The Euro Death Knot

There is a commonly used knot out there that many people use regularly to join two ropes together that is totally misrepresented by its name. The Euro death knot (EDK) is not dangerous and it is not a death knot. It is likely that American climbers gave the knot this name when they saw Europeans use it because it looked sketchy.

The EDK is officially known as an overhand bend or an overhand flat knot. It would be far better to refer to this knot by one of these names as they do not strike fear into those that use the knot.

The Overhand Bend (AKA Overhand Flat Knot/Euro Death Knot)
In this photo the tail is very short and there is no back-up to the Overhand Bend.
Photo from Wikepedia

Most people like the overhand bend for two reasons. First, because of the knot's asymmetrical profile, it tends to pull smoothly over edges and doesn't get caught as easily. And second, it is very easy to untie.

To tie the knot, lay both ends of the rope together. Make sure that they are pointed in the same direction and then make an overhand knot in both ropes at the same time. This is the overhand bend. Most guides tie a backup by adding a second overhand bend next to the first. This will keep the knot from rolling if there are unexpected high loads.

In the past, most climbers tied the overhand bend alone. If the knot is tied by itself without a backup, there must be a significant tail. It is not recommended to tie the overhand bend by itself.

Some people tie an overhand eight in lieu of an overhand bend. This is far more likely to roll than a unbacked-up overhand bend and is not recommended.

Most of our guides tend to tie not only their rappel ropes together with an overhand bend, but their cordelletes as well. Guides tie their cordelletes with this knot because it is easy to untie. A cordellete that may be opened has a great deal more flexibility. It can easily be opened up and used like a webolette. Some like the ability to open up a cordellete because an open cordellete without a welded double-fisherman's knot can be cut up more effectively for anchor material.

Following is a short video from the Canadian guide, Mike Barter, on how to tie a overhand bend.



--Jason D. Martin

Climbing and Outdoor News from Here and Abroad - 11/11/10

Northwest:

--In mid-September, AAI Director, Dunham Gooding made a joint presentation with the Mount Baker-Sonqualmie National Forest and with a representative from NOLS to obtain the funds in order to have toilets installed on Mount Baker this summer.  This week, we were pleased to find out that the Mount Baker Ranger District was awarded $12,000 for toilet installation!

--The Washington National Parks fund recently released a list of projects that were supported in North Cascades National Park by their donors. To see the list, please click here.

--Friends of the Olympic National Park are looking for volunteers to help with some service projects at the foot of the Olympic Mountains this season. To learn more about the opportunities, click here.

The shadow of two climbers hanging at a belay in Smith Rock.

Photo by Jason Martin

--Two men have been rescued from the Red Wall climbing area of Smith Rock State Park. KTVZ-TV reports 24-year-old Ian Wallace Carlsen of Puyallup, Wash., called 9-1-1 at about 6:45 p.m. Saturday to report that he and 22-year-old Russell Scott Howard of Gresham were stranded. Both had been rappelling and had underestimated the amount of rope they needed to descend the wall. Carlsen was stranded about 250 feet from the bottom and Howard was stranded about 200 feet from the bottom. To read more, click here.

Sierra:

--Leo Houlding has successfully free climbed a new line on El Cap in Yosemite National Park.  The line shares pitches with Bad to the Bone and The Secret Passage.  The new line clocks in at VI, 5.13d R.  To read more, click here.



--Yosemite National Park has been selected as the recipient of the Fiscal Year 2010 National Park Service (NPS) National Sustained Park Accessibility Achievement Award. The award, which was presented to the Yosemite National Park Accessibility Program, recognizes an individual park that has made “sustained” efforts to comprehensively identify barriers to equal accessibility for persons with disabilities and to implement consistent, on-going action to resolve those barriers.  During the last five years, Yosemite has made steady accessibility improvements to a range of visitor facilities, including parking lots, hiking trails, educational exhibits, and tactile displays. The park created a Yosemite Accessibility Guide that is available in large print and Braille at visitor centers. The guide is also available at park entrance stations and on the web. To read more, click here.

--A crown jewel in the National Park System, Yosemite National Park has seen its fair share of high profile visitors--including the latest, Oprah Winfrey, who taped her travels with best friend Gayle King to share with America. As millions watched their camping adventure in Yosemite, Oprah and Gayle helped bring to light the fact that people of color remain largely absent from our national parks as both visitors and National Park Service staff.  She left her "comfort zone" and rode a mule, cooked dinner on a campfire, and went fly-fishing in the Merced River. She also met with Yosemite Park Ranger Shelton Johnson, whose initial invitation to Oprah to visit Yosemite asked her to help in "spreading the word that the national parks really are America's best idea, and that this beauty belongs to every American, including African-Americans."  To read more, click here.


--An example of the dysfunctional bear management situation in the Lakes Basin - That's what Mammoth's Wildlife Specialist Steve Searles said about a bear break-in at a cabin near Lake Mary where he is not allowed to employ his bear control techniques. The cabin owner, Lou Capaso of southern California, had nailed boards up on all windows and tried to secure his cabin that bears have invaded six times. His family has rented from the Forest Service since the 1930s. Searles pointed out that this was the same cabin where Blondie the bear had broken in and was shot earlier this summer.  To read more, click here.


Desert Southwest:

--There was a serious fall on Red Rock's Crimson Chrysalis (IV, 5.8) last week that required a helicopter evacuation.  To read more, click here.

Alaska:

--Denali National Park and Preserve is considering/planning to substantially raise the climbing fee assessed on Denali climbers from $200 to $500, effective in 2012.  The public comment period on this issue has begun and you can learn more about how to respond to this, here.

The Alaska Range from the Talkeetna River in October

Photo by Jason Martin

--AAI Director, Dunham Gooding was quoted in an article by the Fairbanks Daily New Miner this week. The issue was that more climbers want to hire guides to scale Mount McKinley and the National Park Service are considering an increase in the number of permits allocated to guiding companies on North America’s tallest peak. To read more, click here.

