[url= http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68020 ]Crazy stuff[/url]
Steck/Griffiths/Moro were attacked by 100 sherpas and had to get off Everest in fear of their lives.
Wonder if this might signal breaking point between sherpas and the sheer volume of climbers tackling the mountain these days.
That story has all the familiar aspects of a STW rant. I'd like to see the tale told from the Sherpa viewpoint.
Don't fek with a Sherpa, especially whilst up a mountain.
Why eve climb the bloody thing? ****ing show offs why don't they do something useful like be a nurse or somefink?
Disturbing story.
MrNutt - what a weird comment?
I haven't even read the story prior to posting a derogatory and ill informed statement of objectionable opinion, do you mean to say I've done something wrong?
No amount of talking would calm the [s]lead Sherpa[/s] Molgrips down and as a final act of defiance he ordered his whole team of 17 Sherpas [s]off the Lhotse Face and back to Camp 2[/s] to overtake on a blind bend.
"We [u]were on STW and[/u] were told [u]by TJ[/u] to put on our helmets, pack our bags, and run."
The climbers believe that the [s]lead Sherpa[/s] Smurfmatt was tired and cold and felt that his pride had been damaged as the three [s]climbers[/s] drivers were moving[s] unroped and[/s] much faster to the side of him
Why eve climb the bloody thing? **** show offs why don't they do something useful like be a nurse or somefink?
Ueli Steck is a pretty inspirational person mrnutt. He has (and still is) continually pushed mountaineering forwards, challenging what has previously been thought of as not possible. Given your strong views, can I ask what is it you do for humanity (although I suspect you may have been joking) 🙂
Yet another reason not be bother with climbing Everest. Much better challenges out there unless you are just interested in bragging rights (not talking about Steck here BTW).
Not wrong necessarily just strange - and stranger still now that you have elaborated. But as peterfile said, I may have missed the joke.
clearly the Sherpa's didn't find him very inspiring now did they peterfile, now DID THEY!?!?
yeah, really inspiring, I wonder how people would feel if this happened on a building site down the road from where you live:
three young lads on a holiday
told by local engineers not to play on the dangerous building site that the engineers are actively working on
the three lads then decide to go and play "along side" the building site, despite warnings from the builders
Then the three lads decide to cross the building site that they had been told not to play on, because they know better
The three lads then "accidentally" kicked some debris down on the local engineers whilst shouting "natural hazard", some of it lands on the local engineers
The local builders then chased the visiting troublemakers away, the holidaymakers get a ride in a helicopter.
yeah, very inspiring, who's paying for all this??
...ermmmmm......
What about Andy and Frank, are they OK?
MrNutt, have you been writing 90% of the comments on the DM's page?
I'm for [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ueli_Steck ]Wooly Stick[/url]!
For some reason I read this as 100 Lamas attacked them. 😆
For some reason I read this as 100 Lamas attacked them
I've been attacked by a llama. A horde of angry sherpas is nothing in comparison.
I think the climbers had a bit of an altitude problem.
220 climbers can't be wrong. Or can they?
Real climbers climb somewhere else these days.
This from the UKC thread:
Last year Ueli Steck said this in an interview...
"Going to Everest is a different game. It is not real mountaineering but I have to accept the rules. I often had to wait behind the rope-fixers but I would not pass them out of respect for their work".
Seems to me that the only thing that would get Sherpas really riled is someone disrespecting their work on the mountain - Steck apparently offered to help them fix rope after the rope-crossing incident, was turned down, but then did it anyway. Can't see that this would get him a friendly reception back in basecamp.
A view from the otehr side..
http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2013/04/30/that-everest-brawl-the-sherpas-view
The seeds of the discord were sown on Saturday. Arnette said it had been agreed at a prior meeting at Base Camp that no climbers would attempt to ascend the Lhotse Face to Camp Three on that day as the teams of Sherpas would be fixing ropes for all the climbers, needing concentration on a technical exercise.Simone Moro was not at the meeting and may have been unaware of the unwritten rule that the Sherpas be left to get on with their job unhindered by other climbers.
Arnette said other western climbers told Moro, Steck and Griffith they should not climb on Saturday, but the trio set out anyway.
What's the point of climbing the mountain? It's a mountain. FFS! You are suppose to jump off it without a chute ... then let the vulture enjoy a free meal.
Or do something else at your door step like try to free dive in to the deepest ocean without pressurise suit ...
The Sherpas are protecting their rice bowl knowing you rich western people coming ... they see you coming ...
Seems odd that x dozen Sherpas would simultaneously get pissed off at these guys for no reason. Would reckon the Sherpas have a radically different way of seeing it all.
BigJohn - 😀
"Arnette said other western climbers told Moro, Steck and Griffith they should not climb on Saturday, but the trio set out anyway."
