Mountaineering Ethics

[Boggy B]

Even when there are no safety concerns and everyone in the group has a bunch of solo experience, splitting up isn't great because a missed rendezvous due to unexpected delays may lead to snowballing decisions in a vacuum.

So I'd say staying with your partner is a good hard-and-fast baseline. Still, sometimes there's value to everyone in separating. In those cases I find radios make that decision palatable, terrain and distance permitting. One person continuing to a summit while the other waits or begins to descend is pretty much the ideal use case.

Hard to say if comms would have saved Michelle Vanek, but as with the OP that probably also fell outside the realm of "no safety concerns" and "solo experience."

[JROSKA]

It seems to me like in terms of mountaineering ethics, when two or more experienced individuals team up, there are really a lot of gray areas and “depends on the situation” when deciding to split up. I’ve been in a few situations where the partner (s) I was with all had plenty of experience and splitting up didn’t seem like a big deal at all. I’m usually the one who is “on the edge” in terms of whether or not I can complete the mission to the summit (usually due to lack of sleep) and I would absolutely never place an expectation on a hiking partner that they have to turn back with me. I have realized in recent years that when I suddenly communicate to a hiking partner that I can’t continue, it does cause an inconvenience by forcing that person who thought they had a partner to make a snap decision if they want to continue solo. Does that rise to the level of “ethical lapse”? Doesn’t seem like it.

The ballgame changes though when I’m with someone with little or no experience. I think that’s when the rule of “we don’t separate under any circumstances” does need to kick in. I definitely believe that rule applies to any situation where someone lacks experience. Not sure I’d throw the rule around too loosely when all parties have reasonable experience in the mountains.

[greenonion]

I’m liking Nunn’s original response and question. It depends. Similar to Roska’s. It depends. And it definitely depends on communication of expectations ahead of time/hike/climb if you know you’re partners at all. If you don’t, or aren’t sure, comm before the hike is really essential.

All for one and one for all, for any and every hike is just… unfortunate at times.

[oldschool]

In Aug of 2010, myself and 3 others, Kiefer, Noah, and Steve Gladbach set out on the Capitol to Snowmass traverse (Satan's Ridge). It was a long rough day. We had been out for 12+ hrs. We were just getting to the "hard stuff". Steve shared he was done.. not feeling great and wanted to descend to Geneva Lake. He wanted us to continue. It took all of us 1 second to say no..he will not go down by himself. We all descended together.

I turned around 5 times on winter ascent attempts of La Plata Peak. Got it on my 6th solo trip. Why 5 turn arounds? My partners were struggling so we turned around. No biggie.

My style.....I choose to never leave a partner.

Mike

[desertdog]

In Aug of 2010, myself and 3 others, Kiefer, Noah, and Steve Gladbach set out on the Capitol to Snowmass traverse (Satan's Ridge). It was a long rough day. We had been out for 12+ hrs. We were just getting to the "hard stuff". Steve shared he was done.. not feeling great and wanted to descend to Geneva Lake. He wanted us to continue. It took all of us 1 second to say no..he will not go down by himself. We all descended together.

I turned around 5 times on winter ascent attempts of La Plata Peak. Got it on my 6th solo trip. Why 5 turn arounds? My partners were struggling so we turned around. No biggie.

My style.....I choose to never leave a partner.

Mike

This!^ Old dogs know!

[Fast Jimm]

It seems to me like in terms of mountaineering ethics, when two or more experienced individuals team up, there are really a lot of gray areas and “depends on the situation” when deciding to split up. I’ve been in a few situations where the partner (s) I was with all had plenty of experience and splitting up didn’t seem like a big deal at all. I’m usually the one who is “on the edge” in terms of whether or not I can complete the mission to the summit (usually due to lack of sleep) and I would absolutely never place an expectation on a hiking partner that they have to turn back with me. I have realized in recent years that when I suddenly communicate to a hiking partner that I can’t continue, it does cause an inconvenience by forcing that person who thought they had a partner to make a snap decision if they want to continue solo. Does that rise to the level of “ethical lapse”? Doesn’t seem like it.

The ballgame changes though when I’m with someone with little or no experience. I think that’s when the rule of “we don’t separate under any circumstances” does need to kick in. I definitely believe that rule applies to any situation where someone lacks experience. Not sure I’d throw the rule around too loosely when all parties have reasonable experience in the mountains.

This is an excellent way to put it. Too many variables to make iron clad rules here. Giving the "We can't separate because if one of us dies, the other will need to subsist off their body" speech would seem a little off for two Everest Guides in their prime taking a stroll up to the top of Loveland pass, but between that extreme and abandoning your 4-year-old near a cliff while you summit Pyramid, there is a lot of ground.

[HikerBox]

What about if your partner is fine, but just runs out of gas and doesn't want to go to the summit?
I have climbed with people and I have said: "Before we start, I want to make clear that each one of us has to make our own decision as to how far to go. If one of us is clear headed and not injured, but decides to turn around, the other one is welcome to go on to the summit and meet up later. Of course, if one of us is injured and needs help, then that supersedes any summit attempt."

