You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Says that they are being exploited, obviously they can't give consent and choose to do a job... seeing as they are poor and ill educated....
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/23/climbing-everest-peak-hubris-sherpas-tragedy
Thoughts? She might have had some valid points about the ridiculous amounts of tourism but the use of "hubris" and general "I know whats good for the locals" irritated me.
Spelling aside, this;
It must be so satisfying to own the only piece of IT equipment on the planet that was made without any ethically dodgy sourced materials that allows you to submit and publish such a piece without the slightest worry of hypocracy. George Monbiot would give his left nut for a go on it!
Says that they are being exploited, obviously they can't give consent and choose to do a job
"Exploited" isn't the same as "forced". But then you knew that I'm sure.
I had a skim. Seemed like ill-informed guff.
This is worth reading if you're interested in the issues:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/04/everest-sherpas-death-and-anger.html
"Exploited" isn't the same as "forced". But then you knew that I'm sure.
Yeah "Exploited" would mean they were paid shite wages in comparison to the local cost of living.....
Exploited can mean a lot of things, not necessarily shit wages.
My economist wife from a third world country disagrees. In fact, she found the article racist.
Last I heard (on the radio the other day when this happened), the Sherpas had said "stuff it, then" and said they weren't going to go back without getting paid a fairer cut of the proceeds.
Interesting one though, this. The disaster was an avalanche, you can't really attribute it to the tourists I don't think (beyond the fact that they wouldn't have been up there caught in it in the first place, anyway). But Everest is still a very, very dangerous place even with an army of Sherpas wet-nursing you up there and it's a mistake to be selling it as a winter Disneyland. Guess if you want to lay blame anywhere it should probably be in the people promoting it as a $100,000 tourist excursion and shoving the Sherpas a couple of grand to do all the donkey work.
She might disagree but it doesn't mean that she is correct in her definition of the word "exploited".
BTW I have no idea whether or not sherpas are exploited, nor do I know whether the author is racist. But I'm happy to accept that the author is racist and hasn't got a clue what she's talking about. If you reckon so.
Can't people just look at the mountain instead of trying to climb it? 🙄
Can't people just look at the mountain instead of trying to climb it?
Or ride it on a bike........what's that about ffs ?
Ernie, Cougar, Tom, have a read of the one linked to. Long article with a lot of detail about the risks, rewards, sacrifices of Western clients and sherpas alike. Much less inflammatory language, too.
Okay yes, the Sherpas could be exploited in soft terms but in terms of pay they aren't or at least weren't....now the Sherpas definition of high risk seems to have changed, then it could be argued that they are being financially exploited if they are leveraged into working without a pay rise.
I will give the other link a read.
The disaster was an avalanche, you can't really attribute it to the tourists I don't think (beyond the fact that they wouldn't have been up there caught in it in the first place, anyway).
In 1996, for example, I made four round trips through the Khumbu Icefall: three circuits as I progressively acclimatized to twenty-four thousand feet during the month of April, and a final round trip on my journey to the 29,035-foot summit and back. I was terrified each of the eight times I moved through the frozen chaos, which usually took more than three hours to ascend, even with my nearly empty backpack, and slightly less than an hour to descend. In contrast, each of the Sherpas supporting my team’s ascent was required to make something like thirty trips through the Icefall, often while carrying eighty-pound loads of food, propane, and bottled oxygen.These days, moreover, members are apt to spend even less time in the Icefall than I did when I was on Everest, eighteen years ago. It’s becoming increasingly common for Western guides and members to acclimatize in hypobaric chambers before they arrive in Nepal, or on other, less hazardous Himalayan peaks in advance of their summit assaults, greatly reducing the number of times they must expose themselves to the perils of the Icefall. Some members now make only a single round trip through it, while each of the Sherpas supporting them must still pass through that hazardous terrain between two and three dozen times. Most Western climbers feel more than a little guilty about this, but I know of none who have ever offered to take an extra lap through the Icefall with a heavy load in order to reduce a Sherpa’s exposure.
What could be done to change that? Obviously, if the risk to the sherpas lives can be reasonably mitigated but isn't then thats grounds for accusation....
ernie_lynch - MemberCan't people just look at the mountain instead of trying to climb it?
Or ride it on a bike........what's that about ffs ?
You can ride a bike or jump off the cliff but why people want to travel that far to climb the mountain? Climb Ben Nevis instead ... 🙄
A risky job for the local there to carry stuff for the tourists but it's either that or be skint. They really cannot blame others for the risky job they are doing. Exploited? I am not so sure. When money is to exchange hands then there is usually the notion of offer and accept so bad bargain?
What a waste of web space.
She has no idea. Quite possibly the most pointless and ill informed piece of crap I have read for ages.
How about a chat with Liz Hawley instead.
