Hypothermic trampers stranded on Mt Robert, Nelson

Hi @PhillipW. Yes I agree. Moaning about people doing stupid things doesn't actually solve the problem. I guess we also have to formally decide if it's a problem or not. At the risk of sounding morbid, is there an acceptable rate of accidents and deaths which appear easily preventable after they've happened? Or is 1 too many? Do stereotypical young backpackers even have a higher rate of dying in New Zealand than when in their home countries? I'd be uncomfortable with anything that cuts down on freedom of access, but to me it does also seem unethical to tell large numbers of people to come and spend money here but not provide the background for them to do so safely. And yes, I know we tell people how (not) to do things (people doing stupid things idiots morons blah blah), but it also seems very clear that the way we're saying it isn't actually getting through to many of the people from the class of visitor we're attracting. How do you get those messages through to young people backpacking, who very possibly trust each other's advice more than they trust a foreign government of a country they're visiting, in a way which makes an actual difference? All this said, I'm still not completely sure if tourists are the biggest problem. Despite the presence of some good culture from people who've grown up in NZ, kiwis get into trouble and sometimes kill themselves too.

@izogi "Do stereotypical young backpackers even have a higher rate of dying in New Zealand than when in their home countries? " I'd argue yes. It's well understood that when people are travelling the way they evaluate risk (in all sorts of ways) is quite different to when they are back home. And while this in itself is a large part of the appeal of travel; it's not an excuse for what we are seeing here. "How do you get those messages through to young people backpacking, who very possibly trust each other's advice more than they trust a foreign government of a country they're visiting, in a way which makes an actual difference? " A damned good point. Which is why the industry profiting off them needs to step up. You are absolutely right, we don't want to restrict access. But we do need to improve the quality of it - and that means throwing some actual money at it.

Stuff has an updated report at http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/71798950/trampers-lucky-to-be-alive-after-rescue-from-freezing-mountain No overtrousers for the man in deep powder snow, no tent, no (useful) forecast checking, no appropriate experience or equipment, high avalanche risk. Oh, and the comment thread's open. Roll on the "stupid idiots" and "they should charge these morons for their rescue" comments.

you wont get through to everyone... doesnt matter what you tell some people young people especially, some get an idea in their head, they lock onto it and wont change their plan... after i went over cascade saddle rain was forecast, , a young chap was heading in the other direction, i told him if the rain came before he got up there that it was very dangerous to descend it if it was wet and several people had died on the pass.. didnt phase him one bit, he was going over regardless. the rain didnt come till late in the day and he wasnt in the news.. some people just think you're being negative and their positive attitude will prevail come what may, but theres too many news stories about preventable accidents and deaths, you can try to educate people and they can take it or leave it. you couldnt pay me to go into the mountains as ill equipped as a lot of people i've seen. it may seen like a great adventure when they scrape through in difficult conditions but its a fine line between success and failure. how many times even do i find i have to warm my hands up before i can hold a key to unlock and start the car at he end of a walk? if i was ill clad it would be a lot more serious..

>Oh, and the comment thread's open Not anymore its not. Must have decided it was going to be a hot potato.

reading that updated article it was a very close call for those two, could easily be reading their obituaries... its very touch and go getting people back from hypothermia that far advanced, their youth would have helped but its not a guarantee you'll get through..

@izogi I'm not certain it's that big an issue either. Most foreigners who come here to hike are not new to it and have done enough research to know that some of our tracks probably carry more hazard than what they might be used to. Many are looking for adventure at some level, and an adventurous area, by definition, is occasionally going to overwhelm people. Some people are just more naturally blaise than others and will give things a crack unprepared. There's no changing personality. I'm not a big advocate of the 'putting SAR at risk' argument either. Those legends love their work, and when was the last time a SAR team suffered a fatality? One thing that might have an effect are more proactively written, area specific signboards at roadends, breaking down the hazard points of a track (with a sobering list of past incidents). What about a more detailed track hazard grading system (it would often need to be applied on a micro level to different parts of a track of course)? Eg, grading the walk (1 being the safest) from Lakes Carpark to Cameron Hut. No river crossings. Only one section of fall danger (which is very exposed). So I would score the track a 3 (some injury risk) with one tiny 8 (strong fatality potential) section. You would need to shadow it with a wet wx rating too. So the above bushline sections rise to 5 and the vertiginous part to 10. You would also need to adjust it for season. We all know getting such a system right, given the variables, would be almost impossible. The point isn't to try and get it 'right', it's to make it very clear to people when they are putting their lives on the line.

But if we look back on our own history it took a few high profile incidents to prompt the formation of entities like SAR, and MSC. We saw that people were making avoidable mistakes and there were things we could do to reduce them. Yet I'm very aware that we never want to impose authoritarian controls over everything, to the extent that we regulate the 'adventure' out of being in the hills. The biggest core problem here is the disconnect between the ideas and expectations of many visitors and the reality they can find themselves in. I'd be absolutely certain these two young people never intended to have quite this much of an 'adventure'. So what are we missing here?

disagree craigo, most foreigners arent prepared at all. only some of them are. depends which tracks you frequent, the popular tracks are awash with ill equipped people a lot of them foreigners, rules had to be put in place on the tongariro crossing to stop shuttle companies let people on their buses without so much as a jacket, and they are still going ill clad. just because sar havent suffered a fatality YET, doesnt mean it couldnt happen, as much as they love their work they can get put under a lot of pressure from ill clad people and they often put their own lives at risks to save them. they often have to make decisions around their own life and death such as the attempted rescue of two people stranded on taranaki a couple of years back, several times SAR teams had to turn back from their attempts to rescue the stranded climbers or they may well have been fatalities themselves.

NZ SAR definitely has suffered fatalities in the past, but off the top of my head I can't think how recently. One example, though was the Otira Face incident on Mt Rolleston in 1966 when one of the search teams' camps was buried in an avalanche. Maybe you could also count stuff like this -- http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11447129 -- DOC ranger and pilot die on a fire reconnaissance flight when searching for 5 trapped people, who eventually saved themselves. I'd expect the standard operating manual says that searchers should never be placed at unreasonable risk lest the situation become worse than it is already, but in practice I'm sure it doesn't always work that way. Probably some of the people people involved in SAR could cite a few close calls. The Louise Wilkinson rescue in 2005 reportedly came very close to the search teams having to make a decision to leave her behind to die on the Tararua tops, after one of their tents blew away in the gale while they were waiting for a window to get a helicopter in for her. She was very lucky in the end.