Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Jul 25, 2012 - 06:36pm PT
|
We have been getting death after death in rappelling accidents. When something happens so consistently one has to ask,
"Am I doing something wrong? Is there something I should be doing?"
Maybe. First of all we need to face the liability. If you tell someone they are doing something dangerous or wrong and they take your advice - and get killed - you have a huge psychological problem, if not a legal one. How you do what you do is more important than what you do. You can't proceed simply out of the egotistical notion what you do is the only correct way. That said....
As in all cultures, there is much in our culture that is out of kilter. Until Alex came along what you usually saw on TV was someone joyfully bounding down a rappel. Because of the lack of redundancy rappelling is one of the most dangerous parts of climbing. That fact never seems to come to the surface in a way that can be seen by the uninitiated. As people who have been through it all, it is our job to give this some visibility.
Have we been doing our job properly?
It seems inevitable that counsel for the public on this matter has to be constructed by an organization or cooperative group of organizations whose lawyers inform their process. Given that, the best minds and people with a wide range of experience need to hammer out the actual guidance. Then there has to be an effort to make this counsel available generally and to give it visibility as a critical public issue.
A number of wonderful writers are also climbers. If the guidance included well written descriptions of some of the really scary rappelling situations we have gotten into, it would be an account no one could put down. It would be a page turner. Its message would be that you can never tell what kind of a bind you will get into.
And when it happens you better know how to decide what has to be done.
That is the message that has to be gotten across.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 06:56pm PT
|
Good points, JS.
Not to hijack this thread, but another wrinkle of this, where we are "not doing our jobs," and something for which I was just talking about with Bob Gaines, one of America's most experienced guides, is that there is currently no standardized protocol in place to investigate and document fatal climbing accidents. Like the recent death John is referring to on this thread - the woman dying at Suicide Rock a few days back.
As is, mostly well-meaning investigators rarely take enough detailed photos or sufficient notes to actually submit to record the crucial information. A comprehensive check list, with specific details provided, including measurements and so forth, would be an easy task if an on-line protocol was available for law enforcement and rangers to easily access.
As is, gear gets moved and untied and unclipped, few photos are taken and the result is that hard information is so lacking that reverse engineering things to a probable cause - usually not that difficult with the sufficient data - is often difficult if not impossible.
Anecdotal evidence (what people remember) is notoriously flat wrong in these cases. And so little to nothing is learned and we emerge from these deaths no wiser than before. Crime scene investigations have stringent protocols per most every aspect of inquiry. Same should apply here. It's not that hard.
I'll probably approach the AAC about working up something in the near future. I've often been asked to weigh in on these cases and find myself at a loss, or just guesstimating, for the lack of coherent data.
Any ideas are most welcome.
JL
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:14pm PT
|
the AAC's been investigating and reporting accidents in north american mountaineering for decades--without developing such a protocol?
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:22pm PT
|
Reporting.
Their investigation is of necessity confined to post accident documents.
John's talking about first responder protocol.
|
|
Don Paul
Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 07:32pm PT
|
There would have to be an autopsy and an autopsy report for each. But these may not be available through FOIA due to personal privacy concerns. The exact details of the injuries probably wouldnt tell you much. How does the body get from the accident scene to the morgue? That's who you need to talk to.
In Apartado where I work there are several competing funeral homes. They are all shady and all believed to dispose of murder victims by cremation, for a price. When someone is killed it seems they race to be the first on the scene to get the business. No doubt, competition in that bueiness is pretty ruthless. Well, in one of my cases, one of the funeral homes was tipped off about the murder, so they could beat their competitors and get there first. They actually arrived before the person was killed, and all kinds of people saw them waiting.
In Yosemite I suspect it is the YOSAR group that does the body recovery. Your idea sounds like something that should interest at least some of them.
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:44pm PT
|
Protocols are overdue. John and Bob are exactly right that in the absence of these, often important evidence that would assist in reconstructing the series of events leading to the accident is lost.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 08:47pm PT
|
In Yosemite I suspect it is the YOSAR group that does the body recovery. Your idea sounds like something that should interest at least some of them.
YOSAR is a branch of NPS Law Enforcement.
All incidents are investigated and run by LEO.
YOSAR is not an independent entity in any shape, way or form........