Himalaya
 

--Defying an age restriction on Mt. Everest climbers imposed by two countries, a nine-year-old Nepali boy is set to attempt to scale the world's highest peak. If he succeeds, he will break the world record for the youngest climber set this year by a thirteen-year-old American. Tseten Sherpa, a third grader from Dolakha district in northern Nepal, has begun practicing for his ascent next year, his father and well-known Everest climber Pemba Dorjee Sherpa said. To read more, click here.

Notes from All Over:

--A medical student is currently doing research on the types of injuries that ice climbers regularly sustain.  She has emailed AAI to find out if we could provide her some test subjects.  If you would like to be involved, please see the following letter:

My name is Kathrin, I am a medical student and at the moment I am working on my diploma thesis with the topic, "Ice Climbing."  I really need your help to complete my work; in order to successfully conduct the study, I need as many ice climbers as possible.

What is it all about?  The aim of the study is to analyze injury patterns which are characteristic for ice climbing.  I hope that I can draw some conclusions on how one can make ice climbing a safer sport.

To be a part of this study, or for more information, please email me at: kathrin.lampl@pmu.ac.at

Conditions Report - November 10 2010

NORTHWEST:

--A quick report for Mount Hood can be found here. Note: it wasn't clear.

--Check out this report for Panorama Point.... "very heavy breakable windloaded"

--No ice in WA yet. Click here for Montana stoke.

--Forecast for the West Slope of the Cascades.

--Forecast for the East Slope of the Cascades.

--Webcam for Leavenworth and the Stuart Range.

--Forecast for Mount Rainier.-- Route and Conditions Report from Mt. Baker Rangers: Mount Baker Climbing Blog.

--Forest Service Road Report for Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.

--Mount Saint Helens, Mount Adams conditions and recreation report.

--Webcams for Mount Rainier National Park, North Cascades National Park, Leavenworth.

--An up-to-date ski and snow report for the Northwest may be found here.

--Up-to-date Pacific Northwest ice conditions may be found here.

RED ROCK CANYON:

--The scenic loop drive now closes at 5pm, effective Monday September 20th. See this thread and the BLM site for more information.

--Forecast and average temperatures for Red Rock Canyon.

--Webcam for Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area.--The late exit and overnight permit number for Red Rock Canyon is 702-515-5050. If there is any chance that you will be inside the park after closing, be sure to call this number so that you don't get a ticket.--The entrance to the scenic drive had a parking area for those who wanted to carpool up until approximately April of 2009. That lot has now become employee parking and people who want to carpool are required to park at the lot outside the Scenic Drive exit.

--The scenic drive currently opens its gates at 6 in the morning.

JOSHUA TREE:


--Forecast and average temperatures for Joshua Tree National Park.

--Webcam for Joshua Tree National Park.

SIERRA:

--First Snow on Half Dome (thanks to whoever caught that)

:

--Tioga Pass is CLOSED. Click here.

--For up-to-date avalanche and weather reports in the Eastern Sierra, click here.

--Webcams for Bishop, June Lake, Mammoth Mountain, Mono Lake, Tioga Pass.

ALASKA RANGE:

-- For the most current updates on Alaska, please see our Dispatch Blog.

--Forecast for Denali.

ALPS:


--Chamonix and Mont Blanc Regional Forecasts may be found here.

--Webcams for Chamonix Valley, Zermatt and the Matterhorn.

Rope Length on a Glacier

How much rope should be between people on a glacier?

Twenty feet?  Forty feet?  Sixty feet?  It seems like there should be a clear-cut answer to the question, but unfortunately there's not.

Some years ago a friend of mine was coming down the Coleman-Deming route on Mount Baker late in the season.  He was at the back of the rope team.  The person at the front of the team slowly began to work his way across a snowbridge. Approximately half-way across, the bridge collapsed.

The leader dropped into the crevasse.  The guy in the middle of the rope team did not attempt to arrest the fall at all.  And my friend immediately dropped into a self-arrest position.  Each of the two climbers at the front of the team were essentially lowered to the bottom of the crevasse.  But unfortunately, my friend was dragged in and fell to the bottom.

The Coleman Glacier on Mount Baker

Photo by Jason Martin

As the crevasse wasn't that deep, no one was seriously hurt in the incident.  But it was a very close call.  One could make a very good argument that if there were just a few more feet between these individuals, that then the fall could have been arrested before it became as serious as it became.

There are three things to consider when deciding on rope length:

1) How big are the crevasses?

Obviously, you will need enough rope out to make sure that two members of the team are not on the same crevasse.  If you're in the Alaska Range or the Himalaya, this is significantly more rope than it is if you are in the Cascades, the Canadian Rockies, or the Andes.

2) How many people are on the team and what kind of room will you need to arrest?

The more people on the rope, the more weight there is.  On a team with five people, I've seen a person fall into a crevasse and stop without a single member of the team self-arresting.  While larger teams tend to be slower and more difficult to manage, they are better when it comes to arresting a fall.

It is also important to make sure that there is not only enough room between each member of the team to arrest a fall, but that there is also enough rope out to arrest the fall before getting dragged into the crevasse.  Essentially, this means that there should be more rope out between people when there are smaller teams.  Having lots of rope out between people doesn't matter as much with larger teams.

3) Is there enough rope to perform a rescue?

Why not just put all the rope out?  Won't this ensure that you always have enough room to arrest?

Certainly there are places where having all the rope out is good.  In ranges with giant house-eating crevasses like the Himalaya and the Alaska Range, it's probably best to put all of the rope out.  But this does make crevasse rescue more difficult and it doesn't give you a lot to work with if someone gets hurt in a fall.

