A "No" Cairn

Threads related to Colorado mountaineering accidents but please keep it civil and respectful. Friends and relatives of fallen climbers will be reading these posts.
Forum rules
Please be respectful when posting - family and friends of fallen climbers might be reading this forum.
User avatar
JenGa
Posts: 195
Joined: 6/16/2008
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits22 
Trip Reports (4)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by JenGa » Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:44 pm

Different sport same message.
Attachments
IMG_2493.JPG
IMG_2493.JPG (689.46 KiB) Viewed 1572 times
User avatar
jrbren_vt
Posts: 540
Joined: 2/18/2006
14ers:summits4 
13ers:summits3 
Trip Reports (2)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by jrbren_vt » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:51 am

Examples from my neck of the woods ...
Image
Image
*****************
Best Regards - John
*****************
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 1948
Joined: 6/14/2010
14ers: List not added
Trip Reports (9)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by Dave B » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:43 am

I don't get all the static against signs. They're usually pretty effective.

Image
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 1948
Joined: 6/14/2010
14ers: List not added
Trip Reports (9)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by Dave B » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:46 am

Although, sometimes a verbal recommendation is needed when widespread warnings, signage, and/or common sense prove to be insufficient.

Image
Sean Nunn
Posts: 859
Joined: 7/29/2013
14ers:summits35 
13ers:summits2 

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by Sean Nunn » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:39 am

Dave B wrote:I don't get all the static against signs. They're usually pretty effective.

Image
That is really, really funny. :lol: :lol: :lol:
"Thy righteousness is like the great mountains."
Psalm 36:6
User avatar
kellycarter
Posts: 2
Joined: 5/3/2016
14ers: List not added
Contact:

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by kellycarter » Wed May 23, 2018 11:26 am

A kind of "NO Cairn" could be built based on designs like these:

1. Geo-fencing using GPS: A smartphone app or maybe some feature of a handheld GPS could alert you when you came within the proximity of a pre-programmed set of GPS coordinates--the point at which you're about to enter a "Don't Go This Way" path. Pros: Invisible--no markings or objects needed, so no detraction to the natural environment. Cons: Requires accurate recording of "Don't Go This Way" points, plus competent and faithful administration of the GPS database (and in our society, probably liability issues). Requires functioning smartphone with app, or compatible handheld GPS, with sufficient battery charge. Requires hiker/climber competent to use the technology.

2. Active wireless device used with proximity detection: A device is planted or mounted on a "Don't Go This Way" path. A smartphone app that searches for and detects the device's wireless signal (probably only Bluetooth would suitable). and warns the user when within range. Pros: Not many, other than it possibly would work. Cons: Device would need recharging somehow (e.g., solar), or have batteries replace periodically. Placement of device would be difficult, and if visible, would possibly detract from natural environment. Device could become dislodged, moved, vandalized, or damaged (e.g., falling rock). Requires the smartphone, app, competent user. Would probably require careful design, and some luck in placement, so that proximity detection would be accurate and reliable.

3. Passive wireless device used with proximity detection: Briefly, like design #2 except the sensor is passive (no electrical power required), like those RFID tags found on merchandise in stores--the ones intended to prevent theft. Hiker/climber would have to carry a special device that transmits a wireless signal for sensing whether the passive device (e.g., RFID) was in range. You can figure out the pros and cons yourself.

I'm guessing most would favor design #1.

And, yes, these ideas could be used for route-finding, too. No just avoidance. To overcome the liability issue, perhaps the routes and avoidance coordinates could be contributed (anonymously) by the public like GPS route files. Users would have to trust the files and accept the risk of them being incorrect. I don't know if governmental authorities like the Park Service or Forestry Service would take on the expense and responsibility for the geo-fencing.
User avatar
douglas
Posts: 307
Joined: 6/13/2010
14ers:summits46 
13ers:summits1 
Trip Reports (2)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by douglas » Wed May 23, 2018 11:59 am

Wentzl wrote:The single dumbest idea I have ever read. And I have read these for a long time.

A no Cairn. Lets say it together. A No Cairn. These piles of rocks, built since the stone age, as an indication of the right way for passage, suddenly marking danger. Brilliant!!


and in a panic. storm closing in. Looking for a safe descent. running from danger and seeking shelter. Off the summit I find myself. Any sign of hope, as I know I am doomed. and through the gloom and sleet and near zero visibility, a sign of hope. a cairn! Hurrah. Safety. A sure way home. Not some bulls**t four stone pile of s**t left by some dumbass feeling a need to leave his mark on the mountain, but an absolute guarantee, a real official looking pile of rocks. This is the real s**t. Look how well made it is. It is a cairn that says if you don't go this way you are a total jackass. Of course. How could I have been so stupid as to not have come up this way!! Down we go. Wheeeee!!!
Completely unnecessary
Zoe Saldana
Posts: 52
Joined: 1/31/2018
14ers: List not added

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by Zoe Saldana » Wed May 23, 2018 12:34 pm

Dave B wrote:I don't get all the static against signs. They're usually pretty effective.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ph ... ch-n780576
User avatar
painless4u2
Posts: 1186
Joined: 7/14/2010
14ers:summits58 
Trip Reports (8)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by painless4u2 » Wed May 23, 2018 12:35 pm

douglas wrote:Completely unnecessary
Along with reviving an old, unfortunate thread. :deadhorse:
Bad decisions often make good stories.

IPAs + Ambien = "14ers" post (Bill M.)

In their hearts humans plan their course, but the Lord establishes their steps. Proverbs 16:9
User avatar
pmeadco
Posts: 302
Joined: 6/21/2015
14ers:summits58 winter2 

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by pmeadco » Wed May 23, 2018 1:43 pm

kellycarter wrote:I'm guessing most would favor design #1.
I'm guessing somebody with the technology and knowhow to do what you suggest would very likely be smart enough to simply follow a GPS track.
User avatar
SchralpTheGnar
Posts: 1630
Joined: 2/26/2008
14ers:summits51 ski49 winter1 
13ers:summits28 ski21 
Trip Reports (20)

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by SchralpTheGnar » Wed May 23, 2018 4:35 pm

I like the bulls eye approach to keeping people on route as one finds on Longs Peak or just wanding routes. The GPS track is the same, tells you where to go, if you’re not on where you should go then you are at where you should not go, simple and finite
User avatar
JChitwood
Posts: 412
Joined: 8/29/2011
14ers:summits58 
13ers:summits36 

Re: A "No" Cairn

Post by JChitwood » Wed May 23, 2018 6:04 pm

The Colorado 14ers are probably as crowded as the Alps so let's look to the Europeans for guidance. Signs everywhere in multiple languages, regularly serviced cables on steep sections, and big huts every few thousand vertical feet. All those will likely be in our future. I couldn't imagine the 14ers could be more crowded than they were 15 years ago. The next 15 will be that times 10.
"I'll make it." - Jimmy Chitwood
Post Reply