Arroganc bit them then gave them a kicking
it had been agreed at a prior meeting at Base Camp that no climbers would attempt to ascend the Lhotse Face to Camp Three on that day as the teams of Sherpas would be fixing ropes for all the climbers, needing concentration on a technical exercise.
Simone Moro was not at the meeting and may have been unaware of the unwritten rule that the Sherpas be left to get on with their job unhindered by other climbers.
A meeting between those teams employing the services of the Sherpas and the Sherpas. That being all teams other than Steck/Moro/Griffiths presumably. I'm not really sure what such an agreement - which they hadn't agreed to - had to do with them, given they weren't employing the Sherpas, but had paid a permit to be on the mountain and wanted to get on with their acclimatisation according to their schedule. I've also yet to see anything contradicting the suggestion that they did leave the Sherpas alone to get on with their job - and indeed offered to help them with it (which I should imagine would more than make up for any inconvenience they might have caused).
I don't believe that really changes the story at all.
Colonialists ignore local rules, surprised by revolting natives.
Such was the history of Empire.
Looks like lesson not learned.
I'm impressed that anyone had the energy to fight at that altitude!
I doubt we'll ever know the truth of what happened here. We'll hear different accounts but the truth will be somewhere in the middle no doubt - possibly just a misunderstanding...
My experience of Sherpas was they were the most generous spirited people I've met (and yes I am aware I was providing them with an income...)
http://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2013/04/30/everest-2013-the-sherpas-viewpoint/
The more rational version of events
Fixing the route, especially in the ice fall and parts of lotse face, is very dangerous work but it pays. If they climbed past against instructions and this brought down debris, the workers would be livid. It's all their lives needlessly at risk.
The Sherpas I met in the khumbu are seriously impressive people. Tough, gregarious, adventurous, generous spirited and nails. The press story seems totally inaccurate. This has been my personal experience with journalists - liars and provocateurs for profit.
For all those defending the Sherpas as peaceful people who wouldn't hurt a fly, try reading http://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2013/04/29/everest-2013-a-time-for-patience/ where other incidents involving them are mentioned.
Nope - I don't believe that changes anything either, mikewsmith. At least the previous information we got was first hand - that lot is second hand at best. There's also an awful lot of economy of truth there - try reading these comments: http://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2013/04/30/everest-2013-the-sherpas-viewpoint/#comment-10673. The bit about Simone shouting and swearing makes no sense at all if he wasn't in some way provoked - maybe by a Sherpa abseiling down onto Ueli as reported previously, something which doesn't appear to have been contradicted by any other reports. Remember that Ueli was climbing unroped, so could easily have been killed if he'd been knocked off the face, a point which they haven't made a big deal of.
The telling bit for me though is this:
"All expedition leaders and Sherpa Sirdars were invited and attended a meeting in Everest base camp to discuss the rope fixing strategy for this season on Everest. At this meeting everyone had a chance to suggest the best strategy and route to safely climb the mountain. The meeting concluded with the nomination of fixing Sherpas (the best available) and the suitable dates to complete the work. It was also agreed at the meeting by all the expedition leaders that nobody would be climbing on the route on these dates except the fixing team. That while these young men were working to fix the route for all expeditions at base camp, no expedition would disrupt or create a distraction for them. Unfortunately, Simone Moro did not attend this meeting, and might not have been aware that this protocol is an unwritten rule on Everest."
There seems to be an implication that Simone should have attended the meeting - but why should he? The purpose of the meeting was nothing to do with him, so why waste his precious time? It appears to be an unwritten rule for the big commercial expeditions, but they weren't part of a big commercial expedition. Or is it the case that the big commercial expeditions and their employees think the mountain is theirs and that small groups of elite climbers should wait their turn?
In the end of the day, it's a big and dangerous place. Simone should probably have know that there would be rope fixing going on at that time of the year - it would be fairly obvious and at least found out what was going on. There seems to be a voluntary ban/abstinence from climbing when this is going on in some places.
Most of the news (as with most of it world wide) is from the viewpoint of the westerner, not much voice is given to the locals there. There is also no way that anyone (in true STW fashion) would be involved in that sort of altercation and speak ill of themselves. First hand reports can be just as biased as others. Sometimes a rational third person can see more clearly what has gone on.
Whatever happened fighting up there is ****ing stupid, then stoning the guys later. I imagine it's not a fun job but acting like that won't help them.
A bit more from Jon Griffith:
[url] http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68025 [/url]
Sometimes a rational third person can see more clearly what has gone on.
Trouble is, the only things anyone can see now are the accounts of those who were there.
Having read the Sherpa view-point & the Jon Griffith letter it seems that the truth is somewhere in-between & someone, possibly both sides, isnt quite telling the truth..
