens) who usually only have two weeks holiday, little time to train and don't want to spend years gaining experience through failure and reflection. Mountain weather and mountain conditions don't give a rat's ass about any of this so often refuse to play ball. People try to overcome this, usually with money and technology (mountain flights, sat comms, fixed ropes, cheap indigenous labor) but that only works so far.

Of course, failure is a good thing, not only because everyone's self-esteem is the most valuable thing, like, ever, now but it means that those failures come back and pay for another shot at a rushed, compromised and degraded goal that can't possibly deliver the esoteric rewards, made famous in books and films of previous generations, that made mountaineering so desirable in the first place.

But then it depends what you mean by 'mountaineering'? There is a widening gulf between what could be called traditional mountaineering - learning skills by yourself and with likeminded friends, gradually working up through objectives over time, putting together trips yourself and attempting things you like, under your own steam - and paying to join a group of clients being guided on a peak that has become a famous brand for whatever reason - Everest, Denali etc. For the former group, ExcitableBoy's post above gives some indication of things for those in the US. My paragraph above mostly pertains to the latter.

People want to acquire the product, not learn the process. This is not only contra to the traditions of mountaineering but ultimately self-defeating by the person's own parameters, because by taking shortcuts they never get the changes or rewards they signed up for. Looks good on Facebook though.

"...the bucket list ... partakes of a commodification of cultural experience, in which every expedition made, and every artwork encountered, is reduced to an item on a checklist to be got through, rather than being worthy of repeated or extended engagement." http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultur ... ucket-list

Most excellent post, Damien.

The central feature here above remains unclimbed. Big problem!

(Julian Alps : Mangart and Jalovec group : Loška Stena : Plešivec northwest face - left part)

Good post by Damien, I think it juxtaposes the problems in the greater ranges with local problems I see. I've seen a bit of what Damien refers to on some of the larger 'marquee' peaks of the world - fixed ropes, fixed camps, guides, pampered clients. All of which leads to overcrowding, sanitation problems (good point by WyomingSummits!), and increasing demand for limited resources which is of course a local problem as well. Perhaps as they say in politics, all issues are local?

In response to my post above, some might be tempted to say "So what? To each their own. Don't tell me how to climb!"

That would be fine, normally I say anything goes, so long as it doesn't adversely affect others. The Problem, in keeping with the OP's question, is that the activities of some are now affecting the rights and activities of others.

An obvious example is the situation in Ecuador, noted here on SP: gov-t-restrictions-in-ecuador-t63791.html where you can no longer climb above 5000m without hiring a local guiding agency. So the needs of the novice gringos wanting paid shortcuts, and the needs of business for profit and government for kickbacks, are trampling independence, competence, tradition and adventure for mountaineers.

In the Cordillara Blanca, for years a training and proving ground for independent alpinists aiming for bigger things, they have been gradually introducing similar regulation, often being rebuffed and compromising, but never completely giving up. Recently Ueli Steck was turned away from one of the entrances because he did not have his alpine club card and was not with a guide.

Over the last several years, expedition insurance has become harder and harder to get, and a number of insurers now distinguish between expeditions with 'professional guides' and 'fixed ropes' on 'established routes' and….er, what we used to call 'climbing', with none of that. They figure the former is 'safer' and the latter is 'riskier', taking no account of the skill, or lack thereof, of the participant. Commerce trumps climbing, again.

There are all sorts of reasons for this, mostly to do with money, but also it's the result of an increasingly risk-averse, convenience-is-king, type of culture back home where the 'mountaineers' come from. These regulations, compromises and conveniences exist because there is a demand for them. But there is also a cost beyond the agency's price.

You might say "just quit whining and go somewhere else" and that is what many of us do. But really, that's a shame to have things limited like that, and even more importantly, what is next? First one area gets sold out, restricted, then another, then the rules of one park are spread over a country. Then what? Then what? First you have to have a local 'guide' on Trekking Peaks, then you have to have a 'guide' on 7000m peaks. Then you have to have two 'guides' on 8000m peaks. This is not fantasy - these are exact proposals put forward in Nepal earlier this year after the Everest avalanche. Where will that end?