One of the things that we teach at AAI is that, if possible, you should have some rescue rope on either end of your team.  This rope should be long enough to reach the next person on your team.  This is so that if there is a major injury in a crevasse fall, that you have enough rope to rappel down and perform first aid before pulling a person out.

If you plan to travel to a range where you will need to have all of your rope out, it is good to practice crevasse rescue without rescue coils.  Unfortunately, it is a slower and more tedious technique.

Rope Measurement for Smaller Ranges

I have a simple system for measuring rope length in the Cascades.  I'm six feet tall and so my wing span is also approximately six feet.  I will generally separate people by measuring the rope with my arms.  Here is a team breakdown:

Two person team - 8 arm lengths - 48 feet between climbers
Three person team - 7 arm lengths - 42 feet between climbers
Four person team - 6 arm lengths - 36 feet between climbers
Five person team - 5 arm lengths - 30 feet between climbers

In a pinch, it's possible to have a larger team, but it is not optimal.  And you should never go below 30 feet between climbers.

When you get to teams with five or six people on them, generally there is not enough rope on either end to perform a rescue.  In such a case, you should have the leader (i.e. the strongest/most experienced person on the team) carry any rescue rope that's available.

Conclusion

Certainly, the amount of rope out between people is a personal and team choice.  Some of you who are reading this are probably shocked at how little rope I suggest between people.  And others are just as shocked about how much I suggest.  Either way, I can say comfortably that I personally feel as safe as is reasonable with these lengths on the glaciers of the Northwest...

--Jason D. Martin

Update --

The guide who fell into a crevasse back in 2000 responded to this post.  Following are his comments on the topic:

Hey Jason, I was checkin out your AAI blog this morning and I saw your post on rope distance on glaciers. Nice article - well written and a great topic. I thought about trying to write about that topic recently but got side-tracked.

Interesting to see an anecdote told about my experience. I learned a few things from that, and as such I might disagree with a couple of your premises - or at least have a few other factors to consider. After my accident, some people told me (Crusty old Tom Bridge being one of them) that I could have benefited from the rope distance being a bit longer. I saw that you put that in your blog as well. Keep in mind however that had there not been a little "floor" in that crevasse, an extra few meters would not have mattered, and we probably all would have gone in anyway - and died. Yeah, more rope distance = more "time to react" but only to a point. The amount of rope out was for me a tiny little variable. The other key thing worth pointing out (and you did anyway) is that it was a small, visible bridge that failed over an open crevasse, rather than the failure of a soft blanket of snow over a hidden crevasse.

 My clients and I were tied the "standard" 35 or so feet apart. In the following season or two, I heeded Tom B. and others' advice that I should go more like 40-45 feet on cascades glaciers. It wasn't until 2005 or 2006 or so when I realized, that all things being equal, I should have gone way closer  than 35 feet. When I started going through the AMGA alpine program, that confirmed it for me. For me rope distance ceased to become a function of anticipated crevasse width. I now go even closer in AK too. I think the most likley consequences of a crevasse fall is usually trauma to the victim - not "the whole rope team getting sucked in". The circumstances of my crevasse fall in 2000 should never be used as an example of how far apart to tie in for glacier travel. We should have been in short rope mode - and thats what I would do if I could go back to that moment on Sept 28th, 2000 (at about 1:45pm in the afternoon to be exact).

At some point that day as we descended, the snow got firmer and the crevasses became more open. It was probably around  8000 feet on the coleman glacier.  S-R mode would have allowed me to route-find better and just end-run the crevasse (which was the most logical and "safe" way of solving that particular guiding problem that day. Long-roping is a great technique for crossing glaciers where hidden crevasses comprise the greatest hazard, but in our case most everything that could open was already open. Short-roping would allow a guide to routefind much better than trying to long-rope with a client 80 feet in front of you leading the way (on that piece of glacier, I thought
about going first but the risk of slips and falls was high - thus another reason to S-R and not L-R.

The other thing to remember about your blog topic is that crevasse falls are not the only big hazard on glaciers. Slips and falls on steep terrain are sometimes more severe, and a rope team moving together while tied in far apart is not well prepared (in my opinion) to deal with those hazards.

So, to make a long story longer, when I am trying to figure out how far apart to tie my rope, I think about a few of the following variables (above and beyond crevasse size, numbers of people, etc...)

- Is long-roping more appropriate or less appropriate than short-roping right now? (L-R when soft snow, bad vis, lots of hidden slots, etc... S-R when late season, Firn, most slots are open, route-finding in complex (but not whiteout) terrain.

- Is the snow firm or soft? I might short rope routes these days in the morning, but then L-R them in the afternoon when they have softened up.

- How fit are the clients and how important is my communication with them and with each other?  - if client safety benefits more from communication, pacing, direction, etc then I might go shorter rather than longer. Its a lot easier to remind your clients to keep the rope tight when they are 25-30 feet away than it is when they are 40. Its also easier to keep the rope tight, as well as direct, warn, caution, etc... I have gotten so sick and tired of tying my clients in 40 feet apart only to see them tripping on my rope with their crampons. They sometimes do such a bad job monitoring rope tension that the additional distance ceases to become a benefit. And you know this is true for recreationalists (comprising much of your blog audience) as well.

- Is adjustability important?  Build a system into the rope team that allows one or more members to drop an intermediate knot - thus extending themselves temporarily - It isn't that hard to teach even the greenest of clients. If we are approaching a monster slot where I am afraid of its strenght and of having 2 or more people on it at once, its easy to go quickly from 25 feet to 40 feet if neccessary - or even switch to a belay-from-anchor.  Furthermore, I think there are hardly any monster slots out there (bigger than 20-25 feet or so) that don't manifest themselves on the surface some how. The biggest slots I have ever seen outside of AK are down in Antarctica, and they always reveal themselves one way or another.