Do you think this is contrary to good mountain ethics?

IME most accident reports involving groups start with splitting up. That doesn't mean most groups that split up become accidents, but it does highlight the problems with splitting up. That said "it depends" - personally I would split up in relatively few circumstances like perfect weather, an easy and short route to the summit and back and experienced partners that are not showing any signs of distress or medical issues. I would also insist on staying put versus descending while someone ascends. Radio's would certainly be helpful too and might extend those circumstances. Winter and Spring add the danger of cold exposure and I think there are even fewer situations where I would split up.

[justiner]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mount-whit ... rned-back/

Two hikers started climbing the mountain late Saturday night and kept going into Sunday. At roughly 3:30 p.m., while they were near the 12,500-foot level, one hiker decided it was safer to turn around and go back down, but the other one kept going.

When the second hiker hadn't returned by Monday morning, the Inyo County Sheriff's Office was contacted and, SAR says, it began searching using a half-dozen searchers and a California Highway Patrol helicopter.

They spotted the overdue hiker's body on the mountain's north face, below the "Final 400" feet from its 14,505 foot summit, SAR says. Mount Whitney is the tallest mountain in the lower 48 states.

[nyker]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mount-whit ... rned-back/

Two hikers started climbing the mountain late Saturday night and kept going into Sunday. At roughly 3:30 p.m., while they were near the 12,500-foot level, one hiker decided it was safer to turn around and go back down, but the other one kept going.

When the second hiker hadn't returned by Monday morning, the Inyo County Sheriff's Office was contacted and, SAR says, it began searching using a half-dozen searchers and a California Highway Patrol helicopter.

They spotted the overdue hiker's body on the mountain's north face, below the "Final 400" feet from its 14,505 foot summit, SAR says. Mount Whitney is the tallest mountain in the lower 48 states.

This is a shame. Would be interesting to hear more facts about this if and when they come out. This sounds like it was just a bad situation. Heard they started out at 11:30pm; at first glance hearing they were only at 12,500ft at 3:30pm sounds like they were very slow, or encountered deep snow, but this time of year the Portal road may be closed a ways down so they may have had to start much lower down and walk several more additional miles and have more vert to add to the already 6,000 vertical ft on this route. Trying to do a daytrip on this in winter conditions is borderline not possible unless conditions are reasonable, someone is extremely fit and experienced and moves fast (which you can't really do in winter conditions here). The higher part of the MR also tends to get icy which makes that section treacherous in early season thinner looser snow cover.

As far as one of them turning around in this case, speculating they probably had the discussion and one person recognized to continue on was an exercise in futility and/or beyond their skills/comfort/energy and maybe could not convince the other climber to turn around. Not sure what else the person who turned back could have done. Should they risk their life also to "stay together"? I think many people would have made that same choice. Also how close were these two individuals. Good friends and hiking partners or a meet up situation to climb together? Don't know. I've been on multi-person trips where the night before or even in the parking lot day of climb, we all agree to turn around together if something happens or one person isn't feeling it; then on the trail someone decides they want to go on regardless of other's decision to turn around and pre-hike agreement. Can't force someone to turn around. Ego, Summit fever, inexperience, just bad luck, the cost to return to climb again, social media influence, you never know what's at play.

[Trtl6996]

buddy rule primary form... do not go for a summit without a partner... period
buddy rule plan b... if any one member of the summit group encounters more than he/she/they are willing to abide farther... all members of group retreat... or if the group is large enough, only those willing to go on can go on (at least two) and those not willing retreat to a safe reconnoiter and work on coms(at least two)... never break into solo mode when in a group venture

[nyker]

I agree with your rule. Sadly though, in practice sometimes the people you previously agree that with at a trailhead, don't follow through and keep going despite partners that might not want to or feel it's above their skill level, risk tolerance, are fatigued etc. I've seen hiking groups of two, where one climber insisted on continuing on while the other climber wasn't feeling it, ran out of gas, out of shape, for whatever reason didn't want to go on. Once I ran into such an instance and the person who reluctantly kept climbing up with the more aggressive partner, ended up joining our group to go down (we were descending), always wondered if we hadn't come across that climber if they would have gone to the summit when they were not comfortable (this was on Eolus). Another time was on Fuji, where granted you will likely never be alone, but still this person was left alone sitting being nauseous while their "partner" needed to summit hours earlier and this person didn't have the state of mind to continue and on Fuji, at a certain point there are separate trails for ascending and descending. Never knew if these partners were super close or just met that day as a meet-up type thing.

Again, agree with your thoughts, but unfortunately sometimes supposed partners don't abide by the same rules in the field when pushed with summit or turn around.

[IntrepidXJ]

buddy rule primary form... do not go for a summit without a partner... period
buddy rule plan b... if any one member of the summit group encounters more than he/she/they are willing to abide farther... all members of group retreat... or if the group is large enough, only those willing to go on can go on (at least two) and those not willing retreat to a safe reconnoiter and work on coms(at least two)... never break into solo mode when in a group venture

My rule: Don't go hiking with people who can't handle things on their own/alone.