To those that say that guiding has been around since the beginning of alpinism, with Swiss shepherds taking rich Englishmen up their backyard hills, that is true. However that is a different type of guiding to what has evolved over the years and can now be found on many trophy mountains. The latter is more commercial mass-guiding, with little or no instruction, up regular, often fixed, routes with increasing infrastructure and often even more hired local help.

In those olden days, though there was undoubtedly trophy-hunting aplenty, the approach and method was quite different, with objectives chosen depending on the time available, weather and conditions, skill and experience level of the client and any other variables. Quite a different thing. Mountain guiding is a perfectly valid job, and at IFMGA level, an admirable professional qualification and career, but the commercial mass guiding of a few packaged peaks is having some serious consequences for climbing.

Good discussion Damien; here are some thoughts I have.

An obvious example is the situation in Ecuador, noted here on SP: gov-t-restrictions-in-ecuador-t63791.html where you can no longer climb above 5000m without hiring a local guiding agency. So the needs of the novice gringos wanting paid shortcuts, and the needs of business for profit and government for kickbacks, are trampling independence, competence, tradition and adventure for mountaineers.

I think money and employment were the biggest factor in the restrictions decision. Safety was likely just an excuse. I saw some really crazy things done by guided groups in Ecuador, such as putting a ridiculous number of climbers on a single rope on Cotopaxi.

Actually the same is probably true of the Cordillera Blanca as well.

As far as commercialization goes, for better or worse, it isn't limited to mountaineering. Outdoor sports like rafting (for example) are even more affected since commercial groups tend to take all the permits on many rivers (at least in the US).

People want to acquire the product, not learn the process. This is not only contra to the traditions of mountaineering but ultimately self-defeating by the person's own parameters, because by taking shortcuts they never get the changes or rewards they signed up for. Looks good on Facebook though.

Maybe, but sometimes it's hard to judge someone's motives (and of course sometimes it is obvious). Although I'm not that great of a mountaineer, I've climbed with about every type of climber that I can think of, from highly experienced and well known to complete noob. Some of them live and breath climbing while others only want to experience it to see what it is like or to experience it from a distance. For some, it is only a part of life, while some it is their life or at least an obsession. Perhaps the most common situation I've seen is when climbing is not the #1 priority in their lives, but they do the best that they can with the time they have and juggle it with other priorities. There are some climbers I know who brag about everything they do and others who swear everything to secrecy and whom never tell a soul and whom shun anyone who does. And of course a whole lot of in between.

There are more than just two types of climbers and they can fit anywhere in a wide spectrum between the two extremes mentioned.

Then you have to have two 'guides' on 8000m peaks. This is not fantasy - these are exact proposals put forward in Nepal earlier this year after the Everest avalanche.

It has actually been proposed (at least on Everest) before this year's avalanche (at least as far back as the 1990's), but the avalanche may hasten it along.

As far as regulations go, you are correct that we will see more of this in the future. You mention Ecuador and the Blanca, but I've already also heard of it possibly happening in Bolivia and even in Southern Peru, which is more remote than the Blanca. The Federales(?) have been telling some people that they can't climb the peaks without guides. Peru and Boliva seem to be the two countries in the Andes that are moving towards more regulations (other than a few mountains in Argentina and Chile, but it is only a few mountains).

There are some mountains that I wouldn't mind taking a guide on (even on some easy ones such as in Guatemala where armed robberies are a problem), but it would be nice if it were a choice rather than something that was forced upon someone.

I don't know what to say about all this other than I guess it's more or less up to the country that you are visiting. It sucks for some, but illegal climbing can possibly make things worse. Anyone can try to persuade the powers to be otherwise, but money is probably the biggest factor in the decisions made. Commercially guided groups are probably seen by poor countries as being more desirable than "dirtbag" climbers.

Anyway, the explosion in guided expeditions has made sponsorship for experienced climbers more difficult on big named mountains that are commercially guided it seems. For example, although Everest has seen a huge increase in traffic, the increase is all limited to the two standard routes. New exploration has nearly stopped and traffic on the non-standard routes has actually decreased by a large amount. I assume this is because with all the guided climbers and people climbing Mount Everest that it is now harder for experienced climbers to get sponsorship for doing other routes on Mt. Everest since not as many people care anymore and that the peak is seen to be less glamorous than it used to be. I assume if Bonnington, for example, was born a few decades later, he'd have a harder time today financing and finding sponsorship for a SW Face expedition than he had back in the 1970's.