Instead of asking myself "how long should I go with my rope distance" when I rope up with my clients, I now try to ask my self 1): Is a rope even necessary? (because sometimes it isn't of course - or sometimes the presence of a rope makes things more dangerous than less - I asked my clients to unrope on a relatively crevasse-free glacier on Mt Blanc this summer because I felt the risk of rockfall from above far outweighed the likelihood of an unroped crevasse fall. 2): How short can I safely go? I bet there are plenty of days on Baker late in the season where one could short rope the vast majority of the route and argue logically that it exposed the team to less risk than long-roping.

The caveat of all of this, and the reason that it is on my mind so much (besides me being the lucky survivor of the story you told) is because of all the 14 guide fatalities in France last year, many of them were due to crevasse falls. Many euro guides can be seen short roping here and there on heavily crevassed glaciers, and it really makes me wonder sometimes... I find myself long roping lots of terrain that fellow french, italian, or swiss guides might be short roping on. There was an inquiry at ENSA (the french guide school) last year after many of the accidents and the ENSA instructors were asked if they teach new guides to S-R the glaciers. "No" they said. "We teach our candidates to use longer distances of rope when the risk of crevasse falls is high" they said. "We don't know why these guides learn one way with us then do something completely different (and much less safe) when they complete their UIAGM diploma".

That about wraps her up... Sorry this isn't very short but as you might know I have a very personal connection to crevasse falls  and crevasse-related risk management. Plenty of people probably don't agree with me by the way, but I'd happily maintain that there is little or no evidence to support the claim that more rope in the team equates to less crevasse fall risk.

I witnessed two crevasse falls in a 30 minute period while guiding the Dufourspitze in Switzerland last summer. I rescued both victims myself. One team (a czech team) tied in a about 35 feet, and did a poor job of watching their tension. A girl popped through a weak bridge in the dark and yanked the other two guys off their feet. She went deep-until she corked. If she hadn't corked she might have dragged them both in. 15 minutes later an Italian climber passed me as I was probing a suspicions area (he wasn't concerned). He and his (single) partner were tied in 25 feet apart. He fell in - and the tension went immediatey onto his partner - who self arrested (crampons on, toes in the snow! - It works!). Is partner was dragged a little bit but not much, and successfully stopped the fall. We hauled that guy out too. One of your blog points was that smaller teams should tie in further apart than big teams. I disagree (with some exceptions). I think they can go just as close (and use heaps of butterfly knots). I honestly believe the benifits outweigh the disadvantages, and overall - if people are skilled and aware - going a little closer is often safer. 

Proposed Mt. Rainier Climbing Fee Increase

Mount Rainier National Park News Release

October 28, 2010

For Immediate Release

Contact: Donna Rahier, Superintendent’s Office, 360-569-2211, x2301

Public Input Sought for Proposed Climbing Fee Increase through January 31, 2011

Mount Rainier Superintendent Dave Uberuaga has announced that the park is soliciting public input on a proposal to increase annual pass fees for those climbing Mount Rainier, beginning in the 2011 climbing season.  The comment period will be open for 90+ days beginning November 1, and will close January 31, 2011.

A series of public meetings to provide information and solicit comments from the public regarding this proposal have been scheduled for the following dates, locations and times:

Tuesday, November 30: Tacoma, WA

7:00pm-9:00pm

            Mountaineers Building

2302 N 30th St

Tacoma, WA 98403-3323

Tuesday, December 7: Seattle, WA

Seattle Mountaineers Building

7:00pm-9:00pm

7700 Sand Point Way NE

Seattle, WA 98115

Wednesday, December 8: Ashford, WA    

Mount Rainier Education Center

7:00pm-9:00pm

            55210 238^th Ave E.

            Ashford, WA 98304

Mount Rainier’s Climbing Program:

·         Manages climbing activities to provide a world-class experience

·         Registers about 11,000 climbers each year, issues and accounts for climbing passes

·         Provides up-to-date climbing route and safety information

·         Keeps weather, climbing, route, and climbing related information updated on a web blog

·         Staffs two ranger stations (Paradise and White River) providing climber information, orientations and passes

·         Staffs two high camps (Camp Muir and Camp Schurman) and briefs hundreds of climbers each evening during peak season

·         Responds to dozens of climbing related searches and rescues; provides emergency medical services

·         Maintains toilets daily at the high camps and hauls several thousands of pounds of human waste off the upper mountain to processing facilities

·         Manages the “blue bag” program to keep human wastes off the climbing routes

·         Maintains  and operates high camp facilities and communication systems

·         Provides climbing rangers with competencies in core skill areas, including mountaineering, search and rescue, emergency medical services, incident management, and aviation

·         Operates a fee collection and point of sale system (credit card machines/iron rangers)

·         Monitors the alpine wilderness areas for impacts related to visitor use and climate change

The park’s Climbing Program is largely funded by cost recovery revenue from climbing pass fees, required by each individual climbing Mount Rainier.  The pass fee of $30 per person per year has not increased in eight years; program funding is no longer adequate to support essential education, safety and other public services.  

Mount Rainier is proposing an increase in the annual pass fee to between $43 and $58, with yearly adjustments thereafter determined by changes in the Consumer Price Index or other methodology.  A cost recovery fee in the $43 range would reestablish essential public safety, education, information, and resource protection services and programs.  A cost recovery fee in the $58 range would support new or improved services for the climbing public. Public input is sought to assist the National Park Service in formulating a climbing pass fee that is fair and equitable, supports unique services for climbers, and sustains a world-class climbing experience on Mount Rainier.   

For more information on the proposal, please visit the Park’s web site at:

http://www.nps.gov/mora/parkmgmt/climbingfee.htm

Comments may be submitted by e-mail or in writing to the following addresses:

rainierclimbingfee@nps.gov

Superintendent

ATTN:  Climbing Cost Recovery Fee

Mount Rainier National Park

55210 238^th Ave E

Ashford, WA 98304

Mount Rainier National Park

Climbing and Mountaineering Program

Proposed Cost Recovery Fee Increase

FAQ’s (frequently asked questions)

1. How does the Mount Rainier climbing program serve climbers and why raise the climbing Cost Recovery Fee?

Mount Rainier National Park is proposing to increase the cost of an annual climbing pass from $30 to an amount between $43 and $58.  The fee increase is intended to offset the impacts of 8 years of unfunded cost increases and fund the essential services and programs that directly benefit climbers and the upper mountain.