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:19pm PT
|
I think it has to be attacked at many levels. I am appalled when people find out that I used to rock climb and their first question is, "did you rappel?". It's in the same category as people saying. "You lived in Nepal. Did you climb Mt. Everest?". Most armchair adventurists know now thanks to Krakauer, that getting off a big mountain is as difficult as going up. Somehow rock climbers have not conveyed the same idea to the public and they need to.
The other lesson is that people seem to be relying too much on technology, assuming the rappel devices take care of everything and human attention is not needed. The Sierra Club used to have a standardized way of teaching everything, it seems we need to do that again with setting up rappels and lowering systems.
Given the age, a video of the process would probably have more impact that climbing writers. How about a series on rapelling, including how to document an accident scene, on utube ? Given the preponderance of cell phones with cameras, if people were aware, they could easily take a photo of the harness and rappel devices before they were removed if they only were aware to do so.
|
|
Curt
Boulder climber
Gilbert, AZ
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:21pm PT
|
As is, gear gets moved and untied and unclipped, few photos are taken and the result is that hard information is so lacking that reverse engineering things to a probable cause - usually not that difficult with the sufficient data - is often difficult if not impossible.
Anecdotal evidence (what people remember) is notoriously flat wrong in these cases. And so little to nothing is learned and we emerge from these deaths no wiser than before. Crime scene investigations have stringent protocols per most every aspect of inquiry. Same should apply here. It's not that hard.
Hey John,
I did a fairly detailed accident analysis of a friend's fatal rappelling accident here in Arizona in 2005 and I recall discussing that analysis with you.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1322431
Better documentation of that particular scene, including photos, before anything had been altered or moved could have perhaps aided a good deal in determining what actually went wrong in that case.
The general problem, as I see it, is that often accident victims are alive when good samaritans and professional first responders arrive on the scene and their first priority is obviously to provide medical assistance--and rightly so. If this means that the accident victim is made more comfortable by being moved or untied from the rope, removed from their harness, etc., that takes priority over everything else and thus critical information related to the accident analysis is lost.
Curt
|
|
Don Paul
Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:29pm PT
|
In case you missed it, here's a scholarly paper about rock climbing accidents, in Boulder County, Colorado.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:49pm PT
|
Reference to the accidents in Boulder County?
Meanwhile jstan made the suggestion on another thread that rapelling should always be a two person endeavor with both people checking the systems before hand, especially when someone is likely to be distracted by giving a demonstration to a class.
That seems to be one of the major changes from trad to sport climbing. With trad two people or even three were on the ledge together while sport climbing is one person up high and another on the ground who may or may not be paying attention to the belay or the lowering process. Emphasis on individual performance and technology has not proven to be safer than the old style partnerships.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:53pm PT
|
I wasn't talking about the cause of death, per se, but the cause of the anchor failure or whatever resulted in climbers falling to their deaths. The reason I know a first responders protocol (for fatal accidents) is needed is because I have many times been asked to try and reconstruct a probable scenario from sketchy or totally missing data simply because the first people on scene didn't understand the need to systematically document the accident.
In most cases the body could be cut away from the harness (easy) and removed from the scene. Body positions notwithstanding, it's mostly the configuration of the gear that will tell the tale. But unless that is thoroughly documented, you'd need someone like Curt to spend hours noodling what could likely be worked through in short order given the right data - especially pics.
The scenarios change dramatically with injured climbers, whose lives should always be given top priority.
JL
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 09:59pm PT
|
I'm not sure I understand what is being suggested. It sounds like you (John S) are saying that the climbing community has a duty to ensure that an extremely detailed analysis of every rap accident is done in order to protect the public.
Why?
Do you need a detailed analysis of every motor racing, or diving, or paddling accident to know that you shouldn't emulate a race driver until you've got some experience? Not trying to be a dick here, but I really don't get it.
There are relatively few ways to die rappeling. That there are so many deaths doesn't mean there are a thousand ways to die, just that a thousand people have died in three or four ways. How is a detailed analysis of every accident going to shed more light on this?
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
socal
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:05pm PT
|
Protocols are overdue. John and Bob are exactly right that in the absence of these, often important evidence that would assist in reconstructing the series of events leading to the accident is lost.
Maybe I'm missing something here. There are so many subjective variables involved on any climb, unless it involves equipment failure or protection practices that defy physics (i.e., triangle of death), the benefit of "CSI" type investigations does not seem to have any real value.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:15pm PT
|
I've lived thru exactly one sample, but here are a few things gleaned from it.
