![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In honor of the snowpocalypse, I listened to a podcast series, "Trapped on Mount Hood," which was so interesting that I read the book it was based on the same day. That was a mistake. (Because the book was bad, not because Iw as traumatized by snow.)
I had not previously heard of the Mount Hood incidents, which was one of the worst alpine disasters in US history. A group of students were taken hiking up Mount Hood students from a private high school is part of a mandatory wilderness program, got caught in a storm, and seven of them died. Two adults also died. I find this particularly awful because it was mandatory for the students, but the disaster happened because the teacher leading them made a series of absolutely terrible decisions.
There was a storm coming, which he knew about, but did not factor into his decision-making. They started too late to avoid at, continued hiking under poor weather conditions, were poorly equipped for getting caught in a storm, ends didn't turn back until long after it would have been prudent to do so. They had to dig into a cave, which wasn't big enough for all of them so they kept having to rotate who was inside and who was outside. Conditions got so bad that a hired guide finally decided to leave and go for help in a blizzard, and took the only student who was willing or strong enough to go with them. They made it out, but got so lost in the blizzard that they had a hard time figuring out where the cave was. Meanwhile the cave got completely buried in snow. By the time the cave was found, several days later only two of the people inside survived.
The behavior of the teacher leading them is a bit mysterious. The author of the book says that he made such bad decisions that he must have been hypothermic. However, the decision to start the hike late when he knew there was a storm coming happened before the hike began, so he couldn't have been hypothermic then. There's also the matter of not taking equipment that should have been taken under the circumstances – also a decision made long before the hike began. However, he previously did not have a pattern of doing reckless things, so it's not really clear why this particular height was different. In previous hikes, they turned back without reaching the summit two out of every three times.
Code 1244 is an incredibly frustrating book. The author interviewed literally everyone who would agree to talk to him who was involved in the incident, and he did get to speak to most of the people who were and who are willing to talk at all. (One of the main people involved, the girl who survived the case she hiked out, has never publicly spoken about it at all.) He had an incredible amount of access so you would think he could have used that to write an interesting book. He did not. It's emblematic that I still don't know what a code 1244 is.
I wishvhe had done an oral history of the event, because I bet that would have been fascinating. What he instead did, as far as I can tell, was to write down every single factual detail that everybody told him, but put in his own words rather than theirs. His own style is extremely dry. He occasionally mentions what people felt or thought, but not all that much. So it's a recital of incredibly minute details. This book has more citations than I think anything I have ever read. About every third sentence is footnoted. I applaud his integrity but it also means that about one third of the book consists of citations.
There are so many details that the overall story often gets lost. It was much harder to follow what was going on in his book then it was in the podcast. I got the book because I was curious to learn more details then the podcasts gave, but when I finished his book, I felt that I knew less, not more. In particular, it was very hard to tell what was going on with the rescue operation and whether or not it was mismanaged, and whether that made a difference. The author obviously felt that one person in particular was to blame for the cave not getting found sooner, but I'm not sure if that was correct.
Based on the podcast, it sounds like he thought that guy was responsible for the guide who hiked out not having been taken up in a helicopter soon enough to search. But in his book, I couldn't tell whether that was a problem or not, or who had made that decision. One thing I really wondered about was why no one ever asked the girl who had hiked out with the guide to go up in a helicopter and see if she could recognize something. It seems to me that two people following the same route might notice or remember different things, so why not ask her if they were going to ask him? This never comes up in either the podcast or the when they finally did let the guide search, it's possibly important because he led the helicopter to the wrong spot five times before he did finally get locate the right spot on his sixth a try. So there was a lot of time wasted searching in the wrong areas, even after he got involved.
It's a very sad story, and also a very interesting one if you're interested in survival and wilderness rescue. If you are, listen to the podcast.
Against the Odds podcast.
I had not previously heard of the Mount Hood incidents, which was one of the worst alpine disasters in US history. A group of students were taken hiking up Mount Hood students from a private high school is part of a mandatory wilderness program, got caught in a storm, and seven of them died. Two adults also died. I find this particularly awful because it was mandatory for the students, but the disaster happened because the teacher leading them made a series of absolutely terrible decisions.
There was a storm coming, which he knew about, but did not factor into his decision-making. They started too late to avoid at, continued hiking under poor weather conditions, were poorly equipped for getting caught in a storm, ends didn't turn back until long after it would have been prudent to do so. They had to dig into a cave, which wasn't big enough for all of them so they kept having to rotate who was inside and who was outside. Conditions got so bad that a hired guide finally decided to leave and go for help in a blizzard, and took the only student who was willing or strong enough to go with them. They made it out, but got so lost in the blizzard that they had a hard time figuring out where the cave was. Meanwhile the cave got completely buried in snow. By the time the cave was found, several days later only two of the people inside survived.
The behavior of the teacher leading them is a bit mysterious. The author of the book says that he made such bad decisions that he must have been hypothermic. However, the decision to start the hike late when he knew there was a storm coming happened before the hike began, so he couldn't have been hypothermic then. There's also the matter of not taking equipment that should have been taken under the circumstances – also a decision made long before the hike began. However, he previously did not have a pattern of doing reckless things, so it's not really clear why this particular height was different. In previous hikes, they turned back without reaching the summit two out of every three times.
Code 1244 is an incredibly frustrating book. The author interviewed literally everyone who would agree to talk to him who was involved in the incident, and he did get to speak to most of the people who were and who are willing to talk at all. (One of the main people involved, the girl who survived the case she hiked out, has never publicly spoken about it at all.) He had an incredible amount of access so you would think he could have used that to write an interesting book. He did not. It's emblematic that I still don't know what a code 1244 is.
I wishvhe had done an oral history of the event, because I bet that would have been fascinating. What he instead did, as far as I can tell, was to write down every single factual detail that everybody told him, but put in his own words rather than theirs. His own style is extremely dry. He occasionally mentions what people felt or thought, but not all that much. So it's a recital of incredibly minute details. This book has more citations than I think anything I have ever read. About every third sentence is footnoted. I applaud his integrity but it also means that about one third of the book consists of citations.
There are so many details that the overall story often gets lost. It was much harder to follow what was going on in his book then it was in the podcast. I got the book because I was curious to learn more details then the podcasts gave, but when I finished his book, I felt that I knew less, not more. In particular, it was very hard to tell what was going on with the rescue operation and whether or not it was mismanaged, and whether that made a difference. The author obviously felt that one person in particular was to blame for the cave not getting found sooner, but I'm not sure if that was correct.
Based on the podcast, it sounds like he thought that guy was responsible for the guide who hiked out not having been taken up in a helicopter soon enough to search. But in his book, I couldn't tell whether that was a problem or not, or who had made that decision. One thing I really wondered about was why no one ever asked the girl who had hiked out with the guide to go up in a helicopter and see if she could recognize something. It seems to me that two people following the same route might notice or remember different things, so why not ask her if they were going to ask him? This never comes up in either the podcast or the when they finally did let the guide search, it's possibly important because he led the helicopter to the wrong spot five times before he did finally get locate the right spot on his sixth a try. So there was a lot of time wasted searching in the wrong areas, even after he got involved.
It's a very sad story, and also a very interesting one if you're interested in survival and wilderness rescue. If you are, listen to the podcast.
Against the Odds podcast.