Mount Rainier’s Climbing Program:

• Manages climbing activities to provide a world-class experience
• Registers about 11,000 climbers each year, issues and accounts for climbing passes
• Provides up to date climbing route and safety information
• Keeps weather, climbing, route, and climbing related information updated on a weblog
• Staffs two ranger stations (Paradise and White River) providing climber information, orientations and passes
• Staffs two high camps (Camp Muir and Camp Schurman) and briefs hundreds of climbers each evening during peak season
• Responds to dozens of climbing related searches and rescues; provides emergency medical services
• Maintains toilets daily at the high camps and hauls several thousands of pounds of human waste off the upper mountain to processing facilities
• Manages the “blue bag” program to keep human wastes off the climbing routes
• Maintains  and operate high camp facilities and communication systems
• Provides climbing rangers with competencies in core skill areas, including mountaineering, SAR, EMS, Incident Management, and aviation
• Operates a fee collection and point of sale system (credit card machines / iron rangers)
• Monitors the alpine wilderness areas for impacts related to visitor use and climate change

The climbing Cost Recovery Fee pays for the majority of these services plus the program is supplemented by base funding and franchise fees paid by the guide concessionaires.   There has been no increase in the climbing Cost Recovery Fee since 2003.  The fee charged has not been linked to the consumer price index (CPI) or adjusted for inflation.  As a result, gains made from the fee increase 8 years ago have been eroded by inflation and cost increases, leaving the climbing program in even worse financial condition than before the 2003 fee increase.

In addition, an assumption was made in 2002 that demand in climbing would continue to increase at the steady rate seen from 1989-2001, thereby increasing the program’s income as more climbing passes were sold each year. This has not turned out to be the case.   

This proposed fee increase would be annually adjusted for inflation, better enabling the park to sustain services for climbers and run a safe operation.  Fluctuation in the number of climbers would still create some variability in available funding from year-to-year.  However, an initial fee increase to restore services, followed by annual adjustments based on CPI, would provide a firm financial foundation for essential services.

2. What new services can be expected as a result of the proposed fee increase?

No new services would be added to Mount Rainier’s climbing program if the fee increases to $43.  This funding level would reestablish and support a program that meets minimum requirements for essential visitor services, resource protection, public and operational safety.

A fee increase to $58 would enhance staffing and support new or improved services for climbers:

• More avalanche oriented climbing information in the spring season
• Better SAR organization with guides, Mt. Rescue units, and other volunteer resources
• More consistent climbing blog posts with more routes covered (especially in shoulder seasons)
• Improved self-registration process
• New online services for climbers such as online pass purchase
• Streamlined online solo-climbing application procedures
• Improved public media like orientation videos, detailed route descriptions, and web information
• Improved human waste collection facilities at high campsMaintain a minimum staffing level which provides appropriate supervisory oversight and backup contingencies
• More public engagements by leadership staff

3. How does the Mount Rainier Climbing Program spend the money it receives from the cost recovery funds and other sources?

In 2010, Climbing Program funding was allocated and spent as detailed in the chart below.  The Program’s total budget was about $348,000.  Climbing fee revenue totaled $273,000.  The remaining $75,000 was non-fee revenue allocated to the program by the park.

  

4. What is the authority under which Mount Rainier National Park collects the climbing Cost Recovery Fee?

Mount Rainier collects the climbing Cost Recovery Fee under 31 USC 9701 (charge for a service –“service or thing of value provided”) and 16 USC Section 3a and OMB Circular A-25 Revised.  The program is managed by DOI Part 346 Cost Recovery and NPS Management Policies 8.2.6.1 and DO/RM 53: Special Park Uses.  Assistant Secretary, Fish and Wildlife and Parks George T. Frampton Jr. signed the approval memorandum, dated May 31, 1995.

5. Why is the Mount Rainier climbing program not funded in full with NPS base funding?

Congress appropriates annual funding for the operation of national park units, including Mount Rainier National Park.  This is considered a park’s “base funding”.  Mount Rainier’s base funding is used to fund a broad range of visitor services and related activities.  Some of this funding directly supports the climbing program through staff salaries, administrative support, communication systems, utilities and facilities.

  

Climbing activities are considered Special Park Uses.  A Special Park Use is a short term activity that takes place in a park area, and that:

• provides a benefit to an individual, group or organization rather than the public at large;
• requires written authorization and some degree of management control from the NPS in order to protect park resources and the public interest;
• is not prohibited by law or regulation; and
• is neither initiated, sponsored nor conducted by the NPS

NPS Policy (RM-53) directs that the NPS will charge a fee and recover costs for special park use permits unless prohibited by law or Executive Order, or when the proposed use is protected by the First Amendment or involves another right and not a privilege.  The NPS will retain funds recovered for the cost incurred in managing a special park use.

Under RM 53, a recoverable cost is defined as, “costs directly attributable to the use. Costs are recoverable when such costs would not have been incurred if the activity did not take place, or, are necessary, in the judgment of the NPS, for the safe completion of the special park use”.

Special use fees may pay for:

• Direct personnel costs
• Material supply costs
• Official travel
• Utilities
• Environmental and cultural compliance
• Vehicles
• Administration
• Management
• Documentation

All Mount Rainier climbing cost recovery fees are placed in an account used solely to provide and support climber services.

