With the death toll already reaching over 140 deaths to occur to climbers attempting to reach the summit and rescruers and the fact the enviromental future is uncertain for the Everest area I now see that there is a race to be the oldest to sumit the deadly mountain. Why don't they close the mountain to climbers and save individuals from a sure death? 70+ year old individuals climbing Mount Everest should be allowed?
2007-10-15 01:47:28 · 11 answers · asked by annabanana 3 in Sports ➔ Outdoor Recreation ➔ Climbing
At this point I am neither an opponent or proponent.I do feel it odd that Dr. Kovarkian is put in prison for his role in assisted suicide while assisting others for a fate possibly the same can be considered an economical advantage.
2007-10-15 02:17:42 · update #1
I didn't expect to be slammed by asking a question. All I wondered was what others thoughts were on the idea. I agree with many of the thoughts shared.
2007-10-15 09:36:12 · update #2
No they should not close it. But they should have more strict rules about climbing it and all the garbage they leave there. I was at Everest two years ago(not climb but trek), and I saw so much garbage on the mountain. They should severely fine the climbers who violate this,, if they want to climb they should be responsible for their actions. Seems like a lot are just looking for a rush or to tell their friends they climbed it. And this is all in a national park, beautiful place.
2007-10-15 09:33:03 · answer #1 · answered by kermmit_de_frog 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm...I guess they should also ban driving because people die in car accidents.
According to Everestnews.com, 186 people have died on Everest and 2249 people have summited (as of 2004). That is a 8.3 percent death rate (and this does not consider climbers that did not summit - which would drop this rate even more).
Perhaps Nepal (and China to a certain degree) should stop giving out as many permits as they possibly can (this is a big source of income for them). Perhaps they should put aside some of the money into a rescue fund (but many climbers already pay for rescue insurance with their guiding company).
It is really up to the climbing community to police themselves. If a client is not able to make it to the top, they should be turned back. Guide services should have minimum standards for clients (and most due, except for the 'fly by night", cheapo ones).
2007-10-15 08:32:59 · answer #2 · answered by Wayner 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, closing Everest would be silly. People are aware of the risks. What good is Everest if it's just sitting there but no one is allowed to climb it? There are alot of revenues generated through climbing in what is otherwise an economically disadvantaged region. It has nothing to do with age, if someone wants to climb and feels they can, let them.
2007-10-15 01:50:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Under what authority would they close a mountain? Man is responsible for himself. People know the dangers involved with the climb. At some point, you need grown people to think and make decisions regarding their own safety on their own.
Are you an opponent or proponent for the freedom that we all are born with?
2007-10-15 01:53:55 · answer #4 · answered by the grand super C 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I noted him a coupld of years interior the previous on the 7-11 over on the west end of city. i replaced into going to go say hi to him yet he paid for his Slurpee and left interior the previous I certainly have been given the prospect. He replaced into making use of a 2006 Toyota Sienna, and that i'm particularly particular he replaced into putting out with bill Paxton, and that i think of of Dr. Dre replaced into indoors the backseat. Then I went residing house and watched reruns of three's organization. It replaced suitable right into a particularly extreme extreme high quality little saturday.
2016-11-08 09:06:12 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it should be open to climbing only if they bring their garabage off the mountain.
2007-10-15 08:38:18 · answer #6 · answered by Buckhunter 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
let them do what ever they want to, at least they arnt putting anyone elses life in danger, i mean, it's not like the rescueres are being forced to put their life on the line.
2007-10-15 01:51:16 · answer #7 · answered by damn_spiders 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah it is pretty dangerous.......
they shudnt close it..mayb they shud just have certain times wen people can go climbin...times wen thers security around and paramedics n stuff lyk tht so if anythin dus happen....then ppl can be saved.....therfore reducing the death toll!
x
2007-10-15 01:49:52 · answer #8 · answered by x.T.x 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
never !
we take risks everyday, driving, riding bikes, swimming, etc.
will we stop doing these things? i don't think so
2007-10-15 01:51:06 · answer #9 · answered by kym b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you want to die
go right ahead.
2007-10-15 01:50:31 · answer #10 · answered by Fuzzybutt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