I get the impression that they are trying to suggest that the three guys were in the wrong for not doing exactly as the increasingly large guiding companies had dictated. Does that mean that if Sherpas are fixing ropes for [s]people[/s] clients who want to handrail/jumar all the way up and down, then anybody who has not paid to use the companies services isn't allowed on the mountain during the windows? The permit system would suggest otherwise.
As someone has mentioned, fixing rope on the Llotse Face is quite a dangerous few days of the season for the Sherpas. It's commonly requested and accepted among climbers that they be given time and space to do this. How this squares with three independent climbers ending up sharing a belay with the fixing team I don't know.
Loads doesn't add up, with some very widely differing statements - Simone Moro getting on the open radio channel and offering to 'fight' Sherpas, according to one non-Sherpa source. Bizarre.
Surprised to see this story on the front page of the Sun yesterday! Must have been a slow news day or one of their "journalists" came up with a pun too good to miss.
I saw that and thought that Moro would be a bit more savvy than to announce his desire for a swedge to all and sundry.
Edit, say there is a weather window, does that mean indy climbers have to sit back because a commercial company is fixing rope for "their" summit day?
As someone has mentioned, fixing rope on the Llotse Face is quite a dangerous few days of the season for the Sherpas. It's commonly requested and accepted among climbers that they be given time and space to do this. How this squares with three independent climbers ending up sharing a belay with the fixing team I don't know.
The thing is, Russell Brice let a climber (a paying client of his) summit at the same time as the rope fixing sherpas not long ago - the first ascent of the season.
I watched it on the Discovery channel, you even saw the client and his sherpa get tangled up in a mess with the rope fixers at 8,000m.
Seems it's one rule for the big commercial entities and another for the small guys.
You really do get the feeling that they consider it their mountain at times.
Edit, say there is a weather window, does that mean indy climbers have to sit back because a commercial company is fixing rope for "their" summit day?
I'd expect that rope-fixing would normally need some sort of weather window. Just seems to be convention that people hold fire for a few days while the face is rigged. You're right though, the interests of the commercial expeditions do come first, which isn't exactly spot-on with the ethics of mountaineering. But that seems to be the Everest way. If indy climbers are not happy with these conventions and timetables, there are plenty of other faces and challenges on other peaks.
Here's a summary of the way the big commercial trips view Everest, and what led to this from Jon Griffith, which also goes some way to explain why they were on the face when they "weren't supposed to be":
A very influential character (sorry no names right now) has asked the Ministry of Tourism to have written on every permit that climbers are not allowed to climb before the fixing team. If this happens it means the only way you can climb Everest is by climbing in a nice big track and on fixed lines with tons of people. It also means that any teams who want to climb something (in alpine style) apart from the Normal Route will not be able to acclimatise in advance before their ascent. It is insane, but it shows the attitude towards this mountain.
[img] 
[/img]
But that seems to be the Everest way. If indy climbers are not happy with these conventions and timetables, there are plenty of other faces and challenges on other peaks.
I'm still not quite clear what right the big commercial expeditions have to dictate terms to independent climbers who've also paid their permit to be on Everest. I mean you could equally say to the people going on the commercial trips that there are plenty of other mountains to climb.
the pro climbers view...tim emmet
"I'm pretty shocked by the Everest saga with Jon Griffith Ueli Steck and Simone Moro. Jon and Ueli are very good friends of mine and respectful people. Simone is considered to be one of, if not 'the' most experienced Himalayan climber in the world, he has visited Nepal 43 times, he is a helicopter pilot and offers free rescue flights to climbers on Everest and the surrounding mountains. Together they have more experience in the Alpine environment than anyone other team I have come across. Moving quickly and efficiently without disturbing others is an integral part of Alpine climbing, especially when climbing without ropes. A skilled climber can climb ice without knocking any down, most other can't. I totally support these guys and I strongly believe that they were courteous to the Sherpas while climbing near by. Just the fact that they were there, climbing solo, next to the Sherpas who were using and fixing ropes, triggered this outrageous reaction.
In the past, I have heard a few stories of wealthy westerns who have invested large sums of money in hope of reaching the summit of the Highest Mountain in the World. Unlike many other situations in life, here money can not 'buy' your way to the top. Unsuccessful ascents have resulted in abusive behaviour and bad language towards the Sherpas, where clients ego's are bruised and money is lost when the 'goal' is not achieved.
Out of all the climbers I know, none would do this. Understanding when to say no, taking responsibility for your own actions and making calculated decisions are the key to climbing longevity. It seems the unexperienced 'want to be's' don't know how to respect the mountain and the people that live and work there. I think these people form an integral part of the problem. Ueli, Jon and Simone just paid the price for it."