6. Why are park entrance fees not used to pay for the climbing program?

Entrance fees are collected at Mount Rainier and other parks and federal lands under the authority of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA).  This Act directs fees collected to be used to enhance visitor services, including repair, maintenance, and facility enhancement.  Typical uses of fee revenues include repairing campgrounds, habitat restoration directly related to wildlife-dependent recreation, fixing boat launches, replacing interpretive displays, providing new restroom facilities and parking.  At Mount Rainier, the fees collected at entrance stations have been used to fund the summer Paradise shuttle system, which helps deal with parking shortages at Paradise, chip-sealing the Paradise parking lot, rental of portable toilets for the lower Paradise parking lot to supplement toilets at the Jackson Visitor Center, funding of a permanent comfort station at the lower Paradise lot (2011), numerous trail rehab projects, Paradise meadow revegetation projects, and many others.  Many of these projects, while not paying for the park climbing program directly, do benefit those who come to the park to climb the mountain.

 

7. Shouldn’t at least some base funding support the climbing program? 

Yes…and it does. The climbing program benefits from base funding in the form of infrastructure, access, services, and administration.  This includes operation and maintenance of ranger stations, the Climbing Information Center, Emergency Operations Center, Camp Muir and Camp Schurman structures, and employee housing units.  Other funded support services include telecommunications, radio communication infrastructure, dispatch support, electricity, administrative and custodial support.  Base funding also supports maintenance of trails and roads that provide access to the park and mountain.  The table below presents the major services and support provided by Park base funds, none of which are charged back to the climbing program.

  

Non-fee Support of Climbing Program Operations
(not associated with the climbing fee)
Position	Cost
Franchise Fees (from climbing guide services)	$19,000.00
Centennial Initiative Funding	$26,500.00
Alpine District Ranger	$99,000.00
Chief Ranger (10% of total costs)	$12,000.00
Backcountry Carpenters	$15,000.00
Backcountry Facilities Manager	$30,000.00
Concessions Manager	$20,000.00
Entrance Station Bluebags	$3,000.00
Wilderness Reservations	$5,000.00
White River Staffing (4 out of 7 days)	$20,000.00
Radio / Telecom Support	$10,000.00
Miscellaneous Support	$10,000.00
Total:	$272,000.00

  

  

The Climbing Cost Recovery fees augment the base funding and cover the salaries of the climbing rangers and the field supervisors staffing the upper mountain and the Climbing Information Center, and the salaries and related support costs to manage human waste on the upper mountain. 

8. Do the climbing rangers provide services to visitors other than climbers paying the Cost Recovery Fee? 

Yes.  While climbing rangers focus their attention on the upper mountain and the climbing public, they do provide services to all visitors.  Climbing rangers provide roadside and low-country EMS, assistance to day and overnight visitors, human waste removal for all who visit high camps, SAR response to all visitors regardless of the activity in which they are involved.  While the Climbing Information Center (CIC) focuses its services on climbers, their staff serves every visitor who drops in by providing general park information.  The CIC is the only information center open during the early morning hours of 6:00 am to 7:30 am.

The specialized training of climbing rangers,  their exceptional fitness, and  skills and expertise in the areas of aviation, EMS, SAR, high angle rescue and snow safety (avalanche) make them a highly valued and versatile staff resource for a variety of non-climbing related operations.

9. Why don’t the guide services put more money into the climbing program?

Mount Rainier’s three mountaineering guide services collect the climbing cost recovery fee from each client that is guided on the mountain and these funds are placed directly in the park’s climbing Cost Recovery account.  The climbing pass fee is the same for guided and independent climbers. 

Per the concession contracts, each guide service also places a fixed percentage of their gross receipts into a franchise account.  By law, 20% of the franchise fees are sent to Washington, D.C. and are used for national park concession activities Servicewide.  80% of the collected funds remain in the park to be used for concession related needs including, high priority facility repairs and improvements, concession contracting, replacement of major equipment or utility systems, and limited program management and oversight related costs, etc.

In 2010, $19,000 in franchise fees was used to support the park’s mountaineering program services.  In 2011, the park will commit between $50,000 and $70,000 in franchise fees to these services. 

10. How much money is generated by these guide service franchise fees and why are they not used exclusively to pay for upper mountain projects and the climbing program?

Mount Rainier National Park receives approximately $350,000 annually from the combined franchise fees of the three mountaineering concessioners.  Franchise fees from all park concessioners (there are 5, total) are pooled and prioritized by park management for use on concession-related needs. 

Franchise fees augmented Line Item Construction funding and helped to support the recently completed structural rehabilitation of the historic Paradise Inn, and construction of the new Jackson Memorial Visitor Center.  Franchise fees have also been used for projects such as the new roof and painting of the National Park Inn and Paradise Inn electrical upgrades.

Since 2008, franchise fees have funded a climbing ranger to monitor the climbing concessions on the upper mountain.  Franchise fees were also used for a major renovation of the Camp Muir Public Shelter.   $54,000 in franchise fees are programmed to support the climbing program in 2011.  The park will use franchise fees to complete the Camp Muir Development Concept Plan and then to implement the plan, including the replacement of toilets and other facilities at Camp Muir. The renovation of Camp Muir could include a new public shelter and/or guide-client building, as well as general rock wall and soil stabilization. Over a million dollars in franchise fees would be needed to complete all of these Camp Muir-related projects.

11. Shouldn’t guide services pay more because they impact the resources more?

It is true that guide services usually have larger groups than most independent climbers, but in reality these groups do not impact the resources more than independent climbing parties.  In fact, the guides and their clients are very closely monitored by climbing rangers and have requirements outlined in their concession contracts to reduce impacts.  Monitoring forms are completed by climbing rangers and reviewed by the NPS Concession Manager.  Guides are required to have training in “Leave No Trace” alpine skills and to educate their clients in these practices.  This has proven effective in minimizing guided climbing related impacts on the mountain…the guides do a good job taking care of the mountain.  Climbing rangers interact regularly with guides to provide feedback and maximize resource protection.