I read the nice lady's article as being more of a critique of the numpties who attempt Everest while being under-experienced and prepared relying on the Sherpa community to get them out of a hole. That would be a good definition of exploitation. Mountaineering requires the mountaineer to be self-reliant and accepting of his/her limitations, going into the death zone. Being reliant on the Sherpas is definitely exploitation then grizzling because your $100k doesn't guarantee the natives will fall into line for 5% of your personal outlay is hubris.
They should ban people climbing that mountain. 🙄
I read the nice lady's article as being more of a critique of the numpties who attempt Everest while being under-experienced and prepared relying on the Sherpa community to get them out of a hole. That would be a good definition of exploitation. Mountaineering requires the mountaineer to be self-reliant and accepting of his/her limitations, going into the death zone. Being reliant on the Sherpas is definitely exploitation then grizzling because your $100k doesn't guarantee the natives will fall into line for 5% of your personal outlay is hubris.
I guess you have a point, not that I entirely agree with it. Do you not think, considering the position of power Sherpas hold, that they are in a position to demand certain rights and pay?
All she needs is a dangly bit protruding from between her eyes and she'd look like one of those fish that feed in the darkest depths of the oceans.
Not sure you have to resort to that, the bit I find irritating is the white middle class thing and the article in general. It struck me that she thought the Sherpas can't look out for their own interests. Her looks are unimportant.
In fact, I think that's a bit harsh to be fair mate - you never know, you might be involved in a firey car crash and end up looking like Nicky Lauda. Then who'll be laughing (me, probably).
Why does she assume all the rich people who pay for climbs are white?
I can't see where she's done that.
Are you assuming that she's assuming all the rich people who pay for climbs are white? 🙂
She has a point though, they are being exploited, the Everest circus must change drastically as it is not sustainable, the tensions within the Sherpa community have been simmering for the last few years. Some pretty fundamental changes are needed.
I agree with Sandwich. The rot set in when rich people could buy their way onto guided expeditions. It would be wrong to assume though that they are all inexperienced beginners, that simply isn't true. But there are too many of them and several of the major peaks are now seriously overcrowded.
chewkw presumably has no idea what motivates people to climb mountains.
slowoldman - Memberchewkw presumably has no idea what motivates people to climb mountains.
Yes, absolutely no idea why they are motivated to climb others' mountain ... 😯 Really.
What constitutes "others' mountains"?
[u]Middle class white lady[/u]
I didn't even bother reading the article, I dismissed it out of hand due to it being written by a middle class, white (and worst of all) lady.
Personally I think the article isn't that unreasonable, and whatever you might think about the broad thrust of the article, the bottom few paragraphs where she mentions clients getting upset at sherpas leaving because they've paid and people walking past the dying certainly are valid points (IIRC we've had a whole thread on the latter point before). However in those last paragraphs is actually her biggest misconception "it is impossible to imagine this kind of death rate being tolerated if the dead were rich and white" - well actually in the previous worst tragedy on Everest most of those killed were (relatively) rich and white, and certainly plenty of those do die up there.
slowoldman - MemberWhat constitutes "others' mountains"?
Mountains not in UK.
Just don't go arguing about human rights this and that for not being allowed to climb there etc.
Stay home climb Ben Nevis.
Why UK? Why not limit me to England or Yorkshire?
OH and to the guy that suggests we give lip service to Liz Hawley another white middle class lady, who has taken it upon herself to chronicle the exploits of the ****less( or keep score of the summiters if you will) she doesn't climb and has never set foot on Everest.
Liz Hawley may not be a climber but she knows her subject.
What subject? The Everest circus
No, climbing in the Himalaya.
Ernie, Cougar, Tom, have a read of the one linked to
Good read, that. Thanks for posting.
irrelevant, have you been to Everest?
slowoldman - MemberWhy UK? Why not limit me to England or Yorkshire?
There you go you starting to argue about human rights now aren't you? 😆
The Sherpas united will never be defeated.
the Sherpas could be exploited in soft terms
An exploitation but done in a really comfy chair, perhaps?
fergal - Member
irrelevant, have you been to Everest?
Yes! Did the trek to base camp 10 years ago,however you get the best views of Everest from miles away.As you lie in Base camp with a headache you hear that icefall groaning and threatening you,sod going anywhere near that. It gets roped every year as it eats the old ones and all the ladders and any thing else man made every winter. Liz Hawley is an elderly lady who lives in Kathmandu and is probably the foremost living authority on Everest expeditions.
Tom_W1987 blah blah blah massive sense of humour failure, hypocritical holier than thou attitude blah blah blah
Not sure you had to resort to that. My looks are unimportant.
In fact, I think that's a bit harsh to be fair mate - you never know, you might be involved in a firey car crash and end up looking like Nicky Lauda.