1. The first on the scene are the survivors and they will have priorities much more pressing than preserving evidence.
2. The configuration of the gear may reflect that and have nothing to do with the accident and be totally misleading as to the proximate cause.
3. First responders are actually second responders and are typically volunteers and not trained investigators even when pros. They may disturb valuable evidence, but they may also inadvertently preserve misleading artifacts. They are also not generally trained in interviewing wittiness and have more pressing priorities than to do so.
4. Statements from eyewitnesses may get swallowed up in the LE / Coroners protocol and not be accessible to investigators. (this is where some policy changes would be in order)
5. All news reports and initial official statements need to be disregarded. Those least likely to know, have the big megaphones.
A better analogue than a crime scene would be an aircraft crash. The aviation community does not expect an instant analysis of an incident. We shouldn't either. Possibly establishing a protocol would benefit most from input from the aviation investigating community on the physical evidence side and from LE on the witness interview portion.
Just a few thoughts.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 25, 2012 - 10:18pm PT
|
I'm not sure I understand what is being suggested. It sounds like you (John S) are saying that the climbing community has a duty to ensure that an extremely detailed analysis of every rap accident is done in order to protect the public.
No. Apparently I was not very clear. I am focussing on how rappelling is perceived by the public. Irene+'s thread would be an excellent first exposure for uninitiated people who have heard about rappelling and want to learn how to do it. Rappelling, like Russian Roulette is a fundamentally dangerous activity wherein anything can happen. And I make the point there really is no standard counsel out there on what precautions need to be taken.
Furthermore, present day climbers have the job of insisting that this vacancy be filled and filled properly.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 10:39pm PT
|
A more structured approach to accident investigation and documentation could certainly yield better information from which to learn, adjust habits, and improve techniques & equipment. The challenge to this is a practical one, as Curt has suggested.
Many (most?) incidences don't involve immediate fatalities...or if they do (as in the case of yesterday's Suicide fatality), the death occurs after the person has been evacuated. Until then, the priority is on scene safety, medical first response and evacuation.
Photographic documentation, as a part of first response, could help preserve some of the information that is otherwise lost during the scene & medical response, but this again poses a practical challenge: no-one's first priority is going to be to photograph the scene.
Still, a set of steps around approaching, documenting, and preserving information at an incident could be integrated into the types of climbing resources that are commonly in use: guidebooks, how-to's, and websites like this. There isn't much need to re-invent the wheel in developing these steps- Jed Williamson (longtime editor of ANAM, AAC) has well developed matrix of accident data. No doubt the broader insurance (& law enforcement) have templates that could serve as good starting points.
|
|
Don Paul
Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2012 - 11:02pm PT
|
Jan the reference is an embedded link, in the words "scholarly paper" above. It may be hard to see. They did not go into a lot of detail and I think the unroped climbing category includes people who are not experienced rock climbers, but here is the basic breakdown:
Climbing fatality by climbing activity (1998 –2011)
Activity type Victims (%)
Unroped climbing 9 (39)
Lead fall 5 (21.5)
Lower off 3 (13)
Anchor failure 2 (8.5)
Rock fall 2 (8.5)
Mountaineering 2 (8.5)
Total 23
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 26, 2012 - 12:12am PT
|
no-one's first priority is going to be to photograph the scene.
I remember video documenting on scene drowning rescue and cpr and medical aid trying to revive the victim during a YOSAR call.
A bystander came up to me and said I was heartless assho_le for running the camera and I should turn it off and go fuk myself.
It was actual video documentation of evidence of the drowning and rescue with evidence of trying to revive the victim as a non public case file only.
Sometimes people just plain flip out not knowing what's really going on ......
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Jul 26, 2012 - 12:44pm PT
|
Maybe I'm missing something here. There are so many subjective variables involved on any climb, unless it involves equipment failure or protection practices that defy physics (i.e., triangle of death), the benefit of "CSI" type investigations does not seem to have any real value.
-
The fact that you can't see any real value is not a case of there not being value there, but rather, so long as people are out there just winging it, conclusions that might lead to preventative measures can simply not be drawn.
And again, if you were ever called on to try and sort through one of these accidents, you'd welcome good data and documentations - you can easily see why.
JL
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!