When all is taken into account, guided climbers and independent climbers seem to impact the alpine resources about equally and take roughly about the same overall amount of climbing staff time and resources

12. Do climbing Cost Recovery Fees pay for search and rescue missions?

Climbing Cost Recovery Fees do not pay for search and rescue (SAR) missions.  SAR incidents that exceed $500 in costs are paid for by a separate, non-park NPS fund. Because most SAR responses quickly exceed the $500 cost threshold, most Mount Rainier SARs are paid for with this fund source.   

Cost Recovery funding plays an essential role in SAR readiness at Mount Rainier by making it possible for the park to have teams of rescue-ready climbing rangers on duty, trained, equipped and available for response to emergencies throughout the course of the climbing season. More importantly, climbing rangers focus much of their energy toward educating and assisting climbers with the goal of preventing SARs, emergencies and tragedies from occurring at all.

13. How was the original fee created?

In 1995, park managers analyzed and determined the basic components of the climbing program.  This included the climbing rangers and other staff necessary to provide information and education services, public safety, resource protection, human waste management, and program administration.  The cost of providing a functional mountaineering program was estimated at approximately $100,000.  That cost was divided by the number of independent climbers registered that season (6,600) resulting in an approximate cost of $15 per climber for a single climb or $25 for an annual climbing pass.  Beginning in 2001, all guide service clients were also required to pay the same Cost Recovery Fee.  In 2003, the climbing Cost Recovery Fee was raised to $30 per climber for an annual climbing pass as inflation and other factors created need for additional program funding.  The single-trip climbing fee was also eliminated.

14. What is the proposed cost of next year’s annual climbing pass?

Between $43 and $58…an increase of $13-18 over the current cost.

In much the same way the original fee was determined by park managers, this fee increase proposal relies on the estimated cost of running the climbing ranger program, divided by the number of climbers expected to register.  The proposed budget to run the climbing program for 2011 is between $512,000 and $660,000.  Looking at current trends, the expectation is approximately 9,650 passes will be sold in 2011.  Dividing the overall cost of the program by the number of passes sold results in a pass cost of $51 to $67. The park intends to increase the amount of franchise fees supporting the program in 2011, lowering the cost per pass to between $43 and $58 per climber per year.

15. When will there be another cost increase?

A  proposed climbing Cost Recovery Fee in the range of $43 would support a climbing program that provides the essential visitor and resource protection services, while mitigating risks to park employees living and operating in a high-risk environment.  A higher climbing permit fee, up to $58, would support additional and improved services.  Fees  would be adjusted beyond 2011 to reflect changes in the consumer price index (CPI), or other methodology, and would be intended to sustain service levels over time.

Changes to the climbing program as a result of changing climatic conditions, demographics, major swings in the popularity of climbing or other effects could occur, however, the proposed fee structure is expected to sustain the program and services into the next decade.

16. How efficient is the Mount Rainier Climbing Program at managing costs and spending the Cost Recovery Fees?

The climbing program has always taken a conservative approach to spending.   That said, the park offers good value for the cost of a climbing permit.  The estimated program cost per climber compares well with those of other NPS park units with substantive climber use, recognizing that costs and other program factors vary widely from park to park and a direct comparison is not possible.  The current climbing program averages out to about $40 per climber (including the $30 climbing fee) and the proposed essential program averages out to about $58 per climber (including a $43 climbing fee).

 

17. Is the park going to charge climbers for crevasse rescue practice on a glacier? 

No.  The park has not required climbers to register and pay the Cost Recovery Fee for practicing crevasse rescue techniques on the lower Nisqually Glacier. 

18. What other user fees are charged to the general public at Mount Rainier besides the climbing Cost Recovery Fee?

There are user fees charged for several other activities including: 

• spreading of ashes                           $ 25
• weddings                                         $ 60
• frontcountry camping                        $ 12-$64
• backcountry camping reservations    $ 20
• sporting events                                  varies 
• commercial filming                           $100 and up

Cost Recovery Fees are charged above and beyond entrance fees for those activities consistently requiring the time and/or services of park personnel that the average visitor does not require.

19. Why are backcountry campers not charged a fee?

Overnight backcountry campers are not currently charged a fee other than a reservation fee if they choose to make a reservation.  The Park's intention is to institute a user fee for permits for this activity, and has worked toward this goal for a number of years.  This fee would help cover operational costs to manage the park's extensive Wilderness use by overnight campers including maintenance and repair of human waste collection facilities, maintenance of trails and backcountry camps, shelters and trails, management of the wilderness permit system, wilderness patrols to protect public safety and protect park resources, and education of the public on Leave No Trace principles and protecting Wilderness values.  These costs are currently covered by park entrance fees, park base funding allocated by Congress, and a number of special project fund sources.  Progress toward initiating a Wilderness Permit fee has been delayed in the past due to attempts to coordinate fee structures between Mount Rainier, North Cascades, and Olympic National Parks, and other priorities, such as flood responses, major construction and planning projects that have dominated staff time.

20. Why isn’t there just one fee that pays for climbing on all of the Northwest’s high peaks?

At this point, the Mount Rainier climbing program is the most complex and costly of the Northwest peaks.  This is due to several factors including the sheer number of climber days, the international appeal, the extensive glaciation, the height and difficulty of the mountain, the risk factors, the complexity and number of incidents, the high level of resource protection (e.g. removal of all human waste from the upper mountain) that is necessary to protect the mountain and the quality of the climbing experience. Mount Rainier could join with the managing agencies of the other Northwest peaks, but the cost of such a pass would have to include the full cost of a Mount Rainier pass, in addition to the costs of other passes.  This does not seem beneficial to climbers not planning a climb of Mount Rainier. 