She seems a bit mixed up between a number of issues, firstly what motivates people to climb mountains, secondly what the morality of putting their ambitions ahead of (possibly symbolic) attempts to help others is, and thirdly what is the role of the sherpas. In amongst all that lot, it's hard to work out her actual point.
From my point of view, as a middle aged desk jockey, who once climbed (small) mountains and made it after a struggle to Everest base camp, I can say that making an ascent would be the most fantastic thing, and way beyond my physical capabilities, whether supported by Sherpas, breathing oxygen, dosed with steroids or not, so the accusation of “playboys” etc seems just ignorant. Whether that amounts to exploiting Sherpas or not I’m not sure – on the one hand, everybody pays others to do something dangerous that they don’t want to do. On the other, the Sherpas do seem to get a rather small piece of the pie.
[i] the death rate for climbing Sherpas on Everest from 2004 until now was twelve times higher than the death rate for U.S. military personnel deployed in Iraq from 2003-07. [/i]
This is mentioned in both articles, and seems to be a completely misleading use of statistics.
chewkw - Member
There you go you starting to argue about human rights now aren't you?
Er no. I'd just like you to clarify where I should be able to climb - or where anyone should be able to pursue any of their interests for that matter.
Reactionary journalism but still I think she makes some fair points. But Ned (i think) thanks for the NYT link, that is a better account IMO. Not surprising given the author.
Everest has long divorced itself from what mountaineering means to me. Shame as it's a sacred place too.
Only thing I'm interested in (Sherpas well being appart) is, are they going to clean up all the coke cans/rubbish from Base Camp?
It seems to me to be just another "bucket list" entry in a long list of Disneyesque tourist tat.
Same happened in sailing, Global events in "You could be a hero if you got off the office seat for a few minuites" I've seen and taken so many office wallers on sailing/racing events that I stopped doing it 7 years ago. The folks who come on board are ignorant, want everything laid on/out for them almost to the point of washing up after them. I guess, could be wrong (probably not) that Everest Climbing attracts the same type of people. Hugely boring Ill mannered and lacking any ethical (environmental or human) consideration.
Nothing worse than an "I've climbed Everest" bore.
If it wasn't for the Sherpas earning a living from it I'd say stop the tat trail.
duckman I know where Everest is, i have been through the icefall so can empathise with the sherpas and the difficult job they have to do. The whole Everest experience has become a farce, the antithesis of what real mountaineering is about, not helped by an ill informed public believing that wealthy adventure tourists peak bagging by any means is the ultimate in climbing adventure.
Tanya Gold doesn't have any particular track-record of writing balanced, thoroughly informed and interesting opinion pieces. She just writes opinion pieces and waits for Julie Burchill to retire.
The whole Everest experience has become a farce, the antithesis of what real mountaineering is about, not helped by an ill informed public believing that wealthy adventure tourists peak bagging by any means is the ultimate in climbing adventure.
But it was obviously totally different when you went, natch.... 😉
Only thing I'm interested in (Sherpas well being appart) is, are they going to clean up all the coke cans/rubbish from Base Camp?
IIRC,there was a levy added to all permits from 2008.
Some more explanation of those mortality statistics:
Annual Fatality Rates by Profession
(Deaths per 100,000 full-time equivalents)•Miners (2000-2010): 25
•Commercial Fisherman (2000-2010): 124
•Alaskan Bush Pilots (1990-2009): 287
•U.S. military in Iraq (2003-2007): 335
•Everest Sherpas (2000-2010): 1,332
•Everest Sherpas (2004-2014): 4,053
The reason for the discrepancy is simple. From 2000 to 2010, only seven ethnic Sherpas died on the mountain. Since then, 21 Sherpas have perished, including the 16 who died in the avalanche yesterday.Number of Sherpas Killed on Everest By Year
•2014: 17
•2013: 4
•2012: 3
•2011: 0
•2010: 0
•2009: 1
•2008: 0
•2007: 1
•2006: 4
•2005: 0
•2004: 0
•2003: 0
•2002: 0
•2001: 1
•2000: 0
This year is not just the mountain’s worst tragedy. It caps the worst three-year period in Everest history
Interesting statistics, but shows the danger of looking at small samples.
Another thing to consider - what is the impact of the money brought in by the Sherpas on the health of the local population? Maybe (and it's pure speculation on my part) the deaths on the mountain are outweighed by reduced infant mortality, or deaths from treatable illnesses, or whatever.
I'm not saying it's good or bad - just something to consider when making an analysis.
Mountains are dangerous places.
The 1999 Galtur avalanche in Austria killed 31. None of them climbers or guides. Just skiers minding their own business in the village.
There were 8 deaths attributed to avalanches in Scotland in the winter of 2012/13.