21. Will an increase in fee result in an increase in non-compliance of payment?

Non-compliance with the climbing Cost Recovery Fee is not currently a problem and the rate of non-compliance did not increase following the last fee increase in 2003.   While there will always be occurrences of non-compliance with any requirement, this level is expected to remain negligible.  Overall, the climbing Cost Recovery Fee seems to be a non-issue with the great majority of climbers, as virtually no complaints about the fee have been received since it was instituted.  The fee is used for programs and services that directly benefit climbers, the climbing experience and the upper mountain.     

22. Can the fee increase be reduced by reducing services?

Each of the services provided by the Climbing Program has been studied for possible reduction or removal.  Each service currently provided is either consistently requested by climbers, focused on public safety, and necessary to manage public use, human waste and otherwise protect the climbing experience and the upper mountain environment.  Additionally, safety risks faced by park employees and volunteers on the mountain dictate the staffing, training, operational and supervision standards that must be met.  All of these services, functions, programs and requirements have associated costs. 

  

Route, weather and avalanche conditions are the most requested items at high camps.  Due to the unique nature of Mount Rainier’s climbing environment, climbing rangers cannot simply repeat general weather reports or condition updates to climbers, but must use their training, experience and knowledge to interpret the available information and formulate reasoned advice or counsel for climbers for each situation.

23. Why do experienced climbers, familiar with the mountain and the park’s rules and environmental polices,  need to register and pay?

There are several reasons why climbers are required to register for permits:  There are limits established in the park’s Wilderness Management Plan for the number of overnight users in each zone of the park,  including the upper mountain.  Carrying capacities protect resources and the quality of the visitor’s experience. This is the reason EVERY person backcountry camping within the park (backpacker or climber) must register for their overnight trip.

Experienced or not, most everyone uses the toilet facilities at high camps and/or the blue bag system on the upper mountain.  Park and agency plans and policy dictate that all human waste will be removed from the upper mountain.  There is a significant cost to this program, and the Cost Recovery Fee pays for it.

Accidents and medical problems happen to even the most experienced climbers.  While rescue costs are not paid out of the Cost Recovery Fees, staffing the mountain with teams of rescue-ready climbing rangers, trained and available for emergencies is.  While a climber might be OK saying, “I don’t want anyone to come help if I am hurt”, their family and friends see it differently.  The park has a duty to act when a visitor is injured or sick.

24. Could there be graduated fees so that climbers pay for only the services they use? Or perhaps pay less for climbing more remote routes with fewer services?

Such a fee schedule adds a good deal of complexity to an otherwise easy-to-understand fee structure.  Many of the comments received during the 2002 fee proposal public meetings emphasized the desire to have a simple fee structure.  The park’s response to this recommendation was to implement the flat fee for an annual pass that is now in place.

Additionally, climbing ranger services for the most experienced climbers are not considerably different from those provided to a novice (see previous question).

25. Are services afforded climbers really more expensive than services afforded the average park visitor?

Yes.  The following are some of the climber services not provided to average park visitors:

• maintaining specialized high-altitude toilets daily and flying human waste from high camps
• providing and disposing of blue bags
• staffing remote high camps with knowledgeable and skilled rangers to assist climbers and respond to incidents
• providing an emergency medical services capability on the upper mountain
• supplying high camps with emergency and communications gear
• conducting summit patrols to assess route conditions, monitor use  and  resource impacts
• provide timely information to climbers at high camps, ranger stations and on the blog
• registering every climber, providing safety, weather, route planning  and orientation information

26. Other Cascade peaks have either a small climbing program or no climbing programs at all.  Why does Mount Rainier National Park need to have fully staffed (and more costly) climbing program?

Mount Rainier is the tallest, most massive and most glaciated peak in the Cascades.  The number of climber days annually for summit climbers is more than twice that of any other large Cascade peak.  On average, climbs of Mount Rainier take three days. With over 10,000 climbers per year on the mountain, that represents about 30,000 visitor use days.  That’s a lot of users and use on the upper mountain, concentrated largely over a three month period, in an alpine environment that is readily impacted and degraded.

This use is managed - through use limits, regulations, permit requirements, information, education, on-site staffing of the high camps, maintenance of toilet facilities and the blue bag system - to protect the environment and the world-class qualities of the Mount Rainier climbing experience.  The climbing routes and camps are clean, and a high quality visitor experience persists, because use is deliberately managed. This management, in turn, requires a combination of skilled and experienced staff and volunteers before, during and after the primary climbing season. 

Moreover, because the NPS has exclusive jurisdiction over Mount Rainier National Park it cannot delegate its management responsibilities (including search and rescue) to another entity. 

Over 100,000 people have attempted summit climbs of Mt. Rainier in the last 10 years!

27. Can paid climbing rangers be replaced with volunteers?

Never entirely.  Mount Rainier relies heavily on volunteers to operate the park and incorporates 3-6 volunteers in its climbing program each year.  Volunteer contributions to the climbing program are invaluable. 

However, experience has taught – in the hardest way possible at Mount Rainier – that  volunteers must also work alongside and be led by a staff of professional, paid climbing rangers with the  specialized skills, knowledge and experience needed in the high risk environment of the upper mountain.

Volunteers are generally a short-term resource with high turnover. Volunteering for some is an avenue to developing the experience needed to compete for a paid position.  To retain rangers with the skills, training, knowledge and experience needed at Mount Rainier – and to keep good people coming back - they must be paid. 

28. What skills are required of Mount Rainier climbing rangers?

Here’s a listing of climbing ranger knowledge, skills and abilities:

• Climbing/Mountaineering Skills  
• Rope Rescue
• Aviation
• Emergency Medical Technician-B
• Avalanche Forecasting
• Fee Collection
• Resource Management/Leave No Trace Best Practices
• Human Waste Management
• Risk Management
• Incident Management
• Mountain Weather Forecasting
• Excellent interpersonal and communications skills
• Ranger Station Operations

Certifications and continuing education are required in several of these areas.